Why in the World do Evangelicals Support Donald Trump?

 

That seems to be the big question these days in the blogosphere and all across social media.  I keep seeing all kinds of posts and links and likes whereby any self-respecting conservative evangelical Christian cannot possibly, POSSIBLY, support Donald Trump to be the next President of these United States.   As one of those absurd evangelicals who actually happen to support Donald Trump I find myself in the unique position whereby I believe I can provide  at least some  of the answers for those pondering this baffling phenomenon.

The very first reason to be in support of Donald Trump can be summed up in one word:  Eligibility.  While there were 18 candidates in the race this was perhaps not as big of an issue, but as the race dwindled down it has become a major issue. Of the top 3 running candidates to date only one is eligible to hold the office:  Donald Trump.

Article II, Section I, Clause 5 states:  No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.

Constitution - union graphic

I have personally researched this issue for years now, and I can tell you that the research is solid, and the founding documents are solid that “Natural Born” means born of American citizen parents (plural) within U.S. Jurisdiction.  It means an inherited state of being that no government can legislate, it is of the blood.  Whenever you have to resort to an “Act” of Congress whether that be an amendment, a Naturalization Act, or a code of Law to prove your citizenship you have just proven you are not Natural Born because a true Natural Born citizen needs no acts, statutes or codes.  The Constitution has no authority to “create” a Natural Born citizen – it can only determine who may be “Naturalized”.

Article I, Section 8, Clause 4 states: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization,……

Notice that Article I, Section 8, Clause 4 does not state anything about “natural born” – only Naturalization.  Think of it in terms of your natural children versus an adopted child.  You need no judge, jury or court decree to declare that a child born of your body is your natural child — it is self evident.  It is of the blood.  An adopted child on the other hand does need that judge, the court decrees, and laws for you to become the parent of that child.  It is not self-evident, it did not come from the blood, it came of a court decree or Judicial Act.  So it is with citizenship.  There is of the blood citizenship, i.e., Natural Born, and there are Acts of Congress, i.e., Naturalization.

There are many Constitutional Scholars out there who agree with me and affirm the definition I’ve given above and have sought to educate on this issue again and again.  I myself was taught this definition in a High School Civics Class 40 years ago.  This understanding is not new, what is new is the lack of understanding among the American people, particularly younger Americans.  Our schools have failed them miserably.  Following are just a few:

“…citizenship is the inheritance of the children of those who have taken part in the late revolution; but this is confined exclusively to the children of those who were themselves citizens. Citizenship by inheritance belongs to none but the children of those Americans, who, having survived the declaration of independence, acquired that adventitious character in their own right, and transmitted it to their offspring….” He continued that citizenship “as a natural right, belongs to none but those who have been born of citizens since the 4th of July, 1776….” (David Ramsay, (1749-1815), Historian, Founding Father, and a delegate to the Continental Congress from 1782-1783 and 1785-1786.)

On this issue I have been amazed to watch the utter dishonesty among many, both within the media and within the courts, who claim that this has “never been defined”.  That is categorically false.  It has been defined over and over in the courts and on the floor of Congress.

“[I] find no fault with the introductory clause, which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” John A. Bingham, (R-Ohio) US Congressman, March 9, 1866 Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866)).

“…it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens . . .” (Minor v Happersett – https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/88/162 – 88 U.S. 162 – 1875)

R.S. § 2172, granting inherited citizenship to children born abroad of parents who “now are, or have been,” citizens, applies only to children whose parents were citizens on or before April 14, 1802, when its predecessor became effective. When petitioner was born in 1906, R.S. § 1993 provided the sole source of inherited citizenship for foreign-born children, and it applied only to children whose fathers were citizens.  (Montana v Kennedy – https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/366/308/case.html#309 – 366 U.S.308 – 1961)

According to The Tenth Amendment Center:  “Senator Cruz was born in Canada of an American mother and a Cuban father. By congressional statute, he was a citizen at birth. His citizenship is not at issue. What is at issue is whether he is “natural born” as the Constitution uses the term. When the Constitution was written, the default rule of international law was that, although for many purposes a person’s status followed the condition of the mother (according to the maxim partus sequitur ventrem), for citizenship or “allegiance” purposes status followed that of the father.”  (See:  http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2016/01/13/claims-that-senator-cruz-is-not-natural-born-need-to-be-taken-seriously/)

The truth is Mothers could never impart citizenship until the 1934 Nationality Act. American law states:  “Prior to May 24, 1934, U.S. citizen mothers were not permitted to transmit U.S. citizenship to their children born abroad. The Act of May 24, 1934 (the “1934 Statute”) gave U.S. citizen mothers equality of status regarding their ability to transmit U.S. citizenship. However the provision was not applied retroactively. Therefore, children born before May 24, 1934 to a U.S. citizen mother and an alien father did not acquire U.S. citizenship.”

This is precisely why Winston Churchill stated back in 1932:

There are various little difficulties in the way. However, I have been treated so splendidly in the United States that I should be disposed, if you can amend the Constitution, seriously to consider the matter.”  – Winston Churchill, 1932

This comment was in response to Churchill being qualified to run for President as his mother was an American citizen (he was born to an American mother and a British father in England in 1874).  In 1874 the 1934 Act had not yet been legislated and Churchill was not only not a natural born citizen, he was not a citizen at all.  This is why he was made an “Honorary” citizen in 1963 during the Kennedy Administration.  Now, what makes Ted Cruz more worthy than Winston Churchill??  If Winston Churchill would not run for the position of U.S. President, and indeed had to have Honorary citizenship bestowed upon him, what makes Ted Cruz claim that he is Natural Born?  The truth is he can’t.  And he has lied over and over on this issue.  Another point to ponder for those of you who believe and accept Cruz’s eligibility you must also affirm and accept that Jordan’s Prince Hamzeh or Prince Hashim would also be eligible.  You see although their father was the king of Jordan, their mother is an American citizen.  Therefore, under Cruz’s logic as long as one of them meets residency requirements, either one of them would be free to run for the office of POTUS!  Do you honestly believe the Founders of this nation truly wanted a foreign born Prince or the brother of a foreign King sitting in the Oval Office?  Really?  Because that is what you have to believe to affirm Cruz is eligible.

There has unfortunately been a deliberate and concentrated effort over the past few decades to redefine the meaning of “Natural Born”.  There have been many attempts in the last few years to introduce Constitutional amendments that would strip this from the Constitution — all acts failed.  I want to reinforce for a moment that if all it required to be a “Natural Born” citizen was to have one citizen parent with place of birth anywhere in the world these attempts would have been unnecessary!  This idea that you can be born in another country with only one citizen parent is completely unheard of until Ted Cruz!!  Barack Obama ran into trouble with his eligibility and brought out all the stops to gain an “Hawaii” birth certificate, he should have just waited for Ted Cruz, he could have freely proclaimed Kenya under Ted’s definition, and it wouldn’t have mattered.  The reason this issue is going uncontested is because both sides of the aisle want this clause removed, but they can’t get it through the amendment process, so they redefine it under their terms such as Ted’s Harvard Law buddies (who he paid to write their review) attempting to redefine the term through a legal sleight of hand deceiving the American people by the thousands using a defunct Naturalization Act.  This horrific legal mumbo jumbo was refuted quite well by Constitutional Attorney Mario Apuzzo on his blog here.  The 1790 Act of Naturalization is the one they trot out as the Holiest of Holies, but they neglect to mention that Act was repealed in 1795.  Not only was this disingenuous but its deceptive to the nth degree.  Why do they do this?  Because the NWO Globalist agenda requires that foreigners be allowed into the Oval Office, its really that simple, more to follow below under this topic.  And the courts have aided and abetted this issue by refusing to hear one case after the other claiming the American people “have no standing” to have this issue adjudicated.

Now we can go around and around on this, sort of like a Poker match.  You bring out your Constitutional Scholars and I’ll raise you 2 of my Constitutional Scholars refuting every 1 of your Constitutional Scholars.  You can trot out the 1790 Naturalization Act and I will trot out the 1795 repeal of that Act, but at the end of the day I probably won’t convince you and you probably won’t convince me.  But as Christians this is a serious issue.  Why?

Because we citizens living in the United States of America no longer live under a Monarchy. We have no king. We have had no King since the Declaration of Independence July 4, 1776.  There is no single governing official in this country. America’s “Supreme Law” does not rest with any one man or any group of individuals. Our “Supreme Law” does not rest with the President, the Congress, or even the Supreme Court. In America, the U.S. Constitution is the “Supreme Law of the Land.” Under this document every President, Member of Congress, Supreme Court Justice, Military Officers, etc. must swear an oath of allegiance.  The United States Constitution is THE authority in the United States.

Now read Romans 13:1-2:  Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.  Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.” (ESV)

The “governing authorities” within the United States are not the men who occupy elected office (although they are certainly authority figures), rather the “governing authorities” are the tenets and principles set forth within the U.S. Constitution that every human authority within the United States must swear allegiance to.   Under our laws and form of government, it is the duty of every citizen, indeed every Christian including our elected officials, to obey the U.S. Constitution. Therefore, this is how a paraphrase of what Romans Chapter 13:1-2 would actually read to Christians in America:

“Let every person be subject to the U.S. Constitution. For there is no Constitution except from God, and the Constitution that exists has been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the Constitution resists what God has appointed, and those who resist this Constitution will incur judgment.”

I see over and over on the net, in blogs, various articles, opinions, Facebook posts likes, etc. criticizing and lambasting Christians who support Trump because of Trump’s morals, language, tone, and what have you.  How can you be a Christian and vote for Trump the refrain goes even to the point of challenging the salvation of Trump supporters.  But I’m going to flip that around on you Trump haters.  Once you have a proper understanding of Romans 13:1-2 how then can any Christian choose to vote for or support a Presidential candidate whose eligibility (or lack thereof) is in violation of that Constitution? Every single one of these various articles, posts, and likes, never once mention the eligibility issue and Romans 13:1-2.  But to knowingly vote for a candidate who is not eligible puts one in rebellion against God. How?  Because when you choose to support a candidate who is not eligible you are resisting the ordinance of God in the United States, which is our Constitution.  And when you knowingly do this you are resisting the qualifications laid down in our supreme law, our supreme authority. This issue trumps (no pun intended) morals.  You want to take the speck out of my eye regarding Trump’s behavior, but you leave a log labeled rebellion against our supreme authority hanging out of your eye!

I realize not every Christian accepts my definition of “Natural Born”,  it is easy to understand why when the powers that be have been attacking Article II for decades now and has ceased from teaching its meaning to younger generations.  So why you may think its okay for you to vote for ineligible candidates, I for one can’t, because I know better and I know I will face judgment doing so.  I will not vote for any Presidential candidate who is not born of American citizens (plural) within U.S. Jurisdiction because that is the requirement laid down by God (Romans 13:1-2) in the U.S. Constitution Article II, Section I, Clause 5.  Now you may have chosen to believe that Cruz and/or Rubio are Natural Born citizens and thus deceive yourself that a vote for either of these men can be done with a clear conscience, but to those of us who know without doubt that these men are not Constitutionally eligible, we cannot do the same because we know we will face the judgment of God.  To do so would place us in open rebellion against God.  I have repeated that twice so that you get it – this is an issue of conviction.  You may not share my personal conviction in this matter and that is okay, but you do not have the right to malign or otherwise attack my character because I choose a different candidate than you do because of that conviction.

I hear from many Christians that they simply cannot cast a vote for Trump, and I say fair enough, but I also say if you are going to obey the Scriptures Cruz and/or Rubio are not options either.  And….I’m going to flip that again…..there are many evangelicals who will refuse to vote for Cruz or Rubio due to the eligibility issue alone in the same degree there are those who will refuse to vote for Trump.  So that argument is void.  The #1 reason why Trump is getting the evangelical vote is the reality that there are many evangelicals like myself who understand this eligibility issue, and like myself will refuse to vote for any men who do not fit the required definition.  And I can tell you it is highly offensive to us to be chastised on “morals” when we have been left with no other option in order not to violate this Constitutional mandate.   I get that you hate Trump.  I get that you don’t think its fair that Cruz or Rubio doesn’t fit the eligibility requirements and you want to ignore this issue so ‘Your Guy’ can be elected.  But you need to remember that when Paul wrote Romans 13:1 & 2 Nero was sitting on the throne there in Rome.  Its not about fair, its about God’s commands.  And if He commanded His people to obey Nero, then its certainly rebellion on our part to decide the Constitution (which is a just and fair authority as it was written)  should only be obeyed when we agree with it, and can be ignored or redefined apart from the amendment process when we don’t.    That’s like deciding which parts of Scripture can be redefined or ignored at will – it doesn’t fly with God.  If you don’t like Article II, Section I, Clause 5 then the process to change it is through the amendment process, not arbitrarily redefining it, or choosing to just ignore it and be apathetic on this issue.  Now stop and think on this, please.  If the Article II clause gets arbitrarily redefined what is to prevent the redefinition of the  1st amendment, 2nd amendment, and so forth?  Look folks, the candidates have come down to 3 leading candidates within the GOP from the original 18:  Trump, Cruz, and Rubio.  Only one is eligible.

Two final points on this issue for those of you still insisting that these men fit the definition of Natural Born:  1)  Are you prepared to abandon the Originalist Conservative View of the Constitution in favor of a Progressive Living Constitution?  If yes, then okay, what more can I say?  If no, you need to realize that while the various Constitutional scholars we both can trot out advocating their differing opinions (based on the Originalist or Living Constitution viewpoints they each hold) regarding the meaning of the term “Natural Born”, they ALL (its 100% unanimous) nevertheless agree and affirm that to accept anything other than birth to citizen parents in U.S. Jurisdiction is a Living Constitution viewpoint.  They ALL (its 100% unanimous) affirm that the above narrow definition of birth to citizen parents in U.S. Jurisdiction is the Originalist view.  This is affirmed by Laurence Tribe, Harvard Law Professor, and former Professor to Ted Cruz who stated:

“When Cruz was my constitutional law student at Harvard, he aced the course after making a big point of opposing my views in class — arguing stridently for sticking with the “original meaning” against the idea of a more elastic “living Constitution” whenever such ideas came up. I enjoyed jousting with him, but Ted never convinced me — nor did I convince him. At least he was consistent in those days. Now, he seems to be a fair weather originalist, abandoning that method’s narrow constraints when it suits his ambition.” –  (Boston Globe, January 11, 2016)

You have to realize that once you affirm that Cruz or Rubio fit the Constitutional requirement and choose one of them over Trump, you must abandon the originalist interpretation of the Constitution and you must embrace a progressive viewpoint.  Are you prepared to do that?  Really?  And call yourself Pro-Constitution and a Principled Conservative?  Really?  Hurl stones at me and other evangelicals all you want to regarding my refusal to back an ineligible candidate, but I can promise you I will not cave on this.

Secondly, another phrase that can be mentioned regarding support of Donald Trump is National Sovereignty.  Stephen Miller is a former aide to Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL).  He is currently working as Senior Policy Advisor for the Trump campaign.  He did an interview with Breitbart News on Saturday, February 27, 2016.

“Because it [Obamatrade] answered the question of whether or not the United States will remain a sovereign country. Already in ways that we don’t readily see but we experience the effects, the sovereign powers of the United States have been bled away, whether it’s with agreements in the UN, whether it’s with agreements in existing international structures, like the World Trade Organization, or NAFTA, or something called the Generalized Agreement in Trade and Services …” – Stephen Miller, February 27, 2016

The powers of the New World Order, Internationalism, Globalism, NAFTA, the North American Union, etc. are all designed towards one world government and the elimination of not only our borders, but our very sovereignty as a nation.  This is dangerous stuff here.  If you are a Christian, this is one-world government Anti-Christ coming to the throne type stuff.   As Christians we understand this one world government will come to pass at some future date, that does not mean that we must vote for it or help it come to pass!  Stephen Miller went on to say that a vote for anyone other than Donald Trump in 2016 will be a vote for the destruction of the United States.  Why? Because of the passage of TPP we have very little time left, we may not even have 4 years left.  And once we ‘cross that rubicon’ we won’t be able to turn it back.  Very sobering.  Just how bad is it really?

Bad.  According to The Economy in Crisis published in 2013 it reported:  “To implement the TPP free-trade agreement, Congress will be asked to surrender its responsibility under Section 1, Article 8 of the Constitution to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and grant President Obama extra-constitutional “Trade Promotion Authority” to negotiate the final TPP agreement. The administration seeks to gain “fast-track authority,” a provision under the Trade Promotion Authority that requires Congress to review an FTA under limited debate, in an accelerated time frame subject to a yes-or-no vote by a simple majority vote rather than a two-thirds vote, as required for the ratification of a formal treaty.”  Today in 2016 TPP has received its fast-track authority from Senator Ted Cruz, he in fact pushed this through.  Another article here.  This is serious stuff folks.  And as Christians we are back to the Constitution, obeying it first and foremost, and we’re back to Romans 13:1 & 2 again.  I cannot support anything or anyone who seeks to strip Constitutional powers away from Congress, I would find myself in rebellion against God again.  The Constitution is my Supreme Law in the United States currently, it is not trade promotion that will give foreign powers the final authority over the United States Constitution!  In my mind, any Congressman, President, or Judge has committed treason passing that law and I will not vote for anyone who promoted it or continues to promote it.  So once again you want to focus on the speck in my eye of “morals” and “tone” and ignore the tree labeled constitutional rebellion hanging of your eye (that log has grown now).

A search on the Trans Pacific Partnership and national sovereignty yields article after article all saying pretty much the same thing, the surrender of Congressional responsibility can lead to nothing less than paving the way for Globalization and the New World Order and goodbye United States.  And to think this was done without a shot being fired and without the will or the approval of the American people is absolutely chilling.  The 2016 GOP candidates?  Again, only one of the original 18 choices stood firm against this monstrosity – Donald Trump.  The rest including Cruz, Rubio, et. al. all supported TPP or even sought the fast track of its passage! I know this to be true, because I’ve done the research.

Look folks, we are on a sinking ship.  It is past time to bail water, it is time to start plugging the holes and stop the ship from sinking and we don’t have much time left.  To constantly chip away at Trump’s “behavior” or Trump’s “morals” or any of Trump’s past sins and ignore this attack against our national sovereignty is to focus on bailing the water and ignore the holes!  We need to plug the holes and save the ship first, then we can move on to bailing out the water.  Ignoring this issue blathering on about “tone” and “behavior” and “morals” is akin to swatting at a gnat on your rosebush while a swarm of locusts is invading the entire garden.  I don’t really care about someone’s behavior or tone at this point if he can get the job done.

We need a General Patton, not Neville Chamberlain.  For those of you who may be uninformed, according to Patton’s official biography he was known for his intemperate manner.  For the men who fought in his army some loved him and some hated him.  My father-in-law served in Patton’s army (7th Army45th Infantry Division directly under Mark Clark).  I can remember him speaking of his glory days in World War II and while he always had great respect for General Clark, he hated Patton. Patton was profane, he was vulgar, and many times quite harsh to the troops according to him as I recall.  But he would always admit, along with most historians, that we would not have defeated Hitler and won Europe without him – intemperance and all.  And make no mistake – in 2016 we are at war.  And because we are at war with radical Islam (whether people want to admit it or not makes no difference) we are not electing a Pastor – we need a gruff, take no prisoners, General Patton type character if we are going to defeat this monster.  So Trump’s “tone” is of little consequence when you consider what we are up against here, because we are in serious peril as a nation, and I will make no apologies for that opinion.

titanic-sinking

A third reason for evangelical support of Donald Trump is illegal immigration and what this is doing not only to our safety, but to our jobs, and to our economy.  This does not in anyway indicate that I am against immigration.  Absolutely not.  What it does mean is that all immigration must be legal.  And that all American citizens should be put first.  Non-citizens should not have greater rights than citizens!  Phyllis Schlafly had it absolutely correct when she came out in support of Trump pounding on the table:  AMERICAN’S FIRST!   There is something seriously wrong in our nation when illegal immigrants get free college tuition and a citizen cannot.  Are you kidding me?  But that is what Marco Rubio did in Florida!

And Rubio has done much more than that.  Let us not forget the gang of 8 debacle.  Rubio likes to claim that bill had it passed would have provided “the toughest border security and enforcement measures in U.S. history”, but Chris Crane (ICE Officer) refuted that saying, “I think that’s absolutely false – there was no real promise or guarantee of stronger border security. The bill actually relinquished Congress’ authority to establish border security measures to the head of DHS.” Once again like TPP, a relinquishing of Congressional Authority.  What is even worse is this bill would have legalized sex offenders, drunk drivers, and others with criminal records.  Does that sound like a “moral” position to you?  You’re going to get all bent out of shape because of adultery in Trump’s past, but ignore releasing violent sex offenders into the streets of America that Rubio wanted to do and in fact supported?  Its not okay to vote for a guy who has made mistakes in his marriage, but its okay to vote for a guy who legalizes sex offenders?  REALLY?  That’s where you want to go?? Well,  this issue got Rubio into some political hot water (and rightfully so) and he tried to claim Chris Crane was not even a law enforcement officer, resulting in an immediate rebuke from Crane, “You recently lied to the American public on FOX news regarding my current status and career as both an ICE Agent and Officer,” Crane writes in his email to Rubio. “I challenge you to make yourself available, as a United States Senator and Presidential Candidate, so that I may present my badge and credentials to you as proof that your comments on FOX news are false.”  To my knowledge Rubio has never responded.

And that is not the only time Rubio has lied over this issue.  In a chat with Univision’s Jorge Ramos, Rubio said (in Spanish), “I believe DACA is important. It can’t be terminated from one moment to the next, because there are already people benefiting from it,” referring to Obama’s Dream Act.  BUT, he later said in English, “But yes, it is going to have to end. It can’t be the permanent policy of the United States,” in effect saying one thing to Americans and quite another to Mexicans.  He got caught by Manny Roman on Breitbart News who happens to speak Spanish in his article:  “Marco Rubio, I speak Spanish. You lied about your Univision interviews.” Rubio has been squirming trying to downplay this, but too little too late as they say proving that Rubio is indeed in the pockets of pro-amnesty backers with no intention of securing our borders.

How about the other candidate, Cruz,  on illegal immigration and border security?  He has been all over the map on this issue, saying one thing, then reversing that position, and to date has not ruled out legal status for undocumented immigrants.  Here is another example of Cruz’s waffling.  Once again the only candidate left standing who has been consistent in demanding border security and is actively campaigning on building a wall is……Trump.

illegal immigration photo: our continent 220107mexicans2.jpg

And Trump is absolutely correct in his assertion that a country without borders is not a country.  According to the U.S. Constitution Article IV, Section 4, it is the responsibility of our government to protect against invasion and domestic violence.  That means securing the borders folks.  When we are being invaded, and those invaders are killing our citizens, it is the responsibility of our government to protect us against that.  If they do not we no longer even have a government, let alone borders!  And again we are back to Romans 13:1-2 aren’t we?  How can any Christian vote for those who will not obey the Constitution in this matter and are willfully rebelling against it?  So here we go again, you want to attack what you consider a speck in my eye of “morals” and “tone” but ignore the Sequoia labeled Constitutional Rebellion hanging out of yours!

Article IV, Section 4 – The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence.

And lack of security on our borders leads me to a fourth reason, Jobs.   Not only are we being invaded and gunned down in the streets, our very jobs are being given away.  Less than a month ago here in Indianapolis, 1400 people  lost their jobs to Mexico.  Most of us are familiar with this story of the Carrier HVAC systems plant leaving the country.  But they are certainly not the first, and if we don’t raise this sinking ship they won’t be the last.   Many, many manufacturing plants have already left the country.  The United States has lost 42,400 factories just since 2001. Dell, Inc. has announced plans to dramatically expand its operations in China with an investment of over $100 billion over the next decade. The United States has lost a total of about 5.5 million manufacturing jobs since October 2000.  Going back to the TPP issue again, there is a report that came out March 3, 2016 that reported there have been 112,500 jobs lost in Ohio as a direct result of the Trans Pacific Partnership.  This report is particularly interesting as it lists states with significant job losses as a direct result of TPP:

  • Michigan (214,600 jobs lost, equal to 5.12 percent of employment)
  • Indiana (103,800 jobs, 3.54 percent)
  • Kentucky (53,700 jobs, 2.92 percent)
  • Alabama (46,000 jobs, 2.32 percent)
  • Tennessee (61,000 jobs, 2.19 percent)
  • Ohio (112,500 jobs, 2.16 percent)
  • Mississippi (22,000 jobs, 1.86 percent)

The total jobs lost as a result of TPP in this report is 2,025,800.  Where did those jobs go?  Overseas. In 1959, manufacturing represented 28 percent of U.S. economic output. In 2008, it represented 11.5 percent.  Read more here.  Is this the country you want?  Its certainly not one that I want, its certainly not the one I remember, and again, no candidate other than Trump is even remotely on top of this issue.  I saw one Facebook poster make the comment that they hated Trump’s slogan “Make America Great Again” commenting America is already great.  I would speculate this poster said that because he wasn’t around 40 years ago to see the difference!  But I was, and I remember functioning factories that are now boarded up all across the fruited plane. I remember when the U.S. was a leader in Industry and Manufacturing, and now we make nothing, or very little. We are now post-industrial. Not good.  I can remember going into stores and understanding that if you bought Chinese or Japanese you would get a lower quality product, and so if you could afford it you always bought American.  Now you have a very hard time buying American as very little is being manufactured here anymore and when you do find something it is the American product that is often of lower quality.  Even U.S. flags are made in China! So when Trump is saying, “Make America Great Again”, he is referring to our lost Industry and he couldn’t be more right.  And again, no other candidate, is even coming close to recognizing this.

19 Facts About The Deindustrialization Of America That Will Blow Your ...

IBM is the next to report massive layoffs are on the way.  According to the IBM Facebook Group a couple of comments say:

“Latest areas getting cut: AA IBM CMS Cloud Division; AMS Strategic Technical Services; Global Services Parts Operations; GTS Strategic Outsourcing. Workers are also reporting work is being moved offshore to Hungary and Brazil.”

“I am cut while my replacement H1B visa worker stays.”

As was the case with Disney employees, these employees are also being forced to train their foreign replacements.   These employees later showed up at a Trump rally and as you read the article Trump has been on top of this speaking out against this evil.  And evil it is.  The other candidates?  Silence.  Here is Trump’s position on H-1B Visas:

Trump position on H1-B Visas – “”Megyn Kelly asked about highly-skilled immigration. The H-1B program is neither high-skilled nor immigration: these are temporary foreign workers, imported from abroad, for the explicit purpose of substituting for American workers at lower pay. I remain totally committed to eliminating rampant, widespread H-1B abuse and ending outrageous practices such as those that occurred at Disney in Florida when Americans were forced to train their foreign replacements. I will end forever the use of the H-1B as a cheap labor program, and institute an absolute requirement to hire American workers first for every visa and immigration program. No exceptions.”

Cruz on the other hand wants to increase H-1B Visas by 500%!  As if we’ve not only lost enough jobs he wants to take away even more American jobs giving them to foreigners  So does Rubio.  At least Senator Jeff Sessions gets it when he said:

“It is understandable why these corporations push for legislation that will flood the labor market and keep pay low; what is not understandable is why we would ever consider advancing legislation that provides jobs for the citizens of other countries at the expense of our own,” Sessions wrote to lawmakers. “Who do we work for?”

Well said Sen. Sessions.  Who exactly are our Congressmen working for?  That is the real question here.

And that question leads me to yet a 5th reason, think one word:  Establishment.  Or rather, the complete and utter destruction of said GOP Establishment.  As an older conservative I have been around awhile in the political scheme of things.  I have been voting for 40 years now.  I cast my first primary vote way back in 1976.  Yes, I voted for Ronald Reagan that year.  And I have been choosing the “most principled conservative” every year since.  I am in fact among those voters who used to think that the “Establishment” was just a myth cooked up by the disgruntled.  Unfortunately over all of these years I have yet to see a single conservative issue dear to my heart ever wind its way through Congress.  Roe v Wade is still being contested, we are in the clutches of trillions of dollars of debt increasing by the hour, and our government is bigger and more oppressive than ever.  We conservatives were told time and again the reason nothing was done was Democrat control, bi-partisanship, it just can’t be done, etc. etc. Well, you get the idea.

As the old saying goes, “The definition of insanity is to keep doing the same old thing over and over expecting a different result.”  Is it not insane to keep electing people who say they are against open borders and then head to Washington and do the exact opposite?! Is it not insane to keep electing people who say they want to bring down the national debt and then go to Washington and increase that debt?! Is it not insane to keep electing people who tell us they will fight for those social issues we care about, then head off to Washington and do nothing about them?  Is it not insane to keep electing people who tell us they will appoint conservative justices for the supreme court who will be strict adherents to the originalist view of the Constitution and then turn around and appoint those justices who reveal themselves to be quite the opposite, even to the point of creating a special tax out of the scope of the constitutionality of the Supreme Court so that Obamacare may remain?   (And yes Cruz supporters, Ted Cruz was the man who pushed Roberts to George W. Bush – Chicago Tribune) Or how about those legislators who say they hate Obamacare, campaign on repealing it and defunding it, then go to Washington, turn it around and fund it?! Or more importantly those who helped TPP become a reality?! Then came Obamacare, the refusal to defund Planned Parenthood, and the final betrayal of Omnibus, Obamatrade, and the Iran deal.

