Get Educated, Inspired, Involved, Participate - Save Your Country!

Conservatives Must Not Squander This Opportunity

2/19/2016 - David Limbaugh Townhall.com

As a supporter of Ted Cruz I have had many supporters of other candidates tell me that he would not be electable in the general election. I disagree.

Yes, Cruz is caricatured in social media and elsewhere as unlikable and as one who doesn't play well with others. He's too extreme and we need someone who can draw independents to win, and, once elected, unite us in bipartisan action. He just isn't as handsome as Rubio, they say.

Yet I have seen polls showing that Cruz is the most well-liked candidate among Republican voters, so you can't always rely on anecdotal evidence -- or expert commentary. The reason is that we all have a tendency to project our own feelings on to the general population.

How could Cruz get legislation through Congress if so many of his Senate colleagues don't like him now, ask the critics. We can't afford any more gridlock.

Well, one reason Cruz is unpopular among many of his colleagues is that he honored his campaign promises to stand up to President Obama and resist his wasteful, unreasonable budgets. Establishment members of Congress and pundits have preemptively declared defeat before each budget discussion. Their cookie-cutter analysis concluded that no matter how outrageous Obama's demands, Republicans would lose the PR battle because they are perceived as the party of less government.

Plus, critics maintained, the Republicans never had enough votes to filibuster or override a veto, so any strong resistance was foolish and would just make them look worse to the people and cause them to lose the next election. "Just wait until we regain power; then we'll be tough."

When Cruz, among very few others, listened to his constituents instead of the defeatists in his own party and proceeded to fight, he was castigated as a grandstander and manipulator who was placing himself above the party and the nation. I remember arguing with many of these people at the time that it is very important that Republicans take strong stands against Obama.

You see, I didn't believe Cruz was quixotic. I didn't view these budget battles solely in the short term. Rather, I had the long view in mind. I think there is some chance we even could have prevailed if Republicans had unanimously united in opposition to Obama's reckless budget submissions, but I was certain that if we didn't fiercely resist him and publicly make our case in the process, we would face serious consequences with the electorate that had twice resoundingly rejected Obama's agenda in the off-year congressional elections.

I have said before that the establishment gave birth to Donald Trump by surrendering to Obama too quickly and not vigorously opposing him. Indeed, I believe the Republicans' failure to join Cruz in these budget battles was a contributing factor. Their calculus about that always-looming next election should now be seen as folly. The grass roots simply didn't believe the GOP was fighting for them, and now we are all paying for it.

The grass roots believed that even conservative Republicans were too feckless or ineffective to oppose Obama's agenda, and many are overreacting and choosing Trump. They don't seem too concerned about whether he is a reliably consistent conservative, or about his record of supporting many liberal causes.

How ironic that Ted Cruz is being punished by people because few of his colleagues would stand with him against the establishment. He has, with his actions, demonstrated himself to be a far sharper thorn in the establishment's side than Trump and his rhetoric. Cruz is the guy that stood up to the establishment from the inside and proved he could not be pressured by his peers to go along to get along. Isn't that what the grass roots have been craving all these years?

It's also ironic that Trump is reputed to be the person who stands up to the establishment and get things done. But he is the one who has boasted in this campaign about his willingness to work with the establishment.

Ted Cruz is remarkably brilliant and has proved more than any politician in modern times that he will do in office precisely what he promises to do in the campaign. This isn't expedient rhetoric; it's his proven track record.

Concerning electability, Cruz, in a general election campaign, would articulate conservatism with a flair we haven't seen in a presidential campaign since Ronald Reagan. I have always believed that if conservative ideas are clearly and unapologetically communicated they will energize the base and attract millions of others. These are positive, optimistic, and contagious ideas that for decades haven't been presented clearly, without dilution, and with utterly authentic conviction.

Ted Cruz believes he can reignite the old Reagan coalition and lead us to victory. I firmly believe it too. And if he wins with such an unambiguous message, he will have the clearest of mandates to pursue his agenda with a Congress elected along with him.

Republicans and conservatives must not overreact and throw the hay out with the pitchforks, when we can have the real deal with Ted Cruz, who will steer America back on the right course, first reversing Obama's destructive agenda and then implementing conservative principles to restore America's glory.

This really isn't that complicated. Cruz is the conservative candidate conservatives have longed for, and it would be tragic if we squander what could be our last opportunity.

A Nation Without Borders Is Not a Nation

Time to Close the Borders

3/24/2016 - Laura Hollis Townhall.com

Enough.

More attacks, more carnage, more death -- this time in Brussels, Belgium. After the Charlie Hebdo attack, the social media hashtag was "Je Suis Charlie Hebdo." After the Bataclan attacks in Paris, it was "Pray for Paris." Now it is "Nous Sommes Bruxelles" ("We are Brussels").

No, we're not. But we will be, unless steps are taken to prevent any more attacks.

We are hearing the usual platitudes from President Obama and others: "We will not be defeated." "We will conquer terror." There is zero political will behind these statements. If there were, you would see immediate efforts to prevent -- at the very least -- immigration from countries that spawn terrorists and sponsor terror. You can no more "conquer terror" by letting terrorists into your country than you can prevent theft by letting thieves into your home.

It is time to close our borders. It is time for a temporary moratorium on immigration.

In fact, it is past time. We have been amply warned. Brussels was hit this week. Paris was hit in January and again in November of last year. The United States suffered terrorist attacks in San Bernardino last year, at the Boston Marathon in 2013, at Fort Hood in 2009, and of course, in New York City on Sept. 11, 2001. (In fact, if you want to see something truly sobering, check out the Wikipedia page titled, "List of Islamist Terrorist Attacks." Pay attention to the escalation -- from a handful of incidents in the 1970s to nearly an attack a day somewhere in the world in 2015. Even assuming that contemporary record-keeping is more thorough, the numbers are staggering.)

In addition to the planned terrorist attacks, Europe is dealing with widespread crimes committed disproportionately by migrants, including hundreds of incidents of sexual assault in Germany and Sweden, theft and other property crimes, and even murder.

Our situation in the United States is not much better. With our own porous borders, over 100,000 illegal immigrants cross into the United States each year. In 2014, nearly 10,000 unaccompanied children from Mexico and Central America crossed the border every month.

Are we sending them back? Nope. Are we sending back those who commit crimes? Not with any consistency. Also in 2014, according to testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, the Obama administration released "193 illegal immigrants with homicide convictions, 426 people with sexual-assault convictions and 16,000 with drunk-driving convictions." Over the past three years, more than 100,000 illegal aliens who have been convicted of crimes and who should have been deported have been released by the Obama administration back into the general population.

Some who have been deported return to commit additional crimes with impunity. Last year, 32-year-old Kate Steinle was killed in San Francisco. The man accused of her murder, Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, has seven previously felony convictions and had been deported five times. San Francisco refused to turn him over to federal authorities, pursuant to its "sanctuary city" policy.

Just last week, in Framingham, Massachusetts, a woman was gang-raped and her boyfriend beaten by four illegal immigrants from Guatemala. Two of the accused attackers had been previously deported, one for drunken driving and disorderly conduct. They managed to make their way back to the U.S.

Meanwhile, the Obama administration cuts aerial surveillance at the border by 50 percent, and our border patrol agents say that they are being instructed not to enforce immigration laws.

Why are we putting up with this?

It's not possible to read a conservative publication without hearing the mewling and whining of the "NeverTrumps." Do you want to know why Donald Trump is walking away with the Republican nomination? This is why.

And all of you -- including President Obama -- who are so sure that Hillary Clinton will beat Trump in a walk? Don't be so sure. Clinton just announced that she wants to extend Obamacare benefit to illegal aliens. How convenient! If they're injured assaulting American citizens, their health care will be paid for -- by those of us who are still working.

I'm well aware of the objections to a moratorium on immigration. There are those who will say, "You are punishing those who did nothing wrong." To that I reply, don't blame us; blame those who have exploited our generosity and our liberty. And some will argue (as they always do), "If we close our doors, then the terrorists have won."

Wrong.

If we leave our doors open, then the terrorists win. If we allow people to pour across our borders, then the terrorists win. If we refuse to do meaningful background checks, then the terrorists win. If, knowing -- as we do -- that our current practices create an increased risk of attacks and mayhem and destruction and death, we do not change those practices, then the terrorists win.

Because they will know that they can do what they like; that they can disrupt our lives and slaughter our citizens, and nothing will change.

It is an election year. Here is my take on things: The decision to place a moratorium on immigration sends the message that protecting American citizens and lawful residents is more important than whatever benefits might be obtained by an open-borders policy. Any candidate who cannot or will not make the public statement that protecting America's citizens and lawful residents is his or her single most important priority does not deserve to hold public office.

And probably will not get the presidency.

A Nation WITHOUT Borders - is NOT Sovereign

Border Walls Would Humanely Enforce a Just Law

3/16/2016 - Terry Jeffrey

The federal government has a duty to enforce this nation's borders and do it in a humane manner that minimizes harm to human life both inside U.S. territory and on the approaches to it.

The best way to do that at the border with Mexico is to build effectively impermeable barriers that send a simple, straightforward message: You can only cross this border legally.

For years, our government has sent a different message: You may be able to cross illegally.

More recently, that inapt message has been compounded by another: If you make it here illegally, we may let you stay.

Between 2005 and 2010, according to the Congressional Research Service, the Department of Homeland Security used a measure called "operational control" to describe the stretches of border it had secured.

"Operational control describes the number of border miles where the Border Patrol can detect, identify, respond to, and interdict cross-border unauthorized activity," CRS said in a report published last month. "In February 2010, the Border Patrol reported that 1,107 miles (57 percent) of the Southwest border were under operational control."

That means our government, according to the Border Patrol, did not have operational control of 43 percent -- or approximately 826 miles -- of our southern border.

By failing to secure the border, the federal government not only allows foreign nationals to come here illegally to live and work, but also provides an avenue for deadly drugs, for the criminals who bring them and for potential terrorists.

The failure to secure our southern border harms American workers whose jobs are put at risk and whose wages are suppressed by competition with immigrant workers here illegally.

It also harms Americans who become addicted to deadly drugs smuggled across the border, and it harms American communities where those drugs are distributed.

"Mexican transnational criminal organizations (TCOs) remain the greatest criminal drug threat to the United States; no other group can challenge them in the near term," the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration said in its 2015 National Drug Threat Assessment Summary.

"These Mexican poly-drug organizations traffic heroin, methamphetamine, cocaine, and marijuana throughout the United States, using established transportation routes and distribution networks," said the DEA assessment. "They control drug trafficking across the Southwest Border and are moving to expand their share of U.S. illicit drug markets, particularly heroin markets."

"National-level gangs and neighborhood gangs continue to form relationships with Mexican TCOs to increase profits for the gangs through drug distribution and transportation, for the enforcement of drug payments, and for protection of drug transportation corridors from use by rival gangs," said the assessment.

Failure to secure our border not only harms people in the United States, it also harms people in Mexico and would-be illegal border crossers. Mexicans are victimized by the drug cartels that exploit our unenforced border, and migrants seeking to cross our unsecured border to illegally live or work here put themselves at risk in remote regions and in the custody of human traffickers.

The message our federal government should send is: If you are coming here illegally, you will not be able to cross, so do not try.

Building physical barriers along the border that make it impossible for people to illegally pass either on foot or in vehicles -- and deploying sufficient manpower to patrol those barriers -- would send that message. Failing to build those barriers and sufficiently man them says: The people who run our federal government are still not serious about securing our border.

America is a generous nation when it comes to legal immigration.

Between 1980 and 2012, according to a 2014 report published by the Department of Homeland Security, the United States granted lawful permanent resident status to approximately 28,370,000 immigrants.

Those 28,370,000 legal permanent residents equaled more than three times the Census Bureau's July 2013 estimate for the population of New Jersey (8,911,502), more than twice the population of Illinois (12,890,552) and exceeded the populations of New York (19,695,680), Florida (19,600,311) and Texas (26,505,637).

America is also generous in granting refugee and asylum status to those who face a "well-founded fear of persecution" in their home countries. In 2013, this country granted refugee status to 69,909 individuals and asylum to 25,199.

We should not turn our back on those who seek refuge and asylum, especially Middle Eastern Christians who face genocide by Islamic State terrorists. Nor do we need to stop legal immigration.

But the border of the United States is a just law that the federal government has duty to enforce. Building walls that deter and stop illegal crossers is a humane way to do it.

Caution: Establishment - Neocons May be Harmful to Your Health

Establishment, Bow Down

3/13/2016 - Arthur Schaper Townhall.com

What is happening to the Republican Party? Is it fracturing? Perhaps. Is it growing? Definitely. Will it disappear and never be seen again? Only if the final convention, brokered or busted, gives way to disparate causes. The roots of this conflict were long in coming. Republican voters wanted conservative lawmakers respecting our rights and securing the borders. The GOP political class has repeatedly failed us. The discussions of an outright revolt like what we are seeing now have been long simmering.

Shortly after the disappointing 2012 election, and the devastating loss of Dame Margaret Thatcher, a few months later I congregated with fellow conservatives in Los Angeles. (Yes, we’re here, get used to it!) They were glum, unhappy, unsure what to do. “They’ve already banned the plastic bag!” one of them lamented.

The national conference continued to disappoint us on key issues. One lady suggested that every Republican voter register as independents at once to get the party brass’ attention. The broiling turmoil is no longer hiding. Conservatives are not giving way anymore. We are not going to settle for more debt, just not as much. Cut the spending, cut the tyranny, and cut the crap!

So, what’s really going on? The bigger picture: the Little Guy is challenging the Big Shots, and winning. The conservative movement is gaining momentum and refuses to look back or hide away when times get tough, or the media refuse to play nice. The hard-working, free market advocates will no longer keep holding their noses for Democrat-lite, for socialism on a cracker with pâté. Mothers and fathers demand a better future for their children, and they will fight for it.

The grassroots activists, the small business owners, the hard-working families, and the overwhelmed taxpayers want a fair deal and free trade. They want limited government, and it must mean more than slowing the growth of spending. They will no longer take "No" for an answer from the government which exists to protect the public interest. They will not permit the Constitution to serve as a set of meager suggestions for a corrupt and entitled political class.

They want more local control, which requires a diligent effort to cut Washington down to size and make our Main Streets and civic centers the center of American life.

While Donald Trump has manipulated the electorate’s anger, Ted Cruz best represents their spirit. Today, Cruz has already forced the Establishment into a tough decision: bow down, or bow out. Whether they like it or not, the strongest--and best--alternative to Donald Trump is US Senator Ted Cruz.

The Washington power brokers, the K Street lobbyists, and every major interest which profits from cronyism and collusion have failed to get rid of this Constitutional champion. He is a disruptor, wants to be the chief enforcer; someone who stood on principle, and still does. When he campaigned against power for power's sake, he meant it. And still does.

Some of his critics have cited his ineffectiveness. Others have pointed out his showmanship which borders on brinkmanship. "How can any man govern as President if he routinely stops routine in the US Senate and stifles the passage of legislation?" The Establishment mutters over and over. And yet, what message have the voters been sending to Washington for the past six years? “Stop the insanity!”

They want an end to the Big Government status quo! And yet it continues unabated, but rather abetted by cowardly lawmakers more concerned about the donor class than the voting masses. This disdain ends this year.

Where will the Washington Establishment turn this time? Jeb is gone, and Rubio is joining him. They have Madam Hillary only, since she does whatever the Big Banks have paid her to do. She cashed in hundreds of thousands of dollars from the major stock brokers, who stalk homeowners with the blessing of well-connected bureaucrats in DC. Hillary is the perfect, pliant shill for every special interest, and thus she fits in perfectly with the Democratic Party, an amalgam of disparate ideologies looking to make a buck off of those who work.

Bernie Sanders is more honest about his warmed-over communism and en masse populism. His authenticity inspires the true believers in our nation's midst. They are not warming up to cold-shoulder Hillary.

The Washington Cartel, Big Business, Big Governor, Big Labor, and all the other government bullies are getting the punches back in their faces, and twice as hard! Dear Washington Cartel, what are you going to do now? The red pill gives you Donald Trump, who loves to assault our eyes and ears on the TV. Like a loquacious dinner guest, he will eat all the food on your plate and spill his wine on your lap. Trump is out to have fun--all at your expense.

Then there's Ted Cruz. He is the bootstraps to billionaire, pit-to-the-palace father figure. He will let you eat the fruits and veggies that you need. No fine linen for you, but he will respect you enough to keep in your place and teach you to like it.

See, Ted Cruz is teaching the insiders that the government is for the outsiders: "We the People", not "We the Well-Connected". We the People are coming back, and we will not be forced to the back.

Dear Establishment: Trump lies while laughing in your face. Cruz tells you the truth. You are no longer in charge, and you never should have been. You have to pick your poison, you not-so powerful power brokers. Why not choose the heavy discipline? It will work out for you in the end. Donald Trump will not only trump you, but double down on what you have been doing for the past thirty years. Except his authoritarian will benefit only himself.

Establishment, you are not getting amnesty that upends the rule of law.

Political cronies, you are not getting the bailouts we paid for.

GOP elites, time to take a hint: bow to Ted Cruz, or bow out for good!

It Depends On US!

The Race to Save -- or Transform -- America

3/1/2016 - Robert Knight Townhall.com

Does it seem to you as if America is in a desperate race?

On one side are those who want to flood the United States with illegal aliens and refugees, get them hooked on welfare, and convert them to be Free Stuff Army voters.

On the other side are “ordinary Americans” who see their country being transformed into a Third World socialist regime in which they are chickens plucked for tax money and targets for abuse by an ever growing number of subsidized identity groups.

Anyone raising objections to this grand scheme to fundamentally transform America – morally, culturally and economically – is denounced as racist, sexist, xenophobic or homophobic.

Allied with the politicians in this transformative scheme are the educational establishment, leftwing foundations, corporations seeking cheap labor, most of Hollywood and nearly all major media. They know that sheer numbers could eventually flatten any native objections to seeing America become a top-down, crony capitalist/socialist state that benefits the ruling elites.

The White House Task Force on New Americans has been working overtime since 2014 to turn immigrants into “new Americans” who will vote Democrat. This would include tens of thousands of recent Muslim migrants that the Obama Administration has been importing as fast as possible.

One of the main cogs in the “New American” machine is the D.C.–based Migration Policy Institute, whose supporters include George Soros’ Open Society Institute, the Carnegie Corp. of New York, the Ford Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and the JM Kaplan Fund of New York, according to Discover the Networks.

Last April, MPI hosted former National Council of La Raza (“the Race”) Executive Director Cecilia Munoz, who as Obama’s domestic policy advisor, unveiled the task force’s blueprint for easing the path to citizenship – and voting – for millions of immigrants.

One immigrant pressure group, Mi Familia Vota, which has ties to the leftwing Service Employees International Union, is holding monthly citizenship workshops through May in key states “to ensure individuals complete the several-month naturalization process in time for November,” according to the Wall Street Journal.

But here’s a bit of good news. In a slap down of Obama administration lawlessness, federal district court Judge Richard Leon on Feb. 22 rejected a request by liberal groups and the U.S. Justice Department for an injunction halting laws in Alabama, Georgia and Kansas requiring proof of citizenship when registering to vote.

Denying the bid by the NAACP and the League of Women Voters for a temporary restraining order against the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, which is instructing voters to follow citizenship laws, Judge Leon called the Justice Department’s siding against a U.S. government agency “unprecedented” and “extraordinary.”

The Justice Department is supposed to defend federal agencies, not attack them.

“Americans believe overwhelmingly that only citizens should be voting in American elections,” said J. Christian Adams, an American Civil Rights Union (ACRU) Policy Board member whose Public Interest Legal Foundation intervened in the case on behalf of the states.

What a concept – making sure that voters show proof that they are really American citizens. It’s shocking that not all 50 states and U.S. territories require this.

Speaking of voter registration, more than 200 counties around the nation have more than 100 percent of their age-eligible population registered to vote. We’re talking about people who have moved away, died, are non-citizens or are double-registered.

Here’s more good news. In the Lone Star State, where the Soros-backed group Battleground Texas is working to “turn Texas blue” by flooding the rolls with recent immigrants, two recent court actions may help restore election integrity.

Terrell and Zavala counties, which are in the Rio Grande Valley, recently entered consent decrees in a federal court to clean up their voter rolls. Election officials did so after the ACRU filed lawsuits similar to ones in nearby Mississippi that yielded court decrees to police dirty voter rolls.

The corruption runs deep. In Crystal City, which is Zavala’s county seat, all city councilmen except one, including the mayor, plus the city manager, have been arrested on various charges, including bribery, illegal gambling and human smuggling.

It’s one thing for legal immigrants to come to America because they love liberty. The nation clearly has been enriched by millions of such people, who are sometimes more patriotic than U.S.-born citizens who take their good fortune for granted.

It’s another thing to discourage assimilation by rejecting English as the common language and winking at immigration laws in order to swell the ranks of Free Stuff Army voters.

That’s what worries many Americans of varying ethnicities and faiths. They see their country slipping away and they want someone, anyone, to do something about it.

As Mi Familia Vota operative Pamela Zamora boasted to the Wall Street Journal, “We have the numbers to shape the election.”

It’s a race, all right, whose outcome will determine whether America will still be America.

Important Points to Consider

Exploring Trumpism

3/1/2016 - David Limbaugh Townhall.com

Just what is the Trump movement all about? I've tried to get to the bottom of it by conversing with various Donald Trump supporters on Twitter.

I have found that most outside the movement are having great difficulty understanding it. It's like nothing we've seen -- at least on the Republican side of the political spectrum.

One perplexed person asked me, "Does it shock you that with all the detrimental information on Trump he is still leading in practically every poll?" My answer: "It doesn't shock me so much as disappoint me."

Let me explore the Trump phenomenon in the form of a dialogue between a hypothetical Trump supporter (TS) and myself. One or two of the responses are from actual Trump supporters, but most are my own words, and I hope they're not offensive to those supporters.

Me: "I'm troubled, because one would think that Republicans would abandon a presidential candidate who has conducted himself as Trump has during this campaign."

TS: "You aren't hearing us. We don't care about political correctness, his manners or your sensitivities. We only care that he will get things done. Wuss!"

Me: "But what about his questionable allegiance to conservatism?"

TS: "You're still not listening. We are not interested in your fancy ideological terms. It's all talk. We want action from an outsider with experience and accomplishments. Action, action, action."

Me: "But what about Ted Cruz? He's admittedly an elected official, but he is still an outsider at heart who's shown he'll fight the establishment. He's actually done it, not just talked about it. And Trump has financially propped up the very people you want to hire him to destroy. So why won't you trust Cruz more than Trump?"

TS: "We already told you. Cruz is a politician and they are all corrupt. In fact, we'd lose our integrity if we even considered supporting him. Even your so-called conservatives have betrayed us by rolling over for Obama's agenda."

Me: "But not Cruz. He fought the establishment and they hate him for it."

TS: "Phooey. He's an insider. Plus, immigration."

Me: "But wait, Cruz has been on the front lines fighting immigration, and, along with a mere handful of others, prevented the Gang of Eight bill from becoming law. He did not steal this idea from Trump. He was defending our sovereignty at the very time Trump was funding those undermining it."

TS: "Cruz is a Canadian. He and his wife are globalists. Goldman Sachs. NAFTA. GATT. CFR. Trilateralists."

Me: "Why would you assign more weight to conspiracy theories than one's actual track record of fighting illegal immigration?"

TS: "Cruz is an establishment liar."

Me: "Oh, boy. Well, I get that Trump supporters are furious at the establishment, but I wonder if a certain percentage of them are just angry in general and hopping aboard the movement because of their discontentment. There seems to be an element of undefined rage involved that accompanies the specific rage over immigration. Is this movement even cohesive?"

Actual Trump Supporter (ATS): "The movement isn't yet cohesive, but there is a powerful element of rage over the largest invasion in human history."

Me: "This brings us back to where we began. If this movement isn't yet cohesive why are its members so enamored with Trump? Why is it their man, right or wrong? Wait, before you answer, I think I've finally had an epiphany. This movement is not just a matter of a cultish following of Donald Trump as many suspect, is it? People were already outraged and Trump just came along, seized the moment and turned it into a wave."

ATS: "Trump isn't the leader. He's merely riding the tiger. If he plays us like the Republicans have for 30 years, he's toast."

Me: "Now we're really on to something. So is this why the supporters are not worried about his alleged dishonesty, his vagueness and vacillation on policy and even his stated willingness to work with insiders?"

TS: "That's right; Trump is very popular among us because he is fearless. He's always on offense, unlike the GOP wimps. But Trump is mainly our vehicle -- a darn good and effective vehicle to be sure, but a vehicle. He's not indispensable. He can always be replaced. This movement is bigger than him. It's about America. Trump, for now, is Captain America, but we the people are America. The sovereignty resides in us. Cruz is a liar. Amnesty Rubio sweats like a pig."

Me: "Speaking of sovereignty, nationalism is the driving force uniting your burgeoning movement, correct?"

TS: "Indeed. As you've suspected, we aren't that concerned, for now, about other issues or the claim that Trump will not satisfy us on those. In fact, we are not necessarily united on those anyway. It's about this nation. We are nationalists. America and Americans first. We must control our borders. That is the key to addressing a number of existential threats facing this nation, and we can worry about the rest of our problems, major and minor, later, once we've returned to the path of securing our borders and saving the nation. When we build the wall and deport millions, we will ensure that all of America doesn't turn into California; we'll better insulate ourselves against Islamist invaders; and we'll help protect our workers from cheap illegal immigrant labor. Another aspect of our sovereignty is that Trump, as the consummate negotiator, will undo the unbalanced trade deals harming our workers. And he'll rebuild the military to protect us against foreign threats. Don't forget. He's a businessman. And Rubio might just be a bigger liar than Cruz."

Me: "I think I understand your concerns, but I ask you again to take a second look at Ted Cruz, for he is not only a safer bet to secure our borders, and restore economic growth, which will enable us to rebuild our military; he is the one person who has shown that, notwithstanding the conspiracy theories, he cannot be bought and he can always be relied on to do those things he promises. There is no reason to take a risk on the volatile Trump, who, in the process of implementing your desired solutions, may expand federal power and implement leftist policies. He's been liberal more than conservative throughout his life, and we have no evidence of any dramatic conversion. As suspicious as you all are, you should be very suspicious here. You might think you'll be in charge, but that's not a realistic expectation. Finally, we must never omit liberty from the equation. Ted Cruz will do most of the things you want done, but he'll unquestionably honor the Constitution and rule of law, which Trump rarely mentions, reduce government and safeguard that which has always made America unique: her liberty. Please give it just a little more thought and consider this. I do believe Ted Cruz shares your concerns about the establishment and understands the condescension of the ruling class. He's dealt with it firsthand. He'll be your reliable advocate."