The Unintended Consequence of Elite GOPers Fleeing to Hillary Clinton



They are, without meaning to, ripping the mask off of our one-party state, run by the military-industrial-legal-financial complex (henceforth MILF).

The MILFs are quite happy to have "two" parties fighting fiercely over abortion, and who gets to go in which bathroom, and legalized pot... because they don't care about these issues one little bit. So long as both candidates are on their side on MILF issues... they win every election.

This realization was starkly thrust upon me in 2004, when 50% of the American people wanted us out of Iraq... and we got two candidates committed to keeping us in Iraq! How could this be? In a two-party system, with an electorate divided 50-50 on a crucial issue, how could we not get one candidate taking each side? Well, because there aren't two parties. There are the two masks of the MILF party, "fighting" furiously over non-MILF issues, to keep the voters distracted, while in almost complete agreement over MILF issues. (Disputes such as: "Should we actually invade Iraq, or just keep bombing it forever?" are allowed.)

And in 2004, when someone threatened to capture one wing of the MILF party who was not a MILF, namely Howard Dean, he was immediately cast as a lunatic by the mainstream (meaning MILF supported) press.

It was probably the case that the only way someone could break the MILF grip on the "two" parties was for that person to be an egomaniac completely impervious to all of the smears he would face from the MILFs if he looked like a threat, in fact, someone who would cackle maniacally at the smearers and give them the finger. Oh well.

And now that the candidate has captured the nomination of one party, the flight of the GOP elite is unintentionally revealing the truth: all their over-blown talk of how "disastrous" and "evil" people like Clinton are was a mise-en-scène meant to camouflage our one-party state. The people they pretended to demonize yesterday they will gladly support today, given the prospect of a non-MILF getting elected.


7 comments:

  1. I see what you did there.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree. Have you been reading Scott Adams (Dilbert author) on Trump. I think he's really nailed parts of this. Ignore his nutty "reality isn't real" stuff.

    Also, I suspect that this post will soon have your highest rate of landings from Google searches.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I saw an initial Adams interview. Is there more?

      Delete
  3. Interesting post. However, it seems to me like GOP elites have been *more* accepting of Trump than the rank and file. For example, you had folks like Boehner, Rumsfeld, the WSJ, etc. say that Trump wasn't so bad and was preferable to Cruz.

    By contrast, my Facebook feed is full of people posting about how they are reregistering as Independents and are #NeverTrump. These folks aren't people who work in politics or have any influence there.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The PR goal of the one-party system is to convince lots of people that it is really a two-party system. And they are good at it.

      Delete
  4. May I suggest the acronym FLIM -- or even FILM, though I prefer the former -- instead of MILF?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It was a joke. I actually threw in "legal" just to get the acronym: you can read it as "Mother-F*ers I'd love to F up!"

      Delete