What's The Point? Four Generations. Unhappy Unless Demonizing? Our Republic-On It's Last Legs? Another Rant.

To those who do not believe in God life is like an un-sharpened pencil - it has no point.

Four generations of my family women.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Most liberals are generally not happy unless they have something about which  to be sour. They seem  overwhelmed by the plight of the world and have so many causes that concern them.

I wish I could help them but I am too busy speaking out, writing, living each day one at a time and generally disagreeing with everything they profess to believe..

Maybe, one day,  I too will become more compassionate and will take to the streets carrying a multitude of signs expressing how sad I am to live in a world where everyone believes they have a right to express themselves without being shouted down, interrupted, demonized and hounded because their views are different. (See 1 and 1a  below)

And, I repeat. (See 1b below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Will our republic continue? (See 2 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Another rant. (See 3 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++
Dick
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1)Liberals Sour on the First Amendment

Claims that conservatives have ‘weaponized’ free speech are a hollow excuse.

By JONATHAN S. TOBIN

·         

·         

When in 1977 the American Civil Liberties Union defended the right of Nazis to march through a Jewish neighborhood in Skokie, Ill., the organization was lionized for its willingness to say that the principle of free speech was more important than the sensibilities of those who were offended by that demonstration. The ACLU took a similar position on campaign-finance laws, which it rightly saw as an attempt to silence the exact kind of expression — political speech — that the Founders were most anxious to protect.

No longer. An internal memo has revealed that the ACLU will stop standing up for the rights of those with whom its liberal donors disagree. And the group isn’t alone in changing its mind: After the Supreme Court’s conservative majority defended the rights of anti-abortion activists and civil-service workers in two separate cases, Justice Elena Kagan alleged that conservatives “were weaponizing the First Amendment.” The New York Times used the comment as the basis for a front-page story in its Sunday edition.

In recent years, the Court has defended the First Amendment in a variety of contexts, from campaign finance to religious expression. But, as the Times noted, while the libertarian position on speech used to be the liberal position, the willingness of conservatives to invoke the First Amendment on behalf of positions and policies that liberals dislike has soured the latter on the idea of free-speech absolutism. They see the individual rights they once zealously defended — when invoked by street protesters or pornographers — as harmful when invoked by corporations or devout religious believers. According to legal scholar Catherine McKinnon, the First Amendment has become the “sword” by which “racists” and “corporations buying elections” amplify and reinforce injustice.

Of course, while this is a departure for the ACLU, there’s nothing new about the Left in general opposing the concepts of tolerance and free speech. In his 1965 essay “Repressive Tolerance,” leftist philosopher Herbert Marcuse argued for stripping conservatives of the right to free speech and assembly. For a Marxist like Marcuse, tolerance should be extended only to those who oppose the mechanisms of liberal capitalist societies.

Marcuse’s ideas were highly influential among the New Left radicals of the 1960s, who would shut down universities and seek to silence their opponents in the name of their good intentions. His was an essentially totalitarian ideology in which left-wing ideologues who claim to speak for objective truth can punish and repress those considered unenlightened or sinful.

That such thinking is completely antithetical to the spirit of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is inarguable. It is true that no right, not even that of free speech, is absolute. But it is a bedrock principle of American democracy that the government exists in order to defend the constitutional rights of its citizens, not to act as a referee tasked with restricting unpopular or inconvenient speech.

The practice of “free speech for me but not for thee,” as the title of the classic work by Nat Hentoff put it, is a game that conservatives play as well. But if liberals have taken the lead, that is not so much a function of tactics as it is a commentary on the way they helped transform American society in the 20th century: They are no longer the objects of government pressure but are now exerting the force of federal power against their opponents. If Christian conservatives, pro-life groups, and critics of labor unions need civil-liberties lawyers these days, it is because liberals were able to pass laws that ignored or trampled on their rights.

But the notion that conservative advocacy of First Amendment rights is “weaponizing” or exploiting the Constitution sounds more like Marcuse than like liberal traditions of principled advocacy. In fact, it’s when constitutional rights are limited to political allies that they become weapons. As Justice Alito noted in his majority opinion backing the right of public-sector workers not to be compelled to contribute to unions, the ultimate basis for the decision was settled and neutral First Amendment law. The attempt by the dissenting justices to use the law to defend unions, which remain engines of Democratic-party fundraising and activism, against those whose right to opt out of dues was at stake, illustrated the way liberal jurisprudence has become the captive of liberal politics.

That’s why the debate about whether the First Amendment is for all or just those favored by liberals is at the heart of the upcoming battle to confirm Justice Anthony Kennedy’s replacement.

Religious conservatives stuck with Trump in 2016, despite any misgivings about his personal conduct and demeanor, because they hoped he would keep his promises to nominate judges who would defend their religious freedom. They were right to do so, as the appointment of Justice Neil Gorsuch and dozens of lower-court conservatives has bolstered support for the First Amendment.

With so many leading liberals — including the quartet on the high court — having effectively abandoned the First Amendment in many cases, Republicans must rally around Trump’s effort to sustain the current majority. And those on the left who are tempted to buy into to Marcuse-like arguments should remember that the worm always turns in politics. There may come a day when they will need the amendment’s protections again. If it is still there, it will be because conservatives have preserved it.

1a)

 

A humble history lesson for all of us!

 

Have you ever wondered what happened to the 56 men who signed the Declaration of  Independence ?  Five signers were captured by the British as traitors, and tortured before they died. Twelve had their homes ransacked and burned. Two lost their sons serving in the Revolutionary Army; another had two sons captured. Nine of the 56 fought and died from wounds or hardships of the Revolutionary War. They signed and they pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor. What kind of men were they? Twenty-four were lawyers and jurists. Eleven were merchants, nine were farmers and large plantation owners; men of means, well educated, but they signed the Declaration of Independence knowing full well that the penalty would be death if they were captured. Carter Braxton of Virginia, a wealthy planter and trader, saw his ships swept from the seas by the British Navy. He sold his home and properties to pay his debts, and died in rags. Thomas McKeam was so hounded by the British that he was forced to move his family almost constantly. He served in the Congress without pay, and his family was kept in hiding. His possessions were taken from him, and poverty was his reward. Vandals or soldiers looted the properties of Dillery, Hall, Clymer, Walton, Gwinnett, Heyward, Ruttledge, and Middleton. At the battle of  Yorktown , Thomas Nelson, Jr., noted that the British General Cornwallis had taken over the Nelson home for his headquarters. He quietly urged General George Washington to open fire. The home was destroyed, and Nelson died bankrupt. Francis Lewis had his home and properties destroyed. The enemy jailed his wife, and she died within a few months. John Hart was driven from his wife's bedside as she was dying. Their 13 children fled for their lives. His fields and his gristmill were laid to waste. For more than a year he lived in forests and caves, returning home to find his wife dead and his children vanished. So, take a few minutes while enjoying your 4th of July holiday and silently thank these patriots. It's not much to ask for the price they paid. Remember: freedom is never free! patriotism is NOT a sin, and the Fourth of July  Was more than beer, picnics, baseball games and even memos

1b)I hope when my three youngest grand children and only great grandchild grow up they will not become liberal fascists.

I hope they will allow others to express their thoughts, be tolerant and treat others as they might wish they be treated, ie. with civility.

I hope they will realize taking a test that challenges your memory is not education.

I hope they will not become hypocrites.

I hope they will understand  the Constitution has served us well as has Capitalism.

I hope they will understand the first responsibility of any president is to protect and defend the citizens and that a nation unwilling to protect it's borders is insane.

I hope they will use sound reasoning, not emotion when engaging in arguments/discussions.

I hope they will realize being an American carries special meaning and responsibilities and is worth defending if called upon.

I hope they will not participate in mindless parades and support causes because being part of the crowd has more appeal than the merit of the cause.

I hope they will not bully and intimidate in order to have their way because they believe breaking the law carries no consequence. (In other words, don't be an Obama and Hillary liberal.)

I hope they will be genuine and not enamored with the vapid values of Hollywood and those who embrace the warped enticing, siren song of PC'ism.

I hope they will realize a good book provides more of a high than pot and is far safer

I hope they will work hard and not expect the government to take care of their needs or go in debt thereby, leaving the next generation's freedoms constrained as my generation has done.

I hope they will be informed citizens and reject radical solutions because they are popular.

I hope they will come to realize there is something beyond self and will not mock those who have a genuine faith.

I hope they will appreciate the sacrifices others make/made so they can enjoy their own life and freedoms.

I hope they will speak out and never hold back about those things that matter most and always be willing to fight for the legitimate rights of all fellow citizens.

I hope they will live a life of moderation, save for their own future and understand the responsibilities of what it means to be a good,informed and participating citizen.

I hope for  all of the above and more because liberalism has lost its traditional meaning and no longer has any valid appeal. Liberalism has come to be defined by the radical left.  It is associated with behaviour and thinking I reject as they should.

I will not live to see them reach maturity but I take comfort in the fact their parents are good role models even though societal trends are frightening.

Stand against the fascist tide parading under the name tag of liberalism and you will be well rewarded.

When liberals are backed into a corner they come our swinging with "swastika" metaphors. I submit when Obama used the IRS, a government agency, to crush free speech by conservative organizations he was following in the path of Hitler. When Obama's attorney general lied about The Fast and Furious episode that was a cover up no less disgusting than those employed by Himmler. When Hillary and the DNC paid to have a false dossier given to the FBI which then used same to obtain a FISA Warrant in order to spy on the opposition party's candidate that was as despicable as anything Goering ever attempted.

The basic difference seems when Democrats break laws in pursuit of elections, when Democrats smear opponents, when Democrats engage in weaponization and character assassination it is acceptable behaviour and they know the mass media will either ignore and/or cover for them by manipulating facts.

Then, those of their persuasion feel justified in shooting Republicans engaged in a baseball practice, restaurateurs feel justified in asking those whose politics differ to leave their public establishment, their friends in Hollywood willingly/openly attack children of the president and  smear his wife because she has the courage to stand up and reject their hate.  If these are the acts of our new America, and Democrats and liberals  then it is not I who is sick and heartless unless the world is upside down

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2)

The Culture That Sustains America’s Constitution

Without it, checks and balances are barricades of foam and counterweights of butterfly’s breath.

Joseph Tartakovsky

Since 1789 the average life span of national constitutions world-wide has been 19 years, according to scholars at the University of Chicago. Meanwhile, “We the People of the United States” are now well into the third century under our Constitution. We’ve lived under the same written charter longer than any people on earth. We’ve had regular federal elections every two years, uninterrupted even by the Civil War.

Yet America’s Founders had serious doubts about the durability of their “experiment.” Alexander Hamilton, in an 1802 letter to Gouverneur Morris, wondered why he had wasted his best years defending our “frail and worthless” charter. In 1832 Chief Justice John Marshall, near the end of his 34-year tenure, lamented in private correspondence that “our Constitution cannot last.”

You might think America’s track record in the subsequent 200 years would inspire greater confidence. Yet many people today feel, as they have after many fraught elections, that the president is either a savior or the harbinger of doom. So it’s worth reflecting on why the Constitution has endured.

There is, first, its text: It is rigid enough to restrain excesses, yet flexible enough to accommodate innovations. It is so terse that you could fold it into a paper airplane (though the guards at the National Archives would prefer you didn’t). It presumes that both governors and the governed will act mostly responsibly. But as Robert H. Jackson, a future Supreme Court justice, explained in 1937: “Checks and balances work as effectively on spite, jealousy or personal ambition as they do on patriotism or principle.”

The Framers also created the world’s first constitution to institutionalize the principle of human equality. Consider that it was an immigrant who put the words “We the People” into the Constitution. He was James Wilson, the brilliant but forgotten Scottish-born founder who taught that under monarchy, in the “attempt to make one person more than man, millions must be made less.”

Popular rule had become more than a slogan. Alexis de Tocqueville visited in 1831 from France, where the crowned heads at Versailles dared not mingle with their people. He was astonished to meet state governors who had kept their day jobs as farmers. Later Tocqueville visited Andrew Jackson in the White House, where the president himself, with no servant in sight, served glasses of Madeira.

America’s progress in respecting the real implications of equality has at times been slow, even glacial, especially with regard to race. As early as 1876, black fathers in Kansas sought to have their children admitted to schools on equal terms with white children. Yet Brown v. Board of Education would not come for another 78 years. The truth that justice will be forever approximated but never achieved is reflected in the paradoxical words of the Constitution’s preamble: the aim of forming a “more perfect” union.

That impossibly shrewd phrase suggests that Americans have a miraculous thing that we must nevertheless strive to make better. In the 1940s, we interned Japanese-Americans out of misbegotten wartime racial hysteria. But we also apologized for it in a 1998 law that was co-sponsored by then-Rep. Norman Mineta. As a child, Mr. Mineta had been taken to an internment camp in Wyoming. He went on to serve 20 years in the House and five years as secretary of transportation.

“Every banana republic has a Bill of Rights,” Justice Antonin Scalia told a Senate committee in 2011. Written guarantees are meaningless without a culture to sustain them. Russia’s Constitution purports to secure the freedoms of speech and press, but Muscovites shrugged in 2001 when Vladimir Putin seized the last independent television network. Imagine if the White House swallowed up Fox News, CNN and MSNBC, one after another. Americans may bicker over “fake news,” but an attempt at censorship like that would unite us in virtuous rage.

Every American generation has a vocal minority that considers itself doomed to live in an age of constitutional degeneracy. The supposed fall from purity began about 600 days into the Constitution’s life, when the Virginia Legislature, in November 1790, denounced George Washington’s financial policies as constitutionally blasphemous. But Americans chose to cannonade each other with pamphlets, not artillery. And so the orderly transitions of power went on, one after another, like a never-ending football game in which the parties eternally gain and lose yardage.

Constitutionalism is not a mere institutional form but a culture—a set of sentiments, habits and assumptions, a permeating spirit that animates an otherwise lifeless paper scheme. Without this instinctive loyalty, the Constitution’s checks and balances are barricades of foam and counterweights of butterfly’s breath. It is not in having a constitution that our strength lies, but in cherishing it. So long as we keep the faith, our Constitution will be displaced no sooner than an ant tips over the Statue of Liberty.

Mr. Tartakovsky is author of “The Lives of the Constitution: Ten Exceptional Minds that Shaped America’s Supreme Law” and a former deputy solicitor general of Nevada.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3) For all the drama and angst, the S&P ended the quarter up, and up 1.67% for the YTD. If you think about all that occurred that the press and talking heads said would tank the markets, it did not happen. For all the constant stories in the media that Trump is the most unpopular president ever, his approval is higher than Obama at the same point, and almost at 50%. My point is one I often raise- be careful what you believe, and rarely believe the mainstream media or pundits forecasting this or that disaster, or financial downdraft.  A lot of talking heads just do that to get on TV, or because it is their job to pontificate, and they hope if they are right about one big thing, it will enhance their career and earnings. Wall St is filled with  one trick ponies. However, the US economy is as good as it has been for decades, or maybe as good as ever, and will stay that way for the rest of the year, and maybe still be good into next year despite tariffs, etc.

Now with the recent decisions of the Court and the Kennedy replacement, reporters and talking heads in the media make it sound as though America is about to end democracy, gays are going back in the closet, and life as we knew it is ended. The left and many in the media have literally lost their minds. If you listen to CNN, NBC, ABC or read some of the papers, you will think you need to leave the planet. Unfortunately this is going to lead to violence from the nuts who believe this crap. The secret service must be working overtime to try to protect the cabinet and Trump. This is the result of what has been the norm on campuses for several years, and the false left wing reporting in much of the media that stirs this frenzy. Now it is dangerous.

Oil has risen a lot the past week or so due mainly to Iran sanctions. Just wait. The whole premise of the Saudi inspired production increase was because many countries could not afford oil at these levels with the dollar so high, and the high prices were sparking unrest in some countries. It is my contention that the Saudis and Russia, combined with the US, will start to pump much more oil very quickly to alleviate this critical issue. The Saudis have just agreed to add 2 million barrels a day, well beyond what they agreed to with OPEC, and it would not be surprising if they add even more if they can pump more. If I were an oil trader, I am not, I would short oil at this level. Oil prices will decline from here. Also keep in mind, the US cost to produce is still far lower (depending on the producer and location of the well it is somewhere in the range of $40) than the WTI prices, so as prices rise, so will US production and exports. The producers can, and will, pay up for workers, and new pipelines will be rushed to completion. Luckily, Trump is not Obama, and the government will do whatever it can to help increase US production, pipelines and export. It just takes time to get online. The world simply cannot bear the higher prices with the high US dollar. Prices will decline

The trade battle will  heat up to fever pitch in July. We will see who blinks. It will not be Trump. The entire EU political system and ability to remain a unified bloc is on the line over refugees according to Merkel’s latest comments. She actually said that. She is very stable and careful, so this was not an idle Trump type throwaway line.  The next week or so will determine if Merkel stays, and if the EU starts to disintegrate into warring factions. The EU is sinking further into trouble politically and economically, and quickly. US tariffs will not be bearable for them right now, especially on German autos. I am sure the Trump administration knows exactly where the pressure points are, and German cars is huge. While Merkel is trying to save her government, Trump is threatening to crush her main industry.  Germany cannot withstand the pressure which will come. Mexico and NAFTA will have to wait for  the new president of Mexico to sit with Trump and cut a deal. Canada can announce whatever tariffs or trade restrictions it wishes, but they lose in the end. Meantime, the US GDP number may be over 4% and rising. Unemployment may be headed to 3.6% during the summer. Or lower. It might hit an all-time historic low this year.

Black unemployment may be headed below 5.5%. That would be a huge thing for blacks. 5.5% used to considered full employment for whites. That could change blacks voting patterns. The Dems only retort is Waters saying harass people and impeach Trump, and the Dems message is- raise taxes, open borders, which is a direct threat to blacks with low skill jobs, and get rid of ICE-not what Latinos living near MS 13 want to hear. At the same time celebs curse Trump publicly. None of that sells in the heartland, or the south. The Dems are so far off the chart now, they make Obama look center right. The further the Dems go left, the higher Trump’s approval has gone, the better chance the R’s keep control, and the Dems are just getting going over the Supreme Court and ICE. All they need is one nut taking Waters or Michael Moore pushing harassment too far, and some Republican getting shot, and it is all over for the Dems and the left. They just arrested a guy who actually threatened to kill the head of the FCC over net neutrality, so one day it is going to really be tried.

Tax reform and deregulation are working exactly as predicted by Cohn and Trump, or better. GDP growth is maybe over 4% in Q2, and unemployment is near an all-time low.  Tax revenue is far surpassing CBO forecasts. If GDP growth stays over 4%, the deficit flat lines or reduces. If that happens before November, the Dems are cooked. Every reason they gave for voting no on taxes will have proven to be lies, and their platform is to raise taxes. CBO projections are again way off base. Only 40% of tax savings by companies goes to higher dividends and buybacks. The rest is going to higher wages, benefits and capital expenditure. Most importantly, it is being spent, which gives a huge boost to the economy no matter where it goes. The one real issue is China, and how that progresses. China’s economy is starting to hurt now, and there are no major tariffs in place yet other than metals. China just released over $100 billion of funds to the banks to keep them solvent. China has real problems right now. A trade war will really hurt them. I have a feeling Xi is pushing Kim to slow walk denuke so he can try to use N Korea as a bargaining chip on trade and IP. I don’t think Trump will fall for that.

The Dems and media are predicting the end of Roe, and the end of gay rights, and to try to stir up a huge noise over this, thinking they can influence the Senate vote of Collins and Murkowski. They are already claiming the world will end, and there will be a reversal of Roe. My view- that will never happen. While I know some of you hope it will happen, reality is, Roberts will never vote for that, and the political blowback would be horrendous. It takes a lot to overturn a 50 year precedent, and Roberts is unlikely to go along. Trump is not going to appoint anyone who has ever indicated in any writing, or public statement, that life begins at conception, and therefore there can be no abortion, ever. That would be politically stupid of Trump, as it would then just feed the frenzy in the media, and he loses Collins and Murkowski, and maybe Flake. Whatever some judges might say about the technical legal basis for the Roe decision, reversal is simply not happening. The court is politically aware, despite us thinking it is objective. Same for gay rights. The guy at the Federalist who picked the list of judge candidates, and who knows more about the candidates than anyone, said on TV the other night, the court will not even consider a Roe overturn. He was very careful in making the list to be sensitive to the Roe issue, so you can be certain there is nobody on the list who is clearly on record against Roe in a way anyone can latch on to. You can be certain the candidate will never give his position on abortion in hearings, and has nothing in his record that says his position. He will do a Gorsuch- just talk about adhering to a strict interpretation of the constitution, and refuse to answer about abortion or gay rights.  There will be many questions about the baker and florist cases on religious rights. Assume the candidate will defer saying he has not been the judge  hearing the cases so cannot comment. Expect this issue to be one that gets a lot of attention because it will possibly get heard again in a year or two by the court, and it touches all sorts of very emotional issues on both sides. This is going to make Bork and Thomas look like a warm up. It is going to be the ugliest nomination process in history. Just keep in mind, almost no Republican wanted Sotomayor, but they did not make her a cause celeb. They allowed it to go through. By letting the Dems and press rage against whoever he appoints, that will just highly motivate Trump’s base, and further insure a Republican Congress in November. The left will be equally motivated, so they can try to stop the next appointment when Ginsberg dies, but I am betting the right gets the extra voters out in key states over this. I assume McConnell is having the vote before the election so he can pressure Manchin and Heitkamp to vote yes. They vote no they lose. The appointing of judges was the biggest issue that got Trump elected according to post election polls. The rage of the Dems and press over this appointment will likely decide the November election.

The misinformation about separated families is getting ridiculous, but typical of the media.  Border patrol agents point out that some of the so called “parents” are really drug cartel dealers who pose as parents to come across the border and get admitted, and when the kids are questioned, they have no idea who the “parent” is. Other “parents” are people trying to get in, but who borrowed the kid to make themselves look acceptable. There is a massive scam going on at the border and the fools demonstrating have no clue about the true situation. In addition, 85% of the kids in shelters are ones who were abandoned by their own parents and sent north with cartel smugglers. With no ICE and no border controls as the Dems bill proposes, there will be a flood of abandoned kids just like we had under Obama. Where are the demonstrations about that. Those 10,000 kids were separated from their parents by their parents, not by ICE or Trump. The US detention centers are the best living situation those kids have ever had in some cases. Reuniting those 10,000 kids with their parents means deporting them back home to parents who sent them away to be on their own. Is that what the demonstrators are demanding? Ask the Latinos in Brentwood Long Island if they feel safer now that ICE has cleaned up MS 13 in their town after so many kids were murdered, or if they want to get rid of ICE and go back to murders of their kids. The left has become insane, and the demonstrators are a bunch of mice following the pied piper of misinformation and gross misrepresentation.  The EU has just instituted a close duplicate of the Trump zero tolerance policy. Nobody gets into the EU from now on -they go to – guess where- detention camps as of this week, and then get shipped home. And that is the EU, and Merkel went along. In the EU, the demonstrations and politicians were demonstrating AGAINST immigrants, and for closing the open borders.  The EU tried open borders and no enforcement under Merkel, for three years, and it is a huge disaster. Crime is much higher in places like Stockholm that was once safe. Schools are overrun in some towns. Do you think the fools in the US might look at a real life example of open borders and no ICE, and see reality. And in the EU they are not faced with the added problems of drug cartels and MS 13.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++