Gyroscopic Investing

A civil war has begun.

This civil war is very different than the last one. There are no cannons or cavalry charges. The left doesn’t want to secede. It wants to rule. Political conflicts become civil wars when one side refuses to accept the existing authority. The left has rejected all forms of authority that it doesn’t control.

The left has rejected the outcome of the last two presidential elections won by Republicans. It has rejected the judicial authority of the Supreme Court when it decisions don’t accord with its agenda. It rejects the legislative authority of Congress when it is not dominated by the left.

It rejected the Constitution so long ago that it hardly bears mentioning.

It was for total unilateral executive authority under Obama. And now it’s for states unilaterally deciding what laws they will follow. (As long as that involves defying immigration laws under Trump, not following them under Obama.) It was for the sacrosanct authority of the Senate when it held the majority. Then it decried the Senate as an outmoded institution when the Republicans took it over.

It was for Obama defying the orders of Federal judges, no matter how well grounded in existing law, and it is for Federal judges overriding any order by Trump on any grounds whatsoever. It was for Obama penalizing whistleblowers, but now undermining the government from within has become “patriotic”.

There is no form of legal authority that the left accepts as a permanent institution. It only utilizes forms of authority selectively when it controls them. But when government officials refuse the orders of the duly elected government because their allegiance is to an ideology whose agenda is in conflict with the President and Congress, that’s not activism, protest, politics or civil disobedience; it’s treason.

After losing Congress, the left consolidated its authority in the White House. After losing the White House, the left shifted its center of authority to Federal judges and unelected government officials. Each defeat led the radicalized Democrats to relocate from more democratic to less democratic institutions.

This isn’t just hypocrisy. That’s a common political sin. Hypocrites maneuver within the system. The left has no allegiance to the system. It accepts no laws other than those dictated by its ideology.

Democrats have become radicalized by the left. This doesn’t just mean that they pursue all sorts of bad policies. It means that their first and foremost allegiance is to an ideology, not the Constitution, not our country or our system of government. All of those are only to be used as vehicles for their ideology.

That’s why compromise has become impossible.

Our system of government was designed to allow different groups to negotiate their differences. But those differences were supposed to be based around finding shared interests. The most profound of these shared interests was that of a common country based around certain civilizational values. The left has replaced these Founding ideas with radically different notions and principles. It has rejected the primary importance of the country. As a result it shares little in the way of interests or values.

Instead it has retreated to cultural urban and suburban enclaves where it has centralized tremendous amounts of power while disregarding the interests and values of most of the country. If it considers them at all, it is convinced that they will shortly disappear to be replaced by compliant immigrants and college indoctrinated leftists who will form a permanent demographic majority for its agenda.

But it couldn’t wait that long because it is animated by the conviction that enforcing its ideas is urgent and inevitable. And so it turned what had been a hidden transition into an open break.

In the hidden transition, its authority figures had hijacked the law and every political office they held to pursue their ideological agenda. The left had used its vast cultural power to manufacture a consensus that was slowly transitioning the country from American values to its values and agendas. The right had proven largely impotent in the face of a program which corrupted and subverted from within.

The left was enormously successful in this regard. It was so successful that it lost all sense of proportion and decided to be open about its views and to launch a political power struggle after losing an election.

The Democrats were no longer being slowly injected with leftist ideology. Instead the left openly took over and demanded allegiance to open borders, identity politics and environmental fanaticism. The exodus of voters wiped out the Democrats across much of what the left deemed flyover country.

The left responded to democratic defeats by retreating deeper into undemocratic institutions, whether it was the bureaucracy or the corporate media, while doubling down on its political radicalism. It is now openly defying the outcome of a national election using a coalition of bureaucrats, corporations, unelected officials, celebrities and reporters that are based out of its cultural and political enclaves.

It has responded to a lost election by constructing sanctuary cities and states thereby turning a cultural and ideological secession into a legal secession. But while secessionists want to be left alone authoritarians want everyone to follow their laws. The left is an authoritarian movement that wants total compliance with its dictates with severe punishments for those who disobey.

The left describes its actions as principled. But more accurately they are ideological. Officials at various levels of government have rejected the authority of the President of the United States, of Congress and of the Constitution because those are at odds with their radical ideology. Judges have cloaked this rejection in law. Mayors and governors are not even pretending that their actions are lawful.

The choices of this civil war are painfully clear.

Maddy wrote:

A civil war has begun...

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/266197/ ... 9t.twitter

Maddy wrote:Honestly, I can't think of a time when the sturm und drang coming out of the beltway has crescendoed to this degree. It does appear that the dems are gunning for a cataclysmic showdown.

