2024 Election Eve Thoughts

We are now down to the final day of the 2024 election cycle.  I believe we are also hearing the dying gasps of the failed Harris-Walz candidacy - the most radically leftist ticket this country has ever seen.  Having neither a proven track-record of achievement, nor past positions they are willing to defend, or even discernible issues to run on (unless you count expanding the gruesome torture and slaughter of innocent unborn children at the hands of an abortionist).  Instead, they are forced to resort to desperate slander and dishonest attack ads funded by the globalist corporatist interests that find their home with Democrats these day

But the truth will prevail - Past, Present, and Future.  We saw Donald Trump's past record of peace, prosperity, and safety during his term.  We see what Harris and Joe Biden has been doing to this country in the past 4 years - inflation, war, and lawlessness.  And we know what a future of a Harris-Walz administration will continue to do to this country, if given another 4 years to extend the decline, misery, and malaise.  Their path to victory, if you can call it that, is predicated on ignorance.  It is based largely on convincing you not to believe your own eyes, forgetting how good we had it during the Trump presidency, or not noticing the shrinking buying power of your paycheck.

 

Thus, it is not to say there is no message there.  There is a clear overarching message - summarized in one word: IGNORE.

- Ignore her long history of Marxist economics and promised price controls learned from her Stanford economist father and her own studies at Howard University

- Ignore her unremarkable record of public service in CA, and how her career was only launched because of her adulterous relationship with Willie Brown - the most powerful man in California at the time

- Ignore her past hard left public stands on the issues and unwillingness to defend them

- Ignore her record in the Senate where she was ranked to the left of even the radical Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders

- Ignore her failed record as a Vice President, President of the Senate, and Border Czar

- Ignore her almost complete lack of positive accomplishments in all those years in government

- Ignore her wholehearted insistence that "the border is secure" and "Bidenomics is working"

- and ignore the fact that you can barely afford a gallon of orange juice, a 12-pack of Pepsi, a couple dozen eggs, or even a Big Mac.

Ignore all of this and vote for four more years of it, because of the man they want you to hate.  

First they tried to convince voters Donald Trump was a threat to democracy (despite the fact that we have a Representative Republic, not a democracy).  When that didn't work, it was that Donald Trump is a Fascist.  And when they still couldn't get traction for their failing campaign, it became Donald Trump is Hitler incarnate and his followers are Third Reich throwbacks and human garbage.

Frankly, this is as clear an example of psychological projection as you can find.  As cynical, as hysterical, and yes, as diabolical as the Democrats themselves are, anyone who actually understands the absolute horrors wrought by fascism in the 1930s and 1940s, would still hesitate to call them fascists.  And that is despite the fact that one can rather safely say that they exhibit similar lawless, heavy-handed and tyrannical tendencies. 

But since they are the ones so freely throwing around the words Nazi and Fascist, it is worth the effort to examine more deeply the basis of their disingenuous exercise in projection...

As you know, it was the Biden Harris regime - not Donald Trump - who actually weaponized the judicial system to persecute those who opposed them, be it parents at school board meetings, grandmothers peacefully protesting outside abortion clinics, Republican political opponents, and ultimately, targeting and attempting to imprison their chief political rival.  So, who is it that is effectively utilizing fascist tactics? 

You see, it was their corrupt DOJ, under the leadership of Attorney General Merrrick Garland which colluded with corrupt, partisan local and state prosecutors from hostile venues to bring multiple expired, frivolous, and unprecedented felony charges against the other political party's presidential nominee.  So who's actually employing fascist methodology?

It was her Orwellian-sounding Dept. of Homeland Security, under Alejandro Mayorkas, that perjured himself, violated his oath of office, and blatantly ignored the department's mandate by turning the border patrol into a welcome wagon for tens of millions of illegal aliens, including criminals, drug smugglers, human traffickers, and even would-be terrorists who were invited across the porous southern border.  Who are the lawless fascists?

They attempted to remove their political opposition - actually their opposition from both parties,  (Trump and Kennedy) from the primary and general election ballots. That certainly sounds fascist-like, doesn't it?

And it was she who was nominated - or more accurately coronated - by party insiders to head her political party's ticket, without appearing on any state ballot or the benefit of winning a single primary.  So who exactly is the Fascist?

They are opposed to voter ID laws and ballot drop box surveillance. Her administration has fought at every turn those states which attempted to clean up voter rolls and remove non-residents, illegal aliens, and even the dead.  Who's the fascist?

They also have a callous disregard for the Constitution.  For nearly 4 years, Kamala and Joe's lawless regime waged relentless attacks against the First amendment, the Second amendment, the Fourth amendment, the Fifth amendment, and the Tenth amendment.  That is a direct threat to our democratic republic.  So who's really the Fascist?

It was her Biden-Harris administration which strong-armed tech companies in an effort to censor important information about COVID from the public?  In addition, it was Tim Walz's administration which opened liquor stores and candy stores but closed churches in Minnesota.  Who are the Fascists?

On top of that, they also want to add two along states with four additional Senators, remove the filibuster, and pack the Supreme Court with judicial activists to ram through their agenda.  All of which sounds a lot like fascist tactics to me.

So when Democrats cynically say " 'Democracy' is at stake in this election," take it with a grain of salt.   Truly, our Representative Republic is at stake, but only if she wins.  It is true that they want the purest form of Democracy - mob rule - when it benefits them, as it did during the summer of 2020 or when Antifa was terrorizing Supreme Court justices.  But when popular sentiment is against them, they are not above ruling against the will of the people, subverting the law, and imposing their will by any method they can get by with.

So my advice on election day is to ignore the angry epitaphs these people are hurling about, things such as:  Donald Trump is Hitler, those who don't support Harris are misogynistic and racist, and patriotic Americans who don't support their unqualified puppet candidate are deplorables, garbage, and fascists.

 

These are the accusations of a power-hungry, wannabe tyrant.

Despising of our system of government, persecuting political opponents, and upending the Constitution are not things to fear from Trump, should he be elected.  Rather, they are the simple reality of the past four years of Democrat control that Kamala and Tim will double down on if they are given power.

Much is at stake on Tuesday, November 5th.  Choose wisely.

Who is this Tim Walz guy?

As difficult as it was, I forced myself to listen to a half hour of that Satanic Circus frequently referred to as the Democratic National Convention last Wednesday night (08/21).

I must admit that Minnesota Governor Tim Walz gave a well-constructed, and even engaging, speech.  Unfortunately, while it was long on style, it fell short on substance, and was almost completely devoid of truth. That comes as no surprise to those of us out here in 'Rocks and Cows' country - as the old bull, Tim Walz, derisively refers to rural Minnesota - the place where many of us live who have suffered under the Walz administration's reign of terror for the past 5 or 6 years.

 

Yes indeed, Walz certainly talks a good game - projecting himself as either grandpa, coach, socialist neighbor, Robin Hood or Santa Claus, depending on the situation.  But what he actually delivers... well that ranges anywhere from a steaming pile of bovine scatology to despotic tyranny.

As has become all too typical with the political party of the far left, the speech itself was a barrage of unsupported accusations, aspersion casting, psychological projection, and just outright lies - commonplace diversion tactics in the critical attempt to hide their radical views from the voting public. Truly, his speech was all that.  But he didn't stop there.

For starters, he claimed - actually implored us to "trust me on this" - that Trump and Vance have a playbook. I agree that they do - and making this possibly one of the very few times he actually told the truth last night.  Although they didn't write it, their playbook is most commonly referred to by patriotic Americans as the Constitution of the United States of America.  And as such, you can be sure it is utterly incomprehensible to either Kamala Harris or Tim Walz.

Truth be told, the Harris and Walz ticket also have a playbook.  No, they didn't write theirs either - that would assume a level of seriousness that neither of them possess.  But in their case, they didn't need to.  

