911-des-plainesBy John Ruberry

This morning Hillary Clinton suffered what is being called a medical episode in lower Manhattan where she may have fainted, but she certainly had to be helped into a van by campaign aides as her knees wobbled, as you’ll see in a video. She’s was in New York to attend a Ground Zero 9/11 memorial service.

The Clinton campaign claims that the Democratic nominee was “overheated,” but so far there are no reports of anyone else among the thousands in attendance at the somber event being overcome by heat. Temperatures were in the late 70s in New York this morning. Today’s incident comes just six days after a four-minute long coughing spell during a Labor Day speech in Cleveland by Clinton, followed by a shorter one on her campaign jet, which the campaign blithely brushed off as related to allergies. Even hardened liberal Chris Cilizza of the Washington Post says that questions about Hillary’s health are legitimate ones, not just fodder for conservative conspiracy theorists.

wallace-road
Henry Wallace was pushed aside for Truman

It’s been said that Clinton is the most dishonest person to be a major party nominee since Richard M. Nixon. It’s now fair to say that she’s the unhealthiest one to run as a major party choice since another New York state Democrat, Franklin D. Roosevelt, won his his unprecedented fourth-straight presidential election in 1944.

Party bosses knew that FDR was sick in ’44, and fears that Russia-loving leftist Henry A. Wallace, his vice president, could succeed FDR as president was the primary reason Democratic leaders convinced him to dump Wallace as his running mate for Harry S. Truman. The press was rabidly pro-Democrat–sound familiar?–and it had for years covered up that Roosevelt was unable to walk, so it of course assisted in obscuring the president’s newer health concerns. But the what we now call the media didn’t convince everyone. So FDR was compelled to strenuously campaign in the autumn of that year–while of course America was at war–which likely further weakened him.

And how sick was Roosevelt?

In World War II Behind Closed Doors: Stalin, the Nazis, and the West, Lawrence Rees wrote in 2009 about Roosevelt’s health at the Yalta Conference in 1945:

Much has been written about Roosevelt’s physical state at the conference. Those who worked closely with him, like George Elsey, had noticed a profound deterioration of the president’s health over the previous months, and Churchill had remarked on how sick Roosevelt looked at the Quebec meeting in September. At Yalta, Lord Moran, Churchill’s doctor, recorded: “Everyone seemed to agree that the president had gone to bits physically…I doubt, from what I have seen, whether he is fit for his job here.”

John "Lee" Ruberry of the Magnificent Seven
John “Lee” Ruberry of the Magnificent Seven

Roosevelt was clearly duped by Joseph Stalin at Yalta, where he handed eastern Europe to the communists, including Poland, for whom Great Britain and France went to war after the weaker nation was invaded by the Nazis, which of course is how World War II began.

Do we want another ill–or yes, I’m going to say it–dying president to be swindled by another Russian leader? Or by Iran? (Of course, that is what happened with a presumably much healthier Barack Obama.) Or by anyone?

Roosevelt, as we all know, died three months after being sworn-in as president for the fourth time.

Oh, yes, I’m aware the John F. Kennedy had Addison’s disease, which was hidden from the public, but he had suffered from the ailment since the 1940s. His sister, Eunice, also had Addision’s, she died at 88. JFK’s health problems were partially attributed to his abuse of prescription drugs.

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

HumanParasiteby baldilocks

It looks like our country isn’t the only one which is experiencing election insanity. From Philip Ochieng:

An ideology is any systematic set of religious or political ideals. Ideally, then, every political party should be identifiable by distinct ideological thought. But, if so, what is the ideological difference between Kenya’s ruling and opposition parties? Every thinking voter ought to pose that question concerning Kenya’s massive switching of parties every time the General Election looms.

Because the next such polls are nigh, Kenya’s politicians now dash from party to party. The political migration will reach its apogee upon party nominations, when certain candidates have failed to be licensed to vie for civic and parliamentary seats.

But if a party is a bastion of discrete ideals, how can pre-election “party-hopping” be the chief characteristic of Kenya’s alleged “multi-party democracy”?

The answer is that none of Kenya’s plethora of parties ­­­is a truly ideological movement. All our political associations are practically identical by their emptiness of social thought.

Father attributes this dearth to the idea that his countrymen

have adopted that language but do not bother to master its nuances that our moral and intellectual vacuity looks so much more spectacular than the Anglo-Saxon world’s.

