Why is RNC allowing Cruz's bid for president?

"Cruz is so dumb that even though he is a lawyer who knew he was born in Canada, he didn't figure out he was a Canadian citizen until he read it in a newspaper." – Reasonmclucus (Telegraph, U.K.)

A Daily Telegraph blog suggested on April 4 that the "Conservative Republican Movement is Brain Dead."

Such suggestions are nothing new, of course, but the argument's proponents normally become tangled up in their own undershorts and suffer an ignoble end. Not so this post, which got right to the point:

"Neither he nor his supporters seem capable of understanding that he is ineligible to be president because he is a naturalized citizen rather than a 'natural born' citizen as required by the Constitution."

A brief Internet search brings up similar concerns about Obama, expressed in a June 2008 email to Snopes and the Snopes response, the most telling line of which is:

"The fact is, the qualifications listed in the example quoted above are moot because they refer to someone who was born outside the United States. Since Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, they do not apply to him."

Hmm … Ted Cruz was born in Canada, not then a province of America.

The point is, however, the Constitution's "natural born citizen" requirement for the president is no longer a matter of the highest law of the land in America; it's a matter of how you feel about it. If you were from the liberal persuasion and liked what Barack Obama was telling you in 2008 and 2012, you voted for him.

If you are of the conservative persuasion in 2016 and like what Ted Cruz is telling you, you will vote for him. What the Constitution was trying to protect us from no longer matters – because the Constitution no longer matters. It's all about how we "feel" about it. As we all know, in today's culture to deprive us of our constitutional rights to our "feelings" would be, well, unconstitutional.

Quite frankly, it's hard to see how a nation that has descended to this level of historical, cultural and religious ignorance has any hope of leading itself, let alone the less-free-every-year world around it. The great hope of America was limiting government and therefore the damage that it could cause to liberty in the hands of any political party. If conservatives have abandoned that view, then what are we?

I sympathize with fellow conservatives who think that by supporting a man who tells them what they want to hear they are going to retake the government and set America right once again.

I'm just skeptical about how that's going to happen. Will the Supreme Court suddenly be packed with originalists who busy themselves reopening prior cases of judges legislating rather than opining from the bench? Will a change in top bureaucrats brought about by "our guy" as president suddenly reverse the reign of liberal terror inflicted upon the nation during the Obama years? Will the nation's colleges and universities shed their gender confusion and Marxist staff in order to offer a true liberal arts education? Will the military-industrial, global-warming, science in the service of politics agenda suddenly come to an end? Will we be able to choke off terrorists without, while still retaining the freedoms that used to make us America?

Pondering these questions you may arrive at a view similar to my own. The agenda that has brought us here is far more malevolent and intelligently designed than most of us are prepared to admit.

The endgame is in sight: Despite our funny-money wealth and our explosive military power, we are no match for what we are being transformed into. We didn't get to where we are as a nation simply by the leadership of the people we elected president. We got here because we forgot about how the human race came to be in the first place – and lost sight of our final destiny.

Maybe our political agenda isn't the only one in play?

Media wishing to interview Craige McMillan, please contact [email protected].