Legal Affirmative Action for those who commit the most crime…

There are three classes of people who commit the most crime:

• Black people of color (to distinguish from people of other colors),
• Illegal aliens, who by definition, 100% of that class commit crime, not including other crimes they commit once here,
• The most devout Muslims, because they have a radically different legal system from that of the West.

All three classes of people have become eligible for “legal affirmative action” (LAA). LAA (as in laa laa land) can be defined as a much lower standard for a “punishable offense.”  In other words, people NOT in one of those three LAA groups are subject to punishment for many more types of offenses than those in the LAA group.

The left, (aka “democrats”, “socialists”, “communists”, “Antifa”, “Black Lives Matter (most)”, illegal immigrant advocacy groups, organizations like the Council on American-Islamic Relations, and the willfully ignorant (which includes a goodly number of media and academia) have created a different rationale for excusing each group from the laws of the land.

In spite of Blacks constituting 16% of the US population, crimes committed by Blacks were wildly disproportionately higher:

• In 2017, 53.1% of those arrested for manslaughter were black.
• Based on a 2017 FBI crime report, 54% of the people arrested for robbery were black.
• In that same year, blacks made up 51.9% of those charged with illegal gambling.
• They also accounted for 33.5% of offenders charged with aggravated assault and 28.7% of rape arrests.
• In addition, blacks accounted for 29.8% of burglary arrests, and 43.9% of people caught carrying firearms. 

https://comparecamp.com/black-crime-statistics/

Most victims of these crimes are also black, by the way.

But wait. Blacks are discriminated against.  Blacks are disadvantaged. Blacks are poorer.  Blacks are in bad neighborhoods with bad schools.  Give them a break.  They can’t help but commit crimes.

The solution:  Subject this class of people to LAA.  Lower the bar. Create a less demanding set of laws for them. Adjust the criminal justice system so that anything much less than murder will not subject them to jail time or even bail requirements.  Yes, Legal Affirmative Action for these folk. That will even lower the crime rate – fewer will be charged with anything.

Reward bad behavior with a myriad of free passes.  That’ll get them to respect the law.  Sure thing.

Next, we know how to give immigrants a good civics lesson – you know, like when they were required to pass a test at Ellis Island a few years back - as they enter the US:  Reward them for breaking our immigration laws (similar to trespassing and breaking and entering) with free travel, free health care, free education, and various government stipends.  100% of illegal aliens are criminals – but who’s counting and who cares?  And is anyone keeping track of the percent of illegals committing crimes here in their first year of illegal residency? That’s kind of difficult when most large cities have LAA prohibiting law enforcement from asking or determining their immigration status.

Finally we have Muslims subject to LAA.  Why?  Because most don’t care much for the US legal system because they have their own Islamic version:  Sharia. Many Muslim enclaves throughout the nation now have their own “no go zones” declared so local law enforcement won’t hurt themselves. 

We shall not impose our nasty, anti-Islamic Western values and laws on Muslim communities.  We must not discourage the culture, religion, or legal system of Syrian, Iranian, Pakistani, Somalian immigrants or those from the other 45 predominantly Islamic nations.  Allah forbids it. Speaking of Allah, that reminds me.  The pudding on the cake is thou shalt not (from the King James) accuse a Muslim of doing ANYTHING wrong or you will make the headlines on CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, Washington Post, New York Times or myriad of local snowflake publications condemning YOU for being an Islamophobe. Thus we have institutionalized LAA for the Muslims of this nation.

These three LAA classes of folk don’t even include those who, until a few years ago were correctly labelled perverts and queers (not in the twisted sense now used by the LGBTQ+++ communities today.)  Anyone who whispers that those folk might be perverts, immoral, or mentally challenged will themselves be charged with a crime.

That is the ultimate Laa Laa Land – lowering the bar to ground level for select violators of laws, civility, and morality, while subjecting the rest of us to the higher standards of “the system.”

These forms of discrimination will destroy our legal system and our nation.

How leftists and conservatives address nations problems

Think about how the left addresses each of the widely discussed and growing problems of this nation.  And then consider the approach of conservatives for each of these issues.  You will notice that the leftist/democrat approach aggravates and worsens the problem while the conservatives approach reduces the problem.

Here are a few examples:

Homelessness

Homeless encampments are mushrooming in many democrat run cities.  The left promotes government programs, policies and handouts to make life for the homeless easier (it’s all about emotional “feel good” policies for leftists).  These are typically comprised of:

• Allowing the homeless use public spaces for their tents and other living arrangements
• Providing food handouts
• Providing drug needles
• Not enforcing vagrancy and loitering laws
• Promoting (advertising) the public policies and programs that attract more homeless and disincentivize employment and independence.

Conservatives tend to do the opposite, primarily:

• Enforcing laws against vagrancy and loitering
• Prohibiting use of public spaces and rights-of-way for homeless camps
• Providing “back to work” incentives
• Not facilitating and enabling drug use

Drug addicts

Drug addiction is a worthwhile behavior for the left.  It gives them more control power and influence.  This is why they:

• Promote open borders to let in the cartels, drug lords and tons of opiates.
• Distribute drug paraphernalia to addicts
• Defund law enforcement
• Have “no bail” provisions (let them out on the street) for various drug-related offenses
•  Promote repealing of drug laws 

Again, conservatives promote the opposite:

• Close the borders and closely vet and monitor those who do cross over legally
• Increase capability to both stop the supply entering the nation and well as the distribution and use through strict enforcement.
• Have stricter incarceration provisions for offenders.

Gun violence

The left prefers eliminating the 2nd amendment.  Short of that they promote making various types of guns illegal (they believe the gun has a mind of its own when it decides to shoot people), limiting magazine capacity, imposing exorbitant taxes on guns and ammo, requiring a centralized nationwide permit system, requiring onerous liability requirements for firearm manufacturers, creating a “social credit” system for the right to bear arms, and prohibit the carry of guns in dozens of public venues.  The left fails to acknowledge that the places with the strictest gun laws have the most gun violence.

Conservatives believe that if guns were more freely carried by the general population in more places, unlawful shootings would be discouraged. More importantly, if existing laws were more effectively enforced, prosecuted, with offenders incarcerated for appropriate durations – not as nicey nice rehab, but as punishment, gun violence would be reduced.  And finally, conservatives have much greater respect not only for the rule of law, but for the essential role of the family and religion in our culture.  The left opposes these things.

Illegal immigrants

The left believes in a global authority, disdains nationhood – especially that of the United States, and thus believes in open borders and free entry of people from any and all nations.  They do not believe that a national identity and culture is worth preserving.  They believe “diversity is our strength” as opposed to our “outdated” national motto of “out of many, one.”  Their quest for diversity denies the reality of “in unity there is strength.”  And they blame the other side for our nation’s divisiveness.

Conservatives want strong borders so that only those who respect our culture and laws and who would add to our nations success and prosperity would be allowed entry.  It used to be that way.  Conservatives respect the concept of “nation” and believe the US has a history and identity worth preserving, although many are beginning to have doubts.

Inflation

The left prefers passing laws, enlarging the federal government, creating more programs and spending hundreds of billions falsely believing that those actions will reduce inflation.  They gut the fossil fuel industry through taxation, withholding permits, and halting pipeline construction.  All of that eliminates our energy independence and dramatically raises energy costs for agriculture, transportation, electricity, and manufacturing while becoming more dependent on enemy nations for that resource.

Conservatives would reduce the size of the federal government, reduce taxes, eliminate many cost-increasing federal regulations, and increase domestic fossil fuel production.

Energy

The lefts policies have eliminated the major sources of domestic energy production causing us to rely on undependable foreign sources. The left promotes the myth of “human-caused global warming”, especially the “evil” US-caused global warming.  This half-baked science causes the left to invoke half-baked policies of “green energy” which is several decades ahead of feasibility.  In the meantime – meantime being the next several decades – the US will be forced into an energy deficit and much much higher energy prices.  As Biden’s protégé, Barack Hussein Obama, famously said, “Under my Plan … Electricity Rates Would Necessarily Skyrocket”.  All the while the mining of “green energy” battery components and use of windmills are raping the landscape and killing wildlife.

Conservatives would assure the US once again becomes and remains energy independent.  We would continue the robust development of fossil fuels while incentivizing the development of alternative energy sources, including nuclear.

Which side of these issues would you feel most comfortable on?

No bias, no conflict of interest…sure thing…

This afternoon Attorney General Merrick Garland declared that he personally approved the decision for the search warrant for Donald Trump’s home.  He did not announce why.

Except most can guess, and the optics smell really foul.

As many might recall, Garland is one and the same Garland who sought a post on the US Supreme Court, but was stymied by the Trump administration.  Retributional conflict of interest much?  Then in his next breath during his remarkably brief press conference he pleads with the public to not have any ill will toward the Department of Justice.

What, me persecute?

The other foul smelling thing is the Florida judge who approved the Mar-a-Lago raid was Bruce Reinhart.  Bruce helped Jeffrey Epstein through his pedophilia and sex trafficking troubles.   He was also a large contributor to the 2008 Obama campaign.

There are so many foul smelling aspects to this ongoing persecution.  More than enough to cause one to think that they are doing all they can to assure Trump doesn’t run for President again.

Trouble is, anyone who is as effective at promoting and implement similar policies as Trump will most likely receive the same treatment.

Nation under siege from within!

Any Way the Wind Blows…

Feathers and Sails.

Many of our nation’s leaders have the moral conviction of a feather.  Along comes a new amoral fad and they follow it like a feather in the wind.  Why?  Because it’s cool.  It’s popular. It gets votes from the “folks” and buyers from the fad driven marketplace. 

Do our leaders direct our ship of state?  Hardly.  Again, the “wind” is our perverse pop culture. Our ship of state is rudderless – driven and directed only by the wind.  The “sails” are our “leaders”, both corporate and governmental.  These “leaders” take the entire ship of state any way the wind blows.

We have few real leaders.  Mostly sails and feathers.

One among hundreds of examples:  The Pennsylvania governor champions their gay pride event where children are taught to pole dance.

“A [gay/pervert] pride event in Pennsylvania that reportedly taught children how to pole dance received a $10,000 grant championed by Gov. Tom Wolf’s (D) administration.”

Pride Event in Pennsylvania Taught Children How to Pole Dance (breitbart.com)

Corporations are not any better. Disney in Florida fights governor DeSantis tooth and nail to promote their gay-pervert agenda.  Yet in Muslim countries they tow the moral line.

“After picking a political fight with Florida over the state’s Parental Rights in Education Law, and declaring itself an LGBTQ ally to boot, Disney is reportedly censoring gay and transgender content on the version of the Disney+ streaming service that it launched in the [Middle East Muslim] region in June.”

Disney Won't Say Gay in Middle East: Censors LGBTQ Content in Gulf Countries While Fighting Florida Law (breitbart.com)

Even parents, whether dedicated, moral and upstanding or drug addicted derelicts, will support and defend the criminal or perverted behaviors of their offspring.  “He’s a good kid” they exclaim of their drug addict, shoplifting, or transvestite child.  They jettison any moral conviction they might have held to pander to their kin.

Other family members behave the same.  Dick Chaney’s daughters are one example. Daughter Mary is a lesbian. Daughter Liz is a RINO.  Liz supports gays to defend her sister.  How noble.

