Friends, sometimes the rank hypocrisy of leftists even irritates...leftists themselves! Here's a case in point: the Biden DOJ thinks it can ignore subpoenas for info and testimony from the Republican-led House of Representatives, at the same time that a former Trump official, Peter Navarro, is currently languishing in jail for...ignoring a House subpoena. In other words, when it was a question of the "January 6th Committee" and its authority, Dems told us subpoenas were sacrosanct. Now that they, the Dems, are the ones getting "served", well, the moral calculus does a 180. Will the dastardly Dems get away with this outrage? Probably. Only the DOJ could settle the score, and it's not likely to do so as long as Merrick Garland is the Sheriff of Ethicsville. And that, my friends, is Reason # 3,782 why the Dems are very unlikely ever to allow Donald Trump to become president, and to appoint his own Attorney General. Because, from their perspective, turnabout IS NOT fair play!
Dr. Waddy from Jack: By reflexive and obvious amoral expeditiousness such as you describe , the antiamerican left undemocratically misuses the administrative power granted it by democracy.Their disempowerment is the only thing that will stop their incipiently totalitarian presumption. Your continuing well taken prediction of their determination not, under any circumstances, including their electoral defeat, to allow DJT to take office, raises appalling prospects for the months ahead. Unprecedented disorder, perhaps leading to thereby "justified" attempted dictatorship, may actually be in the offing! I say attempted because I would fully expect to see many of the states, led by Texas, resist.
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy from Jack: I witnessed the eclipse and it was an experience unlike any I had expected. I have seen a partial but that did not manifest the wonder this one did. We had considerable cloud cover and it did allow us some brief views of the developing scene. But when totality arrived it was attended by a terribly dark cloud front which was
ReplyDeletetranscendently impressive. I try not to exaggerate or presume when I say it put me in mind of descriptions of the sublime darkness the Lord in his wrath imposed at Christ's penultimate moment on the cross. I was very moved by it, very moved.
You're right -- a contested, or hijacked, election could produce absolutely devastating consequences. I'm not so sure that the Bidenistas wouldn't get away with it, though. At the end of the day, Biden could give orders to the military that would...probably...be obeyed, and the only way to circumvent his powers as Commander-in-Chief would be to shoot back, i.e. to use force against the U.S. military, or law enforcement, or some portion thereof. Does any Republican Governor have that kind of moxie? Maybe we'll find out.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad the eclipse lived up to your expectations, Jack! How did you like the last one, back in '25? You must have been middle-aged then... I jest, of course!
Dr. Waddy from Jack: I hear the next one will be in (dare I say it?), '44. I'll only be 97 then so it should be a done deal. My prostrations and incantations to the enraged sun god saved me this time so I should be good to go then. How understandably terrifying though such an event was, probably, for peoples who had no science.
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy frfom Jack: I think the Civil Rights Movement of the '50's and the '60s presents a perhaps telling case study of the employment of Federal armed force in domestic conflict. Some southerners were extremely upset about what was happening. When President Eisenhower sent Airborne (I mean just imagine, he had sent Airborne into France in WWII) into Little Rock in '57, Gov. Faubus went on the air and told Arkansans "we are now an occupied state". One authoritative commentator said of times when JFK sent the army to Alabama and Mississippi " What could those states have been thinking? He's the President, he could send battleships up the Mississippi River!" It never came to combat. Is there as much resentment of perceived central government overreach today as to exceed that which obtained in the south then? There may well be. And this time it would not be motivated by support for a cultural institution which had run its course and was doomed. What we see today is an openly advocated , increasingly forceful imposition of a comprehensive political, social, legal and economic doctrine which contradicts long established principles of American civilization as a whole. Many people of good will , solid citizens who live positive lives, are fed up with being told by presumptuous and disdainful decision makers that they have invested their lives in a civilization which deserves a punishment and "fundamental transformation" they know it does not deserve. They know that the changes consequently forced on them are the product of historically discredited catastrophically sloppy thinking, intense bigotry and clearly indicated and sometimes murderous ( of "inhuman fetal tissue"; who is next !?)totalitarian intent. If they elect to disempower it in Nov. and are denied by extralegal Federal government action of any sort, will they countenance it? If their states choose to resist, will they support it?
ReplyDeleteGood point! We can see these eclipses coming. That does make them a lot less portentous than in days past.
ReplyDeleteInteresting analogy, Jack. I tend to think it proves my point rather than yours, though. I'd say the South was DEEPLY committed to segregation not just as a policy, but as a way of life. That they allowed federal judges, backed up by federal muscle, to dictate segregation's end proves their pusillanimity, and strongly suggests that American conservatives, if it came to rolling over or "insurrecting", would choose the former. It's useful to keep in mind the fact that segregation's demise was, for all the high drama of the 50s and 60s, gradual, which made it easier to put up with -- and democracy's demise is already proving incremental too.
Dr. Waddy from Jack: I may be quibbling about this but: I think segregation was a salient feature but not the definition of white southerner's way of life. When I first met southerners in the Navy I quickly noticed how important hierarchy was to them . It seemed that everyone had a place and until or unless you earn your way out of it, you had better stay in it if you know what's good for you. Some people were just "no 'count" and that reflexively included blacks. Its difficult to think of southerners as pusillanimous; the dominant male culture there, I think, was "you better be 'stand up' or you're 'no 'count' ". The Civil War had perhaps convinced them that it was folly to "stand up" to the main force mustered by the Feds. You are right in that the chances are that our present cold civil war will not ignite ; proven patriotic current southern pride embodies only one of the many grievances all America holds against hopefully temporarily ascendent neomarxists in their airy fortresses. Much successful resistance is already manifested in many states (eg Texas, Florida, Arizona) while states like NY and CA are probably irredeemably lost. Perhaps we will settle into an uneasy standoff. But like a train finally approaching traveling speed, incremental imposition by the radical left accelerates, with ever increasing insouciance and open disdain for America.
ReplyDeleteJack, I haven't a clue where all this will end up, but I do feel strongly that it would take A LOT to get average Americans off their oversized duffs and into the streets, even for a peaceful protest, let alone a civil war. As the most privileged and comfortable people who've ever lived, we have a lot to lose, and I think we know it deep down. Having said all that, if force ultimately decides our fate, as it usually does, only a small number of people actually need to wield those fateful weapons. A few obstreperous small-town sheriffs, or a few disobedient Feds, could determine our collective destiny.
ReplyDelete