Neoconservative Marco Rubio is right about Democrat candidates having a Super PAC all their own in mainstream media.

But so does he. Fox News, which leans mainstream Republican, is also trending toward Rubio as their 2016 Republican presidential nominee. Sean Hannity is Rubio’s biggest booster, chiefly because, as far as I can tell, Rubio sounds fluent, says he’ll put Putin in his place, and has a both/and approach to Assad: No need to choose Assad over ISIS, says Rubio; eliminate both.

More war is just what the doctor ordered for flush-with funds America, whose working-class whites are dying off in middle-age. We’ve all seen men like this one in our communities:

A recent softball conversation Gretta van Susteren conducted with fast talker Rubio was particularly cringe-making, during which Rubio used a lot of hedge words.

There’s no decisive speech in Rubio’s vocabulary to speak of; no principled passion, just naked ambition. Rubio greases his speech with bureaucratic babble about overhauling “bad” practices, instituting “systemic reforms,” “modernizing” and trailblazing those well-trodden “paths” to non-amnesty, but only as soon as those borders without walls become a reality.

Even a hint of the dreaded GOP establishment creeping back into their midst has some in the Republican campaigns screaming for an exorcist.

Via Breitbart:

Several 2016 GOP presidential campaigns are now revolting, not just against the Republican National Committee (RNC) controlling the debate process, but against controversial GOP establishment lawyer Ben Ginsberg’s efforts to insert himself into the process.
Aides to four top campaigns—those of billionaire Donald Trump, former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, and Ohio Gov. John Kasich—have all confirmed they will not sign onto a letter organized by Ginsberg after the GOP presidential campaigns all broke from the RNC on Sunday night.

For some candidates it’s all for show: Kasich is establishment. Ditto Christie. Others are for real. But it’s all good. Any challenge to the existing political order is good. The Republican campaigns have begun divesting the Republican National Committee (RNC) of its overweening powers. Why should a central command apparatus control the political process? When it comes to libertarian candidates, we know how the RNC has behaved. The campaigns are also firing a media organ that, together with party apparatchiks, has generally been a bad-faith broker between the public, on the one hand, and any Republican, libertarian or constitutionally minded political candidate.

At this point, in this magnificent upheaval in American party politics, Fox News fans should take a moment to consider why it is that most of the network’s anchors were almost as livid as the liberal media over the ongoing revolt among the ranks of the candidates. The reason is that Fox News is mainstream media. Fox even set the tone of the debates, with a performance almost as odious as that of CNBC. Come to think of it, only little Andy Cooper of CNN did his journalistic due diligence as debate moderator, this year.

S.E. Idiot aka Cupp, together with all establishmentarians, has been insisting that, to quote the noise-maker last week, “The safe money is on Jeb Bush.” He’s the politically smart candidate to back, she said the other day.

In fairness, S.E. Idiot is one among many white-noise generators on television. (You’ll find everything you need to know about Cupp “commentator” in “Just Another Mouth in the Republican Fellatio Machine.”) While Cupp is not nearly as off-putting, banal and over-the-top as Jedediah Bila, she’s up there. I recall how her fans on Taki’s cussed me when the above piece was published. Now they likely agree. (The same people wanted me fired from WND for opposing the invasion from hell, starting in Sept., 2002; now, not so much.)

Jeb Bush’s campaign is over, toots. It was moribund when Cupp first misspoke. What she meant is that she thought Jeb was the smart choice. Is the woman (and others like her) engaged in Freudian wish fulfillment, namely “the satisfaction of a desire through an involuntary thought process”?

Isn’t such a messy habit of mind cause for firing when your thought process is what, ostensibly, got you hired?

This column has been consistently predictive. The punditocracy is consistency unpredictive. When do they get fired and we–I’ve linked to good guy William N. Grigg, as an example—get hired? Wait a sec. I know the answer: when we agree to a lobotomy; when we ditch our non-partisan principles for theirs.

Seriously, when will America pull the plug on these pathetic pundits and seek out those who have a record of accurate predictions on the defining issues of the day?

To plagiarize a 2004 column:

“Suppose your doctor misdiagnoses your condition – he tells you that six months hence you’ll be stone-cold dead, pushing up the daisies. As it turns out, however, you did not have leukemia after all, but were only suffering from Lyme disease. Would you not consider switching practitioners?

Say your stockbroker’s picks leave you with a portfolio more volatile than Vesuvius and an eviscerated bank account. Short of buying shares in a Baghdad bed and breakfast, he did everything wrong. Would you still entrust him with your money?

Imagine you’re a fisherman. Your local weatherman predicts calm, but you lose your boat in treacherous seas. (Thankfully your life is spared.) Then he forecasts a storm, but the sea is as calm as glass, and you miss out on the biggest catch ever. How long before you stop trusting his “expertise”?

These analogies came to mind as I listened to a different sort of failed “expert,” for whom public goodwill runs eternal.”

If you delegate the disciplining of your kids to state-controlled pedagogues and their enforces—expect your undisciplined progeny to be … disciplined by said pedagogues and their enforcers. If you send undisciplined kids to school—expect them to be … disciplined.

This is what appears to have happened today in one of the socialized schools in the government-controlled, educational penal system. An officer was summoned to assist in disciplining a misbehaved girl, and he got fired for his decisive efforts.

Deputy Ben Fields tackled a girl who disrupted a class and allegedly punched the officer. Media is apoplectic. OMG! But in our socialized schools, teachers are not permitted to discipline feral, even dangerous, kids. Teachers teach at their peril.

The most ridiculous part of the direction the story has taken, courtesy of the moron media, is that just yesterday the same sources were discussing the latest intrigue in the unintended “Ferguson Effect”—the idea that, “Like it or not, it is undeniable that ‘urban safety’ is hampered when law enforcement is criminalized.”

A year after unrest in Ferguson, Mo., brought increased scrutiny of police, FBI Director James Comey has thrown his weight behind the idea that restraint by cops in the wake of criticism is at least partly to blame for a surge in violent crime in some cities. … [CNN]

The “Racism Industrial Complex” should be made to confront the logical conclusions of its tyranny:

* White officers should refuse to police black communities, for they will be tarnished with the racism Mark of Cain, following any act of enforcement.
* In accordance with this racial creed, force a recruitment of blacks only to police other blacks. The result of making the lives of law enforcement impossible will be a shortage of brave men willing to risk their lives to fight bad guys. What a splendid opportunity to put into action the dream of America’s racialists.

All the above, socialized schools and feral school kids, is entirely separate from the real issue of police brutality in America and a militarization of the police force. Apples and oranges. This last endemic problem must be prosecuted one case at a time. See “Eric Garner 100% Innocent Under Libertarian Law.”