What’s The Point Of Name-Calling?

I’ve been called all kinds of names by Obama, Pelosi and Biden. But being called names by George Bush sort of takes the cake. Not that I don’t expect it from him, too.

Remember it started with McCain calling us agents of intolerance.(pre-2000) Even that was only warming up for McCain’s wrath against conservatives..

I don’t mind so much anymore. It is kind of flattering by now to be such a high target on Bush’s list. I mean you never hear him call liberals or Democrats names. In fact, he has little criticism for them at all. Nothing.

It is pretty revealing whom people choose to pin with their worst labels. But was Bush really ever a conservative at all? He is following the McCain, Obama, Biden formula.

So we get nativist, bigot, hater, intolerant and all the rest. He laces his top speeches with critique about us. What gives? I mean why all the anger at us? It’s not like we are jihadis.

That is the point, he can criticize us but then tempers his words on evil barbarians. But then he can go even a step further. When he does have to criticize evil monsters if a situation calls for it, like the 9/11 anniversary, he must also slur it right on over to those right-wing conservatives. Heap it on them real good.

So what does he do? He compares the mentality of the 9/11 terrorists – now that is the correct term for what they were – to us conservatives and regular Americans.

In his speech from the Shanksville 9/11 Memorial ceremony, he tosses in his best criticism. Is that the time and place for it? No, but that doesn’t matter. It is a public opportunity for open ridicule and, buddy, he is not going to pass it up.

“And we have seen growing evidence that the dangers to our country can come not only across borders, but from violence that gathers within. There is little cultural overlap between violent extremists abroad and violent extremists at home.

But in their disdain for pluralism, in their disregard for human life, in their determination to defile national symbols, they are children of the same foul spirit.”

Ah, the same foul spirit – get that euphemism for evil? Isn’t that nice how he works that in? What does that have to do with 9/11 or the sentiments of those who attacked us?

Never mind. He goes on in his domestic criticism saying:

“I come without explanations or solutions. I can only tell you what I have seen. ” — G W Bush 9/11 speech.

No, we are getting his inherent bias and slander about us, not what he has seen. It is his opinion camouflaged as fact. But then he does a strange two-step to at least recognize the objects of the ceremony — honoring brave citizens.

“At a time when nativism could have stirred hatred and violence against people perceived as outsiders, I saw Americans reaffirm their welcome of immigrants and refugees. That is the nation I know. (Applause.)” /…

“Twenty years ago, terrorists chose a random group of Americans, on a routine flight, to be collateral damage in a spectacular act of terror. The 33 passengers and 7 crew of Flight 93 could have been any group of citizens selected by fate. In that sense, they stood in for us all.”

But wait, might any ordinary Americans be the type of people he refers to as “nativists?”

So he has a little problem when he criticizes fellow Americans. He praises them when he wants to and reserves his harshest criticism for Americans. Does it make sense?

It’s bad enough when we hear this bullshit from the Left at every opportunity — when they are the ones who are racists and bigots — but hearing it come at us from Bush is pretty rich. Especially when Bush’s own bigotry will not allow him to criticize the Left, terrorist thugs, or radical Islamists on Jihad.

It is the “same foul spirit,” indeed. So he seems to have taken a page from the Left’s hymnal lately. They have been calling us Taliban. And Bush’s speech went over with them huge. They loved the references. He finds more comfort attacking us than the Taliban.

From nativists to foul spirits, Bush can sure sling them. While doing it all just to preserve and protect his precious legacy from any criticism. We’re disposable deplorables.

It was not George W Bush’s speech that offended me so much, but the fact it was written and scripted that way. He seems to have a lot in common with the lunatic Left.  The only time we hear from George W. Bush is when he is attacking fellow Americans.

Right Ring | Bullright | © 2021

In November, what will we remember?

The strategy for Republicans to win in November amounts to one thing at the top of everything. National issues win. On the fly in less than 800 words.

What the public cares most about are the national issues, which is why Trump won the way he did. That didn’t change. The big picture is now optimistic but needs more clarity.

National issues simply means broad popular issues. The same as 2016. This is not to say that local issues are irrelevant, but the same national issues do affect people locally. It is like a template: budgets, tax cuts, strong military, security, illegal immigration, border enforcement, the wall, jobs and a cadre of others as part of the local mix. Add to that the rise of Sanctuary Cities, pols who support them, and Leftists’ attempts to usurp power.

But face it, local school budgets and zoning ordinances are not the stuff of a national election. Though notice how Democrats try to nationalize them? No, voters go to polls to vote on their congressional reps and, yes, now senators. (17th amend did that) See, Democrats try to nationalize everything to suit their agenda.

We, on the other hand, as conservatives and Republicans, have a great basket of issues people care about, including the blue collar workforce. The fact that unions haven’t caught on should not effect it. There is no one else standing up for people. And those people are still fed up, and now at all the Democrats’ obstruction.

And Democrats are flush with cultural and divisive issues which are not the people’s agenda. Of course, their identity politics requires they play that game. But it is a huge turnoff to voters. Why favor a segment of people when you can appeal to all people?

When people look at their finances, of course they are concerned about jobs, growth, the GDP and spending. Promising someone a free college education doesn’t solve problems, it creates them. Appealing to black lives matter rhetoric doesn’t help anyone. They are identity issues. Screaming racism solves what? Notice how Democrats, to their credit, try to identify with what are now Trump voters. They can’t, yet want to sound Trumpian. But that is the guy they want to impeach as soon as they get their chance.

Republicans cannot be naval gazing, just fighting with themselves, handing Democrats ammunition. Bob Corker went off his little rocker, again, to attack any Trump supporters. He called them “cult-like.” I have a real cult to introduce Corker to. The mirror.

Recently, former Congressman Bob Barr wrote a column explaining the threat this election poses to Republicans and Trump. Impeachment was a big part of it. Understanding that, and impeachment itself, should be a part of this election process. He said much the same thing about national issues. A clarion warning, it offers some inspiration.

Here is the only conclusion I come to: just take all those big, important issues people care about and put them up against the only major issue to Democrats, impeachment.

After all, what would Democrats say, if they were honestly nuanced: (for a sampler)

1) We are going to make you less safe.
2)We’ll make the border less secure — open it up to everyone!
3)We’re going to raise your taxes and explode the budget, at the same time.
4)We are going to tar and feather Trump, first, then Impeach him.
5)We want to roll back your tax cuts and the last election.
6)We want to make America sorry for electing Trump — revenge, payback.
7)We want more sanctuary cities, more ‘sanctuary dances’ like the Philly Mayor’s.
8)We want your guns too, what good is a majority if we can’t take people’s freedoms?
9)We want to stop investigating DOJ, and cover up the Deep State agenda.
10)We will take the abuse of power and obstruction to a whole new level.
11)We will ram our Obamacare back onto the front burner for the 11th year.
12)We would like to turn California into about 5 new Liberal states too — like the way we gerrymander districts. Eric Holder probably has a plan for that.

 Yet that is only for starters. We will just be rehearsing and warming up for phase two, our 2020 takeover. I think we’ve proven our electioneering prowess and capabilities.

 

Not much of a choice when you look at it that way.
We need to finish what we started. Let the Red Tide roll.

Right Ring | Bullright

The Bush-con job

It seems to be time for a little push-push back on the Bush-Bush. Gee, I was so looking forward to doing a Dear John letter to McCain. That will have to wait.

I know, I already had a post on Dubya here but he demands a new one. Now I have to file the Bushes with Corker, Flake, Sasse, McCain, Kasich who are ongoing subjects. After all, look at the legacy they bequeathed us. And they gave us the biggest loser of 2016, Jeb — the guy with an acronym for a name.

It is time for history to respond to the Bush Hecklers. Why were they off limits for years? But that requires a tome that I’ll struggle to do in hardcover. (pre-priced at 49.99) Let’s go with highlights or low lights for starters.

So if that’s what the dynamic duo of destruction want from conservative Republicans, then they shall get it. In his recent speech, George W. declared:

“We’ve seen our discourse degraded by casual cruelty,” Bush said. “At times it can seem that the forces pulling us apart are stronger than the forces binding us together. Argument turns too easily into animosity. Disagreement escalates into dehumanization. Too often, we judge other groups by their worst examples while judging ourselves by our best intentions — forgetting the image of God we should see in each other.”

Has George looked in the mirror in the last few years? He really has been under a rock. Dude, we had to defend you and your Bushisms. They ripped Republicans apart.

“We’ve seen nationalism distorted into nativism, forgotten the dynamism that immigration has always brought to America.”

Is that what you call it,”dynamism”?

Look, if you can’t treat the people who are here, who vote, any better than this, then why should we believe anything you are selling about “immigrants” — illegal or not?.
 

The Bushes don’t seem to understand how all this works. Sure, they were attacked by the left relentlessly. But they shouldn’t mistake that for the ire of the American people they will get in spades from Republicans now. They thought we would not dare respond in kind to their bitter attacks on us. Wrong. They thought it is our job to stand up and defend all their twists and turns of political schizophrenia, the way McCain is. Wrong again. Strange how for political creatures, they just don’t get it.

That is the problem. The Bushes are the poster child for ruling-class elitists who make up the establishment, They are actually viewed with disdain by most of the people, but think they are elite overlords to rule us with an iron hand. They should make decisions, not us.

As Dubya used to say he had “political capital” and he was going to spend it. However, that bank account was drained long ago and the political capital is in the hands of the people, who don’t have much use for Bushes. We are so very fortunate, and I am personally ecstatic, that Jeb did not make it into the White House. So no matter what Bushes think of us and Trump, we are grateful their political power and capital has been cut off.

