Having declared Donald Trump to be "unfit to serve as president," President Obama urged Republican leaders to disavow the GOP nominee Tuesday. "The question they have to ask themselves is," quoth the president, "If you are repeatedly having to say in very strong terms that what he has said is unacceptable, why are you still endorsing him?"
I just love it when Democrats make up rules that apply only to others, never themselves. Resplendent in his sanctimony, Obama was standing in a pulpit that only preaches rectitude to outside denominations.
I am no fan of The Donald. I didn't vote for him in California's June primary when he was the only Republican left standing. I lean toward Libertarian Gary Johnson. I am open to Trump doing something that tells me he actually could be an able president, but it hasn't happened yet. Now Obama says it is not enough to criticize Trump when he's wrong, good Republicans must ignore the choice of primary voters. (Nothing partisan there.)
Obama declared Trump untenable after the billionaire's thin-skinned reaction on Twitter to a speech made by Khizr Khan, the father of a slain Muslim U.S. Army captain. Yes, it is intemperate for any candidate to lash out at the parent of a fallen hero — but it's silly to get huffy about Trump talking back when Khan, after all, challenged Trump at the Democratic National Convention. Both actors were playing politics.
Cable news is breathless in anticipation that this flap will lead to Trump's collapse.
I'm not taking the bait.
Republicans who tend to fall for calls to denounce the GOP ticket for the good of the USA tend to be the usual swelled heads.
In 2008, they walked away from Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, because he asked then-Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be his running mate.
Her shortcomings overshadowed McCain's accomplishments to such precious Republicans as former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld (now the Libertarian running mate), conservative scion Christopher Buckley and former Secretary of State Colin Powell. Like-minded nominal Republicans lamented that they no longer recognized their party.
It was an agonizing decision, they professed in op-ed pieces. Democrats hailed their courage as the small stampede ran selflessly into the loving arms of Washington's ruling elite.
This year is different. A rump of GOP stalwarts resisted Trump early and for good reason. (He has a history of donating to Democrats; he doesn't hold conservative positions.) But really, if a Republican was not with #NeverTrump before last week, why defect now? Over a tweet?
Democrats show few scruples when it comes to their nominee. Hillary Clinton's decision to manage her State Department emails with a homebrew server put national security at risk. She has lied repeatedly about the State Department authorizing her use of a private server, about not sending classified material and about handing over all official emails to investigators.
Her tact may be operational, but her judgment is impaired.
When she crosses lines, she does so with action not tweets. Everyone knows that if Clinton is elected, she'll spend the next four years breaking the china, and then lying about it. We can all see the future, so why are Democrats still endorsing her?