Republicrats Flock to Obama

The new year has already witnessed an unseemly rush on the part of some Republicans to cozy up to President Barack Obama. Sucked in by the lights, the parties, the adoring fans, and of course the fawning "paparazzi," these politicians have traded loyalty to the convictions of their constituents for pilgrimage to kiss the ring of the one whom Farrakhan called "the messiah." 

Where did the train fly off the track folks? If Obama couldn't be trusted prior to the election, as even Senator John McCain indicated, or if he supported all methods of abortion and opposed the Second Amendment prior to the election, as Obama's own record indicated he did in both cases, then he is still an untrustworthy, pro-abortion, anti-gunner. Getting elected did not change these things.

Was Obama guilty of "palling around with terrorists" as Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin said he was in the months leading up to the 2008 elections? Sure he was. His relations with William Ayers were common knowledge. So guess what? He is no less guilty of that now; getting elected didn't change that either.

So why did McCain spend his concession speech rattling on about how good the election of Obama was for our nation? Why is no less a "conservative stalwart" than Newt Gingrich now praising Obama? Why did some of the prominent "conservatives" who had dinner with Obama at George Will's house on January 13, 2009, emerge from that dinner awed by Obama's persona, wishing him the best and believing he might accomplish great things? What great things can a politician who has more in common with Vladimir Lenin than Ronald Reagan accomplish that's worthy of praise from people who claim to be conservative?

No doubt they would say that they hope to moderate the left wing politics of Obama by joining together with him. But a man with solid Democrat control of Congress and a honeymoon ahead is far more likely to influence them, and use them to paste a bipartisan veneer on his radical agenda.

During the last few days it has become known that McCain has actually been behind the scenes helping Obama, advising and conferring with him on various nominees for the upcoming hard-left administration. And Gingrich has had a soft spot for Obama since early 2008, when he described him as "another J.F.K."

In December 2008 Gingrich actually criticized RNC chair Mike Duncan because Duncan dared to ask whether Obama might have ties to Illinois Governor Blagojevich's attempts to sell Obama's former senate seat. Why isn't that a fair question Mr. Gingrich? Time has demonstrated that some of Obama's close friends were associated with the mess; and Obama's proposed Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel seems to have talked to Blagojevich before the case broke.

When CNBC's Larry Kudlow emerged from dinner at Will's house describing Obama as "charming" and talking about how he was so overwhelmed by Obama's presence that he couldn't even remember what they had for dinner, I felt as if I were going to be sick. And that feeling was taken to a whole new level upon reading that "Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and former Sens. John Warner of Virginia and Chuck Hagel of Nebraska" had agreed to attend an Obama dinner on inauguration eve, at which McCain and Vice President Joe Biden would be honored. As with Obama, what could a conservative possibly have in common with Biden? How can these people be so desperate to sit with the "in" crowd? With all respect Mr. Kudlow, Obama has no interest in dealing with both sides of the issue, but he will be happy to avail himself of gullible Republicans.

I fear that the Republicans seeking Obama's favor may not even be far enough right of center on the political spectrum to merit the badge of RINO (Republican In Name Only). Rather, it would be safer to refer to such gullible, attention-starved men as "Republicrats." Neither left nor right in their ideology, they're simply guided by their desire to be part of something that draws the praise of the Sunday morning news programs.

Do these men stand for anything? Is this our future? Some neutered, mixed-political breed that claims to be something it is not in order to get elected and then forgets those claims as soon as the newest, more popular thing comes along?

If this phenomenon took place in any other facet of life people would be outraged. Just imagine going to an NFL game where your team's quarterback purposely threw the ball to the other team in order to see them do well; he would be benched if not kicked off the team in short order. Catch one of our military personnel supporting the enemy and he will be tried for treason. Discover a doctor injecting sickness instead of treating it and he will lose his right to practice and face imprisonment. But let entrenched, inside the beltway politicians trade their dignity and sell out their party to shake hands with Obama while cameras flash and no one blinks an eye.

One Republicrat, former McCain campaign manager Rick Davis, is so desperate for relevance in the Obama-centered world that he gave BBC an interview on January 15, 2009, in which he said: "I hope [Obama] does exactly the kind of job that John McCain would have accomplished for the country." Many of us are scared he'll do just that Mr. Davis.

While Republicrats like Graham, Gingrich, Hagel, Kudlow, McCain, and Warner, among others, are clearing their calendars to make room for a handshake with the "messiah," conservatives are bewildered over the enthusiasm surrounding a leftist whose stated intention is to "remake America." I for one thought our Founders did an excellent job of making America the first time around, and would rather see their vision upheld instead of altered.

It would behoove us to share the sentiment of Rush Limbaugh in hoping Obama's presidency fails. For when the cameras quit flashing and the dinners are over, and all these Republicrats realize they've just been pawns in Obama's game, the "legacy" a successful Obama administration would leave behind will be characterized by socialized and government-rationed healthcare, drastic military cuts, tax increases, attacks on the Second Amendment, and environmentalism run amuck.

Certainly even a dinner with the President at George Will's house isn't worth it if the result is turning a blind eye to the passage of such an agenda.
The new year has already witnessed an unseemly rush on the part of some Republicans to cozy up to President Barack Obama. Sucked in by the lights, the parties, the adoring fans, and of course the fawning "paparazzi," these politicians have traded loyalty to the convictions of their constituents for pilgrimage to kiss the ring of the one whom Farrakhan called "the messiah." 

Where did the train fly off the track folks? If Obama couldn't be trusted prior to the election, as even Senator John McCain indicated, or if he supported all methods of abortion and opposed the Second Amendment prior to the election, as Obama's own record indicated he did in both cases, then he is still an untrustworthy, pro-abortion, anti-gunner. Getting elected did not change these things.

Was Obama guilty of "palling around with terrorists" as Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin said he was in the months leading up to the 2008 elections? Sure he was. His relations with William Ayers were common knowledge. So guess what? He is no less guilty of that now; getting elected didn't change that either.

So why did McCain spend his concession speech rattling on about how good the election of Obama was for our nation? Why is no less a "conservative stalwart" than Newt Gingrich now praising Obama? Why did some of the prominent "conservatives" who had dinner with Obama at George Will's house on January 13, 2009, emerge from that dinner awed by Obama's persona, wishing him the best and believing he might accomplish great things? What great things can a politician who has more in common with Vladimir Lenin than Ronald Reagan accomplish that's worthy of praise from people who claim to be conservative?

No doubt they would say that they hope to moderate the left wing politics of Obama by joining together with him. But a man with solid Democrat control of Congress and a honeymoon ahead is far more likely to influence them, and use them to paste a bipartisan veneer on his radical agenda.

During the last few days it has become known that McCain has actually been behind the scenes helping Obama, advising and conferring with him on various nominees for the upcoming hard-left administration. And Gingrich has had a soft spot for Obama since early 2008, when he described him as "another J.F.K."

In December 2008 Gingrich actually criticized RNC chair Mike Duncan because Duncan dared to ask whether Obama might have ties to Illinois Governor Blagojevich's attempts to sell Obama's former senate seat. Why isn't that a fair question Mr. Gingrich? Time has demonstrated that some of Obama's close friends were associated with the mess; and Obama's proposed Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel seems to have talked to Blagojevich before the case broke.

When CNBC's Larry Kudlow emerged from dinner at Will's house describing Obama as "charming" and talking about how he was so overwhelmed by Obama's presence that he couldn't even remember what they had for dinner, I felt as if I were going to be sick. And that feeling was taken to a whole new level upon reading that "Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and former Sens. John Warner of Virginia and Chuck Hagel of Nebraska" had agreed to attend an Obama dinner on inauguration eve, at which McCain and Vice President Joe Biden would be honored. As with Obama, what could a conservative possibly have in common with Biden? How can these people be so desperate to sit with the "in" crowd? With all respect Mr. Kudlow, Obama has no interest in dealing with both sides of the issue, but he will be happy to avail himself of gullible Republicans.

I fear that the Republicans seeking Obama's favor may not even be far enough right of center on the political spectrum to merit the badge of RINO (Republican In Name Only). Rather, it would be safer to refer to such gullible, attention-starved men as "Republicrats." Neither left nor right in their ideology, they're simply guided by their desire to be part of something that draws the praise of the Sunday morning news programs.

Do these men stand for anything? Is this our future? Some neutered, mixed-political breed that claims to be something it is not in order to get elected and then forgets those claims as soon as the newest, more popular thing comes along?

If this phenomenon took place in any other facet of life people would be outraged. Just imagine going to an NFL game where your team's quarterback purposely threw the ball to the other team in order to see them do well; he would be benched if not kicked off the team in short order. Catch one of our military personnel supporting the enemy and he will be tried for treason. Discover a doctor injecting sickness instead of treating it and he will lose his right to practice and face imprisonment. But let entrenched, inside the beltway politicians trade their dignity and sell out their party to shake hands with Obama while cameras flash and no one blinks an eye.

One Republicrat, former McCain campaign manager Rick Davis, is so desperate for relevance in the Obama-centered world that he gave BBC an interview on January 15, 2009, in which he said: "I hope [Obama] does exactly the kind of job that John McCain would have accomplished for the country." Many of us are scared he'll do just that Mr. Davis.

While Republicrats like Graham, Gingrich, Hagel, Kudlow, McCain, and Warner, among others, are clearing their calendars to make room for a handshake with the "messiah," conservatives are bewildered over the enthusiasm surrounding a leftist whose stated intention is to "remake America." I for one thought our Founders did an excellent job of making America the first time around, and would rather see their vision upheld instead of altered.

It would behoove us to share the sentiment of Rush Limbaugh in hoping Obama's presidency fails. For when the cameras quit flashing and the dinners are over, and all these Republicrats realize they've just been pawns in Obama's game, the "legacy" a successful Obama administration would leave behind will be characterized by socialized and government-rationed healthcare, drastic military cuts, tax increases, attacks on the Second Amendment, and environmentalism run amuck.

Certainly even a dinner with the President at George Will's house isn't worth it if the result is turning a blind eye to the passage of such an agenda.