TWO THOUGHTS AS THE YEAR TURNS

 

            1.  Let Us Pray

The phrase “Let us pray” is uttered by priests at various points throughout religious services.  It may be an invitation (generally in Western style services) or an imperative (generally Eastern or Orthodox).  Some believe that prayer can become a way of life. 

The phrase is often uttered either at the end of or as a beginning to meaningful words or acts.  Therefore, it seems appropriate to utter them as we are on the cusp of the end of one year and the beginning of a new one; a time of both ending and beginning.

Of course, a natural question might be:  Pray to whom?  And for what? 

As far as “to whom”:  I would suggest that it matters less how one envisions the entity to whom one prays than it does the fact that someone accepts that there is someone or something greater than oneself in which one believes enough to send forth prayers.   I know there can be pushback here from every advocate of every religion (and every associated denomination within) who believes theirs is the one and only true faith.  But let’s remember that there is a difference between man-made religions and true faith in something that is greater than, and all-encompassing of, Mankind.  Beyond this short statement, I will leave it to the philosophers and saints to argue about who the whom in “to whom” is.

That leaves us the second question:  For what shall we pray?  That is an individual problem.  Many will sit down on New Year’s Day and compose a list of resolutions.  Those are generally positive wishes for oneself in the coming year; I’m not sure they are really prayers, but they could be if in the end they are directed to that greater being to whom one prays.

I think that my prayer is for a reinvigoration in this world of the faith that makes prayer meaningful.  This seems to be something that many humans have lost, or are in the process of losing, as individuals seem to become more and more self-absorbed and our world becomes more and more secular.

When one has no belief in something greater than oneself, when the self and its own satisfaction become of primary importance, that is when we lose tolerance for others, when we lose the urge and even the ability to do something for the true good rather than simply for what feels good.  That focus on worldly selves is when we lose respect for humanity and the individuals that surround us.  And it results in an emptiness, a hopelessness, and the anger that we see so much around us in the world these days.

So, my prayer is that we return to our souls and within those souls become reacquainted (or perhaps newly acquainted) with a faith in that which is greater than we, whatever we may choose to call that greater power.  Not only will it lead to truer individual happiness, but it will also go a long way toward healing the world.

2.  The Year You Complain of May Not Really be Over

For all of you who have sent out (sometimes quite offensive) “holiday” cards proclaiming how horrible 2020 was and your eagerness for 2021:  I have some bad news.

We are currently in the Chinese Year of the Metal Rat.  It began last January 25^th, just about the exact same time as COVID arrived on our shores (from China).  The year will not end until February 11, 2021.

The Year of Metal Rat comes once every 60 years.  Based in Chinese astrology, the 12 animal astrological symbols are combined with the 5 elemental signs, giving us 60 possibilities, each of which then contains a Yin or a Yang energy.

The Metal Rat is a Yang year.  Yang is an active energy, when the world is shaped through actions and big events, rather than by passive attitudes. It is therefore a year of changes some of which can be drastic. 

The Rat is symbolically a highly active animal; one that is known for being intelligent, curious, and restless. The Rat gets what it wants through tenacity and inventiveness; it is an animal that can also bite, explore the lower realm of our world, and carry illnesses. All those characteristics show up in the Metal Rat year. And the combination of Yang Metal and the Rat makes for a very active year that shakes things up.

This becomes clear when one considers previous Metal Rat Years.  The most recent was 1960-61. Not only did that year begin several years of social upheaval in this country, but it was also the year of a recession, the year that substantial American advisory forces arrived in Viet Nam.  It was a year that saw a strong socialist/communist movement in Europe, it began the transformation of colonialism to independence in Africa, and France detonated its first atomic bomb while other nations including China did so only a few years later.

Going back through history one will find that there were at least a few significant events in each Metal Rat year that caused or helped lead to significant changes in the future.  1900-01 saw widespread application of the internal combustion engine along with several other technological inventions, all of which served to push us full force into the industrial age and change human life forever.

Looking back further, in 1840-41, the World Anti-Slavery commission met for the first time, wagon trains began leaving for California, the Library of Congress was founded, and slavery was ended in the Northwest Territory.  1780-81 brought us to the end of armed conflict in the American Revolution and saw the approval of the Articles of Confederation.  In 1720-21, Tsar Peter the Great ended the Russian-Orthodox patriarchy, peace treaties were signed among several European countries, and Europe’s last major plague outbreak killed around 100,000 people.  1660-61 saw King Charles II sign the Declaration of Breda establishing freedom of religion.  In 1600-01, Astronomers Tycho Brahe and Johannes Kepler met for the first time near Prague, and the first British East India Company voyage departed from London. 1540-41 saw exploration of the New World by the likes of De Soto, Coronado, and Cartier while Michelangelo finished painting “The Last Judgment” in the Sistine Chapel.  The years 1480-81 and 1420-21 saw a number of religious wars play out including Ottoman troops beheading 800 Christians for refusing to convert to Islam,  Pope Martinus I calling for a crusade against the Hussite Protestants, and Jews in Syria and Austria were expelled. 

We could go on, but you get the picture.  Years of the Metal Rat include events that tend to shake up the status quo and are likely to change the course of history.  That does not necessarily make them evil, even though experiencing a Metal Rat year as it is happening may be unpleasant at best. 

But, if we look at the long view, perhaps 2020 or this Metal Rat year is not as malevolent as many now believe it to be.  We should stop and consider what has 2020 taught us, how it has prepared us better for the future and how we can work to make that future better.

But whether it is the Year of the Metal Rat or simply 2020 that is so fashionable to trash, I find it hard to believe that there is not at least one thing that each person can find during the year to be thankful for.  Even in the most difficult times, there is always light to be found.

In conclusion, then, as we sit on this cusp between years, let us search within our souls for the faith that is there that can make prayer real and meaningful.  Let us look to what we have learned from this year that is passing and let us find our many lights within it.  And, for the future, let us pray.

Look Forward

 Whether or not you say that he won, Joe Biden will be our next president.  One can continue to look back at what happened, or one can look forward to what needs to be done.

               The Election is Over.

We had an election.  Irregularities and fraud were alleged.  Legal processes for those allegations were followed.  The states certified their results.  The electors voted.  Joe Biden won that election.  The votes of electors and the slates of electors can be challenged on Jan. 6, but those challenges will most certainly fail.  The vote of the electors will be certified, and Joe Biden will be inaugurated as our 46^th President.  That is how it works in America.

I am in my 70s and every election that I can remember, whether for president or dog catcher or anything in between, has included allegations of cheating and irregularities.  Sometimes recounts do change a result.  That did not happen in this election. 

Certainly, with mass mail-in ballots, use of electronics with its possibilities for hacking or other tampering, one can perhaps reasonably assume that some fraud occurred.  There is documented evidence of some irregularities and even some cheating.  There are certainly suspicious vote drops and failures to follow some state election procedures that should make one at least question what went on.  But fraud has not been proven.  And even if it were, that does not mean that the fraud would necessarily change the ultimate outcome of the election.

In America, we are supposed to accept the results of elections, of due legal processes, even when we do not like those results.  In recent years more and more seem to find doing that to be difficult if not impossible.  How many Democrats never accepted that Trump was a legitimate president?  Before that, how many Republicans refused to accept that Obama was their president?  How many Democrats refused to accept that Bush, not Gore, was the legitimate winner of that election?

Refusal to accept suggests not only a selfishness, but also a lack of understanding of how America works.  It sounds like schoolyard kids.  I don’t accept you.  Well then, I won’t accept you.  He started it.  No, he started it.  If he did it then I will do it.  And on and on.  But it goes nowhere.

Time to grow up.  Time to review our Constitution and begin to understand how our Democratic Republic works.

I realize that some may say, “but state election procedures themselves were not followed, so this is different.”  No, it is not.  Those procedures could have been, and many were challenged before the election even took place.   The challenges either resulted in some changes or failed.  Others were challenged after the fact; those challenges also failed. Either way, there was due legal process before, during, and after the election. 

Just because one thinks that legal challenges were wrongly decided does not change the decision or make it procedurally or legally wrong.  Anyone who follows and understands our legal processes knows that sometimes the outcome of those processes is not what one might have wished it to be.  Sometimes they are not or do not seem to be fair.  But, in this country, in our Democratic Republic, we follow the legal processes and accept their results.  That is how we avoid the rule of the mob, the rule of dictatorship, and how we keep our freedoms.

You do not have to congratulate Joe Biden, you do not have to like Joe Biden, you do not have to say that he won, but pursuant to our Constitution and our rule of law you do have to accept that he will be our President on Jan. 20 of 2021.

               For the Future

So, rather than whine because one did not get what one wanted, rather than continue the schoolyard name calling, it might be far more productive to work to make elections more secure in the future. 

Here is one suggestion. People unhappy with the questionable integrity of this election (that should be all Americans!) can mobilize within their states to petition their state lawmakers to make changes in their election laws.  I would suggest the following:

1.       Requirement that voting occur only in one of two ways:  in person during the designated voting period or by a requested absentee ballot.

a.      In person voting must require that the voter show a photo ID of a type approved by the state’s voting authority.

b.      Absentee ballot must be requested, and a valid reason must be given for the request.  Such reasons might include but not be limited to:  being out of the state during the election period; being an invalid or impaired in a way that prohibits one from physically going to the polls; having no reasonable means of transportation to the polls; etc.

c.      Submitted absentee ballots shall use signature matching or similar verification before the vote is counted.

2.      Required steps for security of the voting and counting procedures.

a.      Requirement that appropriate steps be taken to guard against cyber-interference with the election, including but not limited to checking and protecting voting machines and tallying machines.

b.      Requirement that even when machines tabulate votes that paper ballots be preserved.

c.      Requirement that one observer from every major party represented on the ballot must be present in each polling place during voting and present during any handling, including verification and counting of ballots and votes. 

With relatively simple steps such as these, perhaps we could instill a greater faith in our election process.  None of the above are difficult to implement and would go a long way towards election integrity, and in dispelling allegations of cheating, irregularities, and fraud, whether real or imagined.

In the meantime, we all need to remember that this is America and we are Americans.  We don’t always get what we want.  Neither do we necessarily get what we need.  But, because this is a government of/for/by the people, we are always able to look forward and do more than simply wring our hands over what has already happened.  Even if we feel what happened was wrong, we have the right and the power to stand up and turn whatever hate we may have for what has passed to hope and action for the future.  That is America. 

 

Step Back from This Battle but Fight for the Future

As a lawyer I have fought some hard-won battles and I have suffered a few excruciating losses.  There have been one or two times when I knew absolutely that I/my client were right and yet we lost.  That is hard. 

I think for Republicans and others who question the fairness of the election that this is one of those times.  Like many I believe there was significant cheating or dishonesty in this election and that many illegal ballots were counted.  Because once counted it is impossible to know for whom those illegal ballots were cast, recounts do little; they find the occasional counting error but not the fraud regardless of whether that fraud was minimal or widespread, committed by rogue individuals acting alone or due to some greater coordinated plan.

It is next to impossible to prove election fraud, especially the mail-in fraud that almost certainly occurred or the counting machine tampering that has been alleged.  Moreover, even if proven, it is impossible to prove what the legitimate vote totals would have been.

Yes, there is proof that some vote counting was intentionally deceptive, that some votes that should not have been counted were nonetheless counted and others that should have been counted were not.  But did that swing the election?  There is no proof of that; it is impossible that there could ever be proof of that.

Those who know they are right about the fact that illegal votes were counted are fighting the good fight.  Some are fighting because they believe the presumptive result is inaccurate and want it overturned, some are fighting because they simply want a clear declaration of the improprieties that occurred, and others are fighting to protect the vote in the future. 

The fight is properly playing out in the courts and the fight on behalf of free and fair elections is losing.  The cases asserting fraud are not unreasonable and there is some evidentiary support.  The problem is, because of the very nature of the fraud alleged, there cannot be sufficient evidence to move forward.  As to the Texas case that was dismissed by SCOTUS, that dismissal was expected based on precedent.  That does not mean that Texas should not have brought the case – lawyers sometimes bring cases in which they know they are not likely to prevail in a hope of convincing the Court to reexamine the law.  SCOTUS chose not to do that in this case.

