And So It Continues – (in circles?)

It was exactly 4 years ago tomorrow that I began this blog.  Donald Trump had just been inaugurated and the Democrats and the Left were exceedingly angry.  The ability to have civil conversations was already falling apart and this seemed a good place to present my viewpoint without the childish games of Facebook and other social media.  (see my first post HERE)  

So, today I want to look both back and forward. 

As part of my introductory post 4 years ago, I wrote:

I am not an ideologue.  I do not belong to any political party and am happy to vote for Democrats, Republicans, or others depending on whom I believe will be best for the country as a whole.  My political leanings probably identify most with what were once called the “blue-collar lunch bucket Democrats” – a group that really doesn’t exist anymore.  In the 60s I was a self-styled “hippie” and antiwar protester.  I put myself through college and law school and practiced law before becoming a professor.  I have always been deeply committed to the Constitution and to the equal treatment of all along with the concept of individual responsibility and a “no excuses” approach to life.  I have always believed in America.  I have voted in every election since I became eligible, and as to presidential elections, I have voted for slightly more Democrats than Republicans.  In 2016 I voted for Donald Trump.  I do not think he is a perfect person, nor do I agree with all his policies, but I do believe that he was not only the best candidate but indeed a good candidate who believes in America and its promise.  I also believe that now that he is president, if we will allow him to govern and put our interests in what is best for the country as a whole, that we really will see a better and stronger America.  I hope to explain my reasons behind these statements in upcoming posts.

               Looking Back

What I said 4 years ago holds true today.  Yet in that 4 years the country has been through a lot.  The liberal Democrat party has become extreme progressive Left.  The Democrats never were able to accept Donald Trump as president and instead tried to block his every action whether good for the country or not.  Unable to get over their anger they allowed it to evolve into an intense, vitriolic, and irrational hatred for not only Donald Trump, but anyone connected with him including those who simply voted for him. 

Meanwhile, despite being under attack 24/7 by not only the Left but its handmaiden the media as well, President Trump indeed accomplished a lot for America.  Some of his accomplishments furthered policies that the Democrats opposed, but others did for America what Democrats themselves had been promising for years but unable to deliver. 

Most important to me was that he tried to counter the identity politics that for the previous at least 8 years had been used by the Left to tear this country apart.  Instead of identifying Americans as members of this or that victim or oppressor group, he simply furthered policies that treated all Americans the same – in the spirit of our Constitutional belief and aspiration that we all are equal.  And, despite some programs being identity blind, those whom the Democrats regularly identify as victim groups actually benefited the most – take for example jobs and the economy and the effect it had on the Black community, or Trump’s prison and criminal justice reforms.

The implementation of many of the Trump policies led Americans to once again have hope and a belief in the promise of this country.  For years prior to his election we had been led to believe that America was not a good country and it was our duty to feel guilty and apologize, both to those within our country who had been convinced they were victims with no hope as well as to the rest of the world.  President Trump put his and our country first and allowed Americans to be proud of who and what they are.

               Yet the Hatred – when and how did it begin?

Yet, along with the many positives that were accomplished by the Trump administration (but seldom reported by media), the anger level of the country reached the red zone.  This anger is expressing itself daily as pure hatred.  Many assert that it is traceable to the election of Donald Trump.  I disagree.

I saw hate grow for at least the 8 years prior to Trump’s presidency.  During that time we had a president and a progressive party who played group against group in an attempt to further their own power agenda. 

To grasp at an understanding of “why?” we must go back far more than 4 years, probably to the founding of this country or before.  Books could be (and have been) written.  There are many events and examples that have contributed to various degrees of anger and its cohorts fear and hatred. 

Let’s consider slavery as an example.  When the world came to realize that slavery was wrong, it ended it in a variety of ways.  In America, with no class or caste system, it was actually possible for former slaves and their descendants to rise to positions of wealth and power; some did.

But not all with a history of slavery did well.  There remained discrimination which came to a head in the 50s and early 60s.  While some Blacks had found a way to be successful before Civil Rights, the legislation of the 60s gave hope to all that they would truly have a better life.  And most were motivated to do the work necessary to personally succeed as they chose.

But, enter a series of programs, sparked at least in part by a desire to help but also, I believe, by a more sinister and racist belief that Blacks were/are not capable of succeeding on their own.  This, of course, completely contradicts the American belief/ideal that all humans are equal.   Nonetheless, a series of social programs, mostly created by the Left, created a dependent underclass of dissatisfied Americans.

Never ones to let discontent go to waste, the Left reminded those dissatisfied of their victim class.  We saw identity groups develop into battling warriors of us versus them.  The victims vs. the victimizers.  Blacks vs. Whites; Poor vs. Rich; Women vs. Men; Gay vs. Straight.  Intersectionality developed, giving us a framework for understanding how aspects of a person's social and political identities combine to create different modes of discrimination and privilege.  It became all about that – discriminated victim or privileged oppressor – rather than about the individual and that individual’s substantive character.  Individual substance has no place in a world governed by identity politics.

The anger of the oppressed was cultivated.  Those assigned the oppressor status felt unjustly accused and began to hate back.  And that is where we were when Donald Trump became President Trump.  And, despite his hope to see all of America thrive as one, he was thwarted repeatedly by the Left who ramped up their fomentation of hate among their malicious identity group creations. 

As President Trump’s 4 years progressed, the Left seemed completely unable to see people as people; rather, they were simply representatives of a particular identity group.  Conservatives and whites were deemed evil and essentially inhuman, thus not only justifying, but necessitating hatred and violence toward them.  Meanwhile, every member of designated victim identity groups was to be honored and always believed: almost superhumans capable of no wrong.

               The Election and January 6

The election had irregularities.  Many believe there was widespread fraud.  This came to a head on Jan. 6, the date the votes of the Electors were counted.  As was their right, some Congress people planned to object to those votes.  As was their right many Americans gathered near the Capitol to protest the counting and to support the objections.  As was his right, the President spoke to his supporters.  And as often happens when there are actions and protests that are highly charged, a small percentage of those present turned violent; those few misguided individuals illegally stormed the Capital.

What is now called the “insurrection” by the media and Democrats has given the Left an excuse to continue to promulgate their hatred against not only President Trump but anyone who does not fall into lockstep with the Left’s positions.  We now see calls to “cleanse” the Republican Party, blacklisting of Trump supporters, silencing and cancelling of all opposing views, and a general litany of threats toward anyone who is not on board with Leftist policies, all under the guise of “healing.”

It also gave us a militarized capital that looked more like what one sees when a dictator (always in fear of being unseated) takes over.  These were troops that the Democrats demanded be vetted as not anti-Biden before they could take their posts.  This look of a police state is something that America should never become desensitized to.

               Looking ahead to the Biden presidency (or is it looking back?)

So here we are.  We have just experienced the inauguration of a new president.  What are my thoughts now?

I fear that we are actually circling back to the era immediately preceding President Trump.  We see already President Biden’s litany of signing executive orders to cancel former President Trump’s accomplishments. 

We see a clear return, actually mandate, of identity politics as Biden proudly proclaims not the qualifications of his various appointees but their superficial identity instead: “We'll have a Cabinet of barrier breakers, a Cabinet of firsts” he said.   And so we will have the first woman of color VP, first transgender person as Assistant Secretary of Health, first Native American Secretary of Interior, first openly gay Secretary of Transportation, First Black Defense Secretary, first Latino to head Department of Homeland Security, first woman of color to head Office of Management and Budget, first woman Director of National Intelligence.  The list goes on and on.  (Those appointments that are not “firsts” seem to be mostly retreads from the Obama years.)

I have nothing against people of diverse backgrounds, ethnicities, and beliefs holding these positions; in fact, such diversity is generally a good thing.  But what I object to is the bias inherent in picking individuals specifically for those qualities.  Such bias by necessity excludes a number of qualified individuals from even being considered.  It is racist, sexist, and otherwise discriminatory.  That is not American where a core principle is equal opportunity for all, not just for members of specific identity groups.

This dividing of Americans into groups also counters President Biden’s words calling for “unity.”  Group identity does nothing but divide us.   It is becoming more and more clear that the “unity” that the President and his party are calling for is simply a silencing of all opposing views.  Without any dissent we may have the illusion of peace and unity, but we will have lost America. 

A unity born of silencing also requires elevating narrative over truth.  We saw during the campaign that candidate Biden had no qualms about repeating by then disproven allegations against President Trump.  We see the same disregard for the truth in the first presentation of President Biden’s press secretary.  Jen Psaki vowed to “combat misinformation” while during the same press conference proclaiming that Biden had issued an executive order ending Trump’s “Muslim ban.”  That misnomer was proven false at the time the ban was issued and again last year when Biden used it on the campaign trail.   (What Democrats call a “Muslim ban” was an executive order issued on January 27, 2017, that barred tourism and immigration from seven countries previously identified by the Obama-Biden administration as being particularly vulnerable to terrorism, partly because their internal record-keeping was substandard. These seven nations happened to be Muslim-majority countries, but there was no blanket ban on Muslims from other Middle Eastern countries or the two largest Muslim countries, India and Indonesia.)

The Press Secretary also made it clear that hypocrisy is alive and well in the Biden administration.  She informed us that it was perfectly OK that President Biden violated his own mask mandate because he has “bigger issues to worry about.”  Apparently, the American people are not one of those issues.

So, without a respect for facts, without a respect for all Americans or a belief in the equality of all, without a true respect for America and its citizens, I am concerned when I look at what the next 4 years may bring.  In many respects it is not forward, but a circling back to the often anti-American policies of the Obama years. 

The Biden Administration will not give us the utopia that many dreamed.  I believe that it will, however, give me much to write about as this blog continues.

 

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. 

 

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.

 

The Contrast Could Not Be Starker

Freedom, prosperity, hope vs. control, despair, hopelessness.  If you paid any attention to the two conventions, that contrast should be perfectly clear to you. 

How do you see America?  If it is a beacon of hope, a place of freedom and prosperity, a place where every person has the right to choose how to lead their life, can work for what they value and hope for, then you are a Republican. 

If you see America as inherently evil, a place where you have no hope unless you turn over to the government all your freedom and all your ability to choose what your life will be.  If you believe it is those in power who should have the right to control you, then you are a Democrat.

You might be thinking that both sides promise us a better America. Perhaps.  But go beyond the promises.

Let’s start with who it is that keeps promises.  Donald J. Trump has kept every campaign promise he has made.  This very well may be a first.  It is certainly a first in my lifetime.  And it is certainly in contrast to the record of Joe Biden.  For over 40 years he has made promises to a variety of groups – farmers, small businesses, minorities, school children, etc. –  promises to improve some aspect of their lives, and then has turned around and taken actions that do just the opposite; actions that are far more likely to help him and his family rather than those to whom he made promises.   

As the VP candidate, in conjunction with Mr. Obama, Biden promised us hope and change, but all that administration did was pour fuel on every spark of discontent that they could find as they created divisiveness and despair.  This was not unintentional.

Trump does not have the silver tongue of career politicians, but what he does have is the inclination to simply tell it like it is.  No sweet talk, no fancy words that say nothing.  He tweets.  Sometimes those tweets are hard to take, but they are honest and real.  And when he tells us he is going to do something, he does it. 

His actions are not divided by victim-hood or other identity groups.  All of his actions are for all of the American people.  You may not agree with his policies, but his policies, unlike those of the Democrats, are not divisive.  Indeed, the Democrat policies, like those of socialists before them, are intended to divide us and make us ripe for the destruction of America as we know it that the Democrats seem to be seeking.

These are not the Democrats of old.  Once upon a time both Democrats and Republicans loved America.  They may have had different ideas of how to improve it, but with their common goal they were able to work together.   Perhaps old Joe was once one of them, but he is no longer or if he is he has lost his control to the progressive Left.

Today’s Democrats do not love America.  They believe that America and its ideals are fundamentally flawed.  Their goal is not to improve America but to completely dismantle it – tear it down and start over.  But if you listen carefully you will learn the sort of place that they will build instead.  One in which they, not you will control your life.  They will decide what you can say, what health care you will receive, how much you can make, what God, if any, you can worship, what medicines you must or cannot put into your body, what you must read, what you must learn and where you must learn it, and how much of what you earned you must give to others who may have done nothing to deserve it.  They will dismantle the concept of citizenship and country as they open borders and provide benefits that once belonged only to citizens to every person in the country. 

The Democrats don’t come out and say these things directly.  To listen to them, if they are elected we will all be sitting happily singing Kumbaya while everyone’s life is one of bliss.  But look beneath the pretty words, ask how that hoped for idyllic vision will be achieved.  It is not so pretty and it looks a heck of a lot like the failed socialist dreams that have caused enormous suffering around the globe.

Let’s take a minute to look at our Constitutional freedoms.  We know that the Democrats would delete the Second Amendment in a second if they could and will erode it in every way possible until it is effectively non-existent.  (For example, my city’s Democrat mayor has declared all city parks and civic plaza to be “school zones”, hence banning all guns from these places.  Overreaches such as this will become more and more common until there will be no guns permitted.)

But what about the First Amendment.  We have already lost much of its guaranteed freedoms to the Democrat agenda and its “cancel culture.”  Those who speak words that they do not approve of are assaulted verbally on social media and in person, are sometimes assaulted physically (witness the actions of the Left outside the President’s speech last night in DC.  Look at the videos – it was not a “peaceful protest” but a violent mob that not only attacked police, but also those who had attended the speech.  Sen. Rand Paul, his wife, and others with him were clearly in fear for their very lives).  People more and more frequently lose their jobs if they make a statement of which the Left does not approve. 

These attacks have already silenced many who keep their mouths shut rather than face the Left mob.  But it is not just speech.  It is the other topics of the First Amendment as well.  Religion is under attack, especially Christianity whose views on family, marriage, etc. do not comport with those of the Left.  The free press of the First Amendment is long gone; it is little more than a propaganda machine for the Left.  Those seeking facts will not find them in the media; rather they will find the Left’s narrative.  And peaceable assembly has likewise lost all meaning.  Violent riots, if they support the Left and its causes, are labeled as peaceful protests, whereas a peaceful right-leaning protest will be silenced by the Left.

This is just the beginning.  The Left is stirring up trouble, but it is not good trouble.  It is a pull out all the stops effort to keep President Trump from being re-elected.   And if the Democrats are elected they will be chomping at the bit to begin their total dismantling of America and they clearly have no hesitation to use violence to do so (and let’s not forget that good socialists believe that the overturn of the current regime should always be violent).

Back to the conventions.  The Democrat convention was nothing more than 4 days of hate directed at Trump and his supporters, with the occasional assurance that the Democrats would take care of us (read that as they would take our freedoms and they, not we, would control us).

The Republican convention, rather than a dystopian nightmare, presented a positive and hopeful picture of America.  Each night's theme portrayed a different and upbeat aspect of America.  Land of Promise moved us by showing us the great promise that America has always held for the rest of the world and how the promise continues as we work to ever move the country forward to meet all of its aspirations – something that cannot be done without its core freedoms.

