The first main argument the author uses is Ted Cruz’s first
dilemma in 2009. While getting ready to run for state attorney, he took more
than $250,000 in campaign funds from out-of-state bankers who were advocates of
legalizing marijuana. He then said to leave same-sex marriage up to the states,
which completely overlooked the U.S. Supreme and their input on the issue. Two
strong advocates of gay marriage willingly donated a total of $1,160,000
combined to the Senator. The issue with this is that Cruz would happily accept the donations,
but at the same time appeal to social conservatives on banning same-sex
marriage in Texas.
Another thing that the author questioned was
the some of the bills Cruz has proposed since he’s been in the Senate. One being: a bill to
prohibit the use of drones to kill citizens of the United States. (I laughed at
this for the longest time and I completely agree with the author’s take on this
bill.) The author states “I haven’t heard of a drone in the United States . . .
maybe it is different because these were not U.S. citizens.”
After reading R.G. Ratcliffe’s blog, I agree with his
beliefs on Senator Ted Cruz’s candidacy. The author proved to me that he has
credibility by being well-educated on the subject and has me on his side. The
author also gave extremely valid points that are correct. Lastly, the intended
audience seems to be leaning-liberals. This blog, I think, would confirm why
Republican Sen. Cruz is not the most trustworthy candidate due to his money
dilemmas to most liberals. All citizens can do now is sit back and see what
else Ted Cruz has in store for America.
