Blog

ONE SWAMP DOWN–TWO TO GO

Because this is our first posting since the Presidential election, we want to take this opportunity to congratulated Donald Trump on his well-run and successful populist campaign. We are also inclined to extend congratulations to the GOP as well–though it seems likely that the GOP success occurred in spite of, rather than because of, many members of the GOP Establishment.

We are also pleased to suggest that many of the concepts that led to Trump’s success are covered extensively in our companion book–“Honey I Shrunk the Government (Tough Love for the GOP).”

Anticipating the Trump Presidency has been extremely satisfying. However, we cannot deny that it was equally gratifying to watch the Clinton Machine grind to a staggering and unexpected stop– to the obvious and enjoyable disbelief of the media, the pollsters, DNC folks, and a fair number of anti-Trump GOP Establishment types.  Apparently, this time around, a plurality of American voters decided  not to be taken in again by the Democrats “big lie”–“We’re going to make the lives of the poor and middle class better–just like we always have.”

The notion of “draining the swamp” in D.C. is compelling because it hints of eliminating much of what we perceive to be wrong with our federal government. We are confident that President Trump will preside over a thorough cleansing of the unbridled corruption and cronyism that has been pervasive in Washington and which has done much to destroy confidence in the federal political system over the past two and a half decades.

But cleaning up D.C. is only a start. While corruption, arrogance, lies, deception, and fecklessness are systemic within the federal government, they are arguably symptomatic rather than causal.  The root cause of the disaster that has become the abusive seat of power in Washington can be found throughout contemporary life in America.  In other words–there is more than one swamp which must be drained.

The next reclamation project which needs to be undertaken involves fixing the badly-broken media. There can be little question that the media is strongly biased, at all levels, in favor of the Democratic Party and its candidates.  There is also little doubt that many completely incompetent Democrats have been propelled into office with the swift wind of media bias at their backs.  And perhaps, more importantly, who among us can contest the fact that the GOP and the RNC and their affiliates have spent billions of dollars endeavoring to counter the deleterious effects of liberal, media bias during each election cycle?

The media has essentially abandoned its Fourth Estate function of being the watchdog of the people.  Instead it has become the lapdog of the Democratic National Committee.

As we have frequently suggested, for half the money the GOP normally spends trying to neutralize the liberal media, the GOP could acquire, control, and convert the media to its own political persuasion (a matter also covered in great detail in Honey I Shrunk the Government).   When confronted with the argument that acquisition and control of media outlets by the GOP would violate First Amendment freedom of speech, one needs to simply note that that is exactly what the Democratic Party has done over many decades.

When the liberal media swamp has been thoroughly drained, attention should then be turned to cleaning up the primordial swamp of academia. Ah academia–the cultural institution that is supposed to educate and enlighten our best and brightest.  Unfortunately, our institutions of higher learning no longer enlighten–they offer only politically-correct pabulum, liberal orthodoxy, and unbelievable bias.  Who would have thought that these once bastions of free speech could sink so low as to penalize and excoriate any student having the audacity to articulate a conservative thought or concept?  Who would have ever thought that nebulous notions of political incorrectness, hate speech, safe spaces, and “micro-aggressions” would inveigh students for taking any conservative position on campus (or off campus) which might conflict with any liberal or progressive doctrine?  It appears that “micro-aggression” can be easily defined as being any writing or statement which contravenes any writing or statement containing a liberal or progressive thought or principle.  Leaving for another day discussion of the implications of our colleges and universities creating an entire generation of dysfunctional pantywaists, it is safe to conclude, overall, that we have transitioned from “Institutions of Higher Learning” to “Institutions of Liberal Propaganda.”

The academic swamp may prove to be the most difficult to drain, because the only folks who have any real leverage over these educational institutions are their ultra-rich donors. Unfortunately, as we all know, once folks become extremely wealthy, they tend to take contra-indicative postures by becoming ultra-liberal, eschewing capitalism, and declaiming all things conservative.  Because of the election of Donald Trump, there is some hope that the threat of withholding federal funds might convince colleges and universities that freedom of speech needs to be a two-way street.

After a little practice draining the Washington swamp, and then the media swamp, perhaps The Donald will have gained enough experience to tackle the more challenging academic swamp.

To the millions of real Americans who had the temerity and the perspicacity to vote for Donald Trump, congratulations and best wishes for an exciting 2017. Now let’s get out there and drain some swamps in order to, well, “Make America Great Again.”

© 2016

 

 

 

 

IF

 

unknown

IF you want to know what it was like to live during the Great Depression–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you want to know what national bankruptcy looks like–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you think you’ll enjoy watching the Supreme Court trample the Constitution–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you think an attack on the United States by China would be fun–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you think a weakened military would be helpful in fending off an attack by China–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you think that the Second Amendment means that only the Government should have weapons–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you want more jobs and potential tax revenues shipped abroad–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you think our economy should be hamstrung by even more ridiculous regulations–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you think the country needs to take in more unvetted Syrian jihadists–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you think our country should move toward Sharia Law, with its accompanying denigration of women–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you like having your freedom of speech squelched by ridiculous assertion of political correctness–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you believe that our public schools should be protected from competition so that they can continue to deteriorate–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you believe the country should be divided on the basis of race, age, religion, and income solely for political purposes–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you believe that open, unsecured borders make the country more secure and helps stem the flow of illegal aliens and drugs–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you think that Obamacare is one whale of a good entitlement program–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you think it’s a good idea to put the police in jail so that thugs, looters, and anarchists will have more freedom to roam our streets–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you want the USA to be considered a laughing stock by the rest of the world–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you want to continue to turn our friends into enemies and our enemies into allies–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you think advancing to nuclear weapons objectives of the crazy Mullahs in Iran will reduce global unrest–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you think that liberal bias in the media and in academia is good for the country–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you think that more restrictions on the ability of banks to extend credit and fewer restrictions on greedy Wall Street con artists are good ideas–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you are willing to tolerate even more corruption in the IRS, the Department of Justice and other unchecked federal agencies–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you like being treated as a victim, living in high crime areas, and being completely dependent on the federal government–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you think that politicians should use private foundations to enrich themselves at taxpayer expense–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you think the President of the United States should be oblivious to the impact of classified documents on national security–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you think we should elect a President who thinks the majority of the American people are deplorable, irredeemable, racists, rogue law enforcement officers, Islamaphobes, and religious bigots–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you believe that we should be governed by politicians who believe that the will of the voters is of no consequence–VOTE FOR CLINTON

IF you are unable to comprehend the implications of this message–YOU HAVE PROBABLY ALREADY VOTED FOR CLINTON

 

 

THEY HAVE SEWN THE WIND (OR, IF YOU PREFER, RIP GOP)

Now they are reaping the Whirlwind. The unbelievable shock of the GOP Establishment that there is voter pushback against their empty promises and feckless policies. “If we just had the House.” “If we just had the Senate.” “ If we just had the Presidency.” Time after time they have ignored the clear will of the people. Such hubris. Such arrogance. They can’t believe that GOP voters have finally had enough. But the voters are hellbent on taking their country back from career political hacks, from lobbyists, from Wall Street greed, from special interest groups, and from those anarchists who are committed to spreading chaos by allowing religious liberties to be trampled on, by disregarding immigration laws, by disregarding racially-motivated riots, by disregarding sanctuary cities, by ignoring or making excuses for radical Islam–all with a view to fundamentally changing the nature of our county and our culture.

Many of the Establishment folks have even taken to trying to undermine the candidacy of Trump–calling him unfit, unqualified, dangerous, lacking Presidential temperament, or at least, failing to whole-heartedly endorse him if they endorse him at all. It is obvious that most of these GOP traitors (some of whom are actually violating the pre-primary pledge they took to support the ultimate GOP nominee) are under the misapprehension that all they need to do is suffer through 4 years of Hillary until 2020 when they believe they will be able to run and support a more conventional, ultra-conservative, bought-and-paid-for candidate. Then they can go back to the rigged, crony, feckless governmental activity that has been so beneficial for them and so awful for the rest of us.

It is one thing to cut off one’s nose to spite one’s face–it is quite another thing to cut off one’s head to spite one’s body. Yet that is exactly what our conscience-stricken GOP turncoats are doing.

Here’s what they clearly do not understand. If Donald Trump does not win the Presidential election in 2016, the Republican Party will be effectively dead. Do they really think that millions and millions of Trump supporters and voters are going to take the Establishment’s rebuff of GOP primary results lying down? We think we know where they are going to go: Directly to a nationally unified and organized Tea Party. Not the sporadic, crop-up organization that you know today as the Tea Party–but rather one that will either swamp and supplant the GOP entirely or, at a minimum, take so many votes away from traditional, Establishment-types that the GOP will be lucky to win an occasional county dog-catcher’s race.

The false hope that these arrogant, know-it-all Republican Trump defectors are relying on is the notion that they can still manage to win enough down-ballot races to hang onto the Senate and the House. The only way that these misguided folks can reasonably expect to hold onto anything is if Donald Trump sweeps to victory (or the race is very competitive regardless who ultimately wins). Do they really think that, if Trump is getting clobbered, quite possibly as a direct result of the defections and/or outright attacks by these same Establishment gurus, Trump supporters are going to rush to the polls to vote for some down-ballot Senatorial or Congressional candidate? And to be perfectly blunt about it, unless Trump wins the White House, it really doesn’t matter to most Republican voters whether the GOP holds the Senate or the House. Why should they care? After all, the GOP has held the House since 2010 and the Senate since 2014, and what have the Party faithful got to show for it–bupkis. The Republicans in the Senate, and to a slightly lesser extent in the House, have done absolutely nothing to halt Obama’s assaults on the Constitution, or do anything other than appease their Democrat colleagues. In other words, while we thought we were electing Republicans, we have, effectively simply gotten more Democrats.

Additionally, if Hillary wins the White House and has the likely opportunity to pack the Supreme Court with more Progressive activists, it really won’t matter what majorities the Republicans might hold going forward.

So, in other words, the active Republican opponents of Trump are pursuing the only course that will ensure loss of the White House, loss of majorities in both the Senate and the House, politicizing of the Supreme Court for decades, and the probable, permanent destruction of the Republican Party. You’ve got to hand it to them–they are willing to unabashedly convey the message that they plainly are putting personal aggrandizement ahead of the well-being of the country. Let’s all give them a standing ovation for their candor.

© 2016

 

THEY’VE LOST THEIR FREAKING MINDS

The battle has been won. Donald Trump has run roughshod over a field of 16 mostly-Establishment GOP primary opponents. Thanks to the wisdom of primary voters, the Party has been spared another same-ole, same-ole general election run by an ultra-conservative, destined-to-lose, candidate.

So it’s time to rally round the Trump flag. Everyone can now see that there are only two remaining general election options–Donald or Hillary. We know beyond a reasonable doubt that even 4 years of a Hillary Presidency would mean: (1) continuation of Obama’s failed, left-wing, un-Constitutional, and spendthrift policies, (2) continuation of the tax and spend practice that has left us on the precipice of national bankruptcy (we believe that four more year of profligacy would likely put the country beyond economic recovery), (3) continued decline of the economy with further loss of jobs and loss of American manufacturing businesses to low-wage countries, (4) billions of dollars squandered attempting to solve the Quixotic problem of global warming (if God wanted us to eliminate the accumulation of greenhouse gases, he would not have allowed us to invent the combustion engine–but, of course, the Democrats would have to believe in God to understand the wisdom of this position), (5) taxing the wealth and job creators until they are no longer incented to do their entrepreneurial thing (at least not in this country), (6) evisceration of the Second Amendment, (7) up to four new, ultra-liberal Justices appointed to the Supreme Court (an event the country would not likely recover from in this century), (8) constant, shrill, pontificating speeches about income inequality from the bully pulpit (this prospect alone should be enough to cause sensible people to vote for Trump, or at least against Hillary), (9) further diminution of the military to the point where we will be at serious risk of being attacked on the homeland, (10) further loss of respect around the globe (thanks to the naïve and immature policies of the Obama administration, most of the world already thinks we have abdicated any role on the world stage), and (11) the rise of ISIS and constant, brazen, terrorist attacks from both within and without the country. And readers, the foregoing is not intended to be an exhaustive list of the negative consequences of a Hillary Clinton Presidency.

