Trying to Make Sense of the Capitol Siege on the Epiphany

On the Christian calendar, January 6th was the Epiphany, a day of illumination.  In the Constitutional process, it was the day when Congress would consider and ratify the results of the Electoral College.   As President Donald Trump was convinced that election irregularities had stolen his victory from November 3rd, he called for a big Save America rally on the Ellipse to #StopTheSteal. 

Instead of being remembered as a time when defenders of the rule of law in Congress put forth a case that some of the state’s election results were invalid, most people will remember a Siege of the Capitol, in which Congress left in haste, troublemakers overtook part of the building and one woman was shot and killed.  Conventional wisdom will link the rioting with the Deplorables’ March on Washington, and establishment opinion makers will use it as a means to discredit the populist political movement, or even to remove President Trump by a late day impeachment or the 25th Amendment.

In the fog of war, there is a lot of confusion.  So when trying to make sense of the Capitol Siege, there are some things that do not add up.   A basic question is how could agitators so easily breach the Capitol building?  After all, the date was when all federal lawmakers and the Vice President would be gathering at the Capitol for what is usually a pro forma ceremony. It was clear that some objections would be raised and there would be debate over certification. Surely, security plans would afford added protection for the lawmakers.   In addition, Mayor Muriel Bowser (D-Washington, DC) had requested (and received) help from the National Guard while warning residents to stay home.  With that in mind, how did the Capitol so easily find itself in peril?

Deployment of forces certainly was part of the problem.  The National Guard called up was initially tasked with directing traffic around many of the blocked off streets around Capitol Hill and downtown DC.  National Guard typically does not get front line security deployments because of posse commitatus concerns and letting local law enforcement take the lead. In retrospect, it seems silly to have troops play traffic cops when there were a half million protesters going to march up the National Mall to the Capitol to protest “Stop the Steal”.  

One also has to wonder about the Capitol Hill police.  Video from when protestors breached the West lawn perimeter does not depict officers with full riot equipment as they clashed with troublemakers wearing helmets and carrying shields  who later broke into the Capitol.  But there are videos videos both on the West exterior stairs  and the West entrance  which give the impression that agitators were let into the complex by Capitol Police. This seemed strange.

Then one must consider the timing of the Capitol Siege.  President Trump was still speaking on the Ellipse at 1 PM when the Joint Session of Congress met for Electoral College Certification.  Shortly after certification began (ironically when the Arizona objections were raised), was when serious challenges of the Capitol building entrances began.  The Ellipse is at least a mile and a half away from the Capitol. It seems like troublemakers were pre-positioned on Capitol Hill to riot.  Adding to that conclusion is that the House Cannon Office Building and Library of Congress Madison buildings had been evacuated earlier in the day for security concerns.  Moreover, law enforcement found potential pipe bombs near the RNC which had to be detonated.  Kind of odd for conservatives and populists who needed Republican support to air their objections to physically threat the Republican National Committee.

To make sense of the Capitol Siege, it is incumbent to examine who perpetrated the breach.  A facile answer is MAGA types.   While there is no doubt that a multitude of passionate protestors came to Capitol Hill to exercise their First Amendment rights, most milled around the Capitol steps and did not go inside.  But that's hardly the whole story.

Many who were photographed trespassing in legislative chambers or the Rotunda did not fit the bill as quintessential MAGA rally attendees. Giving the BLM salute while sitting in the Senate President pro tem’s seat is incongruous with Trump supporters.  Jake Angeli (aka QAnon Shaman), an agitator dressed like a Viking had been seen at BLM and Climate Change rallies, again not run of the mill MAGA issues. 

 There was an agitator which investigative journalist Ian Miles Cheong identified as an actual white supremecist.  

A rioter who assumed the seat of the President pro tempe of the Senate made the quintessential BLM power gesture. 

Pro Trump protestors stopped Antifa agitators when caught ransacking the Capitol.  At prior DC MAGA rallies in November  and December, Antifa had counter-protests and assaulted peaceful MAGA protesters on the streets.  Where were such agitators on January 6th?  Nonetheless, it seems that fringe elements and agitators were the instigating the violence. 

This is not to imply that some Trump supporters did not participate in the unlawful Capitol Siege.  Leo Kelly, a Capitol Siege participant interviewed by LifeSiteNews  gave an interview saying that he participated in a communal prayer while trespassing in the Senate Chamber.  A West Virginia State lawmaker recorded his storming the Capitol and  was heard directing people in the Rotunda not to do any damage. Ashli Babbet, the woman who was shot and killed by a Capitol Police officer, was a 14 year Air Force veteran who had flown into Washington for the rally. Capitol Police report that three other people died at the Capitol. But some of those casualties may well have stemmed from ordinary health maladies.

