Tag Archives: Great Society

WELCOME MAT, DOORMAT

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U. S.  The wording of the bill included preference for skilled persons, but the new relative-based “Chain” migration superseded that.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.

THE ENCROACHING

The encroaching divide of America into “Constitutionalist” and “Socialist” camps, is proceeding apace.  At no time in our history has the nation and its culture been so threatened, not even at the time of the secession of the Confederacy.  Then both “North” and “South” shared nearly all moral beliefs and religious ones, economic practices, and the honesty in contracts that underpins our ability to cooperate as a civilization.  The exception, alone, was on the matters of slavery and racial differences and prejudice.

Wrenchingly, courageously, the slavery error has been solved.  During the civil War, reconstruction and segregation, the nation held together and made progress on virtually all fronts, including for the economic success and educational advancement of non-white peoples within the United States.  Black families were strong and growing stronger all the way through “Jim Crow” laws and post-war awakening and struggles, as was the nation as a whole.  This, only because the moral values and their religious underpinnings were widely shared across all strata of American society.

Today, not so much.  The first 60 years of socialist, globalist intrusion had paved a path but few were taking to it… at least until Lyndon Johnson took over from JFK.  Under the guise of “fulfilling Kennedy’s dream,” the Great Society was foisted on a relatively balanced government, federalizing welfare for “the poor” and “minorities,” mainly blacks.  Johnson’s famous prediction, “…I’ll have those n***ers voting Democrat for 100 years” exposed the cynical plantation-mentality of Johnson’s Democrats, and the base, gutter-snipe qualities of Johnson, himself.

At the same time Johnson plunged the U. S. into a meaningless war… er, U.N.-sanctioned conflict, in Viet-Nam, that split the nation politically and for the first time, split youth from parents.  With the advent of drugs and drug-infected music, the revolution was under way:  “the Sixties.”  Nixon was our last attempt to reign in alien culture, and they got rid of him in the most politically destructive way.  Meanwhile, welfare was corroding black families and dissociating old morals from “modernity.”  Feminism aggressively began to destroy both manhood and motherhood and education commenced to dissolve Christian thought as rapidly as new socialist-trained and unionized teachers could be installed in supposedly “public” schools.  Clever lawyers, psychologists, judges and justices found ways to parse common sense and conscientiousness into never-imagined “constitutional” rights.

Even so, with Ronald Reagan’s election patriotic Americans were renewed in belief in the “American Way:” that together, with right leadership, Americans could restore the nation they loved and pull back from the rot that was slipping past common sense everywhere.  We even vanquished Soviet Communism without a nuclear war; “History is over,” pundits declared.  Even Bill Clinton seemed rational for a while as his Alinskyite wife plotted “communitarianism” and socialized medicine.  Rational people seemed to be back in control of our freedom-loving destiny.  But the left never rests.

Gore almost pulled it off.  The Democratic party was, haltingly, inquiringly trying not just voting for the temporarily deceased, but here and there, voting for the imaginary.  Bush stopped them in Florida and waltzed into the September 11th attacks.  For a few hours the congress was unified and appeared to be patriotic.   We’ll be damned if some backward Islamists are going to attack us on our home turf!  That’s OUR job, after all.

Americans still largely believe that we can “fix” things.  Problems are solvable and resolvable in fair and rational ways or, as we’ve shown the world for 300 years, with technical skill and innovation.  Along the way we have spread wealth to more poor people than any other society on earth or in history.  But, we’re slipping:  concerted efforts to change our shared beliefs have taught millions of us to distrust and even hate, our own nation.  The most effective poison?  Charges of racism… and hateful or just confused racism, itself.

The source of these changes is Marxism-socialism.  Those of you who are not willing to correct the flaws of poorly regulated capitalists, and who believe that distorting history and historic figures will somehow make life better in 2020, should step away from the next planned “protest” and consider your own role in the destruction of the best system yet devised for the betterment of the most lives possible.  To reach back to the only governing system that has NEVER succeeded to replace the Constitutional democratic republic that always has, is to prove yourself a fool.  Please wake up.

Nevertheless, the plan to divide and dissolve the United States is working.  States are now practicing what then-future Confederate states employed prior to secession: “nullification.”  With “Sanctuary” status being self-declared by cities and states, the federal system is under assault.  Politically useful illegal immigration is used as a “humanitarian” reason to disavow proper immigration regulations and restrictions, while still accepting federal welfare payments to even illegal recipients.  To date, the political will to stop this trend and restore primacy of federal law over international border control, has not been found.  Division.

Covid-19 has played neatly into the hands of socialist control-agents.  Economic and religious lock-downs both fit their innate desires to impose superior ways of living and doing than those chosen by free citizens.  Dictating how many free citizens can buy the services and products of other free citizens is a reach of executive whim that would seem impossible in an individual-freedom-and-responsibility, Constitutionally limited governance system.  Yet we have acquiesced to it rather sheepishly.  But, not everyone, by a wide margin.  Division is the greatest impact of the 2020 lock-downs.  Disease-prevention is a far-distant secondary effect.  The United States and China are the only major industrialized nations still hampered by this misguided theory.  The United States, ostensibly a “free” nation, is the only one damaged by it.  Division.

The tools of division are mostly forms of lying, whether about the efficacy of Covid lockdowns or of switching America’s high-energy-density economy to a low-energy-density one based on sunlight and windmills, or of “systemic” racism or tremendous racial progress and tolerance.  Those who would divide us are, practically speaking, anti-Christian and anti-Judaic.  Those who would divide our peoples wish most of all to divide us from our past… at least from the good parts.  In their views all that came before right now is so rotten as to be worthless, including the people and philosophies that created it.  Their Marxism is the only true philosophy (religion) and there shall be no other religions before it.

One wonders if they ever listen to the things they say.  Do you?

“20-20” Not So clear

Oh say, can you see?
Oh say, can you see?

