Why Isn't There An 'S' In 'DNC'? (Originally Published On 12/1/2018)

For many years, the Left and the Democratic Party have championed themselves as the caretakers of the poor, and the folks whose primary concern is ensuring the entitlements of those who are less than fortunate; these poor people are severely misled, sometimes out of desperation. This desperation is alleged to have been created by the Republican Party but with no exact reason ever being given. Sure, some will say racism (which is likely the foremost reason most Leftists will give), but to accurately call the Republican Party racist (a wholly different argument than suggesting parts of, groups within, or people who subscribe to the Republican Party) one would have to either ignore the entire history of the United States, or purposefully not look for the clues that would indicate where racism is being taught, and to whom. Myths are commonly bound to popular events in the history of the U.S. like the "Southern Strategy", the battle of "Crow Creek", and, more recently, the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Is there some truth bound to these events? Absolutely; but to discern the truth from the lie would mean there has been some effort to dilute or distract from the truth. But, why?

We should get a truth out there right away: considering the benefits earned by military personell are done so at a price none of the civilians are required to endure, to call them "benefits" is a slight misnomer. The mistitled "benefits" the military folk earn require the individual undergoing the transformation to actually realize the very real possibility of having to potentially give their life in the line of duty; this is part of what makes our freedoms so valuable. See, while the Democratic Party has a history of helping folks, who they choose to help are not usually ones who choose to place value in objective truths or values; I mean, few owithin the established Democratic Party have actions that can be attributed to a well working moral compass; one could easily speculate that these folks have an unwritten vendetta to settle with the Republican Party because the Republican Party has one key desire the Democratic Party, as a whole, does not: a well furnished military.

The military folks end up having one of the most devastating jobs and, yet, the help they should be entitled to are still reffered to as benefits by organizations that would rather disacknowledge a threat. The entitlements are paid for by the collecting of taxes and appropriated by the government; the entitlements are not paid for by the Democratic party, nor is this a concept supported by the core values of the party.

The Democratic Party assumes three main things about the very folks they have unjustly assumed representation of:

1- The Democratic party assumes the poor have allowed the Democratic Party to represent them unquestionably, 2- The Poor require the help they (the Democratic Party) provide, 3-  Nobody is going to call them on keeping the poor poor.

The defense of the poor, or more appropriately, the nation, is truly not the responsibility of the individual as required by their government or the society, instead it is usually voluntary. There is much ado and debate about the system, often referred to as the "military industrial complex" by our friends on the left, and there is an amount of good critique which comes from the left and the Democrats, the issue ultimately becomes one of whether there is a need to potentially defend our country from any attacker. Most on the Democrat side of the aisle would likely vote in favor of defunding the military, which would bring the people further under the bidding of the party.

Fortunately, through dialogue and fact checking our potential leadership, we can get a very good idea of what a candidate really believes, how they really behave, and what their motives could generally be attributed to. Welcome to the Age of the Internet.  

Thank you for reading.