In all former European colonies, we do not even know how to pretend about it. We vote not for the social beauty of ideas – not for ideologies – but for something else. To call a spade by its name, Kenya’s big tribes vote only for the presidential candidate identifiable with their cluster of tribes. It is a deeply embarrassing manifestation of our backwardness in social ideals.

Father shouldn’t be embarrassed. It’s what we’ve become here in this bastion of the Anglo-Saxon idealism for the last few elections. I imagine that things get lost in translation in the other former British colonies where English is not the first language spoken at home, but Americans don’t have that excuse.

Both sets of people—Kenyans and Americans–do have something else in common, however: few members of either set of citizens have been formally educated into understanding the importance of ideals—of principles. And I don’t know about the Kenyans, but I’ve been greatly surprised to find out that many, even most self-identified political conservatives, don’t really know what ideals/principles are. That isn’t an accident.

And, without ideals, what’s left? Tribalism of many varieties, but these are almost always of the ethnic type.

Like my father says, the politicians and the constituents in his country don’t even try to fake it. I’d say that we’ve come to that point in the USA as well.

Hang on! It’s going to be a bumpy election.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2012. Her second novel will be done in 2016. Follow her on Twitter.

Please contribute to Juliette’s JOB:  Her new novel, her blog, her Internet to keep the latter going and COFFEE to keep her going!

Or hit Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Independent Journalism—->>>>>baldilocks

By John Ruberry

This year could end up being the most tumultuous year since 1968. During that year there was of course a heated presidential election, the Democrats nominated Vice President Hubert Humphrey, who represented the status quo, one that was not especially popular. The Republicans chose a former vice president, Richard Nixon, whose critics decried as someone who presented a dark vision of America. Sound familiar?Chicago Police SUV

Missing of course in 2016 is a third-party presidential candidate who can win electoral votes; in 1968 avowed segregationist and renegade Democrat George Wallace fed on racial discord–and there is plenty of that this year, most of it brought on by leftist groups such as Black Lives Matter, which seems very keen on protesting the rare shootings of African-American criminal suspects but is largely on silent on the daily carnage in cities such as Chicago, where so far this weekend over thirty people, most of them black, have been shot. In most of these shootings it’s very likely that other blacks pulled the trigger.

What is largely forgotten about the 1968 election is that it was the first presidential contest since Reconstruction in which a southern blacks voted in large numbers.

We’ve progressed far.

The penultimate year of the turbulent 1960s also brought us the Tet Offensive of the Vietnam War, North Korea’s seizure of the USS Pueblo, the Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia, the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King–the anger from the latter caused dozens of deadly riots in American cities–the May Insurrection in France, and the turmoil of the Democratic National Convention in Chicago.

John ruberry
John “Lee” Ruberry of the Magnificent Seven

I’m sure I overlooked something.

This year has seen several deadly Islamist terrorist attacks, including last month’s Orlando night club shooting and the Nice, France truck killings, two assassination tragedies–one in Dallas and the other in Louisiana–where multiple police officers were killed, “Brexit,” Britain’s vote to leave the European Union, the attempted coup in Turkey, and of course the frenzied US presidential campaign.

Remember: We still have five more months in 2016.

On the positive end, the Apollo 8 mission brought the moon within reach at the end of 1968.

Let’s hope 2016 ends with good news.

Oh, it was also in late 1968 when Star Trek’s “Plato’s Stepchildren” episode aired. Captain Kirk and Lieutenant Uhura delivered American television’s first kiss between a black and a white, and this embrace was not an innocent peck on the cheek.

As Mitch Albom wrote in Tuesdays With Morrie, “Love wins. Always.”

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit. And yes, he was alive in 1968.

Trump lawn signBy John Ruberry

The mainstream media, which of course is no fan of the Republican Party and its nominee Donald Trump, in what must have been an act of collusion, almost immediately dismissed what I thought was an A- acceptance address as a “dark speech.”

Oh, why just an A- from me? I thought Trump’s speech as a bit long, and that he should have used the safety part of the speech at 11:00PM Eastern/10:00PM Central when non-politicized viewers, many of whom only vote in presidential year elections, would be tuning in searching for the local evening news.

Trump did something in last week’s speech that the MSM, and many Republicans, including this one, have been calling on the GOP to do for decades: make an appeal to urban voters.

Democrats run nearly all of America’s largest cities. Some, such as Detroit and Chicago, haven’t had Republican mayors in the lifetimes of most of the people reading this post. However, the turnaround of one city, New York, was achieved only because of the doggedness of one determined man, Republican Rudy Giuliani, who was the mayor of America’s largest city from 1994-2001. NYC was viewed as ungovernable prior to the arrival of the “Mayor of America” at Gracie Mansion.

Burned out Detroit
Southwest Detroit

Maybe only New Yorkers understand. Manhattanite Trump does.

From his acceptance speech:

This administration has failed America’s inner cities. It’s failed them on education. It’s failed them on jobs. It’s failed them on crime. It’s failed them at every level.

When I am president, I will work to ensure that all of our kids are treated equally, and protected equally.

Every action I take, I will ask myself: does this make life better for young Americans in Baltimore, Chicago, Detroit, Ferguson who have as much of a right to live out their dreams as any other child America?

Brilliant stuff.

Rand Paul, who like his father is generally the Republican that leftist media know-it-alls hate the least, received wide-spread praise for making a campaign stop on Chicago’s South Side last year. But such plaudits were easy because Paul was not the Republican nominee and Trump is. It’s circle-the-wagons time for the dishonest media, because the general election is now only a few months away.

Burned-out three story frame
Chicago’s South Side

Despite Trump’s reach-out to urban voters, he will not win a majority of the black vote. He won’t receive even fifteen percent of it. Trump will not win Illinois or Maryland’s electoral votes. But Trump spoke like a leader, not a candidate, as he accepted the Republican nomination for president.

The GOP political newcomer may be able to peel off enough black votes to become the first Republican presidential candidate to win Michigan since 1988.

I believe, maybe it’s just a hope of mine, that a majority of Americans are looking for a leader, not a partisan hack to steer us through troubled times.

As for the cities, we’ve tried it the Democratic Party way for over fifty years. Detroit is an urban ruin. Chicago and Baltimore are headed that way.

Trump wants to heal the rot.

And Trump, yes, really wants to Make America Great Again. All of it.

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit. He regularly ventures into inner-city Chicago for blogging material and has traveled to Detroit.

Hillary Clinton What Difference Does It Make
It doesn’t make much difference anymore.

by baldilocks

Today’s news is a vindication for conspiracy theorists, especially those who contend that a Clinton cabal exists. But I think that there is an overarching cabal; one that includes the entire Democrat Party and most of the GOP. It’s is one which intends to destroy the Rule of Law in America by handing over America’s secrets to foreign actors, hiding and/or destroying the evidence of the betrayals, and, when the cabal members are caught red-handed, allowing the members to escape legal prosecution.

All that seemed crazy and paranoid until this morning, did it not?

Of course, President Obama is an active part of this. Aside from his obvious personal enmity with the Clintons, he does what he is instructed to do, meaning support the Hillary Clinton by making her his first Secretary of State and by endorsing her 2016 bid for president. Bill Clinton can hate Obama all he wants, but the former will stand in for Obama and will remind members of the Obama Administration what the cabal’s goal is and of whom they all work for—whoever that is. (As one of the cabal’s generals, Bill Clinton has to keep the troops in step while they march the Long March.)

Remember when President Obama visited Russia in 2012 and had an audience with Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev? This sotto voce assertion to the Russian leader was caught by the microphone, accidentally, to be sure.

Obama: “This is my last election. After my election, I’ll have more flexibility.”

Medvedev: “I understand. I will transmit this information to [President] Vladimir [Putin].”

Lots of commentary on what the president meant by that, but what I’m thinking is that we are seeing a possible explanation of the meaning now.

Recall that there were many State Department computer network breaches during Hillary Clinton’s tenure there. I contend that she had email servers installed in her home in order to make it easier for foreign entities–like the Russian leadership–to access the information, something which, obviously, would not be detected by the State’s IT department and would not, therefore, end up in the news. Of course, President Obama knew what was going on and I contend that this is part of what he was referring to in his conversation with PM Medvedev.

And FBI Director James Comey—either part of the cabal or being strong-armed by it—declines to prosecute Mrs. Clinton even while he admits that she blatantly violated 18 U.S. Code § 793 and 18 U.S. Code § 2071.

And when one considers the mishandling of classified materials by Clinton Administration appointees like his CIA director John Deutch, and his National Security Advisor Sandy Berger and their subsequent pardon and slap on the wrist, respectively, it’s beginning to seem more ridiculous to assert that there is not a conspiracy.

So, now the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign can proceed apace. It’s her turn, after all and she has done her service to her master(s).

RIP, Rule of Law.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game (click on left sidebar image), was published in 2012. Her second novel will be done in 2016. Follow her on Twitter.

Please contribute to Juliette’s JOB:  Her new novel, her blog, her Internet to keep the latter going and COFFEE to keep her going!baldilocks

Or hit Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Independent Journalism—->>>>

by baldilocks

Right, duty, whatever one wants to call it, I voted today in the California Primary Election. No Party Preference, crossover ballot—Republican. Who did I vote for? Ted Cruz. I figured that readers would want to know.

I first registered as a Republican immediately after the 2000 General Election in which I voted for a Republican picardelectionmemecandidate for president for the first time. This was after a decade-long exploration of the two major political parties and paying closer attention to current events than I had done before that period. Back then, I remained a registered as a Democrat on purpose until after I voted in order to send a tiny message to the party whose principles bore no resemblance to my own. Sixteen years later, the circumstances are similar: this was my first vote as an independent. We’ll see what happens next.


One of my real-life friends tells me that Hillary and Bill Clinton are in town, holding a rally a quick bus ride from my apartment, among other places in LA.

Hillary Clinton is holding multiple campaign events across Southern California on Monday, the eve of the California presidential primary.

Clinton attended a “Get out the Vote” rally at La Fachada Plaza Mexico in Lynwood. Then, she headed to Leimert Park Village Plaza for another rally, followed by an event at Long Beach Community College. The former secretary of state will then head to the Greek Theatre for a concert later in the evening.

The concert will feature singers Christina Aguilera, John Legend and Stevie Wonder.

Clinton has reached the number of delegates and superdelegates needed to win the Democratic nomination, according to an Associated Press survey of delegates.

I get my hair trimmed at a shop about two blocks from Leimert Park and was considering going for a clean-up cut today. Glad I found out about the Clinton event beforehand. Traffic makes me nuts—even when I’m not driving. So do Leftists.

Oh, have I mentioned that my hair is about an inch long? Not so baldilocks anymore. A lot grayer, though.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2012. Her second novel will be done in 2016. Follow her on Twitter.

Please contribute to Juliette’s JOB:  Her new novel, her blog, her Internet to keep the latter going and COFFEE to keep her going!

Or hit Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Independent Journalism—->>>>baldilocks

UICBy John Ruberry

“There’s not a liberal America and a conservative America. There’s the United States of America.” Barack Obama, Democratic National Convention, 2004.

Inspirational words, yes. But the spirit of the Democratic Party is now embodied by the leftist mob in Barack Obama’s hometown who packed the house at the UIC Pavilion, preventing a possible presidential successor, Republican Donald Trump, from speaking at a rally.

Speech codes and safe zones are as much as a part of the 21st college experience as cramming for finals, the UIC Pavilion is on the campus of the University of Illinois-Chicago, where ironically Obama crony and unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers was a tenured professor. But speech codes have entered the political arena. Freedom of expression is acceptable for the left–as long as they agree with what is being said.

Oh, ironically Ayers was protesting Trump outside the Pavilion. I’m sure he was pleased by what he witnessed.

Trump’s forceful, and yes, sometimes abrasive remarks on Islamic terrorism and illegal immigration have altered the political dynamic and re-written the norms of political campaigning.

There are a number of ways people can responsibly respond to Trump. Among those possibilities are ignoring him, not voting for him, and peacefully protest him. And to responsible people–peacefully protesting does not mean screaming during rallies with the intent of disruption, aggressively confronting Trump supporters, or blocking traffic.

Leftists don’t agree.

And Barack Obama isn’t innocent in regards to this transformation. Four years after his DNC keynote address in Boston, Obama was the party’s nominee. While Obama and most of his campaign apparatus were in Denver for the 2008 convention, cerebral conservative Milt Rosenberg hosted author Stanley Kurtz for his WGN Chicago radio show, where he talked about Obama’s ties to Bill Ayers.

How did the Obama campaign respond?

With this email to its supporters:

In the next few hours, we have a crucial opportunity to fight one of the most cynical and offensive smears ever launched against Barack.

Tonight, WGN radio is giving right-wing hatchet man Stanley Kurtz a forum to air his baseless, fear-mongering terrorist smears. He’s currently scheduled to spend a solid two-hour block from 9:00 to 11:00 p.m. pushing lies, distortions, and manipulations about Barack and University of Illinois professor William Ayers.

Tell WGN that by providing Kurtz with airtime, they are legitimizing baseless attacks from a smear-merchant and lowering the standards of political discourse.

Call into the “Extension 720” show with Milt Rosenberg at (312) 591-XXXX. (I edited the number.)