As Minneapolis (and three dozen other cities) burns and is given over to lawless thugs because, evidently, it is politically correct to do so and politically incorrect to arrest looters and arsonists and vandals, the United States has to face some uncomfortable truths, and resolve to believe them, since they are, well… true.

Here is one: sixty years of federalized welfare has destroyed the lives, hopes and attitudes of many blacks.  It has also destroyed the black family unit which had been gaining ground at an accelerated rate for two decades prior to the Great society, and at an uneven, but relentlessly upward direction for seven or eight decades prior to that.

Here’s another:  government cannot “fix” racism, nor can it “make” people love one another, or desire to integrate with one another.  What government, through the adjudication of INjustice can do, is set standards and make clear the police, judicial and penal consequences for the mistreatment of any individual, whether civilly or criminally.

We have enough laws.  We have the most beautiful Constitution and amendments that create a legal  structure of equality of opportunity for every individual, and of equality under the law for every individual.  But the rights guaranteed on paper do not belong to the government nor do they come from government; they belong to United States citizens who have formed  governments to ensure, protect and enforce those rights.  And, when those rights are abrogated by institutions or by individuals, those same governments, who are formed by and paid by we the people, and who are obligated to defend, protect and serve US, must take correct, legal, swift action against the offender(s).

Unfortunately our political structures have failed, largely in order to serve themselves, to treat individuals as deserving of every right and freedom as sovereign individuals, but rather as members of groups – groups who can be defined by either victimhood or unfair advantage.  Identity politics is the underlying acid that has eaten away at the foundations of success for Americans.  It is the same acid that leaves us, nationally, nearly destitute, as we constantly borrow from future generations to make ourselves more comfortable or politically powerful (and wealthy) today.  For shame.

The long-term political structure in Minneapolis and in Minnesota, generated and managed the police and judicial environments that left large numbers of people so distrustful of authority that a spark like a bad police action ignited the pent-up hatreds that politicians have pretended for years have nothing to do with them.  Their reaction is to blame President Trump.  He’ll react, somehow, and almost no one will be happy with what he does or doesn’t do.  Under the Constitution, under our federal system of 50 sovereign states, and under hundreds of years of common law and morals, it is not the president’s job or duty to resolve the grievances suffered by an individual in Minneapolis, Minnesota, except  that he must direct the Department of Justice to ascertain whether federal laws or Constitutionally protected rights have been abrogated. 

He cannot override the government of Minnesota or of Minneapolis.  Yet as the office of president has become as much one of celebrity as of competence or leadership, people, and the press, expect every problem to be federalized.  Competing political forces are attempting to gain advantage by spewing their own hates and dislikes in efforts to gain power from a bad even that, under group identity politics, is portrayed as a national problem.  It is an individual problem, allowed to fester by incompetent local police management and union politics, which played out against an individual, whose family, without question, deserves justice and probably substantial compensation for wrongful death at the hands of the city of Minneapolis.

If the political “leaders” of that city had any vision, they’d be having every other police officer in that department hand-deliver notes of regret and sorrow to Mr. Floyd’s family, with promises to prevent any such event.

The problem is that the utterly corrupt political cabals that generated the equally utter hopelessness that engenders the bottomless hatred for “white” society and control systems – like police – is not the group we should expect to propose a solution for utter corruption.  Just saying.  These are human conditions, created by humans.  Humans can, if armed with the right attitudes and beliefs – philosophies, if you will – prescribe right policies and applications of law and freedom that will unleash the creative, constructive power of inner-city citizens regardless of color.  If you are unable to believe this is possible, then you cannot help form the new structure… can you?

To help the irresolute, Prudence can provide a “coral fact,” as they say in Hawaii, to wit: increasing welfare payments to anyone is nowhere part of the solution.  So, let’s think fresh thoughts.  Actually, they need not be all that fresh, since the mechanisms of success and personal independence are rather well known.  “Oh, c’mon, Prudence!  These are complex problems.  Blacks have been repressed and discriminated against for hundreds of years in this country.  The solutions will take time.”  Words to that effect will be tossed across important looking meeting rooms for months after these riots are almost forgotten by the “press.”

Some very serious person who “sees the big picture” is certain to say, “We can’t just cut people off from their EBT, can we.”  It should be a question but the speaker isn’t seeking any other answer… at all.  She (most likely a she who feels great sympathy for the downtrodden) is part of the welfare industry, not so very well paid, but paid above average, plus state benefits and pension.  And she cares a whole heck of a lot.  She always votes Democrat because they do the most to help the poor.  Ultimately the meeting breaks up after resolving to petition the state for massive reconstruction funds and new housing upgrades, and to have the entire congressional delegation file and back legislation to provide tax breaks to industries to invest in the riot-torn neighborhoods across the country.  They all feel very good about their answers to the problems.  Why, it could be 8, 9 years before there is any unrest in those cities.

People are made weaker from handouts, sympathy and low expectations.  Strength, self-esteem and purposeful living come from attainment.  Having someone tell you that even though you are a personal failure, full of hatreds and resentment for having accomplished nothing of value to others, that you are important and “entitled” to the same “equality” that others have, only weakens the listener.  He or she knows that his or her status and independence have not improved one iota since the last time a social worker told them they were just as worthy as any white person.  After a couple of generations of welfare subsistence, the “white” system is an enemy, not an example; the armed defenders of an obviously racist country and society are merely armed enemies whose actions are invalid at every police, judicial and penal level.  There is no possibility of compromise.

“Piss me off enough and I’m gonna’ burn your house down.”

It simply is not Prudent to attempt to fix the problems, now a mere membrane away, with the policies of the last 60 years that created them.  What have we got to lose?

