El Salvador's Nayib Bukele shows why believe Bernie Sanders would have been popular and shaken up US politics if he had a chance

Lina Seiche on El Salvador's Nayib Bukele with a story which sounds a lot like Bernie Sanders.

On thing people neglect to mention is that "Socialist" Bernie represents a historically red state. Bukele's rise reminds me of Sanders since they both started as "leftists" who managed to unify a politically polarised nation. I think Sanders would have done so if he were given a chance.

Unfortunately, Sanders' time was 2016. 

I'm of the opinion that the duopoly won't let anyone vaguely like a Sanders or Bukele get anywhere near the American people. Also, the people who truly influence politics don't want someone like a Bukele in power.

I don't agree with Bukele's positions on a few things, but he proves that a polarised political climate can be changed. 

A repost of Bernie in a deep red state. 

 

Why the Westminster system really beats the US model.

 I was talking with Doggone and she commented about the ability to change governments in the Westminster system. When a government loses the ability to legislate, it also gets tossed out (vote of no confidence).  I've pointed out before that 

I like it because the power is where it belongs: in the lesiglature. Additionally, because of that, there is an absolute necessity for political cooperation. One needs to come up with a consensus for a parliamentary system to work. The government literally falls if there can't be a consensus, which is why it is necessary. A lower house of parliament with an ability to dismiss a government by "withholding (or blocking) supply" (rejecting a budget), passing a motion of no confidence, or defeating a confidence motion.

Loss of supply occurs where a government in a parliamentary democracy using the Westminster System or a system derived from it is denied a supply of treasury or exchequer funds, by whichever house or houses of parliament or head of state is constitutionally entitled to grant and deny supply. A defeat on a budgetary vote is one way by which supply can be denied. Loss of supply is typically interpreted as indicating a loss of confidence in the government. Not all "money bills" are necessarily supply bills. For instance, in Australia, supply bills are defined as "bills which are required by the Government to carry on its day-to-day business".^[1]

When a loss of supply occurs, a prime minister is generally required either by constitutional convention or by explicit constitutional instruction to either resign immediately or seek a parliamentary dissolution.

Some constitutions, however, do not allow the option of parliamentary dissolution but rather require the government to be dissolved or to resign.

Comedian George Hargreaves on the Seven PMs in the last 10 years: 

I should say that the changes of government are due more to the mistake called Brexit.

Anyone who knows me will tell you that I was a very staunch remainer, but in the EU, not Britain. 

Of course, as I have also pointed out that the US would probably go through governments faster than Italy or Belgium. In fact, I would guess that it would make Belgium look relatively stable.

My voting third party has nothing to do with a protest vote other than to possibly say the US system is very broken. 

Why have Juneteenth when you can have Odunde?

https://www.odundefestival.org/ 

Once again it's time for the "woke" holiday that was adopted after the BLM riots.

And it seems that a majority of people are ignoring it, which makes sense since it really isn't that much of an event.

It's way more hype tied with a desire to appease the people who went wild in 2020.

On the other hand, Philadelphia's Odunde actually gathers a crowd. Toss in that it has a lot of community support.

"Jane"

So, maybe we should have gone with Odunde which is a thing as opposed to Juneteenth which was pretty much a non-event along the line of the Plymouth Plantation crowd and thanksgiving. 

Who hears about Jamestown's starving time?

Jane needs to be recognised for her struggle in the creation of America!

She needs to be an "American Girl" doll!

We need to know the story of Jane! Who was she? Did she have a say in her ultimate fate?

So, I propose that we need a holiday to remember Jane while we're doing away with Juneteenth and Thanksgiving.

Let's study America's REAL history!

250th anniversary of the United States? Not at all.

Americans love to take quotes out of context rather than look at the whole picture.

Also, the period between 1775 (and maybe earlier) to 1790 is not much of anything since the Articles of Confederation were what was running the show. It also means that the "United States" didn't really exist until the Constitution was ratified. That's another section of ignorance in US history which needs much greater study. 

In fact, thinking about it the early republic wasn't in too hot a condition with a low level civil war that finally broke out into a full scale one in the 1860s.

Perhaps, rather than pretend that the war for independence created a country, we should look at what it was actually created by war. The US should look at how its bellicose nature has put it into the current mess it is in.

This is a real case where war is not the answer and the real one needs to be found. 

Roe v Wade was overturned? Quoi c'est bordel?

 I say that because there has always been a simple solution if we use the concept of Separation of Church and state under the First Amendment. It's what's being pointed out here in France's making Abortion a constitutional right and why it is a constitutional right.

Big hint, if the Judges who overturned Roe are Catholic, then you have a glaringly obvious example of how this simple way to make it a constitutional right also works in the United States. It's one I've thought about writing about for a while, but this post is now truly necessary.

The first amendment states:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" 

And can't forget Article IV, Clause 3:

"no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." 

Laîcité is how France keeps religion and government separate to effectuate those principles. Here's an explanation of the concept.

 As she points out that "faith is a private matter for each individual citizen, and when it comes to the state: it's a no god zone."

Which is where laïcité, or secularism, comes into play when one sees a group of Catholic judges banning abortion, or any other religious person for that matter, then one can safely infer that religion is involved.

So, if the reasoning is based upon any metaphysical belief rather than an actual scientific one, then it's probably unconstitutional under secularism.

And given the amount of miscarriages and the high cost of malpractice insurance for obstetricians, we can add that it's wrong anyway.

So, given that I believe that if there is a god, he also believes that abortion is no biggie and should be a right. After all, he's more than willing to end a pregnancy.

That makes the choice to terminate a pregnancy one that belongs to the woman and her health care provider and no one else. 

The founders created the United States as a secular because they didn't want religion to mix with public life for pretty much the same reasons that the French did. They knew that religion and politics don't mix.

Unfortunately, the influence of religion is far too pervasive in US society. It's time to look to Laïcité. 

And join France in making abortion a constitutional right. 

The Virginia "Gun Rights" crowd go where angels fear to tread.

The Spotsylvania Commonwealth's Attorney is showing his ignorance of Virginia history and law in a way that is quite pleasurable for those of us who want to preserve the Constitution. Especially since, as I like to point out, the Virginia Constitution's analogue to the Second Amendment makes it pretty clear that the right is tied to enabling a militia, as opposed to a standing army.

Article I. Bill of Rights Section 13. Militia; standing armies; military subordinate to civil power

That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.

Wow, that couldn't be any clearer.

Could it?

And you can see it for yourself at:
https://law.lis.virginia.gov/constitution/article1/section13/

I know it's been changed to add the right of the people to keep and bear arms, but the original version written by Thomas Jefferson gives us a great idea of what the founder's intent happened to be:

That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power. 
Virginia Declaration of Rights, 1776 §13 which was written by Thomas Jefferson. 

The issue for the founders wasn't personal uses, but the preservation of the militia system. That's a military establishment like what Switzerland HAD where the professional, full-time, force is mainly for training and administration. The fighting force are the part-timers that is formed by pretty much every able bodied male.

 Pulling in Virginia's declaration of rights is a godsend because it can get the issue back to the actual debates at the drafting of the Constitution. This is because pretty much all the texts used to justify gun rights are misquotations or taken out of context.

The real issue was that the Federal government had an army. The militias were state run organisations. And the militias weren't just anybody with a gun since any real discussion of this period needs to address Shays' Rebellion and the reaction to it. 

The founders were concerned that since Congress had the power over the budget, they would favour the professional army, and possibly create a large standing army. As opposed to funding the militia. You will see the founders actually citing article 1, section 8, clause 16 in the debates in reference to this issue.

Hence the term "infringed". 

Also, as the Virginia Constitution points out, the military, whether army or militia, needs to be under civilian control.

And as the US Constitution points out in Article I, Section 8, Clause 15: the militia is "to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions." 

But the bottom line is that rights come with responsibilities: and the right to keep and bear arms comes with the responsibility of serving in the active militia. 

And following the law.

 See also:
    US Constitution Article I, Section 8, Clauses 15 & 16

History Never Repeats?

 It's funny that a draft dodger during the Vietnam War has me thinking about that war. People would be surprised how similar Vietnam was to what is happening now. 

There's a lot to say about this: one is that I think the people who protested Vietnam have turned into total hypocrites: e.g., John "How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?" Kerry. Well, you voted for the war in Iraq, John: so, now you know the answer.

Anyway, part of this Vietnam revisited on my part is listening to the music of the time, which is where this song comes in:

 It was written 61 years ago and went to number one. 

And it's relevant to the current situation.

Tactical toys for the Walt set.

 I guess one advantage to being a sigma male is that you don't really care about what other people think about you. On the other hand, I have to admit this reel from Instagram by @erikcrackschina, a Chinese businessman, definitely got my attention. It's titled 

The Tactical Illusion: Mass-Producing Male Survival Anxiety 

The most profitable brands don't sell products; they sell solutions to emotional anxiety. Breaking down the industrial reality behind the $200 "military-grade" EDC tactical knife. Discover how massive CNC machines and kitchen-scissor factories mass-produce "alpha male" survival anxiety for just $5.

How DTC founders use the heavy hardware matrix of Yangjiang, Guangdong, to arbitrage Western male "survival anxiety" and turn stamped steel into massive profits. You are buying the feeling, but they are selling the steel.

I was stationed in Hong Kong and was able to visit the PRC (and do a little tourism). So, I can confirm this even though I saw the industry in its nascent stages during the 1980s and 1990.

Even more cutting is this comment to the video:

as a man who has spent 30 years in the gun and tactical industry id like to say your assessment is so dead on its scary. And being im in firearms were one of the only industries not completely dominated by China because of import restrictions. But the firearms accessories market is quickly becoming dominated by Chinese manufacturing as well. Brands like Holosun and Vortex are dominating the optics market. American gun companies should be thankful for those restrictions on firearms import. Ive seen and shot the Norinco AR15 and its actually a damn fine rifle. 

I have to admit amusement because I occasionally cross paths with the US gun community. Toss in that I worked in military procurement (mostly electronic gear), but that didn't stop me from getting addicted to true military surplus.

And not rusty rifles that have sat around in some warehouse since lord knows when.

Anyway, I do have admit that US gun culture is driven by paranoia. Even if sometimes that paranoia can be justified, as happened during the "peaceful protests". Although, some people did go way out of control. But that is a whole other set of posts.

The reality of all this is that paranoia is big money.

"It makes you feel like a navy seal even if you’re not one or want to open an Amazon package in the suburbs." 

And its LARRP that they are doing not LRRP. 

 

We Rejected a King and Built an Imperial Presidency. They Kept the King and Built Democracies.

Tad Stoermer points out something I have been talking about for a while.  

In the spirit of Mather Byles: I would rather have an official greeter than a tyrant. The loyalists were the real resistance of the Independence period. British North America exists--it's called CANADA.

I'm going to suggest reading the article The Mirror Has Cracked: How the Three Branches Failed America in Fulcrum about how the US Constitution has failed to prevent an "imperial presidency" gone amok.

 

FALSE: "Green New Deal is America's OFF switch"

 

I remember seeing these billboards when I would drive to see my mother and wanting to scream at Sen Camara Bartolotta and Scott Perry for being total morons.

And right now I want to thank them for aiding the Iranians in crippling the United States.

Because of morons like these who cannot understand that energy independence is a necessity to national security and defence they has caused them to aid and abet the enemy in crippling the United States.

 No, you morons, "Green Energy" is not an off switch it's a necessity and it's something you should have been supporting for a long time now.

Fortunately, their treasonous ignorance is mitigated by the fact that they are complete and total dumbfucks.

They should have shut the fuck up and listened to more informed people.

It's not a "tree hugger thing".

It's a matter of national security.

But it's your party that has created this mess.

And it's time we took away your position of power. 

Test post

 I'm back!

Why only congress should be declaring war, not the president

 I am thoroughly disgusted that the bullshit in Iran wasn't stopped before it happened. After all, a deployment that size is hard to hide.

It also doesn't take too much brainpower to see that this was not well thought out to begin with.

But, this confirms it. 

 

Do you really think HIllary or Kamala would have been any better?

 There are a few reasons that I voted Green in 2016 with the major one being there is no way I would vote for Hillary Clinton: even if ranked choice voting as involved. There would have to be a lot of slots for other options before I would vote for her. 

And I have three dogs who I would write in before I would vote for her.

No sexism. Unless the reason you wanted me to vote for her was that she was a woman. Both Kamala and Hillary are pretty bad choices.

I've gotten into them before, but this one needs to be hammered into your head if you think Hillary should have been an option:

 Misogynistic, anti-semites for Jill Stein.

Yeah, right!

Can't forget 'Orrible 'Arris:

 

Gold is not a safe investment--it's a commodity

 There are a lot of myths about gold, which just aren't true.

 One is that you can't lose money on it, which isn't true. As Isaid, it's a commodity with all the associated risks and benefits of a commodity investment.

US Independence was based upon the costs of a prior war

People in the US really don't like the costs associated with wars, yet they keep getting into them. Perhaps it's due to the fact that the war for independence was basically paying for a previous war started by George Washington: La Conquête (or the French and Indian War). 

I think I have mentioned that the War for Independence probably could have been nipped in the bud if the British had said: "No, we won't send troops and supplies until you cough up some money."

But, like Trump's Operation Epic Failure, the wars were started and then the bill shows up.

To be paid for by the average person. Here's Maryam again to explain how the fuel cost will hit the US.

 Of course, Trump and a lot of right wingers don't like renewable energy, which is a serious error as far as energy security goes. The US Department of Defence was reported to acknowledge Climate Change and Renewable energy as important aspects of US Defence strategy prior to the agency becoming the Department of War Crimes under the Secretary of War Crimes: Pete Hegseth.

Anyway, it would be nice if we had reasonable people running the US, but its current political system precludes that.

Another nice thing would be if the US became the multiparty democracy with free and fair elections on a secret ballot that it spent the last Century saying it was and pushing it to the rest of the world.

 

Trump is not "Putin's Pet"

 I've got to admit that I'm surprised I would agree with Fiona Hill, but

 Trump wants to be Putin's pet, but he's not.

Trump's Operation Epic Failure

 Call it what it is. And don't forget to put Trump's name on the front of it since he like having things named after himself. 

And it sort of puts the blame where it belongs.

"Sort of" since only Congress has the power to declare war, which should be clarified to mean any deployment of troops outside of US territory. Especially since this time has been a complete GMFU.

Let's start with something missing from last night's speech: regime change.

 

Maryam is Iranian and a good source of info and commentary on this fiasco. She confirms that Trump's decapitation has only led to more radical leadership.

Let's face it, this adventure was ill-advised and should have been stopped long before it happened. It is not in anyway a victory since it has totally messed up the world order for the worse.

Now, for that Downfall clip to translate last night's speech by the president.

 I hope that the US legislature does something to ensure that the president cannot send troops outside US Territory without authorisation and only in cases where there is an actual, imminent threat to the US.

This is a disaster. 

From Rep. Jason Crow. Bio:

Jason Crow is an American politician, lawyer, and former U.S. Army officer serving since 2019 as the United States representative for Colorado's 6th congressional district.

And from Col. Douglas Macgregor:

Can't forget Joe Kent:

Pretty much everyone I know in the military said this was a bad idea. My opinion is that it's going to make the Dieppe Raid look like a girl scout picnic.

More on Iran War strategy: or lack of it.

 The more I listen to people, the more I think that Trump just charged ahead on this without thinking.

Jonathan Pie on Tearing Down Statues

 Damn, I wish this were up when all the statues were being torn down. I think my reaction was to sell the Civil War ones to the French since they look like the ones for the Franco-Prussian War.

"Sell your losers to our losers."

Former British Intelligence head says the Iranians have the upper hand.

The US needs to do something about making sure the Constitution is followed. An idiot like Trump should no be able to violate the constitutional order and put the military in harm's way.

 And violate US law.