‘The View’ Host Joy Behar Says Liz Cheney Only Supports Gay Marriage Because it Affects Her Family: ‘Typical Republican Move’ (yahoo.com)

How shallow our “Christian” beliefs have been.  How fickle our moral actions really are.

Sails and feathers. Any way the wind blows.

Miscellaneous Tom Foolery by the left and their ignorant, amoral followers…

Everything from releasing criminals, to excusing “mental illness”, to open borders, to endless genders reflect the mindset of leftists and their brainless, amoral followers.

New York leftists adopted a law that caused the release of an attempted assassin of a political candidate on his own recognizance – justified by being suspected of being “mentally ill.”  “Mental illness” is our new “get out of jail free” card.  The major problem with that approach is that every deviant, hostile, criminal behavior has a term developed by the psychiatric profession that classifies that behavior as a “mental illness” – the get out of jail free” card.

California, Washington, Oregon, New York and most large cities have District Attorneys who love releasing known felons into the wild, mental illness or not.

Oh, and defund or just don’t support the actions of police.  That is one other method to allow the lawless to do their thing without consequences. You might as well be a cop in Tehran with a Christian cross on your cap than to be a cop in any large American city.

A nation with borders?  That’s too much to ask of leftists and their brain dead followers.  Borders are too mean.  Anyone who likes national borders is called a bigoted nationalist.  Heck, if you promote the success of your own nation you must be a Nazi Fascist.

Next in my litany of absurdities is gender confusion.  Just yesterday I filled out a medical form that had the following options for “gender”:

• Male
• Female
• Male identifies as female
• Female identifies as male
• Queer+
• Bi-sexual
• Other
• Choose not to answer

So, there you have it.  Given a few more minutes a few more absurdities could be listed.  You can easily think of others. Reversing energy independence is one, but that’s too easy.

The common denominators of all the above are:

• Rebellion against traditional morality
• Pandering to the lowest common denominator in society
• Believing in a utopian society via promotion of globalism – belief that we can all be kumbaya (naïve idealism and a sort of precious, touchy-feely, hand-holding spirit of rosy-eyed unity) and ignore human nature – the genesis of open borders and abhorring nationalism.

The dissolution of a commonly held Judeo-Christian morality is at the heart of these trends.  Diversity is now superior to unity – as long as your diversity is amoral and anti-American.

It’s a strange strange world we live in, Master Brandon.

Can we have anarchy and fascism at the same time?

Our public officials and media don't want to know or admit to the cause of violence in our streets, schools and cities.  Instead they blame it on the gun, the cops, the pressure cooker, or the errant car driven into the crowd.

Instead of identifying the root causes, they broad brush their response and take rights and freedoms away from EVERYONE. Take away the gun, the bullets, the magazines.  Subject everyone to the draconian measures airport body searches because of 19 Muslims.

Meanwhile we ignore the root causes because we might offend someone.

Aberrant behavior, whether extremist religion, extremist political ideology, lack of moral teaching at home and at school, disrespect for the rule of law at all levels of government and society, and ultimately, disregard for a consensus belief in a just God and a generally agreed upon set of behaviors that are a part of that belief:  These are all part of our nation's steep slide.

We've normalized every perverse belief and behavior and can't agree on a common code anymore.  It’s now not only OK to be a pervert, but God help the person who is critical of perversion.

It’s now mainstream to promote vile rap music lyrics – the lyrics the promote cop killing and have “f---“ multiple times in every verse - because we don’t want to offend the black “artists” who write and speak  it and the huge drug imbued fan base that eats it up.

And whatever else we do, don’t offend the Muslim who believes in the only religion on the planet that coerces unbelievers to follow their ideology through threat, intimidation and terror.

We believe in “diversity” more than “unity.”  What else should we expect from that flipped switch except what we got?

Searching the web for a photo that would match this topic I Googled “anarchy” and came upon dozens of books on Amazon on this topic.  Among them was this: “ABC’s of Anarchy” promoting anarchy to toddlers.  Here is a quote:

“I want to tell you about anarchism because anarchism is the only thing that can give you liberty and well-being and bring peace and joy to the world.”

The book earned 4.3 stars.  Seeing this I felt like I was in the twilight zone.

A consensus belief in a common morality is now considered too restrictive and confining for many.  And most of the rest of the population believe that is A-ok. Most don’t agree in a common or traditional morality anymore. Perversion and violence are accepted norms to allow everyone to express themselves.  And those who don’t accept this new “tolerance” are called “bigots.”  And many formerly faithful churches are “going along to get along.”

Those who believe as I do, that there are God-given norms of behavior that society and governments should promote, are now in a small and shrinking minority.

Our nation is headed into an anarchist and fascist direction.  By that I mean that anything goes and the rule of law is selectively enforced against those who object to this new “standard.”  

I didn’t know it was possible to have anarchy and fascism at the same time, but we are headed in that direction.

Broad brushing law enforcement misses the mark…

Remember your days in school when someone in class was acting up?  Teachers had various methods of restoring order.  Sometimes she wasn’t quite sure who it was, or didn’t want to call out the actual offender – but instead punished the whole class hoping to apply some form of “peer pressure.”

News flash!  That technique might have worked on a group of 5th graders but it is NOT an appropriate method to apply to the US population at large.

Yet that “broad brush” approach to solving a behavioral problem among a few individuals misses the mark in two ways:

1) It unfairly punishes the vast majority of citizens who follow the rules, and

2) It does not focus on those few (in the case of the US population fewer than 0.1% of the total population) who are the offenders in the examples provided below.

The elementary school disciplinary technique of punishing the whole class while ignoring the perps does not work when applied to a whole nation.

Three examples come to mind:  Airport security, school security and flying flags. 

In the case of airport security, we understood which tiny segment of our population was involved in hijacking aircraft.  We knew the personalities and predispositions of those who actually hijacked aircraft.  They were those who practiced the fundamentalist Islamic faith, they were of Middle Eastern decent, and they were typically males between 18 and 40 years of age. 

Yet what did we do?  We subjected EVERYONE who flew in planes to be subject to invasive body searches.  ENVERYONE! It’s as if everyone who used a plane for transportation was a threat, fully ignoring those who we knew actually were a threat.  Why?

In the case of school security, we understand which tiny segment of our population is involved in school shootings.  We know personalities and predispositions of those who actually carried out school shootings.  They were those less than 18 years of age, male, troubled, posting threatening messages on social media, often bullied, and from broken or abusive homes.  How difficult is it for individuals fitting that profile to be tagged, monitored and denied the sale of weapons?

Yet what do we do?  Many propose to subject EVERYONE who owns a gun or thinking of owning a gun to gun ownership and gun use prohibitions.  EVERYONE!  It’s as if everyone who owns a gun for protection or sport or hobby is a threat, fully ignoring those who we know actually ARE a threat.  Why?

Why?  Why, in these two examples, do politicians choose the broad brush approach, painting EVERYONE as potential hijackers or school shooters instead of identifying those who actually are?

This third example might provide a clue.

In the case of homeowners flying flags in local communities, the legal right to fly a flag offers some peculiar and unpleasant realities.  The examples provided apply only to those situations tested by the law.  Of course one could fly anything in a homeowners association if no one complains.

So here is the example: 

Flags are a form of speech subject to the first amendment.  So basically a flag depicting ANYTHING, a sports team, ISIS, the CRIPS, any nation, as well as the US flag, are all theoretically allowed under the law.  But HOA’s typically limit formal written permission of flags to the US flag only.  But we know other flags are flown without those “rules” being enforced.  Why?  Because if they were enforced the association would probably lose in court. 

Why would the association lose?  Because such enforcement would discriminate against a class of people and abridge their free speech.  You can’t discriminate against Satanists who might want their own flag.

You can’t “profile” and discriminate against a person who practices a fundamentalist Islamic faith from a Middle Eastern country who is male between 18 and 40 years of age.

Does this same “excuse” apply to refusal to “profile “ kids less than 18 years of age,  male, troubled, posting threatening messages on social media, often bullied, and from broken or abusive homes?  Would that be considered discrimination against a “class” of people who fit that profile?  After all, most troubled kids would probably not even consider shooting up their school.

So instead of assuring that kids who fit that profile are denied weapons and referred to a barely existing mental health system, we have those who insist on applying the “broad brush” and prohibit everyone from possessing weapons.

That, in a nutshell, is another terrible excuse to apply the “broad brush” that considers every evil to be entitled to first amendment protections.  That is the area where more thinking and refinement of the limits of the first amendment is appropriate. 

Just overly simplistically banning guns is another mindless, poorly consider approach to addressing school shootings that “misses the mark.”

Rationally and logically, keeping guns in the hands of those who are intent on SAVING LIVES to defend against those with guns who are intent on  TAKING LIVES is much preferred over making those intent on saving lives defenseless. 

Those intent on taking lives do not care if the weapon, whatever it is, was obtained legally or illegally or if a sign is posted prohibiting weapons on school property.

Government controlled redistribution…

Whether it’s “government-controlled redistribution of wealth” or “government controlled redistribution of goods”, it is wrong and counterproductive.

Government controlled redistribution of baby formula is even worse.

To what extent is the governments redistribution of pallets of baby formula to illegal immigrants at least a partial contributor to the baby formula shortage in the US?

More HERE.

GOP rep says illegal migrants sent ‘pallets’ of hard-to-find baby formula

GOP rep says illegal migrants sent ‘pallets’ of hard-to-find baby formula | Fox News

Rails to Trails: The sweetener on top of a dying nation

In small towns and large cities across the nation city planners have been touting their “great successes” in converting abandoned rail lines to recreational trails. That appears to be a great thing to do – make good use of miles of unused right of way for walking and bicycling.  Great!  Let’s recreate!

But on the other and, this is like making a BBQ pit from the leftover bricks from your bombed out house.  Sad, really.

No! Neither trails nor BBQ pits make things better – not compared to what was given up. They are both a misleading salve over a bad situation – the urban planning version of making a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.  But the poor pig is dead!  Like the violin music that helps lift the spirits just before the Titanic goes down.

And no, abandoned rail lines are not the result of advances in transportation or advances in technology. They are a sign of our economic decline.  We don’t yet have transponders that send kilotons of dry goods from point A to point B. Trucking is not the most cost effective mode of transportation for things we don’t produce anymore.

That’s the problem:  Things we don’t produce anymore.

With Nixon’s trip to China in 1972, we began to offshore production to reduce costs to American consumers. That was the beginning of the US transition from a producer nation to a consumer nation.  From a productive nation to a recreating nation – getting fatter, happier, and lazier as a result.

We thought that was great for over 50 years.  Cheaper stuff:  Yaaa!  More recreation:  Yippee! Fatter and happier:  You betcha!

But we were like the proverbial frog in the pot…the water temperature has risen.  And now we find ourselves beholden to nations we are beginning to fear for essential goods, from pharmaceuticals to electronic components. and a thousand other things most are yet unaware of.

So what happens when most of the products we depend on come from a nation we begin to fear and becomes one of our top three enemies? Is it too late to wean our way off our dependence on those wonderful lower prices and fill the void of strategically important components?

Rails to trails:  A symbol of a nation that got itself into an economic death spiral.

________________________

[A little levity:  Is it possible that the the 1961 song “The Lion Sleeps Tonight” was prescient, giving a coded economic/fiscal message with the lyric “Wimoweh” really meaning“wean our way” while the Lion sleeps. It was sung by The Tokens after all.  OK, very little.]

The argument for doing A LOT more in Ukraine

Up till now, the US, NATO and all the nations of Europe have been intimidated by Russia from taking effective military action to help defend Ukraine. The West’s excuse to stand down:  “Oh, but Russia has nukes.”  So, when do we hand over the keys to our spooked and intimidate house? This is Russian nuclear blackmail.

Sure, allies have provided humanitarian assistance to refugees and belated shipments of armaments are being sent to Ukraine.  We have imposed “sanctions” against various aspects of Russia’s economy – which by the way – our government admitted could take months to have any significant impact. And even with that tepid response, Putin has declared these sanctions to be a “declaration of war.”

So, if these actions are already considered by Russia “a declaration of war”, while doing little to slow Russia’s advance, shouldn’t we do a hell of a lot more?

Yes.  Russia has nukes.  Does that give the West an excuse to ignore Russia’s killing of thousands in their reign of destruction upon innocent nations? How long will the West dally? Is the West to lay down and become militarily comatose?  It has become obvious to most who are paying attention that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is a continuation of their advance toward their former USSR glory days.  Russia has already taken Georgia and a southern chunk of Ukraine (Crimea).  There are many more sovereign nations in Russia’s sights:  Moldova, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Poland, Romania, and Finland.

So, are there any good reasons to call Russia’s bluff, get a spine and militarily join the fight?

Here are the consequences of the West remaining unengaged militarily in Ukraine:

• Russia continues its blitz, its bombardment, its killing and destruction of Ukraine.
• The humanitarian crises worsens.
• Russia is emboldened, knowing the West will do little to defend itself.
• Russia continues on its trek to invade and consume other neighbor nations.
• Seeing the West’s lack of resolve, China is emboldened to take over Taiwan and further advance in the Pacific.
• The West endorses its own moral failure to defend other peaceful nations against unprovoked attack. We become complicit in our passivity.

Yes, NATO needs to establish a “no fly zone” over Ukraine.  Yes, NATO needs to destroy Russian columns threatening Ukraine’s cities.  Yes, the West needs to prepare for various counter attacks from Russia.

How about we stop being merely observers and commentators as if we were watching a bunch of Christians in the Roman Coliseum being slaughtered for sport.

Remaining passive during this sort of unprovoked attack on a peaceful neighbor is both a moral lapse and a precursor to Western suicide.

Post script:

There are those who are simply “hand-ringing”, asking “what can we really do? We can’t really do anything.”

There are those who are doing “as much as they can do” without “poking the bear”, meaning doing as little as possible while being substantially ineffective.

There are those who urge us to stay out of it, warning it is none of our business.

And there is a growing number saying we MUST act militarily, Russian intimidation be damned.

Which of these do I believe the Biden administration will follow?  All but the last.  They are too invested in the US becoming a 2nd world nation via their emphasis on “climate change”, killing fossil fuel production, promoting multiple genders, and open borders.

Ukraine: Moral Imperative Denied

Imagine, if you will, this neighborhood scenario:

A good friend of the neighborhood, but not a member of the neighborhood “Club” begins being pulverized by a thug from the adjacent neighborhood.

The neighborhood, in forming their “Club”, agreed that they would defend from outside bullies ONLY those who are in the club.  Since the “good friend” is not in the “club” the neighborhood merely stands by, watching, as they exchange predictions of how badly the thug will pulverize their “friend.”

Does it seem clear to you that, in spite of the fact that the good friend of the neighborhood is not in their “Club”, that the neighborhood has a moral obligation to defend their friend?

Is the neighborhood using the lack of club membership as an excuse to avoid confrontation with the bully?

If the neighborhood has that much fear of the bully, it makes you wonder if they would act even if a member of their own club was being pulverized.

This is the situation with NATO, the US, Ukraine, and Russia.

I have to ask:   Is NATO using Ukraine’s lack of membership in their “Club” as an excuse to deny their moral imperative to help a “friend” who is being pulverized?

