Tag Archives: Bob Corker

Checks & Balances??? HAH!

Posted on by under Political commentary

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

That, as you all know, is the Preamble to the United States Constitution, the foundation for the government of the U.S.  Until recently, it was a representational form of government.  The Constitution calls for three separate and distinct branches of government in order to achieve a system of checks and balances so that no one branch has complete autonomy.  The reason is to protect our representational form of government from corruption, from making self-serving and destructive decisions. If there was ever a doubt in your mind that there are no longer checks on the executive branch, the presidency, you can put those doubts to bed now, for the proof is in the pudding that Congress, the legislative branch of government, is too afraid of Donald Trump to act on behalf of We The People.

You will recall that on June 1st, Trump imposed a 25% tariff on imports of steel, and a 10% tariff on aluminum, on the European Union, Canada, and Mexico – our allies – citing “national security” as the reason.  Our allies were, justifiably and understandably, disturbed by this move, as were many here at home. The tariffs were poorly received by the vast majority of economists; almost 80% of 104 economists surveyed by Reuters believed that tariffs on steel and aluminum imports would be a net harm to the U.S. economy.  The World Bank has warned that a spiral of rising tariffs could lead to a drop in global trade not seen since the financial crisis of 2007-2008.

The legal basis for Trump to impose the tariffs is questionable, at best.  It comes from Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 which under certain circumstances allows the president to impose tariffs based on the recommendation from the U.S. Secretary of Commerce if  “an article is being imported into the United States in such quantities or under such circumstances as to threaten or impair the national security.”  This section has never been invoked since the creation of the World Trade Organization was established in 1995, and I have to ask just how Wilbur Ross, Secretary of Commerce, concluded that the import of steel and aluminum poses a threat to national security.

National security?  There is far more harm in starting a trade war and alienating our closest allies, our friends, than there is in free trade.  In fact, trade agreements such as NAFTA contribute to the economies and safety nets of the nations involved.

The tariffs garnered widespread criticism among members of Congress, even some conservative republicans!  On Thursday, June 7th, Senator Bob Corker filed a proposal to require congressional approval for President Donald Trump’s tariffs in the form of an amendment to a must-pass defense appropriation bill.   Corker was joined by Tennessee Senator Lamar Alexander and eleven other senators who have grave concerns about the tariffs and the near-certain retaliatory tariffs and the damage that will be done to the U.S. economy, not to mention our standing with our allies.

Admittedly, Corker’s bill, even if passed in the Senate, stood a slimmer chance in the House, and was almost certain to fail passing with a veto-proof majority in both chambers.  BUT … it was a beginning that sent a message that perhaps Congress was finally willing to do their job, and it was gaining momentum.  BUT … on Tuesday, at Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s request, Senator Jim Inhofe blocked Senator Corker’s tariffs bill from a vote.  The bill is now effectively dead, and Trump has once again proven that he has authoritarian powers.

Why did Senator Inhofe block the bill?  Because it would displease Trump.  Bob Corker said it best …

“The United States Senate, right now, on June 12, is becoming a body where, well, we’ll do what we can do, but my gosh, if the president gets upset with us, then we might not be in the majority. And so let’s don’t do anything that might upset the president. ‘Gosh, we might poke the bear’ is the language I’ve been hearing in the hallways. We might poke the bear. The president might get upset with us as United States senators if we vote on the Corker amendment, so we’re going to do everything we can to block it.”

trump constitution 1I am a voter.  I paid federal income taxes from the time I was 13-years-old until I retired a few years ago.  I am a citizen.  I do not want to live in this nation if Herr Trump can wake up one morning and make a decision without any oversight from our elected representatives, or if our elected representatives are so fearful of Trump that they refuse to represent us.  The majority of people in this nation feel the same.  If the “Mitch and Jim Show” can, with the snap of their fingers, render our voices silent by silencing the voices of those people we elected to represent our interests, then we are no longer a representational government, and rather than being citizens, we are now subjects.

ENOUGH!!! (Part I)

Posted on by under Political commentary

 

Senators Bob Corker (l) and Jeff Flake (r)

They need to invent a machine … one that I can scream into, and there will be no sound, it will mute and be absorbed by some material within the machine.  The reason I need this is because when I am perusing the news and see something that particularly sets my teeth on edge, my scream has a tendency to scare the family and the Significant Seven half to death.  So, some of you scientific geniuses out there, please hurry before I either get thrown out of my home, or give everybody else in the home heart failure.

pillow-scream-2

On Tuesday, Senator Jeff Flake, a republican from Arizona, announced that he does not intend to seek re-election next November.  He also gave a very moving, thoughtful speech, which I share with you now …

As I contemplate the Trump presidency, I cannot help but think of Joseph Welch.

On June 9, 1954, during the Army-McCarthy hearings, Welch, who was the chief counsel for the Army, famously asked the committee chairman if he might speak on a point of personal privilege. What he said that day was so profound that it has become enshrined as a pivotal moment in defense of American values against those who would lay waste to them. Welch was the son of a small prairie town in northwest Iowa, and the plaintive quality of his flat Midwestern accent is burned into American history. After asking Sen. Joseph McCarthy for his attention and telling him to listen with both ears, Welch spoke:

“Until this moment, senator, I think I never really gauged your cruelty, or your recklessness.”

And then, in words that today echo from his time to ours, Welch delivered the coup de grace: “You’ve done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?”

The moral power of Welch’s words ended McCarthy’s rampage on American values, and effectively his career as well.

After Welch said his piece, the hearing room erupted in applause, those in attendance seemingly shocked by such bracing moral clarity in the face of a moral vandal. Someone had finally spoken up and said: Enough.

By doing so, Welch reawakened the conscience of the country. The moment was a shock to the system, a powerful dose of cure for an American democracy that was questioning its values during a time of global tumult and threat. We had temporarily forgotten who we were supposed to be.

We face just such a time now. We have again forgotten who we are supposed to be.

There is a sickness in our system — and it is contagious.

How many more disgraceful public feuds with Gold Star families can we witness in silence before we ourselves are disgraced?

How many more times will we see moral ambiguity in the face of shocking bigotry and shrug it off?

How many more childish insults do we need to see hurled at a hostile foreign power before we acknowledge the senseless danger of it?

How much more damage to our democracy and to the institutions of American liberty do we need to witness in silence before we count ourselves as complicit in that damage?

Nine months of this administration is enough for us to stop pretending that this is somehow normal, and that we are on the verge of some sort of pivot to governing, to stability. Nine months is more than enough for us to say, loudly and clearly: Enough.

The outcome of this is in our hands. We can no longer remain silent, merely observing this train wreck, passively, as if waiting for someone else to do something. The longer we wait, the greater the damage, the harsher the judgment of history.

I have been so worried about the state of our disunion that I recently wrote a book called “Conscience of a Conservative: A Rejection of Destructive Politics and a Return to Principle.” I meant for the book to be a defense of principle at a time when principle is in a state of collapse. In it, I traced the transformation of my party from a party of ideas to a party in thrall to a charismatic figure peddling empty populist slogans. I tried to make the case for the sometimes excruciating work of arguing and compromise.

This was part of the reason I wanted to go to the Senate — because its institutional strictures require you to cross the aisle and do what is best for the country. Because what is best for the country is for neither party’s base to fully get what it wants but rather for the factions that make up our parties to be compelled to talk until we have a policy solution to our problems. To listen to the rhetoric of the extremes of both parties, one could be forgiven for believing that we are each other’s enemies, that we are at war with ourselves.

But more is now required of us than to put down our thoughts in writing. As our political culture seems every day to plumb new depths of indecency, we must stand up and speak out. Especially those of us who hold elective office.

To that end, and to remove all considerations of what is normally considered to be safe politically, I have decided that my time in the Senate will end when my term ends in early January 2019. For the next 14 months, relieved of the strictures of politics, I will be guided only by the dictates of conscience.

It’s time we all say: Enough.

Senator Bob Corker, who announced in September that he would not seek re-electin in 2018, and Senator Flake, both republicans, are just the latest in an ever-growing list of legislators who are saying Enough of Donald Trump.  And, predictably (ho-hum), Trump had an almost immediate comeback …

“The reason Flake and Corker dropped out of the Senate race is very simple, they had zero chance of being elected. Now act so hurt & wounded!” (precisely 140 characters … how does he do that?)

“The meeting with Republican Senators yesterday, outside of Flake and Corker, was a love fest with standing ovations and great ideas for USA!” (again, exactly 140 characters)

“Jeff Flake, with an 18% approval rating in Arizona, said “a lot of my colleagues have spoken out.” Really, they just gave me a standing O!”

I repeat what I have said so many times in the past … such maturity from the ‘man’ in the White House.

Trump’s remarks are not germane to this discussion, but follow his usual (ho-hum) pattern, a pattern that is beyond old and tiresome.  But, that aside, we are just over a year away from the mid-term elections and should be asking some questions.  The first one is obvious … what does it mean, relative to the 2018 elections, that these members of Congress are leaving?  To date, there are a minimum of 14 who will not be seeking re-election or are leaving prior to the elections.

Common sense would lead us to believe that this is a positive, that it will open the door for democratic wins in both Senate and House, given Trump’s continuing low approval rating of under 40% (37% as of yesterday’s FiveThirtyEight aggregate polls).  And, typically members of the president’s party have a harder path to winning in mid-term elections.  But common sense flew out the window sometime prior to 8 November 2016 and has not yet returned.

For the most part, the representatives and senators that are leaving are among the less radical, more moderate branch of the GOP.  Steve Bannon, who is still, I am certain, Trump’s top advisor, just not on the payroll, at least officially, has stated his goal of putting more far-right conservatives in office next November, rather along the lines of his Alabama pick, former judge Roy Moore, who is the least-qualified candidate for Congress I have seen.

I will return later this week with further analysis of what this all means in the grand scheme of things, as well as a look at some of the specific seats that will be up for grabs with no incumbent next year.  Also, question #2: Why have these legislators kept silent for nine full months?  Stay tuned, folks …

 

Thoughts on “Value Voters”

Posted on by under Political commentary, Social commentary

Recently I have heard the term “value voters” bandied about.  I did not really think much about it until this past Saturday when Steve Bannon spoke harshly at a “Value Voters Summit”, and then I began to wonder … what, exactly, are value voters?  The short answer I found is …

“One who participates in elections and makes decisions based on issues such as religion, abortion, capital punishment and same-sex marriage.”

In other words, one who places their own personal morals above the good of the nation, the security of the world, and the important issues that should be the business of government. Banning same-sex marriage is, to the value voter, more important than protecting the environment, the air we breathe and the food we eat.  Banning abortion takes precedence over international security.  And prioritizing one religion over another ranks higher than human rights.

And the Values Voter Summit at which Bannon spoke on Saturday is …

“An annual political conference held in Washington, D.C. for American social conservative activists and elected officials from across the United States. The Values Voter Summit is hosted by the Family Research Council. There are numerous conservative organizations sponsoring or otherwise participating in the conference. In the most recent summit, 38 organizations and an audience of 2,000 people participated. The summit is usually held in September or October of each year.”

The all-star cast of previous summits have included right-wing commentators and conspiracy theorists Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, Ann Coulter.  All three of these have received Filosofa’s Idiot of the Week award … need I say more?

This year, Steve Bannon, Trump’s friend, ‘former’ chief strategist, and advisor, spoke at the summit and ‘declared war’ against the GOP at the ballot box in next year’s midterm elections.

“This is not my war. This is our war. And y’all didn’t start it. The establishment started it. But I will tell you one thing — you all are going to finish it.”

Bannon’s two main targets were Senators Bob Corker and Mitch McConnell.  Corker, you may remember, spoke out last week, saying that republican lawmakers were privately concerned about Trump’s ability to lead the country, and later tweeting, “It’s a shame the White House has become an adult day care center. Someone obviously missed their shift …”  Bannon said the incumbents in Congress must now “come to a stick [microphone] and condemn Senator Corker.”

Since leaving the White House in August, Bannon has returned to his post as chairman of Breitbart and made it his express mission to purge the Republican Party in the 2018 primary challenges to sitting members of Congress. His efforts are reportedly being backed by conservative hedge-fund mogul Robert Mercer, a real piece of work in his own right.

White supremacist and former Trump aide Sebastian Gorka also spoke at the summit …

“The left has no idea how much more damage we can do to them as private citizens, as people unfettered. 2018 will be the crucial year. This is the year. Steve has declared war on the RINO class as have I and we must tell them we have had enough.”

Not one to pass up an opportunity to be in the spotlight, Trump also spoke at the summit, the first sitting president ever to do so.

“We know that it’s the family and the church — not government officials — who know best how to create strong and loving communities. We don’t worship government, we worship God.” (Somebody shoot me now, please?)

Trump continued to toot his horn and condemn Congress for failing to rubber-stamp his own agenda, but nothing that we haven’t all heard before, so I won’t waste mine or your time repeating it ad nauseam.  What I would focus on, however, is the ideology of the ‘value voters’ who attended this conference.

This was a group, at least some of whom believe that God placed Donald Trump in the White House.  My snarky self simply cannot resist asking the question, do they believe, then, that Vladimir Putin is God? This is a group who place their own religious values far above truth and integrity in government, environmental protection, global security, human rights, justice, international relations, crime prevention, healthcare, the economy, or any of a number of other serious issues facing our nation today.  These are people, evangelical Christians, as they refer to themselves, who believe this nation should have a state religion:  Christianity.  They have no room in their hearts for those who are Muslim, Jewish, atheist or agnostic.  Many have no room in their hearts, even for those who are Hispanic or African-American.  I am not speaking of Christianity as a whole, but this relatively small group of ‘value voters’ who choose to push their religion upon us all, to the detriment and exclusion of all else.

Bannon, Gorka and Trump knew their audience, knew what would sell.  But they also spoke to a much larger audience:  We The People.  This writer found their message ridiculous, but also chilling, for if they have their way in November 2018, a large portion of Congress will be their hand-picked choices from the radical-right.  Soldiers for Bannon’s army in his self-declared “war” on the 64% of us who do not support Trump and his ideology – an ideology that is the opposite of “government of the people, by the people, for the people”.  That is the government that Abraham Lincoln proclaimed “shall not perish from the earth.”  If Trump, Bannon and the value voters have their way, I fear it will perish after all.

Lincoln

Need I Say More?

Posted on by under Global Issues, Political commentary

There is a difference between strength and bombast.  Bullying, tooting one’s own horn, threats – whether idle or real – are all part of bombast, not real strength.  Genuine strength includes understanding the situation, knowing when to act, when to wait, and when to keep one’s mouth shut.  Real strength in the world of governance requires knowledge, understanding, patience and intelligence. Events in the last 48 hours in the dark world of Trump include threats against one of the three biggest television networks in the nation, a challenge to take and compare IQ tests to the Secretary of State, threats to de-certify a fully functioning global agreement that is contributing to world peace, mocking and taunting a U.S. Senator, threats to pull out of a trade agreement with our closest neighbors/allies, and threats against the NFL.  If there are any who still support him, perhaps they see these moves as strength.  The rest of us see it for what it is:  bombast.

The following is an excerpt from a letter written by a student at State College in Pennsylvania on September 29, 2016, almost two months before Donald Trump was elected:

I urge those of you who are unsure of how you will vote in November to consider what it would mean to have a man who is a bully, and who supports bullies, have the keys to our nuclear weapons. That Donald Trump is a bully is undeniable. He yells at people he does not like, he threatens them, and he calls them names. These are behaviors that we all agree are totally unacceptable in our schools and workplaces. Why should they be acceptable in a Presidential candidate?

Significantly, Trump continues to express admiration and respect for other bullies. And scarily, these bullies are dictators such as Vladimir Putin and the fortunately deceased Saddam Hussein. Again, do we really want a man who admires brutal dictators in charge of our nuclear weapons? Does Trump have no idea of the difference between our American way of life and that espoused by the world’s worst dictators Does he not understand the role America plays as the leader in demonstrating what democracy truly means?

A bully as our Commander-in-Chief. A bully in charge of the world’s greatest military power. Do you really want to vote for that?  Hillary Clinton has demonstrated, in a number of important positions, that she understands the proper use of our power. We can make America stronger by voting for her.

Pamela Monk

The title of her letter? True Strength Is Not Bombast

One astute commenter, a student from Temple University, responded to Ms. Monk with an apt quote from Theodore Roosevelt …

 Theodore Roosevelt: “I neither respect nor admire the huge moneyed men to whom money is the be-all and end-all of existence; to whom the acquisition of untold millions is the supreme goal in life, and who are too often utterly indifferent as to how these millions are obtained.”

Need I say more?