There are many forms of conspiracy of which average citizens have some inkling or suspicion, despite, or perhaps because of the concerted mendacity of government officials and agencies, including our military bureaucrats. Particularly since the Biden administration took control, world politics and military relationships have become more dangerous, more conspiratorial and far more difficult to control, let alone understand. Naturally, Americans are much more nervous and feeling isolated, as we probably should. With China encroaching on our spheres of influence and on numerous allies like Canada, Columbia, Panama, African nations and Europe, itself… even Hungary, the “world” seems to be ganging up on the U. S.
This is a rather abrupt turn of events. One has to wonder if it’s all a matter of incompetence and lack of understanding, or if key power centers in the U. S. are executing a plan. Can these questions be answered?
Was Covid-19 a strategy or unfortunate accident?
Is the widespread “legalization” of very dangerous marijuana and the onslaught of lethal drugs flooding our neighborhoods, just wretched capitalism or an element of intentional weakness that makes sense to some people?
Is the attack on Ukraine part of an “approved” plan by globalists to weaken NATO and the U. S.?
Is the “attack” on oil and gas in the U. S. part of the same plan?
Where did the basic plan to expand “transgenderism” among grade-schoolers originate?
How is it that major hospitals suddenly coordinated with the LGBTQ+ agenda and public schools to begin performing transgender mutilations and sterilizations?
Is the pressure to give virtually everyone from age 5 and up the modified RNA injections part of a larger objective of weakening individual freedom, lower general health and possibly population control?
Who, or what country(ies), actually benefits from the dramatic changes in U. S. monetary and immigration policies?
Who, or what country(ies), benefits from election fraud?
Who, or what country(ies), benefits from soft-on-crime policies in major cities?
Who, or what country(ies), benefits from high inflation in the U. S.?
Who, or what country(ies), benefits from restricting food production – reducing fertilizer use and sequestering productive acreage?
These are all rather sad questions to be able to posit. How could so many negative policies suddenly descend upon our nation and people? Can they all be parts of tragic, unavoidable coincidences? Or, could they be coordinated from… well, somewhere? Someone? Some group?
Can we put much credence into the idea that Joe Biden, a man whose mental state requires guides and “handlers” at all times, actually believes in what he says or does, or that he thought up the set of policies he has put into action?
Or, God forbid, but not an impossibility, is it possible that leftists/globalists in the United States’ “deep state” have considered the evolving relationships and power of Red China, the problems and responsibilities of American freedom and nationalism and the blandishments of the World Economic Forum in terms of a financial control model of vastly smaller populations, and decided that the only answer to the possibilities of wars and nuclear conflict is to throw in with the W.E.F. and establish a global government able to negotiate with, and even coerce China into coexistence? Perhaps systemic treason has been sold to the oligarchy as salvation.
If broadcast words could be weighed, it seems Prudent that they would amount to a great, ponderous weight… and more than weight, a great mass possessed of a great inertia. Fortunately, since most have no “God particles,” they bear no weight at all. The God particle of speech is a mix of logic and sense or, put another way, reason and truth. When enriched with God particles, speech carries a lot of weight, influence and ability to move vast nations, like ours. We used to call it “common sense” but it is so uncommon, now, that we rarely hear that term.
So it is with most pronouncements and policies emanating from the federal government under the Biden administration. Daily, and sometimes more than once a day, the Biden regime states a policy that is questioned only by a few, with most of media agreeing with leftism, and almost inevitably it is a policy that cannot be justified on logical bases or on (uncommon) sense. A very clear example of this phenomenon is “Biden’s” (read: Obama’s) open borders policy and relaxing of immigration laws. Millions of people have flooded (read: invaded) our nation while the Biden administration states that “…the border is secure…” There are neither logic nor truth connected to this policy.
The ”Green New Deal” is a prime example of this process of misleading. The “GND” is a lie based on a lie, but elevated to spiritual truth despite the near absence of “God Particles” in any of it. There are truths nearby to it, but they lead in a very different direction from where the “Greens” intend to force humanity. To start, the degree of human impact on the rate or type of “climate change” is immeasurable, as in unquantifiable, and our ability to alter it is unknown, if any. Hence, it is completely illogical to destroy societies and standards of living in order to “fix” climate change. Climate has been changing for as long as there has been an atmosphere on Earth: warm, cold, ice ages, sweltering swamp and warm oceans, dry, wet and every mixture thereof.
The major effort of the “GND” is the changing of energy sources from so-called fossil fuels (and nuclear) to so-called “renewables’ or “natural” energy sources. The problems with this “conversion” grow destructive because the proposed alternatives are available only intermittently. The green theory depends on wonderful batteries to capture energy when it’s available. Such batteries are very ecologically “dirty” to make and to later recycle. When all the energy inputs are calculated to make (now) lithium-ion batteries, and to create, erect and maintain solar and wind-power collector/generators, there is no advantage or even equivalence to the ecological cleanliness of our cleanest and most efficient uses of oil and gas and even coal.
However, leftists have adopted the green new deal as the best way to replace the capitalist, free-enterprise economy. If it hurts the majority of Americans it seems to be of no concern of theirs, if not their intent. Their claim is that we must “decarbonize” in a decade or so or the planet will be destroyed by climate change and we’ll all die. Human life is based on carbon. Decarbonizing includes, in “green” theology, that there are too many people as well as too many cows, and too many farms using too much fertilizer growing food for too many people. It’s not a pleasant concept. Still, if we discard most of the progress civilization has made, both technically and politically, the Green gods will be pleased and will make the Earth more perfect for those people self-judged to be better than most and deserving of longer lives.
Our Military posture is another source of abundant fallacy. Any policy that involves “woke” theories of racial and sexual identity is fundamentally untrue, yet both now appear to govern “military” thinking and practice. We annually entrust hundreds of billions of dollars to the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the military branches, ostensibly to keep the country protected by maintaining overwhelming strength and prowess, both technological and human. Instead the Pentagon has elected to cater to trangenderism – its own body of fallacy, if not phallacy – equal rights for women, a mixed bag of strength and weakness and waste, and politicized medicine, to wit, mandated “vaccines” that don’t work and risk the health of personnel.
The vaccine mandate error, alone, has cost thousands of trained – expensively trained and experienced – soldiers, sailors, airmen and women, and marines, their positions “in” the military. What a stupid waste. Clearly there is no capacity for admitting egregious errors by top “brass” or their civilian counterparts. Altogether, over the past several years, their efforts have weakened the U. S. military. It seems that this is failure of the grossest order. Has anyone lost his or her exalted ranked position for this failure? Not that Prudence can recall; with a group of relatively unintelligent far-leftists holding executive power since January 2021, we’re not likely to hear of any in the immediate future, either.
Just the egregiously damaging withdrawal / retreat from Afghanistan in August of 2021 should have resulted in a dozen or more high-level firings and resignations. The only person forced out of service is a Lt. Colonel who had the temerity to point out the multiple failures being executed in that withdrawal. Shame on us for tolerating, even rewarding such stupidity; shame on us for electing “executives” who employ stupid ideologies for U. S. policy. God save us.
One way to look at our current national condition is from the top of the Mountain Of Lies. It’s a better viewpoint for observing the accumulating effects of dishonesty upon the health and strength of the nation to which it is dished on a literal daily basis. Sometimes there is illumination provided by organizing lists of items that share one or more parameters. It will be Prudent to consider the entirety, if not enormity of the following list of lies on which Americans’ lives depend:
LAW. Our history and culture are replete with real and literary conspiracies based on subversion of laws. To Prudence, undercutting the law is the worst of all lies. Peace, safety, freedom and life, itself, depend on honesty in matters of law. It is still worse when it leaves the individual level and seeps into “official” policy and action – denying or subverting the law, that is. We can see the scope of damage that official lying can do, by reflecting on the completely fabricated “Russia” conspiracy that politicians and law-enforcement agencies attempted to pin on Donald Trump before he won election as 45th President, and through much of his administration. Subverting federal laws only expanded after that.
A few people lost their jobs at the FBI, but, so far, not their pensions! The message is that anything illegal done against Donald Trump is not considered to be nearly as bad as illegal acts taken against some other American citizen. Yes, you broke the law, but it doesn’t bother us enough to apply legal sanctions – wink, wink. Subversion of law: one of the worst kinds of lie.
But, unfortunately, the unprecedented crimes against Trump are not the worst in terms of how the citizens of the U. S. are besmirched by government lying. We have to look at immigration and border policies and practices since Joe Biden signed that stack of executive orders on January 21st, 2021.
U.N. and U.S. rules for “refugee” and “asylum” status are pretty loose, subject to multiple steps of acceptance despite previous errors or even untrue/fraudulent applications. A judge can always accept some claim of good reasons to submit fraudulent statements in order to obtain safety unavailable in their country of origin. In other words, it is subjective at almost every step. Those who hyperventilate over “loopholes” in tax laws are singularly unconcerned about the sieve of loopholes in immigration law. Interestingly, many of the possible claims for asylum are based on non-binary sexuality. However, there are laws and regulations that govern the processing of asylum claims and of asylees, themselves. These are being ignored at the President’s direction, leaving millions of illegal entrants in our country with virtually no way for our erstwhile protectors to monitor or arrest them when they fail to appear for “hearings” required by law.
It’s all part of “Progressives’” intention to dissemble our Constitutional Republic. Every person connected to the Biden administration who comments on “the border,” has lied about it, and quite consistently. Those are bad lies, sure enough.
LEGISLATION. Once upon a time in Washington, representatives of the people and representatives of the states would diligently research and debate, in both Houses of Congress, the federal budget. Presidential administrations would cook up budgets with their own plans and hopes, including the increased spending inevitably required by each and every one of the 1,000 or so executive departments, offices, agencies and “black” projects. Congress, politically, would dissect parts of it, replace parts of it, gain hours of news coverage about their essential work, and eventually pass some form of it, including myriad political advantages for the parties holding some level of power: earmarks. And, always, plenty of “pork.”
The two great sources of power in Congress are 1) Spending; and, 2) Taxing. No matter how motivated or honest a new congressperson may be, fairly quickly he or she becomes either purposefully corrupt or casually corrupted by the systems of Congress. The orientation process for newbies includes explaining why it is that what each feels is the right thing to do… cannot be done. In order to accomplish a small bit of what spurred the campaign to enter Congress, much has to be compromised. That is the economic dynamic of Congress – not right or wrong, but bartering for good and not-good. With the number-one goal of everyone in both Houses being re-election, the barter system quickly becomes bartering to gain re-election benefits. Voting on the so-called “budget” offers dozens of barter opportunities, and so it goes. It is inherently corrupt and corrupting, which means that our fresh new representatives – House or Senate – must lie to us at their first opportunity.
Then, there are the aggregations of spending and taxing ideas that are given names like, “The Inflation Reduction Act.” These mountains of malarkey cut and pasted by the “power brokers” who then present a 1,000-page or 3,000-page pile of words with hundreds of new “laws” included and call for a vote within 24 or 48 hours. No one can read or understand the implications all of it before voting, yet there is a great trumpeting of accomplishment. Most of the time prior to the vote is spent by each “yea” voter to find something – anything – that he or she can tell constituents was “accomplished” for their benefit, including how their representative “fought” for them against the evils of Washington. Still, where’s the truth? There are $31 Trillion in the national debt that display 65 years of great lying to American citizens.
IMMIGRATION: No country is a greater magnet for emigration than the U. S. Despite the constant Marxist drumbeat of “systemic” racism, imminent murder of blacks by police and unfair incarceration of pathetic, somewhat innocent or non-responsible prisoners, people of color flock to our southern border by the millions. Some just walk in and say the magic words claiming asylum. Our Border Patrol officers spend virtually all of their time “processing” the flood of people from up to 100 countries(!). In The meantime, about 25% as many as claim asylum escape through our poorly secured border, carrying tons of fentanyl and other drugs (drugs that kill over 100,000 young Americans every year) as well as carrying plans in some of their heads to commit terrorist attacks.
It is one of the prime responsibilities of a President and administration to prevent these very circumstances. For a government to NOT fulfill this obligation requires two forms of “untruth:” 1) a purpose other than protecting the United States or its citizens; and, 2) a constant barrage of utter lies about the “secure” status of the casually breeched southern border, supporting the pretense of an administration that is fulfilling its vows. Typically, there is a penalty to pay for lying, much more so if the lie causes injury or cost to the subject(s) of it. What sort of penalty is appropriate for this grandiose lie?
The upshot of this close-to-the-worst-of-lies is that about 4 MILLION illegal entrants are scattered across the country. Each of them is a living, breathing, expensive lie. Along with them are the nearly 1 MILLION “gotaways” who evaded apprehension thanks to President Biden’s utter… no, purposeful… failure to complete the border wall, which would at least have channeled prospective entrants to limited points of entry. They are all lies, too, whose very presence implies some sort of right to be inside our borders. That there is no such right for nearly all of the 4 MILLION and the 1 MILLION, simply compounds the grotesque lie this administration has been telling American citizens.
COVID: This compendium of lies began 10 years ago as the great Dr. Anthony Fauci funneled NIAID grants to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for gain-of-function research on the SARS-2 coronavirus. He has denied that purpose, of course, which simply shows that lying is common in the federal government’s hundreds of agencies. Fauci’s NIAID agency of the CDC earned millions in royalties from helping Moderna develop its mRNA “vaccine” (the vaccine that doesn’t prevent infection, doesn’t create immune response and doesn’t prevent contagion), which Moderna was working on in Wuhan months before the world heard of the novel coronavirus, Covid-19.
Interestingly, the only response to Covid infection was – and still is – “vaccination.” All other treatments, some very effective, have been suppressed and discussion of them censored. Reputable scientists estimate that half a million American deaths can be blamed on failures to treat Covid with known anti-virals, immune boosters and supplements. Individual personnel within the NIH are allowed to earn royalties from numerous pharmaceuticals they helped to research, including the slickest liar of all, Dr. Anthony Fauci, reportedly the highest-paid employee in the federal swamp. Lying about Covid must have been the most lucrative scam he’s had. To really push the mass vaccination program that was part of a tawdry, essentially worldwide scheme, great fear had to be fomented, and locking down the country from most business activity fitted in perfectly with that goal.
First, though, the “Friends of Fauci,” recognized scientists all, conspired to flood medical publications with false opinion papers that claimed, uniformly, that the origin of the ENGINEERED SARS-2 novel coronavirus came from some natural evolution that workers at a “wet market” in Wuhan city were exposed to. Real virologists, like Fauci, can identify the Furin cleavage site in the viral chain where other genes were added to the original SARS virus. Yet the papers went forth at Fauci’s direction to confuse politicians and divert attention from the financing of the exact research – begun in the U. S. and shifted to Wuhan – that made COVID-19 so infectious. Lies have consequences.
COVID killed a lot of people, although far fewer than statistics claim, and nowhere at a higher rate than in the United States! How could that possibly be? We certainly have a right to know.
In effect, the pandemic here was handled politically, not medically. Fauci and others inside the deep state, beholden to big Pharma, and PROFITING from them, advised federal and state governments to impose useless and actually harmful steps, locking down economic and social activities, ruining family economics and, worst of all, forcing protocols on hospitals that ignored known treatments and caused the deaths of thousands who could have survived. It seems criminal.
As the so-called “vaccines” were introduced, the lies became greater. The definition of “vaccine” had to be changed to include the weird chemicals that comprise mRNA shots. Pushing them as vaccines was and still is comforting to the average “emergency use” recipient, now pushed down to infants and children. Unfortunately, nRNA shots don’t prevent the disease, they don’t prevent infecting others, and they don’t instill normal immune response. Oh, and they don’t last long in their one effect: mitigating the “severity” of infection. As one gets into “booster shot” country, the effects dwindle to a month or two. The shots are utter failures as vaccines and immensely successful as money-transfer agents.
But, wait! There’s more!… or less. The shots are dangerous to humans! You’ve seen the ads, over and over, telling the trusting that COVID vaccine is “effective and safe.” Some mothers couldn’t wait for them to be available so that their kids could be protected from a disease that is of nearly ZERO threat to them! Zero as in NO THREAT! Why force an experimental drug known to damage children to the point that they are at greater risk from the injections than they are from the disease? I’ll tell you why: FEAR and two years’ of lies from our helpful government.
Other lies… well, let’s talk about IMMIGRATION. Anyone in this administration or Congressional Democrat who happens to get a question about the “control” of the border with Mexico, lies. No one stands out as telling the truth about this one issue.
