Media Assault Plus Corruption Probes to Depose National Leader

 

Depending on where you live, this title has a different target. In Israel, it has been the decades’ long probes into the Netanyahus, covered maliciously by a hyperventilating media seemingly in heat, or at least fevered excitement. In America, it has been the year of unending accusations from the leftist media, politic and enraged public factions known as #Resistance and their unceasing assault against President Trump. In both nations, the previous election was polled to be a walkover for the leftist candidates ending the time for Prime Minister Netanyahu in office and sending candidate Donald Trump back to his real estate business. In both elections, the left was shocked when Donald Trump was elected President and Netanyahu retained and gained seats in the Knesset giving him a somewhat more comfortable hold on power. Since each man has taken office, they have been investigated, and investigated, and investigated with an indictment coming at any moment. Over the years, the Israeli police, whose leadership has a definitively leftward leaning, have investigated the Netanyahu’s ice cream bill, his wife’s hair styling costs, and now his receiving cigars and champagne as gifts from friends who came for dinner. Perhaps they should have requested less expensive dinner gifts, perhaps a goldfish, puppy, kitten or snake (the media would ask why the pet snake was not venomous). Trump is being investigated for collusion with the Russians to win the election.

 

In the most recent investigation into Prime Minister Netanyahu it is very interesting that the main witness against Netanyahu is Yair Lapid, the leader of an opposition party who fashions himself the best replacement for the position of Prime Minister should Netanyahu be removed. One has to wonder how strong a case you have when you are depending on the subject of the whole investigation’s primary rival for office. In the investigation against President Trump the main evidence apparently came from a piece of fiction produced by his election rival Hillary Clinton’s paid investigation where her campaign colluded with Russians to produce dirt on Donald Trump. As a layman, one can only wonder how strong the evidence or charges could possibly be when the person investigated is facing charges produced or provided by their political rival. Still, this has not and will not prevent these investigations from having an impetus with media and public demands from the left demanding charges, removal from office by impeachment for Trump and resignation for Netanyahu. Yair Lapid supporters are convinced that should a new election be forced, then his party will be chosen to form a coalition, as they will gain more mandates (seats in the Knesset) than Netanyahu’s Likud Party. Many of the Hillary Clinton supporters mistakenly believe that should Trump be forced from office by resignation or impeachment and Russian collusion be proven in the election, then Hillary Clinton will be swept into the Oval Office by some miraculous decision from on high, we just have no idea how high as such would be against the line of succession and completely unprecedented.

 

Trump, Netanyahu, Clinton, Lapid

 

So, what can we say and learn from these two cases? The obvious call is that the left side of the political spectrum believes that they and they alone are the supreme chosen to lead their respective nations and anybody else must be hounded and forced from office. They appear to believe that their visions for the future are the sole prescription for the continued survival and health of human societal structures and individuals. Their prognostication over climate change; which historically included the predictions of a coming ice age in the 1970’s which became global warming by the late 1980’s and finally to include any and every change, global climate change currently, is the only valid explanation and any disagreement is a sure sign of a devious desire to make obscene profits while risking the lives of humankind. Their designs for fiscal survivability are the one means of sustaining the health of the planet and sustaining the economy. They are the wise leaders who are aware that the reason their ideas have failed is simply because insufficient investment has been made. Their idea for unfettered immigration is the best prescription for the health and diversity of the population and that all who enter their nation are deserving of citizenship. They know that their ideas of reducing military capability and the removal of their nation’s nuclear arsenals is the best means of leading by example and will lead to peace. Basically stated, they are the least corrupt no matter how much corruption is found as they only do these things to bring about the best for everyone. Their being the sole people permitted to rule is also the best possible for everyone. The only reason their ideas have failed was because just when they were about to show fruit the conservative right wing lunatics took over and ruined everything. They must prevent those right wing conservatives from ever taking or keeping power if their ideas are ever going to work to fruition. This is why they are fighting with such fervor to remove Trump and Netanyahu and replace them with their rivals, Lapid and Clinton. Oh, and do not try and reason with them as you are wrong even before you start and the sooner you realize this, the better off you will be in the end. After all, if you simply come around and see everything as they do, then you will not be required to be placed into a reeducation center.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

The War Against Conservatism Begins

 

