Posted on 12/23/2015 8:22:19 PM PST by Helicondelta
In the conversation with the donor, Cruz was asked if gay marriage was a top-three priority for him and he said it wasn't.
In a recording provided to POLITICO, Cruz answers a flat "No" when asked whether fighting gay marriage is a "top-three priority", an answer that pleased his socially moderate hosts but could surprise some of his evangelical backers. By late summer, she said, the River Valley Teenage Republicans were a grassroots advocacy group working to put Cruz over the top.
(Excerpt) Read more at popherald.com ...
After more thought, I see the play this is getting in the press as an example of them buying their own biased and stereotypical Leftist propaganda.
Remember that the Left believes that Conservatives are homophobically obsessed about gay marriage. Cruz saying this plays into that stereotype and bias: OF COURSE it’s going to hurt Cruz, because denying homosexuals marriage equality is a core component, THE core component, of what makes one a “Conservative”.
(I’ll add an aside here that it’s also projection, since it’s the Left thats really obsessed with the identity politics of race, gender, class, orientation, etc)
The Left doesn’t “get” that Conservativism is rooted in a deep believe in the Constitution and Bill of Rights and commitment to the founding ideals of this nation. In part because of their own obsession with “identity” but also because they don’t see the Constitution as an absolute but rather political silly putty that can be twisted and shaped to fit their needs.
Yep.
Don’t this this will hurt at all.
“Oh, Helicondelta is a pro-Trump troll - which should give her an infinite pass around here.”
Nope, just pretending to be a Trumpster to get a free pass so they can keep posting.
That one is a Clintonite.
I was one of the original Obama birthers here at FR but I eventually walked away from it for a few reasons.
Right off the top its no secret that the birth issue came straight from the Clinton camp. Then there was the fact that anyone with any sense knew that nothing would happen with it. There were many obvious liberal trolls who were single minded in their desire to get everyone to harass all republicans about the issue and destroy them if they didn’t answer correctly.
A few days ago there was a story that is typical of how the left operates and use the news to advance their “progressive” agenda.
Just by coincidence this particular progressive agenda with a Clinton presidency could be very very profitable to one Donald Trump.
The story was about the problems of lead paint in low income housing.
The lead paint claim started with, IIRC, Freddy Gray.
Now we’ve got another story “investigating” the lead paint problem which will then be followed by other stories on lead paint.
Pretty soon there will be a feeding frenzy in the MSM on the problems of lead paint in low income housing.
Hillary will then have herself a campaign issue on the need to get the “children” out of these “death traps” and into safe housing.
With a Clinton presidency moving all of these people out of low income housing in the inner cities and the buildings they are living in being declared as unsafe for human occupation, a whole lot of real estate in the inner cities will be opened up for development.
Heli is only here for one reason. To damage Cruz, the only threat to Trump. She/He has no productive reason to be allowed on this board.
The lead paint story didn’t start with Freddy Gray, it has been around for 40+ years. Maybe they are bring the subject up again but it certainly isn’t new.
I’ll say it again. Heli is here for one reason and one reason only. To damage one of the most conservative members in DC. I have no problem posting pro (fill in candidate here), but that’s not what he/she does. He/she has no place on this board, in my opinion.
Sorry didn’t know I had to explain it to you.
We can hope that a conservative wins the presidency and then three or four of the old leftist bastards on the court slump over dead on toilet and that the new president fights hard to put true constitutionalists on the bench, that a state brings another case arguing for sovereignty on this issue and the will of the people finally wins out over judicially tyranny.
The problem with judicial appointments is the fact that they tend to go their own way.
The Federal Judge who ruled in favor of gay marriage in Michigan the last time before it went to the US supreme court was a Reagan appointee who has drifted leftward over the years.
In Michigan we elect our state supreme court judges and they remain accountable to the people.
Well .. and that too.
Yeah, I got that.
It’s just the left’s usual.
That is a good reason to have both term limits and age requirements for Federal Judges.
We need a Convention of the States.
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.