More Statesmen, Fewer Politicians

“A CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER”

by Joseph DeMaio, ©2019

(Jan. 23, 2019) — Soon, Petulant Pelosi and her apparatchiks will bore through the Earth’s mantle and enter the realm of magma as they dig their juvenile temper tantrum pit deeper and deeper.  We now learn that she has basically locked President Trump out of the House Chamber by disinviting him to deliver the State of the Union Address to the Congress and the American people there.  To be precise, she has sent him a letter stating that she will not allow a vote to come to the House floor for the customary “joint resolution” usually preceding a State of the Union Address.  Even as this post is being composed, the Internet is abuzz with “fake news” that Pelosi “Cancels the State of the Union.”

Ummm… not so fast.  While the Shrieker of the House presents a clear and present danger to the existing “state of the union,” her childish – an odd but apt modifier when applied to someone who is nearly 80 years old… – snits have nothing to do with “cancelling” President Trump’s constitutional duty to deliver to the Congress his assessment of the nation’s status, in his own words and on his own terms.  Memo to Pelosi and her sycophants: there is no requirement of the Constitution that a “joint resolution” precede the delivery of the SOTU address.

The Constitution provides in Article 2, Section 3, only that the President shall, “from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union….”  And, as correctly noted here, that portion of the Constitution further states that the President may, “on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses….”  See N.L.R.B. v. Noel Canning, __ U.S. __, 134 S. Ct. 2550 (2014).   That language would seem to indicate that, even if Shrieker Pelosi adjourned the House and sent everyone home, President Trump could immediately “convene both Houses, or either of them” and direct them to appear at a McDonalds or Chick-fil-A in downtown D.C. (or even here) to listen to the SOTU.

The foregoing hypotheticals, each a stretch, are interposed simply to demonstrate how small, petty, adolescent, intransigent and, yes, egomaniacally stupid politicians who have resided in the toxic bubble of the District of Columbia for nearly one-third of a century can become, in fact, clear and present dangers to the state of the union.  It needs to stop.

A good “start” for that “stop” effort would be for Pelosi (see…, no pejorative modifier…) to down a bunch of dark roast coffee, inhale some smelling salts, swallow hard… and tell President Trump that she has decided to “turn the page” on their relationship.  Trump should respond like a president, not like an adversary, by accepting her offer and delivering the SOTU in the House on January 29.  He might even consider easing up on his use of the term “wall,” while still making it clear that, one way or another, a structure of that nature is coming to the southern border.

Ft. Sumter

Do not hold your breath for that series of events to take place any time soon, because it is painfully clear that Pelosi’s hatred for President Trump exceeds by several factors of magnitude her love and respect for the United States or its safety, well-being and prosperity.  Lamentably, what we are now witnessing is not a great deal unlike an updated version of the lead-up to the First Civil War.  A Second Civil War would be – let us say it together –: not good.

To quote an anonymous (but, trust me, reliable source…), what is needed now, more than perhaps at any time in recent history, is more statesmen and fewer politicians.

One Response to "More Statesmen, Fewer Politicians"

  1. marlene   Thursday, January 24, 2019 at 10:28 AM

    Just like the “palestinian” terrorists, Pelosi ‘hates Trump more than she loves’ our country.!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.