I Was A Never Trumper Until Democrats Went Gonzo On Kavanaugh | The Federalist

Image result for trump rally

As a voter who recognizes the unfortunate realities of our politics, I believe supporting Trump has become the responsible choice.

Source: I Was A Never Trumper Until Democrats Went Gonzo On Kavanaugh

“Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!”

For decades, now, the Democratic Party has been moving further and further to the Left, embracing more and more draconian and authoritarian approaches to political correctness, subverting the Constitution to serve its ideological agenda (not that it has a monopoly on that), and branding anyone and everyone who questions it as racist, sexist, xenophobic, homophobic, and downright deplorable… even while proclaiming loudly how tolerant, liberal, compassionate, and committed to diversity and multiculturalism they (the Democrats) are.

Maybe so, as long as that diversity and multiculturalism was sexual and racial. But if it was intellectual or philosophical – particularly if, quelle horreur, it included conservative or traditional views on politics, society, philosophy, morality, or religion – the story was quite different. Still, until recently, they were fairly adept at concealing most of this behind a brocade curtain of liberalism and “love trumps hate.”

[The kind of “love” that hounds opponents and their families out of restaurants, screams profanities, vandalizes buildings and cars, and hits people with everything from eggs to bicycle locks, as it turns out, but I digress…]

That brocade curtain sagged and gapped a bit during the 2016 election, when Hillary Clinton depicted her opponents as a “basket of deplorables” (it had begun to flap open a little in 2008, when Barack Obama described his as “clinging bitterly” to God and guns). But it was ripped open and the ugly and dangerous machinery behind it exposed for all with the eyes to see during the Kavanaugh hearings.

The author of this excellent piece, , is far from alone when he writes,

“I have been radicalized. The enormity of the efforts by the Democrats and their media allies to destroy Brett Kavanaugh forced me to reconsider my views. The concerns I have about Trump’s character, temperament, and propensity to damage America’s cultural and political institutions are still there, but I am supporting him anyway.”

Now, I was never a “never Trumper.” I rarely if ever say “never,” because, to quote one of my late beloved mother’s aphorisms, “circumstances alter cases.” But neither did I climb aboard the “Trump Train” until after Hillary came out with her “deplorables” comment. That was the last straw for me, and I voted for Trump, although I had to take a deep breath before I did. Since then, however, he’s grown on me.

He tweets too much, and sometimes irresponsibly. He is sometimes guilty of failing to check his facts before making pronouncements. He could often choose his words with more care; he is brash, sometimes boorish, and often lacking in tact. And I do not always agree with his policy emphases. But against that:

He has kept most of his promises (still waiting on the “Wall”…). The economy has improved under his administration, probably due to greater confidence on the part of business and industry, although I personally am still seriously underemployed. Illegal immigration appears to be down, even without the wall, and “internal” deportations (that is to say, deportation of persons already here illegally) are up.

He has donated his entire Presidential salary to various agencies within the Federal government, including the National Park Service – despite the fact that NPS personnel were among the early leaders of the so-called “Resistance” – the Department of Education, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Transportation, and the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Overall he has made it clear that he does, in fact, put America first, something which many (myself included) would argue could not be said about his predecessor. And to be honest, his very brashness is in some ways refreshing, compared to previous holders of the Oval Office who were polished speakers but talked out of both sides of their mouths. President Trump, as near as I have been able to ascertain, says what he means, and means what he says. I admire than in a person, and I admire that in a President.

And, then we have the Democrats. To quote Blake again,

“It is not just that the Democrats have vitiated any claim to possess superior character or temperament (though they have), or that Trump’s policies have been better than I expected. I now support Trump because the Democratic Party and its media allies are controlled by people who view conservatives not as political opponents to be voted down, but as enemies to be personally destroyed…

“Trump will say anything, but Democrats will do anything. They and their media allies smeared a universally respected judge with an impeccable record as a serial sexual predator on evidence that would not have justified an indictment. They repeatedly lied and hid evidence in order to create delay (e.g., Christine Blasey Ford’s supposed fear of flying)… They did not want a serious, confidential investigation; they wanted to publicly grind him into the dirt while the mob howled for his head.

“With rare exceptions, the national media repeated every smear and Democratic talking point. They spent weeks trying to destroy Kavanaugh’s life and reputation with lies, then had the effrontery to sneer at his anger when he took umbrage at being labeled a gang-rape mastermind… They earned every bit of Trump’s “enemy of the people” and “fake news” epithets.

“Kavanaugh was a normal establishment Republican pick. Destroying him had nothing to do with opposing Trump’s particular flaws. This was about annihilating anyone who gets in the Democrats’ way, especially anyone who threatens their illegitimate Supreme Court policy wins. It was a declaration of war on every conservative, no matter how respected, reasonable, and mainstream.

“There is no refuge from this sort of totalizing, destructive politics. The Republican rejection of Merrick Garland was political hardball; the sliming of Kavanaugh was categorically different and much worse. The Democrats crossed the line from policy disagreement to personal destruction, and in doing so they nuked any middle ground between themselves and conservative Trump skeptics. And they put every conservative on notice: You could be next.” [emphasis added]

I am reminded of Rod Deher’s comment on the subject, which I posted in an earlier entry:

“I look at him, and what’s being done to him, and see my sons, and even my daughter. If they were nominated for a position like Kavanaugh’s, I would want them to have a fair hearing. I don’t think that’s possible any more in America, not for the kind of people identified by the cultural Left as the Enemy. And make no mistake, if my daughter grows up to be a believing Christian and a social conservative, she will be the Enemy, as sure as my sons will be. These cultural elites would eagerly destroy the character of my children, as well as myself and most of my friends, to pursue their political goals.”

This is what the supposedly “liberal,” “tolerant,” “progressive” Left has wrought. Is this the kind of America we want to live in? It certainly isn’t, for me! And I am clearly not alone. If there is not a “red wave” backlash in November, I will be disappointed, but I will also be very surprised. Here is Blake again:

“I wish this was not so. I would rather be arguing about the Enlightenment than jumping on the Trump train. As a writer and scholar I want to persuade, not to destroy. I do not want American politics to be like this.

“But as a voter who recognizes the unfortunate realities of our politics, I believe supporting Trump has become the responsible choice. Things may change, but right now Trump’s policies are better than I expected, he is not the authoritarian some feared, and he does not want to destroy me and mine. It isn’t much, but since Trump stands between me and those who would ruin me, he will have to do.

“This is about self-defense.”

MAGA HatI have never been a party-line voter, but I am this year. If you aren’t a hard-Left ideologue, if you care about your future and our country’s future, put on your MAGA hat and vote this November, and vote Republican, across the board. It’s a matter of self-defense, and the defense of our nation, culture, and way of life.


Percy Dearmer on the Prayer Book system

Percy (Percival) Dearmer (1867-1936) was an English priest and liturgist who was and is best known as the author of The Parson’s Handbook, a liturgical manual for clergy of the Church of England. His appointments included:

• Vicar of St. Mary the Virgin, Primrose Hill, 1901-1915
• Professor of Ecclesiastical Art, King’s College, London, 1919-1936
• Canon of Westminster Abbey, 1931-1936

Although on the Anglo-Catholic side of the Anglican liturgical spectrum, he was decidedly not an ultramontanist (Romanist), favoring, rather, ritual forms drawn from the pre-Reformation “English Use.” Wikipedia notes that he also had a strong influence on the music of the church and, with Ralph Vaughan Williams and Martin Shaw, is credited with the revival and spread of traditional and medieval English musical forms.

As the title of “The Parson’s Handbook” indicates, he had a strong concern for the parochial; that is, the ordinary, day-to-day spiritual and religious life of ordinary Christians, and found (as many have, both before and after him) the classical Prayer Book pattern – the core of Anglican tradition – to be an excellent model and aid for growth in holiness.

He was also a prolific writer. The following excerpt is from one of his tracts, entitled “A Christian’s Life According to the Prayer Book,” and is rather shamelessly cribbed from the blog of St. Bede’s Productions, which notes that the whole tract is available on Project Canterbury, but this is the heart of it.”

[As I prepare to post this, it occurs to me that I may have posted it, or parts of it, earlier; but if so, no matter! If I have, it’s been a while, and this is the sort of thing that one needs to revisit from time to time, if one is even the least bit serious about what Martin Thornton called “Christian Proficiency.” I hope some may find it helpful!]


Let us see, then, what the Prayer Book system will be when we have come back into the habit of carrying it out.

The Churchman is helped by the grace of God all through his life, from the cradle to the grave. He is baptized as a little child, and thus brought into the Holy Catholic Church and made a member of Christ. As soon as he is old enough to understand, he is taught the Catechism diligently, thoroughly, regularly, from week to week, while his elders sit by and listen—for they are expected to be present.

When he has come to years of discretion, and is no longer a little child, he is brought to the Bishop to be fortified by Confirmation. After Confirmation he becomes a regular communicant, going to the Lord’s Service every Lord’s Day, indeed on Holy-days as well as Sundays. [*The Prayer Book provides Collects, Epistles, and Gospels for the red-letter Saints’ Days just the same as for Sundays.]

Thus at Baptism he begins his spiritual life, just as he begins his natural life at birth. [*See the 3rd chapter of S. John’s Gospel, where our Lord explains this as being “born again.”]

At Catechizing he learns about his spiritual life.

At Confirmation he is strengthened in his spiritual life.

At Communion he is given spiritual food to support his spiritual life, just as at ordinary meals he is given common food to support his natural life. [*See the 6th chapter of S. John’s Gospel, where our Lord says that except we are fed with the Body of Christ we have “no life,” that is no spiritual life, in us.]

If he is married, he comes for the blessing of the Church; and at the end of the Marriage Service a rubric tells the newly-married pair that they ought then, or as soon after as possible, to make their Communion. If there are any children, the mother comes to be Churched; and then the little one is brought to Baptism, and the “Occasional Services” are begun over again for another little Christian.

Lastly, when illness comes, the Church is there with her blessing once more for his Visitation, Absolution, and Communion; and at the end of all she receives his body for the last time within her walls, and commends his soul to God in the Burial of the Dead.

Thus the events in a Christian’s life have taken us through a considerable part of the Prayer Book—the part that lies between the Thanksgivings and the Psalter.


Now let us look at the rest of the Prayer Book—the parts that concern the everyday life of the Christian, viz.:—

(1) The Kalendar (including the Lectionary).
(2) The large section from Mattins to the end of the Prayers and Thanksgivings.
(3) The Psalter.

How does the Church of England expect you and me to worship God from day to day? More than we most of us do. The bad habits of many generations have left us far behind this Christian ideal, and often we cannot live up to it if we would. Holy-days, for instance, used to be real holidays, when all the people had a rest; and then it was easier to come to church. But Oliver Cromwell made people work on these days, and took away the people’s holidays; and so it has been more difficult to go to church ever since.

Still, most of us could worship God more than we do. We might come to church before work begins, for instance, on Holy-days, and many can often come on ordinary week-days also.

Here, at any rate, is what the Prayer Book expects of us:—

1. Every day of the week. Morning Prayer in the morning and Evening Prayer in the evening, “that the people (by daily hearing of holy Scripture read in the church) might continually profit more and more in the knowledge of God.” [*The Preface “Concerning the Service of the Church.” See also the Order at the end of this Preface; and notice how often the word “daily” comes in the Prayer Book.]

2. Wednesdays and Fridays. The Litany in addition to Mattins and Evensong.

3. Holy-days, i.e., the Saints’ Days, etc., “to be observed.” The Holy Communion (see the Collects, Epistles, and Gospels provided for these days), and Catechizing, in addition to Mattins and Evensong.

4. Sundays. In addition to the above (Mattins, Litany, Holy Communion—with the special Collect, Epistle and Gospel of the Sunday—Evensong, Catechizing) a Sermon is ordered to be preached on Sunday during the Communion Service by Canon 45.

Some special days are further marked out. The Great Festivals (Christmas, Easter, Ascension, Whitsunday, Trinity Sunday) have Proper Prefaces at Holy Communion. Ash Wednesday has an extra service of penance called the Commination. Four times a year there are three Ember Days, which have special Collects, so that people may pray for those who are to be ordained on the following Sunday. Other “Prayers and Thanksgivings” are provided for special occasions, notably the beautiful Prayer for All Conditions for use on the mornings when there is no Litany, and the Prayer for Parliament for use during the Session; and furthermore, the Athanasian Creed is set down on certain Festivals.