It is a reasonable presumption that a relatively small group of Antifa types created chaos on Capitol Hill, breached the Capitol and egged the many disgruntled MAGA demonstrators to participate.  With the prior soft barricades being removed, many from the Ellipse surrounded the Capitol, probably with the attitude that “it’s the peoples’ house”.

In trying to make sense of the fallout from the Capitol Siege, it was easy to see how this violence overshadowed any objections to certifying some of the Presidential Electors due to election irregularities.  It was clear that the 117th Congress was unlikely to accept any objections, considering the slim Democrat majority in the House and Republican Senate leadership coming out against them.  Moreover, Vice President Pence issued a statement claiming that he had no power in the matter other than acting as a ceremonial manner, quashing hopes that some certifications would be sent back to the states. However, the objections to certification would have given a public forum to show the facts in a formal setting, so they would not be dismissed as conspiracy theory.  Alas, debate on the first set of objections in Arizona was interrupted by the Capitol breach.  

When Congress reconvened that evening, some lawmakers who previously considering joining the objectors switched sides, and in general consensus Congress rushed through the certification. Those who wondered about the propriety of certifying states with voting and election irregularities will be left unsatisfied and will likely conclude that President-elect Biden holds office under questionable legitimacy.  Seeing how quickly Republican establishment lawmakers folded under pressure gives the impression of being quislings.  Those groups who make trade of violent street protests as a vehicle for change will feel empowered.  The establishment in the media and on Capitol Hill may well use this as the pivot point to discredit populism and re–establish Deep State authority.

President-elect Biden gave a speech imploring President Trump to condemn the violence and demand an end to the siege. At the same time, President Trump was recording a message for social media urging people to go home and be peaceful.  But tech oligarchs on Twitter and Facebook interfered with distributing President Trump's message and later suspended Mr. Trump until he withdrew that message because it might incite violence and questioned the election results. Now our cyber betters have indefinitely banned the 45th President from Facebook  

It is also odd that more National Guard troops were called up and their mission was changed by Vice President Pence and the Acting Secretary of Defense in conjunction with Congressional leaders. Isn't the President Commander-in-Chief?  If one takes the rumors that Cabinet officials were talking (but not with Vice President Pence) about invoking the 25th Amendment to remove Mr. Trump, doesn't this lend credence to something resembling a coup? 

In the aftermath of the Capitol Siege, many details are distorted or undiscovered so there is not a true Epiphany.  One ought to give some consideration that these events may have been an attempt to actuate a Color Revolution and progressive forces use the chaos to make a play and power and cement their dominance over the body politick.   As noted before, Antifa was not present in their typical garb, but their tactics and some mannerism seemed evident amongst some rioters.  On January 5th, there were caches of bricks, lumber and propane tanks stowed on the street near Freedom Plaza, close to MAGA protest sites.  Those supplies have the hallmarks of Antifa or BLM rioting tools. But with the Capitol Hill Siege being successful, they were not deployed.  

Time will tell if such kinetic tactics will continue in the 46th President’s Administration or will markedly expand to other fringe groups. Moreover, it is unknown if the civic response to this anarchistic agitation create crackdowns on civil liberties or against voices which challenge the Establishment "mainstream".

Post Scriptus 01/12/2021 

There have been indications that there were Antifa Agent Provocateurs who planned to create chaos and egged passionate Pro-Trump protestors to storm the Capitol.

In an extended interview with the Epoch Times, war correspondent Michael Yon noted how organized Hong Kong tactics were evident outside of the Capitol during the siege. In addition, Yon observed how peaceful Pro-Trump demonstrators tried to stop these agents provocateurs and sought to separate themselves from their anarchy.

h/t: The Epoch Times

"Biden Did You Know?"--An Advent of Truth?

For many Christians, Advent is a a time anticipation for our ultimate salvation via the incarnation of our Messiah Jesus the Christ.  To get to that point, the faithful are asked to prepare by contemplating the end times and final judgment.  That is why the liturgical readings are prophetical and often tinged with a sense of calamity. This preparation exposes hard ultimate truth and raises questions as to how we comport ourselves in the here and now.

In our culture we prefer the unbridled joy of Christmas Carols rather than the brooding meditations of Advent hymns, like "Wake, Oh Wake" and "Veni Emmanuel".  One of the new contributions to the Advent repertoire is "Mary Did You Know?",  a Protestant carol written by Mark Lowry 1984 and later set to music in 1991 by Buddy Green of the Gaither Vocal Band.   The lyric were written as reflections between acts of a Christmas play which posed hard questions as to whether the Blessed Virgin Mary understood everything that would be implicated by her fiat, her assent to what God asked for in the Annunciation. 

In the wake of the instances of election irregularities and accusations of coordinated voter fraud in Election 2020,  Eric Metaxas did a a filk written by by John Zimrak  and produced by Chris Hines of the contemporary Christmas-tide classic in "Biden Did You Know?

This video could be dismissed as a piece of propaganda from a Trump supporter blowing off steam at the victory of his opponent former Vice President Joe Biden (D-DE).  More sympathetic listeners might find it hard to hear as Mr. Metaxas is not a natural soloist.  But the video raises some uncomfortable questions that the presumed President Elect must address as nearly half of Americans are under the impression that Election 2020 was stolen. Metaxas combined pop cultural film references, graphics which illustrated his points along with video evidence indicated election night Malarkey (sic), such as the Fulton County Georgia suitcase of hidden ballots, the Detroit TCF Cobo Center  hidden vote count center and CNN's chyron of over a hundred thousand ballots instantly switching columns. 

Even though Election 2020 was conducted during the COVID19 pandemic, the Biden presidential campaign was conducted in an extremely unorthodox fashion.  During the General Election campaign, Biden basically hid in his basement with a message of  defeating Trump and COVID19  using a wholesale campaign strategy. Biden ads ran heavily, along with allies like the Lincoln Project.  Other campaign events included poorly attended Zoom calls and scripted "interviews" with friendly media (and Biden reading off a teleprompter or being corrected by his wife DOCTOR Jill Biden--sic).    

During the normally intense two months before the November 3rd vote, the Biden campaign called "lids" (no news today) at nine am for a fortnight. Biden's running mate, Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) did not try to outshine the top of the ticket on the hustings.  When Joe Biden deigned to be seen in public, he mostly appeared in Delaware or within even driving distance of Philadelphia.  Such "rallies" were more media events, with basely a score of attendings sitting in COVID correct socially distanced circles. 

By the end of the General Election campaign, Trump counter-protesters were overshadowing the curated Biden/Harris campaign events, so much so that Joe Biden, the candidate calling for unity, called them chumps and ugly folks.  Harris held "rallies" in secret locations and may have employed body doubles at events. These do not seem like tactics of a campaign which supposedly won 80 million votes, 10 million more than President Barack Obama. 

 This Biden/Harris unorthodox campaign conduct sharply contrasted with President Trump, who help scores of rallies which attracted  tens of thousands of attendees per event, many unruly off the cuff pressers.  Donald Trump definitely won 10 million votes more than 2016, with marked increases of support from African American and Hispanic voters.  Trump had coat tails, with Republicans winning 27 of 27 key House races and the GOP only losing two Senate seats when they had 23 races to defend.  Trump won 18 of 19 bellwether counties.  Yet supposedly Trump lost by six million Popular Votes and lost several battleground states by small margins bolstered by midnight ballot drops thusJoe Biden wins 306 Electoral Votes.  In the abstract, that doesn't make sense, but these facts may be derided as  sour grapes.

In retrospect, there were several odd remarks from Democrats about the Biden campaign the post election aftermath that when they are juxtaposed with the election anomalies that give a skeptical body politic cause for pause as to "Biden did you know?".

One of Joe Biden's persistent traits is being a gaffe maker  So often, his off the cuff remarks seem blunderously off-message,  wrongfully boastful,  and actually quite odd (e.g. "Corn Pop").  I was willing to consider those moments as being the Biden gaffe machine, which has been heighted due to obvious cognitive challenges and overplaying his "aw-shucks Uncle Joe" persona.  But sometimes these gaffes reveal uncomfortable truths, albeit in a clumsy manner.  A pithy maxim in the District of Calamity is that a gaffe is a politician telling the truth.  Joe Biden has said: "A gaffe in Washington is someone telling the truth and telling the truth has never hurt me."  OK, let's test that premise.

One of the most striking verbal blunders was when Joe Biden actually said that [Democrats] had put together the biggest and most extensive voter fraud organization in history. Wow, what a gaffe!

   

Perhaps he meant to say "Get Out the Vote" organization.  But let's examine this gaffe with the facts.  In the 116th Congress of 2019, Speaker Nancy Pelosi put forth HR1, which was a measure that sought to imposes mail in voting nationwide. Note this was a year BEFORE the Wuhan Flu reached the shores of America.  When that measure did not pass, a couple of COVID relief bills were held up in reconciliation bills because Speaker Pelosi insisted that liberal mail in voting laws be imposed nationwide.  The Democrat National Committee spent considerable resources shepherding mail in voting laws in the states, despite the fact that the Carter/Baker Commission concluded in 2004 that mail in voting was prone to fraud. So was it a Biden gaffe or Joe telling an inconvenient truth?

Prior to November 3rd, there were warnings from Democrats and the media that because of COVID19 that we would not know the results of the election immediately.  In fact, I recall some Democrats warning that it might appear that they would be down but in the end they would be victorious.  Former Democrat Presidential candidate First Lady/Senator/Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton implored Joe Biden not concede if the election is close, perhaps ruing her concession which complicated "The Resistance" after the 2016 Trump victory.  

What is more likely is that Democrat leaders realized that when then Vice President Albert Gore, Jr. conceded and then retracted the concession after the 2000 election that they lost some of the narrative which impeded their victory in the contested election coverage. I believe that there was so much pressure on President Trump to promise to abide by the election results, and after November 3rd to extract a concession is to give the psychological impression that the cake is baked and to normalize the presumptive Biden/Harris Presidency.  But true to character, President Trump is a fighter and chooses to brawl in the legal system for what he believes was a wrong result due to illegitimate votes.

Three days before the election, in a prominent rally in the Motor City along with Barack Obama, Joe Biden said something truly strange:  "I don't need you to get me elected, I need you once I'm elected...".  Sure, a candidate might long for support for his policies (whatever the actually are) once in office, but at a Get Out The Vote Rally affirmatively saying "I don't need you to get me elected"--Huh? It's hard to explain that away as a simple verbal blunder.

One other rhetorical oddity which makes one wonder "Biden did you know?" is how readily Biden publicly sees his departure from the Oval Office.  Quite understandably, it is prudent for a frail, gaffe prone 78 year old to announce that he was chary about running for a second term.  But towards the end of the campaign in Tampa, Biden referred to the Harris/Biden Administration. Politicians tend to be ego driven so juxtaposing your running mate as top of the ticket might be telling the public something. That theme was echoed by Kamala Harris proclaiming "The Harris Administration under Joe Biden as President."  It's it's kind of presumptive or is it a plan.  Then there was a the post election Biden/Harris CNN interview when Joe claimed that if we ever really disagree, then I'll develop a disease and resign. 

   ; 

Biden was comparing his relationship with President Biden and applying it to the Harris Administration with President Biden (sic).  One would expect such action with a subordinate.  But isn't Biden supposed to be Chief Executive of the United States?  In and of itself, this might have been another one of Joe being Joe.  Yet a month before Election 2020, Speaker Nancy Pelosi introduced a bill to create a commission to study applying the 25th Amendment to Presidents unable to carry out their duties?  Coincidence or messaging? 

Advent carols are all about anticipation of a messiah as an ultimate truth. Thus we ought apply  Advent principles to our own age.  The truth is that  regardless of who prevails in the Election 2020 overtime, certainly we won't find a messiah.

I may be more like in Monty Python's Life of Brian:  "There's a mess here alright but there's no messiah."

Alas, to shift pop metaphors,  I fear that it may be more of a dark winter and winter is coming.

If Election 2020 Political Football Goes Into Overtime

 

As a political junkie, I have jested with friends and family that Presidential Elections are kind of a Superbowl for me.  Usually, the sturm und drang of a political campaign ends on election day.  In rare occasions, not so much.  Election 2000 stretched out through Thanksgiving that year due to the Florida recount. 

So when my beloved asked me how long would it be until we know who will be President next year, she was shocked when I suggested that it might be until January 4th.  What a fitting way to close out the annus horribilis of 2020.  I think that the field has been prepped for overtime in Political Fantasy Football resulting in a contested election scenario.

Granted, information may change by the hour, but on the evening after Election Day, the Democrat candidate Joseph Robinette Biden is thought to have 264 Electoral College votes, and Nevada is poised to surrender its six Electoral College votes, giving him a squeaker of a victory in the only metric which constitutionally matters.  Incumbent President Donald Trump is disputing an early call of Arizona’s 11 Electoral College votes.  

If Trump carries North Carolina, Georgia, Pennsylvania (battleground states where he is leading) and Arizona then Trump would win 274 votes and be re-elected.  Notwithstanding an outright victory, the Trump campaign has vowed to litigate against many instances of alleged voting irregularities, canvassing violations and potential fraudulent ballots for unvetted late mail in votes. Trump’s legal team has vowed to fight these violations, possibly even petitioning the US Supreme Court. 

This has the potential to impact results in key battleground states like Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Arizona.   If there are substantial cases, this may take time to litigate, which may delay or sway the official reporting of results.   Regardless of judicial outcome, if these violations are compelling, they may sway the process.

To refresh our civics knowledge, we do NOT live in a democracy but a Republic.  So when one casts a vote on election day for President, you are actually not voting for a Presidential candidate per se, you are voting for a slate of electors who then votes for the winning candidate in each state in the Electoral College, the ultimate party school. That’s how it normally works.  But technically, according to Article II Section 1 Clause 2 of the US Constitution, the power to name electors lies with state legislatures.  

Note well, this is a state legislature’s responsibility under federalism, which does not include input from a state Governor.  It is important to note that several battleground states with alleged voting irregularities, like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, have Republican majorities in their legislatures, despite having liberal Democrat Governors.   

It would be extraordinary, but not inconceivable, that Republican Legislatures may be convicted that voting irregularities which do not follow their legislation and would have be addressed when naming Electors for the Electoral College.  Obviously, Democrats would object to having their win overturned, so more than likely an alternative slate of Electors would attempt to be presented to the Electoral College.  And political mayhem ensues.

Presuming that the Constitution is followed, the legislature endorsed delegates would participate in the Electoral College vote on December 14th and that result would be sent to the US Senate. 

On January 3rd, the second duty of the Senate in the 117th Congress after their swearing in would be to ratify the Electoral College vote.  First vote decides the Vice President among the top two vote getters. Then the EC vote for President among the top three candidates. 

Normally, this is a pro forma vote and there is polite applause for whoever won the Election.  But in this scenario, Senators would challenge state slates of Electors.  This should be determined by a majority vote, with a tie being decided by the sitting Vice President (who is in office until January 20th).  If slates are thrown out and neither candidate gets a majority of Electors, then the contested election moves to the House of Representatives.

Even though Democrats have maintained their majority in the House, voting in a contested election is done by Representatives en banc via state.  Republicans have a 26 to 24 state majority in Congress, thus it would point to re-election of President Trump.  If there is not a majority of state delegations electing a President or Vice President by January 20th, then the Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA 11th) or whoever is Speaker of the House at that time,  Acting President until the succession is determined. 

 Historically, there have been a few contested elections. In 2000, the Florida recount was settled by a Supreme Court decision in favor of George W. Bush.

 While the 1960 Presidential election was not formally disputed, the popular vote was only decided by 0.14% in favor of John Kennedy.  It is said that if 10,000 votes switched in four states, Richard Nixon would have become President in 1961. There were allegations of shenanigans in Texas and Illinois.  Moreover, there were 14 unpledged delegates in Mississippi and Alabama cast for Harry F. Byrd.  But Nixon did not want to divide the country so he did not fight. 

The 1876 Presidential Election was a quintessential case of a contested election.  Democrat Samuel Tilden won the Popular Vote but there were difficulties in the  Electoral College.  One of Oregon’s Electors was deemed ineligible as he was an elected official.  But Florida, South Carolina and Louisiana had competing Electors as each party sent slates, amounting to 19 more unresolved Electors.   To resolve this matter, Congress adopted an informal agreement known as the Compromise of 1877 which gave all 20 unresolved electoral votes to Republican Rutherford B. Hayes, thereby making him President.  In exchange, the federal government under Hayes withdrew Reconstruction troops that had been propping up carpet bagging state governments in Florida, South Carolina and Louisiana.  

Prior to the 2020 Elections, Democrats ran an election war game of a close election.  In this simulation Democrat activist John Podesta refused to concede and extracted political promises by threatening that West Coast states, such as California, Oregon and Washington would leave the Union unless they got their way.   This obstinate political modus operandi seems to echo the extracted promises from the Compromise of 1877. 

A hypothetical overtime in political football seems pretty theoretical but strange things have happened in 2020. We may be suffering from the Chinese curse of “May you live in interesting times”, even without  Joe Biden assuming the Oval Office.

Mulling Over the DNC Miami Mixup #1

Democrats held the first in a series of debates for prospective 2020 Presidential candidates in Miami.  Since the DNC qualified 20 of 25 candidates to take the stage, the debate was done over two nights with purportedly random match ups.  The first night mostly featured 1%-ers – no not the taxpayers that Democrats want to jack up their rate to 70% but those who barely qualified for the debate with more than blips on political polls.  The only first tier candidate that night was Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA),

In the 2020 election cycle, a gaggle of Democrats pandering for POTUS will march like ten left feet together, so their policy proposals will track a similar progressive path.  So political junkies enduring this exercise look for overarching themes which brand a candidate’s campaign and for break out moments which elevate or deflate a debater.

During the first third of the Miami Mixup, Warren came out strong with an anti-corporate aura.  It was interesting that in an era of a booming economy with record unemployment, her thesis is that the economy isn’t working for everyone so we must dismantle the system. 

Senator Warren was one of the two hands raised to eliminate private health insurance when reforming American health care.  But when the organizers lost their close control of the debate stage, Warren became a less dominating figure, particularly when the exchanges turned to abortion and immigration.


Former two term Congressman and failed Texas Senate candidate Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke (D-TX 19th) tried to make his mark out of the box, starting to answer his first question  to him in Spanish. Booker had a remarkable look at “Beto’s” bilingual blurtation, which gives the impression of “Damn, he beat me to it on that pandering gimmick”.