The degree to which the establishment figures have lost all of their strategic bearings and are reacting like caged animals suggests that they are terrified of what is coming down. At this point, it's all about who has what on whom. And the revelations just waiting to come out appear to involve hundreds of high-ranking government officials and to encompass everything from illegal wiretapping to child sex trafficking to murder.

This week alone, we've had a glimpse of just how pervasive the corruption within government is and how deeply the so-called Deep State has embedded its tentacles into all three branches of government. First, the revelation that murdered DNC-insider Seth Rich was the probable source of the e-mails obtained by Wikileaks, then Judge Napolitano's relaying of his conversation with Justice Scalia in which the latter shared his belief that the U.S. Supreme Court was being surveilled by the Obama Administration, and now Trey Gowdy's cryptic comment to the effect that history may judge former FBI director Comey kindly when it is revealed what formidable intra-government forces he was up against.

It's now clear that the Shadow Government is not just a handful of stuffy elites that meet once a year in Switzerland. And that they're fighting for their survival, pulling out all the stops to assure that this country is brought down before they are.

Libertarian666 wrote:I know the Trump voters are still happy that they voted for him, and the latest polls (done a week ago, to be sure), indicate that if the election had been held again, he would have beaten Hillary again.

Maddy wrote:Where, in God's name, is Jeff Sessions? The Germans are at the border.

moda0306 wrote:

Maddy wrote:Where, in God's name, is Jeff Sessions? The Germans are at the border.

Huh? What are you implying he should do?

clacy wrote:Dennis Kucinish weighing in on the dangerous state of affairs currently with the Deep State waging an internal war on Trump....

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ ... ithin.html


The Deep State (which Bush 41 built and Bush 43/Clinton/Obama grew exponentially) is the biggest existential threat to our country as we know it since the fall of the USSR.

clacy wrote:Welcome to the United Deep States of America

Anyone who doesn't think exactly like the technocrats, media propagandists and spooks in DC is now an enemy of the state.

He’s in Washington for a meeting with Larry Summers, the former US treasury secretary and Obama confidant. Summers asks him point blank: do you want to be on the inside or the outside? “Outsiders prioritise their freedom to speak their version of the truth. The price is that they are ignored by the insiders, who make the important decisions,” Summers warns.

Jack Jones wrote: If this isn't the deep state declaring its existence, I don't know what is.

Maddy wrote: The Deep State has been an organized force for many decades, as evidenced by the large number of books on my shelf authored in the '40s and '50s which describe in considerable detail its stepwise plan for transforming this country.

Jack Jones wrote: Any that you would recommend?

Libertarian666 wrote:I can't remember anything quite as insane as this witch hunt for something, anything, that they can pin on Trump to get him out of the Presidency. No, it's not at all like Watergate, because in that case it was abundantly clear that there had in fact been a coverup and obstruction of justice.

Of course it is theoretically possible that something like that has been going on in the Trump administration, but so far there is no, zero, nada, zilch, zip, evidence of anything even remotely corrupt.

Actually, I don't think the general public is buying the whole "Russiagate" story. I know the Trump voters are still happy that they voted for him, and the latest polls (done a week ago, to be sure), indicate that if the election had been held again, he would have beaten Hillary again.

So what are those pushing impeachment actually after, a civil war?

moda0306 wrote: Can you provide us with a link or source of analysis for your conclusion that "so far there is no, zero, nada, zilch, zip, evidence of anything even remotely corrupt."

Maddy wrote:

moda0306 wrote: Can you provide us with a link or source of analysis for your conclusion that "so far there is no, zero, nada, zilch, zip, evidence of anything even remotely corrupt."

Whoa. . . You're asking for proof that there is no evidence of corruption?

Has the burden of production been turned completely on its head? What is the legal standard of guilt now--a boldly asserted allegation that cannot be convincingly proven to be false? This is exactly the thing that the article I posted earlier was condemning: "flexible" logic and a results-oriented ideology that is devoid of principle.

Hopefully I'm misunderstanding, but I doubt it in light of a radio program just yesterday where the (faux conservative) host kept hammering on the question, "Can you [any member of the listening audience] say with absolute certainty that there was no collusion with Russia?" I had to turn the radio off and go swing an axe for a while.

stuper1 wrote:The media wants us to have a Pavlovian response where every time we see the word Russia we think of nuclear missiles headed our way from over the horizon after a big red button is pushed by a cold, ruthless, monomaniacal leader.

I'm trying to condition myself to a far more realistic reflexive response: every time I see the word Russia I imagine hearing the cha-ching of a cash register while visualizing the words Boeing, Lockheed, Raytheon passing in front of my eyes.