One can observe the feckless reactions of mayors and governors to the transformation of “loving” protests into coordinated  riots across the country.  Are these failures based on political motivations?  They certainly are not based on executive decision-making.  What fools these liberals be.  Have we decided, politically, that there is more than one America?  That model has placed some of these nincompoops into power.  Do they fear losing their political influence so much that they will allow the destruction of their jurisdictions so as not to “offend” destructive mobs?  If there were ever an un-American group/organization it is Antifa, and these are the people who must not be offended?  For shame.

The neighborhoods where welfare is the largest source of income, and any family now in its second or later generation of welfare as its source of income, must be transformed.  This won’t happen by building nicer public housing, nice as it may be.  Even for those who have come to terms with never being independent of welfare handouts, they must be directed, guided, rewarded for and, ultimately, forced onto a path of attainment.  What does that mean?

First, responsibility.  This requires moral judgment on the part of the welfare industry, something for which current policies and employees thereof are incapable.  We have created a process of handing out monies by people who are just as resentful of “white” attainment models as are the increasingly hopeless clients of the system.  More welfare yields more resentment, so it’s not a solution model.  Public assistance must reward attainment, not mere acquiescence.  That is, recipients need to be taught to believe in their own ability to be responsible for themselves and, despite everything they’ve been taught or heard for 60 or 150 years, that their efforts will succeed

This won’t be done through “training programs,” “computer literacy” classes or voter recruitment drives.  Some form of “responsibility boot-camp” is required, operated by people who believe in free-enterprise capitalism and in “e pluribus unum.”  What have we got to lose?  Political influence?

Our existence as a nation depends on the ideas  that make us a nation.  We are not a nation because of shared ethnicity, but because of shared ideas and ideals, the main one of which is “Out of many, One” – e pluribus unum.  This is the American dream: that all kinds of people, recognizing that people are NOT all the same, but are all entitled to equality of opportunity – to make the most and best of themselves – and to equality under the law, can live as one people!  There is little else that a government “of the people, by the people and for the people,” can honestly do… or should do.  The breakdown of order in multiple cities here in late May of 2020, is the result of attempting to dishonestly  do for people not because of their equality under the law, but because of their inequality  under the law.

The socialist outlook is to disperse responsibility for failure and to force sharing of success.  And, they teach this fallacy, having assumed control, politically and actually, of the government education monopoly.  Without changing the belief of all of our citizens that there is a “sub-class” of people who are incapable of being responsible unto themselves and their families, the end result will fail to strengthen society.  We cannot “pay off” people who hate the concepts of America and thereby get them to suddenly love this nation.

Every single program going forward must be designed in accord with the principles of personal responsibility and of the opportunity to attain to ever greater success and status.

Attainment is not about getting rich, although money can, with the right attitudes, be part of the measure of it.  Getting richer  in many more ways than money is the truer measure.  So far, and it’s been only about 100,000 years, so it’s not yet proven, humans have found only one way to advance: by attaining to every level of advancement, which is to say, by striving for each.  So far, and it’s been only about 100,000 years, no one has been able to give attainment to anyone, only the opportunity to reach for it.

It would seem that no government has ever been able to grant anyone the rewards obtained by striving and earning a certain level of attainment, only money – which has never made anyone a better human.  It follows that no quantity of sympathetic or even empathetic words has ever changed the outcome of pretending that a person is not responsible for his or her decisions, actions or feelings; likewise, those words cannot change a handout into attainment.  Yet every human being has the spark of attainment from birth… until taught otherwise.

Clearly it is parents who must instill the essential morals and beliefs… and decency into their children.  Clearly millions of parents have failed miserably at their duty; our governments have failed by supporting “families” that take no responsibility for themselves, and less for their children.  Financing generational resentment is not a plan.  As local and state governments finally recognize the need to stop rioters, the question of what to do with violent, destructive, anti-American thugs who are not interested in the path of attainment, must be answered.  Do we think we’re going to coddle them enough or pay them enough to change their hatred to love?  Do we intend to just send them home to apartments that we renovate to make their living conditions more fair?

Where should they go?  What kind of jobs can they do – or would they do – to support themselves?  Drug dealing?  Gun dealing?  Extortion?  House painter?  Roofer?  Carpenter?  Do we expect to incarcerate them all until they turn nice or die?  In part, their state of hatred and resentment is “our” fault and we can’t continue treating them as we have under the “Great Society.”  Do we try to be “nicer” to them?  Those willing to riot and destroy businesses and willing to kill police, are not part of American society.  They are not like you and me and our children.  Should we reward their hatred for decent society because we feel sorry for them?  Where should we let them live?  Where should they be so that the rest of us are protected from them?

Should they get to eat if they don’t work to support themselves legally?  That’s a deeper question than it sounds.

FOR THE HEALTH OF IT

A patients view of the doctors, just before going into surgery.

Few topics or “matters” matter as much or generate as much discussion and political malfeasance as health care, and not really “care,” but coverage.  Coverage is where the “easy” money is.  “Coverage” is like a giant public works construction project: easy to skim from.  It’s virtually impossible to get any graft – or campaign contributions – from individual medical procedures, but insurance conglomerates and hospital corporations and the pharmaceutical industry are deep wells for craven politicians.  Consequently, those same politicians are willing to expose the federal budget and debt creation to the medical “field” to the benefit of all, and even of patients sometimes.

Money, money, money.  About one-sixth of the U. S. economy is tied to “health care,” but a much smaller fraction is tied to CARE, itself.  These are huge industries with gigantic advertising, promotion and bribery budgets.  The ever-pure United States calls those filthy bribes  campaign contributions… or, they might be “donations” to colleges and universities for research and production of new doctors who, coincidentally, will be fully committed to pharmaceuticals, chemotherapies, surgery and maintenance for life – or death.  It’s all expensive.

