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

What Nixon and Trump Have in Common

It’s hard to believe Richard Nixon, the consummate, disciplined insider, and Donald Trump, the shambolic, impulsive outsider, have anything in common, but it’s true. Both men shared the belief that winning a national election should convey political power.

Acting on the belief a national majority gave him a popular mandate to make changes in Washington cost Nixon his presidency. Just mentioning draining the swamp in passing is in the process of costing Trump his.

Nixon’s “third–rate burglary” in the Watergate complex provided the bureaucracy and its allies in the Democrat Congress the pretext to drive him from office.

Forty–three years later the administrative state had grown so powerful that it required no cooperation from Trump to supply a crime. His investigation is based on speculation and conjecture supplied by political enemies and it began shortly after the swearing in ceremony.

Both investigations are designed to nullify an election by using the power of the administrative state to taint and drive from office a president who wants to change the way Washington operates.

As Henry Kissinger wrote, “Nixon provoked a revolution…For reasons unrelated to the issues and unforeseeable by the people who voted for what Nixon represented, this choice was now being annulled.”

As in usual in these matters, Alexis de Tocqueville — the crystal ball of the 19thCentury — warned of the danger of the administrative state. He wrote that centralized administration is what despotism will look like in democratic times.

During his second term Nixon planned to confront the permanent bureaucracy. In a November radio address he said, “If this kind of [bureaucratic] growth were projected indefinitely in the future, the result would be catastrophic. We would have an America top heavy with bureaucratic meddling, weighted down by big government, suffocated by taxes, robbed of its soul.”

Trump in his scattershot manner has spoken of eliminating entire cabinet agencies and moving the surviving headquarters out of Washington. That sentiment was one reason John Marini — author of “Unmasking the Administrative State: The Crisis of American Politics in the Twenty-First Century” — had confidence in Trump, “his perspective was that of a citizen’s and a common–sense view of what politics should be.”

Both faced daunting obstacles. Nixon had a Congress controlled entirely by the Democrat Party. Trump had what Nixon earlier termed a “timid [Republican] party” controlled by Curator of the Senate Mitch McConnell. And both presidents were “resisted by the combined and determined inertia of Congress and the bureaucracy.”

Marini writes, “Although Woodward and Bernstein were lauded as investigative reporters they served merely as a conduit by which the bureaucracy [the FBI and other leakers] could undermine the authority of an elected officeholder.”

Disgraced FBI agent Andrew McCabe and his cabal of administrative state functionaries demonstrated contempt for the democratic process and “the instinct for self–preservation at all costs” when they began spying on Trump before the election and concocted “Russia Collusion” after.

All without a single pang of conscience, because the administrative state is convinced of its own rectitude.

The confrontation that drove Nixon from office and is paralyzing Trump is essentially a test of the consent of the governed. Our nation was founded on that principle. An unaccountable, unelected administrative state that makes its own law flies in the face of consent of the governed, because the governed have no way to challenge the bureaucracy.

Marini observes “Congress has stopped legislating and started delegating.” Congress is an “oversight body” given to theatrical displays instead of demanding accountability from the administrative state.

The only national referendum where voters have a say on the direction of the federal government is the presidential election. Michael Anton said at the event the people who elected Nixon and Trump “have a sentimental attachment to the Constitution” that swamp residents find quaint. Marini concurs and adds, “the people that elected Trump think elections should make a difference.”

It’s the administrative state’s central mission to prove those voters wrong. Currently, the bureaucrats are winning.

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.

Four Weeks from Oblivion, GOP Congress Slumbers On

The session of Congress that occurs after the just–completed election and the swearing in of the new Congress in January is called a lame duck session. It will last four weeks.

RJ Matson CQ Roll Call

These are the last weeks Republicans will be in control of both houses of Congress and the White House. This was supposed to be a golden age of conservative accomplishment. In reality, it was two more years of the Can’t–Do Caucus telling voters what they promised on the campaign trail at home, can’t be done in DC.

Next year the charade will be over, because the left will control the House.

