The Left Trusts Trump Supporters

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/10/trump-comes-to-rochester.php

My wife and I tried to get in to see Trump in Rochester Thursday night -- we didn't, but it was an amazing experience anyway. The BIG observation is that Black women, Muslim women and frail white women and men in pussy hats don't actually believe the nasty things they say about Trump supporters. Exhibit A ...

Would you go to N Minneapolis and walk around happy and confident with a sign reading "ALL Lives Matter! I Support the Police! ??? I wouldn't, because I would consider it to be provocation, and I would be unsurprised if the local residents responded violently. I actually would not blame them all that much -- I'm invading their turf with a provocotive message after all. 

The attitude of the leftist protestors last night was much like that of preschooler teasing a dog through a fence or poking some animal in a cage -- primitive, giddy, unserious, "it's a game and we know that we are safe". On one hand, I'm extremely proud of the Trump crowd -- as we all know, the odds that many of them are Christian are pretty high, and they fully displayed it as lefties waded out into the crowd yelling obscenities, showing signs with obscenities, and naturally belittleing the President any way they could. The media loves to report to us every time Trump "mocks somebody" -- right after which they do an article on how he is crazy, stupid, looks funny and is pretty much "Hitler". 

My mind goes back to the VERY moderate and reasoned Tea Party "demonstrators" (like the description hardly fits)  in 2010 -- specific messages like "Cut the Debt", "Smaller Government", "Follow the Constitution", etc, No profanity, virtually nothing about Obama beyond maybe "We DID build this!", or "Bitterly and HAPPILY Clinging to Bible and guns!". Naturally, the Tea Party was maligned as RACIST ... and sexist, homophobic, backward, stupid white men, DANGEROUS!, etc. 

We have become tribal, but it is obvious that our tribes are very much not "the same"!

How crazy and violent will the left need to get before they awake the sleeping giant of the right? Standing in the MASSIVE crowd trying to get in to see Trump last night, I'm wondering if they have not already accomplished their task? 

Certainly we all now know that the left has no interest in such arcane morality as "The Golden Rule" --  nobody would want what has been done to Kavenaugh and his family done to them or those they love. We can of course never know "for sure" what happened between two people 35 years ago, but we CERTAINLY know WHY what has happened to Kavenaugh NOW has happened! Ford decided that she wanted to smear Kavenaugh and prevent him from gaining the SCOTUS! Wether it is made up out of completely whole cloth, or she saw him "behaving badly" (in her judgement) at some party once, or exactly what, we can't know -- but since nobody corroborates her story, reasonable people must conclude that what she says happened did not -- at least if "reasonable people" assumes the presumption of innocence. If it doesn't, then "reason" really doesn't mean much. 

Certainly anyone with some semblance of "reason" remaining understands that when you go up against "The Party" (TP-D), there is no presumption of innocence and the burden of proof is on whomever is not of the party. It is also important to know that even if whatever infraction you are accused of -- say a remark, or a look deemed to be sexist, racist, homophobic, etc, there is absolutely NO REDEMPTION. If you are a member of TP in good standing, any "infractions" are unlikely to even be of interest (Ted Kennedy, Slick Willie, Hildebeast, BO, etc) however if there is ANY interest, time redeems TP members in a matter of weeks. 

For example ... 

Oh, and if they call you a "rapist", any response on your part means you "lack judical temprament"! Oh please! 

Cultural Twilight

https://amgreatness.com/2018/09/30/epitaph-for-a-dying-culture/

A great one be Victor Davis Hason, better to just read it than my weak musings.

So everything from Facebook and Twitter censorship to politically recalibrating the order of Google searches serves the larger collective “good.” Even ancient ideas of wealth and poverty fade before our current ideology. If riches are used for social change, even if cynically and for careerist and self-interested reasons, then how they were obtained or otherwise used is irrelevant; if not, then they are proof of greed in their acquisition. Multibillionaire George Soros might be a wanted felon in France or have attempted to break the Bank of England and thereby ruin small depositors. But his wealth is welcomed because he invests a small percentage of it in progressive causes and thereby purchases his own progressive insurance and protection. As did the Catholic Church in the Dark Ages of yore, the Progressive Church now sells indulgences.

Man never lives by bread alone -- he always lives by faith, the question is just "in what"? The reason is that Christ's yoke is light is that besides being Divine and loaded with Grace, it is "not of this world". Taking on the yoke of Christ puts this world in it's right perspective -- temporal, passing away, and certainly passing away QUICKLY for us all, easily seen by those of us over 60!

Your faith, your religion -- or ideology permeates your life. If it is of this world, then you will merely be tribal as man has been and continues to be since his createion. "Progressiveism" is the secular church, and as we see in the Kavenaough hearings, it permeates our culture making largely bad men like Teddy Kennedy, George Soros or Bill Clinton, to be "good" in the eyes of the left, while making me like Kavenaugh, Clarence Thomas, or even W and HW Bush to be "bad" because the left requires it.

Much better to just read it and likely weep a little. America is long gone because as Hanson covers, culture trumps politics. Our dominant culture is totally of the BOistani tribe.

Is BOistan Kennedy's "America"?

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/09/reflections-on-the-devolution.php

A worthy read that pegs the devolution of America into BOistan to the Bork hearings in July of '87. I agree this is a key event, however as I cover here I think Chappaqiddick is an even better point of inflection. Teddy's Bork rhetoric however still bears repeating as a lesson in rhetorical malpractice ....

Robert Bork’s America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens’ doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of the Government, and the doors of the Federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens for whom the judiciary is — and is often the only — protector of the individual rights that are the heart of our democracy….

They didn't try their hand, but I will ...

BOistan is largely Teddy Kennedy's America. A land in which 60 million babies have been slaughtered and when deemed "inconvenient", their body parts sold to the highest bidder over wine and salad. The doors of conservatives homes are battered down in the early morning hours, children as young as kindergarten are schooled in anal sex, bakers and florists are charged with crimes for failing to perform their craft for political adversaries, simple speech is labeled "hate speech" and criminalized, even universities are no longer able to have even civil dialogue on political subjects, and the judiciary has become a politicized mockery always leaning to to the left, a scourge of the rights of any who fail to agree with "The Party" (TP-D).

Teddy predicted -- I report.

Do Unto Kavenaugh

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/09/17/what-should-the-senate-do-with-brett-kavanaugh-219985

The most interesting thing about reading the linked article  is the utter predictability of responses from legal scholars of the left and right. In BOistan, NOTHING is more imprtant than one's political worldview, because in the absence of belief in a transcendent authority (God) -- all is politics, and there is CLEARLY no morality in politics. Obviously, the "rule of law" isn't any substitute for God at all -- even the top legal scholars simply twist "the law" to be what they want it to be.

The immediately obvious thing about the loss of God in this case is the loss of the "Golden Rule". I'm guessing that some people still recall it, though in this tribal state, rarely if ever apply it. The best place to read the basis for it is Matt 22:37- 39 Jesus declared, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.This is the greatest commandment, And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’

These two verses get summarized in Matt 7:12 even more succinctly: "Therefore whatever you desire for men to do to you, you shall also do to them; for this is the law and the prophets." The "Golden Rule".

We all understand that when seeking a job, we would be completely aghast for someone to come out with a charge against us that they had never brought to our attention in 35 years.  When nobody else agrees with the accusers version of events  (of the 5 people supposedly at the party, none except the accuser says what was charged happened at all) .

In decent society for thousands of years we also understood how to deal with a sin against us. If possible, GO TO THE PERSON, if not, got to "authority" -- QUICKLY, because if this is really a serious matter, other young women might be harmed. When you fail to do this for "weeks, months, or ...", especially when you are talking about a 17 year old boy who is exceedingly well known, you make your charge under no threat of reprisal. We are not talking about the town tough who is going to be sure "you get yours", because he is certain he has no future anyway. Failure to come forward drops your credibility with each passing day. LONG before "35 years", your credibility is gone.

So what of "the woman"?  Given the amount of time, the fact that supposed corroborators swear under oath that what she claims did not happen, 65 women and many others coming forward to vouch for the character of the man she seeks to destroy, and the obvious politically motivated climate she came forward in, her credibility is ZERO.

Perhaps she was attacked when young once or multiple times and imagines that Kavenaugh was one of those attackers, or perhaps she only observed Anita Hill ($9 million net worth), and decided that she too could be a heroine to the left for a price. Women trading virtue for rewards is the oldest proffesion after all. In a world where honor and wealth are attached to calmuny, this is certainly well within the grasp of understanding. When there is no other world to come, the taking of easy wealth and fame in this one actually makes total sense. What would be against it? Morality? What a joke.

A country with even a hint of what used to be called "decency" would make certain that every Democrat up for election in November lost by historically unprecedented margins. If we were were a moral and religious people, that would be the certain case. As John Adams said,  "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other".

Clearly we are NOT that people, and since that state was founded on IDEAS, not territory, religion, ethnicity, etc, -- this is more proof that this is BOistan, not America. BOistan is in the process of development -- and as we see from Clarence Thomas and now Kavenaugh, it is not a good place to live if you are not a member in good standing of "The Party" (TP-D). On the TP plantation, you-uns gotta lay LOW if you don't kneel at the alter of the left.

As the charges against Kavenaugh show, liberty can't survive in such an environment because liberty requires the potential of leadership for people of more than one political stripe. We can run down a short list of men of the left NOT destroyed by charges significantly worse than this one even in the unlikely event that what the accuser says has any truth -- Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton are only the head of a sordid list from the left.

On the right? Well, Roy Moore is the most recent example of 35-40 year old "charges" being used to take him down. As I covered here, the Stupid Party (R) is reaping what they sowed. Now Kavenaugh. As the last entry in the linked article says ...

Ford, Kavanaugh’s accuser, maintained a stony silence on these allegations for more than 35 years. At no point did she raise them in connection with the Senate confirmation hearings before Kavanaugh was confirmed in 2006. Kavanaugh has categorically denied the allegations. Late last week, Mark Judge, his alleged accomplice, denounced the allegations as “absolutely nuts.” No other woman has ever made any allegation of this sort against Kavanaugh. and 65 women have written an explicit letter in his defense. Kavanaugh is right not to respond beyond his categorical denial, knowing full well that further comment would only draw him further into a vortex on which credibility determinations would be unending. And the Senate is right to continue with the confirmation vote. The institutional damage to the Senate, the Supreme Court, and the nation has already been enormous. What is left now is only the sorry task of damage containment. What sane judge would like to be the next Supreme Court nominee.

The author of that last piece (the best in the bunch) leaves out the obvious "What sane NON LEFTIST judge ...". The BO istan political buzzsaw really only cuts in one direction, and if you are willing to accept a nomination to a position which the left wants to block you from, not only will they try to block you, they will try to remove you from your CURRENT position -- unless you are a member in good standing of TP (The Party - D), it is best to keep your head down!

This nomination process cannot continue as it was before these grave and credible allegations became known. That would be a slap in the face to women and survivors of sexual assault everywhere. The question isn’t only whether Brett Kavanaugh can still be a Supreme Court justice; it’s whether he can still be a federal judge.

Sasse On Civics, Administrative State, SCOTUS

Well worth the time to watch ... perhaps a future president?

It is a good video -- it would have been great if he was a little stronger on the purpose of the SCOTUS  being ORIGNIAL INTENT of the Constitution, otherewise we need neither a written Constitution nor a SCOTUS.

Oh, and it would be fine if the legislature did their jobs and reined in the Deep / Administrative State as well!

Crying For SCOTUS Standards

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/03/opinion/supreme-court-kavanaugh-partisan.html

Ah, the NY Tines laments the politicization of the court! They ought to read Scalia ... he predicted the obvious long ago. When the Warren court denied the people, the states, and the nation the proper discussion required to make murdering the unborn a "right", they sowed the seeds of exactly what this article laments. The court decided to take political action in legislating from the bench, so the people decided that the justices needed to be poltically vetted and screened so that they would take their political actions in the direction of the people who voted for presidents in order to get "their" judges on the SCOTUS. 

The article interjects Bush V Gore as a smoke screen -- we might still be litigating the 2K election if the SCOTUS had not put an end to it! Naturally, it was the NY Times "loss", so they need SOMETHING to seem like a "conservative win" in the political court. 

The reality is that there are essentially NO "conservative poltical wins" by the SCOTUS because the judges that conservatives want are strict constructionist / original intent judges that DON'T legislate from the bench. Thus the difficulty in overturning even egregious rulings like Roe or Kehlo that ARE "legislating from the bench". Once the court has ruled, "Stare Decisis" taken seriously by converservative judges tends to make the ratchet of judicial activism always tilts left. 

Even worse, the conservatives on the court tend to defer to the other two branches -- so cases like BOcare forcing people to buy insurance still get decided in favor of the left. 

Naturally, the NY Times likes to have "The Party" (TP-D) always control ALL branches of government, including especially the 4th extra-Constitutional Deep / Administrative State. The idea of the SCOTUS not being in firmly left wing hands is enough to make the Times pine away for a totally non-political court. Their assumption is that there are no principles higher than politics, so conservatives are just as likely to make law from the bench as "progressives". 

Most likely not -- and if they get control of the court again, they will be more than happy to see laws that put Christians in jail for failing to celebrate a gay "marriage", genders yet unimagined, sexual practices to make a Roman blush, and government invasions of all manner of property, thought, and faith! 

Naturally, to the NY Times, that is just "progress"!  No need to have a SCOTUS unless it is fully under control of TP! 

NEA Post Janus Meeting (Power Line)

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/07/how-we-welcomed-the-national-education-association-to-minneapolis.php

Power Line covers it pretty well. I'm sensitive to the "evil" charge these days since after reading Suicide of the West, I can see where it really fails to move us forward -- "very misinformed", "alternative tribal world view that is at odds with liberty and keeping food on your table" (see Venezuala).

In any case, thank God for Trump and the Roberts Court! One thing about America vs BOistan ... when you have good ideas, they DON'T need to be mandatory as in they collect union dues from you no matter what!