Pavlov’s RINO

 

Gerry Ford, George H.W. Bush, Bob Dole, John McCain, Mitt Romney …   Jeff Flake, John Kasich … Liz Cheney … the gOp has never lacked for someone willing to take the milquetoast, mushy middle lane that has too often led the party. A complete bunch of losers with ego and vanity that has no limit. Their desire to be well thought of, by all, ‘trumps’ every other emotion and purpose for them.

So Liz Cheney is merely the most recent of a long line of extremely vain losers. Get back in line girlfriend, you aren’t so special. And your memory is rotten. Do you not remember what your ‘good friends across the aisle’ did to your father?!

Republican, Inc. TM was infatuated with these lonesome losers for decades. Decorum, tut, tut and all. No matter that their opponents had dramatically shifted the battlefield over time. What once was “off-limits” in politics, now only applied to one party. A completely unfair fight, unless one determined to join the Fighter’s caucus. The first such fighter was President Ronald Wilson Reagan, the precursor to President Donald J. Trump.

President Reagan was the first interloper and brash upstart to the status quo on November 12, 1975, when he announced that he would challenge President Ford in the 1976 primary.  It was not his turn, not his time yet. Hadn’t he and his supporters learned that back in 1968?! But something happened in the standard voting block of the gOp and in a significant part of the Democratic Party. These folks still believed in the goodness of America and not the lies and phony socialism of the Democrats and their dependent classes. President Reagan and this expanded voting block were fed up and tired of apologizing for the goodness of America. But Republican, Inc. TM was completely oblivious to this substantive change. President Reagan and his voting block were conservative fighters and more than willing to challenge the status quo of the establishment gOp that always promised things that they never delivered upon, because they always backed down to their stronger opponents, out of decorum or something.

Liz Cheney, give it up girlfriend. You are embarrassing yourself and your family’s political legacy. Here is what your Dad said about the first 1990’s brash upstart in the party in 2011 (but still failing to confront Romney’s weakness, due to decorum or something):

When Newt showed up he said, we can become the majority, we can take back the House of Representatives. We hadn’t had the House since the 1940s. And initially, none of us believed it. But he was persistent, he was tenacious. He kept it up, kept it up, and kept it up. Finally by ’94 he’s the newly elected Speaker of the House of Representatives with a Republican majority. So I wouldn’t underestimate him.  link

It’s not Trumpism, per se, but in the 2020s, it is the Fighter’s Caucus, because of the democrat socialists, and whether it is a Reagan, Gingrich or Trump (fighters all, but with different styles), the gOp better get its head out of its arse and get on board to select a fighter to save the nation and its Constitution.  Your voters, not Trump, are the ones who demand it.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 176 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Bishop Wash Member
    Bishop Wash
    @BishopWash

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    This is a local PF. He talks like this every day. Can you decipher this?

     

     

     

    I think this is a complaint about Trump populists wanting more government intervention. My opinion on that is we have gone so far the wrong way it’s actually a legitimate subject. The problem is these guys just constantly talk in terms of cut and paste Civics and cut and paste conservatism.

    I can’t decipher it. As Andrew Klavan pointed out last year, Trump left Wu Flu decisions to the governors and didn’t create some cabinet level agency to enforce a nation-wide response. Flu Manchu was a perfect excuse for an authoritarian to grab power, as evidenced by a lot of the governors.

    • #121
  2. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Bishop Wash (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    This is a local PF. He talks like this every day. Can you decipher this?

     

     

     

     

    I think this is a complaint about Trump populists wanting more government intervention. My opinion on that is we have gone so far the wrong way it’s actually a legitimate subject. The problem is these guys just constantly talk in terms of cut and paste Civics and cut and paste conservatism.

    I can’t decipher it. As Andrew Klavan pointed out last year, Trump left Wu Flu decisions to the governors and didn’t create some cabinet level agency to enforce a nation-wide response. Flu Manchu was a perfect excuse for an authoritarian to grab power, as evidenced by a lot of the governors.

    That wasn’t what I expected, but that is very good analysis. 

    I think the best context is the long interviews of Steve Bannon on Frontline, but I admit that’s a lot of work for most people.

    • #122
  3. DrewInTherapy Member
    DrewInTherapy
    @DrewInWisconsin

    It’s impossible to make a clear case for or against generally wanting government intervention. For some things yes, for other things, no. But the left/establishment nexus thinks it’s achieved a huge “gotcha” when it points out policy areas where small-government conservatives want government intervention.

     

    • #123
  4. DrewInTherapy Member
    DrewInTherapy
    @DrewInWisconsin

    I see Heath Mayo is trying to join Liz Cheney in sucking all the air out of any room he’s in and grandstanding on anti-Trumpism.

    • #124
  5. Taras Coolidge
    Taras
    @Taras

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    DrewInTherapy (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    You have to actually explain it to these people. Unreal.

     

    I guess I couldn’t spot the thing that has David French so worked up. Does he deny corporate censorship?

    David French is mad because more and more people are tuning out his nonsense.

    But I distinctly remember when Alex Jones was banned from YouTube, et al, and the conservative commentariat said that was perfectly okay, because he was a nutcase. And many of us said, “this is where it starts. This is not about Alex Jones. This is about censorship. Take a stand against it!” and we were called conspiracy theorists and Alex Jones cultists.

    And the pogroms continued.

     

    They edit any damn thing they feel like. I mean it’s just unbelievable that he doesn’t know that. He’s not the only one that talks like that.

    Following this stuff — you’re a better man than I am, Rufus Jones!

    • #125
  6. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    DrewInTherapy (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    I wouldn’t even try to guess what the French Davidians might think is wrong with that.

    French thinks that conservatives aren’t being systematically silenced.

    He also thinks he’s a conservative.

    Someone should silence him and see how he whines.

    You don’t silence the Chief of Gaslighting.

     

    • #126
  7. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    DrewInTherapy (View Comment):

    It’s impossible to make a clear case for or against generally wanting government intervention. For some things yes, for other things, no. But the left/establishment nexus thinks it’s achieved a huge “gotcha” when it points out policy areas where small-government conservatives want government intervention.

     

    We are too far past a ton of bad government policy to not be OK with some intervention. 

    They should have gone very libertarian after the fall of the Soviet union and the advent of computers and automation. We are way past that point. It’s a joke. The GOP is a joke in this sense.

    • #127
  8. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Taras (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    DrewInTherapy (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    You have to actually explain it to these people. Unreal.

     

    I guess I couldn’t spot the thing that has David French so worked up. Does he deny corporate censorship?

    David French is mad because more and more people are tuning out his nonsense.

    But I distinctly remember when Alex Jones was banned from YouTube, et al, and the conservative commentariat said that was perfectly okay, because he was a nutcase. And many of us said, “this is where it starts. This is not about Alex Jones. This is about censorship. Take a stand against it!” and we were called conspiracy theorists and Alex Jones cultists.

    And the pogroms continued.

     

    They edit any damn thing they feel like. I mean it’s just unbelievable that he doesn’t know that. He’s not the only one that talks like that.

    Following this stuff — you’re a better man than I am, Rufus Jones!

    I do this because of personal insecurities, but I’m going to give it up I think. I am not the crazy one.

    • #128
  9. Taras Coolidge
    Taras
    @Taras

    DrewInTherapy (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    You have to actually explain it to these people. Unreal.

     

    I guess I couldn’t spot the thing that has David French so worked up. Does he deny corporate censorship?

    David French is mad because more and more people are tuning out his nonsense.

    But I distinctly remember when Alex Jones was banned from YouTube, et al, and the conservative commentariat said that was perfectly okay, because he was a nutcase. And many of us said, “this is where it starts. This is not about Alex Jones. This is about censorship. Take a stand against it!” and we were called conspiracy theorists and Alex Jones cultists.

    And the pogroms continued.

     

    The French Davidian anti-pope thinks, because PragerU hasn’t been thrown off social media altogether, that proves it’s not being subjected to a “relentless censorship campaign”.

    That’s silly, of course.  Big Tech is relentlessly censoring, not everything PragerU does, but just the things it considers important to suppress.  In other words, it’s relentlessly keeping a watch on PragerU, looking for thoughtcrime.

    • #129
  10. DrewInTherapy Member
    DrewInTherapy
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Taras (View Comment):

    DrewInTherapy (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    You have to actually explain it to these people. Unreal.

     

    I guess I couldn’t spot the thing that has David French so worked up. Does he deny corporate censorship?

    David French is mad because more and more people are tuning out his nonsense.

    But I distinctly remember when Alex Jones was banned from YouTube, et al, and the conservative commentariat said that was perfectly okay, because he was a nutcase. And many of us said, “this is where it starts. This is not about Alex Jones. This is about censorship. Take a stand against it!” and we were called conspiracy theorists and Alex Jones cultists.

    And the pogroms continued.

     

    The French Davidian anti-pope thinks, because PragerU hasn’t been thrown off social media altogether, that proves it’s not being subjected to a “relentless censorship campaign”.

    That’s silly, of course. Big Tech is relentlessly censoring, not everything PragerU does, but just the things it considers important to suppress. In other words, it’s relentlessly keeping a watch on PragerU, looking for thoughtcrime.

    I seem to recall that PragerU videos were some of the first things to be censored right after Alex Jones.

    • #130
  11. Sisyphus Member
    Sisyphus
    @Sisyphus

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Following this stuff — you’re a better man than I am, Rufus Jones!

    I do this because of personal insecurities, but I’m going to give it up I think. I am not the crazy one.

    Why would you think there is only one?

    • #131
  12. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Sisyphus (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Following this stuff — you’re a better man than I am, Rufus Jones!

    I do this because of personal insecurities, but I’m going to give it up I think. I am not the crazy one.

    Why would you think there is only one?

    I don’t get what you are saying. What I’m saying is the anti-Trump types. I’m trying to see their point. 

    I’m not the bad or crazy person here.

    • #132
  13. DrewInTherapy Member
    DrewInTherapy
    @DrewInWisconsin

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Sisyphus (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Following this stuff — you’re a better man than I am, Rufus Jones!

    I do this because of personal insecurities, but I’m going to give it up I think. I am not the crazy one.

    Why would you think there is only one?

    I don’t get what you are saying.

    That there’s more than one of us!

    • #133
  14. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    DrewInTherapy (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Sisyphus (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Following this stuff — you’re a better man than I am, Rufus Jones!

    I do this because of personal insecurities, but I’m going to give it up I think. I am not the crazy one.

    Why would you think there is only one?

    I don’t get what you are saying.

    That there’s more than one of us!

    Oh. That’s nice because, man those guys are so judge mental. They spew out the boiler plate BS as if it’s the most thoughtful thing ever.

    • #134
  15. DrewInTherapy Member
    DrewInTherapy
    @DrewInWisconsin

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    DrewInTherapy (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Sisyphus (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Following this stuff — you’re a better man than I am, Rufus Jones!

    I do this because of personal insecurities, but I’m going to give it up I think. I am not the crazy one.

    Why would you think there is only one?

    I don’t get what you are saying.

    That there’s more than one of us!

    Oh. That’s nice because, man those guys are so judge mental. They spew out the boiler plate BS as if it’s the most thoughtful thing ever.

    To be fair, that’s typical politician rhetoric anyway. Empty words built into a tower of babble.

    I think people are going to start demanding more normie-speak from politicians, especially post-Trump. Whatever you think of the man, he always told you exactly what he thought. No puffery on that one.

    • #135
  16. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    DrewInTherapy (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    DrewInTherapy (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Sisyphus (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Following this stuff — you’re a better man than I am, Rufus Jones!

    I do this because of personal insecurities, but I’m going to give it up I think. I am not the crazy one.

    Why would you think there is only one?

    I don’t get what you are saying.

    That there’s more than one of us!

    Oh. That’s nice because, man those guys are so judge mental. They spew out the boiler plate BS as if it’s the most thoughtful thing ever.

    To be fair, that’s typical politician rhetoric anyway. Empty words built into a tower of babble.

    I think people are going to start demanding more normie-speak from politicians, especially post-Trump. Whatever you think of the man, he always told you exactly what he thought. No puffery on that one.

    I have a new trademark. This is how they make everybody dumber. 

    GOPb-boilerplate 

    • #136
  17. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Speaking of boiler plate. Do you think you are going to learn anything by talking to these guys?

    https://www.principlesfirst.us/our-principles.html#/

     

     

    • #137
  18. DrewInTherapy Member
    DrewInTherapy
    @DrewInWisconsin

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Speaking of boiler plate. Do you think you are going to learn anything by talking to these guys?

    https://www.principlesfirst.us/our-principles.html#/

    I will learn how desperate they are for cash.

    • #138
  19. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    DrewInTherapy (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Speaking of boiler plate. Do you think you are going to learn anything by talking to these guys?

    https://www.principlesfirst.us/our-principles.html#/

    I will learn how desperate they are for cash.

    Actually, it’s a very small operation money-wise. They don’t ask for much money and they don’t spend much money. From what I can tell, they hardly do anything except gather names and have a convention in Washington DC every year. Somebody gave them $90,000 to start out, but it isn’t a big fiscal operation.

    At this moment I think it’s a leftist scam to promote people around The Bulwark orbit. It could morph into something else. 

    I don’t know anything about it, but I find it really weird that the management structure only has one public name on it. No board of directors.

    • #139
  20. DrewInTherapy Member
    DrewInTherapy
    @DrewInWisconsin

    RufusRJones (View Comment):
    Actually, it’s a very small operation money-wise.

    So many of these fake Republican grifting organizations are little more than an office, a website, and a phone to be used for booking appearances on CNN and MSNBC.

    Ask David Harsanyi. He’s spoken about how many of these there are in Washington.

    • #140
  21. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    DrewInTherapy (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):
    Actually, it’s a very small operation money-wise.

    So many of these fake Republican grifting organizations are little more than an office, a website, and a phone to be used for booking appearances on CNN and MSNBC.

    Ask David Harsanyi. He’s spoken about how many of these there are in Washington.

    Given the trajectory they are on, it feels like the members are being used in that sense, but they keep a lot of stuff secret.

    • #141
  22. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    This is just textbook principles first. lol 

     

     

     

    • #142
  23. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    This is just textbook principles first. lol

     

     

     

    I think that is better expressed as “It’s good to be important, but it’s more important to be good.”

    • #143
  24. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    kedavis (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    This is just textbook principles first. lol

     

     

     

     

    I think that is better expressed as “It’s good to be important, but it’s more important to be good.”

    Exactly. These people are awful. 

    • #144
  25. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    The principles first guy just tried to tell me there was no such thing as a George Soros prosecutor. That’s what it’s like all day long with those guys. It’s a bad deal when educated and powerful Republicans think like that.

    • #145
  26. DrewInTherapy Member
    DrewInTherapy
    @DrewInWisconsin

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    The principles first guy just tried to tell me there was no such thing as a George Soros prosecutor. That’s what it’s like all day long with those guys. It’s a bad deal when educated and powerful Republicans think like that.

    IYI. Intellectual Yet Idiot.

    • #146
  27. Columbo Inactive
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    DrewInTherapy (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    The principles first guy just tried to tell me there was no such thing as a George Soros prosecutor. That’s what it’s like all day long with those guys. It’s a bad deal when educated and powerful Republicans think like that.

    IYI. Intellectual Yet Idiot.

    or UI. Useful Idiot.

    • #147
  28. Taras Coolidge
    Taras
    @Taras

    Columbo (View Comment):

    DrewInTherapy (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    The principles first guy just tried to tell me there was no such thing as a George Soros prosecutor. That’s what it’s like all day long with those guys. It’s a bad deal when educated and powerful Republicans think like that.

    IYI. Intellectual Yet Idiot.

    or UI. Useful Idiot.

    or MFS. Merely For Sale.

    • #148
  29. Columbo Inactive
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    Baker (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Baker (View Comment):

    Thanks for telling us what we think. I generally disagree with all that. Except the Devin Nunes bit. That’s definitely true.

    Are you actually a member? I’m just going by how Heath Mayo’s Twitter feed looks, the ones in Minnesota, and Gary.

    What is your problem with Nunes?

    Did you go to the DC convention?

    I wouldn’t call myself a member – havent donated any money – but do like Heath Mayo for the most part. I don’t think Mayo and Co. would agree with all – or maybe none – of your statements there. I don’t.

    I did go to the convention last year though and thoroughly enjoyed it. I got to meet Mona Charen which was a real thrill.

    Very telling.

     

    • #149
  30. Columbo Inactive
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Discuss

     

     

     

    • #150
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.