America is on the brink of becoming a "3rd world country"

My definition (and my suggested reason for the existence) of a "3rd world country" is the absence of the rule of law.  The status has nothing to do with the form of government.  Even a dictatorship can be responsive to the needs of a majority of its people.  Chaos, violence, denial of respect of "others," and a desire to eliminate or render powerless and inconsequential all those who would disagree or challenge a "different" point of view are the characteristics most prevalent.

With the election of Donald Trump to the Presidency of the United States, the above characteristics have become predominant...even in those elected to public office.  Prior to his election, once an election was concluded and votes counted, those who considered themselves on the losing side would grouse, whine and moan...often loudly for a bit, promising the collapse of civilization as they knew it...but then retreat to wait for the next election;  there was a respect for the election process and the rule of law.

One can argue that the election of President Trump was a legal revolt by the voters.  Clearly a majority felt that those elected to public office were no longer honoring their oath of office to represent the citizenry, but were actively pursuing  self-aggrandizement, accumulation of personal wealth and of power.  Those possessing the perquisites of elected office find the presence of Mr. Trump in the White House to be a threat to their "elite" status and power, so they...in some cases quietly, in other openly and loudly...do all they can to render him powerless.

Unfortunately, these efforts have not been confined to sanctioned legal political maneuvering.  Elected holders of office and even the press have openly challenged the right of President Trump to hold office, regardless of the fact that the election has been legally certified.  For the first time, elected office holders are urging the portion of the public that disagreed with Mr. Trump's electioneering promises to disregard and disrespect the election and the rule of law, with the intent of disrupting and eliminating any discussion on policy and action in favor of emotional mob rule.  Some have even spoken of their desire that Mr. Trump be "eliminated" only to later disingenuously argue that they only meant removal from office...even as their acolytes and supporters  violently demonstrate, injuring persons and destroying property as they go.

These people behave as if laws are "optional"...only to be obeyed if they happen to agree with them.  Civility and respect for others is now almost universally absent in America, except for small, almost secretive enclaves where people still value disagreeing with others without acting disagreeably.  Friendships and marriages are failing and disappearing because of this encouragement of mob rule as a replacement for the rule of law.

It could be argued that this path started decades ago when the secularists in America began convincing a majority the the rules of behavior handed down in the Bible should be considered the Ten "Suggestions", open to both interpretation and human approval.  Predictably, that now is extending to our secular laws of behavior, as those who chose to ignore and act contrary to law insist that they should not be required to suffer "consequences" for their transgressions.

With the ongoing combination of polarization, disrespect for those who do not agree with us, and the encouragement to disrespect not only the law but also those who enforce the law, it is certain that increased violence will result, as those so inclined will feel encouraged to kill and otherwise eliminate all who do not agree with them.  And that, my friends, is exactly what happens in 3rd world countries.  Take the time to breath deeply, set emotions aside, quietly calm yourself and consider if this is what you want for your country, much less the world around you.

Mob rule in this country was violent.  And the day after, most of the members were quietly embarrassed and ashamed of their actions.  Unfortunately, today's Media encourages and excuses the excesses, even labeling them as justified and proper, not particularly surprising as it if financially and ideologically rewarding for the media to do so.  One wonders if the framers of the Constitution had that in mind when they gave the Press the freedom to libel and slander as they wish under the guise of "freedom" of the press.  The result is that one Mob rule moves on and pops up somewhere else, sometimes under a different name or "cause."  It makes me consider seeing them as the mob equivalent to the renown "Oldest Established Permanent Floating Crap Game in New York" first described in "Guys & Dolls."

It would be reassuring to think that America will wake up at some point in the cold, harsh light of reason and reverse course.

That isn't going to happen.

Will Mueller turn out to be our modern day Torquemada?

The voters of the United States of America, under the impression that they had the right, elected Donald Trump to be President of the country.  He did not come from a long line of politicians.  He was not a politician.  He was not active in any political activities, other than as they affected his businesses, until disgust with politics motivated him to run for President, which led to his subsequent election.  Evidently a lot of people agreed with him.

The political establishment was neither amused or content; they were horrified..  For politicians, the "game" of politics takes on the aura of religion; it is a way of life and they believe that being "called" to be a politician establishes a common bond that transcends ideological differences.  They become "family."  So, while they can fight between themselves, when an outsider appears and disagrees with their family "habits" of behavior and activity, they stop fighting and combine to defeat the newcomer.

Ah...but how to accomplish this?

The "people" have spoken.  Clearly a multiple pronged attack is clearly in order.  First, mount a campaign of both falsehoods and half-truths that, if pursued constantly and loudly, will cause a diminution of President Trump's support. Secondly, do all that is possible to prevent any accomplishments reach the eyes and ears of the public, hoping that the public will conclude that no Presidential promises are being kept or being effective.  Third, work across ideological boundaries (but cautiously, so the public does not become aware) to defeat bills that would enable actions desired by President Trump.

However, there is a chance that these efforts will not be enough to defeat President Trump's support or prevent his accomplishing some of his declared goals.  What more can be done?

It is unclear who actually triggered the concept (one suspects that all would take credit if asked "off the record"), but the appointment of a "Special Prosecutor" took place.  Usually, this is in response to evidence that a crime has been committed and the goal is document it and determine the responsible party(ies) to be sent to prison...as in "Watergate."

Curiously, after more than 9 months there is no evidence of a crime.  With the porous nature our nation's capitol, if there were such evidence it is inconceivable that it would not by now have been leaked to press corp proven ravenously anxious to publicize any illegal act by President Trump or his supporters. Yet...we have a Special Prosecutor.  Not only do we have one, but he is one ideologically oriented to the Democrat party which is the lead ideological group seeking President Trump's removal from office.  Certainly a good number of Republican Congressmen and women would cheer the event also...but oh so quietly, while giving lip service to President Trump.

The power granted to a Special Prosecutor is immense.  It is reminiscent of the power granted to the Grand Inquisitor of the Spanish Inquisition in the late 15th century, Tomas de Torquemada.  And there are more similarities:  two prominent leaders, King Ferdinand II of Aragon, and Queen Isabella I of Castile (you may substitute "Sen. Schumer: and "Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi" if you wish) appointed Torquemada to "cleanse" Spain of "non-believers" ( you may substitute "non-politicians" if you wish) in 1483 and he remained in office for the next 15 years.  There is no "expiration date" for the office of Special Prosecutor.

Both the Special Prosecutor and Torquemada enjoyed virtually unlimited power authorized by the government with no over-ruling element (while the Special Prosecutor may in theory have some of his actions subject to challenge, the political price is so enormous that it rarely happens).

The various forms of Inquisition lasted in the Hispanic Americas until 1825, in Portugal until 1820,  and in Spain until 1846.  In Italy, it ceased in 1870.  But the office, renamed twice, remains to this day: Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.This particular enumeration of "Special Prosecutor" is the first that was clearly established as a "fishing expedition" and lacks a specific law-breaking event to investigate.  Much as was the Spanish Inquisition, the Special Prosecutor may do and investigate whatever he chooses with little if any legal, political or Sense of Justice; Justice will be what Mr. Mueller declares.

Not sure that any of us should be comfortable with that.

"Trump" is an idea, an attitude, but not a President

I must admit that our Federal Government has infuriated me for a minimum of six Presidential terms of office.  We have descended morally, financially and civilly.  I have watched misbehavior in the White House (always, I am sure, present to some degree at different times) become endorsed as acceptable and understandable and not cause for censure by the multitudes.  Our Federal Representative and employees have shown disregard for responsibly balancing the federal budget and for actually working an honest work day properly for some pretty good wages.  And now we see all our Elected officials lying with unprecedented frequency with not one hint of embarrassment.

But when anyone shouts out in anger and disappoint, stating these facts out loud, the media and multitudes shout them down as being "disrespectful."  Seriously?  Such behavior warrants respect?  In what Universe?

And into this remarkable state of affairs comes one Donald Trump.  He doesn't work for people; people work for him.  That has been true for most of his life and he has made money...a lot of money. He has gotten quite used to his word being law and, to quote a recent, once successful actor, "winning."

He has, like many of us, become unhappy with our government.  And he states his anger with no filter.  What is most wonderful to many of us is that the media actually reports these comments.  And these are comments we have made for years to each other and not one reporter, not one elected official has ever done more than nod in what was supposed to be seen as sympathy, ... and then ignore us and our anger.  To see the consternation on the part of media at this is cathartic...it makes me feel wonderful at not being able to shut down his comments.

So...why am I uneasy?

Because anger, when unchecked, becomes the ignition for mob attitude and behavior;  such anger becomes the rationale and excuse for excesses that go beyond those that are the immediate source of that anger.  It can be dangerous...like watching a back-fire you thought would stop the big blaze suddenly turn into an even bigger danger.  Be careful what you wish for...

