If you want on/off this ping list, please let me know.
Please beware, this is a high-volume ping list!
CRUZ or LOSE!Posted on 04/12/2015 12:38:27 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
It’s never been a secret that the politically regressive “progressives” on the New York Times editorial board hate freedom. And so, in last Sunday’s lead editorial, they came out full square for a totalitarian state under the iron boot of Supreme Leader Barack Obama.
The Times is concerned that, as the failed Obama presidency heads into the final stretch and his policies become a greater concern to voting Americans, frightened citizens, especially those that have never voted before, will continue replacing tangential establishment Republicans in Congress with robust conservative-libertarian-tea partiers.
That is why the Times finds the return of a vibrant GOP opposition party “disturbing” and fears it will “undermine not just Mr. Obama’s policies, but his “very legitimacy as president.”
The process by which the American people undermine Obama’s policies (executive amnesty, job-stifling government spending and debt and Obamacare) and his legitimacy as president are called elections. You know, it’s all part of that pesky and sometimes messy course of action called democracy.
America is prone to radical shifts in direction because its people are not stringent ideologues like the frightened editorial writers at the New York Times. The same people that elected Jimmy Carter president in 1976 sent him packing four years later in favor of Ronald Reagan.
It’s a president’s foolish and dangerous policies that “undermine” his “very legitimacy” with the American people.
As you may recall, it was Carter’s dismal handling of the Iranian hostage crisis that turned Americans away from him and paved the way for the rise of the first and only modern conservative president.
The Times obviously fears Obama’s dangerous deal with Iran, which legitimizes the possession of nuclear weapons by the globe’s foremost exporter of Islamic terror, will backfire, affecting the president’s legacy and the electoral prospects for Democrats (read Hillary Clinton) in 2016.
In defending the indefensible, the Times contends that conservative Republicans are “blatantly racist” and that it is “impossible to dismiss the notion that race plays a role” in their opposition to Obama’s policies, domestic and foreign.
“Perhaps the most outrageous example of the attack on the president’s legitimacy,” said the Times, “was a letter signed by 47 Republican senators to the leadership of Iran, saying Mr. Obama had no authority to conclude negotiations over Iran’s nuclear weapons program.”
Actually, the open letter simply reminded Obama and his new-found friends in Tehran that “under our Constitution, while the president negotiates international agreements, Congress plays the significant role of ratifying them. In the case of a treaty, the Senate must ratify it by a two-thirds vote.”
The Times, Obama and Iran’s ruling mullahs see the U.S. Constitution, with its clear separation of powers for its described coequal branches of government, and mandated elections, as a threat to the legitimacy of, well, totalitarian evil.
And nowhere in that founding document does it say the Senate must relinquish its role of “advice and consent” based solely on the pigmentation of the nation’s chief executive. That would indeed be racist.
The Times’ ham-fisted use of the race card, to borrow a phrase from its editorial, “is slightly more subtle, but it is impossible to dismiss the notion” that the flaky left’s pulp disseminator of dangerous notions fears a continued electoral backlash that began with the tea party “shellacking” of 2010 and the Republican sweep of 2014.
And no one is more aware of that continuing backlash, and its parallel to a feckless Jimmy Carter and Iran’s criminal leadership, than GOP presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz.
At a 2015 Conservative Political Action Conference round table with reporters and bloggers, Cruz said, “I think the parallels between Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama are uncanny and I believe 2016 will be an election like 1980.”
And, apparently, so does the New York Times.
Except 2012 was that bad, too.,.worse, in fact, than 1980 in my opinion.
And America didn't learn.
Despite the rants of some of my fellow FREEPers, I do not believe Mitt Romney was worse than Obama. I do believe that Obama is significantly worse than Jimmy Carter.
A demographic change? I don't know. I somehow believe with George W Bush that ALL people--no matter their race, age, educational level--want to be free. And not "free" to be a dependent, but free to pursue their dreams.
I think the fundamental difference between 1980 and 2012/16 will be a spiritual one.
The people of God, those who claimed the mantel of Christianity and/or Judeo-Christian ethics, helped Jimmy Carter win (barely) in 1976. He claimed to be a Southern Baptist Sunday school teacher and a born again Christian. He admitted his faults in a famous Playboy interview. He seemed to be real...but then, given the opportunity, he governed miserably.
1980 came along, and Ronald Reagan sensed the need for someone who didn't exude the outer facade of Christianity (he never claimed to be a Sunday school teacher and in fact was a denizen of Hollywood--gasp!) but was appealing in his positions to a more moral code.
Our spiritual life as a nation, alas, has deteriorated in the years between then and now.
Needed today is a true--and I mean true--spiritual awakening.
We are like Jerusalem in 586 BC...or Rome in 476 AD...we are rotten on the inside, and a bare shell holds us together. Our leadership, corrupt to the core, reflects the citizenry that has forgotten the Creator. Jerusalem had had a history that recalled Him--Rome had a bare knowledge of it that was beginning to take hold, but the accumulation of centuries of perverted thinking was still around.
America, 85 years ago or so, began to denigrate the idea of hard work and shifted to a "Nanny State" mentality. Families of all kinds--black and white--began to fall apart, secure in the "knowledge" that government would care for those that were abandoned.
Then 40 years ago or so, this nation began to repeat the sin of slavery under another form. Instead of thinking of blacks as property to be used in any way the "owner" saw fit, the mantel was passed on to unborn children. Babies were mere "tissue" if still in the womb, and the cry from so-called feminists was that a woman could do anything she wanted to her body at any time.
And in the past 20 years or so, we have started to deteriorate the very meaning of "family" and "marriage". From Bill Clinton's efforts to change the military's makeup and morale to the current desire to crush religious freedom in the name of tolerance, we are turning our back on the Almighty.
There is hope for those who turn to Him. And America ought to do that.
If the GOP does as expected and nominates Jebster then they will make it happen. They have almost perfected nominating the designated loser.
Nephelium
Exactly!
Rove and the GOPe’s will once again use the divide trickery
by getting as many fake conservatives in the primary as they
can pay for.
These tribal candidates will each pull their tribal votes from their
tribal voters.
Thus leaving the RINO to win the nomination.
The only way to win is unite early behind one candidate.
Otherwise history will repeat itself.
Ted Cruz in his annouchment speech believes that God is not finished with America yet.
BINGO DINGO RINGO !
MAN AND WOMAN MARRIAGE PRODUCES LIFE !
GAY MARRIAGE PRODUCES STRIFE !
It appears that the "liberal / progressive" wannabe communists calling themselves democrats are beginning to "hear us now."
.
I believe it can happen!
Perhaps his race and any attitudes arising out of that race should be considered? After all he and his negro Attorney General have made race a big factor in American life.
CRUZ or LOSE!Is is cheaper than TP? Come to think of it, the people of Venezuela would likely be good candidates to purchase subscriptions to the NYSlimes. The Slimes could save money be reducing the amount of ink for the Venezuelan edition. A win-win for not the Slimes and Venezuela!
I should be a management consultant!
That's harsh punishment, dude!
“undermine not just Mr. Obama’s policies, but his “very legitimacy as president.”....
how does anyone undermine...anyone else’s legitimacy?
Obe’s the only one responsible for his illegitimate administration.
You don’t know the half of it.
Why has the New York Times not reported on the “undercover” video by Steven Crowder, filmed in Dearborn, MI, where NOT ONE Muslim bakery owner would consent to baking a wedding cake for a same-sex wedding. WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE FROM THE NYT? The only group in America one can discriminate against and get away with is is White Christians. FUNYT!!!
Yes! My aunt had a Mynah bird. She surely could have used a NYT subscription!
Exactly!
The Conservatives of this Country know when She’s in trouble; and they also know what to do about it.
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.