Skip to comments.
Speech By Presidential Hopeful Sen. Ted Cruz Fires Up The Crowd At The NC GOP Convention
Lady Liberty 1885 ^
| June 15, 2015
| ladyliberty1885
Posted on 06/16/2015 10:22:09 AM PDT by SoConPubbie
Applause and cheers greeted 2016 presidential candidate Senator Ted Cruz as he took the stage at the North Carolina Republican Convention.
Opting to move around instead of speaking from behind a podium, Cruz sounded Reaganesque as he spoke on three main points of economic growth, defending our Constitutional rights and restoring America’s position in the world.
Cruz’s speech was fluid, fast-moving, had the crowd laughing and on their feet applauding multiple times. The speech lasted just over 40 minutes — and he did it all without a teleprompter.
Senator Cruz warmed up the crowd by thanking them for retiring Senator Kay Hagan and electing Senator Thom Tillis in her place. The Senator then transitioned into a ‘central issue’ of his campaign, which is “reigniting the promise of America.” and the fundamental idea that our kids will ‘have it better’ than we did.
On economic growth, Cruz pressed the need for tax reform by scrapping the current tax code and adopting a flat-tax. Cruz added that regulation reform was also needed and cracked a joke, that was captured by TWC News, about firing the 90,000 IRS workers and putting them on the border.
There are about 90,000 employees at the IRS. We need to padlock that building and take everyone of them and put them on our Southern border, he said.
While some of Sen. Cruz’s speech could be considered tongue in cheek, some delegates say they appreciated the honesty.
TWC News did not include the punchline of the joke. “If the first thing you see is 90,000 IRS agents,” said Cruz, “youd turn around and go home too,”. The audience rippled with applause and laughter.
Obamacare, which the Senator has long opposed, was also made mention of. “We should repeal every word of Obamacare.”, the Senator said. Cruz noted Obamacare as being a jobs killer and the recent propose rate hikes by insurance companies, including the 27% hike proposed North Carolina’s Blue Cross Blue Shield.
“I will always, always, always stand and fight for religious freedom!”, exclaimed Cruz while speaking about defending the Constitution. Senator Cruz also defended the Second Amendment and the 10th, slamming the Obama administration on the latter.
Unlike Governor Walker, Senator Cruz’s comments on education almost immediately went to Common Core. Cruz cited the need for the states to ‘repeal every word of Common Core'; stressing the need to get rid of the Dept. of Education and return to state and local control of education.
On Cruz’s final leg of the speech, he turned towards the failed foreign policy of the Obama administration, condemning the administration’s negotiations with Iran. Cruz said we should not be allowing Iran to obtain nuclear weapons.
Senator Cruz criticized President Obama’s broken relationship with Israel and for not meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu. Cruz said, “Imagine a President standing unapologetically next to the Prime Minister of Israel.” This statement received the biggest and loudest standing ovation of the afternoon.
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: North Carolina; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: 2016election; cruz; cruz2016; election2016; nc2016; tedcruz; texas
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
"If we must have an enemy at the head of Government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures." - Alexander Hamilton |
|
"We don't intend to turn the Republican Party over to the traitors in the battle just ended. We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support. Turning the Party over to the so-called moderates wouldnt make any sense at all." -- President Ronald Reagan |
|
"A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice." - Thomas Paine 1792 |
|
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." - Samuel Adams |
|
"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen." - Samuel Adams |
|
|
|
To: SoConPubbie; Kale; Jarhead9297; COUNTrecount; notaliberal; DoughtyOne; MountainDad; aposiopetic; ...
Ted Cruz Ping!
If you want on/off this ping list, please let me know.
Please beware, this is a high-volume ping list!
CRUZ or LOSE!
2
posted on
06/16/2015 10:22:39 AM PDT
by
SoConPubbie
(Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
To: SoConPubbie
The current Federal income tax code--around 75,000 pages of code so complex that even James Joyce's famously unreadable novels
Ulysses and
Finnegans Wake are almost readable in comparison--costs
US$1 TRILLION per year in compliance and economic opportunity costs (as of 2014, according to the Tax Foundation), and is easily the biggest source of corruption in Washington, DC.
Cleaning up that tax code--or take it even further by ending the income tax in favor of something like FairTax--would result in the next American economic boom and a reborn middle class. The very fact Ted Cruz favors such radical reform is why I'm supporting him for President.
3
posted on
06/16/2015 10:29:07 AM PDT
by
RayChuang88
(FairTax: America's economic cure)
To: SoConPubbie
Why oh why does he support TPP and fast track? Otherwise, he could be the perfect candidate.I would still vote for him, but it’s a disappointment.
4
posted on
06/16/2015 10:59:14 AM PDT
by
Calpublican
(No Comprendo)
To: Calpublican
Why oh why does he support TPP and fast track?...Because he doesn’t. Try reading up and researching TPA, TPP and other treaty crap. Sheesh!
5
posted on
06/16/2015 11:04:34 AM PDT
by
Safetgiver
( Islam makes barbarism look genteel.)
To: Calpublican
Question is ...why do you take the same position as Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and every other democrat???
6
posted on
06/16/2015 11:06:42 AM PDT
by
ontap
To: Calpublican
Do your homework. Cruz explained his position on the parts and pieces involved.
7
posted on
06/16/2015 11:08:51 AM PDT
by
Cobra64
(Common sense isn't common anymore.)
To: Safetgiver
He explained his support for TPA. He has not come out either way for TPP yet. Depends what is in it.
To: Cobra64
Agree...Cruz explain himself well. My disagreement is the secrecy and giving that bozo too much power. The trade agreement could start after the next prez takes office(?)
9
posted on
06/16/2015 11:16:17 AM PDT
by
rrrod
(Just an old guy with a gun in his pocket.)
To: Calpublican
Why oh why does he support TPP and fast track? Otherwise, he could be the perfect candidate.I would still vote for him, but its a disappointment.
He supports TPA, not TPP. He has not decided how he will vote for TPP until negotiations are complete.
There is nothing wrong, constitutionally with TPA. He has made his positions perfectly clear.
There have been several articles posted on FreeRepublic where Ted Cruz has clearly laid out his support for TPA and explained both TPA and TPP.
I'd suggest before you post anymore concerning Ted Cruz and TPA and TPP, you should educate yourself by reading the articles available on FreeRepublic on these subjects.
10
posted on
06/16/2015 11:18:45 AM PDT
by
SoConPubbie
(Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
To: rrrod; Cobra64
Agree...Cruz explain himself well. My disagreement is the secrecy and giving that bozo too much power. The trade agreement could start after the next prez takes office(?)
Totally false. Probably the most-repeated myth right now isnt even related to TPA but instead to the TPP, which is still being negotiated. According to the anti-TPA script, the TPP is so secret that nobody knows whats in it, andmuch like Obamacare legislationnobody, not even Congress, will know whats in it until the agreement is passed into law. Once again, however, nothing could be further from the truth:
- First, Obamas USTR and Congress have been consulting on the TPP since December 14, 2009, when then-USTR Kirk notified Congress that President Obama intended to enter into TPP negotiations. USTR then held initial consultations with Congress in 2010 and, according to a January 2015 fact-sheet, has since held almost 1,700 congressional briefings on TPP alone. USTR also previewed various TPP proposals with key congressional committees before taking them to our trading partners. (Odd that the TPP talks have been going on for six years, but the vast majority of these secrecy complaints have only emerged in the last few months, huh?)
- Second, USTR has provided access to the full negotiating texts for any Member of Congress, including for Members to view at their convenience in the Capitol, accompanied by staff members with appropriate security clearance. This access began in 2012, and several House members and senatorsboth supportive of TPA (like Mike Lee) and opposed (like Sens. Jeff Sessions and Elizabeth Warren, as well as Rep. Rosa DeLauro)have reviewed the draft negotiating texts. Moreover, the level of security surrounding these TPP texts isnt part of some scary Obama administration plot; its set by Congress (which, as youll recall, is controlled by Republicans these days). A U.S. government official confirmed to me that the Senate and House security offices determine the procedures for viewing classified material in the Capitol reading room where the TPP text is kept for Members—not the administration
some people claim that its more difficult to view military or intelligence information, but its all subject to the same rules that are set and enforced by Capitol security.”
- Third, USTR has engaged the public on the TPP via published reports and stakeholder meetings with groups like labor unions, consumer groups, and, of course, corporations and trade associations. Some of these stakeholders have even reviewed the negotiating texts and US proposals. Admittedly, the official texts arent available to the general public, but this is common practice for all FTAs (as a quick Google search reveals) and for good reason: just like other high-value negotiations among private parties or governments, revealing draft proposals before a deal is struck emboldens the opposition, undermines the parties negotiating positions, and exposes negotiators to public scrutiny over provisions that might not even be in a final deal. Publishing draft FTA texts would make completing a deal difficult, if not impossible, and its thus no coincidence the most vocal advocates for full transparency in free trade negotiations are actually those most opposed to free trade.Its also important to understand just how unoriginal this secrecy canard is:
Yes, protectionists have been using the same secrecy lines for over 20 years. In fact, if you replaced NAFTA with TPP in those old Ross Perot commercials, theyd be almost indistinguishable from the ones on our TVs today.
- Finally, unlike the oft-analogized Obamacare legislation, the actual text of any final TPP deal will be required by law to be publicly available (online) for monthsyes, monthsbefore Congress votes on it. As you can see from the table below (source), under TPA the president must make the entire text of any trade agreement, including TPP, available to the public for 60 days before he can even sign it.Once its signed, Congress will have weeks, maybe months, to scour the deal, hold mock markups in various committees, and suggest changes to the agreement before the president sends Congress legislation implementing the FTA for a final vote. Also, within 105 days of the FTAs signing, the U.S. International Trade Commission must issue a report on the deals economic impactagain prior those bills being submitted to Congress. And once the bills finally are submitted, Congress will then have up to 90 legislative days (which is like five months in normal human days) to review the bills and hold final votes.
Bottom line: when or if TPA is passed, the general public will have monthsand if the presidential elections interfere, maybe yearsto review the TPP before Congress acts on it. Think thats crazy? Well, its precisely what happened to U.S. FTAs with Colombia, Panama and South Korea, which were signed by President Bush but sat around (online) for years before they were submitted to, and passed by, Congress in 2011.
11
posted on
06/16/2015 11:19:33 AM PDT
by
SoConPubbie
(Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
To: Calpublican
12
posted on
06/16/2015 11:30:25 AM PDT
by
right way right
(Disclaimer: Not a prophet but I have a pretty good record.)
To: Calpublican
13
posted on
06/16/2015 11:56:01 AM PDT
by
libbylu
To: wolfman23601
14
posted on
06/16/2015 11:59:50 AM PDT
by
Safetgiver
( Islam makes barbarism look genteel.)
To: right way right; SoConPubbie; Cobra64; Safetgiver
Wow! Lots of rude and curt responses. I do understand that there are separate votes and separate issues here. I guess you guys are okay with giving more power to Obama. Further, I will be shocked if he does not support TPP.
15
posted on
06/16/2015 5:47:36 PM PDT
by
Calpublican
(No Comprendo)
To: libbylu
See reply to right way right.FR would not recognize name “libbylu.”
16
posted on
06/16/2015 5:49:54 PM PDT
by
Calpublican
(No Comprendo)
To: ontap
no one is wrong a hundred percent of the time. Even they don’t want to give Obama that much authority.
17
posted on
06/16/2015 5:52:21 PM PDT
by
Calpublican
(No Comprendo)
To: SoConPubbie
Self note for me to read more on this TTP/TPA issue.
Anyone who has other resources along such lines please do post.
Thanks,
To: FourtySeven
Good interview at post #13.
19
posted on
06/16/2015 6:32:55 PM PDT
by
right way right
(Disclaimer: Not a prophet but I have a pretty good record.)
To: Calpublican; right way right; SoConPubbie; Cobra64; Safetgiver
Wow! Lots of rude and curt responses.
Well, what did you expect?
Sweet platitudes?
You repeat, as if it is a fact, an ignorant, ill-informed accusation that if you had done your own research, you would never have made that statement, that is, if you are an honest person.
20
posted on
06/16/2015 8:05:32 PM PDT
by
SoConPubbie
(Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson