Skip to comments.
Swearing by the Constitution-Ted Cruz’s lodestone (Very long)
Weekly Standard ^
| 10/4/15
| Terry Eastland
Posted on 10/04/2015 8:17:09 AM PDT by VinL
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-23 next last
From the article:
"Cruzs chance of winning the Republican nomination seems remote. But his candidacy is interesting because it tests whether voters agree with him about the countrys condition, the causes of that condition, and the proper medicine. A problem for Cruz may lie in the extent to which, in the minds of Americans, the Constitution of 1787, as amended, has been supplanted by the so-called living Constitution, its elasticity making possible the politics of transformation so assiduously practiced by Obama and the Democratic party. In this view, the government may do almost anything in the name of improving the lives of citizens..."
******************
OK article, but Mr. Eastland betrays his prejudice by virtue of his failure to include the DC GOP in that universe of adherents to the "living constitution".
1
posted on
10/04/2015 8:17:10 AM PDT
by
VinL
To: VinL
2
posted on
10/04/2015 8:39:10 AM PDT
by
cripplecreek
(Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.)
To: VinL
3
posted on
10/04/2015 8:59:12 AM PDT
by
highball
("I never should have switched from scotch to martinis." -- the last words of Humphrey Bogart)
To: highball
Why any conservative would even consider anyone else is beyond me.
4
posted on
10/04/2015 9:19:29 AM PDT
by
cripplecreek
(Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.)
To: VinL
crickets... looks like people don’t want to line up for long lectures on the ratification process. Shocking.
5
posted on
10/04/2015 9:43:42 AM PDT
by
proust
(If Obama was accused of being a Christian, would there be enough evidence to convict him?)
To: VinL
I would be interested in reading his senior thesis on the 9th and 10th amendments. Link anyone?
6
posted on
10/04/2015 9:46:59 AM PDT
by
zeugma
(Zaphod Beeblebrox for president! Or Cruz if Zaphod is unavailable.)
To: cripplecreek
7
posted on
10/04/2015 9:47:45 AM PDT
by
mtrott
To: zeugma
He had a great mentor.
8
posted on
10/04/2015 10:10:37 AM PDT
by
cripplecreek
(Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.)
To: cripplecreek
Many great mentors:
9
posted on
10/04/2015 10:12:51 AM PDT
by
proust
(If Obama was accused of being a Christian, would there be enough evidence to convict him?)
To: mtrott
He’s speaking in Kalamazoo Michigan tomorrow. I wish I had known earlier so I could have planned on getting over there.
10
posted on
10/04/2015 10:19:36 AM PDT
by
cripplecreek
(Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.)
To: zeugma
11
posted on
10/04/2015 10:42:14 AM PDT
by
ProgressingAmerica
(Progressives do not want to discuss their history. I want to discuss their history.)
To: proust
Ted Cruz does appeal to those with higher intellects. I can understand that Cruz’s exegesis on the Constitution and the founding principles of the nation may be beyond the intellectual capacity of some.
12
posted on
10/04/2015 10:57:25 AM PDT
by
VinL
(It is better to suffer every wrong, then to consent to wrong.)
To: VinL
It’s sad that Cruz supporters need to pat themselves on the back.
It’s also a shame Cruz was unable to form a winning strategy even with that massive intellectual capacity of his.
13
posted on
10/04/2015 11:26:13 AM PDT
by
proust
(If Obama was accused of being a Christian, would there be enough evidence to convict him?)
To: VinL
We can’t all be reality TV fans I guess.
14
posted on
10/04/2015 12:17:27 PM PDT
by
cripplecreek
(Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.)
To: proust; cripplecreek
Its also a shame Cruz was unable to form a winning strategy
******************
He has a winning strategy!!!! Don’t you see it????? Oh, I’m sorry, you can’t see it, can you? I’d explain it, but some just can’t understand. Sorry.
UH, Go Donald, yer yuuge!
15
posted on
10/04/2015 12:30:19 PM PDT
by
VinL
(It is better to suffer every wrong, then to consent to wrong.)
To: VinL
16
posted on
10/04/2015 12:35:33 PM PDT
by
right way right
(May we remain sober over mere men, for God really is our one and only true hope.)
To: VinL
17
posted on
10/04/2015 12:43:35 PM PDT
by
cripplecreek
(Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.)
To: VinL
Well isn’t that the snoot approach?
Fault Donald for a thousand things, he does not talk down to you.
18
posted on
10/04/2015 12:45:26 PM PDT
by
HiTech RedNeck
(Embrace the Lion of Judah and He will roar for you and teach you to roar too. See my page.)
To: VinL
In his campaign book, A Time for Truth, Cruz writes, For far too long, Congress has passed legislation with no one in the Senate once asking what should be the preliminary question: Do we have the constitutional authority to enact this bill? A Cruz administration would press that question when necessary, and if it found such authority lacking, the legislation might receive a presidential veto.
EVERY bill should include, in it's forword/preface/summary/whatever, a quick section explaining how that bill is constitutional, with relevant citations. For how legally convoluted they make some of these bills, I think a little bit of legal research wouldn't be too difficult!
To: HiTech RedNeck
Well isnt that the snoot approach?
Well it was in response to a snide little troll.
20
posted on
10/04/2015 1:17:59 PM PDT
by
cripplecreek
(Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-23 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