Marco Rubio: Judas Goat

For a couple of years now we’ve been hearing how Marco Rubio is the “new face of conservatism” that the GOP seems to be pinning its hopes on for a resurgence in electoral victories at the national level.

th[1]He’s a “person of color” (to use the socialists’ terminology) with truly “conservative” chops, we’re told.

Then why is he the GOP point man on yet another round of amnesty for illegal aliens?

We’ve been down this road before. This is just a rerun of the 1986 Simpson-Mazzoli debacle in which we were promised all kinds of things — “border security”, employment checks, etc. — in return for a “one time, never to be repeated” amnesty. It was going to cure ALL our illegal alien problems.

Well, the only thing we EVER got was the amnesty for over 3 MILLION illegal aliens. And here we are, once again, 27 years later with over THREE TIMES AS MANY illegal aliens as we had then.

Reagan later regretted signing it into law as one of the biggest mistakes of his presidency.

Are we going to be stupid enough to repeat history? “Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it” – Santayana.

Yet here we are, once again, hearing the same old same old. SSDD. Rubio is standing there as the face of the “Gang of Eight” – yet another “gang” that nobody elected to anything – supposedly “negotiating” a gargantuan public policy without any public input or debate. Who elected these eight guys to decide how the entire country is going to treat the problem of our invasion by illegal aliens?

According to Rubio, the illegal aliens will have to face some minor bureaucratic requirements and pay a $2000 “penalty”, after which they can be “legalized”, get green cards, and ultimately apply for full citizenship. Which means voting rights.

Oh, brother… $2000 in “penalties”?… That’s IT????????

Hell, here in Commiefornia you can get fined more than that for a traffic offense. This is total bullpuckey. And, of course, the same old empty promises about the “border security” that not only never happens, but can’t even be defined by any measurable standard anymore, thanks to the amnesty apologists from both parties currently (and previously) in office.

th[6]The Republicans who keep trying to foist this nonsense upon us keep claiming that this horde of under-skilled uneducated people is somehow going to magically turn into future conservative/GOP voters if we simply show some sympathy and “understanding” and let them “come out of the shadows”. What planet are these fools living on?

This group is EXACTLY the demographic of future Democrat/socialist voters by a HUGE margin: scofflaws, unskilled, uneducated, high crime rate, high illegitimate birth rate, low income, many (if not most) of them from ethnic minorities. Prime Democrat subjects. Please… THESE are future conservatives?

Which brings us back to our title, “Marco Rubio, Judas Goat”. Any self-professed “conservative” who stands for amnesty – under whatever guise or alias – is a Judas Goat, frankly, for exactly the reasons I’ve delineated above. Just like the animal Judas Goat who leads his fellow goats into the abattoir to slaughter, Rubio and fellow “conservatives” who promote amnesty for illegal aliens are leading this entire country to destruction.

As far as Rubio ever getting elected President: fuggeddaboudit. His career as a “conservative” is over. That’s proved to be a complete lie. He’s no more “conservative” than that turncoat “maverick” McCain.

ANYTHING that “legalizes” illegal aliens is amnesty. Period. And any purported “conservative” who supports it is no true conservative at all.

© Brian Baker 2013

87 comments on “Marco Rubio: Judas Goat

  1. Buck says:

    The Democrats pop up with a “two steps forward” amnesty plan.
    Rubio’s “alternative” plan is the “one step back”.
    And you know where that leaves us.
    Right on
    Rubio has shown his colors and I don’t like ’em.

  2. clyde says:

    Holy Crap, McCain catch Rubio with small farm animals too??? Got to say, I had some hopes for this guy, but, amnesty is more and more what this bill is looking like. HE supports it, HE will sink with the ship. IF the PSP think these people are going to THEM, that tells me THEIR plans have NO chance at reducing the size and scope of the current government. Damned hard to beat Baracka Claus at HIS game. Truly time for the GOP to go the way of the WHIGS. Sooner the better.

  3. BrianR,

    Good essay. We’re simply being betrayed by the clowns in Mordor on thePotomac, on BOTH sides!

  4. thedrpete says:

    Bullpuckey? Whoa. We can’t say”illegal aliens” anymore. Those northbound walkers are “undocumented Democrats”. Meanwhile — never mind Rubio — even Rand Paul wavers and panders to the gimmees and moochers and wagon riders.

    • BrianR says:

      That’s a good point, DrP. So many of the so-called “conservatives” don’t seem to be truly able to walk the walk.

  5. Buck says:

    What could possibly convince those morons that if they grant amnesty the GOP will garner a bunch of votes?
    Folks this pissignorant should never be sent to DC to represent us.
    WHY do we continue to send them?
    clue…go read the 1895 8th Grade test at “nox & friends” and compare to today’s education system.

    • BrianR says:

      Buck, the abject stupidity involved on the part of GOPers is literally beyond belief. It’s like believing that if you add some salt to water it’ll flow uphill. You’ve got to just sit there and scratch your head and wonder what would make anyone with half a brain believe it.

      Thanks for the ‘Nox plug. On my way.

  6. Grey Neely says:

    You have to wonder, is it Rubio or his handlers? Has the federal government gotten so large and corrupt that it is now impossible to elect a truly honest Conservative?

    I too had great hopes for Rubio. Now they are dashed upon the “rocks of the Potomac”.

    • BrianR says:

      Grey, I believe it’s Rubio himself. I think he’s bought into his own “legend” as a “conservative person of color” who can do no wrong. He sees himself as an example of how conservatism can sway minorities, while ignoring every single other bit of evidence that asserts to the contrary. It gives him a blindness to reality, either willful or otherwise. He’s bought into the hype about his ascendant star, the same weakness McAmnesty fell to in 2008, and thinks no one on the right will criticize him. Obozo’s the same on the left. It’s sheer arrogance.

      It goes like this: “Hey, I’m a real conservative. Everyone says so, and look… I’m now a ‘leader”. I believe in ‘comprehensive immigration reform’, even though it’s amnesty. But because I’M backing it, it will automatically become completely acceptable to conservatives!!!”

      He’s an arrogant fool. Just like Obozo. And McAmnesty.

      As to your most excellent question: Yep. Houston, we have a problem.

  7. Hardnox says:

    Good post Brian. You mirror my thoughts exactly. Illegal is illegal. It is no more complicated than that. The fact that Rubio is the frontman on this issue is simply politically expedient only because he too is “of color”. Rubio is a huge disappointment. Immediately after he won election as Senator he asked his constituents to pray for him and his family so that they won’t be changed by Washington influence. Evidently the prayers didn’t work.

    The R’s are quite adept at flouting their conservative credentials immediately before election time then revert to that reach across the aisle crap immediately after., then commence to throw the true conservatives that actually won under the bus.

    Further what happened to the 20-30 million illegals that everyone was talking about 10 years ago? Now it’s 11 million! After amnesty they will discover that it’s 40-50 million. Whoops!

    Off topic: Yesterday, I received a call from the RNC begging for a $250 donation. I exploded! I told them that they were no better than the commies in charge now since they were purging conservatives from positions of influence within the party. Crickets was my response. I told the caller never to contact me again as I am through with them.

    If there ever was a time for a Conservative Party it is NOW. I realize the implications. It would cost us 2014 and 2016, possibly beyond, but if not now when? I remain disgusted with what is happening to our beloved country.

    Sorry for the rant. I am pissed.

    • BrianR says:

      Hardnox, no apology necessary. That was a great comment, and I thank you.

      I’m not so sure a true replacement party would lose that many cycles. The GOP only lost the 1856 cycle as a national party, then won with Lincoln in 1860, their second outing. And the current GOP sure seems to mirror the problem with the WHIGs.

  8. clyde says:

    Got a new one up about the asshat Axelrod at Nox, place. Check it out if you get a sec.

  9. Buck says:

    Clyde, I think his statement plus the Bostonians “Shelter-in-place” thingy smells of a government trying out Dr. Pavlov’s experiments only this time it ain’t on dogs..

  10. CW says:

    Right on the money, as usual Brian.

    There are no words to adequately express my frustration on this topic. It feels like 90% of the country has been hypnotized and the rest of us can only watch helplessly while they stupidly set the country on fire.

    What are the supposed objectives here? To stop the flow of illegal immigration? That’s easy: make employers use E-verify; stop giving taxpayer-paid services to illegals (no school, no welfare, no medical); end the stupid misinterpretation of the 14th amendment (i.e. no more anchor babies); enforce the law by deporting illegals when they’re caught; secure the border.

    That’s all it would take if someone is TRULY interested in stopping illegal immigration. It doesn’t require that we “hunt down 11 million illegal aliens,” which is the disingenuous straw-man argument everyone – left and right – loves to use. We don’t catch every murderer in the country, but the fear of being caught is enough to deter most people from committing that crime. Right now illegals have little fear of being caught because it rarely happens and it’s not that big a deal if it does. They stand to gain a lot by coming here and they risk very little. It shouldn’t take a genius to figure that out. It also shouldn’t take a genius to figure out that if democrats are for it, it CAN’T be good.

    And you’re 100% correct on this: the vast majority of Mexicans are socialists. It’s ingrained in their culture to the point where it may as well be genetic. Why any conservative would want to expand the army of voting socialists in this nation is a mystery to me, but then it simply proves that there are no conservative in the “gang of eight.”

    The fact is everyone in the “gang” has other motives for wanting to reward illegals, regardless of what they pretend their reasons to be. Some want to be hailed as heroes for supposedly solving this problem (ha!), some want to increase their voter rolls (this is the biggest stupidity of all for Rubio, et al, as you point out), but NONE of them are sincerely looking out for the best interests of this nation, because rewarding criminals is NEVER in the best interests of anyone.

  11. Buck says:

    Brian: Emailed a piece where Rubio person compared illegal aliens to 19th Century slaves.
    Thought you’d like it…..

  12. AfterShock says:

    I like Rubio, I think he’s the real-deal as they say on many issues. But immigration reform is not one of them. He seems very naive to me, thinking there is any way his insisted upon “triggers” would ever be seriously enforced, or that somehow Hispanic voters would suddenly appreciate conservatism. He’s just wrong wrong wrong but that said, I have a very hard time believing he’s in any way similar to the likes of mccain, or boehner. I think he’s been played for a fool and has acted the part, brilliantly.

    • BrianR says:

      Well, here’s the thing, Aftershock: if he’s that much of a fool that he can be played like that, what does THAT say about him?

      I have to say, amnesty is one of those few issues to me that are deal-breakers, because I think amnesty is one of those few issues that can completely destroy this country in the long run.

      • AfterShock says:

        No disagreement here on the importance the immigration amnesty issue Brian, just sayin’ the most elect can be derailed to the wrong path with the best intentions in mind. Human beings are imperfect organic machines, but is Rubio a cynical fraud like McCain, or Harry Reed or John Boehner? If the perfect candidate has to be as flawless as a slice of silicon we’re already toast because there isn’t enough time to educate enough low info voters to win enough elections to tip the balance of power and release this country from the grip of an authoritarian soon to become totalitarian regime.

