It’s Time for Trump to Take On Mitch McConnell

This week we have one of those rare occasions when government priorities and government funding match exactly. Fox News reports, “Loose change left at airports may be used to help fund border operations.”

RJ Matson; CQ Roll Call

If you need additional proof Washington, Inc. doesn’t give a damn about stopping and reversing illegal immigration this should do it.

Maybe Trump will order the Pentagon to go through the seats looking for nickels after Nancy Pelosi commandeers a military jet to take her home on weekends.

Pelosi, though isn’t the problem. She’s doing what she promised her voters. The House isn’t the problem. Even under the ‘leadership’ of Paul RINO immigration bills were passed and forwarded to the Senate.

The problem is the Senate. Even when Republicans controlled the presidency and both houses nothing was done. People are tired of an immigration policy that only works against citizens and the Chamber of Commerce conservatives who refuse to change it.

Already Sen. Thom Tillis (R–Carolina del Norte) has a primary opponent named Garland Tucker III who is running TV commercials. Sen. Susan Collins (R–Intermittantly) has a primary opponent, as does Sen. Lindsey Graham (R–Weathervane). All fit Tucker Carlson’s description of our ruling class, “decadent and narcissistic.”

These primary opponents are a start, because without a change in the Senate, retaking the House and re–electing Trump will be as meaningless for border enforcement as it was in 2016.

The only way for Trump to send a message that he demands cooperation from the Senate is if he personally defeats his main roadblock: Curator of the Senate Mitch McConnell.

McConnell has treated Trump and his agenda with thinly disguised disdain since the election. McConnell’s claim to fame is mere longevity in office as if he were a turtle only to be valued by how long he has been in existence.

McConnell is completely undisturbed by the single most important issue facing the nation, the approximately 30 million illegal aliens already living inside our borders.

Instead of bucking the cheap labor lobby that supports the world’s first taxpayer–subsidized invasion, McConnell proudly introduces trivial legislation to raise the minimum age to buy tobacco to 21.

“Youth vaping is a public health crisis,” McConnell announces while the real crisis is bussing the table in the restaurant where he eats.

As long as McConnell is ‘leading’ the Senate, Trump’s immigration agenda and reducing the size of government is dead. (Although Mitch and Jared – that negotiating fool – might be able to work something out on keeping Mitch’s wife as part of the cabinet during the second term, too.)

The Curator is gearing up for his 2020 re–election by trumpeting his two biggest accomplishments: Acting as the Judicial Human Resources Dept. for the White House and increasing the national debt.

Instead of tweeting about whatever has penetrated his thin skin this morning, President Trump should be lining up and funding a primary challenger for McConnell. Mitch’s approval rating among Kentucky voters is what pollsters term “underwater.” Fifty–six percent disapprove of job his performance while only 33 percent approve.

But wait until they find out about his get tough policy on Juul!

Trump on the other hand is vastly more popular. His approval rating is 61 percent compared to a disapproval of 35 percent. Even in 2016 Trump was more popular. He carried Kentucky by 30 points, while McConnell two years before won by only 16.

Challenging McConnell in the primary isn’t exactly a suicide mission. His last challenger, Matt Bevin, is now the state’s governor.

If Trump recruited a primary challenger and then put his charisma and his cash behind the challenger I believe the Mitch the Turtle would be soup. More important, it would send a message to the rest of the housebroken conservatives in the Senate that there are real costs to opposing the president’s agenda.

And so what if the challenger loses? Could McConnell pass any less of Trump’s immigration and border security legislation? How much more passive aggression does the Curator contain?

Either Trump changes the composition of the Senate or his administration will have accomplished less than the Bush Interregnum. The only difference being Trump’s was noisier.

Advertisements

Why Voters Like Trump in Spite of His Failures

Donald Trump is remarkably cheerful for a man sitting in the smoking ruins of his presidency. He promised to get tough with China and end our trade imbalance. This week the Department of Commerce reports our trade deficit is $621 billion, much higher than the level that existed during the Obama administration.

Trump’s second summit with North Korean nuclear maven Kim Jong–un was less successful than the first inconclusive gab–fest.

Worst of all, after frittering away two years when Republicans controlled the Senate and the House, Trump’s promise to build a wall and end illegal immigration is in shambles. Illegals currently pour across the border at a rate that will more than triple that of the Obama regime. Trump’s call for a “Deportation Force” may have vanished beneath the swamp, but he’s building a “Space Force” that will apprehend any illegals who achieve low earth orbit.

