Posted on 01/25/2016 9:10:32 AM PST by Sioux-san
Matt Walsh tweeted his delight at a feverish chain of twenty-two essays denouncing Donald Trump in National Review. Coming only a few days after Sarah Palin's less than stellar speech announcing her support for Trump's candidacy, the Dump-on-Trump-a-thon bordered on hysteria...
...The tightly knit Brahmin caste feels the need to intervene....
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
I do want to commend you, though, on considering this. Most of the Cruzers don’t want to even examine the question of why he isn’t connecting with conservatives.
Pushing TAP and not taking seriously concerns that he is not a "natural born citizen" don't fit with that narrative. Add in his support to increase H1B visas five-fold, and there does seem to be a globalist edge to his Constitutional priorities.
This is why guys like why guys like Kasich (who I don't like) and Santorum (who I do like) will never get any traction. Give them a microphone and all they can do is talk about forgotten bills they worked on that never got passed.
A leader has to be able to talk about ideas and ideals. And do it with some believability. Sometimes I almost think Santorum gets that, and then he starts talking about HB something or other from 1997.
I was not surprised that Lopez likes the intelligent, reasoned, even-tempered Cruz. I don’t trust Cruz or Trump for a host of reasons, and I trust their competition even less. Fool me thrice, however, then I truly am nutso for believing the Messiah is running for POTUS. More like, this is elaborate street theater for We the Peasants.
The Fix is in at all levels of our Society as Lopez sadly illustrates. The RINO establishment is just the other side of the Oligarch coin. They do nothing to fix ANY problems on purpose, so this is not incompetence. Despicable, it is.
This organized chaos, I believe, is all to put Sanders in the White House (the Millennials love him, and they could naively tip the balance). Rejected candidates will quickly develop ‘3rd’ party choices to split the vote as much as possible. Then the little commie from NY/VT who came out of nowhere can give Obama his de facto 3rd term.
What made Sanders decide to run for POTUS in the first place? A passion to beat Hillary? Doubtful. Who anointed him to do this? Is Hillary not radical enough, or someone soon to be indicted at just the right time? Is this all a ploy to get the deranged Biden drafted at the Convention? Quid Pro Quo...
The Goal is to Merkelize America - That old commie knows what she is doing in Germany, and that’s the plan for the NWO here in the USA. Don’t ever think that what is going on over there was not fully anticipated including the treatment of their own citizens.
Cruz is not perfect, and you put your finger on two chinks in his armor. He voted for TPA before he voted against it, and the first vote might have stopped it while the second vote against it qualifies as a “show vote” that he rightly rails against. His subsequent attack on McConnell was a good save, and the only reason I forgave it.
He seems to have backed away from his desire to increase H1b five-fold. That one bugged me too. I understood it not as a globalist bias, but something else. Until Trump, opposing illegal immigration would get you pounded in the press, so most politicians would balance that by saying they were for increased “legal” immigration, so that no one could accuse them of being anti-immigrant.
Trump finally blew the top off of that, and since Trump we don’t have to play that game any more.
Even if you prefer Cruz, as I do, Trump has done us a service simply by rejecting political correctness and refusing to back down. He has cleared the way for the others.
Citizen voters look at Trump's business record, and without taking into account the degree to which his "tremendous" success as a businessman can be attributed to America's free enterprise system--although Trump himself seems not to be able to articulate that message either--they long for such a certain and results-oriented "leader" type.
One hopes that somewhere in Trump's background an awareness of the debt he personally owes to America's Constitutional limits on government has penetrated his thinking. If so, one also hopes that, at some point, he will begin articulating that understanding.
What a lesson that might be for the so-called "millenials" and others who have not witnessed a leader who, like Reagan, honored the Constitution's principles as those which would guide his policy positions.
“They know that Sanders is a commie wack job who can’t win, but you don’t see them writing an entire magazine dedicated to destroying him or making nasty comments about those who support him.”
Well, that’s because the Democratic party are all “commie wack jobs” at this point. Bernie just didn’t get the memo that you aren’t supposed to be honest about that.
“Trump would willingly and delightful wield any and all power needed to achieve his desired ends.
Some people may be scared by allowing Trump this much power. But the sad truth is ... the LEFT is already wielding this much power, and if we are not willing to fight back with equal ruthlessness, we will be steamrolled.”
Count me out. You don’t beat the enemy by becoming the enemy.
Ted always has a good excuse for betraying the base.
"The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes." - Benjamin Disraeli
This sounds frighteningly familiar. Hope "the heat" would not include a tendency to find ways to use "executive orders" to escape the consequences of violating the "sacred Oath" to honor the limits on power demanded by the provisions of the United States of America.
Such a tendency to violate the limits on power required by our written Constitution are no more desirable when exercised by a "conservative" than when attempted or carried out by a "liberal/progressive/socialist." The cause of liberty is threatened when the rule of law is subverted and/or supplanted by the rule of men/women.
name me one major war anyone ever won by playing nice and by the rules?
I am sorry, but your way just wont work.
Here is a simple example:
Rogue country __________ unexpectedly shoots 100 nuclear missiles at us.
How you do you respond?
1. fire back
2. wait to die?
if you answered 1 you just broke your own rule. Because you just condemned millions of innocent civilians in the attackers country to death.
if you answered 2 you just lost and are dead.
Whoo. The conspiracy juice is out today.
You’re saying part-—maybe a lot-—of Trump’s success is due to the “system” True, but that only goes so far. There are thousands of people who inherited some money and didn’t build anything-—many lost it all. He has been a great success in two different fields, business and entertainment. Pretty good record.
“if you answered 1 you just broke your own rule.”
No, because responding to an attack is not the same as initiating an unprovoked attack. Nice try though.
We’re not talking about war, we’re talking about principles of governance.
This is a very good point. Most people would, having inherited a couple of millions, sit on a boat in the Caribbean until it was gone. Not many take a small fortune and do the work and go through the risk and worry to make it into a big fortune.
Considering that Trump came close more than once to losing it all, and fought his way back from the brink, and kept building, it is plain that he is a different breed of cat.
Disraeli and little ol’ Cassandra! I like it...
I am an old broad who has seen history repeat itself constantly in my lifetime. Destructive events appear to be ramping up with different faces, but same intentions. I used to take things at face value and assume good intentions. That attitude has not served me well. Now I am a pathological skeptic. Disraeli knew. I believe him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.