Who’s Zoomin’ Who, Donny?

I have long contended that if the GOPe (GOP Establishment) were forced to choose between the two, Cruz or Trump, they’d choose Trump in a heart beat. Why? Here’s why (You can click the image on the right to enlarge it):


Gravy train. “Trump train” my ass . It’s the gravy train that’s now a’rollin’. Of the two, Trump will deal. Cash. Cruz will always choose the Constitution.

And cash is more fun, isn’t it?

Add in this excellent article below from American Thinker by Daren Jonescu, and it appears my thinking is now being actively validated.


 

Is Trump a McConnell-Rove Establishment Tool?

On January 19, Donald Trump, the loudest Republican claimant to the anti-establishment label, filled out his recent attacks on Ted Cruz in a very telling way, as revealed on Mark Levin’s radio program (click here, select the 1/19/16 podcast, go to the 23 minute mark):

We've been contacted by the establishment types.  They all want to know, how do they get involved with the campaign?  They're giving up on their candidates…and I mean these are real establishment people, that I've known when I was a member of the establishment -- meaning a giver, a big donor.  But they are contacting us -- Corey [Trump's campaign manager], I think we can say that very honestly, they're contacting us left and right about joining the campaign, and these are serious establishment types.

Who might these “real,” “serious” establishment types be?  Perhaps there is a hint in this subsequent comment, a follow-up to his recent pro-establishment assault against Ted Cruz:

So when you talk about temperament, Ted has got a rough temperament, I don't know.  You know, you can't call people liars on the Senate floor, when they're your leader.

This, of course, is a direct reference to Cruz’s criticism of Mitch McConnell regarding the GOP establishment leader’s secret deal with Barack Obama prior to a trade vote.

Donald Trump defending Mitch McConnell, you ask?  The answer is yes, and the explanation may be found by examining Trump’s recent history as a political donor.

Back in early 2013, Tea Party conservatives, fed up with McConnell’s feckless (to be generous) Senate leadership, his semi-tough talk that never seems to match his legislative decisions and results, and his relentless suppression of the conservative minority in the Senate, sought to supplant this establishmentarian’s establishmentarian by supporting a conservative rival in the 2014 Kentucky primary.

In response to this challenge, a super PAC called “Kentuckians for Strong Leadership” was formed to raise funds for McConnell’s scorched earth campaign against not only his own Tea Party rival, but the whole Tea Party movement.  I put the group’s name in scare quotes because, of its fifty-eight major donors — those who had given $1000 or more as of May 15, 2014 — the Louisville Courier-Journal identified only five with Kentucky addresses.  “Kentuckians for Strong Leadership” was in fact, as Tony Lee reported at Breitbart at the time, a re-branding of Karl Rove’s American Crossroads, an organization expressly dedicated to destroying the constitutionalist movement in favor of the old guard GOP establishment.

The big donors to Mitch McConnell’s anti-Tea Party defense fund gave amounts ranging from $1000 to $250,000.  In the upper half of this donor list appears one Donald J. Trump, who gave $50,000 to the group.  Five days earlier, he had already donated a few thousand dollars to McConnell’s campaign directly.  This total donation is far and away the largest contribution Trump has ever made to any individual Washington politician’s campaign — at least ten times larger than any other contribution he has made to a national Republican candidate.  Indeed, one has to cross over to the Democrat side of his donor history to find anything comparable to this contribution at any level of government.  That would be his $50,000 donation to Rahm Emanuel’s mayoral campaign in December 2010.

Mitch McConnell has been perhaps the single most prominent leader — certainly the most powerful — in the Republican Party’s long-standing effort to “crush” (McConnell’s word) the grassroots constitutional conservative movement that threatens the privileged status of the Washington Brahmin caste, aka the American political establishment.

In 2014, the Tea Party had the temerity to challenge McConnell directly on his own home turf.  He did indeed crush them there, as he would happily crush them in the Senate.  His effort to annihilate the constitutionalist resistance was funded heavily by a nationwide group of donors affiliated with Karl Rove, who presumably shared McConnell’s and Rove’s desire to defend the establishment against the belligerent serfs who were daring to assert their liberty against its permanent privilege.

