Moonbat logic at work - budget edition

There's a breathtakingly stupid piece of moonbat propaganda floating around, seeking to blame local and state government fiscal mismanagement on ... wait for it ... Mitch McConnell, the Senate Majority Leader!

The main instigator for [defunding police], of course, is the protest movement sparked by the police killings of George Floyd and other African Americans. In their efforts to reduce law-enforcement budgets, however, the protesters have an unlikely ally: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. By spurning congressional Democrats’ efforts to dispatch additional aid to state and local governments, McConnell is enabling budgetary crises in city after city. These crises, in turn, are making well-funded police departments an easier target.

Police budgets are mostly paid by local governments. And for local governments, COVID-19 has been a fiscal catastrophe. Local governments fund themselves through a combination of property taxes, sales taxes, income taxes, special taxes (on the occupants of hotels, for instance), and aid from states. By slashing consumer spending, the pandemic has slashed sales-tax revenue. The collapse of tourism has decimated special taxes paid by the hospitality industry, and job losses have reduced revenue from income taxes. Moreover, states—which face their own budgetary shortfalls—are likely to cut local aid. The result, according to the National League of Cities, is that from now until 2022, cities collectively face a budgetary hole of $360 billion.

On May 15, House Democrats responded by passing the HEROES Act, which would have allocated close to $1 trillion to state, local, and tribal governments—$375 billion of which would have gone to cities and counties. Because most states and many cities start their fiscal year on July 1, that cash might have helped local governments stave off major budget cuts.

Senate Republicans, however, oppose another large infusion of federal funds anytime soon. In April, McConnell suggested that states respond to their fiscal woes by declaring bankruptcy.

There's more at the link.

As we've covered in these pages many times, the reason state and local governments don't have enough money is that they've "wasted their substance on riotous living".  They're prodigal sons who refuse to come to their senses.  They've lavishly funded pensions for their workers, entitlement programs for their voters, and politically correct programs, outreaches and activities beyond number.  When they didn't have enough money coming in to fund their pet projects, they borrowed it.

As a result, many US cities and states are billions - sometimes hundreds of billions - of dollars in debt.  Unable to dig themselves out of the fiscal hole they've dug, they're turning to the Federal government and demanding bailouts from taxpayers all over the USA.  The so-called "HEROES Act" is nothing more than an attempt by the Democratic Party to ram that through Congress.  I'm very glad Senator McConnell has stopped it dead in its tracks so far - although, if the Democrats take control of the Senate and the White House in November's elections, I'm afraid it'll be forced upon us willy-nilly.

I think the premise of the HEROES Act, and the article cited above, is ridiculous.  I see no reason why taxpayers in fiscally responsible states should have the liability for fiscally irresponsible ones foisted upon them.  I think Senator McConnell is entirely correct when he said that states who've spent themselves into bankruptcy should be allowed to declare it, and take the consequences themselves.  Why should we pay for their profligacy?

To assert that police defunding is, or will be, the result of Senator McConnell's obstinacy in refusing to bail out states and cities, is breathtaking in its arrogance and denial of reality.  Those entities don't have enough money because they've wasted everything they had!  If we gave them money to bail out their debts, they'd merely incur more debt right away, to continue to live beyond their means.  They wouldn't recognize the concept of fiscal responsibility if it jumped up and bit them in the unmentionables.

The only sane approach is to spend no more than you have or can afford to pay off - not to borrow yourself into oblivion to fund such spending.  If cities and states need more money, let them cut spending, even at the expense of their much-vaunted "progressive" programs and activities.  To use an old idiom, let them "cut their coat according to their cloth" - and that includes paying down the debt they've already incurred.  Only when they're doing that, and have done so for some time, and are demonstrably on the way to genuine fiscal reform and recovery, should we consider helping them.  If they want to continue their financially self-destructive ways, let them do it on their own, without wasting our money into the bargain.

Distrust any attempt by the mainstream media to blame anything on anybody.  As Glenn Reynolds, a.k.a. the Instapundit, has said so often, "Just think of the media as Democratic Party operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense".  He frequently quotes the tweets shown below.

Keep that in mind, and a lot of things will become clearer.

Peter

Seattle: what did I tell you?

Yesterday I wrote that Seattle has abandoned the rule of law.  It's allowed protesters to set up an "autonomous zone" in a six-block area of the city, and pulled police out of it.  I warned of what was likely to occur - and guess what?  It's already happening.

Headlines that tell the story:

Police: Seattle demonstrators

running checkpoints at CHAZ

Lawless In Seattle:

All That CHAZ

Seattle’s Autonomous Zone

Has Its First Warlord;

Local Rapper Raz Simone Takes Over

There are already reports of violence being used to "enforce order" by local vigilantes, and that "some demonstrators on Capitol Hill are armed and trying to extort protection money from area businesses and residents".  The protesters who've "taken over" (only to have their "control" hijacked by thugs with guns) are learning that "an armed and organized element with leadership that isn’t afraid to use violence pretty much trumps all the slogans and antifa bullsh** you can spout."  Say it ain't so!

That's what happens when you negate the rule of law.  Inevitably, the law of the jungle takes over.  It's survival of the fittest and strongest.  Bring them food, or be food for them.  Chairman Mao said it well:  "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun".  The halfwits who proclaimed the "Autonomous Zone" are re-learning that lesson - and not just about power, either.  They're also learning that if you try to help them, the grasshoppers will rob the ants blind.

They want food, do they? I have a suggestion. Let's each of us buy a packet of frozen peas, and transfer the contents to freezer containers so we can use them at our leisure.  Then, let's mail the empty frozen-pea packets to the organizers of the Autonomous Zone (or perhaps to our local Antifa branches or Democratic Party offices), with a note reading "No Justice, NO PEAS!"  I think we should make that go viral, so they're inundated with empty pea packets.  It's no better than they deserve.

What about Seattle's police force?  Their city leaders won't allow them to do their job.  Therefore, those individual cops who still have a spine, and at least some professional pride, should resign from Seattle PD and take their services to places where it'll be appreciated and properly used.  The others should follow the well-known precept of "Lead, follow, or get out of the way".  They're not allowed to lead, and they have no effective leader to follow, so they should get out of the way and let citizens defend themselves - because it looks like nobody else is going to do it.

I said yesterday that "I'm a pastor and chaplain, and have my own perspective on what's happening - which does not involve violence unless in defense of my life, family and property."  Getting rid of thugs with guns who are threatening me, and refusing to be intimidated into contributing to their support, most certainly falls under that defense, IMHO.  I think it's time the good citizens of the "Autonomous Zone", and of Seattle as a whole (at least, those who haven't been brainwashed into abandoning their rights and responsibilities as citizens), banded together to reassert their own authority, and show these idiots where to go.  If necessary, assist them to get there.

After that, elect or appoint city and state authorities who'll preserve the rule of law in future.  I don't care what you do with the old ones.  They're utter failures, and deserve no consideration at all.

Peter

Seattle has abandoned the rule of law. Is this a foretaste of what's to come?

