And the real difference here is?

Sitting down and catching up on my reading and talking head shows, I’m quickly reminded of the shallowness in today’s society when I’m watching things that clearly aren’t what they appear to be on the surface.

I’ve caught snippets of the “organic” and “student-led” anti-gun protests in DC and Detroit.

Pretty impressive for something that by all accounts was organized by a bunch of high school students.

From the professional stage and media system all the way down to the smallest details like the printed lanyards/backstage passes to the “I call BS.” & “I will vote” pins/stickers, it’s not too shabby.

But, I’ve attended more than a few high school drama productions in my time.

Those kids put plenty of heart and certainly a lot of effort into their sets and performances…but nothing even remotely like I saw on TV. That was light-years beyond the skill sets of those kids…especially when done in the span of about one month!

And then you have the democrats making another go a tipping the elections in their direction. Their ideas aren’t working, their candidates are uninspiring (unless you like getting free things), so they’re changing things up.

Much like the similarly “organic” Voters Not Politicians, their latest attempt is a group called Promote the Vote, which much like VNP, certainly has a lot of democrats behind the scenes pulling the strings.

But that’s just crazy talk, they’ll respond.

This is a legitimate extension of the outrage from the electorate…or some other silly nonsense along those lines.

Silly nonsense now being spewed forth by a certain political party which had lost its way long ago…and apparently never correctly learned the lessons from history.

{More about who they are below the fold}

For those of you keeping track, the federal government doesn’t actually run under a budget, per se. It hasn’t been for a number of years now. It’s been limping along under continuing resolutions, which are a stop-gap measure used when Congress is unwilling to do the job that they worked so hard to obtain.

Now, one would think that after the ‘16 Elections, someone, I don’t know, who said that they would restore fiscal sanity to Washington, said that they would adhere to our Constitution, said that they no longer do things the same way might want to be a little more mindful of their jobs, and I don’t know…FOLLOW THROUGH WITH WHAT THEY HAD PROMISED THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WHEN THEY RAN FOR OFFICE!

Did we get that last Thursday in the $1.3-Trillion Omnibus Spending Bill/CR?

After all, it’s not that easy to go through 2,000+ pages of legislation in less than three days. Much less retain what you have read.

A “republican-led” Congress should easily be able to follow its Constitution Authority, find what is and is not appropriate spending and do what is right for the American Taxpayer.

They even said that they would do it right here (click on Constitutional Authority Statement link at right):

[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 48 (Monday, March 20, 2017)]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
By Mr. ROYCE of California:

H.R. 1625.

Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant to the following:

Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United States

[Page H2240]

About Constitutional Authority Statements

On January 5, 2011, the House of Representatives adopted an amendment to House Rule XII. Rule XII, clause 7(c) requires that, to be accepted for introduction by the House Clerk, all bills (H.R.) and joint resolutions (H.J.Res.) must provide a document stating “as specifically as practicable the power or powers granted to Congress in the Constitution to enact the bill or joint resolution.”

It’s a shame that these “learned and experienced” republicans never read about the powers of the government being few and defined?

If you count the half a billion to Planned Parenthood, continued funding for the CPB/NEA, half a billion in pork for Sen. Chuck Schumer, NO FUNDING for The Wall, continued foreign aid up the wazoo, continued funding for illegal  “Sanctuary Cities”, using taxpayer funds to promote gun control (Dickie Amendment, anyone?), and a continued fear of outright killing Obamacare (is Snydercaid finally on the ropes?)…then the answer is sadly no.

And oh yeah, Congress gave themselves a raise in all of this.

So, who can we thank for this?

Well, in a 256-167 vote in the House (do I really need to tell readers how Sens. Peters & Stabenow voted?), you can thank Reps. Mitchell (which is personally disappointing), Bishop, Trott, Moolenaar, Huizenga, Upton, and Walberg.

I haven’t agreed with him for a while now, but kudos go out to Reps. Amash (along with Bergman) for having the integrity to vote “NO”.

And our President?

Initially, he was heeding the warnings of fellow Conservatives who strongly urged him to veto this huge heaping, steaming pile of bull droppings and tell Lyin’ Ryan and Squish McConnell to go back to the drawing board. He even said so himself here.

Sadly, in the end, he folded up like a wet newspaper and gave Team “d” everything they wanted. Purportedly, he was so disgusted by this, that he claimed that he would never do that again.

I firmly remain skeptical of that statement!

I honestly don’t know what brought about Pres. Trump’s change of heart on this, nor do I think it is even relevant to this post.

Yes, I am very disappointed in his cowardice.

Speaking of cowardice, I’m going to have a talk with my Rep’s office tomorrow on his little part in all of this.

Monday will very probably go something like this: I’ll have a hard time getting someone to open up his office door on Van Dyke (all of that reflective one-way material on the office door makes it hard to see Constituents wanting to get it to see their representative). I’ll get a gatekeeper (probably Amanda) who will pleasantly take down my concerns. I’ll have his chief of staff (or someone else from his office) call me later to tell me that the representative has been made aware of my concerns and will try to spin his vote as a positive (most likely with the military funding), and pleasantly tell me that if I have any other questions or concerns to contact his office.

Call me a closet optimist, but I’m still going anyway.

If something different emerges, I’ll pass along.

Not everything in life (and politics) is plastic and artificial.

You Betcha! (12)Nuh Uh.(0)

  7 comments for “And the real difference here is?

  1. Corinthian Scales
    March 25, 2018 at 10:43 pm

    Either you're going to support this President that we elected or, you're going to support the assholes in the House and Senate that are undermining this President.

    There's your choice.

    The Swamp is a motherf***er.

    Lansing's Swamp is no different.

    You Betcha! (3)Nuh Uh.(0)
    • KG One
      March 26, 2018 at 6:44 am

      CS, that is a false dichotomy that I've been hearing variations of ever since a certain "rockefeller-republican" made a similarly bone-headed move by issuing an ill-conceived pardon.

      And I know that you're smart enough to realize how well that decision played out for the rest of that decade.

      Yes, the swamp is a BMF.

      Yes, Pres. Trump has been a pragmatist.

      But in the end, continuing to compromise your principles only perpetuates it.

      He should have spent the entire weekend line-item vetoing each and every extra-constitutional provision contained within it before signing, which was well within his authority as President.

      You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)
  2. Sue Schwartz
    March 26, 2018 at 7:11 am

    I thought the march was a scary signal--smacks of Soros funding. All those small, undeveloped. clueless minds gathering for a non-purpose, while at the same time funding is signed to better ARM our services.. .then flash-back to the 60's. That's what I saw--course in the 60's no one was funding our gatherings--we didn't get free plane rides via Delta--school-funded bus load-field trips to DC. etc. Made me think of the Marches ordered in Iran . . .That's what this was--no matter how you look at it--scary signal.

    As for Trump--can't help but think there's a strategy in here somewhere--#Q-anon

    You Betcha! (3)Nuh Uh.(0)
    • KG One
      March 26, 2018 at 7:42 am

      If there is a strategy behind Pres. Trump's signing, I'm still at a loss to discern it.

      You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)
  3. Sue Schwartz
    March 26, 2018 at 1:24 pm

    Strategy thoughts--Trump knows the importance of building back up our defense--got it. Used the opportunity to squarely put the DACA issue back into the DIMS laps--twice now they've blown it--thank goodness the DACA's aren't as stupid as Pelosi and Schummer--now placing blame where blame needs to be. This 2000 plus page bill--Trump said--"I won't do this again". I take him at his word. Shutdown coming September, just in time for the height of the political season--six months to put blame on all this and me thinks the next one will have all the DACA craps, etc. DIM's think it a win--Ha, I see it as a noose around their necks. I also see as a huge boongoggle for Ryan and McConnell who seem to be sharing the noose.

    Then, there's secondary issues--like the Walk for Life by a party believing in abortion--the irony will not escape them forever.

    You Betcha! (1)Nuh Uh.(0)
  4. Sue Schwartz
    March 27, 2018 at 6:35 am

    More Strategy thoughts KG: this was an "ominous bill" not a budget. Its a wish list from MPRS. These four contributed and so did Trump. Trump's only contribution: a six line or so clause that said I'll sign your wish list but no spending on these items unless I specifically signs off on them. (The former dude in the West Wing started this) So, guess what Mr. Trump has already sign off on? Only two items, the wall and defense.

    When Trump signed it, he spoke clues--give me line item veto--(specifically he got it) and "I don't know why they didn't include DACA. Lastly, "I never signed anything like this again". He doesn't need to, he got his defense budget. I just love my President.

    You Betcha! (1)Nuh Uh.(0)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.