“Did Ted Cruz fight to support legalizing people that are in this country illegally?” Rubio asked.
Cruz was insistent that he had not.
“I have never supported legalization, and I do not intend to support legalization,” he stated firmly.
Those words will come back to haunt him because the facts are pretty clear that Cruz did, in fact support legalization—but not citizenship. As talk radio host Erick Erickson noted yesterday, “Contrary to what Cruz said Tuesday night, he too did favor a pathway for legalization of some illegal immigrants, though not necessarily citizenship.”
Cruz could easily have admitted this and then claimed that Donald Trump helped him see the error of his ways, just like he changed his position on H1B visas for high-skilled workers. It would have been simple to do so and his supporters would surely have accepted the explanation.
Instead of doing that, Cruz has embarked on a shaky plan to deny his own record. Despite his angry pronouncement, the facts indicate that during the debate over the Gang of Eight bill, Cruz offered several amendments to grant legal status but not citizenship and to beef up border protection.
Cruz was quite clear on this during a session of the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 21, 2013:
If legislation that includes a path to citizenship passes, like it did in 1986, I have little doubt that we will be back here in 20-30 years with not just 11 million, but 20-30 million. We need a solution that respect the rule of law and ensures that there are meaningful consequences to breaking the law. If this amendment is adopted to the current bill, the effect will be that those 11 million will still be eligible for RPI status, for legal status, and for LPR status, and would be out of the shadows. This amendment would allow that to happen. It would remove the path of citizenship that shows there are real consequence that respect the rule of law and treat legal immigrants with the fairness they deserve. […]
In my opinion, the current bill does not fix the problem. It may incentivize further illegal immigration, further exploitation. I think anyone can have an opportunity to become a citizen, if you come legally. And one way to do that is to expand legal immigration. Tying immigration reform hostage to a path to citizenship is not a strategy to passing a bill. […]
I want immigration reform to pass, so if the objective is the pass common sense immigration reform, then we should look for areas of bipartisan agreement to come together. and if this amendment pass, the chances of this bill becoming law would be greater.I want common sense immigration reform to pass. I think our immigration system is broken. I think there are large majorities who want to get immigration reform to pass.
This bill does not stop the problem. Human tragedy would flow as a direct result of this bill. I believe this bill will not become law because it will not pass the House of Representatives and become law. In the course of this mark-up, I’ve introduced 5 amendments. One of the greatest failings of this bill is that it is almost utterly toothless with respect to the border. I think it is unfortunate that we saw the votes that we did.
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.
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. He also wants to eliminate the per-country limit that he said left applicants from countries like Mexico, China and India hamstrung when they tried to gain legal entry to this country.
Update: The September 2013 interview with the Tribune is also interesting because Cruz explicitly used the term “poison pill” as a means of denouncing Democrats for allegedly trying to block any kind of legalization as a means of scoring points against Republicans. This is consistent with his earlier remark that he wanted to bring illegal immigrants “out of the shadows.”
Cruz said the Obama administration and partisan Democrats would not yield on the citizenship requirement, which they know would kill the entire effort because of a lack of support in the House. The result, he said, will be a future campaign tool by which Democrats can blame Republicans for failing to overhaul immigration.
“If your objective is actually to pass a bill insisting on a path to citizenship, it is in both intent and effect a poison pill,” he said, adding that he thinks many of the immigration groups working on the issue are “being taken advantage of.” […]
Cruz has said the stalemate is denying help to farmers and ranchers who “have a real need for labor resources.”
With Donald Trump in the race, it’s obvious why Cruz has changed his position. What’s not obvious is why he refuses to admit it.
Update II. Responding to this post on Twitter, several people have questioned the accuracy of the Texas Tribune piece, stating that it was putting words into Cruz’s mouth. Fortunately for accuracy’s sake, in March of this year, Cruz spokeswoman Catherine Frazier was asked specifically about his statements in the Tribune article. She confirmed that the piece was accurate and that the senator did indeed support legal status for undocumented immigrants:
Asked by MSNBC about where Cruz stands now on legalization, campaign spokeswoman Catherine Frazier said that the senator has been “consistent” and confirmed that the views he expressed in the Tribune had not changed. She described his amendment to the Senate “gang of eight” bill as an effort “to improve a very bad bill” that he ultimately opposed.
While Frazier said Cruz fought the bill’s path to citizenship because it “flies in the face of the rule of law,” she declined to apply the same label when asked about legal status in the right circumstances.
“I think his main priority is dealing with the border security component and making sure that we know who is coming into the country and making sure that we have control over who is coming into the country and then we can deal with what to do with the people who are already here,” she said. […]
The idea anyone could get to the right of Cruz on immigration, who has repeatedly threatened to shut down the government to defund Obama’s “illegal executive amnesty” might come as a surprise. But by the terms of the immigration debate set out so far, his bona fides could absolutely come into question.
Many conservatives, including the leading anti-immigration groups, consider any policy that falls short of deportation “amnesty.” It’s this fundamental divide, far more than any argument over legalization vs. citizenship, that has paralyzed GOP attempts at immigration reform.
“The baseline is anything that lets illegal aliens stay illegally,” Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which favors reducing immigration levels, told MSNBC. “Anything else is word games.”
Hat tip: Stanley Tedwick.
A journalist, television producer, and web designer, Matthew Sheffield is a Bold contributor. Previously, he was the managing editor for the Washington Examiner, a columnist at the Washington Times, and the founder and executive editor of NewsBusters.
Ted Cruz filed a 76-page brief to ban sex toys and ‘autonomous sex’
Further proof Ted Cruz is the ultimate buzz kill: That one time he tried to ban sex toys.
The GOP presidential second-runner once pored over an impassioned plea to cease sex toys in Texas — and his 76-page screed against self-pleasure resurfaced Wednesday thanks to an expose from Mother Jones.
As Texas’ solicitor general in 2007, Cruz filed a brief in the US Court of Appeals upholding a lower court’s decision to criminalize the sale of dildos and other sex toys — or “obscene devices,” as Cruz called them on paper.
The case arose from retailers selling sex toys challenging a state law outlining the promotion of their products. The sex shop vendors argued the law violated the 14th Amendment’s right to privacy — by policing the privacy of the bedroom.
As part of his master debate against sex toys, Cruz and his legal staff argued dildos are not “deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and traditions,” and that selling them violates “public morals.”
Elsewhere in the whopping brief, Cruz argued sex toys show “no liberty interest relating to procreation,” and he defended the government’s right to discourage “autonomous sex.”
Ted Cruz thinks people don't have a right to "stimulate their genitals." I was his college roommate. This would be a new belief of his.
— Craig Mazin (@clmazin) April 13, 2016
“There is no substantive-due-process right to stimulate one's genitals for non-medical purposes unrelated to procreation or outside of an interpersonal relationship,” Cruz wrote.
The appellate court wasn't’ feeling Cruz’s bad vibrations — and ruled against him in a 2-1 vote.
But Cruz carried on with his heroic quest to rub out sex toys, teaming with Texas attorney general Greg Abbott to file another brief requesting a hearing. The duo even asked to take the case to the Supreme Court before they finally pulled out for good.
Cruz would later became a Texas senator, while Abbott serves as the Lone Star’s governor.
Cruz’s war on dildos hasn’t come up during his presidential run, but he hasn’t grown any more sex positive, as he regularly speaks out against abortion, Planned Parenthood and birth control access.
But one person from his past questioned Cruz’s battle against “autonomous sex” — Craig Mazin, the college roommate infamous for spilling embarrassing details on Cruz.
Mazin tweeted Wednesday: “Ted Cruz thinks people don’t have a right to ‘stimulate their genitals.’ I was his college roommate. This would be a new belief of his.”
NY DAILY NEWS
The anti-Trump politicians were passing around a “Resolution to Forbid Colorado Delegates from Voting for Trump” for weeks before the convention.
On Saturday Ted Cruz supporters took all 13 of the delegates up for grabs at the Colorado GOP Convention to complete a clean sweep of the state.
But it was not without controversy.
There never was a vote – Party elites decided on who got the delegates.
The anti-Trump politicians were passing around a “Resolution to Forbid Colorado Delegates from Voting for Trump” for weeks before the convention.
After Cruz swept the Colorado delegates the Colorado Republican Party tweeted this out:
Robert Zubrin from Colorado Republicans for Liberty wrote about the anti-Trump resolution at American Thinker back on March 22, 2016:
In the caucuses March 1, I was elected an alternate delegate to the Colorado State GOP convention, which on April 9 will select and instruct our delegates to the Republican National Convention in Cleveland this summer.
Accordingly, I have drawn up a resolution that is now being circulated that will forbid Colorado delegates to the national convention from voting for Donald Trump for president or vice president on any ballot. Such a resolution is necessary, because Trump has publicly stated that his methods of operation include buying or renting the services of politicians for cash.
As the text of the resolution provides a succinct and forceful summary of the reasons why Donald Trump is unacceptable as a Republican candidate for president, I thought I would share it with the readers of American Thinker. Here it is:
Resolution to Forbid Colorado Delegates from Voting for Donald Trump
Whereas Donald Trump is not a Republican; and
Whereas Donald Trump is a demagogue who is using fear, hate, and lies to assemble a mob in support of an agenda of socialist policy, unlimited government, and strongman rule; and
Whereas Donald Trump would destroy the Western alliance which is the basis of American security; and
Whereas Donald Trump would destroy the system of international trade which is the basis of American prosperity; and
Whereas Donald Trump would destroy the freedom of the press that is the basis of American liberty; and
Whereas Donald Trump would destroy the rule of law which is the basis of American civil society; and
Whereas Donald Trump has mocked those who risked their lives to fight for America when he avoided doing so; and
Whereas Donald Trump has acted as an apologist for America’s enemy Vladimir Putin and other brutal anti-American foreign tyrants; and
Whereas Donald Trump has set himself forth as an open exponent of lust, greed, and other vices antithetical to Judeo-Christian ethics and the moral fiber necessary to sustain a republic; and
Whereas Donald Trump has demonstrated that he has no respect for the truth, and
Whereas Donald Trump has defrauded thousands of ordinary Americans of their life savings; and
Whereas Donald Trump has, in the course of the present campaign, committed acts potential prosecutable as incitement to riot, a federal crime punishable by up to five years in prison; and
Whereas Donald Trump has knowingly acted to degrade the Republican presidential nominating process to a vile level that can only serve to drive people of talent and integrity out of the party and assist in the election of the party’s opponents; and
Whereas the nomination of Donald Trump for president would insure a landslide defeat for the Republican Party nationwide in the fall, and deeply damage the Republican Party and the conservative movement for years, and possibly decades to come; and
Whereas a vote for Donald Trump by any member of the Colorado delegation to the Republican National Convention would dishonor and disgrace the Colorado Republican Party;
Therefore, be it resolved that:
The Colorado Republican Party forbids any of its delegates to the Republican National Convention to vote for Donald Trump for president or vice president on the first ballot or any other ballot, and
The Colorado Republican Party asks its delegates to national convention to pledge on their honor to do everything in their power to help secure the presidential nomination for someone other than Donald Trump.
Donald Trump has threatened the Republican Party with mob violence. Let’s tell him where to go!
Colorado Republicans for Liberty.
The anti-Trump officials handed out this same resolution at the state convention on Saturday.
Here’s the resolution passed around at the convention that instructed Colorado Republicans to not vote for Trump.
THE RESOLUTION WAS CREATED BY "COLORADO REPUBLICANS FOR LIBERTY"- A CRUZ OFFSHOOT GROUP.
PLEASE CHECK OUT THE "ARTICLES" PAGE FOR FRONT PAGE NEWS STORIES AND OP-ED'S YOU MAY HAVE MISSED! FEEL FREE TO SHARE OUR ARTICLES AND WEBSITE WITH OTHERS! (THE EDITORS)
Ted Cruz is bound to one ambition above all others: Win at all costs. Lie, cheat, bamboozle the people. Whatever it takes to gain power and wealth. Screw the People!!!
As the people’s representative, we are elected to uphold our constitution and support democracy in our nation. This is what I,Ted Cruz, will tell the people to get elected president. However, I don't believe a word of what I just said. It's B.S.!
As far as my "conservative values" goes; I would rather be in porn, it pays better than politics. But, you gotta dance with the gal that came with you to the party.
Politics it is, for now.
I'm Ted Cruz and I approve this message!