Showing posts with label Republicans. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Republicans. Show all posts

Friday, July 22, 2016

Cruz Soils Himself And Endorses Hillary Clinton

http://www.internetmonk.com/wp-content/uploads/ted_cruz15.jpg

Well, Ted Cruz made his convention speech, all right.

I had a conversation with a friend about what he might do and my prediction was that Cruz's speech would mostly be an attempt to set himself up for 2020. Cruz could, of course be the one guy who could unify the party and at the same time position himself for a future run. If nothing else, just the fact that he kept his word to support the GOP nominee would mean a lot to people down the line.

That's the choice Reagan made after he was robbed of the nomination in 1976, and he manned up and worked hard for Gerald Ford. I personally think it helped Ronaldus Maximus a great deal in 1980.

Cruz is a very different kind of man, and I use the term loosely where's he's concerned.

The speech itself was basically boilerplate, and at least listenable for awhile because someone finally convinced Cruz somehow to drop the faux-preacher delivery this time that's always been a dead giveaway.

He got away with a lot of cute little lies, like trashing the Iran deal when it was Ted Cruz who voted for the Corker Amendment that allowed Obama to shove it through the senate. Or Cruz talking about how bad out of control offshoring and illegal migration is. It was Marco Rubio who pointed out Cruz's curious record on illegal migration in the debates and stumped him. And you don't get more globalist or pro offshoring than Cruz's choice of running mate, globalist shill Carly Fiorina. And of course, Cruz wasn't going to mention that he helped Obama fast track TPP, and lobbied heavily to increase H1B visas that throw Americans out of work in favor of cheaper foreign labor.

But I was prepared to let him get away with this horse manure because I hoped that just this once, he'd be concerned with something other than Ted Cruz. Silly me.

After talking about how we need leaders who stand for what he called 'shared principles,' Cruz told people not to stay home in November, which the crowd took as a lead in to his endorsing Donald Trump. Instead, he told essentially told people not to vote for Donald Trump with a line he threw in that was missing from the copy of the speech he submitted to Trump and the convention..."Vote your conscience."

Here's what happened after Cruz came out with this beauty..he was literally booed off the stage amid chants of “We want Trump!”



Typical Cruz moment... when the boos started, he flashed that sickly cobra smile of his and said, "I appreciate the enthusiasm of the New York delegation." Except it wasn't just New York as you can see from the video. But Cruz just stood there, smiling that creepy smile that reminded me of nothing so much as Humphrey Bogart's Captain Queeg in 'The Caine Mutiny' smiling while telling the court martial all about the non-existent key and the strawberries. Because like Queeg, Ted Cruz is always right. All that was missing is the little metal balls rattling in his hands.

Even most of the Texas delegation was fed up with him:



Fortunately, Trump and Ivanka appeared to hear Eric Trump speak, and the angry crowd was diverted, which is why you can hear the loud cheers at the end.

The fallout didn't stop there. Back stage, many of Cruz's supporters were visibly angry with him, as the Politico, CNN's Dana Bash and the AP reported. Cruz was refused entry to Sheldon Adelson's Skybox loaded with Republican conservative donors and strategists and was told simply to get out, that 'you don't belong here after what you just did.'

Another well known, long time Cruz backer was reportedly so angry he had to be physically restrained from assaulting the senator, and Heidi Cruz was heckled so badly she had to be hustled out of the arena by security.

The fun didn't end there either. Apparently the Texas delegation holds a traditional breakfast the morning after every convention roll call, and it's usually a pretty easygoing affair. It wasn't this time. Ted Cruz attended to try and make up some lost ground and the delegates called him to account for his behavior, as the New York Times reported:


Repeatedly, the taunts rained down on him.

“Sit down!” one man said, before a “Clinton-Cruz 2020” sign was raised.

“You need to do it now!” shouted another.

“Do it!” yelled a third. “Do it now!”

The episode supplied another vivid demonstration of a party sharply at odds during a moment historically reserved for unity, a snapshot of a convention hurtling into chaos in what was intended to be a celebratory week.

When attendees pointed out Mr. Cruz’s past pledge to support the eventual Republican nominee, Mr. Cruz, under duress throughout 25 minutes of heated questioning, suggested that any agreement was “abrogated” when Mr. Trump attacked his family.

“I am not in the habit of supporting people who attack my wife and attack my father,” he said, adding that he was not a “servile puppy dog.”

(Quite a give away, since it proved it wasn't about Cruz's principles, but all about him. - ed. note)

A man in the back hollered at the stage: “You’ve got to get over it. This is politics.”

One attendee, Thomas Mathis, said loudly that he was helping to elect Hillary Clinton and demonstratively turned his back, facing a table of beverages, as Mr. Cruz pressed on.

Another guest, Shawn McAnelly, who twice shouted at Mr. Cruz, was warned by security that if he did so again, he would be ejected.

Mr. Cruz sought to depict his critics as reflective of two men considered boogeymen for hard-line conservatives: John Boehner and Mitch McConnell.

He suggested that the calls to endorse under any circumstances reminded him of Washington ethos of “sit down, shut up, just support the team.”

“If that’s the price, I ain’t gonna do it,” he said.

Other members of the Texas delegation made no attempt to mask their anger at Mr. Cruz, who rose to political stardom with his attacks on other Republicans.

“It’s consistent behavior from him,” Representative Pete Sessions said before Mr. Cruz spoke on Thursday, adding, “He continued what he is — it’s about Ted.”

Representative Jeb Hensarling told reporters that Mr. Cruz had delivered the beginnings of an effective speech on Wednesday night and then “missed a two-foot putt” at the end.

The criticism was particularly striking, given that Mr. Cruz will need the support of the activists and officials in the room here when he seeks renomination to his Senate seat in less than two years.


Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, who spoke earlier endorsing Donald Trump said it exactly right..."If You're not voting for Donald Trump, you're voting for Hillary."



There's no doubt in my mind that Governor Walker, an uncommonly brave and principled man will work his heart out to get Donald Trump elected. What a contrast to the subject of this story!

The latest attempt by the #neverTrumpers to whitewash this was a series of articles by the usual suspects especially at places like the rapidly sinking NRO. According to their line of - well, I censor myself -why no-oo, Ted Cruz didn’t say anything negative about Donald Trump. 'Vote your conscience' never meant don't vote for Donald Trump, Trump supporters just chose to take it that way. And say, if Trump is such a great, principled guy and it didn't apply to him, then why are you complaining, hmmm?'

Oh, please. Everybody knew exactly what 'vote your conscience' meant after Cruz delivered it with his signature smirk. Even Hillary Clinton got it and tweeted the phrase right after Cruz uttered it, likely cackling while she did it. So did every delegate on the the floor and Cruz caught hell for it even from a lot of his own people. Ted Cruz essentially endorsed Hillary Clinton, with all that portends. She knew it, and so did everyone else.

Vote your conscience.

It was a sick, shameful exhibition of a man putting his own ego before country, let alone party.

I'm sick and tired of people defending this malignant narcissist. This was Trump's convention, he earned it fair and square and if Cruz didn't want to do the right thing, he should have stayed home just like John Kasich, Jeb!, and Lindsay Graham.

Donald Trump showed some real strategy smarts in how he handled this. Cruz wanted a speaking slot and Trump agreed he could have one, even giving him one in prime time. Trump had held out an olive branch to Ted Cruz before when the campaign ended only to have his hand slapped away, but perhaps he figured that given time to get over himself, Ted Cruz might actually do what he pledged to do, swallow hard and support the nominee.  That, by the way is how winners behave. They give people the opportunity to come around and do the right thing.

Instead Cruz saw this as an opportunity to do whatever he could to help Hillary Clinton torpedo Donald Trump, figuring the party would rally around him in 2020.

When Trump's people received the speech Cruz planned to give, Cruz's invitation could have been rescinded. It certainly would have if it was Hillary's convention. But Trump wisely let it go through.

He gave Ted Cruz enough rope to hang himself in front of the entire party and millions of voters on prime time television. It actually unified the party by showing people the real Ted Cruz.

The Ready For Hillary #NeverTrump diehards will still worship him, but a lot of people who used to support him now see Ted Cruz for what he is.

2020? I doubt he even gets re-elected to the senate in 2018.

Sunday, January 31, 2016

Trump Skipping The FOX Debate - Bad Mistake Or Good Move?

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2016/01/ring.jpg

By now,the results of the Trumpless debate are pretty much in, and of course, the pundits are having a wonderful time with it.

To summarize briefly, Donald Trump had a major problem in FOX including Megyn Kelly as a moderator in the upcoming debate because he felt, with some justification she didn't treat him fairly the last time. So he simply said he was bailing unless FOX replaced her as moderator, and when they refused, he followed through and simply didn't appear.

This sort of thing is unheard of, although it shouldn't be. If after the first debate, Mitt Romney had simply said that he felt the country had gotten a good look at the differences between he and President Obama and he felt no need to further embarrass the president, he might be in the White House right now. Ditto if he had insisted on a more neutral moderator instead of the obviously partisan Candy Crowley for the second one.

What we saw here, as Rush Limbaugh cleverly noted is a glimpse of how Donald Trump negotiates, something that is normally not on public view. Right up to the end, he had Roger Aisles and FOX doing their best to get him to reconsider, because they knew what a Trump absence would do to ratings. But ultimately, they refused his final offer of $5 million donated to charity, which he probably knew they would anyway.

So was it a shrewd move on Donald Trump's part or a big mistake?

We'll see for sure Monday night, but personally I think it was a win-win for Trump.

I saw both the FOX debates and Donald Trump's charity event. The difference was extraordinary.

Fox chose to make their debate a slug fest between the candidates rather than an informative debate. Megyn Kelly in particular, along with Democrat Chris Wallace went out of their way to make the thing a circus, posing questions to the candidates designed to make them fight with each other. With Trump gone, the focus was on the other candidates. That emphasized the difference between Donald Trump and the other front runners, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio. They didn't come out well as all.

When the Fox News moderators showed Marco Rubio on video repeatedly saying he wouldn’t support amnesty, and then Megyn Kelly pointed out that he went on to be a major part of the Gang of Eight GOP amnesty group, Rubio, smarmy as he is had a real deer in the headlights moment. It got especially bad when Jeb Bush pointed out that not only did Rubio support the amnesty bill, but went on to say on national TV that Rubio asked him to support it, and that Bush did so because he agreed with the Gang of Eight bill. Governor Bush also called Senator Rubio a coward at least twice for attempting to retreat from his support of amnesty for illegal migrants.

Video of Senator Ted Cruz supposedly supporting the Gang of Eight bill also was played. Cruz did his best to squirm out of that, but it involved a complex explanation of amendments that I'm not sure many viewers were fully able to follow. The attacks from Rubio and the others seeking to get into the top tier definite didn't help Cruz. As a whole, the debates were boring and barely watchable.

Donald Trump's event for disabled veterans and those suffering from PTSD and other problems was a whole different item.

For one thing, the contrast in the energy level was amazing. While the FOX debate was sour and fairly negative, the Trump event was a live wire, even before the candidate came onstage. In contrast to the collection of elites on FOX, Trump's event, put together on 24 hour notice featured real people, the sort of folks the average Iowan could identify with.

Held at the auditorium of Drake University, the event attracted hundreds of people whom waited on line in the bitter cold. Even Donald Trump seemed surprised the turnout on such short notice. "Look at all the cameras," he said. "This is like the Academy Awards."

And of course, there were the veterans. Trump did something I thought was an extremely astute move, making the event all about them. When he first hit the stage, he dropped his usual speech and talked all about the disabled veterans this event was designed to help, something that resonates in a lot of hearts given the recent VA scandals. when he read off the names of his wealthy friends who had pledged contributions, topped by a $1 million check of his own, the place simply erupted.

After that he yielded the stage to Staff Sgt. John Wayne Walding, who lost a leg to sniper fire in Afghanistan and had the crowd's total attention as he spoke movingly about his own struggles to cope and the fact that an estimated 22 veterans per day commit suicide. Walding tells his story in a book I recommend,  No Way Out: A Story of Valor in the Mountains of Afghanistan. Walding also shared several stories of Trump’s kindness toward himself and other veterans.Two other Marine vets came on stage after Walding finished and spoke on the same theme..after which they presented Donald Trump with an honor ring from their veterans group representing the number of veterans who commit suicide after returning home.

Also speaking at the event were two other candidates running for the nomination, Mike Huckabee.  and Rick Santorum.They weren't there to endorse Trump so much as they were there to endorse what he was doing that night.

AFP

Trump ended the event not so much with his usual campaign speech but with a speech mostly focused on the problems veterans have faced when returning from Iraq and Afghanistan -- inadequate healthcare, problems finding housing, drug abuse, and mental health issues.

"Our vets are being mistreated. Illegal immigrants are treated better in many cases than our vets and it's not going to happen any more. It's not going to happen any more," he said.

Of course, there was another message being sent as well.

An unbelievable night in Iowa with our great Veterans! We raised $6,000,000.00 while the politicians talked!

Exactly. And I think a lot of people got the same message.

According to the latest polls, Trump has increased his lead over the second place Ted Cruz to six points. It wasn't so long ago that Cruz had the lead by a decent amount. 

The Iowa caucus is a unique event, where turnout is everything. The weather forecast for tomorrow shows there's a chance of a blizzard, which could definitely effect turnout.

The usual turnout for these things is between 133,000 and 137,000. A smaller turnout favors Ted Cruz, whose campaign claims they have a guaranteed 7,000 votes. A larger one, say over 150,000 or so favors Donald Trump, many of whose supporters are said to be first time caucus goers.

No matter how Iowa turns out, Trump did himself no harm by skipping the FOX debate, and may very well have done himself some good. Simply based on what I saw, I think quite a few Trump supporters are going to caucus and vote whatever the weather does.

Monday, December 28, 2015

Proof That Jeb Bush Is Absolutely Desperate

http://www.alternet.org/files/styles/story_image/public/story_images/screen_shot_2015-05-09_at_12.30.36_pm.png

I had to laugh at this one. Jeb Bush's campaign is in such dire condition that he's been reduced to issuing schoolyard challenges to GOP front runner Donald Trump!

Please pack it in Governor Bush, and at least salvage some dignity. It would be, ummm, an act of love wouldn't it?

Friday, September 04, 2015

Trump Signs Pledge Not To Run As A 3rd Party Candidate

 Spencer Platt/Getty Images

Donald Trump sat down with RNC head Reince Priebus and has signed a pledge written up by the Republican National Committee that he will not run as a third party candidate and will support the eventual nominee of the party. Every candidate is being asked to sign on to this, but I have no doubt this was aimed at Donald Trump because of the insurgent nature of his campaign:

“He’s been extremely fair,” Trump said of the Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus who met with Trump at Trump Tower in New York Thursday.

“I’ve wanted fairness. … I just wanted fairness from the Republican Party,” Trump said at a press conference following the meeting.

Trump announced:

Frankly, I felt the absolute best way to win and beat the Democrats, and very easily, I think, beat the Democrats, no matter who it will be … the best way for the Republicans to win is if I win the nomination and go directly against whoever they happen to put up. And for that reason, I have signed the pledge.

The crowd viewing the press conference cheered after Trump’s announcement.

Trump said he would not rip up the pledge at a later date.

“I’ll be totally pledging my allegiance to the Republican Party and the conservative principles for which it stands–and we will go out, and we will fight hard, and we will win,” Trump said.


This is extremely sharp of Trump on several levels.

Yes, it's true that it was necessary to enter several upcoming primaries and get on the ballot as a Republican but Trump had plenty of time for that. The real reason is more subtle.

In the beginning, Trump held off because it was a major advantage for him.Unlike the clueless blowhards at the RNC, he was able to see the tremendous anger that exists at the GOP establishment's weakness and the betrayal of the people that voted a Republican senate into office. And seeing it, Trump was able to channel it, which gave him tremendous poll ratings and support as an outsider. Some of these people actually saw Trump as a replacement for the GOP - or as one person put it, "Trump's not our takeover, he's our murder weapon."

