England Expects …

It was two hundred and fifteen years ago today that  Admiral Lord Nelson defeated the combined French and Spanish fleets off Trafalgar. This is one of those victories that in the modern age we seem to think was pre-ordained. It wasn’t. I’m told that it is barely celebrated in England, that’s very silly. This is a victory that did as much to make the world we live in as Salamis, Lepanto, or the Armada.  That’s sad. I can only attribute that to too many of our people coming to believe that our influence on the world has been an evil one. That is not only wrong, and perhaps evil in itself, but diametrically opposed to the truth.

Sir Walter Raleigh, in A Discourse of the Invention of Ships, Anchors, Compass, &c., said this:

For whosoever commands the sea commands the trade; whosoever commands the trade of the world commands the riches of the world, and consequently the world itself.

This was also quoted by Fleet Admiral Nimitz, on his retirement. It was true for the Elizabethans, it was true in Nelson’s time, it is true now, it will always be true. But the Anglo-Saxon powers have always been more interested in trade than pure control of the world and its people. Alfred Thayer McMahon, in The Influence of Sea Power upon History, says this with regard to the British fleet:  “Those distant, storm-tossed ships, never seen by the Grande Armee, were all that stood between it and world domination.” And that is so. Our francophile president, Thomas Jefferson wrote that if Napoleon took possession of Louisiana and attempted to move an army there, “on that day we shall have to marry ourselves to the British fleet and nation”. Nor was he kidding, control of New Orleans would have (and had under the Spanish) stifled the growth of not only the Old Southwest, but also the Old Northwest, it was simply something that America could not allow, and survive.

Nor did it end there. We haven’t forgotten that during our Civil War, the French attempted to impose a Hapsburg emperor on Mexico, or that it was only thwarted in 1865, when fifty thousand battle-hardened Union troops assembled in Texas, leading to the French Foreign Legion’s most famous defeat. But we also recognize that one of the reasons that we developed as we did is that the Royal Navy was the guarantor of the Monroe Doctrine. That allowed the new world to develop at its own speed and in its own way.

We should also mention that the end of chattel slavery in the west was primarily done by the Royal Navy, which encouraged industriousness amongst its people by paying prize money for captured slavers, and the return of their cargos. Slavery ended with the deaths of a half-million white Americans, but they and the Royal Navy were both following the precepts first proposed around the time of the Revolution–in East Anglia.

Nor do I think there is any question that India, is far better off today than it was in the days before the Raj. Gandhi himself once said that his nonviolent tactics would not have worked against a less moral people than the British, and in fact, Dr. Martin Luther King said the same thing about the civil rights struggle here.

And so we come to the twentieth century, to 1941 specifically. Off Newfoundland, two convoys of warships met. One carried the British Prime Minister, Winston Churchill on HMS Prince of Wales. the other carried the President of the United States, Franklin Roosevelt, on the USS Augusta. This is the time when the guard of the English speaking peoples changed from England to America. Fittingly it happened during Church Parade on the Prince of Wales. Churchill said this about it:

The prime minister reported that no one who attended would forget “that sunlit morning on the crowded quarterdeck—the symbol of the Union Jack and the Stars and Stripes draped side by side on the pulpit,” and “the close-packed ranks of British and American sailors, completely intermingled, sharing the same books and joining fervently in the prayers and hymns familiar to both.” Churchill had chosen the hymns—“For Those In Peril On the Sea;” “Onward, Christian Soldiers,” and “O God, Our Help in Ages Past.” He said later, “Every word seemed to stir the heart. It was a great hour to live. Nearly half of those who sang were soon to die.” HMSPrince of Wales was sunk by Japanese aircraft off Malaya on December 10, 1941.

Here was mapped the grand strategy that would allow the cousins, for that, is what we were, and are, to free the world from the menace of Nazi Germany, and Imperial Japan. But here’s the point: On that day in 1941, only seventy-nine years ago, if you were free to speak your mind, you spoke English as your native language. All the rest of the world owes their very freedom to those distant storm-tossed ships, that won one of the world’s greatest victories, for England, and for the world.

And so, for two hundred and fourteen years now, the Royal Navy has drunk one toast in silence, and all free peoples should join them.

I give you, Gentlemen (and Ladies):

“The immortal memory,

of Nelson and those who fell with him”

 

It’s true now, as it has always been, We sleep safe in our beds because of rough men (and now women) who are prepared to do violence on our behalf.

Sunday Funnies; Awesome Notepad

The awesomeness of an empty notepad

Meanwhile Outside Alys’s Restaurant

And of course

Meanwhile, I’ve noticed a strange feel in the air, like a ginger is trying to steal my soul

 

#WalkAway from Corruption

I want to talk a bit about the revelations about the Biden family this week, and will under the fold.

But first I’d very much like you to watch this video. This a young woman’s walk away story and she is very impressive. Yes, the video is a bit long, but that also means it’s pretty thorough.

I’ve said many times that my dad, while actually pretty conservative, was a New Dealer, and I cannot fault why he was and was probably right to be. But I was also right to walk away from the Democrats clean back in High School because they just did not make sense in my world. Only in the reign of Obama, however, have I come to believe the Republican Party may well be America’s deliverance once again, but only if we conservatives force them to be.

Here’s the video

See what I mean, this is powerful stuff, I think, for any Democrat who still has a residual ability to think for themself.


OK, on to Biden et. al. The NY Post (one of the very few newspapers who retain any credibility whatsoever) broke a story on Wednesday about the corruption emanating from Joe Biden’s family. It is based on a copy of a computer hard drive found by a Maryland computer repairman and turned over to the FBI last year. One of the very interesting questions raised is just what the FBI has been doing with it for almost a year, or was it just used as a seat cushion. I suspect many of us know the answer to that.

It is seemingly pretty damning about Hunter’s activities in Ukraine and China. To me, it looks like corroboration more than anything we haven’t already suspected. But it is interesting that supposedly Joe required his family to kick back 50% of their ill-gotten gains which makes the Mafia look like pikers. Like I said, very interesting but nothing much all that new. And in fact, Biden’s campaign hasn’t denied it so much as attempted to spin it.

But the real story here is that Twitter suspended the Post and removed the Tweets associated with the story, suspended the Editor of the Post, suspended the official Trump campaign site,  locked White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany’s account, and blocked links to the official US Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans on the matter.

Facebook while somewhat more measured has also restricted access to the material.

Senator Ted Cruz’s questions are appropriate,

1. Who made the decision to prevent users from sharing this story? On what basis did they make that decision?

2. When was the New York Post made aware of Twitter’s decision and what process was afforded to it to contest the censorship?

3. Has Twitter prevented the New York TimesWashington Post, or any other major news outlet from posting its own reporting? If so, when?

4. If Twitter did not prevent Buzzfeed from sharing its reporting on the Steele dossier or the New York Times reporting on President Trump’s tax returns, please explain a politically neutral principle for why the reporting is treated differently?

5. Has Twitter ever restricted a story published by a major news outlet about Donald J. Trump during his four years as President of the United States?

6. Have Twitter or any of its employees involved in the decision to censor this reporting been in contact in any capacity with the Biden-Harris campaign or any of its representatives regarding this reporting or the allegations contained therein?

Meanwhile, Senator Josh Hawley  Tweeted this:

Once again, the coverup is poised to do more damage to the perpetrators than the alleged crime(s).

If we hold the Senate, and/or take the House, which is our part in curbing this corrupt nonsense, then the Article 230 status of big digital media is in play, and they are likely to lose, being held to the standards of publishers, and likely convicted of election interference on a scale that Russia and China have never even dreamed of.

It’s an ill wind …

Confirmation

Neo will roll his eyes but I have to mention the television series, West Wing. I learned so much from that series about which I had known nothing.

We’re watching the confirmation hearing for Amy Coney Barrett and I never understood what that entails. Fortunately, West Wing covers some of that and I always operate under the assumption that if I don’t know something, other people may not know either. I think it’s a fair assumption.

The process takes far longer than you may expect it to. There’s generally one person in charge of the confirmation process, usually the ‘policy guy’ (I don’t have to type ‘or woman’, do I? I think we’re all adults here). He’s the guy with the ‘check list’. Amy Barrett allowed that she submitted 1800 pages for the confirmation team. Several people will have been chosen to read all or some of those pages, depending upon what topic the page covers. They read to see if the nominee for Supreme Court Justice has any legal writings detrimental to the policy of the current administration. They look for any mention displaying bias, discrimination, defamation, and/or disagreement with the current administration. They look for malfeasance and any hint of scandal.

If the written collection holds nothing that red flags the nominee, they begin the interviews of friends, co-workers, family, neighbors of the nominee. They go to previous employers. They sniff out every possible wrong the nominee may have participated in.

If there are still no red flags, the confirmation team will meet with the nominee and have a few face to face meetings, and the person’s work record is questioned and uncertain ground can be clarified and cleared. If the confirmation team finds no issues that require further inquiry, the team will then inform the president of that administration of their findings. If the president has reasons of his own, he may turn down the potential nominee and ask that another person be looked at using the same process.

If the president accepts the recommendation of the confirmation team, he then meets with the potential nominee to decide for himself whether or not he thinks the possible nominee meets whatever his personal criteria may be.

Having gone through this process and passing all the attendant laser focus of this background check of all time, the president will then announce to the press his nominee for the seat of Supreme Court Justice. And from that second forward, the members of the ‘other party’ begin the same process in regard to that nominee, considering the other party has other interests and policies that they are concerned with.

The actual hearing for confirmation, as we have learned – large and in our faces on the major networks – is a mud flinging, party boosting, scandalous innuendos, aspersions casting attempt to both ruin and/or elevate the nominee, depending on the party asking the questions.

This is what we need to understand. In this particular case, in this particular place and time, the hatred for the President of the United States is such that there is no depth of disgusting to which the Democrats will not delve. According to the Democrats, Amy Barrett has been nominated by the President to INSURE that what He wants gets done to the DETRIMENT of millions of Americans. You’re all very nice people so all I’m going to say to that is ‘stuff and nonsense’! Should she be confirmed, she will be one of eight Justices. [Nine including the primus inter pares Chief Justice*] So when they repeat – ad nauseum – that her decision will kill Roe v Wade, Obama Care, any of the cases that will come before the Court – they are lying. Pure and simple.

*The Chief Justice has no control over any legal decision made by any Justice, he does assign the writing of opinions with which he agrees and has a fair amount of administrative control of the court. admin.

Lead or Cower

So the President is back in the White House, and I’m laughing my burr off at the left. On my post Monday, Patriot USA commented,

Trump acting like the POTUS should. Leading by example.I love watching the doc talk about Trump.

He’s spot on. Leaders lead, and Trump is a leader. His Tweet as he got ready to leave Walter Reed was classic

“One thing that’s for certain, don’t let it dominate you. Don’t be afraid of it. You’re going to beat it. We have the best medical equipment. We have the best medicines all developed recently, and you’re going to beat it. “

Reminds me of something another American President said, “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.” He was in many senses right then as well. Much of the problem in the 30s was people sitting on their mattresses lumpy with their cash, while people starved looking for something to do, and that is likely what is happening again while far too many people hide in their basement from a freaking virus. Leaders, lead, alright, but the second half of that aphorism is Cowards cower.

Here are the Wuhan Flu survival rates:

0-19 years old: 99.997%

20-49: 99.98%

50-69: 99.5

70 and over: 94.6%

And for this, we’re going to shut down the greatest economy in the world and play duck and cover in our basements? Give me a break. There’s something else going on here. A couple of somethings, I suspect.

You know why as well as I do. When you are quaking in fear, justified or not, your higher brain function shuts down and you’re willing to do whatever you’re told, or you simply freeze in place. And that’s what the left is counting on, Americans for once doing what they tell us to, and knuckling under to them, particularly in the person of Biden at least till Harris replaces him (remember everybody is expendable to the left). Then our centuries long experiment in freedom is over.

And make no mistake, the old press is a full partner in this whole thing, witness their anger that Trump not only survived but is back in the White House leading.

You can really see it happening in Danistan, formerly known as Victoria, Australia, and Great Britain is not far behind. In both cases, the people love freedom as much as we do (although they are neither as rowdy nor as well-armed) but they have no leadership. We do. Make it work.

But you know something folks. I am an American by birth, and I’m an American by choice, and I’ll die as I was born, a free man in a free country.

And you know something else, we here in America, we are the first Revolutionaries, we got it right, and so we became the keepers of that flame, from the bonfire we kindled in the City on the Hill, long ago. We have kept it flaring bright ever since, and its flames have lighted the world. I see so many articles from people who have joined us, from Russia, from Cuba, from Vietnam, and from Africa and the Middle East, who have caught the dream from us. Why? Because all people have always dreamed of being free, and America has made it a real possibility.

And now, once again, it is up to us.

General John Starke’s toast on July 31, 1809, really says it all

Live free or die: Death is not the worst of evils.

And an afterword: In the picture above, look at the president’s salute to Marine One. It’s textbook perfect, isn’t it? Long ago the Air Force taught me almost word for word what Military.com has on their website.

The salute is widely misunderstood outside the military. Some consider it to be a gesture of servility since the junior extends a salute to the senior, but this interpretation isn’t true at all. The salute is an expression that recognizes each other as a member of the profession of arms — that they have made a personal commitment of self-sacrifice to preserve the American way of life. The fact that the junior extends the greeting first is merely a point of etiquette — a salute extended or returned makes the same statement.

The self-respect, the respect for the military, and the respect for America as conceived are all contained in that gesture not ever required of a civilian Commander in Chief freely offered to us all.

Thoughts on This Week’s Presidential Debate

As I was watching the pseudo-debate the other night, the thought crossed my mind, “I’ve seen this show before”. Indeed I had, as I thought about it later I realized it was a rerun of Joe Biden and Paul Ryan’s Vice Presidential debate in 2012, with two differences, the roles were reversed and that debate had a moderator not covering fire.

It was bad enough I don’t remember writing about that debate, but Ann Althouse did, in fact, she live blogged it. And she remembered too. Here is some of her live blogging that she quoted in the linked article.

Biden is being rude, laughing and mouthing words…. Biden mutters an interruption. When Biden is given a turn, he calls what Ryan said “malarky.”… Ryan is speaking earnestly… and Biden is chuckling toothily, his body shaking like Santa Claus…. When Ryan speaks, Biden is laughing clownishly again. It looks just awful… Biden is acting as though he cannot physically tolerate Ryan having a turn to speak!… Biden continually interrupts Ryan in a way I find incredibly annoying…. While Ryan is talking… Biden sighs long and loud… Biden interrupts. Ryan says: “Mr. Vice President, I know you’re under a lot of duress to make up for lost ground, but I think everyone will be better served if we don’t keep interrupting each other.” I love the politeness of “if we don’t keep” — we — when Biden has been an interruption machine and Ryan has barely interrupted and only occasionally has talked over to keep from losing his turn. The moderator, Martha Raddatz has done nothing at all to control Biden….

And so on. Sounds familiar, doesn’t it? Well, I’ll bet that Trump watched that debate too, and saw the very nice man (Never-Trumper though he may be) Paul Ryan snowed under by one of the less smart people in Washington, and said to himself, “Nope, ain’t happening to me”. He undoubtedly also remembers that the Oh so nice and policed Romney/Ryan campaign went down to defeat, as do we all. Karma is an ugly witch, isn’t she?

Althouse and I both also remember Martha Raddatz just let Biden run off at the mouth with his comedy act and it was pretty ugly. Maybe Chris Wallace remembers that too because he didn’t do that. What he did do was at least arguably worse. He provided covering fire for Biden as he was getting his payback for 2012 Both commentators lost control, and badly, but Wallace lost it by taking a side so that the President was faced with two opponents. As far as I know. Wallace isn’t running for anything so why is he involved in the debate?

Here is an example:

He was there to moderate, not debate. as Sean Davis Tweeted:

Pretty disgusting really.

But that is in character for him. He’s a liberal Democrat bordering on a leftist. He has shown that often enough, especially when called on it of Fox by conservative women.

Think I’m kidding? Ace of Spades noticed it too. Here he quotes Rolling Stone.

Two, Chris Wallace really, really, really cannot abide women disputing his Solomonic pronoucements.

 

During a Thursday panel discussion, Fox News contributor Katie Pavlic seemed to make excuses for the alleged actions of 17-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse, who, on Wednesday, was charged with first-degree intentional homicide after allegedly shooting and killing two protesters and seriously injuring another during demonstrations over the police shooting of a Black man, Jacob Blake, in Kenosha, Wisconsin.

Fox News contributor Katie Pavlich made an argument that seemed to excuse vigilante justice when a law enforcement “void” exists.

“I have to say on the argument of vigilante justice. When you have no police around to defend businesses and people who are being attacked and their livelihoods burned to the ground, then there is a void that is filled,” Pavlich said.

Pavlich then railed against Democratic city and state officials who she blamed for the supposed void, and host Melissa Francis wholeheartedly agreed with her take, saying, “No, that;s a great point. The vigilantes are just as much the fault of those local leaders who have failed so miserably. Great point.”

Following a commercial break, Wallace made it clear that he was not buying the message that was sent during the last segment.

“I’ve got to push back on something we said at the end of the last segment because there seemed to be the implication that somehow vigilante justice was understandable or justified by the lack of sufficient police action and authority and presence in some of these cities,” Wallace said.

As Wallace tried to complete his thought, both Pavlich and Francis showed their displeasure with Wallace’s understanding of their argument, interrupting several times.

“I just gotta say this, just as it’s completely a disconnect,” Wallace said when he tried to continue after Francis interjected to say, “That’s not what was said.”

Wallace replied, “Well, that seemed to be the implication. That vigilantes were filling� Let me finish� that vigilantes were filling the void from police. Just as it�s fair to say that rioting and looting is a completely inappropriate response to George Floyd or Jacob Blake, vigilante justice is a completely inappropriate response to the rioting in the street. There is no justification for what happened in Kenosha, and vigilante justice is a crime and should be punished as a crime.”

There is Chris Wallace — hard news man — pronouncing that self-defense of one’s life is not a “justification” and furthermore that if you defend yourself from antifa/BLM, you should be prosecuted for a “crime.”

And, again quoting Ace, Mollie Hemingway, one of the best reporters in the United States.

And again, Wallace is being praised by a leftwing source (Mediaite here).

 

Hemingway added “there needs to be a reckoning” in the media over their promises that Trump would be found guilty of [treason, collusion, etc.] “The people who spread this theory,” Hemingway said, and “who did not behave appropriately, need to be held accountable.”

Of course, Mueller�s report has not even been released yet, something Fox News anchor Chris Wallace pointed out in the segment after Hemingway’s comments.

“No one has seen [this report],” Wallace said. “To say that somehow this clears the president seems like the height of rushing to judgment.”

Wallace went on to brutally dismantle the rest of Hemingway’s arguments seeking to dismiss Mueller�s investigation.

“People talk about the appointment of the special counsel,” Wallace said. “The fact is the reason the special counsel was appointed is because Trump fired James Comey in the middle of his investigation. If Comey had been allowed to finish his investigation there probably wouldn�t have been an special counsel.”

Note that Chris Wallace is, was, and always will be a huge shill for the Russia Collusion Conspiracy Theory […]

He is about as objective a news reporter as say, anybody at CNN, maybe less, and this was supposed to be the best moderator of the campaign.

Do read the linked articles, and make your own judgment, but this is what I mean when I refer to the Fox Propaganda Network. The opinion people over there are fine and mostly better than fine, but the hard news folks are just as bad as any other broadcast network, maybe worse because they have an unearned reputation as conservative. More wolves in sheep’s clothing, right up there with Walter Duranty.

%d bloggers like this: