Closing Thought–23Sep20

We all know about the so-called stim plans that the government has put forward to help the nation survive the pandemic.

Of course the Wall Streeters made out the best from the different plans….now news has come out that the Pentagon got stim cash to help fight the virus in the military….instead they do what they do best…pissed it away.

Back in March, Congress gave the Pentagon $1 billion to combat coronavirus and build up the country’s medical supplies. But instead, the Pentagon diverted most of the money to defense contractors to make things like jet engine parts, body armor, uniforms, and other military equipment.

The money was part of the Cares Act, a $2.2 trillion coronavirus relief bill. It was allocated to the Pentagon under the Defense Production Act, which allows the president to direct companies to manufacture certain products.

The funds were given to the Pentagon to “prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus.” The Washington Post reported that shortly after the stimulus was passed, the Pentagon began funneling hundreds of millions of dollars to defense contractors.

Some of the awards the Pentagon handed out were disclosed by the Post. $183 million went to companies including Rolls Royce and ArcelorMittal to maintain shipbuilding. $80 million went to a Kansas aircraft parts business, tens of millions went towards satellite, drone, and space surveillance technology, and $2 million went to a domestic manufacturer of US Army uniforms.

Some companies that accepted this hand out from the Pentagon also received money from another bailout fund, the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP). The Post found that at least 10 of the 30 companies that received money from the Pentagon also received PPP money.

Portions of the money were dolled out to smaller firms, including a group of companies that work on drone technology. But larger firms also received bailout money, like GE Aviation, a subsidiary of General Electric, that received $75 million in June.

(antiwar.com)

More reading…..https://www.military.com/daily-news/2020/09/22/2-million-funds-earmarked-covid-19-went-buy-army-greens-uniforms.html

The Pentagon should have the money returned from their budget……and then the generals making the decisions should be jailed for misappropriation of funds.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Proslavery Constitutionalism

This is where the history of the US gets a bit confusing……can you have an antislavery constitution and proslavery constitutionalism? Or how about the reverse?

Let’s look at these historic conundrum……

Historians today speak of the “proslavery Constitution” and “antislavery constitutionalism”; they almost never speak of the “antislavery Constitution” or of “proslavery constitutionalism.” This fact is a testament to the profound success of the critique of the Constitution leveled by abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison. In his condemnation of the Constitution as proslavery, his resort to Madison’s “Notes from the Constitutional Convention” to demonstrate this case, and his rejection of the Constitution’s authority—all punctuated by his dramatic burning of that document during a Fourth of July address—Garrison has set the terms within which subsequent historical debate on the relationship between the Constitution and slavery has been carried out.

Even historians who disdain Garrison’s caustic critique of the Constitution, who question his partial readings of the Convention’s debates, and who emphasize the development of constitutional arguments that culminated in the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments concede at some level Garrison’s premise that the Constitution was intended to be proslavery. Thus, it is sad, but not surprising, to see that the mob rounded up by the New York Times’s “1619 Project” is setting fire to the project of antislavery constitutionalism. Garrison’s belief that the Constitution was intended to be proslavery is an unquenchable fire that will eventually consume all it touches.

The Legend of the Proslavery Constitution

For more information on Garrison……https://www.ushistory.org/us/28a.asp

Here is a look at pro slavery in the early Republic……from the perspective of Univ. of Virginia……

According to the standard view of Southern history, there was a strong antislavery tradition in the South until the 1830’s when the militant abolitionist attacks upon not only slavery but also slaveholders forced Southerners into a defense of their peculiar institution. This view over­ looks, however, the strong proslavery tradition that also existed in the South from 1790 to 1830. This study is an attempt to re-examine this period and consider the proslavery arguments that did exist in the early United States.

Examining sources primarily from the public forum, such as speeches, newspaper articles, and pamphlets, this study focuses upon the proslavery positions presented in the early republic. It looks at not only the actual statements but also the rationale behind them. The defenses used ranged from Biblical sanction and historical precedent to “scientific” evidence, from constitutionalism and economics to social considerations and racism. In each instance, proslavery advocates justified the institution of black slavery, and the way of life based on it, as not only necessary but also beneficial for both whites and blacks.

https://libraetd.lib.virginia.edu/public_view/g445cd210

If you like reading about early American history then may I suggest this book…it is an interesting read…..https://d3p9z3cj392tgc.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/09162520/9781501726446.pdf

Further reading……

https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2019/09/30/the-anti-slavery-constitution/

Slavery is a terrible point in our history and to have a complete conversation we need to have all the facts and thoughts….and the ultra-conserv Heritage Foundation tries to explain the Constitution and slavery…..

While all today recognize this momentous accomplishment, many remain confused about the status of slavery under the original Constitution. Textbooks and history books routinely dismiss the Constitution as racist and pro-slavery. The New York Times, among others, continues to casually assert that the Constitution affirmed African-Americans to be worth only three-fifths of a human being.

Ironically, many Americans who are resolutely opposed to racism unwittingly agree with Chief Justice Roger Taney’s claim in Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) that the Founders’ Constitution regarded blacks as “so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect, and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit.” In this view, the worst Supreme Court case decision in American history was actually correctly decided.

read more and you decide……

https://www.heritage.org/the-constitution/commentary/what-the-constitution-really-says-about-race-and-slavery

Learn Stuff!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Dems Need To Buck Up

Trump will be naming the successor to Ginsberg soon…..and as usual the Dems are starting their predictable whining and bitching…..they will pull out all their stops to sway the Repubs to not vote until they have all their ducks in a row.

The pre-October surprise death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg worsened the divisive political nightmare of a nation struggling to cope with successive disasters while under minority rule by a president who can’t govern.

Her body wasn’t even cold before heartless Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced that his followers will vote on her replacement, violating a self-imposed 2016 rule that prohibited confirming a court nominee before a presidential election. He set the stage for an all-out battle between his Republicans and Democrats.

Chaos Galore

All their (Dems) whining will be a moot point if they cannot find a couple of GOP Senators to get aboard with the Dems….the one I am thinking is Mitt and he has crapped on that idea…..

Democrats’ chances of stopping the confirmation of a Supreme Court nominee before Election Day all but disappeared on Tuesday with an announcement from Mitt Romney. The Utah Republican says he supports moving forward with President Trump’s soon-to-be-announced nominee, reports Axios. Romney was seen as a possible “no” vote for Democrats, as was Colorado’s Cory Gardner. Both have since fallen in line with Senate Republicans. While two GOP senators say they don’t support confirmation until after Nov. 3—Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins—that’s not enough to stop the process that Mitch McConnell has vowed will take place.

“The historical precedent of election year nominations is that the Senate generally does not confirm an opposing party’s nominee but does confirm a nominee of its own,” Romney said in his statement. “I intend to follow the Constitution and precedent in considering the president’s nominee. If the nominee reaches the Senate floor, I intend to vote based upon their qualifications.” President Trump tweeted Tuesday that he’ll announce his choice to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Saturday.

But yet I keep getting emails on how we can stop this nomination going forward until after the election….it is do-do!

Judges are confirmed by the Senate……and the Senate is owned by the GOP….ergo Trump’s nomination will go forward with a little bitching from the Dems so they can get some airtime in the news cycle.

But let’s say that the Dems got a couple of Repubs to get on their ship and the split was 50-50….that would mean that the decision would be made by the Vice President……and Pence is a Trump toadies…ergo…his nomination will win the day.

In short there is no “legal” to stop the nominee from winning confirmation.

Dems need to buck up….there is nothing they can do to prevent the conserv judge from taking her seat on the highest court in the US.

All this political theater is more a circus than a passion play.

Please stop you guys are looking more and more pathetic.

Learn Stuff!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

The Coming Insurrection?

I get a chuckle when so-called conservs start their BS line with the revolutionaries on the Left that will start a war over this election.

First, wanting change is not a revolutionary according to the modern definition.

Is this election a “civil war” election?

The US presidential election is now eight weeks away. The campaign between Trump and Biden is pitting an administration that is making an increasingly open appeal to violence and police state repression against a Democratic Party campaign that, as always, offers no genuine alternative to the drive toward authoritarianism and war.

The Trump administration is utilizing the election campaign in an attempt to build up a right-wing, fascistic movement on a ferociously antisocialist basis. Trump has followed up his praise of Kyle Rittenhouse, who murdered two protesters and injured a third in Kenosha, Wisconsin last month, with calls for vengeance directed against opponents of police violence.

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/09/09/pers-s09.html

Is this what makes the Right think there is a civil war coming?

a coalition of leading progressive groups gathered on Zoom to begin organizing for what they envision as the post-Election Day political apocalypse scenario.

Put together by the Fight Back Table—an initiative launched after the 2016 election to get a constellation of lefty organizations to work more closely together—the meeting dealt with the operational demands expected if the November election ends without a clear outcome or with a Joe Biden win that Donald Trump refuses to recognize. 

Sources familiar with the discussions described them as serious with a modestly panicked undertone. A smaller FBT session last fall had talked about post-election planning, but those discussions were tabled because of the COVID-19 pandemic. This was the first time they were bringing the matter to the 50-plus organizations that make up the coalition. To formalize the effort, they gave it a name: the “Democracy Defense Nerve Center.”

https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-left-secretly-preps-for-violence-after-election-day

If this worries the Right….and yet stuff like this means little to them…..

At a campaign rally and in a television interview, President Donald Trump reiterated his threats of police-military repression during and after the Nov. 3 election to maintain himself in power. He suggested again that he “deserved” a third term, for a total of 12 years in office, although that would violate the US Constitution.

His campaign speech Saturday night in Minden, Nevada, a small town outside of Reno, included a litany of insults and threats against his Democratic opponent, former Vice President Joe Biden, and a claim that he would defeat Biden in Nevada and nationally on Nov. 3.

“And then, after that, we’ll negotiate, right?” Trump said. “Because we’re probably—based on the way we were treated—we’re probably entitled to another four after that.” Trump has repeatedly suggested staying in office beyond the two-term limit set by the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution.

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/09/14/elec-s14.html

Trump’s people are no better than him….his HHS Secretary has added fuel to the bullshit scenario….

The former Trump campaign employee appointed in April as spokesperson for the Health and Human Services department on Sunday issued warnings that had little to do with the coronavirus. In a Facebook Live video, Michael Caputo said “his mental health has definitely failed” and outlined multiple conspiracy theories, reports the New York Times, which says Caputo on Monday said threats have been directed at him and his family since he joined the administration. He claimed that a “resistance unit” of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention scientists is conspiring against President Trump and predicted that Joe Biden will lose the election but fail to concede. “When Donald Trump refuses to stand down at the inauguration, the shooting will begin,” he said. “The drills that you’ve seen are nothing.” He added: “If you carry guns, buy ammunition, ladies and gentlemen, because it’s going to be hard to get.”

Caputo said he “didn’t like being alone in Washington” because the “shadows on the ceiling in my apartment, there alone, shadows are so long.” He told followers: “You understand that they’re going to have to kill me, and unfortunately, I think that’s where this is going,” On Saturday, Caputo slammed the “deep state” following reports that his team had been altering CDC reports on the pandemic. The Times notes that in his video Sunday, he sounded “anguished” about the virus death toll and warned his friends to leave Trump rallies if most people there aren’t wearing masks. “I don’t want to talk about death anymore,” he said. “You’re not waking up every morning and talking about dead Americans.”

To add fuel to the fire…….some see that the US is in the early stages of an insurgency……already.

David Kilcullen is one of the world’s leading authorities on insurgencies. For decades he has studied them. As an infantry soldier in the Australian army and an adviser to the U.S. Army, he’s fought against them. His latest scholarly work has focused on their role in urban conflicts.

So when Kilcullen says that America is in a state of “incipient insurgency,” it’s worth sitting up, taking notice, and trembling just a little.

The official definition of an insurgency is the “organized use of subversion and violence to seize, nullify, or challenge political control” of an area. An “incipient insurgency” might be happening when “inchoate actions by a range of groups”—followed by organizing, training, acquisition of resources (including arms), and the buildup of public support—lead to “increasingly frequent” incidents of violence, reflecting “improved organization and forethought.”

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/09/america-insurgency-chaos-trump-violence.html

One last question….what if Trump loses election in 2020 and refuses to leave the White House?

For months now, President Trump has carefully planted the seed that he might not leave the office of the presidency willingly if he loses.

Whether it’s tweeting that the election should be delayed as it “will be the most inaccurate and fraudulent election in history” or that there will be widespread voter fraud because of the expected uptick in mail ballots due to the coronavirus, Trump seems intent on undermining the electoral process.

This, in turn, raises a rather thorny and unprecedented question: What happens if Trump won’t go? The answer is bleak. Experts tell me that the president actually has a lot of power at his discretion to contest the election, and some of the scenarios that could bring us to the edge of a crisis are actually very plausible.

Consider this one: It’s late on Election Day, and hundreds of thousands of votes in key battleground states still have to be counted due to the increased use of mail and absentee voting because of the pandemic. As a result, media outlets have largely avoided calling the race, but based on the votes that have been counted, Trump leads in enough states to reach at least 270 electoral votes, which would be enough to win the election if his election-night lead holds. Trump claims victory, but because Democrats were much more likely to vote by mail than Republicans, Joe Biden eventually pulls ahead because of the Democratic lean of the remaining votes — a phenomenon known as the “blue shift.”

What If Trump Loses And Won’t Leave?

A lot of info to digest…but all the scenarios are something to consider…..this election will go down in the history books.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”