We like to know who is logging on, and we send out an email announcing each new posting with a link to the site. To let us know who you are and/or to be incuded on the email list please send an email to: firstname.lastname@example.org
A Note on Format
Links to other parts of the website can only be made to a page, rather than a specific article or part of article and there may be more than one article on a page. Therefore, when you click on a link to another part of the website there may be more on the page to which you are taken than just the material you are looking for.
There will be an occasional short article on the Home Page and the longer weekly post starts in the right hand column of this page. Navigation to another page on this website may be done in two ways. You can either click on the link contained in the article to take you to a continuation of the article, or you may go to the top of the home page where there are tabs to take you to the remaining pages.
The address to which comments or request to be put on the mailing list shoulld be sent is email@example.com or you may use my personal email address which is firstname.lastname@example.org Later I will probably add an automatic email link that can be used to send emails to the website, but right now I am just trying to get the basics done.
Send any comments or criticism to one of the above email adddresses
LINKS TO OTHER ARTICLES STILL ONLINE
click on the link to the right of the article
#180 Inciting A Riot... page 4
#179 The Delmar Divide page 4
#178 The Ferguson Msg. page 2
#177 The "I" Word page 3
#176 The Amok Catcher page 6
#175 ...Statutory Construction.. page 3
#174 Don't Shoot The Msgr page 6
#173 Bowe And "O" page 5
#172 Reformers... page 5
#171 Where Is Joe McCarthy page 2
All articles on this website are copyrighted on the date first placed online. All rights reserved.
No part of any article may be reproduced for redistribution without express permission
September 25, 2013 Appellate Court Acquits Tom Delay in Texas
A Texas appeal court has reversed the guilty verdict against Tom DeLay for money laundering entered a couple of years ago by an Austin, Texas, trial court. However, instead of sending it back to the lower court for a new trial, the appellate court entered a judgment acquitting DeLay of the commission of a crime. There is a significant difference between an acquittal and the usual remedy in such a situation which is simply sending the case back for a new trial. The appellate court’s action was a complete repudiation of the trial court, thus confirming that the prosecution of DeLay was an example of the politicization of the criminal process.
It will be recalled that DeLay, a very powerful Republican who was the Speaker of the House of Representatives in the U.S. Congress, was targeted by a Democratic Houston prosecutor named Earle, for purely political reasons. Earle was well known for indicting his political enemies and that included some who were Democrats. When Earle was unable to get a Houston Grand Jury to indict DeLay, the case was taken to Austin, the hot bed of leftists in Texas, where a left wing Grand Jury entered the indictment against DeLay for money laundering. The alleged crime consisted of DeLay’s sending some of the money in his campaign war chest to Republican legislative candidates in Texas. Some of the money in Delay’s campaign account consisted of entirely legal contributions from corporations. The Texas statute relating to campaign contributions prohibits corporations from contributing to political campaigns but does not apply to federal candidates such as DeLay. The practice DeLay was following was widely recognized as being beyond the reach of the Texas statute relating to political contributions.
The Texas money laundering statute makes it illegal for persons such as drug dealers to run their ill-gotten gains though legal bank accounts to sanitize them. The theory of Earle and his fellow leftists in Austin was that DeLay’s corporate contributors had run their contributions through DeLay’s campaign account to put them beyond the reach of the Texas political contributions act. Their theory was total nonsense. There was no evidence that any part of the money in DeLay’s war chest was intended for Texas political candidates at the time it was contributed to DeLay. Once in DeLay’s war chest it was, of course, mixed with the rest of the money already there. The money sent to Texas by DeLay was not ill-gotten in any sense, and not, therefore, covered by the Texas campaign contributions statute. No illegally obtained money had been laundered
The Texas appellate court recognized the Earle tactic for what it was, a contrived effort to politicize the criminal process by using a law to cover a situation it was never intended to cover. Nothing could be more destructive of our bedrock principle of the rule of law than the prosecution of DeLay in those circumstances. In fact our bill of rights was included in the Constitution as a reaction to the same kind of tactics used in England in the notorious Star Chamber proceedings. There can be no justice, indeed there can be no democracy, when those in power can corruptly use the criminal process to send their political opponents to jail.
The DeLay conviction was covered in a previous posting on this website. The action of the Texas Democrats in this case is just one of many examples of the fact that leftists are guided by only one principle and that is power. When one attempts to make this argument it is usually met with the response known as ‘a pox on both of their houses,’ in which it is asserted that there is no difference between the political tactics of Republicans and Democrats. While extensive research may find an instance where Republicans have been guilty of conduct similar to that of the Democrats in this case, it has to be contrasted with the ‘business as usual’ approach of the Democrats in similar circumstances. Another case that differs but little from the DeLay case, and was going through the courts at about the same time, was that of Scooter Libby who was convicted by DC jury of a crime that was never even committed. Libby’s prison sentence was commuted by President Bush, but that does not erase the conviction in the same way that a pardon would.
August 28, 2014
September 15, 2014 #181 Whence Proceedeth This Lust For Blood
The idiocy continues. It is the idiocy of black separatists and their leftist sponsors continuing to create the illusion that blacks are a superior race entitled to privileged treatment, and that whites are denying them their entitlement. The conclusion that many blacks draw from this is that there are no problems in the black community, and that violence against whites is justified.
The tools of the creators of the illusion are many, and they are spread throughout the culture. They include affirmative action, multiculturalism, diversity, the profiling taboo, the press refusal to reveal the racial identity of those who commit crimes of violence or even report black-on-white violent crimes, and political correctness which prohibits any rational discussion of racial issues. The entertainment and advertising industries feed the problem by portraying the black as a person of superior judgment and intelligence and the white male as inferior. Every ad must have more blacks and women in prominent roles, and they’re always the ones with superior positive qualities while the white male is the stupid or evil one. The problem doesn’t get any better, it gets worse. For a while Fox News was refusing to accept some of the limitations on the discussion of racial problems, but even they now seem to bow to the dictates of the left and the black separatists.
In a previous post on this website, an article in The Atlantic Magazine was discussed in which the same problem exists with respect to children of all races who are today being raised with a false sense of their own abilities. The Atlantic article exploded the myth that raising children permissively and giving them unrealistic illusions about their own abilities in order to build their self-esteem will produce a superior, more confident, and compassionate adult. In fact, such an approach has the opposite effect and creates dysfunctional adults. The psychological principles involved in that study are exactly the same as those that are creating so many of our current racial problems. Indeed, it is one and the same problem because black children are also being reared permissively, mostly by grandparents, and fed the same supposed self-esteem builders. The only additional twist is that their blackness is being described to them as a positive quality that they are told is also evidence of their superiority. It should be no surprise when they demonstrate their belief in their own superiority, and act out against the white devils who are denying them their right to enjoy a higher status and a greater share of the national wealth.
The cause and effects of this approach to racial relationships can be seen in every one of the nationally publicized racial incidents in which a black youth is killed or suffers real or supposed injury at the hands of whites. That is true with respect to Tawana Brawley, the Duke LaCrosse Team, Trayvon Martin, and Michael Brown. In every case the black separatists, with the aid of the leftist press, calls out the mobs that loot, burn, and attack anyone or anything in sight until the real facts reveal that the affair began with an act of violence, or fraudulent claims in the Tawana Brawley and Duke LaCrosse team cases, committed by the supposed victim, and then the mobs melt away. In the last two cases the black separatists, even after the mobs have melted away, continue to insist that the white cop, or quasi-cop must be punished. Their position seems to be that no white male is entitled to defend himself from violent black youth who are so aflame because of mistreatment of blacks generally. They clamor for ‘justice,’ which clearly means that regardless of the facts the white ‘offenders’ (actually defenders) must be tried and punished. They don’t want justice, of course, they want vengeance.
As an aside, the claim that the whites must pay regardless of the facts, has a parallel in the position of the left with respect to the Israeli/Arab conflict. Although the attacks in that conflict are all initiated by the Arabs, usually in the form of a suicide or rocket attack, the Israeli’s are blamed for defending themselves. The justification in that situation is the same, the Israelis and their American ally are blamed because of supposed injustices they have visited upon the poorer Arab world. The only thing that has been done to incur the wrath of the disadvantaged is, of course, to have applied superior skills to increase the productivity of the United States and the world. The left, and the black separatists, seem to take the position that justice will never be done until the people who have created the industrial and technological system which has increased the quality of life of even the poorest, are totally destroyed. In one sense, it is mass robbery at the national and international level. The position of the left carries over into the debates with respect to other social issues. Immigration is an example. The left has skewed our immigration system to favor the poorest, and least capable, people in the world while excluding the more competent and skilled people. The refusal to do anything to slow the mass influx of South and Central America’s poor into this country is the most obvious example. They will not be satisfied until this nation is reduced to Third World status. The United States is the primary target simply because it is the most successful.
The struggle to destroy those who have created the wealth desired by the disadvantaged poor, is being fought on many fronts. Senseless attacks on the creators of wealth don’t just occur in the form of the suicide bomber attacks in the Middle East. They are occurring in the United States every day. Not long ago it was so-called polar bear attacks by blacks on randomly selected whites. In those instances black gangs single out a vulnerable white and attacked with the purpose of ‘knocking out’ the victim. For a while Fox News reported some of these incidents, but the rest of the press either ignored them or claimed they didn’t exist. Then even Fox News ceased reporting them. That doesn’t mean the attacks stopped. It just means the press stopped reporting them. To the best of my knowledge a recent example of the worst kind went unreported except by a Republican Party email newsletter I receive. In that attack, a gang of black youths gathered in a Kroger parking lot late one night. The whole thing was recorded on a cell phone camera by a young black girl. She can be heard, on the video she created, saying excitedly, and laughing as she said it, “Oh look they fixin’ to jack.” They got a white dude, (still laughing).” The ‘dude’ she mentioned, and two other randomly selected whites, were severely beaten and required hospitalization. If ‘terrorist’ attacks are those designed to strike terror into the minds of an entire people, then attacks such as the Kroger parking lot incident are nothing short of terrorist attacks. There are reports that European tourism to the United States is dropping off drastically because of this senseless violence.
It is obvious that not all of this can be explained on the basis of the class struggle of the ‘have nots against the haves.’ Much of it has to be due to nothing more than a propensity for violence that exists in the African and Middle Eastern personality. The recent bloodthirsty campaign of ISIS in Iraq and Syria can be explained mostly, or at least partly, on such a basis. That is simply the way conflict is resolved in that part of the world. Sharia Law which cuts off hands, feet, and tongues, stones people to death for adultery, gouges out their eyes, engages in mass killing of innocent civilians by suicide bomber and other means, are other examples. Such violence may be due to nothing more than the extent to which the world has passed the Middle Eastern world by for the last 1500 years or so, and they have not evolved beyond the primitive state of the world in that time. Indeed, it is often said that they reflect the attitudes of a thousand years ago.
The emergence of ISIS, and the reaction to it, has an interesting relationships to this entire discussion. The timing of that offensive probably reflects the weakness of the United States in international affairs that has resulted from the feminization process with its passive, narcissistic, and subjective approach to social matters. That same approach was involved in the refusal to directly confront the problems of violence in the black community and, instead, engage in the same permissive, esteem building, approach to racial relations that has disabled an entire generation of our children, and resulted in such violence as that in Ferguson, Missouri. The primitive African and Middle Eastern personality has played a role in both situations also. It is, however, the third strand of the leftist/feminist mindset, the class warfare between the haves and the have nots, that has resulted in some of the most interesting positions being taken in this debate.
One of the most interesting aspects of that debate is the insistence by almost everyone, including people with such diverse views as John McCain, Bill O’Reilly, and Brian Williams, that the violence of ISIS is more extreme, in both quality and quantity, than any violence seen thus far in the conflicts in the Middle East. That position is total nonsense. ISIS violence is indistinguishable from the suicide bombings, inexplicable mass killings of innocents such as in 9/11, the slitting of the throat of David Pearl in Pakistan, and countless other acts of brutality that have always been commonplace in conflicts in that part of the world. Equally interesting is the fact that such claims are always followed by the statement that the correctness of such a position is proven by the fact that even core Al Quaida has refused to condone such violence, which is equally nonsensical. The split between Al Zawahiri and Al Baghdadi was entirely based upon a struggle for power between those two. That power struggle is detailed in an article in The Weekly Standards. The weakness of this position is underscored by the fact that a second lie is used to corroborate a previous lie.
This is where the third strand of the leftist/feminist mindset comes into play in the debate. Their interest in class warfare has always placed them on the side of the poorer Middle Easterners against the more advanced nations of the West including Israel. They have a seeming dilemma in the struggle between two Middle Eastern groups. That dilemma is resolved by the fact that Zawahiri favors an international approach to his war against the West, and his internationalism also has strands of socialism. Al Baghdadi, on the other hand, is a Sunni nationalist, and nothing more. That was the basis of his disagreement with Zawahiri. It had nothing to do with an abhorrence of brutality countenanced by both sides. Nationalism, be it Arab or otherwise, is anathema to the leftist/feminists. Also influencing the leftist/feminist position is the fact that ISIS, or the Sunnis of Iraq and Syria, have shown a superior skill at organizing a nation. They appear to be capable of creating a First World nation. That alone would be enough reason for the leftist/feminists to convince themselves, regardless of what might be objectively true, that the cruelty they are demonstrating is of a far more extreme kind than that of their poorer enemies. These factors should have triggered an inquiry into where our national interests lay in this struggle. When it is realized that all the rhetoric and brutality of Al Baghdadi has no other purpose than using current Middle Eastern emotional triggers to get the Sunni nationalist movement off the ground, then our interest, and theirs, becomes clear. When that movement is successful, it will definitely turn toward the United States. It has nowhere else to go, and it will become a counter-force to Iran and that country’s alliance with Russia and China. Such a development would go a long ways toward stabilizing the Middle East.
All of this became clear the other night when Bill O’Reilly referred to ISIS as a NAZI movement. Remember that NAZI stood for National Socialism, while the USSR was the fortress of International Communism. This rationale also explains our wars with Serbia, Libya and Egypt. While Serbia may, ostensibly, be a socialist state, its conflict over Kosovo was basically a matter of Serbian nationalism. The same is true of Libya and Egypt. In the case of Libya, that country had only recently ended its connection to the terrorist Jihadists and made an accommodation with the U.S. when it was attacked by us. Egypt was an American ally when we attacked them and turned control over to The Muslim Brotherhood, an international Muslim movement. We are still smarting from the removal of The Brotherhood from power in Egypt by those who lean toward America’s side. Also compare the position our government took when the Honduran Legislature and Supreme Court ousted a Hugo Chavez allied President. Our government initially took the position that the Honduran Constitution had been violated. That put us in the absurd position of disagreeing with the Honduran Supreme Court and Legislature as to the meaning of their Constitution, and also put us on the side a member of the international socialist movement which was openly hostile to the United States. When we set out to destroy ISIS we are making the same mistake we made in all of those situations.