After the past 3 years of criminal malfeasance on the President’s part, malfeasance that has spread throughout “his” administration, it is time for all Americans to admit to the gross damage that inserting Biden as president has caused. Democrats have nothing to be proud of – and much to answer for – in the matters of the 2020 elections. The possibility that Biden was fairly elected dwindles almost daily. A fair observer should concede that Trump’s suspicion of unprecedented election fraud and wrong-doing is well justified. His frantic attempts to reverse the certifications of “votes” were justified actions of a chief executive officer. Unfortunately, there is neither time nor mechanism to expose distortions as grand and effective as those employed in 2020. January Sixth played out as the phenomenal political hatchet that certain rabid leftists and anti-Trumpers had only dreamed-of hitherto.
As a result of the various crimes and distortions of 2020, Joe Biden and a gaggle of idiots came into power, including for the third time, Barack Obama. Biden, it is clear, has neither the thoughtfulness nor mental capacity to contrive the policies his administration is following. He has never understood history. Neither has he ever judged the nature of foreign leaders properly, accounting for decades of poor decision-making through his Senate and Vice-Presidential tenures. Worse, he is personally weak, leaving him easily manipulated by stronger personalities like the aforementioned Mr. Obama. His declining mental sharpness places the United States’ existence as a world power at existential risk. Woe are we.
It is hard to isolate a single Biden failure to discuss, but it seems Prudent to consider the open borders policies he has fostered. One must ask oneself, “Why in God’s name would anyone with influence in the U. S. promote or favor or allow such policies?” There are two reasons that have been stated over and over in multiple ways, neither good for the USA: 1) Change the demographic majority of our population (white’s need not apply); and 2) Divide the U. S. against itself and weaken it economically. Accomplishing the first will install Democrats forever in power – priority 1 – and accomplishing the second will enable globalism to replace Independence. For shame. We can see a dozen other leftist, anti-American policies working toward the same goals in education, communications, medicine and constant erosion of religious thought, but none will achieve the two main goals as rapidly as Biden’s flood of 10 MILLION or more illegal entrants.
The premises under which Biden acted to carry out Obama’s long-time plan, derive from “Executive Orders,” and were illegal in and of themselves. An executive order by a president can, legally and constitutionally, impact only the executive branch in terms of how the LAWS, passed legislatively and signed into law by a president, shall be executed. An executive order may not prevent the faithful execution of the laws, or set them aside in favor of un-legislated directives put forth by a president on his or her own initiative. However, as Mr Obama is confident of, there are few remedies available in the case of a president’s abuse of power. The only one is “impeachment” in the House followed by conviction by two-thirds of the Senate – a never-accomplished set of actions. No Congress has yet had the political will to carry through an impeachment (allegation) to actual conviction, even when laws have been broken by a president. Hence, “Biden’s” open border policies have remained in place for more than 3 years despite the breaking of and failure of enforcement of, immigration laws.
Millions of words have been spoken and written about the unfolding tragedy and dangers of the failure to enforce our border and immigration laws… except two: “I’m sorry” (for damaging the Nation, the States and hundreds of communities), spoken by Joe Biden. Oddly, no State, even Texas, has yet sued the federal government for imposing costs on States and municipalities in the furtherance of illegal federal actions. Another suit could be filed in federal court concerning those same States and municipalities being forced to not enforce their own laws on behalf of their own citizens. Nor has Biden, himself, been impeached in the House. An illegal travesty continues unabated.
At some point, when the Chinese Communist Party dictates, there will be an horrendous terrorism event inside the United States, perpetrated by some of the thousands of Chinese who have walked into the U. S. and by some of the thousands of entrants from terrorism-sponsoring Muslim countries. Everyone will be upset and casting blame, perhaps even at Joe Biden, who will be long gone or oblivious when it occurs. When it does those Democrats who engineered the certification of Biden’s electoral vote count on January 6th, 2021, will finally offer two words about the open borders policy: “Who, ME?”
A major factor in the success of the United States and its economic freedom (among other freedoms) is the honesty and relative strictness of its judiciary, both federal and State. The honesty of contracts at every level, including the contract between the American people and the federal government: the Constitution, relies increasingly upon the Supreme Court, the final arbiter.
Article III details the legal circumstances that require original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, which means that the supreme court is the first, and only Court, that can hear those cases and rule upon the issues in conflict. In all other cases – and there are hundreds – the Court must agree to accept an appeal from litigants who not only aren’t satisfied with the decision made, but who also believe there is a Constitutional issue involved in their conflicting claims. At least four Justices must agree to accept a case, and one of them is likely to write an opinion, if not THE opinion that will form the Court’s ruling. It takes time. When the majority opinion is delivered there usually is a dissenting opinion. Lawyers everywhere study both. Crucial interpretations of Constitutional issues will form arguments in other cases. Sometimes the issues raised in the dissenting, or minority opinion, will be refined to bolster other cases. The written words of the Supreme Court are critical to our success as a nation.
The Congress is given the power to establish inferior federal courts and charge them with certain authorities over types of crime or types of conflicts. There are courts for immigration matters, for example, or for tax issues, and several others. The country is divided into 12 “Circuits” and Justices often visit those Circuits. See https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/court-role-and-structure for a comprehensive view of federal court structure.
Leftism consistently challenges our Constitutional Republic. Socialism / Communism is inherently counter to the structure of morality and individual responsibility that is embodied in the Constitution. Freedom includes the freedom to fail, to try again and to make choices about how to advance in life. Forces of the left consistently attempt to tie individuals to government rules and regulations. This can be seen in attacks on religion and in unionized “public” education, itself. Little by little, leftist philosophies, even direct Marxism, like “minimum wage” laws, constantly distort our economy and increase dependence on government. These stresses generate social-issue conflicts that threaten domestic tranquility and even personal safety. This places immense public, if not mob pressure, on the Court and on individual Justices. Starting with Judge Robert Bork in 1987, the left – personified by Senator Ted Kennedy, an avowed socialist – has attacked and refused to compromise with “conservatism” in any form.
Leftist, or “Progressive” policies, inherently are on the attack against the premises and ideas expressed in the Constitution. The Supreme Court was and is charged with primary defense of the ideas underpinning the Constitution. Judge Bork represented a shift away from leftist activism on the Supreme Court. The retiring Justice, Lewis Powell had often been the swing vote on issues like abortion, tilting the Court to the left. Bork was a strict constructionist, unswayed by social pressures. To leftists like Kennedy, that threat of a shift away from the attack on original intent, was a threat so serious that the destruction of the reputation of an esteemed legal scholar like Bork, was well worth the effort. The attacks continue, as evidenced by the violent reaction to the reversal of Roe versus Wade in the “Dobbs” decision in 2022.
Among our “Unalienable rights” listed in the Declaration of Independence are “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” Within them has developed a severe conflict, mainly due to the equality of status that women have acquired since the beginning of the United States. “Liberty” and “Happiness” both depend upon freedom of action by individuals. Pregnancy, uniquely, with its 9-month period of physical commitment and subsequent lifetime obligations, can interfere, unquestionably, with happiness and liberty of the pregnant woman. So far, we have not found a balance between the rights of the mother/parent, and those of the baby growing inside her.
Does the right to LIFE take precedence? Many think so. Do the rights of the mother take precedence? Many believe this is so. Mainly non-religious, non-Christian or anti-Christian persons, are pleased to take dominion over natural life, and grant women the absolute right to abort their child. Religious people tend to support the rights of the new life to be born and to thrive after birth. They are “pro-life.” Abortion absolutists have done their best to pervert the meaning of conception and of what a fetus actually is: a human baby, growing. Inevitably, this conflict landed in the Supreme Court. Sadly, Roe versus Wade resulted in more than 60 Million Americans being aborted, most of whom were growing inside women of color. It is a number that should give Anti-life believers some pause.
The Supreme Court makes mistakes. The “Dred Scott” decision is recognized as the worst of them, as Chief Justice Roger Taney attempted to undo several state and federal laws governing the status of slaves and even of any free negro citizen. Taney went so far as to declare the Missouri Compromise un-Constitutional and to state that the concept of “free soil” and freedom of slaves who resided there, was constitutionally unenforceable and need not be recognized by other territories or states. The decision helped to push the South to secession and proved to be recognized in its disregard among free states and territories. The 13th amendment made Taney’s decisions moot.
Another simpler, but still egregious decision was the “Kelo” decision: a 7-year battle over the “taking” of private property for public use, that was decided – many feel, wrongly – in 2005. The city of New London, Connecticut, decided that development of land next to a new Pfizer plant, would increase tax receipts to the city, and therefore qualified as a public good. Unfortunately, Suzette Kelo and her neighbors lived on that land, many on long-time homesteads, in perfectly acceptable, non-condemned homes. The city turned the land over to a new, semi-private development Commission along with the power of “eminent domain,” with which the Commission forced homeowners to sell their real estate. Tragically, The Supreme Court interpreted the “taking” clause in the 5th Amendment to include not only the clearly stated “public use,” like a school or water treatment plant, but for an amorphous “expected benefit” for the public, such as increased tax revenues might provide. In other words, amazingly, “public use” was interpreted to include “private use” if it raised more taxes than current landowners provided. Several States have amended their own laws to prevent exactly the premise of the Kelo decision.