But the problem with Beto is that he offers an alluvia of words but never actually answering a question.  Granted, a time tested political media trick is to answer the question that you want, not the one that is asked.  But when O’Rourke could not clearly respond to a direct question on whether he supported a 70% federal income tax rate for the very rich, it highlighted how “Beto” was all style and no substance.  Or to put it in faux Texan terms for a faux identity politics Hispanix (sic)– He’s all hat and no cattle.

Many of the low polling Democrats in the first Miami Mixup clung to their bio as a crutch to define their campaigns as sometimes as a cudgel as they fight for the political spotlight against their comrades.  Some candidates seemed more successful in weaponizing their bio.  While it seemed tedious for Representative Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI 2nd) to keep referencing her military service, but it gave her gravitas when she verbally parried with Congressman Tim Ryan (D-OH 13th) over continued American military involvement in Afghanistan. This may be why Gabbard topped a Drudge Report instant poll on who won the debate.  That moment both may be a break out moment for Gabbard and a break down moment for Ryan.

Former San Antonio Mayor and  Obama HUD Secretary Julian Castro burnished his Hispanic identity politics credentials by highlighting his bio. Castro came prepared to be the immigration expert on stage and outstaged “Beto” on his immigration answer, with Castro chiding “Beto” to “do your homework”.

Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) garnered the most time in the spotlight that night, started nearly every exchange citing that he lives (or more honestly put– owns a condo) in a sketchy Newark neighborhood. Presumably, Booker is trying to swing some African American support away from former Vice President Joe Biden (D-DE) while appealing to social justice warriors.  But the repeated references became too obvious.  Inquiring minds might connect Newark’s persistent urban problems to his seven years tenure as Newark’s mayor before ascending to his Senate seat.

Governor Jay Inslee (D-WA) defined his campaign as being all about climate change.  Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) was a me too women’s candidate who fights for the total right to abort unwanted unborn children. Comrade New York Mayor Bill De Blasio (D-NYC) seemed to be about changing the character of the Democrat party to be union oriented and progressive.  In his four years running for the Democrat presidential nomination, ex Rep. John Delaney (D-MD 6th) has tried to steer a somewhat centrist course to his campaign. Delaney applied his campaign’s premise in disputing the wisdom of totally overhauling America’s health care system by qupping “We should be the party that keeps what is working but fixes what is broken.”  Wise words but such wisdom is unappealing in an unbridled pander-fest.

Perhaps the most egregious example of progressive pandering was Julian Castro’s reproductive justice tact for supporting abortion.

Castro’s invocation that men can have abortion too may sell well with convicted intersectional progressives but hardly seems like it would appeal to Trump Democrats in the general election.


This early in the campaign cycle, political promises are ambiguous and do not stand for close scrutiny.  But the rhetoric used during this Democrat Debate repeatedly invoked emergencies for climate; gun control and health care.  This may be the modus operandi for a successful Democrat President to impose unpopular progressive policies under the guise of “emergency action”, particularly if their nemesis President Trump cites in addressing illegal immigration issues.

President Trump had promised to live tweet during the Democrat debate.  He summed up his impressions of the debate with a one word critque: BORING!

But the real Donald Trump did not spare debate hosts NBC News for their five minute technical difficulties by not cutting the mikes of the first panel of interviewers.  For a network celebrating seventy years on the air, this TV Miami Mixup merits mockery.

Hopefully, President Trump will live tweet the second debate, with leading candidates socialist Senator Bernie Sanders (D-VT) and former Vice President Joe Biden (D-DE). Nevertheless, expect more live tweeting from @CalamityDC using the #DemDebate heading. 

Bob Corker Celebrates Democrats Winning Alabama Senate Special Election

A Show After the Show for Ferguson the Play's Final Closing Curtain

Conservative entertainment activist Phelim Mc Aleer held the World Premiere of his  2015 play "Ferguson the Play" in New York City . The drama depicts the shooting of Michael Brown by a greater St. Louis police officer  in 2014 which sparked several days of rioting. This ugly incident which galvanized the Black Lives Matter movement under the ersatz slogan "Hands up, don't shoot."  Mc Aleer wrote the play because he believed that the truth that it was a defensive shooting was not getting out because of media bias buying into a progressive activist agenda.

What made Ferguson the play notable is that playwright McAleer constructed the verbatum theater completely using the released transcript of the Ferguson Grand Jury.  McAleer and director Jerry Dixon worked with a multi-racial cast to put on the controversial courtroom drama  for a short run at the 30th Street Playhouse in Manhattan.

On the closing night, Cedric Benjamin commadeered the stage at the close to voice his displeasure as he thought that the play was unbalanced and biased.





Director Jerry Dixon shut down the rogue actor's rant, but the histrionic polemic spilled out into the street, with actor Benjamin accusing playwright Mc Aleer  of "white arrogance".  




