Freedom Slipping Away – USA Gov Policy

There should be greater attention paid to the comments made by Washington’s growing number of hard-left politicians.

Socialism is increasingly seen as part of the American political environment. It is more than just an an economic philosophy. Because it involves the centralization of a key part of a nation’s life, the use of government power to enforce its tenets is a major necessity in achieving its strategies and goals.

In many ways, this runs directly contrary to the standard Constitutional emphasis on individual rights. But that is not seen as an obstacle for those who view that bedrock document as open to loose interpretation.

The use of overbearing power to insure the compliance of those who would stand in the way of the activities of leftist governments rather quickly develops into an habitual practice. The old USSR, or today’s Venezuela, are two of the best known examples, and they are the rule, not the exception.

The 2018 midterm elections brought with it a new generation of pro-socIalist elected officials. They have not even officially taken office, and their philosophical proclivity to suppress dissent has already taken hold.

It is difficult to take many of Representative-elect Ocasio–Cortez‘s comments on substantive issues seriously due to her rather shaky grasp of facts. But she is abundantly clear about her devotion to socialist policies, and her determination to execute a “fundamental transformation” (to borrow Obama’s phrase) of America.

True to form for socialists across the globe, Ms. Ocasio–Cortez has little tolerance for oppostion. Following an instagram post by Donald Trump Jr. criticizing her by pointing out the deficiencies of her political philosophy, she responded, not with a countervaling argument or even an ad hominem attack, but with a comment on the House’s ability to issue subponeas. The message was clear, and consistent with the history of socialism: dissent will be punished.

More than just an attack on individual opponents, the U.S. left is now focusing on essential components of the U.S. government that block their goals.
Apart from this, you can get rid of infertility and vaginal buy viagra online downtownsault.org dryness. Headache, dizziness, runny nose, upset stomach etc are some of the symptoms that can identify male the imbalance and risky male erectile condition as well- Facial hair, hot flashes, hypertension Loss of libido or vaginal dryness. levitra generico uk Most of these medications could also be habit forming, thus, doctors samples viagra cialis are exploring more ways for a better alternative. The clients have appreciated the value and significance of this wholesale viagra pills treatment modality.
Preventing the implementation of their radical concepts is the steadfastness of the U.S. governing structure. As a consequence, it has become a target.

The practice of basing legal decisions on law and precedent limits the ability of biased judges to push a socialist agenda. As a result, the radical 9th Circuit has had its results frequently overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court. That explains the extrordinary vehemence of the left’s opposition to G.O.P. president- nominated justices.

A more recent battleground has been added to the “fundamental transformation” fight. Based on equal representation of each state, the U.S. Senate is a powerful check on the ability of left-wing dominated jurisdictions to push their agenda on the rest of the nation. That has led to rumblings about abolishing it. The latest assault comes from former Rep. John Dingle, (D-Michigan) who openly proposed just that in an Atlantic theatlantic.com article:

“Abolish the Senate. At a minimum, combine the two chambers into one…It will take a national movement, starting at the grassroots level, and will require massive organizing, strategic voting, and strong leadership over the course of a generation. But it has a nice ring to it, doesn’t it? ‘Abolish the Senate.'”

The attempts to reject the traditional impartiality of judges and to abolish the Senate reveal a dramatic, even if obvious fact: socialism is wholly incompatible with the American form of government, and also with basic American culture and traditions. Socialists recognize that reality, but it does not appear that others do.

Indeed, even some of those who rather blithely claim to support socialism are unaware of its true nature, believing it to be just an enhanced form of liberalism. That’s its greatest strength: the ability to hide its true nature from the masses.

Photo: Ocasio-Cortez, from her website

Quick Analysis

Ukraine’s Frozen Conflict

As we approach winter in the northern hemisphere, the war in Ukraine is beginning to resemble a “frozen conflict” from many perspectives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told the media he hopes the war will end faster once President-elect Trump takes over in January. Opinions in Moscow, however, differ from that of the Ukrainian leader. Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needs to exclude Ukraine from joining in “exchange” for peace. If it does not, he says, then no end to the war is in sight. So far there is no Christmas solution. Several NATO countries, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, are tentatively considering “coalitions-of-the-willing” to provide security for Ukraine outside of the formal NATO framework. There is, however, no collective mechanism today under which such an arrangement is viable. According to the NATO Charter, while Ukraine is a NATO partner country, it may not join as a full member since it has not fulfilled the requirements for membership. That has not stopped NATO and allies from continuing “to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence,” according to the organization. Socor says that keeping Ukraine out of NATO will not advance peace with Russia. Waiting for a peace settlement, he suggests, would only serve to encourage Moscow to continue the war indefinitely. Although the Biden Administration officially withdrew its support for Ukrainian membership in 2021, NATO maintains an “open door” policy toward membership-seeking countries. The current White House position led the way for European states to oppose Ukraine’s membership saying that a decision should be delayed until “conditions are met.” Biden pushed for changing “open door” to a “bridge” metaphor. It is not intended as an across-the-board NATO policy and has been implemented in the past on a case-by-case basis, says Socor. “The alliance’s open-door policy was not fully insulated from Russia’s non-statutory blocking power, and NATO-aspirant countries’ path toward membership was not always irreversible.” Russia has successfully blocked states like Georgia from joining, first in 2008 and again after the war in Ukraine began in 2014. Russia recognizes the value add of Ukraine to NATO is enormous and that Kyiv has a better case than some other nations. Putin’s invasion was, in part, intended to foreclose that option. By 2021, Moscow was pushing hard to maximize its war objectives, which included further annexations of Ukrainian territory. A main goal for Putin was, and is, to ensure there is no Ukraine left to join NATO. As President-elect Trump prepares to assume office in January, he is faced with the historical challenges presented by the war. Post-conflict security guarantees were the center of several proposals made during the 2023 military stalemate. The incoming Trump Administration has yet to outline how it intends to handle the Russia-Ukraine war. Analysts in Washington believe that the new Administration will expect its European allies to guarantee the majority of Ukraine’s security needs. As we approach 2025, several European nations have acknowledged that they do not view Ukraine as eligible for NATO membership as it would draw the organization into the middle of the conflict. Others want to wait until the war is over or pending a “peace” settlement before considering Ukrainian membership. Socor reports that some “influential voices” are suggesting that “Kyiv should join NATO after “freezing” the war along a stable armistice line, de facto accepting Ukraine’s partition, with NATO security guarantees applying de jure to the government-controlled territory only.” This would mean starting accession talks soon with the actual talks to commence only after a ceasefire is in place. Trump arrives in Washington at a time when Putin’s hybrid strategies of war in Ukraine have eviscerated commonly-held differences between war and peace. “Absent a political consensus in NATO over Ukrainian membership, certain European allies, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, are holding informal consultations about post-conflict security guarantees to Kyiv by NATO members outside of NATO’s framework,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. The Biden Administration downplayed the discussions on possible forms of military assistance and defense industry cooperation by sending only an Assistant Secretary of State. For a European peace to hold the Trump Administration would need to formally extend the United States’ nuclear deterrence to Ukraine. Options under discussion in Europe include a “coalition of the resolute” to deploy forces to Ukraine as part of a possible armistice package, deterring further Russian attacks, says Secor. European officials are also debating, without any agreement, whether its military forces could perform non-combat logistical roles to free Ukrainian forces to fight. None of the possible courses of action has moved forward as all eyes are waiting on the incoming Trump Administration for clues about its intended level of support for a NATO framework and other non-NATO proposals. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.