At this point, a significant amount of that support is being clouded by thoughts of what America might be like ruled by Hillary Clinton and/or Elizabeth Warren and/or Bernie Sanders and/or Joe Biden. And how a third party run by Trump might siphon off enough votes from a GOP candidate to give the Democrats the election.

Trump sensed that too, and since he realized he wanted to be president more than he wanted to be this year's Ross Perot, he signed the pledge. It will definitely solidify his support and likely add to it as more people will see him as a serious candidate. Certainly it had that effect on me.Like the canny businessman he is, Donald Trumps milked an advantage to the maximum and discarded it just as it was becoming a disadvantage.

And there's no downside, really. If he doesn't like the results the pledge is not legally binding, so he can still do whatever he wants later if he deems it necessary.

An interesting ticket would be Trump/Cruz. Because of his age, Trump might only serve one term, which would give Cruz an opportunity to learn more about how to work successfully with others and manipulate them into supporting him, something Ronaldus Maximus was a master at and something I've always felt Cruz needed to learn more about in spite of his other stellar qualities.

Moreover, Cruz could help Trump because of his smarts and skill as an attack dog on the campaign trail and his knowledge of law and how government works as opposed to business, something Donald Trump appears to lack.

Stay tuned.


Friday, August 07, 2015

The Opening Salvo - Last Night's Debates

https://localtvkstu.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/s051485448-300.jpg?w=770

What can we take away from the FOX news GOP debates last night?

The first and most important thing is that it gives the lie to President Obama's current approval numbers, which I've always questioned. Over 24 million people watched the debate last night, an audience that shattered all previous records for a non-sports event.

These people are hungry for change,literally starved for it. They may not say so to a pollster, out of fear of the regime targeting them, which they've seen happen all too much. Or of being labeled 'rscist'. But they're not deaf dumb and blind to how the country is being destroyed.They were watching to see who among these men could be relied on to save it.

And there's also immense anger at the betrayal of the Republican establishment, whom did nothing they promised during the 2014 campaign. That is what explains Donald Trump's high poll numbers, and last night's huge audience.

I disagree with much of the criticism being tossed at the FOX moderators last night. First, handling that many people is extraordinarily difficult anyway, but I thought FOX managed it fairly well. And I liked the way they kept things moving. I also disagree that the questions were overly barbed or biased, although there were a couple I think the event could have done without.

This is the big leagues, and the Republican candidates had better get used to this sort of scrutiny, the kind Democrats never face. If you think last night was bad, wait until you see how Candy Crowley and CNN treat the GOP lineup. And don't ask me why the GOP agreed to Candy Crowley as a moderator after what she pulled in 2012. You wouldn't like my answer.

The candidates? In the lower tier, Carly Fiorina did very well, and may have launched herself into top tier. She went after Hillary Clinton with both fists and was extraordinarily on point. Unfortunately, I researched Ms. Fiorina thoroughly when she ran for senate in California, I'm very aware of her record. I'll be sharing that with you in a separate piece.

In the top 10 tier?

Donald Trump was initially the focus of attention, but that shifted very quickly. The overall impression on anyone with an open mind is that with a few exceptions, this is a highly qualified group of people.

I thought Ted Cruz and Mike Huckabee did extremely well. For many people it's the first time they've seen either man in action, and both were articulate and intelligent. I would also say that for those people thrilled by Trump's anti-establishment rhetoric, both of these men came across as choices with actual records of long standing opposing the status quo and that GOP establishment. And both candidates are going to have an appeal to people of faith...of all colors and backgrounds.

Donald Trump trotted out the expected applause lines, but was hit hard on his donations to the Clinton Foundation, his past support for abortion on demand and his sudden conversion to being a Republican after being a life long Democrat. His answers to these questions struck me as pat and rehearsed. The real kicker, of course was when he was asked if he would commit to not running as a third party candidate and he refused.

His performance last night will reinforces suspicion in many quarters that he may very well be running as a faux candidate to split conservative votes and deliver the election to Hillary Clinton, with whom he's on very good terms. It is not out of the realm of possibility in the least. Especially when we're talking about the Clintons.

Personally speaking, I've already been here before with Ross Perot, who delivered the White House to Bill Clinton in 1992. Yes, dear readers, I fell for Perot's song and dance and voted for him, and it's the one vote I ever cast I wish I could take back.At least Perot had the honesty to run as an honest third party candidate from the jump. Donald Trump apparently lacks that honesty, and as far as I'm concerned that's the end of the story for me unless he changes his mind. For those of you enamored of Trump's anti-GOP establishment rhetoric, there are other candidates running more worthy of support if you're being intellectually honest.

Rand Paul and Scott Walker had some really excellent moments, and Walker in particular was able to show off his outstanding record as Wisconsin's governor. He's also noticeably more comfortable at the podium, and in discussing foreign policy. Rand Paul thrilled the entire crowd when, in response to a question on same sex marriage he responded "I don't want the government registering my guns or my marriage." He also deserves credit for pinning down Donald Trump on his refusal to commit to not running as a third party candidate.

Ben Carson was a pleasant surprise, showing off a sense of humor that went over very well, and a knowledge of security and foreign policy matters that showed he's been studying up.

Marco Rubio did well also, although his performance was fairly rehearsed. If you like Marco Rubio, you were pleased with his showing. If you don't, and especially if you still don't trust him on illegal migration, it didn't change your mind.

Jeb Bush had a coupe of stumbles, but again did OK if you like Jeb Bush. After all, he was a very good governor for Florida and accomplished quite a bit. The illegal migration issue will either lose him or get him the nomination. His attempt to differentiate 'legal status' from citizenship struck me andpropbably a lot of other people as desperation.

Christy-Creme is finished. I can't imagine why anyone takes him seriously.He's been a lousy governor of New Jersey with a poor fiscal record, and is simply the last quivering corpse of the endangered East Coast RINO species. And I can't imagine why John Kasich was first tier. He had his moments, but it's hard to imagine him as president.

What was most interesting to me was the high quality in general of the candidates. With th possible exception of Cristy-Creme and perhaps Mr. Trump, these are serious and qualified people...some more than others in my view, to be sure.

Monday, April 13, 2015

A Change In The Weather - Looking At The Current GOP Field

It's early days, and a few people who will likely be running haven't formally announced yet. But I think it's worth looking at Republican contenders for the White House and giving you my initial impressions. I'll be looking at Democrats in a subsequent article.

http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/files/2015/03/0323tedcruz3.jpg

Senator Ted Cruz was the first to announce, and of course caught an initial blast from the Left's media hacks. We certainly can't dignify them with the term 'journalist since so many of them are simply Leftist activists with access to a microphone or a byline. Expect them to ignore blatant violations of law by the likes of Mrs. Clinton while examining in great detail any occasion where one of the Republican candidates borrowed five bucks from someone ten years ago and forgot to pay it back.

In a sense though, Senator Cruz was either exhibiting great courage, a certain amount of naivete or a mixture of the two by choosing the venue and the speech he did for his announcement. And I say that as someone whom admires him a great deal. By speaking at a Christian college at a time when Christians are under vicious attack by the Left and indeed, by the Obama Administration, he showed exactly what a brave man of principle he is. And make no mistake, Ted Cruz is a man of principle.

He is also a dynamic speaker, scary smart and a superb debater who has argued cases before the Supreme Court.

The one false note he's hit so far didn't particularly jar me, but I think it might have bothered others...his emphasis in his speech on his profession of Christian faith.

Ronald Reagan too was a man of rock solid faith, but when he voiced it, he took great care to phrase it in ways that were deliberately inclusive. Ted Cruz did not. For many people, this was their first opportunity to actually hear and see Ted Cruz speak. He's already been painted by the usual suspects as a fanatic rather than the articulate and accomplished man he is, and I have no doubt that some of them felt somewhat uncomfortable, although Cruz's audience obviously went wild over it. I look on it as an unforced error (and by no means a major one) by someone not quite used to campaigning with an eye towards a nationwide audience. And it pales when you look at how dynamically he came across, with no podium and no teleprompter, moving all over the stage to a crowd of wildly cheering students.

