Posted on 06/17/2013 12:57:42 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Via the Examiner, a short but noteworthy clip insofar as it exposes a potential fault line between Cruz and Rand Paul. McCain lumps them together as “wacko birds” but I’m not so sure that’s true of Cruz on national-security issues. His alliance with Paul interests me because it strikes me as a personification of the uneasy libertarian/tea-party alliance. The groups overlap heavily on spending issues, and both are deeply suspicious of Obama’s expansion of government. The master stroke of Paul’s drone filibuster was that he found a sweet spot for both, making the philosophical case for due process while humiliating O for having turned into such a hypocrite about it. Even so, no matter how much Paul sometimes likes to pretend that the tea party is synonymous with libertarianism (for his own strategic reasons), various polls show that it just isn’t so. Tea partiers are more socially conservative than doctrinaire libertarians, they’re more likely to support entitlements, and they’re more traditionally Republican on defense/security issues. That’s not to say that they’re not becoming more libertarian — polls lately show Republicans are more skeptical about NSA surveillance than Democrats are, although that’s probably for partisan reasons — but they’re not all Ron Paul fans either. That’s why Rand is usually quick to claim the tea-party label. The more he gets TPers thinking of themselves as allied with him, then theoretically the more receptive they’ll be to his libertarian ideals.
McCain doesn’t seem to understand the difference between them but comparing Paul’s reaction to the NSA revelations to Cruz’s is instructive. Paul’s first instinct was to organize a class-action lawsuit and accuse the NSA of an “extraordinary invasion of [Americans'] privacy.” Cruz, by contrast, says the revelations are “cause for concern” but urges Fox viewers to reserve judgment until we know more about the programs. And from the looks of it here, his chief objection seems to be that this particular administration can’t be trusted with NSA’s surveillance tools in light of the IRS scandal, not necessarily that any administration can’t be trusted with it. He may very well end up joining Paul’s lawsuit, but I suspect that’ll be aimed at impressing libertarians whose votes he’ll need if he ends up running for president someday just as Rand often tempers his own libertarianism in order to impress more mainstream tea-party conservatives. Cruz’s ally, Sarah Palin (who returned to Fox this morning, although she doesn’t speak in this clip) seems to be taking a position similar to his lately. From her speech at the Faith and Freedom Conference on Saturday:
“The scandals infecting this city, they are a symptom of a bigger disease, and it doesn’t matter if it’s a Republican or a Democrat sitting atop a bloated boot on your neck, out of control government, everybody gets infected, no party is immune,” Palin said. “That’s why, I tell you, I’m listening to those independents, those libertarians, who are saying, it is both sides of the aisle, the leadership, the good ol’ boys in the party on both sides of the aisle, they perpetuate the problem.”…
Palin also took on the “pandering, rewarding the rule breakers, still-no-border security, special interest written amnesty bill,” especially ribbing Jeb Bush for his fertility comment yesterday. “I think it’s kind of touchy territory to want to debate this over one race’s fertility over another, and I say that as someone who’s kinda fertile herself.”
Obama didn’t evade Palin’s lashing, either. “Where is our commander in chief?” Palin asked. “We’re talking now more new interventions? I say, until we know what we’re doing, until we have a commander in chief who knows what he’s doing—well, chief, in these radical Islamic countries, aren’t even respecting basic human rights, when both sides are slaughtering each other as they scream over an arbitrary red line ‘Allah ak-bar’—I say, let Allah sort it out.”
I suspect Cruz would agree with every word, and that her former running mate would disagree with most or all of it. (Palin advocated “Cruz control” for Washington in the speech, in fact.) She doesn’t want any more interventions under a strategist as poor as Obama — but she’s not against intervention in principle. She wants America to listen more to the libertarians, but when it comes to the lousy Gang of Eight bill, she rightly opposes it for its weak border security — even though libertarians are famously comfortable with weak borders. None of this is contradictory; most tea partiers would, I take it, agree that America needs more libertarianism while maybe not quite so much as Ron Paul supporters would prefer. The point is, though, there are real differences between Cruz and Rand Paul and I think we’re getting a hint of one in the clip. And the longer the national debate stays stuck on liberty-versus-security issues, the more obvious I think those differences will be.
You got that right. Cruz rates way up there with me but here we go again.
What Gowdy means to say is Congress has been checkmated by a corrupt WH, DoJ and Dem Senate -- while the Vichy GOP have castrated their own.
We are simply amidst a Constitutional crisis where a completely discredited, reptilian WH and DoJ are in charge of investigating its own High Crimes. NOT HAPPENING.
Ya think those capable of critical thought haven't noticed this decades long wholesale sellout?
Nice post.
This disaster and Vichy Republicanism began in earnest with the do-nothing policies and pro-Mexican agenda George W. Bush. The day he purposely allowed hundreds of thousands of Illegal Invaders to march in the streets of LA, Denver, and ChiTown with impunity in 2006 (was it May Day?) was THE day Treason to the US Constitution was waged in the open and Amnesty was de facto officially endorsed.
That’s about it.
It's going to take brass balls and the intestinal fortutude of our Founders to directly take on the Dem-Commie-Statist Machine.
It’s going to take brass balls and the intestinal fortutude of our Founders to directly take on the Dem-Commie-Statist Machine.
You’re exactly right. We’re in bad trouble because I don’t see what needs to be done being done.
That’s right. He’d kick some ass.
BTW-when I was young I read the story of the USS Johnston. What a remarkable story. Those men were beyond brave.
Yes Sir -- the deeds of courage and conviction of the men of the Johnston, Indianapolis, Hoel, etal. during the Battle of Leyte Gulf were awe-inspiring. Considering recent events, it saddens me deeply to know that their great sacrifice may have been in vain.
G S Patton said that in Europe we replaced one bastard {Hitler} with worse bastards {Soviets}.
Those bastards have been on our shores for a long time and now they’re in charge.
Yup. History has proven Patton 110% correct of his suspicions and knowledge of the future. Furthermore, he also knew the State Dept BACK THEN was a corrupt, Commie, treasonous outfit.
Those bastards have been on our shores for a long time and now they’re in charge.
Agree. It's why the UN and State Dept have controlled our international agenda and facilitated the castration of the US Military.
This is why we lose elections.
Here is Bush's home state of Texas 2006...Dallas...
Dallas Tx, 2006.
Emboldened by by Bush's open border free for all, during war time no less, 500,000 illegals and their supporters pushed foreign flags in our faces while making demands and threats..
All this while Bush celebrated Cinco De Mayo up in the White House.
Not one ounce of libertarian in me. I get the points of those against Snowden on our side like Bachmann, Bolton, Cruz and Gaffney. But I agree with West. Spying on citizens is wrong and that is not securing the public. Still Snowden is a loopy Libertarian Ron Pauler.
With respect, may I suggest something to think about? One of the main reasons we have arrived at our present state of affairs with the federal government totally out of control and the Constitution all but meaningless... is that people cling to the notion of politicians being on their side.
Many so-called conservatives were just fine with Bush and the Republicans greatly increasing the power of the executive branch and the intrusiveness of the government's intelligence and security operations. The problem is that long after 9/11 and long after 'the emergency', the power and precedent remains. Now we have a nightmare leftist administration taking those powers and expanding them further. Do you really trust your 'side' to not do the same thing during the next Republican administration? Power corrupts... and each new administration has plunged us deeper into an Orwellian state.
Agree or don't, but this nation has reached the point where we probably cannot restore it through voting. A true conservative has very few, if any, allies in the federal government. Certainly he no longer has a side.
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.