My WND Weekly Exclusive

Is Newt the right choice for Trump?

The rumor mill is cranking into high gear wondering who Trump is likely to choose as his running mate. So far several names have surfaced.

The L.A. Times wrote, “Trump has benefited from his outsider status, but the billionaire businessman has said his vice-presidential pick will likely have political experience.” And we all know what that means. In case you don’t, this is why having political experience is important to The Donald. He recently told George Stephanopoulos during an interview on “Good Morning America”: “I would like to have somebody who could truly be good with respect to dealing with the Senate and dealing with Congress – getting legislation passed. Working toward something where we’re not signing executive orders every three days like President Obama does.”

read more

Government Regulations Likely to Backfire Again

By: the Common Constitutionalist

What is the easiest way to kill an industry – any industry? The answer is to inject government into the equation. Government has long been a thorn in the side of American business. And it is also the answer to lessening competition for those crony corporations who, through donations and graft to politicians, are able to virtually lock out up-and-comers with a better mousetrap. As I’ve stated many times – the government takes it upon itself to pick winners and losers, as it has done for decades.

So how does government ruin companies and entire industries? Well, they can punitively tax them, but this has to be done legislatively and must be at least loosely based on the Constitution. That’s far too much of a hassle and also must effect all people or businesses. Oh, and it’s also far too public.

No, this the answer is and has been the Administrative State – bureaucratic regulatory bodies within the government whose dictates often go unheard and unseen to the general public, but whose rules and regulations carry the full weight of law – without the legislative entanglements and fanfare.

Save for the relatively informed few like us, most Americans are still virtually unaware of the havoc the EPA has wrought on the coal industry, or their stated goal to kill it off completely. The general public may only notice an increase in their power bill for which many will simply chock up to corporate greed. read more

Not a Closet Trump Supporter

by: the Common Constitutionalist

It seems lately I’ve spent an awful lot of time defending the Trumpster, Donald Trump. And frankly, I’ve gotten some feedback that I’m just a closet Trump supporter.

Well, I am, but only on one, maybe two issues. There is his position on illegal immigration, as well as his stance on the military, which is good, as he proclaims that were going to rebuild it – make it powerful again. He also claims he will take care of veterans and that’s great news, depending on how he intends to do it. The rest of his platform, if you can call it that, seems to me to be a lot of ethereal nonsense.

What he never says is how or even if he plans to shrink the government. Which departments does he want to shrink – which does he want to get rid of? He doesn’t have town hall type gatherings, so no one can question him about it. Now this may be because he draws such huge crowds, or it may be by design.

Rush Limbaugh had a segment on his show yesterday, where he spoke that the Republican “brain trust” is warning voters that Trump is just an empty suit. Like Obama in 2008, he has simply mesmerized voters. Rush describes the Republicans as warning us that “Donald J Trump has cast a spell over otherwise well-intentioned and good people who are so fed up and so angry and so marginalized and feel so left out that they are willing to support what may end up destroying the country just to get even with what happened to them eight years ago.”

Rush is indeed right about the Republicans warning us, but the problem is, that none of the same wizards-of-smart warned us about Obama. They didn’t care in 2008, because they already had their establishment guy in John McCain, and that’s the only reason they are warning us now. Their establishment darling, Bush, is getting trounced. read more

Malkin Beats Me to the Punch

I am a Santorum supporter. Rather than just explaining why I don’t support the other schmoes, I’ve had a request to write an article explaining my support for him.

Well, it appears, I don’t have to. Michelle Malkin has expressed her support for Santorum as well as I ever could.

From Michelle Malkin:

Rick Santorum opposed TARP.

He didn’t cave when Chicken Littles in Washington invoked a manufactured crisis in 2008. He didn’t follow the pro-bailout GOP crowd — including Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich — and he didn’t have to obfuscate or rationalize his position then or now, like Rick Perry and Herman Cain did. He also opposed the auto bailout, Freddie and Fannie bailout, and porkulus bills.

Santorum opposed individual health care mandates — clearly and forcefully — as far back as his 1994 U.S. Senate run. He has launched the most cogent, forceful fusillade against both Romney and Gingrich for their muddied, pro-individual U.S. Senate waters.

He voted against cap and trade in 2003, voted yes to drilling in ANWR, and unlike Romney and Gingrich, Santorum
has never dabbled with eco-radicals like John Holdren, Al Gore and Nancy Pelosi. He hasn’t written any “Contracts with the Earth”, as Newt did.

Santorum is strong on border security, national security, and defense. Mitt the Flip-Flopper and Open Borders-Pandering Newt have been far less trustworthy on immigration enforcement.

Santorum is an eloquent spokesperson for the culture of life. He has been savaged and ridiculed by leftist elites for upholding traditional family values — not just in word, but in deed.

He won Iowa through hard work and competent campaign management. Santorum has improved in every GOP debate and gave his strongest performance last week in Florida, wherein he both dismantled Romneycare and popped the Newt bubble by directly challenging the front-runners’ character and candor without resorting to their petty tactics.

He rose above the fray by sticking to issues.

Most commendably, he refused to join Gingrich and Perry in indulging in the contemptible Occupier rhetoric against Romney. Character and honor matter. Santorum has it.

Of course, Santorum is not perfect. As I’ve said all along, every election cycle is a Pageant of the Imperfects. He lost his Senate re-election bid in 2006, an abysmal year for conservatives. He was a go-along, get-along Big Government Republican in the Bush era. He supported No Child Left Behind, the prescription drug benefit entitlement, steel tariffs, and earmarks and outraged us movement conservatives by endorsing RINO Arlen Specter over stalwart conservative Pat Toomey.

I have no illusions about Rick Santorum. I wish he were as rock-solid on core economic issues as Ron Paul.

And I wish Ron Paul was not the far-out, Alex Jones-panderer on foreign policy, defense, and national security that he is.

If Ron Paul talked more like his son, Rand Paul, about the need for common-sense profiling of jihadists
at our State Department consular offices overseas and if he talked more about the need for strengthened visa screening and airport security scrutiny of international flight manifests, I might have more than a kernel of confidence that he would take post-9/11 precautions to guard against jihadi threats and protect us from our enemies foreign and domestic. But he doesn’t, so I can’t support Ron Paul.

Mitt Romney has the backing of many solid conservatives whom I will always hold in high esteem — including Kansas Secretary of State and immigration enforcement stalwart Kris Kobach, former U.N. ambassador John Bolton, and GOP Govs. Nikki Haley and Bob McDonnell. With such conservative advisers in his camp, Romney would be better than Obama. And a GOP Congress with a staunch Tea Party-backed contingent of fresh-blood leaders in the House and Senate will help keep any GOP president in line. Romney’s private-sector experience and achievements are the best things he’s got going. Only recently has he risen to defend himself effectively. But between his health care debacle, eco-nitwittery, and expedient and unconvincing political metamorphosis, Mitt Romney had way too much ideological baggage for me in 2008 to earn an endorsement — and it still hasn’t

changed for me in 2012.

Lest we forget, this election is not about choosing a showboat candidate to run against John King or Juan Williams or Wolf Blitzer.

It’s not about “raging against” some arbitrarily defined GOP “machine.”

For many grass-roots conservatives across the country, Romney and Gingrich are the machine.

And at this point in the game, Rick Santorum represents the most conservative candidate still standing who can articulate both fiscal and social conservative values — and live them.