Gorsuch, The Dems & the Perversion of the Loyal Opposition
The View from the Middle
Throughout our history, it has been the role of the minority party to defend its values and insure that the majority party didn’t run roughshod over them and, in effect, their constituencies. This is actually an important part of a democracy and something our founders anticipated would keep our republic from drifting too far in either direction, which they considered dangerous. Today’s Democrat Party has perverted the role of the “loyal opposition” however and turned into the “paranoid obstructionists”.
First, let’s take a look at the Democrats treatment of the Trump cabinet vs. the Republican Party’s treatment of Obama’s, which I’m sure they found to be just as distasteful. President Obama had over half of his cabinet (8 members) confirmed on the day of his inauguration. Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates was a holdover and didn’t require a confirmation hearing. Obama also had 12 of his 15 cabinet members confirmed within two weeks of his inauguration.
President Trump had only two members of his cabinet available to him the day after his inauguration, and only four in the first two weeks. In fact, the confirmation process for Trump’s cabinet has been the slowest in modern history, and is still not complete. There is a point at which the minority party stops performing the role of the loyal opposition and becomes an impediment to the new President and actually performs a disservice to the American people. They, the American people, want the government to work, and in this situation the Democrats have been thwarting that possibility.
And for the last couple of days I have watched Democrats rationalizing their “no” votes against Neil Gorsuch to the point of being ridiculous. Abraham Lincoln once said, “If you look for the bad in people, expecting to find it, you surely will.” The Dems have been so focused on finding anything bad to say about Gorsuch that they have completely ignored his qualifications. He graduated from Columbia, Harvard Law School and Oxford. He’s a pretty smart guy! He has been an Appellate Court judge for almost 10 years and has only been overturned by the Supreme Court one time. He knows what he’s doing. And he has the highest rating from the American Bar Association. That’s a lot to ignore along with the thousands of rulings he has made that conflict with the portrait that Democrats are trying to paint of him.
But, you say, this is just what the Republicans did to Obama, right? NO. Sonia Sotomayer was approved with 68 votes in the Senate with nine Republicans joining the Democrats and Independents voting in favor of her appointment (Ted Kennedy was not able to vote). Elana Kagan was approved with a 63 to 37 vote with five Republicans breaking ranks to get her approved. Without Republican support, neither Sotomayor nor Kagan could have gotten by the Senate’s 60-vote filibuster threshold.
OK you say, Republicans were able to play the loyal opposition role in these cases while still allowing the process to move forward, but they were total obstructionists when it came to Merrick Garland. Actually, no again. I’ve written an article that supported giving Garland a hearing, but I at least understand the Republican argument on the subject.
And no one argued it better than Joe Biden back in 1992 when he insisted that George H. W. Bush should not even make a nomination for the Supreme Court in a Presidential election season. He suggested that if an opening occurred while a new President is being elected, the privilege / responsibility of selecting that new justice should be saved for the new President. Scalia died in February of 2016, and waiting for the new President caused the court to operate with eight justices for over a year. If I were king, I would have granted a vote on Garland, but I do at least understand Joe Biden’s argument. Biden may now regret making his bold declaration and he may even try to suggest he didn’t mean it, but unfortunately, the video speaks for itself.
The Gorsuch confirmation process gives Democrats the opportunity to put the country ahead of their selfish, partisan interests, but as I watch the tortured, slanted questions from that side, I fear that Democrats will force Republicans to invoke the nuclear option to get this eminently qualified candidate approved. They should follow the example of Republicans in the cases of Sotomayor and Kagan and place Neil Gorsuch on the Supreme Court.
A friend of mine made a suggestion that actually makes total sense to me, but which I’m unsure will ever happen. He proposed that Democrats should help confirm Gorsuch with a bi-partisan 60+ vote total, and Trump could reward that cooperation by promising to nominate Merrick Garland for the next vacancy. Since Ruth Bader Ginsburg is 84 and Justice Kennedy will turn 81 in July, there is likelihood that Donald Trump will appoint at least one more Justice. These two moves, one by Democrats and one by President Trump would go a long way to unite the country. In the old “swamp” this would never happen, but with the unconventional Donald Trump, might this “deal” be a possibility?
