Tonight clutters up the airwaves with another Republican debate where nobody gives in-depth answers to questions about any issue voters care about. What viewers with nothing better to do will get is rah-rah Democrat rhetoric about defending the country.
Trump painting Ted Cruz as some kind of maniac is tonight’s main attraction. So far, Trump put Cruz in more in danger from a Daisy attack ad than is Marco Rubio:
The Daisy ad was only run once, but it unfairly demolished Barry Goldwater in 1964. Liberals told us that electing Goldwater meant he would nuke the world. According to the REPUBLICAN establishment, the danger coming from Ted Cruz is the opposite of Goldwater. Supposedly, electing a maniac will surely trigger a world war of self-defense started by enemies. Ted Cruz would leave the entire world no choice but to defend themselves against America’s dastardly Constitution.
To everybody paying attention, Rubio is more dangerous than Cruz. Commander in Chief Rubio would use America’s military might for the United Nations. The public will not hear how our security is in the enemy’s hands.
As I’ve many, many, times, giving the United Nations control over our military has been a New World Order priority since 1945. Giving the UN the authority to tax Americans is the only priority higher than surrendering control of the military. I would not want to be hanging by my thumbs waiting for the media to ask Rubio how he would use the military. Even if he is asked he will answer “Defend America against all enemies foreign and domestic.” while strains of America the Beautiful rise to a crescendo:
Here’s the rub. Rubio, least of all Republicans, does not see the United Nations as the enemy.
NOTE: For seven years our glorious leader has been helping America’s enemies prepare to defend themselves against America’s sovereignty.
I spotted Rubio as a United Nations guy when media pundits were pushing him for Mitt Romney’s vice president. To now label him as a Wilsonian disguises his first loyalty to global government administered by the United Nations.
Based on Rubio’s history he should be pressed for precise details:
II The Wilsonian Tradition
You can take this to the bank. In the unlikely event Rubio gets the nomination his Democrat opponent will not use a Daisy ad against him so long as he is“. . . perfectly willing to use American military power to achieve his idealistic goals.”
Finally, I originally thought Rubio was okay in general. His part in the Gang of Eight eliminated him from consideration. In short: I cannot find America’s goals in anything I ever heard Rubio say.
Trump painting Ted Cruz as some kind of maniac is tonight’s main attraction. So far, Trump put Cruz in more in danger from a Daisy attack ad than is Marco Rubio:
The Daisy ad was only run once, but it unfairly demolished Barry Goldwater in 1964. Liberals told us that electing Goldwater meant he would nuke the world. According to the REPUBLICAN establishment, the danger coming from Ted Cruz is the opposite of Goldwater. Supposedly, electing a maniac will surely trigger a world war of self-defense started by enemies. Ted Cruz would leave the entire world no choice but to defend themselves against America’s dastardly Constitution.
To everybody paying attention, Rubio is more dangerous than Cruz. Commander in Chief Rubio would use America’s military might for the United Nations. The public will not hear how our security is in the enemy’s hands.
As I’ve many, many, times, giving the United Nations control over our military has been a New World Order priority since 1945. Giving the UN the authority to tax Americans is the only priority higher than surrendering control of the military. I would not want to be hanging by my thumbs waiting for the media to ask Rubio how he would use the military. Even if he is asked he will answer “Defend America against all enemies foreign and domestic.” while strains of America the Beautiful rise to a crescendo:
Here’s the rub. Rubio, least of all Republicans, does not see the United Nations as the enemy.
NOTE: For seven years our glorious leader has been helping America’s enemies prepare to defend themselves against America’s sovereignty.
I spotted Rubio as a United Nations guy when media pundits were pushing him for Mitt Romney’s vice president. To now label him as a Wilsonian disguises his first loyalty to global government administered by the United Nations.
LAS VEGAS — The Republicans who want to be commander in chief are set to debate Tuesday for the first time since deadly terrorist attacks rocked Europe and the United States, leaving many Americans anxious about their personal security.
That concern, pronounced among Republican primary voters, provides both opportunity and risk for the GOP presidential candidates. Those who project a sense of command and competence on foreign policy and national security issues could have a break out moment and shake up the 2016 campaign. Those who fail the commander in chief test, precisely as Republicans are looking for a strong leader to take on the terrorist threat, could see their campaigns irreparably damaged.
That concern, pronounced among Republican primary voters, provides both opportunity and risk for the GOP presidential candidates. Those who project a sense of command and competence on foreign policy and national security issues could have a break out moment and shake up the 2016 campaign. Those who fail the commander in chief test, precisely as Republicans are looking for a strong leader to take on the terrorist threat, could see their campaigns irreparably damaged.
The GOP contenders' commander in chief test
By David M. Drucker
12/15/15 12:01 AM
The GOP contenders' commander in chief test
By David M. Drucker
12/15/15 12:01 AM
The GOP contenders' commander in chief test
Based on Rubio’s history he should be pressed for precise details:
II The Wilsonian Tradition
When we say that Rubio is a Wilsonian, we are simply noting that he has chosen to identify himself with a tradition that emphasizes the high-minded but forceful application of American power around the world, often aimed at advancing democracy and human rights. Wilson was a Democrat and a progressive, but at the same time, he was nothing like, say, George McGovern; McGovern was virtually a pacifist. No, Wilson was not a dove at all—he was perfectly willing to use American military power to achieve his idealistic goals.
A Stark Choice: Ted Cruz’s Jacksonian Americanism vs. Marco Rubio’s Wilsonian Internationalism
by Stephen K. Bannon & Alexander Marlow
14 Dec 2015
A Stark Choice: Ted Cruz’s Jacksonian Americanism vs. Marco Rubio’s Wilsonian Internationalism - Breitbart
by Stephen K. Bannon & Alexander Marlow
14 Dec 2015
A Stark Choice: Ted Cruz’s Jacksonian Americanism vs. Marco Rubio’s Wilsonian Internationalism - Breitbart
You can take this to the bank. In the unlikely event Rubio gets the nomination his Democrat opponent will not use a Daisy ad against him so long as he is“. . . perfectly willing to use American military power to achieve his idealistic goals.”
Finally, I originally thought Rubio was okay in general. His part in the Gang of Eight eliminated him from consideration. In short: I cannot find America’s goals in anything I ever heard Rubio say.
