…because he’s one of them, in many ways. These papers practically fawn over Kasich, while slandering conservatives. For starters, the Boston Globe:
He has a record of pragmatic Midwestern conservatism, and has demonstrated an aptitude for the horse-trading and coalition-building that’s so lacking in today’s Washington. (It’s no small irony that one of Kasich’s finest accomplishments as a congressman — joining the bipartisan deal to impose a 10-year ban on assault weapons — is one that he barely mentions now.)
Well, how ’bout that. Then, of course, we have the infamous New York Times:
…he has been capable of compromise and believes in the ability of government to improve lives. He favors a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, and he speaks of government’s duty to protect the poor, the mentally ill and others “in the shadows.” While Republicans in Congress tried more than 60 times to kill Obamacare, Mr. Kasich did an end-run around Ohio’s Republican Legislature to secure a $13 billion Medicaid expansion to cover more people in his state.
Lovely… and telling. Moving on to Iowa, here’s the Quad City Times:
John Kasich is the poster-child for all thinking Republicans left behind by a party overrun by an irrational, seething fringe. The Ohio governor is the antithesis of the shrill, bigoted screaming heads dominating the Republican Party field. He should carry the GOP standard heading into November’s presidential election, if re-injecting reason into GOP rhetoric is of any concern.
Kasich won’t wage the dehumanizing ground war against immigrants looking for work. Kasich sees immigrants as human beings, supports bolstering U.S.-Mexico border security, while providing a much-needed pathway to legal status for the 11.5 million people already illegally in the U.S.
And in New Hampshire, the Keene Sentinel:
While in Congress, he voted for an assault weapons ban and favored background checks at gun shows.
In Ohio, he stood out as a Republican governor willing to implement the expansion of Medicaid services through the Affordable Care Act. Criticized by his former tea party supporters for the move, Kasich said two things that are indicative of his leadership style. He noted the program would be paid for mainly by the federal government, including with money Ohioans had sent to Washington and deserved to see return to the state. More to the point, he noted it was simply the right thing to do to help those most in need in his state. While opposing the ACA, he acknowledges that any reworking or replacing of that law needs to include continuing to care for those Americans who have gained coverage through the program.
…and the list goes on. In nearly every editorial supporting him, they laud his ‘pragmatism’ (read: selling out to the left) and trash conservatives at every turn. As I explained a couple of months ago, Kasich is no conservative, as evidenced by his demeanor, debate performances, and rhetoric. The betrayal on the 1993 Clinton ‘assault weapons’ ban is enough to exile him from consideration from the Presidency, no matter what good works he’s done as Governor. His (at best) checkered record on federal mandates, his failure to press for right-to-work legislation, his support for amnesty for illegal aliens (made exponentially worse by how he demonizes anyone interested in enforcing immigration law) and his embrace of Medicaid expansion all make him an absolute non-starter for conservatives. Let’s hope he’s out of the race after New Hampshire, the state he’s placing all his chips on.
Originally posted at The Bull Elephant.
I know a number of conservatives who read this site are going to disagree with me on this. They will be angry/disappointed/infuriated. I expect there will be threats to never read this site again.
OK, so be it.
I’ve never let that stop me from putting my thoughts down, and I refuse to do so now, so you’ve received fair warning. Your outrage and threats to leave will be met with the same scorn and ridicule heaped on anyone else who thinks they’re so important, that they need to issue a mighty YAWP! about their intent to boycott my blog.
I’m all about discussion and controversy, so I invite you to discuss and debate. For those of you who want to never come back… Bye, Felicia!
An interesting outrage/controversy/whatever you want to call it has caught my eye this morning. Apparently, there’s conservative outrage, because Fox/Google have invited an anti-Trump Muslim advocate and
an a formerly illegal alien who came here as a child, (edited to add information I should have previously researched about this woman) to be among those asking questions of GOP candidate, and that the RNC approved their appearance. Leading the outrage brigade this time around is Michelle Malkin and the always dependable Trump shills at Breitbart, and for the life of me, I can’t figure out what the outrage is about – two questioners out of…. however many questions will be asked in several hours are opponents of the GOP’s immigration views and Trump views on Islam! OH NOEZ!
Here’s the thing…
The same people who whine about the mainstream media being unabashedly biased are screeching when Fox and Google are at least making an attempt to be balanced in this debate.
This is a chance for the candidates to really shine and address some of the completely outlandish policies some of these people espouse, as well as advance the GOP point of view on these issues in a structured, orderly manner. Hell, some of these radical leftists might get a lesson they didn’t really expect. I’m all for that!
Are the GOP candidates really scared of addressing opposition questions? I would think not. I would think they will welcome the opportunity to reply to some of the more idiotic accusations that have been lobbed against them in a formal, mature manner. Is it so horrible to ensure that questions reflect a broad swath of the population? Are they really expecting us to believe that the other point of view doesn’t exist?
Hate to tell you this, people, but the President is not just YOUR president. He’s everyone’s president, despite what some of the more rabid Obama supporters will tell you. So yes, he will face tough questions from audiences. He will face tough questions from the media. Many of the reporters in the White House press corps are and will continue to be hardcore leftists. And guess what! The President will have to face them and answer their questions as directly and seriously as any others! Yes, even questions from the rabid amnesty supporters. Yes, even questions from supporters of the frothing advocates of the current administration’s refugee plans! Yes, even those who lob ridiculous assertions about “Islamophobia.”
So what is so outrageous about Fox/Google making the debate more challenging and more balanced, rather than lobbing the usual softball questions at the candidates, or trying to pit everyone against Trump?
I’ll tell you what. Not a damn thing.
But now, what you outrageatrons have provided is yet another excuse for Trump to pussy out of this debate. Whereas a few days ago he was whining about Megyn Kelly, he now has the opportunity to claim that he pulled out of the debate, because of some insane Fox/Google conspiracy to load the questioners with his opponents, as well as supporters of amnesty for illegals. Breitbart has already started the outrage machine.
Trump two days ago: I’m going to pull out of the debate, because, MEGYN KELLY IS MEAN!!!!
Internet: This guy is afraid of Megyn Kelly, but promises to face the Russians, Chinese, and Iranians? LULZ
Breitbart today: Oh, noez! Conspiracy! ANTI-TRUMP!!!!
How long before Trump’s campaign jumps on that bandwagon? Noooooo, it wasn’t Megyn Kelly. He’s not afraid of Megyn Kelly! It’s the total lack of fairness! Fox is unfair to him! They’ve loaded the debate with *GASP!* opponents – a whole two of them – and those opponents will be allowed to *GASP!* ask questions!
Bush dealt with some pretty vicious, many times unfair, reporters.
Every President does. It’s part of his job
If a presidential candidate can’t handle a couple of YouTube “celebrities” tossing a couple of questions in his direction, he (or she) does not deserve the post!
Fact is, I’m pretty sure, at least several of the candidates can easily answer the type of questions these illegal alien advocates and jihadist defenders with grace and aplomb, while advancing the GOP point of view with facts. And I’m pretty sure they will.
And that’s why I think the outrage is much ado about nothing.
Well, quite the shit storm I caused with my last blog post about Trump’s continued arrogance and antics!
Some came to berate me about my language, because apparently I won’t convince anyone if I hurl insults. I will once again remind my readers that I’m not out to convince. I’m not out to cajole. Nor am I out to win hearts and minds. Sorry, guys, but I just don’t give a damn.
This is my blog. I pay for it. I write it, with the help of a couple of great guys. But ultimately, I write it for me. In response to one of the commenters, I wrote the following regarding my posts on Trump.
Larry, I never write to convince anyone. In the “About” section of this blog, I have said this more than once. This blog is catharsis for me, as is writing. Sometimes people read it. Sometimes people like it. Sometimes people link to it. I blog because it’s fun.
The problem with Trumproids is that there’s no convincing them. His little joke about shooting someone in the middle of 5th Ave. has a grain of truth in it. You can show them all the information possible about him supporting Democrats, about him wanting to suppress freedom of speech, about him wanting to use government force against his fellow citizens, etc. etc. etc. ad nauseam. Problem is they don’t listen. So I’ve stopped trying. Now I just ridicule them, because there’s nothing left to do. They will do what they do, and no amount of factual information will stop them.
I stand by that assessment of Trump supporters. They came out in droves today to tell me how disingenuous I am, how I’m lying about him, how I’m perverting the truth about him, you name it. Just read the comments in last nights post! It’s as if they adopted his ever-so-bruised ego.
And what an ego it is!
I was watching Wolf Blitzer’s interview with Trump this morning, discussing whether or not he was going to skip the next debate, because Megyn Kelly bruised his labia.
“I’m not a big fan of hers at all. I don’t care,” said the candidate. “I mean … I might be the best thing that ever happened to her. Who ever even heard of her before the last debate?”
This is the same tactic Trump uses on other issues to boost his fragile ego. No one talked about immigration reform until he came along. Ben Carson is a loser, according to a Saturday Night Live promo Trump did a few months ago. Sure it was meant to be funny, I suppose, but it was petty and puerile more than anything. Carly Fiorina is much too ugly to be President, according to Trump. It goes on and on and on…
This particular claim about Megyn Kelly is especially amusing, given the fact that Kelly has been on Fox News Channel since 2004 and was named to Time magazine’s list of 100 Most Influential People in 2014 – all without Trump’s help. She’s been profiled in the New York Times, GQ, Elle Magazine, and others. Yeah, I’m fairly sure, millions of people knew who she was before the Toupee-Clad Narcissist came along.
What’s even more amusing is that Trump is throwing a fit, threatening to boycott the next debate, because tiny little Megyn Kelly is MEAAAAAN to him, and Fox has told him to piss up a rope.
Of course, every time he opens his cock holster, he has to walk something back. Like when he claimed – after his comments about Megyn Kelly bleeding out of her… – that he really meant eyes… Like when he walked back his comments about Carly Fiorina’s looks… Like he walked back comments on Muslim registration… It’s not what he meant. He was taken out of context. Blah, blah, blah.
So he’s walked back his threat to skip Thursday night’s debate.
Too bad. It would have been nice not to see his smirking maw, or see him contort his snatch every time he’s asked a question he doesn’t like.
And by the way, just to show you that the Trumproids really can’t ever tolerate criticism of their dumpster fire of a hero, no matter how accurate said criticism, I give you a smidgen of the comments from one of the reports about his whining about Kelly.
If a man criticizes a woman, no matter the validity of the criticism, it’s sexist. If a non-minority criticizes a minority, no matter the validity, it’s racist. Isn’t it nice for people who may be legitimate targets for criticism to have a Saul Alinsky-type defense, no matter how valid the criticism? That way, they don’t have to defend themselves against the criticism; they need only cry ‘sexist’ or ‘racist’ and, in their minds, end the argument. Pathetic.
You’d kind of think if you were going to make the charge that Trump is sexist, you’d have at least ONE piece of evidence or even an example. If you took Kelly’s name out of it, there is not one single word said by Trump that would indicate his criticism is aimed at a woman. Even so, criticizing a female is not sexism. I’m not a Trump guy but I am against the absolute insanity that the media has become. Journalism in America is truly dead. This article is absolutely worthless trash.
Nope. No proof that Trump is sexist. Except for the barbs about Fiorina’s looks. Except for the comments about Ariana Huffington’s looks. Except for his comment’s about Katy Tur as a reporter. Except when he made a smarmy comment to former playmate Brande Roderick about being on her knees.
Nope, none at all.
Expect another stampede of Trumproids defending their hero in 3… 2… 1…
UPDATE: Reuters reports that Trump has pulled out of the debate.
Trump’s campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, told reporters after a combative news conference held by the candidate that Trump would definitely not be participating in the debate scheduled for Thursday in Des Moines, Iowa, and co-hosted by Google .