Day: October 15, 2025

Put An End To Gerrymandering

The hot topic for about a month now has been the off-season gerrymandering by Texas and others are planning this technique to guarantee wins at the ballot box.

The state of Louisiana and their plan is before the Supreme Court as I type….so gerrymandering is back on the news table (for now)….

Can this silliness be stopped?

That is a question that was asked of some leading politicos  (please read the whole article and let us know your thoughts)….

Across the democracy reform movement, a growing debate has emerged over how, if at all, reformers should respond to the escalating gerrymandering battles unfolding in states like Texas, California, and beyond.

Last week, Fix.us convened a provocative discussion thread featuring academics and practitioners, surfacing a wide spectrum of views on this contentious issue.

Given the profound implications for democratic integrity in the United States, The Fulcrum is hosting a curated roundtable to explore the strategic, moral, and civic dimensions of partisan redistricting. We invited leading voices in the reform space to share brief reflections (250 words or fewer) in response to one or more of the following questions:

  • What principles should guide reformers when one party engages in aggressive gerrymandering?
  • Is retaliatory redistricting ever justified in defense of democratic norms?
  • What national reforms could meaningfully end the gerrymandering arms race?
  • And finally, what concluding insight might help illuminate the tensions and possibilities of this moment?

Below are the initial responses we received. Some in direct answer format, others as narrative reflections.

Response from: Joe Leadem, founder of www.thesaveamericaproject.org

Question: What national reforms would meaningfully end the gerrymandering arms race?

Answer: In this country, we are told that we are a “representative” democracy. We are not.

Our elected officials do not really represent voters: they represent themselves, their big funders, and their political parties. This is at the heart of all our problems, including gerrymandering, which has become a go-to strategy for keeping power.

If you agree with this line of thinking, then the solution is to elect real representatives who will do their best to represent citizens. Is that even possible? How might we do it?

(please read on there some interesting thoughts)

https://thefulcrum.us/democracy/gerrymandering-in-the-us-2673957832

My thoughts are more radical and I will present them soon here on IST.

Please if you read the article/interview let us have your thoughts on the political game…..a game that does more damage than it corrects.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo

Presidential Medal Of Freedom

This is a wonderful thing except in recent years it has not been about freedom so much as donors getting slap on the back…..and it is all presidents.

It has been a freakin’ joke for decades and this just craps on it completely.

But Donny has gone full stupid….he has given this honor to someone who has bucked the very idea of freedom and now that he is dead he will be immortalized.

President Trump on Tuesday posthumously awarded America’s highest civilian honor to Charlie Kirk, the assassinated activist who inspired a generation of young conservatives and helped push the nation’s politics further to the right. The ceremony coincided with what would have been Kirk’s 32nd birthday, the AP reports. It came just over a month after the Turning Point USA founder was fatally shot while speaking to a crowd at Utah Valley University.

  • In a sign of Kirk’s close ties to the administration, he was the first recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom in Trump’s second term. The president also spoke at at Kirk’s funeral in September, calling him a “great American hero” and “martyr” for freedom, while Vice President JD Vance accompanied his body home to Arizona on Air Force Two along with Kirk’s widow, Erika. She accepted the medal on his behalf Tuesday, the Guardian reports.
  • “We’re here to honor and remember a fearless warrior for liberty, beloved leader who galvanized the next generation like nobody I’ve ever seen before, and an American patriot of the deepest conviction, the finest quality and the highest caliber,” Trump said Tuesday afternoon.
  • Of Kirk’s killing, Trump said: “He was assassinated in the prime of his life for boldly speaking the truth, for living his faith and relentless fighting for a better and stronger America.”
  • Trump said “far-left radicals” are committing “acts of violence and terror because they know their ideas and arguments are persuading no one,” the Hill reports. “They know that they are failing,” he said. “They have the devil’s ideology.”
  • The president joked that he almost requested to move the ceremony because of his Mideast trip. “I raced back halfway around the globe,” he said. “I was going to call Erika and say, ‘Erika, could you maybe move it to Friday? And I didn’t have the courage to call. But you know why I didn’t call? Because I heard today was Charlie’s birthday.”
  • In her remarks, Erika Kirk said, “Today we’re gathered not only to celebrate Charlie’s birthday, but to honor a truth that he gave his entire life to defend. And that’s freedom.” She said that if Kirk had lived, he probably would have run for president, but “not out of ambition,” the Hill reports. “He would only have done it if that was something he believed that his country needed,” she said.
  • Kirk founded Turning Point USA in 2012. Trump has praised Kirk as one of the key reasons he was reelected. But Kirk’s politics were also often divisive. He sharply criticized gay and transgender rights while inflaming racial tensions, the AP reports. Kirk also repeated Trump’s false claims that former Vice President Kamala Harris was responsible for policies that encouraged immigrants to come to the US illegally.
  • Trump wrote in a Truth Social post hours before the event that he was moving the ceremony from the White House’s East Room to the Rose Garden to accommodate a crowd he said would be “so big and enthusiastic.”

This pure caca…..this blowhard no more served the cause of freedom than a rattlesnake in heat.

But to back up what I say….let’s look at what this tool actually stood for….

Here’s what to know about some of Charlie Kirk’s political views:

Free speech

Kirk, a self-avowed advocate for free speech, demonstrated his commitment to spirited disagreement through regular debate events, often in front of large crowds where attendees could challenge his views.

Kirk also said the utterance of hate speech should not carry legal consequences. “Hate speech does not exist legally in America. There’s ugly speech. There’s gross speech. There’s evil speech. And ALL of it is protected by the First Amendment,” Kirk said in a post on X in May 2024.

Critics have questioned Kirk’s commitment to free speech, however. Turning Point USA, under the leadership of Kirk, compiled a “Professor Watchlist,” which aims to “expose and document college professors who discriminate against conservative students.”

Some professors said they received hateful messages, even death threats, after being added to the list. “You don’t want to get too overly paranoid, but it’s also hard to not do that sometimes because you are targeted on this list,” Shawn Schwaller, a professor at California-based Chico State University, told ABC News affiliate KCKR in Northern California.

(there is more….read on….)

https://abcnews.go.com/US/charlie-kirks-political-views-conservative-activist/story

If you read that then I ask does it sound like this hateful blowhard was furthering the cause of freedom?

Not in my world.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

What If They Say NO?

A regular visitor and reader of IST John at https://johnrieber.com/ (visit often for some wonderful stuff)….in a recent comment he asked what would happen if the generals that were chastised by Hogsbreath and Donny refused an order…..

I found this article that may answer his question.

…

Increasingly, then, the question is: What will the military leaders do? Let Trump turn full blown Kim Jong Un? Or say, “No sir!”

About saying “NO!”… It isn’t just legal — it is compulsory under the current conditions, and this will only become more apparent. According to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ, Article 92, service members have the duty to obey only lawful orders and to refuse unlawful ones. An order is unlawful if it violates the Constitution, US laws, military regulations, or international law. Obeying illegal orders can result in criminal liability.

At Quantico, by remaining silent, by not applauding, by not smiling at Trump’s “jokes,” the generals and admirals gave some of us at least a sliver of hope that they understand the weighty responsibility upon their shoulders.

Perhaps they will not, after all, go quietly into the night.

What Would Happen if the Generals Refused to Follow Orders?

This may not be a definitive answer to the question but it could give us an idea an d ask questions of our generals, our military commanders.

If we go by the Uniform Code of Military Justice there are several things that could be levied against one who breaks the code….

Punishments under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) range from less severe administrative penalties to severe criminal punishments, including reprimands, forfeiture of pay, reduction in rank, extra duties, restriction, confinement, and punitive discharges like a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge. The specific punishment depends on the severity of the offense, and for the most serious crimes, penalties can include life imprisonment or the death penalty. 

Common punishments
  • Reprimand:A formal verbal or written disapproval of conduct.
    Reduction in rank:Demotion to a lower pay grade.

    Forfeiture of pay:A portion of the service member’s pay is withheld.

    Extra duties:Being assigned additional duties outside of the normal work schedule.

    Restriction:Being confined to a specific geographic area, such as a base.

    Confinement:Physical imprisonment, with options for hard labor without confinement.

    Fines:Monetary fines can be imposed.

    Punitive discharges:These are severe penalties that result in separation from the military and can have significant consequences:

    Bad-conduct discharge:Imposed for more serious offenses.
    Dishonorable discharge:The most severe type of discharge, used for the most serious offenses.
    Dismissal:The equivalent of a dishonorable discharge for an officer.

Death penalty:Can be imposed for the most extreme offenses, such as treason or espionage.Severity and process

Non-judicial punishment:

Minor offenses are typically handled by a commanding officer through a process known as Article 15 or non-judicial punishment, which avoids a criminal conviction.

Courts-martial:

More serious offenses are tried in a court-martial, which is a military trial.

Sentencing and review:
A court-martial conviction can lead to severe punishments. If the sentence includes a punitive discharge, dismissal, or confinement of more than one year, it is subject to review by an intermediate court.
More specific….what about disobeying direct orders….

Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) covers the Failure to Obey an Order or Regulation. Service members accused of failure to obey orders, regulations or performing their duties in a negligent or intentionally poor manner may be charged under this article.

This is one of the most commonly charged offenses in military justice. It can apply to a wide range of misconduct, including dereliction of duty, failure to follow safety protocols, and refusing to carry out a lawful order.

Violating a lawful order in the military is serious. The government may launch an investigation into:

  • Refusal to carry out orders
  • Negligent performance of duty
  • Drunk or incapacitated on duty
  • Failure to follow standing safety procedures
  • Dereliction of duty that causes injury or death

Even a single mistake can lead to nonjudicial punishment (Article 15), a GOMOR (General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand), administrative separation, or even court-martial.

I know it is a lot of information but this is the jest of what someone who disobeys a direct order can look forward to getting.

Now the question is will any of the generals show that sort of fortitude after in vesting much of their adult life to the military?

I hope this helps understand what is expected if one does not follow a direct order.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”