Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    RNC Reverses Course, Supporting Roy Moore Again

    RNC Reverses Course, Supporting Roy Moore Again

    The RNC along with its DNC counterpart has one goal — winning.

    When embattled Republican Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore was in the midst of a sexual misconduct accusation onslaught, the Republican National Convention withdrew from their fundraising agreement.

    The same day President Trump formally endorsed Moore, the RNC reversed course and is once again throwing their hefty financial support behind the Republican candidate.

    If polling is accurate, Moore scoots through the race handily trouncing his Democratic opponent. Which is why I suspect the Republican party’s upper echelon has decided to rejoin the game.

    From the WaPo:

    President Trump’s endorsement of Alabama Senate nominee Roy Moore on Monday prompted the Republican National Committee and a pro-Trump super PAC to re-enter the state, boosting a candidate who had been largely cut off by his party.

    Senate Republican leaders remained critical of Moore on Monday, warning that the former judge is likely to face an immediate ethics probe if he is elected next week. But the America First Action super PAC, following Trump’s lead, announced that it would spent $1.1 million to elect Moore, while the RNC said it was returning to the field after pulling out in mid-November.

    The divergent attitudes toward Moore, who has been accused of making unwanted sexual advances toward teenage girls when he was in his 30s, underscored how polarizing a figure he would be among his party’s national leaders if he wins the Dec. 12 special election.

    Even if Moore is largely ostracized by his Senate colleagues, the support of the president could make him an influential figure in Washington — a point he appeared determined to emphasize on Monday.

    “I look forward to fighting alongside the President to #MAGA!” Moore wrote on Twitter, using the acronym for Trump’s signature campaign theme, “Make America Great Again.”

    Trump and Senate Republicans have already started pondering Moore’s place in the party if he gets past Democrat Doug Jones in a contest that recent polling shows is neck and neck. The president wrote on Twitter on Monday that the united Democratic opposition to the GOP’s sweeping tax plan showed “why we need Republican Roy Moore to win in Alabama.”

    Moore sustained political wounds from a bevy of sexual misconduct accusations, party betters insisting he drop out of the race, and a bloodthirsty political media set demanding a scalp. As I predicted, Alabama voters have tuned out the national chorus and are supporting Moore nonetheless. If anything, the meddling by outsiders and particularly the entrance of Gloria Allred to the circus galvanized Moore’s support. The South (and Texas) prefers to be left alone to sort their business out amongst themselves.

    The RNC along with its DNC counterpart has one goal — winning. We passed the part in this where principles matter to the party betters at least 8 political lifetimes ago.

    Follow Kemberlee on Twitter @kemberleekaye


    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.


    “The RNC along with its DNC counterpart has one goal — winning. We passed the part in this where principles matter to the party betters at least 8 political lifetimes ago.”

    You are drawing a false conclusion here. If the RNC was really interested in winning, it would have thrown its support behind Moore when he was accused. Especially when the allegations began to unravel. However, it was not only content to throw Moore under the bus, BUT actually allowed leaders of the party, such as McConnell, work against Moore.

    What they are interested in is appearing to support a candidate who is likely to win walking away, if the polls are to be believed, And to reduce the antagonism for the Party by a Senator whom it discarded during the election.

    Now, if your comment about principles refers to Moore’s with regard to the unsupported allegations, you are way off base. What is with you women and accusations of sexual misconduct made by women? Why the automatic assumption that women are speaking the truth in these matters. I have heard a lot, A LOT, of women talk about other women. They are horribly judgemental and use derogatory terms that a man would be run out of town for using. If a young woman marries an much older man, the criticism of that woman, from other women, is unbelievable. And, every woman on this forum knows exactly what I am talking about. Women trading sexual favors for money or position? Well, all I’ll say is that men are not the ones pushing prostitution laws.

    So, what gives with the blind acceptance of unsupported allegations against men?

      assemblerhead in reply to Mac45. | December 5, 2017 at 8:06 pm


      “So, what gives with the blind acceptance of unsupported allegations against men?”

      Feminists. That is what they have been demanding for a long time.

      Lookup something called the “Duluth Model”. It states that in all Domestic Violence claims the female is telling the truth and the claim cannot be questioned or disproven.

        Mac45 in reply to assemblerhead. | December 5, 2017 at 10:59 pm

        While this is possible, I am not willing to blindly accept that answer. I would really like to know why educated, intelligent women blindly choose to believe the accusers, absent any significant evidence that their accounts are true and accurate.

        It is not an attack upon any women, as Rags would have people believe. It is simply frustration.

        In Moore’s case, his accusers stories may all be true. However, no evidence has been presented which corroborates their accounts. Then we have the ages of the accusers and the time elapsed between the alleged incident and the report. Most of those claiming to have been on dates with Moore, while just under or over 18 yoa, described him as being a gentleman and no allegation of any misconduct was made. So, we have a problem. Who to believe; Moore and those who describe him as a considerate gentleman or the two who describe him as a sexual aggressor?

        As an individual, people are free to believe anything that they want. However, in all fairness, in this case, people still have to give Moore the benefit of the doubt, until some evidence actually corroborates his accuser’s account; or at least lends it significant credence. Right now you have two very shaky claims of sexual aggression and three or four claims of gentile behavior.

    Ragspierre | December 5, 2017 at 12:39 pm

    I’ll just note that Mac45 isn’t disagreeing with or critiquing Kemberlee, he’s attacking her personally for holding an opinion different than his.

    He’s doing it using his own unsupported nonsense. Moore’s accusers ARE well substantiated, and the evidence includes the lies told by Moore, his wife, and his slobbering enablers. But to accord that evidence is verboten.

    This is ThoughtPolicing.

