The Big Temper Tantrum of The Palestinians. How Donald Trump is Standing up to The Big Bully in The Middle East.

Protests and riots broke out in the middle east again after President Trump said that he would recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. A campaign promise he made and has now fulfilled. Palestinians and Muslims alike took to the streets on their Holy Day in what they called ‘a day of rage’ destroying property, throwing rocks at police, and even lighting tires on fire and rolling them towards the line of Israeli soldiers at the border.

Still if you read this article from Reuters you would think that it’s the Israelis who are out of line and the innocent Palestinians just want what’s right. Media bias doesn’t surprise me and I’m beyond being bothered by it, but when it comes from Reuters it does surprise me a little. I mean Reuters is sopposed to be one of the truly unbiased media outlets left, right?

It’s funny to me, perhaps funny isn’t the right word but one can’t help but chuckle when the hypocrisy is so blatant. The liberal left wants us to believe, and so does Islam that by not recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital it somehow helps the peace process. That, my friends is a lie! You know what would help the peace process? If people didn’t riot after a decision was made that they disagree with!

Liberals dub Islam a religion of peace and yet in the Reuters piece it’s Muslims who storm the streets and cause chaos. It’s Muslims who attack police and launch rockets.

We are certain that such steps will yield increased hatred, conflict, violence and suffering in Jerusalem and the Holy Land, moving us farther from the goal of unity and deeper toward destructive division,” 13 patriarchs and leaders of Christian Orthodox communities wrote in an open letter to Trump on Wednesday.”

That’s what was quoted in this CNN article when they asked religious leaders what they thought of Trump’s decision.

My question is, what doesn’t cause “increased hatred, conflict, violence and suffering” when it comes to the Middle East? I’ll tell you, Barack Obama and his weak kneed policies. Palestine has gotten really used to threatening violence everytime something comes up they don’t like, and Obama would give in every time. That’s why he, and the three presidents before him cowered away from fulfilling the promise they made to do what Donald Trump did. They always gave in to the bully and the bully didn’t go away satisfied like they’d hoped, nope, the bully got bolder and more aggressive. The bully doesn’t like when someone stands up to him and that’s what we’re seeing right now with Trump standing up to the terrorists that threaten Israel’s sovereignty everyday.

I wish I had recorded it but I saw on TV this week someone actually blaming evangelical Christians for the violence that erupted after the announcement was made. The media and their liberal puppies love to throw blame around for the violence and the unrest, the Christians are to blame, the Jews are to blame, Donald Trump is at fault, everyone except the Muslims who actually commit the violence.

If the Palestinians actually wanted peace they would be happy with what they’ve got, but they don’t want peace, they want Israel’s annihilation. They openly admit that, so does most of the war-torn countries of the Middle East. So don’t give me that crap that this move hurts the peace process, Ronald Reagan said it best “peace through strength” and that’s a motto to live by. You don’t get peace by cowering in the face of evil, you get peace by pushing back that evil and revealing how strong you are and declaring that you aren’t backing down. It works with a schoolyard bully and it’ll work with the terrorist organization known as Hamas too.

Donald Trump is the best president America has had in a very long time. And I’m not afraid to say that. Part of how I know that is based on how much the media hates him, how much Islam hates him and how much the Democrats hate him. He isn’t perfect, he says things on Twitter that make me scratch my head, but by and large Donald Trump is poised to become the greatest president, ever!

Anyway, these are my thoughts and whether you like them or not, agree with them or not, I thank you for reading.


Breaking News! The Simpson’s is a Racist Show Because it Pokes Fun at Apu.

So I came across this story saying that the way The Simpson’s projects Apu is racist. It’s says, and I quote “elements of the character are troubling, including his arranged marriage, many children and that he is defined by being the owner of a convenience store.” They also say “…It gets to the insidiousness of racism.” And “elements of the Apu character are bolstering racial stereotypes“.

I have one question, which character on The Simpson’s DOESN’T bolster stereotypes of whatever race, creed, sex or religion of said character? Homer is a middle aged white man who likes to drink beer and overeat. Not to mention that he’s portrayed as an absent father, lazy, doesn’t do his job, and sits on the couch all day. Chief Wiggum is also an obese, donut eating, lazy, white cop who couldn’t chase a crook if he stole his donuts. Snake is a white trash, low life thief who always finds himself behind bars. Cletus lives in crappy house, on a farm, also has a lot of kids which he can’t name, the whole family combined couldn’t make a complete set of teeth, and he’s portrayed as a dumb hillbilly! The nerdy scientist, the Reverend, the Reverend’s wife, comic book guy, Martin, Marge’s twin sisters all bolster stereotypes, not just Apu.

The show is chock full of stereotypes, and the only bad one is APU??!!?? I’m sorry, but this angers me just a little. Everyone wants to complain about being stereotyped and stereotypes must be racist…. I’m gonna take a deep breath….

Ned Flanders. You know Ned, don’t ya? Here’s another stereotype, only this one nobody complains about. Ned is a Christian, he doesn’t cuss, he’s always friendly, he’s always in church on Sundays, his kids have names that rhyme with God, they don’t watch the same TV and movies as everyone else, are sheltered and portrayed as scared of the outside world. Ned is taken advantage of by Homer, wears a sweater all the time and quite frankly is a bit of an oddball. None of this bothers me! I can relate to Ned, stereotypes and all.

I am a Christian who tries not to cuss, I find myself being taken advantage of, I don’t let my kids watch the crap on TV (including The Simpson’s) or watch the movies that other kids watch. I try to be friendly, if I’m not outta town on Sunday, I’m in church. Apart from the mustache and the green sweater, I am Ned Flanders!

Why are stereotypes bad all of a sudden? Why is it bad to point out that a lot of East Indian men own and operate convenience stores? If that’s bad then shouldn’t portraying middle aged white men as fat, lazy slobs also be bad? If you ask me TV and Hollywood in general stereotype white men in a far worse way than they do other people. Just take a look at any sitcom on TV today, or in the last twenty years, how many of them show married men with kids as fat, lazy, slobs? To be fair, some of these stereotypes are true. That’s what makes them funny! Men my age tend to gain weight, love to sit on the couch and enjoy way more than our fair share of unhealthy calories. I don’t take offense to any of that.

Let’s take Apu for example, he owns a business and runs it. Isn’t that a good thing? Why is it so wrong to say it out loud? The fact is, a lot of East Indian men DO own and operate convenience stores. I say good for them! They’re providing for their families, they’re working. They’re doing it in a way that suits what they want out of life.

Here’s another fact, there are a lot of lazy, overweight, white men out there. Is it racist to say that? Most people don’t think so, but if I were to replace the word ‘white’ with another color and said “the prisons are full of…” I would be called racist and almost nothing I could say or do would help get me out of that hole.

My point is, the liberal double standard is becoming more and more apparent. I’m glad that it’s so obvious, I’m sad that most still can’t see it. Obviously a part of the willful ignorance ingrained into their newest recruits – conservative -bad! Liberal – good.

I wanna go back to Ned Flanders here for a bit. I admit that Christians have in the past spoken out about The Simpsons saying that it’s not a good show and kids shouldn’t watch it. We’ve even tried to get it off the air from time to time. Much to our dismay the show goes on, and I’m fine with that. Ned Flanders is a character they hammer pretty hard most of the time. They make him look goofy, and silly, and aloof. They exaggerate his okaly dokely way of talking, they show him outraged at the things non believers do, they even portray him as the kind of Christian that uses the fear of God as a way of evangelizing…even to his kids. Again, most of that doesn’t bother me, I would say it’s a true representation, or you might say, a stereotype, of what many church going people do, or at least how culture sees us.

The show also shows him reading the Bible, it shows the kids reading Bible oriented books, and watching TV shows that are faith based. These are good things! This is accurate of what Christian dads like myself try to do. Mind you they do often portray these things as silly or someone makes fun of them for doing it, but the image is there nonetheless. Now imagine for a second if Apu’s character was shown in a way where his religion was being mocked like Ned’s. Do you think that the people who wrote the article would’ve stopped at simply saying that stereotyping Apu is racist? No way, they would be looking to publicly hang the writers for being so demeaning to another religion, they might even coin a new word “hinduphobic’ or something. There would be protests and boycotts, and if they had their way people would be fired, the show would be canceled. All because they poked a little fun at an eastern religion, the same way they already do to our westernized version of Christianity.

Hank Azaria has apologized for how the character he voices has been portrayed, he says that The Simpson’s writers are evaluating what to do next with Apu. Hank Azaria is a comedian, poke fun at the world is his job, does it seem odd to anyone other than me that all of a sudden, after twenty five years, that now they see the stereotypes as offensive? I don’t think it’s a coincidence, I think that since Hollywood is seeing a reckoning from the many, many women they’ve used, abused and exploited that whoever is complaining about Apu is simply hopping on the bandwagon, maybe a different part of the bandwagon, but they’re hoping to get their share of the pie. Need I remind anyone that Hollywood and TV glorified Charlie Sheen for his character on Two and a Half Men and how he can get any woman, anywhere to jump into his bed? It was funny when Sheen exploited women, but it’s not funny when it happens in real life?

Anyway, one more point. Russell Peters, you know who I’m talking about. He’s of East Indian heritage and he makes fun of it all the time! Is this the same double standard we see in other parts of progressive society, where it’s okay for people to make fun of their own culture but it’s not okay for people to make fun of other cultures? I think so.

Long story short, if The Simpson’s needs to rewrite Apu into a less offensive role then maybe they should also start rewriting Homer, or Marge, or even Bart, because not all men are like Homer, not all women like Marge, and not all boys like Bart.

Gov’t Says Fast Food Ads Are Bad For Kids. Question; Aren’t Ads Objectifying Women Also Bad? Why Ban McDonald’s Ads But Not Unrealistic Images of Women? 

Our government is at it again, this time they plan on banning junk food ads that are targeted at kids. 

On the surface, this seems like a good idea right? I mean don’t our kids eat way too much garbage and not nearly enough fruits and vegetables? Wouldn’t a ban on Oreo cookies be a good thing, if they don’t see it, they won’t want it, right? 

How do you write that sound the buzzer makes when a contestant got something wrong on a game show? Well that’s the sound you should be hearing right now! Yeah kids today should eat healthier, the same would’ve been said about my generation and the one before that. But my kids don’t know about junk food from ads they’ve seen on TV, they know about junk food because of me! I bought the stuff and I let them eat it! 

This is nothing more than government censorship over free speech and the continuing overreach of a corrupt government. 

If they wanted to start banning ads harmful to our children then maybe they need to ban the YouTube ads before an episode of Paw Patrol that show a scantily clad warrior princess provocatively riding her horse into battle with just enough slow motion bouncing that would make Pamela Anderson on Baywatch blush! Seriously, there are more depictions of unrealistic women in ads for games you can download to your tablet than in a Victoria’s Secret commercial. 

I play a word game with my six year old and it’s ad endorsed, so that means that in order to keep playing you have to watch an ad first. Here’s a screenshot from one of those ads.

This is on a ‘E’ rated game too! Everyone is supposed to be able to play and the content will be appropriate, the ads apparently aren’t part of that rating. 

Here’s​ another ad I saw while hovering over my four year old as he clicked on a YouTube episode of Team Umizoomi, keep in mind that most of those commercials must be watched for a while before your video will start. 

That’s a girls kissing game made by some group claiming ties to Barbie. Correct me if I’m wrong but doesn’t it look like the mermaids are just lining up to kiss this guy? And of course each of these girls look like they’re ready to move in to the Playboy mansion… if only they had legs. 

Finally, we have the famous Kate Upton ads she did for Game of War. Showing more cleavage than a Hollywood yoga studio she made the game one of the most popular, wealthy games in the history of mobile apps. Unlike the other two ads I showed you, this one was live action. Upton rode horses that trotted along conveniently bouncing Kate and her assets, she wielded a sword and she stared intently at the camera making all the nerds playing this game weak in their knees. 

But won’t somebody please think of the children!? I can just hear Reverend Lovejoy’s wife begging cry to think of the kids when it comes to these ridiculous ads that are allowed to play, uncensored. Meanwhile the government want to ban ads for potatoe chips and Snickers bars because they’re the harmful ones. Not the ads that suggest that it’s normal for two men to be in bed together while the girlfriend of one of the men ponders what to do in this scenario – obviously she should join them. No that’s not as bad as an ad featuring Toucan Sam following his nose, or Tony the tiger thrusting his tiger fist in the air shouting about how grrrrreat Frosted Flakes are. 

I get it, I really do, obesity is at epidemic proportions, kids are eating junk three meals a day and our overly busy lives don’t help. All I’m saying is that our government says they want to do what’s best for the kids and that’d be fine, if it were true. In reality they (the government) is trying to ease the burden on the healthcare system by letting us see less commercials for Doritos and Coca Cola. But censorship isn’t going to do that, especially if they aren’t going to enforce it. Remember when they made it illegal for commercials to be louder than the show you were watching? I actually agreed with that one, but nobody enforces it, overweight car salesmen still yell at you through the screen at a decibel level that would make King Kong cower in fear. What good is the law? 

Anyway, I’m ranting, I just thought that someone had to say it, so I did. 

Have a great day! 

In case you’re wondering, this is where my info  I came from

Worst. Premier. Ever!

If it didn’t seem already that the Ontario government is hellbent on bankrupting the province, this latest ploy to buy the vote should make it quite obvious. 

Click this link to see the news article to which I’m referring. 

Kathleen Wynne in all her brilliance, plans to give free daycare to low income families and has the audacity to call it ‘universal’ daycare. Apparently she doesn’t know that universal means everyone. 

For all the talk about discrimination and acceptance and tolerance the liberals do not seem to understand that their “universal” plans discriminate against the people who dare to work for a living. Child care is extremely expensive and any government subsidized plan will only drive up the cost for those who have to pay for it. Making it even more unfair to those who don’t fall into the category of low income. 

The same goes for her “universal” drug plan, if you’re under twenty five, your drugs are free! Again for all the talk about pay inequality doesn’t something like this just scream discrimination against everyone over twenty five? I mean how fair is it that a 24 year old and 26 year old could have the same prescription filled at the same time and one of them has to pay for it, and the other doesn’t? Then again, these “universal” plans of hers aren’t exactly designed to be fair, they’re designed to buy the votes of every single millennial voter out there. After all what kid nowadays isn’t going to give you the vote if your just like his enabling parents who never say “no” and always buy them stuff? 

Let’s talk about Wynne’s plan for “universal” basic income. Just another way to help the impoverished right? Wrong. Hmmm let’s see, if I’m working at McDonald’s for minimum wage making between twenty and thirty thousand a year (if I’m lucky), and my buddy who plays video games in his mom’s basement all day gets a government check every month for about the same as mine from Mickey D’s, why on earth am I going to keep punching in Big Mac’s at the till? Oh that’s right, because minimum wage is going up to $15 bucks an hour and that’s going to encourage me to continue to work, if I still have a job that is, after the tech companies in China realize that they can make a computer to do my job for less than the cost of three months pay and thanks to the TPP they won’t have to pay to bring it over… Ronald McDonald isn’t gonna wanna pay me $15 bucks an hour to do a job a computer can do faster and better and won’t sue after it’s feelings got hurt when being told to do a better job. 

The Ontario liberals are a disaster of epic proportions! One colossally stupid idea after another and somehow they still have the support of much of Toronto. Which wouldn’t bother me except for the fact that our ridiculous setup doesn’t truly represent the province, just the city of T.O. If they vote liberal, the rest of us really have no say whatsoever. 

For those that are really paying attention they’ll see her ploys for what they really are – giving you free stuff to vote for her. What makes it worse is that these are only promises that she “plans” to implement after she’s elected at which point she can back out and blame it on those pesky conservatives who won’t support her plans to help the needy. Ironically, her backing away from these dumb plans is something I’d be happy to see if only because I don’t want the province to become bankrupt. I bet though that even Kathleen Wynne knows that she can’t pull off all these universal plans to make dependants of low income families, it would cost way too much. 

So where does this leave a province that’s already paying too much for everything from food to electricity to real estate, and is taxed more than just about anyone on the planet? Where does this leave a province that somehow, in spite of its leadership is actually seeing some economic growth? It leaves us in a spot where some might say ‘its not that bad, at least we’ve come a long way in terms of human rights, right?” But it’s not good either people, the housing market is about to pop, dissatisfaction among voters has never been higher, and we’ve never seen the debt that we are in right now. 

If there’s one thing Wynne has done right it would be how she’s polarizing the vote. She is going so far left with the hot button topics she makes Hillary Clinton look like a centrist. She will get liberals to vote, there’s no doubt about that. And, she will win the election if conservatives don’t show up come election day. That my friends is where this is truly troubling, our flip flopper of a leader in Ontario – Patrick Brown should be taking a page out of Wynne’s book by leaning further right and drawing a very clear line in the sand between him and Wynne. I might go as far as to say that following Donald Trump’s lead would garner him more support if he’d give it a shot. Sadly, Brown wants to play the middle and try and sway some of the liberal vote in his favor, that’s not going to work, he needs to go after the vote that will vote conservative if they believe in the conservative leader. Instead he’s been wishy washy about the whole sex ed fiasco, among other things, but he’s done very little thus far in terms of going after voters who really want to vote for him. He’s leaving a giant Stephen Harper shaped hole in the collective soul of conservative voters, (I know he was national and we’re talking provincial, but the analogy fits) voters who desperately want to see in him what we saw in Harper – true conservative principles and values that we can count on. 

This is your election to lose Mr Brown, the balls in your court, take the shot and be the leader we, no Ontario desperately needs, even if they don’t know it. 

Love Thy Enemy

Last week Kathy Griffin got herself in hot water after she posted a very push the envelope kind of picture to social media. The pic, if you haven’t seen it won’t be seen here but it was of her holding a bloodied, decapitated head that resembled Donald Trump. 

Naturally, the backlash came from both sides of the political aisle, which if you ask me I think she expected and had a plan for, but what I want to talk about today isn’t about the picture, the backlash or what kind of person Kathy Griffin is for posting such a disturbing picture. Since this is a Christian blog, I want to talk about how Christians should handle things like these.


LOVE YOUR ENEMIES -Jesus Christ. Matthew 5:44

The knee jerk reaction today is to fight fire with fire. It’s even the reaction for many Christians who quote the Exodus 21 law of an eye for an eye (out of context of course). 

I have to admit, my initial reaction to Griffin’s picture was one of disgust, I anticipated and hoped for people to call her out for it, I hoped for her to lose her job and I hoped that she never be seen again as having a status of celebrity. (That may be due to me not caring for her brand of comedy, but nonetheless…) All those things happened except for the celebrity thing, I see now how this will actually help her and perhaps it was the (devious) plan all along, I don’t know. But the fact that I wished for her demise has nothing to do with her, and everything to do with me. 

I have a similar feeling when I see other kids pick on my one of my kids, that kid needs a spanking, that kid needs better parents, someone should teach that kid a lesson! I actually have to tell myself, out loud sometimes that that kid is just a kid. I have to remind myself that my kids do bad things too and that from someone else’s shoes, my kid needs a spanking. 

At the core of Jesus’ ministry is love. Love one another (John 13:34), love the Lord (Matthew 22:37), and of course love your enemy (Matthew 5:44) are just a few examples of Jesus’ love teachings. So while I don’t see that kid as my enemy I can see that Jesus left no room for anything but love when it comes to how I, or my child should treat him or her. And the same goes for someone like Kathy Griffin, who would probably be in almost all things the complete opposite of me and what I stand for, Jesus leaves no room for anything less than love towards that person, like-minded or not.  

So what do we do then with those people who do things to provoke that knee jerk reaction from us? Kathy Griffin had to know she would hit a nerve with that pic, despite her denials since then claiming it was supposed to be edgy, artsy or an expression of her first amendment right to free speech, she knew that at the very least Donald Trump’s supporters would find it offensive. She knew that a lot of us have a hard time resisting that urge to react in kind and obviously a lot of people did. Many would say that we can’t just do nothing, what she did deserves consequences and they’re probably right but what I would respond with is “who are we to dole out those consequences?” Have we forgotten Jesus’ reaction to the crowd that brought Him the woman caught in adultery? 

If we must do something and that something must align with the teachings of Jesus then whatever we do should resemble Jesus while at the same time….no, not the same time anything, it should resemble Jesus and that’s it. I brought up the woman caught in the act of adultery, according to the law at that time the leaders had every right to stone her – she broke the law and the punishment for that was death. Jesus comes along and points out the fact that all (except Him) have sinned and that if they wish to carry out the law on her they should feel free to do so but only after examining themselves and their sins. If they could honestly say they were free of sin, than go ahead, cast the first stone. You know the story, one by one they drop their stones and walk away leaving nobody but Jesus who, ironically enough had no sin, He could’ve stoned her and it would be right to do so. Of course, Jesus being Jesus does not do that, He acknowledges that she sinned, tells her to sin no more and lets her carry on. You can read the story on John 8:1-11. 

So, let’s say Kathy Griffin is the woman caught in sin. She knows what she did is wrong and so does everyone else. Are we wrong to call her out and seek justice on her? Not necessarily. But ask yourself, what good would that do? Besides giving her lynch mob the satisfaction of knowing they destroyed her, not a single good thing would come out of that. Now, if we were to truly practice what Jesus taught, we could instead examine ourselves, search our souls for the sins we don’t want to confess and see that maybe, for the moment, Kathy did something pretty bad, but you have in yourself angry feelings towards her that Jesus compared to murder (Matthew 5:21-22). Which one of you deserves the consequences of their sin? Her, or both of you? 

That brings me to the gospel. Romans 6:23 says that sin brings death, but Jesus brings life. Since all have sinned, all deserve death. Since Jesus came, all can receive the life we don’t deserve. Whether it’s my sin of anger or Kathy Griffin’s sin of anger towards Trump, we both deserve death according to the law. The difference is I’ve accepted the salvation that Jesus accomplished, Kathy Griffin? Well, I don’t know her heart, I can’t judge. 

The long and short of it is this – she sinned, but she may not see it that way. You’ve sinned and hopefully you can see that and repent of them. If we truly love our enemies the way Jesus taught, our reaction towards her wouldn’t be one of hatred or anger, it would look like what Jesus did in John chapter 8. 

Hello, My Name Is…

Hi, thanks for clicking on whatever you clicked on to get you here. My name is J.D and I started this blog in light of all the things going on in our world today that leave people confused and scratching their heads. If you’ve ever just stopped and looked at where we are as a society and wondered “how did we get here?” you are in the right place. 

This is the place where I will (hopefully) say what you’ve been thinking, and for the other end of the spectrum I’ll be saying what you hope nobody says. 

I am a Christian. I am a husband and a father, and I have a point of view that I hope to share with you. More importantly than my POV however is that if I accomplish nothing else, I hope to share Jesus, the Gospel, and God’s amazing plan for our lives. My hope is that through whatever I post here, you will either ask the hard questions if you’re an unbeliever, be encouraged in your faith if you are a believer, and overall learn something about Jesus you didn’t know before. 

Thanks so much for reading, I look forward to your feedback.