Da Techguy's (no longer backup) Blog

The whole point of Jacksonianism is “You leave me alone and I’ll leave you alone. You play fair with me and I’ll play fair with you. But if you fuck with me, I’ll kill you.”

Steven Den Bestie

4th Doctor: Well of course you swore an oath! Now you have to choose. Your personal honour against the safety of the whole of Traken.

Nyssa: Yes, father.

Tremas: I can’t, Doctor.

4th Doctor: Well, that’s fine. That’s fine, Tremas. I mean, when this thing has taken over the entire Source you’ll have the consolation of knowing that you kept your honour intact.

Doctor Who, The Keeper of Traken 1981

The President’s executive order splitting the difference on extending Unemployment benefits and other COVID business is both smart and dangerous.

Mind you I’m not talking about measures in the order itself. The questions of extending federal unemployment bonus, student loan and eviction extentions are all fair ones for debate. Trump’s move splits the difference between both sides. I think the tax holiday for payroll taxes is a bad idea because it will bite a lot of people later (I’ll be increasing my extra withholding to play it safe) all in all it’s a fair compromise on it’s own but again I’m talking the order itself, not what’s in it.

I’m not by nature a fan of executive orders to begin with. I don’t belong to the pen and phone club. While executive orders do have their place the idea that they will be used to break a congressional deadlock (even if the measures are allowed by law as in this case) is a bad, I would say even a dangerous precedent to set. The conservative in me doesn’t like it.

Then the Jacksonian in me speaks up. A tactic that is used by my enemies against me is certainly a tactic that can be used by us against them. Furthermore by playing hardball the President puts the left in a box to either make an actual deal or let him get credit for the unemployment benefit extension. The fact that he did so while detailing the Democrat wish list in the bill makes the point even better and given how critical this election is you have to be willing as his predecessor once said: “Punch back twice as hard.”

But there is also another lesson here. Just as the Democrats (as they were warned) have been made to pay for tossing the filibuster allowing 51 votes for Trump judges and for over-reliance on the executive order to make laws without, you know actually making laws the old fashioned way through congress, if this stands then there is no reason to think that the next Democrat President (and there WILL be one, just not Joe Biden) doing the same

So the problem is this: How do we cut the Gordian knot of Jacksonian battle with the left while preserving the principle of limiting the power of a chief exec to make laws by fiat. The answer actually is pretty simple.

Introduce a bill to remove the underlying laws allowing said orders.

The solution is simple which makes it hard to do. The GOP of course doesn’t want to handcuff this president in the face of Democrat intransigence while Democrats may balk as they will want this power in the future.

President Trump won’t be president forever and it would be a really good idea to get something like this over the hump before his 2nd term ends A push for a repeal of such laws, playing it up as a “Stop Trump” measure to the media/left whose base would likely fall for it.

Would that mean a little less leverage for President Trump in dealing with the left? Sure, but he has proven himself able enough to novel them in other ways. Such a bill would come late enough to allow this President to use this Jacksonian tactic for a while, and still satisfy that Conservative instinct to slow government and restrict its power.

If something like this can be passed during Trump’s 2nd term it would go a long way toward restoring “regular order’ and forcing the congress to do the job is it elected to do. We likely will never get another chance to get something like this done.

Of course the best solution would be a functional congress, but that frankly isn’t possible with the current makeup of the Democrat party but until it happens as Don Surber puts it:

Somehow, the Supreme Court and presidents now write the law but Congress does not. We really should fix that. Democrats can go first by declaring DACA invalid.

Until then, you fight the battle with the weapons you have.

The time to fight that fight will be after we win.

To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.

Sir Robert Peel’s (the founder of Modern Police) Policing principles #7

Yesterday I alluded to the police not going hard on those who use force, even lethal force defending themselves in places like Seattle where they have been forced to retreat. Let me give you an example of how I think this will work from something that happened in my own life.

About 15 years ago or so my youngest was briefly in the same school where my wife was school nurse, One day I got a call from the VP at the school. He was called into the office one day because he had hit another kid. It turned out the kid had said something about his mother (my wife) and he slugged him.

I went in to see the vice principal and when he objected to my sons actions I bluntly told him what the rules I laid down for my sons years ago concerning fighting at school:

1. If the other guy is armed don’t fight under any circumstances.
2. If the other guy throws the 1st punch: fight.
3. You are not allowed to throw the 1st punch UNLESS the other guy insults your Mother or Grandmother. In that case you are not only authorized to throw the 1st punch your are expected to.
4. You are not allowed to hit a girl even IF she throws the 1st punch or insults your mother or grandmother.

I told the VP that while I understand he has to enforce the rules and will not complain if he does but as far as I was concerned at home he would not be punished for his actions he would be commended for them.

I further informed the VP that if faced with the same circumstances at school again he is under my orders to do the exact same thing.

Needless to say the VP was rather surprised at my take and said that while he would have to punish my son he would take steps to make sure the provocation was not repeated. As I was leaving he walked to the door with me and in a low voice told me he hoped his sons would stand up for their mother like mine did.

In the end my son got a light pro-forma punishment, neither the kid he slugged nor any other said another word about his mother and the next year I had him in a Catholic School.

That’s how I think such things will work when people decide to reclaim their duty as citizens and when people loudly complain, and they will, the police will note said complaint, and ignore it because this is the society they have voted for.