Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
A Reply to Paul Ryan
Dear Representative Ryan,
This is in response to your email inviting me to take the 2015 Congressional Policy Survey because “This survey is one of the best ways for your voice to be heard.” Being asked for my opinion on leaders who spend more time unilaterally disarming themselves than engaging in the battles that I and others sent them to Washington to fight on our behalf is a dicey proposition, after all. It’s rather like being asked, “Aside from the obvious unpleasantries, how was your voyage on the Titanic?”
My first inclination was to print the email out so I could experience the exhilaration of physically tossing it in the garbage, but I thought better of it. You want my voice to be heard? Fine. Here we go:
From Survey 4869362-42K, I read, “The answers to this questionnaire will help Republican House Leaders confirm where grassroots Conservatives stand on important issues being debated in Congress.” To which I quickly point out that grassroots Conservatives, by some 60 percent, wanted someone other than John Boehner as House Speaker, and not only were they summarily ignored by Republican House leaders, but Republican members who sided with their constituents were punished. Just the same, I’ll play along:
-
1. Please check the top three issues you want House Republicans to focus on in the 114th Congress:
-
Help create jobs and real economic growth
-
Cut spending
-
Eliminate excessive government red tape
-
Repeal Obamacare & lower health care costs
-
Reform the tax code
-
Exercise vigorous oversight of the Obama Administration
-
Keep Americans safe
-
Improve access to quality education
-
Expand energy production
-
Secure the border & enforce our laws
-
Ban taxpayer funding of abortions
-
Make Congress more open & accountable
-
An innocuous list really, and utterly meaningless since the pursuit of any of these items would require an involuntary spinal transplant for Republican leaders. “Repeal Obamacare?” You’ve had multiple opportunities to sink real teeth into that monstrous law — constitutional opportunities at that. Aside from a plethora of meaningless show votes destined for nowhere, every time Republicans have had a chance to take serious action on Obamacare, you’ve voted to fund it fully. “Keep Americans safe?” Mr. Ryan, would you be so kind as to inform Mitch McConnell that surrendering the Senate’s treaty review power under the Constitution doesn’t exactly keep Americans safe?
Tell ya what, sir, instead of checking off the top three issues from your list, I’ll narrow it down to one issue — the fact that Nancy Pelosi has more testicular fortitude than all the Republican leaders combined. Oh, she’s about as batty as a saucer-eyed moonie on mushrooms, no question about it! Her ideas consist of undiluted lunacy on the half-shell, but at least she’s willing to advance them rather than cower at her own political shadow. Unless your colleagues on Capitol Hill “grow a pair,” to use the current vernacular, none of the items on your list are attainable, and you know it.
-
2. Do you believe our $18 trillion debt is a threat to our children and grandchildren?
-
Yes
-
No
-
Undecide
-
-
3. Would you say that the current tax code is easy and fair to understand?
-
Yes
-
No
-
Undecided
-
Anyone who would answer that the debt is not a threat, or that the tax code is easy and fair to understand, wouldn’t be very likely to be on the list of this survey’s recipients, would they? These are “gimme” questions, but to what end? Shallow affirmations of empathy are of little use at this point.
- 4. Have you or someone you know lost health care coverage, or a doctor, as a result of Obamacare?
- Yes
- No
- Undecided
No, but no one I know personally has contracted AIDS either — that doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened. I’ve read the data and heard the interviews. What I want to know is why Republicans keep funding this hideous destruction of American healthcare?
- 5. Should faith-based employers be forced – through Obamacare – to provide services that go against their religious beliefs?
- Yes
- No
- Undecided
Of course not. Should anyone be forced to enter into a private contract by virtue of their simple existence? Of course not. Should the constitutional power of the purse be surrendered in the effort to free Americans from this coercion? Of course not. And yet Republicans have done it.
- 6. Should Congress promote responsible legislation that would preserve and protect Social Security and Medicare for future generations?
- Yes
- No
- Undecided
Yes, but hold on to your Depends, because there will be resistance from the White House and the media. Which means that the odds of such legislation being advanced in any meaningful way by your colleagues are exactly zero.
7. Do you believe the Obama Administration needs to outline a comprehensive strategy to defeat and destroy terrorist groups that threaten Americans – like ISIS?
– Yes
– No
– Undecided
The Obama Administration has a comprehensive strategy and it is called appeasement. At home, ISIS can walk right across our southern border, and your leadership is willing to do exactly nothing to stop them. Our ally, Israel, faces an existential threat from Iran, which vows to also destroy America even as the Obama Administration surrenders at the negotiating table and Republicans hand over their only constitutional means of stopping the madness. The question isn’t whether the Administration has a strategy to defeat these maniacs. They don’t. The question is whether the GOP has a comprehensive strategy to stop Barack Obama’s crippling of America’s security. Stick some substantive ideas on one of your surveys and then we can talk.
-
8. Should Republicans continue to press the Obama Administration to provide a full and complete accounting of its response to the terror attack in Benghazi and the correspondences on Hillary Clinton’s private email server?