This brief session will constitute another Gohmert Moment, which I’ve named after Louie Gohmert, the genuine Texas conservative congressman.

When Gohmert first entered Congress he and other freshmen were excited about the prospect of passing truly conservative legislation. That was before he met the timid, country club conservatives who comprise House leadership.

Gohmert explained at his first GOP House conference the leadership’s caretaker conservatives were worried. They acknowledged the campaign has promised big things. But in Washington there was “a small chance” Republicans might lose the majority in two years. To play it safe, leadership wanted to do small things, win the election and keep the majority.

Then, leadership promised it would be time to do big things.

Gohmert disagreed, “If there’s any chance we might lose, then this is the time to do the big stuff.” Gohmert was ignored. He’s been ignored ever since.

Rachel Bovard, of the Conservative Partnership Institute, reminds us of what could be done if our placeholder GOP believed in the issues on which it campaigned.

Bovard suggests this last GOP Congress, “take a cue from the Democrats’ playbook in 2010. Like present-day Republicans, House Democrats were then about to lose their majority. Republicans, like now, were expanding their majority in the Senate. But in the face of waning power, Democrats did not fold. They fought.”

The left focused on Cultural Marxism and one foreign policy initiative. The Cultural Marxist hot buttons appealed solely to left’s base — a concept as foreign to GOP leadership as quantum physics is to a cat. The goal was repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” so homosexuals in the military could go ahead and flaunt it, and pass the DREAM Act, an amnesty for younger illegal aliens. The foreign policy initiative was the NEW START nuclear arms treaty. Sure to rev up any surviving ‘Ban the Bomb’ marchers from the 60’s.

Bovard explains, “Democrats intentionally chose to aggressively move forward on controversial legislation on which they had previously punted — likely driven by the fact that they were not sure when they’d again control both houses of Congress and the White House.”

The left was successful on two out of three. Only the DREAM Act failed.

If our conservatives–in–name–only Republicans followed that successful template, top legislative priorities during this lame duck session would be terminating the funding of the organ harvesters at Planned Parenthood; pulling the plug on PBS, NPR, NEA and NEH; fully funding President Trump’s border wall, and reforming immigration law by ending the anchor baby and asylum scams.

Then conservatives would miss them when they were gone.

William Galston, a former advisor to Bill Clinton, said Democrats were successful because, “They were prepared to pull out all the stops.”

Unfortunately, today’s conservative “stop” is Curator of the Senate Mitch McConnell, who follows an extra–Constitutional policy of requiring 60 votes to pass legislation in the Senate, while a simple majority works fine in the House.

And what are the curator’s priorities for the lame duck session? The Hill reports Mitch wants to pass a criminal justice “reform” bill, a pork–laden Agriculture bill, a foreign aid measure and ratify judicial nominations — a routine task in any other Congress but an activity for which this pack of seat–warmers expects fulsome praise.

Do you see any correlation between what the conservative base wants passed and what the housebroken conservatives intend to pass? It’s no wonder many conservatives were guided to the polls by muscle memory rather than enthusiasm.

Evidently lame duck is a dish that can only be prepared by leftist chefs.

As these dissemblers stagger toward the finish line of this Congress, I feel much like Oliver Cromwell did in 1653 when he dismissed the equally wretched Long Parliament:

“It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place, which you have dishonored by your contempt of all virtue, …[you are] enemies to all good government; ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would like Esau sell your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas betray your God for a few pieces of money.

“In the name of God, go!”

Mitch McConnell: How to Win Without Doing Anything

The best summary of the 2018 midterm elections came from National Review, that hotbed of Never Trumpism. David French wrote, “Republicans solidified their theoretical advantages in the [Senate].”

“Theoretical” being the operative word. With Curator of the Senate Mitch McConnell in charge, any conservative changes in the status quo were always only “theoretical.” That’s why the big winner of this election was McConnell.

Rick McKee, The Augusta Chronicle, GA

As this is written the left has picked up 29 House seats and lost 3 seats in the Senate. That’s not a “blue wave”. It’s more like the splash on your shoes after a lobbyist’s SUV drives by during a DC rainstorm, while you wait for a bus.

