Sen. Ted Cruz calls in to defend himself against Donald Trump and Marco Rubio. For one, Trump keeps threatening these frivolous lawsuits against Cruz. Donald Trump’s lawyers are numb-skulls if they move forward with a lawsuit against Ted Cruz. A defamation lawsuit against Cruz brought by Trump would be thrown out of court. Trump is used to getting his way, by threatening lawsuits and it won’t work with Cruz who is inviting Trump to sue him. Many who support Trump would have supported Ross Perot in the 90’s. Also, the Republican establishment has now gotten behind Marco Rubio. It is made even more obvious because now Gov. Nikki Haley in South Carolina has endorsed him. The establishment is willing to elect Rubio in spite of his support of the Gang of 8 and pledged not to immediately rescind Obama’s executive order on amnesty. Later, the Democrat Party, which tried to destroy Justice Clarence Thomas and blocked Miguel Estrada, are pulling the race card yet again. It’s time that Senate Republicans push back against this race baiting and not hold any hearings for Obama’s Supreme Court nominees. Finally, Congressman Louie Gohmert calls in to discuss his Congressional race and his opponents nasty ads against him.

What are your substantive thoughts about what he has to say, here?

​Cruz’s latest line of attack on Trump is a purely debating point to demean “deal-making” … one of Trump’s most important qualifications.  Cruz emphasizes that the most important qualification is to be true to conservative principles.  The inference is that Trump would make “non-conservative” deals with the DC Cartel Establishment.  But such a tactic is completely inconsistent with Trump’s stated GOAL of “To make America GREAT again.”  That goal is the strongest statement in Trump’s campaign.  It recognizes that Obama has used Alinsky tactics to completely demolish the core tenants of Conservatism.  The sad fact, not appreciated by Conservative purists, is that Trump’s campaign is really the necessary PRECURSOR  for revitalizing conservative principles in government.  He clearly recognizes the top priority job is to stop and then reverse the Alinsky aspects of Obama’s narcissistic agenda.  That effort requires a new coalition (which is already forming) led by a really tough, experienced “doer” like Trump!.  Cruz distorts Trump’s motives by refusing to recognize that Trump’s vision is the best way to kill the effects of existing policies and stop any new Obama/Alinsky-type policies that are destroying the American dream and damaging our prestige abroad.  The secondary step is to pursue Trump’s dream of restoring the American Dream and, in the process. enhancing conservative principles!

Cruz doesn’t appreciate Obama’s true motivation.  It is based on intensifying  the conflict  between the “HAVES” and “HAVE-NOTS”.  This is pure Alinsky doctrine … the goal is to empower the  “HAVE-NOTS” to diminish the exploitation power of the “HAVES”.  Obama has used this tactic to make our society the most divisive ever.  But this result should be  really self-destructive since it is based on “biting the hand that feeds you.”  But for some reason, which I do not fully understand, it hasn’t been … the lack of understanding may be because I have a hard time believing that any American would prefer to be on the dole rather than working for a living.

The other ramification of the Obama-Alinsky strategy is that it acknowledges that there are significant economic costs associated with implementing the agenda, especially OBAMACARE.  Employing Alinsky’s tactic of deception,  Obama pushed these costs far enough into the future so that the adverse political impact of the true costs would not disrupt their political agenda (i.e., winning future elections).  The process to sell OBAMACARE is the poster child of this cynical tactic.  The financial planning horizon for considering OBAMACARE was legally limited to 10 years (the horizon for the Congressional Budget Office’s economic analyses).  So the game was to reduce 10-year costs to less than $900B, with all analyses constrained by Obama’s guidance.  There were several iterations of these CBO analyses to reduce the 10-year cost to approximated $900B.  However, the deceptive analysis used 10 years of income (OBAMACARE funding paid for by taxpayers) to pay for 6 years of benefits. But, what would happen in the next 10 years when OBAMACARE would have to pay for 10 years of benefits?  CBO could not analyze that issue since it was beyond its lawful planning horizon.  Recall that Obama won “2013 Lie of the Year” award for the deceptions related to OBAMACARE!  What a disgraceful commentary on his legacy program … and there has been no political consequence YET.  But that honeymoon may be coming to an end.  Annual Obamacare tax increases continue kicking in.  As the public takes increasing hits in its pocketbook, more attention will be paid to what the real costs are … and that should generate a big backlash.    But Obama, the narcissist, still enjoys his self-proclaimed 8 years of glory.  But the true hallmark of his fiscal stewardship will be doubling the national debt to over $20 trillion.  The perfidy of this result is greatly magnified by his Alinskyite tactic of deceiving the electorate by touting the brilliance of his policies to reduce the annual deficit … an overt lie since any deficit just aggravates our fiscal viability by increasing the already intolerable national debt.  But that policy sounded good to an uninformed electorate since it helped finance an expanding welfare state.  In truth, the fundamental  precursor of the destruction of our economy is the burgeoning national debt, a metric that Obama never mentions.  In this context Trump really is the best candidate to fend off a financial collapse.  The critical focus now cannot be on preserving the purity of conservatism … we need a leader like Trump who has the technical skill set and aggressive  leadership experience to get our economy moving back toward the right track.   

The longer we postpone taking the medicine that will halt, and then reverse Obama’s economic perversity, the more radical the cure will have to be.  Being blinded by “conservative principles” mimics the favorite liberal problem-solving orthodoxy … relying on “faculty lounge theories” while ignoring empirical evidence that define the nature of the problem and its cure (prime example: Global Warming).  When your health is in extremis, you must kill the cancer or whatever is causing the problem, and then follow-up with rehabilitative procedures under a skilled doctor’s care.  

We  need a proven problem solver and “doctor” like Trump!

Wes May
Pinehurst