Cruz Control

Depending on the pundit you read, Ted Cruz either destroyed his political future with last night’s speech—or he insured it. My guess is that he bought himself an insurance policy.

As I see it, the next four years are going to be tough. Neither Clinton nor Trump seem to offer much promise of easier times ahead. Clinton’s brand of cronyism would operate within fairly well-understood bounds and would be kept in check by “the system,” but it would not be generally beneficial for America. Trump’s administration would be a wild card. Even if it turned out to be more good than bad, it would be disruptive. After 12 years of Obama and Whoever, the electorate will be even angrier that it is today. I’ll bet we are about to elect a one-term president. Come 2020, “I told you so,” may be a useful subtext to have running through a campaign. The slogan “A Return to Normalcy” worked in 1920. It may be ripe again a century later.

We’ll see.

The Republican’s have several young potential candidates to groom over the next four years. Who do the Democrats have? Martin O’Malley?

It’s gonna be a rough four years.

120 thoughts on “Cruz Control

  1. Right now, people think it was principles, that he held true to his conservative values. Carson said something poignant, that he supports trump because it’s not about him, it’s about the country. So, given that Reagan, who was very upset at Ford for winning the nomination in 76, made the same decision, cruz is going to have to reconcile that. Also, texans, have a strong Lt governor that they would love to send to washington, and cruz has called him names for years, so cruz, in my opinion didn’t do himself and his career any favors. And don’t think that ford’s people didn’t call Nancy Reagan every name in the book, they just don’t do it publically, I have been in politics and if anything, trump is very mild compared to what I have witnessed.

    Cruz also was never vettes, and I don’t want to ruin the worship of him, but I am very confident that he wouldn’t survive the scrutiny trump got. When you are booed off the stage and including the Texas delegation, it was another stupid decision,which he is inexplicably prone to make.

    • 2 words: Bull and Crap.

      Cruz was never vetted? WTH are you talking about. He has had the entirety of the megamedia complex crawling through ever detail of his life for years looking for anything that could destroy him. An army of liberals have gone looking , striving , praying they find anything. When they can’t, they make it up.

      All the Trumpettes are screaming because he didn’t say the word endorse. They wanted complete capitulation. His very act of showing up and giving hios supporters and out to go ahead an vote for Trump was plenty but no the rabid media has to create a fight. He didn’t say don’t vote for him and several of the previous contenders didn’t use the word endorse either.

      This is nothing short of a chance to weaken a future opponent.

    • Reagan didn’t endorse Ford in 1976. Not at the convention, not after. Mark Levin and Reagan biographer Craig Shirley thoroughly rubbished that claim yesterday.

      • Yes he did, not only did he endorse him, he announced him and they hugged, that’s right they hugged onstage. Also Reagan was a campaigner for ford

        • As usual, BPO, you’re flat out wrong. I trust Craig Shirley, Reagan’s biographer, over your recollection.

          Often wrong but never in doubt, that’s our BPO. I still love ya, dude (no homo).

          • A, R, T a truck through the holes, as Reagan was a staunch supporter for Ford which earned him the respect of the east coast Republicans which gave him the nomination after two previous failures

      • My recollection is he did not but either way Cruz is no Reagan. There is a reason why Cruz is despised by his fellow Senators. Sorry I voted for him but my vote was a protest bs Trump

        • Mike Lee loves him. Are there Senators that hate him whose opinions should matter to me?

          Did you notice that Mitch McConnell got booed upon introduction?

  2. It says something about the nominee, and what the party hacks actually think of him, when they say “vote your conscience” is an attack. The other major candidate has a body count. What does your conscience say about that?

    • Hillary is a known quantity. Terrible person, yes, but a known quantity.

      Trump is completely unknown. Sure, he’s saying he’ll control the borders now, but he also once claimed the Queen was interested in one of his apartments.

      Trump spent the primaries viciously attacking whatever candidate was on top at the time. Sure, you expect some of that, but Trump took it to a level that made sure he burned bridges. Now, he’s demanding they all kiss his ring. Unsurprisingly, they’re suggesting he kiss something else.

  3. American institutions have done so well at keeping Hillary in-bounds so far, we can be 100% sure they’ll continue to do so when she’s the supreme executive.

    (And if you can’t get the sarcasm in that statement… A Hillary presidency will bury the rule of law.)

  4. Vote your conscience and for candidates that will uphold the constitution. Trump claims that means Cruz didn’t endorse him? WTH.

    What does that say about Trump?

    • “Vote your conscience and for candidates that will uphold the constitution. Trump claims that means Cruz didn’t endorse him? WTH.

      What does that say about Trump?”

      Queer, huh? Senator Cruz ends his speech speaking of “voting your conscience,” supporting/defending the United States Constitution,” and “freedom…”

      And, gets *BOOOOOOOOOO’ED* for saying as much. THAT speaks volumes.

      Cult personality and politics OVER country… all. day. long.

      What a fucking shame. *spit*

  5. The RNC lost me for life the moment they pulled the parliamentary B.S. on Monday. The RNC is nothing but a fascist group of elites. They don’t care about principals or values.

    Well, none of us have to be in the RNC. The minute Ted Cruz forms his own political party, I will work on inventing a time machine solely so I can go back in time and become the first person to sign up for that party.

    The RNC is dead to Conservatives. They hate Conservatives. They’ve proven it repeatedly. If you have any Conservative tendencies whatsoever, GET OUT! You’re the battered wife in an abusive relationship. The RNC will only continue to drift leftward because if you vote for Trump you’ll vote for ANY a**hat they force onto the ballot. They’ve got your vote under lock and key. There’s no direction they can move to get more votes other than leftward.

    • I’m kinda curious why you didn’t make this observation after Bush I, Dole, Bush II, McCain and Romney? The RNC has been lying to conservatives for decades.

      • They never, until now, put up a flat-out corrupt LEFTIST as their candidate. And Some1 is pointing to the person in charge hiding behind a curtain, bracketed by guards, to avoid receiving the documents that would put the rules up to a roll-call vote, all to empower that flat-out corrupt Lying LEFTIST Democrat, Donald Fscking Trump.

        And the Republicans is correct, not the autocorrupt “Republican’s” near the bottom of the article.

        • The notion that Donald Trump is a leftist is delusional. He might not be a rightist, but, he certainly isn’t a leftist either.

          In John McCain the Republicans nominated a neo-con, neo-conservatism being a movement originated by alleged-reformed leftists. Among McCain’s leftist credentials was his support for amnesty, and his de facto support of the Democrats move to block the confirmation of all conservative judicial nominees [gang of eight.]

          Feel free to believe that the GOP has now crossed a line never heretofore crossed. Medicaid expansion, no child left behind, and the doubling of the national debt during the Bush II administration argue against that premise.

          • Like I said, any actual Trump supporter is either flat-out deceived or an outright liar. The notion that the Corrupt Lying LEFTIST Democrat Donald Fscking Trump is anything BUT a Leftist is absolutely insane. Donald Trump is a life-long Leftist in every position he has held — until it came time to get Republican votes.

          • Anti-Gun
            Anti-Free Speech
            Pro-Partial Birth Abortion
            Democrat economic policy good, Republican economic policy bad
            Pro-Centralized Powerful Government over land that should belong to the States or the People (that means Anti-9th Amendment and Anti-10th Amendment)
            Hillary Clinton would make a great President.
            Hillary Clinton was a great Secretary of State.
            Funneled huge amounts of cash to Hillary’s Presidential run and endorsed her.

            Out of that list of Trump positions, name the one that is NOT Leftist.
            Delusional, my arse.

          • Pray tell since when was opposing illegal immigration the “leftist” postion. If you are correct in claiming that Donald Trump has been a “leftist on every position he has ever heard. Otherwise, you are simply wrong.

          • He never said “every position Trump has ever held”. He said “every one of THIS LIST of positions”. And you haven’t answered his question. Which one of THESE positions that Trump has publicly stated he supports is rightist?

            * Anti-Gun
            * Anti-Free Speech
            * Pro-Partial Birth Abortion
            * Democrat economic policy good, Republican economic policy bad
            * Pro-Centralized Powerful Government over land that should belong to the States or the People (that means Anti-9th Amendment and Anti-10th Amendment)
            * Hillary Clinton would make a great President.
            * Hillary Clinton was a great Secretary of State.
            * Funneled huge amounts of cash to Hillary’s Presidential run and endorsed her.

            Yes, I’m repeating John Hitchcock’s list verbatim, because I can’t really say it better than he did.

          • Did everyone see how BSB totally ignored all the Leftist stuff Trump espoused to claim “Look! Trump’s a xenophobe like all true Conservatives!”?

      • “I’m kinda curious why you didn’t make this observation after Bush I, Dole, Bush II, McCain and Romney? The RNC has been lying to conservatives for decades.”

        1) How old do you think I am? 😛

        2) Even if I did not make that observation then, how would it invalidate my observation now? If I went 30 years thinking 1 +1 = 3, and now I say, 1 + 1 = 2, would you be criticizing me with “Why didn’t you change your mind years ago?” instead of going “I’m glad you finally see it!”? Just curious. Seems kinda counter productive to claim on the one hand that the RNC has been lying for decades and then being upset that someone who gets it didn’t get it earlier… But maybe I’m crazy.

        • I held my nose and voted for Dole. He was no Conservative.
          I wasn’t going to vote for the Left-of-Center McCain but then he put Palin on the ticket and I voted for her. I even endorsed her for 2012. But then she went insane and endorsed the Corrupt Lying Leftist Democrat Donald Fscking Trump and I wrote her off.
          I did not vote for the even further Left Flip Flopney.
          I will never vote for the Corrupt Lying Leftist Democrat Donald Fscking Trump. Ever.

          • I agree with all of that except, I did hold my nose and vote for Romney. I still think he is the best _man_, the best _human being_ to run for President in some time, but I would have hated him as President. Just not quite as much as BHO.

            Trump? Every time I think I can take a barf bag into the booth and pull that lever, he opens his cake hole and convinces me otherwise.

  6. Cruz is a big boy, he is certainly smart enough to figure out his own risk/benefit situation.

    I hear people blame Trump for Cruz’s speech because he (or his campaign) had it ahead of time and vetted it. And so Cruz’s speech is a failure of Trump’s management or something. Of course, had the Trump people edited Cruz’s speech or rescinded his invitation to speak then that would have been a sign that Trump is Hitler or whatever, too. To which I say, whatever.

    The Trump people obviously allowed the platform for Cruz. They did not have to invite him, and surely they could have made an endorsement – before the speech – a prereq for giving him the floor. They did not. Which means that they were not looking for an endorsement from Cruz. They gave him the floor, and he did what he did based on his own calculations. Others will do the same.

    Yes, if Trump loses, then being the See I Told You So guy has some value. Because everyone LOVES that guy. And if Trump wins, well, Cruz a safe seat in the Senate.

    #NeverTrump says look all his opponents won’t endorse him, what does that say about Trump? I say, what does it say about his opponents?

    In the first debate, the question was asked of the candidates about supporting the eventual nominee. Trump – alone – did not raise his hand. And he was roundly castigated for that. He was not honorable like the other guys on the stage, they said. And Trump later reversed himself – with the cover of “it’s going to be me.” No one on that stage said “well, we won’t if it’s him.”

    Again, what does it say about them? They didn’t want to get booed then, so they did not say what they thought. Bush, Kasich, Cruz – they did not uphold their pledge, not to Trump, but to voters. People may forget and forgive that. Or they may not.

    I find it ironic that Ken Cuccinelli is playing a Cruz spoiler given what happened in Virginia. Cuccinelli “rigged the system” to get nominated to be candidate for governor. It was widely believed that if there was a primary, Cuccinelli would have lost to Bolling. Cucinelli obviously believed it, because he worked to get the primary cancelled and a convention held instead – where he was chosen as the candidate. That process, while it made him the candidate – left bad blood behind. Bolling refused to endorse him, and, oh by the way, Virginia’s Democrat governor is Clinton bag man Terry McAuliffe now. Thanks much. We won’t see a Republican governor in Virginia for a long time.

    Parties can survive bad candidates (examples, Goldwater, McGovern, Mondale, Dole) – they can’t survive this sort of internecine fratricidal warfare.

    • If Trump had not made vicious, below-the-belt attacks on Cruz’s wife and utter lies about Cruz’s father, I might agree with you. As it stands, I find Trump’s behavior towards Cruz abhorrent, and hold him released from his pledge with regard to Trump.

      If Cruz had refused to endorse, say, Kasich (in the alternate universe where Kasich stood a ghost of a chance) I would find him to be in breach of promise. But I feel that Trump broke the contract first, and so Cruz is not obligated to uphold it. His coming to the convention anyway, and telling Republicans not to sit this election out but to vote for conservative candidates up and down the ballot, was extremely classy given what Trump did. I hope Trump will return the favor and apologize for his past behavior, but I have to admit I’m not holding my breath.