The budget bill he signed after shutting down the government is worse than the bill be refused to sign before the shutdown. Trump’s ‘victory’ bill has a tiny $1.3 billion dollars for his wall and that pittance is limited to constructing 55 miles of “bollard fencing”. That will make it harder for gas–guzzling SUVs to cross the border, but won’t stop any of the zapato traffic.

Trump hasn’t even managed to scrounge up a ballpoint pen to sign the executive order banning anchor babies he promised way back in November of 2018.

Administration apologists claim Trump’s judicial appointments, the tax cut and regulatory reform are more than enough reason to re–elect him, but that’s like praising a super hero for simply owning a cape.

Any of the 2016 GOP presidential aspirants would have done the same and that includes chronic fatigue sufferer Jeb Bush.

What separated Trump from the rest was his hardline stance on illegal immigration. One might make a case that the tipping point for immigration occurred when businesses began ordering callers to “Press 1 for English”, but Trump promised to reverse the tide.

His repeated immigration failures will make it very hard for this ‘Deplorable’ to vote for him in 2020, but I may prove to be the exception.

Trump may win in spite of his repeated failures.

A politician who doesn’t have a genuine personal connection with his voting base lives or dies politically according to his performance in office. Bush the Elder and Nixon before him are prime examples. Trump has that invaluable personal connection and it supersedes his lack of accomplishment on his signature issue.

The iconic image of his recent speech at CPAC proves my point. After a brief introduction Trump enters from stage right and before he walks to the podium he turns and embraces the Stars and Stripes.

The picture went worldwide in an instant. It will be the mental image most voters retain from his endless two plus hours speech. You look at him holding Old Glory and you know and he knows that he’s mugging. But it’s inspired, patriotic mugging.

No media consultant or speech preparation expert suggested he do it. The gesture was a spur–of–the–moment impulse that instantly connected with every member of his base and resonated with anyone who still loves the USA.

Can you imagine any Democrat doing likewise? That party has an almost biblical view of the flag. As the hymn ‘The Old Rugged Cross’ says in another context, the left views our flag as “the emblem of suffering and shame.”

Hillary might have grabbed a flagpole to keep from falling down, but not out of any affection for the flag or what it represents.

Trumps gesture bonds with the average patriotic American. Beato, the Texas flavor of the month, thinks being quirky equals a personal connection with the electorate. Skateboarding into an appearance or livestreaming your colonoscopy may appeal to immature trend surfers in the media, but it’s not presidential. And it’s not lasting.

Spontaneous patriotic symbolism is not something one associates with the humorless apparatchiks that compose the Democrat presidential field.

Trump is impulsive, funny and he loves our country. The combination may be enough to earn him four more years.

Donald Trump Suffers Separation Anxiety

When journalist Lenore Skenazy first introduced the concept of “free range parenting” I knew it was only a matter of time before the idea would careen out of control. Free range parenting is a return to the 1960’s when kids were allowed to enjoy frightening activities like walking alone to the store, playing unsupervised in the park and remaining unwatched and unmonitored for hours at a time.

Free range is a particularly risky choice for citizens who live in a state run by leftist nannies, as Danielle and Alexander Meitiv discovered to their dismay. Their children were spotted walking home from a park located less than a mile from home.

Sean Delonas, CagleCartoons.com

The two were seized by local police and held until their parents could be investigated by Maryland Child Protective Services functionaries. The resulting ‘investigation’ found the Meitivs guilty of neglect.

US children don’t even have to be moving under their own power for parents to have them ‘separated’ by the authorities. If mom runs into 7/11 on a hot day to buy a Powerball ticket, and leaves junior in the car with the windows down, she can be arrested for neglect even though junior is close enough to hit with a wadded–up Powerball ticket.

And the ticket isn’t the only loser. Mom will be separated from junior until she grovels enough for CPS to be satisfied.

That’s not the way Extreme Free Range parenting is practiced in Latin America.

Rango libre parents send their unaccompanied kids thousands of miles north. In the States parents can get in trouble for letting their kids chase the ice cream man. But it’s “no hay problema” when the kids are chasing Uncle Sam.

The Opposition Media ignores the fact that citizen parents are held to a higher standard than illegal parents. For that matter, Walmart shoplifters are held to a higher standard. The first action the police take after arresting the parent is to separate the children.

None of the OpMedia, leftist politicians or spineless Republicans ever ask the obvious question: What kind of parent lets their child travel hundreds of miles with strangers? What parent brings the kids along when they break the law? And how is society served by leaving children with abusive or criminally stupid parents?

That’s not rango libre parenting, it’s felony parenting.

Approximately 12,000 children are being held on our southern border. Only 2,000 of those children are with people claiming to be their parents, the other 10,000 somehow arrived by themselves.

