INDEPENDENCE DAY 2018

The Declaration of Independence of, what would become, the United States of America imposed on its signatories the pledge in dedication to their cause of “our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred honor.” These last words of the revered text that launched an entire people into warfare, death, and conflict are momentous for the history of the world.

The text of the Declaration begins by informing the intended recipient of what they intend to do:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

Then follows a statement of values:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal . . .

Then the indictment:

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good. . .

And then twenty-six more paragraphs of the indictment follow in a barrage of accusations unequaled since the 97 theses of Martin Luther. Finally, the aforementioned pledge of life, liberty, and sacred honor indicates the length to which the signatories and supporters felt it necessary to go.

The ensuing bloody, vicious warfare underlined the serious intent of the Declaration. Divorce was acrimonious and occurred with enormous loss and suffering. Yet, the great document is for the ages and its sentiments endure to this day. Though the United States is a country that still struggles to make all men and women equal, it cannot be doubted that the pledge of the founding fathers endures to this day. The ideals, which it could be argued the founding fathers did not fully understand, and certainly did not implement, constitute a roadmap to the future from the past for the present.

Those who fought and died to liberate the people suffered the worst conditions of man and nature. It is not a myth that they trudged through snow in bare feet, starved in the woods, encamped in the depths of winter on a frozen patch of ground, and then faced a paid Hessian army that took no prisoners. Atrocities against the people embittered the opponents against the Crown, and alienation from families and friends during service to the promise of democracy cut deeply into the spirit of the revolutionaries.

In the end, the luminaries boldly leading the country into statehood found that success only posed a long list if challenges to the founders. Some would have reverted to monarchy and exchanged one King George for another. George Washington would have none of it, and neither would the rational leadership of the day Having defeated the Crown, the challenges grew. The intellectual champions of the day argued like brothers, and there was no clear winner among the intellectual giants. Hamilton and Jefferson, imperfect vehicles for the task, nevertheless, set the course. The Articles of Confederation, conceived as a loose binder of hope, failed. The country found that it had more in common than it had differences and the Benjamin Franklin reminder that they would hang together or hand separately, echoed beyond the past war and into future nation building. The failure of the weak Articles taught an important lesson about working together as individuals as well as states. What they organized set a standard for the rest of the world to follow. With the immediate addition of the 10 first amendments, they made the statement that The United States of America was a work in progress. And the rest is more history.

Consequently, the United States continues to evolve based on its constitution, amendments, and Supreme Court decisions. There is a sense that today, the country can detach itself from the constitution that has been fought for in bloody wars at home and abroad. Some advocates believe the courts are a tool of untethered political will. Yet the Declaration of Independence teaches a strict lesson. A people cannot use the logical traditions, amended as they are, to oppose the will of the founders whose constitutional wisdom was born from the womb of experience with tyranny. If the United States is to survive the rigors of the twenty-first century, It must resolve to the following:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to resolve the political bands which have disconnected them from each other, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect for the opinions of each member of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to their repatriation in honor of those who sacrificed and died before them.

PARKS AND RECREATION ON THE FRITZ

The following article appeared in The Oregonian on March 28, 2018:

 

“A man who describes himself as a “light-skinned Hispanic male” has filed a lawsuit against the city of Portland, claiming Parks and Recreation denied him job opportunities because his skin isn’t dark enough.

Frank Higuera says in the suit that he worked as a seasonal parks ranger for several years before the city eliminated his job during budget cuts. The suit claims he wasn’t rehired for several other parks jobs despite meeting the qualifications “because his skin color was too light.” Higuera claims “applicants of darker skin color were selected . . . because of the color of their skin and not because of their qualification.”

Parks managers told him they wanted to hire him but learned they couldn’t because he was the “wrong color,” according to the lawsuit, filed last Friday. A parks and Recreation manager also told him that he would need to get a suntan to land a full-time city job, the suit says.

Higuera filed a complaint with the city human resources office and was told it would be investigated, but he never heard back, he says in the lawsuit.

Human resources officials declined to confirm that Higuera worked for the city and his filing of a discrimination complaint. A spokesman for Amanda Fritz, the city commissioner in charge of Parks and Recreation, said Fritz doesn’t comment on personnel matters or pending lawsuits. Higuera plans to ask a jury to award him $530,000 for lost wages and emotional distress.

 

Sophisticated bureaucrats have discovered the Fitzpatrick Scale, described by Wikipedia, as follows:

 

Fitzpatrick scale:

The following list shows the six categories of the Fitzpatrick scale in relation to the 36 categories of the older von Luschan scale:[87][88]

Type Also called Sunburning Tanning behavior Von Luschan’s chromatic scale
I Light, pale white Always Never 0–6
II White, fair Usually Minimally 7–13
III Medium, white to light brown Sometimes Uniformly 14–20
IV Olive, moderate brown Rarely Easily 21–27
V Brown, dark brown Very rarely Very easily 28–34
VI Very dark brown to black Never Never 35–36

 

As might be expected, a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. Frank Higuera deserved better notice of the conditions of service when applying to Parks and Recreation. Conseratismbittersweet recommends that Portland job applicants be issued a color wheel at the time of time their applications are submitted. As an efficiency move, doing so reduces the cities paperwork and prevents both sides from wasting their time. The color wheel should come with instructions. For example:

 

“Place your color wheel against the back of your forearm and match your skin tone to that of the appropriate Fitzpatrick color. Your skin tone must match the designated Fitzpatrick tone as shown in the upper righthand corner of the application. If your skin tone does not match, you are not eligible for the job for which you are applying.” The color wheel should, of course, be reusable and recyclable, as any city proffered materials must be.

 

Of course, the root of these procedural requirements is the desire for City of Portland equity, and it is obvious that an efficiently operating government is a fair government. Although Mr. Higuera was applying for outdoor employment, similar operational efficiencies are achievable for office work. Conservatismbittersweet recommends that office cubicles be arranged from light to dark in order to facilitate manager confirmation of the accurate Fitzpatrick scale number.

 

Under the circumstances, it is recommended that the city take care of its employees responsibly and supply an appropriate quantity of sunscreen to prevent workers from putting themselves out of work unnecessarily. Clearly the compassionate city must support the people.

 

Had Mr Higuera been aware of the true requirements of the job, he would have saved the city money in his application and heartache for himself.

 

And here is one more suggestion. Every employment office window should have the following sign as appropriate to the job:

 

Applicants for Fitzpatrick skin tone number I-V need not apply.

CRIME AND JUSTICE

One would think that a basic function of American government is to administer and enforce the laws of the United States. To that end, the head of the executive branch of this country, President Trump, has called for the National Guard of the respective states to help defend the border with Mexico.

 

Predictably, the leftist governor of Oregon, Kate Brown, has refused to contribute Oregon troops to the effort. Liberal Democrats (redundancy noted) believe that they have an acute sensitivity to moral and ethical decisions. This allows them to ignore laws erroneously passed by the American democracy that elected them. Ignoring anti-marijuana laws or retaining illegal aliens is no problem. The high moral standards they have designated for themselves allows them to ignore murderers who inhabit their communities, having figured out that a little collateral damage from the felons is acceptable, as long as it advances the notion that American standards of compassion have been upheld. Their high moral beliefs also allow them to advocate for peace and killing unborn human beings at the same time.

 

It is assumed at this point that you are still following their line of reasoning, but if you lack their moral acuity you may not. Therefore, if confused, simply trust them to guide you as they see fit, for they have sent the conundrums of modern life through their moral sifter and arrived at the truth.

 

Now consider the dilemma of George Washington. In order to support the government of the United States, it was necessary to levy taxes. Everyone hates taxes (except left-wing Democrats). Thinking of the Federalists of the day as the analogue to Republicans of today is a bit of a stretch, but the government was just starting out and the party in power determined that steps to support government decisions were necessary. Taxes are a necessary part of citizenship. Note: this is not the same as saying all taxes are justified or desirable. So, with the encouragement of Alexander Hamilton and others, a tax on distilled spirits was imposed in 1791.

 

The locus of the problem was in four counties in western Pennsylvania and two in western Virginia where opponents of the tax had gone so far as to create a flag with six stripes to symbolize the organized opposition in the six counties in question. A little context is required here. The French Revolution and its aftermath were in full swing, and what had the American revolution been about, but taxation without representation. It was somewhat lost on the tax opponents that this was an example of taxation with representation. The resistance, which became known as the Whiskey Rebellion, threatened to topple the fragile government. With French-like threats to form a committee of public safety and calls for the guillotine, a real threat existed to the future of the United States.

 

Stepping into the breach as usual, President Washington took control of the situation, and found legal support from Justice James Wilson for the formation of a militia to answer the violent faux French revolutionaries. Washington became the only president to personally lead soldiers into battle. Washington realized the importance of his mission, for in his words and reasoning, that if the laws were “trampled upon with impunity, and a minority . . . is to dictate to the majority, there is an end put at one stroke to republican government.”[1]

 

Forced to deal with the 13,000-man militia force, the rebel opposition was crushed. Some 150 prisoners were brought to account for their transgressions. Washington showed mercy in all cases by granting clemency to the rebels, including two who were convicted and sentenced to death, but pardoned by the president.

 

Today the United States is threatened by a metastasized rebellion fomented by public officials and leftist ideologues who believe that they are empowered by superior moral judgment to override the law as it stands. Clearly there is for many of them a design to further deny Americans their rights by facilitating a vote for aliens to which those aliens are not entitled. They are aided by well-meaning people who believe they are helping a downtrodden population of victims, when, in fact, they are perpetuating the same unsolved problems other countries do not fix, by providing a safety valve for dictators and political monopolists who exploit their people.

 

The rule of law in a democracy represents the power of justice in action.

[1] Washington A Life by Ron Chernow, Penguin Books2010

 

 

THE FLAG AS SYMBOL

Flag of the U.S.S.Constitution

The NFL (Not For Long, Not Funny League) has modified its rules on political demonstrations to tacitly condone the protests against the flag of the United States. This, despite banning a tribute to 911 victims by the NFL in earlier years. Some have suggested, that by kneeling in protest in front of the flag, NFL players are not really protesting the flag. Really, it must be the Nazi, White Supremacist in Section 12, Row 8.

 

No, it actually was the flag that they protested. What courage is that? You soften your protest if you come back and say, it really wasn’t an attack on the flag as some have said. Suppose an opponent of abortion protested in the same manner and pointed to the crowd and said, “I was aiming for that right-to-do-with-your-body-whatever-you-want woman in Section 66, Row versus Wade, not the flag.” Yes, it is actually the flag.

 

The irony in this is that the flag covers even the flag protestors (if they are United States citizens). So, in a sense they are protesting themselves. Perhaps that is not wrong, but intellectually it means nothing; protesting the flag is a cry for (publicity) help. Protestors do such things to draw attention to their narcissistic selves as if they are above the flag. But the flag represents everyone and stands above them, and should represent a deeper solemnity for the pain and sacrifice of those who have suffered and died for the flag and what it represents.

 

Angry Iranians, as well as others, burn the American flag. It is not their flag. Americans have not taken to burning foreign flags, just their own. Such is the freedom in this country. When women and slaves lacked the vote, there might be an argument that they could protest by burning the flag to demonstrate their plight. But, again, American citizens with the vote protesting their own flag, protest themselves.

 

That it is offensive to many of their fellow Americans does not bother them. Offending foreign people of color insensitively is tantamount to a crime against humanity. Offending patriotic Americans – no big deal.

 

A fair person must honestly say, protest is honorable, and if a grievance is heartfelt, a thoughtful person must also say, go for it. But that is not a license for any action the imagination can summon. Physical harm is not allowed, and other societal proscriptions may apply. Dishonoring the flag is one of them.

 

But here is the heart of the matter: the American flag is a broad brush. Attacking the flag is an attack on Jew and Gentile, Black and White, Old and Young, Gay and Straight, and all the combinations and possibilities that come under the banner of Citizen of the United States.