Recent statements were only an appetizer because the duo of disdain revealed their true inner views in a new book. I suppose Dubya will have to comment or promote this new book around the country, and remind us of the not-so-forgotten Bush years.

The Hill

Former President George H.W. Bush has a blunt assessment of Donald Trump: “He’s a blowhard.” And his son, former President George W. Bush, has harsh words for his Republican successor as well: “This guy doesn’t know what it means to be president.”

“I don’t like him,” George H.W. Bush says in the book. “I don’t know much about him, but I know he’s a blowhard. And I’m not too excited about him being a leader.” – “The Last Republicans” by Mark K. Updegrove.

Does 41 always despise people he doesn’t know much about and call them blowhards? Yet he and his preening son are prestigious? Tell us what it means, Dubya, oh wise one.

The response from this White House was not kind: Necn.com

“The American people voted to elect an outsider who is capable of implementing real, positive, and needed change – instead of a lifelong politician beholden to special interests.” White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders told NBC News. “If they were interested in continuing decades of costly mistakes, another establishment politician more concerned with putting politics over people would have won.”

While in Asia, Trump was asked about it and said:

After landing in Japan for his 11-day Asia trip, Trump refused to comment on the report, saying: “I’ll comment after we come back. I don’t need headlines. I don’t want to make their move successful.”

The White House also responded on the general party criticism:

“If one Presidential candidate can disassemble a political party, it speaks volumes about how strong a legacy its past two presidents really had”

If this is not proof: no matter what happens the Bushes can’t listen to the American people, even to the results of an election. The verdict is clear and now the Bushes are the past.

Right Ring | Bullright

Leave it to Charlie Daniels

Leave it to Charlie Daniels to call out division and status quo from politicians of all ilks.

Read at: https://t.co/Lfyy3SSDXI

Negative Impact On The Election

Okay, which one had more negative effects and impact on the election:

(A) hacks and wikilleaks’ dumps of a couple email accounts connected to Hillary Clinton
(and so-called Russian intervention in the election via influencing voters) OR

(B)the hyper-radicalized media coverage attacking Trump 24/7 for over 9 months ?
(while dumbing down coverage by ignoring criticisms / record of Hillary Clinton)
 

You decide. Shall we examine the headlines and press pages, too? Mo’ investigation!

RightRing | Bullright

An Open letter to Spkr Ryan: Jeff Lord

An Open Letter to Speaker Paul Ryan: It’s time to leave.

by Jeffrey Lord
October 11, 2016, 6:44 pm

Dear Mr. Speaker:

I like you.

We both admired and worked for Jack Kemp at different stages of his career. I agree with much of your Kemp-style agenda. So it gives me no pleasure to say what is now abundantly obvious.

It is time for you to do the honorable thing and resign as Speaker of the House.

Your views on Donald Trump — and for that matter anything else — are between you and your constituents in Wisconsin. But most certainly what you do as Speaker of the House — which is to say as the leader of the Republican Party in the House and a senior leader in the national Republican Party — is to support the Republican presidential nominee elected by the voters. Amazingly you have dragged your feet repeatedly on one of your central responsibilities as a party leader. Now, with your latest statement refusing to defend Donald Trump — the Republican nominee and the elected leader the Republican Party — you have refused outright to perform your job as a senior party leader.

With that in mind, it is time to do the right thing — and the honorable thing: Resign the Speakership immediately.

To my dismay, you have chosen to disregard the long ago wisdom of Ronald Reagan that “a political party is not a fraternal order.” Instead, you have essentially joined forces with those who view the Republican Party as just that: a club. A combination fraternity/sorority and country club whose members — self-selected Congressmen and Senators, wealthy donors, consultants, and lobbyists — see themselves in high school terms as the “in crowd” and all the rest of their fellow Republicans — not to mention conservative Democrats and Independents — not as allies and supporters but as outsiders. Outsiders for whom the “insiders” have a fundamental contempt — a view that is strikingly similar to the view of Americans held by Hillary Clinton and the American Left at large.

Indeed, it is this “fraternal order” psychology that produced first the Reagan Revolution and has now produced Donald Trump. In both instances the base of the party was fed up with Republican elites whose view of America was centered on not principle but their own careers. It is precisely this mindset that — long before Donald Trump appeared on the scene — has given millions of Republican voters the belief that the Republican elites in Washington and elsewhere are, to borrow from Sean Hannity, feckless, weak and interested not in the country but only the preservation of their own careers. As Reagan well knew this kind of belief can be fatal to a political party. […/]

Read more: http://spectator.org/dear-speaker-ryan-resign/

Redistribute this….

This has circulated the Internet but worth reading.

College Student Ashamed Her Father Is A Republican, Until He Said THIS…

A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age, she considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat, and was very much in favor of the redistribution of wealth.

She was deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch Republican, a feeling she openly expressed. Based on the lectures that she had participated in, and the occasional chat with a professor, she felt that her father had for years harbored an evil, selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his.

