Connect with us


Give credit to Mitch McConnell



Give credit to Mitch McConnell

To many on the right, Mitch McConnell is the worst Republican Senator. Many Conservatives, including myself, relish the day when McConnell is removed from the Senate Majority Leader position in favor of a real Conservative or a system which omits the position entirely. But while he remains high in status on Capital Hill, there appears to be too much hyperbole in the underachievement that is his reign as Senate Majority Leader. Even Conservative Review has him ranked as the #2 RINO in all of Congress, with Lindsey Graham at number one. This ranking is despite the fact that many Republicans in Congress shamefully ave a lower Liberty Score than McConnell’s 36. I’m not here to say that Mitch McConnell is a good Republican or even an average one. I’m here to say he doesn’t deserve to be referred to as the worst or even bottom ten.

Race To The Bottom

I first want to prove there are at least ten worse Republicans in Congress. To begin, Paul Ryan is Speaker of the House. He was Mitt Romney’s VP candidate. He had a reputation for wanting to balance the budget. As speaker he has done nothing of the sort. With Trump in the Whitehouse, he is still doing nothing of the sort. He is worse than Mitch.

Susan Collins has a Liberty Score of 10, the lowest of any Republican. She is also one of the most pro-abortion Republicans in Congress. Lisa Murkowski is one of the most pro-union Senators among Republicans. Her support for Obamacare is with little waver. Lamar Alexander has a Liberty Score of 17, the second lowest among Republicans. Lindsey Graham is worse, and the reason will be obvious in the next section. There are actually 10 alive Senators with worse voting records than Mitch McConnell. He may be in charge, but listing him as the worst almost absolves the other RINOs in the herd. It’s a classic uninformed voter mentality that your incumbents aren’t the problem. It’s always another state voting these idiots.

Blind Squirrel’s Nut?

In recent days, Mitch McConnell has become a championing force for the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation process.

It’s clear that McConnell will do what’s in his power to ensure the confirmation. Does that mean Kavanaugh has the votes? No, But McConnell won’t be the vote of betrayal. So is McConnell all of the sudden decent? This line of thought is also misleading. Let’s roll back the clock to 2009. Obama with his first Supreme Court vacant seat, nominated Sonia Sotomayor. Numerous Republicans voted on the bill. Only 3 are still around. Lamar Alexander, Lindsey Graham, and Susan Collins all voted for Sotomayor. McConnell opposed Sotomayor’s nomination.

A year later, Elena Kagan was confirmed to the Supreme Court. Lamar Alexander joined the Republicans. Susan Collins and Lindsey Graham were in favor among current Republican Senators. McConnell was opposed.

In the summer of 2016, Obama was poised to nominate a third judge, replacing Antonin Scalia, a solid constitutionalist. This was a crisis. If Obama had his way would be dwindled down to two Conservative judges. But McConnell did not budge. He instead gambled on the election. Obama went on to nominate Merrick Garland. Garland was an anti-gun judge on the DC v Heller case at the appellate level. This was Obama’s attack on the 2nd Amendment.

54 Republicans sat on the Senate. McConnell gave them no chance to lend the Democrats the opportunity to flip a Supreme Court seat left. Would Garland have received 60 votes? No. But when so many Republicans are willing to bend over, McConnell gave them no chance, and this is noteworthy. Moving forward, McConnell’s gamble paid off. Trump nominated Neil Gorsuch. McConnell was a championing force behind the confirmation, for a RINO. McConnell went nuclear so that the Democrat’s filibusterer was broken and only a simple majority passed. Gorsuch received 54 votes, shy of 60. Without McConnell’s commitment, we wouldn’t have Gorsuch and likely wouldn’t have a third Conservative on the Supreme Court.

Now McConnell’s efforts will be needed to ram through Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation despite the stalling tactics of the Democrats and a new low of weaponized sexual assault allegations. McConnell may be unwilling to pass Kate’s Law or meaningful spending cuts, but he is instrumental in confirming quality judges to America’s highest court. This needs to be accounted for in Conservatives’ rankings of Congressman. Mitch McConnell may be all-establishment RINO, but considering how bad the GOP is, especially in the Senate, he’s not the worst. He’s mediocre.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Why we won’t see Medicare-for-All legislation until after 2020



Why we wont see Medicare-for-All legislation until after 2020

We won’t see Medicare-for-All legislation presented to the public or brought to the floor of the House for one politically expedient reason.

Here’s a spoiler for those who don’t want to read the whole thing. In its current state of ambiguity it’s growing more and more popular with the general public. Once the details are brought to light, even moderate Democrats will acknowledge it would implode the economy in a couple of years at best.

In a perfect world, all basic needs would be covered. Of course, that perfect world, often referred to as communism, could only work in the minds of fiction writers and hardcore leftists. In the real world, it’s not only impossible, but has proven to be counterproductive with its stated goals. This is a basic fact that has been demonstrated throughout modern history.

Facts don’t stop leftists. Anything that gets in the way of the leftist agenda or narrative is pushed aside in favor of new “facts.” My least favorite one that’s floating around lately is that socialized medicine has been a tremendous success in many nations around the world. This is questionable at best and when viewed on a longer scale than the last few years, it’s clearly impossible to sustain.

That’s the biggest problem with socialist ideas. They often DO work, but only until the money runs out. Leftists will say it’s unfair to point to Venezuela, a nation that should be the most prosperous in South America but that lies in economic ruins today. Any time Venezuela is brought up, proponents of socialism will say that they were practicing an invalid form of the failed political and economic system.

It’s through the pathways of reality surrounding socialism that Democrats do not want to travel. Not yet. They can’t risk heading into the 2020 elections allowing voters to have a clear understanding of what Medicare-for-All would mean to them. The more facts and figures are revealed about the proposals, the harder it will be to sell it to the people. Instead, they chant about Republicans not believing healthcare is a human right. Or something.

Take soon-to-be-Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, for example. For proposal for Medicare-for-All has a $32 trillion price tag over the next decade. Paying for it would require extreme tax increases, which is okay to most of her supporters. Why? Because the bulk of the cost would be paid by the “rich,” according to AOC. Or, as she puts it, “You just pay for it.”

When actual math is applied, it becomes clear it would be impossible to stick even most of the price tag on the “rich,” but that’s based on our definitions. If her definition of “rich” means anyone making middle-class incomes or above, then she MIGHT be able to pay for it by more than doubling current taxes.

There’d be no fiscal repercussions from that, right.

It’s imperative for Democrats to keep details surrounding Medicare-for-All hidden. The surface notion is appealing to some. If the details were examined, their base support would fall off. I’ll invoke a leftist tactic by saying Medicare-for-All would literally kill people.

Continue Reading

Foreign Affairs

Turkish-American relations aren’t better, just quieter than they were



Turkish-American relations arent better just quieter than they were

President Trump said Saturday “we’re having a very good moment with Turkey.” The operative word in his statement was “moment.” In other words, relations can go south at any point, and they probably will very soon.

Diplomatic conflict with Turkey had been escalating for a year until very recently. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has balked at U.S. demands and made harsh statements about America’s foreign policy, particularly as they relate to Iran and Syria. He’s playing a game of brinkmanship, pushing his rhetoric and policies right to the edge before backing down.

Right now, he’s in his quiet mode. That likely won’t last long.

As Burak Bekdil noted at Gatestone, the list of problems between the United States and Turkey has not been reduced.

Turkey and US: Conflict Contained, Not Resolved three months ago Turkey and its NATO ally the United States had too many issues about which to disagree: They had major divergences over Syria; they had different views on Turkey’s plans to deploy the Russian-made S-400 air defense system on NATO soil; they had mutual sanctions on top government officials due to Turkey’s refusal to free Andrew Brunson, an American evangelical Christian pastor living in Turkey who faced bogus charges of terrorism and espionage; they had a potential U.S. decision to block delivery to Turkey of arms systems, including the F-35 stealth fighter; they had potential U.S. sanctions on a Turkish public bank; the U.S. had doubled tariffs on Turkish steel and aluminium; a Turkish boycott on U.S. electronics; major differences over Syrian Kurds; and Turkey’s persistent demands for the extradition of Fethullah Gülen, a Muslim cleric who is Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s political nemesis, living in self-exile in Pennsylvania.

This could be a calm before the storm between the United States and Turkey. Both nations are pushing against each other, especially in reference to U.S. policy in the Middle East. The two NATO allies will be acting more like enemies very soon unless one or the other backs down.

That’s almost certainly not going to happen.

We must be very mindful of and cautious towards Erdogan. His lust for power is quickly manifesting as a desire to be the de facto leader of the Middle East Muslim world. To do that, he’ll need to turn America into a symbolic enemy for the whole region.

Continue Reading


The great ideological divide in the Democratic Party is artificial



The great ideological divide in the Democratic Party is artificial

Since the midterm elections, we’ve seen some pretty crazy things happening in the Democratic Party. You have a small revolt against Representative Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) with a handful of Democrats in Congress opposing her ascension to Speaker of the House. There’s a freshman Representative, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who is already trying to get her followers to run against sitting Democrats in Congress. Then, there’s the posturing by Democrats wanting to run for President in 2020.

In all three circumstances, it’s the Democratic Establishment that is old and out of touch versus the young, aware new Democrats. Sometimes these new Democrats call themselves Democratic Socialists. Sometimes they lay claim to the Democratic Party as a whole.

The Establishment is supposed to be the “moderate” wing of the party while the Democratic Socialists are the far left. Here’s the problem with that notion. They both say pretty much the exact same things. There are nuances in how they say it, but the end results are the same. For example, they both promote healthcare for all. It doesn’t matter whether some call it “Medicare-for-All” and others don’t give it a name. When the chips are all on the table, they’ll end up in the same place.

Healthcare is just one example of top priorities listed by both “sides” of the Democratic Party. On gun control, they’re in lockstep. The only difference between the “moderates” and the far-leftists is the number of times they say they “respect the 2nd Amendment” in their speeches about the varying ways they want to take guns away from law-abiding citizens.

There are a few issues in which the money flowing to the Democratic Establishment keeps them quiet while the radical leftists go all out. Climate change, for example, can be easily misconstrued as an issue with a unified position within the party, but it’s far from it. Establishment Democrats push for a light version of environmental solutions that will make them appear tough on carbon without harming their benefactors. The left-wing takes it up a few dozen notches, calling for an end of fossil fuels in a decade.

But the environment is a small issue, despite the attention given to it by the leftists. I don’t mean the issue of climate change and the attacks on the energy industry by leftists are insignificant. I mean it’s a small divide between the opposing sides within the Democratic Party. One could be fighting the oil companies while the other is owned by the oil companies and they can still sit together for lunch in the Capitol Hill cafeteria.

Some would argue the Republicans are the exact same way, and to some extent this is true. But the ideological divide that separates the very small minority of true conservatives is much wider for one big reason. Establishment Democrats and far leftists are in total agreement that government needs to grow, especially at the federal level. Establishment Republicans agree. True conservatives vehemently disagree.

Unfortunately, there are so few limited-government Republicans in DC that it hasn’t really made an impact. Even under President Trump, budgets are through the roof, and while he’s cutting bureaucracy, more is being added in its wake.

This is important to understand because it means the leftward lurch we’re seeing in the Democratic Party is very different from the conservative push that spawned following the passage of Obamacare. Where conservatives failed at pulling the party to the right, leftists will succeed in pulling their party to the left.

Today and onward beyond 2020, we’ll see two things happen. The first is what we’re witnessing today with the artificial chasm forming between the old Democratic guard and the new leftist ideologues. This will grow as we see presidential hopefuls jockeying for the Bernie Sanders mantle. In fact, they’re going to try to out-Bernie the Vermont Senator himself. We’re already seeing Senators Cory Booker and Kamala Harris pull to the left of the party on the First Step Act. Their reason: it doesn’t release enough convicts back onto the streets.

Then, there’s Eric “Nukem” Stalwell. He’s unofficially launching his presidential campaign by threatening to confiscate guns.

This will continue until the 2020 Democratic nomination is decided. That’s when we’ll see stage two. This is where it gets dangerous.

The second thing that will happen is the bridging of the chasm in the party. Republicans solved it by bringing “conservatives” over to the mushy middle, making them embrace Establishment concepts for the sake of being practical. It’s why the ideologues won in 2015 by passing a clean Obamacare repeal, but the Establishment won in 2017 by pushing forward every Obamacare action they could think of without even considering a clean repeal. They only acted conservative when they knew President Obama would veto it.

Democrats will do the opposite. The old guard will see Ocasio-Cortez, Harris, Booker, Beto O’Rourke, and other far leftists doing so well with the base. Then, they’ll embrace them. Those who are too pragmatic to leave the Establishment will be shocked when they realize the Establishment merges with the far-leftists. When the chasm disappears and the dust settles, the Democratic Party will be firmly controlled by Democratic-Socialists.

This is why the divide is artificial. They’re not stupid. The Establishment sees the writing on the wall. They’ll fight it for as long as they can without making enemies, but they are well aware that their choices are to adapt or get booted.

As far to the left as Democrats seem today, we haven’t seen them fully unleash their lunacy. The moderate Establishment that gave them candidate Hillary Clinton is rapidly being replaced by the far-leftists. Democratic-Socialists are going mainstream.

Continue Reading
Advertisement Donate to NOQ Report




Copyright © 2018 NOQ Report