Tag Archives: sanctuary

Climate, Crime, Culture, Economics, Family, Religion

PARTY OF DEATH

Leave a comment

The United States is, essentially, a “Christian” nation. We were founded by Christians and our fundamental laws and jurisprudence are inspired by the laws and advisories of how to live and love that are contained in the Old and New Testaments. For hundreds of years the lessons of Christ have slowly converted relative pagans into empathetic Christians. It never worked universally; there have always been agnostics and atheists, but until quite lately, they were the outliers. Virtually automatically, the divine lessons and instructions have been modified, structured and even diluted by men (mostly), since they were first revealed. As quickly as Jesus, the Christ, declared His “church,” Peter and his spiritual descendants have seized Christ’s teachings as the means to political power and economic, let alone intellectual, control of “the masses.”

It was unavoidable. We have “free will” and the daily, hourly, momentary opportunity to choose from evil, which seems to lurk around every corner… when not lurking right beside us. Still, prelates of churches based on multiple emphases of certain teachings and of the traditions of Catholicism or Orthodox Christianity, have continued to prod us toward incrementally closer adherence to Christ’s teachings. It worked for centuries, resulting in the evolution of what we call modern ethics and economics… and freedom. Ultimately, the pinnacle of American success was reached, approximately in 1962.

The forces attempting to unseat Christianity have never wavered. The energy they have employed was noted as “early” as the story of the Garden of Eden. As quickly as God had prepared Man and Woman to take dominion over His “garden,” the serpent offered a great temptation. At the moment of choice, God’s creation chose to accept the risk to enjoy the “benefits.” Today we call those temptations “socialism.” Its “benefits” are the promise of avoiding both responsibility and hard work, while having access to everything in creation. Ancillary benefits include debauchery and license to enjoy sexual perversions and the thrills of hatred. No longer would the “serfs” have to earn their own way or face the responsibility for their decisions. Paradise on Earth.

The simplest, clearest distinction between the “forces of God” and the forces of anti-religious socialism can be stated as Life versus Death. God promises not only life on Earth, but eternal life. Socialism promises irresponsible cavort on Earth and then, lights out. Rather than growing both spiritually and physically by accepting the tests and responsibilities, even hardships and opportunities of life, many are tempted to seek comforts, enjoyments and conveniences of life without hardship, unfairness, or injustice, as promised by the sirens of socialism and, even more promissory, Communists. Throughout the growth of the socialist opposition to Christian-based government and economics, Democrat or Social-Democrat political parties have drifted (if not skipped) closer to outright Socialism while pretending to adhere to the traditions of “Western” civilization and civilian governance. But, like all opposition to Christian influence, their efforts are constant – sometimes incremental, sometimes leaping and bounding as they undercut those same traditions in pursuit of power.

Since that same 1962, leftist forces have assumed control of the “Democratic” party. First, they killed Kennedy… not the ordinary Democrats like Johnson and others, but the rabid defenders of the C.I.A. and other elements of the growing, deep, administrative state – the true leftists. One by one, people who overtly dislike everything about religious freedom – Judaism and Christianity, specifically – managed to obtain election to the House and Senate. First through opposition to fighting Communism in Viet-Nam and marshaling students to widespread demonstrations against the government, and then, cherry on top, unseating President Richard Nixon. A new landscape emerged in American politics and power; trust in government was gone. Rebellions of the ‘60’s shifted morality to the dark side as federalized welfare began to erode family strengths and the raising of children to be new, moral, responsible adults. As the old order, the fundament of governance, liberty and improved standards of living, imperfect but wildly successful, was dumped, the new order of Roe v. Wade was imposed on the flimsy premise that the “penumbra of the Constitution” protects a brand of “privacy” that permits personal convenience to be worth more than human life.