Some (mostly Democrats and Biden supporters) refuse to believe there were any irregularities at all.  Some (mostly Republicans and Trump supporters) will never be convinced that Trump did not win.  The truth is likely somewhere in between.  Yes, there were irregularities and some of those irregularities may well have amounted to fraud.  Trump may well have won more electoral votes and Biden fewer than the results show; but that does not necessarily mean that the ultimate result would have changed.  Sadly, we will never know what the result would have been if irregularities, tampering, and possibly fraud had not occurred. 

But we do have a result.  While other legal actions are available, it is clear that any further challenges to that result will likely have no effect. 

As a lawyer I learned to be a good winner (don’t gloat) and perhaps more importantly to be a good loser – know when it is time to step back from the battle and congratulate your opponent, even when you know that the result is not what it should be, even when you know there were mistakes made, laws misread, evidence missing or incorrectly excluded.  

Sometimes, you just don’t have what you need to prove your case.   For those of you more familiar with the popular Queen’s Gambit miniseries than the courtroom, sometimes the chess player must realize that it is time to lay the king on his side and resign.   For card players, the phrase is “you’ve got to know when to fold ‘em.”  The point is, when the outcome is clear and when it is equally clear that any further efforts will be entirely fruitless, it is time to walk away.  Now is that time for the Republicans.

I am sad that half of America was not interested in examining or even discussing the large number of irregularities that evidence indicated occurred.  I am sorry that so many feel it is just easier to move on than to seek the truth when that truth may lead to unpleasant results.  I am saddened that so many care so little about our right to vote and how essential it is that it be protected in order for our democracy and our freedoms to continue.

As I have said from the beginning, this election was not just about the specific men running; it was about much more than that.  This election was about what kind of country we are going to become.  This inertia towards any unpleasant narrative, this lack of concern over a core element of our democracy saddens and concerns me.  That people are celebrating when an election lawsuit is dismissed while their comments reveal they have no understanding of why it was dismissed or even the important right of the people that it involved, I wonder where indeed this country is headed. 

I hope the bitterness of this election passes and that when it does that people stop and think rationally about it, about the Constitution, and about the central role that voting rights play in our democracy.  I hope that it is not too late for every legitimate voter in this country to demand that safeguards be enacted so that the voting irregularities of this election never happen again.  That is necessary to protect the vote of those entitled to cast one and more importantly to preserve the freedoms that those votes protect.

It is time to accept the result even if you feel it is not fair.  Step back from this battle.  Use that energy instead to fight to ensure that our Constitutional protections will be the guiding force for our country’s future. 

It’s So Much More Than Just the Biden Coverup

By now you are (or should be) aware of the fact that the press conveniently ignored and suppressed the Hunter Biden investigation until after the election.  Now, when the result is fairly certain, they begin to report it, though generally with the best spin possible. 

We should all be appalled about their coverup, but the concern goes or should go far beyond that.  Anyone who does not believe their vote this election was at least in part manipulated by the media is dreaming.  But, beyond vote manipulation, we should all be concerned about the way that more generally our thinking is being manipulated.    

        The Hunter Biden Affair
First, a quick recap of the Hunter Biden affair. If you are not inclined to research the actual documents, two current opinion pieces present the key facts fairly objectively and I will quote from them in this summary. They are from the Wall Street Journal LINK-HERE  and The Hill LINK-HERE 

If you only read the mainstream Left media or get your news from social media, you probably don’t remember when the Biden story broke last October.  The New York Post published an exclusive story about Hunter Biden being under investigation.  There was a laptop and incriminating email from and to Hunter including about arranging a meeting between his father Joe and executives of the Ukrainian oil company with which his father may have used his influence when he was Vice President.  There are texts and witness statements from people close to Biden. 

The story’s sources were verified.  Here is what happened to that story:  It and any reference to it was banned from Twitter and accounts were locked down; other media outlets and all Democrats simply and immediately dismissed it as either Russian disinformation or a smear campaign by Trump and the Republicans. 

Here is what some of the more popular “news” outlets said:

Politico: “Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say.”;
CNN: “The anatomy of the New York Post's dubious Hunter Biden story.”;
Washington Post: “The truth behind the Hunter Biden non-scandal”;
New York Times: “Trump Had One Last Story to Sell. The Wall Street Journal Wouldn’t Buy It: Inside the White House’s secret, last-ditch effort to change the narrative, and the election — and the return of the media gatekeepers.”;
Taxpayer-funded NPR: "We don't want to waste our time on stories that are not really stories. And we don't want to waste the listeners' and readers' time on stories that are just pure distractions."

Leslie Stahl interviewed President Trump for 60 minutes and here is a portion of that interview relating to the Biden story:

Stahl (response when Trump brought up the topic): “This is the most important issue in the country right now?” 
Trump: “It’s a very important issue to find out whether a man’s corrupt who’s running for president, who’s accepted money from China, and Ukraine, and from Russia. . . .Take a look at what’s going on, Leslie, and you say that shouldn’t be discussed? I think it’s one of the biggest scandals I’ve ever seen, and you don’t cover it.”
Stahl: “Well, because it can’t be verified.  I’m telling you —”
Trump: “Of course it can be verified.  Excuse me, Leslie, they found a laptop…”
Stahl: “It can’t be verified.”

As the Hill article notes, “Well, it's difficult to verify anything when you don't bother to check under the hood in the first place, right? Because that's exactly what happened here, except that the cake was baked with a condemnation of the few who decided to pursue the story.”

None of these responses should surprise us.  Before the NY Post Story, there were earlier reports that Hunter’s position on the board of Ukrainian energy company Bursima was tied to improper influence by his then Vice President father Joe.  The media chose to ignore this along with Sens. Ron Johnson and Chuck Grassley, the chairmen of investigating Senate committees who in September released a joint report detailing some of Hunter’s million-dollar dealings with politically connected foreigners. The report said they raised “serious counterintelligence and extortion concerns relating to Hunter Biden and his family.” And as the WSJ states, the press merely “yawned.”

But now, the election is over, Hunter admitted that he is under investigation, and the story can no longer be ignored (although, the press is putting the best spin possible on it to make it as innocuous as possible for presumptive president-elect Biden).

            Omission Bias
There was widespread omission bias by the media and big tech.  Omission bias is “when an outlet or publication purposely suppresses or outright ignores a newsworthy story that is carried by others.”  In this case the story carrier was the NY Post and the suppressing (actually outright banning) outlets were the rest of the media.      

The Hill piece notes “There are two kinds of bias in the media. First there is the kind we regularly see from many – not all – outlets in broad daylight, which includes openly rooting for one political party while echoing rapid-response opposition research against another. And then there is the more invisible, insidious variety — the bias of omission.”

Clearly, the Hunter problem is a clear example of this insidious bias.  But it is not in any way the only example.  For four years we have had the worst spin possible put on anything that President Trump did while any achievements were either downplayed or ignored.  Ask those who get their news from the mainstream or social media or late-night TV.  They never heard about Trump’s criminal justice reform, about his peace accords in the Middle East, about his work to improve the economic status of minorities or to preserve funding for Black colleges.  They don’t know the positive effects that his re-negotiated trade agreements had for American businesses.  And the positives that they have heard about are couched in such things as:  the previous administration set up the ability for him to do this or that; despite a litany of negatives, he did one small thing; etc.  They still believe that the Obama border cages did not exist before Trump took office. 

The political bias is clear and it is indeed a bias of omission rather than just spin.  That is dangerous because without facts, with a preconceived narrative presented to us, we are bound within the facts of the particular narrative being presented.  Our views are being bent to fit within someone else’s narrative.

That should anger us.  And not just because the press is not doing its job of presenting us with fair and unbiased facts.  It should anger us because it means that they are trying to change, create, and determine the way that we think about issues or people.

That the press creates a narrative for us means that they are attempting to manipulate and mold our thinking, and that should be of deep concern to every American.

               The Manipulation goes beyond Political Viewpoint
Not just the news, but everywhere around us our freedom of thought is being interfered with if not obstructed. The Academy Awards now require certain identity qualifications for actors and staff.  Try to get a grant in any of the arts without having a “social justice” aspect to your work.  LeBron James was awarded Time’s athlete of the year because of his activism (I don’t deny that he is a great athlete, but that goes unmentioned in this “athletic” award). 

The political correctness and thought control goes beyond popular entertainments.  People are fired for speaking their mind if it is not in agreement with the appropriate political correctness.  A doctor had his license revoked after giving a view of COVID precautions that was not that of the mainstream.  A medical professor at Harvard expressed the more widespread danger of this sort of action to science generally:  science requires that people question; when questioning is silenced, when people become afraid to speak out, then science cannot progress.  Nor can anything else.

In Russia following the revolution the Communists created a series of 5-year plans to lead the country more and more toward socialism.  Contrary to popular belief, these plans were not just industrial or manufacturing goals.  They also governed things like the arts, media, and most every aspect of life.  The goal was to create a new type of human being, to turn the individual into a communist, a communal being that was little more than an automaton for the State.  The individual voice was no longer welcome and everything the people did, read, watched, or interacted with was designed to display the (often false) positivity and beauty of communism and the proper behavior of the communist.

So, when the media commits acts of omission and when it presents clear positive bias for its narrative and negative bias against those who disagree, when the arts present only one view of life as that which should be lived and strived for, when athletics become about how good an activist (for the right cause) rather than athlete you are, when you cease questioning either because you are afraid to or simply not allowed to, when these things happen, remember this:  media can change your thinking, remold who you are.  The Soviets tried it, and it worked for 75 years. But those 75 years were far from the utopia that the people were told it was.

We live in dangerous times.  This is a post-truth America.  I’d like to think that those whose votes were manipulated this election cycle will wake up when they see the bait and switch that occurred.  I doubt they will because the media will continue to hide what is inconvenient to its narrative.  More dangerous is the media, film, music, entertainment generally that is with us 24/7.  That and the social shunning of those who question or disagree. 

We are definitely being manipulated and the danger is that we end up losing ourselves.  Stay alert.  Keep questioning.  And most importantly, think for yourself.

 

Freedom Requires Questioning

While I do think there was fraud in the 2020 Presidential election, I also believe it cannot or will not be proven.  Rand Paul amongst others has pointed out that statistical fraud was found in four states where President Donald Trump lost in the presidential election during supposed “data dumps” in the middle of the night and early morning.  But this, amongst other anomalies and miscounts, and counts of illegal votes, is something that most people, and especially Big Tech, the Mainstream Media, and the Washington Deep State prefer to ignore.  So, that being the will of the people and this being America, that is what I and the rest of the country will do.

This is not the first time my candidate will not be the one inaugurated in January.  But this time it troubles me far more than others.  This election was not just about my candidate winning or losing; it was not really about the candidates at all; rather, it was about the future of America.  I think that too many voters did not understand that.

So, as I move forward, my concern is how do we educate the electorate so that they understand better what was at stake in this election as well as what might be at stake in the future.

I, like many others, have tried and tried to educate people about our system of government, about the truths of socialism or even a significant move toward socialism and its “trickle up poverty” ^* and hopelessness.  I and many others have tried to explain that a narrative, an opinion, an interpretation, that none of those are facts and that to make good decisions about our future we must arm ourselves with facts, not feelings or opinions.  Yet, for the most part that has been to no avail.

I have a friend to tells me that people are not interested in thinking about these things, but that they will sit up and take notice only when they are personally and fiscally affected.  Well, I suspect that those who pay taxes will not have long to wait:  Biden announced that he will nominate Janet Yellen, a former chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank, to be his Secretary of the Treasury.  Analysts tell us that will mean personal income taxes will increase, 401ks will drop in value as the new administration and Yellen increase the corporate tax on the corporate stocks in those 401ks, and the cost of gasoline and energy will increase.  That will hit taxpayers and other Americans where it hurts, in the pocketbook.

But is that really enough?  I don’t think so.  In my state we are willing to accept food lines and arbitrary closures of food sources as well as other unsupported mandates issued under the cover of COVID-19.  When people are not willing to question or to think for themselves, then they are likely to accept most anything they are told to do.  So, if they are told that the financial hits they are about to take are for some noble cause, they are likely to accept it without question.

What we need is EDUCATION.  But not just education for our children (which there is no question needs to be improved), but also for the adult population who take their information from media or tech sources that are no longer interested in providing factual and objective information but rather in creating a story or furthering the propaganda of one or another political cause.

For example, over the last 4 years, given the many accomplishments of President Trump, the media could have used their biased rhetoric to laud him and paint him as one of the greatest presidents ever.  Instead, they chose to paint him as the most despicable.  This was done by the ever more biased word and fact choices in the stories they presented as well as in the complete failure to report many of his accomplishments.  For example, how many people know about his criminal justice reform, his raising the economic status of minorities to the all time best, his help for Black colleges, or even his work to negotiate not one, not two, but three peace accords in the Middle East?  And those are just a few of many of which a vast number of Americans are completely unaware.

So, when a particular and totally negative picture of President Trump was created, the people simply accepted it.  And now, the reverse painting occurs as the portrait of Biden is nothing but positive.  And the people simply accept.

It is amazing how many news stories start with an unproven assumption upon which the rest of the story is based.  For example, “Trump’s unfounded statements that  . . . .”  Too many accept stories which begin this way as if the statements were in fact not founded whereas at the time of the statement is made it is nothing more than an opinion/a wish/a narrative.  It is not a fact, and everyone should be asking “On what are you basing the conclusion that the statements to which you refer are unfounded?”

When one bases an argument upon a false or arguable assumption, the whole argument is in danger of falling apart. We used to learn the classic deductive syllogism in our schools, and it became an essential part of our thought structure:

All men are mortal

Socrates is a man

Therefore, Socrates is mortal.

We also learned that if the first and second statements were true, the conclusion must be true; therefore, the way to attack a deductive conclusion was to question the two premises:

All swans are white

Jack is a swan

Therefore, Jack is white

Because all swans are not white, Jack is not necessarily white. But coming to this understanding requires questioning the first premise that all swans are white.

All Brand X car batteries die at 20,000 miles

My car battery is Brand X

Therefore, my battery will die at 20,000 miles.

But, perhaps we might want to check to make sure my battery is indeed brand X because if we question and check and find it to be brand Y, then given the information we have we don’t know when it will die.

QUESTIONING.  It is the beginning of being truly informed.  Some of us have forgotten to do that.  Others were never taught.  But unless we start doing it again, start asking questions, we will never be truly informed.  And once we become uninformed and willing to simply accept what we are told, then we lose control over our lives and our very selves.

And to be clear, numerous repetitions of the same assumption or opinion do not make that assumption or opinion a fact or even true.  If you tell me a million times that my black swan Jack is white, that does not make it so.  If you tell me over and over I have a car battery Z so I don’t have to worry that it will die at 20,000 miles, that does not make it so.  I need to question – is it really a Z or is it an X?  And if it is a Z, what facts do we have about when it might die?  Just because I’d like my swan to be white or my battery to last forever, does not mean it can or will be so.  I need to look at facts, not assumptions or desires.

When we let our emotions and feelings rule us, when we become lazy enough to simply accept what we are told because we like what is said, then that is how we lose our country.

Many did not question the negative facts about Trump because they chose to hate him from the moment he was elected.  Others were simply lulled into accepting the total negative picture because it was all they saw and heard on their social media and MSM.  Trump was not perfect, nor was he pure evil.  Like any human and any president, he is complex.  Facts give us a much clearer picture than any narrative.  We need to remember that.

When we get the rosy pictures of Biden and his administration, we need to remember again that no one is all good or all bad.  We need to question what we see and hear.  Just because the preferred media narrative is that everything Biden is good does not mean that we should not question the assumptions we are given.  We always need to demand facts, even when those facts are inconvenient and do not fit our preferred narrative.

We tend to question less when we are in fear and uncertainty.  We look to someone else to provide the certainty and answers to our pain in the same way that children look to parents.  But certainty and safety can become a prison.  Questioning is the only true way to alleviate uncertainty and fear.  It is the only way to retain the true ability to control one’s own destiny.   

If we stop questioning it means that we are leaving the course of our future to those who control the narrative.  We are not children and I, for one, do not want to become like children to an all-powerful government/Big Tech/Media that makes my decisions and creates my narrative for me.  Therefore, I will continue to question. 

Question narrative.  Question facts.  Question support.  Question interpretations of facts.  Question opinions.  Simply Question.

*******************************************************************

*I don’t know if the term “trickle-up poverty” has been previously used to characterize socialism, but it is definitely appropriate.  I discovered it in this well thought out and well explained piece by the CEO of Whole Foods. LINK 

 

The New Regime

I do not use the word “regime” lightly.  It is defined as: “a government, especially an authoritarian one.”

Now, I admit I was a Trump supporter and still strongly support his numerous accomplishments for our country and his agenda that puts our country and all of its people first; but, like any good American (and unlike most Democrats in 2016) I will accept the duly certified president, even if that is Joe Biden.  I will likely not agree with his policies or his actions, but it is my responsibility as an American to support the office and the institution of President, even when I disagree strongly with the person occupying that office.

So, what do I expect from a Biden presidency?  First, I do believe we will have some of that “nice” that some people voted for.  That is, it seems that Biden will fill key positions with typical career politicians – the ones who are really good with words and eloquent speeches.  The ones who hide behind those nice words but never tell you the full truth of what they are doing or what is going on.  The ones who think that you, the American people, don’t really need to know.   They will be nice and polite as they stab America in the back. 

The news media will cooperate with the Democrats in giving us the appearance of nice.  While they worked to make every word of President Trump into a racist/homophobic/authoritarian/hateful pronouncement; while they investigated every move he made, every obviously sarcastic tweet; while they turned every day of Trump’s presidency into some sort of earth shattering and existential crisis; while they distorted his words and any facts that did not fit their narrative; while they conducted, advocated for, and supported every unfounded allegation; despite this behavior regarding President Trump, when it comes to Biden the press will treat him as they have throughout his campaign: not only not asking the difficult questions, but suppressing any evidence of corruption or malfeasance.