President Biden is virtually never asked about the border – that’s left up to his press flacks: first Jen Psaki and now the incomparable Karinne Jean-Pierre. On August 29th reporter, Peter Doocy asked “KJP” why tennis star Novak Djokovic cannot enter the United States to play in a tennis tournament because he ‘s not “vaccinated” against Covid, but migrants can just walk into Texas and Arizona unvaccinated and are allowed to stay?
Jean-Pierre’s response was that just walking in was not how it works. When corrected of that notion she stated that “…it’s not like that you can’t just walk over and…” And so it goes in the great mendacity machine that is the Biden administration.
Prudence has asked before: Where do we turn when our own government lies to us?
The Green New Deal has become a means of theft: elites taking freedom and independence, and possibly life, itself, away from the middle and lower classes. “Oh! No!” you say, “Surely you are misinterpreting the existential threat of climate change and their intense efforts to save the planet.” Well, no, actually I’m trying to balance reality with what we’re being told.
Many hundreds of statements and declarations are made on a weekly, monthly, annual basis – certainly on every hot day, cold day, dry day or wet day, that “climate change” is wreaking havoc on the planet and on the poor and downtrodden, minorities and LGBTQ+ “communities” worst of all. It’s all the fault of you smug suburbanites and your SUVs spewing that awful carbon dioxide… and the cow farts you cause by eating burgers made from meat and not insects. Don’t forget your air conditioners and outdoor grills – all hastening our extinction.
This would be such a nice planet to live on if it weren’t for all you… well… people for goodness’ sakes. (Can’t say ‘God’s sake.’)
Actually, if it were not for the constant tilt of most media outlets, the condition of the earth and its climate could be discussed and better known by young and old, alike. We are just coming to the end of a very hot summer. There were drought conditions in many countries. We will soon be inundated with claims of the planet having a “fever” and “the earth is on fire,” and similar declarations. So far, we haven’t suffered a hurricane coming ashore to the United States; as soon as one does, we’ll be told there are more -and stronger – storms because of our driving “fossil-fueled cars” and resisting buying non-polluting “electric vehicles,” EV’s. If we have a severely snowy winter with lots of cold, cold days, they’ll all be our fault, too.
There is some supposed perfect average global temperature… one we like. It is impossible to define the “ideal” climate, the ideal temperature, the ideal amount of ice at the poles, the ideal amount of cloud-cover or precipitation… or the ideal anything else. What does seem easy to idealize is the right population the earth should hold and support, and it is a Hell of a lot smaller than the population we have, today. Various oligarchs, like Bill Gates and others, think the world is overpopulated by 5 BILLION people, or even more. It’s going to take substantial new rates of sterility and deaths to achieve the “ideal.” What an achievement that will be.
Around the planet ice is melting… from the poles (supposedly), Greenland, various glaciers and so forth. This causes terrible worries. Oddly, they’re more terrible for leftists in the West, than for conservatives. They don’t make a damned bit of difference to leftists in Russia, China, India and elsewhere, or to Islamists, who are happy with any number of earthlings as long as they’re all Muslims – the right kind of Muslims.
It’s rather comforting that the climate is changing, whether warming or cooling at any time: the climate has been changing for hundreds of millions of years – maybe billions of years… as long as we’ve had an atmosphere. No one would want to be here on the day the climate STOPS changing. For most people, “climate change” translates as “global warming.” We can see videos of running water on Greenland and shrinking glaciers in the mountains. Definitely, it’s warming. Then we have a summer like 2022’s and we are convinced of the imminent danger of the seas rising and a hurricane toppling our houses. Look what happened to New Orleans, for Pete’s sake. Maybe if they’d all had electric cars in 2005, the people who wasted the federal moneys for strengthening the dikes around the ninth ward might have gone to jail.
It’s hard to predict the future, and that’s the only kind of predicting there is. There is a form of false, God-save-us-if-this-happens sort of prognosticating, though, that is employed stridently by “Climate Campaigners.” It’s always negative. People who worry about and inveigh about the climate, are certain that change means some form of doom. They never seem to make any predictions of benefit from “climate change.” It’s always an imminent disaster, and it’s always our fault, meaning that we have to make drastic changes to avert certain death in as few as 10 or 12 years.
The premise of prediction is history. Recorded history of what people have done, or which volcanoes blew up or geologic evidence of mile-thick ice sheets that created the Great Lakes and the like, as well as records of various past weather trends and climatological periods, provide a basis from which inferences are drawn and, in very grave tones, predictions are made about the future of climate and weather over the next hundred years or so. It’s all very scientific, except it’s impossible to replicate the conditions to see if the same effects take place, so climatologists are unable, actually, to apply the scientific method to historic evidence and add to the evidence of the first “experiment,” seeking correlation.
Atmospheric scientists have gained great knowledge and reasonable predictive power of weather deriving from worldwide patterns like El Niño, although little has been said about movements of the magnetic poles, for example, and the focus of charged particles changing cloud formation patterns. The availability of satellite data, global photography and thousands of measurements daily and hourly, have given meteorologists perhaps too much confidence in prediction, and this has seeped in to the self-esteem of climatologists, too.
Whether from ice cores or dendrochronology (tree rings), climatologists can paint what they feel is an accurate picture of what the climate has been for hundreds, if not thousands of years. Things become more sketchy when they try to make inferences as to WHY they were the way they were. Bias, or belief, can sway even the best scientists’ theories of cause and effect. It’s something “science” ostensibly guards against and works against no matter the line or field of inquiry. Replicating experiments and finding the same or similar results – and publishing those results for other scientists to review and try to replicate or prove wrong, is how science makes real progress towards understanding.
It is not possible to replicate the past; it’s not possible to mimic all the conditions, both on the earth and impacting the earth hundreds or thousands of years ago. But there is great pressure, whether personal or from the all-important funding sources (grants) for a direct correlation to be discerned… cause and effect. Why? Because the reason the study of the past is being funded is often because of beliefs about today’s climate and weather, and that there is a way that humans and their bold politicians can avoid the conditions of the past. A little humidity – if not humility – is called for.
Politicians and the scientists they fund, have an overriding belief that we humans can modify the climate to keep weather as pleasant as we like, the oceans at the depths they currently are, the glaciers as big as they are if not bigger, and polar bears in their favorite conditions, too. Underlying this presumption is a belief that we humans have caused changes in the climate to begin with. Otherwise, we are powerless to undo the damage it is believed we have done! So, to start with, let’s agree that humans HAVE altered the climate somewhat, and not just around cities.
Cities form “heat islands” with huge blocks of real and manufactured stone, steel and asphalt absorbing more sunlight than the natural environment they replaced. But huge, multi-square-mile farms also modify natural environments, also changing sunlight absorption, requiring and transpiring huge volumes of water – water that is artificially moved away from its natural location(s). Are either of these commonplace alterations of the natural environment changing climate? Somewhat, but how much? It is very hard to quantify or even describe. That is, we know the CAUSES we’re concerned about, but we cannot, despite many claims, actually pin down the EFFECTS of these two causes. Certainly there are some, but what should people be forced to stop doing in order to offset those effects? We don’t really know, but there is a strong political pressure to force people to stop doing something because of some politicians’ FEARS. Indeed, one of their biggest fears is of doing nothing or, worse, of failing to force other people to stop doing something.
The urge to do something and to force others to do something comes, deep down, from a belief that a wise-enough human, especially from the leftist persuasion, can control almost anything, including populations, countries and planets. To a great degree, these same authoritarians will automatically adopt any tool or method to control those who aren’t in agreement with them, especially people whose faith tends toward religious origins rather than government ones. Soon, the authoritarians commence to blaming those who don’t agree with their beliefs, for the problems they believe they, the ‘wise,’ are destined to solve. Any contrary data, facts or “science” non-leftists discover, are automatically denigrated and their proponents are labeled “deniers,” as an attempt to more firmly cement the immutable truth of what leftists believe. It becomes difficult to discuss or debate ideas in that environment.
Because CO2 is generated by so many human activities and machines, not least of which is electricity generation, and because climatologists have observed wide fluctuations in the apparent concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere over millennia from all those ice cores and tree rings, there has grown up a set of beliefs about the correlation of temperatures at different points in time and CO2. We can summarize this fear quite easily: More CO2 than the magical percentage is BAD; less CO2 than the magical percentage is GOOD. Sometimes the rise in CO2 concentration precedes a warming period, sometimes it follows, but there is definitely, we’re almost certain… in fact, we’re so close to certain that it’s time to pass laws that we think will reduce the amount of CO2 that enters the atmosphere so that the average temperature of the entire planet’s biosphere can be controlled.
Whether these temperature fluctuations are caused by carbon-dioxide or not is unproven and unprovable. But, it is definitely believed by many. Of course, CO2 is essential for life and good for vegetation in particular, from which our food derives: farms and crops and things. So we wouldn’t want to interfere too much, would we? How much is too much? It’s impossible to say, but less than we’re making now, we’re quite certain.
CO2, methane, nitrous oxide and water vapor are the primary “greenhouse gases.” They’re all natural. Many chlorinated and fluorinated gases that we manufacture also have the effect of “trapping” solar energy. Fortunately, they are much smaller fractions of the atmosphere, although not as small a fraction as the dreaded CO2. [See http://www.prudenceleadbetter.com/2017/07/20/a-home-on-the-beach/ ]
It’s common to see descriptions of human contributions to total greenhouse gases based on what percent of our (American) contribution is CO2. This makes it look like CO2 is a gigantic problem and the U. S. contributes over 70% of it! Ye Gods! Stop breathing! On the other hand, it is very reassuring that over 70% of what we contribute is CO2 and not methane or manufactured gases. Methane is natural gas, basically, and the product of bacterial action on organic materials, like food we eat or grasses and grains that cattle, deer, antelope, bears and squirrels eat, among other living things. Those gases escape, both intentionally and accidentally. As far as we know, animal escapes are all accidental. Still, methane is a greenhouse gas, the concentration of which also should be reduced, according to the magical percentage theory of global management. This has led to calls to reduce cattle herds and, less publicized, to reduce human herds, too. Ye Gods, again!
Those who are deeply committed to the magical percentages of greenhouse gases theory, are equally committed to blaming their fellow humans for every weather event that is less than perfectly comfortable for everyone from the Amazon watershed to the arctic tundra. Everything is now our fault. It has become a great tool for forcing people to accept authoritarian government as it lovingly struggles to avert the imminent climate catastrophe. A “climate crisis” is declared repeatedly. Taxpayers and anyone who wants the United States to survive and prosper, should have justifiable concern about any use of “crisis” in relation to items of government interest. The designation is uniformly employed to justify borrowing from future generations to create politically advantageous spending, now. There’s a $31 TRILLION liability on our balance sheet that demonstrates the effectiveness of this spending strategy. Thus it is that “climate change” has become “climate crisis,” a political tool, and not just for the U. S. Climate is global, and through the World Economic Forum [See http://www.prudenceleadbetter.com/2022/04/16/where-the-globalists-struck-first/ ] it is politically valuable to globalists and other socialists. There is no reason to trust them.
The W.E.F. has determined that nitrogen-based chemicals, like most fertilizers, must be curtailed in order to save the planet. You can see the conflict: humans eat the products of fertilized crops. We like to eat meat, too, often simultaneously, and the animals that provide it also contribute to nitrogen chemicals resulting from bodily functions. It is what it is. The globalist solution? Less eating! Unfortunately, many governments pay attention to the blatherous emanations of the W.E.F., and adjust policies to fit. You can read of the effects of this nonsense in the Netherlands, where farmers are in serious protest, or in Sri Lanka where people are starving. Oddly, the same people who want to mandate the mRNA “vaccines” are they who want to limit food supplies to avoid climate change. Are the two efforts connected in purpose? Population reduction? Certainly, in terms of the net effects of the Covid-19 “vaccines,” population reduction appears to be the biggest net effect. The spike in non-Covid deaths among the healthiest demographic (ages 25 to 64) in the U. S., Canada and the U. K., is continuing. The victims are vaccinated against Covid.
It seems intensely Prudent to be intensely skeptical of the unsubstantiated claims of Climate believers.
We should consider the benefits of warming and the ancillary costs of attempting “carbon neutral” or, worse, “zero carbon” by any date-certain. All the public statements about “climate change” fit under one heading: “The sky is falling!!” Note the dual exclamation points! Once the rabid claims are sorted out – and the overblown statistics corrected-for – the best projection for the extent of warming is 2 to 3 degrees Fahrenheit by year 2100. What are the upsides?
One is longer growing seasons for the crops that sustain the world’s population. This can also translate to requiring less fertilization and more fallow periods for fields, enabling natural processes to enrich the soil between crops. There will be more arable land, now covered by ice. Some may think this is a tragedy, but those who live near the ice are glad to see it go. Earth’s current weather patterns will change. This may mean more rain in lots of areas. Deserts that have evidence of past wet periods might return to that condition, improving opportunities for many peoples to feed themselves and spend less time on subsistence, leaving more time to develop their societies and, perhaps, correct their crappy politics and improve millions of people’s lives and futures.
Less energy will be expended heating homes and other buildings; less fuel expended clearing snow. Meanwhile, should we manage to avoid or stifle the warlike designs of globalists and Communists, the invention and innovation of free, well-nourished people will be making at least as much progress in engineering and science as we’ve made in the past 80 years. Our economies will cost less in energy density, transportation will be logarithmically more efficient. People who are bound by ideologies that condemn half the population, and who are willing to twist “science” for political advantage, cannot conceive of humans creating solutions to the problems that serve one political ideology today: leftist authoritarianism.
In short, there are more reasons to hope for the future than to fear it. If we have the wisdom to restore freedom as our flame of purpose, there is nothing to fear. Biden and his ilk will be gone. Education will be dramatically decentralized and made honest and non-ideological. Freedom, Hope and Genuine Progress: bring it on!
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?
The Biden “administration” has done everything it could in 19 months to destroy the trajectory of the U. S. economy, and, possibly, U. S. permanence. Above all, everyone is either helped or hurt by the big “bugaboo,” inflation. Economists, pundits, commenters and news-readers galore, all have wise-sounding opinions, yet no one seems to know what inflation IS!
It seems Prudent to assume that some of them do, but the average person listening to any such is not going to find it out. To a mouth, all say in so many, many words, that “inflation” is prices increasing. Well, no it isn’t. Inflation is inflation of the money “supply.” And that isn’t even accurate; it’s inflation of available cash OR CAPITAL that is “liquid,” or lendable. Capitalism and “inflation” go hand-in-hand to create prosperity for most people.
“Wait just a minute,” you’re thinking, “Inflation makes prices go up, and that’s bad, so it’s not helping MY prosperity.” Actually, it has helped it – look at the riches and bounty we enjoy. It’s a two-edged sword… like fire. It can cook our food, keep us warm, run our engines or… burn the house down. The key is keeping inflation where it runs the engine without burning down the house. So, where does this wonderful inflation come from?
The simple answer is debt. Our economy – even your personal economy – operates on a “futures” basis. If you own your home you probably have a mortgage on it, which is a long-term debt, well into the future. One of the quirks in our economy is that banks can legally loan out more “money” than they actually have on deposit. It’s called “fractional reserve,” and it is about 14%. In other words, among all the stored “savings” deposits and “performing loans” and temporary deposits, the “Bank” has an average number of dollars “in reserve,” at any given time. If it amounts to a million dollars, our laws allow the bank to lend out up to $7 Million, round numbers, of which 6/7ths is, fundamentally, air. So long as the honesty and ability to repay of most borrowers are intact, this is a safe system and the recipient of the check for the house you bought, accepts the dollars that were created to write it, as well as if he saw them peeled from a big fat roll of $100-dollar bills.
If the seller of the house also dealt with the same bank, his or her new deposit of, say, $400 thousand will, for a while, increase the average “reserve” the bank can lend seven times as much of.
Anyway, you commit to paying your mortgage for 20 or 30 years because the pain of losing your home is worse than the pain of making the payments. Besides, you have a job, you’re productive, you’re helping to create profits somewhere – productive surplus, if you will. It is reasonable that you will keep your promise to pay. You have made your work valuable enough to produce some “productive surplus” for your own family.
Try to imagine where the construction industry and millions of jobs would be if there were no such thing as mortgages or construction loans. But, if you’re worried about inflation, look at what you just did: you caused the inflation of the money supply by about $340,000! Depending on the “velocity” of that money (through the economy), possibly even more than that. But! It’s OK. You’re going to pay it down – or “back” – to the bank. Owning that house will cause you to buy a bunch of other stuff that increases production (let’s hope, inside the U. S.), as well as future repairs and upgrades, and it will enable you to raise your children to become productive, too.
