In this episode of the Conservative Conscience, Daniel blows up every myth of the Left about an affirmative right to immigrate and violate our national sovereignty. Daniel goes through the history of immigration law and notes that it is at the core of our foundation that a sovereign nation can exclude anyone for any reason or place any conditions on those here who have not yet become citizens.
Daniel takes conservatives to task for cowering in the face of mob rule. If we have come to a point where we can’t even temporarily suspend immigration from a place like Somalia during a time of out of control terrorism, then we are destined to become Europe.
Moreover, the courts are setting a terrible precedent by violating 200 years of the most settled case law – that the political branches of government have full authority over immigration. Courts have absolutely no jurisdiction and aliens who are not on our soil (airports don’t count) have no right to judicial review. If we don’t rein in the courts, they will prevent us from dealing with illegal immigrants as well.
“It is an accepted maxim of international law that every sovereign nation has the power, as inherent in sovereignty, and essential to self-preservation, to forbid the entrance of foreigners within its dominions, or to admit them only in such cases and upon such conditions as it may see fit to prescribe.” Nishimura Ekiu v. United States, 142 US 651 (1892).
[“the right of a nation to expel or deport foreigners who have not been naturalized, or taken any steps towards becoming citizens of the country, rests upon the same grounds, and is as absolute and unqualified as the right to prohibit and prevent their entrance into the country.”] Fong Yue Ting v. United States, 149 US 707 (1893).
What better authority on this subject than Justice Robert Jackson, the famous Nuremberg prosecutor who was a champion of due process rights (he wrote the dissent in Korematsu v. United States, the Japanese internment case) and regarded as one of the greatest writers of his time? Here is what he had to say: “Due process does not invest any alien with a right to enter the United States, nor confer on those admitted the right to remain against the national will.” Shaughnessy v. Mezei, 345 US 222-223 (1953) (Jackson, J., dissenting).
The big day has arrived. Republicans now have possession of the ball. But does that mean we have already scored? Absolutely not! Now is when the work begins.
In this episode of the Conservative Conscience, Daniel runs through some of the major issues that conservative must confront immediately and gives an update and an outlook on where each one stands. From repealing Obamacare and ending the Iran deal to rescinding Obama’s amnesty, reforming refugee resettlement, draining the Obama personnel from executive departments, and nominating the best SCOTUS pick, conservatives have many challenges. In some cases, the prognosis is pretty grim unless the grassroots rise up and demand adherence to the campaign promises.
The main job of conservative media and the grassroots is to ensure that we don’t get distracted with nonsensical issues in the media while liberals rack up real policy victories. Now is not the time to whine about the media or Democrats; now is the time to get our house in order and stand for what’s right.
With Republicans continuing to echo Democrat talking points and premises on health care and many other issues, Daniel asks an unsettling question in this episode of the Conservative Conscience: are there any conservatives left in politics? Rather than being emboldened by the electoral mandate, Republicans always move to the left when they are in power, and some early indications suggest that this time is no different.
In confirmation hearing after confirmation hearing, the cabinet nominees and GOP senators continuously echoed, accepted, and validated even the most extreme Democrat premise on major issues; from Iran and Obamacare to transgenderism and global warming. Additionally, Daniel talks about some of the disturbing things he’s hearing about the transition and why it portends more of the same failed tepid republicanism unless the grassroots rise up and demand more. Don’t hope for change, demand it and ensure it.
“Liberals have successfully moved the entire political landscape and the contours of acceptable political discourse so far to the left that even when they lose they still win.”
“Democrats have become so extreme that it’s easy for Republicans to be one or two tranches to the right but still well within deep liberal and destructive territory.”
“The time for being “not Obama” or “at least better than Hillary” are over. Now is the time to stand up and be counted and declare what we affirmative believe in and strive for.”
Are we really draining the swamp or is the swamp draining our resolve?
In this episode of the Conservative Conscience, Daniel goes through a list of disturbing observations this week from Congress, Trump, and some of his cabinet picks, that demonstrates we might not move in a fundamentally different direction on some of the most critical issues. From social engineering in the military and the Iran deal to Obamacare and Israel policy, there are a lot of disturbing signs that Republicans are taking Obama-era policies as a legitimate baseline and will not fulfill their promises to wipe his presidency clean.
What is evident from these observations is that we don’t have a personnel problem. Even good people in this system will feel the pressure to never think outside the broken box. We need to systemically reform our entire system of government and we should not wait for Democrats to win back power to pursue some of the long-term reforms we need.
In this passionate episode of the Conservative Conscience, Daniel lays out the source of the problem with GOP reluctance to fully repeal Obamacare. At its core, they are making up procedural excuses that don’t exist and have no understanding of free markets. Worse, their political barometer as to what the public wants on health care is completely broken.
Daniel blasts the entire premise of the mindless mantra: “repeal and replace” and demonstrates how it has morphed into bait-and-switch. Anyone who understands the source of the problem with health care and how Obamacare exacerbated that problem into complete insolvency would know that we don’t need to replace Obamacare at all. We need to repeal, reform, and restore the free market. There are a number of good free market ideas, a number of which are explained in this episode, but the premise that they must be in place before we repeal Obamacare or serve to supplement the core goals of Obamacare is false.
