Well, that’s an interesting way of putting it. Could you rephrase that in simple english? I think I’m missing your point. And I wonder if we aren’t thinking of different “fundamentals” entirely.
The biggest difference between Ted Cruz & me is that I do not do one thing (allegedly on behalf of a constituency) & then, say the opposite when there is protest (or the obvious disagreement) to what I have done. If you believe in something that may be/ is unpopular- fine. But don’t try to rationalize, blame something someone else has done, or otherwise “talk your way out of it”, because it is what it is. People will either agree or not- as is their prerogative.
I have a real major problem with him giving 0bama more power (& when that’s done, it’s done. It can’t be undone.). Twice, on 2 different & very important issues- TPA & this Iran deal. WTH? Whose side is he *really* on? (because I honestly can’t tell)
How’d the Founders get into this?
They had their differences. And if they hadn't been able to put them aside the entire enterprise would have failed. To assume the mantle of "conservative" I think requires that you carefully examine and explicitly identify exactly what it is you're attempting to conserve. It will implicitly be legacy, and so we must look to history to find it. How better to conserve it than to emulate they men who created it?