Posted on 08/02/2014 4:07:20 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
Sen. Ted Cruz has his eye fixed on the White House, and he plans to undercut the established Republican House leadership to help get him there, reports say.
Cruz's latest political target, according to Breitbart, is New Hampshire Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, who he says "has voted lock-step with President Obama to prevent any efforts to finally secure our border."
But while Shaheen's most likely opponent in the upcoming elections will be Republican Scott Brown, a former senator from Massachusetts, Cruz's choice of key state New Hampshire to make an impression says more about the lofty aspirations of the junior Republican senator from Texas that it does his opposition to Shaheen.
Cruz, an avowed tea party supporter, currently is receiving a lot of the credit, or the blame, for the failure of the GOP border bill in the House, which would have provided $659 million in funding, less than the $1.5 billion of the bill's original price tag, cut back to placate conservatives, and a lot less than the $3.7 billion President Obama was seeking to deal with the crisis of over 50,000 unaccompanied illegal immigrant minors who have flooded the Southwest border, according to the Christian Science Monitor.
With last-minute wheedling, Cruz, who wants to cancel out Obama's 2012 executive action to defer deportation, which he has termed "amnesty," helped to persuade enough conservative legislators to defeat the House bill.
Combined with Cruz's elbowing his way in to the New Hampshire race, and planned visits to another key state, Iowa, his actions have caused the Washington Post to declare, "Ted Cruz is running for President."
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Wow. Interesting response. So, you’re saying that if you see something happening and you will in all likelihood be blamed for the result, you aren’t responsible?
Give you an example: you see a bunch of kids playing out on some thin ice during Winter. You are the only adult anywhere around. You will likely be blamed if something bad happens. Should you 1. Take charge and get those kids off the ice and to safety or 2. Pretend you didn’t see anything and let nature take its course?
How does this philosophy fail your conservative criteria? Ever serve any time in uniform?
Their first choice is one of their own, but a very, very close second will be either Cruz, Jindal, Haley or Rubio, and the higher the perceived TEA party support, the better.
Any of them can make their problems go away, but especially Cruz. He's their Daisy.
I am slow witted. Perhaps, you could explain, your tagline. Thank you.
Exactly right!
I don’t know - maybe I don’t write very clearly...
It just means that if you recognize a problem and you will be held responsible for that problem, then do something.
When I was a oldish Marine lieutenant I saw several young enlisted Marines using a large forklift to raise a smaller forklift to lift a wall locker to the third floor windows of a barracks. The whole mess was teetering, and of course several of the Marines were perched on top and there was beer involved. I was the only Marine leader above lance corporal in the vicinity, so even though these weren’t Marines from my battalion, I would be blamed if this mess ended in disaster. I took charge, got the drunken idiots off of the forklifts and all of everything back on the ground. Nobody got killed and while no one thanked me, I slept soundly that night.
My tag line means if you see a problem and there’s even the remotest chance that you will be blamed, take charge.
Interesting concept. Thanks.
IOW:
SEE IT, OWN IT, FIX IT!
Example: Ted Cruz being a UNITED STATES Senator this past week.
Yes, he will. He has to be the most dangerous man in America, from the UNIPARTY's point of view.
The GOP establishment hated Reagan, too.
Thanks!
If he is angering the establishment then that is a GREAT thing
Thanks!
Fencing in “high traffic areas” only moves the high traffic areas east or west a few miles, resulting in no net benefit. They have roads in Mexico running parallel to the border, you know!
Without a serious fence system for the Border Patrol to actually watch and guard, the BP is forced to “defend in depth.” The southern border is 2,019 miles from sea to sea. If the Border Patrol check points are 40 miles from the border, they must roam across an area of 80,000 square miles seeking illegal immigrants. This is a fool’s errand, deliberately futile.
80,000 square miles is the size of Idaho or Kansas.
The same number of border patrol actually guarding a physical barrier means that every inch of the border is under observation at all times. Anybody carrying a ladder t the fence will be seen, and stopped by nearby Border Patrol agents who react to their approach.
That is why the San Diego fence is so effective. It needs to be extended. Or, we can keep play-acting at border security, with the Border Patrol playing Keystone Kops across 80,000 square miles of rough scrub land terrain.
Anybody who is against building an actual fence is either foolish, or secretly supports open borders. That is the point of nonsense “solutions” like the laughable “virtual fence” of a few years back.
That's crazy! Doesn't he know that he can count on Boehner and Rove to support him?
(bah-dum-tish) Go Ted, go!
I’m just as likely to give money to the RNC as I am to give it to Hamas.
Yup, yup, yup.
Frustration is part of being Presdient. Sen. Ted Cruz can handle it.
TED CRUZ FOR PRESIDENT!!!!!
LOVE IT!!
Please run Ted, it would be nice to finally have a solid conservative presidential candidate.
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.