Kevin Baker of The Smallest Minority posted thus:
Daniel Greenfield, Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, aka “Sultan Knish” has a piece up on Frontpage Mag entitled The Civil War is Here. QotD:
We can have a system of government based around the Constitution with democratically elected representatives. Or we can have one based on the ideological principles of the left in which all laws and processes, including elections and the Constitution, are fig leaves for enforcing social justice.
But we cannot have both.
Some civil wars happen when a political conflict can’t be resolved at the political level. The really bad ones happen when an irresolvable political conflict combines with an irresolvable cultural conflict.
That is what we have now.
The left has made it clear that it will not accept the lawful authority of our system of government. It will not accept the outcome of elections. It will not accept these things because they are at odds with its ideology and because they represent the will of large portions of the country whom they despise.
The question is what comes next.
Yes it is.
What comes next, indeed?
We have already seen areas in major U.S. cities where one may not travel safely. Including racial and religious intolerance. Now, political intolerance has been added. People being attacked because they openly support The President or just appear to have!
There is now a massive divide in this Republic, and it appears no amount of positive propaganda, Norman Rockwell posters or calls to regain civility will solve the problem. The Fabian Socialists have reunited with the Communists (non-Fabian socialists), and are systematically attempting to disrupt social order to the point government has lost perceived control.
Just as Norman Thomas, Saul Alinsky and George Soros wanted.
And, as the public education system has been so diluted, edited or poisoned to the extent American generations no longer understand (or support) The Constitution and Bill of Rights, this will go either of two ways:
BIGGOV will attempt to regain control by being more fascistic (see The Patriot Act), or the Leftists will continue to promote more violence and social disorder until the government falls.
In any case, I don’t see a pleasant, non-violent outcome for The Republic.
The Great Experiment is coming to an end.
Whether we want it to, or not…
Today is the 241st anniversary of our Declaration of Independence from the tyranny that was the British crown against the colonies.
And, it will be celebrated with fireworks, picnics, barbeques and other family get-togethers. Some parades and even some solemn remembrances.
We should acknowledge this day, but we should also remember tyranny never stops, and government never stops growing unabated.
YES! WE HAVE A BILL OF RIGHTS! – but how many of them are forgotten or stepped-on today?
Freedom of Speech? Hardly. Colleges and university restricting or stopping speech with which they disagree WHOLESALE!
The Right to Keep and Bear Arms? I will acknowledge much improvement has happened over the past 20 years in this area, but we must not sit on out laurels. Just this past week, the Supreme Court declined to hear how possession (carrying) of weapons outside the home factors in. Leaving an erroneous District Court finding to stand.
Search and Seizure? Do we even have a Fourth Amendment, anymore? Blanket wiretapping of cellular phone and Internet communications. DUI checkpoints. The TSA. Anyone see any warrants affiliated with these actions?
Trial by a Jury of one’s Peers? Seriously? How often?
And don’t even get me started on seizure of assets and jury nullification!
I thank God that we didn’t elect Barack 2.0 (aka Hillary). This doesn’t mean that the current White House occupant is close to being a diamond in the rough.
He is a populist, and certainly NOT a libertarian! And surrounds himself with statist conservatives.
We have won some battles, but are nowhere close to winning the war.
The quote “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty” is often mistakenly attributed to the Irish lawyer and politician John Philpot Curran and frequently to Thomas Jefferson.
In fact, Curran’s line was somewhat different. What he actually said, in a speech in Dublin on July 10, 1790, was:
“The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance.”
And, according to Jefferson scholars there is “no evidence to confirm that Thomas Jefferson ever said or wrote, ‘Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty’ or any of its variants.”
Whoever said it, it is TRUE! Stay vigilant, My Friends!
Happy Independence Day
(from Fox News)
The United States Supreme Court…
In win for Asian-American rock band the Slants, and possible boost for the Washington Redskins, Supreme Court rules that the government can’t refuse to register trademarks that are considered offensive.
More on this: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/06/19/supreme-court-rules-trademark-law-banning-offensive-names-is-unconstitutional.html
AGAIN, free speech is not about that with which we agree!
