Posted on 08/26/2015 6:26:21 AM PDT by libertarian neocon
I've always liked Ted Cruz, he is the Republican who I agree with most on the issues. He's free market, pro-life and for a measured foreign policy (less aggressive than Marco Rubio but more aggressive than Rand Paul). Most importantly, he would stick to his ideals despite pressure from the establishment. He may have made some tactical errors because of that but I couldn't help but admire him for his idealism. He has been the candidate that I would have voted for if I didn't care at all about electability.
Unfortunately, his interview last night with Megyn Kelly unmasked him as just another smarmy politician. One who thinks the Constitution is maleable, depending on the way the winds are blowing or what is politically advantageous, one who doesn't answer direct questions with direct answers.
When Megyn Kelly asked him about the 14th amendment and birthright citizenship, he said that "as a policy matter, it doesn't make sense anymore". This struck me as the same answer you would get from a liberal with regards to the Right to Keep and Bear Arms after a school shooting.
It seems to me that the text of the 14th amendment is pretty clear on birthright citizenship. It says "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." It is no less clear than "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
The funny thing is that Ted Cruz actually agrees with me or he used to before it became politically expedient to mirror Trump's views with the goal of getting his supporters when Trump blows up. During the interview Megyn Kelly quoted Ted Cruz back to himself. Here is what he said in 2011:
“The 14th Amendment provides for birthright citizenship. I’ve looked at the legal arguments against it, and I will tell you as a Supreme Court litigator, those arguments are not very good. As much as someone may dislike the policy of birthright citizenship, it’s in the U.S. Constitution. And I don’t like it when federal judges set aside the Constitution because their policy preferences are different.”
But of course that was before he was running for President and so didn't have to worry about his words offending another candidates supporters. He really didn't have a good answer after Megyn Kelly brought out that quote, talking around it rather than explaining why he changed his mind like a normal, honest person would have.
Megyn Kelly then asked Cruz the same question Trump has been asked, whether he would deport with the parents two children of illegal immigrants that were technically citizens of the US. He totally avoided answering that question as he attempted a typical maneuver of a politician, having his cake and eating it too. Without being on record as saying he would deport them, he could pivot later and say he is against deporting children without technically flip-flopping while at the same time not saying anything that would offend the Trumpitistas and those that support Trump's immigration plan. I don't like Trump for many reasons but at least he answers questions directly as he did this question when it was asked of him.
Last night it became clear that Ted Cruz is willing to do anything to become President, which is exactly the opposite of why I always had been fond of him. If I wanted someone who would lie with a straight face and a smile and evade questions I would vote for a Bill Clinton or a John Edwards. Looks like Ted Cruz came to Washington to change it but instead it changed him.
He also left me wondering what other constitutional provisions is he set to oppose for political expediency with the goal of gaining more power for himself?
Wasn't interesting even before the mold grew on it.
Needs more hits. Pimpin' is hard for a Fiorina fan boy.
Exceedingly so.
But there are idiots who vote based off who fathered someone.
Ain’t dynastic politics great?
He’s a concern troll.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/news/3338394/posts?page=15#15
And doncha know, you need to vote for her based off who her daddy is.
LN said so.
It would be nice if choosing a candidate required so little effort or thought, but that’s not how it works.
Yeah.
Especially in the age where politicians and candidates change their positions so often you could hook wire coils up on them to generate power from their circular motion.
“subject to the jurisdiction thereof”
That’s the part that does not mean what you think it means. But Ted Cruz knows what it means. :-)
He’s a Carly Fiorina concern troll.
And he’s voting for her based off who her daddy is.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/news/3338394/posts?page=15#15
Actually the languageis not clear at all and as such the courts should defer to the people. And the people should make clear that anchor babies do not bestow citizenship to them or freebies to the parents.
Why isn’t this tagged as a vanity? Just wondering. I thought that was the correct protocol for posting your own musings in the form of an article...
Because he’s a blogger AND a Carly Fiorina supporting concern troll.
And as a blogger, he thinks we should be blessed with every flatulent thought that pops into his head, vanity or not.
And doncha know, we should vote for Carly the HP crasher due to who her daddy is.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/news/3338394/posts?page=15#15
his last lie at that link.
Conservative credentials are hereditary according to him.
LOL.
And by his own admission he’s an iCarly guy.
He posted this thread to smear and troll Cruz.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3329329/posts?page=122#122
http://freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3329329/posts?page=123#123
http://freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3329329/posts?page=144#144
That figures.
FYI, no longer a Fiorina guy, I’m going with Ted Cruz
http://libertarian-neocon.blogspot.com/2015/11/ted-cruz-for-president.html
I agree. I don’t think Cruz is just a smarmy politician I just like Trumps plans especially for illegals and the border better than Cruz’s plans.
The Immigration debate has removed abortion, and gay marriage off the radar here on FR.
In all of Secretariots’s Tripple Crown races in 1973 he did not come out of the gate and lead in first place.
But yet he is the greatest race horse of all time.
His 2nd race in the Preakness he broke dead last then made his bold move in the first turn.
Go check out all his Tripple Crown races.
No horse yet has broke his record at Belmont.
Well then, now is the perfect time for you to root on the underdog in this race to win...
Come on, it’s not hard if you try.
Root on the underdog....
ROCKY ! ROCKY ! ROCKY !
The underdog taking on Apolocreed.
It’s not in the Constitution and there’s all kinds of corroborating evidence that it expressly wasn’t intended at the time it was written.
This guy lost me right there.
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.