Posted on 01/01/2016 7:42:09 AM PST by Isara
Yes, Cruz is the real deal. No need to take my word for it. Just look and listen. It's as Limbaugh says: the left and the establishment right will always tell you who they fear the most.
Sure, they hate both Trump and Cruz. The hatred for Trump is understandable, from their standpoint. He makes republicans look bad – he's intolerant and generally causes them embarrassment. But the antipathy for Cruz is born of fear. They fear the end of the government gravy train if he get's elected. They fear that with Cruz at the helm, Americans may just discover they don't actually need Washington involved in every facet of their lives. They fear an uncompromising Constitutional standard bearer as head of the party.
So their strategy is to send out trusted surrogates to trash the candidate and place the seed of doubt in voter's minds (and big money backers) that a Cruz nomination will surely equal a Hillary win.
Case in point: Moderate republican shill and former George W. Bush communications director Nicolle Wallace said in an interview regarding Ted Cruz: "He is truly despised [by republicans] - he is not a team player" and is apparently the king of "hubris and egomania." She, like almost all other establishment hacks, pundits and politicians are just plain befuddled, as Wallace, with an uncomfortable laugh, tells the interviewer that Cruz is "at the top of the polls in Iowa, so I think voters are saying they just don't care."
The key here is not so much that Cruz is despised or is tops in hubris and egomania. No - it's that "he is not a team player." I'm reminded of the movie Johnny Dangerously. A gangster boss known as Johnny Dangerously is actually Johnny Kelly. His younger brother Tommy Kelly has no idea he is the notorious mob boss Dangerously. Tommy is appointed assistant District Attorney and vows to bring down the infamous gangster. The D.A., who's on the mob's take, invites Tommy to his palatial estate, which is all courtesy of gangster payoffs. He tells Tommy, he too could have what the D.A. has, as he proclaims, "It's all yours Tommy, if you play ball! What do you say?" – to which Tommy replies, "I'll see you in prison!"
With this unfortunate confirmation of the assistant D.A.'s lack of cooperation, the mob, unknown to Dangerously, attempts to then "take out" his younger brother Tommy.
Ted Cruz is Tommy Kelly. He must be taken out.
Wallace explains that, "these are good republicans who worked in the Bush administration and who clerked in the Supreme Court who say they would have a really hard time voting for Ted Cruz if he were the republican standard bearer."
What can you say to an exclamation such as that - but WOW! I've been holding my nose and pulling the lever for progressive establishment republicans since 1988 and these people have the nerve to cry over one conservative candidate? Look at who we've been conned and bullied into supporting, all for the good of the precious party! George H.W. Bush, the kinder/gentler progressive. Bob Dole, war hero, but his nomination was equivalent to a lifetime achievement award. George W. Bush, who merely pretended to be a conservative. Bush lied - my vote died. And of course the other two loser establishment picks: McCain and Romney.
And we're not allowed one candidate? This inner circle of power and control is very exclusive and conservatives are not allowed a seat at the table - and we certainly don't have the necessary accreditation to sit at the head of the table.
What have we conservatives been saying all along? If someone like Cruz or Trump gets the nomination, the establishment would much prefer a Hillary presidency and this is the exact veiled threat the establishment kingmakers sent Wallace out to disseminate.
They are scared to death of Ted Cruz. It is a delight to see and I personally count it as a gift to finally be able to back someone I believe in – not someone we have to settle on, or like Romney, try to convince ourselves that he will be okay. We finally have someone for whom we don't have to constantly wonder, "Is he for real this time?"
Where you get the idea I’m in Mississippi is a mystery to me. I’ve never set foot in the state.
Here is the problem. Saying you are anti Capital Cronies and will stand up to DC are empty, hollow, meaningless slogans IF, when conservatives need action, your principles require you to do nothing. Cruz supporters seem delighted with a candidate that gets no results. They just need to understand that others see it differently.
See post 118.
Correction: 121.
After Cruz found out about the blatant legalities/wholesale election theft, did he do anything that produced concrete/desirable results?
You must actually believe Trump wants conservative things. LMAO. Trump is all ego and will say anything to win the primary. I was not born yesterday. I remember all the things he said that tells me he is a lib at heart and at best no better than all the rinos that have run before him.
I did.
So?
What do you want from me, if anything?
You didn’t get pinged to the “correction” in my very next post?
I mixed the GA. and MS. flags.
Here is the problem. Saying you are anti Capital Cronies and will stand up to DC are empty, hollow, meaningless slogans IF, when conservatives need action, your principles require you to do nothing.
You've identified no specific course of action outside of Cruz endorsing McDaniels, and I (and another poster) have already addressed that point.
