An unnecessary urinating contest risks two primary frontrunners canceling each other out.
It’s a given to the point of predictability, in contested republican primaries, that eventually someone will defensively mis-invoke Reagan’s Eleventh Commandment. Naturally, this will require someone to explain that the intent of “thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow republican” is a prohibition against personal attacks, but that calling someone out on an accurate understanding of their actual record is always fair game. That said, I can honestly say that I never expected to have to explain one of the Ten Commandments in the context of a political campaign, nor that I would have to do so as a remonstration to a political attack that is not only blatantly personal, but also patently false (to the point of being willingly, deliberately, and knowingly deceptive).
A golden opportunity to actually “pink slip” the nanny state looms large this weekend.
This coming Saturday Noon will mark the first anniversary of the inauguration of Donald John Trump as the 45th President of the United States. If we’re being honest (which the legacy media characteristically is not), then it’s been a year that even Reagan might have envied . . . and no, I’m not yet tired of winning. Believe it or not, though, this weekend might yet be remembered less for the demarcation of DJT’s actual first year in office, and more for the president making good on a threat from back in May, which comeuppance some senators – on both sides of the aisle – are on the record as thinking is some sixteen weeks overdue.
With Friday night’s deadline in mind, in light of the apparent deadlock around key issues (such as immigration infrastructure and military funding), Alice Ollstein penned a Talking Points Memo op-ed discussing what, in her opinion, are the three possible outcomes to the current standoff, none of which are particularly appealing. Former congressman, and current congressional candidate, Kerry Bentivolio, had a somewhat different take on Ms. Ollstein’s opinion, which he shared in an e-mail with fellow veterans, campaign staffers, and other supporters. With Kerry’s permission, I’ll share his thoughts following the break – with a skosh of editorial license and personal wordsmithing applied.
As badly as we need this done, do we care why he’s doing it, or even whether he gets the credit?
“If Hitler invaded Hell, I would at least make a favourable reference to the devil in the House of Commons.” (Winston Churchill, to his private secretary, Jock Colville, on June 21st, 1941, the evening before Operation Barbarossa)
Churchill was well known for being a consistent and vociferous opponent of communism, and had often spoken quite unfavorably about the Soviet Union, and particularly of Joseph Stalin (who was well-known even then as the brutal monster that honest history records). However, in seeking to stop the menace of Hitler’s Nazi Germany, Churchill was willing to adopt an ad hoc “enemy of my enemy” approach, and initiated the Anglo-Soviet Agreement for joint action against Germany.
Given much of the recent hullabaloo regarding a badly-needed grassroots initiative having been likely co-opted, by a moderate opportunist apparently seeking a means to advance his political ambitions, and given that I have personally stood directly in the path of those ambitions at least twice in the past seven years, what I’m about to say is going to sound exceedingly strange, but I’m going to say it anyway.
The LORD laid bare his arm, in plain view of the nations, to ensure our salvation.
How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of a herald, who announces peace and preaches good news.
He announces salvation and says to Zion, “Your God is king!”
The voice of your watchmen – they lift up their voices.
Together they shout for joy, because with both eyes they will see it when the LORD returns to Zion.
Break out, shout for joy together, you ruins of Jerusalem, because the LORD is comforting his people.
He is redeeming Jerusalem.
The LORD lays bare his holy arm before the eyes of all the nations, and all the ends of the earth will see the salvation from our God.
Isaiah 52:7-10 (EHV)
(In advance, I’ll credit my good friend Aaron Frey, who originally preached this sermon on Christmas Day 2006, as the source of much of what is written following the break, and as the inspiration for the rest of it.)
Multiple vulnerabilities and loopholes leave Michigan voters exposed to election fraud.
“I consider it completely unimportant who in the party will vote, or how; but what is extraordinarily important is this – who will count the votes, and how,” (Joseph Stalin, circa 1923). Often this quote is loosely interpreted as, “The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.”
Donald Trump has made clear in multiple speeches that he is under no illusion about being up against a rigged system, and that we cannot expect to correct such a system by relying on the trustworthiness of those who rigged the system in the first place. No, in order to reform a corrupted system, a critical mass of known trustworthy people must be placed inside the system, which often requires overwhelming the system at the ballot box. The problem with doing so is that we are required to rely upon a process where, in spite of clearly demonstrated key weaknesses and vulnerabilities, those charged with protecting the integrity of the process insist upon blaming the messenger rather than correcting the problems.
Michigan republicans have a bad habit of making national news for all the wrong reasons.
According to Article IV, Section G, Paragraph 1 of the Bylaws of the Michigan Republican State Committee, “The Chairman shall have the power to declare vacant the seat of any officer who refuses to support the Republican nominee for any office within the State of Michigan.” That’s the language, and it’s straightforward. If you’re one of the officers specified in Article IV, Section A of those same bylaws, then you support the republican nominees, up and down the ticket, or else risk immediate termination . . . end of discussion.
That paragraph is something that a certain lady, whom I still consider a friend, should have considered before shooting her mouth off, knowing the cameras were rolling, last Friday.
My late father, who was old enough to fly P-51D Mustangs for the USAAF during World War 2, once told me that he could remember exactly where he was and what he was doing when he heard about the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Likewise, my elder brother (the only one of my siblings who is legitimately a baby boomer) can recall exactly where he was and what he was doing when he heard about the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.
In the exact same vein, a certain September day a decade and a half ago is irremovably burned into my memory.
How do the current crisis period and the current presidential election impact each other?
“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.” (attributed to Margaret Mead)
Insofar as I have been able to research, historical consensus is that the American Revolution began with the Stamp Act Congress (October 1765), and ended with the ratification of the Bill of Rights (December 1791). This twenty-six year effort to secure independence from the British Crown, and establish a free and independent republic (America’s original “crisis period”), was unique in the entirety of human history. By this I mean that, rather than simply swapping one set of rules for another, or one set of political leaders for another, the patriots of America’s founding generations created, from scratch, a nation dedicated to and based upon the proposition that every man and woman stands equal before the law, and has a God-given and inalienable right to a life of Liberty and Justice. Yet, the sum total of soldiers, sailors, statesmen, sages, and shopkeepers who pledged their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor to the cause that established the freest and most prosperous nation ever known – made most of the sacrifices, did most of the work, and made nearly all of the major decisions – amounted to merely three percent of the total American population of the time . . . evidence for the credibility of what historians refer to as “The Law of The Vital Few.”
In contemporary America, every economic, social, and political trend seems to indicate that the United States are already in the fourth crisis period of our national history. Given this, the question seems fair to ask: Where now are the sages, statesmen, investors, entrepreneurs, intrapreneurs . . . and even leaders . . . who will guide us through not only this crisis, but also the austerity and rebuilding that will surely be needed once the crisis has passed? More importantly, would we know how to recognize such producers and leaders when they arrive?
Donald Trump isn’t the republican nominee, and Ted Cruz hasn’t been mathematically eliminated . . . yet.
At roughly noon on May 4th, after running fourth in a three-man race for seven consecutive weeks, John Kasich finally suspended his presidential nomination campaign (raising the obvious question of, “What the hell took so long?”), leaving Donald Trump as the “sole survivor” of what was originally an eighteen-candidate republican field. And, go figure, before Cinco de Mayo was in the books, various talking heads and keyboard pundits were acknowledging, with varying degrees of enthusiasm, that The Donald was now the presumptive republican nominee. However, to channel L. P. Berra, this campaign ain’t over ‘til it’s over, and despite a certain well-circulated AP report, a certain critical milestone hasn’t yet been tallied into Trump’s column, and so June 7th is still going to matter . . . very much.
Did the Michigan Republican Party pull another fast one with RNC delegate allocation?
Those of us who’ve been hanging around RightMichigan since prior to 2014 likely remember well the Michigan Dele-Gate Fiasco of 2012. As a quick refresher, on Tuesday, February 28th of that year, Mitt Romney defeated Rick Santorum in the statewide popular vote, 41.10% to 37.87%. However, because 28 of Michigan’s 30 post-penalty delegates were awarded on a district-by-district basis (Romney and Santorum splitting the state at 7 districts each), and because the statewide vote totals were so close (requiring the two at-large delegates to be split one each), the resulting 15-15 delegate tie didn’t exactly square with the RNC/GOPe’s preferred media narrative that Romney won his native state. Thus, in the telephonic equivalent of a late-night, backroom deal, the MIGOP Credentials Committee (then consisting of Bobby Schostak, Sharon Wise, Saul Anuzis, Holly Hughes, Bill Runco, Mike Cox, and Eric Doster) voted 4-2 – Hughes was not present at the meeting – to creatively interpret State Party Rule 19C, and award both at-large delegates to Romney. The resulting backlash fueled an eleven-week effort that culminated in a two-day Showdown in Motown, with the end result being the ballot box blowout ouster of the national committeeman regarded as the chief engineer of the ex post facto railroad job.
It’s probably not going to draw much attention (likely because damn near no one noticed), but the potential for a Grand Theft Delegate con job similar to the Michigan Dele-Gate Fiasco of 2012 was averted, largely due to one person explaining a key state party rule in a way that eliminated the possibility of applying that rule by political discretion, and instead imposed a resolution rubric according to plain mathematics.