_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Wednesday, January 25, 2017

Bang Bang Crazy, Part 12: Red Lines

They’ll cheer us in the streets of Chicago!

Six days in and he's already threatening martial law.

clip_image001

 

If Chicago doesn't fix the horrible "carnage" going on, 228 shootings in 2017 with 42 killings (up 24% from 2016), I will send in the Feds!

I will send in the Feds! and he put an exclamation mark on the end of it so you know he means business.

I will send in the Feds.

And so, the man conservatives elected because they feared Big Government is, less than a week into his administration, threatening to invade an American city and impose martial law…

What?

What’s that? You have a problem with my use of the term martial law? You think I might be exaggerating for effect?

Interesting.

I’d refer you conservatives back to the whole Jade Helm thing, but I know how selective your memories are.

I will send in the Feds.

Look here, Trump said if Chicago doesn’t fix the horrible carnage I will send in the Feds. Now if a guy who loves him some Vladimir Putin isn’t talking about martial law, then what exactly do you think he is talking about?

What?

Oh, I see.

So, then what’s the plan?

No really, what’s the plan? Send in the Fed, stop the violence, law and order, right? Come now, let’s walk that through all the way to the end. Send in the Fed: Is he talking about sending in federal aid? Money? Social workers? Urban development?

No? Not that. No, of course not.

Well, then what do you think he’s talking about?

Now now, I can see your fingers crossed behind your back and we’re never going to get anywhere unless you start being honest.

You know what he’s talking about.

I know what he’s talking about.

image

So let’s just dispense with the bullshit, shall we?

Trump is talking about Chicago.

He’s talking about law and order.

Trump is talking about gun violence.

Gang violence.

Black thugs. Black on Black crime. Two hundred and twenty-eight shootings. Forty-two murders by gun less than a month into the new year.

That’s what he’s talking about.

And he’s threatening to send Federal forces under his control to end it.

 

He’s talking about military force.

 

When Trump says, “Send in the Fed” he’s talking about sending in troops.

Because that’s the only option conservatives will support. Not aid. Not money. Not education. Not reasonable gun control. Force.

This is typical of the same mindset that thinks you can carpet bomb other countries into democracy by dropping freedom from B-52s.

This is the same old conservative idea that you can storm ashore, burn the place down, and then ... just walk away, expecting peaceful robust civilization and stable government and economic vitality to sprout fully formed from the ashes without addressing any of the underlying reasons for the original conflict.

This is the same mindset that had Milwaukee sheriff David Clarke calling peaceful protests – protests consisting of hundreds of thousands without a single arrest – in Washington a “total collapse of the social order.”  

image


With these people, force is always the answer.  

So don’t tell me Trump isn’t talking about sending in troops, because that’s exactly what he’s talking about.

What you have here is no less than the President of the United States threatening an American city with invasion, with martial law.

Don’t believe me?

I’ll prove it.

Do what I say, or I'll send in ... what?

The options are fairly limited.

Look at the strategic situation:

Trump is obviously talking about conservatives' ongoing obsession with Chicago: Specifically with black gangs and black on black violence. Again, let’s dispense with the bullshit and code words and disingenuous doubletalk. When conservatives – and many liberals – talk about Chicago, they’re talking about black on black violence.

Trump specifically called out gun violence and he sure as shit ain’t talking about law-abiding white gun owners. “Carnage” he said and listed shootings and gun related deaths. That’s what we’re talking about, black thugs, because that’s what conservatives are always talking about when they talk about Chicago. 

Black gangs. Gun violence. 228 shootings. 42 murders.

Let’s at least be that honest.

So, that’s the objective: Black on black violence. Black gangs. Black criminals.

So, that means whoever goes in will have to be armed, organized, and prepared to wade into the worst parts of the city. Tactically, they’ll have to hunt down armed gangs and criminals, building by building, block by block, root them out from their strongholds, distinguish targets from civilians, disarm and contain the terrorists domestic enemy combatants criminals, and they’ll have to have the kind of administrative and intelligence support which allows them to sort the criminals from the innocent (unless we’re just going to kill them all) and then – somehow – impose some sort of social structure on the remainder to prevent immediate reformulation of gangs and violence. That social structure at a minimum will require funding, urban renewal and construction, self-sustaining economic opportunity, education, law enforcement and security, and a functioning sense of involved community at the street level.

 

In military terms: Invasion, occupation, and nation building.

 

Now, the president has limited options when it comes to the assets at his disposal for such an endeavor.

The FBI doesn't have that kind of manpower, command structure, training, or equipment – not even if they co-opt the local police and place them under federal control.

The Department of Homeland Security doesn't either – though arming them up and sending them in to impose martial law would really put a polish on the department's creepy dystopian name.

I digress.

Who does that leave? The Secret Service? The IRS? Fish and Game?

End the violence. Disarm the gangs. Take the guns. Send in the Feds. That’s what your president said.  

And what does that leave?

Who has those kind of numbers, that kind of organization, the kind of command and control and communications and intelligence assets, the  training, the experience, the equipment, the funding, necessary to pacify a city the size of Chicago?

Who?

The National Guard, that’s who.

The National Guard under federal control – in other words: the Army.

 

And that's martial law.

 

And what will the Army do?

How will they fix the horrible “carnage” going on?"

How?

Remember, Trump is talking specifically about gun violence. He said so, 228 shootings in 2017 with 42 killings.

How will the Army under President Trump stop gun violence in Chicago?

No. NO. NO.

Don’t you dare look away.

Don’t you dare move the goalposts.

It's too goddamned late for that. You elected this guy. Now we have to deal with it. So, Trump sends in the Army under federal command to take control of an American city to end gun violence. To hunt down gangs and ... what?

You look me in the eye and you tell me how that works. Block by block. Building by building. Door by door. Tell me how that works.

Because there’s only one way that works.

So, you look me in the eye and you tell me, conservatives, that you're okay with the President of the United States sending in the Army to kill Americans and TAKE THE GUNS.

I want to hear you say it.

You look me in the eye and you tell me, conservatives, why you're okay with the President sending in the Army to kill Americans and take the guns NOW, but you weren't for the last eight years.

 

image

I want to hear you say it.

You look me in the eye and tell me why it's okay for the President of the United States to talk about taking guns away from people who shouldn't have them, I.E. FEDERAL GUN CONTROL, why that's ok with you now, but it wasn't last month.

I want to hear you say it. I want you to tell me why regulating who can and cannot have guns is totalitarianism under Obama, but not under Trump. I want you to tell me why you called me a fucking commie and liberal scumbag and an un-American traitor when I wrote the previous installments of this series. I want you to tell me why you sent me death threats and threats of violence when I suggested that perhaps we should implement a process that keeps guns out of the hands of criminals and gangs and the dangerously mentally ill and those who shouldn’t have access to firearms.

 

image

 

Do not move the goalposts.

Don't change the subject.

Don't throw out non sequiturs.

Don't engage in logical fallacies.

You tell me why you're okay with Trump threatening to take guns away from Americans.

Go on, I'm all ears.

