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

Fighting Mass Killings

In a recent edition of our local newspaper there was an article by Megan McArdle, a Washington Post columnist, in which she addressed some familiar “solutions” related to gun control in the U.S.  The entire article can be found at the Washington Post website under the title of “How to Fight Mass Killings.” However, be warned. WP restricts people to a limited number of visits, so you may have to find alternate ways to access the article.

In any case, following are some highlights.

Ms. McArdle asks, Why are so many mass shootings happening now? Why not decades ago, when the United States had plenty of guns, alienated youth, dysfunctional families, economically distressed communities, sexism and almost every other factor commonly blamed for these tragedies?

Surprisingly, mass public shootings used to be rare, freak events. They spiked in the late 1990s,  then abruptly fell in 2000 and stayed low for years. What changed? She points out that in 2000-2004, the dot-com bubble burst. Then there was a hotly contested election, followed by the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the Iraq War. All these events distracted the media and this, in turn, had an effect on those who follow wall-to-wall coverage of massacres.

In her opinion, mass shootings seem to be a “social contagion, a behavioral epidemic.” In fact, she feels they are almost like a disease triggered by media coverage.

Preventing Mass Killings

As we all know, much discussion has taken place on how to stop mass killings. Ms. McArdle provides what she calls two “obvious” policies:

  • Ban private gun ownership
  • Ban extensive coverage of mass shootings

Unfortunately, both violate the Constitution … even though they could radically reduce (if not entirely eliminate) mass killing sprees.

She goes on to say that mental health treatment isn’t the answer since not all shooters have shown any signs of mental unbalance before they strike. She also dismisses violent video games and entertainment. And background checks won’t work because many mass shooters buy guns legally. Or they borrow. Or steal what they can’t borrow.

She points out that a high capacity magazine ban enacted in 1994 proved useless because it’s the high velocity power of the gun that’s the problem, not how many bullets it can hold.

She then asks: “What part of the Bill of Rights do we want to amend, read out of the Constitution or simply violate outright? The First Amendment or the Second?”

She ends her commentary by indicating she will point out a better way in her next column. I hope to be able to access it and report accordingly. However, if it’s not provided by our local newspaper, I encourage readers to research on their own and share her solutions via comments on this post.

*************************************
Image by Clker-Free-Vector-Images from Pixabay

Do You Love the U.S.A.?

If your answer is YES, then I implore you to read and think about the following excerpt from Robert A. Vella’s blog post.

Another mass shooting has struck an American school, this one near the site of an even worse mass shooting at a school.  Meanwhile America’s president is waging a multi-front war against all comers.  Donald Trump is waging a political war against the U.S. House of Representatives because the Democrats who control that legislative body are attempting to perform their constitutional duty to conduct oversight of his thoroughly corrupt administration.  He is waging a propaganda war against journalists in the news media who dare to investigate his shady past and behavior in the White House.  Trump is waging an ill-conceived economic war against China which threatens to undermine not only the U.S. economy but also the world economy.  He is on the verge of waging an incredibly dangerous military war against Iran simply because his despotic allies wish it.  And, Trump is waging an ethnic war against migrants and asylum-seekers who have committed no more serious offense than wanting to escape the destitution and violence of their native countries.

These ongoing shootings, the depravity of President Trump, and many other worrisome trends, are symptoms of the demise of a once-great nation.  America is at war with itself.  It has lost its moral compass, its appreciation of the importance between discerning right and wrong, and the ability to correct itself.  Its leaders have failed, and its people have fallen into primitiveness.

As long as Americans fight tribe against tribe, so long will they be a little people, a silly people, greedy, barbarous and cruel.

If I wasn’t a U.S. citizen whose life is dependent upon the health of my country, I might be inclined to wish for America’s end to come quickly.  The American people as a whole deserve neither admiration nor sympathy, for we have collectively abrogated our responsibility to uphold and defend the constitutional principles which our nation was founded on.

What is happening to this country under the current leadership is not only appalling but downright scary! Each and every day brings a new crisis. And few, if any, are resolved before the next one takes its place. It is a three-ring circus that never leaves town.

I realize there are those who are convinced the U.S. is better off under the current POTUS. For whatever reason, they believe he can do no wrong and they back every action he has taken. All I can say is … I hope you’re right. Because if you aren’t, every single individual who calls this nation home is eventually going to suffer.

Bruce Willis’ Simplistic Statement

Following is a ‘brief’ that was in today’s local newspaper:

Bruce Willis says he’s against new gun control laws that could infringe on Second Amendment rights. He dismissed any link between Hollywood shootouts and real-life gun violence in a recent interview while promoting his latest film. He believes “the real topic is diminished” when observers link Hollywood entertainment with high-profile mass shootings. “No one commits a crime because they saw a film. There’s nothing to support that,” he said.

It’s that last statement that sent me through the roof. Of course no one goes out and commits a crime just because they saw a film! It isn’t simply the movies, video games, or television programs that cause individuals to go out and murder innocent people. It’s what these forms of communication are frequently promoting, i.e., violence and disrespect for human life.

Watch practically any action movie or TV program and you’ll see this person killing that person (most frequently with a gun). Look over the shoulder of your teenager as he plays one of the popular video games and what is he doing? Shooting and killing.

Certainly not every person who is exposed to a violent movie or video game is going to go on a mass murdering spree. There are nearly always other factors involved. However, as Eugene V. Beresin, M.D., (Massachusetts General Hospital and McLean Hospital) writes in the following online article:

While the causes of youth violence are multifactorial and include such variables as poverty, family psychopathology, child abuse, exposure to domestic and community violence, substance abuse and other psychiatric disorders, the research literature is quite compelling that children’s exposure to media violence plays an important role in the etiology of violent behavior.

Dr. Beresin goes on to say:

The “typical American child will view more than 200,000 acts of violence, including more than 16,000 murders before age 18.”

He adds:

“They may come to see violence as a fact of life and, over time, lose their ability to empathize with both the victim and the victimizer.”

I was particularly struck by this statement:

“The typical scenario of using violence for a righteous cause may translate in daily life into a justification for using violence to retaliate against perceived victimizers. Hence, vulnerable youth who have been victimized may be tempted to use violent means to solve problems.”

In my opinion, while Mr. Willis may support Second Amendment rights, his comment related to films and crime demonstrated a complete disconnect to the very real issue that is facing our nation today.