Speaking to activists at the South Carolina Tea Party Coalition Convention, Sen. Cruz takes aim at the GOP establishment and President Obama.
Tag Archives: tea party
It would be a lot easier for conservatives to tolerate the sanctimony of Republicans In Name Only (RINOs) if they weren’t so hypocritical — or in the case of Mississippi RINOs — despicably hypocritical.
‘Moderate’ Republicans never tire of telling us conservative extremists how they are inclusive and ready to reach across the aisle to get things done. While we are exclusive and alienate and people that disagree with us.
Well the Sen. Thad Cochran campaign got things done in Mississippi all right and in the process of building their ‘big tent’ party the RINOs turned race–baiting 180 degrees.
Formerly in Mississippi and other states where Jim Crow was president of the chamber of commerce, unscrupulous white bigots used the threat of black voting, lawlessness, sexual potency, you–name–it to frighten other bigots into voting against the opposition. Typically this was another Democrat that only had one parent in the Klan, as opposed to the baiter who had two.
The lurid overt and covert campaigns wielded scurrilous attacks in the primary because in the South at that time the general election didn’t count. Republicans were as scarce as black members of the Sons of the Confederacy.
This year in a new low for even bottom feeders, the RINOs in the Cochran campaign used race–baiting to scare blacks into voting against Cochran’s conservative white opponent. In the process smearing State Sen. Chris McDaniel with all the mainstream media and leftist TEA Party slanders.
None of it was true, but accuracy was beside the point when crony capitalists, lobbyists and an entitled Senate staff were working to keep their access to the government trough.
The sleazy campaign hired sleazy consultants and then denied involvement with the product. The Cochran group — lead by lobbyist Haley Barbour and his nephew Henry Barbour —denied knowing anything about the content of the robo–calls or radio ads. The nephew told The Daily Caller, “She (a discredited black consultant forced to resign from the mayor of Atlanta’s staff for filing false financial reports) and I talked message for calls, but I never heard them.”
As lies go this isn’t even as good as an Obama lie.
I’ve worked in campaigns for over 30 years and I assure you that when a campaign pays for a product, they approve it before it goes on the air. Heck, campaigns argue about yard signs for days, so you can imagine the discussion around radio advertising.
So at least Barbour knew, but I’m not so sure Cochran did. Coordination between an ‘independent’ expenditure and the campaign is illegal and even if it wasn’t, Thad occasionally has difficulty distinguishing between the days of the week.
The ads specifically warned black voters that McDaniel had a “racist agenda” and that blacks “could lose food stamps, housing assistance, early breakfast, free lunch” and all the other handout programs. The ads concluded with the ominous, “We’ve come this far, we can’t go back now!”
Say to the time when Mississippi was run by white bigots who were Democrats.
This combination of pandering and lying is actually worse than the old–fashioned race baiting, because then, after the election, the race–baiting winner was going to vote the way the bigots wanted. In fact the loser in the primary probably would have voted the way the bigots wanted.
Which lent the practice an air of twisted integrity. But the herd of RINOs, Barbour & Barbour, backing the longtime and frequently out–of–touch incumbent Cochran will do no such thing. If the primary result stands, Cochran will go back to voting the same way that earned him a zero civil rights rating from the ACLU.
Giving ‘credit’ where ‘credit’ is due, the Cochran victory was remarkable. Typically when a long–time incumbent is forced into a runoff, he loses. Cochran trailed in the first vote by 2,000 votes and then won the runoff by 7,000 votes. The difference being the McDaniel campaign spent the runoff turning out it’s base and the Cochran campaign spent its time turning out Obama’s base.
But there is no guarantee the Cochran ‘victory’ will stand.
Mississippi law says anyone can vote in the Republican runoff as long as they did not vote in the earlier Democrat primary. If they did, those votes are illegal. McDaniel campaign representatives have already begun checking names and claim that thousands of Cochran votes came from voters that had already voted in the Democrat primary.
Meanwhile back in Virginia, those inclusive RINOs in the Cantor organization are busy making sure the Dave Brat campaign won’t have the use of the hundreds of thousands of dollars that until last week were sitting in the 7th District Republican Committee.
Eric Cantor — either ambitious or too–big–for–his–britches, take your choice — had turned the committee into an influence–peddling machine. He raised almost $400,000 for the committee so he could contribute campaign funds to other Virginia candidates and build up a bank of political chits he could call in later.
This money was in addition to any leadership PACs and his own federal campaign account that he used to buy influence with his fellow members of Congress. Of course a funny thing happened to Cantor on the way to being Speaker of the House or governor of Virginia.
He lost a primary to Dave Brat. So instead of healing the wounds and uniting for victory in November, Cantor had his lackeys on the committee give the money away in a breath–taking display of spite and poor losership.
Brat’s plan initially was to use a bit over half of the money for a grassroots get–out–the–vote effort with a dozen staffers who would supervise telephone call centers and a direct mail campaign.
Instead the RINOs charged in and gave $150,000 to the Republican National Committee, $150,000 to the National Republican Congressional Committee, $5,000 to Ed Gillespie’s campaign for US Senate, $25,000 to a GOP state senate candidate and $13,000 to the VA GOP. And oh yes, they left a $10 gift card to Ace Hardware in the deposit box so Brat could buy a bucket to soak his head.
Once the deed was done, the lying could begin.
Cantor’s consultant assured the media the best way to insure the money will come back to the 7th district is to send it off to Washington, as opposed to leaving the money in the local bank account where is already was. Possibly he thought the money would gain momentum as it traveled through the banking system and return to Virginia with the impact of an asteroid.
But I’ll tell you what will happen. Most of the money will go anywhere but Virginia. These committees are run by 24–year–old masters of the universe that let polling do their thinking. Brat’s seat is a safe seat, so he won’t get a dime. The money will go to other House races in other states.
If Gillespie polls well, he could get some of the 150K back, minus a few miscellaneous handling fees, but that’s a big if. What is not in doubt is that Dave Brat won’t have a GOTV operation unless he raises the money for it himself.
So who are the fanatics now? The TEA party–backed candidates who worked hard and turned out conservatives or the RINOs who use sleaze and spite to get their way?
Have we as a nation – and more precisely, we are Conservatives, Constitutionalists, Libertarians and Republicans – completely given up on playing by the rules? That would seem to be the case, at least in the instance of election law in the State of Michigan.
The Michigan Secretary of State, Ruth Johnson, a Republican, has abdicated her responsibility to enforce election law for the most basic of issues: how someone qualifies for being included on an election ballot.
The Hill reports:
“Michigan won’t appeal a federal judge’s ruling that placed Rep. John Conyers (P-MI) on the Democrat ballot, ending the threat that he would have to run a write-in campaign.
“The office of Michigan Secretary of State Ruth Johnson, a Republican, announced the decision on Friday to let the judge’s ruling stand.
“Conyers had originally been ruled ineligible to appear on the ballot for the August primary because local officials found he didn’t submit enough valid petition signatures.
“A US district court judge last week, though, overturned that decision, finding it unconstitutional, and issued an order directing the local election commission to place the longtime lawmaker’s name back on the ballot.”
Let’s overlook, for the moment, that fundamental election law is supposed to be – supposed to be – reserved for the States. While the US Constitution prescribes basic qualifications of an individual to participate in a federal election, State legislatures regulate the eligibility of an individual for voting and to regulate the qualifications for a candidate appearing on a ballot paper. Ergo, the federal judiciary has unconstitutionally overstepped its authority in intervening in this case.
If the Secretary of State – a position directly elected by the voters of any given State – is charged with the responsibility to faithfully execute election law, in the case of Ms. Johnson, the option to abdicate responsibility to follow the letter of the law does not exist. By not executing an appeal of the federal judge’s unconstitutional ruling she both violates her oath of office to faithfully execute her duties as Secretary of State, but she also betrays the constitutional rights of her State’s citizenry by surrendering the State mandated rights of Michiganians.
