The Case for Cruz

There are several polarizing candidates in the 2016 election. Many people feel exceptionally strong about Donald Trump, Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, and Ted Cruz. These four are the candidates that people really either love or hate.

I would argue that three of these deserve the label of unelectable. One, however, stands apart from the rest, and I would like to explain why I feel this way.

First and foremost, context matters.

Ted Cruz is the son of a Cuban immigrant. Rafael Cruz actually joined with Fidel Castro in his revolution against Batista. When he discovered Castro’s Communist vision and disenchanted with the cause, Rafael, severely beaten by the Batista regime and in fear for his life, fled to the United States. He would later convert to Christianity, adopt a strong belief in the freedom promised by the Constitution, and eventually become an Evangelical pastor.

The life of the father directly ties into why I believe that Ted Cruz truly appreciates The Constitution.

From a very early age, Rafael instilled the importance of freedom and religion into Ted; even forcing him to memorize and recite the Constitution without pause. Ted Cruz was bred to be President. Rafael taught him to speak without “umms” and “uhhs” typical of most who engage in public speaking. This is why Ted seems so “polished” when he speaks. He was simply raised to be like that. It’s not because he is a politician, it’s because perfection is ingrained in him.

Ted’s life is full of achievements. Here are just a few of his accomplishments:

  • Member of the “Free Market Education Foundation” (while still in high school)
  • High School Valedictorian (1988)
  • Top speaker at US National Debating Championship (1992)
  • Top speaker at the North American Debating Championship (1992)
  • US National Speaker of the Year (1992)
  • American Parliamentary Debate Association- Team of the Year (1992)
  • Senior thesis argues IN FAVOR of the Constitution’s power to stop an all-powerful federal government
  • Cum Laude from Princeton University (1992)
  • Semi-finalist in the World Debating Championship (1995)
  • Princeton names a championship trophy after Cruz
  • Magna Cum Laude- Juris Doctor from Harvard (1995)
  • Law clerk for William Rehnquist (1996)
  • Argued cases supporting the NRA, impeaching Bill Clinton, and protecting the Ten Commandments monument in Texas.
  • Solicitor General of Texas (2003-2008).
    • Argued AGAINST the Bush administration’s desire to deport 51 Mexican nationals on death row in Texas, and won—making him effectively an enemy of the Bush family.
  • Named one the best litigators in America by American Lawyer Magazine, The National Law Journal, and Texas Lawyer.
  • Elected to the US Senate (2012)
    • Sponsored a repeal of Obamacare
    • Sponsored prohibition of drone use in killing US citizens within the US.
    • Sponsored investigation and prosecution of felons and fugitives who illegally purchase firearms.
    • Sponsored the proof of citizenship for registering to vote in federal elections
    • Sponsored increasing coal, natural gas, crude oil exports, the Keystone Pipeline, expanding offshore drilling, drilling in Alaska and Native American reservations, fracking, repealing Renewable Fuel Standards, and stopping the EPA from regulating greenhouse gases.
    • Sponsored elimination on limits on direct campaign contributions.
    • Introduced legislation to allow the President to deny visas to ambassadors to the UN who have been found guilty of espionage activities or terrorism.
  • Committee on Armed Services
  • Committee on the Judiciary
  • Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
  • Committee on Rules and Administration
  • Special Committee on Aging

In short, Ted Cruz is incredibly accomplished, and has held pro-Free Market, Constitutional principles since at least high school. Unlike Obama who has a law degree, but only worked as a Community Organizer, Senator Cruz actually applied his education to supporting Constitutional Conservative causes in courts all the way up to the Supreme Court.

Ted’s Presidential Platform is something that is easy for me to support. Here is a snapshot:

  • A 10% flat tax, 16% corporate tax, elimination of corporate loopholes, and abolishing the IRS.
  • Building a wall, strengthening border security, cracking down on employers, and enforcing existing immigration law. NO pathway to citizenship.
  • Auditing the Federal Reserve.
  • Pro-life (only exception when mother’s life is in danger).
  • Supports traditional marriage, but leaves legality to the states.
  • Opposes Common Core
  • Opposes Obamacare
  • Supports the Second Amendment
  • Opposes legalization of marijuana, but leaves legality to the states.
  • Opposes net neutrality.
  • Opposes a higher minimum wage
  • Supports Keystone Pipeline and an “all of the above” energy policy
  • Opposes government subsidies for farmers
  • A Constitutional Orgininalist (he believes that we need to look at the intentions of the Founders when interpreting the Constitution).

I do differ on Cruz on two issues. 1. I do not think we need to obliterate ISIS from the face of the Earth. I guess I am more of a non-interventionist. 2. His recent stance on wanting to force Apple to comply with FBI requests.

Cruz has been criticized, especially recently, for what I consider to be unbelievably minor offenses—most of which can be easily explained. Here are the defenses, and why these are idiotic charges.

  1. The Ben Carson/Iowa “Controversy.”
    • CNN absolutely discussed on television, at length, that Carson was heading back to Florida rather than campaigning. Their pundits speculated on whether or not Carson actually wanted to be President. This is what the Cruz campaign addresses in the defense.
    • On TWITTER, CNN did correct the record soon after the story broke. This is what the Carson campaign addresses in their attack.
    • Furthermore, if Cruz’s people at the caucuses did put forward that Carson was quitting, where were Carson’s people to debunk the rumor?
  2. The Natural Born “Controversy.”
    • Cruz’s mother is an American citizen. Therefore, he is natural born.
    • Our first six Presidents were also born in another country, were they not legitimate?
    • An Illinois court recently set the precedent for this, as they ruled IN FAVOR of Cruz.
  3. The Non-Tithing “Controversy.”
    • Between 2006 and 2010, Cruz tithed about 1% of his income. This, I suppose, makes him a bad Christian?
    • His defense is that he regrets this.
    • This is from FIVE YEARS AGO. What are his recent tithing levels?
    • Why does this EVEN MATTER?
  4. The Rubio-Amnesty “Controversy.”
    • Respected conservatives, Mike Lee and Jeff Sessions, have come out to support Cruz’s assertions that his “support” of a pathway to legalization (not citizenship) was meant as a poison pill to derail RUBIO’S amnesty bill.
    • Even if Cruz DID support the bill initially, he VOTED AGAINST IT. This makes his stance MUCH STRONGER against amnesty than that of Marco Rubio.

Ted Cruz is THE STRONGEST on the Constitution. He is THE STRONGEST on illegal immigration. He is THE STRONGEST on the Free Market. He is THE STRONGEST when it comes to standing on principle. He is THE STRONGEST and MOST CONSISTENT candidate on the race. He is THE STRONGEST conservative.

You can find video evidence throughout the years of Cruz either staying consistent on the issues he currently supports, or at least providing a reasonable explanation for changing his stance. There is no question why he believes what he believes and says what he says.

Can you say the same about any other candidate? Trump and Clinton have held every position on every issue. Rubio still cannot explain his position on amnesty. Ben Carson has also flip flopped throughout the campaign as he is effectively learning on the job (see his opinion on banning assault rifles in 2015 compared to today). Bush can deny all he wants, but he was certainly a supporter of Common Core, and his handling of the Terry Schiavo case was an abomination.

Of course Cruz is not perfect. I have some disagreements with him, just not as many as I have with all other candidates. His controversies are superficial, at best. He beats both Clinton and Sanders in every poll, so the electability argument is not valid. He might look and sound weird, but I would rather have a creepy looking guy who shares my values than a super stud who will drive America into oblivion (and if you are a Trump supporter…I mean….come on). I would rather have President Cruz than President Kardashian. Finally, as a world renowned debate champion who has performed quite well in the nine (and counting) GOP debates, wouldn’t you like to see Cruz go one on one with Sanders on socialism vs. capitalism? I know I would!

Vote principles. Vote consistency. Vote Cruz.

Advertisements

The Modern American Prometheus

Donald Trump is the most dangerous man in America. His meteoric rise to the top of the Republican presidential ticket this primary season has cultural, historical, and future ramifications that I think too many Americans are missing.

Americans, as a nation, have become incredibly short sighted. I am about to make an argument that many will not like. I am going to compare Donald Trump to some very dangerous figures. Please understand that I do not do so lightly.

The Golem

Made from clay and given life by Jewish Rabbis, the Golem protected Jewish settlements from attack. The only safety net was deactivating the creature by the Sabbath. When this restriction was not met, the Golem turned on the people who created it and began to destroy the city that it was supposed to guard.

I see Mr. Trump as the American Golem. Half of our population feels like it is under attack. For the past several years, tradition has been uprooted. Our previously agreed upon social categories of race, gender, and sexuality have been deconstructed. Our definition of marriage has been altered to now include same-sex couples, and religious freedoms are under assault.

As a response to the crisis, we are giving life to a strongman. Republicans are looking for someone who will protect tradition, regardless of the potential dangers of giving power to a creature whom we cannot control. My biggest fear is that we will not be able to deactivate Trump. What havoc might he wreak?

Trump is our Golem. He is our Frankenstein monster; the Modern Prometheus.

Octavian

The Roman Republic was facing multiple military threats, not unlike the tumultuous situation our country is facing with Iran, ISIS, N. Korea, and Russia. Octavian, also known as Augustus was a mighty general. He was part of the Roman Triumvirate that won victory over several enemies.

Augustus promised to uphold the Roman traditions and protect Rome through strength. He promised to make Rome great again. With a desire for a strong leader who would protect Rome, the Senate agreed to disband the Republic and grant Augustus the power of Caesar.

Once again, Donald Trump promises to win, to protect tradition, and to make America great again. He constantly berates those currently in power, and openly talks about how inept they are. Like Octavian, Trump will use his power selfishly, as made evidence by his history of business and political abuse. He has no respect for the Constitution or Republic. Trump is for Trump, and we must all comply or be destroyed.

Early 20th Century Germany

In the 1920s, Germany faced a number of problems that are mirrored in today’s America. Reeling from the effects of World War I, the country faced an economic disaster. There were internal civil conflicts (Weimar Republic vs Bavaria).

An upstart fought against those in power, at first through violent revolution, but eventually gave that up for a political one. His first election was won through support of the lower-middle class. This man promised to make Germany great again. He was considered, at the time, as being a “demagogue and gutter politician.”

He believed that Germans were superior to all other cultures. He was the “anti-establishment” candidate, who often derided the political class who lie to the people just to get votes. He blamed others for manipulating currency and running a “crooked and speculative economy” that harmed Germany.

This presidential candidate railed against “cowardly pacifism” and campaigned on the idea that “only a genius” could best represent the voters and restore German greatness.

This man gained traction as the inevitable response of the German “tradition of nationalism, militarism, worship of success, and of force, and the exaltation of state.”

Of courses, I am sure you have now deduced that I am referring to Adolf Hitler.

I am not inferring that Trump will bring about the Holocaust, just that the circumstances around the election of one of the greatest monsters in history strongly resemble those that we are facing in today’s America.

If we replace Germany with America, Hitler with Trump, and the Jews with illegals, Muslims, or China, the similarities (other than overt racism and genocide, of course) are difficult to ignore.

Why Trump is the Most Dangerous Candidate

We have seen examples of turning to a “strongman” throughout history and mythology. Choosing a strong leader is the cry of the oppressed. A strong leader reflects on the electorate, and we often wish to appear strong. This is our nationalistic tendency, and it can unite a nation under the banner of patriotism. However, what makes a strong leader a wise or dangerous choice can often make the difference between a successful country and one who ends up ruled by a totalitarian force.

I believe Trump will rule America like a fascistic totalitarian dictator. The political “left” (though I hate that term) elected Obama for many of the same reasons why the “right” (ugh!) is looking toward Trump. They wanted someone who would aggressively stand up for their beliefs in retaliation for Bush’s perceived policies of war and deregulation. Obama, however, is an ideologue who believes that the best way to change America is through progress, rather than by force.

Trump is not so subtle.

Not only has The Donald held just about every position on every issue (sometimes within one speech), but he actively seeks to destroy his enemies. He wants to silence them, to bankrupt them, and to publicly shame them into compliance or oblivion.

Selina Scott was sent to interview Trump, but he attempted to seduce her. She resisted his advances and he has spent decades harassing her.

The now infamous shaming of Megyn Kelly began after a simple question about Trump’s public treatment of women.

He has compared Ben Carson to a child molester and has begun an all-out assault on Ted Cruz for being a “liar” and a “bad guy.”

There are dozens of examples, and I do not have time to deal with them all. The man thrives on tearing others apart. He finds a boogeyman, and attempts to crush them.

This man jokes about dating his own daughter, brags of sleeping with married women (while he, himself, is also married), and publicly rages whenever he is treated “unfairly” by the media. He is the worst kind of narcissistic sociopath. He is an aggressive, power hungry activist.

I believe that Trump will bring about WWIII by either military or economic attacks on his “enemies”. He wants to murder the wives and children of ISIS members, do worse than waterboarding (largely agreed upon as torture), and impose trade tariffs on China and Iran.

If Donald Trump is elected as our American Golem, we will have no power to control him. He will be our Frankenstein, our Augustus, our Hitler. Donald Trump has the potential to be the very destruction of our nation.

History does repeat itself, which is exactly why I believe his election to be inevitable.

My Thoughts on the FBN GOP Debate

My thoughts on the GOP debate on Fox Business.

**Disclaimer: I am a registered Independent, but I lean heavily Libertarian. I will more than likely vote for one of these people over any Democrat candidate.

Ted Cruz: I believe he won the debate. He was clear, concise, answered the questions, and did not come off as petty. Plus, I agree with all of his answers.

Rand Paul: Rand finally showed up to a debate. He is very good on the economy, and does not shy away from his clear differences with the others on the military and climate change. Although I disagree with him on some issues, knowing that he would not use the government as a weapon to enforce his personal beliefs is enough for me to endorse him regardless.

Marco Rubio: Another solid performance. Marco is consistently in my top three, and I could see myself voting for him. I was not wowed, but not at all disappointed.

Donald Trump: I would NEVER cast a vote for this man, but I believe he did well at this debate. I cannot back his tax plan and his immigration plan is unrealistic at best. He is actually pretty decent on foreign policy and great on veterans’ affairs. I just don’t trust him at all.

Carly Fiorina: She was a little bit more low-key. Her performance was in the middle for me. She was not great, but not terrible.

Ben Carson: I believe he is a great and honorable man. I just do not think he has a command of ANY issue. He is behind the pack on the economy, foreign policy, and social issues. His idea of a dual minimum wage is awful, he was for gun control before he was against it, and he is obviously learning on the fly. He also comes very close to vanishing at the debates. That is not the mark of a great leader, especially in a field that has several.

Jeb Bush: He keeps showing why George W. passed him by and became president first. Jeb is bumbling, rambling, petty, and looks confused most of the time. He is as terrible a public speaker as W., but without the personality. His policies are antithetical to almost everything I believe in—he wants more government to fix government.

John Kasich: He would be a formidable Democrat candidate. His record in Ohio is sketchy—ask anyone who actually lives there. Moreover, he comes off like the grumpy uncle who complains about the “kids these days” at family functions. Like Jeb, he is a big government progressive who is only slightly to the right of Hillary and Obama.