Replies

“I believe we should follow the text of every law, even [a] law I disagree with,” Cruz said. “It’s one of the real differences—if you look at President Obama and the lawlessness, if he disagrees with a law he simply refuses to follow it or claims the authority to unilaterally change.”

Well, that's where I disagree with Cruz then. Where do we come off saying that just because something is called a "law" it is valid? We have supreme law of the land, the Constitution. Adhering to the Constitution is what we need.

Dang man, slavish acquiescence to invalid unconstitutional law is what has brought us to the brink. Obama's "lawlessness" is mainly his blatant unconstitutional acts.

Cruz is already the best leader on the scene with respect to GOP candidates for POTUS, your suggestions notwithstanding.

That may very well be true and I hope the best guy gets in there. I do not agree with those that think somebody has to completely agree with you to be the best candidate as is being brought up by Rush Limbaugh on another thread. Nobody agrees with anybody about everything. "The main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing."

But this constitutional issue is the crux of the problem and no one person or "savior-politician" can fix it. Don't know if anyone except God's intervention can fix it. But the states and the people are going to need to get involved in rejecting and nullifying unconstitutional federal acts if we are to move away from the brink of tyranny and back towards a free constitutional republic. It will take more than a politician no matter how good he is.

Well, then again, Cruz now has standing to sue.

Well, that's where I disagree with Cruz then. Where do we come off saying that just because something is called a "law" it is valid? We have supreme law of the land, the Constitution. Adhering to the Constitution is what we need.

Please point to where Ted Cruz stated the law was "valid"?

Quit with the Red Herrings already!

He is auditioning to be the President of the United States, the Chief Executive. Do you really think he would be a fit leader if he chose NOT to do things constitutionally and legally? Both following the law, AS IS, and also trying to change the law, using the constitutionally defined process?

This is what he is, the POTUS candidate that is most knowledgeable about the Constitution and the one who has and will follow the constitution with the most fidelity.

But this constitutional issue is the crux of the problem and no one person or "savior-politician" can fix it. Don't know if anyone except God's intervention can fix it. But the states and the people are going to need to get involved in rejecting and nullifying unconstitutional federal acts if we are to move away from the brink of tyranny and back towards a free constitutional republic. It will take more than a politician no matter how good he is.

No one, and I mean no one supporting Cruz is looking at him as some type of "savior-politician".

Quit with the sour grapes responses because your guy, Walker, isn't liked as much.

Conservative opposition to Cruz aside, I think the left will be no match for him, based on what he’s done so far. This recent move is genius.

Of course it will take more than one politician. Why do you think he’s talking about amassing an army of conservatives?

Let’s face it. The power grab at the federal level is well known by politicians. The governors and legislatures are more than aware of it, so is Congress, so are the courts. Yet for the most part they’ve done nothing about it. So who will?

A lot of folks, including Ted Cruz, are drawing parallels between him and Ronaldus Magnus. And there are. But I think they’re looking too much at the 1980 race and not the 1976 race, the aftermath of which saw some very interesting chamges in how politics at the grassroots level was pursued.