Let the primaries begin: Rand Paul, Ted Cruz battle over foreign policy

posted at 11:21 am on March 10, 2014 by Allahpundit

Like the Cold War itself, it’s all very diplomatic but has the potential to escalate quickly. Or rather, was very diplomatic: The line in Paul’s op-ed at Breitbart this morning lamenting certain unnamed critics “who have never seen war talking tough for the sake of their political careers” makes me think this could get nasty fast. Matt Lewis covered some of the history between them last week but here’s a quickie timeline if you haven’t followed it. Back in November, the NYT opened a story about the nascent battle for the 2016 tea-party vote with this tidbit:

But when Mr. Cruz went to New York City to meet with donors this summer, he privately offered a different view of Mr. Paul: The Kentucky senator can never be elected president, he told them, because he can never fully detach himself from the strident libertarianism of his father, former Representative Ron Paul of Texas.

Word of Mr. Cruz’s remarks reached Mr. Paul’s inner circle, touching off anger and resentment.

That got a lot of attention when the story first ran. What hasn’t gotten as much attention is the fact that Cruz had been trying to quietly separate himself from Paul on foreign policy for months before that, telling Time magazine last August that McCain and Paul represent the two poles of Republican opinion on foreign policy and that Cruz himself follows a more Reaganesque line between them. That’s as transparent a bit of triangulation as you’ll ever see, but it’s a clever way to frame Paul as extreme. If superhawk John McCain is one end of the spectrum and Rand Paul is the other, how radical must Paul be?

Fast-forward to late February, when Paul told WaPo (before Russia invaded Crimea) that while it’s fine to support Ukraine, it’d be foolish to needlessly antagonize a major power like Moscow by inviting Kiev to join NATO, as McCain had been doing. Some hawks in the party, he said, want to gratuitously “tweak” Moscow all the time. I was struck at the time by how different he sounded from Cruz, who’d been criticizing Russia harshly for weeks. Two weeks later, while attendeding a foreign policy event being held to coincide with CPAC, Cruz repeated his old point about McCain, Paul, and Reagan and bloggers took notice.

Evidently that was the last straw for Paul, who knows that his biggest liability in the primaries is being seen as too much like his old man on foreign policy. The longer he waits to rebut Cruz, the greater the risk that Cruz will define him in tea partiers’ eyes as unacceptably dovish. So this weekend brought a flurry of responses. On “Fox News Sunday,” he told Chris Wallace that his foreign policy is in line with George H.W. Bush’s (would President Paul have led a coalition against Saddam Hussein?) and mentioned points of agreement between himself and Reagan. Then, when Wallace asked him about Cruz’s jab at Bob Dole, McCain, and Romney for being too centrist to win their elections, Paul added this:

Asked on Fox about Cruz’s remarks, Paul said, “Everybody has their own style,” but added, “I don’t spend a lot of time trying to drag people down.”

“Can we do things different to get the party bigger? There’s always ways we can get bigger, particularly when we don’t win,” he continued. “But I don’t spend any time sort of trying to criticize others in the party, because I realize the party has to be bigger, not smaller.”

While Paul was saying that, Cruz himself was on “This Week” saying this:

“I’m a big fan of Rand Paul,” Cruz said, “but I don’t agree with him on foreign policy. I think U.S. leadership is critical in the world. I agree with him that we should be very reluctant to deploy military force abroad. But I think there is a vital role, just as Ronald Reagan did. When Ronald Reagan called the Soviet Union an evil empire, when he stood in front of the Brandenburg Gate and said, ‘Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall,’ those words changed the course of history. The United States has a responsibility to defend our values.”

Skip to around 1:50 of the clip below. Yet again, Cruz had claimed the mantle of Reagan in drawing a distinction with Paul.

So Paul replied today with two op-eds. One, at Time magazine, emphasizes “strong action against Putin’s aggression.” Sanctions, international isolation for Putin, and, most notably, a reminder that “it is our role as a global leader to be the strongest nation in opposing Russia’s latest aggression” — it’s as hawkish as anything you’d see from Cruz or Marco Rubio, a few paragraphs at the end about not launching interventions we can’t pay for aside. He even calls for re-installing a U.S. missile shield in eastern Europe, provided that Europeans pick up the cost. A key passage:

Reagan’s policy of “peace through strength” requires strength of the sort President Obama now fails to project. But what some American leaders, including some in my own party, often forget is that lasting peace was always Reagan’s ultimate objective.

I have said, and some have taken exception, that too many U.S. leaders still think in Cold War terms and are quick to “tweak” the international community. This is true.