Cancer is one of the cash cows of medicine: the big shibboleth in human caring and willingness to help others.  People fear it, and rightly so.  Breast cancer is a powerful subset, and so is pediatric cancer.  We love kids and care about their health more than for any older group.  Kids are helpless and pathetic; humans feel these things and sacrifice to raise them from complete dependency, to minimal independence, to experimental independence, to sports and education and personality development and, one day, separation into adult-hood.  We hate any interruption to these things and sacrifice to facilitate the stages of normal childhood.  Cancer is a Hell of an interrupter and we want to pay to stop it.  And we do.

Billions of dollars have been raised by the American Cancer Society, for example, and they claim a 79% rate of actual cancer expenditures: mostly for research, but a large amount is for “soft” expenses that help those who are in treatment and their families, and other non-care, non-research uses.  A big pile goes to run the Society, of course.  To its credit, A.C.S. does a lot of good along the paths it sees fit, and it’s much more efficient than the federal government, a low bar.  Sadly, despite its widespread use of children to raise its millions (Relay for Life, anyone?), only a small percentage of ACS dollars are employed to solve pediatric cancers.

In one case Prudence knows well, a 6-year-old girl survived neuroblastoma after much chemo, operations, stem-cell harvests and replacements only to fight through it again 4 years later, with more of many of the same poisons that forced the cancer to retreat the first time.  Five years later, more chemotherapy to force a third retreat.  “A miracle,” her family declared.  3 years later osteosarcoma attacked her right tibia, part of which was removed with cadaver bone up to the knee.  More chemo – same crap as earlier times, same poison to push the cancer back.  College and Masters degrees completed, 6 years later the fifth attack and fifth battle with cancer, now in the thoracic cavity pressing on the lung.  The bone cancer was a not rare reaction to earlier treatments; the chest problem a recurrence of the bone cancer, by genus.  Same poisons prescribed and administered, except she was unable to tolerate any more of it.  Twenty years of treatment, constant news about this and that breakthrough therapy, DNA, customized immunology, yada, yada, yada… same attempts to kill the cancer a little faster than the patient.

When the young woman with the lengthy, miraculous, cancer survival history heard what kind of poisons they were planning to pump directly into her bloodstream, she naturally pointed out that it was the same crap she’d received the last time!  Was there nothing better?  Newer?  Apparently not.  Bring us your sick children and we will poison them for you in the hope that the cancer cells will die first and we can hold your child back from the brink of death.

Medical students arrive at medical school with science knowledge
–at least biology, maybe chemistry – ready to be taught some skills, mostly about using and understanding the data produced by wonderful diagnostic electronics, and about the latest in pharmacological weapons to counteract natural biological weaknesses, failures, breakdowns, related pains and mental/emotional discords and incongruities.  There is a lot to learn.  If surgery is the interest, there is a lot of practice.  Students develop likes and dislikes that lead them to one specialty or another, or, for many, general health and well-being such as “family” doctors ought to know.   Some of these general practitioners are really “internists” who understand “internal medicine” as distinct from “external medicine,” one supposes.

In any case, new doctors are taught according to fairly rigid protocols and traditions by people whose adherence to standards is well known… and respected.  Indeed, it is only by proving one’s own adherence to those standards that a doctor will be licensed or safe when sued.  “Recognized” standards, “current” protocols, “best” practices – those are the only defense a doctor has.  Where is the profit for leaving medical orthodoxy?

Does this mean that “doctors” or “big pharma” are blocking the introduction of miracle cures that an obscure researcher somewhere has developed because traditional medicine would not?  Well, “yes,” and “no.”  I think, or at least hope fervently, that the answer is “yes” although there is no intent to do so; and that the answer is “no” because there is no intent to do so.  But, the inhibition of new ideas is almost inevitable.  Thankfully it is not impossible and progress does get made, inventions are developed and made marketable – and trustworthy – and new drugs are eventually approved.  So, what’s the problem?

The problem is that the new drugs are rarely giant steps – sometimes they are, but not  often.  This is because most research is built on previous success and lines of inquiry and wide departure from the reservation is not very likely – it doesn’t get funded.  Pharmaceutical manufacturers are looking for sure things.  Often the greatest advances are side-effects of drugs, new and old, that coincidentally prove beneficial elsewhere.  More power to them.

Similar effects produce medical technology like, for popular example, knee replacements and hip replacements.  Now very reliable and long-lasting, such replacements are commonplace, almost to the exclusion of alternatives.  Could the damage and erosion of joints be prevented?  In most cases.  Are there nutritional preventions that are still regarded as anecdotes, not science?  Absolutely.  Do you suppose that part of every knee replacement is dedicated to learning how to prevent knee replacements?  Well, no.

Americans, and most residents of highly developed countries, eat themselves to death, drink and drug themselves to death, smoke themselves to death, fertilize and pesticide ourselves to death, and so on.  For all of our health clubs, gyms and YMCA’s, Americans tend, on average, to not take very good care of the bodies we are born with and, now that parts can be replaced by our remarkable “repair, replace and maintain” medicine, there seem to be fewer reasons to worry about the consequences of ice cream, sodas and cheese-burgers and lack of basic exercise regimens.  We are told 8 times every half-hour by our flat-screens that we need never suffer from aches, pains, discomforts, anxieties or depressions.  There are pills for each of these maladies.  In fact, there are separate analgesics for shoulder pains, neck pains, knee and foot pains, back pains, headaches, migraines and insufficient sleep.  People who have allowed apnea to intrude on their ability to sleep can get a C-Pap device to counteract it.  What’s to worry?

What do all of these OTC chemicals do to us?  Some of the long-term effects are known, not the least of which is liver damage, but it’s slow, virtually unnoticeable, until it isn’t – kind of like moderate smoking.