Protesters and demonstrators in Seattle have set up what they're calling the Capital Hill Autonomous Zone around the 11th Precinct police building in Seattle.  They've even produced this map of the "liberated" area (clickit to biggit).

As the labels on the map make clear, this is nothing more or less than a far-left-wing, progressive, communist-inspired project.  The labels are typical of communist propaganda throughout the world over the past century or more.  They leave little doubt as to the ideology behind this farce.  It's Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals" writ large, on the streets of one of America's largest cities.

Of course, that city - Seattle - is so far left of center in its politics that it's arguably no longer American in its governance and outlook.  The occupiers of the "Autonomous Zone" appear to agree.  This notice appears on one of the barriers blockading entrance to the zone:

Please imagine, for a moment, that you're a business owner or resident inside the boundaries of that zone.  Suddenly your customers and suppliers no longer have free access to your business;  suddenly your right to the peaceful enjoyment of your residence is interrupted by radical activists who are controlling entrance to and exit from the zone.  You may face demands for access to your facilities at any time, and any refusal may draw accusations that you're "racist" or "reactionary" or (perish the thought!) "conservative".  You may be expected to "support the people" by donating supplies to the "masses", whether you like it or not.  Refusal is unlikely to be well received.

Worst of all, to my mind, is that local police deliberately and openly abandoned their own precinct building, opening the way for the radicals to take over.  I doubt very much whether police took this decision on their own initiative.  I'm pretty sure it was imposed on them by city administrators.  Despite claims that the precinct will remain staffed, it's now clear that those staff are not using their own headquarters building, which has been taken over by the mob.  Police are patrolling from mobile staging areas instead, and appear to be voluntarily remaining outside the self-declared "Autonomous Zone".  What this means for you, if you live and/or work inside that zone, is that you can no longer rely on police protection or assistance.  You're on your own.

This means that Seattle has effectively abandoned the rule of law within city limits.

Let's examine what "the rule of law" is.  Encyclopedia Britannica defines it as:

... the mechanism, process, institution, practice, or norm that supports the equality of all citizens before the law, secures a nonarbitrary form of government, and more generally prevents the arbitrary use of power. Arbitrariness is typical of various forms of despotism, absolutism, authoritarianism, and totalitarianism.

. . .

In general, the rule of law implies that the creation of laws, their enforcement, and the relationships among legal rules are themselves legally regulated, so that no one—including the most highly placed official—is above the law. The legal constraint on rulers means that the government is subject to existing laws as much as its citizens are. Thus, a closely related notion is the idea of equality before the law, which holds that no “legal” person shall enjoy privileges that are not extended to all and that no person shall be immune from legal sanctions. In addition, the application and adjudication of legal rules by various governing officials are to be impartial and consistent across equivalent cases, made blindly without taking into consideration the class, status, or relative power among disputants.

There's more at the link.

Those conditions no longer apply in Seattle.  There, it's now patently obvious that:

• Not all citizens are equal under the law.  Left-wing protesters and agitators are being handled with kid gloves.  Try mounting a right-wing protest, for any cause from free speech, to pro-Second-Amendment, to outright racism like the Ku Klux Klan, and you'll doubtless get handled rather differently.  Don't believe me?  Why don't you try it, while the rest of us watch?  Pass the popcorn, please . . .
• Power is used arbitrarily, particularly as regards policing.  The police are no longer "protecting and serving" everybody.  They're doing so selectively.  If you're in a zone controlled by the politically correct, you can expect little, if any, help from law enforcement authorities and officers.  Seattle PD's motto is officially "Service, Pride, Dedication".  As far as the "Autonomous Zone" is concerned, I see from them little service, nothing to be proud of, and dedication only to surrendering to the mob.  It's hard to see how any self-respecting officer can remain in the employ of so pusillanimous an agency.
• The Mayor and city administration are abandoning their duty of care towards the city under their control, and pandering instead to pressure groups and extremist ideologies.  Those who don't fall into "politically correct" categories are no longer welcome in Seattle.  They're on their own.

In a properly administered state, the Governor and/or state authorities would have intervened long since to protect and uphold the rule of law, and ensure equality before the law for all citizens of the city.  That's unlikely to happen in Washington, where left-wing progressive politics dominate the state government.  The powers that be will adopt a snooty, high-toned, morally bankrupt perspective on the whole thing, and abdicate their responsibilities.

I'm fairly sure this won't be the only such "Autonomous Zone" set up in US cities.  Anywhere the radicals can expect compliance from city authorities, they'll try to do likewise.  Those opposed to them, or those who object to their businesses and property being turned into political pawns, are going to find themselves S.O.L. as far as the authorities are concerned.  It goes along with the "Defund the Police" and "Abolish the Police" narratives currently being spouted by the radicals.  By excluding police from "Autonomous Zones", they hope to demonstrate that they're not needed.  They may not be needed by the radicals, but they'll sure be missed by those the radicals intimidate, oppress and rob!

Of course, this will only accelerate the inevitable backlash.  Don't believe me?  Aesop spelled it out yesterday evening in relation to the "Abolish the Police" movement, but what he said applies just as well to radical "Autonomous Zones" (run, as they are and will be, by the same people that want to get rid of law enforcement).

Since ever, the whole thing is a Left-wing con job, exactly like advertising.

Create the need for the otherwise needless; then meet the new "need".

They've just taken ads for dishsoap and popcorn makers to their logical political extreme.

It's a riff on the Mafia's "protection" racket:  "That's a nice society you have there; be a real shame if it suddenly burned down."

The only answer to that is to shoot the "salesmen"; and then hunt down and exterminate the guy who sent the salesmen, and all their minions, to the last man, and last child.

Nothing less will suffice.

The Left, whether they realize it or not, is setting the table for an existential war of survival, down to the last side standing.

It's a recipe for civil war on a biblical Armageddon scale.  Everyone's families and entire lifestyle are the chips in that game.

Kill all they send.
Then find and destroy the nest.
First one to go ugliest the fastest wins.

Any half measures are a recipe for self-destruction.
Dresden and Hiroshima were a template.
Second place prize is a body bag.

What we're all witnessing daily right now is the Left's Useful Idiots trying to completely upend civilization, to suit their own ends.

Half of them think they can win. The other half would rather burn everything down to try, knowing they cannot win, and not caring anyways.

This is logic via Lucifer:  "If I cannot rule everything, I'll burn it all down."

The answer to that, as ever, comes out of the barrel of a gun, and at the point of sword and spear.

Again, more at the link.

This is my greatest fear right now.  The more radicals on one side push the limits, the closer they get to the brink, the more the other side will become radicalized and push right back, raising the stakes, "upping the ante" until there's no alternative but to go all in - or lose.  That's what's behind terrorism, the ultimate expression of radicalism.  It's what we saw on 9/11, but written (so far) in political slogans and biased, one-sided actions rather than in the large-scale shedding of blood.  Can it stay that way?

Historically, it hasn't.  Historically, extremism has always led to counter-extremism.  I think that's what we're seeing right now in the USA.  I'm reliably informed that many local movements are forming and organizing right now.  They're taking extreme pains to remain "under the radar", not using traceable or interceptable communications, being very careful and selective about whom they trust, and making plans that are not discussed publicly.  Some have progressed to the point of coordinating their plans with other groups, through very carefully vetted channels.  I won't be surprised to see regional and national networks forming, in due course.

I'm not part of any of those groups.  I'm a pastor and chaplain, and have my own perspective on what's happening - which does not involve violence unless in defense of my life, family and property.  However, some of those involved are former (and still trusted) colleagues, so I hear a few things from time to time.  I'm very worried by what I'm hearing.

After the Paris terrorist attacks in November 2015, I wrote:

I've seen war from the inside.  I've been under fire, and I've fired on others.  I've been wounded ... and I've inflicted my share of wounds.  I've picked up the dead, and the pieces of the dead.

Those aren't the worst aspects of violent conflict.  To me, the worst is what it does to the human psyche.  You become dehumanized.  Your enemies are no longer people - they're objects, things, targets.  You aren't shooting at John, whose mother is ill, and who's missing his girlfriend terribly, and who wants to marry her as soon as he can get home to do so.  You're shooting at that enemy over there, the one who'll surely 'do unto you' unless you 'do unto him' first.  He's not a human being.  He's a 'gook'.  He's 'the enemy'.  He's a thing rather than a person.  It's easier to shoot a thing than it is a person.

. . .

You no longer think of civilians as such.  They're in enemy territory, or known to be sympathetic to the enemy:  therefore, they're 'things', suspects, never to be trusted, never to be treated objectively or with anything other than the forced, mandatory legal definition of 'decency' imposed by your superiors . . . and even that becomes flexible when those superiors aren't around to monitor what you're doing.

. . .

That's the bitter fruit that extremism always produces.  It's done so throughout history.  There are innumerable examples of how enemies have become 'things'.  It's Crusaders versus Saracens, Cavaliers versus Roundheads, Yankees versus Rebels, doughboys versus Krauts . . . us versus them, for varying values of 'us' and 'them'.

. . .

And in the end, the bodies lying in the ruins, and the blood dripping onto our streets, and the weeping of those who've lost loved ones . . . they'll all be the same.  History is full of them.  When it comes to the crunch, there are no labels that can disguise human anguish.  People will suffer in every land, in every community, in every faith . . . and they'll turn to what they believe in to make sense of their suffering . . . and most of them will raise up the next generation to hate those whom they identify as the cause of their suffering . . . and the cycle will go on, for ever and ever, until the world ends.

We cannot 'kill them all and let God sort them out' ... There are too many of 'them' to kill them all, just as 'they' can never kill all of 'us' ... We cannot kill our way out of the dilemma of being human, with all the tragedy that entails.

May God have mercy on us all.

I fear greatly that unless the extremists on both sides come to their senses, those words may yet prove prophetic in these tragically dis-United States in which we live.

Peter

EDITED TO ADD:  It seems that yesterday evening, Tucker Carlson basically agreed with what I've said here about the threat from extremists.  See for yourself.

Quite so.

A sign of political backlash against the activist left?

I've been watching for signs of a political backlash against the aggressively "pushy" attempts by Democratic Party legislators to reshape their electoral districts, cities, states, and even the nation as a whole, in a progressive, far-left-wing, socialist image.  A good example is Virginia, where despite massive protests and rejection from over 90% of the state's counties, the new Democratic majority government (elected by only a few counties around Washington D.C., with large numbers of people) passed new anti-gun legislation and imposed it on the rest of the population willy-nilly.

It looks like that's already having consequences at the polls.

Staunton, a usually reliable Democratic stronghold in the conservative Shenandoah Valley, went surprisingly Republican in Tuesday’s City Council elections.

The slate ... took the four seats up for grabs in the 2020 local election, giving the Queen City a conservative majority for the first time in recent memory.

. . .

How unlikely was this conservative sweep? Hillary Clinton won Staunton in the 2016 presidential election, Barack Obama had won the city in the previous two election cycles, and Democrat Jennifer Lewis pulled 56.5 percent of the vote in her 2018 Sixth District congressional race against Republican Ben Cline, who eventually swept to victory, winning 59.7 percent of the vote district-wide.

. . .

The result is a shocker, to say the least, and if people in Richmond are paying attention at all, this one should be a wakeup call times ten.

There's more at the link.

I'm hearing increasing rumors of a similar, but even stronger electoral backlash following the riots over the death of George Floyd.  Many voters acknowledge the problems that exist in our society, and (like me) are more than willing to permit (even join in) peaceful protests to bring about change.  However, when thugs and low-lifes take advantage of protests to start rioting and looting, their tolerance (and mine) is at an end.  Matters should never have been permitted to get so far out of line.  The sight of uniformed police officers "taking a knee" in solidarity with protesters is also a step too far.  It's the job of police to maintain law and order - not to publicly adopt political positions or express political opinions.  They're supposed to be neutral, "above the fray", impartial.

The result is increasing determination among some of the electorate to make their feelings known at the ballot box in November.  I've heard many expressions of disgust, anger and resolve, and I know I'm far from alone in hearing them.  Other bloggers with whom I'm in touch report the same things from their audience.

The response from the progressive left, of course, will be additional voter and electoral fraud, as we've posited in these pages in the past.  They've become more and more blatant in their efforts to do that, including Congress' recent attempt to impose and fund "ballot harvesting", eliminate state and local electoral protections through national legislation, and other measures.  Fortunately, it looks as though their "license to steal elections" won't go any further this year . . . but they'll try again.  If they win control of the nation's government in November, look for that to become law next year, just as soon as they can ram it through.

As I've said many times before, I'm neither Democrat nor Republican - I vote for the individual, not the party.  Nevertheless, I'm encouraged by the outcome of the Staunton, VA elections.  If our politicians give us the metaphorical finger by forcing through legislation, we can return the favor at the polls.  Let's hope more American voters do that in November.

Peter

When the sheep bleat in unison, you know it's a cluster-flock

If there's one thing the series of crises in 2020 has illustrated, it's that the mainstream media and mainstream politicians in the United States are almost all being manipulated.  Few, if any, of their voices are genuinely independent.  Most of them - darn near all of them - manifest a controlling hand behind them, spreading a common message, demanding that everyone walk in lockstep to the beat of the same drummer.  Individuality, critical thinking and independent responses are not just discouraged, but regarded as social, political and psychic heresy - and heretics are to be cast out, shunned, cut off from society.

In saying this, please bear in mind that I'm neither Republican nor Democrat.  I vote for the person, not the party, and on principle, not on party platform.  I neither support nor condemn the President or any other politician.  I look at their policies, their performance in office, and (very important to me) their integrity as an individual.  I weigh those factors against each other and against the politician's opponent, and make my decision based on which better embodies and/or upholds the principles I stand for.  I won't be told who to support, or brainwashed into voting in lockstep with the wishes of the political class.

Unfortunately, that's intolerable in today's America.  If you, or I, or anybody, dares to think for ourself, we're a threat.  We have to be bludgeoned and dragooned into letting others do the thinking for us.  Facts and independent judgment no longer matter.  Both sides of the political spectrum demand such unthinking loyalty, but it's far more vocal and outspoken on the left than on the right.

