Skip to main content

Ted Cruz Takes A Progressive Stand on the Birth Right Issue.

Breitbart's Article (with link to video) reports accurately on the dialogue
Headline states :Cruz Accuses Megyn Kelly Of Asking "Mainstream Media Liberal " Question
http://goo.gl/WQpp6Y

In this interview, Kelly's asks two questions that Cruz refuses to answer dodging the questions like a season politician and a true progressive- with the meaning of progressive being one who thinks that the constitution can be overridden to serve policies and political agendas of the day- versus a conservative who hold that the constitution is the ultimate Rule of Law and that the philosophical intent of the constitution must be the measure of any change to our constitution.

Cruz keeps the focus issue on policy in response to Megyn's question as to whether he thinks changes to birth right citizenship requires a Constitutional amendment  OR if it can just be changed by Congress. Cruz uses a lot of rhetoric to say that it is a policy (meaning not a constitutional) issue and needs to be achieved any way that it can be achieved. When listening closely Cruz is saying clearly that it is can be changed by Congress and does not need to go through a process that requires the consent of the governed- but in terms of the perception manufacturing industry- Cruz is trying to appear as not taking any position at all. Megyn Kelly is asking him a very direct and clear answer for which he gives us reams of rhetorical talking points that he consistently repeats every time Kelly rephrases the question.

When Megyn asks specifically if he would deport the children born in this country to illegal parents or deport only the parents- once again Cruz cannot give a direct answer and evades it like a politician- then he pulls out the big one - he attacks the question- using the standard attack of the anti-establishmentarians- He calls the question a "‘Mainstream Media Liberal Question" . This functions like a command to the anti-establishmentarian social media organizations which then reach across the internet spinning  Megyn Kelly as a Liberal. The anti-establishmentarian social media unilaterally attacks Megyn Kelly -Paying no notice to Cruz's politically crafted evasion of  the constitutional issue.  Once again. the perception manufacturing industry attacks Megyn Kelly for asking  perfectly legitimate and spot on questions which their candidates cannot answer- and once again the candidate delivers his instructions to the foot soldiers of the anti-establishmentarain movement on how they should target Megyn Kelly. mirroring the Donalds message, publicly delivered during the debates when he told Megyn that she was not being nice to him and suggested that he could could be not nice to her as well!

There is nothing "liberal" about Kelly's question and if it is a question the non-mainstream media thinks Cruz should not have to answer, then shame on the non-mainstream media!

Cruz's undeniable evasion of the question asked by Megyn Kelly- which goes straight to the heart of the constitutional issue- which is the ultimate Rule of Law- reveals that Cruz is a progressive when it comes to the US Constitution. "it's a policy issue" is the answer that makes that clear !

Afternote: 

I came across this article from the Heritage which discusses a series of Supreme Court decisions that clarify that no involuntary expatriations are legal. Taking away the citizenship of any one born in the USA qualifies as an involuntary expatriation- in my layman's assessment:

Here is the specific quote:

Finally, in Vance v. Terrazas (1980), the Court clarified its decision in Afroyim by holding that it was not enough to show that an individual voluntarily committed an act that Congress determined was inconsistent with American citizenship. It was necessary also to show independently that the individual "intended to relinquish his citizenship." Given the broad language of the more recent cases, it seems that no involuntary expatriations are lawful. The one exception, which applies only to naturalized Americans, is the denaturalization (and deportation) of those who became citizens through fraud or illegality. It has been applied most notably in recent decades to former Nazis who engaged in war crimes during World War II and later lied about their wartime activities either when they entered the United States as "displaced persons" or when they applied for citizenship.

Reasons for involuntary expatriation that were overturned by the Supreme Court:
Although it upheld expatriation for voting in a foreign election, Perez v. Brownell (1958), it overturned expatriations for desertion from the military during wartime, Trop v. Dulles (1958), and for service by a dual national in the Japanese army during World War II, Nishikawa v. Dulles (1958). In 1963, in Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez, the Court ruled that a citizen could not be expatriated for fleeing the country during wartime to evade military service. 

Afternote 2
  As election season heats up the anti-establishmentarians are becoming increasingly aggressive about censoring the free speech of all dissenters to their will.

So after I signed up for FreeRepublic and posted this blog post and only this blog post , my posting privileges were revoked. You can see from this screenshot how networked the anti-establishmentarian movement is:


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

An Incomplete Theory of Inflation Made to Order for Mass Consumption.

M oney is not what it used to be, so must our ways of thinking about it adapt. jaakko-kemppainen-unsplash The message treads across the media terrain, beating louder and louder as if to drown out the beat of the distant drummer. W arning! The only thing the stimulus will stimulate is inflation. The people will pay as the wealthy elite invests their windfalls in financial assets. Doom and gloom set to march across the land to the beat of the distribution of stimulus funds. In recent years as past predictions of fiscal disaster following stimulus spending failed to materialize and so the thinking about national debt and deficits has evolved, most noticeably with the development of  Modern Monetary Theory . In the   fall of 2020,  National Affairs  published a story,  Does the Debt Matter ? by Peter Wehner & Ian Tufts. Peter Wehner is vice president and senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and served in the last three Republican administrations. Ian Tufts is a recent g

Why are social impact investors trying so hard to defeat smaller shelters for the homeless?

  "Social Impact” developers in Portland, Maine seek to squelch a referendum for smaller shelters called for by qualified practitioners with concrete experience in the field. A large sign says Vote C to support the Homeless, small handmade sign next to it says Untrue! That sign is paid for by developers who want / Photo by Jess Falero In   the 1970s under Governor Longley , Maine became a centrally managed economy that expanded Maine’s wealth gap and merged, almost seamlessly, the public and private and the non-profit and for-profit economic sectors into one mutually beneficial wealth-concentration & distribution system. Currently, mutually benefitting factions are coming together once again in hopes of building a mega-shelter for the homeless in a Portland, Maine industrial development district. In addition to beds for the homeless, the project will include, dining, and locker facilities, as well as offices and an attached health clinic. The promotion  describes the facility

JECD Group Holds Master Plan Pow Wow for Boothbay Peninsula

The most honest statement to come out of the ringleaders of the Joint Economic Community Development Group in their first workshop program was "none of us are experts on economic development", which in my most humble opinion is evident in the fact that the JECD begins with the premise that economic development can be master minded by central management. The article in the Boothbay Register begins with this paragraph: The Joint Economic Development Committee master plan workshop on Thursday, Oct. 12 discuss findings from stakeholder interviews conducted early last month. The interviews centered around building an overall economic development strategy for Edgecomb, Boothbay, Boothbay Harbor and Southport. Who are the stakeholders?  A search for articles in the Boothbay Register comes up short. Why is the public not told who the stakeholders are. Since the taxpayers of Boothbay and Boothbay Harbor footed the bill for the JECD's consultants, why are they not the stakeh