What if? Part 1

Some talking-heads and pundits on the right are spending a lot of time, energy and ink discussing the possibility of a civil war happening in America and what would be the cause or causes. They seem to think there would be two triggering events. One of the reasons would be the impeachment of the president. I suppose by impeachment they mean a guilty finding and removal from office.

The democrats and their allies in the media have been beating the impeachment drum for a considerable length of time. Some have been beating this drum since election night 2016. The democrat leadership would not venture into these waters until public opinion showed support for impeachment. According to the polls the pendulum swung in favor of impeachment. We now have an impeachment inquiry in the House. A word about polls and polling data. I fail to understand why politicians from either party still trust and rely on polls, given that most all polls had the democrat nominee handily winning the 2016 presidential election. Yet they still site poll results.

The democrats in Congress have pretty much painted themselves into a corner over impeachment of the President. Even if they at some point conclude that they have made a poor choice there is no way they can not bring the articles of impeachment and still manage to save face. They have already crossed the Rubicon on this.

At this point most on the right think and indeed believe that there is no way the Senate will vote to remove the President. You will notice that I said most on the right. I personally do not place that much confidence or trust in the republicans in the Senate. More than one of them wanted to be President and some may be harboring a grudge, after all some unkind words were exchanged during the republican primaries and since. Jealousy and revenge have driven many to extremes.

There is also this to note. The democrat leadership in the House did not go forward until the polls had shown that the pendulum had swung in favor of impeachment. Why the wait? Some democrats believe they already have enough evidence to have the vote. The word ironclad came up the other day, the House would not proceed until there was an ironclad case. So I pulled out Webster’s and looked up the word ironclad, having no obvious weakness. I think they now wait for enough republican support in the Senate to remove the President, there may also be one or two democrat hold-outs.

Let’s say the House charges and the Senate convicts. The President is removed. Will this trigger the civil war predicted by the talking-heads and pundits? Think about it. How often and how many times have the republicans in Congress(House and Senate)disappointed the voters? A provision in the Constitution would have been followed. I do not think this would trigger a civil war, however some isolated violence could possibly break out. It would however guarantee one thing, there would never be another republican elected to a national office, which would lead to total democrat control which would lead to a socialist state.

What if the talking-heads and pundits from the first paragraph have it exactly backwards? Would the President not being impeached lead to civil war, started by the left.

Let’s say that the House, for whatever reason, does not introduce and vote on the articles of impeachment. Many if not most on the left fully expect the House to follow through on impeachment. They will at the very minimum be severely ticked off if the democrat controlled House fails them. How will they react?

The House could charge and the Senate could acquit. Again the leftists will be mightily ticked. How will the leftists react?

It was not the right that were rioting, burning and breaking things. From what I have seen the right, with very few exceptions, has been remarkably restrained for years. The left not so much.

At any rate I am glad I am not in a planning and operations section in any government agency. They should be already deep in the planning of a response.

By choice or force?

The leftists are going all out with their plan to disarm the peaceful law-abiding citizens of this Republic. Quite sure by now everyone, not living under a rock, has seen the clip of the 2020 presidential hopeful saying “Hell yes, we are going to take your AR-15, your AK-47”. Some in his political party have tried to distance themselves from his statement. I do have to wonder if it is the message they are against or the delivery. Did he say openly what most leftists talk/dream about privately? They might not be able to get the toothpaste back in the tube.

When he used the word “We” he meant the government. So what he actually said was, “Hell yes, the government is going to take your AR-15, your AK-47.

The following comes from the Patrick Henry speech “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death” 23March1775.
I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past.

The following excerpt comes from The Declaration of Arms also known as the Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms, 06July1775
The inhabitants of Boston being confined within that town by the General, their Governor, and having, in order to procure their dismission, entered into a treaty with him, it was stipulated that the said inhabitants, having deposited their arms with their own magistrates, should have liberty to depart, taking with them their other effects. They accordingly delivered up their arms, but in open violation of honor, in defiance of the obligation of treaties, which even savage nations esteemed sacred, the Governor ordered the arms deposited as aforesaid, that they might be preserved for their owners, to be seized by a body of soldiers; detained the greatest part of the inhabitants in the town, and compelled the few who were permitted to retire to leave their most valuable effects behind.

There is something to note from the excerpt above The word arms is used twice, the word muskets is nowhere to be found.

The citizens of Boston trusted that the General, their Governor, would honor his word(treaty). They were sadly mistaken. Once disarmed they had no means to resist what was coming.

They could have, I suppose, asked or even begged for the return of their arms so they could defend themselves or at least force the General, their Governor, to honor his word. Do you think that a population that had been disarmed would be rearmed?

What happened in Boston that day in April 1775 was perhaps the first recorded example of a voluntary buy-back scheme. The price the government would pay for the voluntary surrender of arms by the citizens was the freedom to depart Boston and with them take the remainder of their possessions.

They traded one thing to gain another and wound up with neither and nothing. Seems like Benjamin Franklin had a quote on that matter. He had another, “Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you”.

There was a quote attributed to Edmond Burke, “Those who don’t know history are destined to repeat it”(the word doomed is sometimes used in place of destined). There is another old adage that fits, “History is a guide post not a hitching post”. History is chock full of examples of what has happened in countries where and when the population, the peaceful law-abiding population, is disarmed. Roundups and exterminations.

It was once said that one man with a gun can control one hundred without guns. If that is true then you just have to do simple math to figure out where this leads, if one can control one hundred, than ten can control a thousand, one hundred can control ten thousand and so on.

The gun control debate is just a part of the overall control issue. Gun control is not about the elimination of arms, it is about controlling who is armed.

Some in government and some wanting to be in government are more than willing to use the force of government to disarm the peaceful law-abiding citizens. Some politicians, the various gun control groups and their allies in the media tell us how much safer we will be if we disarm.

There are only two ways that an armed civilian population can be disarmed.
Choice.
Force.

Can peaceful law-abiding citizens(civilians)trust the government if only the government is armed.

History says no.

A possible solution

There is some common ground on mass shootings, both sides want them to end. Unfortunately that is all the two sides have in common.

I have a possible solution, but it is going to take cooperation, a lot of cooperation, from both sides of the gun issue, and indeed their allies. Both sides will actually have to sit down and have a civil debate. I know this is asking a lot.

First, a little background on how I came up with this. As I was looking through my news feed I came across something that was a very bad idea, but it did open some interesting ideas for a solution. Actually solutions for many things.

I will sum up the article, you can find it on your own and read the whole thing.

The leader of a large labor union is threatening to boycott the largest retailer in the country, the boycott centers around two demands.
1. Stop selling guns.
2. Stop making political contributions to politicians who oppose gun control.
The union leader claims to have 1.7 million members. The “leader” also has a few other suggestions for the retailer in a letter written to the CEO, in this letter the “leader” calls on the company to do its part to help build a future with fewer guns and safer communities and also urges the retailer to fund buyback programs and for the CEO to create a summit with other CEOs to discuss ways corporate America can address rising gun violence.

My first thought as I was reading this article was here is yet another leftist threating to boycott a retailer because of what they sell, they sell guns and ammunition and just about everything a person could use or want. Worse using her position as the leader of a large labor union to do it, a loss or potential loss of 1.7 million customers could be catastrophic. But would the loss of 1.7 million out of perhaps 100 million be all that much of a loss? The retailer would just adjust for the loss of revenue by reducing the workforce. Then I reread the article and thought wait a minute this lady might be onto something and came up with many solutions for many problems.

Campaign contributions. The meat and potatoes of politicians, but a lot of that money is wasted as only one is going to win election or reelection. That means that the money given to and then used by the loser just goes up in smoke. The money left over(not spent/wasted)win or lose goes into their “war chest”. On a side note I watched all four of the democrat debates and many of them said that they needed to get the “dark” money out of politics. Here is a sure way that none of that money is wasted and has the side benefit of proving that you believe in your position.

