Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. Legacy GOP Exposed

 

Let’s take a look at the Republican Party’s last two nominees before Trump in 2016.

John McCain famously reneged on two signature issues the traditional base voters wanted, immigration reform “build the damn fence!”, McCain exclaimed when running for re-election to his Senate seat, and the repeal of Obamacare.

Much of the criticism, and even some of the outrage, was muted due to McCain’s illness (although he could have retired) but now that the official mourning period is over, and all the lamentations from Democrats have subsided, it’s time to revisit that treachery in light of the next nominee’s betrayal.

Forensic analysis of the 2008 McCain campaign suggests self-sabotage, and a cursory look back through the life of this man certainly bolsters that theory. Others speculated that McCain, never one to respect the conservative wing of the party, actually threw the fight, took a proverbial dive, and/or simply never cared enough to win.

Our 2012 nominee was ruthlessly attacked and mocked by Democrats, and every Republican defended him without fail.

Sure, his conservative record was a bit spotty (to say the least), but he was adept at explaining conservative ideas. In those days, influential Republican pundits, well-schooled in conservative thought, emphasized rational debate as the primary method to win over engaged Democrats and Independents. Of course, using the hammer/nail analogy, if you’re a scholar in conservative thought, everyone looks like a student. Weekly Standard and National Review readers were in the distinct minority, but Jennifer Rubin was widely read in the Washington Post, Mona Charen had a column in USA Today, and Ross and David graced the pages of the New York Times. The other method proposed was pandering to the millions of Hispanics for whom the party had willingly left the back door open to appease their donors.

To many, Romney was an icon of upstanding morals, a graceful decent man who would certainly fulfill the role of President-as-Prince  so many conservatives longed for. He wouldn’t get October surprised by the media. Not this guy!

Having lost the culture war, many Republicans desperately longed for a virtuous avatar in the White House to role-model America back into being decent, traditional, moral, family-oriented wholesome people. The slogan could have been, Make America(ns) Good Again.

Now in retrospect, we see yet another man who rose to the pinnacle of Republicandom going squarely against the voters and other elected Republicans. In all of Congress, every Republican representative in the House voted against impeachment, and every Republican Senator, including several historical fence-sitters (Collins, Murkowski, Alexander) voted for acquittal, except one Mitt Romney. The Senator from Utah apparently has a uniquely brilliant rationale for his vote other Republicans, including most Utahans he purports to represent, cannot see.

This legal insight is so important that Romney is willing to be the lone dissenter among every elected Republican and side with Democrats.

This is exactly what John McCain did in signaling thumbs down as a deciding vote on the signature Republican issue.

This is now the legacy of the two previous Republican presidential nominees. In the meantime, it’s fair to ask what has become of ex-Speakers Paul Ryan and John Boehner. Denny Hastert?

Obviously there was, and still is, something horribly wrong inside the Republican Party. It can’t be more obvious.

Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. On Irrelevance: Mitt Romney and NeverTrump

 

Mitt Romney has been able to make himself feel relevant again, for a fleeting moment, to the class that really matters to him. The major media network NBC, its baby sister known as MSNBC, as well as CNN have all declared him a “profile in courage”. All those who hate the existence of Donald Trump, because he has proven to actually be relevant, are allowing Romney another five minutes or so of self-delusion before he will again fade back into their midst. When tested his conservatism wasn’t that severe after all.

We all want to feel relevant to those that matter most to us. Sometimes the key to our inner peace is the honest definition of what they are. And yes, they can change depending on our rate of maturity or insight.

Yesterday, February 5, 2020, was not the first time we have seen Romney buckle when faced with being an outcast from the class where he feels the warmest. It came in front of us all in a televised debate. He allowed himself to be cowed by a biased “journalist” whose name we can barely recall from pressing the very relevant point that the Obama administration had willfully abandoned Americans to die in a foreign land.

I still waver back and forth about the relationship between the so-called modern progressive Democrat Party and the bulk of the media. The only question is which one is really pulling the wagon and which one is holding the reins. But they both belong to the same class, the political class. The media, those who “serve” throughout the administrative state, those who chase elective office and those who find it warm and safe to thoughtfully stroke their chins while being pundits to others who thoughtfully nod are all in the same class. One can have a safe membership in this class if they understand their place. Far too many of what I have come to call “professional conservatives” cherish that membership.

While some can make an honest argument about parts of Donald Trump’s persona, his real sin has been that he has challenged the relevance of these class members, and he has exposed it.

They consider Trump a class apart. And so does he.

Romney did not hesitate to court Trump for the position of Secretary of State. A simple “search” can find the picture of them having dinner together as the former candidate graciously offered to help guide the successful candidate through the forests of foreign policy, perhaps adding a needed touch of professionalism to this peasant uprising.

But his offer was rejected. And somewhere in all of this Donald Trump was “classless” enough to point out that Romney himself had lost a race that was winnable. But that would have required him tearing up his membership card.

Despite turning into a Never-Trumper after the rejection, Romney again did not hesitate to ask for the president’s endorsement in the 2018 Senate race in Utah. That is the Utah he had just recently moved to where there was an empty seat. President Trump endorsed him and was rewarded with an immediate flip by Romney back to Never-Trumper status.

Mitt’s feelings might not have been that different from those of his father from whom the younger Romney inherited his class membership card. George Romney must not have been too comfortable with having a B actor from Hollywood invading the realm. He, like most of the “establishment” GOP, undercut him whenever possible.

Reagan was relevant. There were real outcomes from his conservatism. But because of that he could never be fully accepted by the political class.

Donald Trump is relevant. Things actually change and move. And all that change and movement makes it oh-so apparent how really irrelevant the professional pundits and political class “conservatives” have been – for decades.

All that change and movement are also poison to another division of that political class, the dominate one. It is what I have come to call the Saul Alinsky members. They have had their way for some time now. The America of today is distinctly different from the America of 1900 because of them. There are times when the ball moves more slowly than others but they know that the compliant members from the lower “conservative” division will not risk their status by actually changing the entire course. This division is panicked by a serious change of direction and real outcomes. The more outcomes, the more desperate they are.

But these Alinskites are even more desperate because they now have a serious challenge from an even more overtly radical division. Their rise makes the issue of re-electing Donald Trump even more important for those intent on preserving the principles and vision of the Founding.

In the final analysis, all members of the political class have a real problem with the relevance of the agenda that the peasants were finally able to move forward by voting for an impolite outsider. That agenda had been either ignored or slow-walked by all certified (or is that certifiable?) members of the political class which pushed the grass-roots Tea Party to the corner. It is that agenda they hate most of all.

Romney’s vote was against that agenda and against the Constitution which protects it. That vote will get him a pat on the back from the Georgetown crowd and a brief clap from a media that would gladly turn on him in a second. But it is the relevance of that agenda that has to survive for the sake of that Constitution.

Contributor Post Created with Sketch. Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. This Week’s Book Review – Frozen Orbit

 

I write a weekly book review for the Daily News of Galveston County. (It is not the biggest daily newspaper in Texas, but it is the oldest.) After my review appears on Sunday, I post the previous week’s review here on Sunday.

Book Review

‘Frozen Orbit’ is science fiction at its best

By MARK LARDAS

Jan 25, 2020

“Frozen Orbit,” by Patrick Chiles, Baen Books, 2020, 336 pages, $16

The United States is sending a manned space expedition to Pluto. Not to put the first humans on Pluto but because they’re not the first humans to reach Pluto.

“Frozen Orbit,” a science fiction novel by Patrick Chiles, starts with this. The time is the very near future. Magellan, with a four-astronaut crew, is heading to the outer planets.

Magellan, a reusable nuclear-powered spacecraft, was originally to be sent to Jupiter on its first mission. Other outer planets were to be visited on subsequent flights. Then NASA officials learned the Soviet Union secretly sent a three-man expedition to Pluto in 1991, the year the Soviet Union collapsed.

The Soviets launched it secretly because their Arkangel spacecraft was powered by nuclear bombs and could trigger a nuclear war. It was kept secret because something the cosmonauts discovered proved so dangerous the Russians destroyed the return capsule as it approached Earth landing years later, long after the crew’s death.

Magellan’s mission is to find out what that discovery was.

