Why Ted Cruz!?!

Here is my op-ed published on NewsMax:

http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/ted-cruz-2016-hillary/2014/12/30/id/615541/

Someone shared this video…kind of says it all:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XyaLvflTF5o#t=48

Also, here is my letter (more detailed analysis) to Republicans as to why I think Ted Cruz is the best candidate for 2016.

Why Ted Cruz?

Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, Matt Salmon

For 2016, Republicans are understandably worried about Hillary Clinton’s massive political machine and finding the right candidate to win the White House.

To them, I say we can Cruz to Victory!

As we approach the 2016 presidential elections, Republicans are fortunate in the high caliber of the pool of candidates when it comes to our potential nominee. The national swelling ranks of successful Governors and national leaders from various backgrounds present us with some great options.

I wanted to share my thought process and analysis of why I believe Ted Cruz would not only make a great president but would also be the best and strongest option to defeat Hillary Clinton.

Hillary Clinton in 2016 is the most invincible political force since Hillary Clinton in 2008, as they said then and now say again. Undoubtedly, she is, and will be, a formidable candidate whose chameleon-style campaign will be attractive to many and dangerous to our country.

We need the right candidate, with the right message to win. And Ted Cruz is the right candidate – in significant part because of his ability to build and attract a coalition that will be vibrant beyond just expanding our grassroots conservative turnout.

Cruz is a leader who is not afraid to stand on principle, speak out for what he believes and ruffle more than a few feathers when it comes time to standing up and fighting for the future of our Republic and everything that has made America the greatest country in the history of mankind.

He’s the candidate many in the mainstream media and Washington chattering class love to hate. He is demonized by many while revered by so many more throughout the heartland of America. He speaks his mind, stands his ground and is willing to fight the fight.

Cruz is grounded by a loving family, his Christian faith, his conservative principles and a moral compass that is all too often lacking in political life.

Cruz is a movement conservative.

I will readily admit, like with any of the other candidates, he has his strengths and his weaknesses. I don’t always agree with his tactics or rhetoric. I might like to see a more measured approach to governing and politics. But I never question his principles or his values.

When I listen to him, I am often reminded of one of my first political heroes, Phil Crane. I will never forget when I first met Crane while still a college student when he told our group, “I would rather stand on my principles and lose, than lose my principles and win”.

Well, Ted Cruz is willing to stand on his principles AND because of that, I think is uniquely qualified and positioned to win.

First, Cruz the candidate. A son of a Cuban immigrant, Cruz’s upbringing and historical perspective is an important factor in his current thinking. It’s hard to imagine a speech where Cruz doesn’t reflect and draw on his family’s experience and desire to seek freedom and liberty. Escaping an oppressive regime, his family epitomizes the American Dream. His father, Rafael, labored to put food on the table, became a born again Christian and is now a Minister. Ted’s mother, Eleanor, was one of 17 children, was the first to go to college where she majored in mathematics and was an early entrant as a woman in the field of computer science. From humble beginnings, they worked their way up the ladder of opportunity, ultimately seeing their son graduate from some of America’s greatest universities, work his way up in public service and ultimately get elected to the United State Senate.

Cruz and his wife Heidi have a beautiful family, two lovely daughters – Caroline and Catherine – a strong faith and a work ethic that is second to none. Heidi is perhaps the most telegenic and articulate spouse of any potential 2016 candidate. Don’t underestimate what a visible Heidi could do to endear her husband to voters, especially women.

I’ve had a chance to meet Cruz several times over the last few years. I had the unique opportunity to sit with him one on one for well over an hour talking about politics and America. It’s impossible to spend any time with Cruz and not leave impressed. I would have to add, even inspired.

This is a man who believes wholeheartedly in American exceptionalism. A man who understands the challenges American faces and is willing to step into the arena and fight to preserve our liberty and our constitutional framework that has made our country what it is.

When you combine his life experiences, his faith, his family, his education and his principles, you find a well-rounded man who is destined to do great things…in service of our country.

