Tag Archives: responsibilities

Too Much Dependence

Posted on by
Reply

…on the central government in DC.

Sunday’s Wall Street Journal had a piece decrying the problems with getting the Wuhan Virus vaccines “the last mile” into folks’ shoulders. They’re right that that’s a serious problem. Even though the Federal government is behind schedule on getting vaccine doses into the States’ hands, those States have the bulk of those delivered vaccines still in the refrigerators, uninjected—they’re vastly behind schedule.

The States and locals, though, are mischaracterizing the problem. Typical is this:

Jeff Duchin [Health Officer & Chief, Communicable Disease Epidemiology & Immunization Section, Public Health], Seattle and King County, WA, said the federal government succeeded in helping fund and purchase vaccines that were developed in record-breaking time, but said it didn’t do nearly enough to ensure that the “last-mile” distribution efforts would be successful.

He’s badly mistaken, and that’s dangerous for Washington’s citizens, and the error itself is dangerous for all Americans. That “last mile” is, and can only be, the responsibility of the States. The Federal government has no authority there.

That’s the nature of our federal republic structure of governance.

The States—Progressive-Democrat-run and Republican-run alike—had been told for months that vaccines would be available by the end of the year. Where was their planning? Even if they didn’t believe the ability to execute commitment, or the commitment itself, that prior planning would have been useful whenever the vaccines arrived. The States chose not to bother.

Personal Responsibility and Incitement to Riot

Posted on by
Reply

Andrew McCarthy had an op-ed in Saturday’s National Review in which he talked about the impeachment of Richard Nixon and the impending impeachment of President Donald Trump. In his discussion of Trump, McCarthy had this:

I do think the president has committed an impeachable offense, making a reckless speech that incited a throng on the mall….

He made that claim while offering no evidence. In particular, he chose not to quote Trump or to walk us through his logic in getting from what Trump said to that conclusion. He did offer this:

The president was utterly irresponsible in his demagoguery. He plainly intended for thousands of supporters to march on the Capitol to create political pressure on Vice President Pence and congressional Republicans—i.e., to induce them to take what would have been lawless procedural steps to invalidate electoral votes that states had cast for President-elect Biden.

Demagoguery: a carefully inflammatory—and wholly unsupported—characterization, the nature of which is quite unlike McCarthy’s normal bent.

But beyond that, Trump did, indeed, encourage his supporters to “create political pressure”—that’s what protests are intended to do; they’re not pleasant, sun-blessed strolls with parasols on ladies’ shoulders. As to the “lawless” procedural steps, there were plenty of Congressmen—lawmakers—in both Houses who disagree with the purported lawless nature of the steps being advocated. However zealously.

But there’s a far larger point here, and that’s personal agency, or it’s apparently assumed lack.

Conservatives emphasize the importance of individual—personal—responsibility. That would include the rioters being responsible for their own actions; no one else was then or is now. No one put guns to the rioters, or forced them in any other way, to invade the Capital Building. They did that from their own, deliberately chosen, decisions. Full stop.

What happened to McCarthy’s conservatism? Does he really believe adult human beings are not personally responsible, instead holding that their Betters control those lesser ones’ actions?

I expect that from Progressive-Democrats; that’s at the heart of their “incitement” impeachment claim. And the claim is as insulting to Americans with our individual responsibilities as it is purely political and an act of satisfying pent up grudges.

Some Poll Results

Posted on by
Reply

The Washington Times has some McLaughlin Poll results.

  • When voters are told that Joe Biden will be inaugurated on January 20th, but Speaker Nancy Pelosi wants Congress to impeach and remove the President in his last week in office, 60% of all voters say that this is another waste of time and money
  • 77% of all voters think that Congress should make its priority this week dealing with Coronavirus
  • 74% of all voters agree that efforts by Pelosi and the Democrats to try to impeach the President after Joe Biden is sworn in would be politically motivated to prevent the President from running again, stripping his Secret Service protection, and preventing him from having a Presidential Library
  • 65% of all voters agree that by continuing to attack the President, Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi are making this worse and keeping the country divided
  • 74% agree that if Twitter, Facebook, and Google can censor and take away the President’s right to free speech they can take away the right to free speech for any American
  • 70% of all voters agree that Big Tech companies like Twitter, Facebook, Amazon, Google, and Apple have too much power and need to be regulated to protect the freedoms and privacy of Americans

Especially these:

  • 48% of all voters are less likely to vote for a member of Congress who votes to impeach the President
  • The generic vote for Congress favors the Republicans over the Democrats 49% to 42%.

The survey can be seen here. McLaughlin conducted its survey at the start of this week, and they interviewed 800 voters reflective of the demographics in 17 battleground States of the November election. The 95% confidence interval is ±3.4%.

A Stolen Laptop

Posted on by
Reply

Senator Jeff Merkley (D, OR), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations and Senate Appropriations committees, has reported that his laptop was stolen from his office, ostensibly by the rioters who assaulted the Capital Building last Wednesday afternoon. (Ostensibly: frankly, I have no reason to doubt the fact of the theft or which member(s) of which crowd did the theft. However, the deed as theft and who did it remain unproven at this early stage of the investigation.)

Merkley also said he’d left his office unlocked while he went to the Senate floor for the Electoral College vote counting and debates. The importance of that will become clear below.

He apparently isn’t alone in this:

The Justice Department (DOJ) said Thursday during a briefing that “national security equities” may have been among the records stolen during the looting and destruction that stalled the congressional proceedings….

What’s not being reported in the NLMSM is the utter contempt these folks—possibly from both parties—have for our nation’s secrets, our classified information: they won’t even take the slightest pains to protect them.

A laptop unsecured in an unlocked office? Not even in locked away in a safe when the Senator isn’t around? An open office is all the security a Senator—a Senator experienced in handling classified materials, if only by his membership on a foreign relations committee—deems necessary?

Classified “equities” left unsecured in other offices?

How does that work, exactly?

Where are DoJ’s and DIA’s investigations into this manifest mishandling of classified material?

“Fight Like Hell”

Posted on by
Reply

President Donald Trump incited the assault on the Capital Building last Wednesday—or so say Progressive-Democrats, the NLMSM, and the Left generally—with those words.

Here’s the definition of “fight,” per Merriam-Webster:

intransitive verb
1  a : to contend in battle or physical combat especially : to strive to overcome a person by blows or weapons
The soldiers fought bravely.
b : to engage in boxing
He will fight for the heavyweight title next month.
2 : to put forth a determined effort
They were fighting to stay awake.

transitive verb
1  a(1) : to contend against in or as if in battle or physical combat
fought the invaders of his homeland
was fighting a forest fire
(2) : to box against in the ring
fought several strong contenders
b(1) : to attempt to prevent the success or effectiveness of the company fought the takeover attempt
(2) : to oppose the passage or development of fight a bill in Congress
2 a : wage, carry on
fight a battle
   b : to take part in (a boxing match or similar contest)
3 : to struggle to endure or surmount
fight a cold
is fighting cancer
4 a : to gain by struggle
fights his way through
b : to resolve by struggle
fought out their differences in court
5 a : to manage (a ship) in a battle or storm
b : to cause to struggle or contend
c : to manage in an unnecessarily rough or awkward manner

Notice how many of these definitions have to do with physical combat and how many have to do with metaphorically and nonviolently carrying on the struggle.

Those Progressive-Democrats, the NLMSM, and the Left generally are projecting their own propensity for physical violence as the means of getting their way.

And they’re doing it while having downplayed the violence and destruction of the Left’s riots in Minneapolis, New York City, Chicago, Portland, and Seattle over the summer.

Never mind that the importance of the invasion of the Capital Building flows from its status as a symbol—and it’s a hugely important symbol. The damage done the Capital Building, however, is debris in the streets after those summer riots, which burned whole neighborhoods, destroyed businesses, crushed Americans’ ability to earn their living. And that destruction was aimed at minorities in particular. And that destruction was repeatedly billed as largely peaceful, a pent-up frustration being released, as reparations.