Full Caf Americano®
It was an obvious collaboration of efforts when Hillary Clinton made her disingenuous pitch for Republican support yesterday.
How do we know it was disingenuous? Hillary’s lips were moving. How do we know it was collaborative? Karl Rove’s lips weren’t moving.
It seemed like an obvious political coup: scores of Republicans telling voters that a Hillary Clinton presidency would be safer than a Donald Trump one. Fifty of them signed an open letter warning that Trump “would put at risk our country’s national security.” Fifty more joined “Together for America,” a Clinton effort urging voters to “put country over party.” Then her team began exploring whether former secretaries of state, such as Henry Kissinger, might back her.
That, liberals warned, would be a step too far. And the prospect fed a perception that, with a contentious primary behind her, the Democratic nominee has returned to her old, hawkish ways and is again taking progressives for granted.
Yep, WaPo is worried that Hillary might lose liberal support by querying GOP establishment turncoats. So why would Hillary take the risk, if she had not been assured of establishment GOP support?
Hey, I’m just thinking out loud here.
It’s even an odder marriage, at that, when you add the Cruzers. Some Ted supporters (apparently seeing the handwriting on the wall) climbed onboard the Hillary Express way back at the beginning of the year.
The commies at ThinkProgress jumped on it as early as February.
“Quite honestly, I would probably vote for Hillary Clinton before I would vote for Donald Trump, because I think Donald Trump is going to destroy the Republican party,” [44-year-old Cruzer Jason Seibold told the leftist blog]. “I’m a Republican, but if Donald Trump wins the election, then the party’s left me. I haven’t left the party. At that point, I’m no longer going to be a Republican.”
So you desert and run as far left as you can get from Ted Cruz’s much-touted originalist “convictions”?
Not a peep from St. Cruz the Beloved in all this time, we should add.
Many of these are the conservatives who are quickest to throw the Buckley rule in our face when a Pat Buchanan loses to a George W. Bush.
Yet they turn on a Roosevelt dime to support an Alinsky radical when a boistrous New York Republican gives their fair-haired Pentecostal or their limp-wrist Catholic an @$$whooping?
To support a woman who, one hastens to point out, seated Orlando Islamist shooter Omar Mateen’s father, a gay-bashing, Sharia-spouting Taliban supporter, in a place of honor on stage behind her podium.
Not one of the Pulse victims’ family members in sight.
Full Caf Americano
But there are a few commonsense true-blue conservatives and establishmentistas left who are doing the right thing.
It wasn’t exactly with the in-your-face-trust-no-one-under-30 fervor of a ‘60’s radical, that George P. Bush broke ranks with Bush the Weaker and declared his support for Donald Trump.
But, by George, he did cowboy up.
“From Team Bush, it’s a bitter pill to swallow, but you know what? You get back up and you help the man that won, and you make sure that we stop Hillary Clinton,” George P. said, according to a video from the event.
So the secret is not out?
I would’ve thought that everyone in the Bush domiciliary knew that the wheelchair-bound nonagenarian Bushes and their scion are completely comfortable with their “black sheep son” as first gentleman in a Hillary White House.
So how do I end this?
How about by just saying, You Lying Hypocritical SOBs!
Politics. Culture. Hot Chicks.
American Patriot's Reality Check
News you need to know to stay informed
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" - Richard Feynman
Est. 2010 - "Dishonest, diversionary and pompous..."
If You're Left, You Just Ain't Right
Rag Tag Bunch of Conservative Misfits - Contact Info: TheLastRefuge@reagan.com
Just another WordPress.com weblog
Mike's views on politics and the world in general