A citizen versed in the threat of Progressivism would point out that one of the primary goals of the Progressive movement is to centralize government at the federal level, moving the authority of government away from elected representation and toward an ever-expanding federal bureaucracy. Ms. Johnson, by skirting her responsibility to defend her State’s authority to render election law, has aided the Progressive cause in Mr. Conyers’ inclusion on the Michigan ballot when he had not satisfied the requirements to be included.
As the mainstream media continues to manifest a false narrative about a “rift” within the Republican Party, the fact of the matter is this. Those who call themselves Conservatives, Constitutionalists and TEA Partiers (and by the way, TEA is capitalized because it is an acronym for Taxed Enough Already) are standing against those “go along to get along” Republicans who consistently betray the core tenets of the Republican Party, chief among them the common understanding that the United States of America – as so eloquently stated by John Adams – is “a nation of laws, not men.” To wit, there is no “rift.” True Republicans are trying to purge Progressives from their ranks, especially in positions of leadership.
This understood, hasn’t Ms. Johnson proved herself a Progressive in the Republican Ranks? One has to ask, what gives Ms. Johnson the authority to pick and choose what laws she follows and what laws she doesn’t? An action such as this is something the Obama Administration engages in…and that, constitutionally speaking and in a land of laws and not men, is both unAmerican and illegal.
The House Oversight & Government Reform Committee has voted to advance a Contempt of Congress charge against Lois Lerner, the former Director of the IRS Exempt Organizations Division. The vote was 21 to 12, brought about by Ms. Lerner’s refusal to provide information about the IRS’s targeting of Conservative advocacy groups vying for 501c3 tax-exempt status, especially during the period before the 2012 General Election.
To say that this very legitimate issue has been politicized would be an under-statement. Both Republicans and Democrats – not to mention Progressives – see political capital to be gained from this issue. Democrats and Progressives will continue to advance the canard that any action against a member of the Obama Administration is based on racism and hate, while Republicans, Conservatives and TEA Partiers will continue to point out that crimes have been committed against the American people; crimes directly affecting rights guaranteed in the United States Constitution.
While committee chairman, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), stated, “This is not an action I take lightly… [lawmakers] need Ms. Lerner’s testimony to complete our oversight work and bring truth to the American people,” Rep. Carolyn Maloney (P-NY), rebutted, “Guilty or innocent, Ms. Lerner has a constitutional right to remain silent on this issue,” and Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-MA), said smugly that the case would be “laughed out of court.”
To the latter points, yes, Ms. Lerner has the right not to incriminate herself under the Fifth Amendment rights afforded her in the US Constitution, but I seriously doubt that the political targeting of American citizens’ First Amendment rights to redress government would be “laughed out of court.” As to the hypocrisy of Ms. Lerner seeking protection from the US Constitution, even as she disregarded the protections the US Constitution affords her fellow Americans, that she should be rewarded with a pension and/or benefits stemming from her 32 years of federal employment – including service with the Justice Department and the Federal Election Commission, two positions that prove she knew better than to do what she is accused of doing – is a scandal in and of itself.
There are those who are willing to allow Ms. Lerner to “get away” with her politically-based ideological attacks on her fellow Americans by granting her immunity to testify, perhaps in an effort to spotlight others who may have been involved in the crimes committed. Many suggest that she is shielding US Attorney’s General Eric Holder, who himself has been held in Contempt of Congress for his unyielding obstruction of several investigations led by the House of Representatives: “the people’s house”; the direct voice of the people in federal government. Others suggest that Ms. Lerner’s direction originated in the White House, possibly by super-secret special adviser, confidant and political handler Valerie Jarrett. Of these two accusations we cannot be sure, purely for the fact that Ms. Lerner and her complicit underlings refuse to answer questions about their actions, their direction and their motives.
Those in favor of granting Ms. Lerner immunity, with the caveat that she gets to keep her pension and benefits if she provides information, say just such a move will facilitate the information necessary to determine where the order to violate the citizenry’s constitutional rights, in deference to political advantage, originated. But there is a huge flaw in that thinking…and perhaps two.
Should Ms. Lerner be granted immunity to provide information related to this crime against the American people, there would be no guarantee she would tell the truth. She has already proven that she cannot be trusted to do right by the American people on two levels. First, the very fact that she would oversee the usurpation of the citizenry’s First Amendment rights proves, in enough measure, that she is willing to deceive to achieve; she is willing to break the law to achieve a political outcome. And second, she has proven, through her refusal to cooperate with a congressional investigation, but, in defiance, cooperate with a rigged investigation by the US Department of Justice (and please, the Holder DoJ has proven time and time again that they are politically and ideologically motivated), that she will seek the safe haven of the corrupt over admitting to wrong-doing and serving the best interests of the people of the United States.
Additionally, should congressional negotiators be naïve enough to offer immunity to Ms. Lerner, should she perjure herself in the immunized testimony, she will most likely claim immunity to prosecution if found out. This very point almost entices the corrupt and the politically and ideologically motivated to “re-write” the history of the events in question, if not to save their sorry hides, to affect the very political and ideological “change” that was the goal in the first place. And, if you even have a cursory understanding of the Progressive Movement, you know they are prone to re-writing the facts and history to facilitate their narratives.
(As an aside, a good example of Progressives re-writing history to suit their immediate needs comes in President Obama’s lionization of LBJ as a great and insightful leader; the one who burned political to achieve Civil Rights legislation. The truth of the matter is that President Eisenhower, a Republican, first floated Civil Rights legislation only to have it derailed by three Democrat Senators; Sens. Strom Thurmond, D-SC, John F. Kennedy, D-MA, and Lyndon B. Johnson, D-TX. Further, the only reason LBJ was able to steal credit for Civil Rights legislation was due to overwhelming Republican support. Democrats stood in opposition to the bill. Yet today, Mr. Obama re-writes history to extol the greatness of LBJ, the man who ensconced us in Vietnam.)
The intentional and systematic usurpation of our citizenry’s constitutional rights is, to put it mildly, unacceptable. Ms. Lerner – and all involved – should be made to pay an incredibly high price for their misdeeds. But depending on the Eric Holder-led US Justice Department to affect justice in this case is just as much a fantasy as Obamacare being a beneficial legislation for the total of the American people.
Perhaps – just perhaps – Mr. Issa and his crew can do some outside the box thinking on this matter; crafting an effective course of action to affect truth and justice in this case. Perhaps they can figure out a way to empower this investigation to extend beyond the 2016 General Elections, when an Attorney’s General might be seated who would actually care enough about the law to pursue a legitimate investigation into, and subsequent legitimate prosecutions of, the violation of the citizenry’s constitutional rights.
Of course, that would mean that Republicans – and many establishment Republicans at that, would have to dispense with ego to better serve the people…and we don’t see a lot of that these days, from either party.
As Republicans stand on the precipice of taking back the majority in the United States Senate – that is if (and that’s a mighty big “if”) they can achieve the remarkable feat of not snatching defeat from the jaws of victory – it is becoming painfully obvious that our rhetorical standard-bearers of the punditry have not only been absorbed into the beltway mentality, but have ingested so much of the elitist Kool-Aid that they are, themselves, becoming the poison that moves the foundation of the Republican Party – and, therefore, Conservatism – incrementally to the Left.
It was with great chagrin that I listened to Ann Coulter, appearing on FOX News Channel’s Hannity, depict those who are calling out “establishment Republicans” shysters (or scheisters, if you will). Ms. Coulter, a usually stalwart scion of the Conservative Movement (but for her affection for New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who hasn’t a clue about the serious threat our country faces from Islamofascism), while seemingly lauding the TEA Party, in the same breath took them to task for identifying Progressives who exist on the Right side of the aisle.
In part, Ms. Coulter opined:
“There are two ways of looking at it. The people out in America who call themselves TEA Partiers are fantastic. They’re the heart of America and I think they have made a huge difference; they did in the 2010 elections, which in the House, anyway, Republicans picked-up more seats than they did in the famous 1994 election…[U]nfortunately, as with any grassroots movement, I think there are a lot of con men and scammers coming in a tricking good Americans into sending them money claiming ‘we are fighting for you,’ and they aren’t fighting for you.”
Ms. Coulter later opined:
“Basically, anyone who claims to be going after ‘establishment Republicans,’ the key word here is ‘Republican’…if we don’t elect Republicans – I don’t care which Republican – we will not repeal Obamacare…The only way to repeal Obamacare is to elect Republicans. It is not to be fighting against Republicans.”
Evidently, and due to the fact that we live in a time when the electorate is about as evenly split as it ever has been; a five to ten percent of the population deciding elections, by Ms. Coulter standards, it is never a time to take a stand against the encroachment of Progressivism in the Republican Party.
Each and every one of those so-called “Conservative” pundits (including Ms. Coulter, I am quite sad to say) who attack the TEA Party – which is just as much a part of the Republican Party as Progressive-Leftists are a part of the Democrat Party – should forever refrain from singing the praises of President Ronald Reagan for their complete abandonment of Reagan’s 11th Commandment, originally declared by Gaylord Parkinson, “Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican.”
The demonization of those who the TEA Party grassroots elected to office – be it on the local, county, state or federal level – is inexcusable, as is their defense of those who have made being federally-elected a career, instead of a duty. By defending the status quo in the “establishment GOP,” Ms. Coulter and her fellow “top level” pundits, either inadvertently or knowingly, facilitate the incremental political slide to the Left from which our country currently suffers. They do so by their support for those in elected leadership who abdicate the founding principles of the Republican Party for retention of power.
As I stated back in a 2009 article titled, The Path to the Future Requires a Return to the Roots:
“In summary – and to paraphrase – the platform stood for protecting the rights of individuals as outlined in the Charters of Freedom, the right to unfettered government recourse and due process in the event those rights were challenged. Further, it embraced only specific and limited measures that would provide opportunity for individual achievement and advancement. And lastly, it set forth a welcome mat for men of all ideas and affiliations who ‘believe in the spirit of our institution as well as the Constitution of our country.’
“In other words, the original platform of the Republican Party was one of protecting the rights of individuals so that they could advance their individual beliefs and causes in society. What it did not establish was a platform of positions on special interest issues and litmus tests for those who would be put into nomination to lead the party, both in government and organization.
“Today’s Republican Party has abandoned these founding platform commitments. Instead, today’s GOP finds itself naively acquiescing to false challenges put forth by our political opponent parties; taking concrete positions on special interest issues that divide the electorate into two camps. The Republican leadership of today has fallen prey to a political tactic that forces declared positions on special interest issues. Because of this the party has become a haven for special interest groups instead of being a pure political organization that protects the fundamental rights of all Americans, including special interest groups.”
Each time our modern day national GOP leadership engages into “compromise” with the Progressive leadership of today’s Democrat Party; each time they break-off into “gangs” of eight, twelve or sixteen; each time they make excuses not to hold to the promises they made to the electorate during campaigns or try to explain why they voted directly against the founding principles of the party they lead, they prove to care more about retaining power than doing the work they were elected to do: representing their constituents and executing their charge with fidelity to the platforms they ran on.
Even a cursory understanding of the tactics used by the Progressive-Left sheds light on the fact – the fact – that they use the word “compromise” in situations where they already have the advantage, so as to “begin” “negotiations” from a position left of true political and ideological center. In using this tactic, they are assured that any perceived “compromise” will always – always – move the issue’s end point further to the ideological Left. A perfect example of this is “hate crime” and “hate speech” legislation.
As addressed in a recent article, who is the arbiter of the definition of “hate”? Hitler, Stalin and Guevara all had their own definitions of “hate” and those definitions resulted in the mass murders of millions of people. But Progressives manipulate the electorate – and their political opponents – by tapping into “feelings,” therefore, a fickle national GOP; a federally-elected Republican Party leadership more concerned with how they are perceived than the principles they were sent to Washington, DC, to defend, will always lose – always, and do so incrementally.
Today we have a federal Republican leadership team – or, an “establishment Republican” leadership team (a moniker at which Ms. Coulter grimaces), that:
▪ …has promised tax reform for decades but has never delivered said reforms, almost always tapping the excuse that it would never fly in an election year, even though Democrats promise the same;
▪ …has promised a decrease in the size and scope of government but has, instead, presided over a grotesque expansion of government, including the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (just for snicks-and-giggles, look-up the literal translation of Gestapo or “Geheime Staats-Polizei,”);
▪ …has consistently, since the enactment of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), openly and overtly pledged to do “everything possible” to de-rail, de-fund and repeal the law, yet refused to use the full power of the purse allocated to the US House of Representatives by the Constitution to do so;
▪ …has abandoned the law – the law – that says the southern US border is to be secured physically; instead entering into another round of immigration reform “compromise” that will – again – see the Progressive-Left achieving a mass amnesty for those who violated our laws to exist in our country.
I could go on and on and on but I will simply address one more:
▪ …has abandoned and abdicated their constitutional mandate to provide for the common defense. They have so egregiously abdicated this responsibility that we exist at the point where we cannot, by all accounts formulated by military leadership, wage and win two major conflicts simultaneously. Would the same level of ineptitude have existed in 1941, we would have lost World War II to either the Nazis or the Imperial Japanese…maybe both.
Yet, Ms. Coulter and her “establishment Republican” pundit brethren, and it gives me no pleasure to say this, continue to support the status quo incremental slide to the Left by facilitating the mentality of the career elitist Republican politician; the Progressive who has infiltrated the GOP; those who seek to legislate by “gang” and oligarchic elitism. It is for this reason that this statement of Ms. Coulter’s is so very misguided and, in fact, dangerous, and it bears repeating:
“…the key word here is ‘Republican’…if we don’t elect Republicans – I don’t care which Republican…”
Ms. Coulter, I certain do care about which Republicans are elected. Consider this: a Senate full of Lindsay Grahams and John McCains…It should send shivers down your spine.
Governor Cuomo of New York state, says conservatives are not welcome.
See more A.F.Branco Cartoons here
I watched the movie “Rendition” a few nights ago and began thinking about the situation in our nation today. The movie is about an Egyptian man who has lived in the United States for 20 years, moving here when he was 14. He is a college educated chemical engineer, married, with a young son and a pregnant wife. He has some relatives who have the same last name as a known terrorist so he is kidnapped by the CIA upon his return to the United States from South Africa. When questioned by the CIA counter terrorism branch he denies any knowledge of terrorists, past terrorist attacks, or plans for future attacks. As a result of his denial he is put on a plane and taken to a country in the Middle East (which I surmised to be Egypt) and is given to the nation’s secret police for questioning. He is subjected to beatings, water boarding, and electric shock torture. He finally gives up names of “co-conspirators” and is thrown back into a very small cell.
An American intelligence analyst who survived a terrorist bombing that killed his companion replaces the dead man as part of the interrogation team. After days of torture the prisoner gives a list of names to his interrogators. The American runs the names of the people given up by the prisoner through various intelligence agencies, including Interpol. What he finds is that the names given are the members of the Egyptian National Soccer Team in 1990, the year the prisoner left Egypt for America. In the meantime, the wife of the prisoner has contacted an old friend who is the chief of staff for a prominent Senator. The friend is stonewalled and when he is faced with losing his job if he pursues the matter further he tells the wife that he can do nothing to help. The analyst goes to the Minister of the Interior in this foreign country, shows the information he has found, and gets the man to sign an order for the release of the prisoner. The American then arranges clandestine travel for the man to get home.
After September 11, 2001 I bought into many of the steps taken to find terrorists and stop them in their tracks. I agreed with the Patriot Act at the time, when I knew only talking points about it. Much has changed in light of thirteen years of wars that have not really made our nation any safer from outside attack, but have certainly made the nation much more of a police state. Today the story line of this movie is more than just a story about Moslem terrorism; it is much closer to home.
When I first heard Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Charles Schumer, and others call me a homophobic, islamophobic, hate mongering, bomb throwing Nazi TEA Party “potential domestic terrorist” I took offense. And frankly, they drove me deeper into the Republican ranks of voters. But in the years since the 2010 elections, and especially in the last few months, I have begun to hear Republicans speak the same rhetoric as life-long Marxist Democrats. John McCain, Mitch McConnell, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Peter King, and others begin to call people like me the same names and refer to patriotic citizens in the same vein as the Obama/Pelosi/Reid/Schumer crowd.
This is alarming to me. When I see the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) allow for the indefinite detention of American citizens without charge, without trial, and without probable cause I begin to wonder. I hear those in both political parties call me and other patriots “potential domestic terrorists” for having the temerity to stand up and demand our government follow the Constitution. I wonder when they will subject me to the same treatment as this innocent man in the movie. All that is necessary for me to be arrested and held indefinitely is for someone, anyone, to denounce me as a terrorist for my political beliefs and my rights under the Constitution are gone, just like that!!!! Call me crazy but this sounds like a movie right out of Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, Communist China, East Germany, North Korea, and countless Moslem countries. Of course, politicians in both parties who are calling for these NDAA provisions say they will never abuse the Constitution and subject We the People to these provisions. If that is the case then why even have those provisions in the bill?????
Our nation has lasted long past any form of government since the Roman Empire because the Constitution provides for “unalienable rights” given by God and guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States of America. Those currently in charge of our government have already trampled on those rights. The 1st Amendment, written to protect religious organizations FROM government, is constantly under attack where Christianity is concerned. Atheists, agnostics, and Moslems aren’t attacked by those who are so concerned about the “separation of church and state”. Only Christians are subjected to the restrictive decisions by activist judges. The Secret Service now has the option of declaring the 1st Amendment provision of “the right of the people to peaceably assemble” null and void if they decide they want to. No justification is needed other than the President or other high level official will be present. So they can prevent any dissent from being voiced by a gathering of protestors when it suits them. I know what that sounds like to me, and it isn’t a free Republic!!!!!
Our civil rights under the 2nd Amendment are constantly under attack by local, state, and federal governments, despite the amendment very clearly stating that ”the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. New York City and the State of California are using registration lists to confiscate the firearms of people who have done nothing to violate the law, and other states are not far behind. This video is from Canada but it is coming here:
Some Senators are saying all veterans are mentally unstable and therefore should not be allowed to own firearms. Colorado state legislators are being recalled by state voters for passing gun control laws that stand against the Constitution and the will of We the People because citizens are fed up and taking action. Obamacare has provisions for the search of citizen homes without probable cause and without a warrant, violating the 4th Amendment. The 9th and 10th Amendments are being rendered irrelevant by federal bribery and/or bullying of state governments who are so dependent on federal tax dollars that they refuse to stand on those provisions of the Constitution. Add the fact that the political machines own most politicians at the state level, and many at city and county level also where do We the People go for redress of our grievances?
New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg, before he left office, outlawed what was it; salt, pepper, any soft drink over 16 ounces, among a host of unconstitutional actions. The Federal Food and Drug Administration is about to outlaw trans-fats, and the EPA has now outlawed the use of wood burning stoves, just to name a few instances of government bureaucratic over-reach. Wood burning stoves????? I can’t eat what I want to eat now?????
Does anyone really believe these same people won’t subject We the People to the FEMA camps when push comes to shove and citizens have reached their limit of toleration of tyranny? What have federal agencies, unconstitutional ones at that, done to ensure that We the People will not be subjugated and led to the slaughter as were the Jews and others in Nazi Germany????? It looks to me like they are doing exactly the opposite.
This is not a Democrat vs. Republican battle here. This is, good vs. evil, right vs. wrong, ruling political elite vs. We the People, the working class American; and finally the Constitutional Republic vs. dictatorship. From a practical aspect this is what we are facing, like it or not. The Republican Party as currently controlled is as much a danger to liberty as the Democrat Party. They have teamed up to enslave We the People, and they are doing just that!!!!!
I submit this in the name of the Most Holy Trinity, in faith, with the responsibility given to me by Almighty God to honor His work and not let it die from neglect.
December 20, 2013
Earlier this month I wrote that Walmart doesn’t help its PR efforts when the company acts in a manner that only serves to reinforce its reputation as the Simon Legree of retail. (Details here.) In this instance an Ohio store had a display in the employee break room asking for donations to help other Walmart employees that had fallen on hard times during the Thanksgiving & Christmas season.
Asking employees who earn an average of $12.83/hour to contribute to other employees is a touching testimony to the innate decency of the Walmart workforce, but it also calls up unfortunate images of the widow’s mite particularly in comparison with the wealth of the Walton family.
The column concluded with a look at Walmart’s Associates in Critical Need Trust. This is a fund that dispenses up to $1,500 to employees suffering severe financial setbacks. (This does not include a bad losing streak in connection with the Powerball lottery.)
I liked the sound of that, until I learned that once again these donations are no skin off the Walton family’s stock certificates. This trust is funded by voluntary payroll deduction, again from the $12.83/hour employees.
And that’s when problems began at the Shannon household.
My wife announced that unless the Walton family stops being so selfish (they have $144 billion in Walmart stock) and makes a major contribution to the Trust we will be boycotting Walmart. Generally I have no problem with boycotts. It’s an individual decision that uses the market to bring pressure on a merchant. No government intervention required. Colonists did it during the run up to the Revolution.
For taste and political reasons, I never darken the door of Starbucks (homosexual marriage is “part of the corporate DNA”), Caribou Coffee (Sharia–compliant finance) or Chipotle (one of the nation’s leading employers of illegals).
On the other hand I’m also cheap, so I regularly shop at Walmart, in spite of linguistic encounters with Walmart employees that graphically illustrate what retail shopping is going to be like after John Boehner decides it’s safe to grant illegals amnesty.
The wife says Target is going to be the windfall beneficiary of Shannon shopping dollars in the future. But I have mixed emotions regarding that store, too. All too often in the Sunday advertising circular the clothes younger models wear contribute to the sexualization of tweenaged shoppers. Young girls are hard enough to shop for without major retailers urging them to dress like pint–sized Kim Kardashians.
This is not a problem encountered when viewing the frumpy models in a Walmart catalog. I don’t know for certain whom it is wearing those dowdy clothes, but most of them appear to be related to Fred and Ethel Mertz. Regardless of age there are no sex symbols in a Walmart catalog.
Besides the Target food section is mostly full of do–it–yourself yogurt mixes and it is about one third the size of Walmart’s. (Although, credit where credit is due, Target does carry Malt–O–Meal.) I do hate sneaking around behind my wife’s back. The fact that my future secret assignations are with a major retail chain and not a hoochie mama is probably a commentary on the dullness of my existence, but I plan to continue to visit Walmart.
On the other hand I won’t be visiting Republican members of the Virginia House delegation. Last week I wrote about the shameful Boehner/Ryan sellout they tried to spin as a “budget deal.” (Details here.) This capitulation raises taxes (fees), increases spending and negates the sequester.
Ryan is so proud of himself. The good congressman says he’s increased Pentagon spending by $2 billion, which means all the Coffee Colonels there can go back to using the Keurig instead of making do with Nescafe. In return for all this bounty Ryan agreed to let the Democrats increase their spending by $22 billion! That’s an 11 to 1 ratio and we’re on the short side.
GOP apologists talk about future spending cuts contained in the deal, but with these big spenders the cuts always remain in the future, just over the horizon, like a mirage.
You can’t bind a future Congress to a deal made today. Heck this Congress can’t even bind itself. Who do you think negotiated the original sequester?
Now Boehner is flush with positive MSM coverage and has declared war on the TEA party. He’s tired of having Obama hand him his hat, so the great strategist turns on his base. Now maybe Karl Rove will return his phone calls.
At times like this the favorite criticism of the TEA party centers on Senate candidates. The TEA party supported candidates that lost and that cost Republicans the Senate.
Establishment Republicans never foist a loser on the electorate. Just look at the great work being done by President Romney and Senator George Allen. Not to mention that paragon of tanning, Senator Charlie Crist from Florida. All these worthies are (or were, Crist became a Democrat this year) establishment Republicans with the full support of party elders.
The TEA party is not a monolithic closed structure resistant to outside ideas — wait that sounds like Boehner’s cabal — it’s a loosely affiliated collection of like–minded conservatives and tin foil distributors. (Just kidding.)
There is no national body that selects candidates. Local groups support local candidates.
The TEA party–backed candidate lost in Missouri because establishment Republicans in that state utilize a primary system that doesn’t have a runoff if no one gets 50 percent of the vote. That’s how Todd Akin becomes your nominee with fewer than 35 percent of the vote. Akin and his gynecological theories could have never won a runoff. The TEA party candidate would not have survived the primary if Missouri Republicans ran the party like Texas Republicans.
In Delaware, Christine O’Donnell was simply mislabeled. She would have had no problem winning as a Democrat. If Patty Murray of budget deal negotiating fame can win her first race running as “a mom in tennis shoes,” O’Donnell would have had few problems as “a mom who’s not a witch.”
Country club Republicans conveniently overlook the fact that TEA party energy is responsible for Boehner sitting in the Speaker’s chair today.
This wretched budget deal has now passed the Senate where Republicans with primary opponents voted against it as a sop to people like you and me. There was never a doubt as to House passage. If you want to see how your house member voted you can check here and here.
I’m sorry to say the deal passed with every GOP member from Virginia voting ‘yes.’ These Republicans are either too timid to vote conservative or they simply aren’t conservatives.
Regardless of the reason for their failure, I’ll be happily boycotting every one of these politicians until they’re out of office. No money and no votes from the Shannon household and I urge every conservative reading this to do likewise.
This is a boycott every conservative can get behind.
Well before the government shutdown had begun, I knew it was a supremely stupid idea and a fight that would gain nothing for Republicans and the Tea Party (other than further damage of their image in the American people’s eyes), and I warned my friends on Facebook who thought it was a good idea they were wrong.
On October 11th, after 10 days of the shutdown, CDN published my article explaining, in detail, why the government shutdown was a foolish idea, why there was nothing to be gained from it, why it was impossible to repeal or defund Obamacare while Obama is still wielding a veto pen (and a 55-seat Senate majority), and why Republicans need to first win the argument, then win the vote, and only then make policy. I also predicted Republicans would eventually cave in.
I was right, and those who argued otherwise, including Tea Partiers, were dead wrong. But another man had predicted Republicans’ and Tea Partiers’ defeat much earlier – in fact, over 2,500 years ago. His name is Sun Tzu.
Yes, that Sun Tzu, the ancient Chinese general and strategist who authored the world’s first military treatise, the Art of War, a masterpiece that inspired leaders as diverse as Emperor Qinshi Huangdi, Oda Nobunaga, Togo Heihachiro, Douglas MacArthur, Vo Nguyen Giap, and Stormin’ Norman Schwartzkopf.
Contained in this succint treatise that would fit on 13 pages of A4 paper today are the keys to victory in all competitive endeavors – war, business, sports… and politics.
And this masterwork, completed sometime in the 6th century or the early 5th century BC, explains nicely why various battles and wars throughout history have ended they way they have. Including Republicans’ and Tea Partiers’ recent Obamacare debacle.
Basically, in virtually every case in history, the losing side ignored at least one, if not more, of Sun Tzu’s teachings, or the winning side successfully utilized the principles he taught.
In this case, we can see that going into the government shutdown battle, Republicans and Tea Partiers cavalierly disregarded not one, not two, but SEVERAL of Master Sun’s teachings, to their detriment.
Sun Tzu wrote:
“Move not unless you see an advantage; use not your troops unless there is something to be gained; fight not unless the position is critical.” – Chapter XII, verse 17
“Thus we may know that there are five essentials for victory: (1) He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight.” – ch. III, v. 17
“There are roads which must not be followed, armies which must be not attacked, towns which must not be besieged, positions which must not be contested, commands of the sovereign which must not be obeyed.” – ch. VIII, v. 3
Yet, Republicans started a battle they never had any chance of winning, a battle they were doomed to lose, at the wrong time and the wrong place against a much stronger, well-entrenched enemy, a battle from which there was nothing to be gained.
Intelligent people, such as Dr. Charles Krauthammer and this writer, warned Republicans even before the shutdown that there was no way they could’ve defunded Obamacare from one house of Congress, because the Senate would never pass, and Obama would never sign into law, a bill or resolution defunding his sole legislative “achievement” – so there was no way they’d agree to doing so even if the shutdown took place – which it did, and Obama still didn’t agree to defund Obamacare.
Indeed, Obama and the Democrats, not Republicans, were the only side that could’ve gained anything from the shutdown – an opportunity to portray Republicans as extremists who want to send the country into havoc.
Sun Tzu wrote:
“The art of war, then, is governed by five constant factors, to be taken into account in one’s deliberations, when seeking to determine the conditions obtaining in the field.
(1) The Moral Law; (2) Heaven; (3) Earth; (4) The Commander; (5) Method and discipline.
The Moral Law causes the people to be in complete accord with their ruler, so that they will follow him regardless of their lives, undismayed by any danger.” – Ch. I, v. 3-4.
These aqre the five constant factors governing warfare and determining who wins and loses. It is no coincidence that the first factor Sun Tzu lists is “Moral Law” – or, as translated by Samuel Griffith (I’m otherwise quoting the Lionel Giles translation here), “Moral Influence” – in other words, popular support, i.e. moral support from the general populace.
This is a crucial factor for victory in virtually every war, even for dictatorships – this is why America had to withdraw ignominiously from Vietnam and Iraq and is now withdrawing from Afghanistan – because the American people no longer support these wars. Even Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, under popular (and financial) pressure, had to withdraw Soviet troops from Afghanistan in 1989 after 10 years of fruitless fighting.
Popular support is even more important for those fighting in the political arena, especially in democratic countries (i.e. those with democratically-elected governments). If Republicans want to ever retake the Senate and the White House, let alone enact their policies, they must enjoy thef support of a majority of Americans.
Yet, by starting the government shutdown, Republicans and Tea Partiers have only alienated large swathes of the American electorate, already largely unfriendly to them in 2012. Most Americans do oppose Obamacare in principle – but not to the point they want the federal government to shut down.
Moreover, according to Gallup, a significant majority of Americans wants Republicans and Democrats to compromise (yes, that dreaded c-word), and according to another poll (not by Gallup), 51% of Americans say Republicans should just “get over the fact that Obamacare is the law.” Also, according to Gallup polling, by far the biggest criticism levied by most Americans (and a plurality of Republicans) against the GOP is that it is too inflexible and too unwilling to compromise.
Sun Tzu wrote:
“If the enemy occupies high ground, do not attack him; with his back resting on hills, do not oppose him.” – ch. VII, v. 26 in the Griffith translation
Yet, Republicans have attacked a much stronger enemy who was occupying high ground – a President Obama wielding a veto pen and controlling the whole executive branch and a 55-seat Senate majority. In addition, the public opinion sided mostly with Obama on the government shutdown, even though it does not approve of Obamacare itself. Even before the shutdown, Obama had approval ratings much better than those of Congressional Republicans and the Tea Party, above 40%. Today, Obama still has approval ratings above 40% – at 43% according to Gallup. While these ratings are nothing to boast about (his disapproval ratings vary from the high forties to the low fifties), they are still way better than those of Congressional Republicans, their leaders, and the Tea Party.
Republicans made the same foolish mistake they made in 1995: they tried to implement a radical change (in this case, repeal or defunding of a newly-enacted major law) while controlling only the Congress, and without a veto-proof majority, while a Democratic president wielded a veto pen. This time the mistake was all the more foolish, because Republicans controlled only one chamber of Congress.
Republicans were hardly the first “army” to attack an enemy occupying high ground. The Union Army did so in 1862 at Fredericksburg and the Confederate Army at Gettysburg in 1863. That latter battle arguably, in the long run, cost the Confederates the war. The Confederacy is no more any longer. The same could very well happen to the GOP.
Sun Tzu wrote:
“When the common soldiers are too strong and their officers too weak, the result is insubordination. ” – ch. X, v. 16.
“If soldiers are punished before they have grown attached to you, they will not prove submissive; and, unless submissive, then will be practically useless. If, when the soldiers have become attached to you, punishments are not enforced, they will still be useless.
Therefore soldiers must be treated in the first instance with humanity, but kept under control by means of iron discipline. This is a certain road to victory.
If in training soldiers commands are habitually enforced, the army will be well-disciplined; if not, its discipline will be bad.
If a general shows confidence in his men but always insists on his orders being obeyed, the gain will be mutual.” – ch. IX, v. 42-45.
“When the common soldiers are too strong and their officers too weak, the result is insubordination. When the officers are too strong and the common soldiers too weak, the result is collapse.
When the higher officers are angry and insubordinate, and on meeting the enemy give battle on their own account from a feeling of resentment, before the commander-in-chief can tell whether or not he is in a position to fight, the result is ruin.
When the general is weak and without authority; when his orders are not clear and distinct; when there are no fixed duties assigned to officers and men, and the ranks are formed in a slovenly haphazard manner, the result is utter disorganization.” – ch. X, v. 16-18.
Clearly a big factor in Speaker Boehner’s and Leader McConnell’s defeat was the large, undisciplined, insubordinate contingent of radical Republicans (Tea Party Republicans) in Congress, led by Sens. Rand Paul and Ted Cruz in the Senate and by Congressmen Raul Labrador, Justin Amash, and Mick Mulvaney in the House. With soldiers like that, no military commander, not even Sun Tzu, would’ve been able to win any battle.
These Congressmen and Senators – most of them very young and very inexperienced (Cruz has been in the Senate only since January, Paul since 2011) – are arrogant, overconfident, and very aggressive in their demands. Yet, despite their junior status, they have been able to hold the GOP Congressional Leadership hostage due to their large numbers. So in the Republican “Army”, the common soldiers are too strong and the officers are too weak. There is disunity in Republican ranks. The commanding generals – J0hn Boehner and Mitch McConnell – are weak and without authority within their contingents.
That is so because they – at least until recently – have failed to keep their troops “under control by means of iron discipline”, which, according to Sun Tzu, is “the certain road to victory.” They have failed to insist on the GOP’s leadership’s orders being enforced with stern discipline; they have failed, until recently, to punish those radical Republicans who aren’t team players, insist on unattainable non-negotiable demands, disrupt the work of the Congress, and don’t support the party’s agenda.
In January, the GOP House Caucus removed four such insubordinate, disruptive Republicans (including Justin Amash) from key committees. Conservative media hysterically called it a purge; in fact, it was a minor and long overdue correction. A purge would’ve meant removing all insubordinate and disruptive Congressmen from all key committees. Likewise, Mitch McConnell has only now belatedly begun to fight back against pseudo-conservative groups like the Senate Conservatives Fund, the “Club for Growth”, and FreedomWorks by denying NRSC contracts to companies that also do business with these groups. These radical organizations claim to be conservative, but in reality, they only serve to get more Democrats elected and to advance their agenda by targeting mainstream-but-not-radical Republicans whom they don’t consider “pure enough” and by ensuring that totally unelectable fringe candidates (like Todd Akin, Richard Mourdock, and Ken Buck) win GOP primaries and then lose general elections.
And yet, it was not until this month that McConnell began taking action against these groups.
One’s own soldiers must be treated humanely, but also kept under control by means of iron discipline, as Sun Tzu wrote.
Sun Tzu wrote:
“Sun Tzu said: The good fighters of old first put themselves beyond the possibility of defeat, and then waited for an opportunity of defeating the enemy. To secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands, but the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself. (…) Thus it is that in war the victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory.” – ch. IV, v. 1-2 and 15
Yet, Republicans started a battle before devising any plan to win it. They went into battle without any plan to win. Like all other vanquished armies in history, they first fought and then sought victory – exactly the wrong order.
Had Republicans and Tea Partiers been wise people, they would’ve first devised a plan for victory, then would’ve created the conditions for triumph (which would necessarily mean retaking the Senate and the WH), and only then would’ve fought.
Thus you can see why Republicans lost – and were doomed to lose – the government shutdown battle against Obama, and how Sun Tzu predicted their defeat over 2,500 years ago. Republicans and Tea Partiers will continue to suffer further defeats if they continue to recklessly ignore Sun Tzu’s wise advice.
Let Master Sun have the last word here, across 2,500 years of time:
“The general that hearkens to my counsel and acts upon it, will conquer: let such a one be retained in command! The general that hearkens not to my counsel nor acts upon it, will suffer defeat:–let such a one be dismissed!”
LOS ANGELES, Oct. 24, 2013 /Christian Newswire/ — Conservative and independent-minded Black Americans are demanding a public apology from Congressman Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) for his remarks equating the Tea Party to the Ku-Klux-Klan. Grayson made the remarks on MSNBC’s “PoliticsNation” with host Al Sharpton and escalated the attack by issuing a letter to his constituents depicting an image of a burning cross in place of the letter “T” for Tea Party. The image also had the following caption: “Now You Know What the ‘T’ Stands For.” Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, Founder and President of BOND Action and the South Central L.A. Tea Party, blasted the liberal Democrat. The following is his statement on this issue:
- “Rep. Alan Grayson has managed to insult both the Tea Party and sensible Black Americans with his outrageous and callous remarks. I grew up on a plantation near Montgomery, Alabama during Jim Crow and witnessed real racism. Klansmen murdered my great-grandfather. For Alan Grayson to cavalierly compare law-abiding Tea Party people to a violent and racist organization like the Ku-Klux-Klan is offensive and minimizes the suffering of Black Americans.
- “Alan Grayson is playing on the worst fears of Blacks in an attempt to continue the brainwashing tactics of the Democratic Party. He knows that for more than 160 years it has been the Democrats who have used the Ku-Klux-Klan, Jim Crow, and failing liberal policies to keep many blacks on the liberal Democrat’s plantation.
- “Grayson’s latest actions show a lack of self-control and a complete disregard for the facts. I am seriously concerned about his sanity. It’s disturbing to know that this man is entrusted with our nation’s national security secrets. The South Central L.A. Tea Party is demanding that Congressman Grayson apologizes to black Americans and the Tea Party for his outrageous lies.”
The largest law suit ever filed against the IRS just grew stronger.
One of the interesting items which occurred during the vote in the Senate to stop the government shutdown and raise the debt ceiling was the surprise appearance of the Senate stenograhper at the microphone. She took the mike and began to decry the vote by shouting about the Freemasons and the Constitution and then quoted the Bible verse, “A house divided cannot stand.”
What I found fascinating was that this woman unitentionally stated the current condition of the Republican party especially in the Senate. I saw this division commented on in news programs both before and after the agreement was reached. Commentators from the right and left were both saying how this war among Republicans was a very bad thing for the party. I suggest this is not necessarily the case.
First of all, an examination of the groups within the GOP is in order. One group is popularly known as the “Establishment” Republicans. They are the members of Congress who have been in office the longest and were elected prior to the 2010 mid-term elections. They are characterized by Senator John McCain and those like him. They believe that in politics you must “go along to get along.” They continually give in and compromise to the opposition so as not to offend anyone else and maintain party power in Washington. In other words, the priority of the Establishment GOP is the maintaining of political power for themselves.
The second group in the GOP are known as the “Tea Party” Republicans. They basically came into existence with the 2010 mid-term election victories. They are represented by people such as Rand Paul and Ted Cruz, both of recent filibuster fame. This group is excoriated repeatedly by the main stream media, the Democratic Party and the Establishment GOP as those who cause division and stir up trouble on Capitol Hill. Which is exactly what they do. However, contrary to their opposition, they act because of the ideal that our nation is a Constitutional Republic and should therefore be both morally and fiscally conservative. In other words, the priority of the Tea Party fealty to our founding document and principles of freedom which inspired it. That priority is what they have remained loyal to no matter the vitriol thrown their way.
Democrats suffer no such division. Those on the left are united behind their leader, President Obama. And President Obama is very much a commited zealot to, as he himself put it, the “fundamental transformation of America.” I maintained as long ago as the primaries for the 2008 nomination, this was the one statement then candidate Obama made everyone should believe and beware of, because Obama believes it himself. His actions demonstrate that he is sold out to an ideal of a Socialist state with at least Muslim leanings. He and those with him will never compromise anything unless it furthers his cause.
This appears very bad for the Republicans, however in truth, it is only bad for the Establishment GOP. They are used to politcal battles. They know how to fight for political gain with compromise. They do not know that to win against those committed to a cause, you must be more committed to the rightness of your cause. History has demonstrated this time and time again. WWII and the Cold War were examples of such.
That’s why the Establishment GOP is in big trouble, and why the Tea Party Republicans have hope of victory. Tea Party Republicans hold fast to an ideal of freedom not unlike the Allies in WWII and the West during the Cold War. Establishment Republicans only seek political survival. No one outside party loyalists is inspired to commit to the non-ideal of simply gaining political power. Unless the Establishment types convert to the ideals of the Tea Party, they will continue to lose and eventually cease to exist as even a political force. Money may prop them up for a while, but sooner or later they will fade away, and I would say good riddance. In a war for freedom against “fundamental transformation” to socialist servitude, there is no place for fear and the compromise politics resulting from it. In this case “a house divided” is a good thing for it forces the power mongers to change or leave as long as we who fight for the right ideal of freedom stay the course. The result is a stronger and more effective political force that can fight and prevail against the left.
When: Sunday, October 13th, 10pm Eastern/7pm Pacific
`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
Whether it’s “down the rabbit hole”, or “through the looking glass”, the world of politics is often referred to in the lexicon given to us by Lewis Carroll. No matter what, those terms are resurrected when referring to something that has gone terribly wrong. And that’s what’s here on Jabberwonky…
Tonight: Maybe they’ll make a deal, maybe they won’t. Who stands to win in this battle over the budget and debt ceiling? Who will blink first? We’ll be talking about the possible outcomes tonight, and probably will talk at least a little about bacon – because @MissRuth1021 will be stopping by.
House Speaker John Boehner flanked by his House colleagues. Photo credit: Associated Press/J. Scott Applewhite.
Never, ever shut down the federal government again.
- President Bill Clinton, 1996 State of the Union Address
As everyone knows, on October 1st at midnight, the federal government shut down for the first time in 17 years. This event has had and will have lasting, serious, negative consequences for the entire country, and even moreso for the two political parties. This article will explain why, looking from a conservative Republican perspective, shutting down the federal government is the worst idea possible for the GOP, the conservative movement, and the country that my fellow conservatives claim to care about first and foremost. In short, the shutdown is bad policy AND bad politics.
Why it’s bad politics for the GOP and conservatives
Contrary to what many of my fellow conservatives think, nothing good can come out of this conundrum for conservatives or for the Republican Party (regardless of whatever future you wish for that party). This is a battle we simply cannot win, and no amount of throwing the RINO epithet at everyone who disagrees with you will change that fact.
Some have pointed out to polls supposedly showing Barack Obama’s approval ratings as being at 40% or lower, and disapproval ratings going over 50%. Even if these polls are scientific and accurate – and depending on who commissioned them, they might not be – these people completely ignore the fact that Congressional Republicans and the Tea Party have even lower approval ratings in the eyes of the American people.
According to polls commissioned by Fox News – hardly a liberal outlet – Congressional Republicans had only a 23% approval rating in June and August, with disapproval ratings of 67% and 66%, respectively. That means that fully TWO THIRDS of the American public view Congressional Republicans – especially their conservative wing – negatively.
By contrast, Congressional Democrats’ approval ratings, while still dismal, were better than Republicans': 32% approval and 60% disapproval in both June and August.
Moreover, Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell has the worst ratings of any major party leader in America today: 22% approval, 42% disapproval in October. John Boehner has 27% approval and 51% disapproval ratings (in April, he had 31% approval and only 41% disapproval). Even Harry Reid now does better at 27% approval and 43% disapproval) in the same month. Nancy Pelosi is at 35% approval, 47% disapproval (whereas in April, she was at 31% approval and 48% disapproval, so her image has improved since then).
Barack Obama, meanwhile, while having seen his approval ratings slump somewhat, still enjoys much higher popularity than anyone in Congress. His approval ratings, according to various polls, average at 45%, and range from a low end of 40% (Fox News, 54% disapproval) to a high end of 47% approval and the same amount disapproving.
So no matter what poll you take, Barack Obama, while hardly at the peak of his popularity, is STILL seen far more favorably than anyone in Congress, ESPECIALLY Congressional Republicans, ESPECIALLY their conservative wing.
It is inevitable that this government shutdown will take a heavy toll on the Tea Party’s, the conservative movement’s, and the GOP’s image in the American public’s eyes, and it may well prevent Republicans from retaking the Senate and the White House in 2014 and 2016. Even before the shutdown began, polls were warning that more Americans would blame the GOP than Barack Obama for the shutdown. Now, after it has happened, the veteran political analyst Charlie Cook warns us that the shutdown could cost the GOP future elections.
Despite the garbage that the Tea Party and its allies on talk radio like Rush Limbaugh probably feed you, the reality is that the absolute majority of Americans wants moderate policies from the GOP and wants both parties – including Republicans – to compromise. Gallup has demonstrated this repeatedly over the last several years, over and over again, including here, here, here, here, here, here, and most recently here. In fact, as the shutdown drew closer, Americans’ desire to see the two parties compromise increased.
According to that most recent poll, published just a week before the shutdown, 53% of all Americans (an absolute majority), as well as 56% of moderates, 65% of liberals, 55% of indies, 61% of Democrats, and even a plurality of conservatives (42%) said, just a week before the shutdown, that it was more important to compromise and avert the shutdown than to “stick to principles.” Just 25% of all Americans, and only a third of conservatives, said it’s more important to “stick to principles.”
The two groups most hostile to compromise were Republicans (only 38% supported it) and Tea Partiers (39%). 36% of Republicans and 40% of Tea Partiers said it’s better to “stick to principles” even if it means shutting the federal government down.
This fact is not lost on the American people; by far their biggest criticism of the GOP is that it is “unwilling to compromise.” This is the biggest criticism levied at the GOP by Dems, independents, and even Republicans themselves.
The current government shutdown will only aggravate this problem. The longer it continues, the heavier the toll on the GOP’s and the conservative movement’s image will be.
Contrary to what the Tea Party and the likes of Rush Limbaugh tell you, the GOP is not “Dem lite” or “not conservative enough” and does not want to “surrender” on Obamacare. The GOP is, in fact, criticized by American voters, including a plurality of Republicans, for being too unwilling to compromise. And compromise is not nearly the same thing as surrender – under a compromise, EVERYONE has to swallow unpalatable stuff, Republicans as well as Democrats.
The biggest damage will be in the eyes of moderates, women, youngsters, and minorities – the very voters the GOP will need to win future elections, or to even stay relevant as a party.
Why it’s a bad policy
The shutdown is not only bad politics, it’s bad policy too. The GOP’s objective, as we all know, is to get rid of, or defund, Obamacare. However, that – or any other meaningful policy change – CANNOT come about while Obama is still in office and controls the Senate. Republicans simply CANNOT govern the country from one half of Congress – as the astute Charles Krauthammer, Brent Bozell’s MRC’s latest award recipient, has rightly remarked in a column warning Republicans against the shutdown.
To defund Obamacare, Republicans can do only two things: either shut the entire government down, as they have done, or somehow convince Senate Democrats to pass, and President Obama to sign, a bill defunding Obamacare.
As Krauthammer has warned in his seminal column, there is NO WAY IN HELL Obama will sign into law a bill defunding, or delaying the implementation of, his singular legislative “accomplishment” – the Dems had been waiting for over 50 years to check this item on “FDR’s Unfinished Business List”, as Ann Coulter calls it.
Obama will never agree to anything that defunds his sole legislative “achievement”, the sine qua non of a liberal welfare state, liberals’ Holy Grail. Nor will Senate Democrats, marching in lockstep with Harry Reid, vote for defunding or otherwise gutting Obamacare.
And short of them agreeing to the impossible, the only way to defund Obamacare is to shut the federal government down completely.
Republicans have already tried this, in a way. In 1995, under Newt Gingrich’s leadership, they offered President Clinton a budget funding parts of, but not all, of the federal government; cutting spending faster than he was willing to accept. When Clinton said no, Republicans shut the federal government down – and that killed their chances of winning in 1996. Eventually, Republicans had to agree to a budget on terms not much different from what Clinton offered before the shutdown.
So no, there is no way Republicans can win this shutdown battle – or to defund Obamacare while Obama is still in office.
And let’s use some common sense. Does ANYONE really believe that Republicans can undo ANY meaningful Obama policy – ANY significant part of Obama’s “legacy” – while he’s still in office, wielding a veto pen, a bully pulpit, and a 55-seat Senate majority?
Margaret Thatcher famously said “first you win the argument, then you win the vote.” What she forgot to add is “and only then can you make policy.” Thatcher would’ve never been able to make any policy changes had her party not won a clear majority in the Commons. And that, in turn, would’ve never happened if she had led her party to the right fringe of British politics, alienating the vital center.
Republicans first need to convince a clear majority of Americans that Obamacare still can and should be repealed, then win back the Senate and the White House, and ONLY THEN can they make any policy changes, like repealing Obamacare.
So the shutdown, however it ends, will CLEARLY fail to achieve the GOP’s objective: defunding Obamacare.
The damage to the military
In addition to the damage the shutdown will do to the GOP’s and conservatives’ public image, it will also wreak havoc on the US military, adding greatly to the damage being done by the sequester.
A government shutdown means that eventually, when the money runs out from previous years’ approps, there will be nothing to pay the troops with, no money for their and veterans’ care, and no money for current training and equipment maintenance, operations (like protecting the skies over the US), and the development and acquisition of new equipment, nor to pay DOD civilian employees (the majority of whom are not pencil-pushers but real hard workers, like mechanics at military depots).
Why shut the government down?
The ancient Chinese strategist Sun Tzu advised against fighting on ground, or at a time, disadvantageous to you, or when the enemy is too strong. He further wisely counseled (The Art of War, ch. 12, v. 17):
“Move not unless you see an advantage; use not your troops unless there is something to be gained; fight not unless the position is critical.”
So how did America get into this mess in the first place? If the shutdown won’t achieve any conservative policy objective and will only do damage, why was this stand-off started?
Because the fringe of the GOP, including the Tea Party, which views any compromise as betrayal and anything other than scorched-Earth tactics as surrender, demanded that Republicans shut the government down over Obamacare. And most Republicans in Congress, scared to death of a Tea Party primary challenge, listened to the Tea Party and followed suit – thus driving America over the cliff.
Most House Republicans and many GOP Senators, including Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, and Rand Paul, come from single-party GOP monopolies where most people are hardline conservatives who see any compromise as treason. These politicians live in single-party conservative cocoons and are thus totally detached from reality and out-of-touch with most Americans (as is the Tea Party itself). Just check the PVI ratings of Raul Labrador’s district (ID-1) and of the states of Texas, Utah, and Kentucky. Their districts and states are no more representative of America than Nancy Pelosi’s SF district.
Thus, they have no incentive to compromise, and far more to fear from a Tea Party primary challenger than a general election Democratic opponent. So they continue pushing the country to the brink, as the Tea Party demands, the consequences be damned.
Sadly, they may well take the GOP, and not just the country, over the cliff with them.
My new motto is one we conservatives need to live by: “Drown The GOP In Conservative Tea!”
Conservatism was kicked out of the GOP by a progressive inside machine and Republicans are now joined at the hip with the Democrat Party and it’s progressive policies. So why should we conservatives continue supporting RINOs who sold us out?
There is no difference between the two parties, it’s no longer Democrat versus Republican, its one big party of incestuous bureaucrats whose sole interest is power with life terms.
I’ve said it before: John Boehner and Harry Reid are politically incestuous and together they bred Nancy Pelosi’s Flying Monkeys. Unfortunately such ill-breeding gave us RINOs.
Conservatives, let’s be honest with ourselves: The Republican Party is no longer the party of Abraham Lincoln, Frederick Douglass, Calvin Coolidge William F. Buckley, Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan.
Is Marco Rubio really conservative? Rubio sides with the King of Amnesty John McCain, because Rubio only cares about becoming the first Hispanic president. He didn’t even support Rep. Allen West of Florida during the 2012 race. Rubio stood by and let West lose his district.
What about Eric Cantor and Kevin McCarthy? They want you to believe a government program handing out universal healthcare will simply crumble and go away, so why bother defunding ObamaCare. Europe has proven government programs never crumble but expand out of control and drown economies.
The only way to destroy government programs controlling people’s lives is to destroy government programs.
Eric Cantor is sell-out, so is Lindsay Graham.
Paul Ryan proved he’s a snake oil salesman when he campaigned against Obamacare. It would hurt his mother Betty’s Medicare. After the election Ryan stopped fighting to defund ObamaCare. He decided to delay it.
In other words: Ignore ObamaCare in favor of a Congressional job that gets to opt out of ObamaCare with fabulous healthcare opportunities.
Joe Manchin shows up for votes, but refuses to take sides in the vote except on voting procedure. Perhaps Manchin should quit his job since he is incapable of doing his job.
Mitch McConnell raised taxes that enable Obamcare expansion. How conservative!
Don’t even get me started on New Jersey’s loud-mouthed beached whale in a suit Chris Christie!
Cry-baby John Boehner wants to wait for another debt ceiling before he considers fighting ObamaCare.
Boehner and GOP leaders, with the exception of Ted Cruz and Rand Paul, are siding with Democrats not to shut down the government and defund ObamaCare, as well as holding off employer mandates until the 2014 election is over, because they don’t want the truth–Obamacare will destroy the economy– coming out and destroying vote-grabbing reelections for Republicans and Democrats.
Heaven forbid Tea Party candidates win RINO seats. The country might have leaders willing to serve limited terms doing what is constitutionally right to restore America.
Remember Boehner said he wouldn’t risk anything by pushing to defund ObamaCare:
You’ve got a Democrat president, you’ve got a Democrat Senate. It’s very difficult for us to impose our will on them. There will be opportunities ahead, but do you want to risk the full faith and credit of the United States government over ObamaCare? That’s a very tough argument to make.
The GOP imposing conservatism on progressives? Why that would force the government to acknowledge the Constitution as the law of the land!
And let’s not forget all of these men vilified Michele Bachmann for questioning why Muslim Brotherhood-connected Huma Abedin had top security clearance inside the State Department. These RINOs deemed Bachmann intolerant.
We conservatives better impose our conservative constitutional will on those imposing their progressive, anti-American, anti-Constitution will against America or we will lose this country to tyranny!
Let’s admit the truth conservatives: Republicans are no longer Republicans, they are Democrats disguised as Republicans (in the case of John McCain I would say he’s Hillary Clinton in better man’s drag). The GOP now cares more about reelections so the people serve the leaders for life through tax dollars, stolen from earned paychecks by the Federal Government, then serving the people and states they are supposed to represent, as well as this country.
It’s obvious that was the Democrat goal all along: Destroy the Republican Party’s conservative values and traditions by infiltrating the party with Democrats pretending to be Republicans.
It’s now one big party of progressive bureaucrats against conservatives.
Despite these morons showing their true progressive colors, Republican voters keep reelecting RINOS! Why? Don’t conservatives want the Constitutional Republic (we are not a democracy, the Constitution limits and divides power with separate government branches and forbids the majority to vote to impose its will upon the minority ) founded on liberty restored?
Don’t we want our fundamental rights returned? Don’t we believe in Nature’s Laws? Or do we prefer the government’s European democracy-style will imposed upon our individual lives?
Wake up conservatives! We lost our Grand Ole’ Party to progressives whores who married themselves to the ultimate progressive socialists—Democrats.
Conservatives: It’s time we take on a new motto and live by it: “Drown the GOP in Conservative Tea!