Donald Trump was a major donor to that effort.  He even threw another $10,000 into the pot in October 2014, to bring his total contribution to McConnell to more than $60,000.

Now he is attacking his primary rival, Ted Cruz, on the grounds that “Nobody in Congress likes him,” and, more specifically, that “you can’t call people liars on the Senate floor, when they’re your leader.”

Donald Trump is no longer making a generic accusation against Cruz’s demeanor or reputation.  He is slapping him on behalf of the Republican he has supported most generously, Mitch McConnell.  I have previously argued that Trump’s reputation as anti-establishment is all hot air, corresponding to nothing he has ever really done.  Here we have just one more clear example of that.

A conservative blogger friend recently suggested to me privately that he is not ready to reject outright the possibility that Trump is actually the establishment’s clever creation — that, after years of deepening threats from an increasingly serious constitutionalist faction within the GOP, the progressive Republicans may have surmised that the best path to victory is, as my friend puts it, to “run against themselves.”

Whether strategic or merely fortuitous, the alliance between Donald Trump and the GOP establishment, which has lurked verifiably behind Trump’s brash mask for years, has now become an open feature of his primary campaign.  And the chief target, Enemy Number One, of both parties in this alliance is Ted Cruz.  Cruz is “nasty” and “nobody likes him,” as Trump says, because he is brazenly defiant toward the GOP establishment’s leaders.

And you thought the whole point of being anti-establishment was to be brazenly defiant toward the establishment’s leaders.  Silly you.  Apparently, a real anti-establishment candidate would not donate $60,000 to Mitch McConnell’s “crush the Tea Party” campaign.

###end###

Ben Carson and The Party of Slavery

American Thinker has yet another brilliant piece.  This time it was inspired by the schadenfreude arising from The Left’s Ugly Hatred of Ben Carson as observed by a writer new to me, one Peter Heck.

You see, from a Tea Party perspective, the Democrats have never changed.  They’re exactly the same party as they were 200+ years ago.  They still believe the black man can’t survive without the white man.  Then, it was a place to live, some food to eat, and a job to do in the form of slavery.  Now, it’s government housing, food stamps, and a jobs program in the form of the government plantation.  In exchange then, as now, they expect absolute fealty. Then in the form of forced labor until you drop dead, now in the form of a vote for your sustenance until you drop dead.

What the hell’s the difference?  Just because it’s been made more palatable doesn’t make it any less evil or paternalistic.  The Democrat impulse to control people’s lives burns just as brightly now as it did then, only now it’s even better: they get to spend other people’s money to do it.  No crop failures for Nancy Pelosi to worry about, oh no…

So herewith are some excerpts from Mr. Heck’s excellent piece, though I heartily recommend you read it in its entirety.


It’s a small man who delights in the misfortune of others, but I can’t help myself. As much as I regret that he is being forced to deal with (it)… I am having a blast watching the left try to deal with Dr. Ben Carson… Liberals are having to come to grips with the reality that Carson is a legitimate contender. And it isn’t going over well.

Why? First, it proves that the annoying habit liberals have exhibited the last seven years of shoving their fingers in their ears and screaming “racist” at any person who opposed the presidency of Barack Obama… (Republicans don’t) mind electing a black president at all -– they just haven’t enjoyed a socialist one.

But the rise of Carson stirs a more primal reaction on the left that shouldn’t be ignored… As the party of big government social welfare spending, liberals have enacted policies that have locked blacks in (all manner of) failing (civic institutions)… Both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are disciples of leftist icon Saul Alinsky. It was Alinsky who articulated the strategy that in order to control a group of people they, “must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and chance the future.” While gutting the black community with their policies, Democrats have managed to successfully portray themselves as that group’s only hope. …

The only thing that upends such a diabolical electoral scheme is the emergence of a self-made member of the oppressed group… Ben Carson, a man born into the crucible of inner-city strife, but who escaped the cycle of poverty intended for him to become a brilliant neurosurgeon.  Carson’s message of a smaller government, self-reliance and Christian faith offer a stark contrast to the grievance mongering, victim mentality that’s been force fed to blacks for decades by Democrats…

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) has decided they don’t really want all “colored people” to advance –- just the ones with liberal politics. They’ve even declined to condemn racist slurs hurled at Carson. … When you come to believe that a person must think a certain way simply because of their skin color, and you despise them when they don’t, you are the one with the race problem. That is the uncomfortable truth Ben Carson’s candidacy is revealing, and it’s why the left will stop at nothing to destroy him.


Amen!

July 14, 2015. A VERY Bad Day.

In no particular order, here’s why Tuesday, July 14, 2015 was a particularly bad day in America… and really, the world.

1. OBAMA FORCES CONTRACEPTION ON NUNS Obama Admin tells nuns – Yes,Little Sisters of the Poor NUNS – they must facilitate the purchase of birth control.  (And as a bonus: these are nuns who minister to the poor – in hospice.  HOSPICE, okay?  Not a lot of nookie goin’ on in their daily ministry.  And their name?  Even their name should elicit gentleness and compassion in anyone with a conscience:  Little Sisters of the Poor.)

Little Sisters of the Poor2

I don’t even know how to comment on this story without crying.  Honestly.  And I’m a fallen woman.  An EX-Catholic, with no particular “brand” of faith to call my own.  So I’m no reflexive Catholic apologist.  But I’m not without wit.  I’m sentient.  I can read.  I know what our Founding was all about, what it means, why it means what it means… etc., etc., and this is just flabbergasting.

FURTHER READING:  If you’d like to so some reading on how this could happen in America, of all places, let me heartily recommend a brilliant America Thinker piece, U.S. Has Established a State Religion: What Now for Christians?, which echoes my thoughts beautifully.  It delineates how the federal government’s establishment of non-religion has become the functional equivalent of the federal government’s religion… which is sorta the opposite of the whole point of our country…

2.  BABY BODY PARTS FOR SALE (Taxpayer supported) Planned Parenthood is selling body parts… and evidently has no problem discussing the best way, during a late-term abortion, to crush-this-without-crushing-that, while keeping the profitable organs intact, and going over the minute details of this unimaginably evil practice while sipping wine over lunch at a restaurant.

I mean… What… What can you even say to that?

MEDIA MALPRACTICE: Meanwhile, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, The New York Times, and The Washington Post etc. is shoving a microphone in front of every single GOP Presidential candidate demanding they condemn Donald Trump over his remarks on the Mexican border (which were impolitic but substantially true) or be regarded as endorsing them, but not a single one of them has asked Hillary Clinton (or any other Democrat, candidate or not) if she stands with Planned Parenthood, will condemn thisSanger on weeds ghoulish practice, return the many thousands of dollars in campaign donations they’ve given her, awards they’ve given her, or be regarded as endorsing them.

It’s good to be a Democrat.

Margaret_Sanger-KKKFURTHER READING: If you’d like some further reading on the long, long ties between Planned Parenthood and the Democratic Party, here’s just one blog post I found on HRC’s, Obama’s, and Democratic support in general for PP. If you are unaware of the hideous genesis of Planned Parenthood, and you might well be since it’s been buried so well, Margaret Sanger founded it back in the Progressive Era.  She was a virulent racist, eugenicist, and spoke openly about how the purpose of “planned parenthood” wasmargaret-sanger-quote-about-negro-population the pulling of “weeds” from the population, i.e., ‘undesirables’… like blacks…

Again… If people only knew the truth of progressivism, how cold and calculating it was and remains (clearly!), there’s just no possible way you could embrace it.  And please don’t misunderstand:  it’s not that I am for a return to back-alley abortions.  I’m not.  That genie is out of the bottle.  But I do believe that third-trimester abortion should be severely restricted.  I mean… Good grief.  If you don’t know if you want to go through with a pregnancy until you’re 8 1/2 months along… the decision had been made for you, toots.  That baby is coming.  If you don’t want it, give it up for adoption.  

3.  NUKES FOR MULLAHS The capitulation was finally complete this morning in Vienna.  We have a deal.  With Iran.  This piece at American Thinker pretty well sums up my feelings on the matter.  In short?  Obama just launched a Middle-East NUCLEAR arms race, and I don’t have a lot of confidence these medieval-mahdi-seeking-mullahs will exercise self-control.  If it’s not Israel’s death-warrant, it’s surely somebody’s… maybe a lot of somebodys…

And just for kicks, consider:  This President has gone out of his way, orchestrated a massive global effort, to see to it that Iran gets nukes, while simultaneously launching an equally aggressive domestic effort to see to it that his fellow Americans can’t have a lawful gun.  Got that?  Mullas and nukes = GOOD.  Fellow Americans and Second Amendment = BAD.

I guess you’d have to be a progressive to appreciate (or divine) any nuance in that.

FURTHER READING:  Mark Levin’s take on this (the Iran deal) is perfect.  Highly recommend listening to his 07/14/2015 podcast in full (It’s his entire 3 hour show – less than 2 hours because all the commercials are chopped out – and it’s free, every day), or you can read excerpts here.

So that’s July 14, 2015 in America.

And we’ve got 555 days more of this to go.

If we make it that far.

The Obama Doctrine’s Perfect Analogy

“As far as it’s possible to make out, the Obama Doctrine for the Mideast consisted of an abandonment of our traditional allies in favor of the Muslim Brotherhood, the ur-terror organization that gave birth to al-Qaeda and eventually ISIS. Allowed to take over in Egypt and encouraged in several other states, the Brotherhood was treated as a government-in-waiting — as if the Mafia was being encouraged to take over Italy.”

Heartily recommend this piece in its entirety, Recovering from Obama: Foreign Policy, at American Thinker. It’s brilliant.

This. Is. Stunning.

UPDATE #2 SAT 06/06/2015 8:15am:  As expected none of the eunuch-palace-scribes at either the White House or State Department briefings asked about Gertz’s findings.  I even checked to see if D.O.D./Pentagon was having a briefing or had had one recently and they just linked to State.  Gosh, I miss journalism.

UPDATE #1 FRI 06/05/2015 8:30am:  I wonder if  The New York Times was “asked” to write the inane Editorial I commented & blogged on just the other day because The White House knew this piece from Gertz was coming? Things that make you go ‘hmm’. 


This is quite possibly the worst thing ever written about any American president ever by quite possibly the best reporter on intelligence matters in America, Bill Gertz (And that’s not just my opinion.  Mr. Gertz is widely regarded as the “go-to” guy for his razor-sharp mind and deep & impeccable sources.  The only other reporter I would put anywhere near him is Catherine Herridge of Fox News.)

I know I sound hyperbolic, but dear GodGertz is basically reporting that our President has given aid & comfort to the enemy.  And not just any enemy.  This enemy ties each of a woman’s arms and legs to four cars then speeds off (yeah…), rapes an 8 year old girl in front of her family then makes each watch while the others get beheaded one by one, crucifies 3 year old boys, drops gays off rooftops, plays soccer with decapitated heads… burns a caged man alive… I mean… even members of the administration have said publicly they’ve never seen such depravity.

This charge about Obama has been made made many, many, many times before, but never from a source as universally respected as Gertz.  The only thing wrong with it is the White House Press Corps, most prominently ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, NPR, The New York Times, The Washington Post, will never, ever, ever touch it because Gertz now writes for a “right-wing” source (He published this in The Washington Times, but he also writes for The Washington Free Beacon, a newer paper without the sort of strange background as the WT).  It might possibly come up at a State Department briefing.  Possibly even a Pentagon briefing.  If it does, I’ll update.)

Damn.

I’m still sort of thunderstruck so I’ll just stop here and invite you to read the American Thinker’s take on it, below.


Via The American Thinker – Gertz Expose: Pentagon docs show Obama supports Muslim Brotherhood
June 5, 2015
By James Lewis

Bill Gertz, top Pentagon reporter for the Washington Times has just reported that “Obama secretly backed Muslim Brotherhood.”  The Brotherhood is literally a fascist Muslim radical group from the Nazi period.

Writes Gertz:
President Obama and his administration continue to support the global Islamist militant group known the Muslim Brotherhood. A White House strategy document regards the group as a moderate alternative to more violent Islamist groups like al Qaeda and the Islamic State.” (Aka ISIS).

The policy of backing the Muslim Brotherhood is outlined in a secret directive called Presidential Study Directive-11[.] … The directive was produced in 2011[.] …

Efforts to force the administration to release the directive or portions of it under the Freedom of Information Act have been unsuccessful. …

The directive outlines why the administration has chosen the Muslim Brotherhood, which last year was labeled a terrorist organization by the governments of Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates as a key vehicle of U.S. backing for so-called political reform in the Middle East. …

The UAE government also has labeled two U.S. affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood, the Council on American-Islamic Relations and the Muslim American Society, as terrorist support groups. Both groups denied the UAE claims. Egypt is considering imposing a death sentence on Mohamed Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood-backed former president who was ousted in military coup in July 2013.

Critics of the administration’s strategy say the Brotherhood masks its goals and objectives despite advocating an extremist ideology similar to those espoused by al Qaeda and the Islamic State, but with less violence. The group’s motto includes the phrase “jihad is our way.” Jihad means holy war and is the Islamist battle cry.

Counterterrorism analyst Patrick Poole said the Brotherhood in recent weeks has stepped up its use of violent attacks in Egypt.

The Muslim Brotherhood is called the “Ikhwan” in Arabic, meaning “brotherhood.”  (Like German “ich” and “won.”)  It took that name in 1928, when fascist and Nazi “brotherhoods” were spreading all over Europe.

From the start, the Ikhwan actively collaborated with Hitler through the mufti of Jerusalem.  One of their slogans is “All we want is to die in the way of Allah” – which means killing as many infidels as you can when you die.  This is the theological basis for suicide-bombing.  Today, there is no daylight between the Ikhwan and ISIS.

In 1981, an Ikhwan front group assassinated Pres. Anwar Sadat, the most important Arab peacemaker with Israel.

The Ikhwan employs Malik Obama, the president’s half-brother, as a big money man.

The Ikhwan created Hamas – the terrorist group that uses children as human shields to protect rocket launchers in Gaza.

The Ikhwan helped neo-Ottoman fascist Erdoğan to take over Turkey.

The Ikhwan is almost certainly behind ISIS, together with Turkey and Qatar.

In 2011, the Ikhwan overthrew Egypt’s President Hosni Mubarak – who upheld the Egypt-Israel peace treaty for four decades – in close collusion with Obama, Code Pink, and Bill Ayers.  The Western media actually reported that  Code Pink and Bill Ayers were protesting Hosni Mubarak in the weeks before Mubarak was overthrown.  Today, millions of Egyptians believe that Obama supports their mortal enemy, the Ikhwan.

The Ikhwan is now engaged in a monumental civil war against President El Sisi, whose court just condemned its leader to death.  Their leaders who are not in jail have fled to Qatar, Turkey, and Gaza, all part of the Ikhwan network.

The Ikhwan controls American front groups like CAIR, which buys up American politicians by the truckload, especially on the left.

Four-star admiral James Lyons (USN, Ret.) has gone public with the charge that the Ikhwan has deeply penetrated U.S. intelligence.  That is why Obama can’t even say the words “Muslim war on America.”  That is why our defense has been so feeble and cringing.

Hillary Clinton’s closest personal aide as SecState was Huma Abedin – an Ikhwan insider.  Abedin was one of the few people who had access to Hillary’s illegal personal e-mail account on the night of Benghazi.  Nothing has changed – Abedin is still at the top of the Hillary campaign.  Probably for the first time in U.S. history, presidential candidate Hillary has stonewalled any media questions, period.

Major Ikhwan money flows have been reported going to the Clintons, the Carters, and Obama.  Ikhwan penetration of American society and the U.S. government gives all the appearance of a political quid pro quo – with our survival at stake.

Bill Gertz’s Pentagon documents now prove the Ikhwan connection directly.  The liberal media will try to stifle the facts, as always.

Maybe this time they will fail.

==end==