Hundreds of Central American children held at an American Air Force base remind us of the humanitarian crisis at our southern border. Another thousand future illegal immigrants riding atop a Mexican "death train," anticipating their permisos en los Estados Unidos, remind us of the lawless policy that is causing this predictable crisis.
But it is the criticism by Hispanics and African-Americans of President Obama's response to the tsunami of adult and pint-sized illegal immigrants which suggests the political catastrophe that these events will unleash on Democrats during elections barely three months away.
Please read the rest of my Op-Ed for the Denver Post here:
In a Gallup poll released Tuesday, the percentage of Americans who say that immigration is the nation’s most important problem reached 17 percent, the highest level in eight years and the second-highest ever recorded by that polling organization.
It’s easy to scoff at the fickleness of the American public, taking a long-term problem such as immigration (legal or otherwise) from rating as most important by 5 percent of the population to 17 percent of the population in just a few weeks, notwithstanding the images of young unaccompanied children flooding into Texas. After all, border security and immigration didn’t suddenly become three or four times as important as it was just a month ago. It’s just that the symptom has alerted people to the disease of a lawless situation encouraged by a lawless president and an ineffective immigration system.
But what has become massively more important in that short time frame is immigration as a political issue and how it may now favor Republicans — or at least not harm them.
Immigration, along with the closely-tied issue of race, were to be two the three legs of the stool upholding already flimsy Democratic electoral hopes in November’s elections.
But as Hispanic congressmen, an irate black woman in Houston (in a now-viral video), and furious black crowds in Chicago publicly assail President Obama for not doing his job and for treating illegal alien children with more care and concern than he shows for American children, claiming that the GOP is a party that “black and brown” people must fear and loathe is suddenly a challenge.
Similarly, with even MSNBC hosts questioning the administration’s competence, bashing the president for not visiting the border, and scoffing at a Democrat’s claim the border is really secure, the effectiveness of Democratic appeals (particularly to Hispanic voters) that Republicans are the problem when it comes to immigration reform will run into the increasingly credible notion that the GOP has no reason to trust this president as an honest partner in negotiating such reform. Would you?
Please read the entirety of my article for the American Spectator here:
It’s beginning to sink in with the intelligentsia: The flood of illegal aliens (yes, I said “illegal”) and particularly the tsunami of children traveling alone — parents risking their youngsters’ lives by sending them from Central America through gang-ravaged Mexico — threatens to turn the immigration debate into a major political liability for Democrats in November.
While immigration is typically low on the list of issues Americans care most about, it was to be a trump card for the left in turning out otherwise apathetic or demoralized Hispanic and liberal voters four months from now. But, as seems to be the result of almost every Obama administration policy, reality is blowing up the best laid plans of the DNC.
As liberals are wont to do, their responses to the collapse of their one potentially winning issue fall into two main categories: demonizing critics of the president and others who are troubled by current events along our southern border and trying to change both the direction and actual words of the conversation about the problem. The latter is a particular sign of desperation.
Murrieta, California, a city of just over 100,000 people in Riverside County, was the site last week of protesters waving American flags and blocking buses transporting illegal aliens who had been apprehended illegally crossing the border into Texas. They were being moved to California because of overcrowding of Texas holding facilities. Not least due to health concerns, residents of Murrieta wanted no part of it.
In the last six months, over 52,000 mostly Central American children have been caught at the border. The estimated cost of taking care of them is $252 per child per day, with a total cost to American taxpayers of over $2 billion expected for 2014.
CNN’s Candy “I’m here for you, Barack” Crowley interviewed Murrieta mayor Alan Long on Sunday using language that should be journalistically disqualifying: “As you look at these protests, the overwhelming concern did not seem to be ‘Oh my goodness, the poor children.’ The overwhelming concern seemed to be ‘Go away. Not here.’”
Please read the rest of my article for the American Spectator here:
The bodies of three young men, assumed to be the two Israeli and one Israeli-American yeshiva (religious high school) students kidnapped on June 12th, have been found "under a pile of rocks in an open field" between two towns in the West Bank, according to NY Times reporting. Initial reports are that the boys had been shot.
Let neither our utterly worthless Secretary of State, John Kerry, nor his utterly worthless predecessor, Hillary Clinton, utter a word about "calm" or "the peace process."
It is time -- well past time -- to end all US financial support for the murderous Palestinians who, even when not directly involved in attacks on civilians and children, celebrate such attacks while teaching their own children that Jews are monsters deserving of suffering and death.
Israel should find and kill everybody involved in the kidnapping and every Hamas official who sanctioned or even tolerated it.
And the world must understand that Hamas (and probably the faux-moderates in Fatah) share much more with ISIS than they share with the civilized world. It is a debilitating psychological condition which for most people can only be cured by death. Some need the cure sooner than others.
For my thoughts on Colorado's Republican primary election for governor, as well as on the Oklahoma Senate primary and the Mississippi Senate runoff, please see my article for the American Spectator here:
Does anyone else thing these stories might be related?
- Phil Mickelson: High Taxes Discourage Me from Working Harder
- Investor, Bettor, Golfer: Insider Trading Inquiry Includes Mickelson...
- And today's news: Golfer Mickelson’s Role Said to Be Overstated in Insider Inquiry
Here's how it sounds to me: Famous rich athlete complains about the negative incentives caused by high taxes. Government usees especially aggressive tactics to try to find him guilty of securities violations, not least perhaps intentionally leaking the existence of an investigation, a story which the Obama-cheerleading, tax-loving NY Times is only too happy to cover. The Times then reports that "Mr. Mickelson’s ties to the investigation are weaker than previously reported." But of course much of the damage to Mickelson is done, harming his reputation as well as distracting him from his profession and the rest of his life.
To me, and I'm not a particularly conspiracy-minded person, this smells like a mini-repeat of the IRS targeting of conservatives, except this time the "rogue" agency is the SEC, which is hardly less frightening for its victim.
The Times, not wanting to appear to be as biased as they are, notes that today's details "may also raise questions about the government’s decision to deploy what appear to be unusually aggressive tactics in the investigation, particularly when the F.B.I. agents publicly approached Mr. Mickelson even though he is known to have a lawyer and a sports agent." If they want to prove that they still have a shred of true journalistic spirit left in them, I dare the paper to chase this down, to figure out why they were given such harmful and (at least mostly) false information about a public figure.
In his Republican primary race on Tuesday evening, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) was a bigger favorite than California Chrome. (Last week, Cantor’s campaign claimed a more than 2-to-1 polling lead.) But in both cases we’re reminded “that’s why they run the race.”
The most common reaction after economics professor Dave Brat crushed Rep. Cantor by 56 percent to 44 percent – despite Brat’s campaign raising and spending less than 5 percent of Cantor’s total – was “Nobody saw it coming.” In an article which appears to have been re-written following the election, the Washington Post predicted that Brat would “fall far short.” (How nice to be able to delete failed predictions; I’m sure Cantor’s pollsters wish they could do the same.) Perhaps the skepticism of Brat’s chances shouldn’t be a surprise because although Brat was considered a more credible challenger than many of Cantor’s prior Republican foes, no sitting House Majority Leader had ever before lost a primary.
The left is already trumpeting this political earthquake as representing a Tea Party takeover of the GOP – a point they’ve been trying to make for some time despite the relative lack of success of pro-liberty groups in the 2012 primary season (including Senator Lindsey Graham’s trouncing of all of his Tea Party opponents at the same time that Cantor was losing as well as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s easy victory against a flawed but strongly Tea Party-backed challenger.)
But despite the “Tea Party” appellation in nearly every news article about the election, Brat is only a Tea Party candidate in the sense of running on principles and seeming to be sincere when referencing the American Constitution – both of which are anathema to the Fourth Estate and too often to Republican leadership who prefer constitutional lip service over honoring their oaths of office.
While Mr. Brat did get significant support from several high-profile conservative talk radio hosts such as Laura Ingraham and Mark Levin, and from some small local Tea Party groups in Virginia, no major national Tea Party group came to Brat’s aid, financially or in any other public way. If this represents the new Tea Party, both the establishment and Democrats should be even more afraid than they might have been following their 2010 “shellacking.”
Please read the rest of my article for the American Spectator here:
(Not to be sung or hummed to the tune of any John Lennon song...)
Imagine a congressman who has never missed a vote in the House of Representatives.
Imagine a congressman who has explained every House vote he has cast on his Facebook page.
Imagine a congressman who places fidelity to the Constitution over the wishes of special interests, even when it means voting against his own party.
Imagine a congressman targeted by the party establishment who disapprove of his independent thinking.
There is only one member of Congress who fits this entire description: Representative Justin Amash of Michigan's 3rd Congressional District (Grand Rapids and the surrounding area.)
You don't believe me? Check these:
- Amash's voting record (his bio says he also never missed a vote while serving in the Michigan state legislature.)
- Amash's Facebook page
- Amash and the Constitution (one of hundreds of examples)
- Amash and his "establishment" primary challenge
At the age of 34, Justin remains one of the youngest members of the House, and someone who could be a force for liberty and fundamental principles for years to come if the forces of go-along-to-get-along, of party before principle, of "what can you do for me?" can be held off.
