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.
The Counterattack Begins
Friday morning saw something rare on the floor of the United States Senate. It was badly needed for the sake of the American people and — like most good deeds — will probably not go unpunished if the GOP leadership, leftist media, and Beltway insiders. In fact, the reprisals began almost immediately.
Sen. Ted Cruz took the floor to call out not just Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, but the whole system that’s used to insulate Congress from the will of the people. In this specific case, it dealt with the effort to end the Export/Import Bank, a relic of the New Deal which uses billions of public dollars to ensure financing for such shoestring operations as Boeing and General Electric. It’s corporate welfare and crony capitalism at its worst and should have died a well-deserved death long ago. It is kept alive by both parties as a source of taxpayer-funded power.
But the essence of Cruz’s words were about the abandonment of conservative principles by the leadership of the GOP. This specific case might have been about Mitch McConnell lying to Republican senators as a deal to keep the EX/IM Bank alive and the legislative trick used to do it, but the thrust of the charge is about betrayal of the voters who have spoken loud and clear on a number of issues.
Cruz laid out the exact details of each step in the McConnell deception with the skill of a nation college debate champion or a precise litigator who had argued nine cases before the Supreme Court and won them all (which he just happens to be). Those who rely on the network or cable news will not get the detail of his exacting and condemning, but they are clear.
Only days later, the House of Representatives saw another act of political courage to address the same lack of principled will by the established GOP elite. This time Rep. Mark Meadows from the 11th District of North Carolina introduced a resolution to declare the position of Speaker of the House to be vacant, creating an opportunity to replace John Boehner.
On the floor of the House, Meadows outlined a point-by-point list of the Boehner failures of both leadership and purpose. The GOP leadership in both houses has funded the Obama agenda while undermining the constitutional power of the Congress. Nothing has been done to contain the spending that assures our children of bankrupt future. Immigration enforcement, repeal of ObamaCare, control of nation spending, and national security comprised the basis for two huge election cycles for the GOP which gave them control of both houses.
What both Cruz and Meadows has done is publicly “out” the elite of the party for their lack of real opposition to the Obama agenda, the very basis for their being in Congress to begin with is a lie.
Regardless of your personal choice for any office, the thrust of what has to happen within the Republican Party is to leap back to the Reagan concept of “bold colors.” We do not need to consider it. We must leap toward it and embrace it. Too many of these get-along types have already taken us down the road too far for anything but a principled, all-out effort to save our children from what the Founders feared.
The media knives are already out for Cruz and Meadows. That includes a great deal of what is deemed “conservative” writers who are — for the most part — too loyal to and comfortable with the Beltway of doing things. Cruz and Meadows will find slim support in either house.
A great deal of what establishment of either party does is to force compliance and silence with party money and bullying in regard to the perks of the Congress, which they control. Both McConnell and Boehner have threatened and bullied with committee appointment and access to the legislative process. Even those who are — in spirit — agreed with Cruz and Meadows know that to publicly stand with them is to lose in regard to access to power and party money.
But an important step to restore the vision of self-government and making it work again is to publicly acknowledge that the present the leadership of the GOP stands in our way. They actively oppose conservatives while voicing their causes. This is little different from the left who have done so much to destroy that vision and practice while proclaiming the very values they destroy.
Does anyone doubt that if the Senate had 60 members like Ted Cruz and Mike Lee and House had 270 Mark Meadows that we would have fought a much better fight the last six years and actually have done some of the things promised?
The answer for our children’s future is not with a political party which has long ago committed itself more to social utopianism than to self-government. But the answer is not the Republican Party either. The answer is conservatism.
The answer is returning to a vision of responsible self-government protecting individual rights. Self-government requires citizens, not those who see elective office as a lifetime career path. It is citizens who must be the force that drives the machine.
Both Cruz and Meadows took a step to bring the individual citizen back into the process. They will be pounded by the media, their fellow Republicans who will try and dismiss them publicly, and the elites of the Beltway. Most of those who agree with them will not strand with them publicly. It is the citizens’ role to let their voice be sent as loud and consistently as possible to the members of both houses that both these men have the support and appreciation of the “base” of the nation.
I will again state that this look behind the veil at the shabby way business is done should be a clear call for an Article Five approach to remove more power from the D.C. elites and place more of the emphasis on the people themselves. These two will be feeling the “heat” today and for a long time forward. What they have done is a “game-changer” for their careers in the GOP. They will pay a political price for it from the establishment. If they gain from the people themselves will have to be seen. But the real factor will be what we do now.
