Ted Cruz blows it again, big time: stalled appointments to make it through lame duck

From the Washington Post story here:

"As Democrats and a bloc of conservative Republicans jousted on parliamentary disputes on an unrelated matter, Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) took advantage of the dispute to set up a string of votes on nominees that might have otherwise not made it to confirmation before the session adjourned. Once this session ends, the Republicans take charge next month and have vowed to block any nominee a vast majority of them oppose."

Suddenly it's important news to ABC that Republican superfunder Koch Brother isn't a conservative

Here from George Stephanopoulos:

“I’m basically a libertarian, and I’m a conservative on economic matters, and I’m a social liberal,” [David] Koch told ABC News’ Barbara Walters during an interview for her special “The 10 Most Fascinating People of 2014″ that airs at 9 p.m. ET Sunday on ABC.

Koch, who supports abortion rights and gay marriage, said he isn’t concerned with candidates he supports who don’t share some of his views. He said his primary concern when choosing a candidate to support is their fiscal policies.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Koch's political affiliation before 1984 was Libertarian Party, according to his Wikipedia entry, which means he's a hard-boiled libertarian. The man is 2014's ninth wealthiest in the world.

In this sudden attention to Koch's liberalism I smell a new political effort afoot by the liberal media to highlight the differences between libertarianism and conservatism to split the right in the interests of Democrat liberalism in 2016.

Remember, it was also George Stephanopoulos who brought us the war on women in 2012. George is getting ready early this time.

It's a sign of self-perceived weakness in the Democrat camp that they are already thinking they must begin to divide the right to win in 2016.

Speaking of Grubers, this, from the things you thought were true but are not department

Adolf Hitler was not a Schicklgruber, and proven not to be already in the early 1950s, as recounted here in 1990 in the New York Times:

'Almost 40 years ago, however, in ''Hitler, A Study in Tyranny,'' which remains a standard biography of Hitler, Alan Bullock exploded this myth. Bullock noted that Hitler's father, Alois, had been born out of wedlock to Maria Anna Schicklgruber.

'Eventually, the acknowledged father, Johann Georg Heidler, married Maria, but he never bothered to legitimize his son.

'In 1876, however, the brother of Johann Georg Heidler, then dead, took the necessary steps to legitimize Alois and legally change his name. Thus, records Bullock, ''From the beginning of 1877, 12 years before Adolf was born, his father called himself Hitler, and his son was never known by any other name until his opponents dug up this long-forgotten village scandal and tried, without justification, to label him with his grandmother's name of Schicklgruber.'''

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This letter to the editor of the Times points out that the Schicklgruber myth was perhaps the most successful propaganda victory of American psychological warfare experts, believed even by the Times in 1990.