I've had the opportunity to speak one-on-one with Justin by phone and in person, to have lunch with him near the Capitol; he is unflinching in his principles and unfailing in the clarity of his thinking. On the very rare occasion when he and I disagree, his explanation is one which even if it doesn't convince me is always honest and thoughtful. I've never met another Congressman like him -- which says a lot about why our Congress is such a persistent disappointment.
The liberal media, or even moderately conservative local newspapers such as the Port Huron Times Herald, have an interest in portraying the race as close although recent polls show Amash with a fairly comfortable lead.
Michigan's primary calendar has their elections quite late: this year, the primary is on August 5.
Given the establishment's ability to throw money at a race, despite Justin's current polling lead, supporters of liberty, limited government, political transparency, and most importantly the Constitution, might consider a contribution to Rep. Amash's campaign to be a wise investment.
My money is where my mouth is: For the second election cycle in a row, Justin Amash is the only member of the House of Representatives to whom I have made a campaign contribution.
I almost never encourage people to contribute to politicians' campaigns, and in those cases it is only when I'm doing what I'm suggesting. As I say, it's easy this time since there's only one candidate I'm contributing to and I hope you'll consider doing the same.
Not only is any amount helpful, but you can take pride in supporting one of the few truly principled people in Congress, a man who always does what he believes is the right thing, no matter what John Boehner or any other Republican tells him, no matter how much he is pressured, even knowing that House leadership will aim to punish him as they did last year by removing him from the House Budget Committee. (If you're for the NSA continuing to spy on Americans, Justin isn't your guy...)
Again, with my money where my mouth is, please consider clicking here and contributing to a politician most worthy of your support.
One final thought: Some time ago when I was considering running for office (I have since banished the thought from my mind), I told a friend who is a true political expert that one thing which I wouldn't look forward to is asking people to contribute to my campaign. She said, "that means you don't understand what you're asking for." Her point was that a contribution to a politician whom you truly support is not a gift to that politician, but an investment in your future, in your children's futures, in the hope for a prosperous and exceptional nation. She was right, and the message was one of those things that seems so obvious but only after someone explains it to you. While that wasn't the main reason I decided that I probably never want to run for office, it clarified my thinking when it comes to political contributions -- and makes me feel not just comfortable, but proud, to contribute to Justin Amash.
To coin a phrase, R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. has forgotten more about politics than I’ll ever know. His familiarity with great ideas and thinkers, his personal ties to some of the most important conservatives in recent history (Ronald Reagan visited his home!), and his affable writing style — not to mention that he founded the publication I write for — give me pause when considering even a modest contradiction of the man.
Perhaps RET is much more congenitally optimistic than I am about politics, but I cannot share his counseled optimism that a renewal of the “Liberal Death Wish” may cause the left to “go the way of the dinosaurs.”
No doubt, as in all areas of human endeavor, those who feel a strong sense of power or control or popularity tend to overshoot, to overestimate the public’s desire for whatever it is they’re selling. Whether it’s Sony Betamax, New Coke, Polaroid (their too-little-too-late decision to enter the digital camera market), Enron (more about fraud than about poor marketing), or Jimmy Dean’s Chocolate Chip Pancake-wrapped Sausage on a Stick (I’m not kidding), “smart” and otherwise successful people have made decisions which caused their brands something between embarrassment, real harm, or even complete destruction.
The living disaster that is the Obama administration fits squarely into this paradigm, doing great damage to the reputation of the Democratic Party and particularly of its radical subset — perhaps the majority of the party’s elected officials — known as “Progressives.”
But when you think about the biggest mistakes made by some of the biggest corporations, few have actually been fatal — at least on their own — to those companies. Sony and Coke each survived (and thrived) following two of the biggest blunders in marketing history. True collapses caused by a single decision or at least the medium-term implementation of that single decision may be famous but they’re not particularly numerous among already-large organizations — as which the Democratic Party would surely qualify.
Please read the rest of my article for the American Spectator here:
Sometimes the best form of criticism is humor, especially when all other forms seem ineffective.
So in order to try to help you laugh, or at least stop crying, I offer these two gems in response to the trade of 5 Taliban terrorist leaders for one Army sergeant who probably deserted his unit:
First, from Mad magazine, a new movie poster based on the trade:
(click for larger version)
Next, from the always brilliant Oleg at ThePeoplesCube.com:
Obama Trades All Remaining Gitmo Detainees for Magic Beans
?(click picture to read entire hilarious article)