#69 Tulsi Gabbard – “Party-identity?”

The Democrat Party rejected, maybe cancelled is a better word, Tulsi Gabbard’s 2020 presidential campaign. Why would the Democrat Party reject a candidate that fits their demographic criteria? She is attractive, photogenic, well spoken, ethnically brown and liberal. Could it be that her character is intolerable to The Party’s cause; ethical, honest, with a belief in the US Constitution and outspoken against military intervention.

After the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2021 was introduced in the House earlier this week, (to prevent future coups?) Tulsi Gabbard, the former Democratic representative from Hawaii, expressed her concerns about the proposed legislation. The following text, taken from a recent interview, reveals one of her obvious Democrat Party flaws.

“This is an issue that all Democrats, Republicans, independents, Libertarians should be extremely concerned about, especially because we don’t have to guess about where this goes or how this ends,” Gabbard said.

She continued: “When you have people like former CIA Director John Brennan openly talking about how he’s spoken with or heard from appointees and nominees in the Biden administration who are already starting to look across our country for these types of movements similar to the insurgencies they’ve seen overseas, that in his words, he says make up this unholy alliance of religious extremists, racists, bigots, he lists a few others and at the end, even libertarians.”

She said her concern lies in how officials will define the characteristics they are searching for in potential threats. “What characteristics are we looking for as we are building this profile of a potential extremist, what are we talking about? Religious extremists, are we talking about Christians, evangelical Christians, what is a religious extremist? Is it somebody who is pro-life? Where do you take this?” Gabbard said.

She said the proposed legislation could create “a very dangerous undermining of our civil liberties, our freedoms in our Constitution, and a targeting of almost half of the country.”

“You start looking at obviously, have to be a white person, obviously likely male, libertarians, anyone who loves freedom, liberty, maybe has an American flag outside their house, or people who, you know, attended a Trump rally,” Gabbard said.

In December 2020, then Representative Tulsi Gabbard (D., Hawaii), introduced the “Protect Women’s Sports Act” into the U.S. House of Representatives, (the Oklahoma Republican, Representative Markwayne Mullin, is a co-sponsor). Gabbard’s proposed legislation attracted some interesting responses from LGBTQ advocates, with claims of exposing, “her right-wing credentials with attacks on transgender student athletes”. Some have pigeonholed her as, “opportunistic people, like Rep. Gabbard who, under false pretense, claim to be protecting girl’s sports to justify discrimination.”

Gabbard says that her “Act” is to protect the intent of the 1972 Title IX amendment, that prohibited “discrimination on the basis of sex.” When Title IX was applied to the funding of athletic programs it increased the athletic opportunities for millions of female athletes. Today the definition of “Sex” is under scrutiny. This bill attempts to define “Sex” requirement for female sports.

The Supreme Court’s decision in, Bostock v. Clayton County, demonstrated, the logic of discrimination “on the basis of sex” can be defined in various ways. In Harris Funeral Homes v. EEOC (the transgender case in the Bostock package), the majority of the Court was convinced that “gender identity” is an offshoot of sex and that, in the context of employment, distinctions between the sexes can amount to discrimination.

When applied to Title IX, “gender identity” males will be permitted to compete against females when they claim transgender or a male gender identity status. This could end women’s sports as we know it.

In education, the collapsing of sex-based distinctions began in 2016 under the Obama administration’s “guidance” to schools and colleges, telling them to expand the definition of sex to include “gender identity.” The Equality Act, which Joe Biden and Kamala Harris have promised to pass within 100 days of office, would overwrite sex with “gender identity” in federal anti-discrimination law.

In a statement, Gabbard said that the Protect Women’s Sports Act actually “protects Title IX’s original intent which was based on the general biological distinction between men and women athletes based on sex.” The Bill would preserve an “equal opportunity for women and girls in high school and college sports,” as well as holding to account those “states who are misinterpreting Title IX, creating uncertainty, undue hardship and lost opportunities for female athletes” by allowing males to dominate and displace them.

Male elevated testosterone levels and androgenized bodies make them generally stronger and faster than females; research indicates 10 to 30 percent performance gap in elite sports. This advantage holds true in non-elite sports where male athletes can dominate the female field. In Connecticut two high-school-aged males (mediocre athletes in comparison with their male peers) deprived female competitors of 15 state championship titles and more than 85 opportunities to participate. https://4w.pub/three-connecticut-girls-sue-to-protect-womens-sports/

“And I ain’t no Communist and I ain’t no Capitalist
And I ain’t no Socialist and I ain’t no Imperialist
And I ain’t no Democrat so I ain’t no Republican
I only know one party and it is freedom I am, I am, I am
I am a patriot and I love my country
Because my county is all I know”
Jackson Browne


#68 The Social Media Mob

The Kid “Comes of Age”

Congress has, for a long time, acted in collaboration with the media. This relationship started with the print media, that gave way to TV and Hollywood. Now there is another passing of the baton. The new kid on the block has flexed its muscles. Social media has arrived! 

The social media generation has come of age. A generation that defines the words “friend” and “like” differently than I do. Today’s “friend” is someone you can tolerate or anyone that does not troll you. The meaning of “like” is a bit more convoluted. It means that you actually want to be “liked” for “liking”. “Like” does not even indicate that you like the material posted. No,“like” is a declaration of membership into the tribe that the “liked” belongs.  

This is the generation that has been weened on social media.  A generation in search of “safe spaces” will pander for that warm and fuzzy feeling of being liked or friended. A generation that craves approval (“like”) and will sell their soul to avoid being not liked. (is thumbs down even an option?) This phenomena is contagious, many “cool adults” have discovered they too crave “friends” and “likes.” Hell, in the Covid lockdown you’re never alone when surrounded by “friends” that “like” you.

Social media is an environment of group-think. In this venue, the users will avoid or tolerate outrageous spewing as long as it is not directed at them. The spectators on social media realize that it’s a lot easier and safer to avoid and appease rather than resist. This is fertile ground for bullying and today’s social media bullies ostracize to destroy reputations, businesses and lives. 

Social media can be harsh, it brings out both the best and the worst in its users but the users “agreed” to this. As toxic as this environment may be the social media oligarchs make it worse. They have put their thumb on the scale of fairness. When they are allowed to choose the winners and silence the losers we all lose. The removal of social media platform Parler from the internet was driven by these dynamics. 

Congress “Likes” Social Media  

The relationship between Congress and the media has always been delicate. Sometimes it’s difficult to determine who’s the dog and who’s the tail. The conservative media works with their guys and the liberal media works with theirs. The social media oligarchs made a huge advance on the orders that they received from their Democrat “friends”. https://nypost.com/2020/11/18/democrats-use-big-tech-hearings-to-demand-more-censorship/

“Social media is one of the most powerful generators of group-think ever invented in human history, enabling a small number of people to make decision-makers feel besieged with scorn and threatened with ostracization if they do not obey mob demands. The other is that the liberal-left has gained cultural hegemony in the most significant institutions – from academia and journalism to entertainment, sports, music and art — and this weapon, which they most certainly did not invent, is now vested squarely in their hands,” says Glenn Greenwald. https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-moronic-firing-of-will-wilkinson

The oligarchs of social media are not idiots. Greenwald says, “It is inconceivable that Tim Cook, Jeff Bezos and Google executives believe that Parler is some neo-Nazi site that played anywhere near the role in planning and advocating for the Capitol riot as Facebook and YouTube did.” 

Was deplatforming Parler a simple business decision? The oligarchs had a clear choice between taking a 1st Amendment approach to expression or two, censorship, wiping out the voices that they disapprove. If they choose the freedom of speech approach they would have suffered retaliatory assaults from their users. By traveling the censorship path, de-platforming Parler, they would satisfy their “liberal”tribe of uses, appease their Congressional collaborator, console the Trump Derangement Victims and it would silence the #1 app downloaded (at that time) and its 10 million users. No brainer, destroy Parler!

Whether it’s: banning Donald Trump’s and his followers from social media; or Antifa accounts for organizing anti-Biden marches; or Palestinian journalists; or canceling any reports of the Hunter Biden illegal behavior uncovered on his laptop; or pro BDS support; or anti-Covid virus claims; these bullies will find “dangerous” expression and silence it. 

The Social Media Mob is alive and well.

#67 Madison Tried But Hamilton Prevailed

Madison Tried

The Framers, James Madison in particular, designed the American constitutional system as a representative republic, not a direct democracy. Representatives, of the people, were the only directly elected position in the Constitution. They would serve for the public good. 

