A Brain Matters

Once again, I found Heather Cox Richardson’s most recent newsletter FULL of disturbing information related to the Government-in-Charge.

As is her custom, Ms. Richardson included several shenanigans carried out by the Republican party. However, in this particular issue, she included an incident related to Jared Kushner that was especially mind-boggling. Then, when asked about it, Trump’s inane response seemed to originate in the lower part of his body.

Apparently there was a recent exchange between Jared Kushner and a reporter in which Kushner made the following comment related to the coronavirus pandemic supplies going to the states:

“The notion of the federal stockpile is that it’s supposed to be our stockpile. It’s not supposed to be the states’ stockpiles that they then use.”

When CBS News reporter Weijia Jiang later asked Trump what Kushner meant by “our stockpile,” Trump said it was a “gotcha” question. Ms. Richardson went on to share Trump’s exact words:

“You know what ‘our’ means? United States of America,” he said. “We take that – ‘our’ – and we distribute it to the states.” “[W]e need it for the federal government,” Trump said. “To keep for our country because the federal government needs it too, not just the states.” “It’s such a basic and simple question and you try and make it sound so bad,” he added. “You ought to be ashamed of yourself.”

Whaaaat?

“We need it for the federal government … the federal government needs it too, not just the states.”

Did I miss something? Last time I checked, the states make up the federal government! In fact, here it is as stated on the USA.gov website:

The federal government of the United States is the national government of the United States, a federal republic in North America, composed of 50 states 

The pure vacuity of brain matter that exemplifies the leader of this administration is simply mind-boggling.

******************************************
Image by Gordon Johnson from Pixabay

Trump’s Law

President Trump has publicly and vociferously claimed that the Constitution gives him “the right to do whatever I want.” After thinking about this for awhile, I came up with some possible scenarios of past and future events …

Had Trump’s Law been in effect at Clinton’s impeachment, he could have had sex with every staffer in his office, admitted it, and never gone through impeachment because he had “the right to do whatever (he) wanted.”

Had Trump’s Law been in effect during Nixon’s reign, he could have not only admitted his role in the Watergate break-in, but itemized all the other illegal activities he was involved in to get reelected and never gone through impeachment because he had “the right to do whatever (he) wanted.”

Had Trump’s Law been in effect during Johnson’s reign, he could have replaced the Secretary of War with whomever he wanted, whether the Congress agreed or not, and never gone through impeachment because he had “the right to do whatever (he) wanted.”

With Trump’s Law in effect, Trump (or any president) could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue in New York and never be prosecuted OR go through impeachment because he had “the right to do whatever (he) wanted.”

Further, because Trump’s Law is so constitutionally valid, any future president would be able to …

  • Declare war and send troops to destroy a foreign country simply because he wants to.
  • Censor or eliminate all news media reporting simply because he wants to.
  • Do away with all the branches of government and set himself up as supreme ruler simply because he wants to.
  • Designate all people of color as slaves and servants simply because he wants to.
  • Close all U.S. borders and refuse admittance to anyone he doesn’t like simply because he wants to.

This list just skims the surface of what a president could do under Trump’s Law. I feel certain readers could add to it with minimal thought and effort.

It can never be repeated enough … we MUST vote this man out of office. If he is allowed to continue as the Leader of this country, there will be no limit to what he will do under Trump’s Law.

**********************************
Image by Peggy und Marco Lachmann-Anke from Pixabay

Here We Go Again

Religious Freedom seems to be the topic of the day in many circles (after the impeachment, of course). Especially since our esteemed President signed the recent Executive Order which he said was aimed at “reducing discrimination against people and groups of faith.”

(Ironically, Trump ended his above comment with … “There’s nothing more important than that.” I can’t help but ask … more important that impending impeachment?)

One writer in an article about the EO seemed giddy with excitement:

President Trump acted in the best interests of the American people Thursday when he signed an executive order to bolster and protect the rights of students to pray and discuss God in their schools. The order champions and reinforces the freedom of religion guaranteed to us in the Constitution as one of our most important rights.