 

Karl Marx already wrote their playbook (as updated by Gramsci) in 1848. According to Antonio Gramsci, no cultural revolutionary worth his salt is without his long march through the institutions and history.  Walz is no exception.

Walz may be a former high school social studies teacher, but he is first and foremost a prevaricating politician. As such, his attempts at historical revisionism are pathetic, but expected - believable only by sycophantic party members and the brainwashed masses in attendance.  One such example was when he straight-facedly said:  "We know what they'll do if they get back in the White House. They'll jack up costs on middle-class families."  A charge that is laughable on its face.

To make such a charge against his opponents, willfully ignores the indisputable fact that in their 3 1/2 years, the Biden/Harris regime ushered in the highest inflation rates this country has seen since Jimmy Carter.  Yet Walz had the temerity to accuse the Republican ticket of planning to raise costs on families - consumer costs that have risen steadily since Harris and Biden assumed office and implemented their inflationary economic policy.  Inflation, more precisely, that was fueled by the cynically-named Inflation Reduction Act and which was only enacted by means of Ms. Harris' tie-breaking vote in the Senate.

Given that inflation is widely considered by economists to be the cruelest tax of all - hitting hardest those with the least means - this nonsensical claim was both a show of his utter lack of factual integrity and a clear appeal to ignorance within the Democrat base.

 

His economic illiteracy is illustrated further, given that only days prior, his running mate had announced her economic plan - or more accurately her plan to institute an obtrusive centrally planned economy.  A key component of which was wage and price controls to combat, in her words, "price gauging."  We can only speculate, but their plan will likely include asking Congress to repeal the law of supply and demand. 

As an aside, he also accused his opponents of wanting to repeal Obamacare.  Which ironically, is an action that, if passed through Congress would most certainly reduce health insurance prices to working Americans.

He also attempted to stir patriotism by appealing to his dubious military service claims (a topic for another time and another person) and by declaring that freedom was a big part of "what this election is about."  That, in some strange way, may be one of the few statements he made that Republicans might possibly agree with.  But any illusory point of agreement ends upon further examination of what he means.

Again, this truth-shifting sophist leveled the ironic charge that it is actually Republicans - not Democrats - who would be the threat to our freedom.  Such a fantastical claim can only be understood when you realize that his definition of freedom has little to do with the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 10th amendments, parts of the Bill of Rights which he has big disagreements with, but primarily the so-called 'freedom' to kill babies - unborn and even newborn - via surgical and chemical abortions, for any or no reason, and by any method, however gruesome.

More interestingly, the freedom charge is rife with hypocrisy coming from a man who reigned as a little dictator during COVID - someone who shut down his state, who set up a snitch hotline for neighbors to turn against neighbors, who sent armed police forces to shoot paintballs at citizens who were sitting on their front porches, who fined and jailed small business owners for remaining open, ordered COVID-infected patients into nursing homes, and who shut down churches while opening up candy stores, liquor stores, and strip clubs, while continuing his unchecked Emergency Powers months after COVID was no longer a threat.  This is the charlatan accusing Republicans of being a threat to freedom.

 

Indeed, quite a strange notion of freedom, these Democrats.

Despite all that, it would be a huge mistake to presume that Walz is a low IQ individual on par with his presumptive boss, Kamala Harris. Quite the contrary, he's probably better described as a diabolical genius, a master propagandistic rhetorician, and an opportunistic wannabe dictator.  In this writer's opinion, that's not 'Minnesota nice'.

 

 

 

 

A Dream Interrupted

 

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today.  ~  Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Some 60 years ago (and just months before I was born), Martin Luther King gave what became one of the most heralded speeches yet to have been delivered in the English language.

At the time, hopes that this dream laid out by Rev. King would become widely accepted were largely aspirational.  His words that day hearkened back - in more than one way - to those of a similarly gifted orator, Abraham Lincoln.  You may recall, in urging for reconciliation how President Lincoln had appealed to "the better angels of our nature," in his first inaugural address.

In both cases, the nation moved forward, however imperfectly, until both of these great men's visions advanced from aspiration to realization.

 

In fact, not that many years ago, acceptance of the notion that all people should be judged by the content of their character was nearly ubiquitous among both conservative and liberal constituencies.

More recently, however, a worrisome trend has emerged.

This troubling new vision substitutes reconciliation with Balkanization.  It is a vision of division instead of unity.  No longer is the appeal to our nature's "better angels", as it once was, but to something far less noble:  tribalism, avarice, and retribution.

This vision pushes back against the very notion of good character as a virtue.  Such ideals have been watered down, redefined - or rejected outright.  No longer is the vision one of character qualities over superficial appearance, but rather tribal affiliation based on skin color over all else.

So in our current political climate, while the conservative cause has fully embraced King's colorblind creed, it seems that the political left has gone in a new and dangerous direction.  In doing so, they have abandoned the dream, and embraced a nightmare.

 

 

The Biden Referendum: Tuesday, November 8

Joe Biden is a really bad President.

That's not just a statement from an admittedly partisan blogger, but it is empirically confirmed by the citizens and voters across the country.  There can be no question that, despite the advantages provided by a fawning and shilling news media, Joe Biden - with his 38% favorable rating - is one of the least popular U.S. presidents since such statistics have been tracked. (1)  However, that's not to say he hasn't been effective.  The trio of executive orders, selective non-enforcement of existing law, Congressional legislation, combined with a constant stream of propaganda from the presidential teleprompter have been very effective in dividing us along political and racial lines, undermining the shared social fabric, and destroying the country's economy.  Effective yes, very much so.  But popular, absolutely not.

As such, tomorrow's election - despite the President's objections - has turned into a referendum on the dangerous and destructive policies being imposed on us by the unpopular Biden Regime.  Many of us have come to the conclusion that the best way to stop or at least slow the consequences of those policies - at least in the short term - is to deny his political party the Congressional and state majorities which exist to enable his lawless regime and its policies

With this in mind, I have been compiling a list of a few of the most obvious reasons to vote against Democrats at all levels in Tuesday's election.  Below, I offer you my Top Ten Reasons to vote GOP on November 8:

 
Reason #1 to vote GOP on November 8: 
Intentional human Chaos created on the southern border - For fiscal year 2022, we had an all-time record number of criminal and illegal aliens flooding across the border.  Under the intentionally chaotic misrule of DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, we have suffered through:
- 2,378,944 illegal alien 'encounters' in 2022 - the worst on record.  Most of these unscreened, undocumented, unvaccinated, uneducated, and acculturated aliens were ushered into the country posthaste by the Biden regime.
- Another 600,000 illegal alien known 'got-aways'
- 856 reported deaths at the southern border, another record - not including the deaths south of the border
- 98 known or suspected terrorists apprehended - 4x more than the previous 5 years combined (for reference, only 19 terrorists were involved in the Sept 11 attacks)
In an attempt to conceal the bad border news which reporting requirements forced them to publicly reveal, Homeland Security dumped the Sept. and fiscal year end data at 11:30 pm Friday (10/21) night. (2)

Reason #2 to vote GOP on November 8:
Intentional drug Chaos on the southern border - During his first two years in office, Biden oversaw record drug overdose numbers, much of which was fentanyl-related.  As a consequence of Biden's lawless border policies, enough fentanyl was seized while being smuggled in fiscal year 2021 to kill every US citizen 7 times, which begs the question how much of the deadly drug wasn't intercepted at the porous and virtually undefended southern border.  If the Biden regime isn't deliberately cooperating, hand-in-glove, with the Mexican drug cartels which are flooding our country with illegal drugs, it is hard to fathom what more they could be doing to assist the effort.

Reason #3 to vote GOP on November 8:
National security - A Surrender in the fight against Terrorism.  After the ill-planned and hasty withdrawal from Afghanistan, literally billions in armaments were gifted by Biden to the Taliban.  This included vehicles, planes, night vision equipment, small arms, and parts.  Even the lowest estimates of the value ($7-8 billion) of what he left behind is 2 to 3 times the amount the Biden regime requested for Israeli defense in fy2022 - in other words, Biden's policies provide more support for Taliban terrorists than our best middle eastern ally.

It's no better on the home front, where his inexplicably stubborn refusal to enforce the law, finish the border wall, or beef up the U.S Border Patrol, means that would-be terrorists are literally pouring across the southern border (98 of whom were stopped in fiscal year 2022 alone, according to DHS statistics, which do not speculate how many terrorists made it through)

Reason #4 to vote GOP on November 8: 
National security - Projecting Military weakness.  Undermining our military strength has been a hallmark of Biden's defense policy.  Not only did his unceremonious and haphazard surrender in Afghanistan signal weakness to our global enemies - and thereby greenlighting Putin's invasion of Ukraine - but by not consulting with our allies before his pullout there, he jeopardized their future cooperation.

He has further undermined our military by:
- Draining the Strategic Petroleum Reserve needed to defend the country in wartime
- Injecting woke, politically correct, and divisive racial theories into the officer corps and enlisted ranks
- Implementing politicized COVID and speech policies to thin the ranks and deter recruitment.  (For instance, the army has fallen 25% below its recruiting goal in 2022). (3)

Reason #5 to vote GOP on November 8: 
Fuel prices - Biden's war on the energy industry.  While our Commander-in-Chief has generally favored the funding of - rather than fighting against - terrorism, Biden was quite quick to declare war on our domestic energy industry, and by proxy, the American people.  On his first day in office, he revoked the existing permit for the new pipeline bringing oil in from Canada, enacted a moratorium on oil and gas leases on Federal lands, and placed our entire economy hostage to the whims of Obama's unratified treaty known as the Paris Climate Accords.

In addition, he reinstated restrictive permitting & drilling rules while cancelling leases & lease auctions.  Among the most debilitating effects of all these America-punishing efforts included doubling and even tripling, the cost of heating oil, gasoline, and diesel.  This, in turn, led him to order the draining of the strategic petroleum reserve prior to the 2022 midterms, in an attempt to ameliorate the electoral impact of his misguided energy policy.

Reason #6 to vote GOP on November 8:
The lawless Justice Department. - Since his confirmation as Attorney General, Merrick Garland's partisan conduct has only proved that he was rightfully spurned as a Supreme Court justice nominee.  During his short time as A.G., the FBI has lost what was left of it's tattered credibility, while being remade into a bludgeon of political persecution. He has turned the Justice Department as a whole into little more than a partisan tool of the far left to target the Biden regime's ideological opponents.  At his direction,we saw:

- Targeting school board attendees by raising the specter of FBI investigations of parents interested in debating school board policies
- Refusing to enforce federal law against those engaged in intimidation of Supreme Court justices
- Personally approving an unprecedented armed Raid on a former President's residence over a document storage dispute
- Charging pro-life protestors with Federal crimes under a spurious interpretation of the FACE Act (while still ignoring BLM/Marxist/Antifa rioters who burned down entire city blocks and government buildings)

Reason #7 to vote GOP on November 8:
Stop a Lawless administration - Insomuch as he is actually capable of being in charge, Biden presides over a profoundly lawless and corrupt administration.  We had previously discussed the Dept. of Homeland Security and the Justice Department:
- Under Alejandro Mayorkas, Homeland Security is blatantly ignoring it's mandate and allowing literally millions of would-be terrorists, drug smugglers, human traffickers, and illegal aliens to stream across the porous southern border.
- Under Merrick Garland, we have seen the continuing radical politicization of the Justice Dept. and the FBI - including targeting of parents attending school board meetings and peaceful pro-life picketers, armed predawn raids and arrests of political opponents, and a refusal to prosecute Democratic political allies.
The only way such lawless public officials can be impeached and removed from office is when the Democrats who protect them don't control Congress or block Congressional inquiries.

While those examples are truly bad, there is much more dereliction of duty and outright corruption that requires probing by the Congressional oversight committees that Democrats currently control, including:
- The self-inflicted war on domestic energy production, that enrich our enemies (such as Russia, Iran, and Venezuela), spurred by his adoption of the radical Green New Deal policies
- The reckless draining of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in a pre-election attempt to temporarily lower fuel costs caused by his energy policies
- The leaving of Billions - if not tens of Billions - of armaments and the renovated Bagram airbase to Taliban terrorists during his hasty surrender in Afghanistan
- An IRS which is literally arming up its agents and requiring them be prepared to use deadly force against taxpayers, while at the same time filling 87,000 new positions
- An attempted politicization and demoralization of our armed forces
- The Unconstitutional spending of $500,000,000 in unappropriated funds to forgive and transfer the college debt of potential wealthy supporters in a bold attempt to buy votes before the election. (The Brookings Institution says one-third of student debt is held by the wealthiest 20% of households.  By comparison, only 8% is owed by the bottom 20%)

Reason #8 to vote GOP on November 8:
Economy and Inflation - Biden's 8.2% inflation.  The Biden team's level of economic incompetence seems to be only rivaled by that of Jimmy Carter, and chasing hat of Weimar Germany.

Plainly put, Democrat policies have pushed our economy into a recession.  Despite the left's desperate attempts to rewrite the classic definition of recession or blame everything bad on Putin, a recession is defined as "two consecutive quarters of negative growth."  Biden delivered negative economic growth for both the 1st and 2nd quarters of 2022, and it is expected to go negative again for Q4.  Despite labor market shortages, inflation has now outpaced wages for 18 consecutive months.(4)  Fuel prices have doubled, and even tripled.  Pinching you even more, home mortgage rates have went from under 3% to over 7.5% under Biden's watch.

Although Biden had promised not to raise taxes on the middle class, keep in mind that this inflation itself is a cruel 8.2% tax - in fact, it is a flat tax - one that both erodes the value of our savings and increases the cost of goods and services we need to survive.

Reason #9 to vote GOP on November 8:
COVID-19 Policy - While COVID-19 was clearly a serious threat, in retrospect, one has to wonder if the threat to individual liberty was by far the greater peril.

The Wuhan/COVID virus quickly became an excuse for all sorts of mischief by those (almost exclusively Democrats) with totalitarian instincts, such as:  inflexible vaccine mandates, travel bans, lockdowns, vaccine work requirements, shutting down schools, locking in seniors, eviction moratoriums, banning church services, emptying prisons, student loan interest forgiveness, student loan debt cancellation and reassignment, the abrogation of election laws, unmonitored ballot drop boxes, etc. - and don't forget those economic stimulus checks they paid to inmates - all of which empowered the bureaucracy and endangered individual liberty.

Reason #10 to vote GOP on November 8:
Abortion - While it is probably unfair to characterize Democrats as godless, it is fair to ask the question - exactly which god it is that they worship?  Especially so as almost every other ad they've run during this campaign cycle is in support of unfettered, unrestricted abortion.  It does seem to me that this spectacularly cruel form of child sacrifice has become the most important sacrament required in the worship of their diabolical gods.

Indeed, their leader has pledged to turn bad Constitutional law (which was overturned by the Dobbs vs. Jackson ruling) into bad Congressional action.  Joe Biden has already promised that the first bill he sends to Congress next year will be one that legally codifies - and likely exceeds - the Roe vs. Wade decision, in the unlikely event that Democrats somehow control enough seats in Congress to pass it.  This threatened violation of everything good and holy in itself, seems to me to be the only reason one needs to justify denying them a ruling majority.


That's the ten, but there's still so many more, which I will lump under the title:
Return to sanity - I recently heard a GOP congressional candidate say something to the effect that this election "wasn't about Democrat versus Republican, but crazy versus normal."  I think he was on to something.

