Tag Archives: DOUG SMITH

Doug Smith: “General principle” insufficient in impeachment probe

16 Nov

trump leaving for camp david


doug at wvhu

Doug Smith is an opinion columnist, historian and Associate editor for Free State Patriot

November 16, 2019


 

I learned the specific application of a general principle in the Navy. The specific application was “Anything which is everyone’s job is nobody’s job. The general principle is anything which is too widely, or universally applied becomes meaningless, since it does not specify any thing.

One example in practice is me and my fellow Republicans. Each time we disagree with Leftists, on anything, we are racists, sexists, bigots, and homophobes. Now, I’m willing to accept the premise that among the universe of Republicans, there may be people who are one or some combination of those things. But the words are now meaningless, because they are thrown around as an indictment for anything the Left disagrees with, and not for the real meanings or actions behind the words. So, because it means anything, it means nothing when a “Leftist” calls us one of these names.

To bring the general principle to another specific case in point, let us consider the case for impeachment of Donald Trump. The Left, of course, made the point that he was not qualified to be President during the campaign. Fair enough. That is how politics is played. ( Note for a future article: the point may be made that his opponent, Hillary Clinton, is not qualified to hold any position of public trust, including dog catcher in Little Rock) But, here we differ from the normal, because as soon as it became apparent that Trump would win, the argument became one of get him at any cost. For any reason. He must be impeached, the reasoning went, because we think he is unfit (and by extension, so are all of you who voted for him) and therefore, ought to be impeached. Not, mind you, because he committed high crimes and misdemeanors in office, but because we do not like him. Our opinion of his qualifications, his manners, his speech, his “pink monkey” outsider status, is enough that he “deserves” to be impeached. So now all we need is a reason, or an excuse.

So “deserves to be impeached”, or impeachable offense, has becomes so general as to be meaningless. Everything the Left, or the Never Trump Elitist so called Conservatives, disapproves of, disagrees with, or dislikes about Donald Trump becomes the latest smoking gun, bombshell, reason, excuse to remove him.  And they all become so universal as to become meaningless. Worthless. Impeachment itself, has become a meaningless political exercise, and excuse for soft coups to change governments. It has been used over and over, and we should remember, has never been successful. I suspect it never will.

But the greatest offense of the Left, (again, Never Trumpers on the Right? A whole different article.) is the assault on language, and ultimately, the Constitution. The protection of impeachment against a truly egregious POTUS is evaporated. No one takes it seriously as anything other than sour grapes. And no one takes seriously the latest avocado. Huh? Means as much as bombshell, and I like avocados. And no one who is not consumed with Trump Derangement Syndrome misses the fact that without reason, or with excuse after excuse which has evaporated, the Democrats are into a political process, impeachment, which will fail, in the hopes of skewing the outcome of the next election, which they surmise they will also lose to Donald Trump.

And so, they should.

Doug Smith: Here’s some common sense perspective on all this “shouting” about President Trump!

30 Sep

trump in wv


doug at wvhu

Doug Smith is an opinion columnist, historian and associate editor for Free State Patriot

September 30, 2019


 

Let’s take them sequentially, shall we?   

Editor’s disclaimer: Those incapable of incorporating logic into your mental processing, are free to return to your Sunday comics, gum wrappers and The Springer Show.  This could be hazardous to your mental stability.

1.      I started out, before his nomination, criticizing Donald Trump as an ass. Nothing to date has altered my opinion. He is rude, crude, and I would not be his buddy. However, that also does not alter my view that he was far and away a better choice than Hillary Clinton, who is vicious and utterly amoral. And based on his performance, I conclude that while I would have liked a less abrasive POTUS, he has done more than any POTUS since Reagan to roll back the progressive’s corrosive effects on the nation. I still give him a solid B.

2.      Joe Biden, like Hillary Clinton, needed to be investigated long ago, by someone who had not predetermined not to bring charges against a Democrat. He is dishonest, self-aggrandizing, and, apparently, utter lacking in a moral code. He committed plagiarism in law school, shamelessly stole speeches from better politicians. One must wonder how he ever managed to graduate. He has falsely, and wildly claimed that he went to law school on a full scholarship (false), graduated in the top of his class (also false), and had 3 undergraduate degrees (he had one, like most college graduates.) Like Hillary and Barack, he consistently tries to convince that he is the smartest guy in the room, without compelling evidence that this is even nearly true. He is also stupidly dishonest. How do we know about his shady and likely criminal dealings with Ukraine s government and a gas holding company, along with his son? Because he bragged about it, on tape. He could take advice in being Teflon from the Clintons.

3.      Impeachment is a political remedy for misbehavior in office. The Democrats have lived and breathed the idea of impeaching Donald Trump since late the night of November 8, 2016, when it became obvious that Hillary was extending her losing streak. Their perspective is not that we should impeach the President because of this act or that, but that we should impeach the President because we don’t like what he says and does, and we need to find a crime to match the punishment we are determined to meet out.

4.      The Democrats have a history of trying to destroy, rather than defeat, Republican Presidents. It is not too much of a stretch to note, that the Democrats’ resistance to the 1st Republican President led to Civil War, and that a Democrat, and actor, assassinated him. But in more modern history, since WW2, there have been 7 GOP POTUS. Of these, Eisenhower doesn’t really count, because he had to check his registration to say what his party was, and he was such a national hero after the war that he was untouchable. Ford doesn’t count, because he was in office only a short time, filling Nixon’s unexpired term. Of the remaining 5, who were elected and served at least one full term, the Democrats have sought to impeach every one of them. Check your history if you find this incredible. Democrats introduced bills to impeach Nixon, Reagan, Bush 41, Bush 43, and they are carefully impeaching without impeaching Trump, largely because the want him gone, their lunatic base wants him impeached, but they realize that voting articles of impeachment will be a political disaster.

5.      When your irritating little brother or cousin bugs you, you may smack him. When you see 4 bigger guys jump on him and shove him down, you leap to his defense. This should explain why Trump supporters, even those, like me, who consider him an ass, but an effective ass, and OUR ass, are loathed to criticize him and quick to defend him. Like the camel sticking its nose in the tent, we realize that since the Dems and the Left attack him constantly, for everything, much of it made up, and not with the purpose of convincing him to alter course, but with the sole purpose of destroying him, we feel that we cannot give an inch in defending him. He may blunder sometimes, and his mouth may lead a life of its own, and he may be an ass, but the calculus that made him the choice over Hillary still holds, as do his results. The Dems, particularly the ones who suffer badly from the mental illness that is Liberalism, somehow have the idea that if only they can remove Trump, they will get Hillary. Of course, they don’t understand that what they would get is a fired-up President Pence, a seething GOP electorate, and, in 2021, unmovable GOP control of both Houses of Congress, and the White House, and, sometime in the foreseeable future, and 7-2 Originalist SCOTUS. Nor do they care. They are simply consumed by hate and want to hurt their enemies.

6.      As a student of history, I would urge any Leftists who still have thinking abilities unhampered by political madness to study Robespierre and the Jacobins in France. His final thought, before the guillotines that he set in motion descended on his neck must have been that it is easier to release the Kraken than to control it.

 

Doug Smith: Our veterans have earned our memory – our honor – our gratitude.

29 Sep

veterans-heading-image

It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.

Gaius Julius Caesar

No state has an inherent right to survive through conscript troops and, in the long run, no state ever has. Roman matrons used to say to their sons: Come back with your shield, or on it. Later on, this custom declined. So did Rome.

Robert Heinlein

doug 2

Doug Smith is a historian who proudly served our nation in the Navy aboard the submarine “USS Gato”.  He is also Free State Patriot associate editor.

September 29, 2019


 

All of us who wore the uniform have a place in our hearts, a quick tear, easily brought forth, by the memory of the guys who never made it home. We remember the guys trapped below decks on the Arizona, the 1st wave on Omaha Beach, the B-17 crews blown to bits high over a target, boys whose last sight was a dirty rice paddy in Vietnam. Yes, we remember our fallen.

doug smith

But on the 11th hour, of the 11th day, of the 11th month, in the year of grace 1918, as the guns fell silent across the front in France, we began a tradition of remembrance of those who served, and suffered, and lived. We who lived to grow to silver hair and old age remember boys who did not, comrades, friends, youngsters, who served in some of the same places and ways that we did. Yet it is fitting that we remember those who came home now full of years, and full of memories of the things that they, and we, did.

Caesar was right: the things the veteran must endure are remarkable and much to ask. It is not easy to persuade people to endure them, even though Heinlein’s observation is equally correct: a society in which that small percentage refuses to stand to and endure will itself, not endure. We look around us and note that our numbers are small, indeed. In WW2, some 16 million served, about 12% of the population. Most numbers are far smaller, perhaps 7% at most serve. So vanishingly few know, from experience, what we know about the day to day realities that make a Veteran. Some have read, or seen movies, or heard Sea Stories, ( which of course, are never crippled by the constraints of truth or reality) but only a tiny handful know because we have seen and felt it.

But we know.

We know the loneliness. Ask any Vet, no matter where they served, and you will find nodding heads. Yes, we endured times of crushing loneliness. We spend Christmas Eve s surrounded by strangers, in places far from the familiar sounds and smells and sights that equal home. We often do mundane jobs far from parents, sweethearts, wives, husbands, and children. The jobs may demand much, or not, but they demand us; far from where we would rather be. So we trudge on and get the job done, get the mission accomplished, while feeling that aching emptiness from faces we can see, but not touch. All of us together, feeling that ache, sharing the place and the time, find that it is endurable, if just barely, because the people next to us know. They are there too. We may miss WV, while they miss Brooklyn, or Missouri, but together we form a new family: our brothers, and a new home town: the outfit, the company, the boat. The place where we endure loneliness together becomes our home, and the people, our brothers. That is how we survive. That is how we endure.

