On politics and terrorism and our thin blue line

Oh what a week it has been.

Donald Trump and Ben Carson are now neck and neck at the head of the Republican primary pack. And CNN has reevaluated its criteria which may allow Carly Fiorina to join the crowded debate stage on September 16.

That three political outsiders have risen so strongly in the polls gives proof of the peoples’ disgust with establishment Washington. Carefully calibrated positions, politically correct formulations, and raw hypocrisy have left the voters deeply disgusted. So candidates who speak obvious truths (among Mr. Trump’s wild exaggerations) without submitting to the verbal constraints demanded by the liberal elite are eagerly embraced.

For instance, there is a political cartoon currently making the rounds on social media illustrating this point. It depicts a puzzled  President Obama on a “Wheel of Fortune” set asking the host, “Gee Pat – I don’t have a clue… workplace violence?  Armed insurgency? Can I buy a vowel?” The game board displays “_SLAM_C  TERROR_SM,” and the caption reads “And it’s even his favorite vowel.”

Why does this strike home? Because everyone knows that the horrors perpetrated by the Islamic State and Boko Haram are rooted in their Islamic beliefs, twisted as they may be. We know it. President Obama knows it. But he will not bring himself to say the words. That is deeply distressing to the populace who desire a clear identification of our adversary and what motivates them. Somehow, we hope, Trump and Carson and Fiorina will not be afraid to name the enemy.

Meanwhile, the Hillary Clinton private email server story will just not go away. Seven thousand more of her emails released by the State Department contained significant redactions. Redactions (black outs) of text indicate that the text is sensitive. Arguments are swirling whether she committed a crime by not using a federal email account. Yes. No. Perhaps. Or, possibly, only technically a crime.

Here are a few questions for you. Why did her email server share an IP address and SSL certificate with the Clinton Foundation’s email server? Was her server STIGed to federal security standards? Why did Mrs. Clinton wipe her server and submit the emails to the State Department as a pile of printed documents? Why are we not privy to the email metadata? (For those confused by the forgoing, ask your son-in-law in IT or any high schooler to research it for you).

There is one thing for certain. Wall Street banks, dogged by populists such as Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, would not get away with providing printed copies of email to the Securities and Exchange Commission. The SEC would assert that the missing metadata was material, and that printed emails were subject to undetectable alteration. The regulatory response would be swift,  harsh, and the fines quite steep.

In other topics, there has been a deeply disturbing trend playing out. Consider this:

Charles Gliniewicz

Darren Goforth

Henry Nelson

Steven Vincent

Carl Howell

Sean Bolton

Scott Lunger

Sonny Kim

These are all police officers who have been killed by gunfire in the past few months. One in particular, Goforth, killed in cold blood, ambushed. Officers dead. Families bereft. Kids fatherless. It is hard to appreciate the depth of the loss.

But not less, the loss to their communities. These officers were sworn to serve and protect. In their absence, their communities are less safe. It is difficult to understand the mindset of activists and protesters who carry signs proclaiming “Police are the Enemy.”

What a twisted worldview.

Yes, there are some bad cops. There are bad teachers and doctors and baseball players too. But we don’t paint them all with the same brush. Unfortunately, the debate in this country as of late has done just that.

The vast majority of police officers are honest and fair. Their job is incredibly difficult. They never know, when encountering a subject, whether that is an upstanding citizen such as yourself or a psychopathic criminal. The danger is palpable, their precautions understandable.

Here is a bit of advice. Never argue with a police officer. Comply with his or her directives. If you feel you are being treated unfairly, lodge a complaint later with his superiors or with a judge. So many tragedies, almost all of them, could have been avoided.

In closing, it is now September. The shadows are growing longer, the days shorter. Take a deep breath and enjoy this late bit of summer. Politics and civil strife and global terrorism will wait until tomorrow.   

Celebrate! The war is over.

President Obama, in a major foreign policy speech at the National Defense University,  has declared that the war on terror is over. This is a very interesting tactic that might have been very useful if only known to Franklin Roosevelt. In June, 1944, sixty nine years ago, the beaches and fields of Normandy were a muddy, bloody cauldron as allied troops strove to wrest a beachhead from the Nazi juggernaut.  Over 200,000 American, British, and Canadian troops were killed or wounded in a campaign that could have been completely avoided if only Roosevelt had simply declared the war over.

But no matter. The current administration has elected to choose a path of lessening America’s role in the world. The president, his supporters, and confidantes are of the view that America is an enemy of freedom rather that its defender. The newly-appointed U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Samantha Power, has said: “Some anti-Americanism derives simply from our being a colossus that bestrides the earth. But much anti-Americanism derives from the role U.S. political, economic and military power has played in denying such freedoms to others.”

So in support of this view, the administration is cutting military budgets, withdrawing from the heartlands of radical Islamic Jihadism, and is ceding the world  stage to our benevolent competitors. Surely the military planners in the Kremlin and Beijing are celebrating this wondrous gift. And in the vacuum created by America’s withdrawal, they will surely lead the way in advancing the cause of freedom and individual liberty. (News item – Russia backs Syria’s despotic leader, Bashar Al-Assad, and promises to deliver advanced anti-aircraft missile systems).

In the meantime, while asserting that America in the world is too big, the administration is simultaneously arguing that American government at home is too small. Even though the president has declared the end of the war on terror, his National Security Agency is spending billions to collate the phone calls, emails and tweets of hundreds of millions of Americans. The IRS, soon to be responsible for enforcing the onerous terms of the “Affordable Care Act,” was somehow unable to respect the constitutional rights of those who disagree with the President’s politics. And the Justice Department is going after journalists, wiretapping and threatening charges for simply reporting the news.

Where is this heading? Unfortunately, nowhere good. By reducing America’s presence in the world, the cause of freedom will be harmed. Likewise, by growing government’s scope and power at home, our individual liberties are lessened. If you believe that freedom and democracy are fundamentally good, this is not good news. Is this truly the path we want to follow?

Saving only one life

"The Life Line," Winslow Homer, 1884

Vice President Joe Biden, appointed by President Barack Obama to oversee a commission on gun policy following the horrific massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School on December 14^th, has established his criteria for making legislation.

“If our actions result in saving only one life, they’re worth taking,” Biden proclaimed at a meeting of victims and gun control proponents at the White House on January 9^th.

Let’s stop and consider this. According to the Vice President, the saving of one life is justification for taking legislative action which may affect the constitutional liberties of millions of Americans. Not to say that this is undesirable, but let’s consider a few scenarios.

On Monday January 7^th, a California mother was taken into custody for the death of her 2-year-old step-daughter. Proximate cause? According to police, she forced the child to ingest chili powder. Who knew that chili powder is poisonous to young children? The possession of chili powder should be immediately banned. After all, who actually needs chili powder? “If our actions result in saving only one life, they’re worth taking.”

In late March, 2011, a Georgia woman was killed by an injection of silicon intended to augment the allure of her buttocks. Morris Garner, a transgender, cross-dressing, unlicensed cosmetologist who formerly served in the military discovered that body-augmenting procedures might be profitable. So he hooked up with the unfortunate victim on the Internet. His lack of a license did not deter her, but led unfortunately to her death. Silicon injections for cosmetic purposes should be immediately banned. After all, who actually needs to have augmented buttocks? “If our actions result in saving only one life, they’re worth taking.”

Toledo, Ohio, August, 2011.  A 62-year-old women died from asphyxiation after falling head-first into her city issued recycling bin. It is likely that Sheila Decoster was trying to dispose of a small bag of recyclables but fell into the bin and perished from “positional asphyxia”. Clearly, these recycling bins are far more dangerous than we have been told. They should be promptly banned. “If our actions result in saving only one life, they’re worth taking.”

A recent Huffington Post article reports that 178 children have been killed by U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen, and other countries. That's nearly nine Sandy Hooks. Do we hear a cry from the administration to curtail these strikes? “If our actions result in saving only one life, they’re worth taking.”

Not to make Mr. Biden sound foolish, but he is. Pandering to emotion to force political change is the worst kind of demagoguery. Legislation need be formed rationally, coolly, logically. Costs and benefits, rights and responsibilities must be carefully considered and balanced. We, the governed, deserve the benefit of the big picture, not the hormone rush of high emotion.