Podcast – The Common Constitutionalist Dissects Trumps WSJ Op-Ed

In this episode I sift through, break down and render my own opinion of The Donald’s Op-Ed piece he recently penned in the Wall Street Journal entitled, “Let Me Ask You A Question.” In it he makes several points regarding the campaign in general and specifically pertaining to the Colorado primary, such that it was. But what having to do with Trump would be complete without a healthy dose of Cruz bashing. He gave readers plenty of that. The only thing he forgot to mention was his new catch-phrase, “Lyin Ted.” I’m sure that was a mere oversight. read more

The Squishy Kimberley Strassel

by: the Common Constitutionalist

 

As far as conservative newspapers go, there are very few. The most recognizable being IBD, the Washington Times, the New York Post (at times) and of course, the Wall Street Journal.

While I agree for the most part, I challenge those who trust the Wall Street Journal to be conservative. In my opinion it only masquerades as a conservative newspaper.

Case in point: A recent article penned on May 2 by Kimberly Strassel entitled, “About Those Conservative ‘Squishes’”. In it she tows the typical Republican line. You know, the faux-conservative Karl Rove, Bill Kristol republican line.

She began the article with: “Texas Sen. Ted Cruz recently gave a speech to some FreedomWorks activists, delivering a fascinating retelling of the Senate-it gun control fight. After taking credit for killing the bill with his filibuster threat, Mr. Cruz went on to divide the Republican caucus between those who have ‘principles’ and those who are a bunch of ‘squishes’.”

FreedomWorks activists eh? Not a group of FreedomWorks patriots; no, activists. I also enjoyed the implication that Ted Cruz is nothing but a glory hound.

She continued with: “… The GOP is split between those who insist on making a point, and those who want to make some progress.”

Although I am not, I could stop here as she reveals her hand in one word: “progress”. The watchword of both Republican and Democrat big government Statists.

She claimed that Cruz, Rand Paul and Mike Lee screwed up the perfect storm of Obama’s failed gun control bill. She, of course, was all about the Republican win. No mention of preserving the Second Amendment. It’s all about the party.

And not a word regarding the left’s ultimate strategy, assuming she even knows it. What was supposed to happen was the Bill was to sail through the “squishy” Senate and get soundly defeated in the Republican-controlled House, giving Obama and his minions the issue they can hammer into 2014. The strategy was, that if the bill was approved, it would further their gun confiscation agenda. If it was defeated, they have an issue for 2014.

Strassel said the Cruz “faction” wanted to make a point that the GOP believed in the Constitution. He’s right and what’s sad is that there seems to be but a few senators standing up for the document.

She went on to describe how the House was on the verge of scoring a political victory over the Democrats on some minor funding for Obamacare insurance exchanges. (Yes I know, it’s $5 billion, but that’s minor for Obamacare.) Wow, the Republicans would force the Dems to choose between sick people and some money. Big win!

She then explained that if not for the Cruz “absolutionists” the reasonable Republicans could’ve force the Dems to kill off a tiny portion of Obamacare. Cruz and his buddies, she claims, insist on full repeal or nothing. Oh the nerve of them.

Does Ms. Strassel fail to realize that trimming around the edges of Obamacare is utter futility? Sen. Cruz and his few allies along with Heritage and the Club for Growth seem to be the only ones in Washington that know or care of the devastation that is Obamacare.

She then points out that, “the majority of Republicans are ardent supporters of the second amendment, passionate about repealing Obamacare, in favor of lower taxes.” Tells you a lot that she has to point it out!

“Yet”, she states, “disagree with Mr. Cruz on his filibuster strategy and you are a ‘squish’.”

Well, Ms. Strassel, Ted Cruz is the upstart you make him out to be. He and a few other relative newcomers have so far been uncorrupted by the DC moderate “Squishes”, and the big government Republicans don’t know how to contain them and that, no doubt, is quite frustrating.

So since the moderates can contain these rebels, they run to the so-called conservative press to do their dirty work.

It appears to me at least that the inside the Beltway Republicans think, as do the leftists, that these conservative rabble-rousers are the biggest threat to our country and certainly to their power. Bigger than joblessness, the debt, taxes, Obamacare and terrorism.

If they could just get rid of, or turn, those uncompromising conservatives, Washington would run like the well oiled machine we all know it to be. (Kinda choked on that one).

A Changing of the Guard for the Republicans?

by: the Common Constitutionalist

I’m sure the left is just loving this, for they hate the conservative wing of the republican party as much as the RINO’s do.

McCainHuffPo writes: “One of the Senate’s leading hawks, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), took to the Senate floor Thursday to fire back at Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), saying the Kentuckian’s rant against extrajudicial drone killings was ‘simply false.’” It should have read, one of the Senate’s leading hacks.

The HuffPo report continued: “Quoting extensively from a Wall Street Journal editorial that mocked Paul, McCain also argued that Paul had belittled the growing use of drones to kill terrorism suspects by invoking the name of Jane Fonda and suggesting a drone could have killed her when she was a Vietnam War protester.”

“I must say that the use of Jane Fonda’s name does evoke certain memories with me, and I must say that she is not my favorite American. But I also believe that, as odious as it was, Ms. Fonda acted within her constitutional rights, and to somehow say that someone who disagrees with American policy — and even may demonstrate against it — is somehow a member of an organization which makes that individual an enemy combatant is simply false,” McCain said, hitting his lectern for emphasis. “It is simply false.”Paul

The Wall Street editorial read, “Calm down, Senator. Mr. Holder is right, even if he doesn’t explain the law very well. The U.S. government cannot randomly target American citizens on U.S. soil or anywhere else. What it can do under the laws of war is target an “enemy combatant” anywhere at anytime, including on U.S. soil. This includes a U.S. citizen who is also an enemy combatant.”

The only problem with the Journal editorial and McCain’s remarks is that Mr. Holder kept trying to dodge Senator Ted Cruz’s clear and concise question of whether it is constitutional for this government to drone strike an American citizen, within our borders, for example, sitting in a café, that poses no immediate threat. Rather than just affirming the unconstitutionality of such an act, Mr. Holder chose to keep insisting that they would never do that., saying, ” It’s hard to imagine when that would ever occur.” Hardly the correct answer. I, for one, take Attorney General Holder at his word. He has, after all, proven himself to be an honest and forthright individual ( eg: fast and furious). Right!

And who, Mr. editorial writer, shall be the judge (jury and executioner) of exactly who is a domestic enemy combatant? This President? Some unnamed, faceless bureaucrat?

If a U.S. citizen, on American soil, was deemed to be an enemy combatant, why would the police or FBI not take him into custody and try him in court, asrand-paul-cspan2 is constitutional? You know, like they are going to do with the non-U.S. citizen, Osama Bin Laden’s terrorist son-in-law.

And as for that fossil, John McCain’s mocking assertion regarding a drone strike on Jane Fonda; she was not on American soil. She was in Vietnam giving aid and comfort to the enemy, which is not within her constitutional rights. I agree, she should not have been droned, technology at the time aside. She should have been brought back to the United States and tried for treason.

All these ridiculous side shows are just that; side shows. At the heart of this issue, for Senator Paul and the others who stood by him, is the reckless behavior of this administration. Obama and his minions believe they can do anything they wish, just daring someone to stop them. Finally, someone dared to do just that.

As for Senators McCain, Graham and the other old farts of the so-called republican party; they see, with this one brave act (the filibuster) a possible changing of the guard, and it scares the crap out of them.

If Senator Paul had spent his 13 hours in relative anonymity, none of the RINO’s would have their respective panties in a bunch.  It would hardly have been given a mention.ted-cruz

But, as we all know, that is not what occurred. Senator Paul became a conservative rock star overnight, literally. He has become the talk of the town, or nation. His status in conservative circles, has skyrocketed. And why? Because someone finally stood up to the democrats and more importantly, the establishment republicans. He, as a United States Senator, just decided to do it. He didn’t feel the need to clear it with daddy McCain first.

Mike_LeeTo make sure his word got out to more people than he could imagine, he appeared on all three of the conservative heavy-hitters radio shows; Limbaugh, Beck and Hannity and their multi- millions of listeners.. That surely rubbed salt in McCain’s wounds, for he would never dare to appear on either Rush’s or Glenn’s programs. I believe he hates Limbaugh and Beck as much as Obama does.

The McCain, Karl Rove, Bill Kristol, mushy middle-of-the-road wing of the republican party can ill afford a group of upstart young conservatives gaining popularity. These young bucks must be slapped down, and fast. If they gain too much popularity and real conservative voters begin to believe in them, the old guard will be sent out to pasture, along with all their advisors.

Thank you Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, et al.