The Federalist sums this up with regard to the mainstream media.

It seems no great event or upheaval in our national life can pass now without the media lying to our faces about it.

They lied about the Trump campaign colluding with Russia in 2016. They lied about the Mueller probe and Brett Kavanaugh and former national security adviser Mike Flynn. They lied about Trump’s phone call with the Ukrainian president and the impeachment farce that ensued. They lied about the coronavirus and the lockdowns and the White House response. And now they’re lying about the riots.

In recent days we’ve heard a steady drumbeat of lies, distortions, and disingenuousness from the mainstream media about almost every aspect of the unrest now gripping American cities. The deceit is almost too pervasive and amorphous to describe, but I’m going to try anyway.

Over the weekend we were told, for example, that the looting and violence was being instigated not by left-wing anarchists and antifa groups but by the media’s favorite villains: white supremacists. CNN, whose Atlanta offices were vandalized Friday, went on and on—without a shred of evidence to back it up—about how white supremacists might be infiltrating the protests and stirring up trouble. The New York Times, in a report that even quoted a senior police official in New York City saying outside anarchist groups were coordinating mayhem before the protests began, nevertheless veered into a long aside about how far-right “accelerationists” were hoping the unrest would bring about a long-sought second civil war.

By Monday, no one was talking about the white supremacist agitators anymore. The media had moved on to better, more plausible lies.

. . .

[Repeated incidents illustrate] a broader pattern of opposition to Trump that the media has maintained for years, that whatever might be happening in the country, whether a global pandemic or mass rioting, the most important part of the story is always that Trump is behaving badly—that he’s lying, misleading, undermining democratic norms, tweeting mean things, whatever. Nothing, not even nationwide riots, are more important than pushing that narrative.

You see the media’s obsession with this narrative everywhere, no matter what the actual facts of a story might be ... After Trump’s Monday night walk through Lafayette Park to St. John’s Episcopal Church, the media breathlessly reported stories about violent Park Police clearing peaceful protestors with tear gas. After nearly 24 hours of endless tweets, articles, and cable news stories claiming protestors were tear-gassed for Trump’s “photo op,” the Park Police information officer disproved all prior reports confirming, “No tear gas was used by USPP officers or other assisting law enforcement partners.”

One could go on and on with examples like this. Get on Twitter right now and you’re bound to find fresh examples posting every hour as reporters and pundits lie about events that are unfolding in real time.

There's more at the link.

The way the mainstream media march in lockstep, to the bidding of their corporate and political masters, was very well illustrated in 2018 when Sinclair Broadcast Group (a conservative-leading corporation) made its many TV stations read the identical manifesto on air, making a mockery of their "editorial independence".  (Yes, this was right-wing, rather than left-wing - as I said, the problem exists on both sides of the political spectrum.)  See and hear for yourself.

The resulting mashup made headlines, and rightly so - but those headlines failed to point out that precisely the same thing was, and is, being done by opponents of the President.  The problem is universal.

This reality is very clearly illustrated in recent mainstream media news headlines and reports of the rioting.  Almost every one circles back to lay the blame for the unrest at the President's feet, despite the fact that he, personally, had nothing whatsoever to do with it.  The news media are taking their marching orders from their puppet-masters, both directly through private channels and through sites such as Common Dreams, Think Progress, etc.  They're also influenced by discussion among activists on sites such as Democratic Underground.  The pattern is very clear.  Look at the "leads" and "talking points" being generated on those Web sites, and you'll see them reflected in news reports and opinion pieces in the mainstream media within hours - sometimes within minutes.  The same goes for public response to those reports.  Those commenting on them all too often parrot the "party line" rather than display independent thought.  Everybody has to be "on message".  Anyone straying from the "party line" - such as the New York Times publishing Republican Senator Tom Cotton's views on the riots - is rapidly cut down to size by savage criticism, and forced back into line.

Fortunately, this simplifies our response.  When we see almost every mainstream media report saying the same thing, and blaming the same people;  when we hear almost every politician parroting the same talking points;  when we can't hear the still, small voice of reason over the clamor bidding us not to think, but simply to believe and do as we're told . . . then we know we're being misled and manipulated.

The cure is to ignore all those influences, get the facts for ourselves - and yes, that can be hard work sometimes, digging through the dross to find the few nuggets of truth available - and then make up our own minds.  Only by doing so can we be the responsible citizens this country so desperately needs right now.

We should also cherish the few objective voices that still exist in the media.  There are a few.  I personally have come to value the reporting of John Solomon and Sharyl Attkisson.  Both try to be as honest and objective as possible.  They don't mince their words or pull their punches, and they take on both sides of the political spectrum as and when necessary.  That's all too rare these days.  (I also value the opinion of Tucker Carlson, who's not a reporter but a commenter on the news.  He's conservative, but by no means lockstep Republican, and has criticized both left and right in his analyses.  YMMV about his opinions, of course.)

Let's conclude with Sharyl Attkisson telling us "how astroturf, or fake grassroots movements funded by political, corporate, or other special interests, very effectively manipulate and distort media messages".  It's a very good talk, and worth your time, IMHO.

Consider how such influences are currently at work in the news media, and how they're portraying our current crises. They're doing their best to shape and guide our thoughts, rather than allow or encourage us to think for ourselves. Caveat emptor.

Peter

This may explain why Minneapolis PD allowed rioters to burn down their precinct

If this account is correct, it looks like Minneapolis had already gone a long way down the liberal, progressive, socialist road to hell that's being followed in California and many other places.

All of the adults on the city council have retired or been voted out, and the council is now composed of earnest young progressives like our boy mayor Jacob Frey. And what does every young progressive like Jacob fear the most? Being called a racist. We also have a few AOC types who want to seize the Lake of the Isles mansions for the (well-connected) people.

. . .

Retail stores are soon found to be easy targets. Chain stores are the easiest. CVS and Walgreens and Chipotle will absolutely fire any employee who looks at a petty criminal in a mean way. The store manager is held responsible for shrinkage –loss due to theft– but if the manager even attempts to stop theft, he or she will be fired.

. . .

Now add in the great progressive paranoia: I cannot stand to be called a racist.

So rather than risk that city and county officials decided to stop enforcing laws against retail theft. Remember that video from a San Francisco store of thieves cleaning out all the makeup in a drugstore in broad daylight? It happens here in Minneapolis also.

Here the thieves will grab a box of trash bags off the shelf, pull out a couple, and fill it with easily fenced stuff like Tide detergent, diapers, and small electronics. If there are cigarettes, they’ll jump over the counter and grab them, along with Similac baby food (that’s already behind the counter due to high theft). Then they will walk out, and if you stand in their way, you may get shoved down. Certainly all of the “Sir, please, stop” which is the corporate recommended solution, will not slow them down.

The really great thing is, a merchant can call the police while burning a DVD of the perp’s faces, and the cops probably will not show up. If someone is injured by the bad guys, probably someone will come and hand the manager a card with a case number, but that is all that will happen. I have seen this many times in many stores.

