Connect with us

Everything

GOP’s hidden contempt for limiting government is why they’re failing

Published

on

Ask an average Jane or Joe on the street which party is in favor of limiting government and most with a basic understanding of party politics will point to the Republicans. Shrinking government has been a mantra of the GOP since FDR’s New Deal, but in recent decades it’s been nothing more than that: a mantra.

In reality, the GOP has embraced big government at progressively stronger degrees since Barry Goldwater lost his election. They had Ronald Reagan do what he could to slow the growth, but the federal government grew even under his watch. It wasn’t all his fault; fighting the Establishment has always been a challenge for small-government Republicans, even the Gipper.

Today, we’re seeing the culmination of the GOP’s hidden contempt for limiting government manifest in its most blatant form: inaction.  Despite control of most states, Congress, and the White House, they’re tiptoeing the line between their mantra and their true feelings. This is most obviously seen in the debacle they’re trying to call an “Obamacare repeal.”

For seven years, they’ve railed against the notion of government-run health insurance. They’ve campaigned on the idea that if they had the opportunity, they would roll back the damaging policies of Obamacare. Now that they have the power, they’re impotent. Why? Because they don’t really want government to get out of health insurance. It’s too lucrative. It gives them too much power over wealth distribution. It enables them to do things they couldn’t do if the free market economy took the reins in the health care industry once again.

This is why they were able to pass a clean repeal in 2015. They knew it would get vetoed. Now that they have a President who allegedly wouldn’t veto a clean repeal, it’s only spoken of by actual Federalist-minded conservatives. The rest sit back and make excuses for why they won’t pass the bill they passed two years ago. These excuses are hollow, but more importantly they’re often flat-out lies.

The Republican Party is not a party that embraces limiting government. They are the party that will accept slightly less government than the Democrats. With their opponents now pushing further to the left, it should surprise nobody that the GOP is lurching to the left along with them. Why? Because they can. Because conservatives and Federalists feel they have no better option than to accept the lesser of two evils. This more than anything else is why the Federalist Party must rise. If the GOP will only pretend to want to limit government, a party that will truly act on the promise to defend the Constitution and reduce the influence of DC over states and individuals must become viable.

There are three areas that Federalists must attack in order to succeed: Congress, the Presidency, and the electorate itself. Let’s look at why all three need an infusion of Federalist-thinking for the betterment of the nation.

A Congress that won’t relinquish influence

The concept of “enumerated powers” has been lost on today’s variation of Congress. This isn’t new. It’s been growing since FDR opened the floodgates.

Getting people who are willing to relinquish influence and the benefits of wielding it is why the Federalist Party must always take the high road when selecting candidates and representatives. This means finding people who aren’t life-long politicians, who find no allure in favors or kickbacks, and who are essential incorruptible. We’re not so naive to believe anyone is perfect, but we can as a group watch carefully and hold our representatives accountable. We can also put in the right measures to monitor potential avenues where corruption can sneak in.

Congress is unwilling to give up an ounce of power once it has hold of it. We don’t believe every GOP Congressman and Senator has always been corrupted by the benefits of state-run health insurance, but now that they’re in the driver’s seat many of them have been convinced of the benefits. Why give up control over something so lucrative?

Unfortunately, their attachment to power is hurting America and her citizens. We need consumers to drive the health care markets which means that any form of mandate cannot be allowed. Once insurance companies know they’re offering commodities rather than mandated services, the consumer-driven market can drive down costs and improve quality. That’s how it works in other industries. The health insurance industry is no different.

These concepts aren’t lost on Congress, but embracing them requires a willingness to relinquish influence. Most will not. Mike Lee, Rand Paul, and others are willing to fight to get the national government out of health care which is why they’re Federalists even if they still retain the (R) next to their names on the ballot. Someday soon, this will change.

A President who’s concerned about himself

Politico, which I admittedly rarely read because of its left-leaning nature, put out a surprisingly strong piece about the GOP’s failings. They start off the article, “GOP despairs at inability to deliver,” with a very telling statement:

The Republican Party is more powerful than it’s been in more than a decade — and yet it has never seemed so weak.

What they missed in the article is that one of the biggest reasons for the GOP’s weakness is in the mentality of the President himself. It’s not that some of his policies are liberal because some of his other policies are conservative. It’s not that he’s too new or inexperienced. It isn’t even that he lacks the intelligence. The main reason the President is damaging the GOP is because he’s more interested in protecting and promoting himself than in leading the nation.

We’ve seen this narcissism in the White House before. In fact, the most narcissistic President in the modern era just left the Oval Office. With Trump, it’s slightly different. His narcissism and desire to protect himself are accentuated by his most unfortunate character flaw. When he feels threatened, he isn’t the fighter that he and his most vociferous supporters want to believe he is. Instead, he uses the weakest defense mechanism available to him: the victim card. Everyone’s unfair to him. Everyone treats him badly. He’s just a poor, defenseless President and the mean [fill in the blank] are being mean little meanies to him.

Yes, he’s that juvenile.

It’s unlikely the Federalist Party will be able to mount the support or fundraising necessary to put up a serious contender by 2020, but we’re certainly going to try. Our desire to never run in an election unless we have a chance of winning it will prevent us from going down the road of futility that the Libertarian, Constitution, and other third parties travel every four years. With that said, we will do what we can as long as we remain realistic.

An electorate that clings to slogans

I wish I could find the article with the exact poll numbers, but I’ll have to present some striking data from memory. Two years ago, over 70% of Republicans wanted free trade over fair trade. Around September or October of last year, the number was down to under 40%. Why? Because the electorate bought into a slogan.

Never in history has there been such easy access to real information. The Internet has empowered the people to be informed if they choose to be. Unfortunately, the masses are either clinging to “fake news” or ignoring news altogether.

It’s imperative that the electorate changes how it receives and perceives information in the coming years. It’s inexcusable that over 40% of GOP voters prior to voting for Trump believed that he was born into poverty, that he’s a self-made success.

We need to be the most educated electorate in the world, not one that falls for false slogans like “drain the swamp” or “yes we can.” We need an electorate who realizes that smaller government yields far superior results than constant government overreach.

We need the electorate to learn.

The tenets of small-government federalism can and should ring true for a majority of Americans. We’ve seen the results the Democrats delivered and we’re seeing similar results from big-government Republicans. This needs to change quickly. Federalism is the answer.

Advertisement

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Immigration

Title X: How border wall construction could start tomorrow without Congress or a national emergency

Published

on

Title X How border wall construction could start tomorrow without Congress or a national emergency d

What I’m about to describe to you isn’t a new idea. In fact, it’s probably been thrown about by Congressmen, Senators, and White House advisers since before the government shutdown started. But there’s a reluctance to take advantage of it that I’ll discuss a little later. For now, let’s talk about Title X, subtitle A, part 1, chapter 15, section 284 of the United States code.

Yes, it’s a mouthful, but stay with me on it.

Title X refers to the armed forces. Subtitle A covers general military law. Part 1 details legal military powers. Chapter 15 covers military support for civilian law enforcement agencies. Hmm. You probably already know where I’m heading with this, but let’s dig into section 284, which is titled, “Support for counterdrug activities and activities to counter transnational organized crime.”

Subsection A reads:

(a)Support to Other Agencies.—The Secretary of Defense may provide support for the counterdrug activities or activities to counter transnational organized crime of any other department or agency of the Federal Government or of any State, local, tribal, or foreign law enforcement agency for any of the purposes set forth in subsection (b) or (c), as applicable, if—

(1) in the case of support described in subsection (b), such support is requested—

(A) by the official who has responsibility for the counterdrug activities or activities to counter transnational organized crime of the department or agency of the Federal Government, in the case of support for other departments or agencies of the Federal Government;

Okay, so far, so good. The Secretary of Defense can provide support for law enforcement agencies at all levels requesting assistance to fight drug or organized crime that’s coming from transnational sources. That means drug lords trafficking across the border. It means MS-13 sending members into America. Heck, a local county sheriff on the border could ask the Secretary of Defense for assistance if he couldn’t keep up with heroine traffickers crossing the Rio Grande.

Now, the next logical question is what can the Defense Secretary do to support law enforcement agencies at the border? The answer is found in subsection B, line 7.

(7) Construction of roads and fences and installation of lighting to block drug smuggling corridors across international boundaries of the United States.

Some may balk at this point. They’ll say we need a wall, not a fence. I have no idea if it’s legal to call the steel slats the President is requesting a fence, per se, but even if they can’t be considered fencing, we should take a quick peek at Israel’s border with Egypt. Prime Minister Netanyahu recently Tweeted an image of the fence that has virtually eliminated illegal immigration on their southern border.

As you can see, this isn’t a chain link fence that border crossers could climb over or cut through in a matter of seconds. This is a sturdy, tall fence with a gnarly razor wire at the top. By itself, it cannot solve our border crisis. Combined with monitoring technology, increased border patrols, and a concerted campaign to inform people south of the border that they need to use the designated ports of entry, this will dramatically improve our border security.

The best part is, we don’t need to keep the government shutdown. We don’t need to convince Democrats to come to their senses. The President wouldn’t have to declare a national emergency that would wrap the border wall in so much red tape, we won’t see construction beginning for years. And, we wouldn’t have to trade amnesty to get it done.

This would be a beautiful move for the President. Imagine how Democrats would look if they passed on his offer to extend DACA protections, only to have him rescind his offer and build the barrier anyway. They’ll look like stubborn fools who had an opportunity to make a trade and squandered that opportunity with nothing to show for it.

Now, if you’re wondering why this isn’t done, I’ll assume it’s because of the wording. It’s a fence. The President wants a wall. Heck, I want a wall. But at this point, I’ll take a tall, thick fence with gnarly razor wire on top instead of the open air that currently separates the United States from illegal immigrants, drug traffickers, gang members, and terrorists.

If you would like to see this happen, please alert everyone you know about this information. Get every conservative on your Twitter list to Tweet this at the President and those in his orbit. Share it heavily on Facebook. Let them know we want the border secured and the government open and there’s a solution sitting right in front of them. Let’s make America safe again as quickly as possible.


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Conspiracy Theory

China says doctor behind gene-edited babies acted on his own

Published

on

China says doctor behind gene-edited babies acted on his own

BEIJING (AP) — Chinese investigators have determined that the doctor behind the reported birth of two babies whose genes had been edited in hopes of making them resistant to the AIDS virus acted on his own and will be punished for any violations of the law, a state media report said Monday.

Investigators in the southern province of Guangdong determined Dr. He Jiankui organized and handled funding for the experiment without outside assistance in violation of national guidelines, the Xinhua News Agency said.

Along with the birth of the twins, Lulu and Nana, another embryo yet to be born reportedly resulted from He’s experiment, while five others did not result in fertilization. All three will remain under medical observation with regular visits supervised by government health departments, Xinhua said.

It didn’t say which laws He might have violated but said he had fabricated an ethical review by others.

“This behavior seriously violates ethics and the integrity of scientific research, is in serious violation of relevant national regulations and creates a pernicious influence at home and abroad,” the report said.

Then little-known, He attended an elite meeting in Berkeley, California, in 2017 where scientists and ethicists were discussing a technology that had shaken the field to its core — an emerging tool for “editing” genes, the strings of DNA that form the blueprint of life.

He embraced the tool, called CRISPR, and last year rocked an international conference with the claim that he had helped make the world’s first gene-edited babies , despite a clear scientific consensus that making genetic changes that could be passed to future generations should not be attempted at this point.

China called an immediate halt to He’s experiments following his announcement.

Gene editing for reproductive purposes is effectively banned in the U.S. and most of Europe. In China, ministerial guidelines prohibit embryo research that “violates ethical or moral principles.”

The chief of the World Health Organization said last year his agency is assembling experts to consider the health impact of gene editing.

WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said gene editing “cannot be just done without clear guidelines” and experts should “start from a clean sheet and check everything.”

“We have a big part of our population who say, ‘Don’t touch,’” Tedros told reporters. “We have to be very, very careful, and the working group will do that.”

Continue Reading

Immigration

As predicted, Trump offers DACA amnesty in exchange for border wall

Published

on

As predicted Trump offers DACA amnesty in exchange for border wall

Throughout Trump’s first two years in office, I’ve been one of only a handful of conservative voices shouting from the rooftops that the New York liberal’s promise to fix America’s out-of-control illegal immigration problem was nothing but a lie.

As a candidate, Trump promised to build a “big beautiful powerful wall” on our southern border at Mexico’s expense, and he promised to overturn Obama’s unconstitutional Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) executive order that allowed illegals to stay in America indefinitely. Unfortunately, the “wall” has become an “artistically designed” barrier of some sort funded by the U.S. taxpayer, and DACA is not only still in effect, it’s on its way to becoming permanent.

While the reality of Trump’s broken promises dealing with illegal immigration have been crystal clear to those not drinking the orange Kool-Aid, his inevitable betrayal on the issue has been brought sharply into focus since last summer.

In May 2018, as Trump and the GOP were looking for ways to save their jobs ahead of the midterms, the House Freedom Caucus joined hands with Democrats to push for a “fix” to DACA.

In June 2018, Paul Ryan proposed a plan that would allow DREAMers to legally stay in the country and be put on the pathway to citizenship in exchange for $23 billion for building a border wall.

Following their September 2018 budget betraying funding everything from Planned Parenthood to DACA and sanctuary cities, rumors began spreading around Washington that Trump was ready to cut an immigration deal with Democrats in light of the reality that the Democrats were about to retake the House in the midterms.

The Democrats did retake the House, and in the days since their victory, Trump and the GOP have been laying the foundation for their inevitable immigration betrayal. With the help of Trump’s son-in-law and advisor Jared Kushner, trading DACA amnesty for a border wall is now the official position of the Trump administration and the GOP-controlled Senate.

So, it came as no surprise when Trump proposed a deal over the weekend to end to his manufactured government shutdown by offering Democrats a three-year extension of DACA in exchange for $5 billion for border security funding — an idea originally conceived by Sen. Lindsey Graham.

Three years? I’m sure it’s just a coincidence, but that’s just enough time to kick the can down the road until after his 2020 election … assuming there is one. And just in case there are any doubts about the motivation behind this three-year timeframe, consider this: Mitch McConnell, who has refused to let the Senate vote on the shutdown, has endorsed Trump’s offer and will hold vote on it this week.

Mickey is also up for re-election in 2020.

For now, Democrats are rejecting Trump’s offer, but it’s only a matter of time before they get what they want. After all, Trump and the GOP want the same thing.

Originally posted on StridentConservative.com.

 


David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His daily radio commentary is distributed by the Salem Radio Network and is heard on stations across America.

Follow the Strident Conservative on Twitter and Facebook.

Subscribe to receive podcasts of radio commentaries: iTunes | Stitcher | Tune In | RSS


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2019 NOQ Report