What is Romney up to?

Updated,

5.15.18:

There is a discharge petition gathering strength in the House.  It is intended to pass an amnesty law before the election.   Before or after, it matters little.  It is a lot like John McCain, in a way.

John McCain has spent his entire political life screwing somebody.  He screws liberals who he ran against by pretending to be conservative.  Then he screws conservatives, by siding with liberals once he is safely in office.  Now, at the point of death, McCain wants to give his supporters the finger.

The same principle applies to the so-called RINOS, who are joining with Democrats, with the intention to pass a bill that gives the finger to conservatives.  The conservatives have been winning, and so these RINOS want to give a parting shot, just as McCain thinks he is doing.

Nobody should honor McCain.  We shouldn't honor people who dishonor themselves with their own disloyalty.

These RINOS want to divide the GOP so that they may lose the House.  It is as I said before, they are taking a dive.  If it works, then they will have caused a lot of problems that may have been avoided.

RINOS are typified not only by their disloyalty, but their intense dishonesty.  Somehow, they must be defeated.


Originally posted 5.14.18, original post follows below:

He seems to be linking Islam with Mormonism.  Of course, there may be a valid point here, folks.

For those amongst us, who call themselves Christians, it may not be wise to be too critical of the Mormons.  If they make alliances with Islam, we have a problem.  I know the zealots are going to be up in arms with this.  But you cannot make an enemy of everybody.

Still, Romney is somebody you cannot fully trust.  He joins up with McCain, it seems.  Why?  Why is this demand that McCain be treated as some kind of untouchable when he is in politics himself?  Why is anybody an untouchable in politics?  Only Christians are touchable.

Think about that, if you dare.

Ah, and to change the subject ever so slightly...

Have you heard about being "on the wrong side of history"?  Because that is a Marxist turn of phrase.  Communism is supposed to be inevitable, because capitalism will collapse, commies like to say.  This is part of Marxist ideology.

Hillary likes to use the phrase.  Now Joe Scarborough is using it.  Wasn't this guy a GOP pol before?

Politics make strange bedfellows, it has been said.  But are these people really that different from one another?