If these people are ‘conservatives,’ I’m not one!

You all know I’m a Trump supporter (even after last night’s debate which admittedly I had to turn off).  I used to call myself “conservative” but no more.  While I’m still trying to figure out (LOL!) what I am, here are a couple of things I want you to see that are helping me decide which way to go….

Melania Trump talks to Greta
I happened to catch this interview and found Mrs. Trump to be an articulate and kind person. So, who the hell are you Ben Howe! And, why would Heritage Foundation and others hire you for anything! No wonder Heritage membership is down!

First, Diana West tweeted this earlier this morning:  “Why I left the movement…” by John Kluge at Ricochet.  Read it all, it resonates with me.

And, for the record, if Republican loser Mitt Romney thought he helped the anti-Trump cause yesterday, he blew it badly.

So, just as I was chagrined by the tenor of the debate last night (wishing Trump hadn’t gone there), comes this bit of information also from Diana West, here on Wednesday (hat tip: Richard, Blue Ridge Forum).  If this creep Ben Howe is a conservative I refuse to ever be one again (except to say I might consider being an ‘America First Conservative’ if the idea catches on).

Now to that other information from Diana West that I learned this morning which makes Trump’s language mild in comparison…

(Imagine how much work went into West’s collection of the vile language (The Right’s Trump lexicon) used by ‘conservatives’ in just the last few weeks and months!  Scroll down to ‘W’ is for whore!)

W is for Whore…..

Screen Shot 2016-03-01 at 5.34.17 PM



Super Tuesday tweet by Ben Howe, Redstate contributing editor & CEO of media consulting firm,Howe Creative,  whose clients include:

super tuesday





See more of ‘conservative’ (foul language) commentary on Trump at Diana West by clicking here.

I know you will all tell me it’s irrational, but frankly if Trump ends up going third party, I’m going with him.  And, you can thank the likes of Ben Howe (whoever he is!).

17 thoughts on “If these people are ‘conservatives,’ I’m not one!”

  1. Trump was downgraded on the Numbers USA report card for immigration. He also has now ” softened” (his words) his views on the worker visa program. Only Cruz has an A .


  2. and I am going to follow Trump also.

    On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 7:19 AM, American Resistance 2016! wrote:

    > Ann Corcoran posted: “You all know I’m a Trump supporter (even after last > night’s debate which admittedly I had to turn off). I used to call myself > “conservative” but no more. While I’m still trying to figure out (LOL!) > what I am, here are a couple of things I want you to se” >

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Thanks for all of your comments, either for or against. Sorry, never got back to the computer yesterday to post them. I’m sticking with Trump for now mostly because a) we need to shake Washington to the core and b) I respect Senator Jeff Sessions on the issue of immigration and since he has thrown his weight (and his staff!) behind Trump, he must have complete confidence in him.

    I do admit however, that Trump is being foolish and not apparently taking time to tap the best staff in the country on the immigration issue who have signed up with him. If he did listen to them he wouldn’t have looked so foolish in the debate on the Syrian refugee issue.

    I will repeat again and again, that Trump’s arrival on the scene has forced so many in Washington and elsewhere to reveal who they really are—like this Ben Howe creep, Romney, Rubio, Trey Gowdy etc. etc… and for that I am grateful.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Trump supporters, while I appreciate and admire your enthusiasm for your candidate, and he does have some fine qualities, he also has boxcar loads of liabilities and baggage that Lamestream and the Democrats have not even begun to unpack yet. They are holding back, just waiting.
      If he gets the Nomination, Americans will be treated to more astounding video, documentation and audio from Trump than you can imagine.
      Incriminating stuff. Embarrassing stuff. Disgusting stuff. The cascading October surprises will begin long before October and well over 50% of the country will reject him at the ballot box.
      That’s one thing to think about.

      Regarding Ted Cruz, the ‘points’ listed against him are not accurate and have been debunked many times over.

      This ‘unusual’ election is unusual because finally in this age of social media and broad access to alternative news sources, Americans – especially Republicans – are clearly seeing how things really work in Washington D.C..
      Deal-making, elitism, power networks, loaded Christmas Eve Bills passed in the middle of the night, promises to voters immediately forgotten and broken, the Constitution not even factored into lawmaking and policies, federal crimes ignored, national security left hanging in the breeze, enemies re-named and appeased, House and Senate leaders blocking necessary legislation, caving to the White House……

      People are enraged, and the last thing they want is a Washington insider. Understood.

      Unfortunately, Trump people can not seem to see that he is the consummate deal-maker in that environment, is comfortable with the Washington establishment, understands and accepts the power structure as it is and has been benefiting personally from deal-making with Washington for many decades.

      As Trump himself has stated from the podium and in interviews, he can ‘change’ and he has already ‘softened’ his stance on issues such as immigration, Planned Parenthood, Iranian nuke deal, China, Vlad Putin’s adventurism.

      Ladies and gentlemen, you must see that as unique and unconventional of a person as he is, the last thing Donald Trump can claim is that he is an ‘outsider.’
      He has been schmoozing with Washington for most of his adult years.

      On the other hand, Ted Cruz has devoted his entire career in public office to rejecting elitism, stepping past power-brokers, to restoring local power to citizens and communities, to defending First and Second Amendment Freedoms, even at the highest Court in our land, and winning for us.

      In Congress Cruz has fought the very things we have asked our elected representatives to fight:

      *Ballooning government spending
      *Environmental regulations that negate private ownership of property
      *Planned Parenthood holocaust of death, baby body parts trading
      *Federal attempts to pass ‘gun control’
      *Illegal immigration, its economic and security threats to our society
      *Obamacare, the federal takeover of personal medical decisions and of one sixth of our entire economy

      If you have heard about these legislative battles, sneaky deals and leadership blockades in Congress, you know that Ted Cruz has consistently been on the front lines of the battle.
      If not for Ted Cruz, we would be saddled with far more corrosive, destructive laws than we are putting up with now.

      It should be noted that Donald Trump was not only absent from these battles, there is strong evidence that he was taking part in and supporting the D.C. establishment’s activities regarding some of these issues.

      Ted Cruz is absolutely dedicated to forcing Washington D.C., the insiders, the power-brokers, our Congress, to function within their narrow, specifically listed duties in the Constitution, and leaving all other powers to the states and to We the People.

      This absolutely terrifies the establishment, and Lamestream ‘news’ media, and offends their sense of entitlement and dynasty.

      Understand, this makes Ted Cruz the ultimate Outsider.

      Any citizen who wants our Republic to be restored and defended with resolute, total dedication, who wants a clear-eyed Constitutional conservative as the Chief Executive, who understands that our Freedoms are not negotiable or subject to deal-making, and who can see that the next Supreme Court appointments have got to be made with extreme care, should give all their support to Ted Cruz.



      1. Regarding Ted Cruz, the ‘points’ listed against him are not accurate and have been debunked many times over.

        Since I wrote the “points” regarding Cruz’s eligibility, I’ll bite.

        Who debunked them?

        What sources did you use to determine the Constitution, Congress, SCOTUS, the U.S. Department of Justice and the State Department are “bunk?”

        Did you notice that one of the two lawyers who wrote the Harvard Law Review article claiming Cruz is eligible was the Acting Solicitor General who wrote the Writ of Certiorari in Flores-Villar?

        Why did Mr. Katyal take a position when accountable the court that anyone born outside U.S. jurisdiction has no right to U.S. citizenship and that such citizenship when granted through Congress’ authority to “establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization”, regardless of having citizen parents, that process is still a naturalization, but said the exact opposite when speaking to you?

        Are you not curious as to why Katyal and the DOJ would take one position when addressing the court on behalf of the U.S. and another when addressing you, the public?

        Are you aware that Flores-Villar is only one such case, that there is a consistent history of such rulings, laws and policies that support the U.S.’s position in Flores-Villar and the ideas you say debunk them have a long history of only several years of pundits and “experts” suddenly saying over 200 years of fact are “bunk?”

        Do you believe someone can knowingly and willingly break the Constitution and still be an avid supporter and defender of the Constitution?

        If you can provide your sources, I’m more than willing to look at them seriously and to entertain that over 200 years of consistent legal precedent and law is bunk.

        And just for the record, I’m not defending Trump. I’m defending the truth and the truth about the Constitution. I’m accusing Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, both political parties and all the pundits and newly enlightened “experts” of deception and I’m asking why?


