AND THEN THEY CAME FOR ME

It is almost beyond belief that the Republican establishment is still clueless—even in the face of overwhelming evidence. The Republican establishment (let’s just call them the “Establishment)” knows who they are: Reince, Mitch, Paul, John, et al—or as Ted Cruz likes to call them, the “Washington cartel,” have thrown off the mantle of leadership and have succumbed to the “victim” mentality of the political left. 

We elected majorities in the House in 2010 and the Senate in 2014 on the representation of most of our candidates that they would go to Washington and stop the economic, social, and regulatory madness.  But our hard won Congressional majorities soon succumbed to whatever malady infects our representatives once they are ensconced in the collegial D.C. environs.  We elected them to do battle with the Dems—to stop the madness and the serious damage that Obama and his progressive minions have been doing to our economy and our country generally.

They had barely hung their Congressional drapes when the Establishment adopted a simple mantra—“We really can’t do anything because, you know, that guy in the White House will simply veto anything we propose.” If I had a nickel for each time one of our fearless Establishment members uttered that phrase, I would be a very rich man.  Surely, the victimized members of the Establishment have argued, you don’t really expect us to jeopardize our careers by taking actions that will only be filibustered by the “minority” party or vetoed by the Progressive-in-Chief in the White House?  Well, actually, that is exactly what we had hoped our fearless leaders would do: put the interests of the country ahead of their naked political agenda.  We feel betrayed, but perhaps we should just admit that it is we who are clueless.  Our leaders know exactly what they are doing: joining their Democrat colleagues in the kabuki theater that is Washington.  Surely, they say, our constituents don’t expect us to engage in acts of futility, to take positions based upon principle, to take any action that might alienate our Democrat colleagues, to act in a manner that might be criticized by the liberal media, or incur the wrath of that master of Chicago political thuggery in the White House?   Au contraire.   That is exactly what we had hoped you would do and what we expected you to do.  If you planned to play the part of minority Constitutional victims of the political process, it would have been nice if you had so informed us prior to your election so that we might have taken your lack of conviction into account in the primaries and at the polling booth.  In your defense, however, I suppose it is possible that you did not realize that there was a Democrat socialist in the White House who was likely to oppose any reasonable suggestions, propositions, or legislation of yours.

Apparently we are not the only ones who are clueless.

But what, you ask, were we to do in the face of such daunting opposition? Well, here are a few suggestions:

  1. Since Obamacare was adopted by Democrat trickery called “reconciliation” requiring only 51 votes in the Senate for passage, you should use “reconciliation” as a basis to repeal Obamacare with only 51 votes in the Senate. After several years and ceaseless cajoling by your constituents, you final realized that this was an option available to you all of the time.  While Obama will undoubtedly veto any such repealer, you at least have demonstrated the cleverness to get the proposed repeal out of the Senate.  We salute you brave political warriors.
  2. Change the Senate rules to require only 51 votes for cloture in order to circumvent Democrat filibuster of legislation you want to pass. Lord knows the Democrats have showed no hesitancy to change the Senate rules when it suits their interests, and only a fool would believe that they would not do so again in the future.  Can’t you at least use the same rules as the Democrats when it is to your advantage.
  3. Use the power of the purse. Simply decline to appropriate funds for some of the outlandish programs proposed by the Democrats.  Obamacare comes to mind immediately.
  4. Shut down the government if need be in order to curb the irresponsible and devastating debt that is being foisted upon your constituents. Of course the liberal media will pillory you for doing so, but your fear of that prospect only lays bare the notion that you are more interested in your political hides than in your constituents’ well being.  You can preserve essential services such as defense, entitlement payments, national parks, airport security and traffic control, etc.—but if you were to shut down the SEC, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Education, the EEOC, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of the Interior, and the IRS, the only consequence would be substantially reduced traffic in the D.C. area.  And while the media would howl, your constituents would hail you.
  5. Introduce legislation that would require member of Congress to live by the same rules as the rest of us. Your constituents would love it—but I doubt that you have the courage.
  6. Take the President to court with regard to every ultra vires action he takes—from his unlawful modification of our immigration process, to his failure to enforce the laws or the land, to his use of the IRS to pursue his political enemies, to the use of the EPA to legislate in circumvention of Congress—to name just a few.
  7. Construe the Iran nuclear deal as a treaty, submit it as such to the Senate, and have the Senate fail to ratify it.
  8. Impeach Obama. While you are not likely to succeed in such action because the lock-step Democrats will not go along, if ever there were a President worthy of impeachment, Obama fits the bill.  Attempting to impeach the President would, at a minimum, occupy his attention and keep him from doing any further damage during the remainder of his lame duck presidency.  And this would not be political theater.  There are dozens of legitimate grounds for concluding that Obama has been guilty of high crimes or misdemeanor.

Among others, examples of these grounds are:

a. Disregarding the Constitution (which he has sworn to uphold, on numerous occasions.) For example, unilaterally amending the nation’s immigration laws and failure to enforce existing immigration laws.

b. Allowing the IRS to target his political opponents such as Tea Party organizations.

c. Knowingly lying to the American public about the events at Bengazi for purely political purposes.

d. Entering into a feckless deal with Iran regarding its nuclear capacity knowing full well that the agreement was politically and economically detrimental to the interests of the USA.

e. And last, but certainly not least, releasing five major enemy combatants in the middle of a war under the pretext of and exchange for an Army deserter. As a result of this action, Obama has given aid and comfort to the enemy.  This is essentially an act of treason.  It’s as if we had captured five Nazi officials during WWII and released them back to the battlefield while the war was still going on.  This is, at a minimum, giving aid and comfort to the enemy, and at worst, treason.

The Establishment, in an attempt to preserve the status quo, has taken none of the above actions. And now, the Establishment is somehow stunned that the Republican base is looking outside the Washington cartel for potential presidential candidates.  The Establishment is entirely responsible for the “Trump phenomenon.”  The Establishment is so accustomed to pulling the wool over its constituents’ eyes that it simply cannot comprehend that its base has tumbled to the notion that the GOP is merely Democrat light.

Memo to the Establishment: We did not send you to Washington to make nicey-nice with the Democrats. Not to go along to get along.  We want you to take charge of the situation.  Be bold.  Take some risks to right the ship of state.  Do something that doesn’t smack of cronyism or greed.  Otherwise, it’s good bye Establishment—hello President Trump.  And right now, thanks to the Establishment’s total disregard of its constituents (when 76% of Republicans oppose amnesty for illegal immigrants, what business does any Congressman have lobbying for amnesty?), why should the Establishment be remotely surprised by the hostility of the base?  Do you remember Eric Cantor?  Are you incapable of adjusting, of learning from your mistakes, or relating to your constituents, of simply carrying out the political intentions of your constituents?  If so, prepare for a long, cold political era and a country bereft and adrift without a moral, political or economic compass.  And the blame will rest squarely with the Establishment not with the taxpayers, not with the voters, and not with the constituents of the Establishment.  It’s time to fish or cut bait.  Are you representatives and conservators of the grand American experiment—or just greedy, self-interested political hacks?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *