[Rushtalk] How the GOP plan to loose to Hillary

John A. Quayle blueoval57 at verizon.net
Sun Jul 19 00:45:34 MDT 2015

At 12:40 PM 7/17/2015, Carl Spitzer wrote:

         "Losing" to her would be bad enough, but 
"loosing" to her would be unconscionable! =-O

>How the Republicans Plan to Lose to Hillary
>Cliff Kincaid  ­   July 16, 2015
>comments   | 
>A new 
>from Univision, the pro-Mexico television 
>network, demonstrates the utter folly of 
>Republicans appealing to Hispanic voters. It 
>finds that 68 percent have a favorable view of 
>Hillary Clinton despite the scandals swirling 
>around her. By contrast, only 36 percent have a 
>favorable view of former Republican Governor Jeb 
>Bush, who is married to a Mexican and speaks Spanish.
>Bush “was the highest-rated of all the 
>Republican candidates,” Univision reports, with 
>Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL), a one-time proponent 
>of amnesty for illegals, coming in second with only a 35 percent approval rate.
>What the poll demonstrates is that Hispanics are 
>basically owned by the Democratic Party. The 
>Democrats’ power grab for the Latino vote has 
>been successful. However, ultimately the 
>Democratic Party’s success in the presidential 
>election depends on convincing Republicans to 
>fruitlessly continue to appeal to Hispanics, 
>while abandoning the GOP voter base of whites, conservatives and Christians.
>Overall, in terms of political party 
>affiliation, 57 percent of Hispanics identified 
>themselves as Democrats and only 18 percent said 
>they are Republicans. A total of 25 percent called themselves independent.
>In another finding, 59 percent of Hispanic 
>voters said they were satisfied with Barack 
>Obama’s presidency after his six years in 
>office. Clearly, most Hispanics have drunk the 
>Kool-Aid. For them, it appears that federal 
>benefits and legalization of border crossers are 
>what matters. Most of them don’t bat an eye in 
>regard to Obama’s lawless and traitorous conduct 
>of domestic and foreign policy.
>What the Republicans have left is to try to 
>appeal to white, conservative and Christian 
>voters. But that strategy, of course, runs the 
>obvious risk of being depicted by the liberal 
>media as racist. After all, whites are not 
>supposed to have a “white identity,” as 
>Taylor’s book by that name describes.
>Whites cannot have a racial identity, but 
>Hispanics and blacks can. This is one aspect of 
>political correctness. As communists Bill Ayers 
>and Bernardine Dohrn, who are themselves white, 
>put it in 
>book, it is a “race course against white supremacy.”
>If Republicans pander to Hispanics, they will 
>alienate their voter base, which has shown in 
>their reaction to the Donald Trump candidacy 
>that they want more­not less­action taken to 
>control the border with Mexico. Republican 
>Senator John McCain (AZ) calls the Trump 
>supporters “crazies,” an indication that the GOP 
>establishment would rather jettison these people 
>than bring them into the Republican camp. Like 
>McCain, former GOP presidential candidate Mitt 
>Romney has also attacked Trump, saying his 
>remarks about criminal aliens are hurting the 
>GOP. It’s amazing how a loser like Romney, who 
>also threw in the towel on gay marriage when he 
>was governor of Massachusetts, continues to 
>generate press. What he is saying is what the liberal media want to hear.
>Of course, the political correctness which 
>dominates the national dialogue and debate also 
>means that Republicans like Jeb Bush and Marco 
>Rubio are likely to continue to demonize Trump, 
>thereby alienating many whites. As a result, the 
>Republicans will get less of the conservative 
>and Christian vote, further diminishing their 
>chances of winning the White House. It will be a 
>replay of the losing campaigns of John McCain 
>and Mitt Romney. Republicans have already 
>alienated many Christian voters by giving up the 
>fight for traditional marriage. They had planned 
>to abandon border control as an issue until 
>Trump and “El Chapo” got in the way.
>Meanwhile, in another amazing turnaround, 
>Republicans on Capitol Hill are backing Obama’s 
>call for “sentencing reform,” a strategy that 
>will empty the prisons and increase the crime 
>rate, thereby alienating GOP voters in favor of law and order.
>As this scenario plays out, Mrs. Clinton is 
>coming across on the Democratic side looking 
>like a moderate, by virtue of the fact that an 
>open socialist, Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), 
>is running “to her left” for the Democratic nomination.
>The Clinton-Sanders show has all the earmarks of 
>a carefully staged demonstration of the Marxist 
>dialectic, an exercise designed to create the 
>appearance of conflict in order to force even 
>more radical change on the American people through Democratic Party rule.
>Anybody who knows anything about Hillary, a 
>student of Saul Alinsky, understands that her 
>“moderation” is only a façade. Her thesis on 
>Alinsky for Wellesley College was titled 
>Is Only the Fight
” That is the Marxist 
>strategy. It is the Alinsky version of the 
>Marxist dialectic. It was also adopted by Obama, 
>who was trained by Alinsky disciples working 
>with the Catholic Church in Chicago.
>In my column, 
>Marxism to Understand Hillary,” I noted that 
>Barbara Olson had come to the conclusion while 
>researching her book on Hillary that “she has a 
>political ideology that has its roots in 
>Marxism.” Olson noted, “In her formative years, 
>Marxism was a very important part of her ideology
>This means that Mrs. Clinton understands that 
>the Sanders candidacy actually supports and does 
>not undermine her own candidacy. It makes 
>Hillary look like a moderate while she moves 
>further to the left, a place she wants to be, in 
>response to the left-wing Democratic base. Only 
>the Marxist insiders seem to understand what is happening.
>Some uninformed commentators refer to something 
>called “Clintonism,” a supposed moderate brand 
>of Democratic Party politics. If that ever 
>existed, it applied to Bill Clinton and not Hillary.
>The fact is that Sanders and Mrs. Clinton have 
>associated with the same gang of communists and 
>fellow travelers for many years. Sanders was an 
>collaborator with the Communist Party-sponsored U.S. Peace Council.
>As for Hillary, Barbara Olson reported in her 
>to Pay that Robert Borosage, who served as 
>director of the Marxist Institute for Policy 
>Studies (IPS), was “a colleague and close 
>acquaintance” of Clinton. Olson wrote that Mrs. 
>Clinton operated in the “reaches of the left 
>including Robert Treuhaft and Jessica Mitford,” 
>who had been “committed Communists” and 
>“Stalinists.” Olson said that Hillary worked for 
>Treuhaft and paved the way for Mitford to lobby 
>then-Governor Bill Clinton on the death penalty issue.
>Olson described Hillary as a “budding Leninist” 
>who understood the Leninist concept of 
>acquiring, accumulating and maintaining 
>political power at any cost. She wrote that 
>“Hillary has never repudiated her connection 
>with the Communist movement in America or 
>explained her relationship with two of its 
>leading adherents. Of course, no one has pursued 
>these questions with Hillary. She has shown that 
>she will not answer hard questions about her 
>past, and she has learned that she does not need 
>to­remarkable in an age when political figures 
>are allowed such little privacy.”
>Researcher Carl Teichrib has provided me with a 
>photo of a Hillary meeting with Cora Weiss from 
>the May 2000 edition of “Peace Matters,” the 
>newsletter of the Hague Appeal for Peace. Weiss, 
>a major figure in the Institute for Policy 
>Studies, gained notoriety for organizing 
>anti-Vietnam War demonstrations and traveling to 
>Hanoi to meet with communist leaders. In the 
>photo, Hillary is shown fawning over a Hague 
>Appeal for Peace gold logo pin that Weiss is wearing.
>Teichrib, editor of 
><http://www.forcingchange.org/>Forcing Change, 
>recalls being an observer at the 1999 World 
>Federalist Association (WFA) conference, held in 
>association with the Hague Appeal for Peace, 
>during which everyone in attendance was given an 
>honorary membership into the WFA. In addition to 
>collaborating with the pro-Hanoi Hague Appeal 
>for Peace, the WFA staged a “Mission to Moscow” 
>and held several meetings with the Soviet Peace 
>Committee for the purpose of “discussing the 
>goal of general and complete disarmament” and 
>“the strengthening of the United Nations.” Mrs. 
>to a WFA conference in a tribute to veteran 
>newsman Walter Cronkite, a supporter of world government
>In the WFA booklet, “The Genius of Federation: 
>Why World Federation is the Answer to Global 
>Problems,” the group described how a “world 
>federation,” a euphemism for world government, 
>could be achieved by advancing “step by step 
>toward global governance,” mostly by enhancing 
>the power and authority of U.N. agencies.
>Obama’s Iran deal continues this strategy by 
>placing enormous power in the hands of the 
>U.N.’s International Atomic Energy Agency.
>At this stage in the campaign, even before the 
>first Republican presidential debate, we can 
>already see how the race is playing out. Hillary 
>is counting on the Republicans nominating 
>another loser with a losing strategy while she 
>moves to the left and looks like a moderate.
>Alinsky would be proud.
>Rushtalk mailing list
>Rushtalk at csdco.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://kalos.csdco.com/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20150719/2628441c/attachment.html 

More information about the Rushtalk mailing list