Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Senator Ted Cruz's Contradictory Position on Illegal
American Thinker ^ | March 28, 2015 | Allan J. Favish

Posted on 03/28/2015 1:04:56 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-60 last
To: 2ndDivisionVet

Walker has long been maligned about flipping on ethanol by a lot of people, including some Cruzers here on FR.

Readers have a right to know the truth on Walkers longstanding ethanol position, one he articulated again in his Iowa speech.

+++

Walker on ethanol, March 7, 2015

“While I do not support the mandate, I do not have a problem with ethanol...”

“However, it is clear to me that a big government mandate is not the way to support the farmers of this state...”

“Central planning will not help our family farmers, protect our environment, or provide jobs.”

“The free enterprise system must drive innovation to relieve our dependence on foreign oil, not mandates from the state or federal government.”


41 posted on 03/28/2015 3:49:34 AM PDT by Balding_Eagle (The Gruber Revelations are proof that God is still smiling on America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
And let's remain allies in electing a conservative

Wifey, you are posting on FR and want the single candidate, single issue purists to be civil and treat you and your subject with dignity?

I am a Cruzer, and he is the only candidate that I have donated to during the Presidential election cycle, BUT, I like Walker and would be OK with him as our candidate.

I will try to be civil with you and your guy, but if I step over the line, slap me silly and remind me of this post.

However, there are some posters here at FR, that beg to be bitched slapped, and I will do that when they beg hard enough.

42 posted on 03/28/2015 4:20:03 AM PDT by USS Alaska (Exterminate the terrorist savages, everywhere.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USS Alaska
I think either Walker or Cruz would be an excellent nominee. Neither one will agree with me 100 percent, but, hey, no one is perfect. /sarc

The important point to realize is both men are hated by the establishment and the GOP-e will send in their flying monkeys as concern trolls.

43 posted on 03/28/2015 4:30:18 AM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

These supposed disputes are like UFO sightings. Someone heard someone say this or more accurately some lefty misquoted them and now folks on our side are claiming one of our guys said it.
Where is a VIDEO or AUDIO proof?
We know the lefties twist and contort what anyone says or does on the right. So, unless their is an actual video or audio of Cruz or Walker saying something crazy i am just going to file it away in a X file.
Either Walker or Cruz, or both together, would be far better than what we have now. Either one of them could come out in a clown suit and sing Tip Toe Through the Tulips and still be a substantially better choice than Obama.


44 posted on 03/28/2015 4:39:34 AM PDT by Leep (Ronney/McCain 2016!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leep

Thank you, and everyone on the thread for making good comments and discussing this.


45 posted on 03/28/2015 4:47:06 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Hot Air - March 28, 2015: Ted Cruz’s campaign: He hasn’t ruled out legal status for illegals "I’m tempted to accuse Team Walker of feeding this bit of oppo to MSNBC to take some heat off of their own rolling clusterfark on immigration. But I’m sure author Benjy Sarlin, a smart guy who follows this issue for the network, hit on it himself. (Wouldn’t Walker’s team have leaked it to Fox to maximize Cruz’s embarrassment among conservatives?) To a lefty, the tangle of GOP primary politics on amnesty must be irresistible: Why is Scott Walker taking a beating on the right for supporting legalization when Ted Cruz, Mr. Conservative, also supported legalization in the form of work permits as recently as 2013? How can Ted Cruz be the “anti-amnesty” candidate in the field when his position — at least as of two years ago — is basically indistinguishable from Walker’s and (gasp) Jeb Bush’s?..........."
46 posted on 03/28/2015 4:54:20 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Crim

yep!


47 posted on 03/28/2015 5:54:00 AM PDT by jennings2004 ("What difference, at this point, does it make!"!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine

If you read about the toxic interaction of LEGAL IMMIGRATION + REFUGEE INDUSTRY + NON-PROFITS you will see it’s more than the border that needs protecting. The 8USC 1324 statute on Shielding, Harboring, Aidding was undermined under Clinton. 1611 was added but gave the US Attorney General power offer a huge loophole providing non-profits, NGO’s defense from prosecution. Here is what I have written on a blogpost:
Although President Clinton signed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act in 1996 -8 USC 1642, (which required proof of citizenship in order to receive many benefits and made church charities and non-profit organizations verify eligibility of citizenship), it also came with another caveat.The Attorney General was given exclusive powers to create community programs,services and assistance necessary for the “protection of life or safety” which could be provided by government-funded agencies without regard to legal status,(8 U.S.C. 1611).

