Posted by: Eric Buss | November 20, 2018

For several years, I have been operating from the premise that Washington, DC is ran by THE PARTY rather than two distinct ones. I have accepted it is a matter of course and I am not alone. However, it appears that when a major election occurs (not unlike the 2018 Midterm that we just endured), conditions in America suddenly hit critical mass. It is as though America’s fate hangs in the balance and the multitude hold their noses to keep our country from sliding into the abyss. If each election existed in a vacuum with no basis for comparison, then we would be justified in voting for the party that, if only marginally, aligns with our views. But, that is not the case.

It is my intention to make the case, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the few distinctions left between the GOP and the Democrat Parties are incidental and not fundamental. The GOP elite are fine with Democrat ideals as long as they can prevent genuine Constitutional Conservatives from gaining a foothold in the halls of power. If successful, this should serve as a wake up call to the threat the Duopoly poses while posturing as the best solution.

Bipartisanship of Bush 41

On the heels of the Reagan Revolution, another was enlisted to restore the status quo. While many conservatives would agree that Reagan yielded the last great push for our cause, there have been nothing but concessions since he left office. This decline commenced with the advent of George H.W. Bush a.k.a Bush 41. Best known for his “Read my lips, No new taxes.” Bush 41 repealed his position and signed the tax increase into law. Though, it is believed to be the primary reason he lost his re-election, it is by no means the only reason. His own biographer had this to say about him:

“He embraced compromise as a necessary element of public life, engaged his political foes in the passage of important legislation, and was willing to break with the base of his own party in order to do what he thought was right, whatever the price.”

~ Jon Meacham

While a defense could be conjured up to support the necessity of reaching across the aisle to get things done (after all, the Democrats controlled the House), it alienated him from the Conservative base of the GOP. Time and again his instincts led him to seek bipartisanship, to vote for things that were anathema to Conservatives and to forsake the firm positions of his predecessor. But why was this his default mode of operation? What would compell a Republican President, with all of the Conservative momentum at his back, to be so ingratiating to Democratic legislation? This excerpt from his personal diary may shed some light on the subject.

“There’s something terrible about those who carry it to extremes. They’re scary. They’re there for spooky, extraordinary right-winged reasons. They don’t care about Party. They don’t care about anything. They’re the excesses. They could be Nazis, they could be Communists, they could be whatever. In this case, they’re religious fanatics and they’re spooky. They will destroy this party if they’re permitted to take over.”

~ George H.W. Bush

As the GOP establishment darling in the 1980 presidential primary in which he faced off against Reagan for the nomination, his loss was a major setback for the DC elite. For 8 years, they had to endure the inspiring speeches, leadership and uniting message of individual liberty (remember the Blue Dog Democrats?). Bush 41, emerged from the shadow of Regan with an agenda of restoring business as usual to Washington, DC. What he accomplished was just that. His frequent and swift capitulation to Democrat agenda items alienated him from the Conservative core of GOP support. Why else would an up start business Tycoon named Ross Perot enjoy such broad support?

Above quotes were taken from

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/what-george-h-w-bush-got-wrong/amp

Contract With America

Two years into the Clinton presidency, Senate Minority Whip Newt Gingrich along with House Minority Leader Dick Armey, drawing heavily from elements of Ronald Reagan’s 1985 State of the Union speech, penned their popular Contract With America. Just 6 weeks prior to the 1994 midterm election, this document was released and signed as a formal commitment to Conservative ideals. The resulting gain of 54 US House and 9 US Senate seats gave the Republicans control of both Houses for the first time in 40 years.

Among the Contract’s agenda items were such Conservative gems as Welfare Reform (which Bill Clinton reluctantly signed), Tort Reform (intended to reduce the ease with which frivolous lawsuits could be filed), increases in criminal prosecution with stiffer penalties (which appears to need a reform in 2018…but OK), greater oversight of government spending, and sweeping cuts to government programs. In addition are two amendments still drawing broad appeal in many Conservative circles to this day: a Balanced Budget Amendment and Legislative Term Limits (top issues among proponents of an Article V – Convention of States).

What became of these proposals? Many seemed unpalatable to subsequent sessions of Congress, being deemed too aggressive for the majority of the establishment. Rather, the Contract with America served as a brief rebranding of the GOP that appealed to a broad swath of the electorate. The surge in Republican victories could be construed as a mandate that Americans, by and large, recognized the Contract as a revival of Reaganism. It resonated but lacked resilience when confronting the entrenched establishment on both sides of the aisle.

DC Default

George W. Bush took up his father’s mantle and, after an 8 year remission, brought the Bush dynasty back to its throne. After the hanging Chads debacle of the 2000 election (yes…Florida still retains the record for voter fraud and folly), he was crowned the 43rd President of these United States. Once the “stolen” election was settled, it appeared that mediocrity would settle in once again…that is until 9/11 happened.

As sensitive as the subject is, as horrible as the event was that bright Blue Tuesday and as divided as America has been on the subject of liberty balanced with security since, it is not the event but the reaction I have to take issue with. In the days following, a hastily prepared war was launched to decimate the dead hijackers’ leader. While he evaded capture for a decade, we shuffled our feet in divising a plan of victory. We strategized, plotted and adjusted according to the moment’s need. These are not commonly considered detrimental traits but in the case of Afghanistan and later in Iraq, we had no direction home and no path to take us there.

Following the attack, with our retaliation well under way, and the economic decline impacting the people, another Bush instinctively turned to the DC Default…government growth. With a heretofore unprecedented increase in spending to fund the war efforts, economic stimulus packages and newly generated Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Transportation Safety Administration (TSA), King George 43 ushered in a new era of government prosperity. This was accomplished by a Republican President and majority In Congress. To be sure, it was a time of fear and uncertainty, but such has often been the case when liberties have been surrendered. Bill Clinton, the morally bankrupt nemesis of the Right, could never have spent so much or grown the Federal government so exponentially as his GOP predecessor. Many still look at George W. Bush as a decent man who found himself in difficult times. However, the means by which he dealt with them was still the very reason we repudiate the Democrat agenda.

Rise and Fall of the Tea Party

Early in Obama’s first term, after having defeated another Bipartisan believer, the public outrage at government spending reached its peak. Inspired by or in conjunction with (I was never quite clear myself) a viral video featuring an impromptu rant by Rick Santelli from the floor of the Chicago Board of Exchange, the Tea Party coalesced and began taking to the streets. Rallies were organized by people who had never participated in anything of the kind before. Conservatives and Libertarians met in the streets to protest the Fiscal irresponsibility of the Federal government. Drawing on the spirit and message of liberty that inspired the original colonists, empassioned by their contempt for DC indifference and carrying the slogan of Taxed Enough Already, they peaceably assembled per their 1st Amendment right to petition for a redress of grievances (of which there were many).

With the momentum of a nationwide movement, political networks began to connect and strategize. They started non-profit organizations to advocate on behalf of the silent majority. At this point the IRS, Weaponized by the Obama administration, fought back by delaying numerous applications for these organizations to obtain 501c3 tax status and in some cases denying them outright without cause. Despite Federal interference, GOP candidates poured over the walls of DC on a wave of Constitutional appeal. Men such as Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, Rand Paul, and Marco Rubio found favor with the movement. All gained Senate seats in the subsequent mid-term election of 2010.

In the aftermath of 2010, the establishment brought all of its weight to bear against further encroachment by these grassroots upstarts. In the words of Senate Majority Leader:

“I think we are going to crush them everywhere,”

“I don’t think they are going to have a single nominee anywhere in the country.”

~ Mitchell McConnell (2014 – speaking about the Tea Party during his Primary bid to retain his Senate seat)

Such was the vitriol toward the Tea Party Conservative counter-revolution. Becoming aware that the Tea Party saw him as the enemy establishment, McConnell made war on his opponent, Matt Bevin. The Tea Party’s fight to purge the DC elite ended at his door step. Will of The People be damned, Mitch was going to maintain his power base and prove, once and for all, that outsiders have no chance of forcing change in Washington, DC.

And so it was. The Tea Party, having encountered the gilded, granite walls protecting DC’s power base, cleaned up after themselves and went back to work in a vain effort to pay down the national debt incurred by our elected representives at the Federal level. From a leaderless, organic movement keen on setting brushfires of freedom across the nation in 2009 to a bed of hot coals in 2014, the Tea Party had reached the end of its effectiveness in the political arena. The ship had crashed on the rocks of Republican repudiation.

Hushing the House Freedom Caucus

One cohesive by-product of the Tea Party was the foundation of the House Freedom Caucus. In 2015, a coalition of Conservative and Libertarian Republicans within the House of Representatives deigned to insulate their Constitutional moorings from establishment pressure. The fact that it was comprised of about 40 members out of 445 total congressional seats should serve as a standalone point to make the case for this article. With a commitment to liberty and their constituents, they held the line against additional regulations, increased spending and expansion of Federal power. They were the ones we could count on to disregard the Party line and vote their conscience. That is until the campaign pledge so many Republicans ran on, ‘Repeal Obamacare,’ transitioned to ‘Repeal and Replace Obamacare.’

During the brutal battle that ensued for the prevention or passage of a socialist bulwark like Obamacare, the GOP controlled House, Senate and Presidency applied all of the usual tactics to gain a kinder, gentler version dubbed by many Conservatives outside the Beltway as Obamacare 2.0. Social media campaigns jumped to action in an effort to apply equal and opposite pressure against the passage of this bill. What was the result? After threats to be disavowed in future election bids by the party’s fundraising apparatus, being publically named and shamed by the president and even their Senatoral equivalents encouraging them to assist with its passage, many members broke ranks to do just that. The result was a successful division of its membership. Among those who held the line, many have subsequently been primaried, retired or failed to retain their seats in their respective general re-election bids. In the pattern of its Tea Party predecessor, the House Freedom Caucus has been broken by the DC machine.

What does all of this mean? It means the Republican Party, long considered the guard dog protecting the republic from Democrat policy, has become more than comfortable with those policies if it means they can reject their own platform. It means, no matter who we send to DC, they will be blocked or cast into outer darkness with the former Republican base where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. It means every effort we have made, every approach, whether through primary elections, general elections, protesting in the streets, social media blasts, calling their offices to be heard directly and any other process at our disposal have been ignored.

They have proven that suppression of our vote can be accomplished by remaining indifferent to it. They hold a monopoly on political opinion, policy, agenda, spending and access. In their estimation, who else are you going to go to? Where are you going to turn with a hope of reducing Federal spending, to advance a Pro-Life agenda, to minimize and reduce the size and scope of government, to deregulate our lives, to place emphasis on our Constitutional foundations or to preserve Life, Liberty and Property for the American people at large? Well, it should be obvious by now, the Republican Party is no longer the answer for any of those.

(Visited 365 times, 1 visits today)