(Just when you thought the Supreme Court was worthless…)
(Yes, yes. I know many think we have devolved into an oligarchy. I’m writing about what we are as a Nation, on PAPER!)
To Benjamin Franklin: “Well, Doctor, What have you given us, a Republic or a Monarchy?”
“A Republic, if you can keep it!”
There are various other versions of this supposed quotation, the essence of which is WE (The United States) are a REPUBLIC!
Remember THIS from Grade School?
“…and to the Republic, for which it stands.”
Speech by Senator John F. Kennedy, Beverly Hilton Hotel, Los Angeles, CA – (Advance Release Text)
November 2, 1960 (excerpts):
We live in a fast moving nation. But one thing constant from the birth of our Republic has been our faith in education and our determination to make it available to all our citizens.
Thus the value and importance of education was at the foundation of Western thought – and was again present at the foundation of the American Republic.
Virtually EVERY President (Yes, even Barack Obama!) referred in some manner to the American Republic! (Don’t believe me, do your own searches!)
We are NOT, and NEVER HAVE BEEN, a democracy!
Then, why do all politicians, even conservative republicans (democrats are a given) make statements to the affect that thus-and-such yatta-yatta this democracy?
Inquiring minds want to know.
I was recently asked (by a liberal friend) my thoughts on the Sanctuary Cities controversy.
To be honest, I’d not given it much thought.
Initially, my gut response was (as I suspect it is with most conservatives in the Republic) they (the cities and States creating Sanctuary Zones) are in violation of federal law.
But then the libertarian part of my brain became engaged. Have these cities and States (or even those therein who are seeking Sanctuary) received due process for their actions? Or is it just the power of the federal government that is forcing these political entities to bow to their will? And, of course those individuals, too.
I remembered, the Republic antebellum, when the States held much more power. But Lincoln killed that concept.
And the federal government has continued to grow ever since! Have you ever seen a warrant, signed by a judge, used for the searches at the airport? Or DUI checkpoints? Or when ‘they’ spy on your computer?
If the illegal aliens avoiding the feds are in these places, they need due process to be extracted and deported. If they are more than illegal aliens (like criminals) they too need due process.
That pesky Constitution so says.
As a conservative, I say go get ’em. As a libertarian, I say wait for proper paperwork. Just withholding gov’t funds to cities and States may be a great tactic (as ‘they’ ubiquitously do with highway funds!) but blackmail is not proper paperwork.
I am a conservative libertarian.
I am all about legal aliens to be here legally, get their ‘green’ cards, and move toward proper citizenship, if they desire.
Illegal aliens? Should be deported. Except is the most special circumstances.
But the paperwork needs to be in order, first.
Not just federal force.
Peter, of The Bayou Renaissance Man, brings us this:
The inimitable Victor Davis Hanson sees many parallels between California today and the antebellum South.
In December 1860, South Carolina seceded from the Union in furor over the election of Abraham Lincoln.
Lincoln did not receive 50 percent of the popular vote. He espoused values the state insisted did not reflect its own.
In eerie irony, liberal California is now mirror-imaging the arguments of reactionary South Carolina and other Southern states that vowed to go it alone in 1860 and 1861.
. . .
Of course, this is 2017, not 1860, and California is super-liberal, not an antebellum slave-owning society.
Nonetheless, what is driving California’s current efforts to nullify federal law and the state’s vows to secede from the U.S. are some deeper — and creepy — similarities to the arrogant and blinkered Old South.
. . .
California is becoming a reactionary two-tier state of masters and serfs whose culture is as peculiar and out of step with the rest of the country as was the antebellum South’s. The California elite, wishing to keep the natural environment unchanged, opposes internal improvements and sues to stop pipelines, aqueducts, reservoirs, freeways, and affordable housing for the coastal poor.
California’s crumbling roads and bridges sometimes resemble those of the old rural South. The state’s public schools remain among the nation’s poorest. Private academies are booming for the offspring of the coastal privileged, just as they did among the plantation class of the South.
