Sen. Ted Cruz speaks to a crowd gathered at Prime Time Restaurant in Guthrie Center, Iowa on Monday, January 4, 2016. (Photo by Rebecca F. Miller)
Posted on 01/06/2016 1:55:22 PM PST by Isara
Sen. Ted Cruz speaks to a crowd gathered at Prime Time Restaurant in Guthrie Center, Iowa on Monday, January 4, 2016. (Photo by Rebecca F. Miller) |
Then there are the less desirables: the constant broadsides courtesy of rivals big and small, the logistical headaches on and off the road, and well, the media stampede trailing you everywhere you go.
Such is Ted Cruz's life as the Republican frontrunner in this critical proving ground for presidential candidates, home to the first-in-the-country caucuses that are now less than a month away. The U.S. senator from Texas, who has slowly risen to the top of the GOP field here, is currently barnstorming the state by bus, planning to hit 28 counties in six days — and show his campaign will not settle for second come Feb. 1.
The message to Iowans is simple, according to a Cruz campaign that has not shied away from ballooning expectations for a contest his rivals are increasingly talking about with more caution. "We intend to win," said Matt Schultz, who chairs Cruz's campaign in Iowa.
In drafty coffee shops and cavernous restaurants — complete with at least one cowbell-ringing admirer — Cruz is beginning to hone his closing argument to Iowans, telling them the "silly season" is over and a final choice is on the horizon.
"This is now the time that the men and women of Iowa step up and make your decisions," Cruz said as he launched the tour in Boone on Monday morning, the start of a five-stop day that ended close to midnight with the senator pouring coffee for patrons at a diner hundreds of miles later.
Playing witness to the Cruz road show are a separate coach bus for his growing Iowa press corps, a larger-than-usual entourage of traveling aides and thousands of Iowans looking to catch a glimpse of the caucus favorite. Asked Monday evening if he saw himself as the frontrunner in Iowa, Cruz played coy as he alluded to his come-from-behind victory in the 2012 Senate race.
"The only way I've ever campaigned is campaigning as the underdog, and that is certainly how I continue to view myself," Cruz told reporters before an event in Winterset.
Yet even as he downplayed his frontrunner status, Cruz spoke of a turning tide in the primary, one in which he has inherited from Trump the brunt of most attacks. "Something has changed," Cruz said again and again, with thinly veiled delight, when asked about the growing target on his back.
At stop after stop, Cruz is warning audiences that the worst is yet to come: potentially tens of millions of dollars in attack ads against him that will make it all the more important Iowans don't stay home by the fireplace on a likely frigid night come Feb. 1. Throughout the trip so far, he has largely avoided wading too deep into each attack, categorically dismissing them as a natural byproduct of his rise to the No. 1 spot in the Hawkeye State.
More than once Monday and Tuesday, Cruz seemed to revel in the negative attention, using it as a convenient foil in his anti-establishment pitch to voters. Speaking Monday afternoon in Carroll, Cruz paused to acknowledge flyers that were passed out before the event by critics of his position on ethanol, which the flyer said would kill tens of thousands of jobs in Iowa. The pro-ethanol outfit behind the materials, America's Renewable Future, has been criticizing Cruz over his opposition to the Renewable Fuel Standard, which sets a minimum amount of biofuels that must be blended into the gasoline supply.
"'Ted Cruz is dangerous!'" Cruz boomed, mockingly reading the mailer's ominous billing before adding: "You know what? To the Washington cartel, to the career politicians there that are getting fat and happy and want the gravy train to keep going, that's exactly right."
The next morning in Onawa, Cruz mused about the flammability of such literature, saying it makes "great kindling in the fireplace." The mailers, he added to scattered chuckles, "really do light up fast."
The list of anti-Cruz efforts in Iowa does not stop with the ethanol lobby. Since the holidays, Cruz has increasingly landed in the crosshairs of the past two caucus winners, Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum, as well as a healthy majority of other GOP rivals looking to trip up the Iowa pack leader on everything from his stance on gay marriage to his commitment to the second early voting state, New Hampshire.
"Some people are drowning right now and not catching enough air, and they're doing the only thing they know how to do, which is go negative," said Schultz, Iowa's former secretary of state who backed Santorum in the 2012 presidential election.
The source of the Cruz attacks was not always known as the bus tour got underway. In a parking lot near his stop Monday afternoon in Guthrie Center, flyers were attached to windshields of cars accusing Cruz of being "SOFT ON TERROR," — apparently due to his votes over the years against the annual defense spending bill, which Rubio has made a subject of scrutiny.
The most visible antagonist of Cruz in Iowa this week is America's Renewable Future, which has been stalking Cruz on his bus tour with a vehicle of its own, an RV planned to be parked outside all 28 of the senator's stops this week.