The war against Conservatism and all things right of center, and possibly even left of center, has begun but where will it end? Recently the August 16, 2017 “MTP Daily” show and the August 20, 2017 “Meet the Press” program, author Mark Bray, who wrote a book about Antifa was featured. Bray argues that, “Nazism and fascism was not stopped by polite dialogue and reasonable debate. It had to be stopped by force.” This led to the conclusion of the discussions to plead that violence is necessary. Apparently, if there exist people whose views do not correlate within the prescribed norms as defined by our masters in the media, academia, entertainment and the rest of the left leaning establishment to the extreme leftists, then they may be dismissed and are of little concern according to many of our political leaders. In all honesty, this struggle has been ongoing for much longer than many of us realize. Believe it or not, this did not begin with the election of President Trump, nor with President Obama, nor George W. Bush, nor William Jefferson Clinton, nor on an on for elected leadership back before even President John F. Kennedy, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and on and on back before President George Washington. This fight between the right and left goes back to Aristotle and possibly to King David and possibly even earlier than that. This struggle between the liberal left and the conservative right has been one of the basic contentions of humankind.

 

This argument was fought when the Israelites threw off slavery in Mitzraim (Egypt). The argument was seriously debated by the Greeks and in Rome it took the life of Caesar and led to numerous wars throughout the ages. The modern history of this struggle became to a pinnacle point on June 15, 1215, when King John of England signed the Magna Carta Libertatum (Medieval Latin for “Great Charter of the Liberties”), at Runnymede, granting limited shared power between the King and the major land owners of Britain. The struggle continued on through the American Revolution followed by the French Revolution, the second having less than stellar results. The next point of armed struggle in the United States was the Civil War and the resulting freeing of the slaves. There was some backsliding with the laws which resulted in returning many slaves to second-class status and this continued until the next great struggle of the Civil Rights movement. This was incorporated into the entire sixties peace movement and its related alternative lifestyles. Things appeared to come to a boil in the sixties as there were violent protests with the media, academia, entertainment and the right leaning establishment to the radical right conservatives who desired to take things back to the “good old days,” a term which was very loosely defined if defined at all. Over the next forty to fifty years, there has been a changing of the guard and a shift in positions on many subjects. In the sixties, the left were the Libertarian leaning side who supported limited government and individuality while the right believed that society needed regulations and laws in order to prevent chaos, crime and immorality. That was then, but what about now?

 

Today the sides have changed in many ways. Instead of the establishment being right leaning, today the establishment leans left. The media, academia, entertainment today are all left leaning or even reaching into the far left. The right is in favor of less government and individualism while the left believes that government must take charge and clear all of the societal ills. Simply put, the sides and power have shifted and as the power used to be with the right, it now lies with the left. Things were nice and quiet and running smoothly whenever the left, the Democrats, were in the White House and thus holding ultimate power over the government as the President can prevent anything the left considers backsliding from their agenda. While President Clinton was in office, the fight was fairly civil. While George W. Bush was in the White House, things were less civil but still could be considered civilized though there was much consternation over the initial results against Al Gore and the debacle in Florida. Then came President Obama and things were reported as being the most unbelievably wonderful of all administrations. The economy was reported to be in constant and steady, if slow, recovery. Problems were minimal and the problems with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) would be worked out and it would be the most successful healthcare innovation since the invention of penicillin.

 

Then came the election for the successor to President Obama and the campaign was running smoothly and with precise and perfect precision according to all mainstream media reports. Hillary Clinton was the presupposed and inevitable winner and was to be coronated President after the election. As the election came closer, the numbers began to close together, something which always happens, so nobody took any real note, as Hillary could not lose to the ignorant and offensive Donald Trump. Every newspaper from the large cities touted their polls of their readership and they showed Hillary with double-digit leads. Every major city around the nation, Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, Seattle, San Francisco, Boston and Washington D.C. all ran headlines right up to a day or two before Election Day giving Hillary Clinton a comfortable lead. The night before the election the lead narrowed to a point where some began to doubt the polling and some even claimed that Donald Trump could actually win. Well, they were correct and we now have President Trump and the left who believed with every fiber of their being that Hillary Clinton could not lose went completely off the deep end. Since the election of President Trump there has been a concerted effort to destroy him and open warfare has been declared by the leftists. We see it regularly and where it will lead cannot be predicted, but we know what they demand, the return of power to the left and its protectors as they feel the left are the only people who have the right to lead.

 

Blame Game Starring
Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump

 

The open conflict between the left and the right was coming to a boil long before Charlottesville and making it appear as that was the start was simply another deception. The left uses the media to define everything to their means and way of thinking. They insist that only the left has any answers to the challenges which the nation faces. They claim that the right is full of racists and people angry and filled with hatred and thus are unfit for leadership. The left claim to be all about compassion but apparently they feel that only those who agree with their programs and principles are worthy of receiving that compassion. There are many on the left who are wonderful people and they are willing to compromise and work with those on the right who also will compromise. Then there are those on the far left which are most often labeled as leftists who take a position that should their compatriots on the left not be in power then violence is the answer. They would riot and take offense at any and every perceived offence and were the ones who came ready to fight with the alt-right in Charlottesville. Since Election Night, there have been continuous streams of points which have been called pivotal focal points which they have blamed the right, or the alt-right, for taking things to a new level and; in each of these, the levels of the conflict have been escalated. Friendships have been destroyed, marriages have broken up, families torn asunder and business partners broken apart as the escalations have grown to the point that civil society is now close to being threatened. Where this will lead is becoming painfully apparent, as there will be no peace for as long as the Republicans hold the White House. Actually, that is not entirely honest as there are rumors of a plan being put in motion which would permit a Republican in the White House with certain concessions being made.

 

Everyone has seen that the Republican core old guard all are pretty much against President Trump almost as much as are the Democrats. Their leader has been Senator John McCain. But there are rumors this core of Republicans has decided to join with the Democrats and rid the United States of this upstart and irresponsible person sitting in the White House. There are rumors that some have been promised leadership in the new government while others have been promised campaign funding or other monetary enticements. The one rumor which is the most disheartening has been the one which places Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan siding with the Democrats to form a new union. This has all the beautiful aroma of the coming of some Republicans switching parties or forming a dual party coalition to rule as a new consensus party of left-leaning and leftist Democrats and Republicans who will run claiming to be mainstream members of their respective parties but would legislate and control the Congress and White House all while attempting to keep their agreement from the people. They would act out their arguments while voting as to their agreed mission. The worst of the rumors claim that Speaker of the House Paul Ryan has joined an effort which will result in his becoming President. The idea is preposterous, but according to the rumors, the intent is to impeach President Trump. One may inquire as to under what pretense and charges. Well, the charges do not matter, any pretense which results in a majority of the Representatives on the House bringing a charge and two thirds of the Senate finding for guilt and the President is impeached. The charge could be mentally unsuited for office, the current thread being pursued replacing the Russian conspiracy and alt-right ties. Anybody with any knowledge of American governance will point out the small inconvenience, that once President Trump would be impeached, then Vice President Pence would take office, not the Speaker of the House. This is where many call this rumored concept of convincing Speaker of the House Ryan that he would be placed in the Presidency would fall apart, but wait, the conspiracy theorists have this covered as well. They agree that Vice President Pence would take over and be President, temporarily. They have already come up with an idea for the next step, impeachment of President Pence. They claim that they can get him on his inability to separate religion from his office and as we “all know,” there is this “wall separating Church and State.” Well, actually, there is only a wall separating State from Church but none separating the Church from State as religious beliefs are perfectly permitted in politics. But as we pointed out previously, the charges do not matter, it is the votes which count. But would not Pence on becoming President get to appoint a new Vice President? Then that person would become President next even if Pence were impeached. Hold on there cowpoke, the new President gets to nominate a new Vice President upon taking office and they are not granted the office until the Senate approves their nomination. If the Congress can refuse to approve any nominee for Vice President and impeach President Pence before such nominee has been approved, then the third in succession becomes President, Speaker of the House Ryan.

 

As long as we are going down the rabbit hole, we see another outcome where these Republicans would be left out completely and it is really simple. All the Democrats need do is take their time on the impeachment of President Trump, continue once that has been accomplished to prevent any new Vice President being approved and have charges be leveled against President Pence and then wait for the 2018 elections. Then if they take the House of Representatives they can appoint their own Speaker of the House, and if Hillary Clinton would run for a House Seat in a solidly bluer than blue district and thus become a member of the House of Representatives, they could make Hillary Speaker and then convict Pence thus impeaching him and placing Hillary Clinton into the chair they claim was stolen from her. As long as we are talking craziness, why not go completely down the rabbit hole.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Losing Free Speech Would be a Costly Mistake

 

Free speech as protected in the First Amendment does not protect “Hate Speech,” or so says Howard Dean. This is kind of funny as my remembrances were that unpopular speech was exactly the speech the First Amendment was meant to protect, and “Hate Speech” would most certainly be very unpopular. The proof of this is exactly what is playing out at University of California, Berkley Campus, often referred to as the home of free speech. It was at Berkeley in the 1960’s that freedom of speech was first tested and protected with the anti-war movement. It was back during this tumultuous time when the five rights delineated in the words of the First Amendment: ”Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”. Seems simply stated though courts have recognized that certain logical limits should be applied to “Freedom of speech” such as yelling fire in a crowded theater when there is no fire as such could lead to bodily harm. Causing bodily harm was an important limitation to most rights; you could continue any right up to the point of harming another soul. As distressing as it might be to hear honest and actual “Hate Speech,” it has been a right defended time and again as this is exactly the speech which is protected which is largely behind the reason that the ACLU defends the rights of the American Nazi Party to march and speak in public in the famous Skokie Case which occurred in Ohio.

