Tax Exempt Status for Political Churches?

   Today an executive order was signed which will allow churches to more freely endorse political candidates. Opponents say this chips away at the separation of Church and State, and something does seem fishy about what has occurred. In discussing this, I will tell a story, as well as argue, as I have to the Christians up the street, that the Christians are deceived by Donald Trump. Jesus does not support Tyrants, nor does Pope Francis- as the fake news story tried to have it- support Donald Trump, nor should American Christianity allow itself to be enlisted in the emerging anti-Muslim “nationalism,” elsewhere and more truly termed fascism. Who is your neighbor?

   I was pleased to find a church and preacher I quite liked, just up the street, as I could walk there, and had stopped going to both a Catholic and Baptist Church, each for different reasons. On my first visit there, the pastor commented that he was forbid to speak politics from the altar, and the whole congregation seemed quite paranoid about me, as if I were some liberal come to spy out their tax exempt status. They stopped raising their hands in prayer, for example, though the second time I was there, when they prayed for me as I had asked, they raised their hands, and some even spoke in tongues, which was quite a powerful experience. I told them I needed help, that I needed work and a lawyer, and was in some difficulty at home there up the street, but they would only give me their first names, and, as said, seemed quite suspicious. Apparently there had been a robbery on the property recently, and of course one never knows.

   After my second visit, I decided to write to the pastor about some things I had learned from his preaching on John, about the tax exempt status question, and about how the Christians are quite deceived about Donald Trump. When I was a teacher at the community college, of American Government, I would tell the kids that they of course were allowed almost limitless free expression of religion, but for me to preach Jesus from the lectern would violate the establishment clause, though I would comment on the Bible as a part of the unwritten constitution of the Americans, as George Anastaplo discusses this in his book on the constitution.* I thought maybe similarly the parishioners have a right to express politics, but not the preacher from the pulpit, and this is close, but not quite it. I said this as much to demonstrate how the Establishment and free expression clauses fit together as to communicate silently that I would like to teach about Jesus but cannot- and this was not my job. I told Tom, the Pastor, that similarly he was limited from certain things about politics, though that it not quite it. I too would refrain from any partisan politics in class, and, I told him, I was concerned that Christians be free to teach the ethics of the Bible, including the teachings that homosexuality is not good for the soul, from Moses and Paul, and even that abortion is wrong, though this is a Greek Hippocratic, and not a Mosaic teaching. Leviticus distinguishes between killing a born child and causing a miscarriage as by striking a pregnant woman, and the latter is not murder, though it is a crime. Jesus never got around to teaching against homosexuality, as though it were not so much a priority, though Paul does, in Romans 1. I wrote too that Paul in Romans 2 implies that violence against gays is the result of repressed homosexuality (“you yourselves are doing the same things”), as this is a more serious or higher level of sin. And what, I asked Tom, if it is true that homosexuality is bad for the soul and also true that our use of pesticides and suburban lawn chemicals is interfering with the hormones of our youth? Plus, people are not required to be Christian in order to be American, and this is extremely important. As I have a braided ponytail, since I have not been able to afford haircuts for two years, kind of like it, and used to grow my hair long when I was in High School and College, I think they thought I might be gay. Rather, I think of Lancelot when he comes out of the woods for the final battle in the movie Ex-Calibre.

   So I wrote him a two page letter discussing these things, since he did not have much time on Sundays for discussion. I also gave him my website and Twitter numbers, as I like to promote myself and was surely not worried about revealing my true self to him. I wrote that it seemed unconstitutional to forbid him to say just about anything as a preacher, except to incite crimes, as when a speech becomes an action, in slander, libel, false advertising, perjury, fake news and such, fraud and other ways of harming people, and this of course, like all our constitutional questions, can become extremely difficult. We forbid religious expression even of students when, as when the Texas High school prayed as a group in the end zone after each touchdown, though, unlike Germany, we try to allow hate speech, though this too can cross the line to become an action, violating rights that it is the purpose of government to secure.

   I wrote to Tom that Trump was not a Christian (though I might be wrong), that he hardly believes that murder is wrong, let alone that abortion is murder, that he does not care about any sexual morality, let alone transgender issues, that the Miss Universe Pageant (held in Russia at the building owned by Tillerson) demonstrates a disregard for adultery as an ethical crime, or promotes adultery as well as the regard for sex over love, that his defrauding of the elderly through Trump University demonstrates a willingness to lie and steal, and his willingness to use the law to hurt people, such as the blacks and the liberals and the Mexican immigrants is characteristic of a tyrant, and that the Christian’s opposition to Hillary was far from sufficient reason to invite Russian and KKK influence into U. S. politics. Fascism is quite opposed to the message of the Gospel, I argued, and the Christians quite snowed by Donald Trump, who is a salesman and will say and use anything for his own advantage or self interest. I think I am stating the matter a bit more clearly today than I did in the letter to him, but you get the gist of what was said in the letter.

   After missing Church the day that I delivered the letter, I appears for my third sermon, the fourth week since I began to walk up the street on Sundays to his church. He met me on the steps on the way in, said things that indicated he had misunderstood me to be pro-abortion and pro-gay- a misunderstanding, as I am quite the centrist, with rather unique positions on all the issues, due to thinking a lot about both sides, and trying to teach. Tom had said two things that had indicated the sort of news stations he was listening to- that the report of Trump calling up 100,000 national guardsmen was fake news (Trump changed his mind), and that Obama had christened many new intelligence officers just before he left office. It was also clear that he did not have time, as do I, for a detailed and vigorous study of the news. Teachers of American Government sometimes have a natural tendency to become centrists, though not always. My philosophic studies of the roots of both left and right wing extremes, in communism and fascism, and seeing how the extremes of both the right and left political characters leads people into twentieth century totalitarianism either way- this also impels me to my unique centrism.  I had argued that when we vote for a president, we vote for a man capable of the executive office more than for a party platform, one able to be president, for the good of our nation, and that both the Republicans and the Christians were simply snowed by Donald Trump. I do not much appreciate Jesus being used for political self interest, and so do not mind stepping up, even to talk to a preacher. I was told that I would not be happy at their church, and it was clear that I was being asked to leave. But I knew he misunderstood me and sincerely wanted to hear the sermon. A woman coming up the stairs backed my saying that Trump was cozy with the White Supremacists, as Steve Bannon had been chosen Chief of Staff. In his previous sermons he had added great points to my understanding of the famous scene where Jesus, resurrected, asks Peter, Do You love me? He said that God wants our fellowship, and Jesus indeed our friendship, profound teachings, and he had showed me that Peter just goes back to fishing, back to money-making, when he returns to Galilee after the crucifixion. A Catholic had showed me that cool thing about the two scenes with the charcoal fire, and I was seeing confirmation about my learning that it is John and not Peter who is the guy, even as the Eastern Orthodox Church might show us Catholics. And Tom showed me something about the calling to be a preacher, I thought, about agape and two kinds of philo, feed my lambs, shepherd my sheep,” and “feed my sheep,” thee different things in answer to the two or three different questions, do you love me, then he prophesied Pete’s death and he said “follow me.” And what is it to Peter if indeed John did remain until He came to visit him on Potmos, or even if John remained, as he did throughout the crucifixion, more faithful to the last day?

   These are the sort of things I was seeing, and though I was quiet throughout the sermons, and tried to be helpful and friendly to everyone- discussing the six kinds of machines with the son of one man who is a member, etc, Tom made it clear that it was not their choice that I return. I had said on the steps going in, “Do you mean to say that I am not welcome in you church unless I am a Trump supporter,”? and he could not say yes for fear of the law about the tax exempt status. I was attacked in speech on the way out as I tried to explain, accused of disrespecting our President and government contrary to Romans !3 1-7, and I asked what they thought Paul did when, some ten years after writing this, he was ordered by Nero to give up the names of his fellow Christians? Did he obey his government? No, that is surely not what he means by obedience, and if the Christians were ordered by the Nazis to answer, “Do you have any Jews,” we would be obligated to lie- that is my teaching, anyway, or that that is not what John means by liars. Rather, the “liars” might be those who tell the truth to save themselves, as perhaps Peter did around the first of the charcoal fires.

   I was also accused for raising my voice to the preacher, in the back of the church on the way out, though I said I thought Tom had the Holy spirit in his preaching, and “wise” I called him to one I tried to proselytize to come that Sunday but not his political theory. “I am a PhD in politics,” I pleaded. Accused of disrespecting the House, said to a woman, Who’s house is this? And to their surprise- for they did not seem to know the saying, I quoted: “Fist remove the log from your own eye, then you will see clearly to remove the splinter from your brother’s eye.” I backed out the door saying loudly, “This is the word of the Lord,” to my own surprise, and wandered home wondering about the ironic joke on me that I had clearly failed to remove the splinter from my brothers eye and keep myself in the class I was enjoying.

   I had put one dollar in the collection in an envelope which asked for my address. A few days later I received a letter with no return address, with a checklist of similarities between Hillary o the Democratic platform and the Nazi’s, things I too complain about when government becomes like Big Mother,” making me spend 1/2 hour plus a day for the last seven years rolling my own cigarettes ’cause they tried to tax us out of smoking, o indeed ending my teaching career because Politics and Philosophy had been White male dominated departments prior to affirmative action, and the liberal arts could be used in a way that medicine, for example could not to promote the feminist superiority teaching or the understanding that equality means numerical equality rather than equal opportunity regardless of prejudice, as if we would require a proportional number of short Asian women in pro baseball or the NBA.

   So, is Tom a religious or a political organization? And what would happen if the law compelled him to let me stay, so long as I was not disruptive? And just as I did not claim the benefits of common law marriage, because my fiance never would officially marry me, so I toil for free in the work of my nation and my faith indistinguishable. Perhaps if the Trumpsters are going to use Jesus to snow the Christians, they ought at lest pay their taxes.

 

Note *The Constitution of 1787 by George Anastaplo opens with a discussion of some of the comprehensive influences on the American Constitution. Examples of Biblical influences that can be discussed in a political science course are Genesis 9:6, which presents the reason that murder is wrong, and Deuteronomy 25:3, forbidding the return of escaped slaves. The difference between the scientific, Judicial and religious use of scripture is quite interesting in elation to the First Amendment and Establishment from the lectern. Deuteronomy 25:3, though it is not law for us, is yet why I could not, as a Michiganian, swear allegiance to the pre-Civil War Constitution. Up here, we knew that it was, as Montesquieu explains, a violation of political liberty to compel one to do what is wrong (or prevent one from doing what is right (Spirit of the Laws, XI). The contradiction could have been corrected by appealing to the Article IV requirement that each state be guaranteed a republican form of government, avoiding the civil war. But Jackson’s man Taney could have prevented the 265,000 American deaths in the civil War had he but decided that Dred Scott was a man. Sometimes there is silence in an awful moment which could and should have gone another way, and many lives and much suffering are at stake. This topic came up when we were discussing the engenius basis of Supreme Court case # 16-907, which argued that the election was unconstitutional because the national government is required to protect the states from foreign invasion, as occurred by the Russians through the internet.

Orwell’s 1984 in 2017: Truth and Delusion

   If you seriously cannot tell which is reality and which is illusion, I suggest you look at who is persecuting people for mere speech. And here we see the surprisingly deep importance of the principle of the free speech clause of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. I keep forgetting that there are Trump supporters, and perhaps people who seriously cannot tell, as well as people who due to an ethical failure do not care or are simply willing to pervert the truth for baser interests.

   In Orwell’s 1984, there are of course people who believed that government, or, there are fools.  I recall Orwell’s description of his neighbor’s family, where all were as if wholly deluded, the father, mother and two children, all avid supporters willing to live wholly in the world Big Brother had created for them. There are also people who from fear do not consider truth, and of course a third sort, people who know well the difference, and for some ungodly reason are willing to impose the tyranny and its delusion onto everyone. That is how the domestic life of North Korea appears to us out here in the West. But seriously, who knows? Are there not “two sides to every story,” and did you not know that “truth is relative?” “We have our culture and they theirs,” and did you not know that ethical truth is culturally relative? “Who knows?” or rather, swallow this: if we lived in North Korea, Kim Jong Un would truly be the “Great Father!” Sarcasm is important, and does not, sometimes, come across through the written word. I keep forgetting that there really are Trump supporters. Trump has people willing to believe his fake news, and also to believe his accusation that any criticism of him is fake news. Our press struggles nobly to achieve for us objective clarity in the face of the stupidest lies. Many Americans seriously admire a good sales pitch regardless of the truth. Trump also has people who seriously cannot tell the difference, and, again, third, people who know the truth of the story quite well and are willing to produce for him fake news. And look now across America: Our democracy is seriously having difficulty telling the difference.

   2=2=4, and it does not equal 5. I had a great professor who once mentioned Orwell, and we, the students, were surprised that he would descend to discuss a novelist. He said he liked the work quite well, 1984, but took issue with Orwell’s presentation of human nature as being that malleable. But this was before the age of the Internet. If we do not act now, the orchestrated opinions may soon be those of We the people. It is perhaps an ethical problem, or, at root it is an ethical question: Are you willing to pervert your theoretical mind and common sense for the sake of bodily self interest? Will you do this if they threaten you? Or do they only need to pay you? And how much? For, like the joke about the prostitution of the wife of the man offered a “million dollars” to let the seducer sleep with his wife, we have already established that she is a prostitute, the only remaining question is the price. Read Machiavelli’s play Mandragola. And do you have enough money yet, America?

   But sometimes there is a serious difficulty about truth and a mirror image, which after all does have the same features as the true picture. Birds often are seen trapped in an illusion that the bird in the mirror is indeed another bird, because they have never yet seen such an example, and it takes a while to learn that such an illusion is even possible. Who would intentionally set up a mirror to confuse me in this way? Can we not just trust that the Lord would not make things so difficult for common sense? Do you mean, Mr. McDonald, to say that we really do have to consider such things about the president of the United States? Are we not obligated by the grandeur of the office not to question? Are we not obligated by the chain of command? Yes, indeed, this is not North Korea, yet, and every American citizen has a right to work on a Supreme Court case, to support impeachment when it in the nation’s interest, to speak freely and to ask questions freely. Trump had never read the constitution, and that is why he so often trips over it, and the Trumpsters do not care, and that is un-American!

   But this does not change the truth: Those who say 2=2=5 are lying. The philosopher can always be presented as mad, because the people cannot, without a great natural intelligence and a life of toil devoted to the truth, understand him, and, amid their life absorbed in practical concerns, they do not care. Again that is why our constitution is so important, and free speech so fundamental. I will add that that is why the abuse of our courts and the issue of perjury is so fundamental. I was taken from my driveway and held for 20 days without even getting a single word in to a judge, until a court appointed lawyer gained an independent evaluation by a psychologist who did not have an interest in filling a bed or getting me addicted to their drugs, and this convinced a judge of the rather obvious truth that they did not have a right nor any legitimate power to seize me 20 days prior. The abuse of our mental health system is, along with perjury, very serious, a very important development, because this system needs to be in place and honest for those who truly need it, that is, for genuine emergencies. I have seen it, the courts and our mental health system, corrupted by Trumpsters for political reasons, and this is simply not ok, that is, assuming that we do see something truly wrong with the way of life under Kim Jong Un, and we are not to assume it is simply our cultural preference. I am pressing charges of perjury, but it is quite likely that the police will be told to do nothing, and that the officer will again say that the question is “above his pay grade.” And it is perjury: When certain Tumpster relatives learned by experience that they could not have me “treated” by compulsion unless I were a “danger to myself or others,” they simply lied to say I was. We have an uncle who has a PhD in “Education,” and he was influenced too by some “psychologist,” likely a Trumpster, and perhaps someone in our government who has an interest in my being certified insane: I do not know, and fear to raise these questions so as not to appear “paranoid.” But someone sure does have an interest in presenting as insane, or a mere “conspiracy theorist,” anyone to whom it has become apparent the extent to which Russia threw the 2016 election. Again, if you seriously cannot tell which is truth and which illusion, I suggest you look to those suppressing the questions, to those suppressing free speech, for I was seized in my driveway while the Supreme Court Case #16-907 to void the 2016 election due to Russian interference through the internet was moving through the courts, I having done nothing wrong, not a thing I do not have a right to do, having threatened no one illegally, nor even said a single thing that is false, but for mere speech. One can always tweak and twist a word, and then forbid the accused to explain. The limed bird, remember, the more you struggle to free yourself, the more you will be stuck, if only we use everything you say only against you, will not listen, and insist it is you who will not listen, while it is we who are entering your world to determine how things shall be for you. Liberty is fundamental, and when one has violated the rights of no other, it is the obligation of government to leave him alone. This is fundamental law in America still, the principles of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments and the Third assertion of the Second sentence of our Declaration: “…to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men.” The purpose of government is to secure rights, and so again, since it is apparently difficult, when one has not violated the rights of another, government has no purpose and must leave him alone.

   But in the end, and in “this world,” these questions are determined not by equations on a blackboard, but by power. We must take a stand, or see free government perish from this earth. I can blog, and have a wonderful time, and you can read, dwelling here with the ideas, if you have leisure, but in the end, they control the visibility and access to my writings through the internet, because we have allowed this to occur. The Resistance can tweet all day, but in the end it is on Twitter, and Twitter is being monitored and controlled, and by someone other than “We the people.” They can win because they have money and power, and we are not taking a stand.

Impeach Trump When Duterte Visits the White House

   Let’s impeach Trump in time for the Duterte visit to the White House. Any member of the U. S. House of Representatives can draft and propose articles if the Judiciary Committee is too partisan. Trump is not the Guy to deal with North Korea, and the wold is now in peril of nuclear war. But we’re set up for a win-win for Putin- surprise! Then, after we impeach Trump, we should evacuate the South as quickly as possible from the border down and watch Kim- and those under him- get ill. We might solve the problem and liberate the North without a single shot, as Reagan dissolved Communism for the Russians. But even if not, it is time to get the South Koreans who are within striking distance out of harm’s way. Houston was evacuated for a hurricane, and we need to practice evacuating large cities anyway.

   Trump is a tyrant, and may revert to the fascist or white supremacist understanding of “America first” at any time. If they like Russian methods so much, let them go with the Hillsdale Republicans on their upcoming luxury cruise to St. Petersburg and stay there to enjoy such fine anti-“globalist” nationalism. It is not clear that our own attack on Mexican immigrants, the city of Chicago (black gangs) or Muslims has yet been permanently shelved. Trump will flirt again with the White Supremacists when it suits his “winning” or his next sales pitch. Ditto for nuclear war. We need to impeach this man before it is too late. The committee system is not in the constitution, and any Democrat can Impeach for emoluments, election fraud, intimidation of the Press and others, Trump-Russian connections (Page, Tillerson, Flynn, Kirchner), and many more things- rewarding Bannon for fake news, defrauding the elderly through Trump U, etc. Someone told him the election would be thrown for him and the method- spy-marketing and targeted interference- could not be discovered. Now to jilt Putin, after rewarding him by questioning NATO and sanctions- he grows a heart about Syrian children getting gas attacked- like he did not know that is what men like Putin and Assad do. He admires every tyrant, the only plank in his platform that is not changeable according to perceived advantage-.Now he invited Duterte- who dishonored the U. S. Presidency, and is a murderer- to the White House. Charming. Enough of this Teflon Don- the articles will stick.

Nietzsche’s Zarathustra and the “Last Man.”

   Nietzsche is of course a very bad man, a diabolical thinker, in fact. People do not realize how bad Nietzsche and Machiavelli are, until they are subjected to a tyranny and it is much too late, for the political expression of the diabolical is tyranny. Jung, though, knew quite well about Nietzsche. But then, once these things occur, everything we care about, everything worth living for, will be gone, as it was for Germany in 1938- though they did not realize it until 1946. And it will be the same for us, apparently, as we are letting what is now occurring occur, and no one seems to be able even to see it, let alone to do a thing about it. We watch those who see be attacked one by one, and no one will stand. We are the “last men.”

   One respect in which Nietzsche’s Zarathusta is prophetic is in his foreseeing the coming of the “last man.” These remind me of our U.S. citizens on Oxy, where one can say to them the most earth shattering things, as Pope Francis just said, and they stare back in stupefied dull amazement, indeed like cows to whom Lincoln practiced his speeches. It is Sunday, indeed, what time is the game on? The world is in danger of nuclear war today, and Putin is trying to destroy America and with it all hope for political liberty, and they blink. They do not know what political liberty is, or why it matters if Putin destroys it and America, nor do they know what tyranny is, or consider the difference between tyranny and liberty, but how is that stock market doing, and jobs jobs jobs, it is the economy, stupid.” No, it is in fact LIBERTY, stupid!! And for nuclear war, well, it will likely only fall on those other people, right? What time is the game on?

   In the fifth section of the Prologue to Zarathustra, Nietzsche prophesies the “last man:”

What is love? What is creation? What is longing? What is a star? Thus asks the last man, and he blinks. The earth has become small, and on it hops the last man, who makes everything small. His race is as ineradicable as the flea beetle; the last man lives the longest.’We have invented happiness,’ say the last men, and they blink. They have left the regions where it was hard to live, for one needs warmth. One still loves one’s neighbor and rubs against him, for one needs warmth. ..Who still wants to rule, who obey? Both require too much exertion.

No shepherd and one herd! Everyone wants the same, everybody is the same: Whoever feels different goes voluntarily to the madhouse.

Formerly, all the world was mad,’ say the most refined, and they blink…One still quarrels, but one is soon reconciled- else it might spoil the digestion. One has one’s little pleasure for the day and one’s little pleasure for the night; but one has regard for health.

   Bodily health has of course replaced all ethics for us, as the one objective good we can all agree upon. “Just don’t smoke,” they say, as they blink.

We have invented happiness, say the last men, and they blink.

‘Give us this last man, O Zarathust,’ they shouted. ‘Turn us into these last men! Then we shall make you a gift of the overman!’ And all the people jubulated and clucked with their tongues.

   Here are two lines to compare, from early and then late in Prologue 5:

They have something of which they are proud. What do they call that which makes them proud? Education, they call it; it distinguishes them from goatherds…

and then

I listened too much to brooks and trees: Now I talk to them as to goatherds…

   We, the Jesus philosophers, can appreciate the beauty of the diabolical, though it be at peril of our souls.

   The “overman” or “ubermench” is of course the superhuman tyrant who will seek to impress his form onto the matter that is mankind, since, you know, there is, according to Nietzsche, no natural form of man that we seek to fulfill in order to find true happiness (as for Plato and Aristotle), but rather a form that we create and impose tyrannically, expressing our “will to power,” since this- self-contradictorally- is the truth about how man is. All modern philosophy is self contradictory. And why should this form be cruel and tyrannical? It just is so? No, but there is a nature of these things, and there is good and evil, and evil is the perversion of the good.

   One saying of Jesus from the Gospel of Thomas is most helpful in the Christian reading of Nietzsche, because the diabolical has the forms of the spiritual though these are inverted, so that the spiritual reader sees the forms, and, not understanding the diabolical turning, strephein or tropos, as we call it- the fallen angel is also an angel- they think Nietzsche is some fine fellow. Many clergymen cannot see this. But the saying from Thomas is:

#7 Blessed is the lion which becomes man when consumed by man; and cursed is the man whom the lion consumes, and the lion becomes man.

   In both, the lion becomes man. Both refer to a spiritual transformation, the first the natural form and the second the diabolic opposite. It is because of the possibility of our becoming saints, like John, the equal of angels, that the diabolical can occur, the equal of fallen angels, and since 1917, according to the vision of Fatima, Hell gapes and souls fall in, as in Twentieth Century Totalitarianism. It is possible for humans to not allow these terrible things to occur, but the last men are too busy clucking, and making for Zarathustra a gift of the overman, as though there were nothing better to do.

“Society Must Protect the Robbed and Punish The Robber”: MLK Jr’s Letter From a Birmingham Jail

   In a previous blog, St. Martin is referenced regarding our recent corruption. This paper, the Birmingham Jail letter, is pulled out of materials once used in my Introduction to American Government class, taught for ten years at Oakland Community College. Martin is answering critics, since he has some time on his hands while sitting in jail, and he has just answered the argument that civil disobedience breaks the law. King answered with the distinction we call natural right, the basis of the distinction between just and unjust laws. We like this section because his teachers are the theologians rather than the political philosophers, and he appeals to the health of the soul as did the Brown decision, though in neglect of John Marshall Harlan’s dissent (in Plessy), that our constitution is “color-blind” and neither knows nor tolerates distinctions of race. Martin then turns to the criticism that their non-violent protests are unjust because they incite violence from the unjust:

   In your statement you assert that our actions, even though peaceful, must be condemned because they precipitate violence But can this assertion be logically made? Isn’t this like condemning the robbed man because his possession of money precipitated the evil act of robbery? Isn’t this like condemning Socrates because his unswerving commitment to truth and his philosophical delvings precipitated the misguided popular mind to make him drink the hemlock? Isn’t this like condemning Jesus because his unique God-consciousness and never-ceasing devotion to his will precipitated the evil act of crucifixion? We must come to see, as federal courts have consistently affirmed, that it is immoral to urge an individual to withdraw his efforts to gain his basic constitutional rights because the quest precipitates violence. Society must protect the robbed and punish the robber.

   Indeed, women perhaps should not wear short skirts, but the raper is the criminal. Indeed, a good way to avoid thieves is to have nothing to steal. Indeed, my sister likes to say, “how’s that workin’ for ya,” and we have not yet been able to ask how perjury is working for her. And how is that “working for” Martin, and for us who let him stand up alone while our representative government with its beyond question honorable FBI committed crimes unanswerable against him, and may indeed have helped to allow him to be murdered? If you want to protect the integrity of the FBI, our suggestion is not that you suppress criticism, but rather, act with integrity, submit to oversight, and indeed learn to oversee yourselves, before the Americans do it for you.

   Beneath all this is a very profound and ironic question of political philosophy which leads us to the teaching that not everyone should literally follow the actions of these heroes. Socrates harmed Athens by giving Athens the occasion to commit the heinous sin of killing the philosopher. We really must take care of our fellow man even in their very immorality, if we would practice the complete and perfect love incarnate in Jesus. At the same time, as Martin notes, “To a degree academic freedom is a reality today because Socrates practiced civil disobedience.”

   But as for the measure of right and wrong by material success, we note that the sun shines and rain falls on the good and evil alike. By following justice, it is only apparent that we set aside material advantages. One difference is in the pleasures and health of the soul, allowing us to enjoy the wealth we have more than the rich who are unjust. Beside that, we need less than the unjust, or indeed, need less than people commonly can imagine.

The Fear of Death

   The fear of death is a great and ancient topic. Its conquest is said to be the beginning of philosophy. Reversed, the fear of death becomes the desire for self-preservation, the great first principle of modern political philosophy. When I was first removed from the internet a couple months ago, I began to read the book of the brothers Grimm, and came across this point in the story of The Wolf and the Seven Little Kids, where the kids are told by the mother goat that they will know the wolf by his black feet seen under the door, but the wolf goes to the miller and has him whiten his feet with meal, having already had the baker rub them with dough…

The miller thought to himself, ‘the wolf wants to deceive some one,’ and refused; but the the wolf said, ‘If thou wilt not do it, I will devour thee.’ Then the miller was afraid, and made his paws white for him. Truly, men are like that.

   Tyranny advances by the fear of death that rules most parts of most people most of the time. When it reaches a critical mass, it can seize power in a regime, and so too in the world. But it can also be defeated, because the wolf or wolves cannot eat all day, and can only visit one goat’s house at a time. So too, if we all stand up at once together, tyranny will dissolve and simply go away to await another day, when men have become corrupt again and susceptible to its power.

   Why the human things are this way is of course a great mystery. But here too one sees the saying that if men would only pray and receive Him now, the age of the Messiah would come to be.

Pope Francis Votes For Trump!

Beloved Pope Francis Just Issued A Dire Message Comparing Donald Trump To Adolf Hitler

By Eliza Mayhew –

January 23, 2017

Share on Facebook

Tweet on Twitter

Something has gone horribly wrong if the Pope feels the need to make a statement to the world to beware of an incoming president.

Yet Saturday, that’s exactly what Pope Francis did. In a statement made to the Spanish newspaper El Pais, the Pope highlights the concerns he harbors about Donald Trump.

The reporter asked Francis “what he makes” of Donald Trump being sworn into office, citing that the whole world feels tense about it. He responds “…that we must wait and see. I don’t like to get ahead of myself, nor to judge people prematurely. We will see how he acts, what he does.”

The reporter then asked the Pope about the rise of populism and how he feels about it. They cite how fear and growing inequalities have led to the rise of leaders which are “so-called anti-system.” Claiming “Trump’s case is the most noteworthy,” that “[t]hey capitalize on the fears of an uncertain future in order to form a message full of xenophobia and hatred towards foreigners.”

The Pope responds without acknowledging Trump specifically, but going straight into a conversation about Hitler and 1930s Nazi Germany. He claims the most obvious example of populism in Europe was the rise of Hitler. He claims:

‘Germany is broken, it needs to get up, to find its identity, it need a leader, someone capable of restoring its character, and there is a young man named Adolf Hitler who says: “I can, I can.” And Germans vote for Hitler. Hitler didn’t steal power, his people voted for him, and then he destroyed his people. That is the risk. In times of crisis we lack judgement…’

Well, if America and the world weren’t afraid before, we certainly are now. Much of the context behind the election of Donald Trump certainly echo the problems facing Germany at the time they elected Hitler. It is true that in many ways Donald Trump claims to be a populist, and through the selection of his staff he has already demonstrated that it was only an election ploy.

The Pope went on to call out men who claim to be a savior, and who use tactics which create barrios among people:

‘A savior who [tries to] give us back our identity [by] let[ting] us defend ourselves with walls…is a very serious thing.’

Certainly, Trump’s vilification of immigrants and his steadfast commitment to building a wall along the U.S. to Mexico border is divisive. It speaks to Trump’s election tactic of inciting fear and that only he was able to protect Americans from the loss of their identity. The Pope, in this interview, condemns this type of methodology because he condemns the isolation and separation of people “from their neighbours.”

The rise of a man who promises to restore the country’s “greatness” with division and exclusivity with almost nothing but a charismatic personality, is congruent in the two cases.

The fact that the Pope felt it prudent to express his thoughts about populism and Trump by highlighting those similarities, however, is extremely ominous and concerning.

Feature Image via Getty Images/Franco Origlia.

Impeachment II: Procedure and the Constitution

   In the United States, no man is above the law, and this is secured at the top by the constitutional provisions for the impeachment of the president. The procedure is drawn from 3 or 4 places in the Constitution. The president can be impeached and removed for “Treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors”(II.4). The House of Representatives holds the “sole power of impeachment (I.2),” and by a majority vote, introduces articles of impeachment. These have in the recent past been drawn up by the judicial committee, but the committee system is not from the constitution, but tradition. Impeachment here refers to the accusation, which is then sent to the higher body, the Senate, for trial (I.3). The Chief Justice of the Supreme court presides over the trial, replacing the Vice President, who usually presides over the Senate (I.3). Two thirds, or here 67 Senators voting for conviction are required for removal. This may seem a high bar, but in the perjury charge against President Clinton, impeachment failed by a narrow margin, and the impeachment of Andrew Johnson failed by only one vote. President Nixon resigned, as Mr. Trump might, facing nearly certain conviction. Nixon was impeached for using the office of the presidency to obstruct the investigation into the plumbers break in at the Democratic Party headquarters. The second article was that he had abused his use of the FBI, CIA and IRS, violating the constitutional rights of citizens, and by establishing the plumbers as a secret investigative agency in the White House. He was also charged, in the third article, with defying the committee of Congress by refusing to produced the subpoenaed tapes, where, famously, he claimed executive privilege to withhold the tapes, but the Supreme Court decided that executive privilege did not cover hiding ones own guilt, but only national security or other crucial interests that are a legitimate part of the executive office.

   We would recommend the following articles be considered from among the vast store, and we focus on the comprehensive issues and the truth about what is occurring, rather than the smaller matters, which may indeed be a part of the impeachment, but taken by themselves may not succeed.

I Election fraud has been committed by rewarding the spread of false news and intimidating the press surrounding the U.S. elections of November 9, 2016, a high crime. A foreign government may also have been invited to interfere and may have been rewarded for interfering in the U.S. election. The internet was used in a comprehensive manner to interfere with the voters themselves, especially in the swing states. The Electoral College was then prevented from considering, as is their job according to the Constitution as explained in Federalist 68. 26 reasons for charging Mr. Trump with election fraud are presented in a previous blog.

II. The press has been intimidated with threats as just occurred this past weekend, when Mr. Spicer told the press there would be “consequences,” and the press was called the most dishonest group of persons ever (neglecting tyrants). This is a violation of the free speech clause of our constitution and of the oath of office taken just days before, a high crime.

III. Bribery is committed already, as the emoluments clause forbids receiving payments or loans from foreign governments.

IV. Constitutional procedures have been interfered with, as the attempt to bring the election fraud before the Supreme court in order to postpone the inauguration.

   Treason is narrowly defined (III,iii), and requires confession in open court or the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act- a bit more than a wink and a nod. But if Russian interference in the election was invited or encouraged, this may be treason.

   Detailed reasoning has been presented on the issue of election fraud in previous blogs on this website. The newness of the internet and Russian control of the internet has allowed this to occur, as these are simply not the results of a legitimate election or election process.

   To repeat, the delivery of our presidency through illegitimate election to one incapable of the office is a blessing to our enemies that may well have been intended. The immediate result for our nation will be the expansion of the war against ISIS to parties with whom we are not at at war, and the intended destruction of many of our sons and daughters. Domestic tyranny is also likely to result, as this president has praised the methods of the tyrant Duterte in the Philippines and the tyrant Putin in Russia, under the excuse of an unprecedented war on crime. Civil unrest is a certainty, and civil war a definite possibility. The security of our nation therefore, and not only considerations of Justice, requires the immediate impeachment of Donald Trump.

   One impeached may be subject to indictment, but is by impeachment itself subject only to removal from office ((II.4). In this case, that may be blessing for Mr. Trump, to be removed from an office for which he is unprepared, by peaceful and constitutional procedure. The illusion that by this we violate an election or fail to “give him a chance,” as would be required in an election that was without fraud and foreign interference, simply are not true in the present instance, a national crisis.

New Year News: Office of Congressional Ethics is Gone

   The first thing the Republicans in Congress do to prepare, no doubt, for the new administration is to remove the independent oversight of Congress. After all, why should not a House committee, no, an independent ethics panel, staffed by janitors, chauffeurs and pages, be as capable of partisan bickering while he public good is bought and sold? M. Richard Painter, the Chief ethics lawyer in the Bush administration, explained a bit of the meaning of this on NPR. Where, he says, the executive agencies are subject to independent oversight, the House will be no longer. And has anyone tried to bring up any questions about the executive agencies lately? Chain of command assures thee will be no questions raised.

  Congress is preparing for the disappearance of impeachment, because now they can buy off the centrist or sane Republicans to vote with the Trumpster republicans to bring no accusations.

   In other news, our new friend Russia seems to have been using ISIS through Chinese connections, as is evident if their assassin has shot all those Turks in the night club to avenge the shooting of their ambassador. IsIs is about as smart as Trump, Islamic terror having been first the inspiration for shooting back at Russia for Allepo, then the means of Russian vengeance as an excuse to strike the Turks. Again the only winner is Putin. Except that has become more evident that he is using both sides in the Syrian Civil war. Shhh! And do not say “Kaspersky.”

   Hey but the oversight of the FBI has been just terrific, and it is really going to be great, I know, ’cause I can make a deal, and so know all about the internet Al Gore created, and the FBI is going to be great again. China has created an “honesty rating” for its citizens, all voluntary of course, and only able to work for one’s benefit. Ask Mr. Ehrler, hey, why not? But the observant Chinese commentator said at least it is not the NSA, spying on all the people all the time.

   The ways to deal with the rot, for those who have some spirit of liberty and are not yet thoroughly lobotomized and emasculated, is to go right through it, and at the same time to go away from it. Take back the tech, the stupid phones and T.V.’s and computers that spy on us, even dump it right through their window, Boycott the spy-marketing system, openly and fearlessly discuss the INDICTMENT OF DONALD TRUMP, just say no to Russia, and remind Kaspersky that that virus seemed to walk right past him though he cashed the check all the same, and back-pocketed the advantage Tell about the FBI-Moscow alliance for appearances aimed at ISIS but in fact used to turn the U.S. elections, and TURN THEM BACK! Let the private things indeed become public. This witch will melt- They really did not want to do those things anyway. The Republicans do not need Trump, and we do not care if it is perhaps time to fight the fascists.

   The spy-marketing and interference state is unconstitutional, and has no legitimate authority, except by force. It haven proven to be a disaster, we can fix it. We are the Americans, now disdained for our slavishness by all the world.

   But why have an Office of Congressional Ethics if there are none there to watch over. Tell Mr. Painter: we would elect better reps, perhaps, if your party had not gerrymandered the districts and if third party candidates were not prevented from running for office by the system requiring a party machine to even get on the ballot. Not to mention death threats no one will investigate because the executive agencies have such terrific oversight

   Welcome to a Trump tyranny with no fourth Amendment. Americans, overturn the Russian election, or your liberty is gone.

Punish Putin By Indicting Trump: Take Away the Fruits

   As it becomes more evident what has occurred regarding the 2016 elections, our President has taken some measures to demonstrate our displeasure. Yet, to all appearances, we are prepared to allow Putin’s man to just keep walking into the most powerful position in the world, with control of the U. S. nuclear arsenal. Perhaps the Justice Department is considering an indictment, but perhaps they are, as the Republicans have been, rather slavishly looking to their self interest- a fact on which Putin has staked his little project. Fear and self-interest has so far prevented a recount in certain crucial states and prevented the Republican electors from even considering depriving Vlad Putin of the fruits of what General Hayden has called “The greatest covert operation in history.” I keep expecting to hear that Donald Trump has been arrested, but the news just is not coming yet. Perhaps they are gathering evidence or trying to prove that he knew or encouraged Putin in some way that can help the charges stick in court. Did he not seem over-confident in not advertising in the swing states, as though someone had promised him the election, and promised to do it in a way their techies told them could not be detected? Has he not rewarded Bright Bart and then Tillerson, who owned the building where they hosted the Miss Universe pageant in 2013, in Russia?

   Now Vlad has said he will return-retaliate after his boy is in office. Hence, we will all be safe, all our money and our jobs, and the heck with our constitution. Safe, that is, until our sons go for Putin to fight the 1.9 billion Muslims in the world, while he waltzes across the Ukraine to the Atlantic. The BBC will get the news when they see him out their office window. Safe, that is, until Vlad and Donney get in a squabble about who is going to be butch dyke (to show how politically incorrect a Trump opponent can be, and to get your attention while adding a bit of humor to a very tense situation). Now Donney has answered that he always knew Vlad was “very smart.” Vlad, of course, has him on calculative abilities as well as experience being a tyrant. John McCain is right, these men are thugs, and Vlad is a butcher, as was his namesake the “Impaler.” We are just going to sit here and let Trump take office? Perhaps the yuppies that do not know this are too young to hold office in American government.

   We are also afraid of the electoral confusion that would result, but as John Paul II quoted you- know-who, “Be not afraid: I go before you always.” The circumstances are unprecedented, and so must be the response. But we have a Supreme Court and Constitutional procedures, at least for another twenty days.