James Madison spent the year before the Constitutional Convention reading books on the history of failed democracies. Madison believed that failed democracies were the result of government succumbing to the rule of demagogues and mobs. So he designed the Constitution to avoid that fate.

Direct popular elections tend to bring out the demagogues and “crisis” brings out the mobs. The Constitution addresses both. The presidential search was to be a process that the States controlled. Nominations were taken from the States’ representatives in Congress, then the State Legislators would selected/appoint Electoral College members to cast votes representing their state. From this process the President would be selected. 

No campaigning, no funding, no direct involvement of the people. The selection process would be based upon the merit and the body of work of those individuals nominated, not on showmanship and money. A procedure that probably would not in today’s Congress.

Today’s Congress has changed too drastically: the US Senators are no longer beholden to the states (17th Amendment), the U.S. Constitution called one Representative for every 30,000 persons, gerrymandering and other tactics allowed to favor those in power has created a Congress entrenched with partisan politics. Besides you would trust them? https://news.gallup.com/poll/1600/congress-public.aspx 

Madisons constitution also took mobs very serious. He included a series of cooling mechanisms intended to slowdown impulsive act of populist passion. Madison thought that a pause would quell the heart and activate the head. These cooling mechanisms would ensure deliberative reasoning, thus allowing for a prudence in action to prevail.

Madison research made him well aware the the dangers of mob rule. He referred to these mobs as factions. In “Federalist No. 10” he outline the danger of such mobs: “united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.” 

Madison believed that “group think” spreads quickly distorting public policy and threatening liberty. Only if the public is given time and space to consider long-term interests rather than short-term gratification, liberty could prevail.

Madison’s Federalist No. 10. “A pure democracy, by which I mean a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person, can admit of no cure for the mischiefs of faction.”

Hamilton Prevailed 

The constitution has failed. Selecting a president is trending toward a direct election by an uninformed public. This system gives us talented demagogs, capable of raising lots of money with enough salesmanship to make hollow promises to the passionate populist mobs. 

The elected representatives in Congress are not beholden to the people. They are elected based upon a Democrat or Republican Party vetting program that weights their potential to solicit lobbyists money while staying within the approved limits of the Washington paradigm. 

Madison envisioned Congress as a cooling mechanisms where thoughtful deliberation would take an appropriate course. However, today’s deliberations in Congress are red vs blue or liberal vs conservative. One group pitted against the other group using words as a cattle prod to move the herd into their corral.

A new faction has arrived in Washington, ready to unite. This faction is slicker, user friendly and more professional than the last. But the fact is, they are the same demagogues that feed off the passions of the mob. President Joe Biden’s faction has taken 33 executive actions in his first six days in office. 

Are there really 33 crisis too important to bypass the Constitution? Did any of the Executive Orders stop the wars? How many brought troops home? Any address the domestic violence perpetrated by governmental authority? Any remedies for the humanitarian disaster that we help to create in Yemen? No, twelve reversed Trump policies thus nurturing the anti-Trump mob and eighteen feed the crazed Covid mob.

Democracy? Maybe Hamilton’s dream has come to fruition, an elective monarchy!

#66 Democracy and Its Cathedral

Q: Are you a Christian, a Jew, a Muslim, a Hindi?
Q: Do you worship in a church, temple, mosque or mandir?
A: No sir, I worship Democracy and pray at the Cathedral on the Potomac.

The Faith
“This is democracy’s day.
A day of history and hope.
Of renewal and resolve.
Through a crucible for the ages America has been tested anew and America has risen to the challenge.
Today, we celebrate the triumph not of a candidate, but of a cause, the cause of democracy.”

“We have learned again that democracy is precious.
Democracy is fragile.
And at this hour, my friends, democracy has prevailed.”

“to restore the soul and to secure the future of America – requires more than words.
It requires that most elusive of things in a democracy:
Unity.” …

“For without unity, there is no peace, only bitterness and fury.
No progress, only exhausting outrage.”

“That’s democracy. That’s America. The right to dissent peaceably, within the guardrails of our Republic, is perhaps our nation’s greatest strength.”

This is a time of testing.
We face an attack on democracy and on truth.
A raging virus.
Growing inequity.
The sting of systemic racism.
A climate in crisis.
America’s role in the world.”

“Will we rise to the occasion?
Will we master this rare and difficult hour?
Will we meet our obligations and pass along a new and better world for our children?
I believe we must and I believe we will.
And when we do, we will write the next chapter in the American story.”

“Let us add our own work and prayers to the unfolding story of our nation.
If we do this then when our days are through our children and our children’s children will say of us they gave their best.
They did their duty.
They healed a broken land. My fellow Americans, I close today where I began, with a sacred oath.
Before God and all of you I give you my word.
I will always level with you.
I will defend the Constitution.
I will defend our democracy.
I will defend America.
And together, we shall write an American story of hope, not fear.
Of unity, not division.
Of light, not darkness.
An American story of decency and dignity.
Of love and of healing.
Of greatness and of goodness.”

“May this be the story that guides us.
That democracy and hope, truth and justice, did not die on our watch but thrived.
That our America secured liberty at home and stood once again as a beacon to the world.
That is what we owe our fore-bearers, one another, and generations to follow.
So, with purpose and resolve we turn to the tasks of our time.
Sustained by faith.
Driven by conviction.
And, devoted to one another and to this country we love with all our hearts.”

The Cathedral

“Just look around.
Here we stand, in the shadow of a Capitol dome that was completed amid the Civil War, when the Union itself hung in the balance.
Yet we endured and we prevailed.
Here we stand looking out to the great Mall where Dr. King spoke of his dream.
Here we stand, where 108 years ago at another inaugural, thousands of protestors tried to block brave women from marching for the right to vote.
Today, we mark the swearing-in of the first woman in American history elected to national office – Vice President Kamala Harris.
Don’t tell me things can’t change.
Here we stand across the Potomac from Arlington National Cemetery, where heroes who gave the last full measure of devotion rest in eternal peace.
And here we stand, just days after a riotous mob thought they could use violence to silence the will of the people, to stop the work of our democracy, and to drive us from this sacred ground.
That did not happen.
It will never happen.
Not today.
Not tomorrow.
Not ever.”

May Democracy bless America and may Democracy protect our troops.
Thank you, Democracy. In Democracy we trust!

Excerpts taken from a recent sermon delivered by The High Priest of Democracy
(January 20 2021)

#65 Washington – A Gated Community

Washington – A Gated Community 

In a recent article Pepe Escobar states: “we could never have imagined such a graphic simulacrum: the Green Zone fully replicated in the heart of imperial D.C. – complete with walls, barbed wire, multiple checkpoints, heavily armed guards.”


Escobar called this guarded enclave the “Blue Zone.” Mr Escobar went on, “The Blue Zone is now “protected” by a massive 26,000 plus troop surge – way more than Afghanistan and Iraq combined.” 

Escobar continued, “Just like an ordinary Iraqi was not allowed inside the Green Zone, no ordinary American is allowed inside the Blue Zone. Just like the Green Zone, those inside the Blue Zone represent none other than themselves. And just like the Green Zone, those inside the Blue Zone are viewed by half of the population in the Red Zone as an occupying force.”

In my search to find out more about the Green Zone, I came upon an article in the New York Times written by Michiko Kakutani. It was a book review of  Rajiv Chandrasekaran’s, Imperial Life in the Emerald City Inside Iraq’s Green Zone. On October 13, 2006, the review appeared under the title, Behind Baghdad Walls, Rosy Plans in the Green Zone. https://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/13/books/behind-baghdad-walls-rosy-plans-in-the-green-zone.html

Rajiv Chandrasekaran book is not about the city that the Wizard made famous. No, it was written about the same Green Zone that Escobar writes. The headquarters for the American Coalition in Iraq, the occupational government area following the United State’s 2003 invasion.

Washington – The Coalition

After reading these articles, I could not help to think of the Washington “Coalition”.

Chandrasekaran described the Green Zone as, the walled-off, heavily guarded enclave, centered around the republican palace, the buildings of government that shielded the Iraq’s previous leader, Saddam Hussein. A fantasyland, a place where members of the Coalition lived cut off from the grim realities of Baghdad and the rest of Iraq. 

“From inside the Green Zone,” Mr. Chandrasekaran writes, “the real Baghdad — the checkpoints, the bombed-out buildings, the paralyzing traffic jams — could have been a world away. The horns, the gunshots … never drifted over the walls. … Wild West lawlessness that gripped one of the world’s most ancient cities swirled around the walls, but on the inside, the calm sterility of an American subdivision prevailed.”