Final note – my wife and editor in chief agrees with all of this article, except for the last paragraph. Isn’t this a great country where we can disagree and still be friends?
Thursday, March 23, 2017
Saturday, March 18, 2017
Dershowitz on Trump Travel Ban
Alan Dershowitz on Trump Travel Ban
The View from the Middle
Alan Dershowitz, Harvard law school professor, constitutional scholar and defender of civil liberties is hardly my “go to” guy when it comes to conservative principles, but I have to admit that I like what he has been saying lately. He actually supported President Trump’s original executive order, which temporarily restricted travel from seven countries due to poor vetting procedures in those countries.
His point on Trump’s first order was that the President has broad rights to limit immigration from any country when he perceives a risk to our national security. In addition, Dershowitz suggested that the judges involved couldn’t use statements made in the heat of a campaign as proof of some kind of motive for the order. Presidents are allowed to change their minds, right? Obama changed his mind on traditional marriage. So did Hillary. Actually there is a long and rich history of opinion shifting in politics on both sides of the aisle.
But what Alan Dershowitz said this morning was not only brilliant, but also stated so simply as for any and every American to understand. He said that these judges were ruling in a way that would make this order perfectly legal, if it were issued by Barack Obama, but illegal if issued by Donald Trump.
Think about the implications. This would allow judges to consider perceived (not actual) motives for Presidential action and then ruling against these perceived motives whenever they liked. I don’t know if these judges are getting off on some power trip when they think they can scuttle the plans of the President, or if they are just advancing some ideological agenda. Either way, that’s not their job, and I predict a reversal in the 4th Circuit or the Supreme Court if it has to go that far. I’m betting that serious judges will understand the implications of Alan Dershowitz’s logic.
The View from the Middle
Alan Dershowitz, Harvard law school professor, constitutional scholar and defender of civil liberties is hardly my “go to” guy when it comes to conservative principles, but I have to admit that I like what he has been saying lately. He actually supported President Trump’s original executive order, which temporarily restricted travel from seven countries due to poor vetting procedures in those countries.
His point on Trump’s first order was that the President has broad rights to limit immigration from any country when he perceives a risk to our national security. In addition, Dershowitz suggested that the judges involved couldn’t use statements made in the heat of a campaign as proof of some kind of motive for the order. Presidents are allowed to change their minds, right? Obama changed his mind on traditional marriage. So did Hillary. Actually there is a long and rich history of opinion shifting in politics on both sides of the aisle.
But what Alan Dershowitz said this morning was not only brilliant, but also stated so simply as for any and every American to understand. He said that these judges were ruling in a way that would make this order perfectly legal, if it were issued by Barack Obama, but illegal if issued by Donald Trump.
Think about the implications. This would allow judges to consider perceived (not actual) motives for Presidential action and then ruling against these perceived motives whenever they liked. I don’t know if these judges are getting off on some power trip when they think they can scuttle the plans of the President, or if they are just advancing some ideological agenda. Either way, that’s not their job, and I predict a reversal in the 4th Circuit or the Supreme Court if it has to go that far. I’m betting that serious judges will understand the implications of Alan Dershowitz’s logic.
Thursday, March 9, 2017
Trump is Learning Fast
Trump’s Learning Curve
The View from the Middle
I have to admit that I feel sorry for the average Democrat out there. Eight years ago they were wallowing in self-confidence and influence in Washington. They had a massive majority in the House, a filibuster proof majority in the Senate and a wildly liberal President in the White House. Then they got cocky and decided to ignore the other party. They told Republicans that elections had consequences and that they needed to get in the back seat of their legislative Prius, while Democrats passed Obamacare without a single Republican vote in either House. Then, they found that cocky, self-righteous condescension had consequences too.
Today they have lost the Senate and things look even more desperate in 2018. They’ve also lost the House of Representatives and the White House. Now they are left with Hillary’s strategy of “Resist and Persist”. Why do they say, “resist”? Because it sounds better than “lie, cheat, obstruct, hold our breath and throw tantrums”. And then, along came the Russians.
Let’s be honest. If the Russians were behind the hacking of techno wiz John Podesta’s computer (his password was “password”, Really?), they weren’t doing it to get Donald Trump elected President. NO ONE thought Trump was going to win. Not the media, not Hillary, not even Trump and certainly not the Russians. The Russians, if they were behind the leaks, were trying to weaken the person they thought was going to be the next President of the United States, Hillary Clinton.
