Month: November 2020

Responding to Van Jones’ comments on the President’s “expected” refusal to concede

Van Jones spoke on TED on YouTube on October 26, 2020, a week before the election about President Trump’s anticipated refusal to concede the election if Biden won, which refusal to concede has now actually taken place given the legal issues regarding the rampant alleged election fraud committed by the Democratic Party until after these issues are determined. I entered the following comment responding to Van Jones’ lengthy TED speech. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZWRhLW7Y8w

1) concession speech – Hillary to Biden “DO NOT CONCEDE!!!!!” Yeah. So it’s okay for Biden to refuse to concede no matter what, but not Trump where there is glaring fraud? What about where there is glaring irregularities in the vote, like in Bush vs. Gore? Sure, concessions are there when there is a clear outcome in the election. But here, it was clear that mail in voting was going to cause problems, and the Democratic controlled cities and states decided that Republican observers would NOT be permitted to observe the counting, even after a court ordered they be admitted. Justification for challenging the vote. Stay tuned for outcome. 2) You said Gore conceded after the Sup. Ct. decided the case – ha ha..well, but he did not conceded until after the court decided the important question of which Florida votes were LEGALLY countable – uh….basically the same issue which will be decided by the Supreme Court in this election – Same thing. 3) All of what happens after the election and concession until January 6th is in the Constitution. The Concession is meaningless. It is the Constitutional function that actually determines the presidency. You have it backwards. Completely. The law is there for a reason. 4) You totally mixed apples and oranges by claiming that bringing a new slate of electors to the electoral college vote is the same as challenging allegedly fraudulent ballots in Court. The former is untenable, the lawsuits are in fact completely necessary when there has been evidence of fraud, as here in at least 5 states, and probably more. The outcomes of those cases will help determine the outcome of the election. That is how the system works. There is nothing wrong with that system. If the claims of fraud are spurious, they will be thrown out of Court. If not, they will be carefully considered. Bush vs. Gore is a good example. 5) As for the Constitutional method for choosing the president when it goes to the House of Representatives, the system designed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, and in place for 245 years, is that it is one state, one vote. And you are right. There are more red states than blue states. America is a patchwork of states across 3,000 miles of amazing land encompassing 50 states. But “blue states” are concentrated on the coasts, and “red states” are concentrated in mostly the center of the nation, where there are far more states. Sour grapes? sounds like it to me. But Van, you called it a “coup”. Of course you did. But you called it a perfectly Constitutional coup. That is a ridiculous statement, as I just pointed out. It is the Constitution. Want to change it? Good luck. You know the process that has been in force for 245 years. Follow it. Go for it. 6. You keep talking about challenging the results by refusing to accept, but if the election is determined after all legal challenges, then it is over. Period. Why are you creating an issue where it does not exist? 7. “Progressive organizations are preparing to warn Americans about the threat to Democracy.” Van. Listen. The biggest threat to Democracy has been the extensive fraud committed by the Democratic Party in this election, the participation of the media in censoring the opposition to essentially shut them up (basically eliminating any reference to the Biden revelations in the weeks before the election, and many other issues), putting in place a system of wholesale mail in voting which contained absolutely none of the checks and balances in assuring one qualified voter, one vote, and then counting the votes in secret (something done in banana republics, like Venezuela, Cuba, Bolivia, Russia) Democracy is threatened by the left. Make no mistake. 8. Finally, stop referring to the president’s legal actions to determine the outcome of the election as a “coup”. The only “coup” here is the one that began over 4 years ago to impeach the President (failed) and ending with the current attempt by the Democratic Party to stuff the ballot boxes with bogus ballots (e.g. hundreds of thousands of fake ballots which only vote for Biden, with no other races selected, backdated ballots, illegal ballots, etc.), and then count them in secret, to destroy Trump ballots (which can never be recounted in a recount if they are destroyed), using computer software to change the outcome, and various other methods which will come to light in the lawsuit to be filed this week and in the coming weeks. Just like there is no concession under these circumstances, there is no “president-elect”, because the races have not been completed yet under existing law.

Democratic Party Drug Mafia – drugging our kids to finance the agenda of the left – a tragic mistake of epic proportions

New York Governor Cuomo in a recent interview stated that New York is ripe to legalize recreational drugs (https://nypost.com/2020/11/05/gov-cuomo-says-2021-is-ripe-for-legalizing-pot-in-new-york/). His focus was almost completely on the financial benefits this would provide to NY coffers through taxation dollars going to the government, sufficient he thought to finance much of the left’s billion dollar programs. His complete attention was to the oodles of tax dollars the government would derive from the sale, purchase and usage of recreational drugs by New York citizens. To this extent, I imagined the Governor sitting at his desk, leaning back in his chair, and dreaming of the billions of tax dollars NY would haul in, rubbing his hands together, and cackling. He was talking about the New York State Government Drug Mafia, taking its “cut” for actually drugging NY citizens, drugging our families. If you are not appalled, you must be a Democrat. It almost sounded like a meeting of the “five families” in The Godfather to split up the drug profits (you remember Barzini said “after all, we are not Communists…,” probably not true in this case of Democrat Governors figuring out how to profit from their citizens’ drug addiction).

There has always been a deep divide politically regarding the effect of drugs on our citizenry, at least for the past 70 years, and probably longer. Those on the left have always been tolerant of drugs, particularly now and in the 60s and 70s (possibly a baby boomer effect), and those on the right bitterly opposed to them, and much of the difference is ideological regarding the effects of certain drugs on people in general, the overwhelming criminal implications of violating laws against use of certain drugs, and the enormous financial implications of the drug “industry”, which should be read as “governmental drug mafia”, essentially akin to organized crime benefitting from the addiction, physical or otherwise, to the effects of drug use, and the downward spiral of most users “needing” to keep buying.

I won’t get into statistics or such arguments. Personal observations and personal aversion to drugs has informed my thinking about the effects on American society, and has affected my conclusions. The stats are there to find.

I was opposed to many of the legalization laws, in particular recreational marijuana (THE gateway drug – those “studies” which are not convinced marijuana is a gateway drug always rely on alcohol and smoking as also “gateway” substances, but the difference is glaring – alcohol and smoking are not illegal, and once someone has used an illegal “drug”, they are far more likely to wander down that rabbit hole to other illegal substances), which have spread like wildfire throughout the US, and the general recent reality that the left has induced a numbness to the effects of drug use in light of the overwhelming support among voters, particularly younger voters. The left is also in love with the notion that since many drugs are no longer illegal, arrests for use or sale have been all but stopped.

Estimates you might find for NY’s taxes on drug sales, including franchise fees and taxes and taxes on sales, range from $300 million to more than $1 billion yearly.

Just think of it. All you need to do is sacrifice your children and their families, give them over to pot, let them freely use it, and/or sell it, and many of NY’s financial problems will be over! It reminds me of the organized crime structure, and of the cops taking bribes, other law enforcement taking bribes to look the other way, and here now, we have the government itself taking its 20% cut of the drug trade. The Great New York State Drug Cartel. That will be the name of New York from now on. Just another cartel, using organized drug sales to enrich the State and fill its coffers. Anyone who has had family swallowed whole by drugs knows the dangers inherent in these policies and should find this repugnant.

It should come as no surprise the Democratic Party will raise money by drugging you and your kids, and profiting from that.

Personally, I find it disgusting in so many ways, it is hard to articulate how deeply disturbing this trend is. Drugs are no less dangerous now than they have been all along, the only thing that changed was the liberal government’s greed and avarice, and willingness to play the Devil, and entice our youth into participating in this deadly game and generate cash. This is no better than the thug on the street corner selling pot or worse. Not one single bit better. Cuomo, Mafia Drug Lord. It fits the Governor perfectly.

Macron is right, but it is too little too late

Millions of oppressed fled Syria. Most were fleeing death and misery. Many though were embedded with extremism, a brand of Islam bereft of tolerance, hence “believe like me or die”. Once the doors were thrown open in the EU, many European members were forced to yield, and in many forms of Islam there is no leeway for getting along with “freedom of speech”. Thus, like in Communist China, or Cuba, or Venezuela, or North Korea, or Russia, or a variety of dictatorships in Africa, or in Asian Islam, like in Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, or for the likes of Hamas, Hezbollah, PLO, Iran, and others, free exchange of ideas is anathema to them, and even the slightest disagreement with their dogma inspires horror and murder, as we saw recently in Paris and Nice. Macron’s response is justified, but it is too little too late, and he was weak for too long in recognizing the inevitable influence the influx would have on European sensibilities and customs. The seeds of this destruction are now already planted in Europe, and every country that opened its doors to this particular endless immigration has introduced social conflict that is in many respects incompatible with the traditional freedoms inherent in Western culture. The result unfortunately has repeated itself in London, in Paris, and throughout the EU. It is not going away.

We see some of this in Ilan Omar, her intolerance and ideology, her palpable hatred of America, and Jews in particular. We see it also in a host of others who fled somewhere to bring this intolerance to our shores, in some cases itching for a fight. There is no place for it in our culture. There are hundreds of millions who can and do get along in the world. But for the rest it is like throwing a match into a barrel of oil.

There are those ready to appease the intolerance of those of Omar’s ilk, yield to their demands of “believe like me or die”, and the current thread of appeasement which runs through the Left’s eagerness to embrace those who despise our freedom and our nation leaves me in fear of our future, with the likes of Tlaib, Omar, Ellison and others manipulating our open system to their advantage, and injecting insidious dogma into those they influence (like the rabid Antisemitism and hatred of Israel spreading like wildfire in the BLM/Antifa movement and the Democratic Party).

We should use Macron’s initial fecklessness as an example of what not to do, and a cautionary tale to impel us to adopt the vigilance we need to keep the incompatible hatred and violence from infecting our nation. We welcome legal immigrants and refugees to our shores, but they are welcome only if they abide by our long, long history and traditions of freedom, tolerance and acceptance, and “believe like me or die” is not acceptable dogma in our collective American DNA. It most certainly is not.