These seem remarkably similar to things Obama said about Bush. And Bush about Clinton. And Clinton about Bush sr. And so on.
I agree. I’m just sick of the sky is falling hyperbole
If Cruz ever got elected POTUS, however, I may have to join in.
cite?
Thanks to all for reading my post and showing an interest in my thoughts.
I have enjoyed yours, and remember some of them well.
I’m not going to attack anyone or their choice of political candidate, as you have formed your opinions as you see fit.
What I will do, as said earlier, is attempt to explain what may be, to some, a foreign mindset, which a sizable number of Senator Cruz’s supporters happen to share, though I make no claims to be any sort of spokesman or representative.
To begin, I call myself a “libertarian” because I don’t care about you or what you do as long as you extend the same courtesy to me and mine. Not my place to judge, unless you’re infringing on my space. I stay inside of society’s conventions, but make my own decisions, based on an alignment of the head, heart, and gut. I believe strongly in accountability and consequences for ones actions. I, and many of my friends, define “Liberty” along the same lines. Argue textbook definitions all you want. I’m not a textbook. This is me and my view.
The “conservative” part comes from wanting to keep what I’ve gotten through my own accomplishments to do with as I see fit. I served honorably in the military, hold myself to high standards, and pay too much in taxes. Outside of my family, it is not my obligation to provide for others, as I am not their better, but it is often a pleasure to share. I believe in the principles of the Constitution, as they are simple and limit the power of government, giving ultimate power to the people. I generally don’t like lawyers or bureaucracy, but I acknowledge their occasional usefulness.
If any of this sounds familiar and we have something in common, great.
Probably give us something to talk about.
Please let me know what people like myself don’t “get” about you and your buds.
Take care
Then I take it you’re a strong supporter of the EPA?
Yes, how did you manage to accomplish the feat of having been born with an ability to learn a language? Because I can name whole classes of people who can’t manage that.
You mention you were in the military. Do you think it’s my obligation to provide for a military? Do you think it’s morally right for me to be forced at gunpoint to give healthcare to people in the military?
He’s not a libertarian except on process. Any conservative interpretation of the Constitution that one actually adheres to rather than just using for convenience will tend to force you into a libertarian direction as a matter of law. Cruz strikes me as what Clarence Thomas would be if Thomas’ nomination had been rejected and he’d decided to run for Senate instead.
It would be great if further discussions of libertarianism could go into their own thread that I could assiduously avoid.
If by EPA you mean the environmental protections agency, I would say that, like most government programs, it started as a decent idea with a quantifiable purpose. Now it mostly exists to keep itself in power via miles of red tape. Simple is better.
If you mean Eicosapentaenoic acid, the jury would still appear to be out, though I do consider certain natural supplements to be beneficial if properly prescribed and consumed.
Remember right before you were born when they showed up and asked your preferences to all of the 5W questions? Ethereal looking HR-bot with a clipboard? Me neither. I have made the most of my talents, however, and will continue to assist those less fortunate than myself as circumstances allow. Having said that, I don’t do guilt, as I acknowledge having earned everything I’ve gotten, good or bad. Unfortunately, I have learned not to expect the same from others.
If you choose not to support our military (and I don’t mean blindly), then don’t get all butt-hurt when they don’t support you. Your gunpoint comment is inflammatory, and I will not take the bait. As for the concept of public obligation, the same question could be applied to any social program, couldn’t it? The real question, in my view, is why do we, as a society, expect some bureaucratic construct to exercise restraint if we give them unchecked power?
Now, tell me a little about yourself. I hate to assume based on questions.
I’m fine with the military not supporting me. We got along just fine with a token defensive force both prior to WWI and in the Inter-War Period. Our modern bloated military is a product of the Cold War and the so-called War On Terror. Frankly, an ounce of sense as regards foreign policy would save a trillion dollars’ worth of “Defense” spending.
Perhaps. Are you in favor of any social programs other than the military and the police? Personally, I’m in favor of social programs which prevent problems more than programs which attempt to solve them.
Assume nothing. Engage with my ideas, if you can.
I do not wish to have an adversarial relationship with you.
Fascinating how many libertarians are all for little gubmint except when it comes to police and the bloated military and the benefits afforded them to build their wealth and health. One doesn’t need to be a psychoanalyst to cringe at what this value set projects. It is a sort of sociopathy and that is why the creep factor is strong with Cruz. I would be delighted to see McCarthy,er, I mean Cruz run against HRC.
You know what’s funny about the Cruz campaign? That his youth and inexperience have not really been brought up much. That’s mainly been the knock against Rubio. Yet Cruz is only one year older than Rubio and has less political experience. But Cruz looks like a middle aged guy and Rubio looks like he’s 25, so there ya go.
Cruz was born middle aged.
Now consider that, if a worker wanted to control their own means of production, it would be a good thing to have an increasingly intrusive government out of the way. Possibly distracted by infighting. We generally acknowledge that our representatives have isolated themselves in ivory towers, out of touch with “the little guy”, right? So lets apply some Sun Tzu - use their methods against them.
In the following mini scenarios…
- Clinton as President- Congress falls all over itself to appease the same old progressive policies. More big government.
- Cruz as President - Congress gets all tangled up fighting “the Wacky Bird” and, eventually, themselves. Deadlock.
Yes, this presupposes many things, and its over simplified.
But.
Nope. In fact, one of the big problems with the GOP is that its representatives are too conversant with what one vocal section of the populace wants: The Tea Partiers are so responsive to one narrow section of the electorate they have no ability to actually govern for fear of losing the next primary election to someone who’s promising to be even less reasonable than they are.
Populism isn’t automatically a good thing. Trump is massively populist in that he’s a perfect embodiment of a single scrap off the lunatic fringe. He doesn’t have a single actual idea, only platitudes and insults taken from the nutballs he represents. He has the full attention of that one segment and is toxic to everyone else. He is the purest possible example of populism taken too far.
However, Trump is merely an extreme example. Cruz is similar, in that he uses insurgent tactics to hold the government to ransom in order to get what he wants, but that only works because there are enough nutballs just as crazy as Cruz in the House to give his threats teeth. Trump and Cruz are both symptoms of the same disorder plaguing the GOP as a whole: Listening too much to one segment of the electorate while disregarding both the entire rest of the country and basic rationality. It’s populism taken to extremes.
…which pretty much validates my overall premise.
Thanks for doing the heavy lifting, Derleth. 
Is it just me or does it seem like this “natural born citizen” story might be a seriously damaging blow against Cruz’s hopes in the primary? Even McCain is coming out to question his eligibility now.
It would be nice to have that stupid phrase clarified. McCain is a pretty good example of someone who might well not be a natural-born citizen (he was not a US citizen at birth), or might be (he is a US citizen who was never naturalized as such).
Or done away with. I think anyone who was been a citizen for 20 years should qualify for president.
Why have a citizenship requirement at all?
Congress passed a bill declaring McCain a natural born citizen, so he’s fine. Plus, he was born on a US military base which is a whole different situation than Cruz.
I’m not saying this is a legitimate issue, for me. I think Cruz is probably eligible. But I think its starting to look like it might have legs at least for a media cycle or two.