-
Yes
-
No
-
Undecided
-
That server should have been subpoenaed long ago. It wasn’t. Representative Gowdy’s cross-examinations are stunning in their ability to expose incompetence and fraud while puncturing the egos of the elite. Aside from that most excellent theater, what are the real consequences for those who abuse the public trust and break the law? I fear this is yet another example of Republican theatrics that highlight, but do not seriously address or correct, the problem.
-
9. Should Iran be allowed to continue enriching uranium?
-
Yes
-
No
-
Undecided
Should I be required to make a redundant point? With Republican assistance, Iran will be allowed to enrich uranium, and Iran will be allowed to nuke up. Next question please.
- 10. Do you agree with Republicans that President Obama’s executive amnesty cannot stand?
- Yes
- No
- Undecided
Hell, Republicans don’t even agree with Republicans on this one, because President Obama’s executive amnesty now stands with bipartisan support! Quoth Mitch McConnell back when he was courting voters: “We will use the power of the purse to push back against this overactive bureaucracy.” And here is one of my favorites: “If President Obama acts in defiance of the people and imposes his will on the country, Congress will act. We’re considering a variety of options. But make no mistake. When the newly elected representatives of the people take their seats, they will act.”
And act they did, because, within days of gaining a clear majority, the Senator took to the microphones to announce that, “We will not be shutting the government down or threatening to default on the federal debt.” So not only did McConnell preemptively surrender the power of the purse, he adopted the fictional narrative that Republicans would be the ones to close the government and default on the debt. When asked what exactly he would do to stop the President’s unilateral overreach, McConnell said, “We’ll let you know.” The result was as predicted. Those who doubt whether the concept of unconditional surrender is realistic in modern times need only watch Republicans in action.
As for your boss, Speaker Boehner said, “We are going to fight the President tooth and nail if he continues down this path. This is the wrong way to govern. This is exactly what the American people said on election day they didn’t want!” Fiery rhetoric, that — signifying nothing.
The sad fact is that the President’s executive overreach can indeed stand. It stands to this day, buttressed by the self-emasculation of a nominal opposition that now adds insult to injury with this complimentary idiocy of a survey that I predict will ultimately prove as useful as our own votes were last November.
Now you have your answers.
Published in General, Politics
Brilliant synopsis!
Aaron, your first paragraph resonates deeply, since America is already unrecognizable in many respects. I still maintain, as I note above, that all isn’t lost just yet.
Larry, I’m not so sure they think even the “fig leaf” is necessary any longer. The lies are blatant and repetitive, and they really don’t seem to care.
Well, I’m told that Ricochet is read in the corridors of power, and of course, I’m happy to answer all replies from those corridors.
This will be printed out and sent.
RumorPropaganda has it that they actually read the stuff that comes in over the transom. “Amount of trouble taken” and so forth.We need to be having serious, substantive arguments about policy, but not only policy. We have to reacquaint ourselves with the ideas behind the Constitution. First, amongst ourselves ( a la Ricochet), and then with the country as a whole. A Presidential campaign is a perfect place to do this. Fundraising is not the be-all, end-all of political existence.
I was watching Peter R.’s UK interview with Steve Hayward, and Prof. Hayward mentioned something important. During the last years of the Reagan presidency, he pushed some Constitutional proposals, like a taxpayer’s bill of rights, an amendment to prevent wage & price controls, etc., and Prof. Hayward cides Reagan that these proposals should have been part of his first-term agenda. When, please oh please, President (insert GOP nominee here) takes the oath in 2017, he or she needs to argue in not only policy but in Constitutional terms. Tie the myriad problems we have with the Obama Administration directly to the Constitution. It isn’t just that we disagree with him on policy; he has willfully, repeatedly finessed, obscured or ignored Constitutional norms. There is a reason why this is bad. Without limits imposed both by one’s own propriety as well as the Constitution, we have an administrative state without accountability or restraint.
We must recapture the ideas of the Constitution; otherwise all the arguments about policy are just talking past one another.
The GOP is a dead Party. Sure there are plenty of individuals in the Party worthy of getting votes and even some money for campaigns, but as a Party it is a meandering zombie stumbling around looking for a constituency to stab in the back.
Some suggest that the best way to fix this is to work within the Party to get folks in there that will re-energize it and start turning the ship of state back toward sanity and Constitutional government. I have advocated that we need to start a new party, just start leaving and convincing other to do the same who are in your area. Who knows maybe the GOP’ers who are actually worth a damn will come with us to give some sense of credibility.
But the truth is, who knows what to do to fix the problems? It’s maddening to think that all that is needed in DC to start winning is to have a leadership “grow a pair” and stop worrying about the media. I mean it truly is as easy as that, but how do we get them to do it? We have voted. We have sat at home during elections. We have given money, and then stopped. We have called, emailed, and called again. They don’t care to hear us.
This is 100 percent truth! In fact, I’d go a step a further and say that the country’s policy problems are inextricably tied to the Constitution, or more correctly, to our elected leaders having ignored the Constitution. A government limited by the law of the land cannot, in good faith or conscience, proceed on any policy without first ascertaining whether or not it has the authority to do so. Thank you for highlighting this.
I do hope that comments such as yours are printed out for Messrs. Ryan, Boehner, and the rest to read. Personally, I think a 3rd party effort is suicide and I would much rather pursue the remedies that the Framers themselves provided in our Constitution. But Republicans need to be served notice that Conservatives are not just another constituency that, like an abused spouse, keeps coming back for more. That’s the Democrat’s secret formula.
It wouldn’t do any good. They’d just ignore it.
Dave Carter: One of the reasons I joined Ricochet!
No kidding. A warm feeling comes over me whenever I see that he has posted something new. Often I can’t read the post when he first puts one up but I look forward to my evenings when I can read and savor every word and thought he puts forth.
Larry, I know a good therapist.
Congress doesn’t care…unless there is a large donation attached to it. Then it gets more than a passing glance to whatever the person with the largest donation wants.
I’ve lost a lot of respect for government representatives, mostly because no one is held accountable for their actions: both elected officials and government workers.
Dave, you are my therapist. Thanks for being with us on the Rico-journey.
I have heard over and over that a Third Party is suicide, but the thing is I haven’t heard a compelling reason to stay with the GOP, to try and make it better from within. Look at what happens to members of the Party who do try to make it better. Ted Cruz? He sucks because of the shutdown and he sounds like a used car salesman when he talks. Want to replace Boehner as Speaker? Fat chance and anyone attempting to will be punished by not having their turn on key committees. Try to primary the dinosaurs? Nice try, they will just appeal to Democrats in an open primary a la Thad Cochran. I feel like the grassroots folks have pulled all of their money, but they still have their means. What’s left to be done? Third Party seems the final act.
What left to be done, in my humble opinion, is to decentralize power away from Washington DC. At the risk of being redundant, Article V provides for precisely that remedy.
I haven’t heard much about the Article V convention lately. Any updates from anyone?
Dave: At the risk of being redundant, Article V provides for precisely that remedy.
Wikipedia: Because no Article V convention has ever been convened, there are various questions about how such a convention would function in practice. One major question is whether the scope of the convention’s subject matter could be limited
Given the media climate, I’m confused as to why conservatives feel an Article V remedy would go our way. Doesn’t this have the potential to create a constitutional basis for even more socialism or other progressive non-sense? Like say, a right to health care or a right not be offended and so on?
The amendments to be considered would be agreed to among the states prior to the convening of the proceedings. Additionally, states would retain the right to withdraw delegates that stray from the agreed amendments. Thirdly, 3/4 of states would be required to approve the amendments that are proposed by the Article V convention. The reality is that the “right” to health care, right to free false teeth, more socialism, etc., are already unfolding before our eyes as it is. Article V provides a constitutional method for the people to have some say in their own governance again. If there is another constitutional way to walk back the unconstitutional disaster that threatens to destroy civil society, I’m open to hearing it.
Craziness would probably be out because of the requirement for 3/4 of the states to ratify.
thanks Dave. Wasn’t arguing….truly trying to understand. Seems as though the 3/4 requirement would indeed prevent anything too crazy…but also anything awesome no? We’ve got at least 13 so-called blue states.
(Shouldn’t blue be Conservative and red Liberal?)
Actually, I think the electoral map used to be red for Democrats and blue for Republicans.
The media changed that because of the obvious associations.
Third parties have been successful. The Republican Party was initially a 3rd party. (Interesting aside-It was started in Wisconsin. That may explain some things.) The Bull Moose Party elected a President.
Suicide is maintaining the status quo. Something has to change and it seems easier to get a 3rd party going than getting 38 states to agree on anything. Why not try both?
Separate question: What is it about Washington, D.C. that extracts the backbones from Republican representatives? For the past several elections, Republicans have been sent to Congress with a clear message. As soon as they get there, they get amnesia. What gives?
The sending of a absurd “survey” by the GOP establishment reveals the disdain that they have for conservative voters.
Could be indigestion or you gulped too much moonshine instead of sipping…..
Dave, I don’t think the Democrat elites are in the mood to defend the Constitution anyway. I doubt if they would care what was decided by an Article V convention. The problem is not that the laws and the Constitution need to be changed or amended — it’s that the laws and the Constitution aren’t being followed. How do you enforce that? When the enforcers are not willing to do their jobs? The natural cycle of elections always brings a Democrat into the White House and/or the Congress and all the happy talk about such things go down the rat hole.
NO, we must defeat the Dems in the court of public opinion. We must counter them directly on their own turf and prevent this brand of Progressive Democrat from gaining power during the odd times. We must have a basic set of shared values.
1. I echo the “WELCOME BACK” sentiments of many.
2. Thank you for the refreshing deconstruction of one more idiotic missive from our Republican “leadership.”
3. I’ll send $100 to your favorite charity, Dave, if the e-mail from Ryan did not contain a request/plea/bleat for money. Why does anybody still part with their hard-earned $$ in response to these bogus surveys?
Jesus. That is awful.
And this is what our leadership is doing. Blankly sending out carpetbagger solicitations to a wide enough net to catch a few bucks.
I sure hope the offices are nice and comfortable for the staff at Republican Party HQ.