We are at a remarkable moment. We have an open, 2,000-mile border to our south, and the entity with the power to enforce the law and impose safety and order will not do it. Wall Street collapsed, taking Main Street’s money with it, and the government can’t really figure out what to do about it because the government itself was deeply implicated in the crash, and both political parties are full of people whose political careers have been made possible by Wall Street contributions. Meanwhile we pass huge laws, bills so comprehensive, omnibus and transformative that no one knows what’s in them and no one—literally, no one—knows how exactly they will be executed or interpreted. Citizens search for new laws online, pore over them at night, and come away knowing no more than they did before they typed “dot-gov.”
It is not that no one’s in control. Washington is full of people who insist they’re in control and who go to great lengths to display their power. It’s that no one takes responsibility and authority. Washington daily delivers to the people two stark and utterly conflicting messages: “We control everything” and “You’re on your own.”
All this contributes to a deep and growing alienation between the people of America and the government of America in Washington.
This is not the old, conservative and long-lampooned “I don’t trust gummint” attitude of the 1950s, ’60s and ’70s. It’s something new, or rather something so much more broadly and fully evolved that it constitutes something new. The right never trusted the government, but now the middle doesn’t. I asked a campaigner for Hillary Clinton recently where her sturdy, pantsuited supporters had gone. They didn’t seem part of the Obama brigades. “Some of them are at the tea party,” she said.
None of this happened overnight. It is, most recently, the result of two wars that were supposed to be cakewalks, Katrina, the crash, and the phenomenon of a federal government that seemed less and less competent attempting to do more and more by passing bigger and bigger laws.
Add to this states on the verge of bankruptcy, the looming debt crisis of the federal government, the likelihood of ever-rising taxes. Shake it all together, and you have the makings of the big alienation. Alienation is often followed by full-blown antagonism, and antagonism by breakage.
Which brings us to Arizona and its much-criticized attempt to institute a law aimed at controlling its own border with Mexico. It is doing this because the federal government won’t, and because Arizonans have a crisis on their hands, areas on the border where criminal behavior flourishes, where there have been kidnappings, murders and gang violence. If the law is abusive, it will be determined quickly enough, in the courts. In keeping with recent tradition, they were reading parts of the law aloud on cable the other night, with bright and sincere people completely disagreeing on the meaning of the words they were reading. No one knows how the law will be executed or interpreted.
Every state and region has its own facts and experience. In New York, legal and illegal immigrants keep the city running: They work hard jobs with brutal hours, rip off no one on Wall Street, and do not crash the economy. They are generally considered among the good guys. I’m not sure New Yorkers can fairly judge the situation in Arizona, nor Arizonans the situation in New York.
But the larger point is that Arizona is moving forward because the government in Washington has completely abdicated its responsibility. For 10 years—at least—through two administrations, Washington deliberately did nothing to ease the crisis on the borders because politicians calculated that an air of mounting crisis would spur mounting support for what Washington thought was appropriate reform—i.e., reform that would help the Democratic and Republican parties.
Both parties resemble Gordon Brown, who is about to lose the prime ministership of Britain. On the campaign trail this week, he was famously questioned by a party voter about his stand on immigration. He gave her the verbal runaround, all boilerplate and shrugs, and later complained to an aide, on an open mic, that he’d been forced into conversation with that “bigoted woman.”
He really thought she was a bigot. Because she asked about immigration. Which is, to him, a sign of at least latent racism.
The establishments of the American political parties, and the media, are full of people who think concern about illegal immigration is a mark of racism. If you were Freud you might say, “How odd that’s where their minds so quickly go, how strange they’re so eager to point an accusing finger. Could they be projecting onto others their own, heavily defended-against inner emotions?” But let’s not do Freud, he’s too interesting. Maybe they’re just smug and sanctimonious.
The American president has the power to control America’s borders if he wants to, but George W. Bush and Barack Obama did not and do not want to, and for the same reason, and we all know what it is. The fastest-growing demographic in America is the Hispanic vote, and if either party cracks down on illegal immigration, it risks losing that vote for generations.
But while the Democrats worry about the prospects of the Democrats and the Republicans about the well-being of the Republicans, who worries about America?
No one. Which the American people have noticed, and which adds to the dangerous alienation—actually it’s at the heart of the alienation—of the age.
In the past four years, I have argued in this space that nothing can or should be done, no new federal law passed, until the border itself is secure. That is the predicate, the commonsense first step. Once existing laws are enforced and the border made peaceful, everyone in the country will be able to breathe easier and consider, without an air of clamor and crisis, what should be done next. What might that be? How about relax, see where we are, and absorb. Pass a small, clear law—say, one granting citizenship to all who serve two years in the armed forces—and then go have a Coke. Not everything has to be settled right away. Only controlling the border has to be settled right away.
Instead, our national establishments deliberately allow the crisis to grow and fester, ignoring public unrest and amusing themselves by damning anyone’s attempt to deal with the problem they fear to address.
Why does the federal government do this? Because so many within it are stupid and unimaginative and don’t trust the American people. Which of course the American people have noticed.
If the federal government and our political parties were imaginative, they would understand that it is actually in their interests to restore peace and order to the border. It would be a way of demonstrating that our government is still capable of functioning, that it is still to some degree connected to the people’s will, that it has the broader interests of the country in mind.
The American people fear they are losing their place and authority in the daily, unwinding drama of American history. They feel increasingly alienated from their government. And alienation, again, is often followed by deep animosity, and animosity by the breaking up of things. If our leaders were farsighted not only for themselves but for the country, they would fix the border.
Congress
Arizona’s First Congressional District encompasses huge swaths of the Grand Canyon State (including portions of the Grand Canyon). My hometown of Show Low is in CD 1, so I’ve always had a high interest in what happens there.
For me it’s a call between Flagstaff dentist Paul Gosar and former legislator and artist Rusty Bowers.
Bowers has deep family roots in the district and is probably related to a bunch of voters. One challenge for him might be that many of his relatives are conservative Democrats and won’t be able to vote for him in the primary. Bowers is a fiscal conservative, a social conservative and an all-around great guy. However, he hasn’t been able to kick his campaign into gear and raise any significant money.
Gosar is also a conservative and has lived in the Flagstaff area for more than a quarter of a century. He’s a small businessman and, being a dentist, understands with acute awareness how government regulation can stifle economic growth.
Both Gosar or Bowers would make a fine Congressman, and both would mount a strong challenge to Democrat incumbent Ann Kirkpatrick, who is so out of touch with her district that she has been seen driving from Winslow events in a car with California plates.
The potential spoiler in all this is retread Sydney Hay. Her pure ambition to be a member of Congress (as evidenced by multiple runs for a seat) is enough to disqualify her from consideration.
In a very close call, Gosar gets my support for being better positioned to take on Kirkpatrick and give CD 1 the representation it has deserved for years.
Gosar for Congress in AZ-01.
Ben Domenech, a truly gifted thinker and writer, has a great post about Obama’s recess appointment of Donald Berwick to head the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). (Ben also has additional comments here.) After the passage of the Democrats’ health care bill, the director of CMS is like the third most powerful person in the country over your life. So how that person views your health care is pretty important. Read Ben’s post, which includes the video, but I’ve included it here as well.
It just makes you shake your head and wonder how in the world…
I have heretofore refrained from spending much time thinking, talking, blogging or otherwise about the primary between Senator John McCain and former sportscaster, former Congressman, former radio host J.D. Hayworth.
However, as we are getting closer to the election and the rhetoric is heating up, I am compelled to weigh in and offer my perspective as someone who has worked fairly closely with both of these men for more than 15 years.
Let’s start with some of the rhetoric that the average voter doesn’t see coming from the daily press releases churned out by the Hayworth campaign. I am on Hayworth’s press release list, I suppose because I blog.
Before a few weeks ago I generally deleted the emails without reading them (like most political emails lately). However, lately the emails have projected a different tone. Was it sharper messaging? Was it more focused? Actually, no. It was growing desperation. Here is a sample (my commentary in bold italics):
McCAIN FEELING HEAT FROM HAYWORTH, JUMPS ON THE ANTI-OBAMACARE TRAIN LATE AND AMONG THE LAST
This headline is so absurd that it barely warrants a response. McCain was on the anti-ObamaCare train while Hayworth was still on the radio whining about losing to Harry Mitchell.
Phoenix, AZ (June 2) - The spokesman for U.S. Senate Candidate J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ) said his candidate was pleased McCain took Hayworth’s advice and finally signed up against ObamaCare.
“He’s just a day late and a dollar short,” said spokesman Mark Sanders. “While his colleagues began signing Sen. Jim DeMint’s measure to repeal ObamaCare on March 23rd, McCain waited until April 20th to join.
Speaking of a day late and a dollar short, did it really take the Hayworth campaign from April 20th until June 2nd to notice that McCain had signed onto DeMint’s bill? The timing of when McCain joined as a cosponsor is immaterial to his position on repealing ObamaCare, and having served in Congress, Hayworth knows this, which makes this comment ridiculous and petty.
“And that was after Hayworth challenged him to do so on APRIL 9th, according to a news release issued that day by Hayworth’s campaign,” Sanders said.
He also noted that McCain was one of the last Senators to sign on as co-sponsors on April 20th.
“Like with most every issue in this campaign, McCain wants it both ways - he wants to be for ObamaCare and then against it, he wants to support amnesty for illegal aliens and then wants to complete the danged fence, he wants to oppose tax cuts and now wants them extended,” Sanders said.
Frankly, asserting that McCain ever wanted to be for ObamaCare is such a blatant lie it should disqualify Hayworth from even being in this race. If he is so blind to facts, how can we trust him to be a Senator?
Was Hayworth just not paying attention when McCain was offering multiple amendments to try to stop ObamaCare? Did he not listen to multiple floor speeches McCain made against the bill? Did he fail to even check the Congressional record and see that McCain voted against every amendment and procedural motion – and final passage – of ObamaCare when it went through the Senate?
Rather than burying the lede any further, I’ll cut to the chase: J.D. Hayworth is unworthy of holding the title “Senator.” Period. And especially when it would mean taking that title away from John McCain.
I know my position is going to surprise a lot of people. Particularly my friends who know how conservative/libertarian I am. I have ranted privately (and not so privately) about various positions and issues taken and championed by Sen. McCain over the years. I am a purest when it comes to the First Amendment, so I vigorously disagreed with McCain’s campaign finance bill.
I do not, in any way, believe that climate can be affected in any substantive way by human activity. So I have disagreed with him on climate and environment issues.
However, I am a hardcore fiscal conservative – and so is John McCain.
J.D. Hayworth is anything but. He championed the pork he brought back to his district. He got cozy with the power brokers of D.C. not only for his political gain, but for his personal gain, by raising money for his PAC which employed his wife.
I strongly oppose Indian gambling, not so much on moral grounds but on the inequality built into the system that has allowed small (and sometimes less than credible) tribes “game” the system enriching a very few, while the Native American population on the whole continues to exist in squalor. The federal government has a history of not fulfilling it’s treaty obligations and giving some tribes the “easy money” of gambling doesn’t do anything to fix the underlying system.
That all said, there was not a bigger booster for the few chosen tribes in Congress than J.D. Hayworth. I don’t mean booster in a complimentary way. In fact, he was Co-Chairman of the Indian Gaming Caucus in Congress with none other than… (you’re going to LOVE this one)… Patrick Kennedy. Yes, Ted Kennedy’s son.
Sidebar – one day years and years ago I was walking in the basement hallways of the Capital building when I heard a strange sound – someone imitating an Indian war chant – I turned around and it was the then-Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, Bill Archer. When he was done with the chant, I realized what he was doing, because he was calling out to Hayworth and yelled, “There goes the Indian gambling lover.” Can you imagine how out of line your conduct would have to be to have the Chairman of your own committee mock you?
In fact, Hayworth used his position on Ways and Means to cut special deals for tribes (usually siding with the Democrats to get those done) and influence the executive branch to favor one tribe over another. That’s abuse of power.
And even though Hayworth touts his record as a tax-cutter, he authored the largest airline ticket tax in history and got it passed as an amendment to the 2001 tax bill with support from nearly every Democrat on the committee and only a handful of Republicans. Why the ticket tax? His amendment killed a proposed tax on gambling proceeds on Indian Reservations. So, he passes legislation that gives preferential treatment to a small group of people and sticks it to the average traveler. Even gambling operations in Vegas and other states pay taxes.
Then there is the immigration issue. All that I will say about the issue is that McCain sees the issue similar to Ronald Reagan - America is the place of freedom, the shining city on a hill. Hayworth would just as soon put out the lights of the city and paint it in dull colors and make it as unattractive as possible. I do not, for a second, believe that he has a sincere bone in his body when he talks about legal immigration. If our forebears had his attitude, he wouldn’t even be here.
Does McCain deserve to be re-elected because he was a war hero and P.O.W.? Just that alone gives him more credibility to represent us in the Senate than Hayworth, but he has done much more to deserve my support. He not only led the charge against a government take-over of health care, he used his influence to help keep every single Republican together in opposition to the bill. And, he was helpful in the election of Republican Scott Brown to the bluest of all blue states, Massachusetts, in Ted Kennedy’s seat no less.
However, putting all the policy and politics aside, the main reason I support McCain over Hayworth is character. McCain has character, and Hayworth is a character. And an angry, bitter character at that. And, without going into specifics, Hayworth is the most selfish person I know – and given the number of politicians I know, that’s saying something. And, it turns out he’s a huckster to boot.
The bottom line is that McCain has done more to protect our freedom than even Hayworth could bloviate about… and that’s a lot. And for me, I follow Goldwater’s maxim, “are we maximizing freedom?” In this case, McCain exceeds Hayworth on the test of freedom. I’m voting for McCain.
This is one of the most outrageous examples of abuse of power I have ever witnessed. And people wonder why I doubt whether Democrats have any regard for the First Amendment?
This guy (Rep. Bob Etheridge - D-NC) needs to be thrown out of office, like yesterday…
The American people can’t say that they weren’t warned about the misinformation that Obama and the Democrats continued to push during the debate over their health care bill.
One warning was that the bill would essentially lead to a government take-over of health care because the government would force employers to change coverage plans they currently provide to their employees.
Obama and the Democrats knew that if the American people thought the government could force coverage changes, they would oppose the bill even more. That is why one of the most repeated claims by Obama was the line, “if you like your current coverage, you can keep it.”
Well, now Obama’s own administration is projecting that a majority of workers will have a change in coverage within the next three years.
This is just one of the big lies about the health care bill that will be exposed in the months and years to come.
It would be useful for us to remember this pattern in future debates - if something is being repeated so often, it must be a lie.
“Washington Democrats’ out-of-control spending spree is scaring the hell out of the American people”
Truer words have never been spoken. It is a quote from this story in the Hill about how Democrat leaders are going to push through big-ticket spending items before the Memorial Day recess.
What part of the message of “enough is enough” from the American people do Democrats not understand?
Maybe they understand it just fine, but they know that this year is their best chance to push big government takeovers, spending and growth because of the drubbing they are likely to take in November’s election.
You have to say this about them: they are darned consistent with their philosophy of more and more government, despite what the American people want. Call it courage, call it principle, but you can’t call it a smart way to keep a Congressional majority.
I receive news alerts from the New York Times. This morning, I received this news alert related to job numbers:
U.S. Economy Adds 290,000 Jobs in April; Jobless Rate Rises to 9.9%
Three minutes later, wunderkind Senate Policy Committee staffer Chris Jacobs sent out an email:
169,000 Jobs Short…
While it’s welcome news that the economy created jobs last month, it’s worth putting it in context. Not only do the jobs figures reflect a temporary bump in hiring of short-term government bureaucrats for this decade’s census, but they also fall far short of the number of jobs Democrats themselves promised during the health care debate. In her opening statement at the White House summit, Speaker Pelosi noted that passage of the health care bill “will create 4 million jobs – 400,000 jobs almost immediately.” But today’s jobs figures for April show that the private sector created only 231,000 jobs during the month – meaning that this month’s employment figures miss Democrats’ own mark for job creation by nearly half. And job growth within the health care sector actually declined from March to April by 16,000 workers, according to the BLS survey.
Of course, it’s hard to argue that any legislation imposing over half a trillion dollars in tax increases will create jobs in the first place. In other words, the Speaker – having taken her own advice that “we have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it” – may well find that passing a $2.6 trillion government takeover of health care will kill jobs, rather than create them.
The Gray Lady must have felt squeamish – or they got a call from Capitol Hill - because 11 minutes later another news alert came across the transom:
Four-Month Rise Strengthens U.S. Job Outlook
It’s kinda cool that one smart Senate staffer can who offers instant response to news can rattle the cage of the self-proclaimed “most important” newspaper in the world.
This is just downright inappropriate and disgusting, even for Harry Reid:
“You can find the Republicans are having difficulty determining how they’re going to continue making love to Wall Street.”
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), quoted by ABC News, explaining why the financial regulation reform bill is stalled.
And Harry Reid is a shameless hypocrite. In a story about Washington’s Sen. Patti Murray, the Seattle Post Intelligencer, we find this nugget:
Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., another member of the Senate’s Democratic leadership, has received $1.58 million from the securities and investment industry during the current campaign cycle. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has taken $902,000, even more than he has received from the gaming industry. (emphasis added)
To put that in perspective, there is this tidbit from the Wall Street Journal:
According to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, Democrats have received nearly two-thirds of the $34.7 million donated by the entire securities and investment industry since Jan. 1, 2009. Democrats took in 57% of Wall Street’s donations in the 2008 campaign and 52% during the 2006 midterm elections.
The last time Wall Street contributed more money to Republicans than Democrats was during the 2004 presidential election cycle when the GOP collected 52% of their donations, according to the center.
Reid needs to look in the mirror and recognize that if what Republicans are doing equates to making love to Wall Street, than what he is doing is just a cheap trick.
What must be the world’s longest (and largest) spending spree is coming to an end. Politicos everywhere were abuzz this afternoon following Representative David Obey’s (D-WI) surprise announcement of his plans to retire at the end of this Congress. Elected in 1969 (he’s been in Congress longer than I’ve been alive, and it feels really nice to say that), Obey won all but two of his 21 elections with more than 60% of the vote (1969, in his first election, and in 1994, the year of the Republican Revolution and, importantly, when the political environment was very similar to today’s).
While the 71 year-old Chairman of the powerful House Appropriations Committee asserted during his announcement that being “bone tired” was one of the primary motivations in making his decision (Hey, who can blame him? All those taxpayer dollars don’t spend themselves!), it no doubt deals a huge blow to House Democrats as they already face an uphill battle to November.
Will Obey’s move inspire other Dems to follow suit? How ugly will the fight for the Approps gavel get? Today’s events leave many a question mark, but it can safely be said that Republican Sean Duffy, who was already waging a fierce battle against Mr. Obey, is having a pretty great Wednesday.
Peggy Noonan has a great column about our current illegal immigration problem, and more specifically, the problem with our southern border, that will run in this weekend’s edition of the Wall Street Journal. It is worth the read, and the entire piece follows. I have been a huge fan of Noonan even before I knew it. She was a speechwriter for President Ronald Reagan and has a beautiful way with words. As is demonstrated in this column, she always makes you think.
The Big Alienation
Uncontrolled borders and Washington’s lack of self-control.
The American people fear they are losing their place and authority in the daily, unwinding drama of American history. They feel increasingly alienated from their government. And alienation, again, is often followed by deep animosity, and animosity by the breaking up of things. If our leaders were farsighted not only for themselves but for the country, they would fix the border.
