"True Conservative" Lincoln Project: We're All-In For "Fundraising" For Abortion-Without-Limits Tim Ryan

Remember, guys: the permanent DC "Republican" Swamp Dwellers of the Lincoln Project are and always were "True Conservatives" Fighting For You.

The woman saying "pls no" to the Lincoln Project? That is none other than Tim Ryan's director of communications and no that's not a joke.

But it's not just the Lincoln Project that is demasking as far as revealing it is and always has been loyal to the left and to the Democrat Party.

Bill Kristol, 1998, when he was Selling the Rubes a "conservative" magazine:

Bill Kristol, yesterday, when he is more open about who he's really serving:

Glenn Greenwald
@ggreenwald

These so-called #NeverTrump GOP operatives and neocons started off pretending they were still the same conservatives as always, just horrified by Trump.

But now they have jettisoned almost every view they held, with no explanation, and are full-fledged Dems and nothing more.

To put it more precisely: they jettisoned every view they held for decades which conflicts with their new liberal fans who buy their books and donate to their groups.

But mostly they assessed -- correctly -- that the Dem Party is a more hospitable home to their core ideology.

Not quite right; he's now being more honest about what he really believes. It was the prior "beliefs" that were the pose, not the current ones.

mike @not_that_mike

Replying to @ggreenwald

Do people change their minds over 25 years?

Christina Pushaw
@ChristinaPushaw

Replying to @ggreenwald and @DonnaDavisHNL

That's what makes it all look like such a grift. If he genuinely changed his mind on abortion, and he wants to keep speaking publicly about the issue, he should articulate WHAT caused him to change his mind. But he doesn't do that, because it's not genuine

Well... he's genuinely expressing his beliefs now. He was counterfeiting them before.

I witnessed a Twitter discussion that Kristol initiated, before the rise of Trump, in which he proposed that the GOP just abandon all social issues and become a socially-liberal, fiscally-"conservative" (actually, fiscally-corporatist, he meant) party.

A party which was openly just a front for his neoliberal corporate donors, in other words.

Ben Domenech pointed out that that particular profile he was pushing represented about 5% of all voters, whereas the GOP's current (alleged) socially conservative, fiscally conservative alignment represented 25-30% of all voters. (Remember, they also pick up independents.)

So Bill Kristol was pushing for a party that represented only a tiny slice of the electorate.

But which, of course, would be supported by a huge amount of the Money Electorate. As Krystal Ball noted, the kind of Corporate Neoliberalism that Bill Kristol was advocating for here is the "best-funded fringe political movement in human history."

And fat lazy Bill Kristol is all about that sweet, sweet corporate megadonor funding.

Bill Kristol doesn't bother with the fig-leaf of a "here's how my views have evolved" cover story because he wants you to know he was Conning the Rubes all along. He wants the liberals to know he was always really with them.

I don't have any problem, exactly, with moderate Republicans, or even liberal Republicans. Or even neocon Republicans. Or pro-choice Republicans.

My problem is that they hold most key positions of power in the party and government bureaucracy, far, far out of proportion to their actual strength within the party, and do not exercise that power in service of what their constituents sent them to DC to do, but instead use their power to thwart their constituents' wills.

Because they hate and fear normie conservatives with every bit of the same parochial class bigotry as their Democrat officemates, housemates, and bedmates.

A few data points to prove this:

Dan Riehl told me that Mark Levin told him that when he (Levin) entered the Reagan administration, the chief obstacle to implementing the agenda Reagan had run on, and which the public had, with full informed consent, voted for, was not the scattered and battered Democrat Party, but the resistance from the liberal Establishment GOP, the northeastern George Bush Republicans who came into the Administration with Reagan's conservatives. They were the Disloyal Internal Opposition who thwarted Reagan at every turn, coordinating with Democrats, leaking to the media to block conservative policies, etc.

They were Democrats in all but branding.

A dozen times Obama told us that, behind closed doors, Republican office-holders would tell him that they were secretly in favor of open borders (or, "Comprehensive Immigration Reform," as the DC euphemism goes) as well as Obamacare and other leftwing agenda items, but that they could not be seen voting for these things due to the evil, thuggish, unenlightened GOP base.

We should have believed Obama. He lied about many things, but I'm now convinced he was telling the truth about this.

A Slate article -- approvingly linked by Hot Air, and I don't think you need three guesses to identify who linked it -- admits there is a Deep State and praises it for having blocked Donald Trump's foreign policy. Bear in mind, Trump was very clear about his foreign policy. He announced it to the public. The public voted in favor of it. They were not confused about it and there was no deception regarding it.

Trump's foreign policy was not just Trump's foreign policy; it was the foreign policy America's voters chose, democratically and fairly, after being fully informed about it and having had an entire campaign season to consider it.

But an alliance of neoliberals and neoconservatives in the permanent foreign policy Blob in DC illegally and unconstitutionally blocked the democratically-selected foreign policy from going forward and to this day, the neoliberals and neoconservatives are high-fiving each other about their subversion of Our Precious Democratic Norms.

Here's a fresh data point that Instapundit just linked, at the Battleswarm blog: Texas Governor Abbott's chief of staff just signed on to be a lobbyist for... the leftwing Soros-controlled Tides Center.

The "People's Pundit" reports on the Establishment trying to beat a real conservative in a blue Latino district -- because, whatever happens, the Establishment will not permit conservatives to gain power in the GOP.