When this virus thing happened, the city actually announced that they would not prosecute retail theft and transit fare jumping, among other things.

There's more at the link.  It makes depressing reading, but explains a lot.

Aaron Clarey (a.k.a. Captain Capitalism), who lives in or near Minneapolis, is even more scathing.

Minneapolis (and Minnesota in general) is a failed city/state, full of leftists, parasites, communists, and race pimps, all pampered and enabled by self-loathing, pussy white people who want to bring about a socialist utopia.  I hate the citizens of Minneapolis.  I hate the people of Minnesota and I am merely biding my time until I can move.  This is merely poetic justice watching a potpourri of leftists (SJW's, antifa, aggrieved black members of the community, spoiled rich kids from the suburbs-turned-virtue-signaling-activists, and simple thieves/looters) destroy a neighborhood/city that has voted-for and doted on leftist political causes EVERY SINGLE TIME.  You COULD NOT FIND A MORE PRO-MINORITY, PRO-SOCIALISM, PRO-SJW block of voters than Minneapolitans... who are now watching their city get destroyed by the same leftists they so enthusiastically supported and sucked the ***** of.  Meanwhile, the most cowardly mayor and governor in all of history stand by and do nothing, letting their most loyal constituents and neighborhoods burn.  It truly is an example of "Enjoy the Decline" and "Enjoy the Show."  You get the government you deserve.

Regardless, I am supremely confident Minneapolitans and Minnesotans in general will learn nothing.  They will go back to voting for socialism, treating minorities as incompetent teenagers instead of adults, and nothing will change.  And thus you will have essentially two groups of people.  One with guilty (predominantly white) goodie two shoes Minnesotans who obey the law and will constantly castrate themselves in front of socialists and socialist policies.  And another group (skewed towards a minority population, but also most certainly including white leftists/antifa/SJW/professional activist-victim/socialists) whose self-perceived victimhood and all-important egos will in their mind rationalize them to "heroically" riot, steal/loot property that is not theirs, destroy their town, and in general act like feral animals (but never major in STEM, get a job, stop having kids they can't afford, and in general take responsibility for themselves).

Again, I cannot emphasize how much of this is self-inflicted and how much of this is outside the rest of society's control, and thus why I (and neither you) should care.  It is the consequence of decades of brainwashing generations of victims ... They are NOT capable of having a civilized society and you do not what to be part of this society (no matter how "cool" it is to be "in the city" or whatever crappy "theater" or "colleges" or culture Twin Cities politicians promote).

I don't know how many times I've told people to move out of Minneapolis, businesses to never invest in Minnesota, young people to start careers elsewhere, industrious black men to leave the ghetto, and that YOU DO NOT OWN YOUR OWN PROPERTY IN MINNEAPOLIS AS IT IS NOTHING MORE THAN A LARGE COMMUNIST HOA.  But nobody listens.

Again, more at the link.

Such perspectives help to explain why the dreadful Ilhan Omar was elected to Congress from that city, and why her predecessor was the appalling Keith Ellison (self-avowed Antifa supporter, progressive extremist and currently Attorney-General of Minnesota, who will take over the prosecution of the police allegedly responsible for the death of George Floyd.  There goes any hope of a fair trial for them, IMHO.)

Let the powers that be ignore the law, and those responsible for enforcing it will pretty soon realize that if they do as they swore to do when taking the oath of office, they'll be treated as criminals.  That's almost certainly why Minneapolis PD rolled over spinelessly, and abandoned one of its precinct headquarters to destruction by a mob of rioters.  They knew they'd be damned if they did, and damned if they didn't.  Personally, I'd be ashamed to work for an outfit like that . . . but I took (and still take) my federal law enforcement oath of office seriously.  It remains binding on me in retirement, because it has no expiry date.  Minneapolis PD clearly doesn't feel the same way about theirs.

I'm glad I don't live anywhere near that city, because if I were confronted by a mob of rioters bent on causing me harm, I'd be doing my level best to return the favor, particularly in defense of my wife and home.  During eighteen years spent in various war and conflict zones, I came to understand what Josh Billings so famously quipped:

Thrice is he armed that hath his quarrel just,
But four times he who gets his blow in fust.

As the old saying goes, there's many a true word spoken in jest.  I've learned (the hard way) to be as fusty as I can, when danger makes it necessary.  I recommend the principle, particularly in these troubled times - and doubly so in a progressive hellhole such as Minneapolis appears to have become.

Peter

Minneapolis: the cowardice of the city authorities

I'm sure we've all seen images of the rioting and destruction in Minneapolis following the tragic death of George Floyd at the hands of police there.  I won't bother to reproduce any here.

I have no problem with protests against the actions of police in Mr. Floyd's death.  If I were living in or near Minneapolis, I'd take part in them!  On the basis of video evidence, I have no hesitation in labeling it police malfeasance, at the very least.  There should be (and I hope there will be) legal consequences for all concerned.  However, when the protestors start behaving like thugs and criminals, that crosses a line just as clearly as the one the police crossed in dealing with Mr. Floyd.  The protestors make themselves criminals too.

I can't understand how the city authorities in Minneapolis are allowing this anarchy to continue.  In northern Texas, I know for sure that every small business would have its owner(s) and/or employees deployed outside with firearms in the event of similar trouble here - and they wouldn't hesitate to use their guns if necessary in defense of their property.  They're entirely within their rights to do so.  Many of their customers would join them to help out.  However, that doesn't appear to be the case in Minneapolis, where business owners are cowering at home, relying on the police to protect their property - and the police are conspicuous by their absence.

This abdication of authority and responsibility seems to be a pattern in that part of the world, judging by earlier reports.  It's a license for anarchy.  Unless it's stopped, and the authorities do their job, Minneapolis may become - perhaps already is - ungovernable.  The current behavior of its police force, letting the riots continue without actively moving to stop them, appears to be nothing less than an acknowledgment of that reality.  I can only assume their behavior is the result of orders from the city authorities, which means that the latter are equally culpable.

If that's the case, I think - I hope! - that an increasing number of Minneapolis residents will take matters into their own hands, and start striking back at the anarchists and criminals and thugs who currently appear to rule their streets and business districts.  If I were living there, I'd be among them.  If police fail to keep the peace, then it's up to us to do so in our own neighborhoods and towns.  If police have no duty to protect individual citizens, as the Supreme Court has ruled, then citizens most certainly have the right to protect themselves and their property.  That's one of the primary justifications for the Second Amendment to the United States constitution.

If the authorities can't be trusted to stop this sort of anarchy, why should they be trusted to deal with the coronavirus pandemic, or business and commerce, or anything else?  Right now, Minneapolis doesn't appear to have a city government at all.  Will its residents do something about that at the next elections?  I hope so . . . but as Joseph de Maistre famously said, every nation gets the government it deserves.  I guess that applies to every city, too.  I just can't figure out how Minneapolis became such a nasty place as to deserve the government it's got!




Peter

The real peril behind vote-by-mail

Tucker Carlson puts it into a short, concise segment.  This is a "must-see" if you're to understand why certain political parties, pressure groups and influencers are trying to promote universal vote-by-mail as a "solution" to the coronavirus pandemic and the risks it poses.