Ted Cruz will only get better as he goes along.


http://cdn.thedailybeast.com/content/dailybeast/articles/2013/11/20/scott-walker-is-the-perfect-republican-candidate-for-2016-on-paper/jcr:content/image.img.2000.jpg/1384929876151.cached.jpg

It's interesting to compare Ted Cruz with Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker. While Ted Cruz says the right things and articulates them with great skill and aplomb, Scott Walker simply does things and talks about them in ordinary, everyman style. It's Governor Scott Walker who took on some of most vicious public employee unions in the country and won, Scott Walker who balanced Wisconsin's budget, lowered taxes, oversaw the creation of thousands of jobs,and passed a badly needed voter ID law. And he did it while facing two election campaigns and one recall that were financed by millions of out of state dollars as well as death threats aimed at him and his family. The Left wanted Scott Walker's head badly,even to the extent of judge shopping to try and embroil him in bogus charges of campaign financing misdeeds. But he defeated them because he inherently understood that these people need to be challenged and fought, not accommodated and appeased. And because his performance, not his rhetoric spoke for itself. That experience is going to help him a great deal in the current campaign, as evidenced by his embarrassing the media over a dollar sweater and his superb push back to President Barack Obama's condescending horse manure about 'boning up' on foreign policy vis a vis Iran.

Yeah, Scott Walker has already faced the full force of the Left and survived quite nicely, thanks.And he puts up with zero static from the Left. That combination could take him a long way.


 http://l2.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/Ok7cZOyZES.pCzUZQHjUFw--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Zmk9ZmlsbDtoPTM3NztpbD1wbGFuZTtweG9mZj01MDtweW9mZj0wO3E9NzU7dz02NzA-/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/ap_webfeeds/e5ba11d79fdf000f730f6a706700324e.jpg

Senator Rand Paul announced Tuesday, and he likewise looks to be a strong candidate. In many ways, he's a throwback to the days when America actually was a free country who revered its Constitution. He's been unfairly slammed as an isolationist, simply because he, like a lot of other Americans is sick and tired of going to war by presidential diktat. Sort term pre-emptive strikes like President Reagan did in Libya, Grenada and the Persian Gulf against Iran that don't involve long term dispositions of U.S. forces are one thing, and by design have a distinct, concrete goal in mind.

The sort of wars we've seen lately in places like Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan with long term deployments and fuzzy, ill defined goals are another animal entirely, and our Founders were quite correct to insist that our commander in chief make the case to congress and get a weasel proof formal declaration of war in order to proceed rather than a mere resolution to use force.

Like Ted Cruz and Scott Walker, Rand Paul also disdains the defensive crouch that normally defines conservatives. An example of that occurred today, and it was refreshing:

 When quizzed on his about his views on abortion, Republican Kentucky Senator Rand Paul avoided the gotcha game and told NH1 reporter Paul Steinhauser to ask DNC head Debbie Wasserman Schultz if it was okay to "kill a 7-pound baby in the uterus." 

"Why don't we ask the DNC: Is it okay to kill a 7 pound baby in the uterus?" Paul reportedly said. "You go back and you ask Debbie Wasserman Schultz if she's okay with killing a seven pound baby that is not born yet. Ask her when life begins, and you ask Debbie when it's okay to protect life. When you get an answer from Debbie, get back to me."

 In other words, chump, let's see you ask the Democrats you love so much these same kinds of wedge questions. And of course, the even more revealing follow ups, if you expect any answers from me along  a similar line.

This is exactly how to handle these people. Most Americans would shrink from the idea of a doctor taking surgical scissors, puncturing the skull of  a  healthy baby over five months old with a fully developed nervous system and the ability to feel pain,vacuuming the child's brains out to collapse the skull and then ripping the child out of the womb unless the mother's life was endangered or there was some other kind of dire medical emergency. So it's never described that way.

Yet these kind of late term abortions happen every day in America for no reason other than a child being inconvenient. And even though the abortion lobby which insists on abortion on demand and supports this sort of carnage is one of the most  important parts of the Democrat coalition, no one ever tries to pin  Democrats down about their support for this sort of thing after describing it in such graphic - and sadly accurate - terms.

If Senator Rand Paul is able to return service to the left this well now, it bodes well for his candidacy. And the fact that he, like Scott Walker is not yet another lawyer from Harvard,Princeton or Yale ( he's a medical doctor, an extremely reality based profession) appeals to me as well. We're going to need quite a bit of reality to clean up the mess Barack Obama and his cronies will leave behind when they leave. And Senator Paul also has a demonstrated ability to appeal to younger voters and to get voters to cross party lines.

 

Senator Marco Rubio at first glance would seem to be a strong candidate. He's young, a good speaker with an inspiring story, and a fiscal conservative with a good record on taxes, the Second Amendment and other such hot button issues. And some members of the consultant class see his Hispanic surname as a bonus.

The problem I see is that Senator Rubio seems to fold under pressure to a certain degree, and to lean more towards trying to please everyone (which of course ultimately pleases no one) rather than starting out embracing firm principles and then making minor compromises to get a deal done.

A good example of this was the way Democrat senator Chuck Schumer twisted Rubio around his little finger when it came to the bogus Senate immigration bill. Aside from making Marco Rubio look foolish, it gave the Obama WHite House an important talking point about how the Democrat majority senate had 'passed a bi-partisan bill, and all the House has to is pass it.' With, of course the president saying that since the House wouldn't act,he had the prerogative to violate our laws and the Constitution to do so.

It was a major error, and while Rubio at least eventually admitted his mistake it doesn't bode well for a Rubio presidency.

And that Hispanic surname? Don't count on it as a benefit. Hispanics in America are a much more diverse group than the consultant class would have us believe. Marco Rubio, like Ted Cruz, is of Cuban descent, and Cuban-Americans are a very different group than Mexicans or Central Americans, particularly those who President Obama has let in under his executive amnesty and whom are already appearing on the voter rolls illegally.

Many of them speak little or no English and receive all of their information from the likes of Democrat-controlled Telemundo and Univision. And many of them will be voting for a Democrat promising unlimited amnesty and increased social welfare benefits.

 http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/02/150205_POL_JebBushDetroit.jpg.CROP.promo-mediumlarge.jpg

Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush hasn't announced yet, but is raising funds, hiring staff and obviously preparing to do so. Let's look at him.

Unlike the other GOP candidates with the exception of Scott Walker, Jeb Bush has solid executive experience and was a reasonably accomplished governor of Florida, with an excellent record on taxes and on fiscal sensibility, including civil service reform. He's pro Second Amendment and school choice, In addition, he has the ability to raise tremendous amounts of money. and authentic Hispanic roots through his marriage. He also has an excellent track record with Hispanic voters and speaks fluent Spanish.


A problem with Governor Bush is that his stance on many issues like amnesty and Common Core is essentially opposed not only to the Republican party's base but to a majority of Americans in general. His message, essentially, is that the Republicans are Democrat-lite - they will do pretty much what the Democrats will, just cheaper and better managed.

People inclined to vote Democrat/Socialist will invariably vote for the real thing come election day if nothing else to avoid putting someone with the surname 'Bush' back in the White House. And a large segment of the Republican base will simply sit home, just as they did with Mitt Romney.

That's the current GOP field as I see them today. I'll examine Democrats in a subsequent article.


Monday, January 06, 2014

Liz Cheney Drops Out Of Wyoming Senate Race

Liz Cheney is shown. | AP Photo

Well, I figured this was coming.

She announced her withdrawal today, citing, health concerns in her family as the reason.

She did have some concerns, to be sure..a daughter with newly diagnosed juvenile diabetes. I can personally testify to how devastating that can be to deal with.

Aside from the heavy odds taking on long time conservative Senator Mike Enzi, a struggle in itself in a small state like Wyoming, there was also the unfortunate matter of her remarks on gay marriage.

Her sister Mary,whom she's always been close to married her partner Heather Poe in 2012.

There's no law that says someone has to have a position on each and every issue, and no matter how one feels about same sex marriage, a response along the lines of 'this is a family matter for me and I don't feel it's appropriate to comment' would have been a proper response. Instead, she chose to make it a campaign issue, understandably enraging her sister and putting her parents in the uncomfortable position of being in the middle.

That lack of judgment alone would have had me pulling the lever for Mike Enzi if I lived in Wyoming. But I'm also prepared to cut Liz Cheney some slack and call it an unforced rookie error, provided she learns from it and makes an effort to make things right. An endorsement of Enzi might be a good start, as well as an apology to members of her family.

While she was taking a beating in the polls, the fact also remains that she raised over $2 million in funding,very respectable for Wyoming. Enzi's 69, junior Senator John Barrasso turns 62 this year, and Wyoming's sole member of the House, Rep. Cynthia Lummis is well entrenched. Meanwhile, Liz Cheney is fairly young and a retirement by any of them or even a run in a nearby state, along with some seasoning, might see Liz Cheney in Congress.

Friday, June 28, 2013

Sarah Palin Unloads On The GOP Over Amnesty Bill

1001014_10151696618443588_230169468_n

She must be feeling particularly betrayed, since a number of the senators that voted for this atrocity like Marco Rubio and Kelly Ayotte only got there because of her and the Tea Party activist's help.

Here's her full Facebook post:

Please take a look at the article linked below to understand how the amnesty bill the Senate passed yesterday is a sad betrayal of working class Americans of every ethnicity who will see their wages lowered and their upward mobility lowered too. And yet we still do not have a secured border. This Senate-approved amnesty bill rewards lawbreakers and won’t solve any problems – as the CBO report notes that millions of more illegal immigrants will continue to flood the U.S. in coming years.

Great job, GOP establishment. You’ve just abandoned the Reagan Democrats with this amnesty bill, and we needed them to “enlarge that tent” of which you so often speak. It’s depressing to consider that the House of Representatives is threatening to pass some version of this nonsensical bill in the coming weeks.

Once again, I’ll point out the obvious to you: it was the loss of working class voters in swing states that cost us the 2012 election, not the Hispanic vote. Legal immigrants respect the rule of law and can see how self-centered a politician must be to fill this amnesty bill with favors, earmarks, and crony capitalists’ pork, and call it good. You disrespect Hispanics with your assumption that they desire ignoring the rule of law.

Folks like me are barely hanging on to our enlistment papers in any political party – and it’s precisely because flip-flopping political actions like amnesty force us to ask how much more bull from both the elephants in the Republican Party and the jackasses in the Democrat Party we have to swallow before these political machines totally abandon the average commonsense hardworking American. Now we turn to watch the House. If they bless this new “bi-partisan” hyper-partisan devastating plan for amnesty, we’ll know that both private political parties have finally turned their backs on us. It will then be time to show our parties’ hierarchies what we think of being members of either one of these out-of-touch, arrogant, and dysfunctional political machines.

- Sarah Palin


As usual, she's 100% correct.

The entire GOP Renaissance in 2010 only happened because of Sarah Palin and then-Senator Jim DeMint, and the GOP establishment fought them every step of the way.

The reward for both of them was essentially to be ridiculed and driven from the GOP.

Notice this part: Folks like me are barely hanging on to our enlistment papers in any political party – and it’s precisely because flip-flopping political actions like amnesty force us to ask how much more bull from both the elephants in the Republican Party and the jackasses in the Democrat Party we have to swallow before these political machines totally abandon the average commonsense hardworking American.

I think Governor Palin and those that think like her are fed up to the point they have an entirely new, independent movement in mind. I think it's been brewing for some time,and that it's probably far too late to stop it even if the House rejects the Amnesty bill.

Which, of course is exactly how the Republican Party was born in the first place, over disgust with the Whigs on slavery and a number of myriad other issues.

The GOP establishment hates conservatives, hates the Tea Party, hates people like Ted Cruz,Jeff Sessions, Mike Lee, Sarah Palin and Jim DeMint. They want them out of the Republican Party.

I think they're going to get their wish. But I doubt they're going to like the results.

Monday, December 10, 2012

Senator Rand Paul: 'We Should Let Dems Raise Taxes And Then Let Them Own It'

 

On one of the Sunday shows:

SEN. RAND PAUL: I have yet another thought on how we can fix this. Why don't we let the Democrats pass whatever they want? If they are the party of higher taxes, all the Republicans vote present and let the Democrats raise taxes as high as they want to raise them, let Democrats in the Senate raise taxes, let the president sign it and then make them own the tax increase. And when the economy stalls, when the economy sputters, when people lose their jobs, they know which party to blame, the party of high taxes. Let's don't be the party of just almost as high taxes.

LARRY KUDLOW, CNBC: Some people have called that the doomsday scenario. Others have said, 'Look, it's a strategic retreat on the Republicans' behalf.' WWould you vote present for that in the Senate if that came up?

RAND PAUL: Yes, I don't think we have to in the Senate. In the House, they have to because the Democrats don't have the majority. In the Senate, I'm happy not to filibuster it, and I will announce tonight on your show that I will work with Harry Reid to let him pass his big old tax hike with a simple majority if that's what Harry Reid wants, because then they will become the party of high taxes and they can own it.



I totally concur.

The latest idiocy being touted by certain establishment Republicans is to offer the president his tax hikes because then, we can get to entitlement reform and close tax loopholes.

That's exactly the way to put Republican fingerprints on what's coming.

I can just hear the media and the Democrats now..'you Republicans want to take healthcare and social security away from people.. Why? What's wrong with you?'

And if the GOP has any hand in new tax regulations, do the Republican congressmen really think that the media is going to blame Obama and not them when things cave? At best, the talking point will be that it was bipartisan and thus can't be blamed on Obama and the Democrats. If any one doubts that, look at how the insane  spending in the last two years of the Bush presidency when the Democrats controlled both houses of congress became 'Bush's fault'.

The GOP should make a strong, very public and well publicized statement disagreeing with every aspect of this, make sure the American people know that President Obama owns this and vote present.

Just do it, and have some courage for once.



Thursday, December 06, 2012

The GOP's War On The Tea Party Continues

There's a quiet war being waged in Washington these days.

The Republican establishment is systematically engaged in marginalizing it's conservative base.

Conservative congressmen, especially any associated with the Tea Party are being denied committee seats and chairmanships they obviously qualify for as a 'punishment' for apparently not going along with some of the GOP leadership's more outrageous cave ins.

It's purge time for conservatives and anyone associated with the Tea Party, and I'm certain that's going to be even more obvious when the funds from the RNC get doled out.

Another obvious sign of this is Jim DeMint's decision to leave the senate to head the Heritage Foundation.

Jen Rubin, the supposed conservative voice at the Washington Post had an unthinking and fairly vicious reaction to this that is probably typical of how the GOP leadership feels about DeMint.

At leqst Rubin shows her true colors. She's obviously not aware that the entire GOP resurgence in 2010 was largely the work of two people - Sarah Palin and Senator DeMint. The largest segment of the party's bench, consisting of people like Marco Rubio,Kelly Ayotte, Nikki Haley, Susana Martinez, Pat Toomey and a host of others in the sneate, house and state offices benefited for their channeling the energy of conservatives and the Tea Party into a GOP resurgence.

Palin's reward for working herself silly in resurrecting the GOP by speaking,endorsements and raising funds through SarahPac was to be denied a speaking role at the 2012 convention, even though she's one of the most effective and dynamic communicators of conservative ideas in America. DeMint's was to have to swim uphill against a dysfunctional GOP establishment until he got sick and tired of it and decided to leave.

Obviously, the GOP leadership figures that they can win elections by becoming Democrat lite, not realizing that people who lean ion that direction would much rather vote for the real thing. If they continue on that path, they will certainly continue to lose elections. 3 million self-described Republicans stayed home last November. If the Republican Party continues to marginalize conservatives in this fashion, even more will do so next time.

