By Nancy Thorner & Ed Ingold -
A phony and a fraud was visited upon the American people on Thursday, March 3rd, but it wasn’t only by Mitt Romney — a two time failure at the presidential sweepstakes and the self-appointed guardian of the Republican establishment – who excoriated Trump by expounding upon "profound consequences" should Trump be elected president
Ironic is that Romney courted and touted Trump's endorsement and support in 2012. At the time Romney proudly stood next to Trump and accepted his endorsement, as did the establishment, for winning was most important to the Republican Party. Four years later Trump has become a monster to the very enablers who creation the conditions for his rise in popularity. Why? Not being able to control Trump, he threatens the status quo of Republican establishment members, whose power is linked to keeping control of the Republican Party and remaining in office.
Voices raised against Romney's Trump attack
Judi McLeon had this to say about Mitt Romney's diatribe against Donald Trump in her March 3rd article published in the "Canadian Free Press" on Thursday, March 3rd, "We taw a puddy tat’ named Mitt Romney":
Up to now, other than watching his son Josh Romney try to force a primary challenger on Utah Senator Mike Lee, it has been a case of cat’s got your tongue’ for Romney on the 2016 presidency. But now that it looks like business mogul Donald Trump has a real shot at the presidency from millions of 8-year-long disenfranchised Americans, Romney comes crawling out of his gilded ‘puddy tat’ cage. Shouldn't folks remind him, 'The election is over, MItt, and you so roundly lost.' The catnip sent his way by the apoplectic GOP establishment, the same one who sent him out unprepared on the campaign trail before, was the lure that brought him out again today.
Rev. Franklin Graham said, "The Republican presidential campaing has not only sunk to new lows, but the Republican establishment seems to be desperate to pick their own candidate. . . " statements regarding Romney's presentation.
"Playing ball" essential to winning acceptance
Rather than endorse one of the candidates, Romney could have endorsed one of the remaining candidates, but instead he did what even the Democrats dare not do – launched a personal attack on The Donald. The ostensible reason is that the Establishment doesn’t think Trump can defeat Hillary Clinton, but it goes deeper than that.
The Republicans want a candidate who will “play ball,” In other words, one they can control, as stated before, or their gravy train and power will end. Trump is definitely not that guy. They would rather lose the election than admit defeat from one of their own. The thought of voting for Donald Trump for president is so unbearable to "Weekly Standard" editor Bill Kristol that the infamous neocon has promised to leave the Republican Party in support of a third party bid if Trump becomes the Republican presidential nominee.
As far as who might be a better spokesman for the Republican establishment than loser Mitt Romney, it's certainly not John McCain given his failed presidential run of 2008. As soon as Romney finished his address denouncing Trump, Senator John McCain, the party’s standard-bearer in 2008, endorsed Mr. Romney’s harsh Trump rhetoric, citing Trump's ignorance on foreign policy, based on McCain's perceived "dangerous" pronouncements made by Trump on national security.
What does “playing ball” mean to the Republicans? Unlike the Democrats, Republicans do not speak with one voice (from the same scripted message). In the absence of unity, the Republican leadership attempts to speak for us, with or without the support of the membership.
The Immigration Issue
The big issue is immigration. The Democrats want open borders in order to gather votes. Republicans want open borders for cheap labor. Hence, nothing gets done – no fences, no enforcement, no staunching the influx. Recently reported was that Abbott Labs gave layoff notices to 180 IT workers. Who spoke out against Abbott for replacing 180 workers with Indian immigrants, here on H-1B visas? Richard Durbin? In an outrageous turn, Abbott will require the workers to train their replacements.
Trumps softened stance on visas at Thursday night's (3/3/2016) Republican presidential debate when Ms. Kelly pressed him on whether he was abandoning his tough criticism of the visas, known as H-1B, did shock some of his supporter who had seen Trump as being against an influx of foreigners taking American jobs. In an immigration blueprint released in August of 2015, Mr. Trump said the visas for highly skilled workers were part of what he called “disastrous” immigration policies that had “destroyed our middle class.” He gave detailed proposals on fixing the visa program to protect Americans.