The left claims the border situation is different. While the Walmart shopper is just another petty thief, the Hispaniard is a “refugee” seeking asylum. Just as patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel, asylum is the last refuge of the illegal.

My ICE source tells me most of the asylum claims only come after the “refugee” is informed he will be sent back to his country. That’s the point in the interview when the illegal slaps his knee and says, “¡Ay, caramba! I forgot to tell you about the death squad!”

And these are death squads with strange priorities. What is it about the landscaping community that has marked so many of them for pruning? Back during the Reagan administration (home of the one–time–only amnesty for illegals) Central American death squads targeted the elite leadership of a country. Politicians, journalists, educators, lawyers and the wealthy were all in the crosshairs.

But these days it appears instead of concentrating on movers and shakers, modern death squads are after mowers and rakers.

Another fact that works to undermine the credibility of “refugees” and their separated children is geography. If I were a battered woman or a lawn care specialist targeted for extinction, I would apply for asylum at the nearest US consulate. There are four located between the southern border of Mexico and the border of Texas.

Why wait days to apply if you’re in real danger? That’s easy. They aren’t in danger and if an applicant is turned down in the interior of Mexico he’s on his own. But if he can make it to the US border Uncle Sam will leave the light on and take care of food and lodging while the process grinds to a conclusion.

Now President Trump has single–handedly undermined his stringent enforcement policy by cratering and allowing illegals to keep their “children.” For a while Latin America saw there were consequences to violating US immigration law. That’s gone now. The US is once again provides a soft landing for foreigners characterized by recklessness, avarice and contempt for the law.

Even worse, Trump has damaged his own immigration credibility with his base. Now the left knows if they broadcast enough pictures of crying kids, Trump will once again be an immigration tigre de papel.

Finally! Democrats Support Cutting Off the Money

It hasn’t made the national news (except for this column) but for a brief time it looked like Democrats around our nation’s capital were going to accept the fact the federal government can withhold funds from states that don’t cooperate with the feds.

And this wasn’t a mere threat to turn off the spigot; funds for Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia have been cut off.

metro-cartoonYet no Democrats are vowing to fight to the last ditch to get their money. No state attorneys general are rushing to the courthouse hoping to find a federal judge willing to write legislation from the bench. No legal defense funds have been established. No lawyers have been hired. No posters have been printed. And no protestors wielding superglue and PVC pipe have blockaded entrances to buildings.

Why George Ramos wasn’t even thrown out of a news conference for asking impertinent questions.

If you’re thinking now that Trump has vanquished the Sanctuary City movement, it’s time to move on to Obamacare repeal, I have bad news.

Now I’ve got you. You’re wondering what bad news? The question is easily answered by clicking on the link below and reading the entire column on Newsmax.com:

http://www.newsmax.com/MichaelShannon/city-federal-funding-sanctuary/2017/03/01/id/776296/

 

 

Amnesty: The Next GOP Leadership Betrayal

House GOP leaders prepare to negotiate amnesty with Democrats

House GOP leaders prepare to negotiate amnesty with Democrats

House Republican leadership is preparing to betray the base. Again. To illustrate the magnitude of the sellout I was going to use a hypothetical analogy with Democrats and their base. Initially I was going to posit that Sen. Tim Kaine (D–Secular) had changed his mind about abortion.

For years Kaine has said that although he’s personally opposed to abortion, he is not willing to impose his beliefs on a ‘woman’s right to choose.’ Essentially confessing that his Catholic faith is not strong enough to get in the way of his political ambitions. (In his last campaign he became even more weaselly, saying he didn’t want to stand in the way of a woman exercising her “constitutional choices,” unless the choice involved a handgun.)

In my hypothetical Kaine would announce he had decided that what the Catholic Church teaches and the Bible says is the truth and he will no longer support any abortion unless it is to save the life of the mother. Kaine would also declare that he will no longer vote for any taxpayer dollars to be given to Planned Parenthood since both his beliefs and opinion polls show Americans don’t think tax money should pay for or help support abortion facilities.

It’s a great analogy but it has one problem: No one, but no one would believe it. The Democrat base worships at the altar of abortion. The analogy is too fantastic for even temporary suspension of disbelief. Brent Bozell, chairman of ForAmerica, put it nicely this week: “So what’s the difference between Boehner and Pelosi and McConnell and Reid? Answer: The Democratic leadership honors its promises. Republican leaders have abandoned theirs.”

