Ted Cruz

I often use the phrase that at some point you have to stop worrying about the arrow and start worrying about the archer.

In my judgment, particularly given the threats we are seeing from North Korea, the potential threat we have from the Nation of Iran, reducing our commitment to missile defense at this point seems ill-advised.

As recent events have powerfully underscored, these are perilous times, whether we are speaking of the horrific terror attack in Boston this week or the escalating situation in North Korea.

Has that been the experience you've been seeing in the market? That the impact has been coverage costs increasing and impacting, in particular, those struggling to climb the economic ladder?

Of all of the economic data that swirl about, the one I find most troubling is 0.8 percent, which is what our economic growth has been, each of the last 4 years.

I express the deepest sympathies that law enforcement was not able to prevent the horrific crimes you suffered.

I will say this is an incredibly important topic.

Well, and I would apologize to the Committee, but I have lost my voice entirely--perhaps from cheering too much at last night's State of the Union.

The Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms does not protect any individual whatsoever

To my mind, that data suggests that allowing law-abiding citizens to arm themselves, and in particular protecting the right of women to protect themselves, is an important safeguard against violent offenses.

Heller actually went further than that and enumerated some specific examples: namely, a ban on felons possession firearms Heller said was permissible under the Second Amendment.

The core of which was to keep an operable firearm in the home for the purpose of self-defense.

I would urge anyone interested in assessing what the proper standard is for protecting our right to keep and bear arms to watch Ms. Hupp's testimony

Twice given the opportunity to answer is there any empirical basis for the proposition that strict gun control would reduce violence, twice you have not been able to give an example of that.

Are you aware of any serious empirical basis for the proposition that significantly restricting the rights of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms actually results in reducing violent crime?

The Supreme Court's decisions in Heller and McDonald were landmark decisions.

I think we should continue to respect and protect the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens.

What you are focusing on doing, which is bringing the criminal laws to bear, stopping and punishing violent criminals, is critically important, and I commend you for that service.

Constitutional rights are designed to be protected not just when they are popular.

The focus of law enforcement should be on criminals, and we should be unstinting in protecting communities.

I think that is due in part to vigorous enforcement, getting guns out of the hands of violent criminals.

Thank you for coming. Thank you for standing for your lost loved ones.

I think that may actually be an area of potential bipartisan cooperation.

After that 15 or 20 minutes discussion of Benghazi, do I understand your testimony correctly that neither of you had any subsequent conversations with the President the rest of that day and that evening?

So if I understand your testimony correctly, in your military judgment there was no way conceivably to get troops on the ground sooner than 13 to 15 hours?