PDA

View Full Version : Alex Jones: "I'm sold on Ted Cruz"




compromise
05-17-2013, 05:08 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=FXnroAFYvnQ

Warlord
05-17-2013, 05:21 AM
This Warlord is definitely not.

MaverickPAC, Bush, neocon friends like Mark Levin and bankster wife are all too much to ignore.

Sorry Ted.

PSYOP
05-17-2013, 05:22 AM
The guy has Goldman Sachs connections -- I wouldn't trust him 100%.

Warlord
05-17-2013, 05:24 AM
By the way you notice Mark Levin sounding like a constitutional conservative lately?

He was saying on TV the other day we need to stand up for the 4th amendment... WHAT? He cheered the PATRIOT act and Bush's desecration of it.

These guys are slick and Ted Cruz is a big buddy of his!

Petar
05-17-2013, 05:27 AM
I understand that Cruz has some shitty associations, but he just doesn't ring the scumbag alarm for me, in the intuitive sense.

I guess that my feeling is that I expect that there would be some areas where he would sharply diverge from the libertarian point of view, but at least he seems honest and predictable?

Warlord
05-17-2013, 05:27 AM
Levin was saying last night we need to get rid of the IRS... yet just a few months ago he was ridiculing the one guy who had the courage to push this (Ron)

See how fast these guys change their spots?

Petar
05-17-2013, 05:28 AM
Levin was saying last night we need to get rid of the IRS... yet just a few months ago he was ridiculing the one guy who had the courage to push this (Ron)

See how fast these guys change their spots?

That is Levin, but is Cruz shitty like that too?

Warlord
05-17-2013, 05:29 AM
Levin is big buddies with Cruz and knows him personally from years ago.

They're essentially the same: neocons who cheered Bush and used their lawyer skills to give him a pass on torture and the 4th amendment's destruction and the war in Iraq.

Ted just wasn't around then but dont think for a minute this isnt his mindset.

compromise
05-17-2013, 05:33 AM
Rand's close friends with Beck and to some extent Ingraham. Most of these Senators have a radio talk show host buddy. I don't think there's anything wrong with that.

If Levin's sounding different recently, that's a good thing.

Petar
05-17-2013, 05:35 AM
Levin is big buddies with Cruz and knows him personally from years ago.

They're essentially the same: neocons who cheered Bush and used their lawyer skills to give him a pass on torture and the 4th amendment's destruction and the war in Iraq.

Ted just wasn't around then but dont think for a minute this isnt his mindset.

Well, for now there is no doubt that he is helping.

When he does something really shitty, then I guess that we will have cause to crucify him at that point.

Warlord
05-17-2013, 05:39 AM
Rand's close friends with Beck and to some extent Ingraham. Most of these Senators have a radio talk show host buddy. I don't think there's anything wrong with that.

If Levin's sounding different recently, that's a good thing.

I think that comparison is wrong... Ted and Levin's association likely go back further than Rand knowing Ingraham/Beck. They're both lawyers and he keeps sayihg he knows him from years back i.e 10 years or more. He's Levin's type of Republican. He was then and is now: Neoconish, ready to use the military and support war and ready to give people like Bush a pass

Levin sounds different because there's a Democrat in the White House. He's still pro-empire, pro-war and an incoherent lunatic.

See this for what they're up to:
http://lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo253.html

And dont forget they hate our guts.

Warlord
05-17-2013, 05:45 AM
Mark Levin joined in the attack on Scheuer using strawmen: 'He's blaming the jews, leftist idiot!'

I wonder if he's seen Rand's reading list yet? :)

You see... they're not our friends. They hate our guts.

Don't forget it.

CaptUSA
05-17-2013, 05:47 AM
Cruz adds weight to our side of the scale. That's enough for me. Even if it's not as much weight as someone else, it doesn't matter. Same goes for Rand.

There are those that work towards liberty and those that work towards tyranny. As long as any of these folks don't try to infringe upon me, they are good people to have around.

V3n
05-17-2013, 06:05 AM
I'm not going to play "guilty by association" - his votes have been good - a lot better than either of my Senators. Until he disappoints in that regard, I see no reason not to get behind him.

Warlord
05-17-2013, 06:11 AM
I'm not going to play "guilty by association" - his votes have been good - a lot better than either of my Senators. Until he disappoints in that regard, I see no reason not to get behind him.

He's unlikely to let you down because he's too clever and in stealth mode.

compromise
05-17-2013, 06:39 AM
I think that comparison is wrong... Ted and Levin's association likely go back further than Rand knowing Ingraham/Beck. They're both lawyers and he keeps sayihg he knows him from years back i.e 10 years or more. He's Levin's type of Republican. He was then and is now: Neoconish, ready to use the military and support war and ready to give people like Bush a pass

Levin sounds different because there's a Democrat in the White House. He's still pro-empire, pro-war and an incoherent lunatic.

See this for what they're up to:
http://lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo253.html

And dont forget they hate our guts.

Ted Cruz said he opposed the growth of government during the Bush presidency in his CPAC speech. He also voted against foreign aid. Not sure where he stood on previous wars because he doesn't talk about them. I agree that on Iran, he tends to be overly hawkish. When Cruz actually votes for war, then I'm alright with denouncing him. Until then, I'm not going to judge him on that. Domestically, he's definitely up there with Lee and Cruz.

Also, is a friend really enough to disqualify him? I'm sure there's people on here that have friends that are liberal, neoconservative, socialist, nationalist, etc. Doesn't mean they agree with them on everything.

Warlord
05-17-2013, 06:46 AM
Ted Cruz said he opposed the growth of government during the Bush presidency in his CPAC speech. He also voted against foreign aid. Not sure where he stood on previous wars because he doesn't talk about them. I agree that on Iran, he tends to be overly hawkish. When Cruz actually votes for war, then I'm alright with denouncing him. Until then, I'm not going to judge him on that. Domestically, he's definitely up there with Lee and Cruz.

Also, is a friend really enough to disqualify him? I'm sure there's people on here that have friends that are liberal, neoconservative, socialist, nationalist, etc. Doesn't mean they agree with them on everything.

Look at his PAC, these aren't just his friends it's who they raise money for and support in the GOP. All neocons.

compromise
05-17-2013, 06:55 AM
Look at his PAC, these aren't just his friends it's who they raise money for and support in the GOP. All neocons.

Not really. Dean Heller definitely isn't a neocon. Connie Mack and Tom Graves were pretty good too. It is a PAC than helps friends of the Bush family, but it's not necessarily ideologically neoconservative in its endorsements. I believe that PAC shows some preference to candidates of ethnic minority origin.

Brett85
05-17-2013, 06:59 AM
Hmmm. Is Alex Jones becoming mainstream?

jmdrake
05-17-2013, 07:07 AM
Hmmm. Is Alex Jones becoming mainstream?

Rachel Maddow's attack on Ron Paul via Alex Jones may have done Jones more good than harm. For her to poo-poo every conspiracy, including the proven fact that the DHS is buying a ridiculously unjustifiable amount of bullets, makes Jones' "crazy" conspiracies look sane to republicans smart enough to realize that there is at least something afoul in D.C.

Warlord
05-17-2013, 07:10 AM
Not really. Dean Heller definitely isn't a neocon. Connie Mack and Tom Graves were pretty good too. It is a PAC than helps friends of the Bush family, but it's not necessarily ideologically neoconservative in its endorsements. I believe that PAC shows some preference to candidates of ethnic minority origin.

Heller is a tool as are Graves and Mack. They all support war and massive spending by the Federal government.

Heller:

Voted NO on removing US armed forces from Afghanistan. (Mar 2011)
-10 years of WAR not enough for Dean

Voted NO on investigating Bush impeachment for lying about Iraq. (Jun 2008)
Voted NO on redeploying US troops out of Iraq starting in 90 days. (May 2007)
- 5 years of WAR not enough for Dean

Strengthen sanctions on Syria & assist democratic transition. (Apr 2008)
-Wants to change the regime in Syria just like McCain/Graham/Corker/Menendez and put in islamic nutjobs

Voted YES on $60B stimulus package for jobs, infrastructure, & energy. (Sep 2008)
Voted YES on $192B additional anti-recession stimulus spending. (Jul 2009)

I'm sure if I look at Mack/Graves it will be similarly bad.

