Tea Party Caucus Chairman Tim Huelskamp Endorses Ted Cruz, a ‘Full Spectrum Conservative’

Posted by AJAshinoff 10 years, 6 months ago to Politics

Another fine endorsement. Its remarkable how silent the MSM is about these things.

SOURCE URL: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/02/16/tea-party-caucus-chairman-tim-huelskamp-endorses-ted-cruz-a-full-spectrum-conservative/

Add Comment

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

4

Posted by freedomforall 10 years, 6 months ago

Tea Party was co-opted away from its original goals years ago and taken over by GOP insiders.
Good for Cruz campaign relative to the other GOP looters.

Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
- 2
  
  Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
  
  And Cruz ISNT a looter????? You are kidding. He is a religious zealot of the first order who will vote for mixing religion in with government at all opportunities
  
  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
  - 1
    
    Posted by freedomforall 10 years, 6 months ago
    
    I did write "other GOP looters", term2 ;^)
    That doesn't exonerate Cruz.
    
    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
    - 2
      
      Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
      
      ok. if politics today wasnt so much of a 'take from me and give to you" affair, not a lot of people would care about who is president. We would need an administrator who carried out the wishes of congress as inexpensively and efficiently as possible. But government today is all about whose ox is going to be gored to benefit who
      
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
      - 2
        
        Posted by freedomforall 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        Ever read Hamilton's Curse? It's a revealing look at the founding documents and its manipulators .
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        1
        
        Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        can you give me a litle teaser on Hamiltons Curse
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        2
        
        Posted by freedomforall 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        Fee Review:
        http://fee.org/articles/hamiltons-cur...
        Author's presentation about the book:
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uox8h...
        Lewrockwell dot com :
        https://www.lewrockwell.com/2008/10/t...
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        1
        
        Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        Interesting book. I got it on kindle. Makes me think the only thing the so called founding fathers could agree on is to be able to practice "their,," religion and quit paying taxes to england. Everything else was a compromise of competing crony interests
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        1
        
        Posted by freedomforall 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        No, crony interests vs liberty and free markets.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
  - 1
    
    Posted by Gonzotr 10 years, 6 months ago
    
    What facts do you have to support you assertion. tr
    
    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
    - 1
      
      Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
      
      I just listened to his "debate" speeches with all the relgiosity in there. He wants gays out of the military and wants to stop gay marriage. That was enough for me actually, and I havent researched past those. Being so evangelical, he will in all liklihood want to force other religious tenets into government laws.
      
      Not that I like the dogmatic approach to things that heavily religious people subscribe to, but at least if he pledged allegiance to a 'god' that was an objectivist it wouldnt be so bad I suppose to support Cruz vs the other candidates.
      
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
      - 1
        
        Posted by Gonzotr 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        Objectively, there is no such thing as Gay Marriage. It can be called something else, don't care, but it is not the same as marriage. This is not only a religious stand. Don't conflate history, culture and law. I would not really care if the law did not recognize marital status, but they do. If you don't like Ted's dogma, you must certainly have a problem with the Declaration of Independence. Maybe your in the wrong country? :)
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        2
        
        Posted by Tuner38 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        Marriage is a contract. It doesn't need government sanction or religious sanction. Like any contract it can be made or broken. As for dogma I don't see what the Declaration of Independence has to do with it.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        1
        
        Posted by Gonzotr 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        It is first, a definition, then, a covenant.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        
        1
        
        Posted by ut91t05 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        It's pretty simple;
        person A owns person A, person B owns person B
        the declaration supports that.
        
        life liberty the pursuit of happiness. the gov has no business in contracts between consenting adults including marriage.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        1
        
        Posted by Gonzotr 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        Until they divorce, and split up the millions.....
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        1
        
        Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        I say the constitution and declaration of independence were documents designed to free the colonists from the rule of the king of england particularly- not to set some standard of personal freedom in general.
        
        If there were no death tax exclusion and favorable tax treatments, the whole marriage argument is kind of useless. Having religious "marriage" is ok, and if they dont want same sex "marriage" to be called "marriage"- I am ok with that really. But, legal marriage is tied up with religious marriage, and thats what I dont like and what the Cruz people mix up.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        1
        
        Posted by Gonzotr 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        There is a major societal benefit for keeping married families together. Fact. That is the underpinning of "licensing " marriage. I can make that argument all day long, with no religious overtones at all. ( And win it )
        
        Your impression of the signing is much too tight. Read the writings, it is much broader than that. Freeing slaves really did not come about until the early 1800's, and they knew, writing the Deceleration, and Constitution the way they did would start the ball rolling. But economic, and religious freedom were more important to most at the time. The war between the states was more about economics than slavery.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        1
        
        Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        How about economic and religious freedom FROM the king of england seemed to be the most important thing. Not sure they thought past that at the time (or at least thats all they could get a consensus on)
        
        As to societal benefits, I dont give a damn about that communal benefit stuff. Government should guarantee individual rights, and thats ALL
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
- 1
  
  Posted by AJAshinoff 10 years, 6 months ago
  
  Considering its organizational structure I doubt the Tea Party has been co-opted by anyone. I agree a chapter here and there may had migrated from the Tea Party's initial platform, but there are far too many chapters, with little central organization, to speak in general terms.
  
  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
  - 1
    
    Posted by Bethesda-gal 10 years, 6 months ago
    
    I would tend to agree that the Tea Party has been co-opted, except the premise of this discussion - Cruz getting a Tea Party Caucus endorsement- would contradict that. TP started out ( as far as Im aware) to be very anti-excessive govt (Taxed Enough Already). Unfortunately, from my perspective, evangelicals like Cruz glommed on and diluted the whole point of getting back to following what's written in the darn Constitution. (and Bill of Rights)
    
    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
    - 0
      
      Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
      
      I agree, Cruz and his religious zealotry, have infiltrated the tea party. We have had ENOUGH of mixing religion and government, and it needs to stop now.
      
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
      - 1
        
        Posted by Bethesda-gal 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        I wish it would. And Tea Party has that potential. But I doubt it will happen. The GOP relies on evangelicals for a voting block if they say what they want to hear. And the left wants to amend the Constitution to read "freedom FROM religion". Neither perspective suits me.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        1
        
        Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        I am not sure I would object to government granting "freedom from religion" in its actions. Look at what happened to the mormons for their beliefs in polygamy. They were run out by the soldiers all the way to Utah !! All because their belief was different from whatever religion the puritans had.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        1
        
        Posted by Bethesda-gal 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        I don't know constitutional law, which I guess would be the governing authority over this. Or did congress or even the SCOTUS have to make this distinction ? I don't know. Nor do I know how its determined for religions who claim drugs, legal or not, are part of their religion. Polygamy seems to be legal again (since its on tv). But I think its gone too far where kids are forbidden from bringing a bible to school to read during lunch. Or teachers prohibited even mentioning judeo-christian things.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        1
        
        Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        Get rid of public school, and the whole bible thing becomes moot. The problem is the fact that education has been usurped by the government. It should be voluntary and selectable from private offerings, not some "government indoctrination center"
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        1
        
        Posted by Bethesda-gal 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        Wasn't public indoctrination -turn the teeming masses into a melting pot - the purpose of public education ?
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink

3

Posted by allosaur 10 years, 6 months ago

Old dino was in the Tea Party until he who is me became overwhelmed by a unending hurricane of donation requests by phone, mail and email.
Ring, ring! Telephone ring! Ring, ring! Telephone ring!
Phooey!
One reaches the point when he who is me says the heck with all this and take me off your freakin' list!.
At this point I've decided to vote for Cruz at least in the primary due to the fact that the GOP insiders hate Cruz for having solid conservative principles.
I take that back. Cruz is hated for having principles period.

Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink

3

Posted by RSG1776 10 years, 6 months ago

While I could wish for a better option, none are available. Of all the likely candidates for POTUS#45, Cruz is by far the best we could hope for. As one moves through the list -- Rubio, Kasich, Bush, Trump, Sanders, Clinton -- the potential damage to our country and our freedoms rises exponentially.

Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
- Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
- 3
  
  Posted by MichaelAarethun 10 years, 6 months ago
  
  Let us rephrase that. He is by far the best the single party system has allowed us to have. No need to sugar coat what is common knowledge. Even Reid is saying McDonnel will cave
  
  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
  - 4
    
    Posted by splumb 10 years, 6 months ago
    
    sigh
    I'm heartily sick of voting for the "least worst" candidate.
    
    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
    - Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    - 1
      
      Posted by ut91t05 10 years, 6 months ago
      
      then don't. IMO the only wasted vote is a vote not cast.Look for a 3 party candidate or write in someone. Until we all stop voting for the lesser there will only be the lesser to vote for
      
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
- 1
  
  Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
  
  I think incredible damage can be done by mixing religion in with government. Look whats happened already? We have prohibition, anti-drug laws, the insane level that the DUI laws have risen to, anti-abortion, hatred of homosexuals. The list goes on and on. Cruz is the worst for this mixing of religion and government. Rubio is right up there, followed by Carson. Bush is from the old school and who wants 3 Bushes in there. Kasich is an unknown and in all liklihood will never be nominated, let alone elected. Sanders is a wacko who will never make it to the election (but will probably be nominated). Clinton has all the money behind her, but she is dishonest, a liar, a manipulator, and hides like tricky dick Nixon did. Trump is not an objectivist by any means, but at least tells it like it is and isnt PC. Thats why I am voting for him.
  
  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
  - 1
    
    Posted by Gonzotr 10 years, 6 months ago
    
    We have prohibition,( Prohibition, albeit interesting, actually worked, Would I do it today. No. ) anti-drug laws, ( Anti drug laws have no basis in religion, just good common sense. ) the insane level that the DUI laws have risen to, ( insane, See first response. It works. Your an idiot if you drive and drink. ) anti-abortion, ( Cruz, as I, do not want to ban it, we want it sent back to the states. The true correct constitutional view. What part of selling baby parts do you want to be normalized? ) hatred of homosexuals.( We don't hate you, we just don't want you redefining 6000 years ) The list goes on and on. Cruz is the worst for this mixing of religion and government.
    
    Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
    
    John Adams
    
    Even if you take out the religious, you must still keep the moral.
    
    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
    - 1
      
      Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
      
      Unfortunately, I think John Adams said it right. Very unfortunately.
      
      As to DUI, what I was talking about was what happens to you when the cop pulls you over when you havent actually hurt anyone (they call this a victimless crime). You get branded, your license is taken away, you lose about $10k of your money, you can get house arrest, mandatory AA meeting requirements, and ridiculous probation for 3 years, during which you cannot violate ANY laws and cannot be found driving with ANY alcohol at all. They are trying to make you NOT DRINK at all. Has nothing to do with drinking and driving. Tell me thts not religion in action like it was during prohibition
      
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
      - 1
        
        Posted by Bethesda-gal 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        I disagree. I believe countries that aren't overly religious have even stiffer DUI laws than the U.S. has. Just b/c one gets 'lucky' and can DUI w/o killing someone doesn't give them the right to put others at such risk. IMO, there's NO reason to drive if ANY alcohol is consumed. Do one, or the other, but not both together ! This has zero to do with religion. It has to do with not having the right to put the public at risk. Just like texting and driving is illegal most places now. There's certainly no religious component to that either.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        1
        
        Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        So what about having your screaming baby in the car distracting you, or a wife cackling, or a husband being nasty, or eating a cheeseburger, or listening to loud music. DUI is a money making machine at this point and a way to simply control people.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        1
        
        Posted by Bethesda-gal 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        None of those examples impair you neurologically like alcohol or drugs do. Texting totally takes your eyes off the road. None of those examples do that either. But distracted driving can cover those as well.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        1
        
        Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        My point is there are many things that can result in subpar driving performance. Like being tired, daydreaming, being worried about some problem that can result in attention lapses. So should there be arrests and fines if a cop hears a screaming baby in your car. Not that you hit anyone, but just had the screaming baby in the car. Victimless crimes just give go bcc Sement excuses to control us and get our money for their programs
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        1
        
        Posted by Bethesda-gal 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        You are still wrong. Screaming babies don't automatically impair someone. ALCOHOL DOES IMPAIR someone - whether they get "lucky" and don't kill someone or not. It's only "victimless" until someone gets killed - which isn't an "if", it's a "when". I don't want drunk drivers on public roads. As for other things that can be distractions - yes, people are responsible if they create a distraction for them. Alcohol/ drugs are always impairments regardless of whether or not that irrefutable impairment leads to an accident that particular time.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        1
        
        Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        You just want to control other people. Drinking alcohol does not automatically cause property or personal damage. Put a screaming baby in my car and I guarantee I am impaired. Yet lots of mothers tote their babies around in cars and in restaurants where they scream. I would like mothers to keep their screaming babies at home and not distract or annoy me- but I dont go around passing laws forbidding it and fining them thousands of dollars for falling asleep inside their car instead of driving home after drinking and then getting DUI for that (yes you do get DUI for that very thing)
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
      - Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      - 1
        
        Posted by ut91t05 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        He was right but that doesn't make it an endorsement for legislating morality or religious beliefs. The constitution was designed to restrict laws and high moral standards were seen as filling the inadequacy of the document. The founding fathers agreed on only one thing, the natural rights of man were given by God. What does that mean? What is God? Each person can answer that in their own way but you have to decide on an ultimate authority in order to pen any written contract. The founding fathers chose the creator of the universe as that authority.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
      - 1
        
        Posted by Gonzotr 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        I am very religious, and think the .05 standard is way too low. We can agree on a lot. But, I have also seen a Corvette split in half, wrapped around a pole, with 2 drunk kids in it. Paul said, do not be drunk with wine, as is the manner of many. I agree. But a good guiness does me well. tr
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        1
        
        Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        I think murder by car is murder by car, and there should be accountability if it happens. Whether aided by eating a cheeseburger, texting, or whatever. If there is no victim or damage to others, I dont get the idea why there should be so much fuss. Now its a big financial boondoggle with lawyers fees and all the driving restrictions. Its out of control.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink

3

Posted by Susanne 10 years, 6 months ago

I wonder why they're not endorsing a tea party candidate? Cruz is anything BUT that...

Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
- 1
  
  Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
  
  Its the whole evangelical thing. In history more harm has been done by religious zealots than any other group
  
  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
- 1
  
  Posted by Radio_Randy 10 years, 6 months ago
  
  Probably because a Tea Party candidate wouldn't stand a chance. This same question came up during the last Presidential election. Not because they're wrong, but because it appears to be a solid Democrat vs. Republican race, anymore.
  
  After all, even Bernie Sanders won't run as a Socialist...knowing he probably wouldn't have a chance.
  
  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
  - Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  - 1
    
    Posted by MichaelAarethun 10 years, 6 months ago
    
    Solid Democrat versus Republican? when most are in the same party? it's 2016 not 1945. Get real.
    Chances are greater than Comrade Reid and Comrade McDonnel will not confirm Lynch than what you suggest.
    
    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
    - Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    - 1
      
      Posted by MichaelAarethun 10 years, 6 months ago
      
      are greater that Comrade Reid and Comrade McDonnell will not confirm Comrade Lynch than...
      
      that was really a poorly written sentence Michael
      
      Yep
      
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink

2

Posted by mdant 10 years, 6 months ago

Great! Cruz seems to be the best option out there because he is committed to the constitution. Religion is fine...our constitution and everything about the founding of this country was bathed in religion.

Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink

2

Posted by Esceptico 10 years, 6 months ago

Full spectrum. Yup. Bible thumping is what he does best. Trump is right, Cruz is a liar, resorts to dirty tricks, and excuses it all with his prayers. Government should be a “Religion Free Zone” and Cruz is 100% the opposite of that. Which is fine with the TP, as they compete with each other as to who thumps best.

Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
- 2
  
  Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
  
  You got it right !!!! I am tired of bible thumping and the mixing of religion and government. I would rather have the less than perfect Trump, since he seems to offer some separation of religion and state, and he tells it like it is, and isnt pandering to special crony interests. Cruz panders a LOT to special interests.
  
  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink

2

Posted by jimjamesjames 10 years, 6 months ago

Of all the candidates (turds in the bucket), Cruz is the only one with the demonstrated love of, knowledge of, experience with and history of supporting and defending the Constitution.

Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
- 0
  
  Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
  
  Cruz is a religious zealot. his God, whatever that is, is the only one who really knows how he will perform. For example, he wants to kick gays out of the military AGAIN.
  
  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
  - 1
    
    Posted by jimjamesjames 10 years, 6 months ago
    
    I have more than a few vet friends and one current member of the military, my grandson, Lt in the Navy, grad of Annapolis, that have no problem with gay influence being removed from military operations. Personally, I don't care.
    
    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
    - 1
      
      Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
      
      Why not leave it up to the company commanders. After all, they have to fight the wars and should be able to pick who they want.
      
      Cruz is just using his relious tenets to ban from his pulpit gays in the military. Maybe it would be any government workers next. Maybe gays would be OK if his god relented, but lesbians would be out. He is basing his government on religious tenets- and thats what I dont like. Religion really has no place in government.
      
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
      - 3
        
        Posted by jimjamesjames 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        My sister forced me (!) to read his book and am convinced that his religion is the basis for his moral foundation but he knows, understands, and will adhere to the Constitution as the foundation of this government. To believe that his religion will influence his choices in government seems the same argument that JFK would be ruled by the Pope. To paraphrase Jefferson, whether he has no god or 20 gods, as long as he doesn't break my leg or pick my pocket, I don't care.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        2
        
        Posted by edweaver 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        I concur with your thoughts. I have read his book and he has been on my radar since he ran for the senate. From everything I've seen he has been true to his word.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        1
        
        Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        Totally agree with separation of church and state. I do think that Cruz will find that an impossible goal when it comes to certain topics like same sex marriage, homosexuality, abortion, and god knows what other things. Thats why I turn against anyone who touts his religion when he is running for political office.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink

Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
1

Posted by MichaelAarethun 10 years, 6 months ago

or are the donors slaves to their politicians? All in all a rather dirty business condoned openly by all but the most pollyannish voters. Self feeding,self-perpetuating...on a constant growth cycle. The motive for all concerned who support is greed. Not the egoism kind Rand wrote of but the pure unadulterated ego centric kind that wishes to acquire everything but especially money and control.

Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink

Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
1

Posted by MichaelAarethun 10 years, 6 months ago

Actually no. It was the industrial revolution and the need for technically trained people for workers.

the original plan was 8th grade for most, high school for those going into technical skills and universities for those in upper management.

that plan was one of Ford's contributions as he and others like him needed people with more education but not that much more.

Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink

1

Posted by Herb7734 10 years, 6 months ago

Cruz isn't an ideal for Objectivists. But if you're the type who feels he's throwing away his vote to go Libertarian, I think he's the best of the bunch. He did have the courage to fight against Obamacare with a filibuster, and has made both the Democrats and Republican insiders hate him. He has won cases before the Supreme Court, and is highly intelligent. He has more courage than Rubio and Bush together. There is no comparison between him and Trump. And...if you think Obama is bad, you will come out with hives if Clinton or Sanders gets in. Then it is truly, irrevocably over for the USA and it becomes The People's Republic of America.

Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
- 1
  
  Posted by Bethesda-gal 10 years, 6 months ago
  
  Cruz's biggest problem, imo, is that he's not just UN-likeable, he's DIS-likeable ! I agree with a lot of his positions but even I cannot stand him. His affect is so arrogant and condescending he just makes you want to slap him ! He will never win a general election if he was the nominee.
  
  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
  - 1
    
    Posted by Herb7734 10 years, 6 months ago
    
    Your description of Cruz fits a lot of so-called Objectivists I know.
    
    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
    - 1
      
      Posted by Bethesda-gal 10 years, 6 months ago
      
      Yeah, but hopefully you dont have to be subjected to seeing any of them on tv for four years. ;)
      
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
      - 1
        
        Posted by Herb7734 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        You got a point.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
  - 1
    
    Posted by edweaver 10 years, 6 months ago
    
    I have to ask, have you spoken to him or is your dislike for him from the media soundbites? I ask because I like him both as a person and for his record in the senate. I do not see him as any of the things your are saying and I would really like to understand what I don't see. I have not spoken to him either but I have listened to him for a long time. I've also listened to his father talk about his own background immigrating from Cuba and the direction he sees America on. It is a compelling story. I've also read his book and he appears to come from humble roots.
    
    No Ted is not the most charismatic person in the world but I see him as a down to earth, honest person of integrity with the courage to stand up to this disgusting establishment we have in government. Of course maybe I'm wrong.
    
    I'm not asking to change your mind since I believe you are set in your position. I just really want to understand where your perspective comes from.
    
    Thanks
    
    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
    - 1
      
      Posted by Bethesda-gal 10 years, 6 months ago
      
      Just from seeing him on tv. And I watch a LOT of political tv, and listen to C span radio. But I've heard Cruz has even polled in correllation with my impression, ie. that women in particular dont like him. Oh well. I'd still vote for him in the general if he was the nominee. Jeb is the only one I wouldnt vote for no matter what. But after having two presidents for eight years who I couldnt stand, I would reeeeally like to like my president again !
      ps - I'm not even so sure how honest Cruz is with some of his campaign's tactics. For honesty, I give Carson an A, and Kasich an A-, just b/c he's been in politics a lot longer.
      
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
      - 1
        
        Posted by edweaver 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        Thanks for your reply.
        
        I'm with you on Jeb. I see Kasich as establishment and will not vote for him. Trump was on my no vote list too but decided that if he makes it I will vote for him so I get a chance to see if I am correct about him. I will never know for sure if he is not elected. I think Carson is a great guy and could have voted for him, if I had to. Rand Paul the same but he's gone now.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink

1

Posted by johnpe1 10 years, 6 months ago

maybe the Ds will be so wounded that Cruz can beat
their surviving candidate. . we can hope. -- j
.

Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
- 2
  
  Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
  
  Cruz would never beat Hillary, so you better get accustomed to seeing her face for the next 4 years as you are standing in the unemployment line.
  
  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
  - 2
    
    Posted by edweaver 10 years, 6 months ago
    
    I disagree. Have you read his book yet? He had the same uphill battle to get into the senate and he won. He can beat both of the socialist.
    
    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
    - 1
      
      Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
      
      I have to tell you, I have a distinct dislike for Cruz. Not sure what its based on at this point. Maybe his bible thumping, maybe what I hear about other people in the government who cant stand him, maybe its a distinct feeling he cant separate religion from government.
      
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
  - 1
    
    Posted by johnpe1 10 years, 6 months ago
    
    that has been my conviction all along -- I was just
    following along where AJ might have been leading....... -- j
    .
    
    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
    - 2
      
      Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
      
      what a series of choices they have given us this time. The really good ones didnt stand a chance I guess !! The problem is that the culture in the USA has degenerated so much that the good responsible choices just cant get votes.
      
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
      - 1
        
        Posted by johnpe1 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        the corruption machine behind Hillary Diane is extensive
        and practiced ... and millions just lemming along with them
        to the voting booth. . proof of the demise of u.s. -- j
        .
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        2
        
        Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        she has made so many behind the scenes promises to get contributions, its mind boggling. Big contributors dont send money with no strings attaches- even if you dont see them right on the surface
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        1
        
        Posted by johnpe1 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        so our politicians are slaves to their donors, and they
        want to make us slaves to their redistribution plans.
        I thought that we had left slavery behind! -- j
        .
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        2
        
        Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        Except for trump who at least spends his own money
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        2
        
        Posted by johnpe1 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        yes. . astonishingly, though, I just heard on Rush that
        The Donald just said that he is in favor of the BHOcare
        mandate for buying health insurance. . he will need to
        modify that statement, I bet. . don't know how, thought. -- j
        .
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        2
        
        Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        I thought he wanted to get rid of Obamacare. Its so hard to figure out what they really say with all the media getting involved in it with their hidden agendas. In any event, nothing is going to change without the congress signing off.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        2
        
        Posted by johnpe1 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        that's what he's said, but, well, he adjusts things
        regularly ....... -- j
        .
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        2
        
        Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        I wonder about Rush sometimes though. he has hidden agendas too. I wonder what the context was
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        1
        
        Posted by johnpe1 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        it was a "sound bite" which he played twice, of an
        interview with DT about "people dying in the streets."
        DT said that Rs are good people and do not want
        people dying in the streets, and that he happens to
        like the mandate, so that people get health care,
        even though they can just go to the ER anyway.
        it was fuzzy enough to bear some adjustment. -- j
        .
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        2
        
        Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        I dont think I would want to run for president. You get asked questions constantly- how are you to even remember what you said during a campaign like this. What really matters is what you DO once elected after all the consideration is done with advisors, congress, etc
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        1
        
        Posted by johnpe1 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        I just posted an article by Ann Coulter which explains
        why so many like DT among the angry populace;;;
        you might want to check it out:::
        
        https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post...
        
        -- j
        .
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink

Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
1

Posted by MichaelAarethun 10 years, 6 months ago

That's a good start if it will pare the real T party away from the Rinos

Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink

1

Posted by awebb 10 years, 6 months ago

I'm wondering if part of the reason he's getting so many endorsements so rapidly now is because people are realizing that Trump isn't just going to go away.

Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
- Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
- 2
  
  Posted by MichaelAarethun 10 years, 6 months ago
  
  one can always hope but the laugh is this is very much between choosing between Stalin and Hitler
  
  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
- 1
  
  Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
  
  Trump isnt going away because people are tired of politicians and religious zealots. Trump tells it like it is, and we need that.
  
  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
- 1
  
  Posted by allosaur 10 years, 6 months ago
  
  LOL! You may very well be on to something.
  
  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
- 1
  
  Posted by roneida 10 years, 6 months ago
  
  awebb.. Trump may be going away to our handsome house on Pennsylvania Avenue.. He has endured far beyond what all the "experts" guaranteed. I am reading a book by David Mcullough, "Truman", and just finished the part about the 1948 election where President Truman is holding the newspaper with the famous headline," Dewey defeats Truman". It ain't over till the fat lady sings and she is still singing and screaming.I sent a note to Comrade Sanders telling him that if he keeps Clinton's wife from being nominated, I would vote for him in gratitude...and I was sober at the time.
  Don't forget to vote.
  
  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
  - 1
    
    Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
    
    Our country needs the anti-political correctness of Trump. We also need to hear whats really going on, and have someone who kknows how to hire people to get things done. I am finished with establishment politicians and certainly finished with the hide-behind-the-scenes Hillary, religious zealots, and admitted socialists.
    
    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
  - Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  - 1
    
    Posted by MichaelAarethun 10 years, 6 months ago
    
    My hope is stronger than voting for a national socialist corporatist instead of an international socialist statist.
    
    I reject your suggestion. I am done with voting for the left and that includes Comrade Trump
    \
    
    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
    - 1
      
      Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
      
      FAct is, if you dont vote for Trump, most likely Sanders or at best Hillary will win the white house. Hang on to your wallet while waiting in the unemployment line
      
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
      - 1
        
        Posted by Gonzotr 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        If ( I say that loosely ) Trump gets the nomination, the Left will DESTROY Him. he has no shot. They are just keeping their powder dry.
        
        “[The] candidate is considered a political outsider by all of the pundits. He’s tapping into the anger of voters, delivers a populist message. He believes everyone in the country should have health care. He advocates for hedge fund managers to pay higher taxes. He is drawing thousands of people at his rallies and bringing in a lot of new voters into the political process.”
        
        “Who am I describing?” Brzezinski asked.
        
        “You’re describing Donald Trump,” Trump responded.
        
        “Actually, I was describing Bernie Sanders,” Brzezinski replied.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        1
        
        Posted by roneida 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        Gonzotr Brzezinski is not part of the debate in spite of her shapely legs. She is a facilitator for the candidates, NOT a judge. the media is staffed by smart mouth wise guys and bimbos basking in their minute of fame. ,,,We need elections for the media to be allowed access to the real game.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        1
        
        Posted by Gonzotr 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        It is not a comment on her, but how Trump so easily fell into the groove. He is not a conservative, Bimbos, and all, they will destroy him. Huffpo has already started.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        1
        
        Posted by roneida 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        Ms. Huffington is hardly fit to discuss presidential politics or qualifications... As with all left wing, socialist, hate America firsters, she can only do what other followers of Lenin try,,, t.."Destroy the messenger...Never, never engage in back and forth debate because there is no substance or thought in the communist message....only SNL immature insults.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        1
        
        Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        voters are very angry at the hypocrisy, lying, and manipulation of mainstream politicians. Some one has to stop this sort of behavior, and Trump is the one to do it.
        Unless the left can find a way to do nuclear fusion grown money trees, THEY will destroy themselves with Sanders.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        2
        
        Posted by Gonzotr 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        Sorry, no he is not. We have been waiting for a principled, tough, honest conservative for decades. One who has stood up to the Cartel. Ted Cruz is that man. 42 Amicus briefs, 9 SCOTUS wins. He took on the POTUS, World Court, and entire establishment to win the Houston death penalty case. What has Trump done. Trump is no more than a strong man. In Nicaragua, you would be calling him dictator, and trying to depose him.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        1
        
        Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        I reject him because he is a religious zealot and mixes religion and government- a big NO NO for me. I dont care if he is religious, but the fact he bible thumps while campaigning bothers me a lot.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        1
        
        Posted by roneida 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        We do not elect Popes or ministers in America. Our freedom of religion also guarantees freedom from religion. All , All, elected officials should be required to have a hand on the U S Constitution when they take their oath of office,,, not some superstition primer for non readers. WE need men and women who defend America, not some friend in the sky. If there is a big Creator up there, HE / SHE has ample defenses to survive without American leaders groveling.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        1
        
        Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        Absolutely !!! Government has no business enforcing religion, no matter which of the hundreds of religions happens to be popular at the time.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        1
        
        Posted by Gonzotr 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        Rubio must drive you crazy then?
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        1
        
        Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        He is definitely off the wall (Rubio). When he came out with the statement that a woman who is raped has to carry the baby to term- that was over the top. Could you imagine having to actually do that? If I was a woman, I would definitely not want to carry a rapists baby to term. But Rubio is definitely going to use government to enforce his evangelical beliefs, so I have scratched him off the list
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
      - 1
        
        Posted by freedomforall 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        Since Trump is not the selected candidate of the GOP your comment is fiction, not fact.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        1
        
        Posted by term2 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        There are no nominated candidates at this point, you are right. It is looking like Trump vs Sanders though
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        1
        
        Posted by freedomforall 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        Depends on which lying sack of $%^# you believe, CBS (Trump has commanding lead) or CNBC (Cruz inches ahead.)
        
        http://www.cnbc.com/2016/02/17/trump-...
        
        http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cbs-news-...
        
        We should know before November ;^)
        
        Comrade Bernie is soooo popular:
        http://www.politicususa.com/2016/02/1...
        
        But the Wicked Witch is ahead of Bernie in all the polls
        http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epol...
        
        Before election should be an opportunity to short the market.
        
        OTOH, it's possible the GOP runs both Trump and Cruz.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        -
        
        1
        
        Posted by Gonzotr 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        Trump will never side saddle, and Cruz is way too smart for that.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
        
        1
        
        Posted by freedomforall 10 years, 6 months ago
        
        The candidates are not the ones in charge of selection process. You may be reading the candidates correctly, or not. Trump is all show and bluster, but If he thinks his chances improve by having Cruz as running mate, I think he would. Cruz might take VP slot just as GHWB did in 1980-1984, but I can't predict the odds.
        
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink

Tea Party Caucus Chairman Tim Huelskamp Endorses Ted Cruz, a ‘Full Spectrum Conservative’

Add Comment

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

Working...