Ann Coulter Letter: Moonies for Ted Cruz
Commentary by
Ann Coulter |
URL of the original posting site: http://humanevents.com/2016/04/06/moonies-for-ted-cruz/?utm_source=coulterdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl
Until now, the only primaries Cruz has won are in Texas (his home state), Oklahoma (basically the same state) and Idaho (where Trump never campaigned).
So now, Cruz has finally won an honest-to-goodness primary. This is great news for him, provided:
(1) the general election is a caucus, and
(2) the national media universally denounce Cruz’s Democratic opponent the same way the Wisconsin media denounced Trump.
In that case, Cruz should do fine.
The Cruz-bots don’t care. They don’t care that they’re being used as a cat’s-paw by the Never Trump crowd, and that a brokered Republican convention is more likely to end with Bernie as the nominee than Cruz.
The Cruz cultists don’t even care about plain honesty, which I always thought was a conservative value. Republicans used to be appalled by guttersnipe, lying political operators like the Clintons. Now they are guttersnipe, lying political operators like the Clintons.
It’s all hands on deck to stop the only presidential candidate who wants to save America from the cheap labor plutocrats.
Cruz has flipped to Trump’s side on every important political issue of this campaign — which only ARE issues because of Trump. These are:
— Quadrupling the number of foreign guest workers to help ranchers and farmers get cheap labor: Cruz was for it, and now is against it.
— Legalizing illegal aliens: Cruz was for it, and now is against it.
— The Trans-Pacific Partnership deal: Cruz was for it, and now is against it.
— Building a wall: Cruz was against it, and now is for it.
These are all positions Cruz has changed since being a senator — most of them he’s flipped on only in the last year. I’m supposed to believe that U.S. senators can sincerely change their minds about policies it was their job to know about, but a New York developer can never change his mind about pop-offs he made more than a decade ago.
Back in 1999 — 17 years ago — when Donald Trump was considering a presidential run on the Reform Party ticket, he said this when asked about abortion by Tim Russert on “Meet the Press”: “Well, look, I’m very pro-choice. I hate the concept of abortion. I hate it. I hate everything it stands for. I cringe when I listen to people debating the subject. But you still — I just believe in choice.”
Russert then asked him specifically if he’d ban partial-birth abortion. Trump said, “No. I am pro-choice in every respect and as far as it goes, but I just hate it.”
A year later, Trump wrote in his book “The America We Deserve”: “When Tim Russert asked me on ‘Meet the Press’ if I would ban partial-birth abortion, my pro-choice instincts led me to say no. After the show, I consulted two doctors I respect and, upon learning more about this procedure, I have concluded that I would indeed support a ban.”
Sometime in the intervening 16 years, Trump became fully pro-life.
You can say you don’t believe him — just as you might say you don’t believe Cruz has truly changed his mind on amnesty, the wall, or the Trans-Pacific Partnership, etc. But to claim Trump is pro-choice today — present tense — is what’s known as a “lie.”
But that’s what Cruz says over and over again, including in a campaign ad — and not one of those “super PAC” ads that count even less than a retweet. A Cruz ad plays the clip from that 1999 interview where Trump says, “I am pro-choice in every respect,” repeats it three times, and then cuts to a narrator proclaiming: “For partial-birth abortion, not a conservative.”
These are the kinds of lies that used to drive conservatives crazy when the Clintons did it. Not anymore. All’s fair in smearing Trump.
Trump has said a million times that he’d scrap Obamacare and replace it with a free market system (which, by the way, he explains a lot more clearly than Washington policy wonks with their think-tank lingo). Merely for Trump saying that we’re “not going to let people die, sitting in the middle of a street in any city in this country,” Cruz accuses him of supporting “Bernie Sanders-style medicine.”
Yes, because Trump is against people dying in the streets, Cruz says that Trump thinks “Obamacare didn’t go far enough and we need to expand it to put the government in charge of our health care, in charge of our relationship with our doctors.” Over and over again, Cruz has repeated this insane lie, telling Fox’s Megyn Kelly: “If you want to see Bernie Sanders-style socialized medicine, Donald Trump is your guy.”
Trump’s alleged support for the kind of national health care they have in Scotland and Canada is another big fat lie. Trump was issuing his usual effusive praise before he drops the hammer — “It actually works incredibly well in Scotland. Some people think it really works in Canada.” Then he continued, in the very same sentence: “I don’t think it would work as well here. What has to happen — I like the concept of private enterprise coming in. … You have to create competition.”
Cruz and his cult-like followers lie about Trump wanting a health care system akin to Canada’s and Scotland’s. They lie about his supporting Obamacare. They lie about his supporting partial-birth abortion. They lie about his ever having been a Democrat. They lie about his campaign manager assaulting a female reporter.
I tried being nice after Florida, when it became clear that Trump was the choice of a majority of Republican voters, nearly choking on a column praising Cruz for his admirable flip-flops to Trump’s positions on immigration and trade. I censored loads of anti-Cruz retweets. But — as with the Clintons — you offer these Cruz-bots an olive branch and they bite off your hand.
The next thing I knew, the Cruz cult was accusing Trump’s campaign manager Corey Lewandowski of criminal battery for brushing past a female reporter. Anyone who claims this video shows a “battery” is as big a liar as the liberals who lined up to say Clinton did not commit perjury when he denied having “sexual relations” with Monica Lewinsky.
If James Carville and Paul Begala had a baby, it would be a Cruz supporter.
They lie about my own tweaking of Trump — I didn’t like the Heidi retweet! — amid a tidal wave of support. Trump is the only presidential candidate in my lifetime who will build a wall, deport illegals and pause the importation of Muslims. He’s the only one who cares more about ordinary Americans than he does about globalist plutocrats. Does anyone really think I’m “tiring” of him because of a retweet?
Apparently, for slavishly devoted Cruz-bots, a normal human making a small criticism of her preferred candidate is unfathomable! That fact alone proves how dishonest they are about their own candidate.
I was under the misimpression that I was dealing with adults and not swine like Carville and Begala, willing to twist someone’s words to win a momentary political advantage. Mostly, I was under the misimpression that honesty was still a conservative value.


Hillary Clinton: Abortion is “Critical to Who We are as Women, It’s About Women’s Autonomy”
Selling Baby Parts
Donald Trump Cancels Scheduled Phone Call With Pro-Life Leaders After Controversial Statements
Child”
Pro-Life Groups Back Ted Cruz for President: “He Will Protect Unborn Babies From Abortion”
Woman Prosecuted for Illegally Buying Abortion Pills Left Her Fully-Formed Baby in a Trash Bin

Ted Cruz Defeats Donald Trump by 16-Point Margin in Wisconsin After Pro-Life Endorsements
Constitutional Rights
a Wrong Answer”
New York Abortions Drop 21% in Last Seven Years to Reach Historic Low as More Babies Saved



Bernie Sanders Agrees With Hillary Clinton: No Constitutional Rights for Unborn Children




Donald Trump: “I Misspoke” Saying “Punish” Women for Abortions, Blames “Convoluted” Question
Click to Read at LifeNews.com
Click to Read at LifeNews.com
Trump Spokeswoman: Comment on Punishing Women for Abortions Was “Simple Misspeak”
Click to Read at LifeNews.com
When Abortion Was Illegal, Women Were Not Jailed for Having Abortions. Here’s Why

The Inept Thing Donald Trump Said About Women Who Have Abortions is Making Pro-Lifers Cringe
Says That’s Okay
President Obama Gives Planned Parenthood a Huge Parting Gift to Sell More Abortions
Utah Governor Signs Bill to Require Anesthesia Before Abortion Because Baby Can Feel Intense Pain
Woman Who Had Affair With Bill Clinton Claims Hillary Clinton Had “Several” Abortions

Life issued an endorsement for pro-life Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz over GOP rival Donald Trump.
encouraging them to abort their unborn babies.

“Trump is favored to win Tuesday’s primary not only because of his polling advantage, but also because he has the backing of former governor Jan Brewer.” The former governor is popular. Of course, immigration’s a huge issue in Arizona, and Trump is personally identified with that issue. But it says here (it’s a Weekly Standard story) that “Trump may have hurt himself among these voters by announcing that he was ‘softening’ his position on immigration in a recent debate and showing himself to be ignorant about the details of his own immigration plan in an earlier debate.”
RUSH:
So when I saw this New York Times story headlined: “Republican Leaders Map a Strategy to Derail Donald Trump,” I believe every word of it. I think there’s probably even more to it than what the story includes. But here are some highlights.
“Mr. Coburn, who left the Senate early last year to receive treatment for cancer, said in an interview that Mr. Trump ‘needs to be stopped’ and that he expected to back an independent candidate against him. He said he had little appetite for a campaign of his own, but did not flatly rule one out. ‘I’m going to support that person,'” whoever this group comes up with to stop Trump. “‘and I don’t expect that person to be me.’ Trump opponents convened a series of war councils last week to pinpoint his biggest vulnerabilities and consider whether to endorse,” Cruz or Kasich.
Prior to joining Trump, you know what they did? They were Tea Partiers. And, by the way, the Tea Party and Trump supporters are not monolithic. They’re not all poor white — look, let me just call a spade a spade. What they want you to believe is the average Trump voter is an uneducated hick, white trash, upset over his own or her own personal failures looking to blame somebody else and Trump has come along and given them comfort.













Can’t be All My Way”

Abortions 













J.E. Dyer









They know the hypocrisy charge, even if it sticks, is never gonna harm them. But with Obama saying opposing his nominee goes against the Constitution — which, of course, it doesn’t. But the real question is: Why should Obama be so concerned about what the Constitution says about appointing someone to the Supreme Court when he doesn’t want whoever he appoints to follow the Constitution anyway?
We now have Chuck Grassley (paraphrased), “Whoa, I’m rethinking this. Maybe we will conduct hearings.” And then Mel Tillis… (Nope, I take it back. That’s the country singer.) Thom Tillis, North Carolina. (paraphrased) “Oh, I think we don’t want to look like obstructionists.” And there it is, folks! There it is! (paraphrased) “We don’t want to look like obstructionists.” That’s translated: “We have to cross the aisle on this. We have to show the people we can help make Washington work.
“Moderate?” He laughed. “I don’t know what that means! I’m gonna nominate somebody qualified.” Translation: “I’m gonna find the nearest socialist I can and I’m gonna ram it down their throats. Get your popcorn ready. Moderate? Are you kidding me? I don’t do moderate!” But here are the Republicans. So I just… I tried to warn everybody not to confuse your hope with what you think you heard. I even got into an argument with Snerdley! He thinks that Mitch McConnell…
“He was dead serious! This is different, Rush. It’s the Supreme Court.”
Why have liberals become so intolerant? They think nothing of denying someone as prominent as former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice from speaking on a college campus. They embrace activists who shut down speakers. They publicly shame people for the slightest deviation from liberal orthodoxy.
For them everything from science to the law is “settled” once they get into power. Progress is a one-way street. Their mindset is the very definition of closed-mindedness.
The easy answer would be “they are all bad people.” But frankly that’s a cop-out. Not all liberals are bad people, any more than all conservatives are angels. No doubt among the fevered minions of liberal activists there are people with, shall we say, psychological issues, but that doesn’t explain why so many otherwise reasonable people are so beholden to liberalism as an ideology.
The short answer is that it pays. A lot of people in and out of government benefit. Liberalism also makes people feel good. Whether you are politician dispensing government benefits or the citizen receiving them, liberalism hides the self-interest and sometimes even greed that motivate people.
But the devolution of liberalism into something now openly illiberal has causes far more complex than these familiar explanations provide.
For one thing, liberalism is no longer mainly about ideas. It is about power—as in who has it and who doesn’t. Believing they already know the answers to all questions, liberals view politics and governing as mopping up operations.
Second, liberalism today is not the liberalism of yesteryear. It’s not Franklin Roosevelt’s or John Kennedy’s liberalism. It’s not even the liberalism of Bill Clinton. It has become something much more radical. Bill Clinton talked about the “era of big government” being over.
Today, there is virtually no government program that liberals won’t embrace. Clinton had his Sister Souljah moment when he repudiated extremism in his party. Today liberals can’t get close enough to the “black lives matter” movement.
Third, liberals have surrendered to (some would say created) the nasty culture of intolerance that infuses our popular culture. To this extent, they are not at all different from some self-proclaimed right-wing people who do the same. But the difference is—or at least is supposed to be—that liberals profess to be the party of the open mind. They have become anything but.
Now that they control so many of our institutions—our universities, high-tech corporate board rooms, the entertainment industry, and increasingly even mainstream churches—they are closing the door behind them, making sure that no one, especially conservatives, will sneak in the back door.
Finally, liberalism has become hostile to open inquiry. Liberal intellectuals used to love open-ended debates because they thought they could win people over with their intelligence and wit. No more. Today’s liberal intellectuals are much more interested in stifling debates than having them. After all, who needs debates when all the big questions have been answered by their ideology? Liberals are no longer the scruffy radicals of Washington Square, but a tenured Mandarin class hotly competing for government research grants.
As I argue in my forthcoming book, “The Closing of the Liberal Mind,” to this Mandarin class:
There’s an old saying, he who controls knowledge controls power. Liberals get this adage instinctively. They treat truth not as wisdom—as something to be discovered—but as a will to power to be imposed by law and governmental fiat.
In this quest for power, they have become masters at controlling not only knowledge, but popular culture. For example, when Americans watch entertainers like Jon Stewart, they don’t see an ideologue channeling liberal clichés. They see just a really funny guy. The ideology is completely buried. Young people respond in lockstep not because they were indoctrinated by some boring Maoist, but because they think the whole thing is great fun.
What we have here is nothing less than a new and highly attractive form of illiberalism—an illiberal liberalism, if you will. Intolerance is championed in the name of tolerance, closed-mindedness in the name of open-mindedness, and hatred in the name of compassion. It’s classic double-think, and the deception is precisely the danger. Americans don’t expect liberals to be authoritarian wolves in sheep’s clothing. They are not prepared to be on guard all the time because liberals are supposed to be the good guys—the guardians of freedom of speech and the like.
Alas, they are not. Just ask Condi Rice or anyone else who has been denied the opportunity to speak on an American campus.