NewsWithViews on Pinterest NewsWithViews on Google+

Additional Titles


The Difference Between Wealth and Profit










By Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall
January 31, 2016

“Ted Cruz idolizes Ronald Reagan…” “To his credit, Barack Obama has done the same thing. There are some in the political world that vilify Barack Obama. Personally, I’ve never been one of them. I think he is deeply committed to his principles and demonstrated real courage in fighting for them.”Senator Ted Cruz, The Guardian, December 2013

Ted Cruz idolizes Ronald Reagan and the real courage of Barack Obama, Raw Story

I do not believe Megyn Kelly was the reason Donald J. Trump did not show up for the Fox News debate last Thursday. Though Kelly appears to view herself as an elephant in the Donald’s campaign, I think she is more of a flea on the elephant’s butt.

Two days before the debate, Breitbart filed a good article which proved to be totally true. Fox had two “sleepers” recruited to make Trump look radical in his lawful views about immigration – and that was the intent. It appears Fox has become Marco Rubio’s champion. Those who are impressed by Rubio need to consider that his first major speech after announcing his candidacy was to the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), a New World Order group.

In a later article out Saturday, Breitbart discovered that Fox News was trying to push Trump into a corner during the debate... a corner where he would either have to be badly embarrassed or would have to violate debate rules to defend himself. The debate organizers believed he would violate debate rules and put a plan in place to escort him from the stage. Trump's instincts are good and he made precisely the right decision to stay away from the Fox debate. [Fox News Moderators Planned to Escort Donald Trump Off Debate Stage If He ‘Broke Rules’]

The “sleepers” submitted questions via Google and they were selected as among the best questions. Each would ask their question, on camera, during the debate. If you believe these questions were the best of the hundreds of thousands submitted, I sympathize with your lack of knowledge regarding the numerous survival issues facing our nation, from economics and jobs to terrorism. These women and their questions were selected to cost Donald Trump votes in the Iowa caucus scheduled to take place about 90 hours after the debate. His responses would have been easily explainable – and justifiable – but it would take longer than 90 hours to reach caucus voters.

If you watched the debate Thursday night, you saw the two women selected by Fox News and Google. One was an illegal alien Mexican who had overcome poverty and become a successful entrepreneur in Los Angeles... obviously a slam against Trump’s stated desire to lawfully return illegal aliens back to Mexico. Her question focused on how the American economy would lose if illegals like her were all sent home to Mexico. Trump has said if they want to return lawfully, they can get in line and do so. He respects the Rule of Law. Since every dollar illegals contribute to the economy is countered with a $3 cost for social services, it would not be a difficult question to answer.

The second person selected to ask a question was a Muslim woman. She was born in America. She questioned plans to deport all Muslim refugees who cannot be properly vetted. How could the government remove her friends who had done no wrong, she asked, wailing? Again, it was an obvious slam at Donald Trump’s statements that until Muslims can be safely vetted, they should not enter America and those who had entered unlawfully should be sent home.

My answer to her would have been: “Ms. Noor, you say you are a moderate Muslim and that you were born in America. The problem is this: You are evidence of the statement that not all Muslims are terrorists. Unfortunately, another equally true statement is that all terrorist acts around the world are being committed by Muslims – not just in America but in Paris where what you tell me are peaceful Muslims killed 130 innocent victims, Sweden where they are exporting 80,000 violent Muslims, Finland which is exporting 40,000 Muslim refugees, Germany where at the Cologne rail station Muslim men who appear to have no respect for women raped several German women. Since no one from your peaceful moderate Muslim community is willing to oppose the violence you say does not represent your faith, people around the world are doing what is necessary to ensure their safety. I’m sorry if that emotionally distresses you, but whether you awaken each day a happy woman because you are surrounded by friends and family is of less importance to me than having innocent Americans killed by Islamic terrorists because America's ‘moderate Muslim community' cannot or will not reject terrorism.”

Jeb Bush sympathized with her (as one would expect Jeb to do) and there was little discussion of the matter by other candidates. I would also say that Jeb’s solutions do not comply with America’s immigration laws... a lack of respect for the Rule of Law. He forgets that the primary responsibility of the President of the United States is to protect the citizens of this country. To read the immigration law Donald Trump supports and which applies to any group that rejects the Rule of Law that flows from our Constitution, go to this link and scroll down to Chapter 2, Section 212.

It amazes me that the “professional journalists” who run these debates do not ask even the most basic question. Every Republican candidate states he or she is a conservative. I have yet to hear any of them ask any candidate: “You say you are a conservative. How do you define that word... what does it mean when you say you are a conservative?”

Generally speaking, most of the candidates will respond with an answer like “I believe in smaller government,” or “I oppose abortion and same sex marriages” or “We need a strong military” or “I believe in lowering the debt” or “I do not believe in socialized medicine.” These are all issues of concern to conservatives, but issues do not define conservatism. Principles that come from conservative philosophy define conservatives. If you do not know what those principles are, read on... but ask yourself: If you don’t know what conservative principles are, how can you be sure the person you support in political races is really conservative?

Every voter who thinks of him/herself as a conservative should be able to answer that question. How do you define “conservative?” Conservatism is a philosophy that supports very specific principles. It is not about issues – like gun control, abortion, trade, privacy, taxation, the size of government, etc, etc., etc. Principles and issues are not the same thing. If you do not realize that, you are likely part of the reason we keep electing people who say they are conservative but, once elected, prove to be anything but.

Most people confuse principles with issues. Because I am pro-life does not make me conservative. Being an Evangelical Christian does not make me a conservative. Because I believe in the Second Amendment and gun rights doesn’t make me conservative. It means I have conservative views on these specific issues.

Believing in the total Constitution is a conservative principle. Believing in the Rule of Law that flows from the Constitution is a conservative principle. Believing in truth (facts) is a conservative principle. These three things are the primary principles of conservative philosophy. Candidates who do not understand and accept the Constitution in total cannot be conservative. Those who do not believe in the Rule of Law that flows from the Constitution (and practice it) are not conservatives. Those who lie to make their “truth” more believable are not conservatives. How do we know when someone is lying to us? We don’t. We must take the time to look at candidate history: We find facts not in what they say, but in what they do.

Any candidate who opposes the right to bear arms cannot be a conservative because he or she rejects the Constitution. A person who supports the Second Amendment but not other portions of our Constitution is not a conservative. To enter America unlawfully violates the Constitution and any candidate who opposes upholding the dictates of the Constitution as it relates to immigration is not a conservative. To support the legalization of or amnesty for the millions of illegal aliens currently in America is unconstitutional... and anyone who violates the Constitution is not a conservative because it violates conservative philosophy. If they will violate the Constitution in one way, they will violate it whenever they wish.

If you do not know the contents of America’s Constitution, then you cannot say with certainty that you are conservative. If you don’t know the contents of our Constitution, how can you select a conservative candidate? Answer: You cannot.

And that is how all of these cretins who currently serve as elected officials got into office. It is how they fooled so many Republicans who consider themselves conservative. They got elected because millions of people who call themselves “conservative” really don’t know what the word means, don’t understand the very basis of the philosophy – the Constitution – and thus cannot ask candidates questions designed to determine if they are just neo-conservative (pro world government via fascism) or a liberal (pro world government via socialism).

Because someone is a Christian doesn’t make them a conservative. It makes them a person who prefers a Christian view when government policies are legislated. The things Christians have accepted as constitutional for years have nothing to do with the Constitution. Christians have allowed themselves to be bullied into accepting things like the removal of religious Christmas displays from in front of public buildings... that can be found nowhere in the Constitution of the United States.

The Constitution says there shall be freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion. Because Christians are too mentally lazy to take a week and study the laws of the land contained in America’s Constitution, they have allowed Christianity to largely be removed from our society. Indeed, they have allowed the Constitution to be removed from our society.

Because too many Christians would rather spend money on Smart TVs and iPhones rather than banding together to pay the costs of fighting the “remove Christianity from public life” activities of their Godless opponents, we have lost much of our Christian culture. Any atheist or agnostic who is a Constitution-believing conservative strongly opposes these efforts to remove Christianity from our schools and public buildings. Why? Because they are conservative constitutionalists and these things have no constitutional jurisdiction.

You do not get to pick and choose which parts of the Constitution you support. It’s an all or nothing deal. You may disagree with it and you have every right to try and do what’s necessary to Amend the Constitution... that’s quite constitutional. But until the Constitution is Amended, you support what it says in plain English whether or not you agree with it. It is the law of the land and conservatives believe strongly in the Rule of Law. You do not apply “updated” or “worldly” definitions or personal opinions (like Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg) of what the founding fathers might have meant had they been writing that document in 2016 rather than the late 1700s. If you cannot do that, you are probably not a conservative.

When I vote for someone, I am as sure as I can be that person is a conservative because if I listen closely to what they say a problem's solution is, it is either a constitutional answer or it is not. If they hold elected office, I can check their record to see if their deeds match their words. I would have a whole lot more faith in the judgment of American voters if I believed they had read the Constitution before voting for someone who claims to be conservative but who, in reality, is just another politician looking for access to the purse strings of the nation.

Subscribe to NewsWithViews Daily Email Alerts

*required field

Is saving your nation worth a few evenings of your life? This is the most important election of your lifetime and whether you are willing to take a tiny amount of time to be able to identify those who want to enslave you versus those who are truly conservative and dedicated to freedom may make the difference in whether you live your life as a free person or in slavery.

As Kelleigh Nelson said in her recent article, Trump is neither Republican or Democrat, neither liberal or conservative. He's just an American who loves his country. He's the best chance we've got of turning the corrupt establishment of Republicans and Democrats upside-down -- and that's why they're working so hard to discredit him.

� 2016 Marilyn M. Barnewall - All Rights Reserved

Share This Article

Click Here For Mass E-mailing

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall began her career in 1956 as a journalist with the Wyoming Eagle in Cheyenne. During her 20 years (plus) as a banker and bank consultant, she wrote extensively for The American Banker, Bank Marketing Magazine, Trust Marketing Magazine, was U.S. Consulting Editor for Private Banker International (London/Dublin), and other major banking industry publications. She has written seven non-fiction books about banking and taught private banking at Colorado University for the American Bankers Association. She has authored seven banking books, one dog book, and two works of fiction (about banking, of course). She has served on numerous Boards in her community.

Barnewall is the former editor of The National Peace Officer Magazine and as a journalist has written guest editorials for the Denver Post, Rocky Mountain News and Newsweek, among others. On the Internet, she has written for News With Views, World Net Daily, Canada Free Press, Christian Business Daily, Business Reform, and others. She has been quoted in Time, Forbes, Wall Street Journal and other national and international publications. She can be found in Who's Who in America, Who's Who of American Women, Who's Who in Finance and Business, and Who's Who in the World.

Web site:





I do not believe Megyn Kelly was the reason Donald J. Trump did not show up for the Fox News debate last Thursday. Though Kelly appears to view herself as an elephant in the Donald’s campaign, I think she is more of a flea on the elephant’s butt.