Tea Party Caucus Chairman: GOP Leaders Need To Stop Attacking Conservatives And Start Listening

By: Ginni Thomas / The Daily Caller

Kansas Rep. Tim Huelskamp is one of the most energetic and principled of the 63 Republican freshman elected in 2010, a class that gave the GOP the majority in the House. In this exclusive video interview, Huelskamp offers encouragement to citizens who are feeling America is on the wrong track with weak congressional leadership.

“We are in a town that continues to move down the progressive route of bigger government every day. If we sit by, the president will continue to take over more and more of our economy, more and more of our lives and take away more of our liberties,” he said.

Speaking directly to viewers who may feel like giving up on politics, Huelskamp worries, “If we do nothing, I guarantee, we could lose it all. As Ronald Reagan said, if America falls, where will people escape to?” Did calls and emails about the Speaker vote make any difference? Huelskamp says, “Absolutely, without a doubt!” Citizen engagement and contact “scares the heck out of [elected members in Congress]!”
 
Huelskamp was shocked to hear John Boehner, after being reelected House Speaker, decry citizens who called Congress to urge a no vote on him. In this interview he reports that Boehner said, “Too many people were calling into Washington and beating up on his Members.”

But the congressman thinks this is the essence of self-government. It is not wrong for people to tell their elected members what kind of leadership they want, Hueslkamp thinks. Besides, he recalls, “John Boehner was probably involved in a coup against Speaker Newt Gingrich twenty years ago.”

Now the new chairman of the Tea Party Caucus, one of several conservative enclaves being fortified, hesays, “This town does not listen.”

As for the controversial vote against the speaker this month, he admits “it’s a difficult vote that comes with a lot of intimidation.” The chairman of the House Veterans Affairs committee, Florida Republican Rep. Jeff Miller, let Huelskamp know he was jeopardizing an expected subcommittee chairmanship by announcing his intentions to not vote for Boehner.

Defiant, Huelskamp stood resolute against the threats and pressure tactics, as leadership punished Huelskamp last Congress for voting his conscience by stripping him of two committees. For Huelskamp, the lame duck CRomnibus was among the clues that this Republican leadership was not inclined to stand up to President Obama on principle. “They weren’t going to push conservative principles. They, actually, were pushing back against conservatives!”

Exposing the tactics leadership uses against renegades, Huelskamp said, “So much of it’s about money and campaign contributors.” The leadership puts you on a “do not contribute to” list.

Other power tools leadership use, he said, are threats to withhold funding, denial of committees, subcommittee chairmanships, reduced influence and denial of access to campaign contributors. They refuse to do fundraisers for you, he says, and they will even find primary challengers against you.

Whether or not the newly elected House Republican leadership for the 114th Congress will effectively coalesce, listening to those independent Republicans, like Huelskamp, aligned with the citizens who are clamoring to be heard, based for their frustration with weak leadership and the direction of the country, has yet to be seen.

Iraqi Ambassador to the US: We Must Cleanse Iraq of ISIS

 

Gayle Trotter / Townhall Columnist

[Editor's Note: Gayle Trotter was able to sit down for an interview with Iraq's Ambassador to the United States, for his perspective on the unrest in the Middle East, terrorism, and America's role in fighting ISIS.

Gayle Trotter

Tell me a little bit about your background and how you find yourself in Washington, D.C., as the representative of your country Iraq?

Lukman Faily

My major is in mathematics and computer science so my background was always technical. I worked in various companies in the United Kingdom and worked in IT-related industries, primarily consultancy. I moved on into project management, program management and then into governance and infrastructure projects.

The last two companies I worked for before joining the Iraqi Foreign Service were HP (formerly EDS), and other multi-national companies in the banking sector. I've also been involved since college in Iraqi politics, within the Iraq Diaspora in Manchester in the United Kingdom.

I've long had that connection with student activism, community activism, and political activism. I've always had an interest in Iraq and a focus on the politics of Iraq. The United Kingdom has one of the largest groups of Iraqi Diaspora. That helps because you already have a large community to work with.

In 2009, an opportunity came up for me to move into the Foreign Service as an ambassador, and I was one among about 60 new ambassadors. I was the ambassador to Japan for three years and I've been in D.C. for just over a year and a half.

GT
What role do you see the Americans, who are deployed to Iraq by President Obama in the wake of the ISIS advance, playing with respect to security? The U.S. is being told that these American forces, which number over 2,000 right now, are not engaged in a combat mission. Is that really true or are word games being played in order to disguise what the Americans are really doing there?

LF
No, there is no disguise. There is clarity of narrative or, I would say, even an alignment, a clear alignment, between the Iraqis and the Americans and the coalition in relation to who should be on the battle front, who should be doing the actual fighting and who needs to provide the capabilities to provide the right environment for it. In that sense, I don't see any ambiguity there. The Americans were clear they wanted to leave Iraq since

President Obama's statement in 2008, and he stuck to his commitment to the American people.

The Iraqis, as well, were seeking independence. No status of forces agreement was agreed on. So the troops had to leave by the end of 2011. That took place. Now the security situation has deteriorated. It became clearer in their requirements that they need the U.S. capability to support them in advising, training, equipping, and so on. The United States is our largest partner in the provision of our military capability, whether it's in relation to F-16 jets, Apaches or tanks, and Humvees, or our integrated air defense systems.

Obama's Tax Plan

Rich Galen / Townhall Columnist

 

Not content with overseeing the largest - in terms of both numbers and scope - seat losses by any President in American history during his term, Barack Obama has set his sights on causing potential nominees for his office to have to run against his schemes in 2016.

President Obama's annual State of the Union address (SOTU to Washington, DC based Tweeters, saving 14 characters) is scheduled to be delivered tomorrow night in a joint session of Congress in the House Chamber.

The same geniuses at the White House who concocted the politics and policies that allowed Republicans to gain the largest majority in the House in three generations and to take control of the U.S. Senate by winning a net nine seats in the last election have decided that they can utilize the "bully pulpit" of the Presidency to keep the GOP back on its heels in spite of its large majorities.

The plan began the day after the elections when the President held a press conference to say that he was discounting the whole exercise because only about 36 percent of eligible voters turned out.

"To everyone who voted," Obama said, "I want you to know that I hear you. To the two-thirds of voters who chose not to participate in the process yesterday, I hear you, too."

President Obama and his staff have determined that he and he alone must be the voice of those non-participants. They didn't stay away because of Conservative plots to keep minorities from voting.

They stayed away because neither party - and that includes Obama's Democrats - gave them a reason to spend maybe one hour of the 8,760 hours available to them over the course of a year to vote.

Remember that Obama said during the run up to the elections that even if his name wasn't on the ballot, his "policies are on the ballot. Every single one of them."

Op-ed: 
Sanctions on Iran vs Obama's Pen 
By: Diane Sori

“Congress needs to show patience.” 
 - Obama's words to veto any new sanctions being placed against Iran

In what amounts to a threat...YES a threat...Barack HUSSEIN Obama warned Congress they dare NOT cross him by putting any new sanctions on Iran...the very country who calls America the 'Great Satan'...because he says new sanctions would “undermine” international unity against Iran.

I never knew there was international unity against Iran...did you...didn't think so.

And in his claiming that new sanctions would also prevent or at least delay any deal-in-the-making from being reached to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons, Obama has gone so far as to announce to Congress that he will veto any and all legislation that places sanctions against Iran, and he will do so even though many Democrats are on board with this. And so once again he's bending to the will of Iran and their negotiator, Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, who said that reaching a comprehensive deal depends on Washington showing “good will” towards his country and will happen only if global powers, as in the P5+1 (the five permanent members of the UN Security Council-the U.S., UK, Russia, China, and France-plus Germany), stop pressuring Tehran.

And if they do NOT stop pressuring Tehran and if a sanctions bill does pass Congress, some Iranian lawmakers have threatened they will push their government hard to resume unlimited uranium enrichment.

In fact, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, in an effort to make that threat stick, recently said on Iranian state television that,“If the Western countries want to negotiate with the Islamic Republic of Iran, they must make a political decision, which for some could be difficult, and stop with the pressure.” And Obama, good little islamist that he is, of course will acquiesce and is more than willing to go along with a 'weak' deal...any deal...instead of NO deal at all, ignoring the fact that it would set a dangerous precedence in regards to the issue of nuclear proliferation. And lets NOT forget that he could then also pat his narcissistic self on the back and say to the world, 'see I disarmed Iran.'

So Obama's saying that, “The likelihood of the entire negotiations collapsing is very high if sanctions are reinstated" is just empty words because the current ongoing negotiations are being conducted with Tehran expecting that NO new sanctions would be put in place against them, thus equating to the fact that Obama both acknowledges and cowers in fear to the threats being issued by Iran. Cowering to threats while at the very same time willingly choosing to ignore the fact that Iran will do whatever they damn well please NO matter if deals are reached and put in place or NOT.

And his being threatened and then cowering to Iran afforded Obama the very opportunity he needed to now threaten the new Congress hoping they in turn will cower to him...giving him back, in his eyes alone, a bit of his manhood.

And NOT unexpectedly, British Prime Minister David Cameron...a fellow liberal-in-denial albeit one with an oh so proper English accent...also believes further sanctions would hurt the talks saying new sanctions would, “fracture international unity.” And Cameron truly hopes that the new Republican controlled Congress...a Congress that he's personally lobbied NOT to implement sanctions...will bow to Obama's and his wishes.

But hopefully this new Republican controlled Congress will NOT.

And guess what...imposing further sanctions is actually what's needed...strict crippling unrelenting economic sanctions plus a whole lot more...as in it's time to go in...hand-in-hand with Israel (who Iran calls the 'Little Satan')...and seriously kick some Iranian butt because who are they to be holding the (for now anyway) free world hostage with their incessant demands and threats that NO deal will be reached if sanctions against them are still even a possibility.

Holding the world hostage while at the same time continuing to threaten to wipe Israel of the map. Yeah...we need to negotiate with these people...NOT.

And like I said, some Democrats are finally seeing the light and recognizing the danger we here in America face with a nuclear armed Iran...a danger Benjamin Netanyahu has spoken about for years. In fact, Senator Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) told Obama in NO uncertain terms that if Congress waited too long to do what needs to be done that sanctions could NOT be put in place fast enough to have any effect if the talks...as Obama says...collapse. And Obama's saying that he would deal directly with Congress if talks do fail...that he would “tighten the screws” if that happens...is a joke at best for this president has done NOTHING of substance all these years to halt yet alone slowdown Iran's moving forward with its uranium enrichment program for the simple fact is he does NOT want to slow it down.

You know it...I know it...Israel knows it...and now some Democrats in Congress are finally starting to know it as well.

And that along with Iran's very actions...actions including their ongoing aggression towards Israel, their constant threats of war, and their outward monetary and military support for worldwide terrorism...shows proof positive that any true and binding agreement with them will be just about if NOT impossible...and that if a deal by some chance is reached it won't be worth the paper it's printed on.

So the bottom line remains that we need to economically choke Iran so severely that they are brought begging to their knees until we finally have the courage and fortitude to go in and do what we and the world know needs to be done.

But...and this is a big but...with Obama as America's President and Commander-in-Chief...traitor-in-chief actually...in addition to his 'supposedly' being the leader of the free world...what needs to done will NOT now or anytime on his watch be done simply because this man will NEVER step on his brethren's toes. With Barack HUSSEIN Obama, his muslim blood is thicker than any minuscule amount of allegiance he may have to the country he was elected (gag) to serve.

And when you have none other than islamic cuddlier Secretary of State John 'Swiftboat' Kerry as head negotiator you just know that any deal reached will NOT be in America's best interest and will most likely be reached for Obama's face-saving political expediency alone. And knowing that Europe is (rightfully) NOT too happy with America and Obama right now, Iran will actually now have the upper hand in negotiations and will use that to their advantage when they call once again for a 'comprehensive' lifting of nuclear sanctions against them along with wanting access to trade, technology, finance, and energy. And the only thing 'our side' will get in exchange will be Iran's agreeing to...with fingers crossed behind their back of course..a "mutually defined enrichment program with mutually agreed parameters"...parameters you just know they will NEVER honor.

So as Kerry continues on with this 'dog and pony' show in Geneva, Obama is getting his veto pen ready all while the centrifuges Iran already has continue in operation moving them ever so closer to their becoming a nuclear power...and a rogue nuclear power at that.

Are you scared now...you damn well better be.