In Clinton’s first midterm he lost 54 House seats and 8 Senate seats and that was before he went all Harvey Weinstein on the help.

Nobel Prize–winning Obama, beloved by all, lost 63 House seats and 6 Senate seats in 2010. As Ed Rogers pointed out, the left’s victory didn’t even exploit the alleged national loathing for Trump. “Democrats have underperformed in comparison with the historical markers and general expectations of a midterm cycle. The president’s party loses 37 seats in the House on average in midterm elections when his approval is below 50 percent — but Democrats aren’t projected to pick up nearly that many seats.”

Some of these numbers could change by the time you read this because Democrats have dispatched vote–finding teams for the undecided races. These grave robbers and dumpster divers somehow manage to unearth previously hidden leftist votes in much the same way the French find truffles.

Mitch McConnell, Architect of Inertia, wins because even the most rabid members of the base won’t expect him to pass conservative legislation when the House is held by Antifa.

Had Republicans held the House, the additional three new GOP senators would have been an unmitigated disaster for McConnell. The pressure to finally pass legislation conservatives have been promised during the campaign, but somehow gets lost on the trip back to DC, would have been overwhelming.

A relieved McConnell will spend the next two years cheerfully functioning as the Human Resources office for the White House judicial nomination team. After each confirmation, Mitch will claim the approved judge is a victory for Senate conservatives.

The truth is every judge is a victory for the man McConnell secretly despises: Donald Trump. His victory in 2016 upset all the curator’s careful plans. With Hillary in the White House, Mitch could be his natural, passive–aggressive self. Trump ended the ‘if we only controlled the White House’ excuse Senate country club conservatives used to justify their legislative coma.

Even after Trump made the McConnell family a two–income household again — his wife is Sec. of Transportation — Mitch showed his gratitude by refusing to support Trump’s budget, Trump’s wall and Trump’s effort to shrink the federal government. McConnell is responsible for 90 percent of the failure to pass Trump’s legislative agenda.

Now McConnell is mumbling about working with Democrats. This means he’s ready to reopen the Pork Palace under the guise of “bipartisanship”, because the only activity the two tribes in Incumbentstan can agree upon is spending money.

McConnell will enjoy the extra three–vote pad on judicial confirmation votes even though he did nothing to produce the unprecedented Senate victories.

He avoided the immigration issue. He didn’t force Democrats to cast votes that would not play well at home. McConnell did almost nothing aside from his HR duties.

The president, on the other hand, was a campaigning machine. As Laura Hollis pointed out, “[Trump] was instrumental in the GOP victories in Florida, Indiana, Texas, Ohio, Tennessee, Missouri and North Dakota.”

Trump won running his issues and not those of the housebroken conservatives hiding in the Swamp. Frank Cannon and Paul Dupont summed it up nicely, “The GOP [McConnell and the ‘leadership’] cannot afford to settle for a “truce” strategy on social issues, surrendering to Democrats the power to define the cultural narrative. This repeatedly has proven to be electoral suicide. If Republicans are to capitalize on the Democrats’ growing weakness, they must campaign unapologetically as conservatives, as President Trump did in 2016, or else resign themselves to eventual defeat.”

Ed Rogers has sage advice for the curator, “Voters had a chance to repudiate Trump and they did not. Much of the commentariat has said this year’s elections are about who we are as a country and what America is all about. Well, a lot of America seems to be about supporting Trump.”

If McConnell — who has a lower approval rating in Kentucky than Trump — can’t grasp that fact he needs to get out of the way.

Trump Says “Adios” to Birthright Citizenship

Ending birthright citizenship, better known as dropping the anchor baby, is the most significant illegal immigration reform the President Trump has announced. With a single executive order, he unplugs a beacon that attracts scammers from the world over. He also attacks a visible manifestation of the Foreigners First mindset that has infected the State Department, and the rest of the federal bureaucracy, since the 60s.

Gary McCoy, Shiloh, IL

For those late to the discussion, birthright citizenship is the GPS theory of national allegiance. If your pregnant wife was sitting in the stands at Lambeau Field and she got so excited she gave birth, the resulting baby would not be entitled to season tickets for the rest of his life. But if your wife, Consuela, was an illegal alien in a sanctuary city, who gave birth in a sanctuary maternity ward, your new child would be a Yankee Doodle Dandy. An instant US citizen with all the welfare rights that come with the birth certificate.

Trump will end that.

As is customary in these situations the left and its propaganda arm the Opposition Media instantly sprang to the defense of this devaluing of US citizenship. Even worse, the OpMedia had no trouble recruiting reflexive anti–Trumpers like Paul Ryan (R–INO). Ryan evidently liberated by his banishment to private life, stabbed Trump in the back using his favorite tactic of preemptive surrender. He claims anchor babies aweigh will require an amendment to the Constitution.

The left’s defense of birthright citizenship relies much on sentiment and sad stories and is light on facts. The talking points read like Shotgun Joe Biden wrote the memo. Here are the main defenses of this nonsensical geography theory of national obligation:

  1. The plain language of the 14th Amendment guarantees birthright citizenship.
  2. Birthright citizenship has been a part of the US since the beginning.
  3. The Supreme Court has ruled illegals are entitled to birthright citizenship.
  4. Throwing anchor babies overboard required amending the Constitution.

Each point is factually incorrect. Here is the plain language of the 14th Amendment: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” The key phrase is “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” The author of the citizenship amendment, Sen. Jacob Howard, who ought to know what he meant, explained, “This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the government of the United States, but will include every other class of person.”

This was tested in the case of Elk v. Wilkins where an Indian sued, contending he had birthright citizenship. Elk lost. The court ruled, “No one can become a citizen of a nation without its consent.” It took passage of a law in 1924 to grant birthright citizenship to American Indians.

The Supreme Court has never addressed the question of birthright citizenship for illegals. The case defenders cite, Wong Kim Ark, concerned two Chinese diplomats who were in the country legally and had a child. In their wisdom, the judges used subjectship under English common law, which the Founders had specifically rejected in the Declaration of Independence, to arrive at a decision that would be overturned today. The case said nothing about aliens in the country illegally.

Mark Levin said, “Not until the 1960’s [was] the Constitution …interpreted to convey birthright citizenship on the children of illegal aliens. And not due to any congressional statute or court ruling, but decisions by various departments and agencies of the federal bureaucracy.”

The federal bureaucracy is controlled by Trump, intermittently at least, so he can tell the executive branch to close the border maternity ward. An amendment isn’t necessary.

Trump should make the order retroactive to the first day of the administration. Certainly, the left will file a lawsuit and fall into a trap of their own making. This is the defining case that can overturn Wong and restore the original intent to the 14th Amendment and not the Hallmark Card legal philosophy that the government has followed for over 50 years. That’s a victory that will last long after the Trump administration.

Finally, Paul Ryan’s back–stabbing response when asked about Trump’s most important policy reinforces my advice to conservatives. Go on strike when you vote in congressional races. Conservatives should vote for every Republican candidate except Representatives. On that line write “On Strike.” Without the conservative base, always taken for granted, Republicans can’t win. In 2020, after the country club conservatives who survive have learned their lesson, resume voting as normal.

Conservatives will never see change in Congress until they change who’s in Congress. Going on strike is the place to start.

Nov. 6th Is the Day Conservatives Go On Strike

Republican incumbents are getting nervous as election day approaches. And for good reason. The political party of the left, Democrats, has energized its base while the country club conservatives in the GOP have euthanized theirs.

Sean Delonas, CagleCartoons.com

Evidently the strategy is to rely on muscle memory to get conservatives to the polls, because the so–called accomplishments certainly won’t.

Confirming Supreme Court justices who are rumored to be conservatives isn’t a Senate accomplishment, it’s Trump’s accomplishment. Curator of the Senate Mitch McConnell had nothing to do with Trump’s victory. McConnell was one of those incumbent nose–holders who viewed Trump as something of an embarrassment when compared to DC’s refined caretaker conservatives.

Which is also McConnell’s attitude toward the conservative base.

Without Trump there are no justices for McConnell — head of Senate human resources — to rubber stamp. The other ‘accomplishment’ is the tax cut. Tax cuts are not why Trump was elected. All the GOP candidates claimed to back a tax cut.

Trump won because he pledged to stop illegal immigration and reform what passes for legal immigration.

Here’s the Republican Congress’ record on issues that matter to conservatives:

No funding for the wall.

No expedited deportation of illegals

No requirement for E–verify

No English as official language.

No end to funding Planned Parenthood

No repeal of Obamacare

No cuts in federal spending

Here’s what Sen. Chuck Schumer (D–Antifa) says about the GOP Congress, “If you would’ve told me this year that we’d be standing here celebrating the passage of an omnibus bill, with no poison pill riders, at higher [spending] levels …than even the president requested, I wouldn’t have believed it. Almost anything the Republican leadership in the Senate achieved this year, they achieved on Democratic terms. … Democrats had an amazingly good year.”

The housebroken conservatives’ record these past two years is so abysmal that even the very polite Christians at First Things magazine have noticed. Phillip Jeffery quotes from a series of interviews, “We’re tired of being treated like our issues are of secondary concern.” If an issue ‘can’t be solved with a new tax rate,’ the establishment seems not to care.” “By her account, the electoral power of the pro-life movement does not match the level of attention it attracts from conservative leaders.”

That’s putting it mildly. And now comes a last gasp attempt to save their jobs that proves just how stupid the cocktail conservatives in Congress think we are. Paul RINO plans to introduce a bill that fully funds construction of the wall, contains Kate’s Law and targets sanctuary cities.

The best part is they plan to vote on it AFTER the mid–term elections. Leadership says this makes the election a “referendum on immigration policy.” I call it a cynical ploy to save their candy behinds. These clowns have been in office almost two years. Only the specter of looming defeat motivates them to act on Trump’s number one agenda item.

If they were serious about illegals, the House would pass a hardline bill today and send it to the Senate.

McConnell would stop dusting the furniture long enough to bring the bill up for a vote. Then he brandishes his dust mop and forces Schumer to conduct a traditional filibuster if Chuckie wants to block passage. Voters would see the left is prepared to stop government to protect illegal alien criminals at the expense of taxpayers.

That would make the mid–terms a genuine referendum on immigration. Under the gutless, craven ‘leadership’ we now have in Congress this will never happen.

It’s high time the conservative base did something that will attract “attention …from conservative leaders.” That means going on strike on election day. Conservatives are at least 30 percent of the GOP base. They can’t win without us.

When you go to the polls, or vote absentee, vote for whatever wretch is on the Republican line for Senate. For the House — unless your representative is a member of the Freedom Caucus — cast a write–in ballot for “On Strike.”

Yes, this means some acceptable GOP incumbents will be defeated, but their loss will send an unmistakable message to the RINOs in the Senate: Conservatives expect action now!

Nothing will change in Washington until we change the composition of the Republicans in Congress and put the fear of God into the barnacles that manage to hold on to their seats. Losing the House in the short run will be a victory in the long run.

In 2020 conservative voters can return and vote for new conservatives and chastened conservatives of convenience. We can take back the House and continue to control the Senate. But only in 2020. In 2018 Republicans don’t deserve your vote. They deserve your contempt.

Time for Conservatives to Go On Strike

Retiring Rep. Paul Ryan (R–NeverTrump) has revealed what he hopes will be his lasting political legacy. Ryan intends to be the last Republican Speaker of the House. Ever.

And Ryan working hard to achieve his goal. The immigration bills he supports will do everything Donald Trump promised he wouldn’t do when he ran for president. Grant amnesty to DACA invaders and continue to dump low–wage visa workers into the food sector.

Gary McCoy, Shiloh, IL

Ryan’s bill gives amnesty to a minimum of 2 million illegals. A more accurate estimate, depending on the fraud levels and federal lassitude, is 6 million illegals. Plus, 1.35 million H–2C visas.

A Real Clear Politics poll shows that as soon as the conservative GOP base got wind of the plan, generic Republican poll numbers started dropping. Ryan doesn’t care, he’s busy burning down the House.

Amnesty presents problems for barnacles like Curator of the Senate Mitch McConnell (R–Inertia) who want to remain in DC. His solution is a warning that sounds more like a self–fulfilling prophecy.

The New York Times reports “…a strategy is emerging on the right for how to energize conservatives and drive a wedge between the anti–Trump left and moderate voters: warn that Democrats will immediately move to impeach President Trump if they capture the House.”

America Rising, a GOP consulting firm, sent an email warning “Right now the only thing standing between the president and the Democrats’ underhanded impeachment attempts is the Republican majority in the House fighting to defend our president.”

Former Trumper Steve Bannon, still stinking and smoldering from his political self–immolation, stopped beating out the flames long enough to add, “You have to put Donald Trump on the ticket. You’re not voting for Congress. You’re voting for Donald Trump.”

Thoughtful voters may find this ‘if you don’t vote for me, the other guy is gonna get it’ strategy curious. What possible additional damage could Democrats do after Republicans have willingly legalized 6 million new leftist voters?

GOP apologists can’t even attempt to balance the illegals sellout with other conservative legislation. There is none. Planned Parenthood still cashes federal checks. Competition is still missing from healthcare. The budget remains uncut. The federal government remains bloated.

The one bright spot is there’s a good chance Cinco de Mayo will soon be added to the list of national holidays!

It was ironic that McConnell was quoted telling an audience he’s like a cemetery groundskeeper, “Everybody’s under you but nobody’s listening.” It’s an accurate description of McConnell’s tenure as Senate Majority Leader. He marks time, keeping the lawn mowed and the bushes trimmed while awaiting Jesus’ return — when something will finally get done.

This month marks the only achievement that is really important to the curator. McConnell is now the longest serving GOP Senate majority leader in history. His legacy is longevity. Something that can also be said of a turtle.

It takes dedication and gullibility to find something in McConnell’s record to celebrate. The Hill contends a refusal to hold a vote on Obama’s final nominee to the Supreme Court is “McConnell’s most lasting legacy.” And the Emperor of Inertia’s strategy wasn’t even original. He was following ‘Shotgun’ Joe Biden’s lead.

The Hill was also impressed because McConnell, “kept a steady hand on the party through two political revolutions within the GOP: the emergence of the Tea Party in 2009 and 2010 and the election of President Trump.” Yes, McConnell managed to waste an unprecedented grassroots movement for change.

Now two bodies filled with ‘leadership’ that can’t stand the president are using Trump as a human shield. Vote to keep people in office who won’t do what you want — to prevent people from getting in office who will do what their base wants.

If you’re like me and are tired of campaign–only conservatives, lets send a message in November that even McConnell can’t ignore. It’s time for conservatives to go on strike.

This November conservatives should vote for the GOP Senate candidate and write in ‘On Strike’ as their congressional vote. ‘On Strike’ — instead of Mickey Mouse or Goofy — sends an unmistakable message.

‘On Strike’, we can make a difference. The write–in vote in Alabama was enough to deny victory to the creep. Our November write–ins can deny another victory to do–nothing, country club conservatives.

A Democrat House will try to impeach Trump, grab guns and may require Christians to not only bake same–sex wedding cakes, but also attend the service. So what? McConnell has plenty of room in his legislative mortuary.

The strike ends in 2020. We recapture the House delivering another base–generated wave for McConnell. Only this time, instead of wasting it like the TEA party and Trump waves, McConnell will know he either uses it or we’ll lose him.

Mitch McConnell Is Just a Clerk at Heart

Curator of the Senate Mitch McConnell has decided to re-define his role in public life. McConnell is moving away from characterizing himself as a conservative legislative titan. According to an obsequious profile in The Weekly Standard (a Never–Trumper hotbed), McConnell has found his true calling.

The curator believes the best use of his talents is to serve as the Human Resources Department for the federal judiciary. In his new role as head of HR McConnell contends that whatever happens to those losers in the House this November, the Senate must remain in his swampy hands.

Pat Begley The Salt Lake Tribune, UT

The Emperor of Inertia has come to the belated realization that voters were listening when he promised them electing a Republican–controlled Senate, House and White House would mean a rebirth of conservative legislation.

The reality was different. Voters got premature ejaculations on election night and nothing has been conceived since.

“The stuff we did last year was clearly a Republican agenda,” McConnell rationalizes. “…judges, taxes and regulations — that’s what we live to do, and virtually all of those are forever done on a party–line basis.”

Like Union Civil War Gen. George McClellan, in his mind McConnell is always outnumbered and facing overwhelming odds. Mitch is convinced LBJ couldn’t have done a better job, but the voters aren’t. That means McConnell’s first task is political alchemy. He must turn stagnation into steak.

 

Yet two of the three “accomplishments” are reactive at best. The only vaguely conservative legislation passed thru his initiative was the tax bill and taxes weren’t the driving issue during the 2016 campaign. None of the conservative legislation voters said they wanted has been passed. None of the leftist legislation conservatives want eliminated has been repealed.

The cocktail conservatives at the Weekly Standard don’t mind. They depict this weak, elderly placeholder as a victorious boxer with both gloves raised overhead. They would have you believe, “Republicans are better off than they look. The midterm election is six months away, and their chances of preserving a good–sized chunk of their power in Washington are good.”

This is supposed to be good news? Up until this November Republicans had 100 percent of the power and did nothing. Losing half their legislative clout is supposed to raise our morale? Any perceptive conservative voter will ask the obvious question: What’s in it for me?

The truth is, nothing, but McConnell gets to keep his big office if the GOP wins.

Hence McConnell’s makeover. He doesn’t want to move. The way to conceal his failure to repay the conservative base for its loyalty, is by completely changing voter expectations. Now instead of being Mr. Legislator, McConnell is telling voters he’s Mr. LinkedIn! The one–stop networking source for Republican lawyers looking for a soft landing in the judiciary.

“If we hold the Senate,” McConnell explains, “we can continue to confirm nominations to lifetime appointments for a full four years and finish the job of transforming the American judiciary, which is my number–one goal.” You might say it’s one lifetime incumbent eager to recruit more lifetime federal employees, which he hopes won’t ‘grow in office’ once they land on the bench.

Forget about resetting the dial on the family, immigration, religious freedom, federal spending or reducing the size of a bloated, wasteful federal government. Who has time for that when Mitch is conducting job interviews for circuit court?

Even if you’re a conservative who buys into Senate–as–headhunter, there is this nagging question. Where do those judicial nominations that McConnell is so eager to ratify originate? Is there a ticker–tape deep in the bowels of the Supreme Court building that generates a candidate whenever an opening appears?

Or does Mitch man a booth at legal job fairs where he lassos likely candidates?

All that’s immaterial to the Standard. They are in awe of the process, “In this ambitious effort, it takes two — a leader and a [Judiciary Committee] chairman — to tango.”

Well, no. Truthfully this matchmaker isn’t making any matches. Instead the nominations originate in a White House occupied by the dreaded President Donald Trump. I’m no cheerleader for Trump. His waffling on DACA, his short attention span and his embrace of the spend–a–palooza budget bill are infuriating.

Still, without Trump in the White House there wouldn’t be any nominations to “transform the American judiciary.” Hillary would be president and she’d be sending the names of leftist politicians who think they look good in black. But we are 800 words deep in a 994–word puff piece before Trump’s name is even mentioned and then it’s in connection with impeachment!

Mealy–mouthed, multi–chins like McConnell are the reason Trump won in the first place. Their continued failure to grasp that fact explains the trouble they face in November.

The Constitutional Work–Around for Term Limits

I’ve always wondered why the National Education Association (NEA) and the country club conservatives in the Republican House and Senate leadership aren’t allies, instead of enemies. Both organizations use the same tired talking points to defend inert members from the forces of accountability.

When education reformers urge legislative bodies to adopt merit pay for teachers and thereby reward the best teachers with the most money, the NEA counters that experience is crucial and paying teachers according to seniority rewards that excellent system.

Bill Schorr, San Clemente, CA

In the same fashion, when congressional reformers urge House and Senate leadership to adopt an amendment adding term limits to the Constitution, leadership rejects the proposal out of hand, claiming seniority is crucial to keeping Congress the paragon of competence it is today.

It’s no accident that education, Congress and penal institutions all grant more privileges based solely on how much time you’ve served.

Cong. Francis Rooney (R–Doomed) wants to remove Congress from that list. Rooney has formulated a brilliant method of implementing term limits that does not require an amendment to the Constitution. Rooney’s Thomas Jefferson Public Service Act would place no limits on how long a member could warm a seat in Congress — that requires an amendment — instead Rooney would reduce a member’s paycheck to $1 per year after they served six terms in the House or two terms in the Senate.

My wife is skeptical. She believes after 12 years our ‘public servants’ have already made themselves millionaires, so the $173,999.00 pay cut won’t bother them. She is not alone.

FedSmith.com downplays Rooney’s bill, too, “…most Congressmen make a career out of remaining in Congress (often moving on to the Senate). Many become millionaires within a few years after their election and, of course, they also receive a pension under the Federal Employee Retirement System (FERS).”

What both overlook is the loss of status if Rooney’s bill passes.

When Newt Gingrich was running the show, Republicans imposed term limits on committee chairmen. In the House and Senate, Republicans are limited to six years as the jefe of any committee.

At the end of their term as chairman these members must surrender the gavel, without any reduction in salary or benefits. Many retiring chairmen look upon that gavel as the closest thing to Thor’s Hammer they will ever wield. Giving it up is such a personal Ragnarök that they retire from Congress rather than revert to being hammerless rank–and–file member regardless of their salary.

I’m thinking not getting an envelope on payday would have the same effect. It’s one thing to talk about being a ‘public servant.’ Becoming one and working for free is something entirely different.

I’m willing to grasp at Rooney’s straw if there’s even a slim chance of success.

Rooney is so serious he’s prepared to become very unpopular with his colleagues. In an interview with Fox News’ Bret Baier, Rooney correctly termed arguments against term limits legislation as “elitist paternalism.” He already has seven co–sponsors for his bill and he intends to put the heat on nominal term limits supporters.

“There are 90 co–sponsors on term limit by [constitutional] amendment bills and there’s something called the ‘Term Limit Caucus.’ Let’s see what they want to do,” Rooney explained. This is where Rooney drops off Christmas card lists.

Co–sponsoring a term limits constitutional amendment is exactly like promising to repeal Obamacare. It’s showy and consequence–free.

The chance of the amendment coming up for a vote is exactly the same as the chance of Donald Trump being named Man of the Year by La Raza. If the unthinkable happens — see Obamacare vote — and term limits comes to the floor, co–sponsors will cheerfully betray their voters just as Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins did.

Rooney’s bill will put these poseurs on the spot. There are 26 members of the Term Limits Caucus, yet only two are co–sponsoring his bill. Rooney should have 31 co–sponsors and that’s before he goes after the amendment popinjays.

Baier went to Curator of the Senate Mitch McConnell for a comment on Rooney’s bill. In a voice dripping with disdain, McConnell gargled, “I would say we have term limits now, they’re called elections, and it will not be on the agenda in the Senate.”

True and the current system has given us McConnell as an example of what term limits would prevent.

Rooney’s only misstep so far came in his announcement. He quoted former Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn (R–Great American) who said Americans “are frustrated with the federal government.” True again. But Coburn is no longer in the Senate, because he imposed term limits on himself.

I fear the time–servers Rooney is trying to persuade will hear that name and ask themselves, “yeah, and when was the last time Coburn was on TV?”