The next dirt bag?

It occurs to me the American people do not vote against a president because he is a dirt bag. Clinton proved it. The man raped a woman and he was reelected. The thing that troubles me is that Clinton won both terms with a plurality; Hussein won with a majority.

NOTE: All the world loves a lover. Ralph Waldo Emerson. One of America’s greatest tragedies was letting the media protect Clinton when he erased the line separating lover from pervert.

I’m not implying Hussein is a sex pervert à la Bill Clinton. Still, Hussein has been so secretive the public knows very little about his personal history. Bottom line: He alone is responsible for speculation about any perversions he might have been into before he got to the White House; especially during his years of being mentored by known homosexual Frank Marshall Davis. No matter. Republicans would be crazy to use it against him because Clinton demonstrated that sexual deviancy is NOT a roadblock to the presidency. Oddly enough, congressmen, senators, and state officials, are punished whenever they are outed.
All things considered, I concluded that incrementalism works for dirt bags at the presidential level as well as it works for socialism’s policies. Here’s the thing that is so troubling. Voters went from Clinton to Hussein in less than one generation. Question: How filthy will the next dirt bag be?

Beating Hussein

The Republican candidate will not defeat Hussein if he confines his campaign to talking about the economy, unemployment, jobs, and gas prices. As powerful as those topics are, Hussein’s disloyalty must play a prominent role in his list of weaknesses. Remember that Clinton’s loyalty to this country was not challenged in ‘92 or ‘96 although it should have been because he and Hussein are the same when it comes to their loyalty. Both betrayed this country to the International community, but Hussein’s betrayals were more aggressive in foreign and domestic policies.

Assuming top Republicans do not agree with Hussein’s worldview (a dangerous assumption to be sure), the RNC should be preparing a chronological list of the things Hussein did since he took office. A list comprised of uncomplicated declarative sentences —— no lies, no spin, no speculation, and no rhetoric. Concentrate on the things he did; the bills and executive orders he signed; the regulations he ordered bureaucracies like the EPA to implement. Every foul thing he did should be preceded by the date he did it —— including bowing and scrapping before foreign leaders who hate this country.

Don’t waste time telling voters the things Hussein said. That crap is easily dismissed as standard campaign rhetoric; Republicans do it, too. Besides, the parasite class has been swallowing Hussein’s garbage since 2008. There is no reason to think they will upchuck this year.

An accurate list of Hussein’s weaknesses must be widely distributed in order to be effective. Naturally, an accurate list would include items Democrats support. The healthcare bill for one, environmental crapola for another.

An accurate list would also include items congressional Republicans went along with. Most notably, raising the debt ceiling, stimulus packages, and bailouts. Whoever the Republican candidate happens to be he should have no trouble distancing himself from the things congressional Republicans did —— no trouble if he is a true conservative.

My point: Don’t detail Hussein’s disasters with an eye towards winning over his hardcore base.