Time to Stand Up, Pick Your Side, and Speak Up

It is becoming fully apparent that the Democrats won’t rest until they have not only destroyed President Trump but have completely torn the Country apart as well.

We know why they have this need to destroy the President:  First, he won the election which they were “supposed to” win in 2016.  Now they are concerned that with his many promises kept, the booming economy, improved standing in the world, etc., that they will not be able to beat him in 2020, so they must destroy him one way or another before then.  And, of course, they just don’t like him – he is not like them, he is real, he says what he thinks, rather than play political games he’d rather just get things done.  His successes prove how ineffective the Democrats have been and how little they really care about the American people and their country.

So, the Democrats are willing to tear the country apart, destroy it perhaps beyond repair, just to regain their power and finish off the man whom they irrationally hate.

They are already well on their way to success.  The most obvious display of their irrationality is in their continuing obsession with the Mueller report.  They refuse to give up on their debunked Russia collusion story.  They defy well established law as they hold the Attorney General in contempt for following laws that prohibit the release of confidential grand jury testimony.   They would hold hearings after hearings after hearings for no legitimate purpose while the real business of the country, the business they were elected to attend to, goes unattended and ignored.

But there is more.  They have put the Constitution itself under attack.  They find several ways to silence those whose views do not agree with their own.  Conservative speakers are often excluded from a variety of events; those who support the President are shamed and attacked, both verbally and physically; those who serve the president are the subject of not only verbal and sometimes physical assault, but also of every possible legal assault as well.  Lawsuit upon lawsuit upon lawsuit is filed for any action with which the Democrats do not concur – no matter that it reflects the will of the people, thus slowing down action after action that would benefit this Country and its people.  Political correctness silences views and opinions that are not those which the Democrats approve – no matter that those opinions or observations may be necessary to have a full and objective discussion of an issue. 

Like little angry children who can’t accept compromise, the Democrats in essence keep yelling “It’s my way or the highway!”  They cannot accept the will of the people when it isn’t what they want.  This is not what our Constitution envisions; it is not the way our Democratic Republic works!

Democrats are trying to change the way our president is elected.  The loss of the electoral college would put far more power in the Democratic strongholds – large cities and liberal coastal states – leaving those in fly-over country with no real reason to even cast a vote. 

Their lack of understanding of the Constitution is startling at times.  Nancy Pelosi recently stated that Congress is the “superior branch” of government when she should know that all 3 branches are equal.  Democrats, in their goal to eliminate guns, compare them to cars which are licensed, ignoring the fact that while there is a Constitutional right to bear arms, there is no constitutional right to own or drive a car. 

Democrats have lost respect for the protections that our Constitution provides against unreasonable search and seizure.  They disregard such concepts as “innocent until proven guilty.”  Rather, if they approve a narrative that proclaims someone guilty, they will ignore any and all evidence to the contrary.  The Constitution strives to treat all citizens equally; the Democrats would divide us based on a variety of identity characteristics as they pick favorites and those whom they condemn in their continuing games of identity politics.

In the same vein, the Democrats have forgotten that the Constitution protects our right to hold our own beliefs and be free to exercise them.  We hear anti-Christian and anti-Semetic sentiments, as well as anti-white and anti-other disfavored identity groups daily from the mouths of Democrats who should know better.  And, they further seek to rewrite history, eliminating what they don’t like, eliminating unpleasant aspects that we may not be proud of but from which we learned and evolved.  That is, they would eliminate part of what in the end makes us great.  And, what they do not seek to eliminate, they would rewrite to serve their own ends.

I do not mean to imply that Constitutional rights cannot be limited; they can when there is a compelling need to do so, but such restrictions are as narrow as possible.  The Constitution is the core of our Country.  It gives us our representative form of Democracy which allows every citizen to have a voice and in so doing protects us from mob rule of a pure Democracy or State control by a Socialist or Communistic structure.  The Democrats seemingly do not want us to have that protection. 

The Democrats are not going to give up in this war that they are waging on the President, our Country, and our way of life.  No one can stand on the side any longer.

I am reminded of the words of Pastor Niemoller, regarding his failure to speak up in Nazi Germany.  Beginning with the Jews he lists several groups that were subsequently and incremental purged, group after group. After stating each group, he confesses he did not speak up because he was not one of them.  The statement ends with the words “Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.”

We are all in the shoes of Pastor Niemoller in the face of the Democrats.  Don’t let their double-speak and projections of their behavior onto that of their enemy fool you.  It is not Donald Trump or the Republicans who would destroy the Constitution and our Country; it is the Democrats who are doing so even as I write, and you read this.

A time comes when one must choose sides.  If not now, that time is fast approaching.  In choosing one must not be swayed by what is popular or pretty or immediately gratifying.  One must truly understand with whom they are choosing to stand and what their victory would mean, not just in the short term, but in the long view of the individual, our Constitution, our Country, and our way of life.

This is serious business.  And it demands a serious review of who we are and what our Nation stands for, and what will be lost if we do not stop the Democrats’ march to destroy it all.  The Democrats would prefer that no one take notice, that like blind sheep we ignore the wolf they have become in our midst.  Those who choose to do that, to simply sit back and assume all will be fine, must consider that when they have lost all that was, there will be no one left to speak for them.

Purging “Enemies of the Party” with Accusation Alone

In Communist Russia under Stalin, people were sent to the Gulag on accusation alone.  If there was a trial, is was a kangaroo court where the accused was already guilty.  This was the way that the country was purged of “enemies of the party.”  People's lives and the lives of their families were destroyed based on nothing more than a whispered accusation.

We like to think this wouldn’t happen here, that our country stands for freedom and justice.  A person is innocent until proven guilty.  Mere accusation alone is not enough; justice requires proof.  That justice, that freedom, is part of what our country stands for.

Or, so we thought.

This past week we have watched the destruction of a man’s life based on the accusation of one person alone.  No proof.  No evidence.  No innocence until proven guilty.  Brett Kavanaugh has been sent to the gulag of public hatred and his life, along with the life of his family, will never be the same.

To demand that a woman provide more than just an accusation – here one that is about something alleged to have happened 36 years ago – is not an attack on that woman.  It is simply a demand for the fairness and justice that our country demands. 

I don’t know if some incident happened or did not, but if it did, it apparently did not have enough impact to cause the “victim” to have any sort of contemporaneous reaction.   Aside from her word, there is apparently no evidence that the incident did indeed occur.  This may change now that we have a group of Democrat operatives hired who are putting out the call for something more, though new evidence suddenly appearing at this point should be suspect.  Essentially, we now have her word against his.  If we get more sudden memories on both sides it is still just their word against their word. 

In this country we require evidence.  We have rules.  We do not have lynch mobs.  Or at least we didn’t used to.   But what is the press and the Democrat behavior but that of a lynch mob out to destroy Judge Kavanaugh?  Of course, that destruction is part of a greater plan.  Just as Stalin and his right hand man Beria rounded up and destroyed all enemies of the party – anyone with any kind of dissenting viewpoint – so the Democrats are one by one trying to destroy anyone associated with Trump and his policies because those dissenting views are enemies of their party.

Does anyone really think that the Democrats care at all about Ms. Ford other than as her use as a weapon in their own fight for power?  Or that they really even care about the act of sexual abuse?  If they do, why are they not investigating their own darling Rep. Ellison for the far more substantiated allegations against him?  Why do Democrats including Feinstein and Hirono (both of whom are so “outraged” about Kavanaugh’s behavior of which they have already and without proof determined him guilty) take campaign funding from a fellow Democrat who admitted hitting his wife?  Why do the same Democrat lawyers and operatives who are working with Ms. Ford defend Al Franken and Bill Clinton for the again far more substantiated claims against them? 

This has nothing to do with MeToo or women’s rights or sexual abuse.  It has everything to do with the Democrats' unquenchable thirst for power.  And, more importantly, in taking a page from the playbook of Stalin and Beria, it is a direct assault upon our freedom and our system of government.

Today I thought that this circus would be on its way to being over.  But the farce continues.  Ms. Ford was given a deadline of 10 am this morning to indicate if she would testify, but that deadline has passed and yet, as of this writing,  “negotiations” continue. 

We have rules for a reason.  In the Senate they allow for an orderly process.  In the case of the Kavanaugh nomination, a hearing was scheduled, Kavanaugh was questioned, witnesses appeared, and the hearing closed.  The next step should have been a vote.  The ranking Democrat on the Committee, Diane Feinstein, had received the accusation from Kavanaugh’s accuser before the hearing began.  She still refuses to share the letter she received with the full committee, but apparently she had shared it with her Democrat colleagues because they asked questions that in hindsight were obviously intended to be able to catch him in a lie about the accusation.  Feinstein could have brought the accusation forward at the hearing so that the committee could consider it, possibly seek more information from the accuser.  She chose not to.  The hearing ended and then, as a vote was scheduled, she raised the issue.  Instead of saying "you had your chance, too late," the vote was canceled and a date was planned for the “victim” to testify or tell her story.  Then the accuser started making demands:  FBI investigations; security; who could question her and how; more time to meet with her Democrat handlers; more accusations of insensitivity against anyone who will not meet her demands.  Finally, she was given a deadline to simply state if she would appear or not.  She said she needed more time (for what?  She has a story, it’s not going to change, so either tell it or be quiet).  The delay goes on.  Justice does not.  The rules are forgotten as sympathy for the “victim” becomes the calling card and rule of the day. And we the people are being denied a vote on a highly qualified nominee.

We have processes for victims that protect both victim and accuser.  When someone is a victim, the proper place to seek recompense is in a court of law.  When someone seeks revenge, then one will avoid a court of law because the law seeks justice, not revenge.  This “victim” has had 36 years to seek justice.  But, justice would require that she actually prove that the person that she is accusing is guilty of the alleged crime.    I don’t know what this accuser’s motive is – revenge, power, attention, or something else.  It certainly is not justice.

Many courts have statutes of limitations on some types of claims, and there is a reason for that too.  People’s memories fade, evidence is lost, memories change or are generated.  Similarly, teenage crimes are treated differently than those of adults.  We know that the teen mind is not fully formed and so most juvenile crimes up to and including murder are tried in juvenile courts and, if convicted, the sentence is usually in a special juvenile facility with an end date of the sentence corresponding to the date the juvenile becomes and adult.  At that time the record is often expunged so that the individual can begin adulthood with a clean slate. 

Here we have something that allegedly happened at a teenage party 36 years ago.   There was allegedly alcohol involved.  A boy allegedly grabbed at or tried to kiss a girl.  She was allegedly frightened; perhaps he was going further than she had expected.  She ran away.  He did not pursue her.  Her story does not suggest rape or anything close to that.  This is just not a big deal, or at least not the big deal that the media is making it.  This happens at teen parties every weekend in America.   Should it?  Probably not.  But it is part of what goes on in the teen years as young people begin to discover who they are, what their values are, and how they incorporate those values into their lives and the lives of others.  It is called growing up. 

This accusation should not be permitted to ruin a man’s life.  Even if her fuzzy story were true, can any of us say that we did not have one less than honorable incident during our childhood or teen years?  Is this really the sort of thing that should keep an outstanding jurist from the Court?  If so then there is truly no one on this earth qualified for the position of Justice.

What we have here is the Democrat party using and blowing out of proportion a simple allegation of teen misbehavior.  I do not know what the accuser’s mental state is in regard to this alleged incident.  I do know that she had 36 years to seek justice or make a claim against Judge Kavanaugh in a venue that would have allowed him due process.  She has had 36 years to deal with whatever psychological traumas she believes stem from this alleged incident.    Did it happen?  I don’t know.  Does she believe it happened?  I don’t know.   Do the Democrats care?  I don’t think so.  Does the media care?  Only so far as it gives them a good story.

What is lost in all this?  Justice.  Our Country.  Our Democracy.  Our rule of law.  When we start convicting people in the kangaroo court of public opinion based on mere accusation alone we have lost the fairness, justice, and due process that make this country what it is.   

This nomination may actually be a watershed moment for all of us.  I hope that Kavanaugh will not be driven to withdraw (as I am sure the threats to him, his wife, and his family are intended to cause).  Anyone who cares about this country or justice should demand that this kangaroo court, this lynching by the Democrats and the media stop immediately.  If we do not, then are we any better than those who stood silently watching their fellow citizens be sent to the gulag on questionable accusation alone?

Silencing and Name-calling as Agents of Change

Favoring enforcement of the law, even when it calls for prosecution of illegal immigrants, does not make one racist.  In the past week I have been called that along with “anti-American,” “not human,” “a heartless devil,” “evil,” “un-caring,” “a Jew” (used in the pejorative – “even though I assume you are a Jew, you should still have some compassion”), “ignorant,” “selfish,” and “privileged.” I have been told my “exhausting and conformist” views (of following the law and our democratic process for its change) leave “zero room for change to help as many people as possible.”

No matter.  I stick to believing that in a country of laws, all laws must be enforced.  In this country we have a process for changing laws we do not like.  That process does not include name calling and other personal attacks.  It does, however, allow infinite room for change and has the ability to help enormous numbers, especially when the laws are equally and fully applied.

Yet, along with a prevalent misunderstanding or ignorance of our laws and Constitution, there is an even more dangerous attitude that is so prevalent that it is becoming a societal norm within this country.  That attitude is that it is OK to silence those with whom one disagrees; and, the preferred method of doing so is name calling and other personal attacks.  People who simply want to have a rational dialog or share information with others of varying views on an issue are shamed, silenced, and made to feel guilty about opposing views.

Even the American Civil Liberties Union (upon whose local board of directors I once sat) seems moving toward that norm.  That (previously) staunch defender of the First Amendment which includes the right of free speech, has now stated that "Our defense of speech may have a greater or lesser harmful impact on the equality and justice work to which we are also committed.”  The ACLU will no longer defend all speech, but will weigh it against other social justice issues.  Certainly, social justice issues are important, but so is the right of everyone in in this country to exercise their Constitutional right to free speech, even when that speech is unfavorable to many.

The danger of this, of allowing free speech only when one’s views are acceptable, is that it gives enormous power to those deciding exactly what is acceptable as well as whom can be silenced.  Such a model is one of dictatorship where, eventually, the people have no voice at all.  The founders of our democratic republic, in contrast, stated that free people need a free marketplace of ideas.

Governments that place all power in one individual can be kind and benevolent, but they can also be cruel and inhumane.  In current and recent history alone, we can see examples of countries where the people have no voice and their only recourse is to violently rise up against their leaders until the protestors are either fully silenced, even to the point of death, or until some form of coup is successful.

Thankfully, in this country we the people have a voice that we can exercise productively and peacefully to bring about change.  I realize that some anti-Trump propaganda would have us believe that he is some form of dictator, but that is just not the case.  He may or may not want to be king (I personally doubt it), but he currently does not have that power and our system of government does not allow it.  Only when we fail to follow that system does it make the idea of kingship more possible.

Demanding that we follow our laws and follow our Constitutional process for changing unacceptable, outdated, or otherwise offensive laws does not mean that one is racist, evil, or the Devil.  More importantly, name-calling is not an effective agent of change, and the possible consequences of using it as such are more in line with 1984 than a government that cares about its people.   

A desire to follow the process to change a law does not necessarily reflect lack of compassion for those affected by the law.  Rather, it reflects a true belief in America and all that it stands for, including a government of, for, and by the people, a country where diverse views and opinions are welcome and can be discussed rationally, a country where we listen to and have tolerance for the opinions and views of others, even when those views are not ours.