There Is No Such Thing As The GOP — Guest Post by The Blonde Bombshell


There is no such thing as the GOP, in the sense of an opposite party to Democrats. And there hasn’t been since Ronald Reagan left office. Reagan himself never was supposed to be the candidate, and he was never supposed to win the 1980 election. To blunt his independent spirit, he was assigned George H.W. Bush as vice-president. That way, in case of emergency, the country would be in the tested hands of a man who could well open the door to a New World Order.

The case can be made that Papa Bush was not an operative of the Republican party, but rather of something else. The substance of the “something else” can be debated, and there isn’t room for that discussion here. It can be said that whatever this entity is, it is not Republican and not birthed by the Party of Lincoln.

It is no small point to note that Bush 41 has gone on record to assert that he will not be voting for the Republican nominee. His GOP bona fides have been officially revoked.

Enter Mr. Clinton. His party loyalty was and is nominally to the Democrats, but as the evidence continues to show, his loyalty—then and now—lies mostly to Himself and Herself. While he could cry crocodile tears and “feel your pain“—his actions ultimately exacerbated the pain for countless citizens, as they watched factories close and jobs go south, exactly as H. Ross Perot predicted, with a “giant sucking sound.” That comment was met with much mirth and merriment by the establishment media; and in the video the tittering of the crowd is audible.

Bonus: Perot nicely sums up the incestuous relationship politics has with industry in this clip. To be perfectly fair to Mr. Clinton: NAFTA could not have been passed without Republican congressional support.

To maximize personal gain and profit, Mr. Clinton had to forge an alliance with the “something else.” Fortunately for him and later for Mr. Obama, progressivism and the “something else” are largely the same, except the “something else” is infinitely more devious, watchful, and determined than the clueless rank-and-file members of the Democrat party.

Then…surprise! Bush II is elected. A Bush boy was up for office, but it was supposed to be the sober, hardworking Jeb. In a cruel twist of fate, we were gifted George Junior. On his own he was likely harmless enough. He could cut ribbons and read books to schoolchildren, as if that is the important work of a president. And it is, if “something else” is calling the shots. Bush II led the United States to war, and War is usually in the purview and the privilege of Democrats, giving further credence that Bush II was never really, fully, sincerely a Republican.

There has been an acknowledgement that Republicans do not always act in the interest of the people (see NAFTA). Republican In Name Only (RINO) is a real phenomenon, and senators and congressmen sent to Washington under the banner of the GOP routinely attend the same parties as their friends across the aisle. Sooner or later, GOP lawmakers find that they have more in common with the Democrats than the rubes back home, and legislate accordingly. The GOP gave up on itself, long before anyone seriously considered Donald J. Trump to be a contender for the presidency.

There is a great deal of handwringing about the “future of the Republican party.” See here, here, here, here, here for starters. Why are Democrat-voting reporters are obsessed with reading the (yet to be extruded) entrails of November 9th when they don’t seem interested in investigating the facts of:

  • The existence of a server that illegally stored top-secret material in someone’s house
  • The murder of four Americans in Benghazi
  • The sale of fetal tissue by an organization that widely supports the Democrats, and vice versa
  • Admitted voter fraud, which resulted in at least two resignations
  • A mysterious transfer of $1.2B to a bank account in Qatar
  • Satanic rituals and child abuse involving members of the ruling elite
  • The baffling death of Seth Rich
  • The unusual of uranium deal with the Russians
  • How one family—not born to wealth by any stretch of the imagination and never involved the production of any material object—is able to attract and control staggering wealth.

Shall I go on?

Obviously, the stories are in the news, and there is reporting, in the academic sense, but there is no urgency to get the nitty-gritty of what really happened. If Woodward and Bernstein took such a cavalier approach to the Watergate break-in, there would have been no impeachment, no arrests, and no jail time for anyone involved.

The legacy media prefer to be fed stories than going out and doing some real reporting. It isn’t just reporters whose interest is not piqued by these events, but GOP lawmakers are reluctant to examine the shenanigans related to Herself. Trey Gowdy and Jason Chaffetz are willing to enter the fray, but they aren’t getting the tactical support they need to do battle with such an enormous beast.

The party formerly known as the GOP is dead, and there is no one blame but the elected officials who deliberately, knowingly, and willingly turned their collective back on the American people. The charge that the current “GOP” nominee is holding the bloody knife that killed the party is grossly unfair. The party sacrificed itself on the altar of the “something else” a long time ago, at the expense and the everlasting chagrin of the American public.

Categories: Culture

15 replies »

  1. The last Republican president was Eisenhower. Nixon started the slide with wage and price controls, closing the gold window, devaluation of the currency as standard procedure, the EPA, etc. Then he got hounded from office over a trivial issue compared to the real damage he started. Eisenhower’s warning about the military-industrial complex has proven true, just with a different name and different players.

  2. I would have to disagree on Trey Gowdy, I think he is a token ‘conservative’ like many others who is there to just trick GOP voters into thinking the GOP is actually doing something. Sorry, I am not going to take the time to go back and find links and articles that support my contention (not that it matters really anyway!). There were several articles on how he bungled the Benghazi investigation (one in particular by Andrew McCarthy sticks in my mind).

    I think that is one of the main problems with the GOP, determining the sheep dogs from the wolves. I recall somebody posted (maybe the author of this piece?) a link to an article how super pacs were set up specifically to fleece Tea Party members of their money.

    I was actually not going to vote int this election, but the utter corruption of HRC followed closely by that of the GOP forced my hand. And no matter what anyone thinks of Trump, the one thing he did for sure was to tear the mask off the current GOP and reveal them for the globalists they really are.

  3. Hack

    Agreed – certainly we had more to fear from the Bushes as globalists than we did from Romney as a Mormon and his mixed allegiances.

    I saw a progressive link at one time showing “all” of the “republicans” against Trump. Globalists all.

  4. The Blonde Bombshell,


    Has ever the GOP been the opposite party to Democrat? Opposite in what sense? It has always been an alternative in elections. Are you also saying that the GOP is dead because both Bushes are not Regan? What has happened to the core values that define the GOP?

    What are your sources of the facts itemized with bullets in the post? Trump is not a liar and has said that Hillary has broken the law, so the republican FBI director James Come must be wrong and is an incompetent lawyer. Right? ( I am not a conspiracy theorist.)

  5. 10 thumbs up to Hack.

    My opinion is that I would let the Uni-party go off and do its thing as long as they would leave me and my family alone. Unfortunately, we are in this Titanic all together and the Uni-party has steered us into the icebergs. Trump is the only option to steer us out. If we hit one and Hitlery is elected today, then it will be each of us fighting for a life boat.

  6. As long as the citizenry keeps on voting in professional politicians, professional politicians are what we get. Term limits for all elected Federal positions, not just the presidency, would solve a lot of systemic problems.

    An issue raised by Trump is kind of obvious, but largely ignored — why do so many citizens, many generation after generation, keep voting for the party that has kept to policies that have decimated their cities? Detroit is one such “poster city” (along with Michigan overall, mostly) that has stuck to philosophically-based policies that have driven away businesses causing a long-term decline. Polices that sound nice, but are proven time & again to fail.

    So why do those suffering citizens keep on electing the party that fails them?

    Because humans are like salmon, in a sense — salmon will go back to the same environment they were born (hatched), or die trying. They could go up a different stream more comfortably, but are essentially programmed to go the painful way.

    Humans are like that. A person subjected to parental abuse will similarly select a spouse that abuses them in the same way, as one example.

    One of the features of die-hard Democrats that vote with their emotions over logic, when some evaluation can be obtained, is that they are similarly emotionally damaged, with a sizable proportion being what are called Adult Children of Alcoholics (ACOAs). They see the world thru a distorted lens with a well-studied and particular kind of distortion.

    Growing up, ACOAs have have been subjected to abuse by alcoholic parent(s) and heard every apology & promise for things better only to be disappointed time & again. Like salmon or children who were abused and marry a similar abuser, their damaged psyches find the allure of a Democratic candidate sweetly touting failed policies, again, as the irresistible siren song of their damaged youth–it feels just like home.

    Illogical & irrational, but in very succinct terms, that is how the emotionally damaged human mind & psyche operate. Intellectual objectivity and logical analysis are shut down as a defense mechanism — reality is too painful and impossible to remedy…so emotional thinking and reasoning, a kind of living in the moment, takes over…and becomes the way this personality survives emotionally.

    The ACOA problem has gotten worse in proportion with the need for the “nuclear family” to split up as both parents need to work, and the associated stresses that carry over into toxic upbringing of affected children. According to some studies, modern society has something like 40+ percent of children exposed to alcoholic abuse in the family (e.g. see The proportion of society hailing from emotionally unhealthy families correlates closely with the proportion of society self-identifying with far-Left failed policies. This was predicted as the need for both parents to work (and neglect their children) and remains predictable when one can evaluate how a person was raised.

    Bill Clinton, for example, is an ACOA (and there is a credible book or two just about that with him out there).

    One woman has a website about dealing with the ACOA problem, — after having their developing minds warped in a toxic family dynamic, they have considerable difficulty interpreting “normal” (meaning “healthy”) emotional relationships. One of the recurring failings associated with ACOAs is self-sabotage. So, like recurring parental abuses and promises to improve (that never are fulfilled), choosing a candidate that makes similarly intense emotional appeals for policies that never work feels to an ACOA just like the home life that programmed and warped how they perceive reality. Sweet Democratic appeals to failed socialistic policies feel so homey and don’t confront painful realities they had to suppress to survive emotionally (for them, pretending everything was fine, or would work out fine, felt tolerable and the best they could make for themselves).

    Republicans (in typical no-nonsense business directness) tend to confront issues head-on … which is terrifying for an ACOA (and many others with comparable mental health issues) who, in so doing, would have to confront a painful reality they could not escape. Such direct confrontation is terrifying to ACOAs and others from toxic upbringings. Listen to the objections of Republican candidates from those on the far Left and one can easily spot this fear — the various elements & manner of confrontation are what one observes they focus on, never the issue being confronted (“GET OUT NOW!! The upper floors are on fire & the building is going to collapse on us!!! Oh, did you see how rude he was…he just barged in & interrupted our conversation and yelled at us. What a meanie.”.

    Dr. Rossiter describes this same phenomina in different terms in his book, The Liberal Mind; The Psychological Causes of Political Madness — available at

    R. Reagan was one Republican who could tap into the emotional mind of those on the Left with emotion-laden rhetoric while simultaneously addressing, gently, the issues needing to be addressed. For some reason, Republican candidates keep forgetting that lesson — to win over the Left, they need to incorporate gentle emotional appeals, not brute force direct confrontation.

  7. Thank you, Blonde Bombshell, for this concise summary of political reality. I’ll leave aside a few quibbles, such as whether Woodward and Bernstein were working for us or the “something else.” Terrific article.

    Hack – Add another 10 thumbs up from me. I certainly intend no disrespect to those who died in Benghazi, but we need to talk more about the weapons transfer to ISIS than “four dead Americans.” Since that would implicate certain Republicans as well as Hitlery, they send out the faux conservatives to muddy the waters.

    JH – 1) I agree that the “core values” of each party are largely public fables, but their “brands” operate in the minds of most of us (as in trademarks, as well as the instrument used on cattle). Social issues are merely shiny things to keep us distracted from the common agenda of both parties. That said, I think BB’s point is that unlike Bush, Reagan’s loyalty was to the nation state, not to the NWO. 2) Your questioning of BB’s facts is an opportunity for you to share where we can go for an untainted version of the “facts.” Hillary was outed as a liar on many fronts, by diverse sources, long before Trump merely stated the obvious. 3) Comey said Her Royal Highness was guilty but couldn’t be prosecuted. This isn’t about Comey’s skills as a lawyer, but about his ties to the Clinton Foundation and the fact (not “fact”) that the DOJ is a compromised player.

    Ken – 1) “The proportion of society hailing from emotionally unhealthy families correlates closely with the proportion of society self-identifying with far-Left failed policies.” Did you really mean to say this on a statistician’s blog? I’ll leave it to the experts to school you. 2) Your discussion of ACOA brings to mind other dysfunctional dynamics, such as Camille Paglia’s take on Hitlery’s emotionally abusive upbringing at the hands of her dad. Still, there are too many variables to pin it as a left-only issue.

    Last year’s viral “Open Letter to Jonah Goldberg” detailed years of political abuse of conservatives by the GOP, leading to the term, “battered conservative syndrome.” However, this cohort is now fully awake and starting to heal; the GOP can no longer count on their support. The progressives were given an opportunity for their own awakening by the unmasking of faux candidate Sanders – time will tell if they take it.

    Bush I destroyed the modern Republican brand just as his anointed successor, Bill Clinton, destroyed the Democrats’. It was Bill Clinton who integrated Wall Street’s religion of open borders into the Democrat Party catechism. I recall a time, not so long ago, when Democrats like Barbara Jordan and Eugene McCarthy could speak out freely about the unintended consequences of the 1965 Immigration Act and the damage it has caused to their constituency. Today, Trump echoes this formerly Democratic mindset and is called a racist. Then Trump endorses diplomacy with Russia and opposes war in Syria, so they call him temperamentally unfit to lead. The neo-cons are laughing all the way to the bank while both parties operate under the slogan, “Invade the World, Invite the World,” all to the detriment of the American people. Briggs is right; we’re doomed.

  8. That the Democrats and the GOP seem so much alike is Democracy in action. Both sides try to please everybody. The result is inevitably middle of the road candidates which don’t really differ much on issues. Just like a fair contract where both sides think they’ve put one over the other party or both feel equally screwed.

    So, what we get is a race where only personality governs the choice. In this race, Clinton’s personality is far more dangerous than Trump’s disrespecting women. She was more than cavalier about keeping state secrets and clearly thinks her personal convenience outweighs national security concerns. She even gave her maid access to secret documents. She also made it clear that all of that stuff is for the little people she wants to lord over. See the state department video where she preaches what she didn’t practice.

    Anyone that votes for her is likely also the same person who would cry for protection from terrorist attacks but strangely remains unconcerned about telling the same terrorists our plans for dealing with them.

    Hey! If a politician lines his pockets while in office, fine. The state I live in was far better run when the crooks had power. It was in their best interest to see to it. If that’s what it takes the so be it. The first”non”-crook nearly ran the state treasury into the ground. Hillary, though, makes it clear she only wants the money and will wring the stone dry then toss it away.

    Other than that, when it comes down to it, the outcome will be the same regardless of who wins. Actually, liberals would get far more out of Trump who really wants everybody to like him than Hillary who doesn’t really care at all. Who knows. maybe a Trump presidency will be every bit as good as Reagan’s.

  9. Just two categories? Ken, are you in your toxic upbringing period? As the artistic curators would say?commentators say.

    It’s so well observed that individuals as they mature move from the left to the right if, they move at all. It’s not hard to understand why this is and why the shift. No need to talk of toxic thingamies.
    I’m sorry I just can’t take this seriously any more. You’re all stuck and so are we with whoever you voted for.
    Thanks to those who voted for Mr T.

  10. I’ve got news for you, sunshine, that “something else” is and always was the GOP. Reagan was part of that something else too. And Milton Friedman. Inflation is a beast most feared by the cash rich and large consumer service businesses. These are powerful interests. In the late 70’s the strategy of economic policy in this country is to restrain inflation above and beyond all other factors began. The optimal unemployment rate is set by it’s influence on inflation. Cheap labor exports and illegal immigrant labor all contribute to the suppression of inflation. Interest rates are completely beholden to inflation, so much so that they bottomed out and we all could only hope they can ever go up!

    This notion that any and all inflation is always an forever a negative thing has to come to an end. Of course there will be inflation if more Americans get better jobs and make more money! Of course inflation will go up if more people have health coverage and go to school and put other pressures on supply! But it can be managed. We’ve shown almost net-zero inflation since the war on inflation began. But now our interest rates are on the floor and that’s hurting savings and bonds and such, and it really seems we are long since and official in the historic Doldrums. We have room to grow, allow for some inflation, and get this country moving again.


  11. JMJ is confusing economic growth with inflation. Inflation is debasing of the currency. It’s the deliberate creation of more money (essentially promises to pay with something of real value such as a precious metal or a commodity) than the economy needs to function. Inflation is a negative when somebody owes you a fixed amount and over time the value decreases so that you are paid back with less valuable money. Of course, if you owe, it’s a positive for you because you’re the one paying back. There’s a net loss to the economy however, because lenders factor inflation into their lending rates (interest), meaning we all pay more for “insurance” against the debased currency with money that could buy us other, more useful things. Right now the economy suffers from constraints that have little if anything to do with available capital. Hence the near-zero interest paid by banks. If the economy ever picks up, all that excess currency provided by the Treasury Dept over the last decade will produce the inflation that’s waiting to erupt. Only the stagnant business climate is keeping it at bay. Neither political party understands or cares to understand this.

  12. Gary, you have a narrow and almost comic-bookish understanding of economics. Stop watching the “buy gold” commercials and try studing the subject a little more.


  13. JMJ, Gary is right. Inflation devalued money meaning more money than wealth.


    Looks like Trump won 274:218 according to Fox News but it also looks like not all the states have been counted yet. Confusing.

  14. I got down to the remark about NAFTA and stopped reading.

    Dollars sent overseas tend to come back. Even when they don’t that helps keep the money supply under control. The case for trade surpluses is the same as the case for Keynesian economics.

Leave a Reply
