» cfbleachers

The PJ Tatler


Follow cfbleachers:

Safe Sects: America Needs Protection, But From What?

Thursday, March 15th, 2012 - by cfbleachers

The Republican Party is lurching forward through it’s clumsy foreplay, also known as its “primary.” The early stages of speed dating its way through the rich guy with bad hair and a big ego, the smooth talking “playah”, the hunk who needed Cyrano to whisper answers in his ear, the hot chick with 27 kids at home…and now we are down to four.

As we contemplate who we want as our final date, it might help to compare and contrast what we need with what they offer.

America needs protection. The Republicans are offering four separate and distinct methods of prophylaxis.

1) Isolation/world celibacy: You can’t get into any trouble if you hide from the rest of the world. Disengage. Being cranky and wanting to be left alone, the Hermit Crab approach to world affairs, is certainly effective in keeping away suitors. And, most sane people. This Safe Sects division offers us protection from interaction with enemies, friends, allies, and everyone except aliens. Which brings us to our next entry.

2) Mooning the Future, Zero Gravity Romp. With gas prices as high as they are, rocket fuel may wind up being the cheaper alternative one day soon. Everybody Wang Chung tonight has an appeal that appears to be fading a bit. Mr. Thrill a Minute and Mr. Idea a Minute seem to be related. No staying power. It’s all over before it begins. This is the American Pie division of the Republican Safe Sects.

3) Hold me, scold me, mama told me. The Chastity Belt for America. At a time when people wish to be fitted for a new money belt, this one chafes a bit on some folks. It comes with a finger-wagging instructional video and a DVD on how to pull pork.

4) Lucky Stiff. Although we got rid of the rich guy with bad hair, we still have in contention the rich guy with good hair. It does not appear that much is needed in the way of protection here, he gives every appearance he is shooting blanks.

America needs protection for the small c communist virus it has contracted over the last three years. NONE of these candidates offers much in the way of protection. In fact, the Republican Party as a whole seems completely oblivious to what has happened inside our DOJ, the NLRB, the Dept. of Energy, Treasury, and how virulent the spread of this disease has become.

Capitalism is under vicious assault. The free market is in free fall. Our natural resources are being squandered. Our military is being gutted. Our liberties are under assault. The Constitution is being shredded.

Is contraception the key issue? Sex on the moon? Isolationism the answer? We need someone to protect us at the core of our national structure. And we have been offered a crank, a skank, a spank and a blank.

Lord, save us from our protectors. And send us a hero.

Read bullet | Comments »

Stroking Beards While Shaving Reality

Wednesday, March 14th, 2012 - by cfbleachers

For all intents and purposes, no matter what anyone else says, Alabama and Mississippi were three way ties.

It did not matter that Santorum got a few thousand more votes or that Gingrich got 28% or that Romney wound up with about a third of the delegates available.

Well, largely doesn’t matter. Sure, each one can spin some politi-scat that it means “this” or it means “that”. It doesn’t.

What it means it that none of these candidates appeals to the very, very, very distinct segments of the non-Obama contingent in the South.

Fervent Evangelicals break hard against Romney. The lower income, lower educated, do as well. They don’t connect with him and it is unlikely they ever will.

The highly educated, highly successful urban and suburban Republican prefer Romney over the other candidates.

This three way race between the Metrosexual, the MicroSexual and the OmniSexual candidates, (Ron Paul being an isolationist leaves him master of his own domain), leaves one asking the morning after once again, “Is that all there is?”

There is much beard stroking about how Romney needs to “regroup” or that Santorum has “momentum” or that Gingrich needs to decide whether to drop out. Uh, no.

In states that have a dominant metro-suburban voter casting votes, Romney will win.

In states that have fervent faith-based folks who care deeply about social issues and tend to resent “moderates”, Santorum is going to edge out Gingrich and beat Romney.

On and on we bumble forward, state by state, inch by inch, delegate by delegate.

Santorum will never capture the hearts and minds of those who cringe at what they see as his invasion of the body snitchers, being a scold, or his schoolmarmish approach to sexual issues.

Gingrich wants to transform civilization. Here, and inter-galactically. He sees himself as the great and mighty wizard behind the curtain, pulling levers and ruling Oz. That’s inspiring to many. And, frightening to many. And, comical to many. The latter two categories make up too large a contingent to overcome. He won’t get out of the race until it’s no longer fun to pull all those levers. Or, he loses his one donor.

Then there’s Romney Dangerfield. He can’t get no respect. He’s the guy people are voting for, whose real guys are sitting on the sidelines. They want Paul Ryan, Mitch Daniels, Chris Christie, John Thune, ..one of the A-Teamers. He’s the “least worst” for the  none of the above crowd.

Quite a ringing endorsement.

We are going to Tampa. Still fractured, still dis-united, still with the exact same split, in the exact same manner, over and over again.

