How the Left views the GOP

It is fun to read articles written by Leftists about the Republicans. They toss around derogatory terms like a preacher talking about Satan. 

Which brings me to The Nation's John Nichols, and his editorial, "The GOP Establishment Now Faces Its Nightmare Scenario: Trump Versus Cruz". He even manages to arrive at the correct conclusion:

Republican leaders have to be asking: How did the party of Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, and Dwight Eisenhower end up faced with the choice between a narcissistic billionaire who keeps saying awful things and a narcissistic senator who keeps doing awful things? 

If the Republican elites who stopped listening long ago to their better angels really want an answer to that question, of course, they need only look in the mirror.

Unfortunately, to get there, he has to travel through Leftist Loonyville.

I won't disagree with anything he has to say about Trump, who deserves all the bile tossed at him from every side of the political spectrum. But Cruz? While Cruz has honesty issues, what politician doesn't? Also, his "government shutdown plan without an escape hatch" is one of the biggest mistakes in modern politics.

As far as Cruz's stands on the issues:

1. I like that he is a Constitutionalist, unlike the current White House occupant, who seems to ignore the Constitution's body for the holes in it. 

2. He shares Trump's ideas about securing the border, without the wacky "make Mexico pay for it" (Really Donald?). 

3. Sadly, Cruz is another Republican knuckle-dragging, chest-thumper, who thinks we need to destroy ISIS. Will somebody in the Republican Party wake up and realize America is the poster boy for radical Islamic recruitment? Anybody? Bueller? Bueller?

 

4. Another item on the plus side: Cruz does seem serious about reducing the size of government. 

But how does Nichols see Cruz? here is a list of his descriptions for Cruz:

1. "Every bit as extreme as Trump on the issues, equally combative and at least as ethically challenged, Cruz is Trump with an extra helping of meanness": First off, nobody "out-means" Trump, who is the proverbial bull in the political china shop. I wouldn't even put Cruz in the same class as Trump, at least he isn't in public. As for ethically challenged, Cruz doesn't hold a candle to Trump, or even Hillary Clinton, in this regard. 

2. "nightmare": Of course Cruz is a nightmare to every progressive in the world. they shudder at the thought of anyone trying to reduce government. Nichols is no exception.

3. Cruz has no "pliability" in his positions: This is actually kind of funny, because Nichols was accusing Cruz of being as extreme as Trump, yet he proceeds to call Trump pliable. So which is it? Regardless, having no pliability in the issues isn't necessarily a bad thing. It just means he believes in what he says, unlike most politicians who decide what they believe based on the latest opinion poll.  

4. "narcissistic senator who keeps doing awful things": Admittedly, Cruz does have a reputation for being a narcissist (sorry Ted, you have to live with that one). But other than shutting down the government without a plan for what to do if Obama didn't give in, I missed the other "awful things" he has supposedly done?

Of course, if it was Marco Rubio in Ted Cruz's position, I suspect Nichols would probably use similar terms of endearment for Rubio, because it is all about the "-R" after the name. Don't believe me? Remember this quote?

"How did the party of Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, and Dwight Eisenhower..."

Notice he didn't include Ronald Reagan in that list? When a progressive talks about great Republicans, they have to reach back to pre-Goldwater American history. For many progressives, Reagan is still a sore spot. Ask any progressive to name a great modern Republican, and watch them stumble around for a bit before mentioning some RINO like John Boehner or Mitt Romney.

At the end of the article, John Nichols is described as "The Nation’s national affairs correspondent". Really? How does such a poor thinker get to such a lofty-sounding position? Then again, considering who is leading the race for the presidency, it clearly doesn't take much to succeed in American politics.