It’s Wednesday, October 12th, 2016…but before we begin, the Boy Blunder’s Iran deal is looking better by the minute…
…at least to those still wearing their Progressive President’s patented…
…Happy Glasses. But from where we sit, Obama’s abject abasement to Iran, like the parlous state of his America (be it measured by the health of its economy, mushrooming national debt, out-of-control entitlements, shrinking military or any and every other possible metric!), ain’t lookin’ too good!
Yet the #NeverTrumper’s solution remains handing the keys of the country to a woman whose commitment to Socialism undoubtedly equals…and likely exceeds…even that of The Dear Misleader himself. And all because The Donald’s a vulgar buffoon whose policy preferences remain uncertain.
As regards Trump’s unseemly behavior, we’re with Ruthfully Yours, who suggests to Liberals and Conservatives who’ve suddenly developed a puritanical streak…
Oh PuLEEZ! Get Off Your High Horses
Mary Jo: “But Teddy, what if I get pregnant?!?”
Senator and future Dimocratic candidate for President Teddy Kennedy: “We’ll cross that bridge when we come to it!”
Eleven years ago Donald Trump was taped using vulgarity and boasting, like many playboys and locker room machos, about his prowess with women. Disgusting? Sure…but spare me the high dudgeon elicited by strategic release of those tapes, just as Wikileaks revealed more chicanery by Clinton.
Even some conservatives have joined the caterwauling declaring that this is proof positive that Trump is not “presidential.” Presidential???That bar was lowered decades ago.
Was it presidential when John Kennedy invited Mafia molls to the White House for a roll in the hay? Was it presidential when he and his brother Triborough Fitzgerald Kennedy shared the sexual favors of a pathetic movie star?
Was it presidential when his successor, Lyndon Johnson- purveyor of the ruinous entitlement scam known as “The Great Society” showed his class in conducting press conferences from the toilet?
Was it presidential when Bill Clinton used government employees to find him sex partners? Or how about his encouragement of a besotted intern to become his er….private server…in the oval office? (Then lied about it under oath?!?)
Ted Kennedy had the gall to attempt a run for the White House and did anyone question whether it was presidential to back off a bridge into water and permit his passenger to drown while he swam away and tried to convince his cousin to take the rap? And Kennedy’s friend Chris Dodd also tried to get into the race for the White House even after he and Kennedy squeezed a waitress between them and fondled her in a sordid incident that begat the name “the Dodd-Kennedy sandwich. Did anyone say that Dodd was not presidential?
And finally, is it presidential for Obama to invite rappers to the White House who extol the murder of policemen and call women bitches and Blacks “niggas?” One was named “Common” and his poem includes : “They watching me, I’m watching them”Them dick boys got a lock of c*** in them.” The most recent presidential invite was in January 2016 when Kendrick Lamar met with President Obama in the Oval Office on Monday. Lamar’s “To Pimp A Butterfly” album shows a group of Black men in front of the White House holding champagne bottles and hundred-dollar bills on top of the dead body of a white judge. Obama has said the rapper’s “How Much a Dollar Cost” which is on that album was his favorite song of 2015. That’s presidential?
Dumping on Trump is stumping for Hillary and that is truly deplorable.
Can you smell…
…the hypocrisy?!?
By the way, we’ve never maintained The Donald’s even remotely “presidential”; anyone who reads us regularly knows we loathe the man. For the record, we view those foolish enough to have ever backed him with disappointed disdain…though we hold those in positions of prominence greedy enough…
…to have actively acted on his behalf while there were genuine Conservative alternatives in complete contempt. After all, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio or Carly Fiorina would be MOPPING THE FLOOR with this…
…hapless harpy!!!
As for the ultimate nature of his policies, we’re more than willing to roll the dice and take our chances, since Hillary spells certain doom for both the Constitution and the Founding Fathers’ Republic.
But we are where we are, so here’s the juice: like Winston Churchill’s view of Democracy, Trump is the worst candidate…except for all theother choices!
“Now why might it be that men regard women as sex objects? Surely the ravenous purchase by females of stiletto heels, push-up bras, butt-hugging mini-skirts, plunging necklines, false eyelashes, hair extensions, breast implants, butt implants, lip implants, and mascara, rouge, and lipstick to the tune of billions a year has nothing to do with it.Females would never ever exploit their sexuality to seek attention from men. [Billy] Bush and Trump, driving to the set of Days of Our Lives on a studio bus, comment on the legs of actress Arianne Zucker who is coming to meet them: “Oh, nice legs, huh?” Trump says. “Your girl’s hot as s—, in the purple,” Bush says. How surprising that Trump and Bush noticed Zucker’s legs! As documented in the video, she is wearing a skimpy purple dress, with an extremely short hem cut on the bias, a low neckline and fully exposed back. She is in high heels to accentuate her bare legs. The ratio of exposed skin between Zucker, on the one hand, and Trump and Bush, on the other, is perhaps 100 to one. But all that bare flesh must simply be because Zucker has a high metabolism and gets exceedingly warm; she would never want to broadcast her sexuality to men or have men notice her.The fact that she swishes her hips when she walks must just be a quirk of anatomy.
The sudden onset of Victorian vapors among the liberal intelligentsia and political class at the revelation of Trump’s locker-room talk is part and parcel of the Left’s hypocrisy when it comes to feminism and sexual liberation. But the feminists can’t have it both ways: declaring that women should be equal to men in all things and then still demand a chivalric deference to female’s delicate sensibilities. Either women are the same as men or they’re not. It is particularly galling to see the selective resurrection of Victorian values from the same crowd that has been pushing transgender locker rooms on the world, in an effort to destroy the last shred of girls’ innate sexual modesty.“
“…Hillary Clinton lost the debate because she likely figures she’s already won the election — she was ahead in every battleground state now and in all the major poll averages by around 5 percent even before the nation really takes account of the “Access Hollywood” hot mic tape — and decided to play it safe.
The prevent defense is a sound strategy when you’re ahead by two touchdowns and a field goal. Hillary isn’t there yet. Her refusal to try to deal a death blow, and Trump’s own refusal to lie down and play dead, has kept him alive to fight another day.
Unless she knows there’s something even worse coming out next…”
“It was at times difficult to watch, but Donald Trump scored a desperately needed victory in Sunday night’s presidential debate in St. Louis. He addressed crude comments he made 11 years ago and bested Hillary Clinton on issues such as health care and the economy.
…Election Day is still nearly a month away, so it’s too early to say Mr. Trump saved his campaign—or even the Republican Congress—with his performance in St. Louis.But it was a start.“
“…In other words, now that we know how coarse Mr. Trump can be, the only proper course is to reject him. Never mind that in some ways this would be the ultimate phoniness, given that, like Mr. Clinton, Mr. Trump’s extramarital sex life has not been a secret—though Mr. Clinton has certainly lied about it more often.
It also misreads the argument for Mr. Trump. Notwithstanding some evangelical pronouncements about Mr. Trump’s relationship with Jesus, it’s not likely that the many decent Americans who support Mr. Trump will ever confuse him with St. Paul. To the contrary, their calculation is pretty basic: Given the reality that either Mrs. Clinton or Mr. Trump will sit in the Oval Office come January, they’d rather have the candidate who will not use the entire power of the federal government to ram through rules and policies hostile to their beliefs.
Here Mrs. Clinton, to her credit, is unusually frank about what these priorities might be. Plainly they will include an activist Supreme Court that she may get to shape for a generation to come, one that will continue to unearth hitherto hidden constitutional rights as it usurps the right of a free people to make these decisions through their elected representatives.These priorities will also mean more diktats such as the Health and Human Services mandate requiring Catholic nuns to provide contraceptives to employees.
Does anyone believe a Trump administration would be anywhere near as zealous as a Hillary Clinton administration in pursuing these issues?And given the alternative of a woman who has never told the truth when a lie will do, is it really obvious that it’s beyond all morality to opt for the vulgar man who might even help revive the economy and help opportunity for millions?…”
“…What’s the mood like in the Trump camp today? See for yourself:
They’re getting crushed by Hillary farking Clintonand may be bringing the party down with them— and they don’t care. They never have; they’re political arsonists. No wonder Team Hillary was rooting for her self-destructive longtime donor and pal to win the Republican primary. Last night’s debate may have helped Trump marginally, but this deficit, or a deficit anywhere in this neighborhood, is insurmountable. Let’s see if this is an outlier. If it’s not, Trump is in the worst shape of the entire race, which is really saying something.”
“…Had the events of the last two weeks not occurred, we might be viewing the impact of the Town Hall format debate very differently. But they did, and we can’t pretend that Trump merely exceeding expectations can make up all the ground he’s lost in that time.“
But Tobin’s column is far more noteworthy for a position with which we vociferously disagree…
“…Just as important, the headlines coming out of this debate will continue to focus on topics that don’t help Trump. His supporters may have been delighted with his echo of their “lock her up” chant, but his talk of her being “in jail” was as shocking as it was unprecedented in American history. That is the sort of thing that happens in dictatorships and banana republics, not the United States, and reinforces concerns about whether a vindictive man like Trump should be entrusted with the power of the presidency.“
“A more judicious Republican candidate than Mr. Trump would promise to de-politicize the Justice Department and not follow Mr. Obama’s example. But as Democrats keep saying, Mr. Trump isn’t one to honor traditional political norms. It’s a shame Mr. Obama created the precedent for Mr. Trump to embrace.
Speaking of bad precedents, don’t forget FBI Director James Comey. The bureau is supposed to be independent, but Mr. Comey’s investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s private emails offered so many special deals and ignored so much evidence that it has undermined public confidence in a single standard of justice. Mr. Comey absolved her in a highly unusual public statement, only days before the Democratic convention, and in a way that let senior officials at the Justice Department duck political accountability. No wonder Mr. Trump’s supporters cheer his call for a special prosecutor.
Democrats want to portray Mr. Trump as a solely Republican infection, but the New Yorker’s rise could not have happened without the political tenor and governing example of the past eight years.“
Sorry, we just don’t see it that way. What Trump proposes isn’t banana republic retribution; it’s called equal justice under the law. Just as Bill was disbarred for perjury after the fact, Hillary deserves incarceration for her purposeful sacrifice of national security in order to hide the Clinton Foundation’s pay-to-play bribery scheme. Not to mention her serving time for a felony would go a long way in convincing a significant segment of America we remain a nation subject to the rule of law…the direct opposite of what happens in dictatorships and oligarchical banana republics.
“…It may seem odd that, after so many controversies, the Access Hollywood tape provoked such a reaction. It is true that it doesn’t reveal anything very new about Trump. And surely if hot mics had caught off-color banter from JFK we would have heard similar things. But that doesn’t make it any less appalling. Here is a nearly 60-year-old man boasting — and probably not idly — about his attempted adultery and unwanted sexual advances and groping. No presidential candidate has ever been heard to utter such things before.
The rejoinder from Trump’s campaign is that Bill Clinton is worse, and Hillary Clinton has been his enabler. Trump made these points in the course of his robust and relatively competent performance in last night’s debate. There is no doubt that Bill Clinton is a predatory womanizer and Hillary participated in the political operation to discredit his partners and victims. It is satisfying to see someone make this case forcefully.But as a sheer political matter, it’s hard to see how the swing voters Trump needs will forgive his grossness because of Bill’s.
It is no secret that we are not fans of Donald Trump, who is not a conservative or an honorable man. The only thing to recommend him is that he’s not Hillary Clinton, but even this quality has to be weighed against the fact that his recklessly selfish campaign is very likely to make her president of the United States. In this circumstance, Republicans need to do exactly what Trump always does: ruthlessly look after their own interests.“
“…For whatever is left of the institutional Republican party, expending resources to aid Donald Trump would be a grievous mistake. Perhaps a cataclysmic mistake or revelation damages Hillary Clinton fatally; perhaps Trump still, somehow, manages to win. But no one should be counting on it. Trump has bragged about his ability to self-fund; he should be left to do so now. He’s high-energy? Time to prove it.
But at this late point, with Trump likelier than not to be damaged even further, every remaining resource — every nickel and dime, every College Republican volunteer, etc. — should be applied toward holding the Senate and the House. Hillary Clinton is likelier than ever to win by a wide margin next month, and when she does, she’ll claim a mandate. It should be Republicans’ most urgent priority to keep hold of the one institutional check on her power: to prevent the single-payer health-care program she might try to ram through, to prevent the resurrection of cap-and-trade, to block the appointment of the activist-masquerading-as-judge that she promised last night to appoint to the Supreme Court; to prevent, in a word, another 2009 — or worse.The prospect of a Clinton presidency is grim.The prospect of a Clinton presidency accompanied by a Democratic Congress is nightmarish.
If Donald Trump wants to steer the Trump Train over the tracks, fine. But Republicans shouldn’t let him take the country with him.“
…to sum up our position.
As a noted Conservative pundit brought up at lunch on Monday, the real issue is what happens to the Republican Party after a Hillary victory? The answer: dissolution!
Here’s the problem, as detailed by James Taranto:
“…The Post’s Robert Costa—one of the authors of the story quoted atop this column—tweeted today: “In calls this morning, many Rs privately want to defect from Trump. But they say the debate gave them pause since he roused their base.”
“Base” is political jargon for voters, specifically for a party’s most loyal voters. We can’t fault Republican politicians who find Trump’s comments repugnant or who worry about their political fallout. But how can a party function, or even survive, if its leaders are at odds with its voters?
Trump’s behavior has often exacerbated that divide, but his nomination was primarily an effect of it. A plurality of Republican voters rejected the conventional GOP candidates—a majority if you consider Cruz to be, in his own way, an unconventional candidate. Some Nevertrump commentators have been forthright in blaming the voters for the party’s current predicament. If the politicians adopt that approach, they won’t have a party for long.“
Simply put, particularly since politicians of every stripe are so fond of quoting Lincoln, a house divided against itselfcannot stand. Does anyone really believe the Republican Party is any different?
Here’s what we see playing out first: the Senate, comprised of such stalwart, self-impressed statesmen as RINOs Orin Hatch, John McCain and Lindsay Grahamnesty, rapidly acquiesce to The Obamao’s last request and confirm Merrick Garland to the SCOTUS in the name of bipartisanship…followed quickly by whoever Hillary subsequently names to replace Ruth Darth-Ginsburg…and night begins to fall.
This is the Whigs seeking a halfway solution on slavery all over again. With friends like Establishment Republicans, who need Dimocrats?!?
In all seriousness, Hillary’s election spells the ultimate demise of the GOP. And considering the lack of leadership…or perhaps more accurately, the utter absence of BALLS…exhibited by the likes of George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Denny Hastert, Tom DeLay, Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, Bob Dole, John McCain, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, or any other supposed leader of the Republican Party…perhaps its demise shouldn’t be mourned.
All that remains is what person of vision will rise to lead a new, truly Conservative movement, from the ashes?
Moving on, courtesy of John Berry and the Richmond Times-Dispatch, the problems facing the U.S. Military in microcosm:
Ray, it’s not nearly the punishment you deserve!!!
“…Navy Secretary Ray Mabus announced that the U.S. Navy has deep-sixed almost 250 years of naval tradition. Henceforth, “the Navy will address each other by rank, like the other services do.” This all began with Mabus’ directive to remove the suffix “-man” from Navy ratings such as sonarman or yeoman. Apparently, it was easier to just eliminate all designations.
Perhaps, the goal is to simply make everyone alike, to crush and macerate us all into a sad, blue goo — where everyone is special to the point that no one is, and everyone is subjected to the tyranny of sameness. “Good morning, Comrade Sailor.” The official propaganda states that this will make it easier for sailors, ease transition to civilian life, and make the Navy more inclusive. “Celebrate diversity, be the same as everyone else.”
So much for traditions that made one feel a part of history, linked with the likes of Lord Nelson, John Paul Jones, Farragut, Halsey and Nimitz. Shall we toss that over the side with this morning’s breakfast leavings?
Mabus has decided that bureaucracy is superior to tradition, social theory a higher imperative than mission, that what is en vogue with the elites outweighs a sailor’s sense of identity and nautical lineage.
I am no Luddite. Change is necessary and often welcomed. That said; Change that is for the sake of a government agent’s vanity, that necessitates time and energy searching for a justification, is not only unnecessary, it is wrong. Change that alienates veterans of the seagoing service, and denigrates those who serve in harm’s way is damaging to morale and therefore to the mission.
History will not remember Mabus like we remember James V. Forrestal, the great Navy secretary in the 1940s. Mabus will taste neither victory nor defeat. While it could be said that he has done more damage to the U.S. Navy than any force since the Imperial Japanese Navy, he will have no legacy. He is simply a pogue, an unfortunate cabin boy to a vainglorious commander-in-chief. Come January, he will be gear adrift, so much flotsam trailing behind a noble vessel.
There will come a time when our nation calls upon the Navy to sail again into harm’s way, when its men and woman, ships and planes are called into action. I pray that when that day comes, our sailors have not become seagoing cube-rats who all look the same and act the same and are the same. I hope that somewhere there will still be a sailor with a rolling gait and salt water in the veins, who can take charge and fight the ship.
I believe that it will take more than a Mabus to drive that out of my Navy, and I pray to God that I am right. This Thursday — Oct. 13 — is the 241st birthday of the United States Navy. Give the Navy a birthday present by signing the petition to restore Navy ratings atpetitions.whitehouse.gov.
If we had our way, Mabus would be flogged, keelhauled and then hung from the highest yardarm of the USS Constitution…alongside a number of other traitors…
…who come to mind.
Next, also courtesy of NRO, Alexandra DeSanctis relates…
“Think the pro-abortion movement couldn’t get any more despicable? Then you probably haven’t noticed its latest tactic: insisting that society must “end the taboo” against women who regret having had their children. From pro-abortion organization NARAL’s Twitter account:
This makes it sound as if NARAL simply wants women to be able to choose whether or not to become pregnant or deliver a child, but the Huffington Post article contained in the tweet insists that the next feminist battle will be fought for the right to express regret over having had one’s child without incurring judgment.
…Arguing for a woman’s right to openly regret her child’s existence — and to do so without incurring harsh “judgment” from society — is the logical extension of pro-abortion thinking. If a woman can regret a pregnancy and end the life of the child she doesn’t want simply because she doesn’t want it, why should she be criticized for wishing she had never borne and raised the child she does have? Their short answer: She shouldn’t. Aside from the lunacy of arguing for a woman’s right to societal approval as she mourns the presence of a child sitting across from her at the dinner table, these articles illustrate society’s fundamental distortion of human life and parenthood.Children are not an interchangeable item that women can demand or eliminate as their emotions dictate; the “fulfillment” of parenthood comes not from giving in to regret when times are tough but from committing to raising a child despite the tough times.And while it would be wrong to claim that parenthood is easy, progressives have lost sight of the fact that it isn’t meant to be.“
Any question…any question at all, what’s next…or perhaps more accurately, who’s next…on the Feminazi’s baby-killing agenda?!?
Finally, we’ll call it a wrap with a walk on The Lighter Side:
Loading ...
You must be logged in to post a comment.