Remembering Planetary Soldiers

????????????????????????????????????

The phrase comes from Robert Leckie’s The Wars of America and has been apt since the Spanish-American War. American Forces have fought just about everywhere and in just about every climate, in defense of freedom. And so this weekend, from Fort MacPherson, Nebraska, to Manila, The Philippines, to Luxembourg, to Cambridge, England and on Robert E. Lee’s own front lawn, free men and women will honor American soldiers who died for their freedom.

This is Memorial Day weekend when we honor those brave men (and often women as well) who gave their lives to save America, and to keep the beacon that was lighted so long ago, lit. America, the first Revolutionaries, winning our independence in war with the Greatest Empire of the Age and keeping the torch lit down through the centuries.

On 13 December 1636 a Royal Regiment of Foot was organized in Massachusetts from the pre-existing trained bands. From that regiment once known as the North Regiment is descended the 181st Infantry Regiment of the Massachusetts National Guard.

37762_132550020116358_2738621_nThe unit carries battle honors from French and Indian Wars, American Revolution, War of 1812, American Civil War, Spanish-American War, Mexican Expedition, World War I, World War II, Guantanamo Bay detention camp, Iraq War, and Afghanistan War.

Their honors include: Cited in the Order of the Day of the Belgian Army for actions in the ARDENNES (1944), French Croix de Guerre with Gilt Star (1918), French Croix de Guerre with Palm (1945), French Fourragere (1945).

This is the oldest military unit of the United States formed only 16 years after the Mayflower and in existence for 380 years. From that day till this we have depended on our military for the defense of our liberty and they have never failed us.

One of the places mentioned above is the Ardennes, and Uwe E. Reinhardt wrote about where some of those men rest the other day in The Wall Street Journal.

My wife, born in China and reared in Taiwan, and I, born in Germany and a longtime U.S. citizen, first visited the World War II cemeteries when our American-born children were young. We would tell them: Here rest some of the warriors who sacrificed their lives so that your parents and people in many parts of the world would be free from tyranny and could pursue their dreams in freedom. We made it clear to our children that this was not just a grown-up talk—that it was real and part of their proud heritage.

The lesson must have stuck. Last year our eldest child, now a fully grown man, urged me to come along to visit the battlegrounds in Germany, near the Belgian border, where U.S. troops fought so bravely and where so many of them—too many—met their early death.

This time we visited the large American cemetery near the Belgian town of Henri-Chapelle, about 20 miles west of the German city of Aachen. There rest the warriors who fell in the brutal, four-month-long battle of the Hürtgen Forest, followed by the Battle of the Bulge and the eventual push of American forces all the way to the Rhine River.

You can walk along the gravel paths of these cemeteries, and among the thousands of markers—crosses and Stars of David—beneath which the warriors rest. Pick a marker at random and adopt the soldier whose name is chiseled into that marker. Make him your father, or brother, or cousin, or a friend. Imagine him alive, and how you might have hugged him as he shipped out to the distant front.

However brutal his death may have been, you will draw solace from knowing that he rests here, in this serene setting, alongside his buddies who shared his fate. You may even imagine that somehow, don’t ask how, the fallen soldier may know that you are visiting him, to pay your respects.

Of them, General of the Army Douglass MacAurthur said this

Their story is known to all of you. It is the story of the American man at arms. My estimate of him was formed on the battlefields many, many years ago, and has never changed. I regarded him then, as I regard him now, as one of the world’s noblest figures; not only as one of the finest military characters, but also as one of the most stainless.

His name and fame are the birthright of every American citizen. In his youth and strength, his love and loyalty, he gave all that mortality can give. He needs no eulogy from me, or from any other man. He has written his own history and written it in red on his enemy’s breast.

But when I think of his patience under adversity, of his courage under fire, and of his modesty in victory, I am filled with an emotion of admiration I cannot put into words. He belongs to history as furnishing one of the greatest examples of successful patriotism. He belongs to posterity as the instructor of future generations in the principles of liberty and freedom. He belongs to the present, to us, by his virtues and by his achievements.

In twenty campaigns, on a hundred battlefields, around a thousand campfires, I have witnessed that enduring fortitude, that patriotic self-abnegation, and that invincible determination which have carved his statue in the hearts of his people.

From one end of the world to the other, he has drained deep the chalice of courage. As I listened to those songs of the glee club, in memory’s eye I could see those staggering columns of the First World War, bending under soggy packs on many a weary march, from dripping dusk to drizzling dawn, slogging ankle deep through mire of shell-pocked roads; to form grimly for the attack, blue-lipped, covered with sludge and mud, chilled by the wind and rain, driving home to their objective, and for many, to the judgment seat of God.

I do not know the dignity of their birth, but I do know the glory of their death. They died unquestioning, uncomplaining, with faith in their hearts, and on their lips the hope that we would go on to victory. Always for them: Duty, Honor, Country. Always their blood, and sweat, and tears, as they saw the way and the light.

And twenty years after, on the other side of the globe, against the filth of dirty foxholes, the stench of ghostly trenches, the slime of dripping dugouts, those boiling suns of the relentless heat, those torrential rains of devastating storms, the loneliness and utter desolation of jungle trails, the bitterness of long separation of those they loved and cherished, the deadly pestilence of tropic disease, the horror of stricken areas of war.

General MacAurthur’s words seem a bit dated sometimes, his verbiage a bit purple for our tastes but I say the deeds they commemorate are the only justification they need. And so.

Brexit: the View from the Prairie

brexit-800x500I want to thank Jessica for sharing her views on Brexit yesterday, here. As I said then, mine differs somewhat, so let’s look at them.

First President Obama’s remarks in remarks while in the UK, were, or should have been insulting to any Brits who heard them, as well as to any American who values the UK as a partner or even an ally. Not to mention that he’s about the lamest lame duck of a president, ever. Ted Cruz had this to say:

“Instead of standing with our allies President Obama routinely hurls insults at them. Sadly, it happened in London last Friday, when the President of the United States informed the British people they would be at the ‘back of the queue’ for a US-UK free trade deal if they dared to vote to leave the EU on June 23,” said Cruz.

Cruz argued Obama’s intervention was nothing less than a slap in the face to British self-determination. “If Brexit takes place, Britain will be at the front of the line for a free trade deal with America, not at the back,” Cruz added. The Texas senator reaffirmed his commitment to the “special relationship” and slammed the president’s foreign policy priorities.

“The British people will shape their destiny, and we will stand with them regardless of the outcome of the referendum. As president, I will work to ensure that our special relationship is reinvigorated — and the Obama doctrine of coddling tyrants while castigating democratic allies will finally be at an end.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/04/26/ted-cruz-hammers-obama-for-anti-brexit-intervention/#ixzz47cmPkvUA

Quite, and while we can’t be sure of what Hillary or Trump think (or if they’ve been told what they think yet) Cruz is correct. And yes, I found Obama’s remarks both shameful and insulting as well.

As far as the economics of staying or leaving go, I simply don’t know, and I doubt strongly anybody else does either. It is beyond doubt that London is one of a handful of ‘world cities’ along with New York, and perhaps either Singapore or Hong Kong, and yes, there is a telling point in that. All three or four of those, and there is at most 1 or two more, is by heritage and outlook founded on English values and common law. You might want to think about that. I note that if you know a bunch about this, The Conservative Woman, a British blog, has a contest for the best article about how Britain would function outside the EU. You can enter here. The best article I’ve seen is from The Spectator, and his conclusion is to leave.

The last time I looked, the UK economy is about the size of Germany’s, and larger than anybody else in the EU. I’ve also noted that Europe appears to need Britain a lot more than Britain needs Europe. The UK also has the highest energy prices and quite high food prices. Why? Well, I suspect that unlike much of Europe, the UK tends to obey the law, instead of looking out for the special interests. Both are something the New World can fix, but Europe can’t.

I would say that if Britain is to stay they should forget the half-measures and join the community and lead it, and quit the half in and half out nonsense. But be convinced you really want to be part of Europe first, because you will be leaving your heritage, all over the world, behind. I’m convinced that your future is better served with what has come to be called the Anglosphere, mostly Canada, the US, Australia, New Zeeland, and increasingly India. Also, the ‘Remainers’ tend to offend me with their fear-mongering, and they should you, too.

One thing that bothers me, as an American, a lot about this so-called ‘ever closer union’ is that the UK is the ally and friend that we are prepared to throw ourselves on the railway to save, and we have all seen that the UK has been the same way with us. Somehow, I don’t think the European Army will be such a good ally, and it’s something the US needs, another voice and perspective, sometimes to save us from ourselves.

