Here are a series of articles which appeared
this week on the American Thinker website, which I think outlines “The Donald” issue very
well - emotions, intellect, aims, goals, accusations and points to ponder. Personally, I think Cruz will take the nomination,
and I said that in 2013, when no one knew who he was. But can he win?
I first heard him speak on one of the Fox news shows and
he sounded like an evangelist preacher. I
wondered why a news show would have a preacher on and was about to change the
channel. However, I listened just long enough to realize
my mistake and it became obvious he was politely strait talking, knowledgeable and
brilliant. I’ve been following him ever
since. For a politician running for
national office Cruz has an odd look and an odd way of speaking – but he’s
brilliant.
People say he can’t be elected. I say his looks and way of speaking only seem
odd until people start listening to him.
Everything changes after that. I’ve
seen women who were stunning until they opened their mouth and I never found
them attractive again. I’ve seen women
who were very ordinary looking until they opened their mouth – and I found them
to be stunning after that. There’s more
to speaking than moving your mouth. What’s
said should reflect who and what a person is.
After Trump has trampled the PC crowd and told them to go
and pound salt – After the GOP leadership has been exposed as the hypocrites
and heretics to conservative principles they are – After the other candidates like
Kasich, who suffers from a serious case of weird compounded by a massive
infection of hubris, and would be the perfect Democratic candidate, have made
complete fools of themselves, he will be seen as the only real conservative candidate. The differences between Cruz and the rest of
the field, the Republican leadership, and the Democrats are becoming amazingly clear
to the most casual observer. He can be elected!
Please enjoy the following articles I’ve chosen, which may
not be in chronological order.
Lauri B. Regan
It’s impossible to get through
a day without hearing the name Donald Trump…over and over again. His name is
plastered across the pages of newspapers and magazines. His speeches and
interviews are continuously replayed on television, radio and the Internet.
Friends, family, and colleagues bring him up at every opportunity as if the
most important topic in the world today is whether Trump will win the
nomination. And perhaps it is. Barack
Obama has almost single-handedly destroyed America’s standing in the world and
certainly our relationship with our allies. He has aided and abetted the rise
of ISIS and other terrorist organizations as well as enemies such as Iran,
Russia, and China. And he has fomented division and unrest here at home. I say “almost single-handedly” not just
because his administration has been filled with accomplices to his destructive
policies. I’m referring to the American people who elected him -- twice.
Americans enabled Obama to accomplish his promised transformation of the
country -- and the world -- as they bought into his false promises and
messiah-like personality cult. They are blameworthy for our situation today
because they were blindly ignorant and ideological then….
Eugene Slaven
My Facebook feed is inundated with indignant Republicans
excoriating Donald Trump for his comments about Muslim immigrants. This has
been a recurring theme since Trump announced his candidacy last spring:
Republicans who don't like Trump express outrage over Trump's off-color or
problematic remarks and spend the next six news cycles distancing themselves
from Trump. What Trump's Republican detractors
don't realize is that their Trump Derangement Syndrome is playing directly into
the left's hands. That's because the Obama administration and the Clinton
campaign, overwhelmed by the Islamic terrorist threat whose name they lack the
moral courage to even utter, use the GOP's vociferous condemnation of Trump to
distract Americans from the Democrats' abject failures.…..
Russ McSwain
There are four stylistic differences between Liberals and
Conservatives. Liberals all hold the same opinions. They view disagreements as
affronts rather than as opportunities for debate. Liberals are casually wiling
to depart from traditions and accepted practices with little or no concern.
Finally, the changes they propose more often than not hurt the very people they
were supposed to help. Conservatives exhibit independent thought and
enthusiastically defend their views in debate. We are willing to change but
only if the change is thoroughly grounded and well thought out. Conservatives are
well aware of adverse unintended consequences.
Conservatives often wonder what if anything liberals are thinking. This
election cycle, I'm surprised at conservatives asking that same question of
one-time conservatives who now support Trump. They all repeat the same points
and quote his book as if it were scripture. Any criticism of Trump is met with
invective. They are willing to support Trump in policies previously thought to
be unworkable, and continue that support even when these policies are detrimental
to their interests.
By Ed Straker
Donald Trump attacked Ted Cruz for
not supporting ethanol subsidies. He said in Iowa on Friday, "Oil
companies give him a lot of money, so he's for oil." The thing about oil
and gas is, it doesn't require big subsidies, because it's the cheapest and
most efficient form of fuel for cars. Ethanol, on the other hand, does require
big government subsidies, because it is highly uneconomical. Ethanol is much
more expensive than oil and gas and, gallon for gallon, produces much less
energy than gasoline. That's why the government has to hand over billions in
subsidies to big agri-businesses to keep it going. And that's also why the
government has to force oil companies to blend ethanol in with their fuels.
Because without government coercion, oil companies wouldn't do it, and the
price of gasoline would be substantially lower than it is now. Additionally, ethanol actually acts as a
corrosive on car engines. It slowly degrades car parts over time…..
By Ed Straker
The latest polls have Donald Trump up at around 35% of
the Republican primary vote. But what does he need to win the nomination
outright? Previously, I documented many of the arcane rules,
state by state, for GOP presidential primary voting. Some states award
delegates proportionally, some award nearly all delegates to the candidate with
the largest plurality of statewide votes, and some award delegates based on a
combination of the largest plurality of statewide votes and the largest
plurality of votes within each congressional district. A candidate needs 1,236 votes to be
nominated. Let's say, of the 11 pure
winner-take-all states (and territories), that Donald Trump wins all of them,
getting 405 delegates out of 438 delegates (the rest being
"uncommitted" pre-picked GOP insiders who will probably support Marco Rubio)……(Ed. Note- Make sure to read his entire
analysis). That means he needs just a shade over
32% of the vote to win. Right now, according to recent polls, Donald Trump is
at 35% of the vote nationally. That means, theoretically, he has enough to win
the nomination outright right now…..
By Earick Ward
The Washington Post reports that the RNC
and Establishment Insiders have met
and strategized over what to do if Donald Trump still holds the top spot as
they enter the GOP Convention next year. Specifically, they’ve discussed how to
“manipulate” the process as to nominate a more palatable (read: Establishment)
candidate. Weighing in on that scenario
as Priebus and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) listened, several
longtime Republican power brokers argued that if the controversial billionaire
storms through the primaries, the party’s establishment must lay the groundwork
for a floor fight in which the GOP’s mainstream wing could coalesce around an
alternative, the people said. As Trump,
Cruz, and Carson lead the race for the nomination, is it conceivable that “our
Party” could maneuver the selection of the fourth place contender; Marco Rubio,
or 4% in the polls; Jeb Bush?......I would expect disenfranchised Conservatives
to stay home on Election Day…..30-40% of the electorate that has stated clearly
that we will not “go along to get along.”….John Kasich has alluded, to see
Hillary Clinton elected, before they accept Donald Trump, or Ted Cruz as their
nominee…..
By Earick Ward
We are not in an age of reason. We are in an age of
emotion. A knock against the
low-information Leftist electorate has been that they’d traded their ability to
think for “how they feel” about the issues of the day. Free college
education – I can’t think of any reason that that’s not a good idea(because I
can’t think), but it “feels” good. Mass, unfettered, Illegal Immigration –
Again, I can’t think of any reasons that this might not be a good idea, in
spite of its negative impact on the availability of jobs and downward pressure
on incomes, or the possibility that “radical elements” might infiltrate
the, oh-so-sweet children coming here (out of Love) to pursue the American
dream. Have conservative voters
abandoned reason, to service their own emotional well-being, in their support
of Donald Trump? As we view the great
statesmen in history – Reagan, Thatcher, Churchill, Kennedy, Lincoln,
Washington, Franklin, Jefferson, et al, these leaders appealed not only to our
emotions, but also to our intellects. We could reason that they deserved some
measure of our trust and respect…..Ibelieve that Donald Trump is absolutely
necessary for this election cycle, as he obliterates vestige after vestige of
Political Correctness….If you can reason a case for Donald Trump as commander
in chief, good on ya, but take caution that it is your intellect making this
case, and not your emotions……
By Thomas Lifson
Nearly all Republicans, from Dick Cheney to John Kasich,
are pulling their hair (if any) out over Donald Trump’s proposal to prevent
Muslims from entering the United States. Just when President Obama’s Oval
Office address was being scorned even on MSNBC, suddenly commentary is focused
on the constitutionality and morality of Trump’s proposal. Hillary Clinton must
be smiling and planning voter registration drives and counting campaign (and
Clinton Foundation) donations to come from Muslims. Whether or not the public will join the media
and professional political class in condemning his proposal is less certain.
Certainly some elements of the public will take each side; it is merely a
question of the proportions. One thing
is certain: the wisdom of welcoming hundreds of thousands of Muslims as
refugees and immigrants is on the table. Whether or not you believe the poll
Trump cited, it is certain that some percentage of Muslims sympathize with
ISIS, some want sharia law in the United States, and many hold deeply
anti-Semitic views, as the Quran instructs them…..
Daniel John Sobieski
Well, not for criticizing
Trump, but for breaking the law and recklessly endangering their citizens by
harboring and shielding from scrutiny illegal aliens among whose number may
include assorted Islamic State agents, sympathizers and potential lone wolf
recruits, along with assorted criminals like the one charged with
the murder of Kate Steinle in the sanctuary city of San Francisco. They are
accomplices in crime. That is the suggestion of Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal,
who followed the righteous indignation of those condemning Trump for suggesting
Muslim immigration be curtailed until we get our terrorist act together, a
suggestion not unlike President Jimmy Carter’s halt to Iranian immigration
during the hostage crisis. Jindal made the case on Monday on Boston
Herald
Radio:
By Thomas Lifson
The American Civil Liberties
Union has descended to the level of self-parody. Of course, the civil liberty
guaranteed by the Second Amendment has never existed in its view, but in the
past it occasionally defended free speech for people with whom its liberal
membership disagreed. Rarely have its officials called for murderous
totalitarianism (although, in fairness, the organization was originally founded to
defend the rights of American communists
who supported the murderous totalitarianism of Joseph Stalin). Actual political
murder of opponents in America was never advocated by its officials. Until now. Derek Hunter of the Daily
Caller reports:…
By Lloyd Marcus
My 87-year-old black dad
is a baby conservative. After several years of me printing out my articles and
mailing them to him, Dad finally realized that his loyalty to Democrats was not
only misguided, but actually destructive to blacks. Thus, I have become Dad's
conservatism coach. He phoned me with a
chuckle in his voice. “What do you think about Donald Trump?”
Dad was referring to Trump's comment about restricting Muslims from entering
our country for a while. Despite my efforts to guide him to conservative media,
Dad still gets his news from the MSM. He's a fan of Don Lemon at CNN.
Consequently, Dad has been taught by the MSM that all opposition to leftists
implementing their liberal socialist/progressive agenda is racism or hate……I
offered Dad a parable. Imagine that you are starving. A gruff, burly, unbathed
biker comes along and gives you food. You would ignore the biker's rough edges
and foul odor, right? Dad said, “Yes, I would say praise the Lord.”
I said, “Dad, the American people are starving for a renewal of
America's greatness.” I recited a list of Obama's lies and
anti-American policies. I informed Dad to how voters have been betrayed by
Republicans, reneging on their vow to push back against Obama's lawless
implementation of his socialist/progressive agenda….I
explained to Dad that Ted Cruz is Donald Trump without the slightly unpleasant
smell…… All I am saying is, Ted Cruz is a true conservative who offers all the
boldness, fearlessness, and promises of Trump but with presidential gravitas
and moral authority…..
By Ed Straker
Donald Trump has been
criticized for proposing a temporary ban on Muslim immigration and closer
surveillance of mosques. But these moves are widely popular. He has only extended
his lead in the latest polls, jumping to 35% in the latest NYT poll. Polls
have shown that the majority of Americans have an unfavorable view of Islam
– not surprising, given the nature of recent terrorist attacks.And now the
amazing thing is that even some Democrats are starting to talk about this
formerly taboo topic. Loretta Sanchez, who is running in a contested primary
for the U.S. Senate in ultra-liberal California, made a point of saying that up
to 20% of Muslims support establishing
a caliphate. A prominent Democratic congresswoman and Senate candidate said
that up to 20 percent of Muslims want to establish an Islamic caliphate and
would use "terrorism" to achieve that goal……
By Ed Straker
Our media has played a series
of games. The first game is that we are not fighting radical Islam. The problem
is blamed on generic "terrorism," guns in general, and, lately,
"global warming." The second game the media plays is to say that
Muslims in America don't commit or sympathize with acts of terrorism. In a
clumsy effort to prove this point, the Times inadvertently showed that Muslims
in America were 25 or even 50 times
more likely to be terrorists than the general population. And now, in reaction to the latest radical
Muslim pair who committed mass murder in San Bernardino, Donald Trump (and Ted
Cruz, to a lesser degree) has called for a halt to Muslims coming into America.
Finally, some Trump opponents
are starting to get a clue. Ace of Spades HQ has an
excellent analysis of Trump’s rise in support, and why it will continue unless
others in the GOP take a clue from him. Ace is no supporter of Trump, but he
understands the essential role Trump is playing in countering the default of
the GOP establishment in challenging the leftist hegemony over the boundaries
of political discussion. He cites David
French’s analysis
of Trump’s smashing of the “Overton Window.” French explains, at the rabidly
anti-Trump National Review Online:……. By controlling the media and academy, the left has controlled the
terms of acceptable discourse. It is no longer permitted to question same-sex
marriage, for instance, whereas 20 years ago there was a bipartisan consensus
behind the Defense of Marriage Act. Trump’s great and essential contribution to
this leftist hegemony:…… In my view,
Trump has opened a door by smashing the hegemony of the Democrat-GOP
establishment media over discussion of issues that critically affect most
Americans. If I had to guess, it will be Ted Cruz who walks through that door.
Yes, while many in the GOP establishment hated him the most until Trump came
along, Cruz may be the one compromise candidate who could unite the deeply
split GOP.
By Carol Brown
Historically, dhimmitude has
been second-class citizen status imposed on non-believers by Muslims. But now
we are witnessing an unprecedented phenomenon whereby Westerners willingly
embrace dhimmitude. Muslims don’t have to force it on them. Westerners
willingly sign up. Go figure. There are countless examples of voluntary
dhimmitude around the world. This blog post is about places in the U.K. where
policing has become dysfunctional, if it exists at all, as sharia law is
allowed to take hold. The post also touches upon the U.K.’s potential ban of
Donald Trump. Breitbart reports
on the current state of policing in and around London, where one police officer
stated: “When I was a teenage lad in [B]urnley there were no go white areas.
This IS the case still nationally… including London where you have to have
extra vigilance in certain parts when you are working.” This same officer also
said, “Islamification has and is occurring. You have to have extra vigilance in
certain parts when you are working.” And
he’s not the only one……
Donald Trump’s announcement
that he would put a temporary hold on Muslim immigration until the government
can get its act together has been greeted with the expected howls and cringes.
Both Democrats and Republicans have rushed to denounce him in increasingly
strident terms. You can almost see the words “fascist” and “Nazi” forming on
the sputtering lips of liberal pundits and candidates. Of course, the much closer comparison is with
liberal hero President Franklin Roosevelt’s policy of detention of
Japanese-Americans after Pearl Harbor. Trump is asking for a hold only on
people who aren’t in the country yet, so we need to ask ourselves who the
fascist is….
By Ed Straker
The latest campaign against
Donald Trump accuses him of using fear
tactics to get votes. The NYT says:.......Well, they certainly managed to make that connection to racists, but I'm puzzled why they also didn't compare him to Klansman Robert Byrd, or FDR, who appointed Klansman Hugo Black to the Supreme Court, or Bill Clinton's mentor J. William Fulbright, who was a segregationist. But the master of
fear and division is Obama and the liberal media. (I combine the two because it
is hard to tell where one ends and the other begins.)….
By Ed Straker
I was watching Donald Trump
speak, and suddenly I had a flashback to the Star Trek episode "Bread and
Circuses," where Claudius Marcus tells Kirk, "You're a Roman, Kirk,
or you should have been." Marcus had been trying to break Kirk down by
sending Spock and McCoy to fight
in gladiator games…….Kirk talked tough and was full of confidence. Just
like Trump. Trump names the enemy, radical Islam, and says we're going to go
after them with everything we have. He's high-energy and aggressive. When he is
held prisoner on a planet of thinly disguised barbaric Arab tribesmen, and the
Klingons call for him to be killed, his response is: Kirk: Or
let the Klingon and me fight. It might amuse you…..Obama, however, is like
Jean-Luc Picard. He's always diplomatic, always lowering the tone, always
avoiding confrontation, which, ironically, is viewed as a weakness and often
leads to confrontation. In a confrontation with the Romulans, when the Romulans
talk threateningly, Picard
meekly responds:
"Commander,
we have made some progress here. Let's not ruin that with unnecessary
posturing".
In
another episode, when the Romulans attack his ship, Picard actually says:
"Worf:
Direct hit, sir. Our shields are weakening. Picard:
Warn them we'll return fire."
Just as Obama drops leaflets
warning ISIS before bombing strikes. Picard
is never a good wartime Captain. He simply doesn't understand the enemy or have
the aggressiveness to take the battle to them. That's what we have. Picard as
president. Mush. But when I hear Trump
speak, and I listen to his tone, and I look at his hair, I find myself
thinking, "Kirk is back."
Just a side note: It should be obvious to the most casual observer Star Trek: The Next Generation was nothing more than leftist gibberish, disguised with a few wars with the Klingons, Borg, Romulans, Kardashians and a few other galactic misfits, and the Federation is nothing more that an effort to promote the United Nations and a one world politically correct government. RK
No comments:
Post a Comment