We know the fatigue. Sleep? What exactly is that? In the brief moments we try it, we perfect the art of sleeping anywhere, anytime, on anything. A torpedo skid, a gun mount, a tow motor, a stack of boxes, a hole, wet, cold, hard, hot, sandy, doesn’t matter. We get so tired that if 5 minutes comes our way to close our eyes, we sleep. Perhaps not well, or for long. From the 1st way too early morning we began our lifelong hatred of the word Reveille. This hatred was underscored by an entirely unreasonable Ape kicking a 30 gallon metal GI can and introducing us to our first bit of military poetry: grab your socks and drop your; well, you know the poem. You just finished it in your head. We began to get an inkling that an uninterrupted 8 hours of sleep was an entirely civilian phenomenon. We also began to understand that we were civilians no longer. We had no idea how poorly we would ever again fit that world. But sleep? Wake up, you got the watch. General Quarters, All Hands Man Your Battle Stations. All hand turn to, clean up ship. In the rack promptly at 2300. Up at 0200 for the dogwatch. Back in the rack at 0400. Back up at 0600 for cleanup. Chow at 0700. Muster for Quarters at 0800. Did I sleep? I can’t remember. 9 to 5 and a 40 hour week, again, were relics of that left behind world. We worked till it was done, or until we dropped. Sleep? That was a luxury, and there were few luxuries.

We should mention coffee. SSAM. Soldier, Sailor, Airman, Marine: we all learned about coffee. Hot, if possible. Strong? We left strong behind a long time ago. Military coffee, Navy Coffee, as I came to love it, ranged from suitable for cleaning valves, to paint thinner, to the really strong stuff. Too old? Too strong? These are, again, strictly civilian concepts. If it was vaguely brown, and had at some point been above body temperature, and could still be poured, or cut into pieces and placed into a cup, we would drink it. Lots of it. It was at first, a poor substitute for the sleep we could never get enough of, and later, our buddy, our pal, our mate, Ambrosia and Nectar, Breakfast of Champions, Food of the Gods, The Water of Life. In cups, tin cups, steel pots, mess kits, whatever would hold it for us, we moved from coffee to coffee, working, cleaning, and functioning in between on the familiar acid warmth in the guts that is our Coffee. All praise to the Coffee.

We know the boredom. The old saw is that military life is hour after endless hour of sheer, mind numbing tedium and boredom, interrupted now and then by seconds or minutes of sheer terror. We can nod our heads in knowing agreement, because we fought a constant battle with boredom. We would do anything to break up the tedium once the work was done. For we could not leave, but must just hurry with our work, then wait. And wait. Pinochle, Cribbage, Euchre, Poker, Backgammon, Acey Duecy, Chess, Checkers, these were all our little friends in the battle. Long watches at night on the Bridge, 20 questions, discussions about baseball, food from back home (a very popular subject), wives, sweethearts, girls, ( also a very popular subject.) And then there were the jokes.

How much time to we have? We have gone for a bucket of steam, 6 feet of waterline, a bag of exhaust from a jeep, a frame for the sight picture, the mail buoy watch, a jar of relative bearing grease. If we were feeling extra bored we might treat a boot to the sight of a Sea Bat, or send him to wake the CO to ask for permission to retrieve the Mail Buoy. If we were extra brutal, we could always send for a Machinists Punch. Military folks develop a truly unique and somewhat morbid sense of humor; another reason Veterans never “quite” fit in with the true civilians.

Veterans learned these hardships, and pain. Pain was a constant companion. Short hours of sleep on a hard and oddly shaped surface left sore backs, butts, and necks. Odd eating habits, working in dim light, breathing fumes or low O2 often left headaches. Aspirins or APC tablets (remember those? Aspirin, Phenylthaline, and Caffeine, an ancient and sovereign cure for what ails ye) were carried in bulk containers by Medics and Corpsman. Hands skinned on the job, knees from crawling or kneeling, ankles from walking or marching. Head, neck, back, arms, hands, butt, legs, knees, ankles, feet, stomach: something always hurt.

Food. We learned to eat what we had. We had some odd loves. And odd language. The typical civilian, offered a plate of “expletive” on a Shingle, will back away from you as if you were mad. We would gobble it up. Meals were sometimes hot and plentiful, but often interrupted, sometimes out of a can, put away for your grandfather, but still good enough for you to survive. Ice cream took on an almost mystical importance. We could sail the world, and charge the gates of hell on Spam, Peanut Butter, Ice Cream, and Coffee. Another of those things civilians never quite get about us is finishing our meal in 3 minutes. We are not here to socialize, we are here to eat. Get it down, while you can.

We come away with strange reflexes. Some of us jump at sharp noises. Some of us can’t stand anyone behind us. Some of us have to have a fan on to sleep, and wake instantly if the power goes off and that background hum ceases.

We tend to speak a common, almost English, but still very foreign language. When we speak of shit cans, bulkheads, making a head call, FUBAR, SNAFU, REMF, Short Timers, Salts, civilians stare at us, but Veterans smile and nod in recognition: Brother. We find the Anglo Saxon monosyllable beginning with F to be a most useful and versatile noun, verb, adjective, adverb, exclamation, pronoun, and gerund. It amazes us as much that civilians do NOT use it with regularity, as it shocks them that we do. It is simply the most useful and descriptive word we know.

Yes, Veterans are an odd lot. We endured a life like few ever know. By and large we chose that life. Most will never understand why we did, or, upon hearing our stories, how we stayed and endured. We were not all wounded, and unlike our honored dead, we all came home. Yet if we came home alive, and if not unwounded, at least functioning, we did not come home unchanged. We left something of ourselves behind. We may believe that we brought home a great deal, but we never fool ourselves that it was without cost.

Yet, we echo the question of President Lincoln: Can any nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the premise that all men are created equal long endure? And for the Veteran, regardless the reasons to put on the uniform, adventure, boredom, escape, opportunity, patriotism; the idea gels before long that we have , at least, our answer to President Lincoln’s question. It will endure, if I have anything to say about it. I will take my oath seriously, and through loneliness, boredom, pain, and hardship, and if necessary, placing my life between “my loved home and war’s desolation”.

So we take this moment, born when the guns of August fell silent that November morning, and remember at this time, not those who died, but those who answered the call. We remember those who said, whatever it takes, nobody will get through me, and get to you. Kids can play in the park with their folks because we will stop any evil trying to reach them. We remember the ones, who, on that November morning, looked around and said, We’ve made it. We remember those who did not know, perhaps till much later, just what they had paid, and what it had cost for them to stand to and hold the line. We remember those who determined that they would pay the cost, whatever it was, even if it were a cost that they would be paying the rest of their lives. We remember those who say, decades later, full of years, softer, greyer, thinning on top, thickening in the middle, older but still proud, knowing it all, I would still do it again. We remember what they did, what they were, what they are, and what they meant to the country we live in, and what they mean still.

It has become a more common thing these days for civilians to greet Veterans they see with the words, Thank you for your service. Many of us are not sure just how to respond to that. We are grateful that they are not showing the disrespect are brothers faced after Vietnam coming home. But we are just a bit embarrassed and not sure how to respond to the civilians thanking us.

But not so with other Veterans. We remember how it was. We remember our comrades in arms. Our brothers. We give you respect.

We remember you.

 

Doug Smith: Liz Warren’s 2nd Amendment gaffe betrays true liberal agenda.

24 Aug

eliz warren

A “wild-eyed” Warren address group of supporters


 

DOUG FOR FSP

Doug Smith is an opinion columnist and associate editor at Free State Patriot

August 24, 2019


 

Accidental Truth

An interesting moment in politics occurred the other day when Elizabeth Warren touted her latest violation of the 2nd Amendment by noting that her massive increase of taxes on gun manufacturing and sales of guns and ammo would have the effect of diminishing the production of guns.

Pause to let that sink in. (THIS article is NOT about the desire of Leftists to disarm the folks so they cannot resist the enlightened leadership of Elizabeth Warren, by the way.)

She accidentally told a basic economic truth: That which you tax more, you get less of. That which you pay for, you get more of. She didn’t mean to, but she did.
Because when, in another pronouncement, she proposes to “modestly” tax the existing wealth of very successful individuals. Just a couple of percentage points. On accumulated wealth, on which they have already paid taxes. Sort of like the “death tax”, making sure that the government gets part of what you worked your whole life for, but without waiting till you die. This might also be a good point at which to mention that the income tax was originally a “modest tax” of only 2%, only on the top 1% of earners. Most of you will be just fine, and those greedy wealthy can afford it. (Before you read on, pop quiz. Are you in the top 1%? No? Did you pay more than 2% in taxes last year? Yes? Hmm. Pause to let that sink in.)

But let s consider this in light of her swerving into the guard rails of truth beside the road. When corporate taxes were quite high during the Obama Regime, where did corporations park their money, in the Trillions? Answer: not here. It would cost them enormously to bring that money to the US, so they didn’t. Nor did they invest it here. It was one of many anti-business factors of the anemic Obama years of low employment, low business startups, and sub 2% GPD growth for the first time since, oh, FDR and Wilson.  Because what you tax more, you get less.

Now, let’s say I’m smart enough and driven enough to be Bill Gates, or Warren Buffett, or Jeff Bezos. And I realize that a President Two Feathers Warren is going to go after my money. Where am I going to put my money? The Virgin Islands? Monaco? Someplace that will not tax it, confiscate it, or interfere with it, but let me spend it. I might build a nice estate and buy a bigger boat. But not in the United States. I won’t be spending my money there, because it will be worth less. So, who will Liz rob of their life savings? Anyone who has had enough thrift to accumulate something, but is not wealthy enough to escape.
You.

She didn’t mean to tell you this. It was an accident. She does mean to DO it. And to you, if you earn or have anything. But she doesn’t mean to TELL you so.
The other side of that coin is that what you pay for, you get more of. On that note, a few observations. For all you may hear about the end of welfare as we know it, the reality, if you look around, is that we have generations dependent on other people’s money to function. We have grandparents and great grandparents doing their best to raise children with money from the public dole.

And not that progressives are known for logic, but, try this one on. We have heard repeatedly how illegals do not receive public assistance, and how they are a net positive to the economy. Yet, as the Trump administration proposes to enforce rules that deny green cards or entry to anyone who cannot demonstrate self-sufficiency, and to anyone already hear currently receiving assistance from the public dole (SNAP, HUD, Medical Cards, etc.), the Left is outraged! (I note in passing that the Left is always outraged) That is cruel and heartless. But wait. If they cannot receive public assistance, as you tell us, and Trump proposes to enforce that law which you tell us governs, how it that heartless? Can it be that the Left is accidentally telling the truth once more?

If you have ever raised or cared for a child, here is a though experiment. Suppose you decide that you will never say no to a child. If they want a toy in the grocery store, they get it. If they want pudding for dinner at 10 pm, they get it. If they want to miss school, why they skip. You never deny them anything. What will you have? If you said a spoiled brat who screams and throws tantrums, you would be close to the mark.

There are limits and what we may get, and what we may do (many things may be worthwhile, but resources are finite. If you send money to every heartfelt appeal on TV, you will starve.) If there are no limits, and anything that seems worthy must be done, regardless of cost, you find generations of spoiled adults with no concept of the real world. Remember a young lady who did a video of herself after Trump was elected, in which she screamed and cried in hysterics at the thought that her side had lost an election? Her pull quote was “I am literally going to die”.

Had she been a child, raised when I was raised, some adult would have said “You stop that right now or I’ll give you something to cry about!” She is not a child. She is a ruined adult.

Truths. If you tax it, it will diminish. If you pay for it, it will grow. If you never make value judgements, you are incapable of deciding that a $ 50,000 car is less important than rent and food. And you expect “them” to give it to you. So, you get behind “them” when they promise it to you. And never realize the difference between what you earn, and what you are given, or between a privilege and a right.

And that what the government must give you, the government can deny you. You must trust both the intentions and the abilities of a person who says “I know what is best for 400,000,000 people, every day, and every moment. Trust me. “

Let that sink it. No one is that good, or benevolent, or smart. But 400,000,000 free citizens, left to pursue happiness in their own way, and to live in liberty, are that smart. They will choose for themselves better than any small cadre of progressives can. So our founders thought.
But not Elizabeth Warren. Except occasionally, by accident.

But trust her. Shell get over it.

Doug Smith: On Thievery and Philanthropy

14 Jul

DOUG FOR FSP

Doug Smith is an opinion columnist, historian and social editor for Free State Patriot

July 14, the 2019


 

Remove justice, and what are kingdoms but gangs of criminals on a large scale?  What are criminal gangs but petty kingdoms? A gang is a group of men under the command of a leader, bound by a compact of association, in which the plunder is divided according to an agreed convention.

If this villainy wins so many recruits from the ranks of the demoralized that it acquires territory, establishes a base, captures cities and subdues peoples, it then openly arrogates to itself the title of kingdom, which is conferred on it in the eyes of the world, not by the renouncing of aggression but by the attainment of impunity.

For it was a witty and truthful rejoinder which was given by a captured pirate to Alexander the Great.  The king asked the fellow, “What is your idea, in infesting the sea?”  And the pirate answered, with uninhibited insolence, “The same as yours, in infesting the earth!  But because I do it with a tiny craft, I’m called a pirate; because you have a mighty navy, you’re called an emperor.”

 St Augustine of Hippo, The City of God

I have been reading Dan Jones’ The Plantagenets: The Warrior Kings and Queens who made England. It led me to consider 2 millennia of thievery. First the Norsemen came to raid Normandy and the British Isles, then later the Normans, mixed in with Norsemen who had stayed, in the person of William the Conqueror conquered England in 1066. It was the grandson of William (also known as the Bastard, depending on the tome you read) Henry II, who established House Plantagenet, and, by all accounts, England.  (Watch The Lion in Winter), Richard the Lionheart, King John (of Robin Hood and Magna Carta fame), his grandson Edward, (Longshanks, of Braveheart infamy), Edward, The Black Prince (you saw him in A Knights Tale). See, you know these guys. What you don’t know is that they were broke, and had expensive hobbies. Their hobbies were France, Wales, Ireland, and Scotland. For while their main endeavor was conquering new lands to provide income to themselves and their sons, they had no source of income, no viable skills to trade, other than being very good at war, and, from time to time, at making laws. Laws, taxes, and the point of a sword were their stock in trade. No one who raised crops or shoed horses came to them and offered silver in exchange for a new set of laws, so they had to borrow and tax to finance their wars to obtain further lands from who to obtain further taxes. Et Cetera, ad nauseam.  These Wars included the aptly named Hundred Years War. Almost without exception, they amassed fortunes, spent them on wars to acquire other territories, to get the income from them, to get more territories, and died leaving the nation in debt. For purposes of this article, we won’t dwell on the bones bleaching at Agincourt, just the money. Henry says of himself, in James Goldman’s The Lion in Winter, “My life, when it is written, will read better than it lived. Henry Fitz-Empress, first Plantagenet, a king at twenty-one, the ablest soldier of an able time. He led men well, he cared for justice when he could and ruled, for thirty years, a state as great as Charlemagne’s.” He cared for justice when he could, but his skill, his raison d’etre, was fighting. So how did he get the money to “rule a state as great as Charlemagne’s? Institutionalized thievery, at the point of a sword. He gave laws, and molded the outline of England, but he took the money to do so at the point of a sword.

Does all this bear on our modern world?  Consider a politician who today makes $ 174,000, but a year ago made barely 26,000, has student loans to pay off, and can’t afford a place to stay, offering to give away free stuff that will cost 5 times as much as all the money produced by the entire United States economy in 2017. Who will pay for it?

Henry could tell you. The bankers who lent to his grandsons and were bankrupted could tell you. Henry might at least make the argument that for all he cost, he did leave behind a legacy of better laws and justice. Nor would he couch it in terms that he was only doing it for the people. No, he was straightforward about his ambitions to rule.

sanders

One can respect his attitude as true, even while resenting his taxes. But question with a jaded eye the one who is “only thinking of the folks”.

Free medicine. Who pays the Doctors? Or are they to be slaves?

Free housing? Who pays the builders? Or are they to be slaves?

Free Education? Oh this one is rich. Will they make slaves of the NEA and University Administrators?

Green New Deal. Now that is a good one. Who pays for that? The cost, by conservative estimates, is over $ 93 Trillion dollars. Who pays? Or who becomes a slave. These are, understand, the only options.

When Andrew Carnegie, who was, at the time, the wealthiest man in the world, began to put his money to use building libraries (including the one in Huntington, WV. Look at the cornerstone on the original building sometime. It reads, A gift of Andrew Carnegie to the people of Huntington. ) Universities, he was a philanthropist. He believed that money, wealth, was best spent helping people help themselves. And to that end, he gave away over $ 350,000,000 before his death in 1919, the equivalent of 5.3 Trillion today.

Franklin Roosevelt, with his original New Deal give-aways, never touched his own fortune. Instead, he spend, in 2019 dollars, 900 Trillion taxpayer dollars by 1940. The future obligations of those give-aways are over 50 Trillion. Who paid for that? Or who will pay for that? And who will pay for the free stuff encompassed by the GND?

Well, of course, the Left will tell us, we will simply tax the evil, greedy rich. But consider. The total net wealth of everyone in the United States, including the wealthiest, is hovering around 88 Trillion.  So, to take all the proposed free stuff Democrats politicians are bandying about, conservative estimates are a cost of 243 Trillion dollars. If we enact a 100 percent tax and confiscate everything owned by everyone, that still leaves us well over 100 Trillion short. And remember, estimates of the cost of government programs are always low, usually by huge margins. We have another problem as well. If we go to the 100% wealth tax, that is the last dollar the government ever brings in. Period. No one has a car to go to work. No one owns a factory to hire employees. No one can afford to make widgets, or buy them if they were made, or plant a crop. The economy comes to a halt, because no one has any money, except for the government. If history has taught us anything, it is that they will quickly consume their feed corn.

So, when a politician offers to give things away, unless they are offering to give away their own money, we have the answer to the question: Who becomes a slave? Everyone. Me. You. Your children. They own it all, and we get only what they bestow on us, only if we do exactly what they approve of. That is the definition of slavery.

Now, let us consider this.

Of the current crop of potential candidates for President in 2020, which is proposing to give away a great deal of money that they don’t have, by the simple expedient of stealing it from anyone who does have it, so that they can control it, and, regardless of their promises, dole out whatever they choose? Everyone running for the Democrat nomination.

And of this same crop, which has donated their entire salary to various causes for over 2 years?

If you are a Lefty, or a Never Trumper, you should stop reading now. No, really I mean it, I’m warning you. Really, don’t do it.

Ok, you asked for it.

That would be President Donald Trump.

Doug Smith: The truth about illegal immigration

24 Jun

After a sabbatical following the loss of his hero, his father, Doug has returned with absolute clarity on the crisis at our Southern Border.  The crisis is real.

illegals for doug's

The crisis at the border is real

___________________________________________________________________________________________

DOUG FOR FSP

Doug Smith is an opinion columnist, historian and social editor for Free State Patriot

June 24, 2019

__________________________________________________________________________________________

 

During the time of the Barbary Pirates, there was an expression of the sentiment of the times. In various forms, it said “Millions for defense, not a sixpence for tribute.”  The Pirates, you see, would offer to stop attacking our ships if we would only pay them off. The sentiment was to reject the offer, and reject it we did. Jefferson sent the Navy and Marines to fight them off and there was no more problem with the Barbary Pirates.

A similar principle is at work in the arguments regarding the costs and treatment of illegals detained in the US. Legal immigrants play by the rules. They must show that they are able to support themselves before being allowed to come in, and are expect, at once, to begin contributing to, not taking from, society. It is, therefore, manifestly unfair to permit others to push around those waiting to do it right, and sneer at our laws and borders, and reward such behavior by supporting them while they are here illegally, and meanwhile, the ones who respect our laws, and our country, wait.

In 1986, Democrats, led by Ted Kennedy, made a deal with President Reagan. In exchange for amnesty for 3 million illegals, Democrats would agree to secure the border and fix laws so that legal immigration was streamlined and illegal immigration was much harder, and dealt with much more sternly. Unsurprisingly, looking back at deals with Democrats, he lied. The 3 million got amnesty. None of the promised actions took place. Not even now, 33 years later.

When our laws, our enforcement, and our benefits to illegal entries all combine to make it attractive to disobey our laws, and count on being rewarded for being illegal, and punished for doing the right thing, we get what you would expect: more illegals.

We must remove the incentives to break our laws.

Now, there is an argument being put forth that it is cheaper to release them and give them welfare than to detain them. (Have you noticed that the Left is never concerned about how to pay for something, or what it costs, unless it is for something of which they disapprove?)  This is particularly specious. For one thing, detainees will be held for a limited period of time. Then, after a hearing, if denied amnesty, they will be deported to their homes. Illegals released into the population, and given public moneys to live on, will be living on it, in most cases, for decades. Arguments by the catch and release crowd to the contrary, ICE testified before Congress in Dec 2018 that in fact, a scant 15 % ever show up for hearings. And with good reason, from their point of view, because less than 12% of amnesty claims turn out to be valid and approved. There is massive fraud in these claims, because lawyers and open borders advocates coach people before they arrive on what to say to trigger a claim for amnesty. Yet, once they are investigated, very few are found to be legitimate.

This is tantamount to saying it costs so much to hold a felon that it is cheaper to release him into the community. After all, what he would steal is probably less than what it costs to hold him. In one sense, it may be cheaper, with the single felon. But there is also the desire to deter crime and make it costly to the criminal. We want to discourage crime and live under the protection of a system of laws. If we always do that which is cheaper and easier, regardless of right or wrong, we soon find ourselves at the mercy of bullies and bandits.

The arguments to simply release everyone are just the open borders arguments in various guises. The United States of America is not going to have open borders, and permit anyone, anywhere, who wishes to come, to come on in, ignore our laws, and get paid for it. Because if we did, the United States would cease to exist. No sovereign nation has, or can, continue if it does not control its borders and its populations. Many countries require visitors to have a return ticket before they can roam around.

The current flood of people coming into Texas is no longer just people fleeing Honduras or Guatemala looking for the good life here. Citizens of 29 different countries have been flooding Texas in recent months. A small town of 17000 recently had over 300 Congolese illegals appear on their streets, and no one who can even speak their language. Proof, in case we still need it, that the word is out: drag a child with you and you can get in, and that these folks are getting help to get in. How else do 300 poor Congolese make the trek from Africa to Mexico and then walk up across the border.

It is unfair to legal immigrants, or those waiting to come in illegally, but it is also unfair to US citizens and taxpayers. Essentially the open border argument says “No matter what it costs you, no matter how much it taxes your resources, no matter that it may bankrupt your town, then your county, then your state, then the nation, you must accept as many of the worlds billions of poor who want to come and take from your purse.” I reject this argument, and say I, and my fellow citizen, get to set the limits on my charity. Often in response, I am called a bigot or xenophobe. These are not arguments, but simply attacks. They do not persuade. If anyone, government or fellow citizen, wishes to take my good and money from me, without persuading me that it is in my interest to give it, then it is simply robbery, whether the gun is visible or not. Ultimately, the threat of force is behind it.

I am an American. I advocate for the interests of my country, and my fellow citizens, first and foremost, and above and to the exclusion of any others. For those who want to come in, you may ask to do so. You must play by the rules, and there is a chance you will be permitted to come. Not everyone will. America may be a friend to other countries. We are the best friend other countries can have. We are the ones called when a tsunami wipes out hundreds, or an earthquake devastates an already backward country. Us. The United States. Not Cuba, or Venezuela, or China, us. And we respond over and over again with ships and people and money. The world looks to us as the big dog when trouble strikes. But we will not accept, en masse, their entire populations of poor, thereby relieving them of the obligation to care for them, and breaking our own system and economy.

It costs something to detain, care for, process, and deport illegals. It will cost Mexico something to slow down the mass movements on their southern border. But once the word filters out that it is no longer a cake walk, and that dragging a child along a dangerous 1200-mile journey is no longer an EZ Pass into the US, the flood of illegals will slow considerably, to levels we can manage. Until it does, these are steps we must take to preserve our country.

 

Doug Smith: Scoundrels leading fools

1 May

DOUG FOR FSP

Doug Smith is an opinion columnist, historian and Associate editor for Free State Patriot

May 1, 2019


 

“12 year olds should be nailed in a barrel and fed through the bung until they are 16, at which time the bung should be sealed. “

Mark Twain

16 year olds are morons.

That assessment is, I realize, overly generous. But I am fond of many 16 year olds. I sympathize with them for the number of times they say or do something incredibly stupid and cringe over it. I spent much of my 17th year of life cringing, justifiably. I still cringe over the memory of ignorant but certain pronouncements I made to girlfriends, buddies, teachers, and other adults in my life. I am still amazed that they let me drive a car. I was going to list some of the moronic things I did as a 16 year old, but I find that even decades later they make me want to curl up like a potato bug in embarrassment. Instead Ill invite you to recall some of the idiotic things you said and did at that age. Feel good about yourself? Yea, right.