But mutual respect and practical diplomacy is a two-way street, where Russia or any other nation should not be tweaking us either, or their neighbors.

Putin’s invasion and occupation of Crimea certainly now goes far beyond tweaking.

I’m curious to see how libertarians and paleocons react to that. Russia dominating its satellite states was, I thought, a classic case of “MYOB” given that there are few American national interests involved. The other op-ed, at Breitbart (and linked up top), is a direct rebuke to members of his own party who shall remain nameless to stop “warping” Reagan’s foreign policy. Guess who this is aimed at. Hint: Not McCain.

Every Republican likes to think he or she is the next Ronald Reagan. Some who say this do so for lack of their own ideas and agenda. Reagan was a great leader and President. But too often people make him into something he wasn’t in order to serve their own political purposes…

Many forget today that Reagan’s decision to meet with Mikhail Gorbachev was harshly criticized by the Republican hawks of his time, some of whom would even call Reagan an appeaser. In the Middle East, Reagan strategically pulled back our forces after the tragedy in Lebanon in 1983 that killed 241 Marines, realizing the cost of American lives was too great for the mission…

I don’t claim to be the next Ronald Reagan nor do I attempt to disparage fellow Republicans as not being sufficiently Reaganesque. But I will remind anyone who thinks we will win elections by trashing previous Republican nominees or holding oneself out as some paragon in the mold of Reagan, that splintering the party is not the route to victory…

Yet, some politicians have used this time to beat their chest. What we don’t need right now is politicians who have never seen war talking tough for the sake of their political careers.

Paul’s never seen war either and, after that Time op-ed, he’s talking about as tough as anyone. The obvious move for Cruz now, if he wants to escalate further, is to claim that Paul’s the one posturing for political ends, posing as some sort of Reagan/Bush “peace through strength” negotiator when, Cruz could argue, he’d follow the Ron Paul line in office if elected. But maybe Cruz doesn’t need to respond; maybe the whole point here is to bait Paul into hawkishness knowing that some libertarians will grumble about it. Then, when/if Paul tries to satisfy them by taking a more dovish line in the future, some of the grassroots conservatives intrigued by his newly hawkish stance on Russia will wonder if Cruz is right that Paul is privately more dovish than everyone thinks. The more the two sides of Paul’s base have reason to doubt he’d be their guy in office, the more difficult Paul’s task becomes.

Exit question: Quien es mas Reagan?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

What we don’t need are a bunch of politicians telling us what we want to hear so that they can remain in power over us.

gryphon202 on March 10, 2014 at 11:21 AM

Yes lets fight among ourselves… That’ll help…

sandee on March 10, 2014 at 11:22 AM

I don’t need to read this mess to know I’ll take Cruz over Paul any day. Paul is too politically vapid with his embrace of McConnell.

DanMan on March 10, 2014 at 11:25 AM

I’m with Cruz on this all the way. I like Paul and would vote for him for President in a heart beat…but there are things he says and does that remind me of his Dad. And it makes me uncomfortable.

Jack_Burton on March 10, 2014 at 11:30 AM

Yet, some politicians have used this time to beat their chest. What we don’t need right now is politicians who have never seen war talking tough for the sake of their political careers.

Azzholes, from all sides, who claim not/never to do this are…well…azzholes.

Schadenfreude on March 10, 2014 at 11:30 AM

I have no doubts that many conservatives love these guys.

But a president has to govern and has many duties.

neither of these guys have ever run anything.look how that worked out with Obama.

gerrym51 on March 10, 2014 at 11:30 AM

Cruz is against amnesty.

Paul is for amnesty and open borders.

Case closed.

TxAnn56 on March 10, 2014 at 11:31 AM

“Quit talking about Reagan and start acting like him” — Sen. Lee @ CPAC 2014

Schadenfreude on March 10, 2014 at 11:31 AM

One thing for sure, Rands dads on line poll clickers will put Rand on top of any on line poll or any phone call poll.

Primay real vote totals not so much.

Ted will force the real Rand Paul to stand up, done deal then.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on March 10, 2014 at 11:32 AM

Let iron sharpen iron.

22044 on March 10, 2014 at 11:32 AM

Yet, some politicians have used this time to beat their chest. What we don’t need right now is politicians who have never seen war talking tough for the sake of their political careers.

De-legitimizing your opponents is probably not the right way to have a debate over a legitimate issue. Or, for that matter, the way to accomplish the goal of “the party has to be bigger, not smaller.”

Note that I don’t have a problem de-legitimizing a political stance that is truly indefensible, like giving aid to Iran.