Consider the following "crazy" ideas being promoted by the left:
- Critical Race Theory (CRT) in public schools
- Drag queen story hours and pornographic literature for small children
- Mutilating minors with so-called 'transition' surgeries
- Girls/women forced to compete against boys/men in sports.
- Criminalizing political dissent
- Decriminalizing drug crimes
- Defunding the police
- No cash bail for repeat offenders
- Millions of criminals crossing southern border
- 401k plan-destroying inflation
- DEI and ESG
- Promises from a figure-head president to shut down power plants and "no more drilling"

A return to a Republican Congress, your statehouse, and legislature is the best check on their "crazy" brand - the crazy, leftist policies of Biden and his Democratic enablers, led by Pelosi and Schumer.  It could even open a path to impeachment proceedings against their worst offenders - including Garland, Myorkas, and Biden.

Meanwhile, we keep in mind their sneering arrogance and refuse to forget the utter contempt these people have for us.  Obama called us 'bitter clingers', Hillary called us "the deplorables", CNN's Rick Wilson sneers that we are the ignorant "boomer rube demo", Biden thinks he insults us by saying we are "ultra MAGA", and more recently, the View's Sonny Hostin accuses us of being cockroaches.  But considering the source of the insults, those of us patriots who are their targets either laugh or perhaps take it as a compliment, while we vote them out of office at the polls on Tuesday!

But above all, remember to fight, finish, and keep the faith.  As goes the encouragement the Apostle Paul gave to his understudy, Timothy, while speaking to his fortitude and personal conduct:  " I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith." (5)

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

1 - https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/10/20/bidens-job-rating-is-similar-to-trumps-but-lower-than-that-of-other-recent-presidents/ 

2 - https://nypost.com/2022/10/22/record-856-migrants-die-at-southern-border-in-fiscal-year-2022-cbp/

3 - https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2022/10/13/is-the-military-too-woke-to-recruit/

4 - https://www.statista.com/chart/27610/inflation-and-wage-growth-in-the-united-states/

5- II Timothy 4:7

A Short and Harsh Memorial Day Assessment

In their relentless assault on our rights, the tyrannical left rarely waits until the bodies are cold before they seize upon what must certainly be viewed in the dark quarters of their leadership as yet another fortunate opportunity to capitalize on the emotions surrounding the victim's deaths.

Yes, as harsh as that sounds, I do believe there is neither sincerity, nor honest acknowledgement with them of the brutal truth behind why the 2nd Amendment is the cornerstone upon which all other rights that free Americans possess are secured.  For the truly astute observer would take note that it was hardly a week ago that they were proclaiming the virtue of and insisting on the Constitutional necessity of ensuring the legal slaughter of millions of innocent children - if done at the bloody hands of the trained abortionist.  And yet this week, in a remarkable reversal, an awful and illegal slaughter by a lone psychopath is held up as the sufficient and sole reason to gut the amendment that underpins the entire Constitution and to place the liberties of all citizens in the hands of so-called enlightened tyrants.  This sort of duplicity is exactly the reason why their endless pursuit of the disarming of the American citizen cannot just be chalked up to ignorance of our founding documents.

No, it would be overly charitable to assume that the American left is ignorant of the importance of the Second Amendment to the preservation of liberty.  Rather, the Bill of Rights in general, and the right to bear arms in particular, remain the greatest and perhaps last obstacle to their goals of perfecting upon the many failed and bloody attempts by their ideological soulmates, ranging from the past to the present - be it Stalin, Mussolini, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro, Ceausescu, Chavez, or Maduro.  These goals were and are of a desire to rule over us, born of extreme arrogance, combined with an exceptionally dangerous belief in the perfectibility of man and the woeful misreading of the sin nature inherent in mankind.

Thus, the calls for still more laws heaped upon more laws, under the guise of gun control, gun bans, ammo bans, or whatever the latest registration and licensing schemes, are not the end in themselves, but another step toward your ultimate enslavement.  It will come at a great cost, and will be imposed - if not opposed - with or without your consent.

That is a tragic lesson Ukrainian citizens almost learned too late.  So when you hear calls for 'reasonable restrictions' and 'compromise' over issues concerning gun or ammunition rights, learn from the past and consider carefully the motives of those making such proposals.

I implore you to remember again this Memorial Day how it was that the hard-fought and blood-bought freedoms we enjoy were earned, who paid the price, and how quickly they could be squandered if the left is allowed their way.

"I would remind you that extremism in defense of liberty is no vice."  - Barry Goldwater

 

 

An Arresting Development

There remains very little room for doubt lurking in the mind of thinking persons that the Biden Administration's primary achievement in it's first year has been one of serving as some sort of an out-of-control wrecking ball dedicated itself to imposing maximum chaos and lawlessness upon this country.  One needs only look as far as the southern border to see this illustrated.

We have recently seen how our own Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has repurposed our border patrol agents into running some kind of government-funded air travel service for illegals - leaving precious little time spent enforcing the law by repelling or intercepting aliens as they illegally attempt to cross the southern border. And judging from his Congressional testimony, DHS Secretary Mayorkas - certainly one of the most disingenuous officials in the Biden cabinet - doesn't really know, or even seem.to care, who many of these illegal aliens are or what their intentions may be.

That would normally present a problem.  For instance, we have all seen how onerous the whole process of boarding an airliner has become.  You or I would be required to present an government-provided ID to a TSA agent at the security checkpoint, take off our shoes and empty our pockets, and then get yourself wanded - and still possibly be subjected to what almost amounts to a strip search - just to board an airplane.

That's how U.S. citizens are treated.  But what about illegal aliens who don't have a valid ID in their possession, or worse, those criminal aliens intent on hiding their background or who may have destroyed their ID and lied about their name, age, or origins?

Not a problem, says the TSA!

Apparently the official Biden Administration policy as outlined by the TSA for criminals caught sneaking into the country is that they can now fly at taxpayer expense, to the destination of their choice, simply by presenting their arrest warrant in lieu of a valid ID.  (1)

Imagine if you or I tried doing that.  "No sir.  I don't have an ID to show you.  But there is this outstanding warrant for my arrest, okay, so can you just use that and let me get on my plane now?  I really don't want to be hassled.  I've got stuff to do."  No doubt we not only would be kept from boarding our flight, but could very well expect a couple days - minimum - in a detention cell, all the while having some very uncomfortable conversations with law enforcement.  Yeah, that would go really well.

Instead, next time you fly, skip the hassle and tell them you are an illegal alien.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 1 - "For non-citizens and non-U.S. nationals who do not otherwise have acceptable forms of ID for presentation at security checkpoints, TSA may also accept certain DHS-issued forms including ICE Form I-200 (Warrant for Arrest of an Alien)." a TSA spokesperson told Fox News.  https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tsa-confirms-allows-illegal-immigrants-arrest-warrants-id-airports

 

 

 

Who's in Charge Here Anyhow?

This is a piece, the ideas for which, have been simmering in my mind for a while now.  Unfortunately, the more time I spend observing, the more obvious the problem has become.

Every week there seems to be some sort of new policy blunder or verbal faux pax committed by the current inhabitant of the White House.  This continual incompetence on display within the Executive Branch only reinforces what many of us had suspected well before last year's primary season - that Joe Biden struggles mightily in the area of mental acuity and capacity.

But now, the fact that the Emperor has no clothes is even being hinted at by as unlikely a source as the editorial page of the New York Times (12/14), whose center-left opinion columnist Bret Stephens was granted permission to call into question Biden's "fortitude" by publicly noting his often rambling incoherence, frequent mental lapses, and inability to inspire confidence. (1)   Mind you, this is no small thing.  It is rare indeed that the country's farthest left major newspaper would drop the protective shield instinctively reserved for their political allies and allow a dissenter to breach their Praetorian Guard-like defense of a Democrat Chief Executive.

What is on display for all to see is a seemingly aimless meandering from one disastrous policy failure to another and one incomprehensibly self-destructive executive order after another.  That, in combination with reports of a major rift between the President and his toxic Vice President in the midst of their plummeting poll numbers - all does little to inspire confidence with the American people.  While on the international front, the fecklessness and incompetent blundering displayed by this empty suit Commander in Chief does not escape the notice of the leaders of China, Russia, Iran and other belligerent and openly hostile foreign powers.  

So while the whole border reparations story itself may be old news for many of you, still, it is illustrative of the state of mind (or lack thereof) of the President.

In an administration known for it's divisive leftist political vision combined with a string of disastrously implemented policies - for instance the Afghanistan withdrawal fiasco, spiking crime rates, supply chain breakdowns, and spiraling inflation - perhaps none has been quite as flagrantly dangerous and destructive as the administration's blatant open border policies with Mexico.  And nothing about this man-made fiasco is quite so ludicrous as the proposal outlined in the Wall Street Journal late in October (10/30).  According to the article, three of the most corrupt and partisan agencies in the Federal government - the Justice Department, Homeland Security, and Health and Human Services - were in talks to essentially pay human traffickers from south of the border nearly half a million dollars each for the "lasting psychological trauma" they endured attempting to illegally smuggle children into the United States. (2)

It was an idea so absurd that, even in what many think is the dementia-addled mind of President Biden, it was initially dismissed as ridiculous. When first confronted with the proposal, his response was that the report was to say"That's garbage," while emphatically adding when questioned by Fox News' Peter Doocy, “That’s not going to happen.” (3)

At least that's what Biden said before he was informed by his puppet-masters that it actually was going to happen, despite what he may have thought or wanted.  Lesson learned:  Don't put the parrot in the spotlight until you are sure he can repeat his lines.

By the next day, however, one of his spokeswomen, deputy press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, assured the press that the President was - or had become - “perfectly comfortable" with the concept of paying off foreign criminals for the troubles they may have endured in the process smuggling children into this country.  And by Saturday, November 6, Biden was emphatically denying that he had even called the outrageous proposal, "garbage". (4)  Of course, that is likely just another example of his short-term memory loss.

Lest you think this is being over-hyped, Fox News' Bill Hemmer reported that within hours of Biden's original denial, the ACLU suggested that President Biden may not have been 'fully briefed' about the actions of the Justice Department he is supposed to be in charge of.  (Or perhaps he wasn't awake during any such briefing.)  Anyway, a few days later, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas would confirm at a speech before the Aspen Security Forum (11/04) that they were not merely negotiating for cash payouts, but - in lieu of serious jail time for felony child endangerment - also discussing a 'path to citizenship' for these reckless lawbreakers and potential Democrat voters who were caught sneaking into our country using innocent children as a shield. (5)

Perhaps some historical review is in order.  During the previous administration, As part of the attempt to quell the lawlessness and chaos at the border, someone had the profound idea to simply enforce existing law as written.  The Trump administration's answer was the 2018  'zero tolerance' policy:  Arrest, prosecute, and deport all those caught sneaking into the country between our ports of entry.

At the same, decades of selective non-enforcement, meant that potential illegal aliens were becoming increasingly aware of the fact that special treatment was being granted to those who crossed the border accompanying a child.  The law of unintended consequences meant this policy encouraged drug runners, child traffickers, and others with evil intentions to beg, borrow, and sometimes literally steal a child to gain preferential treatment in their attempt to illegally enter our country.  Perhaps many - or even most - of the groups illegally sneaking into the country may well have been actual biological families.  However, the shear numbers of illegals overwhelming the system made it very difficult to determine if groups claiming to be family were actually blood relatives or merely criminal drug runners using innocent children as Saddam Hussein-type human shields - and in some cases, human traffickers smuggling kidnapped children across the border for even more evil purposes.

In arresting, prosecuting, and holding these criminal aliens for trial, innocent children were indeed separated from their criminal parents - instead of being held with them in jail.  (The same parents, incidentally, who had risked their children's lives sneaking through the drug-cartel controlled Mexican desert.)  On the other hand, children were also separated from child traffickers, drug runners, and their captors.  This, in much the same way as the children left behind in a bankrobber's getaway car, are not imprisoned awaiting his formal charges, bail hearing, and trial.  So despite the faux outrage from the left - the practice of imprisoning an entire family for the crimes of the family patriarch mostly ended (at least in the west) sometime during the age of enlightenment. (6)

But back to original point, when one contrasts the President's initial response with the actual policy, it leads one to wonder if Mr. Biden is even a full participant in the role of the Presidency.  Was this simply just a case of him not being fully briefed, as his defenders stated?  Could he really forget something this potentially explosive, or was he never in the loop to begin within?

He was caught completely unaware, and certainly not in control of, a highly controversial policy being pursued by his appointees and/or handlers.  Without the aid of a prepared script projected on his large print, Jumbotron-sized teleprompter, he was caught unaware of what his people were doing, presumably on his behalf.  Time and time again, left to his own devices, he quickly meanders into unintelligible gibberish and demonstrably false anecdotes.  However the internal machinations of the Biden White House are contrived, it's clear his handlers need to better brief and instruct the President concerning his core principles.

But perhaps even more important than individual policies, the question to be pondered here is who it is actually hiding behind the curtain in the White House, who is to be held responsible for making all these destructive decisions?  Decisions to try to spend our way out of an inflationary spiral, decisions to leave hundreds of U.S. citizens and tens of billions of dollars of military equipment for the Taliban, and in this case, decisions to financially incentivize and reward those criminals who unapologetically risk children's lives by dragging them through the drug cartel-controlled Mexican desert and illegally smuggle them into this country.

Who is in charge here, anyhow?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1.  https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/14/opinion/biden-age-election-2024.html

2.  https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-administration-in-talks-to-pay-hundreds-of-millions-to-immigrant-families-separated-at-border-11635447591

3.  https://news.yahoo.com/peter-doocy-presses-biden-admin-212503925.html?fr=yhssrp_catchall  https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-calls-report-to-pay-separated-immigrants-450k-garbage

4,  https://news.yahoo.com/biden-gets-heated-over-proposed-152115632.html?fr=yhssrp_catchall 

5. https://news.yahoo.com/border-sheriff-apos-perplexed-apos-134533586.html?fr=yhssrp_catchall

6. https://www.npr.org/2018/05/10/610113364/transcript-homeland-security-secretary-kirstjen-nielsens-full-interview-with-npr  "First of all, the law says if you cross between the ports of entry, you are entering without inspection and that is a crime. First time is a misdemeanor. After that it's a felony. And then it goes on from there. So that hasn't changed, that's the underlying law. Our policy has not changed in that if you break the law, we will refer you for prosecution. What that means, however, is if you are single adult, if you are part of a family, if you are pregnant, if you have any other condition, you're an adult and you break the law, we will refer you. Operationally what that means is we will have to separate your family.

That's no different than what we do every day in every part of the United States when an adult of a family commits a crime. If you as a parent break into a house, you will be incarcerated by police and thereby separated from your family. We're doing the same thing at the border." - Kirstjen Nielsen 

 

 

Impeachment Redux

In her continuing efforts to unify a country emerging from a divisive election season, primarily by shaming, silencing, or straight-up eliminating the political opposition, Nancy Pelosi has ushered her troops through a successful second impeachment vote. She will now work in tandem with Chuck Schumer – with the tacit approval of President Biden – in trying to manipulate the Senate into a kangaroo court trial and removal from office of a popular president - one who happens to no longer be in office.

Notwithstanding that this act is most likely Unconstitutional, it also seems a rather unlikely way to bridge the gap between the two sharply divided political parties or kick off an effort encouraging meaningful bipartisan cooperation in tackling the urgent issues facing our county – unlikely?  well, yes - at least, to those of us living outside the D.C. beltway.

Nonetheless, in her infinite wisdom and with many decades (if not a century) of experience in this sort of thing, the Speaker charged ahead. She forced a change of House rules and rushed through a lone article of impeachment in a single day – without provision for legal representation for the defendant or so much as an attempt to present evidence to prove her claims.

