How opinions do change

AS WE BLAST further in the presidential campaign season, you’ll be seeing more conservative, political stuff hereabouts. If it’s too much for your sensibilities, I offer these three alternatives for blog posts about life south of the Rio Bravo.

One is Steve Cotton who lives occasionally on the sweltering Pacific coast at Barra de Navidad. You’ll get your doses of Mexican parades, sunsets, food and bugs.

Two is Babs, an old lady who lives in the Gringo-infested burg of San Miguel de Allende. There you’ll get lots of news and photos of her grandchildren because old ladies do that, but she offers fun stuff about Mexico too. You will encounter Trump Derangement Syndrome on occasion, however.

Last but hardly least is Al Lanier who lives outside San Miguel. His blog is very good but, once again, you’ll encounter Trump Derangement Syndrome at times. Al, like me, is a former newspaperman. He’s also a refugee from communist Cuba who now supports the Left in the United States. Latinos can be contradictory and amusing, eh?

As for The Moon, we’ll be back to normal after November 3. That’s not to say that we’re going completely political till then, but there will be plenty of politics due to the hilarious lineup of Democrat hopefuls and the endless fun of the Blond Bomber.

The hole is too deep and full of gold not to mine it.

The top video illustrates beautifully the hypocrisy of leading Democrats over the years on the issue of border control. Then they liked it, now they don’t.

Below is a great take on Democrat candidate Mayor Pete. That vlog is run by a house painter who lives in a mobile home he calls the Hobo Dojo in the Los Angeles cesspool.

It’s his, I believe, second appearance here. Let’s give him a hand!

31 thoughts on “How opinions do change

  1. It was as recently as 2012 when the Democrats still touted Obama’s record of the most deportations ever as being a good thing. And as much sympathy as one might have for the poor south of the border, it would be fiscally impossible to both run an open borders policy, and a free healthcare-for-all policy simultaneously. One would simply have to choose.

    But let’s not forget that the “fiscally responsible” Republicans are also living in their own fantasy land, running trillion dollar-plus deficits here at the top of the business cycle.

    Frankly, we’re doomed no matter which party wins.


    Kim G
    Boston, MA
    Where we’red tired of being so realistically gloomy.


      1. How about a little “sanctuary” for those of us here legally, following the rules? This idea that you have to coddle criminals who are here illegally on top of their more serious crimes is just plain ridiculous.


  2. I am gobsmacked by the “opinions” held earlier which totally contradict what the pols are saying these days. They do depend on no one having the presence of mind to dig up the past to compare the consistency of their “opinions.” Voters are easily swayed by what they see and hear in TV ads and “debates” aired currently.


    1. Carole: In the era of the internet your past never disappears, does it? The Democrat pols have changed their tunes because political correctness has grown stronger by the year. And one reason Democrats and their subset the SJWs holler so is that The Donald is incredibly not PC and is very vocal about it. Drives them bonkers.


    1. Ms. Shoes: That is quite true, nor will one find Trump Praise either because the two of you are nervous about the mob, which makes sense for some people. Not me, of course. The main reason I included neither of you, and I did consider it, is that you — especially you — rarely write anything. You are ghosts. Too bad because you’re both very talented.


  3. Well, it is as if the Democrat party is dividing into two separate sects. The mainline party of something for nothing and the socialist party which in fact promises everything but delivers nothing. They promise free this and free that, but government cannot give something to someone without first taking it from someone else. But both sides of the party still ask the same question “What’s in it for me?” Ever see a poor Democrat politician?

    But I am afraid we have run out of the so-called rich to despoil. The truly rich live in the Far East and the Middle East. They are not subject to our taxes. If we confiscated the wealth of all of the so-called U.S. billionaires, we would still be in the same ugly fix we now find ourselves. There just isn’t enough to solve our problems.

    Worse, there is a whole class of people that are dependent upon government handouts. They do not produce enough to justify their current lifestyles. They have become entitled to a better lifestyle, and they do not want to give it up. This will not end well. Both factions of the party are mean-spirited and hateful. With Mr. Trump in office, we will see a few more years before it all falls down. If any of the Democrats get into the White House, it well be over in a matter of months.


      1. Mr. Trump is kind of crude, and he speaks to the problems directly. He reminds me of the roto rooter guy. Not one we hold up as a model, but we are sure glad to see him when he arrives. He is what is needed at this time.

        All bets are off if that Wuhan virus gets out of China. I am afraid the Chinese authorities are not being entirely honest about the whole problem. It seems as if some Chinese researchers working at the Canadian lab stole the virus and sent it to the Chinese germ warfare center in Wuhan. There some aspects of the HIV virus were joined into the virus to make it a very powerful weapon. But it all went wrong when the virus got away from them. Doctors in Thailand are using HIV medicine to treat people, and it seems to be working. Let’s hope and pray it is contained. If it gets into Central Asia or Africa it is all over.


        1. Señor Gill: I don’t find Trump crude. I find him refreshing! Love the guy because he sends the PC legions into apoplexy.

          If the coronavirus gets out of China? It’s already out of China. We are all doomed. Luckily, you and I cannot die young.


  4. Well sir, you got the old pot well stirred on this one. It’s truly fascinating to watch the rewind from the internet. Folks just can’t escape their past anymore.
    I really hope a goodly number of us up here North of the Rio Bravo are paying attention. I am personally acquainted with several who are. And, they’re not all old like me.

    Carry on, sir !


    1. Yes, but to keep a mind working and thinking requires that the mind be challenged, and probably more importantly requires admitting that one might be mistaken.