Cut off from their base and their principles, the GOP will go the way of the Whigs and be replaced by a new party..and they'll deserve it.

Nature always abhors a vacuum, and vacuums always get filled...especially in politics.

Friday, August 31, 2012

Clint, Marco And Mitt



Tonight was the big night at the Republican convention, with three major speeches, including the Big One, Governor Romney's acceptance speech.

Here's my initial reaction to all three.

Clint Eastwood only disappointed me once tonight, and it wasn't his fault. Somebody forgot to use the theme music from 'The Good, The Bad and the Ugly' to bring him onstage. It would have been perfect.

The speech itself was actually a pretty kinky brand of satire a lot of the left was too crazed to fully get. It featured Clint Eastwood in an imaginary conversation with Barack Obama, explaining to him exactly why he should get out of Dodge. Unscripted, a little rambling just like a real conversation, but effective as all get out, from someone who's a long time libertarian and old enough and successful enough not to give a damn what anyone thinks. Some money quotes:

..I just think that there is so much to be done, and I think that Mr. Romney and Mr. Ryan are two guys that can come along. See, I never thought it was a good idea for attorneys to the president, anyway. {...}

They are always devil’s advocating this and bifurcating this and bifurcating that. You know all that stuff. But, I think it is maybe time -- what do you think -- for maybe a businessman. How about that?

(APPLAUSE)A stellar businessman. Quote, unquote, “a stellar businessman.”


And I think it’s that time. And I think if you just step aside and Mr. Romney can kind of take over. You can maybe still use a plane.

(APPLAUSE)Though maybe a smaller one. Not that big gas guzzler you are going around to colleges and talking about student loans and stuff like that.{...}

I would just like to say something, ladies and gentlemen. Something that I think is very important. It is that, you, we -- we own this country.

(APPLAUSE)

We -- we own it. It is not you owning it, and not politicians owning it. Politicians are employees of ours.

(APPLAUSE)

And -- so -- they are just going to come around and beg for votes every few years. It is the same old deal. But I just think it is important that you realize , that you’re the best in the world. Whether you are a Democrat or Republican or whether you’re libertarian or whatever, you are the best. And we should not ever forget that. And when somebody does not do the job, we got to let them go.


That last is a classic line that could have come from one of Clint Eastwood's films.Right up there with 'A man's got to know his limitations.'



Marco Rubio's speech was very much worth the price of admission. To my mind, it pretty much tied with Paul Ryan's last night as the best one out of the whole convention.

You see, Senator Rubio, like Mia Love, really gets America. He not only understands it's challenges but its possibilities. At one point in his speech, talking about the time he spent with his Cuban grandfather, he said. "For those of us who were born and raised in this country, it's easy to forget how special America is. But my grandfather understood how different America is from the rest of the world, because he knew what life was like outside America."

I couldn't agree more, and I've seen that more than once in immigrants to this country myself. And Americans who travel overseas and spend real time in a foreign country instead of just briefly hitting the tourist circuit frequently get that same appreciation.

Senator Rubio understands innately that one of the most insidious things the Obama regime is doing to America is eroding those possibilities. And with it, a great deal of what has traditionally made America a special place:

No matter how you feel about President Obama, this election is about your future, not his. And it's not simply a choice between a Democrat and a Republican.

It's a choice about what kind of country we want America to be.

As we prepare to make this choice, we should remember what made us special. For most of history almost everyone was poor. Power and wealth belonged to only a few.

Your rights were whatever your rulers allowed you to have. Your future was determined by your past.

If your parents were poor, so would you be. If you were born without opportunities, so were your children.

But America was founded on the principle that every person has God-given rights. That power belongs to the people. That government exists to protect our rights and serve our interests.

That we shouldn't be trapped in the circumstances of our birth. That we should be free to go as far as our talents and work can take us.

We are special because we've been united not by a common race or ethnicity. We're bound together by common values. That family is the most important institution in society. That almighty God is the source of all we have.

Special, because we've never made the mistake of believing that we are so smart that we can rely solely on our leaders or our government.


Like Paul Ryan, Marco Rubio was unafraid to hit President Obama in his weakest spot...his abysmal record as president. And like Ryan, he did it with humor and verve.

We will be seeing more of Marco Rubio in national politics. Sin duda.

So now we get to the big event..Governor Mitt Romney's acceptance speech.



The Governor's speech had some wonderful moments, but overall I give it a A- to a B+. Although to be honest, that grade very much depends on what you felt this speech needed to do.You see, unlike the current occupant of the White House, Mitt Romney is far more concentrated on actually doing things than just spewing hot air about them.

if tonight's speech was intended to humanize Governor Romney to people who are undecided and that didn't know much about him aside from the caricature of him as a heartless plutocrat they've seen and heard about via the Obama media, I think it did so. Governor Romney essentially is simply a decent, public spirited and principled man, and that came across tonight. People are unused to that, because it's been a long time since we had that quality showing so obviously in our president. Mitt Romney has that in abundance.

He touched all the right bases...his plans for the economy, religious freedom,even President Obama's abysmal foreign policy.

And yet, to my mind, he failed in one important area. Look at this:

How many days have you woken up feeling that something really special was happening in America?

Many of you felt that way on Election Day four years ago. Hope and Change had a powerful appeal. But tonight I'd ask a simple question: If you felt that excitement when you voted for Barack Obama, shouldn’t you feel that way now that he’s President Obama? You know there’s something wrong with the kind of job he’s done as president when the best feeling you had was the day you voted for him.

The President hasn’t disappointed you because he wanted to. The President has disappointed America because he hasn’t led America in the right direction. He took office without the basic qualification that most Americans have and one that was essential to his task. He had almost no experience working in a business. Jobs to him are about government.


'The President hasn’t disappointed you because he wanted to'? What idiot speechwriter stuck that in there?

President Obama has been quite deliberate about the direction he wanted America to go since day one. The problems we face now are entirely his responsibility. He was elected to solve problems and to govern, and instead what we got was a crooked, self-serving and dishonest Chicago style rape of law, our national principles. and the public treasury, rotten with crony capitalism and special interests.

It's about time someone had the stones to say so openly.

I have heard a number of clips of President Reagan in the 1980 election going after President Jimmy Carter's record and hammering him on it..and President Obama's record actually makes President Carter look halfway competent. Ronaldus Maximus knew how to hit Jimmy Carter hard, sometimes with humor, sometimes with a stiletto, sometimes with a Louisville slugger. But he never stopped pounding him.It worked well,because if any president deserved to be knocked around for his record, it was President Carter.

I'm disappointed that Governor Romney saw fit to buy into President Obama's number one alibi, repeated ad nauseum..that none of this was President Obama's fault.

Rest assured that when the Democrats meet in Charlotte next week, every other word out of their mouths will be used to demonize Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan and Republicans in general. All of their media lackeys will be mobilized to talk about how hard hitting and masterful these speeches are, and when President Obama gets up on stage and mouths the usual nonsense, the media will genuflect no matter what he says.

The Democrats will not care one whit about what looks presidential. They will simply pull out all the stops and do what they do.

I'm hoping that this was just a momentary lapse of reason on the Romney campaign's part, and that they will understand what kind of people they're dealing with.

They may still end up winning without doing so, but if they want the sort of electoral repudiation of Barack Obama and his party that their performance in office merits, they had better wake up and take some lessons from Ronald Reagan.

Monday, August 27, 2012

As Isaac Moves Into The Gulf, Will The GOP Cancel Its Convention?

092844W_sm.gif

The polls remain pretty much neck and neck, and the nation was waiting to see what Mitt Romeny had to say to them in a widely anticipated acceptance speech.

And then Isaac, a tropical storm that has built into a force 1 hurricane hit.

The worry isn't that the storm would hit the Tampa-St. Petersburg area, but that it will rain devastation on other areas on the Gulf Coast, most likely on Mississippi and New Orleans just as the convention gets started in Tampa Bay.
Link
Aside from the fact that a hurricane will almost certainly suck all the oxygen out of the news cycle and eclipse the GOP convention, ( and quite rightly), one has to consider the effect of the juxtaposition of a hurricane's devastation and people launching balloons and wearing funny hats in the Tampa Bay Convention Center.