      • BrianR says:

        I agree that there’s no such thing as a “flawless” candidate (unless I decide to run for something, of course).

        BUT… it’s one thing to be wrong on a minor issue, and a whole different animal when you’re so completely wrong on an issue so fundamental, and with such epic ramifications, that it can completely destroy the country.

        That’s what’ll happen when 11+ million illegal aliens (an absurdly low estimate, I believe) are given amnesty and “a path to citizenship”, i.e. voting rights.

        Is Rubio a cynical fraud? I don’t know. But if he’s not, he’s stupider than a box of rocks.

      • AfterShock says:

        Yes Brian dumber than… on this issue. I will however reserve judgement until regular order procedes to the actual vote. Then we shall see. If Rubio and Jeff Lane actually vote yea, I will reevaluate therefrom. Both men are in districts heavy with “Hispanic” voters. It would take great courage for either to vote no on the bill, though I agree that should be the only vote. I heard Lake double step in an interview with Glenn Beck, so I think he knows a yes vote will be a mistake. They could save face by separating immigration reform from border security as it should have been from the git-go.

      • BrianR says:

        And there you have it, right there! Exactly what I’ve been saying and writing for years: why does there have to be “comprehensive” immigration reform at all? I’ll tell you why: because the damned Dems know the ONLY way they ever get another amnesty is if they try to wrap it around false promises of border security, that’s why. And Rubio, Bush, McIdiot, Grahamnesty and the rest of the GOPers who go for it are fools and idiots, at best.

        This entire issue should be done one step at a time, as separate legislation, STARTING with securing the border. If, and ONLY if, the border’s ever secured, THEN we can look at other things.

        But as far as ANY kind of amnesty goes, and I don’t care what they call it or try to dress it up with dinky fines and stuff, NEVER!!!! Because as I’ve constantly written, and am firmly convinced, amnestizing millions of future Dem voters — and that’s EXACTLY what they’ll be — spells doom for this country.

        In 1986 Reagan signed Simpson-Mazzoli into law giving amnesty to about 3 million, mostly Latinos, and what’s the GOP moaning about NOW? How the “Latino vote” is costing them elections. Well, no s**t, Sherlock! Any moron should have been able to see that one coming. And their great solution is to amnestize 3 or 4 times as many NOW???? Talk about the Einsteinian definition of insanity!

        That’s why, to me, this is a deal-breaker issue, along with gun control. I will NEVER EVER vote for anyone who supports amnesty. I don’t care if my one and only vote costs them the election; frankly I’d be happy if it did.

      • AfterShock says:

        Your position creates the ultimate catch-22 Brian. Your passion is understandable but the strategery of regaining control will require keeping a few of the shakier members of congress in place while simultaneously working to replace them down the road. Rubio, Lake and Ryan to name a few are young enough and intelligent enough to correct.. McCain, Graham and their ilk need to go in their next election cycle. I don’t believe there will be another opportunity to regain control of our government if the Dems — and their President (dictator) for life — regain control of the house and senate. Obama in addressing Planned Parenthood, said “Planned Parenthood is not going anywhere, It’s not going anywhere today, it’s not going anywhere tomorrow.” then added for as long as he is president. That tells me Obama sees himself in office for as long as planned parenthood might exist. To stop him, to stop total destruction of our liberty not to mention our status as a sovereign nation, we must work with less than perfect members of congress under the Republican banner. Once we regain control of congress we then “one step at a time” begin the process of replacing the more useless idiots therein.

      • BrianR says:

        Yeah, but that’s the thing, Shock: I don’t care WHO has control if both parties are enacting policies that are going to destroy the country, as amnesty will. Screw ’em all, then.

        What, we’re supposed to vote for brain-dead GOPers simply because they’ll drive the bus of state off the cliff a little bit slower?

        The GOP needs to learn, as I’ve been preaching for years, that they can’t win anything by abandoning core principles. They seem to constantly forget that, but when you look at the results when REAL conservatism is on the menu — Reagan, Jindal, folks like that — it wins, and wins big. Conservatism sells, plain and simple.

        The GOP is in trouble because their lack of principles has caused voters like ME — who won’t abandon ours — to refuse to vote for them. I’m not going to vote for someone just because they’re “not quite as bad” as the lefty opponent. Screw that. I’d rather let the whole country self-destruct, and maybe something better will arise from the ashes. And if it doesn’t, then this sorry country will have earned its destruction, just as the Founders warned about.

    • rjc says:

      I got here from comments on Michelle Malkin’s article on Rubio. Sorry, I just can’t let the above post from AfterShock go by without setting things straight on Rubio. He is no little innocent. He knows what he is doing. Being a Floridian who has watched his career, I’d like to give you a short rundown. I’ll try to be brief.

      First, you should know he and Jeb Bush have been protege and mentor for a long time (since Marco’s newly won popularity, this has no doubt cooled a bit).

      Early 2000’s, as member of the Florida Hispanic Caucus, called immigration laws “draconian”.
      2003 and 2004, twice introduced DREAM Acts in the FL House, which Floridians wanted none of.
      2008, as powerful Speaker of the FL House, blocked six enforcement bills, much needed and worked on tirelessly by Floridians (hired the attorney who wrote the successful Oklahoma laws). Rubio sent word through an aide that he would not impede them. What he actually did, however, was call his fellow Hispanic legislators, (the ethically challenged) David Rivera and Juan Zapata to come from Dade up to Tallahassee to call the proponents of the bills racists. Floridians deluged his office with calls but in the end he blocked them all, including E-Verify and even the one having to do with illegal felons.
      2010, lied endlessly in interviews during the Senate campaign, claiming he was anti-amnesty, despite his record of continually advocating for illegal aliens to the detriment of Florida’s citizens. He needed to lie to be elected to the Senate seat; we had just about run Mel Martinez, who co-wrote the Bush/McCain amnesty plan, out of office. He resigned; Rubio won his seat.
      2010, after being elected, the dust had hardly settled when he criticized the Arizona law and accused Republicans of being hostile to Hispanics. Not much later, started talking about DREAM Acts.
      2012, this you already know, but to recall, he sabotaged Romney’s campaign stance of self-deportation by babbling about yet another one of his DREAM Acts. This, of course, forced Obama to issue his (unconstitutional) executive order giving DREAMers a form of amnesty; he didn’t want to be upstaged by Marco. No one gives Marco “credit” for this, but they should. I’m sure Rubio did all of this on purpose. He wanted to embarrass Romney. And stop an anti-amnesty candidate.
      2013, so here we are now. Leading the Gang of Eight.

      I am sure you all realize just how monstrous this bill is. It will change this country almost overnight. Hispanics are over 80% of the illegal alien population. With chain migration, some of those immediately legalized (unlike with LEGAL immigrants) the numbers will be staggering. Assimilation will be an impossibility; there’s no incentive for it when so many of one ethnic heritage come in such a short period of time. We will become them; they will not become us. And there will be so many of them, what will it matter anyway? We’ll lose our culture, our language, and the rule of law will be a joke.

      As for Rubio’s “conservatism”, I have had a suspicion all along that it was his job to win over the conservative Republicans and when he had their trust he could just blow this amnesty past them while delivering it for his RINO friends, Jeb Bush and company. A Manchurian Candidate if there ever was one.

      • BrianR says:

        RJC, I can’t tell you how happy I am that you took the time to stop by and write that astounding and very informative comment. VERY much appreciated.

        Not only am I happy to have my thoughts confirmed by someone with far greater knowledge of Rubio than I have, but also to be given that stupendous history of his actions as an obscure (nationally) state legislator.

        He’s even worse than I thought.

        I also really liked your analysis of his “mission” in this fiasco, and it makes perfect sense. He truly IS a Judas Goat, in the worst way possible.

        Once again, thanks very much. Please stop by whenever you like; we try to keep things interesting here.

      • AfterShock says:

        Thanks rjc I stand better informed thanks for the clarity. That does not however change my mind on strategy to correct course, it just adds another name to the list of political animals needing to be purged. Who in Florida can run against Rubio and win?

      • BrianR says:

        The problem is, Shock, that the “course” will never be corrected as long as the PSP (Perpetually Stupid Party) thinks they’ll win by trying to be the Dem-Lite party.

        It’s like educating a 3-year-old. They have to learn that there are consequences for bad behavior, otherwise you end up raising a brat.

        I don’t know why it is that every time they lose an election, the message they seem to take from it is: “We weren’t ‘liberal’ enough! We need to be more like the Dems!”.

        The message they SHOULD be getting is: “We weren’t CONSERVATIVE enough!”.

      • AfterShock says:

        The leftist/progressives embarked nearly a century ago on a communist plan to support left leaning “Republican” candidates, those that could be counted on to cave to the left when critical issues affecting our liberty and national security arose. The technique was called boring (noun). The idea of course (duh) was to begin destroying the Conservative resistance to what Barrack Obama termed “fundamental change” in America. Of course useful idiots were a necessary part of the plan i.e; supporting candidates that otherwise couldn’t get elected dog catcher. Joe Biden is an example of the intellect they were seeking for both parties. As a result most politicians are of low intellect with less than average intelligence –many with law degrees that may as well have come out of a cracker jacks box.. Hollywood types, many musicians and most “journalists” are also products of this long standing effort (sweeping generalization I know) to place leftist morons into public life. That’s why Nikita Khrushchev proclaimed with such bravado fifty years ago that America would be destroyed from within, rotting from the core.

        The Republican Party just as the Dem party has been overrun with such dim-witted politicians. Yet the Republicans do have, albeit a minority, an increasing number of true conservatives among them. They are a beginning to build on. There is no short cut to regaining what has been taken from us — liberty and sovereignty — it will require a protracted effort to eliminate the moles in our political system. In the meantime I do not believe it possible to correct course so to restore liberty and freedom for generations to come by tossing the baby (Republican Party) out with the bathwater. drpete believes all is lost, I can’t stop fighting for what’s right regardless what the facts indicate now. The facts were completely against a successful revolution in 1776, even more so than today. But I guess the facts one way or the other are irrelevant if we all walk away from the fight. I refuse to go out like that.

      • BrianR says:

        The same argument was made in the 1850s to justify continuing support for the WHIG Party when they became the gutless, stupid and marginalized party of their era, too.

        Are you suggesting that the country would have been better off if the GOP of that time hadn’t replaced them?

        I maintain that we’re in the same predicament as a country that they of that era were in. It’s time for the GOP to s**t or get off the pot, or be replaced by a party that WILL stand up for principles unequivocally.

        When I, and people like me, refuse to cast our votes for brain-dead gutless Dem-Lite a-holes, we’re not “walking away from the fight”. WE’RE the ones actually taking the fight to them; they can’t count on us to just give them our votes simply “because”. They have to EARN those votes, and if they refuse to do that, then they lose elections, which seems to be the only language they understand.

        If they lose enough elections, one of two things happens: they either get with the program and straighten out their act, or they ultimately get replaced by people who WILL do what’s right and expected, just as the 19th Century GOP replaced the WHIGs.

        I listen to GOP Establishment “rock stars” like Rove, any Bush, Romney, McCain, now Rubio, and others like them and I want to set fire to my TV.

  13. garnet92 says:

    Excellent piece Brian. Unaccustomed as I am to being brief (I sometimes get a little verbose), I find that CW covered my thoughts so well that there’s little I can add. Ditto CW’s comment.

  14. Buck says:

    I am mixed on the issue. I do not understand pandering to “Hispanic” i.e. Americans of Mexican descent vote.
    After all do the illegals not steal their jobs, too?

    • BrianR says:

      Well, Buck, IMO it’s just more evidence of the GOP’s inability to frame their message. The Dems paint everything as a racial issue, and instead of debunking that, the GOP plays right along on THEIR terms, basically acceding that there IS a racial issue and that they’re no more “racist” than the Dems.

      So, they lose on trying to sell that message, they lose by playing on the Dems’ terms, and they lose by not reframing the debate as one of values and principles rather than race.

      Also, don’t forget that a significant percentage of today’s “Hispanic bloc” of voters have the right to vote as a result of the 1986 amnesty; they’re either former illegals or the kids of former illegals themselves. And amnestizing a whole bunch more of them now is simply going to lead to a huge “Hispanic bloc” in the future that will NEVER vote for conservatism, which is why I hold that amnesty will spell the doom of this country.

  15. rjc says:

    To Aftershock: “Who can run against Rubio and win?” Unfortunately, the odds are not good that anyone can. And here I have to clarify one thing: Not that I am giving Rubio any credit, but no matter who was or is Speaker of the House in Florida, those bills do not pass, and they haven’t passed since 2008. Florida is run by what I call a RINOcracy. Because tourism is its main industry and there is a lot of crop picking done here, the Republicans are in bed with the Chamber of Commerce and the Ag industry.

    But the year that Rubio pulled that trick embittered many Floridians, because it was our best chance. NumbersUSA and FAIR were here and a lot of time, effort and money, which is in very short supply, was spent on the preparation of those bills, and a group went to Tallahassee to shepherd them through, optimistically taking Rubio at his word. He could have been a real hero to Floridians but of course he had other plans anyway.

    There is a real hard core group which is beginning to make itself heard here, vowing to get him out of office next time around. But that’s very difficult because the big money supports cheap labor, and thus an amnesty candidate. The establishment usually gets what they want, no matter what. When Rubio ran, there was an anti-amnesty candidate, Bob Smith, a plain vanilla middle-aged white guy. Obviously, he didn’t stand a chance.

    I don’t know if you have read Byron York’s recent column, a real eye-opener no doubt for Rubio and the Gang, where York describes the results of Rubio’s “invitation” on his website to voters for suggestions on how to improve the bill. Of course Rubio and the Gang thought they would get little comments which would “tweak” the bill; then they could change one little part and declare it a victory. Well, to put it bluntly, the overwhelming majority said to junk it, throw it in the garbage, kill it, go back to square one, etc. etc. I think that is one of the most interesting articles that has been written about this bill, which is supposed to be a fait accompli. And if that sentiment continues to grow, and the voting public becomes aware of just how bad the bill is, that may even change things for Marco Rubio, as well as for the bill. But it will take a lot of work by American citizens, because there are so many powerful groups that are agitating for it, from the Dems to the media to the churches to the tribal Hispanic groups, not to mention the deep pockets of Big Business. But there’s hope I think.

    • BrianR says:

      This has been the ongoing problem with the GOP Establishment, not only on this issue, but many others as well, as I’ve written about repeatedly for years. It is a “RINOcracy”, as you very aptly termed it.

      I read York’s column, and it was very illuminating and informative. A “must-read” for any traditional conservative.

  16. clyde says:

    rjc, thanks so much for shining the light on the polished turd Rubio. When Rush had him on his program, I about shot my damned radio out. A HUGE problem is numbnuts like Rush, with what HE thinks is OVERWHELMING conservative support, actually STILL believes the GOP is the way to go. If he’s talking about the swirly ride down the shitter, then he’s right. Stick with the moribund PSP, we damn sure will never get anywhere.

  17. clyde says:

    Shameless plug. Got a two-parter up today about the moonbats frothing over the possibility the EEEEVVVVVIIIILLLL Kochs may buy the Tribune Group. Seems the unions, along with the L.A. City Council don’t like the idea.

  18. AfterShock says:

    Brian I’m pointing out the obvious that the left has us in a virtual checkmate should they manage to win the House and retain the Senate. We won’t, in my opinion, get another chance in our lifetimes to clean-house if that happens. I haven’t heard the artful term SOGOTP since the 1950’s or 60’s. BTW don’t set your tv on fire, Flight Aware maps and forcasts look great on Big Screens.

    • BrianR says:

      Shocky, I’ve been hearing that “obvious” end-of-the-world prediction since at least Clinton’s first term. As a matter of fact, as a result of it the GOP actually got their act together in ’94 and TOOK both houses of Congress on a straight conservative platform… which they then promptly turned around and commenced to ignoring, leading us right back to the pickle we’re in.

      Sorry. I’m just not buying it. They are the absolute living embodiment and proof of Einstein’s dictum that insanity is repeating the same action while expecting a different result. In this case, they constantly keep tracking left while taking their base for granted on the completely stupid and asinine assumption that we’re gonna vote for them no matter what they do.

      Well… WRONG!

      I’ve said it many times, and I’ll say it again: I don’t care WHO controls Congress if the same result is what we’re gonna get. Why the hell would I vote for ANY nimrod who supports amnesty, regardless of party, when I am absolutely convinced that it will be a knife into the heart of this country. Is a GOP-backed amnesty somehow better? How?

      Why won’t those idiots look at the success of Reagan, and Jindal, and the 1994 “Contract With America” takeover of Congress and actually LEARN from history, instead of ignoring it?

      Which is precisely why I call them the PSP: Perpetually Stupid Party.

      • AfterShock says:

        Those idiots are not the Republican Party — voters are. Admittedly, those idiots do have media supported control over the public face of the party and unfortunately that translates into RINO/Establishment control. RINO’s are just another minority tail wagging the dog. There is no sucha animal as perfect. How perfect were the founders? One can certainly argue that none were so politically pure and that some were outright disasters. Alexander Hamilton certainly falls to the latter category for me when considering his support for a powerful central banking system. I think the repeat of events has had more to do with low information voters being un-engaged in the actions of their elected government, mindlessly trusting their elected representatives, thus paying NO attention to what said representatives were actually doing. I do not believe that’s the case now, I believe in large part due to the proliferation of truth via the internet — during the past decade particularly — that more and more voters are keeping tabs. As a result I don’t believe a Chris Christie for example has any chance of being the Republican Nominee in 2016 regardless the low info voters that remain.

        Republicans and Dems do appear to have become the same animal, the establishments of both parties support BIG government and that’s a problem that will take time to fix. But who has done more damage — Bush or Clinton, Bush or Carter, Ford or Carter, Bush or Obama, Repubs or Dems? I choose hands down the latter in each category though that does not make me comfortable with the former.

        Byron York stated that Republican “voters want to believe in a candidate [and] if Republicans find that candidate, they will win.” Well that’s not saying the candidate has to be ideologically pure, politically or personally mistake-free, it’s saying that candidate has to be someone the electorate can believe in. I acknowledge that “winning” is not the entire point of an election, what’s expected from winning is equally important. The expected mandate is set by the voters and in the Republican case the only mandate coming from the electorate will be to turn this nation back to Constitutionally limited government so we need to believe the candidate(s) we vote for will substantially fulfill the mandate. The question always boils down to whether it’s all or nothing. If the Dems win House, Senate and Prez, because conservative’s expectations are so purist that they refuse to vote for any candidate that falls short of perfect, they’ll take that as a mandate to legislate for unrestricted illegal inflow, amnesty, voting rights, not to mention gun control and the end of absolute truth where the constitution is concerned. And what will stop them? You need only look to Obamacare to understand their ruthless intentions… so purists will have won what by not voting? Your position seems to assume that the Republican establishment will actually feel punished, when it’s likely they don’t really care that much about being the minority party.

        I am not a Rubio for President supporter, I said I liked him. I’ve heard a lot here that gives me pause and I’ll look into it further but I will care more about what’s actually in his heart than what has been made of his political career. And that goes for any candidate. I need to believe they will do the right thing, that they are capable of rising to the occasion regardless what they thought in the past. Rubio and others need to explain themselves on the issue of immigration reform for me to be a supporter. Can he? I don’t know. I’ll be more likely to support candidates that get off the political tightrope to stop the game-playing; that doesn’t mean we must agree 100% but substantially. For most of them just that would require firing their political advisers as a first step. What really needs to change in this country is what the voters expect from the candidates they choose. That requires engagement and communication with the candidate something needing vast improvement but something I believe IS improving. For President I am currently a Rand Paul supporter though I do not agree 100% with him on all issues. I believe he is a man of integrity.

      • BrianR says:

        Well, there’s a lot there to comment on.

        When I talk about the political goals of “the GOP”, obviously I’m talking about the political hacks who run the party, not the Joe Sixpack voters. You’ve put your own finger on the problem: “… those idiots do have media supported control over the public face of the party and unfortunately that translates into RINO/Establishment control.” Yup. Exactly. And THOSE are the drones who refuse to learn the lessons of history, who steer the direction of the party, put its planks in place, and allocate the money and resources that make any run for office possible (if they support it) or impossible (if they don’t like the candidate). By the time actual VOTERS get involved, there’s not much choice left at all; it’s either the party hack or third-party.

        Just look at 2008. The hacks were kissing Giuliani’s butt — a guy I called Bald Hillary because he’s such a lefty — until he dropped out, then they immediately lip-locked onto McCain’s derriere. McCain, ole Mr. Stab-Conservatives-In-The-Back himself. Things weren’t any better in 2012. They couldn’t wait to dump Perry, Santorum and Gingrich (though I’m not a Newt fan myself) so we could get those good ole “moderates” to the head of the pack, culminating in Mr. Wishy-Washy himself, Romney. Gooooooooooooooooood grief…

        You (quoting York): “The expected mandate is set by the voters and in the Republican case the only mandate coming from the electorate will be to turn this nation back to Constitutionally limited government so we need to believe the candidate(s) we vote for will substantially fulfill the mandate.”

        And why would any sane voter expect that to happen from the current crop of GOPers? Rubio running around touting AMNESTY, for Christ’s sake, a country-killing policy if there ever was one. Christie in a lip-lock with Obama’s butt every time you turn around. McCain hating the idea of a border fence, and supporting gun control. Boehner refusing to defund Obamacare, ridiculously citing the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution in a hilariously absurd rationalization. I could go on, but why bother? The Establishment GOP is a disgusting bunch.

        You: “… because conservative’s expectations are so purist that they refuse to vote for any candidate that falls short of perfect.”

        Not so. Nobody’s talking about “perfection”, and never have. But that, also, is the grotesque rationalization the GOP religiously falls back on as their excuse to abandon core principles. When you have GOPers PROMOTING amnesty, and gun control, and fiscal idiocy, the question then isn’t an issue of “perfection”; it’s one of complete acquiescence to the agenda set forth by the Left, but in a slightly modified version. It’s complete lunacy, and I refuse to vote for any candidate that embraces it.

        “Imperfect” is a GOPer voting to slightly increase the tax rate to pay down the deficit; where are the appropriate spending cuts? THAT’S “imperfect”, and that candidate could still get my vote. Voting for amnesty is a flat-out desertion of core principles and ideology (as well as being suicidal for a supposed “conservative”). I’m NEVER voting for any idiot who supports it, any more than I’d vote for a gun-grabber. THOSE are deal-killer issues.

        You: “Your position seems to assume that the Republican establishment will actually feel punished, when it’s likely they don’t really care that much about being the minority party.”

        WELL… if that’s the case, then I’d say you’re making my case for me. Time to replace them, then, just like THEY replaced the WHIGs.

        You: “Rubio and others need to explain themselves on the issue of immigration reform for me to be a supporter. Can he? I don’t know.”

        How can anyone “explain” amnesty to make it acceptable? No one will ever convince me a s**t sandwich is pate, no matter how glib they are. I know the difference.

        At this point, I’d agree with you on Rand Paul. I like the guy; he’s right on MOST issues (though not “perfect”), and I also think he has a lot of integrity. BTW, the issues he’s NOT “perfect” on aren’t issues I consider of fundamental import, a serious difference from others in that party.

        I also like Jindal. I think Ryan has potential; though he’s off on a couple of issues and thus not “perfect”, I think he’s votable. Cantor has promise, if he can get away from being Boehner’s wingman. Jeeeez, I’d hate to be stuck as being that bonehead’s mini-me; a spineless wimp. There are some others.

        Great comment, Shocky. Lots of meat. Mmmmmmm…. beefy!

  19. rjc says:

    Hi, Guys,

    Just wanted to add a little comic relief. Here’s a little ditty the folks here in FLA have prepared just for Marco. Things are revving up here.

  20. BrianR says:

    Welcome, newbie James. Thanks for taking the time to comment.

    Well said; and you may be right. Is it too late? Maybe…

    In that case, either we need a new “major party” to emerge — quickly — or the country is over, and the Fat Lady will have sung. I certainly agree with you that the Big Government statists are in charge of the GOP.

    • BrianR says:

      Interestingly enough, your example of Commiefornia (where I live) is right on point. It’s proof positive of my thesis that allowing the GOP to track Left unpunished is suicidal.

      This used to be a CONSERVATIVE state, believe it or not. But back in the early 70s when the state Dems started winning elections, the GOP (which was pretty complacent here at that time) started getting scared.

      Back in those days, I was on the board of the local Young Republicans organization. An internal conflict developed as to strategizing the future of the state GOP between the conservative and “moderate” wings, and the moderates won. I actually quit my post and the YR in disgust and protest.

      The end result over time? As the GOP here kept tracking left trying to chase votes, they ended up losing all support from actual conservatives, with the consequence being a party in minority status all across the board out here.

      There are still some GOPers in state positions, primarily the few of the more conservative persuasion who come from conservative strongholds in the state, such as where I live in Santa Clarita.

      The strength of conservatism still exists, as we saw in the recall election of uber-lib (and incompetent) Gray Davis when he was voted out and Schwarzenegger was voted in. But Ah-nuld turned out to be the worst of both worlds: a complete incompetent who was ALSO a flaming lefty, no better than the jagoff he replaced.

      In the meantime, the leftist policies of this state (and the country) regarding the illegal aliens and “social services” have resulted in this state being overrun with illegals and bums. We have the largest illegal alien population in the country; we have 10% of the nation’s populace, and 1/3 of its welfare recipients; there are areas of the state where you can’t find anybody who speaks English; absurdities like that are common here.

      This state is clearly doomed. And why? Because the GOP lost sight of what it was supposed to stand for, now stands for nothing, and is almost irrelevant.

  21. AfterShock says:

    Well then f–k it Brian, we substantially agree, actually. I suppose if a conservative with indisputable integrity doesn’t get nominated in 2016 I won’t vote either as the game will already be over. Then it comes down to “what’s next”. What’s next will determine whether anyone in this land will ever have Liberty protected by government again. Still, many say the nature of human beings is too base, too self indulgent for man made government to ever protect individual rights and liberty long term. It’s akin to the entropic effect of thermodynamics. Order descends into disorder, then into chaos… and from chaos comes, allegedly, order — perhaps a new “world” order?

    • BrianR says:

      LOL, Shocky!

      Yeah, we do. I never doubted that; our differences were regarding strategy, not principle.

      You: “Then it comes down to ‘what’s next’. What’s next will determine whether anyone in this land will ever have Liberty protected by government again.”

      Yes, I agree completely. We’re actually forced into kinda playing a long game.

      The way you ended reminds me of that observation popularly credited to Alexander Tytler:

      “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury.

      “From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising them the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.

      “The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence:

      “From bondage to spiritual faith;
      from spiritual faith to great courage;
      from courage to liberty;
      from liberty to abundance;
      from abundance to selfishness;
      from selfishness to apathy;
      from apathy to dependence;
      from dependency back again into bondage.”

      What stage do you reckon we’re in?

      • BrianR says:

        Yep. It’s a real problem.

        I’m 64. When I was a kid, my Dad worked, and Mom stayed home and took care of us kids, my sister and me. We had a new car periodically, owned a home, and lived a decent middle-class life.

        Absolutely not possible anymore. I don’t see how anyone could do that, unless the guy earned megabucks, or they were already independently wealthy.

      • AfterShock says:

        I just hate chains, they’re worse than seat belts; my neck gets all red and irritated, it’s hard to move around. So lets sing: Swing low, sweet chari-ah-ot, commin’ for to carry me home…

      • BrianR says:

        ALL TOGETHER NOW! Swi-i-ing low, sweet char-i-ot…


  22. BrianR says:

    Actually, I deal with that one all the time, like this:

    The 1986 Simpson-Mazzoli “one-time, never to be repeated” amnesty is a great example of what a boondoggle the idea is. In return for the amnesty, we were promised a secure border, a halt to further illegal incursions, and an employment verification system with sanctions against those who hire illegal aliens. What did we end up getting? The amnesty, and absolutely NOTHING else. Three million people amnestized, and here we are 27 years later talking about doing the same damned thing for at LEAST four times as many illegal aliens.

    A complete screw-job, which Reagan later lamented as one of the biggest mistakes of his presidency.

    Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on ME.

  23. AfterShock says:

    jamesdandy aka anarcho libertine

    • BrianR says:

      Really? You think so?

      If so, he’s managed to sneak by my spam filters. I’ll keep an eye out. When that guy posted here before, once he went over the line I deleted all his stuff and “spammed” him.

      I can always do it again.

      • AfterShock says:

        Yeah I do, well at least he’s being a gentleman now. So what’s the harm? The debate he presents is fine regardless the usual “Con-bashing” agenda.

      • BrianR says:

        Yup, that’s the bottom line.

  24. AfterShock says:

    Brian, FYI, anarcho-libertine is busted at drpete’s… Enjoy!

    • BrianR says:


      Well, I just read the exchange; thanks for the heads up.

      I’d say you’re right. I guess my spam screen was fooled by the WordPress blog log-in. Whatever. What he’s written here so far is civil, so it gets to stay as long as the discussions HERE stay civil. If that changes…….. well, that’s what the “delete” button’s real good at fixing.

      • AfterShock says:

        I agree! 100%

      • BrianR says:


        BTW, when are you going to write something new at your place? I swing by everyone on my Blog Roll at least a couple times a week, and it’s been a while.

    • BrianR says:

      AND it looks like “jamesdandy”, otherwise known as “Moshe The Brainless” (as he freely admitted) crossed that line. Hence, all his posts are now gone.

      • AfterShock says:

        Yes he posted on my blog yesterday as well — which I relegated to permanent spam — to fess up that it was he, moshe, but in fact there is little difference between he and anarchoneoconslayerpoldputzlibertine, as they were an inseperable tag team; and as our old friend tampadoc (Jim) always suspected, they were virtually one in the same. Obnoxious in the extreme.

      • BrianR says:

        I think they’re the same guy using different screen “personas”. Back in the day at my TH blog he admitted it on more than one occasion.

        TWICE as moronic as any sane individual. Two nuts in one.

  25. AfterShock says:

    And,.by the way, Brian, what we really need is a little “Jim Dandy to the rescue” not anarcho sayin’ FU……

    • BrianR says:

      You know how I feel about civility in the comments. I think I’ve made that crystal clear over the years. I’m with ya on that.

      • AfterShock says:

        That’s why your blog is so well respected Brian — you’re a man of unyielding principle.

      • BrianR says:

        Shocky… thank you. I very much appreciate your saying that, and am flattered.

  26. clyde says:

    Moshe and Anarcho. Two blasts from the past, bwahahahahaha. Shameless plug for tomorrow. One at breakfast, AND for lunch. For breakfast, we have YET ANOTHER DOE loan grantee failure. For lunch, I skewer the moron Eric Cantor.

  27. thedrpete says:

    I’m seeing quite a few tea parties starting to organize as I tried back in 2007 with GetAmericaRight (with which I failed), i.e., as PACs. Their focus is on finding, recruiting, and supporting truly-conservative/libertarian candidates for House and Senate in their districts and states. They’re trying to overcome the “lesser of two evils” dilemma.

    While that’s great, in my opinion, I still believe it’s too little and too late.

    • BrianR says:

      Could well be. Hard to say. But we need to try anything and everything, because the path we’re on is certainly a recipe for failure.

      Remember, we’re in a situation that very closely resembles the political scene in the 1850s in which the WHIGs were replaced by the GOP, the issue at the time being slavery. Emancipation was considered a very radical issue to base a political movement around, as surprising as that may seem today.

      • AfterShock says:

        Given em liberty was just a path to citizenship; then they’d be wantin the right to vote and interracial marriage, and that’d surely be the end of…? the man.

      • BrianR says:

        Uhhh…. huh…?

  28. Buck says:

    “Remember, we’re in a situation that very closely resembles the political scene in the 1850s in which the WHIGs were replaced by the GOP, the issue at the time being slavery.”

    Could abortion and the murder of unborn children be the issue this time?
    Could Gosnell trial be equivalent of “Uncle Tom’s Cabin”?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s