Trump's comments are expressions of frustration...but they are not solutions.  When asked for specifics, he replies with a torrent of comments which all come down to two things: "I'll build a wall" and "Trust Me."  The first is only a first step to protect our borders and is by no means comprehensive.  "Trust Me"????

We are completing 6 1/2 years of an administration that was elected on the basis of "Hope" and "Change."  Everyone I have spoken to interpreted those words as meaning what each individual saw as hope and as change.  Turned out that no one ever actually demanded that our "President" tell us how he defined those terms.  That has not turned out very well.

Now I watch a firebrand and hear him saying "trust me."  I don't think so, Skippy!  Been down that road before and I won't do it again.

But that ignition is still operating and I watch, hear, and read the tremendous emotion of his followers, acolytes and minions declaring that "the whole thing needs to be turned down."  They are the reverse image of the followers of our current "President"; facts mean nothing, questions are not allowed, discussion is useless, and behavior is crude and uncivil.  Any challenge is perceived as personal, not related to policy of accumulation of fact.

We have a President right now that sees his power as exponential, by-passing Congress on everything, including items that are clearly withing the purview of Congress; who is so thin-skinned that whenever anything...anything...he says is challenged in any way, you can see the rise in both blood pressure and  pulse rate.  Mr. Trump has the same reaction to any challenge, only his verbal skills are far more crude and direct; Mr. Obama will internalize that and then seek retribution in some way that does not leave any evidence.

I don't want a hot head in the oval office.  I don't want a liar in the oval office.  I am looking for a President that is honest and has a sense of NOT being the smartest person in the world; one who will always welcome questions and disagreement...both of which expand understanding and lead to better decisions.

Does anyone who has watched the ideas and attitude that is "Trump" feel that such attributes apply?

Adages

I was raised with adages echoing in my ears.  Today, I can go for months without hearing even one. What are adages, some of you ask?  Well, as some examples: "Birds of a feather flock together," "The early bird catches the worm," and how about "Call a spade a spade."  Now, an adage is not quite as declarative as a proverb...or even a maxim...but it has its roots in both tradition and observation.

When I was a youth, and I would have some trouble that came about because of things some of my friends were doing I would, of course, claim that I personally hadn't done anything wrong and didn't understand why I was being punished.  The response?  "Birds of a feather flock together."  "You are known by the friends you keep."  In other words, by choosing friends less than wisely, I would be tarnished by the same brush that recognized their miscreant behavior.

Adages came to be recognized by me as non-religious rules to live by; instead of commandments or bible verses used to claim dictates of or by God, adages were based on long experience of many generations...proven to have value and permanence.  Over time and with consistent repetition I came to gain respect for adages...and proverbs and all the rest...as non-experiential ways of living a less dangerous life than I might have otherwise.

Now...there is absolutely no substitute for failure as a learning tool.  If you chose a dangerous path and fall and break a leg, you will never make that choice again...or at least not without taking the proper precautions.  If you invest on the promise of another and lose your investment, you will never take a person's word as sufficient again, requiring some additional form of surety.  Nonetheless, adages do have a very helpful influence and can guide all of us to an easier life, somewhat limiting the number of failures needed to grow and learn.

Where have the adages...and the proverbs, maxims, and axioms, etc.....gone?  When was the last time you heard one, except from a grandparent?

Big deal, you might say; what difference does it make?  Really?  Are you sure you want to go there?

We (the United States of America) currently suffer the presence of an administration and a President that clearly abhors truth, desires power beyond that granted by our Constitution, used words not to explain or clarify but to mislead, distort and subvert, has a work ethic based on sloth, and has surrounded himself with people who clearly want to totally change our governance.

Perhaps you ask, "how would adages and the like have helped?"  Consider my first example: Birds of a feather flock together.  Who raised Mr. Obama?  What was that person's political beliefs?  In whose church did Mr. Obama sit for years, never complaining or objecting?  What were (and are) that leader's feelings about the United States?  One of his associates was Bill Ayers, an admitted and unrepentant domestic terrorist.  If one had been comfortably cognizant of "Birds of a feather flock together" do you suppose public concern might have been loud and persistent?  I do.

And how about job background and performance as a focus.  "By their works shall you know them."  Simply thinking that out loud and then seeking answers regarding each of the seekers for public office...and particularly that of the Presidency...might have done us a tremendous service.  But that did not happen.  Instead, the constant plea of the con man of "trust me" carried the day.  Twice!

What is past is past.  But I would suggest that there is a lesson to be learned.  And that lesson is that a reflection upon adages, proverbs, maxims and, heaven forbid, Commandments might not be such a bad idea for the future...particularly when electing those who would have power over us.