Add to these the Forms of Prayer to be read daily at sea, which come after the Psalter, and the Ordinal (i.e., the Services for the Ordination of Deacons and Priests, and for the Consecration of Bishops), and we have completed our survey of the Prayer Book.


Is it not a great ideal of Christian life and worship? Shall we not all be better and stronger men when we take better advantage of our opportunities? Will not the Church of England be indeed a great and noble Church when all who belong to her are regular communicants, when the parish church of every place is thronged with devout worshippers day after day, and when the children of England are all thoroughly taught the splendid Doctrine and Duties of the Catechism?

It is a sad and humiliating thought that, while a few centuries ago all Englishmen belonged to the fellowship of the one Church, and all partook of the life of our Lord in the Sacrament of His Body and Blood, now England is full of petty divisions and miserable quarrelling, while the masses of the people are not even communicants. They belong to the Church, but they do not understand her, and so they are not faithful to her, and have little real love for Christ in their hearts. We have, therefore, enormous arrears to make up. We must pray more, worship more, teach others more, and thus lead the way, by our own loyalty, to a great revival of Christianity in our land.

Shall we not succeed? Through the neglect of past years the Church has become like a missionary in a strange land. But as we love God more and love our neighbour more, and in this spirit of love and devotion carry out the half-forgotten rules of the Prayer Book, we shall lead the people back from their Babylon, and build again the walls of Jerusalem.


Defy Mob Justice by Celebrating the Life of Robert E. Lee | Crisis Magazine

The acting assumption seems to be that if only we can erase any memory of the Confederacy and slavery, racism will finally be a thing of the past… [However,] it’s worth pointing out that before we tear men apart, or tear down their statues, we are duty bound to know the facts of the case, no matter our personal feelings toward, or disagreements with, the male in question.

Source: Defy Mob Justice by Celebrating the Life of Robert E. Lee – Crisis Magazine

Today marks the anniversary of the passing of General Robert E. Lee – “Marse Robert” (“Master Robert”), to his devoted men – in 1870, just over five years after he had reluctantly surrendered the Army of Northern Virginia to Union Gen. Ulysses S. Grant at Appomattox Courthouse, in the realization that he had done all he could do, and prolonging the conflict any further would simply result in still more senseless death and destruction.

Although he was the greatest of many great Southern generals (and indeed, among the greatest military leaders of any land and of any time), he had never been a secessionist, and only reluctantly resigned his commission in the United States Army when it became clear that he would have to choose between what he – along with many, both North and South – saw as a voluntary Union of sovereign States, and his beloved home state of Virginia, “the Old Dominion”: it would not be possible to remain loyal to both.

He also was personally opposed to slavery, holding it to be a “great moral and political evil,” but believed that its abolition should be gradual and equitable to all parties concerned – rather than the sudden, violent, and disorganized way in which it actually occurred, which has contributed to both resentment, and many practical problems, ever since. In this, I think he was rather prescient.

At any rate, as the linked post notes,

“This man, known primarily for his dignity, his dedication, and most of all his outstanding leadership and military prowess certainly merits honor. He should be remembered with respect by history, with prayer on the day of his death, as well as being commemorated with statues. Toppling statues of Lee will not remove the shame of slavery from American history. Rather, refusing to recognize nobility among enemies—even historical ones—demonstrates symptoms of a culture purposefully ignorant of history, as well as one unable to dialogue when in disagreement…

“Immediately following the Civil War, though animosity between North and South had hardly died, Lee held the respect of the entire nation. Crocker states, “Soon after the war’s end, he was increasingly regarded not merely as a military genius but as someone to be venerated by the South and by the North, to be venerated, indeed, throughout the Western world as a great man.” His reputation as a world-class tactician, peerless leader, and humble gentleman extends beyond the bounds of this country, and beyond the limits of his own time…

“Therefore, even those who deeply disagree with General Lee ought to stand up for him now, remember him prayerfully on the anniversary of his death, and honor his memory. Rewriting history doesn’t change history or remove its errors, it merely eliminates its lessons along with examples of greatness and nobility. Likewise, failure to recognize nobility and give honor when due gives rise to the very hatred from which racism springs: the inability to recognize goodness in those who are different from oneself—whether that be in appearance, ideas, or nationality. Such an inability has its source in a refusal to dialogue in the pursuit of truth.”

An excellent article – the excerpts quoted above are but snippets. The whole thing is worth a read! And General Lee is worth remembering with respect, indeed (I believe) with reverence. He was a great General, but more than that, he was a great Christian gentleman. In the words of President (and former 5-star General and Supreme Commander, Allied Expeditionary Forces Europe, in World War Two) Dwight David Eisenhower, when asked why he kept a portrait of General Lee in the Oval Office,

“General Robert E. Lee was, in my estimation, one of the supremely gifted men produced by our Nation. He believed unswervingly in the Constitutional validity of his cause which until 1865 was still an arguable question in America; he was a poised and inspiring leader, true to the high trust reposed in him by millions of his fellow citizens; he was thoughtful yet demanding of his officers and men, forbearing with captured enemies but ingenious, unrelenting and personally courageous in battle, and never disheartened by a reverse or obstacle. Through all his many trials, he remained selfless almost to a fault and unfailing in his faith in God. Taken altogether, he was noble as a leader and as a man, and unsullied as I read the pages of our history. 

“From deep conviction, I simply say this: a nation of men of Lee’s calibre would be unconquerable in spirit and soul. Indeed, to the degree that present-day American youth will strive to emulate his rare qualities, including his devotion to this land as revealed in his painstaking efforts to help heal the Nation’s wounds once the bitter struggle was over, we, in our own time of danger in a divided world, will be strengthened and our love of freedom sustained.”

Needless to say, I agree with all of the above. General Lee is one of my heroes, and one of my earliest role models. May God bless the memory of “Marse Robert”!

No automatic alt text available.

Surgeon: More Trans People Requesting Sex Change Reversals (But No One’s Talking About It) | Intellectual Takeout

Surgeon: More People Requesting Sex Change Reversals (But No One's Talking About It)

The “world-leading genital reconstructive surgeon” is getting more and more requests to reverse sex change procedures.

Source: Surgeon: More Trans People Requesting Sex Change Reversals (But No One’s Talking About It) | Intellectual Takeout

So, any normal (!) person who reads the above headline and caption would logically conclude precisely what the author of this article, Michael Liccione, PhD, suggests:

“I have a theory. When trans people change their minds and want to detransition, that isn’t because they think they have ceased to be members of the sex they had transitioned to, and now believe they have returned to being members of the sex they had transitioned from.

“Rather, they have come to believe that they always have been members of their ‘natal sex,’ but came to mistakenly believe otherwise. In other words, they have come to believe they were suffering from ‘gender dysphoria,’ regret what they did in response to that disorder, and now want to return to a state as close to normalcy as they can achieve.”

This is probably not, to most of us, particularly radical or shocking (except for the sadness that such individuals actually underwent sex-change operations in the first place): most of us realize that most people, at some point or other (often in their preteen or teen years, but sometimes later), find themselves wondering what it would be like to be the opposite sex; and some even feel frustrations of various types at being the sex they actually are, physiologically and genetically.

For most, this never goes beyond fleeting thoughts. Gender dysphoria, of course, is when people take this questioning beyond occasional musings, and become obsessed with the idea; and transgender is when they act on that obsession, in ways ranging from cross-dressing, to hormone shots, to actual “transitioning” (sex-change) surgery.

But what if, sometime after the initial transition, you realize that you were wrong – that switching one’s outward appearance (and to some degree, functioning) did not solve one’s issues… or even, now, feels “wrong”? Again, for many of us, that would not be a surprising development: you are what you are, physiologically and genetically, and only very rarely (something like one-half of one percent of the population) is that gender-ambiguous.

But for those who are ideologically (socially, politically, and emotionally) committed to the idea of transgenderism, the idea that one could be wrong about something like that, and want to transition back – to “restore default settings,” in computer lingo – is a hugely threatening concept:

“That is deeply troubling to transgender ideologists. It suggests that, in at least some cases, gender dysphoria consists not in being a member of one sex ‘trapped in the body’ of the opposite sex, but rather consists in the belief that one is a member of one sex trapped in the body of the other sex.

“To legitimize detransitioning, for the reasons given by detransitioners, would thus be to allow evidence that gender dysphoria could be what most people used to think it is [e.g., a psycho-emotional disorder, that can be treated with appropriate therapy]. That could undermine the entire basis of the transgender movement… which, of course, cannot be allowed to happen.”

Personally, I am of the opinion that reality is what it is; that nature is nature; that God doesn’t make “mistakes,” and that the whole concept of “transgenderism” is one of those odd anomalies – a type of mass hysteria, like the medieval flagellants, or the witch hunts of the 15th-17th centuries, or the “Satanic Panic” of the 1980s – that happen from time to time in society.

I actually think that this view – understanding and addressing gender dysphoria as a treatable condition – is more compassionate to those who are suffering from it, as well as fairer to the very small minority who actually are born intersexed, than what I continue to think of as the hardcore LARP-ing of the transgender movement. Enabling someone’s disorder is not, ultimately, helpful to them. But of course the ideologues, whose identity and claims to credibility are wrapped up with this “movement,” are not likely to agree.

That is unfortunate, because clearly people are condemning themselves to unnecessary, inappropriate, and eventually unwanted surgeries to make themselves something they are not. And this gender confusion is also linked – whether its proponents want to admit it or not – with the normalization of sexual deviancy and degeneration which is part of the overall Leftist / cultural Marxist assault on Western culture and civilization (and which is another, and even more sinister, form of mass hysteria, in my view).

But like the rise of national populism, the outbreak of traditionalism in many younger Millennials and members of Generation “Z,” and even the increase in religious traditionalism among many Millennials and other young people, I wonder if the uptick in the number of “trans” people seeking to “detransition” might be a sign that the worm is beginning to turn, that the pendulum is starting to swing back from some of the absurdities of the era which began in the later 1960s, and has continued until today.

One can, at least, hope!

US admits lowest number of refugees in more than 40 years – CNNPolitics

The United States admitted 22,491 refugees in the last fiscal year – one of the lowest amounts on record.

Source: US admits lowest number of refugees in more than 40 years – CNNPolitics

“The United States admitted 22,491 refugees in the last fiscal year – one of the lowest amounts on record.

“The admissions count for the 2018 fiscal year, which ended on September 30, was less than half the number of refugees admitted in FY 2017 (53,716) and about one-quarter of the number of people admitted in FY 2016 (84,994). According to State Department records going back to 1975, the only year that the US admitted fewer refugees was 1977.

“A State Department spokesperson said the reduced number of admissions ‘was consistent with operational capacity to implement new screening and vetting procedures following Executive Order 13780, Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States.'”


Let me be clear: we have a moral responsibility to assist those who are genuine refugees – albeit, with the goal of helping them to return to their countries of origin, if or when circumstances allow.

We also have a moral responsibility to distinguish between authentic refugees and those claiming “refugee” status as cover for their real intention, be that criminal or terrorist activity, or with the hope of becoming economic migrants.

In the case of the latter, we have a social (and arguably moral) responsibility to our own citizens, and to the nation as a whole, to ensure that only those who have a reasonable expectation of making a positive contribution to our nation’s economic and social well-being are allowed in: and coming in, or attempting to come in, under false pretenses is a pretty good example of a disqualifying factor.

Notwithstanding the signs carried by the people pictured above, the sentiments expressed are, at least, debatable; a nation with no borders – or porous borders – is not a nation at all. Good to see us finally standing up for our own sovereignty, once again!

President Donald Trump’s winning streak | CNNPolitics

Kansas Trump rally: Live stream of Trump's Make America ...

Donald Trump may never have a better day as President. Only a re-election party on the night of November 3, 2020, could possibly offer the same vindication as the 36 hours in which two foundational strands of his political career are combining in a sudden burst of history.

Source: President Donald Trump’s winning streak – CNNPolitics

In which even CNN – despite their predictable carping – is forced to admit that “Trump is building a substantial presidency that in many ways looks like a historic pivot point, despite its extremely controversial nature,” and further conceding that

“It will be up to voters in November and in 2020 to decide which of the two interpretations of Trump’s presidency – an era of conservative achievement or a disastrous national distraction – becomes dominant.

“But it already seems that Trump’s grand design will be difficult for a future President to quickly reverse.

“Less than two weeks ago, foreign diplomats at the United Nations laughed at Trump when he boasted about the historic sweep of his presidency – and there was no doubt that he was, as usual, exaggerating.

“But it’s also no longer possible to credibly argue – despite the distracting blizzard of controversy, busted decorum and staff chaos constantly lashing Washington – that there is not something significant taking place that is changing the political and economic character of the nation itself.”


Image result for trump train

I was a latecomer to the “Trump Train,” not climbing aboard until Hillary let loose with her “Deplorables” comment. But I’m happily onboard, now, and looking around for a shovel to help pour on the coal…

(Yeah, I know this picture depicts a diesel. Work with me, here… lol!)

Brett Kavanaugh sworn in as Supreme Court justice, cementing conservative control

Chief Justice John Roberts, right, administers the Constitutional Oath to Judge Brett Kavanaugh in the Supreme Court Building.
Chief Justice John Roberts, right, administers the Constitutional Oath to Judge Brett Kavanaugh in the Supreme Court Building. AP | https://nypost.com/2018/10/06/brett-kavanaugh-sworn-in-as-supreme-court-justice/

Brett Kavanaugh was sworn in as a Supreme Court justice in a private ceremony Saturday just hours after the Senate voted (50-48) to confirm him.

Source: Brett Kavanaugh sworn in: Senate votes to send him to Supreme Court

We have a new Justice on the Supreme Court! After a grueling and viciously partisan nomination battle, Judge Brett Kavanaugh has been sworn in as the newest Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States: the only court mandated in the Constitution (which provided for others to be created by Congress). On this day, Saturday, October 6, 2018,

“Brett Kavanaugh was sworn in as the 114th Supreme Court justice in a private ceremony Saturday just hours after the Senate voted to confirm him, solidifying conservative control of the highest court in the land for years to come and ending a bitter battle over his nomination.”

As an opinion piece by Scott Jennings in USA Today added,

“The confirmation delivered a major win to President Donald Trump, who defended his embattled nominee when sexual assault accusations were leveled against him. Kavanaugh has denied the accusations.

“Kavanaugh’s confirmation was not just a chance for Republicans to shift the court to the right for what could be decades. It was also a test of how public officials responded to the raw emotions unleashed by the #MeToo movement amid accusations from Christine Blasey Ford that Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her when they were teens. He said the incident never happened.  

“That controversy will likely be scrutinized even further with the Nov. 6 midterm elections a month away, giving Democrats have a chance to take control of one or more chambers of Congress.”

Needless to say, this will provide considerable motivation for the Democratic base to get out to the polls for the 2018 midterm elections, just a month away on November 6th – but the conduct of Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee and elsewhere in Congress, as well as their supporters on the streets, will also galvanize the conservative base. It will be interesting, to say the least, to see how this plays out in November!

The New York Post adds,

“Brett Kavanaugh was sworn in as 114th Supreme Court justice Saturday, hours after the Senate voted 50-48 to confirm him. The quick swearing-in enables Kavanaugh to begin work immediately in advance of arguments at the court Tuesday.

“The court says Kavanaugh took the oath required by the Constitution and another for judges that is part of federal law in the same room where the justices meet for their private conferences. The 53-year-old justice’s wife, children and parents were in attendance.

“Chief Justice John Roberts administered the constitutional oath and retired Justice Anthony Kennedy administered the judicial one. Kavanaugh is replacing Kennedy on the bench and once served as his law clerk.”

I, personally, am convinced that – despite determined and actually despicable attempts by Democrats (who are becoming increasingly indistinguishable from the hard Left) to derail the nomination – the system worked as it should and the decision reached (albeit by a very small margin) in the Senate was the correct one.

Is now-Justice Kavanaugh perfect? Of course not! No human is. But was there any legitimate, verifiable reason to preclude him from being appointed to the Supreme Court? No, there was not.

Again, despite Leftist arguments to the contrary, it is not being an apologist for sexual misconduct to insist that allegations of such conduct against an individual be substantiated, and that did not occur; furthermore, the very FBI investigation that the Democrats insisted on cleared Justice Kavanaugh of any misdoing (it also appears to have turned up evidence that the assault on then-Judge Kavanaugh was even more concerted and organized than originally thought).

And was Judge Kavanaugh qualified for the appointment? Eminently. The Democratic attempts to smear him and delay any appointments to the Supreme Court until after the elections (which they think and hope will gain them control of at least one House of Congress – as I say, we shall see about that!) were more than just wrong-headed; they were vile. And as for Christine Blasey Ford, her memories were disjointed and often contradictory; it seems clear to me that if she is not flat-out lying about what happened, she is mistaken as to the identity of her attacker.

As Roger L. Simon of PJ Media put it,

“Nothing was as expected. A real rape had taken place but it wasn’t the one everyone was talking about.  It was simultaneously a rape of Judge Kavanaugh, his family, and the American people themselves.  The collateral damage was Dr. Ford, her friends, and her family. And the perpetrator was the Democratic Party, principally their Judiciary Committee members, their ranking member, and the minority leader.”

He is speaking metaphorically, of course; but the outcry over Kavanaugh was a travesty of justice; it was a gross abuse of Constitutional procedures (the Senate’s duty to give “advice and consent” for Presidential nominations); and if it had been allowed to succeed, it would have set a horrific precedent: one in which unsubstantiated, uncorroborated allegations would have become the new standard of “proof,” and anyone, anywhere, any time, could have their honor and integrity impugned, their personal and professional reputation besmirched, their family traumatized, and their life potentially ruined simply because someone chose to make such an allegation.

In light of this, what is really depressing about the vote is that only one – one! – Democratic Senator, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), crossed the line and voted for Kavanaugh. Every other Democrat in the Senate was either too ideologically blinded, or too frightened, to understand or appreciate how close we came to a very frightening outcome.

It was only this year – in fact, just before the primaries – that I finally did what I probably should have done years ago, and switched my party affiliation from Democrat to Republican. Thank God I did. I would have hated to have been associated in any way, shape, or form, with the circus we’ve seen the last few weeks. A member of one of my Facebook groups posted a comment by Aaron D. Wolf, contributor to the conservative Chronicles Magazine, who wrote,

“The worst mistake Republicans could make right now is to try to make friends with the Democrats or the media again. This is how conservatives always lose when they win — snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Forget restoring bi-partisan dignity to the Senate. Harris, Booker, Feinstein, et al. are revolutionaries. The media are revolutionaries who hate traditional morality and culture, foment chaos, disturb the peace, and want to replace the traditional American majority — white and black… Pass state laws that would garner ACLU suits that would challenge Roe in ways amenable to the jurisprudence of the SCOTUS majority. Also, build the wall. Give voters something worth voting for.”

I agree. I have always been a moderate, a conciliator, one who seeks to bring people together. But there is a time for conciliation, and there is a time for standing one’s ground; for standing for principle. This is that time. Just a few days ago, I had written in my personal journal, and then posted in another Facebook group, the following:

I think it is time – and well past time – that we stop calling today’s Leftists “liberals,” and call them what they are: radical extremists, neo-Marxist revolutionaries, who are utterly determined to pull down, not only what THEY see as “white male privilege” (it’s amazing how many women and people of color I interact with every day, who do NOT see it that way, at all), but everything they see as linked to it – up to and including American culture, society, system of government, jurisprudence, and everything else about it.

Christianity not least! And of course, this is just part of a larger assault on the West as a whole, and its history, heritage, and culture. We are in a war, even if it’s not a shooting one… yet. I pray it doesn’t come to that! But it may, if the lunacy of the Left continues to build. At least (to change metaphors slightly) the confirmation of Justice Brett Kavanaugh has put another finger in the dike. I pray it may hold!