Skip to comments.Ted Cruz: I stand with Rand Paul against Chris Christie’s attacks
Posted on 07/29/2013 11:47:13 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
He’s light on specifics here about the pros and cons of the NSA program as he sees them, but any time three serious contenders for 2016 are in a scrum over national security and civil liberties, it’s blogworthy. More than that, it’s blogworthy because the Paul/Cruz Senate partnership is to some extent a proxy for the tea-party/libertarian partnership generally. It won’t go on forever, but it’s fascinating while it lasts. I won’t bore you with rehashing why I think Cruz is more a tea partier than a true blue libertarian; read these two posts if you care, or read Nick Gillespie for the libertarian take on why Cruz doesn’t really belong in the movement. Wherever you think Cruz lies on the ideological spectrum, though, he’s a shrewd judge of where his base stands on the issues. And in this case, he’s right in thinking that they Stand With Rand too.
In fact, before you watch the clip below, go back and watch this very short clip of Cruz on “Fox & Friends” in mid-June, after Edward Snowden’s PRISM revelations. He was asked what he thinks of NSA surveillance — and his response was basically noncommittal. He said the program is “cause for concern” but cautioned that we shouldn’t rush to judgment; his main worry about the program seemed to be that Obama might abuse it to target his political enemies. By contrast, Rand Paul had already announced a week before that he hoped to sue the NSA program into oblivion. Why is Cruz firmly with Rand now when he wasn’t before? Could be that the accumulation of leaks about what the feds are doing has finally driven him firmly into the libertarian camp, but the most damaging stuff that Snowden had — the details of government spying on Americans — had already leaked by the time of his F&F appearance. Paul, as I said, had already seen more than enough to demand a class action lawsuit against the feds by that point.
What you’re seeing here, I think, is Cruz executing the opposite of Paul’s 2016 strategy. Paul’s really a doctrinaire libertarian who’s inched towards mainstream righties on some issues (most notably immigration) because he knows he needs a broader coalition to be viable for the nomination. Cruz is really a tea partier who’s inched towards doctrinaire libertarianism on some issues (most notably drones and the NSA) because he recognizes TPers have become more libertarian and because he’s hoping to pick up Paul’s supporters in the primaries if/when he emerges as the right-wing choice against the establishment. It’s a smart strategy. Expect Rubio and Scott Walker to become more libertarian-friendly over the next year or two also. Click the image to watch.
I stand with Rand a hell of a lot more than I will stoop for the Rinos...
Moral clarity. I wonder how it will be received?
IMO, at the time of the leak, there was not enough info to make rash claims of NSA recklessness. Though, I think everyone with half a brain suspected it. Subsequently, no one has cited a single case where the massive program had stopped a single attack.
I don’t see where Cruz has shaded his conservatism whatsoever. Bob
Hopefully, they’re basing their position on the Constitution and not how the electorate is thinking.
The 4th amendment forbids warrantless searches and seizures.
The 1st amendment forbids abridging the right to petition for redress of grievance....an impossibility with secret courts, secret recordings, and secret meetings.
~ Don’t Stoop for RINOs, Stand with Rand!
I’d LOVE to watch the liberals s**t themselves when these two open up a salvo of a$$-whoopin’ on Hitlery or whoever the Dhimm’s coronate.
Cripsy cream, another me me too credit political whore, just using the R label to make himself look more attractive to business instead of utter retard populist liberals... but still a populistas coward in the end.
I’ve always said Cruz/Palin...but I would be willing to go with a Cruz/Paul....I would not want Paul to be President, but it might be a means of getting CRUZ in....
He doesn’t care about reception.
We are so used to wimpiness. He is not a wimp.
I am primarily a Social Conservative and Secondly a National Security one. I did not trust the old wackjob Ron Paul and I do not trust his younger son either. Except for very limited issues (like protecting 2nd Amendment rights), I have little love for Libertarians. It is my belief than Ron Paul’s running in 2012 caused the nomination of Romney...the worst possible candidate (except for Ron Paul). So, although I enjoy Cruz’s spunk, IF he supports Paul...he will not get any support from me.
Now that being said, I dislike the RINO Christy as much or more than Rand Paul. I do not consider him to be Republican - he is some form of Democrat light beer. However, I do not consider Paul to be Republican either...he is a Libertarian and should run for election as such and stay OUT of GOP races.
The ONLY reason I am upset about the NSA scandal, etc. is that President Obama has not used this power to protect national security...he has used it to suppress and spy on conservatives and political foes - an absolute abomination. This is what upsets me - not the power - the abuse of the power.
There will be much gnashing of teeth, pulling of hair and rending of garments....... the tears of rage and fear will taste like Frangelico or Dubonnet to me...
Rand and Cruz are both way better than anything we have had in the recent past.
I know. But I care how the American people will vote.
Wake up. The 47% won and is growing and the media still supports them. I wish we could get a conservative too but it ain't gonna happen.
Regardless of the “MSM reported” majority’s liking progressivism, I will be with Cruz, Rand and Palin.
Now to redress and overcome the liberal media, the liberal’s graft, the liberal’s vote buying and the liberal’s vote fraud, regrettably is likely to require re-shuffling the deck and let the liberals have their NE and West coastal empires, while flyover country regains honest common sense government and liberty our Forefathers envisioned.
If Americans won’t vote for a strong character who works solely to protect and defend the Constitution, which they have not had a chance to do in 30 yrs there’s not much that a media scmoozer can do to fix that
Go, Ted, go! Get’em!
The Three who may well keep us free are Rand, Cruz and Lee. Let sarah get into the Senate and I will add Palin to the list (maybe in front of the list). Folks, we need more like these in the Senate and House! Let us work hard to fight the macine politics of yore and get more like them in office—it is our only hope to keep from the Obama monarcy in the making. We must unite and place a new wave of people into Washington DC.
What can we do?
1. Find people who are right of center (Tea Party) who are running or planning to run.
2. Support them over RINOs and Old Hat people with no guts.
3. Research them so they are the best we got!
4. Send money, give time, write letters and do all we can to make sure they win!
I like Rand, but he seems quirky to me. I love Ted, and I’m glad that he is the type to wait for facts to be gathered before he makes his decisions. If Ted is a RINO, EVERYONE is a RINO.
One thing I don’t like about Rand is the fact that he surgically tears apart the Amoeba’s nominees, then votes FOR them. Ridiculous. Bob
How about one of our GOP governors? They’re solving problems and improving their states. Plus, they have executive experience.
Crispy creme is a rino plain and simple!
Are these “PHONEY POOLS OF BLOOD” where DOJ-supplied weaponry (via Fast and Furious) was used by drug cartels to murder 16 people at a Birthday Party, including 14 children?
For all their crying about illegal immigrants, the fact is neither Eric Holder nor Barack Obama have any respect for Mexican citizens. LOOK at these pictures and tell me WHO is phoney.
“I stand with Rand Paul against Christie’s attacks”
Well, better late than never I guess.
We may stand a chance as a Republic
Now we are talking. Had to tweet this one...
I don’t think Rand Paul would be a strong nominee; I question whether he can even be reelected in KY in 2016.
Sounds ike nearly all of them
Cruz is no RINO!
Moreover, it seems part and parcel of a pattern, dating back to Christie's embrace of President Obama last fall (just prior to the presidential election) and his trashing of congressional Republicans, just a little later.
All in all, I believe Rand Paul comes out looking okay after this little dustup, whereas Chris Christie appears a bit churlish...
The Senate is sure benefiting from greater diversity....
Thank God for Cruz, Rand Paul, Palin, Mike Lee, Louie Ghomert, to name a few Conservatives out there. Let's work with them for US, the USA.
To me, the whole idea behind America is that you limit the government's power so that the damage which can be done by the corrupt and incompetent is also limited.
Giving power to government and trusting that it will only be used for good purposes by wise and freedom-loving men is a dangerous delusion.
I guess your idea of fighting terrorism is cataloging Facebook posts at home, and pissing away lives/treasure in decades of futile nation building abroad.