The American public is right to challenge the Supreme Court and, through the Senate, to carefully examine the beliefs of nominees to the Supreme Court. As political conflicts, largely fomented by the Left, become more heated and hateful, the ability of Justices to ignore such matters becomes ever more difficult. It is more crucial than ever that the strength and intention of the Court must be to preserve the originating ideas and ideals of the Constitution, resisting all attempts, regardless of political heat, to drift, stumble or run-away from them.
As the Christ Mass approaches we tend to – are obligated to – place our most prized results of our year of labor and multiplication upon the altar, proving our willingness to sacrifice for God and thanks to God. It’s metaphysical… in a non-computerized sort of way. God, of course, doesn’t need our sacrifices, he needs the act of sacrificing. He needs that expression of love, and so do we.
There’s a lot of charity flowing at this time of year, as you surely notice. Charity is an act of selfless, as in “non-selfish” love; acts of love with no physical benefit in return. Of course those and their organizations whose appeals we may answer as Christmas nears, do their best to thank all who gave of our supply of time or treasure, but acts of charity don’t require such recognition. Thanking is certainly good manners, sometimes done to ensure future charity and, truth be known, most humans resent the lack of thanks, but it’s not a true factor in the equation of love or of its charitable expression.
We humans are beings defined, or measured, by economics. We consistently judge the values of giving and receiving, thanks for a gift… or for charity. It’s not always a healthy calculation, nor is it part of the love equation. Or, of the charity equation. Love, or charity, is an aetheric substance. What we do here on Earth is a rather crude reflection of the pure, spiritual development that happens to and for our higher selves, our non-physical selves. Except, we can’t manifest things to and for other humans without being in the physical plane, as it were. If we are, someday, accepted into the plane where our soul is supposed to be, love is an automatic manifestation, not a choice. Here, amidst a thousand distractions and evil opportunities, love and charity are a decision – sometimes a difficult one. If you find it easy to express love for others and to sacrifice for others, count your blessings.
One of the tests we must pass is how to not slip through the diaphanous membrane between love and hate. Hatred is often expressed towards ourselves, where it is most damaging. It may be as simple as a mistake, even just dropping something, spilling something… stupid stuff. Immediately we chastise ourselves in words we’d never apply to another, certainly never towards someone we love. If our spouse or child experiences something irritating, an accident, a time-consuming error that makes him or her angry, your usual reaction is to sooth and help in resolving the problem. Yet when we do something similar, ourselves, we immediately express self-hatred for our failing to do something smarter. Prudence can’t explain why it works this way, but “the force,” God, the Universe, or Life, cannot deliver the best, most fortunate opportunities to you if you are immersed in hatred of yourself, OR, toward others. It’s an equation: Love fits into it but hatred never does. Love yourself – you are a product of love and of an investment by your mother and others of love. You never deserve to be hated.
The greatest gift we can give, whether at Christmas or on any morning, is to review and refresh the love you are giving to yourself and others. Even in mundane, economic interactions like sales, the advice always is to imagine that you love the stranger you would like to have a sales relationship with, before you pick up the phone or walk into an office. It seems to make the interaction far more successful. Prudence can testify to this effect.
How different might all interactions be if every human projected love toward his or her correspondents. Unfortunately, our society and politics, even our elementary schools and teachers(!), spend much of their efforts at teaching children and grownups alike to hate others. What a gross distortion of the life opportunities God gives us every year and day.
Children, most sadly, are taught not just hatred of their race or skin color, but hatred of their selves. If born male, they are taught to forego the responsibilities of manhood and to pretend to be female; if born female, they are taught to forego the majesty of motherhood and to pretend to be male: two special forms of self-hatred. Part of the self-hatred process involves separation from parents and other relatives who won’t “confirm” their new sexual outlook. Learning to no longer trust one’s parents is a giant step toward hating them or, at least, hating their roles.
Children can be, and should be, taught to love themselves… not to hate themselves… or others. Like Critical Gender Theory, Critical Race Theory is an agenda based on hatred.
Questions of race and slavery generate peculiar ripples of hatred, essentially only in the United States. Millions are caught up in them, especially politicians of various stripes, who have learned that constant aggravation of these questions can yield political influence. Such influence is fruitful within a population of people who “enjoy” rubbing hatreds raw, including within themselves. Foolishly, politicians have figured out that hatred can be not only powerful, but profitable. Still, the strong feelings do not, and cannot, lead to solutions or transformation into positive feelings, outlooks and cooperation.
There are truths about slavery… and falsehoods. There are truths about racism… and falsehoods. Falsehoods seem to prevail, but truths about both subjects are immediately seized upon to draw false conclusions and false premises about what some true piece of history should force upon people of today. Just the fact of slavery in the past has proven sufficient reason to never stop hating, as evidenced by the renewed, and listened-to demands for “reparations.” Reparations justify hatred for white-skinned people: apparently whites owe an undying debt to blacks because of slavery. Whites, it seems, are prone to guilt over having succeeded in mastering so many sciences and skills. Not all skills, of course, but whites pioneered in many skills that not only have created comfortable standards of living and great wealth, but which have benefitted virtually all peoples on the planet. Perfectly? Absolutely not.
If we are waiting to stop feeling guilty until we are perfect, no less, we’ll wait forever. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t become better. But, are the children guilty of the sins of their parents? Only by choice and training; those who decidedly choose a better path than their ancestors, better ways to treat and interact with everyone else, skin color notwithstanding, should be respected and loved as anyone might be loved. There’s no guilt appropriate. Unfortunate and deceitful politics, however, casts all whites into the guilty column because some of their forbears owned slaves or mistreated blacks following slavery. What is owed to whom, today?
One of whites’ imperfections is an expectation that money can replace sin – the monetization of guilt. It is the fundament of perpetual welfare and the social welfare state. Perhaps handing over money for no value will convert hatred for whites into love for whites. That seems doubtful based on the “success” of the Great Society. Otherwise, every welfare recipient would run into the street to hug any taxpayer who wanders by their less-than-ideal, welfare-provided home. Nope. Giving free stuff makes only the most temporary of friendships and quickly reverts to resentment. The only “reparations” of any value or consequence to the quality of life for anyone, is teaching a person how to succeed in our culture, perhaps even helping that person to succeed for a limited time. But locking that person into perpetual victim-hood and welfare-poverty is a system designed to destroy that persons humanity and worth, yet we persist at it, waiting for the miracle socialists promise.
For their part, far too many blacks believe that destroying the society and culture whites have succeeded in, is going to make their lives better and balance the cosmic scales, somehow. That approach requires perpetual hatred and resentment – there is no love that is part of it. One doesn’t steal, loot, destroy and burn the work of others out of love. One doesn’t teach others to hate anyone, let alone a group, or to hate themselves… out of love. This is why socialism is an abject, deceitful lie: it is premised on the belief of the inability of the individual to elevate him- or herself, improving skills and understandings and esteem while teaching him or her to love the good in everyone and to strive against the bad. Under socialism, all trust is placed in others, mostly unknown.
Interestingly, America is full of blacks who have raised themselves up by working within the system and then transcending the system, leading the rest of us to better ourselves. In almost every field, great, accomplished black-skinned Americans have excelled and led. Why not emulate them instead of hating whites? Crappy politics, that’s why. Since the Clintons popped into the White House, hatred has become the overarching driver of political action: not freedom, not justice, not improvement of living standards, not wisdom in foreign policy, not budgeting on behalf of American citizens, not “America first.” Despite constant accusations from the Democrat left, most of the hatred emanates from Democrats and their allies. Yes, there are haters on both sides of the divide, but the distinction between left and right is gigantic, culminating in the Communist uprisings in 2020 and the Covid pandemic. There weren’t “right-wingers” burning America in 2020.
There weren’t right-wingers creating and pushing Covid across the planet, or creating and pushing ersatz vaccines into every body. Those were the works of the left. Why?
It wasn’t to increase individual freedom or to balance the budget; it wasn’t to prevent inflation of the monetary supply or to strengthen energy independence and the U. S. balance of payments with other countries; it wasn’t to solve our weak border enforcement, improve public safety, reduce the rate of drug overdoses and deaths or to strengthen the rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights in any way. Why would a political movement take significant, even drastic steps that weaken the United States of America?
Well, aside from enrichening its adherents, it would be to, well… weaken the United States.
Love of country makes us stronger; hatred of it makes us weaker. To govern and legislate in conformity with the warped ideas of the World Economic Forum and with the corrupted, communistic ideas of the United Nations, is to express hatred for the United States. To promulgate policies, persecutions and punishments that divide Americans into two classes – favored and hated – is to DIS-unite the previously United States: hatred.
This is the time of this most important year, when love of others, of law, of nation, of selves and of God, should be foremost in all of our intentions, yet our politics has failed us, creating problems that our democratic republic can’t solve, while rewarding hatred as the means to power. Let us pray as we see fit to return ourselves to a transcendent path, not the descendent path we’re on.
Trump was a phenomenon in politics and in our history. It seems Prudent to recognize that the greatest good he could possibly do… has already been done. Not everyone who gains center stage will be a King, someday. Some will merely be President of the United States, and then retire.
Aside from his extraordinary rise to the presidency, the most extraordinary aspect of Trump’s political chapter in his own life and in ours, was the unprecedented attacks he drew from the corrupt “leaders” who burrow into Washington and try never to leave. Self-service is nearly the only service that City knows… or recognizes. It stains and erodes everything, there.
In what can fairly be described as a sacrificial role, Trump exposed the nature and breadth of the rot we call the administrative state. He took the slings and arrows for all of us who supported him, and for those who didn’t, in fact. Like a lightning rod on a fragile, wooden barn, we are glad – thankful – that Trump was there during the storms. Yet we recognize that we should not get too close when the next storm threatens, for he also draws the lightning bolts that could injure us as well as him. It’s a real dichotomy, and grossly unfair.
Comfortably blind Democrats and leftists who may still pledge allegiance to this amazing nation, are certainly blind to the sacrifice Trump made to even run for president, and to accept the burden of election. His fortune shrank and he relinquished control of businesses that bear his name. We need not cry for him, but America owes him an historic debt of gratitude: he may have saved the Republic. Unlike most in Congress and in the 1200, or so, agencies, departments, offices and programs, The Donald did not go to Washington to become rich by hook or crook.
Like nearly every true leader, Trump has human flaws and among them are an outsized impression of his irreplaceability. He is vain and narcissistic and hates to not be the center of attention. Prudence does not envy him his retirement. Those flaws are damaging his legacy, now, and damaging the nation he deeply loves and served. To a great extent, his anger over a very questionable 2020 election hurt Republicans’ ability to win the Senate in 2020, and it is poised to hurt the same opportunity, again.
Unfortunately, Donald Trump’s need to be the center of attention and authority keeps him from playing on a team – only if it’s HIS team. For this reason, Prudence recommends that Mr. Trump actually retire from seeking office. He is a huge influencer, and that power can be put to good work to keep politics and leadership fighting for “America First.”
There is a very painful effect for someone in Trump’s position, to stop pushing to get revenge on political enemies who have lied and conspired to tear him down. Other Republicans will do well to sit down with him to map out how they will eventually bring down those who have broken numerous laws in their false accusations and fraudulent uses of federal power. It can take the “Trump Wars” off of the front pages and let local political battles be won by other conservatives. There are better, more unifying candidates for President, as hard as that is for Trump to accept.
So, Trump can be an heroic figure in history… or, he can be seen as a vindictive man who faded from importance, squabbling and lashing out at those who, genuinely, distorted the truth – even committed blatant, illegal fraud – to hurt him, personally and the country as a whole. Prudence recommends heroism.
As for other Republicans, honesty, morality and dedicated “America First” policies are the pathways to power and American restoration. We must re-frame the abortion issue with truth and pro-American views. The pre-born are Americans. It is time to make “pro-choice” the free choice to have sex, not to kill the baby. Our long-term success as a nation requires guaranteeing the rights enumerated in our constitution, including LIFE. We must restore the meaning of words and biological truth at the same time. Republicans must stand for life and define the pro-death attitudes of the left, for they include the death of the United States of America.
Republicans must stand for honesty, integrity and honor in education, including reasonable limits on the power of education unions. Among those must be political actions or donations on behalf of any officials able to affect or effect financial advantage for union members. The same should be true for all public employee unions.
No laws should be signed into effect if they are based on self-declared feelings, absent empirical evidence. Smart Republicans can create anti-discrimination protections for everyone that are not based on feelings, but on actions against the person of any American.
Criminal penalties must not be affected or distorted based on race or gender or gender-identity, only on the severity of the criminal acts, themselves. Citizens understand the difference between honest and equal application of the laws, and political favoritism that distorts public safety. Republicans must be clearly identified with public safety, and making clear the distinction between real safety and faux enforcement distorted by the left.
American foreign policy needs clarity and unquestioned pro-American patriotism. We must strengthen our alliances with British commonwealth countries and a handful of others who share our philosophies and anti-communism. At the same time we must be clear in our own anti-communism. Our military behemoth needs strict reform and reallocation of resources. There is too much General staff and not enough troops or hardware, or training. The next president must be especially tough with the 6 branches, making them lean and effective. All vestiges of “wokeism” and “social justice” must be weeded out of the academies and the ranks, right up to General staff level. Only then will foreign policy mean very much and will diplomacy achieve very much.
Fiscally, the federal budget must be cut, including welfare of every sort. The debt ceiling should be reduced every year until we are in balance, no exceptions. Every Department and agency should have its budget and cost / performance rating reviewed separately: no more “omnibus” budget bills and no more continuing resolutions. If ANY politician truly desired to reduce the federal budget / “money disposer,” he or she could put some brains together to create a campaign to sell the idea to Americans. We are doomed if no one does.
There is a reason America became great. The ideas that made it possible are so old they are new again. However, it will take a disciplined political force to make them attractive to Americans, themselves. Given the crass, petty squandering of political opportunity so sadly displayed in 2022, another party is needed, it seems Prudent to say.
It is certainly obscure, even mysterious, why a wealthy oligarch like George Soros would expend his fortune on the election of socialist, soft-on-crime District and States’ Attorneys. He has had an outsized impact on not only crime rates and, automatically, the victims of criminal acts, but also on the reduction in trust of government, police and justice, itself. Still, there must be a plan.
It doesn’t seem that Soros’ purpose stems from a love of crime or even any particular sympathy for the weak-minded dopes who commit crimes. He doesn’t appear to be an advocate for all things anti-White or pro-Black. But, there must be a plan and, considering his actions Prudently, the shape of the plan can be discerned. It is quite simple.
Soros is a socialist – a virulent one. He doesn’t seem to trust Communists, which is a mark of intelligence, but, like most political socialists, believes that socialism can be controlled and manipulated to fit the goals of oligarchs and one-worlders. By employing a process that breaks down civil order and public safety, Soros makes clear his contempt for the “proletariat,” which is most of us. He has always seemed offended, as it were, by the Constitutional limits that underpin the United States, the belief in “unalienable rights” that they guarantee, and, even more, the basically Christian love of freedom and personal sovereignty. Soros hates the power and influence of the United States of America, and of Americans.
So, it seems clear that the purpose of destroying cities through increasing crime and lack of trust in authority, is designed to force Americans to accept authoritarian forms of government… so as to “clean up” the crime, drug, homelessness and other problems that make normal citizens unsafe. It’s simple, really, and it won’t take long. There is already a significant political party/movement that is pushing for exactly the solutions Soros wants: Democrats. Their experience in promoting and excusing multi-city rioting and destruction, weakening of police departments and removal of the only populist president in our lifetimes, in 2020, and the ability to control almost everyone, including stripping many of their “unalienable rights” by building up the Covid-19 scare of 2020 – 2021 and beyond, encourages Democrats to attack the Constitution directly. They, and Soros, have won some victories.
Are any students, anywhere in America, learning why what Soros has been doing with his money is evil and anti-American? By the same token, are any learning about the Constitution, itself?
When tyranny threatens, elections are months away.
THE CONSTITUTIONAL MILITIA
The evolution of American constitutionalism responded no more to the several theories of rights and representation of the late 18th Century, as much as to the necessity of freeing ourselves from the shackles imposed by the British Crown and a non-representative Parliament. That freedom would not have been won without “Militias” – home-grown assemblages of armed citizens, by definition, non-governmental organizations. Our Constitution references these quasi-military, self-selected groups of passionate defenders of farm, family and business, in the Second Amendment.
The potency of the Second Amendment is rarely mentioned. Everyone argues over the “… right to keep and bear Arms…” Opponents of gun ownership point to the first phrase, “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, …” as if it referenced what we now call the State Police, or even “State Militia” which are controlled and limited by our friendly and benign state governments. Some liken the term to the National Guard, which is even further off the mark. “Militia,” in the Second Amendment, refers to self-declared and assembled, armed, private-citizen organizations. It is not clear that such organizations are legally tolerated today.
In fact, there are a number of such groups around the country: legal gun bearers who come together like clubs, perhaps including some militaristic training. They tend strongly toward white-guys, exclusively, sometimes religious, generally anti-federal government. Unfortunately, there is a parallel tendency toward racism, but the number of incidents in which members of such “clubs” attack blacks or others is very, very small… no way comparable to the numbers of blacks who attack everyone else, although never being charged with “racism.”
Militias have a bad name. Still, they are a part of the patriotic front that challenged and stopped the British in the 1770’s, and which became part of the “official” Continental Army under general George Washington. They were tough people, supported by equally tough wives and relatives, both farmers and merchants. How would they fit in to today’s social fabric and political landscape? They are referenced and promoted in our Constitution, but universally denigrated as, mainly, racist crackpots playing with guns.
“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State…” What “state” were the framers talking about?
At the time of the fight for independence, the “states” were colonies: 13 separate entities with separate civil authorities appointed by the King or by his governors. To become sovereign states they had to both rid themselves of British governors and soldiers, who were the “police,” as it were, and then establish their own authorities with elections, appointments, codified laws and relatively independent courts. They had, also, to defend themselves. Automatically it became obvious that the colonies had to stand against the British together, else they’d be militarily quashed separately. Without much debate, they formed the Continental Congress and a sense of “nation” was established across fairly diverse colonies. A common enemy will do that.
Militias, essentially, were folded in to the individual colonies’ “Minutemen” forces and ultimately into the Continental Army, but not all of them. Many Militia fighters served key roles in interfering with British supplies and cavalry, harassing them like guerilla fighters, sometimes providing a flanking force when standing ranks faced off on battlefields. However, by the time of the war of 1812, militias were relatively unheard of. Citizens were still armed, but the U. S. Army and Navy then formed the military wherewithal of the new nation, calling up fighters from the states, each of whom represented their states as much as they did the United States.
The Constitution acknowledged and stipulated the importance of “militias,” and stipulated the right to keep and bear arms, but militias, themselves, faded from prominence.
By the end of the Civil War there was no question that the military forces were U. S. forces, and the federal government took on the costs and administration of veterans’ disabilities and welfare. States had police forces, but no longer raised their own “regulars” or trained or equipped them. Militias, if such can be identified at all, devolved into chapters of the Ku Klux Klan, constantly ginning up anger against negroes – a most despicable era of American history. Roughly speaking, the “Union” army and victorious states were “Republicans;” the former confederacy and the Ku Klux Klan itself, were “Democrats.” Democrats supported gun control laws, among other segregationist restrictions, to keep guns out of the hands of blacks. To maintain power and influence, the Klan, like revolutionary militias, had to constantly exaggerate the presence of a common enemy: free negroes.
“Militias,” now, are perceived as kooks. Any concept of forming armed forces to overthrow “the government,” is inherently illegal, and only a tiny fraction of Americans in either party think it’s either practical or legitimate. Yet the concept of non-governmental militias is Constitutional! Where could “militias” fit in? First, they’d have to meet standards. Their fellow citizens would have to trust them in terms of public safety and support of the Constitution, itself. Then what?
Somehow, some way, militias would have to coexist with police forces, both municipal and state. Participation in “Guardian” training and functions is a good place to start.
The Guardian Program, yet to be adopted anywhere, is designed to “legitimize” concealed carry, in a sense. The Constitution already protects the right to keep and bear arms – carry them around, in other words: to be individually armed. As a Guardian, the person who is willing to carry a firearm would also be trained in handling, safety and safe reaction in the presence of a crime or imminent criminal act. That person would also wear a “9-1-1” transponder that would identify and locate the individual and alert police forces to a possible active-shooter situation. Meanwhile, the guardian would take such action as practical to defuse a conflict or stop criminal action until police arrived.
Finally, the guardian would be shielded by special indemnification for legitimate and proper actions taken to stop criminal actions, whether on his or her own property or in public. “When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.” The truth of that observation is timeless. Establishing “Guardian” legislation enables the multiplication of police power and effectiveness at very low cost. It also provides vectors for evaluating gun owners and their family environments. If such gun owners formed the core of “militias,” governments and citizens could have confidence in their judgment and rationality.
Militias could also be held to ethical standards. Non-guardians who “joined up” would have to swear to certain behaviors and practices concerning gun ownership, handling and safety inside and outside of their homes. Militia organizations would be subject to fines for failing to adhere to ethical standards or for failing to reject or eject members who fail to do so. Such information would have to be shared with law-enforcement and become part of the unacceptable persons’ records. Most Militias would form through “Rod and Gun” clubs or hunting clubs or “Sportsmens’ Clubs.” Whether they could remain associated with those clubs would be a decision of the club, not of any government. How would a Militia function politically? How would the majority opinions of a Militia or dozens of Militias, enter into public policy or political power? Who would their “common enemy” be?
By definition, the “common enemy” would be our own federal, central government at the moment it is perceived as tyrannical. We have major political forces who are enthralled with government by experts – the bureaucratic state. Decision-making by and for individuals is anathema to these leftist “Progressives.” They are also anti-religious, increasingly opposed to free speech, virulently opposed to the second Amendment as written, and socialist in economics and social organization. Many members of a militia organized to monitor and resist – if not remove – tyranny in our central government, would count “Progressives” among the tyrants. A militia formed by progressives, for such there could be, though unlikely, would see themselves as saviors and conservatives as the common enemy.
Obviously, those most attracted to “militias” would be vilified and hated to greater degrees as members than they are, if at all, as relatively quiet, unobtrusive neighbors and co-workers.
Militias would tend to be somewhat secretive in their meetings and deliberations. Using common social media communications would leave them open to attack and interference. They will want to network – and perhaps coordinate – with other militias through a modern version of “Committees of Correspondence” as was done in Revolutionary times, when their discovery would have resulted in arrest and torture. If not actual secrecy, strict confidentiality would be essential to operation and growth of militias. But, how, short of taking up arms in fact, would constitutional militias influence political, governmental actions and direction?
Clearly they would have to be financially independent of government support or tax abatement or tax-free status on any places of meeting or practice / training. They would be subject to continuous hate from leftists and racists, for they would not be able to control militias from the inside. They would have to be scrupulous about opening membership to anyone who met their standards of behavior and ethics, which standards would include legal gun ownership, by definition. But, again, how would a militia influence political power? Could a militia sway the votes of others?
Communications, communications, communications. As with the Committees of Correspondence, militias would have to present factual and documented positions on the actions of government(s) and of elected or appointed officials. They would have to lay bare the nature of tyrannies large and small that made clear the un-representative nature of those in power including, most specifically, the expenditures of public monies. To do so would mean operating publishing businesses in both print and digital formats. Since a militia would not be a political “party” or be attempting to run candidates of its own, its publications would have to be both historical and current, and easily comprehensible as to how an issue/ topic either resisted tyranny of the state (or municipality) or fit into a tyrannical or potentially tyrannical action that threatened Constitutionally guaranteed rights or the freedoms of individuals.
Would anyone care if they did this work? Would citizens listen? Militias, like those that deposed tyranny at the inception of our country, have an obligation to pursue wisdom and to act upon it. The first militias had the wisdom of recognizing tyranny and of how to multiply their effectiveness in fighting it. It led them to wonderous courage and sacrifice. To fulfill that legacy, Constitutional militias must form with that same sort of commitment. Membership would not be a sport or part-time interest. Just as “the Left” maintains decades, if not centuries, of commitment to upending Biblical truths and models of behavior and governance based on individual freedom and responsibility, Militias must maintain a singular purpose to inform other Americans of the lies and evil of Socialism and Communism, backed up by the ability to risk everything to overthrow tyranny in defense of the American Way.
The creation of one militia, independent and uncorrupted, will bring forth many others, and their creation still more. We have learned after dozens of congresses and hundreds of representatives and senators, that the election of readily corruptible men and women who enter office with pathways of personal wealth and influence providing them all too many comforts and excuses for failure, has not – and will not – bring about the change needed to save and preserve our nation, our Constitution and our integrity. A well regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free State.
A man shall leave his mother and a woman leave her home
And they shall travel on to where the two will be as one.
As it was in the beginning is now and till the end
Woman draws her life from man and gives it back again.
And there is Love. There is Love.
From Peter, Paul & Mary: Wedding Song
To hear it screamed about, the apparent likelihood that the Supreme Court will vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that upended common law regarding abortion, marks the end of life as we know it. (Pun intended.) Or, maybe, the end of civilization, itself. How grievous that women may again be celebrated for motherhood.
Well, maybe that’s not fair: women are so much more than mere “birthing persons.” They are able to work, after all, which the artificially high costs of living and taxation require these days, and even earn more than many, Ugh!, men can earn, for Heaven’s sakes. Careful of the “Heaven” reference, there, Prudence. No sense bringing spirituality into this “life” argument; it’s taken nearly 50 years to denigrate it as well as we have.
Besides, religion is for the handful of weirdos who are not as enlightened as abortionists and who, still, think abortion is somehow “wrong:” science-deniers, all. KEEP YOUR RELIGION OFF OF MY BODY, or can’t you read the signs of deep wisdom all around you as you leave church this Mothers’ Day? We will not be held in subjugation by men for a million more years as we have been: mere mothers and homemakers and nannys to the children of, Ugh!, men.
Well, that’s one way to look at it.
One sign that popped into being since the big, illegal reveal says, “(euphemism for fornicate) to come, not for pregnancy!” Females, then, (since ‘women’ can’t be defined) have been elevated to the higher status of pleasure-seeking pleasure objects… which is another way of looking at it. That men have benefitted the most from freely available abortion – at least in terms of unfettered pleasure-seeking – and WHITE MEN most of all, seems to have escaped the notice of enlightened females. Black men tend to be discarded in abortion clinics at much higher rates than whites, but, then, who’s listening to them?
Somehow, though, the relative power of the feminist mystique has resulted in wholesale destruction of women’s true status which was supposed to be elevated by loosening the shackles of pregnancy. Exactly why current ideological, pedagogical theory requires pediatric exploration of sexual pleasure rather than language and arithmetic skills, critical thinking and problem-solving, has not been explained, but it certainly is a component of socialist beliefs. Children, both sexes, we are told… they are told, need to be separated from traditional “roles” that science-denying religionists assign to them at birth, especially traditional roles of boys and girls growing into men and women, from whose love shall come forth new generations. Those same kids must be separated, psychologically from their parents, who can’t be trusted as much as their true friends, the “education” establishment.
Go ahead and give birth, if you want to, but that’s where your rights end.
Men are pigs, so to speak. Despite their strengths and values, men tend to set aside almost any higher calling when they perceive the possibility of having sex. To borrow a phrase, it takes a village to keep men in their own pasture, and the head of that village is a man’s wife. Women are the civilizing force in society. Decades ago the strengthening feminist juggernaut decried President Reagan’s statement that “women are the civilizing force on men.” (Or, words to that effect.) The feminist “leader” who put Reagan in his place for that comment, was signally offended by his statement, apparently because it linked men and women in the processes of socialization and civilization. God forbid. No way did a modern, liberated woman have any obligation to do anything – even a good thing – for a man: everything required negotiated parity between equals. Love had nothing to do with it, nor, apparently, did child-rearing or family dynamics or nurturing stability or dependence on some, Ugh!, man to provide for the family. It is remarkable, indeed, that any families are still being formed, today.
A measure of the destructiveness of feminized socialism is the breakdown of traditional father-mother families, and it is at its worst for black families. Today nearly three-fourths of black children grow up in single-parent households, mostly fatherless; nearly 30% of white and Hispanic children do, also. This shift began in earnest with the “Great Society” and the federalization of welfare, perhaps the worst public policy experiment ever conceived. People blame Lyndon Johnson for the foul execution of military policy in the Viet-Nam War, as they should, but 100 times as much damage has been done through federal welfare programs that facilitate single-mother households.
Since the eugenics of Margaret Sanger, but really since the inception of the Great Society, the “liberation” of women, constantly touted by the Democrat Party to their key voting block, as they help them throw off the shackles of oppression by men, women have striven towards economic equality with men, but it has cost them the rewards of their majestic roles as mothers in loving 2-parent households. In part as a result, American citizens no longer have enough children to replace ourselves. Is this a measure of feminist success?
It is almost better referred-to as a success in the battle against motherhood, now that the battle against fatherhood is so well underway. The rabid attempts to sexualize and gender-neutralize elementary school children could play a vital role in this battle. Indeed, the greatest impact of convincing children that they are not who they originally thought they were, but are some sort of gender-fluid non-boy or non-girl, is STERILITY! In the minds of feminized socialists, separating children from their parents and from reality, is the most effective way to destroy Christianity, as it destroys procreation.
Are there any demonstrations over Roe v. Wade outside of Mosques?
Indeed, the entire, sick fad of trans-genderism, non-binary identities and gender fluidity is an assault on both masculinity and femininity. To what end, a normal person is inspired to ask? To express hatred towards life? Towards God? Towards love? It expresses nothing better than hatred for all of these things.
Perhaps the destruction of traditional sexual mores is the natural outgrowth of feminism. Can a half-century of celebrating anti-masculinity result in a new appreciation for the value of men? Our culture teaches boys that they are flawed almost to irredeemability, able to restore approval only by renouncing maleness in grade school. The same culture teaches girls that the least-attractive aspect of their lives is as a mother, then it teaches that some giant boy pretending to be a girl is worth more than girls, themselves.
Then we select and celebrate a female judge who is incapable of defining what a woman is, and entrust her with discerning the essence of our Constitution when she cannot discern her own. No wonder women are angry these days, and, as on most days, when angred there must be a man at the root cause of it.
Prudence is not certain that having more women in government really is an answer we’ve been waiting for: more real men might help, though. Maybe the liberal wing of the Supreme Court can find a right to love one another in the penumbra of the Constitution, and override all State laws to the contrary.
Time may not be on our side. One cannot overview the world and our political circumstances… and the calendar, without realizing a little fear for where things might go from here. Where is that?
Let’s look at some of the pressures building up.
First, the political time-line. Mid-term elections are the historic relief valve for sometimes hasty or confused political decisions made during presidential elections two years earlier. There certainly were those in 2020. Because the national conscience is so, well… impacted by beliefs concerning the 2020 elections – stolen or not stolen – the release of tensions in the 2022 mid-terms is a little harder to predict than what a lot of pundits are trying to foresee. Most are making judgements on “normal” political considerations and it doesn’t seem Prudent to do so.
The weird eminence that most have already discounted, but who is the key to millions of voters’ decisions, is Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House. She has been a unique Speaker, at least. For decades she has appeared to be simply a fierce partisan and has been appreciated, if not revered, by partisan Democrats who were happy to be “winning” barely-understood battles through her slick machinations. By rights, she should be at the end of her career, and she probably is, but it’s a career that descended into a previously unrecognized socialism starting under Obama and deepening with hatred under Trump. In those 12 years, Democrats became uneasy. While enjoying victories Nancy engineered, no matter how messy, Dems also became concerned about the leftward lurch, yet had no other port in which to seek refuge. Over the Trump years, leftist hatred for “America First” left many Democrats adrift. What are they going to do in 2022?
If “centrist” or “American” Democrats abandon the Pelosi-led leftists (not that Pelosi was elected to lead the leftists: she has run, skipped twisted and kneeled as needed to stay ahead of them) will they suddenly vote Republican? That doesn’t seem Prudent. Will they fail to vote in standard numbers? That question forces Prudence to wonder about what “the Black vote” might do.
Blacks have slowly been drifting away from their Democrat plantation, with an interesting increase in that trend in 2020. Despite Covid, Blacks did well economically under Trump since 2017. Despite, also, a perpetual anti-Trump media blitz accusing Trump of racism, Blacks could see that his policies helped all races. Like all underdogs, Trump was seen somewhat sympathetically by Blacks who understood too well how prejudice hurts. Have Blacks been treated better by increasing leftism? Were they advanced by BLM-led riots and Antifa hatreds that damaged so many black businesses and jobs? Have they been helped by Democrats’ union-led resistance to school choice? Has weakening public safety served Black families or neighborhoods in any way? Are they particularly likely to “reward” Pelosi’s weird coalitions with more power, more votes? That doesn’t seem Prudent, either. But, will they vote for anyone else?
So, on the backdrop of multiple failures of the “Biden” administration and severe economic news, what will be the “shape” of the change in fortunes for our two parties? Over the next 11 months, how virulent will the Pelosi Left become? Clearly their anger has been kindled by the loss of legislative momentum thanks to West Virginia Senator, Joe Manchin and Arizona Senator, Kyrsten Sinema. Even 3 counties of Maryland would like to become part of West Virginia.
In 2020 we suffered through months of cultural destruction and destructive rioting and looting and economic despair in numerous cities. Many strange, leftist mayors and governors have been exposed as feckless, ignorant and ideologically foolish. Americans are practically fleeing their jurisdictions for states that seem to honor the Constitution more. Yet the Pelosi House insisted on passing the enormous, so-called “Build Back Better” bill that would have transformed fundamental freedoms and democratic-republic structures created by the Constitution. Against the backdrop of systemic failure at the southern border and the flood of illegals swept into the country by administration policies, the congress spent inordinate time on the “BBB” plan and the pointless “January 6th” commission. Not a word is spoken in congress about what Americans are truly upset about, not least of which is the southern border. With that legislation apparently doomed, what will the 117th Congress do to improve Democrats’ re-election chances in 2022? Most options are likely to do damage to the republic at least domestically.
_________
Internationally, the Biden bindlestiffs have made a mockery of leadership and of honesty. Without fundamental honesty, there are no diplomatic maneuvers that will work, almost regardless of what’s at stake. In matters of war and alliance, conditions, tensions, and opportunities for gross, deadly errors, can spiral out of control quite abruptly. Let’s look at the simplest area of tension: Iran.
The postulate is the following: Iran hates the United States as much or more than it hates Israel. Iran is a theocracy determined to correct spiritual wrongs to the point of suicide. To correct those wrongs, Iran will use nuclear weapons. The inherent danger is that first the Obama regime and now the Biden regime DON’T BELIEVE THESE THINGS. That is, they’d rather believe that Iran is as rational as other nations, desirous of better living standards for its people, better economic conditions internally, and willing to negotiate to achieve those ends. All this talk about “death to America” and wiping Israel off the map is just talk, just posturing. Because they don’t believe the United States can be guided by religious concepts of good and evil, neither can any other nation. The United States can show them how love is better than hate and kindness and generosity will prove that the U. S. can be a reliable partner in seeking a better life for Iranians.
As the imbecilic John F. Kerry, onetime Secretary of State once said: “Would that it were, would that it were.” For a man who has but the mildest relationship with truth, he places a lot of faith in the words of Iranian negotiators. He apparently believes that Iran is enrichening Uranium purely for domestic power production… to improve the standard of living for Iranians.
Trump, to his America-first credit, had a sense of when he was being lied-to, and that extended to Iran. He recognized that the “Iran Nuclear” agreement (never proposed as a nation-binding Treaty because it would never pass the Senate) was a pack of lies, which, naturally, Biden has been begging Iran to renew under his administration. Iran has refused, so far. With all the cash and lifting of sanctions that Obama and Biden have given them, the Iranians no longer need to negotiate further concessions under the agreement – they received what they needed for free. Now it is merely a matter of time before Iran starts issuing nuclear-backed threats toward Israel, which the Biden regime will perceive as opportunities to go “back to the negotiating table.” To their credit, Israel (and other nations in the Mideast) will take steps to prevent an Iranian strike. The U. S. won’t, failing to realize that Iran will likely strike both the Little Satan and the Big Satan simultaneously.
PRUDENT JUDGMENT: VERY DANGEROUS UNDER THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION.
The next simplest, as in somewhat more complicated, problem area is the Western Pacific, including both Taiwan and North Korea, but also India, unfortunately. Here is the postulate: China intends to take over Taiwan; China virtually controls what North Korea does at any point; China will not move against Taiwan if it believes the U. S. will fight for Taiwan’s independence; China is beginning to think that the U. S. will not make any serious moves to stop China (the Biden family’s compromised position vis a’ vis China is a factor, here); and, finally, North Korea will make some sort of military moves against South Korea at the same time, seriously complicating United States’ response to the Taiwan crisis. There has been shooting along the frontier of China and India within the past 18 months. It is not inconceivable that China would stir that pre-heated kettle at the same time or before, that it moves against Taiwan. This feint would likely involve Pakistan, as well, another nuclear power that hates India. Every nation in the arc from the Arabian Sea to Qinzhou will suddenly be seeking a side in the conflict. The failure of the U. S. to decisively defend its allies will transform the entire region and its oceans… and world trade.
PRUDENT JUDGMENT: EXTREMELY DANGEROUS UNDER THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION.
Finally, of the 3 hottest spots, Ukraine and Russia are preparing for some level of shooting. The U. S., thanks to Obama and Joe Biden’s family, has meddled in Ukraine for years. Ukraine is a big country that encompasses wide swaths of fertile land, great waterways, warm-water coastline on the Black Sea, huge coal deposits and iron ore, manganese ore, and other ores, which yield a large steel industry, heavy machinery manufacturing and, its greatest political weakness, a natural, relatively unimpeded pathway for oil and gas products to be transported to Western Europe. The same can transport armies, too.
For more than a thousand years the Russian people have had strong cultural and religious ties to Kyiv, now the capitol of Ukraine, and to Crimea, Odessa and Sevastopol. Strategically, the naval value of Crimea is perceived as so crucial to Russia, as with the USSR, that taking the Crimean peninsula “back” from a recently independent Ukraine was worth the international condemnation. It’s a done deal and will never be negotiable.
In addition, the industrial heartland of Ukraine in Donetsk, Kharkiv, Dnetpropetrovsk and Zaporizhzhya, covers much of eastern Ukraine from the Dneiper River to the Russian border. Russia depends on many of the manufacturers in the region for not just machinery, but military and aerospace equipment. Not having complete control of them is a sore spot. Further, Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson districts have significant Russian populations and Russian-speaking populations, which has formed an excuse for Russian regulars posing as irregulars or subversives, to create an enclave of sorts with a militarized line facing Ukrainian army regulars.
Sensing weakness and indecision from the Biden administration, and determined to not have Ukraine join NATO, Putin and the Russian Federation is looking for the opportune time to, in effect, take control of eastern Ukraine, if not all of Ukraine, by military force or forced federation. When they move, what will Biden do? Both Democrats and some Republicans have made tough-sounding statements about standing firm with Ukraine as if the status of Ukraine were a vital national interest. Perhaps it is. But setting up a line of U. S. troops to deter Russia seems unduly provocative. If the situation were reversed and the Russians were placing troops to deter the U. S. from taking over cartel-dominated Mexico, let’s just say, we would certainly not find that a reason to stand down, would we?
What seems “small” to most Americans, in geopolitical terms, could place us in a hot confrontation with a huge nuclear power, 4,000 miles from our border, where both the land location and the naval one make us the underdog.
PRUDENT JUDGEMENT: VERY DANGEROUS UNDER THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION, and more dangerous than it appears.
____________
The shift away from “America First” thanks to the 2020 “elections,” has caused friends and foes, alike, to re-evaluate their relationships with the U. S. The brutal withdrawal from Afghanistan, apparently executed by military idiots and a bumbling president, has changed strategic calculations by many nations. The English-speaking world no longer reveres the U. S. as the leader of their coalition, and certainly does not respect Biden as it did Trump. A strong, pro-national leader is not only respected, but understood by other nations, including adversaries. There is a profound logic to leadership that clearly is patriotic and who speaks clearly of his – or her – intentions. No nation likes surprises, internationally, nor confusing messages. Every leader can make clear judgments about clear leaders, even about those they view as opponents. This is not our current situation.
It has been said many times that the most dangerous circumstance is when other nations are unsure about what America will fight for; it is yet even more dangerous when America, itself, is unsure. God save us.
We, meaning the Exchange Club of Lawrence and the Andovers, and a bunch of wonderful volunteers and relatives thereof, installed the “Field of Honor” for the third time on the North Andover, Massachusetts Common, this past Saturday. It is a labor of love and patriotism and, in fact, a most serious community service, part of two of Exchange’s Four Pillars of Service. To do a lot of what a “full-calendar” Exchange Club wants to accomplish each year requires money, and mixed with our forms of service to our communities are some vital fund-raising events; the Field of Honor is a four-way winner on that calendar. With a single project we fulfill “Americanism,” we raise needed funds, we unify our Club and we provide “Community Service” for all of those who sponsor flags in memory of loved ones or in honor of them, who recognize first-responders, health-care workers, coaches, teachers and other personal “V.I.P.’s” in their lives.
Each sponsored flag has affixed a colorful, laminated “Tag” that names the honoree, field of service and heartfelt commentary by the sponsor about this very important person. The first time we “did” a Field of Honor we followed the lead of a nearby Exchange and tried to read all the dedications on the day of ceremony at the end of the Field’s term of display. We messed it up fairly well since we didn’t have a good database, but the hearing of one’s dedication was very important to the flag sponsors, a fact made abundantly clear to us by those who did not hear their own, or who missed the reading. That is when the nature of the service we were suddenly responsible to provide properly, became clear.
We’ve fixed that database problem. We’ve also fixed our lack of recognition among the communities we’ve served for, now, 75 years. Both our Club members and the Club, itself, can be identified with this beautifully visible display, now of three-week’s duration. But, the “Field” is still greater than the values already noted. It’s a unifier when Unity in these “United” States is under its greatest stress. This is the larger part of the story.
Dis-unity is the most potent weapon there is in the hands of an enemy of a democratic republic – a republic built on personal morality and personal responsibility and above and beneath all, FREEDOM. In the past dozen (or five-dozen) years, or so, we have witnessed the coalescing of “liberal,” socialistic tendencies toward dictatorial government, around the always-tender concerns about race and attendant hatreds. There is very little within the non-discussive discussions about race in the U. S. that involve truth. Among intentional, often political LIES about race or racism, exist often-repeated – shouted – non-truths that are based upon beliefs that are just not so. That is, many, mostly guilt-ridden liberals, repeat statements they believe are true, but the premises of which are false. They have no intention to lie, per se, but become greatly exercised as they parrot non-truths. We should stipulate some truths.
One – Different races are not limited compared to any other race in terms of ABILITY, only by BELIEFS. Within those beliefs are familial, parental and social expectations that are imprinted even before birth, as to what constitutes propriety and success for an individual.
Two – Mixing races together, including by force, as with slavery, ALWAYS carries the risk of continuing division because of conflicting BELIEFS, not because of mental or physical abilities. Humans are much more alike than not, despite oft-repeated untruths we may have grown up with. Diversity, in and of itself, is a weakening agent to the cohesiveness of a society, to a nation. Similarity is the great strengthener, and, when reinforced by diverse experiences, a tremendous strength to the United States nation. Diversity for its own sake is a source of social divisiveness, yet now governs our economic and social constructs, including valuations of one another as “sufficiently diverse” enough in our daily lives and actions. No nation can survive, no society can succeed if its interactions are biased toward the non-traditional beliefs of newcomers, rather than the newcomers being required to live by our traditional moral standards, no matter their personal beliefs.
Three – Shared morality is essential to social unity and to economic success. America’s economic success is based on fundamental honesty in contracts written and unwritten, from marriage to multi-year leases, commodity pricing and delivery, and in covenants between the people-formed governments and those governments, themselves, local state and federal. Together with honesty in contracting, our sense of – belief in – sacrifice for a better future for our children and for people unknown, made our phenomenal growth and wealth possible. Welcoming, or allowing establishment of, moralities alternative to the historical, traditional morality of a society, is a first step to social suicide. Americans, in our folly, are not merely tolerant of other beliefs, which is relatively harmless, but we fail to require all citizens to live by our own fundamental moral traditions. Indeed, we have managed to talk ourselves out of living by them.
Four – There are two genders: many feelings about one’s place and purpose and pursuit of happiness, but only two genders. That so much heat is generated over “trans-genderism” or “trans-sexuality” is based on those individuals who desire so much to believe in two contradictory ideas at the same time, that they will endure a host of suspicions and fears among “straight” populations. Others who desire acceptance of aberrant lifestyles, AND those who are mainly interested in the dissolution of the United States, seize upon those who believe in trans-genderism and employ their suffering – which is real – as a further wedge to separate the vast majority of Americans from their traditional morality. Sadly, ultra-progressive parents, themselves, are changing their own beliefs to accommodate the popularized mental incongruity that two diametrically opposed concepts may be true at the same time. Small children who claim to be other than their actual gender are encouraged in this incongruity even to the point of chemical – EVEN SURGICAL – modification of growth and maturation (with untold consequences, nearly all of which are negative). Supposed psychologists, scientists of a sort, including “child” psychologists, have bent their attitudes towards normality and no longer advise maintaining traditional roles for children until maturity. Most minors “grow out of” dyspohric fantasies. Unfortunately, a less and less morally constrained population has created political pressure sufficient to have draconian laws passed requiring society to accommodate these incongruities, to the direct affront of not only honesty, but of all traditional moral codes, including religious codes, and to our peril as a democratic republic, which, as noted, can function only amidst a population self-controlled by shared morality.
Five – Derek Chauvin did not kill George Floyd. Oh, he was “convicted” of murder, much like Joe Biden having been certified as President. The Chauvin conviction was mere confirmation of what weak, jittery politicians had agreed with mobs to do. The nearly sainted George Floyd was on an express bus to an early death that day, before his antics even gained police attention. Chauvin, not the brightest bulb in the string, could have feigned great concern and demanded that people taking videos go find a doctor instead. He could have laid George’s big head on his lap and tried talking to him while they waited for the EMT’s. He’d still have his job, Minneapolis would still be a city, and dozens of businesses and thousands of jobs would still be supporting families in Minnesota. No, Chauvin didn’t kill Floyd, but he caused the deaths of many others and many more to come as idiotic, fearful, politicians attempt to buy favor from Communists and fascists by weakening police departments.
Six – To say that “black lives matter” is to state an obvious fact; all lives matter in a non-communist society: our morality informs us of the sacredness and sanctity of human life. To adhere to the “Black Lives Matter” organization as some sort of leaders in the mattering of black lives, however, is to put the lie to every aspect of the sanctity of black and every other life. More than in any other “advanced” culture, lives matter most under a system of freedom and personal worth. Religion has a lot to do with that, Christianity most of all in this Prudent view. To latch on to anti-Christians for leadership in this area of humanity, is utterly nonsensical. Misguided blacks, in fact, are at the forefront of DISCOUNTING the values of black lives! Let us count the ways.
Blacks are solidly Democratic in their politics, evidently expecting expansive government to make their lives better. Yet it is they who have the most to say about the betterment of their lives and the lives of all blacks. After 60 years of federalized welfare and the concurrent dissolution of the black family, wise blacks can readily describe the negative impact on black lives, a gift from Democrats. The incessant turning away from success by so many black youth, consumed in hatred for anything “white,” like educational excellence and personal merit, is also a product of political divisiveness employed by the great protectors of blacks: Democrats.
Just as was done in South Africa during apartheidt, unions have been strong promoters of unionization and minimum wage laws – the net effect of which have been to make it more comfortable to hire whites instead of blacks. Black youth, more likely to be lower-skilled, unfortunately, are denied their best marketable quality: willingness to work for less to get started up the ladders of success. We have made it illegal to work for less. Alternatives on the streets and gang associations where all the leaders are non-white, are made much more attractive to disaffected youth. Keeping blacks unskilled and inexperienced serves to make unionized jobs more white… just like in South Africa. Who are the strongest proponents of unionization and minimum wages? Democrats, who are trying their hardest to improve the lot of blacks, just ask them. Those are they who celebrate success of black Democrats while heaping scorn upon blacks of other political views. Black lives matter, so much.
President Joe Biden, race-baiter in chief… and great “unifier,” has authorized the flying of “Black Lives Matter” flags at American embassies around the world. It is a move so utterly offensive to so many, and so essentially diametric toward everything the United States has ever professed, fought-for or relied upon in its founding ideas and ideals, and so stupid, as to expose the rank folly of this man’s being president of this nation or of virtually any organization of alert humans. Nothing he does is to be trusted. Nothing he has done as president is pro-American… or anti-racist.
Seven – Education is the primary business of parents: not of the government at any level, or of teachers unions or of mediocrity contracts with arbitrary groups of teachers. Teachers are hired, fundamentally, to teach our children how to be honest, literate, knowledgeable about science, mathematics and the natural world, and knowledgeable about our culture and founding, governing principles. Educators need not teach religion, per se, but about religion as part of World History. Nor should they teach against it. They should teach common decency and respect for others, good manners and propriety in all things within the school campus/environment. Sports and other team functions and competitions are relevant for good health and good adjustment to the individual strengths and weaknesses of others. Exposure to the Arts is also essential for becoming well-rounded individuals, armed with some choices of direction to follow after the first 12 years of instruction. Elective courses should include “manual arts” and tool use, carpentry and basic trade skills. It is not the business of educators to expose minor children to unusual sexual practices or any sexual practices. The subject matter of any “Health” class should be vetted by the parents of children in the school system, else their children may not attend said class. Any school or “system” unwilling to collaborate with parents at that level about sexuality or any other area of controversy, perhaps with open petitioning by a certain percentage of parents, requiring such vetting, does not deserve access to students or to the tax monies that follow them.
Ideally, every school should be a Charter School, and every child should be expected to excel… and to behave.
Eight – The breaching of the Capitol Building on January 6th was not an insurrection. It was several things, but “insurrection” was not one of them. There was no attempt, or even hope, to overthrow the sitting government or our governing “system,” EXCEPT where said system was lying to the American people. The mealy-mouthed half-truths and outright lies tossed around in the hallowed halls of Congress, ostensibly to do “the people’s business” has become so offensive and off-target that people wanted to talk to their erstwhile “representatives” who were about to certify a most questionable election of one of the most crooked presidents-elect to ever reach that level. The actions of some who assaulted the building were clearly unrelated to the President’s words; those are they who entered the crowds at the Capitol and who had not attended the rally.
Capitol police, oddly, had not, despite advance notice for days, made any reasonable attempts to make such a breach difficult and, in fact, made the breach easier, even to helping people enter the building once the physical breaches had occurred. Offers of reinforcement from the Trump administration were refused because of “optics,” we’re told. Yet the entire period since the rather silly impacts of the vandalism and broken windows, has been nothing but “optics,” as conservatives and Trump voters, generally, have been branded as “white supremacists” and “terrorists” and greater threats to “democracy” than “9-11.” What hogwash. The greatest threat to “democracy” in the past several decades exists among those who engineered the 2020 Elections that led to certification of the electoral College votes that propelled Biden-Harris to be sworn in on January 20th. To say that the January 6th events were not a legitimate “protest” against perceived government mendacity is to rewrite history and word-meanings simultaneously. Long before the 2020 elections, sufficient reasons to protest the actions within the Capitol were accumulating: things like $27 Trillion in debts.
Breaching the Capitol was foolish, obviously, and illegal in its own right, from which a host of other crimes and misdemeanors flowed. The worst crime, committed by a Capitol Police officer, was the point-blank murder of Ashli Babbit, who was not assaulting any person or presenting a threat to the officer who shot her. Ms. Babbit was unarmed. Four months later we can finally identify the police officer at fault, despite video of the incident. He is a Trump-hater, reportedly, but not charged with this crime. Can we suppose that had the breach been the work of “BLM” that the entire congressional leadership would have taken a knee on their Communist behalf in the Rotunda? Fourteenth Amendment, anyone?
Back to the Field of Honor in North Andover: Exchange attempts to gather good people to a common purpose, much of which is helping, serving, others. Through scholarships, recognitions of excellence and of overcoming tough challenges, and through Americanism, we attempt to remind our fellow Americans of the qualities that are worth emulating, honoring and teaching. In our experience, people need that reminding; they need to remember or recognize and honor those who were raised with those vital qualities; people truly want the reminding: it affirms that the best of being an American is still true and worth emulating, including to whatever extent, in their own lives and in the lives of those around them.
To all those who, for whatever reason or untruth you are convinced of, teach our children, and who convey that America and its entire history and purpose is to be hated and discarded for a socialized, anti-Christian system that has failed wherever tried, stop! You have no right.
There is no solution or resolution to the new racism America is “enjoying” in 2021, unless we dramatically change course in multiple key areas: Education, Religious freedom, Health care, Monopoly capitalism, Municipal government, Police theory, Government budgeting, Taxation, Border integrity, Cabinet-level policies, Judicial theory, FBI/DOJ practice, Foreign policy, and, if current events allow, a few others. What constitutes this “new” racism?
To leftists the new racism is the same as the “old” racism, and, given that definition, is the “fault” of the descendants of “old” racists, back to 1619, if not earlier, like 1492, maybe. But, it’s not the same, is it? The United States has painfully advanced from white slavery of non-whites over a span of 200 years, in no small part due to the advocacy and non-violent protest-education that led to the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act and Affirmative Action in all of its misguided intentions. The process cost many blacks in beatings and even deaths as the tentacles of “KKK-like” racism tried to cling desperately to the old ways and old hatreds. As a nation we have rejected those old ways legally, officially, judicially.
Unfortunately, under Lyndon Johnson, we created, simultaneously with the new legal civil rights platform, a federalized welfare structure that has most efficiently deconstructed black families and black success. As Johnson described the bill-signing, he remarked, “I’ll have those niggers (sic) voting Democratic for generations.” To that degree he was completely honest, unlike most of his political career. In fact, federal responsibility for family support is the basis of the “new” racism. Since federal checks follow, there has been a distinctly muted effort to reverse federal welfare despite decades of evidence of its worst corrosive effect: fatherless children.
The coincident weakening of religious teaching, especially of Christianity, even if only one day a week for a couple of hours, is a second, very large factor eroding our Republic. Our Constitutional system of, ostensibly, limited government, has worked, and can work, ONLY if the individuals who ratified the Constitution and who swear allegiance to the nation it defines, are honest, morally straight and responsible to themselves and their families. Without that quality of citizens, the U. S. of A. will not survive for long, something global leftists are working for.
U. S. leftists seem to be working for the same thing.
We cannot make much progress toward a more honest, more moral nation while the Congress and the bureaucratic state are the most influential liars. Here and there are some Representatives or Senators who appear to be somewhat honest, but they cannot stem the mendacity tide. Now Capitol Hill has joined its lies with the White House’s extraordinary disingenuousness, leaving honest citizens with nowhere to turn. The history of the 46th president’s public positions is disturbing enough; his abrupt change of beliefs – if that’s what has happened – is more concerning. Mr. Biden became a self-made Manchurian Candidate, yet lots of confused Americans are cheering him on. He has also adopted the new racism as he claims to be “uniting” the country. Most people who are really strong for Biden, are also those who were taught to hate Trump the most.
While Biden dissembles on virtually everything, especially on domestic and foreign policies, Trump, for all his braggadocio and embellishment – mostly to enhance his own image – never lied about policies he would pursue. There’s some difference.
The new racism isn’t aimed at “solving” racism. The new racism is simply a crass, cynical tool for social destruction. White liberals… and brown liberals, actually think that by forcing whites to “admit” to racists attitudes and to berate one another for our unthinking, “systemic” racism, that every American will finally, regardless of ALL other efforts since our founding, become anti-racist. Since the underlying premise is false, most of what is said about it is also false. Racism is normal. What is not normal, or acceptable, is twisting normal suspicions into hatreds, unjust actions and, sadly, illegal actions.
America is founded on PERSONAL responsibility and personal morality. Our freedoms are INDIVIDUAL, not grouped. As John Adams said, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people”. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
If for no other reason, Socialism’s first goal is always to separate people from religion and faith in God, thereby making government far more necessary to maintain order in society. Scottish historian, Lord Tytler, is reputed to have said the following:
“The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependence; from dependence back into bondage.”
Books have been written on that very same theme. Some describe the phases differently, seeing a shift from liberty into a society dominated by “high priests, experts and judges.” In America’s case, Prudence can describe that phase as beginning about the time of World War II, simultaneous with the rise of data digitization. Many of the “high priests” were now identified – since Roosevelt – with government types, the bureaucratic state and academia. Then, with the foul-minded president, Lyndon Baines Johnson, the explosion of regulation swamped the ability of individuals to manage their own affairs, their own families or their own businesses. Leftists, as part of the long, long march toward the emasculation of the United States and its eventual demise, saw doors opening throughout the 1960’s through which they could insert levers to separate Americans from the traditions that made the U. S. the strongest nation in the world, and the leader among nations. Separating us from our traditions has reached a fever pitch.
The new racism is similar in purpose to the old racism: keeping one group down and unable to affect the freedoms… or whims, of the dominant group. But, it’s not the same. The new racism defines groups not simply by skin color or other immutable traits, ethnic origin and the like, but by politics and economics; in other words, according to the tenets of Karl Marx. Lo and behold, the loudest agitators for the new racism are, in fact, Marxists. Many who join hands and voices with them are oblivious (one hopes) to the Marxist kernel. Like Joe Biden and some other Democrats, they repeat indefinable phrases like “social justice,” “equity,” and “systemic racism.” The only “systemic” anything is adherence to the founding documents like the Declaration of Independence and the ratified Constitution of 1789, the principles enumerated in the Northwest Ordinance, the Bill of rights and the best of Amendments to the Constitution. These same are the targets of the new racists: our Marxist brethren in “BLM,” most colleges and universities, the public education industry and unions, and the most “progressive” leftists in the Democrat party.
The simple view is that the new racism is anti-white, but it is even more virulently the enemy of blacks and other minorities who agree with whites or even any white, singular, based on what that white person THINKS. The new racism is based on hatred, not fear of difference or even economics, per se, although the current economics has to be destroyed in their view. Everyone who thinks he or she can state agreement with “Black Lives Matter” loud enough to be safe from their racism (Marxism), is deeply confused… for they are Marxists. And, they seem proud of that and, evidently, proud of their ability to use racism against the white majority. The latter requiring a special version of hate. We who are sympathetic to the plight of some minority citizens must be vigilant that we aren’t digging the grave of the United States with BLM shovels.
Along with the never-ending political hatreds associated with (ostensibly) slavery, today’s professional racists have gathered up the LGBTQ “community” as if those people were another “race” as well, equally discriminated against and equally prevented from pursuing happiness. The theory doesn’t hold water, of course, but it’s good politics… for both groups. The fear and guilt elicited by “Black Lives Matter” has enhanced the influence of “LGBTQ” demands far beyond simple numbers would indicate. White liberals can chastise themselves for almost anything brought to their attention.
“BLM” and other communist types don’t seem smart enough to have decided on the 2020 election year as the year they could shift the conscience of a nation using lies about racial animus among police. There are no statistics that support their hollow claims; indeed, they support the opposite. Trump, maligned for more than four years, was making progress on many fronts including the economy, defense of our borders and foreign policy. All indicators showed his popularity soaring and that he was likely to cruise to a resounding re-election. It would take a confluence of negativity to stop his momentum.
Democrats threw everything at him, including the kitchen sink and a baseless impeachment and he was still holding a substantial polling lead heading in to 2020. Moreover, his efforts were starting to dig deeper into the “deep state,” the depths of which few had grasped. The left and subservient media had to unsettle the American people and change the landscape enough to revamp all voting practices so as to mask the “greatest voter fraud operation in our history,” as Democrat candidate Joe Biden, himself, described it.
Enter Covid-19. There appears to be some history, including funding, between the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, under the direction of the renowned Dr. Fauci, and the Wuhan Laboratory for Viral Diseases. One might naturally question the value of researching “bat” viruses, but, far, far worse, why would an American lab PATENT the SARS2 coronavirus after having “engineered” it sufficiently that it was no longer a natural life form, which is legally unpatentable? And then, why would that same NIAID lab transfer the research to Wuhan when it appeared the American lab was skirting the laws against working with potential bio-weapons? Finally, why would China aggressively spread the “new” or “novel” coronavirus around the world at the beginning of 2020? Covid-19, in the eyes of this old conspiracist, was part of a perfect storm damaging the first non-deep-state President in a generation… and his nation, at the primary benefit of China, itself. What a horrible thought, given the history of civilization as a panoply of conspiracies. One would be stirred to question why any hint of “conspiracy” regarding the past 60 years, or so, is so abruptly shut down and ridiculed. Perhaps the anti-conspiracists protest too much.
Is the new racism a conspiracy? Since there is evidence of the most horrible coordination of bad events, it seems feasible. Proof? Not so much, but when multiple enemies of the same man and movement are at the hearts of multiple attacks against him… and us, one is entitled to wonder. Still, Americans are not used to such speculation; we have grown soft in our expectation of good in most people – even politicians. It is too much to digest the possibility that multiple anti-American forces worked together in our Covid-besmirched year of Marxist terrorism. To see that year end with a clearly questionable election, marked by the unlikeliest set of anomalies benefitting one candidate, has, at last, caused many Americans to go, “Hmmnnhh.”
In 2007 we were not a racist country. Since then one party and one global, leftist movement has worked tirelessly to turn us into one. They have had some success. May God forbid they have any more.
