Hysteria Over Cruz Illustrates What We’re Up Against

z

By Lloyd Marcus, a proud unhyphenated American

Wow! Can you believe how Ted Cruz is catching it from both sides in response to his powerful speech announcing his quest to win the White House in 2016? As expected, the Left is doing their typical thing calling Cruz extreme, stupid and crazy. Conservatives are taking shots at Cruz because he has not mastered walking on water.

Folks, this is what you get when you have the cojones to take a bold stand for liberty and conservatism. The hysteria, outrage, slings and arrows coming from both sides of the political aisle targeted at Cruz is what a true conservative must be willing to endure.

For crying out loud, Cruz simply trumpeted traditional principles and values that Americans have celebrated since the Republic’s founding; American Exceptionalism, liberty, freedom, hard work, God and country. The problem is without even realizing it, many have succumb[sic] to the Left successfully tainting their thinking, lowering the nation’s behavioral bar and forcing political correctness down our throats. So when a Ted Cruz comes along, his message sounds edgy to those hearing it for the first time. And yet, I believe many will be instinctively drawn to it.

Why? Because conservatism connects with our higher self/spirit. It inspires people to be the best they can be. That is what attracted me to conservatism.

Jesus said, “My sheep hear my voice….and follow me.” Without a miracle, conservatism will not resonate with lazy deadbeats filled with class envy and hatred for achievers. It is a foreign language to them. All they care about is handouts and a free ride. Let the Democrats continue pandering to them; the chickens and turtles. Let’s take the higher ground, striving to attract eagles which I believe are a majority of the American people. This is why the Left is so terrified of Cruz, he knows how to spread the good news of conservatism.

Folks, we must stop Obama’s quest to diminish who we are, reducing us to a nation of part-time workers, dependent and subservient to big government. In the name of our founding fathers, we are Americans! Let’s act like it!  Read more at Lloydmarcus.com.

Share this:

17 Comments

  • Posted March 29, 2015

    Joe Z

    Ted Cruz is being attacked by the Democrats, the Republicrats and the liberal, socialist media. He MUST be doing something right.

  • Posted March 29, 2015

    David Martin

    Kind of reminds you of both parties treatment of Ron Paul, doesn’t it? How did THAT work out?

  • Posted March 29, 2015

    Gary

    Cruz is another patsy– Bush is already smiling knowing he has a chance with some hanging chads like big brother did he is a shoe in it is republicans turn.

    The real crux is ” There is not a bit of difference between either party check the history since the Act of 1871. just a steady decline of Morality and Honesty we have been hookwinked and most are afraid to speak of it.

  • Posted March 29, 2015

    Susan

    Cruz is going to do a great job voicing the right path the US needs to take. Go Ted – ignore all idiots no matter what party they represent!

  • Posted March 29, 2015

    Sue

    The very polished, lovable Ted Cruz is not really like us and he isn’t going to save us from the establishment power structure, or Obamacare, or the IRS, or anything else. He is part of the power structure that we want to be rid of. He talks a great game with his advocacy of the Constitution etc and so, in our desperation, we fill in the blanks and make assumptions about who we think he is and what we think he will do for us. But that isn’t real, people. In real life he is just another wealthy, experienced politician, a “connected” Washington insider with silver tongue and a likeable face that makes us want to trust him. Like Obama.

    Some conservatives, desperate for a candidate that thinks the way we do, downplay the significance of his wife’s Goldman Sachs career and her membership in the Council on Foreign Relations. However, those of us with eyes wide open know that you can best judge someone by examining the company he keeps, and when I look at Cruz’s career and associations, it worries me.

    Heidi Nelson Cruz did in fact help write and did endorse the CFR’s “Building a North American Community”, a report that purports to be about border security and economic development between the US and Canada and Mexico, but is in fact a document that lends support to the eradication of U.S. sovereignty and the merging of the three countries into the North American Union. She supports that and he supports her. What more do you need to put you on notice about his deepest values and views?

