10

Democrats secret and not secret agents...

Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 7 months ago to News
131 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

I've been depicting Fiorini as the perfect Democrat secret sleeper agent. That Is still more true than not. But it's only my opinion - well - not only. Now we find the second agent depicted by Mona Charon's column on Dec 9th. That's today!!!

She lays out her case in no nonsense straight forward terms. Question inow is how many of his approval number came from the left to begin with. Who? Trump the life long Democrat turned RINO. Who else as an opponent would bandaid the left back together?


http://townhall.com Mona Charon

The dictionary defines "bogeyman" as "an imaginary evil spirit, referred to typically to frighten children." Hello, Donald Trump. It's not clear whether he set out intentionally to elect Hillary Clinton, but there is little question that he could not be fulfilling the role of Republican bogeyman to greater effect.

As Commentary's Jonathan Tobin noted, during a week in which the disastrous fecklessness of President Obama and his party in the face of terrorism ought to have been Topic A, we are all talking about Trump instead. Brilliant. Tobin's point actually applies to the entire presidential contest. By rights, it should be about the Democrats' unraveling. From Obamacare to terrorism, from the economy to climate change, and from guns to free speech, progressive policies have proven deeply disappointing when not downright obtuse and dangerous. Clinton promises more of the same while trailing an oil slick of corruption in her wake. And yet swinging into the frame, week in and week out, the orange-maned billionaire bogeyman dominates the discussion.

Hell yes, Republicans are anti-Hispanic bigots, Trump (a lifelong Democrat) is supposed to confirm. Just look at the way he talked about Mexican "rapists" and vowed to build a wall that Mexico will fund.

Hell yes, Republicans want to fight a war on women. Did you hear what Trump said about Megyn Kelly and Carly Fiorina?

Hell yes, Republicans are anti-immigrant, anti-handicapped, anti-Jewish and anti-Muslim. Line 'em up and Trump will offend. Not cleverly, mind you, but crudely. Donald Trump is fond of saying that our political leaders are stupid, constantly outmaneuvered at the bargaining table by shrewder Chinese, Mexicans, and Japanese. No one can accuse him of stupidity: provided his goal is to elect Hillary Clinton.

This week, while we were still burying our dead from San Bernardino, every Republican -- rather than explaining why President Obama's refusal to fight the war on terror has led to this moment -- instead had to condemn Donald Trump's mindless proposal to keep every single Muslim out of the United States until further notice. Again, he's the perfect bogeyman.

It's not just that what he says demands condemnation. It's that it seems to give credence to the Democrats' narrative.

Personally when I listen to or read about Trump I'm reminded of the climb to power int he 20's and 30's of the last century by an ex German Army Corporal who also had a hair problem..on his lip.


All Comments

  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ 9 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I'm not a Libertarian and I firmly believe by close examination the Republicans are not only as bad as the Democrats they are two parts of the exact same political philosophy and the same party what I call the Government Party... Do they or do they not believe in Government ruling Citizens. Yes they do. Do those who claim differently still support them by remaining Republican? Yes they do? Does the Republican Party continually support the left? Yes they do? Has the Republican Rino majority been instrumental in setting up a quasi police state. Yes they have? In rigging the election system? Yes they have? The list is seemingly endless.
    So why should I support a lame bunch of left wing wannabe's socialists who continuously demonstrate they are lapdogs of the left? I shouldn't and i don't.

    Personally I'm in favor of the military upholding and honoring their oath of office which hardly constitutes a garage door startup and is, in fact, a legal move and a required move on their part.

    We never took an oath to the country nor the people nor the government but to the Constitution. If there were 'sometimes worthy' actually worth anything they wouldn't be lackeys to Republicans-In-Name-Only and goose stepping along enabling the right wing of the lef t as they support the left wing of the left them you have helped destroy liberty. For sure you weren't worth fighting for. We expected you to watch our backs only to return and found our country sold down the drain ....thanks for nothing.

    Vote for your 'sometimes worthy's? What for? Same reason I wouldn't vote for a Democrat. I'm no traitor to my oath freely given still uphold without purposes of evasion. Spare me the dog an pony show and the empty campaign rhetoric. If they are worthy let them start showing it through action not empty words.

    My apologies for the unseemly rant. But where better? If it was a Republican or a Democrat group it wouldn't be allowed. Not in the approved script don't you know?



    .
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ CBJ 9 years, 6 months ago
    Re: “No one can accuse him of stupidity: provided his goal is to elect Hillary Clinton.” Based on all the available evidence, I think Trump’s goal is to elect Trump. And judging by the latest polls on the immigration issue, Hillary is on the wrong side of public opinion, even within her core constituency.

    According to a recent poll (taken before San Bernardino) a surprising 63% of Hispanics oppose the U.S. accepting Syrian Muslim refugees. So do 55% of African-Americans. So do 54% of those ages 18-29. So do 66% of women. http://www.breitbart.com/big-governme...

    In a Trump vs. Hillary matchup, if immigration is still the number one issue 11 months from now, a lot of traditionally Democratic voters will likely stay home on election day or cast their vote for Trump.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "the whole Libertarian argument that Republicans are as bad as Democrats and that therefore neither is worthy of support."
    I think it's funny how Republicans just assume that if it's a contest between them and Democrats, Republicans are more favorable to liberty. In my view, they're more open than Democrats in their believe that gov't should have an opinion and influence on people's personal lives.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "unfortunately the facts argue [non-Democrat voters are... stupid enough to latch onto any principles-devoid juggernaut]"
    Yes. I wonder why Democrats haven't similarly latched onto Sanders.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Interesting. I read the article you linked. I cannot tell whether the author is correctly that she started with a glib attitude toward Trump "that made advisors squirm" and moved to taking him seriously. That could be true.

    Or it could be she previously wanted to portray herself as a maverick who ignored conventional political wisdom, and now she realizes she only stands to gain from Trump so she helps him by appearing to take him seriously and mentioning him by name instead of "some of my opponents".
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ CBJ 9 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Most of what you say about the GOP in 2015 was true in 1972, the year Ayn Rand supported Nixon, and even decades earlier. For example, Robert Taft, a leading conservative of his time, was denied the 1952 presidential nomination by the GOP’s “liberal eastern establishment”, which backed Eisenhower. This even though Taft had won a total of 2.8 million votes in the Republican primaries vs. 2.0 million for Eisenhower. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republi...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Hey! I was in retail for over 20 years and never did such a thing. Lighten up Michael -- not everyone outside the exalted realm of Objectivism is a villain.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ 9 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Once upon a time when it was just a little bitty start up lottery my Mom bought $10 worth of tickets every Wednesday and every Saturday. I put the same in the bank at - then six percent interest.

    Twelve years late she was down 2x$10x52x 12 or $12,480 There was an average of four winners on the big prize a year or 48 winners. I came in 49th with $12, 480 plus interest minus taxes.

    Not exactly I invested in something called penny stocks.That account was double the savings account. So no millionaire here...

    Either one was better odds than Lottery or Politics. The difference. With Lottery the odds are a few million to one with an unknown conclusion. With politics the number one rigged game in the country the odds are exactly 50:50. Fifty a left wing socialist statist/corporatist will win and fifty a left wing socialist corporatist/statist will win and one hundred percent the player will lose.

    All my funds left the country in 2007. The odds of them going back are zero.

    You gotta play to win but you don't have to have to buck the odds of beating a stacked deck in a rigged game when other choices are available
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment deleted.
  • Posted by freedomforall 9 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Don't waste time voting for a 98%evil statist instead of a 99% evil statist.
    Produce the music!!!!!!
    Should your nickname be Halley7734?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ 9 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I'd rate him opposite Hillary at 50% negative but still moving to the left with Hillary as a 100% to the left rather than your 75%. With a rigged election the best you could hope for is how little it will hurt but accepting it will hurt?

    That's what you get for playing with somebody else's marked deck.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ 9 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Actually it leaves at best Hillary making a 3/4 negative. Trump I would rate the same as one is International Socialist leaning and the other is national socialist at best.

    Thumbs up for the music. Why not join the counter revolution and don't play with their rigged deck?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Whew!
    You guys are tough. I have to agree. But, I can't just stand by. Trying to make something good come out of an evil situation. I already know your reply, which is nothing good can come out of it. If whoever beats Hillary fulfills 1/4 of the promises made it will be an improvement. Unless Trump gets in.
    If what you say comes to pass I'll spend my remaining years writing music.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ 9 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Especially since the became the lapdogs of the Democrat Party.....No difference all left wing socialists....
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 9 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    At that time most of what you know about Nixon was not known, and the history of the GOP as a tool of socialists was in no way clear. This is 2015 and the GOP is immensely different. Their history of betrayal is obvious. Rand wouldn't select a candidate based on their claim that they were influenced by her writing. Hillary could say the same thing truthfully. I think Rand would have recognized that in 2015 the party insiders select the candidate, and they never choose anyone they can't control. Rand was not politically naive. She would have pulled no punches in exposing the weaknesses of any candidate.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 9 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    None of those misguided people will ever be allowed to represent the party as presidential candidate unless they have been co-opted by the evil ones controlling the party. The GOP is a cesspool. No one who falls in comes out as clean.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo