Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Insane

GOP - Trump - LogoSo I’m watching a news program featuring a bunch of Trump supporters and one in particular stood out in my mind. The gentleman identified himself as gay (though not trans-gendered) and complimented Trump on not bothering with the issue of where he peed and was concentrating on more important issues.

This gentleman helped me clarify several things in my mind…

One: New Republican Voters
Trump and his supporters keep bragging about the record number of new voters he will bring to the Republican Party. This (I suspect) is the quality of the new voter. And if this is the new inclusive Republican Party, I’ll have no part in it. In Trumps defense, this is exactly what the establishment GOP has been pushing for years. But when politicians (and shysters) brag about “growing the party” or creating a “big tent” they are simply using codes words for “compromising conservative principles” as the price to be paid for winning, and power, and money which are their real goals. That’s a trade-off I’m never going to be interested in. If you become your enemy to win the war, have you really won the war? Of course not.

Two: The Election is Already Settled
The 2016 election is already lost. Trump (by his nature) and his followers assure it. There will be no game unless he’s the nominee. They will support nobody else… So Hillary wins and the GOP most likely looses the Senate (if not the House also). It’s a done deal.

In all fairness, I’m no better. I’ll support Trump under no circumstances. BUT also to be fair I was never going to support Bush, or Christie, or Kasich for the same reason as I won’t support Trump. None are conservatives and I’ve vowed never to support another non-conservative for office. Romney was the last. The GOP label is not enough anymore; nor is throwing me a VP bone. I’ve abandoned the GOP and my sole hope for this election cycle is that it tears the GOP apart and creates one of two new parties. I hope the same for the Democrats in the near future.

Insane - StampThree: National Insanity
Western civilization is in the throws of committing suicide by reason of insanity. How long that will take I have no idea; but the process is now at full speed. The new Trump supporter is aghast that we’re having the debate over restrooms. So am I… but for a different reason. He’s aghast because it is so un-important and obvious that we should be inclusive and let people be who they are or identify as. I’m aghast because it is so obvious that men (biologically speaking) should not be allowed in any female facility. That we’re even debating such a fundamental fact is proof of irreversible societal insanity.

Yes; there are some very important issues out there like the debt, immigration, terror… so why aren’t we addressing them? Because each has a moral component that we repeatedly prove we lack… We continually spend what our children and grandchildren must repay. We allow those who would do us harm free access across our borders, not to mention seek to fundamentally change our nation by allowing in those will will never assimilate (this being the price for votes and cheap labor). We have such self-loathing that we espouse moral equivalence with our terrorist enemies. And… We grant men (all men) free access to the private facilities of our mothers, sisters, wives, and daughters.

On issue after issue, we demonstrate decay. And don’t even get me started on rationality… We are insane with NO sign or hope of recovery.

I don't understand the question...

I don’t understand the question…

Remember this idiot? Rachel Dolezal was the white girl who “identified” as black. She lied about it in order to run an NAACP chapter somewhere (Spokane, Washington). I know many of us had hoped this nut’s 15 minutes of fame were up… but it seems she intends to squeeze a few more seconds out of society.

She recently did an interview on “Today” (a vapid network morning show) and explained she’s ready to come out and talk about… herself and write a book and generally make us revisit the train-wreck that is her life and mental state.

A lot of people it seems have reached out to Rachel over the past year because they don’t quite fit in either. They too are “somehow caught between boundary lines of race or culture or ethnicity, and so [it’s] this larger issue of you don’t fit into one box and if you don’t stay there your whole life being identified from birth, as who you are”. This, of course, would only confirm our suspensions that there are many, many, similar nuts out there… or at least nut enablers.

I guess the quote from Rachel that really caught my attention was…

“Race is such a contentious issue because of the painful history of racism… so I think it’s really important to really think through some of those kind of topics and questions people have… What is race? Is there one human race, or is there… you know? Why do we still want to go back to that world view of separate races?”

From a rational person this is actually a pretty insightful, philosophical statement; a step away from the abyss of racial identity and division. But coming from the likes of Rachel Dolezal (and the NAACP, and the left) it’s absurd. The central ideal behind Rachel’s entire life, career, and mental dementia is a “world view of separate races”. It is how Rachel Dolezal made her living in Spokane, Washington. It is how the NAACP makes millions of dollars every year. And it is how the left maintains much of its power.

I would hope that the final seconds quickly tick off this 15 minutes of fame, but why? I’m sure there another one, just like this one, skulking around the corner. It’s a never ending cycle of leftist, politically correct bullshit we are forced to watch over and over again as this nation is fundamentally changed.

Society is doomed; not because Rachel Dolezal identified as black and lied about it and got away with it for so long. We’re doomed because of the percentage of the population who entertain the idea that she is black simply because she “identifies” as such. Rationality is utterly lost for too large a segment of the population for the whole to survive. Nuts and perverts have always existed (and always will). Societal embrace of nuts and perverts? That’s the real problem.

Rationality - Not Allowed

Eating Our Own

GOP InfightingA friend recently sent me an email concerning conservatives “eating their own”; asking what do I think about it. He linked as an example an story about Ann Coulter tweeting incendiary remarks concerning Fox News and Ted Cruz in reaction to riots at the Trump rally in Chicago.

My thoughts on that are that Coulter (and many other Trump supporters) have valid grievances that have built up over decades. The pressure of these grievances has so crescendoed that it has impaired their rationality to the point that they lash out at anybody who doesn’t fall into lockstep for their cause (Trump).

To be honest, I understand this reaction. The reaction is valid and warranted; I only disagree with the vehicle chosen to give it voice and possibly power. And it could be argued that I’ve fallen into the same trap but chose a different path in channeling it. (see below)

It all gets back to the frustration of GOP voters built up over 20+ years of being betrayed by the guys in power. We’re not talking about the left here, but rather the GOP guys that we ourselves put in power. The pressure behind that dam is so massive and intense that it has led to people latching on to the thing most anti-establishment no matter the rationality behind that thing.

All this is the Establishment-GOPs fault. AND… they are still clueless to this fact; as is evident by them trotting out Romney, Boehner pushing Ryan at a brokered convention, and this idiot delegate saying the primaries are immaterial because they choose the nominee. IDIOTS!

Coulters Specific Tweet:
On the specific issue Coulter was tweeting on, her grievance was somewhat valid, her reaction and assessment was not. (See, as a Coulter fan I can call ’em like I see ’em. No Kool-aid here.)

Here is the exact tweet from Ann Coulter…
“Fox News & Cruz are American traitors, in league with the liberal establishment. Silent majority must face fire from a unified oligarchy.”

I’d like to parse it a bit…

“Fox News & Cruz are American traitors”… You have to question if she believes this literally or is just using incendiary language to express her displeasure.

I was disappointed in Cruz’s reaction. I thought it was a political mistake. I don’t think it was traitorous. Fox News? They were fine.

“in league with the liberal establishment.”… Cruz (Rubio and Kasich) echoed the leftist spin for political reasons; again a mistake, but that hardly puts them in league with the real evil doers.

“Silent majority must face fire from a unified oligarchy.” Ahhh… totally true. But she might ask herself who else must face the slings an arrows of this group and who has done so for years before Trump ever came on the scene? That would be Ted Cruz.

Mistakes Were Made:
So, I agree with her that Cruz should not have even implied the violence in Chicago was even remotely Trumps fault (the leftist spin). Trumps words and temperament at his own rallies and its effect on his supporters is valid (and fair game) but not these organized and instigated riots by evil leftist (Soros, MoveOn, etc…)

Cruz made a political decision to take the tact he did and was wrong to do so. Fox News (being fair and balanced) put forth both sides of the issue where some commentators blamed Trump and other categorically refuted that. That’s what I want from my news channel. I guess Coulter took exceptions that both sides were presented.

Like I mentioned in another post, out of curiosity I watched other “news” channels that night (CNN and MSNBC) and was completely disgusted by what I saw; completely blaming Trump and celebrating the rioters as heroes.

