Category ArchiveFirst things . . .
First things . . . Richard Falknor on 21 May 2013
“’I left a thriving family business with my husband that I loved, to do something I didn’t necessarily love, but [which] I thought had to be done,’ she says. ‘But I really think if we don’t do this, if we don’t stand up and speak now, there might not [always] be that chance.’”
For those readers who may have missed the saga of Catherine Englebrecht who founded True The Vote, then was subject to all manner of Federal harassment, click here to read Jillian Kay Melchior ‘s article “True Scandal” in National Review on Line.
Mrs. Englebrecht with the support of her family persevered throughout the whole ordeal because she took her patriotic duty seriously.
Members of the Congress take this oath:
“I, (name of Member), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God” (5 U.S.C. §3331).
Members of the House don’t meet this obligation simply by taking, without reflection, the GOP Leadership’s implicit assurance, by bringing a measure to the floor, of what is constitutional (click here). Nor by dutifully acquiescing in the GOP Leadership’s failure to defend the Constitution (click here). Nor by uncritically accepting the House Speaker’s (admittedly uninformed, he had not read the letters) take on which foreign and domestic enemies members should not concern themselves about (click here and here).
Catherine Englebrecht risked a great deal because she knows her country is in great danger.
We conservatives should expect House members who fly under the conservative flag to take at least that same level of risk.
Risking one’s seat, one’s advancement in the House, one’s popularity with the media, the displeasure of other members, the expectation of a comfortable retirement, the vengeance of a misguided Leadership–all these may well be the cost of doing the right things in these very grave times. This is no time for GOP members to feel ‘entitled’ to a trouble-free career in office.
It is particularly galling, as the nation stumbles under the crushing load of big government and faces perilous foreign threats, to see GOP ‘celebrities’ (the Hollow Men) trimming their rhetoric on the future of this country — better to position themselves, supposedly, for 2016’s presidential race (click here).
Today we need a far higher standard for our GOP politicians, the better to cope with what Caroline Glick (click here) describes as
“the modus operandi of the Obama administration: To establish an ‘official truth’ about all issues and events, and use the powers of the federal government to punish all those who question or expose the fraudulence of that ‘official truth.’”
What conservatives should be asking of House GOP members are the traditional American virtues of bravery and determination.
After all, that is what House members routinely ask of their fellow Americans in the military.
First things . . . Richard Falknor on 16 May 2013
First things . . . Richard Falknor on 05 May 2013
For readers who may have missed it, here is Ken Klukowski’s Saturday report in Breitbart: “Pentagon Defends Unconstitutional Policy Against Soldiers Sharing Faith”–
“Pentagon personnel responded to Breitbart News’ report about court-martialing service members who share their faith in the military, which the Pentagon confirmed on May 1, and the Air Force on May 2 separately confirmed a second time.
Now the Pentagon claims the opposite. But these new statements instead only compound the problem, as the Pentagon’s new definitions for terms squarely contradict what the dictionary says those terms mean. All this has taken place as the first flag officer in the military has stepped forward to defy the unconstitutional policy.”
On May 1, professor Klukowski had written (click here)
“So President Barack Obama’s civilian appointees who lead the Pentagon are confirming that the military will make it a crime–possibly resulting in imprisonment–for those in uniform to share their faith. This would include chaplains—military officers who are ordained clergymen of their faith (mostly Christian pastors or priests, or Jewish rabbis)–whose duty since the founding of the U.S. military under George Washington is to teach their faith and minister to the spiritual needs of troops who come to them for counsel, instruction, or comfort.”
Now read here for House GOP whip Kevin McCarthy’s flaccid response. He suggests no consequences from Congress if the Obama Pentagon declines to change course. This is no ordinary “misunderstanding” soluble by Pentagon “clarifications.”
What is needed, instead, is a series of House Armed Services Committee investigative hearings – complete with swearing the witnesses and subpoenaing documents — on what anti-religious policies the Obama Pentagon has been developing for the U S military.
The Virginia Tea Party Patriots Federation should be pushing the Old Dominion’s GOP House delegation to insist on such hearings: that course would be a higher and better use of the Federation’s time than their Rube Goldberg scheme to try to anoint “official” Tea Party candidates in the GOP primary May 18 in Richmond.
And Where Are the Maryland and Virginia Clergy?
Listen to General Jerry Boykin here at 5:45 –
“The president’s going to fix it. The party’s going to fix it. We fixed it, all right.
