Here’s someone we haven’t heard from — a blast from the past. Long time Atlas readers remember our own political theorist, Dr. Nancy G. She’s back with her “Two Cents.” Dr. G. dissects and makes sense of the post-caucus cacophony.
Dr. Nancy’s Two Cents
Hi, it’s been a while but there’s something on my mind and I just have to say it. Like a lot of conservatives, I’ve been vacillating between our illustrious GOP hopefuls and I had, up to this point, found Cruz, Trump and Carson most desirable. Trump is larger than life with crossover appeal and has brought the importance of our sovereignty in the immigration debate to the forefront. This is something no one else was really able to do. Cruz is brilliant, and a serious Christian who can articulate conservative positions with aplomb. Dr. Carson is a multi-talented and well rounded pediatric neurosurgeon who would do us proud, I believe.
> In the last few days, we’ve heard how the latter may have been damaged by the Cruz camp who took advantage of a break in Carson’s activity, reported by CNN as a likely campaign-ending move, to lure his supporters and thereby win the Iowa caucus. Setting aside the fact that the mainstream media first reported this and that the Rubio campaign may have acted in a similar manner, it was admirable that Cruz took responsibility with a personal apology instead of blaming staffers and letting others’ heads roll.
> While it is doubtful that Carson would have done appreciably better, critics continue to take shots at the now front-runner Cruz. Donald Trump has called for a re-do as the fellow he now describes as “fantastic” was defrauded by Cruz who “stole” it. The voter violation cards sent out were insult to injury and Trump continued to tweet complaints calling for disqualification. This was a far cry from the earlier respect he had shown Cruz during debates when he was far ahead.
What was not aired with all this post-caucus coverage, not even by Rush Limbaugh, was side by side soundbites and clips that contrasted Trump’s protests of fraud against the “fantastic” doctor with his previous awful descriptions of Carson weeks earlier. He seemed to affirm the man had been lying about his personal history regarding the claims as “crap” and how Iowans were “stupid” to believe him. The media were trying to smear Carson as dishonest at the time, and Trump piled on saying he had “pathological disease”, and he doesn’t “want a person that has pathological disease. I don’t want it”. He even likened such disease as being similar to a child molester. Carson was soon asked about this derision and the doctor refused to respond in kind because he is a class act.
> For my part, I have long admired Dr. Carson and that unpleasantness saddened me. I’d contributed more to his campaign than anyone else’s in my lifetime, and he did not deserve to have his character assailed. That said, the fuss over the Iowa caucus has changed the way I view this primary season. I was never disturbed by Trump’s brashness and lack of a filter. Name-calling and profanity would not deter me. These were his unpolished assessments of situations and people. I thought he was honestly trying to make the country great again and if the truth hurt, so be it. He brought attention to tough issues and faced them head on unapologetically and without political correctness. However, if you can go from deriding Dr. Carson to calling him a fantastic guy so you can now deride Cruz who you used to approve of, then we really can’t invest in what you say. This is beyond caprice or flip-flopping. He doesn’t express concern or disappointment when he turns on these people. They are now awful. Cruz becomes a nasty guy no one can get along with and a defrauding trickster because he’s from “Canada”. Ironically, Trump’s 2011 birther claims in regard to President Obama never seemed to matter because his mother was clearly American. That dog wouldn’t hunt so the president set the precedent for Cruz, paving his way despite Trump’s saying he was going to get his “ass” sued off.
> The point is, this latest tussle has highlighted the candidates’ characters. While no one comes out perfectly, we’ve begun to see how the conservative base can finally get a candidate they believe in and not another RINO. It’s being said the Republican establishment’s new pick is Rubio. He’s actually pretty impressive, but when I met him months ago I felt he was too enthusiastic about a form of amnesty. It wasn’t just a position he held, but a passion. Next. Trump’s reckless statements and tweets are not sitting well with me, nor are the bloody bites the candidates are taking out of each other. Perhaps not putting their disagreements to rest has resulted in Cruz not getting the expected bump going into New Hampshire that would be expected from the victor in the Iowa caucus. I thought we needed an outsider to save us from the corruption and malaise of the huge government machine, but I’m beginning to welcome someone with the right kind of experience. That would be one with an admirable voting record who’s been in the trenches, and didn’t go along to get along. Outsiders are refreshing, but Trump has illustrated you don’t know what you have if you really don’t know what they’ll do. I think it’s clear we know what Ted Cruz will do. Because of this, he has become my front-runner. Since we’ve had McCain and Romney, it’s hard to imagine a real conservative as the Republican candidate, but I have a dream. Rest assured, however, upon waking I’ll get behind whoever is nominated.
God bless America!