Huh? They’re both for open borders.
Huh? They’re both for open borders.
1. “What difference does it make?”
2. Taking a big red plastic button over to Russia
3. I don’ kno’ nuffins ’bout no cattle futures
4. Forgiving Bill
Bowling Green, Kentucky
“Republicans haven’t gone to African-Americans or to Hispanics and said, ‘You know what? The war on drugs, Big Government, has had a racial outcome. It’s disproportionately affected the poor and the black and the brown,’” he said, on TheBlaze.
This has never been tried before.
Unless it has.
Two words: Jack Kemp.
Who averaged a BIG BIG BIG whopping 5% of the vote in Republican primaries and caucuses he actually tried to do well in when he ran for President in 1988. And when he was the Vice-Presidential nominee in 1996, he let wooden AL GORE of all people get the better of him in a debate. Kemp’s being on the bottom of the ticket that year probably didn’t get as much as one single black or Hispanic voter to change their vote from Clinton to Dole. And that was the first real chance that black and other non-white voters had to show their appreciation to Kemp for all of his years of pandering to them, as the only kind of elections he ever ran in before were in his own western NYS Republican-gerrymandered Congressional district, which hardly had any blacks or Hispanics, or in Republican Presidential primaries and caucuses in 1988, which blacks patronized about as well as they do bookstores. (In 1988, Jesse Jackson was a semi-credible contender on the Democrat side during their primary and caucus season, so black voters had an obvious skin interest there.) Yet, the kind of people Kemp so dearly cared about because they were all in one big jock shower together (his own words) strangely wanted nothing to do with him.
Now, back to Jack Kemp 2.0.
Rand Paul’s 2016 keynote issues?
* Allow felons to vote (*)
* Quasi-legalization of drugs
* Oppose the NON-ISSUE (**) of the use of armed drones on American territory
* Give tax breaks to non-taxpaying minorities
* And most of all, swing the borders wide open and give work permits to anyone on Earth who wants to come here and work, turning us all into wage slaves, well, all of us except for the top 1% of the top 1%.
Wow, there’s the path to victory.
No, there’s the path to LOSING, which is the opposite of WINNING. Which is why he’s getting more and more favorable coverage from the liberal media, save the WaPo, and the only reason they’re not on board is because they need to sell subscriptions in a city full of people that either work for the NSA or people that are related to or are friends with people that work for the NSA.
Nominate Rand Paul, LOSE.
Nominate Jeff Sessions, WIN.
(*) – Kentucky is one of the few states that have an almost absolute blanket prohibition on convicted felons voting. Which would come in handy if you’re running for Senate from the state of Kentucky in a close contest, wouldn’t it, Rand?
(**) – Note to peanut gallery: The Posse Comitatus Act of 1871 already makes illegal the use of armed drones on regular American territory. We won that battle 143 years ago. No need to re-fight it.
Catherine Hanaway is in for GOV-R-2016.
She was Missouri’s first Republican House Speaker when Republicans flipped the chamber in 2002. She ran for but lost Secretary of State to Mrs. Antolinez two years later. After that, Bush 43 made her U.S. Attorney for Eastern Missouri.
I would have been mildly enthusiastic for a Gubernatorial campaign of hers before she became U.S. Attorney, but her time as U.S. Attorney was less than stellar in my opinion and to put it lightly.
With the fall of Christie Soprano, the new establishment A-1 choice for 2016 is…
Sure, he might have suffered immensely with everyone else when he noodled along with the Gang Bangers of Eight, but that’s precisely what now makes him a donor/barnacle class favorite.
We find out here that Paul Ryan isn’t running, which means Rand Paul has that big big big 5% Jack Kemp constituency all by himself. He’s really on his way.
I swear, they’re making things so easy for Jeff Sessions to win the nomination that all he’ll have to do is declare and keep having a pulse.
When the Clintons sat in judgment, Claire McCaskill got the seat closest to the fire. Bill and Hillary had gone all out for her when she ran for Senate in Missouri in 2006. But McCaskill seemed to forget that favor when NBC’s Tim Russert asked her whether Bill had been a great president, during a “Meet the Press” debate against then-Sen. Jim Talent in October 2006.
“He’s been a great leader,” McCaskill said of Bill, “but I don’t want my daughter near him.”
Instantly, McCaskill regretted her remark; the anguish brought her “to the point of epic tears,” according to a friend. She knew the comment had sounded much more deliberate than a forgivable slip of the tongue. So did Hillary, who immediately canceled a planned fundraiser for McCaskill.
A few days later McCaskill called Bill Clinton to offer a tearful apology. Bill was gracious, which just made McCaskill feel worse. After winning the seat, she was terrified of running into Hillary Clinton in the Capitol. “I really don’t want to be in an elevator alone with her,” McCaskill confided to the friend.
But Hillary, who was just then embarking on her presidential campaign, still wanted something from McCaskill—the Missourian’s endorsement. Women’s groups, including EMILY’s List, pressured McCaskill to jump aboard the Clinton bandwagon, and Hillary courted her new colleague personally, setting up a one-on-one lunch in the Senate Dining Room in early 2007. Rather than ask for her support directly, Hillary took a softer approach, seeking common ground on the struggles of campaigning, including the physical toll. “There’s a much more human side to Hillary,” McCaskill thought.
Obama, meanwhile, was pursuing her too, in a string of conversations on the Senate floor. Clearly, Hillary thought she had a shot at McCaskill. But for McCaskill, the choice was always whether to endorse Obama or stay on the sidelines. In January 2008 she not only became the first female senator to endorse Obama but she also made the case to his team that her support would be amplified if Govs. Kathleen Sebelius and Janet Napolitano came out for him at roughly the same time.
McCaskill offered up a small courtesy, calling Hillary’s personal aide, Huma Abedin, ahead of the endorsement to make sure it didn’t blindside Hillary.
But the trifecta of women leaders giving Obama their public nod was a devastating blow. Hate is too weak a word to describe the feelings that Hillary’s core loyalists still have for McCaskill, who seemed to deliver a fresh endorsement of Obama—and a caustic jab at Hillary—every day during the primary.
And why did all these prominent women break early for Obama over HRC? Because…Reverse Queen Bee Syndrome aka Female Crabs in a Bucket Syndrome.
As someone who was on the other side of Claire McCaskill’s ledger in 2012, from my vantage point, she got absolutely no help from Clinton, Inc. that year.
Many of the other names on the traitor side of the ledger were easy to remember, from Ted Kennedy to John Lewis, the civil rights icon whose defection had been so painful that Bill Clinton seemed to be in a state of denial about it. In private conversations, he tried to explain away Lewis’s motivations for switching camps midstream, after Obama began ratcheting up pressure for black lawmakers to get on “the right side of history.”
Lewis, because of his own place in American history and the unique loyalty test he faced with the first viable black candidate running for president, is a perfect example of why Clinton aides had to keep track of more detailed information than the simple binary of for and against. Perhaps someday Lewis’s betrayal could be forgiven.
Ted Kennedy (another seven on the hit list) was a different story.
He had slashed Hillary worst of all, delivering a pivotal endorsement speech for Obama just before the Super Tuesday primaries that cast her as yesterday’s news and Obama as the rightful heir to Camelot. He did it in conjunction with a New York Times op-ed by Caroline Kennedy that said much the same thing in less thundering tones. Bill Clinton had pleaded with Kennedy to hold off, but to no avail.
John Lewis is easy to explain — Race race race race race. Ted Kennedy endorsing Obama over HRC is harder to figure, but I think I know the answer, though it might be an answer he took to his grave so we’ll never be able to confirm in this world — One hint to the answer is the use of the word “Camelot” here. The only Kennedy that was ever President was John, and only for 1,036 days. If HRC would have been elected President in 2008, it would have meant that the Clintons would have instantly become more of a credible Democrat Presidential dynasty than the Kennedys, by definition of two different Clintons winning the White House as opposed to just one Kennedy. If I’m right, look for either an above or below the surface jihad from the remaining living political Kennedys to bring down HRC when the Presidential campaign season begins in the second half of next year going into early 2016.
Paul Ryan to Republicans: ‘Go into inner cities, go into minority communities’
Former vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan thinks Republicans need to take their limited-government message to voters who are “unfamiliar with hearing us.”
“Go into inner cities, go into minority communities,” Ryan, who speaks in Iowa tonight, told The Des Moines Register in a telephone interview on Monday. “Go into communities that have not seen or heard from Republicans in a long time.”
You know why they “haven’t heard it in a long time?” (Even though they’re telling us that we have to do this seemingly every other day). It’s because it has already been done, and failed spectacularly.
This was the playbook for one of Paul Ryan’s mentors, that being Jack Kemp, when he ran for President in 1988, and doing so while only a Congressman, as Ryan would be if he runs in 2016, presuming he wins re-election to another term in Congress in 2014, (hopefully some immigration patriot will knock him out). And how well did it work? Kemp won no states, averaged 5% in primaries while he was actually running and supposedly “competitive,” and 2.72% or 331k votes overall, the percentage inevitably decreased after he dropped out, because, you know, constantly getting 5% of the primary vote in each state isn’t going to win you many Presidential nominations.
The only big difference this time is that the immigration issue is hot now while it wasn’t in 1988, so Ryan is making “immigration reform” (amnesty and open borders) a centerpiece of his speculative Presidential campaign, the same amnesty and open borders we just screamed at the top of our lungs to stop at least for awhile.
He’ll be lucky to get 5% in his own state much less any state with that as his prime issue.
Christie got 51% of the Hispanic vote. (Except he won’t get anywhere near that among Hispanics versus the Democrat nominee in a Presidential race). Even if Mitt Romney got 51% of the Hispanic vote, keeping everything else the same, (and that’s not possible in the real world), he still would have lost.
And how did Christie even get to 51% of the Hispanic vote? By supporting ObamaCare, by being for amnesty and open borders, by appointing a temporary Senate replacement “Republican” (Jefferey Chisea) that voted for the Gang Bangers of Eight bill, by hearting Obama. IOW, by being a Democrat. He can do that and not lose any white votes in a state with a severe dearth of white conservative voters like New Jersey, but that won’t play among Republican primary and caucus goers in most of the country, nor among the same trying to turn them out the following November.
The “HRC might not be so inevitable” bandwagon is starting to fill up.
But who does New Republic think is the answer to “if not Hillary then….?”
Answer: The Dime Store Indian.
Pardon me? Gender sociology is part of what wrecked HRC in 2008 — The Dime Store Indian is also a woman, and not much younger than HRC, so she too will be subject to the same social pressure.
I still think it’ll be Mark Warner.
I’ve never believed the notion that some of our favorite websites have been pushing that Romney picked Paul Ryan as a running mate at the behest of consultants, barnacles and donors. I’ve tended to the theory that Romney elevating younger “talent” like Ryan up the ladder ahead of what is considered normal schedule was a feature of his managerial style in the world of business.
Drudge today has been splashing heavy this Time expose mainly about what scared the Romney campaign away from Krispy Christie, but in passing, my sensibilities have been confirmed:
Mitt meditated on the choice that now seemed inevitable: Ryan. Beyond all the political pros and cons, Romney felt comfortable with Paul. He reminded Mitt of junior partners he used to work with at Bain: eager, earnest, solicitous, smart and not at all threatening. Bob White had a phrase for these buttoned-down go-getters, which he applied to Ryan: “client-ready.”
That will get missed, but at least the good news is that dirty laundry is starting to show up re Christie. Not soon enough to keep him from winning a second term as New Jersey Governor on Tuesday, but this will very likely seriously hurt his Presidential chops.
And as a Jeff Sessions guy, that suits me just fine.
Great idea, nominate a northeastern moderate.
If Romney loves Christie so much, why did he pick Ryan instead of Christie? The first link in this story answers all.
I still think that given enough time, Democrats will blink first, because their own activist groups are dependent on the kinds of Federal spending that is not happening.
But why are they going to hold out for awhile?
It’s as simple as this:
Democrats think that if they blink first, Ted Cruz is the next President of the United States.
Personally, I don’t think it’s that nice and neat an easy, but I’m thinking for myself and not for any elected Democrat.
Cape Girardeau, Salem
No URL yet for corroboration, but I can confirm because I have my ear to the right kind of ground: Kindercare will very likely run next year in MO-8 and try to take down Jason Smith in the Republican Primary, the same Jason Smith who beat Kindercare in that famous eight-ballot caucus of the Republican central committee for MO-8 last year to determine the Republican nominee for the special election that was called after Jo Ann Emerson quit Congress to take a lobbying job.
I wonder if this means that Kindercare is mentally checking out of the race for Governor in 2016. If he is, then that’s big news, because it was looking like until today that Kindercare as Republican nominee for Governor in ’16 was pretty much a done deal. If he’s out, that opens things up quite a bit. I have a theory about a dark horse.
However, Kindercare doesn’t have to quit being Lieutenant Governor to run for Congress next year. If he can’t topple Jason Smith, then he remains in that office, meaning he’s still in okay position to run for Governor in 2016. Problem is, I think that if he loses to Smith again but in a different political venue, I think he’ll be damaged goods for 2016 even if he’s still one heartbeat way from being Governor. If he beats Smith and goes to Congress, why would he spend a few months in Congress then come right back home to start campaigning for Governor? This is why I think he’s giving up on the Governor’s Mansion.
Speaking of Jason Smith, H/T MOPNS:
So I’m sitting at my desk eating my brown bag lunch, listening to Rush, and he just now said that HRC won’t be the Democrat nominee in 2016.
I thought it and made-for-TV movies were dead, too, because hiring non-WGA writers to write one crummy unwatchable “reality” “show” after another was light on the nets’ bottom lines.
The only thing that will ineviably be missing from this HRC miniseries on NBC? The “I’m Hillary Clinton, and I approved this message” disclaimer at the end.
And also…this won’t make CNN happy.
Just like 2007 for the most part. How’d that turn out?
Claire McCaskill has already endorsed HRC for 2016, which is curious because she was an early adopter of Obama back in 2007. I interpreted her and many other white women Democrats going for Obama over HRC relatively early in the process as an indication of Queen Bee Syndrome, an example of HRC’s taboo gender sociology problems that I think will present again in 2016.
And also…don’t blame me. Todd Akin wouldn’t be endorsing HRC right now. Oh no.
Your Blogmeister’s Desk
Everyone is saying that HRC as the Democrat nominee in 2016 is inevitable. But HRC as the Democrat nominee in 2008 was also supposed to be inevitable. Yet, she didn’t win, someone came out of left field to take what was inevitably hers from her. Other than Obama being both black and “not too black” at the same time, I think there’s some unspoken undiscussed and maybe taboo reason/X-Factor that HRC couldn’t win the nomination in 2008, that I think is going to show its head again in 2016. Maybe it has something to do with gender sociology of some sort, maybe it has something to do with Democrat voters not taking kindly to her entitlement attitude, maybe it has something to do that unlike the Republican Party on the Presidential level, the Democrat Party on the Presidential level has been more conducive to people “coming out of left field” to win the nomination, or maybe it’s a factor nobody really knows anything about.
As far as 2016 Democrats, watch out for Mark Warner.
One more thing: The only kind of Republican that can win the Presidency from here on out is one that makes immigration patriotism (opposition to amnesty and open borders) a centerpiece of his or her campaign. If the Republicans nominate an open borders type or a squishy no-opinion-on-the-issue type in 2016 and later, that will only guarantee the election of whoever the Democrat is.
By “gender sociology” wrecking HRC’s candidacy, I mean either the female crabs in a bucket syndrome (women having the catty hen house dislike of another woman and therefore not wanting to see the other woman get ahead), queen bee syndrome (powerful women who prevent other potentially powerful women from accumulating too much power, evidenced in 2007-8 by all the white women elected politicians who endorsed Obama over HRC early), the polar opposite of queen bee syndrome (semi-powerful political women didn’t want to see a woman President because they subconsciously knew she would start acting queen bee and that would be the end of their own advancement — To wit: A President Hillary Clinton would appoint as few women as possible to Cabinet level and other important executive positions), or maybe Rush’s theory that nobody wanted to watch an already upper middle aged woman grow old quickly in the public eye (the Presidency is a job that ages you in a hurry), and the “old” look looks more authoritative and power-indicative on men than it does on women, or maybe that there is really a glass ceiling underneath the Oval Office (people, both men and women, don’t want to put a woman in command of the world’s most powerful military — My own mother has said as much, that there should be no woman President as long as our military is that powerful), or maybe there are other factors I can’t even fathom.
The reason I’m all of a sudden saying watch out for Mark Warner to come out of left field is that Andrew Cuomo is too creepy, Biden’s a non-starter because his two previous Presidential campaigns, 1988 and 2008, were also non-starters, and he’s too much of a doofus/spaz, and of course, like I said, HRC’s failure to launch in 2008 for whatever reason will re-present in 2016, and that leaves Warner.
Brit Hume, WTF?
BARBARA BUSH isn’t ready for another Bush. Why should the whole country be?
$14M set for Hill’s new book
Hillary Rodham Clinton inked a deal to write a new book that will come out at the height of the political season next summer, amid industry speculation that her advance could hit $14 million.
Although Clinton has already penned four books, this one has DC buzzing that it could be a launching pad for a second presidential campaign.
Clinton got an $8 million advance for her previous book, while hubby Bill Clinton got $15 million for his memoir, “My Life.”
The new untitled memoir will chronicle Hillary’s “key decisions and experiences as Secretary of State,” according to her publisher, Simon & Schuster. (Emphasis added)
It will cover the killing of Osama bin Laden, the Arab Spring, China, and Libya. The timing of the release in 2014 will put Clinton on a national book tour just as presidential campaigns are organizing.
I highly doubt this book’s sales will be brisk enough to justify $14m of royalties from S&S to HRC. So why is S&S ponying up so much so soon?
HRC probably still has outstanding 2008 campaign debt, so this will help her pay that off and whatever is left over will help seed her 2016 candidacy. S&S is a division of CBS Corporation, a multimedia conglomerate with a lot of assets and a lot of interests. CBS Corporation, vicariously through S&S, is buying HRC so that she doesn’t sign any legislation harmful to them or uses her influence to push legislation and policy that helps them if she becomes President.
Plain words, we know that CBS News will basically become a PR arm of the HRC for President in 2016 organization. Because, CNN has already chosen its candidate.
He’ll never get it.
I’m just might have enough steam left in me to get one more call back from Kris Kobach. If and when he does, I’m going to try to talk him into running for President in 2016 directly from the Kansas Secretary of State office. This immigration issue is too important to wait around for Governor or Senate in Kansas to open up, neither will in 2014. The immigration issue is too important to wait around on some “protocol” that you have to have been this or that before you can be President. He will almost likely win a second term as SoS next year very easily. And WTH — Secretary of State is just as much a statewide elected office as Senator or Governor. He would go into the 2016 campaign season with two statewide election wins under his belt, which is actually what a lot of candidates covet, and which would be more than what many of the 2016 “contenders” have — Rand Paul and Marco Rubio would both only have one statewide election win by then, and in fact, depending on their states’ laws, would have to choose between running for re-election to the Senate and running for President.
One more thing: Rand is actually hurting his own chances to win the Republican nomination by doing this. The big money interests that benefit from open borders also want nothing to do with Rand’s semi-isolationist foreign policy. Especially when there will be choices in the 2016 Republican field who are both for amnesty/open borders AND neo-con FoPo adventurism. (Cough cough, Jeb Bush, cough cough)
Crazy ass off the wall theory on my part.
The Republican end of the open borders lobby really wants Jeb Bush in 2016. But his last name is still “Bush.”
Could it be they’re talking up Rubio now to bird dog for their real wish, Jeb Bush?
What I mean by that is by late 2015, Rubio will be talked about so much that he’ll already be old worn out news, and there will already be tons of negative baggage out there on him and his name, because someone, some leftist, some MSNBC-type media prick, or someone, will search for some dirt and inevitably find it. Meanwhile, there will be Jeb Bush, relatively “fresh” but more ironically more experienced (consummated two-term Governor of a swing state, rhetorically polished, “solid” political legacy), there to “save the day.”
Tell me I’m all wet.
Trenton, New Jersey
Read it, then come back.
Good, you came back. You didn’t run out on me.
Other than their usual mischief, I think Democrats in the New Jersey legislature are trying to put the king piece called Chris Christie into political checkmate for 2016. If he signs this bill, he’s signed away any chance to win the Republican nomination, and at least in these Democrats’ minds, one of the best Republican chances to win the White House in 2016. If he doesn’t, and wins the Republican nomination somehow, then they’ve created ammunition (no pun intended) for Hillary or Cuomo or Warner or Biden or whoever wins the Democrat nomination to use against him.
I guess Rubio and Krispy Christie are engaged in a race to the bottom to see who can appeal to the low information crowd better.
Meaning: Booker is punting his Presidential ambitions to 2020 or later.
Meaning also: The only two real possibilities for Dem-Prez in ’16 are now Andrew Cuomo and Mark Warner. Biden is the incumbent Vice-Messiah, but his two Presidential campaigns (1988, 2008) never really went anywhere, and I don’t see any of the sociopolitical reasons which led to his own two candidacies going nowhere changing four years hence, just because he’s the incumbent Vice-Idiot. Even if HRC does run, nobody is going to want to watch a (by then) almost 70 year old woman grow elderly in the public eye day in and day out doing a job that ages you in a hurry. Like Biden’s own failed campaigns, HRC also has a failed Presidential run on her resume, and my analysis is still the same: That which caused her to fail in 2008 won’t subside much by 2016.
Meaning also: Look for the New Jersey Democrats to offer Laut a lot of candy to retire so that the Next Great Mulatto Messiah Hopeychanger can slide right in.
Meaning also: There is a Republican dark horse that could stand in Booker’s way. I’ve been talking her up ever since Krispy Christie picked her as his running mate for Governor in 2009. She is current Lieutenant Governor Kim Guadagno, formerly a Sheriff of a northern NJ county, liberal on most things but has a very good immigration record, at least while as Sheriff. If ’14 is a red wave election season, then this filly is more light than dark.
Newt essentially crowns HRC the 45th President. Stinkin’ election? We don’t need no stinkin’ election.
But whatever problems bedevil the country from 2017 to 2021, she will have inherited them from Bush.
Yes, I did have a chance to meet Newt during the Todd Akin campaign, namely Newt’s trip to town to campaign for us in Kirkwood. Everyone has these lofty expectations of Newt now, thanks to some of his good campaign debates and speeches from the primary and caucus season. The problem is, Newt seemed disappointingly average both that day in Kirkwood and during his RNC speech (where he showed up with the same wife he had nine months before, some sort of Newt record). I get the sense that Newt is the kind of guy that takes a long time to get going, his train will take a long time to warm up at the station, and it will pull out slowly and accelerate slowly. But once he gets going, he really lets it rip. There’s a catch, though: Any random branch or twig on the tracks will easily derail him.
Plain words, the days of the zany Newt we all know and love so much, the one that can parlay an unbuilt interstate highway, colonies on the moon, and the day being the anniversary of some semi-significant political or military event that Newt and only Newt cares about, are long gone.
And no, my estimation of him has not improved simply because he picked the right horse in MO-SEN 2012. He can’t erase all the incompetence at best slash treachery at worst from the days when he actually had political power. Mike Huckabee is another one: Why he was ever on board our train is a mystery to me, and why we ever loved him for it is another mystery, save the conventional wisdom that we needed him to win southern Missouri because it’s close to Arkansas. First off, we didn’t need Huck for that, second, it has been ten years since Huck won a relevant election in Arkansas that resulted in him having political power. Todd was strong immigration control and mildly anti-interventionist foreign policy through and through, while Huckabee was full throated invade the world invite the world in hock to the world.
L to R, top to bottom: Sen. Kelly Ayotte (NH), Michele Bachmann, Jeb Bush, Krispy Christie, Gov. Nimrata Randhawa (SC), Gov. Piyush Jindal (LA), Gov. Susana Martinez (NM), Gov. Bob McDonnell (VA), Rand Paul, Gov.-Elect Mike Pence (IN), Rickroller, Sen. Rob Portman (OH), Marco Rubio, Eddie Munster, Gov. Brian Sandoval (NV), Rickroller II, Jon Cryer, Gov. Scott Walker (WI).
I had to provide a caption. Most people don’t know who any of these people are. And, most people would presume that persons number five and six were people with poor English speaking skills yet mysteriously named “Cindy” and “Mark” whom they had to speak with on the phone recently to resolve a customer service issue.
I figure the first debate with 18 podiums will be some time this summer, where Candy Crowley and George Stephanopoulos will ask them one clown question after another about contraceptives and the age of the Earth and underwear and Aqua Buddha and musical instruments and smartphone apps and transubstantiation and love letters and civility and fused sweaters.
And also…no breaks. Notice I already had to create a “Campaign 2016″ category.