Hate is Hate

Hate is strong word. There are no levels of hate, to hate for any reason is wrong. Hate is commonly used to describe opposition to a rival team or player and even that type of hate is wrong. People should respect rivals not hate them. After all, with out rivalries sports and athletics would be boring. Rivalries are what sells tickets and make headlines. If you can find it your heart to hate a player because he goes to wrong school or plays for the wrong team then you can find it your heart to hate anyone for any reason.

I have been accused of hating Obama. I never said or would I ever say I hated Obama. Obama seems like a nice guy and great father. I have no reason to hate him, but I disagreed with him very strongly on his policies. These are not same things. To hate someone because of political ideas and ideals is no different than hating someone because of the color of their skin or sexual orientation. Hate is hate and it is wrong.

Recently, Dennis Quaid was criticized on Twitter by thousands saying very hateful things and actually saying they hate him for saying he though President Trump was doing a good job in the Covid 19 response. People are calling for a boycott of his movies simply because of a political view. This is why I say those people who "hate" Trump are acting no differently than of the behavior they accuse Trump. Hating is wrong. This behavior is ludicrous. I do not agree with many Hollywood stars political beliefs but I do not hate them and wish ill will on them. I would not even consider to boycott a movie they are in. It is just petty, trivial, and shallow. A political ideology does not necessary define a person's character or persona. That sad thing is that both sides just fail to realize that other side wants to improve America, but they have a different philosophy about doing it. That is it.

Of course, there are extreme circumstances where hateful feelings may be hard to control such as towards some that may have committed a crime against a family member. Sure, forgiveness someone for such heinous acts would be difficult, but it should certainly be the goal of afflicted persons to try to make peace with what transpired. I can certainly understand hateful feelings in these circumstances, but it is certainly very hard to justify for political ideals, sports rivals, or other tedious things. To hold a ballplayer or a political rival in the same light as someone that harmed a family member is obscene and why hate is such a strong word and should not be used.

One would think during these dark hours of Covid 19 folks could put their political ideology aside for the betterment of America.

The Left is being Disingenuous about the Pandemic

I am using the word disingenuous because I do not want to call anyone but liar, but I am seeing articles and hearing from friends that the "anybody could have seen the pandemic coming". Thus, they are saying Trump did not act fast enough. Obviously we should have acted faster knowing what we know now, but the question is did Trump have the right information to act sooner? I do not think he did. It was not until January 30th that China and the WHO admitted that they had a pandemic that could be spread person to person. Despite that the WHO still said any travel bans are not necessary. Although it was not official Trump had already put together a Covid 19 task force with experts like Foucci who were recommending against any action at that time. Despite the WHO report and recommendations from the task force, the next day Trump initiated his first travel ban on China and later against Europe. Of course, everyone who claims to have seen the pandemic coming resorted to identity politics calling Trump a racist for his travel bans. In the preceding weeks Pelosi, Cuomo, and deBlasio were in China towns asking more people to join them and resist the xenophobia of the President. As soon as Foucci and Birx recommended lockdowns and social distancing the President acted the next day. Five to six weeks following the first travel ban and weeks after the first state lockdown orders, Cuomo and deBlasio were still saying this crisis would not be bigger than China and they had the best healthcare system in the world in NY to deal with. Three weeks later, Trump had tripled the capacity of New York hospitals including beds, equipment, and healthcare workers. Nine weeks after the first travel ban, Biden said Trump was right, but by that time this pandemic would have killed millions. How do I know this? I have seen the data. We need to look no further than ski resorts to see the effects of travel on these areas. The prevalence rate in these areas was astronomical and that includes only the people that live their year round, not those who got sick and went home to spread the virus.

Why do I know everyone who said they saw this coming is not being truthful. Easy, look at the markets. The markets responded as Trump responded. Most Financial companies have offices in China and Asia but yet they did not react first and markets are very finicky. People should have been making out like bandits if they could foresee the future and few did like Senators Burr, Loefler, and Feinstein. That is because they were getting insider information days before Trump would act but it was only then the markets responded.

I live in a small town and county. My state was one of the first to order a lockdown and our county had no cases but decided to follow suit. Nine days after the lockdown we got our first case and despite being locked down for over 30 days our cases continue to rise. Our county prevalence rate is well above the national average for cases and mortality rate. I thought for sure the early lockdown by Colorado and our county would have prevented what has happened, but I was wrong. But, of course, there are few no it alls that saw exactly what was going to happen, but yet complain about being hammered by the market. If they knew, why didn't they sell? Simple, they are not being truthful.

In hindsight we should have acted faster, but you can only respond to the data you are given. People should not be angry at Trump, but should be united with their anger pointed at the WHO and China. I think deep down the Left knows Trump responded properly that is why they are trying to drive a wedge between him the Convid task force members, governors, and mayors. That is why there were at least 20 articles this week on hydroxychloriquine including many saying Trump is profiting without any proof. I would simply ask those people who write such articles to visit an infusion clinic in a hospital to watch people battle cancer and disease that are going through incredible pain and only hoping to find some cure. To find hope. These people writing these articles and making these claims have never been really sick. What Trump has done should be applauded. To make a last ditch drug available for Covid use is brilliant. He is right, we got nothing to lose and as a person who sits in infusion clinics and prays for other possibilities to make me and the others feel better, I thank him. If it saves one life it was worth it. I just do not understand the Left, Trump is not doing enough and whatever he does do has to be wrong. I want Trump on my side, not any of those media morons like Jim Acosta.

Yes, we missed the boat big time on testing and we are still not were we need to be. But to get there thousands of regulations, rules, and mandates have to be suspended and removed. The government has the power to accomplish the testing task, but it is too big with too much red tape to act efficiently. Trump will work through and get it done, and he will do it faster than liberal who would not want to act in fear of offending someone because of identity politics.

2020 NFL Mock Draft

1. Cincinnati: Joe Burrow, QB, LSU

2. Washington: Chase Young, DE, Ohio State

3. Detroit: Jeffrey Okudah, CB, Ohio State

4. N.Y. Giants: Isaiah Simmons, LB, Clemson

5. Miami: Tua Tagovailoa, QB, Alabama

6. L.A. Chargers: Justin Herbert, QB, Oregon

7. Carolina: Derrick Brown, DT, Auburn

8. Arizona: Tristan Wirfs, OT, Iowa

9. Jacksonville: CJ Henderson, CB, Florida

10. Cleveland: Jedrick Wills Jr., OT, Alabama

11. N.Y. Jets: Andrew Thomas, OT, Georgia

12. Las Vegas: Jerry Jeudy, WR, Alabama

13. San Francisco (via Indianapolis): CeeDee Lamb, WR, Oklahoma

14. Tampa Bay: Mekhi Becton, OT, Louisville

15. Denver: Henry Ruggs III, WR, Alabama

16. Atlanta: Javon Kinlaw, DT, South Carolina

17. Dallas: K'Lavon Chaisson, OLB, LSU

18. Miami (via Pittsburgh): Josh Jones, OT, Houston

19. Las Vegas (via Chicago): Kristian Fulton, CB, LSU

20. Jacksonville (via L.A. Rams): Antoine Winfield Jr., S/CB, Minnesota

21. Philadelphia: Justin Jefferson, WR, LSU

22. Minnesota (via Buffalo): Trevon Diggs, CB, Alabama

23. New England: Jordan Love, QB, Utah State

24. New Orleans: A.J. Epenesa, DE, Iowa

25. Minnesota: Yetur Gross-Matos, DE, Penn State

26. Miami (via Houston): D'Andre Swift, RB, Georgia

27. Seattle: Curtis Weaver, DE, Boise State

28. Baltimore: Kenneth Murray, LB, Oklahoma

29. Tennessee: Ezra Cleveland, OT, Boise State

30. Green Bay: Tee Higgins, WR, Clemson

31. San Francisco: Raekwon Davis, DT, Alabama

32. Kansas City: Cesar Ruiz, C/G, Michigan

Liberals are not the Protector of State Rights

Since Trump correctly claimed he had total power over the economy Liberals are now professing the 10th Amendment to refute Trump's claims. This is pretty disingenuous because liberals have worked tirelessly to redact the 10th Amendment from having any impact in constitutional law. Just as liberals proclaim that nationalism is racist (comparing it to Hitler and fascism) they have done the same about state rights. They say state rights advocates are racists because states rights had been used in the past to protect slavery. But this is far from the truth (Read my book defending freedom of contract). First, it was Democrats that promoted States rights and slavery from the South. On the other hand, it was State rights and the North promoting to abolish of slavery. It was the Federal government that supported slavery in the first part of American history as can be seen in many Court cases such as Prigg v. Pennsylvania and Dred Scott v. Sanford.

Democrats have always used State rights or nationalism when it suits their needs such as State rights to protect illegal immigrants or state rights for marijuana use (except in Raich when it could diminish federal authority over the commerce clause). So what is the reason to promote state rights for opening the economy? Only because Trump is president. But another thing that Democrats fail to realize that in the closing of the economy and in the opening of the economy, Trump and the federal government placed very little mandatory mandates, rules, or regulations on the states. The federal government will lay out some guidelines, but the states will have full power over what they do to close or reopen the economy. Trump has walked on eggshells not wanting to be sued by states for Constitutional violations and up to this point there have been none. However, by the time this over there will be dozens of suits filed against state governments for constitutional violations or personal liberties. This is actually a smart move by Trump because when the economy does not recover very quickly, he can point to the states and their policies. He can say I have done my job and given them trillions and did everything to control the virus, but it is the governors that are the decision makers. Governors breach of power will rile up Republicans in an election year.

Sure, Republicans do the same thing with federalism and nationalism. But the Democrats have succeeded at redacting important clauses from the Constitution such as the Ninth Amendment, tenth Amendment, and contracts clause. Progressives added the sixteenth and seventeenth amendments to further limit federalism. Progressives changed the meaning of the constitution from being a Republic to a Democracy and are even trying to change it to a social state. This has had dire effects on federalism. You can read all about in my book: Defending Freedom of Contract. There is over a century of progressive movement to eliminate state's rights. Now they want State rights. It merely shows how two faced they are when dealing with Trump and Trump is playing the game just right. Leaving the responsibility to the States.

Unfortunately, Trump (Federal Government) has Total Authority Over Economy

I urge folks to read my book Defending Freedom of Contract to understand why the Federal Government has total power over the economy. The original meaning of the commerce clause in the constitution was to protect trade between the states, but Supreme Court precedent has changed that meaning to include everything that is economic including manufacturing, wages, hours, child labor, and even intrastate trade. The change in the meaning of the commerce clause happened gradually over time. The change began early in American history in the Marshall Court's ruling in Gibbons v. Ogden. In this case, the meaning of the commerce clause was changed from trade to a more ambiguous meaning of intercourse.

By the time the FDR court came around they changed the meaning of commerce to include anything that may have even a minute impact on commerce including intrastate trade. In Wickard v. Filburn the FDR court ruled that a farmer could not grow more wheat on his farm than dictated by the Agriculture Adjustment Act (AAA) even if the excess wheat would go to feed his livestock and family. Unfortunately, this horrible ruling was upheld in Raich v. Gonzalez only a few short years ago. Raich denied a terminally ill woman the right to grow marijuana for self use. In fact, Raich protected the illegal marijuana market at the expense of Raich's civil rights. Actually, Wickard and Raich would essentially deny anyone the right to have a garden of any kind because it would a have a minute impact on commerce. It has not come to that yet, but we are very close. During the Coronavirus epidemic, Michigan Governor Whitmer denied persons the right to garden.

Now, everyone is up in arms and saying States have rights protected by the 10th Amendment. That is true, but the 10th amendment was turned into a truism with little meaning by the FDR Court in U.S. v. Darby Lumber: "The amendment states but a truism that all is retained which has not been surrendered. There is nothing in the history of its adoption to suggest that it was more than declaratory of the relationship between the national and state governments as it had been established by the Constitution before the amendment or that its purpose was other than to allay fears that the new national government might seek to exercise powers not granted, and that the states might not be able to exercise fully their reserved powers." This decision was upheld in Garcia v. San Antonio Transit Authority, but was overturned in National League of Cities v. Usery. Around this time conservative courts have tried diminish some of the damage of Wickard and Darby Lumber. In United States v. Morrison, United States v. Lopez, and United States v. Bond the court upheld 10th amendment arguments against the commerce clause. In Morrison, Lopez, and Bond the Court held that economic rights protected by the commerce clause did not extend to criminal behavior. After all, the federal government only has the authority to prosecute very few types of crimes in the Constitution: Slavery, crimes against the nation, treason, and counterfeiting. That is it! That said, the reemergence of the 10th amendment still did not stop federal control over all economic activities. The courts have done a similar thing to the 9th Amendment. The Constitution is short and our Founders had a purpose for every word and clause. They did not intend for certain provisions to be ignored.

The founders did not place any hierarchy of powers in the Constitution. In other words, all clauses and amendments had equal weighting. But the Court found ways around that by claiming the 9th and 10th amendments were truism. The 11th amendment was used to trump the contract clause because it was a newer provision. Even today, not all amendments are held to the same regard. The bottom line is if one amendment or clause fails then the law should fail. But this is not how things are done and the 10th amendment has very little clout also being trumped by the 14th amendment in many cases.

States may rely on some compelling reason such as the safety of the American public over the coronavirus to stop federal authority. But public health goes both ways since an economic collapse will also affect the mental and physical health of Americans.

The history of the Supreme Court is littered with precedent of allowing governments the right to infringe on the rights of Americans (behind the guise of health and safety) even when the ends do not justify the means. Take for instance the Slaughter House Cases. In these cases, the Court held Louisiana could permanently deny butchers the right work that profession to protect the city of New Orleans from disease. This may sound legitimate, but some basic guidelines for eliminating waste from butchers shops could have prevented disease without eliminating butcher businesses.

The bottom line, SCOTUS has provided the federal government complete authority over any economic conditions. This is not right, but it is now the law thank you to liberal power grabs.

The Hysterical Food Police

Going grocery shopping is already a nightmare, but it just got worse. Our store is already too small for our city and that explains why I had to wait an hour to get in the store because they are limiting shoppers. Okay, I understand that, it is better to be safe than sorry. But shortly after getting into the store the couple waiting in line behind me brought the store manager up to me and pointed and said "Him! He is the one!" The manager started to quiz me as the couple and others looked on. How old am I? he asked. I replied "56". The lady said he is a liar. I showed him my license. He then explained to me that 7 to 8 am is limited to persons that are 60 or older or have some underlying health conditions. I explained it was after 8am by the time I got in the store. The couple argued I should have not been in line before 8 am. They were also were angered that I did not wear a face mask while waiting in line and went the wrong way down one aisle complaining that I was a naysayer of science. Those complaints are true, but the new one way signs are hard to see. I also explained a mask was not required in the line outside because we were all well over 6 feet apart. Furthermore, no grocery store workers were wearing masks and at that same time 3 people were going the wrong way down the aisle. Are they going to be reprimanded? I also explained only one family member should do the shopping, are they going to be reprimanded? I would never complain about such a violation because I nothing about them, maybe they both need to shop because they have some disability. I do not know.

When I explained to the manager that I had an underlying medical condition. Again, I was called a liar and naysayer of science. I explained how I had low immunoglobulins and lymphocytes. I had been immune deficient since I was a child. I told them I have been sick most of life and they did not believe me. I also explained to the scientists that covid is more likely to kill men than women because they have better immune systems than men. That is why women are more susceptible to get an autoimmune disease, sometimes a strong system attacks good cells. And that is why they live much longer than men. They did not believe me or my science so I invited them to be my guest this Friday afternoon at the hospital infusion clinic where I am getting IVIg treatments for immune deficiency, neurological disease, and autoimmune disease. I said lunch is on me and would welcome company for the 4 hour procedure.

He let me finish but warned about coming back during restricted hours. They did not believe me even though they accused me of being 35 years old and were proven wrong on that point.

Shopping has become a nightmare but this is out of line. None of us know what is going on inside another person and to presume we do is very dangerous. If we can all worry about ourselves and do the right thing then everything will be alright. We do not need a bunch of presumptuous know it all chiefs dictating their biased beliefs on others.

This Ain't the Same America as During WWII

I hear all this praise for Americans stepping up to the challenge for Covid 19. Sure, the state and federal governments and military are scrambling big time and stepping up. But are common everyday Americans really stepping up? Maybe most, but some are only getting on board after their livelihood has been hampered by layoffs or some other inconvenience. I went out for a walk today and saw 7 people and all of them were within 3 feet of each other. Why? Because they had not been motivated by inconvenience. People just do not understand they need treat this situation as if they are infected (and maybe they are but are asymptomatic).

The perfect example of people caring less about their comrades may be witnessed at a buffet. I love buffets, but they are a petri dish of bacteria. I may witness dozens of people licking their hands and fingers and a handful more cleaning or picking their noses. If that ain't bad enough there is less than a 25% chance that guy leaving a bathroom urinal or stall washes their hands and I am willing to bet that less than 10% use soap when they do stop at the sink. When someone drops the tongs or serving spoon on the floor, they put back in the food. I have never seen a buffet clean a serving tong or spoon, nor I have I seen them replace a tong or spoon. I can only imagine what is on each of serving utensils at the completion of breakfast, lunch or dinner. That said, if there was motivation for people to keep their hands clean at the buffet, such as a monitory gain, then they may do it, not for the interest of their comrades, but for their own greedy self-interest.

People may step up, but only after there is motivation such as trying to get back to work sooner. People tell me, hey there are only 20 or 30 cases in our county and only 3 people have died. But after I explain to them that our prevalence rate of contraction and mortality are well above the national average, they do not believe me. You are 2 times more likely to have Covid in our small county and 3 times more likely to die from it than any county in California.

With the virus killing off older folks, what is the big concern I read about today by our young folks. There needs to be study on how this virus is affecting persons of color. Everything has got to be turned into some political talking points. Yet these same young folks ignore recommendations because it does not kill them, but maybe some older persons.

The persons who fought for freedom during WWII did it to protect the rights and freedoms of every American, not just for some demographic. This ain't the same America, it is much more selfish and narcissistic.

Biden Fails all Democrat Precedent to Remove Trump from Office

The Democrats have created a lot of scary precedent under the Trump administration and they are in the process of nominating a candidate who fails all of it. First, Biden has been accused of sexual assault by a former staffer. Although this story is not being covered at all, how is this any different than what Brett Kavanaugh went through. According to the Dems standard a person can be removed or denied office for sexual accusations. In other words, they accusations do not have to be true or proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Second, election interference is grounds for removal from office (they are right) but how is a bogus investigation into Trump and Russia collusion not interfering in our election process. Especially when you consider it looks like Mike Flynn has been illegally imprisoned and Carter Paige was illegally spied on by our government. Sure, Biden and Obama may take the John Banner line of defense "I know nothing" about that, but it is certainly hard to believe that the executive branch is not in the know about a case of such importance. If the executive was not in the know, then it is also a problem with the administration.

Third, the Dems said that a president may be impeached for a quid pro quo with no underlying crime. Unfortunately, all of Joe's siblings and son seem to make millions from countries that Joe has political influence. Even if all of this is on the up and up, but the appearance of impropriety alone is enough to impeachment. Fourth, the Dems have said that Trump is not mentally fit and should use the 25th Amendment to oust him from office. On this point I hope I am wrong but after watching Joe the past 6 months I am now convinced he has early onset dementia. The difference between Trump and Biden is that I see personality changes (not just forgetfulness) whereas Trump is consistently incoherent and confrontational. For a presumptive Democratic nominee, you see very little of Joe because they are trying to hide him.

Many in the liberal media have had their prayers answered by the Coronavirus. They wanted the economy to tank and they got their wish. People are going to be suffering for a long time (I think years) from this disruption. This may get Joe (or Jill) elected but remember what comes around, goes around.

One final point on the media at Trump's daily conferences. Not a single one seems to know what the difference is between a mathematical model and reality. But yet they all claim to be backers of science and models to predict climate change. I wrote years ago that 99.9% of the public has no clue about science and climate change because they do not understand models or what is even being modeled. I rest my case, totally disgraceful.