Not only that, but you can count of the Obama Media to draw parallels between Isaac and the last big hurricane to hit the area Katrina. And of course, the Republican who was in the White House then.

President Obama could certainly be relied on to take advantage of this by making a high profile tour of the area, something he's rarely seen fit to do when it came to other disasters.

Ideally, one would hope both parties could set aside politics and work together at a time of disaster and work together in unison to overcome it.

That is probably too much to hope for, but for their part I hope the Republicans will at least consider postponing their convention until we see which way the wind blows..literally. A GOP oriented drive to aid hurricane victims if that's what it comes to wouldn't hurt either if they are shut out of participation in disaster relief by the White House.

But the convention needs to be postponed. It's not only the smart thing to do politically, it the right thing to do.

Sunday, August 26, 2012

What Leftist Anarchists Have Planned For The Republican Convention



Brandon Darby worked undercover for the FBI in 2008 and helped stop a bomb plot at that year's GOP convention. In this interview on Breitbart, he goes into some detail on what's being planned and we can likely expect - and it will not be peaceful:

Brandon Darby: The video I gave you is interesting because it’s a video surveillance I took of one section of the Republican National Convention welcoming committee. Several of the clips of video were used in the prosecution of David McKay and Bradley Neal Crowder.



What happened at the Republican National Convention in ’08 is that the overall liberal, Democratic protests were organized by a group called United for Peace and Justice. Now these were the mainstream liberal protesters, not the ones who would violate the law or violate a police order or anything crazy. Now what was interesting is that the same group of people organizing the mainstream liberal protests also organized a breakaway group called the RNC Welcoming Committee and it was 500 to 1,000 anarchists. And their goal was to shut down the Republican National Convention by any means necessary.

Now they had meetings for a long time before and what they ultimately decided to do—and it was folks like Lisa Fithian leading the training, and I know because I was in the training…undercover —but what they did is they mapped out the city, maps with corporate targets, business leaders home addresses, and Republican delegates home addresses, and also where the hotels were the delegates were going to be staying in. And they handed out these maps and then they showed people videos of Molotov cocktails and various other criminal behavior and asked everyone to be creative and feel free to use what they called a diversity of tactics and to make sure the Republican National Convention can’t occur, you know, can’t happen.

In a later planning session they mapped out the area around the convention center; they divided it into several sections. Then each group of anarchists of their RNC Welcoming Committee—which we now call Occupy—each group was responsible for a different sector. They had organized everyone into three groups of people. There was the red, the yellow, and the green. What they decided was that the yellow group was going be the group that would be arrestable. They were the ones who were going to get arrested. They were going to chain their arms and hands together in PVC pipe so that the cops couldn’t cut ‘em out without injuring them. But they were going to chain themselves across the major arteries so that the delegates could not get to the convention center.

Now, Lisa Fithian and the organizers, they realized that the police were not going to allow a group to set up and do that, allow the yellow group to do that. So they figured they could use the green group, the green group being the mainstream liberal and Democratic protesters who would never violate the law intentionally. So the organizers would manipulate the green group to get into the street and protest. The green group’s not realizing that they’re being used to cover illegal behavior that’s interfering with the rights of other Americans to assemble. And then when the police told the green group to get out they would slow the green group down and try to keep them from getting out of the road. Well eventually the green group would get out of the road. And if that didn’t give the yellow group enough time to finish locking down across the road, then the red group—which are the black mask wearing anarchists would come in—and the red group would actually begin to attack police.

Last time they made riot shields that they had made out of stolen traffic barrels and the riot shields had protruding sharpened deck screws from them. And they had their signs where, their protests signs were made out of heavy, heavy sticks so they could actually have a weapon against police but police couldn’t take them or else they were violating their rights to free speech.

And they would send the red group in to attack the police and then the red group would flee and then that would give the yellow group enough time to lock down and shut the RNC down. Well what was interesting about it, is that when the red group fled then the police would treat the protesters—because they’re all one protest—they would treat them as though they had just been attacked, because they had been. Well then the green group would look like they were innocent protesters who were getting attacked and in their minds they were because they didn’t realize that Lisa Fithian and the leaders were using them as part of this effort to violently attack police and attack conservatives.

So the buses that did get through when they were held up by the yellow group, then the red group would come back and the red group threw bricks and flagstones through the windows, they slashed the tires of the buses, they threw bleach and urine in the delegates faces and they attacked the buses and the people on the buses. And that’s what they’re going to do this time.

So that was…the red, yellow, green concept is very important for people to realize that that’s what’s occurring. So people have to remember, this isn’t a bunch of unorganized and disorganized kids. This is Lisa Fithian, she’s the one who led the unions and the anarchists to shut down Seattle at the ’99 World Trade Organization protest in Seattle. It’s not something to play around with because when this is all said and done the FBI informants will have stopped bomb plots just as they and I did last time.


These kinds of tactics were exactly what was used in Seattle, in Oakland, in Vancouver, and even in London as various groups swap strategy and techniques.

And according to Brian Darby, there's an aded twist planned for the GOP convention to shut it down:

The other thing that they’re trying to do is that they have a coms group—and this is breaking news you need to know this—they have a coms group that is trying to shut down the EMS communications structure for the city. That’s really happening. They’re trying to shut down the communications structure for the city for law enforcement and emergency medical personnel.

People don’t realize that these demonstrations, they have a sophisticated communications structure. Like before they have one of these demonstrations, whether it’s this one or whether it’s WTO or whether it’s, whatever it is, whether it’s IMF…When these people when this global movement of anarchists that protests these things they have to rent space and have extra cooling systems and have massive cable networks and they have to have to have a lot of communications equipment, a lot of computer equipment. It’s not like a bunch of people are going to show up and talk on their cell phones. They have some massive computer equipment and their goal is to shut us down.


Needless to say, just as with the OWS movement, the leftist, pro-Obama media is going to defend these people to the death as 'harmless protesters' victimized by over zealous law enforcement. And the fact that Tampa has a Democrat mayor and Obama surrogate in Bob Buckhorn who has been quite vocal about wanting convention participants disarmed and being willing to call off the Republican convention at the least excuse just adds to the mix.

Be prepared to see the RNC shut down because of street violence.



Monday, August 20, 2012

Todd Akin Being Hammered By GOP To Quit Missouri Senate Race



After his remarks that 'legitimate rape rarely results in pregnancy.', Rep. Todd Akin, the GOP nominee for the Missouri Senate race is resisting calls from all sides in the Republican party to withdraw.

"I am in this race to win. We need a conservative Senate," Akin tweeted Monday afternoon, as he solicited new donations. He also told Fox News' Sean Hannity on his radio show that "we're going to stay in."

The tweet followed scattered and unconfirmed reports that Akin was moving to withdraw from the race. Akin, though, rejected those claims publicly even as Republican leaders leaned on him hard to reconsider his bid for Senate.

A source within the National Republican Senatorial Committee told Fox News that Sen. John Cornyn, head of the Senate GOP campaign arm, already has told Akin that if he stays in the race, the $5 million set aside for the Missouri race will be withdrawn. Cornyn, according to the source, told him the party is concerned his presence in the race could imperil Republicans' chances of winning the Senate majority. {...}

Adding to the wave of condemnation, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell called his comments "totally inexcusable."

"What he said is just flat wrong in addition to being wildly offensive to any victim of sexual abuse," McConnell said. "Although Representative Akin has apologized, I believe he should take time with his family to consider whether this statement will prevent him from effectively representing our party in this critical election."

Several other GOP Senate candidates were also putting serious distance between their campaigns and his, as they tried to head off Democratic efforts to link Akin's comments to other members of the party.

GOP Sen. Scott Brown, who's in a tough race against President Obama ally Elizabeth Warren in Massachusetts, tweeted that he found Akin's remarks to be "outrageous."