Rich Baris "The People's Pundit"
@Peoples_Pundit

Republicans have some "real" candidates this time and could win seats they never even dreamed possible with this shift in the Hispanic vote and realignment.

But the Establishment and GOP donor class who owns them are holding them back.

They are their weak links.

You want a "for instance", look no further than @DavidGiglioCA. The man has been running a face-to-face campaign visiting traditional Democratic strongholds in a majority Hispanic district for a year.

No joke, ghettos.

The GOPe pushes a donor with no chance to win in November.

This no-chance donor candidate enriches Establishment consultants--same fake pollsters who told Mandel he was ahead, by the way--who have literally been plagiarizing David's campaign rhetoric and slogans in advertising.

It's pathetic and self-defeating.

Btw, get this...

If this GOPe donor candidate were to win, he'd be done the very next day when DEMs release the tape of him saying Hispanics have to vote for him because he employs them.

No kidding, he really said that in a majority Hispanic district.

Over before it starts. Open seat lost.

Btw, we poll this race. As of now, @DavidGiglioCA has a slight 5-point lead with Hispanic voters, while Trump leads Biden by 6 points among the very same voters who admittedly voted 56/38 for Biden in 2020.

GOPe donor candidate getting crushed by 11 points among these voters.

We're the GOPe's real enemy. Not the Democrats. The Democrats are their occasional allies, their frenemies. We have always been their real enemies.

I didn't follow the Ohio primary, so I can't vouch for what J.D. Vance claims here, but it sure feels true.

If Karl Rove was against him, I'm suddenly retroactively in favor of him.

The generally-useless National Review check-casher MB Dougherty makes a good point: The Establishment likes attacking people on grounds that they're "inconsistent" or other policy-neutral terms, to disguise the fact that they really oppose people on things like their immigration-hawk positions -- positions that are popular with voters but hated by the corporate donor class.

I wonder if Dougherty knew, when he wrote that, that he was actually fragging fellow National Review writer Jim Geraghty, who had just made the "Buh His Inconsistency" attack on Vance that Dougherty is claiming is a craven, dishonest attack-of-opportunity made to hide the real attack, which is about immigration?

I didn't read the article, though, so I don't know what Geraghty's point is. I have gotten the sense that Vance's "MAGA" credentials are shaky.

But... I mean, okay. Trump's pro-life credentials were also shaky but here we are on the cusp of Roe v. Wade being overturned, huh?

And I'm not sure whose interests it serves to attack the GOP candidate after the primary.

I've been saying this for years and years: The pseudoright neocon corporate shills are all about open borders, and have been stealthily pushing that agenda for years, and were on the cusp of finally achieving it.

Then Trump upset that apple-cart by announcing a policy of unapologetic border hawkishness, igniting a preference cascade which electrified the party.

The Open Borders contingent did not want to admit they're open borders -- they're dishonest, craven, shifty motherfuckers who do not confront arguments honestly and fairly by head-on engagement, but by subversion and innuendo and sidewinder collateral attacks -- but they did want to kneecap the border hawk position.

So they just began making a series of basically-insincere attacks on Trump. Oh, there was some sincerity in the attacks on Trump - -they genuinely disliked him.

But the attacks were made in place of the real attack, which was: "He's ruined the Comprehensive Immigration Reform sell-out we were just about to broker!"

So they began offering up collateral attacks. "Say, you Rubes like Morality, don't you? Well this Trump feller's been divorced twice, doesn't that just steam your beans?! This Trump feller's had four business bankruptcies! What a lout! And look at all this rubbish he says on Twitter! What an absolute heel! So unchristian!"

You'll notice they never talk about immigration, whether to support Trump or to oppose him. That's because they're sneaky, cowardly rats who do in fact oppose him, and support Open Borders -- Oh, I'm sorry, I mean, Comprehensive Immigration Reform that Welcomes Undocumented Americans with Love and Kindness -- but they know they can't win on that so it's just this constant series of dishonest attacks on side-issues about "character."

Oh, sometimes they talk about Free Trade, which is very, very closely linked to Free Immigration Across Borders. In fact, the Wall Street Journal used to argue -- persuasively -- that it was senseless to talk about free travel of goods across borders without simultaneously talking about free travel of labor across borders as well.

So they'll talk about "Free Trade" as a stand-in for what they won't talk about, which is Open Borders.

But when they say "Free Trade" -- understand, they also mean Open Borders.

And they will not stop subverting us and throwing elections until we submit and give up and agree to their Comprehensive Open Borders schemes. This isn't even just an economic corporate play at this point -- though it is that too -- it's a holy, racial-redemption religious point for them at this point too.

This is how they prove they're #NotRacist to their liberal friends, wives, and lovers.

We can't have this any longer.

We just can't.

"Big Tent Republicanism" has been tried, and it has failed. These people must be removed from the party and all the affiliated apparatuses of the party. They must be purged.

They may still vote for the party, if they like, which I suppose they will do about 25% of the time, as they do now. Always for far left "Republicans" like Christine Todd Whitman.

But it's time to purge these people from all positions of influence in DC and drive them from elective office.

I'm so tired of this bullshit, with liberal Democrats posing as "Republicans," all lining up to vouch for their fellow Democrats posing as Republicans:

We cannot spend 6-9 months fighting the liberals in campaign season and then fighting the covert liberals in our own party who sabotage us and subvert us for 2-4 years when we've "won" an office.

No party can accomplish anything when its "leadership" class is constantly at war with its actual voters.

And you can't fire the voters, so it's time to fire the leaders.

posted by Ace at 02:26 PM

| Access Comments