“When I was a boy of 14, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be 21, I was astonished at how much the old man had learned in seven years.”

Mark Twain

Mature adults smile at this quote, recognizing in it their own journey to maturity. Sadly, we live in a world containing far too many large children of 13 or 14, whose bodies have grown for a couple of decades. While the adults smile at their teenage angst, and certainty about everything, beginning with the premise that everything done by everything before us was wrong, or at the least, certainly inferior to what we, with our superior, well, something, would do when we were in charge. For many of us there comes that eureka moment, usually not during a bath, more often with the first pay check, or paying for a car repair, or perhaps some very loud sailor who doesn’t really care how badly you would enjoy 5 more minutes on your mattress. It is 0530, there is a lot to do, and you are going to do it, and you are decidedly not in Kansas. Welcome to the adult world.

But evidence suggests, as far back as 30 AD, there were those who learned the lessons of adulthood poorly, belatedly, and with difficulty.

Witness the prodigal son.

Entitled: “Give me what is mine” (Boy, none of it is yours. If your Dad decides to endow you with a living or a bag of coin, that is his choice to bless you. But you earned nothing by virtue of being born.

Profligate: That which he had not earned, he did not value, and set about spending his money with bartenders and hangers on, also happy to share in unearned value. He set nothing aside, provided no source of replacement income, and purchased nothing of value beyond today’s meat and wine and women. Like everyone who eats their seed corn, comes the time of planting and harvest, the foolishness becomes apparent. Everyone will share your wine, none will share your hunger.

Foolish: As witnessed by his wisdom, obtained by hardship, in the Eureka moment when he realizes “Even the guys who work for my Dad are better off than I am now, and I was his son. Maybe he’ll give me a job. “

Of course, we now understand, from medical science, that the forebrain, that part responsible for reasoning and logical thinking is still developing at 16. In fact, it is not fully developed until around 25. The body, hormones, muscles, and other parts of the brain are rapidly developing, enough that a 16 year old can simulate an adult in many ways. But of course, the part that makes sound judgements is still at around the same place that thinks bringing Mom a snake, or chasing a little girl with a bug, or cutting down Moms favorite tree with Dads favorite cross cut saw are all great ideas.

So what, you might ask, is your point? Any of us past the age of 30 can look back at our own foolish 16 year old self, and conclude, yes, it was a miracle that I survived. We must have guardian angels. So why, then, we might ask together, would liberal Democrats want to extend the franchise for voting to someone who we judge (Correctly!) is not old enough to responsibly buy and drink alcohol, enter into a contract, buy real estate, purchase a gun, enter the military, or, in most cases, marry without permission? We lowered the voting age to 18 in response to the Vietnam War, on the logic that if an 18 year old can go fight in the jungle, they ought to be able to vote for the leaders who send them. There is something to be said for that argument, but it is not axiomatic that it was correct. We have a class of 18 year olds about to vote for the first time who have lived in a country at war their entire lives. That will certainly color their thinking, and (another article,) it should give us pause as well, but it does not make 16-18 year olds any more mature and responsible than they ever were.

Who then, wants people known for making ill-advised decisions, still self-assured of their own superiority, because life has yet to kick them in the shins with the results of their dumb decisions, to be part of the decision making about who gets to lead the country? Well, if we apply a bit of basic logic, it is easy to see that would benefit people who want to enact half-baked ideas which any rational, mature adult, would reject out of hand. What party wants to spend more money that the GDP of the entire world? What party races to the microphone with promises of all they will give away, after 8 years of the worst jobs and economy performance in American history, assuming their friends in the Teachers Unions have successfully dumbed down a bunch of entitled children so that they never think to ask who will pay for all this stuff? (A too- generous Santa Claus at Christmas means beans and macaroni instead of steak and chops in January. A step on the road to adulthood is realizing that relationship.)

(Dad, can I hitch hike to Canada this summer? And while I’m at it, can I spend more money than you, me, and my kids, will manage to earn to give everyone I meet free game consoles, MP3 players, and lobster dinners? Uh, no, you may not. Tell you what, you can work all summer, see how much you can save, and spend that money any way you want. At which point giving away freebies will be less appealing, because why should you give the fruits of your hard work to your pals who spent their summer playing games and eating junk food? And you will suddenly find yourself in the Republican Party. Funny how that works.)

There are those who will give away their votes purely for the promise of all the free stuff politicians offer them. As I have often noted on these pages, Government owns nothing, produces nothing, has nothing, can give nothing that it does not take away from someone else. Marcus Tullius Cicero said it most eloquently:

“The evil was not in the bread and circuses, per se, but in the willingness of the people to sell their rights as free men for full bellies and the excitement of the games which would serve to distract them from the other human hungers which bread and circuses can never appease.”

Next up: Why Democrats should campaign and recruit candidates in Psychiatric Hospitals.

Short answer: They already buy into insane ideas.

 

%d bloggers like this: