Posted on 03/24/2015 4:47:25 AM PDT by LeoMcNeil
I want to like Ted Cruz. He has all the right views from Obamacare to taxes to amnesty to Federal spending. He’s a gifted speaker, his speech yesterday was given without a teleprompter. He appeared genuine, frankly it appeared as though he had written the speech himself. The left hates Cruz, which of course makes him all the more likable. John McCain has called him a wacko bird, which again makes Cruz more likable. Anyone who annoys McCain must be good. Lost in the euphoria conservatives are having over Cruz is an objective look at whether Cruz will actually make a good President. Let’s face it, there isn’t a lot of evidence out there that Cruz is capable. Yes, he has all the right views but is he capable of governing effectively with those principles he claims?
Ted Cruz has as much experience today as Barack Obama did in 2007. Both entered their first Presidential race with zero executive governing experience. Both of them had just over two years of experience in the Senate before announcing their candidacy. Neither of them accomplished anything legislatively in the Senate, neither authored a single bill which made it through the chamber much less Congress. Ted Cruz is the conservative version of Barack Hussein Obama, he even has the birther crazies going wild because he was born in Canada.
Obama would have been much worse, from a conservative standpoint, had he been experienced heading into the White House. During his first year he had a filibuster proof majority in Congress and failed to get more than a watered down Wall Street bill and a Stimulus bill passed. He failed to pass an amnesty bill, he failed to pass a tax increase, he failed to pass Cap & Trade, he failed to close Guantanamo. The President wanted single payer socialist healthcare, he had to settle for Obamacare. Had Obama been more experienced, he’s likely to have figured out how to pass most of his agenda. From a managerial standpoint, his agencies are a mess. They had three years to put together a website for Obamacare and the administration failed miserably. Obama had no idea there was a problem until after the website went live. Obama came into office promising to clean up the VA, six years later nothing has changed. Much of this is due to the President’s inexperience. Obama’s lawless unilateral actions today are directly traceable to his legislative inexperience and lack of skill.
What evidence is there that Ted Cruz will do a better job than Obama? Yes, we can always fall back on Cruz having the right principles. However if he isn’t capable of implementing those principles, what good is he to the conservative cause? The question for conservatives today is what evidence is there that Cruz will be effective managing the executive branch? Objectively there isn’t much evidence out there that he’s capable of doing much of anything other than give a good speech. A President has to be more than that though. There is a lesson to be learned from Obama’s nomination, it simply isn’t wise to nominate someone who doesn’t have much experience.
On a more subjective note, don’t you wonder about the motivations of someone who thinks that after two years in the Senate he’s qualified to be President? After eight years of watching Obama, it’s clear he’s a narcissist. That probably should have been obvious from the moment he announced his candidacy. Only a narcissist would think he’s qualified to run for President with so little experience. Cruz is in the same boat. While it’s nice to believe his motivations are pure and Constitutional, we’re only fooling ourselves if we truly believe it. Cruz is arrogant enough to believe that despite his inexperience and lack of accomplishment he should be elected President. Considering all the conservative jumping on the Cruz bandwagon, it appears we’ve learned little from the mistake of Obama.
For that matter, most anyone who's reading this right now would make a better President.
A wind up toy monkey would make a better President. It wouldn't do anything stupid.
Absolutely, but do the American people want a “good” president? I am unsure that they do.
It’s hard for us to understand how tens and tens of millions of American citizens violently disagree with our constitutional perspective.
Speaking of wasted energy, recall all of it expending in 2011 here because Palin was play acting a run with the bus tours to New Hampshire and Iowa, and the Passion rising vid was a classic ...kissing babies and shaking hands in Iowa "My passion is rising " LOL.
I mean it was fight thread after fight thread here, both sides seemed sure she was running, and she wasn't.
Not obvious that it made any difference though.
First, this happened back in 2013 -- not yesterday -- when the gang of 8 were pushing their comprehensive immigration reform with their 'path to citizenship'.
Cruz came out solidly against that immediately and totally against any illegal entry or any attempt to make illegals legal. The quote often used against him begins "secondly...expand legal immigration.." Folks should ask, "If this is secondly, then what is firstly?"
Firstly, in disputing the comprehensive bill, he said absolutely ZERO illegal immigration. Secondly, he said that any shortfall in workers would be made up on the LEGAL side of immigration.
Now, he has fully supported Senator Sessions who has connected the job market and the illegal alien problem.
So, what we have is a senator who'd been in office for 5 months saying zero illegal immigration and any shortfall would be made up ONLY with legal immigrants and legal visas. I believe this is the actual proposed amendment by Cruz. It clearly is focused on shortfalls. See E (2)(b) http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Cruz4-(MDM13526).pdf "have at least 2 years experience in an occupation designated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics as experiencing a shortage of labor throughout the United States.’’"
I actually support that....for SHORTFALLS.
Here's an article from the time:
http://www.texastribune.org/2013/05/08/cruz-files-border-security-anti-amnesty-amendments/
Cruz Files Amendments to Immigration Reform Measure by Julián Aguilar
May 8, 2013 9
U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz has jumped into the immigration reform fray by filing a slew of amendments that call for additional fencing on the border and that block a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.
The Texas Republican's move comes as the U.S. Senate’s Judiciary Committee begins a weeks-long mark-up process on the omnibus immigration reform bill authored by a bipartisan coalition of senators known as the “Gang of Eight.”
Cruz, who was called a “schoolyard bully” by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., earlier this week, said his amendments were part of a pragmatic approach to moving forward on a divisive issue.
“There is widespread, bipartisan support for fixing our nation’s broken immigration system, and we should approach it by addressing those areas where we can reach agreement so that we actually have a chance of passing an effective bill into law,” Cruz said in a statement.
The freshman senator also filed a measure that would prohibit local, state and federal governments from doling out entitlement benefits to the millions living in the country illegally. His amendments are in concert with a plan his conservative colleagues have embarked on that would end with stronger border-security policies than those introduced last month by the Gang of Eight. That plan outlines a 13-year path to citizenship for the estimated 11.2 million people living in the country illegally. That road can only begin, however, when certain border security measures are met, including a 90 percent effectiveness rate for deterring illegal entries, defined as “the number of apprehensions and turnbacks in a specific sector divided by the total number of illegal entries.”
Cruz’s amendments would mandate that the Department of Homeland Security triple the number of U.S. Border Patrol agents on the southwest border, and quadruple equipment, including cameras, drones and helicopters, during the same time frame. The border security amendment also mandates that if the goals are not met within three years, the department’s budget will be slashed by 20 percent and that money would instead be diverted in the form of block grants to agencies in Texas, Arizona, New Mexico and Arizona for border security.
Cruz’s amendments also include a measure to expand legal immigration by reforming the high-skilled temporary worker program.
America’s Voice, a progressive, pro-immigration-reform coalition, was quick to rebuke Cruz’s efforts as part of its “Good, Bad and Ugly” review of amendments.
“An amendment from Senator Ted Cruz would prohibit anyone who had been undocumented for any period of time ever from becoming a United States citizen in the future,” Frank Sharry, the group’s executive director, said in a statement. “This would not only destroy the path to citizenship in the Senate bill — the popular heart of an immigration reform solution — but also turn its back on one hundred years of precedent in immigration policy.”
I remember. Here, however, we don’t have a case of a candidate who is unclear or demurs about what he wants and intends. The first out of the gate with an unequivocal candidacy.
>> Over the past 100 years (or so) we have had 8 presidents with prior gubernatorial experience <<
Yep, but let’s consider the POTI during those same 100 years who went directly from the U. S. Senate to the White House:
1. Warren Harding
2. John F. Kennedy
3. B. Hussein O’Bama
A whopping 100% of these POTI racked up terrible records, as opposed to your 80% of gubernatorial POTI who were “unmitigated disasters.”
And by the way, just how do you conclude that Coolidge was any sort of disaster? IIRC, he was Reagan’s favorite past POTUS.
see post #105
You misread what I wrote. In no way do I think Coolidge was a disaster. In fact, I said that he and Reagan were the only two who were NOT disasters.
And Obama isn’t a terrible president because he only served one term in the Senate.
He’s a terrible president because he is an America-hating extreme leftist who never knew anybody who wasn’t a racist leftist America hater.
Obama is a terrible president because he has a staggering ignorance of American culture and history.
Obama is a terrible president because he is a megalomaniacal psychopath with delusions of Godhood.
Obama is a terrible president because he is intellectually lazy and has the emotional maturity of a 14-year-old.
And those are just some of the reasons.
Maybe now he can get some of that *attention* that Walkers been getting for a couple of months now, all of a sudden last night he's on the top of MSNBCs radar screen after his announcement.
I am more interested if he can beat Jeb. So far GOP polling has indicated that Walker is my best bet for that, so lets see if this announcement makes any difference.
I also want to see who Cruz goes after too. Is he going to try to being down Bush?
Whichever solid conservative we put in the White House in 2016 – after a thorough fumigating and disinfecting, of course — will fail if we don’t also run the Obama enablers and apologists – in BOTH PARTIES — off Capitol Hill! Do what you must to assure that YOUR guys will support whoever makes it to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue as we begin what will probably be the decades long job of reversing the incredible damage Obama has done to the very fabric of the American idea and the rule of law the Founders sought to leave us.
Cruz was proposing a TOTAL ban on ANY illegals being allowed to have a path to citizenship at the time of the comprehensive immigration bill IN 2013! Instead, he proposed a program to allow increased LEGAL immigration based on SHORTFALL verified by the Bureau of Labor.
If you'll notice, his amendment proposed in Feb 2013, iirc, was after only 2 months as a senator, but with years of experience as a Texan.
For me, it’s down to the two - Walker and Cruz. I am for Cruz, but I won’t trash Walker or try to propel Cruz forward with a blitzkrieg of positive stories like some here do for Walker.
I think the distinction between the two will become evident days ahead and I like to think they will be honorable to each other. The trashing, backbites and vehemence should be against the Dauphin here because he is clearly the antithesis of conservatism. We have to work smarter, not just harder.
Face it, he needs to walk back his position on H-1b to get my vote. You cannot polish this turd. Even if he reverses his stance I have to decide whether I believe him. Your mileage may vary, but cut the BS, he is a big H-1b visa proponent.
Even in 2013, a new senator said that any shortfall had to be verified and it had to be legal. That is not the same as saying we MUST have 600,000 H1bs every year.
It’s saying “verify a shortage” and you can have up to a certain amount.
Your article is built on a false premise-—namely, that Obama hasn’t accomplished anything.
In reality, he has seen a large part of his leftwing agenda come to fruition, and he keeps trying and pushing. Who knows what he’ll manage to get done by the time he leaves office.
I agree with Mark Levin that we need a LEADER, whether that person is a senator, governor, or whatever. Cruz has proven himself to be that.
Obama’s mother, no matter where Obama was born, was a naturalized citizen who was not a citizen long enough to infer natural born citizenship on her son.
Cruz’s mother was a natural born citizen. She was under the jurisdiction of the United States at his birth and she registered his birth at the embassy because, as her son, he was under the jurisdiction of the United States at his birth.
What a load of claptrap.
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.