I've been reprimanded, chastised and censored for my #NeverTrump stand.
I will not be moved.
While other Republicans and Conservatives are tripping over one another to proclaim their devotion to President Trump, I'm just stubbornly standing firm on this rapidly eroding rock.
They're perfectly happy to compromise every Republican principle to accept Trumpism, even if it means hoisting their picks and axes to chip away at Conservative values. Constitutional acumen? Not necessary. Statesmanship? Who needs it? Moral standards? Whack! Autocratic tendencies? We're all in!
I've been told that I'm too pessimistic. "Give Trump a chance! Stop protesting Trump and his voters," they admonish. I know I'm in the minority now. According to foxnews.com, "Conservatives appear fully behind new Republican President Trump, based on a straw poll Saturday at the annual CPAC summit in which attendees gave him an 86 percent approval rating and overwhelming agreed that he was 'realigning' the movement."
You see, this is why I won't stop complaining. This is what I warned about during the entire election campaign. By entertaining the thought of Donald Trump representing Republicans or Conservatives, we've abandoned the very definitions of these titles. By electing him, we've admitted that they didn't mean much to us anyway.
To those who condemn me for pointing out that they have sold out to a con-man, rest assured that I don't spend all my time protesting. You may be content letting Trump redefine the Right, but I never will. There will be a remnant of us who remember and retain what it means to stay true to our nation's foundations. That's why I teach Constitutional principles in the public school. Someone needs to let the next generation know how we lost our Republic and why it's vital to get it back again to protect our unalienable rights under the Rule of Law instead of the cult of personality.
Don't get me wrong- I rejoice when Trump listens to his Mike Pence and accidentally does something to protect the Constitution. But I won't forget what we've sacrificed for the "win". In four to eight years, we'll realize that the noble principles on which we once stood have been thoroughly demolished and we can never again claim the high or solid ground.
I'm just afraid that, by then, Trumpism will have convinced Republicans that wallowing in quicksand is terrific.
Sunday, February 26, 2017
Saturday, February 25, 2017
Boehner Bursts the Bubble
On the same day that President Trump made another vow to repeal and replace Obamacare in his rambling and self-congratulatory speech at CPAC in Maryland, former Speaker John Boehner was in Orlando, Florida, casually refuting that promise at a conference hosted by the Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society.
The ease with which Boehner, a smoker who now serves on the board of tobacco giant Reynolds American, declared that "They're basically going to fix the flaws and put a more conservative box around it," betrayed the freedom of a man no longer required to play his part in the political theater of Washington, D.C.
Exposing the drawbacks of the independent thinking of Republicans, he admitted, "In the 25 years that I served in the United States Congress, Republican never, ever one time agreed on what a healthcare proposal should look like. Not once." Conservatives would like to imagine that dedication to free market principles kept them from imposing federal solutions on a manufactured crisis.
With Trump at the helm, who prides himself on claiming the role of "fixer", and advised by Steve Bannon, who advocates Economic Nationalism, it's easy to accept the brutal honesty coming from Boehner. Maybe Republicans won't admit it as readily as Progressives, but they must relish the opportunity to leverage this crisis to their benefit.
Does Bannon imagine a federally managed healthcare plan as part of the nationalist investments he promotes?
From independent.co.uk:
"Unlike Republicans for the past thirty years, Mr. Bannon seems keen on public infrastructure spending. Indeed, he sounds positively Keynesian in his ambitions.
'I'm the guy pushing a trillion dollar infrastructure plan,' he says. 'With negative interest rates throughout the world, it's the greatest opportunity to rebuild everything. Shipyards, ironworks, get them all jacked up. We're just going to throw it up against the wall and see if it sticks.'"
Instead of "making a conservative argument for limited government, Bannon joins in the attack against the social democratic content of the New Deal and goes beyond it to push for a more executive-centered state. Here, the crusade of run-of-the-mill conservatives to roll back government and welfare state merges with the authoritarian nationalist agenda of ideologues like Bannon." - peoplesworld.org
While President Trump continues to lead his followers in chants, vowing to "Repeal and Replace!" he knows they'll gladly support him if he decides to use his big brain to fix it. Controlling a sixth of the economy is too tempting to relinquish, for the oligarchs of either party.
The ease with which Boehner, a smoker who now serves on the board of tobacco giant Reynolds American, declared that "They're basically going to fix the flaws and put a more conservative box around it," betrayed the freedom of a man no longer required to play his part in the political theater of Washington, D.C.
Exposing the drawbacks of the independent thinking of Republicans, he admitted, "In the 25 years that I served in the United States Congress, Republican never, ever one time agreed on what a healthcare proposal should look like. Not once." Conservatives would like to imagine that dedication to free market principles kept them from imposing federal solutions on a manufactured crisis.
