Humor to Ease Tensions

For John, BLUF:  Someone tried it and failed, although in retrospect I think he made some good points.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Monty Python Star John Cleese Is the Latest to Be Silenced

From PJ Media, by Reporter Stephen Green, 14 March 2022, 5:14 PM ET.

Here is the lede plus two:

John Cleese had his microphone taken away at an SXSW comedy event in Austin, TX for having the audacity to joke about reparations, according to the Daily Mail.

“[People] get competitive about this business of being oppressed,” he deadpanned.  “We were oppressed, the English, by the Romans from about 0 to 400.”

Cleese asked, “You do know the British have been slaves twice, right?”

Twice?  Yes, remember the French conquest of England in 1066—Battle of Hastings and all that.

Yes, the Englished managed to absorb the French and reassert themselves.  Remember Robin Hood?  Rember the 1215 Magn Carta.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

The Great Charter

For John, BLUF:  We we bgin to see emerge the Rights of Englishmen, which we enjoy today.  Not perfect, but pretty good and evolving.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Today is the Annivrsary of King John Affixing His Seal

I joked to someone that after this nothing of importance happened in history until July of 1776.  While that is a little flippant, it also contains a grain of truth.

Regards  —  Cliff

Clawing Back Power

For John, BLUF:  The elites started us on the road to modern democracy, back in 1215 AD.  Now they want to take the power back.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

The elite war on democracy

From The New Neo, 21 October 2019.

Here are the last two paragraphs:

I note several things, one of which is the participation of Alan Dershowitz, who seems to be fighting this fight on several fronts.  Another is the more general idea that one of the ways that the elites are fighting back is through lawfare (something we already know) but in particular through the redefinition of politics as a form of corruption.  For those of whom they approve, no act is bad enough to prosecute, but for those they wish to remove, actions that would never have previously been defined as corrupt are now defined that way and the legal system is the means to accomplish their aims.

This parallels the manner in which the legal system manned by liberal judges has been used to circumvent the people’s reluctance or slowness on certain issues in the recent past.  One was abortion, of course.  Another was gay marriage.  State-by-state solutions and decisions were not allowed, and new constitutional rights were created by liberal justices impatient with the pace of change.$nbsp; The time-tested process of using amendments to the Constitution to effect change is considered too tedious and democratic as well.

Is it that the "Elites" don't think the Proles are smart enough to participate in the decision making process or do they just want the power for themselves?

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Brexit Alive

For John, BLUF:  Brexit, which has been counted down and out several times, and which opponents try to frustrate at every turn, seems to be creeping ahead.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

PUNDITS WERE CERTAIN BORIS WOULDN’T GET A RENEGOTIATION

From Order Order, the blog of Guido Fawkes, 11 October 2019.

Here is the lede:

The state of Brexit negotiations still remains unclear, with only slivers of information leaking to the press, however what does now look certain is Boris has forced the EU to prise open the Withdrawal Agreement and renegotiate – the precise thing we were told by the anti-Brexit punditry and MPs was under no circumstances going to happy.  That was just a Boris fantasy.  Guido thought it appropriate to revisit some of these cracking and emphatic predictions from this country’s top Europe pundits:

And, if you go to Guido's Blog you can see his examples.

Interestingly, this 11th of October is the Anniversary of the Ordinances of 1311, which built on the Magna Carta. The Ordinances of 1311 were eventually overturned some 11 years later.  However, they were an important step toward the idea of a limited monarchy and the rise of the House of Commons.

One of the things that might be helping The Honorable Boris Johnson (BoJo), the British Prime Minister, in his fight with the European Union is his threat to fight from inside the EU, upsetting the current applecart.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

All Hail the Barons at Runnymede

TRIGGER WARNING:  I give praise to Englishmen for helping to bring forth freedom and liberty.
For John, BLUF:  We owe those Barons a lot!  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Today is the 800th Anniversary of the Magna Carta. Here is Columnist George Will, of The Washington Post, writing about "The 588-year path to limited government".  This is the line from the Barons meeting with [Evil] King John at Runnymede to Chief Justice John Marshall publishing the US Supreme Court Ruling in Marbury v. Madison on 24 February 1803 read aloud at Stelle's Hotel.  That was when it was established "the power to declare a congressional act null and void."

Incidentally, fittingly enough, it was Americans who erected the first monument to the Magna Carta at Runnymede.

It wasn't so much that we can trace a direct solid line as it was that the Barons established a principle and those who followed them continued to establish that principle.  If we do not continue in that tradition, freedom will be lost to overpowering government.

All Hail the Magna Carta.

Regards  —  Cliff

Magna Carta 800 Next Month

For John, BLUF:  Not perfect, but yes, pointing in the direction we should wish to go.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

From The Wall Street Journal, which is often behind a paywall, we have, for Saturday, "Magna Carta:  Eight Centuries of Liberty".

June marks the 800th anniversary of Magna Carta, the ‘Great Charter’ that established the rule of law for the English-speaking world.  Its revolutionary impact still resounds today, writes Daniel Hannan

Those of us old enough to remember the 1950s TV show, The Adventures of Robin Hood, starring Mr Richard Greene, know that Prince John (later King John) was a very bad guy.  The Barons, however, got him to sign the Magna Carta, which has been good for us ever since.

Eight hundred years ago next month, on a reedy stretch of riverbank in southern England, the most important bargain in the history of the human race was struck.  I realize that’s a big claim, but in this case, only superlatives will do.  As Lord Denning, the most celebrated modern British jurist put it, Magna Carta was “the greatest constitutional document of all time, the foundation of the freedom of the individual against the arbitrary authority of the despot.”

It was at Runnymede, on June 15, 1215, that the idea of the law standing above the government first took contractual form. King John accepted that he would no longer get to make the rules up as he went along.  From that acceptance flowed, ultimately, all the rights and freedoms that we now take for granted:  uncensored newspapers, security of property, equality before the law, habeas corpus, regular elections, sanctity of contract, jury trials.

There it is.  Limits on Government.  What a wonderful concept.

William Penn published the first copy of the Great Charter on American soil in 1687 and had these words about what made Englishmen unique:

In France, and other nations, the mere will of the Prince is Law, his word takes off any man’s head, imposeth taxes, or seizes any man’s estate, when, how and as often as he lists; But in England, each man hath a fixed Fundamental Right born with him, as to freedom of his person and property in his estate, which he cannot be deprived of, but either by his consent, or some crime, for which the law has imposed such a penalty or forfeiture.

Regards  —  Cliff

Voting Tomorrow—In The United Kingdom

For John, BLUF:  And, they are still a testing lab of democracy.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

From the Brookings Institution, down in DC, we have a report from Mr Jeremy Shapiro on the elections in the United Kingdom tomorrow "Little England: Why the British election matters to the United States"

Foreign elections don’t get a lot of attention in the United States.  These days, particularly, we are a bit caught up in our own imminent presidential election—it is a mere 18 months away.  And, honestly, from an American perspective, such elections tend to feature poor production values, mind-numbingly substantive debates, and endless banging on about pensions, health care, and other extremely parochial issues.  But on May 7, there is an election in the United Kingdom that might just merit putting aside that latest exposé on Hillary Clinton’s hairstyle.

Why is the British election worth diverting ourselves from such weighty issues? Well, first, it’s in English (more or less) which makes it at least plausibly comprehensible for interested Americans.  But perhaps more importantly, the British election will have important implications for the United States and may well be a harbinger of things to come.

The United Kingdom (U.K.) has long been the United States’ most stalwart and visible ally.  Indeed, more than an ally, the United Kingdom became, in foreign policy terms, a sanity check. In the halcyon days of Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair, the U.K. was the first place American policymakers went to understand how U.S. foreign policy would be received beyond their shores.

The U.K. was never an American poodle, but it was fair to say that if you couldn’t sell a policy in Britain, it was unlikely to do well in France, India, or China.  The U.K. was America’s most sympathetic critic, its most willing collaborator, and its most able partner.  Indeed, it was the only large country in the European Union that maintained its defense spending at 2 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) as all NATO members are supposed to do.

Frankly, we owe the UK a lot.  We are who we are because of England.  We also owe Germany and Ireland, and Mexico, and France (Louisiana Purchase and immigrants from Canada), and the West Coast of Africa, but it is England that shared with us the Magna Carta and the Common Law and the "rights of Englishmen" and the idea of little shop keepers, and who, 85 years ago, held the line for us against a distorted and corrupted Germany, until we could get our act together.

I don't care who you are or where you come from, what the color of your skin and your sexual orientation, they are our British Cousins and they should matter to us.

Regards  —  Cliff

Leaking in Milwaukee

TRIGGER WARNING:  Article has material which calls into question the integrity of Democrat politicians in Wisconsin.

For John, BLUF:  There is a reason to vote people out of office beyond incompetence and that is lack of integrity.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Professor Elizabeth Price Foley seems to be the InstaPundit's go to guy regarding the John Doe case in Milwaukee, instituted by Democrat DA John Theodore Chisholm.  In today's episode she delves more deeply into the question of who leaked the "pre-dawn paramilitary-style raid of the home of Cindy Archer".  Yes, this so secret you can't even tell your mother or your lawyer raid made the newspaper, the same day.

Well, it is unlikely Cindy Archer leaked to the paper and we have the admission of Reporter Patrick Marley that he was on the front lawn of Ms Archer during the raid.  Apparently he didn't get the tip, based on Reporter Jason Stein, who actually wrote the article, saying he got the leak.

The thing about leaks is you get prosecuted (persecuted?) based on how the Government feels about you.  Ask Scooter Libby.♠

We know that leaking a Warrant prior to its execution is a Class I Felony in Wisconsin.  So, does it appear as though DA John Theodore Chisholm leaked the Warrant, but is home free because there is no one to go after him, or does it appear as though DA John Theodore Chisholm realizes there was a leak but is unwilling to see justice done in this case, presumably because he thinks that Ms Cindy Archer et al are the scum of the earth and therefore don't deserve justice in this issue of leaking.  I am going with "C"—All of the Above.

Shame.

Even if Ms Archer is guilty of something, and it appears she isn't, this whole investigation doesn't rise to the protections of the Star Chamber and is an affront to the rights of Englishmen, as was won on Runnymede 800 years ago this year.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  The thing to be aware of is that if you contradict yourself or say something that isn't true you can be brought up on charges of lying to a federal officer.  You have to be careful in an interview, especially if you are innocent.

Anniversary of the Magna Carta

For John, BLUF:  Holding Government to account.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Here is an item from The New Yorker on the Magna Carta.  This is coming up on the 800th Anniversary of that great and wonderful document.  On the other hand, the author of "The Rule of History:  Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights, and the hold of time," Ms Jill Lepore, is not that enthused.  That said, she is at Harvard, down county.  Poor Jill.

That said, I do like her concluding paragraph:

The rule of history is as old as the rule of law.  Magna Carta has been sealed and nullified, revised and flouted, elevated and venerated.  The past has a hold:  writing is the casting of a line over the edge of time.  But there are no certainties in history.  There are only struggles for justice, and wars interrupted by peace.

I worry that Democracy is tenuous and that we need every anchor we can find.  For me, the Magna Carta is one of those anchors.

Remember, 15 June 1215, at Runnymede.  Every school child should know this.

Regards  —  Cliff