FOLSOM

I hear that train a’comin’!/It’s comin’ ‘round th’ bend!

But I ain’t seen the sunshine/Since I don’t know when!

—Folsom Prison Blues

From The Washington Post “Daily 202”:

“The British government on Friday ordered WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange’s extradition to the United States to face espionage and hacking charges. Assange has 14 days to appeal the decision.” 

“Assange has been held in a London prison since 2019, after seven years evading arrest by seeking political asylum in the Ecuadoran Embassy.

************************************** 

I believe the case of Julian Assange is the almost perfect illustration of why the Democratic Party’s posture is almost unacceptable now.  Many Democrats are angry that Assange published the texts of e-mails from Hillary Clinton allegedly stolen from their recipient(s), and they want to prosecute and imprison Assange, notwithstanding his First Amendment right to publish whatever truthful information he came by innocently.  Both Barack Obama and now Joe Biden have been trying to force Assange’s extradition for criminal prosecution in the US for daring to expose Hillary’s peccadillos!

Democrats don't ask how come their favored presidential candidate in 2016 was so incredibly STUPID to have crafted those e-mails and to have arrogantly used her personal server for official State Dept. business in CLEAR violation of government policy and the LAW!  They don’t seem to care about the SUBSTANCE of those absurd e-mails.  NO!  They are righteously indignant ONLY about the fact that somebody got ahold of those juicy tidbits and PUBLISHED them!  FAILED to help keep her dirty secrets hidden!  That Julian Assange did not sit on them and PROTECT their candidate from her own stupidity, as any good statist “liberal” should have!  They WANT to believe that Assange was in criminal cahoots with Donald Trump and his thugs, who may well have wrongfully obtained the actual e-mails and funneled them to Assange, and that he was part and parcel of Trump's anti-Hillary machine.  Democrats don’t bother to ask if, perhaps, Assange did most of us a favor by showing us Hillary Clinton’s UTTERLY UNACCEPTABLE nature as the presidential standard-bearer for the Party in 2016.

The nomination and promotion of obsessive “statists" like Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Joe Biden in 2020 are graphic examples of what is wrong.  Our top priority should be the preservation of individual liberty, radically under attack by most Republicans and also many traditional “liberals” in the Dem Party who, like most Republicans, are also default “statists,” which is to say they both rely upon aggressive (mis-)use of government POWER (and the resultant loss of personal liberty) to “save” what they support.  Dems are presumably “kindergentler“ statists than the radical Republicans seeking to ram government power where the sun don’t shine!  But, the answer to such misuse of power is not more misuse of government power, just because it is for a more noble cause!

Samuel Alito’s revocation of ROE vs. WADE is a serious threat to the Rule of Law and our fundamental liberties, but the solution is NOT some federal government action in the opposite direction, as Joe Biden and many “chardonnay liberals” have suggested!  For one thing, there is no SPECIFIC recognition of the rights protected under ROE within the US Constitution, as Alito has asserted.  But Alito has chosen to dismiss the plain language of the 9th Amendment which makes clear that there may well be “rights” deserving of protection that are not enumerated in the Constitution!  In fact, there is really NO SUCH THING as any “constitutional right” at all!  Instead, the CORRECT question to be asked is, by what authority does any government, state or federal, assert POWERS allowed by the People through a constitution to CRIMINALIZE exercise of a fundamental right (reproductive choice) they have no legitimate POWER to mess with in the first place?  State legislatures DO NOT have unlimited powers to fabricate crimes out of whole cloth!  WHY don’t Democrats have the nerve to say so?

Contrary to what a lot of presumed but weaselly constitutional “experts” have said, our “rights” ARE absolute!  There is no “balancing act” needed to resolve conflicts that don’t really exist. What so many people FAIL to understand that if something is NOT "absolute,” then it’s probably NOT a “right” but instead is some sort of “privilege,” like drivers licenses.  But NONE of our true rights are “granted” by the Constitution, even though some are MENTIONED!  Nevertheless, our personal right to vote is clear and absolute!  Our right to due process is absolute!  Our rights to freedom of speech, press and religion are absolute!  But those rights are merely referenced in directives to Congress about what must or must NOT happen!  The “First” Amendment starts off by PLAINLY stating that "CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW respecting the establishment of religion, OR prohibiting the free exercise thereof….”  Those are instructions to CONGRESS, not a squeamish declaration of limited rights for the People!  We are not (SUPPOSED TO BE) dependent upon some action from “government” to enjoy our rights, except to stay the Hell out of the way!

We have an ABSOLUTE RIGHT, supposedly protected by the Constitution, to PEACEABLY express ourselves, even in vulgar fashion, about any topic we so choose AND to expose ANY wrongdoing by ANYONE we so choose!  No one is obliged to protect important peoples’ "dirty secrets,” not even Julian Assange!  I have often said that the First Amendment guarantees our "right” to be offended!  We certainly do NOT have some sort of “right” to holler “fire” in a crowded theater UNLESS the damned place is really on fire, so babbling about that as a limitation of our “right to free speech" is ludicrously misplaced. Falsely yelling about fire is simply NOT a “right” AT ALL! Neither are threats, lies or frauds, though they may be spoken. As the saying goes, my “right” to swing my fists ends at your nose!

So, the Constitution is ONLY a listing of permissible government POWERS and, to the extent that “the People” have allowed “government” to have any power at all (such being derived from us, the People), then that “permission” needs to be found within the four corners of the Constitution.  Our “rights” are just too numerous to be listed anywhere!  It was much easier for the Framers to simply set down what POWERS the government ought to have, so that’s what they did. Our rights, having arguably “existed" for “Eternity,” also precede in time the existence of ANY government created by white European descendants in this hemisphere!  “Government” must be dedicated to enforcing and protecting our rights.  Now, the Supremes (thanks to the “Savage Six”) seemingly plan to ignore that, and who’s to say they will stop with reproductive choice?  Is it REALLY any of the state government’s beeswax whom I may wish to marry, so long as it’s a consenting adult human?  Where is that “power” listed in ANY state's constitution?  Anyone seeking to mess with that is a damned idiot!  WHY can’t the Democratic Party say so, firmly and proudly?  It certainly won’t “stop” abortions (nor homosexual attractions) as ANYONE who was alive back in 1973 before ROE was decided should remember!  EVERY pregnant woman is a potential ABORTION!  So, it seems we’re gonna have to learn those ugly lessons all over again, because of the gibbering IDIOTS and ideologues in high places who fail to remember, and who FAIL to read the entire Constitution and bother to truly UNDERSTAND how it really works!  Or, like some Democrats and most Republicans, they just don’t care!

ANYWAY, the reason that Julian Assange is front and center is that many DEMOCRATS hate his guts for having published Hillary Clinton’s stupidly crafted e-mails!  Democrats are perfectly happy to let Joe Biden's GOVERNMENT rake him over the coals, lock him up, stuff him incommunicado in some “supermax" prison somewhere for most of his remaining life, and be exploited as an example of what is bound to happen to those who dare to take their First Amendment rights seriously at the Democrats’ expense! They seem determined to VIOLATE his ABSOLUTE RIGHT to publish unsavory material about THEIR STUPID, STUPID candidate!  SCREW the First Amendment!  And, EVEN IF Hillary is not as bad as all that, his ABSOLUTE RIGHT is to express whatever he wishes, if he believes it to be true. Yet, it seems that DEMOCRATS are perfectly happy to let Assange twist in the wind, and to Hell with his “rights”!  They seem to not care if Assange is railroaded; after all, in their view he hurt Hillary and possibly cost her the Election!  Dems seem to think it serves him right!  It seems that Joe Biden and his clueless minions will see to it, too!

I am a “strict constructionist”!  I think the Constitution’s PLAIN MEANING is remarkably clear and clearly protects people like Julian Assange, but I won’t hold my breath waiting for THIS Supreme Court to uphold the First Amendment and protect Assange. I won’t hold my breath waiting for the Democrats to find their spine and stand up for our liberties!  Should not at least ONE major party do so?  My undivided loyalty is to the US Constitution, as written until properly amended.

Democrats have been taking civil libertarians for granted for years.  NO self-respecting civil libertarian should support most Democrats anymore, UNLESS they radically change their attitudes, and their policies, and their expressions.

_______________________ 

JUST DO SOMETHING!

From Wash. Post “Daily 202”:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/03/enough-biden-said-gun-violence-well-know-soon/

“Enough! Enough! Enough!” — President Biden, June 2, 2022.

In a rare prime-time address, Biden rattled off more than two decades of mass shootings — “after Columbine, after Sandy Hook, after Charleston, after Orlando, after Las Vegas, after Parkland, nothing has been done.”

“Just DO something!”

Joe Biden has given us a rather cogent summary of the arguments that gun opponents have been making.  With a couple of exceptions, though, I don’t see how the 2d Amendment is RELEVANT IN ANY WAY, yet that distinction does not seem to curb strident calls for revocation of or substantial changes to the 2d Amendment, AS IF any of those proposals are inhibited thereby!  Wayne LaPierre of the NRA seems to think so, but why is his mere opinion dispositive of the issue?

I do not believe (though many disagree with me) that the 2d Amendment addresses ANYTHING pertaining to arms COMMERCE—buying or selling arms.  The PLAIN LANGUAGE of the 2d Amendment (disregarding the meaningless fluff about “well regulated Militias”) seeks to protect a “right” ONLY in “keeping” (possessing) and “bearing” (carrying) arms.  Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution gives Congress the unlimited POWER to regulate “interstate" commerce, and there is NO EXCEPTION therein for “arms.”  PRESUMABLY, Congress has the constitutional power to control (or even prohibit) INTERSTATE arms sales and purchases!

Given that all states have ratified that language as “the supreme Law of the Land” (Article VI), I think they are also bound thereby.  A majority on the Supreme Court may not (yet) agree with me.  They should.

In MY opinion, some of these proposals (Biden’s “policy solutions”) have their own defects, but they are not CONSTITUTIONALLY impaired.  As clearly indicated, they are POLITICAL in nature, so the aim to have “bipartisan” support seems reasonable.  What bothers me is that this stuff gets predictably dragged out and yelled about EVERY TIME there is some horrible gun incident, frequently involving innocent little children as victims.  But NONE of those incidents have been precisely linked to any of the popular “solutions,” limitations on magazine and clip capacities excepted.  

(Given modern technology, I don’t know why rifles cannot be manufactured with a durable electronic "shot limiter" built in, to disable the firing mechanism (temporarily, requiring an operator re-set) after so many shots have been fired, REGARDLESS of clip size!)

Most of the proposed remedies seem to be “feel-good” propositions that have almost nothing to do with the demonstrated horrors of “gun violence”!  For instance, HOW might an “assault weapon” be actually DEFINED (for law-writing purposes)?  It can’t be banned if it can’t be precisely described!  Would a “ban” also be on private possession or just on sales and purchases?  How might such a law be enforced, especially in regard to private sales?  It seems to be an attempt to regulate gun aesthetics—mere appearances—and not gun function.  

Does a gun that “looks bad” actually encourage misuse?  Supposedly, the perp in the recent Texas shooting LEGALLY bought an AR-15 to use in the slaughter.  But as he is dead now, we’ll never know WHY he chose that particular weapon.  I think that is important to know.

EVERYONE needs to understand the significant difference between (1) “semi-automatic” and (2) “fully automatic.”  Legal guns (including so-called “assault weapons”) are all “semi-automatic,” requiring a separate trigger-pull for each shot fired.  Federal law bans all unlicensed FULLY automatic weapons, like machine guns.  The AR-15 is NOT a “machine gun.”

I have recently reviewed federal firearms laws, and they seem pretty thorough to me.  Advocates of “gun control” are obliged to specifically address any regulatory and enforcement shortcomings. What legal changes MIGHT have prevented the subsequent slaughter(s)?  How so?

If someone is put on some sort of “red-flag” list or “background check” list, should not they know who maintains those lists, what are the SPECIFIC “flags” being examined, and how might one challenge being WRONGFULLY listed?  All that is called “due process,” constitutionally guaranteed for everyone.  Everybody's unmitigated, unconditional, unlimited and ETERNAL rights to DUE PROCESS and EQUAL PROTECTION must be strictly observed, INCLUDING those of arms dealers; sweaty, swaggering, gun-totin’ white supremacists; innocent little children; EVERYBODY.

If some “questionable” people have no official record of misbehavior or mental/emotional issues, HOW might such persons be picked up and listed?  The perp in Texas HAD to undergo a federally mandated “background check,” and he easily passed it!  He HAD NO RECORD!  Supposedly, he had just turned 18 and was emotionally primed to avenge all the horrible crap he’d had to endure for a long time in his adolescence!  HOW might someone like him to be detected and intercepted?  What TREATMENT for adolescent “disturbance” might be suggested, and how should we round up and identify all the “adolescents” who might be thus “disturbed”?  Might it be like admittance to the “Key Club” or FFA?  I doubt it.

Many mental-health advocates are annoyed that gun violence has been linked with “mental illness.”  I certainly agree that the perps seem “disturbed,” but the knee-jerk connections to “mental illness” generally are absurd.

If the Biden Administration is going to advocate a more aggressive response, it needs to address or answer ALL my questions IN ADVANCE, and come up with concrete proposals to be introduced in Congress and shepherded through the legislative process from beginning to end. Waiting for Congress to act will be like waiting for Godot!  (He ain’t coming!)  POLITICALLY, I think “small bites” make more sense than the omnibus ”toilet bowl” so piously favored by Democrats and almost ALWAYS guaranteed to fail.

I hate to say this, but I am inclined to believe that, really, NOTHING much can be done about such horrible slaughter of innocent little children!  There is really NO SUCH THING as “crime prevention,” yet many people babble that phrase AS IF we all know what it is and how it’s achieved.  MOST laws are “enforced” AFTER THE FACT; after innocent people are murdered or the money is gone!  Life in a truly “free” society involves assuming risks of misbehavior by others!  We might punish the Hell out of them after the fact, but we may not be able to PREVENT their misbehaviors!  STOPPING all those nasty folks in advance is just unlikely.  It only takes a few seconds to pick up a loaded gun and blow somebody away!

Just ask Alec Baldwin!