He followed up with a written statement calling on Akin to bow out.

"As a husband and father of two young women, I found Todd Akin's comments about women and rape outrageous, inappropriate and wrong," Brown said. "There is no place in our public discourse for this type of offensive thinking. Not only should he apologize, but I believe Rep. Akin's statement was so far out of bounds that he should resign the nomination for U.S. Senate in Missouri."

Further, NRSC Chairman Cornyn used a brief written statement to nudge Akin to reconsider his bid for Senate.

"Congressman Akin's statements were wrong, offensive, and indefensible," Cornyn, R-Texas, said in a statement. "I recognize that this is a difficult time for him, but over the next twenty-four hours, Congressman Akin should carefully consider what is best for him, his family, the Republican Party, and the values that he cares about and has fought for throughout his career in public service."


GOP Presidential candidate Mitt Romney also weighed in, as did a number of other Republicans. "Congressman Akin's comments on rape are insulting, inexcusable, and, frankly, wrong," Romney said in an interview with the National Review.

And the Crossroads PAC, which had $2 million in ads scheduled to run in Missouri for Akin has cancelled them.

Akin has already tried walking this back, saying he 'misspoke' but it's hard to put toothpaste of this kind back in the tube.

Congressman Todd Akin is right...we do need a conservative senate. What we don't need is a stupid one.Nor do we need another careerist who puts his own ambition before what's good for the conservative cause he claims to believe in.

This is a test of character for Mr. Akin. He's obviously not ready for prime time. And he needs to withdraw from the race....now.

I also note the difference between the majority of Republicans and Democrats when one of their own does something wrong and makes an asinine statement.Like say, Joe Biden.


Tuesday, July 31, 2012

Ted Cruz Wins Texas Senate Nomination!!!



Which means he's almost assured of a seat in the next Senate.

Cruz was an underdog to take down Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst - the favorite of the party establishment and Hutchison's heir apparent. Ted Cruz was more aligned with the Tea Party, and he had a lot less money to spend than Dewhurst did.

But Ted Cruz prevailed, and I mean to tell you..I think we have an excellent rookie conservative senator coming up. It's good to see common sense prevailing somewhere in America.

Monday, April 02, 2012

Scorched Earth: Santorum Says GOP Floor Fight At Convention Would 'Energize Party'

Rick-Santorum-Not-Tea-Party-Candidate

More proof, if any more were needed, that Rick Santorum is unfit to be president:

Rick Santorum says a fight at the GOP convention over the party's presidential nominee would be "energizing" for the party.

Campaigning in Wisconsin Monday, Santorum pressed his argument that front-runner Mitt Romney isn't the strongest Republican to go up against President Barack Obama in the fall.

The former Pennsylvania senator says a convention floor fight over which candidate should be Obama's general election opponent would be a "fascinating display of open democracy" and would encourage more Republican voters to participate.


This is likely a response to polls showing him losing tomorrow in the Wisconsin winner-take-all primary tomorrow..not to mention the primaries in Maryland and DC.

The idea that some disgruntled failed candidate would try to set off a bomb at the GOP convention just to massage his own ego and try rationalize the damage that would do to himself by saying it would be 'energizing' is simply disgraceful.As I've noted before on other occasions, he doesn't deal with pressure well. President Obama would destroy him in the general election.

Did Senator Santorum forget the main exercise, ridding the country of President Barack Obama? Is he so wrapped up in his own feelings that he thinks a prolonged floor fight televised nationally is going to contribute to that effort?

It's interesting to note that in 2008, Mitt Romney withdrew from the race when he was doing far better than Rick Santorum ( a decision CPAC mourned) and urged people to strive for party unity to defeat Obama and get behind John McCain, the presumptive nominee at that time.

Governor Romney, say whatever else you want about him, is a man who thinks big, beyond himself. Senator Santorum is a much smaller man.He needs to do some real soul searching at this point.

Friday, March 23, 2012

Santorum: 4 More Years Of Obama Better Than Romney


Like I said previously, one of Rick Santorum's weaknesses is that he doesn't handle pressure well.

His latest, in response to a crushing loss in Illinois? That four more years of President Obama would be better than electing Mitt Romney.

“You win by giving people a choice. You win by giving people the opportunity to see a different vision for our country, not someone who’s just going to be a little different than the person in there. If you’re going to be a little different, we might as well stay with what we have instead of taking a risk with what may be the Etch A Sketch candidate of the future.”

Even Newt Gingrich did a double take on that one, tweeting, “Rick Santorum is dead wrong. Any GOP nominee will be better than Obama.”

The Etch A Sketch remark refers to an interview a Romney campaign aide gave on CNN where he made an unfortunate remark to the effect that “everything changes” for the fall campaign. “It’s almost like an Etch A Sketch. You can kind of shake it up and we start all over again.”

If you take the out of context remark to mean that all presidential candidates campaign towards the center once the primaries are over, it's the simple truth but poorly phrased, to say the least.

For Santorum to make statements like this is so far over the top its ridiculous.He obviously never heard of Ronald Reagan's 11th commandment.

For one thing, calling Mitt Romney 'just a little bit different' than President Obama is absolute lunacy, as is speculating that another four years like the ones we've just seen would be anything but disastrous for the country. For another, it's actually Rick Santorum who is a lot closer to President Obama..just from the other side of the spectrum. He's certainly not a conservative.

At this point, all but the diehards are urging him to think about quitting the race. I doubt he will, especially with the Louisiana primary coming up where Louisiana's Catholics can be expected to vote for him and he's favored to win.

Senator Santorum has proven on many levels that he's not ready for prime time. There's no way he can win, and the longer he stays in, the more he helps President Obama's effort for re-election. He needs to put the country ahead of his own ego and get out of the race.

UPDATE: Walkback city...Santorum now has 'clarified' his remarks to say he'll vote for whomever the GOP nominee is against President Obama.Notice he said "vote for" rather than support. Pathetic.

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Which Way Is The GOP Race Headed?

Now that the Illinois primary is over, it might be a good time to actually examine the GOP race in the cold light of fact. And the fact is that Rick Santorum faces an almost impossible task in getting the GOP nomination barring something crazy happening. And that's especially true since he lost huge in Illinois tonight.

Let's take a brief look at the actual math involved.

To get the nomination, you need 1,144 delegates.

Right now, not taking Illinois 54 delegates into account, Mitt Romney has 521 delegates, while Rick Santorum has 253. Newt Gingrich, who's no longer really a factor has 135.

There are 289 unbound 'super delegates' not pledged to Santorum, Gingrich or Paul. Mitt Romney already has 33 of those delegates..giving him a total of 554.

The next slew of upcoming primaries include 329 delegates who will be awarded on a winner take all basis, all in states Romney is heavily favored to win - Maryland (37), Washington DC (16), Delaware (17),California (169), NewJersey (50), and Utah (40) that gives Romney a total of 883, not counting Romney's Illinois win ( 54 delegates) , not counting any delegates Romney picks up in other states that award delegates proportionately and not counting any additional super delegates that get behind the front runner, as they always do towards the end.

The other upcoming proportional primaries in New York (95 delegates) and Rhode Island ( 19 delegates) also strongly favor Romney.

Even if Rick Santorum wins the only other winner take all primary in Wisconsin, (42 delegates), even if he wins most of Louisiana's 46 delegates, even if he manages to get most of the delegates in his home state of Pennsylvania, even if he wins the majority of the 155 delegates in Texas ( and I think both Texas and Pennsylvania going totally to Santorum are doubtful ) the math just isn't there for him to get to 1,144.

Unless Mitt Romney commits such a huge gaffe that he simply knocks himself out of the race.

What I think this means is that both Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich need to do some serious thinking. Both of them say they want to defeat Barack Obama in November, and neither of them have any strategy left to get the nomination outside of some kind of sabotage at the convention.

Meanwhile, as the contentious GOP primary continues eating up oxygen and money,President Obama is flying around the country at the taxpayer's expense and building his campaign and his war chest unimpeded.

I hope both of them sit back, take a deep breath and reflect on these two facts.