Transactions like these happen thousands of times a day, whether for homes, or cars, or work vehicles, trailer trucks and on and on. Every loan creates some inflation, but not more than the “economy” will absorb, or, we might say, not more than the economy needs.
In the process of economic activity, wages, sales and so forth, governments collect taxes. That is, BECAUSE THERE IS PRODUCTIVE SURPLUS in our economic activity, “we” can afford to pay taxes for those services and public works that individuals cannot provide for themselves. Among these are public school facilities, police departments, fire departments, all the bureaucrats who are there to help US, the military, highway and roadway constructions, sewage treatment, water works and sewers, themselves. All that stuff is paid for from productive surplus. If kept in a rough balance, it all works together amazingly well as more people become productive and relatively financially independent, and benefiting in safety and economy from our shared public works.
How does it get out of balance? Put most simply, if the money supply grows with no commensurate increase in production or productivity. Take the example we’ve experienced recently where governments, based on perceived, raw, political advantage, decree that the “minimum wage” shall be $15.00 per hour. A kid stuck at the fry station in a McDonald’s, making French fries for as many customers as desire some, gets a sudden, say, 20% pay increase. He or she cannot fry more potatoes than before the raise, there are only so many orders for fries in a given day. The added pay does not enable the fry-kid to encourage more people to buy fries than they used to buy before the change in pay. Do you think the individual cost of an order of fries is going up? Of course. Or, is it possible that customers might wait a little longer to get their fries – and their whole orders, when it’s busier? Perhaps the restaurant owner can’t afford to put two kids at the fry station in busy periods, now that the pay has increased arbitrarily. The customer pays – or suffers – for this arbitrary work rule.
So, French fries go up in price, but is that “inflation?” Well, no, obviously. It’s an imposed change to the “CGS,” or Cost of Goods Sold. How would inflation cause the price of French fries to go up?
Suppose that in a certain marketplace: your town, for example, there are both a lot of disposable income – free cash, as it were – and a limited supply of frozen French fries. Potatoes are neither grown nor processed locally; they are transported some distance to the restaurants that want them in your town. People in your town are in the habit of ordering fries with their burgers and sub sandwiches and business in fries is brisk.
Because the supply of spendable cash has been inflated (increased), people who might have held off adding fries to their sandwich orders, have started to order them more frequently, yet the total volume of fries coming from the processors can’t increase for quite a while, as the extra cash in everyone’s pocket makes it possible to afford the fries in other towns, as well, and the price of fries appears to be a bargain where they used to be a bit of a luxury.
Restaurants are finding that they’re “selling out” of fries and seeing customers go to another restaurant that still has some. The owners get on the phone to order more fries but there aren’t any extra to be had. Very quickly busier restaurants will offer a premium price to the distributor to get an extra case of frozen fries every day. Realizing the nature of the increased demand, the distributor makes a deal with a potato processor who guarantees additional frozen fries, but at a higher wholesale price, too.
Pretty soon, the French fry supply problem is solved and people in your town can obtain all the fries they want, although each order costs a little more. Lo, and Behold! Inflation of the money supply changed demand patterns in the French fry marketplace. This example is too simple, but also real. During the engineered Covid crisis, the federal government wrote checks to millions of people that it/they, the federal, state and municipal governments had thrown out of work… billions and billions of dollars’ worth, but they were from accounts that had no actual – although highly hoped-for-future – money in them! The checks were written from AIR. Worse, they were doled out without regard to increasing productivity or other economic growth. No new crops were planted, tended or harvested; no new mines were opened and their valuable minerals retrieved; no new inventions were spurred causing new manufacturing to commence. But people accepted the ‘air-checks’ and spent them like money. The money supply increased by over a Trillion Dollars while the supply of goods to be purchased actually went DOWN!
Prices started to go up until states started to re-open their businesses and let people go back to work. The economy was roaring back when Biden was shoveled into office. He promptly signed another Trillion-dollar “Covid Relief” bill that was no longer needed, indeed it extended payments to not work, and inflation really started shooting up. The money supply – more air, but who’s counting – was now completely untethered from productivity, production or quantities of goods for sale. In addition, there was an even larger incentive to not work. The Consumer Price Index (CPI) started to take off in a serious way.
Because of “petro-dollars,” a sweetheart deal we made with Saudi Arabia (and, therefore, OPEC) when Nixon closed the gold window in the early ‘70’s, our federal spenders have developed a habit of calling everything a “crisis.” It doesn’t have to be a war, a disaster, a plague… just a problem – like getting re-elected. And, since there is (almost always) a terrible crisis, they can justify borrowing to resolve it. So, they spend about one-third or more, MORE than the real money tax receipts that the federal government collects each year. That missing third or 40% or so must be borrowed, largely adding to the “national debt.”
Now, if the extra federal spending were creating real wealth, which is what real investment does, the loans would steadily be repaid by the productive surplus the investments made possible. Another way of saying it is that the DEBT would be DESTROYED. That’s a good cycle: ideas vetted, loans obtained, practices, processes or new resources are implemented or obtained,* and the new productive surplus can be applied, in part, to “retire” the loan while net societal – or National – wealth increases. Living standards improve and the repaid capital (the loan) becomes available for other real investments.
This neat system collapses when non-productive or ANTI-productive effects of the loan (deficit spending, it’s called) are mandated by law. Most commonly, it collapses because the government borrows money to PAY FOR CURRENT EXPENSES, like welfare, interest on older loans, increasing the numbers of people employed in non-productive pursuits, and so forth. A good example of hiring more people to be non-productive is part of the recently passed “Prosperity Reduction Act,” or, as it is officially mis-labeled, “The Inflation Reduction Act.” Inside of this dishonest legislation is a provision to hire 87,000 more IRS agents, who will harass and impoverish productive people (tax-payers they are called) with absolutely no increase in productive surplus for anyone. Oh, there’ll be some fat paychecks, but the net wealth of our economy will decline.
The extra payroll dollars (among others in the bill) will inflate the money supply, however, and prices will move upward again as more cash chases fewer goods.
There are $600+Billion other dollars in the “bill” that also don’t represent any new production, productivity or wealth… they just lower the value of all the dollars floating around or in your wallet and retirement accounts. Thanks, Brandon.
*Where are new resources “obtained?” Well, there are only so many sources of new wealth that can add to an economy and total wealth of a nation. The first is agriculture. The elements of a crop of wheat or corn or soybeans or potatoes, are relatively inexpensive. We count on God to provide the soil, the rain and sunlight… even the seeds, although humans have figured out how to augment everything but sunlight, and how to till the soil and harvest the crops with automated machinery, which has reduced the cost of labor in food production, as well. Barring weather disasters and political interference, agriculture creates new wealth with every crop-cycle. Many inventions and new mechanizations have been developed in response to the need for better food production as population has grown.
Coincident with expanding agriculture are various forms of mining, whether for coal, metals, oil, gypsum, quartz and dozens of other riches the earth provides. From them have come thousands… no, Millions of products and inventions and improvements to standards of living, not least of which are pharmaceuticals and computer chips. Virtually every one of these bits of progress and improvement has required some “financing,” or, as better known, debt. Little by little every step has also “inflated” the money supply, but in rough equivalence to the new economic activity each has spurred. A lot of that activity has been in the form of “fixed” assets, like buildings, roads, bridges and so forth. At their creation, “fixed” expenditures DEFLATE the money supply, while enabling long-term economic benefit for lots of other activities, comforts or safety.
Somebody is going to paint those buildings. We’re still driving across bridges that were built by the Works Progress Administration in the 1930’s.
Some companies, banks, agencies, treasuries and individuals are benefitted very nicely by inflation, primarily the federal government. They get to spend the money first. Debts and other invoices the federal government owes are paid off with “cheaper” dollars. Increased payrolls result in increased tax receipts. Favored industries obtain contracts and payments to carry out policies incorporated in the inflationary legislation. Millions of votes are purchased as loans are forgiven and exorbitant expenses incurred and paid off. So, some benefit immediately and don’t begrudge deficit spending. Others, tax-payers, not so much.
