Category Archives: presidential

When Did Ted Cruz Become an Anti-Republican Anti-Establishment ‘Outsider’? March 23, 2015!

I just love hearing the stories about how Ted Cruz has always been a Washington outsider. How he has always bucked the Washington establishment – especially his own party! And when you mention how much Cruz’ fellow Senators hate him, to the Cruz followers, that is a badge of honor. And so it is with many who have grown frustrated and angry with the hapless Republican leadership, especially since the grassroots saw fit to give the GOP the House and Senate.

So anyone that bucks the “leadership” of Mitch McConnell and John Boehner and his current feckless successor Paul Ryan instantly becomes an item to all Republicans living outside the RINO pen.

And Ted Cruz has said the right things and voted against the establishment as far back as anyone remembers. Right?

Well, it depends on how far back your memory goes. If it starts on March 23, 2015, the day Ted Cruz announced his bid for President, then you would be correct. But if your memory goes back to January 21, 2013, you will have to say Cruz started out as an establishment GOP lap dog. And it was only after he decided to run for President that he suddenly embraced his current anti-Establishment positions.

Let’s go back to the beginning of 2015. Ted Cruz was just another Republican Senator that followed the party voting lines and did as he was told.

There was that time in 2013, his first year in the Senate, where he joined in on a filibuster to stop our military from killing our enemies on US soil with drones. What? Cruz would be opposed to a drone moving in on the fleeing San Bernardino terrorists and blasting them to Allah? Yep. It is hard to figure, but Cruz was trying to find his way to Senate stardom. Unfortunately, this wasn’t it. And even Rand Paul, who also spoke against drone use to kill terrorists in the US admitted it wasn’t going to do anything. Ultimately he would be shut down. And he was.

And then there was the Obamacare filibuster later in 2013. With absolutely no hope success, Cruz spoke for 21 hours and Obamacare was fully funded anyway. But at least Cruz established himself as long winded. And a sucker for lost causes. But it played well to the Conservatives.

But with only those two exceptions, Ted Cruz was an establishment lackey until he decided to run for president.

“But he votes against his own party,” you say! Well, that is true but only since announcing his presidential bid. Before that, Cruz was as establishment as it gets.

Ted Cruz Voting Recors With / Against GOP 2013-2016

So between January 2013 and March 2015 Ted Cruz voted with the GOP 84% of the time. (Source OpenCongress.org) And for comparison, Lindsey Graham, who is just about as establishment as you can get only votes the party line 79% of the time. So from 2013 until he announced his bid for president, Ted Cruz voting record marks him as more of an establishment Republican than Lindsey Graham.

But Ted Cruz has undergone a metamorphosis since March 23, 2015. He has been solidly against the Establishment voting against the party line 46% of the time.

This is simply stunning and shows why Cruz is not the Conservative anti-Establishment “outsider” he is now claiming to be. Nor is he the staunch Conservative he is pretending to be, either. This graph is proof that Cruz has made a conscious effort to remold himself to fit the demographic that was untapped by the expected GOP presidential field in March 2015.

There was a decided absence of Conservatives and Evangelicals in the race, especially after Utah Senator Mike Lee announced in late January that he would not run for President. That opened the gate for a solid Conservative and someone to tap the evangelical vote. And the country had grown sick of the lack of ability of Republican establishment types to get anything done. And another Washington insider wasn’t going to stand out. But Cruz voting record was anything but “outsider” in March 2015.

But since becoming a presidential candidate, Cruz has tried very hard to reinvent himself as a Conservative. He has voted against the party 46% of the time and on July 24, 2015 he went into a rant on the Senate floor actually calling Majority Leader McConnell a liar. Yes, McConnell is a liar and Cruz was correct. But why did he wait until he was running for President to speak up? McConnell has been a liar as long as anyone can remember. He has stabbed Republicans and Conservatives in the back so many times we have lost count. He was probably worse at caving in and lying about it when he was Minority Leader.

So why July 24?

When Cruz entered the race on March 23, his “bump” in the polls saw him rise to 16%. But in mid to late June 2015 his numbers began to seriously decline. Scott Walker was drawing interest as were a couple of others at that time. Cruz went as low as 3%. So on July 24, 2015, he called McConnell a liar and his numbers rose after that to 10% by mid August before they started back down. By September 24, 2015 his numbers were down to 5% again.

And that is when he decided to filibuster Obamacare. So was the move anti Obamacare? Or pro Ted Cruz? I believe the latter. It set the Conservatives hearts into a collective pitter-patter and his numbers began to rise again back into the double digits he was longing for. Ted Cruz managed to fool a lot of people. And as other potential Conservative or conservative-ish candidates began to fizzle, and Carson and Trump were sucking the air out of the race, Cruz little attention gimmick did what he planned. It took some attention off of Trump and as Carson went into freefall, some landed on Cruz.