So, in a nutshell, I think Trump supporters have thrown rationality out the window when it comes to attacking those who have yet to surrender to the movement. But by definition I think they had to throw rationality out the window to even to begin to associate Trump with conservatism in the first place; but that’s just my opinion.

Guilty of Same Sin:
But am I guilty of the same sin? Years ago (right after Romney), I promised myself #NeverAgain. I promised myself I would NEVER vote for a non-conservative for the Presidency of the United States; not matter the ticket he/she is running on; no matter the token VP selected.

So I’m against Trump; but I’m against him for the same reason I’m against Jeb, and Christie, and Kasich, and many, many others. They’re not conservative and after those two decades of settling, I’ve decided that moderate GOP officials are as much of the problem as the left is. I’m don’t trust the populist either based on his past.

So put me down as the #NeverTrumpJebChristieKasichEstableshment guy. I’m not likely to win, but I knew that from the beginning. Do what’s right… and to hell with everything else.

Charles KochIn a recent editorial in the Washington Post, Charles Koch expressed some common ground with Bernie Sanders; the Democratic Socialist currently running for President on the Democratic ticket. Koch admitted that there were plenty of areas where he and Sanders disagreed but in the spirit of common ground and civility he wanted Sanders to know that they agreed that a key problem existed (though probably not on the solution to that problem).

(See Original Editorial: Charles Koch: This is the one issue where Bernie Sanders is right)

“The senator (Bernie Sanders) is upset with a political and economic system that is often rigged to help the privileged few at the expense of everyone else, particularly the least advantaged. He believes that we have a two-tiered society that increasingly dooms millions of our fellow citizens to lives of poverty and hopelessness. He thinks many corporations seek and benefit from corporate welfare while ordinary citizens are denied opportunities and a level playing field. — I agree with him.

I (TexasLynn) would also agree that the problem exist and is getting worse; though I’m sure I would disagree with both Sanders and Koch as to the extent of the problem and solutions as well. We’ll look at this further as I dissect Koch’s editorial.

But before the dissection, an observation. The key to the Koch editorial is the agreement between libertarians and leftist on social issues. The left generally form their positions on these issues for two reasons… A misguided view of Social Justice generally based on fallacy (Hands Up Don’t Shoot) and/or Race Baiting in order to keep blacks on the figurative Democratic plantation. Libertarians adopt these views based on a sense of liberty and individual freedom; but I can only imagine the mental gymnastics the normally logical libertarian must perform in order to buy into the initial fallacy created by the left.

Yet, Koch (and other libertarians) seem to have done just that. Koch takes some obvious facts and problems (agreed to by most everybody) and stretches them as far as they can go to justify the illogical and absurd ideas pushed by the left.

Let’s take a look…

“Democrats and Republicans have too often favored policies and regulations that pick winners and losers. This helps perpetuate a cycle of control, dependency, cronyism and poverty in the United States. These are complicated issues, but it’s not enough to say that government alone is to blame. Large portions of the business community have actively pushed for these policies.”

Winners and LosersTrue that. Democrats and Republican and big business (in that order) are to blame for our current broken system rife with corruption, and cronyism. Thus my often repeated adage that the Democrats are taking us to hell at a dead run; and every now and then we elect a Republican who slows us down to a trot. Big Business is behind both, egging them on.

Yet, today the two people most likely to become our next President is a billionaire who has gamed the system his entire life and a woman whose very family name is synonymous with deceit, fraud, favoritism, and cronyism. Then there is Bernie himself (to whom this editorial is addressed) who espouses a system (Socialism) that is the very definition of the government deciding winners and losers. Bernie isn’t seeking to make things fair, he’s just seeking to pick new winners. Koch wants to pick new winners on a very specific topic (drugs) and seems willing to tolerate the lefts fuzzy logic to achieve that goal. (Read on concerning that point)

“The tax code alone contains $1.5 trillion in exemptions and special-interest carve-outs. Anti-competitive regulations cost businesses an additional $1.9 trillion every year. Perversely, this regulatory burden falls hardest on small companies, innovators and the poor, while benefiting many large companies like ours. This unfairly benefits established firms and penalizes new entrants, contributing to a two-tiered society.”

Crony CapitalismKoch’s point is government policy through taxes and regulations has evolved in feeding the beast of favoritism. He’s right, but Bernie wouldn’t solve any of that. Exactly the opposite, he would double down on both. Koch begins this editorial by stating obvious truths in hopes of using this base to support the illogical fallacy later.

Both systems (taxes and regulatory) cannot be fixed in a normal manner. The only real solutions is to start from scratch. Rip both up by the roots and burn what you hold in you hand. THEN… start from scratch which even includes the employees within the system. It wouldn’t be a bad idea to put a sunset provision on both as well. Every 20 years… start over.

“Whenever we allow government to pick winners and losers, we impede progress and move further away from a society of mutual benefit. This pits individuals and groups against each other and corrupts the business community, which inevitably becomes less focused on creating value for customers.”

Again, Koch is right as to how the system corrupts those who produce. General Electric is a prime example. Once a powerhouse in producing products the company has “evolved” into a juggernaut of profit via government regulations and gaming the system. Many companies, and the American culture are following suit. Companies are formed to take advantage of the latest fad largess from Uncle Sam (can you say wind/solar/renewable); and then close their doors once they’ve lined their personal pockets with high salaries and bonuses (see Solindra). Their long term “business model” proves to be idiotic; but that’s OK because it was never intended to last long term. Meanwhile, the American taxpayer is left holding the bag when they have all headed for the hills.

party-bosses-smoke-filled-rooms

“With this in mind, the United States’ next president must be willing to rethink decades of misguided policies enacted by both parties that are creating a permanent underclass.”

Again, that would be nice, but look who we’ve got. Clinton is practically defines these policies. Bernie who would simply shift the winners/losers. And Trump who is at best a wild card, but who has gamed the system his whole life.

But when Koch says the “next president must be willing to rethink decades of misguided policies” he’s got something very specific in mind. (Read on)

“Our criminal justice system, which is in dire need of reform, is another issue where the senator shares some of my concerns. Families and entire communities are being ripped apart by laws that unjustly destroy the lives of low-level and nonviolent offenders.”

Justice ScalesAhhh, finally an area where I can demonstrate some disagreement with Charles Koch.

The Koch brothers are of a more libertarian stripe and are thus willing to go along with the bullshit concerning the broken criminal justice system. Don’t get me wrong, the criminal justice system has problems; but the extent of them is exaggerated by the left. And the things identified as the problem aren’t really the problem. For them, it’s all about race-baiting…

The idea that there are hordes of “low-level”, “nonviolent” offenders clogging our jails and prisons is a fallacy; an illusion created to stoke the fires of racism in this nation. You’ll notice that the left never really puts a definition on the terms “low-level” or “nonviolent”. You’ll also notice that they don’t trot out any examples of these poor abused offenders.

Why?

Drug DealerOne, Because by low-level, they mean dope dealers (and know if the public really got a look at these misguided youths, it would not go well for their cause)

Two, The lack of definition allows them to propagate the myth that they are talking about poor Johnny just smoking a little pot and going to prison for it.

Three, the left sees the problem as little Johnny is a drug abuser (a disease he can’t help). Of course little Johnny didn’t go to jail for that; he went to jail for stealing a car and robbing grandma so he could do that (feed his habit).

Fourth, the left ignores the fact that a vast majority of sentences are plea bargained, with the original charge being reduced; giving the false impression that little Jonny’s crimes weren’t as bad as they seem (allowing for the terms low-level and nonviolent to be applied).

No, America, there are not hordes of pot smokers sitting in jail/prison just because they decided to light up. The guys incarcerated, are there because they broke the law and most, MOST, should be right where they are. We’re safer for it.

People - Obama, Barack - Dope Head

The libertarians (Koch Brothers) want to legalize the dope and by extension decriminalize the actions, thus they are willing to play along with the leftist fallacy. I just can’t believe they’re stupid enough to actually believe this crap (given their logical grip on economic issues). So… If you are embracing a lie to further your cause, best to re-evaluate your cause.

Conservatives (like me) might be willing to discuss our broken criminal justice system and seek compromise on acceptable punishments for these “low-level” and “nonviolent” offenders. Alternative forms of punishment and plugging up the cracks that lets the well connected escape punishment might be addressed… but those aren’t the objectives of the left (and libertarians) in this matter. Thus no quarter is given because conservatives might try to compromise and fix the stated problem; but not the intended one.

So we conservatives are expected to begin the discussion and negotiations conceding/pretending the fallacy being pushed by the left is true. I’m not willing to do that. And the legalization of dope and the giving of dealers a free pass is a non-sequitur. So the problem of a broken legal system festers on.

“Today, if you’re poor and get caught possessing and selling pot, you could end up in jail. Your conviction will hold you back from many opportunities in life. However, if you are well-connected and have ample financial resources, the rules change dramatically. Where is the justice in that?”

Concept - MisdurectionNotice how Koch uses weasel words to try and misdirect the reader (the same way the left does). Poor Johnny didn’t end up in jail for “possessing” pot, but for “possessing and selling” pot. Why is the word “possessing” even in the sentence when selling was the reason Johnny went to jail? If you sell something, isn’t it being in your possession and control implied. The turn of the phrase is again meant to misdirect the public into thinking “possession” is the key to incarceration when it is not.

So Yes Mr. Koch… dope convictions have consequences… as do many other poor choices people seem to make; some legal and some not; like burgling your neighbors house or having a child out of wedlock, or skateboarding down that guardrail without a helmet, or tattooing “^%$# You” on your forehead, or ignoring your education to the point of not being able to form an intelligible sentence…

The solution the left (and libertarians) has for mean well-connected assholes getting away with it is to let everyone get away with it. Perhaps, PERHAPS, the solution is to work on making sure the well-connected assholes get what is coming to them also; and not just throwing up you hands, opening the gates and telling everyone to just do what-ever-the-hell you’re gonna do.

Monopoly - Go to Jail

Personal responsibility is a good thing. The solution is always more of that, not less; not reducing society to the lowest common denominator in the name of fairness. It’s idiotic and NOT in the best interest of society.

“Arbitrary restrictions limit the ability of ex-offenders to get housing, student or business loans, credit cards, a meaningful job or even to vote. Public policy must change if people are to have the chance to succeed after making amends for their transgressions.”

What Koch is calling “arbitrary” here is conviction of criminal activity; supposedly “low-level” “nonviolent” activity. And yes, in this case he is correct that simply being busted for possession has consequences… as it should. Being busted for selling has greater consequences as does running a cartel… as it should.

To his credit, Koch is putting his money (his Company) where his mouth is. He says “At Koch Industries we’re practicing our principles by ‘banning the box.’ We have voluntarily removed the question about prior criminal convictions from our job application.”

Again I say this policy is to Koch’s credit but it’s also stupid. What happens when an employee with a drug problem has an accident and hurts someone? The scenarios are endless and a trial lawyers wet dream. But then Koch Industries can probably more easily afford the consequences of this policy than most (not so corporate) businesses who lack a gaggle of lawyers on stand-by.

Koch (and Bernie’s) first order of business to fix this problem is simply legalize the drugs and empty the jails/prisons. Conservatives disagree and will fight that “solution”.

Hopefully Koch (if he got his way) would still advocate for every businesses right to choose not to take risks on dope-heads; just as his company has made the opposite choice.

But then there is the right to vote (mentioned last in the list of restrictions). The left throws a hissy-fit about this travesty all the time, but never seem to address it properly. Probably because of a pesky little thing that is constantly getting in their way. The U.S. Constitution. According to the Constitution, the STATES set the criteria for who gets to vote.

This should be an opportunity… The states are supposed to be the crucibles in the marketplace of ideas. Why don’t they (the left and libertarians) grab more leftist states and go wild? Just open those voter roles right up to all sorts of felons. But like always, the left wants everyone to jump off that cliff together; and for Uncle Sam (the Federal Government) to do the pushing. For some reason they believe the example of this working in their home states isn’t convincing…

Felons Voting

“I applaud the senator for giving a voice to many Americans struggling to get ahead in a system too often stacked in favor of the haves, but I disagree with his desire to expand the federal government’s control over people’s lives. This is what built so many barriers to opportunity in the first place.”

Recognizing a problem is good thing. But lacking common sense to the point of proposing solutions that exacerbate that problem and create new ones only makes society wish you never saw the problem in the first place.

Bernie and a to a lesser extent Koch both fall into this category when it comes to drugs and the criminals that abuse them and deal in them.

“It is results, not intentions, that matter.”

Exactly Mr. Koch… Exactly. Apply that to yourself.

“When it comes to electing our next president, we should reward those candidates, Democrat or Republican, most committed to the principles of a free society. Those principles start with the right to live your life as you see fit as long as you don’t infringe on the ability of others to do the same. They include equality before the law, free speech and free markets and treating people with dignity, respect and tolerance. In a society governed by such principles, people succeed by helping others improve their lives.”

This is the classic libertarian line. After decades of failure, rich libertarians like the Koch Brothers are now determined to take over the Republican Party. The problem is; the vehicle has never been the libertarian problem. It’s the message and the results that are their problem. If the libertarians manage to take over the GOP, it will simply become as ineffective as the Libertarian Party when the social conservatives leave.

I admire libertarians to some extent. Libertarians get it… when it comes to issues of economics. More so than the GOP. But when it comes to social issues, these fiscally conservative hippies would take this nation to hell as fast as the left could ever hope to. And that is the common ground Koch is so eager to find with Bernie…

Libertarians

Left - OrwelianTonight, a political rally for Donald Trump was shut down in Chicago. Trumps crime, daring to speak at the University of Chicago.

Protesters in mass occupied the venue, and shut it down. These were young people. These were leftists. These are Occupy people. These are people who have no concept of freedom of speech and likely no concept of any of the principles this nation is founded upon. The scariest part in terms of the future of this nation is that many of these idiots were college students. Is civics really that lacking in our education system?

I could call these thugs fascist or Stalinist. The adjectives are apt. But the best description would be Orwellian. And it’s people like this who define the leftist agenda in this nation. It’s people like this who define policy on economics (socialism), racial division, class victimization, junk science (converted to religion)…

I was curious and watched the coverage of this event by CNN and MSNBC. My conclusion? I’ve never seen such a collection of dirt-bags (commentators and pundits and guests, every one) in many years. They too fit the mold of the very people they celebrated tonight.

They blamed Trump for this… completely! They glorified (and interviewed as heroes) the protesters. They claimed Trump planed and orchestrated the event so as to produce exactly these results; saying things like “He’s the arsonist who wants credit for dialing 911.” They turned this mob into something justified because of all the “social injustice” in this horrible, horrible nation.

Their arguments (on this being Trumps fault) are nonsense based on one simple fact. This crap isn’t new and it certainly isn’t unique to Trump. It has happened for many, many years, and happens to many, MANY conservatives who try to speak in this nation. Just last month, Ben Shapiro (conservative pundit) suffered the ire of such leftist protesters as he tried to speak at various college campuses. Ann Coulter has been repeatedly dis-invited at various campuses and when allowed to speak has been physically attacked. Even Condoleezza Rice is denied her right to speak by these thugs. There are many more… practically all of them conservatives. And none of them fit the bill of inviting or deserving it as the Main Stream Media argues Donald Trump does.

If you read this blog, you’ll know I’m no supporter of Donald Trump. There are a lot of people I don’t agree with even remotely, but I would never seek infringe on their first amendment rights. That basic concept of common decency is now irrevocably lost when it comes to young leftist.

Donald Trump as president would be a national travesty. But these thugs, this evil, is an existential threat to this nation. Evil that is a tool and a sign of our social, political, and moral decay.

DilutionBuilding the Party is a big argument right now by Trump and his supporters. And there is truth in the fact that Republican primaries have seen amazing increases in participation (while the Democrats have seen moderate decreases). BUT I submit that those new participants can’t be be relied upon in the conservative cause.

Analogy: Let’s say I have two pounds of chocolate pudding; but that I need three pounds to feed my party guests. I have no more pudding so I mix one pound of manure into my existing pudding and viola! Three pounds of “pudding”! But what do I really have at the end of this process. Three pounds of chocolate #$@&!

Diluting the conservative movement with non-conservatives produces the same results. Exactly what did you “win” in this scenario? An election? Big whoop!

The media and the left (redundant) reason with conservatives that we must tack to the left and moderate in order to win. If and when conservatives actually capitulate to that argument, the next reasoning is we need to tack just a little more left and a little more and a little more… Let me ask you this, when was the last time you heard anybody advise the left to tack to the right in order to be viable? Thus my old adage “The middle is simply where a moderate pauses before turning left.”

If I’m going to lose (on policy and issues) I would rather it be by the hand of those I openly opposed, not by the hand of those I supported and elected. Becoming your enemy in order to win a battle (election) means you just capitulated the war.

But that is the key to WHY Trump is where he is. (Winning) The base of the GOP is so mad at being betrayed by those they supported (the Establishment) they have become irrational with anger; to the point to supporting the man who most irreverently sticks it to their tormentors, even if it’s obvious (if they would just look) that he doesn’t hold the views he claims.

AND… the establishment is obviously still oblivious that they are the cause of Trump! These morons trot out none other than Mitt Romney to kick off their opposition. IDIOTS! Even if you have a valid message, you’ve lost it by sending out the wrong messenger.

Maybe Trump is a blessing. In my opinion conservatives needed to have the same attitude if Jeb, or Christie, or Kasich were in the drivers seat. But it is unlikely they would have elicited the same response.

VoteI didn’t watch much of the 2016 Super Tuesday returns last night. I was instead watching Walking Dead and Better Call Saul. I like to digest this stuff the next day anyway. Trump had a yuge night and Cruz did what he had to do (though just barely), which was win Texas and a few more states. Rubio is always going to stick around, but I just don’t see him doing anything if he can’t win Florida and it seems right now that is not going to happen.

So what’s out on the interweb for me to digest. Unlike Trump, Cruz and Rubio really don’t have a chance to win the nomination outright. So if they stay in the race they’re really just betting on a brokered convention. Their strategy must be to keep Trump from reaching the magic number of 1,237. As of today Trump has 316, Cruz 226, and Rubio 106.

The whole trouble with this strategy (which also seems to be that of the Republican Establishment) is that Trump is a egomaniac who won’t hesitate to blow the whole thing up with an independent run (if HE is not the nominee) insuring a second Clinton is elected via such means. (see H. Ross Perot for folks under the age of 30)

Moving on…

Of a Faustian nature, the other big thing out on the interweb is Trumps press conference which I’ve seen bits and pieces of. The interesting thing isn’t Trump at all, but rather Christ Christie staring into oblivion (almost literally) behind Trump the whole time.

People - Christie, Chris - Screaming - Behind Trump

I thought pundit Alexandra Petri (Washington Post) said it best (just an exert… the whole thing is choke full of interesting cultural references)…

I believe that Donald Trump was talking, tonight, and that he, in fact, held an entire press conference. But it was impossible to hear him over Chris Christie’s eyes.

Chris Christie spent the entire speech screaming wordlessly. I have never seen someone scream so loudly without using his mouth before. It would have been remarkable if it had not been so terrifying.

Sometimes, at night, do you still hear them, Clarice? The screaming of the Christies?

His were the eyes of a man who has gazed into the abyss, and the abyss gazed back, and then he endorsed the abyss.

— Alexandra Petri

(Read the whole post here: Chris Christie’s wordless screaming)

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 90 other followers