Republicans have fundamentally adopted the Democrat philosophy on health care – pursuing the elusive and utopian goal of universal coverage at the expense of lowering costs. In reality, the only political option that would actually lower costs is full and unconditional repeal of the insurance regulations. Repeal that is contingent on replace is not repeal at all. Only after the fire is put out can we go a step further and roll back some of the anti-market forces – both in health insurance and on the supply side of health care – that existed even before Obamacare. Daniel teases a number of these ideas at the end of the podcast.
Repeal, reform, and restore – not repeal and replace. Understanding that distinction is the lynchpin to this battle.
“We need to "replace" Obamacare before repealing it the same way we need to replace the ancillary warmth some people derive from an arson before the fire is extinguished.”
“At its core, the problem with health care is that we regulate it into insolvency, drive up costs, then break the budget on subsidizing the higher prices, which in turn raises the prices even more and engenders and even greater need for subsidization – a complete circuitous death spiral of insolvency.”
“Obamacare stepped on the gas pedal in terms of the cycle of regulations/mandates and subsidies. When Republicans talk about “replacing” Obamacare, they intend to accept the basic premise of mandates and subsidies, albeit with a pale pastel distinction.”
“The word “actuarial” is mentioned 63 times in Obamacare. The law literally prohibits actuarially solvent plans. What is so hard and politically risky about Republicans simply repealing that prohibition – the heart and soul of Obamacare?”
Why is it that Republicans can’t understand fully repealing Obamacare is a winning issue? Why are they too scared to even cut funding to the UN and the PLO?
In this episode of the Conservative Conscience, Daniel uses this week’s legislative betrayals as examples to demonstrate why Republicans always betray their topline campaign promises. 1) they don’t understand or have knowledge of constitutional conservative principles and free market policies; 2) they often don’t believe in it; 3) even if they believe and understand them, their political barometer – the understanding of what is and is not a winning issue – is completely broken; 4) the legislative process is so complex and “inside baseball” that they can manipulate voters into thinking they are doing the opposite of what they are actually enacting.
This is the reason why Republicans are scared to repeal Obamacare in a meaningful way. And this is how they are able to fool us.
Also, Daniel explains how Republicans were too scared to go on offense even against the UN and the PLO this week, opting to pass a resolution that gave Democrats cover and essentially codified Kerry’s obsession with the illogical “two state solution” into U.S. policy. If we can’t defund the PLO, then what can we do? Yet, given their broken political barometer, Republicans plan to bring legislation to the floor punishing the countries that voted for the UN resolution (such as Senegal and New Zealand) but not the PLO itself!
This is why conservatives can’t hope for change this year or assume there will be change. They must fight for it and demand change.
“There are so many smart stupid people in politics because they can’t break free of the existing paradigm and are stuck in an intellectual ghetto.”
“You can’t fight if you don’t have a proper political barometer, you can’t have a proper political barometer if you don’t believe in the right things, and you can’t believe if you don’t understand the issue.”
Donald Trump was on the money when he recognized that the ethics office House Republicans attempted to defang was unfair and unaccountable, but at the same time it was a dumb way to prioritize the expending of their political capital.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">With all that Congress has to work on, do they really have to make the weakening of the Independent Ethics Watchdog, as unfair as it</p>— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/816298944456232960">January 3, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
In the first 2017 episode of the Conservative Conscience, Daniel explains why Republicans were right to gut the Pelosi-era, unaccountable ethics office, but at the same time the optics of the way they did it were cringe-worthy. Republicans must remember that they will need to employ legitimate strong-arm tactics to save the country by repealing Obamacare, reforming immigration and refugee resettlement, and reclaiming power from the unelected judiciary. Why expend it on an issue that is nearly impossible to message to their constituents? Ultimate, it would have been better for Republicans to make these changes more gradually and in broad daylight.
Nonetheless, on the substance of the Office of Congressional Ethics, the Republican majority was correct. As bad as corrupt members are, the corruption of falsely accusing people of corruption without due process is even worse. Ultimately, it is up to the FBI to investigate criminal charges and up to the members themselves – led by the standing Ethics Committee – to police violations of House rules and ethics. That is why we have elections.
The media is being very dishonest, evincing the notion that this office is somehow enshrined into our laws. It was in fact created not by statue but by the very same House rules process Republicans are using now. The unelected body stocked with progressives worked with left-wing groups to try people in the court of public opinion without the accuser having to divulge his name and without informing the member of the investigation. Even members of Congress deserve the right to defend themselves and be afforded due process when being investigated by their political enemies on the taxpayer dime. The existing structure of the Ethics Committee in the Senate and what used to be in place before Pelosi in the House afforded basic due process rights such as witnesses, right to counsel, etc. to members.
With that said, it would be one thing if Republicans took a principled stance on other more consequential policy issues. But if this turns out to be their only bold stance of the month – while shirking their responsibility to fully repeal Obamacare and defund the UN – this will prove once again that they have not changed from their modus operandi as the stupid party. Ultimately, Republicans were forced to retreat amidst backlash, as always.
Finally, Daniel discusses some of his upcoming articles detailing a positive conservative agenda that, unlike what Republican just did, is actually broadly popular with the public.