And on the Trump side of the election ledger? Well we don’t really know all that much about him because he has not squandered his entire life “in the public service of the country” (that’s a compliment by the way)–but he appears to be a confident leader who understands the peril the country is in and possesses the business acumen to do something about it.

And so, with the scales of national destruction weighted so heavily in Hillary’s favor, and with the only other choice being Trump, how do our erstwhile Republican, Establishment leaders set about to advance the cause? They take every opportunity to bash Trump, call him unpleasant things, demand that he come to Republican leaders in Congress on bended knee to beg for support, withhold endorsements, and attempt to goad him into revising his message and its delivery in a way that is entirely inconsistent with the successful approach he used to blow away the Establishment’s toady primary candidates.

Are these Establishment folks stark raving mad? If they are not mad, the remaining conclusion can only be that the GOP Establishment is so contemptuous of GOP voters, so anxious to prove the voters wrong for supporting Trump, and so looking forward to being able to say “we told you so,” that they would prefer to accelerate the destruction of the country rather than support a candidate who does not fit the stereotypical mold of a GOP Presidential candidate (like Bob Dole, John McCain, and Mitt Romney for instance). The Establishment would apparently prefer a nominee who would mindlessly go along with the program they believe is necessary to protect its sinecure.

Think of all of the times the GOP Establishment has asked voters to go along with its Presidential nominee preference. But now, when the voters ask the Establishment to go along with their choice, the Establishment treats the voters like miscreant children, or like people who simply cannot understand the complex working of politics at a high level, who are incapable of thinking for themselves, who are insufficiently attuned to the needs and wants of the other side of the aisle.   In reality, however, these are simply GOP voters who have refused to drink the Establishment Kool-Aid.

But enough about concepts of political loyalty (apparently an oxymoron). Let’s name some names and call out some Establishment types.

Let’s start with John Kasich: a good man, a competent man, an able administrator, who stayed in the primary race almost as long as Bernie Sanders for no apparent reason other than to castigate Trump at every opportunity. Kasich signed the pledge to support the eventual GOP nominee, just like every other GOP primary candidate. Apparently we were to take that pledge to mean–every potential nominee except Trump. Kasich has said that he is not sure that he and Trump share the same values, does not approve of Trump’s “demeanor,” doesn’t agree with many of Trump’s positions, and believes that Trump is “trending down”–in other words, Trump is not at all like John Kasich. Well, Duh. If Trump were more like Kasich, he probably would not be the Party’s nominee. In light of Kasich’s strident anti-Trump rhetoric, it would have been a fair comeuppance if Trump had insisted on moving the GOP National Convention from Cleveland to New Jersey.

And what about Paul Ryan? Ryan has repeatedly suggested that Trump needs to “earn” his endorsement by demonstrating that Trump is prepared to truly unite the Republican Party. As though Trump was the sole cause of division within the Party, and that the cause of Party division has nothing to do with the inaction and ineptitude of the Republican majority in Congress.   What chutzpah for Ryan to summon the man, who just received more votes than any candidate in GOP primary in history, before the Establishment to prove that Trump, and Trump alone, is able to resolve all of the Party’s differences. In other words, Ryan wants Trump’s commitment to join the “Good Ole Boys” club in D.C. Why Ryan would think it is Trump’s obligation to “mend” the Party, when it has largely been the members of the Establishment sowing the seeds of Party discord, is anyone’s guess.   Political civility (perhaps another oxymoron) would suggest that members of the Establishment should be congratulating Trump and offering their support and cooperation.

And then there was the allegation of racism, coming not from Hillary or Elizabeth Warren, but rather from Mitch McConnell (and even Newt Gingrich) over Trump’s statements regarding the New Mexico federal judge presiding over the Trump University fraud case. With friends like Mitch, who needs enemies? And Mitch is just dead wrong with regard to his interpretation of Trump’s statements. We need to get over the notion that alluding to someone else’s ethnicity, that allusion, per force, constitutes racism.   When Donald Trump drew an inference that a federal judge of Mexican heritage might not view Trump favorably or fairly, consciously or subconsciously, because Trump wants to wall off Mexico from the United States, it was hardly racist to raise such a logical inference. Trump was not calling the judge a racist, even though the defendant in the case is white, but rather is merely suggesting that, under the particular circumstances, the judge may have an “appearance of impropriety” problem. If Trump weren’t running for President, and hadn’t announced plans to wall off our border with Mexico, and had stated that he was not being judged impartially because persons of Mexican heritage are incapable of judging white people fairly–now that would be racist.

So why did Mitch go out of the way to declare Donald to be a racist, even in the face of reasonable inferences to the contrary? We don’t know. You will have to ask him. Perhaps, like Kasich and Ryan, McConnell is simply out of his freaking mind. These three individuals all know that a Hillary Presidency would be a long-term disaster for the country, and they all know that Trump offers the only possibility of defeating Shrill Hill, and yet they go out of their way to bash or impugn Trump. Madness.

There are lots of Republicans in this year’s political drama that need to mend their ways – but Trump isn’t one of them.

All Republicans should get solidly behind Trump and help him win the in November. If they can’t do that, and do it quickly, then they are part of the problem and, at least, need to quietly get out of the way.

© 2016

PLANE INCREDIBLE

imagesimages

As clandestine meetings go, this one turned out to be not so clandestine.

As everyone except perhaps California surfers now knows, former President Clinton’s private plane and Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s private plane almost experienced a mid-ground collision on the tarmac at Phoenix’s Sky Harbor airport a few days ago.

The AG had a speaking engagement in Phoenix, so her presence at the airport was understandable.

Bill Clinton’s presence at the airport seems a bit more coincidental. The Clinton spokespersons would have us believe that Bill was just flying around the country for lack of anything better to do, when his pilot spotted the beautiful Valley of the Sun and decided to drop in at Sky Harbor as a break from spending so much time flying nowhere.

Once on the ground Bill apparently learned that Loretta Lynch was “coincidentally” headed his way for a Phoenix speaking engagement (or whatever). Having nothing better to do than flying aimlessly around the country, he decided to wait on the tarmac until the AG’s plane landed. Being the gregarious sort, he determined that he would pay a little surprise visit on Mrs. Lynch as soon as she landed and her plane was parked. It is unclear whether Mrs. Lynch’s plane coincidentally parked close enough to the former President’s plane so that he would be able accomplish his social visit on foot, or whether the former President’s plane was required to stalk the AG’s plane in order to effectuate the rendezvous.

We also know that President Clinton met alone with Loretta and her husband–no press, no staff, and no security personnel. The next logical questions are “how” and “why”? Either the meeting was pre-arranged among the principals, or he had to communicate through his security folks in order to make sure they understood the rules. One can only imagine the nature of that conversation:

“Mr. Secret Service guy, would you hustle over to talk to the Attorney General’s plane, before she deplanes, to let her know that I, former President and august personage, would like to honor her with a brief social call. Let her know that this coincidental, unscheduled, and completely unplanned meeting is most fortuitous, since I would like to have a chat with her about golf, our travels, and  grandchildren.  Oh yes, and make sure that she understands that the meeting must be completely private. We wouldn’t want the press to glean any information about our golf scores, where we have been, or our grandchildren’s potty training, you know.”

We then presume that an acquiesce by Mrs. Lynch arrived in timely fashion, and the former President, accompanied by his security detail, ambled across the tarmac to the conveniently close Lynch plane, parted company with his security detail, and climbed the stairs into the sanctuary of Mrs. Lynch’s plane. We do not know whether Mrs. Lynch’s pilot and co-pilot were hustled off the plane or were simply sequestered in the cockpit.

So we have a pretty good idea how the details of this chance meeting unfolded–but what about the “why” aspect of the encounter?

We know that both the former President and Mrs. Lynch had in mind that their meeting would go undetected. Neither one left the meeting declaiming–“Wow, what a coincidence, I just unexpectedly ran into former President Clinton!” or “Wow, I just unexpectedly ran into Attorney General Lynch.” In point of fact, we would likely still not know about this “chance” meeting if a local Phoenix TV anchor or reporter had not been tipped off that it was taking place.

Even if one could believe that this little tête-à-tête really occurred by chance, the demand for total secrecy leaves only the very, very naïve to believe that the conversation was limited to golf, travels, and grandchildren.

We will not be so crass as to suggest that the subject of the FBI’s ongoing criminal investigation of Hillary, Bill, and their relationship (and the government’s relationship) to the Clinton Foundation actually came up during the half hour or so meet and greet. Nor was it necessary that Bill raise the subject of the investigation in order to get his point across.

Our surmise is that Bill told Loretta that she was Hillary’s first choice to fill the vacancy left on the Supreme Court by the untimely demise of Justice Scalia. Then he turned the conversation to golf, travel, and grandchildren–so, at least, they wouldn’t have to lie about that.

Pretty clever actually. Without ever mentioning the FBI or its investigation, Bill communicates that if Hillary is actually indicted, she will lose the election, and if she loses the election, Loretta’s prospect of being appointed to the Supreme Court goes up in smoke as well. Anyone but a politician would consider this sort of conduct to be a form of bribery.

The most amazing thing about this fabrication by a high ranking former public official and a current public official, is that, even when confronted with its implausibility, Democrat spokespersons and the Main Stream Media have tumbled to this fairy tale with the gusto of the Brothers Grimm.

Who of sane mind (or any mind at all for that matter) could seriously believe that Clinton’s plane and Lynch’s plane just happened to be in the same place at the same time; or that complete secrecy was necessary for a casual conversation about grandchildren. Please. We know that the principals perpetrating “Plane Gate” are corrupt, but it never ceases to amaze that the media types are so willing to look like ignorant boobs in order to try to conceal the obvious. But then no one ever claimed that Democrats and their support group were lacking in gullibility.

© 2016

THE UNFOUNDED FATHERS

Founding Fathers

This will be short and sweet because it is both simple and urgent. We have 140 days, give or take, to put matters right, or matters may never be right again.

We all know about the Founding Fathers, those great men from centuries gone by who created the wonderful Constitutional Republic that has become a superpower, a global force for good, the creator of a protracted era of global peace (the “Pax Americana”), and, without question, the greatest, most-benevolent, and generous nation the world has ever known.

The Founding Fathers were legitimately concerned about the prospect of “Unfounded Fathers” (though they didn’t call them that), who, in spite of all of the checks and balances built into our form of government by the Founding Fathers, would become so corrupt as to cause our democratic fabric to come unwoven. While the Founding Fathers were concerned, they had to believe that it was unlikely that their carefully crafted checks and balances would be rent asunder, because that result could only occur if the people voted into office representatives of incredible greed, ego, self-interest, narrow-mindedness, stupidity, and lack of regard for the will of the voters and the general well-being of the country.

Well friends, the day of reckoning, the day the Founding Fathers hoped would never come, is upon us. The “Unfounded Fathers” are among us, suffused in Beltway ignorance and arrogance, egomania and self-centeredness, greed and narrow-mindedness, incredible hubris, and disregard for the country and its citizens.

And we are not here to castigate Congressional Democrats, or even the Democrat-in-Chief in the White House–those folks have always exhibited the character and other failings set forth above. No, concerned citizens and conservatives, the “Unfounded Fathers” are here and bent on destruction generally of the nation’s political balance of power and destruction specifically of the Republican Party. It is with much angst and considerable sadness that we have been set upon by the enemy within–current members of the Republican Establishment. The very folks who are supposed to act as a check and balance against the callow, mindless policies of the unenlightened and maniacal Democrats, have thrown in the towel, have stabbed their constituents in the back, have gone over to the dark side, and are in the process of throwing this great country under the bus.

Shame on you Paul Ryan, shame on you Ben Sasse, shame on you Mitch McConnell, shame on you John McCain, shame on you Mitt Romney, shame on you George W. Bush. Shame on all of you phony Republicans who have decided that your “consciences,” your “elitist attitudes,” your “unbounded arrogance,” your alleged political “experience,” your ostensible political “judgment,” your previously lacking “canny insight,” your “distain for the judgment of your constituents,” and your “unbounded egos” entitle you to dismiss the will of the voters who have selected Donald Trump to be the Republican nominee for President.

We hate to rain on the GOP Establishment’s “pity parade,” but Unfounded Fathers, when it comes to honesty, candor, sincerity, loyalty, common sense, love of country, and desire to make America a better and safer place to live, you aren’t worthy of carrying the Donald’s gym bag.

Most startling is the fact that the Unfounded Fathers are not only incredibly ignorant, you are also incredibly wrong. It takes an arrogance of Obamaian proportions to tell your constituents that they are misguided idiots. More importantly, the Unfounded Fathers are apparently under the erroneous belief that they can ignore, demean, and oppose Donald Trump as the Party’s nominee while still saving their yellow, political skins by concentrating time, effort, and money in an attempt to keep “down-stream” Republican candidates from being “swept away” by a Hillary Clinton landslide. The Unfounded Fathers seem to have reached the illogical conclusion that they can bash the head of the GOP ticket and yet, somehow, help the GOP under-carders to carry the day. Unfortunately, these political geniuses have it exactly backwards.

If (thanks in large part to the unfounded opposition of the Unfounded Fathers) it appears as election day approaches that Trump has no chance of winning, millions and millions and millions of Trump supporters will stay home. Why should they make the effort to vote for a candidate that the Unfounded Fathers have beaten into the ground? And if the Unfounded Fathers think that the worst Republican turnout in history in a Presidential campaign is going to be good for their “down ballot” buddies, then they are even more foolish than we give them credit for. Perhaps these flighty Unfounded Fathers, who have shown little interest in supporting their constituents by challenging a political novice and lightweight like Obama, believe that, even though they have done everything in their power to drive away Trump supporters, those same voters will flock to the polls for the sole purpose of perking up the candidacies of beleaguered Republican Senatorial or Congressional candidates. Do they really expect the voters, whose candidate they have just willfully trampled, will come to the rescue of their favorite candidates?

Perhaps the Unfounded Fathers simply believe that the voters will have the common sense to want to preserve Republican majorities in the House and the Senate. But why should the voters respond to that self-interested appeal by the Unfounded Fathers? After all, the Republicans have had majorities in both the House and the Senate for 2 years, and have accomplished zero, zip, nada. Trump supporters are counting on Trump to shake up D.C., including the Republican majorities–to put an end to gridlock, ever-expanding bureaucracy and regulatory intrusion, petty bickering, and economic calamity. In other words: to mix things up a bit in the nation’s capitol. But, without Trump, there is no mix, no shake up, no change, and very little to hope for. Under such circumstances, do the Unfounded Fathers really think that, without Trump, the voters really give a fig whether the GOP retains its majority in either chamber?

Let us be perfectly blunt about this. The perilous path that you Unfounded Fathers are pursuing is guaranteed only to ensure 8 years of a Hillary Presidency, the loss of conservative influence on the Supreme Court for decades, the probable bankruptcy of the country, economic stagnation or recession for years to come, the Middle East in increasing flames and disorder, China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia unchecked on the world stage, further reduction in both size and readiness of the military, further fomentation of divisiveness on the basis of race, gender, age, religion, and socio-economic status, and vastly more attacks by Muslim extremists, both inside and outside of the United States. But not to worry, the Unfounded Fathers will still have reserved deck chairs on the USS Titanic.

But before the country goes under, or before anyone who can afford to leave the country does so, we will make sure that there is a huge monument erected to the Unfounded Fathers, prominently featuring all of their names and memorializing their destruction of the single greatest country in all of human kind–and for no reason other than the Unfounded Fathers’ petulance over the Republican primary voters having had the temerity (imagine the gall) to pick a Presidential nominee that the Unfounded Fathers would not have personally selected.   Election Day in 2016 will become the new day that “will live in infamy,” and the names of the Unfounded Fathers will forever be etched in the history books as the shortsighted individuals who singlehandedly destroyed the greatest and most successful political experiment of all time. And don’t forget that, after the destruction of the country, the loss of both the House and the Senate, and the ultimate consolidation of power to the Democrat Party, the lingering justification by the Unfounded Fathers will be an astonishing–“Well, at least our Presidential candidate lost.” Brilliant. Great political minds will be staggered for generations to come.

© 2016

JUSTICE ANTONIN SCALIA

HCK Blog 17 (Justice Antonin Scalia)-2

Rest in peace Mr. Justice. Your legacy as one of the truly great Supreme Court Justices is secure. More than any Justice within recent memory, you have embodied the legal spirit that we believe the drafters of the Constitution had in mind. You have interpreted the Constitution without endeavoring to expand or modify it. Your opinions have been insightful, imminently readable, fair, and consistent–whether as part of a majority or in dissent. And you have carried out your sworn duties with verve, wit, and humor.

We suggest to our readers that they take the time to read some of your recent opinions if they want to understand how a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States should comport himself or herself.

It is however a sad commentary on the state of political life in America today that, before you even had an opportunity to lay in state, the matter of your successor became a political football. President Obama was quick to assert that he intended to carry out his sworn Constitutional duty to nominate your successor. As an aside, it is interesting to observe how this President adheres to the Constitution when it suits his political narrative and blatantly disregards that document when it does not.

And so the President has set the table for the Republican majority in the Senate to, at last, demonstrate to their constituents why it was important to elect that majority. In spite of holding majorities in both the Senate and the House, Republicans have done little to justify the honor that the voting public has bestowed upon them–unless, of course, one believes that acquiescence to Presidential whims, or standing by while the President tramples upon the Constitution, are virtues. But perhaps this is the moment we have all been waiting for–that significant opportunity for the Senate majority to demonstrate that they are not simply Democrats light, that they are more than just appeasers, that they have at long last developed a backbone.

Let us begin by noting that allowing President Obama to have his third nominee appointed to the Supreme Court would be an unmitigated disaster. Who can seriously doubt that a President, who has politicized everything down to the White House china, would fail to politicize the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice who could, and likely would, implement his plan to radically transform America for decades to come?

And so we beseech you Senate majority–stand tall and firm with respect to this seminal event. The President has, once again, endeavored to convince the public that he occupies the moral high ground by promptly performing his Constitutional duty to nominate a new Supreme Court Justice–while, of course, implying that the failure of the Senate to immediately confirm his nominee would be an un-Constitutional response. The Senate majority must not let the President frame this debate. The Senate has “a Constitutional obligation” not to appoint a Presidential nominee who has even the remotest chance of sending the Court in a decades-long, leftward-leaning misdirection. And, by design, the Senate’s Constitutional obligation trumps the President’s obligation. So here is the challenge to the Senate majority–unless the President nominates Newt Gingrich, Rush Limbaugh, or Ted Cruz, there is no justifiable basis for the Senate to approve “any” Obama nominee. While we would take some satisfaction from having the Senate remind the President that “they won and he lost” or that “elections have consequences,” we will settle for the simple exercise of Constitutional defiance. We don’t really care whether the Senate exercises its Constitutional duty by means of a blanket statement that no Obama nominee will receive consent of the Senate, by advising the President that any nominee he puts forward will be unacceptable and that no hearing will be necessary, or by going through the exercise of holding a hearing before turning down the nominee (though, in fairness, any nominee who wants and receives a hearing should be advised in advance that the process will likely be a waste of his or her time, of the Senate’s time, and of taxpayer dollars).

The appointment of any Obama nominee will disrespect, and likely destroy, the decades of hard work judicial work by a singular Justice. And if the public good is insufficient incentive for the Senate majority to do the right thing, perhaps enlightened self-interest will do the trick. Cooperation with Obama on this important matter would be a deal-breaker for re-election of any Republican Senator.

To date, the center of the Republican majority seems to be holding firm–although the usual weak-kneed GOP Senators have attempted to straddle the fence by agreeing to meet with Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland. We will see if the soft, squishy middle of the Republican Senate is willing to hold its ground. Kudos to Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell, of whom we are frequent critics, for so far holding his ground regarding this critical Supreme Court decision.

© 2016

 

 

 

ET TU MITT?

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney speaks during a campaign event in Chantilly, Virginia, on May 2, 2012. Romney said he was "pleased" by US President Barack Obama's visit to Afghanistan, after the election-year rivals had sparred over the commemoration of the killing of Osama bin Laden. AFP PHOTO/Jewel Samad (Photo credit should read JEWEL SAMAD/AFP/GettyImages)
JEWEL SAMAD/AFP/GettyImages

In a stunning (only in the sense of its counter-productivity) event, Mitt Romney recently held a press conference for the sole purpose of disparaging the front-running candidate for his own Party’s 2016 Presidential nomination. You may remember Mitt. He was the GOP Establishment’s pick to go up against Barak Obama in the 2012 election. By 2008, the bloom was well off the Obama “Hope and Change” rose.   Apparently assuming that the election was in the bag, Mitt chose not to challenge Obama with respect to any of his many failed policies.   And so Mitt sat on his hands while the 2012 election slipped away. Instead of driving Republican voters to the polls, he drove them to stay home (in droves). Many remain of the opinion that Mitt lost the most easily winnable Presidential election within memory.

In spite of his stunning loss in 2012, Mitt nonetheless apparently believes that he is qualified to judge the qualifications of other GOP Presidential candidates.   He began his analysis by launching a broadside attack against Donald Trump (whose endorsement Mitt sought and received during Mitt’s lackluster campaign in 2012). By way of apparent gratitude, Mitt called the most popular candidate in the Republican primary process a “fraud,” “lacking Presidential timbre” and “unqualified” to occupy the White House who is, essentially, and deliberately “misleading” the American voters (particularly those gullible Republican primary voters).

Good grief. Has the Republican hierarchy lost its collective mind (an obvious rhetorical question)? The Establishment has abandoned Ron Reagan’s “Eleventh Commandment” (“Thou shall speak no ill of a fellow Republican”) in favor of some sort of political hate speech (“Thou shall criticize, insult, and demean any other Republican candidate who stands between you and the White House”). Do the leaders of our Party not realize that the natural consequence of this incessant bickering is to ensure that all of the candidates, including the ultimate nominee, will stumble out of the primary process mortally wounded for the general election? How do we justify destroying the character, credibility, and honesty of all of our candidates before the Democrats even lay a glove on them?

The reduced number of debates and shortened primary season (compared to 2012) were supposed to help prevent the candidates from cannibalizing each other. The actual impact of these modifications is that the candidates have felt it necessary to hurl even more invective at each other to compensate for this year’s compressed primary time frame. Instead of meaningful debate with an occasional gratuitous barb, the debate appearances of all of our candidates devolved into acts of slander, libel, invective, mistruth, outright lie, and character assassination–leaving little time for examination of important issues. Those who characterized the GOP debates as being the political equivalent of a WWE “cage match” were not far off the mark. How can the Party leadership allow this self-destruction to occur, let alone continue for the entire primary season?

One of the original objectives of Honey I Shrunk the Government was to offer constructive advice to the GOP. But the Party may well be beyond mere constructive criticism. If the Party will not, or cannot, control the tenor of its candidates’ rhetoric, then the Party will surely self-destruct. Corruption, greed, self-interest, and apathy appear to be so ingrained in the current GOP Establishment that there may be little hope for overcoming the vitriolic patina that most of the primary candidates acquired.

