Category Archives: Race

Abortion, Climate, Crime, Culture, Education, Elections, Health Care, Politics 2024, Race, Religion

DEATH BECOMES US

Leave a comment

Since the brutal terror-attack on Israel last October 7th, there have been “protest” actions ranging from building occupations at universities to outright vandalism to widespread hate-crimes and breaching of civil rights of Americans. The so-called protests were… are, aimed at Israel and Jews in general as though Israel caused its own victimization. Funding for all of the signs, flags, tents and food support comes from a variety of front organizations for Hamas and, ultimately, Iran. The marchers, occupiers and rioters are, essentially, shouting in FAVOR of murder: death to Israelis and to the nation of Israel, itself. The thinnest of membranes separates that desire from the very same for America, itself. This death business has become one of the largest businesses in America. Sadly.

Another death-rattle in our modern, “progressive” society is the aggressive abortion industry. One need not be an active “Christian” to grow up with a sense of the sanctity of life. Our Declaration of Independence lists our “unalienable Rights” among which are “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” Little of the message of our Declaration is known or contemplated by most Americans, but many can quote “life liberty and pursuit of happiness” and most actually think those promises are in the Constitution. Shame on elementary education that the Declaration is so poorly known or understood, but if only one scrap were able to be widely known, “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness” is the one most needed. The sanctity of LIFE is part of America.

For 150 years the sanctity of life has been under assault from forces flying a variety of banners. One of the worst is eugenics. Unfortunately, the concept of perfecting or purifying the racial makeup of our population captured the backing of many politicians. The concept of choosing death of non-whites over education and opportunity is a sick one. Big names, like Harriman, signed on to Margaret Sanger’s effort to abort the babies of the less fit – mostly brown-skinned. How it is that blacks and others can vote for Democrats and their slavish promotion of abortion as a social problem solution, is an example of excellent “psy-ops” by Democrats to convince blacks that the people trying to abort them are their friends.

The concept to marginalizing, if not killing blacks, can be seen at work in “Great Society” welfare programs that have practically destroyed the black family. The whole miasma of “the war on drugs” that has produced 50 years of increase, has also yielded overdose deaths on a scale that once would have caused immense distress to “normal” people, but has become just a background problem for those “less fit.” Shame on us for not being nationally serious about drugs. They KILL upwards of 100,000 AMERICANS every single, damned year.

However, we have been programmed to believe that life is not part of the American way; it is only true if you don’t upset the oligarchy – and the Communists – too much. Life is no longer revered. Murderers are rather routinely let out of prison or not even prosecuted. The greatest murder machine on earth: Planned Parenthood, is a political force, able to tap into federal taxation/borrowing in various ways. Politicians seek their support. Churches are denigrated and polluted with popular fads, their normal defense of life as not just revered but, sacred, yet under constant assault. Children are indoctrinated with odd theories of sexual unreality, part of the great movement to disassociate Americans from truth. Halloween is celebrated more than Christmas.

Clearly there is a macabre fascination with, if not celebration of death. Great effort has been made to convince the blindly secular that murder isn’t murder if there is some overriding social purpose. Among such purposes are convenience, economics, social injustice, food profits, pharmaceutical profits, climate change and hatreds, including political hatred… so many ways to justify death as a preferred solution. Underlying many of them is a political belief that the Earth would be a great place to live if it weren’t for all the humans. Dropping the total population by FIVE OR SIX BILLION people, as many elite globalists would like, would make for some very uncomfortable decades. Large sums of money are being spent to achieve depopulation.

One political party has staked its success on abortion rights, on backing Hamas and Iran and on greasing the subversive skids of the Chinese Communist Party, the most murderous nation on Earth. The same party helped kill tens of thousands of Americans with stupid Covid rules and stupid mRNA injection mandates, and looks forward to reducing our population by reducing food supplies while still promoting these infernal gene-therapy shots to even 5-year olds and to everyone else in the form of “boosters” that limit and undercut our natural immune systems. The latest weapon in this attack is an mRNA technology called “Replicon,” being tested on the Japanese right now. Once at work in humans’ cells, this crap replicates itself so as to spread to other cells where it generates “spike” proteins, ostensibly to stimulate an immune response.

The trouble is, these replicating RNA strands can be transmitted to others in close contact, causing them to be “innoculated” unknowingly. Unfortunately, the well-documented threats to overall health and natural immunity are just as bad as from the original mRNA shots that people lined-up-for… until they got wise and no longer do. This would be a wonderful planet if it weren’t for all the people. In Prudence’ view the most tragic death will be of the United States, itself.

Killing a nation happens on multiple “fronts.” Obviously, killing all the people would kill the IDEA of a nation and its culture. Genocide is the worst war crime there is. But, if the ideas that are shared by the citizens of a nation can be eroded, even reversed, so to speak, that nation will die a different kind of death. As the process descends that nation increasingly exists for the benefit of others, not for itself or for its people. Soon its education system is teaching history (if taught at all) of all the reasons to be ashamed of the nation’s founding, ideals and actions. Then, enclaves of foreign cultures are invited in where populations of people with unassimilated and unassimilable ideas are allowed to grow to an extent that they affect elections, crowding out American beliefs and voters. Closer to the end, law and order, police systems, layers of the judiciary and national law enforcement are twisted into political tools for resisting or undercutting the members of society that still are passionate about the nation and its founding philosophies.

Finally, one political party commits itself to all the forces and fallacies that spread the many kinds of death that are threatening to kill the nation. That party should never hold power, again.

Crime, Culture, Economics, Education, Elections, Family, Governance, Health Care, Immigration, Politics 2024, Race

TRUTH & HONESTY

Leave a comment

The concept of TRUTH: unvarnished, unbiased, unalloyed actual, real, provable TRUTH… is a commodity upon which the greatest philosophies are built or related to. So far in human history, no one has been able to connect for more than brief periods, to pure truth. This is not to belay the claims of strong connections to truth; there are millions of those, but they seem to be temporary. Moreover, each claim is subject to language and the meaning of words, not to overlook cultural beliefs of both claimant and listener. It is uncommon that a new “revelation” of truth will actually change cultural or other long-held beliefs. Columbus didn’t prove or reveal that the Earth is round – many already knew those things – but his success at finding a “new” continent gave millions of Europeans something new to “believe in,” but until a colonist or conquistador actually experienced being on this land, he or she had no idea what was actually believed-in. The existence of this land, north, south and islands, was absolutely true, regardless.

Let’s imagine, then, that so-and-so colonist were to visit her home country and try explaining how wonderful the new colony is and the beauty and bounty it offered. What would happen during that conversation? You might be able to perceive several dangers to truth already.

The teller’s enthusiasm – or perceived enthusiasm – would be heard by the listener with automatic reservation. Are conditions as good as she says? Isn’t she overstating how wonderful things are? Just thinking about winters over there makes me shiver!

Was any TRUTH conveyed? The teller wasn’t trying to lie to her correspondent, but did she actually share what her listener accepted as truth? Was such a conveyance even possible? Is truth possible only as a result of experience?

TRUTH has a lot to do with the welfare of nations and citizens: everything from public safety to public health, to macro-and micro-economics. Economists, or business “experts” are often asked about “inflation” these days. Everyone is impacted by rising prices for basic necessities of life, for example, and they would like to know why they rose so quickly and when they’ll return to “normal?” Those asked are likely to say that the “rate of inflation” is coming down to where it was four years ago. This might please many, but none of them will have heard the truth. The queried experts will have referenced a number, or value, concerning “inflation,” but proceeded to describe something else entirely. Even if said expert believed he or she was being accurate, the resulting “information” was unrelated to the topic asked about. BELIEF will have been conveyed… even honest belief, but no truth, per se. The listeners receiving that belief will probably accept it as if true, and even go on to repeat it as if it were. No harm was intended and, probably, none was done unless, that is, one of the listeners has a role in macro-economic policy somewhere. Let’s hope – and we all do – that the policy-making listener knows what “inflation” actually is and makes decisions on that basis.

Truth is precise and provable when experienced. A person touching a tree-trunk can rest assured that the tree exists in the exact form he or she can feel, see and possibly smell. If the observer is a good speaker and tells a person who has a decent command of their shared language, what the tree looks like, feels like and smells like, and exactly where it is, the listener, IF HE OR SHE BELIEVES THE SPEAKER TO BE HONEST, will have received some truth about a bit of reality, and be confident that is the case. How often we complete conversations with the general feeling that we have learned something that is basically true, or is close enough to truth to make a decision about or act upon. “True enough,” we say.

The description of a tree has no future impact on the life, health or fortunes of the receiver of that information. It won’t keep him from going to work, from eating meat or picking up his child from baseball practice. Even if the description by the observer/experiencer of that tree were wildly exaggerated to a point of nonsense, the rest of the listener’s life would be unaffected, unless he or she were to one day encounter that same tree and find that the observer had lied about it, thus changing their relationship for the future. There are, decidedly, different “levels” of truth that we all have learned to manage the impacts of. Indeed, we have learned to manage our own relationship with truth that connects to or emanates from ourselves. Neither society nor civilization could function OR IMPROVE, without a certain level of truthfulness that most members agree to. But, how to measure the levels or, to be more precise and truthful with ourselves: how to make judgments about “truthiness?”

Judging others is virtually automatic by age 12 or so, but the habit deserves more thought than it is typically afforded in today’s social-media environment. We are constantly assailed by strong opinions about people and topics, with little time spent on using our judgment power. Concepts slide into our consciousness without much analysis and become part of a background of belief – or “truth” – against which newer ideas are compared and sources thereof, judged. It doesn’t seem Prudent to try to socialize only in terms of absolute truth. Personalities would be overridden by analytics; friendship and love would be impossible: the strengths and weaknesses of individuals would be disregarded. The very essence of judgment, sympathy, empathy and charity would be subsumed in a distillate of pure truth. The joy of wonder and hope would be made unnecessary if humanity were defined only by pure fact.

If interpersonal relationships must include true feelings and honesty as essential parts of managed truth, where is unvarnished truth required in modern society? Education, government, law-enforcement and medicine. It is easy to see why, with a little reflection.

First, Education: Learning has been slipping badly over the past 40 years. It is crucial that there be real human teachers keeping students on course – it’s part of maturation – but there must be a high percentage of absolute truth conveyed. No human will be bias-free, but that’s useful in terms of engaging students in the subject matter: interaction with the teacher/professor. Healthy argument speeds internalization of crucial parts of the subject matter, and not the same argument for every student. Humans are essential, but each should be judged or evaluated on the true percentage of TRUTH that is conveyed – and learned – by students. Education by indoctrination is failing miserably.

Second, Government: Maintaining governing structures and processes that are most effective in lying to citizens and others will only hasten the demise of the nation. Advancement, free-enterprise and success of the citizens can only occur with a high degree of honesty in every interaction with government. When dishonesty is the order of the day, people commence to make their own decisions about which laws each will obey. If more than one person in 15 becomes criminal, society will implode. Moreover, dishonest government will lie most actively about budgets and debt, ultimately bringing [Society cannot survive] financial ruin down upon the people, generally, and on the nation.

Third, Law-Enforcement: The most basic covenant between citizens and their government in a Republic, is equal application of the laws. It is counter-productive entirely to create different classes of people based on how laws are enforced; it is beyond logic, fairness and honesty by any definition to enforce laws more harshly on citizens than on illegal entrants. Society cannot survive when its leaders dissipate the value of citizenship.

Fourth, Medicine: Crass industrialization – and politicization through money – of medicine, medical research and pharmaceuticals, has cheapened medicine to mere employment and made the medical “system” an untrustworthy power-player with access to the taxing/inflation power of the federal government. Worse, it spurs globalization for the potential marketing of marginally useful, if not dangerous products to billions, not just millions, of customers. The CARE element of healthcare must be restored to prominence, along with free-enterprise innovation and competition… to keep truth the key factor in care and honesty the key element of healing.

The concept of MERIT, or meritocracy, in all phases of governance and every facet of civilization and social/human advancement, is based on truth and honesty. The ability to actually perform the functions of critical work, or to acquire and grasp the knowledge to invent, innovate and execute increasingly technical skills, are crucial elements of merit. The originators of socialism in its various colors, are the source of “DEI” and other ideas that weaken or specifically deny merit as the right philosophy of honest, benevolent progress. All of such injections of “anti-merit” education, training, hiring and firing, including even in business, have occurred in entities controlled or involved with essentially socialist-influenced government.

Americans should compare ALL political candidates in terms of meritocracy or anti-meritocracy, regardless of related pejoratives employed by either “side.” Our standards of living, health, safety and comfort can be weakened in just a few years of twisting society towards sympathetic “equity” and away from meritocracy… and truth.

Abortion, Biden, Crime, Culture, Economics, Education, Family, Governance, Immigration, Obama, Politics 2024, Race, Religion, Taxation

NOT SO SUPER…

Leave a comment

America appears to be at its weakest condition both nationally and internationally (if the two can be considered separately), if not ever, certainly since the Civil War. We’re entering the last few months of the most questionable Presidency in our history, during which the actual levers of power and communication seem to be in the hands of unknown people other than the erstwhile president, Joe Biden. Major changes in our international relationships have taken place in the same period, including significant failures both military and diplomatic. Our greatest enemies have formed new or stronger alliances against the U. S. or its allies, and our economic position is under daily assault, also both domestically and internationally.

Our financial structure is groaning under the weight of excessive borrowing and debt. Even as the cost of INTEREST in the federal budget has exceeded One Trillion Dollars per year, the Biden-Harris regime is planning deficit spending that will take our total debt to over $50 Trillion in another 10 to 15 years! Even without the Marxist welfare plans they have, deficit spending is now such a habit in federal budgeting that the concept of balance income and expenses at the federal level is so politically distant that the risks to solvency AND OUR ABILITY TO DEFEND OURSELVES, are far away behind a fog-bank of self-service and electoral enrichment.

Our Navy, for example, is at its smallest, least-modernized status of the past 50 years. Our latest aircraft are so expensive that fleet size has been curtailed, as are, sadly, some of the advanced technologies, themselves. Piece by piece, we have reduced the number of defense contractors, and thus the competitive pressures that yield the best innovations and quality. Many armaments depend on materials and chips, in particular, that must be imported. It is questionable whether the U. S. could sustain more than a week or two of all-out war with either Russia or China. Indeed, we are strained to provide arms to Ukraine and Israel at the same time.

And our allies, solid and ephemeral? The Biden regime has disturbed them at every turn. The inexplicable retreat from Afghanistan, after pouring treasure and people into that odd, horribly expensive balancing act of inexplicable purpose, has other nations wondering about trusting the U. S. when the chips are down for their countries. Why didn’t we hold Baghram Air Force Base? Because the Chinese Communists told Biden they wanted us out of there? They didn’t want the U. S. able to strike from a few hundred miles instead of several thousand? What should India think… or Pakistan? Or, anyone else?

We’re no longer the “arsenal of Democracy…” more like the arse-holes of Democracy. We’ve been sending our treasure and our best young people to other lands to instill a form of government and ostensible freedom, that we don’t want, ourselves! Indeed, one of our major political parties delights in encouraging demonstrations and riots that tear at the roots of our society as if they prove how wonderful and “free” our system is. It is, apparently, a message that 70 MILLION aborted Americans can’t transmit.

A majority of Americans no longer trust our basic institutions of government and society, including even medicine and higher education. One political party constantly tells us how crass and dismal our history is, how the high-falutin ideals of our founding are really lies told by enslavers, how religion is part of the lies we have been told, and how children can be helped to change their genders. It is difficult for citizens to keep their mental footing.

Marriage is crumbling. There is no more significant pillar upholding Western / American civilization than strong, committed, life-long marriages. Those on the left, opposed to religion, particularly Christianity – and the farther Left the more virulently opposed – look to government laws and regulations as the only source of ethics or, even, morals. Satisfying government bureaucrats, so-called “experts,” is the goal of anti-religionists. Satisfying personal, conscientious beliefs and oaths of honor, is the abiding guideline of those raised in a religious environment, in families strengthened by the same sort of personal honor. There is nothing stronger or more life-affirming. No civilization or culture can survive or grow without a commitment to LIFE. The growing commitment to anti-life, anti-marriage and anti-growth in America, is a recipe for doom. We are reinforcing this trend with our mendacious economics, as well.

The left, placing its entire hopefulness in the hands of government, cannot trust in individuals or their ethics. The private economy is a mystery to leftists / socialists / Communists and Democrat liberals. They call themselves “progressives” so as to avoid anyone mouthing those other names. They believe that welfare and massive government spending will somehow make individuals smarter, stronger, more productive and more moral. Having rejected spiritual life, entirely, Progressives place no trust in any individual’s motivation to do what is right or beneficial. Consequently, Progressive, far-left Presidential administrations will, and always have, diverted resources away from Defense and into domestic “free stuff.”

On Mayday, 2010, a major water main bringing water from the Quabbin Reservoir in Massachusetts to the Greater Boston city and regional system, burst at a gigantic valve in the town of Weston. It created a major water emergency. Governor Deval Patrick issued directives for people to boil their water until further notice. Made eminent sense. At the same time, the MWRA brought truckloads of bottled water to key distribution points. One might think that boiling water would be a function that most humans in the United States could handle… even in 2010. Fights broke out over the bottled water distribution, fights that made the news. Amazing. Even for such a simple emergency situation: the recommendation to boil tapwater before cooking with it or drinking it, large numbers of people expected government salvation without delay. They wanted enough bottled water to take baths with, not just for consumption. It seemed weird.

What is likely to happen when Americans are forced to sacrifice? What if we must fight all-out war? What if the economy, $35 Trillion in debt, collapses and foreign countries won’t accept payment in devalued dollars? Would people find a way to persevere as they did during the Depression? Or, during World War II? Would we be capable of boiling our water if an enemy has contaminated water supplies? One wonders. What if we lose the internet, GPS, cell-phone service or electric power for long periods? Are we tough enough to survive? Smart enough?

Biden, Crime, Culture, Economics, Foreign Policy, Immigration, Obama, Race, Representation, Terrorism

BIDEN’S OBAMINATION

Leave a comment

After the past 3 years of criminal malfeasance on the President’s part, malfeasance that has spread throughout “his” administration, it is time for all Americans to admit to the gross damage that inserting Biden as president has caused. Democrats have nothing to be proud of – and much to answer for – in the matters of the 2020 elections. The possibility that Biden was fairly elected dwindles almost daily. A fair observer should concede that Trump’s suspicion of unprecedented election fraud and wrong-doing is well justified. His frantic attempts to reverse the certifications of “votes” were justified actions of a chief executive officer. Unfortunately, there is neither time nor mechanism to expose distortions as grand and effective as those employed in 2020. January Sixth played out as the phenomenal political hatchet that certain rabid leftists and anti-Trumpers had only dreamed-of hitherto.

As a result of the various crimes and distortions of 2020, Joe Biden and a gaggle of idiots came into power, including for the third time, Barack Obama. Biden, it is clear, has neither the thoughtfulness nor mental capacity to contrive the policies his administration is following. He has never understood history. Neither has he ever judged the nature of foreign leaders properly, accounting for decades of poor decision-making through his Senate and Vice-Presidential tenures. Worse, he is personally weak, leaving him easily manipulated by stronger personalities like the aforementioned Mr. Obama. His declining mental sharpness places the United States’ existence as a world power at existential risk. Woe are we.

It is hard to isolate a single Biden failure to discuss, but it seems Prudent to consider the open borders policies he has fostered. One must ask oneself, “Why in God’s name would anyone with influence in the U. S. promote or favor or allow such policies?” There are two reasons that have been stated over and over in multiple ways, neither good for the USA: 1) Change the demographic majority of our population (white’s need not apply); and 2) Divide the U. S. against itself and weaken it economically. Accomplishing the first will install Democrats forever in power – priority 1 – and accomplishing the second will enable globalism to replace Independence. For shame. We can see a dozen other leftist, anti-American policies working toward the same goals in education, communications, medicine and constant erosion of religious thought, but none will achieve the two main goals as rapidly as Biden’s flood of 10 MILLION or more illegal entrants.

The premises under which Biden acted to carry out Obama’s long-time plan, derive from “Executive Orders,” and were illegal in and of themselves. An executive order by a president can, legally and constitutionally, impact only the executive branch in terms of how the LAWS, passed legislatively and signed into law by a president, shall be executed. An executive order may not prevent the faithful execution of the laws, or set them aside in favor of un-legislated directives put forth by a president on his or her own initiative. However, as Mr Obama is confident of, there are few remedies available in the case of a president’s abuse of power. The only one is “impeachment” in the House followed by conviction by two-thirds of the Senate – a never-accomplished set of actions. No Congress has yet had the political will to carry through an impeachment (allegation) to actual conviction, even when laws have been broken by a president. Hence, “Biden’s” open border policies have remained in place for more than 3 years despite the breaking of and failure of enforcement of, immigration laws.

Millions of words have been spoken and written about the unfolding tragedy and dangers of the failure to enforce our border and immigration laws… except two: “I’m sorry” (for damaging the Nation, the States and hundreds of communities), spoken by Joe Biden. Oddly, no State, even Texas, has yet sued the federal government for imposing costs on States and municipalities in the furtherance of illegal federal actions. Another suit could be filed in federal court concerning those same States and municipalities being forced to not enforce their own laws on behalf of their own citizens. Nor has Biden, himself, been impeached in the House. An illegal travesty continues unabated.

At some point, when the Chinese Communist Party dictates, there will be an horrendous terrorism event inside the United States, perpetrated by some of the thousands of Chinese who have walked into the U. S. and by some of the thousands of entrants from terrorism-sponsoring Muslim countries. Everyone will be upset and casting blame, perhaps even at Joe Biden, who will be long gone or oblivious when it occurs. When it does those Democrats who engineered the certification of Biden’s electoral vote count on January 6th, 2021, will finally offer two words about the open borders policy: “Who, ME?”

Economics, Education, Family, Race, Religion, Responsibility, Sex, Taxation

AMERICA – Article III

Leave a comment

A major factor in the success of the United States and its economic freedom (among other freedoms) is the honesty and relative strictness of its judiciary, both federal and State. The honesty of contracts at every level, including the contract between the American people and the federal government: the Constitution, relies increasingly upon the Supreme Court, the final arbiter.

Article III details the legal circumstances that require original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, which means that the supreme court is the first, and only Court, that can hear those cases and rule upon the issues in conflict. In all other cases – and there are hundreds – the Court must agree to accept an appeal from litigants who not only aren’t satisfied with the decision made, but who also believe there is a Constitutional issue involved in their conflicting claims. At least four Justices must agree to accept a case, and one of them is likely to write an opinion, if not THE opinion that will form the Court’s ruling. It takes time. When the majority opinion is delivered there usually is a dissenting opinion. Lawyers everywhere study both. Crucial interpretations of Constitutional issues will form arguments in other cases. Sometimes the issues raised in the dissenting, or minority opinion, will be refined to bolster other cases. The written words of the Supreme Court are critical to our success as a nation.

The Congress is given the power to establish inferior federal courts and charge them with certain authorities over types of crime or types of conflicts. There are courts for immigration matters, for example, or for tax issues, and several others. The country is divided into 12 “Circuits” and Justices often visit those Circuits. See https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/court-role-and-structure for a comprehensive view of federal court structure.

Leftism consistently challenges our Constitutional Republic. Socialism / Communism is inherently counter to the structure of morality and individual responsibility that is embodied in the Constitution. Freedom includes the freedom to fail, to try again and to make choices about how to advance in life. Forces of the left consistently attempt to tie individuals to government rules and regulations. This can be seen in attacks on religion and in unionized “public” education, itself. Little by little, leftist philosophies, even direct Marxism, like “minimum wage” laws, constantly distort our economy and increase dependence on government. These stresses generate social-issue conflicts that threaten domestic tranquility and even personal safety. This places immense public, if not mob pressure, on the Court and on individual Justices. Starting with Judge Robert Bork in 1987, the left – personified by Senator Ted Kennedy, an avowed socialist – has attacked and refused to compromise with “conservatism” in any form.

Leftist, or “Progressive” policies, inherently are on the attack against the premises and ideas expressed in the Constitution. The Supreme Court was and is charged with primary defense of the ideas underpinning the Constitution. Judge Bork represented a shift away from leftist activism on the Supreme Court. The retiring Justice, Lewis Powell had often been the swing vote on issues like abortion, tilting the Court to the left. Bork was a strict constructionist, unswayed by social pressures. To leftists like Kennedy, that threat of a shift away from the attack on original intent, was a threat so serious that the destruction of the reputation of an esteemed legal scholar like Bork, was well worth the effort. The attacks continue, as evidenced by the violent reaction to the reversal of Roe versus Wade in the “Dobbs” decision in 2022.

Among our “Unalienable rights” listed in the Declaration of Independence are “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” Within them has developed a severe conflict, mainly due to the equality of status that women have acquired since the beginning of the United States. “Liberty” and “Happiness” both depend upon freedom of action by individuals. Pregnancy, uniquely, with its 9-month period of physical commitment and subsequent lifetime obligations, can interfere, unquestionably, with happiness and liberty of the pregnant woman. So far, we have not found a balance between the rights of the mother/parent, and those of the baby growing inside her.

Does the right to LIFE take precedence? Many think so. Do the rights of the mother take precedence? Many believe this is so. Mainly non-religious, non-Christian or anti-Christian persons, are pleased to take dominion over natural life, and grant women the absolute right to abort their child. Religious people tend to support the rights of the new life to be born and to thrive after birth. They are “pro-life.” Abortion absolutists have done their best to pervert the meaning of conception and of what a fetus actually is: a human baby, growing. Inevitably, this conflict landed in the Supreme Court. Sadly, Roe versus Wade resulted in more than 60 Million Americans being aborted, most of whom were growing inside women of color. It is a number that should give Anti-life believers some pause.

The Supreme Court makes mistakes. The “Dred Scott” decision is recognized as the worst of them, as Chief Justice Roger Taney attempted to undo several state and federal laws governing the status of slaves and even of any free negro citizen. Taney went so far as to declare the Missouri Compromise un-Constitutional and to state that the concept of “free soil” and freedom of slaves who resided there, was constitutionally unenforceable and need not be recognized by other territories or states. The decision helped to push the South to secession and proved to be recognized in its disregard among free states and territories. The 13th amendment made Taney’s decisions moot.

Another simpler, but still egregious decision was the “Kelo” decision: a 7-year battle over the “taking” of private property for public use, that was decided – many feel, wrongly – in 2005. The city of New London, Connecticut, decided that development of land next to a new Pfizer plant, would increase tax receipts to the city, and therefore qualified as a public good. Unfortunately, Suzette Kelo and her neighbors lived on that land, many on long-time homesteads, in perfectly acceptable, non-condemned homes. The city turned the land over to a new, semi-private development Commission along with the power of “eminent domain,” with which the Commission forced homeowners to sell their real estate. Tragically, The Supreme Court interpreted the “taking” clause in the 5th Amendment to include not only the clearly stated “public use,” like a school or water treatment plant, but for an amorphous “expected benefit” for the public, such as increased tax revenues might provide. In other words, amazingly, “public use” was interpreted to include “private use” if it raised more taxes than current landowners provided. Several States have amended their own laws to prevent exactly the premise of the Kelo decision.

The American public is right to challenge the Supreme Court and, through the Senate, to carefully examine the beliefs of nominees to the Supreme Court. As political conflicts, largely fomented by the Left, become more heated and hateful, the ability of Justices to ignore such matters becomes ever more difficult. It is more crucial than ever that the strength and intention of the Court must be to preserve the originating ideas and ideals of the Constitution, resisting all attempts, regardless of political heat, to drift, stumble or run-away from them.

Culture, Economics, Education, Governance, Politics 2022, Race, Religion, Representation

All Christmas Matters

Leave a comment
Boston Rescue Mission

As the Christ Mass approaches we tend to – are obligated to – place our most prized results of our year of labor and multiplication upon the altar, proving our willingness to sacrifice for God and thanks to God.  It’s metaphysical… in a non-computerized sort of way.  God, of course, doesn’t need our sacrifices, he needs the act of sacrificing.  He needs that expression of love, and so do we.

There’s a lot of charity flowing at this time of year, as you surely notice.  Charity is an act of selfless, as in “non-selfish” love; acts of love with no physical benefit in return.  Of course those and their organizations whose appeals we may answer as Christmas nears, do their best to thank all who gave of our supply of time or treasure, but acts of charity don’t require such recognition.  Thanking is certainly good manners, sometimes done to ensure future charity and, truth be known, most humans resent the lack of thanks, but it’s not a true factor in the equation of love or of its charitable expression.

We humans are beings defined, or measured, by economics.  We consistently judge the values of giving and receiving, thanks for a gift… or for charity.  It’s not always a healthy calculation, nor is it part of the love equation.  Or, of the charity equation.  Love, or charity, is an aetheric substance.  What we do here on Earth is a rather crude reflection of the pure, spiritual development that happens to and for our higher selves, our non-physical selves.  Except, we can’t manifest things to and for other humans without being in the physical plane, as it were.  If we are, someday, accepted into the plane where our soul is supposed to be, love is an automatic manifestation, not a choice.  Here, amidst a thousand distractions and evil opportunities, love and charity are a decision – sometimes a difficult one.  If you find it easy to express love for others and to sacrifice for others, count your blessings.

One of the tests we must pass is how to not slip through the diaphanous membrane between love and hate.  Hatred is often expressed towards ourselves, where it is most damaging.  It may be as simple as a mistake, even just dropping something, spilling something… stupid stuff.  Immediately we chastise ourselves in words we’d never apply to another, certainly never towards someone we love.  If our spouse or child experiences something irritating, an accident, a time-consuming error that makes him or her angry, your usual reaction is to sooth and help in resolving the problem.  Yet when we do something similar, ourselves, we immediately express self-hatred for our failing to do something smarter.  Prudence can’t explain why it works this way, but “the force,” God, the Universe, or Life, cannot deliver the best, most fortunate opportunities to you if you are immersed in hatred of yourself, OR, toward others.  It’s an equation: Love fits into it but hatred never does.  Love yourself – you are a product of love and of an investment by your mother and others of love.  You never deserve to be hated.

The greatest gift we can give, whether at Christmas or on any morning, is to review and refresh the love you are giving to yourself and others.  Even in mundane, economic interactions like sales, the advice always is to imagine that you love the stranger you would like to have a sales relationship with, before you pick up the phone or walk into an office.  It seems to make the interaction far more successful.  Prudence can testify to this effect.

How different might all interactions be if every human projected love toward his or her correspondents.  Unfortunately, our society and politics, even our elementary schools and teachers(!), spend much of their efforts at teaching children and grownups alike to hate others.  What a gross distortion of the life opportunities God gives us every year and day.

Children, most sadly, are taught not just hatred of their race or skin color, but hatred of their selves.  If born male, they are taught to forego the responsibilities of manhood and to pretend to be female; if born female, they are taught to forego the majesty of motherhood and to pretend to be male: two special forms of self-hatred.  Part of the self-hatred process involves separation from parents and other relatives who won’t “confirm” their new sexual outlook.  Learning to no longer trust one’s parents is a giant step toward hating them or, at least, hating their roles.

Children can be, and should be, taught to love themselves… not to hate themselves… or others.  Like Critical Gender Theory, Critical Race Theory is an agenda based on hatred. 

Questions of race and slavery generate peculiar ripples of hatred, essentially only in the United States.  Millions are caught up in them, especially politicians of various stripes, who have learned that constant aggravation of these questions can yield political influence.  Such influence is fruitful within a population of people who “enjoy” rubbing hatreds raw, including within themselves.  Foolishly, politicians have figured out that hatred can be not only powerful, but profitable.  Still, the strong feelings do not, and cannot, lead to solutions or transformation into positive feelings, outlooks and cooperation.

There are truths about slavery… and falsehoods.  There are truths about racism… and falsehoods.  Falsehoods seem to prevail, but truths about both subjects are immediately seized upon to draw false conclusions and false premises about what some true piece of history should force upon people of today.  Just the fact of slavery in the past has proven sufficient reason to never stop hating, as evidenced by the renewed, and listened-to demands for “reparations.”  Reparations justify hatred for white-skinned people: apparently whites owe an undying debt to blacks because of slavery.  Whites, it seems, are prone to guilt over having succeeded in mastering so many sciences and skills.  Not all skills, of course, but whites pioneered in many skills that not only have created comfortable standards of living and great wealth, but which have benefitted virtually all peoples on the planet.  Perfectly?  Absolutely not.

If we are waiting to stop feeling guilty until we are perfect, no less, we’ll wait forever.  That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t become better.  But, are the children guilty of the sins of their parents?  Only by choice and training; those who decidedly choose a better path than their ancestors, better ways to treat and interact with everyone else, skin color notwithstanding, should be respected and loved as anyone might be loved.  There’s no guilt appropriate.  Unfortunate and deceitful politics, however, casts all whites into the guilty column because some of their forbears owned slaves or mistreated blacks following slavery.  What is owed to whom, today?

One of whites’ imperfections is an expectation that money can replace sin – the monetization of guilt.  It is the fundament of perpetual welfare and the social welfare state.  Perhaps handing over money for no value will convert hatred for whites into love for whites.  That seems doubtful based on the “success” of the Great Society.  Otherwise, every welfare recipient would run into the street to hug any taxpayer who wanders by their less-than-ideal, welfare-provided home.  Nope.  Giving free stuff makes only the most temporary of friendships and quickly reverts to resentment.  The only “reparations” of any value or consequence to the quality of life for anyone, is teaching a person how to succeed in our culture, perhaps even helping that person to succeed for a limited time.  But locking that person into perpetual victim-hood and welfare-poverty is a system designed to destroy that persons humanity and worth, yet we persist at it, waiting for the miracle socialists promise.

For their part, far too many blacks believe that destroying the society and culture whites have succeeded in, is going to make their lives better and balance the cosmic scales, somehow.  That approach requires perpetual hatred and resentment – there is no love that is part of it.  One doesn’t steal, loot, destroy and burn the work of others out of love.  One doesn’t teach others to hate anyone, let alone a group, or to hate themselves… out of love.  This is why socialism is an abject, deceitful lie: it is premised on the belief of the inability of the individual to elevate him- or herself, improving skills and understandings and esteem while teaching him or her to love the good in everyone and to strive against the bad.  Under socialism, all trust is placed in others, mostly unknown.

Interestingly, America is full of blacks who have raised themselves up by working within the system and then transcending the system, leading the rest of us to better ourselves.  In almost every field, great, accomplished black-skinned Americans have excelled and led.  Why not emulate them instead of hating whites?  Crappy politics, that’s why.  Since the Clintons popped into the White House, hatred has become the overarching driver of political action: not freedom, not justice, not improvement of living standards, not wisdom in foreign policy, not budgeting on behalf of American citizens, not “America first.”  Despite constant accusations from the Democrat left, most of the hatred emanates from Democrats and their allies.  Yes, there are haters on both sides of the divide, but the distinction between left and right is gigantic, culminating in the Communist uprisings in 2020 and the Covid pandemic.  There weren’t “right-wingers” burning America in 2020. 

There weren’t right-wingers creating and pushing Covid across the planet, or creating and pushing ersatz vaccines into every body.  Those were the works of the left.  Why?

It wasn’t to increase individual freedom or to balance the budget; it wasn’t to prevent inflation of the monetary supply or to strengthen energy independence and the U. S. balance of payments with other countries; it wasn’t to solve our weak border enforcement, improve public safety, reduce the rate of drug overdoses and deaths or to strengthen the rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights in any way.  Why would a political movement take significant, even drastic steps that weaken the United States of America?

Well, aside from enrichening its adherents, it would be to, well… weaken the United States.

Love of country makes us stronger; hatred of it makes us weaker.  To govern and legislate in conformity with the warped ideas of the World Economic Forum and with the corrupted, communistic ideas of the United Nations, is to express hatred for the United States.  To promulgate policies, persecutions and punishments that divide Americans into two classes – favored and hated – is to DIS-unite the previously United States: hatred.

This is the time of this most important year, when love of others, of law, of nation, of selves and of God, should be foremost in all of our intentions, yet our politics has failed us, creating problems that our democratic republic can’t solve, while rewarding hatred as the means to power.  Let us pray as we see fit to return ourselves to a transcendent path, not the descendent path we’re on. 

Crime, Culture, Economics, Education, Elections, Governance, Politics 2022, Race, Responsibility

From Trump to America, First

6 Comments
Button, button, who’s got the button…?

Trump was a phenomenon in politics and in our history.  It seems Prudent to recognize that the greatest good he could possibly do… has already been done.  Not everyone who gains center stage will be a King, someday.  Some will merely be President of the United States, and then retire.

Aside from his extraordinary rise to the presidency, the most extraordinary aspect of Trump’s political chapter in his own life and in ours, was the unprecedented attacks he drew from the corrupt “leaders” who burrow into Washington and try never to leave.  Self-service is nearly the only service that City knows… or recognizes.  It stains and erodes everything, there.

In what can fairly be described as a sacrificial role, Trump exposed the nature and breadth of the rot we call the administrative state.  He took the slings and arrows for all of us who supported him, and for those who didn’t, in fact.  Like a lightning rod on a fragile, wooden barn, we are glad – thankful – that Trump was there during the storms.  Yet we recognize that we should not get too close when the next storm threatens, for he also draws the lightning bolts that could injure us as well as him.  It’s a real dichotomy, and grossly unfair.

Comfortably blind Democrats and leftists who may still pledge allegiance to this amazing nation, are certainly blind to the sacrifice Trump made to even run for president, and to accept the burden of election.  His fortune shrank and he relinquished control of businesses that bear his name.  We need not cry for him, but America owes him an historic debt of gratitude: he may have saved the Republic.  Unlike most in Congress and in the 1200, or so, agencies, departments, offices and programs, The Donald did not go to Washington to become rich by hook or crook.

Like nearly every true leader, Trump has human flaws and among them are an outsized impression of his irreplaceability.  He is vain and narcissistic and hates to not be the center of attention.  Prudence does not envy him his retirement.  Those flaws are damaging his legacy, now, and damaging the nation he deeply loves and served.  To a great extent, his anger over a very questionable 2020 election hurt Republicans’ ability to win the Senate in 2020, and it is poised to hurt the same opportunity, again.

Unfortunately, Donald Trump’s need to be the center of attention and authority keeps him from playing on a team – only if it’s HIS team.  For this reason, Prudence recommends that Mr. Trump actually retire from seeking office.  He is a huge influencer, and that power can be put to good work to keep politics and leadership fighting for “America First.”

There is a very painful effect for someone in Trump’s position, to stop pushing to get revenge on political enemies who have lied and conspired to tear him down.  Other Republicans will do well to sit down with him to map out how they will eventually bring down those who have broken numerous laws in their false accusations and fraudulent uses of federal power.  It can take the “Trump Wars” off of the front pages and let local political battles be won by other conservatives.  There are better, more unifying candidates for President, as hard as that is for Trump to accept.

So, Trump can be an heroic figure in history… or, he can be seen as a vindictive man who faded from importance, squabbling and lashing out at those who, genuinely, distorted the truth – even committed blatant, illegal fraud – to hurt him, personally and the country as a whole.  Prudence recommends heroism.

As for other Republicans, honesty, morality and dedicated “America First” policies are the pathways to power and American restoration.  We must re-frame the abortion issue with truth and pro-American views.  The pre-born are Americans.  It is time to make “pro-choice” the free choice to have sex, not to kill the baby.  Our long-term success as a nation requires guaranteeing the rights enumerated in our constitution, including LIFE.  We must restore the meaning of words and biological truth at the same time.  Republicans must stand for life and define the pro-death attitudes of the left, for they include the death of the United States of America.

Republicans must stand for honesty, integrity and honor in education, including reasonable limits on the power of education unions.  Among those must be political actions or donations on behalf of any officials able to affect or effect financial advantage for union members.  The same should be true for all public employee unions.

No laws should be signed into effect if they are based on self-declared feelings, absent empirical evidence.  Smart Republicans can create anti-discrimination protections for everyone that are not based on feelings, but on actions against the person of any American.

Criminal penalties must not be affected or distorted based on race or gender or gender-identity, only on the severity of the criminal acts, themselves.  Citizens understand the difference between honest and equal application of the laws, and political favoritism that distorts public safety.  Republicans must be clearly identified with public safety, and making clear the distinction between real safety and faux enforcement distorted by the left.

American foreign policy needs clarity and unquestioned pro-American patriotism.  We must strengthen our alliances with British commonwealth countries and a handful of others who share our philosophies and anti-communism.  At the same time we must be clear in our own anti-communism.  Our military behemoth needs strict reform and reallocation of resources.  There is too much General staff and not enough troops or hardware, or training.  The next president must be especially tough with the 6 branches, making them lean and effective.  All vestiges of “wokeism” and “social justice” must be weeded out of the academies and the ranks, right up to General staff level.  Only then will foreign policy mean very much and will diplomacy achieve very much.

Fiscally, the federal budget must be cut, including welfare of every sort.  The debt ceiling should be reduced every year until we are in balance, no exceptions.  Every Department and agency should have its budget and cost / performance rating reviewed separately: no more “omnibus” budget bills and no more continuing resolutions.  If ANY politician truly desired to reduce the federal budget / “money disposer,” he or she could put some brains together to create a campaign to sell the idea to Americans.  We are doomed if no one does.

There is a reason America became great.  The ideas that made it possible are so old they are new again.  However, it will take a disciplined political force to make them attractive to Americans, themselves.  Given the crass, petty squandering of political opportunity so sadly displayed in 2022, another party is needed, it seems Prudent to say.

Crime, Culture, Education, Elections, Race, Religion, Responsibility

Heil Soros!

Leave a comment

It is certainly obscure, even mysterious, why a wealthy oligarch like George Soros would expend his fortune on the election of socialist, soft-on-crime District and States’ Attorneys.  He has had an outsized impact on not only crime rates and, automatically, the victims of criminal acts, but also on the reduction in trust of government, police and justice, itself.  Still, there must be a plan.

It doesn’t seem that Soros’ purpose stems from a love of crime or even any particular sympathy for the weak-minded dopes who commit crimes.  He doesn’t appear to be an advocate for all things anti-White or pro-Black.  But, there must be a plan and, considering his actions Prudently, the shape of the plan can be discerned.  It is quite simple.

Soros is a socialist – a virulent one.  He doesn’t seem to trust Communists, which is a mark of intelligence, but, like most political socialists, believes that socialism can be controlled and manipulated to fit the goals of oligarchs and one-worlders.  By employing a process that breaks down civil order and public safety, Soros makes clear his contempt for the “proletariat,” which is most of us.  He has always seemed offended, as it were, by the Constitutional limits that underpin the United States, the belief in “unalienable rights” that they guarantee, and, even more, the basically Christian love of freedom and personal sovereignty.  Soros hates the power and influence of the United States of America, and of Americans.

So, it seems clear that the purpose of destroying cities through increasing crime and lack of trust in authority, is designed to force Americans to accept authoritarian forms of government… so as to “clean up” the crime, drug, homelessness and other problems that make normal citizens unsafe.  It’s simple, really, and it won’t take long.  There is already a significant political party/movement that is pushing for exactly the solutions Soros wants: Democrats.  Their experience in promoting and excusing multi-city rioting and destruction, weakening of police departments and removal of the only populist president in our lifetimes, in 2020, and the ability to control almost everyone, including stripping many of their “unalienable rights” by building up the Covid-19 scare of 2020 – 2021 and beyond, encourages Democrats to attack the Constitution directly.  They, and Soros, have won some victories.

Are any students, anywhere in America, learning why what Soros has been doing with his money is evil and anti-American?  By the same token, are any learning about the Constitution, itself?

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.

Culture, Education, Family, Politics 2022, Race, Religion, Sex

MALE AND FEMALE CREATED HE THEM

Leave a comment
And there is love…

…

A man shall leave his mother and a woman leave her home

And they shall travel on to where the two will be as one.

As it was in the beginning is now and till the end

Woman draws her life from man and gives it back again.

And there is Love.  There is Love.

                                                                        From Peter, Paul & Mary: Wedding Song

To hear it screamed about, the apparent likelihood that the Supreme Court will vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that upended common law regarding abortion, marks the end of life as we know it. (Pun intended.)  Or, maybe, the end of civilization, itself.  How grievous that women may again be celebrated for motherhood.

Well, maybe that’s not fair: women are so much more than mere “birthing persons.”  They are able to work, after all, which the artificially high costs of living and taxation require these days, and even earn more than many, Ugh!, men can earn, for Heaven’s sakes.  Careful of the “Heaven” reference, there, Prudence.  No sense bringing spirituality into this “life” argument; it’s taken nearly 50 years to denigrate it as well as we have.

Besides, religion is for the handful of weirdos who are not as enlightened as abortionists and who, still, think abortion is somehow “wrong:” science-deniers, all.  KEEP YOUR RELIGION OFF OF MY BODY, or can’t you read the signs of deep wisdom all around you as you leave church this Mothers’ Day?  We will not be held in subjugation by men for a million more years as we have been: mere mothers and homemakers and nannys to the children of, Ugh!, men.

Well, that’s one way to look at it.

One sign that popped into being since the big, illegal reveal says, “(euphemism for fornicate) to come, not for pregnancy!”  Females, then, (since ‘women’ can’t be defined) have been elevated to the higher status of pleasure-seeking pleasure objects… which is another way of looking at it.  That men have benefitted the most from freely available abortion – at least in terms of unfettered pleasure-seeking – and WHITE MEN most of all, seems to have escaped the notice of enlightened females.  Black men tend to be discarded in abortion clinics at much higher rates than whites, but, then, who’s listening to them?

Somehow, though, the relative power of the feminist mystique has resulted in wholesale destruction of women’s true status which was supposed to be elevated by loosening the shackles of pregnancy.  Exactly why current ideological, pedagogical theory requires pediatric exploration of sexual pleasure rather than language and arithmetic skills, critical thinking and problem-solving, has not been explained, but it certainly is a component of socialist beliefs.  Children, both sexes, we are told… they are told, need to be separated from traditional “roles” that science-denying religionists assign to them at birth, especially traditional roles of boys and girls growing into men and women, from whose love shall come forth new generations.  Those same kids must be separated, psychologically from their parents, who can’t be trusted as much as their true friends, the “education” establishment.

Go ahead and give birth, if you want to, but that’s where your rights end.

Men are pigs, so to speak.  Despite their strengths and values, men tend to set aside almost any higher calling when they perceive the possibility of having sex.  To borrow a phrase, it takes a village to keep men in their own pasture, and the head of that village is a man’s wife.  Women are the civilizing force in society.  Decades ago the strengthening feminist juggernaut decried President Reagan’s statement that “women are the civilizing force on men.” (Or, words to that effect.)  The feminist “leader” who put Reagan in his place for that comment, was signally offended by his statement, apparently because it linked men and women in the processes of socialization and civilization.  God forbid.  No way did a modern, liberated woman have any obligation to do anything – even a good thing – for a man: everything required negotiated parity between equals.  Love had nothing to do with it, nor, apparently, did child-rearing or family dynamics or nurturing stability or dependence on some, Ugh!, man to provide for the family.  It is remarkable, indeed, that any families are still being formed, today.

A measure of the destructiveness of feminized socialism is the breakdown of traditional father-mother families, and it is at its worst for black families.  Today nearly three-fourths of black children grow up in single-parent households, mostly fatherless; nearly 30% of white and Hispanic children do, also.  This shift began in earnest with the “Great Society” and the federalization of welfare, perhaps the worst public policy experiment ever conceived.  People blame Lyndon Johnson for the foul execution of military policy in the Viet-Nam War, as they should, but 100 times as much damage has been done through federal welfare programs that facilitate single-mother households.

Since the eugenics of Margaret Sanger, but really since the inception of the Great Society, the “liberation” of women, constantly touted by the Democrat Party to their key voting block, as they help them throw off the shackles of oppression by men, women have striven towards economic equality with men, but it has cost them the rewards of their majestic roles as mothers in loving 2-parent households.  In part as a result, American citizens no longer have enough children to replace ourselves.  Is this a measure of feminist success?

It is almost better referred-to as a success in the battle against motherhood, now that the battle against fatherhood is so well underway.  The rabid attempts to sexualize and gender-neutralize elementary school children could play a vital role in this battle.  Indeed, the greatest impact of convincing children that they are not who they originally thought they were, but are some sort of gender-fluid non-boy or non-girl, is STERILITY!  In the minds of feminized socialists, separating children from their parents and from reality, is the most effective way to destroy Christianity, as it destroys procreation.

Are there any demonstrations over Roe v. Wade outside of Mosques?

Indeed, the entire, sick fad of trans-genderism, non-binary identities and gender fluidity is an assault on both masculinity and femininity.  To what end, a normal person is inspired to ask?  To express hatred towards life?  Towards God?  Towards love?  It expresses nothing better than hatred for all of these things.

Perhaps the destruction of traditional sexual mores is the natural outgrowth of feminism.  Can a half-century of celebrating anti-masculinity result in a new appreciation for the value of men?  Our culture teaches boys that they are flawed almost to irredeemability, able to restore approval only by renouncing maleness in grade school.  The same culture teaches girls that the least-attractive aspect of their lives is as a mother, then it teaches that some giant boy pretending to be a girl is worth more than girls, themselves.

Then we select and celebrate a female judge who is incapable of defining what a woman is, and entrust her with discerning the essence of our Constitution when she cannot discern her own.  No wonder women are angry these days, and, as on most days, when angred there must be a man at the root cause of it.

Prudence is not certain that having more women in government really is an answer we’ve been waiting for: more real men might help, though.  Maybe the liberal wing of the Supreme Court can find a right to love one another in the penumbra of the Constitution, and override all State laws to the contrary.