    When examining someone’s associations to glean clues as to their character and values, it doesn’t get much better or clearer than examining the values and associates of their spouse. It is hard to apply this to Ted Cruz because so many of us bought his talk and saw him almost as a liberator from the tyranny we are now living under. But we have to face this. He is not who we hoped he was.

    Whether we conservatives are willing to see if or not, you can be sure that our enemies, i.e. those who support exterminating America by eradicating our borders, culture, sovereignty, independence and Constitution in order to merge into the North American Union under one world government, have taken note of Heidi Cruz’s professional associations and her position and endorsements while at the CFR. They understand, even if most American conservatives don’t (or won’t), that by looking at her alliances, they can infer much about what a Cruz presidency would mean to their personal agendas and to America — or I should say, what his presidency would mean to the North American Union.

    If the supporters of the North American Union want Ted Cruz, and it appears they do, based on the money he is raising, WHY would we who love America and want her restored choose him as our president?

    Besides all that, according to the Constitution he is NOT a natural born citizen and is therefore not eligible. Of course, that isn’t a problem for advocates of the North American Union who detest the Constitution and aren’t worried about eligibility. But it should be an issue for those of us who want to protect our sovereignty, borders, language, freedoms, culture and currency.

    So, we each must decide. To support the Constitution you must support the whole thing. There are no half measures here and we don’t get to pick and choose even though we may like some parts of it better than others. It hurts to say it because I too pinned my hopes on Cruz, but if you do support the Constitution, you cannot support Cruz for president.

  • Posted March 29, 2015

    Gary

    Here is one vote for Sue!!!! Great information and the truth and that is very nice to hear and see in writing.

  • Posted March 30, 2015

    Tom

    Thanks Sue, Your information is enlightening.

  • Posted March 31, 2015

    Rosemarie Newton

    Thanks, Sue. Your analysis is right-on and I am saving it to share, and for conversations that I am sure will come up in the coming days.

  • Posted March 31, 2015

    Trevor Loudon

    Ted Cruz is completely eligible to become president. Read this article for a good analysis.

    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2015/03/23/yes-ted-cruz-is-constitutionally-eligible-to-be-president-n1974967?utm_source=thfbp&utm_medium=fbpage&utm_campaign=thupdate

    Regarding Heidi Cruz’s ties to the CFR, its hardly a dealbreaker. While the CFR certainly has a very malevolent side, many patriotic people have belonged to it. Brief membership alone does not signify much. It would take a longtime membership and a clear pattern of promoting anti-American concepts to raise any alarm bells with me. Heidi Cruz’s work for the CFR was pretty innocuous by my reading, and she is apparently no longer involved. I’ve briefly met Ted Cruz and spent some time with his Dad Rafael. If both are not the real deal, I was completely fooled. Ted Cruz is head and shoulders above any GOP contender that I can see folks. The American republican is 21 months away from extinction. Can Ted Cruz save the day? I dont know. But he is by far the best hope we have.

  • Posted April 1, 2015

    Alan Berkelhammer

    Thanks all for your comments, the more dialog, the better. I find it quite interesting, however, that some accept as gospel (and sometimes share), information they read from someone who doesn’t even use their last name.

    Thomas Jefferson said: “The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.” Do your own research!

  • Posted April 1, 2015

    Sue

    Thanks Trevor. I’ll check out the Townhall article, and then do some more research, although his eligibility is not the main issue for me.

    It sounds like you’re making a “lesser of the evils” case for Cruz. Yes, he’s personable, but I disagree with you about the significance of his wife’s, and his, associations with CFR. I do not want my next president to come from that milieu.

    My take on Heidi’s brief (5 yrs?) CFR membership is that she got out because she realized her association with CFR would hurt Ted’s anticipated presidential run. She knew her membership would cast doubt in voters’ minds about Ted’s alleged conservatism. Where you see benign innocence in her statement of endorsement of the report, I see a comment carefully crafted to avoid alienating CFR cronies, while at the same time avoiding any words of support so specific that they could hurt Ted’s future presidential candidacy; I see highly skilled team playing and manipulation, traits that she shares with Ted. Heidi Cruz is no babe in the woods and her participation in that particular report was not happenstance.

    As my mother used to say, “Leopards don’t change their spots.” I say, once a globalist, always a globalist. She and Ted still move in social and political circles dominated by globalists and are successfully raising money from those people for his campaign. Shouldn’t that tell us something? I look at the team she has been playing on for her entire career and I infer that it reflects her true beliefs, and by association, Ted’s beliefs. I don’t like what I see.

    If I recall correctly it was W that secretly got us into this North American Union (NAU) mess in the first place, so it has been a done deal in the eyes of the elites for a long time, and we commoners have been paying the price. I suspect that the “done-ness” of this deal goes a long way toward explaining the lack of effort to control illegal entry at our southern border and the efforts to ram amnesty down our throats; also the complacent attitude on the part of Obama and Congress as they continue to push us off the fiscal cliff and work to collapse our dollar, all while the Amero is waiting in the wings. And let’s not forget how Congress and even the Supreme Court have stood by and let us be steamrolled by blatantly unconstitutional legislation — a cavalier attitude that has trickled down to a point where even community police officers feel emboldened to trample our rights.

    All around us we see attacks on free speech, gun rights, and even the right to just be left alone. Now why would that be? Why would they feel so empowered to do these things and so sure that they can get away with it? Could it be because in the eyes of most of the members of Congress our Constitution has already been made obsolete by our new place in the world order as part of the NAU? Could it be that, with their insiders’ privilege and viewpoint they are already comfortable with the idea that we are no longer a sovereign nation and therefore they are not constrained by the Constitution or by the honor and spirit of America as she used to be? Could it be that our leaders no longer pledge allegiance to America in private, despite their public proclamations? It seems to me that all or most of what is wrong in America today is due to the insinuation of corrosive globalist philosophy into the business and operation of Constitutional America. Electing someone already known to have embraced that philosophy would make sense only to another globalist.

    Ted talks about the Constitution and sovereignty, but he has not come out with an unequivocal statement against the NAU. I haven’t heard him express alarm about it, or even express disapproval of it. He certainly hasn’t talked about getting us out of that deal. Our sovereignty does not appear to be a priority for him. What have you seen him do or heard him say that makes you think he would stand against it? To do so he would have to buck the powers that be, the same people who are helping fund his campaign, nurturing him, sheltering him and employing his wife. Does it seem likely that he is going to abandon his circle of friends and all that insider support?

    I want our next president to have clear and unconditional love and respect not only for America and our people but for our Constitution and our uniqueness and sovereignty. I want him/her to honor America’s uniqueness instead of accepting her as part of a group of castrated former nations forced into a political/economic co-dependency to enable the operation and expansion of the elite’s global government.

    I think Ted is, at best, conflicted on this issue. On one hand, he is a globalist and likes keeping company with them. On the other, he wants to see himself as a patriot. The two are mutually exclusive. He and his wife went willingly into the globalist cabal and have accepted the privileges and benefits of membership in those powerful inner circles. They are his tribe now. He is a globalist first and a U.S. citizen second. The fact that he and his wife manage to look good and be “nice” while straddling that divide is irrelevant to me. Ted has neither the gonads nor the incentive to make our sovereignty his top priority. I will not support him because I SEE what he is.

  • Posted April 1, 2015

    Alan Berkelhammer

    Sue “there you go again.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VJwe1yc84w You sound very disgruntled to me. I can understand that. Maybe you feel that everyone in government has let you down and you don’t trust anyone anymore. I know what you mean. With a few exceptions, the politicians out there are really depressing.

    In the last two paragraphs of your first comment, you talked about Ted Cruz’s eligibility as if you were a Constitutional scholar and expert, but when a real Constitutional expert, internationally respected author, Trevor Loudon, totally debunked your claims, even linking to an article by well known Conservative author, Guy Benson, you came back and said “…his eligibility is not the main issue for me.” Mr. Loudon also did an excellent job addressing your other “concerns,” and very concisely I might add. I’m sure our readers appreciated that. And speaking of the Constitution, did you know that Senator Cruz memorized the entire Constitution while he was in high school? I don’t suppose YOU memorized it. Me neither.

