Phyllis Schlafly endorses Trump; and, More shrill rhetoric from disgruntled conservatives: “a phony, a make believe christian, Adolf Hitler reincarnate”

Phyllis Schlafly endorses Trump [and, More shrill rhetoric from disgruntled conservatives: “a phony, a make believe christian, Adolf Hitler reincarnate”]


[The Sweetheart of the Silent Majority speaks out for The Donald]


Iconic patriot Phyllis Schlafly endorsed Donald J. Trump Friday, as her pick for the President of the United States.

Schlafly made the announcement with Ed Martin, the president of the Eagle Forum, at noon from the St. Louis rally at the Peabody Opera House on Market Street.

“I was born and grew up here, went to school and college in St. Louis and its a great city and I welcome you all, this is the heart of america and I’m glad to meet a great american.
Schlafly, 91, has been a long-time conservative publicist, as well the national leader of the conservative movement since the publication of her best-selling 1964 book, A Choice Not An Echo. She has also been heralded since 1972 as the leader of the pro-family movement, when she led the fight to defeat the Equal Rights Amendment.


In December, Schlafly said that she believed Trump Is ‘Last Hope for America’, noting her severe disappointment in the GOP regarding the betrayal over the $1.1 trillion omnibus bill.

At the time, Schlafly told WND that “this is a betrayal of the grassroots and of the Republican Party. We thought we were electing a different crowd to stand up for America, and they didn’t. We’re extremely outraged by what Congress has done. Nancy Pelosi couldn’t have engineered it any better.” She ended by saying “I think the people are going to react by electing Donald Trump.”

In response to the omnibus passage, Trump released a statement to ABC News saying: “If anyone needs more evidence of why the American people are suffering at the hands of their own government, look no further than the budget deal announced by Speaker Ryan. In order to avoid a government shutdown, a cowardly threat from an incompetent president, the elected Republicans in Congress threw in the towel and showed absolutely no budget discipline.”

“Congress cannot seem to help itself in bending to every whim of special interests. How can they face their constituents when they continue to burden our children and grandchildren with debts they will never be able to repay? Our government is failing us, so we must do something about it. Who knows how bad things will be when the next administration comes in and has to pick up the pieces?”

In response to that statement Schlafly said: “It sounds like Donald Trump is the only one who has any fight in him. He will fight for the issues that we really care about and are very hot at the present time, such as the immigration issue. I don’t see anyone else who’s eager to fight.”


Glenn Beck raising a German ballot to compare Trump to Hitler

A schism is occurring in the conservative movement, with outlets like the National Review, Glenn Beck’s The Blaze, and his associated legion of hosts such as Dana Loesch and Mark Levin descrying Donald Trump as a phony, a make believe christian, and even Adolf Hitler reincarnate.

Yesterday, Glenn Beck came out against other conservative outlets such as The Drudge Report, Infowars and Breitbart for “conspiring and shilling for Trump” after The Drudge Report ran a photoshopped image of Sen. Macro Rubio:


Beck has declared that he won’t even use The Drudge Report anymore, even though his site receives large amounts of traffic whenever Matt Drudge decides to run one of their articles.

Paul Joseph Watson of Infowars said today that Glenn Beck’s media outlet is falling apart, noting that since he began his campaign against Trump in defense of Cruz, the Blaze’s unique visits have halved.

Get AQ Email Updates

10 comments on “Phyllis Schlafly endorses Trump; and, More shrill rhetoric from disgruntled conservatives: “a phony, a make believe christian, Adolf Hitler reincarnate”

  1. There you go again, Tom, sweetening the pot.

  2. Phyllis has just died. RIP.


      ‘Taught and inspired so many to fight the good fight in defense of American values

      [The sweetheart of the Silent Majority]

      Published: 9/5/16

      Phyllis Schlafly, the legendary conservative activist, lawyer and author who strung together a career that spanned seven decades, has died.

      Schlafly founded the Eagle Forum in 1972, a pro-family conservative group focusing heavily on social issues — it has about 80,000 members and, as of this week, Schlafly was still president.

      She was 92.

      “Phyllis Schlafly spent an astounding 70 years in public service of her fellow Americans,” said the Eagle Forum in a statement. “Her focus from her earliest days until her final ones was protecting the family, which she understood as the building block of life. She recognized America as the greatest political embodiment of those values. From military superiority and defense to immigration and trade; from unborn life to the nuclear family and parenthood, Phyllis Schlafly was a courageous and articulate voice for common sense and traditional values.”

      “America has lost a great stateswoman, and we at Eagle Forum and among the conservative movement have lost a beloved friend and mentor, who taught and inspired so many to fight the good fight in defense of American values,” said Eunie Smith, Eagle Forum’s first Vice President in a statement to the Associated Press. “I have personally lost a dear friend of over 40 years.”

      She earned a Bachelor of Arts degree from Washington University in 1944 — her masters from Radcliffe College in 1945 — and a J.D. from Washington University in 1978.

      “Today, Phyllis Schlafly passed away in the presence of her family at her home in St. Louis, Missouri,” the Eagle Forum posted in a statement on its website.

      The group called its founder “an indomitable pro-family grassroots advocate and organizer.”

      “Phyllis Schlafly spent an astounding 70 years in public service of her fellow Americans. Her focus from her earliest days until her final ones was protecting the family, which she understood as the building block of life. She recognized America as the greatest political embodiment of those values. From military superiority and defense to immigration and trade; from unborn life to the nuclear family and parenthood, Phyllis Schlafly was a courageous and articulate voice for common sense and traditional values.”

      Schlafly was a constitutional lawyer, the author of 27 books and a public speaker. Her latest book, from co-authors Ed Martin and Brett Decker, is set to be released on Tuesday. It lays out how GOP nominee Donald Trump is “a surprising conservative choice” for president, the Washington Times reported.

      According to Federal Election Commission reports, a political action committee bearing her name was registered by Ed Martin, the president of the Eagle Forum. It’s called Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle PAC.

      “There will never be another Phyllis Schlafly,” Smith continued. “Today is a day to celebrate her amazing legacy and to remember the profound difference she made in the conduct of American public policy. Thank you, Phyllis. We will not grow weary.”

      Schlafly’s final column ran last Sunday in WND in which she hailed Ronald Reagan’s no-surrender attitude that won the Cold War [see comment below].

      Her longtime friend and former GOP presidential candidate and writer Patrick Buchanan’s recent op-ed praises her new book on Trump [see comment below].

      At 92, Schlafly has a new book out published by Regnery, “The Conservative Case for Trump,” co-authored by Ed Martin of Eagle Forum and Brett Decker. It it, she argues that Trump is an authentic conservative around whom every conservative should rally.

      * * *


        Phyllis Schlafly recalls Gipper’s no-surrender issue that led to end of Cold War

        Donald Trump’s surprise visit to Mexico, where he met the Mexican president and discussed the many contentious issues between our two countries, reminds me of President Reagan’s important trip to Geneva in 1985. Reagan was more than willing to sit down with the Communist leader of the USSR in an effort to build a personal connection between the two men without sacrificing America’s vital interests in the Cold War.

        The 1985 Geneva summit was highly advertised as a potential showdown between Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev, the supposedly reasonable new Soviet leader. When it was over, Americans realized that behind Reagan’s genial affability was a steely determination to protect our country against the threat from Soviet nuclear missiles.

        Just as today’s mainstream media are bent on undermining Trump’s call to put Americans first in our dealings with Mexico, the media of the 1980s (led by ABC’s Sam Donaldson and CBS’ Dan Rather) were overwhelmingly pro-Gorbachev and anti-Reagan in their daily coverage.

        Left-wing celebrities from around the world converged on Geneva to support the media narrative that a stubborn President Reagan was refusing to consider Gorbachev’s reasonable proposals for world peace. Rep. Bella Abzug, actress Jane Alexander and the inevitable Jesse Jackson were giving daily interviews.

        I led a delegation of 25 distinguished women leaders to Geneva to support Reagan and American nuclear superiority. The media didn’t give us much coverage, but President Reagan telephoned me afterward from the White House to thank me for our support.

        Reagan had been elected on a promise to “win” the Cold War against the Communist forces arrayed against America. Before Reagan, our country’s foreign policy was controlled by men like Henry Kissinger, who thought victory was impossible and that his job, as he famously told Adm. Zumwalt, was “to negotiate the most acceptable second-best position” for the United States.

        After three decades of steady deterioration of America’s place in the world, Trump is the first candidate since Reagan who is comfortable using Reagan’s vocabulary of winning. Trump has pledged to make America “win” again, instead of being cheated and outmaneuvered by our adversaries and even our so-called allies.

        Trump’s visit to Mexico recalls Reagan’s trip to Geneva in other ways, too. At both meetings, there was one signature position on which the American refused to budge.

        Reagan’s no-surrender pledge was his unwavering commitment to the Strategic Defense Initiative, that is, to build and deploy a system to shoot down Soviet nuclear missiles headed for our cities. With Trump, it’s his rock-solid promise to build “an impenetrable physical wall” on our southern border.

        Both Reagan’s and Trump’s signature ideas were purely defensive weapons to which no country could have any legitimate complaint. Reagan’s SDI was a non-nuclear weapon whose only function was to destroy or deflect incoming nuclear missiles.

        Reagan stuck to that non-negotiable position at the summit with Gorbachev the following year in Reykjavik, Iceland. As we now know, that’s when Gorby realized he could never win an open competition with the United States, so that his “acceptable second-best position” was the dissolution of the USSR over the next five years.

        Likewise, Donald Trump’s wall is not a provocative, but a neighborly idea to stop the rampant illegality that harms both nations along the U.S.-Mexico border. With no legitimate objection to erecting a fence, wall or other physical barrier between our two countries, Mexico should be grateful for Trump’s leadership and even agree to help pay for it.

        The value of a wall begins with stopping “murderers” and “rapists” from freely entering and re-entering our country with impunity, as Trump mentioned when he announced the start of his campaign last year, but it doesn’t stop there. Felony assault by motor vehicle is another deadly crime that seems to be rampant by illegal aliens driving recklessly without the licenses or insurance law-abiding Americans take for granted.

        The wall would also stop the plague of heroin that has exploded during the last few years of the Obama administration. Deaths from heroin overdoses surpassed deaths from car crashes last year and will hit a new record this year. Most U.S. heroin is delivered by Mexicans working for the drug cartels.

        Of course, most Mexican immigrants are not murderers, rapists, drunk drivers or drug dealers. But even the good, hardworking people who come here from south of the border, both legally and illegally, have such low education and skills that they can’t survive economically without massive public subsidies to provide for the care, food, shelter, health care, education and welfare of their children.

        Voters finally have the opportunity to choose a president who will make America first by securing our border and ending one-sided trade deals that favor foreign workers rather than our own. Trump’s strong stance in his meeting with the Mexican president demonstrates that Donald Trump is the “choice, not an echo.”


        Pat Buchanan praises Phyllis Schlafly’s latest book, cheering on the Donald

        In 1964, Phyllis Schlafly of Alton, Illinois, mother of six, wrote and published a slim volume entitled “A Choice Not an Echo.”

        Backing the candidacy of Sen. Barry Goldwater, the book was a polemic against the stranglehold the eastern liberal establishment had held on the Republican nomination for decades.

        “A Choice” sold 3 million copies.

        Schlafly went on to lead the campaign to derail the Equal Rights Amendment, which, with 35 states having ratified, was just three states short of being added to our Constitution.

        Pro-ERA forces never added another state. Phyllis, who at 20 was testing weapons at a munitions plant in World War II, shot it dead.

        At 92, the founder of Eagle Forum has a new book out, published by Regnery. “The Conservative Case for Trump,” co-authored by Ed Martin of Eagle Forum and Brett Decker, argues that the Donald is an authentic conservative around whom every conservative should rally.

        Yet, in making their cogent case, Schlafly and her co-authors raise questions that today bedevil the movement.

        What does conservatism mean in 2016? Upon what ideas and issues, principles and policies, do conservatives still agree?

        “In my father’s house there are many mansions,” the Bible tells us. So it is in the house divided that is the American Right.

        Each of the chapters in “The Conservative Case for Trump” is devoted to Donald Trump’s stand on a major issue of the campaign. And on most of the issues selected, almost all conservatives agree.

        Trump believes Antonin Scalia is the gold standard for Supreme Court justices and federal judges, and that among the indispensable cures for decrepit and failing public schools is competition from private, religious and charter schools.

        A businessman and builder, Trump has confronted the onus of federal over-regulation that stifles enterprise and kills jobs. With most conservatives, he believes in a U.S. military second to none.

        Some Republicans, however, part with Trump on his contempt for political correctness, his refusal to observe strictures on debate laid down by our ruling elites and his rejection of their claims to moral authority with his airy dismissals of their demands for apologies.

        Part of Trump’s populist appeal is that, by his rebellious stand, he appears to challenge the very legitimacy of the regime. Thus those most disgusted with the establishment cheer him loudest.

        On immigration, Trump shares the alarm of a Middle America that sees its country being irretrievably altered by an invasion from across our border. He has no hesitancy in urging tough methods to secure the borders and send back those who disrespect our laws.

        This offends the sensibilities of many Republicans. And, indeed, it contradicts a core dogma of the “conservatism” preached at the Wall Street Journal.

        Years ago, when some of us first took up the border crisis, the Journal, under editorial page editor Robert Bartley, called for a new five-word constitutional amendment – “There shall be open borders.”

        The Journal anticipated John Kerry who just told the graduating class at Northeastern University, “You are about to graduate into … a borderless world.” Is John Kerry a Wall Street Journal conservative?

        Chapter two of Schafly’s book deals with Trump’s stance on the trade deals of recent decades – NAFTA, MFN for China, the South Korea deal and, the daddy of them all, the TPP.

        Chapter title: “Rotten Trade Deals.” Yet, all of these trade deals had the support of the Party of Bush I and Bush II.

        Trump has spoken out against crusades for democracy, nation-building abroad and unnecessary wars – especially Iraq in 2003.

        And what was the official “conservative” stand on Iraq in 2003?

        William F. Buckley’s National Review attacked the libertarian and traditionalist right that opposed invading Iraq on such flimsy pretexts as “unpatriotic conservatives” who “hate their country.”

        “This is a binary election,” John Bolton is quoted in Phyllis’ book. “[N]ot voting” for Trump is “functionally … a vote for Hillary.”

        Yet that is where some conservative and neocon columnists and scores of foreign policy veterans of the GOP, and ex-Presidents Bush I and II, and 2012 GOP candidate Mitt Romney are heading.

        Three of Trump’s rivals for the nomination – Ted Cruz, Jeb Bush and John Kasich – who held up their hand and pledged to support the nominee, appear about to dishonor their pledge.

        But what is conservative about rendering aid and comfort to the presidential ambitions of Hillary Rodham Clinton?

        As for the issues on where the right is split, interventionism is born of Wilson and FDR; noninterventionism is of Taft, Ike and Reagan.

        Free trade as dogma comes out of the Party of Wilson and FDR, not the Party of Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt.

        Ike sent a general to secure the border and send illegal immigrants home. Yet self-described conservatives like the Bushes and McCains join hands with the Clintons and Obamas to call for amnesty.

        “The Conservative Case for Trump” is a splendid little book by the first lady of American Conservatism.

        The Hillarycons now owe it to us to make their case.

  3. Like communism, save for tinpot dictatorships, conservatism, per se, fell with the end of the Reagan era. It had a brief, albeit reprise in 94 but that ended up in baffling chaos and the re-election of a serial philander to the White House only two years later.

    For a fascinating narrative of why Catholics have failed as miserably as conservative GOP hacks to have made a dent in American culture in the last 60s years.

    • conservatism, per se, fell with the end of the Reagan era

      Heh. Jones has it falling with the 50’s anti-communist movement, and he puts Phyllis in with those who got co-opted by the CIA. OK. (I haven’t finished the radio show, but heard several of Jones’ points, including his belief that Vatican II was CIA psy-ops.) I like Jones. I read Fidelity in the early 90’s. He didn’t always get his facts straight, but he was right on with Medjugorje and chariswhackos. I think he gets along with John Vennari, although Jones was always vehemently anti-SSPX.

      Back to the anti-Communists. Yes, our gov’t was in constant warfare with the commies, as they were with us. We probably did a lot of bad things. The question is, can a decent Catholic, like I assume Phyllis was, actually participate in politics and government, or is it so tainted that none of us can rise to the level of effecting morally upright policies? If so, then we are done. Kaput. Go home and pray you don’t get visited by the gestapo.

      There is an extreme brand of the anti-anti-Communist, and they don’t like Schlafly. Here’s a link: Re Schlafly:

      NOTE: Eagle Forum is an NGO in Special Consultative Status with United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC). [UN/NGO Database]

      Schlafly belongs to the Merovingian Bloodline which claims direct descent from Jesus Christ. [See: The Rosicrucian Connection] Prior to her marriage to Fred Schlafly, Phyllis Schlafly was Phyllis Bruce Stewart, making her a blueblood of both the Bruce and Stewart lineages. Phyllis Schlafly’s genealogy appears in the Parson’s Technology Genealogy Online: …

      This site, run by fallen-away evangelicals (if I have my facts straight) has the “dirt” on all the folks of the right. I think (not willing to do a search tonight) they put Pat Buchanan (whom Jones indicted in the radio show as having been co-opted by the anti-commies) in the bad camp because of his SMOM membership (Knights of Malta). Yep – then he’s a murderous CIA insider just like Bill Casey. OK.

      I once read this watch.pair site and more, trying to get to the bottom of it all. There’s lots of good info on Rockefeller and his minions, but the rest looks like guilt by association — association with supposedly bad organizations. Good luck in resolving who’s who. The bottom line is, everybody is tainted except for people (the authors) with whom I don’t want to be associated — much like the JBS.

      If I get time, I’ll listen to the rest of the radio show.

      • Yeah, I don’t buy the claim that the CIA was substantially involved in Vatican II. I do know that intel agencies monitor the Vatican and have going back for a long, long time. I read that he OSS was involved with Pius XII’s approval in a plot to assassinate Hitler and then turn the Wehrmacht into an ally to take out the USSR. Like all these tales, there may be here or there some element of accuracy but it is impossible to know.

        Anyway, the CIA was beaten like a redheaded stepchild by the KGB, time and again. And it was fortunate that the KGB wasn’t half as effective as its fans suggest.

        Phyllish Schlafly was a prodigious Catholic warrior, even if she did misperceive where to direct loyalty – if even THAT is true.

        Jones has a prodigious imagination and did an excellent job with the Medj and on the ethnic cleansing the “elites” performed against ethnic Catholic neighborhoods. His theory on that I think is worthy of further study.

        Nevertheless, it is a fruitless task to try to determine who done what, when unless hard evidence is available.

        On that, Jones’ huge tome on the jewish revolutionary spirit does stand out as a bona fide classic of supremely serious scholarship.

  4. I’ve been watching some of the live streaming of the pre-inauguration festivities today. After the wreath laying and the concert at the Lincoln Memorial, Trump spoke to a group of his benefactors. He was speaking about various family members and Reince Priebus and others who were important to his successful campaign. He spoke about Mrs. Schlafly for a few minutes during this speech. Perhaps some viewers will look into who she was…

Leave a Reply