With all the crises that beset us, why must we continue to relitigate questions answered so many times before? “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” This is not optional. This is not discretionary. This is not an opinion. There is precious little to debate or revise. This is not something that can be put on hold due to sickness or death, any more than we might interrupt gravity and levitate by wishing for it. This is not a theory. These foundational laws of our social physics are just as straightforward as gravity, or Newton’s laws of motion.
Why is this being debated?
Without those axioms, we are adrift in a sea of troubles. We are not worthy of any special consideration. We are no better than the next poor excuses for government to the north and the south of us. We are merely treading water before the maelstrom.
Doesn’t the very act of debating such principles at this stage in the game seem analogous to that of the man at a society ball who gets a beautiful women to consider sleeping with him for a million dollars yet, when that same woman is asked if she might do it for $10, she protests, “What do you think I am?”
The man answers “I think we have established that. Now we are just haggling over the price.” Any compromise on these first principles is an opening to bad consequences.
Practical considerations such as dealing with a pandemic, or whether we should use atomic weapons are best dealt with by open debate. Period. This is where freedom of the press and of speech and assembly are most crucial. That is what we elected Congress to do. How is it we find ourselves at odds with that?
If we are attacked, as we were at Pearl Harbor, we must strike back and defend ourselves to the fullest. Even Roosevelt, a progressive socialist understood that much. We may have been provocative before the attack, but certainly not on the scale of our open aid to the despotic regime in the Ukraine. Is there any doubt that supplying missiles to a petty tyrant like Zelenskyy will provoke the equally small-minded Putin to react? Didn’t Russia try this with us in Cuba some years ago? A war is being manufactured for dubious purposes by our own oligarchy of illiberal tyrants, when such a declaration of war can only be made by Congress. Is this in question?
A nation has borders. Without them, it is a fiction. Can we long survive this invasion? Who pays for the social services of a government that oversees the welfare of anyone who decides to come?
We now have pretend elections. Send in your ballots, please. Vote early and vote often. But not to worry. The outcome will be decided for you.
Our currency is debased by inflation. A digital economy is being arranged by actors in a World Economic Forum according to their own special interests. What sort of nation are we if we cannot control our income and debt?
Tucker Carlson appeared on Tulsi Gabbard’s show recently and in the course of discussing one aspect of our current collapse, the infiltration of Twitter and social media by the FBI and other spy organizations, he lost it and used foul language while discussing this degradation of our freedoms by our own government. Evidently, this behavior was unacceptable by many, even though Tucker was himself a victim of this chicanery. My own opinion of Tucker, already high, soared. And I am not the only one who has been wondering, “Where’s the outrage?”
When are the sitting members of Congress who have any common sense going to rise up en masse and say, “No more!” Were they elected to negotiate away our liberty or to protect it? Does their oath to the Constitution mean anything, or is it merely a formality?
The game is afoot, and we need a hand. Are there no leaders with the nation’s best interests at heart?