 

The flag that the NFLers protested is the symbol that has draped the coffins of its soldiers of all kinds and colors. Those who have died and given up everything that comes with a long life, should remain the most honored citizens – revered and respected, and not a cause for diminishing the American flag. Let us remember, the first man to die in the Revolutionary War was the likely runaway slave, Crispus Attucks, who was half Black and half Native American. Since then many have suffered and died for their country – a country that honors protest, but not desecration or disrespect.

JIHAD

The United States is headed towards a crisis. Democrats, well versed in the art of treachery, have launched their own Jihad (holy war) against the duly and legally elected president of the United States. There Jihad is not much different from that of ISIS.

For they believe they have superior moral values and greater intellectual breadth than anyone else outside their elite bounds. They have determined that anything – no lie, no deception, no illegality – is unreasonable in their attempt to unseat the legally elected president. It has led the left-wing press (an unavoidable redundancy) to turn the truth upside down. It has led the lefty columnist Eugene Robinson to persecute the president and accuse him of having a persecution complex. It has, more recently [The Oregonian, 8/6/17], caused Ruth Marcus, another of the lefty press to accuse the president of “. . . a one-man assault on the rule of law.”

The topsy-turvy world of Ruth Marcus believes that, “Trump’s campaign and now his presidency have been an unceasing effort to demean the Constitution. From “fake news” to “so-called” judges, from his ill-considered travel ban to encouraging police officers’ roughing up of suspects, Trump is a one-man assault on the rule of law.”

Let us put aside the idea that Ms. Marcus looks past the obliteration of 33,000 subpoenaed emails by Hillary Clinton and the use of a private server, contrary to U. S. law, as well as many other questionable practices. Let us look past the support for illegal aliens, including criminals. (We don’t have enough already in this country). Let us look at the idea that President Trump, defending himself against the contrived, false charges of a Russian conspiracy is not allowed to voice his views because, why? Oh, he is not allowed to defend himself by exposing the methods of left-wing propaganda or the efforts of the deep state to undermine his presidency and by the “resistance” movement, which includes a left-wing establishment of judicial extremists who believe that they are the law, not the interpreters of the law.

For sure, President Trump does not play by the rules of understatement and pretense typical of all the players in Washington D. C. He has attracted the support of equally blunt and unpretentious thinkers among the working class as well as many fellow Republicans. He is not always right. But here is the difference, he is not undermining the process of selecting a president by political legerdemain and savage hatred by pretense. What is the proof of this? Before even his inauguration, his enemies called for his impeachment. There has been an unrelenting scream of hate speech built into nearly all the commentary about President Trump. The news operations of the establishment press have been non-stop in their unkind interpretations of Trump policy.

They did not pause to think about how President Obama’s policies “evolved” over time. In fact, before he accomplished anything, President Obama was given the Nobel Peace Prize. The expectations of the press and the deep state were set from the beginning of both presidencies, and they became self-fulfilling.

The current president has been the victim of illegal acts, not the perpetrator of them. A conversation of General Michael Flynn was illegally leaked to the press, which was dutifully printed by the bearers of stolen words. Conversations with foreign leaders and President trump have also been leaked. More leaks have occurred from the current administrations than any others and some, if caught, will go to jail. The unrelenting sympathy for a Democrat congressperson shot by an imbalanced gunman compares to the disappearing coverage of Steve Scalise and a group of Republican congresspersons who were near victims of an assassination attempt. Let us hope that Steve Scalise and the other targets don’t have a persecution complex.

It is stating the obvious, that Ruth Marcus and a host of insiders have, to varying degrees, launched a political attack against the sitting President of the United States. This is politics. Politics can be rough, and that is not the complaint. The complaint is that the hypocrisy of the left has come to the point of stealing the election by the appointment of a special prosecutor by one of the witnesses involved in the complaint. The special prosecutor, a friend of the discredited former James Comey, has appointed a list of Democrat attorneys to aid him in his investigations. To President Trump, this is a set-up. They will find something illegal to accuse the president of doing. Ms. Marcus who reveres the Constitution, will drop her pretense of innocent until proven guilty, and announce an I-told-you-so victory, along with other deep state backers, and hound the president until he has been impeached. The people who did not see perjury in Bill Clinton as a high crime or misdemeanor will have the opportunity to remove the duly elected president for advocating for his people. If this scenario should enfold, the crisis will begin. The left may see a President Pense as a victory, but democracy will have failed. We shall not go beyond this point. But if this scenario is not chilling to citizens of the United States, then you are living in the Ruth Marcus fantasy world, that actions have no consequences, and the Newtonian rule that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

ALL-OUT ATTACK – THE COLD WAR ON CONSERVATIVES HEATS UP

Over the preceding weeks, the revenge Democrats have expanded their front against the Trump Administration as widely as they possibly can. No half-truth has gone unnoticed or unused in this war. The politics of personal destruction have appeared once again to create distractions from the Democrats stall tactics in the Senate. The latest victim is Attorney General, Jeff Sessions. He is accused of lying to Congress after stating that he had not contacted the Russians about campaign matters from the joke of a senator from Minnesota, Al Franken. Never mind, that Sessions answered accurately the rambling question that was asked. If you can twist the truth to suit your needs, you too can be a Senate Democrat.

In a Washington Post article by Ron Charles – a book reviewer for the newspaper – the author tripped over the words of Trump advisor Kellyanne Conway’s who described “alternative facts” that she would issue in the defense of President Trump’s assertion that he drew the largest audience ever to his inauguration. In elaborating on his point, Charles compared the use of the words, “alternative facts,” to the world created by George Orwell in his elegantly satirical book “1984.” In Charles’ view, “Big Brother’s pronouncements are treated as absolute truth by his acolytes, even when they defy rational thought – so Black is White, 2+2=5, War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength.”

A rational reading on this point would suggest that Conway’s views might equate to the debate on global climate change. Where a Leftist might state that sea levels are rising, the other side might express the alternative fact that the earth has been warming since the last ice age. The defense of a point of view can be stated correctly, but in the aggregate remain wrong. But Charles’ comments were not really about inelegant language and a book. His views were part of a larger effort by the Left in this country to discredit, by any means, the policies of the Trump administration.

Conway is a lightning rod for criticism. More recently she was the target of a crude joke by Rep. Cedric Richardson. During a session in the Whitehouse Oval Office, Conway was sitting on her heals on a sofa in a room and pictured with 60 African American Presidents of historically black universities and President Trump. Richardson commented “ . . . she really looked familiar to me in that position . . . . He later apologized for the derogatory comment. Yet, it is a tribute to her effectiveness as a senior Whitehouse advisor that she continues to draw criticism for even her posture on a couch.

Very simply, there is an all-out attack by the American Left on the government of the United States. They are attacking on every front available. They have already begun to use obstructionist tactics in Congress. Angry women protested against . . . well, they protested against something – can’t figure out what it was. Cities all over America have declared that they are “Sanctuary Cities,” thus harboring criminals. Rioters have damaged property and violated the rights of commuters to travel in their own communities. Madonna has expressed thoughts of blowing up the Whitehouse. A bust of Martin Luther King was falsely reportedly removed from the Whitehouse as a way of substantiating the left-wing narrative that Trump is racist.

The overwhelming number of criticisms come from the same people who have engaged in their own version of Orwellian fascism. It is a form of bullying to attempt to intimidate the countries legally elected officials with verbal threats, civil disobedience – some sanctioned by local inaction – and thinly veiled propaganda from self-important news organizations.

The breadth of control or attempted control by the left stretches over nearly all the educational, social, political, cultural, and some religious institutions of America.

There is no limit to the efforts the left will make in pursuing its objectives. The violence and threats leveled at Milo Yiannopoulos, who had to be escorted by police from the University of California at Berkley, illustrates the lengths to which the left will protect its speech against alternative facts when they threaten to come home to the La La Land of the left coast. There is so much irony here that it deserves a few words.

The University was the home of the famous free speech movement of the sixties. What no one realized at the time was the free speech part only applied to those who agreed with the left. This takes us back to the Orwellian view that 2 + 2 = 5. Also, Mr. Yiannopoulos is gay. It must be disconcerting to the doctrinaire left that a “homophobic” conservative is, well, homo.  The violent attention directed towards Mr. Yiannopoulos reminds the observant conservative of the confirmation hearings of Clarence Thomas in which, now, Justice Thomas, was vilified with ad homonym attacks on his personal character. Normally deferential to African Americans, Congressional liberals went after him as if he were the reincarnation of Hitler. Why was this? It wasn’t just that he was conservative, but as with Mr. Yiannopoulos, it upset the narrative contained in identity politics, that we are our race, sex, sexual orientation, etc. So, Black is White.

As If the widespread indoctrination of college students were not enough, the following paragraph concerning what is taught in America’s public high schools appeared in National Review in 2014:

“The College Board, the private company that develops the SAT and Advanced Placement (AP) exams, recently ignited a firestorm by releasing, with little public notice, a lengthy, highly directive, and radically revisionist “framework” for teaching AP U.S. history. The new framework replaces brief guidelines that once allowed states school districts, and teachers to present U.S. history as they saw fit.”

To the left, history has become a weapon. To control the minds of the young is to control the future. The NR review also specifies the black listing of the truth, as follows: “In a report for Boston’s Pioneer Institute, American historian Ralph Ketcham, author of a classic biography of James Madison, condemned the College Board’s new history guidelines for “deliberately minimizing or distorting” the story of America’s founding. The redesigned framework’s treatment of more recent developments is no freer of bias than is its handling of early American history. The revised guidelines present New Deal and Great Society liberalism in a positive light, while portraying conservatives as reactive and fearful. Leftist movements of the 1960s are sympathetically featured, while large tracts of modern political and economic history are omitted. Ronald Reagan is called “bellicose,” and his achievements are attributed to a belated willingness to make friends with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev rather than to his determination to hold fast on issues such as the deployment of nuclear missiles in Europe.” As they delete the truth, it is clear that ignorance is strength (for the left).

The control of the youthful mind is only a part of a greater picture of propaganda and thought control. Wherever there is publicity, the left will be found. Movie stars and their affiliated hangers-on – movie moguls, agents, publicists – blacklisted Trump supporters who might have performed at the Trump Inaugural balls. Thef left applauds the pure political correctness of their members, and pounds down the nails that dare to stand up. The movie, “Avatar,” is nothing but one long metaphor painting the evil corporations and their greedy controllers against the simple purity of the nature-bound, local inhabitants of the planet. The blue natives (read Native Americans) and their few enlightened white (read liberal) supporters rewrite history as the natives triumph over their machine driven enemies.

Likewise, in the Lord of the Rings movies we see the local natives as naïve, yet pure, people living simple lives in thatched huts. The message is that the reduced circumstances of the masses can be ennobling. The leftist narrative fits the view that our best days do not involve material success produced by the exploitation of natural resources, but derive from our high moral principles in a quest for a perfect world. If the economic, medical, and scientific advancements of America have rested on the foundation of a strong economic base, it is only coincidence that coal, oil, and iron ore were there at the same time.

Economic development has supported the very home base of the left. That is, the power of the political left as it lies with American colleges and universities where the roots of thought control run deep rests on Capitalist dollars. At college campuses all over America, enforcers of political correctness create Bias Response Teams (BRTs). The job of the BRT is to intimidate students who speak politically incorrect words as defined by the BRTs after the fact. At least at one school – Rutgers – it is not considered acceptable to use the words “illegal aliens.” The job of the BRT is to intimidate students who speak politically incorrect words as defined by the BRTs after the fact. Thus, a word like “fat” cannot be used as it is unprotected speech in referring to a person, unless the word is used derogatorily towards demonized classes of right-thinking opponents such as “fat cats” of the corporate world. The corrective is reminiscent of the “reeducation” camps run by communists in post-war Vietnam designed to punish and propagandize those who opposed the communist side before their totalitarian victory. But there is positive view to this. So far, torture has been ruled out.

The identity politics mantra does not only affect the presentation of Leftist to the outside world, it predictably affects the internal rationing of truth within its own borders. For example, the following appear on the blacklivesmatter.com website. The unknown author writes:

“Rooted in the experiences of Black people in this country who actively resist our dehumanization, #BlackLivesMatter is a call to action and a response to the virulent anti-Black racism that permeates our society. Black Lives Matter is a unique contribution that goes beyond extrajudicial killings of Black people by police and vigilantes.”

Many comments could be made about these two sentences, but the first thing that is necessary to do is decode the language. Four ideas need to be noted here:

dehumanization = slavery

extrajudicial killings = lynching

police = sheriff’s posse

vigilantes = Ku Klux Klan

It is as if the author is living in an alternative universe that reverts to the past whenever there is a need to prove victimhood. There is no perfect world, and these complaints, whether valid in the days of Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman or not, evoke a sci-fi vision that sustains the negative belligerence of Black Lives Matters true believers still in denial.

A rational view of the world would weight far more heavily the accomplishments of a Black two-term president, billionaire businesspersons, at least one world-famous doctor who is becoming a member of the current presidential cabinet and following previous similar successful representatives of the same community appointed by previous president s of both parties, many soldiers who have died for their country, and countless others of distinction, large and small, who have added to the welfare of their country. But for the delusion suffering Black Lives Matter folks, the only reality is represented by scattered incidents that ratify the false narrative that nothing has really changed for African Americans. Thus, once again the Orwellian dogma is spelled out by these fantasizing victims in the words, “Freedom is Slavery.”

Probably the most famous area of contention in American politics lately has been the symbiotic relationship of the press and President Trump. Not since Richard Nixon accused Dan Rather of running for political office, has there been such a level of tension between political pundits and the office of President of the United States. Whenever Trump wants to juice his supporters, he merely has to call a press conference. Americas fifth estate, which famously supported Hillary Clinton well into the 90-percentile range, not only slanted the news in her favor, but also sent her campaign donations. Trump wins these confrontations by not losing. His supports see him as their defender. But the press is also winning by broadcasting their antagonism to the like-minded leftists who view the press as a support group. The cold war between these two factions oddly benefits both sides, so it is possible to say that “War is Peace.” The peace that comes from one’s supporters makes the existence of the antagonists possible. Fear increases as one side or the other demonizes the other.

While the press is an expected ally of the left, another player has emerged – the bureaucrat. Since they operate in a sphere of anonymity and concealment, these partisans have emerged as major players in the war against truth. During the Obama administration there were many examples of this. The left advanced its control of government by acts both legal and illegal. The assault included attacks on democracy as well as individuals and culminated in one Obama soldier at the Internal Revenue Service taking the fifth amendment to avoid disclosure, and possibly prosecution, for targeting conservative organizations. The worst in the Obama legacy occurred in the Justice Department where Eric Holder advanced policy decisions contrary to accepted legal practice and justice. His lawyers within the Justice Department were chastised by judges (see Senator Ted Stevens R-Alaska) for their blatantly unprofessional behavior in pursuit of the greater leftist cause of destroying the Senator from Alaska. An excellent book on this topic is Obama’s Enforcer, by John Fund and Hans von Spakovsky. More recently, left-supporting intelligence officers antagonistic to the president, released information that General Flynn had been in contact with the Russian Ambassador. The sin of lying to the vice-president was probably the reason for Flynn’s fall, but the point is the root cause was the active effort of an element, probably in the FBI, that was out to embarrass the administration, even at the risk of violating the Logan Act.

In looking at the comprehensive phalanx of attacking leftist troops, there must be a reason for the viewpoints that motivate their hypocrisy. Among the studies such as Black Studies, Native American Studies, Women’s Studies, etc., another concept should be admitted to the list – Left-Wing Studies. But beware, the left would attempt cooptation of this area of inquiry should it be opened to the rigors of academic scrutiny.

The war on truth has and will be a long-lasting one. The focus of the left is on the Trump administration now and into the future. Orwellian methodologies of propaganda through institutions of government, the press, education, media, bureaucracy, and law enforcement undermine democracy to achieve the ends of dubious control of the American mind and body. The use of violence to achieve political ends continues even as the Trump administration redirects America’s energy toward American achievement and growth. The true Orwellian guides the blue left hand of America as democracy cannot rest or relax.

Setting the Scene

As America haltingly formed, first organized under the Articles of Confederation and then with that great achievement the Constitution, there arose the worst nightmare of those founding fathers-“faction.” Very early on, the scene was set. The faction known as the Republicans as led by Thomas Jefferson squared off against the Federalists whose standard bearer was Alexander Hamilton. From the time the former was named Secretary of State and the latter was named Secretary of the Treasury under George Washington, the scene was set for American history’s most vituperative confrontation, between factions and philosophies represented by two of the great men in history.

The conflict, which traces its beginning from the time that these two brilliant fighters took opposing offices under Washington, famously led to the death of Hamilton at the hands of the Republican Aaron Burr. During the time between the two secretaries took office and Hamilton’s death the printing presses of the day were filled with personal enmity that set a high standard for America’s politicians for the next two hundred hears and beyond. As Hamilton told Rufus King, “The political putrefaction of Pennsylvania is greater than I had any idea of.”

The passionate anger of those days could not have been more damaging to the development of the American government without causing an irreparable split between the states along a north/south axis based on the apparently opposing views of the partisans. Jefferson’s view of an agrarian society based on his vision of a farm economy clashed with the urban Hamiltonian view which set a hegemonic view of urban growth through commerce and industry.

There were numerous fault lines between these two groups. Hamilton was accused of monarchist views he did not hold. He viewed an economically strong central government as decisive to American growth, power, and safety. Keep in mind that at the beginning of their conflict America had no foreign reserves and was deeply in debt. Hamilton hit the ground running before Jefferson was able to return from France, and through a lifelong work ethic that had no equal in his day, was able to establish policies that set the new countries economy humming and made Hamilton popular.

Another fissure formed when Jefferson returned from France. His advocacy on behalf of French Hegemony clashed with the views of Hamilton who believed that, England, as the greatest economic power of the day, should continue its relationship with the United States, minus the odious taxes and unrepresentative control occurring during the colonial days. In Hamilton’s view, the most logical trading relationship should be with the country that was previously the dominant trading partner. The sentimental views derived from the support the French had given the colonies in their struggle against the British.

Early America was not only beset by north/south divisions, but also suffered an east/west fracture that split the young country. To some extent, this represented an urban/rural divide. Hamilton’s Whiskey Tax further alienated these factions and culminated in the Whiskey Rebellion which was put down by George Washington with a minimum of casualties.

Hamilton also took many hits, both personal and public. As the illegitimate son of a woman of dubious character, he battled demons his entire life. Affable in person, he was sensitive to slights and was quick to challenge an opponent who questioned his integrity and honor. Before his final dueling death he had several near misses with opponents who reconciled with him, perhaps realizing that Hamilton was not running a bluff.

The divisions in the American body politic ran deep and hard and did not abate after Hamilton’s death. The Constitution’s provisions did not deal with the issue of slavery. Hamilton was, perhaps, the leading abolitionist of his day, Jefferson a holder of over one hundred slaves. As is known today, the death of hundreds of thousands of Americans during the civil war seemed to have inevitability about it.

As America seeks to come to grips with the candidacy of Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, there is a sense here that the level of personal conflict and policy have been seen somewhere before. It does not matter that the current candidates are as small as Lilliputians tying down a great country with their vanity and failings. Nor is it a comfort that the country survived the split between greater men, Hamilton and Jefferson, as well as a crushing civil war. There is no guarantee that civilization will proceed over any bump. Anthropologists believe a South American Indian culture collapsed after it ran out of lime to make the structures they built. An economy is not inevitable, either. Sometimes it doesn’t take much. The apocalyptic view has been wrong in the past, but past performance is not an indicator of future results.

More on this later . . .

Flag of the U.S.S.Constitution