      • Like I said some people will forget and forgive. You have chosen to say that the pledge to voters was conditional, at least for you. And the “raise your hand” technique is imperfect, it does not leave room for nuance.

        Trump, for his part, said that for him. the pledge was conditional, that the RNC had to treat him fairly for it to be meaningful. I have not heard that any of the other candidates placed such conditions. But maybe they had them, they just didn’t bother to tell anyone else.

        However, there is a saying – Politics ain’t beanbag. If you get all pouty because the other guy said something mean, you probably don’t have a future in the business.

        • I didn’t think it was conditional at the time — but Trump’s way-outside-the-pale behavior broke the unwritten contract, and made it conditional.

          • The promise was to Republican voters, not Trump. Republican voters did nothing to Ted Cruz other than favor Trump.

        • As for “politics ain’t beanbag”, I’m moving towards the opinion that it’s that way because we, the voters, put up with way too much sh*t. Attacks on a man’s positions, or even his character, are one thing, and I’m willing to grant the “politics ain’t beanbag” thus far. But attacking his family should be outside the pale.

          • Robin Munn – You’re making great points in this thread.

            Billions in free media, universal name recognition from being a reality tv star and leading a very public life for decades, being pushed by big names like Hannity, should have been enough to push anyone over the finish line.

            Attacking the family is beyond the pale – making up stuff out of whole-cloth, ridiculously false headlines in the National Enquirer (coincidentally ran by a big supporter of Trump), made it even worse, imo.

        • Attacking family is beyond the pale. Got it. I’ll call Sarah Palin and tell her that one.

          Look, the Left doesn’t play by any such niceties. They are going to go after whatever target works for them. And they will protect their own. Sasha and Malia – we may not say anything less than totally glowing about them. Jenna and Barbara – weapons free.

          There is a such thing as non-combatants out there in politics. Cruz’s wife and father were integral parts of the campaign. They weren’t non combatants.

          And I am not going to defend ugliness, but the things that people say Trump said he didn’t say. He never called Heidi ugly, he never said Cruz’s father assassinated Kennedy. Was there some imputing going on? Sure. Crossing streams, but Kimberlinic butthurt is not a tort.

          Trump plays New York tough guy. And he has broken some taboos, but a lot of those needed to be broken. And he beat the best field of candidates Republican party has had in a long time.

          He’s going after Hillary in ways no other Republican candidate would dare to. There is room for Cruz, Kasich, and Bush to do the same, at whatever level of fervor and viciousness works for them, without being a puppet for Trump. If they prefer Hillary, well, Monkey’s Paw, right?

          • “He never called Heidi ugly, he never said Cruz’s father assassinated Kennedy. Was there some imputing going on? Sure. Crossing streams, but Kimberlinic butthurt is not a tort.”

            Yea Trump “didn’t say” a lot of things. That’s part of the clown act – repeat something disgraceful a few times so you can “let people know” that you disagree with it.

            It didn’t help anyone to have those things bought up. Trump and his campaign bought them up.

          • He’s going after Hillary in ways no other Republican candidate would dare to.

            What ways are those?

          • “Attacking family is beyond the pale. Got it. I’ll call Sarah Palin and tell her that one.”

            I know Palin’s family has been viciously — even rabidly — attacked, so I imagine she’d agree with that statement. So I don’t quite understand your point.

            Or are you implying that Palin attacked someone else’s family at some point in her political career? If so, please show me evidence. I’ve already written her off as “doesn’t get it”, but if there’s evidence that she engaged in the kind of disgusting personal attacks that Trump engaged in, then she should be roundly condemned for it. But if there’s no evidence, then you shouldn’t be engaging in this kind of snide insinuation. (If I misread your statement, then I apologize, and please ignore this paragraph.)

          • “He never called Heidi ugly”…

            False. Here’s the tweet from Trump himself. WARNING: Don’t scroll down after clicking on that link; the first tweet below is the disgusting personal attack on Trump that started this fight, showing Trump’s wife in a racy pose. Unfortunately, I don’t know any way to link to a Tweet without Twitter showing the tweet it was in reply to, or I would.

            Yes, Trump was provoked: the tweet by “Don_Vito_08” was unconscionable and utterly wrong. But Trump was also utterly wrong to respond in the way that he did, by attacking Cruz for something that Cruz had no responsibility for.

            And before anyone brings up the “Well, Trump didn’t actually SAY that Heidi Cruz was ugly in that tweet” defense, that’s weasel argumentation worthy of Kimberlin. I trust that nobody here will be so crass, but I want to pre-empt the argument before anyone tries to make it.

          • “Attacking family is beyond the pale. Got it. I’ll call Sarah Palin and tell her that one. ”

            Yeah, you’ll have to remind me which politicians insulted her family who then received a glowing endorsement from her.

      • Whatever you think of Cruz (and he wasn’t my 1st, or 2nd, or 3rd, or … choice, Trump’s wink, wink, nudge, nudge attack on his wife and father wasn’t “politics ain’t beanbag” stuff. That was personal, not political.

        I don’t begrudge Cruz his personal contempt. Cruz is a smarmy asshole, but he played nice with the party and didn’t give the “F*** you and the horse you rode in on” speech Trump deserved from him.

          • Carson told everyone he was taking a break, at a critical juncture in the campaign.

            What did he think was going to happen?

          • “Carson told everyone he was taking a break”.

            Carson said he was heading home after a primary. Cruz is too intelligent to have honestly mistaken that statement as suspending his campaign and not just a quick visit to be with family.

            Cruz is many things (and a lot of them unflattering), but an idiot is not one of them.

            But as bad as that is, it was still directed at Carson. It wasn’t “Your wife is ugly and your dad was friends with a traitor”.

            That ain’t sleazy, That ain’t politics.

            You might as well expect Schmalfeldt to endorse Krendler or vice versa.

          • Carson told CNN or MSDNC he was heading home, they sent out the story that he was suspending his campaign, one of Cruz’s staffers responded to that on Twitter.

            That’s the basis for Lyin’ Ted. How many lies has Trump told this week? Hell, he was instrumental in bringing the RNC to Cleveland, he said so (it was booked in ’14 before Trump entered the race.)

            Like Kimberlin, Trump lies. He lies frequently, stupidly, and unashamedly. He lies when the truth would serve his interests. He lies.

            The only reason to consider him is, Hillary. God help me, I’m pondering if that’s enough.

  7. Personally, I see my choices as either voting for the Democrat that makes it likely to elect a Republican in 2020 or voting for the Democrat that makes it likely to elect a Democrat in 2020.

  8. How would a president cruz handle put in insulting his wife, his family? So ted is major butthurt from the footprints on his backside, and whined in front of the sorld. Trump gave him a huge conciliatory chance, a gesture by a fellow warrior to make his mark. Ted used it to schmalfeldt himself and worsened it the today addressing what he mistook were his supporters – the Texas dekegation. They ripped him a new one.

    • “How would a president Cruz handle Putin insulting his wife, his family?”

      Probably not by calling him a great guy and the person to lead the world forward towards prosperity.

      • I’m not a
        Trump supporter
        But he is now my only choice
        Now Ted has deprived me of voting for him in 2020 because – his seat is not safe, he is going to be primaried and the Hispanics – who hated Dewhurst – are going to come out like they did for Ted and vote for his opponent in record numbers so Ted will lose to a primary challenger

        the Dems are smart in Texas, with no official political party affiliations, anyone can vote in the primaries.

        Cruz didn’t beat Dewhurst, the dems beat Dewhurst

    • How would a president cruz handle put in insulting his wife, his family

      Bad example. Cruz and Trump were supposed to be rivals, but still on the same side.

      How would a President Trump handle Justin Trudeau attacking his wife?

      • “How would a President Trump handle Justin Trudeau attacking his wife?”

        By arresting Justin Timberlake. You know, like how he blamed Cruz for an ad a Rubio group put out. That’s the kinda attention to detail we have coming if Trump wins.

        • Close, but not quite. A Cruz super PAC put out the ad in Utah of Melania on a bearskin rug. It was the Rubio campaign that shopped around the story of the alleged Cruz affairs, and Cruz blamed Trump for that. The logic escapes me, but this is politics.

          And, yes, the super Pac was pro-Cruz, and shared the same mailing address as Carly Fiorina’s group, after Cruz named her as his VP pick.

          • “And, yes, the super Pac was pro-Cruz, and shared the same mailing address as Carly Fiorina’s group, after Cruz named her as his VP pick.”

            Uh, no.

            Firstly, the pac was anti-Trump. At the time, only Cruz was left so they were supporting him.

            Secondly, a lot of Pacs use that mailing address, it’s a drop box address or some such thing.

            Thirdly, Fiorina was only his VP pick for 6 days – in May. Your link is from March.

          • I know it’s from March. I also know that Mair and a few others were part of the “Ben Carson is quitting” misinformation campaign that Cruz later apologized for. If anyone thinks that PACs are not coordinating with candidates on some level, and I mean all PACS, they are misinformed. Yes, it’s illegal. They do it anyway.

          • No, Mair is not Team Cruz. She was on Scott Walker’s campaign, and really just hates Trump.

            The Trump connection to the Cruz affairs story can be found in the only endorsement the National Enquirer has ever made. #TrumpLovesPecker

    • Someone at the National Review spoke of “jobs that only a foreign worker would do temporarily,” with punch-line, “marry Donald Trump. ” That was one of the most personal and disgusting attacks on a candidate’s spouse ever, and, it passed without notice. Clearly, one standard is being applied to Donald Trump, and another to everyone else.

  9. The statement, “Clinton’s brand of cronyism would operate within fairly well-understood bounds and would be kept in check by “the system,” is simply completely wrong. Hillary Clinton will have the opportunity to appoint a fifth liberal to the Supreme Court, and possibly a sixth and seventh. “The check” on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals will be gone. You don’t have to imagine how bad it will be. You merely have to research the various decisions the Ninth Circuit has had overridden by the Supreme Court. [I would remind everyone that one of those decisions in the pipeline is a declaration that the Second Amendment ends at your front door.] The election of Hillary Clinton will be a disaster for our country for a generation, and, perhaps forever. Talk about picking up the pieces in 2020 is nonsense. Supreme Court Justices serve for life, and, their decisions have no political recourse other than amending the Constitution with the approval of 39 states.

    • That depends on whether you’d include secession in the category of “political recourse”. But I no longer find it unthinkable that Texas, for one, might pull the ripcord on the parachute if the rest of the country is headed for the ground at high speed.

  10. I think that voters have become used to faux civility. Case in point: our current president. All you have to do is go back to Truman for someone who spoke his mind publicly, and was also roundly excoriated for it.
    “Some day I hope to meet you. When that happens you’ll need a new nose, a lot of beefsteak for black eyes, and perhaps a supporter below!”

  11. Also, in regards to Trump being a Leftist. I wouldn’t classify him that way, same way I wouldn’t classify him as a conservative with a lower or upper case “c.”

    I think he operates on a different political axis, and if you are on the wrong plane (not the kind that flies) you will view his positions differently, and perhaps wrongly.

    I don’t think Trump looks at Left and Right, Liberal v Conservative. His axis is along a Pro-America – Anti-America axis. Now, don’t read me wrong and say if you are anti-Trump, you are Anti-American. That is not what I am saying at all. I am saying that Trump looks at it on that Axis, and that is how he operates. He cares more for the feelings of an American tranny than he does for a Syrian mother. That’s how I think he looks at it.

    • Well, I agree whole-heartedly that he is an unapologetic nationalist.

      But economically, he’s a socialist: “Raise my taxes”, use the power of the state to pick winners and losers, etc.

      Nationalist and Socialist. And we wonder why conservatives feel abandoned by their party.

        • No more than Bernie Sanders, who is also a nationalist and a socialist, is Hitler.

          Maybe Republican’s should have put Bernie on the ticket. That’ll bring the conservatives back to the Party.

        • But they didn’t put Bernie on the ticket, did they? Who did they put again? Oh, yeah, Mike Pence.

          Because conservatives don’t have a place at the table, right?

          • They didn’t put Pence on the ticket, they put Trump there.

            And from what I’ve heard about Pence, he was Indiana’s Bush I to the prior governor’s Reagan: meh.

            A Bernie/Pence ticket wouldn’t be any less disheartening.

      • And it goes to the axis of politics that I described below – pro-American v anti-American. Why should the United States borrow money from China in order to pay to prop up Estonia? Why should American men and women go and die for them? This questions becomes especially poignant when you note that Estonia won’t meet the minimum requirement of defending themselves?

        I get that this argument has been played out before over places like Korea and Vietnam and Iraq….

        And it comes down to what is the larger picture – if those struggles were not just about those particular countries, the calculus changes. Are we better off with a contained Soviet Union?

        And so it goes with this current. Is the calculation that we should borrow money from China and pledge our children to die for Estonia because we want to stop Russia from taking over the world?

        If so, make that argument. Allies are important, yes, but not being a chump is important on the world stage, too.

        • The issue is that that calculus should be done *before* an attack occurs, not afterward.

          So whether or not NATO should protect Estonia is a legitimate debate. But part of being reliable and honorable is being up-front about it and not leave them wondering. “Maybe we’ll help, maybe we won’t, it all depends on whether I like you on that particular day or not.” Yep, you can count on Trump. Not sure what you can count on Trump for, but whatever it is, it’s gonna be great, the best ever. YUGE!

          • The only thing I like about Trump is his position on NATO and immigration. The alliance should end and we should pull out. I can’t imagine defending Turkey and a dictator. Do we really want to come to the defense of Germany who imports rapists to rape their own women and demand their press not report about it.

        • “This questions becomes especially poignant when you note that Estonia won’t meet the minimum requirement of defending themselves?”

          There is no way that I can – within the bounds of courtesy required by our host on his forum – express how I feel about attacking Estonia’s commitment to defense (especially since Estonia does spend more than 2% of GDP on defense by the way) given their history.

  12. Donald Trump had the speech beforehand. Without boos from liberal NY delegates Cruz’s speech was a non-story. Trump and his campaign wanted to knife Cruz and why Donald came out during his speech. Trump’s son is a NY delegate and they should’ve been told to be quiet.

    I was going to vote Trump because I’m a Republican. I will write in a candidate now and not vote Trump. Hillary was going to win anyway, but I will not vote for Trump because if “vote your conscience” is an attack, my conscience is too pricked.

    NY gave Trump the nomination and took it away last night.

    • Trump got the speech two hours beforehand. His son was sitting next to him, not with the other delegates. Is the standard now that Trump is responsible for Ted Cruz’s speeches, and public reaction to them? Should he have stopped Cruz and been accused of censorship, etc.?

      • Really? If Donald Trump can’t control his own convention he can’t run a country. His delegate son should’ve been 2 hours before telling NY to shut up and stand down. The Ted Cruz speech was just a speech until Donald and the New York delegation made it a story. Laying out conservative principles and then saying vote your conscience is now an attack … anyone listening to that speech without Trump’s idiocy and antics would’ve walked away thinking I should vote Trump.

        Donald Trump is responsible for his reaction to Cuz’s speech. I don’t need the media to tell me it was an attack speech and label it so … it wasn’t an attack speech! Trump and his campaign turned it into an attack speech.

    • FYI head of the NY delegation is Carl Paladino, who lost big-time to Cuomo on his pledge to clean up Albany: I won’t take a broom, I’ll take a baseball bat.

      This is my not-so-shocked face. Pretty much the same face for Team Kimberlin and Team Trump. And for pretty much the same exact reasons.

      And God help me, I’m considering pulling for the SOB. His only qualification is, he isn’t Hillary. He might do non-evil by accident.

  13. I donated something to Ted’s Senate campaign tonight. I suggest everyone do the same.

    Trump wrongful vilification of Cruz’s wife and father near the end of the campaign was absolutely uncalled for. Trump should have been mending fences at that point but instead he doubled-down and tripled-down on vile, disgraceful attacks.

    I will always vote my conscience, just as Ted suggested.

  14. Pingback: Biggest Loser? | Batshit Crazy News


    …Trump explained his plan this way:

    “I would get people out and then have an expedited way of getting them back into the country so they can be legal…. A lot of these people are helping us … and sometimes it’s jobs a citizen of the United States doesn’t want to do. I want to move ’em out, and we’re going to move ’em back in and let them be legal.”

    Under his plan, illegal aliens don’t have to go to the end of the line behind those who have complied with our immigration laws. They get an “expedited way of getting them back into the country so they can be legal.” They get to cut the line and then stay in America. …

  16. A passionate, maybe even angry, piece by Jonah Goldberg:

    … But that’s okay because he’s Trump. He’s a “winner.” And now that he’s the nominee, the Smart Set and the Mob is telling me that Cruz is the outrageous violator of norms and good manners. Let’s all look down our noses at the sore loser everybody, as we bend the knee and make every apology possible for the sorest, most ungracious winner in American history. When I watch Trump’s kitchen cabinet of yes men rise from their “Thank you, sir, may I have another?” prostrations just long enough to talk about Cruz’s self-interestedness, I have to laugh. Where’s your shinebox, Governor Christie?

Leave a Reply