Mr. Chandrasekaran, portrait of the Green Zone is a simile for Washington. All of it’s ineffective decision making; its reluctance to listen; its inability to allocate resources and staff productively; its willful ignorance of culture and history; its obliviousness to realities of the country, were all on display in the Emerald City.

Mr. Chandrasekaran describes the Coalition as a bunch of handpicked cronies from the past that bungle issues of the present. They ignore facts to make decisions that contribute to a burgeoning insurgency and a growth of ethnic and religious strife. The American hubris, idealism and denial have resulted in skepticism, resentment and anger directed at the Coalition.

Mr. Chandrasekaran points out that cronyism riddled the coalition. That the selection of senior advisers followed a similar pattern: “A well-connected Republican(Democrat) made a call on behalf of a friend or trusted colleague. Others were personally recruited by the President …” Lower level jobs were often filled with a similar attention to political allegiance: “Two C.P.A. staffers said that they were asked if they supported Roe v. Wade …”

Mr. Chandrasekaran also addressed the coalition’s attachment to micromanagement. “The education advisers were going through textbooks line by line to determine what should be expunged. The health-care team was studying every single prescription medication used by the Health Ministry. Americans … were vetting every single … diplomat.”

In the end, Mr. Chandrasekaran writes, “the Iraqis believed that they should have been free to chart their own destiny, to select their own interim government and to manage the reconstruction of their shattered nation… good advice and ample resources — from a support corps of well-meaning foreigners, not a full-scale occupation with imperial Americans cloistered in a palace of the tyrant, surrounded by … blast walls.”

He concludes, the last thing needed — or wanted — was a bunch of Americans trying to dictate the shape of the country’s future from within the walls of a gated community known as the Emerald City.

Phil Ochs sing about the destiny of this gated community – or is it the Coalition’s version of January 6th? 

#64 Talk Backwards

Talk Backwards

In the 1970’s the great but late Steve Goodman wrote a song “Talk Backwards”. The song just keeps on repeating itself in my head. 

“Hey everybody wherever you are

There’s a new way of talking and it’s gonna go far;

You take the letters in the words,

Turn ’em all around; you say the last ones first

And you check out the sound

Talk Backwards”  

Check Out The Sound

Rep. Ayanna Pressley, called for the Black Lives Matter protests; ”to continue, … unrest in the streets for as long as there’s unrest in our lives.”

Just a few months ago, during the BLM riots, members of Congress portrayed police officers as racist rabble. Accusation of “police brutality” rang through the temple of our democracy. 

In June 2020, Rep. Kamala Harris voiced support for the BLM protests. She said, “that they’re not going to let up, and they should not, and we should not.” Reports indicate that she even contributed to bail funds for the BLM rioters.

It just took an uninvited mob entering Congress’ sacred temple to change that cavalier attitude.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi scorned the intrusion as a “desecration of this, our temple of Democracy.” Temple? I did not realize that members of congress were gods. 

Temple? Maybe she meant they are prophets of democracy. That would explain why the infidels who entered the Capitol chose, “their whiteness over democracy.” 

Some have called the Capitol the “fortress of democracy,” “the people’s house” and are calling for harsh measures of revenge on those people who set foot inside in their own house.

Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer compared the January 6th “coup” to Pearl Harbor and a “day of infamy.” Schumer complained that the “temple to democracy was desecrated…our offices vandalized” the rioters were able to “stalk these hallowed halls.” 

Sen. Cory Booker compared an incursion that did break windows and furniture, with the 1814 British invasion that torched the Capitol.

Politicians like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said, “We came close to half of the House nearly dying” from the attackers. 

President-elect Biden said that the protestors’ action was “an assault on the citadel of liberty: the Capitol itself….An assault on the rule of law.”

“Never can tell, one of these nights

Those who talk backwards will demand their rights.

They’ll rise up angry and get a solution

In the form of an amendment to the constitution,

That guarantees ’em freedom of reverse elocution;

And then every T.V. show that airs

Will have to be captioned for the forward impaired”

Explain For The Forward Impaired

Why the hyperbolic enhancements of one protest while pandering for another protest? Why similar acts of violence are not equal. Why will some protesters be severely punished while others overlooked? Do the gods of Congress believe this is the American way?

Did the Washington “coup” do more or less destruction than a SWAT team’s no-knock raid? Like the ones that happen thousands of times a year in American neighborhoods across the land. 

Remember 1984, the Supreme Court entitled government agents to intrude onto private land without a search warrant as long as they did not venture into areas where individuals were involved in “intimate activities”. “No Trespassing” signs no longer applied to G-men but they do for protestors. 

Did those that “stalked these hallowed halls” steal more secret and personal information than the National Security Agency -NSA vacuumed up from millions of Americans’ emails? 

Remember it is your congressional appropriations that allows for the NSA to continue to destroy all Americans’ privacy. Remember when Edward Snowden exposed NSA documents showing that the agency surveillance on anyone “searching the web for suspicious stuff“? What happens to protection for whistleblowers like Snowden?

Were more killed in the “day of infamy” raid than the violence perpetrated by U.S. military forces that Congress allows to continue. 

Remember we are now engaged in combat in 14 nations. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/03/opinion/american-troops-yemen.html

Did the “desecrators of the temple” cause more disruption than the blockades of medical supplies and nourishments that the US government has imposes on Yemen, Syria, Venezuela, Iran, and other nations. 

Remember that around 80 percent of Yemenis rely on aid, and 13.5 million people face acute food insecurity. 

Tragically this “white-lash” take-over killed people. Did it kill more people than the sanctions and blockades on foreign countries that you allow?

Remember an estimated 40,000 people died in Venezuela as a result of US sanctions that stopped ordinary citizens access to food, medicine and medical equipment. 


Will the money spent to repair the damages the vandals caused at the Capital cut into Congress’ funding of the military complex?

Remember $21 trillion will be pumped into the Pentagon to allow the United States military to drops an average of one explosive once every 12 minutes. Does that seem odd because we’re technically at war with zero countries.


Give us your best Reverse Elocution for these issues.

#63 Corporatism – A Brief Lesson

Oops’ I Forgot About Corporatism

The corporate social media giants just fired a shot that ripped right through the Bill of Rights. But here’s the catch, private companies are not under the demands of the Constitution. In other words “damn the 1st Amendment, we have the right to do as we feel fit.” But do they? Who is their master?

In my previous blog I admitted that I was scared of future legislation that would “secure the nation” against “domestic terrorism”. I must have had a senior moment thinking that the US was an open market based republic that endorsed free speech. In reality we have transgressed into a Corporatism State controlled by the industry giants that Washington has seduced into their bed. 

Corporatism has nothing to do with a business corporation. Corporatism is a system of government. The term is derived from the Latin word for body, corpus. The body of Corporatism is the private businesses or sometimes public/private “independent” commissions that are used to regulate their industry. Under Corporatism the leaders/CEOs become the chess pieces for governmental/state strategies and dictates.

One Hand Washes the Other

Corporatism hides behind the fact that private companies are not under direct control of government. So, when the government delegates through “private” organizations their directives are “softened” by an intermediate layer of authority. This system gives a perception of free and independent entities serving their clients but in reality they are the arm of the government. As a matter of fact many refer to Corporatism as “soft Fascism”.  

Rulers have always had an aversion to an open markets that function without direction or control by the state. In Corporatism, the Oligarchs of industry benefit from Washington’s protection. They are allowed to pursue their motivations of profit and maintain their self-interest, property, competitiveness and as long as they fall in line with the Washington directives. 

Technically industry compliance is voluntary but the Oligarchs will not tolerate non-compliance. Put more bluntly, Historian Andrew Wolvin, said of Corporatism it’s, “based on voluntary cooperation, but those who did not comply were to be forced into participation.” 

Big Tech

The Corporate regulatory government is very efficient and is capable of an almost immediate response to crisis or perceived crisis. The ruling elites, of their industry, can disseminate the dictates of Washington without the usual delays of a parliamentary procedure as they did in deplatforming of Parler. 


The war on “domestic” terrorism has been declared and big tech has mustered its forces to lend aid. This war is aimed at the openness of the 1st amendment, the inability to control their narrative. Tech’s big three CEO’s were given their marching orders this past summer. Just prior to the final push toward the 2020 Presidential election, Congress instructed them to go forth and do a better job at censoring their domains. The reward appears to be that Congress and the giants of tech will collaborate on censoring and the writing of any anti-trust legislation. 

On November 15th, at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Congress held a public evaluation of their Presidential election performance. https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/11/17/tech-hearing-dorsey-zuckerberg/ 

Big Tech was questioned about their companies’ “content moderation practices” during the election. Congress played their role wonderfully. The Republicans grandstanding about excessive censorship aimed at conservatives while the Democrat peacocks unfurled their trains while pushing for more censorship against misinformation and hate speech.

This divide on censorship was revealed at this past summer’s Congressional hearings, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg expressed his confusion as to which god he should serve. “The fact that both sides criticize us doesn’t mean we’re getting this right. But it does mean that there are real disagreements about where the limits of online speech should be.” November’s election of Biden cleared this ambiguity. More censorship!

Mainstream Media

The take-over at the capital has jump-started a vindictive hysteria across media venues. The Washington Post has argued for a “hate speech” ban. Most mainstream media reports “reveal” that it was white supremacists and anti-Semites who overrun the Capitol. The New York Times tells us that “a debate has broken out over whether the once-sacrosanct constitutional protection of the First Amendment has become a threat to democracy.” “Hate speech,” threatens democracy?

Will the Democrat president and Congress succeed in passing laws that specifically deny First-Amendment protections to white supremacists, hate speech, anti-lockdowners, anti-green initiative or any other anti-wok group? Preying on the public’s fear of “terrorism” has a long and successful history of abuse. 

We The People

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn author of Gulag Archipelago, claimed that the foundation of totalitarianism is an ideology made of lies. The system depends for its existence on a people’s fear of challenging the lies. Many of us, if not most, do not have the strength to stand up in public and say what they really believe. However, we need to show some courage and refuse to affirm what we do not believe. The dignity of truth may be the only way the 1st Amendment will survive.

#62 Civil Disobedience Becomes a Coup

“Never let a serious crisis to go to waste” 

In their article “Global Instances of Coups from 1950 to 2010: A New Dataset,” authors Jonathan M. Powell and Clayton L. Thyne define a coup; “A coup attempt includes illegal and overt attempts by the military or other elites within the state apparatus to unseat the sitting executive.

Am I going out on limb to say that a ragtag group of Trump supporters that were essentially allowed by law enforcement to walk into the capitol does not qualify as “military or other elites”. Posing for pictures, stealing podiums, selfies with cops and acting more like lost tourist than criminals may qualify them as trespassers but certainly not a military force of elites or domestic terrorist.  

The media comparing this incident to the burning of the White House in the War of 1812  is more criminal than the “mostly peaceful” demonstrators breaking into the Capital. However, rest assured the new sheriff in town, Joe Biden, will take measures to protect this domestic tourist attack. https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-says-mob-that-stormed-capitol-were-domestic-terrorists-11610046962

By coincidence, before the Capitol incident, The Wall Street Journal reported that Biden already had plans to of passing a law against domestic terrorism. https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-administration-urged-to-take-fresh-look-at-domestic-terrorism-11605279834 

This is the same situation that occurred after 9/11. Oh my, the new sheriff was also involved with the usurpation of our liberties that the Patriot Act brought about. Biden voted for the 2001 Patriot Act, which greatly expanded the federal government’s surveillance capabilities. However, there is more to that story. Remember, Uncle Joe has been around for a while.

Biden has said the Patriot Act was modeled on a terrorism bill he wrote after the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, that was never signed into law. “I drafted a terrorism bill after the Oklahoma City bombing,” he was quoted as saying by the New Republic in 2001. “And the bill John Ashcroft sent up was my bill,” he said, referring to then-Attorney General John Ashcroft’s introduction of the Patriot Act. https://www.history.com/topics/21st-century/patriot-act

In a 2002 Senate hearing on FBI counterterrorism efforts, Biden again took credit for creating the Patriot Act. “Civil libertarians were opposed to it,” he said. “Right after 1994, and you can ask the attorney general this, because I got a call when he introduced the Patriot Act. He said, ‘Joe, I’m introducing the act basically as you wrote it in 1994.’”

Biden’s Patriot Act was Washington’s reaction to the terrorist attack of 9/11. How did that work out? Everlasting wars, the loss of privacy and freedom for what? Security, yes a nation in fear traded away freedoms for security.

Biden has now been “blessed” with a new “terrorist” crisis. The fear induced by the media and many politicians are plowing the fields for a Biden’s response. I too am scared! My fear is from the “domestic terrorism” legislation coming in response to the “DC Coup.” Yes, I fear a further loss to the depleted civil liberties that Americans have left.