Shallow ignorant politicians lacking any integrity always say at once what they think will make them viewed favourably. Linsey Graham and Nikki Haley both came out with resounding endorsement of the Israeli military action on the first day. They are not honest and far-seeing enough to know that they were committing themselves to support what would become ongoing genocide. The attempt by both them to position themselves as leaders in foreign affairs is a joke that they probably still don’t recognise. They are posturing without any thought beyond the moment.


As a citizen of the United States, willingly or not, you are bankrolling and approving a foreign country that is committing obvious genocide. You are vetoing in the United Nations every condemnation and attempt to relieve the genocide, although we were taught that the U.N. is a place for humane representative world opinion.


Terrorists are small groups committing violent acts against occupying powers. There is nothing surprising about a terrorist group fighting back against the occupying power, even with unconventional methods. However, a terrorist act DOES NOT JUSTIFY the occupying power killing the women children in the occupied area.


And all our Americans supporting the genocide are the same people who react indignantly to any other offense around the world that oppresses non-white people. And the same people who have been busily inviting Muslims into the U.S. for half a century. A government that is as deeply into dysfunction as the U.S. today is very close to failure.

There is no need to be sympathetic to Islam, which is a dubious creed whose adherents often fight among themselves and show little fellowship. Yet Islam is the faith of millions and they have quite as much right to be free of foreign occupation as any people.

​Joe Biden is a horror as President. The only reason he is President is because Barack Obama chose him as Vice-President. At that time he was without any standing as a national figure. Did Obama pick the worst man he could find?
​

The current resistance of the Texas authorities to illegal acts of the rulers of the U.S. government is important and heartening for two reasons.

First, it reflects the real “Constitution for the United States,” which has long been in disuse. In the real Constitution the States have the right to interpose between their people and the government’s unconstitutional acts. Abuse of power and violation of the law by federal rulers is by definition tyranny---an affront to government “of, by, and for the people.”

Secondly, Texas has raised the principle of the right and responsibility of “the lesser magistrates,” to oppose the tyranny of higher authorities. Any just regime has magistrates to enforce the true laws, to protect the innocent and punish the guilty. When the situation arises these officials in their lawful capacity can rightfully counter the illegalities of the “higher” authorities. (I thank Reckonin' commenter Roscoe for reminding me of this.) This idea was a deep aspect of the American case in the War of Independence.

​Unfortunately we have a multitude of examples of lesser magistrates violating their duty to distinguish right and wrong. Take the notorious case in Minnesota. The governor, mayor, attorney general, prosecutors, and judges all took the side of the lawbreaker and condemned the law enforcer. The lawbreaker got universal praise, a gold casket, and a monument. The law enforcer got massive slander and prison. But, after all, the policeman was considered sacrificable as one the “delporables,” ordinary white people disdained by our sophisticated rulers.

Long ago, during my misspent youth as a newspaper reporter, I saw a revealing incident. There was a minor conflict at a local restaurant. The newspaper’s most popular columnist inflated this into a crime wave in the better part of town. The mayor immediately announced his alarm and opposition to this development, without any assessment of the facts. He was simply, like all politicians, immediately doing what he thought would be popular. No consideration of truth or falsehood, good or evil, ever entered his head.

This exactly describes Joe Biden’s reaction to any reported incident possibly to be considered as offensive to black people and all good citizens. It was an occasion for virtue signaling that would be praised by the media. Why else do so many of our politicians of both parties warmly embrace the genocide going on in the Mideast?

The fact is they are shallow and ignorant men and women who have no real interest other than self-promotion (vanity and greed). The stand of Biden, other authorities, and the media convinced the world that a police reign of terror against black people was a fact of American life. An honest and patriotic President would have told the world that such was not the case, that in fact blacks were 18 times more likely to kill policemen than the other way around.

We have no politics, no rational debate or discussion of ideas and policies at the mainstream level---only advertising. That is that state of our “democracy” today. We can only be hopeful about the current acts of the Southern “lesser magistrates.” And hopeful that a future Judgment will expose the real minds of our politicians and provide an appropriate punishment.

Vladmir Putin is greatly superior to Joe Biden in every observable way. Putin has more intelligence, more integrity, more honesty, more courage, more far-sighted understanding. He is more Christian, more patriotic, and works to strengthen his country, while Biden is destroying his. Putin is an historical figure, while Biden is merely a loser, like the last king of France and the last Csar of Russia - weak, ignorant rulers who brought disaster to their people. Putin is articulate and knows some real history, ahead of Biden on both counts.

During the War of 1812, the wise statesman John C. Calhoun considered what was the duty of a citizen during war time. Of course, he must support his people, but if he thought the country and its leaders were wrong, to what extent was it a citizen’s right to say so? Of course, the war that Calhoun was discussing was a Constitutionally declared war. There were genuine but patriotic differences of opinion about what action was good for the country.

But what is our patriotic obligation to support the U.S. present military actions operating around the world? These actions are not Constitutional, their benefit to the country has never really been discussed. We sympathise when our fellow citizens who are in harm’s way are killed or wounded in remote places where they should never have been at all - sacrificed by muddled and irresponsible rulers.

​I note recently deaths and injuries to our men at some place, an apparently vulnerable place. Note also, those hurt were not regular army people but Georgia National Guardsmen who doubtless never imagined that their service would lead to such sacrifice. The bureaucrats claiming to be soldiers always lean on the South they hate.

Our chair-warrior leaders are eager to say that in defending all these far away bases we are somehow defending America. This is a lie. Our retaliation is in no manner defending our American land and people. Further, these people respond to the attack of a few “terrorists” with massive bombing of entire civil populations that are assumed to harbour such terrorists. This is a grave sin that will create blowback, if God is just.