4 votes

Rand Criticizes Ted Cruz on Foreign Policy

http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2013/09/tea-party-fri...

WASHINGTON — It was bound to happen eventually. Two tea party allies angling for president can’t agree on everything, and Tuesday, a gaping foreign policy schism came into focus as Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul went out of his way to critique Sen. Ted Cruz’s approach to Syria.

Paul tartly derided the idea of forcing “show votes” in the United Nations to embarrass Russia and China. “True leadership,” he said, would involve finding diplomatic common ground.

He didn’t call out Cruz by name. But his critique fit precisely the Texan’s calls to force a United Nations Security Council vote condemning Syria for attacking its own citizens with chemical weapons.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Guts

To all those who don't like Rand; this is a big deal. He is pissing-off the power structure with this stance.

Ted Cruz the zionist warmonger

Being a Zionist in tea party clothing, Cruz would be a warmonger just like McCain, Romney and Gingrich. Cruz talks a good game on some issues but is a kook, just like his father, whose group scrapped their website entirely after some increased media scrutiny.

14 Ted Cruz Quotes on Israel

Cruz is Canadian....

not a Texan how the hell is it that he is a U.S. senator? Smacks of Obombya. WTF. I don't trust this guy or his big banker wife. (No offense to my brethren in Alberta)..

"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is argument of tyrants. It is the creed of slaves." William Pitt in the House of Commons November 18, 1783
"I have one word for you...predator drones. Oh, you think I'm kidding?" Obombya

Very interesting.

Bump.

https://twitter.com/StonewallDP

Support these Liberty Candidates and find and add more !
http://www.dailypaul.com/287246/2014-liberty-candidate-thread

2016 Presidential Candidates Exposed!
http://www.dailypaul.com/307360/2016-potential-president

To HELL with the UN! ( I mean it in the theological sense!)

It has caused more damage to people's liberty and our sovereignty, and has often neglected the plights of minorities in Communistic countries and other statist countries.

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

Cruz for President?

Forgive me for harping on the subject, but every time I hear the name of Ted Cruz and his possible presidential candidacy, particularly on a site like DailyPaul, where intelligent discussion should rule, I get sick! To even consider in passing, without outright condemning, a potential Cruz run for president, is very disturbing, considering the "natural born citizen" (NBC) eligibility requirement for President and Vice President. Are we SERIOUS?!?!

How many on this site actually believe that merely being BORN a citizen is the same as NBC? Correct me if I am wrong, but Cruz not only was NOT born on US soil (being born in Canada) but ALSO had a non-US citizen (Cuban) father at birth, and was born with dual or possible triple (Canadian, American & Cuban) citizenship. And if being born on US soil is optional for NBC, what the h*ll was all the fuss about Obama being born in Hawaii or not? Ted Cruz is clearly not a NBC and therefore not eligible to be President or Vice President, since he was neither born on US soil nor born to two US citizen parents.

In failing to condemn such a run, we are in effect enabling the continued violation and degradation of the US Constitution and our respect for the rule of law. How many of you on this site are aware that most of the Republican candidates for President in the last two election cycles were NOT eligible for the office, or had doubtful qualifications. If anybody cares, I can supply supporting evidence. What's up? Neither major party can seem to find any presidential candidates that are eligible to serve under the constitution. Coincidence? Right??? Think this is a SIDE issue of little or no importance. It IS, but ONLY if you think the Constitution is a side issue and of little importance. WAKE UP, people!!

PEOPLE OPPOSING TYRANNY - Real Grass Roots!
Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

Poor choice of headline

As noted in text, Sen Paul did not mention Sen Cruz at all. For all I know, they may actually agree on most particulars of the Syrian issue. The headline serves only to divide, not to unite, those opposed to attacking Syria.
Opponets to getting involved in the Syrian war, in my opinion, should accept and congratulate any ally we get on this, regardless of what we may disagree on.

The headline is accurate....

...and if basic facts serve to divide, then so be it. I think the story is worth knowing about because it gives an indication that Cruz may be a bit more hawkish on Russia and China than Rand, which is worth knowing if they're both going to be running for the GOP nomination in a couple years.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

I disagree

The headline claims as fact what is inferred in the text of the source article. The inference is nothing more than interpretation of the author, not fact. I still submit that there is more agreement between Sen Paul and Sen Cruz on the Syrian issue. Both methods also serve to delay any action by the Executive.

Using UN General Assembly vote can be a good thing, regardless of my opinion of wether the US should be a member or not. Most of the socialist leaning governments and many in Congress consider opinions from within the UN. Therefore, in my opinion, a vote of which nations may or may not be in favor of a US attack could have some weight on opinions of advisors to the President and many members of Congress.

the original headline is

Tea party friction: Sen. Rand Paul lashes Ted Cruz approach to Russia and China

nowornever decided to push the attempt to divide more by making it sound as though rand was attacking cruz. in actuality rand has said he wants the GOP to be for a "little less aggressive foreign policy" you could say cruz wants a little more aggressive foreign policy. big difference?
hardly.

where's ron paul when we need him?

Rand > Cruz or Lee

It's well known that Cruz and Lee are hawkish when it comes to foreign policy. Far more than Rand.

Rand is the closest thing to Ron Paul.

Ron Paul is STILL the best.