This Is Unethical, But The Rhetoric From Democrats, Pundits And The Media Make Resisting The Impulse Nearly Impossible

goose-and-gander2

Matt Mayer of The Spectator, in an essay titled, Revenge of the Republicans, writes in part,

The 2020 election has provided fertile ground upon which Republicans can spend the next four years doing to Joe Biden what the Democrats did to Donald Trump and George W. Bush. 

For four years, Democrats and their media allies trumpeted every claim, no matter how baseless or crazy, that Trump’s 2016 election win was illegitimate and fraudulent. Despite zero evidence that so much as a single vote was interfered with, Democrats peddled the hoax that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to elect Trump. Even after the Mueller investigation exonerated Trump and his campaign from the collusion canard, Democrats, led by the shameless Adam Schiff, continued to allege collusion. Their simple goal was to undermine and delegitimize the Trump presidency. It clearly worked to the degree some voters turned their backs on Trump even as they voted Republican down-ballot….

Though he managed to get far more done than people give his team credit for, Trump governed under a dark cloud for most of his presidency. His team had to waste precious time and energy defending him against the Mueller investigation with its phalanx of Democratic hitman lawyers and corrupt FBI personnel. The media aided this assault by running stories over the last four years based on anonymous sources, several of which ended up being false. No president has had to undergo so thorough an investigation on such thinly-sourced claims. Trump may be lots of things, but he is as patriotic and faithful to America as any man who ever occupied the Oval Office….

…The fact of the matter is Biden’s call for unity is like the kid in your class who lost every game, but always shouted ‘starting now’ only after he was ahead. In the days since Biden asked Republicans to turn the other cheek, his old boss Barack Obama launched his book promotion by claiming that Trump only won in 2016 because too many Americans are racists. Obama followed that left hook to Main Street America by then denigrating Trump as a dictator despite the fact that it was Obama who arrested and investigated journalists during his presidency.

…One legacy of Trump is he taught Republicans how to fight back. Thus, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Biden will now serve under a cloud of suspicion and feel the heat as investigators dig into every nook and cranny of his family’s life. If Republicans pick up the handful of seats they now need to take back the US House in 2022, Biden and the Democrats will rue the day they made Schiff their attack dog.

Turnabout is fair play, especially in politics.

Indeed, what Mayer describes is Donald Trump’s version of “ethics.” It’s not ethics, but neither is it practical ethics to recommend conduct that history and human nature tell us is unlikely and perhaps impossible.

I only used the Spectator article because it popped up first; there are so many others making exactly the same point. There is also a critical level of defiance and anger out there….indeed in here, among the comments on Ethics Alarms.

What I referred to for four years as the 2016 Post Election Ethics Train Wreck cannot become a cycle without ultimately destroying the nation. The essay’s metaphor about “the kid in your class” is apt, but what is the alternative? A line has to be drawn and the principle must be stated: this cannot go on, and must end, or else. OK, the Democrats destroyed a Presidency and stole an election with the assistance of a world pandemic, a corrupt news media, and a deeply flawed leader (I will never be convinced that a President in Trump’s position who had the ability to communicate with the skill of a Reagan, an Obama, even a Bill Clinton, would not have prevailed in the election with ease). Let them high-five and gloat. The survival of the nation and its values are more important than payback.

Of course it would help a great deal if Democrats would stop exploding heads with their astounding levels of dishonesty, arrogance and hypocrisy. One example out of legions: The Axis of Unethical Conduct bombarded Americans for four years with the Big Lie that the President should be feared as an autocrat seeking totalitarian control. Yesterday, Kate Brown, governor of one of the bluest states in the nation, called on citizens to inform on their neighbors who defied the state’s draconian pandemic restrictions….endorsing one of the signature tactics of autocratic regimes.

At the same time, commentary on conservative blogs and websites indicates that the GOP base wants and demands the revenge Mayer describes, but believes that the party doesn’t have the gumption to deliver “sauce for the gander.”

This, for the Republicans, is a classic ethical dilemma: do the right thing, and lose, or do the wrong thing, and make supporters happy while dividing the nation beyond repair.

39 thoughts on “This Is Unethical, But The Rhetoric From Democrats, Pundits And The Media Make Resisting The Impulse Nearly Impossible

  1. I think it’s clear that Joe Biden is going to be our next president, here’s one of those what if’s that I usually don’t engage in but I honestly don’t know how to answer the question.

    If after Joe Biden is inaugurated it’s actually uncovered that there was massive fraud in the swing states that illegally created hundreds of thousands of fraudulent votes for Joe Biden and the numbers show that Joe Biden actually lost the election by a lot in the swing states, what happens to a sitting President that really is literally illegitimate because he was put into office by fraudulent means?

    Congress can’t impeach him if they cannot directly connect him to the fraud.

    Do any bills he signed or executive orders he created become null and void?

    I really don’t know if the Constitution covers something like this, it’s outside my knowledge base.

    All that said; I’m not sure that Biden would allow any continuing investigation into the possibility of voter fraud so this is not likely to happen in reality but I’d like to expand my knowledge base to be better informed.

    • Neither Adams 2 nor Hayes had any of their presidential acts nullified because of the circumstances of their election. Biden would be president (until and unless he resigns) and the country would need to live with that.

      Hopefully, even if the GOP takes the House in 2022, they would refrain from impeaching him for stuff that happened before his election, always assuming he wasn’t directly involved in any fraud nor involved in a cover-up.

      If what you posit actually were to happen, I’d assume 2022 would make 2010 look like a blue wave.

      • The republicans will not be voting to remove Biden unless they can take out Harris first.
        I predict a coming crisis will be a president declining into a complete inability to govern and a republican party who won’t remove him.

        • I don’t think that will happen. I think Biden will either resign and make Harris President or as his faculties decline his advisers will use him as a figurehead to rule.

    • Heaven forbid that should happen, Steve. But, when the joint session of Congress meets on Jan. 6, 2021, they will tabulate the Electoral College votes. As they do that, any member may object to a state’s vote. If at least one member each of the House and the Senate puts the objection in writing, there is a recess, and the two houses meet separately to discuss and vote on the objection. For the objection to stand, both houses must approve it. If a ticket reaches 270 or more electoral votes, the President Pro Tem declares the election of the President and Vice President. After that, it would be (in my view) both foolish and unethical for any action intended to change the results, such as by continuing trying to discover massive voting fraud. Impeachment would be the only Constitutional way to change the outcome.
      Given the nature of Trump and his most vociferous supporters, and given that Jan. 6 event, well, I’ll just say Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.

  2. Yes, it is very very tempting to do exactly as they did and hold a protest march on January 20th, shouting ‘Not my president’. And yes, it is not hard to see that that would lead to a declining spiral in the country.

    On the flip side, if Trump’s campaign were somehow to prevail in court and Trump actually reelected — I am sure that the Democrats would heed our calls to unite and cheerfully accept those results, right?

    Ahem. Getting back to reality, there is another possibility on the horizon. In 2008 Obama’s election was helped considerably by the economy crashing in the fall, plus I think the Bush fatigue factor. He was re-elected in 2012 at least in part because the economy had clearly rebounded from the 2008 crash, thus getting a boost from both ends of the Great Recession.

    My concern is that something similar will happen with the Democrats in 2022 and/or 2024. Given a)the astonishing success of Trump’s Operation Warp Speed in producing vaccines (these things typically take years instead of months, and I don’t think anyone every produced a human coronavirus vaccine before), and b) Trump’s insistence on getting people back to work and not pushing the economy off another cliff. What is quite possible is that by the second half of 2021, if the Republicans keep control of the Senate, the economy will be roaring back and unemployment again heading for the cellar. That could buoy Democratic efforts to gain total control of the federal government.

    On the gripping hand, Biden and the Democrats will likely be doing everything they can think of to keep that from happening. If they don’t get the Senate, they’ll be pushing Biden to re-regulate the economy and reverse the things Trump did that gave it such a boost during his term. So they may succeed in again throttling our economy so that we do not get a really big recovery. Good for their ideology, but possibly also good for Republican prospects at the national level.

    So, on a practical level, we don’t need lots of rioting and destruction if Biden wins. Aside from other things, it is just not Republicans’ style — and I also assert we don’t tend to do so because Republicans tend to attract a better class of people than that other party (so color me prejudiced, I’m a big boy). If we hold the Senate and can restrain the worst instincts of the Harris/AOC administration that’ll have to be enough.

  3. The Democrats are allowed to act dishonestly and destroy and Republican they see fit. If Republicans don’t do likewise, people will vote Democrat to because it looks like every Republican is ‘dirty’. Only if Republicans do the same thing will the country reject these tactics. If Republicans act ethically, unethical conduct wins. If unethical conduct always wins, who will be left to be ethical? Don’t you love Catch-22’s? The reason we are here is because the Republicans refused to participate in such conduct until recently. Democrats have contested every Republican presidential win in the last 30 years. If Republicans had done the same thing, this wouldn’t be happening because people would be sick of it. Because Republicans overlooked the dirty dealings, the election fraud, and accepted losses ‘for the good of the country’, we are where we are now. The best way to fix the problems seems to be to make the problem so bad that people will demand it be fixed.

  4. Jack,
    You make good points about what’s best for the nation. But here’s the thing – Democrats aren’t going to stop. Many of them are chomping at the bit, and not hiding it, to get payback on anyone who opposed them by voting for Trump. I think it would be great for our nation to be more unified, but liberals spent the last four years breaking things beyond repair. I disagree Republicans are facing an ethical dilemma in pushing back against an anti-American left. I think doing everything we can to make sure Dems don’t gain control of our nation is the only ethical thing to do.

    • I think doing everything we can to make sure Dems don’t gain control of our nation is the only ethical thing to do.

      These people are evil.

      They even corrupted the public health establishment.

      There can be no unity with them.

  5. This, for the Republicans, is a classic ethical dilemma: do the right thing, and lose, or do the wrong thing, and make supporters happy while dividing the nation beyond repair.

    The nation is already divided.

    There can be no unity with evil.

  6. Regardless of what the GOP does, America loses. That’s the crux of the biscuit here. If they “turn the other cheek” and try to bring down the heat level, what is the likelihood that the Democratic party, as it is currently constituted, will also do so? Virtually zero. Unilateral disarmament on the right will only hand the reins to the nascent totalitarians on the left, who have already signaled that they are willing to shred the fundamental elements of our system once they attain power. But if the GOP keeps up the pressure and gives Biden tit-for-tat what Trump received from the Democrats, it will further strain an already dangerously divided nation, perhaps beyond repair. Neither of these options promises a healthy future for the American experiment.

    Is there a third way out of this mess?

  7. While I generally agree with Jack’s message, it is all a matter of timing.

    The people opposing Trump view him as an aberration. With the aberration gone, they think things can get back to normal. They do not understand that their behavior was the aberration. Getting rid of Trump does not fix that. they are like the toddler who slaps another kid because he does not understand that hitting someone causes pain. He has to be taught by example. The problem with their behavior does not disappear just because Trump is gone; they are still here.

    You can’t teach people that you reap what you sow if, when they sow the wind, they don’t reap the whirlwind.

    A certain amount of ridicule is necessary in the coming months.

    That is about all the energy I gave for that. Their ability to piss and moan for 4 years is astounding. They really have to be miserable people. My variety of melancholy cannot match their energy.

    I think I will start with a post that John Lewis will be skipping Biden’s inauguration.

    Also, the message must be sent that there is no reward for cheating. If they insist on suggesting that people who support election integrity are actually trying to suppress the vote, they must be met with the charge that they support cheating. Trump’s efforts here are solely to counter their support of electoral fraud. The election methods must be opposed and they must know that these sorts of challenges will become routine if they insist on cheating.

    -Jut

  8. I am disappointed at how many people here are framing the situation as a win-lose false dichotomy. Either allow people to get away with corruption, or engage in turmoil to make everyone suffer, and hope they learn the correct lesson from it? That won’t work. You can’t beat ethics into people. If that were possible, your planet wouldn’t have all these problems in the first place. We can do better than that.

    There are constructive ways of enforcing principles. First, however, you need to understand all of the values that are already in play.

    For every problem, there are different tradeoffs that people tend to make in order to deal with them, based on what sort of tradeoffs they feel they can survive. That’s normal, and usually straightforward to deal with. If you can demonstrate that you understand other people’s fears and are willing to invest effort to prevent them from coming to pass, they will stop feeling defensive and paranoid. They will be willing to listen and reciprocate the effort, to create a win-win outcome.

    What makes human problems difficult is that when different groups of humans choose tradeoffs that conflict with each other, they perceive each other as evil instead of trying to work together to find a solution that works for everyone. They typically frame the problem in the laziest and least useful way possible, which perpetuates the conflict. The amazing thing about this phenomenon is that it happens despite all of the children’s books and television shows that make the point about how vital it is to understand the feelings of one’s adversaries and what one can do to put them at ease.

    I infer that by the time they have grown to adulthood, humans have learned from their role models that it is socially acceptable, and even laudable, to trample over those who disagree with them, if they can get away with it. Humans seem to have a gift for deciding that it is impossible for them to figure out how to make things work, when really it is just more difficult than they expect and they keep stopping the “figuring out” process prematurely.

    Fear not, though. I’m working with a couple of groups to launch a workshop to build mutual understanding and trust by framing all aspects of a problem constructively, and by brainstorming cooperative approaches to mutually satisfactory solutions. As people apply the concepts we will equip them with, they will turn walls into hills.

    I’ve already done the impossible part. All that remains now is the hard work.

