Posted on 12/17/2015 12:07:55 PM PST by Isara
In Las Vegas, he stands up for winning Reaganite foreign policy, not the losing Bush version.
...an important distinction was reintroduced to Republican politics. During the debate, Texas Senator Ted Cruz presented a well-thought out, foreign and national defense policy based on the original, Reagan conservatism. One that focuses on advancing America's security interests around the world, not on sacrificing American lives and treasure on replacing foreign dictators with human rights, birthing new democracies, or building jobs and prosperity in foreign lands.
The Cruz and Reagan doctrine goes all the way back to America's Founding Fathers. They wanted America to stay out of endless European wars, and foreign "entangling alliances." They wanted America to stand for human rights, democracy, and prosperity for all. But they envisioned America advancing those goals by its own example, not at the point of a gun.
At the debate last Tuesday, Florida Senator Marco Rubio took the lead in advancing a different, more recent policy - the neoconservatism of George Bush, which committed America to replacing Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein with a modern democracy and economy, based on a culture of Western civil rights. Ohio Governor John Kasich and South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham also appeared in supporting roles for Rubio's vision. Cruz enjoyed the vocal, reasoned support of Kentucky Senator Rand Paul.
...
Cruz's ultimate intellectual coup in this last debate is a very positive turn for Republicans. Reagan's wise, conservative, foreign policy was enormously popular. All his political life, Reagan was maligned by Democrats as a warmonger. But once he got his chance as President, he won the Cold War without firing a shot. Bush's neoconservatism, however, was hugely unpopular, and paved the way to the Republicans' fall from Reagan's grace.
His performance Tuesday will only further fuel Cruz's rapid rise to a now probable, smashing Iowa victory....
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
“His performance Tuesday will only further fuel Cruz’s rapid rise to a now probable, smashing Iowa victory...”
Whoa there. Let’s see how the post debate polls turn out.
Reagan foreign policy didn’t include risking American lives for every civil war on the planet.
How about some domestic policy triumphs instead of this status quo crap?
Nothing Good Ever Comes From Congress At 2:00am
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3373826/posts
Trump is THE ONLY candidate I’ve heard address this spending bill for the atrocity it is.
I admit that I thought defeating Saddam was useful for several reasons:
1) Weapons of mass destruction in the hands of an avowed opponent (since somewhat disproved by events)
2) Reminder to Islam that destroying two of our BUILDINGS will result in the destruction of two of your COUNTRIES
3) Demonstrate that democracy can exist within islam as a demonstration project for others to aspire.
I was wrong about #3. Had it been possible, I think it would have been useful. It wasn’t, given the nature of islam, Iraq and 0bama. And, it has now been shown to me to be a less than useful goal of American foreign policy.
I been bit. I now agree with Cruz.
Before the Iraq war, the conventional wisdom was that Iraq was a largely secular, modern country that was being held back by a brutal dictatorship. Few foresaw the religious extremism that would emerge after Saddam was toppled.
Please click on the pictures at the top of the columns for more details on the ratings of the candidates.
 |
 |
 |
| Budget, Spending & Debt |  |
 |
| Civil Liberties | |
 |
| Education | |
|
| Energy & Environment | |
|
| Foreign Policy & Defense | |
|
| Free Market | |
|
| Health Care & Entitlements | |
|
| Immigration | |
|
| Moral Issues | |
|
| Second Amendment | |
|
| Taxes, Economy & Trade | |
|
More at Conservative Review: https://www.conservativereview.com/2016-presidential-candidates
Note: If you don't like the ratings for any reason, please contact Conservative Review's Editor-in-Chief, "The Great One," Mark Levin. But I have to warn you that you may get this response from him: "GET OFF THE PHONE, YOU BIG DOPE!"
That has no meaning without knowing exactly how those ratings were compiled. Trump bad on free market?? I don’t think so! Trump mixed on the second amendment?? Who ever thinks that hasn’t watched any rallies!
My mistake, and my apologies, that last post was from 2014
Trump supported TARP, auto bailout and Porkulus bill, i.e., Trump is for big government and big businesses. And, of course, he is for Renewable Fuel Standard, so governement can pick winners and losers.
Trump's Record on Free-market Issue: (from the Conservative Review)
Trump has a terrible record on free market issues. The only bright spot is the Federal Reserve's quantitative easing, but this glimmer is countermanded by his repeated support for bailing out Wall Street and the auto industry, and increased stimulus spending. Of particular concern is Trump's belief that the government can use eminent domain powers to seize private property in the name of private economic development. This comes as no surprise, given his support for using eminent domain to profit his own company.
Trump supported the Supreme Court’s 2005 decision in Kelo v. City of London, allowing public authorities to seize private land for economic development by private investors; Trump said, “I happen to agree with [the decision] 100 percent.” (National Review) This is no surprise given Trump’s attempt to use eminent domain in his own line of work. (Institute for Justice)
Trump supported President Obama’s 2009 stimulus, saying: “The word stimulus is probably not used in its fullest…you know, certain of the things that were given weren't really stimulus. They were pork, as we call it, or they were gifts to certain people. But overall, I think he's [President Obama] doing very well. You do need stimulus and you do have to keep the banks alive.” (CNN)
Trump supported TARP, saying, "You had to do something to shore up the banks, because ... you would have had a run on every bank." (CNN)
Trump supported the 2008 auto bailout, saying, “I think the government should stand behind them 100 percent. You cannot lose the auto companies. They’re great. They make wonderful products.” He also said that the federal government could “easily save the companies.” (Daily Caller)
Trump criticized the Federal Reserve’s intervention in the debt market, saying quantitative easing creates “phony numbers” that mislead the marketplace and “will not ultimately benefit the economy. The dollar will go down in value and inflation will start rearing its ugly head.” (CNBC)
Donald Trump has a history of using eminent domain to complete business deals. Multiple times Trump has supported the use of government agencies to take possession of homes and businesses for use in his private business plans. Eminent domain seizures are reserved only for public use of property rather than abuse by the government taking property from one individual and giving to another. (Washington Post)
Donald Trump has sought and received crony capitalist tax breaks for his commercial properties in New York. These tax breaks, and even an abatement, force the property taxes of other property owners to rise at the expense of the connected. Special treatment for one business or industry over another with the tax code conflicts with free market principles. (National Review)
In 2009, Trump supported Barack Obama's call for limits on the pay of executives. (CNN)
In the past Trump has paid lip service to the Second Amendment. More troubling is that he supported the so-called assault weapons ban and a longer waiting period for gun purchases. However, during the 2015 campaign, Trump has made a major shift on Second Amendment issues. He released a policy paper on the Second Amendment which promises major reforms that gun rights activists have long wanted. Examples include support for national reciprocity for concealed carry permits, the end of weapons and magazine bans, and curtailing of the expansion of a failing background check system. Time will tell if the 180 about face is principled driven or merely political in nature.
- See more at: https://www.conservativereview.com/2016-presidential-candidates/candidates/donald-trump#article-13
Yeah, Trump would be of no use on budget, spending, and debt.
Look at how he’s run his campaign, almost no spending to be three to ten times higher than everyone else, and tell me he merits a yellow there.
This chart is preposterous and more evidence of why Cruz will be very lucky to get one Trump supporter.
His team insults the rest of us non-stop as Liberals.
Well, Liberals don’t vote for people like Ted.
You guys win. Ted circles the drain.
Have you had even one person tell you this trash you post on the forum has caused them to switch sides?
Every Trump supporter has reviewed all that and decided those things are not part of his platform.
Isara, you’re going through posting that stuff every day, everyone has seen it, and those who matter, the ones who support Trump have moved on.
Tell me I’m a liberal and be done with it, and then remind me again how you’ll want my support for Cruz if Trump fails.
Remember, Liberals don’t vote for folks like Ted.
Second time; Will you vote for Trump if Cruz doesn’t get the nomination?
BTTT
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.