The actual net result is a reduction in both national and individual wealth for MOST people. The few favored in the legislation get an artificial boost of income. It’s all very unfair and sold to the American people as a universal “good.” But, what does it have to do with “petro-dollars?”
Petro-dollars refers to our agreement with OPEC that oil would be traded only for dollars. Every nation, basically, would need to always have some dollars on deposit – some even made the U. S. dollar a “reserve” currency – so that when they needed to buy oil they could. If they sold oil, they accepted having billions of U. S. dollars on deposit. Dollars could be exchanged for any other currency an “oil” nation needed to buy products from anyone. Still, a global acceptance of dollars gave a golden “carte blanche” to ignorant congresspeople to borrow without any practical limit. All they need is a “crisis.”
At the same time that President Biden has ruined relations with Saudi Arabia and the rest of OPEC, and attacked fossil-fuels in the United States, multiple countries like Russia, China, Brazil and Iran, are making moves to eliminate the dollar as the currency of trade in oil. When they succeed – WHEN they succeed – countries will start dumping dollars. They won’t have the impetus to buy stuff from the U. S. in order to use up the dollars they have had to hold. Currency markets will turn upside down.
We will experience price increases that are unimaginable. All the goods and goodies that we import now, will have to be paid for with more valuable currencies than U. S. dollars. Exchange rates are going to punish the dollar when that day comes. All the dollars that have been created in other countries and banks have been inflating the same “money supply” we talked about earlier. Every dollar BILL is, in fact, a bill that must be paid with something valuable, not merely with more “Federal Reserve Notes.” The mendacious debt that Congresses and administrations have racked up to the tune of almost $31 TRILLION, will complete its cycle of inflation, as well, while much of the trading world rejects payments in dollars, preferring gold, rubles, rials, or, most likely, yuan. We have no concept of and no political ability to balance our books and bring the number of dollars floating around into alignment with some form of productive output from our economy. Prices, for everything, will shoot up.
We can see the World Economic Forum, a group of self-selected control freaks by which real governments – including our own – are being influenced, is spreading the organic fertilizer of “nitrogen pollution,” since carbon-dioxide hasn’t scared enough people. To limit “nitrogen” requires, in their view, reducing crop yields (by refraining from using chemical fertilizers) and going “organic.” There is an agenda that is far removed from “climate” at work here. What will we do when hyper-inflation is chasing reduced supplies of food around the world? Or, when Chinese- and Bill Gates-owned land is held out from cultivation in our own country? We need miss only ONE growing season to be faced with famine, which is very unpleasant, even here.
Looking at the effects of the “green” movement and the recent pandemic-inspired tyranny, and the so-called vaccines that resulted, the main effects, cumulatively, have been death and sterilization. Sounds like population reduction, if one were being Prudent. Lo, and behold! Bill Gates and the people he hob-nobs with agree that there are too many people on Earth, by a factor of two-thirds or more! Let’s “vaccinate” every person on the planet. Inflation won’t be a problem, then.
It is becoming ever more clear that there are good, solid, society-strengthening, family-strengthening and tribe- or nation-strengthening reasons to NOT sink into hyper-sexuality and debauchery.
“Oh, come on, you damned Republican prude, sex is fun and ‘empowering’ for individuals that didn’t like themselves before learning to translate everything about life and economics into sexuality. Don’t be such a Donnie Downer.” And, if one steps back from identity politics far enough to see the forest AND the trees, that one can see the point being made in that reactive statement.
Now, now, now… calm down, there. America and the West have tried a 60-year experiment in immorality and sexual depravity, all couched in terms of “love,” “freedom,” “rights,” and “health care.” It has proven extremely confusing, mainly because all the things the experiment was supposed to make better, have proven to become worse.
Of course, the prime target of the acids produced (and “dropped”) by the experiment has been morality, primarily Christianity. REGARDLESS of your opinion of “the Church” or any reformation thereof, or of “the Bible,” the rules for living contained in both Testaments, are far, far better than the pack of “rights” and re-defined words we attempt to operate society with, today. There is plenty of evidence of the breakdown of “Western” civilization, here in 2022, not least of which is the installation of an American administration controlled by mostly traitors and liars, and the “root cause” of this breakdown is mirrored by, or caused by, the spread of hyper-sexuality, mainly, but not exclusively, in forms of “non-binary” expressions.
“Oh, you hateful homophobic trans-phobe! You can’t say that, you hater. Next you’ll say you’re opposed to gay marriage. Hummphh!”
It is not Prudence’ intent to use broad-brush half, or even smaller fractional truths to express feelings about others’ partial truths. She intends to make very pointed statements about them. Some examples might help.
Let’s consider pornography. No one talks about it anymore. In the 1950’s and 60’s pornographic photography came of age, or so people thought, in part thanks to Polaroid technology whereby film negatives didn’t have to be shared with any third parties in order to be shareable. Of course there were always hidden, secretive “foreign” magazines from “Sweden” or some other exotic place, but, for the most part, “porn” was under-the-counter or back-room stuff in sleazy joints that most honorable, upright citizens would never frequent. And then came “Playboy.”
With Playboy numerous barriers were breeched: a new envelope was created, as it were, and ever more prurient publications pushed to stretch it. Our own Constitution was unprepared for it. The First Amendment had to be applied in some way to keep porn under wraps… and it couldn’t. Judges, themselves, couldn’t agree on what constituted pornography or obscenity. Pictures, and full-color, high-definition videos, of course, of naked bodies in the midst of various activities, are “protected speech” according to clever attorneys and agreed-to by judges, including supreme court justices. Somewhere along the line, unlike the strict definitions of words usually applied to the Constitution, “speech” has been stretched to include “expression” which is automatically stretched to include bodily movement and exposure, all sorts of cursing and verbal attack. One can almost hear the arguments.
“Freedom of Speech” now means any form of observable or audible activity detectable by another. So, what, you ask? Well, how about skewing life and sexuality toward unreality? Do you not see the damage to marriage, families and morality? And, now that what used to be hidden in various ways is quite public (any “Gay Pride parade), in movies and on television and a raft of advertising campaigns, can we even define morality?
“Morality?” you scream… “You mean that Christianity stuff? Separation of church and state, pal!” Hyper-sexuality has become the most effective weapon against true religion, most particularly, Christianity. Just count the rainbow flags and laws that are closing in on what pastors and priest can even SAY within the liturgy. What good has over-sexualizing everything from elementary school to church services actually done for America?
“Well, we can have more and innovative forms of sexual pleasure, so there… besides, it’s a free country and she can always have an abortion if something happens.” Something. And, it makes health care busier.
Let’s consider another example: the “trans-gender explosion.”
Hyper-sex has become a tool of the left – perhaps it always was. We can define the left as always attempting to erode freedom and responsibility, turning both over to some form of tyranny, camouflaged or not. Federalizing every personal unhappiness is a clear marker, making tyranny stronger and individuals weaker. Ultimately, spirituality and religion are weakened or lost altogether, as we are experiencing, now. Back to “trans.”
Public schools, so-called, are increasingly federal, government schools, with “the public,” whose offspring are the reasons for their and their teaching staffs’ existence, increasingly excluded from participation or influence. Children, from the age of 5, and even earlier in “pre-schools,” are carefully prepared to distrust their parents, prepared to ignore their own realities, like physical features and even names, IN SCHOOL! Teachers, to whom the kiddos are entrusted for 3, 4, 5, 6 hours a day and more, and who are clear authority figures and sources of wisdom – which every child is attempting to gain – are spending less time educating the kids in preparation for adulthood, and more time guiding, or grooming them, for early-onset sexual experimentation and experience. “Do you feel like a boy or a girl, today?”
“You can feel like both, if you want. We’ll call you by a name you like better and we’ll use the pronouns that fit how you feel.”
“Don’t tell your parents about your new name; they’ll be mad at you. You can change into different clothes when you get to school – to match your new name. It will be our secret.”
Can you imagine such conversations? … from TEACHERS? These are your tax dollars at work. When the kids are older, the boys are taught how to tuck their penises into certain underwear so that they’ll look like girls in their underpants rather than boys. What the Hell do “underpants appearances” have to do with school?
Girls are taught to bind their breasts so they’ll look more like boys. Both are offered drugs to prevent development in puberty, risking permanent physical damage and developmental retardation and likely sterility. Is that the point? To prevent more children? Or is it simply, and cruelly, designed to dissolve tradition and normalcy and family bonds?
Who, or what “institution” benefits from the breakdown of chastity? Casting about in all directions reveals only a single beneficiary: government… and Satan, one might say, often indistinguishable. And as it expands, it is not a government of benign partnership in the success of its citizens; it is a government that almost automatically divides its population against one another, increasing dependence upon… you guessed it, not freedom, but increasingly tyrannical government.
Government of, by and for the government. 87,000 new, armed, IRS agents will do that. None of their purpose is to enhance freedom – it’s to vacuum money from we the serfs.
Interestingly, the strongest political force against this foul creep of foul creeps, is parents, fighting to keep their families intact and their children as pure as possible.
Why the hyper-sexualization of kids, though? There is an overarching control-meme pushing otherwise professional and ostensibly educated people to adopt Critical Gender and Race theories. We can encapsulate it with the term, “ideology,” but that’s the same charge these groomers use against religion: ideology, a belief system without empirical proof. And, they are the first to shout the loudest about “impose your religious mumbo-jumbo on my body…” Yet, the only “proof” that has emitted from Critical Gender Theory is the destruction of lives, families, suicides and lifelong regrets in all but the rarest of cases. And WE’RE the haters?
Dear friends, we are fighting the Anti-Christ, pure Marxism. Marx, who believed in God, believed also that he would go to Hell for his philosophies. He knew what he was doing and advocating. We need to know, also, and reverse the tide on Marxist hatred that seems to have infected much of our American governance. Those who are its advocates have adopted the anti-life, anti-freedom philosophies for the crassest, crappiest political advantage and wealth. For shame.
Following the assassination of John Kennedy, numerous bad, poorly thought-out ideas became legislation and law, not least of which was “The Great Society.” Among them was the Immigration and Nationality Act. Promoted by avowed socialist, Edward “Ted” Kennedy, the “Hart-Celler” act opened immigration to all nations somewhat equally, no longer favoring European nations, and gave preference to those who claimed relatives already resident in the U. S. The wording of the bill included preference for skilled persons, but the new relative-based “Chain” migration superseded that.
Immigration increased and shifted dramatically in nationalities represented, but it took a while for Democrats, fairly solidly in power in the congress for 40 years, to grasp the possibility of using immigration to increase the population of Democrat voters. In 1986, during the Reagan administration, the first codification of a premise called “amnesty,” the Simpson-Mazzoli Act, was sold to the President as a means to control illegals’ taking of jobs in the private economy, while strengthening the Border Patrol. Rather than a “solution” it created a platform for increasing problems, the worst of which, in a legal sense, is the concept of “amnesty,” which is a pleasant-sounding term for “helping” the downtrodden. Amnesty does, in fact, help the poor unfortunates who “risk everything” to escape less-pleasant circumstances to sneak into the U. S., which is not to say that such “helping” is the business of the U. S. or of those American citizens elected to administer the government of the United States.
That is, “our” representatives, the crux of our democratic Republic, have NO BUSINESS giving away the birthright or adopted, legal citizen-rights of U. S. citizens. Prudence hopes that statement is not confusing to her readers.
Between these two nation-weakening steps the political left in the U. S. learned the power of guilt as a means of twisting national direction. Hillary Clinton and many others thought her husband’s presidency was finally the time to take over health care, a cornerstone of the Communist Manifesto. While the timing was off, and Bill Clinton’s mendacity led to his moving rightward to win re-election, the pattern was set. Along with “de-education” by their friends in the education unions, left-facing Democrats could shift America to a one-party state with sufficient guilt (over racism), the unseating of Christianity, and control of the Supreme Court – courts, generally, being merely another political tool to use when Americans proved too dense to agree with global socialism. Hatred became the political engine to keep the shift moving.
Hatred was firmly applied in the George W. Bush administration. Hardly a day passed that he wasn’t vilified, yet he still managed to defeat Kerry to earn a second term. The election of Barack Obama established non-compromise as a policy. Not only with “Obamacare,” but with numerous issues, compromise with Republicans became the very last, possible resort to get things done. No longer were Republicans brought in to help shape solutions; Obama’s goals were all transformative, anti-Constitutional, and, largely, party-line. “Elections have consequences.”
A fairly porous southern border became, under Obama, fairly open. For the first time “caravans” of illegal immigrants formed up at the southern Mexico border, or in Guatemala, and moved north with substantial help from human traffickers – cartels that found they could charge many thousands of dollars for individuals and whole families to get to the U. S. border. They even taught the interlopers what to say to guarantee a hearing on refugee or asylee status. Illegal entrants, always a problem, nearly untouched by “amnesty,” became a flood. Obama and his corrupt AG, Eric Holder, had no interest in stemming the flow. Despite higher “deportation” numbers than previous administrations, Obama changed the immigration landscape with selective enforcements and easier entry for children. Cartels took advantage of changes and began teaching people to say the right things to create potential asylum, and to have children with them at the border, even if only “rented” for the purpose. “Immigration” became one of the potent issues that propelled Donald Trump into the White House.
Obama, extra-legally, also invented “DACA,” Delayed Action for Childhood Arrivals. By executive order the President changed the status of those who were brought into the U. S. illegally before they turned 18, making them magically less illegal than their parents. It covered some 750,000 child arrivals. That group also were given renewable work permits. Since they had “grown up” in the U. S., everyone felt sorry for them and that it would be cruel to force them back to their own countries. More magic.
At the time of the 1986 Amnesty bill / farce, illegals were estimated to number about 7 million. As the next few years passed under Clinton, that estimate slid up to “12 million,” and no matter how illegal they might be, surely it was not possible to “arrest 12 million people” and deport them! The groundwork for lawlessness being rewarded was being put into place.
The Obama administration saw an explosion of “sanctuaries” for illegals: first towns and cities, and later whole states, declared themselves “sanctuary” jurisdictions where local and state police would be directed to not cooperate with federal C.I.S. and I.C.E. agents as they attempted to apprehend known criminals who were illegal entrants. I.C.E., standardly, would file a detain and hold notice in a local jurisdiction or with a court magistrate whenever local police or sheriffs had arrested a fugitive illegal. Local authorities, even judges, would facilitate the escape of the fugitive, even sentencing them to a number of days that meant they were free to go following their court appearance. Then an employee or even a court officer would help the criminal out a back door so as to avoid federal I.C.E. agents attempting to serve an arrest warrant. Criminal magic.
Is this “nullification?” Not quite, but it certainly skirts the law. Federal jurisdiction clearly extends to our borders and immigration, customs, contraband interdiction and arrest and deportation of illegal aliens. In effect, our borders extend to any physical location of an illegal entrant. “Sanctuary” status, self-declared by local authorities, attempts to establish local jurisdiction over illegal entrants where none exists, and in contravention of federal jurisdiction, that does exist, in law. When President Trump attempted to withhold federal aid to police agencies that refused to cooperate with federal warrants, he was rebuffed by judges on the basis that there were no provisions for singling out departments or agencies for such withholding unless they had broken certain laws including misuse of funds. Since police power is the jurisdiction of respective states, the President’s instincts couldn’t apply. This is not to say that “Sanctuary” status is recognized in law or precedent; it is tolerated for lack of sanctions and lack of will to legislate them by Congress.
For the most crass and cynical reasons of political advantage, protecting illegal aliens became widespread: for Democrats, the eventual amnesty they pushed for might create millions of democrat voters; for Republicans, being accused of being anti-immigrant, or anti-Hispanic or, worse, racist, was too hurtful or too much trouble to refute. Both parties’ supporters are happy to have cheap labor. Neither party has made much sense in immigration over the past 40 years.
Trump, at least, attempted to gain control of our geographically and topographically open border with Mexico. Democrats fought him at every step, particularly in terms of building a wall that would force potential entrants to specific points of entry where administrative procedures could be followed, including adjudication of refugee or asylee claims, most of which are legally denied. Ultimately he had to divert dollars from military budgets to pay for about 500 miles of fencing. One of the first steps President Biden took was to stop construction, putting all those expenditures and materials yet to be installed, to waste. Elections have consequences.
