Mr. President, Keep it Closed

Well, something happened last night, either my IT guy got it figured out, or the Windows 10 update did some good, or a miracle. My money’s on my IT guys – but this seems to be working again. Yay! 😂

Which of course means I have nothing prepared, Oh well.

I ran across this the other day, and it sums it up very well, from Dov Discher at The American Spectator.

Go back to Genesis 39, the story of Joseph, Potiphar, and the seductive wife of Potiphar whom Joseph spurns for fear of G-d. (If you are biblically illiterate, you also can find it towards the end of the first half of Andrew Lloyd Weber’s “Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat.”) In no time, the woman accuses Joseph of attempted rape. Why, then, is he not executed? Really, why did the Pharaoh not execute a man accused of attempting to rape the wife of a top national officer? Henry VIII chopped off such people’s heads faster than a Food Network host preparing a salad of cabbage and lettuce. Why was Joseph “only” sent to prison? Because no one believed the wife. They knew what she was made of. But they had to impose something punitive on Joseph, the imported Hebrew slave, to enable the high-ranking Potiphar politically to save face.

That’s the Bible. But in the United States circa 2018, a Perjury Blasey Ford not only becomes a national hero, but also is followed by a long line of #MeTooPhonyRapeAccusers. By now, a few of them even have admitted point-blank that they lied to the Senate under oath. Others have faded into the background. It is to the everlasting shame of Sen. Chuck Grassley and his Republican-majority Senate Judiciary Committee that the perjurers all will get away scot-free without a day in jail or even a $5 fine. But that is the state of America today. The lying and perjury is even worse on college campuses, and the pointless federal Department of Education existed under Obama to empower Potiphar Wives and Columbia-Barnard mattress girls.

So it goes throughout so much of the federal Government. We do need the military to protect us from threats overseas. We need an agency to collect tax, if tax we must pay. We need airport security on the ground (like TSA) and in the sky (like air traffic controllers). We need the post office. We need honest federal judges and courts and the staff that enable them to administer justice. But we do not need a great many of the agencies, departments, nor a great many of the 800,000 meanwhile-furloughed government workers. We have to pay their salaries; that money does not come from trees. We work hard for our families, earning what living we can. When we bring home our pay, we are not looking for business partners in Washington to share any percent of it in return for their drafting a new federal regulation or typing it or filing it or rewriting it. No one minds paying salaries of the fraction of federal workers who provide truly important services. However, for a large number of them, if they lose their government jobs and end up doing what my wife, my kids, my siblings, their spouses, my parents, my grandparents, my nieces, my nephews, my neighbors, my friends, my professional colleagues, and my enemies all have done — and work in the private sector — we all will be the better for it. In time, even hundreds of thousands of those 800,000 also will appreciate why a Government shut-down is a delight.

Yep, maybe we should simply consider that 25% of the government closed – would anyone notice? Sounds good to me, but I’m a simple man, and people in Washington like to complicate things, usually to cover their ass in case some simple guy with common sense asked sensible questions. Doc ends with this, and we need to make it so.

Every time a police officer or a fire chief or a Kate Steinle spending a happy weeknight with her Dad at the amusement park or local pier gets shot to death by an illegal alien, the tally will ratchet higher. Every opioid death. Every case of human trafficking. The voters in the middle in the swing states will decide, as they always do. If that is what the voters want, then so be it. If not, then the Wall will come.

Yup, it will.

South of the Border, Down Mexico Way

So, I gather some retired generals wrote recently in the Post that sending troops to the Mexican border was illegal or involved them in politics or some such tosh.

The truth is, of course, that the generals are the ones politicizing the use of the troops. It is clearly legal, in fact, it is the reason troops were first raised millennia ago, to protect that which is ours. It’s extremely disingenuous to claim such nonsense.