As with his previous novel “Farside,” Chiles builds a story blending a plausible but unlikely scenario, hard science fiction and an entertaining and gripping plot. Could the Soviets have secretly launched a manned mission to Pluto? The technology of the Arkangel mission is rooted in 1960s technology, and the 1980s Soviets were paranoid and grandiose enough to attempt Chiles’ scenario.

Chiles nails the atmosphere of a NASA-run human spaceflight mission in the 21st century, the jargon of the mission controllers and astronauts, and the bureaucratic infighting characterizing today’s NASA.

He packages everything in an entertaining story, one that compels readers to keep reading to learn what comes next. The scenario and background don’t overwhelm the story. Rather they are the scaffolding on which a gripping tale is formed.

Readers experience the wonder the astronauts feel on a remarkable voyage, groan as the Earth goes crazy as the expedition progresses, and thrill to a powerful conclusion.

“Frozen Orbit” is science fiction at its best — a novel that could have fit its 1950s and 1960s silver age, updated to the current century.

Mark Lardas, an engineer, freelance writer, amateur historian, and model-maker, lives in League City. His website is marklardas.com.

Contributor Post Created with Sketch. Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. QotD: All Men Would be Tyrants

 

Do not put such unlimited power into the hands of husbands. Remember all men would be tyrants if they could.

–Abigail Adams

Abigail Adams, the wife of John Adams, was a very bright woman, farmer and investor. She was a devoted partner to her husband, and showed her strength and independence at those times that he was required to leave her alone at their home farm called Peacefield in Massachusetts.

During her lifetime, she very much supported women’s rights and spoke to her husband about them, including the right to vote. Yet in the years of his governance, only limited rights were extended to women.

Since Abigail Adams’ relationship with her husband was just as much a partnership as a marriage, her quotation is puzzling at first. But I think I know her reasons for saying it.

She was telling women in those times that they must own their own power and not give all of it to their husbands. Men, the testosterone gender, felt powerful, and the culture gave most powers to them in marriage. It wouldn’t have occurred to most of those men that the power in a marriage was meant to be shared.

Women have come a long way. And yet there are cultural leftovers from a time when women had little to say about their choices, preferences or family decisions. I think Abigail may have been prescient in her statement since, to this day, I think many women still are inclined, whether they’ll admit it or not, to defer to their husbands in some ways. At the same time, our culture has browbeaten men so badly that I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that they harbor dreams of being tyrants in their marriages.

What do you think?

 

Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. The Ongoing, Bipartisan Effort to Make Democrats Look Stupid

 

The State of the Union address has been described as kabuki theater; an elaborate, carefully orchestrated, melodramatic spectacle heavy on showmanship and light on content. President Trump is good at this, he has built a very successful career in business and entertainment by excelling in theater, in one form or another. His production of, and performance in, yesterday’s State of the Union address was aptly masterful. Nothing that happened there was an accident. The whole show was carefully, and brilliantly, planned and executed. And I think that’s fine; play to your strengths. This is one of his strengths.

My problem was the other side of the show. The behavior of Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats in attendance was absurd. What makes that absurdity particularly noteworthy is that it was just as carefully planned and executed as President Trump’s address. They had months to prepare for this. They knew exactly what President Trump was going to do. And the best they could come up with was wearing white, expressing disapproval at America’s successes, and tearing up his speech after he gave it. The Democrats were essentially filming Republican campaign ads for them, making themselves look ridiculous, clueless, and meanspirited, and this was after months of careful planning. This was exactly what they intended to do. I just don’t get it.

If I were a Democrat voter, I would really wonder about this. “Couldn’t they come up with something, anything, better than this? The Republicans are going to try to make us look stupid, petty, and vicious. Why are we helping them?”

To be fair, the Democrats really can’t campaign on results. By nearly any measure, Trump’s presidency has been a remarkable success. Domestic policy, economic policy, foreign policy, and so forth… it would be extremely difficult to portray his presidency as a failure. They could try, of course. But they don’t try. They rarely mention policies or results. Which is probably sensible.

And the Democrats don’t have any realistic alternatives. Their policies are either impractical (Medicare for all), detrimental (open borders), or completely insane (Green New Deal). They don’t have any promising candidates to run against Mr. Trump in the upcoming election. And whoever they do run will lose if s/he admits what they actually believe in. The leadership of their party is either unlikable (Chuck Schumer), criminal (Hillary Clinton), communist (Bernie Sanders), deluded (AOC), confused (Biden), or all of the above (Pelosi).

So Trump’s presidency has been an obvious positive for the United States, and they have no suggestions for how to improve on it. So what to do?

I’m not sure. But surely, not this.

Again, Trump is really good at this sort of thing. He makes his opponents look bad. It’s remarkable, really.

But the Democrats are helping him. With endless planning and coordination, they are helping him.

I just don’t get it.

Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. Member Post

 

“Let me tell you who we conservatives are: we love people. When we look out over the United States of America, when we are anywhere, when we see a group of people such as this or anywhere, we see Americans. We see human beings. We don’t see groups. We don’t see victims.” – Rush Limbaugh I […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Contributor Post Created with Sketch. Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. Throw Mitt Romney Out

 

Mitt Romney has voted with the Democrats to convict President Donald Trump on the first of their BS articles of impeachment. This comes after Romney voted for more witnesses, which the House could have called but chose not to, because he didn’t think there was enough evidence. My tolerance for squishy Republicans is pretty much limited to Susan Collins, who at least has the benefit of coming from a squishy state. But Mitt didn’t vote to convict because he’s squishy, rather because he has a personal dislike of Trump. Mitt is beneath contempt. He should be expelled from the Senate GOP conference and stripped of all his committee assignments.

The Democrats, with Mitt’s help, tried and failed to impeach Trump. The House didn’t even pretend to accuse Trump of an actual “high Crime or Misdemeanor,” as required by the Constitution. Their contempt for the Constitution is only surpassed by their contempt for Trump, which is to say their contempt for you, the voters. They didn’t impeach Trump. Trump was not impeached. His acquittal voids the impeachment. They impeached you. But Mitt was fine with that because he doesn’t like Trump.

Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. An Open Letter to Sen. Mitt Romney

 

Tucson, Arizona
February 5, 2020

Dear Sen. Romney:

Please allow me to introduce myself. I am no one of consequence. I am a 52-year-old lawyer from Tucson, Arizona, married and with four children. My oldest son is a sergeant in the Marine Reserves. I am a patriotic American and a lifelong conservative Republican.

I believe that I first became aware of you when you ran for the Republican nomination in 2008. I did not vote for you in the Arizona primary as I preferred Gov. Huckabee, but I found you to be an outstanding and honorable candidate. I recall that I preferred you over my own state’s senior Senator, John McCain. In the 2012 Arizona primary, I did not vote for you, preferring Sen. Santorum. Again, I found you to be an outstanding and honorable candidate in the primaries.

I was an enthusiastic supporter of your 2012 campaign against President Obama. I was extremely pleased with your selection of Rep. Ryan as your running mate, and I recall my excitement at your masterful performance against President Obama in the first debate. I voted for you without reservation, and I wish that you had emerged victorious. I concluded that you were a man of extraordinary ability, integrity, and moral character.

I have carefully followed the impeachment trial of President Trump. I found the case against him to be quite unconvincing, on many grounds, but I understand that there is room for disagreement on this issue among people of good faith.

I was extremely disappointed by your decision to vote to convict the President on one of the two Articles of Impeachment. I am concerned that you did not fully realize the gravity of your vote.

I watched your Senate speech stating your position. You predicted, quite accurately, that you would be attacked for voting to convict the President. This is already beginning, as I have seen your motives questioned and your character impugned.

First, I want you to know that I oppose that criticism. I believe that you honestly voted your conscience, on the basis of the evidence as you interpreted it. I disagree, but I respect your position and am convinced that you acted in good faith. I believed that you were a man of honor when I voted against you in the 2008 and 2012 primaries, and when I voted for you for President in 2012. I believe the same thing today.

Second, however, I must point out the grievous political and historic consequences of your decision. I wish that you could have found room within your conscience to abstain if you could not acquit. In the House, 195 Republican Representatives voted against impeachment, with not a single Republican vote in favor. In the Senate, all 52 of your Republican colleagues voted against conviction. If you had voted to acquit, or even abstained, the entire proceeding could have been dismissed, as I believe it should have been, as a wholly partisan gambit by an out-of-control Democratic Party.

Again, I wish to emphasize that I believe that you voted your conscience. I am concerned, however, that your conscience imposed an appalling political cost on the Republican Party and the conservative movement. I fear that your decision, by adding a tiny patina of bipartisanship to an otherwise completely partisan process, will be damaging to the beliefs and values that we share, in both the 2020 elections and in the longer history of our country.

Other than a declaration of war, I believe that impeachment and removal of a President is the most momentous decision that any Senator or Congressman can make. On this issue, your conscience is contrary to the conclusion of every one of your 247 Republican colleagues in Congress who voted on the issue. All of your friends and allies disagreed with you. You alone stood with our political opposition. Your views are manifestly outside the Republican and conservative mainstream.

I do not ask you to change your vote, even if you could. I do not ask you to apologize for doing what you believed to be right.

I do ask, respectfully, that you consider resigning your position as United States Senator.

Very truly yours,

Gerald F. Giordano, Jr.

Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. The Narcissism of Suffering

 

Mitt Romney cast a vote of “conscience” to convict President Trump of “abuse of power”. He said in doing so that

It is the last decision I wanted to take. The personal consequences, the political consequences that fall on me as a result of that are going to be extraordinary.

Yeah, it’s going to get very lonely. And again, the consequences are significant. … There has not been a morning since this process began that I slept beyond 4 a.m.

No doubt Mitt has spoken honestly. This is how he feels. His judgement is better than his colleagues. He has a closer walk with G-d.

Mitt anticipates suffering. He has experienced his own Golgotha. It is now his obligation to suffer. That is what happens to men (and women) of principle. Jesus Christ, St. Peter, Joan of Arc, Joseph Smith, Deitrich Boenhoffer, and now Mitt Romney. Or at least that is the company he envisions himself to keep.

Sanctimony is not a good look. Sanctimony in service to the corruption of the Constitution by the Democrats is even worse. Mitt does not see it that way, but then again why would he?

The Senate is not a priesthood. It is a political body created to check other political bodies. Mitt forgot that Jesus called him to be “as cunning as snakes….“ (Matthew 10:16) He eschews “cunning” as something less than himself.

America needs cunning men. As Patton said: “No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making some other poor dumb bastard die for his country.” We need warriors, not lambs, in the halls of Congress, because the progressives are in the fight and they are not fighting by the Marquis of Queensbury rules. Mitt is not a hero, he’s a chump.

But he can now revel in his suffering, deluded in his self-righteousness.

Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. Member Post

 

Maybe never-Trumpism should be in the DSM-5 as a recognizable mental disorder. Jonah Goldberg, a man of wit and erudition, a prolific, insightful author and a genuinely likable guy is jeopardizing his career (especially the perception of his new venture The Dispatch) to make the point that we should all be more critical of Donald […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Contributor Post Created with Sketch. Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. Advice to Republicans on Winning over Non-Republicans

 

So you want to be elected? Do you really? How’s about acting like it? If you must, fake it ’til you make it. Here are a few suggestions, for free:

  • Show up.
  • Listen actively and respectfully.
  • Act on what you hear.

Free is much less than Karl “The Architect” Rove charged, but we all know how his advice worked out, leaving President George W. Bush in the hands of Speaker Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Reid. Take a look at the latest State of the Union address, consider the many actions, words, and images that formed the basis of a string of accomplishments, and you might find a path to maximizing your chances in future elections, near and far.

Karl Rove’s advice was grounded in the loser belief that Republicans could only delay the tide of history. Under this view, the best Republican strategy is to do detailed analysis of each district and demographic, carefully activating just enough registered Republicans to win just enough to take and hold power at the presidential level. Mitt Romney spoke out loud what the Republican establishment believed and still believe, that demographics and the irresistible trend of social welfare programs were naturally changing the electorate into one that would vote for the party of entitlements. None of them really subscribed even to Ronald Reagan’s views, views that had broken Democrats’ grip on demographic groups characterized for a time as “Reagan Democrats.”

To be fair, even Reagan bought a big part to this gloomy forecast, as he never contended for African American votes. Go back to Justice Clarence Thomas’s autobiography, My Grandfather’s Son. He describes his disappointment in the Reagan administration squandering an opportunity. President Reagan appointed Thomas the eighth Chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Thomas quickly expressed his desire to work in community outreach, seeking the support of African Americans for Republican policies and candidates. He was met with silence. When he pushed the issue hard enough, a senior Republican Party official finally answered verbally, completely dismissing African-Americans as a group whose votes were not worth Republicans’ effort.

It took Donald J. Trump to upset that apple cart. He had stewed for decades over the disgrace of our biggest cities having both great success and lasting squalor. It was a scandal to him. So he decided to take action when he was elected. Here is what he did:

President Trump showed up. We all understand that candidate Trump targeted sections of the country that were disrespected and ignored by both major parties for years, and that these sections were largely white, skewing working-class. Yet, our standard filters may blind us to his pre-election bid for African-American support. That was a speech and a written set of promises.

“What do you have to lose?” was not going to be a big winner for a first-time candidate running as a Republican. Yet, he had actually reached out. His post-election activities included a high-profile meeting with two serious black men, Jim Brown and Ray Lewis. Jim Brown walked away from football on top, one of the all-time greats, then dedicated his life to mostly quiet service to poor inner-city communities, seeking to break the cycle of violence and poverty. President Trump met with Kim Kardashian West, a celebrity married to a massively successful black celebrity, Kanye West, about prison reform.

President Trump listened actively and respectfully. He heard Jim Brown and Ray Lewis. He listened to Kim Kardashian’s plea for the release of a black woman from a very long prison term.

President Trump acted on what he heard. He acted to revitalize inner-city communities, to improve education and training, to push employment opportunities. He took the high visibility meeting with Kim Kardashian to drive long-stalled prison reform legislation and to change sentencing policy. President Trump spent a significant portion of the status report section of the State of the Union address laying out promises already kept. Let’s start with the president’s special guests, from the White House website:

Now, review what the president said, both in reporting current status and in laying out future policy. Consider the relevant excerpts from the State of the Union Address [emphasis and comments added]:

The unemployment rate for African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Asian Americans has reached the lowest levels in history. (Applause.) African American youth unemployment has reached an all-time low. (Applause.) African American poverty has declined to the lowest rate ever recorded. (Applause.)

The unemployment rate for women reached the lowest level in almost 70 years. And, last year, women filled 72 percent of all new jobs added. (Applause.)

The veterans unemployment rate dropped to a record low. [African Americans, serve at much higher than their population percentage, especially black women.] (Applause.) The unemployment rate for disabled Americans has reached an all-time low. (Applause.)

Workers without a high school diploma have achieved the lowest unemployment rate recorded in U.S. history. [Blacks fit this category disproportionately.] (Applause.) A record number of young Americans are now employed. (Applause.)

Under the last administration, more than 10 million people were added to the food stamp rolls. Under my administration, 7 million Americans have come off food stamps, and 10 million people have been lifted off of welfare. (Applause.)

In eight years under the last administration, over 300,000 working-age people dropped out of the workforce. In just three years of my administration, 3.5 million people — working-age people — have joined the workforce. (Applause.)

Since my election, the net worth of the bottom half of wage earners has increased by 47 percent — three times faster than the increase for the top 1 percent. (Applause.) After decades of flat and falling incomes, wages are rising fast — and, wonderfully, they are rising fastest for low-income workers, who have seen a 16 percent pay increase since my election. (Applause.) This is a blue-collar boom. [This reinforces the black employment news.](Applause.)

Jobs and investments are pouring into 9,000 previously neglected neighborhoods thanks to Opportunity Zones, a plan spearheaded by Senator Tim Scott as part of our great Republican tax cuts. (Applause.) In other words, wealthy people and companies are pouring money into poor neighborhoods or areas that haven’t seen investment in many decades, creating jobs, energy, and excitement. [See decades of Trump remarks on this problem.] (Applause.) This is the first time that these deserving communities have seen anything like this. It’s all working.

Opportunity Zones are helping Americans like Army veteran Tony Rankins from Cincinnati, Ohio. After struggling with drug addiction, Tony lost his job, his house, and his family. He was homeless. But then Tony found a construction company that invests in Opportunity Zones. He is now a top tradesman, drug-free, reunited with his family, and he is here tonight. Tony, keep up the great work. Tony. (Applause.) Thank you, Tony.

Our roaring economy has, for the first time ever, given many former prisoners the ability to get a great job and a fresh start. This second chance at life is made possible because we passed landmark criminal justice reform into law. Everybody said that criminal justice reform couldn’t be done, but I got it done, and the people in this room got it done. (Applause.)

…In the Gallery tonight, we have a young gentleman. And what he wants so badly — 13 years old — Iain Lanphier. He’s an eighth grader from Arizona. Iain, please stand up.

Iain has always dreamed of going to space. He was the first in his class and among the youngest at an aviation academy. He aspires to go to the Air Force Academy, and then he has his eye on the Space Force. As Iain says, “Most people look up at space. I want to look down on the world.” (Laughter and applause.)

But sitting behind Iain tonight is his greatest hero of them all. Charles McGee was born in Cleveland, Ohio, one century ago. Charles is one of the last surviving Tuskegee Airmen — the first black fighter pilots — and he also happens to be Iain’s great-grandfather. (Applause.) Incredible story.

After more than 130 combat missions in World War Two, he came back home to a country still struggling for civil rights and went on to serve America in Korea and Vietnam. On December 7th, Charles celebrated his 100th birthday. (Applause.) A few weeks ago, I signed a bill promoting Charles McGee to Brigadier General. And earlier today, I pinned the stars on his shoulders in the Oval Office. General McGee, our nation salutes you. Thank you, sir. (Applause.)

From the pilgrims to the Founders, from the soldiers at Valley Forge to the marchers at Selma, and from President Lincoln to the Reverend Martin Luther King, Americans have always rejected limits on our children’s future.

The next step forward in building an inclusive society is making sure that every young American gets a great education and the opportunity to achieve the American Dream. Yet, for too long, countless American children have been trapped in failing government schools. To rescue these students, 18 states have created school choice in the form of Opportunity Scholarships. The programs are so popular that tens of thousands of students remain on a waiting list.

One of those students is Janiyah Davis, a fourth grader from Philadelphia. Janiyah. (Applause.) Janiyah’s mom, Stephanie, is a single parent. She would do anything to give her daughter a better future. But last year, that future was put further out of reach when Pennsylvania’s governor vetoed legislation to expand school choice to 50,000 children.

Janiyah and Stephanie are in the Gallery. Stephanie, thank you so much for being here with your beautiful daughter. Thank you very much. (Applause.)

But, Janiyah, I have some good news for you, because I am pleased to inform you that your long wait is over. I can proudly announce tonight that an Opportunity Scholarship has become available, it’s going to you, and you will soon be heading to the school of your choice. (Applause.)

Now I call on Congress to give one million American children the same opportunity Janiyah has just received. Pass the Education Freedom Scholarships and Opportunities Act — because no parent should be forced to send their child to a failing government school. (Applause.)

Every young person should have a safe and secure environment in which to learn and to grow. For this reason, our magnificent First Lady has launched the BE BEST initiative to advance a safe, healthy, supportive, and drug-free life for the next generation — online, in school, and in our communities. Thank you, Melania, for your extraordinary love and profound care for America’s children. Thank you very much. (Applause.)

…My budget also contains an exciting vision for our nation’s high schools. Tonight, I ask Congress to support our students and back my plan to offer vocational and technical education in every single high school in America. (Applause.)

To expand equal opportunity, I am also proud that we achieved record and permanent funding for our nation’s historically black colleges and universities. (Applause.)

By showing up, listening, and acting, President Trump has become the first Republican president since at least World War II to actively contend for the votes of African Americans. This will not result in a majority of black voters turning to Republicans, yet it may well move the needle enough to change electoral politics, stripping Democrats of certainty and forcing Republicans, including political operatives, to get serious about campaigning beyond their comfort zone. The same holds true for other groups who turned out to vote for President Trump, when they had not voted Republican since Reagan, if ever.

It all starts with universally applicable basics:

  • Show up.
  • Listen actively and respectfully.
  • Act on what you hear.