Ex-Massachusetts governor and 2016 Libertarian Party vice-presidential candidate Bill Weld has decided that the 2020 election won’t be exciting enough with 738 frothing liberal loons fighting for the title of “Biggest Proglodyte” like so many rabid raccoons over a garbage can, so he has decided he will challenge Republican incumbent Donald Trump for the nomination.

Pardon me while I throw up.

As unpalatable as Trump may sometimes be, he at least tries to keep the promises he made on the campaign trail, no matter how hamhandedly.

But Weld – obviously desperate for some attention – has decided will be the one to challenge the President this year. Because his ticket got a whole 3 percent of the national popular vote in 2016? Because he’s oh-so moderate (fiscally conservative and socially liberal)? Because he has executive experience as Governor of Massachusetts?

Let’s examine that, shall we?

The first thing that I will note is that Weld is so “trustworthy,” that despite the promise he made to the Libertarian Party that he would remain loyal and be a Libertarian “for life” when he begged the party faithful for the VP nomination in 2016, he quickly decided he’s a Republican again as soon as he sniffed that Trump might be vulnerable in 2020. I know a lot of libertarians who decided to take him at his word, and they were sorely disappointed, which makes me giggle, given the fact that Weld’s treachery is nothing new.

In 2016, instead of staying the course and promoting his party’s candidates, he all but endorsed the C-Hag.

Instead of promoting the top of the LP ticket on serious policy issues – fiscal responsibility, respect for the Second Amendment, privacy, etc., – this leftist buffoon proceeded to genuflect in front of Hillary Clinton and lick her shriveled labia on national television, probably in hopes that as President she would hand him a plum assignment as a US Ambassador, like her husband tried to do, but whose confirmation was given the finger by Jesse Helms, who rightfully pointed out that Weld was unqualified to be the US Ambassador to Mexico.

…when Maddow asked Weld if there was any argument he could make to persuade voters in swing states to vote for the Libertarian Party and help it draw the 5 percent vote it needed to qualify as a minority party and receive federal funds — and easier ballot access — in future elections, how did Weld respond? He damned Johnson with faint praise —regurgitating bloodless bromides about how libertarians are fiscally responsible and socially tolerant — and then changed the subject to Clinton again. “I’m here vouching for Mrs. Clinton,” he cooed. “I think she deserves to have people vouch for her other than members of the Democratic National Committee.”

Further, Weld talked a good game on fiscal responsibility and smaller government, but in reality was just another big-government spender – probably one reason why he was so popular in Massachusetts.

So how has the Weld revolution turned out? Did the first Republican to be elected governor of Massachusetts since 1970 make good on his vow to reduce state government radically?

Not according to one high state official, who in August 1995—more than four and a half years after Weld took office—portrayed a state still mired in government, taxes, and regulation. Far from shrinking, the state’s tax revenues and budget had climbed every year since 1992. The official characterized Massachusetts in Year 5 of the Weld administration much as the governor himself had five years earlier: “A bunch of boards . . . regulate barbers and cosmetologists and landscape architects and the like, . . . because somebody thought government ought to save both people and shrubs from the trauma of a bad haircut. . . . We’re choking on an excess of benevolence. . . .

“[The state] props up segments of industry that ought to die a noble death in the marketplace. It creates social distortions like welfare that destroy the people they’re supposed to help. . . . In our cities we’ve got people living in places where government interference has completely driven out all the economic and social vitality of the community. These places are nothing short of public sector hells. . . . If a program fails, government historically . . . has slapped another program on top of it. . . . That’s how Massachusetts wound up with 23 separate agencies serving the disabled; 41 separate job-training programs. . . . The Code of Massachusetts Regulations has grown so vast, bookshelves buckle under it.”

Weld makes a lot of promises, which he promptly breaks as soon as it becomes convenient. Fact is he loves higher taxes, more regulation, and bigger government bureaucracy – everything that true conservatives (and libertarians) despise.

Gosh, that certainly sounds like someone I want in the White House!

NOT.

Meanwhile, Weld’s other betrayals have included gun control and support for eminent domain.

He also supports US membership in the United Nations – the most mismanaged and corrupt organization in this world, other than some socialist governments in third world shitholes.

He supported John Kasich. KASICH – probably one of the most unlikable characters in politics today, who thinks it’s perfectly cool to force religious bakers to make cakes for gay weddings, regardless of their religious beliefs and at the point of a government gun. Kasich, who supported the 1990s “assault” weapons ban and who wants expanded background checks on guns because SCHOOL SHOOTING EPIDEMIC (except there isn’t one). Kasich, who supports Medicare expansion.

If Weld is a Republican, then I’m an ice-skating goat that’s wearing pimp pants.

Weld is a big-government liberal who has been jumping in and out of parties and elections where he thinks he has a shot at a nomination or election – or at least an opportunity to get attention. In 2006, for instance, he dropped out of the New York GOP race for governor; and he had been also nominated by the New York State Libertarian Party as its candidate for Governor on which he reneged.

Weld is a desperate has-been politician, who is floating around as a perpetual candidate for any political party that will have him, probably because his fragile ego can’t take not having at least a little spotlight shined on him. He’s also a despicable leftist cockroach, who should be universally shunned by anyone with conservative views.

He should have a “D” behind his name – D for disgraceful, detestable, doucheface, dickbag Democrat.

Featured photo courtesy of Pixabay: Pixabay License