Category ArchiveFirst things . . .
First things . . . Richard Falknor on 09 Jan 2017
The extent and intensity of the pushback against president-elect Donald Trump — even before he takes office on Friday, January 20 — tells patriots what America barely escaped from a Hillary Clinton victory: completion of the Obama transformation of America!
And not just more open borders and more job-killing trade deals and the acceleration of Muslim refugee importation.
But a Clinton Administration intent on using Federal power to impose even more Cultural Marxism on our state and local governments!
Had Mrs. Clinton won, moreover, the House Republican leadership was prepared to move ahead on Big Immigration.
Only a Donald Trump could have put together a campaign strong enough to break the Clinton Machine — and to start to reshape a Republican Party whose leadership had become globalist and whose first instinct had been to capitulate to a Red-Green-Axis-oriented White House.
Thanks to Trump’s election, we have a reprieve from the destructive Obama-Clinton sentence for Americans.
How Should Patriots Use This Providential Reprieve To Restore America?
That is where a Trump Movement comes into play.
For the Trump election is hardly the end of the battle.
It is rather the start of our own long march through our government and our institutions to restore our historic values.
Tomorrow confirmation hearings begin for senator Jeff Sessions to be Attorney General of the United States.
Trump supporters everywhere should be leaning on their United States Senators to confirm Mr. Sessions.
There are more than purely legal achievements in Sessions’ strong record–
Back in April 2015, Hudson Institute senior fellow John Fonte wrote about Jeff Sessions–
“Clearly, the political leader of the conservative populist coalition is the indefatigable Senator Sessions. Day in and day out, for the past two years, Sessions has been issuing memos and talking points, giving speeches, and making media appearances explicating a coherent populist message. The Alabamian is a conviction politician. He is not ‘positioning’ himself for some strategic advantage; rather, he favors limiting (not eliminating) legal immigration because he believes doing so is best for the American people.” (Highlighting Forum’s.)
Don’t count on your local Republican Party to use this precious reprieve to advance patriots’ goals.
Typically they restrict their role to electioneering for GOP incumbents, not acting as engines of accountability.
We can rarely push them to ask incumbents questions like “why did you vote for last year’s Paul Ryan budget?” — or get local GOP meetings to discuss exigent concerns like accelerating Muslim importation into the US.
Last month we explained–
Trump Patriots acting through their own well-organized statewide organizations can have a strong voice for the new president’s campaign priorities that will be heard by their Congressional delegations.
VDARE’s James Kirkpatrick elaborates—
“Similarly, within the GOP, the critical need is to develop a crop of ‘Donald Trump Republicans’ at the local and state levels, running in his name and on the populist platform he campaigned for. Even if Trump himself does not explicitly endorse insurgent candidates, this can be explained away as simply something he has to do because of his position as head of the GOP. The debate should always be framed as though Trump wants populists to take over the GOP—even if he says nothing of the kind. This is a Narrative the Main Stream Media will be eager to believe and to magnify.”
The Trump Reprieve is our last chance — let’s get to work!
Remember the Other Team — from both parties — has not stopped working. They are not going to allow a second reprieve if the first fails.
First things . . . Richard Falknor on 26 Mar 2016
“ALMIGHTY God, who through thine only-begotten Son Jesus Christ hast overcome death, and opened unto us the gate of everlasting life; We humbly beseech thee that, as by thy special grace preventing us thou dost put into our minds good desires, so by thy continual help we may bring the same to good effect; through the same Jesus Christ our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Ghost ever, one God, world without end. Amen.”
First things . . . Richard Falknor on 20 Mar 2016
Last Friday, Rush Limbaugh told us what to expect and why from the Hard Left (today’s Democratic Party and their vast network of agitators and media megaphones)–
“You know what I told you I think’s gonna happen after this election, if a conservative Republican wins this election? Whoever the next president is, is going to be harassed and harangued every day by the usual leftist suspects. And if even element of the Obama agenda is attempted, if we try to get rid of it, Obama himself is gonna be on TV with his buddies in the media trying to defend it. It’s not going to be for the faint of heart. That’s why what’s happening in our campaign right now, this whole Republican primary, is tiddlywinks compared to what the future’s gonna be if we succeed in beating these people back.
It’s tiddlywinks, and people have got to know how serious this is.”
“You’re worried about riots right now? You haven’t seen riots until somebody tries to unwind Obamacare. You haven’t seen riots until the next Republican president takes dead aim at numerous Obama policies — illegal immigration, amnesty — until he takes dead aim at all of Obama’s executive orders. You haven’t seen riots. They’re already promising us that it’s gonna happen.
The Occupy Wall Street crowd, they’re already promising these things. They’re bragging about the biggest riots anybody’s ever seen in the summer to protest Trump. They’re gonna protest us no matter what, whoever on our side wins. And what worries me is that we do not have a Republican Party apparatus that is equipped and prepared for this. It’s a genuine concern of mine. I don’t like using the word “cave,” but it’s patently obvious they’re not much into conflict. It’s pretty clear that they are willing to compromise what they believe so that the media doesn’t call them names. Well, we don’t even know what name-calling is yet.
People are involved in this right now like it’s an academic exercise.” (Highlighting Forum’s throughout.)
Limbaugh translated: today’s GOP apparatus shrinks from the sting of battle!
If today’s Hard Left isn’t seriously attacking major GOP politicians, the Left has rightly figured that those politicians are all hat (self-styled “common-sense conservatives”) and no cattle (lacking the grit to plan successful action against the Hard Left’s agenda).
First things . . . Richard Falknor on 20 Feb 2016
Trump Iraq War Criticism Can Spur Rediscovery of First Principles For American Conduct in War and Peace
One of the many benefits of the Trump candidacy is that his iconoclastic criticism of George W. Bush and the War in Iraq may open the door to a rediscovery of the first principles of our foreign policy as developed by our founding statesmen.
Instead, what we have heard on the so-called Right, are politicians’ exhortations for the U.S. president to “lead”–somewhere with vague objectives and without reference to the military budget; debates over “boots on the ground” vs. airpower in the Middle East; reckless bi-partisan Congressional bankrolling of “moderate” Muslims in the Syrian civil war (resulting in Christian deaths); and no open accounting of what we were doing in Libya (Benghazi in particular) and which members of the Congress had signed off these questionable adventures.
Moreover reports of U.S. efforts to hold Israel back from striking Iran’s nuclear capabilities are particularly troubling.
Donald Trump’s challenge to the validity of the Iraq War has opened a long-overdue public discussion of America’s policies on war and peace from the perspective of our national interest.
Islam scholar (and physician) Dr. Andrew Bostom last Wednesday (click here) examined the “dangerously misguided utopian mindset” that he believes was behind the 2003 invasion of Iraq (see his “WMD or ‘Democratization’? Bush II and the Iraq Invasion”).
“Rancor unleashed by Donald Trump’s allegations during Saturday night’s 2/13/16 South Carolina GOP primary debate has completely obfuscated sober re-assessment of the overriding motivation for the Bush II administration’s March, 2003 invasion of Iraq.
I maintain that dispassionate analysis reveals Iraq was invaded on the basis of a dangerously misguided utopian mindset aggressively inculcated within eight days of the cataclysmic September 11, 2001 jihad terror attacks. Moreover, the abject failure of the Bush II administration to eliminate Iran’s much more tangible nuclear weapons of mass destruction (WMD) threat—clearly evident before, during, and after the Iraq invasion—objectively validates my argument.”
So what was the driving U.S. policy behind invading Iraq after the Jihadist attacks of September 11, 2001?
Bostom points the finger at what he dubs the “Lewis Doctrine.”
“Notably absent WMD references, Peter Waldman’s methodical, well-sourced Feb 3, 2004 Wall Street Journal investigative report (‘A Historian’s Take on Islam Steers U.S. in Terrorism Fight Bernard Lewis’s Blueprint—Sowing Arab Democracy—Is Facing a Test in Iraq’) stands as important confirmation of the overarching ideology which spurred the March, 2003 Iraq invasion. Waldman meticulously documented how the so-called “Last Orientalist,” nonagenarian professor Bernard Lewis, exerted profound influence in shaping the Bush II administration’s ‘Islamic democracy agenda’—invading Iraq being the sine qua non manifestation of this ‘Lewis Doctrine.’ Lewis, as Waldman notes, began evangelizing his ‘Doctrine’ to the highest level Bush II administration officials just over a week after 9/11, accompanied, significantly, by Ahmad Chalabi, a likely ‘vector’ of Iranian influence.”