But then Trump won and Democrats had to come up with some way to destroy his Presidency, even if Americans had to suffer while they did it. So, they decided to use the Russian connection to do it. There was and still is no evidence that there is any connection between the Trump campaign and the Russians, but that wouldn’t stop the Democrats and their lame stream media underlings. Accusations are enough for them, and then they could demand Congressional hearings or a special counsel, which would keep the story in the news for years and go nowhere. Great Plan, right?
The Dem’s only mistake is that they must have said, “Simon says”, because Trump copied their move last Saturday with his own, “Obama’s wire tapping me” story. He figured out their game! He didn’t have any proof, but the Dems had taught him that he didn’t need any. A bold accusation is enough. And then to put the icing on his accusation cake, Trump suggested that Congress should look into it. That would put this story on a slow boat to nowhere. And the Democrats will have a hard time accusing Trump of having no proof because virtually every Russian connection story has included the disclaimer that THEY have no actual evidence of any wrongdoing. Trump is learning fast.
I don’t believe that either story is true, but I must admit that there is a higher probability that someone in the Obama administration surveilled someone on the Trump team than there is of anyone in the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians. Americans as a whole are sick of this accusation BS and would just like these jackasses in Washington to work together for their benefit. Fat chance of that happening, unless Trump moves “term limits” up in his political agenda. I would love to hear the rationalizations from Congress as to why anyone needs to be in Congress for 30, 40 or even 50 years. That kind of tenure leads only to corruption of the kind we are witnessing right now. A pox on both of their houses!! And vote for anyone in favor of term limits.
The View from the Middle
I have to admit that I feel sorry for the average Democrat out there. Eight years ago they were wallowing in self-confidence and influence in Washington. They had a massive majority in the House, a filibuster proof majority in the Senate and a wildly liberal President in the White House. Then they got cocky and decided to ignore the other party. They told Republicans that elections had consequences and that they needed to get in the back seat of their legislative Prius, while Democrats passed Obamacare without a single Republican vote in either House. Then, they found that cocky, self-righteous condescension had consequences too.
Today they have lost the Senate and things look even more desperate in 2018. They’ve also lost the House of Representatives and the White House. Now they are left with Hillary’s strategy of “Resist and Persist”. Why do they say, “resist”? Because it sounds better than “lie, cheat, obstruct, hold our breath and throw tantrums”. And then, along came the Russians.
Let’s be honest. If the Russians were behind the hacking of techno wiz John Podesta’s computer (his password was “password”, Really?), they weren’t doing it to get Donald Trump elected President. NO ONE thought Trump was going to win. Not the media, not Hillary, not even Trump and certainly not the Russians. The Russians, if they were behind the leaks, were trying to weaken the person they thought was going to be the next President of the United States, Hillary Clinton.
But then Trump won and Democrats had to come up with some way to destroy his Presidency, even if Americans had to suffer while they did it. So, they decided to use the Russian connection to do it. There was and still is no evidence that there is any connection between the Trump campaign and the Russians, but that wouldn’t stop the Democrats and their lame stream media underlings. Accusations are enough for them, and then they could demand Congressional hearings or a special counsel, which would keep the story in the news for years and go nowhere. Great Plan, right?
The Dem’s only mistake is that they must have said, “Simon says”, because Trump copied their move last Saturday with his own, “Obama’s wire tapping me” story. He figured out their game! He didn’t have any proof, but the Dems had taught him that he didn’t need any. A bold accusation is enough. And then to put the icing on his accusation cake, Trump suggested that Congress should look into it. That would put this story on a slow boat to nowhere. And the Democrats will have a hard time accusing Trump of having no proof because virtually every Russian connection story has included the disclaimer that THEY have no actual evidence of any wrongdoing. Trump is learning fast.
I don’t believe that either story is true, but I must admit that there is a higher probability that someone in the Obama administration surveilled someone on the Trump team than there is of anyone in the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians. Americans as a whole are sick of this accusation BS and would just like these jackasses in Washington to work together for their benefit. Fat chance of that happening, unless Trump moves “term limits” up in his political agenda. I would love to hear the rationalizations from Congress as to why anyone needs to be in Congress for 30, 40 or even 50 years. That kind of tenure leads only to corruption of the kind we are witnessing right now. A pox on both of their houses!! And vote for anyone in favor of term limits.
Friday, March 3, 2017
The Russians are Coming
The Russians Are Coming
The View from the Middle
Thank God for our stalwart and unbiased mainstream media. They have just uncovered more frightening proof that the Trump campaign was in cahoots with the slimiest of Russian operatives. So slimy, in fact, that they would send chills down the spine of one of my personal heroes, 007, James Bond.
It was revealed today that Attorney General Jeff Sessions attended a cocktail party in Washington D.C. where he brazenly ordered a Black Russian nightcap. The mainstream media was quick to decipher this act for what it was. This was a clear signal that Jeff Sessions is both a racist and a traitor. Thank God they caught this.
Later in the day they discovered that Secretary of State Rex Tillerson had actually read both Crime and Punishment AND War and Peace. Some may mistake Mr. Tillerson’s action as the simple act of an eclectic speed reader, but thank God for the media who exposed this for what it was; an obvious outreach to the Russian FSB (the new name for the KGB). I have to admit that I would have missed this one. Thanks, MSM.
And the piece de resistance was just released. You may not have even heard of it, but the lamestream (I mean mainstream) media partnered with the largest Beatles Fan Club in America to discover that if you play Donald Trump’s inaugural speech backwards and at slow speed, you can clearly hear Trump saying, “I love Russia more than America”. They are pretty sure they also heard, “Paul is dead”. Wow, this is real investigative reporting.
Thank God for their diligence and the fact that they have also saved us from wasting our time on the really unimportant stories. For example, the United States sold 20% of our uranium mining assets to the Russians while millions of dollars flowed into the Clinton Foundation from the Chairman of Uranium One (the company sold to the Russians). How could there possibly be a connection? Thanks for flushing that story down the lamestream media toilet for us.
Then there was Bill Clinton’s half million-dollar payoff for making a speech to Renaissance Capital, a Russian investment bank that was promoting the sale of Uranium One stock to Kremlin controlled Rosatom. There couldn’t be a connection to the fact that his wife was Secretary of State, could there? Almost all of his big payoffs did just happen to occur while she was in that role, but come on, that’s just a coincident, right? Thanks for steering us clear of that potential rabbit trail.
And finally, there was President Obama’s open mic moment when he whispered to then Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, “I’ll have more flexibility after my election.” Everyone knows he was talking about the yoga classes he was planning on taking with Hillary after his election. What else could he be talking about during his missile defense discussion at Seoul? Thanks, lamestream.
Let’s be perfectly honest. Jeff Sessions is an honorable guy who was asked a tortured, finely defined question by Al Franken and answered it honestly. He shouldn’t even have had to recuse himself from the investigation on the Trump campaign’s connection with Moscow. Most of all because there is no connection despite the Democrats’ and lamestream media’s desperate attempts to create one. But Jeff Sessions did the honorable thing and recused himself. We have enough dishonorable, pathological liars in Washington to investigate before we go after one of the good guys!
The View from the Middle
Thank God for our stalwart and unbiased mainstream media. They have just uncovered more frightening proof that the Trump campaign was in cahoots with the slimiest of Russian operatives. So slimy, in fact, that they would send chills down the spine of one of my personal heroes, 007, James Bond.
It was revealed today that Attorney General Jeff Sessions attended a cocktail party in Washington D.C. where he brazenly ordered a Black Russian nightcap. The mainstream media was quick to decipher this act for what it was. This was a clear signal that Jeff Sessions is both a racist and a traitor. Thank God they caught this.
Later in the day they discovered that Secretary of State Rex Tillerson had actually read both Crime and Punishment AND War and Peace. Some may mistake Mr. Tillerson’s action as the simple act of an eclectic speed reader, but thank God for the media who exposed this for what it was; an obvious outreach to the Russian FSB (the new name for the KGB). I have to admit that I would have missed this one. Thanks, MSM.
And the piece de resistance was just released. You may not have even heard of it, but the lamestream (I mean mainstream) media partnered with the largest Beatles Fan Club in America to discover that if you play Donald Trump’s inaugural speech backwards and at slow speed, you can clearly hear Trump saying, “I love Russia more than America”. They are pretty sure they also heard, “Paul is dead”. Wow, this is real investigative reporting.
