Posted on 10/30/2015 6:55:40 AM PDT by Isara
...
HUGH HEWITT: Now Mark Steyn, on two levels, and we'll talk about the substance, but there is art in that response. There is a man who's litigated successfully nine times before the Supreme Court, who managed without taking notes to retain every personal attack, reframe them, repackage them, repurpose them into a counterattack on the panel expertly. It was actually art.
MARK STEYN: Yeah, and that's the Ted Cruz I like, Hugh. The criticism of Ted Cruz this election cycle has been that he's been too canned and too rehearsed, and he uses his talking points. And when he does that, he can come over as a bit unctuous and oleaginous. But when you just let him rip impromptu like this, as you say, what gave it force was that he remembered with absolute specificity all the stupid questions that these boneheads had wasted America's time with. And that's the Ted Cruz that is absolutely great, and he transformed that debate - because then what happened is that Marco Rubio went and did his line [about the media being the Democrats' SuperPac], and Chris Christie did his line about how even in New Jersey what you're doing would be considered rude ...and then Donald Trump in his windup said that as an example of his great negotiating skills, he'd managed to talk CNBC down to two hours so they could all get the hell out of there. And every single candidate on that panel smiled and cheered at that line. And so the ones who won, I think, picked up on the Cruz dynamic, and the ones who lost were the ones who didn't participate in that ...Jeb Bush and Kasich and Rand Paul.
...
You can read the full interview with Hugh here, and hear the audio here.
(Excerpt) Read more at steynonline.com ...
Cruz was great.
Cruz pointed out how the moderators were treating everyone, and contrasted it with what they did with the dems. By making it a universal observation, he kept it from being a whine.
Bravo to Senator Cruz!
The criticism of Ted Cruz this election cycle has been that he’s been too canned and too rehearsed, and he uses his talking points. And when he does that, he can come over as a bit unctuous and oleaginous. But when you just let him rip impromptu like this, as you say, what gave it force was that he remembered with absolute specificity all the stupid questions that these boneheads had wasted America’s time with. And that’s the Ted Cruz that is absolutely great, and he transformed that debate
...
That’s what Trump’s been doing all along. I saw an interview where he said the energy of the audience is so much greater when he speaks his mind.
Its interesting - last week’s candidate of the week - Carly Fiorina - actually had the most time to speak at the debate yet no one is talking about her at all.
Oh, Please, that can't be connected to this: Cruz's wife...a Goldman Sachs exec.... served on the North American Union task force, and supported their report called---Building a North American Community.
That effort was sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations in association with the Canadian Council of Chief Executives and the Consejo Mexicano de Asuntos Internacionales.
Translated into English, that means forget US sovereignty....just eradicate US borders.
Pardon me for criticizing the writing style of the Great Mark Steyn, but he is being redundant.
I always love Mark’s take on things. He is great! So funny, as well, most of the time.
None of them is safely consistent on borders and immigration except Santorum (I think) and he is not in the running.
Paul in particular, since he was up next, could have tag teamed the moderators, but instead chose to deflate the energy of the moment.
Kasich was this week's designated Trump killer so of course he wouldn't join in.
TED CRUZ CURRENT SENATE COMMITTEES
(SOURCE: Cruz web site):
Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities
Subcommittee on Seapower
Subcommittee on Strategic Forces
Committee on Commerce, Science, & Transportation
Subcommittee on Space, Science, and Competitiveness, Chairman
Subcommittee on Aviation Operations, Safety, and Security
Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, Innovation, and the Internet
Subcommittee on Consumer Protection, Product Safety, Insurance, and Data Security
Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and Coast Guard
Subcommittee on Oversight, Agency Action, Federal Rights and Federal Courts, Chairman
Subcommittee on The Constitution
Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest
Joint Economic Committee
Committee on Rules & Administration
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!"
Do you think that we would be able to discuss issues freely in this forum under a Trump administration?
"Trump has an inconsistent record when it comes to civil liberties. He supported the NSA mass surveillance program but did not weigh in on the recently passed reforms. Overall, he has avoided commenting on religious freedom, but says he would be an advocate for Christians. Trump supports an individual’s right to make unlimited campaign contributions, but advocates for an end to soft money in politics. Most concerning is Trump’s belief that the government can use eminent domain powers to seize private property for economic benefit for others."
.
Thanks for your canned trolling Liz.
Now can you buy some canned thinking to balance it out?
.
Right. That should be obvious. I guess.
C'mon Mark, you made that up. I've never seen that word in my life.
Yeah because the guy who argued and WON a Supreme Court case protecting the supremacy of domestic law is OBVIOUSLY in the bag for the One World Order folks.
ROTFLOL
2.exaggeratedly and distastefully complimentary; obsequious...is what I think he meant.
Why can’t them foreigners learn to talk Mercan?
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.