Biden brought in Alejandro Mayorkas as Secretary of Homeland Security. Mayorkas is an accomplished and committed liar. To place him in the Cabinet is an affront to American citizens and to all those who have served in presidential administrations. To place him over “DHS” is a lie in its own right. There is no reason to trust that the Homeland is Secure. There’s no such thing as compartmentalization of national security – it functions as a whole. One cannot administer 1800 miles of wide-open border while claiming that, 1) the border is closed and secure; and, 2) we are secure at all of our ports, airports, imports and immigration procedures. One can try, however, as Mayorkas has, including serial perjury before Congress. Perhaps he’ll take the fall for the Biden administration when the rule of law returns to Capitol Hill.
Since Biden took office and started signing Executive Orders he may not have even read, more than 3 MILLION illegal entrants, claiming asylum, have been processed by the Border Patrol / DHS. They include large numbers of Central and South American migrants, family units and children and hundreds of unaccompanied “minors.” As they are “processed” they receive free cell-phones, clothing, back-packs and other niceties like “EBT” cards or meal chits, and bus or plane rides to their preferred location. What a country!
Over the same period, however, illegal entrants from over 100 other countries – people whose claims to asylum require suspension of disbelief, as they have traveled many thousands of miles to get into Central America for the walk to el Norte. There doesn’t seem to be any maximum number the administration is hoping to reach for migrants streaming across our “closed” and “secure” border.
Worse, some 900,000 “got-aways” have entered, too. Now we’re talking. No country has survived for long, nor any culture, nor any “people,” has or will survive for long if left undefended. The Biden presidency is best defined as being anti-American, best-exemplified by failure to defend the nation. Unbridled and un-vetted immigration, free from the constraints of economic merit and/or freedom from disease, is a classic form of national dissolution… as though anyone would aspire to such a level of stupidity or incompetence. One must stretch his or her incredulity to accept that Joe Biden actually received more votes for president than any other candidate ever has. None of us should overlook the leftward collapse of Biden and, essentially, everyone he works with… or for.
Mr. Biden has not only failed to comprehend the consequences of bad policies and incompetent appointees, he appears to actively pursue them. What on Earth for? More money? More recognition or fame? Help his depraved son, Hunter? Maybe he doesn’t recognize depravity when he sees it in his own family. Or, if his daughter’s diary can be believed, may… and it seems possible… maybe he doesn’t KNOW what is depraved and what is not – doesn’t know that Hunter’s incest with his older brother’s widow was depraved – or that hiring hookers to have sexual orgies laced with crack cocaine is depraved – or, as most ethical people would agree, doing the exact opposite of what he had sworn to do before God and country during inauguration, is also depraved.
Indeed, doing the exact opposite of what he has stood for during his political career is also a little depraved, when you think about it.
WASHINGTON, DC – JULY 21: U.S. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) (Photo by Nathan Howard/Getty Images)
How unfortunate it is… No!
How SAD it is… to be writing a post that Prudence hopes will be – can be – read later than September first of 2022. Does that sound extreme? The worries of a foolish patriot? Maybe YOU are not paying attention.
Nancy Pelosi, relatively un-American Speaker of the House for only the crassest, most selfish reasons (those who have repeatedly voted her into the Speakership have always done so for their own, temporal, financial, re-election benefits and not those of their constituents) has decided to “visit” our Asian “friends,” indeed, leaving on the trip today, July 30, 2022. Prudence hopes that this date does not mark the beginning of the end of the United States’ independence.
Part of her itinerary, perhaps for some good reason that escapes the grasp of most thoughtful observers, was announced to include a visit to Taiwan, an island nation with a most unusual history, coveted by Communist China since Chiang Kai-Shek fled the mainland at the end of the Communist Revolution. The communists, in keeping with their world views, intend to fully absorb Taiwan, even as they have absorbed artificial islands they’ve created above various reefs in the South China Sea.
For several decades known as the island of Formosa, from a name bestowed by Portuguese explorers, Taiwan has never been a comfortable fit with the rest of Chinese Dynasties, experiencing numerous rebellions, particularly by indigenous Taiwanese, mostly populating the mountainous central spine of the island. “Formosa” even existed for a few months as an independent Republic, following the Sino-Japanese War, in 1895. Japanese rule also didn’t last very long. Until the Nationalist Chinese under Chiang Kai-shek invaded and dominated the island in 1949, there had never been solid Chinese control of Taiwan (“Taoian” to its natives). During the mid-1600’s the Dutch East India Company fought Han Chinese repeatedly for control of shipping and trade on the Pescadores islands near Taiwan, and control of Taiwan, itself. They, too, were driven out.
All in all, control of Taiwan has only in the past 70 years been Chinese, albeit Nationalists. The Communist mainland government has at least as legitimate a claim as the Nationalists, having defeated the Nationalists in 1949. Only the support, explicit and implicit, of the United States, strong allies of the Nationalists against the Japanese in WW-II, has prevented Communist China (“PRC”) from taking over. U. S. affinity for democratic republican governments, and for the strategic value of Taiwan specifically against the PRC, and our virtual economic and military dependence on imports from BOTH the PRC and Taiwan, forces the U. S. to attempt continued threading of the needle between the two nations.
China has made its intention to take over Taiwan clear; the U. S. has replied in muddled, ill-defined terms of “support” or “defense” of Taiwan. Under Joe Biden, who always seems to back down when pressed by the PRC, China may perceive that there will never be a better opportunity to make a strike on Taiwan. This should make everyone who voted for Biden for President and those who intentionally covered up his corrupt connections to the Chinese Communist Party, ashamed of their role in weakening the U. S. against the only country/empire that can not only replace the U. S. as the dominant force in the world, but, should we back down on Taiwan, push us out of the Far East as a trusted ally for anyone.
What are the possibilities if Nancy DOES stop off – or attempt to – in Taiwan? None looks good, but we need to look around the world for other conditions in the summer of 2022 to understand the list of possible consequences.
China is watching the Russian crimes against Ukraine very carefully. What has ”the West” done to counter the Russians? Did NATO – the U. S. in particular – STOP the Russians? Well, no, we shrank back when Russia rattled its nuclear weapons. We have provided lots of weapons, not always timely, but eventually, and we appear to be content to let Ukranians die in their own defense. The U. S. does not appear to be ready to die alongside them. There is no particular reason why the U. S. would have the will to do anything different for the Taiwanese… at least, that is likely the logical deduction of the Chinese.
Then their question has to be: “If we attack Taiwan, will the U. S. do anything differently from what they’ve done for Ukraine?” One wonders if anyone in OUR country knows the answer to that question.
But, the Chinese are both cautious and operating on a longer schedule than biennial elections in the United States. Somehow the visit to Taiwan by the American Speaker of the House has presented a golden opportunity to China. If a few blusters by the CCP can keep her from visiting, there is something to learn about U. S. resolve. If she does visit, that is also something to learn.
But, but, but… what if she takes the challenge and decides to attempt to land on Taiwan in the face of the PRC’s telling her – and us – that she can’t go there without PRC permission? Will the Communists perform their show of force as threatened? Just as Pelosi may feel that she has to go to Taiwan, the Chinese may feel that they have to carry out their threats. Now, Chinese fighters and U. S. fighters are in the same airspace with Chinese pilots acting aggressively. One of them, or more, slides within the defined safe zone of the Speaker’s plane and Americans fire a warning shot to back them off. The Chinese, who already threatened to fire warning shots in the run-up to the conflict, fire their own warning shots but an American plane, if not the Speaker’s plane, is hit. The Americans shoot AT the offending Chinese plane and it is forced down or the pilot is forced to eject.
Talk about supply chain interruptions. The Chinese could invade Taiwan as soon as the Speaker lands, or sooner! Too bad if Americans are hurt or die. The U. S. sinks an aircraft carrier. It’s going to be a very difficult Christmas.
Do we even know what we are doing – the U. S. Navy that is firing people for not accepting those dangerous and useless mRNA injections?
Or, the Speaker decides to not visit Taiwan. Everyone is all smiles as she returns to the U. S., but the end of U. S. enforced “freedom of the seas” is upon us, and history will have changed for a century or more, all to America’s disfavor. This is a real pickle. The Chinese could decide at that point that the U. S. is comprised of wimps and LGBTQx+ people who are too confused to fight for our country, and certainly too afraid to fight for any other: Taiwan is invaded. Forty countries will abruptly stop playing nice with the U. S. and begin ignoring dollars. Life becomes extremely unpleasant inside our borders. Even welfare may have to be cut back! God forbid.
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.
