Phyllis Schlafly makes the case for President Trump

[Belle]

Great article; it's lengthy, so here are some clips:

...91-year-old conservative icon and living legend Phyllis Schlafly declared that Donald Trump “is the only hope to defeat the Kingmakers,” and detailed why she believes Trump alone will return the government to the people. She warned that if immigration is not stopped: “we’re not going to be America anymore.”

Today, Schlafly tells Breitbart that the defining and most important battle is immigration. She said that current visa rates will “destroy our country,” and called for a pause on all new immigration, just like the county had during the middle of the 20th century.

The quick-witted conservative heroine also delivered a blistering critique of Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI)
 and Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL),the two most prominent representatives of the Republican Party’s donor class. Schlafly said that “Rush [Limbaugh] is right” to argue that a Ryan-Rubio tag team in the Presidency and House Speakership would ensure the swift enactment of the donor class’s agenda. 

However, Schlafly declared that Rubio will never become President—explaining that his “anti-American” immigration agenda is “why he’s not going to get the nomination.”

“The Kingmakers have picked our last bunch of losers. And there’s one loser after another because they were more interested in maintaining their flow of money from the big donors and their cooperation with the Democrats—their bipartisanship—and that’s not my goal. I’m for America [Schlafly slams hand on table] and America first [slams hand on table again].”

“Trump is the only hope to defeat the Kingmakers.  Because everybody else will fall in line. The Kingmakers have so much money behind them.”

While Schlafly spoke warmly of Sen. Ted Cruz, she said that she'd ideally like to see Cruz on the Supreme Court during Trump's administration.

 
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/01/10/phyllis-schlafly-makes-the-case-for-president-trump/

[Boudicca]

There's a reason real conservatives are behind Trump, and it's not because he's the most conservative R running.  That ideological purity test would be won by Cruz, Carson, well, those two.  But, Trump displays thus far massive and intense crossover appeal to the same libertarians (socially liberal, fiscally conservative and for the rule of law) that have been stuck with the choice of two unappealing alternatives:  socially restrictive (to their way of thinking) R who used to, anyway, try to be the party of fiscal responsibility and the rule of law, or socially liberal (and it's gone way too far for many people who have a D registration at this point) D who flouts the rule of law and spends as recklessly as a drunken sailor.

Apologies to any drunken sailors for comparing them to Dems.

ANYWAY, getting back to my point at the beginning of all this.  People like Schlaffy would probably prefer to see a R in the White House at least once before it's their time to exit the stage.  I know when I am not long for this mortal coil I'd rest easier with a R in the Executive than some dweeb of a D.  Trump can win, and right now, the Right is looking for a winner. 

[Lacarnut]

A great read.This grandma has got it right about the sell-out kingmakers in both parties.

If we do not halt or seriously reduce the illegals and the number of refugees, we will become a bannana republic in a few short years. 

[Eupher]

I like the way Schlafly thinks.

The Kingmakers is a very apt way of putting it. There are also Kingmakers on the Dem side and for the last 7 years, those Kingmakers have managed to put a no-name Marxist in the White House. A narcissistic chump who has had the world handed to him on a platter, those Kingmakers on the Dem side have done remarkably well for themselves.

The Republican Kingmakers keep putting up losers, as she notes.

The question is, why?

[libertybele]

While I have been a Schlafly fan for quite sometime, she is absolutely correct that we need to rid ourselves of the Kingmakers.  However, I am not convinced that Trump is not merely a siphon for the Dems.  He has attacked everyone of his opponents and he has gone after Cruz relentlessly after Cruz overtook him in Iowa.  I understand he is out to win and this is politics, but it seems to me that he has spent more time and energy attacking Cruz then he has on Hillary.  Secondly, he had troubling stating that he would commit to supporting the GOP candidate should he not be the nominee and also threatened several times to run 3rd party.  Awhile back he also stated (jokingly?) that he would love Oprah to be his VP.  I can't think of anyone much more liberal with a boat load of money and influence.

I think Schlafly has got it wrong -- she should be endorsing the MOST conservative candidate; Cruz.  Cruz is equally as anti-amnesty as Trump and the only one that has a proven record of standing up to the Kingmakers a/k/a Washington Cartel.

[Boudicca]

While I have been a Schlafly fan for quite sometime, she is absolutely correct that we need to rid ourselves of the Kingmakers.  However, I am not convinced that Trump is not merely a siphon for the Dems.  He has attacked everyone of his opponents and he has gone after Cruz relentlessly after Cruz overtook him in Iowa.  I understand he is out to win and this is politics, but it seems to me that he has spent more time and energy attacking Cruz then he has on Hillary.  Secondly, he had troubling stating that he would commit to supporting the GOP candidate should he not be the nominee and also threatened several times to run 3rd party.  Awhile back he also stated (jokingly?) that he would love Oprah to be his VP.  I can't think of anyone much more liberal with a boat load of money and influence.

I think Schlafly has got it wrong -- she should be endorsing the MOST conservative candidate; Cruz.  Cruz is equally as anti-amnesty as Trump and the only one that has a proven record of standing up to the Kingmakers a/k/a Washington Cartel.

Donald Trump has a message for those who think he's NOT in it to win.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/01/11/exclusive-donald-trump-shames-the-doubters-my-life-has-been-about-winning/

Just weeks away from the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primaries, Trump is in prime position to seal the nomination—and may just pull off what everyone in the permanent political class in Washington, D.C., and on the island of Manhattan thought was impossible.

“My life has been about winning. I like to win. I like to close the deal,” Trump said when asked Monday afternoon what he thinks of all the people this whole election cycle who thought he wasn’t a serious presidential candidate.

Trump’s latest high-profile endorsement comes from Eagle Forum’s Phyllis Schlafly, who said Trump is the GOP base’s only hope to defeat “the kingmakers”—the establishment and donor class figures who have been pushing people like Rubio because of his support for granting illegal aliens amnesty and for wide open borders policies on immigration and trade.

Schlafly—now 91—is an icon in the conservative movement. She has been battling the political establishment for more than half a century, fighting against the institutional left and donor-class efforts to control education, immigration and more

I have no doubt that Trump is NOT a siphon for the Dems, unless it is for Democrat voters any other R candidate is not going to get in a general election.  And that would be the the reason many on the right do not like him; he is not an ideological conservative, rather he is more in the libertarian mold.  And since, I would venture to speculate, the vast majority of the self-identified moderates in this country actually are libertarian at heart, and that includes many young people despite the college idiots, Trump's appeal is broader in depth and scope than any other candidate on either side.