“The Donald” Is President… Now What?

The dog days of the Summer of 2017 have been especially brutal, with sweltering heat and humiditydc summer turning Washington, D.C. into a miasma.

The election of 2016 was one for the books. The expected “coronation” of Hillary Clinton never took place, her ambitions for election to the highest office of the land crushed when the FBI investigation into her emails resulted in her indictment on federal misdemeanor charges. Only a last-minute pardon granted by outgoing President Obama saved her from a lengthy trial and probable conviction.

When self-avowed Socialist Bernie Sanders became the official Democrat party nominee due to a rabid outpouring of support from the ultra-left fringe, the GOP – now insulated from the threat of a Hillary candidacy – reverted to form and coalesced around Establishment candidate Jeb Bush.

Defeated in the primaries, Donald Trump declared himself a candidate as an Independent. On election night this dynamic played itself out to its finale, with Sanders getting little support from other than the ultra-left, Bush getting little from any other than the GOP loyalists, and the remainder going to Trump. In an election cycle with a record-low turnout, that happened to be enough to give Trump the win.

trump in officeNow, six months after the inauguration, Trump sits at his desk in the Oval Office brooding over his next moves. He’d tried to push through his promise to build a border wall between the US and Mexico with the stipulation that he’d stick Mexico with the bill, but he’d immediately run into another “wall” he hadn’t anticipated.

Congress had refused to create any legislation authorizing such a project, and with no ties to either of the parties in control of Congress, Trump found himself with no leverage at all with which to proceed. His request for such legislation was simply DOA. The only thing he got was a gift from the President of Mexico of a bottle of fine agave tequila, with a sardonic note of congratulations.

Along similar lines, when he’d tried to find some way to suspend the automatic granting of US citizenship to “anchor babies”, there was no actual way to effectuate his efforts. He couldn’t do it by executive order, because citizenship is a state of being, not a document issued by a government agency to which he could issue orders. He again asked Congress for appropriate legislation, and ran into the exact same problem he faced regarding his proposed wall: Congress ignored him.

In August of 2015 he’d said that he’d support a tax increase on the “ultra-rich” – heresy to conservatives – and when he’d proposed the idea to Congress he got strong support from the Democrat side of the aisle, and strong opposition from the GOP, again with the same result: no action from Congress.

Last month’s meeting with Putin had gone badly. They didn’t click on a personal level, a problem right out of the box. He’d tried to insist that Putin call off his dogs, but the Russian just stared at him with those beady eyes. It was infuriating! “All right, so he got a little annoyed at what I said”, Trump thought. “But I was calling his actions ‘stupid’, not him personally. Can’t he tell the difference?”

He’d tested another policy initiative a couple of months ago, a sort of trial balloon. He’d instructed our ambassadors to Saudi Arabia and Kuwait to present to those countries bills for our costs in protecting their countries militarily, including from the Saddam Hussein invasion. After all, they have virtually unlimited wealth from their oil production, and we provide their military support. It was for only $1.5 trillion! Who’d have thought they’d react the way they did? The Saudis even insisted Trump recall our ambassador to that country. Imagine! Looks like that balloon popped…

Which, Trump mused, means the odds of doing the same thing anywhere else look pretty slim…

The backlash from his announcement last week that he was sending the 82nd Airborne Division to the82 airborne Middle East to fight ISIS utterly confounded and perplexed him. If there was any actual personification of actual evil on this planet, they were it. So how could so many people – not only in the electorate, but in Congress – not see that we had to send in the troops?

“Quagmire?”, he grumbled to himself. “What does that even mean? I can tell those generals how to win that war. And anyway, if they don’t do it my way, and win that damn war, I’ll just fire them.”

Seeing that the sun was setting, he rose from the chair and left the room. Tomorrow was another day.

©Brian Baker 2015

Trumpists = Clintonistas

The critics use terms such as “demagogic ideologue” with “no specific policy proposals”, while the cheerleaders say things like “savior of the country” and “America’s best hope”.

Name that candidate.

trump clinton

Yes, that’s right. As painful as it is to write, and maybe even more painful to read, I’ve come to the conclusion that all the rabid hysteria in support of Donald Trump reminds me of nothing so much as the same kind of rabid hysterical support Clinton gets from those on the Left.

In both cases, their supporters have to convince themselves that their candidate’s history is irrelevant. In Clinton’s case, a boatload of scandals, improprieties, and corruption. In Trump’s case a checkered past of being literally all over the map on the political issues, being a big monetary supporter of the “other” party, being a member of several parties other than the GOP, and always serving his own self-interest first and foremost, before any other consideration (in that respect being very Clintonian).

A couple of weeks ago I wrote my first essay on the Trump phenomenon, and I have to say that I was very surprised by the pushback I got from several fellow bloggers and web-friends whom I normally consider to be very reliable conservatives. In that essay, and the one I wrote on the night of the first GOP debate, I pointed out many of Trump’s flaws as a candidate, including his many character failings. Yet many of these people, whom I generally consider to be very level-headed, were willing to simply ignore all of this because they’d either fallen under his spell, or convinced themselves that his basic character – his nature – didn’t matter in this instance.

I remember the 1996 election cycle in which Bill Clinton ran for a second term, and how that was the first time in the modern political era that “character” became a notable issue. Since that time, it’s one the GOP and conservatives raise regularly in criticizing their opponents, but somehow, this time, in the case of Trump they’re more than willing to ignore that very same quality when the question is directed at Trump, while at the same time using it to disparage Hillary Clinton.

What is one to make of this… inconsistency?

Here’s my assessment of their characters: both are egotistical megalomaniacs with a strong sense of entitlement; both are populist ideologues – he allegedly on the Right, she clearly on the Left – who are long on populist rhetoric and short on policy specifics; both have histories of political expediency to advance their own self-interests; both have improperly exercised their personal power, at the clear expense of others and with utter disregard for the consequences to others, merely to further their personal positions and ambitions; both are cynical manipulators; both have flip-flopped on their professed positions on policy issues; and neither one is trustworthy.

According to reliable polling data (Quinnipiac) each of them enjoys broad support from their respective ends of the political spectrum, but that support is undermined by their low ratings for honesty, likeability, and trustworthiness. In other words, a mile wide and an inch deep.

Trump is the Right’s Hillary.

That’s my assessment of their characters; my opinion. Now, if you’re a Trump supporter, look deeply into your own heart of hearts, and ask yourself these questions: Am I wrong? Do you trust Trump? Is he someone you’d have over to your home for dinner? And if the answers to those questions are “No”, then how are you any different from a Clintonista?

If next November’s election night rolls around and we’re looking at a picture like the one at the top of this essay, this country is well and truly screwed.

©Brian Baker 2015

 

(Also published today at my local newspaper, The Signal: http://www.signalscv.com/section/33/article/141085/)

 

Trump Himself Proves My Case!

The first GOP debate is still going on while I write this essay, but right out of the box, the FIRST question asked of the panel by Chris Wallace proves my thesis in my last essay about “The Donald”.

When asked if there was anyone on the floor who could NOT pledge to support the eventual GOP nominee, and forsake running an independent third-party campaign, guess who was the only candidate to raise his hand?

Anyone?… anyone?… Bueller…?

That’s right; gasbag Donald Trump.

It’s a-a-a-a-a-ll about him as far as he himself is concerned. He flat-out said that the only GOP nominee he could “support” was himself if nominated, even after Chris Wallace pointed out that a third-party campaign by him would almost assuredly end up in a Clinton presidency.

Does anybody doubt anymore what I wrote about this lunatic ten days ago?

trumpjackass

 

 

UPDATE: The debate is finished and Trump managed to live down to, if not exceed, my lowest expectations. When asked any questions, he had absolutely no specific answers, nor any actual policy proposals to put on the table, as opposed to EVERY OTHER CANDIDATE there on the stage. His only responses were his usual nonsense and bluster. It was actually pretty funny watching his face get redder and redder as the debate went on. This guy’s a nincompoop. An absolute imbecile.

 

He made Jebbie, Christie, Huckabee and Kasich look good by comparison, guys I actually usually can’t stand.

 

 

 

©Brian Baker 2015

“The Donald”: Reigning Clown Prince of Politics

I’ll preface by stating that I’m not a member of any political party; I’m a Constitutional conservative, and if I were to be a member of any party, I suppose it would be the Tea Party, though they don’t actually have a formal “party” per se.

In this very blog, I’ve mocked and satirized Crazy Uncle Joe Biden several times as being the Clown Prince of Politics, but I think he’s now been deposed, proving the Left doesn’t have a monopoly on political lunacy.

trump2

Not very “presidential”. Is this why he wears a hat all the time now?

Exhibit A: “The Donald”, the guy with the world-class comb-over, proving one can be tacky and tasteless in appearance while at the same time exhibiting absolutely no discernible decorum or political acumen.

As George Santayana famously noted, “Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it”, and we can see that play out right now as Trump repeats the bombastic campaign of another eccentric billionaire with delusions of grandeur, Ross Perot, the guy who’s single-handedly responsible for us ever having to say the words “President Clinton”… at least, so far.

There have been other hyperbolic populists in the last few years who have enjoyed their moment in the sun before fading out of the limelight, Chris Christie coming immediately to mind. What is it about these guys that gives them such popularity – Trump currently being the GOP candidate with the highest individual poll numbers – in spite of their political record? Christie is a Northeastern “moderate” with a very mixed record on traditional conservative principles, who famously lauded Obama. Trump’s record on political contributions actually favors Democrats, including Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, John Kerry, and Hillary Clinton; he’s been registered as other than Republican several times over the last couple of decades, even running for President as a Reform Party candidate. He’s advocated restrictions on “assault weapons”, and increasing wait periods.

I think it’s pretty clear that Trump has virtually no chance at all of ever being elected President. In fact, if he were to somehow miraculously win, and if he tried to govern as he claims he would, he’d be either the most ineffective, or the worst, President in American history, as his “style” would be more suited to a dictator than the President of a republic.

I also think it’s instructive that many of the same people who have been criticizing Obama for years about his lack of experience before being elected President would actually support Trump, a man with even less… in fact, none at all.

So why all the hoopla? I think it’s because Trump – and Christie before him – personifies an approach to the arena that they wish was more prevalent in the legitimate candidates of their party: a willingness to be confrontational with a news media that largely and openly supports their opponents; aggressive advocacy on certain hot-button issues of the moment; and a perception of independence from vested party interests.

That last is a very key element, I believe. Sadly, the GOP of the post-Reagan era has become infamous for claiming to support traditional conservative principles, and then promptly abandoning them as working priorities as soon as they win the elections. There was a brief resurgence of conservatism during the Gingrich era, but it very quickly dissipated.

Instead, we’ve seen a constant parade of lackluster “moderate” candidates who can’t generate anyth[7] (4) enthusiasm among the conservative base of the party. In fact, on a personal note, the 2008 nomination of John McCain was the final straw that caused me to renounce my own membership in the GOP of almost 40 years.

Even at the congressional level, we’ve see that same problem as recently as last year’s election, during which the GOP candidates ran on a platform of directly confronting Obama’s policies and fiats only to promptly abandon taking any real action as soon as they took office and the majorities of both chambers of Congress.

I think Trump has been imbued with a kind of representational fantasy, just as John Wayne was perceived as a “hero” because of all his exploits in westerns and war movies, though he never served a day in uniform or heard a shot fired in anger. He represents what they want that party’s legitimate candidates to do, and be like, and support.

All of which leads me to the conclusion that the fault for Trump’s current popularity can be laid right at the doorstep of the Establishment GOP itself, for failing to comprehend the unrest among its own claimed “base”.

©Brian Baker 2015

 

UPDATE: Recently released polling data by Quinnipiac shows Trump being the worst performer of any of the current Republican candidates in a matchup in the General Election, being soundly beaten by Clinton, Biden and even self-avowed socialist Bernie Sanders. Not only beaten, but solidly thumped. To quote the poll: “Trump has the worst favorability rating of any Republican or Democrat”.

Read it all for yourself:  http://www.quinnipiac.edu/images/polling/us/us07302015_U645de.pdf

Second update: It looks like no less an intellectual illuminary than Thomas Sowell agrees with everything I said:  http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2015/08/04/the-trump-card-n2034124/page/full

 

 

 

OMG! My Feelings Are Hurt! Kill the First Amendment!

We’ve all heard the buzzwords, the new encyclical of the Left. If they can’t respond to logical rebuttals to their policy proposals and hysterical pronouncements – which they can’t, because subscribing to Leftist doctrine requires a complete suspension of logical thinking and any realistic understanding of basic human nature – then their only alternative is to try to completely shut down the debate.

gore bloviatorWe’ve heard it ad nauseum, starting with Al Gore’s polemic on “global warming” as presented in his Power-Point-cum-Movie “An Inconvenient Truth”: the assertion that “the debate is over…”.

Of course, if nothing else, the basic flaw in that statement is clearly obvious: here we are, twenty years later, still actually debating the “undebateable”.

But lately we’ve gone from the ridiculous to the sublime. So let’s have some fun and look at a sampling of the latest buzzwords rambling down the pike, as well as in the opinion columns of your local Leftist PR sheet, AKA “newspaper”.

“Microaggression”. Totally cool word, meaning that something you said made someone somewhere feel that they weren’t appreciated in the way they themselves thought they should be. If you think that same-sex marriage isn’t the best thing since self-rising bread, well… that’s a microagression against LGBTSMwhatevercomesnext people! You need to be at least silenced, if not punished and banished, or at least “shamed”!

Which, of course, brings us to our next gem, “shaming”. If you violate Leftist doctrine, as defined at this point in time (and always subject to whatever latest trend comes roaring down the Pike) and can’t be sued or prosecuted for actually violating a real law, well, then… you must be singled out for hyperbolic and (usually) hysterical personal attacks in order to “shame” you into complying with the latest fad in Leftist Political Correctness!

“Dog whistle” enjoys not only convenience, but greatness, if you’re on the Left. It’s really a catch-all, dog whistlebecause it signifies that whatever someone who’s not on the Leftist plantation says that might not conform to the “approved” doctrine of the moment – for example, “tax reform” – can always be labeled as actually meaning something else (usually much to the proposer’s surprise). “Tax reform” was labeled as being a “coded racial appeal” in outlets such as Salon (Salon article) and Kos (KOS article), as well as by established commentators like Bill Moyers (Moyers).

This is obviously a tactic based on the interpreter’s incredibly amazing ability to read other peoples’ minds, Carnackvery much along the lines of Johnny Carson’s “Carnack” character. And it’s extremely useful, because if your conservative opponent hasn’t actually said what you want him to mean, well… that’s no longer a problem, is it?

“Voter ID”. That seems pretty straightforward, doesn’t it? When I first registered to vote I was given a voter ID card which identified me as a legally registered voter, and I had to show it to the poll watchers whenever I showed up to actually cast a vote. I even still have it!

Alas, “voter ID” has turned into a “dog whistle” for “minority vote suppression”. I don’t know how that happened. Everyone has to show some legitimate form of ID to get a book from the library, drive a car, get on an airplane, cash a check, file for disability or welfare benefits, cross an international border (unless you’re an “undocumented immigrant”, formerly known as “illegal alien”), and a whole bunch of other things. Presumably, minorities – AKA “people of color” – aren’t any more inconvenienced by getting ID cards than anyone else. So how come it’s only “minorities” – AKA the Leftists’ presumed voter “base” – that can’t perform such a simple task? Anyone with half an ounce of intellectual consistency would realize that the Leftists are the real “racists” in this equation for advancing the preposterous idea that simply because someone is “of color” they can’t do the same tasks as everyone else. I mean, c’mon… isn’t that the very basis of racism?

“Free speech zone”. An absolutely hilarious concept. If you’re a student on a college campus and you’re thDAAPCM1D“exposed” to thought, speech, or ideas that make you feel “uncomfortable” or “threatened” or are “microagressions” (meaning “conservative” ideas), well… no problem!

All you have to do is report the “transgressor” to a counselor or other college official and they’ll make sure that the “offenders” and their repugnant and “intolerant” ideas are banished to a “free speech zone”, which is usually an area about the size of a Smart Car hidden behind the furthest reaches of the back parking lot.

Which brings us to the definition of “Tolerance”, but… n-a-a-a-ah. You get the idea.

©Brian Baker 2015

(I wrote this essay on Father’s Day of 2015, based on a conversation I had at the party at John and Stacy’s house, with prodding from Cynewulf and Buck [a couple of old on-line buddies]. My sincere thanks to all of you for helping me to coalesce my thoughts on the subject)

(Published on 6/26/2015 in The Signal: http://www.signalscv.com/section/33/article/139001/)

President Clueless

In a stunning display of utter cluelessness, while addressing the graduating class from the Coast Guard Academy Obama made the astonishing statement that “climate change constitutes a serious threat to global security, an immediate risk to our national security…” and that disagreeing with him on the issue “… is a dereliction of duty … Denying it or refusing to deal with it endangers our national security.”

The DunceHis foreign policy initiatives are in tatters. Russia under Putin has essentially annexed large swaths of Eastern Europe. The Middle East is in flames, with ISIS controlling large areas and perpetrating mind-numbingly horrendous atrocities on everyone in sight. Iran’s on the verge of getting nukes. North Korea’s accumulating a respectable stockpile of nukes while rattling sabers at South Korea as well as us. China’s confronting the world in the South China Sea through their development of the Spratly Islands, and their expansionist territorial claims.

And Obama thinks the biggest threat we face to our national security is “climate change”? Folks, you just can’t make this stuff up.

It seems to me that the biggest “risk to our national security” is Obama himself.

Further, what exactly does Obama – and the rest of the climate change hysterics – think can actually be done? Do they actually believe that mankind can somehow stop the climate from changing for the first time in the planet’s entire 4.5 billion year history? Isn’t that the real “denial” in the issue? Denying that climate change is the natural state of affairs for this blue orb?

You may as well try to stop the tides with a kid’s sand pail and shovel.

 

 

©Brian Baker 2015

(Also published today in my local newspaper: http://www.signalscv.com/section/35/article/137645/)

Lemme Have A Thin Crust Cheese And Pepperoni, With Extra Hypocrisy And Mendacity, Please

pizzaAssuming you haven’t been marooned on a deserted island in the middle of the ocean, you’ve probably heard about Memories Pizza, a small family-owned pizzeria in Walkerton, Indiana. 

When asked whether they’d cater a same-sex “wedding”, the father-daughter duo who own and operate the small pizza joint said that though they serve anyone who walks in their door, they’d have to decline to actually participate (by catering and actually being there) in such an event due to their Christian religious tenets. 

Needless to say, the LGBT community and their lefty supporters immediately launched into frenzied hair-on-fire mode. 

In all the hoopla that’s been published since, there’s one key point I’ve curiously never seen mentioned. 

If you’ll recall, when the Proposition 8 controversy was swirling here in Loonyfornia, the one thing we were constantly told was that the authorizing of same-sex “marriages” wasn’t going to affect anyone else, outside of giving “loving couples” of the same sex the ability to have “marriage” ceremonies. If you weren’t gay yourself, there was no way it was going to affect you in any way. 

It sure didn’t take long for that lie to be exposed, did it?

The reality is that businesses have all kinds of rules, which are normally just taken for granted. There are dress codes, for example. The most common: “No shirt, No shoes, No service”. We’ve all seen that one. Some restaurants require men to wear ties or business attire, or have other requirements as to the minimum acceptable standard of dress, such as banning blue jeans, tank tops, shorts and/or flip-flops. Isn’t that “discrimination” against people who can’t afford better clothes?

SF nudists

Not wearing jeans, shorts, tank tops or flip-flops. Following the rules?

What about those nudist fanatics in San Francisco and Portland, Oregon who insist they have a “right” to ingloriously flaunt their sagging skin in all its infamous glory whenever and wherever they want? Aren’t their “rights” being violated?

Further, these cases – Memories Pizza as well as photographers and other service providers suffering the same persecution – are based on the outrageous and repugnant idea that just because one makes their service available means that somehow their provision of that service becomes mandatory regardless of the provider’s own wishes in the matter as to their participation. Isn’t that actually a form of slavery?

Let’s take a couple of hypotheticals to illustrate. Let’s say I’m a caterer who’s also a member of AA. A potential customer wants me to cater a bachelor party and he makes it clear that it’s going to be a drunkathon with everybody getting wasted out of their minds. That’s absolutely the worst environment for an alcoholic to find themselves in. But I can’t turn that gig down, even though my own health is endangered by my participation?

Or I’m a photographer, and potential clients want me to take the pics at their next weekend orgy. I don’t have the option to refuse?

These are all perfectly legal activities, so does that make my participation mandatory, even though in one case my physical and mental health is endangered, and in the other my morality is violated?

Though these may sound like extreme and fairly preposterous scenarios, they actually accurately represent the real issue in play in these “gay rights” cases. Just because the reason in the actual cases is based on religion doesn’t make it any less valid.

We really have entered the era of the gaystapo, and it’s time it comes to a screeching halt.

 

 

 ©Brian Baker 2015

My Name Is Hassan

I was born in the camps 22 years ago. Life was hard. I have two older brothers, and one more and a sister were born after me. My father struggled very hard to provide for us, but work was hard to find. Sometimes, often, there was not enough food for all of us to eat. Then my mother would put the food on the table, and she and my sister would go into the other room and pretend to eat, though I knew there was no food there for them.

