Get Over What about Trump, Exactly?

Now we're told at this early date to "get over it." We being those conservatives who aggressively opposed Donald Trump, of course.

So what exactly should we get over? What does getting over it look like? Let’s explore. 

This notion was floated by no less than my friend, colleague and editor of more than eight years, Thomas Lifson, on this site yesterday.  The same sentiment was parroted across the internet and on talk radio yesterday as well.  Much of it by people with far less interest in serious adult conversation than Lifson.  I say far less serious because I don't think a single pro Trump commenter to my article yesterday addressed the direct Trump quotes I presented.  Many of my comments below are directed at that mindset, not at Dr. Lifson’s. 

And as Thomas knows, I both praised and criticized Trump here in April...of 2011...in American Thinker.  My position on Trump has been totally consistent for more than five years.  That is not a universal trait.  For five plus years I've warned about Trump -- while praising him on many levels.  I recognized the good and the bad.  Thus, no I'm not over anything at the moment.  I've been warning about this since before Huckabee won Iowa. 

So back to what it is we should get over: If you simply mean we should vote Trump to keep Hillary out of the White House, then I may already be "over it.” Or I might be by November.  But if you think I'm going to let anyone off the hook for disastrous decisions?  No way, Jose (a little border lingo). 

So if the "get over it" posture is your position, may I inquire if this the standard Trump supporters will apply to themselves on the morning after Election Day 2016 if Hillary Clinton wins?  Hey, she won.  No biggie.  I'm "over it."  Yeah, right.

For the record, I'm not among those who think that Trump will certainly lose to Hillary.  I believe Hillary is capable of losing to anyone, Trump included.

So if that happens, for example, will you apply that same quickie "get over it" standard the day President Trump suggests replacing ObamaCare with something worse because he's "gonna be fantastic for women's health care" and conservatives are "cruel and heartless"?  Or signs a bill funding Planned Parenthood after "making a deal" with Chuck Schumer? Or sics the Internal Revenue Service on companies in your 401K portfolio because he doesn't like where they make products? Or extends ethanol subsidies so your gas and your food both cost more while the corn distillate destroys your engine? Or plays golf with his big buddy John Boehner and a day later gives Nancy Pelosi everything she wants? 

Or for that matter, when he does anything that flies in the face of his "position papers" on his website -- words he clearly never read, let alone wrote? Words he contradicted every time he was in front of an open mic? Will you merely get over it? 

These are serious concerns about Trump, and they remain today.  And if any of us who opposed Trump were over it today, then that would be a sad commentary on our depth of understanding and commitment.

I have never gotten over a bad election result that quickly, and I never will.  And it's the elections that matter, not the candidate.  This is about the country.  We are on the precipice of a fantastic opportunity and we have squandered it.  Hell no, I am not over that.  And what I'm not over is far deeper than the idea that my favorite choice didn't win.  That's not the issue.  That little part I am over.

But no, I am not over the Constitution, although apparently many are, because they have thrown in with a man who never mentions it and often runs afoul of it.  Donald Trump was born "over" the Constitution and still is.  He's never been concerned with it.  New York values don’t intersect with the Constitution.  No, I am not over the idea of liberty, and thus I'm not quite over the fact that the Republican nominee is a man totally unfamiliar with this concept and a man who never ever looks at increased liberty as the answer for out of control government.  Ever.

Please, show me where I am wrong on that. 

Nor am I over the related concept of limited government.  Nothing, not a single syllable out of Donald Trump's mouth, has uttered a whiff of anything to do with limited government.  When Carrier and Ford are forced offshore because of out of control government, what does Donald do? He threatens even more government power as the solution.  It never even dawns on the Orange One or his followers to perhaps remove some of the government obstacles in the way of Carrier, Ford and other once free companies.  What an idea! 

When crony capitalism is destroying our free market, does Donald want to stop government from picking winners and losers? NO! He doubles down on ethanol subsidies.  He obfuscates the issue of eminent domain.  And he rails against trade, not even considering the obvious conclusion that the big stick of tariffs is centralized planning and government picking winners and losers on steroids.

And I'm not over fighting the establishment either -- something I've been doing since 1992 -- and yet daily I get savaged by many who likely didn't understand the concept until maybe 2014 -- if at all.  My first establishment target in 1992 was John McCain, even having a heated argument with G.  Gordon Liddy about McCain in early 1993.  There was no palpable anti-McCain sentiment until at least 2005-6.  I was alone here. 

I owned the web URL www.firekarlrove in 2001.  Yes, 2001.  Think about that for a minute.  When did you figure Rove out? Just asking. 

So certainly everyone is perfectly within their rights to call anyone an establishment hack, because in this country you are perfectly free to be embarrassingly wrong.  Speaking of which, the notion that Trump is this great wrecking ball to the establishment would be laughable if it weren't so serious.

Trump is the establishment.  His big check to party boss and establishment poster child Mitch McConnell has barely even cleared yet -- a donation he followed up by insulting on Twitter those stupid Kentuckians who were willing to forgo McConnell's crony gravy train to his home state in favor of a principled man like Matt Bevin.  Trump brags he has been giving to Republicans lately, but these donations are to establishment Republicans running against outsiders! 

So no, I'm not over this kind of House of Cards attitude, and if you are, then you were never really in the fight to begin with.  You've been conned.

Alexander Hamilton said “if we must have an enemy at the head of Government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures.”  He was right.  Many of you haven not heeded that lesson.  I have, and I am proudly not over the nomination of big government New York liberal Donald J Trump. 

Edmund Wright is contributor to American Thinker, Breitbart, Newsmax TV and Talk Radio Network.  He has been exposing and opposing the establishment since 1992. 

Now we're told at this early date to "get over it." We being those conservatives who aggressively opposed Donald Trump, of course.

So what exactly should we get over? What does getting over it look like? Let’s explore. 

This notion was floated by no less than my friend, colleague and editor of more than eight years, Thomas Lifson, on this site yesterday.  The same sentiment was parroted across the internet and on talk radio yesterday as well.  Much of it by people with far less interest in serious adult conversation than Lifson.  I say far less serious because I don't think a single pro Trump commenter to my article yesterday addressed the direct Trump quotes I presented.  Many of my comments below are directed at that mindset, not at Dr. Lifson’s. 

And as Thomas knows, I both praised and criticized Trump here in April...of 2011...in American Thinker.  My position on Trump has been totally consistent for more than five years.  That is not a universal trait.  For five plus years I've warned about Trump -- while praising him on many levels.  I recognized the good and the bad.  Thus, no I'm not over anything at the moment.  I've been warning about this since before Huckabee won Iowa. 

So back to what it is we should get over: If you simply mean we should vote Trump to keep Hillary out of the White House, then I may already be "over it.” Or I might be by November.  But if you think I'm going to let anyone off the hook for disastrous decisions?  No way, Jose (a little border lingo). 

So if the "get over it" posture is your position, may I inquire if this the standard Trump supporters will apply to themselves on the morning after Election Day 2016 if Hillary Clinton wins?  Hey, she won.  No biggie.  I'm "over it."  Yeah, right.

For the record, I'm not among those who think that Trump will certainly lose to Hillary.  I believe Hillary is capable of losing to anyone, Trump included.

So if that happens, for example, will you apply that same quickie "get over it" standard the day President Trump suggests replacing ObamaCare with something worse because he's "gonna be fantastic for women's health care" and conservatives are "cruel and heartless"?  Or signs a bill funding Planned Parenthood after "making a deal" with Chuck Schumer? Or sics the Internal Revenue Service on companies in your 401K portfolio because he doesn't like where they make products? Or extends ethanol subsidies so your gas and your food both cost more while the corn distillate destroys your engine? Or plays golf with his big buddy John Boehner and a day later gives Nancy Pelosi everything she wants? 

Or for that matter, when he does anything that flies in the face of his "position papers" on his website -- words he clearly never read, let alone wrote? Words he contradicted every time he was in front of an open mic? Will you merely get over it? 

These are serious concerns about Trump, and they remain today.  And if any of us who opposed Trump were over it today, then that would be a sad commentary on our depth of understanding and commitment.

I have never gotten over a bad election result that quickly, and I never will.  And it's the elections that matter, not the candidate.  This is about the country.  We are on the precipice of a fantastic opportunity and we have squandered it.  Hell no, I am not over that.  And what I'm not over is far deeper than the idea that my favorite choice didn't win.  That's not the issue.  That little part I am over.

But no, I am not over the Constitution, although apparently many are, because they have thrown in with a man who never mentions it and often runs afoul of it.  Donald Trump was born "over" the Constitution and still is.  He's never been concerned with it.  New York values don’t intersect with the Constitution.  No, I am not over the idea of liberty, and thus I'm not quite over the fact that the Republican nominee is a man totally unfamiliar with this concept and a man who never ever looks at increased liberty as the answer for out of control government.  Ever.

Please, show me where I am wrong on that. 

Nor am I over the related concept of limited government.  Nothing, not a single syllable out of Donald Trump's mouth, has uttered a whiff of anything to do with limited government.  When Carrier and Ford are forced offshore because of out of control government, what does Donald do? He threatens even more government power as the solution.  It never even dawns on the Orange One or his followers to perhaps remove some of the government obstacles in the way of Carrier, Ford and other once free companies.  What an idea! 

When crony capitalism is destroying our free market, does Donald want to stop government from picking winners and losers? NO! He doubles down on ethanol subsidies.  He obfuscates the issue of eminent domain.  And he rails against trade, not even considering the obvious conclusion that the big stick of tariffs is centralized planning and government picking winners and losers on steroids.

And I'm not over fighting the establishment either -- something I've been doing since 1992 -- and yet daily I get savaged by many who likely didn't understand the concept until maybe 2014 -- if at all.  My first establishment target in 1992 was John McCain, even having a heated argument with G.  Gordon Liddy about McCain in early 1993.  There was no palpable anti-McCain sentiment until at least 2005-6.  I was alone here. 

I owned the web URL www.firekarlrove in 2001.  Yes, 2001.  Think about that for a minute.  When did you figure Rove out? Just asking. 

So certainly everyone is perfectly within their rights to call anyone an establishment hack, because in this country you are perfectly free to be embarrassingly wrong.  Speaking of which, the notion that Trump is this great wrecking ball to the establishment would be laughable if it weren't so serious.

Trump is the establishment.  His big check to party boss and establishment poster child Mitch McConnell has barely even cleared yet -- a donation he followed up by insulting on Twitter those stupid Kentuckians who were willing to forgo McConnell's crony gravy train to his home state in favor of a principled man like Matt Bevin.  Trump brags he has been giving to Republicans lately, but these donations are to establishment Republicans running against outsiders! 

So no, I'm not over this kind of House of Cards attitude, and if you are, then you were never really in the fight to begin with.  You've been conned.

Alexander Hamilton said “if we must have an enemy at the head of Government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures.”  He was right.  Many of you haven not heeded that lesson.  I have, and I am proudly not over the nomination of big government New York liberal Donald J Trump. 

Edmund Wright is contributor to American Thinker, Breitbart, Newsmax TV and Talk Radio Network.  He has been exposing and opposing the establishment since 1992.