Author Bostom continues–
“Eight days after the Sept. 11  attacks, with the Pentagon still smoldering, Mr. Lewis addressed the U.S. Defense Policy Board. Mr. Lewis and a friend, Iraqi exile leader Ahmad Chalabi –now [circa 2/2004] a member of the interim Iraqi Governing Council—argued for a military takeover of Iraq to avert still-worse terrorism in the future, says Mr. [Richard] Perle, who then headed the policy board…
Call it the Lewis Doctrine. Though never debated in Congress or sanctified by presidential decree, Mr. Lewis’s diagnosis of the Muslim world’s malaise, and his call for a U.S. military invasion to seed democracy in the Mideast.… As mentor and informal adviser to some top U.S. officials, Mr. Lewis has helped coax the White House to shed decades of thinking about Arab regimes and the use of military power. Gone is the notion that U.S. policy in the oil-rich region should promote stability above all, even if it means taking tyrants as friends. Also gone is the corollary notion that fostering democratic values in these lands risks destabilizing them. Instead, the Lewis Doctrine says fostering Mideast democracy is not only wise but imperative.” (Highlighting Forum’s).
Readers may wish to consider the entirety of Dr. Bostom’s post here.
Congress’s Corker-Cardin Capitulation
In a previous article, Bostom blamed Republican leaders in Congress for not effectively opposing Obama’s dangerous Iran deal.
He presents Congress’s role in the Iran deal as a dereliction of duty to protect the country–a gross example of this Congress’ malfeasance and abdication of power.
Declared Bostom in his “Cruz, Rubio, Paul: All abandoned ‘advice and consent'”–
“By voting for the Corker-Cardin amendment, S.615, ‘Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015,’ all three Republican senators running for president – Ted Cruz, Rand Paul (who just ‘suspended’ his presidential campaign) and Marco Rubio – relinquished their constitutional authority to manage one of the most important global security matters of our time.
Back in March of 2015 I supported the only member of the Senate who served in both Iraq and Afghanistan, Sen. Tom Cotton, and his March 9, 2015, ‘Open Letter to the Leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran.’ Cotton’s letter, endorsed by 46 other GOP senators, informed the theocratic totalitarians of Iran – and reminded U.S. citizens – that, “In the case of a treaty, the Senate must ratify it by a two-thirds vote.” Commendably, and consistent with the ‘advice and consent’ power of the Senate, Sens. Cruz, Paul and Rubio, co-signed Sen. Cotton’s letter. As signatories to the Cotton letter, these senators and presidential aspirants were cognizant – then – of the anti-constitutional Obama administration approach to such a dangerously destabilizing nuclear ‘agreement,’ shorn of senatorial review and debate, and mandatory two-thirds approval vote by that august body.”
The Blue Ridge Forum also addressed the Corker-Cardin disaster (click here) in our July 15 post “Iran Surrender — Worse Than Munich: Congress Greased The Way By Approving Corker Scheme With Huge Majorities Bigger Than Chamberlain’s in 1938.”
And we remind readers that constitutional scholar Andrew McCarthy termed here the Corker-Cardin scheme a “constitutional perversion” and explained here “Why GOP Congressional Leaders Support the Iran Deal in Fact — Follow the Money.”
First Principles: Drawing Sharp Lines between America’s Business and
That of Others, as Well as between Peace and War
Underlying both Bush’s and Obama’s foreign policy errors is the failure to identify America’s interest in making war and peace.
Many of us know Angelo Codevilla from his magisterial 2010 essay “America’s Ruling Class — And the Perils of Revolution” (click here) in the The American Spectator: “The only serious opposition to this arrogant Ruling Party is coming not from feckless Republicans but from what might be called the Country Party — and its vision is revolutionary.”
In his 2014 book, Angelo Codevilla has written an essential guide (click here) to putting America’s foreign relations on a wise basis: To Make and Keep Peace: Among Ourselves and with All Nations—
“Achieving ‘a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations’ is statesmanship’s proper goal. It is also naturally indivisible, because peace with foreigners guards tranquillity among fellow citizens and nothing so incites domestic strife and fosters the loss of liberty as do war’s despotic necessities. Domestic harmony is as precarious as it is precious, everywhere. But nowhere as much as in America, our ‘nation of many nations,’ where so much diversity offers so much occasion for division. Nor are any people so jealous of liberty as are Americans. Fear of war’s effect on peace and liberty at home is the reason why our founding statesmen, beginning with George Washington, were willing to sacrifice so much for peace and agonized so deeply over war.”
The thinking of our leaders is quite different today–
“Often do our statesmen contemplate commitments to conflicts, but seldom how to end them in ways that benefit the American people.”
How did we stray from these first principles of foreign relations?
Among later generations of statesmen, however, other concerns gradually obscured that healthy caution. The illusion of serving noble causes by making foreign quarrels our own has lured the past century’s statesmen to abandon their predecessors’ sharp distinction between war and peace and to fight wars mindless of war’s first principle: that it is an extraordinary event conceived to end in peace. The result, intended to be ordinary and permanent, has been violent ‘nation building’ abroad plus ‘homeland security’ in America, enforced by a national security–homeland security complex whose very size fits it for use as an instrument of partisan strife. ‘Peace among ourselves and with all nations’ is beyond the horizon of twenty-first-century American statesmen.”
We cannot know whether America can ever live in peace again, what kind of peace we may win for ourselves, or what peace we may end up having to endure. But we do know that our statesmen and academics have ceased even to think about such things. Our purpose is to rekindle such thoughts.” (Highlighting Forum’s throughout.)
In his review of Codevilla’s book, David P. Goldman (Spengler) catalogues the current consequences our national journey “from hyperpower to hyperventilator”–of a decade of wrong-headed foreign policy (click here) —
“It isn’t just that the emperor has no clothes: the empire has no tailors. In the decade since President George W. Bush’s 2003 ‘Mission Accomplished’ speech, America has gone from hyperpower to hyperventilater. The Obama administration and Republican leadership quibble about the modalities of an illusory two-state solution in Israel, or the best means to make democracy bloom in the Middle East’s deserts, or how vehemently to denounce Vladimir Putin. Meanwhile, everything that could go wrong, has. Europe’s frontiers are in play for the first time since the fall of Communism; Russia and China have a new rapprochement; American enemies like Iran have a free hand while traditional American allies in the Sunni world feel betrayed; and China has all but neutralized American sea power within hundreds of miles of its coast.”(Highlighting Forum’s.)
Let’s pray that the Trump Insurgency also spurs ordinary Americans to demand we return to first principles on war and peace.
(Post has been edited since its publishing on February 20, 2016.)
First things . . . Richard Falknor on 19 Feb 2016
Historian Diana West writes —
“Unveiling a work in progress, The Big Conservative Dictionary of Donald Trump.
The fun part about The Big Conservative Dictionary of Donald Trump is that it is brought to you by those erudite conservatives who, some even between birthing the stink bombs below, endlessly deplore crudeness and ‘tone’ in simply scads of elevating sermons and television lecture-bytes. (See ‘Rudeness Is not a Conservative Value,’ ‘Against Trump,’ etc.).”
The Trump Insurgency has already changed the national conversation about America’s future: now focusing on legal and illegal immigration, one-sided sovereignty-ceding trade deals, and the grave dangers of importing Jihadists.
The venomous tone of the “conservative” establishment, a.k.a. Conservatism, Inc., shows their well-grounded fear that they will no longer be able to shape the national conservative narrative.
Click here to read author West’s dictionary in progress!
First things . . . Richard Falknor on 03 Feb 2016
Politico’s Ben Schreckinger today reports here in “Trump resists staff calls to change course” that – –
“In the lead-up to Donald Trump’s loss in Iowa, staffers sought additional funding for campaign infrastructure and were denied. Now, six days from the New Hampshire primary and looking for his first win, Trump is still refusing to shake up his ground game.”
We cannot second-guess Trump’s Grand Campaign Strategy with the information we have.
Our gut, however, tells us that from what we have seen in our part of the forest (Maryland and Virginia), more talent and resources would be most helpful.
But this brings us to the larger picture of the Trump Insurgency, or better, the hopes for an American Reformation he has raised throughout the nation.
These hopes — for the return of our sovereignty through control of our borders, management of our legal immigration, trading arrangements that clearly benefit us; restoring our economy to benefit ordinary Americans; rebuilding a robust national defense while distinguishing between selected foreign actions that are our business and avoiding the many entanglements that are not our business — have taken on a life of their own.
From conservative patriots ranging from Phyllis Schlafly here to senator Jeff Sessions here to Ann Coulter here, to thousands of Americans who have lined up across America to hear Donald Trump, they are deeply invested in the future he has evoked.
Trump is now the steward of these widely held hopes — almost as if he were already in public office.
The message to Trump: understand as you make your tactical decisions that your campaign has become a national movement to begin to resuscitate a seriously endangered United States.
First things . . . Richard Falknor on 01 Jan 2016
The Omnibus: The Moral Failure of the House Conservatives — Did They Even Try To Derail The Omnibus Express?
The left-leaning Politico got it right when they declared “Conservatives give Ryan a pass on budget deal they despise” —
“But unlike past fiscal battles, when lawmakers took shots at GOP leaders and tried to tank bills, this time conservatives are largely holding their fire. Even as they vow to oppose the package, many are still praising Speaker Paul Ryan’s handling of the $1.1 trillion spending bill and $680 billion in tax breaks.” (Highlighting Forum’s)
“Virginia Republican Dave Brat, a Freedom Caucus member who also sits on the budget panel, said Ryan has also gained support because he has been ‘credible on regular order’ — Congress-speak for empowering committees and rank-and-file members — and has already teed up the budget process for the beginning of 2016, a starting point unheard of in recent years.
‘The end product here is just cleaning the barn; it’s a disaster,’ Brat said of the spending and tax deal. ‘We’re breaking our pledge on the budget caps to the American people, we’ve lost fiscal discipline, and we’re throwing it all on the next generation.’
But in the same breath, Brat praised Ryan: ‘Not only is he saying the right things, he is lining it up to do the right things … and then leadership can’t hijack the budget at the end of the year and throw in the kitchen sink, which we just did.’
Praise from members of the conservative flank is a sign that they believe Ryan (R-Wis.) is trying to chart a new course in his nascent speakership. The conservatives feel more included in the process and said Ryan’s staff has been vocal about wanting their feedback. But the lawmakers are also planning to watch the speaker closely in 2016, when they say he’ll have more control over the appropriations process and Boehner can’t be blamed.” (Highlighting Forum’s)
But PowerLine’s Paul Mirengoff has a sharper perspective in his “GOP leadership caves on Gosar Amendment”–
“From the Politico article, it’s clear that Freedom Caucus members like that Ryan is giving them face time. This represents the triumph of vanity over principle. Ryan is playing these folks and they seem happy enough to be played. (Highlighting Forum’s)
Ted Cruz likes to talk about the ‘Washington Cartel’ — the leaders from both parties who, he says, make sure business continues as usual, to the people’s detriment. Cruz’s rhetoric seemed extravagant to me, but now I wonder whether it is apt.”
Last week Mirengoff added further insights in his “The problem with Speaker Ryan in one headline”–
“[Amber] Phillips’ [WP] article does a good job of explaining how Ryan managed to sell out conservatives without drawing the ire of his conservative colleagues. She demonstrates the problem with House conservatives in two paragraphs:
Ryan managed to negotiate a spending bill with Democrats in the same manner and with largely the same outcomes that Boehner likely would have. But Ryan did it without earning the same kind of vitriol from the right flank of his party that Boehner likely would have. The group on the right didn’t like the spending bill, and many didn’t vote for it, but they didn’t call Ryan names for negotiating it with Democrats.
Knowing he was at risk of being compared to the politically toxic former speaker during these negotiations, Ryan did his best to subtly draw contrasts with Boehner outside of them — Boehner smokes and drinks; Ryan works out every morning. Boehner stacked powerful committees with his allies; Ryan opened the positions up to the whole House.
Apparently all it takes to turn House conservatives into poodles is a morning workout and the promise of ‘openness.’ Amazing.” (Highlighting Forum’s)
Who Voted Against The Consolidated Appropriations
Act of 2016 & The Rule Enabling Its Consideration?
Take a look who voted no on these two bills:
- The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2016 — 95 Republicans and 18 Democrats voted no.
- The Rule (H.Res 566) enabling its consideration — 2 Republicans and 183 Democrats voted no.
Think about this. If just 40 of the 95 Republican members (42%) who voted against the bill itself had earlier voted against the Rule (together with the 183 Democrats who did so), they might well have brought the Omnibus Railroad to a halt.
The reasonable and publicly defensible objective would have been to enact a further continuing resolution until mid or late-January (as Americans for Limited Government urged), allowing both the members of the Congress and the public carefully to examine and consider this enormous legislative package.
Daniel Horowitz summed up the Omnibus problem in his “Paul Ryan’s 11 Christmas Gifts to Obama–
“At 1:34 on Wednesday morning [December 16], the party of Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan dropped their Christmas package off at the White House lawn in the form of a 2,009-page omnibus spending bill and a 233-page tax subsidy bill. The House plans to vote on the tax bill today and the spending bill tomorrow [December 18]. The enormity of this betrayal is breathtaking. At the same time, however, it perfectly illustrates why the American people are done with the Republican Party as currently constituted, as witnessed by the direction of the presidential primary. Amazingly, many ‘D.C. conservatives’ are giving Paul Ryan a pass.” (Highlighting Forum’s)
Perhaps even a seriously organized pushback of House conservatives against rushing this monstrous Omnibus to approval might have failed — with Nancy Pelosi getting enough Democrats and Ryan enough Republican Poodles to get the House to approve a Rule giving the green light to the Omnibus Railroad before Christmas.
But if House conservatives had pushed back hard against the GOP leadership on the Omnibus, whatever the outcome, they would have kept their credibility — and their honor — for the future.
* * * * * * * * *
For readers’ quick reference, the following articles make it very clear what this Omnibus should have accomplished, and suggest just some of the damage already identified in that lamentable measure.
- Conservative Review Senior Editor Daniel Horowitz–“9 Harmful Policies GOP Must Block in Budget Bill”
- Senator Jeff Sessions — “Sessions Issues Statement On Immigration-Surging Omnibus”
- Breitbart’s Stephen Bannon & Julia Hahn — “Paul Ryan Betrays America: $1.1 Trillion, 2,000-Plus Page Omnibus Bill Funds ‘Fundamental Transformation of America’”-–
“By locking in the President’s refugee, immigration, and spending priorities, Ryan’s bill is designed to keep these fights out of Congress by getting them off the table for good. Delivering Obama these wins–and pushing these issues beyond the purview of Congress–will suppress public attention to the issues and, in so doing, will boost the candidacy of the Republican establishment’s preferred presidential contenders, who favor President Obama’s immigration agenda.” (Highlighting Forum’s)
First things . . . Richard Falknor on 24 Dec 2015
First things . . . Richard Falknor on 15 Dec 2015
UPDATED: Immigration & More: What Do Maryland GOP U.S. Senate Primary Hopefuls Think About The Imminent Omnibus?
UPDATE DECEMBER 16–MORE FOR MD GOP SENATE HOPEFULS TO COMMENT ON! WND’s Leo Hohmann reports “Secret deal quadruples foreign workers in U.S.–Borrows from Rubio’s ‘Gang of Eight’ bill to flood blue-collar job market” –Buried in the 2,000-page omnibus spending bill released by the Senate this morning is a secret provision that many senators hope unemployed blue-collar workers won’t find out about.This provision would quadruple the number of H-2B visas for unskilled foreign ‘guest workers.’ It would allow more than a quarter of a million foreign workers to enter the U.S. each year and work in the construction industry, hotel-motel services, truck drivers, food processing, forestry and many other fields that don’t require a college education.…The last-minute insert was sponsored by Sens. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., and Thom Tillis, R-N.C….’In 2008, CIS found that Mikulski, a long-time champion of SOSSBA, received tens of thousands of dollars of campaign contributions from the biggest users of the program,’ [Ian] Smith said. Like Maryland, Tillis’s state of North Carolina is a big user of the program.” Breitbart’s Neil Munro on Rep Andy Harris role here. Read Ian Smith’s NRO piece here–“Members of Congress from Maryland and North Carolina…should join the bipartisan effort to condemn the bill.” (Highlighting Forum’s.)