 

Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes formulated the clear and present danger test for free speech cases. In that case, Socialist Party of America official Charles Schenck had been convicted under the Espionage Act for publishing leaflets urging resistance to the draft. Schenck appealed, arguing that the Espionage Act violated the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. In Schenck v. United States, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected Schenck’s appeal and affirmed his conviction. This conviction continued to be debated over whether Schenck went against the right to freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., writing for the Court, explained, “the question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent.”* Included in these evils would be bodily harm to individuals or a group of individuals. This is real and measurable harm, not like some other qualifiers in our society where it comes down to the desired opinion of the individual in question.

 

The problem with Howard Dean goes further than denying protections of the First Amendment to “Hate Speech” in his definitions. Mr. Dean defines “Hate Speech” in this case as the upcoming scheduled speech by conservative journalist Ann Coulter. We at BTC do not agree with Miss Coulter on any number of her positions but defend her right to speak to the group which invited her and anyone else who desires to hear her speak. But, Howard Dean desires that a committee of like-minded people such as himself be appointed to decide what constitutes “Hate Speech” and thus ban that which they disapprove. Should such be permitted, then how long before we are facing 1984 and Big Brother Watching for INGSOC (English Socialism) and its trinity of newspeak; “War is Peace,” “Freedom is Slavery” and “Ignorance is Strength.” These were considered “double-plus-good” and deviating and becoming emotional was considered you’re becoming a threat which is very much “double-plus-ungood.” This was presumably the Achilles Heel of INGSOC and the loose thread that if pulled hard enough, everything would unravel. Mr. Dean believes that the little snowflakes attending University of California Berkeley cannot handle reality given at face value. It is the leftist indoctrination and the permitting of the college indoctrination keeping these snowflakes, otherwise called students, from ideas which their professors would consider to be outside their own message and thus as “Hate Speech.” This would be when the professors inform the easily influenced snowflakes that they can escape Ms. Coulter and her viscous “Hate Speech” by running to their designated safe zone. This begs the question of what are they afraid of?

 

Ann Coulter

 

Therein lies the secret. One could ask the professors exactly what is it that they and Howard Dean are so afraid the children in their care might hear, dissenting opinions and arguments backed up with convincing facts and references to refute the lies they have been foisting on impressionable minds such that they can indoctrinate them and fashion them into fellow leftists. This education format is dangerous as it instills a singular outlook on the world which lacks the fullness of depth and only allows for understanding the leftist outlook. This leaves these students unprepared for the real world and the demands it will throw their way. Unfortunately, many of these delicate flowers find themselves a job in the middle of a flower patch full of fellow flower power advocates and never leave their comfort zone. Others will often need to lose a few jobs before they start to realize that there is an entire world out there just waiting for them to study and learn of other opinions which permeate the workplace. They will find that there really are men and women with diverse ideas and concepts which their college indoctrination did not prepare them for and unless they begin to receive such as potentially valid and weigh everything testing the concepts against the real world finding new ideas which work as well or better than what they had learned, they will live a life restricted and void of the ability for comparative reason. Once they are freed to become whomever they eventually define themselves as being, their lives will grow from that point. What is so pathetic is that in all too many instances, especially in the soft sciences, the outlook in such a college atmosphere is limited to singular leftist opinions integrated so as to replace any normative lesson with one based on a strictly limited leftist outlook. With “Trigger Warnings” and “Micro-Aggressions” (whatever in the world these are) demanded to be placed on any material which might shake up their world, the snowflakes are restricted to living life in their leftist cocoon. Many of these students tend to be hard sciences-challenged as they cannot accept that there are such items as correct and incorrect results. They have been taught that it is the effort that matters and not the correct answer. These sensitive and fragile egos cannot handle having to produce actual results as reaching the correct value in an answer has become more subjective in this new world being foisted upon all too many college students. What is remarkable is today’s speech police demanding the banning of all speech which contradicts or questions any of the leftist ideologies, were the very people demanding open and free speech be upheld when their speech was the undesirable ideas. When their ideas were the ones challenging the status-quo, the demand was to honor the spirit of the first amendment and permit all speech. Now that theirs is the established speech and the former status-quo has become the challenging speech, these former guardians of the freedoms of the First Amendment become stuffy old fuddy-duddy holders of the line, they now demand that only “Approved Speech” which will not hurt their little future indoctrinated leftist army by forcing them to think. You need understand one principle of this new age, groupthink must be maintained and all speech which counters groupthink must be banned and kept from ever reaching the ears of their subjects. That is the truth; they are no longer students in these institutes of higher indoctrination but are merely subjects there to be programmed and sent out in an as-is condition and most companies are required to retrain college graduates on how to perform their jobs. Remedial training at many technical companies includes simple algebra and geometry problems, as such skills were never taught effectively from kindergarten on through college. Other subjects no longer taught in anything resembling a rational or reasoned manner and especially not the traditional manner are such little items as history including, American history, Ancient History, Modern History, Civics, English, and any of the Humanities. Many classes now avoid inclusion of any men, especially white men and never any white men who had slaves. This makes the coverage of the founding of America rather different from traditional teaching of the subject. English no longer believes that any of the traditional white male authors or their compatriots such as Mary Shelley as she committed the crime of co-writing with men of her era. Other authors considered too Christian or traditional include William Shakespeare, Chaucer, Oscar Wilde, Edgar Allen Poe, J.R.R. Tolkien, Brothers Grimm, Alexandre Dumas, Aesop or even the story of Beowulf as it is too simplistic depicting good and evil and degrades women as Grendel’s mother is shown as evil despite her only crime presumably was being a woman, or so the argument is made. There are hundreds of authors, composers and masters of the arts who are now considered unworthy simply because they expound on the ideals of good and evil and the Judeo-Christian, white male perspective even if they may have been women as it is the good and evil ethics of Judeo-Christianity they cannot couch. When your belief system is that all things are in all ways equal you have no belief system, you have a cop-out refusing to experimentally compare and contrast one set of ideas against another and judge which one is more erudite, more morally correct, and honors humankind treating all equal (or as equal as such treatment was due people in the period in which one lived as it is completely unfair to judge a person from 1776 or from 1492 or from 92 or before that sometime BCE such as around 1050 BCE, approximately when King David conquered Yerushalayim and made it the Capital City of Israel from that time forward through time).

 

The willingness of the professors of the colleges and universities to deign whether anything or anyone is worthy of attention solely if they measure up to the standards of the modern secular humanist leftist version of quality is Stalinesque. Their idea of equality is no better than Charlemagne had a handle on it as the Inquisition followed him across the continent of Europe and felled many an innocent, thus is the reality when one utilizes an arbitrary system in deciding whether one is worthy of life or consideration. Students today are not even required to read philosophers such as Descartes, Kant, Machiavelli, Sun Tzu, Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky, Homer, Jules Verne, Ernest Hemingway, Bram Stoker, Isaac Asimov, Carl von Clausewitz or others. Instead, many classes only read often solely from obscure poets and writers from Africa and Asia with recent additions in many schools of Quranic based education in the public schools, apparently there is no separation of Mosque and State as there is Temple, Church, Synagogue and state, respectively. The classics in writing, music and art are considered now to be poisonous to student sensitivity. They are simply taught that their entire heritage, providing their heritage came from a Judeo-Christian basis, is to be destroyed and discarded as retaining any piece of Judeo-Christian ethics is a thought crime for which one will face ridicule and be ostracized. All that our modern society is built upon is taught to be contaminated and rotting through and through and the sooner we allow refugees from across the third world, the place of variety and where there are beautiful ideals to be explored and exalted as they are completely foreign to Western thought and custom and thus they must be superiorly equal, the sooner our societies can grow under new influences which will be simply wonderful, or so it is promised. I never thought that this phrase could ever actually fit in an article about modern society, but it can be said that as all civilizations and all philosophies are claimed to be equal but Judeo-Christianity and Eurocentric histories are to be considered to be of a lesser nature and to be cast down because some civilizations, some philosophies, some religious writings, some traditions are simply more equal than others and these are the ones which have nothing to do with Western culture and the developed world’s actual roots. The university campus is a self-hating reactionary place where normative thought is considered gauche and to be rejected with everything to do with Judeo-Christian history and development as that is the wrong path for the future. Really?

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

* Our thanks to WikiPedia for the previous examples from the life of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.