This article was co-authored by Michael Bicksel, senior editor for the Chicago Thinker where he originally reported Senator Slotkin’s remarks, and Christopher Lynch, student at Florida State University and Florida Gubernatorial Fellow. Both served as interns in Domestic Policy Studies at the Heritage Foundation.
Rarely in American politics do politicians say the quiet part out loud. But when they do, it is always revealing.
This is exactly what happened when Senator Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) launched into a monologue befitting a C-list Bond villain while addressing the University of Chicago’s Institute of Politics this past week.
There, she outlined the need to prosecute alleged “corruption” by the Trump administration to such a degree that it would make talented young Americans entering the labor force think twice before joining the federal government. In her own words, she wanted to establish a “deterrence message” by making young conservatives believe serving their government would “cause a lot of problems.”
Such Bolshevik tactics would make Lenin and Stalin blush.
The University of Chicago is famous for its commitment to free speech. The university’s Chicago Statement, as it is commonly known, has been adopted by more than 100 universities.
It is appalling, then, that an elected leader would go to a premiere American university noted for its commitment to free speech and outline such anti-American plans with such ease. Perhaps even more ironic is Senator Slotkin’s and her party’s obsession with “defending democracy.” She happens to be one of six Democratic lawmakers who encouraged active duty military personnel to disobey “illegal orders” from the Commander-in-Chief.
One must ask how that honors the consent of the governed and civilian control of the American military designed within our Constitution.
Apparently to the Left, the only functioning version of Our DemocracyTM is one where it is impossible to provide any opposition to their unending quest for power.
However, this rhetoric is not new. In fact, as young conservatives, it’s become standard practice from our friends across the aisle.
While many Americans may yearn for the bipartisan relationship of President Reagan and Speaker Tip O’Neal, that dynamic has been dead and buried for as long as we can remember.
Before we were 10 years old, Barack Obama had deployed the Internal Revenue Service to target conservative nonprofit organizations.
In the first presidential election we were old enough to experience, the FBI let Hillary Clinton skate for mishandling classified information. At the same time we would later find out, the national security apparatus of the Obama administration was seeking to concoct the Russiagate Hoax to frame President Trump as a Manchurian candidate.
Then came the Mueller Probe. And the Ukraine Impeachment Hoax. Then, in the throes of the COVID-19 Pandemic, conservative voices were throttled in a scheme between Big Tech and the Federal Government.
But it got worse still.
The Biden Administration engaged in a form of lawfare unseen in the United States, typically reserved for third-world tinpot dictatorships. The January 6th Committee went after some of President Trump’s closest advisors.
And then there is President Trump himself.
He was indicted in four different municipalities. New York Attorney General Letitia James threatened his personal fortune through civil suits against his companies. New York lawmakers rewrote state law to allow the E. Jean Carrol suit financed by Democrat megadonor Reid Hoffman to go forward.
For Senator Slotkin, that’s not enough. If Democrats reclaim power in 2026 and 2028, the focus now turns to the staffers who make the wheels of government go round.
It’s not like they haven’t laid the groundwork. Special Counsel Jack Smith was hoovering up the phone records of Republican Senators and lists of Trump Campaign donors during his witch hunt against the President.
On top of all of these attempts to weaponize the American legal system, young conservatives have dealt with immense social pressure to give up their belief system. While as a nation we have seemed to move past “Cancel Culture,” (vibe-shift anyone?) we still remember the dark days of what Alexandria Ocasio Cortez laughingly calls “Woke One.”
All that is to say that young conservatives are used to the anti-American methods of the modern Left. We are intricately familiar with their Orwellian attempts to punish wrongthink.
Luckily, we don’t fold easily. And we won’t start now.
Take it from us. Two conservative college students from different areas of the country. From our perches at a private school in the midwest and a state school in the south, we are both committed to pursuing careers dedicated to public service and challenging the damaging, anti-Americanism of the Left.
The best part is, we are far from the only ones.
The reason Senator Slotkin outlined the Left’s plan to deter young conservative staffers is because she and the other liberal extremists in Washington know that to be true.
We are both alumni of the Heritage Foundation’s Young Leaders Program. We spent the past summer in Washington D.C honing our conservative policy chops for the decades to come. And we were just two of over 60 intelligent, well-meaning conservatives with bright futures.
There are certaintly plenty more where those came from.
It is sickening that a United States Senator, whose state is home to some of the nation’s most prestigious universities, would discourage our best and brightest from public service.
We express these sentiments not seeking praise for resisting the Bolshevik tactics echoed by Senator Slotkin. Rather, we hope to showcase a fraction of the drive and backbone that so many of the other young conservatives in our cohort possess.
We refuse to be intimidated, even by former CIA analysts-turned-U.S. Senators.
The United States of America is our home. And we have a country to save.
No threat will change our drive to help do just that.
Michael, I too was shocked to hear her comments. The worst part is that it was at a University sponsored organization, the Institute of Politics, and all the interviewer could do was nod his head, apparently in assent. A read of the IOP’s Mission and Guiding Principles from their website would show that her comments and that assent are totally contrary to the IOPs goals.
Perhaps you should write a letter to them asking if they agree with the comments and whether their Mission and Guiding Principles have changed…. and if they have, forward that up to the University to test against the same.
Guiding Principles, and Mission/Vision/Values statements are just words on paper and become meaningless if not reinforced when the “rubber meets the road”. Right now, I see this as a total fail.
Jerry Clark Class of ’74