Because of this past history, what makes you conservative voters out there believe that any “principled conservative” you choose to vote for is going to remain a “principled conservative” when he gets to Washington?   Honestly, what guarantee do you really have?  How in the world did we get to this point where principled conservatives can no longer even be trusted. Because they are neo-conservative who co-opted the term conservative in order to win elections is how.  If you don’t know what a neo-con is and why that matters go here.  Its because of these things that there is a very real COLD ANGER among the electorate.  The feelings of betrayal don’t begin to come close to how most of us feel.  We now realize there is a Neo-Conservative (not conservative) Republican Oligarchy that has entrenched itself deep within the GOP and is dedicated to its own self-interests  at the expense of liberty and we the people. The “Establishment” is indeed real, and it is not only an Oligarchy, it is Authoritarian.   Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee nailed it in this interview:

http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/4783263328001/huckabee-the-establishment-has-ruined-this-country/?intcmp=obnetwork&playlist_id=937116503001#sp=news-clips

That’s just it.  Over the last couple of years we have endured an onslaught of unconstitutional actions that went unchallenged by the representatives we sent to Congress to represent us and they did nothing.  They did nothing because it did not suit their interests, or rather the interests of the donors who control them.  We the people have had enough.  We are tired of being screwed over and branded the enemy.  On August 22, 2013 Judicial Watch released this absolutely stunning press release:

Washington, DC – Judicial Watch announced today that it has obtained educational materials from the Department of Defense (DOD) depicting conservative organizations as “hate groups” and advising students to be aware that “many extremists will talk of individual liberties, states’ rights, and how to make the world a better place.” The documents repeatedly cite the leftwing Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) as a resource for identifying “hate groups .  Judicial Watch obtained the documents in a response to a Freedom of Information Act request (FOIA) filed on April 8, 2013. The FOIA requested “Any and all records concerning, regarding, or related to the preparation and presentation of training materials on hate groups or hate crimes distributed or used by the Air Force.” Included in the 133 pages of lesson plans and PowerPoint slides provided by the Air Force is a January 2013……” one which stated:

In U.S. history, there are many examples of extremist ideologies and movements.  The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule and the Confederate states who sought to secede from the Northern states are just two examples.”

How chilling is that? Our Department of Defense is now teaching that our Founding Fathers were extremists and members of a hate group!  How is that not treason? They are in effect saying that our Constitution was written by members of a hate group.  Think on that for a moment.  Well I don’t know about you, but in light of the above, focusing on “tone” and “morals” while rats are swarming in the basement seems a bit dense to me, if not outright insane.  I for one am tired of being a naive pawn – no more!  We want this corruption cleaned out and the only way that is going to happen is to send someone to Washington who isn’t dependent upon donors and big money to get elected, someone who isn’t controlled by special interests, and someone who hasn’t spent a lifetime in politics.  The ONLY 2016 GOP candidate who fits that bill is, you guessed it, Donald Trump.  Every other single candidate were and are controlled by one PAC or another. The very best explanation that I have found on the seedy underbelly of Washington corruption aka the GOPe and why you should vote for Donald Trump are some articles over at the Conservative Tree House:

Yes, the Conservative Tree House is a pro-Trump site; however, they do the best job anywhere analyzing and researching what we the people are truly up against.  And its not pretty.  Now look at recent attacks from Mitt Romney (wouldn’t it be nice if he had taken a fraction of this energy he’s used attacking Trump against Obama back in 2012?) or the reaction of the entire GOPe in going after Trump this primary season.  Instead of backing the front runner they have been throwing everything at him except the kitchen sink in an effort to “stop Trump”.  This is quite eye opening.  Its eye opening because it tells me these guys are truly frightened of the idea of a Trump Presidency.  The one thing I truly appreciate Trump for is that he has ripped the conservative masks off many people, both political and in the media, exposing the neo-conservative globalists underneath.  And with the masks now off and the vermin exposed, we can clearly see that they are scared out of their wits, and this explains why this primary has been like no other.  When you attempt to get to the “why” of that fear, you become highly motivated to actually vote for Trump instead of against him! Why?  Because if these guys are pure as the driven snow, there is no reason for this behavior. Their irrational response tells me that there is a great deal of corruption in Washington (which we already knew) and they are fearing the loss of their gravy train.  That’s a plus for the average American voter — cleaning out that gravy train.

Underneath is a caption reading: "I've had just about enough of you ...