We are now tracing this enthusiasm for “refugees, asylum” in our state of Texas and the money to be made. Obviously the Central American “youth” invasion made this loophole very profitable.
When I hear Cruz talk about LEGAL IMMIGRATION I am hoping he knows about this...


48 posted on 03/28/2015 6:14:54 AM PDT by magna carta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Crim
Do we punish those here for their parents sins, or reward lawbreaking with benefits that they could never have got if they didn't, encouraging more?

Not our problem.

Its easy to post anonymously ‘Deport hem all’ but they all, including Cruz, know at the national level that it wont fly.

There is no "moderate" stand on illegal immigration.
If we allow a "pathway to citizenship" these same illegals will sue to get full citizenship status.

All illegals should be deported.

49 posted on 03/28/2015 6:32:05 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist (GO WISCONSIN BADGERS GO!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Crim
Illegal is illegal.....and people with no right to be here should be deported post haste.

Is there a current candidate or potential candidate who is on the record with that exact position?

If not, do you plan to sit out the presidential primary and the general??

50 posted on 03/28/2015 6:54:07 AM PDT by Eric Pode of Croydon (I wish someone would tell me what "diddy wah diddy" means.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

Is there a current candidate or potential candidate who is on the record with that exact position?

If not, do you plan to sit out the presidential primary and the general??


51 posted on 03/28/2015 6:54:57 AM PDT by Eric Pode of Croydon (I wish someone would tell me what "diddy wah diddy" means.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

I am (at least so far) a Cruz supporter, but am glad you posted this article, Cincinatus’s Wife.

Every candidate owes us the obligation to be straight forward and specific about their positions on immigration: 1) border control, 2) what to do with the millions of illegal invaders already here, and 3) how many more millions of immigrants they want to import to take American jobs and/or put on our various government programs.

Cruz needs to answer this as well as all the rest of the candidates.

The one candidate who has been forthcoming on this is Jebbie Arbusto. I appreciate his letting us know that he plans to continue to give our country away rather than hiding his position.


52 posted on 03/28/2015 7:13:00 AM PDT by SharpRightTurn (White, black, and red all over--America's affirmative action, metrosexual president.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Cruz is IMO the best candidate, in the unlikely event Cruz is somehow eliminated from the race I think Walker is a decent man and an acceptable second tier candidate above all others.


53 posted on 03/28/2015 8:07:03 AM PDT by PoloSec ( Believe the Gospel: how that Christ died for our sins, was buried and rose again)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine; Cincinatus' Wife

The difference is that Scott Walker supports citizenship and Cruz opposes it.

So who is Cincinatus’ Wife trying to bring down? Ted Cruz.


54 posted on 03/28/2015 8:18:36 AM PDT by ansel12 (Palin--Mr President, the only thing that stops a bad guy with a nuke is a good guy with a nuke.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife; 2ndDivisionVet

While Scott Walker supports citizenship, you want to go after Cruz’s efforts to block that, by confusing conceding to a form of legal status to bring them out of the shadows, as being like Walker’s wanting to make them citizens.

Cruz is doing what he can to prevent citizenship.

Walker supports citizenship, Cruz opposes it.


55 posted on 03/28/2015 8:23:25 AM PDT by ansel12 (Palin--Mr President, the only thing that stops a bad guy with a nuke is a good guy with a nuke.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: wardaddy

OK, I stand corrected. But really, that’s impossible for a politician to not do, versus a statesman.


56 posted on 03/28/2015 8:51:36 AM PDT by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Praxeologue

I understand that Cruz opposes a path to citizenship. My point is that Cruz was willing to vote for the Gang of Eight bill, which gave legal status to illegals (short of citizenship). I am against such legal status, and am in favor of the position I set forth in my article.

From my article:

“Sen. Cruz stated in his press release that he is “confident my proposed amendments will effectively address the current problems with this bill.” If his proposed amendments would have “effectively address[ed] the current problems with” the bill, there does not seem to have been any reason for Sen. Cruz to have voted against the bill if his proposed amendments had been adopted. Apparently Sen. Cruz did not see any problem with the bill giving illegal immigrants legal status, so long as it would be a status less than citizenship.”

As I state in my article: “Sen. Cruz is America’s last hope for a credible border.” I hope he agrees with my position, as expressed in the article. But I don’t know if he does. The point of the article is to get him to state his position.

I noticed at the recent post at Legal Insurrection (http://legalinsurrection.com/2015/03/ted-cruz-disputes-msnbc-claim-he-supports-legalization-of-illegal-immigrants/), the following two paragraphs:

“Senator Cruz’s campaign spokeswoman Catherine Frazier told us Cruz’s goal in the Gang of Eight amendment was three fold: to get Senators on the record showing where they stood on the issue, that it was a good faith effort to improve the bill, and to stop a pathway to citizenship. Frazier explained it was not intended to suggest support for legalization.”

“Cruz supports strengthening the border and fixing our legal immigration and interior enforcement systems before we deal with those who are here illegally,” Frazier said. “It’s premature to discuss what to do with those who are still here illegally until we have made these reforms. Indicating that there may be the potential for amnesty in the future, only encourages more illegal immigration.”

There are two problems with what Frazier said. First, she said that Cruz’s Gang of Eight proposed amendment “was not intended to suggest support for legalization.” It may not have been intended to do so, but Cruz’s Press Release about his proposed amendments stated that his “proposed amendments will effectively address the current problems with this bill.” As I explain in my article, this means that Cruz was supporting legalization to a status less than citizenship. Frazier is being disingenuous here. Cruz should step in quickly and correct here and clearly state his full position.

Secondly, Frazier said: “It’s premature to discuss what to do with those who are still here illegally until we have made these reforms.” It is not premature. Present law requires their deportation, in most cases. There is no authority for the President to suspend enforcement while we wait for true border enforcement. Is Frazier saying that if Cruz becomes President he will not do anything regarding the illegals presently here until he gets the border truly controlled? I am hoping that is not Cruz’s position. Again, Cruz needs to step in now and deal with this issue and Frazier’s statements.

I don’t think there is any significant chance that any of the other candidates would agree with me. Perhaps, Rick Santorum, but I am not sure he is running. Cruz might do so. But I don’t know.


57 posted on 03/29/2015 10:33:44 PM PDT by AJFavish (www.allanfavish.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: AJFavish
If you wish to encourage Sen. Cruz to provide more clarity on the two issues that you raise, I would suggest that you address your concerns to Sean Rushton, Senior Policy Advisor, email sean.rushton@cruz.senate.gov, or perhaps Ryan Newman, Cruz's chief counsel.

My personal view is that you are taking Cruz's and Frazier's remarks too literally.

Beyond my posts 8, 14 and 25, above, I interpret Cruz's statement that he is "confident my proposed amendments will effectively address the current problems with this bill" is intended solely to back his Senate colleagues into a political corner, offering everything but citizenship to demonstrate their duplicity. It is also obiter to his amendment removing a path to citizenship.

Frazier's statement that "It’s premature to discuss what to do with those who are still here illegally until" the border and "interior enforcement systems" are secured, means, to my mind, "what to do with" them beyond what we are doing now pursuant to current laws. It is stretching her words, and interpreting them contrary to Cruz's known position, to suggest that Cruz would halt enforcement until the border is secure.

58 posted on 03/29/2015 11:53:46 PM PDT by Praxeologue ( ')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

I don’t trust Cruz on immigration either. He has in the past said he’s open to some kind of legalization. Believe me legalization mean citizenship the minute the Rats gain control of the government and Cruz knows this. One thing I dislike about Cruz is he is always trying to be to clever. I’ll take a straight shooter like Trump over a “clever” Cruz any day.


59 posted on 08/23/2015 5:59:51 AM PDT by jpsb (Believe nothing until it has been officially denied)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crim
You might just see 50 cals every 500 yards soon. Have you been watching Europe lately? Riots over immigration in Germany. Macedonas' police force being over run by migrates. Slovia tells EU no we are not taking in more Muslims. Frances' English tunnel entrance closed due to huge migrate crowds trying to stowaway and get to the UK. Eastern European nations rushing armed forces to their borders. It's really bad in Europe right now.

The Wests' PC policies on "migrants" are now revealed as the insanity we always knew it was. Both the USA and Europe are being over run. This election we either win with Trump or things get really bad.

60 posted on 08/23/2015 6:10:06 AM PDT by jpsb (Believe nothing until it has been officially denied)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-60 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson