“For a significant period of the time during the debate last night, it seemed that the moderators were not giving questions to Cruz. After a few initial questions to him, they went for a long period without asking him anything. As the top polling person present on the stage, one would have thought he would have had more questions and more time. In fact, it was Marco Rubio who was given more time. While Cruz came in with second most time, it was mostly front-loaded. There was a little bit of a dust up between Chris Wallace and Ted Cruz early on when Wallace refused to give Cruz the ability to respond to a point made against him by Rubio. The rules allowed for response by candidates who were named by other candidates, but Wallace didn’t adhere to that. After the dust up, the time given to Cruz seemed to dry up.
This attitude was reflected in the Fox News Twitter account as well. The last tweet with a Cruz response was reflected at 9:22 EST, 22 minutes into the 2 hour debate. From then until the end at there was not one Cruz response tweet. One reason was the long period the moderators went without asking him a question. Fox didn’t even put up Cruz’s closing statement while having the others, except for Christie.
In counting up the number of tweets from 9:22 to 11:14 on the Fox News account, there were 4 for Kasich (2 with video), 5 for Bush, 6 for Paul(3 with video), 8 for Carson, 8 for Christie (2 with video), and drum roll…16 for Rubio (3 with video). Zero for Cruz in almost an hour and forty minutes of the two hour debate.
Carson also suffered a time deficit given his standing in the polls, he was given the least amount of time of the candidates, at 6:11.”
———————————————
It was pretty obvious that Fox and Wallace wanted Rubio, and it showed.
There was a bit of discussion last night about Libertarianism.
Along that line, let me remind you of Judges 17:6. The book closes out with 21:25 “In those days there was no king in Israel, every man did that which was right in his own eyes.”
That didn’t work out very well for them.
Though I’m aware that God told Samuel that they were rejecting Him when they asked for a king. I never understood that.
And Proverbs 14:12, “There is a way that seems right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death”. Also 16:25.
I like John Stossel on FoxNews. He is a Libertarian. But if you listen to him long enough, he will come up with some dumb ideas. Libertarianism sounds better than it really is.
Chas- That is why I consider myself a Conservative/Libertarian. Get the government out of any area of my life the Constitution doesn’t address.
I remember when the Libertarians came around in the early 70s, they were more of a states’ rights party. I guess over the years they have become an individual rights party.
In other news. From today’s Times-News.
“RALEIGH- The state Supreme Court on Friday upheld the firing of sheriff’s deputies who declined to donate to their boss’s political campaign, ruling that they aren’t covered by a state law protecting county workers from political coercion. “
And I read where there’s still a lot of “undecideds” in Iowa, many could make up their minds in the last couple days. Should be interesting.
Iowa may or may not signal the way the rest of the caucus/primary elections go. I think most importantly it provides momentum (and could eliminate those who have yet to get much traction).
But it will be after NH and then after SC that it will start to narrow down. Let’s hope Trump is starting to sink.
In our area there’s a guy who drives around in his truck with a huge billboard on the back along with U.S. flags, etc. He’s kind of crazy (or he looks that way), but he’s a local staple and it’s always kind of interesting to see what the monthly message is. Currently it’s a yuge and garish (though his mobile displays are all garish) pro-Trump sign. 🙄
There was a poll on Drudge yesterday. Of preference for all the presidents.
I think Trump had about 63% (or thereabouts)
I voted for Cruz. Twice.
That tells you something about the poll.
It also tells you something about Trump supporters.
Only scientifically conducted polls (as opposed to voluntary participation ones on sites that skew right or left) are valid — and they get it wrong, too. Remember 2012? Ouch. 😦
Polling is more difficult now, also, with the advent of mobile phones and things like call-blocking features. It’s just not as quick and easy (or as verifiable) for pollsters to connect with (real) people who vote.
It will be interesting to see what happens on the Democratic side in IA, too — how close it is between Clinton and Sanders. If Sanders wins, that’ll signal more trouble for Clinton (who already is seeing some of the danger signs repeating themselves from her failed ’08 campaign — she was thought to be inevitable back then, too).
Craig Ziemke has voted for Democrats all his life, including twice for President Barack Obama. Not this year.
“The whole country is going to hell,” the 66-year-old retired factory worker said, standing against the bleachers at a high school gymnasium while waiting for Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump to arrive. Ziemke’s fury is deep: Roads and bridges in the U.S. are falling apart, jobs are scarce and the U.S. border is wide open, he says.
“We’re letting all these people into the country. No one even knows who the hell they are,” he said. “We don’t need any more Arabs. The United States, anymore, is just a dumping ground for everyone.”
Ziemke plans to caucus for a Republican on Monday – and likely for Trump, “the only one with brains,” he said.
___________________________
Thomas Sowell made three great points:
1. Conservatives should unite behind the strongest conservative candidate.
2. The ignorant (read Trump voters) should not vote.
3. Trump should grow up.
Of course, the question remains about which conservative candidate will eventually rise to the top for us to all join behind. But that’s what the caucuses and primaries will (hopefully) ferret out. I could and will vote for any of them with the exception of Trump.
Oh, and I see Trump’s latest add features his mother’s Bible. Sheesh. Why can’t people just see through all that? Or do they see through it and it doesn’t make that much difference?
Michael Cromartie (“the Crom” to me for 30 years now) is the most significant person in Washington DC that you’ve never heard of. And that’s just the way he likes it. Not because he’s a backroom K Street wire puller from the shadows of House of Cards. To the contrary: he is the rarest thing you can find in Washington: a truly honest broker; a person of faith, understated on the surface because it is very deep underneath; someone who treats everyone with utmost generosity and magnanimity. In a town of towering egos, he has none; in a town a rancid self-promotion, he exemplifies perfect New Testament humility. He commands total respect from everyone that knows him (and just about everybody in Washington does know him), and you won’t find a single person who has a bad word to say about him. …
… Mike doesn’t have the public visibility of Falwell, but his endorsement will not go unnoticed among the influencers in the religious communities of the country.
_______________________________
“… I support him for many reasons but here are a few: his clear commitment to restoring America’s reputation and standing in the world, his plans to revitalize our national defense, his “Jack Kemp style” commitment to elevating the lives of everyone via robust economic growth that promotes broad-based economic opportunity, to his firm but compassionate reset of our flawed immigration policies, and because of his inspirational and optimistic embodiment of the American spirit and story (especially embodied in his own family history).
But above all else, I support him for his firm and stalwart commitment to the protection of religious liberty, and his ability to publicly express, in a persuasive and thoughtful way, the basic elements of his own Christian faith. …”
______________________________
I think you can throw out everyone except Rubio and Cruz. Huckabee does not understand economics. Christie is not a conservative. Bush is even weaker than his brother or Dad. I like Paul, but his personality isn’t good and he hasn’t caught on. Carson is a nice man, but not really up to speed on the issues. The others are asterisks.
Rubio gives us the best chance to beat Hillary or Senator Socialist.
In fact, I would give him a 60-70% chance of beating the Dems. However, I am worried that he is Little Bush with a tan. The same Neo-cons and Wall Street crowd that backed the Bushes like him. I would like to believe Krauthammer that Rubio and Ryan are conservative reformers who could make things slightly better. Both come from middle-class backgrounds, so they lack the rich man’s guilt that always tugged the Kennedys, Carter and the Bushes to the left. However, I don’t think Rubio can really reverse our course.
Cruz is the option of throwing the deep pass. He is much more likely to lose the general than is Rubio, because the press, the neo-cons, all liberals and even other Washington Republicans hate him. However, if elected, I think he might try to make real reforms – in economics, in foreign policy and in judicial appointments. His chance for success is not great. His personality is not as good as Rubio’s, but he is brilliant and he is principled.
On the Grow Up article. I have often thought we put way too much emphasis on the get out the vote idea. If people don’t care enough to be informed, they should sit it out. and they should not whine about the outcome.
Kaisch won(?) the NYT endorsement. Not sure if that will help or is wanted.
Clinton, of course, was also endorsed by NYT. The paper spent the last few months pretending Sanders didn’t exist. And when it did notice him, it was rather dismissive.
Sanders actually polls fairly well against Republicans, esp against Trump. Clinton doesnt fare well with independents probably for the same reason Bush never gained traction.
“Houston, Texas – Yesterday, Operation Rescue’s Texas attorney, Brisco Cain, released never-before seen documents that show Planned Parenthood engaged in providing fetal body parts from aborted babies to four public-funded Texas universities.
Cain stated in a news conference held in front of the Houston Planned Parenthood office that the documents “appear to throw water on Planned Parenthood’s claim that they do not profit from the sale of fetal tissue, but only make enough to cover their costs.”
These documents add to mounting evidence that the Harris County grand jury’s decision to “clear” Planned Parenthood was motivated not on the evidence, but by bias against Operation Rescue President Troy Newman, for complaints filed against another Houston abortionist, Douglas Karpen, in 2013. Newman served as a founding board member for the Center for Medical Progress, which released a series of undercover video summaries last year that clearly showed Planned Parenthood was illegally profiting from the sale of aborted baby remains.
Instead, the grand jury indicted CMP head David Daleiden, and his associate, Sandra Merritt, who appeared in the undercover videos taken at the Houston Planned Parenthood office.
“It is now clear that the Harris County grand jury never really investigated Planned Parenthood,” said Cheryl Sullenger, Senior Vice President of Operation Rescue. “Because of this new evidence, we renew our call for a new grand jury to investigate Planned Parenthood to be directed by an independent special prosecutor not related in any way to Devon Anderson, anyone in the Harris County District Attorney’s office, or Anderson’s friend, Chip Lewis.””
““Because Planned Parenthood was selling to publicly funded universities, this means that our tax dollars went to buy aborted baby remains and ended up in the pockets of Planned Parenthood executives,” said Sullenger. “Yet Devon Anderson turned a blind eye to this crime while charging the people that reported the crimes. This injustice must not be allowed to stand.””
Turns out that the issue of whether or not Cruz can be considered a “natural born citizen” is not “settled science”, so to speak. He is an American citizen, but that’s not the whole issue.
Ronald Rotunda, co-author of a widely used constitutional law textbook, told me a couple of weeks ago he had no doubt that Cruz is eligible. But when he investigated the issue, he concluded that under the relevant Supreme Court precedents, “Cruz simply is not a natural born citizen.”
Catholic University law professor Sarah Helene Duggin wrote in 2005, “Natural born citizenship is absolutely certain only for United States citizens born post-statehood in one of the fifty states, provided that they are not members of Native American tribes.”
So, what would happen if Cruz became the Republican party’s nominee, but then the Supreme Court ruled he is not a natural born citizen? Would there have to be another convention? Or would the nomination just fall to whomever came in second place?
I also belive Rubio is the conservative with the most general election ‘electability’ factor. He’s conservative enough for me, maybe not for others here.
Cruz? Yes, he *could* tip everything upside down and be successful at reversing some of the damage.
Or (and I tend to think this would rather be the case), he’d perpetuate the angry gridlock that has the nation so stuck right now.
I’m just not sure that’s what the nation needs right now.
I think if someone sues Cruz because of where he was born, then he should sue Obama over his citizenship status. Did BHO come to the US as a foreign student? Has he renounced the other county’s citizenship? Yeah, it’s too late to prevent him being President, but it could make it such that none of his laws would be valid, wouldn,’t it?
I watched the debate and it seemed to me the reason Rubio got so much air time was that the others kept mentioning him, giving him a chance to reply. They almost seemed to be ganging up on him.
My son has been saying that Trump the candidate is like Obama the candidate. I couldn’t make the connection. This article helped me. Both present an attractive blank screen on which their supporters project their fondest desires. The article also succinctly devastates Trump, Republican leaders and the conservative intelligencia of which the author is a part.
On Cruz’ citizenship: Do we really think that courts that force states to “marry” men to other men and completely ignores the clear language of Obamacare is going to say that a person born to an American citizen in another country is not a citizen and can’t run for President? For the federal courts it is “anything goes” and the “rights” of the individual trump all.
This link is about as good an example as you will find explaining the difference between classified documents and classified information. If I read a top secret document and call someone on an unsecured telephone or send an unsecured email to someone detailing what I read in a top secret document, then I have violated the law. It also gives a good example of the term “born secret.”
I used to have a Top Secret clearance. There is nothing higher than top secret. Though there are categories within the different disciplines. By that I mean that though I had Top Secret in Defense Mapping, I don’t have access to CIA, nor State. Though I was once “read onto” some CIA material. I’ve forgotten what it was.
When they say “higher than top secret, they mean it’s in codeword areas. Everyone with TS clearance is in some category, but others are not allowed.
When we deal with that, we want as little as possible because:
1. It’s boring once you get past the initial stage.
2. You have to be careful. Even with people who have the same clearance, outside the secure area.
3. You know what’s classified and what isn’t. People don’t make those mistakes. There is no such thing as an “honest mistake” when you deal with that stuff.
4. I said before, Clinton was right when she said, “I never sent anything marked “classified””.
Nothing is marked “classified”. It is marked “Top Secret -Codeword” Making one up, it might be “TOP SECRET – Baseball” Often abbreviated TS-BB. Now. I might have TS-BB, but I’m not allowed to see TS-FB (Top Secret- Football)
I hope that helps clear some of that up.
Talked to a fellow (older, British-born) journalist at church today, we were both shaking our heads over the crazy ’16 election. He’s Democrat (but is probably wisely quiet about it), is astounded over Trump’s rise.
Wandering Views 
For those who thought Cruz was “whining” about time during the debate, perhaps he had good reason. And maybe Carson did as well…..
http://www.weaselzippers.us/253707-fox-gives-most-time-to-rubio-in-debate-twitter-account-seems-to-ignore-cruz/
“For a significant period of the time during the debate last night, it seemed that the moderators were not giving questions to Cruz. After a few initial questions to him, they went for a long period without asking him anything. As the top polling person present on the stage, one would have thought he would have had more questions and more time. In fact, it was Marco Rubio who was given more time. While Cruz came in with second most time, it was mostly front-loaded. There was a little bit of a dust up between Chris Wallace and Ted Cruz early on when Wallace refused to give Cruz the ability to respond to a point made against him by Rubio. The rules allowed for response by candidates who were named by other candidates, but Wallace didn’t adhere to that. After the dust up, the time given to Cruz seemed to dry up.
This attitude was reflected in the Fox News Twitter account as well. The last tweet with a Cruz response was reflected at 9:22 EST, 22 minutes into the 2 hour debate. From then until the end at there was not one Cruz response tweet. One reason was the long period the moderators went without asking him a question. Fox didn’t even put up Cruz’s closing statement while having the others, except for Christie.
In counting up the number of tweets from 9:22 to 11:14 on the Fox News account, there were 4 for Kasich (2 with video), 5 for Bush, 6 for Paul(3 with video), 8 for Carson, 8 for Christie (2 with video), and drum roll…16 for Rubio (3 with video). Zero for Cruz in almost an hour and forty minutes of the two hour debate.
Carson also suffered a time deficit given his standing in the polls, he was given the least amount of time of the candidates, at 6:11.”
———————————————
It was pretty obvious that Fox and Wallace wanted Rubio, and it showed.
LikeLike
There was a bit of discussion last night about Libertarianism.
Along that line, let me remind you of Judges 17:6. The book closes out with 21:25 “In those days there was no king in Israel, every man did that which was right in his own eyes.”
That didn’t work out very well for them.
Though I’m aware that God told Samuel that they were rejecting Him when they asked for a king. I never understood that.
And Proverbs 14:12, “There is a way that seems right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death”. Also 16:25.
I like John Stossel on FoxNews. He is a Libertarian. But if you listen to him long enough, he will come up with some dumb ideas. Libertarianism sounds better than it really is.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Chas- That is why I consider myself a Conservative/Libertarian. Get the government out of any area of my life the Constitution doesn’t address.
I remember when the Libertarians came around in the early 70s, they were more of a states’ rights party. I guess over the years they have become an individual rights party.
LikeLiked by 1 person
In other news. From today’s Times-News.
“RALEIGH- The state Supreme Court on Friday upheld the firing of sheriff’s deputies who declined to donate to their boss’s political campaign, ruling that they aren’t covered by a state law protecting county workers from political coercion. “
LikeLike
Aj, I thought that Fox’s post-debate coverage was very pro-Rubio and anti-Cruz as well.
LikeLike
They asked tough questions which is what they’re supposed to do.
Sometimes there is bias in the media; if not, nowadays, it’s still perceived in the minds of viewers or readers.
Someone was asking why so many debates — but I kind of like that there have been so many (and with different networks and different moderators).
Of course, the GOP field was (and still is) big which has required maybe more of them than usual.
LikeLiked by 1 person
And I read where there’s still a lot of “undecideds” in Iowa, many could make up their minds in the last couple days. Should be interesting.
Iowa may or may not signal the way the rest of the caucus/primary elections go. I think most importantly it provides momentum (and could eliminate those who have yet to get much traction).
But it will be after NH and then after SC that it will start to narrow down. Let’s hope Trump is starting to sink.
In our area there’s a guy who drives around in his truck with a huge billboard on the back along with U.S. flags, etc. He’s kind of crazy (or he looks that way), but he’s a local staple and it’s always kind of interesting to see what the monthly message is. Currently it’s a yuge and garish (though his mobile displays are all garish) pro-Trump sign. 🙄
No one was really very surprised.
LikeLike
There was a poll on Drudge yesterday. Of preference for all the presidents.
I think Trump had about 63% (or thereabouts)
I voted for Cruz. Twice.
That tells you something about the poll.
It also tells you something about Trump supporters.
LikeLike
Only scientifically conducted polls (as opposed to voluntary participation ones on sites that skew right or left) are valid — and they get it wrong, too. Remember 2012? Ouch. 😦
Polling is more difficult now, also, with the advent of mobile phones and things like call-blocking features. It’s just not as quick and easy (or as verifiable) for pollsters to connect with (real) people who vote.
It will be interesting to see what happens on the Democratic side in IA, too — how close it is between Clinton and Sanders. If Sanders wins, that’ll signal more trouble for Clinton (who already is seeing some of the danger signs repeating themselves from her failed ’08 campaign — she was thought to be inevitable back then, too).
LikeLike
Interesting news article on the ‘anger’ in the campaign:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article57273748.html
___________________________
MARSHALLTOWN, IOWA
Craig Ziemke has voted for Democrats all his life, including twice for President Barack Obama. Not this year.
“The whole country is going to hell,” the 66-year-old retired factory worker said, standing against the bleachers at a high school gymnasium while waiting for Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump to arrive. Ziemke’s fury is deep: Roads and bridges in the U.S. are falling apart, jobs are scarce and the U.S. border is wide open, he says.
“We’re letting all these people into the country. No one even knows who the hell they are,” he said. “We don’t need any more Arabs. The United States, anymore, is just a dumping ground for everyone.”
Ziemke plans to caucus for a Republican on Monday – and likely for Trump, “the only one with brains,” he said.
___________________________
LikeLike
Thomas Sowell made three great points:
1. Conservatives should unite behind the strongest conservative candidate.
2. The ignorant (read Trump voters) should not vote.
3. Trump should grow up.
http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2016/01/30/grow-up-n2112211
LikeLiked by 2 people
Boyd Cathey is one of my favorite Southern paleo-conservative writers, so I was very disappointed with this article:
http://www.unz.com/article/why-i-support-donald-trump-and-not-ted-cruz/
Cathey completely overthought the question. For Southerners, the issue is simple. Trump is an extremely unpleasant person from the North. Cruz is not.
LikeLike
Ricky, I read that Sowell piece too.
Of course, the question remains about which conservative candidate will eventually rise to the top for us to all join behind. But that’s what the caucuses and primaries will (hopefully) ferret out. I could and will vote for any of them with the exception of Trump.
Oh, and I see Trump’s latest add features his mother’s Bible. Sheesh. Why can’t people just see through all that? Or do they see through it and it doesn’t make that much difference?
LikeLike
A Rubio endorsement:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/01/rubio-bags-the-crom-endorsement.php
___________________________
Michael Cromartie (“the Crom” to me for 30 years now) is the most significant person in Washington DC that you’ve never heard of. And that’s just the way he likes it. Not because he’s a backroom K Street wire puller from the shadows of House of Cards. To the contrary: he is the rarest thing you can find in Washington: a truly honest broker; a person of faith, understated on the surface because it is very deep underneath; someone who treats everyone with utmost generosity and magnanimity. In a town of towering egos, he has none; in a town a rancid self-promotion, he exemplifies perfect New Testament humility. He commands total respect from everyone that knows him (and just about everybody in Washington does know him), and you won’t find a single person who has a bad word to say about him. …
… Mike doesn’t have the public visibility of Falwell, but his endorsement will not go unnoticed among the influencers in the religious communities of the country.
_______________________________
LikeLiked by 1 person
From Cromartie’s endorsement:
__________________________
“… I support him for many reasons but here are a few: his clear commitment to restoring America’s reputation and standing in the world, his plans to revitalize our national defense, his “Jack Kemp style” commitment to elevating the lives of everyone via robust economic growth that promotes broad-based economic opportunity, to his firm but compassionate reset of our flawed immigration policies, and because of his inspirational and optimistic embodiment of the American spirit and story (especially embodied in his own family history).
But above all else, I support him for his firm and stalwart commitment to the protection of religious liberty, and his ability to publicly express, in a persuasive and thoughtful way, the basic elements of his own Christian faith. …”
______________________________
LikeLike
I think you can throw out everyone except Rubio and Cruz. Huckabee does not understand economics. Christie is not a conservative. Bush is even weaker than his brother or Dad. I like Paul, but his personality isn’t good and he hasn’t caught on. Carson is a nice man, but not really up to speed on the issues. The others are asterisks.
Rubio gives us the best chance to beat Hillary or Senator Socialist.
In fact, I would give him a 60-70% chance of beating the Dems. However, I am worried that he is Little Bush with a tan. The same Neo-cons and Wall Street crowd that backed the Bushes like him. I would like to believe Krauthammer that Rubio and Ryan are conservative reformers who could make things slightly better. Both come from middle-class backgrounds, so they lack the rich man’s guilt that always tugged the Kennedys, Carter and the Bushes to the left. However, I don’t think Rubio can really reverse our course.
Cruz is the option of throwing the deep pass. He is much more likely to lose the general than is Rubio, because the press, the neo-cons, all liberals and even other Washington Republicans hate him. However, if elected, I think he might try to make real reforms – in economics, in foreign policy and in judicial appointments. His chance for success is not great. His personality is not as good as Rubio’s, but he is brilliant and he is principled.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Those at the FBI are not happy campers…
LikeLike
On the Grow Up article. I have often thought we put way too much emphasis on the get out the vote idea. If people don’t care enough to be informed, they should sit it out. and they should not whine about the outcome.
LikeLike
I had to print off the Support Trump one as it is too long to read away from small people.
LikeLike
Wow, I thought it was long. Sixteen pages.
LikeLike
Everything Cathey writes is long. He is brilliant, but this time he is wrong.
LikeLike
Kaisch won(?) the NYT endorsement. Not sure if that will help or is wanted.
Clinton, of course, was also endorsed by NYT. The paper spent the last few months pretending Sanders didn’t exist. And when it did notice him, it was rather dismissive.
Sanders actually polls fairly well against Republicans, esp against Trump. Clinton doesnt fare well with independents probably for the same reason Bush never gained traction.
LikeLike
Oos that would be me
LikeLike
HRW, Your (?) reminds me of a Tweet from Sweet Meteor of Death a few days ago: “Bush was unable to avoid the dreaded Lindsey Graham endorsement.”
LikeLike
As I mentioned the other day….. There’s way more to this than meets the eye. And not just a corrupt DA either.
http://www.operationrescue.org/archives/invoices-from-houston-planned-parenthood-show-profit-from-aborted-baby-remains-add-concerns-that-grand-jury-tainted-by-bias/
“Houston, Texas – Yesterday, Operation Rescue’s Texas attorney, Brisco Cain, released never-before seen documents that show Planned Parenthood engaged in providing fetal body parts from aborted babies to four public-funded Texas universities.
Cain stated in a news conference held in front of the Houston Planned Parenthood office that the documents “appear to throw water on Planned Parenthood’s claim that they do not profit from the sale of fetal tissue, but only make enough to cover their costs.”
These documents add to mounting evidence that the Harris County grand jury’s decision to “clear” Planned Parenthood was motivated not on the evidence, but by bias against Operation Rescue President Troy Newman, for complaints filed against another Houston abortionist, Douglas Karpen, in 2013. Newman served as a founding board member for the Center for Medical Progress, which released a series of undercover video summaries last year that clearly showed Planned Parenthood was illegally profiting from the sale of aborted baby remains.
Instead, the grand jury indicted CMP head David Daleiden, and his associate, Sandra Merritt, who appeared in the undercover videos taken at the Houston Planned Parenthood office.
“It is now clear that the Harris County grand jury never really investigated Planned Parenthood,” said Cheryl Sullenger, Senior Vice President of Operation Rescue. “Because of this new evidence, we renew our call for a new grand jury to investigate Planned Parenthood to be directed by an independent special prosecutor not related in any way to Devon Anderson, anyone in the Harris County District Attorney’s office, or Anderson’s friend, Chip Lewis.””
““Because Planned Parenthood was selling to publicly funded universities, this means that our tax dollars went to buy aborted baby remains and ended up in the pockets of Planned Parenthood executives,” said Sullenger. “Yet Devon Anderson turned a blind eye to this crime while charging the people that reported the crimes. This injustice must not be allowed to stand.””
LikeLike
I read that “Grow Up” article and found it well written and it makes the right points. Maybe Thomas Sowell should run for President.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Turns out that the issue of whether or not Cruz can be considered a “natural born citizen” is not “settled science”, so to speak. He is an American citizen, but that’s not the whole issue.
Ronald Rotunda, co-author of a widely used constitutional law textbook, told me a couple of weeks ago he had no doubt that Cruz is eligible. But when he investigated the issue, he concluded that under the relevant Supreme Court precedents, “Cruz simply is not a natural born citizen.”
Catholic University law professor Sarah Helene Duggin wrote in 2005, “Natural born citizenship is absolutely certain only for United States citizens born post-statehood in one of the fifty states, provided that they are not members of Native American tribes.”
http://reason.com/archives/2016/01/28/could-ted-cruz-be-disqualified
LikeLike
So, what would happen if Cruz became the Republican party’s nominee, but then the Supreme Court ruled he is not a natural born citizen? Would there have to be another convention? Or would the nomination just fall to whomever came in second place?
LikeLike
Finished the book on Trump and enjoyed it. Especially toward the end. Thanks.
LikeLike
I would agree with Ricky’s assessment at 1:34.
I also belive Rubio is the conservative with the most general election ‘electability’ factor. He’s conservative enough for me, maybe not for others here.
Cruz? Yes, he *could* tip everything upside down and be successful at reversing some of the damage.
Or (and I tend to think this would rather be the case), he’d perpetuate the angry gridlock that has the nation so stuck right now.
I’m just not sure that’s what the nation needs right now.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think if someone sues Cruz because of where he was born, then he should sue Obama over his citizenship status. Did BHO come to the US as a foreign student? Has he renounced the other county’s citizenship? Yeah, it’s too late to prevent him being President, but it could make it such that none of his laws would be valid, wouldn,’t it?
LikeLike
I watched the debate and it seemed to me the reason Rubio got so much air time was that the others kept mentioning him, giving him a chance to reply. They almost seemed to be ganging up on him.
LikeLiked by 1 person
My son has been saying that Trump the candidate is like Obama the candidate. I couldn’t make the connection. This article helped me. Both present an attractive blank screen on which their supporters project their fondest desires. The article also succinctly devastates Trump, Republican leaders and the conservative intelligencia of which the author is a part.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430525/donald-trump-republican-debate-no-show
LikeLiked by 1 person
On Cruz’ citizenship: Do we really think that courts that force states to “marry” men to other men and completely ignores the clear language of Obamacare is going to say that a person born to an American citizen in another country is not a citizen and can’t run for President? For the federal courts it is “anything goes” and the “rights” of the individual trump all.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This link is about as good an example as you will find explaining the difference between classified documents and classified information. If I read a top secret document and call someone on an unsecured telephone or send an unsecured email to someone detailing what I read in a top secret document, then I have violated the law. It also gives a good example of the term “born secret.”
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/423362/clinton-emails-were-born-classified-andrew-c-mccarthy
LikeLike
I used to have a Top Secret clearance. There is nothing higher than top secret. Though there are categories within the different disciplines. By that I mean that though I had Top Secret in Defense Mapping, I don’t have access to CIA, nor State. Though I was once “read onto” some CIA material. I’ve forgotten what it was.
When they say “higher than top secret, they mean it’s in codeword areas. Everyone with TS clearance is in some category, but others are not allowed.
When we deal with that, we want as little as possible because:
1. It’s boring once you get past the initial stage.
2. You have to be careful. Even with people who have the same clearance, outside the secure area.
3. You know what’s classified and what isn’t. People don’t make those mistakes. There is no such thing as an “honest mistake” when you deal with that stuff.
4. I said before, Clinton was right when she said, “I never sent anything marked “classified””.
Nothing is marked “classified”. It is marked “Top Secret -Codeword” Making one up, it might be “TOP SECRET – Baseball” Often abbreviated TS-BB. Now. I might have TS-BB, but I’m not allowed to see TS-FB (Top Secret- Football)
I hope that helps clear some of that up.
LikeLiked by 3 people
This has me humming the 007 theme …
Talked to a fellow (older, British-born) journalist at church today, we were both shaking our heads over the crazy ’16 election. He’s Democrat (but is probably wisely quiet about it), is astounded over Trump’s rise.
LikeLike
Or Mission Impossible. Which is so top-secret it apparently “doesn’t exist.”
Hmmmm
LikeLiked by 1 person
It self-destructed, of course.
Poof.
LikeLike