On Amash leaving the GOP

Let's start with the Washington Post op-ed in which he announces it. It strikes all the notes I'd want him to strike in such a piece. He's not wrong about modern partisan politics being in a death spiral. I'm pleased that he notes that the reason a lot of people have opted to focus on their personal lives to the near-exclusion of the mortal ideological combat that consumes the oxygen in Washington, in the media and on the Internet is its toxicity, but I'm also pleased that he then says that those concerned about reviving this nation cannot abandon the arena of engagement.

I will say that his call for impeachment a few weeks ago seems ill-advised. I'm not here going to rehash the LITD position on Donald Trump, but the president's ample shortcomings don't rise to the level of impeachable offenses.

I classify that as a quirky move in a career otherwise exhibiting a fealty to principle I yearn to see more of. I was on his side when John Boehner removed him from the House Budget Committee. That it takes courage to stand for cutting spending and making even tepid attempts to address the national debt is a sad commentary on the Congresses of the past several - well, decades, but courage he did indeed demonstrate.

I suppose the logical next move is a run for president as either an independent or a Libertarian. He can't win, of course, but it would give me someone to vote for that would allow the eternal record book to show, as it shows for what I did in the voting booth in 2016, that I did not press the button for either an America-common-sense-decency-and-dignity-hating socialist or a bombastic narcissist.

It's some kind of reassurance to know that whatever fate befalls Amash politically, he will be around in some capacity as a voice for liberty. He's much needed.

Just what is the current state of the Republican Party?

It seems the subject of how the GOP is faring ten months into the Trump era is on a lot of minds today.

There's an editorial at The Weekly Standard entitled "The Surrender" .

David M. Drucker at the Washington Examiner has a piece called "Trump Has Won the Civil War Where It Counts - With Voters."

On their "The Editors" podcast, the NRO guys call their discussion about it "The GOP vs. the GOP vs. the GOP."



Michael Barone's take at Real Clear Politics is called "Both Parties Trying Harder to Defeat Themselves."

David Limbaugh at Townhall's take is that "There is No GOP Civil War."

And Joe Cunningham at Red State, no fan of Trump, says, "Love Him or Hate Him, Trumps Economics Seem To Be Working."

A common thread among the assessments over whether it's a good or bad thing is that the Republican Party is now Trump's party.

Ready for LITD's take?

It's that that is probably true, but it's not on balance a good thing, the greatly improved economy, the defanged EPA, the return to seriousness in foreign policy and great judicial appointments notwithstanding.

Why? Because we would have achieved these things with an actually conservative president, without the cult of personality which, coming on the heels of the cult of personality surrounding the previous president, probably insinuates that feature into the nation's political landscape so that it will be a given in races into the foreseeable future. And now that it's been established that the politically motivated populace chooses as figures to surround with such cults men lacking character in one way or another, our chances for getting choices between really exemplary public servants will not get better.

The argument that goes, "What is there to argue with? We're getting the results we wanted" leaves out the cultural level, which, as you know LITD insists drives the political, economic and national security levels. The country's educational apparatus, its entertainment industry (including sports and highbrow arts), what's left of its journalism, and a great deal of its corporate world, most definitely including the big social-media companies, are still in the hands of people who, as we warned, are able to conflate Trump's cringe-inducing behavior (which never abates for more than a few minutes) with actual conservatism. (Then there is the related thorny matter of the different kinds of Republican opposition to Trump. Let's not stand for any conflating of Sasse and Cruz style opposition with that of shaky-at-best-and-often-downright-squishy opposition from the likes of Flake, Corker and McCain.)

Yes, I'd say Piers Morgan is probably right that Trump is on track to win a second term. But he'll do so with incredibly high disapproval ratings. The public discourse will continue to be one big snarl-fest, with no doubt annual scream-at-the-sky events every November.

We seem to have settled for getting what we want policy-wise by dragging it over the finish line at the expense of any improvement in the state of our culture.

And I daresay it won't be long at all until Trump pulls yet another policy-level stunt that will have his slavish devotees swallowing hard and actual conservatives saying, "WTF?"

I carry no party's water; I remain an immutable-principles guy to the end

I am so glad I no longer consider myself a Republican.

Of course, I'll continue to vote nearly exclusively Republican for the foreseeable future, given that the main alternative is evil and the rest are silly.

But this repeal-and-replace impasse makes me want to throw up.

Consider who is lining up for the House bill and against it.

Against: the good guys and the smart guys:

Heritage Action, Freedomworks and Americans for Prosperity -- three of the biggest groups that Republicans will need to help them whip their right flank into voting for this thing -- have all come out hard against it. Avik Roy and Michael Cannon, two of the leading opponents of Obamacare in the policy community, have both panned it. You’re not exactly seeing enthusiastic cheers from the journalists who opposed Affordable Care Act, of which I am one. See? This is me, emphatically not cheering. If such a thing is possible, I am actively failing to cheer.

Squirrel-Hair claims to be open to modifications, but says that has to be done through the amendment process. Like that is going to bring more clarity to the whole enterprise.

And Mike Pence has squandered a great deal of credibility in this matter:

The White House on Tuesday cast the GOP bill as a "work in progress," a sign that changes may be necessary in order to move it through the House. Pence acknowledged that reality by saying as the legislative process goes forward, the GOP plan "is the framework for reform and we are certainly open to improvements and to recommendations in the legislative process."

But he also warned the GOP, "this is the bill" backed by President Trump.

Mitch McConnell seems anxious to have the Senate vote on it.

Nice work, you clowns.

Yes, the cabinet appointments, the reversal of the EPA's tyranny, and the new US tone at the UN are all marvelous developments made possible by last November's election results.

But failing to stand on the side of liberty on this crucial issue would negate those gains.

A whole lot of citizens of this land would feel that there was now truly nowhere for them to go.

I'm not at the point of total hopelessness, but I am at the point of total disgust.

A party that claims to stand for what I stand for and then gets the vapors when it's time to prove it is no party of mine.

Freedom-Haters behind the eight-ball

There's a frequent commenter here at LITD who, in the last couple of days, has taken to saying that Congressional Pubs have no mandate. Something about the raw numbers of votes nationwide cast for Pub Senators vis-a-vis those cast for Freedom-Haters.

Um, about that:

The victory of Donald Trump for the presidency and the continued Republican control of the House and Senate is only part of the story of the Democratic Party's total demise.

Expected to make modest gains in state legislatures across the country, the Democrats instead lost governorships, lost two state legislative chambers, and now have total control of only five states -- the fewest number in their history.

Perhaps the loudest bell tolling for the death of the Democrats is in Kentucky, where Republicans gained control of the state Senate for the first time in a century. This means that for the first time in history, there is not a single state legislative chamber controlled by Democrats in the old Confederacy.

In the Electoral College, where Republicans took six of the ten biggest prizes for the first time since the Reagan years, Democrats should no longer be considered a national party. They are, at best, a coastal party with a few liberal enclaves -- mostly college towns like Madison, WI, and Austin, TX -- in between.

What would that's-not-a-mandate types have Pubs do? Sit passively and wait for Freedom-Haters to announce a legislative agenda and then see where common ground can be reached?

LITD has seen plenty of that, even coined a term for it: Reasonable Gentleman Syndrome. Most of those afflicted with it have either died (politically speaking) or are being treated for it.


 It's called capitalizing on the opportunity to see conservative principles applied to the issues of the day. This is the moment. I don't think there are enough fools in the GOP anymore to run it into its familiar ditch.

I can't imagine more of a mandate than Pubs have at present.

Of course, you'll notice I'm hedging my bets. I said I don't think there are enough fools left in Pub ranks. Always gotta hedge your bets with Pubs.

One downer note: the difficulty Pat McCrory is having reaching the requisite number for a victory in his quest to retain his seat as North Carolina governor. He is one of the true heroes. Prayers that he pulls it out.

Monday afternoon roundup

The Republican party is set to commit ritual suicide open its convention in Cleveland this evening. It will bestow supreme leadership to an ideologically unmoored, narcissistic charlatan with no political experience (as demonstrated by the constant, roiling chaos that characterizes his campaign organization), let alone interest in the Constitution and the principles and philosophical lineage underlying it.

Oh, and did I mention that he's still doing dismally poll-wise?

In key battleground states, Hillary is trouncing Trump:

Hillary Clinton leads Donald Trump in four of the most diverse presidential battleground states, according to brand-new NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Marist polls.

Clinton is ahead of Trump by eight points among registered voters in Colorado, 43 percent to 35 percent; a combined 21 percent say neither, other or are undecided.

In Florida, which decided the 2000 presidential election, she's up seven points, 44 percent to 37 percent; the rest are undecided or prefer someone else.

In North Carolina, a state Obama won in 2008 but lost in 2012, Clinton leads by six points, 44 percent to 38 percent.

And in Virginia, Clinton's advantage is nine points, 44 percent to 35 percent.

You see the number that really jumps out? It's the one that starts with 3. Donald Trump is below 40 percent in each of these states. Granted, Hillary's unpopularity puts her below the 50 percent threshold but to be stuck in the 30's?

It's like a nightmare.

Of course, Breitbart is touting an Axiom Strategies poll that shows Squirrel-Hair leading Hillionaire in six battleground counties around the country.

Well, okay, the first link is about one poll, and the second looks at a handful of counties. What is the latest RCP average? Hillionaire 43.8, Squirrel-Hair 40.6.

Did you catch any of the 60 Minutes Leslie Stahl interview with S-H and Pence? I got a clear impression of discomfort, of a guy of solid principle and conviction, a man with a conservative's mind and a Christian's heart who was trying to make excuses for where he was. It was their first interview as a ticket, and already they are dealing with the obvious no-we-don't-agree-on-everything reality. And how long is Pence's go-to response on the matter - the "this-is-a-great-man" line - going to provide him any cover? I wager that it will ring hollow and even be widely mocked within a week.

Still, Laura Ingraham is trying to portray continued real conservative opposition to this fiasco as the whiney sore losers missing out on an electrifying week - and lots of fun parties! -  on the Erie shore due to their own obstinate pedantry.

There's been a fourth full acquittal in the set Freddie Gray-case show trials upon which prosecutor Marilyn Mosby insisted.

So will she give it a rest now?

Not likely.

Speaking of attempts to stoke a war on cops and perpetuate a notion that black post-Americans are en masse a class of victims, not to mention phony calls for harmony and peace, if you haven't availed yourself of the exchange between CNN's Don Lemon and Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke, you really should:

Clarke began by scoffing when Lemon described the police's reaction to the shooting as being one of peace and unity. Clarke challenged Lemon: "You don't believe that, do you?"

He asked Lemon if there were any riots or protests over the death of the police officers in Baton Rouge or Dallas, but Lemon didn't know.

"I've been watching this for two years. I've predicted this," Clarke said. "This anti-police rhetoric sweeping the country has turned out some hateful things inside of people that are now playing themselves out on the American police officer."

Lemon warned Clarke, "Sheriff, let's just keep the vibe down here."

"This anti-cop sentiment from this hateful ideology called Black Lives Matter has fueled this rage against the American police officer," Clarke said.

Why wasn't this part of last year's "agreement" between the P5+1 powers and Iran made public?

 Key restrictions on Iran's nuclear program imposed under an internationally negotiated deal will ease in slightly more than a decade, cutting the time Tehran would need to build a bomb to six months from present estimates of a year, according to a document obtained Monday by The Associated Press.

The document is the only part linked to last year's deal between Iran and six foreign powers that hasn't been made public. It was given to the AP by a diplomat whose work has focused on Iran's nuclear program for more than a decade, and its authenticity was confirmed by another diplomat who possesses the same document.

The diplomat who shared the document with the AP described it as an add-on agreement to the nuclear deal. But while formally separate from that accord, he said that it was in effect an integral part of the deal and had been approved both by Iran and the U.S., Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany, the six powers that negotiated the deal with Tehran.

Details published earlier outline most restraints on Iran's nuclear program meant to reduce the threat that Tehran will turn nuclear activities it says are peaceful to making weapons.

But while some of the constraints extend for 15 years, documents in the public domain are short on details of what happens with Iran's most proliferation-prone nuclear activity - its uranium enrichment - beyond the first 10 years of the agreement.

The document obtained by the AP fills in the gap. It says that as of January 2027 - 11 years after the deal was implemented - Iran can start replacing its mainstay centrifuges with thousands of advanced machines.

Centrifuges churn out uranium to levels that can range from use as reactor fuel and for medical and research purposes to much higher levels for the core of a nuclear warhead. From year 11 to 13, says the document, Iran can install centrifuges up to five times as efficient as the 5,060 machines it is now restricted to using.

Have a nice evening.

 

Squirrel-Hair changes his tune - today's edition

So S-H goes after the Manchester Union-Leader's publisher in the wake of the paper endorsing another candidate (Christie). A fairly true-to-type move. But consider what he's had to say about McQuaid in the recent past:

To be sure, the Union Leader’s endorsement usually boosts a candidate (though not in 2008). However, failing to obtain that paper’s blessing can hardly be viewed as much of a setback. And even if it were, the proper response of a candidate to this or any other such “snub” is a shrug of the shoulders, if that.

But Donald Trump isn’t the shoulder shrugging kind. He’s all about winning. Thus, in a sneak preview of what a Trump presidency would look like, he is lashing out. And not just against the Union Leader (which endorsed Chris Christie) but also at South Carolina Rep. Trey Gowdy who had audacity to endorse Marco Rubio.

In New Hampshire, Trump has called Union Leader publisher Joe McQuaid a “lowlife” and “just a bad guy.” McQuaid says Trump’s attack is merely a product of the paper’s position on his candidacy:

He says our newspaper is failing and I am ‘absolutely terrible,’ yet six months ago, in June, he said we were all ‘terrific,’

According to the Union Leader, Trump said in June that “The Union Leader, by the way, they’ve been so fair to me, and they are terrific, and Mr. McQuaid is a fantastic man.” 

Meanwhile, in South Carolina, Trey Gowdy is experiencing the wrath of Donald. Almost immediately after Gowdy endorsed Rubio, Trump tweeted:

Face it, Trey Gowdy failed miserably on Benghazi. He allowed it to drag out and in the end, let Hillary get away with murder.

He added, “My prediction on the Trey Gowdy endorsement of Rubio is that it will do nothing for Rubio and finish Gowdy.”
In late July, however, Trump tweeted that Gowdy would be his pick for Attorney General. To be sure, this tweet predated the Benghazi hearings. But what would it say about Trump’s judgment if the man he tabbed for Attorney General turned out a few months later to be a miserable failure in such an important event as the Benghazi hearings?

And what would it say about the Republican Party if it were to nominate a thin-skinned, vindictive, inconstant jerk for president? A President Trump would make Richard Nixon seem easygoing, lighthearted, and non-threatening. 

Still somebody in that bleak, grim land known as post-America still loves S-H, to the point of showing up at his rallies to fist-pump, to cheerlead for him in all caps in comment threads, and put him over the top on all polls.

We end this year on a pretty terrifying note.

Makes sense to LITD

The head of the largest state Pub organization (Louisiana), who is also vice chair of the RNC, makes a pronouncement that seems like a logical next step to us:

“McConnell needs to resign!!” Louisiana GOP Chairman Roger Villere wrote in a Facebook posting.

[snip]

“Mitch is a good and honorable guy, but the base is leaving our party,” Mr. Villeresaid in an interview with The Washington Times. “I’m out in the field all the time and we have all our elections this year for state offices, and it’s hurting us tremendously with our elections.”

LITD was probably willing to extend the benefit of the doubt longer than many, but the deal-breaker was last November, immediately upon being reelected, when he said a government shutdown was off the table.