Except breaking my exile to discuss the Khan con, I didn't comment on the convention. But now that we are into the general election cycle, I feel compelled to pop my head out from the bunker once again and give my point of view, as I see it.
How am I going to vote in November? Honestly, I'm not sure yet. But I know if definitely ain't gonna to be for Hillary. In other words, I'll be voting my conscience, and my conscience is really bothering me.
If you haven't gone to see it, I recommend you see Dinesh D'Souza's "Hillary's America" and you can understand why the only place Hillary Rotten Clinton deserves to occupy is a prison cell, not the Oval Office. She is a dangerous person, and anyone who is so turned off by Donald Trump that they've decided to vote for her should have their sanity checked.
Which brings us to Donald Trump. I'm not excited about him either. It's another "lesser of two evils," but there's only a little less evil than Hillary. But these two candidates really are a reflection of how our society has sadly become accepting of the lowest common denominator that we have two candidates who are a reflection of that. More about Trump later, but first I want to discuss those who are opposed to Trump, aka the "NeverTrump" movement.
Honestly, I found myself sympathetic to a lot of their arguments, reasoning, etc. But the recent actions of the #NeverTrump movement have shown me that their arguments are not about conservatism. Far from being what some Trumpkins called Ted Cruz crybabies, the #NeverTrump movement is not about conservatism. It is instead the last gasp of the GOP establishment, the Bushies, as well as the supporters of Jeb! and "Little" Marco Rubio who are having their public temper-tantrum after seeing that the public has tired of the "do-nothing" establishment and their milquetoast losers like McCain, Romney, Dole, et al.
So what did the #NeverTrumpers decided to do? They found their own candidate who they're rolling out two and a half months before the election, some guy named Egg McMuffin..er excuse me, Evan McMullin.
But don't be deceived, McMullin is no conservative (National Review Online).
In three years of Facebook posts, he never commented on a domestic issue, economic or social. He never said anything on any specific issue that a diehard Democrat couldn’t applaud.
When I was telling my boss Frank Cannon about McMullin’s Facebook page, he made a possibly unfair, or possibly telling, comment: “I find the people who post photos of Lincoln and Churchill are the least likely to actually be leaders like these men.” He meant that if you want to be a uniter, not a divider, you cannot be a leader in perilous times like Lincoln and Churchill were. Now, after their battles are long won, they unite us in admiration. But they were leaders precisely because they were willing to be reviled and despised at the time, not only by their opponents but by their fellow party members, if that was the price of defending core principles. Principles that turned out to be right.
After I scoured Evan McMullin’s Facebook page, I went to his website, wherein he says he’s very pro-life, but the only policy he commits to is no taxpayer financing of abortion; he boasts of support for adoption; and he commits to virtually nothing concrete on any issue, much less religious liberty, trying, I suppose, to be a unifier through vagueness, as many consultants would no doubt advise. This may or may not help you win (I think not, in this instance, as voters are onto this game), but it definitely makes it almost impossible to have a victory worth winning, as the GOP majorities in Congress have proved time and time again.
A few days later, consistent with his desire to be the new face of the Republican party that existing Washington GOP power players are longing for, McMullin was asked by Mark Halperin about gay marriage:
“As a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Rommey behind this??? MIM), I believe in traditional marriage between a man and a woman, but I respect the decision of the Court, and I think it’s time to move on,” McMullin said, according to Lifesite News.
When Halperin asked if a President McMullin would at least appoint Supreme Court justices who would overturn the Obergefell decision, he replied, “I wouldn’t.”
He could have evaded. He could have said he would look for constitutionalists like Justice Scalia. But he didn’t. He instead said its time to accept that the Left gets to decide what is in our Constitution and move on.
No one who cares about or understands constitutional conservatism would answer that way.
Where have we heard an answer like that before? Um, let's see...John Kaisch? (Ding, ding ding!!!!) So according to Egg McMuffin and John Kaisch, the Supreme Court spoke and their word is Gospel. Leaders they're not! If we had poor excuses for leaders like that in our history, some of the worst decisions by the court might still stand today, such as slavery being found constitutional (see Dred Scott), as was segregation (see Plessy vs. Ferguson "separate but equal").
McMuffin's campaign is being pushed by a GOP-e consultant named Rick Wilson, who is obsessed with destroying Trump. But conservative he is not, as Wilson tweeted this obscene tweet out back in May (censored).
That tweet tells you all you need to know about why, for better or for worse, Donald Trump is the GOP nominee.
My personal opinion, seeing the polls how they are, the rebellion among the GOP establishment #NeverTrumpers, as well as conservatives who are planning to either sit out the election of vote 3rd Party, I have a painful feeling we will witness a blowout election that will cost not only the White House, but the Congress and ultimately the Supreme Court.
And I think this was by design. It was a con set up to help a candidate who most American see as unlikable and who is so ethically challenged defeating her should have been a cakewalk, just as defeating Obama in 2012 should have been easy. But a con-job needed to be planted who could win the GOP nomination and divide the party in the process. And the RNC leadership, who so wanted to destroy Ted Cruz or any similar candidate, fell for the con-job that came straight out of The Godfather (read between the lines for my theory about the Corleone, I mean Clinton family crime syndicate).
You can blame the Rinse Preebus led Republican Party for blowing yet another Presidential election, just to make sure a real constitutional conservative candidate is not allowed to run against an Alinskyite socialist extremist.
No I'm not blaming Donald Trump, I'm blaming the feckless Rinse Preebus (I misspell his name on purpose). Preebus has made it his mission in the last few years he led the Republican party to destroy the chances of conservatives and Tea Party types, making sure these people never rise to prominence within the party or as a candidate.
Need proof? When the handpicked choice for 2012, Flip Romney, faced opposition, the GOP-establishment attacked candidates like Newt Gingrich with a barrage of smear stories that violated the famous 11th Commandment (Never speak ill of any Republican) quoted by Ronald Reagan. None of these RINOs, Romney included, who attacked any conservatives in 2012 attacked Obama with the same vigor.
In 2013, the Virginia GOP nominated a real Constitutional conservative, Ken Cuccinelli, as the candidate for governor that year. But the sore losers in the establishment, like Bill Boilling, did not endorse Cuccinelli and Preebus sent financial support to Krispy Kreme in New Jersey instead, leaving Cuccinelli's campaign to wither on the vine, and giving us the head of the Clinton Hillbilly Mafia, Terry McAwful, as governor, which allows him the opportunity to put the Commonwealth in the Clinton column by hook or crook.
In 2014, when the establishment GOP incumbent senator Thad Cochran was nearing defeat by Tea Party candidate Chris McDaniel. But Cochran was saved when the establishment came to his aid by attacking McDaniel using the bigoted language of the Left. And Preebus said nothing.
So, we had so many candidates spit the conservative vote, as a scheme to get the establishment's choice as GOP nominee. But it didn't work. Instead, we have Trump who foiled their plans but is not a conservative, but instead acts as the liberal's stereotype of what a conservative/Tea Party supporter is. But that was only part of Preebus' act for 2016. Also, in a move similar to 2012, the establishment steamrolled over any rules changes by the grassroots and orchestrated the uncivil attacks on Ted Cruz during his convention speech, after approving the contents beforehand. So Rinse got a twofer in 2016, destroy Ted Cruz in the eyes of the press and the Trump nomination, so when Trump loses, he can point the finger of blame at all those Tea Party types who aren't wise enough (in his view) to know what a great leader Jeb Bush, John Kaisch, or Little Marco Rubio are. And don't blame Trump for losing Congress, after two years of the Boehner/Ryan and McConnell white-flag leadership, why would anyone vote for a GOP majority who act like they're in the minority?
Which is why I've always said establishment Republicans are just as unpatriotic as liberals, but in a different way.