Although Ted Cruz is a Little ways down my short list of presidential candidates in 2016 (behind Walker, Jindal, Paul and Rubio), I just found one extremely compelling reason to think about supporting him.
23 thoughts on “Reconsideration”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Yes please!
Then again, how many liberals actually moved to Canada after Bush the Younger was elected. I’m sure King will file this with the rest of his campaign promises he never intended to keep.
Promises, promises.
I want Pat Buchanan to run.
No more Senators in the Oval Office, Please.
He’d make a hell of a AG.
No more Senators in the Oval Office, Please.
I wouldn’t forbear supporting a current or former member of Congress in the presidential primary so long as they’ve also had some major executive experience (governor, mayor of a major city, ran a large business or other complex organization, etc.). Being president isn’t about delivering red meat speeches to your base – it’s about having the skills to actually govern and I’m frankly tired of how much time and attention gets spent on the former over the latter. It’s how we ended up with Obama and frankly I think Cruz or Paul are pretty much offering the same, albeit to the right rather than left side of the aisle.
That being said if either of them win the nomination or are placed on the ticket as VP, I’ll vote for them over Clinton or whichever dark horse contender wins the Democratic nominee.
Come on, guys, we should be talking about Victor Orban here. Duh. And since he was born in Canada (eh) to a noncitizen father, is he really native born?
And regarding Senators in the White House, it strikes me that the current one is striking not for his adherence to legislative prerogatives, but for his rejection of them. One of those “hmmm” things. His failure is not because he’s overly collaborative, but rather because he’s trying to execute what he doesn’t have the right to do.
The problem with Mr.Cruz is that his vaunted fidelity to his principles is in the realm of politics and economics, two spheres of human activity that simply will not admit ideologically pure and intellectually clean solutions. So his my-way-or-the-highway approach, quite possibility exacerbated by his own sense of intellectual superiority, makes him prefer the unattainable perfect over the realizable good. It also inclines him strongly to see those with differing views not only as mistaken (and obviously, to him, as intellectually inferior) but also as morally suspect, whence his flame-throwing, take-no-prisoners rhetoric. Cruz seems like a textbook example of a person who would rather be right than do right.
“The problem with Mr. Obama is that his vaunted fidelity to his principles is in the realm of politics and community organizing, two spheres of human activity that simply will not admit ideologically pure and intellectually clean solutions. So his my-way-or-the-highway approach, quite possibility exacerbated by his own sense of intellectual superiority, makes him prefer the unattainable perfect over the realizable good. It also inclines him strongly to see those with differing views not only as mistaken (and obviously, to him, as intellectually inferior) but also as morally suspect, whence his flame-throwing, take-no-prisoners rhetoric. Obama seems like a textbook example of a person who would rather be right than do right.”
Come on, guys, we should be talking about Victor Orban here. Duh. And since he was born in Canada (eh) to a noncitizen father, is he really native born?
If you’re asking about Cruz’s eligibility to run for President, the standard is “natural-born” which only requires that he be considered a U.S. citizen when he was born. This can typically be done either by being born on US soil (or in an area under its jurisdiction) or having at least one of his biological parents be a US citizen* before he was born. So the fact that Cruz was born in Canada and his father was Cuban is trumped by his mother being an American.
* There are certain residency requirements set by statute none of which seem to be contested here.
“I am very surprised conservatives would accept Mr. Cruz, a first term senator and an attorney to boot. Especially one from one of those elitist universities like Hahvad. And so little experience! Sounds like their version of Obama. And you say he wasn’t born in the U.S.? Delicious.”
http://www.shotinthedark.info/wp/?p=52184#comments
Really, Emory? You’re linking your own comment screw up in a different comment thread? That takes an M.C. Escher level of Möbius strip Internet commenting.
And here I thought we agreed on something. ;^)
See, just because I point out your wild hypocrisy, doesn’t translate into agreement.
It’s worth noting that economics does admit pretty black and white solutions, actually.
With the exception of moral bounds on what kinds of transactions can be considered voluntary, those who tinker with the markets generally run into huge problems, like New York City and San Francisco rent controls resulting in the highest rents in the nation, the abyssmal failure of the Warsaw Pact, and the like.
Same thing with politics. When we admit a lawless man like Mr. Blagojevich Soetoro into the Oval Office, bad things happen. Lex Rex is not just a cool name for a book by Samuel Rutherford, but an extremely good idea.
Honestly, Emery, can you start doing some thinking for yourself? These things are not exactly subtle truths well-hidden by the Masons or something like that.
You know as well as I do that Mr. Cruz knows he has a Inhofe’s chance in Hell of ever being elected President of the United States. This is all a political tactic to raise money from poor saps who can ill afford to send this huckster anything.
Just be honest about it….
Just listen to Emory. Don’t bother thinking for yourself.
Just give up, already . . .
Why don’t you donate your pension to Sanders, EmeryTheAntiSemiticSoci@list? I hear he is running.
I like Governor John Kasich of Ohio. If the GOP thinks that Romney and McCain lost because they were too moderate, let’s just get out of the way. Every Dem should send Cruz $10 and get on his mailing list, and stay on it right up to November 2016, so we can again see Karl Rove lose his mind.
f the GOP thinks that Romney and McCain lost because they were too moderate, let’s just get out of the way.
It’s not just “thinking” it. 400,000 more conservatives showing up to the polls in Ohio, Florida, Colorado and Pennsylvania, and Mitt would be President today.
Those weren’t mythical paper conservatives; those were people who’d been the polls before.
But feel free to have Dems send $10 to Cruz, Walker, Rand Paul, or, sure, Kasich (if he runs – he’d be somewhere close to my short list).
Emery would prefer the Republicans run a Moderate because then Republicans will lose, leaving Democrats in charge, which is his ultimate goal. That’s fine advice from Emery, it helps his side; but why do Beltway Republicans keep taking it?
Modern Republicans elected President ran as conservatives: Reagan and Bush Younger; Republicans who lost ran as moderates: Bush Elder, John McCain, Mitt Romney, Bob Dole.
Cruz may or may not be the right conservative for the job. But better him than an establishment insider moderate.
I like Cruz throwing his hat in the ring, it will drive the conversation of where we’re at in this country. One thing for certain I don’t want another Bush, Clinton, or God forbid another Kennedy on the ballot when I go to the polls.
Pingback: There Is No Such Thing As “Too Conservative” | Shot in the Dark