Outlawism: the next phase
To hear President Obama talk about the so-called budget cuts known as sequestration, his two-year-old idea of those required slashes in federal spending didn’t turn out to be such a good idea after all.
As usual with President Obama, however, the failure of his own plan is not his fault.
The president, his Cabinet secretaries and his press secretary are describing a veritable fiscal Armageddon for the country if the cuts he proposed in 2011 start taking effect on Friday, as legislatively required. And conveniently forgetting that in late 2011 Obama vowed to veto any attempts to disarm the sequester cuts he now raises alarms over.
Remember now, these aren’t real cuts in current spending. These are cuts in the future increases of current spending. We’ll still be spending more and more and more each year, as we have since Obama took the throne. In fact, he’s been spending more than $1,000,000,000,000 above what the government takes in every single year.
We’ll just be spending a little bit less of the usual annual federal budget increases. Only 2.3% less, as a matter of fact. Could you cut $23 in spending out of a $1,000 raise you might get someday if you ever find a job during this Obama economy? See?
But to hear Obama describe the ugly upcoming scenario you’ll probably have to send your kids to school unfed, maybe even naked. See how awful Republicans are?
“Thousands of teachers and educators will be laid off. Tens of thousands of parents will have to deal with finding child care for their children. Hundreds of thousands of Americans will lose access to primary care and preventive care like flu vaccinations and cancer screenings…..workers will sit idle when they should be repairing ships.”
Obama made these claims to the nation’s governors Monday and urged them to contact their congressional delegations. These are 50 men and women chief state executives, every one of whom balances every one of their government budgets every single year. And the White House Democrat has the nerve to seek their help avoiding modest trims that still add to his existing historic deficits.
Today, Obama takes his OMG Tour to Virginia’s coastline, where he might mention some awful alleged things those Republicans will force him to do to our once-proud Navy.
He probably won’t have time to explain that the Republican House has twice passed measures to address the sequester challenge but the Democrat Senate is too busy to take them up, as it has been violating the law and not passing federal budgets for the past four years.
I admire Andrew Malcolm’s continued good humor as he describes the surreal transformation of our country into something that runs on nothing but lies, media manipulation, will to power, and an increasingly single-party government that fights over who will control the federal leviathan at any given moment.
The TEA Party swept GOP governors to power. They returned the House to the Republicans. And what have they gotten for it? Broken promises, “pragmatic” (and dramatic) leftward turns, capitulations on tax hikes, reversals on “patient’s rights” manifestos that were meant to protect against the implementation of ObamaCare, establishment invective (coupled to active efforts to destroy their most prominent potential candidates, or new organizations designed to defeat them in primaries by labeling moderates “conservative” and labeling TEA Party challengers Sharon Christine O’DonnellAkinMourdochAngle) — all things that, taken in the aggregate, prove conclusively that the GOP has no desire to represent its conservative base, though it’s happy to use that base to win elections by pandering to them during primaries.
There is no saving the GOP. So while I’m happy to vote for solid conservatives I can trust who run under the GOP party banner, it’s time for a kind of third party challenge — without necessarily requiring us to adopt an official third party.
Here’s my thinking: we run TEA Party conservatives in Republican primaries. But when they win, they cease referring to themselves as Republicans (though they’ll run as such) and refer to themselves only as committed constitutionalists and protectors of individual liberty and equality of opportunity, and defenders against an overweening regulatory state and federal intrusion into your bathrooms, your lunch rooms, your vending machines, your restaurants, and so on.
I’ve been saying this for who knows how long know here, but let me repeat it again: losing more slowly is still losing. Radical measures must be taken. There will be no more voting for the lesser of two evils.
These candidates, who we agree to support, we agree to support in exchange for certain publicized promises: 1) that they represent the wishes of their constituencies 2) that they impose upon themselves limits of 8 years in the House and 12 years in the Senate 3) that they will refuse to caucus with party leaders who refuse to honor the principles of the party base, and no amount of arm-twisting can turn them; if the GOP establishment responds by withholding money from their re-election campaigns, the TEA Party / committed constitutionalists will counter by not only challenging establishment Republicans in primaries, but by refusing to endorse those Republicans should they win: electing those with Rs in front of their names just for the sake of doing so is turning politics into a team sport. And we shouldn’t think of it as a game, as too many people’s livelihoods are put at risk during games of political positioning that the GOP has proven itself so poor at playing; that they will, as a caucus of committed constitutionalists, hold daily press conferences to get their message out to the American people. If this requires televised ads to challenge the national press into covering their alternative message to the ruling class narrative, money is raised for precisely that effort.
Additional money and seed capital should be sought to build and promote a cable news network to compete with FOX. FOX has become the outlet for the establishment GOP to help shape the debate in “conservative” circles, with Karl Rove and every other Bushie sucking all the oxygen out of the individual sovereignty / constitutionalist agenda. Panels of “conservative” experts promote things like fiscal cliff surrenders, or continuing resolution surrenders, or capitulations on “taxes on the rich,” and so on — all while trying to relegate those who oppose these abrogations of principle as “purists” or “True Believers” with hairy feet and a desire to rape and pillage the language like rhetorical Visigoths.
This is an attempt to re-calibrate the political spectrum, with the Founders and Framers, who are best represented in principle by the various TEA Party factions, relegated to the fringe (with the Birchers, the KKK, the nativists, etc), while Karl Rove and the national GOP and an increasing number of “pragmatic” big government Republicans redefine moderates and leftwing Republicans as “conservative”, which has the practical effect of then moving the New Left socialists / Marxists to the center-left, pulling them off the fringes.
It is fair to ask at this point, just whose side are the national Republicans on?
And it fair to ask that as a purely rhetorical question: because increasingly it is obvious that they are on their side; that they are on the side of big government; and that they have very little interest in fighting the rhetorical tide of the Pravda media when they can receive praise for capitulating to the progressives — and can then keep their cushy jobs as the loyal opposition, consistently funded by the plebes in the hinterlands who keep sending in money hoping to elect people to represent them.
Which more times than not requires settling for the lesser of two evils.
It’s a largely closed system pretending to be a representative republic. Having recognized that, we have no one to blame but ourselves from now on for not being able to take it back from the entrenched ruling class who operates in its own interests while pretending to operate in ours.
Having myself been marginalized for writing this way long before it became fashionable, I expect these ideas to fall largely on deaf ears. So I post them here for posterity. And with the hope that somewhere in the conservative movement there are those who are willing to help me promote them from the obscurity in which they were tendered.