I think he's right.  If this pressure succeeds, you can effectively say goodbye to democracy in the USA.

Peter

The demon of inflation has lost more of the chains holding it back

Demonocracy is known for its graphic illustrations of financial facts and figures that can be so large we simply can't grasp them.  It puts them into visual terms to which we can relate.  For example, here's $1 trillion in $100 bills, stacked up and arranged neatly together alongside objects with which we're familiar (a Boeing 747, an eighteen-wheeler, the White House, etc.) for scale.  Click the image for a larger view.

Demonocracy has used the same technique to visualize the current US stimulus package in response to the coronavirus pandemic.  It's frightening when you realize just how big it is - and understand that the whole thing is based on borrowings and "printed money", generated out of nowhere, with no economic reality to back it up.  Here it is in video form.  I recommend watching it in full-screen mode to get the full impact.

You can see the whole thing as a Web page at this link.  It's even more frightening like that than in a small video window.

Finally, remember that you and I - every single US taxpayer - is on the hook to repay that money, sooner or later.  I don't think that's economically or mathematically feasible, which leaves only two options.  Both may happen, separately or together.

1. The rate of inflation will be deliberately allowed to grow, rendering "current" dollars almost worthless in relation to "historical" dollars.  Old debts can then be repaid with new dollars, a much less painful process.  Unfortunately, that leads to hyperinflation.  Just look what happened to Weimar Germany when it tried to do exactly that to repay war reparations.
   
   
   
   
2. The US government will simply ignore fiscal reality and continue to borrow money to fund its expenditure.  This will see the deficit climb, and climb, and climb, until eventually no-one will buy US bonds or securities any more, because the "debt overhang" has become so great as to threaten the stability of the world's economic system.  At that point, the US government's ability to pay for all its programs will collapse - as will the US dollar as a world reserve currency, and the US economy as a whole.

As I said, the really scary prospect is that we may see both of those things happening simultaneously.  During the previous recession, the Federal Reserve ended up as the largest "buyer" of securities issued by the US Treasury, effectively printing money to pay for printed securities that weren't worth the paper they were printed on.  It's doing the same thing now, as international demand for US securities can't absorb the trillions of dollars required for the current pandemic stimulus package.  The Federal Reserve's balance sheet has grown astronomically over the past couple of months, and the growth shows no signs of slowing down.

There are those who argue that the current situation may lead to deflation, rather than inflation, due to asset prices taking a major hit.  In the short term, they may well be correct.  However, in the long term, the lesson of history is clear.  Dilute the currency in any way (adulterating precious metals with base, or printing money without any economic foundation to support it) and sooner or later, the chickens come home to roost.  Inflation is the inevitable result.

I think we're already seeing some of that affecting the consumer.  Have you noticed food prices lately?  I know they're attributed to market conditions, but I think they also reflect the underlying reality of inflationary pressure on the consumer.  I've demonstrated several times in the past that real consumer inflation, as measured by objective sources such as Shadowstats or the Chapwood Index, has been far higher than official figures.  As Miss D. and I do our shopping every week, we're seeing inflation even higher than that.  Some items' prices have increased by more than 25% since March!

What will dumping an extra few trillion dollars into the economy, money created out of nothing from nowhere, do to the rate of inflation over time?  I think we all know.

Peter

"A Band-Aid on a chest wound"

That's how the Guardian describes the rush by illegal immigrants to get in line for California's handout of taxpayer dollars to them.

Last month, California made headlines when it announced a first-in-the-nation plan to create a $125m coronavirus relief fund for undocumented workers. But its rollout got off to a chaotic start this week, with thousands of calls flooding phone lines, creating huge delays, and so many visitors to the official website that it crashed for hours.

Adding to already overwhelmed telephone systems, the state issued last-minute directives that said callers needed to reach a live person in order to apply for aid.

Nonprofits across the state selected to distribute the money reported huge demand as people rushed to secure a spot for the first-come, first-served program.

The Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles, or Chirla, one of 12 nonprofits tapped by the state to distribute the funds, received more than 1.1m phone calls on day one of the program – 630,000 calls just within the first 90 minutes of opening the hotline.

“We knew the number of applicants would be high, but we were just overwhelmed,” Chirla’s executive director told the New York Times.

Lucas Zucker, the policy and communications director for a nonprofit north-west of Los Angeles that advocates for social and environmental justice, wrote on Twitter that the program’s rocky rollout was predictable.

“Websites and phone lines across the state crashed. Our team saw so much frustration, anger and sadness from folks just trying to feed their kids. The need here is way too large to be met with a one-time disaster relief fund. We’re putting a Band-Aid on an open chest wound,” wrote Zucker.

. . .

Undocumented immigrants make up an estimated 10% of the state’s workforce ... [there are an] estimated 2 million undocumented immigrants living in California.

There's more at the link.

Note the last paragraph cited above.  I daresay the sheer volume of calls demanding a share of that money gives the lie to the 2 million estimate.  (My law enforcement contacts in California privately estimate the number of illegal aliens there to be at least 5 million, possibly more.  They base that on their experience of traffic stops, criminal investigations, and so on.  I believe them.)

Of course, the state of California should not be rewarding illegal aliens for their presence with taxpayer dollars.  That's flatly insane, and can do nothing except encourage further illegal entry (which is probably the point, given the nature and policies of that state's government).  However, this stampede for assistance highlights the economic plight of the marginally employed.  We've already seen that many are apparently returning to Mexico under the impact of the coronavirus pandemic.  They have no jobs there, and Mexico has few (if any) social assistance or entitlement programs to help them.  Those who remain in this country aren't eligible for the federal government's assistance or stimulus package, yet are also at risk of losing their jobs not just temporarily, but in the long term, as the economy contracts.  To say that they're becoming desperate is to put it mildly.

What does this forbode for social stability?  I don't think it's anything good.  I expect demonstrations, even riots, in California as the illegals demand more sustenance to which they're not legally entitled (at least, not under federal law).  I expect California's government to cave in to their demands, and expend more taxpayer funds on them.  That, in turn, will arouse resentment and anger among taxpayers, who see their money being wasted on those who have no right to it.  I don't think that's going to end well.

Will this have an impact on the November 2020 elections in that state?  Is the special election there earlier this month an early "canary in a coal mine" for a sea change in California politics?  Who knows?  We can but hope . . .

Peter

Nah. I'm sure there's no connection. None at all . . .

Headlines to make you see red, when taken together:

California will pay illegal immigrants

not included in coronavirus stimulus

Newsom Proposes Cuts For

State Worker Pay, Schools, Health Care

In Grim COVID-19 Budget Revision

Western governors join Gavin Newsom

in $1 trillion appeal to Congress

for coronavirus aid

What a coincidence!  That the states falling over themselves to hand out taxpayer dollars to illegal aliens, the homeless and what they define as "needy" groups, should turn around and demand that the rest of us pay them ONE TRILLION DOLLARS for "coronavirus aid"!  And what a coincidence that only a few days after announcing millions in taxpayer dollars as a handout to illegal aliens, California's governor is asking state employees to tighten their belts!  There can't possibly be a relationship between them.  Right?  Right?  Anyone . . . Bueller?

Perish the thought that the "coronavirus aid" Western states are demanding might not be for costs related to the current pandemic, but instead to replenish their states' coffers that they've depleted wasted through misspending, overspending, ideological blindness and just plain incompetence - so they can turn around and waste that money all over again in the name of "compassion" or "tolerance" or "equality".

None of those things could possibly be more than coincidental . . . could they?




Peter

Asking the unthinkable question

The wholesale erosion - or even flat-out denial - of our civil liberties and constitutional rights during the coronavirus lockdown has (not for the first time) raised vitally important questions.

• To what extent should we allow our government to do this?
• To what extent should we be prepared to acquiesce, to knuckle under, before we take a stand and say, "This far and no further!"?
• How should we resist when the intrusion into our rights becomes too great to bear?  Must we restrict ourselves to fights in the courts, which may well result in a verdict proving us right, but in the meantime - until that verdict is issued - will result in our having to endure those intrusions?  Or are we entitled to take physical, dynamic measures to resist oppression?

Let's set the scene first.  Carol Brown lays it out.

We have become part of a mass scale human experiment in government control and it turned out that stripping away our freedom wasn’t all that difficult. Under the guise of concern for our health and well-being, tyrants came out of the woodwork.  Our Constitution, our Bill of Rights, and our lives are being destroyed as the left solidifies and expands their oppressive powers. We’ve been herded around like cattle, threatened, isolated, confined, silenced, and arrested. You name it, it’s happening.

. . .

We’ve been told who can work and who can’t ... We’ve been physically and verbally harassed, threatened, fined, detained, arrested, jailed, and/or placed in forced quarantine ... Stay home. Do not go out. Do not earn money. Do not pay your bills, feed your family, maintain your credit rating, live your life. Do not make a single move without permission from the State or you will be punished.

Do not dare go to church. They have been shut down, some threatened with permanent closure. Even services that maintained social distancing were not tolerated ... Religion cannot thrive in a totalitarian state, as the state must reign supreme.

. . .

In several places, our right to protest has been stripped away as has our right to promote protests ... The Bill of Rights has been set on fire and tossed off the top of a skyscraper as a police state rushes in ... The government will hunt you down, find you, and force you and other members of your household to stay in your home, even if there’s no food in the house. The quarantine cycle could leave an entire household locked up for weeks and weeks on end, with no end in sight as we are essentially placed under house arrest. Strategies for how to identify people who’ve met certain criteria have been discussed, including government issued armbands.

. . .

And while the lust for power underpins this shocking spectacle, it’s wrapped up in the guise of “safety.” Who could possibly question a doctor in a white coat touting such an idea? No good totalitarian regime would be without its idealized worldview to sell fools down the river.

And so we’ve sailed, as our economy has collapsed, Americans have been controlled, law enforcement has complied, and people are bombarded with fearful messages every hour of every day – messages riddled with distorted information and lies, from bogus models to inflated mortality rates and everything in between ... When nations go to war, they do so to defend their culture and way of life. Instead, we are destroying ours.

. . .

So far, the police state has been a wild success.

There's more at the link.

If you want a classic example of the above, just look at Illinois Governor Pritzker's latest insanity.  He's going to make criminals out of anyone and everyone who dares disobey his dictatorial edicts.  Will the people of Illinois stand for it?  If they do, they've strayed far from the path our Founding Fathers laid out for us . . .

There have been some - pitifully few - law enforcement officers and agencies who have taken a stand, and refused to participate in this mandated assault on our constitutional rights and civil liberties.  However, the statists simply don't care about this.  They go right on riding roughshod over the "little people" they despise, even as they rule them.  Witness how the Virginia governor and legislature have ignored (and openly expressed contempt for) the more than 90% of Virginia counties who have opposed their drive to restrict gun rights.  Despite many counties declaring themselves "Second Amendment sanctuaries", despite thousands of gun owners demonstrating at the Virginia capitol, the powers that be went ahead and passed most of their anti-gun agenda into law.  The balance is likely to follow before long.  They were completely unfazed by the opposition;  in fact, their determination was probably strengthened by it.  "We'll show these deplorables who's boss!" appears to sum up their attitude.

What's more, our acquiescence in such administrative, executive and legislative overreach appears to be evidence that they can get away with it.  Apart from a few demonstrations, where has been the public outrage?  Where has been the mass civil disobedience that such overreach should call forth?  Where has been our signers of a modern Declaration of Independence who will pledge their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honors to stopping such overreach, no matter what the cost?  All those things have been conspicuous by their absence.  No wonder the statists are emboldened!

The news media and social media are, of course, solidly behind the statists.  Facebook, Twitter and YouTube are actively censoring any views that oppose the mainstream, no matter how expert or authoritative the person espousing those views may be.  Dissenters are de-platformed, de-monetized, denigrated and denied the ability to propagate their views.  If those views are too well grounded in fact to be contradicted, they're simply ignored, as if not talking about them will somehow magically make them go away.

It's no coincidence that most of these offenses against our rights and liberties have occurred in left-leaning states and cities.  Matt Taibbi, no conservative, explains why.

Democrats have lately positioned themselves as more aggressive promoters of strong-arm policies, from control of Internet speech to the embrace of domestic spying ... Democrats clearly believe constituents will forgive them for abandoning constitutional principles ... In the process, they’ve raised a generation of followers whose contempt for civil liberties is now genuine-to-permanent. Blue-staters have gone from dismissing constitutional concerns as Trumpian ruse to sneering at them, in the manner of French aristocrats, as evidence of proletarian mental defect.

Nowhere has this been more evident than in the response to the Covid-19 crisis, where the almost mandatory take of pundits is that any protest of lockdown measures is troglodyte death wish. The aftereffects of years of Russiagate/Trump coverage are seen everywhere: press outlets reflexively associate complaints of government overreach with Trump, treason, and racism, and conversely radiate a creepily gleeful tone when describing aggressive emergency measures and the problems some “dumb” Americans have had accepting them.

Again, more at the link.

Sadly, many applications to the courts to overturn executive overreach have been delayed, tied up in legal red tape, or even denied by activist judges who are entirely in sympathy with statism versus constitutionalism.  A shining exception is Texas Supreme Court associate Justice Jimmy Blacklock.  In a recent decision, he stated flatly and emphatically for the majority:

“The Constitution is not suspended when the government declares a state of disaster.” In re Abbott, No. 20-0291, 2020 WL 1943226, at *1 (Tex. Apr. 23, 2020). All government power in this country, no matter how well-intentioned, derives only from the state and federal constitutions. Government power cannot be exercised in conflict with these constitutions, even in a pandemic.

In the weeks since American governments began taking emergency measures in response to the coronavirus, the sovereign people of this country have graciously and peacefully endured a suspension of their civil liberties without precedent in our nation’s history. In some parts of the country, churches have been closed by government decree, although Texas is a welcome exception. Nearly everywhere, the First Amendment “right of the people to peaceably assemble” has been suspended altogether. U.S. Const. amend. I. In many places, people are forbidden to leave their homes without a government-approved reason. Tens of millions can no longer earn a living because the government has declared their employers or their businesses “ ‘non-essential.’ ”

Those who object to these restrictions should remember they were imposed by duly elected officials, vested by statute with broad emergency powers, who must make difficult decisions under difficult circumstances. At the same time, all of us—the judiciary, the other branches of government, and our fellow citizens—must insist that every action our governments take complies with the Constitution, especially now. If we tolerate unconstitutional government orders during an emergency, whether out of expediency or fear, we abandon the Constitution at the moment we need it most.

Any government that has made the grave decision to suspend the liberties of a free people during a health emergency should welcome the opportunity to demonstrate—both to its citizens and to the courts—that its chosen measures are absolutely necessary to combat a threat of overwhelming severity. The government should also be expected to demonstrate that less restrictive measures cannot adequately address the threat. Whether it is strict scrutiny or some other rigorous form of review, courts must identify and apply a legal standard by which to judge the constitutional validity of the government’s anti-virus actions. When the present crisis began, perhaps not enough was known about the virus to second-guess the worst-case projections motivating the lockdowns. As more becomes known about the threat and about the less restrictive, more targeted ways to respond to it, continued burdens on constitutional liberties may not survive judicial scrutiny.

Ideally, these debates would play out in the public square, not in courtrooms. No court should relish being asked to question the judgment of government officials who were elected to make difficult decisions in times such as these. However, when constitutional rights are at stake, courts cannot automatically defer to the judgments of other branches of government. When properly called upon, the judicial branch must not shrink from its duty to require the government’s antivirus orders to comply with the Constitution and the law, no matter the circumstances.

More at the link.

I, for one, am not prepared to see the Constitution ignored or abandoned.  I swore an oath to support and defend it against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and that oath had (and still has) no expiration date.  By that logic (and it is logical), those who ignore or trash the Constitution in their statist decrees and dictates are its enemies.  That means it's incumbent on me not to merely tolerate, temporarily, their excesses and overreach until courts can rule on the subject - particularly when we can't be sure the courts will rule as the Constitution requires.  Instead of tolerating, I need to take action.  The question is . . . what action?  To take up arms against, and violently resist, the duly and Constitutionally elected government and its officials - whether local, state or national - is by definition a criminal act.  However, it's well in line with the Declaration of Independence, which preceded the Constitution and precipitated the American Revolution.  That's a dynamic tension which may have to be resolved before too long.

I blame a great deal of the inaction of the American people on the abolition of civics education in American schools and colleges.  Even the Atlantic, a very left-wing, progressive source indeed, observed in 2016:

While there surely are many varied causes for the current American political situation, one among those is the relative ignorance of basic American history, scientific, technological knowledge, and what some refer to as “civics” among a large sector of our population. It is testimony to the failure of the country’s education system that a high percentage of the voting-age population is simply ignorant of basic facts—knowledge that is necessary to act reasonably and rationally in the political process.

. . .

James Madison put the current dilemma clearly in focus almost 200 years ago, when he wrote in an 1822 letter to W. T. Barry: “A popular Government without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy, or perhaps both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.” The American people are not doing this today, and the results are evident in the cracks appearing in the country’s democracy.

More at the link. Bold, underlined text is my emphasis.

The problem, of course, is that statist administrations don't want people educated in civics.  Their poisonous intrusion into and effective trashing of Constitutional rights couldn't be done if the electorate were more aware of the limitations on their power.  Remove that awareness, and overreach becomes much easier.

So . . . what do we do?

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

God forbid that a new civil war should be brewing . . . but I have a feeling in my water that one may be on the horizon.  I will not be ruled as a slave, licking the feet of dictatorial statist masters.  I will not allow my Constitutional rights and liberties to be ignored, trampled or taken away.  That's my bottom line;  and I'm old enough, and have little enough to lose, that I'm willing to insist on it, no matter what the cost.

What's your bottom line?  And how far are you prepared to go to insist on it?

This would be a good start . . . but I don't think it goes far enough.

The 2020 elections in November aren't far away.  Will the American electorate vote for statism, or freedom?  Subjection, or liberty?  We're about to find out.

Peter

True dat!

Found on Gab:

And that's why we're having so many problems getting out of "this" together - because with very few exceptions, those managing "this" aren't part of what the rest of us are experiencing.  I reckon most of them need replacing, at once if not sooner.




Peter

Betraying America, redux - or, fiddling while America burns

The well-known (and almost certainly apocryphal) story of Emperor Nero playing the fiddle while his city of Rome burned around him is well-known.  It seems the same story could be told of Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic Party right now . . . but not apocryphally.  They appear willing to let this country go to the dogs, just so long as they can ram through their ideology - an ideology which has nothing whatsoever to do with the coronavirus pandemic and the damage it's done to our nation and our economy.

Let Tucker Carlson explain just how ghastly is their new "HEROES Act" and its focus on ideological concerns, rather than relief for those who are suffering.  You really should take seven minutes to listen to his monologue from last night.  To call this bill "mind-blowing" is an understatement, IMHO, as he makes clear.

When the Democrat's first "relief bill" appeared, I called it "Betraying America", and asked:

Would somebody please point out to me what (if anything) those points have to do with providing relief to American citizens and corporations from the effects of the coronavirus pandemic?  I'm calling on Democratic voters and supporters in particular.  Come on - precisely how do those points bring relief to Americans who've lost their jobs and livelihoods, and to companies that are about to go to the wall under the impact of this crisis?

I can only say the same thing, in spades, for the legislative atrocity the Democrats are calling the "HEROES Act".  It's 1,815 pages long, containing 347,000 words.  Something that massive is obviously not a recent, hurried production.  Clearly, this has been prepared over a long period of time, probably with various departments and groups working on specific sections and clauses.  It's bundled together every pie-in-the-sky socialist wet dream you can imagine, and seeks to thrust this burden onto the backs of those Americans still working, who'll have to pay for it, one way or another, sooner or later.

This is so blatant, so in-your-face, that its sheer chutzpah leaves one breathless.  Nancy Pelosi has even gone so far as to dismissively observe, "I can't be bothered about what others say.  What I'm proud of is what we are doing."  I'm sure she is . . . but I suspect the rest of America, particularly its taxpayers, won't be anything like as proud.  In particular, allocating about $900 billion to cities and states to bail out their spendthrift budget deficits and long-term indebtedness is sheer lunacy.  All that guarantees is that they'll immediately take out more loans and go into debt once again, to continue to fund expenditure they can't afford;  then they'll come back to Congress and demand yet another bailout, citing this first one as a precedent.

If this bill passes, America will become a debt-ridden, fiscally crippled hellhole almost overnight.  It's that bad.  I sincerely hope that every legislator who's signed on to, or votes for, this monstrosity will be punished severely at the polls in November's election.  They deserve nothing less than to lose the offices they've disgraced by ignoring reality and pandering to socialist pie-in-the-sky.




Peter