But I don’t really think this will be decided on economics, it will be decided on sentiment, and patriotism. And here there should be little doubt. England, and by extension Britain, has always done better when it turned away from Europe, at least back to when Henry VIII turned his back on the Catholic church, established the Royal Navy, and started the first Empire – the results are astonishing, the US, Canada, The Commonwealth, much of Africa, and India, all from those little fogbound islands, about the size of Nebraska. You built the system we all revere, all the way back to Alfred the Great, the unique Common Law, the practical methods of getting along, capitalism itself, along with the free people that we all have fought so many wars about.

Where’s the French heritage to match, or the German one? For so many of us, our history starts with your history, and if you’re not proud of it, well I’m sorry, we are.

I commented yesterday that it had been 37 years since Maggie Thatcher became Prime Minister, and she, and you, along with Ronald Reagan and Pope John Paul II freed the Communist slave empire. You, every bit as much as us, or the Vatican, led that effort, as you did all through the last century to restore freedom to Europe, and the world. You, like us, have seen Brussels betray that legacy. In truth both Washington and Westminster have as well, but that is no reason to allow the EU to have prerogative powers that you took away from the King way back in 1688. And that is exactly what the EU is doing. So much of this looks like weak men, who nonetheless lust after power and wealth, passing the buck to other unaccountable people. Seems to me, that you, like us are learning the truth of that old Russian proverb, “God is far up high, the Tsar is far away.” That is not the British way, any more than it is the American or the Australian.

I think we’ll close with a few words from one of my best friends, Professor John Charmley, writing in The UK in a Changing Europe. He says this:

The problematic relationship between Britain and the European Union is rooted in an original sin which continues to shape the debate.

At its heart is “English exceptionalism” – a phrase that can trigger the sort of reaction which used to be reserved for heresy. Those who refuse to recognise that England’s history is different from that of her Continental partners will fail to understand how to convince so many of their sceptical or indifferent countrymen that ever-closer political union is something Britain needs.

For the original six members of what was then the European Economic Community, it was obvious. They came to the idea from the experience of defeat and occupation; it was an alternative to what looked like failed states.

Britain, as one of the “Big Three” World War allies, wished their troubled neighbours well and hoped it might finally solve the German question which had haunted them since 1871. But they saw no reason to suppose their history as an imperial people was at an end. England had been a state since the seventh century, and its history, after the Norman Conquest, was one of steady expansion; nothing in that history pointed to its ending in an “ever closer political union”. […]

If Britain had deigned to become a founder member of the Common Market, then she would have been able to have named her terms and helped create its structures. But coming in as she eventually did, in the early 1970s, those structures were set, and Britain’s negotiators were unable to strike the sort of deal they had wanted. This failure was compounded by the fact that the period after 1972 witnessed the first post-war economic crisis, which meant that the promised economic gains were far fewer than had been predicted. […]

Can the effects of this “original sin” be undone? Not if current portents are anything to go by. Again, with the honourable exception of the marginalised Liberal Democrats, we see no major political figures make the “high road” visionary argument. The main answer to the argument that we are in an “ever closer political union” seems to be that we have “opt outs”.

To an electorate which has failed to buy into the idea of “Europe” or to take much interest in it, that might just be enough to win the referendum campaign, when combined with some suitable concessions gained by a politically skilful prime minister. But it will not win many hearts and minds, and whatever the result, in the absence of a convincing deployment of a case for the vision of ever closer union, the arguments will continue.

You all know that I am fond of the saying “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”. But there is a corollary to that rule, “If it is broke, and you can’t fix it, replace it, or do without it.” Europe is broke, you (or we or anybody else, I think) can’t fix it. Come on home, with those of us who with you built the modern world, and help us fix that.

And so for this small ‘c’ conservative American, of Norwegian extraction, who has found his place in the English-speaking world, it seems to me that the conservative position is to conserve the UK from being submerged into Europe.

Vote to leave.

Naught For Our Comfort

This is a repost of a post I made reworking Jess' first (and guest post here) in the fall of 2014, when she was just starting her recovery. It gave me comfort then from the strain and worry involved, and the horribleness of knowing she might be gone from my life,  just like that. Now, it still gives me comfort, as I look around an America, that I  barely recognize. I hope it does you as well. Neo

I doubt that it is news to any of you but, one of the great joys of mine in writing this blog for the last two years has been the help and friendship of Jessica, and her co-author Chalcedon. I admire them both greatly, and one of the reasons for that is that they have rekindled my love for poetry, and you have seen all of us use it to reinforce our points. It is hardly a new method but, it is one used rarely these days. I suspect because most of us are so ill-educated that we are unaware of its richness, and ability to reinforce our point.

If you read much of Lincoln’ writings and speeches, for instance, you will see it used to great effect. For instance his famous, “of the people, for the people, and by the people’ was not original, nor did he claim it was, and his listeners knew it was not. The original is this: “This Bible is for the government of the people, for the people and by the people.” it is by John Wycliffe and it is from 1384.

And so they have enriched my life, and will continue to do so, God willing, and yours as well because it is reflected in my posts for you. And so

A sea-folk blinder than the sea
Broke all about his land,
But Alfred up against them bare
And gripped the ground and grasped the air,
Staggered, and strove to stand.

For earthquake swallowing earthquake
Uprent the Wessex tree;
The whirlpool of the pagan sway
Had swirled his sires as sticks away
When a flood smites the sea.

Our towns were shaken of tall kings
With scarlet beards like blood:
The world turned empty where they trod,
They took the kindly cross of God
And cut it up for wood.

He bent them back with spear and spade,
With desperate dyke and wall,
With foemen leaning on his shield
And roaring on him when he reeled;
And no help came at all.

There was not English armor left,
Nor any English thing,
When Alfred came to Athelney
To be an English king.

It was a very bad time to be King Alfred of Wessex, and I think it holds parallels to our time as well. to continue

“Mother of God” the wanderer said
“I am but a common king,
Nor will I ask what saints may ask,
To see a secret thing.

“But for this earth most pitiful.
This little land I know,
If that which is forever is,
Or if our hearts shall break with bliss
Seeing the stranger go?”

And here we come to my introduction to this epic by Jess when she quoted to me on one of our political defeats

I tell you naught for your comfort,
Yea, naught for your desire,
Save that the sky grows darker yet
And the sea rises higher

“And this is the word of Mary,
The word of the world’s desire
`No more of comfort shall ye get,
Save that the sky grows darker yet
And the sea rises higher.’

Naught for your  comfort has become a catchphrase for us when things go awry, which has been often these last few years for us Americans, and for Britons as well.

We are living through a failed presidency (or, at least, trying to) and one of the reasons it has failed is that many of our countrymen have confused Obama with God, and I suspect he has as well. That never turns out well, and it is not here either.

I’m reminded that first class leaders hire the best men they can find to help them, and second class leaders hire third class helpers, and worst of all, third class leaders hire lackeys who will tell them what they want to hear. Sounds familiar, doesn’t it?

But we are going to have to soldier until after the next election and hope we find a man (not a god) to help us lead in the rebuilding western civilization, for without our leadership it will fall. It’s going to be an epically hard battle, and we could do worse than to emulate King Alfred.

But remember, we remember King Alfred because he won. Let’s finish with the rest of the poem.

And this was the might of Alfred,
At the ending of the way;
That of such smiters, wise or wild,
He was least distant from the child,
Piling the stones all day.

The King looked up, and what he saw

Was a great light like death,
For Our Lady stood on the standards rent,
As lonely and as innocent
As when between white walls she went
And the lilies of Nazareth.

[…]

They shall not come in warships,
They shall not waste with brands,
But books be all their eating,
And ink be on their hands.

Yea, this shall be the sign of them,
The sign of the dying fire;
And man made like a half-wit,
That knows not of his sire.

What though they come with
scroll and pen,
And grave as a shaven clerk,
By this sign you shall know them
That they ruin and make dark;

By all men bond to nothing
Being slaves without a lord,
By one blind idiot world obeyed
Too blind to be abhorred.

By thought a crawling ruin,
By life a leaping mire,
By a broken heart in the breast
of the world
And the end of the world’s desire.

By God and man dishonored
By death and life made vain
Know ye, the old barbarian,
The barbarian come again

The eternal battle against barbarism is ours to win for our generation or to lose for generations to come. It has taken us a thousand years to get where we are, and it might take longer to recover. So, Stand Fast, my friends.

Did that interest you enough to wonder about the poem and its author? I hope so. It was written by G.K. Chesterton (and it’s much longer than the excerpts here) it’s called The Ballad of the White Horse. You can find it at Project Gutenberg.

The Morning After…

…in the City on the Hill.

Rubio suspends his campaign.

 

 

A class act, till the end, Marco Rubio. Yes, I, like many of you, strongly disliked his predilection of immigration amnesty. But, that said, he is amongst the best of us. I’ll miss him, but it was time.

Kasich can no longer be nominated, he has been mathematically eliminated, although I never understood why he was in the race, in the first place.

And so, it comes down to:

Cruz v. Trump

Which is as it should be, I suppose.

But always remember:

Now the onely way to avoyde this shipwracke and to provide for our posterity is to followe the Counsell of Micah, to doe Justly, to love mercy, to walke humbly with our God, for this end, wee must be knitt together in this worke as one man, wee must entertaine each other in brotherly Affeccion, wee must be willing to abridge our selves of our superfluities, for the supply of others necessities, wee must uphold a familiar Commerce together in all meekenes, gentlenes, patience and liberallity, wee must delight in eache other, make others Condicions our owne rejoyce together, mourne together, labour, and suffer together, allwayes haveing before our eyes our Commission and Community in the worke, our Community as members of the same body, soe shall wee keepe the unitie of the spirit in the bond of peace, the Lord will be our God and delight to dwell among us, as his owne people and will commaund a blessing upon us in all our wayes, soe that wee shall see much more of his wisdome power goodnes and truthe then formerly wee have beene acquainted with, wee shall finde that the God of Israell is among us, when tenn of us shall be able to resist a thousand of our enemies, when hee shall make us a prayse and glory, that men shall say of succeeding plantacions: the lord make it like that of New England: for wee must Consider that wee shall be as a Citty upon a Hill, the eies of all people are uppon us; soe that if wee shall deale falsely with our god in this worke wee have undertaken and soe cause him to withdrawe his present help from us, wee shall be made a story and a byword through the world, wee shall open the mouthes of enemies to speake evill of the wayes of god and all professours for Gods sake; wee shall shame the faces of many of gods worthy servants, and cause theire prayers to be turned into Cursses upon us till wee be consumed out of the good land whether wee are going: And to shutt upp this discourse with that exhortacion of Moses that faithfull servant of the Lord in his last farewell to Israell Deut. 30. Beloved there is now sett before us life, and good, deathe and evill in that wee are Commaunded this day to love the Lord our God, and to love one another to walke in his wayes and to keepe his Commaundements and his Ordinance, and his lawes, and the Articles of our Covenant with him that wee may live and be multiplyed, and that the Lord our God may blesse us in the land whether wee goe to possesse it: But if our heartes shall turne away soe that wee will not obey, but shall be seduced and worshipp other Gods our pleasures, and proffitts, and serve them, it is propounded unto us this day, wee shall surely perishe out of the good Land whether wee passe over this vast Sea to possesse it;

Therefore lett us choose life,

that wee, and our Seede,

may live; by obeyeing his

voyce, and cleaveing to him,

for hee is our life, and

our prosperity.

John Winthrop

on board the Arabella

in 1630.

As true today, as it was on that day.

Obama’s wrong. Americans should back Brexit – and so should you

1776Because Americans love Britain, and because we are a presumptuous lot, we often advise the United Kingdom on its foreign policy. And not only the UK, but Europe. Successive US administrations have urged European nations to form a United States of Europe as an answer to the question attributed to Henry Kissinger: ‘Who do I call if I want to call Europe?’

The latest such unrequested advice was offered to your Prime Minister by no less a foreign-policy maven — see his successes in Libya, Middle East, China, Crimea — than Barack Obama. The outgoing president informed David Cameron that his administration wants to see ‘a strong United Kingdom in a strong European Union’. He seemed to assume that, in the words of the Sinatra ballad, you can’t have one without the other.

But many of us here in the US are rooting for Brexit, and not just because we want what is best for Britain. We think Brexit would be in America’s interests.

Britain has long been America’s most valuable ally.

via Obama’s wrong. Americans should back Brexit – and so should you » The Spectator.

Yup, a full hundred years now, and our history of cooperation goes back even further, to almost immediately after the War of 1812. We’re proud of that, but there’s more. In many ways we are you. We, like you, look back at the long sweep of history and we see our political ancestors, fighting for liberty, against the Stuarts, the Plantagenet’s, and the Normans, all the way to Alfred the Great and perhaps further to Aethelbert of Kent, who wrote the first written law code in any Germanic language. Here, with the codification of Aethelberts’ Law is the origin of The Common Law, our joint heritage, and the one thing above all others that has made Britain and the America the only modern superpowers.

And mind you, the common law is the basis of the entire modern age, without its protection of lives and property from random seizure by an autocratic king, the world we jointly have made, would not exist. It would likely still be Hobbes’s vision, “Nasty, brutish, and short.” Look around, at the world, and where our influence is strongest, the people, not just the rulers prosper, where it wanes, the people suffer.

Dr. Suzannah Lipscomb made a video a few years ago that is on point, I think

I think she correct, and you know, if the Tudors made you what you are, you, at the height of your freedom, made us, it is above all the common heritage of the Anglosphere, and one that the whole world envies. If you would know why Britain and America are hated, look no further, it’s all based in envy of the people, and fear on the part of their rulers. Because we, and pretty much only we, have done all the things required to make it work. The rest, including most of Europe, give our principles only lip service, if that, and that is why thrice in the twentieth century, we, led by Britain and America, have had to rescue them from tyranny. Thrice, no less!

What I see in the European Union is still another attempt to bring Britain back under the control of Europe. One of the best analyses on this I’ve read is from Think Defence, an excellent British defense blog. He ends this way:

From a short to medium term operational defence and security perspective, I actually think the impact of BREXIT would be minimal either way. The advantages and disadvantages of EU membership, at least from this writers view of the defence and security landscape, seem to be hugely exaggerated by both sides of the debate.

NATO would remain, bilateral cooperation would continue and develop in other ways, defence spending will go up and down depending on threats and mechanisms for intelligence sharing explored, developed and implemented.

There are risks and opportunities on either side, but short term doom and gloom or the wide open uplands, in defence and security, you are looking in the wrong place.

At moment, more EU defence generally means more HQ’s, marching bands and flags, but after a remain vote and a period for dealing with the migrant crisis, calls for actual, real and tangible integration will get louder and louder.

For me at least, this is the question we should be dealing with, do we want a single EU state with a single EU Navy, Army and Air Force?

Everything else is a minor detail.

As an American, I can’t help but believe that the day the White Ensign is furled for the last time, succeeded by that obvious rip-off of the canton of the American flag, the chance of real freedom in the world, for all of us, will be reduced immeasurably. The Tudors made you (and us), it would be a shame to let Europe undo six hundred years of improving the human condition.

Weighed in the Balance

Oobie is one of my favorite bloggers. Why? Because she writes from knowledge of her subject, and with plain common sense. For me, it’s a winning combination. here she outlines her problems with this election, which parallel mine rather closely, but the meat of a fine article is in these final two paragraphs.

Here’s the problem for me. Can I in good conscience vote for somebody I think is unfit for the presidency? That of course includes Hillary Clinton in first order, so a vote for her is out of the question. That leaves me facing the prospect of voting for somebody else of very dubious qualifications. If I say affirmatively about Trump, “This is the man for me!” — what then? What if he gets in and then breaks all his promises (and he will — he might build a bit of wall, but it won’t be a serious endeavor), or starts to behave irrationally? What kind of satisfaction would I then have from a mindless insurrection? What good would have been achieved? Or what if he turns out to be as bad a candidate as I think and lost? And then again, if I sit home and withhold my vote from Trump, I automatically give that vote to the much worse criminal and lunatic, Clinton. And that can’t be right, either. I don’t see a happy ending here.

I guess I’m going to pray fervently that Ted Cruz can pull it out or Rubio is in as a brokered candidate. And otherwise, to cast a vote for Trump. If I do, it won’t be in the expectation of being proven wrong about his lack of character and irrationality. The Democrats were stupid. They should have run someone like Evan Bayh of Indiana, a mild-mannered, likable guy who is Mr. Middle of the Road. Then people such as I could have voted for him. But no, the parties are in the grip of the true believers now and things are not going to go smoothly.

via Weighed in the Balance | Ooobie on Everything.

Yup, that is exactly the problem isn’t it. Clinton, a crook, and a more or less proven national security threat, or Trump, a buffoon, and perhaps more of a threat to civil liberties than Obama, and supposedly of the same party as Congress.

Hobson’s choice, isn’t it? Well, sort of, it’s really more of a variant of Morton’s Fork, I think. But in any case, it’ll be a sad day in the history of the Republic if we have to make a choice between Clinton or Trump. I just don’t know what I’ll do if they are the nominees, I hope it simply doesn’t happen. Ted Cruz, I’m looking at you. I know, and refreshingly you know, that you’re only a man, although an ambitious, thoughtful, and serious one, who believes in the lodestar of the Republic, The Constitution. That will do, I think.

%d bloggers like this: