The Trump Speech On Muslim Terrorism Every American Should Hear

From http://www.conservativehq.com

George Rasley, CHQ Editor | 6/14/2016

Yesterday, Donald Trump delivered a speech that should change the dynamics of this year’s presidential election – especially when it is compared to the dangerous lies of Hillary Clinton and the follies of the Republican establishment regarding the war Islam has declared on America and the West.

Trump went straight to the point of why the Pulse nightclub in Orlando was targeted and the Islamic religious motivation behind it:

A radical Islamic terrorist targeted the nightclub not only because he wanted to kill Americans, but in order to execute gay and lesbian citizens because of their sexual orientation.

It is a strike at the heart and soul of who we are as a nation.

It is an assault on the ability of free people to live their lives, love who they want and express their identity.

It is an attack on the right of every single American to live in peace and safety in their own country.

We need to respond to this attack on America as one united people – with force, purpose and determination.

Trump also had the guts and integrity to say what every honest person working in the national security field already knows – but under Obama is afraid to say lest they lose their job:

The bottom line is that the only reason the killer was in America in the first place was because we allowed his family to come here.

Trump had much more to say about border security, about Obama’s failure (we say intentional failure) to effectively confront Islamism here and abroad, and other related matters, but in that one line he identified the crux of the entire debate over Muslim immigration to the United States.

If we allow more Muslims to come here we can expect more of the same, and if we do not treat Muslims who are here as potential subversives we can expect more of the same.

Trump then elaborated on his view of how to address the problem and we say with some pride more or less echoed what we here at CHQ have been saying for years:

I called for a ban after San Bernardino, and was met with great scorn and anger but now, many are saying I was right to do so — and although the pause is temporary, we must find out what is going on. The ban will be lifted when we as a nation are in a position to properly and perfectly screen those people coming into our country. (See our article “We Can – And Should – Ban Most Muslim Immigration To America.”)

The immigration laws of the United States give the President the power to suspend entry into the country of any class of persons that the President deems detrimental to the interests or security of the United States, as he deems appropriate.

I will use this power to protect the American people. When I am elected, I will suspend immigration from areas of the world when there is a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe or our allies, until we understand how to end these threats.

After a full, impartial and long overdue security assessment, we will develop a responsible immigration policy that serves the interests and values of America.

We cannot continue to allow thousands upon thousands of people to pour into our country, many of whom have the same thought process as this savage killer. (See our article “Why Do We Let These Vipers Into America.”)

Many of the principles of Radical Islam are incompatible with Western values and institutions.

Radical Islam is anti-woman, anti-gay and anti-American.

I refuse to allow America to become a place where gay people, Christian people, and Jewish people, are the targets of persecution and intimidation by Radical Islamic preachers of hate and violence.

It’s not just a national security issue. It is a quality of life issue. (See our article “Orlando Massacre: Muslim Kills Gays To Enforce Shariah In America.”)

We contrast Trump’s clarity of purpose as expressed in this speech with the PC nonsense spouted by Hillary Clinton who predictably blamed the Orlando attack on guns and not only downplayed the threat, but defended further Muslim immigration to America.

But Trump’s speech also bears contrast with the dangerous comments and actions of establishment Republicans, especially Speaker Paul Ryan and Homeland Security Committee Chairman Mike McCaul (TX-10). Ryan has steadfastly, and inexplicably, supported increasing Muslim immigration to America, while Chairman McCaul has steadfastly, and inexplicably, supported Obama’s failed Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) strategy that pours millions into Muslim Brotherhood affiliated groups – the same kind of groups that were granted immediate media platforms to promote the lie that the Orlando massacre “had nothing to do with Islam.”

Donald Trump concluded his remarks with this promise: “When I am President, I pledge to protect and defend all Americans who live inside of our borders. Wherever they come from, wherever they were born, all Americans living here and following our laws will be protected.”

If you are still on the fence about voting for Donald Trump I suggest you read his speech and then ask yourself, for all his foibles, who is more credible, focused and trustworthy on winning the war Islam has declared on America, Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton?

And then ask yourself if you can risk handing over the future of America and Western Civilization to Mrs. Clinton, when she is so clearly compromised by having Islamists like Huma Abedin in her inner counsels, that she plans to continue, if not expand, the very policies that led directly to the San Bernardino and Orlando Muslim terrorist massacres?

Trump wasn’t my first choice, but he’s earned my respect and my vote with this speech and the clarity, focus and understanding he demonstrated in this speech. I urge you again, read this speech and vote for Donald Trump to save your country.

Gingrich: GOP establishment should back, not battle, Donald

From http://www.washingtontimes.com

Trump after New York: The presumptive nominee -GOP establishment should back, not battle, Donald

 – – Wednesday, April 20, 2016
Newt-Gingrich-vs-Donald-Trump

The scale of Donald Trump’s victory in New York turned him from frontrunner into presumptive Republican nominee.

The vehemently anti-Trump faction of the party will reject this conclusion.

The news media will dither and analysts will knit pick.

The pseudo-sophisticated will point to the cleverness of stealing delegates legally pledged to Trump.

It is all baloney.

Trump’s emphasis on the will of the voters will “trump” these arguments and analyses. When one candidate has won the lion’s share of the popular vote—and almost certainly Trump will have won more than his two rivals combined—the Republican base is not going to support overturning that outcome with insider cleverness at local, state or national conventions.

And even those efforts are likely to be moot since Trump seems poised to win the nomination outright.

Let’s start with New York.

As I write, the latest numbers are 89 delegates for Trump, 3 for John Kasich, and zero for Ted Cruz.Let me repeat: The champion of the stop Trump movement just won ZERO delegates.

Ahh, the sophisticates say, but this is Trump’s home state. Of course he won all the delegates. If that is the standard, let’s look at the results in Cruz’s home state.

In the Texas primary on March 1, Cruz got 104 delegates, Trump got 48, Rubio got 3 and Kasich got none. In Cruz’s home state, Trump got nearly one third of the delegates in a four-person race.

One other really big state, Florida, has also had the chance to vote. And what happened there? On March 15, Trumpwon 99 delegates. Cruz, Rubio and Kasich combined won zero.

So in the three biggest states to have voted so far, the delegate count is Trump 236, Cruz 104, and Kasich 3. (California will vote on June 7 and the latest CBS poll shows Trump at 49 percent, Cruz 31 percent, Kasich 16 percent.)

Trump is far ahead in delegates in the three biggest states to have voted.

Of course, Trump’s core argument is not about delegates. It’s about the popular vote.

In Florida, New York, and Texas, Republicans have voted. Roughly 2.4 million voted for Trump, compared to 1.8 million for Cruz and 500,000 for Kasich. In these three biggest states, Trump has attracted more votes than Cruz and Kasichcombined.

All evidence is that California will further widen that margin based on recent polling.

Trump is probably going to win all of New Jersey’s delegates (which is winner-take-all, with poll numbers resembling the results in New York). He’s probably going to win Pennsylvania, Connecticut, and Maryland as well (though by a narrower margin) and possibly Rhode Island.

It is likely that Kasich will come in second and Cruz will come in third in all of those states. That could strengthen Kasich enough for him to rival Cruz in California (further widening the “Never Trump” candidate’s gap behind Trump).

Cruz’s best shot to turn the race around may be Indiana. That state could be a legitimate battleground for all three candidates. (Kasich is the governor of Ohio right next door, so he also has a shot at Indiana.)

Cruz may win a few small western states. He may also cleverly keep poaching Trump’s delegates at state conventions in an effort to overturn the popular vote with insider maneuvering.

There are two problems with those strategies.

First, Trump is correct in asserting that a manipulated nomination defying the popular vote would be anathema to the Republican base. It would make Cleveland and the fall campaign chaotic and unmanageable.

Second, Trump is probably going to win the nomination on the first ballot.

Take a clear-eyed look at the numbers. After New YorkTrump has 845 delegates. Cruz has 559, and Kasich has 147.

So Trump is 139 delegates ahead of the other two combined.

He is almost 300 delegates ahead of Cruz, his closest rival.

Every analysis of the next few weeks indicates Trump’s margin will widen and he will move steadily closer to 1237. Already, he is only 392 short before any undecided delegates, Rubio delegates, and the like are counted.

These are the numbers of a presumptive nominee, not a front runner. If this were any candidate but Donald Trump, the media would be saying his rivals’ efforts were hopeless and the establishment would be pressuring them to exit the race.

It is time for the GOP establishment to work with this new reality rather than wage war against it.

West Hollywood Bans Trump In the Name of ‘Diversity’

Oh… the hypocrisy of the left, the Mayor of the beautiful city of West Hollywood is a very pretty young woman who happens to be a lesbian, and we gather that she is also smart, outspoken and most likely very liberal and….a Dem, but she does not know anything about the First Amendment. So I guess she does not need our business, fair enough. No shopping, eating or entertainment in West Hollywood! – Celeste

From http://www.truthrevolt.org

West Hollywood Bans Trump In the Name of ‘Diversity’

Donald Trump is apparently so intolerant that the tolerant city of West Hollywood wants to ban him.

Speaking on CNN Tuesday, West Hollywood mayor Lindsey Horvath defended her position to ban Donald Trump in the name of “diversity” by saying the city is too “welcoming” to host Donald Trump. That makes perfect sense.

“You know, West Hollywood is a very diverse community,” Horvath told CNN’s Brooke Baldwin Tuesday. “We’re over 40 percent LGBT. We have Russian-speaking immigrants, some of whom were concentration camp survivors. We’re the first declared pro-choice city in America. Our city is very diverse, we’re very open, we’re very welcoming. And that’s the kind of community we want to continue to be.”

Unaware of the complete logical fallacy at play, Horvath added that “Donald Trump has used hate speech, his violent tactics, and systemically targeting people for their religion, for their country of origin, for their gender, is not the kind of behavior, not the kind of language that we want in our community.”

Making good on her promise, Horvath has instructed city staff to refuse event permits to Trump’s campaign, saying his rhetoric goes beyond just mere disagreement. Asked whether or not she has the authority, let alone constitutional right to deny Trump from campaigning in her city, Horvath could only say that Trump has no right to speak his mind, because its “hate speech.”

“The city is going to follow the law,” Horvath said. “This isn’t about free speech, this is about hate speech. We are able and willing to exercise our voice and use our first amendment rights to say we want to elevate the discourse here. We’re demanding civil discourse. That’s not too much to ask, certainly not of someone who’s running for the highest office in the land. He should respect the office by treating it with the respect that it deserves.”

The Freedom Center is a 501c3 non-profit organization. Therefore we do not endorse political candidates either in primary or general elections. However, as defenders of America’s social contract, we insist that the rules laid down by both parties at the outset of campaigns be respected, and that the results be decided by free elections. We will oppose any attempt to rig the system and deny voters of either party their constitutional right to elect candidates of their choice.

George Miller: The Trump Phenomenon

The Trump Phenomenon

By George Miller

I still can’t believe it myself. The larger than life real estate and reality show billionaire, from my original hometown, who always has something to say about nearly everything, who has gingerly dipped his toes in the political waters before but always hung back, is finally running for office. Not starting with city council or state assembly, but going for the gold- PRESIDENT of the You-nited Snakes of America. Wow.

What is the significance of this? Well, can you name the last billionaire businessman President we had? Bush, you say? Yeah, well he had degrees from Harvard and Yale, lost some money on a sports franchise and dry oil wells- no billionaire. Name a REAL businessman tycoon President. Romney was an also-ran.

We keep hearing from “The Media” that Trump doesn’t have “political experience,” therefore “he isn’t qualified.” Please, name a politician who has a better mastery of bending other politicians to his will and playing the media like a fiddle to achieve his agenda. Name a contemporary national politician who attracts huge, adoring crowds, besides Bernie (Obama doesn’t count anymore, having largely lost that franchise). Name a politician who has successfully built a multi-billion dollar organization in dozens of countries, with tens of thousands of employees and dealt with many jurisdictions to make all this happen. Hillary, Rubio, Kasich, even Cruz? Ha!

But , also name another American non-politician- or even politician- who has so many influential opponents- on the left, right, middle- doing everything in their power to stop him, but he STILL leads by commanding margins in the primaries and polls. This is unprecedented and bears some thought. It’s interesting that his most bitter political enemies are also the ones many deplore the most. The so-called “President.” The DNC. Republican elite, or “GOPe” as they are now often called (the “e” stands for establishment).

He is a flawed candidate- as ALL of them are. With a towering ego and surprising insecurities for such an accomplished man, vengeful, impulsive, not so discreet and improvisational, one wonders why he isn’t stopped right there. He makes lots unforced errors/gaffes. But many things he says and does that opponents think are errors are perceived otherwise by his growing supporter base. I personally believe he would be a lot more successful in his campaign if he would hold his tongue more and think about its effect. But, then again, I’m not leading in the Republican Presidential campaign last time I checked.

So, why isn’t he stopped? Well, for one thing, his force of personality, innovativeness, sheer energy, intelligence, drive and persistence make him somewhat akin to a force of nature. He can focus that like a laser when he wants to get great things accomplished and overcome great obstacles to do it. Every time he clears his throat, media surround him with cameras and microphones, leading detractors to claim the media loves him :-). If they really loved him, why do they eviscerate him at every opportunity?

All great people have major flaws. All great people have compensating attributes.

Consider that nearly all of his campaign opponents except Ben Carson were professional politicians, with years and years of experience and practice at campaigning, speaking, analyzing issues, controlling “spin,” letting opponents defeat themselves and helping them do so, when needed.

Many of his detractors are openly contemptuous of him, singly and in tag teams they attack him from all sides. Yet, every time the smoke clears, he is still standing, often higher than before. His political epitaph has been written, futilely, multiple times in the last 9 months.

So, what then is his secret weapon that keeps his campaign alive- thriving, actually? Simple- three things:

1- He never, never gives up, as long as he sees a path to victory- and he has better vision of such things than almost anyone. If thwarted, he will immediately counterattack, devastatingly. Or, he will wait, bide his time and later attack from another direction, at a time and place of his own choosing. A nine billion dollar fortune is also helpful when you need staying power and independence.

2- He has ideas which are often far more workable and popular than opponents, who consistently underestimate him, seem to think.

3- He has tremendous support from the public, from nearly all types of people, income, educational level and backgrounds, including many from groups the establishment claims hate him. He emphatically rejects political correctness, to a fault. For example, even though he had repudiated David Duke multiple times, he obstinately refused to sit up and bark like a trained seal once again for CNN’s Jake Tapper on that subject recently. His fans LOVE that in a way that the establishment can never even begin to comprehend. They LOVE hearing him run down establishment figures and their failed ideas.

I would prefer a better political “Messiah” for our troubled nation at this critical juncture- But don’t see a better one on the horizon at this time. Was it Donald Rumsfeld who said “you go to war with the army you have”? I think back to biblical passages where God calls upon deeply flawed individuals to carry out his will on earth. Well, why not The Donald? He has taken tremendous risks- to his reputation, business empire, even a physical risk of being killed by powerful, desperate opponents who will stop at nothing to prevail– “Our lives, our fortunes, our sacred honor.” His enemies say he is doing it for his ego, to make more money, whatever. But, he could instead be coasting on his victory lap of fulfilling the American dream- admired, enjoying his family, the fruits of his labor and the admiration of millions. But, at the age of 69 and at a peak of success in his life-long efforts, he’s NOT.

Next installment: Trump’s ideas on immigration, trade, jobs, foreign policy- are they crazy, “racist,” impractical or ….? Is he a “Conservative?”

George Miller is publisher of Citizensjournal.us and an Oxnard, CA resident

The Trump Phenomenon

The Trump Phenomenon

by George Miller

I still can’t believe it myself. The larger than life real estate and reality show billionaire, from my original hometown, who always has something to say about nearly everything, who has gingerly dipped his toes in the political waters before but always hung back, is finally  running for office. Not starting with city council or state assembly, but going for the gold- PRESIDENT of the You-nited Snakes of America.  Wow.

What is the significance of this? Well, can you name the last billionaire businessman President we had? Bush, you say? Yeah, well he had degrees from Harvard and Yale, lost some money on a sports franchise and dry oil wells- no billionaire. Name a REAL businessman tycoon President. Romney was an also-ran.

We keep hearing from “The Media” that Trump doesn’t have “political experience,” therefore “he isn’t qualified.” Please, name a politician who has a better mastery of bending other politicians to his will and playing the media like a fiddle to achieve his agenda. Name a contemporary national politician who attracts huge, adoring crowds, besides Bernie (Obama doesn’t count anymore, having largely lost that franchise). Name a politician who has successfully built a multi-billion dollar organization in dozens of countries, with tens of thousands of employees and dealt with many jurisdictions to make all this happen. Hillary, Rubio, Kasich, even Cruz? Ha!

But , also name another American non-politician- or even politician- who has so many influential opponents- on the left, right, middle- doing everything in their power to stop him, but he STILL leads by commanding margins in the primaries and polls. This is unprecedented and bears some thought. It’s interesting that his most bitter political enemies are also the ones many deplore the most.  The so-called “President.” The DNC. Republican elite, or “GOPe” as they are now often called (the “e” stands for establishment).

He is a flawed candidate- as ALL of them are. With a towering ego and surprising insecurities for such an accomplished man, vengeful, impulsive, not so discreet and improvisational, one wonders why he isn’t stopped right there. He makes lots unforced errors/gaffes. But many things he says and does that opponents think are errors are perceived otherwise by his growing supporter base. I personally believe he would be a lot more successful in his campaign if he would hold his tongue more and think about its effect. But, then again, I’m not leading in the Republican Presidential campaign last time I checked.

So, why isn’t he stopped? Well, for one thing, his force of personality, innovativeness, sheer energy, intelligence, drive and persistence make him somewhat akin to a force of nature. He can focus that like a laser when he wants to get great things accomplished and overcome great obstacles to do it. Every time he clears his throat, media surround him with cameras and microphones, leading detractors to claim the media loves him :-). If they really loved him, why do  they eviscerate him at every opportunity?

All great people have major flaws. All great people have compensating attributes.

Consider that nearly all of his campaign opponents except Ben Carson were professional politicians, with years and years of experience and practice at campaigning, speaking, analyzing issues, controlling “spin,” letting opponents defeat themselves and helping them do so, when needed.

Many of his detractors are openly contemptuous of him, singly and in tag teams they attack him from all sides. Yet, every time the smoke clears, he is still standing, often higher than before. His political epitaph has been written, futilely, multiple times in the last 9 months.

So, what then is his secret weapon that keeps his campaign alive- thriving, actually? Simple- three things:

1- He never, never gives up, as long as he sees a path to victory- and he has better vision of such things than almost anyone. If thwarted, he will immediately counterattack, devastatingly. Or, he will wait, bide his time and later attack from another direction, at a time and place of his own choosing. A nine billion dollar fortune is also helpful when you need staying power and independence.

2- He has ideas which are often far more workable and popular than opponents, who consistently underestimate him, seem to think.

3- He has tremendous support from the public, from nearly all types of people, income, educational level and backgrounds, including many from groups the establishment claims hate him. He emphatically rejects political correctness, to a fault. For example, even though he had repudiated David Duke multiple times, he obstinately refused to sit up and bark like a trained seal once again for CNN’s Jake Tapper on that subject recently. His fans LOVE that in a way that the establishment can never even begin to comprehend. They LOVE hearing him run down establishment figures and their failed ideas.

I would prefer a better political “Messiah” for our troubled nation at this critical juncture- But don’t see a better one on the horizon at this time. Was it Donald Rumsfeld who said “you go to war with the army you have”? I think back to biblical passages where God calls upon deeply flawed individuals to carry out his will on earth. Well, why not The Donald? He has taken tremendous risks- to his reputation, business empire, even a physical risk of being killed by powerful, desperate opponents who will stop at nothing to prevail– “Our lives, our fortunes, our sacred honor.” His enemies say he is doing it for his ego, to make more money, whatever. But, he could instead be coasting on his victory lap of fulfilling the American dream- admired, enjoying his family, the fruits of his labor and the admiration of millions. But, at the age of 69 and at a peak of success in his life-long efforts, he’s NOT.

~~~

Next installment: Trump’s ideas on immigration, trade, jobs, foreign  policy- are they crazy, “racist,” impractical or ….? Is he a “Conservative?”
George Miller is publisher of Citizensjournal.us and an Oxnard, CA resident

Five Things To Watch For While Watching Tomorrow’s GOP Debate

From Forbes.com

Five Things To Watch For While Watching The GOP Debate (Reagan Library Edition)

Bill Whalen

 

Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.

January 2008: Republican presidential hopefuls debate at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California. (Photo by David McNew/Getty Images)

Yogi Berra supposedly said: “It’s tough to make predictions, especially about the future.”

Then again, it was Will Rogers who observed: “You’ve got to go out on a limb sometimes, because that’s where the fruit is.”

Last month, I listed five things to be on the lookout for during the Republicans’ first debate in Cleveland.

Here are five things I’ll be looking for on Wednesday night, when the GOP field gathers at the Reagan Presidential Library for the second nationally televised candidates’ debate (two debates, actually, at 6pm and 9pm EDT).

1. Donaldus Magnus? National polls indicate it’s Donald Trump’s race. Do his actions make it his debate? Obviously, much of the build-up swirls around the question of what Trump will have to say about his rivals, what his rivals have to say about him, who throws the first punch, and so forth. My question: does Trump do anything in the course of the debate that moves the ball forward – i.e., words or ideas other than “make America great” to suggest that he’s more than a protest vote against political correctness and timid Republican leadership. Or does Trump, a very skilled golfer (self-taught, he’ll tell you), play it down the middle of the fairway and keep the message tailored to the angeristas?

2. Carly Or Carson’s Turn? Ben Carson’s surged to second in most polls; Carly Fiorina’s worked her way up to the prime-time debate. Along with Trump, they’re the GOP’s trinity of candidates whose record isn’t blemished by holding office. Trump and Carson have experienced a minor flap. Trump and Fiorina have differences much more personal (his comments about her looks bringing new meaning to the term “face-off”). I can give you a scenario in which Carson’s serenity further elevates his cause. I can also paint a scenario in which Fiorina’s poise and quick thinking play well against Trump. The guess here: it’s a good night for Fiorina. At only 3% in the latest CNN poll, she has more room growth than Carson. Whereas Carson struggled at time in the Cleveland debate (except for a great closing statement), Fiorina shined under the lights. Wednesday night could be more of the same.

3. “I Paid For This Microphone.” Can we get through a Republican debate without righteous indignation – real or feigned? Let’s flash back to January 2012 and another CNN-sponsored debate – this one, in South Carolina. During that debate, New Gingrich was asked about an interview with his ex-wife, during which she’d claimed the ex-Speaker wanted an open marriage. Gingrich’s response to CNN’s John King (here’s the video) not only won over the audience, but also lit a new fire under his candidacy. John King isn’t doing the asking this time, under the CNN banner. Instead, the honor goes to talk radio’s Hugh Hewitt. You won’t be surprised to know that Trump has issues with Hewitt’s interview style. The question: given how Trump has benefitted from picking fights with Fox News and other media outlets, does he go after Hewitt during the course of the debate, or leave the criticism for the spin room?

4. The Opening Debate – Any Signs Of Life? With former Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s campaign now in hibernation, only four candidates will compete in the 6pm debate – former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham and former New York Gov. George Pataki (former Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore wasn’t invited to the party as he couldn’t crack 1% in CNN’s poll averaging – here’s CNN’s debate criteria). Call this ensemble what you like – kiddie table, singles table, isle of lost souls. My question: what can any of these gents do to garner the same notice and media bounce as Fiorina, the star of Cleveland’s prelim debate? My guess: brace yourself for a steady stream of Washington-bashing, some if not much of it directed at the GOP establishment. Here’s where the Reagan Library’s primetime debate could differ greatly from Cleveland’s. From Kim Davis’ imprisonment and the GOP Senate’s cautious handling of the Iran deal, to upcoming frays over Planned Parenthood funding and extending the debt ceiling, there’s plenty of room for debate – a Mack truck’s width – and a serious divide between the pragmatic and bomb-throwing wings of the GOP field (translation: Ted Cruz vs. John Kasich).

5. There They Go Again. No less than five candidates mentioned Ronald Reagan during the course of the Cleveland debate. The 17 men and women who belong to the Party of Lincoln mentioned Honest Abe but once. It’s impossible to ignore Reagan – as Rush Limbaugh calls him, “Ronaldus Magnus” – in his library/resting place. To honor Reagan is to be expected. To be over-reliant on his legacy comes with risks, as I explain in this Real Clear Politics piece. Just go back to the 2012 Census and do the math: nearly 102 million Americans were age-50 or older three years ago. Politically, they came of age in the Age of Reagan.

However, another 103 million Americans in 2012 fell between the ages of 20-45. They’re too young to have voted for Reagan, who was last on the ballot in 1984. Does it makes sense for a 2016 candidate to highlight the greatest hits of the 1980s – firing air-traffic controllers, staring down the Soviets? Put another way: in an age of iPods and DVR, why talk Walkman and Betamax? No Republican has filled the void in the post-Reagan GOP, which is one reason why this race is so chaotic. My advice t Wednesday’s slate of 15 debaters: mimics of the 40th President usually end up as pale imitations of Ronald Reagan. Avoid that temptation – focus on who you are, and what you believe the GOP should be.

What the GOP field is saying about Rick Perry

From CNN.com

Rick Perry drops out of presidential race

Washington (CNN)Rick Perry, the former Texas governor who insisted he learned lessons from his disastrous 2012 presidential campaign, dropped his second bid for the White House on Friday after just 100 days.

“Today, I am suspending my campaign for the presidency of the United States,” Perry said in an address in St. Louis that virtually mirrored his standard stump speech until the very end. “Life is good. I am a blessed man.”

The departure of Perry, who had little support in early-voting states or among the GOP donor class, is unlikely to alter the contours of the Republican race. But Perry nevertheless implored his supporters in an email to back a candidate who embodies the principles of conservatism.

“The conservative movement has always been about principles, not personalities,” Perry said, before making a not-too-veiled swipe at Donald Trump, the GOP’s current front-runner. “Our nominee should embody those principles. He — or she — must make the case for the cause of conservatism more than the cause of their own celebrity.”

For almost two years, the swaggering Texan had prepared and studied for a second shot at the presidency. But in a 17-candidate field, Perry found himself weakened by fundraisers who ditched him for his rivals and by top surrogates who defected as his campaign crumbled. He raised only about $1 million in the first fundraising quarter, and he never had enough supporters for him to earn a spot in the premier GOP debates. Back in Texas, he remained under indictment on an abuse-of-power charge.

And as it became increasingly clear that the campaign wouldn’t be able to overcome deep financial problems that left him without enough money to win a competitive race, he became the first GOP candidate to leave it.

Still, Perry’s exit still comes surprisingly early. He was scheduled to appear next week at CNN’s Republican debate, which his allies hoped would be a turning point for his troubled campaign. His super PAC sat on more than $17 million that it was investing in Iowa to fill the void created by his Austin-based campaign as its financial difficulties mounted. And Perry acted very much the candidate all day on Friday, authoring an opinion piece about terrorism in National Review in the morning and sharing his vision for his presidency for a half hour in his St. Louis speech in the afternoon.

Some of his top supporters expressed shock that Perry bowed out so early. David Johnson, an Iowa state senator and the candidate’s top backer in the Hawkeye State, said Perry may have prematurely pulled the plug.

“Perhaps Governor Perry sees something that I don’t,” Johnson said, explaining that he heard about Perry’s decision from the other Texan in the race — Ted Cruz. “I was certainly ready to go.”

Perry was unable to reassemble the Texas political and financial base that made him, at one point, the party’s front-runner in the last presidential cycle. In the 2012 race, his campaign was dogged by questions about his readiness, punctuated by an embarrassing moment in a debate when he couldn’t name the third agency he planned to eliminate as president.

And just as in his first campaign, the man who was once governor of the largest Republican state for 14 years, leaves the campaign trail disappointed and also politically damaged.

Deep financial problems

The second campaign began to unravel this summer, with the operation essentially abandoning its efforts in Iowa and New Hampshire. Doug Deason, the son of a $5 million donor to the Perry super PAC, said Perry’s campaign had only raised $100,000 in the two months since the last reporting period. Deason said Perry delivered the news of the suspension to him on Thursday.

“He felt it coming. He knew there’s only so much the super PAC can do,” explained Deason, a powerful Texas donor who is part of the Koch Brothers’ political network. “After the word got out they were struggling, they did start getting donations in — but it just wasn’t enough to really make a difference.”

Deason expects to get his millions of dollars returned next week.

“The beauty, of course, of investing in a super PAC is you get the money back that doesn’t get spent,” Deason said.

But Austin Barbour, the group’s top operative, said it was not immediately clear if the law allowed the donations to be refunded.

Nevertheless, other campaigns Friday evening were moving rapidly to poach top financial and political backers of Perry. Deason dined with Cruz a few evenings ago. Even while Friday’s speech was going on, Deason was contacted by Cruz finance director Willie Langston and lieutenants from the Jeb Bush and Scott Walker campaigns. Johnson said in the hours after Perry’s decision, he heard from aides representing Walker, Cruz and Rick Santorum.

“Would you consider another Texan for president?” asked Bryan English, Cruz’s Iowa state director, according to Johnson.

The departure of Perry speaks in part to the limitations of super PACs, which had been expected to save the cash-strapped campaign. Perry’s well-funded group, Opportunity and Freedom PAC, depended heavily on a small group of Texas families, and the organization had indicated it was willing to hire field operatives and launch an aggressive advertising campaign.

“In It For The Long Haul: Opportunity and Freedom PAC Is Back On The Air In Iowa,” the group announced at 9 a.m. on Friday.

“We all felt like we had really turned a corner in the past few days,” said a disappointed Barbour, whose super PAC had knocked on 10,000 doors in Iowa so far. “We wanted to fight. We felt like there was path, but again, it’s not up to us.”

Earlier this week, Perry shuttered his South Carolina campaign headquarters in the capital city of Columbia. And field staffers in Iowa and New Hampshire went without pay this month as the campaign tried to salvage its operation. About a month ago, Perry’s campaign announced that it would no longer be paying staff across the country.

Some Perry staffers had remained loyal to the campaign, and his super PAC was expected to play a growing, if not unprecedented, role in resuscitating the official campaign. Perry’s support barely registered in polls, but his departure will likely create an intense fight for the dollars that have flooded his big-money group, which must spend the money independently.

It is unclear which candidate, or candidates, will inherit the support of Perry’s backers. In the past, Perry has repeatedly gone out of his way to lavish praise on another candidate with Texas roots: businesswoman Carly Fiorina.

2016 candidates salute Perry

Soon after Perry announced the end of his bid, a flood of warm wishes came from his now-former GOP presidential rivals on Twitter — perhaps in an effort to court his support, or that of his backers.

“.@GovernorPerry is a terrific guy and I wish him well- I know he will have a great future!” tweeted Trump, who has made antagonizing his GOP rivals, including Perry, a hallmark of his campaign.

Cruz said he donated to The Lone Survivor Foundation and the Chris Kyle Frog Foundation, two of Perry’s favorite charities, and praised his one-time boss.

“The entire GOP field was unquestionably made stronger by the experience & wisdom @GovernorPerry brought to the race,” he tweeted.

“.@GovernorPerry has dedicated his entire life to his family, friends, and Jesus Christ,” Florida Sen. Marco Rubio said.

Bush praised Perry for his commitment to conservatism.

“Amen. God bless Rick Perry for his continuing commitment to that cause,” Bush said.

“@GovernorPerry getting to know you and Anita has been a great joy for our family. Thank you for your service friend,” Santorum tweeted.

Other candidates, like Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal and Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, who have feuded with Trump, used Perry’s departure to mock the GOP front-runner.

“.@realDonaldTrump Attacked him one day. Praised him today. Sounding like a typical politician. Rick is a better man than you’ll ever be,” Jindal tweeted.

“What does it say about GOP when a 3 & half term Gov w/ a successful record of creating jobs bows out as a reality star leads in the polls?” Paul asked.

Trump Like You’ve Never Seen Him

Ok, no one can claim he is not consistence on where he stands……….


This is NOT implied and endorsement from the GreigREPORT.

Hannity’s Headlines: Advice for Donald Trump

Sean’s Advice to Donald Trump
Sean advised Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump that he should “look at [his] negative numbers, and pick [his] fights.”Hannity said that he likes Trump, and many of the other candidates, and praised him for getting the country’s attention on immigration and the treatment of veterans. Sean also described the “energy” Trump brought to the campaign as “awesome,” “especially in the light of the weak, the timid, the pathetic Republican leadership in Washington.”LISTEN: Sean gives Trump advice for his campaignSean praised Trump for releasing Senator Sen. Lindsey Graham’s personal cell phone number which was “hilarious,” and added that Graham “deserved it.”Sean then shifted, and talked about what he would do if he was Trump’s campaign manager, which he said was in response to comments he had read on Breitbart. He stated that Trump has the nation’s attention, but pointed out that polls at this stage “don’t mean a whole hell of a lot.” Hannity pointed out that at this time in 2007, Rudy Giuliani was topping the polls and Fred Thompson was in second place, while Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, Herman Cain, and Newt Gingrich all led in the polls back in 2011. He continued that the first thing he would say to Trump is, “this is a marathon, it’s not a sprint,” and that he would remind Trump of the history of polling.

Hannity added, “He [Trump] needs to look at the negatives that he is drawing in,” and cited a Quinnipiac poll that showed Trump either dead last, or second to last among presidential candidates in favorability versus unfavorability numbers in Colorado, Iowa, and Virginia.

For more on Sean’s comments on Trump’s campaign please continue reading at Breitbart.com.

ISIS Turns Varsity, Officially
It was January 27th, 2014 when President Obama now famously told The New Yorker in response to questions about ISIS, “The analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think is accurate, is if a jayvee team puts on Lakers uniforms that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant.” Fast forward nearly eighteen months later to FBI Director James Comeytestimony at a Senate Judiciary Committee that ISIS’ power had proven greater than that of Al Qaeda.I have spent a significant amount of time since August 19th, 2014, the day James Foley was brutally beheaded by ISIS forces, trying to convince the American people that ISIS is more than a junior varsity basketball team. Even CNN polling now shows that over 68% of Americans think ISIS is a threat to our security. They think that because they’re right!It took President Obama over a year to react to ISIS in any real way. That’s not the leadership we need to move this country in the right direction and it’s certainly something we need to consider on election day.

Hannity’s Headlines: Trump Fired

This does not implied that we agree or disagree with Mr. Trump’s remarks that have been the main focus of discussion by the main stream liberal media, it is about their hypocrisy, the cover up of some of their “darlings” who have said made vicious remarks, offensive, and some lies, and yet they get a free pass, alas; Al Sharpton, Jessee Jackson, Hillary Clinton,  Brian Williams, BHO, Eric Holder, the Mayor of New York City, etc, etc. also lets not forget that NBC/Universal owns MSNBC………
Read below Sean Hannity’s op-ed.

   
Hannity's Headlines E-Newsletter
Trump Fired
NBC Universal announced yesterday that they are severing all business ties with Donald Trump because of some derogatory comments he made about immigrants.  I don’t want this to sound arrogant because it’s not meant to be, but I don’t know anybody in the media now who has been as close to the border as I have been.  I have seen tunnels that go from Mexico to San Diego.  I have seen warehouses filled with more drugs than you can shake a stick at.  We have more than eleven million people who have crossed the border into this country.
I know what these guys are dealing with.  I know all of the crimes that are committed by the criminals crossing the border into America.  So what did Trump say that was so controversial?

America has become a dumping ground for everybody else’s problems.  It’s true.  When Mexico sends its people, they don’t send their best.  They’re sending people with lots of problems.  They’re bringing drugs.  They’re bringing crime.  Some, I assume, are good people.  I speak with border guards and they tell us what we’re getting.  It only makes common sense.  This has got to stop and it has to stop fast.

We have a problem in this country when CNN calls these remarks “rationally tinged.”  I covered many of the problems with the border on ‘Hannity‘ but the point is Trump was telling the truth.  Trump talked about drugs.  If you’ve seen the warehouses I’ve seen filled with drugs, you’d know he’s telling the truth.  The people who are coming over the border are, naturally, those who have not found success in Mexico.

Donald Trump is recounting what we already know, the border with Mexico is a dangerous place and its security needs to remain at the forefront of our national discussion during the 2016 elections.

So Why Don’t We Have A Fence?
So with all of the debate that has gone on since the 2000 election, it really makes you wonder why the United State doesn’t have a larger fence on the border? We’ve seen the chaos at the border time and time again and yet nothing has been done.  Why?  Simple.  Politics.

If we wanted one we would have put it up.  Democrats are looking at a long-term strategy hoping that many who cross the border will have citizenship and they’ll be Democrats.  They’re thinking, strategically, that they can force a demographic switch that will benefit them politically.  On the Republican side, they’re being short-sighted as usual.  There is pressure from Big Business who is in search of cheap labor.

So we ask, why haven’t we secured our borders?  The answer is.  Politicians haven’t wanted to solve this problem.