Between Ted Cruz and Rand Paul, Ted Cruz should be selected as the Republican Nominee

Contention #1: Ted Cruz is more reliable in standing up to the Republican Establishment. CON asks us what Cruz has actually done. For one, he upheld his campaign promise to fight the Affordable Care Act, coming infinitely closer to doing away with it than any other Republican.[1][2] Ted Cruz had set up a website and spent months rallying millions of constituents and actively kept discussion on the table. In doing so, he not only stood up for his constituents in Texas, but conservatives throughout the nation. Rand Paul filibustered the Patriot Act or 13 hours? Ted Cruz filibustered Obamacare for 21 hours. [3] And I realize CON tries to diminish this feat by pointing out that Ted Cruz read green eggs and ham during the 21 hour speech, but when you’re speaking for 21 hours in a row, it’s pretty hard to come up with new things to say. Not to mention that Cruz was reading for his daughters who were watching at home.[7] Besides, despite being up there for 21 hours, he still was able to competently and thoroughly crush other fully rested Senators in a colloquy.[8][9][10] Watch Mr. Cruz, closely, DDO members, as his debate skills are second to none. CON tells us that Rand Paul has not only criticized Mitch McConnell on the Patriot Act bill, but also made some sharp criticisms about Republicans in a book he wrote. That’s great. Truly great. But as my mother always says, actions speak louder than words. Regardless of the few comments Mr. Paul made, he still endorsed Mitch McConnell in his Senate primary last year. He directly and openly contributed to this guy getting reelected. One could say he contributed to the mess of a Republican Senate we have now. He did the same for Thad Cochran, a man who absolutely embraces every bad thing CON has in that Rand Paul quote.[4] Rather than call out his fellow Senator for the corrupt tactics he used to win a race he was going to lose if not for betraying his constituents, he acquiesced them, simply saying he’s “for more people voting.[5] Now many people have their suspicions on why Rand Paul chose back to establishment rather than help get rid of them when finally given an opportunity to do so. Conservative talk-radio host, Mark Levin, suspects he did so to gather support for his presidential run.[6] Regardless of the reasoning, this is very clear proof that he can bought and made to sell out to the Republican Establishment. Contention #2: Rand Paul is often afraid to speak his mind. CON tells us that Rand Paul does indeed speak his mind on many issues. He cites Paul’s proposal of the “Life at Conception Act” and him saying that “gay marriage should get out of marriage all together.” However, a close assessment of Mr. Paul’s rhetoric and positions on these issues reveals that he’s pretty reluctant to speak about them and otherwise doesn’t want to say what he actually thinks. When the recent gay marriage ruling came out, unlike every other candidate, Paul was silent about it, despite merely needing to say that he thinks the court and government have no business dealing with marriage.[11] When asked to weigh in on Indiana’s Religious Freedom and Restoration Act, he uncomfortably declined.[12] Despite the “Life at Conception Act” CON refers to, Paul has modified his position, talking about the need for a “middleground approach.”[13] CON calls for a comparison between Cruz and Paul’s filibusters, but Cruz’s Senate standoff actually had teeth. It relied upon using a legitimate Congressional power---the power of the purse. Congress used its powers to not fund Obamacare. The Senate at the time allowed the government to shutdown. If not for the spineless Republican Establishment, this tactic would have worked. After all, Democrat House speaker Tip O’Neal effectively employed the tactic against republican president Ronald Reagan 7 times.[14] CON talks about the amount of legislation both have produced, noting Paul has produced 24 more pieces of legislation than Cruz. But in the words of Hillary Clinton, what difference does it make? Rand Paul has been a Senator since 2011. Ted Cruz has been a Senator since 2013? If both candidates stand for smaller government, how does one having produced more legislation than the other make one the better candidate? Overall These contentions go hand in hand. Republicans need a nominee that is reliable and incorruptible. They need someone who isn’t reluctant to speak his/her mind. The issues I’ve raised on the latter aren’t so much Mr. Paul’s position on the issues, but that his consistent ambiguity is a sign of weakness. If you can’t even be firm and consistent with your constituents, how can we count on you to be firm and consistent with our enemies? Rand Paul is a great guy and he would perhaps be a welcome addition as the Secretary of Commerce of even Vice President depending on how this 2016 race unfolds. But bar none, Ted Cruz is the better man for the buck to be stopping at. Back to you CON! Sources http://pastebin.com...