in america; is stupid smart?

There appears an ongoing power struggle between two of the three branches, being the executive and judicial. Albeit the third branch, the one that holds “all legislative power” (Constitution/Article I/Section 1) is inept, feckless, and vacuous, even though it’s divided in two chambers, begging: Can one cognitive brain be found amongst the 535 seated. Or maybe their brains reside there as they loquaciously spew ad nauseum diatribes of profanity, devaluing any semblance of professional decorum. Which begs: Has Congress boiled down to middle-school drama, to what has become Congress’ greatest achievements; sow dissension and discombobulation, including the complete inability to accomplish one damn thing, except spending money.

The worst part, WE THE PEOPLE, are elevating complete imbeciles into positions of power, which makes me wonder if those being elevated are laughing at the imbeciles fawning over them. One cannot make the idiocy of this up. Yet here we are as a people, imbecilic to understanding any of the deceptions playing out. And sadly, as each political Party points the proverbial finger at the opposing side, they disregard the three pointing back. But you must love the hypocrisy of Democrats calling Republicans hypocrites. And before anyone starts pointing fingers, in Washington, hypocrisy is a two-way street.

Anyway, when the Constitution was actually a topic of discussion, a battle between Parties raged in the separation of power. Except, it wasn’t between three branches, but the Federal and the States. The result was the Bill of Rights (BORs), although the opposing side claimed they were redundant; the Constitution itself is a BORs. The government cannot legislate what it cannot control. They framed the document as a limited power government. So, to make certain a king, authoritarianism, tyrannical lunacy, and government overreach did not manifest, the other side demanded: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people (10^th Amendment). Thus, IF the Constitution limits the government’s power and the 10^th reserves the “not delegated” parts to the States, then would not immigration be a State’s Right? It’s nowhere mentioned in the Constitution, but … To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization (Constitution/Article I/Section 8/4^th Clause) is. A conundrum; or is it not? And does “uniform Rule” mean squat to anybody, especially the illegal invasion?

Well, in light thereof, the issue of “due process” must be the hottest topic present today. Especially the illegals being deported without “due process.” So much, Democrats are flying junkets to bring one illegal back to the States even though his country of origin is where he sits today. But was it hot when Bush deported illegals; or Clinton; or Obama; or Biden? Or is it only Trump? Or is it even in the purview of government? Or does anyone even care? And I get it, Party power needs votes. And if Party can give, then Party can get, except the government was meant to be fed; not feed. But Party wants dedicated acolytes, devoted to … where the other Party is out of control, and their acolytes … well, let’s just say, they make stupid look smart. The question begs: Which one is right, or are both wrong?

All the while, of those illegal aliens who remain ZI (zone of the interior/CONUS: continental United States), citizens have been raped, murdered, robbed, including unknown numbers of illegal children abducted into the sex slave trade, or as just slaves. And all of it, committed by illegals (proposed citizens) living here, in the States. Which begs: If they arrived in droves, why can’t they be deported in droves? Especially gang bangers and those desirous of committing harm. Because if each one has to go through the process of court to be returned, how is it they did not have to go through the process of court to get in?

Then on the citizen (real ones) side, violent riots continue (unlike the mostly peaceful ones of 2020), Jewish antisemitism by pro Hamas students on college campuses propagated by professors, and then the destruction of property; both personal and corporate. Hell, Tesla and individuals who purchased them have been under severe attack by Democrat acolytes, although: The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence (Constitution/Article IV/Section 4). Which begs: Does anyone care one iota about the carnage taking place? Or is the destruction of country so Party can gain or maintain control the priority? Think folks, think!

So, in summation, if you’re a reader of ricology but believe Party is right, my scribbling must then be moronic. But if always pointing a finger at the other side, really think about who the moron actually is. And if the riots of 2020 were mostly peaceful, then the J6 storming of the capital was an open invitation, even though anyone who entered that day is a complete idiot. But aren’t those who 2020 rioted as well? I guess it all depends on which Party one stands with, no? Begging: Was “due process” applied in those riots like the capitol riot? Or, like illegal immigration, they served a purpose, thus no due process required? And what about States objecting to the mass invasion that must submit to the influx, who actually carry immigration power thereof. And yes, the last four years brought an invasion unparalleled. Thus, did Congress or the Executive uphold the Constitution? But I get it, there is power in the vote, the same as the decennial census. And those who can secure a voting populace through any means necessary will prevail. And once obtained, what then? Reflect Covid: Take the jab or lose your job; wear a valueless mask or be locked up, lock down schools placing students in future jeopardy, no church, or gyms, but keep liquor stores open? Maybe “due process” is a singular concept of manipulation to achieve an end nefarious, like illegal immigration is for voting and Party is to politics by keeping its acolytes in the dark both figuratively and literally. And I get it, at least two of three branches are following the Constitution? Or is it only one Party? The one that provably cares more for illegals than citizens? Or activist judges? Better, WE THE PEOPLE already know and understand the nation’s framing documents (as I laugh), so if anything isn’t right, it’s the other side, because only one side is always right! Maybe ZI should become LZ (landing zone) as Democrats want every vote possible, no matter who or how, knowing it’s only taxpayer’s money, so what. Oh, and once Party gives, then gets, it also has complete control: autarchy.