Y’all may have noticed I haven’t brought up Trump’s “temporary” reprieve for furloughed federal dead weight yet. Mostly, that’s because I’m of two minds about it. On the one hand: yeah, it surely does look like a cave from at least one angle; Trump was getting nowhere fast with Stretch Pelosi and Chuck “The S’faccim” Schumer, who are standing fast without betraying the least hint of give. On the other hand:
Oh please. Lighten up, Francises – and many of you are my pals. But you need this bucket of cold water. What happened Friday doesn’t matter.
Not at all.
Well, that’s not quite accurate. It could matter, if you decide to keep doing exactly what Nancy Pelosi wants you to do, freaking out. That’s why she employed her brilliant stratagem of just saying “No” – since you’re upset, let me point out that this is sarcasm.
It wasn’t brilliant – it was obvious. She was counting on you to set up as a do-or-die test for Trump over something where she and Chuck Schumer held a veto. Thanks to Paul Ryan and the Fredocons, the House belongs to the Democrats, and the Senate can’t pass anything without 60 votes and we have 52 plus Mitt. So Trump can’t build a wall without their OK, and the emergency power thing is no panacea – it will last about 30 seconds before some Obama judge enjoins it.
You were going to let your support for Trump be entirely contingent on the Democrats’ approval? What were you thinking?
So we lost this round? So what? We’ve lost before, and we’ll lose again. This is for the long-haul folks. It’s a marathon, not a sprint. There’s no magic wand where one term of Vitamin D cures a century of progressive pathology.
I’m not ready to even accept that we’ve lost the battle – let’s see what happens in three weeks. But what was the better plan for the shutdown skirmish? Keep it going? Friday morning was bringing reports of airport shutdowns. That might have made it real to the Normals. See, we political types were watching and caring, while they weren’t. But it looked like they were about to start. Maybe Trump’s instincts, which you have to admit have been remarkable (Just ask Felonia Milhous von Pantsuit after you pump a few cups of joe into her lie-hole to sober her up), told him it was time to cut his losses. Remember Alinsky Rule No. 7?
“A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.”
Did any of you see any indication at all that the shutdown tactic was about to deliver us victory, that it was not becoming a drag? Me neither. Cut your losses. Pull back here, counter-attack there.
So calm down. Don’t be manipulated. If you want the wall, keep backing the only possible politician who has any chance at all of delivering one. Will he? Maybe. Maybe not. But if you don’t support him, your chances drop to zero.
We lost a fight. We have not lost the war. We only lose if we do what Nancy and Chuck want and turn on the President.
I’m inclined to think Kurt is right. Trump may be thinking that, after re-opening the government for three weeks, Pelosi et al will have provided him with absolutely indisputable proof of their mulish intransigence, their unwillingness to compromise in any way on securing the borders. That would free him to fulfill his threat to declare an emergency, then use military funding to at least partially fund the wall.
As Kurt says, that maneuver will immediately be kiboshed by some liberal judge, and the courtroom back-and-forthing will drag on for the remainder of Trump’s lame-duck term, probably. It ain’t gonna get anybody a wall; I remain steadfast in my belief that there ain’t gonna be one, period, no matter what anybody tries to do. But it might serve to shore up Trump’s core support should he seek reelection, at least. Back to the first hand, Ace uncorked some fairly astute analysis in the immediate wake of Friday’s reopening announcement. He covers a fair bit of ground—read it all if you haven’t already—concluding with this:
5. Trump can’t back down or he will not be reelected. But on the other hand, Nancy Pelosi can’t back down or she’ll lose her majority.
So this is pointless. Both sides know this.
The only thing that’s going to resolve this issue is Trump declaring a national emergency and building a wall using his inherent and statutory powers.
The only useful part of the shutdown, and it’s barely useful, is making a case to a Hawaiian judge that Congress is dysfunctional and cannot act in the face of an actual emergency and therefore Trump’s has plausible justification to declare an emergency within the meaning of the statutes.
Actually, I very much doubt that that’s the conclusion likely to be drawn by the kind of “Hawaiian judge” Ace is talking about. That type isn’t interested in whether Trump has “plausible justification” or not, anymore than he’s going to care what the law says, what the Constitution says, or what his proper role here might or might not be. He’s going to be concerned with one thing only, and that’s what will determine his course. His “deliberations” won’t be over what the law and precedent require him to do, but to contrive a pretext for doing what he already wants to do. That’s how liberal jurisprudence works.
Ultimately, the dispute over whether the US will have a well-guarded border and properly-managed immigration, or chaotic open borders enabling an unrestrained invasion of unassimilable aliens, is Exhibit A illustrating the unbridgeable political chasm in this country. As with so many of the other issues dividing Heritage Americans and the commie Left, there is no reconciling the two positions—no fair or workable compromise possible, desirable, or imaginable. There can be the one, or there can be the other. Nothing else. How anybody can expect America to continue as one nation like this is well beyond my ken.