Posted on 02/13/2016 2:16:50 PM PST by vmivol00
Edited on 02/13/2016 2:40:52 PM PST by Sidebar Moderator. [history]
See link.
Damnit!
Rest in Peace...
You might want to re-edit and re-send your post. Some of it was in French. ;-D
Rest In Peace. What a great man!
“Cruz strongly backed Roberts.”
So did most conservatives in 2005.
RIP Justice Scalia... thank you for fighting the good fight.
RIP America.
agree
It is possible to reject the nominees all year long, but I don’t think the Kentuckians will let McC do that, or is it McC who won’t listen to his own Kentuckians.
McPain will say people in AZ are pressuring him to support the Obama nominee, and he must do so.
Of all the presidential candidates, who would have the grit to investigate once elected?
Hadn’t lose a thing.
I say Cruz is the best candidate in the field to pick the next Supreme Court justice, and you give me tweets and mailers.
Before you come back to prop 187, look up Medellin v Texas. Look up Cruz’s Solicitor General of Texas record.
I stand by Cruz being the best candidate in the field to pick the next justice of the Supreme Court.
I haven’t “lost” anything.
I presented Cruz’s own record. If you can’t handle it, fine. I don’t have to buy into your lopsided presentation.
How many cases did Ted argue before the SCOTUS, nine. As I understand it, he won two out-right.
I have been told he has the best legal Conservative mind around. Whoops.
As for his record in Texas, I am not familiar with that.
I am familiar with a state that is trashed continually for being a Leftist state, whose voters none the less did vote to cut off all funds to illegal immigrants.
Ted Cruz then stated he didn’t agree with that.
Well, I don’t agree with Ted.
I listed some things that bother me about him, and you just dismissed them.
Fine. Dismiss them. I’m not the only person who sees Ted the way I do, and he’s not getting my vote.
I’ve got no use for the guy. If you folk want him in the Senate, that’s your choice. I’m not backing him from here.
Right, but not with firsthand personal/professional knowledge of him, as a specialist in constitutional law, or having written op eds backing him nomination.
I pray that you’re right.
Prop 187 was passed in 1994. While Cruz was in Harvard and Bush just became governor elect. How or why would Cruz advise Bush on this in 1999?
Cruz was Bush’s domestic policy adviser in 1999.
Proposition 187 was still talked about a lot, and Bush wanted to have a policy statement on it.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/12/18/us/politics/immigration-document.html
Bush disagreed with it in 1994, he said so. He was asked about after he was elected Governor, before has was sworn in. Long before Cruz went to work for him in 1999.
So at best what you are telling me is that Ted was just one more guy willing to go along to get along for personal gain.
As a Conservative, I would not have been able to stifle my own support for state’s rights and the objections to illegal immigrants being rewarded with amnesty, the Bush plan when Ted worked for him.
In 1999 I was hoping for a president that would finally address illegal immigration and get tough, and Ted was just looking for a paycheck from an enemy of our nation.
This is the guy we are led to believe was one of us? Really?
Ted was part of the problem, not the solution.
POTUS is still POTUS Bush comes out 5 years earlier against 187, and
Cruz also suggest someone other than Roberts, but got shot down. Yes, he supported Roberts, but not his first choice. Heck we all had high hopes for Roberts.
Cruz did leave in 2003 and didn’t stick around until 2008.
Medellin v Texas, which Cruz argues against the Bush position in front of SCOTUS, is some thing you should check out.
Not that it will change your mind, to pick Cruz as POTUS, but it is a good barometer as to Cruz’s legal mindset.
No matter who you support, I think all of us would agree that Cruz nailed this in a way we could all be happy with.
And yet there he was in 1999, conversing with Bush in opposition to Proposition to 187.
There he is conversing with Bush about using children as a prop for opposing cracking down on illegal immigrants.
Tell me, do you give Trump credit when he does things right, ignoring everything else?
Why should I view Ted any different?
I am not anti-Trump.
I don’t think my post to you have suggest so.
I like Cruz better, but not by leaps and bounds.
Yet, 5 years after 187 passed, you bring it up as it was Cruz’s fault for working for Bush in 1999.
I will be kind and not bring up Trump’s positions, via 1999.
I have no problem if I vote for Trump over Sanders of Clinton.
Yes, “for the children” was a political calculation, like the Clintons “ it takes a village” line. Have you looked into Medellin v Texas yet?
I think you would like it.
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.