CLINTON, TRUMP, AND OUR REALITY

Authored by William Barber

All governments are corrupt. Therefore, it is just a matter of time and situation before some member of government, prompted by a willful desire for a dominance of influence and authority, either elected, or appointed; contrives a process, a legalese, a crafted machination artfully designed or overtly extralegal, to subvert the spirit and meaningfulness of the constitutional republic.

“The people” no longer influence, manage, or determine (by their vote) the competency, courage, or honesty of their government. The citizens of America — in substantial numbers — are distracted from and notably ignorant of their obligations of citizenship. They have fashioned a yawning behavioral disinterest in the workings of the elected and appointed. It is the few, the educationally endowed elite, the politically connected, the politicized national media, and their pundits who posit their ideological determinations as if a certainty. Inundated with information, overwhelmed by voluminous and often contrary data, the citizen surrenders to the beckoning of pretty words and pleasantries of style. 

How else could one explain Hillary’s legacy? In the era of emails, cell phones, and archived video, she is the boldface practitioner of lies and deception. As Secretary of State, she enabled the beginnings of a purposeful fraud in the inducement when she participated in the Iranian agreement. With complete disregard of State Department rules and regulations, she stored top-secret inter-department emails on a private server. She unilaterally destroyed 30,000 or so of her emails… I could go on.

Nonetheless, useful idiots applauded her words and laud over her being. This mockery of lawfulness by an officer of the republic is one example why a democratic republic cannot function as designed. Similar to the beckoning that tested the sobriety of  Ulysses, Sirens of promises composed of beautiful words and satisfying wondering sway us, “the people,” into the comfort of pleasantly applied subjugation. Progressives like Obama and Clinton create an ambiance of rainbows and butterflies. They declare that life is good, all is as intended. These progressives only require a half measure of a citizen’s freedom and several pounds of individual liberty as the fare.

I have no idea of Trump’s political viability, his governing intentions, or even his ability to govern. However, what I do know with absolute certainty are the governing intentions of Hillary: They are French in enterprise, Italian in competency, and Machiavellian in scope.

Advertisements

HOPE IS AN ILLUSION

Authored by William Robert Barber

The Obama government is much more comfortable with the concept of “Hope” than the “take no prisoners” truth that defines this apathetic, “could-give-a damn” Darwinian survival of the fittest world. Even when evidencing what one deems as critically threatening to American interest, the president insists on “Hope” as the viable alternative to a persistently menacing problem.

The philosophic basis of today’s liberalism is one of hopefulness. As a liberal thinker President Obama presumes that man is rooted in good; therefore, all discerned exceptions to “good behavior” are the fault of some societal deficiency or Republican brainwashing.

The crux of the progressives’ political message is to point out the unfairness of the economic system. Directly and obliquely, Secretary Clinton and Senator Sanders contend that unfairness derived from and perpetuated by the one percent is the significant cause of economic discontent. They imply and express that the elimination of unfairness is their raison d’être for seeking elective public service. Noting that after almost two terms of a democratic presidency the central issue of concern for Clinton and Sanders persists. Irrespective, the battle cry for elective office by democratic contenders remains a slight variation of “Change We Believe In.”

Firstly, I assume, Clinton and Sanders, in every instance, will define fair. Secondly, they will ultimately define fair in keeping with their ideology and the terms, conditions, and timing requirements of their political resources. However, differing only on the amount of tax dollars needed, these two presidential candidates have summarily agreed on the solution. They have promised to cure what ails with the dispensing of other peoples’ cash. “Spend more money” is the steadfast progressive solution — a solution the president whole-heartily indorses.

Premised on a naïve, fragmented, even incoherent displacement of deductive logic rest the founding principles of President Obama’s foreign policy. He thought that he could declare peace… in fact, he did declare peace and withdrew armed forces from Iraq while underfunding the entire U. S. Armed Forces. His administration now dances around the use of the word ‘combat.’ The man of hesitancy is bewildered, confused, and befuddled, all the while holding his breath until next January.

Domestically, his factious rhetoric has given cause to the disruptive actions of “Black Lives Matter.” He is the reason Secretary Clinton’s indictment for her email malpractice remains a republican dream.

Of course, no worries: we Americans have “Hope.” We will continue to believe that a good defense is superior to an aggressive, relentless offense. Surely, our enemies will realize Allah’s call to arms is a ruse enacted by evil beings. Thematically Obama’s belief is, if we treat Islamic fanatics with respect, they will embrace, in time, a secular’s sense of human values. Convincingly, there must be moderate Muslims who understand that those who cut off heads, enslave women, and burn people alive in the name of Allah are bad people.

Certainly, the immediate preceding is a descriptive of “Hope.” I prefer to believe in faith rather than hope: I have faith that our armed forces will destroy ISIS because our mission statement is explicit. Our planning is in place and our resolution assured because our nation state accepts nothing less.

Hundreds of years ago a Roman general said, “Si vis pacem, para bellum,” — “If you want peace, prepare for war.” Nothing has changed; the world is not any safer and Humankind is just as behaviorally dysfunctional as 1st century Rome. “Hope” is a wish-it-was-so, but it is not reality. Reality took down the Twin Towers. To think otherwise will lead to the end of liberty and the beginning of subjugation.

WE ARE NOT A DEMOCRACY

Authored by William Robert Barber

Democracy, a word offhandedly banded about by politician, pundit, and common citizen as the working descriptive of this nation’s egalitarian system of governess, is flat out incorrect. In addition, the citizenry has accepted a natural carry-forward believe that democratic principles apply as the wherewithal of our electoral process. Of course with a bit of scrutiny one would realize that there is no egalitarian system of governess and certainly, political parties have no obligatory nor interest in anything other than selecting the candidate that will win the party an election.

Nonetheless, dull complacency and disinterested ignorance — both detrimental and injurious for a responsive republic — requires, with respect to government and politicians, a constituency with an askant perspective and inclination to be well informed. Obviously, the voters are complacent and ignorant. Swayed by colorful illusions, an agreeable physical presentation, the timely proportion of polemic accusations and placating prose, for the average voter, the candidate’s policies and merits are suddenly inconsequential.  

This nation’s 1789 constitution founded the operational workings of a republic — a representative government,not a democracy. The Electoral College requires 270 votes of the 538 outstanding to win the presidency; the popular vote is irrelevant to election success. The primaries of each of the political parties are subject to the rules enacted by the particular party’s State leaders. It is as simple as that.

If Donald achieves a majority he is the Republican Party’s nominee. If he falls short he may not be.

The founders purposefully designed a constitution wherein a republic was favored over a democracy. I do not know of a government founded on a democracy. The tallies recorded by popular vote is interesting but may not represent the electoral winner.

LANCELOT AND ROLAND PLUS TWO

Authored by William Robert Barber

Last night I watched the televised “Hannity” featuring Mark Levin espouse his new book “The Liberty Amendments” wherein the brilliant Levin describes the multiple abuses (offering examples layered upon examples) perpetrated upon the original intent of the Constitution by any and all that possessed the power and the means. The perpetrators were presented as having many differing ideological hues spanning specifically from 1913 to the present. However, the clear standout, the overriding persistent abusers, according to Levin, were unequivocally the Liberal Progressives and their socialist brethren.

Further in the discussion was the consensus amongst the panel of political wonks, the host, and the author that because of the precedence of law (settled legal matters), even if these maxims were established by extralegal means or simply misinterpreted judgments, correction is highly improbable to impossible. Withstanding, all participants agreed that the only alternative to correcting the wrongs and reestablishing limited federal government is to persevere, campaign, and educate, with the goal being to win over their fellow citizens. To cause the country’s citizens to reject their heretofore liberal-progressive-political-economic quasi-acceptance for the values inherent in liberty and individual freedom.   

I have not read the book; nevertheless, what I gathered from the forty-five minute program was that it is Mr. Levin’s passionate understanding that “the people,” will cajole their elected representatives to add his amendments to the Constitution. Hmm… he has more faith than I do.

Here are a few of the obstacles: Politicians are not required to tell the truth and the mainstream media conveys a political prospective regardless of the truth. One-man-one-vote does not require the voter to understand anything whatsoever. Ideological and predisposed beliefs create predeterminations that erode reexamination. Contrivance is much more interesting because the prevailing perception is that the facts are ambiguous even when the facts are well-defined. Pointedly, the predominate challenge, the one wrong that if not righted — all other efforts or concerns are for naught — is to redraft for definitive purpose the individual tax obligation owed to  the federal government. When over 45% or more Americans pay no, none, nada, in federal income tax they have no “skin in the game.” Therefore, they have no interest in the prevailing political indiscretions or if the federal government is running amok with injurious, imprudent, costly, ineffectual spending. They endure the careless, the stupid, and the nonsensical because they are not directly paying  the price of incompetence. Indeed, they are being paid not to care. This tax avoidance put forward by politicians is nothing less than buying votes and should be illegal. But here is the greatest obstacle to Mr. Levin’s righteous offering: the progressives promise what does not truly exist and the majority buys it with their votes.

Righting the wrongs of over a hundred years of statutory perversion and unconstitutionally applied procedural distortion requires a high degree of multifaceted political dexterity coupled with the courage of Lancelot and the virtuous sacrifice of Roland plus two.  In other words, a super-leader(s) must emerge from America’s Hinterland and lead the nation back to its founding values.

What are our chances?

WISHFUL THINKING

Authored by William Robert Barber

Mindboggling, bewildering, amazingly dumb, and downright ignorant is the concept of peace at anytime; much less peace in our time. The very idea that peace (as a foreign policy goal) is an attainable probability is an absolute absurdity. Realpolitik dismisses peace as outright naiveté — a dangerous strategy and a silly forethought. Yet, although, and still the intelligentsia unapologetically touts peace as its ultimate goal, the raison d’être of a nation state’s primary obligatory, and most profusely, those who profess to know just about everything (wonks of the department of state for one) pronounce peace as the moral-ethical priority of an enlightened society.    

For those of Harvard, Yale, and Princeton legacy, the very ones that underwrite, regulate, and administrate the workings of the government dismiss the available volubility of documentation to the contrary and continue to profess peace as feasible. After all, they who behold MBAs and JDs have degreed that peace is the rational extension of humanness, of intellectual enlightenment; conclusively therefore, these of Noblesse Oblige lineage (the ones that run the show) have confidently surmised: Rational deduction reasons that peace is reasonable thus attainable.

I say that peace is mythical as well as a convenient illusion void of all empirical evidence as to its attainment; further, peace as a stated policy goal is nothing more than a rhetorical utility extensively used as a reason for violent conflict; an excellent example of such rhetorical utility is WWI: “The war to end all wars.” Since humanoids learned to fashioned and bound stone to stick, millions of humans have died directly or indirectly from the purposeful misdirection of establishing peace in the name of war.

The intrinsic behavioral dysfunction that prompts one to rob, deceive, murder, and lie on an individual basis is the same — although exaggerated dysfunction that prompt nations to, under the ensign of manifest destiny, xenophobia, theocratic intolerance, ideological incongruity, or a myriad of other such ‘causes to act violently’ predicaments that render the idea of peace as a foreign policy goal impossible.  

Amongst nation states the great persuader is not kindness, personal niceties, nor offers of understanding and friendship. The great persuader is power coupled with the will to act. Power if uncoupled from the will to act disadvantages the nation with power; such a disadvantage eventually disables the persuasion of power rendering the nation in common denomination with the not-as-powerful.

The choice is self-evident: America is either the most powerful nation on earth or not. If the choice is “not” then another nation will take its place; the weaker will either submit or conflict. Prudence and analytical reality compel America to be the most powerful nation on earth. Therefore a foreign policy that is as unrealistic as the ridiculous notion that peace is an attainable goal only misdirects costly efforts, wastes resources, and corrupts time spent. Further, when one accepts peace as an attainable goal one expends treasure, resources, and blood in the hope that the particular counter-party will be converted to civil sensibility, rational deduction, stop the violent behavior, and act reasonably. The key word is hope. Hope is not a tactical or strategic policy; hope is emotional wishfulness.

My assumption is that peace as a goal is so impeded in the American psyche that my thoughts will be dismissed and disregarded; nevertheless, I have expressed my thoughts on the subject and found accordingly satisfaction in doing so. Obviously, my concern is that as Secretary Kerry and President Obama seek compromise with America’s enemies and pseudo-allies in the interest of peace the result will be diminished U. S. power while eliminating this nation’s will to act from its quiver of steal-tipped arrows.

THE PRICE OF SECURITY IS TOO HIGH

Authored by William Robert Barber

Fearfulness is frequently an injudicious facilitator of imprudent action which often results in a consequence contrary to expectancy. Fear is a tool used by politicos and oppressors. Successfully exploited it always abates liberty and increases the power of government. Fear will initiate marshal law and effectively rescind individual rights in favor of authoritarian rule. In its finality fear is a grand hoax perpetrated by the knowing,  powerful, and  ambitious to psychologically flagellate the weak, intimidate the strong, and appease their affiliates.

On 9/11 terrorists attacked this nation and thousands died. And as tragic as that day was, the real tragedy was this nation’s response — the immediate curtailment of our liberties.

Today we learned that the federal government is harvesting voluminous amounts of data on Americans because “we fear another terrorist attack”. Fear has prompted an Orwellian policy of incursion, blatant disregard of the 4th amendment of the constitution, plausible intimidation, and the blessings of congress. Now it really does not take an extraordinarily high IQ to master the idea that if a government run program was secret and the essence of secrecy required limited access, how does congress judge not only its effectiveness but also its constitutional compliance?  

Well, the fear mongers have the answer, “trust me I know what I am doing and if I don’t know what I’m doing well I personally know the guy who does”.

There have been many, many, instances of government abuse, incompetence, denial, and downright unconstitutional actions. The government is managed by human beings. The very same humans that interned Japanese-Americans after looting all of their possessions, locked up American Indians in reservations, invaded Mexico, and took Panama from Columbia. I could go on but I think my point is secure.

No, I do not trust this government  — or any government for that matter — and if I want to hold my individual liberty dear, my distrust is sensible. Please name a government, any government anywhere in all of history, that has not exampled corrupt practices, incompetent management, and served some perceived self-interest over the common good.

The Patriot Act is not patriotic; it is the injudicious imprudent action of a fearful state of mind and being.  I will not cede another word from the Bill Of Rights nor surrender more of my American breed freedoms because of a possible threat from an Islamic Jihadist.   

No, federal government, you cannot limit my liberty or freedom for the sake of fearfulness!

VOX POPULI

Authored by William Robert Barber

 

In the words of Alexis de Tocqueville:  “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” 

 

As never before in American history the warning of De Tocqueville has been realized. This election plainly presented a classic exemplar, the quantitative consequence, of President Obama’s class warfare propaganda.  The ethnic minorities, the have-less, the welfare-dependent, the callow, the obsessive contrarians, the idealistically inclined, and the devoted liberal-progressives…  in essence an assortment of divergent special interest groups coalesced to defeat the candidate with the only viable political-economic alternative to the current economic malaise.

 

The Federal Reserve can and will print all the cash it deems necessary, congress will tax, nevertheless printing monies and increased taxation will not generate a fiscally viable economy. There are some financial-commercial realities that cannot be swept away by promises. Taxes and fees (all taxes and fees) are generated from the profits of commerce. Even those creative municipalities that feed off of total revenue instead of net profits can only successfully collect their monies if the particular private enterprise is profitable. 

 

President Obama’s second term will include the enthusiastic continuance of unions financing Democratic politicians, States with Democratic governors will excessively levy, budgetary problems of federal entitlements rhetorically regurgitated but not resolved, ObamaCare implemented at a price of fiscally disastrous effects and complications, statutorily compliant corruption will proliferate, the concept of central planning and green energy rewarded, as the constitutionally enshrined meaningfulness of federalism retrogrades into a meaningless historical-remnant.   

 

On the international front Russia and China will enthusiastically extend their influence, allies will exhibit anxiety, Iran ecstatic, Israel apprehensive; and Canada is wondering if the pipeline will ever go through.   

 

The president and his disciples will immediately focus on the next election with the ambition of returning the House to Democratic control. They will continue overtly and in Argot to personally demonize the Republican Party and its members. Obama’s Deus ex Machina magic requires his coterie of devotees to control all branches of government. By the midterm election the president must establish the means to execute the progressives’ egalitarian entitlement state and their brand of authoritarian statism.

 

The plenipotentiary ambitions of the Statist contested against those persons of conservative principles and limited government will almost immediately evolve into an indignant balkiness of will. A spectacular reminiscent of a televised Mexican Lucha Libre wherein stories of hair-pulling, spitting, and eye-gouging dominate the news media.

But no matter who does what to whom, socialism, progressivism, authoritarian statism, or a status of egalitarian entitlement will not displace the present economic malaise with the antitheses. Governmental largeness will always fail to deliver fiscal success and abate freedom from the within and the without. Obama and his progressives will, at great cost to Americans, follow the path of the entire socialists and progressives of the past — they will fail to deliver.