That said, it's not to imply there wasn't an abundance of examples of threatening and dangerous-sounding speech, which might suggest the incitement of violence, to be employed in an impeachment proceeding.  But rather, in her zeal to begin healing the country's divisions, the good Speaker simply couldn't take the time away from her other unification efforts to share it all with the country. So in the interest of fairness, and as a public service to you, my fellow citizen, I present for your consideration some of the most damning evidence of hateful, riot-inciting speech I could find so you can decide for yourself about guilt or innocence in the whole matter.

For some background, even prior to the storming of capitol Hill on January 6, President Trump was heavily criticized for his history of pugilistic language aimed at political adversaries:

Exhibit 1a:

If I were in high school I'd take him behind the gym and beat the he** out of him.¹

Exhibit 1b:

...my testosterone sometimes makes me want to feel like punching him, which would be bad for this elderly, out-of-shape man that he is, if I did that, (laughing)...²

One of the many claims advanced by the Democrats was that the President's continuing careless words whipped up the crowds at his rallies to extreme acts:

Exhibit 2a:

You know, there needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there’s unrest in our lives.³

Exhibit 2b:

I just don’t even know why there aren’t uprisings all over the country, and maybe there will be...⁴

They further claimed that President Trump's repeated use of incendiary language provoked his followers to threaten political opponents and elected officials: (Even directing followers to storm the Capitol...)

Exhibit 3a:

You get out and you create a crowd and you push back on them! And you tell them that they are not welcome, anymore, anywhere⁵

Exhibit 3b:

Please don’t just come here today and then go home. Go to the Hill today. Get up and please get up in the face of some congresspeople.⁶

Because he insisted that election fraud cost him the 2020 election, they claim that he impugned and threatened the elected officials and courts that rejected his claims - although often merely on technicalities:

Exhibit 4:

You have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions⁷

The most serious allegation is that he summoned his most ardent followers to storm the capitol and foment an insurrection:

Exhibit 5:

So, this is just a warning to you... We ain't playing with you. Enough of the shenanigans. Enough is enough. And for those of you who are soldiers, you know how to do it. Do it right. Be in order. Make them pay.⁸

One of the most devastating charges was that during the siege on the Capitol - that they blame him for starting - he wasn't quick enough to denounce the mob and talk down the rioters:

Exhibit 6:

This is a movement, I’m telling you. They’re not going to stop and everyone beware, because they’re not going to stop... They’re not going to let up and they should not and we should not⁹

Of course, others deny that the President did any such thing:

Exhibit 7:

We’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them. ...I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.¹⁰

So that's the evidence I found, so you can decide for yourself based on the direct quotes. But before you render your final judgment, there's just one more thing your should know.

Actually, all of those quotes – except the last one – were from elected Democrats and not the President.

You can look at the endnotes for yourself and confirm that. All were elected Democrats encouraging riots, Democrats threatening violence and insurrection, and Democrats cheerleading violence directed against their political opponents. This whole narrative they have invented about Trump is known as psychological projection - accusing Republicans of doing what they themselves are doing.

It's what leftists do.

--- Footnotes ------------------------------------------

1 - Exhibit 1a: Joe Biden - “...they asked me would I like to debate the gentleman. 'I said no! If I were in high school I'd take him behind the gym and beat the hell out of him.” – 03/20/2018 –

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/21/politics/joe-biden-donald-trump/index.html

2 - Exhibit 1b: Cory Booker - "Donald Trump is a guy who you understand- he hurts you and my testosterone sometimes makes me want to feel like punching him, which would be bad for this elderly, out-of-shape man that he is if I did that," (laugh) "Physically weak specimen, but do you see what I'm talking about here?” Cory Booker – 07/22/19 - https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/cory-booker-knocks-trump-refers-to-him-as-an-elderly-out-of-shape-man

3 - Exhibit 2a: Ayanna Pressley - "Make the phone calls, send the emails, show up," she continued. "You know, there needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there’s unrest in our lives.” – 08/15/20 – https://www.foxnews.com/media/ayanna-pressley-calls-for-unrest-in-the-streets-over-trump-allied-politicians-ignoring-americans-concerns

4 - Exhibit 2b: Nancy Pelosi - “I just don’t even know why there aren’t uprisings all over the country, and maybe there will be when people realize that this is a policy that they defend,” she said. “It’s a horrible thing, and I don’t see any prospect for legislation here.” – 06/14/18 – https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jun/14/nancy-pelosi-wonders-why-there-arent-uprisings-acr/

5 - Exhibit 3a: Maxine Waters - “If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd and you push back on them! And you tell them that they are not welcome, anymore, anywhere,” – June 2018 – https://www.foxnews.com/politics/watchdog-says-maxine-waters-inciting-mob-violence-presses-ethics-complaint https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/25/politics/maxine-waters-trump-officials/index.html

6 - Exhibit 3b: Corey Booker - "Before I end, that’s my call to action here. Please don’t just come here today and then go home," Booker said. "Go to the Hill today. Get up and please get up in the face of some congresspeople." – July 25, 2018 – https://freebeacon.com/politics/booker-tells-activists-get-face-congresspeople/

7 - Exhibit 4: Chuck Schumer - “I want to tell you Gorsuch. I want to tell you Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.” – 03/04/2020 – https://dailycaller.com/2020/03/04/schumer-kavanaugh-gorsuch-abortion/

8 - Exhibit 5: Cynthia A. Johnson, D-MI House of Reps. - “So this is just a warning to you Trumpers: Be careful. Walk lightly. We ain’t playing with you. Enough of the shenanigans. Enough is enough. And for those of you who are soldiers, you know how to do it. Do it right. Be in order. Make them pay." – 12/08/20 – https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/michigan-lawmaker-disciplined-over-facebook-warning-to-trumpers-after-she-says-she-was-threatened/ar-BB1bN6Qy

9 - Exhibit 6: Kamala Harris - “This is a movement, I’m telling you. They’re not going to stop and everyone beware, because they’re not going to stop. They’re not going to stop before Election Day in November and they’re not going to stop after Election Day. Everyone should take note of that on both levels. They’re not going to let up and they should not and we should not.” 06/17/20 – The Late Show with Stephen Colbert https://www.foxnews.com/politics/flashback-kamala-harris-nationwide-protests-not-going-to-stop https://twitter.com/SteveGuest/status/1299013980711784448

Harris also raised funds to bail out rioters, so they could continue rioting:

If you’re able to, chip in now to the @MNFreedomFund to help post bail for those protesting on the ground in Minnesota. https://t.co/t8LXowKIbw

– Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) June 1, 2020

10 - Exhibit 7:  President Donald Trump -

Anyone you want, but I think right here, we’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them.

Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated.

I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.

Today we will see whether Republicans stand strong for integrity of our elections.

 01/06/2021 - https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2021-01-13/transcript-of-trumps-speech-at-rally-before-us-capitol-riot

 

Supreme Vindication

The importance of the 2020 election cannot be understood apart from an understanding of the dueling visions for the role of the Supreme Court.  Visions that pit the preservation of our liberty against the erosion of freedom and an insidious and ever-growing tyranny.

In that context, it can hardly be overstated how huge the swearing in of Amy Coney Barrett last week was. Absolutely huge. Absolutely, incredibly huge.

Associate Justice Barrett was the third Supreme Court justice appointed by President Trump and confirmed by the Republican Senate in the past four years. As part of an historic remaking of the Federal judiciary, the president has also appointed more than 200 Federal judges - most of whom are Constitutional originalists. As we have seen time and time again, there are never any guarantees about how a judge will rule once seated. Chief Justice Roberts is but the most recent and disappointing example of that. But if our justices don't at least begin from a place of deep respect for the text of the Constitution - and equally important - understand their own role in protecting it, our country's existence would be all but doomed.

 

And we were very close.

Back in 2016, many of us were unsure about exactly what kind of a president Donald Trump Jr. might be. Was he a man of his word - did he mean what he said about draining the swamp and building border walls and getting us out of endless middle eastern wars - or was he just another huckster politician? Could a braggadocios, pugnacious, and sometimes crude New Yorker be trusted to govern with what sounded a lot like mid-western values? Did he truly have a change of heart on the issue of abortion and would it affect his public policy? And above all, would he really keep his eyes on the prize by keeping his promise to appoint only Originalist, Textualist, Constitutionalist judges?

We all had to seriously ask ourselves one very fundamental question: Did the character flaws on public display and being widely and gleefully exaggerated in the predominant news media disqualify Donald Trump from receiving our support? And truly, both candidates were morally flawed. But conservatives and Evangelicals had been burned many times before when going to the dance with Republican candidates.

Many Evangelicals, Catholics, and other people of faith made the prayerful decision to take the chance, trust their gut, and go with the candidate who was right on the issues. Thankfully, many of us - whether joyfully or while holding our noses - cast our vote for Trump and trusted that God would ultimately use him to accomplish His purposes in the same way He has used and still uses flawed individuals today.

Many of us believed back in 2016 - and most still maintain - that the most important issue was Judicial appointments. (Imagine if Merrick Garland had been confirmed in the waning days of the Obama administration to replace Antonin Scalia. And then a President Hillary Clinton had appointed two radical justicial activists to the court.) While we know that court appointees sometimes stray from sound judicial philosophy and we will at times be disappointed in their rulings, still, President Trump's many originalist judicial appointments have gone a long ways toward the restoration of the Constitution as our guiding document, while largely vindicating the value voters' support for the President.

What was it about the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett - this mild-mannered, devout Christian and mother of 7 children, that scares the Democrat party?  Why does a soft-spoken and respectful legal genius, a careful law professor and jurist so rile Senate Democrats?  What is it about the confirmation vote on this thoughtful jurist who promised to faithfully interpret the Constitution sent Chuck Schumer into an apoplectic rage?

I can tell you that it is not because they think she isn't up to the task - she is smarter than any of them and twice as smart as some of them. It is not because she doesn't respect the Constitution - she knows it better and holds it in higher regard than they do or ever did. And it is definitely not that they are politically rudderless partisans - while they may be quintessential partisans, they are anything but directionless.

No, the problem truly isn't that they are without direction, instead it's that their direction is hard left. The Democrat political tantrum we've witnessed over the past four years has shown us how little the average citizen actually has in common with the political party of AOC, Sol Alinsky, Jim Crow, and Karl Marx. They have discovered, to their dismay, that their leftist agenda is too unacceptably radical for the American people and impossible to enact legislatively within the present rules.

For them the court has become far more than just the third of three coequal branches of government - it has become the last chance to enact their unpopular platform. They want to place judicial activists on the court in an attempt to turn it into an unaccountable, un-elected, uber-legislature. Justices such as Barrett, who respect the text of the Constitution, who honor the original intent, and who believe it means what it says are a threat to their radical agenda. That is why Chuck Schumer said of the confirmation of Justice Barrett: 

"It will go down as one of the darkest days in the 231-year history of the United States Senate." (1)

It also explains why he didn't bother, in his mad quest for power, to veil his threats about breaking or changing all the rules the next time he gets control of the Senate.  They threatened to abolish the filibuster, add D.C. and Puerto Rico to the union to inflate their numbers in the Senate, and promised a Supreme Court packing power grab.  Adding insult to injury, they want to disenfranchise the entire midsouth, midwest, and most of the western states by eliminating the Electoral College.  Essentially, there is no rule they will not break, lie they will not tell, or depth to which they will not sink to keep from losing their grip on power.

They would have us, as someone wise has said, abandon the Constitution that has served us so well for over two centuries, and enter into, what Constitutional scholar Mark Levin calls a tyrannical "Post-Constitutional America."

Of course, in their wisdom, the founders provided a Constitutional remedy to their concerns.  Simply enact laws which pass Constitutional muster - or - cultivate the necessary support to amend the Constitution.  Of course those things are hard to do, especially when your platform is neither popular nor tenable.

There is another remedy - a much easier one - and one much preferred for those of us who cherish our liberty and freedom, who value the maintenance of our God-given rights, who want to continue to live in a country ruled by laws and not by men, and who want to continue to live in a Republic not subject to the tyranny of the majority.  That twofold remedy is simple:  It involves NOT rewarding the party that gave us a four year political temper tantrum while at the same time voting for President Donald Trump.

 

Return the Trump-Pence ticket to the White House for 4 more years and keep America great.

 

-- footnotes ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 - Axios - Monday, October 26, 2020 - Dualing views:  Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Monday "will go down as one of the darkest days" in Senate history, moments before the chamber voted 52-48 to confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court.

 

"...the next time the American people give Democrats a majority in this chamber, you will have forfeited the right to tell us how to run that majority. You may win this vote, but in the process, you will speed the precipitous decline of faith in our institution, our politics, the Senate and the Supreme Court."

"My colleagues may regret this for a lot longer than they think. Here at this late hour, at the end of this sordid chapter in the history of the Senate, the history of the Supreme Court, my deepest and greatest sadness is for the American people," Schumer said. 

"It will go down as one of the darkest days in the 231-year history of the United States Senate."

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Democrats oppose the nomination because "they don't like the outcome."

"What this administration and this Republican Senate has done is exercise the power that was given to us by the American people in a manner that is entirely within the rules of the Senate and the Constitution of the United States," McConnell said.

"Elections come and go. Political power is never permanent, but the consequences could be cataclysmic if our colleagues across the aisle let partisan passions boil over and scorch the ground rules of our government." 

2016 Election eve thoughts - What is a follower of Christ to do?

It was just over a year ago in this very forum that we discussed the unique national mood we faced this election cycle and how we were in the midst of an historic political revolt against the establishment – the best hope in decades for an refreshingly conservative, anti-establishment candidate to assume the presidency.

As I lightheartedly noted at the time, the Democrat’s options were limited to a choice between a communist outsider (Sanders) and a criminal insider (Clinton).  Whether the nomination was honestly obtained or not – as we would come to question thanks to Wikileaks – the Clinton machine ultimately prevailed, Sanders and his supporters dropped their opposition and capitulated, and Democrats proceeded in lockstep to circle their wagons around one of the most dishonest and unprincipled presidential candidates of modern times.

Republicans would not be so easily herded… starting with far more choices from both the establishment and anti-establishment wings of the party.  However, the field eventually narrowed down to just three choices:   Cruz, Kasich, and Trump.  In a tricky anti-establishment year, the flamboyant and controversial Donald Trump was left the last man standing.  While perhaps not a true conservative, nonetheless, Trump’s positions on border security and immigration (illegal and otherwise), the economy, and his approach to international aid, trade and treaties resonated with a constituency that had long been dismissed, if not ignored, by the party.  Those who identify with the Republicans found themselves with the maverick Donald Trump, a highly unconventional candidate, as their standard bearer.

The establishment itself split in their support of Trump, with some of the most duplicitous of them (Mitt Romney comes immediately to mind) publicly refusing to do what they had always told the dutiful conservative voters to do – put our differences behind us and unite behind the eventual nominee.  Their disdain for the rank and file in the party was apparently so great, their elitist sensibilities so offended, their lust for power so threatened by this party outsider, that they preferred a Hillary Clinton presidency over the  anti-establishmentarian, drain the Washington D.C. swamp, Donald Trump.

For the rest of us, this is one of those years where a lot of people will ultimately hold their nose and cast their vote.  Both candidates are flawed, seriously so.  Trump has already been confronted with various inappropriate and explicit comments he had made over the years.   Then late in the campaign, he faced accusations and possible civil suits from several women relating to alleged disgusting sexual misconduct. 

For her part, Clinton has a 30 year history of scandal, including the more recent suspicious non-prosecution of her 109 felony violations of the Foreign Espionage Act for recklessly storing classified documents on an unprotected private server.  In addition, there is the bribery and corruption charges relating to using donations made to The Clinton Family Foundation to buy access and favors from the State Department.  Even if these somehow go away, you can bet that these will not be the last legal issues she will face if elected.  It is highly likely that the historic nature of a Hillary Clinton Presidency would not be that she would be the first woman so elected, but rather that she be the first President facing felony charges while serving in office.

For these and other issues, many Evangelicals have been tempted to sit this one out, to somehow keep themselves unsullied by all this sleaze.  Some cite their conscience, saying they could not possibly vote for anyone with such low morals.  Others want to send some kind of political message to the party, to the government, to the supposed ruling class that we need better candidates.  I will say that these “excuses”, for lack of a better term, all fall short under scrutiny, but for now, I will save the arguing against these specific positions for another time.

The problem is, we are uniquely a self-governing people who have a 200+ year tradition and privilege of selecting our own leaders from among us.  Almost exactly 200 years ago, founding father and the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Jay, wrote “Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers.”   He continued that, “it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest, of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” (Letter to John Murray (12 October 1816) as published in The Life of John Jay (1833) by William Jay, Vol. 2, p. 376) Unfortunately for us, the candidates who were the most outspoken in their Christian faith did not prevail through the primary process and quite honestly, it is often exceedingly difficult to see much in the way of Christ-likeness in either party’s candidate.  Yet the yoke of such duty remains upon us.

Even though the system has been distorted and abused over time, we still have a long history of free and (for the most part) fair elections.  Although many see the future of Christian’s public participation in society increasingly at risk, we still have the privilege and responsibility to participate in the process.  If we as Christians take a pass on this important election, we engage in dereliction of duty and basically embark in unilateral disarmament allowing those whose ethics and worldview are not informed by Scriptures to determine the direction of our country.

But now, we are down to just two choices – only two candidates have any chance of becoming the next president of the United States. 

So what are we, as Christians who are called to a higher standard, to be in, but not of the world, supposed to do when our choice is essentially limited to two candidates, both morally flawed.  Since we may not personally like either of the choices presented to us, what do we base our decision on?  How are we then to decide?

In one word:  Issues.

Make no mistake, the differences between the two candidates on the issues is absolutely monumental.  And only one of them will lead us and shape the course of the debate.  Only one of two very different views about the proper scope of government and vision for the country’s future ill prevail for the next 4 or possibly 8 years.  One of the two – Trump or Clinton – will be setting the national agenda.

As Bible translator, Theologian, and Professor of Theology and Biblical Studies, Wayne Grudem, recently wrote:

This election is more than a choice between two candidates. Americans are making a choice between two very different political parties, two very different views of government, two very different Supreme Courts, and two very different futures for our country. One of them is much more consistent with biblical teachings than the other.

There are enormous differences between the candidates and the two parties, differences that I still think have great significance. The differences concern not only the Supreme Court but also religious freedom, abortion, gender identity regulations, rebuilding our military, protecting us from radical Islamic terrorism, securing our borders, supporting Israel, reducing taxes and regulations so the economy will grow and create jobs, increasing school choice, reforming health care, allowing wise use of all forms of energy, reducing racial animosities and many other issues. These differences will determine the kind of nation we leave for our children and grandchildren.

This is a link containing Dr. Grudem’s initial comments:  http://townhall.com/columnists/waynegrudem/2016/10/09/trumps-moral-character-and-the-election-n2229846

I especially appreciate Grudem’s perspective, since he clearly struggled with his response(s) toward this election over the course of three articles written for TownHall.com.   It is quite evident that he wrestled over this 'issues versus character' argument.  For the entire article, as well as links to his follow-up thinking by Grudem, click here:  http://townhall.com/columnists/waynegrudem/2016/07/28/why-voting-for-donald-trump-is-a-morally-good-choice-n2199564

There is simply too much at stake to take a pass or register a meaningless protest vote for a candidate equally flawed, but not facing the level of scrutiny applied to the major candidates.  If we refuse to do our part as citizens, to weigh in on the direction of our country, we risk cutting off our nose to spite our face.  We risk losing the freedom to meaningfully speak out in the future.

Grudem continues far more eloquently than do I, writing “If all the Christians in the country decide not to vote for either candidate, our rulers will then be chosen entirely by non-Christians, many of whom will increasingly use the immense power of government to promote evil, silence Christians, and oppose Christian values in every area of life. This is the opposite of what Paul told us to pray for in 1 Timothy 2:2.”

“I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, 2 for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. 3 This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior” (1 Tim. 2:1-3).

No single factor affecting the issues we face in the coming years so heavily swings the scales in favor of voting for Donald Trump than the Supreme Court.  The High Court has been systematically expanding its own role in our system of government since the 1930’s and with few exceptions, has been expanding the role of the Federal government at the expense of individual and state’s rights.  With the death of the brilliant originalist Justice Antonin Scalia earlier this year, the Supreme Court, and therefore the future of our country hangs in the balance by the appointment of his replacement in the next president’s term.

In fact, given the age and relative health of most of the current justices, many believe the next president will very likely pick 3 or 4 Justices to the High Court.  Those picks will undoubtedly affect the balance of the current court which is at present comprised of 4 liberal judicial activists and 4 moderately conservative and/or originalists justices.  The judges so appointed to the court will likely serve 30 to 40 years and not step down until our grandchildren and great grandchildren are of voting age.

In a follow-up to his original article, after noting the danger of a Clinton appointee replacing Justice Scalia, Grudem confirms my view, noting the far-reaching judicial consequences of having still another Clinton in the White House:

A President Clinton could possibly nominate three or four justices to the Supreme Court, locking in a far left activist judiciary for perhaps 30 or more years. She could also add dozens of activist judges to federal district courts and courts of appeals, the courts where 99% of federal lawsuits are decided. Judicial tyranny of the type we have seen when abortion rights and same-sex marriage were forced on the nation would gain a permanent triumph.

The nation would no longer be ruled by the people and their elected representatives, but by unelected, unaccountable, activist judges who would dictate from the bench about whatever they were pleased to decree. And there would be nothing in our system of government that anyone could do to stop them.

For the entirety of Grudem’s most recent comments, click here:  http://townhall.com/columnists/waynegrudem/2016/10/19/if-you-dont-like-either-candidate-then-vote-for-trumps-policies-n2234187

Grudem continues:

If Trump would appoint a replacement for Scalia from his list of 11, and probably one or two other Supreme Court justices, then we could see a 5-4 or even 6-3 majority of conservative justices on the Supreme Court. The results for the nation would be overwhelmingly good.  Such a Supreme Court would finally return control of the nation to the people and their elected representatives, removing it from dictatorial judges who repeatedly make law from the bench.

Both candidates have told us what kind of judges they would appoint to the courts.  We must seriously ask ourselves, “Would the Constitution, and therefore our country, be best served if Hillary Clinton’s secular left worldview prevails on the Supreme Court, or if Donald Trump’s list of conservative, originalist judges are picked to serve on the Supreme Court?”  “Will the cause of Christ, or even just this nation, best flourish with judges dedicated to studying and discerning the original intent of the text of the Constitution, or by those who hold the Constitutional text in contempt and view the court as but a means to promote secular humanism and socialism by imposing leftist political agendas on an otherwise unwilling population?”

I understand this is not an easy election cycle.

God has in the past and can in the future use flawed, even fatally so, leaders to achieve His ultimate purposes, but according to His grace, we in this country as self-governing citizens, also have a part to play.  But if we refuse to do our part, we must consider carefully if we are we cooperating with or opposing those purposes.

Some of you may agree, others disagree with my conclusion.  Nonetheless, what is at stake is very clear.  Either way, please leave your comments below.