    I’m happy to let this blog become the Valley Of The Dulls, as reflected above by the Collectivist class rhetoric (“aristo”…??? Kinda Jacobin, innit?) and the general echo-chamber.

    At least for a while…

      Barry in reply to Ragspierre. | December 5, 2017 at 3:09 pm

      “…he’s attacking her personally for holding an opinion different than his.”
      “He’s doing it using his own unsupported nonsense.”
      “This is ThoughtPolicing.”

      Are you trying to be a comedian? Or just a hypocrite?

      “Moore’s accusers ARE well substantiated…”

      Typical raggsy bullshit. There is zero substantiation. ZERO.

      And Lewandoski assaulted Michelle Fields /snark

      MarkSmith in reply to Ragspierre. | December 6, 2017 at 2:42 pm

      Too Funny, Morris sticks. Ha.

      Yea, Mac45 is a little of base with

      “What is with you women and accusations of sexual misconduct made by women?”

      But that is not close to

      “You all can play with yourselves.”

      FrankieFrank pretty much nailed it. You are jealous that Mac45 is not getting beat up like you.

      Maybe it is your style that is getting you beat up when you attach. Have notice you are trying, congrats. Dull? Not for me.

      Maybe it is not an echo chamber but a refuge. After listening to NPR, MSNBC and CNN combined with NYT and WaPo, it is kinda refreshing to get an alternative opinion or two.

      Back on topic, my wife was complaining to me that women wear plunging neckline dresses to their belly button and then complain about men looking at their boobs. There is a reason why Eve got the apple as my wife says.

      She also pointed out that if Trump did what he supposedly did, it was not a surprise. It really does not sound like unwanted advances went anywhere. Same with Moore if they were true. Dogs do bite so you don’t temp them.

      When you look at the political landscape of say Donna Rice and Gary Hart or John Edwards mess, you really have to scratch your head about this mess about Moore. When, I repeat, “When” have the liberals had principles?

      Frankin should be gone because he is an idiot and the allegations just prove that. Conyers should be gone because he is past his prime. On que, the Black Caucus is trying to say Conyers is not getting a pass because he is black and Moore and Trump are. This is a dangerous move on their part, lest they have forgotten about Larry Craig.

      The Penn State scandal was obviously about “whites” too.

      Next Wed. this is going to be a non-issue no matter how it turns out. Looks for something bigger because the 2018 elections are coming. Keep and eye out for Bannon because that is were the action is going to be.

    Subotai Bahadur | December 5, 2017 at 2:42 pm

    You can trust the RNC to try to throw any contested race to the Democrats up to the point where it looks like the Democrat will lose. At that point, the RNC will claim to have always been a staunch opponent of the Democrat and demand donations.

    “…he’s attacking her personally for holding an opinion different than his”

    Ohhh boy! Projection much, ain’t ya , Morris? (Is that your real name?)

    This is a distinct sign of Demokrattishnesss, don’t you know!
    Come to think of it,the general vitriol you’re often spewing out here would indicate that you possess strong Lefty-charakteristics anyway.

    God save us from the wolf in sheep skin!
    (and the ass in elephant hide.

      Ragspierre in reply to frankiefrank. | December 5, 2017 at 3:13 pm

      And here’s the predicable personal attack on me for pointing out a few facts.

      Nothing but ThoughtPolicing.

      I didn’t attack him personally for his opinion (had he expressed it) that Moore is innocent. Did I?

      No. I didn’t. That’s a position that reasonable people can hold.

      But it wasn’t what he said. He attacked the author. As I said.

      And he did it in the same filthy way you just did. Generalizing any failure to suck up to Moore as “…the blind acceptance of unsupported allegations against men”.

      Just as you attempt to slime me for a departure from the hive-mind.

      But I’m finished for the day with the demonstration. You all can play with yourselves.

    MikeyParks | December 5, 2017 at 2:53 pm

    So whatever happened to that yearbook – is it under Allred’s mattress? Nobody mentions it anymore and yet it’s the smoking gun that will prove the accuser is a liar.

      Ragspierre in reply to MikeyParks. | December 5, 2017 at 3:03 pm

      And Moore’s threatened lawsuits, that would produce it in discovery, as just a myth, intended to intimidate, not illuminate.

        Barry in reply to Ragspierre. | December 5, 2017 at 3:14 pm

        More raggsy bullshit.

        The accuser has the burden of proof. It’s real easy to turn over the yearbook to an independent for testing.

        EASY. But it will not be done because the forgery is completely obvious to normal people.

        An extraordinary claim, with zero evidence submitted.

          Ragspierre in reply to Barry. | December 5, 2017 at 3:22 pm

          Juanita Broderick.

          One of us is consistent. That would be me.

          But I note you’re trying to change the subject, as you usually do.

          It’s VERY easy to file a lawsuit.

            Barry in reply to Ragspierre. | December 6, 2017 at 12:10 am

            “But I note you’re trying to change the subject, as you usually do.”

            More of your bullshit. I responded directly to your bullshit assertion.

            It’s easy to turn the yearbook over to an independent, MUCH easier than going through a lawsuit.
            Filing the lawsuit is nothing, proves nothing. You have to go through the legal process for the result.
            As you damn well know. But you’re a liar. Clear enough for everyone to see.

            Barry in reply to Ragspierre. | December 6, 2017 at 12:13 am

            “Juanita Broderick.”

            A clear case of changing the subject. She has nothing to do with this.

            MarkSmith in reply to Ragspierre. | December 6, 2017 at 2:10 pm

            I think Moore has bigger fish to fry than a lawsuit over a yearbook. The guys have been getting hammered by the media.

            Looks like he has been through the worst. Next Tues. tells it all.

        MarkSmith in reply to Ragspierre. | December 6, 2017 at 2:11 pm

        Actually threatening a lawsuit might have been enough to make it go away.

    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend