The Resignation of Me, Al Franken

I’ll include the whole miserable, all about me, speech.  But the lies are just as significant. He married Paul Wellstone, Bill Clinton, and a hat-tip hint to Tom Steyer and impeachment just for flavor. The only guy who could mention I more is Barack Obama.

But I will only go after extensively venting my oratory hole.

Franken said his resignation will take place in the coming weeks.
Read a full transcript of his remarks below: (italicized for emphasis)

Stay tuned for when he actually vacates the Capitol premises.

A couple months ago I felt that we had entered an important moment in the history of this country. We were finally beginning to listen to women about the ways in which men’s actions affect them. The moment was long overdue. I was excited for that conversation and hopeful that it would result in real change that made life better for women all across the country and in every part of our society. Then the conversation turned to me. [1]Over the last few weeks a number of women have come forward to talk about how they felt my actions had affected them. I was shocked. I was upset. But in responding to their claims, I also wanted to be respectful of that broader conversation because all women deserve to be heard and their experiences taken seriously. I think that was the right thing to do. I also think it gave some people the false impression that I was admitting to doing things that in fact I haven’t done.

First strike, have a denial announcement. Did you expect anything else from someone who had to worm his way into the Senate by stealing an election? ‘I respect their voice!’

[2]Some of the allegations against me are simply not true. Others I remember very differently. I said at the outset that the Ethics Committee was the right venue for these allegations to be heard and investigated and evaluated on their merits, that I was prepared to cooperate fully and that I was confident in the outcome. You know an important part of the conversation we’ve been having the last few months has been about how men abuse their power and privilege to hurt women. [3]I am proud that during my time in the Senate I have used my power to be a champion of women. And that I have earned a reputation as someone who respects the women I work alongside every day. [4]I know there’s been a very different picture of me painted over the last few weeks but I know who I really am. Serving in the United States senate has been the great honor of my life. I know in my heart that nothing I have done as a senator, nothing, has brought dishonor on this institution. And I am confident that the ethics committee would agree. Nevertheless today I am announcing that in the coming weeks I will be resigning as a member of the United states senate. [5]I of all people am aware that there is some irony in the fact that I am leaving while a man who has bragged on tape about his history of sexual assault sits in the Oval Office and a man who has repeatedly preyed on young girls campaigns for the senate with the full support of his party. [6]But this decision is not about me. it’s about the people of Minnesota. And it’s become clear that i can’t both pursue the ethics committee process and at the same time remain an effective senator for them. Let me be clear. I may be resigning my seat, but I am not giving up my voice. I will continue to stand up for the things I believe in as a citizen and as an activist. But Minnesotans deserve a Senator who can focus with all her energy on addressing the challenges they face every day.

There is a big part of me that will always regret having to walk away from this job with so much work left to be done. But I have faith that the work will continue because I have faith in the people who have helped me do it. I have faith in the dedicated, funny, selfless, brilliant young men and women on my staff. They have so much more to contribute to our country, and I hope that as disappointed as they may feel today, everyone who has worked for me knows how much I admire and respect them. I have faith in my colleagues, especially my senior senator Amy Klobuchar. I would not have been able to do this job without her guidance and wisdom. [7]And I have faith, or at least hope, that members of this senate will find the political courage necessary to keep asking the tough questions, hold this administration accountable, and stand up for the truth. I have faith in the activists who organized to help me win my first campaign and who have kept on organizing to help fight for the people who needed us: kids facing bullying, seniors worried about the price of prescription drugs, Native Americans who have been overlooked for far too long, working people who have been taking it on the chin for a generation, everyone in the middle class and everyone aspiring to join it. [7]I have faith in the proud legacy of progressive advocacy that I have had the privilege to be a part of. I think I’ve probably repeated these words 10,000 times over the years, Paul Wellstone’s famous quote, “the future belongs to those who are passionate and work hard.” It’s still true. It will always be true. And most of all I have faith in Minnesota. A big part of this job is going around the state and listening to what people need from Washington, but more often than not, when I’m home, I am blown away by how much Minnesota has to offer the entire country and the entire world. The people I’ve had the honor of representing are brilliant, creative, hardworking, and whoever holds this seat next will inherit the challenge I’ve enjoyed for the last eight and a half years, being as good as the people you serve.

This has been a tough few weeks for me, but I am a very, very lucky man. I have a beautiful, healthy family that I love and that loves me very much. I’m going to be just fine. I’d just like to end with one last thing. I did not grow up wanting to be a politician. I came to this relatively late in life. I had to learn a lot on the fly. It wasn’t easy, and it wasn’t always fun, and I’m not just talking about today. This is a hard thing to do with your life. There are a lot of long hours, and late nights, and hard lessons, and there is no guarantee that all your work and sacrifice will ever pay off. I won my first election by 312 votes. It could have easily gone the other way. And even when you win, progress is far from inevitable. Paul Wellstone spent his whole life working for mental health parity and it didn’t pass until six years after Paul died. This year a lot of people who didn’t grow up imagining that they’d ever get involved in politics have done just that. They’ve gone to their first protest march or made their first call to a member of Congress, or maybe even taken the leap and put their names on a ballot for the first time. [7]It can be such a rush to look around a room of, full of people ready to fight alongside you, to feel that energy, to imagine that better things are possible. You too will experience setbacks, defeats and disappointments. There will be days when you will wonder whether it’s worth it. What I want you to know is that even today, even on the worst day of my political life, I feel like it’s all been worth it. Politics, Paul Wellstone told us, is about the improvement of people’s lives. I know that the work I’ve been able to do has improved people’s lives. I would do it all over again in a heartbeat. For a decade now every time I would get tired or discouraged or frustrated, I would think about the people I was doing this for, and it would get me back up on my feet. I know the same will be true for everyone who decides to pursue a politics that is about improving people’s lives. And I hope you know that I will be fighting alongside you every step of the way. With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor. ###

 

Well, too bad he didn’t yield the floor after two words, “I resign.” Don’t count me out until…

Let me paraphrase:

[1]  How they “felt” my actions affected them. I’m shocked. Not that they are upset. But let’s make it clear, I am not admitting anything. They felt erroneously.

Newsflash: Franken, it is not about what they felt, it’s about what you felt.

[2] I remember it differently, like a mutual feeling. I preferred the ethics committee as the right venue…only because I had no choice. So I agreed with it, naturally.

[3] Like all progressive superheroes — of which I must be one — I used my powers only for good, in the end. I championed women, yeah, that’s the ticket. I earned a reputation from women I worked alongside. What I did with other women doesn’t matter.

[4] They all have painted a fraudulent picture of me…. just like I had to fight them for my first election. (Cain Mutiny) But I know who I am. They apparently don’t.

[5] I see that huge unfairness irony of a president and another candidate, but now they are worried about little ol’ me, Al [hands] Franken? Why me? I’m a scapegoat for them.

[6] But this is not about me….. it’s about voters. (ignore how I talk about Me a lot)

[7] I know, you all need an arrogant, idealistic, self-serving lecture on running for [progressive] office. I’m a perfect example. I’ll be with you cheering you on. I’ll channel all your other progressive heroes to my career. It’s borrowing, no stealing, but what the hell?

It’s all been worth whatever the cost to others. They owe me an apology.

Oh, I did not dishonor the institution. I only complimented it and made it so much better with my super-heroic presence, Al Franken. But I shall resign. Adios, sometime, I think!

Advertisements

What they did and why on Benghazi

Read and weep. It is coming to a head only about 5 years too late.

The Hill

In the days after the 2012 attack, Obama administration officials initially said it was related to spontaneous Muslim anger over an anti-Islam video tape and not a planned-out act of terrorism.

DeSantis argued the example highlights the politicization of the FBI.

“What operational reason would there be to issue an edict to agents telling them, in the face of virtually conclusive evidence to the contrary, not to categorize the Benghazi attack as a result of terrorism? By placing the interests of the Obama administration over the public’s interests, the order is yet another data point highlighting the politicization of the FBI,” DeSantis said.

DeSantis and several other lawmakers say they plan to press Wray at a hearing Thursday before the House Judiciary Committee about growing concerns that certain FBI supervisors allowed political bias to cloud judgments or decisions.

More http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/363666-gop-lawmakers-cite-new-allegations-of-political-bias-in-fbi

We may have known but all this needs to be flushed out like toxic poison. Obama and Hillary’s legacy is as bad as it can get. But the people need to know their government was corrupt and nothing more than hacks were running it. And still on life support behind the curtains. Their next best hope is mainstream media to help them.

Food and Taxes cookoff

I anticipate that aroma wafting ahead. Every time you want to count on Congress doing something, inevitably it seems to end in disappointment. Why is that?

The trick in cooking some foods is the seasoning. Now we find key in cooking up a tax reform plan is the use of SALT. (state and local taxes) It is also what causes the most argument among chefs. Some prefer salt free and others don’t want to change habits.

How this plays out across America is the largest debate we’ve seen so far. Yes, there are always class warfare warriors. They’ll use anything they can to make the rich vs poor paradigm the whole issue. And they’ll be those who only look at it from the corporate or wealthy side — not particularly concerned about lower or middle income. (as if government is not doing plenty already) The fair people’s minds look at the whole reality.

Taking away something, we see, creates a reality unto itself. The same applies on taxes. Take away and someone surely complains. It is someone’s bread ticket. And we are taught to think and act out of our own self-interest, whether that is on voting or on policy. We are supposed to stay in our lanes, which mostly is how we got into this predicament.

The fight and debate goes on.

You heard much of the debate about taking away SALT deductions; or keeping them in place to protect people in high-taxed states. There doesn’t seem to be any middle ground. Now I’m no moderate, but there is no position to please both sides. Or so we are told.

There are creative things they can do like capping that deduction. Maybe halve the amount one can claim? Or how about cut it off by income so the wealthy do not get the deduction? No, do away with it all at once is a tough pill for some to swallow. But why, at last report, will corporations still get to claim SALT deductions?

Except for one thing: if these states are exorbitantly high taxed, then they have been that way for some years and didn’t suddenly become high. That means those people have been reaping the rewards of high-tax deductions for years and years. While low tax states, or no tax states, have not had that big deduction — meaning they kept more of their income out of state coffers. This is the difference in the states, they say. Right, on one hand many people make more in those states while more is taken in taxes, then deduct it on their federal income taxes.

If you look at the whole picture it is a dramatic difference in policy. We have catered to the high taxed states. I think Ron Paul says what government subsidizes it gets more of.

The good news is that taking away the SALT deductions from high-taxed states puts incredible pressure on those states. What we need. Already they are moaning about it. It could be the biggest lever against higher taxes.Their raising taxes gig would be up.

So the point to remember is that the high-tax states have been benefiting on that paradigm for years. They get government to reimburse or subsidize their tax policy. Taking that away sends shutters up their liberal elitist spines. Yet they have benefited for years on that spending, by offloading their costs to the federal government.

Now the truth has hit the fan

But to start with it is a pill to swallow, doing away with that deduction. It does take something away from some people, who are already paying a lot of taxes. Obviously, I never liked what legislators and liberals used to call targeted taxes. Why don’t they call it ‘targeted-voter tax cuts?’ Those were canards meant to apply to a narrow populace. Little bang for the buck. And the I got mine’s cheered it. No one ever cared to address the mass imbalance on taxpayers. So if you are making a lot of money, why shouldn’t you get relief? Sure people at the bottom need some help as well. Loosening the chains on the economy also helps that.

I suppose it is still up for debate and people can have different positions, based on their factors. If we are honest conservatives, we should not want those deductions — or the high taxes for that matter. Both are real. Pull out the rug and the panic begins in state capitols. Good you say. But some people do get hurt. Leave then im place and the game never changes, does it? The elitists and establishment crooks continue on their road, unabated. No, change needs an appropriate force or resistance. Could this be it?

Now if the object was to strike some balance, there could be ways of doing that. So far, it appears there is no list of options.

Also missing in all the highlights of both tax plans is the issue of carried interest loophole, or the infamous hedge fund loophole. When it was such a prominent part of the debate and campaign, even on the left, its absence speaks volumes. People want to see that and loopholes closed. Now that is popular. Why make it all about SALT when they aren’t yanking hedge fund loopholes? Seems money talks and so do interests of donors. Republicans have barely mentioned it. They still need better P/R to cut the clutter.

Its a smorgasbord of interests.

Right Ring | Bullright

Ode To The Losers

Let’s dispense with this growing, nasty ‘rebellion in the Republican Party’ theme.

These people — and we all know who they mean, McCain, Flake, Corker, Bush — are not rebels. They are losers. They are people who are losing even their support back home. And it is not because they were/are staunch Trump supporters.

What does that mean? It says they could not win, but not because they are tied to Trump. In fact, they are dissenting with Trump. That is the whole point in the media calling them rebels, isn’t it? But their anti-Trump, establishment positions are not popular at all with the people or back home, nor is joining the Resistance against Trump.

Yet media point to this as a pending implosion of the Republican Party. No, we always had these incessant RINOS bucking the trends within. That is not new. It’s old.

What is new is that they are blaming their losing position with their constituents on Trump. They are railing against him calling it divisive politics. No, they have been divisive and dismissive of the party before. They have already been at war with the party.

They can’t blame themselves.

And they are not rebels at all if they are leaving and taking their unpopularity with them. Now if they had any support and were demolition experts, they would stay and finish off the party, which is what the media suggests they are doing. No, they are leaving precisely because they have no support and agenda, other than to oppose Trump. That doesn’t seem to be working for them. Rinos and the left want to make this a Rebel Yell.

Oh, that kind of dissent with us and Trump is popular only with progressives. It is opposition and resistance. Sure Leftists would cheer it. So these so-called “rebels” are trading any Republican credentials for progressive, leftist, Democrat ones.

They stand up to make these diatribes against the Republican Party now. They don’t attack or blame the left. In fact, their sole purpose, like McCain’s, seems to be attacking the right – not the left. They just do it more publicly now. Progs love it. It had little effect on conservatives. It does animate and excite the progressive left though.

So now, tell me exactly how they are rebels? They are leaving with their tales between their legs, blaming Trump for their exit. They are undesirables. What effect is it having on the right? Yes, they do call themselves conservatives but are the same elite estabos that have been undermining conservatives. What is being cut is RINO’s lifeblood support.

The last part is that their real problem is not with Trump; it is with the American people. The establishment was the cause of problems for years. They are the source of the stench in the Swamp. Yet we and Trump are somehow to blame for their elitist demise?

They are the same people who may have waffled on a Supreme Court nominee, illegal immigration, or who bit their royal tongues for 8 years Obama was in office politicizing everything. But now, after swearing off reelection campaigns, they claim liberation to speak their minds. They were unchained before. But no such liberation ever took place under Obama. In that case, they could work with him and his cohorts in corruption.

Resistance and opposition was unpopular for 8 years. It was pooh-poohed as divisive and racist. Now it is all the rage. Throwing the bums out was crazy talk. Now it is cooler than cool. In fact, all they want to talk about is how they can throw out the administration. McConnell got slammed for making Obama a one-term president his goal. Now they put up a petition to impeach Trump from the largest donor of the Democrat Party, at 8 months in office. McConnell was being racist and sinister then. Steyer is praised and Dems are using impeachment as a fundraiser.

Yet we have these Republican whiners agreeing with the far left, calling Trump unstable and all kinds of names. They were turned into the new heroes, the strong, principled ones. Weasels. Rebels of the right? We were the resistance before it was popular. These types are exactly why we elected Trump, and why it was necessary. The left must have missed the revolution, but it was last year. They lost.

Right Ring | Bullright

Micro macro targeting the opposition

Why does the radical left often appear to gain more, faster ground than the right on issues? Well, again, it may have something to do with Alinsky tactics.

Rules for Radicals: rule #12

““Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.“ Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.”

I’m not saying they are more successful as a rule. However, it does seem like the right is constantly caught up in attacking institutions, if by their nature, Yet we know the root of it is the Marxist people. Not like you can go through liberal academia one by one, that would be exhausting. We have. So we focus on the institution they’ve corrupted.

We focus on areas of government they’ve corrupted. But we did have the perfect match with Obama in office — even Holder, Lynch, Rice and Hillary. And guess what? We were told those attacks were off limits, or racist. Republicans frowned on those claiming they did not want it to be personal. Why not though? We ceded the perfect weapon and target. It was successful when they finally held Holder in Contempt.

But we do need to make constant personal examples within the institution. Think about this flag controversy. When we made it about the flag, that was a win, and we used Kaepernick as its poster boy, we saw much more success. Notice how everything the left does is personalized at Trump, even when it doesn’t apply.

Name it and shame it can work. I’ve realized just because Leftists have no shame doesn’t matter. It’s the people who see it who matter. If we concentrate on leaders like Pelosi, Schumer, et al, we are getting more bang for the buck, especially when the Left is also thinking of replacing them. Whenever they stick their heads up we should be zooming in on the opportunity to personalize it.

The same must apply to the RINOs in congress. If they get isolated, they feel it. Sure as heck, those like Corker are going to feel it from home. He can’t even run again. But if he is going scorched earth, then his record and pending scandals are fair game too.

Whether it is tax policy or Obamacare, we have a plethora of personal examples. Just what the left doesn’t want to talk about, real people affected by policy. Besides, the left going after Trump on everything is a tad bit old and stale. Another rule applies there. Rule #7:

““A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.“ Don’t become old news.”

At some point even Trump attacks get old. Media can’t keep them alive on life support. Think of how many things Obama just waited out, scandal after scandal, till finally nothing was done. Remember he called it old news when we never got any answers?

Right Ring | Bullright

The Dreamer Obummer goes to the Wall

It’s okay For Democrats to fundraise off of redacting DACA but it is so wrong to tie future legislation to funding the wall and border security. What a heap of manure.

Now which two of those things are part of the illegal immigration issue?

Obama said Tuesday, after the decision:

“And now that the White House has shifted its responsibility for these young people to Congress, it’s up to Members of Congress to protect these young people and our future.”

“What makes us American is our fidelity to a set of ideals…”

“That’s how, if we keep at it, we will ultimately reach that more perfect union.”

“Shifted responsibility” from the White House? It was him that put it there when it belongs in Congress. He’s completely reversing it and then expects people to believe him.

Those ideals. “Reach our more perfect union”… by illegally making unconstitutional, fiat law? That is not an ideal America stands for. But then the guy who created this mess would have to be so far out there to justify it.

Those “Dreamers” must really be dreaming if they would rather have their status subject to a president’s Unconstitutional, fiat law. That is defending Unconstitutionality.

Obama even knows it. So he is probably laughing real hard to have them all defending his Unconstitutional actions thinking “those morons don’t even know it.”

Once again, here we are dealing with another disaster Obama created — while he is cruising in some yacht, writing revision history standing American rule of law on its head.

I’m tired of the protest crap. Protest this, protest that, boycott this, trying to shut down free speech. And there is one person still at the center of it all, Obama.

One protest sign from Dreamers says “Support DACA Not Walls.” Failure to build a wall helped create DACA. It was lack of border enforcement that caused the problem in the first place. Are these Leftists just mentally-challenged or do they really expect people to believe their contemptible BS? America doesn’t buy it.

Right Ring | Bullright

McCain back….to same old

Lavish on, for the first 5 minutes McCain lectured and praised the institution of the Senate. Lecturing on cooperation within the Senate and trusting each other again, he languished on about “serving the people who elected us,” into attacking outer-chamber voices:

“Stop listening to the bombastic loudmouths on the radio, and television and the internet. To hell with them! [applause] They don’t want anything done for the public good. Our incapacity is their livelihood. Let’s trust each other… return to regular order.”

The hack is back …with his invincible straw man.

So he is back to criticizing those outside voices and those who try to hold Congress and the Senate accountable. Yes, the problem is those outside voices. Sorry, we are worried about the inside voices who do the real damage. That America is fed up with the kind of shit-sandwiches your body is trying to serve up, should be a clue how we feel about it. You are not interested in the will of the people. No, you are an elitist who only uses the words “servants of a great nation” as cover for your real agenda of arrogance. Arrogance that has no limits to wall off the will of the people. Any different than Hillary’s “Deplorables”?

After all, what are elites there for but to do what the people oppose — the corrupt comradery we resent — by scheming against us in every major action. Especially when they team up against us. But that is the bipartisanship McCain stands for. He’s back to branding us Agents of Intolerance. His only real fight is with any outsider opposing him.

So they want to shut us up or shut us down. Marginalize us. There is the resistance and then the resistance within, like John McCain. But if anyone is the opposition it is him.

At a later point, he said we Americans “don’t hide behind walls, we breach them.” A clear attack on Trump and the Americans who want to secure our border. Don’t lecture us about walls. We care about our nation’s security. Stop warring with the will of the people.

RightRing | Bullright

Media enemy of the State

What happens when the media becomes the enemy of the state? Well, we’re about to find out — if it hasn’t been getting clearer all along. It isn’t pretty.

There is no limit to how far the mainstream media zealots and agenda-driven hacks will go. They aren’t armed with the Freedom of Press but with a vendetta and an active imagination with a radical anti-American agenda. (like their messiah Obama)

Some will say, ‘but it’s good and necessary to have an adversarial press.’ Yes, but we are past that, way over that adversarial stage. We are in a new era of hate – resistance.

You can look at it this way, we now have an Independent Counsel investigation. We also have a press acting as if it were special prosecutors. That’s how they operate, with an assumption that they have all these extra powers, as lieutenants for the resistance.

So, in effect, we have the 2 major investigations in Congress. (plus the minor ones) both of them now coordinating with Mueller in the Special Counsel. Mueller feels he has de facto power, direct and indirect, over both of those bodies. And final word. Trump has O.

Then there is the press who thinks no rules apply to it — as if there are any in the other three. Media plays collaboratively off all three official bodies. They handle the steady leaks and anonymous sources, even creating their own news when needed to fill any gaps.

Gas Ahead photo 100_2273.jpg

Photo image cred

There are now leaks coming from the Special Counsel — which we were told would be super tight-lipped. The media worried at first they would be shut out of the info flow because Mueller does not tolerate leaks. Now he appears to be accommodating media.

It is now a full blown coup on the White House.under a unified front. So it comes from multiple directions. Don’t think we are quite there yet? Look around a little more.

Meathead Media is now covering all the voices calling for Sessions to leave. They have their sites on him. More intel leaks are said to justify him leaving. They say he can’t remain. The same voices and media talking heads are also calling for the impeachment process to begin. Many more than Auntie Maxine are chanting impeachment as if there it were as inevitable as his inauguration. Almost like it was planned.

Whether anyone is leaving yet, at this point, they are out to totally shut down this presidency. Make it so unable to function that he cannot survive. That’s the objective.

It just gets worse all the time, as the left ramps up radicalization of all assets at once. With the media being in the center of all the the activity. The harder you look the worse it is.

Here is what News Busters just reported a day ago. Press risks all for its agenda.

At the forum, CIA Director Mike Pompeo took to the stage slammed The New York Times for putting the life of an officer at risk. “We had a publication, you work for Bret, that published the name of an undercover officer at the Central Intelligence Agency. I find that unconscionable,” he angrily declared to the thunderous applause of the audience.

But get this, they seem more concerned for safety of anonymous sources that provide them information than covert operators. This is serious stuff. They are now endangering our national security and our people on the ground. But then the NYT person who was interviewing Pompeo explained it this way — or tried to.

The Times claimed one of the reasons they published the name was because it had appeared in other articles. [their own] Their second reason was that Donald Trump was the president. “[Redacted] is leading an important new administration initiative against Iran,” they said.

Wow, totally outrageous and vindictive. Saying it is justified because Trump is president… which somehow gives them the right to name the person again, with personal information. This is nothing like Valerie Plame. This is real time intel they are messing playing with. Putting lives at risk, daily. Leaks, leaks and super leaks and no one cares.

What we have here is the CIA Director calling out the press right there live, at a security forum. Oh it might not be a hearing at the Capitol but this is even bigger. Right there on stage and people applauded Pompeo for bringing the heat. They deserve public shaming, not that it will work. Is it war?

This is not press or media, these are subversives acting out like seditious cells. That’s how they feel about Trump being President. Jeopardizing the nation’s security means nothing. Disdain for Trump above everything else. Hate rules, Resistance for resistance sake.

Radicals are lose.

And it seems, more and more every day, that not only are there real inherent conflicts and bias with Mueller’s entire team but that he is clearly out to extract a pound of flesh for Comey’s firing. Will he get it? Mueller went rogue from the start. Deep State. All weapons are out in a full assault. Media is at the center driving it all. Hostile enemies within.

RightRing | Bullright

Reruns and old sitcoms, sitcare

Forfeit the issue, argument, resistance — whatever you call it — of Obamacare? Painful thought. But it seems that is exactly what is being prepared in cesspool headquarters.

So we aren’t de-rooting Obamacare but fertilizing it and guaranteeing its survival. And I am pretty disgusted about it.

As if that were not bad enough a thought, it appears as though they put it in such a central position as to take down, or at least compromise, the entire Reepublican agenda. So Obamacare has found new life holding an entire agenda hostage. And it is not giving up.

Hostage negotiators? Well they are on the scene, but seem prepared to negotiate away the very hostages held captive. I.e. we the people and whoever else cares.

Is this the way it all goes down after 8 years of work and grassroots effort? A horrid thought. Is this how it ends by Republicans morphing back into the one-party duopoloy?

Haven’t we seen this movie before? We know how it ends. And that brings us right back to why we are here in the first place, Namely disgust and the sheer American will to break the chains that bound us — ‘mad as hell and not going to take it anymore.’

Before anyone goes berserk to blame it all on Trump not being conservative enough, much of this obfuscation is coming right from the Republicans. Certainly in the Senate. They have a stranglehold on government that I doubt we have ever seen before.

Trump? Well, he can come and go but these Republicans will remain, to some degree. Enough to take down or prevent any new agenda from taking shape., Enough to kill it in infancy. Would Repubs even agree on the epitaph?

My good friend Pepp forwarded me this Breitbart article. Have a look and see what you think. I am afraid Rand Paul is pretty much right on the mark.

I’ll go back to asking how many healthcare stocks are in all their portfolios in the cesspool capital? Bad enough to cede the Obamacare issue, but it seems poised to hijack the rest of any Republican-led agenda, from Taxes to economic liberty or trade. It is just my opinion how much effect it has on everything else.

Republicans seem positioned to allow it to happen. The Dems don’t have to do it. The insurgency within is enough to derail anything on the table.(or under it) Pennsylvania Sen. Pat Toomey announced the reason they had no plan to replace Obama care is they didn’t plan on winning the election. Good excuse Pat. Well, this kind of train wreck is not caused just from Democrats. With media running opposition for Dems, it is hard to get a descent message out. Climate of disgust remains high 6 months in.

Read: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/07/12/exclusive-sen-rand-paul-senate-gop-decides-keep-obamacare/

RightRing | Bullright

Comey Day turns to Comey Day Down

Its billing was “must see” but its reality was seeing does not equate to belief.

I could have made a long, textual post no one would care to read, but no one could indict Comey’s credibility better than he did all by himself. Comey goes to the Senate.

There was an impeachment on Thursday in the Senate…
an impeachment of Comey’s character.

The guy displays all that is wrong with our government. He plotted by political motives all the way along, and then sought to manipulate the entire process for his self-relevant gain.

The best part is that he was fired but even that didn’t temper his manipulative scheme or enthusiasm for relevancy. He is the consummate disgruntled employee now. For Comey, going postal means getting up in the middle of the night to plot leaking information to try to take down a sitting president.

Leakers everywhere must be toasting Jim’s motivation, creativity and persistence.

Comey, as we see in living color, is not the textbook example of a man of character but a compromised man of self-serving character, swimming in a sea of politicized government of Obama. Even his adept lies were not enough to mitigate his character flaws. Emotional yes.

Okay, I’ll mention just one statement:

“I was honestly concerned he might lie about the nature of our meeting, so I thought it important to document.” – Comey on his memo.

Note how he refers to his “honest” emotions and Trump’s deceitful nature. But what is the nature of a teed off government bureaucrat?

He claimed the reason he just had to leak was to get a special counsel to investigate. An investigation that would ‘hopefully’ put him — and his memos — smack in the middle of. An investigation where he could apply his vast, crisis-creating chasing experience and talents, aided by a special counsel who was a long time friend. What could go wrong?

In a Twilight Zone episode, it might be described something like this:

“A man who sought to be the leading influencer of an investigation finds himself at the center of controversy in the investigation. Tables turn as he must now justify his own motives by trying to impugn the motives of everyone else. Stay tuned as best schemes sometimes do not work out just the way you plotted planned them. …
I give you: ‘The Irony of a Government Bureaucrat’.”

RightRing | Bullright – 6/11/17

Time for a Truth Bomb for Pelosi

This is inconvenient, for a lady who claims to be a stalwart Catholic, familiar with Catholic doctrine, who also often finds herself out of step with traditional teachings on life or other cultural issues.

But in this episode, in San Fran Nan’s zeal to attack the Republicans’ alternative plan to Obamacare that passed the house, and her rush to defend Obamacare — Affordable Healthcare Act — she really muddies the water on religion and politics.

Pelosi made her remarks at her press conference shortly after the passing of the latest Obamacare alternative in the House. But it was a repeated lie she had already used against the former Republican bill, which was pulled and did not get passed.

She rattles off a list of organizations opposed to the Republican plan (many of which originally supported Obamacare) She then lists churches or faith-based institutions along with the United Methodist Church.

First let’s start with the previous bill, on 3/09/17, at her press conference, Pelosi said:

So again, on three fronts, of course, the Affordable Care Act and all that it means to families is very important. The United Methodist Church, in their statement, said people will die because of efforts like this to roll back health care. AARP, the American Medical Association, the hospital association, nurses and physicians, patients, insurers, and consumer groups all oppose the GOP bill.

Again, last week on 5/4/17 Pelosi says: (at an open press conference)

“Sister Simone Campbell said, ‘this is not the faithful way forward and must be rejected.’ The Catholic Health Association wrote, ‘we strongly encourage the full house to reject this replacement bill.’ And the United Methodist Church said, ‘opposing Trumpcare, this is what they said, people will die because of efforts like this to roll back health care.

Lutheran services of America said, ‘Trumpcare will jeopardize the health care and long-term service and support of millions of Americans.’ The Episcopal Church said, ‘Trumpcare falls woefully short of our spiritual calling to care for the least of these, as well as the noble values upon which our great nation was founded.’ End of quote. And all that was said before the Republicans decided to destroy the protections of Americans with pre-existing conditions. — [Pelosi- press conference on 5/4/17]

Below is apparently the UMC statement from the article Pelosi was referring to:
Note the author says she is the General Secretary [excerpt]

Health Care is a Basic Human Right

The General Secretary’s statement on Congressional Efforts to rollback health care

by Rev. Dr. Susan Henry-Crowe on March 07, 2017

“We must not allow our leaders to take away affordable and accessible health care from the communities who need it to live and live abundantly.

This bill has been promoted as a “fix” to the health care system in the United States but will do nothing to improve access and affordability. Instead, it will harm many in the congregations and communities in which we live and serve. People will die because of efforts like this to roll back health care.”

That is basically marked as the General Secretary’s personal statement. How could it be conferred as the statement from the national conference board of the UMC? It s one member’s personal position, though it is posted on the GBCS.org website.

It was one member of the UMC church, as influential as she may be. It does not speak for the entire church itself, as Pelosi suggested. No, she insisted on two separate occasions that it was a statement on behalf of the United Methodist Church.

Dr. Henry-Crowe stated in conclusion: (note the pronoun I)

“I will be calling my members of Congress to urge them to vote no on the bill, and I encourage United Methodists in the United States to join me in advocating for a health care system that leaves no person behind.”

She encourages other members to take that action……on behalf of herself, as the Secretary. But she does not speak for the entire church. Again, she has it posted on the GBCS website. Henry-Crowe, not a medical doctor, also offers no proof for the claim that “people will die”.

Another UM news outlet disected Pelosi’s dilemma: [excerpt]
Good News – Walter Fenton- [*GBCS is General Board & Church Society]

“We were confident no such [“people wiill die”] statement existed. The UM Church, thankfully, does not make a habit of pontificating on every bill that comes before Congress. Only the General Conference, which meets every four years, can pronounce authoritatively for the UM Church. What we suspected was that Rep. Pelosi had read something a UM bishop or the General Secretary of GBCS had said about the bill. And sure enough, Henry-Crowe had recently opined, “People will die because of efforts like this to roll back health care.” Pelosi gladly took Henry-Crowe’s personal prognostication that “people will die,” as the UM Church’s official word on the bill. It is not.

Henry-Crowe, who holds two degrees in theological studies, and for 22 years served as the dean of the chapel and religious life at Emory University before her role at GBCS, offered no evidence to support her hyperbolic claim. Her remark is particularly interesting in light of a recent column by New York Times columnist Ross Douthat. To be sure, like Henry-Crowe, Douthat is not a health care expert. But unlike her, he actually references reputable studies that find claims about how many lives this or that insurance plan will save to be overblown. As Douthat notes, since the expansion of Medicaid under the ACA, Americans have not become healthier or experienced lower mortality rates (they’re actually higher in some of the states and counties where Medicaid was expanded).

It is hard to understand why, in a church with rank-and-file members from across the political spectrum, GBCS has felt compelled to march almost uniformly to the left on most issues. And it often seems incapable of even acknowledging people of good faith and good will might find alternative prescriptions to be reasonable, responsible, and compassionate. GBCS has a propensity to close off options and stifle conversation before it gets started. So if you don’t stand with Henry-Crowe and GBCS on the recent bill before Congress, you’re evidently comfortable with a plan that will allow “people [to] die. (read full article here) ”

Listen to two more excerpts in the same article which make the point:

“GBCS [General Board] seems to have no dialogue partners in a church that desperately needs them.”

“This is odd and even unhelpful coming from an organization appointed to serve and represent the whole church, not just its left wing.”

“Progressives often style themselves as community organizers for social justice, but you seldom get the impression that GBCS folks are actually out organizing among the grassroots. Instead, they are more often found provoking laity and pastors with progressive pronouncements issued from their Capitol Hill offices in Washington D.C.”

“In the future, we hope Henry-Crowe can find the good in other proposals and refrain from conversation stoppers like, “people will die.”

So, in the end, Pelosi was duped or lied. Though she should have at least looked at the statement — it is not a UMC dicta. Maybe other Methodists were even hoodwinked by Pelosi’s careless public assertion about a specious commentary, coming from one member who happens to be a Secretary.

Though if Pelosi is going to go out and make a proclamation representing an entire organization, or church, she should have confirmed it first.

It’s also interesting in light of President Trump’s executive order over the Johnson Amendment. For years, there have been threats to churches about taking part in politics, yet, as the author above states, some members freely associate the church with left-wing politics on current issues. That political activism is celebrated, just as this was by Pelosi, as a formal church position on progressive, liberal political issues. That is no problem at all.

Funny how whenever it is abortion or other cultural, traditional issues then people claim it is over the line, off bounds for the church. There are plenty of examples.

When churches or clergy sign a petition to Congress to investigate aid to Israel, no problem with that lobbying. But there is never any dialogue, criticism of left wing positions the UMC adopts…. even taking advocacy positions on sanctuary cities or sanctuary status for UM churches — I’ll call them Sanctuary Sanctuaries. No harm or foul in that.

Ref: http://goodnewsmag.org/2017/04/people-will-die-2/
http://www.democraticleader.gov/newsroom/3917/
http://umc-gbcs.org/faith-in-action/health-care-is-a-basic-human-right
http://www.democraticleader.gov/newsroom/5417-6/

Budget Blues or Budget Do’s

After Failing on Obamacare Fix, GOP Faces Budget Process

By Herbert London
Monday, 17 Apr 2017 | Newsmax

Each year legislators sharpen their knives, consider key constituent needs and meet to pass a budget. This year isn’t very different except that when the Republicans could not unify to replace the Affordable Care Act, unexpected questions about the party emerged.

The Democrats are united in opposition and, after tasting Republican blood in the D.C. waters, are vehemently opposed to compromise. For the Republican leaders, the challenge is keeping the Freedom Caucus in tow. The party appears to be riven by the schism between pragmatists and idealists.

Some Republicans contend they are worried about repeating the experience of 2013 when the party drew most of the ire over a partial shutdown. However, a Republican Congress shutting down a Republican government would be the height of folly.

President Trump has requested new funding for the extension of the wall with Mexico. He also wants to boost military spending to the tune of $54 billion. It is unlikely he gets all that he wants. The question is does he get enough to declare victory.

Apart from a need to pass the budget, Republicans have other big-ticket items they seek to complete this year, including the tax code. This is no time to appear timorous, but the Republicans should not be overconfident either.

The budget will be the next big test on whether party unity can transcend the party’s divisions. Trump and Ryan have to demonstrate they can maintain party discipline. The public jury awaits an answer.

One matter is clear, the Trump agenda cannot be held hostage to the Freedom Caucus. This is the time for Trump to assert, he is president and cannot be intimidated by a minority in the party. At the same time Trump will need consensus to increase the defense budget. The revision of Obamacare is a more formidable task than budget approval. But it is no less important. With the failure to address Obamacare, Trump cannot abide another loss. The symbolism alone, with a press corps out to nail him, would be devastating.

Budget reconciliation is always a bruising battle. The Democrats may be less inclined to work with Trump than usual. Nonetheless, he should reach out to them in a manner that suggests reconciliation. Even if it doesn’t achieve an ensemble – like legislature, it will have created an impression of the president as healer.

A government budget through its various gives and takes is a negotiation. Rarely does a president get everything he wants and rarely does he end up with nothing. Since budgets set the stage for policy, the president would argue for budget items to the exclusion of others. Since sixty percent of the budget is determined by Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security (the so-called “Third Rail” in American politics) there is relatively less flexibility than one might assume.

Then there are those past budget amendments brought about through human intervention such as war or natural catastrophes such as tornadoes. In any given year the government can count on the vicissitudes of conflict or natural disaster to warrant emergency funding. As a consequence, the budget is malleable, less a function of unyielding science and more a function of human assessment.

However, fraught with problems this budget project raises, President Trump should think of it as the next big challenge he is obliged to confront. He must display a level of competence in addressing it and a level of uncommon humility in understanding the arcane process.

Herbert London is the president of the London Center for Policy Research and author of the books “America’s Secular Challenge” (Encounter Books) and “The Transformational Decade” (University Press of America).

Source: http://www.newsmax.com/HerbertLondon/republican-freedom-caucus-obamacare-budget/2017/04/17/id/784795/

Of course that is quite enough, but we also have media whining about it, daily. They operate as a mouthpiece of the opposition party. Republicans have to get better at combating this nonsense.

Jefferson’s wisdom

“Whenever the words of a law will bear two meanings, one of which will give effect to the law, and the other will defeat it, the former must be supposed to have been intended by the Legislature, because they could not intend that meaning, which would defeat their intention, in passing that law; and in a statute, as in a will, the intention of the party is to be sought after.”

1–Thomas Jefferson to Albert Gallatin, 1808. ME 12:110

“When an instrument admits two constructions, the one safe, the other dangerous, the one precise, the other indefinite, I prefer that which is safe and precise. I had rather ask an enlargement of power from the nation, where it is found necessary, than to assume it by a construction which would make our powers boundless.”

2–Thomas Jefferson to Wilson Nicholas, 1803. ME 10:418

“Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore, be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense. Their meaning is not to be sought for in metaphysical subtleties which may make anything mean everything or nothing at pleasure.”

3–Thomas Jefferson to William Johnson, 1823. ME 15:450

Source: http://famguardian.org/subjects/politics/thomasjefferson/jeff1020.htm

Maxine sees scumbags everywhere

Democrat Maxine Waters Calls Trump Cabinet Picks: “A Bunch of Scumbags” (VIDEO)

Jim Hoft | Feb 22nd, 2017 | Gateway-P

Maxine Waters: I just think the American people need to know what is going on. This is a bunch of scumbags. That’s what they are. They’re all organized around making money.

H/T Gateway Pundit

Boycotting America: the infertile resistance breeds

The week of hypocrisy and double standards, and here we go.

The hearings were one thing, emphasis on race and Russia – not necessarily in that order — but dialogue and media are another which got progressively worse, right on script.

We finished the week by having the self-anointed civil rights leader, John Lewis call Trump’s election and his presidency illegitimate. Anyone NOT see that coming? These people certainly are predictable, if nothing else.

“I don’t see this President-elect as a legitimate president,” Lewis told NBC News Friday. “I think the Russians participated in helping this man get elected. And they helped destroy the candidacy of Hillary Clinton.” – NBC

No, unfortunately, Lewis was not a lone voice. Predictable. He did it intentionally on Friday before MLK Day — which I guess is now ensconced as the day of hate.

Now you would think that Lewis making this statement would be like a bomb going off, and the shock of it from a sitting senior Congressman would outrage people. You would think immediately people would distance themselves from his remarks, en masse. The condemnation would be fierce. And you would think a media outcry would demand every single Democrat condemn his remarks or be condemned. Nope.

Actually, Michelle Obama kicked it off on Oprah saying “we’re feeling what not having hope feels like.” She was praised for saying we have no hope. They cheered her on.

One Democrat pundit said on Sunday, “this is the resistance; this is just what it looks like now.” Ah, “what it looks like now” is short for this is the way it’s going to be. No, it’s actually going to be worse. They know it and so do we. And then their shadow Obama government will be adding to the resistance.

What you would think should be a normal response, in their racist political correctness, now is reversed. Rather than blanket condemnation, the praises for John Lewis came from everywhere: media, Congress, the black community, the public. Hard to find anyone who does condemn his statements.

Remember Joe Wilson, the SOTUS “heckler”? He had the audacity to make a public disagreement with Obama. He got a good talking to from the Republican leadership. And Mitch McConnell, all he said was that job #1 was to make Obama a one-term president. Democrats turned that into a giant insult and classic racism. Justice Alito shook his head. People were called racists for asking questions about Obama’s birth certificate or records — since he really had no trail. Just questioning Obama was blatant racism.

So it was way more than Obama ever received, even before Trump takes office. Now resistance is celebrated. Calls for obstruction ring from every corner of the Left. Respect is out, Resistance is in.(lockstep of course) In fact, the Left even says, proudly, it is following the model that worked so well for Republicans. (choke, gag) Get that, they even blame us for their radical resistance. They blame Russia for the election results. And they blame Trump for the condition of America which preceded any thought of his to run. Now they are trying to even make us own Obamacare.

Well, the total fallout of John Lewis is wide agreement with him. In fact, 23 members of Congress are boycotting the inauguration. It’s the cool thing now to join the resistance. They will institutionalize it, celebrate it, take it into schools and claim it as righteous.

All this deception won’t work. The people have been awakened and are not going to take their eyes off this, We survived their decade of decadence and aren’t happy. Sorry, Dems, don’t even try to out anger us. It ain’t happening. The blame projection won’t work. But they have the towers of media carrying their water, and soon will have every one of their shadow operatives opposing Trump. Exactly the way they did in the general election. Almost as if the election never happened because, to them, it didn’t.

Protests are highly overrated. Respectful protests were fashionable toward Obama, disrespectful protests toward Trump are now in. When Tea Party protests were born, the IRS and media assailed “speaking truth to power” using their big-gov firehouses, under a black president. It was Democrats in the sixties who opposed Lewis and their ‘civil rights’ agenda. Now they blame Republicans but no one is supposed to know the truth.

Now their resistance stuff is all the rage. Resisting what? – doesn’t matter. On the IRS Tea Party scandal, blacks and Democrats stood on the side of big government fire hoses. They stood up and walked out. Eric Holder was in contempt and they stood up for him, who was standing up for Obama. But now they see illegitimacy as the cause de jure.

So the answer, my friend, ain’t blowing in the wind. No, their answer to nothing is to boycott Trump and whatever he does. Take that Mitch McConnell. He let them beat him up for eight years for a benign statement. Then people bent over backwards for Obama. Republicans stood there like deer in the headlights, as radicals ruled the White House and administration. That really worked?

The boycott of Trump takes full shape before the parade or swearing in. What will they do when he’s in office? I think we know. (whatever was not done to Obama) Can’t you smell what the boycott is cooking? It means de facto protesting America and what it stands for, the rule of law. So civil rights or justice are excuses, the real boycott is against America.

And happy MLK Day, for what that’s worth.

RightRing | Bullright

Little people’s info doesn’t matter

This is to all the people who have had their personal information hacked, stolen, pilfered or used by foreign state hackers. My sympathies to you. (including anyone who worked for the federal government.) You’ve been used and abused in more than one way.

Now we know the real truth. Your privacy, security and personal information mean nothing to Obama’s administration or even Congress. Let’s be honest, you are not Hillary Clinton, John Podesta, or the DNC. Your shit doesn’t matter — only theirs does.

They proved this with the hacking narrative they and the media have elevated to the top national security issue. Obama called for an investigation of Russia on the election.

When did they call for an investigation, let alone consequences, for those who did the hacking of all that government and personal information? Where is that national debate and outrage? Where is all the media coverage about it? Where are the demands to do something? They didn’t want to acknowledge the story or comment on it when the hacks happened. Where is the CIA and FBI reports, and 17 intelligence agencies? — MIA

RightRing | Bullright

Graham – McCain: touring tag team

2008-02-12t001902z_01_rmd07_rtridsp_0_usa-politics-mccain

James Woods fires off at Graham, McCain for doubling down with Dems

December 30, 2016 | Warner Todd Huston | BizPac Review

Actor James Woods, who recently rejoined Twitter with his conservative posts, slammed Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham for joining Barack Obama in his desire to punish Russia with further sanctions over unproven allegations that Russian hackers interfered in the U.S. elections.

Referring to a story by The Hill newspaper, Woods criticized GOP Senators McCain and Graham for joining Obama and a list of Democrats who want even tougher sanctions on Russia.

More http://www.bizpacreview.com/2016/12/30/james-woods-fires-off-sens-graham-mccain-doubling-dems-429946/

Coming to the Sunday circuit near you. Hasn’t their 15 minutes expired? Good idea, they could be so happy in Demland. They can never criticize the Soros crew — that is taboo. Fexibility, cold war jokes and resets out, sanctions are in. Just trying to keep up.

Congressional Review Act, Thanks Harry

Law backed by Harry Reid will haunt Dems in 2017

By Susan Crabtree | 12/16/16

One of outgoing Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s greatest legislative achievements will come back to haunt Democrats early next year.

President-elect Trump has promised to repeal two federal regulations for every new one issued, and the Congressional Review Act, which Reid co-sponsored in 1996, will give him a running start.

The law gives Congress the power to rescind any unwelcome late, so-called “midnight” regulations from an outgoing president through a simple majority vote in both chambers of Congress.

Since its passage as part of House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s Contract with America in 1996, it has only been successfully used once, but Republicans are promising to leverage its full power in January to kill rules the Obama administration has issued in its last months in office.

In his 77-minute farewell address on the Senate floor last week, Reid included the Congressional Review Act as one of his top accomplishments in the Senate, along with passage of Obamacare, the 2009 stimulus bill, a taxpayer bill of rights and several other measures

Republicans, with the help of the Congressional Research Service, have compiled a list of roughly 50 regulations they could go after early next year.

“I know some of my Democrat colleagues say, ‘Why did you do that?'” Reid said during his final speech on the Senate floor. “Here’s what I did. I worked with Republican Sen. Don Nickles from Oklahoma … Don and I talked about this. We knew that the administrations would change and it would affect every president, Democrat and Republican.”

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/law-backed-by-harry-reid-will-haunt-dems-in-2017/article/2609786

Good old Harry left something worth something.

The Pundit’s Paradox: Matt Lewis’ dangerous allegory

Normally, I reserve my tit for tat arguments for political elites. In this case, I’ll make an exception. It started with a Matt Lewis article that is getting lots of play on CNN and the lamestream express.

Oh, remember the days of Matt Lewis on Townhall and conservative circles? Anyway, he writes a Moonbat-bait piece and Libs compliment his intellectual acumen for daring to raise all the pertinent questions. They love that.

See the article hereShould You be Afraid of President Trump?

For the first time in my lifetime, however, people seem to be wondering if the system is self-destructing.

This debate was on full display today on Morning Joe when Anand Giridharadas squared off against Joe Scarborough. In case you haven’t been paying attention, Donald Trump’s election and subsequent rhetoric (his baseless suggestion that voter fraud cost him the popular vote, his attacks on media figures and outlets, and his recent suggestion that the penalty for flag burning should be jail or loss of citizenship) has alarmed people like Giridharadas who worry he has the kind of authoritarian tendencies that might flout the rule of law. /…

In the past, there have essentially been two things stopping American leaders from dictatorial powers: Character and the system. Ideally, we would elect the kind of people who would, like Washington, serve two terms and then (voluntarily) go back to the farm. But in the event this did not occur, our system would prevent the seizure of power (anyone who tried would fail miserably—and go down in history as an ignominious figure). It’s worth considering whether (A) Donald Trump’s character or (B) the ability of the system to contain him are adequate safeguards?

Lewis goes on in his intellectual quandary. Though I grant his questions may be real ones, his manner of handling, or explaining, the paradox is not. What I mean is he references Joe Scarborough who intimated ‘checks and balances’ should be enough to deter Trump — or anyone for that matter. Understandable. But Matt fears that may not be enough.

That is the beauty of our whole system; or at least it always was until Barack Obama blew it up and proved otherwise. (…he had a little help) Lewis adds:

These fears are not entirely irrational. According to a study reported in today’s New York Times, “signs of democratic deconsolidation in the United States and many other liberal democracies are now similar to those in Venezuela before its crisis.” For example, “researchers found that the share of Americans who say that army rule would be a ‘good’ or ‘very good’ thing had risen to 1 in 6 in 2014, compared with 1 in 16 in 1995.”

More sanguine observers, such as Joe Scarborough, assure us that the American system (with its balance of powers, federalism, and checks and balances) pits ambition against ambition, thus containing the ambitions of any one strongman.

See, Lewis’ problem predates Trump the politician. But in some ways Trump is made to order for our predicament. Like Joe, Libs refer to checks and balances. (Cue those cartoons for the filibuster.) What about checks to the power? We are lectured on the three branches of government. Matt worries about how anyone can hold Trump accountable? But that is the same problem we already have, unaccountable power.

How have these 3 divided branches or checks dealt with the abuse of power thus far? Now therein is the problem. We finally got down to the ‘who gives a damn?‘ stage in our self-government evolution. We proved that we can allow abuses to go on, in some cases without a whimper of protest. We have the first unimpeachable president in history.

Then we showed Obama that Congress would stand as no opposition to him. The Court did basically the same. Should we rerack the tape of the High Court rewriting and passing Obamacare? Where were all the fretful liberals and nail biters then…or abusees?

The point is profound: we the people found there was no check and balance to Obama. Our greatest hope or guarantee was the two-term limit as the sole check and balance. And we can’t say Republicans did not have a majority to do anything, They did. The one time we stood up to face a government shutdown, we blinked and basically gave Obama what he wanted anyway. And Obama was adept at using those circumstances to his benefit.

To Lewis’ assertion on military power, respect, or possible coupe: well, what would you expect? I mean look what we’ve been through. The trust of the Congress is MIA. This is not the people’s fault. We tried every other means to rein in the power. In fact, it was widely accepted that this was our last chance to right the ship, at the ballot box.

So the fact that Military or police — which he claims are both associated with the right — are considered more credible with the people than our government is not so out of the ordinary. Note that the press/media is on the discredited list as well.

Then came Trump who is no fix-it man. However, he is the best disrupter we could have. The first step to correction must be to break this symbiotic relationship that has avoided any accountability thus far. They worry about accountability now? Where were these people? “Trust and verify,” they say? Nothing with Obama was verified… except that he lied to us often. (Obamacare) After we all knew it, still it meant nothing.

It was not working; people were not held accountable, no one was fired, no one went to jail. We had no active checks and balances to out of control power. At least with the military there are some repercussions for actions. Police have accountability. So the point is this system was busted from we the people’s perspective. We don’t see that in the military.

And it was not a case of party politics. That played a role but is not the enabler. We had institutional breakdown. IRS ran amok in politics and abused its power to target political enemies. No one stopped it or held them accountable. The checks and balances went unchecked and unbalanced. Dep of Justice operated as the Injustice Department.

Now I have no fear that Trump would be granted the same latitude Obama had. That’s not going to happen. Press will not do latrine detail for Trump as they did for Obama. So this is better than what we had. But we got something more, even better. We now have someone who voices the concerns of people. Someone who is on the side of the people — a fighter. (he carried their message through the election) Someone as fed up as they are with status quo. We didn’t have that before. The people had no voice. That matters.

In the end, Matt Lewis postulates that he personally believes democracy is preciously fragile enough that one must presume it could be lost. Well, it doesn’t hurt to be vigilant but it requires action, not hyperbole and inaction. In other words, deeds matter more than theory which is exactly why we elected Trump.

Trump is no savior, but at least he is willing and able to do what others wouldn’t or couldn’t. Yet the critics, overwhelmed by fear, are more worried about what he will do than the cause that brought him to bear and made him essential to our cause.

(Note: Lewis’ book Too Dumb to Fail: How the GOP Betrayed the Reagan Revolution to Win Elections (and How It Can Reclaim Its Conservative Roots) was published in January 2016)

RightRing | Bullright