California, for all its braggadocio, cannot leave the U.S. or continue its states’-rights violations of federal law. It will eventually see that the new president is not its sickness, nor are secession and nullification its cures.
Instead, California is becoming a reactionary two-tier state of masters and serfs whose culture is as peculiar and out of step with the rest of the country as was the antebellum South’s. No wonder the state lashes out at the rest of the nation with threatened updated versions of the Old Confederacy’s secession and nullification.
But such reactionary Confederate obstructionism is still quite an irony given California’s self-righteous liberal preening.
There’s much more at the link. Recommended reading.
I think Mr. Hanson is right. The current frothing-at-the-mouth hysteria in California over President Trump’s policies reminds me of George Wallace’s inaugural address as Governor of Alabama on January 14th, 1963.
- Insistence on doing things as Alabama wants them? Check.
- Refusal to kowtow to federal authority? Check.
- Warning Washington that the next President would be determined by voters who shared Wallace’s and Alabama’s views? Check.
Well, guess who won that fight? (Hint: see the outcome at Appomattox. Wash, rinse, repeat.)
California might want to think about that . . .
I’m torn on this issue. States should be free to separate from the Republic as they wish. Certainly California has been one of the leaders in thinking and acting different from the Constitutional Republic in which I was raised.
But, secession? Calexit?
It is interesting how in one week they ‘rattle their sabers’ for becoming a separate entity. Then beg for federal help when their infrastructure continues to crumble.
I’m thinking you cannot have it both ways.
(I was gonna put WHITE in there, but didn’t wish to mislead!)
Well, it seems this Nation is indeed separated into
two three factions: Those who support the President-elect, and those who hate him. (And those for whom the jury remains out).
I don’t think our long national nightmare is yet over…
FOUR EIGHT years ago, when the Electoral College put a Black man into the White House? And many on the Right referred to him as The Black Jesus? Because the Left viewed him as the solution to all things ‘wrong’ with the Country.
And, after all, he wasn’t George W. Bush (or his weak carbon copy John McCain? Or Mitt Romney?)
Hope and Change? Fundamentally transform? (Pick one).
Well, now (if we’re thinking racially), we’ve replaced a Black man with a White man. (Not that other Black candidates weren’t possible – Condi Rice? Mia Love? Clarence Thomas?…)
If we’re NOT thinking racially, Mr. Trump is a populist.
He doesn’t appear to have read recent Supreme Court decisions, or, the U.S. Constitution, however. (wanting to ban flag burning, for example – reprehensible speech though it may be).
And Gitmo will remain, as will massive surveillance. As will issues with guns, illegal immigration, terrorism and civil liberties. Pending court decisions on the next administration’s actions.
And, I think many folks are harkening back to the days of Norman Rockwell. (The 40’s, 50’s?) Burying their heads in the sand, because we no longer have a Leftist President. Of whatever color.
Those of us who are concerned with civil liberties need to continue our watch into the next administration.
Lest we become
- “A simple democracy . . . is one of the greatest of evils.” ~Benjamin Rush, Letter to John Adams, July 21, 1789
- “Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.” ~James Madison, Federalist Paper 10
- “It has been observed, by an honorable gentleman, that a pure democracy, if it were practicable, would be the most perfect government. Experience has proved that no position in politics is more false than this. The ancient democracies, in which the people themselves deliberated, never possessed one feature of good government. Their very character was tyranny . . .” ~Alexander Hamilton, The Debates in the Several State Conventions, 1787, p. 253
- “Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” ~John Adams letter to John Taylor, April 15, 1814
Were it not for the Electoral College, small densely populated, mostly urban areas on the east and west coasts would have elected Hillary Clinton instead of Donald Trump. The votes of the inhabitants living in the vast central land mass of the USA would have essentially been of no value, and the needs, opinions, and desires of those citizens would have been ignored by a President who owed them no loyalty. In fact, it would be possible for a candidate to win the election by campaigning only in those highly populated east and west coast areas without setting foot anywhere in between. That egregious lack of equality would lead to a dissolution of the country with unfortunate and disastrous results.
Many might be surprised to learn that the word “Democracy” does not appear in the Bill or Rights or the US Constitution. Nor does it appear in the Constitutions of the 50 States. A Democracy is “mob rule,” a dictatorship of the majority in which 51% of the citizenry rule the other 49%. Our freedoms and liberties are guaranteed to us because the framers of our Constitution, through past experience and careful consideration, gave us a Constitutional Republic, not a Democracy . . . A governmental system based on the rule of law and not the rule of the majority.
After the War of Independence and the failure of the Articles of Confederation, when our Constitution was being conceived and written, the total population of the thirteen colonies was estimated to be 2,628,400. The thirteen colonies were not equal in terms of number of inhabitants, with Delaware being the smallest at 45,400 residents and Virginia the largest with 538,000 residents.
Does President-elect DJT have the gravitas to do what is necessary? Without compromising the Constitution?
AH! There’s the rub.
No extra-constitutional executive orders. No bulls-in-china-shops (in spite of the fact he has no verbal filters!)
Of course, as with GWB, it won’t matter what he does or says to some people, just because he’s (in their view) the wrong person.
Bayou Renaissance Man has a take on the recent (and ongoing) unpleasantness (in part):
I’m astonished that no-one has yet pointed out, publicly and loudly, that the organized anti-Trump protests following his victory in last Tuesday’s election are as organized, and as manipulative, as most of the other protests we’ve seen all year long. It’s the same professional agitators, going from issue to issue and from state to state, seizing on any popular idea and transforming it into a lever to undermine our nation, our democracy and our constitution.Consider:
- The Black Lives Matter protests were very clearly organized. Numerous police forces admitted or asserted that ‘outsiders‘ came into town to make trouble, then moved on to the next protest. They were funded by the same source that bankrolled the Ferguson riots ‘protests’.
- As soon as the North Dakota pipeline protests geared up a few months ago, what happened to the BLM protests? Suddenly there was hardly a mention of them. The reason was simple – the activists turning the pipeline protests into a violent anti-police, anti-The-Man free-for-all were often the same ones that had been behind the BLM nastiness.
- Now that President-elect Trump is the focus, what’s happened to the pipeline protests? All of a sudden we don’t hear Word One about them in the media . . . because those organizing them, and spearheading the violence there, are now organizing the protests and spearheading the violence in the anti-Trump protests.
I’d love to be able to examine arrest records, or attendance records, from police forces all over the country, to see how many names and how many faces cropped up at all of the above protests over the past year. I’m willing to bet money there’ll be a lot of overlap.
One hopes Mr. Trump will find a way to cut the Gordian knot that ties all these anti-constitutional, anti-democratic, anti-American organizations and individuals together. It’s long overdue . . . and entirely necessary, IMHO.
An interesting perspective. Could it be that the same protesters move from protest to protest – almost as if it is their job?
(Remembering the OWS protesters and the similar folks who appear after mass shootings)
Finding a way to ‘cut the Gordian knot’ (as Peter puts it) + my .02…
And, of course, recognizing the other guy remains President for a while longer…
Yep. I’m speaking of the recent dustup of things long-time ago said by candidates.
Mr. Trump has been recorded using language that might have originated in a high school locker room. As has Secretary Clinton (at least in print). And her husband. And Jack Kennedy.
And, The President.
Use (or non-use) of such language, of course, is not a qualification for The Presidency.
My question is, what ever happened to the character of individuals? Used to be persons with character aspired to be The President. Washington, Jefferson and John Adams come to mind. All persons of character. Each very different. (Yes, I know Washington and Jefferson owned slaves…)
They were human. I suspect they might have uttered socially-inappropriate language in private moments.
But they rose to the challenge to move this Constitutional Republic forward.
I don’t see that in any of the current of recent candidates.
Now, it’s reported by the Clinton’s that they have victims of rape by Mr. Trump coming forward! Seriously? Not only is the timing questionable, but the whole pot-kettle thing!
I know politics by it’s very nature is dirty. Regardless:
I weep for The Republic.