In an interview aboard the RV, Eric Branstad, head of America's Renewable Future, expressed hope caucusgoers would ultimately throw their support to a candidate friendlier to the ethanol cause, saying he believes as much as 40 percent of Iowans are still undecided.
"I think it's still way too early," said Branstad, son of Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad.
Responding to a question from the audience Tuesday afternoon in Cherokee, Cruz alluded to the pro-ethanol offensive as the bidding of lobbyists and Democrats seeking to increase Iowa's dependence on the federal government. The lobbyists specifically are "trying the best they can to snooker the people of Iowa" into thinking the standard is the only way for ethanol to survive, Cruz said.
Cruz supporters seem unfazed by the wave of attacks, though they were topics of conversation as Cruz mingled with crowds. On Tuesday morning in Onawa, grain farmer Ken Carlson walked away from an exchange with Cruz satisfied with the senator's promise to not only get rid of ethanol subsidies, but all energy subsidies.
Marc Wallace, a pastor from Denison who is not yet sold on Cruz, shrugged a bit when asked to assess the effectiveness of the barbs thrown so far at the senator in Iowa.
"Most of the things that I have heard — they're easily seen as false or misleading or slanderous," Wallace said after Cruz spoke Monday afternoon in Carroll.
Cruz is set to continue the tour Wednesday with five more stops across deeply conservative northwest Iowa. By Saturday, Cruz will have gotten significantly closer to fulfilling his promise to visit all 99 counties in Iowa, leaving roughly a couple dozen to check off his list when he returns to the state later this month.
Now that he’s backtracked on ethanol, he is SET.
You would do away altogether with the renewable fuel standard and wind production tax credit, correct?
A. "That is accurate. And I filed legislation to phase out the RFS over five years.
I support ethanol and biofuels and I support wind. Texas is the largest wind producer in the country. But both ethanol and wind can compete on their own merits. ... I would note couple weeks ago when I was in Iowa at the Agriculture Summit every other candidate there supported the RFS including some who previously had different positions. ... What you can count on from me is I'm going to tell you the truth and I'm going to do what I said I'm going to do.
And what was astonishing is that that received hearty applause from the crowd, and that was not the response I necessarily expected and I was certainly gratified by the reaction."
TED CRUZ... being consistant once again.... Nothing changed here
The article on the other thread had a misleading (on purpose) title
Senator Ted Cruz listens to Iowa farmers, supports phasing out the Renewable Fuel Standard (Ethanol) by 2022 - There fixed it.
Please click on the pictures at the top of the columns for more details on the ratings of the candidates.
 |
 |
 |
| Budget, Spending & Debt |  |
 |
| Civil Liberties | |
 |
| Education | |
|
| Energy & Environment | |
|
| Foreign Policy & Defense | |
|
| Free Market | |
|
| Health Care & Entitlements | |
|
| Immigration | |
|
| Moral Issues | |
|
| Second Amendment | |
|
| Taxes, Economy & Trade | |
|
More at Conservative Review: https://www.conservativereview.com/2016-presidential-candidates
Note: If you don't like the ratings for any reason, please contact Conservative Review's Editor-in-Chief, "The Great One," Mark Levin. But I have to warn you that you may get this response from him: "GET OFF THE PHONE, YOU BIG DOPE!"
And, of course, he is for Renewable Fuel Standard (ethanol mandate), so governement can pick winners and losers.
Trump's Record on Free-market Issue: (from the Conservative Review)
Trump has a terrible record on free market issues. The only bright spot is the Federal Reserve's quantitative easing, but this glimmer is countermanded by his repeated support for bailing out Wall Street and the auto industry, and increased stimulus spending. Of particular concern is Trump's belief that the government can use eminent domain powers to seize private property in the name of private economic development. This comes as no surprise, given his support for using eminent domain to profit his own company.
Trump supported the Supreme Court’s 2005 decision in Kelo v. City of London, allowing public authorities to seize private land for economic development by private investors; Trump said, “I happen to agree with [the decision] 100 percent.” (National Review) This is no surprise given Trump’s attempt to use eminent domain in his own line of work. (Institute for Justice)
Trump supported President Obama’s 2009 stimulus, saying: “The word stimulus is probably not used in its fullest…you know, certain of the things that were given weren't really stimulus. They were pork, as we call it, or they were gifts to certain people. But overall, I think he's [President Obama] doing very well. You do need stimulus and you do have to keep the banks alive.” (CNN)
Trump supported TARP, saying, "You had to do something to shore up the banks, because ... you would have had a run on every bank." (CNN)
Trump supported the 2008 auto bailout, saying, “I think the government should stand behind them 100 percent. You cannot lose the auto companies. They’re great. They make wonderful products.” He also said that the federal government could “easily save the companies.” (Daily Caller)
Trump criticized the Federal Reserve’s intervention in the debt market, saying quantitative easing creates “phony numbers” that mislead the marketplace and “will not ultimately benefit the economy. The dollar will go down in value and inflation will start rearing its ugly head.” (CNBC)
Donald Trump has a history of using eminent domain to complete business deals. Multiple times Trump has supported the use of government agencies to take possession of homes and businesses for use in his private business plans. Eminent domain seizures are reserved only for public use of property rather than abuse by the government taking property from one individual and giving to another. (Washington Post)
Donald Trump has sought and received crony capitalist tax breaks for his commercial properties in New York. These tax breaks, and even an abatement, force the property taxes of other property owners to rise at the expense of the connected. Special treatment for one business or industry over another with the tax code conflicts with free market principles. (National Review)
In 2009, Trump supported Barack Obama's call for limits on the pay of executives. (CNN)
Marc Wallace, a pastor from Denison who is not yet sold on Cruz, shrugged a bit when asked to assess the effectiveness of the barbs thrown so far at the senator in Iowa.
“Most of the things that I have heard — they’re easily seen as false or misleading or slanderous,” Wallace said after Cruz spoke Monday afternoon in Carroll.
CRUZ is eligible to be president. To bring up otherwise is a weak attack. It has been brought up time and time again. It will continue to be brought up when an opponent (Republican or Democrat) feels threatened by CRUZ and has little to attack him on.
It was posted by Jim Robinson back in 2013
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3060736/posts
" Cruz proposed a five-year phase out of the RFS mandate months ago. As president, starting in 2017, he would begin the phase out and it would end in 2022. That has always been the plan.
https://www.jobsgrowth.org/icymi-usa-today-agrees-with-sen-cruz-ending-ethanol-mandate-is-good-for-consumers/
you bucking for idget of the day?
What about his mother? Her American citizenship is not relevant? You really stepped into a steaming pile with that.
Hop hop hoppin and flip flip floppin along. :-)
Hop hop hoppin and flip flip floppin along. :-)
Well you should know about hop, hop, hoppin. :-)
How this one? Floppin Down The Bunny Trail? :-)
Note the reference to Natural Law in the first sentence of our Declaration of Independence.
It is crystal clear that the Founding Fathers used the Natural Law definition of 'natural born Citizen' when they wrote Article II. By invoking "The Laws of Nature and Nature's God" the 56 signers of the Declaration incorporated a legal standard of freedom into the forms of government that would follow.
President John Quincy Adams, writing in 1839, looked back at the founding period and recognized the true meaning of the Declaration's reliance on the "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God." He observed that the American people's "charter was the Declaration of Independence. Their rights, the natural rights of mankind. Their government, such as should be instituted by the people, under the solemn mutual pledges of perpetual union, founded on the self-evident truth's proclaimed in the Declaration."
The Constitution, Vattel, and “Natural Born Citizen”: What Our Framers Knew
The Laws of Nature and of Nature's God: The True Foundation of American Law
The Supreme Court of the United States has never applied the term “natural born citizen” to any other category than “those born in the country of parents who are citizens thereof”.
The Harvard Law Review Article Taken Apart Piece by Piece and Utterly Destroyed
Citizenship Terms Used in the U.S. Constitution - The 5 Terms Defined & Some Legal Reference to Same
"The citizenship of no man could be previous to the declaration of independence, and, as a natural right, belongs to none but those who have been born of citizens since the 4th of July, 1776."....David Ramsay, 1789.
A Dissertation on Manner of Acquiring Character & Privileges of Citizen of U.S.-by David Ramsay-1789
The Law of Nations or the Principles of Natural Law (1758)
The Laws of Nature and of Nature's God: The True Foundation of American Law
Cruz has advocated a five year phase out since at least last winter. The evidence is posted above.
Sometimes I wonder about Trump supporters.
Are you a lawyer?
One: the place of birth, the Senate voted overwhelmingly that John McCain met the definition even though his place of birth was not in the United Sates. It is highly unlikely that any court would challenge that opinion.
Two: The current sitting president was the child of one us citizen and one foreign national. IF the court were to rule that both parents must be citizens they would essentially be forced to admit they screwed up and might even have to erase all Obama's orders, vetoes and bills that he signed. It is not going to happen!
The best case against Obama was his adoption by Lolo Sotero and his citizenship in Jakarta. The court ruled that no one had standing and the press led with the weakest accusation of being born outside the country. A simple forged birth certificate was all that was required for documentation.
There is no way on earth that the court would rule against a duly elected president. It is almost certain that the court would rule that place of birth is not determinate and that having one birth parent that confers citizenship at birth is sufficient to qualify as a natural born citizen.
It’s the other 49 states that are a problem. Huckabee and Santonrum also enjoyed the Iowa Frontrunners Life. LOL!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.