So how does Ted Cruz win?

When we look at the nominating process for Republicans and the core of our voters and activists, few candidates bring such a unique coalition together. He is a solid, consistent and bold conservative leader who believes in a strong America and a limited government.

Conservatives of many stripes have been looking for a home, a candidate that not only talks the talk, but walks the walk. We have that in Ted Cruz.

For the primaries, no other prospective candidate in the field better combines all facets of the “three-legged” stool that can attract, appeal to and represent the economic, social, and national security conservatives.

Tea Party members across this country are a growing force within the Republican Party. Frustrated with the status quo, they have joined our party ranks and have a very influential if not dominating voice in many states across the country. They participate at every level of the process and have become a key to many winning campaigns. Cruz represents their views and passion better than most.

The Christian right continues to be an active and important part of our base. Since 1988, they have fully integrated into the party structure and have completely become the backbone and foundation for many candidates and states around the country. Cruz is a devout Christian who can articulate his faith and values better than most.

Traditional conservatives and limited government conservatives have been looking for a principled leader for years. When you poll America and test the issues that matter to the average voters across this country, most identify themselves as conservatives, albeit not necessarily Republican. Ted Cruz reaches this constituency and can pull in the “Reagan Democrats” better than most.

Cruz believes in a strong defense and realizes America plays a unique role on the world stage. A strong supporter of freedom-loving people around the world, he has repeatedly stood up for the universal values of freedom and liberty for all. A strong supporter of Israel, he is willing to stand with our allies and ensure a free and democratic society worldwide. Ted Cruz represents this wing of the party better than most.

And finally, Cruz understands the grassroots of the conservative movement and inspires their passion, commitment and energy necessary to win the Republican nomination. One only has to look at his race for U.S. Senate, where he came from nowhere to win the nomination and represent Texas in the U.S. Senate. He took on the well-funded establishment candidate, with virtually every political leader united behind his opponent – he ran a campaign against all odds…and won. He’s the quintessential grassroots candidate, who connects with our poll worker, Women’s Federation member, phone-bank volunteer and the local precinct worker better than most.

Ted Cruz unites our traditional primary constituency and the base of our party like few others can…and arguably better than most.

But can he win the general election???

Ted Cruz brings home the base. For all the reasons stated above, Cruz is uniquely situated to unite our party and make sure every Republican and conservative comes to the polls in 2016. Ted Cruz is a candidate who could capture over 90% of our base – and potentially achieve conservative turnout not seen in a Presidential year since George W. Bush’s reelection in 2004, when Bush netted 11 million votes over his 2000 results, mostly from conservatives.

As a Latino of Cuban-American roots, he is uniquely positioned to win a large percentage of the Latino/Hispanic vote which shares his values and heritage. It’s not hard to imagine that a Ted Cruz candidacy that could bring as much as 40% or more of the Latino vote nationwide, as he did in his U.S. Senate race. As the first Latino candidate to have a real shot at the White House, I think his appeal would be unique.

As a devout Christian, Cruz appeals to the evangelical community nationwide. This constituency can be the determinative demographic in a close race. A candidate who could help drive more Christians to the polls and inspire their participation in the process gives us a huge advantage going into the November election.

Cruz personifies the “Reagan Democrat”. A man of faith, anti-communist, self-made, hard-working, and no nonsense political leader who can resonate with the average American voter. This matters immensely.

The culturally conservative voter who shuns politics and partisanship is yearning for a political leader who speaks his mind and say what the “silent majority” is thinking. Ted Cruz can walk on any factory floor, stand at any manufacturing plant gate, join a hunt at any deer camp and share a beer with any working American and make them realize he’s their guy.

But the most intriguing storyline could be that Cruz – after being able to connect with the average American voters in unfiltered ways like the debates and long interviews – might just have a surprisingly strong appeal to Independents. Contrary to conventional wisdom, Independents don’t go into the ballot box with a check list of “issues” and litmus tests – which is precisely why they can swing from Democrats to Republicans or vice versa.

Independents want someone who consistently stands on principle, and as much as anything, someone who doesn’t take orders from anyone or any political party. They want someone honest to say that it’s not just the other side that has made mistakes. Cruz is the only guy in the potential 2016 party who says that while he embraces the principles of the Republican Party, his party hasn’t always lived up to those principles.

The fact that Independents hate the special interest-connected “establishment” leaders of both parties, means that Cruz has unique selling point – he might be “conservative,” but he is truly independent from any negative influences within our party and sides with a majority of the American people.

For a winning coalition, Cruz doesn’t need to win Independents – but he could be more than competitive enough to win overall.

Other than Obama in 2008, no Presidential candidate has simultaneously won Independents and the overall popular vote since Clinton did it in 1996. There’s a simple reason: When you “soften” your image and attempt to hide your genuine principles, you might appeal to Independents, but you dampen enthusiasm in the base. Romney won Independents by a big 5-point margin – but lost five million conservatives who had voted for McCain in 2008.

But if Cruz gets 2004 level conservative turnout, 35-40% of the Hispanic vote, maximizes evangelical turnout and is competitive with Independents – he’d beat Hillary.

And then there is his wife, Heidi Cruz. A successful woman in her own right, a powerful asset in any campaign nationwide.

She’s as smart and articulate as Ted. She can dazzle donors as well as act as a surrogate on TV or to key constituencies. Plus, Heidi comes out of the world of politics — they married after meeting during Bush’s 2000 campaign — so she’s relaxed in stressful political situations where other spouses might recoil or wilt under the pressure.

And when Ted may appear a bit too much like a political warrior or a lawyer arguing before the Supreme Court (which he’s done NINE times!), Heidi can truly humanize him, making it harder for the media to paint a one-dimensional caricature.

She has the class of Ann Romney, the elegance of Laura Bush, the loyalty of Nancy Reagan and the tenacity of Hillary Clinton.

Heidi is the proverbial secret weapon.

Facing Hillary Clinton or whomever the Democratic nominee may be, Ted Cruz is uniquely positioned to win a coalition that truly represents the mainstream of America…and the majority of America.

As the campaign unfolds, I believe we need a bold leader, a man of character, passion and principle that is willing to fight the fight. Like Reagan, he has a clarity of vision, a unique ability to communicate and connect with the average American voter and the focus and drive to get it done. In an endeavor like this, never underestimate a candidate’s character, will and drive. Ted Cruz has the “fire in the belly” to go the distance.

Ted Cruz is that man…and I’m ready to stand with Cruz!

So let’s Cruz to Victory!

HeadShot5

By Saul Anuzis, Former Member of the Republican National Committee and former Chairman of the Michigan Republican Party.

Some have asked: Texas Sen. Ted Cruz: Constitutionally Qualified to be President?

 Legal scholars are firm about CRUZ’s eligibility. “Of course he’s eligible,” Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz tells National Review Online. “He’s a natural-born, not a naturalized, citizen.” Eugene Volokh, a professor at the UCLA School of Law and longtime friend of CRUZ, agrees, saying the senator was “a citizen at birth, and thus a natural-born citizen — as opposed to a naturalized citizen, which I understand to mean someone who becomes a citizen after birth.”

 Federal law extends citizenship beyond those granted it by the 14th Amendment: It confers the privilege on all those born outside of the United States whose parents are both citizens, provided one of them has been “physically present” in the United States for any period of time, as well as all those born outside of the United States to at least one citizen parent who, after the age of 14, has resided in the United States for at least five years. CRUZ’s mother, who was born and raised in Delaware, meets the latter requirement, so CRUZ himself is undoubtedly an American citizen. No court has ruled what makes a “natural-born citizen,” but there appears to be a consensus that the term refers to those who gain American citizenship by birth rather than by naturalization — again, including Texas’s junior senator.