One day she was challenging her father on his opposition to higher taxes on the rich and the addition of more government welfare programs. The self-professed objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth and she indicated so to her father. He responded by asking how she was doing in school.

Taken aback, she answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain, insisting that she was taking a very difficult course load and was constantly studying, which left her no time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn’t even have time for a boyfriend, and didn’t really have many college friends because she spent all her time studying.

Her father listened and then asked, “How is your friend Audrey doing?”

She replied, “Audrey is barely getting by. All she takes are easy classes, she never studies, and she barely has a 2.0 GPA. She is so popular on campus; college for her is a blast. She’s always invited to all the parties, and lots of times she doesn’t even show up for classes because she’s too hung over.”

Her wise father asked his daughter, “Why don’t you go to the Dean’s office and ask him to deduct a 1.0 off your GPA and give it to your friend who only has a 2.0. That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair and equal distribution of GPA.”

The daughter, visibly shocked by her father’s suggestion, angrily fired back, “That wouldn’t be fair! I have worked really hard for my grades! I’ve invested a lot of time, and a lot of hard work! Audrey has done next to nothing toward her degree. She played while I worked my tail off!”

The father slowly smiled, winked and said gently, “Welcome to the Republican Party.”

Think of that the next time you hear “fair share” or “level playing field.”

H/T Allen West and The Federalist Papers

Cruz to back Trump…stay tuned

So weeks to go and Cruz is groaning about supporting Trump?

Ted Cruz expected to throw support to Trump

By Katie Glueck and Burgess Everett | 09/23/16 | Politico

Multiple sources close to Ted Cruz say the Texas senator is expected indicate his support for Donald Trump as soon as Friday.

It is unclear whether Cruz will say only that he is voting for the Republican nominee, as other lawmakers have done, or offer a more full-throated endorsement, but the idea of throwing any support to Trump is controversial within Cruzworld.

“If he announces he endorses, it destroys his political brand,” said someone who had worked for Cruz’s campaign.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/trump-rival-cruz-to- throw-support-to-gop-nominee-228584#ixzz4L6YZXU00

 

And that is the little box that Ted Cruz put himself in. He seems unable to get out of it…. at least until now. Will he won’t he?

And http://truthfeed.com/breaking-rumors-swirling-that-ted-cruz-will-endorse-trump-on-monday/25379/

Ted Cruz now says “I intend to keep my word”.

Cruz takes the low road to victory

Senator-too proud for prime time-Cruz made a spectacle of himself in Cleveland. The former presidential candidate framed his prime time convention protest against Trump as a matter of “conscience,” which was the buzzword for the Never Trump people.

He called it standing on principled. But Trust Ted cannot be trusted to keep his pledge.

Memo: do not mistake pride for principle. His excuse is principle, but pride is the reason he cannot work with others or join forces to keep the country from falling off the cliff.

Ted Cruz and the Trump Takeover

Pat Buchanan | Townhall

The self-righteousness and smugness of Ted Cruz in refusing to endorse Donald Trump, then walking off stage in Cleveland, smirking amidst the boos, takes the mind back in time.

At the Cow Palace in San Francisco in July of 1964, Gov. Nelson Rockefeller, having been defeated by Barry Goldwater, took the podium to introduce a platform plank denouncing “extremism.”

Implication: Goldwater’s campaign is saturated with extremists.

Purpose: Advertise Rocky’s superior morality.

Smug and self-righteous, Rocky brayed at the curses and insults, “It’s a free country, ladies and gentlemen.”

Rocky was finished. He would never win the nomination.

Richard Nixon took another road, endorsed Goldwater, spoke for him in San Francisco, campaigned for him across America. And in 1968, with Goldwater’s backing, Nixon would rout Govs. George Romney and Rockefeller, and win the presidency, twice.

Sometimes, loyalty pays off.

http://townhall.com/columnists/patbuchanan/2016/07/22/ted-cruz-and-the-trump-takeover-n2195889<

Ted has a problem. His political strategy is dependent on his theory that he has a lock on all the issues. He obviously doesn’t. Ted seems to believe he is an island to himself.

If there was any doubt about what he meant by conscience in the speech, he removed all doubt the next morning in a press conference with Texas delegates. He came out to say his problem with Trump was a personal thing, and that was same reason he broke his pledge to support the nominee.

And so Ted’s supporters based their support partly on the premise of his pledge to the RNC. But now breaking that is a righteous act to Ted — one of dissent. What a difference a few months makes. He deceived supporters and the RNC with his pledge, then backed out on his word, which he said was his bond. There’s principle for you. But for that pledge he was given access to the database of the GOP. He waffled on his part of the deal, while the RNC kept theirs. Now he said it was for a personal reasons he “abrogated” his pledge.

Rerun Romney still on the 2016 fence

Romney rerun, or is it déjà vu all over again?

Romney, still wanted after all these years …. so he thinks.

CNN

Washington (CNN)Mitt Romney’s family is still pleading for him to mount an independent bid for the presidency, the 2012 Republican nominee said Wednesday.