The retaliation that Cruz and Meadows will receive from the establishment and the media is predicable. But the most meaningful has to come from us. It has to start now.
Published in Politics
I was with you until you mentioned Mr. Trump. That’s a deal-breaker for me.
It’s not just posturing–or it needn’t be–conservative ideas need all the press they can get & any show of seriousness or dedication, even when the attempts fail. & the GOP needs to show itself, & not just in DC, & show its electorate, what these ideas are, that they are being written down in bills, & that think-tank talk is being popularized.
Good example, Sam.
The GOP is doing nothing to stop the leftward march. Social Security is not allowed under the Constitution. Congress does not have the expressed right to do it. Period. And it will never go away because people like getting money they did not earn.
I live here, and I have watched us lose on every item other than guns.
How minorities are treated is better. You know who should get the credit for that? Republicans.
Frank Soto:
They will eventually vote to defund planned parenthood, and the senate will fail as the dems will successfully filibuster. Even if they didn’t, Obama would veto.
You are pretending the Boehner is the obstruction to Planned Parenthood being defunded, when the obstacle is the democrats.
********************
Fine. Let the Democrats support the chop and crush shops. Let Obama veto it. I think making your political opponent defend an abhorrent practice in the long run is going to hurt the opponent.
I think the Congress should get busy sending Obama a bunch of legislation to veto. It will help the public see the difference between the parties.
Mist:
devil’s advocate mode = on >
The Ex/Im Bank has existed since 1934.
If allowing it to continue in 2015 is evidence that the Republican Party has abandoned conservative values, then what about the other fifteen times it was reauthorized, in 1947, 1951, 1957, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1974, 1978, 1983, 1986, 1992, 1997, 2002, 2006, and 2012?
< devil’s advocate mode = off >
**************************
We’re broke. We can’t afford it anymore.
I don’t understand this. They don’t have to vote to defund Planned Parenthood. They just have to not vote to fund it. The Dems are going to filibuster a $1.XX trillion budget bill because it doesn’t include $500 million for PP? I think not. Obama will veto it for the same reason? No.
You are assuming a zero base budget (starts at zero and all spending must be authorized). The problem is that, some time ago, congress enacted previous baseline budgeting. In this system, the spending levels are automatically set at last year’s base + x% increase (to keep up with inflation, of course). Under the rules in place, even just keeping spending at the exact same dollar amount as last year is technically a “cut,” and requires a vote to defund.
We are so doomed.
Here’s the thing you are missing–and what my point, at the least, has been about the GOP Establishment–why not pass the bill out of the House and send it to the Senate. Force the Democrats to make a vote blocking it and then campaign on the idea that they are more than comfortable funneling money to an organization that is harvesting the body parts of dead babies. Or make Obama veto it and campaign on the idea that the Democrat Party is being led by people who are willing to fund the harvesting of baby parts. Do you not recall the “war on women” or “Romney killed my wife by taking my health care away?” Is this not the way they fight us? Why is it so much of a chore to get you guys to see this is how we need to start fighting them?
You cannot begin to win the battle of ideas until you engage in the battle of rhetoric.
Yeah, sure, rhetoric is important, but it’s not everything. If it were, why would Dems ever lose? They’re so much better at it than the GOP!
Then, too, the notion that what’s sauce for the Dem goose is going to be sauce for the GOP gander, too, might be something you want to believe, but I would require argument before I believe it… It’s perfectly possible that the two parties are seen differently by the electorate & are allowed different things…
But if it’s a matter of abortion: The GOP is just incompetent. The people are far closer to the GOP position than the Dem position.
Titus – “you were with me until I mentioned Trump – that was a deal breaker?” Don’t look for a deal – just get out an eraser and remove the T – then you get Rump (some might describe Trump this way anyway), the part of the anatomy that we all better get off of and start pushing back before we have nothing left of our freedom and independence – I just meant Trump is getting a lot of attention on the immigration issue and there is nothing wrong with that – when it gets time to debate, and the horse race becomes narrower, I don’t think he will be a consideration.
When our president mentions he could win a 3rd term numerous times, I am more concerned about that ego and we still have a ways to go with him, where he continues with the “change” before leaving – it’s scary, and we spend too much time discussing what to do and not enough time “doing something”. So I hope collectively we are inspired by what these candidates are saying to get some backbone and courage back – the DC establishment is a disaster and we are on our own.
The third term business I only heard once on his African trip? I agree the point he should have made is, the law is there for a good reason & that Americans obey constitutional amendments. I did not read his full statement, maybe I’m not doing him justice: I got the sense he was saying, he’d rather keep being president. That’s ok; Reagan did not like that amendment either–nor do I–but talking about that abroad seems unseemly…
I think conservatives do not understand the damaged Mr. Trump is doing to their cause & to them themselves. It’s not just that we’re fighting each other now–I say this aside from practical matters–I’m not American, so this is not my fight…–now we’re way too obsessed with revenge. Of course, he might also turn into Perot 2.0 (my worst rhyme bar none, but you kind of had it coming with your cute joke…)
I agree we need to be manly about politics & we need someone who takes our anger seriously. But I do not want someone who is angrier than we are, not to say insane. & I think we’re losing sight of who we’re looking for–this guy is making that worse, too. We need someone–I think!–like Mr. Perry, but who has learned from the voters that he can earn their support & rely on it if he takes their anger seriously & looks for solutions.
Titus – Trump is inspiring to many who feel they are not heard by Washington. He is also oddly popular with Hispanics, as was demonstrated when he was invited to Laredo by the mayor. Supposedly, there are many Latino in the audiences where he speaks – can you explain that? He is also from what I have heard, the talk on college campuses. Any candidate that can get a college student’s ears must be doing something – there is no question is is pompous, arrogant, egotistical, and would probably admit it. But putting issues out in front where people have to talk about them i.e. Democrats, is not hurting the Republican party. I am not defending him, nor would I vote for him – I prefer someone who speaks softly, but directly and carries a big stick. I just think it is refreshing to a lot of people to have someone who doesn’t give a damn who they offend if it will inspire a change for the better in this country.
You said you were not American so this is not your fight, so what is important to you?
1. I do not have explanations about his popularity with Latinos–I’m as interested as you are, but I do not believe I know much or anything about Latino voters, even before you get to looking at the different ethnicities, states, &c.
2. The last guy who got students interested in politics was Mr. Obama. How you can possibly not remember that when you’re writing this? I get this sense continuously when people talk Mr. Trump up: The past is forgotten, reputations & commitments are forgotten for the sake of fever. Won’t everyone involved feel really foolish if this blows over? How about if Mrs. Clinton ends up the winner?
3. This is politics, not math–it does matter who says what. The speaker does matter: Because he has a past by which you judge him. Or else we’re all liberals getting excited about Mr. Obama knowing nothing or caring nothing about his real life!
4. Americans who know enough to care about politics are interested in elections & big political changes in other countries–but they have no dog in the fight. To speak briefly, I believe civilization depends on America & I believe conservatives have a slightly better chance of keeping things going than liberals. I do not despair, but am unsatisfied these days with what I see on offer in American politics. It is a curious situation, to share in the worries of people neither know nor care you exist. Well, I can deal with that.
Titus – Those are good points. I’m wondering where your vantage point is – where is your home? I am interested in your perspective as someone who is not American. Americans do care you exist because we care period, but also because it is sometimes the people looking in who can tell us what we are missing.
I hear callers on radio talk shows from all different countries and walks of life that really surprise me. Example: A liberal, gay man and his partner called in outraged at the immigration issue because the partner, a biologist, came to this country from South America the legal way, paid $1700 in fees and paperwork, waited out the process and followed the rule of law – they love America and think it is going in a disastrous direction. I heard several callers from England to Eastern Europe hollering “disaster” for adopting socialized medicine. People who have been there have much to offer.
Your comment “what politicians say matters because you judge them by their past.” Both Clintons have very dicey pasts, yet people have amnesia and think they can do no wrong. Obama had dicey characters in his past which formed his political views it seems. http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/388560/why-hillarys-alinsky-letters-matter-stanley-kurtz
You say “civilization depends on America” Wow! – why? Interesting opinion below why a free republic works…..
http://www.forbes.com/sites/daviddavenport/2015/07/29/elites-and-courts-push-america-into-a-post-christian-era/
One more thing Titus – another caller on a talk show called in that surprised me. It was a gay woman defending the Christian baker and she was very strong in her language. She said “Isn’t this the very thing we (gays) have been fighting against for so long, being persecuted for our beliefs?” She asked how can we now do the same to others, and even going so far with hate as to shut down these people’s livelihood and causing them tremendous hardship, financially, emotionally? She “gets it”. She said when you (the government or even individual citizens) silence one, you inadvertently “silence all”.
This is how the Nazis started – she sees it – this is someone going through life with eyes open. I believe people like Ted Cruz go through life with eyes open. He and other conservative candidates are compassionate towards immigrants, but the rule of law is the rule of law. I believe that is the strength of our Republic, and the opposite (the neglect of the rule of law) has greatly weakened it.
I didn’t want to be forward… See my profile: I’m writing from Bucharest, Romania. That’s SW of the Ukraine, to give you an updated political reference. I don’t flatter myself that my views do or should make a difference, but I like quarreling about politics anyway…
Yeah, there is a lot to worry about with immigration & socialized medicine–pretty much everything liberals are actually legislating. I share these people’s worries. But it seems like because of our complaints & recent defeats, we’ve come up with a story, as conservatives, of betrayal that requires vengeance. For better or worse, our reasonable hopes about politics depend on the GOP. But they’re traitors & have to suffer the worst we can visit upon them. & the institutions of the state, too. & maybe everyone who did not vote GOP–or maybe having voted GOP is not enough to spare people. Instead, our anger should lead us to consensus policies.
Of course: Nobody’s going to do anything about this vengeance business, because we’re not evil: But it seems like that’s how we think. They did it to us–now let’s do it to them. Unlovely…
As for Mr. Obama: Exactly, let’s don’t be the liberals of ’08!
As for the Clintons: Maybe their electorate is careless–we certainly have not made the difference for them.
Thanks for the article. As for my brief remark: Civilization requires defense of civilization–there America is alone, however imperfect.
Trust me: Americans need to stop talking about Nazism as a domestic matter: It is alien.
1. Americans do not know German politics; or Italian or Romanian… (Americans in 1941 knew tyranny–rather better than in 2015!–& knew to fight, at least knew to listen to a man of the grandeur of FDR.)
2. This is the way we convince ourselves we need civil war.
3. Like students in the 60’s used to call everyone a fascist because they were the enemy, now conservatives do it–it seems, in part, because we’ve been called fascists for so long. When I was in college, I got this often enough to figure that the problem was not me or some small provincial thing: America is exporting this worldwide.
4. It’s an abstraction. It tells everyone implicitly: Let’s not do anything or understand anything concretely. A slogan will do.
5. It’s damned near impious. A good 400,000 Americans died in wars against these fascist tyrannies. That was seriously about whether civilization would survive. We need to keep the perspective! It was not an American war or an American problem or American politics, but FDR knew it had to be done anyway. It was necessity at its ugliest. America prevailed without turning into tyranny. Conservatives should be talking about whether Americans have improved America since 1945–in what ways things are better, in what ways worse. Not bring up the ghost of Nazism whenever we’re angry!
Titus, You sit from a good vantage point indeed. I am of Ukrainian descent as well as Polish. My grandparents on both sides came over on the boat. I used to work a few years ago with a very nice guy from Romania. He talked a lot of about life there, read the Romania News on line and would translate, and ferociously defended the US – he has been able to buy a home, make decent money, even though he has a piece of land there and his mom is there, he plans to stay. We had some great discussions and he even told me about the special red dye for Easter eggs. He goes to the Orthodox church here.
The deaths from WWII tyrannies was double for your country. We bring up past history because unless we remember, we’re doomed to repeat it, as they say. I highly recommend Claire Berlinski’s book Menace in Europe (available on Amazon) if you have not read it. Best wishes to you and thank you for your political views.
Thanks for the kind words. Yes, Romanians, at least the educated classes, tend to have a far better opinion about America than most European places I’ve seen or have heard of–well, you can check with the Romanian folk on Ricochet.
I do have Miss Berlinski’s books–but I am always glad to have them recommended: It is alike to meeting a friend…
I rather fear Europe is moving past menace. There is a dullness that conceals much & portends nothing good. Managing decline is the best on offer; I am uncertain as to how many believe it-
I would like to hear Claire’s opinion on your last paragraph above, or any journalist- and maybe a story forthcoming.