With Trump at the helm, who prides himself on claiming the role of "fixer", and advised by Steve Bannon, who advocates Economic Nationalism, it's easy to accept the brutal honesty coming from Boehner. Maybe Republicans won't admit it as readily as Progressives, but they must relish the opportunity to leverage this crisis to their benefit.
Does Bannon imagine a federally managed healthcare plan as part of the nationalist investments he promotes?
From independent.co.uk:
"Unlike Republicans for the past thirty years, Mr. Bannon seems keen on public infrastructure spending. Indeed, he sounds positively Keynesian in his ambitions.
'I'm the guy pushing a trillion dollar infrastructure plan,' he says. 'With negative interest rates throughout the world, it's the greatest opportunity to rebuild everything. Shipyards, ironworks, get them all jacked up. We're just going to throw it up against the wall and see if it sticks.'"
Instead of "making a conservative argument for limited government, Bannon joins in the attack against the social democratic content of the New Deal and goes beyond it to push for a more executive-centered state. Here, the crusade of run-of-the-mill conservatives to roll back government and welfare state merges with the authoritarian nationalist agenda of ideologues like Bannon." - peoplesworld.org
While President Trump continues to lead his followers in chants, vowing to "Repeal and Replace!" he knows they'll gladly support him if he decides to use his big brain to fix it. Controlling a sixth of the economy is too tempting to relinquish, for the oligarchs of either party.
Tuesday, February 14, 2017
Character Matters
This morning, we all woke up to the news about Michael Flynn resigning from his position as President Trump’s National Security Adviser. The formal excuse for his ouster was that he lied to cover up his totally legal actions. What?
Because, apparently, Trump holds people in his administration to a high moral standard.
The questions regarding the timeline of his discussions with Russian officials about U.S. sanctions against them just became too uncomfortable for the Trump administration to bear.
Before his soon-to-be boss was inaugurated, Flynn called a Russian ambassador on the day Obama levied punishment for overblown charges of meddling in our election affairs. Even if that’s considered fine and dandy in transition etiquette, under whose directive did his phone call occur? And, why did Trump congratulate Putin in a tweet the next day for his mild reaction to the sanctions? But that’s none of my business.
This story actually just reinforced my thoughts resulting from a Facebook exchange I experienced over the weekend. I had posted my review of the movie 42 in a conservative Constitutionalist group. The administrator of the group replied, “WTH does this have to do with the Constitution or Conservativism?”
I replied with a one-word alliteration: “Character.”
He continued to lecture me on the lengthy and complex group rules into which he had invested much time and ego, requiring all members to make only posts and comments on and about his narrow list of approved subjects, among other specified parameters of discussion.
My first thought was, “Either he didn’t read my article, breaking his own rules by posting uninformed judgments, or he doesn’t consider the subject of morality to be pertinent to conservative Constitutionalism. Frightening.
In public reply, he instructed me to read the group rules and he would be “glad” to answer any questions I might have. My question was, “Why do you need me to reread the rules?” as he had not cited any violations.
While awaiting his reply, I continued the discussion about my original post, including a link to a comprehensive list of quotes by our nation’s founders regarding the high standard of character necessary to a successful Republic. This was ignored.
The administrator eventually replied to my policy question by citing his paragraph decreeing that all posts must pertain to either the Constitution, Conservatism, history, or the founders, and the mandate to invite discussion. In reply, I commented: “Done and done.” He “liked” that response.
I guess I should have added one more “done” because, by then, I was most sincerely done with a group whose administrator has such a hard time considering the topic of character as an essential ingredient to Conservatism.
Friday, February 10, 2017
Don't Like the View? Move the Window.
Ideologues resist compromise. It's not because they are more stubborn than other people. They just understand that every concession to the opposition is a blow to the bedrock of principles.
Pragmatists readily compromise, especially those active in the politics of the Left. They have perfected the strategy of asking for a pony and settling for a kitten when it was the cat they wanted all along- for now.
If you're not familiar with the Overton Window, let me enlighten you. It is a theory developed by Joseph Overton, a former vice president of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. It describes the "window" of political options presented for debate. Skillfully and consistently, Progressives have been moving the window of discourse rapidly leftward. By proposing Marxist policies and accepting one more compromise toward socialism at a time, the Constitution becomes the big loser.
The pragmatists on the Right, limiting themselves to the narrow scope of the Overton Window, pretend they are logging wins by conceding to the least egregious demands.
Republican voters took a cue from our pragmatic Congress when they enthusiastically endorsed a "yuge" compromise to the GOP. They failed to take advantage of the remarkable opportunity, in the aftermath of the Obama administration debacle, to elect a true Conservative Constitutionalist. Instead, the electorate compromised fidelity to the Constitution and high moral character at every turn of the campaign to elect a president who believes he can rule by fiat from his Twitter account.
This has resulted not only in the discomfort of Republican ideologues but a revolt by the radical leftists. Don't be surprised when someone representing the values of Socialist Bernie Sanders is elected in 2020. If the Right can endorse an egotistical nationalist to satisfy his populist following, Progressives will push for nothing less than their ultimate goal.
Ideologues on the Right understand that once we compromised each and every principle of Republicanism, we literally gave up our "high ground" forever.
Because once you've demolished the bedrock of your values, you have nothing left to stand on when the enemy rushes in to plant his flag on your hill. Then your view from your cell window looks rather bleak.
Conservative ideologues must make every effort to rebuild the foundations of our Republic. How do we reestablish the bedrock of our nation? By teaching the next generation what they are at risk of losing: nothing less than the unalienable rights that are protected only under a Constitutional Republic. Let's teach them to rebuild our nation with our window to the world firmly framed in the Right Wing of our home, where the pleasant, balanced view of our rights and responsibilities in a free society are clearly beheld by us and our posterity.
Pragmatists readily compromise, especially those active in the politics of the Left. They have perfected the strategy of asking for a pony and settling for a kitten when it was the cat they wanted all along- for now.
If you're not familiar with the Overton Window, let me enlighten you. It is a theory developed by Joseph Overton, a former vice president of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. It describes the "window" of political options presented for debate. Skillfully and consistently, Progressives have been moving the window of discourse rapidly leftward. By proposing Marxist policies and accepting one more compromise toward socialism at a time, the Constitution becomes the big loser.
The pragmatists on the Right, limiting themselves to the narrow scope of the Overton Window, pretend they are logging wins by conceding to the least egregious demands.
Republican voters took a cue from our pragmatic Congress when they enthusiastically endorsed a "yuge" compromise to the GOP. They failed to take advantage of the remarkable opportunity, in the aftermath of the Obama administration debacle, to elect a true Conservative Constitutionalist. Instead, the electorate compromised fidelity to the Constitution and high moral character at every turn of the campaign to elect a president who believes he can rule by fiat from his Twitter account.
This has resulted not only in the discomfort of Republican ideologues but a revolt by the radical leftists. Don't be surprised when someone representing the values of Socialist Bernie Sanders is elected in 2020. If the Right can endorse an egotistical nationalist to satisfy his populist following, Progressives will push for nothing less than their ultimate goal.
Ideologues on the Right understand that once we compromised each and every principle of Republicanism, we literally gave up our "high ground" forever.
Because once you've demolished the bedrock of your values, you have nothing left to stand on when the enemy rushes in to plant his flag on your hill. Then your view from your cell window looks rather bleak.
Conservative ideologues must make every effort to rebuild the foundations of our Republic. How do we reestablish the bedrock of our nation? By teaching the next generation what they are at risk of losing: nothing less than the unalienable rights that are protected only under a Constitutional Republic. Let's teach them to rebuild our nation with our window to the world firmly framed in the Right Wing of our home, where the pleasant, balanced view of our rights and responsibilities in a free society are clearly beheld by us and our posterity.
The Donald's Dirigisme
On January 7, The Hill reported:
“During a White House meeting, Rockwall County, Texas, Sheriff Harold Eavenson told the president about a lawmaker who was offering asset forfeiture legislation he believes would aid Mexican drug cartels.
“Who is the state senator? Do you want to give his name? We'll destroy his career," Trump offered.
It turned out to be the Conservative and female Texas district Senator in Fort Worth, Konni Burton. She responded to the threat: She “has filed a bill eliminating civil asset forfeiture, and has issued a statement defending her push.
‘Property rights are one of the foundational rights in any free society and the taking of property by government is no small matter’, Burton said, adding, ‘I will not be discouraged or deterred. The moment for reform of our system of asset forfeiture has arrived.’
The Senator also took a shot at the the man who touched off the controversy–saying “I have never met with Sheriff Eavenson, nor even heard of him before yesterday.’”
The next day, Trump’s top advisor, Kellyanne Conway doubled down by publicly plugging Ivanka’s products. After an immediate uproar, Press Secretary Sean Spicer announced that Conway had been “counseled” concerning the mistake.
Did President Trump receive counseling as well? Curious minds want to know.
Were these mere faux-pas by inexperienced politicians who don’t see a problem with picking winners and losers in the private sector?
Do representatives of this administration need verbal babysitters? If our elected officials and their representatives don’t know the difference between running reactionary defense maneuvers and promoting political digisme (economic planning and control by the state), we’re in for a wild ride.
Are these merely ignorant missteps, or is Trump’s administration clearly revealing its true nature? After all, wasn’t his campaign, directed by Kellyanne Conway, actually running on the “refreshing” premise that Trump was “just saying what was in his head"?
Why should we interpret his words differently, now that he’s elected? Has he stopped telling us what he really thinks? Or, is he telling us exactly what he really believes?
Neither conclusion is reassuring.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)