Category Archives: Governance

Biden, Crime, Economics, Governance, Immigration, Obama, Politics 2022

WELCOME MAT, DOORMAT

Leave a comment
AP

WELCOME MAT, DOORMAT

Following the assassination of John Kennedy, numerous bad, poorly thought-out ideas became legislation and law, not least of which was “The Great Society.”  Among them was the Immigration and Nationality Act.  Promoted by avowed socialist, Edward “Ted” Kennedy, the “Hart-Celler” act opened immigration to all nations somewhat equally, no longer favoring European nations, and gave preference to those who claimed relatives already resident in the U. S.  The wording of the bill included preference for skilled persons, but the new relative-based “Chain” migration superseded that.

Immigration increased and shifted dramatically in nationalities represented, but it took a while for Democrats, fairly solidly in power in the congress for 40 years, to grasp the possibility of using immigration to increase the population of Democrat voters.  In 1986, during the Reagan administration, the first codification of a premise called “amnesty,” the Simpson-Mazzoli Act, was sold to the President as a means to control illegals’ taking of jobs in the private economy, while strengthening the Border Patrol.  Rather than a “solution” it created a platform for increasing problems, the worst of which, in a legal sense, is the concept of “amnesty,” which is a pleasant-sounding term for “helping” the downtrodden.  Amnesty does, in fact, help the poor unfortunates who “risk everything” to escape less-pleasant circumstances to sneak into the U. S., which is not to say that such “helping” is the business of the U. S. or of those American citizens elected to administer the government of the United States.

That is, “our” representatives, the crux of our democratic Republic, have NO BUSINESS giving away the birthright or adopted, legal citizen-rights of U. S. citizens.  Prudence hopes that statement is not confusing to her readers.

Between these two nation-weakening steps the political left in the U. S. learned the power of guilt as a means of twisting national direction.  Hillary Clinton and many others thought her husband’s presidency was finally the time to take over health care, a cornerstone of the Communist Manifesto.  While the timing was off, and Bill Clinton’s mendacity led to his moving rightward to win re-election, the pattern was set.  Along with “de-education” by their friends in the education unions, left-facing Democrats could shift America to a one-party state with sufficient guilt (over racism), the unseating of Christianity, and control of the Supreme Court – courts, generally, being merely another political tool to use when Americans proved too dense to agree with global socialism.  Hatred became the political engine to keep the shift moving.

Hatred was firmly applied in the George W. Bush administration.  Hardly a day passed that he wasn’t vilified, yet he still managed to defeat Kerry to earn a second term.  The election of Barack Obama established non-compromise as a policy.  Not only with “Obamacare,” but with numerous issues, compromise with Republicans became the very last, possible resort to get things done.  No longer were Republicans brought in to help shape solutions; Obama’s goals were all transformative, anti-Constitutional, and, largely, party-line.  “Elections have consequences.”

A fairly porous southern border became, under Obama, fairly open.  For the first time “caravans” of illegal immigrants formed up at the southern Mexico border, or in Guatemala, and moved north with substantial help from human traffickers – cartels that found they could charge many thousands of dollars for individuals and whole families to get to the U. S. border.  They even taught the interlopers what to say to guarantee a hearing on refugee or asylee status.  Illegal entrants, always a problem, nearly untouched by “amnesty,” became a flood.  Obama and his corrupt AG, Eric Holder, had no interest in stemming the flow.  Despite higher “deportation” numbers than previous administrations, Obama changed the immigration landscape with selective enforcements and easier entry for children.  Cartels took advantage of changes and began teaching people to say the right things to create potential asylum, and to have children with them at the border, even if only “rented” for the purpose.  “Immigration” became one of the potent issues that propelled Donald Trump into the White House.

Obama, extra-legally, also invented “DACA,” Delayed Action for Childhood Arrivals.  By executive order the President changed the status of those who were brought into the U. S. illegally before they turned 18, making them magically less illegal than their parents.  It covered some 750,000 child arrivals.  That group also were given renewable work permits.  Since they had “grown up” in the U. S., everyone felt sorry for them and that it would be cruel to force them back to their own countries.  More magic.

At the time of the 1986 Amnesty bill / farce, illegals were estimated to number about 7 million.  As the next few years passed under Clinton, that estimate slid up to “12 million,” and no matter how illegal they might be, surely it was not possible to “arrest 12 million people” and deport them!  The groundwork for lawlessness being rewarded was being put into place.

The Obama administration saw an explosion of “sanctuaries” for illegals: first towns and cities, and later whole states, declared themselves “sanctuary” jurisdictions where local and state police would be directed to not cooperate with federal C.I.S. and I.C.E. agents as they attempted to apprehend known criminals who were illegal entrants.  I.C.E., standardly, would file a detain and hold notice in a local jurisdiction or with a court magistrate whenever local police or sheriffs had arrested a fugitive illegal.  Local authorities, even judges, would facilitate the escape of the fugitive, even sentencing them to a number of days that meant they were free to go following their court appearance.   Then an employee or even a court officer would help the criminal out a back door so as to avoid federal I.C.E. agents attempting to serve an arrest warrant.  Criminal magic.

Is this “nullification?”  Not quite, but it certainly skirts the law.  Federal jurisdiction clearly extends to our borders and immigration, customs, contraband interdiction and arrest and deportation of illegal aliens.  In effect, our borders extend to any physical location of an illegal entrant.  “Sanctuary” status, self-declared by local authorities, attempts to establish local jurisdiction over illegal entrants where none exists, and in contravention of federal jurisdiction, that does exist, in law.  When President Trump attempted to withhold federal aid to police agencies that refused to cooperate with federal warrants, he was rebuffed by judges on the basis that there were no provisions for singling out departments or agencies for such withholding unless they had broken certain laws including misuse of funds.  Since police power is the jurisdiction of respective states, the President’s instincts couldn’t apply.  This is not to say that “Sanctuary” status is recognized in law or precedent; it is tolerated for lack of sanctions and lack of will to legislate them by Congress.

For the most crass and cynical reasons of political advantage, protecting illegal aliens became widespread: for Democrats, the eventual amnesty they pushed for might create millions of democrat voters; for Republicans, being accused of being anti-immigrant, or anti-Hispanic or, worse, racist, was too hurtful or too much trouble to refute.  Both parties’ supporters are happy to have cheap labor.  Neither party has made much sense in immigration over the past 40 years.

Trump, at least, attempted to gain control of our geographically and topographically open border with Mexico.  Democrats fought him at every step, particularly in terms of building a wall that would force potential entrants to specific points of entry where administrative procedures could be followed, including adjudication of refugee or asylee claims, most of which are legally denied.  Ultimately he had to divert dollars from military budgets to pay for about 500 miles of fencing.  One of the first steps President Biden took was to stop construction, putting all those expenditures and materials yet to be installed, to waste.  Elections have consequences.

Biden brought in Alejandro Mayorkas as Secretary of Homeland Security.  Mayorkas is an accomplished and committed liar.  To place him in the Cabinet is an affront to American citizens and to all those who have served in presidential administrations.  To place him over “DHS” is a lie in its own right.  There is no reason to trust that the Homeland is Secure.  There’s no such thing as compartmentalization of national security – it functions as a whole.  One cannot administer 1800 miles of wide-open border while claiming that, 1) the border is closed and secure; and, 2) we are secure at all of our ports, airports, imports and immigration procedures.  One can try, however, as Mayorkas has, including serial perjury before Congress.  Perhaps he’ll take the fall for the Biden administration when the rule of law returns to Capitol Hill.

Since Biden took office and started signing Executive Orders he may not have even read, more than 3 MILLION illegal entrants, claiming asylum, have been processed by the Border Patrol / DHS.  They include large numbers of Central and South American migrants, family units and children and hundreds of unaccompanied “minors.”  As they are “processed” they receive free cell-phones, clothing, back-packs and other niceties like “EBT” cards or meal chits, and bus or plane rides to their preferred location.  What a country!

Over the same period, however, illegal entrants from over 100 other countries – people whose claims to asylum require suspension of disbelief, as they have traveled many thousands of miles to get into Central America for the walk to el Norte.  There doesn’t seem to be any maximum number the administration is hoping to reach for migrants streaming across our “closed” and “secure” border.

Worse, some 900,000 “got-aways” have entered, too.  Now we’re talking.  No country has survived for long, nor any culture, nor any “people,” has or will survive for long if left undefended.  The Biden presidency is best defined as being anti-American, best-exemplified by failure to defend the nation. Unbridled and un-vetted immigration, free from the constraints of economic merit and/or freedom from disease, is a classic form of national dissolution… as though anyone would aspire to such a level of stupidity or incompetence.  One must stretch his or her incredulity to accept that Joe Biden actually received more votes for president than any other candidate ever has.  None of us should overlook the leftward collapse of Biden and, essentially, everyone he works with… or for. 

Mr. Biden has not only failed to comprehend the consequences of bad policies and incompetent appointees, he appears to actively pursue them.  What on Earth for?  More money?  More recognition or fame?  Help his depraved son, Hunter?  Maybe he doesn’t recognize depravity when he sees it in his own family.  Or, if his daughter’s diary can be believed, may… and it seems possible… maybe he doesn’t KNOW what is depraved and what is not – doesn’t know that Hunter’s incest with his older brother’s widow was depraved – or that hiring hookers to have sexual orgies laced with crack cocaine is depraved – or, as most ethical people would agree, doing the exact opposite of what he had sworn to do before God and country during inauguration, is also depraved.

Indeed, doing the exact opposite of what he has stood for during his political career is also a little depraved, when you think about it.

Biden, Foreign Policy, Governance, Politics 2022

NANCIEST

Leave a comment
WASHINGTON, DC – JULY 21: U.S. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)
(Photo by Nathan Howard/Getty Images)

How unfortunate it is… No!

How SAD it is… to be writing a post that Prudence hopes will be – can be – read later than September first of 2022.  Does that sound extreme?  The worries of a foolish patriot?  Maybe YOU are not paying attention.

Nancy Pelosi, relatively un-American Speaker of the House for only the crassest, most selfish reasons (those who have repeatedly voted her into the Speakership have always done so for their own, temporal, financial, re-election benefits and not those of their constituents) has decided to “visit” our Asian “friends,” indeed, leaving on the trip today, July 30, 2022.  Prudence hopes that this date does not mark the beginning of the end of the United States’ independence.

Part of her itinerary, perhaps for some good reason that escapes the grasp of most thoughtful observers, was announced to include a visit to Taiwan, an island nation with a most unusual history, coveted by Communist China since Chiang Kai-Shek fled the mainland at the end of the Communist Revolution.  The communists, in keeping with their world views, intend to fully absorb Taiwan, even as they have absorbed artificial islands they’ve created above various reefs in the South China Sea.

For several decades known as the island of Formosa, from a name bestowed by Portuguese explorers, Taiwan has never been a comfortable fit with the rest of Chinese Dynasties, experiencing numerous rebellions, particularly by indigenous Taiwanese, mostly populating the mountainous central spine of the island.  “Formosa” even existed for a few months as an independent Republic, following the Sino-Japanese War, in 1895.  Japanese rule also didn’t last very long.  Until the Nationalist Chinese under Chiang Kai-shek invaded and dominated the island in 1949, there had never been solid Chinese control of Taiwan (“Taoian” to its natives).  During the mid-1600’s the Dutch East India Company fought Han Chinese repeatedly for control of shipping and trade on the Pescadores islands near Taiwan, and control of Taiwan, itself.  They, too, were driven out.

All in all, control of Taiwan has only in the past 70 years been Chinese, albeit Nationalists.  The Communist mainland government has at least as legitimate a claim as the Nationalists, having defeated the Nationalists in 1949.  Only the support, explicit and implicit, of the United States, strong allies of the Nationalists against the Japanese in WW-II, has prevented Communist China (“PRC”) from taking over.  U. S. affinity for democratic republican governments, and for the strategic value of Taiwan specifically against the PRC, and our virtual economic and military dependence on imports from BOTH the PRC and Taiwan, forces the U. S. to attempt continued threading of the needle between the two nations.

China has made its intention to take over Taiwan clear; the U. S. has replied in muddled, ill-defined terms of “support” or “defense” of Taiwan.  Under Joe Biden, who always seems to back down when pressed by the PRC, China may perceive that there will never be a better opportunity to make a strike on Taiwan.  This should make everyone who voted for Biden for President and those who intentionally covered up his corrupt connections to the Chinese Communist Party, ashamed of their role in weakening the U. S. against the only country/empire that can not only replace the U. S. as the dominant force in the world, but, should we back down on Taiwan, push us out of the Far East as a trusted ally for anyone.

What are the possibilities if Nancy DOES stop off – or attempt to – in Taiwan?  None looks good, but we need to look around the world for other conditions in the summer of 2022 to understand the list of possible consequences.

China is watching the Russian crimes against Ukraine very carefully.  What has ”the West” done to counter the Russians?  Did NATO – the U. S. in particular – STOP the Russians?  Well, no, we shrank back when Russia rattled its nuclear weapons.  We have provided lots of weapons, not always timely, but eventually, and we appear to be content to let Ukranians die in their own defense.  The U. S. does not appear to be ready to die alongside them.  There is no particular reason why the U. S. would have the will to do anything different for the Taiwanese… at least, that is likely the logical deduction of the Chinese.

Then their question has to be: “If we attack Taiwan, will the U. S. do anything differently from what they’ve done for Ukraine?”  One wonders if anyone in OUR country knows the answer to that question.

But, the Chinese are both cautious and operating on a longer schedule than biennial elections in the United States.  Somehow the visit to Taiwan by the American Speaker of the House has presented a golden opportunity to China.  If a few blusters by the CCP can keep her from visiting, there is something to learn about U. S. resolve.  If she does visit, that is also something to learn.

But, but, but… what if she takes the challenge and decides to attempt to land on Taiwan in the face of the PRC’s telling her – and us – that she can’t go there without PRC permission?  Will the Communists perform their show of force as threatened?  Just as Pelosi may feel that she has to go to Taiwan, the Chinese may feel that they have to carry out their threats.  Now, Chinese fighters and U. S. fighters are in the same airspace with Chinese pilots acting aggressively.  One of them, or more, slides within the defined safe zone of the Speaker’s plane and Americans fire a warning shot to back them off.  The Chinese, who already threatened to fire warning shots in the run-up to the conflict, fire their own warning shots but an American plane, if not the Speaker’s plane, is hit.  The Americans shoot AT the offending Chinese plane and it is forced down or the pilot is forced to eject.

Talk about supply chain interruptions.  The Chinese could invade Taiwan as soon as the Speaker lands, or sooner!  Too bad if Americans are hurt or die.  The U. S. sinks an aircraft carrier.  It’s going to be a very difficult Christmas.

Do we even know what we are doing – the U. S. Navy that is firing people for not accepting those dangerous and useless mRNA injections?

Or, the Speaker decides to not visit Taiwan.  Everyone is all smiles as she returns to the U. S., but the end of U. S. enforced “freedom of the seas” is upon us, and history will have changed for a century or more, all to America’s disfavor.  This is a real pickle.  The Chinese could decide at that point that the U. S. is comprised of wimps and LGBTQx+ people who are too confused to fight for our country, and certainly too afraid to fight for any other: Taiwan is invaded.  Forty countries will abruptly stop playing nice with the U. S. and begin ignoring dollars.  Life becomes extremely unpleasant inside our borders.  Even welfare may have to be cut back!  God forbid.

Crime, Culture, Education, Elections, Governance, Guns, Right?, Politics 2022, Race, Religion, Representation, Responsibility

THE CONSTITUTIONAL MILITIA

Leave a comment
When tyranny threatens, elections are months away.

THE CONSTITUTIONAL MILITIA

The evolution of American constitutionalism responded no more to the several theories of rights and representation of the late 18th Century, as much as to the necessity of freeing ourselves from the shackles imposed by the British Crown and a non-representative Parliament.  That freedom would not have been won without “Militias” – home-grown assemblages of armed citizens, by definition, non-governmental organizations.  Our Constitution references these quasi-military, self-selected groups of passionate defenders of farm, family and business, in the Second Amendment.

The potency of the Second Amendment is rarely mentioned.  Everyone argues over the “… right to keep and bear Arms…”  Opponents of gun ownership point to the first phrase, “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, …” as if it referenced what we now call the State Police, or even “State Militia” which are controlled and limited by our friendly and benign state governments.  Some liken the term to the National Guard, which is even further off the mark.  “Militia,” in the Second Amendment, refers to self-declared and assembled, armed, private-citizen organizations.  It is not clear that such organizations are legally tolerated today.

In fact, there are a number of such groups around the country: legal gun bearers who come together like clubs, perhaps including some militaristic training.  They tend strongly toward white-guys, exclusively, sometimes religious, generally anti-federal government.  Unfortunately, there is a parallel tendency toward racism, but the number of incidents in which members of such “clubs” attack blacks or others is very, very small… no way comparable to the numbers of blacks who attack everyone else, although never being charged with “racism.”

Militias have a bad name.  Still, they are a part of the patriotic front that challenged and stopped the British in the 1770’s, and which became part of the “official” Continental Army under general George Washington.  They were tough people, supported by equally tough wives and relatives, both farmers and merchants.  How would they fit in to today’s social fabric and political landscape?  They are referenced and promoted in our Constitution, but universally denigrated as, mainly, racist crackpots playing with guns.

“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State…”  What “state” were the framers talking about?

At the time of the fight for independence, the “states” were colonies: 13 separate entities with separate civil authorities appointed by the King or by his governors.  To become sovereign states they had to both rid themselves of British governors and soldiers, who were the “police,” as it were, and then establish their own authorities with elections, appointments, codified laws and relatively independent courts.  They had, also, to defend themselves.  Automatically it became obvious that the colonies had to stand against the British together, else they’d be militarily quashed separately.  Without much debate, they formed the Continental Congress and a sense of “nation” was established across fairly diverse colonies.  A common enemy will do that.

Militias, essentially, were folded in to the individual colonies’ “Minutemen” forces and ultimately into the Continental Army, but not all of them.  Many Militia fighters served key roles in interfering with British supplies and cavalry, harassing them like guerilla fighters, sometimes providing a flanking force when standing ranks faced off on battlefields.  However, by the time of the war of 1812, militias were relatively unheard of.  Citizens were still armed, but the U. S. Army and Navy then formed the military wherewithal of the new nation, calling up fighters from the states, each of whom represented their states as much as they did the United States.

The Constitution acknowledged and stipulated the importance of “militias,” and stipulated the right to keep and bear arms, but militias, themselves, faded from prominence.

By the end of the Civil War there was no question that the military forces were U. S. forces, and the federal government took on the costs and administration of veterans’ disabilities and welfare.  States had police forces, but no longer raised their own “regulars” or trained or equipped them.  Militias, if such can be identified at all, devolved into chapters of the Ku Klux Klan, constantly ginning up anger against negroes – a most despicable era of American history.  Roughly speaking, the “Union” army and victorious states were “Republicans;” the former confederacy and the Ku Klux Klan itself, were “Democrats.”  Democrats supported gun control laws, among other segregationist restrictions, to keep guns out of the hands of blacks.  To maintain power and influence, the Klan, like revolutionary militias, had to constantly exaggerate the presence of a common enemy: free negroes.

“Militias,” now, are perceived as kooks.  Any concept of forming armed forces to overthrow “the government,” is inherently illegal, and only a tiny fraction of Americans in either party think it’s either practical or legitimate.  Yet the concept of non-governmental militias is Constitutional!  Where could “militias” fit in?  First, they’d have to meet standards.  Their fellow citizens would have to trust them in terms of public safety and support of the Constitution, itself.  Then what?

Somehow, some way, militias would have to coexist with police forces, both municipal and state.  Participation in “Guardian” training and functions is a good place to start.

The Guardian Program, yet to be adopted anywhere, is designed to “legitimize” concealed carry, in a sense.  The Constitution already protects the right to keep and bear arms – carry them around, in other words: to be individually armed.  As a Guardian, the person who is willing to carry a firearm would also be trained in handling, safety and safe reaction in the presence of a crime or imminent criminal act.  That person would also wear a “9-1-1” transponder that would identify and locate the individual and alert police forces to a possible active-shooter situation.  Meanwhile, the guardian would take such action as practical to defuse a conflict or stop criminal action until police arrived.

Finally, the guardian would be shielded by special indemnification for legitimate and proper actions taken to stop criminal actions, whether on his or her own property or in public.  “When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.”  The truth of that observation is timeless.  Establishing “Guardian” legislation enables the multiplication of police power and effectiveness at very low cost.  It also provides vectors for evaluating gun owners and their family environments.  If such gun owners formed the core of “militias,” governments and citizens could have confidence in their judgment and rationality.

Militias could also be held to ethical standards.  Non-guardians who “joined up” would have to swear to certain behaviors and practices concerning gun ownership, handling and safety inside and outside of their homes.  Militia organizations would be subject to fines for failing to adhere to ethical standards or for failing to reject or eject members who fail to do so.  Such information would have to be shared with law-enforcement and become part of the unacceptable persons’ records.  Most Militias would form through “Rod and Gun” clubs or hunting clubs  or “Sportsmens’ Clubs.”  Whether they could remain associated with those clubs would be a decision of the club, not of any government.  How would a Militia function politically?  How would the majority opinions of a Militia or dozens of Militias, enter into public policy or political power?  Who would their “common enemy” be?

By definition, the “common enemy” would be our own federal, central government at the moment it is perceived as tyrannical.  We have major political forces who are enthralled with government by experts – the bureaucratic state.  Decision-making by and for individuals is anathema to these leftist “Progressives.”  They are also anti-religious, increasingly opposed to free speech, virulently opposed to the second Amendment as written, and socialist in economics and social organization.  Many members of a militia organized to monitor and resist – if not remove – tyranny in our central government, would count “Progressives” among the tyrants.  A militia formed by progressives, for such there could be, though unlikely, would see themselves as saviors and conservatives as the common enemy.

Obviously, those most attracted to “militias” would be vilified and hated to greater degrees as members than they are, if at all, as relatively quiet, unobtrusive neighbors and co-workers.

Militias would tend to be somewhat secretive in their meetings and deliberations.  Using common social media communications would leave them open to attack and interference.  They will want to network – and perhaps coordinate – with other militias through a modern version of “Committees of Correspondence” as was done in Revolutionary times, when their discovery would have resulted in arrest and torture.  If not actual secrecy, strict confidentiality would be essential to operation and growth of militias.  But, how, short of taking up arms in fact, would constitutional militias influence political, governmental actions and direction?

Clearly they would have to be financially independent of government support or tax abatement or tax-free status on any places of meeting or practice / training.  They would be subject to continuous hate from leftists and racists, for they would not be able to control militias from the inside.  They would have to be scrupulous about opening membership to anyone who met their standards of behavior and ethics, which standards would include legal gun ownership, by definition.  But, again, how would a militia influence political power?  Could a militia sway the votes of others?

Communications, communications, communications.  As with the Committees of Correspondence, militias would have to present factual and documented positions on the actions of government(s) and of elected or appointed officials.  They would have to lay bare the nature of tyrannies large and small that made clear the un-representative nature of those in power including, most specifically, the expenditures of public monies.  To do so would mean operating publishing businesses in both print and digital formats.  Since a militia would not be a political “party” or be attempting to run candidates of its own, its publications would have to be both historical and current, and easily comprehensible as to how an issue/ topic either resisted tyranny of the state (or municipality) or fit into a tyrannical or potentially tyrannical action that threatened Constitutionally guaranteed rights or the freedoms of individuals.

Would anyone care if they did this work?  Would citizens listen?  Militias, like those that deposed tyranny at the inception of our country, have an obligation to pursue wisdom and to act upon it.  The first militias had the wisdom of recognizing tyranny and of how to multiply their effectiveness in fighting it.  It led them to wonderous courage and sacrifice.  To fulfill that legacy, Constitutional militias must form with that same sort of commitment.  Membership would not be a sport or part-time interest.  Just as “the Left” maintains decades, if not centuries, of commitment to upending Biblical truths and models of behavior and governance based on individual freedom and responsibility, Militias must maintain a singular purpose to inform other Americans of the lies and evil of Socialism and Communism, backed up by the ability to risk everything to overthrow tyranny in defense of the American Way.

The creation of one militia, independent and uncorrupted, will bring forth many others, and their creation still more.  We have learned after dozens of congresses and hundreds of representatives and senators, that the election of readily corruptible men and women who enter office with pathways of personal wealth and influence providing them all too many comforts and excuses for failure, has not – and will not – bring about the change needed to save and preserve our nation, our Constitution and our integrity.  A well regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free State.

Crime, Culture, Education, Family, Religion, Representation, Responsibility, Sex

FROM ISSUES TO CRISES

Leave a comment

Despite Prudence’ writings over the past 8 years, the nation has not adjusted to the models of governance and behavior she has carefully laid out.  Upon the election of the odd Joe Biden and his basically anti-American administration, irritating, family and society-weakening tendencies have become policies, however illegitimately.  Now, they’re crises – crises that threaten the survival of our nation and of Freedom, itself.  Like the heart of Socialism in every sense, it derives from the avoidance of responsibility.

People say things like, “it’s a new day,” or “Times have changed.”  Except “times” haven’t changed, people have.  They’ve – we’ve – been taught new ideas to believe, habits to adopt, pleasures to revel in.  We can look to a sudden change upon the murder of President John Kennedy.  Most likely, the purpose of that assassination was political, not cultural.  Kennedy had created powerful personal and political enemies.  The abrupt change in culture and morals was an inadvertent one.  Lyndon Johnson became president, federal civil rights legislation moved to center stage, for right reasons, but its adoption was made possible by the crassest political calculations.  Inadvertently, for some but not all, the Civil Rights bill shifted morality into the metastasizing businesses of the federal administrative state and the court, where it has become enforced amorality. 

Prior to the ‘60s, change in living standards and integration was happening due to improvements in individual beliefs in better moral codes… not fast enough, by a long shot, but improvement and progress were being made.  The Civil Rights Act and the movement that brought it to fruition, inadvertently changed the nature of federal moral enforcement, even as it made long-overdue corrections to discrimination and segregation.  Part of the federal “corrections” included elements of the “Great Society,” which federalized welfare and began the application of laws differently for different groups.  This process, in all of its corrupt and socialist pieces, has rendered the federal government a soft tyrant which is hardening daily, while providing $Trillions of support for sub-tyrannies throughout the administrative state, particularly in Education.

Under the Constitution, the only moral adjustments can and should be made through equal justice: Equal protection under the law / equal application of the law.  That canary escaped with the passage of the Great Society.  Otherwise, our system works only if the vast majority of our citizens and residents share basic morals and mores, a claim that can no longer be made.  Every institution that could reinforce the moral strength of our people, including schools and churches, are either hell-bent in the opposite direction, or bending a knee to popular immorality.  For shame.

Freedom isn’t freedom without responsibility, it’s mere licentiousness.  As responsibility began evaporating in the 1960’s, leftists accelerated, as part of civil rights and the Great society, their domination of public education and colleges of education, themselves.  Like Mao’s “Long March,” it has taken decades – well-paid decades – to convert the role of education from conveyance of language, culture, skills, morals and history to our youth, to one of separation by race, class and, incredibly, gender.  Everything happening fulfills the Communist Manifesto: separation from God and from Responsibility.

Churches and liturgies have proven to be much weaker than the years of bygone sacrifices to hold to and establish those faith communities would indicate.  Just count the rainbow flags that some churches think override the teachings that brought them this far.  They are proving every day that it is nearly impossible to convince others of ideas you, yourself, don’t believe.  Simple economics can’t take the place of shared moral goodness.

America has been under moral attack for 60 years at a higher intensity than during its first 170 years.  As the lessons of Genesis make clear, God’s Word (or, if you find that term more offensive than child abuse) moral truths, are always under attack here on Earth.  Christianity has long been the primary target of such opposition, both from within and without.

For centuries those attacks tended to fail because the engine of responsibility kept working.  People still, for the most part, paid the price for their own follies and failures.  That is, until socialism replaced monarchy.  Evil men – almost always men – grasped socialist ideas as a better way to control nations, economies and armies, but they ultimately fell: their bases were evil and so counter to human nature that they became insane.  There has never been a government that created for itself political defenses that not only protected amorality and immorality, but learned to erode morality and, specifically, responsibility by individuals.  Not until the U. S. federal (and state) administrative states.  They’ve made a lot of “progress,” but they are “Progressives” by their own description.  It has taken 60 years of “re-education” to bring us to an America facing the corrosive issues we do today.

What are the parameters of responsibility in matters of conception, pregnancy, abortion and birth?

Since the ‘60s we have replaced marriage as the cultural norm, with contraception, abortion, “hooking up,” and fatherless children.  Responsibility has shifted to federal and state welfare programs.  Women have become convinced that they need not choose a decent, committed and loving man who will provide for his family and children, and who will be in their lives through puberty and into adulthood – and this all before having sex!  All they need is the sperm… and other men when they feel like it.  It is the destruction of the American family and of children – especially boys: our vote-buying tax dollars of destruction, at work.

Along with hyper-sexualization of grade school children, lewd “Pride” parades and filth in school libraries, the left appears to be obsessed with fornication for “all genders.”  To Democrats and other anti-Christian groups, fornication is a “right” as important to freedom as the First Amendment and all the rest.  Except, without responsibility, it’s not a freedom at all.  Enter abortion “rights.”  Except abortion never was a “right,” per se; democratic decisioning at the state level is the “right” our Constitution guarantees.

What are the parameters of responsibility in matters of guns, ownership, self-defense and crime?

Gun owners quote the phrase, “… the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”  It is part of the Second Amendment.  Some like to ignore the stuff about the “A well regulated Militia…”  But, as they may also choose to ignore, the amendment goes on to qualify the concept of a “militia,” as follows: “… being necessary to the security of a free State, …”  Above all, the Bill of Rights amendments and their wordings are intensely Prudent in their purposes of preventing a tyrannical central government.  Guaranteeing individual armament is crucial to that purpose.  Clearly, by simple inference, mindful of why the Constitution was drafted and mindful of the horrendous sacrifices needed to permit its creation, is it not obvious that arming the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT had nothing whatsoever to do with the second amendment?

The only “militias” in the new nation’s experience were those formed by local communities and others to fight off the central government, perceived to be tyrannical toward the colonies.  This aspect is never, ever acknowledged by that same federal government.  Yes, gun ownership is crucial to individual self-defense, which that same federal – and some states’ – governments appear to discourage, if not deny, to its citizens, even as those governments purposely abdicate their contracted role of public safety.  Had the British monarch established today’s same failed public policies, the justification for overturning his authority would have been far more popular.

There is a high expectation of responsibility for Constitutionally legal gun owners.  As a definable demographic, legal gun owners are the least source of crime and, by far, the least source of crimes involving firearms.  Yet this same group is always the target for restriction whenever a mentally or criminally defective person commits a “mass” shooting.  Individual shootings and murders by gang members and drug dealers are of no particular concern to those who attack the rights of legal gun owners.

Maybe the concept of “militia” for legal gun owners is one that should be developed – not by any government, but by gun owners, themselves.  “Whoa,” you might be saying.  “That sounds like a mechanism for insurrection.”

Well, it’s not, but that threat should ALWAYS be on the mind of the Executive departments, and on the minds of voters.  Sadly, and our own faults, the Congress should have it at top of mind, as well.  Americans have the RIGHT to replace a tyrannical government with a representative one.  One bright light – President Biden – during a press conference on gun control, uttered these non-sequiturs:

 
“Those who say the blood of lib- — ‘the blood of patriots,’ you know, and all the stuff about how we’re going to have to move against the government. Well, the tree of liberty is not watered with the blood of patriots. What’s happened is that there have never been — if you wanted or if you think you need to have weapons to take on the government, you need F-15s and maybe some nuclear weapons.”

If these words had been uttered by someone who knew what he were talking about, they’d be chilling to Americans…  perhaps, upon reflection, they are.  That bozo is President.  But the concept of “militia” is not far-fetched.  Certainly it is not a federal force, nor should it be funded federally.  “Militias” should be local, and the more local the better.  In the most Prudent view, those gun owners who choose to carry concealed could be part of an anonymous police-trained force that has been earlier referenced as “Guardians.”  (See: http://www.prudenceleadbetter.com/2016/05/30/the-guardian-program/) These same would be the nucleus of local militias.  Leadership of each jurisdiction’s militia would be chosen by election within the membership, and thereby granted officers’ titles.

The nature of “Militia,” Constitutionally, is inherently anti-federal.  No wonder this aspect of the Second Amendment is never discussed.  “Nuclear weapons,” indeed.  At the time of its adoption, the concept of “Militia” was understood as the forerunners of the Continental Army ultimately led by George Washington, named a General by the Continental Congress.  To make the revolution work required the establishment of a governing body separate from the King and his governors and troops.  It was all extra-legal and deemed illegal by the Crown.  Militias were already fighting the Redcoats by the time the Continental Congress got down to the business of revolutionary government.

Americans are so reliant upon a steady and dependable government in Washington, that we find it hard to conceive of an autonomous civilian militia, yet that is precisely what the framers were talking about.  The colonies had just fought off a tyrant and the framers were determined that we be just as prepared to fight off another, should the tyranny arise.  There existed very little affinity for a central government because of the tendency toward tyranny by virtually all such entities.  The ability of citizens to check the power of government provided all the justification needed for a Second Amendment.  Armed crime in the streets was practically non-existent in 1789, so that wasn’t the reason for it; hunting was so crucial to provisioning of food and even clothing, that no one had to “allow” for it in the Constitution.  What was crucial was preventing another tyranny from replacing the British Crown.  The twenty-seven words of the Second Amendment guaranteed the ability of citizens to replace a tyrannical central government, and Ratification was impossible without it.

Today, unfortunately, discussion of the true reason for the 2nd Amendment brings forth accusations of sedition and insurrection, “fringe” white-supremacist grouping, and religious fundamentalism.  Yet, it is the Constitution we have and that forms us, even now.

To the “left,” constitutionalism is suspect in all iterations.  It challenges and exposes the sanctity of the STATE for the hollow proto-tyranny towards which it constantly slithers.  The “establishment,” nearly as tyrannical as it could be – economically, morally, politically – is directly threatened by the Constitution, as are all tyrants, everywhere.  Our own proto-tyrants fight to make the U. S. as much like every other nation as they can, while patriots recognize and try to enhance the exceptional nature of our constitutional Republic.  “America first” sends chills down the spines of the permanently re-elected swine that wallow for decades at a time in the halls of Congress. 

Americans have unique responsibilities, including defense and preservation of the Constitution; it is not the task of elected people, specifically, but of THE PEOPLE.  The Constitution came not from government, but from “We, the People…”  WE ordained it, which is that we gave it life.  WE ratified it, but only when the Bill of Rights was appended to it, which is that we entered into a covenant  with all who forever after held office upon swearing to Preserve and Defend it – the Presidents merely a handful of those.  The ultimate defense and execution of the Constitution is our business: the People’s.  We are obligated to preserve it, defend it and live according to its rights and responsibilities on behalf of every American citizen, now and forever after, as well as on behalf of every nation and people, who depend upon the United States to stand firmly against globalism, socialism and communism… and dishonesty.  Let’s get busy.

Biden, Culture, Health Care, Politics 2022, Religion, Responsibility, Sex

THE DEATH THAT CAN’T BE SPOKEN

Leave a comment

We’ve all heard of the “Supreme Court.”  Historically, it has had 9 justices, one of whom designated upon presidential nomination, as “Chief Justice.”  When the Constitution was ratified in 1789, the Court was defined with 6 justices, with John Jay as Chief.  The fifth Chief Justice was John Marshall, who also held that position for the longest tenure: 34 years.  Until 1869, the court’s size varied from 5 to 10 justices; at that point Congress set it at 9 justices and it has remained that until today. 

The politicization of the court became an obvious problem under Franklin D. Roosevelt, a so-called “transformative” president, which mainly meant that he pushed policies that the Constitution had not anticipated, extra-Constitutional policies, we might call them.  As the Supreme Court ruled against his socialist efforts, Roosevelt attempted to “pack” the Supreme Court, intending at one point to expand it to 15 justices… of whom enough would agree with Roosevelt’s political ideas.

“Packing” the court got shot down by a wise Senate in 1935, but it has always been technically “legal” constitutionally.  How much safer we’d be today if there were an amendment that set the number of Justices at 9, safely limiting how destructive any one president could be.  Harry Blackmun showed how destructive a Justice could be by inventing a “penumbra” of shadowy rights emanating from the Fourteenth Amendment and perceived “right to privacy.”  It’s not known whether even Blackmun grasped how cleverly the definition of “life” could be distorted so as to convince 62 Million mothers that their unborn child is anything but.

Would he cheer or frown to find that not even womanhood can be defined in our enlightened age?

Coming home from work the other day – the day the “leaked” opinion draft indicating that Roe v. Wade could be overturned was all the RAGE – there were, in just one intersection of our not so very large town, about 250 pro-abortion hot-heads shouting at traffic, waving signs like, “My Body – My choice,” “Keep Abortion Legal,” “Bans Off My Body” and easily 50 other messages.  Prudence observed that every single one of those protesting had never been aborted!

Abortion is definitely not one of those actions that can be done over, nor can the experience be related to others who have had one.  What?  You say that a woman can certainly discuss an abortion with another womens’ rights exerciser?  Well, that’s true enough, but the abortion didn’t happen to her, did it?  The person who actually experienced the abortion has been, pretty much, silenced forever.  No one on this side of the veil can listen to how the abortee describes an abortion.  The person in whom the abortion took place has only a circumstantial description of what happened: her brain wasn’t suctioned out of her skull so she can still speak and breath and stuff.

Of course, it is statements like that that bring down the hatred of the pro-abortion zealots who denounce the hatred being expressed, the lack of compassion for the abortion facilitator / mother, the outright… ummm, well, racism, or worse, religious beliefs Prudence is trying to impose on others!  Ohh, the horror.  Anyone making such a statement is trying to make an unfortunate “birthing person” feel badly about aborting the whatever it is she is carrying inside her.  Aha! You called her “she.”  You’re transphobic, too!  You, you… you MAGA person!

Back in my town’s intersection there was a lot of anger and upset including many young men as well as women (Prudence can tell them apart).  Have they any concept of what they are protesting?  Is it safe to suspect that none has READ Justice Alito’s draft opinion?  Or are they fired up because of the possibility that some authority-figure might have said “No!” to something they want?

What is more unfortunate is that “protests” in the Washington, D. C. area have devolved to the level of targeting the residences of Supreme Court Justices.  “Protests” is in quotes because they are sliding toward riots, and Prudence can tell them apart.  The now almost-expected wrong reaction from the “White House” is a failure to condemn this step towards personal, possibly physical intimidation of JUSTICES for performing the Constitutional tasks that reach the Court through legal, appellate processes.  We are witnessing a creeping sickness that Prudence never expected to see.

The so-called “Biden Administration,” in thrall to a global communist utopia, utilizes the Constitution as a road-map of what to do the opposite of.  The treachery and treason of the entire cabal is so monstrous as to defy belief, even as we watch it unfold.  It has sunk to its lowest level yet when the “President” refuses to condemn the worst behavior of his fellow travelers… he does condemn patriotism, however.  What a s-(euphemism for “turd”).

Biden, Family, Foreign Policy, Immigration, Politics 2022, Representation, Trump

WHY IN HELL?

Leave a comment
Buds.

Prudence, in her most Prudent way, is always trying to keep up with events, trends, purposes and consequences.  And, never one to stir up trouble, Prudence must admit to being fully puzzled as to why in Hell Russia invaded Ukraine?  Perhaps you are wondering the same thing.

History has shown almost every way and purpose humans can imagine for attacking, invading, occupying, destroying, annexing, blockading, burning, looting, bombing or decimating both neighboring and far-off nations or tribes or even continents.  Ghengis Khan and Alexander the Great had what seemed to them and their followers, valuable reasons for dominating as many states, cities and regions as they could.  Hitler had his own “good” reasons for doing the same, and most Germans and like-minded – or like-confused – neighbors went along with him.  The Romans could justify what they did, so did Japan so did Lenin and Stalin in Soviet days.

One expects that Vladimir Putin has a sufficient reason to attack Ukraine, but it certainly isn’t very clear or explicable.  What is going on? 

Given that Mr. Putin hasn’t conferred with Prudence and is not expected to anytime soon, most evidence to which we might allude will be circumstantial at best and inferential, otherwise.  Many wise people have tried to evaluate what he is trying to accomplish, including experienced military leaders.  But they are making military judgements of tactics and short-term strategies and, no matter how accurate, such musings won’t explain the overall purpose of employing war to “solve” some nebulous threat from Ukraine.

Perhaps the non-existent threat from Ukraine was never the impetus for invasion.

Putin is not someone most people would want to chum around with, but he’s not stupid, nor does it seem Prudent to assume that he is mentally addled.  He has managed and manipulated Russia for more than 20 years, gained power and influence geopolitically in that time, and become one of the wealthiest men in the world by cleverly holding and exercising power over the oligarchs that own or control most of Russia’s large industries and banks.  A significant “vig” is paid to Putin for every significant domestic and international trade deal: he is a billionaire.

However, Mr. Putin is also messianic in terms of restoring what he perceives as the once-great Russian empire.  As a loyal KGB agent, once assigned to East Germany, arguably the empire’s furthest outpost, Putin was probably less concerned about Communism than he was about the territorial and political extent of the Soviet Union.  The end of the Soviet system was a severe setback in his view, and something he wishes to set aright.  He had what appeared, at first, to be two audiences to satisfy as to his intent and purpose: Ukraine… and Russia.  It doesn’t appear that he gave a damn about what other countries thought of his threat to return Ukraine to the Russian fold.  It was strictly a local matter for Ukraine to resolve by folding in the face of his threats.

Like it or not, however, Putin’s Russia is a big puzzle piece in geopolitics.  As local as he may have wished to keep his piecemeal dissection of Ukraine, Putin needed to shore up his flanks while going to war on his western border.  Russia’s overall military significance is tied to its huge nuclear stockpile, at least half of which is modern enough to be reliable, which is to say, 2,000 or more warheads and hundreds of missile systems that can deliver them.  Its economic significance is mainly tied to oil and natural gas and extensive mineral resources.  Russia’s longest border is with China, slightly longer than that with Mongolia.  There have been shooting skirmishes along the border with China and the relationship between the two countries has been likened to two praying mantises in a bottle, neither trusting the other.

Lately, however – 6 to 7 years, cooperation between the two socialist/communist giants has been more active.  China’s economy, despite its problems, is 6 to 7 times that of Russia’s.  Russia’s huge land area sits atop enormous natural resources, particularly in oil, gas and relatively untapped shale-oil and gas.  Its population, however, is shrinking.  Programs have been tried to give stipends to parents for having children, but they have not worked to bring births up to even “replacement” rates.  Ultimately, along with politics, economics and industrial base, population size is the key determinant in national strength, depending on how it is achieved.  Massive immigration is not, generally, the solution.

China has 5 times the population of Russia, but lacks sufficient energy resources and, because of an unintended consequence of the “one-child” policies pursued in the late 1960’s through 2010 and beyond, the bias toward boys remains.  This pattern skewed the balance of boys and girls significantly, as parents aborted female fetuses.  During that same period, many thousands of girl babies were “adopted out” so that families could have another baby, hopefully a boy.  China’s ratio of female-to-male is 100 to 118: there are not enough marriage partners to civilize the males, essentially, or to produce enough children to replace aging workers.  China well understands the importance of population quality, rather than mere quantity, and it plays a multi-decade game in its quest to be the dominant country and culture.  So what, you may be asking?

The issue behind almost everything is the U. S. A.  China’s “problem” is not Russia, although the CCP is perfectly happy to buy oil from Russia while it stirs up problems for the “West.”  It is the United States that is the main impediment to Chinese hegemony, even in its own side of Asia and Southeast Asia.  After decades of buying off the elites, Wall Street, the universities, the banks and major industries in the U. S., China has finally secured a compromised President, who it has also “bought off,” and, praise the ancient dragon-gods, is also mentally incompetent!  Things seem to be aligning for China’s big move to unseat the U. S., globally.

Wait a minute, you’re saying, I thought the worst problem is the brutal destruction and wanton murder of Ukraine.  Sadly, Prudence thinks not, although the brutality is the worst the world has seen – paid attention to – in 30 years, except for the murder, rape and slavery promulgated in Africa, in Sudan, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Libya, Uganda, Nigeria, Mali, Angola, Namibia… and on and on.  Of course those countries and tribes didn’t have such good communications or beautiful buildings to be bombed as Ukraine has / had.  Besides, we like Ukraine and our President’s family scammed a lot of money there.  But the dead, starving, uprooted people in Africa are just as dead or more in pain than Ukrainians, who have modern neighbors to flee to and billions of dollars of aid pouring in.  Prudence hates all of it, but Americans are rather selective in our outrage.

What else has been going on in Africa these past 30 or more years?  Why, the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative.  The same long-term strategy reaches into European countries, Arab /Muslim countries, South Asia, South America and Oceania.  China lends money and expertise to countries that need major infrastructure in order to compete economically, but many cannot afford to pay off the loans.  China is happy to trade ownership for the notes, or lifetime access to ports, natural resources, communications systems and so forth, resulting in a densifying web of influence and military advantage that is, bit by bit, surrounding Russia as effectively as it does the United States in their Western Hemisphere efforts.  Hard to tell which of us is more blind.

So, is it really Prudent to connect the “Rape of Ukraine” to China?  Really?  “Absolutely,” seems to be the answer.

Keep in mind that China’s actions are ALWAYS in favor of China.  That kind of nationalism deserves respect, and it’s fully understandable.  This is why we were safer when Trump was president: “America First.”  The United States is the only country that has always tried to do things, internationally, that are better for other countries, including shedding jobs and production in order to “buy” cooperation, first, to resist the Soviet Union and the spread of Communism, but later to try to buy friendship from China, of all countries!  While our largesse wasn’t restricted to only China, the shift to our insidious pro-China tilt, in academia, in industry, and in our “grass-roots” politics, believe it or not, has weakened our will to defend America.  The Biden regime has stopped enforcing requirements to reveal foreign sources of funds flowing to colleges and universities, most of it Chinese.  Why would they do that?

It is safe to say that the timing of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was based on China’s “granting” permission to Putin.  There may have been, it seems likely, some sort of permission from the W. E. F., as well.  Russia had its forces gathered east of the Ukrainian border for more than a year; they could have invaded at any time.  What made the winter of 2022 the “right” time?  Prudence indicates that it is the presence of the Biden administration and a number of steps Biden has taken to soften U. S. policy towards China, both for responsibility for the Covid pandemic and with regards to China’s multiple efforts in other countries that have begun to compromise even southern Europe.  An “America First” foreign policy would have the U. S. countering the Chinese “Belt and Road” initiatives around the world.  What we must aggressively, diplomatically do is attempt to keep poorer countries from succumbing to China’s bait-and-switch.  Instead, the Biden regime has ignored China’s encirclement.  China has observed the shift in U. S. policy since Trump and, it seems, has decided that this period is when invading Taiwan might be most successful.  It is unclear how much more encouragement China needs.

The final test has been observing how “the West,” most particularly the United States, deals with Russia’s aggression.  At the same time, Russia’s abilities are also being evaluated.  China is perfectly happy to fight to the last Russian, even as the West seems to be happy to fight to the last Ukrainian.  Gaining such knowledge will be put to China’s advantage – everything is.  China cares very little what happens to Ukraine or to Ukrainians; just as little about what happens to Russians and Russia, itself.  Russia has been a rival of China’s almost since Mao Tse Tung took over.  China is playing a century-long game with respect to Russia, too.  Helping Russia, now, buying its oil and gas, for example, may, in China’s view result in the acquisition of far eastern Russia, enabling the encirclement of Korea and Japan and control of key parts of the Pacific.  If you’re thinking that , “… oh, China would never try to do that…” then you haven’t been watching its creation of artificial islands and their militarization and disturbing encroachment upon the Phillipines, and Taiwan.  Indeed, the entire arc of Southeast and South Asia is waiting to see how the U. S. responds to China’s expansionism.  No other country in the world can oppose China and the globalization of Communism.

Interestingly, the World Economic Forum is pushing capitalist countries toward global unification, obviously under the benign management of bankers and oligarchs.  This is diametrically opposed to China’s plan for world hegemony, under the benign management of the Chinese Communist Party, the CCP.  Where the W. E. F. says that in the future we won’t “own” anything and therefore we’ll be happy,  the CCP believes we’ll be happier under their form of Communism and total social control that our ephemeral “freedom” fails to afford us: not that different in net.  Neither option will be “Constitutional,” and no one but the United States will be a defender of the principles of our nation.  This part of our exceptionalism is being constantly eroded BY AMERICANS!  Even people we have elected to our own Congress are actively attempting to destroy our Constitutional culture, now reinforced by a Biden administration that is compromised by BOTH China and Russia!  Interestingly, Biden’s family is even compromised by Ukraine!  What a mess.  Just be certain, in your heart of hearts, that NEITHER THE W.E.F. OR THE C.C.P OPTION IS IN THE UNITED STATE’S INTEREST!

Prudence is deeply concerned about the ascendancy of the oligarchy in the U. S. and elsewhere in the West.  Multi-billionaires do not respect Main Street, U. S. A., nor do they respect the basic family values that drive American culture.  Moms, Dads, marriage, Christianity and children raised by parents, are not the path to power that oligarchs crave.  The general morality of the ultra-rich is quite different from that of most moms and dads – by some reports, rather depraved.  When one’s fortune reaches a certain size, the impetus to make governments protect that fortune becomes paramount.  Politicians, unfortunately, are unusually attracted to power and money much like true oligarchs, although they are not smart enough to earn the billions to gain economic entry to the oligarchs’ club.  So, sadly, many are willing to sell-out to the real power brokers, because re-election is equally sought-after.  There is a relative handful of true patriots or statesmen and women in office who will sacrifice to protect the last best hope of mankind.

Wow!  All of this from the “Ukraine” problem?  May God protect that nation and its people.

Economics, Education, Family, Foreign Policy, Health Care, Politics 2022, Representation

Cons-piracy, n. : Piracy Together

Leave a comment

Although it seems imprudent, Prudence is going all conspiracy theory in this post.  Needless to say, there are numerous such theories on a myriad of matters.  Did Oswald act alone?  Or did Hinckley?  Was Barack Obama born in Hawaii?  Did he ever regain citizenship after living in Indonesia?  Why did he claim to be a foreign student?  Maybe Roosevelt knew the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbor, but he wanted to be forced into war.  Were Armstrong and Aldrin acting on a soundstage?  Did Eisenhower meet with UFO aliens?  Do Freemasons know secrets from the Knights Templar?

So, there is no end of possibilities, but we’re going to examine one of the very latest:  Are the mRNA “vaccines” part of a globalist population control scheme?  If so, was the creation of the SARS-Cov-2 virus part of this plan?  Was the coverup of the Wuhan Laboratory gain-of-function research, engineered by Dr. Anthony Fauci and others in the U. S. NIH, also part of the plan?

Those aren’t all the questions.  What role do Bill Gates – and others – play in the worldwide promotion of these rather dangerous injections and the drumbeat for “booster” injections?  What about the U. N. and the W.H.O. and the World Economic Forum?  Why has the W.H.O. lied about the virus and its pandemic and the role of the Chinese?  And, how did Moderna know about the novel coronavirus research taking place in Wuhan but the United States remained ignorant of its nature and potential infectiousness?  How were the mRNA injections developed and distributed in such a short timeframe but that timeframe allowed for approval only after the 2020 elections?  Why have so many standard medical practices been subverted in response to Covid-19?  And, why have safe drugs that have shown effectiveness in slowing down Covid infection been suppressed and made illegal in the U. S.?

Those aren’t all the questions, either, but they’re enough to make us go “Hmmnnhh.”

The human fertility / maternity questions are vehemently answered, “Absolutely no effect,” by the CDC, NIH, WHO and major hospitals and universities around the western world.  There are, literally, hundreds of articles stating no measurable effect of the mRNA injections on either male or female fertility: lots of studies, charts and statistics.  Interestingly, all refer to the shots as “vaccines,” and all claim that there is no effect on DNA from the shots.  To refer to the Moderna and Pfizer chemicals as “vaccines” is to comply with a widespread fraud since they do not meet any definitions of “vaccine,” legally, nor do their patents make any claims of being vaccines or list any effects of defined vaccines as their effects.

The potential effect on DNA has been shown in a laboratory setting by Swedish researchers. 

Technically, then, both companies’ concoctions are correctly described as experimental chemical gene therapies, not “vaccines.”  Most people would refuse such shots since they don’t treat or prevent any known disease.  Most people, however, trust vaccines.  What is going on?

In the simplest sense, a conspiracy to create the Covid-19 novel coronavirus and the expensive “vaccines” to fight it under pandemic conditions, can be reduced to a hunger for money.  Not only did the U. S. federal government spot Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson/Janssen many billions of dollars to develop vaccines as quickly as possible, but that same government set aside many regulations to speed the process.  Then it guaranteed more and more billions to those companies to purchase millions and millions of doses.  People were so fearful of dying from Covid-19 by the end of 2020 that there was no question that all the doses that could be produced and distributed would be used, and paid-for.  Financially, it was a gold mine, so to speak.  But Covid and the pandemic and resulting states of emergency, in the U. S. and many other nations, was far more complex than just an obscene transfer of fortunes in public funds.

The earliest stage of complexity hearkens back to 2003 and the outbreak of SARS in Asia.  SARS is caused by the SARS-CoV virus (or SARS-CoV-1, now that were counting), a novel coronavirus.  Those in the coronavirus fascination business: people like Tony Fauci, key people in the CDC and a couple of researchers at UNC–Chapel Hill, recognized as early as 2002, before the outbreak, interestingly, that coronaviruses that cause things like colds and some forms of pneumonia, are wonderfully manipulable.  They busied themselves in engineering changes to the original SARS-CoV virus so that it could be PATENTED.  There are legal issues around patenting life-forms.  Naturally occurring life-forms cannot be patented.  Only a modified, or “engineered” iteration of a life-form can be patented, and the SARS-CoV virus is defined by patent number 7776521, held by our own, very trustworthy CDC agency of the National Institutes of Health.  Later, the CDC petitioned to have this patent made “confidential.”

UNC at Chapel Hill also holds a patent, number 7279327, which protects their methods of making “recombinant” coronaviruses, which is to say, coronaviruses that contain protein elements from more than one source.  This is, however IM-Prudent, a valuable skill to have, for some reason.  You never know when the market for recombinant coronaviruses might open up.

In any case, the work being done at UNC, financed by Fauci’s NIAID agency, was skirting the law as it was close to bio-weapons research.  Subsequently, the newly modified SARS-CoV coronavirus, the patented property of the CDC, and the patented skills of engineering same, were transferred to the Wuhan Institute of Virology under a contract placed through an U. S. “NGO” headed by Dr. Peter Daszak.  It has taken many months but Americans and the rest of the world have finally learned that the NIAID financed gain-of-function research in the Wuhan Institute.  The functions gained were designed to take a bat-origin coronavirus, supposedly the source of the SARS outbreak in 2003, although that may have had help, too, and make it able to readily infect humans.  There wouldn’t seem to be any economic value to creating a more infectious coronavirus, although there may have been some scientific value.  Certainly no one would want to sell a new disease and, in fact, the CDC / NIAID / EcoHealth cabal didn’t sell it, they gave it away – to China.

Still, there’s no market for the disease, but, if by the rarest of circumstances, we are told repeatedly by eminent scientists, at the direction of Anthony Fauci (the Great), this engineered-to-be-infectious virus were to escape the lab, there would be a Hell of a market for a vaccine to fight it!  “Oh, c’mon, Prudence,” you’re crying, “that sounds like some huge conspiracy theory!”

Prudence doesn’t want to spread a conspiracy theory… just sayin’.

Still, if the impetus were simple enrichment, Covid has worked out very, very well.  However, if the larger purpose is something else… something more in the line of shifting free peoples away from freedom, as leftists are always – unfailingly – attempting to do, then the political, dictatorial “emergency orders” have had a far greater impact than Covid-19, the disease, has had.  What if the purpose was to prepare millions… no, billions of people to accept heavy-handed, un-Constitutional restrictions on movement, freedoms, employment, private properties, personal hegemony and education?  What if weakening the fabric of free societies were the main act?

The heavy-handed, largely UN-scientific reactions by various government entities, to the “threat” (read: fear) of Covid-19, has had, as its GREATEST effect, the division of populations against one another.  Masks and mask-mandates are a perfect example of this.  Despite the utter lack of scientific/medical value of popular masking products against the spread or infection-rates of Covid, Americans become angry toward anyone who questions them.  Schools have been allowed to open, for example (by teachers’ unions), only if children as young as pre-schoolers are forced to wear masks.  There’s plenty of data and evidence for the negative effects of masks on children, yet teachers have gone so far as to tape masks onto special-needs children – as if somebody were made the tiniest bit safer because of its forced placement.  Anger results, and great defensiveness that cites “CDC Guidance” as justification, yet the CDC’s mission is research, not public policy.  Who gave the CDC, of all people, this enormous power?

The Congress, supposedly the most potent locus of power under our Constitution, is left begging for information.  This is upside down, is it not?  The W.H.O., a corrupt agency within the corrupt United Nations, is just as often cited by our administrative state as justification for recommendations that have effectively militarized medicine in the United States.  W.H.O., we should not forget, began its advice about Covid by lying, for weeks, about the role of China in developing and spreading Covid-19 around the world.  It is completely IM-Prudent to take their advice on much of anything.  Now there is building the idea that any NATION that opposes W.H.O.’s directives on health and future (and current) pandemics, should be punished!  This can only be effected by reducing the sovereignty of member nations. 

Almost 90 nations have adopted or are considering some form of “vaccine passport,” including our formerly quite free neighbor to the north, Canada.  Here we have a set of injections – called vaccines – that the latest evidence and releases of information from Pfizer and the FDA show are greater risks than the supposed disease they are supposed to prevent.  Governments and major employers – even the Department of Defense – are using threats against continued employment should individuals refuse to receive those questionable shots.  We seem to be trading our freedom for… well, for risky medication about which mostly lies have been told.  Yet W.H.O. and the U. N. are pushing global requirements to accept the injections.

Clearly the overriding purpose of this pandemic and the vaccines, lockdowns and damage to independent businesses, increased drug overdose deaths, increases in multiple cancers and other diseases and deaths caused by the mRNA vaccines, is not public health.  Nor is it improvement to the standards of living for a majority of the residents of this planet.  No, it’s something else.  You can see this, Prudence hopes.

So, how can inordinate fear of a disease be maintained?  Well, as any government afficianado can tell you, by widespread, even mandatory testing… and more testing, weekly testing, daily testing, testing if you have a friend who knows somebody who was in the same suite of offices as a person who tested positive, him- or her-self, for the dreaded Covid-19.  With enough testing – especially with “PCR” testing – the numbers of “cases” can be kept artificially high.

There’s nothing wrong with Polymerase Chain Reaction testing; such tests can be very accurate in proper laboratory settings.  The only value to a PCR test for Covid-19 is to expose infectiousness.  Finding out that there may have been exposure to Covid-19 outside of the period of perhaps a week or less of actual infectiousness, is fairly useless… at least in terms of preventing disease.  It is useful, however, for inflating the number of “cases.”  Higher case rates justify the imposition of restrictions, mask mandates and, ultimately, injection mandates.  Higher case rates can keep schools closed, businesses shut down, and can empower civil authorities to criminalize normal commercial and religious activities.  God forbid one would be part of a “super-spreader” event.  Constant testing provides justification for all sorts of government reactions, legal or extra-legal, constitutional or UN-Constitutional.

So, if PCR testing is so accurate, how can it be abused?  It doesn’t require malicious intent, necessarily, for testing “data” to be abused by politicians, for they must be portrayed as “doing something.”  The process involves, first, detection of an RNA string unique to Covid-19.  This might involve only a few copies of the RNA “snippet.”  The chain reaction step then replicates the small number of strings in repeated steps until there are enough strings to confirm and display by concentration assay.  Bingo: a positive!  Keep ‘em coming, boys and girls, and we can lockdown those pesky right-wingers for months.

The only real counter to fear of covid is early, safe treatment of symptoms and inhibition of viral replication in the body.  Given a little help, natural immunity will figure out how to stop the virus and create an immune response that can last for years.  Unfortunately, mRNA injections start out lasting only a few months and, by the 2nd “booster” shot, only about 4 WEEKS.  In the process, since they defend against only one protein in the virus, they augment the ability of the virus to mutate, creating “variants” that may or, often may not be deterred by the “vaccines.”  Aha!  More fear, more restrictions, more dependence on government, more formerly self-sufficient individuals on welfare, more billions to develop still other mRNA shots: a lifetime of “boosters.”  If this is a plan, it’s a damned good one.

Treatments for Covid-19, however, have been suppressed.  Typically, facing a new disease, the best medical reaction is to try everything that might help from the pharmacopeia of known drugs.  Obviously, EVERYTHING, in the beginning, will be “off-label!”  Duh!  Every potential anti-viral should be tested, AND THEY HAVE BEEN, and in various combinations with nutrients and complementary drugs.  Protocols have been assembled that are VERY effective at certain stages of infection and progression.  Medical science is a remarkable engine of innovation.

Why do you suppose these treatments have been made, essentially, illegal?  Such a reaction is unique to covid-19!  Patients who exhibit symptoms were told to go home and come back to the hospital if they became really ill.  No treatment offered.  Once in the hospital, again, no treatments, just maintenance.  Some recovered on their own, many were intubated as lung function declined, many of those died, apart from loved-ones.  Eventually, Remdesivir was approved and pushed onto patients, but it is a treatment that’s worse than the disease, with severe, organ-damaging side effects.  None of the inexpensive treatments are ever offered, and even if prescribed by a physician, hospitals will not ALLOW them to be administered.  In many cases – most – pharmacies will not fill those prescriptions because of “CDC guidance.”

The only answer offered to the question of SARS-CoV-2 fears are the weird mRNA shots, shots that don’t promise to immunize, or stop infections or even prevent future infections – only to mitigate infections, but then, only if you happen to contract Covid-19 during the small window of “vaccine” effectiveness.  Unfortunately, it has become clear, these injections tend to disrupt your natural immune system, leaving it able to respond only to the one protein the mRNA shots react to.  “Vaccinated” people become increasingly defenseless against many other diseases, including childhood diseases and cancers that natural immunity typically fights off unnoticed.  Yet, these are the shots governments are FORCING people to take, all around the world.  Why in Hell, one wonders?  And our freedoms will be stripped from us unless we accept them? Populations could decline if this is allowed to continue.

Are we sovereign human beings with unalienable rights?  Or laboratory rats?  How about WE conspire to remove the people who have reduced us to this status?  America, Awake!

Biden, Culture, Economics, Education, Foreign Policy, Health Care, Politics 2022, Religion, Responsibility

WHERE THE GLOBALISTS STRUCK FIRST

Leave a comment
No need to run for office.

A year from now, or 5 or 10 or 50 years from now, the sacrificial role that Ukraine has played in the direction history flows, will be understood far better than it is today.  The forces of freedom and integrity are fortunate that Ukraine is where the globalists struck first.  Ukrainians… not so much.

This chapter is not written, yet, but it is taking shape.  The average American is poorly informed, generally, but right now, dangerously so.  We don’t understand the Ukraine invasion no matter the details portrayed on our screens: the awful deaths and explosions.  We don’t recognize the interplay with China; we don’t recognize the interplay with Iran; we don’t recognize the “cat’s paw” role of North Korea.  We don’t recognize the far, far leftist swing of the Biden administration.  We don’t recognize the damage already done to America’s standing in the world and the inroads into our sovereignty that Covid-19 fostered.

Yet even with all of that, our greatest failure is not comprehending the expanded, vital and increasingly crucial role of the United States as the last and only impediment to global communism.  You may be shaking your head at the wild conspiracy theories that seem completely im-Prudent, but we’re working only from the statements of very powerful people who are in a position to guide and facilitate the imposition of the “Great Reset” you ought to have heard of by now.  What does that reset consist of?

The number-one component of the globalists’ plan is the end of nationalism.  Yet nationalism accounts for the greatest progress mankind has ever made in virtually every arena from health care to nutrition to family and personal safety.  Donald Trump became president on a platform and promise of “America First,” and it is an ideal that resonates with Americans.  We believe in our nation; we believe in the exceptionalism of our nation’s history, founding and divine purpose.

Barack Obama became president on the premise of a flawed and somewhat illegitimate nation, forever soiled by slavery and racism – soiled in a way that cannot be eradicated – and, specifically, as Obama made clear in foreign speeches, no more exceptional than any other nation.  We elected him out of guilt as much as anything else, as if to say that it was high time we had a “black” President, and that perhaps race relations would become even better if we did so.  Where Trump fought the leftists to secure our borders, Obama had loosened enforcement of immigration laws, the essential definition of nationhood: borders.  The Obama administration saw the rise of “sanctuary” jurisdictions, both cities and states.  The very nature of self-declared “sanctuary” status is the rejection of United States’ national authority over matters of national concern: borders, immigration, citizenship and the myriad matters ancillary to those concerns, not least of which is law enforcement and public safety.

Inherent in the concept of nationhood and of patriotism, itself, is that of abiding by true and just laws.  For citizens of the United States this starts with fealty to the Constitution and to the principles of rights enunciated in the Declaration of Independence, neither of which documents implies hatred for another country, particularly England, but which declare independence from England’s misapplication of rights normally enjoyed by English citizens, even under a monarchy, however tempered.  The U. S. was founded on the basis of ideas and ideals to which belief in God, or Providence, impel humankind.  Based on the Bible, and particularly the New Testament’s instructions on how individuals should relate to God and to one another, the U. S. Constitution established a framework of civil decency and authority, individual sovereignty and responsibility, and individual private property, within which U. S. citizens could and do perfect themselves.  Neither the founding documents nor the government they spawned take the place of the Bible, or of God or of the individual’s relationship with God.  A system of government like ours requires that individual citizens carry both the burden of freedom and of responsibility, and it works best, if at all, only when individuals have the moral guidance of a well-informed “conscience” such that most governance is from the self.  This means that only when both citizens and legal residents of our nation share essential beliefs in what is legally “right” and “wrong” can justice prevail for everyone.  Only then can civil society – and civilization, itself – succeed and produce progress in living standards and both individual and public safety.

Americans have both the benefits of Freedom and the obligations of defending Freedom and all that is implied under our Constitution and Declaration.  Our civic responsibilities are NOT LIKE those of any other nation.  We are exceptional.  We are not perfect.  Back to nationalism.

President Trump was often accused of being a “nationalist” as though that linked him to NAZISM in some way.  He obviously was not – is not – a leftist, which generates the abject hatreds aimed at him, and he certainly is not a NAZI, as in National Socialist, another stripe of leftism.  The fact that there are white supremacists who have adopted NAZI symbols and gestures does NOT mean that they have anything to do with conservatism, nationalism or “the right.”  To be pro-American nation is not on the left-right spectrum.  To claim that is merely a means by which leftists make it seem as though the right were evil and that, therefore, being “good” is to be some sort of socialist giving out “free” stuff from the government.  Otherwise, one is a “hater.”

Not having recognized nations simplifies the plans of super-rich oligarchs who meet in Davos every year: the WEF, or World Economic Forum.  There are two major elements of their “perfected” future for mankind: Far, far fewer human beings on the earth, and global governance and economics, such that no one will “own” anything and that will enable us to be happy.  It also requires the dissolution of organized religion, since an individual with faith in a higher purpose than survival will not accept simple worldliness.

The Executive Secretary of the W.E.F. is Klaus Schwab.  He is smart, capable and very rich, much like every other member of the Forum.  There are strange people among them, including Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, George Soros, every major bank in the world, major industries, major securities trading exchanges, huge international companies of all sorts, particularly in energy and food distribution/production.  Also, unsurprisingly, major pharmaceutical companies partner with the forum, too.  There are heads of state or relatives, but none of the executive or managing Board members are popularly elected.  No one has granted them power: they have created this shadowy “world management system” through self-selection and financial influence.  It is more than Prudent that we grasp what the existence of this “Forum” and its growing bureaucracy means to the residents of Earth.

We have seen in the United States, for all of its magnificent founding, how government types congregate in the “deep state” where their full-time jobs are developing and enforcing tens of thousands of regulations, most of which are unknown even to our elected representatives.  Almost to a person, this invisible “state” believes in its ability to “run” things better than individuals… right down to whether babies should be born or weird gene therapies should be mandated for all humans.  To this group, elections are side-shows.  The “voice of the body politic” is not loud enough to affect their far-more-important-work-than-that-of-any-elected-official’s – representative, senator or president.

We have about 150 years of experience with how inefficient and often criminally so, the process of “federalizing” problems is.  One need consider only health care – a most personal problem – as it becomes increasingly “federal” and politicized… one of the base principles of communism.  The nearly immeasurable waste of resources and the dishonesty connected to the NIH, the CDC and the NIAID agencies, and even the “independent” FDA, should be a lesson to Americans that dumping problems onto federal bureaucrats is the same as foregoing our fundamental rights.  We think we are a “free people,” but our freedoms have been diminished faster through federalized health care than by any other mechanism.  There are hundreds of federal mechanisms.

Our Constitution is under assault almost daily; the morality that enables it to guide our national identity is under assault almost hourly.  The process is made worse as rapidly as our shared beliefs crumble, our shared morality dissipates, our institutions shift leftward and our shared freedoms are politicized.  We have become a nation of rules rather than of law.  Yet our Constitution is still defended in the courts to a great degree, and it still protects individuals to a great degree.  However, as the globalist W.E.F. inserts itself into governance in almost every nation, the erosion of our very nation accelerates.  The Constitution will simply be collateral damage.  We need only observe the elimination of the southern border and the laws that ought to be protecting it, to realize that there are people in our “elected” government who are accelerating the dissolution of our nation.  Nationalists have their irreplaceable place.

The United States of America, then, in its exceptional position and DUTY, is the only significant stumbling block to a global, uber-socialist government.  That anti-nationalist, W.E.F. oligarchy will not be bound by the quaint rights and responsibilities of our famed Constitution.  It will govern more closely to the habits of Communist China.  “You won’t own anything and you’ll be happy,” said Klaus Schwab.  Think about that.

The concept of private property, owning the fruits of one’s labor, having rights of possession even under rental or lease agreements, has been the greatest spur to progress in all of history.  Globalism and anti-nationalism cannot succeed where capitalism – if properly regulated to prevent the effects of the worst of human nature – is allowed to flourish and fuel the dreams of billions of free people.  It is no coincidence that the nature of capitalism has been allowed to create the oligarchy we have, today.  For the success of globalism, the image and understanding of capitalism must be destroyed along with nationalism and individual sovereignty with rights granted by God.  Today’s youth, almost to a majority, view socialism as a superior economic system to our increasingly putrid capitalism.  Thank you, public education and essentially communist universities.

Thank you, also, to our socialist-infiltrated governments of the “United” States.

Can we regroup and re-educate quickly enough to stave off the globalist revolution?  Are there enough Americans left who will refuse to trade freedom for some hollow “safety?”  Has America enough courage left to throw out the snakes, eels, alligators and constrictors who have settled in to “Deep State Swamp,” from whence they are sucking from us our livelihoods and our independence?

Is resurrection possible?  God save America.

Economics, Elections, Governance, Politics 2022, Representation, Taxation

“with Liberty and Corruption for all.”

Leave a comment

There are always consequences to corruption in government agencies… and officials… and it’s not always mere dollars.  Simple graft is bad enough for it demonstrates the willingness to lie more or less directly to the people an official or “representative” has sworn to serve while in office.  Typically, we, the foolish voters in either party, see our “humble” servants gain ever more comfortable styles of living, but those gaining the increased comforts are usually careful to hide the actual scale of thefts from which they benefit, and we re-elect them.  We tell ourselves that the problems facing government are the fault of other or previous representatives or senators, mayors, city councilors, governors or, ultimately, presidents, not the ones for whom WE voted.  Our civil society is breaking down, it seems, in every way we contemplate, and yet we only shake our heads when trying to explain what is happening.  The scale of American civil failure disturbs us and we try our best to isolate the one thing we would change if we ran the zoo, but it’s not really clear that our ideas would really cause the change we think we want.  Besides, we’re busy and, fortunately, there’s an election on the horizon and we’ll be able to change the party holding power – or most of it – and “things” will get straightened out.

Except they rarely do get straightened out, or even “change” very much.  Over the past, say 70 years, America’s direction has not been toward strength or toward moral purity, but toward weakness and moral decline.  Still, there appears to be a majority in the country that prefers moral straightness and traditional American honesty and trustworthiness.  Why have “things” declined – lately quite dramatically, in the past 30 years in particular – when most people want the direction to be otherwise?  It’s a damned good question.

The Prudent thing to do, as our erstwhile Vice-President, Kamala Harris, likes to say, is look for a “root cause.”

Prudence offers a theory of the root cause based on extensive evidence: official corruption.  We are in decline not because “the times” are changing.  In fact, we have purposefully caused our own decline by electing corrupt people, and then re-electing them over and over.  The effects of this simple process are very complex – for good, purposeful reasons – and far-reaching to, now, threatening the survival of our nation.  While this sounds like there’s a single “thing” we could change to correct our decline, if this theory is true, we are so far gone that no election or piece of legislation can do it.  But Prudence is committed to never leaving her readers without a solution, or a host of them, so fasten your seatbelts.

Fifty thinkers studying the problem would have 150 opinions about what should be our FIRST move, and in truth, it is the largest conundrum.  So, we have to look for some of those root causes so that beloved corrupt politicians can’t make things worse.  Although its strictures are being eroded as quickly as the left (it’s always “the left”) can chip away at them, our remarkable Constitution is still the fundament of our laws and means of governance.  However, it cannot speak to our modern, sophisticated ways and means of subversion and corruption.  It needs some upgrading via amendment, and via an amendment process that cannot be corrupted by our “deep state” or current elected officials and representatives.  It won’t be easy, but Article V. of the constitution provides the mechanisms for proposing and adopting Amendments.  One such mechanism is for 34 states to apply to Congress for the calling of a Convention for the purpose of proposing amendments.  The Congress must issue the call for such a convention, and then step aside, as the Constitution allows for no further role for the Congress in this mode of proposing amendments.  Ratification is performed by the states, too: three quarters, or 38 of them.

The key to saving our nation, then, is the nature of those who actually attend the Convention, and there is the crux of the matter.  It seems obvious to Prudence that “the left” should have no role in such a Convention.  How can this be ascertained?  Could there be a test of philosophies to select each state’s delegates, like Supreme Court nominees?  State legislatures are going to control who represents their states.  One can hope that the 34 states that ultimately make Application to the Congress to call the Convention, will be the more conservative states, but there is no certainty to that.  Many resolutions over the decades have been passed by one state legislature only to be rescinded by a later legislature.  Most had specified one or two purposes for the Convention to form into amendments.  In many cases, the nature of those reasons to call for the Convention were the reasons for recission, later.

The likelihood of actually convening an “Article V. Convention of the States” appears remote.  A more likely possibility is that during Republican control of both houses of congress, an amendment could be proposed and submitted to the states for ratification.  Such an action requires a two-thirds vote in both houses, but no approval from a President.  Still, there will be a problem obtaining even that much cooperation when one of the key elements of an amendment is to impose term limits on Senators and Representatives.  Could the case be made that the time had come for courage and sacrifice?  It all depends on how corrupt the Congress is at the time.  But let’s assume that a clean, traditionalist, pro-American delegate body could be filtered out and assembled.  What are the “TOP 12” fixes the amendment should include?

Term limits for federal offices keeps coming up as of prime importance.  With our longer lifespans, instant communications and unbridled budgeting with perpetual debt, the opportunities for becoming wealthy in Congressional “service,” are legion.  All that is required is a tingle of corrupt aggrandizement.  One need only pick apart any budget legislation or any “emergency” spending bill – often an “omnibus” bill – that is more than 20 or 30 pages long, and numerous “earmarks” can be found.  These happy “gifts” to Rep’s and Senator’s districts and, often, key supporters, are the price we pay to keep our elected “representatives in office for 20, 40 or more years.  During those decades the motivation to represent the constituents who elect a 2-year or 6-year representative, is twisted into the overarching motivation to keep a cushy, well-paid job in which lots of people treat the lucky “seat-holder” as if he or she were very important.  News media seek out the elected and ask for their unique and oh-so-important thoughts about whatever is “hot” at the moment.  Before too many months have passed since taking office, the elected begin to think that they are wise, not just smart.  After the first re-election, they also begin to accept that they occupy their “seat” because they are one of the uniquely capable humans who can understand the positions to which they have been elected, and understand, at the same time, the incredibly complex and arcane workings of government and legislation.  How fortunate are the ordinary people who are represented by any one of these august creatures.

We have a “system” of election and “representation” that corrupts men and women, alike.  Their jobs are too comfortable and too permanent.  We pay them too well no matter how poor or sloppy a job they do, and no matter how poorly the country and their constituents are doing.  There are too many “perks” and advantages built into their job descriptions and, with the exquisite tools available for twisting news and social media, there is virtually no oversight of their performance.  We re-elect them so that they might “fight for us” in Washington, or, at least, so that they can keep the scurrilous bastards and bitches in the other party from taking away our Medicare, 401k’s or Social Security, or from raising taxes and fees and imposing onerous regulations.

Helping to grease the skids toward illicit wealth are an army of lobbyists – more than we can imagine.  Many of them represent not only business and hand-out interests, but also foreign countries who all, it turns out, have their hands out, too.

The whole corrupted enterprise depends in large part on long-term relationships with those lobbyists and the abiding motivation to be re-elected.  What makes it work is repetitive re-election.  The first article of the new Amendment should be Term Limits on consecutive terms of service.  It doesn’t seem proper to create a group of people who cannot run for certain offices.  Forcing them to remain out of particular offices for a period of 4, 6, 8 or 12 years will open up representation to people who are NOT compromised by lobbyists and re-election corruption.

The second article should pertain to the budget, but not simply that it be balanced.  It should force Congress to manage budget legislation while forcing oversight of the administrative state and the flood of regulations that emanates from it.  So, the “A” paragraph will force the congress to budget no more revenue than that collected in the previous 12 months, and that it shall have 4 budgetary cycles to accomplish this goal.  The “B” paragraph will require that every Cabinet Department’s budget and planned regulatory effort for the next budget year, shall be analyzed and approved or modified separately from other departments.  A sub-committee shall also be charged to review existing regulations and to recommend changes to or “sunsetting of” regulatory regimes.  Finally, the “C” paragraph shall require a date-certain for completion of budgeting and oversight that is prior to the beginning of the next fiscal 1-year or 2-year period.

A third article would simply state that the Congress may, by law, change federal budgeting to be bi-annual rather than annual, should the work of review described in Article 2 take longer than will allow for annual budgeting.

The fourth article will require that: A. No legislation may include items of appropriation or law that are not listed in the title of the bill; B. No bill that raises or lowers taxes may be more than 40 pages long, printed in 8 point or larger type; C. Any bill that appropriates funds for projects or support for any cause or construction that impacts a single District or two or more Districts in a single state must be presented as a single bill to be voted upon separately from any other matter; and, D. Any “continuing resolution” deemed necessary for continued operation of any agency or department of the Federal Government shall include spending at a rate equal to that of the budget cycle preceding that which is just ending, whether a 1-year or 2-year budget cycle.

Finally, the fifth article will replace Social Security with a mandated private investment plan at the same rate of payroll contributions as currently required, with restrictions on dates of retirement similar to those now enforced.  A period of years would be required to completely phase out the current federal “piggy-bank” structure of Social Security so that once privatized – carefully overseen and regulated – the funds will build wealth for taxpayers and cease being a drain on the Federal budget.

There are a hundred other ideas for cleansing our federal spending and taxation and limiting opportunities for self-enrichment while in office.  With more frequent turnover of elected personnel the expectation will be that more Congress-people will employ statesmanship more often, and not fear fighting the bad habits of others.  The same will limit the amount of damage a bad-apple can do in his or her limited period in office.

Meanwhile, let us stop electing career politicians.  Let’s impose our own term limits, particularly at the caucus and primary levels.  The office-holders who have participated in expanding the debt to, now, more than $30 TRILLION, do not deserve re-election.  Remain Prudent.

Biden, Crime, Culture, Economics, Elections, Foreign Policy, Politics 2022, Trump

FULCRUM OF HISTORY

Leave a comment
NATO potato

Prudence observed, recently, that 2022 would be “the” year.  It would be the year that is the fulcrum of history, thought Prudence Leadbetter, and every passing hour appears to confirm that prognosis.  Not only is it a mid-term election year in the United States, but war has broken out in Europe, Canada briefly descended into fascism over Covid vaccine mandates, and China could finally decide it’s a good time to smash Taiwan.  Why should Putin have all the fun?

Americans are going to have their first opportunity to balance the scales after having allowed a most questionable election to install the worst administration in a long lifetime.  There are many questions as to what the consequences of current events may ultimately be, and people have a right to ponder the hundreds of possibilities.  Let’s consider a few.

How long and how large will the Russo-Ukraine war be?  In one view, the best result is a quick victory for Russia and Vladimir Putin.  That will stop the fighting and provide some satisfaction for the Russians, probably stopping their adventurism.  On the other hand, the Ukrainians are not interested in being part of Russia, again, and are fighting ferociously for their land, families, homes and neighbors.  Europe and the U. S. are belatedly providing ammunition, supplies and armaments to Ukraine to whatever degree they can be transhipped to a nation at war for its life.  Without a doubt, the take-over of Ukraine is not proceeding, for Putin, as he intended.  This has made him less rational; he has placed his nuclear forces on “high alert.”

Had the first desired scenario worked out: rapid collapse of the Ukranian government and surrender of Ukranian forces in a few days, perhaps with Zelenskyy fleeing in fear, then Russia could clamp down on Ukraine, start making nice with its NATO neighbors and the world would adjust, amidst grumbling and sputtering, to a new reality.  Putin would be left stronger inside Russia and on the world stage.

However, the second, more dangerous scenario may be playing out.  That is that Russian brutality must increase to the point of war crimes, if not already there, and even if successful in crushing Ukranian resistance, Russia is left a pariah nation and Putin, if he retains power in Moscow, will lose face and influence and any semblance of trust around the world.  Russia will be sanctioned by loss of trade, particularly in oil and gas, weakening it nationally, and possibly reducing cooperation with bordering republics.  NATO will be strengthened.  Amidst this messier turn of events, Putin might do something really stupid… something that draws the United States into direct conflict.  God forbid.

Another question;  Will Democrats attempt even more blatant election fraud to hang onto power in the 2022 midterms?  Despite the inability to prosecute any of the most questionable results, an inability built into the distributed nature of Presidential elections, there are many questions, including Constitutional ones, that no court, including the Supreme Court was interested in hearing, about the conduct of elections in 2020.  Nor did any state want to reverse its certification of electors when that would place them on the ”outs” with a new administration controlling the flows of dollars to state budgets.  It can all be “blamed” on the fear of Covid-19, but the extra-legal changes to voting practices in 2020, were THANKS to Covid-19, not fear of it.

That 2020 experience should be instructive to Americans: the Democrat Party is willing to subvert both standards and laws to retain its hold on power.  The desperation they felt in the face of a most-likely re-election of Donald Trump and his exposure of the deep state bad actors who participated in the attempted destruction of the Trump presidency, was enough to encourage that party to attack election laws in many states, permitting vote-by-mail and unlimited absentee voting, vote harvesting and numerous other weakenings of voter identification.  There is evidence of international electronic connection to voting machines that were, ostensibly, not legally internet connected, and within that illegal action, evidence that foreign actors created blocks of votes that were “dumped” into the electronic records of key states when it became obvious that Trump’s majority would be larger than they had planned to overcome.  They got away with it and Biden’s electors were certified.

What, then, are Democrats prepared to attempt in November of 2022?

Next question:  Will China seize on Biden’s weakness to attack Taiwan in 2022?  Despite its obvious use of Covid-19 to weaken other nations, China is not yet the pariah it should be, internationally.  Many countries are beholden to China for “development” loans they have “paid off” with grants of industrial, raw-material, or military access to their resources, land or coastlines.  Many western leaders are becoming richer through Chinese-led corruption, the greatest of which is the Biden crime family, followed closely by Nancy Pelosi’s husband and Mitch McConnell’s wife.  Hundreds of millions of Chinese dollars enter the U. S. political arena through universities, non-governmental organizations, various non-profits and relatively direct political contributions through straw donors.  Politically, America is compromised.  It is a Chinese strategy that is well-known and well-ignored by our “elites” and the political class.

Does China believe the time is right to move on Taiwan?  We’ll find out, probably around Labor Day.  They, and Democrats, will perceive that crisis as politically positive for Democrats.  God forbid.

Will there be a banking or currency crisis in 2022?  The question hinges not only upon the long-term desire of Russia, China and Saudi Arabia and others to unseat the U. S. dollar as the universal and reserve currency, but also on the oil and gas global trade – something in which President Biden has severely weakened the U. S. position and influence.  It’s almost as though he intended to damage the U. S. economy in as many ways as possible.  Be that as it may, trade dollars, or “petro-dollars,” in practice, became the standard for international conversion for most trade.  This status has also made it possible to create dollars (of DEBT) whenever the U. S. felt like it, which, since the Great Society began, followed by Nixon’s closing of the gold conversion “window,” in 1973, is virtually every budget year.  The government used to borrow in times of war or depression, only – during actual crises, in other words.  However, since the federalization of welfare, there has been a “crisis” nearly every year. 

The U. S. has “borrowed” something over $30 TRILLION dollars, since then, without ever attempting to pay it back.  In return we have seen fit to act as the world’s policeman and foreign-aid piggy-bank.  With the fall of the Soviet Union and general maintenance of stability in global trade and relative peace, sort-of, for the U. S., the rest of the world went along with America’s debt creation and erosion of dollar-value, and our de-facto empire, but the system has grown tiresome and the U. S. has grown less reliable.  Plus, in our soft-hearted / soft-headed immorality, we have gained many enemies that we refuse to recognize or even describe, many of whom are unmoved by stable trade.  Indeed, some have brought America to virtual surrender regardless of the hundreds of billions of military dollars and thousands of lives we have “invested.”

Fewer nations trust us as allies than did 50, 30 or even 10 years ago, possibly than did even 4 years ago.  Precious few will defend our economy when China and others decide to pull the plug on the dollar.  What will that mean?  To start, look at the labels on things you buy.

Many of our vegetables and fruits come from other countries, for example.  If the international standing of the U. S. dollar evaporates, what will we use to buy that produce?  If South and Central American nations, New Zealand, Southeast Asian nations start to require Chinese renminbi for trade, where will we get some to trade with?  Buy them with our own dollars?  Why would China want them?  Sell some gold to China?  Sell some, ahhh… what, to China?  Land???

The U. S. has been acting like an international social-service agency for decades.  This has fitted with the leftist view because it weakens the dominance of the U. S. A.  We have agreed, repeatedly, to buy products to help smaller, poorer nations.  We have agreed to offshore manufacturing to, mainly, China, but also to several other nations, including in Europe.  We’re such nice, friendly folks.  Now, we haven’t sent fast-food “manufacturing” to other countries, so maybe we could trade hamburgers for our fruits and vegetables.  Eh, probably not.  French Fries, maybe.  In our dense “wisdom,” we have already sold off a lot of farmland and food processing to China.  That sounds smart.

Much of America’s power is wrapped up in our position in the global banking system.  Most nations store their gold in New York, for example, with international transactions performed on handcarts between vaults a few yards apart.  Most currency exchange rates are based on the U. S. dollar, secondarily on the British pound sterling, a remnant of the British empire’s dominance prior to World War One.  This works because every nation relies on dollars for international trade, a remnant of American dominance after World War Two.  The final remnant of dollar-dominance harkens back to the final closing of the gold window in 1973.  America had been willing to sell gold to multiple other nations at the then-current exchange rates with the dollar (“redeeming dollars” held by other nations), but we were running out of physical gold.  Enter the “petro-dollar.” 

The U. S. made a deal with the House of Saud that Saudi Arabia would sell oil contracts with other countries denominated in dollars.  Other OPEC nations had to go along.  Several ramifications manifested.  One was/is that most nations needed to have dollars in order to buy oil, the most widely traded commodity.  Because of a high trust level in the honesty of U. S. institutions – including banks, like the Federal Reserve – countries held dollars as part of their reserves.  This “soaked up” a lot of dollars and helped/helps maintain the international value of the dollar.

The U. S., however, effectively flaunts the benefit of having other nations hold and trade in dollars, by creating debt for its own domestic purposes.  This ramification exposes the fraudulent nature of American governance over the past 50 years or so, and now amounts to more than $30 TRILLION, with no end in sight.  This one process threatens U. S. sovereignty and fiscal stability more than any other.  Another ramification is the frenetic speculation in currency exchange rates.  By trading in currency “futures,” countries “forced” to hold petro-dollars are able to hedge against dollar fluctuations, but the net effect is to weaken the dollar to keep commodity prices low (oil, natural gas, wheat, corn, rice, soybeans, pork, beef, steel, chicken, etc.).  It also makes American manufactured products relatively expensive, helping to encourage manufacturers to off-shore production to lower-cost countries, hurting American labor and other economic segments, and driving up the need for Americans to buy products from overseas.  So long as other nations need to have dollars to obtain energy and other commodities, they will accept dollars in payment for their manufactured goods.  What if that stopped?  Can you imagine astronomical price increases?  Rates like 100% per year or more?

Life would change.

Financial gurus have been predicting an economic “reset” for years, and the unseating of the U. S. dollar is its basis.  Yet, politically, we continue to borrow and spend as though the rest of the world will put up with American mendacity forever.  What the Hell is a debt ceiling, anyway?

Very soon, Russia will complete its Ukraine travesty, simultaneously emasculating Europe and NATO, and China will then finalize its move on Taiwan.  What “sanctions” do the Biden administration expect to use to counter that move?  Whether sanctions or real military resistance, China always has the leverage over American debt, and will happily move to unseat the dollar, completing its own elevation to dominance in the world.  At that point the U. S. will be unable to AFFORD to defend itself, an unforgivable circumstance.  Would we turn over the keys to the country in a Rose Garden ceremony?  Do you think we’d go nuclear?  Do you think our progress on transgender equity in our military services enhances our deterrence?

Americans have elected, re-elected and re-elected, sometimes 15 times or more, the same scoundrels who have become wealthy in office while plunging the country into unheard-of debt.  That debt is on us, everyone, not on those we’ve elected, because they have done that deed in our name.  And we have rewarded them for it.  Can we possibly turn our eyes away from the truth and expect life to go on with borrowed funds forever?  Do we think it’s too complicated for us poor rubes to figure out?  One day those debts (loans) will be “called” when that move can do the most damage to us.  Of all the weaponry, research and advantage we have allowed our enemies to steal, the greatest threat is the one we created for ourselves, and that just to keep certain liars in power.  Shame on us.  Maybe this will abruptly change in 2022 when Republicans take over from the Democrats.  If you have evidence of such being likely, please share it widely.

Amidst the wholesale weakening of the United States nation since Trump left office, we are suddenly facing the one alliance we have long hoped would never manifest: China and Russia, and in combination with China’s long-term economic attacks (including organized theft of technology and advanced research), now a combined, hot, military threat.  Most Americans, automatically sympathetic towards the suffering Ukranians, are mostly blind toward the imminent threat of Chinese military action.  This is upon us while the Biden administration has halted the momentum toward strengthening the U. S. military.  God forbid that our country face its second existential threat while the fools in this administration are in charge.  Our national independence and sovereignty could be lost in a week, if it comes to that.