Posted on 02/01/2015 8:19:07 AM PST by SoConPubbie
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) on Monday outlined a list of 10 major policy goals that the Republican Congress should pursue over the next two years, and said Republicans finally have a chance now to contrast themselves against Democrats.
“Let’s lead with a big, bold positive agenda that says to the American people, you had a referendum and you rejected the Obama agenda,” Cruz told Heritage Action on Monday. “There is a better way.”
Cruz said his list may not be possible under President Barack Obama, but warned that failing to try would mean lost elections in the future. “Not only will we not win elections, we’ll get walloped, and we’ll deserve to get walloped,” he said.
Here’s Cruz’s list:
1) “Embrace a big, positive jobs, growth and opportunity agenda.” He said that needs to include not just approval of the Keystone pipeline, but other jobs bills, including easing federal regulations.
2) “We need to do everything humanly possible to repeal Obamacare.”
Cruz said Republicans should send Obama a full repeal bill, but then also send small repeal bills to test Obama’s willingness on health care and draw a distinction between the two parties.
3) “We need to finally secure the border and stop the president’s unconstitutional amnesty.”
4) “We need to hold government accountable, and rein in judicial activism.” Cruz warned that federal judges continue to rule against state marriage laws, when those issues should be left to the states.
5) “It’s time to stop the culture of corruption.” Cruz said quick passage of the $1.1 trillion spending bill last year was an example of both parties failing to govern and failing to give Congress itself a chance to understand what was in the bill.
(Excerpt) Read more at theblaze.com ...
Trying to get FReepers to agree on a candidate is much worse than herding cats. Last election we had some trashing other candidates to support Michele Bachman. MICHELLE BACHMAN FOR cripes sake.
It would be one thing if they merely supported their ignorant choices but they always go too far by trashing people like Newt or Cain.
I can’t tell you how many times I saw that stupid picture of Newt sitting on a bench with Pelosi as if that one was disqualifying.
If we can’t get over this meme that one issue disqualifies a candidate from the nomination we will never succeed in getting a conservative on the ballot.
I didn't think Dole was a good choice. I didn't think McCain was a good choice. I didn't think Romney was a good choice.
I voted for Dole.
I voted for McCain.
I voted for Romney.
The GOP lost. It wasn't my fault, because I voted and I tried to get others to vote -- I did what I could.
If the GOP pushes another Liberal, they will lose again. Simple statement of fact: It won't be my fault. I am NOT obligated to vote for Liberals -- but you go right ahead, if you feel so inclined.
“I like the guy, but extreme situations call for extreme remedies, and Walker’s just too much of a status-quo guy, not counting Union-busting.”
I don’t think you’ll get a candidate like that out of the primary let alone elected in a general national election.
Cruz throws lots of red meat and a lot of Freepers like him but he’s not getting any attention because he’s not considered a serious contender by anybody but the fiercest conservatives.
I could be wrong of course but I expect he’ll be unable to get enough traction or support and run about like Santorum does.
So you expect Walker to risk having Federal Troops sent out? Oh well, Ted Cruz hasn’t even passed a bill in congress so he doesn’t have to worry about having great responsibilities.
Sadly, even the supposed conservative, grassroots candidate is only against amnesty if it’s done by Obama alone.
“Abolishing the IRS” is disingenuous rhetoric, given that the federal government is not going to cease collecting taxes.
I would vote for that.
With Cruz, I would trust that there’s more than an ice cube’s chance in hell that he would follow through on his promises.
I’d much rather see a list of Ted Cruz’s top ten Republican fundraisers.
It will be hard to win the primaries without money.
Walker has well proven he is a fighter.
I think Cruz/Walker would be a very good ticket. Walker isn’t very charismatic, but he is fearless. It would be a good team.
Between the two you have two rather fearless and principled men. Walker understands governance; Cruz is a natural leader.
Team them with a seasoned Secretary of State and we have a chance of turning this ship around.
Please add me to the ping list.
My take:
1. Declare war on IS Put nation on a war footing.
2. Bring Back the Draft for ALL 18 year olds.
3. Tariffs on Foreign made cars (not made in USA).
4. No more IRS—15% Flat tax Only—every pays.
5. Build a Tall ship for the Navy. USS United States.
6. Build the Wall between Mexico and USA.
7. Ballance Budget for USA—
8. End the EPA—limit the regulations.
9. New form of health Care—One for the poor—Simple free clinics as in Cuba—One for the Folks who can pay—as we had in 2008. A giant leap backwards.
10. Rebuild the railroad systems
11. An American Peace Corps to rebuild the urban centers
12. Put in Law and Order/ Economic Zones in Big Cities.
My take:
You’re not a math major.
Jeb
Huckabilly
Slick Rick Perry
Walker
It's either Ted Cruz, Sarah Palin or both or I'm just going fishing again, then to the range.
Excellent goals but Senator Cruz needs to constantly
explain to the masses of uninformed why the attainment
of these goals is important to ALL Americans. Liberalism
is about feel good platitudes and it mostly explains
itself in simple terms however silly. Conservatism requires
thought. If conservatives allow themselves to continually
be defined by their enemies inside and outside of the media
then we can expect to continually lose.
I hear ya.
Maybe Lake Travis will be back in time for the primaries I’m going to ignore if Walker’s the frontrunner.
America's founding generations understood the history of nations, and framed a government by a written "People's" Constitution to protect and allow freedom for individuals and "chain" (Jefferson) elected and appointed government officials.
Unlike today's crop of so-called "conservative" leaders, those generations could articulate the ideas underlying that Constitution's limits on Executive, Legislative, and Judiciary power. More importantly perhaps, they could explain those ideas to "the People."
See the following for a few examples:
"The liberties of our Country, the freedom of our civil constitution are worth defending at all hazards: And it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have receiv'd them as a fair Inheritance from our worthy Ancestors: They purchas'd them for us with toil and danger and expence of treasure and blood; and transmitted them to us with care and diligence. It will bring an everlasting mark of infamy on the present generation, enlightened as it is, if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle; or be cheated out of them by the artifices of false and designing men. Of the latter we are in most danger at present: Let us therefore be aware of it. Let us contemplate our forefathers and posterity; and resolve to maintain the rights bequeath'd to us from the former, for the sake of the latter. - Instead of sitting down satisfied with the efforts we have already made, which is the wish of our enemies, the necessity of the times, more than ever, calls for our utmost circumspection, deliberation, fortitude, and perseverance. Let us remember that "if we suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our liberty, we encourage it, and involve others in our doom." It is a very serious consideration, which should deeply impress our minds, that millions yet unborn may be the miserable sharers of the event." Samuel Adams - Essay in the Boston Gazette, October 14, 1771Why should freedom-loving Americans be cowered into refraining from using the word "slavery" to describe the condition which results as a consequence of coercive government power over the lives, rights, liberties, and pursuit of happiness of individual citizens in the society?"When designs are form'd to raze the very foundation of a free government, those few who are to erect their grandeur and fortunes upon the general ruin, will employ every art to sooth the devoted people into a state of indolence, inattention and security, which is forever the fore-runner of slavery." - Article signed "Candidus," in Boston Gazette, December 9, 1771
"If the public are bound to yield obedience to laws to which they cannot give their approbation, they are slaves to those who make such laws and enforce them." Samuel Adams- As Candidus in the Boston Gazette, January 20, 1772
"The right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of man to alienate this gift and voluntarily become a slave... These may be best understood by reading and carefully studying the institutes of the great Law Giver and Head of the Christian Church, which are to be found clearly written and promulgated in the New Testament." Samuel Adams - Rights of the Colonists, November 20, 1772
"It is the greatest absurdity to suppose it in the power of one, or any number of men, at the entering into society, to renounce their essential natural rights, or the means of preserving those rights; when the grand end of civil government, from the very nature of its institution, is for the support, protection, and defence of those very rights; the principal of which, as is before observed, are Life, Liberty, and Property. If men, through fear, fraud, or mistake, should in terms renounce or give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the grand end of society would absolutely vacate such renunciation. The right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of man to alienate this gift and voluntarily become a slave." - The Rights of the Colonists, November 20, 1772
"To preserve [the] independence [of the people,] we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. If we run into such debts as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our callings and our creeds, as the people of England are, our people, like them, must come to labor sixteen hours in the twenty-four, give the earnings of fifteen of these to the government for their debts and daily expenses, and the sixteenth being insufficient to afford us bread, we must live, as they now do, on oatmeal and potatoes, have no time to think, no means of calling the mismanagers to account, but be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks of our fellow-sufferers." --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Kercheval, 1816. ME 15:39
"I deem [this one of] the essential principles of our government and consequently [one] which ought to shape its administration:... The honest payment of our debts and sacred preservation of the public faith." --Thomas Jefferson: 1st Inaugural, 1801. ME 3:322
"I sincerely believe... that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity under the name of funding is but swindling futurity on a large scale." --Thomas Jefferson to John Taylor, 1816. ME 15:23
"[With the decline of society] begins, indeed, the bellum omnium in omnia [war of all against all], which some philosophers observing to be so general in this world, have mistaken it for the natural, instead of the abusive state of man. And the fore horse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follows that, and in its train wretchedness and oppression." --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Kercheval, 1816. ME 15:40
"Is it now high time for the people of this country to explicitly declare whether they will be free men or slaves. It is an important question which ought to be decided. It concerns more than anything in this life. The salvation of our souls is interested in this event. For wherever tyranny is established, immorality of every kind comes in like a torrent, it is in the interest of tyrants to reduce the people to ignorance and vice.” - Samuel Adams
And:
“The utopian schemes of leveling and a community of goods, are as visionary and impractical as those which vest all property in the crown. These ideas are arbitrary, despotic, and, in our government unconstitutional.” - Samuel Adams
Perhaps a Cruz can and will be willing to articulate that idea, but will any others have such courage?
Even with a flat tax, the feds are going to have a department to collect, process, and enforce it.
The illegals would be identified but never get citizenship.
Yes I’m afraid you are right. Walker has not been altogether forthcoming with his stance on immigration either. That’s worrisome. I think the guy is good for Wisconsin but not for President.
Ted Cruz and I know this is not popular but Rand Paul are the two most likely candidates that actually want to restore the Constitutional Republic and cut the government down to size. If we don’t cut the bureaucracy by at least 50% there will be no saving this country. IMO.
Right now Ted Cruz is my numero uno choice. Jeb and Crispy are my line in the sand. I will not vote for either one of them for any reason.
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.