Thursday, December 31, 2015

Still not bringing what's necessary to the war for America's soul

I'm thinking about an assessment that LITD made this year that was flat-out mistaken: That Paul Ryan was going to work out fine as House Speaker.

In my piece, I relied heavily on an American Spectator endorsement of Ryan by Ross Kaminsky. He knows him personally, and convincingly vouched for his conservative bona fides.

And, to be sure, an argument for mitigating circumstances surrounding the passage of the omnibus spending bill can be made. There was a time crunch. Much of the bill's structure was baked in due to the process underway before Ryan had assumed his post.

But there was not even any indication of a tone of disgust or anger. No statement, before signing onto it, along the lines of, "I hate that this bill funds the murder of fetal Americans and the sale of their organs. I hate that it squanders taxpayers' money on windmill subsidies. I hate that it continues to give a pass to illegal aliens. Circumstances being what they are, it is passing and will go to the President's desk, but in the next microsecond, the fight to reverse this kind of evil begins in earnest."

Couldn't we have at least expected something like that?

Let alone actually fighting before the signing, blowing up the whole process, breaking down appropriations into department-by-department packages, as is actually how it's supposed to be done, and sending each one to the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, knowing full well the Most Equal Comrade would veto it?

Oh, but that would risk a - hold on for it - government shutdown - and Beltway Pubs have already promised that that weapon will never be found in their quiver.

Which brings me to a concern I expressed in another post more recently - that all Pub prez candidates not named Donald Trump would take an above-the-fray stance in regard to Hillionaire's continued feminist pose, even as she sends her Cosbyesque husband out on the campaign trail.

Indeed, we now see my favorite candidate, Ted Cruz, doing exactly that:

Ted Cruz says he won’t use former President Bill Clinton’s political liabilities against Democratic presidential contender and former First Lady Hillary Clinton.
“I am not interested in getting into personal attacks and innuendo,” he said Tuesday at a news conference in Cisco. “Hillary Clinton’s biggest liability is that her policies are a disaster.”
New York businessman Donald Trump, the frontrunner in the Republican race for president, has used Twitter to black Bill Clinton as abusive to women.
“If Hillary thinks she can unleash her husband, with his terrible record of women abuse, while playing the women’s card on me, she’s wrong!” Mr. Trump said Monday via Twitter.
Cruz says he won’t engage in such attacks.
Instead, he outlined how he would contrast himself with Clinton, should he get the Republican nomination for president.

Look, this is an admirable position for Cruz to take. But consider another factor we ignore at our own peril: It is late December 2015, a dark, grim ugly time in a gravely imperiled, once-great nation. 

Just like the maxim that you don't take a government shutdown off the table when talking about budget considerations, you don't take sexual behavior off the table when talking about defeating the Clintons.

And, as with so much - from an understanding of the Constitution, to basic articulateness, to, yes, gentlemanly behavior -  Cruz is astronomically better suited to wage such a fight than Squirrel-Hair, he of the serial mistresses-turned-into-wives.

This is what is driving the enraged post-American populace into the arms of this narcissistic charlatan: the deep thirst for someone who understands how savage the war for America's soul is and is going to get.

If this nation is going to be worth salvaging, it's only because there was an identifiable good side in the war.

Yes, Squirrel-Hair is willing to pull the trigger, to get as ugly as the bad guys. Do we actual conservatives have such a general, such a chief executive, among us? A Sherman, a Truman?

We'd better. God will not bless any other kind of victory over the Democrats, and we'll remain as hosed as we are with this nation's throat in their grip.


4 comments:

  1. Please provide your authentication for this statement: "God will not bless any other kind of victory over the Democrats."

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Authentification" is kind of a weird thing to ask for in this situation. I would just argue that, while it may be possible to defeat the Dems with something other than good, right and true principles - i.e., with what S-H is peddling, such a victory will not bless this nation.

    ReplyDelete
  3. May I propose that you too have at best only a clue, just like the rest of us, regarding what God blesses or does not bless or even what that means.

    ReplyDelete
  4. That's possible, but I was thinking about this. Here's a hypothetical: Say you come upon a group of 250-lb 6'4" thugs - tattoos up the arms, nose piercings - stomping the shit out of a 9-year-old girl. Would you have to do a lot of intellectual gyrating to conclude that that was wrong?

    ReplyDelete