He went on to say (undoubtedly without prejudice) …

We’re not looking to coerce or force anyone to accept our beliefs – we simply want government to respect our constitutionally derived right to freely express our own deeply held faith.

Of course the question then arises … WHOSE “deeply held faith” are you referring to, sir? The deeply held faith of the Muslim? The deeply held faith of the Mormon? The deeply held faith of the Sikh? The deeply held faith of the Jew?

Oh wait! His next remark seems to make it quite clear:

My own organization has been encouraging students to exercise their religious freedom by bringing their Bibles to school on the first Thursday of every October. (emphasis added)

Maybe I’m off-base, but aren’t Bibles the textbook for Christians?

He goes on to mention how terribly some (Christian) students are treated because they were …

… prohibited from praying during non-instructional time, denied participation in faith-based student clubs on campus, and chastised for expressing biblical points of view in class assignments.

IMO, his first two complaints have some validity, but that last one? Borderline if you ask me. I mean, isn’t “expressing biblical points in class assignments” an example of crossing that line?

In another article on the same subject, the Rev. Johnnie Moore, a member of Trump’s informal evangelical advisory board contended that …

the “White House isn’t saying whether one should pray or to whom or what they should pray to” with the announced changes but that “they are simply making it clear that in the United States students have First Amendment rights also, and our ‘separation of church and state’ wasn’t intended to suppress a vibrant religious life in America but to facilitate it.”

Sounds good, but if this guy is on the evangelical advisory board, there’s little doubt the entity “to whom” he’s referencing.

It never ends. Instead of allowing people to be who and/or what they want to be, certain groups insist upon molding everyone to their way of thinking/believing.

Doesn’t anyone ever wonder why “God” (who is supposed to the All-Wise One) didn’t design his creations to all think the same way? It sure would have saved us humans a lot of grief!

Liberty and Justice

Below is a quote from a blog that I recently came across. To many believers, the first part of the sentence (wars and rumors of war) will be familiar as it’s from the bible (Matthew 24:6). But it’s the second part of the comment that disturbed me.

There will be wars and rumors of wars until the end, because of evil people who hate liberty and justice for all.

Are there really EVIL people who hate liberty and justice for all?

In modern politics, liberty is defined as the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one’s way of life, behavior, or political views. 

While justice branches out into several definitions, the one that seems to fit is that it’s a form of fairness; that is, each person is to have an equal right.

I can’t imagine that anyone would hate either definition, but it seems this writer disagrees. And even more to his point … those that do (?) are EVIL!

What do you think?

This, That, and Other Things

Just a few thoughts/questions that recently came to mind …

Does anyone else think the U.S. should offer fire-fighting assistance to Australia in the wake of the terrible wildfires that are literally destroying parts of that country?

*******

I’m not at all versed in the financial end of politics; however, Keith and Scottie recently had a brief conversation related to government economics. I found the following comment by Keith a learning moment.

Obama did not reduce the debt and Clinton only impacted it in a small way for a short time. BUT, they did reduce the annual deficit, the annual accounting of revenue and expenses. In fact, Clinton handed a small surplus budget to Bush which was a huge statement of accomplishment. Bush then gave it a way with an ill-advised tax cut which his Secretary of the Treasury argued against doing and was fired. Obama’s reduction in the deficit was largely due to the sequestration due to the impasse on the debt ceiling. They put something in place in case no deal could be reached. No deal was reached and cuts were made.

While all of this was going on, the debt continued to climb. So, yes Clinton made huge strides to reduce the deficit. Obama made some strides, but could have done more. What should be noted about Clinton’s changes is more jobs were created under his watch than any other president by far. Yet, it is clear, both Bush and Trump have done very little to impact the deficit and debt. 

*******

Does anyone else agree that there will be some notable repercussions (possibly within our borders) from the recent killing of Qassem Soleimani, the head of Iran’s elite Quds military force and one of the most powerful figures in the Islamic Republic?

*******

Why is it OK for Christians to try and pass laws to prevent abortion (which is a woman’s liberty) but they get very angry when they feel their “religious liberties” are being threatened?

*******

P.S. Comments are also open to discuss issues that you may be wondering about. 🙂

*******************
Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay