What Should Be Done About Elderly Politicians?

            The Constitution of the United States gives clear directions as to who can serve as Representatives, Senators, and Presidents. Article I, Section 2, tells us that Representatives must be at least twenty-five years old and have been a United States citizen for at least seven years. Article I, Section 3, states that Senators must be at least thirty years old and have been a United States citizen for at least nine years. Article II, Section 1, declares that Presidents must be “a natural born Citizen,” be at least thirty-five years old, and lived in the United States for at least fourteen years.

            The Constitution does not give a maximum age limit for Representatives, Senators, or Presidents. However, Article II, Section 1, states that the “Powers and Duties” of President will become those of the Vice President if the President dies, resigns, or becomes disabled. Amendment 25 was proposed by Congress and ratified by the states after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. This amendment gives directions on how to remove a President who is no longer capable of fulfilling the duties of President. The Vice President and the Cabinet take a leading role in removing the President from office.

            Discussions are becoming widespread about the capabilities of President Joe Biden to fulfil the duties of President. Kevin D. Williamson posted an article about this topic at The New York Post in December 2021. 

President Biden is having a series of worrisome episodes that seem to be a mix of his trademark plagiarism (adopting episodes from other public figures’ lives as his own in addition to appropriating their words) and what we sometimes euphemistically call a “senior moment.” …

A certain kind of Republican takes a lurid and celebratory view of Biden’s mental fugues. But you do not have to be a bitter partisan to be concerned about the fact that the president of the United States has become a sort of Walter Mitty, so deep into his fantasies that he muses in public about events that – let’s go ahead and emphasize this once more – never happened.

To broach the subject of the president’s competence in a formal way is a serious thing, one that Republicans probably cannot do effectively on their own…. But it is difficult to imagine a single Democrat, much less a meaningful group of them, stepping up on this.

So we must rely either on Republican credibility or on Democratic political courage – i.e., we are hosed.

Because of Biden’s long history of habitual dishonesty, it is difficult to tell how much of this is Biden being Biden and how much of it is Biden no longer quite being Biden – how much is his longstanding and familiar moral disability and how much is, as it may be, late-life mental disability.

We need an independent medical assessment of the president’s mental health. That is a sobering fact to face, but face it we must. And right now, we need a Democrat who will say so in public.

            Biden is not the only politician who is elderly and shows signs of senility. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (age 82) also shows signs of mental weakness. At the time of the writing of the Constitution, there were no career politicians getting rich on the citizens’ dime. Politicians served for a time and then went home to care for their plantation, farm, or business. Politicians continue to run for re-election long after they should retire. We need to either have term limits, or citizens who are willing to vote the elderly politicians out of office. 

Why is Bill Maher My VIP?

            I chose Bill Maher for my VIP for this week – again – because he is the only Democrat that lives in reality. This week he slammed the New York Times because they buried the news about the attempted assassination of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. If the assassination attempt had been on a liberal justice, the news would have been on the front page. Because Justice Kavanaugh is conservative, the news was printed on page 20. 

            A man traveled from California to Kavanaugh’s home in Chevy Chase, Maryland, to kill Justice Kavanaugh. He got out of a taxi in front of the justice’s home and saw two U.S. marshals. He walked down the street and turned himself into the Montgomery County Police thirty minutes later. He admitted to the police that he wanted to assassinate Justice Kavanaugh, and he had the necessary tools and equipment to conduct his desire – a handgun, two magazines, ammunition, a tactical knife, zip ties, a hammer, screwdriver, crowbar, tactical chest rig, and duct tape.

            Maher hammered the Times for putting its “coverage of the assassination attempt on a United States Supreme Court justice far down on its front page and the actual story was on page A20 of the Thursday edition of the newspaper.” He claimed the Times was burying the news story because it has a “leftist media bias.” “The New York Times buried this. If this had been a liberal Supreme Court justice that someone came to kill, it would have been on the front page.” He continued, “And that’s what’s so disappointing about a paper like the New York Times because they just wear their bias on their sleeves.” He added, “And, “If it’s not part of something that feeds our narrative, **** it, we bury it.”

            Maher was not through with his criticism of Democrats. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) also came in for criticism for using “very inflammatory words” against Supreme Court justices in the past. Schumer said in March 2020, “I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.” 

Are You Willing to Fight for Free Speech and Religious Beliefs?

             The topic of discussion for this Constitution Monday concerns violations of religious beliefs and the right to free speech. Colorado makes a practice of trying to force people to use their talents to supply services for same-sex weddings. A few years ago, a cake maker in Colorado had to go to the Supreme Court to get the state off his back. Now, another artist in Colorado is fighting against the same oppression.

            The Supreme Court has agreed to hear arguments in the case of Lorie Smith, a Colorado graphic designer. She claims that Colorado is forcing her to supply services for same-sex weddings. The arguments in her case will be heard next fall. 

Smith is being defended by Alliance Defending Freedom, a nonprofit legal organization that focuses on protecting religious freedom and free speech. The organization held a press conference on Wednesday outside the U.S. Capitol to highlight Smith’s lawsuit against the Colorado Civil Rights Commission. Smith spoke at the event and said, “All of us should be free to say what we believe, even if the government disagrees with those beliefs.”

Joining Smith at the press conference were several lawmakers, including Senators Ted Cruz (R-Tex.), James Lankford (R-Okla.), and Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) as well as Representatives Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.), Debbie Lesko (R-Ariz.), and Vicky Hartzler (R-Mo.).

In addition, 18 senators and 38 House Republicans filed an amicus brief on June 2 in support of Smith. Cruz spoke at the press conference about the universal importance of Smith’s case at the Supreme Court because it would set an important precedent for free speech.

Colorado wants to compel the speech of Christian artists and business owners who decline to use their God-given talents to celebrate events that run contrary to what their faith teaches. Colorado law restricts the fundamental First Amendment rights of Lorie and other business owners like her. And it doesn’t just target Christians only.

Consider it this way: Should a Muslim artist be compelled by the government to draw the image of Muhammad? Should Jewish artists be forced to create art that they consider to be antisemitic? Should a Democrat political firm be forced to take on Republican clients?

            Kristen Waggoner, ADF general counsel, also spoke at the press conference. “Free speech is an inalienable human right, and it is the foundation for self-government. The government doesn’t grant us this right, but fortunately, our Constitution protects it and we are stewards of that freedom.”

Do You Rejoice in God?

             My studies for Come, Follow Me this week took me to the book of Ruth and Samuel 1-3. The lesson was titled “My Heart Rejoiceth in the Lord” and was about the lives of Ruth, Naomi, Hannah, and other people. The lesson was introduced as follows: 

Sometimes we imagine that our lives should follow a clear path from beginning to end. The shortest distance between two points is a straight line, after all. And yet life is often full of delays and detours that take us in unexpected directions. We may find that our lives are quite different from what we thought they should be.

Ruth and Hannah surely understood this. Ruth was not an Israelite, but she married one, and when her husband died, she had a choice to make. Would she return to her family and her old, familiar life, or would she embrace the Israelite faith and a new home with her mother-in-law? (see Ruth 1:4-18).

Hannah’s plan for her life was to bear children, and her inability to do so left her “in bitterness of soul” (see 1 Samuel 1:1-10). As you read about Ruth and Hannah, consider the faith they must have had to put their lives in the Lord’s hands and travel their unexpected paths. Then you might think about your own journey. It will look different from Ruth’s and Hannah’s – and anyone else’s. But throughout the trials and surprises between here and your eternal destination, you can learn to say with Hannah, “My heart rejoiceth in the Lord” (1 Samuel 2:1).

            The stories of Ruth and Hannah are different, but they both show the value of putting our faith in God. Ruth did not stop to wonder about what would happen in her life. She only knew that her mother-in-law Naomi needed her. She returned to return to her own family and people and told Naomi: “Entreat me not to leave thee, or to return from following after thee: for whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God” (Ruth 1:16).

            Like Ruth, Hannah had a problem, and she took it to the Lord. She pleaded with the Lord to give her a son. In return, she promised to give her son to the Lord. The Lord blessed Hannah with a son, and she named him Samuel. She kept him with her until he was weaned, and then she gave him to the Lord. Elaine S. Dalton taught the following about Ruth and Hannah:

Life’s journey sometimes takes us on unexpected paths. There are twists and turns in the road that none of us can anticipate. But with each of these twists and turns there is also opportunity – opportunity to choose our response and our plan of action. Difficulties in life can be opportunities to help us draw closer to the Savior and to trust in Him more fully. In the process of living close to Him each day, we develop Christlike attributes and qualities….

Like Ruth and Hannah, all of us will experience adversity. We may not always understand the Lord’s design for our lives, but it is my testimony that we are never alone. He is ever with us, and He promises us, “Ye cannot behold with your natural eyes, for the present time, the design of your God concerning those things which shall come hereafter, and the glory which shall follow after much tribulation” [Doctrine and Covenants 58:3] (“Lessons from Ruth and Hannah,” Ensign, Apr. 2006, 35, 37). 

            The principle that I want to leave with you is that “We can rejoice in the Lord.” We do not know the twists and turns that our lives will take, but we are assured that God knows and will lead us along on the best paths if we put our trust in Him.

 

 

What Do You Know about Frugal Living?

            Families, communities, and nations are stronger when they practice frugal living. The current inflation rate in the United States is 8.26 percent. This is down from 8.54 percent last month, but it is still at a 40-year high. Inflation is leading to lots of problems, such as people dipping into their savings to purchase day-to-day needs.

I filled the gas tank in my car this week and paid $5.35 a gallon at Costco. So far, I can afford to pay for fuel, but I may not always be able to afford the increasing price. However, many people are already at the point where they cannot afford to buy food and/or fuel. This post will give some suggestions on how to live frugally, and much of the information will come from a textbook titled Fundamentals of Family Finance – Living Joyfully within Your Means written by E. Jeffrey Hill and Bryan L. Sudweeks.

The authors taught that there are two options for living within your means. The first option is to increase your income, and the second option is to decrease your expenses. Since we have more control over what we spend, it is easier to decrease expenses than to increase income. Here are some of the authors’ suggestions for decreasing expenses.

Saving Money on Food

Remember H.A.L.T. Don’t go shopping when you are hungry, angry, lonely, or tired….

Make a menu and write out a shopping list.

Buy store brands.

Reduce the number of trips to the supermarket.

Pay cash. [Studies show that people pay more when they pay with a credit card than if they use cash.]

Buy in bulk and prepare meals from raw ingredients.

Saving Money When You Go Out to Eat

Share a meal with your date.

Order ice water, not soda.

Go out for a late lunch instead of dinner.

Use coupons/savings cards and books.

Saving Money on Transportation

Buy a low-mileage, late-model used car instead of a new car.

Pay cash for your vehicle.

Look at the total cost of ownership. [Sticker price plus cost of gasoline, repairs, insurance, and service.]

Get an inexpensive car for male teenage drivers.

Service your car on time.

Shop around for auto insurance.

Bundle trips.

Walk and bike places.

Save Money on Household Expenses

Get rid of cable.

Get rid of your landline.

Cut your family’s hair.

Lower your thermostat in the winter and raise it in the summer.

Choose cell phone plans wisely.

Turn off electronic devices … [when] not using [them].

Shop at garage sales in nice neighborhoods early in the day.

Look online.

Shop at … thrift stores.

Set a waiting period before making major household purchases.

Save Money on Recreation

Use reward miles from your credit card to pay for air travel.

Be flexible to go at the last minute.

Stay with family members.

Vacation at home. [staycation]

Go to the dollar theater.

Make good use of the library.

            There are many ways to spend less money, but some are more applicable than others. Each individual and family should look at the list and choose one or two ways to decrease spending in each category. My husband and I have been practicing some of the suggestions for most of our married life. However, there are some ways that I could add – such as adding a waiting period before I purchase something. Often when I decide to wait, I choose to not purchase the item. However, we practice frugality, we can strengthen our family, community, and nation by living within our means.

What Have We Learned about January 6?

            The topic of discussion for this Freedom Friday is the hope that Congress will soon focus on the problems in America rather than a so-called insurrection at the U.S. Capitol Building. The January 6 committee held its first prime time extravaganza earlier tonight. Fred Lucas at The Daily Signal watched the hearing so that we did not have to waste our time. Then he wrote two articles to tell us what happened.

            In his first article Lucas, outlined six takeaways from the prime-time televised hearing. The select committee that “investigated” the assault on the Capitol Building is composed of “seven Democrats and two anti-Trump Republicans.” Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) and Vice Chair Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) led the committee.

Thompson and Cheney argued early on that “then-President Donald Trump purposefully encouraged his supporters to attack the Capitol and block certification of Joe Biden’s Electoral College victory during a joint session of Congress.” Thompson accused Trump of overseeing “a sprawling, multistep conspiracy aimed at overturning the election” and that he “spurred a mob” to attack the Capitol with “lies that led to insurrection.” 

            Conservative lawmakers and organizations did not agree with the partisan politics of the program. Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts made the following statement several hours before the hearing started, accusing Democrats of trying to “distract Americans from President Biden’s long list of policy failures.”

Democrats are so brazen they’ve even hired the former president of ABC News to turn the hearings into ‘made-for-TV’ political theater. You can expect a one-sided partisan narrative intent on slandering the left’s political opponents – starting with former President Donald Trump and extending to other conservatives – that has nothing to do with strengthening our republic and everything to do with distracting from their abysmal failures in every major policy area.

What happened on Jan. 6 was wrong, but unlike the violent riots that did so much damage to our country during the summer of 2020, the events of Jan. 6 were subject to one of the largest investigations in our history. If Speaker [Nancy] Pelosi genuinely cares about justice, and law and order, she should immediately direct committee hearings to investigate the violence, damage, and death caused by Black Lives Matter protests leading up to Jan. 6.

            Lucas discussed the following six key takeaways from the two-hour hearing held tonight by the House Select Committee that investigated the January 6^th attack on the Capitol.

1.      Cheney … alleged that evidence would show Trump approved of the infamous chant of “Hang Mike Pence” …

2.      “Thompson focused at one point on a Trump tweet on Dec. 19, 2020, … about the planned rally in Washington. The tweet concluded with these words: ‘Be there, will be wild.’”

3.      The “committee showed excerpts of its video-recorded deposition of former Attorney General William Barr” saying, “I made it clear I did not agree with the idea of saying the election was stolen and putting out this stuff, which I told the president was bulls-t.”

4.      “The committee showed short clips of appearances by the former president’s daughter, Ivanka Trump, and her husband, Jared Kushner…. The president’s daughter seemed to indicate that she believed the election was not stolen. The video clip was brief.” Kushner was “trying to get as many pardons done [as possible].”

5.      Capitol Police Officer Caroline Edwards “was injured and briefly knocked unconscious outside the Capitol.” She claimed that she saw “a war scene.” She saw “friends with blood all over their faces.” She was “slipping in people’s blood.” She “was catching people as they fell.”

6.      Republicans responded by saying that “Americans care more about issues,” such as the cost of gasoline and the “attempted assassination Wednesday of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.” They also emphasized that Democrats are not opposed to opposing results from the Electoral College when Republican presidents are elected.

I noticed that there was no information about Trump’s offer to have National Guard troops at the Capitol Building. His offer was made on multiple occasions previous to January 6. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi personally turned down the offer.

Lucas’s second article said that a “bipartisan investigation of the Capitol riot would dig into the security breakdown and not ignore questions that didn’t conform to a Democrat Party narrative” (Rep. Jim Banks). His “appointment to the select committee was blocked by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.” Banks told the following to The Daily Signal: 

If I were ranking member of the committee, we would be asking the tough questions that Pelosi doesn’t want the committee to ask, because she’s responsible but she hasn’t been held accountable for the security failures at the Capitol and [on] Jan. 6.

The more we learn, the more we realize that there were serious security failures at the Capitol, and why doesn’t this committee want to dig into that? They don’t want to dig into it because it deviates from their political narrative.

            When the select committee was being formed, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) named five members to it. Pelosi blocked his choice of Banks and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio). McCarthy responded by withdrawing his other appointments. In other words, Pelosi appointed all members of the House on the committee.

            The select committee has not investigated why the Capitol Police were not prepared to deal with a mob even though intelligence prior to the assault said that problems were coming. In Banks’ words, the “breadcrumbs lead to Pelosi’s office.” He added, “The head of the Capitol Police union told us they weren’t prepared for Jan. 6 because the intelligence wasn’t ever disseminated to Capitol Police officers.”

            The incidence on January 6 became another “crisis” for Democrats to exploit. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) is on record as wanting “to use the panel as a reason to push for the end of the Electoral College.” Other Democrats “want to push other changes to election procedures.” They want to advance their agenda rather than discover the truth about why the Capitol Building and police were not defended properly.

What Happens When a Person Attempts to Murder a Federal Judge?

            Rants and threats from Democrats against the Supreme Court over recent months and years culminated in protests at the homes of conservative justices since the leak of a court decision happened a few weeks ago. A man from California was arrested this morning near the home of Justice Brett Kavanaugh for threatening to kill Kavanaugh. The man had a handgun, a knife, and burglary tools in his possession at the time of his arrest.

            The man was initially arrested by Montgomery County, Maryland, police, but the FBI has taken over the investigation. He was to appear this afternoon before a federal judge and to be charged with attempted murder of a federal judge.

            CBS cited an FBI affidavit when making the following statement: “Police found in his belongings a black tactical chest rig and tactical knife, a Glock 17 pistol with two magazines and ammunition, pepper spray, zip ties, a hammer, screwdriver, nail punch, crowbar, pistol light, duct tape, hiking boots with padding on the outside of the soles, and other items.”

            The man faces a maximum sentence of twenty years in federal prison if he is convicted of attempted murder of a federal judge.