John Boehner refers to Ted Cruz as "Lucifer in the flesh" and calls him "a miserable son-of-a-bitch." Update!

Courtesy of CBS News:  

John Boehner sounded off a litany of insults for Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz Wednesday night, labelling the Texas senator "Lucifer in the flesh" and a "miserable son of a bitch." 

"I have Democrat friends and Republican friends," the former House speaker said during a frank on-stage discussion at Stanford University Wednesday. "I get along with almost everyone, but I have never worked with a more miserable son of a bitch in my life."

Hard to argue with those characterizations.

My favorite part of this story is Cruz's response to Boehner's words.

"The truth of the matter is -- I don't know the man," Cruz said at a press conference in Indiana. "I've met John Boehner two or three times in my life. If I have said 50 words in my life to John Boehner I'd be surprised, and every one of them has consisted of pleasantries."

I actually heard Cruz give this response on video and yes it was just as whiny and butt hurt as it appears in print.

Of course the problem for Cruz is that every other person who worked with him in the Senate has a similar opinion.

Remember that before Lindsey Graham became so freaked out about Donald Trump's nomination that he ran screaming into Ted Cruz's arms, he once said this about him:

"If you killed Ted Cruz on the floor of the Senate, and the trial was in the Senate, nobody would convict you."

Even the Republican money men who are panicky about a Trump nomination cannot bring themselves to give Cruz any money to stop him.

Personally I really don't need for John Boehner or Lindsey Graham to explain to me why Ted Cruz is a disgusting SOB. That fact is glaringly obvious every time I see him on my TV screen.

Update: I actually wrote this post fairly early in the day yesterday to be robo-posted this morning.

Since that time this story has received quite a lot of additional attention.

In fact the Satanists have also now had the opportunity to chime in: 

Boehner’s comment is illustrative of how well past time it is to adjust our mythologies to reflect our realities. Cruz’s failures of reason, compassion, decency, and humanity are products of his Christian pandering, if not an actual Christian faith. It grows tedious when pedophile priests and loathsome politicians are conveniently dismissed as Satanic, even as they spew biblical verse and prostrate themselves before the cross, recruiting the Christian faithful. Satanists will have nothing to do with any of them.

Just when you thought that Ted Cruz could not be dissed any harder. Now it is even an insult to Satan for him to be compared to Satan.

Realizing that they can no longer win national elections Republicans now want to change the rules. By a show of hands, who did NOT see this coming?

Courtesy of Mother Jones:  

Remember, the presidential election isn't a nationwide contest, it's a state-by-state fight, with each state worth a certain number of electoral votes (the District of Columbia gets 3, too). There are 538 electoral votes total; if you win 270 or more, you're headed to the White House—even, as George W. Bush can assure you, if you don't win the popular vote. The Constitution allows each state to allocate electoral votes however it wants, but in every state except for Nebraska and Maine, the contest is winner-take-all. If you get the most votes in Pennsylvania, you get all of its electoral votes. 

Republicans want to change that. On December 3, Dominic Pileggi, the powerful Republican majority leader of the Pennsylvania state Senate, announced that he plans to introduce legislation that would change how the state allocates its electoral votes. This shouldn't be a surprise: Pileggi was one of the Pennsylvania politicians behind the preelection plan to change Electoral College rules. 

Before the election, Pileggi's plan (backed by a mysterious dark-money group called All Votes Matter) was to allocate electoral votes by congressional district, with the winner of each district receiving one electoral vote and the statewide winner getting a two-electoral-vote bonus. That might not seem like a big deal. But Pennsylvania, like other blue states in the upper Midwest, was subjected to a very effective Republican gerrymander after the 2010 midterm elections. Republicans won 13 of its 18 districts in 2012, so if Pileggi's preelection plan had been in effect, Obama could have been awarded as few as 7 of Pennsylvania's 20 electoral votes, despite winning the state. 

Pileggi's postelection scheme has a new twist. Instead of awarding electoral votes by congressional district, it would award them in relation to the statewide popular vote, with a two-electoral-vote bonus for the winner. That would prevent blatantly undemocratic effects like a candidate losing a state's popular vote but still winning its electoral votes. But it would still have a similar effect to Pileggi's earlier idea—it would ensure that at least some of Pennsylvania's 20 electoral votes, which have gone to Democrats in every election since 1992, would go to Republicans. In a close election, that could change the outcome. 

In other words, the cheating that he GOP did in this last election was not effective so now they want to pass laws to cheat the system in a more overt manner.

So rather than fundamentally change their message in order to reach a younger, less Caucasian, and less gender specific audience, the Republicans are simply looking for a way to continue jamming THEIR values and big business friendly agenda down the throats of the voters who just loudly told them "NO!"

Fuck that!

But hey if we ARE going to change how we count votes in this country, then let's just do away with the electoral college altogether, go to making EVERY vote count, and let the Republicans fight it out state by state, issue by issue, and vote by vote.

Because I will tell you right now, if they did it like that the Republican party would go the way of the Dodo Bird in no time at all. If, that is, they are not already at the brink of extinction.