ProvincialPeasant
05-17-2013, 07:26 AM
Anyone who has followed Cruz knows that he is friendly and close with almost everyone in the conservative movement, regardless of their faction. His skill is that he unites all the factions, and all factions feel like they're on his side (except, obviously, the purerthanthou libertarian types).

jkob
05-17-2013, 07:26 AM
Ted Cruz has been a fine ally and has given me no reason to distrust him, I could only wish Jeff Flake was the same.

Brett85
05-17-2013, 07:32 AM
Anyone who has followed Cruz knows that he is friendly and close with almost everyone in the conservative movement, regardless of their faction. His skill is that he unites all the factions, and all factions feel like they're on his side (except, obviously, the purerthanthou libertarian types).

I think the jury is still out on him. He'll be pretty good domestically, but I'm not sure how excited we should all get about him if he supports preemptive war with Iran and has significant differences with us on foreign policy issues. I'll say that he's our 3rd best Senator and a strong ally on domestic issues, but I'm not going to give him my full fledged praise and full fledged support when his foreign policy still seems to be somewhat hawkish. Foreign policy is important to me.

ProvincialPeasant
05-17-2013, 07:39 AM
I think the jury is still out on him. He'll be pretty good domestically, but I'm not sure how excited we should all get about him if he supports preemptive war with Iran and has significant differences with us on foreign policy issues. I'll say that he's our 3rd best Senator and a strong ally on domestic issues, but I'm not going to give him my full fledged praise and full fledged support when his foreign policy still seems to be somewhat hawkish. Foreign policy is important to me.

He has never said anything interventionist. He just sounds like a mainline conservative on foreign policy (i.e. peace through strength), which rattles a lot of libertarians who want a liberal Democrat's rhetoric on foreign policy.

Brett85
05-17-2013, 07:49 AM
He has never said anything interventionist. He just sounds like a mainline conservative on foreign policy (i.e. peace through strength), which rattles a lot of libertarians who want a liberal Democrat's rhetoric on foreign policy.

Do we really want someone who's a "mainline conservative" on foreign policy issues? Mainline conservatism over the past 12 years has been preemptive war and intervention overseas. If he's a "traditional conservative" on foreign policy issues like Robert Taft I would like that, but I haven't seen any evidence of that yet.

Warlord
05-17-2013, 07:51 AM
He has never said anything interventionist. He just sounds like a mainline conservative on foreign policy (i.e. peace through strength), which rattles a lot of libertarians who want a liberal Democrat's rhetoric on foreign policy.

He said Hagel is "less of a fan of the military" and that therefore is politically a bad thing.

That's going way too far.

He's not had an opportunity to vote on war or intervention yet. Let's see if he supports arming the Syrian rebels.

But bear in mind he's pretty clever and will likely follow/copy Rand on many issues.

He's a Harvard lawyer and politically ambitious. He's not some liberty guy.

ProvincialPeasant
05-17-2013, 07:53 AM
Do we really want someone who's a "mainline conservative" on foreign policy issues? Mainline conservatism over the past 12 years has been preemptive war and intervention overseas. If he's a "traditional conservative" on foreign policy issues like Robert Taft I would like that, but I haven't seen any evidence of that yet.

See, that's the main problem with forum-libertarians. What sounds like mainline conservatism, must therefore be. Do you think a guy who has railed against the Patriot Act and the NDAA is a neocon? Do you think a guy who, from the beginning, has associated himself with Lee and Rand is a neocon? Do you think a guy who has greater constitutionalist pedigree than Rand is a neocon? Please.

Warlord
05-17-2013, 08:02 AM
See, that's the main problem with forum-libertarians. What sounds like mainline conservatism, must therefore be. Do you think a guy who has railed against the Patriot Act and the NDAA is a neocon? Do you think a guy who, from the beginning, has associated himself with Lee and Rand is a neocon? Do you think a guy who has greater constitutionalist pedigree than Rand is a neocon? Please.


Cruz has been in the senate 5 minutes! And I bet if he was in the senate 10 years ago he would have supported it all and cheered on Bush.

You're really funny and easily duped.

Well we're not.

Better pedigree than Rand?!?!!? HAHAHAA.A

ProvincialPeasant
05-17-2013, 08:04 AM
lol

Brett85
05-17-2013, 08:05 AM
See, that's the main problem with forum-libertarians. What sounds like mainline conservatism, must therefore be. Do you think a guy who has railed against the Patriot Act and the NDAA is a neocon? Do you think a guy who, from the beginning, has associated himself with Lee and Rand is a neocon? Do you think a guy who has greater constitutionalist pedigree than Rand is a neocon? Please.

1) I've never heard him give his position on the Patriot Act.
2) Yes, you can oppose the Patriot Act and NDAA and be a neocon. The Patriot Act and NDAA are not foreign policy issues. But, I never said that Cruz is a neocon, just that he's not anywhere close to where we are on foreign policy issues.

Warlord
05-17-2013, 08:05 AM
MaverickPAC is stuffed full of NEOCONS and founded by Ted and Heidi bankster Cruz.

Explain that one...

whippoorwill
05-17-2013, 08:10 AM
I like Cruz. If he dosen't become a turn coat we've got a solid man on our team. If he runs and wins we could capture the Latino vote for 15 years minium.

compromise
05-17-2013, 08:12 AM
Heller is a tool as are Graves and Mack. They all support war and massive spending by the Federal government.

Heller:

Voted NO on removing US armed forces from Afghanistan. (Mar 2011)
-10 years of WAR not enough for Dean

Voted NO on investigating Bush impeachment for lying about Iraq. (Jun 2008)
Voted NO on redeploying US troops out of Iraq starting in 90 days. (May 2007)
- 5 years of WAR not enough for Dean

Strengthen sanctions on Syria & assist democratic transition. (Apr 2008)
-Wants to change the regime in Syria just like McCain/Graham/Corker/Menendez and put in islamic nutjobs

Voted YES on $60B stimulus package for jobs, infrastructure, & energy. (Sep 2008)
Voted YES on $192B additional anti-recession stimulus spending. (Jul 2009)

I'm sure if I look at Mack/Graves it will be similarly bad.

I didn't say Heller wasn't a liberal Republican. He is. He's just more Jon Huntsman than John McCain. He voted for Rand's resolution to de-authorize Iraq, which Lee voted against. In your view, is Lee a neocon?

Mack and Graves voted against Libya and are definitely fiscal conservatives, particularly Mack (he opposed the Ryan plan). They sided with us on various civil liberties issues.

compromise
05-17-2013, 08:18 AM
1) I've never heard him give his position on the Patriot Act.
2) Yes, you can oppose the Patriot Act and NDAA and be a neocon. The Patriot Act and NDAA are not foreign policy issues. But, I never said that Cruz is a neocon, just that he's not anywhere close to where we are on foreign policy issues.

Please read up the definition of neoconservative. This term is thrown around way too much on libertarian forums, often to refer to anyone who disagrees with Ron on foreign policy.

No neoconservative opposes the Patriot Act and NDAA. This is getting a little stupid now. To neoconservatives, the United States is a battlefield and therefore they support any means possible to combat terrorists there just as they would in Afghanistan.

Brett85
05-17-2013, 08:21 AM
Please read up the definition of neoconservative. This term is thrown around way too much on libertarian forums, often to refer to anyone who disagrees with Ron on foreign policy.

No neoconservative opposes the Patriot Act and NDAA. This is getting a little stupid now. To neoconservatives, the United States is a battlefield and therefore they support any means possible to combat terrorists there just as they would in Afghanistan.

No, a neoconservative is someone who believes that the United States has an obligation to spread "liberty" and democracy around the world. Neo conservatism has nothing to do with domestic issues like the NDAA and Patriot Act. Pat Buchanan is a supporter of the Patriot Act who is also a paleoconservative who doesn't support American intervention overseas. Issues like the Patriot Act and intervention overseas are completely separate issues.

Brett85
05-17-2013, 08:22 AM
Also, I never referred to Cruz as a neo-conservative. I agree that that term is over used, and I rarely use it.

supermario21
05-17-2013, 08:25 AM
Dean Heller went from neocon to Huntsman Republican when Sheldon Adelson barely kept him afloat against some socialist woman named Shelley Berkley or whatever her name was this past year. He's joined that fraudulent group "No Labels" as well. We can't afford to kick people off the team when we barely have 1 of 5 or 6 people in both chambers combined. Cruz has been really good as well as Tim Scott. They've both jumped ahead of Flake in my eye who used to be the House's number 2 libertarian behind Ron. People said Scott wasn't any good but he's been right up there with Rand, Lee, and Cruz. I look at Cruz with caution, just like I do every other liberty politician.

compromise
05-17-2013, 08:27 AM
No, a neoconservative is someone who believes that the United States has an obligation to spread "liberty" and democracy around the world. Neo conservatism has nothing to do with domestic issues like the NDAA and Patriot Act. Pat Buchanan is a supporter of the Patriot Act who is also a paleoconservative who doesn't support American intervention overseas. Issues like the Patriot Act and intervention overseas are completely separate issues.

I didn't say that everyone who supports the erosion of civil liberties is a neoconservative - there may well be mainline conservatives, paleoconservatives, beltway libertarians, liberals and progressives that do too. I said all neoconservatives support the erosion of civil liberties. Have you seen any "neoconservatives against the Patriot Act" groups?

Since Ted Cruz has made no public statement about his position on humanitarian war (e.g. Libya) that would be spreading democracy, why do you guys assume immediately that he's a neoconservative? Why not just give him the benefit of the doubt?

TruckinMike
05-17-2013, 08:35 AM
Anyone who has followed Cruz knows that he is friendly and close with almost everyone in the conservative movement, regardless of their faction. His skill is that he unites all the factions, and all factions feel like they're on his side (except, obviously, the purerthanthou libertarian types).

Yep. Ted Cruz is doing to us what Rand Paul is doing to the neocons. And Alex Jones is playing the same game accept with the other radio hosts.

Friends with all. :) The question is --> When will the betrayals begin?

Antischism
05-17-2013, 08:45 AM
Ted Cruz is an Israel sympathizer and far from being a non-interventionist. From what he has said, he doesn't sound much different than your typical conservative on foreign policy issues. That alone is enough for me not to trust him.

Brett85
05-17-2013, 08:50 AM
Since Ted Cruz has made no public statement about his position on humanitarian war (e.g. Libya) that would be spreading democracy, why do you guys assume immediately that he's a neoconservative? Why not just give him the benefit of the doubt?

I've never given you a neg rep before, but I might have to start. I specifically said that Cruz isn't a neoconservative. But just because he isn't a neo-conservative doesn't mean that he's good on foreign policy issues,

compromise
05-17-2013, 08:59 AM
I've never given you a neg rep before, but I might have to start. I specifically said that Cruz isn't a neoconservative. But just because he isn't a neo-conservative doesn't mean that he's good on foreign policy issues,

Sorry, did not see your second post when I started writing my reply to your first post.

FrankRep
05-17-2013, 09:02 AM
This Warlord is definitely not.

MaverickPAC, Bush, neocon friends like Mark Levin and bankster wife are all too much to ignore.

Sorry Ted.

Wow. That was silly logic, almost trollish. Ted has an excellent voting record and has done nothing wrong.

Pericles
05-17-2013, 09:18 AM
Cruz has been in the senate 5 minutes! And I bet if he was in the senate 10 years ago he would have supported it all and cheered on Bush.

You're really funny and easily duped.

Well we're not.

Better pedigree than Rand?!?!!? HAHAHAA.A

You would have preferred that Texas elected Dewhurst instead of Cruz? I don't get it.

klamath
05-17-2013, 10:00 AM
I am not sure I like Cruz's foreign policy but if Rand is torn down by his own base and no longer a viable candidate and I was faced with Santorum, Rubio versus Hillary, Cruz would be my man barring any massive shift between now and then. He has a lot going for him as an electable republican candidate that Rand doesn't have..

ObiRandKenobi
05-17-2013, 10:12 AM
By the way you notice Mark Levin sounding like a constitutional conservative lately?

He was saying on TV the other day we need to stand up for the 4th amendment... WHAT? He cheered the PATRIOT act and Bush's desecration of it.

Mark Levin is a staunch defender of civil liberties...when a Democrat is President.

FriedChicken
05-17-2013, 10:28 AM
senate has been better with Cruz than without. I'm not sure I'd trust him as president but I'm glad he is in the senate - especially if Rand is the president.

Bastiat's The Law
05-17-2013, 01:04 PM
The guy has Goldman Sachs connections -- I wouldn't trust him 100%.
You do realize Ron got some donations from the big banks don't you?

Bastiat's The Law
05-17-2013, 01:12 PM
You would have preferred that Texas elected Dewhurst instead of Cruz? I don't get it.
Dewhurst wouldn't have been reading our tweets on the floor of the Senate during Rand's filibuster. He would've have likely been with McCain and Graham dinning with Obama.

Warlord
05-17-2013, 01:20 PM
He's a lot better than the CIA tool Dewey but he's also very dangerous and likely to help raise money and promote a whole new generation of neocons with George P through Maverick PAC.

Go figure.

Christian Liberty
05-17-2013, 01:49 PM
Cruz adds weight to our side of the scale. That's enough for me. Even if it's not as much weight as someone else, it doesn't matter. Same goes for Rand.

There are those that work towards liberty and those that work towards tyranny. As long as any of these folks don't try to infringe upon me, they are good people to have around.

He's already voted to give our medical data to the Feds. Seems like a small thing, but can you imagine what this government is capable of? No compromises.

That, and that he's hawkish toward Iran, is enough for mee. No thanks. I'm not a perfectionist by any means, I like Rand Paul and Mike Lee so far, but Cruz isn't honestly good enough for me. I mean, is he better than the average senator? I'm sure. But he's still part of the establishment, and there's no way I'd ever vote for him unless he changed his views and proved it with a better voting record.

Then again, Rand may have an influence on him yet. I can't totally give up ATM. But what I've seen... I think he's too deeply flawed for me to seriously support him. He compromises too much (On my principles, not necessarily his own).


Ted Cruz said he opposed the growth of government during the Bush presidency in his CPAC speech. He also voted against foreign aid. Not sure where he stood on previous wars because he doesn't talk about them. I agree that on Iran, he tends to be overly hawkish. When Cruz actually votes for war, then I'm alright with denouncing him. Until then, I'm not going to judge him on that. Domestically, he's definitely up there with Lee and Cruz.

Also, is a friend really enough to disqualify him? I'm sure there's people on here that have friends that are liberal, neoconservative, socialist, nationalist, etc. Doesn't mean they agree with them on everything.

War is a big one for me. I can definitely live with the wrong views on little issues like privatizing roads or immigration or other issues that I hold positions for consistency but am not necessarily all that upset over. I can even live with a mistake or two on something a bit more substantial, drug laws, background checks, abortion (I might make this more of a litmus test but the GOP so obviously uses it as a game, so even while I'm calling for the death of abortion doctors and the release of vigilantes who bravely end their lives... I'm still not using this as a voting litmus test). But foreign policy? That... just no... I'm not really willing to compromise much there. Rand Paul is just within my realm of acceptability there, and that only because he hasn't advocated preemptive war. If Rand ever said wanted to bomb Iran, he'd instantly lose my support.

My belief in just how important foreign policy is was just reenforced by that "You like Ron Paul, except on foreign policy" video. That one's a deal breaker. Anyone who is not anti-war has no business being in the House, let alone the Senate, even if he votes with us on every single non-war issue.