The Morning Report 10/17/22

Good morning kids. Monday and on the latest episode of the podcast, our election and polling expert Dave in FL laid out the tantalizing possibility that beyond merely losing control of both chambers of Congress, the Democrats face a drubbing of such magnitude that the loss could see them out of power for a generation if not longer. Small wonder; the economy is in absolute freefall, the borders are wide open, a politically engineered crime wave is sweeping much of the nation, voices of dissent are being silenced and persecuted, while casual talk of nuclear war is bandied about as if it’s no big deal. All of it is being lain squarely at the feet of the anti-American Left and the party it controls. The subpoenaing last week of President Trump not only did nothing to distract from this public sentiment, in point of fact, I would suggest that it only served to underscore it. 

But during the podcast, we touched upon a theme that I’ve been bringing up for a while now: the zombie-like state of affairs in politics and government. Here we are, three weeks out from midterm elections and, besides the ever-present specter of tampering, interference and outright fraud that we have come to accept with a shrug of the shoulders as routine in the United States of America, the handlers of a puppet president put words in his mouth in an address to the nation that essentially indicted half the citizenry as “a clear and present danger.” The idea of elections or even comity is ridiculous in that light. And yet, here we all are, going on with business as usual. It makes no sense.

As the midterms approach, the great unifier decided that it is a good time to start emphasizing his “unifyingness.” 

He put out a bizarre and delusional text that both bragged about his vision and achievements and claimed he is a president for every American and will not leave anyone behind. 

This followed the White House’s United We Stand summit in September, in which, in full Don Quixote style, Biden tilted against the phantom forces of white supremacy and hate, which from Bidentongue translates into anyone who didn’t vote for him. 

The problem for Biden is that after you have declared war on half of the country while power-charging the misery index, it is not possible to pivot to unity, even if your internal polls scream that you should. 

From day one, he has acted as if he is a wartime president overseeing actions against the 74 million Americans who did not vote for him, even going so far as to say that “brave, right-wing Americans” would need modern fighter jets to stand up against him.

No administration in history has tried to pull off what his has done, which is to declare anyone who doesn’t vote for a Democrat to be the enemy. . . 

. . . While the Democrat media pretend Biden is talking about a small group, he isn’t, and neither are they.  On an MSNBC panel this week, a Brookings fellow, Shadi Hamid, commented to a nodding Jen Psaki, former mouthpiece of the regime, “So then we have to find a way to live with them (74 million Trump-supporters) even if we think they’re bad people, even if we think they’re a threat to everything we hold dear.”

It is a small hop from language and thinking like that to some of the worst atrocities in history.  Democrats are already doing all in their power to marginalize, demonize, and silence.

It matters not who the candidates may be in 2024 on either side. Given how the Democrats have rhetorically and now as we have witnessed via official governmental/law enforcement policy targeted anyone in opposition to them on a broad range of issues as literal threats to national security, how can there possibly be televised debates where for example, Gretchen Whitmer and Ron Desantis walk over to each other, smile, shake hands and then wait for George Snuffelupagus to ask the latter if he’s stopped beating his wife?

Of course, Dave in FL predicts, and I agree, that there won’t be any debates but it sort of misses my point as to the nature of our society as it is right now. If as it seems barring some black swan event of Quetzalcoatl-like proportions, the Democrats are on course for an epic once-in-a-generation ass-kicking, do you really think they’re going to accept it? Already, the media is starting to crank out the stolen election line. One wonders if the Antifa/BLM street goons are already set to torch Portland or NYC if Tiny Kotex and Hochul are indeed ousted. And yet, we’ve had to endure the J6 kangaroo court farce wherein the players are all aghast at Trump for leading an insurrection based on “the big lie” that the 2020 election was stolen. 

Friend and friend of the blog Michael Walsh had a terrific essay last week calling for the repeal of the 16th Amendment. This week, he follows on with the call to repeal the 17th.

Prior to its ratification in 1913, the same year as the 16th and a spectacularly disastrous year for our real democracy, senators were chosen by the various state legislatures, in order to keep them tethered and answerable to their state governments: they were senators from the Great State of Whatever, not interchangeable “United States senators.”

Problems arose when individual states whose bicameral legislatures were split between Republican and Democrats had trouble on agreeing upon a choice of senator, which meant that states might go without a full complement of senators for months or in some cases years at a time. In others, normal human greed and lust for power took over, leading to complaints that “special interests or political machines gained control over the state legislature. Progressive reformers dismissed individuals elected by such legislatures as puppets and the Senate as a ‘millionaires’ club’ serving powerful private interests.”

The cure, however, has proven to be worse than the disease. In trying to solve a problem of “special interests,” rather than the states having two powerful advocates for their interests in Washington, Washington got two powerful advocates of its interests in each of the states, greatly assisting what we now call the Swamp in cementing its control over the nation. The sinister Left, currently fretting about losing “our democracy” remains hell-bent on finishing off republicanism in both its senses; for them, only a government by national plebiscite will do. As any student of early-20th century “reform” knows, the cure for “reform” gone awry was and is always more “reform” rather than a return to first principles. . . 

. . . A repeal of the 17th would largely remove mediocrities of no accomplishment like these from the scramble up the greasy pole. Men are not angels; no doubt corruption in their choice at the state level was very great, as it is in all human enterprise. But by returning the selection of senators to their now-nominal home states would elevate the importance of state legislatures and state elections, returning the power of republican democracy in D.C. back to the states and their residents, where it started and where it still belongs.

I can’t argue with Walsh at all, in either of his essays. The problem is repealing these amendments requires, beyond the political will and majorities of states of the union to ratify the amendment to repeal, the willingness of the corrupt State (Deep or otherwise) that those two amendments helped to bring about to accept the legislation that would in essence lead to its dismantling. It won’t. I think we are so beyond regular order, and worse, those in power are so bereft of morals and ethics, that I would say what’s the point of trying this? Every institution we have relied on to keep us safe and within the boundaries that maintain the civil society is corrupt beyond redemption. Many are not even constitutional in the first place, but that’s beside the point.

Starting with the midterms, the next two years are going to be “interesting times” indeed. Coincidentally, we’re only 11 days away from the 100th anniversary of Benito Mussolini and his fascists seizing power in Italy. 

Mussolini’s alternative to both free market capitalism and class-conscious socialism was corporatism — the organization of a national society into sectors of activity under the overall superintendence of the government. Corporatism sought cooperation between classes, not conflict. With corporatism, a nation would reach its maximum efficiency through harmony among all its working sub-sectors — business, agriculture, finance, family, and religion. . . 

. . . To be uncomfortably frank, Mussolini’s precedent is not without its application in the United States.

In her 2016 campaign for the presidency, Hillary Clinton provided socially constructed criteria to distinguish between those who deserved to be included in the American “volk” and those who deserved to be excluded:

“You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? …The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic — you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up.”

. . . Then, in his speech of September 1, 2022, President Biden distinguished between “good “Americans who follow their “better angels” and “bad” Americans who follow their “worst instincts.”

According to President Biden, only the former deserve to be part of the rightful “American” community and receive the blessings of God, saying “And may God protect all those who stand watch over our democracy”. 

Those who do not deserve God’s blessing were, President Biden pointedly suggested, to be “canceled’, ostracized, and effectively expunged from all polite American society.  Thus did Biden insisted that the American “volk” consist only of some citizens and not all:

Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic…

MAGA Republicans look at America and see carnage and darkness and despair.  They spread fear and lies — lies told for profit and power…

Ladies and gentlemen, we can’t be pro-ex- — pro-ex- — pro-insurrectionist and pro-American.  They’re incompatible…

And here, in my view, is what is true: MAGA Republicans do not respect the Constitution.  They do not believe in the rule of law.  They do not recognize the will of the people…

MAGA forces… promote authoritarian leaders, and they fan the flames of political violence that are a threat to our personal rights, to the pursuit of justice, to the rule of law, to the very soul of this country…

This is inflammatory.  It’s dangerous.  It’s against the rule of law.  And we, the people, must say: This is not who we are…

Given the current polarization among Americans, it would not stretch our imaginations too much to predict that those who identify themselves with the Make America Great Again movement association with former President Trump could easily decide to evict from their American “volk” those they disagreed with.  Those nominated for eviction from that “volk” of traditionalists would likely be champions of Critical Race Theory, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion discriminations, gender fluidity, very permissive acceptance of abortions, free college education and health care, drastic elimination of fossil fuels, an end to toxic masculinity, and other identity badges of progressive points of view.

It’s a good essay until that last paragraph. It’s not that I disagree that what the author suggests should not be done if we ever achieve a level of political power as well as the will to use it that would be required. All of that garbage he frets about is exactly why we are on the precipice of becoming a totalitarian socialist/fascist police state. All of that crap must be expunged and anyone who promotes it never again permitted to be within a million miles of any position of power and influence.

Yet doing so would be beyond the purview of the very Constitution we seek to reinstate and protect. To wit, how do we deny the rights of those who hold those views to hold them or promote them, with the knowledge that allowing them to do so could and would lead to catastrophe?


  • Michael Walsh: “The sinister Left, currently fretting about losing ‘our democracy’ remains hell-bent on finishing off republicanism in both its senses; for them, only a government by national plebiscite will do. As any student of early-20th century ‘reform’ knows, the cure for ‘reform’ gone awry was and is always more “reform” rather than a return to first principles.”To Save America, Repeal the 17th Amendment
  • “Children are moldable. Children are naïve. Children want to please their teachers. They can be more easily conditioned into accepting these concepts, especially when they are presented to be about “the greater good”. With Corporations starting to be rated on their Environment, Social, and Governance Scores (A businesses social credit score), the obvious next step is that they will want future employees that already accept and are accustomed to being rated based on a Social Credit System.” ‘Social Emotional Learning’ is the New Social Credit System Being Implemented in Our Schools
  • Victor Davis Hanson: “The sharper wits of Silicon Valley know that if the public sees their products as toxic extensions of left-wing groupthink, the majority of Americans will shun them.” The Tentacles of the Social Media Octopus



  • “Kirby’s statement came amid a diplomatic row between the Biden administration and the regime in Riyadh, which has pushed back on the [junta’s] charge that the October 5 OPEC+ decision to reduce production by two million barrels a day was taken to benefit Russia’s war in Ukraine, and hurt U.S. interests.” (jeez, what does it say when a middle-aged man wears the smart-girl glasses? – jjs) Kirby Dismisses Saudi Defense of Oil Production Cut as ‘Spin’ and Deflection
  • Daniel Greenfield: “Bribing a foreign power to rig oil prices to keep control of Congress.”Impeach Biden for Saudi Election Quid Pro Quo
  • “A video posted by the Just Stop Oil campaign group, which has been holding protests for the last two weeks in the British capital, showed two women throwing two tins of Heinz tomato soup over the painting, one of five versions on display in museums and galleries around the world. They then glued themselves to a wall.” Who Throws Soup? Climate Activists Trash Van Gogh Painting With Tomato Bisque
  • “The [so-called quote-unquote “president”] and his entire party won’t abandon green extremism, but try to deceive the nation about it. (Heck, they just labeled their huge green-energy corporate-welfare bill ‘The Inflation Reduction Act’ when it did nothing to cut inflation.) That leaves any American who wants energy prices to stop soaring no choice but to vote for every Republican in sight in November’s elections.” Biden Wants High Gas Prices — He Just Doesn’t Want Voters to Notice
  • “He who controls the weather controls the world.” These ominous words were spoken in 1962, at Southwest Texas State University, by then Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson. Is the Climate Being Engineered?
  • Thad McCotter: “This is not the first time the Democrats have raised the specter of Armageddon to shamelessly try to pass off their failed policies.” We’re in the Climate Army Now
  • “Anyone for shooting the rabbit?” Upper-Class Twit of the Year Goes Green
  • “The state’s new offshore-wind goal is an ill-conceived plan that will cost taxpayers billions of dollars.” California Tilts at Windmills







  • The statement said, in part, “For the lives we’ve lost and the lives we can save, I took historic action to stop gun violence in our nation, including signing the most significant gun safety law in nearly 30 years. But we must do more. We must pass an assault weapons ban. The American people support this commonsense action to get weapons of war off our streets. House Democrats have already passed it. The Senate should do the same. Send it to my desk and I’ll sign it.” Biden Pushes ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban After Juvenile Allegedly Kills 5 with Shotgun







  • “The American public was subjected to a campaign right out of the Soviet playbook designed to obfuscate the Biden family corruption.” Hiding Hunter’s Laptop



* * * * *









NOTE: The opinions expressed in the links may or may not reflect my own. I include them because of their relevance to the discussion of a particular issue.