That is a goodly part of the trouble with the higher ranks of the military these days. They’ve forgotten their Douglas MacArthur…

Yours is the profession of arms, the will to win, the sure knowledge that in war there is no substitute for victory, that if you lose, the Nation will be destroyed, that the very obsession of your public service must be duty, honor, country.

Others will debate the controversial issues, national and international, which divide men’s minds. But serene, calm, aloof, you stand as the Nation’s war guardian, as its lifeguard from the raging tides of international conflict, as its gladiator in the arena of battle. For a century and a half you have defended, guarded, and protected its hallowed traditions of liberty and freedom, of right and justice.

Let civilian voices argue the merits or demerits of our processes of government: Whether our strength is being sapped by deficit financing indulged in too long, by Federal paternalism grown too mighty, by power groups grown too arrogant, by politics grown too corrupt, by crime grown too rampant, by morals grown too low, by taxes grown too high, by extremists grown too violent; whether our personal liberties are as thorough and complete as they should be.

These great national problems are not for your professional participation or military solution. Your guidepost stands out like a ten-fold beacon in the night: Duty, honor, country.

And in forgetting those words, they risk the heritage of the most trusted institution in the United States, the US Armed Forces. For if they become just another political interest, then they are no longer the guarantor of rights and the guardian of sacred honor that they have made themselves, compared to the distrusted (but necessary) evil thing they were in the eyes of the founders. Who you might remember abolished the army after the Treaty of Paris was signed in 1783, preferring to depend on militia rather than risk a standing army.

Let’s let Jonathan F. Keiller in American Thinker explain.

As for defending the border, by supplying logistic support to federal and local police, there could hardly be a more legitimate use of the military. Defending national borders is the core function of government. It is what governments were founded to do in the first place, many millennium ago. People may agree or disagree about the politics of it, but it is disingenuous to question whether defending the border is an appropriate mission.

Just a century ago, the Army went to our southern border as a result of Latin American unrest not dissimilar from what we face today. Mexico was in the midst of revolutionary turmoil, and rebels and government forces alike occasionally violated the American border, sometimes with extreme violence. This not only resulted in direct military action within the United States by Army units defending themselves or civilians, but ultimately General John Pershing’s punitive expedition into Mexico to apprehend Pancho Villa — something akin to policing, though to be sure, not within American borders. But had an opportunity arisen to chase and trap Villa within U.S. borders, thus obviating a cross-border incursion, there is little doubt that military forces would have taken part.

Interestingly, at least to me, a bit of history was made during this expedition. The very first mechanized assault happened as the troops killed Julio Cardenez at San Miguelito Ranch, near Rubio, Chihuahua. You may have heard of the officer leading this detachment. His name was 2d Lieutenant George S, Patton Jr. He made a few more mechanized attacks in the wars of the 20th Century that was just dawning.

He was, during this conflict, an aide to another general you may have heard of John J. (Blackjack) Pershing. His nickname came from being assigned to the 10th Cavalry, one of the original Buffalo Soldier units. Which were indeed also on this expedition, most of the field army was, in fact. Soon it would grow considerably.

Not long after the Post’s revelation about the generals, it ominously reported that volunteer militia groups were arriving at the border to assist authorities there. Here the paper claims that Newsweek obtained a document indicating the current military command is “concerned” about the arrival of the militias. But the same article notes that local militias have effectively operated in the area for a long time, protecting property owners and assisting authorities in finding and apprehending illegal border crossers.

The point here is that if the Post, the Democrats, and the former generals don’t want to deal with citizen militias, then they should support action that makes such deployments unnecessary. The current border environment is a security vacuum, and the arrival of the militias is a direct consequence of that, not Trumpian rhetoric. Legitimate use of the military in the face of an immediate threat to the integrity of the country’s borders will make the citizen militias irrelevant. Are the generals against that?

Indeed, that is something the founders understood quite well. If the regular army doesn’t defend the borders, well the militia will. What’s new is old again.

%d bloggers like this: