Let’s Have a Revolution

I think we need a Revolution just to re-establish the Constitutional order. I’m sure if our Amazona saw this – via Brit Hume – she’d have blown a gasket:

This from the article: “he (Vindman) was deeply troubled by what he interpreted as an attempt by the president to subvert U.S. foreign policy…” There is a huge fallacy in this. Anyone know what it is?

The fallacy is that a President can subvert US foreign policy, of course. Per the Constitution, American foreign policy is whatever the President says it is: good, bad or indifferent. Congress has inputs in that they must agree to pay the monetary cost of the President’s policy and the Senate must ratify any treaties the President makes in pursuit of Administration policy…but the President decides what it is. If the President wakes up tomorrow morning and decides that our foreign policy is to insist that foreigners hop on one foot when negotiating with us, then that is the foreign policy of the United States, the end. And it can only be subverted if someone other than the President tries to change policy.

But this is where we are in 2019 – where we have bureaucrats claiming they run the show and large swaths of American political power agreeing with that assertion. We’ve lost all concept of what the Rule of Law is and that has made our Constitution, functionally, a dead letter. It is only enforced, at the moment, on whim…but we can’t remain free (or even civilized) like that. We have to get back to strict enforcement of the law, or we’re doomed. And if we can’t get that via Trump (mostly by appointing judges) then we are going to have to alter or abolish our current government and start all over again.

82 thoughts on “Let’s Have a Revolution

  1. Cluster November 6, 2019 / 3:55 pm

    Context is everything right? Well I just heard on MSNBC that “Trump is having a rough week after being wiped out in KY yesterday”

    The only seat the Republicans lost was the governor. I just heard Rush say that Republicans won every other contest even electing a black conservative to the State AG office. But you wouldn’t know any of that if you just listen to the liberal media.

  2. jdge1 November 7, 2019 / 4:56 pm

    Interesting article points out something I was not aware of. The article talks about the new “Harriet” movie that shows Ms. Tubman using a gun to help protect her and the runaway slaves under her guidance. It also cites that she also carried a sharp-shooter rifle during the civil war. Prior to the civil war blacks were prohibited from owning or carrying firearms. The part of this article that I was unaware of was the reason the KKK started.

    ” Indisputably, for much of American history, gun-control measures, like many other laws, were used to oppress African Americans. The South had long prohibited blacks, both slave and free, from owning guns. In the North, however, at the end of the Civil War, the Union army allowed soldiers of any color to take home their rifles. Even blacks who hadn’t served could buy guns in the North, amid the glut of firearms produced for the war. President Lincoln had promised a “new birth of freedom,” but many blacks knew that white Southerners were not going to go along easily with such a vision.”

    “The KKK began as a gun-control organization. Before the Civil War, blacks were never allowed to own guns. During the Civil War, blacks kept guns for the first time — either they served in the Union army and they were allowed to keep their guns, or they buy guns on the open market where for the first time there’s hundreds of thousands of guns flooding the marketplace after the war ends. So they arm up because they know who they’re dealing with in the South. White racists do things like pass laws to disarm them, but that’s not really going to work. So they form these racist posses all over the South to go out at night in large groups to terrorize blacks and take those guns away.”

    “One of the key reasons for the 14th Amendment’s guarantee that blacks were equal human beings with equal rights was to protect the gun rights of freed slaves after the Civil War. This reasoning was cited in the 2010 gun-rights victory won by Otis McDonald in McDonald vs. Chicago. McDonald, a 76-year-old African-American Army veteran living in a high-crime area of Chicago, felt the Second Amendment gave him the right to protect himself and is family with a gun just as he once protected his country with a gun.. “

    • Amazona November 7, 2019 / 9:27 pm

      A few weeks ago PBS had a show about the KKK and its origin as a gun control organization to try to disarm blacks so they could be terrorized and kept under the thumb of some whites.

      It is interesting that two of the lynchpins of the American Left political philosophy, gun control and abortion/Planned Parenthood, were both designed to control black people and reduce their number as well as their power. This is consistent with the Democrats’ ferocious battling of the Civil Rights Act, until LBJ realized it was taking the party down and did a 180 so the party could then claim ownership of it.

  3. jdge1 November 7, 2019 / 5:14 pm

    And this line from another article caught my attention. ”The death rates inherent in leftist policies aren’t a bug, they’re a feature.”

    • Amazona November 7, 2019 / 8:41 pm

      That is a great observation—because it is true

Comments are closed.