Walker Runs – To Fight And Win

Update: Quotes of the day come from Scott Walker’s 35 minute long announcement speech. His very first sentence? “I love America.” It’s a trite sentiment but well delivered by the former boy scout. Come to think of it, we’ve never heard Barack Obama say that.

“It’s not too late. We can still turn things around.”


Expect even more “Hillary needs a walker; Republicans have Scott Walker” of an avalanche of jokes if Scott Walker becomes the Republican nominee for president. And Scott Walker very possibly might be the Republican nominee for president.

We won’t know, we would not even venture a guess, about Walker’s real prospects until we see him debate on a national stage against formidable opponents on August 6. Is Scott Walker a beautiful bloom nurtured in a Wisconsin hothouse that will droop, wilt, and die when exposed to national political weather? After August 6 we’ll have some idea about Walker and the rest of the Republican field. But thus far, on his first day, for a reason we have smacked Hillary2016 around, we are very very impressed with Scott Walker’s campaign.

What impresses us about the Scott Walker campaign? Consider, Scott Walker is in a very very competitive campaign with more than 15 competitors. So what does Scott Walker do? Does he announce early? Does he make his move in early Winter or early Spring? No. Scott Walker shrewdly waits until the political landscape is set, all major candidates announced, the issue meteorology measured, surprises and events cataloged, personal business settled and the campaign message and strategy set taking all the above into consideration.

That’s what we advised Hillary2016 to do. On the Hillary side there is no real competition, no pressing deadlines, no danger looming – no need to announce early. But by announcing early Bernie Sanders has been empowered and Joe Biden has been encouraged. And we are sure that in Cambridge a one drop squaw squats waiting for an opportunity to go on the warpath if Hillary gets scalped. We advised a “don’t shoot until you see the whites’ of their eyes” campaign strategy in which opponents would be smoked out of their holes then big footed by a massive Hillary2016 effort once the battlefield and the armies on that landscape positioned. But, Hell’s Bells, that’s a Tomahawk over the trees so let’s get back to Walker.

Walker’s candidacy announcement benefited from the knowledge of all that has come before. Walker’s campaign organization waited until mid July and after the rapid rise of Donald Trump. This latest and amazing development forced Walker to respond to Trump and the rest of the field with a message that differentiates Walker from the rest of the other runners.

Walker responded to the rise of Donald Trump by stating that as Governor of Wisconsin Walker had not only fought but he has most importantly won.

As his announcement video so vividly claims, Walker fought and won. And won. And won. And won. And won again.

That’s one helluva campaign message.

Donald Trump has a strong campaign message and Walker tops it with the claim that he has fought against all the odds and won. And won. And won. And won. And won again.

Today’s mid July announcement also helped Walker by writing his campaign strategy in light of all the recent events and all the many candidates. Walker is very much ahead in Iowa followed by Donald Trump. Jeb Bush is slightly ahead in New Hampshire followed by Donald Trump and then by Scott Walker. So Walker figures, win in Iowa and then go for a win in New Hampshire and that will help in all the following states.

Not that the Iowa win play was hard to forecast for a governor from a neighboring state. But the Trump threat in Iowa (and New Hampshire) is real and Walker’s announcement moved to secure the conservative vote in Iowa and nationwide.

No other candidate has as smart a strategy against Donald Trump’s rise as Scott Walker. Donald Trump will attack Jeb Bush on illegal immigration and Common Core thereby opening up a breach for Scott Walker to walk through.

Donald Trump will attack Marco Rubio on illegal immigration and on ObamaTrade votes in the U.S. Senate. Again, a smart Scott Walker will continue to avoid attacking Donald Trump and let Trump clear the field for himself and for Walker.

Perhaps Scott Walker did not need lessons on tough from Donald Trump. After all Walker has walked through fire, a hundred thousand protestors, tens of millions of dollars, and a vindictive Big Media. Today though, Walker did a Trump style response to attacks.

Today Trump used his biggest critics to bolster himself. It was Instagram agitprop which featured Al Sharpton, Jon Stewart, Chris O’Tingles, and Bill Maher. Today Scott Walker supporters used an attack from AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka (“Scott Walker is a national disgrace.”) to bolster Scott Walker. Maybe Republicans are learning? Or maybe, according to the New York Times, Scott Walker is a really smart cheesehead:

He has held elected office continuously since 1993; the presidential contest will be his 14th campaign. And he comes to the race steeped in the knowledge required of a good political operative: what it costs to compete in swing states; the science of purchasing television advertising time; the art of getting good press.

“If I know Scott Walker, he probably knows the media markets just as well in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina as he does Wisconsin, plus where they spill over into and who has the best ratings,” said Robin Vos, the speaker of the Wisconsin Assembly and an ally of Mr. Walker’s. [snip]

Mr. Walker’s strategic talents can be an asset. His ability to formulate and convey an effective message helped him win three hard-fought elections for governor in four years, including a 2012 recall election, in an extraordinarily competitive state. And he is doing much the same now: It was Mr. Walker who came up with the best-of-both-worlds formulation he has recently woven into his stump speech — that his hard-charging Senate opponents are “fighters,” and his rival governors who have won difficult elections are “winners,” but he is the rare breed who has done both.

Wisconsin before Walker was a blue state. Then Walker won the governorship as well as the Wisconsin house and senate. Then Walker won an attempted recall. Then Walker won reelection.

Walker, like a pedestrian at a crosswalk, waited for the green light to make his move. Walker waited until he signed a budget for Wisconsin that he could tout throughout the primary season.

Now that the governor of Wisconsin has announced, the Republican field is pretty much set as far as the big players and likely winner. We’ll wait until August 6 to see how this GOP field performs as they fight tooth and claw for victory.

We don’t know who will win the race for the Republican nomination. But in this very important race, we’ll keep an eye on Walker.


108 thoughts on “Walker Runs – To Fight And Win

  1. http://therightscoop.com/angry-geraldo-threatens-to-knock-out-eric-bolling-on-air/

    Geraldo and Eric Bolling got into it on The Five today, with Geraldo accusing Jesse Watters of exploiting Kate Steinle’s death. Bolling defended Watters and when things got heated, accused Geraldo of exploiting everything. That’s when Geraldo threatened to knock Bolling out on-air. They had to be interrupted by the lovely Kimberly Guilfoyle and a commercial break.

    Video at link.

  2. I think Walker has been a bit disappointing on the stump. He seems to be OK in interviews, just “meh” in his standard stump speech. I haven’t heard any notably interesting policy positions — pretty much standard textbook Republican.

  3. hwc
    July 13, 2015 at 10:00 pm
    I think Walker has been a bit disappointing on the stump. He seems to be OK in interviews, just “meh” in his standard stump speech. I haven’t heard any notably interesting policy positions — pretty much standard textbook Republican.
    That is exactly right.

    At one point, it was suggested that he could be the “fusion” candidate who unites the RINOs and the conservatives.

    His hire of the contemptible Brad Dayspring put an end to that fairy tale.


    When you get him on a national stage he will be seen as mediocre.

    His greatest strength in the Republican primary is that he took on and beat big labor.

    His greatest weakness in the general election is that he took on and beat big labor.

    I am pretty damned sure he will not be the nominee.

  4. Scott Walker…is a guy that just doesn’t do anything for me personally, but it’s good to see he is ready to jump into the race.

  5. Exactly, Scott Walker doesn’t do anything for me personally but then neither do Rubio, Bush, Paul, and for sure Fiorina among the many others. It’s hard to even remember even who all are in the GOP race.

  6. Shadowfax
    July 13, 2015 at 11:41 pm

    Expect jokes also made about him being a zombie walker from The Walking Dead.

  7. Now that Walker is in, where will the Koch brothers put their resources? Any thoughts admin?

    Hillary 2016

  8. I like Rand Paul a lot. Not as President, but he’s a smart guy with a point of view that is, in many ways, sensible and needed.

    Rubio is inconsistent. Sometimes he hits a homerun with a speech. Other times, the same speech falls flat. I don’t think he’s very good at sizing up the room and tailoring the stump speech accordingly.

    Jeb! has been dreadful on the stump. Really uninspired. Reminds me of his dad.

    Hillary has been a zombie. Just from the standpoint of politics as a performance art, she has been dreadful. Almost Stepfordian. She really hates campaigning.

  9. The Kochs have hinted that they will generally stay out of the primaries. At least out of the early primaries.

    The candidates that they would consider supporting already have money to get to New Hampshire. The candidates that don’t have money to get to NH aren’t candidates the Kochs would waste their money on.

  10. Update: Quotes of the day come from Scott Walker’s 35 minute long announcement speech. His very first sentence? “I love America.” It’s a trite sentiment but well delivered by the former boy scout. Come to think of it, we’ve never heard Barack Obama say that.

    “It’s not too late. We can still turn things around.”


  11. More on the Koch’s data mining company:


    Among others, they had the Tom Cotton, Jodi Ernst, and Larry Hogland races in 2014. They’ve got Rob Portman and Kelly Ayotte in 2016.

    Cruz is using a data analytics company owned by his main PAC donor (the Mercer family). This company is also actively nationally in GOP circles. They also worked on the Cotton race, so I suspect they are using the Koch’s database.

    The best of these companies run experiments in certain races to see what works empirically. For example, one of them found than aggressive voter contact efforts to voters already firmly committed to voting actually REDUCES turnout among those voters. Kind of counter-intuitive, but he constant robo-calling just pisses them off.

  12. TheRock, it is doubtful the Koch Brothers are dumb enough to have decided on their candidate. The most any smart person does at this point is winnow the field to 5 or six potentials and to try and figure out how the other candidates might influence the race. For instance Lindsay Graham will not get the nomination but he might wield some influence in the South Carolina primary. Ditto Christie in New Jersey.

    The best bets for eventual winner are Jeb?, Rubio, and Walker. Penumbra potentials are Cruz, Kasich, and because of the very special attributes he brings, Trump (although many would dispute Trump belongs in this category. We think Trump deserves this placement because no other candidate has seized the opportunities he has.)

    Bottom line: The Koch Brothers and just about everyone else, including those donors that say they are already decided/committed, will be heavily influenced by what happens on August 6.

    As to candidates, after August 6 or after the next few debates that winnow the field down further the Koch Brothers will support 2 or 3 candidates and watch what happens.

    But the Koch Brothers are probably least interested in the candidate. We already know where the Koch Brothers will “put their resources”. Their interest and their resources are focused on infrastructure.

    This is where the Koch Brothers have and will put their resources:



  13. What other Republican will follow Trump’s lead and meet with the families of those victimized by illegal aliens? Here’s more fodder for Trump:


    Mexican Illegal Alien Arrested for Allegedly Kidnapping, Raping 13-Year-Old

    While outfits like the Immigration Policy Center say Americans ought to stop believing their lying eyes and understand that the more illegal immigrants stream across the border, the more crime rates fall, the reality is much darker.

    On Thursday, Michigan police arrested a Mexican illegal alien, 23-year-old Aurelio Hernandez-Gomez, after finding him with a 13-year-old Florida girl who had last been seen two days before her ordeal.

    Cops acted on a tip that led them to a Hartford home where Hernandez-Gomez hid the girl while assaulting her.

    Michigan authorities charged Hernandez-Gomez with one count of third-degree criminal sexual conduct, meaning they believe he raped or otherwise penetrated the girl after incapacitating her or otherwise rendering her helpless. They have not released further details, such as whether or not the victim was related to the alien suspect. Hernandez-Gomez is being held on $150,000 bond in a Paw Paw Michigan jail and will be back in court on Wednesday.

  14. Donald Trump to visit the boyhood town of Bill Clinton:


    HOT SPRINGS, Ark. (KTHV) – This Thursday will be Donald Trump’s first visit to central Arkansas.

    The presidential hopeful is speaking at the Hot Springs Convention Center Thursday night.

    Trump has made headlines for bold statements in the past, which is creating quite the buzz around his visit.

    “You may or may not agree with Mr. Trump’s position, but it’s our right to listen and his right to speak about those issues,” said Republican state chairman Doyle Webb, who says their party is excited for Trump to speak at their Reagan Rockefeller dinner.

    “He is certainly a newsmaker,” said Webb.

    Webb explained that Trump’s comments tend to make headlines because he’s the only candidate so far in 2016 who is self-funded and does not accept outside contributions, “which frees him up to say what’s on his mind cause he is his primary supporter,” said Webb.

    After Trump agreed to speak, the event was moved from Horner Hall to a much larger exhibit room at the Hot Springs Convention Center.

    “First this was going to be a very small event and now it’s well over a thousand people, so it’s going to be great to have those visitors,” said Steve Arrison, CEO of the Hot Springs Convention Center.

    Arrison says with big political events like this, they increase security.

  15. admin
    July 14, 2015 at 1:34 am

    Bottom line: The Koch Brothers and just about everyone else, including those donors that say they are already decided/committed, will be heavily influenced by what happens on August 6.

    July 14, 2015 at 1:07 am

    The Kochs have hinted that they will generally stay out of the primaries. At least out of the early primaries.

    hwc and admin – thanks for the education. I’ve actually been so focused on the political wranglings in my home country of Nigeria that I haven’t been keeping up on the opposition’s front office, i.e the Republican pocketbook. I have been privy to some of the un-polled comments of everyday Republicans (though I live in TX, my US roots are in KS) and I can tell you that the early money is on Jeb. That said, there are a lot of people that do see Trump as a serious candidate. Funny thing – I am hearing that he would make a horrible cabinet member, but a good executive. Go figure. His appeal seems to be that he has his own fortune and really does not need to be bought.

    Hillary 2016

  16. I’m from Wisconsin originally. ..I love the state, my family is for the most part union, anti Walker. ..I was in Madison during the crazy recall time. You would have thought with all the media, Soro’s $, amazing and hostile protesting that Walker didn’t have a chance…
    But the heartland had had enough and the silent majority said…we love Wisconsin. ..we love America and we have had enough…and voted Scott Walker

  17. The best bets for eventual winner are Jeb?, Rubio, and Walker.
    Admin, with respect, I see the nomination process shaping up this way.

    First of all, the Republican Party, like its counterpart is based on coalitions. The predominant coalitions in the Republican Party are: i) businessmen (Wall Street, Chamber of Commerce, big business ii) national defense interests, iii) libertarians, iv) tea party and v) evangelicals.

    Second, these groups can be characterized as either establishment or conservative. The establishment groups tend to be globalists, and they favor crony capitalism. The conservative groups favor small business, the Constitution and America first.

    Third, since the end of World War II, all nominees have been establishment candidates except for Goldwater. The three names you mention as the odds on favorites, i.e. Bush, Rubio and Walker are establishment candidates.

    Fourth, the Republicans lost the last two presidential elections because conservatives stayed home, rather than turn out and vote for another republican in name only promoted by the establishment.

    Fifth, establishment candidates have engaged in a program of ethnic cleansing at the state parties and in primaries across the nation. Boeher and McConnell have denied key committee chairmanships to conservatives.

    Sixth, establishment candidates for office told voters they would end Obamacare and amnesty. Thereafter, they reneged on those campaign promises to voters, rewarded donors with massive spending programs, and rewarded themselves by raising campaign contribution limits.

    Seventh, a generation ago there were party leaders capable of bringing the bomb throwers into a single room and reaching a compromise between two factions with fundamentally different world views. Today, those elder statesmen do not exist.

    Eighth, establishment financial interests no longer have a monopoly of Republican money. The Koch Brothers inter alia represents a competing fund of money and they plan to spend a billion dollars in the next election.

    Based on these developments, I believe the nomination contest will come down to two candidates. One will be an establishment candidate, and will be one of the three you mention as the current leaders. The other candidate will be a conservative, e.g. Ted Cruz.\

    I believe the Koch Brothers will end up supporting the conservative candidate rather than the establishment puppet.

    If the establishment pulls its usual shitties, like Bush did to Perot, and later to McCain, the conservatives will stay home again, and Hillary will win. That seems like a rather likely scenario.

    And when the party loses, conservatives will say three losses in a row and we cannot get our candidates nominated. We will be better off forming a third party, which represents our values, than remaining in a party that does violence to them.

  18. And the Mad nuclear scientist doomsday clock signaling the end of the world strikes. ..30 seconds..

    I think the fraud stole the Clinton north Korean nuclear, we got this, nothing to worry about,speech. …hmm how did that work out for the world..yeah feeling it yet?

  19. Crazy middle eastern country, which on a daily bases threatens to annihilation of Israel and your own Country, Satan, I think they call it, oh, yeah, America, acquires nuclear bomb, nothing here, move on by..
    Also today in the news, The Green Bay Packers are expected to win the Super Bowl as Favre announces a come back…

  20. BO is building his legacy. LEGACY? What kind of legacy is a nuclear bomb dropped on a non Muslim country?

  21. there is one more repub candidate set to enter the race @ July 21

    John Kasich…he may have waited too long to get his numbers up in time for the Aug 6 debate…but it sounds like he will jump in and be part of the mix going forward

  22. I just heard Hillary speak in support of Obama’s Iran deal. She continues to lose supporters every time she opens her mouth. Expect more Jewish voters to turn away from Hillary, certainly those who deeply care for Israel’s future or have relatives in Israel.
    I do see a way that Hillary becomes our next POTUS, but it will be for all the wrong reasons. She is now the favored candidate of the wealthy elite, not a broad based coalition of Americans.

    I was unimpressed with Walker’s delivery, but would chose him over Hillary at this point. I don’t like his religious, conservative bent, but am impressed by his record in Wisconsin. I think Hillary can beat him. I do think you may be wrong about Trump. If Trump wins one of the early voting states and continues to draw huge crowds, everything changes. Trump’s candidacy will succeed if the American people rise up to be heard.

  23. Gonzo: it is all in how you look at it.

    Big media is worshiping Obama–WORSHIPING HIM for bringing peace and stability to the Middle East/

    This view is not unanimous however.

    There are, of course, those racists who cannot stand to see a black man in the white house who offer their antediluvian views, and are inclined to fly the Confederate flag when our hall monitors and proctors are busy with other forms of surveillance.

    Let me show you just how wise we are, we members of big media and the Obama coalition (to the extent there is any difference) vs. the great unwashed who did not go to Harvard, and do not have our money–and well planned exist strategy when the consequences of this come to fruition.

    Just look at the terrible things they say to collaterally attack our messiah. For them, the Iran deal is one more example of finding a pretext to resist our brainwashing, strike that, our efforts to educate them on the plain fact that Barcrack is the way.

    (Question: what kind of an idiot claims Kerry is a “good man”? Define what good means.)

    (Answer: a fucking RINO. Next question.)


    Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) charged that the Obama administration has “created a possible death sentence for Israel” with the Iran nuclear deal.

    The pact is also “a virtual declaration of war against Sunni Arabs,” he said this morning on MSNBC, as “you’re making every Sunni Arab nation recalculate — you have locked in an industrial-sized nuclear program on behalf of the Iranians, and over time they can have as large a program as they want.”

    Graham says he hasn’t seen the full agreement just inked in Vienna, but “we’re going to ensure that there will be a nuclear arms race now.”

    “With the mere passage of time, this industrial strength program we have locked in place will become a nuclear weapons program so the Arabs are going to get their own bomb,” the presidential candidate said. “…You have taken our chief antagonist, people who have killed hundreds of Americans in Iraq, who’ve toppled pro-American governments throughout the region including Yemen, you’ve given them the capability to become a nuclear nation. That technology I fear one day will be shared with terrorists and come here.”

    “This is the most dangerous, irresponsible step I have ever seen in the history of watching the Mideast. Barack Obama, John Kerry, have been dangerously naive about the Mideast in general. They’ve taken it to a new level, and any senator who votes for this is voting for a nuclear arms race in the Mideast, and is voting to give the largest state sponsor of terrorism $18 billion. And what do you think they’ll do with the money? Put it roads and schools? It’s going to go to Assad, it’s going to go to Hezbollah and Hamas.”

    Obama, the senator stressed, “put Israel in the worst possible box.”

    “This will be a death sentence over time for Israel if they don’t push back. You put our nation at risk,” Graham said.

    “Every goal the president expressed two years ago has absolutely not been met, and you put the arms embargo on the table at a time when they’re destroying the Mideast with their conventional weapons program. You may think this is a good deal. This is a terrible deal. It’s going to make everything worse, and I really fear that we’ve set in motion a decade of chaos,” he continued.

    “…When they drew a line against Assad and did nothing about it, they set in motion holy hell in the Mideast. I think John Kerry is a good man, but at the end of the day, they want a deal so bad they cannot stand it.”

  24. Tony


    Expect jokes also made about him being a ‘zombie walker’ from The Walking Dead.

    That about just covers it for me, I find Walker really creepy. Just sayin’…..

  25. Kerry is a good man.

    Neville Chamberlain was a good man.

    Hitler was a good man.

    Stalin was a good man.

    Have I forgotten anyone.

    Oh yes.

    Light in the loafers Linday

    Is a nevish.

    And, a racist as well (supra).

  26. When I see comments like this, and listen to lilting lyrics of Reverend Al, Jerry Wright, or Black Jesus himself

    I realize that we have made no racial progress to speak of in the past hundred years.

    Sadly, is all just window dressing.

    This racist critique of the Iran deal is vintage Jefferson Davis.

    In this day and age, how shameful!

    Finally, the litmus test of every race procateur:

    Would they call Obama incompetent if he was white?

    Goodbye to Western Civilization

    Roger Simon (Racist!)—PJ Media

    Now we know what hope and change really meant.

    Somewhere Frank Marshall Davis must be smiling. Barack Obama toasted what he always wanted, the decline of the West, as our president finally rolled over and made a big nuclear deal with Iran, giving the ayatollah virtually everything he could have dreamed of, let alone needed — including control over nuclear inspections, making them meaningless — and getting nothing in return.

    Among the first to respond, Senator Marco Rubio:

    Washington, D.C.– U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, today commented on the Obama Administration’s announcement of a nuclear deal with Iran:

    “I have said from the beginning of this process that I would not support a deal with Iran that allows the mullahs to retain the ability to develop nuclear weapons, threaten Israel, and continue their regional expansionism and support for terrorism. Based on what we know thus far, I believe that this deal undermines our national security. President Obama has consistently negotiated from a position of weakness, giving concession after concession to a regime that has American blood on its hands, holds Americans hostage, and has consistently violated every agreement it ever signed. I expect that a significant majority in Congress will share my skepticism of this agreement and vote it down. Failure by the President to obtain congressional support will tell the Iranians and the world that this is Barack Obama’s deal, not an agreement with lasting support from the United States. It will then be left to the next President to return us to a position of American strength and re-impose sanctions on this despicable regime until it is truly willing to abandon its nuclear ambitions and is no longer a threat to international security

    More from Rep. DeSantis, chairman of the Subcommittee for National Security :

    This Iran deal gives Ayatollah Khamenei exactly what he wants: billions of dollars in sanctions relief, validation of the Iranian nuclear program, and the ability to stymie inspections. It even lifts sanctions against Quds Force Commander Qasem Soleimani, who is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American soldiers during the campaign in Iraq. The deal will further destabilize the Middle East, allow Iran to foment more terrorism, and aid Iran’s rise as the dominant power in the region. By paving Iran’s path to a nuclear weapon, the deal harms American national security and effectively stabs our close ally Israel, which Iran has threatened to wipe off the map, in the back. Congress needs to move swiftly to block this dangerous deal.

    Good words all around, but not enough. Words by themselves are not going to cut it, only action and serious organizing of the apathetic American people. This is not courtly congressional business as usual. This is nothing less than the sabotage of Western civilization by itself, covered by weasel-like spin and outright prevarication. The time has come for the all the candidates, indeed the entire country, to speak out as one. This monstrosity cannot pass.

  27. They will find a way to pass this thing.

    A little vigorish to that Republican senator–money, logrolling, they will think of something.

    J Street will help.

    Just count on it.

    This is what big money wants.

    And whatever Lola wants Lola gets.

    I refuse to get up in arms over this.

    Its too hard on the arteries.

    And frankly there are issues closer to home.

    There was a time when I would have been all over this.

    But its like that line by Von Rumstead:

    After you have tried to interfere with the enthusiastic efforts of the elites to destroy this nation for money and profit, there comes a point when you are inclined to sit back and observe the process with a certain degree of detachment.

  28. wbboei:

    I don’t believe that Ronald Reagan was an “establishment” candidate when he ran against the sitting Republican President Ford in 1976.

  29. Totally Disgusted, “I do think you may be wrong about Trump.” How so? We wrote that Trump because of his “very special attributes” has a real chance now. Few see Trump’s potential as bullishly as we do. Obviously, if Trump comes in first or second in Iowa and/or New Hampshire everything changes in Trump’s favor.

    But at the moment it is Scott Walker who comes in second choice just about everywhere and a very dominant first to win Iowa. If Walker wins Iowa his prospects in New Hampshire increase substantially. If Walker wins Iowa and New Hampshire his prospects increase substantially everywhere else. But we advise a wait and see attitude until we witness Walker (and Trump) debate on August 6.

    What we have noticed about Trump that has not been specifically noted as an attribute is how far ranging in speaking venues he is. Trump has been on MSNBC, on CNN, in California, and in all sorts of places that Republicans typically fear to tread. We can’t think of any candidate that has been so daring and so innovative in choices of appearances. (Cruz has been on MSNBC and Sanders on Fox News.)

    Even on social media Trump is trumping. Check out the link in the article to the Trump Instagram which uses his enemies to bolster his candidacy.

    Today Trump is in Virginia talking jobs. Later this week Trump goes to Arkansas.

    As to Trump’s poll numbers we think they are very good too. Karl Rove is on every show on Fox News highlighting what he terms as Trump’s weaknesses. For instance Rove yesterday discussed the Monmouth poll which has Trump a very close second nationwide to Jeb. Rove pointed out that 39% of Republicans don’t consider Trump a real candidate and that he is doing this all for publicity.

    What Rove fails to consider is that if 39% of Republicans think Trump is about publicity and not a real candidate and still he comes in a strong second to Jeb – what happens if Trump via debates and FEC filings convinces the 39% that he is a real candidate not just a publicity stunt? What happens to Trump’s poll numbers if he wins or comes in second in Iowa? What happens to Trump’s poll numbers if he wins New Hampshire? Trump is already #1 in North Carolina so what happens if he wins that primary? What happens if Trump does very well in the debates and thereby the favorable/unfavorable numbers begin to change dramatically in Trump’s favor which up to now are not at all in Trump’s favor?

    Both Trump and Walker have strong potential upsides. Both Trump and Walker share a cultural problem that mirrors their strengths.

    Walker has a very strong record of achievements but there is a cultural disconnect for many because he is that type of cultural conservative from “Wisconsin nice” which many on the coasts and social liberals cannot relate to. Trump has that New York brash and crass cultural disconnect which many social conservatives instinctively recoil from. That’s why we wait and see how the campaign and debates will shape these two candidates as well as the rest of the field. August 6 is not so far from today.

  30. I have never seen Walker as Wisconsin nice, he just gives me the creeps. I can’t even watch his videos.

  31. Speaking of style, style matters:


    But Trump allies say that the worst may still be ahead for Bush.

    Trump’s close associates — all of whom spoke anonymously with CNN to share his private thinking — said his preoccupation with Bush has been years in the making. His grievances, they said, go beyond policy disagreements with Bush over issues like the Iraq War, immigration and Common Core.

    Described by friends as intensely competitive, Trump has a deep aversion to the idea of a dynasty candidate who might feel entitled to the party’s nomination. Privately and publicly, Trump is known to refer to Bush as “a stiff,” believing that the country badly needs a candidate who can energize the base and that Bush simply “is not a cheerleader,” one person in Trump’s inner circle said.

    “For some reason they didn’t hit it off. Their styles are totally different,” one Trump friend said.

    Ross Perot was known to have animosity towards the Bush family. That did not go well for George.

  32. wbboei:

    I don’t believe that Ronald Reagan was an “establishment” candidate when he ran against the sitting Republican President Ford in 197
    Well . . . (as Reagan would say as he smiled looked down at his shoes shook his head and said there you go again . .

    In 1976 he ran as an outsider, an heir to Barry Goldwater.

    Did he win?

    Or, did Ford, the establishment candidate, win??

    You did not mention 1980–when he did win.

    Was he an establishment candidate by then?

    Not really.

    George Herbert Walker Bush was the establishment candidate then.

    And Reagan beat him.

    So if you want to say 1980 then all I can say is give the man a cupie doll.

    However, if you examine his policies heavily weighted in favor of big business.

    Fools like me fell for the rhetoric, and even today I consider myself a Reaganite.

    But I detest the outsourcing of jobs, amnesty, military build up, anti union policies he introduced.

    So you could argue that he was, by then, an establishment candidate as well, in terms of his policies.

    But that was a vastly different establishment–who lived through the depression and world war II.

    They were patriots, whereas was passes for party leadership today is more globalist than nationalistic.

  33. Reagan appointed the best chief justice of the twentieth century William Rehnquist.

    Cruz clerked for him, and learned at the master’s feet.

    Roberts clerked for him, and learned absolutely positively nothing, except how to clean out his ash trays.

    I wouldn’t want you to think I have something against Roberts.

    I like Justices who give us that deer in the headlight look, and wiggle around like a catfish when you haul them aboard your boat.

    We live vicariously, and this can be very entertaining, if you do not have the time to go to Toledo Bend in Texas, or the Ilwaka Jetty in Western Washington, or the Kenai River in Alaska, when the fish are schooling.

  34. admin
    July 14, 2015 at 1:32 pm
    There are some real slimeballs in politics, and I don’t mean just Schumer.

    I mean the Brad Dayspring types who are character assassins.

    David Brock once a Republican hit man, now head of media matters—he be another mon.

    Karl Rove and Haley Barbour are of that ilk.

    In Mafia circles, paid assassins are sometimes called “mechanics”.

    Low life operatives like these are mechanics of a different kind, since their forte is character assassination.

    When Perot ran against Bush Sr., he accused Bush of threatening his family, and for that reason he quit.

    Perot was a patriot, a Naval Academy graduate, and no stranger to life and death situations.

    I believe he was telling the truth.

    When McCain ran against Bush Jr., he accused Bush of spreading the story that he had fathered a half black child.

    A friend of mine was there and he swears this was true.

    It not Poppy, and it is not W who did these things.

    Rather it was the people they hired who did what they wanted and gave them plausible deniability.

  35. Trumps favorables are on the rise…(note to Dana Perino and Rove)


    One of the giant caveats floating around next to Donald Trump’s 2016 candidacy has been that, despite his decent standing in a splintered field, he was viewed so negatively by Republican voters that it was hard to see how he could actually build on his base of support.

    Well, guess what.

    When Monmouth University polled Republican voters in June, Trump barely registered, showing up at 2 percent in the polls and with favorability ratings that were far under water; 20 percent of voters viewed him positively and 55 percent viewed him negatively. That gave him a net negative-35 favorability — by far the worst in the field. But, again, he was polling at 2 percent.

    In Monmouth’s new poll, he’s jumped to 13 percent in the crowded field — by far the biggest improvement. (Anyone below that diagonal line is doing worse. Anyone above, doing better — and the further from the line, the bigger the improvement.)

    see graph at link

    In part, that’s because way more people view Trump favorably now. He’s now seen positively by 40 percent of Republicans, compared to 41 percent who view him negatively. Most of the Republican candidates still have higher net favorable ratings than Trump, yes, but no one has seen any jump like his.

    The closest is Jeb Bush, who went from plus-5 to plus-20 — a good reminder that some of Trump’s gain is due to his having at last announced his candidacy.

    But not all of it. Notice Chris Christie, down there at the bottom, viewed more unfavorably than any other candidate, despite also having made a recent campaign announcement. Part of Trump’s leap in the polls is certainly his having stumbled onto a popular issue — one that drives the Republican establishment batty.

    Once upon a time, Trump was too unpopular to make it very far in the race. He’s still unpopular, and this is only one poll, so we’ll have to say if others confirm it. But it seems fair to say that ruling him out based on his unpopularity might no longer apply. He’s not popular in the GOP, but he’s no longer a pariah.


    I think the under factor being underestimated is if Trump is attracting supporters from Independents and yes, Democrats (Reagan Dems/working class/moderates)

  36. S
    July 14, 2015 at 3:49 pm

    Trump goes after Hillary on facebook

    It could be much worse, Trump knows that she is trying to bow to the Kooks on the left…and hopefully he will force her more to the center…I can dream.

  37. admin:

    Trump is certainly serious enough to completely shake up the Republican race. On the other hand, I think there is a near zero percent chance that he is clean enough to survive the proctology exam that he’s about to get from the media and oppo researchers. God help him if Ivanka had a Salvadorian nanny.

    It will, however, be a fun ride while it rides. He really is Bullworth candidate.

  38. Scott Walker is a nasty little man with dead eyes. He fights and wins because he has the soul of a killer. That is not how I want this country to win.

  39. S, thanks for the article about the Monmouth poll. It confirms what we posted earlier about Trump’s potential gains.

    We also agree with you that Trump has potential among independents and Democrats. But we’ll add from an earlier Big Pink article about Trump’s potential with African-Americans if he points out the burdens of illegal immigration to that demographic. If Trump makes an appeal to the black population based on illegal immigration he poses a really big threat.

    This article from today hints at what we mean:


    Many analysts have devoted endless hours to pondering the Republican Party’s woes with Latino voters and prescriptions for how the party can fix them in time for 2016. [snip]

    It’s tough to overstate just how critical black voters have become to today’s Democratic coalition, particularly when it comes to the Electoral College. Deconstructing exit poll data from 2012, African-American voters accounted for Obama’s entire margin of victory in seven states: Florida, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia. Without these states’ 112 electoral votes, Obama would have lost decisively. African-Americans also accounted for almost all of Obama’s margin in Wisconsin. All of these states, except Maryland, will be crucial 2016 battlegrounds.

    But what about Latinos? As it turns out, Latinos accounted for Obama’s margin of victory in just four states totaling 49 electoral votes: Colorado, Florida, Nevada, and New Mexico. According to our number crunching, had ZERO Latinos voted in 2012, Obama would have lost the popular vote but still would have won the White House with 283 Electoral votes. Why? Because fairly or unfairly, Latino voters tend to be disproportionately clustered in states like California, Illinois, New York and Texas which simply aren’t Electoral College battlegrounds. [snip]

    The surge of this solidly Democratic bloc has masked Democrats’ downturn with working-class whites, who gave Obama just 36 percent nationally in 2012. According to our calculations, if the African-American share of the electorate were to drop two points in 2016, Hillary Clinton would need to do about 1.5 percent better than Obama did among all white voters just to offset that decline – a realistic goal, but one that would require reversing the party’s current trajectory with whites.

    The election is still a long-way away, but the combination of historical trends (elections to replace a two term president are typically very close) and our polarized electorate suggest that this will be a very competitive one. We also have to remember that these elections don’t take place in a vacuum. We can’t predict how much better or worse a Hillary Clinton will do among African-American voters – or white voters for that matter – without knowing who she will face in November. However, it’s also clear that the African-American coalition is THE critical keystone for a Democratic Electoral College victory, which means we should be spending as much time, if not more, looking at their engagement in the election as we do the growing Latino vote.

  40. S
    July 14, 2015 at 4:11 pm

    Trump is going to be closing the gap on Hillary real soon if she keeps talking that stupid Bobot stuff like she has on Iran.

  41. This just in:


    WASHINGTON — Donald Trump has surged to the top of a crowded Republican presidential field, a USA TODAY/Suffolk University Poll finds, but the brash billionaire is also the weakest competitor among the top seven GOP candidates against Democrat Hillary Clinton.

    In the nationwide survey, Trump leads at 17% and former Florida governor Jeb Bush is second at 14%, the only competitors who reach double digits. Trump’s edge, which is within the poll’s margin of error, is one more sign that his ​harsh rhetoric about immigration and toward his rivals has struck a chord with some voters.

    After August 6, Trump’s numbers should rise against all comers. All.

  42. Admin
    “The best bets for eventual winner are Jeb?, Rubio, and Walker.”
    That was the comment I was referring to. As you write, if Trump does well in one of the early primaries and/ or
    does will in the debates, everything will change.
    I am increasingly impressed by Trump’s brilliance. His grasp of world finance and politics and his grasp of domestic issues ranging from illegal immigration to the economy enable him to speak fluidly without a teleprompter.
    Like Bill Clinton, Trump has the ability to synthesize complex issues into simple language and communicate forcefully with large numbers of people.

    I expect Trump to appear soon with legal Hispanics who work for him praising him as an employer. After that I expect to see black Americans appearing with Trump praising him as a job creator.

    So quiet here on Hillary’s support for the Iran deal….

  43. USA Today Suffolk has a poll out today that largely echos the Monmouth poll yesterday. The USA Today poll is adults, not registered voters:


    Trump 17%
    Bush 14%
    Walker 8%
    Cruz 6%
    Rubio 5%
    Carson 4%
    Paul 4%
    Huckabee 4%
    Christie 3%

    Second poll in a row that shows Trump cannibalizing Carson and Paul “support” while he rides the wave and shows Cruz solidifying a position near the top tier.

    To me the interesting thing to consider is where the support will go as Carson, Hucakabee, Santorum, and Jindal inevitably pull out. And, of course, where Trump’s support goes when he crashes and burns. By then, he will have Jeff Gillooly’d his knee caps so many times, that Jeb! won’t be standing.

  44. Wonder what Trump will have to say about this. Hidden camera exposee with the national medical director of Planned Parenthood describing partial birth abortions and harvesting fetal organs. She appears to be enjoying a nice Chianti…

  45. The bad news for Trump comes in the hypothetical general election match-ups against Clinton. While Clinton is only four points ahead of Bush, 46% to 42%, she leads Trump by a whopping 17 points, 51% to 34%
    Name recognition and nothing else.

    The Republican numbers after the debates will begin to mean something. They will produce a shakeout and consolidation.

    The general election numbers are absolutely meaningless at this point. They are garbage.

    They fail to reflect the shake out and consolidation on the Republican side.

    And they fail to reflect the damage Hillary’s opponents will do to her present standing.

    And they do not reflect the reality of her decision to shackle herself to Obama, as more things go wrong.

    This Iran deal will be one of several catalysts that will shake up the numbers.

  46. Unlike past elections, I expect to see a big swing in the numbers in September 2016/

    I am pretty damned sure this will be a change election—similar to 1980.

    Consequently, I would expect to see more volatility in its final phase, as more tune in.

  47. Bobby Jindal announces investigation into Planned Parenthood


    “Today’s video of a Planned Parenthood official discussing the systematic harvesting and trafficking of human body parts is shocking and gruesome. This same organization is seeking to open an abortion clinic in New Orleans. I have instructed Louisiana’s Department of Health and Hospitals to conduct an immediate investigation into this alleged evil and illegal activity and to not issue any licenses until this investigation is complete. I am also asking the FBI to assist DHH in investigating this alleged criminal activity by this organization.”

  48. Israel Security Cabinet Shoots Down Iran Deal, Confirms Jewish State ‘Not Bound By It’
    by Bridget Johnson

    “The Security Cabinet of Israel unanimously rejected the nuclear agreement with Iran and determined that Israel is not bound by it,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said in a brief statement.

    “The leading international powers have bet our collective future on a deal with the foremost sponsor of international terrorism. They’ve gambled that in ten years’ time, Iran’s terrorist regime will change while removing any incentive for it to do so. In fact, the deal gives Iran every incentive not to change,” Netanayhu said in a statement earlier.

    “In the coming decade, the deal will reward Iran, the terrorist regime in Tehran, with hundreds of billions of dollars. This cash bonanza will fuel Iran’s terrorism worldwide, its aggression in the region and its efforts to destroy Israel, which are ongoing.”

  49. agree Admin about Trump and the possibility of connecting with AA

    …just listen to the father Jamiel who was by Donald’s side at least 3 times last week and had the chance to speak publically and was covered by national/international news and stated clearly that he has many liberal AA friends and they are all excited about Trump and plan on voting for him…

    …and that’s in CA…

  50. And Cruz. Haven’t seen anything from Clinton yet:



    HOUSTON, Texas — U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, released the following statement regarding recent reports that Planned Parenthood is selling body parts of aborted babies:

    “Today’s news regarding allegations that Planned Parenthood is possibly selling the body parts of the babies it has aborted is sickening.

    “There is no place for taxpayer funding of organizations that profit from taking away innocent life, much less profiting off the bodies of the lives they have stolen. Congress should immediately begin an investigation of Planned Parenthood’s activities regarding the sale and transfer of aborted body parts, including who is obtaining them and what they are being used for. And it should renew efforts to fully defund Planned Parenthood to ensure that its morally bankrupt business receives not one penny of taxpayer money.

    “I proudly stand on the side of life and remain committed to fighting for all innocent life to be valued and protected under the laws of this nation.”


  51. Lu4PUMA

    July 14, 2015 at 4:15 pm


    Lu4Puma…when Hillary speaks these days I hold my breath…listened to her big economic speech and her energy was so low

    thought it below her when she criticizes Bush re: longer hours statement…obviously he meant for part time workers…seemed petty and she seems to be grasping for straws

    she has now done another 180 degree turn on Iran

    and yesterday she reaffirmed her position on illegal immigrants and stopping deportations of dreamers

    her positions frankly do not seem to favor our safety…instead very political…

    I don’t know…sigh!

  52. S

    I too, believe it or not, am very disappointed in Hillary’s support of all thing’s cursed by O’Fraud.

    I really wonder if why Nasty wants to meet with Hillary?

    Has Hillary drunk the Kook-aid or is she not being authentic????????

  53. S,

    I, for one, am going to be emailing her campaign and giving her a few choice FB’s and Tweets. I sent her one earlier about being an Obama Zombie.

  54. Another far out thought about Hillary which my mind has generated. Read or scroll as you are inclined.
    Could Hillary be telling us to run, not walk, away, far away, from the Democrats?

  55. holdthemaccountable
    July 14, 2015 at 7:49 pm

    No, because that would leave us to the Repubs. I think she has a billion dollar campaign finance gun to her head and has to promote Obola.

  56. It’s not rocket science. Hillary Clinton is the presumptive nominee of the Democrat party. She is simply endorsing the policy positions of today’s Democrat party. I haven’t heard her say one word that isn’t straight out of the party style guide. Tax the rich. Invest in infrastructure. Help the unions. Increase the minimum wage. Free day care. Abortion on demand for the full 36 week term without restriction. Yadda yadda yadda. It is what it is.

  57. WaPost says Ted Cruz is meeting again with Donald Trump tomorrow in NYC:


    Earlier this month on CNN, Trump said, “I shouldn’t say this because, I assume, he’s an opponent, but the fact is he was very brave in coming out.”

    Cruz has previously met with the mogul at Trump Tower, mostly during fundraising swings through New York.

    Republicans close to Cruz said the first-term senator is intent on staying cozy with Trump in spite of the billionaire’s controversial persona, believing that their overlapping messages and support make them fellow-travelers in a crowded field.

    Should Trump leave the primary contest at some point, Cruz is also angling for his endorsement or at least lingering goodwill among the conservatives who have rallied to Trump’s side as he has revived the hard-line wing of the GOP on immigration, the Republicans said.

    Republicans acquainted with Trump’s circle said the feeling is mutual. They said Trump is content to form an informal bond with Cruz — the son of Cuban immigrants — and sees him as an accompanying voice on immigration who could help him to fend off attacks. The first GOP debate is set for Aug. 6 in Cleveland.

    Ted Cruz is smart as hell. There’s no downside to respectfully associating himself to the Trump energy. The “bridge” to Trump and the supporters he stirs up with his rhetoric will likely be a good spot to be. It’s amazing that more Repubs haven’t figured that one out. At the very least, you don’t want to be Trump’s target on his daily sound bytes and in the debates. Cruz can just sit back and watch Trump throw hand grenades at the others in the debate, while Cruz smiles and says that he plans to follow Reagan’s 11th Commandment, mentioning what swell guys all his esteemed colleagues are. 🙂 It’s like having a your own pit bull.

    I expect Rand Paul to figure out this play, too.

  58. Riding Trump’s coat tails and hoping for either a VP spot or an enforcement doesn’t make Cruz smart, it makes him the snake and creep he appears to be.

    I am tossing this out to the internets…not to the troll for a freakin’ reply.

  59. I don’t think Cruz would take a VP offer. Probably Attorney General. Definitely Supreme Court. I suspect that McConnell would pay someone to take him out of the Senate.

  60. hwc
    July 14, 2015 at 4:32 pm

    I was crestfallen as I watched that video. Politics aside, there is something to be said for morality. If the mother CHOOSES to donate parts from her fetus for research, then that is a different story. Donation of bodies and body parts for study is the only way that doctors can be trained. But SELLING these parts, and I didn’t get a sense that the patient even KNOWS that her aborted fetus is being SOLD. That is just terrible. Then the CEO at the end PRAISING the executive that was in charge says to me that this practice is approved all the way to the top. I have a completely different perspective on Planned Parenthood.

    This has to stop.

    Hillary 2016

  61. Shadowfax
    July 14, 2015 at 6:20 pm


    I too, believe it or not, am very disappointed in Hillary’s support of all thing’s cursed by O’Fraud.

    I really wonder if why Nasty wants to meet with Hillary?

    Has Hillary drunk the Kook-aid or is she not being authentic????????

    I am losing faith more and more each day. Somewhere deep in my chest, right at the base of my heart, I hold out hope that she is doing this to get into the White House. Maybe she knows that to get in, she must deceive the big money people and the controllers of the world, as well as bumbles the idiot, in order to reach the pinnacle wherein she will be able to fix so many of the issues that we as a society are dealing with. But I know her to speak her mind, and I have to believe that what she is saying is what she wants to do. And while her economic model is solid, some of her social positions aren’t tenable, and agreeing with bumbles in regards to Iran slaps Israel in the face. Based on the actions of Prince Salman of Saudi Arabia (signed deals with France and Russia last month), it would mean that we have effectively lost our two greatest allies in the ME.

    Might be time to look at living in another country….

    Hillary 2016?

  62. In the 9/11 Commission Report it states that our pourous borders are our biggest threat. Anyone can walk across. Set aside the illegal immigration and cosider what open borders pose. I have not heard any of the candidates refer to that. I assume they have all read it.

  63. Planned Parenthood doesn’t look at it as “selling”. They look at it as a “reasonable handling fee” to cover their costs, all nicely legal thanks to the abortion industry’s friends in the US Congress. All Planned Parenthood chapters do it. They just don’t involve the national office as a “middle-man” for the reasons explained in the video.

    It’s a real eye-opener and helps understand the puzzlingly vehement opposition to partial-birth late term abortion. For example, Hillary Clinton’s stated position is that there should be NO restrictions on abortion whatsoever. Purely between a woman and a doctor at ANY TIME during the pregnancy, even after “viability” which was the standard in Roe v Wade. Gruesome really. I’ve always been pro-choice, but even I draw the line at delivering and killing viable babies. That just seems barbaric.

    The abortion industry in the United States is gruesome. The currently debated ban on abortions after 20 weeks is hardly an extreme position. The rest of the western world, including virtually all of Europe, bans abortions after 12 weeks (except for the usual health of the mother exceptions). It’s pretty much the US, North Korea, Vietnam, and China that allow late term abortions after 24 weeks. Netherlands and Singapore allow abortions up to 20 weeks. That’s it. So, even a law banning after 20 weeks would hardly be draconian as the norm around the civilized world is 12 weeks. Hardly a message that pierces through the mainstream media.

    (Note: Canada has no national abortion law. It was struck down by their Supreme Court. However, their provi The provinces all have regulations under their government health care regulations, ranging from 12 to 24 weeks depending on the province, most at 20 weeks.)

    I would be fine with the rules in place in Germany, France, and most of Western Europe: abortion on demand only up to 12 weeks and only with exceptions (health of the mother, etc.) after that.

    But, in the US media, a 20 week limit is portrayed as something only the lunatic fringe would support.

    That video has gone viral and is going to be HUGE political firestorm.

  64. BTW, that video made me sick to my stomach. The language. Referring to an abortion as a “case” and an aborted fetus as “tissue”, talking about the prices of body parts, all while discussing wine selections and munching on salads.

  65. Shadow: I do not expect you or anyone else on this blog, other than me, to like Ted Cruz. And his association with Trump is far more than a marriage of convenience. Both of them are fighting the establishment of their party—something you will NEVER see with the other party. for reasons which are beyond the scope of this comment.

    To understand what they are trying to do, and why strict constructionists like me love them, you need to go back to the most important chapter in The Federalist Papers–#10. Here is what Wiki says about that:

    Federalist No. 10 (Federalist Number 10) is an essay written by James Madison as the tenth of The Federalist Papers, a series arguing for the ratification of the United States Constitution. Published on November 22, 1787 under the pseudonym Publius (the pseudonym under which all of The Federalist Papers were published).

    Federalist No. 10 is among the most highly regarded of all American political writings.[1]

    No. 10 addresses the question of how to guard against “factions”, or groups of citizens, with interests contrary to the rights of others or the interests of the whole community. Madison argued that a strong, united republic would be better able to guard against those dangers than would smaller republics—for instance, the individual states. Opponents of the Constitution offered counterarguments to his position, which were substantially derived from the commentary of Montesquieu on this subject.

    Federalist No. 10 continues a theme begun in Federalist No. 9; it is titled, “The Same Subject Continued: The Utility of the Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection”. The whole series is cited by scholars and jurists as an authoritative interpretation and explication of the meaning of the Constitution. Jurists have frequently read No. 10 to mean that the Founding Fathers did not intend the United States government to be partisan

    Translation: political parties did not exist at the time this paper was written. But factions most assuredly did. And they were much to be feared, because they are factions, comprised of coalitions of special interests who have designs on the general welfare, and when they control government, the general welfare cannot be served. To paraphrase George Bernard Shaw—every political party is a conspiracy AGAINST the general welfare.

    I understand there are those who will be quick to defend parties. They will argue that without they have served to create a more perfect union, and have affected compromises along the way which prevent impasse.

    Today, thank to Obama that idea is dead as a doornail. Darker than a million midnights in a cypress swamp. Political parties are the reason we have a 20 trillion dollar deficit, parties are the reason why government does not serve the public interest, for the public interest is disperse whereas the power of factions amalgamated in political parties, and legitimatized even when those interest are bad for the nation are specific and effective.

    That said, there is something grand, and something virtuous in finding two men who are willing to point at the two parties, including the one they belong to and say, as Zola did to the establishment of his day: Jacuz!!! You are the problem. You are factions. You talk about the general welfare, but you serve only your own pocket book. The American People, if they are smart, hate the parties because they know they are self aggrandizing and operate contrary to their interests once they get in power. They are there to serve their donor, not their constituents, hence the public good is served rarely if ever.

    That is the bottom line. That is the mother load Trump and Cruz are tapping into. God bless them for that. Madison would be proud of what they are doing to de-louse this uber corrupt system, and the New Rome which grows fat on it.

  66. Howard Dean has a bad habit of engaging his mouth before his brain kicks in.

    One example of this was his characterization of the Republican Party as the white people’s party which was intended to imply a national socialist agenda, etc.

    Another example, one that relates to our current discussion was his Hennie Youngman one liner: Now it is our turn to RULE.

    That comment is a big tell, is it not?

    Doesn’t sound like something a public servant would say, does it?

    Rhetorically, a public servant would say the people rule and I serve them.

    But that is not at all what Howard said—he said our turn—the Democrat Party’s turn to RULE–THE PEOPLE.

    If you parse that one out further, what he meant was it is the turn of the special interests that comprise the Democratic Party coalition to have their way with the country.

    And it did not take long to find out exactly what he meant–a trillion dollars in stimulus money to pay off donors, with nothing for the American People to show for it. Nothing.

    Several years earlier I was in the bar of the Capital Grill restaurant in Washington and a Iraq contractor sat down next to me. I asked him when he thought that war would end. He told me I hope it never ends, I am making more money than at any time in my life.

    Factions vs the general welfare.

  67. http://spectator.org/articles/63436/yes-trump-can-win

    The media assures: Donald Trump can’t possibly win.

    The GOP Establishment assures: Donald Trump can’t possibly win.

    After assuring everyone that 1) Trump was never going to run in the first place and 2) once he declared that he would run they insisted he would get nowhere, we now find that these whiz-bangs were wrong on both counts. Trump is in the race and he has surged to the top of the polls, drawing huge crowds. By chance, here in my home Central Pennsylvania county, a race to fill a vacancy in the state legislature in an August 4th election has Republican candidate Greg Rothman knocking on doors in this traditionally Republican district. Rothman tells me he has knocked on 3,100 doors thus far — and while he’s there to talk state issues residents in this area are volunteering to him that they support… Donald Trump.

    Yet in spite of the reality of Trump’s candidacy and the support surging for his candidacy — and the startling reality that rank-and-file Republicans are spontaneously telling a Pennsylvania legislative candidate that they like Donald Trump — the Trump critics insist he can’t win. [snip]

    And now once again a candidate has appeared that is drawing the same reaction that Reagan once drew. That would be, of course, Donald Trump.

    Here’s Karl Rove in the Wall Street Journal:

    The response of GOP candidates to Mr. Trump should be guided by the June 23 Fox News Poll showing that 64% of Republicans, 69% of conservatives and 55% of tea party members consider his candidacy a sideshow. An analyst at the FiveThirtyEight website pointed out that Mr. Trump has the worst favorable/unfavorable ratings of 106 presidential candidates since 1980, worse than even Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. Mr. Trump is disliked by 57% of his own party.…

    Mr. Trump could become the 2016 version of Missouri Rep. Todd Akin, who tarnished the GOP brand in 2012 with an offensive statement about rape. Republican leaders from Mitt Romney on down immediately condemned his words, but swing voters were persuaded that every Republican believed what Mr. Akin said.

    Over at NBC Perry Bacon, Jr. asks Can Donald Trump Win? and quickly says no. Writes Bacon:

    Donald Trump is almost certainly not going to be the Republican presidential nominee, and his candidacy puts the Republican Party in a quandary over its rules for which candidates to include in debates.

    Trump has obvious disadvantages. He has never run for another office or held another government post, as nearly all modern presidents have. The Republican Party has at least a dozen candidates with stronger credentials than Trump.…

    He is unlikely to win a single primary.

    Over at the Wall Street Journal again ex-Reagan aide Peggy Noonan seemingly unknowingly repeats exactly of Trump the criticism of National Review columnist James J. Kilpatrick on Reagan. Of Reagan Kilpatrick said: “He’s not a serious man.” Of Trump Noonan writes: “Mr. Trump is not a serious man.”

    At the Washington Post, Chris Cilizza writes:

    There’s a tendency when someone like Donald Trump announces that he is running for president to view — and analyze — him through the same lens that we do for the other men and women actively seeking the presidency. What’s his policy vision? Who’s in his political inner circle? What would a Trump presidency look like?

    Asking any of these questions gives Trump a benefit of the doubt that he simply doesn’t deserve: That a path exists for him to be president.

    It doesn’t. Not even close.

    And like an eerie replay of those above listed attacks by Establishment Republicans on Reagan, like clockwork various Republicans of today are following the footsteps of Gerald Ford, Nelson Rockefeller and the rest.

    Compare them this way:

    • Here’s Rick Perry on Trump: “Your remarks might make for good reality TV, but they are way out of touch with reality.” Ronald Reagan was assailed as “a minority of a minority” (Rockefeller) who was too “conservative” to win (Ford) and whose views were “foolhardy” (Percy).

    Lindsey Graham insists Donald Trump is a “wrecking ball for the future of the Republican Party…” as Charles Percy insisted that Reagan’s nomination would “signal the beginning of the end of our party as an effective force in American political life.”

    Marco Rubio says Trump is “not just offensive and inaccurate, but also divisive.” He is a divisive factor in the party”, echoing the liberal columnist of the New Republic who proclaimed Reagan to be “a divisive factor in the party.”

    Jeb Bush says Trump “doesn’t represent the Republican Party or its values,” and what he says is “extraordinarily ugly” and “wrong.” Which sounds perilously close to the old apparatchiks of the Soviet Union’s party-line Pravda saying of Reagan’s views that they were “putrid bait.”

    But there is one Republican presidential candidate who has made it a point not to join the anti-Trump mob. That would be fellow candidate and serious Reagan-admirer Ted Cruz, the Senator from Texas who has had the chops to stand up and say he’s “proud to stand with Donald Trump.”

    So. Here we are again.

    Is Donald Trump Ronald Reagan? Unless the Almighty has changed His ways and started duplicating human souls, no. All of God’s children are unique etc., etc., etc. Both men were and are uniquely talented with their own set of gifts and flaws.

    But while Donald Trump is not Ronald Reagan, without doubt the rationale of their respective political opponents in the media and the Establishment wing of the Republican Party is almost literally identical. In some cases right down to a literal word or phrase.

    The real question here? Why, exactly, is that?

    The answer to that question is, in fact, very simple.

    Ronald Reagan was, and Donald Trump is, a threat. A threat to the power of the “Ruling Class” Establishment, of the status quo and most of all to that Establishment’s Old World Order.

  68. Wbbs, don’t think that some of us don’t care about the Constitution just because we don’t like or think that Walker is a great guy.

    I trust my gut on people, and it normally is pretty accurate. To me, Walker is not genuine, has creepy eyes…and that’s all I can say about him.

    As they say, the eyes are a window to the soul…and his are freakin’ demonic.

  69. This comment from someone at HotAir on the new poll with Trump in the lead, makes us wonder if we are entirely wrong about Trump and the course of the GOP contest:


    The first debate will vaporize his lead significantly. He is not going any further than Carson when all is said and done. But it is welcomed theater if he can light a fire under some republican arse.

    This really surprised us. Does anyone here think that Trump will do badly in the debate on August 6? It seems to us that Trump is going to set that debate on fire and the ones most burnt will be Jeb? and Rubio.

    Are we the ones who are entirely wrong as to what is going to happen on August 6? Is the comment from HotAir more congruent with reality?

  70. Obama’s Iran Deal Has the Makings of a Catastrophe

    by Daniel Pipes
    National Review Online
    July 14, 2015


    Share: Facebook Twitter

    Be the first of your friends to like this.

    Barack Obama has repeatedly signaled during the past six and a half years that that his No. 1 priority in foreign affairs is not China, not Russia, not Mexico, but Iran. He wants to bring Iran in from the cold, to transform the Islamic Republic into just another normal member of the so-called international community, ending decades of its aggression and hostility.

    In itself, this is a worthy goal; it’s always good policy to reduce the number of enemies. (It brings to mind Nixon going to China.) The problem lies, of course, in the execution.

    Barack Obama announcing the Iran deal on July 14.

    The conduct of the Iran nuclear negotiations has been wretched, with the Obama administration inconsistent, capitulating, exaggerating, and even deceitful. It forcefully demanded certain terms, then soon after conceded these same terms. Secretary of State John Kerry implausibly announced that we have “absolutely knowledge” of what the Iranians have done until now in their nuclear program and therefore have no need for inspections to form a baseline. How can any adult, much less a high official, make such a statement?

    The administration misled Americans about its own concessions: After the November 2013 Joint Plan of Action, it came out with a factsheet which Tehran said was inaccurate. Guess who was right? The Iranians. In brief, the U.S. government has shown itself deeply untrustworthy.

    The agreement signed today ends the economic sanctions regime, permits the Iranians to hide much of their nuclear activities, lacks enforcement in case of Iranian deceit, and expires in slightly more than a decade. Two problems particularly stand out: The Iranian path to nuclear weapons has been eased and legitimated; Tehran will receive a “signing bonus” of some US$150 billion that greatly increases its abilities to aggress in the Middle East and beyond.

    The United States alone, not to speak of the P5+1 countries as a whole, have vastly greater economic and military power than the Islamic Republic of Iran, making this one-sided concession ultimately a bafflement.

    The smart guys (two Iranians) wear tie-less white shirts and look the happiest.

    Of the administration’s accumulated foreign-policy mistakes in the last six years, none have been catastrophic for the United States: Not the Chinese building islands, the Russians taking Crimea, or the collapse into civil wars of Libya, Yemen, Syria, and Iraq. But the Iran deal has the makings of a catastrophe.

    Attention now shifts to the U.S. Congress to review today’s accord, arguably the worst treaty not just in American history or modern history, but ever. Congress must reject this deal. Republican senators and representatives have shown themselves firm on this topic; will the Democrats rise to the occasion and provide the votes for a veto override? They need to feel the pressure.

  71. Admin:

    This is the sort of analysis I have come to expect form Allapundit.

    Not to be confused with Instapundit who is Law Professor Glenn Reynolds at U. Tennessee.

    Allapundit relishes the role of contrarian.

    He thinks he is smarter than anybody else.

    And he is really the round peg in the square hole as Hot Air.

    He prefers to remain anonymous

    At times he has gone against conventional wisdom and been proven right.

    He predicted the first Obamacare case accurately.

    On other issues he has struck out.

    The first debate will “vaporize”(?) Trump’s lead?

    That is a strange word to use in this context.

    There will be a regression to the mean, but that always occurs in these situations.

    I am pretty sure Trump will be in the top 3 coming out of the debate.

    And I think he will be very influential in setting the tone.


    He is a contrarian, yet here he is parroting establishment talking points.

  72. Other candidates will be tempted to attack Donald, but most of them will do so, if at all, obliquely. They do not want to become tomorrows headline for Donald. Do we know yet who the moderators will be? Hopefully not that Dummy Juan Williams. If brains were fuel Juan would not have enough fuel to drive a go cart around a cherio. Brad Baer, Megan Kelly and Brit Hume would be the usual suspects.

  73. Admin: I disagree with Allapundit.

    I think Donald will do well, and he will be in the top 3 after the debate.

    First of all, he is self financed. That means unlike other candidates, he has staying power.

    Second, I believe him what he says the is doing this for this country. And he has lost some business in so doing.

    Third, he is a celebrity. Put a celebrity along side a politician, and the celebrity is the one people will see. Jessee Ventura.

    Fourth, the world expects Donald to go ballistic. When he keeps his cool and drives home key points people will start to say, maybe this guy could lead the country. (under promise and over deliver)

    I can only surmise what Allahpundit will say then.

  74. This just in from HRC. The details of it are a blow to the head.

    We hope you will join us to support Hillary for America at the following event:
    Conversation with Hillary
    Wednesday, July 29, 2015
    2:00 pm – 4:00 pm
    Hosted by Sen. Bob Casey, Jr. & Terese Casey
    and Virginia & Robert McGregor
    Home of Virginia and Robert McGregor
    Scranton, Pennsylvania
    Contribution Levels:
    Friend: $1,000 per person
    Champion: $2,700 per person (includes photo with Hillary)
    Co-Host: Raise $10,000 (includes host reception with Hillary)
    Host: Raise $27,000 (includes host reception with Hillary and membership in Hillstarter’s Program)
    RSVP and Contribute Here.
    You may also RSVP to Giancarlo Stefanoni at gstefanoni@hillaryclinton.com or call (215) 395-1935.
    Thank you and please feel free to be in touch if you have any questions. We hope to see you there.
    Giancarlo Stefanoni
    Pennsylvania Finance Director
    Hillary for America
    (215) 395-1935 work
    (609) 320-4511 mobile

    🙁 4/20/2008. Casey vouches for Obama’s values – Carrie Budoff Brown – POLITICO.com
    www politico com/news/stories/0408/9734.html

  75. Britt Hume is a Bush guy so he might give Trump some problems in the debate. Britt did a big “love you” special about Bush Sr. not too long ago.

  76. Trump plays fast and loose with facts, and the GOPe candidates will gang up to check him there. How he’ll recover from being called on misstatements will determine his performance. I believe he can be shown, over the course of several debates, to be a loose cannon that is too reactionary to be trusted with the most important job in the world. Of course, unlike DogEater, Big Media won’t hide and gloss over his missteps but, rather, beat on them daily, until his support is confined to a hard core smallish constituency.

  77. admin:

    I don’t think we can know what day Trump will vaporize and what the precipitating event will be. Might be the debate, although I’m inclined to think that he’ll bluster his way through that like a bull in a China shop. On the other hand, he could get tripped up by the standard gotcha question that requires knowing the name of the leader of East Ubekistan.

    At this point, I’m just enjoying the entertainment of it all.

    I doubt that Jeb’s goons can resist unloading the load of oppo-research bricks on his head for much longer.

  78. Interesting isn’t it that it’s only the Political class and the pundits – who no longer seek to inform about politics and policies, but to influence their direction – who either dismiss Trump or worse, behave as if he has no right to seek election in this free country.

    Lindsey Graham calls him a “wrecking ball”, as if there were much left of the Repub Party to wreck. The so-called legitimate players have needed no outside assistance. They are managing to destroy their party all on their own.

    At the end of the day, you can like Trump, hate him, or consider him an irrelevant object of ridicule, but there’s no denying that his message is resonating with regular Americans concerned primarily with supporting their families and keeping them safe in an increasingly uncertain and dangerous world. The murder of innocents at the hands of Obama’s illegal immigrants is another constant reminder of the destruction wrought by the misguided actions of a weak president who is more concerned about terrorists and criminals than about hard-working, regular Americans.

    Would Trump be enjoying the popularity and support he has received of late if Americans were happy with government and felt that the best interests of Americans were being served? In all likelihood, he would not. What the media and big wigs in both political parties refuse to acknowledge is that Americans don’t trust the country’s leaders to keep it safe and strong. Leaders from both parties have ignored the will of the people on such issues as Obamacare, amnesty for illegals, and the Middle East.

    The politicians are concerned about party politics. Most Americans don’t give a damn about that. They just want a government that works – one that is of, for, and by the people. Trump may be a joke to the politically savvy, but he has enough sense to recognize that Americans are fed up. They want change – and not the kind that comes from Barack’s hopium pipe. Apparently, many, many of them feel that Trump understands them and can bring about the change they seek.

    If the Republicans think that some well articulated bullshit spoken by another cookie cutter Repub candidate will shut Trump down, I think they have a surprise coming. Those who support trump aren’t going to be impressed by two-dollar words from Republican candidates who have been all talk and no action for far too long. They won’t respond to more party rhetoric. They want action.

  79. I generally hate her TV pundit appearances, but gotta give Michele Malkin credit for this op-ed:


    The Wine-Sipping Butchers of Planned Parenthood
    By Michelle Malkin – July 15, 2015

    Hannibal Lecter ain’t got nothing on the profit-maximizing abortion ghoul caught on tape hawking aborted baby parts as she swilled wine and nibbled on a gourmet salad.

    In newly released undercover footage from the pro-life Center for Medical Progress, seasoned abortionist Dr. Deborah Nucatola, who serves as national senior director of “medical services” at Planned Parenthood, chitter-chattered eagerly about fulfilling the bloodthirsty demand for “intact hearts,” “lower extremities” and lungs.

    Price tag? “You know, I would throw a number out,” she babbled breezily as she twirled her fork. “I would say it’s probably anywhere from $30 to $100” per specimen.

    Hollywood couldn’t conjure monsters this chillingly, banally evil.

    Nucatola exulted at how fetal livers have become tres chic: “A LOT of people” want them.

    She then spoke of the new hot trends in body-parts trafficking as if she were raving about the latest craze for crop tops or artisanal cheese.

    “I was like wow,” she gushed to her potential clients about the market for unborn baby hearts, “I didn’t even know!”

    Like wow.

  80. blowme0bama
    July 15, 2015 at 9:04 am
    That would be the “conventional wisdom” and the obvious call.

    Much depends on whether his narrative against the political class survives intact.

    Like the Nazis they really are the media, and the uni party will work in tandem to take him out.

    None of this is surprising.

    But bear this in mind: the establishment is at open war with conservatives.

    Ergo, it will be harder for them to default to an establishment candidate.

    My theory is that desperate times call for desperate measures.

    And that 2016 will be a change election—-for any number of reasons,

    The Munich accord between Iran and our surrender monkey Obama being the latest “issue”.


    And each of the leading RINOs is repugnant by degree to the base.

    Furthermore the base is smart enough to realize that big media is a joke.

    They are committed to winnowing down the Republican field to the weakest candidate.

    And, it is pretty obvious to me at least that they want Rubio.

    Hence, their ability to influence the outcome is correspondingly diminished.

    With one obvious exception: FOX

    There will come a point where FOX what they did to Gingrich

    Which is to say publish what critics are saying and diminish their coverage of Donald’s rebuttal.

    And, as I noted above by two prior examples–the Bush thugs–the Dayspring/Brock untermenchen will set fires.

    However more than any other candidate, Donald has the ability to define the debate:

    The failure of the political class writ large.

    Which with 93 million not working and 30 million illegals here is the elephant in the room.

    To which the establishment is wifully blind.

    And no candidate is better qualified and positioned to articulate that fact and run with it than Ted Cruz.

    It therefore follows that if Donald fades his support will migrate to Cruz.

  81. Alcina, Altho I have a substantial interest in the info shared at Big Pink, my main abilities such as they are, appear to be more suited to Twitter. In that regard a day or so ago I saw where Hillary had told Trump “Basta”.

    Thot I knew what she said, responded cautiously and only then looked it up. Is apparently equivalent to “Enough is enough,” and with that new knowledge, I tweeted her the same over sticking with Obama. Guess that process may have tipped me toward the decision. She has my $25 but don’t know how I can recover from her falling into the arms of Casey.

    Meantime I’ve been spreading out my minuscule donations as monthly ones to Cruz and Trump. With Carly Fiorina standing up so strongly for Trump on Sunday, I’ve added her in.

    As for Trump, he does blow a little too hard at times and the other side is after him tooth and nail. Latest I know: Brother of Steinle is speaking out against Donald for not getting in touch with family before making the political point. I see extenuating circumstance, but Mules may get him with this.

    Cruz gave a good private TeleTownHall last night. Don’t know what I did to get into his Liberty Circle, but that is why I knew about it. Said in regular donations, he topped Jeb by 14.3 mil to 11.4. That was 175K ppl giving $81 average. Phones last night seemed to be jammed but he was collecting for PAC to bolster college age Repubs.
    enuf 🙂

  82. I could see Cruz helping to rehabilitate Trump during the debates, by portraying the “gotchas” as missing the larger thrust of Trump’s point, then exposing the GOPe candidates’ collusion to protect the establishment: which is symptomatic of what’s entirely wrong with this Big Government / Big Business / Big Media / Uniparty cronyism.

  83. Admin

    The first debate will vaporize his lead significantly. He is not going any further than Carson when all is said and done. But it is welcomed theater if he can light a fire under some republican arse.

    This really surprised us. Does anyone here think that Trump will do badly in the debate on August 6? It seems to us that Trump is going to set that debate on fire and the ones most burnt will be Jeb? and Rubio.

    Are we the ones who are entirely wrong as to what is going to happen on August 6? Is the comment from HotAir more congruent with reality?

    Just looking at statistics, how often is this person’s opinion on HotAir correct vs your opinions Admin? That should tell you that your odds are much better.

    Second, I have watched Trump on tv and the internet for a few years now…in person, he normally is never the buffoon in the room, but easily takes control. He also knows how to cut people to the quick when they try and degrade him in any way. It’s the first thing that made me start paying attention to him.

  84. There is a new book out: “Shattered Consensus.”

    Former Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels reviewed that book for WSJ in an op ed article that appeared in that periodical this morning.

    Shattered Consensus posits that in the course of our nation’s history, there have been three megapolitical events, i.e. revolutons which have changed the social compact, the nation and everything else:

    1. Jeffersonian Democracy (which would include manifest destiny and nation building)

    2. The Civil War

    3. The New Deal

    According to the author, we are on the verge of a fourth revolution which like those predecessors promises to change EVERYTHING.

    Whether you buy that idea or not, there are certain things which reasonable people can and will stipulate to. For example, it is no secret that the World War II order is no more, and our ability to control and shape world events is correspondingly diminished.

    Likewise the Keysnian system which has been an article of faith among the elites has seen its day. What have we to show for it? more debt than we can ever pay off in public debt, public employee pensions. A hundred trillion alone in the case of the latter.

    Erskin Bolls has called the coming default by the United “the most predictable crisis in history.” Likewise the most inevitable.

    What form will this fourth revolution take?

    At this point, that is an imponderable.

    However some scenarios are more likely than others.

    One possibility is that the betrayed elderly will take the big hit which will leave them impoverished and ready to stick pitchforks in the asses–and throats of our beloved political class who abandoned them to such a fate.

    Another possibility is that the plundered youth who are forced to pay social security and medicare for the elderly with no corresponding expectation that they will ever be see any of those benefits themselves will lead the charge against the old order.

    Yet another possibility is that a big blue state like California or Illinois will default on those obligations and will attempt to shift that economic burden to red states like Texas who have managed their finances responsibly.

    When Texas refuses to pay for massive debts imposed by improvident sister states, John Roberts will rule that they must, and they will move to secede from the Union, or some aspect of this.

    This may help explain the purpose behind these military exercises in the American southwest, where a rebellion of this nature is most apt to occur, if it does.

    The proffered explanation–disaster planing for a possible terrorist attack makes no sense whatsoever. If that were the reason, the would target the big cities where terrorists are more likely to hide and where there would be more casulties per square mile, because there are more people per square mile.

    Which of these scearios is most likely the author does not say. It is easier to write about the known past than it is to identify an unknown future with relative certainty. Events may be inevitable, but they do not proceed in a linear fashion or known time table.

  85. blowme0bama
    July 15, 2015 at 11:05 am
    The survival of this nation depends on the ability of its people to recognize what the elites are doing, and to reject them root and branch. Shattered Consensus (supra) tells why. However, this cannot be done without a viable option. Donald and Ted offer that option. I am watching now as Republicans are accusing Trump of being a friend of the Clinton’s, not a conservative. Well, most of them are not conservatives either if the yardstick is the proper one, i.e. fealty to the Constitution. Strange though it might seem than half the Supreme Court can pass that test. And in that August body known as the Senate, there are only three: Cruz, Lee, Sessions.

  86. Clarification: the only Justices who respect the Constitution are Scalia, Alito and Thomas. The rest of them are mutts.

  87. Hillary has my $25 donated when she first announced. Before I realized she had joined forces with Satan. I only see her continuing the trend of saturating the White House with bots should she win. Obama owns her lock, stock and barrel.

  88. Here is a round-up of media coverage of the recently concluded Iran deal. Various pundits try to predict what it effect it will have on America and the world.

    What Key Players Are Saying About the Iran Nuclear Deal according to the NYT.

    “We are confident that the world today breathed a sigh of relief.” — PRESIDENT VLADIMIR V. PUTIN, who emphasized Russia’s plans to be a major partner with Iran in the development of its “exclusively peaceful” nuclear program.

    “We have no doubt that the coming days will see momentum for the constructive role of the Iranian Islamic republic to support the rights of the people and strengthen the bases of peace.” — PRESIDENT BASHAR AL-ASSAD, according to the Syrian state news service, SANA.

    The deal is “a historic mistake for the world” and will allow Iran ‘‘to continue to pursue its aggression and terror in the region.’’ — PRIME MINISTER BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, who has said that a deal will eventually pave the way for Iran to quickly produce multiple bombs and ultimately become a “terrorist nuclear superpower.”

    The Dawn of Iranian Empire, Max Boot.

    What this means is that Iran will soon have more than $100 billion extra to spend not only on exporting the Iranian revolution and dominating neighboring states (Gen. Soleimani’s job) but that it will also before long be free to purchase as many weapons — even ballistic missiles — as it likes on the world market. No wonder Vladimir Putin appears to be happy: This deal is likely to become a windfall for Russian arms makers, although you can be sure that Iran will also spread its largesse to manufacturers in France and, if possible, the UK so as to give those countries an extra stake in not re-imposing sanctions.

    What Does the Iran Deal Mean for Syria? — Carnegie Endowment

    Russia and China are now both angling to get into the Iranian arms market, which is sure to swell once oil money starts flooding back into government coffers in Tehran. Some commentators have estimated that Russia could be looking at $13 billion in arms export earnings and no one will be shocked to learn that the Kremlin has been pushing to lift arms sanctions immediately after an agreement. …

    Still, in some ways, Iran’s military is already benefitting from the deal. In April, Russian President Vladimir Putin pointed to progress in the nuclear talks as his reason for lifting a ban on sales of the S-300, a powerful air defense system long sought by the Iranians as a means of offsetting Israeli and American air superiority.

    In Arab World, Worries That Deal Will Boost Iran’s Power — Associated Press

    The nuclear deal with Iran was met with a profound wariness in the Arab world, where concerns are widespread that the easing of its international isolation could tip the already bloody contest for power in the region toward Shiite-led Tehran.

    Arab countries have deep fears of Iran gaining a nuclear weapon, and some have been skeptical that a deal will prevent that from happening. But equally high for key Sunni-dominated Gulf allies of the United States is the worry that a deal gives Iran the means — through an economic windfall — and an implicit green light to push influence in the region.

    Iran: We Won — Daily Beast

    Iran declared it won the decade-long struggle with the West to rein in its nuclear program after it signed an agreement with the U.S. and five world powers Tuesday. “To our neighbours: Do not be deceived by the propaganda of the warmongering Zionist regime. #Iran & its power will translate into your power,” President Hassan Rouhani tweeted. During a state TV address, Rouhani said Iran had achieved all of its objectives through negotiations. “All the sanctions, even arms embargoes and missile-related sanctions… would all be lifted,” he said.

    Nuclear deal likely to temporarily increase Iranian political stability, cause escalation of Iraqi and Syrian proxy war — Janes Intelligence Review

    The agreement will gradually allow investment in Iran’s economy, Saudi Arabia and Turkey will likely attempt to maximise their gains in Iraq and Syria in the short term, and to increase their dependence on militant Sunni groups, while it will also increase Israel’s fears over Hizbullah’s developing capabilities.

    The Real Reason Obama Did the Iran Deal — Leslie Gelb, Daily Beast

    Iranian negotiators understood well what’s been driving the U.S. president, and they have used the prospect of becoming “a friend” as their best bargaining card. For over a year now in small private conversations and strolls, they have been painting rosy pictures of Iranian-American cooperation.

    The Iranian list of possibilities goes to most of Washington’s principal worries about the broad Middle East. They would step up their fighting alongside Iraqi troops to combat the so-called Islamic State (ISIS or ISIL) in central Iraq. And they would do much more in Syria to go after the headquarters and main forces that ISIS has there. They spoke of finding “solutions” to the civil war in Yemen between Sunnis and Iran-backed Shiites. They raised hopes of forging better relations with America’s “partners” in the Gulf. They pressed the idea of renewing the cooperation they once had with the U.S. fighting the Taliban at the beginning of the Afghan war.

    What’s really wrong with the Iran nuclear deal — Robert Satloff, NY Daily News

    I have read every mind-numbing page of the Iran nuclear agreement. It is a serious document, negotiated by serious people. It includes a series of impressive restrictions on all aspects of Iran’s nuclear program for many years, some lasting a quarter century.

    But it is much more than just a technical accord. It is a strategy paper that maps Iran’s emergence as a regional power, with the full blessing — even support — of the United States and the international community. …

    The Iran accord goes further. On top of refraining from penalizing Iran for bad behavior, the U.S. and its partners commit to assist Iran to develop in energy, finance, technology and trade. The idea that America and its allies will actually help Iran grow stronger in these areas will sound a discordant note around the Middle East, where the Tehran regime is viewed as the eminence grise behind Bashar Assad’s brutal suppression of his people, the Houthi rebellion against state authority in Yemen, the creeping expansion of radical Shiite influence in Iraq and the activities of some of the most extreme Palestinian terrorist groups.

    In that vein, this agreement is truly historic. It marks a potential turning point in America’s engagement in the Middle East, a pivot from building regional security on a team of longtime allies who were themselves former adversaries of each other — Israel and the Sunni Arab states — in favor of a balance between those allies and our own longtime nemesis, Iran.

    Ian Bremmer, a professor at NYU makes the argument that Obama has fundamentally changed the structure of American alliances. He says “within a decade I expect US relations with Iran will be closer than US relations with Saudi Arabia.” The administration, frustrated with the inability of the existing cast of characters to break out of a decades old impasse and stuck in a regional conflagration of its own making simply went and made a new dinosaur; one part Islamic republic, one part nuclear weapons and one part newly available cash. The park has a new attraction and the logjam is broken. What could go wrong?

    This sounds vaguely promising until you remember that the US and Iranian government were once allies — before Khomeini and Carter. Obama is now making friends with the existing regime. But being buddies with regimes is a less stable proposition than making friends with peoples. The ultimate irony would be if the Iranians rose in a few years and overthrew the Ayatollahs with whom Obama made a deal. History is complex, not linear. The administration may discover that their new dinosaur refuses to stay confined in his paddock.

    Perhaps the weakest aspect of Obama’s foreign policy is his readiness to betray friendly civilizations such as the Israelis, Kurds, Christians — even the Sunnis and the Shia who have placed their trust in America — in favor of currying favor with the strongmen du jour. True love cuts no ice with the administration, even though a diplomacy based on cultures is more stable than treaties between strongmen. Like some hard-boiled detective it seems the only partners Obama finds interesting are those who’ve demonstrated a willingness to lie and cheat, nodt the plain, faithful Janes.

    The Wall Street Journal’s Benoit Faucon reports that the world is waiting to see which way the sword cuts. Obama is pouring money on Iran. Will it be water or gasoline?

    Iran is widely expected to use some of the billions of dollars freed up by sanctions relief under the newly minted nuclear deal to aid regional partners hostile to Washington and its allies.

    But with the threat of extremist group Islamic State redrawing old battle lines in the Middle East, the Iranian and U.S. camps sometimes find themselves fighting a common enemy. Iran hopes to leverage better relations to secure closer cooperation against common threats.

    Leslie Gelb’s observation that Obama bought a friend in Iran suggests the president’s deal will meet either one of two fates. The first possibility is that his machinations will succeed and America will find new partners in the Middle East.

    The second possibility is the president will be rolled. Obama, in purchasing the promise of an alliance with Iran for money, is like a man who engages a lady in a clip joint to sit at a table and pretend to be interested in him, even though they have nothing in common. The lady, in this case a bearded Ayatollah, consumes overpriced, watered-down beverages for which he presented an astonishing bill and when opportunity presents may slip him a mickey. Then she escorts her wobbly customer out followed closely by Vladimir.

    It is not unheard of for patrons of such establishments to wake up in a ditch without their wallets, glad they still have their underwear. But if shared values are not the coin in the administration’s realm, then it must be purely down to who has the last laugh. Off go Iran and Obama into the mist. This could be the beginning of a beautiful friendship, but don’t count the ditch out.

  89. Imho…trump can hold his own and will come into the debate ready for attacks and he will punch back

    If I were his oldest…and very smart and sophisticated daughter…and has his ear…I would just suggest she mention he reduce name calling and emphasize I proving his point with examples

    In other words…just keep doing what he is doing…just try not to let some of his bluster step on his message or points
    he is making

    They are jealous and scared because the donald is breaking
    through to the “stupid voters”…and is a wrecking ball at their insider club

Comments are closed.