Fauci Meme

Man-made Climate Change and is CO2 really the Driving Factor?

I think most people will agree that climate change exists. Scientists have found fossils of sea animals at the top of some of the tallest mountains. Remnants of civilizations have been found at the bottom of oceans. When dinosaurs walked this planet, Carbon Dioxide levels were 5 times during the Jurassic period in comparison to what they are today. Hence why trees absorb CO2 since they have always been a form of life on Earth. Oxygen levels increased enough to open the door for more air breathing land animals. Not to mention the multiple ice ages that occurred.

So, for the sake of argument, there has always been some type of natural climate change. Now, we’ll talk about “Man-made” climate change. The idea that with the industrialization and the burning of fossil fuels, raising methane-emitting livestock and our day to day activities have caused this current increase in the average temperature of the entire planet. Human activities have increased this average temperature and the sensitive eco-system’s ripple effect is causing the polar ice caps to melt, causing a rise in the sea levels and well, you know.

The Obama Administration announced that climate change is our number one threat. Notice there is the interchanging of “Man-made climate change” and just “climate change”. It’s kind of like how the anti-Trump folks used “illegal immigrants” and just plain “immigrants” interchangeably. They are two different things. Natural climate change is something we have zero control over. The term “Man-made” or Anthropogenic climate change suggests that it is something that we can control.

I will call the people that believe in man-made climate change as “believers” and those that are not sold as “skeptics”. It’s not by accident that it sounds like that I am talking about a religion. It has all the feel of an organized religion and the jury is still out if it qualifies as one or not.

We are told by the believers that 97% of climate scientists say climate change is real. Is it that simple though? Believers like to take some artistic freedoms when quoting “facts”. Do these scientists believe in “natural climate change” or do they all believe in “man-made climate change”? Because for us skeptics, there is a big difference.

I guess I would not care that a bunch of people believe something that I do not, except the believers expect everyone to take some action in order to counter the effects. If the believer’s had their way, the coal and oil industries would be out of business.

I recently went back and forth with a person that claimed to have knowledge on “anthropogenic climate change”. I asked him the normal questions, like don’t volcanoes and the ocean have a much bigger impact on the climate than humans? And what is the percentage of carbon emissions from humans as it compares to all natural emissions? According to this believer, humans emit 150 times more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than all the volcanoes in the world. Humans contribute 4% of the total carbon emissions. The ocean being the number one offender of Co2 emissions. I was also told that the earth can only absorb 40% of the “extra” carbon emissions, over and above natural emissions. That leaves 60% of the “extra” emissions that stays in the atmosphere and contributes to warming the planet and in turn upsets the Earth’s natural balance.

The Carbon emissions are measured in Gigatons. A Gigaton is a unit of explosive force equal to one billion tons of trinitrotoluene (TNT). Humans emit a total of 6 or 29 gigatons a year. The ocean/plants and soil emits about 300 gigatons.  This whole explanation can get very convoluted and that is how the believers like to sound smart and since they sound smart, they must be right. The only problem is for CO2 to have any effect on global warming, they would have to be at much higher levels than we have today and the jury is still out on that too.

I mentioned the Jurassic period and that the CO2 levels were 5 times higher than the current levels. I will use this argument during a climate change debate. The person I debate will sometimes say that humans were not alive during that period, so it is a moot point. Mammals and the emergence of the direct ancestors of humankind (if you believe that) began during the Pliocene epoch or period. The CO2 levels during the Pliocene period were around 315-380 parts per million (ppm), basically the same levels as today. Because of this similarity, NASA did a study in 1997 comparing the Pliocene period and it’s climate to today’s climate and the whole future of “global warming”.

The focus was during a warming period of the Pliocene and what may have caused this warming. The warming period occurred approximately 2.85 and 3.15 million years ago. In much of their study they used deep ocean core samples of microfossils and pollen records from land-based cores. The data from these samples which they were able to determine warming periods and moisture levels and then ran this data through computer models to see their effect on overall warming. The link to the study is listed below.  I will cut to the chase with an excerpt from the findings in the report.  

“At present, our results do not support the suggestion that Pliocene warming was caused by carbon dioxide increase since such changes are not consistent with the SST (sea surface temperature) distributions derived from deep sea cores. There is evidence that changes in ocean circulation and the amount of the heat oceans transport may be one potential cause of the warming.” - NASA Pliocene Global Warming study

I have seen Bill Nye, who appears to be the mouthpiece for the man-made climate change movement, say multiple times that it is “settled science”. Like I said earlier, the believers use “man-made” climate change interchangeably with “natural” climate change. But, his argument is based on the “settled science” that “high levels” of CO2 causes climate change. I put “high levels” in quotations because what believers are considering high levels of CO2 is also up for debate. The current levels, which at the time of this article (2017) is about 400ppm.

NASA did not see the CO2 levels during the Pliocene period as the cause of the warming. Does that sound like settled science?

Of many of the believers I speak with, most if not all of them, say that the earth will survive regardless of what action we take.  Their concern is the existence of man and if humankind will survive 100 years from now. If the believers had their way, they would close down the coal and the oil industry. If you eliminate these industries along with the affordability of this fuel, how will that impact people? If people lose their jobs and can no longer pay bills or now that we eliminated lower costing fuels, can the poor afford to heat their homes?  If the ultimate goal is to save human lives then should we not consider the current lives on this planet and if the drastic policy changes suggested by the believers will result in the loss of lives?

I’m all for alternative fuels and preserving our environment, but we need to have a balance. If we go around crying that the sky is falling and saying that “climate change” is the number one threat to humans. Who are we helping? People 100 years from now, or people today?

Final thought: Our planet is 4.5 Billion years old and we have about 60 years of climate data. Does that sound like enough data to accurately establish a trend? Are we looking at a grain of sand and making determinations for the entire beach?

~ Sean

 

https://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/features/199704_pliocene/

 

Hillary's Campaign Damaged Her Supporters' Psyche...

  I recently read an article posted by a left leaning friend of mine regarding how the writer of this article could not be friends with someone who voted for Trump. The writer feels it is justified because Trump is about "bigotry and hate". The emotional reaction of the Hillary supporters after Trump won the election showed how committed her supporters were and still are.

Hillary’s whole angle early on in her campaign was emphasizing the fact that she was a woman and that it was time for a woman to become President. It worked for President Obama. His campaign motivated the black voters and he easily won two elections. This appeared to be Hillary’s hope that lightning would strike a third time and that she would be the first female President. Regardless of her proposed policies or the direction that she wanted to move the country to. Just vote for her because she is a woman.

As it started to become obvious that Trump would become the Republican nominee, Hillary’s campaign started to focus on Trump’s speeches. Trump resurrected the illegal immigrant issue that had been placed on the back burner for years. The Hillary team and the DNC put it into their spin machine and it turned into Trump being “anti-Immigrant”. They would conveniently drop off the “illegal” part and it took on a life of its own. The same people that gave Bill Clinton a standing ovation for saying almost the same exact words are now accusing Trump of being a “xenophobe”.  His stance on illegal immigrants then was translated by the left that he was a racist and since he is a racist, he must not like blacks either.

“We are a nation of immigrants, but we are also a nation of laws. It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in the recent years and we must do more to stop it.”

                                   - Pres. Bill Clinton, State of the Union Address, 1995

Trump also courted the Evangelical right in order for him to win over a faction of the Republican Party. The spin machine translated that into Trump was now anti-gay and anti-woman. Hillary harped on these narratives. It became the main points of her speeches. Trump is a bigot, a racist, anti-woman and anti-gay. He’s even the next Hitler who will orchestrate the next holocaust. Trump was accused of fear mongering, yet isn’t that what Hillary’s campaign was doing against Trump?

Protesters were causing violence at Trump rallies and the Media, DNC and Hillary’s campaign would blame Trump. Police cars were set on fire and Trump supporters were assaulted, but the spin machine was working overtime.

The late night shows went on and on about how horrible the country would be if Trump were President. The Media talking heads were so sure that he could never be President. The Hollywood elitists would use what influence they had over their fans to relent against Trump.

All of this was building up within the hearts and minds of Hillary’s supporters.  Of course, Hillary just wanted to become the President. She didn’t seem to be concerned about what damage she was doing to her followers’ psyche. Her campaign would even quote Republicans that disliked Trump. People they were against normally now have some credibility because they don’t like Trump either.

The closer we got to the election the bigger the tidal wave of anti-Trump rhetoric became. The left would marginalize the tens of thousands of attendees showing up at Trump rallies all over the country. Convinced that his supporters were a bunch of racist, backwoods hicks because Hillary said so. Those of us that were not blinded by the overwhelming anti-Trump news reports from all forms of media, saw the large crowds for what they were. People are tired of the direction our country and society is headed. Police are bad, rioters need a space to riot, political correctness has replaced the freedom of speech, our weakening stance in world affairs, the growing racial division, etc. The silent majority needed to step up and be heard.

“You can put half of Trump supporters in what I call the ‘basket of deplorables’. Right? Racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, islamophobic, you name it.”

                                                         - Hillary Clinton, 9/9/16

If you lived in the cities and surrounded yourself with like-minded folks, you did not see this coming. It was nothing to turn on a radio or TV and hear how well Hillary was doing in the polls “Hillary now leading by double digits”, “Trump is losing ground in key states”, “Trump cannot win with only 25% of the party behind him”. It was music to the leftist’s ears. Nothing you read or heard would lead anyone to think that Hillary could lose the election, nothing. Well, maybe if you took a ride into the country to check out the foliage or shop at a farmer’s market and saw all those pesky Trump signs in people’s front yards. They must be anomalies, because Hillary is a slam dunk.

I found it ironic that of all of the celebrities, Michael Moore saw it coming. He read the writing on the wall that every other one of his cronies were ignoring. Moore knew that the power of the working class was strong and they were at their breaking point. Moore’s plea to the working class on his “Trumpland” national tour was his feudal attempt to change the tide and drum up more support for Hillary. Moore gave a very moving speech that touched the heart and soul of the working class Trump supporter. It was even used to drum up more support for Trump. Definitely not Moore’s intentions, but even he understood what was happening. And “Trumpland” has a whole new meaning now.

“That’s why every beaten down, nameless, forgotten, working stiff who used to be part of what was called the working class, loves Trump…The human hand grenade that they could legally throw into the system that stole their lives from them...”

                                                - Michael Moore, “Trumpland”

Election Day came and the impossible became possible. For the left, their nightmares became reality. It made no sense. Everyone, I mean EVERYONE said that Trump would NEVER be President! How could this be?! That feeling of hopelessness. That emptiness. The shock. The inability to see beyond January 20^th, 2017.

You can thank Hillary Clinton and her damaging campaign for those feelings. You can thank the Media political pundits that obviously have no idea what they are talking about. You can thank the late night hosts that convinced you that it was impossible and with a laugh, gave you a false sense of security. Thank all those folks that were so blinded by their own agenda that they covered up your eyes to what was actually going on. Brexit was a wake-up call that you let go to voicemail because you were too busy watching John Oliver or reading the Washington Post.

The moral to this story? Talk to your friends that do not share the same political views you have. Debate with them, nicely. It will either strengthen your beliefs or maybe question them. Watch and read news sources that are not on the liberal reading list. Get the most complete picture possible of what is going on that you can. Venture out of that bubble and learn to accept the fact that things are not always going to go the way you want them to or the way you think they should. Presidents will come and go. Politics are only a small factor in why you are friends with someone. Your day to day lives as a human being in one of the greatest countries in the world is a lot more important than if your friend believes in manmade climate change or not. Or if they think “trickle-down” economics works or not.

Remember, we are all Americans first.

Sean

Freedom of the Press: Have they gone too far?..

Our First Amendment rights include “freedom of the press”. Our Press, our Media has been given a mandate by our founding fathers to be the watchdog of the government. To root out corruption and deceit no matter where it leads.

How has the Press done with this mandate? As I write this, we are two weeks away from the 2016 election. For research, I went to the major news network’s FaceBook pages to see what political and election related news was being headlined.

October 25, 2016, 10am Eastern Time:

ABC – What Hillary wants for a Supreme Court Justice, Where Clinton and Trump stand on issues, Republicans in tight race more likely to abandon Donald Trump.

CBS – Clinton no longer shying away from dealing the “woman card”, Democrats try a new strategy to garner black turnout, Salma Hayek claims she turned down a date with Donald Trump, Michael Moore calls Trump voters “legal terrorists”.

NBC – Time for a reality check on Trump’s poll numbers, Trump brags of endorsement that never happened, No the presidential election won’t be the next ‘Brexit’ for pollsters, Poll: Republican party fractured as Hillary Clinton maintains solid lead.

CNN politics – McCarthy: ‘Wind is in our face supporting’ Trump, GOP Sen. Toomey won’t say if he’ll vote for Trump at debate, Schlapp: ‘I am disgusted by the judgment’ in GOP, Clinton turns fire on down ballot Republicans, Jay Z to headline concert for Hillary Clinton, Kaine: Clinton as president would seek Congress’ input for ISIS fight.

MSNBC – Poll: GOP fractured as Clinton maintains solid lead, Biden calls out Trump wants to talk about the issues, Democrats take aim at GOP Senate majority, Gary Johnson: Vote your conscience, Are polls overstating Clinton’s lead?, Poll: Clinton up double digits over Trump, Is Texas up for grabs?, Elizabeth Warren unleashes on Donald Trump over “nasty woman” comment.

Fox News – Check out this Hillary-themed ‘Haunted House’, Clinton attack featuring Miss Universe was months in the making email shows, Clinton ally helped fund campaign of key FBI officials wife, Duck vs. Trump: Undercover video shows Clinton Campaign coordination on protests, Trump details 7-point plan to ‘Protect American jobs’.

Between WikiLeaks and Project Veritas, there has been a lot of information coming out regarding the DNC and the Clinton Campaign’s connection to a couple organizations that have promoted violence at Trump rallies, voter fraud and promoting the DNC narrative in the media. WikiLeaks revealed that CNN had given debate questions to the DNC in advance. News organizations were clearing stories through the DNC before publishing them. It has been clearly shown that there was a direct connection between the riots in Chicago where a Trump rally was cancelled where people were injured including two Chicago Police Officers and these organizations being directed by the DNC and the Hillary Campaign.

None of this has really made it to the major news outlets except for FOX. CNN did some reporting on the videos but raised more questions on the validity of them and the producer of the undercover footage. A quick look at the headlines shows a clear and obvious difference on how the Clinton campaign is covered and the Trump campaign. If it was not for social media and online news organizations, any news on Trump would all be negative and any news on Clinton would be all positive.

The mainstream media does not appear to be happy about the WikiLeaks email dumps nor the Project Veritas videos. These two groups seem to be doing actual journalism and news reporting. Back during the Bush administration, WikiLeaks revealed truths about WMD’s and the press was all over it. Now that WikiLeaks has uncovered corruption within the Clinton and DNC camps, the press is all of a sudden cautious on the validity of the information. They are even supporting the “Russia did it” narrative directly from the DNC and Clinton Campaign.

The Media’s reaction to the Project Veritas’ videos is much like the undercover Planned Parenthood videos. Because it goes against the agenda that they, as a whole, seem to support, instead of using these undercover videos as a springboard to do their own investigations, they instead, try to discredit the producers of the videos and claim that they are over-edited to sway the viewer. This is of course is what the mainstream media does all the time by cherry-picking the stories that they report on that DO support their underlying agenda.

I believe that the mainstream media has abused their power to inform the masses by pushing their own agenda as the correct way of things. How about you just report the news? Report both sides. Good and bad. And if there is a real story to chase down, chase it down. No matter where it leads. For our democracy to truly work, we need an honest Press. We as voters, need to be truly informed to be able to direct our country in the right direction.

Where are the Woodward and Bernsteins? The Walter Cronkites? I swear it has been a good 30 years since the Media has NOT pushed their own agendas. Does the Mainstream Media even do their own investigative journalism anymore? Or do they just report what is handed to them once it’s been approved by all involved parties?

The Media has given the Democrats a free pass and as a result, the Democrats have become more and more corrupt and deceitful knowing that they will not be called out. If a “conservative” news organization reports something negative on a Democrat, the Mainstream Media circles the wagons to protect them. This is not their job! Their job is to inform the people and to keep the government honest.

If this election has proven anything it is how broken the Mainstream Media is. These fledgling news organizations are the new hope for truth in journalism. The readers and viewers cannot take the headlines at face value. We must look into each story deeper and use various sources to get to the truth and not ignore the truth, even if it is contrary to our own agendas. The manipulation and conflicts of interests in what news is reported has gotten completely out of hand and needs to be reined in.

The truth is the truth. Facts are facts. When a news organization ignores the facts in order to bend the truth, they are no longer worthy to be a real source of information.

 

-Sean

Are Liberals "Over-Domesticated"?...

Is the difference between a Liberal and a Conservative just their political ideology? Could biology be involved? Could this difference in opinion be due to “over domestication”?

When we were cave dwellers, hunters and gatherers, our survival skills were our primary function. Competing with our fellow cave peeps or trying not to get eaten by a saber-tooth tiger were daily concerns. A bad day in the wild was a real bad day. If you have to focus on survival skills exclusively, you probably live in a pretty toxic environment.

Remove that caveman from the wild and place them into a more civilized setting. A village or community where you can purchase or barter for food, sleep in a hut or house and not always be fearful that you may be eaten on a daily basis. This leads to what biologist’s call “domestication”.

Similar to the domestication of wolves that led to our pet dogs. Based on years of experiments with the domestication of different species of animals, biologists have observed several common effects that occur as a result. Biologists attribute these changes to the Neural Crest cells. These are cells that develop early in life that determine the physiology of our bodies including our brain development and demeanors. These Neural Crest cells base their direction of development on the needs of the host. The environment plays a very vital role. Our ability to blend in, aggressiveness, athletic abilities, hunting prowess, etc. are all based on our need for these skills. Our need is based on our environment. Do we need to be a good hunter if we can go down to the local deli for a pastrami sandwich? If we live in a very low crime community, do we need to be on alert all the time? The more we progress, the less we need to fall back on our basic survival skills once needed when we carried spears.

However, there is some drawbacks to this domestication. Maybe it can be considered “over domestication”. If we get so far away from our basic survival skills, we lose them. But, when you no longer need to concern yourselves with basic survival it does allow you to delve more into philosophy, experimentation or maybe even shopping for an electric car or coming up with the newest popular latte’.

If you are living in a nice and safe part of a city, surrounded by your cashmere wearing friends reminiscing about the last protest you were involved in, you may have little to no need to fall back on your caveman skills of ole. It may lead you to contemplate why we even need the Police or the military or anything that is based on our basic survival skills.

If you grew up on a farm and faced life and death on a daily basis, provide protection for your livestock from potential predators, by shear necessity, you are still in touch with the basic survival needs. If you grew up in the country and hunted deer, you also tap into the basic survival needs. If you live in Boston and work in an office and your favorite past time is drinking craft beer with your friends from college. How much do you rely on your basic survival skills? You may see where I am going with this.

Our opinions on issues, prejudices, likes, dislikes are all based on our personal experiences and what we have been exposed to. I’m talking generally here, because there are exceptions to every rule, but in general, you tend to see people who are detached from our basic survival skills to have a more Liberal view on life as opposed to those that still have a connection to these skills. If you have no real sense of fear of any type of predator, you will not truly see the need for Police or even the act of preparing for a possible threat. This certainly can be a drawback in the sense that a predator who has the element of surprise will most likely be successful in their efforts. This puts you off guard if you do not at least entertain the possibility that someone may want to hurt you or take what is yours. You become more of an easy target.

You may not understand someone that prepares for a possible threat or someone who is concerned about a worse case scenario.

A domesticated dog will lose his camouflaged coat, his perked up ears will become floppy and his long snout will become shortened. Even the brain of a domesticated dog is different from that of their wolf cousins. All those things that are necessary in the wild are now secondary or even non-existent.

Is “over-domestication” what causes the Liberal-minded person to not fully understand a more Conservative viewpoint? Not having to burden yourself with basic survival worries allows you to delve into deeper thought on any and all subjects. If you do not consider the dangers of life are you missing the big picture?

As a Conservative, does thinking of these basic survival concerns take up too much of our thinking time? For some, it seems to be too important (i.e. conspiracy theorists). Does a Conservative need to concern themselves with worst case scenarios as much as they do? What are they forgetting or missing when weighing issues? For Police Officers or Military in a war zone it will save your life. But, how does one turn that off when you realistically do not need it? Or can you?

Maybe this is the difference between the Liberal and the Conservative or maybe it is just scratching the surface. I seem to have more questions than answers.

Most of my blogs are not just my opinions, but a different aspect of a conversation that may have not been considered. In this piece, I am comparing the two extremes in political ideologies and it’s possible connection to our actual biology. I would venture to guess that most of us fall in between within each party. Pigeon holing people into one or the other party is unrealistic. There are likely at least a few dozen categories that people fall into. Either way, I believe we need a balance between Liberal and Conservative views. If the pendulum swings too far either way we lose something. We definitely need to have people with a variety of opinions in order to find that happy median.

~ Sean Labbe

Where's Your Trump Bumper Sticker??..

This will be the first election where I did not proudly display my candidate of choice’s bumper sticker on my 1973 Plymouth. My McCain, Ron Paul and Gary Johnson stickers will not be sharing company with Trump. I’ll admit, I would have much rather have been sticking a “Rand Paul” sticker on my Scamp, but the vast majority of the Republican people have spoken and they have chosen the Donald. The thought of Hillary in the White House, again, sends shivers down my spine. More catering to special interests, political correctness, pandering to racist pseudo ministers and groups with false agendas. Using the power of the Federal government to enforce their liberal agenda and reinforcing the anti-Police sentiment that President Obama has graciously bestowed upon our nation. My heart goes out to the Police Officers that lost their lives as a result of this dangerous stance our current White House has taken.

With that said, it may already be obvious that the chances of me voting for Hillary are slim and none, leaning more towards the latter. Trump is my obvious choice. Not excited how he comes across, but this guy has been in the business world for decades, with great success I might add. The business world is dog eat dog. Trump is also a New Yorker. As a humble guy from Connecticut, I have always found New Yorkers sharp-tongued and pushy (my wife is from up state). If I look deeper into the essence of what Trump says, that is where I find an ideology I can agree with. Jobs, economy, national pride and the end to political correctness which threatens our freedom of speech. The “wall” and immigration are admittedly low on my wish list and in a previous post, “Trump Will Improve the Lives of Illegal Immigrants”, I spelled out how I would handle it.  I believe that a Trump presidency would be beneficial to small businesses and in turn would boost the economy and add jobs. I do not have the same confidence with a Hillary presidency. In fact, I believe it would have the opposite effect, based on the current administration.

Now back to the bumper sticker. I value my 43-year-old car and I imagine it will be difficult to replace the curved back window after some anti-Trump teen decides that they disagree with my political choices and smashes out a window that is most likely older than their parents. This is what this election has come down to. The Media with its constant barrage of how evil Trump is and they have even tried to blame the violence at his rallies on him, even though it is clearly his detractors that are trying to silence his message with intimidation and violence. These anti-Trump folks have gone way beyond their right to “peaceably assemble” and in turn block highways, damage public property, smash Police cars and assault people for wearing Trump shirts. This is bullying at its worst. Many times the Police are apprehensive to step in and make arrests due to the presence of the Media and the backlash that comes when they are forced to deal with the radical liberal left. I’m not seeing anything from the Hillary camp regarding this violence and the Media has not been asking her to denounce any of this. But, when some fools from a white supremacist group announced that they supported Trump, the Media was all over Trump for not immediately denouncing them.

So, unfortunately I will be putting my bumper sticker tradition on hold and instead will blog and post about my dislike for the liberal ideology that has crippled our country and my support for a candidate that is not only willing to stand up to the Media with it’s obvious agendas, but for a candidate that truly loves his country and believes that not only were we a great country, but will be again.

~ Sean

The Democrats are Not Far Behind...

Now Democrats, don't get too comfortable up there in your ivory tower. Yes, the Republicans are a mess, but it was inevitable. Just like it is inevitable that the Democrats will have to weather a similar storm.  What's going on nationally has already occurred in my tiny little town in Eastern Connecticut.  We had a Republican party that dominated with little or no competition from the opposing party. This happened around the turn of the millenium.  The Republican party split. Many registered Republicans were disgusted with our party at the time and changed their party to Independent.  Newer and some younger Republicans were moving into town with more modern ideas of how things should be.  The cronyism that was going on had it's days numbered.  The party split and formed a third party.  This party consisted of Republicans, Democrats and Independents. Once the new party took hold and got it's message out, it dominated the elections and future elections to come. Once we brought back balance to our town, the third party disbanded, but it's influence and message is still relevant today.

I see this same thing occurring on a national scale.  In the 2008 elections, Ron Paul marked the beginning of an apparent split in philosophies within the Republican party.  Ron Paul saw bigger and bigger crowds during his campaign, especially with younger voters.  His message was refreshing and made sense. The Republican party at the time was still staunch in it's conservatism and was able to muscle out Ron Paul with a lot of help from the Mainstream Media. Virtually ignoring his rise in the polls and manipulating his numbers in states where his popularity was strong. It was scary to see the Liberal Media and the conservative Republicans share an enemy. Although it may have seemed it, Ron Paul's message was not lost. Because of Ron Paul, the Libertarian message was being heard.

Fast forward to 2012 and we saw an obvious turn within the Republican party.  Their nominee, Mitt Romney was not fairing as well with this new faction of the Republican Party. This was something that was a long time coming.  The party was leaning so far to the right that it was inevitable that some movement to the left had to happen. The religious right no longer has it's strong hold over the party. Donald Trump is a new Republican. As much as he says the Bible is his favorite book, we all know his real favorite book is the Art of the Deal. Personally, I think religion has it's place, but it should not be in our politics.

Now this year, I am seeing some fracturing within the Democrats. You have Hillary, who with all her escapades, has turned off many of the Democrats.  And then you have Bernie Sanders, the Ron Paul of the Democratic Party. There is a difference though. With the Republicans, they are starting to move slightly left. So you would think that the Democrats would start moving slightly right. Nope, they are actually moving further left! I don't care what Seth Mcfarlene says, we do not need more Socialism in our country.  President Obama has already damaged our country with his Socialist ways. Socialized healthcare and pandering to the extremist minority groups. He has made common sense a four letter word.

I am personally happy to see the Republican party changing. Much like my town's Republican party, it has started to not represent my core values and beliefs. We all need to re-read the Constitution and return back to what our fore-fathers intended.

- Sean