Thank God for their diligence and the fact that they have also saved us from wasting our time on the really unimportant stories. For example, the United States sold 20% of our uranium mining assets to the Russians while millions of dollars flowed into the Clinton Foundation from the Chairman of Uranium One (the company sold to the Russians). How could there possibly be a connection? Thanks for flushing that story down the lamestream media toilet for us.
Then there was Bill Clinton’s half million-dollar payoff for making a speech to Renaissance Capital, a Russian investment bank that was promoting the sale of Uranium One stock to Kremlin controlled Rosatom. There couldn’t be a connection to the fact that his wife was Secretary of State, could there? Almost all of his big payoffs did just happen to occur while she was in that role, but come on, that’s just a coincident, right? Thanks for steering us clear of that potential rabbit trail.
And finally, there was President Obama’s open mic moment when he whispered to then Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, “I’ll have more flexibility after my election.” Everyone knows he was talking about the yoga classes he was planning on taking with Hillary after his election. What else could he be talking about during his missile defense discussion at Seoul? Thanks, lamestream.
Let’s be perfectly honest. Jeff Sessions is an honorable guy who was asked a tortured, finely defined question by Al Franken and answered it honestly. He shouldn’t even have had to recuse himself from the investigation on the Trump campaign’s connection with Moscow. Most of all because there is no connection despite the Democrats’ and lamestream media’s desperate attempts to create one. But Jeff Sessions did the honorable thing and recused himself. We have enough dishonorable, pathological liars in Washington to investigate before we go after one of the good guys!
Tuesday, February 28, 2017
Hillary's Plan to Resist and Persist
Resist and Persist
The View from the Middle
Hillary Clinton recently went on TV and suggested that the Democrat Party should engage in “resistance and persistence”. That may be a cute slogan. It does rhyme, and it may even be a strategy to insure that Donald Trump fails (and America with him) but it is hardly a platform. The Democrat Party seems to be hoping desperately for a disaster and doing everything they can to deliver one. Doesn’t that just make you want to vote for them?
They are also manically employing the “sticks and stones” strategy that they used during the general election. They miss no opportunity to call President Trump and anyone who dared vote for him misogynists, xenophobes, racists, bigots, homophobes and Islamophobes. Remember Hillary’s basket of deplorables? Now they have added an accusation of anti Semitism to their diatribe despite the fact that it is difficult to be anti Semitic and an Islamophobe at the same time. But the beauty of their insults is that they don’t depend on any proof or any connection to the truth to make them.
I guess calling half of America a basket of deplorable bigots just doesn’t cut it anymore, however. It is clear to me that the DNC is offering bonuses to any lame stream media commentator who can connect Donald Trump to the most heinous people in world history. I heard liberal talking head Bernard Whitman do a particularly good job of this the other day as he compared Trump to Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin and Mao Zedong in the same sentence.
Don’t get hung up on the fact that these three sociopaths killed between 75 and 100 MILLION people. And if they can’t make any ridiculous personal comparisons, they just exaggerate events. The other day, I heard General Flynn’s conversation with the Russian Ambassador compared to 9/11 and Pearl Harbor. Now those are comparisons that only the most loyal liberal fanatics can embrace.
My point is, what’s lacking in the Democrat Party right now is an actual platform. What do they actually stand for? Are they for open borders? Make your case. Are you for amnesty and citizenship for law abiding illegals? (Wow, is that an oxymoron or what) Are you for legalization, which is a very different proposal? Make your case. Do you want more regulations and higher taxes? Make your case.
Despite how much the American people may not like Donald Trump’s behavior, if his platform starts to deliver positive results, the Democrat Party may be in for a series of long hot summers. I still think, however, they would be better off to share and explain their platform than being the party of “If you don’t think like me, you disgust me” or “I’m really hoping for a disaster for American so I can get my power back”.
The View from the Middle
Hillary Clinton recently went on TV and suggested that the Democrat Party should engage in “resistance and persistence”. That may be a cute slogan. It does rhyme, and it may even be a strategy to insure that Donald Trump fails (and America with him) but it is hardly a platform. The Democrat Party seems to be hoping desperately for a disaster and doing everything they can to deliver one. Doesn’t that just make you want to vote for them?
They are also manically employing the “sticks and stones” strategy that they used during the general election. They miss no opportunity to call President Trump and anyone who dared vote for him misogynists, xenophobes, racists, bigots, homophobes and Islamophobes. Remember Hillary’s basket of deplorables? Now they have added an accusation of anti Semitism to their diatribe despite the fact that it is difficult to be anti Semitic and an Islamophobe at the same time. But the beauty of their insults is that they don’t depend on any proof or any connection to the truth to make them.
I guess calling half of America a basket of deplorable bigots just doesn’t cut it anymore, however. It is clear to me that the DNC is offering bonuses to any lame stream media commentator who can connect Donald Trump to the most heinous people in world history. I heard liberal talking head Bernard Whitman do a particularly good job of this the other day as he compared Trump to Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin and Mao Zedong in the same sentence.
Don’t get hung up on the fact that these three sociopaths killed between 75 and 100 MILLION people. And if they can’t make any ridiculous personal comparisons, they just exaggerate events. The other day, I heard General Flynn’s conversation with the Russian Ambassador compared to 9/11 and Pearl Harbor. Now those are comparisons that only the most loyal liberal fanatics can embrace.
My point is, what’s lacking in the Democrat Party right now is an actual platform. What do they actually stand for? Are they for open borders? Make your case. Are you for amnesty and citizenship for law abiding illegals? (Wow, is that an oxymoron or what) Are you for legalization, which is a very different proposal? Make your case. Do you want more regulations and higher taxes? Make your case.
Despite how much the American people may not like Donald Trump’s behavior, if his platform starts to deliver positive results, the Democrat Party may be in for a series of long hot summers. I still think, however, they would be better off to share and explain their platform than being the party of “If you don’t think like me, you disgust me” or “I’m really hoping for a disaster for American so I can get my power back”.
Monday, February 13, 2017
Gorsuch, A Glimmer of Hope
Gorsuch, A Glimmer of Hope
The View from the Middle
Well, it’s official. We have an entirely dysfunctional government. Let’s start at the top. We have a president whose policies I support, but whose behavior I don’t. I do want border security and tax reform. I want school choice and regulatory reform. I’m for the rule of law and for creating good paying American jobs, etc. I’m not for ridiculing the opposition just for thinking differently than I do. That’s a Saul Alinsky strategy to create division, anger and even hatred. It’s a tactic that may work in the short term to move power from one place to another, but in the long term it will destroy what is great about America. I would encourage our President to pursue his agenda, that’s what he was elected to do, but to do it with respect for his opponents.
Then we have the Democrat Party who is redefining the role of the loyal opposition. Its tactics of suppressing free speech and encouraging violence by not denouncing it are repulsive. They have even created a literal playbook on how to block Donald Trump at every turn. And their goal is not simply to hinder Trump, but it is to make him unsuccessful. What they don’t realize is that the real loser of that type of strategy is the American people. The Democrats are crossing the line between reasonable argument and treachery. The good news is that I have noticed a few Democrats suggesting that this strategy is unwise. They may yet save the Democrat party from devolving into the party of hatred, prejudice and chaos.
And while all this partisan brinkmanship has been playing out in Washington, the press has perverted its intended role as watchdog to being an attack-dog on Trump and a lapdog for the DNC. Trump deserves some of the negative coverage he has received, and many would argue that he is his own worst enemy for making some of his comments. But shouldn’t there be some balance. He HAS been extremely active. He has met with big business, unions, black leaders and today he is meeting to explore how to encourage women entrepreneurs. Is it no wonder that the approval of the Press is even lower than Trump’s?
And just when you think the courts could play their intended role and bring some sanity to the situation, they stooped to the same political hackery that Washington is famous for. I thought the justices were just supposed to interpret the law, but in every story about Trump’s travel delay executive order, all the talking heads could discuss was the political ideology of each judge. And the decisions came down just as expected based on those beliefs. The first judge never even made a legal argument for his decision and the three-judge panel from the 9th circuit never even sited the law that gives the President broad powers to control immigration. And don’t take my word for it. Just ask Alan Dershowitz or Jonathon Turley, two (hardly conservative) constitutional experts.
What virtually every American wants to see is civility in Washington, truth being reported by the media and politicians working together to make things better for the country. Maybe they should all take a hint from Dwight Eisenhower, who may have been our least partisan President who also delivered possibly the most peaceful, productive and successful eight years in office.
There is one glimmer of hope on the horizon, which could speak well of the President, Congress and the Courts at the same time, and that glimmer is spelled - NEIL GORSUCH. By almost all thoughtful opinions on both sides of the aisle, he is eminently qualified to be the Supreme Court Justice to replace the legendary Antonin Scalia. His nomination speaks very positively of Donald Trump’s judgment. IF the Senate can confirm him with more than 60 votes (avoiding the nuclear option) it would suggest that some of the partisan politics have been tamped down and some progress could be made in the future. And of course, Neil Gorsuch would be a great addition to the Supreme Court. Neil Gorsuch would be a big win for everyone, including the American people.
Now, someone needs to throw some cold water on the press!
The View from the Middle
Well, it’s official. We have an entirely dysfunctional government. Let’s start at the top. We have a president whose policies I support, but whose behavior I don’t. I do want border security and tax reform. I want school choice and regulatory reform. I’m for the rule of law and for creating good paying American jobs, etc. I’m not for ridiculing the opposition just for thinking differently than I do. That’s a Saul Alinsky strategy to create division, anger and even hatred. It’s a tactic that may work in the short term to move power from one place to another, but in the long term it will destroy what is great about America. I would encourage our President to pursue his agenda, that’s what he was elected to do, but to do it with respect for his opponents.
Then we have the Democrat Party who is redefining the role of the loyal opposition. Its tactics of suppressing free speech and encouraging violence by not denouncing it are repulsive. They have even created a literal playbook on how to block Donald Trump at every turn. And their goal is not simply to hinder Trump, but it is to make him unsuccessful. What they don’t realize is that the real loser of that type of strategy is the American people. The Democrats are crossing the line between reasonable argument and treachery. The good news is that I have noticed a few Democrats suggesting that this strategy is unwise. They may yet save the Democrat party from devolving into the party of hatred, prejudice and chaos.
And while all this partisan brinkmanship has been playing out in Washington, the press has perverted its intended role as watchdog to being an attack-dog on Trump and a lapdog for the DNC. Trump deserves some of the negative coverage he has received, and many would argue that he is his own worst enemy for making some of his comments. But shouldn’t there be some balance. He HAS been extremely active. He has met with big business, unions, black leaders and today he is meeting to explore how to encourage women entrepreneurs. Is it no wonder that the approval of the Press is even lower than Trump’s?
And just when you think the courts could play their intended role and bring some sanity to the situation, they stooped to the same political hackery that Washington is famous for. I thought the justices were just supposed to interpret the law, but in every story about Trump’s travel delay executive order, all the talking heads could discuss was the political ideology of each judge. And the decisions came down just as expected based on those beliefs. The first judge never even made a legal argument for his decision and the three-judge panel from the 9th circuit never even sited the law that gives the President broad powers to control immigration. And don’t take my word for it. Just ask Alan Dershowitz or Jonathon Turley, two (hardly conservative) constitutional experts.
What virtually every American wants to see is civility in Washington, truth being reported by the media and politicians working together to make things better for the country. Maybe they should all take a hint from Dwight Eisenhower, who may have been our least partisan President who also delivered possibly the most peaceful, productive and successful eight years in office.
There is one glimmer of hope on the horizon, which could speak well of the President, Congress and the Courts at the same time, and that glimmer is spelled - NEIL GORSUCH. By almost all thoughtful opinions on both sides of the aisle, he is eminently qualified to be the Supreme Court Justice to replace the legendary Antonin Scalia. His nomination speaks very positively of Donald Trump’s judgment. IF the Senate can confirm him with more than 60 votes (avoiding the nuclear option) it would suggest that some of the partisan politics have been tamped down and some progress could be made in the future. And of course, Neil Gorsuch would be a great addition to the Supreme Court. Neil Gorsuch would be a big win for everyone, including the American people.
Now, someone needs to throw some cold water on the press!
Thursday, February 2, 2017
A Prayerful President
A Prayerful President
The View from the Middle
As is appropriate, I think, this morning I was praying for President Trump as he prepared to deliver his remarks at the prayer breakfast. I wasn’t praying for a delivery like John Kennedy or Ronald Reagan or even a Barack Obama. I think I know Trump’s strengths and weaknesses well enough to accept that he is not as articulate as those great communicators. I was praying for wise and uniting words, and my prayers were answered.
He was actually humorous and gracious. He started by saying how wonderful this tradition is and was looking forward to coming back for seven more years, which brought laughter from the crowd. And for you “never Trumpers”, come on. If that had come from Obama, you would be falling all over yourselves with praise. Then he patted VP, Pence on the back by rating him a 12 on a scale of 1-10. He said that whenever people question him, they always look at his choice of Mike Pence and say, “He (Trump) must know what he’s doing.”
He showed his passion and respect for the military. He compared our soldiers to Christ when he quoted John 15:13, “Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends.” Powerful! He said the American soldier has no party or specific creed or ideology, but only embraces the bond of loyalty that links us all together as a nation of believers.
He defended religious freedom for all faiths that accept our values of liberty and equal opportunity for all. And probably his greatest line came as he talked about our great country’s connection and reliance on God. Specifically, he said, “As long as we have God, we are never alone. Whether it’s the soldier on the night watch, or the single parent on the night shift, God will always give us solace and strength and comfort.” Sorry to the atheists out there, but this is utterly appropriate for the prayer breakfast.
It was exactly what I had hoped for. It was positive. It was uniting and it was appropriate. Yet, at one point he slipped off the path for a few seconds as he took a little shot at Arnold Schwarzenegger and his ratings on The Apprentice. It was just a few seconds and may have been an inside joke with Arnold (Trump did say that we should pray for his ratings), but what was the headlines from CNN et al? “Trump takes shot at Arnold Schwarzenegger”. If these reports had been around in 1863 and heard Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg address, their headline would have been, “Lincoln doesn’t have much to say at Gettysburg”.
I didn’t like the “Lyin’ Ted” comments back during the campaign, and I didn’t like the “Cryin’ Chuck” comment the other day, but when Trump does something well, I will continue to point it out.
The View from the Middle
As is appropriate, I think, this morning I was praying for President Trump as he prepared to deliver his remarks at the prayer breakfast. I wasn’t praying for a delivery like John Kennedy or Ronald Reagan or even a Barack Obama. I think I know Trump’s strengths and weaknesses well enough to accept that he is not as articulate as those great communicators. I was praying for wise and uniting words, and my prayers were answered.
He was actually humorous and gracious. He started by saying how wonderful this tradition is and was looking forward to coming back for seven more years, which brought laughter from the crowd. And for you “never Trumpers”, come on. If that had come from Obama, you would be falling all over yourselves with praise. Then he patted VP, Pence on the back by rating him a 12 on a scale of 1-10. He said that whenever people question him, they always look at his choice of Mike Pence and say, “He (Trump) must know what he’s doing.”
He showed his passion and respect for the military. He compared our soldiers to Christ when he quoted John 15:13, “Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends.” Powerful! He said the American soldier has no party or specific creed or ideology, but only embraces the bond of loyalty that links us all together as a nation of believers.
He defended religious freedom for all faiths that accept our values of liberty and equal opportunity for all. And probably his greatest line came as he talked about our great country’s connection and reliance on God. Specifically, he said, “As long as we have God, we are never alone. Whether it’s the soldier on the night watch, or the single parent on the night shift, God will always give us solace and strength and comfort.” Sorry to the atheists out there, but this is utterly appropriate for the prayer breakfast.
It was exactly what I had hoped for. It was positive. It was uniting and it was appropriate. Yet, at one point he slipped off the path for a few seconds as he took a little shot at Arnold Schwarzenegger and his ratings on The Apprentice. It was just a few seconds and may have been an inside joke with Arnold (Trump did say that we should pray for his ratings), but what was the headlines from CNN et al? “Trump takes shot at Arnold Schwarzenegger”. If these reports had been around in 1863 and heard Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg address, their headline would have been, “Lincoln doesn’t have much to say at Gettysburg”.
I didn’t like the “Lyin’ Ted” comments back during the campaign, and I didn’t like the “Cryin’ Chuck” comment the other day, but when Trump does something well, I will continue to point it out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)