    • Extradimensional Cephalopod:

      “ For every problem, there are different tradeoffs that people tend to make in order to deal with them, based on what sort of tradeoffs they feel they can survive. That’s normal, and usually straightforward to deal with. If you can demonstrate that you understand other people’s fears and are willing to invest effort to prevent them from coming to pass, they will stop feeling defensive and paranoid. They will be willing to listen and reciprocate the effort, to create a win-win outcome.”

      Not necessarily. I think election integrity is a perfect example. One side wants to make sure every eligible voter can vote; the other side wants to make sure only eligible voters can vote. Both of these are legitimate goals.

      However, an element of the former is happy if non-eligible voters actually can vote (that element is likely to cheat); likewise, an element of the latter is happy if certain eligible voters are prevented from voting.

      With that in mind, the former group wants mail-in voting; however, as this election has shown, that group has made no effort to address the concerns of the latter group (at least that I have noticed). By contrast, the latter group would like Voter ID and, in an effort to address the concerns of the former group, have proposed ways for people to get the requisite IDs. That has not alleviated the paranoia of the former group.

      I have no problem if my guy loses in a fair contest. Our government is more about process than results. The means justify the end. Some do not see it that way. For some, it is about the result, and the ends will justify the means.

      Your theory only works if opposing sides substantially agree about the field of play, so to speak. There is a growing element on the Left that is not playing the same game as the others.

      That is a problem.

      -Jut

      • You raise multiple good points.

        First, regarding the false positives versus false negatives, I recommend that we dig into that a bit more and figure out why some people are more afraid of false positive and others are more afraid of false negatives, when it comes to who is allowed to vote. Realistically, what’s the worst case scenario for either side if some votes are counted when they shouldn’t be, or not counted when they should be? The less is marginally at stake between the two scenarios, the less people will be concerned about it.

        Second, I suspect people haven’t been doing enough to push the angle of helping people get IDs. Coming up with the idea and being willing to follow through are the necessary first and second steps, but after that they need to publicly compel people to answer the question of what they still fear about that plan. Any answers they get, they need to publish and respond to one way or another. Pushing hard on the “aggressively reasonable” angle is the best way I know that a person or group can establish and strengthen their credibility, and it seems like humans aren’t doing much to take advantage of that.

        Abandoning the reasonable approach entirely (which I’m not entirely sure you’re advocating) is the worst thing that you can do, because it takes away the line of retreat that you were offering them. The master of facilitation mindset, Sun Tzu, apparently referred to this principle as giving your opponent “a golden bridge to retreat across.” Simply put, no matter what you do, if you really want your opponent to surrender, you should at all times make surrender seem like a more attractive option than continuing to fight.

        Third, if people don’t agree about the field of play, and some people think the ends always justify the means, then we need to establish what values each person is coming to the table with. Step 1: Understand your own values. Step 2: Understand the values of your adversaries. Step 3: Frame the situation constructively.

        The trick is that your adversaries may not always have a clear picture of their own values. If you really want to succeed, you’ll need to do some of their thinking for them. Yes, by rights they should already be doing that, but we’ve already established that your adversaries are immature and irresponsible, so the question is whether you’d rather do only what’s required of you, or whether you’d prefer to successfully change people’s minds away from destructive methods.

        There is no reward for an ineffective approach no matter how much effort you put in. I do find, though, that I can earn the respect and esteem of humans very easily by using some of the tools in my toolbox to demonstrate that I understand and care about their values and fears, even if we still don’t agree on the best methods to solve their problems.

        How does that sound?

      • Why do they want to do something bad like suppressing truth? Same reason you want to do something bad like commit violence against people: the fear of what happens if you don’t. Take away their fear, and we take away the pressure on them to behave unethically by resorting to corruption. In turn, that takes away your fear and your pressure to resort to turmoil. Why bother threatening people into cooperation when you can just take away their reason to defect? Where I come from we learn that sort of thing in Humans 101.

          • Obviously he feared that it would lead to a Republican victory. Why he, personally, fears Republicans, I’m less sure about. However, Republicans as a group of individuals seem to have a general trend of trying to suppress people’s individual identities when those identities don’t match their preconceived notions of what a healthy member of society is like. This tendency is often referred to as “social conservatism”.

            Additionally, the dynamic between the Republicans and the Democrats seems to have polarized people’s opinions on the environment such that the Democratic identity has become tied with environmentalism and climate change activism, and the Republican identity has become tied with opposing those. That’s another thing Democrats may fear about Republicans in power. There are more reasons Democrats fear Republicans, if you look. These fears may not accurately reflect any threat Republicans pose, but it would be a good start for you to demonstrate that, if you’re serious about wanting a better world. If you just want to fight, that’s up to you, but as of now you do not have the right to say that you had no nobler, more ethical, more effective option.

            Protracted tangent: I find the conventional positions of Republicans and Democrats on environmental issues ironic, considering that rural areas are largely Republican and urban areas are largely Democratic. However, I can see why it makes sense:

            Conservatives tend to work in physical industries where there is a right and a wrong answer and those don’t change very quickly. Farming, manufacturing, transportation, et cetera. You do things the tried and true way because if you don’t, people die. Reality doesn’t accept “close enough”.

            Progressives, on the other hand, tend to work in industries driven by change and communication. Technology, software, academia, arts and entertainment, et cetera… If you don’t drive change, you don’t make money, and in many cases what you do is measured by how it affects people rather than any objective physical effect.

            The trick is that agriculture used to be the newfangled progressive wave, and even though it’s become the status quo over the ages, the fact that it has become a tradition doesn’t exempt it from the possibility that eventually, it’ll stop being sustainable, that “tried and true” will stop being true.

            Again, if humans actually sat down and used a basic toolbox of concepts to talk about the situation, they could work out some steps towards overhauling their systems, using investment and preparation to deal with any problems that they encounter or foresee. They haven’t figured out how to do that yet, which is where I come in.

            • However, Republicans as a group of individuals seem to have a general trend of trying to suppress people’s individual identities when those identities don’t match their preconceived notions of what a healthy member of society is like. This tendency is often referred to as “social conservatism”.

              That looks like woke Social Justice Warriors.

              If you just want to fight, that’s up to you, but as of now you do not have the right to say that you had no nobler, more ethical, more effective option.

              I am not going to pretend we can find common cause with Jack Dorsey or those who support suppressing the truth.

              The media and the TechGiants are the primary evil, for they corrupt ethics. Here is one of the consequences of their corruption of ethics.

              http://mtracey.medium.com/i-wouldnt-gloat-if-i-were-you-49b2692feb59

              I know we’re all tired of the polling-industrial complex and rightly so, but let’s please remember that a December 2016 YouGov poll found half of all Clinton voters that year didn’t just believe that Russia “interfered” in the election to the advantage of Trump, but that they tampered with the ballot tallies and effectively hacked the voting machines. By 2018, a supermajority of Democratic voters expressed this belief.

              Ethics corrupters are a whole different ball game than those with merely deficient ethics, let alone those who disagree with you or me. They are evil, and they must be stopped at all costs.

    • “If you can demonstrate that you understand other people’s fears and are willing to invest effort to prevent them from coming to pass, they will stop feeling defensive and paranoid.”

      I think that you’re missing that the dominant attitude of the left at this time is “contempt.”
      There’s nothing defensive about it, the sense of well-being it provides depends on placing oneself above others. As we’ve seen, if you express agreement with them they will simply slide to the next more extreme position, because the sense of well-being depends on differentiating from others.

  9. The Senate Republicans, assuming that the Senate remains Republican after the Georgia run-off elections, can investigate to their hearts’ content. Most of the media will report only that the Republicans are making “baseless” allegations, regardless of any proof the investigations may uncover. The social media platforms will censor any efforts by Republicans to get the word out. The campaign of lies to undermine Donald Trump succeeded because the media near-monopolies colluded with Democrats in the fight. Any Republican campaign against Biden,whether based on lies or truth, will fail because the media will stop at nothing to protect him.

    What lesson did the media learn from this election? That propaganda, censorship, lies and fraud work; they just need more of it.

  10. I’ve been looking at the House races, finding some interesting results.

    There is an election map on wsj.com — probably behind the paywall, but here’s the link:
    https://www.wsj.com/election-results-2020/

    Two things have struck me about this map. I don’t know who updates it — the WSJ themselves or the AP, but it shows 5 districts in New York as uncalled. The problem with that is that they all show all precints reporting, the vote totals are in the 250-300k range, and Republicans are leading all 5 by margins that range from 10k or so up to 65k. Yes, NY 1 has a margin for the Republican of 61-38%, and they cannot call it for some reason. RCP shows 4 of those 5 as won by the Republicans, with NY 22 (which has a margin of 148k-137k) as the remaining uncalled.

    RCP only has two other races not called, with margins of 47 and 400 votes. I.e. really close. Plus one is headed to a runoff in Louisiana that RCP rates already as a GOP Pickup (I think the top two are both Republican).

    First observation: Interesting that the WSJ still shows only 204 Republican seats (pickup of 8), where RCP shows 210 (pickup of 10). Don’t know how they calculate their ‘pickup’ numbers, as I thought the GOP had 197 going into this election.

    Second observation: The WSJ page shows all the races in columns: Safe/Likely Dem, Leans Dem, Tossup, Leans Rep, Safe/likely Rep. You look down the safe column — 2 Dem seats were flipped, they show 1 safe GOP seat going to the Dems, but I think it’s a mistake (it was 85% Democratic, it was already held by the Dems, and it’s in the Atlanta area).

    Moving on, every seat in the Leans GOP column went to the Republicans (14 seats), every seat but one in the Tossup column went to the Republicans (15 seats) — the 16th seat is too close to call, the Republican leading by 400 votes.

    There were 20 seats in the Leans Dem column: 7 went to the Dems, 12 to the Republicans, and 1 is too close with the Republican leading by 47 votes.

    Bottom line: The GOP goes from 197 to at least 211, maybe 213. That’s astounding.

    The polls were abysmally wrong here, as they were in the Senate races. Presidential polls closer on a national level, but battleground states not so much.

    I am a numbers person, so forgive me the lengthy analysis. It has struck me as extraordinary as I’ve looked at these numbers. I think it also means that Harris, AOC and the like are not going to be able to push through any kind of agenda.

  11. Jack wrote:

    This, for the Republicans, is a classic ethical dilemma: do the right thing, and lose, or do the wrong thing, and make supporters happy while dividing the nation beyond repair.

    I wonder, Jack, if this isn’t a false choice. I say that not because you’re prescription is wrong, but rather, because it is to little, too late.

    Supposing that Republicans did “Do the right thing” (I’ll examine this more later) and not seek revenge on the Democrats and Biden by extension. Let’s say that they don’t embrace the same kind of “resistance” that the Democrats and their apologists spend four years inflicting on the country, all the while informing half of America that they were aiding and abetting a compromised Russian asset by supporting Donald Trump.

    Then, when their appointed, wholly-sympathetic and ethically corrupt investigation couldn’t manage to find any evidence of their sure and certain claims, they continued to make them as if the investigation had never happened. They instigated an unconstitutional impeachment proceeding without any legitimate grounds. Said impeachment was always going to fail because fortunately, the Founders of this country were not fools, but it inflamed passions, especially on the left, to the point that they were able to rationalized the use of broad-based election fraud to ensure they got Trump’s scalp.

    This recapitulation is necessary to explain the breadth and depth of what has been done here. Yet you ask, in the name of saving the republic from a terminal fracture, for Republicans and their sympathizers to simply accept all this as a fait accompli.

    Jack, I truly like and respect you. You may even be right in the sense that if the Republicans return fire, the country will be “divided beyond repair.” Let me stipulate that.

    But let’s be honest: If this goes unanswered, the republic is already doomed. The Republicans and their supporters, at this point, cannot capitulate and “do the right thing” after suffering the horror of the last four years punctuated by a fraudulent election. If they do, there will be no stopping the Democrats from doing exactly what they have threatened to do, including re-educating everyone to reject anything but Leftist views, packing the Supreme Court and adding Democrat machine states to the Union to ensure a legislative majority in both houses of Congress.

    The Left is going to characterize any rejection of their agenda as an attempt at revenge for Trump, whether it is or not. In other words, the Right might as well do what they will be accused of unless they surrender unconditionally. If the Republicans wind up with control of the Senate, every filibuster or failed vote on their preferred legislation or nominee will be characterized as obstruction and justification for radical action, which they will then demand and, through street violence and election fraud, implement. They have a taste for it now, if they didn’t before.

    No, my dear friend. It is too late for the Republican leadership to save the country — the citizens are aroused and will not listen to council for surrender for “the good of the country.” The Rubicon was crossed the moment it became clear the Democrats and their allies defrauded the country, whether or not it is ever proven by more than statistical evidence and sworn affidavits. There is no going back. A leadership capitulation now will only hasten the descent into outright sectarian conflict.

    The war will begin the moment that Joe Biden assumes office. It will start gradually with resistance. Unlike Trump, the Democrats and Biden will act brutally and swiftly to suppress it, and from there the violence will begin in earnest. Both sides will see themselves as patriots on the side of the angels, and unless the Democrats come to understand what is happening and back off (perhaps with the justification of playing the “long game”), it will end with the disintegration of the union.

    The camel’s back is broken. I had hoped it would not happen, but now, no matter what the outcome is, the end of this Republic is almost inevitable and already in motion. It is not too late to save, but given where we are, the chances of both sides backing down and finding a middle ground to save it are almost gone. The Left will never accept anything but complete follow-through on their plans to enhance, consolidate, and make permanent their power. The Right cannot afford to yield an inch, even if it means open civil war. The alternative is ideological enslavement and the death of our way of life.