There Goes the Neighborhood on March 10, 2014 at 11:32 AM

Yes lets let’s fight among ourselves… That’ll help…

sandee on March 10, 2014 at 11:22 AM

Of course it does. It exposes a bunch of weasels.

What do you want? Be a D-rat, all frolicking happily in the latrine, singing kumbaya?

Schadenfreude on March 10, 2014 at 11:32 AM

I like Paul, think he’s a good man….but he really does not impress me…if he’s our nom

..his speech at CPAC did not impress me….

Aside from Palin/Cruz, the only other person who really
impressed me was Dan Bongino (SP)….

ToddPA on March 10, 2014 at 11:34 AM

I’ll take Ted Cruz over the increasingly squishy, passive, establishment-friendly Rand Paul, any day.

bluegill on March 10, 2014 at 11:34 AM

I know that the appeal of internecine bloodletting is catnip at H/A, but do you suppose we could try to win the Senate in this year’s midterms first?

MJBrutus on March 10, 2014 at 11:34 AM

If Paul were smarter, he’d start angling for VP now.

WhatSlushfund on March 10, 2014 at 11:36 AM

Rand Paul = Backing McConnell and trying to destroy the grassroots / TEA party.

Cruz = Speaking for the grassroots.

The choice is real hard.

tetriskid on March 10, 2014 at 11:37 AM

Cruz and Santorum will split votes as they both vie to talk the toughest talk. In addition Cruz’s mouth will get him in trouble about halfway through the primaries. Then it will be all “bridge gate” from the press as his chances fade.

Bradky on March 10, 2014 at 11:37 AM

Bradky, the obama-voter, give consulting advice.

Are you not ashamed of your land, Bradky?

Schadenfreude on March 10, 2014 at 11:39 AM

Two good men – both with no record outside giving speeches.

Who knows?

jake-the-goose on March 10, 2014 at 11:41 AM

Schadenfreude on March 10, 2014 at 11:39 AM

I suppose if I had voted for him you would have a point. I didn’t and you don’t.

Perry-Rubio or Rand-Rubio will be the ticket when the smoke clears

Bradky on March 10, 2014 at 11:42 AM

“Quit talking about Reagan and start acting like him” — Sen. Lee @ CPAC 2014

Schadenfreude on March 10, 2014 at 11:31 AM

That would require bringing in “RINOs” and other assorted ruffians (libertarians and secularists and persuadable Democrats, oh my!) into the tent, you know. Reagan was a coalition-builder.

This means, of course, supporting politicians that may agree’real conservatives’ are quick to tell everyone, bringing more “RINOs” into the tent is just not acceptable even if it was a guiding political principle that Reagan believed in.

So the challenge to ‘act more like Reagan’ is really one for the “real conservatives” who are seemingly interested in more-conservative-than-thou purity purges than in and kicking Democrats out of office on a large scale.

Good Lt on March 10, 2014 at 11:43 AM

…oh geez!…here we go again!

KOOLAID2 on March 10, 2014 at 11:43 AM

What I want to hear from these guys is how either one of them plan to win a GOP primary system that favors GOP Establishment candidates.

Curtiss on March 10, 2014 at 11:44 AM

Cruz and Santorum will split votes as they both vie to talk the toughest talk. In addition Cruz’s mouth will get him in trouble about halfway through the primaries. Then it will be all “bridge gate” from the press as his chances fade.

Bradky on March 10, 2014 at 11:37 AM

…you hope!

KOOLAID2 on March 10, 2014 at 11:44 AM

Bradky on March 10, 2014 at 11:42 AM

now we know who the dems think is their best chance to beat

Palin/Walker – clarity and performance,we will need Cruz in the senate for now and Texas is already sealed for whoever the GOP runs.

DanMan on March 10, 2014 at 11:46 AM

i’m hoping sarah doesn’t engage until the kentucky primary is over or, if mitch loses it to bevin, it’ll be her fault. paul’s alliance with mitch is gonna hurt him with the tea party folks who will roll to cruz for the presidential run.

mitch can only blame himself if he loses this one

gracie on March 10, 2014 at 11:46 AM

Nice response from Rand Paul; one that I agree with.

Amjean on March 10, 2014 at 11:47 AM

Perry-Rubio or Rand-Rubio will be the ticket when the smoke clears

Bradky on March 10, 2014 at 11:42 AM

Thanks for the laugh.

Rubio is a Liar and a traitor, to the TEA party, which brung him, and to the legal citizens and workers of the USA.

All amnesty shills hate the Hispanics and blacks of America. The leftist thugs, if they’d stop to think about it, would realize this.

obama hates the poor and middle classes of America.

Schadenfreude on March 10, 2014 at 11:48 AM

Palin/Walker – clarity and performance,we will need Cruz in the senate for now and Texas is already sealed for whoever the GOP runs.

DanMan on March 10, 2014 at 11:46 AM

I agree – keep Cruz in the Senate – good place for talkers to talk

Palin will not run.

Walker – good pick – but he will not be interested in VP – no way.

jake-the-goose on March 10, 2014 at 11:48 AM

This means, of course, supporting politicians that may agree’real conservatives’ are quick to tell everyone, bringing more “RINOs” into the tent is just not acceptable even if it was a guiding political principle that Reagan believed in.

Yikes – formatting crisis.

What was supposed to be there was the principle that Reagan lived the “the guy who agrees with me 70% of the time is an ally and somebody to reach out to” principle.

Reagan did not cast out and destroy people who did not agree with him 100% of the time.

This isn’t news to anybody here, I hope.

Good Lt on March 10, 2014 at 11:48 AM

So Paul replied today with two op-eds. One, at Time magazine

…there is a problem right there!…Time Magazine!

KOOLAID2 on March 10, 2014 at 11:49 AM

Rand has too much of Ron’s “Until they blow something up and murder a bunch of people in the U.S., it’s none of our business” world view for my liking.

Beyond vaugeries of libertarian rhetoric, what would he demand change?

Mimzey on March 10, 2014 at 11:49 AM

Has Cruz suffered a verbal gaffe in his career so far? I haven’t noticed.

aunursa on March 10, 2014 at 11:50 AM

Can’t really think of one.

jake-the-goose on March 10, 2014 at 11:50 AM

In addition Cruz’s mouth will get him in trouble about halfway through the primaries.

Bradky on March 10, 2014 at 11:37 AM

Has Cruz suffered a verbal gaffe in his career so far? I haven’t noticed.

aunursa on March 10, 2014 at 11:50 AM

Why get into a fight with each other when they have zero control over anything. Criticize Obama, is the one making a hash of everything.

Cindy Munford on March 10, 2014 at 11:51 AM

Criticize Obama, is the one making a hash of everything.

Cindy Munford on March 10, 2014 at 11:51 AM

This – ,,,, Congressmen !!!!

jake-the-goose on March 10, 2014 at 11:52 AM

I know that the appeal of internecine bloodletting is catnip at H/A, but do you suppose we could try to win the Senate in this year’s midterms first?

MJBrutus on March 10, 2014 at 11:34 AM

I don’t agree with you often Brutus, but totally agree with this.
Taking the Senate AND defeating McConnell should be our top priority now.

Defeating any Dem or RINO (I know you don’t like that word, but I explained to you what I mean when I use it) in the Senate that is up for re-election should be out primary goal!!!

bluefox on March 10, 2014 at 11:52 AM

To Cruz, Reagan is just prop to use flailingly in an attempt to burnish his national standing with conservatives.
Paul very adeptly shows what it means to actually know and emulate the man – and not the myth.
This was a solid smack-down by Paul – and shows that while Cruz can ride high for a while on empty platitudes for his supporters and toothless patrony for his critics, he’s going to have a hard time when the debates become substantive and informed.

Cruz will make a lot of noise, but he’ll be at 4th or 5th in the primaries when he eventually drops out.

verbaluce on March 10, 2014 at 11:52 AM

Ted Cruz, just what Republicans need. The latest Republican Obama.

An unqualified candidate with a silly little girl fan base.

Moesart on March 10, 2014 at 11:53 AM

What I want to hear from these guys is how either one of them plan to win a GOP primary system that favors GOP Establishment candidates.

Curtiss on March 10, 2014 at 11:44 AM

I agree with you that this is a far more critical concern at this point.

The GOP Establishment will probably put Christie as the nominee. Christie/McCain 2016!

WhatSlushfund on March 10, 2014 at 11:53 AM

…there is a problem right there!…Time Magazine!

KOOLAID2 on March 10, 2014 at 11:49 AM

Well he does like Mitch McConnell..who wants to “Punch the Tea Party folks in the nose…and hopes to “crush them” anytime they make a stand”.
What not to understand about that?
/

Mimzey on March 10, 2014 at 11:54 AM

Aren’t the Boomers still the biggest demographic? Aren’t they going to be a tad uneasy about a bunch of libertarians supplying their much needed retirement revenue? High unemployment, legal pot, all the makings of a vibrant future.

Cindy Munford on March 10, 2014 at 11:54 AM

Ted Cruz, just what Republicans need. The latest Republican Obama.

Moesart on March 10, 2014 at 11:53 AM

An enormous part of the electorate today is more enamored with words, rather than actual accomplishments.

Sad – but true.

jake-the-goose on March 10, 2014 at 11:54 AM

Between this recent Russia thing, and wanting to invade Syria “temporarily” to seize chemical weapons, Cruz is sounding a little too much like John McCain on foreign policy for my tastes.

Regardless, I honestly and truly do not believe he is going to run for President in 2016. I think it’s a combination of the media wanting a new DeMint to talk about, and Cruz himself wanting to build a national profile around the idea of him running, ala Palin circa 2009-2011.

TheDriver on March 10, 2014 at 11:54 AM

Moesart on March 10, 2014 at 11:53 AM

Same could be said of Paul. Neither of these gentleman should be the Republican candidates for POTUS until they leave the Senate and are governors of their respective states.

Cindy Munford on March 10, 2014 at 11:55 AM

In addition Cruz’s mouth will get him in trouble about halfway through the primaries.

Bradky on March 10, 2014 at 11:37 AM

You assume, erroneously, that he is obama.

Schadenfreude on March 10, 2014 at 11:56 AM

Yes lets fight among ourselves… That’ll help…

sandee on March 10, 2014 at 11:22 AM

I know that the appeal of internecine bloodletting is catnip at H/A, but do you suppose we could try to win the Senate in this year’s midterms first?

MJBrutus on March 10, 2014 at 11:34 AM

If you don’t want us “fighting amongst ourselves” you should agitate to have the primary system completely abolished and simply have the parties handpick all candidates going forward. The reality is that in politics, people will have competing views and are going to criticize each other in public, often in negative ways. Even people I like are probably going to do it.

I don’t like it, but it’s how the game is played.

Doomberg on March 10, 2014 at 11:56 AM

Aren’t the Boomers still the biggest demographic? Aren’t they going to be a tad uneasy about a bunch of libertarians supplying their much needed retirement revenue? High unemployment, legal pot, all the makings of a vibrant future.

Cindy Munford on March 10, 2014 at 11:54 AM

As a boomer myself.

- I am increasingly libertarian – “get out of my life” attitude
- Yes I do worry about retirement money – but not entitlement money
- I worry about unemployment – but this is a macro economic issue IMO
- I don’t care about legalizing pot -

But hey – that’s me.

jake-the-goose on March 10, 2014 at 11:57 AM

Ted Cruz, just what Republicans need. The latest Republican Obama.

An unqualified candidate with a silly little girl fan base.

Moesart on March 10, 2014 at 11:53 AM

Actually…in an odd way, you’re right.
What we need is exactly someone like Obama for conservative issues. Someone who will just use a pen and his phone to undo all that Obama has done, and when done, say to the progressives..”I won..what are you going to do about it?” Let the left waste their time and resources playing that game.

Mimzey on March 10, 2014 at 11:58 AM

In addition Cruz’s mouth will get him in trouble about halfway through the primaries.

Bradky on March 10, 2014 at 11:37 AM

I don’t know Bradky, seems like Cruz’s mouth is making much more trouble for the GOPe and its fluffers.

Bmore on March 10, 2014 at 11:59 AM

I’d take Rand over Cruz on most things, but I’m with Cruz on this one.

GOPRanknFile on March 10, 2014 at 11:59 AM

Moesart on March 10, 2014 at 11:53 AM

Say hi to President Romney for me.

ElectricPhase on March 10, 2014 at 12:00 PM

Someone who will just use a pen and his phone to undo all that Obama has done, and when done, say to the progressives..”I won..what are you going to do about it?”

Mimzey on March 10, 2014 at 11:58 AM

Sounds like government by retribution and that is very dangerous.

jake-the-goose on March 10, 2014 at 12:00 PM

Schadenfreude on March 10, 2014 at 11:56 AM

.

Bmore on March 10, 2014 at 12:00 PM

“Quit talking about Reagan and start acting like him” — Sen. Lee @ CPAC 2014

Schadenfreude on March 10, 2014 at 11:31 AM

That would require bringing in “RINOs” and other assorted ruffians (libertarians and secularists and persuadable Democrats, oh my!) into the tent, you know. Reagan was a coalition-builder.

This means, of course, supporting politicians that may agree’real conservatives’ are quick to tell everyone, bringing more “RINOs” into the tent is just not acceptable even if it was a guiding political principle that Reagan believed in.

So the challenge to ‘act more like Reagan’ is really one for the “real conservatives” who are seemingly interested in more-conservative-than-thou purity purges than in and kicking Democrats out of office on a large scale.

Good Lt on March 10, 2014 at 11:43 AM

Bush 41 was also a coalition builder. The difference between Reagan and Bush 41 was that one let the coalition define and limit the mission, the other defined the mission first.

People accepted Reagan’s coalition, because they knew they could trust Reagan. In order for there to be a coalition, there will have to be trust in the man at the top.

So no, you won’t see any coalitions built around RINOs, because they can’t be trusted.

The trust issue may be a killer for Rand Paul. A lot of people like him, but can conservatives really trust him, or will he veer to the libertarian side as soon as he thinks it’s safe.

I think foreign policy is already hurting Rand Paul’s credibility. It’s going to be hard for him to distance himself from his father’s lunacy without destroying his appeal to libertarians.

There Goes the Neighborhood on March 10, 2014 at 12:01 PM

Rand Paul will never be POTUS.

jake-the-goose on March 10, 2014 at 12:01 PM

Bmore on March 10, 2014 at 11:59 AM

He is serving a worthy role in shaping the debate but I don’t think that carries him to a nomination. But I thought the Browns would have a super bowl ring by now….

Bradky on March 10, 2014 at 12:01 PM

Ted Cruz, just what Republicans need. The latest Republican Obama.

An unqualified candidate with a silly little girl fan base.

Moesart on March 10, 2014 at 11:53 AM

You are ignorant and uninformed. Do some reading.

It will be just for those who are qualified, the opposite of obama.

Schadenfreude on March 10, 2014 at 12:02 PM

Schadenfreude on March 10, 2014 at 12:02 PM

Being qualified is a personal and subjective opinion of someone’s resume.

For some a member of Congress is qualified.

For others – who think Congress is the problem – it is not a qualification.

jake-the-goose on March 10, 2014 at 12:04 PM

But I thought the Browns would have a super bowl ring by now….

Bradky on March 10, 2014 at 12:01 PM

Chuckle & LOL!

bluefox on March 10, 2014 at 12:04 PM

Sounds like government by retribution and that is very dangerous.

jake-the-goose on March 10, 2014 at 12:00 PM

How so? Righting wrongs by any means necessary is not “retribution” imo. Doing the needed thing for the survival of the country and it’s citizens freedoms and rights is not ideological revenge.
As a concept, you have a point, but concept is not reality.

Mimzey on March 10, 2014 at 12:04 PM

I caught this on Drudge or someplace:

Could Some Internet ‘Trolls’ Actually Be Government Operatives? Beck Warns Americans to Be Wary

But for the fact Bradky’s been here since 2006, I’d suspect he probably was.

Lanceman on March 10, 2014 at 12:05 PM

Bmore, you got it.

Schadenfreude on March 10, 2014 at 12:05 PM

As a concept, you have a point, but concept is not reality.

Mimzey on March 10, 2014 at 12:04 PM

Ok – right of left – I don’t agree with Executive actions on the scale you suggest – but I wouldn’t raise my voice over it either.

jake-the-goose on March 10, 2014 at 12:07 PM

jake-the-goose on March 10, 2014 at 11:57 AM

I’m in the same boat but I bet you there are a lot of us that aren’t. And they will vote Democrat because they know they won’t take their “free” stuff.

Cindy Munford on March 10, 2014 at 12:07 PM

Could Some Internet ‘Trolls’ Actually Be Government Operatives? Beck Warns Americans to Be Wary

Lanceman on March 10, 2014 at 12:05 PM

Heh, if any are, get Fluked, royally…then we’ll pour lemon juice on you. You are nothing but D-latrine-rats, hypocritical swine of the world, with deep apologies to the clean pigs.

Schadenfreude on March 10, 2014 at 12:08 PM

Cruz would have the same amount of elected office experience (unless you want to count Obama’s years in the Illinois State Legislature) as Obama did, in the same office too. Four years in the U.S. Senate for Obama (2005-2009) and four years for Cruz when the next President is sworn in (2013-2017).

After the gross incompetence of Obama, not sure you can convince enough people we need another woefully inexperienced President to win a national election. At least not during the very first post-Obama presidential election.

TheDriver on March 10, 2014 at 12:08 PM

I don’t know Bradky, seems like Cruz’s mouth is making much more trouble for the GOPe and its fluffers.

Bmore on March 10, 2014 at 11:59 AM

I agree! He certainly has McConnell bent out of shape and foaming at the mouth, LOL

Ted Cruz UP, McConnell, DOWN & OUT!!

bluefox on March 10, 2014 at 12:09 PM

I’m in the same boat but I bet you there are a lot of us that aren’t. And they will vote Democrat because they know they won’t take their “free” stuff.

Cindy Munford on March 10, 2014 at 12:07 PM

Yep

Voter enthusiasm is always stronger when you want something being offered – over not wanting something.

If that makes sense?

jake-the-goose on March 10, 2014 at 12:09 PM

@AP, thank you for this timeline and background info on this!!

What is going on with HA? Is Word Press causing our issues? Did they update recently?

bluefox on March 10, 2014 at 12:10 PM

So the challenge to ‘act more like Reagan’ is really one for the “real conservatives” who are seemingly interested in more-conservative-than-thou purity purges than in and kicking Democrats out of office on a large scale.

Good Lt on March 10, 2014 at 11:43 AM

Bullcaca

Schadenfreude on March 10, 2014 at 12:11 PM

Because McConnell’s become a douche, edge to Cruz on that factor.

22044 on March 10, 2014 at 12:12 PM

After the gross incompetence of Obama, not sure you can convince enough people we need another woefully inexperienced President to win a national election. At least not during the very first post-Obama presidential election.

TheDriver on March 10, 2014 at 12:08 PM

Add to that reason this – as it relates to Cruz right now.

Neither the right or the left in Congress like Ted Cruz. The President has to lead and has to be able to move Congress. Ted Cruz has not shown any ability to credit a coalition – on either side of the aisle.

Cruz is a good man with a great future – but IMO – not in 2016.

jake-the-goose on March 10, 2014 at 12:13 PM

Sarah steps in and separates the two from their squabble…

“Boys, BOYS! When I helped you get on this playground I told you to play together, and I meant it. Now get back out there in the game and go after the other team, not each other!”

otlset on March 10, 2014 at 12:14 PM

Freshman senators fighting over who gets to succeed the previous freshman senator (Obama) to the White House.

thebrokenrattle on March 10, 2014 at 12:14 PM

Way too early to pick between the two. Rand’s advantage is the best of the Goldwater wing of Republicanism that can possibly expand the playing field. Whereas we all love Cruz because he sticks it to Obama; unfortunately Obama isn’t on the ’16 ballot.

Tater Salad on March 10, 2014 at 12:14 PM

Being qualified is a personal and subjective opinion of someone’s resume.

For some a member of Congress is qualified.

For others – who think Congress is the problem – it is not a qualification.

jake-the-goose on March 10, 2014 at 12:04 PM

100 facts qualify Cruz versus 0 facts qualify obama.

Schadenfreude on March 10, 2014 at 12:14 PM

Bullcaca

Schadenfreude on March 10, 2014 at 12:11 PM

A 49-state landslide is ‘bullcaca’ to you?

Keep up whatever it is you think you’re doing.

Good Lt on March 10, 2014 at 12:15 PM

Two good men – both with no record outside giving speeches.

Who knows?

jake-the-goose on March 10, 2014 at 11:41 AM

I can’t believe you said that as it certainly does not apply to Senator Ted Cruz. I know you are smarter than that!!

bluefox on March 10, 2014 at 12:15 PM

Keep up whatever it is you think you’re doing.

Good Lt on March 10, 2014 at 12:15 PM

He meant horsehooey.

Lanceman on March 10, 2014 at 12:15 PM

IIRC, Regan and GHW Bush fought something fierce before joining forces.

D-fusit on March 10, 2014 at 12:15 PM

Reagan was hated for 3 rounds, especially by the RINO weasels.

See how often George Will berated the principled man. I’m too lazy to look it up, though I will as the race gets closer…Too early for all that work.

Nothing has changed since the 60s, but the crapweasels blame the conservatives.

Schadenfreude on March 10, 2014 at 12:16 PM

Cruz is a good man with a great future – but IMO – not in 2016.
jake-the-goose on March 10, 2014 at 12:13 PM

All you seem to do on this site is badmouth Cruz and others who are in favor of immigration law enforcement and who oppose illegal alien amnesty. And you promote pro-amnesty politicians while claiming to oppose amnesty.

Sorry, but if someone like you opposes Cruz and other conservative candidates, then that looks good for Cruz.

bluegill on March 10, 2014 at 12:17 PM

Keep up whatever it is you think you’re doing.

Good Lt on March 10, 2014 at 12:15 PM

Don’t you tell me about R. Reagan. The man was first a real man and second a principled leader. He’d laugh at your comment against the conservatives.

The factions followed him because he had good principles and was trusted, not because he bent to the winds.

Schadenfreude on March 10, 2014 at 12:17 PM

I can’t believe you said that as it certainly does not apply to Senator Ted Cruz. I know you are smarter than that!!

bluefox on March 10, 2014 at 12:15 PM

I hear you. Listen, I like Ted Cruz – I think he is brilliant and correct on the issues. But I do not think he is ready to be POTUS.

I am however open to changing my mind – if he can demonstrate an ability to lead and govern.

I have not seen it yet – but maybe I will.

jake-the-goose on March 10, 2014 at 12:18 PM

Reagan didn’t have to claim “I’m a severe conservative” or some such that Romney declared…only to then deride the good people.

Schadenfreude on March 10, 2014 at 12:19 PM

jake-the-goose on March 10, 2014 at 11:41 AM

I can’t believe you said that as it certainly does not apply to Senator Ted Cruz. I know you are smarter than that!!
bluefox on March 10, 2014 at 12:15 PM

Cruz-bashing Jake-the-goose butters people up on here with phony compliments.

bluegill on March 10, 2014 at 12:19 PM

All you seem to do on this site is badmouth Cruz and others who are in favor of immigration law enforcement and who oppose illegal alien amnesty.

bluegill on March 10, 2014 at 12:17 PM

Well – you’re wrong.

I don’t bad mouth Cruz – I never have.

I am pro immigration reform – and I am anti amnesty.

Maybe (but I doubt it) you can remember what I have just said.

jake-the-goose on March 10, 2014 at 12:20 PM

Anyone who compares Cruz to obama is a moron. Period.

Schadenfreude on March 10, 2014 at 12:21 PM

Bradky on March 10, 2014 at 12:01 PM

Being a Browns fan sucks sure enough. Being a supporter of Cruz. Not in the least unless you are on the other team. Am I to presume you might think him a fine Senate leader, say in place of Reid?

Bmore on March 10, 2014 at 12:22 PM

Neither the right or the left in Congress like Ted Cruz. The President has to lead and has to be able to move Congress. Ted Cruz has not shown any ability to credit a coalition – on either side of the aisle.

Cruz is a good man with a great future – but IMO – not in 2016.

jake-the-goose on March 10, 2014 at 12:13 PM

As long as Reid is Majority Leader and McConnell is Minority Leader, no one is moving Congress to the right; read that as for the Country & Freedom.

That is why taking the Senate and defeating McConnell is top priority!!

bluefox on March 10, 2014 at 12:22 PM

Cruz-bashing Jake-the-goose butters people up on here with phony compliments.

bluegill on March 10, 2014 at 12:19 PM

Oh my – you really just cannot engage can you. Hang in there – 2016 is a long way off – a lot can happen.

Perhaps even you will find opportunity to learn and grow.

jake-the-goose on March 10, 2014 at 12:22 PM

Maybe (but I doubt it) you can remember what I have just said.
jake-the-goose on March 10, 2014 at 12:20 PM

Not only does you habitually badmouth Cruz on this site, but you also promote pro-amnesty candidates and insult as “single-issue voters” those who refuse to support pro-amnesty candidates.

bluegill on March 10, 2014 at 12:22 PM

He’d laugh at your comment against the conservatives.

Reagan would bridge the gap with the RINOs and unite them with the hard conservative wing of the party.

Reagan would laugh at the notion that you grow the party’s influence and electoral success by shrinking it, which is what you’re advocating.

Good Lt on March 10, 2014 at 12:23 PM

Multitasking seems all but impossible for some.

Bmore on March 10, 2014 at 12:23 PM

The factions followed him because he had good principles and was trusted, not because he bent to the winds.

Schadenfreude on March 10, 2014 at 12:17 PM

And you see this in Cruz?
That’ll require some serious spinning – both as to who Cruz is as well as who RR was.

verbaluce on March 10, 2014 at 12:23 PM

Anyone who compares Cruz to obama is a moron. Period.

Schadenfreude on March 10, 2014 at 12:21 PM

Normally I don’t care much for the use of the word moron. However in this instance. I agree.

Bmore on March 10, 2014 at 12:24 PM

Cruz is against amnesty.
Paul is for amnesty and open borders.
Case closed.
TxAnn56 on March 10, 2014 at 11:31 AM

Well said.

bluegill on March 10, 2014 at 12:25 PM

Cruz – A good guy who really knows how to talk to the base. He needs to expand his reach to those outside of committed conservatives to getting those in the middle to follow. Great at telling what’s wrong with liberalism.

Paul – Currently much better at potentially expanding from the base GOP voter by being willing to explain why conservatism can help the poor, blacks, young and Hispanics. Seems to never forget we are in fight against tyranny.

Tater Salad on March 10, 2014 at 12:25 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4