Posted on 11/05/2015 2:12:37 PM PST by Isara
I have never officially endorsed a presidential candidate before, but I'm endorsing Ted Cruz for president for three simple reasons: 1) he is a man of unshakable, conservative moral convictions; 2) he is willing to take on the Washington establishment; 3) we need a radical shift in the direction of our country, and his team has asked me to help get out the evangelical vote.
Of course, I'm fully aware that a president can only do so much and that our hope for change must be first and foremost in the living God.
And I firmly believe that the greatest agency for positive change in America remains the people of God—committed followers of Jesus living as salt and light.
But there is no question that an ungodly leader can bring destruction to a nation and a godly leader can bring blessing. As Proverbs 29:2 states, "When the righteous become great the people rejoice, but when the wicked dominate the people groan" (Prov. 29:2, Jewish Study Bible).
And so, when Senator Cruz's team invited me to stand with him in the battle for religious liberties in America, also giving counsel to his evangelical coalition of his leaders, I felt this was an open door from the Lord. And since he has been in my top three list from the start, after prayerful consideration, I have given him my strong endorsement.
We are blessed to have a number of godly candidates running for president this cycle (all of them Republican; I could not possibly vote for any of the Democratic candidates, especially the front-runners), and if our nominee ended up being someone like Dr. Ben Carson or former Governor Mike Huckabee, that person would have my vote.
But in looking for the leader who most strongly fits my criteria—being unshakably pro-life, pro-marriage, and pro-Israel; having a good handle on economic issues, immigration, and national security; and not being part of the political establishment—Senator Cruz comes out on top, and I genuinely believe he has a real possibility of making it all the way.
And so, while I am praying for God's best choice for the White House, I'm glad to stand with Senator Cruz, encouraging Americans to strongly consider him for president.
As for a middle of the road candidate from the Republican establishment—someone like former Governor Jeb Bush—that candidate would not get my vote, even if that meant sitting out that part of the election.
To explain more fully, on June 22, 2012 I published an article titled, "Mitt Romney Is Not the Answer," explaining that if I did vote for Romney, "I would do so with extremely limited hopes, and my very act of voting in November would be a reminder to me that I cannot expect the radical changes America needs to come from the White House."
Almost two years later, in March, 2014, I wrote the article, "My Problem with the Republican Party," saying that "rather than voting for candidates who gravitate towards the center in order to gain the maximum number of votes, thereby diluting the right-of-center values we are urging them to uphold, we who hold to these values need to make clear that we won't be fooled again, that we stand for principles first and party second (or third, or whatever), that empty promises won't cut it this time around, and that we refuse to be pawns in support of someone's political aspirations."
I added, "Of course, we've been down this road quite a few times in recent years, but perhaps this time (thanks to President Obama?) we've reached the point of 'Enough is enough.'"
Well, after voting with reluctance for John McCain in 2008 and even more reluctance for Mitt Romney in 2012, I determined that I would not do the same thing in 2016, and if the Republicans did not put forth a candidate who really stood for my values, one who would also take on the party's establishment when needed, I would have to sit out the presidential vote or else register some kind of protest vote.
In these last two elections, as much as I wanted to have the privilege of helping to elect our nation's first black president, I could not vote for Barack Obama, knowing that if he held true to his ways, he would be the most radical pro-abortion and pro-homosexuality candidate in our history, not to mention a weak friend of Israel.
And in the 2016 election, given the radical stances of the leading Democratic candidates, there is no possible way I could vote for any of them.
So, the alternatives are a breakaway, third party, which would doom our chances for change for some time now, barring divine intervention, or a Republican candidate who will face down the establishment, beginning with his own party.
That's exactly what Ted Cruz did in his home state of Texas, and that's exactly what he's done in Washington, even referring to "the Washington cartel." And if there's one thing we know that holds true across the board in our nation it is this: Americans on all sides of the political debate are fed up with Washington, and that is something that Ted Cruz play into, as he will certainly need to build solid alliances throughout the land.
That being said, I'm praying for God's choice for president. I'm not opposing other godly candidates; I'm not here to become the apologist for Ted Cruz, and as a radio host and writer. I'll do my best to report fairly on the elections as they unfold.
But I will be standing with Senator Cruz with faith and confidence, believing that, if he indeed is God's choice, he will not only make it to the White House but also be an agent of positive change for our nation.
And I appreciate Senator Cruz's kind endorsement of me in his press release, which was also tweeted out and posted on Facebook: "Dr. Michael Brown inspires people to seek out the truth about God and faith, and I deeply appreciate his support!"
It's my honor and joy, and the coming months could be quite an adventure.
Forward!
(If you live anywhere near Greenville, South Carolina, I'm scheduled to appear with Senator Cruz, the Benham Brothers, and others in an important religious liberties rally on November 14th. Please join us there!)
Michael Brown is the host of the nationally syndicated talk radio show The Line of Fire and is the president of FIRE School of Ministry. His newest book is Outlasting the Gay Revolution: Where Homosexual Activism Is Really Going and How to Turn the Tide. Connect with him on Facebook at AskDrBrown or on Twitter @drmichaellbrown.
Transferring 90,000 people down to the border is going to cost a fortune. I’d like to see how budget on that and where the money will come from. Understand that IRS will be dispersed but it will take huge resources for getting them down there and then writing all those PDs and various other things. The big question is training. How would the training work? What about housing down at the border? Has he done a study to see if their are adequate resources to make this happen? When is he going to release his detailed plan? I am interested in this but he hasn’t given any syllabus or anything.
I agree with you. Why put people of the boarder? Can’t we just do an honor system? Can we just force Mexico to keep their people on their said until they get a wall built to keep them in?
“..And so, when Senator Cruz’s team invited me to stand with him in the battle for religious liberties in America, ..”
THAT is so important, especially when we currently have a “president” who wants to take away our religious freedoms!
Well supposedly Trump is putting a double wall up there with a little door. So 90K people are just going to look at each other. Both candidates are so stupid it hurts.
Transferring 90,000 people down to the border is going to cost a fortune.
***************
Texas will have a lot of new cash flowing with that many agents on duty.
Lot of new housing, commercial establishments, etc to handle that many
people and necessary resources.
“I’d like to see how budget on that and where the money will come from.”
You are kidding, right? When you take into account all the trillions of dollars we have spent protecting other nations’ borders...
The most logical response is that the nation doesn’t seem to have a problem finding hundreds of billions of dollars caring for illegals already in the country.
Also, you can research how Eisenhower accomplished the same thing (moving millions of illegals out) with very little cost.
I bet you were not around at the time demanding how he proposed to do it, but he accomplished it without you.
Ted Cruz is so crafty - if he succeeds in abolishing the IRS with his 10% flat tax on income over $35k - those Lois Lerner wannabes will be begging for a Federal job transfer to Texas (after all their severance bennies run out).
They have vast work experience in intimidation - should be easy to smack illegals around - they have been treating US Citizens with no respect for decades.
Trump supported TARP, auto bailout and Porkulus bill.
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)
Apparently Trump has no idea of how big the border between Mexico and Texas is.
Someone should show him a map.
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!"
I could be wrong, but I think the Senator is mostly joking about IRS agents at the border.
Yeah, its a pretty obvious joke.
What got my attention on Trump recently was after the debate Trump also said he would be FOR TPP if there are protections against currency manipulation. Nothing mentioned by Trump about the threat to our constitution or sovereignty. Nothing said about the international crony capitalism or that it could function like the EU. Nothing even said about immigration, which one would THINK he would also be all over. I HATED that Cruz initially supported TPA. But for the Trump supporters who point and say, “See, see!?”, I would say your guy ain’t exactly on a rock solid foundation either.
Keep in mind, too, one of Dr. Brown’s requirements for his support: “supporter of Israel”. Senator Cruz has been unwavering in his full-throated defense of Israel and his denigration of the Iran treaty.
While Cruz is promising to remove the US from participation in the Iran “treaty” on day 1 of his administration, other candidates have said they will “evaluate the treaty more closely and keep the good parts” or “wait until Iran proves they are acting in bad faith”.
I like the idea of a double wall. Supposedly there is a portion of double wall along a part of Texas. The space within the two walls is wide enough to be patrolled by border control traffic. There has been NO illegal entry in that portion of Texas since the double wall went up. Can you imagine how maddening it would be to get over one wall, just to face another one, or be stuck there until you get picked up by the patrols.
Cruz is simply the most conservative candidate we have ever had both socially and fiscally, as well as defending the constitution, who has at least half a chance to win that we have had in a long time. No he isn’t perfect. But he is the most solid. But instead of backing him, a lot of us are doing the establishment’s work for them by rallying behind who is considered the most electable.
LOL
Best depiction of a ship of fools that is the Trump train.
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.