For the gun control groups rather than wasting that money on politicians take that money and partner with law-enforcement and institute a voluntary buyback program. Actually buyback is impossible since they never bought it from you to begin with, it would be a turn in program, a turn in for cash. People could turn in(sell)magazines, parts, accessories and even complete firearms of their own free will. Do make sure that the people in your group can pass a background check before they take constructive possession of the firearms being turned in for cash, would not want any one to break the law. And please, please take a safety course for your safety and the safety of others.

For the pro gun groups do not waste that money on politicians(and possibly end up being disappointed)instead set up firearms safety courses, hunters safety courses, weapons training, open ranges and encourage shooting sports. Your services would be needed as the ones operating the turn in sites would need training and a safety class or two.

A little bonus in this section. For the labor unions that have taken a stance one way or the other on the issue of guns, stop wasting your money on politicians. Chip in with your dollars and support one of the above listed causes. Take away those labor union donations and you will see how much the politicians really care about you or your union. For the Hollywood types that have made millions on shoot’em up movies but are in the gun control camp, take the money you have made on those movies and put it, all of it, in the turn in pile. Stop being a hypocrite. For the politicians that support the buyback scheme put some of your fortune in that pile as well. I could go on with this but I reckon you get the picture.

If a politician wants to seek higher office he/she should pay their own way.

If you take away the donations to campaigns from the gun control and gun rights groups you would then find out the true position of your particular politician or political party when it comes to guns or any other issue. Some of you might be quite surprised.

You see this one act can bring about positive results.
First it will get all of the “dark” money out of politics. This may bring about other positives as well. If the politicians no longer receive special interest money they will have no need to subsidize those special interests. The lobbyists would leave town.
Second a “buyback” program that is not tax-payer funded.

Keeping firearms out of the wrong hands. By using the term “the wrong hands” I suppose they mean the criminal element. Again a simple solution. Congress could pass a law and send it to the president to sign. The law should simply say: Effective this very second, all gang leaders and members, drug dealers and convicted felons will surrender all fire arms to law-enforcement without compensation. Failure to comply with this law will result in legal penalty(prison and/or fine).

You can here them now, running to surrender their firearms.

Came across another article where a mental health professional of some importance in that article he noted “there is little correlation between mental illness and violent killings”. Study after study shows that this is not the case. More often the reverse is true, they are victims not perpetrators.

Also in the article is this; Racism, Hate and White Supremacy are not diagnosable mental illnesses.

Find the full article, read it.

Wait, Hold the phone, the latest reports are that the republicans are coming to the table to talk, talk gun control. Looks like there is an “appetite” for some of your schemes and demands but you will have to wait until September to find out how much appetite they have. You might even hook them like a hungry catfish.

Just wondering

With all or most of the democrat hopefuls signing onto the green new deal, I was just wondering if they will be taking the train to their campaign events. No why not? Aint one of the plans in this farce to do away with air travel? I mean after all the leader of this environmental cult said that we only have 12 years to save the planet. We must take radical steps now or it will be too late, she says. If it was all that important they should step up now, lead by example. Oh yeah leave your car behind, as another part of this is to get cars off the road. Ride the train, when you get to a passenger terminal get off the train and walk the rest of the way to your event. Show the rest of us how much you want to commit to stop using fossil fuels.

No these people are not going to take the train, they will instead continue to use jets to continue their campaigning. Nor will they give up travel by car. No they will instead keep using fossil fuels while preaching to the rest of us we must give up the use of fossil fuels. Sort of like the last group of environmental wackos preaching to us that we were destroying the planet, while going to their environmental summits in passenger jets or in some cases private jets. Yep, they too were preaching that we have to change our habits.

If you take the White House on the promise of this green new deal will you commit right now to getting rid of the fleet of Presidential Aircraft? Will you commit right now to getting rid of all the aircraft used by diplomats, agency heads and the rest right now if you win?

I did not think so.

So just when does this 12 year doomsday clock start ticking? 2020? 2032? Maybe never? They gave up on their 10 and 5 year clocks. Back when I was in elementary school(1960’s)they said that a new ice age was coming. The new ice age never arrived.

As for this high-speed rail system, it is over a one hour drive for me just to get to the nearest Amtrak station. If I even wanted to take a train, which I do not, I would have to walk for hours if not days if I were deprived of my truck. I might also point out that much of the land here in North Central Florida and indeed this Republic is not suitable for train tracks of any type let alone high-speed rail.

So you want everybody that wants a job to have a good paying government job. Looks like your plan blasts right through socialism and goes to full-blown communism. For every one to have a government job then the government would have to control everything, the means of production all the way to the means of distribution. You also want them to be union jobs. Why union jobs? Could that be a part of you plan because you green new deal will cost a lot of union jobs? Much of the auto manufacturing industry as well as the airline industry are good union dues paying members. You still must protect the unions.

Okay so you want to save the planet. Could you please tell me what providing a free college education to all has to do with saving the planet? Like wise could you tell me what free health care(Medicare for all)has to do with saving the planet? This guaranteed wage thing needs also to be explained.

Someone once said “Green is the new Red”. Some one also said “A communist is just an impatient socialist”.

Some, if not most, on your side claim that President Trump and the GOP are out of touch with the citizens of this nation and the values of this Republic. You, I dare say, are out of touch with reality.

Again I ask this, Is it too late for a divorce.

DEO VINDICE

The American tragedy

“As nations can not be rewarded or punished in the next world they must be in this. By an inevitable chain of causes and effects providence punishes national sins, by national calamities”. Colonel Mason.

The murder of the unborn, abortion(legalized murder). Day by day the leftist governors, law makers and indeed leftist states are trying to out do the other when it comes to the murder of the unborn. Some states are now at the point of sanctioning abortion up to and including the delivery date, some are even okay with this murder to the point of dilation. At what point will the leftists be okay with this continuing spree of murder including the point where the child was born alive and then murdered?

I might point out that those cheering on this murder spree were actually born. Absolute hypocrisy, but that is one thing the left is good at. Another thing they are good at is choosing the language of the argument.

They call it abortion, so we call it abortion. No it is murder, premeditated with malice in the heart. They divide the pregnancy into trimesters, we dutifully use their language in the argument. Their language does no more than to dehumanize a human being. And just why do we buy into words like viability when it comes to a child, already born or not. We need to change our language.

I have yet to ask and expectant mother how far along she is and have her to answer which trimester she is in, she will instead answer with how many weeks or months along she is. The same when I ask an expectant mother when her due date is she will answer in how many days, weeks or months, never have I had an expectant mother to answer when the third trimester is over.

They call it pro-choice, a woman’s right to choose. They say that a woman should have control over her reproductive organs. It has nothing to do with choice or control of reproductive organs it instead has everything to do with legalized murder. Murder sanctioned and allowed by government, performed by supposed health care professionals and in some cases sadly supported by the church(small c)

We need to call it what it is, it is pro-murder. If one does want to get pregnant then she should not engage in activities where she is likely to get pregnant. There is more than just the woman’s choice to consider, there is also the child’s choice, but the child is never asked or consulted in the matter.

The left is about providing safe spaces, where one can feel safe. The Good Lord provided the safest place possible, the mother’s womb. Yet it is in the womb where a child faces the greatest danger. Some have estimated that upwards of 60,000,000 children in America alone have been murdered in the womb. Do you realize that number is 6 times the number of murders the Third Reich reportedly committed?

It is this very same crowd that comes out with their gun control rhetoric when ever there is a mass shooting(murder), especially when it is a school shooting. What language do they use? They say these measures must be undertaken to protect the most vulnerable in our society. It appears to me that the most vulnerable in our society is the unborn. They have no place where they can hide, no closet to hide in, no door to get behind and lock. The unborn has nowhere to run to avoid the forceps coming to crush the life out of them, or what ever implement the murderer, abortion provider they call them, chooses to use in the murder. Does the mother or the murderer hear the child scream as the murder is taking place? Can the mother feel the child as he or she struggles to stay alive? Can the mother feel the life leaving her still unborn child? Can the women in the waiting rooms at the murder mills hear the screams of the children being murdered in the womb while they await their turn to go in and have their child murdered? Would a child in the womb, if he or she had the means, fight off the attack or the attacker? The current thinking lists the following actions when attacked, Run, Hide, Fight, the child in the womb can do none of these. You see the child in the womb really is the most vulnerable, they count on the mother to protect them. Little does the child know that the mother is part of a conspiracy to murder.

It is this very same crowd that seeks to eliminate the death penalty. I guess it is, in their minds, being too much of a hypocrite to take the life of one who did the same thing as they do. They are unwilling to carry out the sentence, death sentence, of one found guilty of a crime, a capital crime mind you. At the same time they invoke and carry out the death penalty on one which has committed no crime, capital or otherwise. Has being conceived now become a crime, a capital crime? They call the death penalty inhumane while at the same time consider abortion(murder)humane treatment of a child. They worry themselves that a criminal condemned to death may experience some pain or discomfort as the sentence is carried out, They do not consider the pain or discomfort the victim may have experienced. Nor do they consider the pain or discomfort of a child experiences while being murdered in the womb.

Now we have a democrat congressman claiming that the right to be safe trumps the right to bear arms. He claims that the new congress is putting the right to be safe over any other rights possessed by Americans. https://thedaleygator.com/2019/02/02/rep-eric-swalwell-d-marxifornia-your-marxist-moron-of-the-day/

I see no democrat proposing legislation guaranteeing the safety of a child still in womb, they instead focus on depriving citizens of their rights.

I do have to wonder which will be the first state to release those convicted of murder under the premise that they were only late-term abortion providers. The left trying to out left the left.

God help us.

DEO VINDICE

Well that is over

Election 2018 is over and in the history books, save for a few places. The republicans managed to lose the House but made some gains in the Senate. President Trump is still President Trump. Congratulations to Governor-elect DeSantis and Lt. Governor-elect Nunez. Still waiting on the Senate race to be settled.

Today the political strategists will be out trying to find out what went wrong so they can explain how they lost, especially those that thought the race was in or should have been in the bag.

Many a pundit and talking head had claimed this election would be a referendum on President Trump. They claimed his “rhetoric” was dividing the nation and he was himself a threat to the Constitution.

Last night was in all actuality a referendum on Congress. I would think that we conservatives know good and well why the republicans lost control of the House, and it aint President Trump or demographics. I personally was surprised by the gains in the Senate. I think the democrat senators sealed their fate during the circus that was the Supreme Court nominee confirmation hearing and votes. Some of their antics before, during and after the vote looks to have taken their toll.

The voters have chosen a left of center House and a right of center Senate, looks as though they are putting both parties on notice. It is much easier to change the House than it is to change the Senate. A wrong choice in the house can be fixed in two years. The country as a whole is not ready to go left, some states yes, the country no. As to both parties be put on “notice”, I believe the message they, those in Congress, should get from the results of this election is “it is time, past time, to get your feces together”.

So now we have a divided Congress, a democrat controlled House and a republican controlled Senate. What will come of that divided Congress? Both parties call for bi-partisanship, reaching across the aisle. Will we have bi-partisan cooperation or obstruction? We will know that answer in January.

The left of center House still has their own agenda to pursue, and pursue it they will. They will try to attach their agenda to must pass bills, after all Congress holds the purse strings. They will not give up on their gun control agenda, they could attach some of their so-called commonsense gun control measures to other legislation like funding for the wall. In order to get some funding for the wall some gun rights would have to be given up. They could attach citizenship guarantees for DACA to military funding. No citizenship no money. How many government shut-downs will we be threatened with, and how many will we have to endure? Will we be held hostage by our own government? How obstinate will they be before the new congress convenes?

You see my friends we aint out of the woods yet.

Actually it aint over, it is never over, it is just a lull. The campaigning will begin again in January, testing the waters began some time back. Future presidential hopefuls heading out to Iowa, New Hampshire and several other key states and events giving speeches. Hoping to become the next “rock star” of their party.

Well at least my mailbox will get a break.

DEO VINDICE