“We don't win anymore. When was
the last time we won? Did we win a war? Do we win anything? Do we win
anything? We're going to win. We're going to win big, folks. We're
going to start winning again, believe me. We're going to win.”
– President Trump at the Conservative Political Action Conference
(CPAC) on February 24, 2017
Isn't winning a great message to hear
from a sitting U.S. president? Contrast that to the Obama years,
plagued by gargantuan failures and losses. For example, most telling
was the actual level of U.S. unemployment: 95 million able-bodied
Americans absent from the workforce. (The U.S. Department of Labor
repeatedly claimed the rate hovered around a measly 5 percent.) Such
a diet of consistent falsehoods included Obama's famous, “If you
like your health-care plan, you can keep it.” That whopper earned
him left-leaning Politifact's Lie of the Year in 2013.
Interestingly, misrepresentation is the
defining characteristic of modern-day Democratic presidents (and
failed hopeful Hillary Clinton). All that's now required is a slick
persona, a tenuous grasp on truthfulness and the gift of honeyed
words earnest in their bewitching power to distract the public. With
Hillary's hubby, his failings were of a personal nature,
embarrassing peccadilloes highlighted by an affair with a then
22-year-old intern. Remember Bill's infamous claim, “I did not
have sexual relations with that woman, Miss [Monica] Lewinsky.”
(The scandal rocked his presidency, but didn't end it. Ultimately,
he received a pass because adultery was successfully spun as a
private matter. However, his public disgrace affected his ability to
govern much more gravely then was acknowledged at the time.) Also
detrimental to the nation, were Barack Obama's numerous untruths.
Like Clinton, he was abetted by a fawning press—and a foolishly
forgiving electorate.
That same latitude is never granted to
their Republican counterparts. Remember, George H. W. Bush's broken
pledge, “Read my lips: no new taxes”? That one flip-flop cost
him his 1992 re-election bid. By contrast, Barack Obama, not Ronald
Reagan, was the true “Teflon president” . His big government
tenure was “transformative” in all the wrong ways: obtrusive,
overregulated and overtaxed (read: the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the
ObamaCare mandate because its legal basis is a tax!). Combine those
systemic problems with a ballooning federal government, wasteful
programs, deficit-spending and virtually doubling the nation's debt:
a record-shattering 9.3 trillion! That's more in Barack Obama's
eight years than all previous presidents combined (read: 212 years
from Washington (1789) to Clinton (2001))!
In retrospect, the pre-election
electorate was ravenous for a new voice, specifically an
unapologetically pro-American one. (Hillary Clinton isn't that.
Essentially, she promised a de facto Obama third term.) Enter the
plain-speaking Washington outsider, a billionaire capitalist, who
brashly articulated all things wrong with progressives in government.
Central to that message was the concept of winning: obviously for
himself and theoretically, one hopes, for the country. Today, how is
that goal achieved by threatening the Tea Party's Freedom Caucus?
Ironically, he attacks the very group he should champion:
“The Freedom Caucus will hurt the
entire Republican agenda if they don't get on the team, & fast.
We must fight them, & Dems, in 2018!” — President
Trump's tweet at 9:07 AM on March 30, 2017
Under any circumstances, it's frankly
nonsensical to ever conflate conservative Republicans with militantly
obstructionist Democrats. Such groups are naturally philosophically
opposed: political oil and water! For a campaign promise thwarted,
he calls out the Freedom Caucus for rightfully scuttling Paul Ryan's
disastrous “ObamaCare Lite” replacement? Thus, in the
superficial name of “winning,” isn't that precisely like burning
a village to the ground in order to “save” it?
The political landscape is, and
remains, ripe for meaningful change. However, as of late, Mr.
Trump's appealingly razor sharp campaign rhetoric is not living up to
his muddled actions. To again reference the same CPAC speech:
“I'm here fighting for you and I will
continue to fight for you. The victory and the win were something
that really was dedicated to a country and people that believe in
freedom, security and the rule of law. Our victory was a victory and
the win for conservative values.”
A self-proclaimed guiding principle
negated by his recent rant against House Republicans who stand for
that precise thing! Immersed in the Washington swamp, allied with
House Speaker Paul Ryan, is it possible he's lost sight of what
conservatism means in concrete terms? After all, words are
insubstantial compared to policy and practice. For his part, Mr.
Ryan talks an equally good game. (Recall, he's been in Congress
since 1998. That's 17 years before he assumed leadership of the
lower chamber on October 29, 2015. For further context, for the last
7 years, the GOP has promised to repeal and replace ObamaCare.) With
his reputation as a policy wonk, where has Mr. Ryan been all this
time? His Johnny-come-lately response was a rushed bill—with the
Republican brand simply slapped on—that fundamentally lacked
bipartisan consensus: no Democratic support and not enough
Republicans to pass the measure.
The American Health Care Act should
have been a free market solution to health-care, but it wasn't.
Hopeful for a “win,” President Trump mistakenly backed Ryan's
loser: a bureaucratic 3-phased shell game that would have kept the
government behemoth in place with superficial changes like
substituting tax breaks for government subsides. So, it's wrong to
scapegoat the Freedom Caucus for their lack of support. This
debacle—this legislative “Rosemary's Baby”—is all Paul Ryan's
mad creation. For this mess, he should be replaced forthwith. To
that end, someone from the Freedom Caucus would be fitting.
Thus far, Mr. Trump's dealings with
Congress have not lived up to his appealing
CPAC rhetoric. The author of “The Art of The Deal” need not play
things so fast and loose by vilifying other Republicans. While he
owes the Republican establishment nothing, he would be wise to adopt
the following Reaganesque Eleventh Commandment: Thou shalt not speak
ill of any conservative. To do otherwise artificially divides the
GOP against itself. And given their demonstrated lack of effective
leadership, they need all the help they can get.
Polarizing
allies won't achieve the right results for the American people.
Still, Trump's willingness to work with everyone is exactly what
President Reagan did. In that regard, “The Great Communicator”
effectively went directly to the American people over the heads of
his detractors (as The Donald does with his well-conceived tweets).
Yet, Mr. Reagan never used the bully pulpit to literally bully
anyone. Therefore, killing his Tea Party darlings in this way is
something “The Gipper” would never do. That's not winning; it's
reactionary, shortsighted and ultimately self-defeating.
Lasting
success for America equals a staunchly conservative agenda. To get
there, Mr. Trump needs to appropriate the cohesive framework of
principles embodied by the Freedom Caucus. Going forward, embracing
them—rather than Paul Ryan's ilk—would greatly aid his cause.
For instance, they would make an ideal legislative sounding board
while he makes deals and takes constructive action. As modern
history clearly demonstrates, only Democrats get away with
misbehavior and mixed messages. Those types of mistakes are
invariably fatal to the prospects, and success, of any Republican
president.
Twitter: @DavidHunterblog
http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446
http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/
http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976
http://newstex.aci.info/authors/15977720f5100100002
No comments:
Post a Comment