Posted on 12/17/2015 7:03:30 PM PST by RatherBiased.com
The Cruz presidential campaign is now claiming that the senator's attempted amendments and statements were only designed to be so-called "poison pills," a legislative trick designed to get supporters of a bill to vote against it. That was also the line Cruz took in an interview yesterday with Fox News anchor Bret Baier.
But that does not square with the fact that weeks after the legislation failed in the House, Cruz was still talking up how he wanted to grant permanent resident status to illegal immigrants in an interview with the Texas Tribune in September:
Immigration-reform legislation from the Senate's so-called Gang of Eight passed that chamber in June and includes a 13-year path to citizenship. Cruz pushed unsuccessfully for amendments that would have, among other things, eliminated the citizenship component.Asked about what to do with the people here illegally, however, he stressed that he had never tried to undo the goal of allowing them to stay.
"The amendment that I introduced removed the path to citizenship, but it did not change the underlying work permit from the Gang of Eight," he said during a recent visit to El Paso. Cruz also noted that he had not called for deportation or, as Mitt Romney famously advocated, self-deportation.
Cruz said recent polling indicated that people outside Washington support some reform, including legal status without citizenship. He said he was against naturalization because it rewarded lawbreakers and was unfair to legal immigrants. It also perpetuates illegal crossings, he added.
Besides barring citizenship while instituting some level of legalization for those here already, Cruz has proposed increasing the number of green cards awarded annually, to 1.35 million from 675,000.
(Excerpt) Read more at bold.global ...
And if he arrived at it by adjusting his viewpoint it's good enough for me.
Rubio was a founding/proud member of the gang of eight. Ted Cruz fought the gang of eight. End of story.
I support Trump for president. You, and any other Cruz detractor need to grow up. Trump’s past positions make him look like a poster boy for many liberal positions. I’m hoping age has made him a better man with more wisdom and I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. You should be doing the same thing for Ted Cruz because only a juvenile would argue that Ted Cruz as president or vice would be a bad thing for this country right now!
It’s interesting how Trumpophiles only attempt to tear down their opponents rather than building up their chosen candidate.
I suspect it’s quite difficult to make someone with such a long and distinguished history of liberal positions look appealing to the conservative base.
It’s far easier to tear down the competition with sophomoric spin and disingenuous interpretation of motives then try and justify Trumps support of Kelo, Single payer healthcare, Ethanol subsidies, Planned Parenthood, confiscatory taxes on the rich, opposition of Medicare/Social Security reform and donations to Democrat campaigns/causes.
Can’t blame em I guess.
= :^)
Trump cheated on his wife and you want to accuse Cruz of dishonesty...that’s situational ethics
No, I want to accuse you of being a sleazy gossip. Not to mention a dishonest one at that.
Facts isn’t gossip but Trump was sleazy for cheating on Ivanna
Trump is merely another iteration of the very liberal New Yorker, as in Giuliani and Michel Bloomberg, with a very long history of far left activism. Voting for him is like throwing your vote away.
What???? They are both Cubans means something about their policy on immigration? Neither has questions about their eligibility except in your mind.. is also supposed to have something to do with their positions on immigration? Rubio was a member of the gang of 8 and for amnesty, Ted Cruz was not and fought against Rubio-— That is as clear as you can get...
Sessions and Lee also supported the amendment. Think they are pro-amnesty too? Sorry, doesn’t wash. Cruz helped kill the bill with that attempted amendment.
According to Chuckie Schumer, Rubio WROTE the Amnesty bill.
Cruz was pushing for legalization and was upset that it did not pass in the way he wanted it. His own press secretary said this. Read the article.
It’s not that hard to understand.
1. Cruz was against citizenship.
2. Cruz was in favor of permanent legal resident status.
Gang of 8 bill was citizenship. Therefore he opposed it.
But he still wanted legalization—up until Trump got in the race.
While Ted Cruz is my #2 man after Trump; I am well aware that he’s the consumate politician. The reason I have him as #2 is because, after Trump, he’s the only pro-America, pro-Constitution candidate out there.
He is really slick at parsing words, and speaking in double switchbacks, so you really have to pay close scrutiny or he’ll slide something past you.
Tuesday night in his arguement with Rubio, I thought Cruz did a switchback regarding his position on citizenship. He declared that he was NEVER for citizenship for illegals.
What does that mean? That he will only approve citizenship for them AFTER they’ve been given amnesty? Or does he mean he’s O.K. with citizenship for LEGAL residents by declaration, whether they go through Naturalization or not?
Either case is unacceptable with me. My only hope is that if he rubs shoulders with President Trump for at least 4 years, it will wean him away from some of the weasely ways of a politician. Unless the politician in him is so ingrained in him that he’s like a dog that chases cars. It’s impossible to break a dog from chasing cars.
Or if he is made AG, or goes to the SCOTUS, The problem is lessened......unless he starts legislating from the bench.
Well I went from Walker to Rubio (early season) to Trump.......that is my final decision. I’d prefer Walker but I will settle on Trump who is the best candidate we have had in decades.
How is that Trump losing to Hilary Clinton by a YUGE 10 points in the polls working out for ya?
I have seen polls showing Trump beating Hillary by more than any other Republican-— How do those polls work for you?
Yeah? Where are those at?
Now why don’t we go to Real Clear Politics and look at the polls and the averages for hard to heads against Clinton?
I want to win the Presidency and I think he is the only one who can besides Rubio but he is not popular among Conservatives so that would be a waste. I don’t want Hillary in the White House. We have had 8 years of Democratic Presidency and I don’t want the first time in 70 years to have it again. Trump can win this thing.....the rest are too risky.
Exactly. Lot’s of “CONSERVATIVES” have a short term memory.
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.