Romney, speaking to CBS News’ John Dickerson at the Aspen Ideas Festival, said a son asked him as recently as Tuesday to do so.

“My wife and kids wanted me to run again this time, interestingly enough,” Romney said. “I got an email from one of my sons yesterday, saying ‘You gotta get in, Dad! You gotta get in!’ ”

More: http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/29/politics/mitt-romney-family-president-aspen/index.html

Hey, Mitt, what part of America does not want you don’t they understand?
Is it the accent, or maybe the translation? They are a little dense like you.

Oh, I keep seeing those planted comments on social media: “Go Mitt, America needs you.” Well, neither America nor the GOP needs you, Mitt. It’s time to shut the hell up.

What happens in Aspen and what is said in Aspen should stay in Aspen. But just go ahead and try running again, Mitt, and you’ll think it was a cake walk last time. (actually, it was but that is beside the point)

Like the Jethro Tull song…”Thick as a Brick.”

Never Trump’s new level of dissent

There is a difference between abstaining in one’s support of Trump and actively working to elect Hillary. Let’s be clear about it. Never Trumpers have busted the dissent mold. These Never Trump people have taken dissent to whole new operational level. (Hello Kristol)

In the worst of days when people could not support McCain or Romney, they still were not out there actively working for Obama — much less pulling the lever for him. (Maybe Colin Powell) And it was not a widespread epidemic, orchestrated to the highest level.

It would be the same thing for Never Trumpers now who say we’d be better off with Hillary. That they believe Repubs can contain her. Right, that worked on Obama. They are far more concerned about Trump. And they broadcast their dislike at every opportunity. It’s a cottage industry, #NeverTrump. It gets great media attention.

Yet people who didn’t like Romney, self-included, were not rooting for Obama and actively trying to get him elected because they didn’t like Romney. That would have been unthinkable. So this is not dissent, it’s sabotage.

RightRing | Bullright

Media, pols frenzy on Trump judge

What a week Repubs are having, or scratch that – what a field day Liberal media and Dems are having attacking Republicans and Trump over his judge statements.

It seemed each Republican voluntarily took a swipe at Trump’s statements. Some jumped at the opportunity. Here’s the latest partial run down.

Racism was on the menu. Paul Ryan called Trump’s remarks textbook racism.

Newt Gingrich:

“This is one of the worst mistakes Trump has made. I think it’s inexcusable,” Newt said on Fox News Sunday.

“He has every right to criticize a judge. He has every right to say certain decisions aren’t right and his attorneys can file to move the venue from the judge. But first of all this judge was born in Indiana. He is an American. Period.” [CBS]

Paul Ryan

“I think that should be absolutely disavowed,” adding that it was a “textbook example of a racist comment.”

“I do absolutely disavow those comments,” he said. “I’m not going to defend these kind of comments because they’re indefensible.” .. I think it’s “absolutely unacceptable.” [CBS]

So now Ryan insinuated Donald Trump is a textbook racist because he made statements questioning the bias of the judge, Questioning a judges bias and conflict makes you a racist.

Friday Ryan: “Look, the comment about the judge the other day just was out of left field for my mind. It’s reasoning I don’t relate to. I completely disagree with the thinking behind that. And so, he clearly says and does things I don’t agree with, and I’ve had to speak up from time to time when that has occurred, and I’ll continue to do that if it’s necessary. I hope it’s not.”

How about Ryan’s reasoning that we cannot relate to, like the Omnibus package?

Erick Erickson

“The attacks are racist. To claim someone is unable to objectively and professionally perform his job because of his race is racism, and damn the GOP for its unwillingness to speak up on this. The party of Lincoln intends to circle the wagons around a racist. Damn them for that.”

Joe Scarborough

“It’s completely racist. They can’t be morally outraged this week when they knew what he was doing last week.”

Kasich

“Attacking judges based on their race &/or religion is another tactic that divides our country. More importantly, it is flat out wrong.”

Sen Susan Collins

“His statement that Judge Curiel could not rule fairly because of his Mexican heritage does not represent our American values. Mr. Trump’s comments demonstrate both a lack of respect for the judicial system and the principle of separation of powers.”

Source: Politico

Mitch is busy comparing Trump to Goldwater, who he had no love for.

Mitch McConnell:

“In interviews on tour promoting his book, McConnell has said the election will be a choice “between two very unpopular candidates” and that he worries Trump could permanently alienate Latino voters from the GOP in the same way that Goldwater caused black voters to bolt from the party. He has also begun making the case that a Republican Senate could serve as a check on Trump and prevent him from abusing power or doing any real damage to the country.” — the Atlantic.

Not bad tap dancing for someone who voted for LBJ and who now tells people, like Trump, to stop attacking others. He’s one of the chief attackers in his tactically sly way.

Lindsey Graham, who only knows what can come from the Graham Cracker that was just looking for an “exit ramp”.

“This is the most un-American thing from a politician since Joe McCarthy,” — Graham told the NYT. [CBS]

Michael Reagan:

This most likely would be the 1st time if my father was alive that he would not support the nominee of the GOP @Reince @newsmax

— Michael Reagan (@ReaganWorld) June 6, 2016

Michael Reagan: I Won't Vote Trump in Primary, Neither Would My Father https://t.co/9qDQ0E3SMF #Newsmax via @Newsmax_Media

— Michael Reagan (@ReaganWorld) June 7, 2016

Marco Rubio:

“It’s offensive — he should stop saying it,. …He’s wrong. The judge is an American.” [CBS]

And to the bigmouth Senate Majority leader, Mitch McConnell: we have been forced to chew on and digest his statement now for 8 years and listen to it used in every issue, by media and Democrats. (it’s gotten more mileage than Mitt Romney’s dog on the roof of his station wagon.)

“The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.”

Thanks for that, Mitch. But how come you did not take to the air and defend that comment and correct the record about it? You let it hang out for everyone else to eat and defend. I’ll pass on the Sen Bob Corker comments, just because.

One more for the road. Pundit SE Cupp took to CNN on Tuesday, condemning Trump, by telling viewers Trump was “Mounting a campaign for white nationalists.”

And now the Liberal media widely reports many Republicans are wondering if they can support Trump going forward. ER What a generous group of self-serving politicos.

French vs. French on Trump

What did David French say before about a Trump nomination?

Was that a French kiss for Trump?

Fast forward, I wonder if anyone informed the brilliant Mr French that many Americans might have some reservations about voting for someone named French for President? But I admit that is still an unproven theory.

That’s right, the Iggy is still here. Just taking a break from mucking out the stalls.

H/T BizPac Review

The Ignorance of reality on Trump

Hi everyone, Iggy Bliss at your service. I’m sorry I have been so busy with everything Trump that I haven’t been able to update you all on my blissful animal farm adventures.

Now that Trump is our presumptive nominee, I haven’t felt the need to purge my intellect further. Sure, there are those who are still calling us ignorant, stupid people and blissfully so. There seems to be a growing pride in that since…. well, we are WINNING!.

Anyway, not to rub it into my betters and intellectual superiors, but Trump has resonated now like no other with people across a spectrum. From low income to high income, from so-called uneducated to educated. Whether it is on jobs and the economy or terrorism.

But yes, we are still considered the blissfully ignorant ones, equivocated to barnyard animals and evolutionary primates. Do we see a little irony in that yet? If not, just wait it is crystallizing along the Trump Train tracks.

Not that I, the great Iggy, is bragging. I don’t take any comfort in saying I told you so. Who wants, or needs, to rub it in that we have a government and an establishment elite that hardly anyone on both sides of the isle trusts. But that is the central problem or symptom today… not the means to gaining control of it.

I have to catch up on events because so much has happened since I spoke you last. Now Paul Ryan and Trump have met and Ryan still withholds his support. Well, to each his own I guess. What is more interesting, for the unpopular speaker of the House, is the lack of criticism of him from the Never Trump crowd. Wait, weren’t they months ago complaining about Cryin’ Ryan’s failings? Now they are silent on Ryan and that other guy he was hooked up with, Romney.

I thought Romney was the anathema to the conservative movement? Call me stupid, but no, he has been scheming with Never Trumpers about running a third Party candidate. Strange bedfellows, indeed. But Mark Cuban — really? And they all call me blissfully ignorant? I can’t even find any barnyard animals with any love for Romney. Seems the enemy of their enemy is their friend.

So this is me, Iggy, rubbing your Never-Trump noses in the venomous saliva of two-time loser, Mitt-the pussycat-Romney. Meow! I hope you all enjoy your lustful affair.

Romney has now said he is done trying to recruit a 3rd candidate. That doesn’t mean he has changed his position on the matter, just that he will not actively recruit a candidate. How big of him. Still, I heard no criticism about him from those who were eager to jump in bed with him. What does that make you Never Trumpers, prostitutes? I think so. The Iggy may still seem ignorant but he is not the one aligning with a two-time estabo loser.

Iggy Bliss signing off, hoping all your Never Trump hallucinations are happy ones.
We’ll leave the light on for you at a Motel 6.

Captain Iggy Bliss ©

Donald Trump, unifier in chief

Can D. J. Trump unify the Republican Party?(sigh) That seems a lot to ask of Trump.

Trump is not the one who blew up and fractured the Party. He is not the one with a legacy of distrust. Now Party leaders and the press hoist it all on his shoulders to unify the Republican Party. And they are making that his litmus test: If he cannot do that, then how can he do anything and how can we win?

Then we have Ryan grandstanding while acting like the godfather of the Party. Ryan is so concerned about the fractured state of the Party when he has been an active participant. Ryan and Romney lost in 2012 and yet here they are as the stalwart flailing curators of the Republican sideshow it has become. Exhibit A for failure.

Yet along comes Trump to ascend as the presumptive nominee and they grill him on what he is going to do to heal the Party? Surreal. If they were looking for a good scapegoat to their own failings, then they believe they found the perfect specimen.

After all, Trump is being blamed or accused of causing everything from dysfunction in Washington to our struggle with Islamic radicals and terrorism, to Republican Party failures. He is blamed for the failures of press and media to do their jobs. He single-handedly is the excuse for everything. A nuclear explosion in North Korea would be his fault. How much else can they hang on one person — an outsider, non-politician at that?

We now have the most divisive administration in modern times, and Hillary has been a big factor in it. Yet Trump is supposed to lead the entire free world in a chorus of Kumbaya — “come by here”. So much to demand of Trump, isn’t it? Well, that’s the game. The higher they can set those expectations, the better the chances he cannot meet them.

Meanwhile, what is expected or demanded of Hillary-Rotten-Clinton? Oh, that she not be indicted in a current administration that seems to have no will to prosecute her anyway. Really, what is her mission? Her agenda is the same as Obama’s — to destroy America under a ruse of hope and change — and continue that to its natural conclusion.

Everyone, including Republican estabo insiders, is setting Trump up for failure. As long as no responsibility for the current condition of catastrophe points back at them.

So if you thought Benghazi, servergate, ISIS and terrorism, or the scandals of Obama and Clinton mattered, you’d be wrong. What matters is can Trump unify and solve all the genetic problems the illustrious insiders have caused? It is repulsive and revolting.

The estabos’ feud, bitch and grudge match is now with the voters — not just Trump.

RightRing | Bullright

Jeb makes it unanimous

Leave it to Jeb to add a declaration to the prez-election that its now a Bush-Free Zone.

“…tremendously frustrated by the abject failure and inability of leaders in Washington, D.C. to make anything better.

American voters have made it clear that Washington is broken, but I’m not optimistic that either of the leading candidates for President will put us on a better course.

The American Presidency is an office that goes beyond just politics. It requires of its occupant great fortitude and humility and the temperament and strong character to deal with the unexpected challenges that will inevitably impact our nation in the next four years.

Donald Trump has not demonstrated that temperament or strength of character. He has not displayed a respect for the Constitution. And, he is not a consistent conservative. These are all reasons why I cannot support his candidacy.

Hillary Clinton has proven to be an untrustworthy liberal politician who, if elected, would present a third term of the disastrous foreign and economic policy agenda of Barack Obama.

In November, I will not vote for Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton, but I will support principled conservatives at the state and federal levels, just as I have done my entire life. For Republicans, there is no greater priority than ensuring we keep control of both chambers of Congress. I look forward to working hard for great conservatives in the Senate and House in the coming months.”

Funny how the guys that were all for supporting the Republican nominee suddenly now cannot.  Well, you got the “tremendously frustrated by abject failure” part right. But thanks for the Bush-Free Zone, Jeb. That was a solid.

Cryin’ Ryan

Ryan says he can’t support Trump, at this time.

In an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper, Ryan said he wants Trump to unify “all wings of the Republican Party and the conservative movement” and then run a campaign that will allow Americans to “have something that they’re proud to support and proud to be a part of.”
“And we’ve got a ways to go from here to there,” Ryan said.

– May 05, 2016 –
Donald J. Trump Responds to Speaker Paul Ryan

“I am not ready to support Speaker Ryan’s agenda. Perhaps in the future we can work together and come to an agreement about what is best for the American people. They have been treated so badly for so long that it is about time for politicians to put them first!”

Donald J. Trump

Friday, Trump told Fox:

“I was very, very surprised. He talks about unity, but what is this about unity? With millions of people coming into the party obviously I’m saying the right thing,”

“So many great endorsements yesterday, except for Paul Ryan! We must put America first and MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!” Trump said.

So let me understand, Ryan demands Trump unify “all wings” of the Republican Party? What elite arrogance. One of the guys responsible for the ongoing Party failures, causing conservatives’ grievances, blames Trump and then expects him to fix it.

This from the guy who was plastering self-promoting videos of himself on social media. What is going on with Ryan and what’s his problem?

Then comes news of a meeting between Trump and members of Congress for next Thursday. Once again, Ryan injects himself in the news cycle. Meanwhile, with all the grief people have over Ryan’s performance, he is pointing at Trump. I’m glad, with all the problems, Ryan finds a convenient scapegoat and whipping post in Donald Trump.

Meanwhile, Dick Cheney takes a stand for unity.

http://www.allenbwest.com/michellejesse/just-in-former-vp-cheney-reveals-who-hell-support-for-president

Money flows from 50 top donors

Close to Half of All Super PAC Money Comes from 50 Donors

(Washington Post) – A small core of super-rich individuals is responsible for the record sums cascading into the coffers of super PACs for the 2016 elections, a dynamic that harks back to the financing of presidential campaigns in the Gilded Age.

