State if the Union – Nothing New - GOP Rebuttal – the “New Republican Congress” Joni Delivers

Watching the State of the Union, via C-Span, CBS and Fox (different camera angles), one got the impression the man who would campaign no more, was campaigning nonetheless. The reference to working with Congress were weighed with threats to veto Bill that had not yet materialized, plans to take from the “rich” and give to everyone else, and taking credit for an oil and gas price that had nothing to do with the Government at all, sums up the President’s speech.

The redeeming feature of the evening was one Joni Ernst who gave the rebuttal. Politico gives an overview of points, and speaks a bit about who Earnst is and where she fits in the GOP. (Politico) However, watching one saw a woman who was practiced at the delivery, yet somehow came across as sincere. The catchphrase – “New Republican Congress” was akin to a rallying cry to those conservatives and independents that were looking for some movement in the body that could write all the legislation is cared to but nothing would have gotten past the former Majority Leader, Harry Reid’s desk.

Paraphrasing – “We are here to work for you, you elected us, we hear you”…it was a refreshing change from promises never kept, and costs not disclosed. Watching Joni, one has to understand she is a soldier, a mother, a wife, and now a Senator, from humble beginnings, and she states that more clearly than anyone seen in a long while. In other words, Senator Earnst is not so much a politician but one of us.

Joni and her likeminded “New Republican Congress” may well serve the nation better than any previous. It remains to be seen, however, from bored to interested, that’s the way the evening went.

The Clinton – Obama Transition – Spitting Into the Winds of Hate and Division

The Washington Post has an interesting article regarding the transition of power from President Obama to Hillary Clinton entitled: “The tricky Obama-Clinton handoff begins”. The gist in a nutshell: How Hillary Clinton can assume power from Obama and maintain the same policies as he has in place now, while driving a wedge between the American Public and the newly minted Republican Congress, and at the same time keeping a massive distance between herself and the President. (Washington Post)

Perhaps more aggravating than any concept of a dynasty of political elite assuming they are going to just take the power, pre-election, are the comments made within the article by those in “power” in the DNC.

“President Obama’s legacy is now entirely dependent on the election of a Democratic successor as president who will protect and extend it, not demolish it,” said David Brock, a Clinton ally and chairman of the pro-Democratic super PAC American Bridge. “Should she run, they both now have a common enemy in a Republican Congress that will define politics through 2016.”

(Washington Post)

Common enemy – here we go again, years of backbiting and accusations of us vs. them in a never ending quagmire that is Washington DC and those that believe they “own” the people.

Frankly, whether it be a dynastic figure from the Republicans (think Bush 1, Bush II, the Return of Bush), or a dinosaur from the Democrats, those types of elitists no longer should hold sway with the general public. Those would the people who have hired them.

Should there be political disagreements with sound discourse? Absolutely, but slogans and premeditated malaise is not going to be a welcome respite for the citizens- rather, it was this type of partisan division and the sense of entitlement and ownership among the political elite, that led to more individuals staying home due to sheer depressions, and those voting, having had enough.

They never learn.

Favorite part of this entire article is the point made that no matter who follows Obama as the next Democrat President, rest assured, they will be in lockstep with his policies.

Political Party annihilation for Dummies – should be a new “how to” for those who feel they are above it all.

The Washington Power Struggle – Ted Cruz and Mark Rubio – Dangerous to the Status Quo – To Both Major Political Parties.

Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio - Serving Public Contrary to Party Leadership - image Latino Fox News

When one thinks of the center of power in the United States, one instantly identifies Washington, D.C. the wealthiest City in the nation, the home to the President, Senators and Congressman, and their lobbyists. There are the political party leaders, and then the rank and file members – who are expected to do whatever is necessary to keep everyone at their peak of personal power, and when one member rocks the boat, there’s hell to pay.

The Republican’s now have two such members in their ranks – Ted Cruz, Senator from Texas, and Marco Rubio, Senator from Florida – both Hispanics and both staunch Conservatives.

First, Sen. Rubio, who delivered the Republican response to the State of the Union in in February, 2013. (Link includes full text of speech - NPR). Apparently, Rubio became thirsty and grabbed a bottle of water off camera – which quickly developed into Bottled-Watergate via a media hailstorm suggesting that one drink would stymie any future political ambition possibly held by the Florida Senators. In an op-ed by conservative columnist, Cal Thomas, in Newsday Rubio, and his Senate counterpart, Ted Cruz of Texas are portrayed as a “double threat”, first to the Democrats as they see Rubio communicating with Hispanics (which, said minority are considered “owned” by that political party), therefore, a sip of water becomes a full-blown career ender. (With Ted Cruz, it is also about his connection to the Hispanic Community, however, as Thomas suggests the Democrats have a vested interest in eliminating Cruz, not necessarily, it is more likely the Republican Leadership- see Red State on Cruz which follows.) The import of the State of the Union and the Response for the American Public is not as pivotal as it was in decades past – therefore one would imagine it is more about power, controlling power, and consolidating minorities in order for those that hold the power in D.C. to maintain that power.)

Background on the State of the Union

The first televised State of the Union was introduced by Democrat President, Harry Truman, and televised in 1947 (History.com), eventually drawing huge audiences, up to three quarters of the adult population watched on the new medium of television by the 1960’s. (History Channel, The Presidents). As the televised State of the Union developed over the decades, a response by the opposing political party was added. in 1966. (Senate.gov/artandhistory) The last State of the Union in February, drew 35 Millions, (Washington Post), which indicates that fewer U.S. citizens are interested in what the President, or the opposition might have to say - there’s also alternative cable channels.

On Cruz and his being a thorn in the side of Republicans see Erick Erickson of Red State’s take on that subject. Erickson outlines the business as usual in D.C.; the party leadership assigning lobbyist and allocating committee seats to newcomers in order to bring them around to a status point of view. As Ted Cruz is not playing along, therefore, leaks to the press about Cruz are more than likely coming from the left of center Republican Leadership. (Think McConnell, McCain and Graham). Red State).

When a politician who’s ideals outweigh their commitment to power, one of two things happen, either they become part of the party establishment after a period of time, they face a primary in the next term, or they decide one term in Washington is more than enough (Read: A National Party No More” by Zell Miller, one term Senator from the State of Georgia.)

Although one might not politically agree with either the Republican Party or the Democrat Party, the fact that our elected officials, who are elected by the people of their districts or states based upon their individuality rather than party (one would hope), once elected, those members are expected to become part of the “machine” that is Washington. This occurs in both parties (See Rahm Emmanuel and the Blue Dog Democrats), and does little but continue the partisan politics that pervade both Houses of Congress. Moreover, nothing actually gets accomplished other than the growth of wealth and consolation of personal power in the current two-party systems. It is refreshing when a member of either House, goes “off the reservation” and openly revolts by doing exactly what they said they would do – so far.