I have not written here for some time for two main
reasons. One, I personally have been
quite busy, and second and more decisive was that there is just little new to
say. The Democrats are the same angry haters
obsessed with removing Trump from office.
Socialism is still socialism. Trump
is still using crude language but doing great things for the people of this
country – jobs, economy, international relations, etc. etc. So, having addressed all of this previously,
it seemed redundant to rewrite.
But, now that the Democrats have seemingly chosen the instrument
that they will use to attempt a win in November, and now that we have the
Senate Democrat leader threatening Supreme Court justices, I do have a few
thoughts which follow.
First, about Joe Biden.
I think it is clear to just about everyone that Joe seems to be in the
early stages of dementia. Whether or not
you like or support Joe, that is sad.
But more importantly, it is frightening to consider that he could be the
candidate for and could even be elected as president. Anyone with any thought must be able to see
the danger in that.
So, that is why I wonder why his wife stands by and supports
him. We saw her protect him by attacking
a protester recently, but is she really protecting him when she encourages his
continued run for an office it seems clear that his mind in its present state
cannot handle? Is she protecting him
when she is helping him to be used by the Democrats who don’t really care about
Joe, but only see him as a useful tool to possibly regain their power?
I don’t understand this.
But then, I don’t understand how a whole party could care more about
their own power than the country. I
suspect that if the Democrats successfully use Joe to regain power, they will
quickly cast him aside, so if he does get the nomination, the one voters should
be scrutinizing is not Joe, but his pick for Vice President.
But what really puzzles me is the wife. Democrats are always saying that Republican
women can’t think for themselves, but I look at Joe’s wife and I wonder what on
earth she is thinking, or if she is even thinking. Would anyone help to put someone who so
obviously seemingly suffers from some sort of dementia into the powerful
position of President of the United States of America? Can she really be that selfish? Or, is she, like all good Democrats, just
falling in line and doing what she is told, even when in the long run it is more
likely to hurt her husband or at least make him some sort of laughing stock,
while at the same time working to create a situation that endangers the entire
country.
If someone whose mind is not 100% is given the chance to
make world and life changing decisions that can affect us all, then we are all in
danger. Joe’s wife, Dr. Biden (Ed.D.)
must understand that. I know that if I were in her situation and my
husband were showing signs of early dementia, regardless of party demands or
personal love of power, I would do everything I could to talk him out of running.
Joe is a lovable character.
His gaffes are humorous. Now. There are many types of dementia, some progress
quickly, others slowly. But no matter
how much you love someone, or how much you hate the current white house
occupant, absolutely no one should be even considering replacing that current
occupant with someone whose mental state is questionable.
But, then, when your only campaign policy is to beat Trump, I
guess such things as the good of the country really are not relevant.
***
Turning now to Senator Schumer’s recent threats toward Supreme
Court Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, this also is something about which every
American should be outraged. His words,
while arguably hyperbolic, were clear threats intended to intimidate those
justices to rule a particular way in an upcoming case.
That is nothing like giving an opinion about a case that has
been decided or about comments made by a justice in a decided case or on other
matters not before the court. Yet, in its
biased propaganda wisdom, the mainstream media considers such comments by Trump
to be completely analogous to the threats of Schumer. They are not.
Schumer said: “I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell
you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price.
You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.” These words were spoken at an abortion rights
protest in front of the Supreme Court while the court has a pending abortion
case before it. It is a threat to the justices,
an attempt to cause them to rule pro-abortion in the pending case. Schumer,
despite his attempted retractions, knew exactly what he was saying and what he
was doing.
Schumer’s threat is nothing like the statements by Trump in
which he, in his typical straight and common verbiage (not refined politi-speak)
criticizes decisions he does not like.
This is something that every president tends to do – give opinions about
decisions that have been rendered. That
is very different from threatening a judge to decide a particular way in a
pending case “or else.”
Even Trump’s most recent statements about Justices Sotomayor
and Ginsburg were not threats to their decision making in a pending case. He said he thought they have been unfair to
him in the past and that they should recuse themselves from future cases
involving him. These are his opinions;
there is no pending case involved and there is no threat that if they do not
decide his way in a pending case that they will “pay the price.”
Trump’s words express his unfavorable opinions about justices
and their past decisions. Schumer’s
words are a clear attempt to intimidate and influence the decision in a current
case pending before those justices whom he threatened. In this country we are allowed to express our
opinions. We do not, however, threaten
judges to decide a pending case in a particular way. To do so can be a felony or other crime. This is because in this country we expect
impartial justice.
It is dangerous when Americans, especially American leaders
and politicians, believe they can intimidate the Supreme Court and force it to
make decisions political rather than render unbiased, legal, and Constitutional
decisions. Dictators, socialists, other
authoritarian regimes may tell their judiciary how to decide a case, but we do
not do that in this country. But,
perhaps the Left, in its quest to upend our democracy and establish their own
absolute power, have forgotten that.
***
And, finally, one quick comment about another Democrat
primary contender – Elizabeth Warren. Her
inability to endorse Sanders, whose policies mirror those that she advocated during
her campaign, just underscores what we have known since long before this
campaign cycle: that she is a total
fraud. For her, there is only one interest,
and that is herself. She used a false
Native American narrative to further her career and her power; she used big
money, then trashed it when it better served her campaign to do so; and,
apparently she used a progressive/socialist agenda to try to further her
presidential chances, but there is no evidence that she really believed in or
cared about what she was saying. She is
a woman after her own power and nothing else.
I assume she will work to get the best deal she can for herself before
she comes forward with an endorsement which could be for Bernie or for Joe; she
really doesn’t care as long as it is good for her. Remember that next time she runs.
No comments:
Post a Comment