(Show airs from 9:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. tonight)

Then report back on your call at http://my.barackobama.com/WGNstandards.

That cultish email is fascistic.

You will report about any insults about Dear Leader. Orders must be obeyed at all times. You will do as you are told.

Rosenberg explained to listeners that he repeatedly asked for someone from the Obama campaign–whose campaign headquarters was just four blocks from the WGN studios–to appear on his program to rebut Kurtz.

And not everyone was in Denver during Kurtz’ appearance, Ben LaBolt, a senior Obama spokesman, was in Chicago. And if LaBolt had stagefright that night, well, that doesn’t make a difference because by all accounts in 2008 there was telephone service in Denver.

Kurtz, who holds a Ph.D. in social anthropology, is hardly a “right-wing hatchet man” as the Obama apparatus claimed. Two months later there was another Obama call-to-arms when David Freddoso, the author of The Case Against Barack Obama, was a guest on Rosenberg’s show.

Rotting FishObama and his campaign never apologized for the Rosenberg-Kurtz anti-free speech abomination. Did Obama know about the attack? I wager that he did.

And if he didn’t? Well, a saying favored by 1988 Democratic presidential nominee comes to mind: “A fish rots from the head first.”

As president Obama the collectivist has governed by dividing and subdividing Americans into seemingly manageable groups: male, female, black, white, Hispanic, gay, straight, transgendered, religious, atheist, omnivores, vegetarians and many others. Obama presents himself as the only possible uniter of these groups. Of course he’s failed and the next president will have to repair Obama’s damage.

There’s a lot of finger-pointing going on in regards to the melee at Friday’s cancelled Trump rally.

One big finger– perhaps Trump-style it should be the middle one–deserves to be firmly pointed in the direction of our first collectivist president, whose campaign even went as far as forming on Orwellian “Truth Squad” in ’08. The following year the Obama White House requested Americans to inform on each other in regards to “fishy” claims about health care legislation.

What was that again about fish?

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit. He’ll be voting for Donald Trump in Tuesday’s Illinois Primary. 

By Steve Eggleston

“Game over man, game over”

– Hudson, “Aliens”

I could just as easily titled this “The Death of Conservatism”, because that’s what the results out of South Carolina mean. Donald Trump, who returned to his liberal roots in the last debate, won the South Carolina primary by 10 percentage points. By “returned”, I mean “went deep into the Netroots fever swamp”, as even 1990s Donald Trump wouldn’t have parroted the Code Pink tripe regarding the Iraq War (note; Trump supported the Iraq War at the time and said in 2000 he believed Iraq had weapons of mass destruction) and 9/11 (this a few weeks removed from Trump wrapping himself in 9/11’s #NewYorkValues). Thanks to how South Carolina allocates its delegates, Trump won all 50.

Sticking with the debate for just a moment, those are just two of the most recent expirations of prior Donald J. Trump statements. If that sounds familiar, it should.

Meanwhile, Marco Rubio, and even more strongly, his supporters, have taken the nearly-two-decade-long push by the GOP to get a new non-conservative base to heart, using relentless attacks on Ted Cruz (and only Cruz, despite weathering a second state’s worth of attacks from the Jeb Bush campaign) to wrest second.

That Cruz took third in the “conservative” party’s primary in a state that was seen as one of the most conservative in the country is disturbing. Indeed, the fact that full-throated conservatism garners less than 25% versus the “slow drift left” of Rubio and the “say anything because statements are made to expire” of Trump means more than Cruz’s upset win in Iowa.

I suppose the good news is that, with Bush’s departure, the GOP’s Next In Line principle, first noted by The Wall Street Journal’s James Taranto and in effect between 1960 and 2012, appears to be finally dead. That leads me to Nevada, where the Democrats, despite a lot of noise from the Bernie Sanders campaign, appear set to finally break their own equally-longstanding Not Next In Line priniciple. While Hillary Clinton didn’t need to continue her incredible string of “luck” of winning every game-of-chance tiebreaker to win the Nevada caucuses like she did in Iowa (and before that, in hog futures), she did.

Spy vs Spy vs Spy is alive and (un)well.

Blogger with National Review Senior Editor Jonah Goldberg at CPAC in 2011
Blogger with National Review Senior Editor Jonah Goldberg at CPAC in 2011

By John Ruberry

Even if you are on the east coast and buried under two feet of snow, you probably heard that the conservative magazine founded in 1955 by William F. Buckley, National Review, just published a special edition titled Against Trump. The editors of the magazine–I am a longtime subscriber by the way–call the billionaire a “philosophically unmoored political opportunist.”