This House GOP leadership betrayal is passage of an amnesty bill, probably before the November election. Erosion in GOP leadership backbones started with Paul Ryan (R–Cheese Brains) when he began talking about a path to citizenship for illegals. Speaker John Boehner (R–Tanning Bed) went back and forth on “immigration reform.” And now House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R–Sellout) says the leadership supports an amnesty bill for 12 million illegals that includes tighter border enforcement as a sop to conservatives.

This means Boehner and his merry men pay far more attention to agitation from people who shouldn’t be in the country than they do to conservative citizens. And unprincipled businessmen who want a steady supply of imported serfs to compete with and lower the wages of US citizens are far more influential than mere voters.

National Republicans are forever pursuing the ‘independent voter’ at the expense of the base. GOP campaigns downplay ‘social issues’ in an effort to appeal to the uncommitted vote. Democrats on the other hand solidify their base first and then move to the independents. You think that might be why they win elections?

Besides the betrayal of the base, which is bad enough, what political goal do these masterminds in House leadership (to borrow an adjective from Mark Levin) think they are going to accomplish?

Boehner has picked an issue that was a failure the last time Republicans supported it. Ronald Reagan signed a one–time–only–amnesty–that–will­–also–seal–the–border–tighter–than–a–teenage–miniskirt.

The results of that amnesty were threefold:

  1. The bill gave citizenship to people who came and stayed illegally
  2. It produced millions of new votes for Democrats
  3. Legalized an influx of low–skill labor for employers that served to reduce wage rates for          citizens
  4. It attracted another 12 million illegals who came after and who want their amnesty now.

Does Boehner expect amnesty to make inroads into the Hispanic vote? There is evidence in California that has a direct bearing, not that he will pay any attention. Hispanics now make up the largest ethic group in the state as a result of Reagan’s amnesty and the subsequent Democrat failure to seal the border. Today there is not one Republican statewide official in office. California is a GOP desert as Hispanics proved singularly ungrateful.

Does Boehner think amnesty will improve the party’s image among independents? Today’s Gallup poll lists a total of 3 percent of the populace ranking immigration “reform” as a top priority and I’m guessing all their names began with Jesus.

Does Boehner think amnesty will mean more contributions from big business? That’s possible and it may last a cycle or two, but once the amnestied voters gravitate to the Democrats, Republicans will start losing. And the Business Roundtable doesn’t back or finance losers for long.

Amnesty is a payoff to big business, Democrat interest groups and tribal voters. There is no compelling Republican rationale for passage either morally or politically.

Immigration polling, which has evidently frightened the GOP leadership, is dishonest. Respondents are offered choices that simply don’t exist here in reality land, as Ann Coulter pointed out. For instance the Public Religion Research Institute proclaims, “This support for a path to citizenship has remained unchanged from earlier this year, when in both March and August 2013 an identical number (63%) supported a path to citizenship for immigrants currently living in the United States illegally.”

Yet their poll offers three choices that are false or too general to be useful: “become citizens provided they meet certain requirements,” “become permanent legal residents but not citizens” or “Identify and deport them.”

“Certain requirements” is not defined and therefore is useless in determining public policy. Poll respondents can interpret “certain requirements” in a number of ways ranging from “learn to speak English like Tom Brokaw & pay back taxes and a fine” to “stand in a long line for an autographed photo of Obama.”

“Legal residents but not citizens” is an outcome that creates a permanent helot class that won’t survive the first Democrat Congress. And no sane conservative has ever advocated mass deportation. We believe they got here under their own power and they can leave the same way.

I have yet to see a poll that asks a question that offers a conservative choice. For instance: Do you support a step–by–step approach to the immigration problem that begins by removing the economic incentive for illegal immigration thru a law that makes it a criminal offense for employers to hire illegal aliens?

I’ll even agree to change “illegal aliens” to “undocumented workers” if someone will just ask the dang question. But it won’t happen because the support it will receive doesn’t fit the MSM story line of overwhelming support for “immigration reform.”

If illegals can’t work and they can’t collect welfare and rebates from the IRS then the invasion will begin to reverse. Presto the “immigration problem” solves itself! Sure the bill won’t pass the current Senate, but so what? It offers a conservative alternative to the amnesty now crowd and it preserves the rule of law, but that pales in comparison to Boehner’s dreams of campaign contributions from the Business Roundtable.

Before elected officials — Republicans again — got cold feet in Prince William County, illegals were fleeing after an anti–illegal enforcement act was passed. The county saved millions as they fled to nearby “sanctuary” cities and states. The same can happen in a nation that takes its own immigration laws seriously.

Unfortunately that is not this nation and it’s not this Republican Party.

White House Has ‘Peculiar’ Justification for Illegal Immigration

John C Calhoun, the newest White House advisor on immigration.

John C Calhoun, the newest White House advisor on immigration.

Someone in the White House is channeling John C. Calhoun.

Stephen Dinan, of the Washington Times, writes the White House has issued a report that claims, “…the strength and continuity of rural America is contingent on common–sense immigration reform.” In other words, the availability of your boutique tomatoes depends on amnesty for illegals.

The Obama Administration believes rural America, much like the antebellum South, has a ‘peculiar institution’ the rest of the nation must respect. In this instance the 50 to 60 percent of the agricultural workforce that’s in the country illegally.

In the 20–page report Calhoun, whoops…the authors, claim farmers are having trouble hiring workers and as a result are cutting back on planting or “are moving operations abroad as a result of the labor shortage.”

That must require some doing. Are they boxing up the plantation and shipping it — dirt and all — to foreign shores? What happens to the hole left behind in Mississippi? Do administration staffers really think produce is grown in the back room of Whole Foods, adjacent to the customer bathroom?

The justification for tolerating widespread illegality among sodbusters goes like this, “Under the current system, rural America is losing opportunity and harvests due to lack of a stable workforce. Coupled with a decline in native-born rural populations, the strength and continuity of rural America is contingent on common-sense immigration reform that improves job opportunity, provides local governments with the tools they need to succeed, and increases economic growth.”

The entire argument sounds suspiciously like Calhoun’s justification for slavery. He contended, according to Wikipedia, “Southern whites, outnumbered in the United States by voters of the more densely-populated Northern states, were one such minority deserving special protection in the legislature.”

The only real difference is how the workforce arrived to participate in the vital rural economy. In Calhoun’s day slaves arrived under duress, in Obama’s day the helots volunteer. Either way the rest of the country is supposed to tolerate and approve of what Democrats desire.

Both systems undermine our domestic labor market, penalize low–income Americans and reward those with no respect for the rule of law, which in this instance includes both employers and employees.

A simple application of market forces would solve the farmer’s labor problem. Right now there’s little demand among U.S. citizens for agriculture jobs at wages that are depressed by illegal immigration. Close the border while raising wages and watch the wonder of the marketplace at work.

Or invest in mechanization and replace the human factor with machines. Farmers made the switch from horses to tractors. Does the administration think automobile manufacturers would have invested in robotics if they had access to illiterate high school dropouts willing to work for minimum wage and no benefits?

The question answers itself. America would have been entertained by footage of workers fleeing Chipotle and General Motors when INS vans pulled into the parking lot. At least until the Obama re–election campaign began.

Agriculture lobbyists, dripping with concern for harried shoppers, contend that raising wages will mean produce prices go up. That’s a risk I’m willing to take. Besides, if gutless Republican Congressmen would force the federal government cut back on the double subsidy agriculture policy currently in place — farmers are guaranteed a minimum price and get paid by Uncle Sam, while consumers are stuck with higher prices at the grocery store — the reduction in prices caused by letting the market work without government interference, could well balance the increase in costs due to paying a market wage.

Strangely, the White House report issues a vague threat to begin “immigration enforcement actions that could tighten the supply of farm labor.” That appears to be a reference to deportation; something the Obama Administration essentially ended last summer. Threatening to do something Republicans have been demanding for months is hardly a credible threat and will do nothing to put pressure on the House to pass an amnesty bill.

Unfortunately for the administration, this warning is old, discredited news. Alabama passed a bill cracking down on illegal “rural” workers in 2011 and Democrats used many of the same scare stories. Yet Alabama produce did not vanish from the shelves. In fact, Gina Loudon reported, “Immediately after the bill (HB 56) was passed, the unemployment rate began to drop. Since the bill passed last legislative session, in some counties, unemployment has dropped dramatically. For example, unemployment has gone from 10 percent to 6.9 percent in the former illegal immigrant hotbed of Marshall County, Alabama.”

But it was so hard on farmers. According to a Reuter’s story, Jerry Spencer estimates 90 percent of the illegals left the county (note to Members of Congress) and he started recruiting the unemployed to replace the vanished amigos. “There’s a fair amount of reticence on the part of farmers to take the city folk and unemployed workers,” Spencer said. “They really hate letting go of their amigos because they’re so problem-free. They don’t squabble.”

Yeah, there’s nothing like a field full of docile illegals to make one feel like a real patron.

Before the Civil War Democrats and their politicians exploited slaves so they could live in the manner to which they had grown accustomed. Modern Democrat politicians, and the businesses they enable, are willing to exploit illegal immigrants for the same reason. Both sets of Democrats are more than happy to dump the resulting social costs on the rest of the country.

The question is how much longer are we going to put up with it?