Category Archives: Constitution

Hillary’s “Right” to Admission

I’m belatedly getting around to this great Power Line post, “Hillary: The Third World Has a ‘Right’ to Move to the United States.

This piece commenting on her declaration that everyone on the planet has the right to not only come to the United States, but must be admitted. The illegal part of illegal immigration completely disappears.

I suspect that this policy position probably even makes some liberals nervous and that it is why immigration was not brought up at this week’s Clinton-Trump debate.

It’s an extraordinarily radical position to take. It would have likely put Clinton into a bad light and the media doesn’t want that to happen. It would have also possibly given Trump a strong issue and the media dang sure doesn’t want that to happen in a public forum watched by millions of undecided voters.

To “conservatives” unsure of whether to vote for Trump, this position alone should concentrate your mind.

I’ll also point back to my post “The Madness of the Liberal,” wherein I question the sanity of allowing in people who clearly hate the United States and will clearly, upon admission, work to undermine them.

I am pro-immigration for high-quality people who come here to help, work hard and be free but our current immigration policy, under the control of the liberal mindset, actually seems to seek out the opposite — lower-quality third worlders from cultures hostile to the concepts of free markets, democracy, Western Judeo-Christian civilization and toleration.

As I said before, Hillary Clinton delenda est.

Why We Can’t Have Nice Things #53745

Check this out – FCC’s Wheeler Proposing Set-Top Standards Enforcer.

Yes, the chairman of the Federal Communications Communications, the the increasingly ambitious and increasingly dictatorial federal government overseer of all things communication, wants to set up a whole bureaucratic authority to oversee set-top boxes, i.e. your cable box (and don’t be surprised when they decide to include your Roku or Sling Box).

WTF?

Despite somehow inventing and delivering perfectly functional cable boxes for decades, this overweening federal agency is edging towards a decision that somehow the cable box industry can’t work without the federali’s guidance.

The real gist of this is that the bureaucrats behind this want to control the content that goes through that box.

They may bray about “access,” as if it’s okay for people who don’t want to pay for the box have “rights’ to a box, but they are moving towards making the box just another “free” (subsidized and paid for by other people) “right” like an Obamaphone. Maybe it will be called a “Hillarybox.”

And the Hillarybox will have to distribute, under penalty of law, propaganda from liberal groups, free of charge because those groups (euphemistically called ‘stakeholders’) don’t want to pay to have their propaganda carried and many outlets don’t want to voluntarily  carry that propaganda.

Laugh all you want at my paranoia, this will happen if the feds get control of cable boxes.

There simply is no Constitutional reason for the federal government to have any say whatsoever in the hardware used in our private cable systems.

As I’ve said before, given their way, liberals will politicize everything, every minute of our life and every thing we do in life. They see Orwell’s “1984” not as a warning but as a manual and as a goal.

Is Trump “Unqualified” to Be President?

That Donald Trump is “unqualified” to be president is the latest meme peddled by Democrats, their Republican allies and, of course, the Democratic parrots known as the mainstream media.

So is Donald Trump “unqualified” to be president?

Here’s the relevant language from a document called the United States Constitution. You might have heard of it.

Article II Section 1 Clause 5:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

Amendment XIV Section 1:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

Trump meets all those criteria so he is qualified to be president.

I’m sure there are some very clever folks, many of them with Ivy League degrees, who will play the semantics game. “That’s ‘eligibility’ not ‘qualified,’” they’ll cluck.

These will be the same people who voted for a wet-behind-the-ears senator with a nonexistent record as a state legislator, an undistinguished career as a part-time contract lecturer at a university, a checkered past as a “community organizer” and an even sketchier academic career. His only success looked to have been to write an autobiography before he had done anything. He was also good at guilting white liberals with his black skin.

These people are also backing a woman who should be on trial; should be disbarred; who has a past of numerous legal violations; has aided and abetted numerous other crimes of accomplices; had a disastrous period as Secretary of State; had an undistinguished career as a senator; lies with a rare abandon; has lived off the taxpayer much of her life; and enabled her husband’s numerous crimes and misdemeanors as president.

On the other hand, Trump can point to successfully building things, employing people and working with large corporations and local governments. One can also point to failing on some of his projects as well.

The semantictarians are using the rubric that Trump is not “temperamentally” suited to be president.

Again these are the same people who voted for a two-faced narcissist who kept much of his past hidden (with the able aid of the American news media’s willingness to turn a blind eye).

There is no cuddle factor requirement for the presidency. As for insulting various people and groups, Trump is not much more insulting than Obama. The difference is that Obama insults the right groups while Trump goes after politically and socially correct groups.

As for other elements of of disqualification, that he doesn’t know the name of some obscure foreign politician, well, Obama thought we had 57 states… Trump has also threatened to push around some nations while Obama cowers and apologizes. Bellicosity is not a disqualifier for the presidency. Until King Barry the Apologetic, many presidential candidates had made a strong foreign policy part of their campaign.

What I think is really the point is that Trump, for all his faults (and they are not insubstantial), is not part of the professional political coterie that populates the upper levels of both parties. To narrow this down further, it is a group of (often Ivy League-educated) lawyers and people who have done nothing in their life but live off of the taxpayer in a series of governmental and elected jobs. They have little to no experience in the private sector and what little they have is tied to the government in some way. They have done little to nothing in the way creating jobs, businesses or economic activity (they would vehemently disagree with that, thinking that government is the source of all). They have, in many ways, been parasites living off of the public all of their lives.

These are the so-called “political elites.”

Trump offers a stark contrast to these people. Say what you want, by and large, Trump has had to work with people to get his projects done. Unlike the professional politicians he has usually not been able to simply demand that something be done and it gets done through the power of the government hammer.

I actually like the idea of having someone outside of the cushy, comfortable political ecosphere occupy the White House for a little while. The elites need to be humbled and reminded of what they have and what they should be grateful for (rather than demand as an entitlement).

One last point. During the reign of King Barry the Malignant, people have, perhaps more than with any other president, absorbed the idea of the president as omnipowerful king. That’s one reason they are so edgy about a Trump presidency.

But a Trump presidency will not be the way they fear. He will be constrained, as a president should be. Perhaps he might even, in a case of opposite day, remind people of how limited and small the presidency can and should be.

Gun Grab — Power Grab

John Hinderaker of Power Line does a nice summation of the idiocy, strawman arguments and evil behind the modern antigun movement in “Wear Orange to Stop Gun Violence?

The simple-mindedness of the modern liberal would almost be amusing if it didn’t mask the darker, far more sinister true goal, the removal of firearms from private, law-abiding citizens. The idea that wearing orange will somehow engineer a magic “solution” that would render “gun violence” a thing of the past displays typical liberal dimwittery and wishful-thinking.

It also belies a “Baptists and bootleggers” coalition between totalitarian liberals wanting to disarm those that might resist their endless march to omnipotent power and criminals who find a disarmed citizenry to be a happy hunting ground. Both agree that a cowed population is in their best interests.

Is Trump “Unfit” to Be President?

I do enjoy greatly the roil that Trump has brought to the political landscape.

Half of me wants Donald Trump to win just to put a thumb into the eye of the Republican establishment and possibly, finally, drive a stake through the heart of the Clinton vampire criminal syndicate.

The other half would like to see Trump lose just to shut the mindless, iconoclastic, ultra-annoying Trump-supporting barbarians up.

A third half of me laments that we are in this choice of two people — one of whom will be a terrible president, possibly Obama-level awful and the other might be almost as bad. Wake me up when it’s over!

Daniel Hannan has an interesting piece, “The Real Reason Donald Trump Is Unfit to Be President.” He makes many valid points about Trump. I express a skepticism here.

But even if Trump is “unfit” to be president, is there a “fit” alternative?

Hillary Clinton is even less fit to be president. She’s a serial liar. She’s likely committed one or more felonies and that’s not including the email imbroglio. She was stunningly incompetent as Secretary of State and did nothing as Americans were killed in Benghazi.  If she were a Republican she’d have been declared a greater criminal than Nixon by now (and by the American media).

This has led me to a “Eureka!” moment.

I’ve often thought that we put too much into the presidency. The president has gotten too big (and I’m not just saying that because of the fool occupying it now). The presidency is too powerful (and that is especially aimed at the fool) and needs to be whittled down. The trappings of the president have gotten too large. The streets in front of the White House have been blocked off. Whenever the president wants to go anywhere even more roads get blocked off. I know this from living about a mile or so as the crow flies from it.

This president, King Barry I, travels with an entourage of several armored vehicles and when he travels abroad a small air force is involved and over a hundred vehicles can be transported across the ocean. He’s protected by an army of handlers and Secret Service agents.

Yes, he’s being protected from assassination but is that what we really want to do?

When one makes a fetish of protecting someone, doesn’t it make it an even more tempting target?

I say we should knock this effort down. Make the White Hose the people’s house once again.

Make all our enemies know that the president is a replaceable person. Kill him (or her) and another will step in. We’ll continue on. We are not dependent upon a particular leader.

We could, of course, help this transition along by shrinking the size of the federal government elephant that he rides. If Washington did not command so much power over our lives, fewer people would be interested in controlling it or fighting it.

So, to bring this back around to Trump. I like that Trump is shaking up the establishments of both professional parties. A President Trump might (that’s a big ‘might’) fire some people. That scares the Washington professional class because they all believe they are unfireable. Or a Pres. Trump might be isolated from the bureaucracy that he putatively heads. In which case it would lumber along on autopilot, proving that we don’t need a president (and that the federal bureaucracy is out of control and lives only for itself — a secret they do not want you to know).

Finally, President Trump could do a little to make real that fantasy that anyone in America can become president. That you don’t have to be a lifelong politician with a lot of connections to get there. I like that idea.

We idolize the presidency too much. Maybe it’s time to bring it back to Earth. I’m sure if there is a Pres. Trump Democrats will be reminding us of how little power the president really does have. Heck, they might even unpack the Tenth Amendment!

Catch me while I swoon.

Impeach Obama?

Is there an honest Democrat? Is there a Democrat that would put the nation ahead of party gain?

I seriously doubt it. Joe Lieberman was probably the closest and he was almost thrown out of the party at the end for thinking too much on his own. (And he voted to save Bill Clinton during the impeachment.) I think he actually has left the party but maintains a Saturn-distance orbit.

I’d dare say that many of today’s Democrats view the party’s well-being as being the same as the nation’s.

I bring this up because I see a lot of people saying that the reason they support Donald Trump is that the Washington-based GOP establishment has failed them. An agreeable point I’ll happily acknowledge.

But a subset of this group takes it further. They complain that the GOP Congress should have impeached President Obama — and thus failing to do so has lost their support.

Sadly, these people simply do not understand how our political system works. One could argue that they shouldn’t need to understand how it works; that they have jobs and that they thought they had left it in supposedly good hands.

The simple fact is that impeachment of a sitting Democratic president is impossible and will be impossible as long as that party is in existence.

If Bill Clinton couldn’t be impeached with his unarguable list of crimes, there is no way the “first black” president is going to be impeached.

Remember, during the Clinton impeachment (1999) not a single Democratic senator voted guilty on either article (one was perjury and one was obstruction of justice). The only splits came from the Republican side where Slade Gorton, Richard Shelby (say it ain’t so, Richard!), Ted Stevens, Fred Thompson (say it ain’t so, Fred) and John Warner gave Clinton a pass on the perjury charge — after everyone knew that he had lied. Lincoln “The Original RINO” Chafee, Susan Collins, “Weasel” Jim Jeffords, Olympia Snowe and Arlen “Scottish Law” Specter actually voted with the Democrats to save Clinton on both articles.

The point here is that Democrats NEVER break rank. Republicans will break rank — or as some might put it, think for themselves. But Democrats all move in lock-step. They move as one – with one goal: consolidating power in Washington under a Democrat-controlled socialist totalitarian central government.

They are The Borg.

Not a single Democrat looked at the evidence collected in a secure room. There is a lot more to the Clinton impeachment than has been made public. All of it, I understand, quite damning to the Clinton case (notably more interns seduced). But when the DNC ordered the senators not to view the evidence, they turned the blind eye to justice, and American decency. They didn’t need to know anything because they already knew all they had to know — vote not guilty.

Not even putatively “conservative” Southern Democrats like John Breaux, Bob Graham, Ernest Hollings and Charles Robb were willing to go against the party though their constituents wanted them to. None of these gentlemen ever ran for elected office again (Breaux, Graham and Hollings had just been returned to office in 1998 so it made a great thumb in the eye of their constituents).

(And our American news media strangely lacks curiosity about this whole episode yet it can always summon the energy for, say, the ‘33 and 1/3 anniversary of Watergate!’)

If a sorry sack of dung like Bill Clinton couldn’t be impeached, in times when morality in America still had a few breaths left, how on Earth could Obama be impeached when the vast majority of Americans haven’t the faintest idea how he’s violated the Constitution and his oath.

As a party the Democrats would be endlessly sabotaging the whole process. Rich liberal-funded Astroturf groups would be demanding that Republicans “stop their assault on the Constitution” (in that amazing way these groups accuse their opponents of just the opposite of what they are actually doing). The media would be screaming racism, remember their amoral conduct during the Clinton years? Not a single Democrat would vote to impeach Obama, ever. That’s EVER.

He could eat a live baby on TV and they’d complain that Republicans were racist for complaining about that. He could surrender the United States to a troika of Iran, North Korean and Venezuela and the Democrats would defend him. The media would make excuses and do stories about Republican “obstruction of peace.” And a few Republicans would be more than squishy on the matter.

There is a difference between the parties. Democrats have a goal — an omnipotent/omnipresent federal government under party control.

Republicans really don’t have a unified goal. Some want a little more government, others want no more (but maybe it could work better) and some want less. The split makes it difficult to get things done and it makes it nearly impossible to check the Democrats’ never-ending press on government expansion. Essentially, Republicans are always on the defensive.

(On a side note, the Democrats are also at war with the Republican Party and seek its destruction. The Republicans, especially in Washington, don’t understand this and think the old days of national comity still exist.)

If your measure of Republican support is based on whether it would have or will impeach Obama then you are never going to be happy. It is not possible to make you happy. Trump won’t make you happy either.

Our Lord of the Flies

When I was a kid and a young adult in the 1960s and 1970s (even into the 1980s), my grandparents in rural northern Texas loved Roosevelt, FDR, that is. Heck, everyone of that generation did. They praised him because he took care of them and saved them from the clutches of those awful Republican businessmen (who were out to steal their land — often to sell it to the railroad or some mysterious bogeyman — and take their money). The Republicans had  who had started the Depression after all. Or so they thought. Those small towns and counties and others like them throughout the South and rural West voted Democrat as sure as the sun was going to come up, decade after decade. If Satan had run as a Democrat, it’d be Mayor Satan.

Then they’d sit around the table and wonder why Washington couldn’t (magically) solve their problems. Yet, strangely, often they’d sound Republican, complaining about high taxes, big government, stupid policies, regulations and powerful bureaucrats controlling their lives… “Those ‘fellers’ in Washington,” simply didn’t understand, they’d complain. If only Roosevelt were back, he’d fix things right.

That Roosevelt had fixed nothing (arguably made things worse) was a proposition that could not enter their minds. They simply recalled things like getting electricity or telephone service “out to the farm” during his administration (technically it was probably late Hoover but…), a highway finally got paved (though most of the farm roads were still dirt roads) or often-unemployed Uncle Harry had joined the Civilian Conservation Corps and wrote them about it from Idaho. At least he wasn’t bumming around any longer… And even if not everything had been fixed, well, at least Roosevelt put the businessmen in their place and made them poor too. And there wasn’t a Republican in sight.

Then World War II came along and everything changed for those communities. All the kids and younger men “went off to war.” Most didn’t come back but resettled in a city somewhere. But the important thing was that Roosevelt won the war (and died for it) and prosperity came. See, his plan had worked, despite Republican machinations.They were pro-Nazi, in case you hadn’t heard.

For the most part, however, these people simply wanted to be left alone to get on with their lives and dealings. Roosevelt had done that too. It was the Republicans who were for the regulations or rigging the market that would “cheat” a farmer out of his profit or take money from a “widow woman and her children.”

There was an immutability about this world view.

I remember one time, in the early 1980s, when I had graduated from the kiddies’ area to floating on the periphery of the grown-ups table, pointing out that some bugaboo they were on about was actually a “Democrat” proposal. Needless to say, I never made that point again (and beat a retreat to the outdoors to play with my cousins). One grandmother was completely convinced for years that Reagan was going to raise “the taxes.” That’s what Republicans did to the little man. Then they were going to give that money to the rich people, bankers and their businessmen cronies. That’s how those folks got rich. She had seen it “on Dan Rather.” They religiously followed the TV news, Cronkite, then Rather. It was Gospel.

Roosevelt, and therefore Democrats, were always good and Republicans were always bad — that could never change no matter how much my elders and their neighbors actually sounded like Republicans in their day to day conversations. It was my first real collision with political reality.

It should be noted that as they passed on, bless their well-meaning hearts, those areas have turned and are now solidly Republican.

I bring this up because for many, perception is reality. Most voters really don’t dig into issues, no matter how much they think they are “informed.” Their knowledge comes from their “education” (controlled by Democrats — education unions and the hard left college professoriate), reinforced by the pop culture they read about in newspapers and books, see on TV or in movies (again, controlled by Democrats). They are marinated in this, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 52 weeks a year: Republicans and anyone who follows them, e.g. “Big Business,” are bad, mean, stupid, evil, selfish, greedy, uncaring… You don’t want to be any of those things, do you? While Democrats and their supporters, on the other hand, are good and they care about you.

That’s all you need to know.

So it should be no surprise now that someone like Obama can get elected and reelected. He cares about you and works hard for you. He said so himself and so did the paper, CNN, Charlie Rose, Katie Couric, etc.

It should be no surprise that someone like Hillary Clinton (or most any other Democrat) manages to survive, even thrive and get rich despite manifest crimes and shocking incompetence. They aren’t Republicans and she says that she cares. That’s all you need to know.

No one should be surprised that so many, especially younger people, have become accustomed to being taken care of, for their whole lives. They are used to “free” things (Mom and Dad paid for it) like Obamacare, soon-to-be-expunged student loans and easy-term “federally-guaranteed” loans and mortgages. They think that big government will make everything right and even tuck them in at night and look under the bed for monsters. And someone else will pay for it, too!

As of late we seem to have entered a new round of this “Roosevelting” of the populace. We have a generation or more of youth entering adulthood and young adults who are bat-poo crazy, if the campus turmoil is any indication.

These people have grown up in the lap of luxury: fed a plentiful diet while living in quarters unseen for 99.9999% of mankind’s history; entertained as if they were Roman emperors; required to do nothing to support themselves; had no expectations expected of them; doted upon incessantly and indulged on most every (childish) whim; basically treated as minor deities all of their young lives. And, yet, somehow, they have convinced themselves that they are “victims;” put upon by vast, dark and unseen racist, sexist, classist forces; afflicted with horrific conditions (physical and mental); or forced to buy defective or dangerous products; eat poisoned food; breathe poisoned air; live in poisoned environments; etc. Every living moment presents dangerous, existential threats to them they are taught to believe.

How is this so?

Look at how they were educated from their first moments of sentience. They are bathed every second of their waking lives in an unending agitprop from newspapers, magazines, books, TV and movies (many songs too), community leaders, politicians and teachers at all levels telling them how awful things are; how so many people are trying to ruin them; how awful and illegitimate the past is; and how life itself is an omnipresent threat to their well-being. Few dare tell them otherwise (not that they would ever see such counters or understand them). They are told how special and smart they are and no one dares tell them otherwise lest they hurt their feelings. Every adult they encounter (like college administrators) bows to them as if they were potentates.

They are encouraged to express themselves, often in dramatic (even histrionic), emotional terms because emotions are considered to be more legitimate and “real” than anything else. They are told that everything they think and know is right and good while anyone who disagrees with them or has a different opinion is wrong, bad, bigoted and possibly dangerous to them. Such people might need to be avoided, exiled, reeducated or destroyed they, not surprisingly, reason.

They are told that most all businesses are bad, act illegally, cheat people, foul the environment, steal from others (including the government), endanger and underpay workers, sell dangerous products or services and are a threat to all that is good. They are told that people who are successful have succeeded by ill means and on the backs of others (including you!). There has never been a good business of any size above a few employees. These people and their businesses must be regulated, taxed, run out of business and have everything taken from them and given to others, allegedly more deserving. The only hope for businesses is to succumb to liberal governance, make little or no profit, hire only liberals and give money to, devote resources to and support only liberal causes. Then they can be part of an economic public-private partnership — and be guaranteed approved business while competitors justly feel the wrath of public and government disapproval and regulatory constriction.

They have grown up in a world where increasingly everything is to be politicized — either changed, banned or redeployed as a weapon to propagandize and remake society from its abominable past and flawed present into a perfect future society. A world where everything and every moment of life needs to be regulated or monitored for deviations from liberal orthodoxy (AKA all that is good).

They are told that all who came before them were flawed and imperfect, if not downright evil. Prime example — the United States. There are few lessons to be learned from the past. They were all racists, sexists, genderists, classists and are against so many things now seen as good by the important people of today. The past needs to be rewritten or disposed of.

They are never encouraged to sacrifice or act modestly, humbly. Those are ideas and behaviors, with a hint of religion around them, from the past (and the past is bad). The past can never be innocent, it must be tried and convicted. If it feels good it must be right is the new motto.

And there are many of those racists, sexists, genderists, classists still around and they need to be defeated, exiled, reeducated or simply destroyed. Their mere existence is an affront to all that is good and wonderful and hinders the coming of the utopian future that can only be inhabited by the young ones — because they are the only pure ones. There is no room for intellectual or personal miscegenation in the future.

This is their world view. It has become their religion (existent religions being one of those bad things from the past that must be disposed of). Is it any wonder that they turned out the way the did. Give a small, ignorant child a loaded gun and guaranteed that someone is going to get hurt.

So now we find ourselves entering some sort of “Lord of the Flies”-style world with liberals occupying the capricious leadership, constantly “saving” us from “The Beast” while eliminating those who do not subscribe to the prevailing groupthink, and all the rest of us are Piggy, Simon, Sam, Eric and the littluns. Of course that story had a happy ending. I’m not so sure ours will.