Dr. Larry Fedewa
Climate change: a new religion?
A new Apocalyptic vision triggers religious fervor
By Dr. Larry Fedewa (December 6, 2019)
A first in human history:
Anxious about their future on a hotter planet and angry at world leaders for failing to arrest the crisis, masses of young people poured into the streets on every continent on Friday for a day of global climate protests. Organizers estimated the turnout to be around four million in thousands of cities and towns worldwide. (Somini Sengupta, New York Times, September 20, 2019)
(Below: Youth March for Climate Change (New York City, Sept.20, 2019)
What is the motivating force which could impel such an amazing reaction of youngsters all over the world (except China)? Clearly, the threat of extinction is taken so seriously by so many youths that they felt compelled to participate in this effort. What has convinced so many in so many places simultaneously?
Apparently, it is the vision of the planet earth being baked into destruction by the sun’s rays. This vision seems to have originated from the speculations of climate scientists as interpreted and simplified by activists. Cold, neutral, formulaic science has never elicited such emotional reactions. Those ideas had to be interpreted and simplified by propagandists. Eventually, the vision emerged with its dramatic impact and its ability to inspire visceral fear. It is this vision which has motivated a youthful passion which thirsts for a cause to believe in.
In that sense, climate change advocacy demonstrates many of the same characteristics as religion. It is an unquestioning belief in an unseen event; it inspires an ethic requiring sacrifice to achieve; and it thrives on communal events. Thus, it meets the traditional characteristics of religion: creed, code, and cult.
Today’s impeachment hearing
Bias among the elite
By Dr. Larry Fedewa (December 4, 2019)
The first House Judiciary hearing featured three professors in favor of Trump impeachment, one against. The three anti-Trump witnesses elaborated their definitions of “high crimes and misdemeanors” and all came to the conclusion that Mr. Trump was guilty as charged of the three principal charges advocated by the House Intelligence Committee report on its “investigation”, namely, bribery, obstruction of justice, and abuse of power.
Jonathan Turley, the lone expert opposed to impeachment, advocated caution and against proceeding with the current case because it has no solid evidentiary basis and no bipartisan consensus of wrongdoing – hallmarks of the previous two modern cases of impeachment. As expected, the questioning was conducted along partisan lines.
What now?
Exhausted by their hearings, the House now takes a 10-day vacation
By. Dr. Larry Fedewa (November 23, 2019)
Amid apparently lagging interest in the whole impeachment drama on Capitol Hill, the Democrats leave Washington for the Thanksgiving recess with a serious question to ponder. They have to decide whether to pursue their impeachment strategy toward what looks like a bitter end, or to construct an alternate strategy. It looks increasingly like the practical politicians versus the true believers.
As this column has pointed out, the stakes are very high: almost certainly the control of the House in 2020 and probably the presidency as well. The House is currently split with 233 Democrat seats versus 197 Republican seats (+4 vacancies). The Republicans need to gain a net 18 seats to resume control. Their prospects seem to depend on re-gaining the 31 so-called “Trump districts”, i.e. seats that Democrats won in 2018 that had voted for Trump in 2016. Historical trends are against the Republicans, since control of the House has flipped during a presidential election only twice (1948 and 1952) since 1900.
What have the Dems’ impeachment hearings revealed so far?
Interesting but irrelevant
By Dr. Larry Fedewa (November 16,2019)
The much-publicized hearings of the House Intelligence Committee began last Wednesday with three high ranking State Department officials over two days. The hearings revealed two things: 1) how deep the “Deep State” goes, and 2) how shallow the Democrats’ case against President Donald Trump really is.
The Deep State
There are thousands of honest, hard-working people in the federal bureaucracy, who toil conscientiously every day to do the jobs they have been assigned. Among them are the first three witnesses called by Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) to lead off the public testimony phase of his impeachment inquiry.
Their testimony demonstrated just how deep the “Deep State” goes by revealing its characteristics. These people are sincerely dedicated to what they perceive as the official policies of the United States government. The fact that the policy they are dedicated to has been crafted by the senior career officers of their department is simply beyond their grasp. They believe and earnestly defend the un-Constitutional premise that foreign policy should be non-political and that all key decisions and staff should reflect an ongoing strategy and practice which transcends the comings and goings of politicians.
Will Trump win in 2020?
Don’t be too sure
By Dr. Larry Fedewa (November 9, 2019)
The general opinion among Trump supporters – and many Democrats — is that a sitting president who oversees a thriving economy is very difficult to beat in an election for his second term. There is plenty of precedent for this prediction. Only two presidents since WWII have been defeated for a second term – Jimmy Carter and George Herbert Walker Bush. Carter faced a serious recession and Bush shared the vote with third party candidate, Ross Perot. So, history is definitely on the side of this opinion.
Many Trump supporters believe that his re-election is virtually assured. This is a potentially dangerous presumption.
The Dems huge gamble
What in the world are they thinking? 
By Dr. Larry Fedewa (November 2, 2019)
The Democrat Party of the United States of America has apparently adopted the following strategy:
1, Put forth a list of second- and third-rate candidates for their 2020 Presidential nomination, almost all of whom represent positions on the significant issues of health care, immigration, environment, the Constitution, and foreign policy which are so far to the Left that they are never going to attract the majority support of the American electorate.
- To make this decision work, they made a frantic, last minute attempt to remove the current President by the vote of one house of the legislature, even though the Senate, which is controlled by the Republican Party — which must convict the President by a 2/3 majority — is virtually certain the exonerate the President, thus leaving the President in office.
- Nevertheless, proceed with the impeachment on the assumption that the process can be manipulated in such a way as to stain the President’s name and reputation and thereby divert enough independent voters to defeat Donald J. Trump in his quest for a second term.
The goal appears to be to stir up so much hatred of Mr. Trump that the Democrat will win no matter who it is, washed into office by a flood of negative views of Trump and his Administration.
The customary strategy for an American election is to spend the pre-primary season testing one or more favored candidate(s) and discover whether their early choices have the required qualities to defeat the sitting president. If the field does not look strong enough, the elders of the party would start looking for a better candidate. To their credit, they did convince Joseph Biden to join the campaign, but that does not seem to be working too well.
The Dems are destroying the presidency
The real challenge to the Constitution
Among the many absurd accusations being carelessly hurled around by the Democrats these days is the most absurd of all: that the President is violating the Constitution. In fact, we are seeing another example of the Left’s habit of accusing the President – and conservatives in general – of committing the very crimes that they themselves have actually committed.
The most egregious example of this behavior is the Democrats’ accusations that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians to overthrow the 2016 election, when in fact the Clintons and their campaign had a long – and very profitable — influence-peddling scheme going on, using the Clinton Foundation as their cover – to the tune of over $100 million! Even the Mueller fiasco could not find evidence of Trump involvement.
In this case, Nancy Pelosi, through Adam Schiff, Jerrold Nadler and their cohorts, have all but destroyed any U.S. president’s ability to carry on foreign policy. What leader of a foreign government is going to want to talk confidentially with the American president when they have a well-founded fear of their conversation being broadcast to the public? The same goes for American diplomats.
Thank God for elections!
The only way to resolve the current stand-off 
By Dr. Larry Fedewa (October 20, 2019)
The most important function of government in the United States of America is ultimately the elections at every level of government – federal, state, county, township, and some other public services, such as public school boards and bond issues. Elections are the way we proclaim our collective “consent of the governed”, as required by the Constitution.
It is important to remember this basic fact at this time in view of two factors which will dominate the next election: 1) the serious and almost successful attempt by the bureaucracy to reverse the presidential election of 2016, and the current attempt of the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives to accomplish the same objective through their peculiar activities to impeach the winner of that election; 2) the extraordinary level of disagreement over the state and future of the country which exists on both sides, which has resulted in massive demonstrations by both sides and frequently by violence from the opponents of the current administration.
Dr. Larry on the serious issues of our time (podcast)
|
||||||||
|