Here is a good article that explains the Constitutional and historical facts as to why Cruz IS a naturalized citizen:

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/14163-texas-sen-ted-cruz-constitutionally-qualified-to-be-president

 First Congress & Founding Fathers Thoughts:

As to the British practice, laws in force in the 1700s recognized that children born outside of the British Empire to subjects of the Crown were subjects themselves and explicitly used “natural born” to encompass such children.5×5. See United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 655–72 (1898). These statutes provided that children born abroad to subjects of the British Empire were “natural-born Subjects . . . to all Intents, Constructions, and Purposes whatsoever.”6×6. 7 Ann., c. 5, § 3 (1708); see also British Nationality Act, 1730, 4 Geo. 2, c. 21. The Framers, of course, would have been intimately familiar with these statutes and the way they used terms like “natural born,” since the statutes were binding law in the colonies before the Revolutionary War.

 

They were also well documented in Blackstone’s Commentaries,7×7. See 1 WILLIAM BLACKSTONE, COMMENTARIES*354–63. a text widely circulated and read by the Framers and routinely invoked in interpreting the Constitution.

 

No doubt informed by this longstanding tradition, just three years after the drafting of the Constitution, the First Congress established that children born abroad to U.S. citizens were U.S. citizens at birth, and explicitly recognized that such children were “natural born Citizens.” The Naturalization Act of 17908×8. Ch. 3, 1 Stat. 103 (repealed 1795). provided that “the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States . . . .”9×9. Id. at 104 (emphasis omitted). The actions and understandings of the First Congress are particularly persuasive because so many of the Framers of the Constitution were also members of the First Congress. That is particularly true in this instance, as eight of the eleven members of the committee that proposed the natural born eligibility requirement to the Convention served in the First Congress and none objected to a definition of “natural born Citizen” that included persons born abroad to citizen parents.10×10. See Christina S. Lohman, Presidential Eligibility: The Meaning of the Natural-Born Citizen Clause, 36 GONZ. L. REV. 349, 371 (2000/01).Show More

 

The proviso in the Naturalization Act of 1790 underscores that while the concept of “natural born Citizen” has remained constant and plainly includes someone who is a citizen from birth by descent without the need to undergo naturalization proceedings, the details of which individuals born abroad to a citizen parent qualify as citizens from birth have changed. The pre-Revolution British statutes sometimes focused on paternity such that only children of citizen fathers were granted citizenship at birth.11×11. See, e.g., British Nationality Act, 1730, 4 Geo. 2, c. 21. The Naturalization Act of 1790 expanded the class of citizens at birth to include children born abroad of citizen mothers as long as the father had at least been resident in the United States at some point. But Congress eliminated that differential treatment of citizen mothers and fathers before any of the potential candidates in the current presidential election were born. Thus, in the relevant time period, and subject to certain residency requirements, children born abroad of a citizen parent were citizens from the moment of birth, and thus are “natural born Citizens.”

About saulfolks

Saul Anuzis served as Chairman of the Michigan Republican Party from 2005-2009 and was a candidate for Chairman of the Republican National Committee in 2009 and 2011. His previous political and government service included working with Newt Gingrich at American Solutions, Jack Kemp’s 1988 Presidential campaign, serving as Chief of Staff to Senate Majority Leader Dick Posthumus, Chairman of the MI Senate Republican Campaign Committee and serving on the MI House Republican Campaign Committee. In 2009, Anuzis was asked to head up the Transition Team on Technology and led the RNC's first Tech Summit during which over 7,000 activists from around the country participated online, via live video feeds or in person. The RNC created a new standing Committee on Technology and Anuzis was asked to serve as its Chairman by both Chairman Michael Steele and Chairman Reince Priebus. Anuzis was the first non-RNC member to hold such a post. In May of 2010, Anuzis was unanimously elected to be Michigan’s National Committeeman to the Republican National Committee. In 2009 - 2010, he also served as a consultant to the House Policy Committee on New Media & Technology which was chaired by Congressman Thaddeus McCotter (R-MI). In May of 2015, Anuzis was elected to the National Board of Directors of the Republican Liberty Caucus. Anuzis is co-founder and co-owner of Quick Connect VOIP, which is a broadband and VOIP provider in Michigan. He and his partner founded Coast to Coast Telecommunications and later Quick Connect USA which were Competitive Local Exchange Carrier providing local and long distance service to their customers. Anuzis currently serves as a Managing Partner of Coast to Coast Strategies, LLC, which provides strategic planning, political intelligence, political risk-assessment, consulting and business development services. In 2012, Anuzis was appointed to the NRA Board’s Public Affairs Committee. He served on several non-profit boards as well as a Gubernatorial Appointee to the Michigan Jobs Commission and the Michigan Export Development Authority and a member of the Teamsters Union. http://coasttocoaststrategies.com/ Saul Anuzis studied Economics at the University of Michigan in Dearborn. He is the Honorary Consul for the Republic of Lithuania. He and with wife of 30 years, Lina - have 4 sons, enjoy skiing, scuba diving, their Harley and sailing. 5/2015
This entry was posted in Blog. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to Why Ted Cruz!?!

  1. Brad Smith says:

    Good article. I’m persuaded.

  2. Mike Paluda says:

    Great analysis Saul. And I have to admit, one I did not expect from you. The GOP establishment is not going to appreciate what you have penned here, but I certainly do. Let’s Cruz to victory!

  3. Raymond says:

    I like Cruz, but I think Rand Paul attracts a larger base including millenials, minorities, and traditional conservatives. He also is already running as if he were the nominee. We need someone who strives for a bigger tent, and I believe Paul is the man for the job.

  4. bajablue says:

    BRAVO, Saul Anuzis! You’ve simultaneously hit a home run AND the nail on it’s proverbial head!

    As an Independent, I’m reviled and disgusted with the rhetorica-vomitus spewed by both sides of the political aisle. To Hell with Hillary and Jeb!

    Ted Cruz is an honest breath of truly “conservative” fresh air! Cruzin’ to victory? By all means… count me IN!

  5. kathy williams says:

    Ted Cruz will make a grate president because he is well educated and is a very strong believer in our Constitution . He wants to do right by America and her people . He loves our Military and will keep us safe from harm . WE NEED TED CRUZ for he will be a strong leader for America !!

  6. Ineligible, he was born in Canada to a Cuban father. My research says that he was not only a U.S. Citizen at birth because of his mothers Citizenship which , he was a Canadian Citizen due to location and he is still considered a Cuban citizen because Cuba does not recognize foreign citizenship of children born of Cubans. We can go research v research if you like?

    • bajablue says:

      You’re mistaken… unless, of course, you’d like to argue the constitutional facts with Mark Levin or a several other Constitutional scholars?

    • saulfolks says:

      Some have asked: Texas Sen. Ted Cruz: Constitutionally Qualified to be President?

      Legal scholars are firm about CRUZ’s eligibility. “Of course he’s eligible,” Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz tells National Review Online. “He’s a natural-born, not a naturalized, citizen.” Eugene Volokh, a professor at the UCLA School of Law and longtime friend of CRUZ, agrees, saying the senator was “a citizen at birth, and thus a natural-born citizen — as opposed to a naturalized citizen, which I understand to mean someone who becomes a citizen after birth.”

      Federal law extends citizenship beyond those granted it by the 14th Amendment: It confers the privilege on all those born outside of the United States whose parents are both citizens, provided one of them has been “physically present” in the United States for any period of time, as well as all those born outside of the United States to at least one citizen parent who, after the age of 14, has resided in the United States for at least five years. CRUZ’s mother, who was born and raised in Delaware, meets the latter requirement, so CRUZ himself is undoubtedly an American citizen. No court has ruled what makes a “natural-born citizen,” but there appears to be a consensus that the term refers to those who gain American citizenship by birth rather than by naturalization — again, including Texas’s junior senator.

      Here is a good article that explains the Constitutional and historical facts as to why Cruz IS a naturalized citizen:

      http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/14163-texas-sen-ted-cruz-constitutionally-qualified-to-be-president

  7. I like Cruz, but how do you get around the fact that he was not born in the US? How fast will this be contested by the left to discredit him and hits status. His ideas and guts are noteworthy. Anyone have an answer to this? Article 2, Sec 5 of the U.S. constitution. His father was not a U.S. citizen when he was born. He was not a natural born in the US by US citizens. I really like him, but we’ll have problems-same with Rubio.

    • bajablue says:

      Ted Cruz is a Natural born citizen. There is NO ISSUE with his eligibility, forsaking the red herrings being tossed about by scared PROGs and RINOs.😉
      http://therightscoop.com/mark-levin-explains-that-ted-cruz-is-a-natural-born-citizen/

      • Teddy is still a Cuban as far as Fidel is concerned.

        http://havana.usint.gov/service.html

        Dual Nationality

        The Government of Cuba does not recognize the U.S. nationality of U.S. citizens who are Cuban-born or are the children of Cuban parents. These individuals will be treated solely as Cuban citizens and may be subject to a range of restrictions and obligations, including military service. The Cuban government may require U.S. citizens, whom the Government of Cuba considers to be Cuban, to enter and depart Cuba using a Cuban passport. Using a Cuban passport for this purpose does not jeopardize one’s U.S. citizenship; however, such persons must use their U.S. passports to enter and depart the United States. There have been cases of Cuban-American dual nationals being forced by the Cuban government to surrender their U.S. passports.

    • saulfolks says:

      Some have asked: Texas Sen. Ted Cruz: Constitutionally Qualified to be President?

      Legal scholars are firm about CRUZ’s eligibility. “Of course he’s eligible,” Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz tells National Review Online. “He’s a natural-born, not a naturalized, citizen.” Eugene Volokh, a professor at the UCLA School of Law and longtime friend of CRUZ, agrees, saying the senator was “a citizen at birth, and thus a natural-born citizen — as opposed to a naturalized citizen, which I understand to mean someone who becomes a citizen after birth.”

      Federal law extends citizenship beyond those granted it by the 14th Amendment: It confers the privilege on all those born outside of the United States whose parents are both citizens, provided one of them has been “physically present” in the United States for any period of time, as well as all those born outside of the United States to at least one citizen parent who, after the age of 14, has resided in the United States for at least five years. CRUZ’s mother, who was born and raised in Delaware, meets the latter requirement, so CRUZ himself is undoubtedly an American citizen. No court has ruled what makes a “natural-born citizen,” but there appears to be a consensus that the term refers to those who gain American citizenship by birth rather than by naturalization — again, including Texas’s junior senator.

      Here is a good article that explains the Constitutional and historical facts as to why Cruz IS a naturalized citizen:

      http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/14163-texas-sen-ted-cruz-constitutionally-qualified-to-be-president

  8. which… was not recognized until his mother filed the appropriate paperwork and was approved by the consulate.

  9. Tommy Thompson says:

    I already posted once…it’s gone. I find it odd that this article and many others who try to claim Ted Cruz is a natural born citizen use the 14th amendment to prove their point. Instead of Mark Levin or some other blogger who hasn’t really done much research why don’t you listen to the man they call the “father of the 14th amendment”. Congressman John Bingham defined NBC several times before congress. According to him Ted Cruz is not a natural born citizen and therefore not eligible. Who are you going to believe? Some radio host or liberal blogger or the guy who came up with the 14th amendment? Then in 1866, Bingham also stated on the House floor:

    “Every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))

  10. Pingback: Weekly Musing 1-4-15 | That's Saul, Folks!

  11. Pingback: Weekly Musing 1-11-15 | That's Saul, Folks!

  12. Josh Klooz says:

    Saul.

    While I agree in part with you- and I do admire Senator Cruz, I am not fully excited. I have a couple old friends working for him even.

    Could you provide some analysis on how he could fill in his gaps in executive acumen through the experience of other key cabinet appointments?

    I am fearful of another liberal. I am also more fearful of an ill prepared conservative.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s