A brutal take down of the so-called “Conservative Movement”

This is rough, tough, and brutal. I am in agreement with Vox Day on this one, he calls it “Devastating. Absolutely devastating” and he is very much correct. Yes, I know, I have had disagreements with Vox Day in the past. But, on this, he is spot on. (I cannot seem to locate the posts, I may have pulled them.)

This article by a John Kludge over at ricochet basically sums up my feelings as well:

Let me say up front that I am a life-long Republican and conservative. I have never voted for a Democrat in my life and have voted in every presidential and midterm election since 1988. I have never in my life considered myself anything but a conservative. I am pained to admit that the conservative media and many conservatives’ reaction to Donald Trump has caused me to no longer consider myself part of the movement. I would suggest to you that if you have lost people like me, and I am not alone, you might want to reconsider your reaction to Donald Trump. Let me explain why.

First, I spent the last 20 years watching the conservative media in Washington endorse and urge me to vote for one candidate after another who made a mockery of conservative principles and values. Everyone talks about how thankful we are for the Citizens’ United decision but seems to have forgotten how we were urged to vote for the coauthor of the law that the decision overturned. In 2012, we were told to vote for Mitt Romney, a Massachusetts liberal who proudly signed an individual insurance mandate into law and refused to repudiate the decision. Before that, there was George W. Bush, the man who decided it was America’s duty to bring democracy to the Middle East (more about him later). And before that, there was Bob Dole, the man who gave us the Americans with Disabilities Act. I, of course, voted for those candidates and do not regret doing so. I, however, am self-aware enough to realize I voted for them because I will vote for virtually anyone to keep the Left out of power and not because I thought them to be the best or even really a conservative choice. Given this history, the conservative media’s claims that the Republican party must reject Donald Trump because he is not a “conservative” are pathetic and ridiculous to those of us who are old enough to remember the last 25 years.

It is this part here that really sticks out:

Third, there is the issue of the war on Islamic extremism. Let me say upfront that, as a veteran of two foreign deployments in this war, I speak with some moral authority on it. So please do not lecture me on the need to sacrifice for one’s country or the nature of the threat that we face. I have gotten on that plane twice and have the medals and t-shirt to prove it. And, as a member of the one percent who have actually put my life on the line in these wars movement conservatives consider so vital, my question for you and every other conservatives is just when the hell did being conservative mean thinking the US has some kind of a duty to save foreign nations from themselves or bring our form of democratic republicanism to them by force? I fully understand the sad necessity to fight wars and I do not believe in “blow back” or any of the other nonsense that says the world will leave us alone if only we will do that same. At the same time, I cannot for the life of me understand how conservatives of all people convinced themselves that the solution to the 9-11 attacks was to forcibly create democracy in the Islamic world. I have even less explanations for how — 15 years and 10,000 plus lives later — conservatives refuse to examine their actions and expect the country to send more of its young to bleed and die over there to save the Iraqis who are clearly too slovenly and corrupt to save themselves.

The lowest moment of the election was when Trump said what everyone in the country knows: that invading Iraq was a mistake. Rather than engaging the question with honest self-reflection, all of the so called “conservatives” responded with the usual “How dare he?” Worse, they let Jeb Bush claim that Bush “kept us safe.” I can assure you that President Bush didn’t keep me safe. Do I and the other people in the military not count? Sure, we signed up to give our lives for our country and I will never regret doing so. But doesn’t our commitment require a corresponding responsibility on the part of the president to only expect us to do so when it is both necessary and in the national interest?

And since when is bringing democracy to Iraq and Afghanistan so much in the national interest that it is worth killing or maiming 50,000 Americans to try and achieve? I don’t see that, but I am not a Wilsonian and used to, at least, be a conservative. I have these strange ideas that my government ought to act in America’s interests instead of the rest of the world’s interests. I wish conservatives could understand how galling it was to have a fat, rich, career politician who has never once risked his life for this country lecture those of us who have about how George Bush kept us safe.

Donald Trump is the only Republican candidate who seems to have any inclination to act strictly in America’s interest. More importantly, he is the only Republican candidate who is willing to even address the problem. Trump was right to say that we need to stop letting more Muslims into the country or, at least, examine the issue. And like when he said the obvious about Iraq, the first people to condemn him and deny the obvious were conservatives. Somehow, being conservative now means denying the obvious and saying idiotic fantasies like “Islam is the religion of peace,” or “Our war is not with Islam.” Uh, sorry but no it is not, and yes it is. And if getting a president who at least understands that means voting for Trump, then I guess I am not a conservative.

This is what you would call a political smack down and it is about time someone said it. This here too, is something that I high agree with:

Lost in all of this is the older strain of conservatism. The one I grew up with and thought was reflective of the movement. This strain of conservatism believed in the free market and capitalism but did not fetishize them the way so many libertarians do. This strain understood that a situation where every country in the world but the US acts in its own interests on matters of international trade and engages in all kinds of skulduggery in support of their interests is not free trade by any rational definition. This strain understood that a government’s first loyalty was to its citizens and the national interest. And also understood that the preservation of our culture and our civil institutions was a necessity.

I put in bold, underlined and turned that quote red to make a point. This above is what happened to the Conservative movement. It started after Ronald Reagan left office and got really crazy after the election and ultimate defeat of George H.W. Bush. After that, Conservationism went straight loony after that. Conservatives have no one to blame, but themselves. They put in a President, who went soft on taxes, and whom proceeded to usher in the “new world order.” and the Reaganites; which consisted of Fundamentalist Christians, like myself — went running for the hills. They knew then, that they had been duped.

Now, this many years later; along comes Trump and he dares to challenge those in the ivory towers that have created what we have now —- and the vultures are out for blood. They know that the current existing state of affairs in Washington D.C. is being threatened and they are doing everything they can to stop Donald Trump.

The question is, can Donald Trump fight them effectively enough to win the nomination?

Video: Romney Rips Trump, Ryan Ducks

My video comments on this, but first the stories:

On Romney’s ripping on Trump, Politico reports:

Mitt Romney opened a new front in the Republican Party’s civil war on Thursday, going after Donald Trump in a scorched-earth speech that eviscerated the Republican front-runner as lacking the temperament, business record and substantive policies to occupy the White House.

Romney immediately said at the outset of his remarks he would neither endorse a candidate nor announce a third presidential bid of his own. Instead, he focused nearly the entirety of his speech on the urgency of stopping Trump.

 “If we Republicans choose Donald Trump as our nominee, the prospects for a safe and prosperous future are greatly diminished,” Romney warned, speaking at the University of Utah in Salt Lake City.

Trump’s economic policies would lead to a sustained recession, Romney charged. “Isn’t he a huge business success and doesn’t he know what he’s talking about?” Romney asked mockingly. “No, he isn’t, and no he doesn’t.”

“He inherited his business. He didn’t create it,” Romney said. “And what ever happened to Trump Airlines? How about Trump University? And then there’s Trump Magazine and Trump Vodka and Trump Steaks and Trump Mortgage? A business genius he is not.”

On Ryan Ducking, Politico reports:

Mitt Romney’s running mate is staying out of the 2012 nominee’s slugfest with Donald Trump.

Paul Ryan told reporters Thursday that he hadn’t even seen a copy of Romney’s speech denouncing Trump before Romney went public. The speaker said House Republicans would work with “whoever the nominee is.”

Ryan, however, did say he “laughed out loud” when Trump said Ryan would “pay a big price” if he couldn’t get along with the billionaire businessman, if he becomes the GOP presidential nominee.

“Sometimes reality is stranger than fiction these days. I don’t really think anything of it,” Ryan said. “I’m a good-natured guy. I get along with everybody.”

“Mitt and I are very close friends. We have talked about lots of things over the days and weeks,” Ryan added. “But I am not sure exactly what he is going to say. He feels the need to speak out on behalf of the Republican Party.”

My thoughts on these two:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7KSuFxRSW0?rel=0

By the way, I am listening to Chris Christie’s presser. He didn’t resign or withdraw support. He called the presser to answer questions and respond to calls for his resignation. He isn’t resigning.

Good Local Michigan News: Ex-State Reps Todd Courser and Cindy Gamrat to face felony charges

This is such a good thing to hear. Finally, these two idiots are going to have to pay the piper for their stupidity.

Via The Detroit News, which is, by the way; A Conservative/Libertarian leaning newspaper here in Detroit. (For the out of state people that read here.)

Lansing — Attorney General Bill Schuette said Friday warrants have been issued for the arrest of former state Reps. Todd Courser and Cindy Gamrat for felony charges of misconduct in office related to their failed attempts to cover up an extramarital affair that rocked the Capitol last summer.

If convicted on all counts, Courer would face a maximum of 30 years in prison. If found guilty, Gamrat could be sentenced to up to 10 years in prison.

The charges for these two turkeys are as follows:

The accused: former state Reps. Todd Courser and Cindy Gamrat

Courser, a Lapeer-area Republican, will face four felony charges, Schuette said. They include:

■ A perjury charge for lying under oath while testifying before a special House committee about letting an aide forge his signature on a bill he wanted to file before other representatives could.

“Only legislators sign legislative proposals,” said Schuette, a former state senator.

■ Three counts of misconduct in office for allegedly lying to the House Business Office, which investigated the two lawmakers; instructing his staff to forge his signature on bills and asking House aide Ben Graham to send a fake email to Republicans across the state, which Graham refused to do.

Gamrat, R-Plainwell, will be charged with two counts of misconduct in office, punishable by up to five years in prison or a $10,000 fine for each charge, Schuette said.

Gamrat’s misconduct charges are for giving false information to the House Business Office and instructing a staff member to forge her signature to speed up the filing of draft legislation, Schuette said.

And that is not all:

Courser and Gamrat face other legal troubles.

Schuette said he will refer to Secretary of State Ruth Johnson “potential evidence of campaign finance violations involving doing political work on state time.”

The House’s expulsion charges included the use of House employees by Courser and Gamrat of House for political tasks.

Schuette also said he will notify the Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission of the charges against Courser, a Lapeer attorney.

“They will potentially review the status of his law license as this case proceeds through the judicial system,” the attorney general said.

Some might say that this is nothing more than a political set up. I call B.S.; the guy was having an affair with this woman and he tried to use his office to cover it up. Now, he is going have to face the music and that could not be a better thing to happen. The Republicans have always been painted by the liberal left, as dishonest, corrupt people. Well, now that little narrative is going to be challenged by this right here.

May these two get the maximum punishment allowed by law. They used the Tea Party Movement and rode the wave all the way to the statehouse here in Michigan and then, to beat all; they got there and became drunk with power and began an affair. Then, on top of that, they tried to cover it up. Sorry, that does not wash with me. Let them pay for their crimes.

Let them rot in jail. 😡

Audio: Obama talks about Iowa, Hillary, Sanders and 2016

The full audio:

The Story via Politico:

Barack Obama, that prematurely gray elder statesman, is laboring mightily to remain neutral during Hillary Clinton’s battle with Bernie Sanders in Iowa, the state that cemented his political legend and secured his path to the presidency.

But in a candid 40-minute interview for POLITICO’s Off Message podcast as the first flakes of the blizzard fell outside the Oval Office, he couldn’t hide his obvious affection for Clinton or his implicit feeling that she, not Sanders, best understands the unpalatable pragmatic demands of a presidency he likens to the world’s most challenging walk-and-chew-gum exercise.

“[The] one thing everybody understands is that this job right here, you don’t have the luxury of just focusing on one thing,” a relaxed and reflective Obama told me in his most expansive discussion of the 2016 race to date.

Iowa isn’t just a state on the map for Obama. It’s the birthplace of his hope-and-change phenomenon, “the most satisfying political period in my career,” he says — “what politics should be” — and a bittersweet reminder of how far from the garden he’s gotten after seven bruising years in the White House.

The caucuses have a fierce-urgency-of-now quality as Obama reckons with the end of his presidency — the kickoff of a process of choosing a Democratic successor he hopes can secure his as-yet unsecured legacy, to keep Donald Trump or Ted Cruz or somebody else from undoing much of what he has done. And he was convinced Clinton was that candidate, prior to the emergence of Sanders, friends and associates have told me over the past 18 months.

“Bernie came in with the luxury of being a complete long shot and just letting loose,” he said. “I think Hillary came in with the both privilege — and burden — of being perceived as the front-runner. … You’re always looking at the bright, shiny object that people haven’t seen before — that’s a disadvantage to her.”

He also spoke of Bernie Sanders:

Obama didn’t utter an unkind word about Sanders, who has been respectfully critical of his administration’s reluctance to prosecute Wall Street executives and his decision to abandon a single-payer health care system as politically impractical. But he was kinder to Clinton. When I asked Obama whether he thought Sanders needed to expand his horizons, if the Vermont senator was too much a one-issue candidate too narrowly focused on income inequality, the presidente didn’t dispute the assertion.

Gesturing toward the Resolute Desk, with its spread-winged eagle seal, first brought into the Oval Office by John F. Kennedy, Obama said of Sanders: “Well, I don’t want to play political consultant, because obviously what he’s doing is working. I will say that the longer you go in the process, the more you’re going to have to pass a series of hurdles that the voters are going to put in front of you.”

Then he added: “As you’ll recall, I was sitting at my desk there just a little over a week ago … writing my State of the Union speech, and somebody walks in and says, ‘A couple of our sailors wandered into Iranian waters’” — and here he stopped to chuckle in disbelief — “that’s maybe a dramatic example, but not an unusual example of the job.”

As much as I hate to say it; President Obama is correct about that one. The office of the President of the United States is a very difficult job and it requires someone who can handle the job. While Bernie Sanders might be a respectable person and all; if I were voting in a Democratic Primary, there is no way that I would vote for Bernie Sanders, I would most likely vote for Hillary Clinton. Because she has already been there and she seems, for a Democrat, a bit more reasonable, than Bernie Sanders.

Needless to say, being an ideologue is great; if you are an activist or even maybe a Senator. However, when you are the commander and chief, that is a whole other ballgame and there is a certain amount of pragmatism is required in that office, if you actually want to succeed at the job.  You have to remember, when you are President; you are President of the people of the United States of America, not just the President of the people who voted for you. You have to take into account everyone, not just those who voted for you. This is why I am not too keen on Ted Cruz; he is an extreme ideologue on the right, where Bernie Sander is an extreme ideologue on the left.

This is where I think Donald Trump might just be the more pragmatic candidate, who might just be able to get things done in DC and put aside some of this partisan rancor that has become so terrible under Bush and Obama. Now, if we could just work on his humility and get him to stop retweeting stuff like this here.

Other Bloggers: Vox, The Daily Beast, USA Today, Yahoo Politics, John Hawkins’ Right Wing News, Mother Jones, Talking Points Memo, Hot Air, The Daily Caller, Washington Post, ABC News, Shakesville, Slantpoint and The Week – Via Memeorandum

Donald Trump just secured the soccer mom vote 

He also just secured the female evangelical female vote too.

AMES, Iowa — Sarah Palin, the former Alaska governor and 2008 vice-presidential nominee who became a Tea Party sensation and a favorite of grass-roots conservatives, endorsed Donald J. Trump in Iowa on Tuesday, providing him with a potentially significant boost just 13 days before the state’s caucuses.“Are you ready for the leader to make America great again?” Mrs. Palin said with Mr. Trump by her side at a rally at Iowa State University. “Are you ready to stump for Trump? I’m here to support the next president of the United States — Donald Trump.”Her support is the highest-profile backing for a Republican so far. It came the same day that Iowa’s Republican governor, Terry Branstad, said he hoped that Senator Ted Cruz would be defeated in Iowa. The Feb. 1 caucuses are a must-win for the Texas senator, who is running neck-and-neck with Mr. Trump in state polls.The endorsement came as Mr. Trump was bearing down in the state, holding multiple campaign events and raising expectations about his performance in the nation’s first nominating contest.As Mrs. Palin announced her backing, Mr. Trump stood wearing a satisfied smile as she scolded mainstream Republicans as sellouts and praised how Mr. Trump had shaken up the party. “He’s been going rogue left and right,” Mrs. Palin said of Mr. Trump, using one of her signature phrases. “That’s why he’s doing so well. He’s been able to tear the veil off this idea of the system.” – Source: Sarah Palin Endorses Donald Trump, Which Could Bolster Him in Iowa – The New York Times

 

The video:

https://youtu.be/Tif6xm4_ysA?t=58m51s

The question that many are asking is, why did she pick Trump over Cruz? Actually, there are two reasons; one is that Cruz might have seriously pissed off Palin by basically insulting her. The other reason basically is because Ted Cruz’s wife works for or did work for one of the biggest banks, that was involved with the huge meltdown in 2008 and got a bailout from it. She also is or was, depending on whom you believe; a member of the council on foreign relations, which is huge minus among the Conservative base —- especially the Ted Party base.

Reaction has been predictable among the left. The reaction among the right is varied; some are happy, some, not so much. Personally, I think that this endorsement will be just another feather in Donald Trump’s hat; I just hope that Trump does not squander this chance. For the drive-by crowd, I am neither a supporter or against Donald Trump; I view all politicians with a good dose of skepticism.

I would recommend Trump not to use her too much to stump for his campaign, because there are a good number of people, who see Palin as a blithering idiot and that would work against him.  An endorsement is fine, a campaign attack dog would be a disaster. So, keep Palin at a distance. I just hope Trump does not pick her to his Vice President; that would be huge mistake. I mean, anything is better than Hillary. But, with Palin in the VP slot, Trump would not get elected in the general election at all. I might be wrong about that, but I really doubt it.

Either way, I will be following this a bit more closely, as this primary race just got a bit more interesting now.

Blogger roundup:  The Huffington Post, Donald J Trump for President, Guardian, John Hawkins’ Right Wing News, US News, Mediaite, Gawker, FiveThirtyEight, Bloomberg Business, Power Line, The Atlantic, Algemeiner.com, Business Insider, Hot Air, ThinkProgress, Right Wing Watch, Lawyers, Guns & Money, Vox, Shot in the Dark, Raw Story, The Right Scoop,National Review, Le·gal In·sur·rec· tion, RealClearPolitics, The Last Tradition, Washington Post, addictinginfo.org, Trail Blazers Blog, Talking Points Memo, American Spectator,Political Insider …, BuzzFeed, Outside the Beltway, The Slot, Weasel Zippers, Mother Jones, VICE, The Week, Vox Popoli, Daily Kos, The Last Refuge, Politico and Townhall.comMother Jones, ABC News, BizPac Review, New York Times, U.S. News, Washington Times, The Hill, National Review, RedState, Fox News Insider,Washington Monthly, The Daily Caller, The Gateway Pundit, Balloon Juice, American Spectator, The Right Scoop, The Week, Mediaite, Salon, Hot Air, Telegraph,PoliticusUSA, Bloomberg.com, Politico and Little Green Footballs

 

 

Chuck Baldwin makes a very good point

Chuck Baldwin makes this good point:

So, let’s see: all over America this Sunday, millions of Christians will gather in their churches to celebrate the birth of the Prince of Peace. Adult choirs, children’s programs, teen choirs, orchestras, bands, Sunday School lessons, pageants, and sermons will all laud the birth of the Prince of Peace. They will hear messages about love and peace and brotherhood. They will raise their hands in “worship,” smile and laugh, shout “Amen,” and get warm and fuzzy feelings all over as they celebrate the day that the Prince of Peace was born.

No doubt, pastors all over America will quote Luke 2:13, 14. “And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying, Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.”

But as soon as the Christmas celebration passes, their vocalizations of peace and goodwill will be buried amidst a cacophony of hatred for their fellow man: specifically, for their fellowmen who call themselves Muslims. We might hear “Kill the infidels!” from the mouths of certain Islamic jihadists, but that same cry is heard by God from the hearts of, perhaps, millions of America’s Christians.

Chuck goes on:

Every day, my email inbox fills up with anti-Muslim hatred–and much of it from professing Christians. These are the same ones that will celebrate the birth of the Prince of Peace next week.

As justification for their bigotry and hatred, Christians love to quote passages from the Koran that speak of jihad against “infidels.” But, it never ceases to amaze me that these same Christians seem to have never read the Jewish Talmud–or even the writings of many Christian leaders from years gone by.

For example, here are some excerpts from the Talmud:

“Since God already gave the Torah to the Jewish people on Mt. Sinai we no longer pay attention to heavenly voices. God must submit to the decisions of a majority vote of the rabbis.” (BT Bava Metzia 59b)

“All gentile women without exception are: ‘Niddah, Shifchah, Goyyah and Zonah’ (menstrual filth, slaves, heathens and prostitutes).” (BT Sanhedrin 81b – 82a)

“The best of the gentiles: kill him; the best of snakes: smash its skull; the best of women: is filled with witchcraft.” (BT Kiddushin 66c)

“Regarding bloodshed the following distinction applies: If a non-Jew killed another non-Jew, or a non-Jew killed a Jew, the killer is liable for execution; if a Jew killed a non-Jew, he is exempt from punishment.” (BT Sanhedrin 57a)

“Jews may use lies (‘subterfuges’) to circumvent a gentile.” (BT Baba Kamma 113a)

“On Passover Eve they hanged Jesus of Nazareth. And the herald went out before him for 40 days and proclaimed, Jesus of Nazareth is going to be stoned because he practiced sorcery, incited and led Israel astray. Whoever knows of an argument that may be proposed in his favor should come and present that argument on his behalf. But the judges did not find an argument in his favor, so they hanged him on Passover Eve…Did Jesus of Nazareth deserve that a search be made for an argument in his favor? Surely he incited others to idol worship.” (BT Sanhedrin 43a)

Celebrated ancient religion historian Peter Schafer, who is now the director of the Jewish Museum of Berlin, wrote this commentary on the Babylonian Talmud (BT) Grittin 57a, “…Jesus shares his place in the Netherworld (hell) with Titus and Balaam, the notorious arch enemies of the Jewish people. Whereas Titus is punished for the destruction of the Temple by being burned to ashes, reassembled, and burned over and over again, and whereas Balaam is castigated by sitting in hot semen, Jesus’ fate consists of sitting forever in boiling excrement.” (Peter Schäfer, “Jesus in the Talmud,” Princeton University Press, p. 13)

Amazingly, I don’t hear Christians screaming the accusation that “there is no such thing as a peaceful Jew,” based on the writings of the Talmud and its apologists. Yet, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently promised that Talmudic law is the official law of Israel. [Link]

Make no mistake about it: the Talmud, NOT the Torah, is the Bible of the Zionists. The “Oral Law” of the Pharisees who crucified Christ formed the basis for the Talmud. This was exactly what Jesus was referring to when he scolded the Pharisees for placing their “traditions” ahead of the Law of Moses (the Torah). I propose that the Talmud is FAR WORSE than the Koran; and I believe I can prove it.

The Pharisees hated the Lord Jesus then, and their spiritual descendants, the Zionists, still hate Him today. Yet, there is not a peep from the Christian community at large about the threat posed to Christian America from Zionists.

Most people would dismiss this as hate speech. But, it is factual truth. What is a pity that most Christians won’t wake up to this fact.

Problem is Chuck Baldwin is wrong about the Roman Catholic Church. They’re just as evil as the left and the Zionist right.

In fact, the Roman Catholic Church are the biggest enablers of the Zionist movement today. In fact, they practically own it.

Some straight talk on Donald Trump

This is laughable at best. When Trump is winning, he loves the polls, when he is behind they are unscientific. 🙄

The Story via NYT:

Ben Carson has taken a narrow lead nationally in the Republican presidential campaign, dislodging Donald J. Trump from the top spot for the first time in months, according to a New York Times/CBS News survey released on Tuesday.

Mr. Carson, a retired neurosurgeon, is the choice of 26 percent of Republican primary voters, the poll found, while Mr. Trump now wins support from 22 percent, although the difference lies within the margin of sampling error.

The survey is the first time that Mr. Trump has not led all candidates since The Times and CBS News began measuring presidential preferences at the end of July.

Charlie Rose thinks this is a big deal:

Trump says that the polls are unscientific:

This is laughable at best, this is because the reason Donald Trump is falling in the polls, is because of the fact that Trump has bashed Jeb Bush (I am not a fan of Jeb, don’t worry!) and Donald Trump took an underhanded swipe at Ben Carson’s religious beliefs as well, which I thought was totally uncalled for.

Here’s the video of Donald Trump taking his underhanded swipe at Ben Carson’s religion:

You see, people see this sort of stuff; the back and forth with the Bushes, the slamming of Ben Carson’s religious beliefs and they start to think, “since when did this become a religious contest?” Which political elections are not supposed to be about that at all. Donald Trump also comes off as a bit of a jerk to most people when he does this.

For the record, Ben Carson is a Seventh Day Adventist, which I as a Baptist do disagree with their theology, very much so. However, I do not believe that Ben Carson’s religious beliefs should be a litmus test to be President of the United States and I do not believe that this sort of idiotic slamming of someone’s religious beliefs should be a part of this Presidential race at all.

Not to mention that Donald Trump insulted Iowa voters, I mean, can you get any more stupid than that? The funny part is that, to cover his own backside, he blamed a staffer for the insult. How childish can you get?

It is a bit early in this primary cycle; but, I have to say, I am beginning to believe that Donald Trump has used up his star power and that it is going to start hurting him, and not help him. At first, when Donald Trump came on the scene, I supported him. However, it is becoming clearer to me, that Trump is simply in this race to make a name for himself and that he really does not care about winning the Presidency. My support of him has basically dried up and I hope he shortly does the honorable thing and drops out of this race. He has turned a serious race into a clown show and it has done more to hurt the Conservative cause than anyone else in this race could ever do.

I mean, Donald Trump is trying and failing badly at trying to take credit for Ford Motor Company bringing jobs back to America, something that the current Governor of Ohio, who is also running for President, is taking serious issue with, not to mention Ford themselves. This tells me that Trump is simply into this for what I like to call “publicity whoring.”

My advice to Iowa primary voters, give this joke of a Presidential Candidate a one way ticket back to his plush office in Manhattan and vote for someone who is actually serious about being the next President of the United States of America.

 

 

UPDATED WITH STATEMENT John Boehner to resign at end of October

I knew this was coming, I just did not know when.

Via The New York Times:

WASHINGTON — Speaker John A. Boehner, under intense pressure from conservatives in his party, announced on Friday that he would resign one of the most powerful positions in government and give up his House seat at the end of October, as Congress moved to avert a government shutdown.

Mr. Boehner, who was first elected to Congress in 1990, made the announcement in an emotional meeting with his fellow Republicans on Friday morning.

The Ohio representative struggled from almost the moment he took the speaker’s gavel in 2011 to manage the challenges of divided government and to hold together his fractious and increasingly conservative Republican members.

Most recently, Mr. Boehner, 65, was trying to craft a solution to keep the government open through the rest of the year, but was under pressure from a growing base of conservatives who told him that they would not vote for a bill that did not defund Planned Parenthood.

Mr. Boehner’s stunning announcement lessens the chance of a government shutdown next week as Republican leaders in Congress will push for a short-term funding measure to keep the government operating and the speaker will no longer be deterred by those who threatened his job.

There are some that are saying that this could cause a problem for the GOP and it could be a win for the Dems. However, I disagree with that, the Dems are so unpopular now with Americans, especially middle America that I believe that this will only strengthen the GOP’s base and appeal.

Either way, this will be a shift from the establishment running the house to a conservative. Look for more impasse with the President till he leaves office. This might lead to Government shutdowns and other such stuff.

Stay tuned.

Update: Here is the Official Statement:

WASHINGTON, DC – House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) today issued the following statement:

“My mission every day is to fight for a smaller, less costly, and more accountable government.  Over the last five years, our majority has advanced conservative reforms that will help our children and their children.  I am proud of what we have accomplished.

“The first job of any Speaker is to protect this institution that we all love.  It was my plan to only serve as Speaker until the end of last year, but I stayed on to provide continuity to the Republican Conference and the House.  It is my view, however, that prolonged leadership turmoil would do irreparable damage to the institution.  To that end, I will resign the Speakership and my seat in Congress on October 30.

“Today, my heart is full with gratitude for my family, my colleagues, and the people of Ohio’s Eighth District.  God bless this great country that has given me – the son of a bar owner from Cincinnati – the chance to serve.”

The comments over on that site are for the ages. The old school of politics and political operation is over. This is a new era and Boehner just could not exist in it. The days of the Republican ruling class are over; which is, in a way, a good thing for America. The establishment is going to have to either get in line or get out of the way.

Related:

Blogger roundup: ThinkProgress, Power Line, Political Wire, Business Insider, Hot Air, NBC News, The Week, Political Insider blog, Hit & Run, Aleteia.org, The Hinterland Gazette, The Gateway Pundit, Refinery29, Red Alert Politics, Towleroad, John Hawkins’ Right Wing News,The Iowa Statesman, Mediaite, The Daily Caller, Washington Post, BillMoyers.com,Althouse, Outside the Beltway, The Federalist and Allen B. WestBloomberg.com news, Le·gal In·sur·rec· tion, The PJ Tatler, TPNN and Arkansas Blog, Arkansas TimesLiberaland, Washington Monthly, Speaker.gov, protein wisdom,Poynter., UPROXX, Outside the Beltway, The Pulse 2016, Washington Free Beacon and Index: JustOneMinute, American Spectator, addictinginfo.org and Booman TribuneTalking Points Memo, Washington Monthly, Campaign for America’s Future, The Daily Banter, Forbes, AMERICAblog News and The Gateway PunditABC News, RT, Lawyers, Guns & Money and Bloomberg BusinessOnPolitics, Boing Boing and The Agonist 

Scott Walker drops out

I did not see this coming at all. 😯

The Video:

Via NYT:

Updated, 8:14 p.m. | Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin, whose early glow as a Republican presidential contender was snuffed out with the rise of anti-establishment rivals, announced on Monday that he was quitting the race and urged some of his 15 rivals to do the same so the party could unite against the leading candidate, Donald J. Trump.

Mr. Walker’s pointed rebuke of Mr. Trump gave powerful voice to the private fears of many Republicans that the party risked alienating wide swaths of the American electorate – Hispanics, women, immigrants, veterans, and most recently Muslims – if Mr. Trump continued vilifying or mocking those groups as part of his overtures to angry and disaffected voters.

Still, Mr. Walker’s exit was not selfless: He was running low on campaign cash, sliding sharply in opinion polls, losing potential donors to rivals and unnerving supporters with a steady stream of gaffes, like saying he would consider building a barrier wall along the Canadian border.

Appearing ashen and drained at a brief news conference late Monday in Madison, Mr. Walker said the Republican presidential field was too focused on “how bad things are” rather than on “how we can make them better for everyone.” Without naming Mr. Trump, Mr. Walker issued a plea to fellow candidates to coalesce around a different Republican who could offer a more “optimistic” vision and guide the party to a victory next year that, he admitted with sadness in his voice, he could not achieve himself.

“Today I believe that I am being called to lead by helping to clear the field in this race so that a positive, conservative message can rise to the top of the field,” Mr. Walker said. “With this in mind, I will suspend my campaign immediately.

“I encourage other Republican presidential candidates to consider doing the same so that the voters can focus on a limited number of candidates who can offer a positive, conservative alternative to the current front-runner,” he said.

Scott Walker was seen by many as the social conservative that dared to take on public sector unions and won. Of course, the labor movement is over the moon that Walker dropped out.

My Take: While Walker might have generated a good deal of buzz in Wisconsin and with the labor movement; he really never caught on in the national stage. Not only this, but the field was just much too crowded and of course, the progressive media complex was after him from the start. When trump jumped in, all the attention went to him.

It was most likely for the best; because if the progressive did not savage him, the rest of the field would have.

Of course, this might have something to do with it too. Via Matt Lewis:

The thing that really soured me on him, however, was the very transparent way that his team decided Iowa was “must win,” telegraphed it, and then proceeded to pander to the populist right that presumably constitutes the base of the Iowa caucuses. It began when Walker ousted strategist Liz Mair for having said some uncharitable things about the state, but really manifested itself in the hurling of uncharacteristic red meat.

He flip-flopped on immigration, going so far as to say that it wasn’t a flip-flop since he didn’t vote on it. Then he went over the top on saying that he wanted a Constitutional amendment to let states ban gay marriage — but then (apparently) sent his wife out to let it be known that she disagreed. He started to look like a phony who would do or say whatever it took to be elected.

And then, having betrayed anyone not on the populist right (which includes center-right opinion leaders, establishment RINOS, and everyone in between), and having doubled down on being Iowa’s hard-right populist, Walker was completely out-flanked by Donald Trump (and Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina and Ted Cruz). But mostly Donald Trump. Walker looked like a wimp on the debate stage. He had no charisma. He didn’t look like a president. He didn’t even look like a bully, as Trump does. He looked like the guy whose lunch money the bully takes.

Hmmmm… Interesting.

Related:

Blogger Roundup:  Power Line, The Atlantic, Talking Points Memo, The PJ Tatler, Slantpoint,JSOnline, WHNT-TV, Daily Kos, Hit & Run, No More Mister Nice Blog,National Review, Right Wing Watch, tpnn.com, The Gateway Pundit, Outside the Beltway,Business Insider, WSLS-TV, Political Insider blog, Taylor Marsh, LifeNews.com, Le·gal In·sur·rec· tion, Hot Air, Mashable, BizPac Review, Weekly Standard, Political Wire, Mock Paper Scissors, WQAD-TV, KFOR-TV, The Pulse 2016, Naked Politics and Washington Free Beacon