As anyone who knows me knows, I have no love loss for the Republican Party Establishment, but even I just assumed that a majority of House Republicans would vote against the omnibus spending bill, due to the outcry of the base, and it would pass because of the votes of a majority of the Dems. It passed 316 – 113 overall and 150 – 95 among the Republican caucus. Good grief! Even I underestimated the perfidy of the modern GOP. And you can’t just blame this on the GOP “Establishment.” 150 of your House members is the rank-and-file. Every Republican yea voter should be primaried.
Weaver’s laws: 1. To advance conservative goals, often one must oppose conventional conservative positions.
2. Conservatives share some common interest with the libertarian-right but also with the socialist-left. And we oppose one another in other areas.
3. Mass immigration is unaffordable if employers are forced to pay workers well.
4. Americans, especially nonwhite Americans, will only tolerate a great wealth gap if their voting rights are rescinded.
5. A wealth imbalance serves big government interests by creating demand for big government “solutions”.
6. It is better to correct the wealth imbalance sooner rather than later. More damage (immigration) will be done if waiting later.
7. Between guns and butter, butter is better. And the police state is less likely without perpetual war.
In a recent interview, Bernie Sanders defends the nation-state (in a relative sense) and stands athwart open-borders:
Open borders? No, that’s a Koch brothers proposal.
Of course. That’s a right-wing proposal, which says essentially there is no United States.
It would make everybody in America poorer —you’re doing away with the concept of a nation state, and I don’t think there’s any country in the world that believes in that. If you believe in a nation state or in a country called the United States or UK or Denmark or any other country, you have an obligation in my view to do everything we can to help poor people. What right-wing people in this country would love is an open-border policy. Bring in all kinds of people, work for $2 or $3 an hour, that would be great for them. I don’t believe in that. I think we have to raise wages in this country, I think we have to do everything we can to create millions of jobs.
You know what youth unemployment is in the United States of America today? If you’re a white high school graduate, it’s 33 percent, Hispanic 36 percent, African American 51 percent. You think we should open the borders and bring in a lot of low-wage workers, or do you think maybe we should try to get jobs for those kids?
I think from a moral responsibility we’ve got to work with the rest of the industrialized world to address the problems of international poverty, but you don’t do that by making people in this country even poorer.
This is yet further proof that the libertarians and finance-types are a major enemy of conservatives at this time. The conservative-libertarian alliance applies only to foreign policy, the NSA, gun rights, Department of Education, states rights, and similar specific areas. Conservatives also share common interests with the “socialist left” in other specific areas.
Certainly the state and “socialism” are a threat, but reducing immigration is also important. Mass immigration cannot be supported if companies are required to pay workers well.
Republicans who denounce “socialism” tend to support mega “defence” spending and America-last trade while standing weak on immigration. And it has been unions, with all their negatives, that have at least stood for America-first trade.
If we had opposed libertarians back in the 60s, or even the 90s, perhaps we wouldn’t have “lost” America. Paying workers reasonable wages is better than mass immigration.
The coming increased socialism in America is a terrible evil, but it’s an inevitable correction to the wealth imbalance. The sooner the US corrects, the less the damage (immigration) will be.
It is noteworthy that Obama also ran on improving the middle class (including America-first trade), only to exacerbate the wealth gap with immigration, America-last trade, and QE. A wealth imbalance bolsters DC’s power, increases the demand for big government solutions. So, it is advantageous to DC to grab more power in the name of reducing the wealth gap while acting oppositely, blaming Wall Street (or another fall guy), and ever seizing more power to “fix” things.
I don’t necessarily believe in Bernie Sanders, but we’ve seen repeatedly how “centrists” serve Wall Street interests – and on foreign policy, Likud interests. It seems a better gamble to go with the “socialist left” than with centrists of either party. If Trump, Webb, or Santorum can’t win, then Sanders might be the next-best alternative for conservatives.
The House is reportedly going to start voting today on issues leading up to a planned vote on fast track tomorrow. I know I’m biased, but I get the sense that Republican Reps realize that fast track is very unpopular with the base. One way you can tell this is by the number of declared and potential GOP presidential candidates who have recently come out against it. In addition, the people who don’t like it REALLY don’t like it, whereas the people who do support it (other than the fat cats) generally support free trade in theory and just see fast track as a means to an end.
Please contact your Representative today and urge him to vote against fast track. I know the oligarchy usually gets it’s way, but if we make our Reps feel enough heat, maybe we can win this one. Shamefully, the Republicans are the ones who are the biggest problem here, so especially pound the phones if your Rep is a yes leaning Republican.
Obama: I propose to do a lot of stuff that isn’t actually authorized by the Constitution. Good night.