A clarifying statement was issued hours after the debate: “I remain totally committed to eliminating rampant, widespread H-1B abuse” and pledged to “end forever the use of H-1B as a cheap labor program.” This stance is in keeping with Trump's endorsement by Leo Perrero and Dena Moore, two former technology employees of the Walt Disney Company in Orlando, Fla., at a Trump Alabama rally. In testimony in front of the Senate, Mr. Perrero had broken down when he described the humiliation of losing his job and having to train a less-skilled H-1B worker to take over his work. It was Senator Jeff Sessions who helped Donald Trump craft his immigration polices: "It's exactly the plan America needs." Senator Jeff Sessions has now endorsed Trump.
So who are our friends in Washington? The Democrats want immigrants in this country to vote for them. The Republicans want them to serve as a cheap source of labor.
The H-1B visa program was intended to let highly qualified foreigners to work in this country when there aren’t enough American citizens to fill the jobs, mainly in the technical industries. There’s something to this. About 15,000 engineers graduate each year in the U.S., compared to 30,000 lawyers. In Japan there are 60,000 new engineers each year and 1500 lawyers. We would suggest exporting lawyers to Japan (and India), but they’re doing a good enough job wrecking their economies without our help.
Republicans would rather play nice than fight with either Democrats or Hillary
Another issue is the budget. Democrats want unrestrained spending and taxation. Republicans don’t want a fight in which they will be blamed for a shutdown, even if it is the Democrats who erect the barricades. The key word is “fight.” Trump is a fighter. He’s the guy in a bar who will take a punch, put his head down and beat the c*** out of you. In the last Presidential debate in 2012, Romney took it on the chin when Obama lied about Benghazi. Some fighter, some spokesman. Paul Ryan fared no better against veteran stumper, Joe Biden, who glibly makes up facts to support his arguments, and mugs the camera while his opponent has the floor. (Biden is the ultimate photo-bomber.)
The Republicans are pulling their punches against Hillary. Why? Because the Democrats preemptively blamed the "Email Scandal" on a Republican conspiracy, the Washington Post, New York Times, FBI and DOJ notwithstanding.
Prison Reform
When Bill Clinton was president, violent crime fueled by drugs reached a peak. Clinton's response backed up by Hillary, was to set tough sentencing standards to lock up these criminals. Now Hillary is decrying the "injustice" in our prison system, and the Republicans remain silent.
A death knell for Republican Party if will of people is subverted
By violating their part of the agreement, the Republican establishment runs the risk that Trump will run as an independent. Why? Maybe to blame Trump for losing the election, to maintain the status quo? For without power and the control that comes with power, the establishment will lose its lucrative gravy train.
A brokered convention is under consideration by some as the only way to prevent Trump from being the Republican nominee for president. Their plan to achieve this may be to keep at least two candidates in the race in addition to Trump, so that no candidate will have the simple majority needed to secure the nomination. A brokered convention itself will not necessarily be fatal to the GOP’s chances in the fall – indeed some might argue a brokered convention could improve those chances. But the nomination process must seem fair and evenhanded. For Republicans in 2016, how they choose their nominee may be more important than the actual nominee.
Ted Cruz, at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) on Friday, March 4, poured cold water on the calls to stop GOP presidential front-runner Donald Trump during a brokered convention, warning that there could be hell to pay with the grass roots if they believe their will is being disregarded. In Cruz's mind, there's one way to beat Donald Trump: "with the voters."
Any attempts at the convention to freeze out the unconventional candidates will carry enormous cost for Republicans, including a badly divided party or possibly the entry of a third-party candidate, which will carry with it huge loses for Republicans as they seek to win the White House and maintain their majority status in the Senate.
