Outside and from within, prompted by self-enrichment, egocentric behavior, or one’s ideological beliefs. Powers divergent to the intent and spirit of the U.S. Constitution (since the founding of the republic) have influenced, often negatively, this government’s lawmaking prudence, judicial righteousness, and utter disregard for the meaningfulness of procedural due process.

Crises: War, civil unrest, natural disasters, the lack of life-sustaining essentials opportune the government a reason to limit one’s liberty. The government always errors on the more; never-the-less, the present crisis is no exception to precedence.

Generated fear cloaks over underlining veracity; it shrouds and denies the rationale in favor of unwarranted panic. Once anxiety replaces empirical evidence and rational deduction-mayhem ensues. The perfect example of such happenings is this country’s present hyperbolic countermeasures. The nation’s citizenry cannot remain quarantined, product and services must trade, this virus is deadly; however, statistically, the infected to cure ratio, except for specific geographic areas, is endurable.

The fight to confront and eliminate the virus is the mission. The administration, the media, and medical professionals have declared: “this is war.” In all wars, measures desperate or ordinary have integral risk. While striving to protect the most vulnerable, we Americans must accept the realities of warfare, despite all mitigating efforts a number of Americans will die. War and death run in the same circles. I say, (and I’m seventy-five years old and vulnerable) submit new protocols, and open-up sensibly, the marketplace before multi-millions of Americans loose their jobs, critical industries crumble, and national security is jeopardized.

For many liberal progressives, the decisiveness of their political perspective does not require empirical verification, logic, reason, or rationality. However, it does require the obedient acceptance and steadfast adherence to the socioeconomic-political philosophy of Eugene Debs, Saul Alinsky, and Bernie Sanders. Today’s progressives dismiss counter-thoughts as the pejorative discourse of racist, fanatical, right-wing extremism unworthy of contention or consideration. Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov, better known by his alias Lenin would gleefully agree

For these Democrats, by means, legal, extralegal, or amoral, the defeat of Trump necessitates gloves off Machiavellian tactics. For those who populate the political left, the-how-of-it is subordinate to the result. The FBI, CIA, and the D.O.J, by their actions, evidenced such illicit behavior before and during the recent presidential election.

Contrarianism, its beliefs, and practices (for Democrats) aid and assist the circumstantial that directly feeds into a progressive’s sense of “woke.” Detrimentally, the dogma of “Woke,” coupled with their “Theory of Diversity,” ignores one’s normative understanding of objective cognition; while favoring, often unwittingly, Norman Mailer’s factoid over the apparent truth.

Nonetheless, “woke” imposed insertion into the country’s everyday dialogue has decidedly, and I believe, negatively influenced the societal behavior of this nation. The appliance of “woke” into human discourse examples silliness run amok.

Contemporaries home and abroad, including the delusional media, invoke and justify the “woke” narrative as inventively modern. However, intellectual sobriety obliges that one should reject such a narrative as a fanciful obtuse of meaninglessness.

Vexed by conflicting possibilities, variations of “the good, the bad, and the ugly” assort, evolve, and reconfigure into episodes of never-ending issues and concerns. Inevitably, however, the problems of significance fade, the best reconciles with the worst, the offense assuages, and in time the vexing of conflicting probabilities reappear demanding immediate attention and a determinative solution.