  4. Ms. Corcoran, you are sadly making a serious mistake. You are supporting for president a man who believes in rapid touchback amnesty (as his son explained it), greater use of H1-B visas because America doesn’t have enough qualified STEM workers (which I hope you know is untrue), and professionally makes great use of H2-B visas because everyone knows that Americans don’t want to do those jobs. Mr. Trump is a crony capitalist of the highest order and will not hesitate to use you to gain high office and then throw you away when you and your ilk no longer suit his purposes. I truly do feel sorry for you. Bless your heart, Ms. Corcoran.


  5. http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2016/02/29/hmm-trump-immigration-comments-nyt-n2126719?
    Feb 29, 2016
    Oh My: Did Trump Tell NYT Editors He’s Bluffing on Immigration?
    Guy Benson

    March 1, 2016
    Trump praised the brutality of the old Soviet Union, the Chinese Communists, and North Korea
    by joel c Rosenberg

    Mar 02, 2016
    For Trump Supporters, a Reckoning Is at Hand
    Jonah Goldberg

    Feb 28, 2016
    Meet Donald Trump: The King of Sleaze
    Rebecca Hagelin

    Mar 01, 2016
    Gratuitous Hatred Is Destroying Republicans — Just as in Ancient Israel
    Dennis Prager


  6. Ben Howe works for The Blaze too. I’ve forgotten what he does. Maybe an editor and writer for Dana? Beck and Co. are all in for Cruz…the naturalized citizen.

    From Flores-Villar v. U.S.: This Writ of Certiorari was submitted to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals by Acting Solicitor General Neil Katyal, et al., who also just happens to be one of the two “experts” that wrote the Harvard Law Review article claiming Cruz is eligible. (Bolding is mine for emphasis.)

    “The fact that Congress has enacted a law under which some foreign born individuals acquire U.S. citizenship at birth by virtue of a parent’s citizenship does not mean that such individuals are not naturalized citizens for purposes of the Constitution. As explained above, when Congress enacts rules to govern acquisition of citizenship, it acts pursuant to its constitutional authority to establish a uniform rule of naturalization.”

    “See Miller, 523 U.S. at 434 n.11 (opinion of Stevens, J.) (“ Though petitioner claims to be a citizen from birth, * * * citizenship does not pass by descent. * * * Thus she must still meet the statutory requirements set by Congress for citizenship.”); see also id. at 453 (Scalia, J., concurring in the judgment) (“Petitioner, having been born outside the territory of the United States, is an alien as far as the Constitution is concerned.”); cf. Nguyen, 533 U.S. at 72 (acquisition of citizenship through an unmarried citizen (my comment: or married, or an unwed mother, as the brief explains) father “is a naturalization,” even though it “is retroactive to the date of birth”).

    “Constitutionally, of course, no foreign-born child is entitled to U.S. citizenship, and no U.S. citizen is entitled to bestow citizenship on a foreign-born child either at birth or later in the child’s life.”

    Just for record, Rubio is an anchor baby. Is a person who is a citizen due to the misapplication of the 14th Amendment a natural born citizen? At the time the Constitution was written and ratified, children born to aliens within U.S. jurisdiction were themselves aliens. The sovereignty of both countries to determine their citizens mattered and checked duality of citizenship, which has always been the U.S.’s official position to do when possible.

    Do not confuse “citizen” with “natural born citizen.” Both Cruz and Rubio are citizens. Neither is natural born for Constitutional purposes.

    Their supporters are rabid in their dismissal of facts, just like Obama’s supporters were and are. If anyone dares question the natural born requirement’s original meaning and intent or their eligibility, their supporters, media and pundits immediately begin to froth at the mouth. On some level, some of these people, like Howe and Beck (and Cruz), who claim to be warriors for truth and for the upholding of the Constitution, must know they’re on imaginary ground. You can’t have even a modest understanding of history, the Constitution, sovereign jurisdiction and original intent and not be able to figure out the problems these candidates have. Dupes or deceivers? Inquiring minds want to know. Sadly and tellingly so, these people will not even entertain a discussion of documented facts.

    Why is there such vitriol? Well, what is the strategy and purpose of eroding national security protections and sovereignty from trade to the borders to the job qualifications for the president? Is Trump a threat or something else? Aren’t we all just one happy global family where all things are relative and if you think otherwise, you’re a hater that must be destroyed? Let’s ask the Southern Preposterous Lie Center, shall we? We can talk about Morris Dees and the KKK for a while too.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. “Warriors for truth and the Constitution” Yes, those have been the words coming from their mouths.
      But not eligible to be POTUS = Not eligible to be POTUS, according TO the Constitution!

      It’s not okay, because it’s a guy on the Right. Anyone else find the irony in the fact that the only 3 who have questionable eligibility; are the three that have sealed their records?!

      Liked by 1 person

      1. It’s not okay, because it’s a guy on the Right.

        Exactly, BigMamaTea. I have seen people who researched the original meaning of natural born, etc. suddenly dismiss everything they had believed previously in order to back Cruz. They now believe Mark Levin over original documentation. I can’t make that leap.

        How can we talk about truth, principles and upholding the Constitution, then ditch them when it applies to somebody we like?

        As far as I’m concerned, Cruz has exposed the truth about his character and what he really believes by running and it’s not a belief in the Constitution. He knows he’s not eligible. He’s not stupid.

        Rubio, IMO, is not the brightest bulb in the pack, but I suspect even he knows he’s an anchor baby and a citizen only by the misapplication of the 14th Amendment. “Subject to the jurisdiction thereof…” means what it says. Aliens are not subject to the sole jurisdiction of the U.S. They remained politically tied to their home country. They are covered only by civil protections while present within U.S. jurisdiction. Just means they’re to obey our laws and if they run afoul of it, they get a lawyer and fair trial. That does not makes a citizen nor does it make them subject to the sole jurisdiction thereof. If it did, why have embassies?

        There are lots of commentaries, discussions in Congress and from government lawyers that consistently define the premise under which a citizen is created under the 14th Amendment. It was meant to prevent the freemen from being stateless after emancipation. For others, sole jurisdiction. Back then, citizenship wasn’t handed out like candy to anybody who dropped a kid here.

        Maybe the easier question for the people who support any of these ineligible candidates is for them to tell us who isn’t eligible, because we’re now told that a person is eligible if they’re born abroad on a military base to U.S. citizens (McCain, which does have exemptions under specific circumstances), born on the soil to one citizen parent (Obama), born abroad to at least one citizen parent (Cruz) and born within U.S. jurisdiction to alien parents (Rubio, Jindal and possibly Haley.) What’s left?

        Everybody is natural born now. Al-Baghdadi can send a foreign-national wife over to drop a kid here or take an American citizen sex slave and have the kid in ISIS held territory and the kid is now eligible, according to the new definitions.

        Who in their right mind thinks this is what natural born means or that it meets the intent of the requirement, “to check foreign influence?” We are the world, I guess, and America can not be permitted to be sovereign, unlike all other countries that don’t throw open their borders and toss national security to the wind. Why the U.S.?

        This all ties in with illegal immigration and with the RRP. Call it a conspiracy or call it strategy. We end up in the same place, either way.


      1. I remember seeing that segment, TwoLaine. I think Bret Baier made that statement himself. Suddenly, not another word, just like when I heard Baier say that it had been discovered that George Washington had a long overdue book from the library in New York, Vattel’s “Law of Nations.” The title was not uttered again.

        As a side note, we don’t need Vattel to discern the meaning of natural born. Jurisdiction and the natural rights of sovereignty tells the story.

        Liked by 1 person

    1. I knew better but watched anyway. The entire day was horrible beginning with Mitt Romney. WHO is he? I remember holding my nose and voting for him in 2012 ~ won’t do it again. (By the way, his invitation for response to his ‘message’ had in the lower left hand corner “paid for by Mitt Romney for President” so is he planning to run for president again? The establishment is losing whatever may be left of it’s collective mind which I can’t miss when I sneak in a few minutes of television time. Ann, I’ve even posted your thoughts about ‘if this is conservative then I guess I’m no longer conservative’. The GOPe has turned into something very ugly. When the campaign started my sister and I were both supportive of Cruz but as time passed and the red flags presented I shared with her that I was leaving Cruz and joining the Trump campaign. Since then she has alternated between ‘popping off’ at me on Facebook which she takes down but it shows up in my email box and then sending private messages apologizing, our phone calls are sparse and we can’t discuss politics. She and her Cruz friends post nasty photos and remarks about Melania which I ‘hide’ from my timeline. Don’t know if there will be enough left to govern after all these people strip and shred Donald Trump with so many lies. I vow I will not watch anything on Fox after yesterday. But I will vote for Trump March 15!!!

      Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.