Our home was a very poor affair, a small house, more of a hut, made from scraps of building materials my brothers and I could take at night from nearby construction sites. But it was our home.

I was very lucky. I was always the smart one in the family. My father, a very devout man, visited the Mosque every day for ablutions and prayers. I often went with him, from the time I was a very small boy. I love the Q’uran, and learned it quickly. I am very devout, and the Mullah noticed this, Praise be to Allah. He took special notice of me, and allowed me to go to school at the madrassa. I learned much there.

I learned that Allah is great, and all is the will of Allah. En sh’Allah, Allah willing, all the peoples of the world can become the instruments of Allah’s plan for this world, in preparation for entry to Paradise in the next.

I learned that the Great Prophet Muhammed, may his name be praised, revealed to us His plan in the Q’uran as to how we should prepare for that day. That we should convert all Infidels to Islam. That those of The Book should be allowed full conversion, and the rest allowed a form of generous accommodation. As long as they acknowledge Allah as the one true god.

We must remain chaste, especially our women; sisters, mothers, daughters. Chastity is good, and the men of the family are honor bound to enforce this virtue.

We must pray five times each day, facing Mecca. The M’uzzin shall make their call to remind us, and we must heed their call.

But at the madrassa and the Mosque, I also learned some things that disturbed me very much. I learned that the reason why I, and my father before me, could not find work to provide for the family is that the Jews and the Americans conspire to keep us poor. They wish to control all the Middle East, and its oil. They wish to make the Faith and the Imams and Mullahs weak, by imposing “democracy”, in which any person, regardless of how faithful they are or are not, shall have the same voice as the Faithful. And this includes women! They would give women the same voice as men! Even in the Mosque, where all are equal in the eyes of Allah, women sit in an area away from the men. This “democracy” would put all together. This is heresy!

In my final year at the madrassa I was honored to be chosen, with a very few others deemed as true believers and good students, for special instruction. We were introduced to the Imam. We pursued further, special studies. We were shown videotapes, taken right from the Infidels’ own television stations in America and Europe, showing how degraded their culture truly is. I was shocked at what I saw, and felt the sin of even watching such evil and debasement.

I was shown videos from the television news shows in the West, films that showed how greedy the Infidels are, with their big cars and big houses, the souks they call “malls” with wasteful and shameful things for purchase. The Imam instructed us that the only reason the Infidels can afford such shameful, sinful luxury is by stealing the wealth of our homelands. Their greedy companies make dishonest deals taking advantage of the owners of the oil, to make unfair profits. The Jews keep the Arab brothers at each other’s throats through their lies, then steal when they are distracted. They make their bread for their religious days from the blood of the young Faithful. I learned of how the Jews plan to conquer all the lands of the Faithful. It was all in a book called The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, written by the Jews and Zionists themselves. It was truly frightening.

I saw movies that showed the actors, men and women together, the women shamefully exposed. Even movies with the people doing the forbidden act, which is only for man and woman when married. Imagine! In a movie! It is beyond shameful, beyond sinful! The people who would do these things are no better than animals, pigs rutting in the mud.

It is with shame that I have to confess that when I saw these things, my body betrayed me. I could not arise from my seat because my shame was so obvious, but the Imam, in his kindness, Allah be praised, put his hand on my shoulder and told me he understood. That the shame was for the people who would do these disgusting things in front of a camera. He made me understand that the shame is not in the act itself, because it is right for a married man and woman who wish to have children. And it is also right as a reward in Paradise for those who are martyrs to Jihad. That Allah, in His wisdom, has reserved virgins for those who become martyrs to Jihad, and all is right.

terrorist (2)I have chosen the path to fight for Jihad, and if Allah is willing, to become a martyr for Jihad. I have taken special instruction in how to do this. Tomorrow is my day.

Do not forget me. My name is Hassan.

 

©Brian Baker 2007

 

(I originally wrote this essay, and published it at my blog on Townhall.com, back in 2007. In light of recent events, I thought it timely to republish it here and now)

The Witless, Gutless GOP

If you keep up with the political scene, you know that in the wake of the political massacre the Dem/socialists suffered in this year’s mid-term elections Obama has vowed to take unilateral action on Obama dictatorseveral issues, most notably illegal immigration, by granting illegal aliens de facto amnesty through Executive Order.

In spite of the fact that such an action is clearly illegal and exceeds a President’s constitutional authority – as noted by no less an authority than Professor Jonathan Turley, noted legal scholar and self-proclaimed “social liberal” (Newsmax article) – Obama seems determined to again ignore and bypass Congress on this (and several other) issues.

As I’ve discussed previously,  impeachment – though warranted – is impractical at this point. Obama’s in his last two years of office; it would be politically counter-productive in the extreme; and the net result, even if successful, would be at best a Pyrrhic victory, leaving Crazy Uncle Joe Biden in the Oval Office. It makes no sense to jump from the frying pan into the fire.

However, as a result of the mid-terms the GOP has taken control of the Senate, securing two of the three levers (House, Senate, President) of legislative control. Now that Harry Reid has been removed from the equation as the Despot Of The Senate, they can easily pass a budget that prevents Obama from spending any funds whatsoever to advance his unilateral actions. They completely control the power of the purse strings.

So, in light of this undeniable mandate given to them by the American people, what’s been their response, along with their bobble-head sycophants in the Establishment GOP?

scared childIt reminds me of a little kid scared of the Bogeyman and other monsters hiding under his bed.

Both Mitch McConnell, the new Senate Majority Leader, and John Boehner, the incumbent House Speaker, have already stated that they won’t allow a government shutdown in a budget war with Obama.

I hope that the next time I’m in the market for a new car my salesman has the negotiating skills of Boehner car dealershipand McConnell. I’ll end up owning the dealership.

They’re scared that any government “shutdown” will be blamed on them, and they’ll suffer politically in the next election. Well, first of all, we just HAD an election about Obama’s policies – as he himself stated – and it turned out GREAT for the GOP.

Secondly, who even worries about any such “shutdown”? Did anyone even notice the last time it happened? Thirdly, it takes two to tango, and any such impasse in negotiations is just as much – if not more so – Obama’s fault as it is the GOP’s… which after all, and again, controls two of the three levers of legislative power. Can’t the GOP find ANYONE who can clearly state that simple fact (other than me, and I’m not even a Republican)?

On top of everything else, we just had an election on these issues; it’s TWO YEARS until the next one; and no one’s even going to remember a “shutdown” that happens now when that time rolls around.

If these gutless GOPers aren’t going to stand up for what they were elected to do, what’s the point in even ever voting for them? How can they ever claim any justification for their very existence, if all they’re ever going to do is play patty-cake with Obama, and let him control the agenda and negotiations on his own terms?

After all, as Obama himself stated, “elections have consequences”.

Someone should alert the GOP to that, and send them a memo.

 

 

©Brian Baker 2014

Obamacare Strikes Again!

Over 23 times between 2008 and 2010 Obama promised that “If you like your health care plan, you can keep your plan”. In September 2010 he said, “If you’re happy with what you’ve got, nobody’s changing it”. (News article)

Then he kept kicking the political can down the road, delaying enactment over and over again in order to try to avoid the electoral consequences. But that could only happen so many times, and as I’ve pointed out several times in various forums, the health insurance open enrollment period occurs every other year just before election time. At SOME point, the piper was going to demand payment.

Well, guess what? THIS is that year.

HMO0001 copyA few days ago I received notification from my health insurer, Anthem Blue Cross, that the Medicare Advantage PPO plan I’d been a member of for many years is no longer going to be offered. Further, as I researched my options on Medicare’s website, it turns out that NO PPOs are authorized anywhere in Los Angeles County. The only options I have are for HMO plans.

In June of 2009 Obama also promised that “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor” (Wall Street Journal article). This turns out to be another big, fat lie. In 1998 I had a heart attack, and since then my cardiologist has been my “primary physician”. He was part of my PPO network, which is no longer available to me (as I said), but he’s NOT a member of any HMO group, nor does he intend to join one.

That means that in order to “keep my doctor” I’m now going to have to pay for that myself, without benefit of my health insurance plan. Granted, I can negotiate a “cash price” with his office, which I have in fact done (a saving of 20% of the “normal” billing fee), and fortunately I’m in a position to be able to afford to do that.

But what about people who aren’t so fortunate?

I have no doubt this same scenario is playing out across the country, just in time for the mid-term election in about three short weeks. It’s time for the Dem/socialists who single-handedly foisted this mess on the American people to pay the price for their arrogance. I hope they suffer a solid thumping at the polls in November.

 

©Brian Baker 2014