This whole notion of giving people what they need to be successful, or “content”, goes against every law and founding principle of our Country. For one, it is impossible to figure out what everyone needs and distribute it fairly. Why do you think the term, “created equal”, was inserted? Do you really think the original Americans thought everyone was created exactly the same with the same talents? I doubt it; most likely they used the term to illustrate that any system created should offer the same chance to everyone, equal treatment. If we are created equal, we should be treated equal by the system. It is impossible to control the circumstances that every individual is born under to make things fair. Communism has failed at trying this on every attempt. But it is reasonable to think that a system could be created that offers the same opportunity regardless of whether you are rich or poor. We do it in sports all the time. I want to be clear: the same opportunity from the created system!
I don’t know when this notion began, but I imagine people took advantage of communities wanting to help those who are handicapped. Like so many problems in today’s society, people try to piggyback off of one decision that was made to promote what they want even though the two situations are completely different. A theme that keeps coming up in all my discussions is the fact that many people can’t distinguish situations that are the same from those that are different. For example, take handicap ramps. Some people insinuate that handicap people are entitled to being provided a special entrance to achieve equality. But that is not the case, they are not being provided with a special entitlement. All people can use handicap ramps, so it makes sense that the city creates entrances that everyone can use. It is only logical that if a system is going to provide something, it should provide something that everyone can use if possible. Handicap people aren’t the only ones who can use the ramps; we all can so it’s not an entitlement. We also typically reserve parking upfront for handicapped people because it is something we wanted to do. Not because they are entitled to it. Parking up front isn’t helping you be more successful than someone else; it is just a nice thing to do for disabled people when making somebody park in the back can’t be avoided.
The above example is not the same thing as giving people something so they can do better. The government provides things for us all to use, but they are specifically prohibited from helping some people use it better than others; once again, the same opportunities from the system is what I’m talking about. As soon as the system starts trying to make different opportunities to create “fairness”, the system is going against the idea of America. What is the purpose of assessing people on something and then giving the lowest performers something special so they can appear to do better? There is no reason to assess people if the results are going to be tailored. Unlike the handicap ramp, there is nothing logical about this philosophy. Additionally, the people born with talents are going to be punished, which also makes no sense. Why would you punish someone for becoming the smartest or the fastest? It’s almost as if the person born without the talent becomes the lucky one. But what would any game with the most untalented people look like? (America right now). Any time one person gets a 90 on a test while another person gets a 100 on the same test, there were some factors (whether it be genetic or circumstance) that created the difference. Obviously the person who received the 90 has some type of handicap. Yet, nobody seems to care about the person who got a 90 not doing as well. All the attention is focused on the people who failed. A contradictory system at all levels! I’m baffled by the term “learning disability” because doesn’t everyone who scores lower than someone else have some type of disability compared to the person who scored higher? Isn’t the purpose of the test to see who was able to learn the most? With this type of logic there can never be a loser because if we don’t score the same then there was a problem with the system. My question for this society is who will be chosen to be the Doctors and who will be chosen to be the Custodians? America is so stupid right now not only does it goes so far as to only help certain people score higher in the system, but it also just gives people higher scores regardless of how they performed. They just as well go ahead and make some “Liberal Crow Laws” and tell everyone who is going to be what and how much we will all get. A system that communists have been trying for hundreds of years and have a 0% success rate I might add. I want to point out something at this moment, there are two things I’m saying are impossible and evil: it is impossible for the system to overcome nature and make everyone’s talents identical before the “game” and it is impossible to ensure that the outcome of the “game” will be identical for every participant. America is unlawfully and ignorantly trying to accomplish both of these evils today; not for character, but for profit by certain people. When I say “game”, I suppose I’m referring to your place in society and the life you can create for yourself.
Any time someone helps one person, who hasn’t earned it, get ahead more than another person who has earned it, robbery is taking place. The idea is a fair game. So nothing should ever be given to one person that specifically helps that person that isn’t also offered to every other person in the game. For example, I have no problem with someone being allowed to use a hearing aid during an oral test or a football game, as long as every person is offered the same device. Why? Because the hearing aid really has nothing to do with what is being tested or attempted. And as long as it’s offered to everyone, the only people who will get it are the ones who really need it. Now let me make it clear here that it is not the officials’ responsibility to provide the hearing aids. We simply let people get what they need, because it is not putting anyone at an advantage (i.e., study as much as you feel you need within a set amount of time for a test or work as many hours as you want on your own business). Otherwise, the officials would be responsible for providing everyone with what they need to make sure people are identical (impossible).
This is where people get confused. The situation I described above is not the same thing as giving a hearing aid to someone when hearing is the test. If the test or the game were based on the ability to hear, then it would be immoral to give certain people hearing aids. And that is what is happening in America today. With the exception of the New England Patriots, I’ve never seen two football teams line up and one of the teams be given special entitlements to help them perform better. I suppose this idea “entitlement” originated somewhere in New England as they have become accustomed to not following the rules but nothing happening about it. I’ve yet to read any clear rules or have ever seen the “Tom Brady tuck rule” evoked in a football game since it was used to propel the New England Patriots to a super bowl. I suppose this was a one-time entitlement.
This philosophy has gotten so bad, that people are demanding something special for themselves. For example, transgender surgeries when there is nothing wrong with the parts God (or nature, if it makes anyone feel better) gave them. It’s even got so crazy that people are demanding things for other people who don’t even complain. For instance, I’ve seen these new handicap ramps that go down to the ocean and people proclaiming equality. If people want to do it, that is fine. But this is not something the government should be involved in because the government does not help anyone else get down to the ocean. This is not the same thing as the government building an entrance for a government building that everyone will use. The government is not here to solve individual problems for people; the Communists tried that and ended up with more problems than people. Besides, if you aren’t capable of getting down to the ocean on your own, you probably shouldn’t be down there anyways because of the danger of drowning. So you should either be with someone who can get you there and save you, or you shouldn’t be there at all. The government should never do anything special for certain people in a society, regardless of whether you are a “special” or “normal” person (whatever either of those words mean, but I’m referring to majority or minority).
This does not mean that we can’t help the poor and provide equal opportunity to move up in the world. It does not mean that we should not think about handicapped or disabled people. It just means that everyone is entitled to the same crap that I’ve been given from the system. Circumstances may not be fair and you may take that up with your God.
[Funny how most people who scream separation of church and state would expect the state to play God in this instance. These are also the same people who all of a sudden think all types of religious marriages are the state’s business. Excuse me because once again I’m getting off track.]
Back to my point: the system has nothing to do with your God’s unfairness because it is impossible to make all circumstances fair in this world; however, we can make the system fair and competitive. We all know how much we hate the guy who changes the rules once he starts losing. And one thing I’ve noticed is that nature is fair, unbiased, and does not change its rules for anyone and the original Americans were keen to this philosophy. That is why they tried to create as natural of a functioning system as possible with as few of man’s regulatory notions as possible. The idea is to let nature govern the system, not elected officials. People are not evil; evil is born with any system created. And the key to hope in any system is the pursuit of earning progression in your life.
Do not take this as an attack or disrespect to handicapped people. I am merely trying to point out the difference in what we do for handicapped people and that it is not the same idea as entitlement. I’ve never heard a handicapped person complain or try to get advantages. I respect handicapped people because all of the ones I know have the American attitude of proving they can accomplish the same as anyone else without special help. They work twice as hard and never complain, which I respect. I’m talking about people who aren’t handicapped, but want something to help them perform better. I’m talking about people who lose or don’t perform and then want the system to change the rules for them only. My point is to show that the entitlements happening in America now are not the same logic as a handicap ramp. In fact there is no logic in what is happening in America. There is no logic in pretending people are qualified to do something. Giving people what they need to be successful is the exact opposite of letting people obtain what they need as long as it is not an unfair advantage. And giving people who don’t earn it the same as those who have earned it is outright robbery and a self-destructive system. Every system that has ever been created in which the non-workers get the same as the workers has failed because people just stop working. Two things are happening in America, one would be the same thing as someone who is not handicapped not being able to walk up the stairs as well as someone else and then demanding a ramp be built that only he/she can use. And then when they get to the top of the stairs we all act like they accomplished the same thing as people who made it up the stairs on their own. Two, not only do we build the ramp but we also push people up the ramp and give them everything that everyone else earned. The government doesn’t give people glasses; it allows people who need glasses to get the glasses they want. If the government were giving an eye exam to find the best “spotters”, it would be absurd to only let the people with the worst vision use binoculars. And even more absurd to give the same score to people with binoculars who still can’t spot anything as people without binoculars who spot everything. What would be the point of the test?
It amazes me that the courts have been allowed to incorporate ideas into our laws by using words that never appeared in the constitution such as “separation of church and state” and also have been allowed to eliminate ideas in our laws in the face of words that do appear such as “equal and equal treatment.” People still insist on blaming lawyers, but what does a lawyer have to do with a judge whose pockets are lined with money?
I guess this has been allowed to happen for the same reason people still sit around watching the Super Bowl calling it American Football when it’s rules are really nothing like American Football or the original idea of the hardest hitter earning victory. I believe the recent demise of the “greatest” female fighter in the world, Ronda Rousey, illustrates how people will allow the media to dictate a lie as reality in the face of the truth. Hindsight is 20/20 and I’m not trying to act like I’ve been saying it along. This is in no way an attempt to degrade Ronda Rousey because I still think she is an exceptional fighter. I thought Ronda was a tough, bad _ _ _ and I still think she is because I would have hit the deck after the first punch from Holly Holm. But the truth is that I never really paid attention to her fights until this recent “kick heard round the world”. I had seen highlights, but I had never actually watched her fight. I definitely did not like Ronda’s personality or mentality before the kick and I still don’t, but when someone is beating people within 20 seconds every match it is hard to deny their toughness, especially when you haven’t been watching the fights. I still think Ronda’s tough and I still don’t like her attitude or mentality, so do not try to ignore or discredit my following observations by calling me an “overnight Ronda hater” (which is the media’s attempt to cover up the fact that they were full of crap).
So, I did some research and this is what I noticed: She was given fighter of the year just as Bruce Jenner was given woman of the year (I might add many people go to jail for pretending to be something they are not, it’s called fraud) and I don’t think either award was true. Why do I mention Bruce Jenner? Because I think there are just as many obvious facts that show Ronda was not fighter of the year as there are facts that show Bruce Jenner is not a woman. However, Ronda taunted this entitlement (I call it entitlement, because she clearly didn’t earn it but for some reason certain people in society have decided that some people deserve recognition more than others and we continue to allow them to delegate entitlements however they see fit) in Floyd Mayweather’s face, a fighter who in my opinion made Pacquiao look average (remember that Pacquiao was recognized as the fighter of the decade). But like most people who receive entitlements, it is easy to convince them they deserve it so Ronda had no problem accepting credit and asserting she had outdone Mayweather even though it was not true. I say she didn’t earn it because by definition the facts were not there to support it. She was very popular and made UFC a lot of money and fame, but that is not the criteria to be fighter of the year. When I actually watched the Bethe fight, it didn’t really look like Bethe got hit on the punch that set her down. At the time I assumed Bethe was the best that was out there because like everyone else I figured if she got a top fight she must be tough. But after seeing her fall so easy, it got my mind wondering. It seems like another recurring theme in my discussions are just how full of crap some of the sporting stations seem to be today because with a few minutes of research it is now obvious to me how wrong the things are that were reported. In fact, I don’t think Bethe is a very good fighter at all and I don’t think Ronda looked like a good fighter (much less best fighter) in that fight. What sounds more deserving of an award to you, beating Bethe or Pacquiao? If Ronda had beaten somebody like Ali or Cyborg (or Holm for that matter), then her award would have clearly been earned. I say: that the fact is that Mayweather beat “the fighter of the decade”. How can a fighter that beats the fighter of the decade be nothing and a fighter that beats Bethe be the fighter of the year? According to proofs and reasoning in Math, beating the fighter of the decade would make you not only the fighter of the year, but better than all the fighters of all the years in that decade (I know it was a different decade, but I think I’ve made my point that it was certainly better than beating Bethe). This is why I say there are facts that show she did not earn fighter of the year.
More ironically we were led to believe that Holly Holm pulled off the upset of the century. But if you take a closer look Holly Holm was a 19-time Boxing champion in 3 different weight classes. Before the fight, people were questioning whom Holly had fought when in reality we should have been asking whom had Ronda fought with her 12 and O record. There are many boxers who start out undefeated that we never hear about because they start losing once the competition picks up. How could any sports broadcasting station worth a crap let this slip? If you respond it was all about money and building up hype then you are part of the problem. No shit, that is the exact thing that I’m complaining about so don’t debate my argument with verification of my argument. Creating false illusions to make money should never be accepted as justification for a crappy job of reporting or anything else. I understand that it really doesn’t matter when it comes to Hollywood and MMA and it’s all about money. If you want to let people make a lot of money promoting fairy tale, super humans, who cares? The problem is that we as an intelligent species cannot allow this same fairy tale to exist when it comes to our social issues and our children’s education. We cannot allow these lies and exploits to ruin our quality of life, our sense of social justice, and the schools that our children attend.
Let us now turn to the point for bringing up this whole discussion because I really don’t value the ESPY awards or the legitimacy of Ronda’s dominance anyway. But what I do want to make clear is that it doesn’t seem like you have to know what you are talking about to be in the media anymore (evidence that the media is giving people jobs based on circumstances verse qualifications. Ironic since they are always the first to scream racism when they think they see someone else doing the same thing). The so-called experts don’t know anything and it doesn’t seem to matter how obvious they demonstrate their lack of knowledge. They continue to preach and we continue to listen. My point is that this is the same media that has been pushing a liberal agenda for quite some time now in the same manner Ronda’s supremacy was pushed. The difference is that in a natural, competitive system that allows the participants to determine their own success, such as MMA, the reality of the results cannot be disguised no matter the agenda and the truth always reveals itself. And what I’m saying is that I am sure that the liberal propaganda also being falsely promoted in America would experience the same fate as Ronda if there were some way to get immediate results. The problem is that most policy changes require years to experience the effects and there are an entangled array of social interactions and changes that complicate analysis. Further, the liberal media will never promote the assessment of their ideas by using real, direct results. These social constructs have always been the biggest weapon of immoral idiots, which allows their voice to ring into eternity and has made government a “10,000” year debate.
Why am I writing about this? Because the media is only capable of doing this if we listen to their analysis of the facts. The facts were available. Yes, the media did provide us with the facts! Not the mainstream media, but all of the local media outlets and everyday citizens who voice their opinions and are the backbone of America gave us the facts (they are the inspiration and target audience of this website). When I go back and look at video of both fighters the truth was presented. However, the biggest difference between America now and of the past is that now people rely on the media to explain what has been presented. People don’t seek out the facts and they don’t make their own analysis, as was once the norm in colonial America.
[This was also once the norm in our schools, but educational policies have forced changes on those norms and now look at the changes in our society. This illogical interpretation of social justice was propagated in our schools and has led to the creation of citizens who condone it. This is also another major point of this website but I am getting a little off topic again. My main point today is to focus on the ridiculousness of Entitlements, whether it be to help certain people perform better or just flat out giving people things they don’t earn.]
I assumed Ronda was the best female fighter because they told me even though her fight videos and Holly Holm’s fight videos were available to me. I could have looked at the facts because the media gave them to me, but just like you I’ve become accustomed to letting the media tell me what the facts mean. The result: we used to have handicap ramps and front row parking for people who had difficulty walking, now we have transgender bathrooms for people who have a gender and people capable of participating demanding special help when they perform poorly. We give people who want to commit crimes encouragement and degrade people who follow the laws. People who want something that is not fair are always defended and people who stand against what is unfair are always attacked. People who illegally park in handicap spots are given the first voice when they think that something is not fair and the government needs to provide more entitlements. And finally, we have the fighter of the year getting a lesson on how to fight from the #7 ranked challenger.
And realize this: just like the evidence was out there before the Rousey/Holm fight, there are hundreds of years of evidence, available by the same media, documenting liberal ideas failing in European societies. All you have to do is look for it and analyze it.
At no time, should the government ever do anything to lift one person up if it comes at the expense of another citizen. Otherwise, the government is nothing more than a gang of train robbers. This is the number 1 problem in America right now. I know it sounds harsh, but whenever you think the government should provide additional services for people for whatever reason think about this: If a college running back is told that he is too slow to be in the NFL, should the player be allowed to complain about having a running handicap? Should we do something to help this player make it to the NFL? If we come up with an alternative race and pretend the player is fast, will that help the player make it in the NFL? Do you really think that the purpose of schools were so that everyone could be a doctor regardless of talent and ability? If you help that running back make it to the NFL, he will be dependent on you and me for his entire career and feels he deserves it.
It’s not fair that someone is not performing well in what society has provided for everyone. Just like it’s not fair that we are all born different (although that is what I appreciate about other people). But that is something between you and nature because it’s a greater injustice and a lie for society to provide something extra for one person and then act like everyone is doing the same thing. And then it’s really dumb to start acting like that person is actually better now. Only people who think they are gods could believe that their lies are more correct than nature’s truth (Science). Ironically, it is the same atheists who adhere to Science and Evolution that come up with the majority of these “entitled” lies.
This is the way I see what America has become verses what it was supposed to become. Let us once again look at the stairs to an entrance. At one time, rich people used to use their circumstances to build stairs for their children to climb to get to the entrance. Nobody else could use these stairs and that is what made it unfair. So the idea was to give everybody access to stairs (such as public schools), which still need to be climbed by the most qualified people. Liberals have now turned this idea into finding people who can’t climb the stairs and saying they deserve something special; special circumstances just like rich people used to provide for their children. Whether we decide to provide a ramp for someone termed “handicap” is a separate argument depending on many variables; but regardless, when someone uses a special ramp that no one else is allowed to use he/she is not doing the same thing as everyone else. We’ve gone so far in today’s irrational reign of logic to actually push people up the ramp who can walk just as good as me. And just like many rich kids have become dependent on their family to always provide steps, the entitled people of America have become dependent on you and me. We all know the spoiled brat who underachieved his/her way into management in the family business. And the brat becomes a life long liability for the family business that needs someone else to do the managing. If someone thinks it’s evil when rich people do it, how could they possibly argue to create a system based on the same injustice?
[I really don’t want to get into the purpose of schools and what’s fair for people with “learning disabilities” although I am prepared to have that discussion. I just feel like I would be getting off topic, but I will say this: putting all of our emphasis on education as a means to become successful isn’t fair for those who aren’t inherently good at it and giving those who aren’t good at it special help isn’t fair for those who are inherently good at it (the same goes for all systems in place by society). Education could learn from what America has done with athletics. Even intramural sports at the local rec league level have phenomenal play and quality. Another example of how competition in a fair system (the idea of America) can improve the standard and conditions at all levels in society; isn’t this the argument for a quality public school education in the first place?].
Do we make a race with the purpose of identifying and only helping the slowest runner? Do we then pump all of our resources into making the slowest runner faster? Will it really help society for someone who runs a 5.5 40-yard dash to improve his/her speed to 5.4 (especially when it’s a lie and they’re still closer to being a 5.5 runner)? Does anyone really have the notion that it is society’s responsibility that the slow kid will become as fast as Deion Sanders? And the real kicker is that people think there is some alternative method to making people fast. As though the pattern of eating healthy, working out in the gym, and running sprints are constructs of the system that favored Deion Sanders. As though it was something different than talent, hard work, and qualifications that got him there. People are delusional for thinking that if we do something different and/or special the slow person will finally have their chance to be fast. As though in some system somewhere eating Twinkies and playing games that involve running on the computer will make slow kids fast because rich people aren’t holding them back with their fancy system of qualifications. All we can do as a society is provide the opportunity to train in the same way that has been proven to make the fast people faster and the smart people smarter. But we will never change the fact that we all can’t be Lebron James, and for some reason that is OK but people think that being smart and going to college or being productive and going to work is somehow different. Learning is an independent, self-controlled variable for the most part. People can only get as good as they want up to their inherited ability and if an education still meant something and could get you somewhere people might start doing better at it again.
Changing the rules of the race changes the race. And I’m not saying the rules don’t need to be changed, but I am saying that when the rules only change for certain people then it’s not a fair race.
Wouldn’t it make more sense to find something the slow kid is good at and pump resources into making him/her as successful as possible in this area? More importantly, why don’t we let the slow kid decide what he/she is good at to pursue as long as he/she is qualified.
And I know what some people are thinking now. But NO, I don’t have a problem with special services or special schools to help people become as functional in society as possible. To me this does benefit everyone because one of the goals of schools is to improve our ability as a culture to communicate and progress. But there is a limit to how much we need to spend on trying to help someone learn to read who has proven that they cannot read. It is not worth spending extra money to get a person to pronounce a few more words if they still won’t be able to read and comprehend. Normally when it is proven that someone can’t shoot the ball, they don’t make the team. And NO, I don’t have a problem with food stamps and helping the poor get back in the “game”. To me this does benefit everyone because one of the goals of America was to improve social conditions and our ability to allow all people a better opportunity to create the life they want. But there is a limit to how much we need to give someone verses helping them get back on their feet. Normally when it is proven that people are refusing to do something, they aren’t given anything. Let’s stop pretending like we can give everyone a shot at being a doctor if they weren’t born with those talents. Let’s stop pretending that University is for everyone and can make everyone successful. Let’s stop pretending that people who refuse to climb the steps were held in place by the system. Let’s stop pretending that some people who aren’t good at climbing the steps weren’t given many opportunities. And let’s stop having a thief’s mentality and pretending like certain people deserve something special to help them become successful or deserve to be given something someone else earned.