Let’s take a candid look at the consequence of the Establishment’s attempt to bring pressure to bear from multiple sources with a view to destroying Donald Trump as a viable candidate for the 2016 Republican Presidential nomination. Consider the nominees that the Party has put forward in 1988 (George H.W. Bush), 1992 (George H.W. Bush), 1996 (Bob Dole), 2000 (George W. Bush), 2004 (George W. Bush), 2008 (John McCain), and 2012 (Mitt Romney)–all Presidential candidates for whom the Establishment likely orchestrated or manipulated the nomination process to ensure that the “appropriate” candidate managed to at least limp across the primary finish line. None of the above-mentioned nominees was a particularly inspiring candidate that primary voters would have selected on their own. Instead, the voters deferred to the GOP leadership and, by and large, supported the Establishment’s nominee of choice. All of those Establishment candidates either lost handsomely or were elected marginally and conducted their administrations in very Democrat-like, tax and spend fashion. H.W.’s win in 1988 was likely attributable to the desire of the folks to continue the Reagan Revolution, and W.’s wins in 2000 and 2004 were likely attributable to the weakness of his Democrat opponents (Al Gore and John Kerry respectively).

And so, Republican voters, having had quite enough of years of Presidential loses or misery at the hands of the Establishment, have come up with a novel solution–namely, selecting a non-Establishment candidate like Donald J. Trump. And the GOP Establishment’s elitist response has been truly amazing. After years of expecting fealty from Republican voters for lousy, losing, legacy nominee selections by the Establishment, the Party’s response to Donald Trump has been–“Voters? What do they have to do with our selection process? We know what’s best for the Party and its members will eventually come to appreciate our wisdom and perspicacity.” The conventional beltway position seems to be that, if the voters lack the instinct to select a candidate who will play ball with the GOP Establishment, then the Establishment will just have to do what is needed to make sure the voters don’t hurt themselves or the country (or jeopardize the Establishment’s sinecure).

Having worked very hard to incur the wrath of grass roots Republicans since 1996 or before, the Establishment has decided to double down with arrogance, condescension, underhandedness, and electoral duplicity.

The Party seems intent on spinning into a self-induced death spiral. The Party professes to be concerned about the tenor and temperament of its putative nominee, Donald Trump. What the Party really needs to concern itself with, however, is the fact that more and more of the Party faithful are ready, willing and able to take a political hike–and it is only the prospect of a Trump candidacy that is holding them in check.

© 2016

 

BON MOTS

Hillary-

Are we the only ones that have a hard time concentrating on a Hillary speech?

She starts out in a sort of rational tone and works herself up in to a screeching rant that is most annoying and vaguely reminiscent of Howard Dean. Four years of that and we’ll all wind up in a rubber room.   Suggested Trump nickname for Hillary – “Shrill Hill.”

Hillary is her own bobble-head. Whenever she makes a forceful point with which she agrees, her head bobs up and down in a way that would make any major leaguer proud, and she doesn’t stop bobbing until the applause has died down.

We are looking forward to watching the Secret Service working to defend President Hillary while law enforcement officers attempt to drag her out of the Oval Office to stand trial for negligent disclosure of national secrets. Will she be able to pardon herself if convicted? Can she pardon herself before conviction and avoid trial altogether?

Obama-

Bumper Sticker – “Elect Putin: Put a Competent Communist in the White House”

He may not be a Muslim, but his obvious affinity for Islam makes him, at best, a CINO (Christian in Name Only).

Obama suggests that Trump apparently fails to understand what a serious job being President of the United States is. We assume that, by that remark, Obama means that the President must be willing to stay on top of his golf game, must be willing to endure long flights at taxpayer expense to exotic vacation destinations, and must be willing to read speeches on the teleprompter that have been written by others. Damn, throw us in that “serious briar patch.”

Race Relations-

How does it improve race relations to always blame the cop with a gun and ignore the prior bad conduct of the shooting “victim?”

Why is it so difficult for people to believe that there are more blacks in jail because blacks commit more crimes? Oops! We forgot about the corrupt law enforcement and judicial system which persecutes and prosecutes more black criminals for no apparent reason and just for the fun of it.

How come a black person cannot be a racist (even if his or her comments or actions are clearly motivated only by race), but a white person is almost always deemed to be a racist (even if his or her comments or actions are obviously wholly unrelated to race)?

If reparations are due to certain groups as a consequence of ancestral slavery, why not the descendents of union soldiers who were killed or maimed during the Civil War in the effort to free the slaves?

Congress-

Does anyone disagree that the first act of an all-Republican controlled government should be to pass legislation requiring Members of Congress to be bound by all of the laws to which it subjects the rest of us-including Obamacare? And, no, they don’t get to beg off by saying that they have purchased other health insurance (using taxpayer dollars). Let’s see how long Obamacare lasts when the Senators don’t get to keep their doctors, keep their plans, and go to the nearest hospital for treatment (and we are not talking about free hospital care for privileged Congressmen). And, oh yeah, the rest of us pay for our stamps, health clubs, country clubs, lunches, and Uber. A few less perks and maybe we can get back to the citizen legislators that the Founding Fathers had in mind. And the second act of a Republican government? Abolish the Department of Education, the EPA, the SEC, the Labor Department, and the Department of Agriculture – just for starters.

Long-term objective – ease back onto the Gold Standard (no more quantitative easing).

Election-

 

Does the Party that seeks to become the Party of the People get off to a good start by having a Chairman named “Reince Prebus”?

Immigration-

Here’s an alternate proposal. After Mexico pays for the wall on our southern border, let’s have them pick up the tab for medical care, law enforcement, education, and taxes attributable to the 12 million illegal immigrants in the country. We don’t have to give them citizenship, but at least we can be a bit more charitable knowing that they are paying (or, more accurately, Mexico is paying) their way.

Capitol-

Has anyone else wondered if the restoration of the Capitol dome is intended as a metaphor for the federal government generally? It’s something that should have been taken care of over time, it is incredibly costly, nobody appears to be working on it, it apparently will take forever to complete, and it will come in well over budget. And, if you want a second opinion, it’s ugly too.

© 2016

 

 

RYAN’S REDEMPTION

Ain’t politics grand? Donald Trump wins the GOP Presidential nomination fair and square, and now most of the folks who promised to support the eventual nominee are either backpedaling or outright reneging. I guess what they meant was that they promised to support the nominee “so long as they were the nominee.”

And now, as if to further demonstrate that the GOP Establishment doesn’t give a fig about what Republican voters want, Paul Ryan, Speaker of the House, has decided that he “isn’t quite ready to support” Trump. Apparently, after a staggeringly contentious primary, the Establishment believes that having the Party badly fractured is a good posture to take us up to the Convention in July, through the Convention, and during the run up to the election in November. The Party might as well just pin a note on the back of its institutional shirt that reads “I’m Dumb.”

But suddenly, the Obama administration hands us an issue that should rally and cement all Republicans.

As you may be aware, the State of North Carolina passed a law that requires individuals who are born male to use the “Men’s Room,” and individual who are born female to use the “Ladies’ Room.” Seems reasonable. Seems like a ratification of a long-standing human policy that, when it comes to bodily functions, men and women should repair to separate facilities. Who could possibly disagree with the approach that we have collectively taken since the middle ages that women ought not to have to be embarrassed by having men watch while they “do their thing,” and vice versa? If you guessed the “Obama administration,” you are, of course, correct.

The administration, flush (pun intended) from its victory of having the Supreme Court invent a Constitutional right to gay marriage, has decided that invasion of our potty rights is the next logical, progressive step in the destruction of our culture.

The Obama administration has concluded that the North Carolina statute is unconstitutional because it discriminates on the basis of sex. Even if one assumes that this is not sheer lunacy on the part of the DOJ, it is unclear to us exactly who is being discriminated against. Does it discriminate against men because they can’t use the women’s room, or against women because they can’t use the men’s room, or against men who think they would like to be women because they can’t use the women’s room, or against women who think they would like to be men because they can’t use the men’s room, or all of the above, or some combination of the above?

Here’s a dollop of common sense for the DOJ to consider; while integration may be okay for our public schools, separate but equal should remain the norm for our rest rooms.

Now all of this would be laughable, but for one condition. While the civilized way to resolve such a dispute would be to let the courts deal with the matter. The DOJ undoubtedly realizes that it would be laughed out of court, and, consequently, has taken a slightly more draconian approach. Bear in mind that the DOJ interpretation would apply, not just to public facilities, but to the facilities of private entities with more than 15 employees.

The DOJ has advised the State of North Carolina that, unless the State hews to the DOJs rest room access policy, the federal government will withhold all federal funds that would otherwise flow to North Carolina. Setting aside for the moment the notion that the money being withheld effectively came from the State in the first place, the DOJ’s position on this matter amounts to just plain blackmail. And it should not be condoned just because it is “Obama administrative blackmail.”   Allowing the Obama administration (or any other administration for that matter) to use taxpayer dollars to badger, berate and blackmail those same taxpayers is unconscionable. Blackmail is a crime, and in our estimation, those folks in the DOJ who are responsible for such conduct should go to jail.

So what does all of this have to do with redemption for Paul Ryan? Considering the degree to which he is in disrepute with Republicans because of his ill-considered failure to support his Party’s Presidential nominee, the “bathroom” issue provides Ryan, and his Establishment cohorts, an opportunity to prove that he is willing to listen to the voters and his constituents. He is willing to convince the Republican base with some evidence that the hard work they have done to hand the GOP majorities in both the House and the Senate was not in vain, and is willing to stand up against the unreasonable, intrusive and, frankly, stupid policies of the Obama administration.

Here are a few things that we think GOP leaders in the House and Senate might consider doing in response to yet one more outrageous action by an already out-of-control administration:

  1. Pass legislation that prohibits the federal government from intruding on the gender or sex policies of the several States, or of private enterprise, with respect to rest rooms. It seems unlikely that the President would veto this legislation since the highpoint of his legacy would then become–the President who allowed men to use women’s rest rooms. If he were to veto the bill, you might even get enough Democrat votes to override an Obama veto.
  2. Immediately defund any portion of the Justice Department that has anything to do with this inane policy and with related threats of withholding of federal funds.
  3. Appoint a special committee to investigate the DOJ’s action regarding its policy, its use of blackmail to enforce the policy, and to determine whether any laws have been broken by those in the DOJ, or elsewhere in the administration.
  4. And if you really want to take a more global and forceful approach, enact legislation that prohibits any federal agency to threaten to withhold federal funds tied to any requirement that a municipality, an entity or an individual take any specific action without the prior consent of Congress.

Any takers regarding whether the feckless and impotent Republican Congressional majorities will pursue any of the above actions, or action of any kind, in response to the unconscionable policy of the DOJ?

Bear in mind that the next logical step would be for the DOJ to determine that “separate but equal” is not a sustainable approach to rest room use, and that all such facilities must become unisex. Why stop when you are on a roll?   And what do you suppose the DOJ will do when they find someone who believes that 100% of the time he/she is 50% male and 50% female. Will the DOJ insist that a door must be blasted between the men’s room and the ladies’ room so that this oppressed he/she can wander freely between the two?

At this very moment, Loretta Lynch, Attorney General and surrogate for the liberal Obama administration, has announced that North Carolina will feel the full weight of the DOJ since, after all, the right of men to use the little girls’ room is a logical extension of the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s. Really? We don’t know what she actually thinks, but her recent pronouncements are classic examples of government overreach, unconstitutional violations of the Tenth Amendment, bureaucratic idiocy, and total contempt for the will and rights of the vast majority of honest, hard-working, sensible taxpayers.

We believe that this irrational intransigence on the part of the DOJ, and the Obama administration, is Donald Trump’s ticket to the White House. This is the federal government taking their notion of political correctness well beyond the absurd. Trump simply needs to tap in to the vast majority of sane voters’ belief that the continued expansion of the PC net must come to an end.

Surely, Speaker Ryan, you understand that the Obama administration is driving Americans to distraction, and that you and your fellow travelers are driving us to Trump.

So here is our challenge to you, Speaker Ryan. If you cannot protect little girls in the little girls’ room from indecent exposure by grown men, then you should acknowledge that there is no reason to have a Republican majority in the House and the Senate, surrender your gavel, and go home to Wisconsin. What do the American people have to do to convince you and your compatriots that we are sick and tired of this PC BS and your unwillingness to do anything about it? Hermaphrodites, bi-sexuals, and trans-genders thank you for your public service.

© 2016