If there was no NATO, would they feel more compelled to help their friend?

If NATO denies the clear [to me] moral imperative to help their “friend” because he is not a member, you have to be concerned about their resolve to help each other if one of their own was being pulverized.  This is especially true if their reason for not defending Ukraine is because of their fear of the bully – which is undeniably the case here.

If they are willing to sacrifice their non-member friend because of their fear of the bully, there is a good chance they would not defend one another due to the same fear.

Or is NATO a mere “protection racket”, the likes of an urban mafia that only protects the merchants that paid their protection money?

Here is the kicker to me:

The United States spent untold billions of dollars and untold thousands of lives over a 20-year period in Afghanistan training, defending, funding, equipping and fighting for a nation who’s people had a radically different culture, that didn’t really want us there, that disdained the values of the West, and which had no motivation to defend themselves, just going half-heartedly through deceptive motions, and whose leaders fled their nation days before its rapid fall.

Then we have Ukraine:  A friend, having as many shared values as any ally we have, an enemy of our enemy, having an uncanny will to fight to defend their freedoms and begging for our help while being pummeled by the overpowering bully next door.

And what does NATO do? Nothing.

What does the United States of freakin’ freedom loving ‘merica do? Not much.

Ukraine isn’t part of the “Club.”

The perfect excuse to pretend the “moral imperative” doesn’t exit.

The history books won’t treat these actions kindly – if freedom loving countries are even around to write them.

Russian government promotes “traditional values”; warns against immorality from the West

Who would have thunk it?

Most conservatives in the United States are, at this point in time, more likely to support Russian government policy rather than US government policy when it comes to culture and traditional values.

Here is the latest national policy coming out of Russia:

The draft text defines “traditional values” as “moral guidelines that form Russian citizens’ worldview, transferring from generation to generation, guaranteeing civil unity, forming the base of Russian civilizational identity and the nation’s unified cultural space, and manifesting uniquely and distinctly in the spiritual, historical, and cultural development of the multiethnic people of Russia.”

Wow!  What a concept.  Promoting “civil unity” over “diversity.”

Additional examples include

“…“life, dignity, human rights and freedom, patriotism, civic consciousness, service to the Fatherland and responsibility for its fate, high moral ideals, a strong family, creative work, prioritizing the spiritual over the material, humanism, charity, justice, collectivism, mutual support and respect, historical memory and continuity between generations, and the unity of the peoples of Russia.”

Why is Russia declaring these standards?  They are defending against the immoral filth from the West.  Here is more from their policy statement:

“The report claims, however, that these values are under threat from outside forces including terrorist and extremist organizations, multinational corporations, NGOs, and the US and its allies. Among the foreign ideas said to be invading Russia, the authors name egoism, permissiveness, “amorality,” and the refusal to grant Russia a positive place in history and culture.”

US conservatives have become subject to a government that does just the opposite of what Russia’s policy promotes.  Here is a list of what the US government has been promoting: 

• Gender confusion and LGBTQP interests
• Suppression of religious freedoms and traditional morality
• Racist discrimination against the founders and our founding principles
• Suppression of law enforcement; allowing lawlessness
• Racism in the selection of government officials, e.g. Biden mandate that excludes all but blacks from Supreme Court consideration
• Facilitation of unbridled, unvetted immigration by those who couldn’t care less about our founding principles
• Erasing, ignoring or rewriting civics and US history in public education
• Considering “patriots” a greater threat than illegal immigrants and others who have little regard for our nation.

My prediction:  Over the coming years, US government policy will, if it continues on its current course, result in less prosperity, influence, power and respect among nations than that of either China or Russia.  We are rushing into 2nd, and perhaps 3rd world status.

Our freedoms degrading into anarchy. Our history transformed into evil. Our morality morphing into irrelevance.

https://www.rt.com/russia/547437-traditional-values-foreign-amorality/