American Thinker and Breitbart Inc. attacked Senator Ted Cruz, Congressman Louie Gohmert, myself, and Glenn Beck earlier today by accusing us of “pandering,” calling us “elitists,” accusing me directly of “helping lawbreakers” and “helping illegals come into our country,” in addition to taking a jab at my appearance on the cover of my forthcoming book. Let’s go through this article. 

While we regular, cash-strapped taxpayers concerned about the well-being of our country stood  on the overpasses Saturday protesting  the total breakdown of our borders, where were a few of our  stalwart conservative spokespeople and politicians? Were they holding anti-illegal immigration  signs  with ‘we the people’  on the National Day of Protesting Against Immigration Reform Amnesty and Border Surge?

I have spent many a weekend going door to door, phone banking, protesting in my day. I figured taking photos, videos, and interviewing people, when given the opportunity, to assess how serious the intensification of this problem truly is, and reporting the desperate need for border security would be my placard. Apparently, according to the American Thinker and Breitbart Inc, I would have been more effective not getting the true story at all. Is it because it was reported on The Blaze?

No. Senator Ted Cruz, Rep Louie Gohmert, Glenn Beck, and Dana Loesch, among others, were in McAllen, Texas meeting with Rio Grande Catholic Charities Director Sr. Norma Pimentel just weeks after her very public visit with Nancy Pelosi. Not to be outdone by the Democrats, photos on The Blaze showed the media stars and politicians preparing food, handing out soccer balls and assisting church groups. Funny how it does not seem to bother them that the rest of us are being forced to pay for transportation, medical care, legal assistance, and housing for the recent surge of illegal aliens coming in droves. Nor do they seem worried about the dangers undocumented illegals pose to the country. If it did, wouldn’t they be with rallying with the protesters, instead of, in St. Paul’s words, partnering “righteousness with lawlessness?”

Had American Thinker or Breitbart Inc reached out for comment prior to running this piece, they would have discovered that this was but one place we visited this trip. I have openly admitted that I disagree with Pimentel’s stance on amnesty. I did so again today on air. I had a terse exchange with a volunteer who disliked my use of the accurate phrase “illegal immigrant.” But to seemingly impugn our characters by suggesting that because Pimentel is pro-amnesty that means we are as well is disingenuous and misleading. We met scores of pastors and volunteers during our visit and not everyone agreed on amnesty but everyone realized that McAllen, Texas, a town without the resources to handle the influx result of Obama’s weak border policy, needed to be met with private charity so as to free up funds for border patrol. The groups with whom we spoke had not received public grants to my knowledge, though there are some charities who have, and I do not support this.

Before the trip, Blaze and Fox News commentator Dana Loesch offered this explanation for her decision to help out at the border even though she is staunchly opposed to illegal immigration.  The feisty liberal-turned-conservative sounds positively out of touch with the very people and issues she purports to champion.

The suggestion from American Thinker and Breitbart Inc that because I used to be a liberal then somehow I’m an impure conservative seems a bit ironic and opposite of our purpose: winning hearts and minds. Is this not the goal? Do I not count because I was a liberal once? So was Andrew Breitbart. These sites also apparently don’t believe that one can be staunchly against amnesty while also being staunchly against government expanding its role beyond border security and defense—exactly what Obama planned to do with the proposition of his $3.7 billion dollar amnesty slush fund. Obama wants to spend our money on what private entities are already doing at no cost to you. I thought supporting private enterprise to prevent public resource drain was conservative? While this has only ever been my entire point, apparently it is not shared by these websites. I shared this on Instagram here.

From The Blaze:

The gospels also implore us to minister and to witness…And the parable of the talents implores us to use that which we have been given by God to do good and glorify his name through our works, which includes using our talents and our platform to serve as good stewards of our fellow man.”

If the issue is Glenn Beck advertising for help with this effort, do they also find it offensive when celebrities promote wounded warriors? Do they find the Salvation Army offensive, when celebrities work with them? I mean, isn’t the whole point of charity awareness and to raise funds to help?”

Loesch, who will be accompanying Beck to the border, said she understands the frustrations of those who were angered by the event, saying: “I get it. You feel like you cannot take it anymore from this administration. You feel overwhelmed. Every day there’s a new headline: the NSA, the IRS, the EPA, the NEA, the BLM, the DOJ, the ICE, Benghazi, voter fraud, healthcare.

The list goes on and on and you feel persecuted, and your patience for everything has run out. Fam, I feel you.”

You can find my monologue here.

This elitist ‘I feel your pain’ rhetoric would not matter or even register on the relevancy meter if these so-called conservative provacateurs did not put up a pretense of representing ‘we the people.’ Their books, speaking engagements, television appearances and radio shows have made them a ton of money. As a token of their gratitude, shouldn’t they stop all the pandering and support the general consensus of the people—you know, the ones who made them rich and famous? If these are our spokespeople, it is no surprise the Left continues to win the war on America.

Not sure how I am “elitist” or how making fun of my equal frustration is worthy of being run as a news piece at Breitbart Inc. I’m also not sure why these sites felt the need to mention wealth four separate times, which seems more Occupy than conservative, but I’m not a rich person. I can’t speak for Cruz, Beck, Gohmert, Rep. Weber, Ted Nugent, Aleveda King, and others that these websites are attacking, but I’m not amongst them in such terms.

Loesch’s comparison of helping lawbreakers at the borders with helping veterans is akin to Sue Smith of a Virginia group LUCHA Ministries, saying “immigrants add a lot to our community” and these protests are “a sad picture of who we really are.” Smith knows Americans are not against legal immigration and Loesch knows helping veterans is vastly different than helping illegals come into our country unimpeded.Senator Cruz also walked the fence with doublespeak stating, “These children, while they’re here, we need to care for them, we need to demonstrate American values, but it’s critical as well that we need to uphold the rule of law.” That ship has sailed, Senator Cruz. Here in my neck of the woods in Augusta County, Virginia the Shenandoah Valley Center is already housing the minors with signs that read, “Welcome Refugee Children.” As usual, no one bothered to tell county residents.

This is really misleading and I have to ask why my words would be twisted in such a fashion at risk of purposefully hurting veterans? I work with the Purple Heart Foundation, among other charitable groups, and was specifically asking if the purpose of publicizing charity (and gave examples of charity including Mercury One’s disaster relief in OK, NJ, Salvation Army, prison ministries, etc) was to bring awareness or “self aggrandizement” of the charity founders? I’m also unclear as to why I’m being compared to an apparent progressive with whom I’m unfamiliar, unless to taint me by wild association. Hardly journalism.

That is what makes Beck and company’s goodwill trip to the border so reckless. The illegal surge, disguised as a “humanitarian crisis,” is affecting real people in real towns across the nation. Citizens with limited resources and no multi-million dollar relief funds are going before country supervisory boards to voice their objections. What the people “get” is that the Obama administration, in total collaboration with their government-controlled media, threw children in front of the camera knowing full well it would clear the way for teen and adult illegals to cross the border. Now they have to deal with nearby facilities being used to house illegals with medical, legal, social and psychological problems. And all this happened without their knowledge or consent. Talk about “Un-American.”

This is where I am confused because the entire purpose, not just of Mercury One, but other private charities, was to provide relief so that border towns like McAllen wouldn’t be drained financially. For instance, as I shared here, a McAllen doctor provided a medical truck and volunteered his time, along with his colleagues, to provide round the clock medical care at one charity location so that local hospitals wouldn’t be overrun and taxpayers stuck with illegal immigrants’s medical bills. Apparently this is wrong and the government should be doing this? That’s the message that American Thinker and Breitbart Inc are sending with this attack on private charity.

So ifthese [sic] high-profile conservatives think they will keep raking in the votes and money while playing both sides they are delusional. Heart-tugging photo-ops,slick marketing, savvy, sexy book covers and courting the Tea Party rank-and-file may have worked up until now but anyone who lends his name or face to this government-sponsored invasion of illegals could soon be on the outs with those of us standing on bridges.

Well, I’m not “raking in the money” (why another mention of wealth?) off illegal immigration and I’m unsure why the need to take a petty potshot at my book cover (I’m a woman in a dress on the cover of a book. Should I be in a burka?), nor am I, Cruz, Gohmert, Beck, Nugent, King, or anyone else “lending our name to an invasion of illegals” by trying to render government obsolete in ministering to border communities so that resources are available for security.

This is what I said earlier today about this:

“You could be hardcore against amnesty, but the government will not allow the people to be deported,” she continued. “In the meantime, this is the choice… It is either public money, tax dollars, and we bankrupt border towns. Or it’s private charity. These people are on the side of government – that’s not conservative […] “For those people saying, ‘Well, going down there and giving someone a sandwich is a welcome wagon,’ no,” Dana concluded. “Let’s take two steps back here. The welcoming party is this Administration creating this problem. The welcoming party is [Rep.] Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) going to the border and saying she’s for amnesty. The welcoming party is Congressman John Lewis (D-GA), who said last week he doesn’t believe in borders. If people want to have frustration, I’m mad too… but… sandwiches didn’t cause the problem. It’s the false beacon of amnesty that caused the problem.”

I didn’t tell Barack Obama to not deport illegal immigrants. I wish he would. But he isn’t. And according to my border patrol sources—and Sen. Cruz today on my radio program—they are disheartened that the admin won’t allow them to do their jobs. Obama et al. have made it to where the only two choices left are to spend public funds doing what private charities are doing, or let private charity do charity and keep government in its Constitutional role: security and defense. As a conservative, I’m for the latter.

More reading:

When Evans attempts to delegitimize private charity, whether due to bigotry, jealousy, or abject stupidity, she toils the ground for the next act of government compassion in its absence.  And while Evans may note that Cleveland referred to charity given to “fellow citizens”, the concept that nature abhors a vacuum stands. Where individuals fail to act independently of the government, the government naturally steps in to act.

Evans advocates a retreat from the battlefield and an acquiescence to a big government solution, even if she doesn’t realize it.

If you choose to support conservatism by standing on an overpass with a sign, then by all means, do so. But realize that there is a need for conservatives who are willing to fight the battles on the ground, and let them do it. Because if they don’t, recognize that your posterboard and sharpie fund will be next on the block when the government takes over the charity for us.

*To add: while there I saw Beck hand a check to border patrol. Can’t talk about that because he’d likely be accused of “self aggrandizing.” But I will.

**I don’t want to make “detainment easier.” I want them to go home. This is why instead of attacking Sen. Cruz, I’m cheering his legislative efforts to solving this problem and making that happen, instead of just dealing with it.

Cue Retracto