People can keep stroking their beards and try to shave reality, but it won’t change this plain fact. None of these guys can capture the other’s base before Tampa. And we will have Groundhog Day until the end of August.

Read bullet | Comments »

America: The Turnaround Client

Saturday, March 3rd, 2012 - by cfbleachers

America is in need of a turnaround.

Perhaps more to the point, the Republican Party is in need of a turnaround. Desperately.

No, I am not speaking about Mitt Romney today. During this primary had I hired Romney (or any of the other Sisyphean rock pushers to date), I would have fired him for gross incompetence at the task of turnaround management of the Republican Party and for lack of building the proper plan for the turnaround of America.

“It must be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to
plan, more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to manage
than the creation of a new system. For the initiator has the enmity
of all who would profit by the preservation of the old institutions
and merely lukewarm defenders in those who would gain by the
new ones. The hesitation of the latter arises in part from the fear
of their adversaries, who have the laws on their side, and in part
from the general skepticism of mankind which does not really
believe in an innovation until experience proves its value. “

“There is no surer sign of decay in a country than to see the rites of religion held in contempt”

“Now, in a well-ordered republic, it should never be necessary to resort to extra-constitutional measures”

(Niccolo Machiaveli)


I quote the three items above because I believe that both Breitbart and Machiavelli are misunderstood. For both, “the ends justify the means” is taken out of context.

Machiavelli and Breitbart were turnaround specialists. The ignorant would cheapen what they did and more particularly, would demean specific tactics used or the poorly understood “philosophy” behind the turnaround attempt.

As we watch the diminution of religion and the constitution by the Fabian in the White House and his cabal of small c communists in his administration, the propaganda machine, Hollywood and academia, we should heed the words of Machiavelli and take stock of the actions of Breitbart.

It is not merely that the ends justify the means, it is that salvation justifies truth. The lukewarm defenders of our sacred honor pose the larger of the two issues we confront.

A new system that cherishes truth, honor and in support of them, a new “system” that contains the courage to overcome the intentional destruction of liberty will not come via lukewarm defenders.

We need not fear the heat of battle against those who mean to destroy us, but the tepid waters of those on “our side” who bathe in hesitation, naysaying, and appeasement to the enemies of freedom.

We must learn this lesson by August. Or learn to live with the consequences.

We need a turnaround. Machiavelli and Breitbart were misunderstood. Let us not be.

Read bullet | Comments »

Scama Lama Ping Pong

Friday, March 2nd, 2012 - by cfbleachers

Fire up the teleprompter, there’s a speech coming up that has a divining rod attached to it,  in search of Jewish money in a desert of suspicion and marked hesitation.

Obamarillo Slim has just announced he does not bluff. That’s probably a good idea for an administration that has repeatedly given the appearance that it isn’t playing with a full deck most of the time. Bluffing requires skill, lying is often simply pathological.

And when it comes to Israel, this administration all too often deals from the bottom.

Joe “Deadwood” Biden and Obamarillo Slim once again are out to prove that sometimes nothing is a real cool hand. In fact, virtually all the time in their case.

The teleprompter is going to be cranked up and this time at AIPAC, it is going to read out a nice song along with the sweet nothing whisperings in the ears of any wallet not hermetically sealed in that room.

If I searched the whole wide world
I’d never, never, never
find me a pearl
Who’d back me
The way that you do
Cause your

Scama lama
Obamalama scama ping pong
Bibi huh
You put the
ooh mou mou
back into my style, child

Hey that is why
You are my sugar daddy doo

It’s a high stakes game, with a nuclear Iran going all in. Obamarillo Slim and his trusty sidekick Deadwood are penny ante thinkers. They have been mucking their hand for three years. Israel has little choice. It must play at this table and it can’t pass.

Unless Bibi wants to continue to be swatted yet again in the next Scama Lama Ping Pong move by this administration, Israel has to ignore the teleprompter with a vengeance

The House odds are too steep to do anything else.

There are no partners at this game. Israel is completely abandoned. Until November, they can’t trust anything that they are told, nothing that they are promised and less that they can depend upon. Iran smells weakness and fear in this White House.  Capitulation is in the air.   Surrender is on the table.

They simply won’t fold. They have read Obamarillo and Deadwood’s tells.  And, that’s all they need to know.



Read bullet | Comments »

A Night For Leaping, A Day to March

Thursday, March 1st, 2012 - by cfbleachers

When beggars die, there are no comets seen;
The heavens themselves blaze forth the death of princes.

Cowards die many times before their deaths;
The valiant never taste of death but once.

Around midnight on a date that only comes once every four years, Andrew Breitbart ventured out to face the darkness while we slumbered.

That was his way.

There is indeed a darkness descending upon us this first day of March. And still we slumber through it.

Do we tremble still at what we think we see? We speak in whispers and cast furtive glances, squinting with unbelieving eyes. No, no. We mustn’t speak so boldly. We should not be so brash.

Half measured and muted tones or else we will be scorned.

In this darkness we curl and and wait. Treading lightly and praying that when we wake someone else will have guarded the gates.

Andrew prowled the grounds in that darkness for us. We rear guard. Perhaps his last act was but a message.

It is a year to leap. It is the first day of our March. Forward, always forward.

Let the heavens blaze forth. Awake from our slumber. The day is upon us, let no man slumber upon this country’s freedoms. Face the darkness and call it by its proper name. Communism.

Read bullet | Comments »

Newt Back in the Loot

Friday, February 17th, 2012 - by cfbleachers

There is strong evidence brewing that Sheldon Adelson is going to give Newt’s Pacmen another $10 million.

It’s not evident how he intends to use it, however.

Promoting moon colonies and hurling insults at Romney were clearly not doing the trick.

He is going to have to capture the deep South to be relevant again and crawl back up from the Ron Paul mid-teen terrain.

Santorum is a target on several fronts (big labor, earmarks, hard core social issues) but Gingrich has shot his wad on negativity on Romney.

The big labor/earmarks issues are absolutely viable, but they aren’t the type of issues that get blood boiling. Without a hot button to press, Gingrich needs a different approach.

He needs to bait Santorum and get Santorum to bite. But will he?

Not likely. Gingrich has money to get all dressed up, with likely no place to go. It does do enough to get him through SuperTuesday.

If he can win a couple of southern states, he can get us to a convention in a three legged sad sack race.

Read bullet | Comments »

The One Man in America Who Is Trying to be a Leader

Wednesday, February 15th, 2012 - by cfbleachers

“Some say that America lacks leadership, but that isn’t entirely correct. We have any number of excellent leaders in the public sector, among whom Paul Ryan ranks at or near the top. The problem is that our real leaders’ ability to effect real change is stymied by the empty suits in locations like 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.”

So says John Hinderaker at Powerline, and I agree with him.

He quotes the opening statement of Paul Ryan and it is eloquent, it is graceful, it is powerful and every word of it is true.

“The real source of dysfunction in the Senate comes from members of the President’s own party, who have been unwilling – for almost three years now – to go on record in support of his budgets, or to pass budgets of their own.

More to the point, it wasn’t so long ago that the President’s party held total control of the White House and both branches of Congress – during which time his agenda was enacted in near totality:
* massive new spending and taxes
* the creation of new, open-ended entitlements
* a regulatory onslaught that hurt the economy
* and trillions of dollars in new debt.”

You should really read it all here.

It is so refreshing to hear an adult deliver a message that ALL members of the opposition to the small c communists can get behind.

Too bad we simply aren’t getting that from ANY of the candidates.

The ONE candidate who actually has the ability, talent, skill set to deliver a powerful message, has imploded so badly, he has now reached the level of being ridiculed.

Ability to carry the message forward is a key element in winning the war for minds of voters in a rigged game against a propaganda machine and its party.

Ryan/Rubio have shown great skills in this arena. And, a comportment of both that has grace and elegance. Which is obviously and patently so…missing in these primaries.

The effects of which we are seeing in the skyrocketing negatives which cannot be denied with any credibility. The Republican brand is taking a beating. And THAT will hurt down ticket as well.

Read bullet | Comments »

What I Don’t Want In A Presidential Candidate (Part II)

Sunday, February 12th, 2012 - by cfbleachers

The ground rules here are to list the negative things I would like to avoid in a candidate.

I’m not looking for someone “perfect”. Or someone that has to pass an all encompassing “purity” test. I just put the balance of positives and negatives on the scales and weigh them.

Some items are more important to me. If I believe you can’t beat Obama, that’s a disqualifier, for instance. If I believe you can’t articulate a clear sentence, I weigh that heavily against you. If I don’t believe a word you say, no matter how nice sounding, I won’t endorse your candidacy. If I think your “posse” includes neo-Nazi, Jew-hating, white supremacists….you’re toast with me.

What I don’t want in a presidential candidate are the following:

1) I don’t want someone attacks America as a foundational platform.

2) I don’t want someone who attacks the free market, capitalism for cheap political gain.

3. I don’t want to be lectured on how to morally live my life by someone who can’t lead by example.

4. My faith is a private matter, I don’t want to be converted to another faith. Lead and I may follow. Push, and expect pushback.

5. If you are blaming America for all the actions of her enemies, you are not fit to lead her or be Commander in Chief of her armies.

6. If you can’t string two sentences together without getting lost in a haze of rambling idiocy, you can’t speak as leader of the free world.

7. If you can’t comport yourself with dignity, grace, elegance, and stand above the deranged frittering of fanatical and rabid internet trolls, you are fit only to join them, not lead them.

8. If you think you are bigger than the presidency itself, than the country or its people, you are too delusional to lead any of them.

7. If you flutter from idea to idea with no grounding, no baseline, no stability, you are a danger to yourself and others if placed into a position of power. You will take yourself and us down an erratic and irrational path too often.

8. If you don’t understand the threat of a radicalized DOJ, the ACORN/SEIU dangers, the NLRB assault on the free market, the dangers of border crashing and organized crime that results from it, the unsustainable path of overloading the system with entitlement gunk…you can’t lead the country.

9. If you are afraid to take on the propaganda machine, you can’t possibly be brave enough to do the rest of the job necessary to carry the message forward.

10. You can change your mind, every rational person does…when presented with new evidence. It’s how often and for what reason that matters more. If you are constantly changing your mind, you aren’t making enough reasoned decisions in the first place.

11. If you are still promoting global warming hoaxes, you are completely lost on the issue and can’t see the dangerous hand of “redistribution” behind it. If you were once for it…and have not come out openly, clearly and unambiguously against it, you can’t lead our energy and natural resource advancement.

12. If you are for pork, earmarks and wasteful boondoggles, you are not serious about economic recovery.

13. If you were for the individual mandate and you still don’t understand how the small c communists are using tyranny to crush the free market, you can’t command the turning around of the ship, because you don’t have a firm grasp of the waters.

14. If you are not conversant on Fast and Furious, East Anglia, ACORN/SEIU, OWS, the Blank Panters voting booth intimidation case, recess appointments, czars and czarinas, Solyndra, the Himalayan icecaps…you can’t possibly understand where the threats to liberty, freedom and the Constitution lie. You can’t understand the tyranny and fraud…you can’t combat it. Being an out of touch cornball won’t cut it.

15. If you are a conspiracy nutjob, a “truther” or you see an “inside job” for 9/11, or for your rise and fall in the polls, you don’t have enough of a grasp on reality to do anything of importance. Like lacing up your own shoes.

16. Being shrill, thin-skinned, strident, loopy, getting into spitball fights and acting in a puerile manner shouldn’t be the first thing that comes to mind, if you are a Presidential candidate. Anyone can get irritated. Turning it into a diva vendetta is not for the leader of the free world.

17. Being a cheap shot artist, a guy who hits below the belt or has his lackeys and minions do it for him, is not only unseemly, it’s disgraceful. It cheapens you, the process, and the office for which you are running.

18. If the first instinct that comes to mind is “grow up”, “get a grip”, “chill”, “tone it down”, “ratchet it back”, “you’ve got to be kidding”, “are you serious”, “what did he just say”, “did you mean that”, virtually every time you open your mouth, your candidacy is on the wrong track.

19. If I can’t trust your handshake, I don’t want your signature. You want to form a contract with the voters, don’t spout empty platitudes and give us your verbal resume. I don’t care what you did in 1984, I want to know how your going to prevent us from living out the real life threat of “1984″

20. Don’t make a speech, make a difference.

Read bullet | Comments »

What I Want In (and From) a Presidential Candidate

Sunday, February 12th, 2012 - by cfbleachers

Let’s try this another way. I have for months sounded the alarm that this field fell short, far short, of the minimal standards we should demand from the Party that is the only one left to represent us, in the most important election of our lifetimes.

For months, I have relentlessly argued for a brokered convention, to finally…finally, get reasonable people to agree that the only rational solution, is nothing less than a complete course correction.

In a two part series, What I Want In a Presidential Candidate in Part ! and What I Don’t Want In a Presidential Candidate in Part !!.

You are free to want something entirely different. However, if it is extremely unlikely that we can change each other’s minds about WHAT to want., then we are NEVER going to change each other’s minds about who we want.

These are the groundrules. Positive qualities only in this section. Negative qualities only in the next section.

1. I want someone who will take back the White House.

2. I want someone who understands the core threat of small c communism.

3. I want someone who is well versed in everything that Stanley Kurtz outlined in his book Radical-in-Chief and can therefore make the nexus between plans, plots and purpose therein, to all that has transpired in the last three years.

4. I want someone to recognize the danger of where Greece is today, the EU is today and how they got there.

5. I want someone who can articulate the problems of the “gifts” of socialism that are wrapped by small c communists with pretty ribbons and frilly coverings, paid for with a credit card that was maxed out 30 years ago.

6. I want someone who will protect my children and grandchildren when I am gone, with a government that does not intend to keep stealing their future from them, to build a socialist sand castle in the sky.

7. I want someone who is willing to articulate the argument that small c communists are hiding behind “populism” and an Inversion Narrative that is phony, and intentionally so.

8. I want someone who is facile with language, ideas and promotion of “my arguments”, so that we are not always losing the “messaging war”.

9. I want someone who can take on the propaganda machine, expose their lies, distortion and hypocrisy…and is willing to do so.

10. I want someone who understands Presidential comportment, demeanor, grace, elegance and wit…and uses them to make points, not to score them.

11. I want someone who comes to his decisions through sound reasoning and strong analysis, so that he is not flitting from idea to idea and does not have to change them…to fit a new audience.

12. I want someone who has a visceral loyalty to America and does not seek to blame her for the actions of our enemies.

13. I want someone who loves our men and women in uniform and appreciates what they do, in the event they are asked to do it.

14. I want someone who understands that our allies deserve our loyalty as well.

15. I want someone who treats loyalty, honor, allegiance as guiding principles of how they lead by example, ..not as slogans to be trotted out in campaigns and on the 4th of July.

16. I don’t mind flaws or frailties, because every human has them. However, I would like to be lead by someone admirable, genuine, and yes, I look at those who surround them to see if there is a pattern.

17. I would like someone who is guided by principles of conviction, not of convenience.

18. I am absolutely ok with a faith-based candidate, however one who knows and understands the line across which a President would be pandering, promoting or proselytizing.

19. I want someone who wants to serve this nation, not transform it in his image.

20. I want a President who understands, in the end, it’s not about him…it’s about us.

Read bullet | Comments »

Did Obama Take a Hit in the Kathleen Sebelius War?

Saturday, February 11th, 2012 - by cfbleachers

Politically, taking on Jews in a surreptitious manner, jackpotting Israel at every turn, overtly reaching out to Israel’s enemies and never once going to the land of our closest ally in the Middle East and possibly our most necessary….is unwise.

But Obama owns it, lock, stock and barrel.

There is little doubt that Obama’s has not much use for the Bible…or anyone who “clings” to it.

“Jesus Christ” is something you say after a bad golf swing, not much more for him.

And Jeremiah Wright’s “church” of the God Damn America brand…certainly seems to fit his Radical-in-Chief entire history, if one pays attention to Stanley Kurtz’ great investigative work.

However, taking on a billion Catholics for no reason, as opposed to taking on a measly 16 million Jews, in order to favor a billion Muslims…lacks pragmatism as well as morality.

Why this religious warfare? Isn’t the class warfare working well enough with OWS $60 astroturf protests, rape, murder and glass breaking?

Isn’t the race card still a big winner?

Sure, Lenin, Marx and all their progeny want to wipe out religion as an “illusion” of the masses.

But, this is a guy who was making withdrawal announcements in Afghanistan out loud, to our enemies…because he was concerned about a “second term”.

In other words, he won’t fight the Taliban…he will tickle their feet and whisper sweet nothings in their ear…but he WILL fight the Catholics?

Makes NO political sense.

Until you combine sophistry, ebullient imperiousness and a specious argument in an ongoing war…to contract a full dose of Sebelius.

There is an ongoing war against the Catholic Church, in which Sebelius has been informed, as has her pastor, that she should not receive Communion.

The antagonism between Sebelius and the Catholic Church is quite pronounced.

What better way to slap their faces than to force them to grovel beneath her feet?

To not only accept that she is in charge of the country’s rules on fetal life and death, on sexual mores, on contraception…but that she can force the Catholic Church to pay for them.

Grinding the Catholics under her expensive heels is payback, and then some.

Obama, who clearly has no use for Judeo-Christian beliefs…but could use the money from the “good Jews and good Catholics”, who put statism ahead of their “illusions”…had no reason to pick this fight.

It’s a political flak magnet.

But, since he generally agrees with the concept of crushing Judeo-Christian “illusions”, he took a bullet in the war of the Kansas ex-communionist.

Maybe that makes her a small c communionist. Certainly close enough for government work.

Read bullet | Comments »

Newt Out of Loot?

Friday, February 10th, 2012 - by cfbleachers

After the Florida and Nevada meltdown, the Santorum Slam and the Rubio rebukes, Sheldon Adelson may be seriously considering sticking to bets where the odds are in the house’s favor.

Or so some are speculating.

Santorum is riding high at the moment and that may be draining the money pool even further away from Newt’s inner tubing.

With Trump’s pile going all in for Romney over Gingrich, Newt may be limping into Super Tuesday with nothing but Kinko-produced fliers and sign spinners at the entrances to Leisure World.

Busted flat?

“It’s starting to sound that way. A new investigation by Bloomberg has been digging through the campaign finance reports, interviewing campaign aides and donors, and reaches the conclusion that Newt Gingrich may be running on fumes at this point in terms of election cash. And his Super PAC money may be drying up also.

This is NOT good news for Cecil B. Moneybags, who needs the Newtonian Implosion to stay alive and split the south.

If Gingrich goes belly up, figuratively speaking, Santorum needs him to do it now.

If Newt hangs on past Super Tuesday, he might as well hang on until August. His few bargaining chips may be worth cashing in…as a spoiler.

Read bullet | Comments »

Tunnel at the end of the light

Friday, February 10th, 2012 - by cfbleachers

As the best thinkers begin to peer into the abyss that is our future, if we stay on the current path, some things are crystallizing.

First, there’s this quote from the Wall St. Journal (via NRO)

“The biggest problem with the GOP Presidential field is that each of the candidates seems to be running to represent only part of the Republican coalition. Mr. Romney sounds like he thinks conservatives can be won over with a few poll-tested lines like “I’ll repeal ObamaCare,” while Mr. Santorum sounds like he only needs conservative votes to become President. To adapt Ronald Reagan’s famous line, Where’s the rest of them?”"

Then, there’s this from Allahpundit at Hot Air:

“One: A dark horse would have grave weaknesses, but depending upon who he/she is, I’m not sure the dark horse would be weaker than Romney. Like Cost says, even if Romney, Santorum, or Gingrich survives a brokered convention to emerge as nominee, they’ll be brutalized by the process. It may be that you need a clean slate with a new candidate at that point. Two: The absence of any organization for the dark horse is a concern, but it’s a concern that party leaders will begin to deal with long before the convention begins. If Super Tuesday comes and goes and the race is still deeply divided three ways, you’ll start seeing stories in the press about some sort of organization quietly being assembled to get to work for a dark-horse nominee just in case it comes to that. The RNC and conservative Super PACs will also start gearing up to go to war for the nominee in case he has no organization of his own. Don’t get me wrong: The organizational question mark is a serious concern, but we’re going to end up playing a weak hand no matter what in November. Serious concerns will abound until the polls open on election day.”

And third, there’s this from Real Clear Politics:

“For many conservative Republicans, the dream outcome of the primary season is a brokered convention. Disappointed in the four remaining choices, they hope to change horses in August, and draft their preferred candidate, be it Jeb Bush, Mitch Daniels, Chris Christie, or Paul Ryan.”

For more and more and more disenchanted voters, it is becoming painfully obvious that the spotlight on the four “B” teamers left in this race, has them staring into the abyss. There’s a tunnel at the end of that light.

What many believed was far-fetched, not possible, not doable…may be our only salvation.

Romney, Gingrich and Santorum are not ready for prime time players. And Paul is not even ready for Saturday cartoons. although his base seems a fitting match for them. Young, unserious, noisy and not a firm grasp on the borders between reality and make believe.

Now, objective, non-fanatical, sober minds and those with a large dose of critical thinking…are coming to the conclusion that we are barreling toward a disaster, that is at least preventable. IF…we begin preparations now AND…if we don’t stay the course because of the most powerful force in the political universe.


No, it will NOT be easy, comfortable or “nice” to tell the four “B” teamers that they are benched. In fact, it will be messy and more than a bit chaotic.

Guess what? It’s going to be messy and more than a bit chaotic anyway.

Time to make a course correction BEFORE the crash, not simply hope the airbag inflates and doesn’t snap our necks.

Beating back the overthrow is the ONLY imperative. Everything else is secondary. Fixing the fiscal disaster is the first order of business, but you can’t do that from the loser’s circle.

It is right to demand better, it is wise to demand better…and by God it is TIME to demand better. The alternative is unthinkable.

Read bullet | Comments »

The Santorum Slam: What It Means, and What it Doesn’t

Wednesday, February 8th, 2012 - by cfbleachers

Congratulations are in order for former Sen. Rick Santorum after last night’s “Santorum Slam,” taking all three contests in Minnesota, Missouri and Colorado.

We should probably take a look first at what this means. Then, I think it’s probably wise to dispel some notions that are floating around that make little sense to me.

1) Is Santorum a real threat to go all the way?

Absolutely. He is probably the best of the “B” teamers that make up this incredibly weak field. He is articulate, and has some political instincts where Romney has near zero. He has less “baggage” than his two main opponents.

2) Can he knock Gingrich off the “not Romney” perch?

Absolutely. In fact, I was surprised it didn’t come in Nevada, but am not the least bit surprised that Gingrich was an also-ran, running about par with Ron Paul for the “most irrelevant” candidate of the evening.

Technically, Santorum didn’t knock Gingrich off the “not Romney” perch, Gingrich flung himself onto the rocks below himself.

3) Is Gingrich done? Put a fork in him? Is this a two man race now?

Yes. And no.

Unfortunately for Santorum, Paul and Gingrich are likely to hang around like a couple of hair krishnas at an airport handing out plastic flowers and waiting for someone to give them something to make them go away.

Ron Paul couldn’t win a state that wasn’t named dementia.

Gingrich has no discipline, no organization, soon to have no money, and he no longer has a receptive audience to his combination spitball fight and diva hissy fit against Romney.

Santorum schooled Gingrich in how to take on Romney. And Gingrich fell off the sled with a thud.

Gingrich is hoping beyond hope that he can last until he smells Southern cooking again.

The Santorum Sweep pushed Gingrich under the rug. Arizona and Maine aren’t going to help Newtrino’s narrative. To be relevant, he’s going to have to go after Santorum, or go away. The latter makes the most sense, which is why it will never cross the Gingrich campaign’s minds.

The Newtonian Implosion is near complete. All he can do now, is be the Santorum spoiler, handing the nomination to Romney on a silver platter.

What does the Santorum Slam NOT mean?

It doesn’t mean he’s a great general election candidate. He’s not.

He’s getting better. He’s the best of a bad lot. It also doesn’t mean that he is likely to win enough delegates before the convention. It doesn’t even mean he is likely to win the next two states, Maine and Arizona. Nor does it mean that he will necessarily finish off the Newtonian Implosion in the south.

Santorum is a flawed candidate, but so is everyone else. His flaws, however, bump up against swing states. The “live and let live” crowd will be turned off completely by a hard core social issues guy.

Book it. It’s an enormous hurdle. May not be fair, may not be right, may not make sense. It’s going to be a problem.

What else does the Santorum slam not mean? It doesn’t mean that the “establishment” disappeared, that there are unicorns and pixie dust extinctions, or that Karl Rove lost his magic wand.

There never was an “establishment” behind the scenes doing something to Gingrich. Santorum proved that. Ed Morrissey and Michele Malkin weren’t “sellouts”. There is no conservative “pravda”.

The Santorum Slam proved that the Newtonian Implosion was self-caused.

Romney still is a horrible candidate. He’s tone deaf. His message is weak, tepid, …really marginal on substance.

He has no connection with the base, or with…well, humans, actually.

A brokered convention is in the cards. If the four horsemen of the apocalypse all stay in for the duration (most likely scenario), nobody is going to have enough to win by August.

Maybe then, the GOP will come to its senses. I sincerely doubt it.

That will leave Romney, who is not capable of articulating a message that defends the free market, much less advances it.

Or Santorum, who has very high hurdles to scale in the swing states which are absolutely necessary to defeat Obama.

The Santorum Slam: He’s the best of what’s there to choose from now. Good for him.

Not sure for the rest of us.

Read bullet | Comments »

Will you be C-Packing?

Tuesday, February 7th, 2012 - by cfbleachers

The OccupyDC crowd has sprouted an ACORN of an idea, it will be interesting to see how this comes off.

The small c communist tree is starting to blossom in all sorts of new, different and unique ways. Attacking Catholics, stonewalling congressional inquiries and brazenly refusing to have a budget scored are but a few.

However, a direct confrontation at CPAC is likely to provide some interesting insights into the mind of the community organizing culture.

They WANT to spark a confrontation. Then…message out through the propaganda machine that the response was “not proportional”. Or is it proportionate? I should write this down when the leftists savage Israel for daring to defend themselves next time.

Anyway, they are threatening to make it a physical confrontation. The ACORN/SEIU, Workers Party, Blank Panters and OWS team will take the field and try to cause a disruption, that they hope will escalate into a disturbance.

Maybe even threaten some cracker babies. Or, engage in one of those not really rape-rapes. Or pretend it’s Oakland and simply break every law from arson to murder. Or camp out Zucotti style and stink the place up beyond human tolerance.

Messing with Northeastern windsurfers is a bit different than messing with Southern boys, however. You can call them stupid, make fun of NASCAR, country music and line dancing all you want. I wouldn’t get up in the face of a Southern country boy and expect to be holding that stupid hippy-dippy smirk with a full set of choppers afterward, however.

There are actual studies…seriously…that Southern gentlemen actually get a bigger rush of adrenaline and testosterone pumping than do Northeastern roller bladers when confronted and provoked. I kid you not.

Surf’s not up here either, dude…if you go poking your finger in the chest of a southerner.

I would recommend highly that the antics be confined to making a spectacle of yourselves, yelling out, chanting insipid slogans and such. Stay out of the physical stuff.

Even better. Stay home and hate the country from your sleeping bag. When you wet yourself, at least it will give you a warm feeling.

Read bullet | Comments »

Smal “c” Communism, What Is It, Why Does It Matter?

Monday, February 6th, 2012 - by cfbleachers

The Daily Caller, one of my favorite stopping off places, “won” a contest to have dinner with Ayers and Dohrn. Tomorrow they will give us a recap on how they kept their food down.

It was Ayers who uttered the phrase “small c communist” to describe his political stance. He also suggested that he was probably the last person to call himself a “communist”.

He may have been laughing at the time, but there was much to take away from that rare moment of clarity.

What made great thinkers who were “liberal” separate from the “small c communists”? John Podhoretz, Sol Stern, David Horowitz, Ron Radosh, Roger Simon, David Mamet saw the disguise, the mask, the masquerade and have tried to unveil it.

No “liberal” would make a nail bomb to attempt to maim, injure and murder 19, 20, 21 year old boys and their innocent dates at Ft. Dix. (or blow themselves up on the process)

When we conflate the terms “liberal” with “small c communist” we assist in putting another addition on the safe house in which the small c communist can hide out.

