I can see 2016 from my house and i don't like what i'm seeing

Lauren Stephens Blog ^ | January 22, 2016 | Lauren Stephens

[RginTN]

Ronald Reagan spent decades in the trenches fighting for Conservative principles and against the Establishment. Trump well, he says a little bit of establishment is great!

[Rock N Jones]

Anthony Weeneee? Mercy me!
Just say I am a little bit more suspicious than the starry eyed!

TRUMP, DONALD J JR
NEW YORK, NY 10019
 8/28/08
$-1,700
Clinton, Hillary (D)

TRUMP, DONALD J JR
NEW YORK, NY 10022
TRUMP ENTERPRISES
3/31/07
$1,700
Clinton, Hillary (D)

TRUMP, DONALD J
NEW YORK, NY 10022
TRUMP ENTERPRISES
11/12/07
$600
Clinton, Hillary (D)

TRUMP, DONALD J
NEW YORK, NY 10022
TRUMP ORGANIZATION
9/24/07
$2,300
Weiner, Anthony D (D)

TRUMP, DONALD J
NEW YORK, NY 10022
THE TRUMP ORGANIZATION
1/31/08
$25,000
Democratic Senatorial Campaign Cmte (D)

TRUMP, DONALD J JR
NEW YORK, NY 10022
TRUMP DEVELOPMENT CORP
8/27/07
$2,300
Rangel, Charles B (D)

http://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/search.php?name=donald+trump&cycle=2008&sort=R&state=&zip=&employ=&cand=&submit=Submit

[LibFreeUSA]

"She attacks the Republican party.."

Where have you been?

Have you seen ANYTHING worthwhile that the "Republican Party" has accomplished the past 6 years??????????????????????

[bushpilot2]

The Federal Government website....as of Jan 2016

[bushpilot2]

[WhistlingPastTheGraveyard]

The Trump Doctrine of Abrogation makes all past positions, statements, actions and donations null & void. What was revealed to The Donald in Medina supersedes that which was revealed in Mecca.

[mosesdapoet]

What really sealed it for me was when Businessman deal maker Trump who also owns Goldman Sachs stock
http://www.freerepublic.com/focua/f-news/3386879/posts
Sided with the GOPES and even advocates expanded use Ethanol because he thinks it will help him carry IOWA . Which also begs the question of Just how heavily invested is he in Ethanol

[Smokin' Joe]

I am pointing out what appear to be seminal differences in the apparent principles of the two candidates. We could get into a lifelong argument about what you think I think, and what I think of your mind reading abilities, but that has no relevance to the question of which prospective candidate will best represent Conservative values after they are elected, should that be the case.

I have expressed my concerns about Donald Trump in contrast to the candidate who is closest to him in the polls.

If that comes across as "support", so be it. Maybe there is something there worth supporting.

I am trying to be dispassionate in this process. I have no emotional attachment to any candidate, just a profound hope we can find someone who will be an appropriate candidate for the United Stated President, and who will embrace and support Conservative values in that office.

[JoSixChip]

My apologies, I got you confused with SmokingJoe who has been particularly nasty to me in recent days.

[Mozilla]

She sure does a pretty good defense of Trump and makes some of my points. I think Trump is great. But I like Cruz as well. I’m favoring Trump now. I feel the conservative establishment is bullying Trump. They wanted Cruz to go after Trump to win. The TDS is showing. I am considering voting for whoever wins. I don’t think Rubio can win nor anybody else running. This food fight is a problem because it will anger people on both sides and I was trying to support Trump and Cruz. If I have to choose then I am going with Trump.

[LibFreeUSA]

Your sentiments pretty much sums up mine as well. I like Cruz, but my discomfort with him are not any of his positions, but on his complete lack of any executive experience to demonstrate how ADEPT he would be to effectively IMPLEMENT his policies through the Congress, but also how ‘SUCCESSFUL’ he would be in getting the results.

[Theo]

Damn Cruz. Filthy Canadian who works with banks. And he looks like Grandpa Munster. So damn him.

All hail messiah Trump, beholden to none, benevolent to all. All hail our king, The Donald.

[dr_lew]

All hail messiah Trump, beholden to none, benevolent to all.

Well, of these appellations, he is in fact "beholden to none", and that's the nub of it.

[Lil Flower]

***3. “Would ANY of us prefer the Obama family over the Trump family?” Wait - which family? His first, second, or third family? Obama may be an asshat, but at least he’s maintained a core family. So, bad play on this line.***

You criticize her and you went there? You gotta be freaking kidding me. Obama and his wife are evil incarnate, “core” family excluded.

The insanity coming out of people to defend “their” candidate on here has reached a level I never thought I’d see on FR.

[Lil Flower]

***Trump has no record of keeping promises to voters.***

How can he have a record when he’s never held any elected office?

You’re a real genius, aren’t you!

[Smokin' Joe]

Accepted, thanks. I would hope supporters of various candidates could tone down the vitriol aimed at each other, emotionally detach from their candidate of choice at the moment and more rationally examine the actions and records of the prospective nominees.

I have concerns about all the candidates, some more than others.

I won't live long enough to see one who is perfect, and despite everyone's slightly different view of that, I doubt any of us will.

We are left with the process of figuring out which Candidate has the credibility, Conservative stance, and character most likely to produce the desired results.

The desired results I have embraced for decades include a smaller Federal Government which is less invasive, is more Constitutionally constrained, and which does the fundamental job of providing for the common defense of these United States.

That's a lot of work to be done in a few words, and would involve the disbanding of a few Federal agencies, the significant reduction of others, and the refocusing of still more. There is a lot of pork in the pen, there, and many pet oxen to be gored in the process. It is not a job for the faint of heart. Whoever does it will be better loved by our posterity than their contemporaries, if it gets done.

If it doesn't, I'm not sure what language the history will be written in or flag it will be written under, but it will likely end up being a different banner than the one we revere.

This nation is in worse shape than ever, and it will take a lot of work to refit it.

[JoSixChip]

This nation is in worse shape than ever, and it will take a lot of work to refit it.

From my perspective, that starts with serious leaders that have a vision that can draw others to their cause. We productive class voters have been relegated to second class status underneath our political betters. For me that was never more obvious then in December of 2014. We sent a wave of "conservatives" to Washington, all having swore to stop obumber from implementing his spending, emigration, obamacare and foreign policies. Then in December it became clear they intended to do just the opposite, and they have done just the oposite in a in your face fashion. This country was never meant to be ruled by a political class, but we currently are and that is our fault. If we do not stop voting for career politicians, that will never change. This is where we start, then we impose term-limits and start holing our leaders accountable to the same laws they force us to live under.

[Gil4]

The second document doesn't discuss the status of those born abroad to citizen parents, except possibly the last two paragraph of section 93, which seem to indicate congress can by statute "prevent the alienage of children born abroad." .

The first document doesn't make citizens of those in Cruz' situation, it merely recognizes that they are citizens at birth (unless you think it also makes citizens of those who are "born in the US and subject to the jurisdiction thereof," since they are listed in a parallel paragraph under the same heading: "The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth."

[Smokin' Joe]

The problem with that is that no one just out of the box is ready to function in DC. It does take someone with stones and principle to stand up to that crowd, especially from the 'inside'. That means whoever does will not be well liked, they won't be one of the 'good ol' boys' club.

An outsider on the inside will be a pariah, and we find out Cruz is not well liked by the GOPe for sticking to principle. He has been in the arena and is still standing on principle.

That's important. He doesn't need to be loved there, that isn't what he was sent there to do.

Upholding the Constitution in DC isn't popular, doesn't fit well with the backroom deal gang, and won't line you up for a K street lobbying job.

That strikes me as a different sort of interaction with government than Trump's, in that Trump has been making deals, to achieve his own ends, and that does not have to adhere to any principle but that of favoring Mr. Trump.

While I will be the first to admit Trump will be able to get things done, what will be on the table in those negotiations? Remember not all things legal are right.

[Gil4]

I’m pretty sure Mrs. Cruz was a citizen of a state after the union had commenced, and not of a colony (and not in a territory before it came under the jurisdiction of the U.S., etc.) I do see the plural “parents” in there, but there was another act of congress passed in 1952 ...

I’m not sure what you were trying to show by posting this, since your case against Cruz is based on the claim that an act of Congress can’t have anything to do with determining who is or is not a natural born citizen.