Concerns Mount Over Kemp’s Appointment Of Former Democrat To Replace Isakson
Georgia Senator Johnny Isakson (R) announced his retirement due to progression of Parkinson’s Disease this past August to take effect at the end of this year. This means Georgia Governor Brian Kemp (R) will appoint an individual to serve in the Senate until the next election cycle when the seat becomes open for challengers. Out of all the individuals who submitted an application in a back-door lobbying scenario to Kemp for the seat, The Daily Caller reported that Kemp is expected to appoint financial executive Kelly Loeffler as Isakson’s successor.
Kemp is expected to announce Loeffler sometime next week, according to several senior GOP officials who spoke with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. A source familiar with Kemp’s deliberations also told the Daily Caller News Foundation that the governor is expected to announce his decision in the coming days.
The announcement would mark the end of months-long backroom lobbying by applicants hoping to become the state’s next U.S. senator.
Upon Isakson’s announcement in August, Kemp said he would begin accepting applications from those willing and qualified to serve the remainder of Isakson’s term before running for election in the 2020 cycle. Hundreds of individuals, including many people who never held elected office, applied for the job. After several months, Kemp came closer to settling on Loeffler, a financial executive with deep ties to the Georgia business community.
Loeffler co-owns Georgia’s WNBA team, the Atlanta Dream, and is the chief executive of Bakkt, which is a subsidiary of the Georgia-based Intercontinental Exchange Inc. She is married to the Intercontinental Exchange’s founder and CEO, Jeff Sprecher. Together, the two have dropped considerable donations to the Republican National Committee in recent time.
Kemp is reportedly behind Loeffler because he believes her candidacy will attract female voters, a constituency that has hedged away from the GOP in the state since the rise of President Donald Trump. However, more hardline conservatives have expressed trepidation over Loeffler, pointing to her past contributions to Democratic candidates and that she has never run for office before, drawing questions over whether she is prepared to mount what could be a tough 2020 campaign.
Kelly Loeffler? Seriously? There is nothing wrong with appointing someone who has never held a political office or even vied for one through the election process. And, there is certainly nothing wrong with appointing a female. However, as we have seen with the current president, Democrats turned Republicans do not equate to being conservative or constitutional. With Kemp indicating it is his belief appointing her to the vacant Senate seat will attract female voters to the GOP, one has to question his additional statements defending his choice.
Kemp indicated he would be selecting individuals “willing and qualified” to serve from the applications accepted. What does Kemp mean by “qualified”? According to Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution for the united States of America, “No person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the age of thirty years, and been nine years a citizen of the united States, and who shall not, when elected be an inhabitant of the State for which he shall be chosen”. That’s the only qualifications for being a Senator. However, whatever qualifications Kemp is referring in determining his selection is HIS qualifications, not the Constitution’s.
Kemp took to Twitter Wednesday to counter claims that Loeffler was not “sufficiently conservative enough”. Kemp wrote, “I stand with hardworking Georgians and [Trump]. The idea that I would appoint someone to the U.S. Senate that is NOT pro-life, pro-2nd Amendment, pro-freedom, and 100% supportive of our President (and his plan to Keep America Great) is ridiculous. The attacks and games are absolutely absurd. Frankly, I could care less what the political establishment thinks. Happy Thanksgiving! More information after the holiday!”
Is it really ridiculous that a Democrat posing as a Republican would tell the one charged with filling the seat what he wanted to hear to get a foot in the door? Let’s just say that a particular candidate for president mounted a campaign based on constitutional tenets concerning the Second Amendment, freedom, and anti-illegal alien invasion only to reverse course when pressure was applied due to past ties with Democrats.
It isn’t ridiculous for Georgians to question Kemp’s appointment of Loeffler. Moreover, when one is in the public sphere of politics, holds an elected position and is responsible for policies and appointments for vacant seats, it is expected one would experience “attacks” and “games” (whatever that means) when a decision made for a departing Senator would appear questionable. Georgians should question Kemp’s choice based on several factors.
In his rebuttal Tweet, Kemp claimed he “could care less” about what “the political establishment thinks”. Maybe Kemp meant he “could not care less”. Either way, Kemp made his choice after receiving pressure from President Trump to appoint staunch conservative GOP Rep. Doug Collins. Kemp arranged a meeting between the president and Loeffler in hopes of quieting Trump’s concerns. But, reports indicate the meeting did not go well, leaving Trump unconvinced of Kemp’s choice to appoint Loeffler as a good decision.
No president should pressure a governor to appoint anyone to any vacant government seat. However, Trump’s concerns are valid, but probably not for the reasons Trump would give.
First, no governor should appoint someone to a vacant Senate seat because of biological gender. While Kemp has a biased opinion that women would gravitate back to the GOP if Isakson’s seat was filled with a woman, it is unfounded. No one can say why women in Georgia are not voting more for Republican candidates. Speculation and theorizing can provide possibilities; but, until women in Georgia are asked why they are not voting Republican, one is guessing or expressing personal opinion and beliefs. Kemp should back off defending his choice with this fallacy.
Again, it is possible women are retreating from voting Republican because Republicans have continually lied to the public to garner votes, then renege on their campaign platforms repeatedly. It is possible women are ceasing to vote for Republicans because Democrats are offering “free stuff”, which isn’t really free, but that’s all voters hear – FREE. And, it’s possible that many women of Georgia, who were formerly GOP voters, are transforming into a bunch of pro-murder of their own children and pro-infanticide mentally ill, anti-mother feminazis in the image of Stacy Abrams. Whatever the reason, appointing a woman to fill Isakson’s seat is not going to entice women to vote Republican.
Second, it is possible that a governor would appoint an anti-Second Amendment supporting, anti-freedom, and pro-murder of babies in the womb and pro-infanticide individual to the Senate. Knowing that Kemp ran on a campaign of being pro-Second Amendment, pro-freedom, and pro-life, any applicant who wanted to fill the vacant seat would mirror Kemp’s own political campaign in order to secure the seat. It doesn’t mean what the applicant said is true.
Georgia Gun Owners outed Isakson as a RINO some time back. And, Isakson has proposed a bill that would provide the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) a fresh infusion of $300 million to produce new “gun control” propaganda while denying his bill is aimed at gun control. Historically, every measure coming out of the CDC revolves around increasing “gun control” measures when it conducted research on “gun violence”. It is why the CDC was prohibited from conducting research under the auspice that “gun violence” was a public health issue.
How convenient is it that a former Democrat, supporting Democrat, anti-constitutional policies, would walk right into a vacant Senate seat with a fresh bill for “gun control” waiting in the wings? Surely, Governor Kemp had to know about Isakson’s bill when appointing a replacement. No one should be under the illusion/delusion that Republicans support in full the God-given individual unalienable right to keep and bear arms or any measure that involves self-defense.
Third, it means nothing that Loeffler is a “financial director”. Despite the election of Donald Trump, the deficit and debt has continued to grow at the same appalling rate without an end in sight. It is too easy to spend someone else’s money and saddle the public with debt since the federal government incurs debt on behalf of the States and the people for generalized business common to all; but, the government ceased to limit itself to the constitutional tenets. Instead, these spend thrifts throw good money after bad without ever considering the burden placed upon the citizens and future generations. Don’t think a “financial director” holding a Senate seat would make any difference whatsoever.
Fourth, no individual holding any seat in either branch of the Congress should be 100% supportive of the president. The president should be supported when following, upholding, the Constitution and opposed when the president does not. The same for anyone in the House, Senate or judiciary. The first and foremost loyalty anyone serving in any branch of the federal government should have is to the Constitution. Unfortunately, what is happening in the swamp that is Washington, DC, is loyalty to party, self, corporations and powerful government – the Constitution and the people be damned.
Fifth, some have stated that Loeffler is “not conservative enough”. Well, who is in politics these days? What is serving, elected and appointed to either chamber of Congress is charlatan “politicians” and not statesmen who follow the Constitution. No one would have to worry about labels such as conservative, liberal, progressive, regressive, etc. if those in the legislature, executive and judiciary branches followed the Constitution. It’s almost a given that Loeffler is not even “conservative”, much less “not conservative enough”. More than likely, she is a RINO clothed in the remnants of conservatism.
In an attempt to counter the extreme anti-constitutional policies and platforms of the Democrats, Republicans, like Kemp, are making choices based on opinion and “belief” instead of using a constitutional measure to choose a replacement for Isakson. How well does Loeffler know the Constitution? Does she understand the role of the Senate and a Senator as contained in the Constitution? Does she know that God bestows man with individual unalienable rights? Does she understand and know the Declaration of Independence as it relates to the purpose of government? Guarantee you, she doesn’t.
There is a reason that Kemp chose Loeffler and it isn’t for any of the reasons he indicated. Considering her ties to the sports world, cryptocurrency, global financial and commodity markets, not to mention sizeable donations to the Republican National Committee in recent years, one can’t help wondering if Isakson’s seat has been bought. Kemp’s fierce defense of his choice of Loeffler should also raise eyebrows. Time doesn’t need to pass to know how Loeffler will perform.
Article posted with permission from Sons Of Liberty Media