(similarly, when we use the term “mainstream” media…we assist in building a propaganda machine safehouse for those intent on destroying the truth in our information stream)

Small c communism is decidedly illiberal. It is a melange of anarchism, anti-capitalism, in near permanent rebellion and overthrow mode. It simply has co-opted “liberal” causes in which to hide.

Too many people believe that “social democrats” in Europe are “identical cousins” from across the pond. (a premise only Patty Duke could pull off).

When George Clooney stands up and defends “all the good things about being liberal”, he trots out the hiding places as if they are “owned” by leftists. In reality, all good people, including independents, social conservatives and faith-based folks believe in basic human decency. It’s not “owned” by the left.

Far from it. In fact, if there is religious bigotry, racial bigotry, ethnic bigotry, class bigotry, regional bigotry today, it is 100000 to 1 more likely to come from the left and their kneejerk steno pool of stereotyping, name-calling and intolerance.

George “Without a” Clooney, conflates the concepts of tolerance and bigotry, of “liberal” and illiberal attitudes and of “being a liberal” and being a seditious small c communist.

The OWS movement is a prime example. The Workers Party wing of the small c communist movement is behind the “red turf roll” of the OWS rape, pillage and plunder scheme. The ACORN/SEIU thugs are going to “occupy” CPAC.

When we stop adopting the lexicon that builds small c communist safehouses in which to hide out, we will finally…finally…be on our way to recognizing what is happening to our Constitution. To our laws, rules and regulations. Why there is no budget from a corrupt Senate for over 1000 days. Why our information stream can get away with naked, open and corrupt distortion.

Small c communism is no small thing. Ask Ron Radosh. Or David Horowitz. Or our own Roger Simon.

And guess who’s coming to dinner…if we elect a second term for Stanley Kurtz’s Radical-in-Chief?

Read bullet | Comments »

Two Ears and One Mouth For a Reason

Sunday, February 5th, 2012 - by cfbleachers

VDH took a look last night and analyzed the situation with calm reflection as he always does: How To Make a Bad Night Worse.

Essentially, VDH says Gingrich is at his best when he spent “about three minutes of inspired moments about issues and ideas in his usual imaginative and intellectually robust style.”

However, as every thinking person can see…Newtrino has devolved into “little more than a litany of excuses, whining, and accusations — characterized by stream-of-conscious confessionals and rambling repetitions. And, I think, will hurt him more than anything yet in the campaign.”

It’s a turnoff of epic proportions. The candidacy that was once easily titled “Great Expectations” has now become “Great Expectorations” as he spits out a mouthful of venom at Romney and barely addresses key issues that matter to the country…you know, the place he says he wants to serve.

Worse news on a harsh night, Sheldon Adelson (according the the Daily Duranty…so take this for what it’s worth), would gladly back Romney the minute Newtrino implodes for good. He does NOT harbor anti-Romney sentiments, unlike much of his very rabid support.

One point worth noting in the Daily Duranty article…something I have been pondering…where are Newtrino’s advisors and campaign staff as he slides deeper and deeper into this stalker obsession?

Mr. Gingrich, whose campaign treasury is severely depleted, is being advised by his inner circle to spend the weeks leading up to Super Tuesday on March 6 resting up, getting Mr. Romney’s attacks out of his head and recalibrating his campaign message to highlight his positive ideas.

The Newtonian Implosion was bound to happen. It was just a matter of when. In this primary, it has happened repeatedly. His entire campaign staff walked out on him, he had some memorable moments in debates…mostly on issues related to leftist media…and now he has dragged his campaign down yet again.

Most of what remains of his support comes from the severely undereducated, the severely unsuccessful and the angry, frustrated, all emotion/all the time voter.

He is losing everyone else in droves. And handing the nomination to Romney.

Romney is tone deaf and Gingrich won’t listen.

Read bullet | Comments »

Mumbly Peg While Iran Builds the Bomb

Saturday, February 4th, 2012 - by cfbleachers

With Leon Panetta recently announcing to Iran the three month window for Israel to assist them in being appropriate as a member of the world community, then going mum, it reminded me of a game that Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn played, called mumbly peg.

The game is essentially the precursor to jackass, you throw a knife as close to your foot as possible, until one of you throws it into your foot and you win.

It is usually played with two players testing their mettle. The Obama administration, however, has Israel playing the game alone.

Every time Bibi hurls the knife closer to Israel’s foot, Obama and his henchmen say it’s not close enough.

Caroline Glick meticulously outlines each toss of the knife at Obama’s insistence in her essay titled, “Fool Me Twice” at Townhall.

Rashid Khalidi’s favorite dinner partner (what WAS on that tape that the LA Times is holding hostage), will not be satisfied until Israel has thrown the knife into its own foot and perhaps even chopped off a couple of toes.

That’s one way to “win” the game.

The other, is for Israel to stop playing.

Read bullet | Comments »