But the reason we are in the shape we are in is because of the church. Because the church has been asleep.” (Highlighting Forum’s.)
General Boykin had made this point earlier (click here) about the absence of the churches on the “don’t ask don’t tell repeal”.
“Army general flares: ‘where were the churches’ in fight against Don’t Ask repeal
by Kathleen Gilbert WASHINGTON, D.C., October 12, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) — One of America’s most seasoned war generals expressed frustration at the silence of Christian churches as the U.S. military’s ban on open homosexuality fell to a repeal effort earlier this year.
Lieutenant General Jerry Boykin described at the Values Voter Summit on Saturday the exasperation of pro-family leaders in Washington who found themselves abandoned by church leaders unwilling to make a stand for the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy. Boykin, who spent the majority of his career in the Special Forces, was mission commander of the battle portrayed in the Hollywood movie ‘Black Hawk Down,’ and accepted the surrender of Panama military dictator Manuel Noriega in 1989.
According to Boykin, ‘nobody in this country fought a greater fight’ against normalizing homosexuality in the military than Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, himself a former Marine who joined forces with senator and fellow veteran John McCain.
‘John McCain kept turning to Tony Perkins saying, ‘Where’s the church? Where are the spiritual leaders?’ said Boykin.
‘The answer was, they were silent. The church was silent.’
Besides a large number of military chaplains, few church leaders in America spoke up publicly against the Obama administration’s campaign last year to pass the repeal in Congress.” (Highlighting Forum’s.)
And the clergy in our history? Readers who seek to know more about the vital civil and military role of the clergy in our War for Independence should visit the video “Pastor Dan Fisher — Bringing Back the Black Robed Regiment” (click here).
Of course, ours is a Judaeo-Christian tradition. Here are links to four Jewish patriots who went in harm’s way to speed the birth of our Republic–
The Obama Pentagon has likely been developing this scheme to extirpate our Judaeo-Christian heritage from our Armed Forces for some time. If successful, this will be a sword thrust through the heart of our culture and our freedom.
First things . . . Richard Falknor on 08 Apr 2013
UPDATE AFTER PRESS TIME! RedState’s Ben Howe reports “EXCLUSIVE: McConnell to Filibuster Reid Gun Control Bill”
* * * * * * * * * *
“In a profound twist of irony, the Senate will be considering a new gun bill which seeks to regulate ‘undocumented guns’ at the same time the Gang of 8 releases its amnesty plan for illegal aliens. We are living in absurdastan. Through the worst eras of big government Republicanism, the party has always stood strong on taxes and guns. Now, after the McConnell tax hikes and the impending gun control cave, there is nothing left of the GOP.” — Daniel Horowitz
Today Marylander Daniel Horowitz gives us chapter and verse on why it is necessary to filibuster this dangerous Reid gun control proposal right away.
Madison Project (MP) blogger Horowitz reveals (click here)–
“As early as this Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid plans to bring the most sweeping gun control bill to the Senate floor since the ‘90s. The Senate Judiciary Committee has passed a slew of gun control measures in short order without bothering to submit a committee report. Reid, with the help of Chuck Schumer and Pat Leahy, has combined many aspects of those bills into one single bill – S.649, which is given the Orwellian name ‘Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013.’ Reid will attempt to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed early this week.” (Highlighting Forum’s.)
What must be done now?
Horowitz explains –
“Republicans must pledge to block it from the floor and use every dilatory tactic to ensure that the train never gets rolling. Senators Cruz, Rubio, Rand Paul, Lee, Inhofe, Crapo, Moran, Burr, Johnson of Wisconsin, Enzi, Risch , Crapo, Coats, and Roberts have already pledged to filibuster the motion to proceed. We need 29 more commitments, including a willingness on the part of Mitch McConnell to lead from the front on this issue.” (Highlighting Forum’s.)
Truth time for Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell?
“Call Mitch McConnell’s office and ask if he plans to lead the filibuster against this terrible piece of legislation.”
Read the entire MP post to understand what GOP senators are working against the Second Amendment, what GOP senators are defending it, and what GOP senators are just dithering. Click here to see all U S senators.
Maryland and Virginia conservatives can reach out to fence-sitting or even hostile GOP senators in other states through their business and professional colleagues in those states, and by getting in touch with local Tea Parties.
And get your message to the House leadership via your House GOP member!
Our March 11 post (below) details the urgency of doing so.
Honor Margaret Thatcher’s legacy of fighting for freedom by blocking these imminent assaults on the Second Amendment.
First things . . . Richard Falknor on 04 Apr 2013
“As bureaucrats and teachers’ unions disempowered neighborhood school boards, while the governments of towns, counties, and states were becoming conduits for federal mandates, as the ruling class reduced the number and importance of things that American communities could decide for themselves, America’s thirst for self-governance reawakened.”–Angelo Codevilla
There can’t be much doubt that key elements of the curricula and practices of American schools from kindergarten through at least college graduation are the major long-term threat to the survival of conservative views — and to self, as opposed to “expert” government.
And many conservatives also understand that this is a concern, however serious, on which the national or state GOP establishments have not spent much time.
Academies for Statism
Below are just a few of many recent examples of schools and colleges running wild as Seminaries of the Left - -
- Stanley Kurtz (Fossil-Fuel Divestment — Part 3 NRO) –
“Millennials, meanwhile, are in a bit of a haze. Their support for an expanded entitlement state and an end to fossil fuels threatens to render their employment woes permanent and their tax burdens unsustainable. Yet they have barely considered what is at stake. How could they, when the press won’t cover the conflicts? With a monolithically leftist faculty, and conservatives viewed as either dangerously uncool or outright genocidal, campus debate over such issues has all but disappeared.
Conservatives rightly want to win back the culture, especially among the young. The problem is that many millennials aren’t waiting to carefully consider earnest arguments from both sides about what sort of society we should want. They’ve swallowed the Left’s caricature of the Right, more out of the need for a secular religion or as a matter of fashion than from due consideration of the issues. That will be tough to reverse.
The fossil-fuel divestment campaign will test the capacity of our politics, our press, our universities, and our young people for thoughtful debate on serious issues. The results so far are disappointing.”
“The school does not offer a single course in American military, political, diplomatic, or intellectual history.”
- Mary Grabar in “Common Core: Leftist Historians Profit”- –
“What Common Core promoters ignore is the fact that states and localities will cease to have control over their curricula. Books will be aligned to tests. The test questions may be open-ended and ‘creative’ (as promised), but you know that they will be asking seventh-graders about J. Edgar Hoover’s sexuality, and more about Malcolm X than James Madison.”
- Todd Starnes (RedState) in “University Compares Pro-Life Students to White Supremacists” –
“The Student Government Association at Johns Hopkins University compared pro-life students to white supremacists and denied them official club status at the school.
‘They were denied status because the students on the student council felt being pro-life violates their harassment policy,” said Kristan Hawkins, president of Students for Life of America.’
Hawkins told Fox News the student group, called Voice for Life, is searching for an attorney and they plan on fighting the ban.
The SGA at Johns Hopkins voted March 12 to deny Voice for Life the right to become an official student club. That vote was affirmed on March 24 by the SGA’s senate.
SGA representatives did not return calls seeking comment.”
Faithful readers will recall that Johns Hopkins University, according to the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), is –
“A red light university [one that] has at least one policy that both clearly and substantially restricts freedom of speech.”
What Should Conservatives Do?
Most important, spend some time with like-minded friends and colleagues carefully to review opportunities to fix K-16 (kindergarten through college) malpractice.
Parents will want to be alert for questionable K-12 textbooks on American history and government and recommend good alternatives; or, if nothing on American government is currently taught, recommend sound readings.
If you are a college or university graduate, pay attention to the current level of freedom on your alma mater’s campus by checking with FIRE here.
Also follow the tone of your alumni magazine which typically markets its college’s latest ‘green’ or ‘diversity’ schemes.
Don’t fall into the sunk-cost syndrome: just because you went to Ruling Class U and paid them all that tuition, doesn’t mean you now have to respond to their money-raising calls with donations if you don’t like what they have become. If RCU is no longer your kind of school, man up — tell them why and to take a walk.
Some larger undertakings, and questions:
Mapping, then turning off the faucet on Federal and state money that goes into turning your state’s K-16 schools into Seminaries of the Left;
Can today’s undergraduate colleges be turned around to provide solid learning and a real diversity of faculty opinion? Or do we need new institutions to provide the right value to America’s undergraduates?
We solicit readers’ ideas.
* * * * * * * * * *
Readers may wish to re-visit some of our closely related posts – -
First things . . . Richard Falknor on 17 Mar 2013
UPDATE MARCH 22: Hear yesterday’s testimony (click here) from delegate Neil Parrott on his HB 1520 where he states that a ‘friendly amendment’ would incorporate the substance of his measure into HB 1178. Listen (click here) to the extensive March 12 testimony from mayor Cheye Calvo of Berwyn Heights, Maryland on delegate Kriselda Valderrama’s HB 1178 as well as the pushback from the Washington County Sheriff’s Office. HB 1178’s companion measure SB 590 (click here) passed the Maryland Senate yesterday 47-0. Several members of both parties on the House Judiciary panel were clearly not taken in by the thinly reasoned opposition to SWAT reporting requirements from Maryland law-enforcement voices.
* * * * * * * * * *
Next Thursday March 21 at 1 PM, the Maryland House of Delegates Judiciary panel will hear testimony on Neil Parrott’s HB1520 entitled “SWAT Team Reports — Required Information and Extension of Sunset” (click here).
The Washington County Republican delegate’s measure would extend the sunset date on existing SWAT-information-collection legislation from June 30, 2014 to June 30, 2017, and expand the information required. (Click here for the bill’s text.)
The back story on this measure is the uproar over the questionable use of SWAT resources in Washington County in a November misadventure which outraged local citizens.
Ann Corcoran (PTPR) covered this Sharpsburg incident extensively (click here).
Whatever the legislative outcome of HB1520 this late in the session of the 2013 General Assembly, next Thursday afternoon’s hearing can be a valuable teaching opportunity for conservatives as they testify in support of continuing and expanding SWAT reporting.
Sharpsburg is not the first SWAT incident in the Old Line State to come under public criticism.
On August 15, 2008, we posted End SWAT Team Overreach in Maryland and Virginia–
“The security of one’s family and property against gross misuse of state power must always be a central conservative concern. Thus we invite the attention of readers to the case of the SWAT team here invasion of the home of mayor Cheye Calvo of Berwyn Heights, Maryland.
Here is what the DC Examiner said this week about the Berwyn Heights case….”
In our August 15, 2008 discussion, we made these points –
- “We suggest the attorneys-general of Maryland and Virginia should develop sensible state-wide guidelines for the use of SWAT teams along the lines originally intended. They should hold public hearings to illustrate the dimensions of the current SWAT problem in their respective states and weigh possible remedies.
- “As Mr. Balko has written: ‘L.A. police chief Darryl Gates invented the [SWAT] concept in the 1960s shortly after the Watts riots. Gates wanted an elite team of police who could defuse dangerous situations like riots, hostage-takings, or bank robberies. For about a decade, that’s how SWAT teams were used, and they performed marvelously.’”
- “Conservatives should seek Congressional review of Federal SWAT team employment, and the extent of past and current Federal SWAT subsidies to local police departments. Critics suggest this Federal help (including large quantities of ‘surplus military gear’) is responsible for the ‘mission creep’ of SWAT teams.”
- “This is rather a tale of blind Federal largesse here to local police departments. It is a story of pork gone rancid.”
- “Gun owners might consider this extract from the Cato white paper [Overkill]: ‘Police say that [one suspect's] concealed-carry permit indicated he was potentially dangerous, which necessitated the involvement of the SWAT team.’” (Highlighting supplied throughout for today’s post.)
See all three current Maryland reports on SWAT use required under existing law.
See also a three-year summary of these reports.
As analyst Radley Balko suggests, continuing transparency is essential to getting the rules right for the employment of SWAT teams.
That is why the Maryland House of Delegates Judiciary panel should extend the sunset on SWAT required data collection, and expand the required information.
Readers may wish to revisit our other posts relating to SWAT teams:
First things . . . Richard Falknor on 14 Mar 2013
- Video “Explosive Exchange at Gun Hearing Between Ted Cruz and Dianne Feinstein” (via Madison Project)
But can the House GOP “Gun Team” muster the same kind of constitutional savvy as senator Ted Cruz — and also put it in plain, strong words?
Or do they even want to?
Goodlatte had told the Capitol Hill media toward the end of February (click here for article from The Hill) –
“Offering a ray of hope for gun-control advocates, House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) – a long-time opponent of tougher gun laws – said over the weekend that he’s eying his own legislation for expanding the background check system.
‘The Congress is going to act on this issue,’ Goodlatte told Roll Call on Friday. ‘The Senate is at work on it, and we are as well. Our goal is to do anything we can do keep firearms out of the hands of people who should not have them.’
Goodlatte’s comments mark a sharp shift for House GOP leaders, who had previously indicated they would not move on any gun-control measures until the Senate passed a bill.” (Highlighting Forum’s.)
As we reported Tuesday from Congressional rules guru Michael Hammond (RedState) –
“The last-ditch solution to both [guns and immigration] of these Armageddon scenarios is the same: the Hastert Rule, which prevents House consideration of any bill not supported by a majority of the Republican caucus — currently, 117 Republicans. Whatever the media has convinced John McCain to do, surely 117 House Republicans would oppose allowing the GOP to commit suicide.” Hammond explains – “Fortunately, it turns out that such a letter already exists on guns: It is the Stockman-Broun letter to invoke the Hastert Rule on any gun control. And, although the Stockman-Broun letter is picking up steam, it still does not have obvious signatures from people like Michele Bachmann and Steve King.” Read the entire Hammond post (Highlighting Forum’s.)
Conservatives will want to talk in person to House GOP members they know about promptly signing the Stockman-Broun letter.
First things . . . Richard Falknor on 07 Mar 2013
This is a story about some disappointing maneuvering by two important national lobbying organizations.
Daniel Horowitz does a great service for all conservatives with his post today (Madison Project) What New Conservative Members Need to Know About AIPAC. (The American Israel Public Affairs Committee).
But first some background.
Last February 27, the New York Sun in their “Hagel Without Tears” revealed –
“And one of the stories that is being spoken of in private is how humiliated the leaders of the Jewish community feel. Nearly all of them — not all, but nearly all — were opposed to the elevation of Mr. Hagel to the Pentagon. But only one of the Jewish defense agencies spoke out forcefully against him.
That was the Zionist Organization of America, which is the oldest pro-Israel organization in America, having been founded in 1897, the same year in which Theodor Herzl convened at Basel, Switzerland, the First Zionist Congress. It opposed the Hagel nomination early, forthrightly, and unapologetically. The result, according to the ZOA’s president, Morton Klein, is that it received objections from several leaders worried about the consequences for the Jewish community of such a public position.
Mr. Klein believes the Hagel nomination would not have been confirmed had the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the Anti-Defamation League, and the American Jewish Committee taken a formal public position against Mr. Hagel. All three agencies have had many heroic moments. But they stood down on Mr. Hagel.” (Highlighting Forum’s.)
Faithful readers will recall our June 15, 2010 post, “Standing Together-Hanging Separately”? NRA’s Bad Choice, where we reported –
“Red State’s Erick Erickson draws our attention to the Wall Street Journal editorial “Guns and Free Speech: The NRA sells out to Democrats on the First Amendment” which explains “Cutting a special deal at the expense of the First Amendment with lawmakers who have decided for now to stop gutting the Second Amendment reveals an NRA that is unprincipled and will be weaker for it in the long run.” Adds Erickson ‘This is about the NRA securing an earmark of constitutional protection for itself to turn itself into a monopoly. That is, in fact, the key. This provision gives the NRA a monopoly that they are perfectly happy to use to shutdown other freedom loving, pro-second amendment groups that should be viewed as their allies, but instead are viewed as competition.’”
Here are some highlights from Daniel Horowitz’ post on AIPAC and the NRA today (click here) –
“You see, AIPAC’s government relations team is very similar to the NRA lobbyists. In their desire to achieve broad consensus for their goal, they water down their proposals and oppose even better proposals in order to give cover to Democrats.”
“In the case of the NRA, it is Democrats who claim to be pro-gun; in the case of AIPAC it is Democrats who purport to be pro-Israel. Just yesterday, the NRA declined to score against cloture on the nomination of Catlin Halligan for the DC Circuit Court of Appeals. As the Solicitor General for New York, Halligan advanced the argument that gun manufactures should be liable for the deaths of those killed in gun violence.”
“So why didn’t they score it? Because they knew that not a single Democrat would vote with them on the matter. Scoring against her (like scoring against Obama’s two SCOTUS picks) would blow the cover off of the façade of the pro-gun Democrat. It would also weaken their own power and influence.”
“AIPAC operates the same way, just with a few added nuances.
“…[T]hey had nothing to say when Chuck Hagel became the most anti-Israel Secretary of Defense ever. They actively lobbied against Rand Paul’s amendment to block transfer of planes and tanks to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, weapons which will only be used for one purpose. As we’ve noted before, AIPAC actively opposes any conservative-backed resolution that would actually help Israel, in favor of bipartisan ones with vacuous language.”
“First, in an attempt to ensconce the partisan divide over Israel, they will never support anything that Democrats will not vote for. In fact, they will lobby against it. Second, unlike the NRA team, AIPAC is run by liberal Democrats. AIPAC’s leader, Lee Rosenberg, is a former Obama adviser and prolific fundraiser for him and other leftist causes. This is probably not true of many of their activists, but on a leadership level they all support the creation of a Palestinian state in the heart of Judea and Samaria, even as the Palestinian Authority is currently constituted. They regard the conservative view of cutting off the PLO as an anti-Israel position.” (Highlighting Forum’s throughout.)
Read the entire Horowitz post here.
On a personal note, I was delighted as a boy when my father gave me a subscription to the NRA’s American Rifleman which I read and continue to read with interest and great enjoyment. But I also remember the advice of the late Chicago conservative Tom Roeser who — when he was the lobbyist for Quaker Oats – warned against business voices, willy nilly, becoming part of the Permanent Establishment like too many corporate representatives today.
The moral of this post is that when great issues of war and peace (Hagel and Brennan) and basic rights (Second Amendment) are in play at the seat of our government, look past the advertising of large and flashy ‘advocacy’ organizations.
Go with those who fight for your safety, and your rights — over those who tout their ability to ‘cut realistic deals.’
First things . . . Richard Falknor on 30 Jan 2013
But today Dick Morris explains how this leadership has evolved into a ‘con game’ — and details the mechanics of the ‘con.’
Click here to listen to Dick Morris.
In sum, Morris explains, the Speaker is no longer a Republican Speaker but a Coalition (or Collaborationist? -ed) Speaker. John Boehner brings measures to the floor (click here) that the House passes with Democratic votes and a core of Boehner loyalists who, Morris suggests, must go along or lose their committee chairmanships.
Of course, this arrangement leaves many rank-and-file Republican members free to vote against the bigger-government-measure-of-the-week, knowing it will pass with Democratic and Boehner-loyalist votes.
We say “free to vote” because, like the Speaker and his core of loyalists, many Republican members also fear a serious confrontation with the Obama Administration. Consequently they need to be sure the bigger-government-measure has enough votes to pass — so they can “safely” vote against it and not bring on a much dreaded Obama confrontation.
In the judgment of careful Congress-watcher Daniel Horowitz (MadisonProject) –
“[T]he entire structure of committee chairmen, leadership posts, and party spokesmen are filled with the ranks of those who don’t believe in conservatism, are incapable of articulating it, or too scared to pursue it. The majority of the conference stands with them.”
Our take is that, with the right leadership, most GOP members instinctively incline toward conservatism, but need substantial help in articulating it.
And a strong GOP leadership will get them over their fear.
However, apparently many Republican members — while trepid about confronting the Obama Administration — don’t fear a confrontation with the GOP’s conservative base.
And perhaps with good reason.
At least in Maryland and Virginia, we have not seen Tea Partiers publicly take the House GOP leadership to task. (If we have missed any such principled grass-roots actions, we should be happy to learn about and write about them.)
What puzzles us is this: What do Mr. Boehner, his loyalists, and his rank-and-file GOP enablers hope to gain?
Do they really believe their irenic course of action will bring them victory in the 2014 Congressional elections? If they are not victorious, there go all those committee and subcommittee chairs to the Other Team.
Does the Speaker hope the Obamamedia will crown him with a statesman’s mantle when he retires for effectively suppressing the influence of the ‘radical Tea Party’ among House Republicans? (In this case, the Obamamedia might just come through.)
Do they believe Leviathan can be dismantled by waiting for electoral victories sometime in the future? Or do they simply wish someday they will have a turn at managing the Giant State itself?
The GOP Base knows something is terribly wrong.
But labeling the House GOP “the stupid party” is too often a substitute for serious thought.
What we suspect is that life inside the House GOP Club – the Bubble – leads to herd-think and discourages frequent conservative or libertarian exchanges that could enrich the anemic House GOP orthodoxy.
Don’t think that the Obamamedia does not both influence and intimidate many GOP members. And GOP-friendly lobbyists constantly reinforce the GOP leadership’s daily messages.
Grass-roots conservatives have now been warned by many sources. Why not have a heart-to-heart with those GOP members you can reach?
First things . . . Richard Falknor on 25 Jan 2013