Close to half of the money — 41 percent — raised by the groups by the end of February came from just 50 mega-donors and their relatives, according to a Washington Post analysis of federal campaign finance reports. Thirty-six of those are Republican supporters who have invested millions trying to shape the GOP nomination contest.

In all, donors this cycle have given more than $607 million to 2,300 super PACs, which can accept unlimited contributions from individuals and corporations. That means super PAC money is on track to surpass the $828 million that the Center for Responsive Politics found was raised by such groups for the 2012 elections.

More: http://www.teaparty.org/close-half-super-pac-money-comes-50-donors-158566/

Plug and play Ted unplugged in Indiana

Plug and Play Ted got unplugged.

Ted Cruz makes much of what he calls his ground game. What Cruz did in Iowa and in Wisconsin, to his success, was to plug into the ground operation of one of the insiders. In Iowa it was Steve KIng, in Wisconsin it was Scott Walker. No surprise that Walker would have a strong grass roots effort in Wisconsin, including media, given his political career.

So Ted was good when he could plug his campaign into the state grassroots in the state he was going. He did not have that other places and he lost big-time. So he depended on that network to deliver success to his campaign.

However, Trump was not fortunate to have all that access and capability. Rather he just built it himself as he went. And Ted mocked Trump recently for parachuting into states like Mick Jagger and then leaving. But Donald turned out the vote, even in Michigan. His ground game is self-constructed

But now, or since Trump’s constant winning streak cannot be undone, Ted reverts to inside political chicanery. That’s right, the outsider Ted is playing inside-baseball politics. We’ve seen it all along. Then we hear Cruz drones say Donald just does not know how to play the game, or doesn’t understand the rules.

So Ted puts his faith, besides the primaries, into the delegate process and hopes for a contested election. Yesterday Jan Brewer criticized how she was shoved out of the delegate process. Now comes the story of Jim Gilmore.

Washington Post

Jim Gilmore may be a former governor, state attorney general, Republican National Committee chairman and presidential candidate. But he couldn’t get elected as a delegate to his party’s national convention.

When delegates were selected at Virginia’s state convention in Harrisonburg this past weekend, Gilmore, 66, put his name forward and was shut out.

The process was heavily politicized, as supporters of Sen. Ted Cruz (Tex.) maneuvered to elect a delegate slate that they hope will block billionaire Donald Trump from winning the Republican nomination for president.

While Trump won Virginia’s March 1 primary and garnered twice as many votes as third-place finisher Cruz, the party activists at the state convention picked 10 Cruz supporters and three Trump supporters to head to Cleveland.

Gilmore said he had been “informally assured” that he would be on the delegate slate — “that it was a no-brainer.”

But that was before the “strong-arm tactics at the convention” forced him out, he said.

More: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/2016/05/02/61d0e896-107e-11e6-8967-7ac733c56f12_story.html

So Brewer was a one off that didn’t know what she was doing or talking about?

Gilmore has said he is interested in bringing Va into the Republican column and keeping it there. He admits that seems to be Trump. He will support the nominee and says we need to unify the party behind our nominee and beat Hillary. But even that is being undermined by Cruz. So for all the talk Cruz has about consolidating and unifying, he is a divider.

Now in Indiana, on the cusp of losing the Hoosier state, after counting on a win there, he recoils and unloads a diatribe on Trump and those supporting him. But he got Pence’s tepid endorsement, if you can call it that, late in the game where Pence said nice things about Trump as well. Then Came Ted’s scorched earth tirade of personal attack on Trump.

Does he really think this would help him on the verge of losing the primary? Apparently so, but then his back room delegate chicanery continues despite whatever he says publicly. Two faces of a campaign — the outsider pretender vs. the political operative grasping at any tactics he can — damn the unity talk.

RightRing | Bullright

To the electoral map 2016

First, a big hat tip to Dave for forwarding this reference article to me some time back. This is as good a time as any for it. He contemplates the general election.

Ted has been running around for months saying he should be elected because he is the one that can win against Hillary. Since he has said it so often and it is his greatest talking point, then how about it? Can Ted beat Hillary? It is not a popularity contest… on popular vote.

Popular vote is one thing but it comes to the electoral college, as we know. So take a look at the Romney map of 2012, below. Now Cruz has to explain what state(s) he could win above what Romney did to get the 64 more electoral votes of the 270 needed?

The article above from Washington Post says, under the current map Democrats use, they have built in 242 votes. Hillary has to provide the balance. But the question is what more could Cruz do  than Romney did since he had 206. (Romney 2012 map–  270towin.com)

Click the map to create your own at 270toWin.com

Or how much differently could Cruz make the map to get the 270. There is an interactive map here to build your own. Below is the tossup map example.(a good start)

Click the map to create your own at 270toWin.com

One such hypothetical for Cruz, in the article, would be Oh, Va, Fla, Co. But, as he explains, “Obama won all those states twice.” Still, it pays to see the article.

Source maps http://www.270towin.com/