The hypocrisy of it all is reeking. But then, hypocrisy and situational ethics combined with a double standard without introspection is the all-too-frequent hallmark of the leftist these days.
Here locally, there has been no end to the chorus of faux outrage over the local GOP's handling of all things Boldt.
In the leftist world, when a Republican becomes one of them without changing their label as Republicans, they believe that it's none of the GOP's business.
They believe that the GOP has no right to point out the inconsistencies, the differences... the indifferences; post-election, post-support, post-ascension to office where-in the support, the money, the hours, the effort of those who supported Candidate A find themselves getting Candidate X, though that candidate is one in the same person, so removed from Republican principles that once put under this scrutiny, he forgets everything else:
He forgets he's allegedly Republican.
He forgets he's in the Majority.
He forgets that there is precisely, absolutely and utterly zero requirement that he "compromise" with his BFF, Democrat Steve Stuart, who views him as nothing more than a useful tool (See Stuart allowing him to engage in multiple conflict of interest votes without a peep.)
He forgets that politically, Tom Mielke is even alive.
And the leftists revel in it.
They revel in it almost as much as they engage in precisely the same activity... just without the scrutiny, care or concern of the local media.
But it's not just here, you understand.
Here's another headline describing yet another RINO... and complaining that since the GOP doesn't see him through leftist eyes, they are, somehow, "wrong."
Originally published Friday, March 30, 2012 at 6:22 PMThe RINO in question, one Nathan Fletcher, will soon be a political afterthought in the San Diego area, even though (Gasp!) a newspaper mistakenly referred to him as a "GOP Rising Star."
A war hero and moderate gets shoved aside by his party, the GOPThe San Diego Republican Party has moved sharply right recently, writes David Brooks. One victim of that movement is a rising party star who is being pushed out of the way by the GOP establishment.
Well, they say the same thing about the utterly worthless congresswoman representing us.
So, how did the democrats treat former US Senator Zell Miller (D-GA) and current US Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) when they acted the same way concerning more conservative issues? What, Mr. Brooks... no mention of these left wing poster children, examples of the everything you only apply with a right wing paint brush?
Brooks describes a so-so military record where he got a clerk's medal with a "V" device (The Marine Corps Achievement Medal, typically given to truck drivers for having a REALLY good inspector general report on their vehicle) and an NCOER where its said the only reason he doesn't walk on water is that he loathes wet shoes.
All, essentially, irrelevant.
Then there's this descriptive bit:
He ran for the California State Legislature and won. His legislative career was an extension of his intelligence work — meeting with people unlike himself and trying to strike arrangements. He championed a bipartisan law rewriting the state's sex crimes to make them consistent with the latest research.
He was one of very few Republicans willing to negotiate with Gov. Jerry Brown, a Democrat, over a tax reform plan. He gave an impassioned speech against "don't ask, don't tell." He became friends with the Democratic speaker.This is a crock, of course.
Oh, not that it isn't true... it likely is.
But it also closely mirrors the actions of a DEMOCRAT, far more then it would a Republican.
What, for example, would happen if, as a DEMOCRAT, he gave an "impassioned speech" FOR "don't ask, don't tell?"
What would happen to his DEMOCRAT rising star?
He would be politically dead in the democrat party. You know it. I know it. The guy who wrote this article knows it.
But they never mention that.
It's only when a REPUBLICAN votes like a democrat and the GOP DOES something about it that any of this is at issue.
Let the reverse happen... as if any democrat were capable of such a thing... and the media wouldn't pay any attention except to say "good riddance."
That Mitt Romney, according to the article, has maxed out to their fellow RINO here is no reason to either admire Fletcher... or Romney.
So, ultimately, Fletcher does what Boldt should do. He moves towards the party he should have been a member of in the first place. He becomes an independent.
And he should. As should Boldt.
Because if you are going to disavow that which raised you politically, nurtured you politically, trained you politically, supported you politically, stood by you politically when YOU need THEM?
Why is it even remotely surprising that when you forget all about that... and all about them... they should stop being enamored of you?
Note that the article ONLY addresses the so-called "center-right." It remains silent about the "center-left," because, well, total bias and a lack of political introspection forbids that kind of examination.
Fletcher leaving was the right thing to do.
Boldt leaving is the right thing to do.
If you can't live with us... then feel free to try living without us. We'll muddle through, somehow.