And now Cruz is laying claim to the “outsider” label as the guy who bucks the Washington establishment. Except that he only became that “guy” after putting his finger in the air and reinventing himself.

Cruz is not the life long anti-Establishment candidate his followers pretend he is. And want him to be. He is a a guy that is too slick by half that has maneuvered himself into contention by reinventing himself and fooling his supporters. The entire Cruz persona is a carefully manipulated facade designed to pull in voters who fall for his deception.

Cruz is willing to do anything to win. And his record and the timeline show he is not who his supporters think he is. He is a carefully crafted manipulator who is very good at the art of deception.

Follow the polls. Follow his votes. Follow the timeline. And you will see that the Ted Cruz you think you see is nothing but a mirage.

A very dangerous mirage.


Article written by: Tom White

I am Impressed with These Two Stories: Lessig 2016 and Deez Nuts!

I saw this story a few days ago.  I was fascinated with it:

Lawrence Lessig, a Harvard professor (which would normally make him suspect with me), decided to conditionally run for President (A reader might say:  Why not?  Everybody else except the reader and the blogger from Virginia is running) in the Democratic primaries if he raises a million dollars in pledges.  I have signed up to get his updates but that is not an endorsement of course.

Why is Dr. Lessig running?  He wants to promote campaign finance and gerrymandering reform – something called the Citizen Equality Act of 2017 and if Dr. Lessig is elected, he’ll use his election to get this bill passed and then resign the Presidency.  (I think this makes Dr. Lessig’s choice for Veep fairly important!  He intends to allow the Democratic Convention delegates decide it.)  He’s serious – deadly serious.  You can even contribute and win a chance to meet Dr. Lessig after an undetermined first debate!  Win the Golden Ticket!  (I submit that any Virginian who gives to a campaign for a chance to win a prize is breaking the state wagering law so I won’t do it and I do recommend anyone else doing it!)

I love his symbol – a tiny stylized US flag with LESSIG 2016 in block letters after it.  I tried to copy it but it would not let me.

Lessig is for various laws that I have some issues with.

Voting rights:

We must have a system that guarantees a meaningfully equal freedom to vote. To achieve that, we must at a minimum enact the Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2015 and the Voter Empowerment Act of 2015. We should as well add automatic registration, and shift election day to a national holiday.

The Voting Rights Advancement Act basically re-stigmatizes the South and also restricts the power of local officials in affecting voting.  The Voter Empowerment Act discusses online voter registration and other similar concepts that ought to increase voter fraud exponentially.  I do agree in principle with making election day a Federal holiday but what day replaces it?

Lessig is interested in weighted voting (which I could support) where you give a first, second or third preference when you vote and if no one gets a majority of first preference votes, the second preference votes are counted until you get a majority.  (If they had had weighted voting in the 12th Senate district primary I think Eddie Whitlock could have won with a vast majority of the second preference votes!)

Equal citizens must have equal representation in Congress. That means, districts must be drawn, and election systems structured, so as to give each citizen as close to equal political influence as possible. FairVote has offered the most comprehensive solution to achieve this equality. At a minimum, the Citizen Equality Act would incorporate their  proposed “Ranked Choice Voting Act,” which ends political gerrymandering and creates multi-member districts with ranked choice voting for Congress.

But there’s more:

A core corruption of our political system is the concentration of funders of political campaigns. That concentration creates extraordinary inequality. The Citizen Equality Act would end that inequality, at a minimum by adopting a campaign funding proposal that is a hybrid between John Sarbanes’ Government by the People Act, and Represent.US’s “American Anti-Corruption Act.” That hybrid would give every  voter a voucher to contribute to fund congressional and presidential campaigns; it would provide matching funds for small-dollar contributions to congressional and presidential campaigns. And it would add effective new limits to restrict the revolving door between government service and work as a lobbyist.

The American Anti-Corruption Act would make us all of us in politics potential criminals (and I am against any increase in Federal criminal laws without a compelling reason) although I am intrigued by the voucher idea.  I am against federal matching funds for elections – we have a 18 trillion dollar debt.

However, I applaud and admire Dr. Lessig for doing something about politics – not just whining about it.  And how it did it might be a template for future issue-oriented campaigns.  The Libertarians ought to watch carefully.

Now we turn to the other weird but admirable thing about Presidential politics this year:  Deez Nuts

Deez Nuts is a pseudonym for a fifteen year old boy named Brady Olsen from Iowa:

America has been fooled by independent presidential candidate “Deez Nuts,” who was revealed this week as 15-year-old Brady Olson, a boy from Iowa. Here’s what happened when the Internet got word that “Deez Nuts” gained traction in some polls this week.

***

Mark Olson responded: “No. It’s my 15 year old son.” It turns out that 15-year-old Brady Olsen filed with the FEC on July 26 as “Deez Nuts” to run for president of the United States.

Now I’m jealous.  Don’t think I wouldn’t have considered doing it as a kid! (Just another day at the office for Brady’s dad I’d bet – how would you like to have your teenage son be more famous than you are!)

But Deez Nuts is actually gaining adult supporters!  The Daily Beast has this report:

Deez Nuts, the Independent candidate from Iowa, is polling at 9 percent in North Carolina for President of the United States.

Now I’m really jealous!  Here is a real FB page for supporters of the teen from Iowa!

I actually agree with some of Brady’s positions (from his official[?] website):

 

  • Federal Budget & Government Spending I believe that the US Government should not be allowed to spend more than it makes from tax revenue. The reason we are in a budget crisis is because the two main parties refuse to compromise on this issue. Every federal official in either Congress, President, or the Cabinet, should immediately have their salary cut in half.  Once the budget is balanced, those salaries may slowly rise. If the budget returns negative, salaries go back to where they started.

***

I also feel that we need to stop being a world watchdog and limit our positions in international conflicts.

***

The Economy I support giving corporations tax incentives for the sole purpose of creating jobs IN America TO Americans FOR Americans. This will in turn stimulate the economy and make us more self-sufficient instead of relying on products from foreign countries.

Here is Deez Nuts’ official (I think) website.  But here’s what I want to know:  Is Brady Olsen being mobbed by girls at his high school?  Naah, I didn’t think so…but just think what his college apps could say under extracurricular activities:  Thousands of people have already voted for me for President.  (Write-ins are usually not counted for President as they do not influence the ultimate outcome but I would say Deez Nuts will indeed get thousands for votes for President.  Of course his Constitutional ineligibility for the office will keep him off most state ballots.)  Olsen will probably be accepted to all eight Ivy League schools!

 

 

 


Article written by: Elwood "Sandy" Sanders

Heisman Trophy Winner Herschel Walker: Donald Trump is ‘My Frontrunner’ for President

I find this interesting:

Heisman Trophy-winner Herschel Walker says that Donald Trump just might get his vote in the upcoming primary elections, even as he admits that his choice may upset some.

Walker, 53, the former University of Georgia running who started his pro career with the defunct New Jersey Generals when Trump owned the USFL team, says that the billionaire presidential candidate is the “frontrunner” in his mind.

“There’s not a doubt in my mind right now he is my frontrunner,” Walker told USA Today. “I’m not going to say anything negative about him because it’s not true.”

The former player says that he supports the building of a wall on the southern border and feels that the real estate mogul is a man of his word.

When he owned the USFL team, Walker says that “[Trump] wanted to win and he was prepared to go out and do whatever it took to win.” Walker continued saying, “He was a guy that always did what he said he was going to do.”

Read more here


Article written by: Tom White

Governor Jim Gilmore got SEVEN Minutes on MSNBC Tuesday!

It’s great to hear my candidate, former Virginia Governor Jim Gilmore, on the video list – he got seven minutes or so on MSNBC in prime time and here it is!

I am pleased with the general tone of the interview.  Gilmore played to his strengths:  Taxes and Foreign Policy (fighting Terrorism) and he sounded presidential.  He has a tax plan, and he will examine the Iran deal but he is skeptical about it.  The former Virginia governor also spoke to the Middle East NATO idea.  We do need a coalition of the willing to fight ISIS; the Middle Easterners should do most of the fighting and Israel needs to stay out to preserve the coalition.  Again, presidential.

I would say – maybe some libertarian leaning GOP voters might have to look at Gilmore due to his stance on birthright citizenship.  I think at the end of the day he’s right.  But I get there in a different way.  And for different reasons.

The actual Amendment provision (I wrote a published scholarly legal article on a related question:  Did the Fourteenth Amendment repeal by implication the native-born requirement for President?  My answer is maybe yes [although I am not sure I like the implications of my research]) is:

“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.”

There is a huge loophole in the All Persons clause:  subject to the jurisdiction thereof.  The Native Americans on reservations were not subject to the jurisdiction under an ancient Supreme Court case and it took a 1924 federal law to change that. Kids of diplomats in the US DO NOT become citizens, either, for the same reason.

Could Congress say all children of illegal aliens are not citizens?  It is conceivable.  BUT I think it sets a bad precedent to give the government power to strip American-born persons of citizenship.  So I would oppose a law to change the birthright citizenship rule.  Ireland has a rule (I am told) that if an immigrant has a child in Ireland, the family can be deported – even the baby born in Ireland – subject to the baby being able to come back and ally for citizenship/residency when he or she turns 18.

So Gilmore is right in effect.  And I think he states the key issue when he says it is dangerous to tamper with this issue right now.  Again he shows leadership to stand up to those who would pander to the flavor of the day.  The former governor is worthy to be considered.  Let us hope Jim Gilmore will be in that debate September 16.  The nation needs to hear him.

 


Article written by: Elwood "Sandy" Sanders