The current field of “conservatives” carries the trappings of being Progressive Democrat Lite more than the stormy and tempestuous political Puritans as we might suppose
While putzing around with the TV remote, I was afflicted with the Fox News Channel’s attempts to interview Chris Christie. It seems Christie, in his effort to be the “chosen one” the Republicans press forth to tilt at the windmill that is Hillary Clinton, is under fire for “pulling a Jindal” by removing himself from his duties as Governor [of New Jersey]. This places Christie in league with Rubio, Paul, and Cruz as each chases their dreams of ruling over the Washington Autocratic Bureaucracy instead of fulfilling prior campaign promises to serve their constituencies as Senators.
Bobby Jindal initiated the program as governor-in-absentia for the eight years he was in office. In fact, Jindal began his Presidential campaign in 1996 while he was employed by Mike Foster as Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals. In 1999 Jindal was named president of the University of Louisiana System; and then appointed by George W. Bush in 2001 as principal adviser to Tommy Thompson, Secretary of the. U. S. Department of Health and Human Resources.
The development of this extensive and well-documented political pedigree is obvious despite his steadfast denials as to presidential ambitions.
Uh huh.
Now Christie, Paul, Cruz, and Rubio are skulking in the shadow Jindal cast. Following Jindal’s precedents, each has managed to repudiate or outright lie concerning devotion to their respective constituencies and the needs of those people. Luke 16:13 says: “No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.” KJV [A mammon is a personification of wealth and avarice as an evil spirit. Some would say this exactly describes some politicians.]
So, as we in the “peanut gallery” suffer the roar of the greasepaint and the smell of this entrant crowd of clowns bumbling around beneath the Big Top, we find the circus is the domain of a crippled elephant struggling to surreptitiously advance the agenda of the # already in power. This poorly crafted effort to emulate great performances of the past is now no more than a poorly crafted attempt at mimicry of the opposing party. And nobody seems to understand what they’re stepping in isn’t clover but is more like the effluent left behind by their predecessor pachyderms.
Politicians are at best disingenuous and outright liars at worse. The GOP candidate hopefuls gaining the most attention are a billionaire blow-hard and a retired neurosurgeon. Neither seems to fit the bill of Machiavellian chevalier. The one is as politically adept and as diplomatic as a jackhammer used for a circumcision, and the good doctor simply tells the truth as he sees it. His dignity and humility seem to be the real deal. His integrity appears to prove he’s not cut-out for the political realm—too much honesty.
The current field of “conservatives” carries the trappings of being Progressive Democrat Lite more than the stormy and tempestuous political Puritans as we might suppose. This is largely due to how Progressive politics has been covertly pushed before the people by charlatans seeking self-serving elevation in society by pursuing political office. Enter Jindal, Cruz, Rubio, Paul, and Christie as they promise service and representation to the people who elected them. They then run this marathon of the damned to the finish of their political lives. If you run too much too often (and in our estimation too bloody long) you become the next Harold Stassen, a tired joke from another time. Stassen sought – and lost -- the GOP nomination ten times between 1948 and 1992. Today Stassen is remembered as the “Grand Old Loser”.
Well, we now have so many vying for the dubious distinction of “Grand Old Loser” by virtue of their quest for a position that they regularly demonstrate they’re not qualified for now. Our disqualification of them is based on the ever-present fact they can’t keep the promises already made to their constituents. They’ve abandoned personal performance responsibilities to campaign for an office higher than that they sought last.
Does this show integrity? Does this indicate reliability, veracity and steadfastness in office? Or does it present a picture of avarice, self-aggrandizement, cupidity, and a selfish drive to control and dictate?
Shall we elect a replacement president cast in the mold of Barack Obama, a man more interested in fundamentally changing America for the worse; or shall we elect a disingenuous clown soon to fall flat on his face as he trips trying to enter the clown car?
Pay attention. It’s all up to you.
Thanks for listening!
