Monday, January 29, 2018

You know when they say, "Read the Whole Thing?"

Yes, you should read the whole thing in this case. It's a speech by Daniel Greenfield, given to a Tea Party group (yes, they still exist) in South Carolina. And while I wish Greenfield's take on things weren't true, it is. Excerpts:
But it’s not guns that make a civil war. It’s politics.

Guns are how a civil war ends. Politics is how it begins.

How do civil wars happen?

Two or more sides disagree on who runs the country. And they can’t settle the question through elections because they don’t even agree that elections are how you decide who’s in charge.

That’s the basic issue here. Who decides who runs the country? When you hate each other but accept the election results, you have a country. When you stop accepting election results, you have a countdown to a civil war.
Do you doubt this? Consider the evidence Greenfield presents:
Republicans can win an election, but they have a major flaw. They’re not leftists.
That’s what the leftist dictatorship looks like.

The left lost Congress. They lost the White House. So what did they do? They began trying to run the country through Federal judges and bureaucrats.

Every time that a Federal judge issues an order saying that the President of the United States can’t scratch his own back without his say so, that’s the civil war.

Our system of government is based on the constitution, but that’s not the system that runs this country.

The left’s system is that any part of government that it runs gets total and unlimited power over the country.

If it’s in the White House, then the president can do anything. And I mean anything. He can have his own amnesty for illegal aliens. He can fine you for not having health insurance. His power is unlimited.

He’s a dictator.

But when Republicans get into the White House, suddenly the President can’t do anything. He isn’t even allowed to undo the illegal alien amnesty that his predecessor illegally invented.

A Democrat in the White House has “discretion” to completely decide every aspect of immigration policy. A Republican doesn’t even have the “discretion” to reverse him.

That’s how the game is played. That’s how our country is run.
Do you doubt that? Consider the spectacle we've been treated to this weekend. The MSM reports that Trump wanted to fire Robert Mueller. It didn't happen, of course -- Mueller has been doing whatever the hell he wants for nearly a year. But because it's been reported that Trump considered getting rid of Mueller, and may have even given an order to do so before he was talked out of it, he's guilty of obstruction of justice. Just thinking about opposing the work of someone who, ultimately, serves at his pleasure, is prima facie evidence of a crime.

You want more? Greenfield has more:
There’s no consistent legal standard. Only a political one.

Under Obama, states weren’t allowed to enforce immigration laws. That was the job of the Federal government. And the states weren’t allowed to interfere with the job that the Feds weren’t doing.

Okay.

Now Trump comes into office and starts enforcing immigration laws again. And California announces it’s a sanctuary state and passes a law punishing businesses that cooperate with Federal immigration enforcement.

So what do we have here?

It’s illegal for states to enforce immigration law because that’s the province of the Federal government. But it’s legal for states to ban the Federal government from enforcing immigration law.

The only consistent pattern here is that the left decided to make it illegal to enforce immigration law.

It may do that sometimes under the guise of Federal power or states rights. But those are just fronts. The only consistent thing is that leftist policies are mandatory and opposing them is illegal.

Everything else is just a song and dance routine.
Our friend Gino lives in California, as does Greenfield. Gino has been making this same argument for a long time now. And there are even more examples than what I've shared here. But they are all at the link. So hit the link. And think long and hard about what Greenfield is saying and what it means.

2 comments:

John said...

Gino is a smart man.

I offer this simple observation on war (civil or otherwise), from someone far smarter than me.

"We see, therefore, that war is not merely an act of policy but a true political instrument, a continuation of political intercourse carried on with other means. What remains peculiar to war is simply the peculiar nature of its means."

From "On War" by Carl von Clausewitz

Gino said...

Thanks John! :)


this has been happening in CA for decades now. CA has a direct democracy initiative process. whenever the right won an initiative, the CA supreme court would nullify it.

we brought one initiative back, cant remember what it was, this time as an amendment to the constitution. The supremes ruled it unconstitutional.

get that. they ruled a duly voted part of the constitution as not part of the constitution.


as goes CA, so goes the nation.
this is the future of America.
book it.

this is a war, but only one side is fighting to win... until the shooting starts. its going that way.