Trump Will Win in 2020

Trump will win in 2020 for precisely the same reason Sean Spicer is still on “Dancing with the Stars.”

I don’t watch the show but my wife does and she was talking today about how Spicer isn’t much of a dancer, but he’s not ended up at the bottom of the heap despite low grades from the experts.  The experts apparently believe there is a grave injustice in keeping Spicer when there are better dancers.  They are upset with the rules they created and now have to live with.  (Does that sound familiar?)

The reason Spicer survives?  I think it is because the conservatives who like him actually vote, rather than just whine about how bad he is.

In my opinion that is what will keep Trump in office.  Conservatives actually go to the polls and vote, rather than threaten to move to Canada.

Austere Religious Scholar?

“Austere Religious Scholar at Helm of Islamic State dies at 48” was the headline for the Washington Post announcing the death of Abu al-Bagdadi at the hands of United States Special Operations Forces.  The actual obituary referred to him as “terrorist-in-chief” but that was quickly stealth edited to “extremist leader of Islamic State.”  For those who don’t seem to recall Abu al-Bagdadi he was the founding head of ISIS.  A group known for the slaughter of innocents throughout the middle east and Africa.  He liked beheadings, torture, burning people alive, raping and just plain old killing of anyone who didn’t fall in line with his world views.

Almost two years ago the Washington Post decided its new motto should be “Democracy Dies in Darkness.”  I wrote a piece on that just the other day.  It would seem the agenda of the WP is not to preserve democracy so much as it is to cast history in any light that discredits President Trump.  One can argue the news media has always been jaded, but the current crop of woke young journalists don’t seem to have a grasp on how to use the language to do much more than present the woke version of a story.  Facts be damned.

Democracy Dies in Darkness

Or so says the Washington Post.  The news outlet made this their motto in 2017 as they ramped up their anti-Trump coverage of the Presidency.  It was not new to them, or even new to Bob Woodward who’s been using it for some time.  Bob supposedly read it in a Judge’s decision on a 1^st Amendment case and liked the way it sounded.  The interesting thing with the news media, in this case the Washington Post, is how selectively they shine their investigative lights and how little of the darkness they are actually willing to illuminate.

If they were actually concerned with the lighting up the darkness of government operations they would be editorializing for the transparency of the Congress as it decides whether or not the President has committed “high crimes and misdemeanors” worthy of removal from office.  Or they would work to substantiate the information provided by leakers to remove any political agenda either they or the leaker might have.  Rather, they are content sit back and report selectively in what can only be called an agenda-based approach.  There is usually some brief report on what the DNC wants to be pushed out to the public, with very little critical analysis.  Any challenge to the reporting is drowned out by opinion pieces on the latest political abuses by the White House, or the GOP.

Other events, some often central to the workings of government receive nary a word in the paper.  The fact the Congress cannot seem to meet even its most basic of responsibilities is passed by as a non-issue.  The responsibility I speak of is the approval of a fiscal year budget prior to the end of the current fiscal year.  As the sole authority to spend federal funds and incur debt this should be JOB ONE for the Congress, but it never is.  Where is the Washington Post on highlighting that failure?  Perhaps because it happens almost every year it is no longer considered newsworthy unless someone decides to shut down the government by not passing a continuing resolution.

In related news:

This past week I learned a new word – thruple.  Apparently, a thruple is a relationship between three people.  Among the political and media social elites thruples are an okay thing, even if there is no equality among the participants.  This comes at the same time as the #metoo movement and grievance groups are railing about how white males are suppressing the advancement of minorities through their mere whiteness.  Apparently, questioning either the morality or the ethical failure of a white female engaging in a relationship with a staffer she employs is beyond question.

Finally, I saw a meme this past week that said something like “We used to believe ignorance was a result of a lack of information.  The internet has proven that not to be true.”  How true and how sad that actually is.

Why is Due Process Important?

We are a nation of laws and a consistent process aimed at protecting the rights of the individual has been a mainstay of our national legal process since our inception.  True, it is a concept deeply flawed by the humans who are supposed to implement those laws and oversee the fair and impartial justice under them, but it is so far the best mankind has come up with.  But if that process does not apply to all our citizens then what is to say it should apply to any of our citizens?

So, we come to the potential impeachment of the President.  The question before us and the Congress is should he be afforded the same protections we are supposed to guarantee to someone accused of a felony or are his “high crimes and misdemeanors” somehow beyond the protections of the U.S. Constitution as it is amended?

From my lowly vantage point, it appears the Congress is clearly divided between political parties and this issue of national importance has been made into a political football with one side writing and changing the rules and the other side crying foul.  It has become a pure political theater with the highest possible stakes.  If it continues, as it seems likely, it will inevitably set a precedent where whoever is president will be subject to the whims of the mob, and there will be no such thing as due process. 

Those who seek to remove the President have shown little regard for respecting the institution of our electoral process and are so emotionally committed to overturning the last election they see no downside to this approach of impeaching someone they despise.  I suspect this emotional approach is similar to the impeachment of President Andrew Johnson, where those of the North were so outraged over the Civil War they would destroy anyone other than Abraham Lincoln who stood in the way of their exacting their financial vengeance, unity of the nation be damned. When that happens, as it must, what will be the impact of justice for the common man or woman accused of anything from a petty to horrific crime? 

If many of us distrust the fairness of the legal system today, think of how that will grow when we see not even the supposedly most powerful individual in the country can expect the protections afforded by adherence to a legal due process.

On The Wrong Side of History

The other day The Honorable Ms. Ocasio-Cortez tweeted out something or other about those who work for President Trump being on the “wrong side of history.”  I had to pause for a minute or two so as not to spit out my coffee over that deep thought.  This statement, coming from a representative of a generation who believes they needn’t study history and can rewrite the past to reflect the political thinking of today is truly laughable.

By all indications from the media who we all know they are the Guardians of Democracy (‘cause that’s what they keep telling us), the millennial generation has set themselves up as the truth givers of America’s morality, even if it means denying biological fact and indoctrinating children into the suitability of alternative sexual orientations.

You know who is on the wrong side of history?  Those who would corrupt legal processes to gain and maintain power.  They are the people who cry loudest about the abuse of power while rallying the mob to corrupt those legal processes so they may gain the power themselves.  That is unless they win.  Then they get to write the history as they would like.

If you would like a good example of how this works, I recommend watching the first episode of an old HBO series called John Adams.  In this episode, we see the Sons of Liberty, led by Sam Adams railing against the British, while his cousin John attempts to walk a centrist line based on the law.  In this scene, John Hancock calls for a British Agent to be tarred (and feathered).  That is how mob rule works.  Not so much different now then it was then.

The question for all of us in society today is who will be the heroes of tomorrow since the great moral questions and the political climate is really about control of long-standing political privilege and power.  Will it be those outsiders who attempt to use a corrupt system to turn it against itself, or will it be those party loyalists who appeal to the mob?

Climate Change Hysteria

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has the most amazing twitter feed.  She was showing one of her town hall meetings to talk with what is supposed to be her constituents when this occurred.

I'll be the first to admit I don't know whether this woman is sick or just a troll, the fact we've come to the point where anyone thinks about this as an option to solve the whole climate change debate shows how the fear-mongering of the political left, as well as the idea human life is cheap and disposable, has shaped the discussion on human impact to the climate.

Yea Us.

In my opinion, the fact the audience remained passive and allowed this woman to continue suggests they were at least considering the 
pros and cons of the idea.

Ms. Ocasio-Cortez put out a few tweets afterward condemning those who mocked this woman who she says is a mental case.  The fact is the left has conditioned the opposition to these responses by their acceptance of the same thing when someone reacts to a conservative position with insane support seems to be lost on her, as it is with most self-serving politicians.

Again, yea us!

The Dumbest Thing on the Internet Today

This meme is the dumbest thing possible.  You know why?  Because it was posted by someone too dumb to figure out it is illegal to kill school children... period.  It doesn't matter if you use a shotgun with three rounds -- illegal to use to kill school children.  It doesn't matter if you use a machine gun -- illegal to use to kill school children. What about if you use something in between? -- Nope, still illegal.

If you want to argue for gun control, at least use some sense and show why your argument actually improves the safety of those you are trying to protect.  Saying geese have more protections than children just shows you are stupid.

Don't be stupid and expect to persuade anyone who's not stupid.