Posted on 03/15/2016 4:44:20 PM PDT by RaceBannon
Hartford Tea Party co-founder endorses Ted Cruz and denounces Donald Trump.
As one of the co-founders of the Hartford Tea Party in 2009, I was appalled to read the statement of Debbie Dooley, claiming that Donald Trump was the choice of someone who once claimed membership in a genuine grass roots organization dedicated to upholding the Constitution, reducing the size of government, eliminating government health care and opposing high government spending.
In her endorsement for Donald Trump, she claimed the following:"I have been an activist fighting for conservative principles since 1976, so I reject individuals and publications that try to tell me what conservatism is. I have watched over the years as we have allowed deep pocketed special interests to set the agenda in Washington D.C. instead of we the people. These special interests gain support for their agenda, by even principled conservatives, using their millions of dollars of political contributions."
Does a principled conservative need to go any further than this to see this is either one of the most ill informed persons regarding Donald Trump or someone who is willfully blind as to what is going on here?
Her claim to decry deep pocket special interests rings hollow since Donald Trump himself has boasted that he freely donates to political persons for the purpose of getting what he wants, and if that is not a deep pocket, I dont know who is. Trump himself says, '“You know what? When I need something from them, two years later, three years later, I call them, and they are there for me. . . . And that’s a broken system.”
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430266/donald-trump-bribery-politicians-hillary-clinton-robert-menendez-solomon-melgen
Deep pockets Debbie? How deep do we need to go? Donald Trump has been holding his pockets open for democrats, liberals and rinos his entire adult life and never once donated to a Tea Party candidate, in fact, he funded the liberal Democrat against the Tea Party choice of Sharon Angle to fund ultra leftist Harry Reid.
Donald Trump has recently released an ad on radio announcing his support for government funded health care, has in his speeches supported single payer health care, and has always in the past, defended Obama' health care program. Well, Debbie, the health care debacle is one of the main reasons that the Tea Party took off with such vigor, and now you defend the same government control of Americans?? On what planet is that considered freedom? That is the action of a tyranny, and Donald Trump just repeatedly said he is all for it; single payer, replacing Obama's health care with something different; replacing Obama care with a different form of government health care is NOT freedom, it is just another form of government control over our health care!
Throwing her name and reputation as a Tea Party co-founder to support one of the most opposing forces of the Tea Party is absurd! She claims to believe in liberty and freedom, and then endorses one of the deep pockets who has made it his political choice to support all the left wing democrats and rinos.
Trump donated to Charlie Rangel, John McCain,and the Democrat Senatorial Campaign Committee. Liberty defenders, Debbie? How about Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and Chuck Schumer, and even "Fast Eddie' Rendell?
People who love liberty and our Constitution know better than to associate any of those names to freedom or liberty.
If Debbie Dooley was actually concerned with supporting the Constitution, only Ted Cruise was the candidate this election cycle that had the highest Liberty rating that is in the race now at the time of her endorsement. Only Ted Cruz kept his word regarding upholding the Constitution, fought against the liberal Gang of Eight whom Donald Trump supported; only Ted Cruz fought against TPP to control the trade deficit while Trump wants to keep it.
If Debbie Dooley actually cared about the Constitution, she surely would not have endorsed someone who donated thousands of dollars to Rod Blagojevich, Rahm Emanuel and Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation. If she thinks that supporting such anti-American politicians represents liberty, she needs a new dictionary.
James Bancroft Hartford Tea Party co-founder Hartford Connecticut 2009
I laughed when she said she was one of 22, we had 40 or 50 in Connecticut alone...
Let the world know that I hereby denounce this denouncement..... and dat’s a fact!
“Mighty touchy and mouthy aren’t we tonight? So Cruz is a lying traitor? Well, you’re backing a 40-year liberal who has been a conservative for four months. Who’s the sucker here?”
Not touchy...always mouthy...You have been brainwashed by the lying traitor it sounds like...Trump is nothing like you describe. But, that is okay...if you need fantasy to be happy go for it!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2194528/posts
Tea Party - Hartford, CT. Friday at NOON (Constitution State)
February 26, 2009
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2196650/posts
Hartford, CT Tea Party Video - Jim Vicevich Speech
February 28, 2009
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeQPxjcsJko&eurl=http://brainflation.wordpress.com/2009/02/28/hartford-tea-party-video-jim-vicevich-speech/
Jim Vicevich Hartford Teaparty Speech
Uploaded on Feb 27, 2009
You all are being duped by the GOPe once again.
Trump bashing because you don’t perceive him to be as ideologically pure is killing this country’s prospects week by week.
There is no way Cruz is getting to a first ballot win, so the best he can do is keep Trump out. And that will lead to a GOPe victory with neither the candidate, but instead some sellout (who will likely lose to Hillary) like Ryan or Romney or Kasich or Rubio.
Even Podhoretz, who has been leading the anyone but Trump charge, has finally caught on to what the Cruzers, including Levin and Limbaugh, have been creating for them:
http://nypost.com/2016/03/16/republicans-are-practically-handing-hillary-the-presidency/
Yup. Cruz excused the BLM to get in a cheap shot at Trump.
Agreed.
so the best he can do is keep Trump out. And that will lead to a GOPe victory with neither the candidate, but instead some sellout (who will likely lose to Hillary) like Ryan or Romney or Kasich or Rubio.
Your link doesn't say that, nor is it remotely feasible; the clear #1 non-Don to unite around is Cruz, few if any of whose delegates are likely to want Ryan or Romney or Kasich or Rubio.
Even Podhoretz, who has been leading the anyone but Trump charge, has finally caught on to what the Cruzers, including Levin and Limbaugh, have been creating for them:
http://nypost.com/2016/03/16/republicans-are-practically-handing-hillary-the-presidency/
'his speech, which featured Cruz throwing the same red meat he always throws.' That 'red meat' is called conservative principles - we used to like that sort of thing on FR.
'his “I won fair and square even if I didn’t get 1,237” card'. There is no such card - the convention makes the nomination according to the published rules, period.
False. CRUZ: Well, let’s be clear. First of all, the protesters were in the wrong. When you come up and — and you use violence, you engage in violence, you threaten violence, and when you try to shut — shut down and shout down speech, that — that’s not what the First Amendment allows. The First Amendment gives every one of us the right to speak, but not to disrupt others.
You are uninformed. I didn’t say the link said that—I said the link said what I said it did.
But plenty of others are saying it. The GOPe will not navigate a brokered convention to a Cruz nomination.
Not a chance.
And the rules are up for change as well.
Your link doesn't say that,
I didn’t say the link said that
I didn’t say you said the link said that.
nor is it remotely feasible; the clear #1 non-Don to unite around is Cruz, few if any of whose delegates are likely to want Ryan or Romney or Kasich or Rubio.
But plenty of others are saying it. The GOPe will not navigate a brokered convention to a Cruz nomination.
They wouldn't like it - but they'd have no choice.
Even Podhoretz, who has been leading the anyone but Trump charge, has finally caught on to what the Cruzers, including Levin and Limbaugh, have been creating for them:
http://nypost.com/2016/03/16/republicans-are-practically-handing-hillary-the-presidency/
'his “I won fair and square even if I didn’t get 1,237” card'. There is no such card - the convention makes the nomination according to the published rules, period.
And the rules are up for change as well.
The point remains that there is no “I won fair and square even if I didn’t get 1,237” card.
You implied it—
They would have a choice—
And I never said there was such a card, which you are, again, implying.
No, you incorrectly inferred it.
And I never said there was such a card
Your link did.
ABSOLUTELY!
Here's the issue: It is no longer about Republican vs. Democrat. It is not even about Conservative vs. Liberal.
It is about Populist vs. Elitist.
Populists (and to a great degree, Nationalists) like Trump will choose some positions that appear liberal and some that will appear conservative. That's what Populists do.
We need a Populist to break the stranglehold the Elitists have on BOTH political parties, and Trump is great on my two hot-button issues: Illegal immigration and gun control.
Ergo, I am for Donald J. Trump.
Ted X Cruz is loathed by the elite core, the country club GOP faction
Amen, Brother. Thanks to FR.
And thanks for the comeback.
I admit, it’s really bizarre.
We all warned people not to fall for Obama’s populism and lack of specifics on the campaign trail in 2008 (not to mention, of course, Obama is a liberal), yet, here we go, in 2016, doing the same thing all over again, except it’s on our side now.
I am hearing a lot of people outside the state of Texas saying Cruz won’t have a chance at even winning his senate seat again in 2018, if he runs for it again.
That is just ridiculous.
I am in Texas, and Cruz campaigned and went to D.C. and did what he said he would during his campaign. Imagine that!
If he doesn’t wind up as President, he will win his next senate seat election in a landslide.
I'm most surprised that so many supposedly sophisticated observers of the political scene seem to not be able to recognize the negative political branding the Trump people have put out (and that seems to be all they've put out) for what it is and instead take it very seriously. I've heard Cruz compared unfavorably to Obama, for God's sake.
I’ve heard Cruz compared unfavorably to Obama, for God’s sake.
Trump himself said the Cruz was as “bad as Hillary” and “worse than Obama”, around the time of the Iowa caucus.
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.