In that case, I suggest you shut up. And the next time you feel inclined to slander freedom-loving Americans, why don't you go have dinner at Golden Corral with Michael Moore, or something else you'd find equally enjoyable.
If I might ask, in your break-down of social then security, where does the Constitution come in? From your statement, in re: to the NSA usage, I’m presume after security?
So, for Rand (as Paul is RIGHT out for ya), whom seems to (currently) solidly voice/vote 90+% Constitutional, you’d more cut off your nose for spite?! Then cast the same aspirations upon those whom he would associate?
Boy, if us (L) are ‘wacky’, I don’t know what (some) ‘Conservatives’ can be labeled...
I see that attitude on display in miniature every time I go through an airport security line: kid glove treatment for obvious Muzzies least they feel offended about being "profiled"; third degree for random citizens right up to an including explosives tests on a paperback set of C.S. Lewis books which I recently got caught trying to smuggle on-board in my carry-on luggage. I kid you not.
Cruz would make a great president as well as a great looking president.
“where does the Constitution come in?”
Libertarians DO NOT correctly interpret original intent of the Founders on many moral/social issues. They mostly get the 2nd Amendment right...but little else.
No, I do NOT trust anyone with “primarily” Libertarian views to hold office much more than I do a liberal democrat. The Paul’s (father and son) are LIBERTARIANS not Republicans.
“Giving power to government and trusting that it will only be used for good purposes by wise and freedom-loving men is a dangerous delusion.’
ANY government is giving up some freedoms to protect other things. All government is a risk. However, anarchy IS NOT an option.
So, I am willing to take a calculated risk in giving certain powers to those in charge....but safeguards need to be in place.
We the People already gave up certain Freedoms/Liberty when the Constitution was created. I don’t recall giving further consent, per C. Amendment, to strip away our 4th A. Rights. I sure as sh!t didn’t give the authority to any 3rd party.
Yet, with the NSA, TSA, etc., no recent terrorism threat/act was prevented *BY* gov’t. Even in your ‘best case scenario’, you’re calculated risk has been for naught.
For someone who believes us (L) cannot interpret the Constitution per the Founders (which one(s), I can not be certain you are referring), I think this one here can read and understand the 4th quite well, thank you very much. To brutalize Washington, I’m not adding any more wood to the fire ‘master’; in fact, the flames are too big already.
One of the strengths of the liberals is ... they are united, no matter what. Conservatives/Republicans, are divided. Each believes in what they have decided will benefit them personally. The people are left with no desirable candidate and direction available.
Sarah is the only one that makes sense and I trust. Only she may not run. MBF says the powers that be in the Republic party told her they would not support her ... which is why she announced the decision not to run. Maybe so, maybe No. We do see she is attacked, blocked, ridiculed, constantly on going.
As for me and my house we will seek God and pray for the will of God. Woe unto those that do evil, intend evil, and spread evil. God gives the people what we declare we want.
(IE when God’s people wanted a King like the other peoples had. God warned them of the tyranny of a KING.)
We never seem to learn. God have mercy on America.
MBF —my best friend
“Sarah is the only one that makes sense and I trust.”
I pretty much agree that Palin is the best possible...because I believe she is a balanced conservative...of course I could be wrong. She is certainly a better pick than Ryan ANY day.
I have reached the point where I do not really trust any politicians anymore. So, I would describe Sarah as being the one I least distrust. :-)
“I dont recall giving further consent, per C. Amendment, to strip away our 4th A. Rights.’
The Fourth Amendment pretty much disappeared when “no-knock” warrants were allowed by the SCOTUS.
Whatever...even IF Paul understands the 4th and 2nd Amendments...he doesn’t get much else right. He is too hit and miss - as are all libertarians. Libertarians (libertines), to include Paul, do NOT correctly understand most of the original intent of the COTUS...except for the really obvious.
I’ll give you that on the no-knock...The whole failed, and ILLEGAL, War on Drugs has really taken our Rights for a loop.
Maybe you can learn me something then on where us (L) ‘get it wrong’? WHO’s ‘intent’, and where/what, are we ‘off’, IYHO?
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.