Sugar and alcohol also have cumulative effects, if not simple diabetes, then an acidification of body chemistry that weakens the immune response to invaders.  Too much gluten, perhaps?  The American diet is awash in wheat and wheat proteins, right down to canned tunafish (only one brand is clean).  Tunafish?  And lots of other products: vinegar, puddings, many candies, gravies, prepared foods of all kinds include wheat starch, “hydrolyzed vegetable protein” and on and on.  Many people know they are allergic to gluten, far more do not… know, that is.  Skin problems, digestive problems, immune problems and, of course, weight problems, stem in large part from too much wheat in our diets.  The body tends to become allergic in the presence of too much of the same thing – often the food you like the best, as well.  But, that’s no problem!  There are multiple crèmes and pills to fight off the effects of our odd diets, so many, in fact, that they must be profitable enough to purchase TV advertising nationwide.  Do you ever wonder if every prescription for these somewhat dangerous drugs includes a small amount of money to fund prevention of gluten intolerances?  Nahh.  Bread, cake, doughnuts, fried clams, stuffing, ice cream, mayonnaise, salad dressings, sub-rolls, pita, crackers and… and… whatever, are too tasty to forego and, besides, “they” have things for that.

When Dwight Eisenhower left the presidency he warned America about the encroaching power of the “military-industrial complex.”  Rightly so, although that sloppy circle of funding and influence has managed to keep the country fairly safe in an uncontrollable world.  One can almost hear the words of a true outsider warning us against the “medical-industrial complex,” although almost no one would listen.  On the edge of Boston and Brookline there is a street called Longwood Avenue where hospitals have grown into connected proximity.  It’s starting to look like Las Vegas.

The insertion of politics into health care really got moving with the “Great Society” in the mid 1960’s.  It hasn’t been all good despite the public intentions of the socialists who caused the Great Society to be codified.  Today federal funds feed into the insatiable maw of modern medicine, and to help it along, every Congress adds new mandates for care and coverage.  Combined with the primacy of welfare (federalized at the same time) the general interface with patients has trended to impersonal, if not de-personalized, care.  The vision for health care is still greater impersonality, robotics and, again, health orthodoxy that satisfies… umm, well, the federal government, and “averages.”

No one is going to stop the money.  If we have to borrow from our 5th descendent generation, by God, we’ll do it!  No one who needs a new hip, rich or poor, will be denied one!  What?  Do we want to have a society where there is one level of care for the wealthy and another for the poor?  With enough agitation and politics anything that needs a licensed medico to accomplish will be funded.  Trans-gender mutilations?  Where’s the checkbook?  Prudence would advise that there is not enough money, or desks for nameless bureaucrats to sit behind, to provide all the repairs and drugs that are known, to every person who thinks he or she needs them.  Maybe robots will provide more even-handed care and cost less than humans.  Not so far.

The Bad Old Days

It is an interesting “fad,” we might call it, to portray every event in history from the viewpoint of the most “woke” or radical perspectives fostered and pandered-to by today’s politicians.  It doesn’t seem to be helpful in terms of increasing knowledge or of increasing understanding of the past.  But it has, in the span of 20 years or so, become commonplace.  Every example of this new ignorance  need not be brought before the bar of reason for the student of history to still be able to ask, “why?”

If we accept the premise that schools are the imparters of truth, then it follows that they should be the bastions of truth, as well.  Interesting word, ‘bastion.’  It means a projection from a defensive wall that affords more effective firing angles against attackers, and it also means “bulwark.”  A bulwark is a person, or a thing, that is the immovable defense of the fort or castle.  In the battle of ideas, persons in the school or education business, are obligated  by their office in society – the official role to which they are committed and for which they are well-compensated – to be the bulwarks against UN-truth and lies.

In that regard, their best success derives from having taught students to both find truth and to recognize it when it appears… or disappears.

Parents consign their children to schools in order for them to learn truths and to learn about truth.  Human beings entrusted with imparting truth to children of any age, are sorely tested to not convey opinions or beliefs they hold that cannot be demonstrated to be true.  One might think – and parents might hope – that a mechanism exists to remove teachers who cannot help but taint truth with their opinions.  That the opposite mechanism exists should give us pause.  Short of severe debauchery or criminal acts, it is nearly impossible to pry a teacher loose from his or her tenured security.  What are they teaching?

Let’s look at a simple event that has caused news stories in recent years;  the landing of the “pilgrims” in Massachusetts Bay, ostensibly at what we know as Plymouth, named for Plymouth, England.  To get to Plymouth the so-called Pilgrims had to endure privations and tribulations that we, today, in our land of too much food and electricity, cannot conceive of.  We lose our cool when another car blocks us or cuts in front of us.  Imagine uprooting your family and leaving the place of your birth and generations of customs and history, to sign on to a corporate adventure to the “New World,” about which little is known.  Your first ship proves unseaworthy and you limp back to port until another can be obtained and hired to your purposes.

You are unable to carry with you more than a small trunk’s worth of tools and possessions.  On your little ship there are no bathrooms, no showers, salted fish and beef to eat, no fresh vegetables, no toothpaste or toilet paper.  Privacy is virtually non-existent, you know nothing of germs or disease except that the latter is common.  Childbirth is among the deadliest of burdens for women.  For years you have planned and hoped for a better life upon reaching the distant unknown shore, and after the final two months at sea you are deposited on the shore, far off from your intended destination, now forced to fend for yourselves from the ground up, in fact, building shelters, foraging for wildlife and wild fruits or berries to try to store enough food for the imminent winter which will be much harsher than what you have been used to, particularly since your delay in leaving England left you in the New World in October, rather than in May or June. 

Among your beliefs is deep religious faith in God, bolstered by frequent prayer, but He isn’t cushioning any blows or revealing hidden stores of healthy food.  Many of you die in that first winter, yet faith and incredible work see you through.  Eventually relations with natives, whom you believe to be “savages,” keep you from dying out altogether and your duties as profitable fur trappers can commence.

Accidentally, in total ignorance, you have brought germs that infect the native people, germs against which they have no defense.   You have brought another disease, economics, including concepts of private property, fences and stockades, and guns and swords of steel to defend them.  You believe that God has blessed you with a new land over which you have every right to take dominion.  History records the clash of beliefs and its outcome.

To this Prudent observer, descended from those Pilgrims and others who followed soon after, the story of immense courage and faith, regardless of what we may, today, think of that faith, is a bit heroic.  Courage in the face of danger is one of humankind’s abiding virtues and is worthy of honor and emulation, but what is more frequently discussed, even abetted by public entities, is the awfulness of the Pilgrims and all of their virtues and beliefs, since it turned out badly for the natives.   The thanks offered prayerfully to God, for the salvation of the tiny colony, must now be denigrated because of those germs and the new ideas the colonists held dear.

The strength of the underdog fighter who wins against all odds, must be hated because, we have since learned, he once flipped the bird to another driver and… it was a woman!  There will never be a good reason to train the way he did, or learn the tactics that he used to win, not ever will there be a reason to mention his name or take his picture.  Everything must be expunged.

And so education has purged itself of the role of Christianity in the creation and final founding of the United States.  Since many teachers and professors, now, are so sure that belief in the Bible’s teachings is superstition, they cannot bring themselves to learn how it is woven into the fabric of America, and certainly not to teach about it.  Is it all just economics?  That was Marx’s view; we certainly must teach about that.  So, is the “new” narrative about where America came from the same as “truth?”  It would seem Prudent to judge that it is a half-truth at best.  Does that fulfill the essential requirement that educational institutions… and functions… be the defenders and imparters of truth?  If not, what are they?  What are they being paid to do, if not impart truth?

Christopher Columbus was nothing if not unusually brave.  It took unusual courage to set sail beyond the sight of land, not knowing how far it was to reach another shore.  It was a struggle for him to obtain not one, but 3 crews to follow him on his undefined journey.  When he landed he was thousands of miles from where he thought he must be.  His mission was financed by the newly victorious, fused monarchies of Ferdinand and Isabella, who defeated the Moors just one day before granting Columbus the support he needed.

They needed gold, which the “indies” reportedly had, and some other valuables Columbus’ crewmates and soldiers might come across.  No one on earth had knowledge of germs, viruses or infections.  No one.  The Spaniards were simple thieves who believed non-Europeans, non-Catholic non-Europeans most particularly, were “savages.”  In other words, Spaniards, like French, British, Italian, Dutch and other explorers… Portuguese, were brought up to believe that because of their relative enlightenment, manufactures, printing, marriage, courts, police, and religion, they were superior to savages wherever they found them.  The Spaniards were fulfilling the charge of their King and Queen, whose authority came from God.  There was no better work they could do.  Not so simple, perhaps.

Today Columbus is vilified, as if current hot feelings might improve Columbus’ own attitudes, causing him and all of his crewmates who had just risked their lives on their mission to the “Indies,” to renounce every belief they held and their faith, and to switch to social services for the savages they had found, perhaps teaching them how to forge iron and smelt bronze, and to build better huts and grow more crops.  The next expedition could teach them to read the Bible and raise their children.

Many teachers seem consumed by the estimates of decimation brought about by European diseases thanks to Columbus’ discovering the new world.  Rather than recognize the essential sacrifice and bravery of mariners of Columbus’ day, along with the unintended consequences of the intercontinental movement of peoples, educators convinced of the evil intent of all white-skinned peoples, pummel their students with the evils initiated by white Europeans.  Increasingly liberal teachers twist the views of their students such that whites begin to hate themselves and question not only bad actions of the past, but even ideas and philosophies generated by people whose skin is not brown.

This immediately translates into hatred of America and the ideas that created it; it also validates hatreds the racialist hate-mongers are encouraging non-stop in black communities.  Neither trend is healthy for our nation, our future progress or our steady destruction of disease and poverty.  It’s stupid, essentially.  Shame on us.

This same poisoned outlook has been seized upon by socialists now to fuel their never-ending struggle to destroy individual freedom, a goal that may only be achieved by destroying America.  They must destroy Christianity, too, since many white people believe in it.

Can the descendants of slave owners atone not only for the sins of their ancestors but for the sins of their ancestors’ ancestors’ ancestors?  No, never.  The actions of the past still remain no matter what is done, now.  Can the descendants of slaves (which are virtually all of us depending on how many ancestries we include) receive some kind of justice for the sufferings of their ancestors?  No, the suffering will have still happened.  Is that suffering the reason some brown-skinned people are economically behind the curve today?  Or educationally?  No.

Up until the “Great Society,” which federalized welfare has purchased the votes of blacks for generations, the suffering of slaves had created a great strengthening of their descendants.  “We shall overcome” had genuine meaning and blacks were overcoming and gaining economic power faster than their white “oppressors.”  But when hate became a tax-funded industry, black progress not only slowed, but reversed.  And still they excel… in virtually every field, yet more also fail, convinced by their hate-filled leaders that life is unfair because of (pick all that apply) whites, Christians, police, schools, businesses, Republicans, slavery, Columbus, NASA, Trump.  What a waste, however enrichening it is for some.

The Potters of Socialism

During a recent conversation, Prudence opined on the new trends of “body art” and unusual piercings, increasingly involving the bodies of young women. It has something to do with both feminism and socialism, Prudence suggests, and this view has caused demands for substantial clarification. Indeed. This line of reasoning could lead to a unified theory of wrong directions and unnecessary complexity.

Life is a test… a series of tests: momentary, hourly, daily, situationally – from birth to death. Humans, LIKE ALL LIVING THINGS, become stronger, more honest, more independent, by facing tests and “passing” them. What is the greatest dis-honesty, therefore?

It is denial of the test. It is humans’ penchant for convincing themselves that they might avoid the testing (which is the spiritual aspect of life) coupled with the denial of spirituality, itself. These fundamentals lead to lifetimes of failure, unfulfillment and even to widening circles of tragedy for other humans, particularly people the unfulfilled try to “love.” On the other hand, those tragedies are also tests that may be passed, leading to strength and growth.

Stated more simply, the worst lie is that which one tells to him or herself. We are in an odd time where such lies are celebrated, promulgated, codified and made, legally, into community-wide lies that form the new bases for anti-discrimination criminality. The hot one is trans-genderism. We call it an “ism” because it derives from belief and not from reality. Under it males tell themselves that they are females, in the preponderance of instances, and females tell themselves that they are males. It is the penultimate denial of human testing there could be.

It isn’t the absolute worst, any longer, because here and there are humans who tell themselves that they are not human, and who seek “rights” as this or that animal… often a dog: humans like dogs.

But, declaring oneself to not be what one is requires holding two conflicting ideas at once, ultimately leading, for most, to mental breakdown. This is not to say that some are not “happy” to be living outwardly as the opposite gender, but they are the minority. Still, they deserve their own happiness and other humans should not disrupt it. But the truth is that gender cannot be changed, only masked. Individuals who are emotionally secure may be happier adopting the mask. It is their mask, and by its artifice the individual attempts to avoid or deny the testing that his or her gender would otherwise face.

So, some would ask, what’s wrong with that? Lots of people avoid tests. We have an entire welfare system that purports to “help” them do so. And this shows the intersection of socialism as a construct of lies and the increasing lies of sexuality that some fight for as forms of “progress.” Both are means of test-avoidance, test denial, and both tend to leave the denier weaker spiritually.

What has this to do with tattoos and piercings? Both are forms of masks, are they not? Even homosexuality is a mask. It doesn’t mean individuals are not “happy” living as not being tested as a man or as not being tested as a woman, but it does mean they have made a choice to not face tests of emotion and feelings of one sort, and the growth their passing would provide. Because of anti-discrimination rules, declaring oneself homosexual means avoiding tests as either one’s gender or as one’s new identity.

In the 1950’s and 1960’s a big form of masking was hair. Girls would shave their heads or apply odd colors to their hair, for example, daring others to react to the change. In that way, at least temporarily, they could step out of the role of “woman” and be tested on the most ephemeral aspects of being rather than facing the tests of female growth and honesty. Boys at the same time would grow their hair to great lengths or shagginess, altering their “aura” as it were, too. Any troubles that came their way over rebellious hairstyling were deemed preferable to those that were associated with maturing in the role of “man.” Test denial. It’s what socialism promises to whole populations, inherently including a denial of spirituality.

In the midst of the “sexual revolution” last century, society, institutions and families fairly consistently encouraged the reality of acceptance of one’s role as man or woman. Most youngsters “grew out of” their odd experiments. Not all, though. By the mid-seventies several large trends were underway:

1. Welfare was federalized and entrenched under the “Great Society.”
2. Feminism was aggressively undoing traditional roles and family structures.
3. Leftist media were celebrating their successful castration of the Vietnam War
and all efforts against Communism that it represented.
4. Leftist media were celebrating the destruction of Richard Nixon, a flawed
conservative at best, over relatively minor crimes.
5. Attacks against organized religion were becoming normalized even as churches
themselves were corroding innocence within their ranks.
6. The Federal Reserve was prosecuting economic policies without regard to
elections or even office holders like presidents in the exercise of new powers
elected representatives could not grasp or counter.
7. Homosexuality was exploding in Western societies.
8. Black families were disintegrating with the help of federalized welfare.
9. Faith in the American idea was fading as quickly as American History curricula.

America is reaping the corrupt crops, now, from mutated seeds sown for fifty years. Youth are in favor of socialism, politicians are proud of it while other politicians flail about in their quest for proper rebuttals to socialist mendacity. Just like homosexuality and its ragged cousin, transgenderism, socialism requires believers to hold, and defend, two diametrically conflicting ideas at once.

Socialism intends two conflicting outcomes: 1) People will become better humans by virtue of changes in their physical surroundings and LACK OF RESPONSIBILITY; 2) If people fail to become higher-quality people thanks to socialism, socialists-in-charge will happily control them until they do.

Prudence’s correspondent had recently visited the waiting room of a plastic surgery and facial reconstruction practice and was struck by the number of quite young people, mostly females, who were there for recuperative follow-ups for various procedures. This, too, is a trend: Young people are having one or multiple procedures done to, they, hope, cause fulfillment of a physical image that is more pleasing, more acceptable, more attractive to society. That is to say, they are living out a dream of comparison to others rather than living on purpose.

Just like body arts or fanatical workouts, plastic surgery provides a mask that the wearer believes is more ”beautiful” than the innate self; this work, often painful, is endured in lieu of making ones inner, true self more attractive or charitable or loving. It is a personal dose of socialism whereby the physical or worldly appearance forms its own replacement spirituality and belief structure. There is no surprise that such shallow, literal children are unable to discern the corrosiveness of socialism. It is no wonder that socialists, and most progressives, are not nearly as happy as conservatives whose belief structures are based in spirituality that leads them to accept and pass tests in reality.

Changing ones physique or physiognomy to fulfill the expectations of society is a means of sidestepping true tests in life. Like the long hairs of the ‘60’s, others will deal with the mask rather than the real person and, it is hoped, the tests associated with the original person will never need passing. Growth is avoided.

Perhaps the most anti-spiritual, test-denial of all is abortion. Despite playing a role in conception of new human life, women have been convinced that the tests of motherhood may be avoided and that they will be more happy and fulfilled as a result. Indeed, not only have they the right to avoid those tests, but all of society, through government theft of others’ earnings, ought to support that avoidance. Perhaps there is less stress temporarily, but little happiness obtains.

Instead of accepting the tests of womanhood and motherhood and the concurrent civilizing of more animalistic males, females are encouraged to exist untested and to a degree, unfulfilled and incomplete. Obviously many of these women will see a logic to socialism and to government “nannyism” throughout their lives. Who needs men in that future? Socialism destroys humanity and abject feminism is socialism’s handmaid. How bleak.

The constant undermining and outright attacking of Christianity feeds socialism’s ascension to acceptability. Not the old testament, but the new, defines man’s relationship to God as personal and an individual responsibility – not as one of God’s chosen people, but as God’s chosen person, responsible to him or her self and to God to take the energy of life provided, and to multiply it by learning and following the rules laid out in dozens of religious traditions.

There is no room for the spiritual in socialism. Socialism is based on groups and denies individual greatness. The infection of education by socialism is obvious in the moves to eliminate valedictorians and salutatorians, or to have multiples of each. Another is to avoid “F’s” or other negative marking, to give everyone a trophy, to (claim to) not keep score in youth sports. One can also observe the same rot supplanting historical knowledge resulting in America’s being no more exceptional than literally every other nation. Rampant egalitarianism provides another patine of legitimacy: no one can earn more, be more worthy, honorable or valuable than the rest. Apparently, only government officials are permitted to be smarter than others, or more morally pure.

Ultimately, Socialism is the avoidance of human tests and, essentially, the avoidance of personal growth. Humans become stronger by overcoming adversity – everything from discomfort, to hunger, to tyranny and lack of freedom. We call the triumph over adversity, “freedom,” not the avoidance of it.

Avoiding adversity is a form of self-subjugation, leaving the subject/practitioner in a jail of his or her own making: less and less likely to ever overcome adverse circumstances. Dependence is the only result. Dependents are the most malleable of clays for the potters of socialism who are more than willing to offer ever more complete avoidance of tests, gaining perpetual power for themselves. Perhaps this little essay is testing the reader, right now.

TRUMP – and other problems

TR.CL“If only Trump would listen to advisors,” we all complained. Suddenly he is listening and we’re jumping down his throat because, needless to say, he’s clearly listening to the WRONG advisors. Even his trademark railing against illegal entrants (They shouldn’t be called immigrants. “Immigrant” implies that one has a place to go and reside when he gets to the end of his journey. Those who have stolen across the border have literally committed a form of theft by taking some of the nation’s space and protections to which they have no legal right. These are more properly called illegal entrants and those who demand to shape the discussion of the problems these entrants create, should be immediately corrected: they are not immigrants; they are illegal entrants.) is getting watered down. Yet it is the first thing that will preserve our republic: stopping illegal entry and “loose” immigration of every type.

So, they have entered and squatted where they have no right to be. Liberals wish to be thought of as empathetic to the less than ideal conditions in which these criminals live; sympathetic to the economic straits in which illegal entrants find themselves; and, willing to sacrifice the rights of others in order to make their lives more comfortable. How beautifully sacrificial and charitable they must be. Ask one and he or she will assure you of the accuracy of their high opinions of themselves.

To most Trump supporters the “fifth column” of pro-illegal entrant sympathizers and executors (politicians), are the worst enemy we face.

DONALD! THERE IS NO COMPROMISE ON YOUR ORIGINAL POINT!

In addition, it’s the economy, stupid. The U. S. economy is fragile, barely keeping up with its burdens, while the dopes in Washington and 50 state capitals keep devising and sharing ways to add to its burdens:
You must hire less-productive people
You must pay them $15 an hour regardless of productivity, trustworthiness, work habits, trainability
You will be responsible for a variety of ‘benefits’ as soon as you say ‘come to work’
You will respect every form of deviancy in personal habits, and you will make accommodations to enable said deviant to ‘work’
You may be fined for hiring an ‘illegal’ despite his or her presentation of a state driver’s license and various forms of false documentation, including stolen IDs and Social Security numbers
You will compete with foreign products that Washington has permitted into our markets, from countries without the non-discrimination, benefit responsibility, and environmental expenses that you must bear by law
You will disturb every employee by allowing sexually confused employees and customers to use restrooms without limitation by gender
You will pay taxes and payroll taxes, employee benefits, local property and real estate taxes, water and sewage fees on time or government(s) will shut you down

The U. S. economy, since the “Great Society,” has been unable to keep up with the spending addiction of the federal government’s politicians and bureaucrats. Slowly, inexorably, simple domestic problems suffered two political forces: federalization and elevation to “war” or “crisis” status. Programs with these statuses also have two inevitable qualities: constantly increasing cost and… permanence.

DONALD! WAKE UP! Normal, tax-paying, bill-paying citizens HATE these habits of Washington! Tell the nation that the way government does its (the peoples’) business is going to change in a Trump administration. Tell us that the effort to transform Washington will start with you and your new team. We don’t need to transform America by outnumbering its citizens and upsetting their culture, we need to UPSET WASHINGTON and its culture of theft and irresponsibility! How’s that?

The premiere engine for the defense and enrichment of our unique American culture is education. Our culture is unique. Americans should NOT consider it no better than all others, but that it is superior for many reasons – just read the Declaration, Constitution, Northwest Ordinance and other founding documents. People come here legally and illegally because of our culture. We are obliged to defend and strengthen it. Public education, increasingly tinged with anti-Americanism and far-left statism, has failed and is failing to do this vital job that we pay it so much to do.

DONALD! PEOPLE WANT A BETTER EDUCATIONAL RESULT! Federal money has not helped, except to raise education budgets and salaries. Let schools compete and require that tax-exempt status for ALL schools be based on including 4 or 5 basic courses (including the first two years of degree-issuing college programs) of which one MUST be study of America’s founding documents, the Federalist Papers and more. We have an OBLIGATION to know our own history and founding philosophy. Our country is based on IDEAS, not ethnicity or history. People want the ideas of personal responsibility, limited government, the Bill of Rights, personal sovereignty and private property rights to be known, understood and FOLLOWED. Commit to these things, Donald, and we’ll all vote for you!