Some Questions For Trump Supporters

For those of you who haven't yet seen The Fraud of Fifth Avenue's town hall style interview on the Today Show last Thursday, I present the pertinent part:

A few quick questions for his supporters, if I may.

1) How do you - especially the conservatives out there - justify voting for someone on the Republican side of the aisle (although I submit that he's anything but) whose views are nearly identical to Hillary's?

Seriously, I need an answer to that because there's no way, in my opinion, to make that leap and still call yourself a "conservative."

2) How does this not disturb you? How does this not make you think twice about supporting him?

3) Given that his new campaign manager, Paul Manafort, was caught - on tape - speaking to GOP insiders saying that Trump is "playing a role" and you'll see the real Trump soon - that audio was played on Fox News Sunday - which Trump will you vote for?

It's been clear to me from day one of his campaign that he's been disingenuous - if not outright lying - about who he is, what he believes, and what his core values are. How is it not clear to you?

4) How can you still seriously call him "anti-establishment" when he's now hiring all Beltway insiders for his campaign? I mean, we're talking about people who have been around D.C. for decades.

5) While we're at it, aren't you the same people who started calling Ted Cruz an "establishment" candidate because he hired Jeb Bush's campaign finance manager? Care to rethink that call now?

Bottom line here is this: I've said since the beginning of this election cycle that one has to take into account the entirety of a candidate's life before offering your support to that candidate. And yes, that includes Trump and his lifelong left-leaning positions.

If there's anything I've learned during all the time I've been following politics, which is roughly 35 years, it's that a candidate's past positions tend to inform his/her present positions.

In the past, Trump has supported abortion - up to and including partial-birth abortion, which is as heinous and vile an act as I can think of. All abortions are evil, as far as I'm concerned - the act of abortion, not all of the women getting them (some are evil, and I will forever hold that belief).

Now, he wants to amend the Republican platform to include exceptions for abortions? How is this conservative?

In the past, Trump has supported higher taxes on the wealthy - even though they already pay nearly 50% of all federal taxes paid.

Trump still supports raising taxes on the wealthy. Not so conservative, is it?

What more will it take for you to realize that you're being played? ~ Hunter

P.S., I really do want someone to answer these questions because I can't for the life of me figure out why anyone would support a candidate who's nearly identical to Hillary in every way that matters.

Contamination

I just finished reading the first four books of a series called "Contamination." The series details a shadowy organization's apocalyptic viral attack on the southwestern United States.

This organization releases a virus into food and water supplies of various towns and cities that turns most people into vile, murderous creatures not unlike zombies. Slightly derivative of some more popular stories across various media, but enjoyable nonetheless, if a bit short.

Some characters pop up in the storyline to interact with the main protagonists - almost all determined to do evil. These characters got me wondering about what humanity might become if society completely broke down.

I'd LIKE to think that society, as a whole - more specifically, American society - would do everything in their power to help their fellow man. The more I thought about it, however, it slowly dawned on me that we probably wouldn't.

That bothers me more than you could know. It shames me to think that man's inhumanity towards man might be the norm rather than the exception.

All I have to do is look at many of the people supporting Trump in the election cycle. The way they treat those who disagree with them is the social media equivalent of the "human wave" attacks on American soldiers in Vietnam. They're seemingly all truly vile. I've made no secret of my opposition to Trump and if you read my blog or peruse my Facebook page you'll know my reasons for that opposition, so I'll not repeat them here.

I have received death threats (which I don't take too seriously) and many other vile, nasty, disgusting comments for that opposition.

I mostly just laugh at them, but today I noticed a comment on a meme I posted yesterday. The meme mocked Trump's ridiculous statement that 9/11 was worse than the attack on Pearl Harbor. A Trump supporter actually said that even despite that comment, he was still the best candidate running.

My response was basically "Only if you're not concerned with the Constitution." He then proceeded to say that the Constitution DOES NOT MATTER because people "only pull it out when it suits their purpose." I am not kidding.

Essentially, this "man" confirmed, at least for me, what I've said since Trump began his run - he and most of his supporters care nothing for this country. They SAY they do, but being willing to throw away the very foundation of this nation pretty much says otherwise.

The people in "Contamination" are essentially the same. They destroyed the foundations of their own humanity in order to prey on others.

Destroying the Constitutional underpinnings of this nation is as bad to me as destroying your own humanity. Neither are acceptable to me under any circumstances. Period.

I may not be able to do anything to prevent a proverbial "zombie apocalypse," but as long as I draw breath the Constitution of the United States of America will never die. If you seek to supplant, subvert, damage or destroy it in any way, you are my enemy and the enemy of this nation.

Trump Cries "Foul" Over Wyoming But Remains Silent About Hawaii

Clearly the Drumpf doesn't know, much less understand, the process by which the Republicans choose the nominee. Maybe I can clear it up for him and his campaign "team." Personally, I think they're too busy eating their crayons to get it, but I can at least try. Here we go...

1) The number of delegates required to have the nomination "handed" to you is ironclad at 1,237. Got it? Good.

2) Anything short of 1,237 - even by one single lonely delegate - is grounds for an "open" convention. Not likely to happen, but still a remote possibility. Got it? Good.

3) Each state has their own rules for selecting their delegates and how those delegates vote during the convention.

a) Some states are "winner take all" - meaning every delegate from that state must vote for the primary/caucus winner of the state on the first ballot.

b) Some states are "winner take most" - meaning the winner receives the votes of most of the delegates while other candidates receive a few as well.

c) Some states' delegates are "apportioned" - meaning the percentage of votes a given candidate will receive is commensurate to how well they did in that state's primary/caucus.

d) Some states, like PA, have rules that say the majority of delegates are not bound by the state's primary results. In essence, they are free to vote however they wish.

***For the record, I'm well aware that I've stripped the processes down to the bare bones minimum, but I kinda-sorta had to. How else will Drumpf and his team understand? I don't have the proper amount of crayons or construction paper it would take to really explain it to them. Just sayin'.***

My point is that it's the state's Republican Party apparatus that sets the rules for how and when delegates are chosen and who they vote for in the convention. These rules have been known for well over a year.

For The Fraud of Fifth Avenue and his team to be crying "foul" now shows how ill-prepared he is for just a simple election. It has to make one wonder how he'll ever be prepared if he wins the presidency, God forbid.

Calling the Colorado system "rigged" while remaining silent about a nearly identical process in Hawaii is especially enlightening to those of us who are actually paying attention. The only major difference between the 2 states is that the Cheetos Kid won Hawaii and lost Colorado.

Puts it in perspective, does it not? ~ Hunter

P.S., A plurality of delegates does not equal a majority. Period. End of story.

Now Is The Time To Stand With Ted Cruz

This election cycle has boiled itself down to this: You can vote for the Republican "win" by voting for Trump - even though he'll lose in a landslide to Clinton or Sanders - or you can vote for the true American values that we claim we want to preserve – the values Ted Cruz has fought for his entire adult life.

The values and principles enumerated in the Constitution are what made this nation great, not a political party or a candidate. It's no coincidence that the United States started to go to Hell in a hand basket as progressives/liberals began pushing us away from those values and principles.

There's no doubt that as America has moved further and further from the Constitution, she went from bad to worse and is teetering upon the precipice of worst. Just look at the perceived legitimacy of Bernie Sanders' campaign for proof of that.

There can be no question whatsoever that a return to the values and principles of the Constitution is what's so desperately needed to turn this ship around. There's also no question that there is only one candidate who understands the Constitution and what it represents, what it means, and has actually taken a stand - often alone - and fought for the Constitution. That candidate is Ted Cruz.

Is he perfect? No. Only one perfect person has ever walked this planet - Jesus. Cruz is, however, the only candidate who speaks of and for the things conservatives have been fighting for these past seven-plus years. Ted Cruz is the only candidate who's tried to fight the big government overreach of the Obama administration while a certain other candidate funded those politicians who allowed that overreach.

A vote for Trump is nothing but a continuation of the system we're all tired of complaining about. He's not an "outsider" as he and his supporters like to claim. Trump is the ultimate insider's insider. A Trump presidency will hasten the destruction of everything we wish to preserve almost as quickly as a Clinton or Sanders presidency. Of that I am certain.

A vote for Cruz is a vote that acknowledges those problems exist and acknowledges that a return to the Constitution is the best way to fix those problems. We, as conservatives, have been saying exactly that for decades. At least since Reagan left office.

We now have the chance to turn this around. Will it be easy? Absolutely not. So much damage has been done it will probably take a generation or longer to repair it all. Can Ted Cruz fix it all by himself? Not likely. But he is the only one who will willingly take those first steps. That alone makes him worthy of my vote.

Those of us who have complained that progressivism/liberalism/outright socialism are destroying the greatest nation in history have no business supporting more of the same. Those of us who have decried the use of government as a weapon against political enemies have no business pushing for more of the same. Those of us who have spoken out government intervention in everything from our daily lives to the free market have no business supporting more of the same..

Make no mistake about it – Donald J. Trump is more of the same. ~ Hunter

Trump's Answer To A Question At Last Night's CNN Town Hall Should Be A YUUUUUGE Red Flag For His Supporters

Anyone who knows anything about our founding documents can tell you that the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are inextricably linked. You cannot separate the two from each other.

The Declaration is essentially an outline for the Constitution, and in that outline, it says that our rights come from God and that government's sole purpose - it's reason for existence, as it were - is to protect and safeguard those rights.

The Constitution of the United States is unique among the constitutions of the world in that it literally spells out what rights we already have and specifically limits what the government can do to impact those rights.

Nowhere in this document will you find a "right" to an education, housing, or healthcare. It's not the federal government's job to provide those things for Americans.

Last night, during the CNN Town Hall, Donald Trump was asked what he thought were the top three functions of the federal government were. After attempting to skirt the issue by making a lame joke, saying "Security, security, security," Trump's inner progressive reared it's ugly head and proclaimed that healthcare, education and housing were top priorities for the federal government.

I'm not making that up.

As I posted on my personal Facebook page last night, right after he said it, that answer alone should disqualify him from consideration for the presidency. If his supporters could get past their emotions for more time than it takes to change the television channel, perhaps they would realize just how much he sounds like Obama, Clinton, and Sanders.

I don't know about you, but I'm not holding my breath on that awakening. The evidence is right there, laid bare at their feet and for all the world to see. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that Trump is not who he claims to be.

It's maddeningly sad to watch otherwise intelligent people fall victim to a conman, especially when the con being run isn't the least bit subtle. The difference between Trump's con and your everyday, garden variety con is that Trump's con leads to the destruction of the nation, not just one person.

For that, there can be no forgiveness. ~ Hunter

It's Our Own Damn Fault

When the Supreme Court made their ruling on gay marriage, those of us who spoke out against the Court even taking the case - let alone our disagreement with the actual ruling - warned that this type of thing would come.

We said that it wasn't going to stop with owners of private companies being forced to go against their religious beliefs.

We raised the alarm and predicted purely religious organizations would be targeted and smeared for not bowing down to a micro-minority but very vocal subset of society.

"You're crazy!" we were told.

"Homophobes!" we were called.

"Bigots! You just don't want equal rights!" they exclaimed.

We were ridiculed, belittled, excoriated by the Left for raising that alarm. Yet here we are, watching it happen exactly as we said it would.

Religious liberty is enumerated as our very FIRST Right in the Bill of Rights.  It comes before free speech, the right to bear arms, petition the government.

All of them come after the right to practice your religion as you see fit, provided that practice doesn't infringe on another's rights in any way.

The Founders held this right as sacrosanct, perhaps inviolable even, which is understandable given the tyranny they had just fought a long war to be rid of.

What makes this all the worse is that the Georgia law - and here's the really important part - only protected overtly religious organizations, like churches and charities. It had nothing whatsoever to do with private companies or individuals. The scope was limited, targeted for just that reason.

In this day and age, immorality is becoming increasingly acceptable to wider and wider swathes of people who don't seem to care what problems they cause for future generations as long as they get what they want RIGHT NOW and to Hell with anyone else.

I no longer recognize the America I once knew - the America where people had the freedom to do what they wanted, act how they wanted, be who they wanted to be regardless what society wanted and within the framework of the Rule of Law.

The age of the individual is over. The Rule of Law has ended. This "Great Experiment" in self-governance is dying a slow, painful, ignominious death and it's our own damn fault.

The lessons learned by, and from, the Founders have been all but forgotten and for that we should all be ashamed. ~ Hunter

What Good Is A "Win" When The Winner Doesn't Share Your Values?

I find myself in a unique and unprecedented position. Yesterday morning, while listening to Chris Stigall, I learned that Rush Limbaugh, apparently speaking about Drumpf, made a statement to the effect that this election is "beyond ideology" for him, that it's about stopping Hillary from becoming president.

Rush has been almost a hero to me. Throughout the last 25-plus years, I've agreed with Rush's take on things political far more often than I've not. I remember when I first started listening to Rush on the radio and thinking, "Finally! Someone out there 'gets it!' Somebody who's saying what I've been thinking!"

It was both Reagan and Rush who taught me that the principles of conservatism not only worked but were morally right and true. It was they who reinforced what my parents instilled in me (though I didn't always practice) that doing right often meant standing alone, fighting the tide. The two of them, more than any other people, taught me that conservative principles are worth taking that stand.

Now, however, it seems we are to throw conservative principles overboard for the "win." At least, that's what I took from Limbaugh's statement. I could be wrong in my assessment, but given the behavior of supposed conservatives pertaining to Drumpf and his candidacy, I don't think I am, and it disturbs me.

I keep asking - "What good is a 'win' for conservatives if the winner is NOT a conservative?" I have yet to receive an answer beyond "Keeping Hillary out of the White House." Sorry, but that's not good enough.

We have to be for something, not just against something. Anyone with half a brain listening to Drumpf speak knows that his positions on foreign policy and trade are beyond reckless, bordering on dangerous - economically if he gets his wish for massive tariffs on imported products and militarily if he orders our troops to fire upon and murder civilians.

This election doesn't go beyond ideology. It's precisely about ideology. If you believe, as I do, in conservative principles; if you know, as I do, that conservatism is what's best for this nation, you cannot possibly vote for a candidate who does not - and never has - hold those same beliefs and stay true to your principles.

I used to believe that the primaries were for your principles and the general was for winning the prize. No longer. I won't be an active participant in the destruction of everything I hold most dear. I just won't. A win by Drumpf in the general election would be a disaster, possibly an even greater one than a Hillary win.

If we don't take a stand now for the beliefs we profess, if we cast off the principles we've been fighting for years to maintain and put into practice solely to prevent a Hillary presidency by electing her ideological equal, there's no point at all to even having principles.

This election is about doing what's right not what makes us "feel good." If we, as conservatives, elect Drumpf we're no better than the liberals we've been mocking for decades for not having any principles.

This love affair the nation is having with Drumpf is as sickening to me as the one we had with King DingleBarry seven years ago. I won't - I can't - just sit idly by as I watch the nation I love be destroyed from within, and by my own side. It's disgusting.  ~ Hunter