Two-Faced Speaker

Having said all of that, there are people who are in limbo. These are kids who know no other country, who were brought here by their parents and don't know another home. And so I really do believe there that there needs to be a legislative solution.

Paul Ryan, Speaker of the House

Yet again, the speaker is showing his true colors.  When President Obama put forth the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) as legislation in 2012, the Congress - notably the House - shot it down.  Despite lacking any legislation, Obama directed the executive agencies to enforce immigration law as if DACA had passed.  Now that President Trump is proposing to enforce the laws as the Congress has written them and past presidents have signed them, Ryan has an about face.  Oh, he was only too happy to let Obama ignore the law while he could claim the moral high ground.  He was just fooling the rubes in flyover country.  It looks more and more like the two parties have been engaged in Kabuki theater, giving the impression that they oppose one another when they have really been working in concert.

 

Never trust a politician.

An Anti-Establishment Year

Speaker Paul Ryan finds himself in a competitive race for reelection against Paul Nehlen.  The last time a Speaker of the House lost reelection was when Tom Foley was unseated during the Republican Revolution of 1994.  Before that, you have to go back to the Civil War!  Ryan was a rising star among conservative Republicans, beloved for his plans to balance the budget and his excellent debate with the president about Obamacare before it was passed.  There was a reason he was selected as the VP candidate for the notably squishy Mitt Romney.  When Boehner the Doormat stepped down from the Speakership, there was hope that maybe, just maybe, the Republicans would start to use the power of the purse to curtail Obama's extraconstitutional activities.  Nope!  Here is yet another establishment politician who lives safely behind Secret Service agents and towering walls telling us to stop nagging about immigration.  Paul Nehlen had something to say about that:

Paul Ryan, if you will not build a border wall for America, then I am asking you to tear down your wall. If you will not build a wall to honor the mothers and fathers of the dead, if you will not build a wall to protect our children, then, sir, you should tear down your wall and show everyone that you will live under the same conditions as they do.

The base has repeatedly tried to tell their representatives what they want done, providing landslide victories in 2010 and 2014, switching both houses of Congress from the Democrats to the Republicans and yet nothing has changed.  Repeatedly, the Republicans have said that they cannot do anything without the presidency.  Have they not read the Constitution that the swore to uphold?  Congress has the power of the purse.  No money can be spent without their consent.  The base was furious how Boehner repeatedly rolled over for whatever the president wanted.  Ryan has proved no different.  What was the point of the victories in 2010 and 2014?  Moreover, why should the voters 'trust' that it would have finally gone their way if only they had chosen JEB or Rubio?  The Republican establishment has failed to deliver for too long and the trust is gone.  Is it any wonder that Donald Trump won the nomination?

Racism?

Speaker Ryan has described a statement by Donald Trump as textbook racism.  No equivocating, no offering of mitigating circumstances, just racism.  This is the presidential nominee of his party.  I have no knowledge of the Trump University lawsuit and that is irrelevant to my point.  Some years ago, a judicial nominee said this:

"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion."

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor

Is that racist?  Maybe sexist?  She is Latina and that make her better.  How about this one:

But she is a typical white person, who, if she sees somebody on the street that she doesn't know, you know, there's a reaction that's been bred in our experiences that don't go away and that sometimes come out in the wrong way, and that's just the nature of race in our society.

Barack Obama regarding his grandmother

I can just imagine how well that would have gone if a white politician had said 'typical black person.'  All these years later, we would still be watching the clip whenever that politician was in the news.  Here is what Trump said:

“He is a Mexican. We're building a wall between here and Mexico. The answer is he is giving us very unfair rulings -- rulings that people can't even believe.”

Donald Trump on Judge Gonzalo Curiel

Based on how President Obama and Justice Sotomayor view race, Trump is making a valid point.  Obama and Sotomayor think that race leads to biases, either for good or ill.  Trump is agreeing with them.  But is there really a reason to suspect Judge Curiel?  Yes.  He is a member of The Race Lawyers of California, that race being Latino and Chicano.  Oh, that should be La Raza, not The Race.  Sorry, shouldn't have translated that bit.  You show me the Caucasian Lawyers Association and tell me that wouldn't be considered a branch of the KKK.  Race is in the name!  No, it is not affiliated with the National Council of the Race, er... La Raza but it is an exclusionary club.  Isn't that bad?

That is not how it is supposed to be.  Justice is blindfolded for a reason.  The law, as applied by judges, should be indifferent to the races of the litigants.  Though it is difficult to achieve, a judge should seek to be impartial.  People are rarely impartial, especially in matters that interest them.  I could be amazingly impartial in judging baseball because I have no interest in it.  Economic theory?  Sorry, I'd have to recuse myself because I have very strong opinions and have already made up my mind.  Former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, himself a man of Mexican descent, said that Trump has a point.

Debt Crisis Ignored by Democrats

I check the US Debt Clock (link in the left column) about once a week.  I first learned of it in November of 2009, when US debt broke $12 trillion, per citizen debt was $39,000, and per taxpayer debt was $111,000.  Things are much worse now:

• US National Debt: $15.7 trillion (source: US Treasury)
• Gross Debt to GDP Ratio: 104% (US Treasury)
• Debt per citizen: $50,827 (US Treasury)
• Debt per Taxpayer: $139,890 (US Treasury; Federal Reserve)
• Budget Deficit: $1.27 trillion (Congressional Budget Office)
• Net Interest on the Debt: $225 billion a year (US Treasury)
• Social Security Liability: $15.8 trillion (Federal Reserve)
• Prescription Drug Liability: $21 trillion (Federal Reserve)
• Medicare Liability: $83 trillion (Federal Reserve)
• US Unfunded Liabilities: $120 trillion (Federal Reserve)
• Liability per Taxpayer: $1,052,598 (Federal Reserve)

These are dire numbers that don't include a fully implemented Obamacare.  The anemic economy, high unemployment, and expanded use of social services make the situation that much worse.  VP nominee Paul Ryan proposed a plan to bring this under control, making spending sustainable.  He has been savaged as a radical and extremist by President Obama and the Democrats.  The President has proposed raising taxes on those making $250K or more a year, which might sate the class warriors but will do nothing for the debt crisis.

According to the numbers, my 6 week-old sons are each $51K in hock and it will get vastly worse when they become taxpayers: $1.2 million.  None of these social programs will survive long enough for them to benefit; in fact, on the current trajectory, they won't survive for me to benefit.  They will pay for them though, through high taxes or a crippled economy.

A Tale of Two Resumes

But Ryan’s Washington experience is also light, at least for a potential President—which, after all, is the main job description of a Vice-President. Ryan has worked as a think-tank staffer and Congressman, but he’s never been in charge of a large organization, and he has little experience with foreign policy.

The New Yorker

This floors me.  Ryan has been in Washington for 14 years but is 'light' for a VP.  Obama had been in Washington for two years and had been in the Illinois State Senate for 7 years before that but was President material.  Really?  As far as qualifications, Ryan has vastly more Washington experience than Obama had and has been the chairman for the House Budget Committee, considered one of the high positions in the House.  By contrast, Obama was chairman of no committees during his tenure in the Senate.  Somehow, I suspect the New Yorker gave high praise to Obama's lesser credentials even though he was on the top of the ticket.

The article goes on to note a weakness is that "Ryan has no significant private-sector experience."  Again, you must be joking.  Ryan's private sector experience is certainly equivalent to Obama's almost non-existent work history.  This is like complaining that Eisenhower didn't choose a fellow military man or Clinton didn't pick a governor.  Isn't diversity (of experience) a good thing?  Romney has plenty of private sector and gubernatorial experience so a legislator ads to the ticket.  By contrast, Senator Obama chose another senator as his running mate giving the ticket no executive or private sector experience and the results of that choice are in: 42 months of 8% or higher unemployment and 4 consecutive budget deficits over a trillion dollars.

Looking at legislation, Ryan has submitted a budget that passed in the House, which admittedly is run by his party.  Obama submitted a budget that failed 99-0 in the Senate, which is run by his party.  Ryan has offered a plan to avert the fiscal catastrophe (think Greece) that looms and Obama's response has been to demonize Ryan while offering no alternative plan.

The article reminds me why I seldom read the New Yorker.