Pete Hegseth confirmed as Sec. of Defense, and...

You have probably already heard that Pete Hegseth has been confirmed as Secretary of Defense. You probably have heard that JD Vance had to cast the deciding vote after the senate was tied 50-50. But did you know Mitch McConnell voted against Pete Hegseth? Why?

Let's Go Brandon sporting a bruised face?

Bruised? Mitch McConnell too.

Mitch McConnell is part of the problem

I'd say Mitch McConnell is a dweeb but that's minimizing the issue.  Mitch McConnell is a status quo establishment guy. That's worse.

Mitch McConnell is not the guy

Mitch McConnell is not the guy to lead conservatives and Republicans to a strong or lengthy majority.  He's fresh off a self-serving Republican loss in what was supposed to be a red wave election. McConnell is not the guy.  He's a status quo guy and status quo is not what conservativism and not what America needs at this point in history.  Yet there he remains. This goes beyond left and right, he exemplifies the status quo nature of American politics and culture, as it remains mired in a slow drift leftward towards socialism and Orwellian social credit  (despite the laudable growing effort to thwart it).

Mitch McConnell has done some good things for conservatism in regards to judicial appointments, but he's not the guy to lead conservatism and a belief in American fundamental values back into preeminence. He's just not.  He's not a visionary.  In fact that is something he seems to fear as a threat to his position.  Not the guy.

Repealing 230 and Mitch McConnell

 Tim Pool discuss the war on Section 230 and the politics around it.

A reminder why president Trump matters for the country

Judges.

Did you know USMCA is not yet law?

Mitch McConnell announced the USMCA deal, which was passed by congress very late in 2019 after they sat on it for a very long time, will be passed in the Senate within a week.  It's not yet the law of the land. Good news though, it will be very soon.

Republican leader gets banned for calling out threats

Republican senate majority leader Mitch McConnell pointed out the threats to him.  But it gets worse. Twitter leaves Leftist calls for "Eradication".

Wow.

Parsing the president on the border wall

A lot of conservatives are distraught that the president is sounding like he's caving on the border wall.  There has been indication that he might cave.  Last time he caved on something he said he would never sign bad legislation again.  But he's seemingly been very bi-partisan in lame duck legislation signing so far this year. He's even been conciliatory, at times.  But seemingly he's going to capitulate now.

But less than an hour ago the president tweeted this:

The Democrats, who know Steel Slats (Wall) are necessary for Border Security, are putting politics over Country. What they are just beginning to realize is that I will not sign any of their legislation, including infrastructure, unless it has perfect Border Security. U.S.A. WINS!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 20, 2018

Seems like even though Mitch McConnell caved in the senate, the president will not sign a continuing resolution to keep the partial government shut down from happening until at least February (when the Democrats will control congress).  I don't get McConnell except to say that clearly border security is not a priority for him.  But you'd think since he's supposedly a shrewd political tactician he'd understand the value of a win, the value of the base and the value of using the lame duck session to maximize what Republicans can achieve over the next two years.  Apparently not.

But look back at what the president just tweeted.  It seems when he says "sign any of their legislation" he is referring yo Democrat legislation, not what Mitch McConnell just passed.  That's a possible interpretation.

If that's the case, the president could be gearing up for 2020 as a referendum on the feckless, fake border security stance of Democrats.  It's a good issue for him.  But it relies on border security voters not caring or forgetting that he did not stand up to feckless, fake border security Republicans this year.  That might turn out to be a political miscalculation by the president, not his first, but by far his most egregious. 

It could be some other calculus, but if that's the case, I cannot see the angle.  Then again, perhaps the president will indeed veto the legislation.  That would be a sign to his supporters that he has not given up the fight, and what we are seeing is just tactics with some design.

Time will tell.

Mitch, let's hope it's your seat we lose

This is absolutely disgusting and reprehensible. What a defeatist attitude on display by Mitch McConnell:

A new interview with Mitch McConnell this week showed the first cracks in the wall of his optimism about the midterms. While not going down a path of gloom and doom, he no longer sounds positive of breaking a long-standing trend of the party in power losing ground in such scenarios. He’s not coming out and saying the GOP’s majorities in both chambers are toast, but he seems to think they’ll be losing seats.

There is no reason to think that, but if you do think that, (1) you plan to counter it, forcefully and (2) you do not say it out loud - not to your caucus let alone the media. Stupid, stupid, stupid.  And weak.  Weakness is a bad thing in case you're not sure.

This idea that Mitch McConnell is some kind of a parliamentary genius is idiotic. Michael Goodwin had an article last month about how president Trump is teaching Republicans how to fight. Let's just say his approach does not include retreat, surrender, capitulation or showing signs of weakness (it's worth reading in it's entirety, here).  Mitch McConnell clearly has not read this article, and if it wasn't too late, I'd suggest he read it.  Mitch McConnell looks weak - now more than ever. Really weak. Jeff Sessions weak. Say what you will about Nancy Pelosi (let me help you with some ideas on that - she's an idiot, she's out of touch), but at least she does not retreat - even from stupid, untenable positions. McConnell could learn from her if he's still afraid of learning from president Trump.

I don't think Mitch McConnell gets it

First let me give GOP Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell credit, he got an imperfect but good tax bill passed through the senate. That's no small tax given the slim majority of Republicans and the rogue elements within the party who are more liberal than conservative and a series of failures on Obamacare.  So good job Mitch.

But...

That Obamacare thing got even slightly more irksome after the win because despite the fact that the tax bill removes the healthcare mandate, perhaps choking Obamacare off for good (and how did McConnell get McCain's support on that?), McConnell still had to put his foot in it afterwards;

“Just what the country needs to get growing again,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said in an interview after a final burst of negotiation closed in on a nearly $1.5 trillion package that impacts the breadth of American society.

He shrugged off polls finding scant public enthusiasm for the measure, saying the legislation would prove its worth. “Big bills are rarely popular,” he said. “You remember how unpopular ‘Obamacare’ was when it passed?”

That last part sure sounds like someone who has come to terms with Obamacare as being palatable now. So despite the senate victory, I don't think he really gets it. 

Well, maybe he gets some of it:

Back home in Kentucky just hours after the Senate narrowly pushed through the nearly $1.5 trillion tax bill, McConnell predicted that the boldest rewrite of the nation’s tax system in decades would generate more than enough economic growth to prevent the burgeoning deficits being forecast.

“I not only don’t think it will increase the deficit, I think it will be beyond revenue neutral,” he told reporters. “In other words, I think it will produce more than enough to fill that gap.”

That's true, as this video points out.

But that whole Obamacare comment...Mitch might be so out of touch as to have to go. After the win we should give him a chance to clarify, but the implication of him not getting that is scary.

Baby steps, right?

It was a nail biter, with vice president Pence needed to break the tie, but the Republicans in the Senate passed a measure to allow debate on the repeal of Obamacare.  

WASHINGTON—Senate Republicans overcame a range of internal fissures in narrowly voting on Tuesday to begin debate on their health-care overhaul, but GOP senators said they recognized they still must resolve the thorny policy disagreements that have stymied them for months.

Not exactly a full blown repeal and replace but baby steps are better than no steps. Right?  Right? Let's keep telling ourselves that.  But only for a week.  

What should come next is Mitch McConnell strong arming or offering deals to senators Collins and Murkowski.  The Democrats did it shamelessly with Obamacare and look what happened - it passed.  As disgusting as it is to reward the obstinate hold-outs, right now it has to be done to secure their votes. By all means they should be primaried but this is hard ball politics and you have to do what you need to do to win, and win now (not next year).  Make a deal with them and then cut them loose.

That's what Mitch McConnell needs to do. If he doesn't get this done, he's not leadership material because getting it done - now - is all that matters. Being a brilliant tactician is not what the senate needs or what America needs.  What America needs in the senate is someone who gets things done.  Maybe the senate needs a Donald Trump.  McConnell has made a baby step, let's hope he takes more steps right away.

GOP, Strike TWO

Let's not understate the size of the GOP failure to repeal and replace Obamacare. It's huuuuuggge! No one GOP senator has decided they are willing to bite the bullet on their principals or their re-election chances and vote to enact some sort of go forward legislation.  As a party the failure lies with everyone in the GOP who is in the senate.  The party whip. Mitch McConnell. The individual senators who are hold outs.  Each individual senator who is not forcing the issue with the holdouts. The former presidential candidates who ran against president Trump and are presenting wish-list roadblocks.  

President Trump too.

The danger of failure is seismic - a possible disenfranchisement of Republican voters, as well as the new Trump voter coalition and independents, leading to a loss of the house and Senate.  If that is not enough of a fire alarm, if that does not get all hands on deck for a 24-7 push until something gets done, I'm not sure what will.   Strike three will be a full-on disaster.  Meanwhile Republicans seem to be trying to draw a walk (to further the baseball analogy) as the strikes fly past.  They seem to be more content to wait it out than to try to do something.

You were elected to lead, not wait for a bigger majority.  Make no mistake - 60 Republican senators would solve the problem of the holdouts and allow for a passage of something, anything.  But you WILL NOT EARN A SUPERMAJORITY by not doing anything. You have to accomplish something if you want to get voter confidence.

Maybe the GOP are trying to wait out Trump's presidency.  Maybe they just cannot come up with a palatable compromise. But the fact that the GOP is waiting, deliberately, is starting take hold - at least with me.  Stepping up to the edge, twice before retreating at the last second seems suspect. First a McCain illness looked like a chance to stall.  Then two last minute change of minds seemed to ensure the second senate failure. It's too much of a coincidence to stomach.

Regardless of the reason the GOP leadership is stalling, time is running short.  There are other things that need to get done - tax reform, tax cuts, a border wall. All of these things are urgent. My simple reminder to the GOP is this:

Do nothing, achieve nothing, become nothing.

Failure to act decisively will come back on you. Now is not the time for weakness or cowardice. To exhibit either will be to be revealed as a fraud. 

The Congress vs. Obama and Reid

GOP self-imposed future?

Happy New Year everyone.  Looking ahead, 2015 is going to be an interesting year in politics. Obama will be forced to veto all sorts of legislation that finally makes it to his desk, despite Harry Reid's efforts to filibuster. A smart Mitch McConnell would leave the Senate rules to negate the need for super-majorities in place for as long as the GOP feels it can hold the Senate.  That would be the smart thing to do.  It may not be the GOP thing to do. I've been on vacation the last 2 weeks and not paying as close attention as I normally would, so I'm not sure if the idea of normalizing those Senate rules is still on the table for the GOP majority, but if it is, it shouldn't be.

The flawed calculus of public opinion as led by the mainstream media that the GOP are doing something sinister and so they should not do it is simply that - flawed.  The leverage given by Reid's distortion of the rules is too powerful to ignore.  Reversing it is a good idea, but not now.  The Democrats have dome a massive amount of damage to America, and the top priority right now has to be undoing that.  Afterwards, normalizing Senate rules can be given some thought.  Obama is still in charge of the Executive branch and is increasingly likely to do ill-advised things.  Taking away your own ability to fight those decisions, even in part, is like tying your own hand behind your back.

If it's public opinion that the GOP leadership is fretting about, I'd advise them to get over it.  It's easy enough to say in every single interview, a la Debbie Wasserman Schultz the same talking point over and over again: these are rules that the Harry Reid Democrats put in place for themselves and we are simply obeying the rules we were given.  Or perhaps something more well-crafted, but the point remains "they did this" repeated often enough and long enough will deflect blame.  And hey, if things go south anyway, it might at least force the public to reconsider the notion of the Senate's role in government to not just be a rubber stamp to the Congress' or the president's will. It's meant to be deliberative. That would not be a bad thing.  It'd be easy to tie it back to the Obamacare push debacle, especially after the 2015 tax collection from the IRS starts to hit taxpayers' wallets.

Mitch McConnell might be a parliamentarian, and a good one at that, but he's not a bold leader.  That's what the GOP lacks in the Senate.  Mitch McConnell strikes me as an effective back room, number 2 guy; an advisor to the GOP Senate leader on the options available.  #1?  That's a role that Rand Paul might fit well, if he were not likely going to run for president instead.

Rules are rules

Harry Reid has sewn some terrible rules for the Senate minority.  The Republicans have had to live by them for the last several years.  Mitch McConnell has talked about rolling them back, and he should - as soon as it becomes apparent that the GOP might lose control of the senate.  That time is not today.  In fact the earliest that might be is late 2016.

Why not govern and force the senate Democrats, now the minority, to live under the same yoke that they forced Republicans to live under?  There is ZERO upside to being more pariamentarian than senator Reid.  Yes it's the right way to govern, but (1) they shoved a lot of garbage down the throat of Americans by bending these rules.  That needs to be corrected, and making it more difficult for yourself to do so is foolish. That makes ZERO sense. (2) The GOP will get ZERO media credit for fixing things.  That means there will be little to no public perception benefit for the GOP espousing fairness. It means no extra votes in 2016. ZERO. (3) The GOP may control the Congress and Senate, but they need as much muscle as they can muster to confront president Obama, who shows no signs of being willing to compromise on his progressive agenda.  Making it more difficult for yourself to contain a lame duck president who wants to instead govern as a king makes ZERO sense.

Mitch McConnell has benefitted from an unhappy conservative base, who have bit their lip and voted for the establishment Republicans in many cases.  The Tea Party have taken one for the team.  They've enabled the Republicans to be able to fight a radical progressive agenda.  They've done so not because they love the GOP, but because they realize that's the only way they'll have skin in the game.  Having taken a pass on Romney in 2012, there's not much else in terms of options.

But that does not give the GOP a pass to govern the senate as if they were still the go-along-to-get-along minority.  To do so will spell a truly bad split within the party base.  Conservative voters want action and the GOP in the senate had better be prepared to deliver or they will truly realize a backlash in 2016.  On the other hand, they are set up perfectly to take action.  Bold action.  There is a difference between bold and reckless and Mitch McConnell would do well to recognize that.  The choices facing the GOP are note solely recklessness and unilateral disarmament.

Use the tools yoe've been given to the fullest possible advantage.  That seems like a no-brainer.  Yes those tools dismantle the reasoning for the senate in the first place and they should be gone.  But the Republicans can now control when that happens. So get it right Mitch.

Kentucky going to the GOP?

It looks like Democrats think that is the case;

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has gone dark in Kentucky, where the party is targeting Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

After a significant investment in support of Kentucky Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes, the DSCC had not reserved time for the final three weeks of the race and, as of today, is no longer on the air.

“The DSCC has now spent more than 2 million in Kentucky and continues to make targeted investments in the ground game while monitoring the race for future investments, but is currently not on the air in the state,” a DSCC official told CQ Roll Call.

I'm not a big fan of Mitch McConnell, but he's definitely better than the alternative. But here's the thing about this - McConnell was never going to lose and it was good to see the Democrats spending wasting money in the state. It means those funds don't get diverted to Iowa or Colorado or some other toss-up state.

That's the dark cloud to go with the silver lining I guess.