|Chains on the tracks of the Trump train: What to watch out for
By Daniel M. Ryan
In a very real way, we Conservatives are lucky in that the SJW pests are so aggressive. Back in 2000, there was a lot of joy when George W. Bush became President Bush. If you’re old enough to remember “Sore Loserman,? you’re old enough to remember the luxury of laughing off the teeth-gnashing Dems. When the “Hate Bush? forces assembled, it was easy to laugh them off as weenies – remember? It’s somewhat embarrassing to recall now, but Bush’s above-it-all blitheness was a carry-over from those happy days.
President Trump is different in two ways. First of all, he lacks the genteelness that made George W. look effete. As is now legendary, he hits back hard when someone hits him. He will not decide that it’s Presidential to rise above it all to the point of obliviousness.
Secondly – and this is due to the times – he’s facing leftie hatred that’s far more aggressive than the start of “Hate Bush.? SJWs harassed some folks who went to the celebratory DeploraBall. There were lots of protesters at the inaugural ceremony; from what I read, those protesters were civil. At that time, and at that place. That’s why it’s important to remember that they were not civil in other places. The lefties, who are essentially the cocks-of-the-walk in universities and foot soldiers for the libs on the streets, are a useful reminder that “Hate Bush? was really “Hate Republican.? We no longer have the luxury of laughing them off.
You’ll see this with regards to the Wall. Now that Bush is long gone and Trump is safely elected and inaugurated, it’s time to look at the real reason why The Fence was not built after being authorized in 2006. No, it wasn’t because Bush and his Chamber-of-Commerce buddies put the kibosh on it. The Fence was stalled into desuetude because of lawsuits: largely environmental lawsuits. When work starts on The Wall, we will see more of them. Thankfully for border security, President Trump is the same old Trump that rather likes eminent domain. To get The Wall built, he’ll need to be. That will leave a lot of folks who own property near the border disgruntled. But those folks will only be nuisances when compared to the greenies (or the greenies-by-convenience) who will throw every lawsuit they can at The Wall. Having Scott Pruit as head of the EPA will help, but only partially. To get the chains off the Trump tracks in this locale will require Congress to pass a law that overrides the court decisions which stopped The Fence. The Wall is going to require special legal immunity.
The same third-party-recourse aggressiveness is going to surface with deportations. Others have noted that the best way for President Trump to proceed is optics-driven: start by deporting the illegals who are hardened violent criminals. The goal here is to maneuver the libs into defending the indefensible: to pin them down into defending violent criminals. They’re hot-headed enough, they might do so. But the trouble with this approach, sensible as it is, is that it’s a political maneuver. The real barrier will be legal. We will find out, in real time, the true extent of judge-made law. Again, libs will run to co-operative judges to reinforce the kind of gridlock they specialize in.
Another point of obstruction is the universities. In a weird way, the age of President Trump will reinforce their old-time habit of playing the victim. They’ll go back to “the barbarians are at the gates.? We will see the faculty of institutions whose collective alumni list might as well be the present-day Social Register posture as if they were helpless underdogs. I know this posturing is almost as absurd as the Council on Foreign Relations playing “woe is us? victim politics, but we do live in an age of absurdities. Absurdities made possible by a common-sensical complaint-driven system transmogrified into massively incentivizing professional complainers. Wise were the words penned almost twenty-five years ago by James Dale Davidson and Lord William Rees-Mogg: the status of victim has become an asset - a status so desirable to some that they’re faking victim status like old-style parvenus who faked up a noble ancestry. Back in the common-sensical days, there were always the politicals who faked-up a log-cabin birthplace to portray themselves as rags-to-riches individuals. This too has been transmogrified through incentivizing.
The age of President Trump – the age of MAGA – will call the whole victim ideology into question. That’s why the progs have a deep, gut-level, fear-of-falling incentive to make President Trump fail. We’ll even see them run to the courts to block infrastructure improvements.
Despite Trump’s victories, the Trump years are going to be tough years. In retrospect, we’ll see the inauguration of President Trump as depicted by this Winston Churchill quote: “Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.?
Distant Early Shafting
One possibility, already threatened, is the easiest to laugh off: President Trump being impeached. This seems ludicrous given the party-line acquittal Bill Clinton got on February 12, 1999. Surely the Pubbies will return the favour?
Not necessarily. The Pubbies of the time did get behind the impeachment of Richard Nixon, so much so that Nixon resigned in the face of the inevitable. In the olden days, this was held up as a shining example of Republican devotion to principle. Nowadays, the base is more receptive to “they just cucked out.?
But there’s a third explanation, one buried in the dusty-shelves parts of an academic library. In 1977, Dell published Victor Lasky’s It Didn’t Start With Watergate. Therein, he provided well-sourced evidence that “Tricky Dicky? was just following in the abuse-of-powers wake of John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson. This book, which was very much ahead of its time revision-wise, showed that Lyndon Johnson had been worse that Nixon.
With this in mind, we can see the apparently high-principle Republicans pursuing a strategy: “By impeaching Richard Nixon, we’re really impeaching Lyndon Johnson.?
Were this a calmer age, I’d freely admit that it worked. It did have the cost of a Dem landslide in the ‘74 elections. But it also got Jimmy Carter into the White House instead of another kind of Dem. Inept and preachy though he was, Jimmy Carter did put the kibosh on abuses of White House power. Nixon-as-Devil even restrained Bill Clinton: it kept a lid on his own abuses. Because of the memory of Watergate, Clinton – whose character was as low as Lyndon Johnson’s in his way – did not abuse the power of the White House in the way that Johnson did. ‘Twasn’t until Barack Obama, who was a child when Nixon resigned, did we see the return of the old-style abuses of power. Neither Clinton nor Carter had a Lois Lerner.
When you look at it this way, you can see how a Pubbie might well be tempted to get behind an impeachment of President Trump.
Tempting though it seems, it would still be a dumb idea. Impeaching President Trump would mean that the Republican Party will be shoved back into the old Romney-Ryan model. It would also be a perhaps-fatal slap in the face of Generation Trump, the predominant group of young up-and-coming activists. In Nixon’s day, Ronald Reagan was waiting in the wings. (Fun Fact: the candidate who won the most votes in the 1968 Republican primaries was Ronald Reagan.) There’s no such figure nowadays.
Given the above, the Pubbies in federal elected office should be as partisan as they have the good sense to be. They should stick to their loyalty even when the libs telegraph intent by yelling about “partisanship? at the top of their big-capacity lungs.
As for the obstructionism of the courts, there’s no simple solution as yet. All i can say is that President Roosevelt’s court-packing attempt, though blown away by the blowback it engendered, did mark the start of an era when the Supreme Court was more...co-operative.
Daniel M. Ryan, as Nxtblg, is shepherding the independently-run Open Audi Initiative Prediction Market Shadowing Project. He has stubbornly assumed all the responsibility and blame for the workings and outcome of the project.