      1. Creigh: The Democrat bigwigs changing their tunes was due to the changing political climate on the Left. It’s self-serving, pure and simple. Nothing noble about it. Feel free to feel otherwise.


        1. Oh, I was referring to keeping our own minds thinking and working. As far as Democratic bigwigs changing their minds, sure, circumstances change so they have to adapt. Just like Republican bigwigs have had to adapt to Trump. (Looking at Lindsey Graham among many others forced to do 180-degree turns.)


  5. At the National Prayer Breakfast on February 6, Arthur Brooks, a Harvard professor and former president of the conservative American Enterprise Institute, gave a talk about what he believes is the greatest crisis facing our nation and many other countries around the world: Contempt for people whose politics we don’t agree with, rather than dialogue or an effort to understand where they are coming from. A complete text of the speech is available at the Washington Post website:

    If you can’t get through the WP firewall, you may find an abbreviated version with some commentary, at
    the website of Church Leaders, a religious publication I’d never heard of:

    Brooks, whom I’d never heard of either, apparently is a conservative and very religious man, and his speech is laced with citations from the New Testament, and advice that people on either side of today’s fractured political scene might find impossible to take, such as “loving your enemies,” that we can only persuade other people to join our thinking with love, nor argument. We should preach to people on our political side to turn down the volume too.

    That’s a tough one, unless you’re on the straightaway to sainthood.

    But I think you and I can do our share to try to listen to other people’s views without demonizing. In your blog, sometimes I get the impression that you turn up the rhetorical flame just for the fun of watching the kettle boil, whistle and jump around on the stove. I don’t believe that someone who writes as well and methodically as you do really believes some of the stuff you write about Trump. You’re not stupid, nor deaf or blind to what’s going on. Hillary, and others on the Democratic side, might take Brooks’ advice too, so as not dismiss political opponents as “deplorable” one way or another.

    Trump’s political strategy, I believe, is based on political agitation (insults, taunts, hyperbole) not a overarching philosophy. His position on abortion and other key issues, as well as his party affiliation, has historically been all over the place. He might be a more difficult guy to persuade to tone it down, for the sake of rational political dialogue.


    1. Señor Lanier: Actually, I believe everything I write about Trump, which is that he’s a far, far better president than the U.S. would have had if Hillary had won and the Clinton Mafia had returned to the White House. Trump is not perfect because no one is. However, he is doing a very good job as president given the restraints of the position and the opposition forces facing him, the so-called Deep State, most of which is not elected. Economy up. Unemployment way down. Regulations falling. Border wall increasing. Military expenditures up. There are negatives too, of course. But perhaps my favorite aspect of Trump is his giving daily raspberries to the PC mob. Political Correctness is absolutely ruining Western Civilization, and I do not think that can be overstated. He’s a wonderful antidote.

      As for loving one’s enemies, it’s not an approach I embrace because it’s nonproductive. It just emboldens one’s enemies, as our Mexican president is currently learning well though he doesn’t admit it. As for Trump’s political agitation, it’s a campaign tactic that worked in 2016, and it will work this year too. Power to him.

      Rational political dialogue, you say? Tell that to the Democrat Powers that Be. A more strident bunch one would be hard pressed to find. And the Democrat hopefuls’ stances? Open borders, free healthcare for illegals, voting from prison, abortion rights up to nine months, etc. Lordy me. Even James Carville is blanching.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. Perhaps the Democrats not calling everyone (including each other these days) racists, homophobes, and Nazis would be a good place to start. And to be clear, I don’t believe you do this. Which is to your credit.


        1. OK, well, I stand reluctantly corrected. Though I hate to think I’ve become a partisan to the party I resisted for almost all of my adult life, it does seem that those calling for civility are mostly Democrats. And those same Democrats are the ones calling people racists, etc.

          As for the term “Nazi,” my parents spent their teen years in Copenhagen under literal Nazi occupation. And my mother at least has assured me that whatever else he may be, Trump is not a Nazi. And she doesn’t even like Trump.


          1. Kim: Señor Al, otherwise mostly a normal and fine person, loses all perspective when the great President Trump comes upon any scene.

            As for calling people racists, both the left and the right do it too much, especially the left. But the difference is that the left is so fixated on skin color that they are indeed racists. It’s not simply an epithet when applied to them. It often is when aimed at conservatives. We care far less about skin color. We judge people by their character, not their race.

            Liked by 1 person

  6. I do not mind the fact that politicians change their views. A similar compilation could be made of how Republican views on immigration have changed since the Reagan era. What bothers me is that views do not merely change; entire moral justifications change. Same-sex marriage is a perfect example. Prior to the Obergefell decision, there were only a handful of Democrat politicians who supported same-sex marriage. Almost overnight, politicians fell all over themselves to reverse their position. But it did not stop there. Now, it was evil to hold a position they themselves had held a few hours earlier. Talk about a bucket of deplorables.

    Thanks for the blog plug. It is true that I have restricted my comments on politics these days. That is partly due to the inability of most people to discuss issues without reducing the discussion to celebrity-bashing (or adoring). I just do not find those exchanges to be very interesting. Now and then, I discuss issues without reference to personalities, but inevitably the first comment will be something along the lines of “I love Trump” or “Trump is a homophobic, racist dictator.” I would rather talk about insects than be part of one of those pointless exchanges. But you have given me an idea for a new essay.


    1. Señor Cotton: It’s not difficult to keep political discussions under control. One must simply wield a firm hand. It’s the leftists who usually go berserk, something they only do once hereabouts.


Comments are closed.