A man, a senator – and president to boot? 42

We think Senator Ted Cruz would be the best GOP candidate for the 2016 presidential election. We like what he says, what he stands for. He is strong, brilliant, confident – and right. And he has the presence, the personality, the manner a president should have. In fact we like everything about him – except of course his religiousness, but that doesn’t seem to be having any adverse effect on his political thinking. Here he is making his principles plain in an interview with Genevieve Wood of The Foundry (part of the Heritage network).  The principles he states are ours too.

We know that not all our regular readers agree with our opinion of Senator Cruz.

We hope those who do not agree will tell us why.

Posted under Commentary, Conservatism, government, liberty, United States, Videos by Jillian Becker on Saturday, March 29, 2014

Tagged with , , , ,

This post has 42 comments.

Permalink
  • Andrew M

    I broadly agree with you that Ted Cruz is so far the most viable candidate for the 2016 GOP nomination. I wish I could say the same about Rand Paul because I agree with him on more things, but he’s shot himself in the foot too many times by now to attract a broad base of right-leaning folks.

    One problem with Ted Cruz is his eligibility for the position – while he’s older than 35 and has lived here for over 14 years, he was born in Canada to a Cuban father and an American mother. Even though the Constitution’s “natural-born citizen” language is quite ambiguous, I worry that the media will seize upon this one fact about Cruz to invalidate him as a serious candidate.

    • liz

      Yes, even though they had absolutely no problem with Obama’s questionable past or citizenship status.

    • Don L

      Hi Andrew M. Could you give some examples of what Paul has done to cool you on him? Thanks

      • liz

        Don – don’t know if you noticed, but the article on Cruz linked by Frank reports that Cruz was educated in the Austrian school of economics.

        • Don L

          I took a quick look at his two links again and didn’t see that but it isn’t a surprise. Theology and ideology, or any ology, adherents can study Austrian or Keynesian or monetarism. Economics is separate from the ologies. It’s like saying that atheism is and only socialist. NOT!

          Ron Paul, staunch Austrian economics follower, is still a nut case pacifist.

          The hardore christians that are Austrians do have a major conflict. Austrian economics is based on the principle that all people act on their own perceived best (self) interests…they are of nature selfish.

          Every born again Austrian writer always spends atleast 1 chapter in their book attempting to reconcile altruism with selfisness…always lame nonsensical arguments…but they cannot refute the analysis, explanations and results of the school..

          I don’t know when Rick Perry came over to the Austrian school, but at one time he imposed, by coercion, vaccines upon children…vaccines he knew or should have known were not tested and were linked to autism. Not an Austrian economics free-market behavior!

          Incidently, the vaccine was approved by FDA or CDC by a gal (Julie Gerlberding?) who had previously been the head of the Merck division that created the vaccine. After the approval…she returned to Merck. Crony capitalism at it’s NORMALCY. At its worst…it’s WORSE!!! LOL.

          Oh, almost forgot…Allen Greenspan was at one time an Austrian adherent. He even wrote a wonderful paper on re-instituting the gold standard and about failures of the FED. Ah, but when the power came and he was asked to be the Chairman of the FED…all was tossed out and the lies began. He knew exactly the lives and wealth he was destroying by his self- & political-/crony–serving policies. He goes to church too.

          • liz

            That’s interesting. Looks like Perry has no problem with cronyism. Wonder if Cruz would.
            Aren’t there laws against that kind of thing these days? Obama seems to get away with it constantly.

            • Don L

              Nope…No laws against it. In fact just about every law and regulation is in support of it. Career politicians are constantly in search of campaign funds and crony capitalism (mercantilism) is the private public relationship that keeps the funds flowing.

              A big corp needs to fight off a competittor, funds come in and a new regulation that mandates some new procedure gets passed. The donor corp has no problem implementing the procedure but the new competitor is put out of business.

              Or a new spending bill gets passed, funded by FED printed or borrowed money, to invest in solar panels, to repay bundled donations, and the 1 million in donations is repaid with a 400 million Solyndra plant…the fails.

              Lincoln and the Whig Party – nay Republican party – understood that cronyism was the way to fund near perpetual party-i-power. It is the same today.
              A new and scary book is very revealing: “Crony Capitalism in America 2008 – 2012” – Hunter Lewis. Lewis is, by the way a christian Austrian – he occasionally interjects little bits that suggest morality is specific to altruistic forces (god by not saying god). If you get by these theist conflict with secular economics interjections, the information about cronyism of the recent Great Recession is scary and the cure very interesting.

              How serving god or christ’s will reveals itself by theist politicians is unknowable as it is irrational to begin with. Again, there is this conflict between free choice and the mandates of collectivism.

              Ron Paul’s error of mind, relative to Iran, was not a theist driven idioacy. He has decided to view the Iranian theocracy as he did the USSR. Madness. We contained the USSR we can contain the Iranians…in his mind. The error is that the thocrats actully believe in self-destruction as being in their god’s plan. Soviets had no such vision. The mebntal gymnastics Paul has to do to disawow the terminal risk if he’s wrong escapes me.

              Anyway, add that book to your list…amazing stuff…all Crony Capitalism is a consequent of the Politician – FED relationship.

              Later Liz.

            • liz

              Well it ought to be unconstitutional. Another one of those things, like term limits, that the founders neglected to address, and the consequences have been extremely damaging.
              Thanks for the info!

      • Andrew M

        He’s only cooled me slightly. I still agree with him on more things versus Ted Cruz.

        The mainstream conservative voters fear his genuine freedom-loving views. He speaks too candidly about the failures of the Drug War and immigration policy. His invocations of faith are gentle and rare. He supports a strong military which only gets deployed when necessary. Worst of all, he’d like to see mohawked punks and trendy hipsters join the rank and file of the Republican party – oh, the horror!

        Most of these qualities endear me to him. If anything, his stance on the Drug War is too timid. I’d like to see the DEA abolished and the CSA repealed. While I oppose illegal immigration, he sheds light on the de facto amnesty position of the federal government. He is also right to suggest that Republicans will have a hard time wooing Hispanic voters if they don’t shed their stereotype of being hungry to deport them. After watching the bloodshed of Obama’s rampant but spineless imperialism, I find his foreign policy refreshing. Lastly, the Republican party desperately does needs new blood, which will only come if it brings a new brand.

        My biggest beef with Paul is his politics-as-usual support for Mitch McConnell, who is a progressive. I cannot compute why he thinks this is a good political tactic. Is Mitch really that strong or important? I doubt it.

        As it stands, Ted Cruz has none of this baggage among mainstream conservatives, who power as a voting bloc we cannot underestimate. Genuine freedom is ancillary to these folks. They regard him as a strong, military-oriented Christian capitalist who hates drugs and weird people. How much he actually would support these policies remains to be seen, but I’m willing to bet he’s better on the meat of it than the current President. Conservatives in hipster disguise will probably still pull the lever for him, just less enthusiastically than they would for Rand.

        If the Republicans are smart, they’d root for a Cruz/Paul ticket. They could condense their views into a “American values” platform while fending off votes from the Libertarian candidate.

        But I’m sure they’re already grooming their next boring, weak-willed establishment candidate to “attract moderates” so they can lose even more of their base. Who’s ready for another Bush/Clinton race?

        • Don L

          I think there is some quid pro quo with Mitch. Yes, the establishment repubs are as much for central planning as the lefties. I think the Mitch arrangement is through the primaries only. McConnell has already started to marginalize Cruz to the esatblishment conservatives anyway.

          I think Paul can bring far more numbers than Cruz’s hardcore theists. In my run of the mill associations, I know lots of real church goers that still believe in a women’s right to choose and finfd the war on drugs to be lunacy. And, many former dems who vote repub now bnecause dem is just too far left. I thik Paul hits the right notes.

          2016 is still aways off and the media can throw lies like no other…it’s going to be interesting to say the least.

  • Frank

    Ted Cruz actively works to undermine the Separation of Church and State as mandated by the First Amendment. True Conservatives would do no such thing.

    From Barry Goldwater:
    “I’m frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in “A,” “B,” “C” and “D.” Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me?

    And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of ‘conservatism.'”
    ~ Barry Goldwater – Speech in the US Senate (16 September 1981)

    From Ronald Reagan:
    “We establish no religion in this country, we command no worship, we mandate no belief, nor will we ever. Church and state are, and must remain, separate.

    All are free to believe or not believe, all are free to practice a faith or not, and those who believe are free, and should be free, to to speak of and act on their belief.

    At the same time that our Constitution prohibits state establishment of religion, it protects the free exercise of all religions. And walking this fine line requires government to be strictly neutral.”We in the United States, above all, must remember that lesson, for we were founded as a nation of openness to people of all beliefs. And so we must remain. Our very unity has been strengthened by our pluralism. We establish no religion in this country, we command no worship, we mandate no belief, nor will we ever. Church and state are, and must remain, separate. All are free to believe or not believe, all are free to practice a faith or not, and those who believe are free, and should be free, to speak of and act on their belief.
    ~ Ronald Reagan, Speech to Temple Hillel and Community Leaders in Valley Stream (October 26, 1984)

    • liz

      Great quotes! Was hoping for another one by Cruz contrasted with those, to prove your point.

      • Frank

        From Ted Cruz’ speech at Liberty University.

        Another example of religious censorship he gave was the story of an Air Force chaplain in Alaska. The chaplain was ordered by his supervisor to take down a religious blog post he’d written, deeming it insensitive to atheists. “I sort of thought the job of a chaplain is to be insensitive to atheists,” Cruz said.

        • liz

          Wouldn’t you pretty much expect a chaplain to write a religious blog? What else is he going to write?! I don’t see why he should have been censored, any more than an an atheist should be censored if he wanted to write about atheism.
          Now the whole idea of the government paying “chaplains” is questionable, but that’s a different argument.

  • Roger

    Ok, I’m going to jump in and see what happens. I refuse to label myself politically any more. I was a libertarian for most of life. That died in 2001. The presidential election is too far away to get worked up about. I share the concerns expressed here concerning both religious candidates and progressives. However, what if our choice is between Cruz and Hillary? How would we vote? Or, would we boycott the election? Unfortunately, if we want to vote, we will be faced with the old choice between the lesser of two evils. I won’t know what I will do until the time comes, but right now, I would much prefer Cruz to another progressive.

    • liz

      No question that Cruz (or just about any Republican candidate, for that matter), would be beyond comparison to Hillary (or Obama).
      Just curious – what killed being libertarian for you?

      • Roger

        My thinking is still libertarian for the most part, but as a political party, I think it is done. I’m more interested in practical results now, as opposed to pushing theory. Both parties reject it in spite of the fact that most Americans agree with the basic ideas. I got tired of losing, and losing hard. I became apathetic. The two parties haven’t offered me anything worth voting for. I supported Ron Paul because I felt that he was closer to my beliefs than the others. Then I wondered if I had contributed to Obama’s victory. I don’t think so now because Ron pulled such a low turnout that it wouldn’t have mattered. I couldn’t stomach McCain, and Romney defeated himself (while wearing magic underwear!).

        First, the event of 9/11 woke me up to the reality that evil really does exist, and that they want to destroy us. And it’s much worse than the old cold war state actors. My isolationist libertarian thinking needed to change. I’m still working on that one. I did not support either war in the middle east, but geopolitics and foreign policy are not my strengths. I have changed my views on national defense, sovereignty, and immigration as a result.

        Second, passage of The Patriot Act was the last nail in the coffin of the Libertarian Party, as if the executive branch needed even more power to abuse. I was stunned watching both parties hand over dictatorial powers to the President. And, look what has happened.

        So, my ideals are still libertarian, but I don’t see any movement in the real world toward those ideals.

        • liz

          That’s interesting.
          I would have voted for Paul (I liked everything except his views on Iran), but I thought it would have just guaranteed Obama’s win. (I guess it was fraud that actually won it for him).
          I wish the Libertarians and Republicans could find enough common ground to join forces. What you said about the libertarian party I can say about the Republican – I’m tired of losing.

          • Roger

            Back to Cruz, any potential candidate for president has to deal with all of the various factions in his party. I think he is a Christian in the same sense that Reagan was. He is a “moderate Christian” as Sam Harris says. It’s a public play to that faction of the party. Yes, he has made statements that made me cringe, but he has to throw some raw meat to the fanatics. I watched the video that was posted here of Reagan’s first state of the union address. What a great speech, and what a great leader. I see why I voted for him the first time. He betrayed his campaign promises though, and I voted for Harry Browne the second time. I see some of that same strength in Cruz. He is my Senator btw, and I have seen him in action. I don’t believe he is a RINO like Cornyn. He would destroy Hilary in a debate!

            • liz

              Yes, I think he’d do great in debate with any candidate they come up with. Who knows what his real intentions are – I know he wouldn’t go as far as Paul and end the Fed, but I can’t quite believe he’s a “dominionist”, either, as Frank thinks.
              But he does seem to have sound leadership qualities.

            • Roger

              I don’t think any president can end the fed. The Congress would have to do that, and without extreme public pressure, it’s not likely. An audit might reveal enough to generate that pressure though.

            • Frank

              The apple doesn’t fall very far from the tree. Read this and be afraid – be very afraid. And if you need more do an internet search for “Ted Cruz speech at Liberty University.”

              http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/10/ted-cruz-rafael-father-video-christian-tea-party

            • Roger

              Thanks Frank. I appreciate the input. I watched the video, and read the article. I stand by my comments above, and I am not a defender or apologist for his father. I think Ted is a skillful lawyer whose knows his audience well. The video is a good example of what I meant above by throwing raw meat to the fanatics. I believe for a Republican to win the party’s nomination, they must win over a majority of the fundamentalist Christian voting block, unfortunately.

              I am not particularly afraid of Christians. I am very afraid of Muslims. I have lived around fundamentalist Christians all of my life, and despite the anti-atheist rhetoric, I find them to be decent, moral people. Yes, some of them are extremists and activists, but no more so than some of the loons on the left. Most believe in live and let live, and they would reach out and help someone in need, even knowing that person to be an atheist.

              I have been a purist libertarian most of my life, but I have come to believe that if I wait for the perfect candidate, I will be waiting forever. In our system, we are presented with two choices on election day. If we choose to participate, we must choose the one closest to our ideals. I live in a solid red district and state, so my vote doesn’t matter one way or the other (in national elections).

              Believe me, I understand your concern, but the only way we can win over theists is one heart and mind at a time. We must show them by personal example that we are decent and moral people, too, only without religion. Many of them are unaware that atheists can be conservatives.

            • liz

              Frank, I read the article, and it doesn’t make me afraid at all. I was in churches for years and heard all of this stuff a thousand times, and it’s all talk! If this is what you base the “dominionist” idea on, you’re worries are baseless. It’s just part of the Christian carnival show, so to speak.
              I actually agree with Rafael on the stuff he said about Obama, and was very encouraged to find out that Ted was trained in the Austrian school of economics!
              Like Roger, I’m not as worried about Christians as I am about leftists and Muslims, and Cruz and his dad are right on those last two. Two out of three ain’t bad!

  • Don L

    Here’s a dirty trick: From now on…every time you hear or see Ted Cruz speak…

    …do not PICTURE HIM WITH A CLOTHESPIN ON HIS NOSE.

    Again, do not PICTURE HIM WITH A CLOTHESPIN ON HIS NOSE..

    He does not have a whiny high-pitched nasaly-twang. No he doesn’t.

    Again and the last time…that whiny high-pitched nasally-twang is not real and he does not have A CLOTHESPIN ON HIS NOSE

    Now repeat that back…Ted Cruz does not have a____

    And, his voice is not a whiny____

    So, don’t think about that voice or PICTURE HIM WITH A CLOTHESPIN ON HIS NOSE.

    • liz

      Too late, I already did!

  • Don L

    Here’s a dirty trick:: From now on…every time you hear or see Ted Cruz speak…

    …do not PICTURE HIM WITH A CLOTHESPIN ON HIS NOSE.

    Again, do not PICTURE HIM WITH A CLOTHESPIN ON HIS NOSE..

    He does not have a whiny high-pitched nasaly-twang. No he doesn’t.

    Again and the last time…that whiny high-pitched nasally-twang is not real and he does not have A CLOTHESPIN ON HIS NOSE

    Now repeat that back…Ted Cruz does not have a____

    And, his voice is not a whiny____

    So, don’t think about that voice or PICTURE HIM WITH A CLOTHESPIN ON HIS NOSE.

  • liz

    I really like Cruz, admire his willingness to go against the establishment GOP, but I think Don probably has a good point here.

    • Frank

      Liz,
      He isn’t going against the GOP establishment. The GOP is controlled by the Dominionists and he is one of them. Ted Cruz is nothing but a Liar for Jesus. And he doesn’t mind telling his lies to children. If he is the GOP candidate he will lose in a landslide.

      http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/03/19/ted-cruz-tells-home-schooled-kids-the-job-of-a-chaplain-is-to-be-insensitive-to-atheists/

      • Don L

        Oh man…hadn’t seen that one…Rand has said the opposite…allow everybody in the tent!

        And, Cruz, in agreement with Liz, has gotten in the establishment repubs face. He has not, however, rocked any christian right boats.

        Dominionists? Christ something else to look up. LOL.

      • Jillian Becker

        He’s horrid on religion. What can one do? Religious belief is the insanity of billions of otherwise sane people. Slowly, slowly, it is dying out. There are more non-religious people now in proportion to the size of the country’s (and the world’s) population than ever before. The trend is away from religion. But if we want to wait for a presidential candidate who openly declares he is not religious, and even better that he is not religious and a free marketeer, and even better that he is not religious and a free marketeer and for the abolition of the Fed and for small government and for low taxes and for strong defense, we will have a very long wait. Meanwhile we should support the candidate least far from our ideal choice.

        • Don L

          Oye!

        • Frank

          Sorry Jillian, he’s not just a person with some religious belief. He is a Dominionist – they want to impose Christian beliefs on the rest of us by legislation. I will help these religitards turn the country into a theocracy.

          • Frank

            CORRECTION:
            I will NOT help these religitards turn the country into a theocracy.

          • Don L

            Hi Frank,

            Say, I searched dominionist. I had not heard of this group/movement specifically but I’m not surprised a group like this exists. The two names that show up consistently are Perry ( I was just liking him again…his speech at this years CPAC was great and his recent acceptance of Austrian econ….oh well) and Bachman. Do you know of others (in addtion to Cruz too)…couldn’t find any listing of political incumbents or candidates. Further, I did not find that there was a formal hdqts or website. I admit to a bit of lazy…lots of listings I did not click all the way thru.

            If you have further specifics on a, like, ‘who is’ about these folk…could you post it? Santorum, Spence…Palin?

            Again thanks for the heads up.

  • Don L

    My god (what a beginning, huh?) he is all platitude and fine sounding feelings. Where’s the beef?

    What changes? There is nothing new in anything he is saying. Decade after decade we hear these fine sounding principles of individuality and common sense and yadayadayada…BS!!!

    Nothing in this country will change until the FED iks eliminated!!! Nothing to the contrary that I have found, he supports the continuation of the FED…the status quo. I have heard him, can’t find it now, give explanations of the cause of the current recession that are ouitside reality… populist and false. It was the FED and politcally-motivated (CYA by Greenspan) manipulation of interest rates. He gives the tired old explanations and misses the truth.

    (incidentally, notwithstanding legislated stupiidties toward housing and bad loans…no collapse would have occurred if the feree market was setting interest rates!!!)

    Only the Pauls, and a few that already left Congress, and only just recently,Gov Perry even understand the economics of freedom…Austrian economics. Unfortunately for the father, Ron, Paul, his libertarianism (ideology ias separate and distinct from economics – Ludwig von Mises observation) got in the way of rationality…Taking the chance that Iran is rational with a nuke is a terminal risk and unacceptable!!! Otherwise…he could have won.

    Unless the core of the problems are addressed, fractional reserve central banking and its intentional purpose to fund crony capitalism (mercantilism by another name) not one thing will change…Cruz iis merely more words witjhout substance. That one would chose him is the failure to recognize that communication skills and good intentions has yet to win fair lady!
    Reagan failed, but had good PR.

    Rand Paul is steeped in Austrian economics. He has already declared reigning in the FED. No budget will ever be cut, no deficit will ever be eliminated…nothing changes as long as the FED can keep funding the corrupters. Ron Paul proved that people, especially the young millenials, get the meassage about the FED…END THE FED is ubiquitous now-a-days (not even attributable to Ron Paul, but he certainly got it heard).

    Rand is the best hope for actually making change…Cruz, West, etceteras…great guys and good intentions, theism aside, but not adressing the core issues…economic policy…specifically, monetary control of the nation run by a corrupt/fraudulent out-for-plunder, private, secretive and deceitful, duplicitous-career-politician-funding central banking cartel….just empty words and same ol same ‘ol outcomes…might just elect Hillary (OK…that was nasty! LOL).

    Yes, any right before left…jus saying.

    Oh…if I might…Just finished a scary wake up call book: “Crony Capitalism In America 2008-2012” by Hunter Lewis…holy crap as Raymond’s dad would say. Before voting read this…this is what must be stopped…I know you probably haven’t read it yet, but only Rand addresses this issue with free/honest money (not FED money) and free-market solutuions. You do not need to understand economics to understand this scary expose of fully-docummented facts…do you know what GMOs are…just wait!

    OK, OK…I’m done

    • Jillian Becker

      Yes the Fed should be abolished. We totally agree with you about that. But first someone has to come to power who can lead. Someone rational. Someone who can be persuaded that the Fed must be abolished. Yes, Rand Paul is an Austrian School man – the best thing about him – and he is a bit more realistic about the world we live in than his dad, but not realistic enough. A far as we can discover, he does not think the US should be the mightiest military power on earth. We do. If we are wrong about this, please tell us what he has said that shows us to be wrong.

      • Don L

        “… has to come to power who can lead. Someone rational. Someone who can be persuaded that the Fed must be abolished. ”

        Candidly, if they don’t already know the FED has to be abolished…once in office, that ain’t goin’ ta happen. Washington was seduced into the first central bank with the placement of D.C. near his house…quid pro quo with Hamilton.

        One politician after another has given in to the FEDilists (did I just coin that?) . And, I don’t see Cruz being any different, after all, he doesn’t understand that his state of Texas, which he chronically uses as a model for his style, doesn’t have the money creation power and that changes the whole ball game. If he doesn’t know that going in…yer out! You will never get a career politician to stop spending…the funds (the tap) must be shut off

        Like most, Cruz doesn’t actually understand economics qua economics. He is the product of the compulsory schooling central bank OK…central planning is the way it is and will always be…conditioning. So, you think you can change the guy after the marriage?
        Electability – Perhaps a weakness in Rand is the fact his father was so out of step with America on his Iranian, specifically, attitude. As we have agreed, just cut and paste Ron Pauls face over Chamberlain’s as Neville stood near the Ford Tri-motor aeroplane (LOL) and held the “…peace in out time…” paper. Sins of the father as it were. I believe he is and has overcome that. I’ll come back to this.
        Cruz, on the other hand, is perceived and will be pushed into, by the media, the christian right camp. Now, as has been discussed on this site many times, if the repubs run a candidate who has religion trappings…repubs lose.
        REALBEING, hi buddy, believes that American ignorance is close to original sin whereas it is a flawed personal responsibilyt thingamabob. I don’t know, but I do know that the predominance of Americans are economically unaware!!!
        They FEEL, and they feel government shouldb’y be telling anyone what they have to buy. They are leaning in the repub favor.
        BUT…BUT if they see religion anywhere near the candidte…they will not vote or will go left…they see government making you believe in something as worse than making you buy something…even if they claim to believe in god already. They believe in choice over pro-life…even if they wouldn’t get an abortion themselves. They don’t get economics but they know they can’t be told what to think!
        Cruz has that religion taint. Rand has already made comments, in IOWA, that he isn’t going to play in the un secular issues. Will he be tested, as will Cruz, on these religion topics in primaries in the bible belt…sure. I believe Rand will win, because, in these very early rounds, he has already stood his ground and gained in acceptablity in non-repubs.
        Now…America strong. I would caution not to visit the sins of the father. Rand, while supportin g Ron, did distance himself dramatically during the 20012 campaign. Rand has stated uncategorically he believes in the Reagan strength thru might idea. He also agrees with our Founders that free trade with all entanglements with none…DEFENSE as opposed to forcing republicanism on the world.
        Neither Rand nor Cruz has taken militry action off the table relative to Iran. Both have stated they support Israel…so, it’s an I don’t know, neither do you…unless you have heard something I haven’t,,on that topic. So, electability, rational economic thinking, has the knowledge BEFORE getting in…I still go Rand Paul.
        Of course, if Cruz gets the nod…I’m on board. And, so sorry REALBEING…longhorns before olive green…Cruz before West! LOL

      • Don L

        Frank provided an interesting link…I had not seen Cruz do the ugly atheist dance before…not good.

        • liz

          You mean the rapture? (Hee hee)

          • Don L

            LOL…how do they come up with this stuff? LOL

      • REALBEING

        Jillian……..A WHOLE LOT OF PEOPLE NEED TO COME INTO POWER IN ORDER TO TURN THIS TRAIN AWAY FROM GOING OVER THE CANYON!

        New senators and new congressmen for the new president to lead!