Since the explosion of drug addiction as new streams of tar heroin entered the U. S. market from Southeast Asia (thank-you, C.I.A. and the Golden Triangle), the “War on Drugs” has managed to capture tons of drugs and dollars, but the total flow of both has increased for decades. Drugs provide a foul but profitable – and corrupting – business in cities large and small, and a slow-motion suicide process for thousands of addicts. We’ve never had the upper hand on drugs. As we have helped to feed the growth of Mexican Cartels (and their Chinese providers) there has grown a deep division in American politics: Democrats have favored illegal entrants and “sanctuary” status for cities and states, where police cannot cooperate with federal deportation enforcement. Republicans have been opposed to both, and yet thwarted in every attempt to sanction so-called, law-nullifying, “sanctuary” declarations.

Today, drugs, mainly fentanyl, kill 100,000 mostly younger Americans EVERY DAMN YEAR! If we were facing groups of people who were SHOOTING and killing 100,000 Americans every year, this American hopes that we would marshal our forces and destroy them, saving the lives of our sons and daughters. Yet, for some reason, we have neither the wit nor will to stop drugs. Apparently there is a “right” to suicide by addiction. Did I mention profitable corruption? Who opposes rampant addiction? Well, it seems to be a right-wing thing which is condemned by the left (Democrats) since so many people wind up incarcerated for drug dealing. Boo-hoo. There must be a racist component since there is a preponderance of black and brown people breaking laws involving drugs. So, less than nothing is done. Indeed, in Democrat cities there are varieties of programs that FACILITATE drug use on the basis of… hold on to your brains… SAFETY!

A hundred-thousand lives are not enough. The same forces apologizing for drug users are rabidly in favor of abortion up to the moment of birth AND EVEN BEYOND THAT MOMENT. Indeed, they base their election efforts on appealing to women who agree with having the RIGHT to destroy gestating beings. First they must remain convinced that the growth in their bellies is not a human being.

Finally, the same leftists in the U. S. tend strongly toward both globalism (communism) and wars of maintenance (leftists in both parties) where, in effect, our greatest export are young men and women who risk death or disability for circumstances that have no plan for victory. And, still, there are too many Americans.

Democrats have an affinity for globalist fantasy, like “Climate Change,” as the reason to change U. S. policy to the detriment of our economy and, now, our food supply. They’ve gone so far as to advise numbskulls to consider the climate before having children… not before having sex. After all, if something goes “wrong,” we can always kill the product. Instead of promoting a clean, non-polluting economy, they prefer the more fascist approach of restriction, mandation and coercion through economic leverage, like encouraging banks and others to not do business with anyone who threatens the climate, as they see it, or, God forbid, exercises Constitutional rights. This includes changing the technologies of washing machines, stoves, toilets and schoolbuses, and not for the better. After all, a lot of those manufacturers are white people, and of Euro-centric backgrounds who don’t deserve any consideration for climate and a hundred other reasons, especially if Christian to boot.

Covid-19 showed that the W.H.O., China and the U. N. can fool all the people some of the time, but they were able to kill off only a few million humans with the original bug and then the mRNA shots. They’ll have to do something more, ummm… effective, yes, effective, to get the world population down to their “ideal” of a billion or fewer. That many people could eat beef all they want without damaging the Earth. Still, it will take a lot of dying to achieve the “safety” of our planet in a single lifetime.

When it starts, don’t believe a word they say.

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

WELCOME MAT, DOORMAT

Leave a comment
AP

WELCOME MAT, DOORMAT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

WHERE THE GLOBALISTS STRUCK FIRST

Leave a comment
No need to run for office.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Is resurrection possible?  God save America.

Economics, Governance, Representation, Taxation

ARTICLE v. AMENDMENT

Leave a comment

If there were, finally, a convention of the States under article 5 of the Constitution, there are many concerns that people across the political spectrum would like to “fix,” and some of these are appropriately “Constitutional.”  Care must be taken to control the content of the hundreds of proposals that will likely inundate the convention.  Still, here are a few problem areas that are the result of either inadequate institutional structure for today’s technologies (communication, globalism, trade and warfare), or the result of the infusion into federal responsibility dozens if not hundreds of matters that are the appropriate business of sovereign states within a federal system.  Here is a list as seems Prudent:

Lifetime Sinecures – Senators and Representatives are in office too long.  The basic mechanism of election and re-election has become anachronistic in the age of, first, widespread and rapid communication, and, now, virtually instant and digitized communication and data analysis.  The control of data and virtual control of news/information, results in mostly “safe” seats, quantified as 94+% re-election rates.   If each were motivated by purity of public service and statesmanship, longevity in office might be laudable.  Unfortunately, we see over recent decades, that federal office-holders not only tend to ignore their constituents, preferring to deal with and respond to their confederates at the next Senate or House desk, but they become wealthy while in office, leading them to focus on pleasing those Congressional associates so that re-election is made more likely.  Once the first re-election is accomplished, relationships with lobbyists and interest-group advocates of all stripes become more and more crucial and consuming.

This means that change #1 should be Term Limits which, most Prudently, should be stated in terms of continuous service.  That is, being a past Senator or Representative should not preclude running for that office at some future date.  The issue is: How many terms must pass before an individual can run again?  Prudence suggests that one full Senate term and two House terms are appropriate periods.

Administrative Statism – For many reasons we are devolving into a national, rules-based control system, rather than a willing federation of semi-sovereign states, based on laws and shared cultural mores.  Since the Great Depression, the many Congresses and 13 more or less feckless Presidents have overseen massive growth in administrative departments and programs.  Erstwhile “representatives” have successfully divested themselves of most of their governing responsibilities, save two critical ones: Expanding the scope of issues that must be federalized, and Debt Creation.  This massive, unelected, regulatory bloat must be reversed, and the only way to do so is to regain control over federal budgeting.

Federal Budgeting – Of the three key covenants the federal government holds with the citizens of the several states and with the states, themselves, how tax monies are spent is the one that affects everyone, every day.  For the past 50 years, or so, there has not been a “budget,” in fact, for a budget would limit expenditures to match, virtually, the revenues raised.  Moreover, the revenues raised would, in an honest federal system, be expended only by vote of the two houses of Congress and agreement of the President.  We are told this is the case, still, but in truth, most of the budget is “entitlements,” and these are rarely, if ever, considered as manageable by Congress, and if some slight study of them is attempted, the result is generally to increase them by increasing the indebtedness of the United States.  That is, we have outlived our means for decades – a most mendacious process.

By itself, the failure of a string of Congresses to debate, analyze and produce an expenditure plan that is honest with the citizenry, and affordable through taxation, is proof of the utter failure of political leadership since the inception of the Great Society.  These failed potentates of promiscuous promises get re-elected at a 90+% rate, while their “work” product becomes smaller and smaller.  They receive automatic pay raises.

So, correcting the budget process will solve multiple losses of freedom.  There should be an amendment that requires that the “budget” of EVERY Department, Agency, Program and Title within them, shall be approved separately by the Congress through legislation.  In short order this will be seen as “impossible,” and the impossibility of financing more “line items” than can be understood or even counted, should become clear.  The redundancy and overlap of purposes for the thousands of expensive programs, must be cleared away and reduced to fewer than one hundred.  The federal government must get out of much of the peoples’ business that it is in.  Some of it is best managed by States with overarching direction by federal laws that ARE APPROVED by Congress, not by relatively hidden agencies and functionaries.  Americans deserve REPRESENTATION in all matters lawful and budgetary.  This brings us to another section of this amendment.

Legislation – There shall be no “omnibus” bills or laws.  That is, no bill shall be brought forth the content of which is not directly related to a single purpose clearly described in its title, nor should the text of any section be longer than 250 words, with budgetary supporting statements of account allowed, nor should any bill in its entirety contain more than 2,000 words.  Prudence would dictate that unrelated attachments to “must-pass” legislation should be banned.

Further, no new policies or expenditures may be included in any “budget” or taxation legislation without a separate bill that shall be studied and approved by committee and brought to a vote by the whole Congress.  Legislation for such “new” federal activities must contain provisions for financing said actions or policies WITHOUT causing any increase in the indebtedness of the United States.

Balanced Budget – Having established over many decades that Congress is incapable of limiting or cutting virtually ANY expenses other than by shifting expenses from the Defense Department toward domestic expenditures, elected Representatives and Senators shall establish a balanced budget.  However, a limit must be set as a percentage of, what?  Gross Domestic Product?  Some percentage of all taxable income?  Can any “federal” metrics be even trusted?  Some clear standard of measure must be set, else the habitual connivance of re-election interests will modify and obfuscate the intention of this amendment.  Further, no budget shall be passed that increases the indebtedness of the United States except in times of national emergency  or declared war.

Citizenship – No person shall be counted among the census, nor be part of any apportionment of Congressional representation except he or she be a naturally born or legally naturalized citizen of the United States.  No person may be considered a naturally born citizen unless one or both parents shall be a legal citizen at the time of birth.

Sanctuary – No state may interfere with legitimate and proper execution of federal laws, nor with the proper functions and procedures of federal law enforcement personnel.  No law passed by any state or subdivision thereof shall be deemed enforceable if it shall interfere with execution of federal laws or attempt any form of nullification of federal laws.  Federal law enforcement agencies may withhold financial support from those state or local law enforcement agencies that attempt to inhibit, delay or interfere with proper federal law enforcement procedures and personnel.  Interference with proper and appropriate federal law enforcement and personnel shall be adjudicated in federal courts.

Prudence tells us that once a Convention of the States has come to pass, the prospects of another are much greater.  The actions of the organizers and participants of the first such convocation will form crucial precedents that may, one hopes, set a pattern similar to the traditions of the supreme Court, the membership of which has been only discussed, never changed.  Consideration might be given to yet another amendment that limits the frequency  of Article V. conventions.

Immigration, Responsibility

Let me in, Wheeeouu!

1 Comment

The city and courts of San Francisco have made ever so much clearer how mentally dispossessed they are, of any semblance of America, and Americanism, and of Decency.  And, of Justice, Prudence dictates.

Jose Ines Garcia Zarate is not – was not – an immigrant.  Señor Garcia Zarate is and was an illegal entrant into the nation and into political subdivisions of the United States of America.  To be an immigrant, or to immigrate into a new country implies legality of action.  It implies that said immigrant has a valid place to be in his or her new country, that he or she intends to “settle” therein and, therefore, to live there legally, perhaps to gain citizenship.  It is for the furtherance and fulfillment of such implications that a nation would institute immigration laws; and it would be to prevent the obverse of the aforementioned implications that those same laws would be enforced.

Nations have a clear, hitherto well-understood obligation to define and enforce the laws that define their borders whether on land or water or, as is now the case, at airports.  Indeed, such enforcement is the first and most fundamental contract of citizenship – even of legal residence – that obligates any nation… else its nation-hood is false.

Amazingly, there have developed numerous pockets of citizens, some of them elected by their peers to represent the highest qualities of citizenship, thereby qualifying them to hold office in various levels of government, all of whom disbelieve these obligations of nation-hood.  Each of those elected has sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America, meaning ONLY of the United States of America.  They may swear to uphold the constitution of one of the United States, but that cannot, by law, presume to deny the supremacy of the U.S. Constitution.

The existence of the nation known as the United States of America, whose laws are defined by the Constitution, carries the clear obligation to establish and enforce laws governing both borders and immigration, citizenship and residency, incarceration and deportation.  There is no LEGAL space in those constructs where officials of any State or subdivision thereof, having been sworn to office, can elect to not be bound by the laws of the United States, feelings notwithstanding.

Any individual citizen or legal resident who were to take it upon himself or herself to knowingly fail to follow the laws of any town, city, county, State or of the United States nation, becomes a criminal upon such failing; further, the status of being sworn to office can in no way change the criminality of failing to live by or uphold any of the laws of the land… at any level.  Any municipal or State official who not only knowingly but publicly fails to follow or uphold the laws he or she SWORE to uphold upon assuming office, is a damned liar, not to mention an unethical pig whose word is less than slop.

Worse, it could be said, such an official is traitorous.  He or she could be said, given the conditions outlined above, to be consorting with and harboring, known federal criminals, wanted on one or more charges.  These actions betray an extraordinary mental twist, one that ought to deny that official his or her office, federal, state or local.

In fact and logic there is NO official obligation to either provide for or protect any illegal entrant, beyond basic humane treatment during the process of returning said illegal entrant to his or her point of origin as may best be determined.  Collectively, this nation has no more obligation than that, as well.

Illegal entrants, by virtue of presence, alone, have no Constitutional protections, which is to say, no “Bill of Rights” under the Constitution of the United States.  No crime committed by an illegal entrant deserves free public defense in court, nor does it deserve any form of “plea” bargain or appeal of verdict.  Illegal entrants are not entitled to jury trial, “Miranda” rights or specific protections from search of their persons or property.  Technically, they may be charged and held without benefit of a Grand Jury indictment.  They have no Constitutional protection against double-jeopardy, nor any specific right to free speech, assembly or redress of grievances.  They are not citizens or even legal residents.

That Constitutional rights are afforded illegal entrants is a failure of enforcement of the very Constitution in which those rights are enumerated.  It is a failure to uphold the rights of citizens.   To treat so-called “illegals” like citizens is, itself, a crime.  Such confusion of our governing obligations is a reflection of the ascendancy of emotion to a level above that of law – law that lately is applied more strictly to citizens than to illegal entrants.  It appears to have infected judges, prosecutors and defense attorneys and is corrosive to the rule of law and to the Fourteenth Amendment among others.

Some political subdivisions want to allow illegal entrants to vote, a right won by the blood of hundreds of thousands of American citizens.  There being absolutely NO legal basis for Constitutional protection of illegal-entrant non-citizens, one must dig very deep to find a justification for doing so, along with the affording of comforts like welfare, medical care and public education.  Is there an agenda, political or economic, that is furthered or fulfilled by harboring illegal entrants?  While such does nothing to change the illegality of failures at federal, state and local levels, especially by sworn officials, the discovery of said agenda might provide a reason to understand the public willingness to break laws on behalf of illegal entrants.

We are told by otherwise rational officials, including congressmen and women and senators, that illegal entrants pay taxes.  For this we should be grateful, we are told, because the ILLEGAL contributions illegal-entrant laborers make toward Social Security (on stolen or fabricated identities), will benefit our retirees.  No mention is made of the crimes involved, especially when illegal entrants collect Social Security payments on stolen Social Security numbers.

We are assured by sworn officials that many illegal entrants entered our nation illegally for very “good” reasons, such as “to work” and to “make a better life” for themselves or their families.  No mention is made of the livelihoods that are stolen or devalued of United States citizens, the only people to whom said sworn officials have any obligation under law, whatsoever.

We are told that law-breaking officials are in favor of deporting illegal entrants who are charged with “serious” crimes, for which stance they seek public approval.  However, this hollow pronouncement overlooks or obscures the arrogation by such officials of a role to determine on their own judgment, without benefit of law or process, which crimes are serious and which are to be ignored.  There is no amount of tax to be collected that justifies the insertion of personal opinion by ANY official as to which crimes committed by ANYONE, much less an illegal – therefore known-criminal – alien, deserve adjudication and which do not.

Indeed, the arrogation of this role, inserted between criminal and civil codes and those charged under law with their enforcement, is itself a crime, made worse by its belying of officials’ sworn statement to uphold “the laws.”

These same have told us that the fears of illegal entrants concerning deportation do, or may, prevent the solving of crimes known to them, since they will fail to speak to police officers given those “fears.”  This is presented as some sort of justification for their (officials’) criminal distortion of enforcement actions by the insertion of their personal judgments as noted above.  This argument is specious and obfuscatory, since illegal entrants OUGHT to be fearful of deportation.

And so, we come back to the matter of Kate Steinle’s illicit death.  A California jury, ostensibly ignorant of immigration issues surrounding señor Garcia Zarate, agreed on the crime of possession of a firearm by a felon.  The lies contained in Garcia Zarate’s initial statements did not sway their rejection of even an involuntary manslaughter charge.  They may have been strictly – very strictly – correct in the particular, and peculiar, circumstances of Miss Steinle’s death, but the shooting was a crime resulting from crimes committed by elected officials in San Francisco.  The killing of Steinle was not “an accident.”

Ultimately, the arguments of the open-borders enthusiasts are summed up as follows: You’ve been stupid about immigration for decades so you can’t stop being stupid, now – it’s not fair.

Immigration

TOLERANCE, LOGICALLY

Leave a comment


There is definitely a logic to modern immigration non-policies and protests. One could be justified in his or her puzzlement as to why criminals might be valued above the law abiding, even by “official” agencies of domestic law-enforcement. Some logic is shouted from the streets, some we’ll have to impute, but there is a logical platform underpinning apparent disconnectedness of immigrant “advocates.”

There would be MORE logic if every advocate were a non-citizen. Being allowed to gain new comforts and benefits that are not available in one’s own country is, logically, something to strive for. Like everyone else – every single member of the human race – people who sneak into a better country or economy are CAPITALISTS! That is, each will gain as much as possible for as little effort as possible. Once gained, the “possessions” one has are reason, of themselves, to defend one’s ownership thereof. That is, “possession” is 99/100ths of the “law” (of possession). Are we going in circles, here?

Well, yes. But there is a certain logic for the possessing individuals. What about “Sanctuary” logic? Heated protesters and their elected officials make a case for “fear avoidance.” That is, people who have snuck into the United States are, in theory, subject to legal sanctions for having broken Federal laws, and they “fear” being found and found-out. Their friends and families, legal residents and non-legal, and the self-recognized and self-created “agencies” that earn their livings working to connect non-legal residents to various welfare benefits, ESL classes and, unfortunately, contrived documentation – like drivers licenses – are on the front lines demanding “justice” for their fellow humans, laws be damned.

Municipal officials claim that these “fearful” non-legal residents won’t report crimes they have knowledge of if they are so fearful of being found-out and forced to go home to their own country. Nothing is said about reporting crimes of other non-legal residents who will likely escape prosecution simply because of their illegal status! MOST countries are NOT as pleasant to live in as is the U. S. Numbers of less-nicely-living people exceed 3 BILLION. How many are entitled to the largesse and safety of the United States? Logically, I mean.

Well, immigrant activists say, there shouldn’t be artificial borders; the World belongs to all of us. There may be logic behind that statement, but there are some sort of borders that come under the definition of human rights, aren’t there? Are strangers, or aliens, entitled to other individuals’ personal property? Even non-legal residents would object to a family of unknown, unrelated strangers moving into their homes and taking their income, wealth, food and personal space. That sounds logical.

There is a perverse sort of logic, not stated but accepted in practice, that stealing from the United States nation isn’t really stealing, like, from another person… I mean, honestly. There are a lot of U. S. citizens that believe the same foul thing! Still, illegal entrants are stealing forms of wealth that belong to U. S. citizens, and these include, in most cases, direct food, education, medical, housing and others kinds of costly aid that our new “residents” have not earned, paid-for, or deserve in any way except emotionally.

