Special to the Mirror by Paul Plante

Every day, it seems, we hear about this group or that group, or this “community,” or that “community” screeching and hollering about “police reform,” without ever really saying what “police reform” is, or what it would look like once enacted or implemented, and in his speech to the Democrats on 28 April 2021 to celebrate Joe Biden making it through one hundred days of what is a four-year term, which is like celebrating someone making it through the first quarter mile of a marathon, Joe brought the subject up himself, as follows:

We have all seen the knee of injustice on the neck of Black America.

Now is our opportunity to make real progress.

Most men and women in uniform wear their badge and serve their communities honorably.

I know them.

I know they want to help meet this moment as well.

My fellow Americans, we have to come together.

To rebuild trust between law enforcement and the people they serve.

To root out systemic racism in our criminal justice system.

And to enact police reform in George Floyd’s name that passed the House already.

I know the Republicans have their own ideas and are engaged in productive discussions with Democrats.

We need to work together to find a consensus.

Let’s get it done next month, by the first anniversary of George Floyd’s death.

The country supports this reform.

Congress should act.

We have a giant opportunity to bend to the arc of the moral universe toward justice.

Real justice.

And with the plans I outlined tonight, we have a real chance to root out systemic racism that plagues American life in many other ways.

end quotes

Now, as we try to do what Joe said to do in his speech to the Democrats on 28 April 2021 where he told us that we have a giant opportunity to bend the arc of the moral universe toward justice, real justice, not some cheap fake or imitation justice, but the real deal, before we can actually do any of that actual bending of the arc of the moral universe towards real justice, not the horse**** version of “justice” Joe Biden is pushing, we first have to consider just what the word “justice” even means anymore, and to do that, we need to go back to August 10, 2020, just so many months before the farce of presidential elections in November of 2020, and the Washington Examiner article entitled “Biden now claims that Michael Brown was a victim of systemic racism” by Becket Adams, Commentary Writer, as follows:

Joe Biden this weekend tied the 2014 shooting death of Ferguson, Missouri, resident Michael Brown to the need to tackle “systemic racism” and corrupt law enforcement.

end quotes

Now, that is some very heavy-duty pure horse**** there, and it is right there that Joe Biden lost me with respect to any bending of any moral arcs, because Joe Biden, a “Willie Horton Democrat,” is trying to bend them the wrong way to benefit the law breakers and scoffers at rule of law and order who are his base to the detriment of civilized society who would be the victims of Joe Biden’s so-called “police reforms,” which reforms are not the province of a United States president in the first place, as we will see as I develop this topic further by making reference to a document submitted to The Urban League a bit ago entitled NATIONAL COPS EVALUATION ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE CASE STUDY: Albany, New York by David Thacher, Research Associate, Program in Criminal Justice Policy and Management, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University – Case Study Prepared for the Urban Institute, which is a very thorough report on the history of the Albany Police, which agency is now under serious political attack by the Common Council of Albany and the so-called “police review board,” and reforms over the years, and the fact that meddling by ignorant politicians just like Joe Biden into matters they know nothing about, but only have their feelings and emotions about, like Willie Horton and the fact that he couldn’t get out of prison on weekends so he could mingle with polite society is a big part of what is wrong with policing in America today, which argues for keeping Joe Biden totally out of the process after his stupid remarks in 2020 about Michael Brown, which takes us back to the Washington Examiner, as follows:

It is puzzling that he would link the one to the others, considering the Department of Justice under his boss, former President Barack Obama, concluded that Brown was no victim.

Rather, the 18-year-old black man was killed in the act of attacking a police officer and trying to take away his gun.

“It’s been six years since Michael Brown’s life was taken in Ferguson — reigniting a movement,” said the former vice president on the sixth anniversary of Brown’s death.

“We must continue the work of tackling systemic racism and reforming policing.”

It’s been six years since Michael Brown’s life was taken in Ferguson — reigniting a movement. We must continue the work of tackling systemic racism and reforming policing.
— Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) August 9, 2020

end quotes

There is Joe on TWITTER, a social media site for morons and idiots who can’t read or understand more than a handful of words or pure gibberish at a time, proving that TWITTER is for morons and idiots by posting the stupid TWEET, which is why I am against Joe Biden bending the arc of the moral universe in his direction, which will be to the benefit of other Michael Browns who like Willie Horton, are a threat to civilized society, not a benefit to it, which again takes us back to the Washington Examiner, to wit:

Again, Obama’s Justice Department found that there was no credible evidence to support the claim that the white officer, Darren Wilson, had done anything illegal when he shot and killed Brown.

Rather, its independent investigation found Wilson had acted in self-defense.

So, why release a statement on the sixth anniversary of the justifiable shooting death of Brown and tie it to “systemic racism and reforming policing?”

What is Biden doing, if not deliberately inflaming passions and whipping up resentment?

The presumptive Democratic presidential nominee seems to be playing footsie with the popular and false assertion that led to the torching of Ferguson at the time — that Wilson had “murdered” Brown.

It is a lie, and a persistent one at that.

Other top-tier Democratic officials, including Sens. Kamala Harris of California and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, have helped spread this bit of fake news, too.

And they know what they are doing when they spread it.

Harris said in August 2019, “Michael Brown’s murder forever changed Ferguson and America.”

“His tragic death sparked a desperately needed conversation and a nationwide movement.”

“We must fight for stronger accountability and racial equity in our justice system.”

Warren tweeted 35 minutes later, “5 years ago Michael Brown was murdered by a white police officer in Ferguson, Missouri.”

“Michael was unarmed yet he was shot 6 times.”

“I stand with activists and organizers who continue the fight for justice for Michael.”

“We must confront systemic racism and police violence head on.”

But Brown was not “murdered,” as the Obama Justice Department made abundantly clear in its investigation of the matter.

The false story that Brown put his hands up and said, “Don’t shoot!” has been debunked thoroughly, and Biden and his campaign team really should know better.

end quotes

Sides are being taken, people, and lines are being drawn.

Which side will you be on?

The following Op-Ed excerpt from the Brennan Center for Justice submitted by Hazel Thomas                                                      

SUMMARY: Bold legislation introduced in the House (H.R. 1) and Senate (S. 1) would ensure that our democracy works for everyone.

Introduction

American democracy urgently needs repair. We now have a historic opportunity to bring about transformative change. In both houses of Congress, the For the People Act — H.R. 1 in the House and S. 1 in the Senate — was designated as the first bill, a top priority this session.

This historic legislation responds to twin crises facing our country: the ongoing attack on democracy — reflected in the assault on the Capitol on January 6 and the subsequent flood of vote suppression bills across the country — and the urgent demand for racial justice. It is based on the key insight that the best way to defend democracy is to strengthen democracy. If enacted, it would be the most significant voting rights and democracy reform in more than half a century.

The 2020 election, like the 2018 midterms, featured historic levels of voter turnout — the highest in over a century, even in the face of a deadly pandemic. But there were also unprecedented efforts to thwart the electoral process and disenfranchise voters, primarily in Black and brown communities, based on lies about “voter fraud.” Those efforts continue through restrictive voting bills in states across the country. Extreme partisan gerrymandering continued to distort far too many races for the House — a plot that is poised to be repeated in the upcoming redistricting cycle unless Congress steps in to prevent it. And despite increased engagement by small campaign donors last year, the most expensive campaigns in American history were still largely bankrolled by a small coterie of individual megadonors and entrenched interests, many of whom were able to keep their identities secret from voters.

These problems were more extreme this cycle, but they are certainly not new. For decades, citizens’ voices have been silenced through voter suppression, gerrymandering, and deceptive tactics. Wealthy campaign donors maintain outsized sway over policy. And the guardrails against discrimination, corruption, and manipulation of the system for personal gain have all been cast aside or eroded. The virulent coronavirus, whose worst effects in terms of both health and the economy have fallen disproportionately on communities of color, underscores the urgent need for a functioning democracy that serves all the people.

The current assault on voting rights across the country underscores the urgency of reform. Even though our democratic institutions survived an attempt to overturn the result of the 2020 election, unscrupulous state legislators have seized on the disinformation that fueled this attempt to introduce an alarming number of regressive bills aimed at restricting access to the ballot, including by sharply restricting access to mail ballots, cutting back on early voting, and slashing voter registration opportunities. To date, more than 250 bills to restrict voting access have been proposed in 43 states, more than seven times the number introduced by this same time last year. These measures target and will disproportionately harm voters of color, young voters, and voters with disabilities. In Georgia, for instance, a recent Brennan Center analysis found that proposed bills to cut Sunday early voting and mail-voting access would burden Black voters most. footnote1_5hw0z9j1

But here is the good news: we know what we need to do to address these problems and strengthen American democracy. It starts with passing the For the People Act. The Act incorporates key measures that are urgently needed, including automatic voter registration and other steps to modernize our elections; a national guarantee of free and fair elections without voter suppression, coupled with a commitment to restore the full protections of the Voting Rights Act; small donor public financing to empower ordinary Americans instead of big donors (at no cost to taxpayers) and other critical campaign finance reforms; an end to partisan gerrymandering; and a much-needed overhaul of federal ethics rules. Critically, the Act would thwart virtually every vote suppression bill currently pending in the states.

These reforms respond directly to Americans’ desire for real solutions that ensure that each of us can have a voice in the decisions that govern our lives, as evidenced by their passage in many states, often by lopsided bipartisan margins. They are especially critical for communities of color. Racial justice cannot be fully achieved without a system in which all Americans have the means to advocate for themselves and exercise political power.

As President Biden remarked in his inaugural address: democracy is precious, but democracy is also fragile. The 2020 election revealed a passionate commitment to democracy on the part of tens of millions of Americans who braved a deadly pandemic, voter suppression, and a concerted campaign of presidential lies to make their voices heard. On March 3, the House of Representatives honored that commitment by passing the Act in its entirety. Now, the Senate and the president must also fulfill their promise to secure representative democracy in America now and for future generations.

Voting Rights

The right to vote is at the heart of effective self-government. In the Federalist Papers, Alexander Hamilton and James Madison laid down a standard for our democracy: “Who are to be the electors of the federal representatives? Not the rich, more than the poor; not the learned, more than the ignorant; not the haughty heirs of distinguished names, more than the humble sons of obscurity and unpropitious fortune. The electors are to be the great body of the people of the United States.” footnote1_xrpdsgu2 For over two centuries, we have worked to live up to that ideal, but have consistently fallen short. Many have struggled, and continue to struggle, for the franchise. The For the People Act would expand and protect this most fundamental right and bring voting into the 21st century.

• Modernize Voter Registration
  • Automatic Voter Registration
  • Same-Day and Online Registration
  • Protect Against Flawed Purges

• Restore the Voting Rights Act
• Restore Voting Rights to People with Prior Convictions
• Strengthen Mail Voting Systems
• Institute Nationwide Early Voting
• Preventing Unreasonable Wait Times at the Polls
• Protect Against Deceptive Practices

---

Special Opinion to the Mirror by Charles Landis: HR 1, the For the People Act, a reveal of the conceal and steal. A clear and imminent threat.

The 2016 and 2020 presidential elections portend to be the most consequential since the Civil War and indeed since the beginning of the great experiment. Half of the country refuse to accept the result of these elections and believe nefarious forces were responsible. Half of the country embraces the populist movement of Trump.  Half of the country sub-scribes to the notional progressivism of identity politics and cancel culture procreated by Biden/Sanders/Warren et al. of left.

 Hatred of Trump by Democrats and demand that he be removed from office began the moment he assumed office and has endured  both as to Trump and the 75 million who support and identify. It must be understood and recognized that Trump is leading a populist movement,  sharing the belief that  the elitist Left  will  relentlessly continue its assault on the values  and institutions that made American great and exceptional.  

With the election of Biden, and  Harris as Vice President  deciding majority in the Senate, HR 1 became the  quintessential legislative goal of the Socialist Democrat Party. Euphemistically titled the “For The People Act “, the intention is to federalize the election process; a blatant refutation of Art.2 Sec. 1 of the Constitution mandating state legislatures as sole authority in establishing election processes. The Act embraces all the corruption that divides and enabled  the Bidenharris election .HR 1 federalizes and micro manages the election process which was decentralized as fundamental since our founding and as has  been administered by the states. It takes away the decentralization of the American election process believed necessary by our founders  in protecting our liberty and freedom.

Heritage Foundation succinctly concludes “HR 1 would usurp the role of the states, wipe out  basic safety protocols, and mandates a set of rules that would severely damage the integrity of elections.” In part, with particularity, same day registration, third party ballot harvesting, and elimination of voter identification and verification as to both in person and write in ballots.

 Perhaps, the most concerning dictate of HR 1 is that it reduces the Federal Election Commission to 5 members appointed by the President, 2 Democrats, 2 Republicans, .and 1 independent as determined by sole discretion of the President. Thus, the historical  prerogative of state legislatures in deciding rules is usurped  and an unelected partisan bureaucracy in Washington mandates. Also, false or misleading statements are forbidden to be published  within 50 days of an election. The First amendment is shredded. Imagine a ministry of truth or a truth tsar  appointed by Biden and handlers.

It should be noted HR1 was passed in  the House without any Republican support and, as with 10 of 12 other resolutions ,there were no hearings. The fate of HR 1 in the Senate is yet to be determined  but we know  the agenda of the left and the  priority of the socialist Democrats. This is why the Democrats want to eliminate the Senate filibuster rule; thus they would be able to pass any legislation by vote of VP Harris. Thus is established a tyranny of the majority. There will be Constitutional challenges and perhaps that will initiate their  court packing scheme.

The more deranged the cults our time become — from wokeism to QAnon — the more it reminds us of Raskolnikov’s prophetic dream from the Epilogue of Crime and Punishment.

In Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment, René Girard notes: Raskolnikov has a dream during a grave illness that occurs just before his final change of heart, at the end of the novel. He dreams of a worldwide plague that affects people’s relationship with each other. No specifically medical symptoms are mentioned. It is human interaction that breaks down, and the entire society gradually collapses:

He dreamt that the whole world was condemned to a terrible new strange plague that had come to Europe from the depths of Asia. All were to be destroyed except a very few chosen. Some new sorts of microbes were attacking the bodies of men, but these microbes were endowed with intelligence and will. Men attacked by them became at once mad and furious. But never had men considered themselves so intellectual and so completely in possession of the truth as these sufferers, never had they considered their decisions, their scientific conclusions, their moral convictions so infallible. Whole villages, whole towns and peoples went mad from the infection. All were excited and did not understand one another. Each thought that he alone had the truth and was wretched looking at the others, beat himself on the breast, wept, and wrung his hands. They did not know how to judge and could not agree what to consider evil and what good; they did not know whom to blame, whom to justify. Men killed each other in a sort of senseless spite. They gathered together in armies against one another, but even on the march the armies would begin attacking each other, the ranks would be broken and the soldiers would fall on each other, stabbing and cutting, biting and devouring each other. The alarm bell was ringing all day long in the towns; men rushed together, but why they were summoned and who was summoning them no one knew. The most ordinary trades were abandoned, because everyone proposed his own ideas, his own improvements, and they could not agree. The land too was abandoned. Men met in groups, agreed on something, swore to keep together, but at once began on something quite different from what they had proposed. They accused one another, fought and killed each other. There were conflagrations and famine. All men and all things were involved in destruction. The plague spread and moved further and further. Only a few men could be saved in the whole world. They were a pure chosen people, destined to found a new race and a new life, to renew and purify the earth, but no one had seen these men, no one had heard their words and their voices. 

This final reference important, because it relates to Lazarus. Raskolnikov, after coming to recognize Sonya’s love for him, is like a man having risen from the dead. His conversion is both a Lazarus story and a story of one man’s turn toward Christian teaching. In observing his own “re-birth” into goodness, Raskolnikov comes to believe there is some hope for himself and for Sonya, after the prison sentence is over, and this hope emerges not from being extraordinary but from accepting the extraordinary—not from being Jesus but from being Lazarus, and finding strength in the very things he previously saw as weak: dependence on others, appreciation for the world, dependence on love.

We can all learn.

Thursday’s Town Council Meeting began with letters from the group The Concerned Citizens of Cape Charles, ratcheting up their attacks on the Coastal Precast Concrete plant.

Town Clerk Libby Hume read letters for nearly 40 minutes, the majority voicing disgust and anger against the work taking place on the industrial zoned property.

Coastal Concrete reopened the old Bayshore plant after it closed in 2018, supplying jobs to Northampton County residents.

The pressure from the concerned group of citizens is beginning to take on a serious tone. The group is hoping to bring in Delegate Rob Bloxom and Senator Lynwood Lewis to help put a stop to the work, thereby alleviating what they consider the nuisance of dust and noise caused by the folks working at the plant.

The complaints ranged from accusations that the plant was polluting the environment and destroying Cape Charles’ natural habitat, that particulate matter in the form of dust could cause respiratory disease and cancer, as well as claims that the noise was making all the old people irritable.

It should be noted that when taxpayer monies were used to construct the new connector road leading right into Bayshore, not a peep was made because Bay Creek residents were happy to get a shiny new highway for their neighborhood. Now that the road is being leveraged by the working class, all of a sudden it has become an issue.

It should also be noted, that the Mirror has confirmed that several of the complaints are coming from people with incomes in the high six figures, as well as retirees with massive nest eggs.

While the party line of the so-called concerned citizens is “we don’t want the plant to close”, private conversations expose this sentiment as a lie. The ultimate goal is to shut down the plant and remove the last vestige of blue-collar working-class blokes, most of which have been run off and squeezed out by the gentrification of Cape Charles.

Opinion

It seems the apartheid gates of Bay Creek weren’t strong enough to contain the intellectual sludge from leeching into the historic district. The “elites” that have moved here and turned the town into a pathetic joke, will not be content until the will of the northeast liberal Bourgeois has fully eradicated all signs of local shore people.

Unless these people shut up, or hopefully move away, this schism will never be closed. The divide runs very deep, as the last presidential election proved. Cape Charles is nothing but a microcosm of the class hatred and bigotry that defines the new America.

The election of 2020 exposed the deep rift that exists between liberal elites in high density, wealthy urban centers (and who have now moved down here), and the rural working class. The angst generated by Coastal Precast Concrete comes from the fact that these elites that “come here” have no real understanding or appreciation of what it means to be working class. They have nothing but contempt for the kind of jobs available for them, the kind of jobs needed to provide for their families.

The war on Coastal Precast Concrete is a war on the working class. The divide between the “working class” and the “elite” is the defining issue in American politics, especially at the local level. 

The folks that make up the work­ing class on the lower Eastern Shore have experienced economic stagnation–social mobility has declined, while inequality has widened as wealthy retirees have moved into their homes, taken over neighborhoods, as well as the town council.

The plant reopening was a wish come true for many that have lived and grown up here.

While the dust and noise generated by ordinary men at work may seem to be the issue, the distrust and disdain expose something more insidious and deep-seated.

Special opinion by Paul Plante

Yes, people, it’s true – Aunt Jemima, who I grew up with and have fond memories of as a comfort on cold winter mornings, is no more!

Too racist, you see!

Or that is what I heard some snippy little girl reading the news this morning (10 Feb. 2021) on NPR saying, anyway, as if all of us here in America who did grow up with Aunt Jemima and found her a real comfort coming into the kitchen on cold winter mornings in an old farm house with no insulation, no hot running water, and wood/coal stoves for heat, seeing her sitting there on the table with her big comforting and welcoming smile on the bottle of maple syrup for our pancakes, were either too stupid to be able to form our own opinions as to who Aunt Jemima was and is in our lives, or we would have to be racists if we admitted to liking seeing the smiling visage of comforting Aunt Jemima on a bottle of maple syrup, which I thought was quite insulting on the part of the snippy little girl lecturing us on NPR about how Aunt Jemima is really a racist symbol.

WHO are these people that come up with this BULL****?

And here, let’s go to the print version of the NPR story entitled “Aunt Jemima No More; Pancake Brand Renamed Pearl Milling Company” by Jaclyn Diaz on February 10, 2021, where we have the following to ponder, to wit:

Quaker Oats cooked up a new image for an old, offensive brand Tuesday.

end quotes

An old “offensive” brand?

Offensive to whom?

What kind of a warped and twisted mind does it take for somebody to find the comforting smile of Aunt Jemima on a cold winter morning “offensive?”

And why are they controlling our lives, or trying to, anyway, by feeding us the pig**** that Aunt Jemima is offensive?

It isn’t Aunt Jemima that is offensive, it is those people spewing the rank pig**** who are offensive!

Getting back to NPR’s version of reality, we have:

PepsiCo Inc. the parent company for Quaker Oats, announced it’s rebranding Aunt Jemima, the popular pancake and syrup brand, retiring the racist stereotype used for the product’s image.

end quotes

Racist stereotype?

That is ******* BULL****!

Aunt Jemima was hardly a “racist stereotype” to me, who shared her company on a daily basis for many months through the cold waiting for the spring to come.

Why would we have a racist stereotype in our house, in the kitchen where the family took its meals together, sitting on our kitchen table?

Aunt Jemima was very much a part of the family, not a racist stereotype, and calling her such reveals the troubled and/or sick nature of these people’s minds.

Getting back to the horse****, it goes on as follows:

Aunt Jemima and other food brands, including Uncle Ben’s, Cream of Wheat, and Mrs. Butterworth’s, announced redesigns amid protests against systemic racism and police brutality in the U.S. last summer.

end quotes

So now Aunt Jemima is somehow responsible for police brutality?

What on earth kind of stupid statement is that?

Saying that eating Aunt Jemima maple syrup on a pancake is responsible for police brutality is ABSURD!

You have to be a moron to even think that, let alone express it as a belief like NPR is doing here, which again takes us back to the story, to wit:

Aunt Jemima has been criticized as an image harkening back to slavery.

end quotes

Criticized?

Criticized by whom?

And an image harkening back to slavery?

HORSE**** is what I say to that.

These people doing the criticizing have some serious mental and pyschological issues that preclude us rational people in America who love Aunt Jemima from treating them as other than psychopathic morons, which takes us back to NPR, as follows:

Old Aunt Jemima originated as a song of field slaves that was later performed at minstrel shows.

end quotes

Okay!

So what?

What relevance does any of that have to reality?

How does that make the smiling face of Aunt Jemima on a bottle of maple syrup into a racist stereotype?

And the answer is that if you are rational, if you have a brain that works, if you are not an idiot, it doesn’t, because only an idiot would think Aunt Jemima was a racist stereotype, which takes us back to NPR for even more horse****, to wit:

Both Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben’s have been criticized for relying on the titles aunt and uncle, which historically were used by people who resisted applying the honorific Mr. or Ms. to a Black person.

end quotes

This **** is so unbelievable it isn’t funny.

If one were to peruse the Marxist Bible by Freddy Engels entitled “Origins of the Family, Private Property, and the State,” one would find as follows:

II. The Family

MORGAN, who spent a great part of his life among the Iroquois Indians – settled to this day in New York State – and was adopted into one of their tribes (the Senecas), found in use among them a system of consanguinity which was in contradiction to their actual family relationships.

The Iroquois calls not only his own children his sons and daughters, but also the children of his brothers; and they call him father.

The children of his sisters, however, he calls his nephews and nieces, and they call him their uncle.

The Iroquois woman, on the other hand, calls her sisters’ children, as well as her own, her sons and daughters, and they call her mother.

But her brothers’ children she calls her nephews and nieces, and she is known as their aunt.

Similarly, the children of brothers call one another brother and sister, and so do the children of sisters.

A woman’s own children and the children of her brother, on the other hand, call one another cousins.

And these are not mere empty names, but expressions of actual conceptions of nearness and remoteness, of equality and difference in the degrees of consanguinity: these conceptions serve as the foundation of a fully elaborated system of consanguinity through which several hundred different relationships of one individual can be expressed.

What is more, this system is not only in full force among all American Indians (no exception has been found up to the present), but also retains its validity almost unchanged among the aborigines of India, the Dravidian tribes in the Deccan and the Gaura tribes in Hindustan.

To this day the Tamils of southern India and the Iroquois Seneca Indians in New York State still express more than two hundred degrees of consanguinity in the same manner.

And among these tribes of India, as among all the American Indians, the actual relationships arising out of the existing form of the family contradict the system of consanguinity.

How is this to be explained?

In view of the decisive part played by consanguinity in the social structure of all savage and barbarian peoples, the importance of a system so widespread cannot be dismissed with phrases.

When a system is general throughout America and also exists in Asia among peoples of a quite different race, when numerous instances of it are found with greater or less variation in every part of Africa and Australia, then that system has to be historically explained, not talked out of existence, as McLennan, for example, tried to do.

The names of father, child, brother, sister are no mere complimentary forms of address; they involve quite definite and very serious mutual obligations which together make up an essential part of the social constitution of the peoples in question.

end quotes

So what kind of real ignorant horse**** is NPR trying to peddle here with this BULL**** that calling Aunt Jemima “Aunt” is demeaning to colored folks?

When she was as much a part of our family when I was young as I was she deserves to be called “Aunt,” which is a term of RESPECT, not racism.

Aunt Jemima, we love you, we grew up with you, and now that you are being taken from us, we will continue to hold you in our hearts because you helped to give us nourishment and life!

Biden, Harris, and their critical race theorists seem perfectly content to drive a wedge through America. Most of us do not want this, but we are being dragged into the abyss.

25,000 national guardsmen occupied our capital city, creating checkpoints all over the place. We got a literal Checkpoint Charlie on the ground just a few days into this new administration.

What do men do when a hostile force takes over your homeland?

You do what all our ancestors have done at such times. You go underground where the light of hope still burns, just as our ancestors did when the hand of oppression tightened its hold. That is where we reconnect with the truths that the state wants to keep hidden. That is where we reconnect with the old ways, the old traditions allowed our forefathers to build greatness that so many hate and take for granted, and are hellbent on throwing away.

We need to hold on to all of those things–we will need them for rebuilding civilization that is being destroyed.

Men of today have a duty to preserve those values in the face of the occupation.

Put yourself around other people on that same mission. There’s no such thing as a resistance or an underground community of one person or one family. No, that’s exile. Don’t be exiled. Join the underground.

Some of our ancestors failed to uphold this duty. Some of us are failing at it now. The conservative Boomers watched the communists march through our society for decades. They shrugged and said, “Wow, shit’s really hitting the fan. Oh well, I’ll go play golf then watch my Cleveland Browns.”

They checked out.

They conserved nothing.

Some men are doing this even now as we pass through Checkpoint Charlie. They’ll be crushed.

But those of us with families, wives, kids, and even grandkids depending on us, we can’t afford to check out. Rather, our families can’t afford it. We carried them on our backs as we passed through that dread gate, and we carry them still as the boot descends.

Are you going to give up? Or are you going to join the underground, connect with others determined to survive, and preserve the sacred truths for our children?

Because it may not be us who rise up and shatter the new wall. The Berlin Wall stood for nearly thirty years. How old will you be in thirty years? How old will your kids be? You could be a young man now and still have your grandchildren be the ones who bring down this wall.

They’ll need the truths this State is seeking to erase. They’ll need hope and resources and knowledge and a network.

They’ll need everything the underground exists to preserve and create.

Because we aren’t just living silently in the dark. People are building underground. There’s growth here, and light and innovation. All the things this hateful State despises most. That’s why we’re hidden. We could survive on the surface, but we thrive in the underground. And when that wall falls, we and our descendants will be ready to rise up as leaders in the new world.

That’s the future. The Berlin Wall didn’t fall in a week, and Biden and Harris will be here for a while (in whatever form their administration takes as things no doubt shift around). What can you do right now, today, to join the underground and secure your family?

Connect with other men on the same mission.

Special Opinion to the Mirror by Charles Landis

In the mid 1850’s the great issue leading up to the Civil War was the promise of the Declaration of Independence of “all men are created equal” and the denial by Chief Justice Roger Taney’s interpretation of the Constitution (Dred Scott-1857).

Lincoln said “I believe this government cannot endure, permanently if half slave and half free… I do not expect the Union to be dissolved… I do not expect the house to fall… but I do expect it will cease to be divided… it will become all one thing or the other.”

Today we are as divided and again it can be said we cannot be, permanently half of one thing and half of another. We cannot be half a constitutional democratic republic with capitalism and half a progressive socialist democracy dependent on government control of lives and livelihoods .

Party labels aside, our division is essentially the populism ushered in by election of Trump versus the progressive movement of the left. To simply view the divide as between Republican and Democrats is to ignore the existential essence of the divide.

Trump populism began when he announced his candidacy as an outsider Republican against establishment elites and progressive interests: main street media, the political class, academia, mega tech, and the deep state…the SWAMP. As with any populist movement, it was ordinary people (middle class, blue collar, and working folk) against elitists; assaults against time honored value precepts.

Th e one thing or the other question begins with two different views of the election process:

On January 11 (5 days after the January 6 official Electoral vote count) I participated in a briefing for members of Heritage Foundation on a meeting of the Heritage president with Vice President Pence that morning. The takeaway was the critical importance of the integrity of the voting/electoral process and what happened in 2020 must never happen again. Specifically, the widespread violation of Article 2 Sec. 1 of the Constitution which mandates the state legislatures as the sole authority in writing the rules in the voting process. Under cover and pretext of Covid considerations, Democrats persuaded election boards, governors, and judges to circumvent the Constitutional requirement and prejudice the integrity of the vote process.

Most important, was identification and verification requirements for both in-person and mail-in votes. The greatest and most egregious issues, of course, arose in contested elections in Democrat controlled battleground states. Democrats consider almost any identification or verification requirements as voter suppression.

The Heritage project is essentially a populist effort to insure integrity of the election process by working with state legislatures to enforce integrity by identification, absentee ballot controls, and verification standards to avoid abuses in 2020 election.

The progressive Democrat left has a different agenda. In HR 1, , The Peoples Act of 2019, the socialist Democrat party endeavors to federalize the election process by eliminating the Art. 2, Sec. 1 requirement of state legislatures and reconstituting the Federal Election Commission. A 5-member board, of which 3 members would be appointed by the president, would make election rules a federal partisan political n process. HR1 has passed the Democrat controlled House but may be defeated in the Senate. How the Constitutional challenge will be met without amendment is unclear.

What is clear, however, is the one way of the populist Republicans is faithfulness to the Constitution and a democratic republic. The other way of the Socialists Democrats reeks of Marxism. The Peoples Act is as of every other socialist/communist Peoples Republic. First there was the 1619 Project to rewrite our history. Now, on the 400 hundred year anniversary of that misguided assault, the socialist Democrats progress with the 2019 Peoples Act to the end of the great experiment.

Res Publica.

The following letter was sent to Spencer Morgan, Accomack County Commonwealth’s Attorney by local citizen Charles Landis. Landis has been accused by Ralph Northam’s Jay C. Ford of making seditious comments.

You have publicly endorsed  a charge  by Mr. Jay C. Ford that I have published “seditious” comments/opinions on social media. And, further, that I should be taken off the “internet”(FB). Below, I have republished offending commentaries and I proudly plead guilty.

I request that you formally charge me with sedition and explain what I have published that is not protected as free speech by the US Constitution or the Virginia Constitution. And why I should be censured from the internet.

Note. Mr. Morgan consistently  hits the like button on FB for everything Jay Ford posts; including charges (as noted) against personally  me by Ford.  As Commonwealth’s Attorney, he could be  required to recuse himself when prosecuting any defendant who is a Trump supporter  for any alleged crime.  Any defendant prosecuted by Morgan need only cite postings of Ford and his endorsement as a prejudice/bias. As officer of court he should not do this..

Charles A. Landis. Resident. Onancock, Va. An d citizen of USA.

=================================================================

COMMENTARIES:

When more than half of the people, including 17% of Democrats, do not believe Biden was legitimately elected, everyone should want to address those concerns. Senator Cruz  simply wants to address those concerns by inquiry into  the causes that gave rise to these concerns. Only by this will there be resolution. Anyone who objects to this resolution confirms illegitimacy and have no interest in integrity of electoral process..  Res Publica.

———————————————————————————————————-

Prior to the Nov. 3 election, I published a commentary on constitutional issues that may arise if electoral votes were contested. This was based upon a study by constitutional  scholars  at the Hover/Stanford. Specifically, Article 2   Sec. 1  (role of state legislatures.) and Twelfth Amendment (role of Vice President). Authority of Vice President (Pence) in  “counting” provision is not defined in the Constitution . Twelfth Amendment only mandates Pence open ballots, it does not say who counts or by what process. Supreme Court would have to interpret if Pence decided to not count a states(s) electoral votes as certified if contested.  Arizona’s  electoral vote certification was   contested by a representative of Arizona and joined by a senator as required (Cruz). .Until counting is interpreted/defined by SCOTUS, the issue remains. I believe Pence correctly decided to avoid the Constitutional challenge because, SCOTUS, probably, would not rule in his favor.  Res Publica.

——————————————————————————————————–

Nothing Trump has said or done is seditious or  insurrectionary. Right of free speech, assembly, and to petition government to address gradiences are guaranteed by the 1^st Amendment. His address to  the many thousands that gathered in Washington, and many millions who watched from elsewhere, spoke to their beliefs. The right to contest the certification of any electoral votes is guaranteed by the Constitution and no member of Congress contested that right. Article 2. Sec . 1 of Constitution was violated by  the several states where certification  was contested.  That is not sedition. At no time  did he incite violence. By employing National Guard, ipso facto, he invoked provisions of Insurrection Act to suppress agent provocateurs at Capitol.

It is a sad day when the Comrade Fords of this world are so filled with ignorance and hate.  Trump is a profile in courage. Res Publica

——————————————————————————————————–

Note. The following comment was first published I n November ,2020.

he Electoral Vote Count Act of 1887establishes  December 8 as the deadline date for states to submit certified lists of electors to Congress. If there are any contests or controversies remaining unresolved, the Act provides for Congress to decide which electors, if any, will cast heir state’s ballots. Then the Electoral College  meets Dec.14. Further, if a state is not able  to certify votes by December 8, , because of  contested after time ballots or other litigation, as opined in SCOTUS decision in Bush v Gore, the state legislatures may take back appointment of elector decision from voters and vest in  the  legislative branch. This would require special superseding legislation which would again entail time and litigation, especially  if legislative bodies are split.

 Again, pursuant to the Electoral Count Act,  the decision will be passed to Congress (House) where each state has one vote and Republicans have a 26-23 majority (Pennsylvania is split). The12^th Amendment, however, requires all certificates of electors be opened publicly by the President of the Senate, Vice President  Pence, in presence of House and Senate and shall be counted. Constitutional issue arises because Act does not say who is to do the counting and the issue has not previously been brought before the Court. It logically follows the Vice president does but this requires him to also  decide if some state’s electors should be counted if controversies and litigation are still not resolved. Democrats would certainly object to a Republican deciding  in case of a closely contested battle ground state.

A new House is seated on January 3, President assumes office Jan. 21.,. but the members elected in 2020 will vote not those elected in 2018.  Some may also be contested or require run offs. One new Democrat representative in Pennsylvania and  a flip in one other state  and the House could be divided 25-25.   Therefore, the Electoral System fails.  Res Publica.

ReplyForward