Posted on 12/15/2014 4:50:59 AM PST by LeoMcNeil
Please don't throw up this ridiculous canard of experience again.
What? Executive experience as a Governor? Not of primary importance.
The most important criteria for President should be a reverence to the United States Constitution.
Again, reverence to the United States Constitution is the most important criteria.
Cruz has repeated shown tremendous respect for our United States Constitution.
I can name a dozen Republican Governors who have no clue about limited government but have tons of Executive experience growing their governments and hence control over the citizenry.
You are probably right. Short of mass civil unrest or worse, it is going to take something other than the normal political process. I don't think that conservatives can take back the GOP from the liberals and we are likely to end up with another Romney type vs. Elizabeth Warren and then a Warren Presidency. One avenue that could shake up everything would be for Cruz and other prominent conservatives in both the Senate and the House to stage a mass defection to form a new party and run new party candidates in 2016.
It is entirely possible that 2016 will be a repeat of 2012. What was interesting about 2012 is that conservatives attacked every single conservative candidate because they were wrong or inconsistent on one or two issues over the course of their careers. The end result was that we ended up with an unlikable candidate in Mitt Romney who signed into law the Massachusetts version of Obamacare, was historically pro-abortion until he decided to run for President, was a supporter of homosexual special rights, wasn’t a Christian and never favored conservative economic policies. How was this better than the mild heretic that Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum or whoever else was?
Equally interesting in 2012 is how much the rank and file didn’t like Romney. Each of the conservative candidates skyrocketed in the polls to pull even with Romney before being eaten alive by other conservative candidates and their minions. I think it could happen again. We can only hope the progressives make the error of allowing Romney, Bush and Christie to run at the same time.
anointed, pushed on us, and admits that he stole the nomination.
(Don't you remember the retroactive rule-changes in the primaries, the "bus incident" at the RNC, or the teleprompter incident?)
Why Cruz over Rand Paul, Scott Walker or some other conservative?>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because Cruz is courageous and true , and very much like Winston Churchill.He once stood all alone.Establishmentarian GOP ridiculed him. They are not ridiculing him now. None of the others have any of that.And the country needs a steadfast man who loves his country deeply, far blacker days are to come.None of the others will be able to hack it.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3237678/posts
Ted Cruz Was Right, Again
The American Thinker ^ | December 16, 2014 | Matthew Vadum
Posted on 16/12/2014 05:56:31 by Cincinatus’ Wife
The usual suspects are attacking Ted Cruz for doing his job.
Republicans and a chorus of conservative commentators are dumping on the sole conservative Republican senator from Texas because–the horror!–he dared to force his Senate colleagues to publicly take sides on President Obama’s shameful extralegal unilateral immigration amnesty.
Apologists for Republican cowardice claim to be upset with Cruz because, as they claim, his parliamentary maneuvers to stymie the amnesty somehow allowed some objectionable Obama nominees to move forward in the confirmation process.
Of course, they’re lying. All Obama nominees are objectionable–remember, our president is a red diaper baby–yet the Senate eventually caves to Obama on more or less all of them............Who really cares if a few bureaucrats who will be approved anyway by the incoming Republican Senate in the new year get to work a few weeks or months early?
What really infuriates namby-pamby Republican senators is that Cruz forced them to take a public stand on the president’s unilateral amnesty. They know that the Republican Party base is mad as hell over the amnesty, and they don’t feel the need to answer to mere hoi polloi. Bought off by the crony capitalist lobby, they support amnesty but don’t want to face the electoral consequences for their betrayal of the American people. Just as Democrats don’t want to get rid of poverty, Republicans in leadership don’t want to stop the amnesty(or get rid of Obamacare, for that matter). They need villains against which to rail.
Just about nobody in the conservative punditry seems to be getting the story right. They are regurgitating an easily digested talking point generated by Democrats and the Senate’s RINO establishment. If it hadn’t been for Cruz,a slew of Obama nominees would still be sucking their thumbs in a state of constitutional limbo,they’d have us believe.
And as usual,they’re wrong about Cruz....
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/12/ted_cruz_was_right_again.html
If there is one single man who can be credited with the destruction of the British Empire, it may very well be Winston Churchill. Yes, his leadership during WWII was magnificent. However, everything he did leading up to the war was a complete and total disaster for his country. I’m not sure we should want a Winston Churchill for America.
As for Ted Cruz his problem is experience. He’s only been in the Senate since 2013. By the time 2016 rolls around he’ll have just as much experience as Obama did. I think the nation is going to be unwilling to accept a nominee with so little experience in the future. You can thank Obama for that.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3237678/posts
Ted Cruz Was Right, Again
The American Thinker ^ | December 16, 2014 | Matthew Vadum
Posted on 16/12/2014 05:56:31 by Cincinatus’ Wife
The usual suspects are attacking Ted Cruz for doing his job.
Republicans and a chorus of conservative commentators are dumping on the sole conservative Republican senator from Texas because–the horror!–he dared to force his Senate colleagues to publicly take sides on President Obama’s shameful extralegal unilateral immigration amnesty.
Apologists for Republican cowardice claim to be upset with Cruz because, as they claim, his parliamentary maneuvers to stymie the amnesty somehow allowed some objectionable Obama nominees to move forward in the confirmation process.
Of course, they’re lying. All Obama nominees are objectionable–remember, our president is a red diaper baby–yet the Senate eventually caves to Obama on more or less all of them............Who really cares if a few bureaucrats who will be approved anyway by the incoming Republican Senate in the new year get to work a few weeks or months early?
What really infuriates namby-pamby Republican senators is that Cruz forced them to take a public stand on the president’s unilateral amnesty. They know that the Republican Party base is mad as hell over the amnesty, and they don’t feel the need to answer to mere hoi polloi. Bought off by the crony capitalist lobby, they support amnesty but don’t want to face the electoral consequences for their betrayal of the American people. Just as Democrats don’t want to get rid of poverty, Republicans in leadership don’t want to stop the amnesty(or get rid of Obamacare, for that matter). They need villains against which to rail.
Just about nobody in the conservative punditry seems to be getting the story right. They are regurgitating an easily digested talking point generated by Democrats and the Senate’s RINO establishment. If it hadn’t been for Cruz,a slew of Obama nominees would still be sucking their thumbs in a state of constitutional limbo,they’d have us believe.
And as usual,they’re wrong about Cruz....
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/12/ted_cruz_was_right_again.html
Winston Churchill did not destrot the Briotish Empire. He sinmply believed in freedom. The USA destroyed the British empire, and got little or no help from Churchill.
I guess you need to study a little more history. The USA is now in the hands of a leftist fascist mob. Fascism was defined historically by Churchill.
Read this:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/barack_obama_the_quintessentia_1.html
Meanwhile folks like you do not know just how bad of a situation we are in. We need a fighter, not a GOP business as usual blighter.Its time to get behind somone who will actually take the liberal fascists out behind the woodshed and whip them with the Constitution.All the ingredients are there to do it, the majority of state governors are Republican. But we have pysychopomps and cockatoos as proposed GOP candidates.
Cruz is actually the only one who can get the job done for the People, whom the GOP disrespects toatally under its present leadership malaise.Out with all of them except Cruz!
Its time to clean shop and roll!
Churchill advocated for war with Germany in 1912 and 1913 and was giddy over the prospect of war in 1914. The world wars didn’t need to happen (they’re really just one war with a 20 year period of armistice) and were the folly of people like Churchill who badly wanted war and adventure.
The Brits in 1914 wanted to prevent Germany from obtaining too much economic and political power. In order to prevent Germany from obtaining said economic and political power, the British Empire was willing to destroy its people and wealth. The end result is that the British won the war with American help but lost their empire. They were still rationing in the mid 50’s. Germany, while destroyed in the second portion of the war, rose to become the leading economic and political power in Europe by the 1970’s.
Churchill advocated for both wars against Germany. I don’t see how we can pretend like those wars didn’t utterly destroy the British Empire, its power and wealth.
he world wars didn’t need to happen>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Six million dead Jews say you are wrong.Go peddle your revisionist history elsewhere.
But for the first world war, the jewish holocaust wouldn’t have happened. The Kaiser would have still ruled Germany (actually the Kaiser only ruled Prussia, Bavaria had its own King) and a nutball socialist like Adolph Hitler wouldn’t have been able to seize power.
I’m not revising history at all, I’m offering a critique of Winston Churchill’s support for war which led to the first world war.
And you likely would not have been born.
Without commenting on the merits of your assertion, I wonder what it has to do with whether Winston Churchill was wise for advocating war with Germany from 1912-1914. What does it have to do with his giddy support for the war adventure while he was in Parliament in 1914.
Enthusiastically spread the word about the “Protest Against Obama Amnesty” rally across America for 2015-01-03 ... Ted Cruz, Jeff Sessions, Mike Lee (et al) will GREATLY appreciate our support ... A great Patriot turn-out WILL encourage the Senate and House GOP to dump McConnell and Boehner ... God Bless America ... Facebook page “Obama Amnesty National Protest : 2015-01-03” ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=680NlRI3v2I ... Thanks to All !!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.