A new logic then is brought to bear: refugee status… and asylum. The U. S. since the end of WW-II has codified processes for EM-igrants: forced to leave their homes because of war. These are they who emigrate for essentially non-elective reasons; émigrés from Cambodia and Viet-Nam are excellent examples. The United States, responsible for much of the immediate destruction of Viet-Nam, Laos and Cambodia, helped tens of thousands of émigrés from Southeast Asia come to the U. S. and resettle in somewhat concentrated neighborhoods, mostly in cities or proximate suburbs.

What happened? Within a year or two our new residents had positive impacts on their local economies. Apartment sharers would combine for one car so that the adults could get to work; extended female family-members watched children for one another. Kids learned English without bi-lingual crutches and within a decade we had a host of “new Americans” whose cultural communities and religious philosophies were NOT purposefully antithetical to our Constitution and our Judeo-Christian legal system. One need look only at their children and grandchildren as they give valedictory and salutatory speeches.

There were both logical and charitable reasons to encourage and accept Southeast Asian immigrants. There is only an emotional justification for accepting large numbers of Muslim refugees. We want to believe that the wonderfulness of U. S. society will cause all degrees of Muslims to become more secular, less fundamental about Islam and to live like their new neighbors. For a nation premised on religious “freedom,” depending upon a softening of religious fervor seems oxymoronic – if not moronic.

Islam teaches dominance over, or death for, infidels. The prime infidels are Jews and Christians. I can see a problem. CAIR describes Islam and the Quran as mostly faith, sweetness and light. They bend over to reference Abraham, David, Jesus and Mary as if we are all brothers in belief and tradition. But history teaches otherwise.

Most, I mean in the order of a billion and more Muslims, will never take up arms against their neighbors, behead a nun in Africa or a reporter in Pakistan. Most don’t spend their days in hatred. On the other hand, they won’t fight too hard against their real faith-brothers who do. Islam, by credo, intends to replace all other belief structures because God commands it; Mohammed said so. “Religious freedom” is anathema to the Quran as are all forms of secular governance and lifestyles. And Muslims mean to carry out the dictates of the Quran.
Well, I can respect their adherence to their faith – I’m an American. Live and let live. But, I’m also conservative. I believe in the Ten Commandments and the teachings of Jesus Christ and the lessons of personal responsibility that the Bible, and our Declaration of Independence and Constitution embody. What ye sow, so shall ye reap… so MUST ye reap.

Christianity has undergone significant reformation not because of what the New Testament says, but because of abuses by the Catholic Church, politically, financially, powerfully. Little by little, sometimes ‘bigly,’ the Church has shifted while the basis of Christianity has not. Yet, make no mistake, Western civilization is dependent upon the success and survival… and integrity, of the Catholic Church. Fortunately, its self-destructiveness seems to be lessening.

“America” became what it did because of Mosaic and Christic principles. It also has failed in many areas because of human failing to follow those and our own laws. In the past hundred years, or so, we have found ways to talk ourselves OUT OF our Judeo-Christian principles by cleverly playing our own words against them… against ourselves. Legalized abortion is a clear example; separation of church and state is another.

We’ve given up our right to exercise judgment, and become afraid to exercise or even honor Christianity. Muslims have never relinquished Islam – every jot and tittle of it. In our amorphous philosophies we invite Muslims to live among us as if they, too, will become amorphous in their philosophies, yet, in our legalistic anti-Christian wasteland, we can’t even TALK about threats to our culture and heritage. The only sin left is intolerance.

So we tolerate, tolerate, tolerate until we’ve become able to argue for automatic citizenship for illegal entrants. Breaking laws and standing, publicly – even by elected officials – against their enforcement, is celebrated. A majority of states elected a president who battles to restore the rule of law and our Constitution, whose wife has the courage to say a prayer in public, and thousands protest in the streets. God save us.