Bipartisanship Is Another Word for Ignoring the Base

Here’s how the Opposition Media’s beloved “bipartisan cooperation” works among the residents of Incumbentstan here in Washington, DC. Republicans join leftists to proudly pass a “prison reform” bill that is of absolutely no importance to the conservative base that keeps Washington country club conservatives in office.

But all passage of “prison reform” really proves is Curator of the Senate Mitch McConnell and retiring Boy Ryan are more than willing to quickly pass a bill that speeds the process of putting illegals in prison back out on the street; but they won’t spend a dime to prevent illegals currently out of the country from finding a way back in.

Nate Beeler, The Columbus Dispatch, OH

In fact, McConnell is having trouble keeping his utter disdain for the base that elects him in check. His latest disingenuous move is a continuing spending resolution that pushes wall funding into February when Nancy Pelosi will be running the House.

Building the wall, deporting illegals and citizen–first immigration reform were the issues that elected President Trump. That should have been the primary focus of his administration from the beginning.

Trump did face a unique situation. First, he didn’t expect to win, which is something he and Hillary had in common. He had to scramble to staff his administration. It was chaos. The only difference between the product of Trump’s HR department and Uber’s was Trumps staffers didn’t assault women. Oh, wait. Well at least not as many as Uber drivers.

He was closest advisors were Democrats, daughter Ivanka and son–in–law Jared. Neither of whom would have voted for any other Republican candidate running on Dad’s issues. Staff slots went to closet Never–Trumpers who opposed his immigration plans and careerists dragging their feet because they were afraid Trump’s policies would kill future job prospects with housebroken conservatives and big donors after they left the administration.

I also suspect Trump was naïve. He probably assumed after he achieved an unprecedented upset what passes for Republican leadership would be eager to fall in line behind policies that obviously resonated with the electorate. The bumptious outsider and the wily insiders would pass important legislation while the opposition was stunned and before the investigations began.

Trump should have realized it was him against the world when prissy McConnell contemptuously dismissed Trump’s first budget with a wave of his dainty hand.

Trump should’ve started publically making the case for his signature legislation then and there. It should have contained all funding for the wall; nationwide, retroactive EVerify for all jobs; criminal sanctions for employers who hire illegals and a tax on over–the–border remittances to fund a stepped–up program of deportations.

First step would’ve been passage in the House, followed by internment in the Senate. But Trump could’ve been patient. Then when the next spending bill came up he could inform McConnell that he won’t sign any budget bill unless his immigration reform is passed.

Curator McConnell’s dirty secret is it doesn’t really take 60 votes to pass legislation in the Senate. And he doesn’t need any Democrats either. All the Curator must do is return to the filibuster rules that were in effect until 1975. Then a simple majority is enough.

Yes, there would’ve been wailing and gnashing of teeth, but so what? It would have been worth the turmoil and potential loss of the House in the 2018 mid–terms to get that bill passed. Now we’ve lost the House and have nothing to show for it.

Instead Trump did nothing. He tweeted while the border burned. Last week he said he would embrace a Trump Shutdown if he didn’t get just the wall. Earlier this week he said he’d sign the spending bill without the wall. As this is written, Trump says he’s not going to sign the bill.

So, who knows? My bet is Trump will botch his last chance for a wall.

Illegal immigration matters to some of us. My wife’s best friend was killed by a drunk driving illegal. After we moved to Virginia another drunk driving illegal killed a friend we made here. My daughter has had two cars totaled by illegals. I was rear–ended by an anchor baby. (By the way, where is Trump’s executive order ending the anchor baby scam?) We certainly aren’t alone in this. We’re just ignored.

We read that when Ivanka gets teary–eyed, her father often responds forcefully. I’m hoping in the next few days one of the First Daughter’s friends will have a bad experience with an illegal. Maybe he’ll take that parking spot at the mall the friend was waiting for or he’ll prune the wrong tree. Something that really engages upper Manhattan emotions.

If only Ivanka chokes up again, maybe her father will stop choking on the wall.

Advertisements

Le’Veon Bell’s Fight Against Time and Economics

Before the NFL season began Steeler running back Le’Veon Bell told ESPN, “I want to play. …But I’ve got to take this stand. Knowing my worth and knowing I can tear a ligament or get surgery at any time, I knew I couldn’t play 16 games with 400 or more touches.”

Bell’s “stand” meant refusing to play for the Steelers unless they improved on their offer of $14.5 million for one season. That would’ve made Bell the highest–paid RB in the league and works out to $36,250.00 each time he touches the football, fumbles included.

Neither Bell nor the Steelers would budge, so the only football he played this season was Madden 2018.

Kevin B. Blackistone, racial grievance columnist for the Washington Post who appears on the sports page, believes future players will grateful for Bell’s obstinacy, “Bell opted to challenge the league to let a club pay him his worth rather than as an expendable, flesh-and-blood cog under the franchise tag again …Bell decided to …claim ownership of his destiny rather than allow the NFL or the franchise for which he plays to dictate it for him.”

What’s overlooked in the discussion of the tension between what the players want and what the owners say they can afford is the damage past financial decisions have done to the bond between football and the fans.

In the beginning the team that drafted a player had his rights forever and they paid him just enough to keep him from quitting the game and getting a real job. As recently as the 70’s NFL players had off–season jobs to support their families. It took a series of strikes for the players to gain collective bargaining rights and a share of league revenues.

The players portion share of revenue formed the salary cap that limits what each team can pay its roster. This is crucial to league balance and prevents richer teams from stockpiling all the best players at the expense of teams in smaller markets with smaller fan bases.

The downside is veteran players become expendable after only five years. As SB Nation points out, “…the main effect of a hard salary cap was the release of higher paid veteran players in favor of younger players still playing out their cheaper rookie contracts.”

That’s a fine personnel philosophy if you’re running a bank or a car lot. No customer in his right mind forms an emotional attachment to bankers or car dealers. It’s different with sports teams. A soul–less, numbers–first philosophy make keep the accountants happy, but it’s a slap in the face to fans who have an attachment to players they may have met or with whom they’ve vicariously shared great moments in football.

It produces a two–tiered NFL. Well–paid veteran nomads roaming from team to team for higher contracts before Father Time finally tackles them and newbies marking time until they can leave to chase a bigger contract.

That’s why only an optimist buys a team jersey with a current player’s name on it. The expensive jersey will have years of useful life remaining when the player is long gone. Smart fans only buy a jersey with a Hall of Fame player’s name on the back, because those guys aren’t going anywhere.

No father enjoys explaining to his son why the Packer he idolizes is no longer a Packer, but is now playing for a rival. Why fight traffic, pay exorbitant ticket “convenience fees” and be frisked entering the stadium to watch players who are just passin’ through?

Blackistone is angry the league treats players like “expendable, flesh–and–blood cogs.” He’s correct. This Rule of the Accountant undermines the connection between fans and players who are the team. (Only vendors cheer for owners and management.)

A better policy would be to have a player’s impact on the salary cap be significantly reduced the longer he stays with a team. Currently, the only players who have ten–year careers with one team are quarterbacks and kickers. The other 20 roster spots are revolving doors.

Player careers are brief. Owner careers are perpetual. Players deserve to maximize earnings during their moment in the sun and owners need profit to pay the players, the light bill and lobby politicians for more taxpayer stadium subsidies.

The people taken for granted in this dynamic are the fans and it is damaging intangible bonds.

Yahoo finance reported the NFL lost thousands of fans last season who were fed up over politics, had no interest in the teams or some other reason. A wise league would try to rebuild the bond between teams and fans. A good way to start would be making it easier for players to finish their career with one team and one set of fans.

CNN’s Jim Accoster Elbows Trump Out of the Way

Evidently in the Trump administration, Kryptonite is spelled ‘injunction.’

President Trump, our Hitler–in–Waiting, proposes to exercise his superhuman powers by beginning a new program. Before the sweat–shops can begin producing the first black uniform the entire enterprise is brought to a screeching halt by some no–name district judge brandishing a piece of paper called an injuction.

This judge, specializing in improv law, guarantees himself a lucrative spot on the law school speaking tour circuit by ordering the president to stop whatever constitutionally authorized action he has taken that angers the left.

President Trump complains about this constantly. Their nuisance–rulings are designed solely to delay implementation of policies the voters ratified in the last presidential election. The lawyers and the judges doing know the legal reasoning is fantastical, but it doesn’t matter. Fantastic or not, Trump is tied up in lawsuits.

That’s why it’s so frustrating when Trump is given the perfect case to strike back at these pettifogging leftist jurists. He could prove to the public how out–of–control the judiciary is. Instead his administration craters.

The headline in the Daily Mail summed up his ignominious defeat: “White House backs down in CNN fight.”

I’m sure you know the story. CNN propagandist and egomaniac Jim Acosta had his press pass to the White House pulled after his latest egregious display of contempt and disrespect for the President of the United States.

Removing his press pass didn’t mean Acosta could no longer report on Trump, it just meant he couldn’t do it from inside the White House.

CNN (the Creating the News Network) went to court claiming that barring Accoster infringed on his 1st and 5th Amendment rights. District Court Judge Timothy J. Kelly, a Trump appointee, issued a temporary injunction ordering the return of Accoster’s pass.

This proves Trump isn’t batting 1,000 on his judicial appointees. Kelly’s ruling is a case of hysterical, ludicrous overreach. He contends once the administration opened the White House to reporters a here–to–fore unknown geography clause was invoked and Acosta has property rights.

The judge then said the revocation was a violation of the 5th Amendment because no one could tell the judge “who made the decision.”

Instead of fighting, the White House gave up.

This bogus lawsuit is the perfect separation–of–powers test case. The judicial branch is ordering the executive branch to conduct its affairs according to the preferences of judiciary, a power it does not possess under the Constitution.

This petty judicial bureaucrat doesn’t have the authority to determine who’s admitted to the White House, just as he doesn’t have the authority to determine seating arrangements at state dinners or the guest list for the White House Christmas party. Admittance is a strictly internal affair at the sole discretion of the president. Banning Accoster for being a jerk does not limit his ability to continue slandering the president, it only limits his proximity.

If this property–right–by–admission exists in the White House, Judge Kelly should check the courthouse. I’ve been in courtrooms where the audience isn’t allowed to read, much less disrupt the proceedings. A reporter demonstrating disrespect for a judge would be escorted forcibly from the courtroom by a bailiff and possibly jailed for contempt of court.

If no press pass violates the 1st Amendment, then banning courtroom TV cameras is equally a violation.

As for the “due process” violation of the 5th Amendment, it’s not the judge’s business how the White House arrives at internal decisions. The Executive Branch is co–equal branch to the Judicial. It doesn’t answer to their internal procedural demands. The Trump administration agreeing to do so sets a dangerous precedent.

The correct response to this pathetic injunction would be a news conference where Trump played a video of Accoster’s greatest hits. Afterward the president would explain entrance to the White House is a privilege and that behavior is intolerable. Next, Trump would explain the Constitution’s separation of powers and how the Executive Branch is not at the beck and call of every ego in black robes.

The President has sole discretion as to who enters the White House and how the decision is arrived at is an internal matter not subject to judicial review. That’s why the press pass won’t be reissued.

The fact the Trump administration did not exploit this obvious example of judicial overreach indicates to me that the president listens to too many lawyers whose thinking is hidebound by bureaucracy and process.

It also indicates the Chinese aren’t as smart as we thought. Instead of fighting a trade war with Trump, they could have stopped his trade policy in its tracks had they only gone to court.