* * * * * * * * *
The Baltimore Sun’s Michael Dresser here tells us that
“[Kathy] Szeliga, 54, gives the GOP its most prominent contender so far for the seat Mikulski has held for three decades. Also seeking the Republican nomination [are] former gubernatorial aide Chrys Kefalas, Navy veteran Anthony Seda and former Pentagon official Richard Douglas.”
We agree with Dresser’s assessment, and we also recall Szeliga’s outstanding competence and judgment from the time she was chief of staff to then-state senator Andy Harris. We do not know the other four candidates. If not so prominent, they may nonetheless be equally able.
But the country is in grave peril, and the Congress as well as the White House is in no small disrepute.
Consequently Maryland Republican candidates for United States Senator in 2016 need to speak forthrightly and in detail about such existential threats as uncontrolled immigration.
Conservative Review senior editor Daniel Horowitz puts the matter here into this week’s context–
“This week will serve as the harbinger for how dramatically Obama will be able to ‘fundamentally transform’ America during his final year in office — coinciding with a time of unprecedented domestic and international security threats. When the voters elect a divided government, the expectation is that each side will have to implement some policies that the other dislikes. With Republicans in control of Congress and the purse strings that come with that power, the December budget bill will be the last opportunity to redress the grievances from which the American people seek relief. This is a time for Republicans to fight for a number of policies that, if not rescinded, will cause irrevocable damage to either our security or our economy. Particularly in Obama’s final year it is vital that Republicans preemptively curb him from consummating the great fundamental transformation. While there are endless liberal policies conservatives would love to block in the budget bill, there are certain items that must be defunded now and cannot wait for the next president.” (Highlighting Forum’s throughout.)
Baltimore-area resident Horowitz continues-–
“Stop Obama’s Dangerous Refugee Program
Republicans are floating the idea of attaching their phony refugee bill to the omnibus. Their bill will not shut down the program; the best way to prevent future radical Islamists from entering our nation. It’s time Republicans harness the overwhelming public opposition to refugee resettlement and defund the entire program for the rest of the fiscal year until the Government Accountability Office conducts a full audit of the program’s security problems and fiscal cost. As Sen. Jeff Sessions noted, if Republicans fund refugee resettlement in the omnibus, December 11 will truly be a date that will live in infamy. The details of the San Bernardino terror attack demonstrate just how dangerous our immigration policies can be. The budget bill will provide Congress with the last chance to block the new immigration of radical sharia-adherent Muslims from Syria and potential terrorists like Tafsheen Malik.“
The release of tens of thousands of dangerous criminal aliens into our communities is undoubtedly the biggest threat to our security for the remainder of this presidency. But the problem is not only limited to sanctuary cities. It’s localities, such as Frederick County, Maryland, that want to cooperate with ICE but are stymied from doing so. Why? Because Obama has essentially repealed the Secure Communities and 287(g) programs designed to coordinate and train local law enforcement in helping with immigration enforcement. Republicans must condition funding for DHS to the reinstatement of Secure Communities and 287(g). They must also defund DACA, which is still incentivizing a massive border surge to this very day. And obviously, they must defund sanctuary cities. We cannot afford another year of mass illegal immigration. Yet, at present, as Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) noted, Republicans are planning to fund every aspect of Obama’s amnesty agenda in the Omnibus. At a time when we have record immigration from the Muslim world, in conjunction with no deportations, no visa tracking, and an open border, we have never been more vulnerable to a terror attack. This cannot stand another year.”
Read the entire Horowitz post 9 Harmful Policies GOP Must Block in Budget Bill here.
Today our worst fears about the Omnibus were confirmed by Breitbart’s Julia Hahn in her Politico: Ryan-Pelosi Give Obama Refugees In Omnibus—
“Establishment publication Politico confirms the repeated warnings of Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL)… and Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL)…, that Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI)’s… omnibus spending bill will fully fund President Obama’s refugee resettlement operation.”
Several Questions For Each Of The Maryland GOP U. S. Senate Contenders
If you were a senator today, what legislative action if any — e.g., sponsoring or co-sponsoring amendments to fix the measure — would you be prepared to take when the Ryan Omnibus comes before the Senate this week?
Would you vote for an Omnibus that did not defund refugee resettlement? that did not defund Planned Parenthood? that did not block gun control?
Or is avoiding a “shutdown” in 2015 your first priority?
Extra points: what sitting U. S. senator do you most admire? Why?
** * * *
Readers (and candidates) might find the following articles useful–
First things . . . Richard Falknor on 14 Dec 2015
“The omnibus would put the U.S. on a path to approve admission for hundreds of thousands of migrants from a broad range of countries with jihadists movements over the next 12 months, on top of all the other autopilot annual immigration – absent language to reduce the numbers.” —senators Jeff Sessions & Richard Shelby
This week the Congressional Republican Leadership plans a vote on a giant “omnibus” appropriations measure to bankroll the Federal government through next September 30!
Today Politico’s Huddle reports—
“Negotiations continued throughout the weekend on a massive government funding deal lawmakers need to clinch this week. Technically the deadline is Wednesday, but it’s highly likely Congress passes another short-term funding measure to give the Senate time to pass any deal that emerged from the still ongoing negotiations. Sources famil[iar] with the talks said staff for Republican and Democratic appropriators, along with leadership, are ‘making significant progress’ and a deal could come together shortly. But big issues on riders and levels of appropriations still exist.”(Highlighting Forum’s.)
Importantly, last Thursday senator Jeff Sessions, in discussing Syrian refugees warned, “It’s going to be jammed through!” (Click here.)
Last Friday constitution defender Sessions and his colleague Richard Shelby urged (click here)–
“Congress must cancel the President’s blank refugee check and put Congress back in charge of the program. We cannot allow the President to unilaterally decide how many refugees he wishes to admit, nor continue to force taxpayers to pick up the tab for the tens of billions of unpaid-for welfare and entitlement costs. The omnibus would put the U.S. on a path to approve admission for hundreds of thousands of migrants from a broad range of countries with jihadists movements over the next 12 months, on top of all the other autopilot annual immigration – absent language to reduce the numbers.” (Highlighting Forum’s.)
The two senators recommended instead–
“A provision to deny the expenditure of grant funds in the omnibus legislation for Sanctuary Cities
A provision to deny the expenditure of funds to issue visas to countries that refuse to repatriate criminal aliens
A provision to prevent the expenditure of any funds on immigration programs that waive in-person interviews
A provision to withhold refugee resettlement funds until Congress passes a joint resolution to authorize refugee resettlement, ending the President’s unilateral refugee power”
Refugee-resettlement expert Ann Corcoran detailed what appears to us to be our Deep State’s larger goal –– click on her Obama Task Force on New Americans: Changing America by ‘seeding’ migrants in towns everywhere–
“Obama is changing America by changing the people! You might even say he is ‘colonizing’ America!
And, they are doing it by changing the language as well!
Update March 2: Learn about another participant in the plan—New Americans Campaign, here.
. . . . . . . . . .
“It is not just Obama!
Finally, remember this “seeding” concept has been going on for decades through Presidents of both parties as the US State Department and its contractors (all nine are progressive, six of them represent the ‘religious Left’) have been seeding communities with refugees — see our post just this week about how over 60 towns in Minnesota have been ‘salted’ (I should have said ‘seeded!’) with Somalis. Obama is just taking it to a new level.
By the way, I will bet the contractors*** were on that Task Force on New Americans conference call too!
Speaking of language—you are a racist if you don’t want to be replaced!
Again, they control the language: If you aren’t ‘welcoming’ then that means to them you are unwelcoming = racist, redneck, xenophobic, nativist boob. Such language sends most good people running for cover. Or, in the case of politicians, especially Republican ones, they virtually wet their pants out of fear while Obama and the progressives move forward with their agenda of replacing you.” (Highlighting Forum’s.)
What — then — should be done?
- The Congress must move the current extension until mid-January so sensible immigration fixes can be added and so that members will have at least a week to review the provisions of this giant measure before voting on it. Blind legislating of this scope under Christmas “deadlines” is simply indefensible.
- Readers who don’t want to be overwhelmed by Shariah-adherent and assimilation-resistant refugees should talk bluntly and right now to their House GOP members who plan to go along with the Ryan Leadership on immigration: we’ll bring up your record at every Republican county committee meeting we attend; we’ll confront volunteers for your reelection campaign on your position; we’ll picket your district offices; we’ll put your porous-border votes on local overpass media; and we’ll seek not just a primary opponent but even explore finding an independent conservative candidate to challenge you.
Civility, yes; “nice”, no longer.