Beyond the Cusp

August 27, 2017

Where Could We Put One and Have it be Safe?

 

Whatever you think of the current American President, there is one fact that cannot be contested, his has been the most reviled, contested, despised and opposed Presidency by everyone except the electorate, and even there his supporters are from that group properly called the silent majority, or silent plurality. One thing for certain, those who are lamenting his election are boisterous, vociferous, persistent, and completely unhinged. No previous President has faced such obstruction from the existing bureaucracy, the opposition party, the Resistance (as they call themselves), the media, academia and so many other areas. Certainly there should be a monument to the least deserved and least desired and most unlikely President in all of American history. He is loathed more than Abraham Lincoln was by the establishment in his day, been called nastier names than even Jimmy Carter received, had more calls for his impeachment than did Richard Nixon, accused of more scandals than Ulysses S Grant, and been considered to be the greatest usurper in all of history. Any single person capable of exuding such emotional outbursts from so many people sending them into such beyond reason convulsions of pure insanity must be deserving of a monument, and something more glorious than simply tall buildings with his name on them, Trump Towers. The only other entity who has engendered equal disrespect and admiration at the same time was Homer Simpson, and he had to be invented, where Donald Trump invented himself.

 

Perhaps such a monument could be designed so as to satisfy both the detractors and supporters. That would be a challenge but somebody just might be up to the challenge. But while the Secret Service, right, we’re kidding, is out seeking this design genius, why not work on the big problem, location, location, location. Obviously the Nation’s Capital Washington D.C. is out as it is Deep State and far-left central, these would never accept such a monument. Factually, both coasts and large cities in the north of the mid-west such as Cleveland and Chicago are completely out as being Democrat central locations which went totally Hillary Clinton in the election and are still suffering withdrawal and reality deprivations syndrome (RDS). Perhaps the monument might be erected outside of Reno or Las Vegas, Nevada where it might simply appear as another attraction and would receive minimal notice in a century or two, until then the protesters trying to burn the monument to the ground might just draw some undesired attentions. There is a location outside Tulsa, Oklahoma nearest to Sand Springs, Oklahoma where there was planned to erect a 217 foot (66 meter) bronze statue of a Native American called The American which was never constructed and is kind of out of the well-beaten-path to satisfy the leftists who would demand such. Such a monument would serve the original purpose of the American and the statue or monument commemorating Donald Trump might even continue to have the same name, if Congress could ever come to realize that Donald Trump actually is an American. If we are not mistaken, Oklahoma went for President Trump and was recently rated as the second most conservative state behind Wyoming and slightly ahead of Mississippi (see map below). Actually, there we have three states which might actually compete for the honor, in their opinions, to host just such a monument and see it as a great honor, though Wyoming is population challenged and would lose any write-in contest. But this article couldn’t be about a monument or statue to President Trump, so what could we be trying to say at this point? Well, continue reading my friends.

 

Conservative and Liberal Ideology by State 2016

Conservative and Liberal Ideology by State 2016

 

There have been calls across Europe and the United States to remove every statue of any person who offends the sensitivities of anyone who matters, translated meaning anyone from the leftist side of the political spectrum, though if things were permitted to be close to fair, then each location would be permitted to retain the statues they value, but this is not about fair, it is about imposing the rules designed by the left, for the left, to promote the left and give the left supremacy over conservatives and all else. The southern states who were part of the Confederacy and value their hometown heroes for fighting the righteous fight against all odds are never to be permitted their history, as they have been deemed evil by the overlords of propriety. The leftists do not demand much, just the right to determine what can be taught to the next generation, what is permitted in the newspapers of record (NYT and close affiliates), what can be permitted to be shown on cable networks, and who can be permitted to be immortalized on monuments and statues using not the standards of their day but the leftist standards of the moment. What they are unaware of is that as time passes and the ideals and standards of the future are revealed, even their heroes and most wonderful of individuals will wilt before the changing values and progress will sooner or later bring them into disregard and thus destroy all records of the past. Were the world to fall into this trap it would face an even worse and catastrophic reality, the past would be erased and all its warnings would disappear with it and this would open up doors to disasters beyond imagination. If anyone could find something from the past over two hundred years of age, that will stand the test of time, please suggest them in our comments, please.

 

We thought we might give a list of things from such a past which there have already been calls for their elimination and to be thrown into the dustbin of history, as they no longer make any contribution to our societies and the modern age. The Old Testament tops the list in items demanded to be thrown out, as it does not measure up to modern standards. The Magna Carter is another of those old, dusty documents which are no longer necessary. There was one professor who decided to make the call easier for all of us and simply stated that any document written on animal skins was an abomination and insult to the modern mind, which of course means that anything written on parchment must go. Let us give you a short list of such items, Torah, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights. The Second Amendment and of late the First Amendment, especially Freedom of Speech have all come under attack with suggestions that all firearms and weapons be kept safely by the government, and speech be limited and altered to read freedom from offense. Unfortunately for conservatives and the religious, their sensitivities are not amongst those to be considered and when they suddenly find themselves offended they will be informed that they are not being insulted but rather they are being instructed and educated in the proper means of how to think. The society will be facing right-think which will only encompass, indulge and convenience leftist social contrivances and traditions be damned, and they would become exactly that, damned. Belief in the Creator would be ridiculed and disappear from all polite conversation and those speaking of such would result in reeducation or complete exile from society. There would be reservations where those who held to provincial ideas and ideals and whose minds were stuck in the past would be relegated so as not to contaminate their betters in society who were the deciders of all which was to be considered acceptable. Societies where the leadership believes that they are the holders of the sole truths and cannot ever be countered and they are correct beyond question are societies which will soon find themselves falling down a rabbit hole never to return.

 

Every great document allowed for some measure of interpretation which would permit changes with time and the finest of documents left hints as to the best paths to pursue and which travels should be avoided at all costs. The item and concept of slavery has been a hot button issue in the news of late and was implied to be used as a filter for the expositor of propriety. Let us begin with what the Torah stated about slavery and its properness for the future. Slaves in the Torah were to be freed and returned to their lands every seventh year. This was intended to make slavery less enriching and temporary and with an intention to eventually make it no longer have any relevance. Torah gave a strong hint that slavery was not something to be permanent and that it wished for a future, the sooner the better, where slavery was no more. The United States Constitution also made it such that slavery would not become a means for attaining power. The three-fifths rule has long been misinterpreted. Frederick Douglass probably had the most to say and understand having suffered slavery and educating himself becoming probably the greatest spokesperson favoring the United States Constitution and the three-fifths clause as the greatest anti-slavery document in history which he explained and can be read here. The Torah and the United States Constitution were both written with full knowledge of the savagery and dehumanizing character of slavery and intended to destroy the institution using time and limitations which would permit the natural demise of slavery as society and human nature matured and realized the inhumanity of the practice. Slavery was going to reach the end of its usefulness with the coming of the industrial revolution when machines would outperform hundreds of people and the operators of the machines required particular skills which would garner a salary. Their designs to end slavery were subtle and encoded in such a manner such as to appear acceptable to those who demanded slaves to make their wealth while always allowing hope to those who opposed slavery as an inhuman practice. Still, these two documents have always been falsely decried as supportive of slavery when in fact they were designed to be exactly the opposite.

 

There is also the confusion over the Bill of Rights. There is confusion over Freedom of Speech versus Freedom from Offense and the even larger misconception that the Second Amendment is about hunting or protecting one’s home from criminals. The Second Amendment is all about protecting the individual from the overbearing interventions of the government and was meant to permit the people the ability to resist government. The idea is in a society where the people have firearms the government fears the people but in a society where the government had the weapons then the people fear the government. The United States was designed for the government to fear the people, not the other way around. But these and other such misconceptions and lies must await another time as we are attempting to be less wordy and having unfortunately limited results, but will continue to try.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Advertisements

August 14, 2017

Crisis Time in America Again

 

It was so nice during the Obama administration. The nation was right all over and there was hardly any disturbance of America is normal, wonderful and happy, with no real problems. There was no homelessness, no opioid epidemic, no crime waves, no epidemic of murders even in Chicago, everything was white picket fences with gardens of sunflowers and roses down the sides of the walk and all days were sunny and not too hot and not too cold, everything was just right. Then somehow, everything went south as one of those nasty Republicans got elected, a horrible man, mean-spirited and just awful. His name was Donald Trump. Now we hear the news and there are crimes, illegals, opioids, homelessness, drug use, protests, and the sun no longer shines and the fences and flowers have been trampled. What has happened to our wonderful nation, which was so perfect with President Obama, and now the news is full of such awfulness all because of the election of President Trump.

 

Okay, so that was not exactly accurate but the tone and messaging by the newscasts has changed and this is not the first time such has been the case. The same thing occurred when Ronald Reagan was elected and also when George W. Bush was elected. When President Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton were in office, the news avoided these problems but as soon as a Republican hit the White House, these problems became front-page news day in and day out. As far as the newsrooms are concerned, when the White House is held by the Democrats, there are few consistent problems which require immediate attention and all the so-called epidemics disappear, but when a Republican is elected, the nation is instantly in crisis with every problem and crisis peaking and coming to a point where they are unbearable and the main news is about how the President is overwhelmed and unable to address all the problems and the White House news teams at briefings demand answers to these problems with every reporter asking why the President appears stunned into inaction in the face of these crises threatening the nation. Everywhere the President turns he sees nothing but crisis after crisis and reporters with the media, all reminding him that he needs to put out these fires or he will look inept.

 

For the unwashed, also known as the younger generations who have not lived through these transitions before, this can come as a shock to their system and it is difficult to hold them completely responsible for their recoiling and initially believing that the new President is clueless. The image painted in the reports is that while these problems were being addressed by the previous administration and were being held in check, they are now running untreated because, as it has been claimed loudly in the news and social media, the Republicans have cut spending in every social program leaving all the problems out of control and untreated. Let us first dispel the claims that the Republican Congress and President have eliminated or cut spending to all the social programs. There is a funny thing about definitions and how things can be stated to imply one thing but because of definitions, they are nothing but lies. Cutting spending is probably the biggest lie the Democrats ever tell. When ever you hear that there have been spending cuts, go look at the real figures from the Treasury Department and you will get a surprise, the actual spending increased. Spending cuts means that the increase was less than the Democrats proposed. Example, the democrats proposed an increase of twelve percent but the actual result in the spending allowance was for seven percent. That is a five percent cut in spending because it did not meet the twelve percent and a seven percent increase must be made to appear as if the entire program has been denied of funds by the mean, spending-cutting Republicans. I bet if you went to your boss and requested a twelve percent raise and, after a lengthy discussion, you left his office with a seven percent raise, would you be claiming that he cut your pay by five percent? Of course not, but that is what the media and the Democrats use as their measure, if they do not get what they want, whatever they get must be a cut in spending, period. It is all part of the image painting where the Republican must be made to appear as if their main joy in life is going to the zoo and stealing candy from children.

 

There is another item the media is not telling the public. The budget the Republicans are working to put together, it will not take effect until the next fiscal year. The budget that is running the government currently was voted upon and put into effect before President Trump was even elected, let alone sworn into office. The government is currently running on the last budget from President Obama’s administration and the Congress that was replaced by the ineffective one currently bungling their way into oblivion. The Congress and President Trump have not cut spending to a single program this year and there is no budget yet formulated for next year or any year in the future. Everything that has been stated about spending is simply conjecture. Nothing has been cut, nothing has been increased, nothing has been changed one iota and if the Congress does not manage to agree on a budget, then one alternative could be a government shutdown. There is one nice thing about any government shutdown; it will most definitely be blamed on the Republicans whether the Congress or the President is credited with the responsibility. But it simply does not matter that the budget which the government is using is an Obama signed budget which presumably gave the President and the Congress everything that both could accept and seal a deal. That is the budget which the government is running under right now and yet we hear about how Meals with Wheels or Medicaid or Obamacare or any of a thousand other programs are being starved of funding and that places such as Planned Parenthood are being forced to close their doors because they have had their funding cut by the horrible budget in place presumably because President Trump refused to sign any budget with the correct funding. President Trump had not yet signed any budget and, as things appear now, he may never sign anything but continuing resolutions which simply continue the spending, more often than not, at near to the same level.

 

Oh, and when that day comes, if the Republican Congress continues to be as dysfunctional as a television sitcom family, the media, the Democrats, the leftists and social media (especially Twitter so please forgive the pun) will be all a twitter with how this is unprecedented and shows exactly what a dismal failure the Trump Administration has become. For the record as a prediction, if this should become the case and the Senate cannot agree to a budget, we will tell you right now why and who should get all the blame, and it will not be just the Democrats though if they continue to act a single block and never break ranks standing against Trump, theirs is the main reason as they will have simply become rejectionists and there are a few Republican, “Never Trumpist,” rejectionists who should be held for special mention in the blame department. The following Republicans will vote against every budget; Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, and John McCain of Arizona, who will claim that a budget is too important to be passed on a strict party line vote and until the Democrats, at least five to ten of them, vote for a budget, he will side with the Democrats. The reason for his choosing a number is because should that number of Democrats support a budget it would pass so he will have to be on the winning side and perhaps, if things work out perfectly, he and a leading Democrat will waltz into the Senate chamber at the final moments and cast their vote together proving bipartisanship. One likely Democrat would be Chuck Schumer of New York. There are a few other probable Republicans who will also reject budgets for the reason that social spending requires more funding and they include potentially Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, Rob Portman of Ohio, Bob Corker of Tennessee, Dean Heller of Nevada, Tom Cotton of Arkansas, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Mike Lee of Utah, Lamar Alexander of Tennessee and Rand Paul of Kentucky.

 

The Encourageables Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, Rob Portman of Ohio, Bob Corker of Tennessee, Dean Heller of Nevada, Tom Cotton of Arkansas, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Mike Lee of Utah, Lamar Alexander of Tennessee and Rand Paul of Kentucky

The Encourageables

 

Most of these names will not surprise the politically attuned as they realize that these are party loyalists; except for Rand Paul who, along with his father Ron Paul, reject all normative politics and hold everything to their strict Constitutional views and interpretations; who reject Trump as an outsider who does not belong to their little club, their righteous fraternity of the inner circle. These are people who have been in Washington D.C. far too long and consider themselves the protectors of the faith and of the true spirit of the government and its responsibilities to the people and they will decide the rightness of all things and when they are out of balance, they, along with some from amongst the democrats, will set everything to rights without regard to party loyalty. What we have observed over the years is that more often than not the things which need to be set right are more conservative leaning than left leaning proposals. That fits with a theory that the longer anyone spends in Washington D.C. the further left they will drift until there is no difference between a longtime Democrat and a longtime Republican as both will have drifted to the same warm home in the flaming far left.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

January 29, 2017

Trump Clinton, the Aftermath

 

Well, it actually is all over except the shouting, and there sure seems to be a whole lot of shouting. If you do not believe us, go visit Facebook and if your page is not filled with screaming heebie jeebies, well, then your friends either do not speak English or other major languages or your friends have never heard of this place called the United States of America. Just for your edification, right now they do not appear all that united. The winner of the election rightfully depends on how you figure the winner. By the rules set forth in the United States Constitution, Donald Trump won receiving the majority of the Electoral College Delegates and it was not even close. If, on the other hand, you play by whatever rules best support your argument, in this case the popular vote, then Hillary Clinton should be the President. But if you really want to be picky, then the Democrat candidate should have been the disenfranchised Bernie Sanders and everybody knows that he would have won, just ask his supporters, they’ll tell you all about how he was cheated and how he would have creamed Trump in the General election. Just in case you have not caught on, it’s complicated. To make matters even more bizarre, Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate for President, did not win a single Electoral College Delegate but still demanded recounts in the three states which Hillary Clinton was closest to beating Donald Trump and would have, any two of the three, given Hillary Clinton the victory making her President. Just for clarity, Jill Stein had nothing to gain in any recount even if done by a blind supporter of her candidacy. For reasons that escaped those on the left, that includes most Hillary Clinton supporters and all of Jill Stein supporters, the courts refused the recount efforts and decreed that the recount request by Jill Stein was ridiculous because it could never have gained her any advantage. They were very polite not to dress her down for acting for Hillary Clinton and at the Clinton Campaign’s request that she be her agent so that Hillary could remain above the dirty down under shenanigans. So, the end result is Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, which is like saying she received over 60% of California and New York plus, for the record, over 90% of Washington D.C., which way outnumbered anything Texas could produce as it was almost close in Texas, 55% Trump, but Donald Trump received the most Electoral College Delegates, that is more states which were close such as Wisconsin, Ohio, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Florida and you get the idea, thus winning the Presidential race. For those having difficulty, if one were to be running for school president and each of the twelve levels of classes received one delegate and candidate A won three of the classes by fifty votes each but Candidate B won the remaining nine classes by three votes on average then Candidate B wins the election nine to three but loses the vote count by one-hundred-twenty-three votes.

 

Now let us give you the particulars. You will hear the claim that each person’s vote in Wyoming, the least populous state, was equal to a thousand votes in California, the most populous state, which explains why Hillary Clinton killing Donald Trump in California but losing Wyoming was important, that actually is how it is supposed to work. If the vote were straight popular vote would anybody ever campaign in Wyoming or Alaska or anywhere other than California, New York, Ohio, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Florida and Texas? Winning California, New York, Ohio, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Florida would easily win you the popular vote but what about the remaining forty-three states, what are they, chopped liver? That was exactly what the Founding Fathers wished to avoid except in their day it was Ohio, Virginia, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts. The Electoral College is made up of five-hundred-thirty-five delegates. Each state receives two delegates to equal their number of Senators and then they get a delegate for each member of the House of Representatives. Every state is guaranteed a minimum of one Representative thus in the Electoral College Wyoming gets three delegates and California gets fifty-five delegates. The population of California is many times greater than the population of Wyoming, sufficient that seventy-five delegates might be a closer representation of the difference, but that is not the rule and the rules for the election were clear, crystal clear, at the beginning of the campaign. Despite knowing that she would win in California and New York, Hillary Clinton still campaigned in both states as if they were in question and crucial to her winning yet she spent little if any time in Wisconsin, Ohio, Virginia, Pennsylvania and Michigan believing they too were guaranteed. They were not. Still, the screaming will continue as if a great miscarriage of justice has been committed because Hillary Clinton was owed the Presidency and Donald Trump is a poser.

 

So, what is the truth behind this election? Well, first off is Donald Trump is not worthy of the office of President, but then again neither was Hillary Clinton. Probably there might have been a third party or independent candidate worthy but the actual reality is the only ones with any hope of winning were the two major party candidates. So, what are the American people to do when both parties put up such candidates? They chose, it is that simple. Truth of the matter is that there are likely a fair number of people who voted for Donald Trump who now wish they had not but had Hillary Clinton won there would have likely been a near equal number of people upset with having voted for her. When the vast majority of the people are voting against one candidate rather than supporting the candidate receiving their vote, there can be no validated winner. That aside, the fact is Donald Trump beat Hillary Clinton by three-hundred-six delegates to two-hundred-thirty-two delegates. That is an electoral landslide despite losing the popular vote. That leaves a vast number of disgruntled Americans facing a President who feels he has an electoral mandate. The media will do what it is able to deprive Donald Trump of any feelings of great victory be constantly questioning his victory and claiming he stole the Presidential election. Even the more conservative and Republican friendly media will not be all that favorable to Donald Trump thus he is unlikely to have many friends anywhere along the political landscape. But there are those who claim, us included, that if you are making everybody angry then you are probably being extremely fair as nobody likes a fair decision, they want their side to obviously win.

 

Still, the question is what choice was there when both candidates were so obviously flawed? The honest truth was the election was more about which candidate was going to lose, not who would win. Hillary lost the election far more than Trump won the election. Each candidate received more of their votes from people scared to death of the other candidate in the White House. As it turned out, more voters in more states were terrified of the Clinton Foundation and the pay to play politics than they were of a complete clown and poser playing at President for the next four years. More people over a wider geographic area felt that Trump could and would do less damage to the nation than Clinton. There were no great expectations or value voters but had there been such, they voted Trump over Clinton. The reality was once Hillary Clinton campaigned in a single speech that she would be President Obama’s third term she lost. Her repeating that mantra cost her the election as the states between the great mountain ranges, the Appalachians and the Rockies, voted all but unanimously for Trump. Hillary won the megalopolises and Trump the smaller cities, towns and countryside. This election was very much similar to the Truman defeat of Dewey by taking rural America over the cities. That election was initially called for Dewey famously by the Chicago Daily Tribune leading to the famous picture of Truman holding up that paper with the headline of “Dewey Defeats Truman” at his victory party. There was one news magazine which had reported a Clinton victory in the election thus history repeated itself except we had to fake the picture. This election will be exciting demonstrations and questions about what will be and might have been. No matter which side of the argument you sit, you cannot win on Facebook. To be honest, Facebook has gotten borderline toxic no matter who you supported as the extremes are ruling the posting wars. If you can survive more than fifteen minutes either you are ignoring the vast majority of posts or you have apolitical friends. All we can request is please bring back the kitten and puppy pictures and funny videos, please.

 

Dewey Defeats Truman and Clinton Defeats Trump Headlines Then and Now

Dewey Defeats Truman and
Clinton Defeats Trump
Headlines Then and Now

 

The future will debate on into infinity what would have been and what was. There will be predictions of how different things would be and debates over if Trump or Clinton really is the anti-Christ. Trump is the President and the best thing we all can do is pray that he makes at least mostly good choices. We also need remember that many of the things Trump will do, that can be reversed in the future just as things President Obama did are now being altered or nixed all together. That is how the American system functions, or malfunctions, all depending on whether your side is in power or not. After four years the American people will be given the opportunity to decide if Donald Trump was a worthy President or not. First the Republicans will get to decide whether to run Trump again or not and then the people will get a chance if the Republicans have not replaced him. Then there is the chance that Trump will decide four years of the bearing the responsibilities is a bit much for him and not run for reelection. It is possible as it has probably happened before like when Lyndon Baines Johnson decided not to run for another term seeing he would definitely have lost and did not want that on his resume. Whatever the case will be, in two years the entire House of Representatives is up for election and one third of the Senate, which leaves a large amount of potential change if people decide that the nation is going in the wrong direction still. This election was somewhat about the direction of the nation with Hillary Clinton claiming to retain the status quo and Donald Trump being the agent for change, radical change. What was interesting is that radical change won as that is uncharacteristic of the American voters and has seldom been the case. The last time such was chosen was Ronald Reagan, not to draw even the slightest of comparisons though if Donald Trump does half as much good he will have been a success. That will likely get some reactions claiming we are insane if we believe Reagan was a good President and that it was Carter’s policies of freedom that broke the Soviet empire down. That is the belief in some circles; fortunately we travel largely in equilateral triangles so as not to get dizzy. All that can be said in honesty now is may Donald Trump be guided by the better angels and produce good for the largest numbers of peoples as he is able with the limited amount of power he legally wields and may he only wield those defined powers.

 

Beyond the Cusp 

 

Next Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.