Cruz supporters seem delighted with a candidate that gets no results. They just need to understand that others see it differently.
There you go again with the generalizations. You should address people individually. Would you like it if I start lumping all Trump supporters as being of a certain type? You need to understand that when you are addressing a person, that you are addressing an individual and not a group.
And here's the problem. You need to understand that Cruz is one congressman out of 535 congressmen who make up one of three branches of a federal government that has constitutionally limited powers. There is only so much one individual congressman can do when just about all the other members of Congress and the other two branches of government are corrupt.
The first step in such a situation is to articulate the correct positions, rallying the people of the country to the correct positions.
Cruz is doing that and now, and you and others are blaming him for the difficulty of his heroic task.
Again.................identify what you think he should have done.
What I am doing is saying that all words and no results satisfies Cruz supporters, but does not satisfy non-supporters. It’s not just Mississippi, it’s a pattern. When Cruz announced his filibuster I thought it would accomplish something. But it didn’t. Neither did calling McConnell a liar. It’s all just words. That’s not enough for some, though it obviously satisfies others.
Emulate Trump!
The Donald has been able make things happen without the office, nor by spending much money.
Dude, I'm really trying to be patient but you are making it very difficult.
I gave you a small explanation about why you should address people individually and not as a group, but it.
And then I asked you again and yet again, what additional thing besides the endorsement thing, should Cruz have done, and you ignore the question yet again.
Yeah what?
Wow. It's apparent that you really haven't read about either one of them at all...
No. You addressed it to yourself.
However, I've now read #121.
Cruz supporters seem delighted with a candidate that gets no results. They just need to understand that others see it differently.
You refer, of course, to the canard that Cruz "can't get anything done" in the Senate.
And, as you're already aware, there is a perfectly good reason why. The GOP Senate leadership isn't going to allow him to get anything done -- the price or having publicly called them out.
Nonetheless, as Sen. Jeff Sessions has explained, Cruz was critical in keeping Rubio and his Gang of 8 from getting anything done, too.
Further, you should be aware that Cruz got quite a bit one in the House. His "Thursday Night Pizza Sessions" helped the House's Freedom Caucus get organized and focussed. I it were not for Cruz's leadership, John Boehner would probably still be Speaker.
If you don't appreciate what Cruz has accomplished in a.) revealing the misleading practices of the Congress and exposing the GOP leadership's role in fostering them, b.) working behind the scenes to help organize the conservative caucus in the House and c.) steadfastly keeping his promise to the Texas voters that elected him...well, I don't know what to tell you.
You may have preferred that he have his name on a few bills appropriating expenditures for a new program or highway. But doing so would've required that he "go along to get along."
We like him the way he is.
While it's true that, to date, Trump has had the most influence on this cycle's election dynamic, it's also true that Trump's impact was enabled by the work Cruz did to expose the GOP-e.
Deputy: That them shootin'?Sheriff Langston: No, it's coming from those rocks.
Deputy: Well, let's go. He ain't hittin' nothin'.
Sheriff Langston: You idiot, he's hit everything he's aimed at!
"Silverado" 1985
Cool. I remember that movie.
Back to my question.
What changes have been signed into law because of Trump?
Oh, bullcrap.
He has ALWAYS been for border control. Outstandingly so. Build the Fence FIRST.
He has ALWAYS been for deportation of criminal elements.
He has ALWAYS been for drying up welfare and job opportunities.
He assumes correctly that without all the candy, aliens will deport on their own.
THEN 'what to do with what's left.' - which is a reasonable position.
That's straight out of the Duncan Hunter Handbook.
That has been the Conservative position as long as I can remember.
He has been remarkably consistent in that, all the way back to his days in Texas.
It is Trump who is inconsistent and all over the map. He cried, "DEPORT THEM ALL!" ...Which you seem to have heard - Yet you ignore that three days later he turned that into some kind of vague touch-back theme. And likewise, you ignore his LONG record of being *for* amnesty.
Metamorphisis from liberal to conservative in three years or less and you take his word (which is all you have) over a tried and true Conservative lifetime record in Cruz? Which one is likely to actually do what he says?
I have been keeping a close watch on both of them for a long time. I used to be a Cruz supporter, but no more. He is too closely knit with several issues I do not like.
Trump is the only candidate with the skill set we need at this point in time to get our country back on a sound footing and our people back to work.
A lot of what you “read” is crap. Dig beneath the surface and research to find the real answers.
It was not Cruz that stopped comprehensive immigration. That is a myth. And if you think Paul Ryan is an improvement over Boehner, what can be said? If anything, he’s worse.
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.