It reviews inconsistencies with Donald J. Trump’s immigration policy–or is it policies?–as well as on international affairs and economics, and it rightly throws a penalty flag at the businessman’s promise that he will deport 11 million illegal aliens. That’s logistically impossible. Yet NR rightly credits Trump’s decision to bring the illegal immigration issue to the forefront of the political discussion, something that the Republican, and yes, the conservative establishment has only paid lip service to, and even then only close to Election Day.

Trump is scolded by the National Review editors for often saying whatever pops into his head. But they fail to realize that part of Trump’s appeal is that what comes out of his mouth isn’t processed and varnished by conservative “experts” such as the writers of the National Review. Sure, NR writers as far as I know don’t work on campaigns much, if at all, but the people they interact with on a regular basis, whether in Washington or New York, often do. Trump has proven that he can succeed without those experts–some of those people I know–and these so-called sages don’t have to be consulted and that means they won’t be paid. I call this group Club Conservative. Typically its members are graduates of elite private colleges, they’ve interned for Republican members of Congress, and they have relatives who are part of the Washington power nexus. The Donald’s base of support is nothing like that.

In the op-ed, the Manhattan-based editors even make a quip about Trump sharing “funky outer-borough accents” with socialist Bernie Sanders.

Trump is a threat to the very existence to Club Conservative, whose income always spikes in even-numbered years (of course that means election years).

As for Trump’s shoot-from-the-lip campaign style, he should be thanked by every American conservative, for well, being himself. Trump proved that a Republican can say something the media elites judge as outrageous–such as remarking about John McCain, “I like people that weren’t captured”–and then ignoring and even mocking calls for an apology.

Trump proved that the mainstream media is a paper tiger. And Trump continues being Trump–with that same media along for the ride essentially financing his campaign.

John "Lee" Ruberry
John “Lee” Ruberry

Is Trump a conservative? We’ll see. With the Democrats as the secular-progressive party, the GOP has become the de facto party of faith. And believers are always seeking converts. Why the fight?

For certain Trump is an American patriot who deeply loves his country; he’s troubled by the wrong turn it has taken under President Obama. And Trump deserves at least a little benefit-of-the-doubt from National Review and Club Conservative because of his patriotism.

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

By Steve Eggleston

First things first, congrats to Peter and the rest of the Magnificent Seven for winning one of the Best Grassroots Blogs awards from Doug Ross. It’s been a honor to write here, even as infrequently as I have been.

2015 has been one crazy year, especially on the political front. Going into the year, the conventional wisdom was that the Republican Party had a very deep bench, especially from the ranks of governors, from which to draw a Presidential nominee. That hasn’t exactly happened, as the first three to drop out of the race were accomplished governors who, arguably, would have been able to keep the grand center-right coalition together, with the remaining candidates representing, or at least claiming to represent, mere chunks of said coalition.

So, what happened? One could say Donald Trump happened, but that is only a partial answer. The long-rumored split between the GOP and its base seems inevitable now, and it’s been engineered by both the party bosses and the leading candidate. In fact, it reminds me of an old staple from Mad Magazine called “Spy vs. Spy”, or more properly, “Spy vs. Spy vs. Spy”.

In the 2-person version, the white spy and black spy plot against each other, Sometimes, the plot works; other times, it blows up in the plotter’s face. Things are a bit different when the grey spy shows up – she always wins.

Over the past year, the DC establishment redoubled their efforts to abandon their (former) base of conservatives, and they have succeeded beyond their wildest dreams. The latest example – for the small price of finally getting the ban on oil exports removed, they gave the Democrats and their K Street masters everything else they wanted, from fully funding ObamaCare, executive amnesty for illegals and Planned Parenthood to resurrecting the Export-Import Bank and picking the first set of winners in the tax-break rewrite game.

Meanwhile, Trump, who entered the race only after consulting the husband of the Democrat front-runner, has been using that abandonment, his gift for the bombastic, and the willingness of those who claim to be tired of being told one thing and getting something else to ignore his pre-2015 positions on various issues to drive out the aforementioned governors and drive himself to the top of the national polls.

I wish my prediction for 2016 were different, or at least as wrong as my predictions for 2015 turned out to be, but the way things are going, the grey spy is going to be standing over the smoking corpses of the white and black spies flashing the double-victory symbol.