So, sure, it will be “nice.”  Nice words.  Nice news coverage.  But no reality.  We the American people will not see what is really going on.  We will be enveloped in “nice” and lulled into unthinking acceptance as the Democrats move forward with their plans for America’s “reset” which I fear will ultimately be its decline. 

And those who would speak out will of course be silenced.  Biden has already selected for key positions at least one and likely more who would severely limit if not do away with our First Amendment rights.  Those who propose “hate speech laws” are really proposing the sort of limited speech that we see in countries such as the former Soviet Union, or today’s China, or most any authoritarian dictatorship or socialist regime.  Of course, if no one can speak up or question anything, then on the surface everything looks nice.

So let’s return to that word “regime.”  Its further definition includes: a system or planned way of doing things, especially one imposed from above.  That of course requires big government, something that is clearly a part of the Democrat plan. 

A regime also involves the characteristic that those in power believe they know better than the masses what is good for them.  Those in power, in control of the regime, tell the rest of us what we can and cannot do, what we can and cannot think or believe, and ultimately who we can or cannot be. 

Don’t believe me?  Look at the history of any socialist regime.  Most of us have some idea of the Soviet Union and its repressive regime.  But remember that the revolution that brought it about was one to bring equality and a better life to the workers.  Actually Lenin was quite the idealist about Marxism – until the revolution was won, and he along with others in power decided that they could not leave decisions to those uneducated workers; instead, it was necessary for the elite, the state, to take away their individuality and tell them how they must behave.  Meanwhile, those in power were able to become more and more corrupt as the people’s suffering grew and grew.

Do you really think the socialist viewpoint is any better here?  For about 50 years (about the amount of time Biden was a “public servant”) we had all sorts of social programs built in the socialist mode to help a variety of groups identified by characteristics such as sex and color.  What did these programs do for those for example stuck in inner city squalor?  The answer is nothing, at least nothing positive.  Instead they took away family and hope and individuality and motivation and self-respect.  They created a permanent underclass – an underclass dependent on the state and those in power and therefore a permanent voting bloc to help those in power retain their power. 

For the 3 years prior to the onset of Covid, this began to change as there were jobs and better economic conditions and hope for minorities and those stuck in inner city squalor.  That hope does not happen with the dependence created by socialism.  During those 3+ years the Democrats opposed everything, every program or other action that made that betterment possible. 

That is telling.  It is clear evidence that the Democrat “concern” for those less fortunate is not really a concern for them, but instead reflects a desire for maintaining them as nothing more than a useful underclass.  Democrat socialist-like programs allow them to talk a good story while walking actions that do something very different.

The new regime is I fear one of smoke and mirrors.  Put eloquent words at the front.  Create a cabinet and other leadership positions based not on substance but on superficial characteristics (color, race, heritage, sex, physical condition, etc.).  It may look diverse and pretty, but personally I would rather have people selected based on substance and skill.  That might result in the same pretty picture, it might not.  But rather than looking right, shouldn’t we be looking for people based on criteria that assure us they can actually perform the job?   Using that substantive criteria, rather than superficial appearances, would certainly be better for America.

Many of those on Biden’s short list for key positions are avowed socialists or have taken a variety of anti-American stands in the past.  But the pretty picture presented makes people forget to look beneath the surface, to question.  And that is exactly what an authoritarian regime wants and needs:  people who do not question.

Of course, we all know that the Democrats are well versed in creating smoke and mirrors about their actions and those of their opponents.  They pull allegations and accusations out of hats (see Russia collusion or Kavanaugh MeToo accusations for example); they know these things are not true, are often manufactured or ignore actual and key facts, but they use them for nothing more than to assert and secure their power.

The great reset or whatever the Democrats are calling it today is not going to be good for America or its people.  The Democrats, with their eloquent words and their socialist dreams think they know better than the rest of us who we are, what we are, and who we should be.  They coach us to give them power by feeding us dreams of the great utopian equality and niceness of socialism.  But history tells us that once socialism comes to full power that niceness does not last long and the equality that is placed upon the masses is one of hopelessness as they struggle daily for their mere existence.

A good authoritarian regime requires that those in power be self-interested, care more about their own power than they do about the people over whom they assert control.   I think the Democrats certainly fit the bill.  They also have the necessary skill of being able to soothe the people into not noticing what is going on around them and hence there is no questioning of their narrative.  Personally, I do not look forward to the new regime, no matter how prettily and nicely those in power and the media paint it.

 

Why Shutdowns are Bad for Democracy

No, it is not the mask mandate, although it might be – we don’t know.  And that is one of the problems.

We have governors and now a presumptive president-elect who make proclamations about COVID-19 and masks and shutdowns for political reasons but which are based on half-truths and selected science.  The result is that we are being put into a mental slumber of unthinking in which we accept without question what we are told.

The mainstream news media, which seems to be where most people are getting their information, has an agenda.  That agenda for the last year has been to convince people that President Trump was getting it wrong about COVID-19.  

Government cannot fix everything.  The Trump administration has and with the vaccine continues to put a dent in the virus and our ability to treat those infected, but no government can cure it or make it go away.  Yet Democrats, rather than applaud successful efforts, choose to set up roadblocks and blame the President as if he had created the virus and intentionally set it upon us.  And governors continue to tell us that they would fix everything if only we would obey their dictates.

There are studies supportive of shutdowns and masks, but there are also serious scientific studies that question the usefulness of such measures.  See for example THIS 

Similarly, rather than pay attention to the scientific studies of the effectiveness of the vaccine, the MSM  jumped on the bandwagon when Kamala Harris proclaimed that the vaccine could not be trusted because it was developed during Trump’s presidency.  Now, when we have two vaccines showing 94 and 95 percent effectiveness, the narrative continues that it may not be trustworthy because it was developed during the Trump administration.

And there are the shutdowns and the mask mandates which come and go like the wind and are always riddled with irrational exceptions. 

Let’s remember that last spring we had a 3-week shutdown to SLOW THE SPREAD.  Not to completely eradicate the virus.  We always expected it would continue to be with us.  But now when the numbers go up in the slightest, we have to shut down all over again because apparently somehow we believe that some government official can just make it completely go away if we only do what he or she says.

About those numbers:  generally, the numbers given to justify government mandates are not complete.  Do you know if deaths due to COVID-19 but with underlying conditions were really caused by COVID-19 or by the underlying condition?  How is that determination made?  Are there incentives to count it as COVID-19?

What about infection rates?  Do more tests result in a higher or lower overall infection rate?  What about false positives and false negatives?  How many are there?  Why?  How do they affect the rates?

And the masks.  Did you know there are significant studies by credible scientific groups that deny the effectiveness of masks?  Why do these studies not get equal time?   Did you know that a study performed by the military resulted with a lockdown showing slightly greater infection rate than non-lockdown? (LINK )

Arbitrary and ever-changing shut down and similar rules can and do take a heavy negative toll on the populace.  Not only do small businesses and their employees take the brunt of economic devastation, but also the people in general suffer in ways that many would find worse than the virus. 

The repressive actions by many state governors seem to ignore such things as increased depression and suicide, increased spousal and family abuse, decline of academic and athletic training and skills at K-12 schools and colleges, the loss of a will to live in the elderly isolated in elder care homes, etc.

But far more catastrophic than the individual and specific events that we can point to is the effect that the shutdowns have on the soul of every individual and ultimately of our country as well.

Isolation is not natural for humans.  Sitting at home, even working at home, lacks the stimulation that occurs when we go out into the world.  That stimulation might be talking with a colleague at the coffee machine, or shopping, or having lunch with friends, or discussing any number of topics in a seminar or playing games inside or outside with friends or strangers or any number of the things humans typically do (or did before they were instilled with COVID-19 fear and threatened with lockdowns).

When one is left without real stimulation, with hours of essentially nothing to do except scroll through social media or stream videos on TV, one becomes sluggish in both body and mind.  An inertia sets in.  I can’t help but think of the description of “mental slumber” found in The Golovlyov Family by Saltykov-Shchedrin: “As she gazed she would think of nothing . . . .  She merely gazed and gazed, until a senile drowsiness began to hum in her ears again, veiling the fields, churches, villages and that distant trudging peasant in the mist.”

The Russian word for such inertia is oblomovshchina [Обломовщина] from the character in Goncharov’s Oblomov who spends the whole day just dreaming and lying on the couch.  In his book Dead Souls, Gogol also referred to such “lie-a-beds.”

We have this soul-deadening inertia being cultivated by our various governors and their lockdowns.  It is not healthy for us or for our democracy.

As any good communist, socialist, or Democrat will tell you, “never let a crisis go to waste.”  COVID-19 arriving on our shores was a crisis.  And the Democrats had no intention of letting it go to waste and continue to use it to suit their agenda.

They begin by generating a fear so great that it cripples logical thought.  Now yes, as with any dangerous thing, including a virus, a little fear or caution is a good thing.  But the fear mongering of the media and the left goes far beyond that as they created and continue to promulgate fear that reaches the level of hysteria about the virus. 

With hysteria and its emotional and illogical mates, comes a huge uncertainty.   Humans do not like uncertainty.  They look for something or someone that can provide certainty to their lives.

The state governors and other politicians make it clear that you must listen to them asserting that they are the only ones who have and understand all the information, and, being in a state of fear many people are willing to listen and accept without question.  They think the mandates will provide them the certainty they seek.

They do not question what that information is.  They do not question why it leads to the mandate being imposed.  They do not question what other information is available.  The people just blindly follow, the well instilled fear being that if they do not then they will certainly die. 

The people are learning to follow blind and often inconsistent and irrational mandates.  They are learning to accept what they are told without question.  They are learning to give up their freedom without question.

This does not mean that everything we are told is inaccurate or not useful, but to accept it without question is the very antithesis of democracy. 

Democracy requires a mind that is awake, that is able to question and to seek out all the evidence, that is energized by debate about information and policy.  It requires a soul that believes in itself and is self-reliant and innovative.  

The mental slumber in which the unquestioned mandates place us is the enemy of democracy, of free and fulfilling lives, of the true happiness and health that comes from being in charge of your own soul.

So, yes, COVID-19 is dangerous and even deadly for some.   For others it is less so.   We are human.  We can think.  We can understand the facts and evidence if it is fully provided to us.  We can take the precautions necessary for who we each are and can do what is necessary to help protect our neighbors. 

We do not need mandates that that are filled with holes like a slice of Swiss cheese.  We have minds and it is time that we started to use them, because if not, the “cure” for COVID-19 will be the death of us all.

 

 

The Silence is Deafening

 Actually, the silence has been deafening for the last 4 years, and perhaps the 8 before that.  So to what silence am I referring?  The silence of truth and the failure to acknowledge hypocrisy.  And the silence of those who have been intimidated and are afraid to speak. 

Let’s start with today and work backwards.  Actually, let’s start with Biden’s call for Unity.

When Biden called for Unity, nearly every MSM publication had an identical headline:  Time to Heal.  (That the headlines were so identical suggests that the press is not as independent as it may claim). 

Just days after that headline, a large group of Trump supporters marched peacefully in DC for honest and fair elections. 

There is no question that the march was peaceful.  But, as the march ended and evening descended, Leftist groups including Antifa and BLM (both supporters of Biden and Democrats) began violent attacks on those peaceful supporters, including elderly, families, and children.  Their stated purpose was to silence and cancel those holding views that are pro-Trump, pro-honest elections, pro-fact.

Did the MSM report this?  No.  Or when they did it was just something like: “Left and Right engaged in some conflict” or simply “The march was marred by conflict.”  Certainly no coordinated headlines as in Biden’s call for unity (or perhaps the coordination was simply not to report).  There was silence.

Did Biden condemn the violence propounded by his supporters?  No.  He ignored it completely.  Silence.   [Update: Late today a Biden spokesperson stated that "President-elect Biden continues to denounce all acts of violence" but did not name Antifa or BLM, the perpetrators of the violence against the marchers this past weekend. I do not see this as any sort of real condemnation of the divisive acts by the Left, but rather it continues the silence that is inconsistent with the call for unity.]

Did Biden’s voters who had told us they voted for him because he would bring civility and unite us say that this was not what they voted for?  No.  Silence.

This is not only the height of hypocrisy.  It tells me that in the minds of Biden and the Left that “Unity” means we all must hold our tongues and not speak if we disagree with them.  That is not America or the democracy or free speech that is our American Right.  This is an America without tolerance and where unapproved voices are silenced.

And it is not just the “unity” lie.  The hypocrisy is everywhere.  Before the election there was silence on Biden’s likely use of his office as VP to further his son’s financial benefits with Ukraine.  There was the ignoring of the charges of sexual harassment (quite a contrast to the way the Left treated the false charges against Justice Kavanaugh!).  There is the fact that Biden’s cancer foundation does virtually nothing with the money it raises except pay salaries to its employees.  All met with media silence.  Anyone who brought forth the actual evidence of these things was ostracized as some sort of nut.  Inconvenient facts – silenced.

But let’s look at the days post-election.  Besides the false unity appeal, we have seen several lies pass Joe Biden’s mouth, with no acknowledgement of that from his supporters who have been eager not only to point out every actual misstatement by the President, but even to make up many more.

Joe Biden told us during the debates that he would not declare victory until the election results were certified.  He lied.  He promised a middle of the road, not far left-wing administration, but look at his appointments thus far and projected ones – many far left, proponents of socialism, etc.  He lied.  Those who try to raise these and other lies are silenced; the press does not report them.  Silence.

But Biden is not alone in his lies.  He has the media at his back.  How many times has the media, in reporting that Donald Trump has failed to concede, told us there is no evidence of fraud.  Yet there are hundreds of pages of affidavits from poll workers, along with piles of credible evidence suggesting there are also piles of illegal votes that were counted.  That is not reported.  Silence.

No, the result of this election, declared by the media (who now seems to be running the country), is unlikely to change.  But that does not mean we should turn a blind eye to fraud, silence even the suggestion that it occurred, and silence any attempt to investigate so that it does not again occur.

In an essay, the whole of which is well worth reading, Caroline Glick states:

“If we learned nothing else from the election campaign and its aftermath, we learned American democracy is in crisis.

The media is the first force responsible for this crisis. For the past four years, all major U.S. television networks and national newspapers have dedicated themselves not to reporting news, but to defining the boundaries of acceptable public discourse. Big Tech firms—Facebook, Google and Twitter, in particular, having amassed powers the KGB could only have dreamed of—serve as the enforcers of those boundaries.”             

Entire article can be found here LINK 

I come back to my previous blog about the Nice vote.  The media convinced many that Biden would bring us nice – civil discourse in which we would all get along.  They believed the media propaganda that they could trust Joe and he would simply wave his magic wand and we would all get along.  They voted for that in their naïve belief that the job of a president is creating national civility rather than the actual domestic and foreign duties of a president.  No one corrected their misperceptions.  Silence.

But, regardless of what those nice voters thought, what this weekend march and Leftest violence shows us is that in the minds of the left and its handmaiden media, getting along simply means allowing only one voice. That is the worst kind of silence.

The nice voters and the naïve voters failed by blindly trusting the media.  Ms. Glick also writes:

“Nearly all the stories about Trump and his supporters have been negative for the past four years. Consequently, while most Americans never heard that Trump conceived and implemented an entirely new foreign policy doctrine that has met more success than any adopted since the end of the Cold War, all Americans know that the media expect them to believe Trump is a racist. They know that the media expect right-thinking Americans to hate Trump and his supporters, and admire his opponents, from Nancy Pelosi to Black Lives Matter (BLM).”

I would add to this that nearly all the stories about President Obama were positive and we see the same approach being taken toward Biden.  The press does not report the negative, and actually, most of the positive is not hard-hitting journalism, but fluff – for example, what pets Joe will bring to the White House – fluff about fluff.  Silence on real facts of real substance.

Yet too many have been silenced into thinking that if they do not hold the voice that the media instructs there is something wrong with them.  They are afraid to speak out, to even think or question what the media, the voice of the Left, tells them.  They are silenced, and the silence is indeed deafening. 

But more than deafening, is the sad truth that without critical thought and questioning, without voicing or hearing opposing viewpoints, eventually those viewpoints cease to exist.  With the silencing if different voices comes the destruction of the individual mind.  Tolerance of opposing views, what used to be referred to as the Loyal Opposition, is an essential piece of democracy.  Yet the Left is doing its best to silence that, and Biden seems inclined to just stand by and let them.

I turn again to Caroline Glick (and again I encourage everyone to read her entire article):

“The consequences of this media and Big Tech tyranny are disastrous for the health of American democracy. Americans know they are expected to act like the citizens of the totalitarian regime in the Soviet Union. The media will tell them what they can say, and social media will enforce the media's dictates.  And like the denizens of the USSR, Americans haven't stopped thinking as a result of this tyranny. They have just stopped telling people what they think. 

“The media's abandonment of journalism and their hatred of half of American society, as well as the Democrats' embrace of a totalitarian theory of race and American secular sin as an organizing principle, are unmooring America from its democratic, pluralistic anchors. American society is moving into a post-democratic reality. And if action isn't taken to restore those anchors, American society as a whole will suffer.”

I actually fear it may be worse – I fear that too many Americans have indeed just stopped thinking.  They seem to find it easier to just accept.  Do as told, think as told, say as told.  Just shuffle along without any brain and ultimately without any soul. 

Americans, all Americans, need to think if this is where they really want to go.  If not, they need to once again not only start thinking, but start questioning.  And most importantly, they need to start speaking. 

The fear of speaking may be great – you may lose friends, you may be outcast, you may be laughed at, you may even be attacked.  But anyone who wishes to enjoy the many benefits of such traditional American things as freedom of thought and speech and assembly and religion, who believes that tolerance of alternate views, even those with which one strongly disagrees, is a good thing and a healthy thing for democracy, those people need to speak out.

The silence needs to end – that is the action that is necessary to restore the anchors of our American democracy.  From Joe Biden who promised us something different and who refuses to speak out for tolerance and truth, and from the voters who voted for civility but are now being betrayed not only by breaches of campaign promises, but by acceptance of violence against opposition speech.  

But the silence from those who are still thinking and questioning but are not speaking, that is the most dangerous silence of all.  No one should tolerate their voice being silenced.  Rather than silence, we need to hear the cacophony of the many individual and diverse views that exist in America.