    I hope you’re all ready. I know I’m not, but I’ve lived long enough. I don’t see a world dominated by the Left as a fate superior to an early departure from this mortal coil. I spent too many years risking my life to oppose communism to embrace communism-lite.

    I find now my earlier hope that I expressed to Steve Witherspoon faded and in tatters.

  12. Glenn
    You have said exactly what I was going to write.

    I will add that much of the schism in this country is driven by envy. This envy drives the electorate to use the Federal government to ameliorate income and wealth differentials through income redistribution.

    Should wealthier people in lower cost Oklahoma be forced to pony up taxes so the poor living in higher cost Montgomery County MD can have a subsistance level of income or is that the responsibility of Marylanders? I say the latter.

    Governors and most people have grown accustomed to making demands for more federal debt. If the governments of Baltimore City or St.Louis, Mo want to equalize incomes or give free health care in their jurisdictions let them through their tax policies and do not permit escalating demands be hidden in the monster that is the national debt

    It is obvious that the ability to tap the “unlimited” money tree, that is the federal government, drives the quest for power and conduct that is rarely ethical.

    I propose that we push for a Constitutional amendment that bars the Federal government from adding state specific funding. If the states want money for their projects make them borrow from the Federal Reserve and put the obligation to pay it back squarely where it belongs: on the beneficiaries of the funding within the state. Then force the states to adjust their taxes to pay back the loans. This will force, among the people in each state, to examine what it truly prioritizes.

  13. Biden is not, nor will he ever be, my president. He does not represent my interests. He does not represent my values. He does not represent me.

    More importantly, Harris is not, nor will she ever be, my president. She does not represent my interests. She does not represent my values. She does not represent me.

    Biden and Harris represent the destruction of everything that matters to me. There is no way, on those terms, for me to ever accept either one of them.

    On top of that, they rigged the election.

    I am going to make a prediction. The Georgia senate races are going to go to the democrats. There are two reasons I predict this. One, the election rigging worked, so it will continue. Two, the Georgia republicans are complicit in enabling the election rigging. They allowed changes to the mail in voting laws to be made. They have prevented auditing of the signatures. They have distinguished themselves in the minds of Trump voters as cowards, sellouts, and frauds. Trump voters will not turn out to vote for them. Some will not turn out because they are discouraged, some because they are angry, some because what is the point of voting in a rigged election? The senate races will go to the democrats.

    What will the democrats do with those seats? They will eliminate the filibuster. They will pack the Supreme Court. They will pass legislation to raise taxes, kill the Bill of Rights, enact massive regulations, lockdown the country and persecute Trump and his supporters.

    People say republicans voters don’t riot, they follow the laws, they don’t damage property and make problems. I think those people are looking at the past and not the present.

    They don’t see the rage that is about to explode. They don’t see the damage that has been done.

    The elites prattle on about the norms that Trump violated and pretend like he was the worst offender. They pretend like his tweets somehow destroyed jobs, lives, health and civility. The talking heads babble about how we can go back to “normal” now, with “normal” being the government, media, and bureaucracy oppressing the people and laughing about it. Infringing our rights and laughing about it. Persecuting and prosecuting the right, giving the left a free pass, and laughing about it. Destroying livelihoods, wages, job availability and economic opportunity, and laughing about it. Waging pointless wars for financial gain, and laughing about it. Taking money from the American middle class and giving it to third world potentates, and laughing about it. Passing laws that encourage terrorism, racism, human trafficking, poverty, homelessness and drug overdoses, and laughing about it. Wiping out the middle class, and laughing about it. Shipping all jobs that pay a decent wage overseas, and laughing about it. Throwing open the borders to drug cartels, human traffickers, and terrorists, and laughing about it. Rigging elections, and laughing about it.

    The voters are not laughing.

    The voters are not going to let the Republican politicians mollify us with empty promises and stabs in the back. The voters are done listening to the propaganda machine. The voters are sick of not having any representation.

    I don’t know what the ethical way to combat this is. I’m not sure there is one. That is a problem. Without an ethical way to EFFECTIVELY combat this, the voters will turn to whatever means necessary. Ineffective is no longer acceptable.

    Personally, I am so filled with rage right now that I cannot think straight. I know my emotions are running the show, and have tried to find ways to calm myself down and think about things logically and rationally. It isn’t working. The left has infested everything with their political agenda. Sports, hobbies…holidays?!? It just feeds the rage. There is no turning down the temperature. There is no where to escape it. Everywhere you turn there is kindling for that rage.

    Republican voters are the party of “leave me alone!” The left refuses to do that. They have built a rage chamber and filled it with people who own guns. They took the ethical options off the table. Where does that go?

  14. The political left really has learned from world history and are in the process of repeating what the Nazi’s did to the Jew’s in 1930’s Germany. If you don’t think so then you’re being willfully ignorant of history.

    First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out because I was not a Socialist.

    Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out because I was not a Trade Unionist.

    Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.

    Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak for me.
    Martin Niemöller

    If you don’t think it could happen in the United States of America then you’re either blind or naïve and both enable the downward spiral into the abyss. The seeds were sewn in fertile soil back in 2008 and now in 2020 those seeds have grown into the immoral tactics that we’re seeing from the political left, and these tactics have becoming so socially acceptable that they are expected.

    Here’s the difference between the current crop controlling the political left and the current crop controlling the political right; it’s the political left that is actively trying to suppress the Constitutional rights of those they disagree with by means of intimidation and the court of public opinion (which is exactly what the Nazi’s did), the political right is actively supporting the Constitutional rights for all our citizens. I choose to support the Constitution and I swore an oath stating that…

    Military Oath
    I, Steve Witherspoon, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

    I will uphold my oath.

    If people choose to support the growing trends of anti-Constitution, anti-American and anti-rule of law then they and I are on complete opposite ends of morality; their choices, their consequences. There is no ambiguity, it’s as simple as that.

    I am not a Trump supporter.

    I support the United States of America and the Constitution, period!

    Here is my pledge…

    The Pledge of Allegiance
    I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

    God help us all.

  15. More on this.

    http://mtracey.medium.com/i-wouldnt-gloat-if-i-were-you-49b2692feb59

    I know we’re all tired of the polling-industrial complex and rightly so, but let’s please remember that a December 2016 YouGov poll found half of all Clinton voters that year didn’t just believe that Russia “interfered” in the election to the advantage of Trump, but that they tampered with the ballot tallies and effectively hacked the voting machines. By 2018, a supermajority of Democratic voters expressed this belief. And the belief didn’t become widely-adopted as a result of standard looney-tunes off-the-reservation conspiracy-theorizing, which is typically understood to emanate from the fringes of society. Instead these crazy, evidence-free beliefs were deliberately engineered by the most Serious precincts of mainstream respectable opinion, particularly those allied with the Democratic Party and its think tank / media affiliates.
    The phrase “hacked the election” entered wide circulation by December 2016, with the New York Times among others spouting it without compunction. If you’re not a particularly sophisticated news consumer, and you have a pro-Democratic predisposition, what exactly do you think you’d have tended to infer from the phrase “hacked the election”? Trump winning the election was unfathomable to many, and people were understandably searching for answers. They were provided with self-deluding fantasies by sources they’d come to regard as authoritative. The people who used the phrase over and over again, like chronic liar Adam Schiff, aren’t stupid. They knew it would engender doubt as to the legitimacy of the election; that was the entire purpose.
    One particularly egregious example from November 2016 was when Gabriel Sherman, then of New York Magazine, totally mischaracterized the views of a group of “prominent computer scientists” by attributing to them the belief that they had “found persuasive evidence that results in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania may have been manipulated or hacked.” The group had then supposedly advised the Hillary campaign to request recounts on that basis. Sherman’s article caused a huge firestorm and clearly contributed to the patently false belief that Russia had tampered with the vote count. But it was bunk; the computer scientist in question renounced Sherman’s article. By then it was too late though, and the legitimacy of the 2016 election would never be accepted by huge swaths of the population — all thanks to the ineptitude/depravity/deceptions of the media class.
    Even proudly ironic left-ish commentators who posture as being so savvy and above-it-all literally recommended “Blame Russia” (that’s a direct quote) the day after the election as their explanation for the outcome. This stuff was across the board. (And I fully expect it to be resolutely memory-holed, along with so many other insane excesses of the Trump era.) The legitimacy of the 2016 election was never accepted by an endless slew of the country’s media and political elites. And that informed their entire strategy in how they dealt with “This Is Not Normal” Trump, from Russiagate all the way through to impeachment and beyond. They may not have manifested their rejections of legitimacy in the same crass absurdist way that you’ll see expressed online now vis-a-vis the fraud claims. But because they wielded influence over mainstream institutions, and know how to set the discursive agenda more craftily, what they did was vastly more pernicious.
    So unless you’re one of the vanishingly few people in media who opposed the movement to de-legitimize the previous election, you’ve forfeited any standing to sneer at the current de-legitimization movement. The precedent’s already been created and you’re complicit. Enjoy.

  16. “You can’t reason with evil, son. Evil wants what it wants, and won’t stop until it’s won, or you kill it. To kill it is to be meaner than evil.” -Kevin Costner as John Dutton in “Yellowstone”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.