Ted Cruz is not a Conservative (Saturbray)

www.braylog.com ^ | 4/16/16 | bray

[bray]

Matthew 22:16 And they sent out unto him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man: for thou regardest not the person of men.

Conservatism seems to been driven off the tracks by the Punditocracy. In the old days of the movement character and transparency was every bit as important as policy matters. How can you be a free country when your leaders are hiding everything from you and shading the truth? If they will hide the truth about little issues who says they will not hide it from big ones?

We have two choices now and in reality the election is over and Trump has won it is just by how much and is it enough to overcome the establishment, but it is still two men. In July when we had seventeen candidates and Jeb was the overwhelming favorite with Walker right behind, I predicted Trump and Cruz due to Trump’s wall and Cruz’s ground game. At that time I suggested they should be a team with Trump President and Cruz VP for four years while he was trained in executive skills. I was wrong.

My hesitation at the time with Ted was his question of being a Natural Born Canadian and Heidi Cruz working for Goldman Sachs and making $800K/yr. Both of those are still a problem if not much larger and there has been so much more piled on top without being in the least bit transparent. His campaign makes the old Clinton war room seem open and airy. If you dare ax the most basic question you get hit with a hammer and demeaned in the vilest attacks, but enough about his supporters.

I have no idea what the framers of this Country had in mind when they decided to have Presidents born in America or by military families stationed overseas, but it seems a good idea you be born here. That said, the troubling part of the birther issue is his refusal to be transparent. Why does he seal all of his birth records and immigration documents to keep his citizenship hidden? Lay everything on the table and get it behind you rather than covering it up like Benghazi, this makes no sense.

Goldman Sachs is the bigger issue of the two and lends itself to his lack of character which has revealed itself over and over. If you have a company supporting your family which is the author of ever bad economic policy in America, how can you claim to be a defender of Conservatism? Nobody is asking you to take a vow of poverty and quite the opposite, but this is profiting on all of those years in the Bush Administration writing all of those free trade agreements. Free for the other Countries while putting chains on America. Goldman Sachs is the very last bank any Conservative would work for if they were who they say they are. How would he balance her making over a million a year if he were President or VP if he had to rule against them and for America?

Then there is the campaign, from Iowa to Colorado there is a pattern of behavior that is very troubling for a Christian Conservative. Whether we like it or not, Christians are held to a higher standard which none of us can attain, but at least make an attempt. He has a habit of taking the shortcut and then blaming someone else for his decision. The buck never stops at his desk and that is a problem.

Whenever he has an issue where he is obviously lying like claiming Carson was dropping out in Iowa, he claims ignorance while saying he is the smartest man in the room. The one he really cannot deny or explain is the half a million his Pac gave to the Carley Pac. Now he will claim he cannot communicate with his PAC and if you believe that there is a bridge in Brooklyn you may want to jump off. How was his campaign manager able to buy the partially nude picture of Trump’s wife and turn that over the PAC if there is not communication?

Why would any campaign which is continually short on cash give a rival campaign running for the same office and roughly the same polling position be given such a large sum of money? If there is any explanation give it, since the appearance is this was hush money to cover-up an affair with Carley’s campaign manager.

In the old days of Conservatism, the appearance of corruption was corruption however today it is until proven beyond a shadow of a doubt so you stall. The same old Carvile tactic. Why did the PAC give a half million and what did Carley get for that? Both PACs should tell the truth if either one of them is honest.

Then we move to Whisky Creek and Colorado with his cozy relationship with the establishment. I remember when Conservatives would vomit if they were supported by Linseed Graham, John InSain, Jeb, Georgie Will, Kraut, National Review, WaPo, Reid and the entire GOP establishment but they ignore that to promote their version of conservatism. These people are the problem and will only make our issues worse, yet they claim it will be different this time.

After Colorado when there was not a single vote cast with Cruz taking all of the delegates we heard rules, regulations and the need to educate yourselves. Having been in one of those GOP selection caucuses here is how they work. Everyone knows exactly who they are voting for before they arrive since they have been given slates of names who to vote for of which delegates will vote for Cruz.

The ones who arrive with an open mind or intend on voting for someone else are outvoted by the slate. You vote down the slate so every chosen delegate gets the same overwhelming votes, it is pure corruption. It is all carefully choreographed and has absolutely nothing to do with the people they supposedly represent, only the kingmakers who demand their voices heard.

The one I was at was ambushed by the Paulbots who got around half the delegates even though he received 4% of the Primary vote. These charades are more like the Soviet Union than America. You can bet none of those slate delegates are under seventy or been with the Party less than forty years.

Cruz of course comes out of the Colorado fiasco blaming someone else as it is never his fault. In reality his team organized all of those slates and made sure of the outcome days before they met. You can claim they had the better ground game, but that way of selecting bound delegates has nothing to do with the voice of the people and more to do with the dictates of the Party.

There is a pattern with Ted Cruz which is very disturbing. He continually will take the shortcut on the truth and openness and then blame someone else after he gets caught. It seems we have had enough politicians who fit that mold and we really do not need more of them and especially as President. If we are going to turn America around we need to begin with honor and transparency which is lacking with Ted. This is not an indictment on Cruz as much as the conservative establishment, but some questions need open answers and apparently never will. It is time for a new direction for Conservatism, it is time to Trump the entire District of Corruption.

Pray America wakes

[ontap]

Cruz got caught lying on his FEC financial disclosure form

The onus is on you to prove this smear also!! You see I don't have to prove anymore than you!!! I'm still waiting on the proof of the National Enquirer smear....that was going to be right around the corner!!!

[Kahuna]

Those of you that just can’t fathom why the Trump businesses donate to candidates on both the left and right have no clue on managing a large corporation. For over a decade I was a Senior V.P. for California’s seventh largest corporation and I can assure you that we budgeted a large amount annually to grease the skids for our interests. Most of our competitors played ball as well.

If you go done the hit list created by Jim Robinson, you may appreciate some of Donald’s appeal. Building a wall and enforcing our borders will solve a myriad of problems and that’s just for openers. Trade is huge as well with our deficits running in the hundreds of millions.

[Rashputin]

I don't think, I know just how far 30 mil got you back then and plenty of people from publisher wannabes to club owners started with more and no one even remembers their names.

Face the fact, he's cut from different cloth than most businessmen and Cruz isn't in the same league when it comes to dealing with reality no matter how bright a bunch of Marxist professors at Harvard claim Ted is.

[ontap]

Well starting with thirty mil is a lot easier than starting with nothing like most people...and some of them are worth more. And he’s not the Pres. Yet!!

[Federal46]

I’m sorry I just don’t understand your reasoning. Are you saying the hundreds of thousands of workers that fed their families working on Trump’s jobs don’t mean anything or the billions of dollars in taxes they have paid the Ted Cruz’s of the world salaries don’t count because he started with 30 million or 300 million or one million. Anyway you look at it Donald Trump has given back more to the American people than Ted Cruz ever will.

[RitaOK]

Give it up. You’re starting to sound envious, jealous and small. Bye.

[kabar]

he Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz, already facing scrutiny for not disclosing a Goldman Sachs loan he used for his 2012 Senate campaign, also failed to disclose a second loan, from Citibank, for the same race, according to a letter he sent Thursday to federal election officials.

The one-page letter said that the “underlying source” of money for a series of personal loans Mr. Cruz made to his Senate campaign in Texas included both bank loans, which totaled as much as $1 million. Both loans were “inadvertently omitted” from the required filings, the letter said. Previously, Mr. Cruz had acknowledged only using the loan from Goldman for his campaign.

The latest disclosure casts further doubt on his oft-stated story of having liquidated his entire family savings of slightly more than $1 million to fuel a come-from-behind win in the Republican primary. The tale has become part of a campaign narrative of a populist, scrappy Mr. Cruz putting everything on the line to overcome a wealthy establishment opponent.

His letter to the Federal Election Commission came after The New York Times reported that at least some of the “personal funds” Mr. Cruz and his wife, Heidi, put into his campaign actually came from a large loan from Goldman Sachs, where Mrs. Cruz works. The loan, for up to $500,000, was secured by holdings in a brokerage account at Goldman Sachs. The Cruz campaign called the failure to disclose the loan an honest mistake and said it would contact the election commission for guidance on how to amend its filings.

The Citibank loan, also for as much as $500,000, was a line of credit, and it is not clear from Mr. Cruz’s letter what collateral, if any, was used to obtain it. Mr. Cruz’s presidential campaign has declined to answer questions from The Times about the Citibank loan.

Kent Cooper, a former election commission official, said the letter from the Cruz campaign was still “lacking critical information” that candidates must report, including the exact amount of the loans and whether there were any co-signers. Federal law required that those details, and more, were to be reported during the primary and general election campaigns.

“This failure to disclose to the public,” Mr. Cooper said, “meant voters in Texas did not have the required information.”

The Times report about the Goldman Sachs loan surfaced in the Republican presidential debate Thursday night, when Mr. Cruz was asked how he could have overlooked disclosing it. Mr. Cruz suggested that the issue was overblown, dismissing it as a “paperwork error” and saying he had disclosed the loans in another public filing.

That filing is the annual personal disclosure, where members of Congress list their assets and income. On those reports, he listed the bank loans — without indicating that they were used for his campaign.

It is the other type of report, which campaigns must file with the Federal Election Commission, that is at issue. On those reports, Mr. Cruz failed to disclose any bank loans he obtained to finance his Senate race. So, while it is true that Mr. Cruz listed the loans in his Senate reports, he has never disclosed in any report that they were used for his campaign.

[Psalm 73]

"Means you have a winner of the election obviously."

Cult of personality - Rev. Jim Jones drew crowds, too....

[ontap]

If he gets the nomination I’ll vote for him....more than a lot of other people! Truth is I’m not married to Ted Cruz I just think he would be a better president. That’s my opinion I’m sure you have a different one.

[ROCKLOBSTER]

I'll take a Cuban-American conservative...

Canadian.

Maybe you would, but the founders wouldn't.

Odds are pretty good that even if he were to secure the nomination, you still wouldn't get one. Only the Cruz die-hards would vote for him against either of the communists.

Besides my objections, I'm not so sure that what you see (with Cruz) is what you'd get.

Trump is saying everything I want to hear, SELECTING the issues of the candidate's debates. All the other "me-toos" fell flat on their faces.

The positions he has taken ARE conservative and pro-America First.(See Jim Rob posts upthread) The fact that Trump has spoken the words, spilled the beans, upset the apple-cart, gets my appreciation big time.

Trump loves his country and its people, unlike the traitor Cankles or Burny the communist. His "conservative" positions are light years to the right of their Marxist claptrap (it is unfortunate that so many morons are out there to support it)

Whether he is "the most conservative" or not is immaterial. Ted will not make it.

The Buckley rule is: Nominate the most conservative candidate WHO CAN WIN.

[Albion Wilde]

His campaign makes the old Clinton war room seem open and airy. If you dare ax the most basic question you get hit with a hammer and demeaned in the vilest attacks, but enough about his supporters.

Jowza! Preach it!

[ontap]

Yea! I know....the smears keep coming!!! Blah!!!Blah!!!Blah!!!Blah!!!

[Psalm 73]

"You do realize that he is the current President, right?"

Is Obama the type of President you admire? You want another four years of Hope-N-Change?

[ROCKLOBSTER]

a Scotch-American identifies-as-a-democrat any time

He was born here, of two US citizens, Cruz and Rubio were not.

[Psalm 73]

"That he won the election that’s what it meant."

All you want is someone to "win an election"?
Hell, Carter won an election, Wilson won an election, even Hitler won an election.

"Just give us shiny things and keep us entertained" is what you may be after.

[aligncare]

“That’ll leave a mark!!!”

Insults? Personal insults? Not the way to win an argument.

The mark it left redounds to he who tossed a personal insult to a fellow member of this forum.

[Psalm 73]

“Obama also “filled up stadiums” - but what does that really mean?”

He won two elections, that is what it means.

And you were OK with how that turned out?
People that just wanted someone to tell them what they wanted to hear - and that's what they got.

[kabar]

Not a smear, a fact. Cruz admitted to it. He had to submit an amended filing to the FEC.

[ontap]

According to your logic Michael Bloomberg would be better....he’s worth a lot more than Trump!!! I can quote everything you said about Trump about him!!!

[gusopol3]

I guess because he’s a conservative and Trump’s a demagogue. What does that have to do with this vanity post?