"Who Else Besides Trump?"

  

Sydney M. Williams

www.swtotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“Who Else Besides Trump?”

November 19, 2024

 

“Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community,

they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you.”

                                                                                               Senator Charles Schumer

                                                                                               The Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC

                                                                                               January 3, 2017

 

“Too much power has been delegated to unaccountable bureaucrats.

Undoing this is necessary to restore American greatness – but

fraught with risk. The unelected elite are powerful and fight dirty.”

                                                                                                Liz Truss

                                                                                                Prime Minister, Great Britain, 2022

                                                                                                The Wall Street Journal, November 13, 2024

 

The paradox in Senator Schumer’s statement – a statement unchallenged by Ms. Maddow – is that he admitted to (and would have agreed with) Ms. Truss’s words written five years later – that unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats exert unacceptable power over our nation’s most powerful people, let alone the rest of us. Neither he nor Ms. Maddow acknowledged the irony embedded in their exchange.  

 

……………………………………………………………….

 

As I wrote on November 6, I felt relief, not joy, with the election’s verdict. But as my wife and I spent six days driving around Pennsylvania and Virginia visiting grandchildren, I thought of the election and its consequences. And I concluded that the growing power of the state and its threat to individual freedom has become so powerful that a traditional Republican candidate might not be willing to confront such an oppressive force – that it would take an individual unafraid to incur the wrath of the administrative state. 

 

There is no question that a government that looks after 335 million people needs a professional bureaucracy. The President and the Executive Branch appoint roughly 4,000 individuals, a tiny fraction of the two million federal civilian employees. The Hatch Act, passed in 1939, prohibits partisan political activity among civilian employees in the executive branch of the Federal and District of Columbia Governments, even as it excludes those Presidential appointees whose jobs depend on Senate confirmation. Nevertheless, violations of the Hatch Act have become rampant in recent years, especially in intelligence agencies and within the Justice Department, as “lawfare” was waged against Mr. Trump and some of his backers.

 

It is, though, the natural instinct of people to defend their jobs, to expand their bureaucracies; it is how they personally advance. It is why slaying the dragon of government bureaucracies is so difficult. But unchecked government growth leads to inflation, bloat, bias, waste, and ultimately to either a government that collapses, or one that assumes dictatorial controls. That being an unpleasant prospect, some restrictions on that growth must be imposed, no matter how unpopular.

 

Is Mr. Trump the right man for the job? Obviously, the question is unanswerable. It is not that I am without concerns. Some of Mr. Trump’s nominations, especially former Florida Representative Matt Gaetz, I find troubling, as I do the possibility that he might use “recess appointments” to bring on board those who may not receive Senate confirmation. Adhering not only to the words of the Constitution, but also to its intent, is paramount to the survival of our Republic. However, when I weigh what Mr. Trump proposes versus what has happened overseas, at our border, to inflation, to crime in our cities, and to our culture, schools, and universities over the past few years, I side with those calling out, “Halt!”

 

…………………………………………………………………….

 

Mr. Trump does not satisfy the traits I seek in a friend. He is crude. His bluntness in public is rude. He is incapable of humility. He seems barren of humor, especially the ability to laugh at himself. He is not introspective, nor does he seem to have an interest in history, or even in political philosophy. I don’t understand his love affair with the three trillion-dollar cryptocurrency market, and I believe markets that size should be regulated. I wish he had nominated Nikki Haley and Mike Pompeo to be in his cabinet rather than the abrasive Matt Gaetz or the untested Pete Hegseth. But none of us get everything we wish.

 

Character is important, but that and my personal preferences are not necessarily the qualities we need in a political leader when we are drowning in debt, living with a collapsed border, and enduring an education system – the most expensive in the world – that has failed our youth, all at a time when cultural issues are more important to elements of the Democratic Party than defending the country’s citizens. The problems we face are not unique to the United States. Classical western liberalism is under threat, as western democracies seem to have forgotten that individual freedom needs defending against those who seek power, as exemplified by dictators in countries like China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea. Evil, as the Bible teaches us, is ever-present. The United States is not perfect as we all know, but its form of government, and the liberty it provides the individual, is unique in the annals of human history. It is a country that has benefitted from capitalism, that understands the critical nature of Adam Smith’s “invisible hand,” encourages entrepreneurship, a country that offers, not equality of outcomes but equal opportunities to those who have ability and aspiration. Trump is a fighter for those things he believes in, for working-class people – regardless of race, nationality, or gender – and for all those who love this country, warts and all.

 

Despite being harried by a media that hates him and hounded by political opponents who used the power of the state to try to destroy him, and opposed by bureaucrats who do whatever it takes to defend their turf, he never quits. He is tenacious. The media and his political enemies claim he wants to become a dictator, but they don’t listen to all that he says – if they understood his proposal for a Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) – they would realize he wants to limit the power of the state, to remove onerous regulations and to reduce the taxes that fund the leviathan that has become our federal government. Writing about DOGE in Saturday’s New York Sun, Newt Gingrich stated: “Unearthing what is wrong and discovering what could be right is the ultimate contribution of this project.” A smaller government, with power returned to the people, is the goal. Nevertheless, there are risks. Can Musk and Ramaswamy work their magic with DOGE, without disrupting the economy and/or financial markets?

 

Mr. Trump is not my ideal of a President, but I understand why history called him at this moment: Respect for the opinions of others, accountability and personal responsibility are traits needed but in short supply in the media and in our governing classes, as the world moves further into the 21^st Century – a world that will never be free from enemies to democracy. Will Mr. Trump be up to the task of navigating these shoals? I don’t know, but I suspect it will take someone outside the slipstream of politics as usual. We need a course-correction – a secure border, increased defense spending, mutual respect, an assurance that the concept of personal responsibility is alive and well, and accounta

"Is Wokeism Dying?"

 First, apologies for the length of this essay. Over two hundred words were cut last evening and another ten this morning. Still, it runs to just over 1,600 words, about a third longer than usual. A disciplined editor with an acute eye and sharp blade could have removed more words but, alas, that was not to be.

 

The Durham Report was released yesterday, finally. While it found no evidence to justify the FBI’s launch of a full-scale investigation into the alleged collusion between the Trump campaign in 2016 and Russia, it also brought no indictments against those who launched the investigation, which cost taxpayers millions o dollars. Perhaps that was because if indictments were brought it would condemn the entire Justice Department and the intelligence services, and the swamp in which they thrive?

 

By the way, with 81-year-old Martha Stewart on the cover of Sports Illustrated, it suggests the 80s may be the new 40s, at least for a lucky few!  

 

Sydney M. Williams

www.swtotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“Is Wokeism[1] Dying?”

May 16, 2023

 

“At its heart, wokeness is divisive, exclusionary, and hateful. It basically

gives mean people a shield to be mean and cruel, armored in false virtue.”

                                                                                                Elon Musk, Babylon Bee

          December 21, 2021 interview

 

For the last few years, the stench of wokeness has enshrouded our nation – in schools, corporations, politics, and cultural institutions. It arrived under the names “Political Correctness” and “Diversity;” as it came in on T.S. Eliot’s “little cat feet,” unobtrusively, but seductively and relentlessly, backed by the arrogance of the self-righteous. While many of its proponents want a world where racism does not exist, where sexuality is a choice, and where a sustainable climate allows mankind to flourish, the world they have created has the absurdity of Gulliver’s travels to the kingdom of Balnibarbi and the island of Laputa.

 

It is the folly of wokeness that augurs its demise: that slavery defined our nation’s founding, and that racism infects all white people, at least those who do not hew to a progressive line; that biology does not define a man and a woman, and that gender is a choice; and that unless we all give up gas stoves and drive electric vehicles the world will become uninhabitable. 

 

At the same time, we face real problems: failing public schools; a shrinking military; a permeable southern border; federal debt that, as a percent of GDP, is higher than at any point since World War II; persistent inflation; an aging population that will require more entitlement spending; a decline in global influence; a general sense of pessimism expressed in declining birth rates; and a President who, as Bruce Thornton recently wrote, “makes Chance, the Gardner look like Abraham Lincoln.” 

 

Students score poorly on international tests in math, science and reading, and they fail questions regarding history and civics. We have been divided into tribes, into oppressors and the oppressed. Those who are seen as victims (and their heirs) are condemned to victimization for all eternity. California has considered reparations to descendants of slaves, including those five to seven generations removed.  Ignored is the instinct for people to better themselves. Neglected is the Biblical admonition from Ezekiel 18:20: “The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father the guilt of the son.” 

 

While it will never totally disappear, racism has lessened over the years. In 1967, the U.S. Supreme Court held that anti-miscegenation laws were unconstitutional. Since then, interracial marriages in the United States, as a percent of all marriages, have increased from 3% to 19%. Executive order 11246, signed by Lyndon Johnson fifty-eight years ago, prohibited employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, and national origin. It was amended two years later to include women. The last half century has seen improvements in race relations and women’s rights. Since the 91^st Congress (1969-1971), the number of Blacks in Congress has steadily increased. Currently there are 60 in the House, or 13.8%, and three, or 3%, in the Senate. Parity has not been reached in the Senate, but progress is undeniable. Women make up 28% of the 118^th Congress. Eight years ago, they represented 19.4% of the 113^th Congress. Nevertheless, silliness prevails. Colleges have incorporated critical race theory into their curriculums; they have segregated dorms and graduation ceremonies. Black judges who do not adhere to progressive orthodoxy are ‘Uncle Tom’s.’ Mary Hamil Gilbert, professor of classical studies at Birmingham-Southern College, was quoted recently in The New York Times on the subject of black actress Adele James who plays the role of Cleopatra in the new Netflix docudrama, “Queen Cleopatra.” As a professional actress, it is a role she is entitled to play. Nevertheless, Ms. Gilbert felt compelled to add that, while Cleopatra was of Greek origin, she was “culturally black,” that “she was part of a culture and history that has known oppression, triumph, exploitation, and survival.” Who and what cultures do those words not describe? My lily-white ancestors came from Britain, where they had been conquered by Vikings and Normans a thousand years ago. As colonialists in North America, they were subject to “taxation without representation.” Does that make me “culturally black?” Of course not.

 

Gender dysphoria is real but not widespread. From time immemorial, it has been a condition felt by young people as they went through puberty. A Pew Research Center poll found that 3.1% of adults younger than 25 feel they are a trans man or trans woman versus just 0.5% of those between the ages of 25 to 29. There have long been exceptions: George Jorgenson traveled to Denmark, in the 1950s, to become Christine Jorgenson. In the 1970s Richard Raskind was reborn as Renée Richards, and in 2015 former Olympian Bruce Jenner became Caitlyn Jenner. However, we have reached a level when only the Babylon Bee or Alfred E, Neuman can do the subject justice: Schools, and some in the medical profession, permit surgery to transition to another sex (removal of breasts, uteruses, and penises) at great medical and psychological risk. Students are told that men can give birth and a statue of a naked, bearded man breastfeeding a baby has been placed in a public spot in Denmark. “Person” is substituted for “man” or “woman” regarding the production of sperm or eggs. Biological men are able to compete in women’s sports. And the Defense Department is more interested in pronouns than in military readiness. Interestingly, while the Woke have become more assertive in their adamancy, the same Pew Research Center study found that the number of Americans who believe gender is determined at birth has risen from 54% in 2017 to 60% in 2022. Will the Woke catch up to the people? 

 

Protecting the environment is a legitimate and welcome exercise, yet in a world of climate fanaticism, inmates now run the asylum. Historically, we were fortunate. Our democratic system of government and free-market capitalism allowed living standards to rise for all inhabitants – far beyond the expectations of our parents and grandparents. While the United States represents only 5% of the Earth’s population, we consume 30% of its energy and are responsible for 28% of carbon emissions. And yet, while we consume more energy per capita than did our forefathers, our rivers, shores, lakes, forests, and mountains are more livable than what they knew. Each year, clean energy technology improves, especially in natural gas, but that is not enough for the Woke who forget how we achieved what we did. Like Canute, who claimed to be able to stop the incoming tide, they say they can halt the warming (or the cooling) of the Earth – a planet that has been around for four and a half billion years – which has been covered with hot and humid jungles and, at a different time, with miles of ice, and where continents have shifted hundreds of miles. Yet the Woke claim that a ban on fossil fuels in the United States, which makes up less than 10% of the Earth’s land mass, will prevent seas from rising. At the margin, their efforts may have some small effect, but at what costs? Have they considered the amount of fossil fuels needed to extract cobalt and lithium (mostly sourced from China), and copper and zinc, to make batteries and solar panels? Have they considered the effect offshore wind platforms have on undersea life? Have they considered how higher energy costs will affect the poor in the U.S., and what those costs will mean to developing nations? Should not adaption to changing environmental conditions be part of their plan?

 

Christopher Rufo recently wrote in the Manhattan Institute’s “President’s Letter:” “Left-wing cultural politics is very good for affluent, single, urban professionals, the ‘avocado toast’ class, but when those people mature into the phase of buying a home and raising a family, I think they’re going to realize that those cultural politics actually work against their interests and values.” I hope he is right, and believe he is. With parents fighting back regarding schools, we have begun to see the beginnings of resistance. People are noting the difference between “equity of outcomes” and “equality of opportunity.” Trustees of pension funds in some states are awakening to the age-old maxim that returns on investment supersede political injections of ESG. Residents of high-taxed states – California, New York, Illinois, and New Jersey – are experiencing out-migration, while low taxed states like Florida, Texas, and Tennessee are experiencing in-migrations. Missing from woke ideologies have been common sense, reflection, wisdom, respect for the opinions of others, along with simple decency. 

 

On February 3 of this year, I wrote an essay with a similar theme: “Is Sanity Replacing Wokeism?” I was heartened by what I felt were signs of optimism – parents of school age children fighting back; (some) university trustees assuming responsibility, and (some) state legislators cutting taxes. Heartened by today’s increasingly comical version of Wokeism, I remain of the opinion, with the pendulum swinging back toward common sense, that Wokeism is dying.

 

In his 2021 book, Woke, Inc.: Inside Corporate America’s Social Justice Scam, Vivek Ramaswamy wrote: “’Diversity’ has become a term of art, a symbol, one so powerful that the symbol is now more important than the thing it was supposed to represent. Wokeness sacrifices true diversity, diversity of thought, so that skin-deep symbols of diversity like race and gender can thrive.” Churchill was alleged to have once said: “You can always count on the Americans to do the right thing, after they’ve tried everything else.” Wokeness has become mindlessly hubristic, which gives me hope that a more sensible world lies ahead – that the American people will do the right thing – so long as we do not self-destruct in the meantime. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                                                                

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

[1] Wokeism. noun. Usually disparaging. Promotion of liberal, progressive ideology and policy, as an expression of sensitivity to systemic injustices and prejudices.

"Self-doubt"

 What the Durham trial has exposed is not getting the press it and the people deserve. The decision by the Clinton campaign to deliberately instigate a false story of Russian collusion by Donald Trump – no matter what one thought of him – was the dirtiest trick ever played in Presidential politics. It tells us what sort of a President Mrs. Clinton would have been. Why is this not getting more coverage? Can you imagine the headlines if roles were reversed?

 

Sydney M. Williams

30mBokum Road – Apartment 314

Essex, CT 06426

www.swtotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“Self-Doubt”

May 24, 2022

 

“The greater the artist, the greater the doubt.

Perfect confidence is granted to the less talented as a consolation prize.”

                                                                                                                                Robert Hughes (1938-2012)

                                                                                                                                Art critic

                                                                                                                                Time magazine, June 10, 1996

 

Self-doubt is usually considered a negative. And when it dominates one’s activities it is. In Measure for Measure, William Shakespeare has Lucio speak to Isabella: “Our doubts are traitors, and make us lose the good we might win, by fearing to attempt.” A recent article in National Review, signed by 59 conservatives, was titled “America’s Crisis of Self-Doubt:” “Our traditional values of fair play, free speech and religious liberty are trampled by inflamed ideologies determined to impose their will by force and fear.” That is all true, but the real problem is the over-confidence of the woke who, with religious zeal, see society “as archaic, unfair, and racially biased.” As a governor of impetuous behavior, self-doubt is a positive.

 

Questioning one’s beliefs can lead to changing one’s opinions, or to strengthening one’s resolve. Self-doubt is akin to skepticism; the former is the questioning – not the dismissal – of one’s abilities, while the latter seeks proof of an allegation. Recall the story of Jesus and the Apostle Thomas, known as “Doubting Thomas.” He refused to believe in the resurrected Jesus until he could see and feel Jesus’ crucifixion wounds. As a skeptic, he wanted evidence to justify his belief. Abraham Lincoln was plagued with self-doubt regarding his ability to manage the Civil War, yet doubt caused him to work harder and to achieve a better understanding. John F. Kennedy had self-doubt as to whether he could live up to the expectations of his father and the memory of his dead brother. But he gathered inner strength, as doubts faded and confidence was restored. More recently, Elon Musk’s evolvement from a “moderate Democrat” to a “moderate Republican” was a consequence of doubting his loyalties to a party that hewed too far to the left.

 

Self-doubt, when one is weighing competing political policy options, is healthy, as it allows one to use logic, reason and common sense to overcome skepticism before reaching a conclusion. Extremists, who see no need for self-doubt, have taken over our politics, especially on the left. In an interview with the Claremont Review of Books, Norman Podhoretz was quoted regarding the struggle within our country’s culture: “One side…believes that America is a force for good in itself,” while the other side claims, “America is evil in itself…” As neither party tries to understand the other, compromise is impossible. Quoting Daniel Bell, Barton Swaim wrote recently in The Wall Street Journal: “The tendency to convert concrete issues into ideological problems, to invest them with moral color and emotional charge is to invite conflicts which can only damage a society.” A plethora of moral certitude and a lack of self-doubt is common among those on the left dubbed “virtucrats” by Joseph Epstein – a term he defined in his 2002 book Snobbery: The American Version as “any man or woman who is certain that his or her political views are not merely correct but deeply, morally righteous in the bargain.” – “Often wrong, but never in doubt,” defines the path they follow.

 

Self-doubt would have questioned the claim that on-line radicalization and racism were the sole motivations behind Payton Gendron’s decision to kill ten black people in Buffalo last week. Self-doubt would have asked: Did not mental illness also play a role? Why have politicians left the mentally ill to live on streets in cities like San Francisco, Lon Angeles, New York, St. Louis and Austin? Self-doubt would have been a good thing for members of the media who accepted without question the now debunked Trump Russian collusion story, a story created by the Clinton campaign in 2016. Self-doubt may have prevented the Biden Administration’s embarrassing creation of the Orwellian-named Disinformation Governance Board, which has now, thank God, been abandoned. Media and political leaders could learn from William Butler Yeats’ poem, “The Second Coming:” “The best lack all conviction, while the worst/Are full of passionate intensity.”

 

When I was in high school, members of the debate team were assigned which side of the resolution to argue. If assigned the affirmative, the next week we might have to argue the negative. While the purpose was to hone one’s debating skills, these guidelines served to remind us that there are two sides to issues. Being able to see two sides – a trait abetted by self-doubt – plays a vital role in composing intelligent and defensible opinions and may change or reinforce one’s beliefs.

 

My purpose, in this essay, is not to suggest that fervency in one’s beliefs is wrong, but that opinions should be based on empiricism, logic and common sense. Self-doubt plays a role in better understanding the issues we face, and it is always most wanted where it is least exercised. It is the antithesis of self-doubt, the religious-like zealotry of extremists, that is the most dangerous. Mainstream media does a good job of calling out the far-right, but they ignore the self-anointed far-left who see themselves as the rightful determiners as to what to read, speak and believe. That is where danger lurks.

"Hypocrisy on the Left"

  

Sydney M. Williams

swtotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“Hypocrisy of the Left”

May 3, 2022

 

“Hypocrites are those who apply to others the

standards that they refuse to accept for themselves.”

                                                                                             Noam Chomsky (1928-)

                                                                                             Media Control: The Spectacular Achievements of Propaganda, 1991

 

“The best defense is a good offense,” is an adage that has been used by many, from George Washington to Mao Zedong. It has been adopted by the Democrat Party. Elon Musk’s bid for Twitter has Democrats atwitter. Columnist Leonard Pitt wrote that the purchase “will turn one of the world’s leading social-media platforms into an even greater transmitter of disinformation and hate…” Keep in mind, Mr. Pitt’s definition of disinformation includes only that uttered by conservatives.

 

Barack Obama, speaking at a conference organized by The Atlantic called “Disinformation and the Erosion of Democracy,” opined: “It’s very difficult to get out of the reality that is constructed for us.” Constructed by whom, one might ask? As the New York Sun editorialized, Obama’s words were an “apt description of what Mr. Obama and the Democrat Press have built. Forget the metaverse. This is an alternative reality.” Speaking at Stanford University, a few days later Mr. Obama added that social media censors don’t go far enough, suggesting the government must step in. Six days later, the Biden Administration announced the establishment of a Disinformation Governance Board (DGB), an Orwellian-like “Ministry of Truth.” Coincidence? The DGB’s mission is to separate fact from fiction for the American people. Its real purpose, I feel certain, is to censor information that does not accord with the Administration’s narrative. The Board will be chaired by Nina Jankowicz who will report to Alejandro Mayorkas, U.S. Secretary for Homeland Security. Ms. Jankowicz seems an odd choice, as she disbelieved the truth of Hunter Biden’s laptop, claiming it was Trump “disinformation.” On the other hand, she did believe Christopher Steele, the discredited purveyor of disinformation about the fake Russian collusion story.

 

Examples of the Left going on the offense abound. The Washington Post claimed that Ketanji Brown Jackson was treated worse in her hearings than was Brett Kavanaugh four years earlier. Really? Was Ms. Jackson queried on her behavior as an 18-year-old? As National Review commented: “This is pure revisionism.” `The information on Hunter Biden’s laptop (the “laptop from hell,” as Nina Jankowicz described it) was reported by the New York Post in October 2020 but was disallowed on Twitter and dismissed as Russian disinformation by mainstream and social media. Following the election, the laptop and its contents were confirmed as legitimate by The New York Times and the Washington Post. No longer able to dismiss its existence, progressives now consider Hunter’s laptop as an “irrelevant distraction.”

 

For years, progressives have indoctrinated public school grade students in critical race theory, gender dysphoria and victimization. They have censured conservative speech on college campuses and banned books in schools that are “hateful,” in their depictions and descriptions of race, gender and sexual orientation, including such classics as Huckleberry Finn and To Kill a Mockingbird. These actions are justified as being in the interest of “the common good.” However, when Florida’s governor Ron DeSantis took steps to ban math textbooks that include references to critical race theory or “social emotional learning,” President Biden, indignantly (and disingenuously), said that Governor DeSantis was banning math textbooks in a bid to keep students ignorant.

 

“Do as I say, not as I do” is a proverb whose roots trace to our Puritan forefathers. It has become an admonitory order from the hypocritical Democrat Party. It was the message of Al Gore and John Kerry uttered regarding anthropomorphic-caused climate change, as they scooted about the world in their private planes. It was the mandates of blue-state governors during the COVID pandemic, as they ignored their own rules. It is what wealthy, white suburbanites do when they call to defund the police, while they hire extra security for their gated communities, and what the same people do when they demand open borders but remain isolated from any infusion of unvaccinated illegal immigrants. 

 

As a conservative, I believe in our natural rights, the freedom to speak and pray; I believe in the governing principles of property rights, rule of law and limited government, I believe in “we the people,” and I believe in personal responsibility, civility, mutual respect, tolerance and honor – that success is predicated on aspiration, merit and hard work. These, along with free-market capitalism, represent the foundation on which our nation was built, and which has allowed it to thrive. 

 

Today, that foundation is showing cracks. An ever-expanding central government – cheered on by their lackeys in media, universities, schools, the entertainment world and social media – has tentacles that reach deep into our personal lives, diminishing our role as individuals. It is those who issue mandates and who empower bureaucracies who claim the threat to democracy stems from those who wish to diminish government’s influence. As a conservative, I am alarmed at attempts to remove us and our ideas from the public square. 

 

As Florida Governor Ron DeSantis rises in the polls, an NBC opinion column by Dennis Aftergut argues that the governor is a “clearer danger than Trump,” and, seemingly unaware of the hypocrisy of his words, he writes, with the sanctimonious arrogance peculiar to the Left, that his (DeSantis’) decision to protect young children from being taught about gender and sexuality represents “Nazi-like thought control.” Republican campaign messaging is labeled “disinformation” and filled with “false narratives,” all of which justifies the decision to create the DGB, a “department of propaganda,” as former Democrat Representative Tulsi Gabbard described it. It is a bureaucracy that should frighten all freedom loving people. Do the initials remind you of something?

 

In terms of political ideologies, most people cluster toward the center; yet extremism persists, and progressives, with their media allies, have a big bullhorn. The fear is that extremists’ numbers and influence are growing, especially among establishment elitists on the left. The fact that Democrats have created this new Orwellian-like department and have accused Republicans of behavior that they themselves have committed is a manifestation of their hypocrisy. It should be a wake-up call. Our democracy depends on it.