Mc Aleer later praised the director for shutting down the unscripted lecture by a cast member.

It seems ironic that the actor invoked arrogance against the playwright, who raised over  $51,000 in a crowdfunding campaign to mount the production, when the actor could not just say his lines. Mc Aleer deliberately brought Ferguson the play to New York after the cast of Hamilton accosted attendee then Vice President Elect Mike Pence to defy the conceit that conservatives are not welcomed in the New York theater community.

On the first production, which was a stage reading in 2015, nine members of the Los Angeles cast walked off, with one actor claiming that he did not trust Mc Aleer's motives.  At least those thespians were professional enough to disassociate themselves with a theatrical vehicle with which they could not agree.

Ironically, Cedric Benjamin's grand gesture might prove to be counterproductive.  It has drawn more attention to a small production, thrusting it into the news.  Phelim Mc Aleer continues to fund raise over the controversy with an expressed purpose of continuing to perform Ferguson the Play in New York.   Mc Aleer took great consolation that one BLM attendee who attended the play and left shocked and mystified that "Hands Up, Don't Shoot" was a lie.

Pollster George Barna recently sought to understand why evangelical Christians supported Donald Trump, who seemed to contradict many of their mores.  A large part of the answer is that SAGE-cons (Spiritually Aware Governmentally Engaged) conservatives have great distrust in the mainstream (a.ka. lamestream) media because of biased reporting against Trump that they now use alternate media sources to avoid "fake news".  By banding together on core issues like rule of law,  Barna contends that this 11% sliver of of the American electorate voting for Donald Trump was "The Day Christians Change America" (2017).

The strength of SAGE-cons influencing America was shown more than for Election 2016.  The informal boycotts by football fans of the NFL as they tolerate players who Take A Knee during the National Anthem has severely cut into attendance along with television ratings and is influencing advertisers like Papa John's Pizza to pull back.  Such a motivated minority of SAGE-cons may well see Ferguson the Play as a chance to actuate their ideas and counter the "fake news" phenomenon in entertainment as well as cultural conceits.

Hillary Clinton on Her Political Future

America's New State Religion?

In the wake of the Obama Administration’s HHS Qualified Health Plan Mandate (a.k.a. the Contraception Mandate), mainline churches have to come to terms with a Federal government which narrowly construes the First Amendment Freedom of Religious Expression.

While the Obama Administration exempts parishes from these objectionable regulations, no such leeway is given to religiously affiliated organizations, like Catholic colleges, religious orders, Catholic Insurers etc.  from paying for abortions, sterilizations and abortifacients.  But such groups were given a year’s reprieve from complying. As New York Archbishop Timothy Cardinal Dolan quipped that they were given an extra year to figure out how to violate their consciences.

President Obama claimed a work around which would force a farce that insurers would give away these services so religious organizations would not have to pay.  Of course, this is a ruse as insurers would simply raise their premiums to everyone to cover these free services.  But Obama’s announcement came on the same day that the Federal Register published the original rules unchanged, so the ameliorations were a rhetorical chimera.

This move by the Obama Administration has awakened a sleeping giant.  This summer, the U.S. Council of Catholic Bishops promoted the “Fortnight for Freedom”,  a coordinated nation-wide effort of prayer, fasting and educating American Catholics on the importance of preserving Americans’ First Amendment rights to the unfettered exercise of religious beliefs.

Some pastors have picked up this mantle to drive this crucial point home.  On the “Pastor’s Page of St. John the Evangelist of St. Paul (MN), Fr. George Welzbacher published this thought piece on the establishment of a nationwide first state religion–secular humanism.

It would seem that, for the first time in the history of our republic, we are witnessing here in the U.S.A. the establishment of a state religion, a religion so crafted as to delight the heart of a secularist, a religion with clearly defined dogmas, compliance with whose demands is to be enforced with all of the coercive powers at the disposal of the federal     government.  Here are the dogmas of this new faith. 

Dogma #1: A woman has the right, the unrestricted right, to make arrangements for the killing of her unborn child whenever such course of action is convenient.
Dogma #2: The chief purpose served by the institution of marriage is the securing of social recognition for romantic attraction, together with the panoply of benefits accruing to such recognition. The begetting of children, together with such subsequent upbringing as will equip them to contribute responsibly to the society in which they will spend their lives, can be dismissed as of  marginal importance. Thus every man, should this be his bent, has the right to marry another man, just as every woman, should she be so disposed, has the right to marry a woman. To suggest otherwise, to imply, for example, that a man's realigning of his reproductive powers to adapt to another man's digestive tract is in any way abnormal is to be guilty of a hate crime, in exculpation of which no appeal to the rights of conscience shall be allowed,  this being an intolerable crime, properly punishable with fines and/or imprisonment.
Dogma #3: The sovereign pontiff in this new state religion is the people's hero, Barack Hussein, now reigning gloriously in the White House.

Dogma #4: Enemy Number One of the new state religion is, by and large, the Christian faith and, with special intransigence, the Catholic Church. Measures must accordingly be taken to compel the recusant authorities of the Roman Catholic faith to genuflect at the new religion's altar. (Thus the new Health and Human Services mandate).

 All of this represents at least one way of looking at President Obama's arrogant trampling upon the First Amendment, not to mention his repudiation of God's Commandments.

If this is the case, I hope that I’m losing that religion come the first Tuesday in November.

Is Obamanomics More Like Chitty Chitty Bang Bang or Evel Knievel?

Chitty Chitty Bang Bang is a children’s fantasy story written by Ian Fleming later made into a 1968 movie about a junked race car which was transformed by an eccentric inventor into a magical automobile which could sprout wings when it hurled off a cliff.

Evel Knievel

Evel Knievel was a Montana born daredevil who gained national attention from the mid  1960s through the  1970s for his attempts to jump over objects like the fountain at Caesar’s Palace in Las Vegas on New Year’s Eve 1967, 13 buses at Wembley Stadium and the Snake River Canyon in Idaho.  While Kneival did have some successes in his stunt entertainment career, he also managed to break 433 bones during his career. 


Despite the near rocket power engine of the Skycycle X-2, the drouge parachute deployed early and the prevailing winds dragged it back south into the canyon short of the goal.  Having enough horsepower to make the leap  is not the only factor of success, as Knievel nearly managed to make the 1966 Caesar’s Palace jump and the 1975 Wembley jump but did landed hard and crashed. The problem with being a daredevil is once one engages in risky showmanship then that individual becomes practically uninsurable. 






Unfortunately, Obamanomics and petty partisan showmanship is threatening to thrown the American economy off the financial cliff.  President Obama has fully invested in class warfare by demanding that the rich pay their fair share and demands that Bush era tax rates expire for those making $250,000 or more a year.  The problem is that windfall from such a demogogic economic policy would only raise $40 Billion per annum, which would only fund the Federal government for eight days. Yet the Taxmaggedon  hikes would shrink the economy by 1.3% and cost 710,000.  This is foreseeable as small businesses would be walloped by these proposals.  It sounds compelling to stick it to millionaires (or those who make $250,000 per year), but many of those are S-Corporations, which are small businesses that combine personal and business income for tax reporting purposes.  Small businesses are the job generators in America.


Congressional Democrats has gotten into the high flying daredevil act on the economy.  To gain political leverage for Obama’s class envy policy of raising the rich’s taxes, Senate Democrats are willing to raise everyone’s taxes unless there is a tax hike for the rich.  Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) the prospective Chair of the Senate Banking committee in the 113th Congress, has declared that she will filibuster any lame duck session fix unless Democrats get their way.  This would mean that the Bush Tax rates would expire for everyone and taxes would go up across the board.


Of course, taxes for Obamacare will commence.  The .9% payroll tax on upper income tax payers and the 3.8% tax on “unearned income” will further erode any steam in America’s economic engine.

Super-Committee Protestors on Capitol Hill

Another impediment to economic growth from the District of Calamity is sequestration.  In order for President Obama to be given authority to raise the debt limit by $2.1 Trillion  in August 2011, Obama agreed to the bipartisan Budget Control Act of 2011. 

 Congress agreed to a $900 Billion spending cut and commissioned a Super-Committee to find another $1.5 Trillion in cuts.  Since the Super-Committee was stymied in reaching legislative agreements, a triggering mechanism will activate a series of automatic across the boards cuts split evenly between military and civilian spending.  A Chmura Economics and Analysis report indicates that a staggering 2.1 million jobs will be lost due to willy nilly sequestration. The reality of these cuts on the military side will mean that personnel rather than weapons in development will be slashed.  Lest this report be dismissed because the  Aerospaces Instustries Association sponsored report is looking after its own, the Economic Impact of the Budget Control Act of 2011 notes that 48,059 jobs in healthcare, 98,953 in construction, 473,250 in manufacturing and 617,449 federal jobs are at risk. That will affect the well-to-do economy of federal workers between the beltways, but the prospective layoff notices may not be issued until after election day in November.  How convenient.


Considering that the $837 Billion of Porkulus stimulus spending of 2011 has done nothing to increase jobs vis-a-vis doing nothing, the combination of prevailing winds should further ground prospective economic growth.  We may not have to wait until New Years Eve 2013 to discover that our economy will not soar to Vulgaria like Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. But without a parachute  and without significant economic propulsion, the American economy will likely crash after being pushed off the fiscal cliffs just like Evel Knievel on an unlucky jump.