The second night showed us the Land of Opportunity.  Individually perhaps not exciting stories, but these were not the speeches of career politicians.  These were the stores of common people – of real Americans.  The third night was labeled the Land of Heroes.  But these were not for the most part famous names – rather, they were again the everyday heroes.  These are the true Americans, the heroes that the freedoms of this country allow each and everyone of us to be.

The fourth night, the Land of Greatness, was indeed a celebration of this great land.  It also laid out the stark contrasts between the Democrats/Mr. Biden and the Republicans/President Trump.  But it wasn’t just in the people speaking at the conventions that we heard such contrasts.  We heard them on the streets and read them on social media.

During the Democrat convention, Republicans did take to airways to respond to points made by the Democrats.  This is expected.  But the Democrats, in full Leftest form, did more than that.  They took to social media to make hateful attacks on every Republican speaker.  These were not attacks on the substance of speeches, they were personal, ugly lies turned into hateful attack.  A tweet after Melania Trump’s speech ridiculed her for being an illegal alien (not true, she is a citizen) and being unable to speak English (because of her native accent).  Black speakers were essentially called nothing more than tokens (because if you listen to Democrats, Blacks cannot think for themselves), other speakers were told they sold out or were using their personal and moving stories for political gain.  Even the sweet story of President Trump’s 3-year-old grandson making a Lego White House for him was met with hate and ridicule.  It was labeled a lie, even though prior photos in the White House show the child with his grandfather and the Lego structure as well as the structure’s later resting place among other memorabilia in the oval office.

And, we have the demonstrations.  Outside the White House lawn where Trump gave his speech accepting the nomination, the Left did everything it could to disrupt the speech.  But that was not enough.  Afterwards they terrorized those leaving.  I certainly did not see such violent behavior or even such attempts to silence the Democrats during their convention.

Actions speak louder than words, but in this case we have both actions and words to guide us.  The Democrats words paint a world of hate and anger, an America that is evil and must be completely remade into something that we would not recognize.  The words superficially may sound pretty, but when one examines what is really being said it is not pretty at all.  Their actions show us the tactics that they will use to subdue and control us and to build the world that provides them the power that they seek – a power to completely control our lives.  If that is the America that you want then vote for the Democrats. 

If you want the imperfect America that gives you the freedom to be who you are, the freedom to improve both your life and the lives of others, the freedom to work for equality of opportunity for all, then listen to the words of the Republicans and look at the actual accomplishments of President Trump.  Those words and those actions do far more to create the idyllic world that the Democrats tout than anything than the Democrats have ever said or done.

Beyond 4 Days of Emptiness

Wow these people are full of hate! 

The Democratic convention is now over.  I’m not sure what they needed 4 days for.  Certainly not to tell us about their candidate or their platform.  Most speeches spent about 1% or less of their time talking about the Democrats and their plan.  The rest of the time was spent on Trump-bashing.

What this amounted to was a 4-day hate-fest.  About the only thing we learned was that Trump Derangement Syndrome is going nowhere and that the Democrats seem to have nothing in the way of platform – at least nothing that they are willing to honestly tell us about before the election.

The most informative piece of the convention was AOC’s one minute.  In that one minute she actually summarized for us the entire Democrat plan for the USA.  They could have just put that speech out and not wasted anymore time.

Here is the entire text of her speech (which was actually 1:24 minutes).  The underlining is mine, noting the points I will discuss in more detail below:

 Good evening and thank you to everyone here today endeavoring towards a better, more just future for our country and our world in fidelity and gratitude to a mass people’s movement, working to establish 21st century social, economic and human rights, including guaranteed healthcare, higher education, living wages and labor rights for all people in the United States. A movement striving to recognize and repair the wounds of racial injustice, colonization, misogyny and homophobia. And to propose and build re-imagined systems of immigration and foreign policy that turn away from the violence and xenophobia of our past. A movement that realizes the unsustainable brutality of an economy that rewards explosive inequalities of wealth for the few at the expense of longterm stability for the many, and who organized a historic grassroots campaign to reclaim our democracy. In a time when millions of people in the United States are looking for deep systemic solutions to our crises of mass evictions, unemployment and lack of healthcare, and out of a love for all people, I hear by second the nomination of Senator Bernard Sanders of Vermont for President of the United States of America.

This is a clear socialist agenda.  It snuck in as a second to the nomination of Bernie Sanders.  But it echos everything that we hear from every corner of the Democrat party.  Let’s look at it a little more closely.  The words sound lovely.  They create a vision of a beautiful place.  But let’s look at 5 key phrases and what they really mean. 

1.  “working to establish 21st century social, economic and human rights, including guaranteed healthcare, higher education, living wages and labor rights for all people in the United States.”

What this says is that the Democrat goal is that EVERY person living in the United States, (not just citizens) will look to the government to provide for them:  healthcare, higher education, a guaranteed wage, a job.  What it does not say is where the money for this will come from.  Certainly the current tax burden will not cover all this and so it would seem that one of two things are necessary to make this happen:  either taxes must be significantly increased or the benefits are not going to be as wonderful as they sound.  For example, what kind of healthcare will be provided?  Who will decide who gets what when there is not enough to go around?

2.   “striving to recognize and repair the wounds of racial injustice, colonization, misogyny and homophobia.”

These of course are the buzz words of the Democrats.  “Racial injustice” – they love to spout this phrase as justification for their identitarian politics that divide us into hateful and competing identity groups.  They urge one group to find their victimhood based on such things as “colonization, misogyny and homophobia.”  They then urge these victims to hate those whom they have labeled as the perpetrators of these evils and thus the ones responsible for the victimhood of those labeled as victims.  (This by the way is a classic socialist political technique.)  Their fine words do nothing to improve or heal America.  Instead they are specifically designed to tear us apart.

3.  “And to propose and build re-imagined systems of immigration and foreign policy” 

Again, fine words.  But what would that new and re-imagined system be?  For one, we know that the Democrats favor if not open borders then widely loosened immigration laws.   They are perfectly willing to accept illegal immigrants as legal equals to those who follow requirements and enter the country legally.  In their desire to remake America in a way that establishes their own power, they are willing to overlook the centuries of not just American but World history that demonstrates that a country requires borders if it is to be a country.  They don’t seem to be willing to consider the effect that unlimited immigration has on the economy and job market, not to mention crime and culture.  

In the same vein, they denounce our current foreign policy.  This is a policy that has brought us an historic middle east peace agreement, talks with countries such as North Korea which, until this president, was considered beyond any hope for reduced tension.  Current policy has revised old trade agreements to the benefit of our country and our citizens rather than to the benefit of foreign powers.  These and many other accomplishments of President Trump are apparently disdained by the Democrats and their hate.  They will likely return us to a policy that favors not our people but those who benefit the Democrats and their own power.

 4.  “A movement that realizes the unsustainable brutality of an economy that rewards explosive inequalities of wealth for the few at the expense of longterm stability for the many, and who organized a historic grassroots campaign to reclaim our democracy.”

What this says is that the Democrats are against capitalism.  Capitalism rewards one for one’s own work and accomplishments.  Because those are different for everyone, based in large part of the individual’s own desires and motivations, there will be inequalities in those rewards.  The Democrats would instead take those rewards from those who justly earned them and redistribute them so that everyone would receive the same. 

There are two problems with this:  first, it destroys incentive and as the motivation to work for a reward decreases so will the actual reward be less.  What this leads to is the second problem:  There will be less to redistribute.  While everyone in the Democrats’ ideal world may get the same, there is no definition or guarantee as to what that sameness will be.  Picture the bread lines in any socialist regime and you have an example of everyone getting their equal piece of what is left to go around.  Under capitalism, people work hard for what it is that they desire and they have the choice as to how hard they will work.  That choice is part of democracy, something that the Democrats seem to despise.

 5.  “deep systemic solutions to our crises of mass evictions, unemployment and lack of healthcare”

I am not sure that we have a crisis of mass evictions, unemployment, or healthcare, but if we did, the Democrats seem unable to tell us what their solutions are.  That is, what is their platform?  We know that they favor some form of universal government healthcare, but is that really a solution?  As noted above, how will they pay for it and what would it really provide?  As to unemployment, President Trump, prior to CoVid, gave us the best employment figures ever, especially for minorities and women.  Even with CoVid, we see the unemployment rates steadily going back down.  Yet the Democrats detest Trump and his policies which indeed were solutions that the Democrats have never been able to give us.  Similarly, evictions are not mass, though CoVid has caused problems.  But it is the President who has sought and to some extent succeeded in halting CoVid based evictions.  So, where is the need for a solution when one is already provided?

Not unlike their presidential candidate, the Democrats are empty when it comes to providing substance about their policies.  They talk a good game, they tell us how they have a “love for all people.”  But they do not show us that love.  Look at their policies.  How have inner city Blacks fared for the last 50 or so years under their leadership of victimhood identity?  Rather than raising people up, the Democrats, who think they know better than us, keep people down and dependent.  Why?  Because if we are dependent upon them, we will need to keep them in power. 

It is President Trump, not the Democrats, who has begun to empower people of all group identities to rise up and better themselves.  Women, Blacks, Hispanics, Poor, People of all Faiths or of none.  The equality that he envisions and that has begun to manifest itself under his administration is one of better, more equal opportunity for all.  It is not that which the Democrats envision:  dependent victims who must reap not their own rewards but those of others; a country in which wealth and other rewards are redistributed so that everyone has the same, and what that is will be decided not by the individual, but by those in power.

When AOC refers to deep systemic solutions, reimagined and rebuilt systems, she is stating the obvious plan if anyone listens to the Democrats:  Rebuilding America to their liking rather than as envisioned and as carried out for the last 244 years.  What no one should forget is that before you can rebuild, you must tear down what currently exists.  That is the Democrat plan.

I don’t know if Joe Biden understands the plan, but I am sure that his handlers and his chosen VP do.  I think the Democrats spent little time on their vision because they don’t want us to be fully aware of their plans.  Rather, they spend their time ginning up hate for the current President.  Someone who many find hard to like, but who, unlike the Democrats, is a man of action.  Unlike the Democrats who rarely keep campaign promises, President Trump keeps his.  President Trump’s words may not have the soothing sounds of the Democrats’ song of love for all, but unlike the Democrats whose words do nothing to heal or fix anything, Donald Trump is indeed getting things done, not for himself, but for this country and its citizenry.

I leave you with a list of President Trump’s accomplishments since taking office – not complete, but quite thorough.  Take a look, because the Democrats and their sycophant partner main stream media will never tell you any of this.  Consider it along with the Democrats’ 4 days of nothing but hate before you vote. 

Trump Accomplishments LINK   

 

 

 

 

 

Question Two

This is the second in a series of important questions that I hope everyone will consider before they cast their vote for President of the United States of America this fall.

How many institutions that are a regular part of your life are you willing to relinquish to a political agenda that may or may not be your own?

Here is a partial list of traditional institutions, both public and private, that are now, at least in part, serving a Leftist political agenda:

• Public K-12 Schools
• Institutions of Higher Learning
• Entertainment Industry
• Professional Sports
• Religious Doctrine
• Corporate Product Naming, Placement, Advertising
• Media
• The Arts
• Public Art
• Funding of Law Enforcement

Education has been leaning Left for several years now.  Indeed, the Marx-Lenin playbook points to education as the key to socialist indoctrination.  Abraham Lincoln was aware of the power (and potential danger) of education when he stated, “The philosophy of the school room in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next.” 

In the past 2 or 3 generations, public schools as well as both public and private universities have become places where students focus less on purely academic subjects and more on social issues with a view towards indoctrinating students into someone else’s values and judgments about what is and what is not “social justice.”  It often does not stop there: often students are aggressively instructed about the causes they should take up. 

In Philadelphia, an English teacher at the Science Leadership Academy stated his concerns that “Conservative” parents might “listen in” or just overhear Zoom lessons and conversations this fall.  His “chief concern” is when teachers are engaging “in the messy work of destabilizing a kid’s racism or homophobia or transphobia.”  I am not sure why an English teacher should be “destabilizing” a child’s feelings, or automatically defining them as racist, homophobic or transphobic.  But that is one of many ways in which education now serves a Left agenda.

Similarly, the NEA in collaboration with the NY Times has developed a 1619 Project curriculum for schools, and some school districts have actually voted to adopt it.  The 1619 Project argues that this country was created not on the Fourth of July 1776, but on Aug. 20, 1619, the date when a ship carrying African slaves arrived in Virginia.  It requires placing Blacks at the very center of every aspect of this nation’s history, celebrating Black accomplishments while demeaning contributions of all others as nothing more than actions only made possible by Blacks.  It denounces the history of this country based on the Revolution, the Framers, and the Constitution as nothing more than racist and white supremacist.  Despite the fact that many historians have questioned the accuracy of the 1619 Project, it will be taught as history in many public schools this fall.   Consider this just another way of using education to promote a Leftist agenda.

Higher education is not exempt.  A Stockton University student is facing suspension for using a Zoom background with a picture of the President of the United States.  It allegedly caused other students “to feel offended, disrespected, and taunted” during class.  If found guilty the student will also be required to take a “social justice workshop” (reeducation camp), simply for displaying a photo of the President.  This certainly puts a chilling effect on any expression that is not Leftist approved. 

There are also any number of incidents of teachers and college professors being fired or in some other way disciplined and silenced when they speak out against a Leftist belief.  Offenses even include such things as forgetting to use a student’s preferred pronoun.  The Left agenda is alive and well and generally pulling the strings in higher education.

Looking at some of the other institutions on the list, the entertainment industry uses its productions to support Leftist causes.  TV and Movie productions often require placement of particular identity individuals:  interracial couples, homosexual characters or couples, leftist values, ridicule of conservative lifestyles, etc.  

Professional sports has now joined in as it supports the BLM movement (which, to be clear, is a political organization with Leftist ties and clear Leftist demands).  Players, now suddenly “woke”, wear “social justice” statements on their shirts and kneel for the National Anthem, as if either action would actually do anything, anything, that is, other than shove a specific political agenda in every sports fan's face. 

We all know that most of the mainstream media is the handmaiden of the Left.  It is a well-oiled propaganda machine.  Gone are the days when one could look to the media to give one the facts.  Now it is opinion stated as fact and then used as propaganda.  In order to discover the actual facts about a situation one must spend hours reading and cross-reviewing a great number of sources, something that most people do not have time, understanding, or resources to do.  

Corporations are also on board.  Social media censors items that are offensive to the Left agenda.  Corporations rename or remove products at the beck and call of the Left.  Those who refuse to do so are subject to boycotts or firings. 

Even some religious doctrine is modified to appease Left demands.  Sermons, youth activities, etc. may promote a specific political party’s agenda rather than that religion’s agenda which may or may not coincide with that of the political party.  Just as schools are places for academic instruction, not family value instruction in the form of a particular political agenda, places of worship should be for religious value instruction and worship, not promotion of a political agenda couched in the form of religious instruction.

The Arts also push certain agendas.  Grants to visual and performing artists often require some “social justice” aspect to the work.  The people’s art – public statues – are destroyed to advance the Left’s agenda.

And, finally, a word about law enforcement.  Local police forces are now falling under the control of the Leftist agenda as their funds are either removed or repurposed to social worker rather than law enforcement type personnel. 

There are other familiar institutions which have long been a part of our lives but that now belong not to us in the way that they once did but are rather already under or moving under the control of the Left.  The agenda is theirs; it is not ours, even if on some points we are inclined to agree. 

As the Left gains control over more and more of these many facets of our lives, as we relinquish these institutions to the Left to control, we lose more and more of who we are and instead become more and more of what the Left wants us to be.   These institutions that used to serve us for the purposes stated in their titles (education, entertainment, worship, etc.) are now being controlled more and more by the Left which pulls their strings sometimes with and sometimes without our conscious knowledge.  The frightening fact is that this Leftist control is becoming more and more prevalent and reaching into more and more aspects of our daily lives.

Is this acceptable to you?  If it is, then you are the voter and the tool that the Democrats seek.  If it is not, then you must stand up against this hijacking of what once were open and relatively unbiased institutions.  You must stand against relinquishing control of every aspect of your life to the Left.  One way to do that is to vote Republican this fall. 

                                 Be sure to consider who is pulling the strings.

Finally, as noted in “Question One” yesterday, I am not registered with any party, but as an independent thinker and voter I truly believe that this may be one of the most important elections of our lifetime.  I hope that everyone gives it the serious consideration that it deserves.

 

 

Sometimes a Mask is Not Just a Mask

CoVid.  Here is what we know:  it is an easily transmittable, airborne virus that has no cure and no vaccine and unknown long term effects; it can kill you or you can have it and be completely asymptomatic.   Given that bottom line you can assess its risk to you in any given situation in the same way that you assess other risks that you face every day.   And we do face many other deadly risks every day.  So why the obsession and continuing hysteria about CoVid?  I suggest that it is not really much about CoVid at all, but a lot about using CoVid as a political football. 

Marco Rubio correctly states that having a rational response to the virus “will be hard to achieve as long as we have a heavily politicized narrative that demands you to pick one of two views.”  He defines these as:

A.      The virus is the apocalypse and everything must close

B.     The virus is being exaggerated and will go away on its own.

Certainly these are decent descriptions of the two narratives, neither of which, by the way, is factually accurate.  But let’s consider the reasons behind these two narratives and what each represents.

From the very first notice we got of the virus and that it had reached our shores, the Democrats, never ones to let a crisis go to waste, saw it as something to be used against President Trump and his supporters. 

In January, our economy was at record levels, Black and minority unemployment at its lowest ever, new businesses and industry were thriving, things were looking pretty good.  I suspect that the possibility that this might end caused some anti-Trumpers to salivate. 

The President stopped travelers entering from China, then Europe, then elsewhere.  His opponents first attacked that move as racist, then complained that he had not done it soon enough.  Democrats began their calls for investigations or even another impeachment for the early handling of the virus. 

CoVid was indeed scary.  No one knew much about it except that it could be deadly, especially for older people or people with underlying conditions.   Those seriously affected would need ventilators and hospital beds and we would need a seemingly endless supply of masks for medical personnel.  We wanted to test everyone.  We needed to avoid a surge of the virus so large that it would overtax our resources. 

So, while the administration went to work ramping up the manufacture of needed supplies (many of which had been allowed to deplete during prior administrations) and setting up military field hospitals (many of which have gone unused), people were urged and/or ordered to stay at home in order to  “flatten the curve.”

The President had daily briefings with his CoVid team during which the doctors and other officials could inform the public of the actual facts about the virus – facts that properly evolved daily as more information was constantly being acquired.  The Democrats objected to these briefings, asserting that they should not be covered or carried live by the media (apparently they did not want the people to be informed from the sources, but only to hear their edited and often misleading takes on the briefings).

The stimulus proposals that had been and continue to be put forth by Democrats contained many items that went well beyond what was necessary to deal with the short term effect of a closed economy and were actually part of their Leftist/Socialist wishlist.  That’s not to say that the Republicans didn’t also see these stimulus measures as a way to gain favor with small businesses and other key members of their base.

As things seemingly came under control and active cases began to level off, there were calls to open back up.  Complete closure could not continue.  It was devastating to the economy as well as to the psyche of many.  So we began a slow opening – too slow for some, too fast for others.  Each governor determined the rules for their state (this is their power and right under our system of government).  Here is where I suggest it really became far too political. 

The hit CoVid took on the economy erased the incredible numbers that the Trump administration had achieved.  So, is it really surprising that many Democrat states maintained far more shut down restrictions than those of their Republican counterparts?  Surely at least in the back of their minds was the thought that if we can keep the economy down and unemployment up it will hurt Trump in the upcoming election.  At the same time, Trump and the Republicans wanted to get things moving again and were perhaps more willing to throw some caution to the wind in order to revitalize the economy.  Both were looking somewhat at the science, but also at the politics of the situation.

The governors’ restrictions quickly became both ridiculous and hypocritical.  Science often did not seem to match what was and was not allowed.  The New Mexico governor said breweries (where beer is both brewed and then served in a bar-like atmosphere) could open, but bars could not, nor could the VFW halls which serve beer.  She noted that it was a different kind of clientele at the breweries (could she mean good hipster Democrats vs bad redneck Republicans?). 

The height of hypocrisy came when those governors who had begun mandating or at least encouraging masks cheered on protestors who gathered and said nothing about nor enforced the mask requirements.  In New York the virus contact tracers are not even allowed to ask about protest attendance.   At the same time as the protests were applauded for gathering large groups, Trump’s rally was condemned because it gathered people together.  This has nothing to do with science and everything to do with politics.

When the rules are applied to some but not to others, one can’t help but wonder if the rules are really necessary.  Statements of the dire nature of the threat and hence the need for dire restrictions does not match the fact that many restrictions are not enforced or are simply excused for the favored groups.  This credibility gap is sure to make one wonder about why one should believe any call for any regulations.  And, in our current climate it is not surprising that people should begin to suspect political motivation.

Then we have the reporting about the virus itself.  We now have much more data available, but sadly what that means is that only pieces of that data will be put forward depending on one’s political agenda.  If one wants to keep the country and its economy suffering you can surely find numbers that will support a demand for another complete shut down along with its damage to the economy and hopefully your political opponents.  If you want to see the country fast tracked to normal then you can find data that supports that as well.  Not only can data be found to support varying views, all data is subject to interpretation, and political interpretations are now the flavor du jour.

Not many people have the time or the education to fully read and then assess the data.  They rely on the news media for their information.  The news media seems to enjoy sustaining as much hysteria as possible.  It is probably good for its ratings.  It is also generally good for the Democrats whose political views the media tends to support.

Masks seem to have become the epicenter of all of this.  As we learned more about the virus, data more and more showed that the spread of the virus was in most instances via droplets spread through the air and not from surfaces.  Studies also began to teach how far the droplets could generally travel – somewhere around 6 feet in normal situations (more in other types of situations where a greater force is used in expelling air).  It also became apparent that the more time spent together and the larger the crowd, the more that one’s risk of being infected became.

The science clearly supports the fact that wearing a mask inhibits the possible spread of the disease by the wearer.  Wearing masks is done not for the wearer but for those with whom the wearer comes into contact.  The protection is not absolute, but it is significant.  One would think that just as one does other considerate gestures for his fellow man, one would wear a mask.

But, this is not about health and masks and civil behavior.  Mask wearing has become the representative of how much one will allow government to mandate certain behavior, of whether one is for or against big government, and probably a fairly good predictor of how one will vote in November.  For some reason the health requirement of wearing a mask is seen by some as a complete abolishment of all their rights.  They think that if government can tell them to wear a mask then government can tell them everything, including what to think.  And, when many Democrat leaders waive any suggestion of masks for BLM and other anti-government protestors, it is easy to see that political motivation has overtaken health concerns, even those that have scientific support.

This is a political battle that has become completely disconnected from the CoVid threat.  With that in mind, with their disconnect from science, governors have lost any credibility or authority to impose or enforce regulations.  In New Mexico, one city mayor simply called his prohibited 4^th of July parade a protest since the Governor had banned parades but endorsed and allowed protests.

With their credibility gone, the Governors (and some of the medical professionals) need to stop calling winners and losers in regard to what can and cannot open and what people can and cannot do.  We all know the risk.  Bottom line is we could die.  That’s the science and if we are given the actual science without the hyped and conflicting narratives, each of us individually can decide what in our life is worth taking that risk.

As to masks, I do believe we should wear them when in public just as we should all make the effort to social distance when possible.  I don’t think it is unreasonable for there to be, for the common good, some sort of mask requirement.   It is not fair to open everything, tell me it is my decision to take the risk, but then to make that risk greater than it should be by eliminating even the suggestion of masks.  That is, if a theater is open to full capacity, I can decide whether or not to go.  But, if no one there will be wearing a mask, it becomes unreasonably unsafe for me to be there and so, by removing even the suggestion of mask requirements I am actually denied more rights than those who would go maskless.

If we can assume that our fellow citizens will act responsibly – including wearing a mask not for their protection but for the protection of others – then we can indeed open back up and people will go where they choose depending on their individual risk assessments.  This is no different than when I make a decision to drive:  I understand that others on the road are expected to follow certain driving regulations that they may not like but that exist for the common good.  I of course know that some few will not, but I expect that most will and with that I am free to drive or not based on my assessment of the risk to me.  But, if I know that there are no driving regulations or that they will never be enforced or that a significant number of other drivers will refuse to follow those regulations, then my risk assessment and my freedom to drive is vastly diminished.   It is no different with masks.

But, it’s really not about any of this at all.  It’s about making a political statement.  That is what CoVid has become – nothing more than a political tool, a set of statistics to throw back and forth, a mask with which to stake one’s righteous political claim.   And, while we play these political games, the reality is that the apocalypse is not here, but CoVid is, and some people are in fact dying.