    You keep referring to Ted Cruz as a globalist, but he has stood up for our sovereignty time and time again. To quote an earlier comment by Joe Z: “Ted Cruz is being attacked by the Democrats, the Republicrats and the liberal, socialist media. He MUST be doing something right.”

    And all of this talk about Ted Cruz’a wife: Did you know that Nancy Reagan often consulted a psychic for advice? Did that make Ronald Reagan unfit to be President? Do you know that Amb. John Bolton is a member of the CFR? Should we trash him too?

    You represent so many of your opinions as fact. It’s so tedious. I’m not going to get into a shooting match and go over your every word; that too would be tedious. In fact, I’d prefer not to feel the need to comment here again.

    Senator Cruz has been standing up for our liberty for a very long time. In fact I remember a time recently when he stood up for our liberty for twenty one hours. Literally. I don’t think that Ted walks on water. No candidate is perfect, but I agree with Trevor Loudon, he’s the best we’ve got. Sue, you may throw YOUR baby out with YOUR bathwater, but I’m going to keep mine. And I’m relatively certain that a lot of people will do the same.

  • Posted April 2, 2015

    Sue

    Well, Alan, you always seemed so pleasant at the GTP meetings, who knew you could be so nasty? Or more to the point, who knew you would be willing to be so gratuitously nasty? A little advice for you here dude: First, if you don’t like my posts just don’t read them, and that includes this one. And second, if you don’t want a shooting match don’t draw down on me.

    You criticize my writing, call me tedious, accuse me of being disgruntled, depressed and unable to trust, and although it was carefully worded I think you may even have accused me of “attacking” Cruz because (you seem to suggest) I am a Liberal. Is that what you were implying? Let me clear that up for you right now. I am NOT a liberal. Nor am I a Republican. Even if I were a Republican I would not be a “ticket” voter. If I must have a label, it would be “Constitutional conservative.” Furthermore, I have no personal animus against Ted Cruz and until I learned of the CFR connection was an ardent supporter of his candidacy. I am NOT attacking Cruz, just raising some issues that people such as yourself apparently don’t want to think about.

    Besides the Youtube link, which I have not followed yet, the entire first paragraph of your response to my post was inappropriate and uncalled for. You don’t know me, Alan, yet you conjecture that “maybe I feel that everyone in government has let me down and that I don’t trust anyone anymore.” You also say you understand how I might feel “disgruntled” because *YOU* find most politicians out there depressing. How effing presumptuous of you, Alan. I did not say I felt disgruntled, and indeed I don’t feel that way. I did not say I felt depressed, or that I felt “let down by everyone in government and unable to trust anymore.” Those are *YOUR* feelings, not mine. Please own those feelings yourself, Alan, and refrain from projecting them onto me.

    I spoke about my personal thoughts and opinions on Cruz’s eligibility and CFR connections and what that might mean; thoughts and opinions synthesized from reading what experts on both sides of the eligibility issue have had to say over the last three years, and based on what I have been able to learn about the CFR. OPINIONs, Alan. And yes, some of them carry an element of fear because this country is in deep trouble and it’s time we demand transparency and true conservatism in our candidates and courage in our voters — the courage it takes to accept the truth about a beloved candidate when we find it. I spoke about my love for America and my concern about how we may already be caught in the North American Union trap. YOU, on the other hand, chose to speak derisively about ME, what I think, and how I express myself.

    At no time did I claim to be a Constitutional scholar, Alan. If you read it that way then that’s on you. I merely stated the conclusion I have drawn from my reading. Maybe for you I should have prefaced my statement about Cruz’s ineligibility with “in my opinion” but, unlike the admittedly concise Trevor Louden, I am not a professional writer and this is not a professional forum. I view most comments here as statements of personal opinion, so it didn’t occur to me that anyone would assume that I was holding myself out to be a “Constitutional scholar.” Of course, as far as I know, you are the only person who did infer that. Just so you know, Alan, if I ever offer a “professional” opinion in my area of expertise, I will say so and provide the credentials to lend weight to my opinion; sort of like you did on behalf of Trevor Louden, who I noticed did not himself feel it necessary to bludgeon me with his professional status and accomplishments, as you tried to do. I wonder if you even understand what I just said and what it says about you.

    Your caustic assertion that Trevor Louden “debunked” what I said was also inappropriate and uncalled for. No “debunking” was needed. Like me, Trevor Louden has an opinion that he apparently bases, at least in part, on what has been said by other experts. I happen to like and respect Trevor Louden and have found him to be a man of integrity, an incisive thinker, and passionate in his views. I indeed think his opinion on eligibility has significant weight, as do the contrary opinions of other experts, but I am not moved by his opinion on the CFR and its significance in the lives of Ted and Heidi Cruz. While he is a recognized Constitutional expert, he wisely lays no claim to expertise on the subject of the very secretive CFR, and thus offers us only his personal assessments. Frankly, his tolerance of Heidi Cruz’s involvement with the CFR, and of the CFR in general, is irrelevant to me. So is yours; and John Bolton’s past membership in the CFR does not make that organization acceptable to me either. I don’t like the CFR. Period. You are certainly free to look away from their secrecy and their agenda and stand with their membership if you want to.

    Unlike you, Trevor Louden had the grace to disagree with my comments in a professional, gentlemanly and scholarly manner. Because of his courtesy I will revisit the eligibility issue. It’s too bad you had to get pissed off and make things personal. It is that very display of intolerance, that very caustic attitude of superiority and impatience exhibited by conservatives of your stripe that has sent more than one budding young Conservative-to-be running to the embrace of the Left.

    Louden and I agree that Cruz appears to be head and shoulders above the other possible candidates, but we part ways when it comes to the issue of voting for him. Oh wait. I forgot. That won’t be an issue for Louden because he is not an American citizen and thus will not have a vote, nor will he have to live with the outcome of our presidential election. He is a man of the world with impressive knowledge, but last I heard he is a citizen of New Zealand, not America. While his love and respect for America matter to me, he cannot know what it is like for us as Americans to see our country being lost to globalists. His stake in this is not the same as mine; it cannot be. It isn’t the same as yours either, a fact that you apparently deem irrelevant when choosing whose opinion to follow. Yes, I said follow.

    Ted Cruz may indeed be the best candidate on offer at this point, but that doesn’t make him good enough for my vote. Until he comes out with a statement solidly against the North American Union and a vow to undo it I will remain suspicious of his values and motives. I notice that while castigating me you failed to offer any examples of Cruz ever denouncing the North American Union scheme — the one thing you could’ve said that would’ve made me reconsider him as a viable candidate. Out of all the times he must have done so (he HAS done so, right?) surely you can provide me with at least one reference. Just one where he makes clear that he will fight for American sovereignty, put his career on the line for it? I haven’t been able to find such a statement from him amidst all that general talk about sovereignty. He talks a great game for sure, with all the “wind” about abolishing the IRS, and supporting sovereignty, and making sure we know that he memorized the Constitution and all, but where is his action plan? Where is his CLEAR, UNEQUIVOCAL statement of opposition to the North American Union, his vow to undo it? You seem to think that his memorization of the Constitution and all his talk about sovereignty etc is some sort of proof that he will not waffle when it comes to maintaining, or rather, reclaiming American sovereignty. Given that much of the big money that is supporting his campaign seems to be more globally oriented, how is that supposed to work if he is elected? Sorry Alan, I’m not buying it.

    Keep your baby and his bathwater Alan.(What an unfortunate analogy you made there!) Vote for Cruz if you get the chance. Do it despite not knowing for sure where he stands on the North American Union issue. Just accept all his general commentary about sovereignty as if it all adds up to a campaign promise, an executable position. I believe you are right, that most Republicans and many independent conservatives will do the same because at this point we are essentially trained to vote the lesser of the evils then shut up and sit down instead of using the power of our vote as leverage against the GOP to force them to offer solid, proven conservative candidates. As for me, I’m just not going to do it anymore.

  • Posted April 3, 2015

    David Martin

    Sue, as an interested bystander who finds your comments cogent and intelligent, allow me to ask a (unfortunately sad) question. If you’re not going to support Cruz, then who will you support? Or will you simply not vote? Either of those options would seem to me very nearly the same as giving a vote to the liberals. Once again, we seem faced with supporting the “lesser of two evils” rather than a clear-cut superior candidate. As Alan said, and not so “nasty” as you stated, no candidate is perfect, and I clearly don’t want another Obama or Hillary elected because I can’t get my perfect candidate nominated and elected.

  • Posted April 7, 2015

    Sue

    Hi David,

    Right now I don’t know if I will vote at all. I do know I will never vote for Cruz or Rubio, or Jeb Bush. Given the way elections work now, I’m not sure our votes matter anyway.

    I doubt that the two party system will survive when the North American Union plan is fully implemented. The surreptitious “fundamental transformation” of America that Obama unveiled has geared up from a series of small nudges to a driving force that is ignoring the Constitution to death, rendering our elections meaningless and leaving us naked and vulnerable to NWO tyranny and taxation. Supposedly we in Florida are already living without (at least some of) the protections of the Constitution, as all of Florida is designated part of the “Constitution Free Zone.”

    The 2016 election may well be the last of the sham presidential elections designed to reinforce in us the idea that we have a say in who leads the country. Technically and legally America may have ceased to exist once Bush signed the NAU agreement. If nothing else it is at least clear that American sovereignty and the Constitution are simply irrelevant in the minds of globally-oriented key policymakers as well as those elected/appointed officials who may not agree with the “worlders” 100% but who are too cowed, or too well compensated by money, associations or political favors, to oppose them. I still see Cruz in that latter category.

    Even now, much of what looks to us like incompetence or insanity in the Obama administration makes sense if one views his attitudes and actions within the context of NWO compliance. And already we see what appears to be a NWO presence in the way many other elected officials are constrained in responding to serious issues such as (formerly) illegal immigration, the collapsing of the US dollar and the loss of our Constitutional freedoms.

    At present we continue to argue amongst ourselves and fret over which of the lesser evil candidates is the least evil. This is not the time to continue with our strategy of voting for “anyone except fill-in-the-blank.” Instead we should withhold our support for any candidate who fails to state publicly his unconditional support for and love of the Constitution and our sovereign way of life. If that means not voting, so be it. Maybe the GOP would offer us a true conservative candidate who believes unequivocally in American sovereignty if we delivered the message that they will face certain defeat without our conservative votes.

    Speaking of lesser evils, I remain convinced that the best evidence supports the opinion that Cruz is NOT eligible to run for the presidency. At PubliusHuldah.com you can read an academically rigorous analysis of eligibility by an un-compromised Constitutional lawyer and scholar. The debate about the meaning of “natural born citizen” continues in comments to the piece, but in the end the intent of the founders on this issue is illuminated in a way that settles the matter for all except those who see the Constitution as a “living” document that must change with the times. Lots of history, and a lengthy read, but worth it.

    • Posted April 8, 2015

      Rod Gonzalez

      Hello Sue,

      It is amazing that so many continue to say that President Obama and his administration are dumb, fools or naïve. You are right in stating that this is wrong. Everything they do is 100% calculated and VERY effective. Heck, he is probably the most effective President ever when it comes to pushing his agenda and getting his way. Neither party is willing to put a stop to it.

      As to the rest of your comment, I must say that there still is, at times, some difference between candidates. Let’s hope that sufficient Americans wake up to this fact. Heck, as expected, the number of establishment GOP types are already doing their best to attack Rand Paul.

      Rod

Leave a Reply