In summing up the conclusion of my rant, I want to talk about Trump’s behavior, or lack of morals, or what have you.  I fully agree that there is a great deal in Mr. Trump I don’t necessarily like.  I am 100% convinced that if elected he will do something that will rub me the wrong way.  Its guaranteed to happen.  It will also happen with any of the other candidates, because they have their own skeletons.  With both Cruz and Rubio you get lies and deception.  And not only over the Natural Born issue, some of which  I’ve already mentioned above.  As we’ve seen in this primary Cruz as been caught in horrific campaign election fraud, vote tampering, along with more lies than even Pinnochio could come up with over and over, again and again.  The Bible has a lot to say about lies and deception (none of which is a positive thing) and even says in Proverbs 6 that these things are among God’s list of the 7 sins He hates.  Lying is actually repeated twice in this passage.

So those who think Trump’s sins are egregious but ignore these moral failings in both Cruz and Rubio need to go back to Bible study again.  There is even a story out there reported on USA Politics Today (and also most recently here) referring to extra-marital affairs Rubio had with a Lobbyist named Amber Stoner and another Lobbyist Dana Hudson.  I have no idea how much of this is accurate, but bear in mind there is a ton of smut that has been leveled at Trump that is not accurate as well.  The only reason I bring this up is to illustrate the baggage all of the candidates have.  None of them are perfect.  And if this story on Rubio is even partially true it demonstrates how incredibly dishonest it is to attack Trump supporters for Trump’s past indiscretions yet ignore Rubio’s current indiscretions and say he’s the guy you have to vote for and be a Christian.

And speaking of adultery, I recall John 8:7  whereby Jesus writes in the sand (regarding a woman about to be stoned for adultery) and tells his audience, “ “He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” Bear in mind as well, that Scripture gives no criteria that secular political candidates must meet any kind of conditions, sinless, morals or anything.  The only criteria given is for leaders of the Church and we are not voting for a leader in the Church.  I would also remind you that David committed adultery with Bathsheba, and yet God still called him, “A man after God’s own heart”.  I am not excusing adultery, absolutely not, it is a grievous sin.  But what I am saying is that God forgives.  And we are commanded to forgive.  As to voting, it is extremely hypocritical to judge a lack of morals in one candidate, and excuse them in another.  In my Bible adultery is sin, but so is lying and dishonesty.  I don’t think God makes a distinction between them and neither should we.  Sin is sin.  So if you are going to judge Trump’s sins, logic and fairness would dictate that you would also need to judge Rubio and Cruz with the same brush.  And to be perfectly honest?   I’m not seeing that.  What I am seeing is a whole lot of self-righteousness and hypocrisy going around.  And a whole lot of divisiveness in the church centered around this election which definitely does not please Him (see Prov. 6:19; Romans 16:17; Galatians 5:20; Titus 3:9) and that needs to stop among fellow believers.

We are faced with 3 viable remaining candidates.  All of which have tremendous failings.  I have tried to document these.  There are many I haven’t documented in the interests of time and space (for example:  the Ted Cruz connection with 7 Mountains Dominionism and the New Apostolic Reformation).  Look, if there were a truly godly candidate with an impeccable character yet strong on all the above policy issues – I would be backing that candidate in a heartbeat.  But there isn’t.  There are just as many sins and skeletons in Cruz’s and Rubio’s closets as there are in Trump’s.  You don’t like Trump and you are baffled why anyone would vote for him and claim to be a Christian.  Do you not realize due to the moral failings of the other 2 candidates that comes across as an incredibly divisive comment? Why do you focus on Trump’s failings, but ignore the failings and sins of the other candidates?  And I am not the only one who sees this.  Pastor Jeffress also came out against this behavior.    I hope I’ve answered some of those questions in this post and that it is quite possible to not only be a committed Christian and choose Trump over the other 2, but that it would be considered rebelling against God to not vote for him when the other candidates we are left with are not even eligible to be running!  People like me are baffled that anyone would think it pleases God to vote for those who lie and deceive and commit fraud.   The reality is we Trump supporters could in fact question your Christianity by choosing an ineligible candidate in Cruz or Rubio.  You do realize that??  And yet we do not do that.  You won’t see any articles, and facebook likes, and what have you criticizing the Christianity of those who choose Cruz or Rubio.  I wish that were the case as well with my side of the debate.

I have seen comments such as, “But Trump scares me!”  Fair enough.  But let me ask you a question.  What is scary about putting Americans first ahead of foreign interests?  How in the world would that be scary?  I am far more concerned with those who would not put Americans first!  What is scary about building a wall and protecting our borders?  I am far more concerned about those who would not!  Let me tell you that a bunch of nutballs running around chopping people’s heads off is scary to me!  I am scared of the politicians who won’t deal with this evil and seal our borders so we can keep them out! That’s what scares me.  The destruction of our sovereignty is much bigger deal to me also, and not fighting against that is incredibly scary.  So I guess different things scare different people.  We can go around and around on this, but I hope I have explained that a true committed bible believing Christian can indeed support Trump.  My hope is that we could all acknowledge that we believers should be free to choose any candidate that we think is best for the country and not have our character, our integrity, or our convictions questioned and challenged.  Wouldn’t that be nice?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s