Kurt Schlichter writing at Town Hall expresses much sentiment we can support
GOP, Can You Hear Us Normals Now?
He delineates an important message delivered to the GOP establishment in Tuesday’s Alabama US Senate primary election. Part of that message should be that aspects of “Trumpism” are not limited to, or dependent on, Trump (given his “official” choice in the race was not who prevailed). It is also true that people probably knew what was up with that, which allows that successful politics requires giving some slack, looking at the overall picture, allowing things to unfold somewhat if information is imperfect or contradictory (and understanding that no candidate is perfect).
We accept a well intentioned caution as regards Judge Moore but the cheap shot about the 2012 Todd Akin Senate race* in Missouri, a cheap shot at Akin, indicates Schlickter can be conventional in analysis, “disremembering” of important aspects and a bit hypocritical if his advice to politicians is to, not being practiced or adroit in a particular matter, GOOD GOD GET OUT OF THE RACE WHEN THE PRESS AND YOUR OTHER OPPONENTS LAY INTO YOU. Oh, and to supporters, withdraw all support for that individual and undermine them viciously. That is the stuff of Karl Rove. Schlichter did not accept the validity of such as regards support for Donald Trump, nor did we.
This article by David Harsanyi, writing at The Federalist, is very useful as it delineates key distinctions in the matters discussed
Sorry, Ivanka and Jared’s Private Email Use Was Nothing Like Hillary’s
One is illegal. One is not.
We would nevertheless add an important admonition to the lovely couple and the others who made similar decisions:
WHAT THE EF WERE YOU THINKING?!
How above the optics, how is it you know so much about the “optics” of other’s actions but not your own? Do you think you are above it all? For Kushner (s) ever so concerned with optics and advising the president accordingly, if you did not publish a statement saying “I will have a private e-mail and keep it only for personal, business or political matters and not intermix government business (not saying he did) and not do so using government time or property, (as far as we know he/they have not) THAT would have been a useful optic to head off the impact of PREDICTABLE intense unfair scrutiny. Always bring in how you are operating differently than Hillary, how her scheme was illegal in many ways. Doing so would have “forced” the anti Trump media to either report your full statement or be too embarrassed to bring up “old news” about Hillary.
R Mall
*Type Todd Akin in our search window to read more about that race.