 

Epilogue:

And so, as I finished typing this, Sean Spicer took to the White House podium:

image
Ah.

Impulsive threat.

Trump’s impulsive threat to send in the Feds.

Because our president is the kind of person who makes impulsive threats. Always a good trait in a guy who controls the nukes, eh? Sure and I’m digressing.

If Chicago doesn't fix the horrible "carnage" going on, 228 shootings in 2017 with 42 killings (up 24% from 2016), I will send in the Feds!

If Chicago doesn’t do what I say, I’ll … send them the help they’ve been requesting!

So less how we got into Baghdad and more like how we got into Vietnam?

Sorry, and it’s like I can’t stop with the digression. Won’t happen again.

Trump’s impulsive threat was really an offer provide requested assistance?

I guess that’s one of those “alternate” facts Sean Spicer is so fond of.

What?

Oh, right, I did promise. Sorry.

Sure. Let’s go with the walk-back.

Trump, he’s like a smart guy even if he can’t express himself in a 140 characters without sounding like the little goof in pajamas running North Korea, but sure. Ok. Trump’s impulsive threat is really an offer for federal (non-military?) assistance to an American city to help curb violence and I’m completely wrong.

Well all right.

In my defense, I keep hearing that the most admirable thing about Trump is that he speaks clearly and he says what he means, but …

What? What now.

Oh, right. Dammit. That’s turning out to be a hard promise to keep.

Anyway, call me crazy, but isn’t that exactly what big government is supposed to do? Provide assistance to local communities?

Isn’t that exactly what liberals have been asking for?

So why hasn’t it already been done? Why the threat that’s really not a threat?

If this is really what the new Republican President meant, if he’s not talking about military force but rather funding, urban renewal and construction, self-sustaining economic opportunity, education, law enforcement and security, and a functioning sense of involved community at the street level, if that’s what Donald Trump meant, then what the hell are we waiting for? What the hell are we arguing about?

Why isn’t this being done in every city?

Why are conservatives like David Clarke sneering at all those women marching peacefully in the street? Aren’t they demanding exactly what Sean Spicer just said his boss meant. Equal rights. Education. Strong communities. An end to violence. Gun control. Yeah?

If that’s what Trump really meant, then hell, I’m in.

 

But, I want to hear conservatives say it.

 

I want to hear Trump say it.

You look me in the eye and tell me that’s what you meant.

Go on, I’m all ears.

 


Addendum 1:  Every time I write one of these, I hope it's the last. But it never is, there's always another massacre. Always.
The Seven Stages of Gun Violence
The Bang Bang Crazy Series:
Part 1, What we need, see, are more guns, big fucking guns
Part 2, Gun violence isn't the exception in America, it's who we are
Part 3, Sandy Hook, the NRA, and a gun in every school
Part 4, More dead kids and why we have laws
Part 5, Gun control and a polite society
Part 6, The Christopher Donner rampage, they needed killin'
Part 7, Still more dead kids and let's print our own guns!
Part 8, Let's try blaming the victim, shall we?
Part 9, Armed soldiers on post, sure, nothing to go wrong there.
Part 10, Big Damned Heroes!
Part 11, Two in the Bush
What do we do about it? How do we change our culture of gun violence? Bang Bang Sanity

Addendum 2: As noted elsewhere, I’ve  been around guns my entire life. My dad taught me to shoot when I was a kid – in fact the very first gun I ever fired was my dad’s prized black powder .75 caliber smooth bore Civil War trench piece when I was about four years old. I still own my very first gun, bought from Meyer’s Thrifty Acres in Jenison, Michigan, for me by my dad when I was fourteen years old – a lever action Winchester 30-30. I got my first deer with that gun.  I grew up shooting, at home, in the Boy Scouts, hunting, target shooting, plinking, with friends and with family.  Thirty years ago I joined the military and spent my entire life there. I know more than a little about guns. I’m a graduate of the Smith & Wesson Rangemaster Academy, the nation’s premier firearms instructor school. I’m a certified armorer and gunsmith. I’ve attended pretty much every boarding officer and gun school the military has. I hold both the Expert Pistol and Expert Rifle Medals. I’ve taught small arms and combat arms to both military and civilians for nearly thirty years now. I’ve fired damned near everything the US military owns, from the old .38 revolver to a US Navy Aegis Guided Missile Cruiser’s 5” main battery – and everything in between. I can still field strip a Colt .45 M-1911 pistol and put it back together in under a minute, blindfolded – I happen to own several of them, along with numerous other semi-auto pistols and a number of revolvers. I used to shoot professionally and in competition. I helped to design, test, field, and fire in combat US Military weapons systems. I’ve spent my entire life in places where gun usage is extremely, extremely, common. I have a Concealed Carry Permit. I’m an Alaskan and I typically carry a gun in the wilds of Alaska on a regular basis. I am neither pro-gun nor anti-gun, a gun is a tool, nothing more. If you feel that I’m ignorant of guns, or that I’m anti-gun, or unAmerican, well, you’re welcome to speak your piece – just so long as you can live with what comes after.

151 comments:

  1. As usual, Chief, you're spot on.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I know where the National Guard needs to go... a little White House on Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington DC. Needs a good house cleaning after only a few days of occupancy by the new occupants.

      Delete
    2. Out of touch liberal- I lived there in Hyde Park for 10 years - the only small pocket of society there - the South side is lawless, no one values anyone life, if you want to be somebody, you better be in a gang and stay on your turf, etc. Obama said he was going to help, Rahm said he'd get it under control, and all its done is gotten worse. Snowballing. Don't know what could be done short of the military coming in. Cops are out numbered and out gunned, in a city where guns are not allowed. In the last few years, the gangs have spread to the downtown and North side. I left, and now a lot of my friends are doing the same. It's not safe on the streets. Don't know how this can be stopped....... 😞

      Delete
    3. You might have missed the point of the essay entirely.

      Delete
    4. The real question is when did the republican party become the white supremist, bullying is ok, ignore the needs of others party? They used to stand for responsibility, moderation and good sense when they called themselves conservative. They used to represent common decency. What's happened to them? And the Republicans who are still real Republicans how can you stand being bedfellows with thugs? Why are you silent? Or worse how can you defend them.? What happened to your moral conscience, where is that famous dignity? What happened to your sense of common decency? What is keeping from you from standing up and saying "you don't represent me or my values"? Or did the last true Republican hero pass away unnoticed because there weren't any left who could recognize it?

      Delete
    5. Hey Jim, must say I agree with just about everything you've written. In reading your Addendum 2, I see that you lived in Jenison as a child. Jenison is where I grew up, and I remember when that Meijer Thrifty Acres was first built. It's a small world! Keep up the good writing!

      Delete
    6. I agree Peggy. How many "independents" are former Republicans and Libertarians, who were left behind by those parties. I am now "decline to state".

      You may find me as Ol Roger on facebook.

      Delete
  2. Martial law? What could go wrong? Kent State, anyone?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ironic, I was just listening to an old LP of Steve Miller's, Jackson-Kent Blues and Industrial Military Complex, history repeats itself!

      Delete
    2. I have found that history is like insanity... if you don't learn the lessons, you do the same things over and over, expecting different results.

      We are in the insanity mode...

      Delete
    3. My thought also, Kent State, send in the guard. Or Watts.

      Delete
  3. Thanks for being out there, a voice crying in the wilderness as it were

    ReplyDelete
  4. Oddly we have a perfect example of what sending in the National Guard to disarm a (Black) population and put an end to violence looks like here in this country. We refer to it as the Tulsa Race Riot of 1921. If you are interested you can find pictures of it here: http://cdm15887.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/landingpage/collection/p15887coll1

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Including aerial drops of explosives, as I recall.

      Delete
    2. sidedoor a smithsonian podcast did an entire episode on it. Very scary. Usually they cover 3 things per episode.

      Delete
  5. I wish I had your gift for words...

    ReplyDelete
  6. I'm sure you'll find someone willing to admit exactly how. Just look on StormFront, or similar. Also, I'm pretty sure the order of the day will be Kill 'em all.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I WOULD like to see Fish & Game march in and conquer Chicago. They could put some of those radio tracking tags on all the futures traders.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Shared this beauty on Facebook. Well said, Jim.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I live just over 300 miles from Chicago. I am scared to death about what is going to happen. The man is an insane egomaniac, and there seems to be nothing we can do about it. Just hang on and try to survive, I guess.

    ReplyDelete
  10. If Chicago got "cleaned up" what city would the NRA use as their poster child for gun control? They point out it has strict gun controls but a high death rate by gun so controls don't work.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I shared this essay, it describes, to me, the descent into a totalitarian regime that is coming, along with the silencing of Federal agencies and citizens who criticize @POTUS. Thank you for sharing your insight and experience.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I hate to keep pressing this point, but there's nothing conservative about Republicans. Heck, these days Democrats hold themselves closer to conservative ideals than the right wingers do. These people are radicals, they're shortsighted, and deep down, they're cowards.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry, but you're wrong.

      The definition of words, particularly those describing political ideology, change. This IS what conservatism means today.

      Unless you're willing to concede that "Liberal" also include the 1930's version (i.e. communists) and the 1950's definition (which includes the KKK).

      Republicans call themselves Conservatives. Just as they call themselves Christians. You and I might have different definitions for those words, but that doesn't make Republicans wrong either.

      Delete
    2. I don't mean to get bogged down or nitpick, but I guess where I'm going with that is that these people are using the word conservative, or perhaps co-opting the word to cover their real ideas. I don't want to give that to them. Otherwise what does a real conservative call her/himself? I respect the concept that people can identify themselves as they see fit, but I don't think that extends far enough to change the definition of words. They already have words for them: reactionary, radical, douchebag come to mind.
      The conservatives I grew up with respected the future. They weighed the risks of progress and the possible costs. They accepted that there was a need for the EPA. They accepted that we needed to deal with China. The conservatives I grew up with respected the future. These so-called conservatives not only fear the future, they hate the present.

      Delete
    3. This is why stupid people win. Because the smart people spend all day arguing over pendentry.

      Delete
    4. In 2017 a conservative is a reactionary right wing extremist.
      A 1957 conservative (Ike) would be considered a moderate Democrat today. Hell, Reagan would be to the left of "moderates" like Kasich.

      Delete
  13. Michael H. AtkinsonJanuary 25, 2017 at 11:07 AM

    It's time to play History Mad Libs: Substitute "Jews" with "Blacks" and "Nazis" with "Conservatives" in this slice of history. http://www.history.com/topics/kristallnacht We know how THIS story from history ends. It CAN happen again and again and again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Jews were innocent and peaceful , and had not done anything to anyone when the Nazis decided to kill them. On the other hand, these people are armed and dangerous, and whatever may end up happening, it will have been done in order to protect others.

      Delete
    2. "These people"? "Whatever may end up happening"? Why don't you state plainly what you mean? No really, why don't you just come out right and plainly say, "I think it's okay to kill black Americans in the name of protecting others"? Because that's what you *mean*, isn't it? Like half of Texas is "armed and dangerous" (cough cough, Waco bikers) - which is, I'll remind you, not actually a crime but a Constitutionally guaranteed Right in this country - but no one is talking about "sending in the Feds" there, are they? What makes the South Side of Chicago different? Go on, state it plainly. We're all waiting.

      And/or you seriously trying to argue that holocausts are okay so long as the targets don't fit an arbitrary assessment of innocence and peacefulness? Seriously?

      Holy shit, I've seen some damned crazy ass comments in the last 6 months or so, but this has to be the damnedest.

      Delete
  14. As usual, brilliant! And as always, thought-provoking. Interesting how quickly the hypocrisy comes to the fore-front. It's always wrong when your guy does it, but never wrong when mine does.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That is the hallmark of narcissists. Do as I say, not as I do. Always.

      Delete
  15. Toward the beginning you wrote "No aide." I assume you meant "aid". The other one is a person. Love your work!

    ReplyDelete
  16. 1) I can't read the lettering in the red map of the US. Any chance you can let me know what it says?

    2) Fed help ~ Fish & Game. Isn't that part of the National Wildlife Service? Seems to me Trump would be attracted to the word "Wildlife" since that's what he wants to control in Chicago ~ the "Wild Life".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "all the states where Trump is President"

      Delete
  17. OK, I'll be the nitpicker... you need to update Addendum 2. You are not in Alaska anymore. You are in Florida. :-)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe I left it that way on purpose. Right now, actual, literal, Nazis are looking for me in Alaska.

      And I don't want to ruin the surprise.

      Delete
    2. I know approximately 8,479,352 people have said this already: be safe!

      Delete
    3. OldNerdGuy said:
      "You are not in Alaska anymore. You are in Florida."

      Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.....

      Delete
  18. Hi Jim. Good article. But what about Posse Comitatus? Doesn't that law have to be overturned before federalized troops are committed to "maintain law and order" in a non-federal emergency?

    Mike Aurelius

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, see, no.

      Yes. But no.

      We changed that. That's why conservatives are always so eager to use the word "terrorist."

      With the Patriot Act and, more, the Protect America Act, all you have to do is call it "terrorism" and then Posse Comitatus no longer applies.

      Have a nice day, Comrade.

      Delete
    2. Exactly like the use the term "war" so we could have our oh - so -successful 'war' on drugs.

      Delete
    3. There are 4 exceptions from the Posse Comitatus Act that were passed by Congress; three of them are in 10 USC Chapter 15, better known as the Insurrection Act of 1807. The one to watch is section 333:

      "Authorizes use of the militia and Armed Forces when domestic violence or conspiracy hinders execution of State or Federal law, and a State cannot or will not protect the constitutional rights of the citizens. Implements Article II, section 3, and the 14th Amendment of the Constitution."

      Link here: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/32/215.4



      Delete
    4. You know Trump will executive order that one out of existence if he needs to "clean things up" in Chicago, Los Angeles, Seattle, New Orleans, Atlanta, Ferguson...

      Delete
  19. Send in the Feds? Think hes seen too many gangster movies. Who's he sending Jimmy Stewart and James Cagney?

    ReplyDelete
  20. There are few comments any sane person can make, other than 'May I share that?' I'll admit, my first reaction was to hope he'd do it - and that the outrage would be great enough that we'd be telling him not to let the door hit him in the rear as he's kicked out of office. What you've had to put up with reminds me that it's unlikely to go that well.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Great piece. Unfortunately, calling out the hypocrisy of the right-wing types is a waste of time, as they totally don't acknowledge the concept. Sociopaths and narcissists never do.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Well, the solution is - of course - to settle all these gang member in FEMA camps.

    However, that has to wait until FEMA under the current administration figures out how to help the tornado victims in the South.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's right! Mississippi governor is begging for the Feds to help tornado victims!

      Delete
    2. Aren't the FEMA Camps only accessable via tunnels under Walmart?

      Birdbrain

      Delete
  23. I'm once again glad you've got our backs, as we have yours. one way, and only one of many that could be listed, is to see President Trump's expression about Chicago as part of the same cloth from which came his administration's unsettling verbal moves relative to the South China Sea. Every day it's another something new. Zeke Miller's article in TIME about the functions and responsibilities of Trump's inner circle of his inner circle is equally disturbing.

    ReplyDelete
  24. 'goof in pajamas' may be the best new thing on the internet today. It doesn't at all surprise me that you came up with it. I'm seriously awaiting a new Potus term since Magic Negro Ray of Chocolate Mojo is (sob) now obsolete.

    And hell to the yes. If that's what he (and Mr #SpicerFacts) meant deal me in, too.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Being that they didn't condemn the President for instituting martial law on those gun owners, by default they're for it.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Why waste the ammo? I mean, this is the buy who asked why we have all those nukes if we don't use them. Expect a smoking, radioactive crater where Chicago once stood. And yeah, I think he is THAT crazy.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Jim you're fuckin spot on again mate

    I'm a Canadian living in Montreal....as you know we have a good social safety net and its pretty hard to get guns over here...doesnt mean that law abiding citizens cannot get them...its just more papaerwork...and magazines of more than 5 bullets are verbotten

    So with all this in mind i'm glad to tell you that last year in Montreal population 1,8 Million (3,5 metro area) we've had...23 murders

    And we have free healthcare....so i hope you come visit one day and see how much FUCKALL happens in a big city like ours even tho a lot of people call it the sin city of the north

    Ciao

    ReplyDelete
  28. Excellent article.

    One small typo (door by boor)

    'You look me in the eye and you tell me how that works. Block by block. Building by building. Door by boor. Tell me how that works.'

    ReplyDelete
  29. when there's a standing National Guard deployment to every major city the resistance will be called terrorism. If we have to live by army rules, What do we need to know about our guardians???

    ReplyDelete
  30. I can tell you why conservatives don't have a problem with this and it's very simple. They don't have a problem with him sending in the feds to take away the guns because he would be taking them away from black people.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I want conservatives to tell me.

      Or give me some gaslighting, whatever.

      Delete
  31. If Trump's threat (and it was one) really meant he was "sending in help", I feel like saying "well why didn't you say so?!" He could've been all magniminious and gracious and a bunch of other "ious" words, and we all wouldn't be yelling "Clarify!". Sheesh.
    Jim, I love love love your words on this subject. Gun control. Nice touch, perfectly applied. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  32. I see "send in the Feds" and all I can think about is that one Denzel Washington and Bruce Willis movie (can't recall the name)that actually showed the result of sending in the Feds...Bruce Willis' line about it being noisy and scary is spot on. This is one thing I have been afraid of with these assholes; over-reaction to a situation just like this. Because it isn't white folks shooting up the local black church, it's black folks shooting each other, making the white folks scared. Talk about deplorable...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Siege. Thank you and yes. This is the 1st thing that came to mind for me as well.
      I have been telling my incredulous Conservative friends/acquaintances, I don't have many but, I grew up in a Red state,OK., went to college in a Red state, FL. and now live in a Red state, NE., so I have a lot of Conservative acquaintances and some family, that it would never be Democrats coming to take their guns, it would almost certainly be Conservatives. Of course they think I'm insane but try explaining to pple who support an Authoritarian that one thing Authoritarians won't abide for long, is an armed citizenry and as soon as they are finished "cleaning up" the black and brown neighborhoods they will need another boogeyman. Once that ball starts rolling there are few ways to stop it other than a nationwide revolt which would put the entire country under Martial Law. There is no good ending to this and my greatest fear, is that not even a new election will change it. Once a Leader imposes Martial Law he will likely refuse to step down declaring an end to elections because only he can fix things. The only way to remove him would be by military force. Yes, I know I sound much like the Conservatives who demanded Obama would set himself up as a Dictator and do the same, but one of them was sane and the other is clearly suffering from a severe personality disorder that is manifesting itself more as each day passes.
      Here's the thing, once Martial Law is instituted, when does it end? When are the streets considered safe and a military withdrawal ordered? Answer; it never is. We will have National Guard along with militarized police standing on street corners, walking through malls and patrolling neighborhoods permanently. Since the National Guard does not have the man power to police both the Country and be combat ready for foreign intervention it leaves little doubt the Gov. would need to reinstate the Draft although I'm sure there would be plenty of Brown Shirts willing to volunteer to police our streets under the guidance of the Gov. they so hate.
      One more thing I'd like to mention is that in 2015, I believe it was, I'd have to look the interview up, none other than Karl Rove stated that the only way to stop the violence would be to suspend or do away with the 2nd Amendment. He quickly walked that statement back after the backlash from the NRA but in a brief moment of truth, he said what every Liberal in the country has know for eternity.
      FFS it didn't even take him a week!

      Delete
  33. Here in Wisconsin, our Governor has already threatened National Guard deployment once (requested of him by--you guessed it--Cowboy David Clarke) and did so deploy them (don't let an opportunity to be a fiend twice) over the summer '16 after an officer-involved shooting of an unarmed (care to guess the race) suspect, which officer has now been charged with multiple felonies including some dandy ones unrelated to the shooting incident and is currently in jail awaiting trial. The community outrage from the original shooting resulted in 3 arson fires (crimes, true; former Firefighter--I have no love of arsonists) and many nights of protest (not criminal actions--until deemed by an occupying force, 1st Amendment-lite). Clarke's deputies fired bean bags at protesters' heads, with injuries. Sound cannons. Tear gas. Arrest of a State Representative standing well away from the main events.

    And so on. We're being softened up for the big push by the proponents of small government. Or as another famous author called it: The hog is in the chute.

    ReplyDelete
  34. As always, you've put the problem into proper perspective...TY Mr. Wright.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Yep, I knew what he meant when I heard him talking about establishing "law and order" during the campaign. When I saw his tweet yesterday I was only a little surprised about how quickly he is moving.
    There is another (though same) issue that is really bothering me and I wonder if you would mind addressing it. DT has already put anti net neutrality guy in place, so there's that, fuck us. One thing I'm super concerned about is the morning that we wake up to find we have no internet, and possibly no phone service. Can you provide any info /advice on what might be done to protect ourselves from this almost certain eventuality? (Might be next week, the speed with which he is moving.)

    Thanks Jim, for everything.

    ReplyDelete
  36. hi Jim. I agree with you 100%. Add to this, the fact that Trump is crazy, and the people around him are exploiting his mental illness, and we have a recipe for disaster. He's broadcasting racist dogwhistles to the people who react to them. He's gaslighting up, semi-expertly, or trying to. He's a failed President, and we are now a "failing Democracy." We need to end this, sooner rather than later. Thanks again for a great analysis.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Jim, I love the way you deconstruct a statement and force the reader to follow it to its logical conclusion using their very own brainstem. I've found, too, that setting up a proposition then asking a pointed question will get one of three basic reactions: 1) I get called a name. If I'm lucky, it's one I haven't heard before. 2) Sudden silence on the other end of the line (often preceded by being told I've been brainwashed. Or, if God smiles, 3) someone actually says, "You know what? I've never thought of it that way before. I'm going to have to think about what you said."

    Had that happen the other day in a conversation about an issue. They guy started out insisting his viewpoint was the only valid one and that I'd been brainwashed by liberal media, and ended up telling me I'd made some good points that he hadn't contemplated before.

    Keep up the call for analytical thinking.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Another brilliant essay sir. It's going to take a lot of whiskey to get through your hate mail; you have such an elegant way to calling people out on their crap! Keep up the good work. Cheers!

    ReplyDelete
  39. I'm actually not surprised. He said in debates and on the trail that crime would stop on day 1 of his presidency- we took that to mean martial law and I'm surprised to see it took him to day 4 to get to it. Too busy destroying healthcare, banning Muslims and watching Fox news I guess. Isn't white on white crime, especially with guns worse in the US?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He could try doing what Duterte is doing in the Phillippines to stop drug dealer, I mean, that's pretty much the only thing left to do beyond simple law enforcement procedures.

      Delete
  40. Of course, what most Trump-lovers mean, but are too chickenshit to say since they don't want to be accused of racism, is that they ARE prefectly AOK with Trump sending the Army to take guns away from black people. (By gods, they likely have orgasms at night dreaming of that happening!) But they've such a ring of sticky wickets to avoid that increasing shit storms of inarticulate flailing is in the forecast for all foreseeable time!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes. Really. If I am not mistaken the original gun ban law in 1968 was due to the Black Panthers having guns " It was May 2, 1967, and the Black Panthers’ invasion of the California statehouse launched the modern gun-rights movement." http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/09/the-secret-history-of-guns/308608/

      Delete
  41. "The Feds" are the Federal Reserve Bank, silly.

    ReplyDelete
  42. I predict that if disarming Chicago is successful he will send the "Feds" to collect the guns from the nice law abiding white citizens. I think if he does go into Chicago we are going to see some real carnage in the streets on our television screens.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The media won't be permitted to televise such things! We'll have the weather and stories about how Trump plays with puppies.

      Delete
    2. Hm. Does Con Man Don think Elliot Ness is still alive?

      Delete
  43. Have never commented before after reading a post of yours. Thank you for standing up and saying what needs to be said. Trump scares me and what his insanity can do. How we got to the point that anyone is ok with a president talking about sending in troops to an American city is beyond me. Guess I will just keep on voting liberal and keep my guns cleaned and oiled. Your site wants to id me as anonymous, but damn that. I am proud that my family has fought in every conflict this country has been in. I have family buried in three national cemataries and I refuse to shame them by being scared to use my name. Steven D. Smith, Texas

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have the same plan, to be honest.
      Thank you and your family.

      Another option for posting is use name/URL, but skip the URL part (I don't have that I know of?) Then your name goes onto the comment, just without linking to a website.

      Delete
  44. As usual, a good assessment. This was a conversation I had earlier today; and I was curious how sending the Feds as a "police" force (and again, the only reasonable agency I could come up with was the National Guard, but I think that he may reconfigure the mission of Fish and Wildlife; maybe the Park Service as well, but I digress) rather than fixing the underlying problem was any kind of a solution.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Thanks for the fantastiv piece sir. I tell you, Trump and his fanatic following makes me miss the early 2000's and being given accused of not being a patriot for not being sold on our invasion of Iraq.

    ReplyDelete
  46. I'm genuinely that Spicer didn't suggest that Feds means Elliot Ness and his Untouchables. Interesting watching Team Trump fingerpaint itself into a corner every day. And by interesting, I mean terrifying.

    ReplyDelete
  47. I started a conversation last night with the phrase:
    If Trump were smart, he would do like George (W) Bush did...
    We are in hell.

    ReplyDelete
  48. I know conservatives denying right now that this is what Trump means. But when it happens? They'll cheer him on.

    ReplyDelete
  49. They said on Fox News last night that they were going to bring in federal prosecutors and they would take over the cases of the top gang members under the fact that most were felons in possession of a firearm. So many of the gang members are getting set free. That's what I took it to mean. But hey, martial law is a lot more exciting and a better way to whip up the crowds.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How does that work legally? I know that you as a "conservative" don't really give a shit about "state's rights" but how exactly does a federal prosecutor go into a state court and tell the state's attorney "get lost I'm taking over." Shit don't work like that.

      p.s. Fox. Lies. All. The. Time.

      Delete
    2. A more specific, thoughtful tweet would've said "I'm going to bring in federal prosecutors" but that probably would've exceeded the 140-character limit--which is one of the problems with policy-by-tweet. Superficial--say something and mean nothing, or everything. But it's near-instant communication, if you can even apply that term. If Trump is being "misinterpreted," it's his own damn fault.

      Delete
  50. I've seriously been wondering if Himself (don't make me type that name!) is going to be the first president to drop bombs on American citizens.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I started using The Cheeto instead of himself.

      Delete
  51. Damn...what else can I say, Jim? Another amazing essay, well worth the read. Nothing sugarcoated, just the plain, hard truth.

    I remember when the media giggled over Trump claiming that he was going to be "unpredictable" when it came to the Presidency, and people on the Left like Slavoj Zizek claiming that Trump would "shake up the system!" and that was a good thing.

    So...anyone want to ask them now how the hell has this been a "good thing"?

    ReplyDelete
  52. I so appreciate you Jim. I will share your Facebook comment and hope people follow it here.

    ReplyDelete
  53. I will point out, that they 'sent the Feds in' in DC. I was there. I saw them. They sat around chatting politely with the various marchers. Oh, wait, you aren't calling that martial law? Well, you're right. It wasn't. They'd been Deputized. Legally made a component of Federal *police* authority. Hmmm. Still Feds, though - Because DC National Guard are drawn from Federal Territory.

    Of course, if he sends in the *Illinois* National Guard, he *still* won't be sending in the Feds. Unless *Federalized,* the National Guard is a STATE formation. Still not Martial Law - Unless the *Governor* of the State of Illinois declares it - Hmmm. That doesn't fit your alarmist narrative either.

    OK, so... What other forms of "Feds" might be sent..? Oh, How about Federal Prosecutors to take over courts? Oh, wait, that's not Martial Law, either. Federal Bureau of Investigation to beef up investigational skills and manpower? Naaah. That's still not the Army. Federal Marshalls? Nope. We don't have any of those.

    In short, I find you to be hysterical and unhelpful with this piece - which is sad, because you normally make good points.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. According to you, Trump LIED about sending in Feds to clean up Chicago's high crime rate because according to you he DIDN'T send in the feds.

      That's precisely a part of what Jim said, that the only way Trump is ever going to be meaningfully "send in the feds to clean up crime" in Chicago is if he sends in pretty much a fighting force. And to confiscate guns no less because the law apparently doesn't work for there to be so much crime according to Trump.

      Either that or the whole thing is a bunch of hot air from Trump as usual, as you've stated. Jim never said that such is not a possibility, in fact given how Trump is, that's the most LIKELY possibility, what he's touching on however is the alarmist consequences of his tweeting, something you've ignored, as a President his tweets have consequences. We've already seen examples of such. There's also a caution about how he might actually do just that, take note, this is Trump we are talking about here. He has already gone through with some of his "promises" even though they hurt the country because apparently he knows what's best better than anyone.

      Delete
    2. There are some haywire remarks here.
      If you are talking about the presence of NG for security at the Women's march In DC- that is a whole nother critter than NG anywhere else. The peculiar situation there is that it is a federal district, not a state. The NG is under the purview of the Fed.

      "Supervision and control of District of Columbia National Guard passed from the President of the United States to the Secretary of Defense pursuant to Executive Order 10030, 26 January 1949 with authority given to the Secretary to designate officials of the National Military Establishment to administer affairs of the District of Columbia National Guard."
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_Army_National_Guard
      ( The mayor of DC may not call the Guard up without an okay from the Fed ).
      It is routine to do what they did when large crowds arrive for events in the city. It is not a legit comparison on other fronts as well.
      Also, while states maintain and operate the NG in their borders , the President has authority to supersede a governor's authority over those troops in calling them up within certain parameters. So, while a governor may declare martial law, the President may also declare martial law without the governor's approval- within certain rules.
      Whether there is a legal right /justification for Mr Trump to actually do so, he certainly appeared to be threatening to do so.
      Especially in light of the fact that he twitted all this after Chicago's mayor made pointed remarks about him.
      Mr Wright's point appears to be that folks who yammer on about state's rights, limited federal government, no gun control, etc. ought to look clearly at what the President said and demand to know what he meant.
      That in some ways they should be the first to demand that accounting- in light of their professed values.

      I'm with you Mr Wright. This endless fudging and moving of the goalposts is bullshit.
      Even the intimation that there would/could be federal intervention in a state without a clear description of what and why is a nasty scary thing before one even gets to whether it could happen legally . Mr Trump blew it, at the least .

      Delete
  54. I live 30 something miles from Chicago and hate everything about it. It is a mess of biblical proportions. But yes, I know exactly what Trump means and it is sending in people with bigger guns and actual training in killing other people. Also I feel obliged to point out that while Chicago has a problematic crime rate, it's foolish to look at the absolute numbers of shootings and murders. There are cities with far worse per capita incidents of violent crime than Chicago. Some of them are even in the state. Rockford is one of them. So, should the Illinois National Guard set Rockford straight as well according to Trump's logic?

    ReplyDelete
  55. I love how licensing and background checks are impositions and "infringement on their 2nd Amendment right to own firearms" in places like Alabama, Kansas, Mississippi, Texas, but "Pave Darker" says the gang members in Chicago should have "licensed," "legally registered" weapons.

    "BzzzzzZZZZZ! I'm sorry. Judges say your argument is disqualified because of rank hypocrisy. But thank you for playing! Johnny, what do we have for our contestant, Pave Darker?!"

    Fuckwit.

    ReplyDelete
  56. My dad, retired from a career in the Navy, helped design the Aegis system while working for Lockheed Martin. I was always taught, by him, to abhor guns. He was in Veitnam. He saw what they could do. My husband was an armorer in the Army. We have no guns. But I am terrified of what my country is becoming. I want my husband to get a gun. Or two. And I need to learn how to use it and keep it. I have four children. I will protect them at all costs. Even if it means going against what I have been taught. I am terrified.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So, your own private arms race then.

      Delete
    2. Ms. Trump, could you clarify for us whom you imagine you'll be defending your children from so valiantly? Dare I ask?

      Delete
    3. Ms. Trump, please say clearly from whom you will be defending your children. I can't imagine you'd win in a peashooter fight with the military or militarized police. So, that leaves one other option in the context of the essay. Say it.

      Delete
    4. (I see my comment really wasn't "blank" the first time...sorry all)

      Delete
  57. "The Army is a broad sword, not a scalpel. Trust me, senator - you do not want the Army in an American city." General William Devereaux "The Siege"

    Don't these people watch movies?

    ReplyDelete
  58. This is JUST what I thought as well. Holy hell. In just a few days he has put a gag order on women's reproductive rights around the world, basically shut down the EPA, lied his nose off about his relationship with Putin, offended every CIA officer alive, began building a wall like communist China and Berlin, began the process to repeal Obamacare, and now this...threatened martial law in one of our American cities. It is as if he does not understand we are a free nation. You cannot stop people from talking, or even killing people. You can have programs to help and deterrents, like incarceration. But we are not the 'Minority Report' where we can go in and preempt crime before it happens. And I am sure I missed something but my head is spinning from all of the insult to the country. I think it's hard to keep up. But that's the plan, isn't it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He's going about this Chi thing all wrong. Build a wall around the trouble area, dump in all the guns and ammo they want. Dump food in one corner and wait for the noise to stop. KKK approved.

      Delete
  59. Time to sell Detroit to OCP and let Robocop clean house...

    ReplyDelete
  60. Conservatives have a hard on for Chicago because it's Barack Obama's city. If Trump really wants to help, I mean genuinely help, he should have a look here: Despite Chicago's most violent year in two decades, that city's per capita murder rate was set to end 2016 at around 27.9 killings per 100,000 people. New Orleans' per capita murder rate was 44.8 per 100,000 people. How about a hand up for New Orleans? Send attorneys willing to work pro bono. Help the huge numbers of people taking plea deals because their overworked public defenders spend 3 minutes with them just before their "trial." Send Fed investigators to find out why Louisiana channels its youth from school straight into privatized incarceration for minor offenses. Send money for better training for police, for teachers, for youth work programs... Yeah, I should live so long.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's what I thought, that conservatives had no other motive than to score a political point against President Obama.

      Delete
    2. The right wing has had it in for Chicago at least since before Obama was born.

      Google Kennedy-Nixon graveyard votes

      And of course at the '68 Dem convention there they think the police didn't riot enough.

      Delete
  61. Look up Orangeburg Massacre, worse than Kent St. But the students were black in the south, so no one knows about it

    ReplyDelete
  62. I think this is a brilliant use of logic to make your argument, and I completely agree. And as a former editor, I thoroughly enjoy your use of the English language, in all its forms. But I must share a "funny" that you inadvertently elicited, from me anyway. A few times you misquoted the tweet as "Send in the Fed," which conjured visions of Janet Yellen descending upon Chicago to tranquilize gang bangers with talk of the finer points of quantitative easing and the distinctions between auction facilities versus term securities lending facilities. Okay, I'm starting to feel my eyes close. Seriously, you are a remarkable fighter, sir. The Force is strong within you. xoxoxoxo

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ha ha, I think Janet Yellen (hilarious image) might actually be the most effective option out of all the possible "Feds."

      Delete
    2. She would have to have Paul Krugman at her side pointing out rent seeking activity and what will change aggregate demand. Maybe make it a trio, with Robert Reich explaining why rises in the stock market don't help average consumers.

      Delete
  63. Amazing addition to the series. Thank you for your voice.

    I was just thinking that if our Straight-Talker-in-Chief (dear God, it hurts to reference him at all) really meant "urban renewal-ish" instead of martial law, there's a well-known Community Organizer that should be back from vacation sometime soon that might want the job. ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  64. Trump said "send in the Feds" - did he mean Janet Yellen and the Federal Reserve?

    ReplyDelete
  65. Well written, amusing, sensible article. Nothing like hoisting them on their own petards.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Great writing and arguments as usual. I noticed that you brought up the notion that conservatives gravitate around FORCE rather than development, education, urban renewal, and...pretty much anything requiring a reasoned approach to solve a problem.

    This made me think about a lot of conservative arguments I heard during the Bush II years with regards to the Iraq invasion. They justified the use of military intervention (even when it wasn't needed) and torture (even though it's not freaking MORAL) because, in their words, "FORCE is the only thing those people understand!"

    Apparently, force is the only thing American conservatives understand, also.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Nicely done! Your line about Fish and Game was great--visualizing a platoon of Game Wardens invading Chicago made me laugh--and it was a much-needed chuckle in a very sobering essay. I like how you broke it down step-by-step as to HOW martial would be imposed and how, suddenly, Trump supporters are A-OK with gun confiscation if that happens. Keep the logical arguments coming!

    ReplyDelete
  68. I always feel better when I read one of your blogs. I've never been afraid of any of our Presidents before. But I'm afraid now. I read all this depressing news and it just worries me to death. And then I read one of your posts, and I feel like the America I know and love is still there, and that we're probably going to be just fine. Thanks so much for writing this.

    ReplyDelete
  69. At some point, a large percentage of the US population will realiaze President Trump's impulsive tweets have no meaning and his advisors/spokespeople are working blind trying to twist his words into some sort of coherent message. At that point, he will lose all ability to control the media or the government. Then we will be at the nonexistent mercy of the senior members of the administration, each pushing their individual agendas and the general republican adgenda to destroy all safety net laws.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Thanks for your fine essay.

    ReplyDelete
  71. http://www.timesofisrael.com/israels-abortion-law-now-among-worlds-most-liberal/ Does this mean the US has to stop funding Israel , since they wouldn't be able to say if those funds were to be used for abortions ?

    ReplyDelete
  72. I'm pretty sure most Trump supporters see a huge difference, in their own minds, between the Feds taking away THEIR guns and the Feds taking guns away from black people. The former is the end of civilization, the latter is what they are all drooling for.

    ReplyDelete
  73. I think one thing to consider with Trump and his admin, is that when they talk about "sending in the Feds!" or any other type of potential threat of force, they could also be talking about the type of force Erik Prince is famous for. We already have private for-profit prisons. You can bet that private, for-profit law enforcement is on their radar. After all, there is money to be made bringing Chicago (for now) and potentially any sanctuary city (eventually) into compliance.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah, finally a mention of the dark prince - betsey's brother and friend of pence. He has been lurking in the shadows and salivating for the opportunity to rise again! No capitals for scumbags.

      Delete
  74. I spent much of yesterday writing out my thoughts on Trump's tweet. Thank you for saying what I was thinking, only much more eloquently.

    You spoke mainly about the feds coming in and taking guns. But martial law means that Constitutional freedoms and liberties are suspended, doesn't it? In addition to taking guns, I can see 1st amendment rights being suspended.

    Hell, Trump is already pounding away at this one, what with placing gag orders on government agencies and making sure that information only comes from his approved mouthpieces. And lest we forget, this is a man who is used to scripted 'reality' TV. He knows what plays good for the camera and he used that skill consistently during his campaign. "Next on 'Saving Chicago,' we'll watch as the President does [insert inanity here]!"

    ReplyDelete
  75. Another thoughtful and well-written installment of a thoughtful and well-written series, that as a gun owner I really wish wasn't necessary to write...

    A minor correction to Addendum 2: The western Michigan family that owns "Meyer Thrifty Acres" spells their name (and the company name) "Meijer."

    Be well, sir
    -Dave in Lansing

    ReplyDelete
  76. well you know they like to work in their own stretchy ball
    "love the freedom of information act but the blocking of research by public organizations is great for the country"
    "Clinton has private email servers hang her! but Trump staying out of the circle of government servers and using his own means he cares about America"
    "you are violating our rights by stopping me from praying but we need lead prayers in public schools because that is what the founding fathrs wanted."
    "the thought of Obama sending in military troops after a TERRORIST bombing just proves he needs to be impeached! but Trump here has a point, people are murdering people and that is bad!"

    I really could go on but it would probably just get annoying after a few more.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Jim -- you hit the nail on the head once again.

    I lived in Chicago from 2006 to 2009, during the ass end of their "urban renewal" project which, in hindsight should have just been called "the kick all the black people out of their neighborhoods and put them in other neighborhoods" project.

    In the 1960's and 70's, Chicago herded all the poor black families (most of which moved there from Alabama and Mississippi to avoid Jim Crow laws and lynch mobs, but I digress) into ghettos like the infamous Cabrini Green. Throughout the 70's, gang activities in these projects rose exponentially -- and in a famous act in the early 90's, a former Chicago mayor tried to "show the world" that they weren't so bad by staying in Cabrini Green, guarded by heavy security, and only lasted one night. After Richard Daley became mayor, city council passed a measure which closed all the projects and relocated the tenants to other neighborhoods and, in some cases, suburbs.

    What we're seeing now is the result of the relocation efforts (because why have high-rise projects when you can have expensive townhomes and condos for middle-class white people?) When you take rival gangs from all over the city and force them to move into the same neighborhood, you're asking for bloodshed -- just ask Britain when they decided to put Shiites ans Sunnis together in the middle east, but I again digress (you and I both have this problem!)

    There is no easy answer to Chicago's violence problem. The racist policies that got us to this point did a pretty damned good job. Over 90% of Chicago is as safe as any town in America, where you can leave your door unlocked or your windows open and not worry about anything. It's that 5% or so on the south side and a few suburbs where dozens of gangs were relocated and told to share streets and buildings where the problem lies. All throughout the south side, community organizers (just like that famous one that moved to Chicago from Kenya and became president after being born in Hawaii -- according to trump's "people". There I go with the digression again) are trying to get people to stop the violence. In almost every business' window along Western, or 95th, or any other street on the south side, signs are displayed which plead to the community "STOP KILLING EACH OTHER!"

    Will martial law and gun confiscation work? Hell no. See, even though you can't get a gun in Chicago, you CAN get one in almost any suburb -- a 30 minute bus ride at the most. If you're going to try to curb Chicago's gun problem, you'll have to also restrict sales and ownership in the suburbs, and in northern Indiana, and Michigan and Wisconsin and, well you get the point.

    ReplyDelete
  78. Maybe we can just re-locate Chicago to the other side of the "wall" once it's completed. Actually it would be easier to move Chicago to the northern wall that we'll need to keep Americans from fleeing to Canada.

    ReplyDelete
  79. What a fine piece of poetry in just one sentence (I'm serious): "This is typical of the same mindset that thinks you can carpet bomb other countries into democracy by dropping freedom from B-52s."

    I just hope you're using the word "democracy" as an irony here, which leads to the main concern: Trump is testing the waters. It's typical of right winged and even fascist governments to do so (and even a way to prepare hard or soft coup d'etats in advance). Let's see how people reacts to the idea, let's push and withdraw it again and again to (literally) f*ck their brains, until they get tired and softened enough to accept it. Then let's try it over the field, in a justifiable scenary for which enough people will agree and will defend the action, to "normalize" the once odd behavior and make it repeateable. Next time Trump would be able to "send the Feds" for weaker reasons, even just at will, arbitrarily, "preventivelly", "just in case". To frighten oponents with fully equiped soldiers ready to shoot anyone with impunity. To silence people, make them stay at home, afraid to speak unless to say "well... surely they did something bad to deserve it" when hearing about a neighboor who was shoot down.

    It happened, I've seen this movie already. I'm from Argentina, and I can tell how a totalitarian regime begins.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Jim, I ought to share the w-mails I'm getting from my friends in France and Germany who are reacting in absolute horror to the events of the past week. There is a growing anti-Americanism building in both countries thanks to Breitbart and Wikileaks doing a 1-2 punch on Merkel and French moderates.

    What truly scares me is how the Republican Party is marching lock step with Trump. Not one single Republican is voting against him. And my friends in Philly are telling me the demonstrations going on in the City against the Republican Party are even larger than Saturday's march but the media is silent about those marches. This is like 1917 Russia when the Bolsheviks are entrenching themselves! Scaring me to death!

    ReplyDelete
  81. Hi Jim, I enjoy your writing. I agree with what you said. On the other hand, I think you over-reacted a bit. (Without knowing it Trump waved a red flag in front of you and you charged.) We are going to have to endure many crazy tweets from Trump, perhaps let the dust settle first? (How do we stay sane during the next several years? I've been trying to ween myself from my Trump addiction.)

    ReplyDelete
  82. Believe among the fatalities in the new president's budget is funding for Community Oriented Policing programs. Would guess that asking "how can we help" and beefing up any grant for Chicago would have been far more effective than tweets about "sending in the feds". Asking myself if threats of martial law and a revival of black sites, are at least partly due to the growing influence of Erik Prince, of Blackwater infamy, brother of Betsy DeVos? Geesh.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Someone above wanted to know what was our Great Leader supposed to do about the South Side other than martial law. How about having some actual fucking gun laws in Indiana to stem the flood of illegal firearms over the border from Hammond, East Chicago, Whiting, Gary... How many gun shows are held at the Radisson at US 30 and I65 pretty much for the purpose of unloading stock to sellers who will grab up 30 - 50 guns at once? Then they drive the 20 minutes to Englewood or wherever and sell them all within a day, sometimes within hours. End the gun show sales, put a limit on quantities, require the same background checks and waiting periods, and you'll see a drop in gun violence on the South Side.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Thanks for another wonderful essay. I have to say though, gun confiscation is not the MO. Rounding blacks up for imprisonment and murdering the troublemakers is what sending in the feds means.

    ReplyDelete
  85. I recently read a post that you might find interesting. It's called "How to Culture-Jam a Populist in Four Easy Steps" here's the address: https://www.caracaschronicles.com/2017/01/20/culturejam/ The writer lives in Venezuela and sees may parallels between their Hugo Chavez and our DT.

    Also, it appears that the brains behind DT is Steve Bannon, who recently told a writer for GQ Magazine that "(Donald Trump) is a blunt instrument for us. I don't know whether he gets it or not." Mr Bannon has also made it plain that his goal is to "destroy the state" and "bring everything crashing down, and destroy all of today's establishment" in order to establish a "new political order" In a Washington Post interview on January 30th, he said, "What we are witnessing now is the birth of a new political order, and the more frantic a handful of media elites become, the more powerful that new political power becomes itself."

    Perhaps we need to set a watchman on this slimy piece of excrement.

    ReplyDelete
  86. Racism rears it head in many ways and this is another example. Claiming "carnage" is another excuse to implement racist policies - much like when we claimed "states' rights" and "law and order" and "the war on drugs". It too conveniently ignores the systemic abuse of minorities for the past 300 years in America. Whether it's through slavery, Jim Crow, mass incarceration, discriminatory housing policies, defunding education, or any other attempt to degrade a race of people, we've institutionalized racism. To say that this is a gang problem is a facile argument that ignores the complicated and cruel history of race relations.

    Trump and his supporters will defend the threat of martial law honestly believing they are helping. And they will "help" at the expense of this city and its citizens because, as we've proven in the past, the rule of law is applied differently depending on skin color.
    Conservatives will ignore the fact that this action violates the 2nd amendment because it isn't happening to them.

    The worst part is they will pat themselves on the back and brag to the world that they solved a problem and delivered on a campaign promise, etc. If they truly cared, they would provide basic services and job opportunities to these people.

    ReplyDelete
  87. After reading your post yesterday on Spicer and Conway, I had to check up on the day's news and found Conway with more alt facts: The Bowling Green Massacre. As you stated, it never happened and is a despicable lie to feed to the unwary. I did find the 'Bowling Green Massacre Fund' page entertaining though; The ACLU capitalizing on racist lies to collect donations 'for the victims of this terrible story', while laughing hysterically at Conways stupidity.
    Thanks for keeping us informed Mr.Wright
    ~Pamela Gunnell

    ReplyDelete
  88. re. Chicago; "I'll send in the Feds"

    "It became necessary to destroy the town to save it"

    ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%E1%BA%BFn_Tre )

    ReplyDelete

Comments on this blog are moderated. Each will be reviewed before being allowed to post. This may take a while. I don't allow personal attacks, trolling, or obnoxious stupidity. If you post anonymously and hide behind an IP blocker, I'm a lot more likely to consider you a troll. Be sure to read the commenting rules before you start typing. Really.