Tag Archives: Cruz

Ted Cruz and Mike Lee go after Obama administration for intimidating pro-lifers

Ted Cruz and Mike Lee go to war against amnesty
Ted Cruz and Mike Lee

This is from Life News.

Excerpt:

Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas and Mike Lee of Utah are accusing the Justice Department of pursuing “frivolous prosecutions” against the pro-life movement and having, according to the senators’ offices, “what appears to be an exceptionally heavy bias” in favor of abortion clinics over houses of worship in a letter sent to U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch Tuesday.

The letter concerns the Justice Department’s enforcement of the 1994 Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, a law that prohibits any use or threat of force and physical obstruction outside abortion clinics and places of religious worship. The law, however, does not criminalize peaceful protests or other First Amendment-protected activities outside abortion facilities or places of worship.

In the letter, obtained by The Daily Signal, the Republican senators write:

The [Justice Department’s] brazen pursuit (and subsequent online promotion) of—at best—frivolous prosecutions in the abortion context, combined with its failure to list any prosecutions or enforcement activities in the religious worship context, gives the distinct impression of a warped and biased enforcement of FACE by the [Justice Department].

Cruz and Lee reference the Civil Rights Division’s web page, which cites “more than 15 FACE actions in more than a dozen states” that the Justice Department has filed. The website also notes “ongoing investigations in other states,” along with “several FACE cases and settlement agreements concerning abortion clinic workers or abortion facilities.”

“Interestingly, it does not list a single case concerning the freedom of religious exercise at houses of worship,” Cruz and Lee write.

To further investigate the alleged double standard, Cruz and Lee are demanding that Lynch hand over a broad range of documents pertaining to the FACE Act dating back to January 2009.

Cruz has a good long record on pro-life issues – lots of pro-life actions in the past to show that the pro-life words of today can be believed.

Charisma News talked about Cruz’s pro-life achievements.

Excerpt:

On Saturday, Texas Senator Ted Cruz received a ringing endorsement from Georgia’s largest pro-life organization. “Senator Cruz has an unblemished record of standing up for innocent life,” said Ricardo Davis, the director of Georgia Right to Life’s Political Action Committee (GRTL PAC).

And here are the pro-life achievements:

Senator Cruz’s pro-life record includes the following:

  • Leading the charge on behalf of 13 states in successfully defending the federal Partial Birth Abortion Act before the U.S. Supreme Court;
  • Joining 18 states in successfully defending New Hampshire’s Parental Notification Act before the U.S. Supreme Court;
  • Successfully defending a Texas law that prevents state funds from being sent to organizations that perform abortions; and
  • Calling for the defunding of Planned Parenthood amid charges that the abortion giant sells aborted body parts.

That was Georgia Right to Life, but Wisconsin is the next GOP primary state. And in Wisconsin, Ted Cruz just picked up another pro-life endorsement.

Charisma News reports:

Wisconsin and its 42 delegates are up for grabs on Tuesday in a contest where the top vote getter wins all of the delegates in each congressional district, as well as statewide. Cruz already has the endorsement of Gov. Scott Walker, who dropped out of the GOP presidential race prior to the votes being cast in neighboring Iowa.

The Texas senator has picked up two more endorsements that could be critical to his winning the Badger State. The first was from Wisconsin Right to Life:

Wisconsin Right to Life’s Political Action Committee supports Ted Cruz as the only presidential candidate with a proven record on life who can win.

“There has never been an election more important than this election, and the stakes have never been higher when it comes to protecting the unborn,” stated Chelsea Shields, PAC Director of Wisconsin Right to Life. “There is only one candidate for president who has always been pro-life, who has a 100-percent pro-life voting record with National Right to Life and Wisconsin Right to Life, and who can win the Republican nomination and defeat pro-abortion Hillary Clinton in November. And that candidate is Ted Cruz.”

[…]Cruz also picked up the personal endorsement of a key evangelical pro-family leader in Wisconsin. Julaine Appling, president of Wisconsin Family Action, said Wednesday that Cruz is a man of integrity who has kept the promises he made when he ran for Senate.

[…]In addition to Appling’s personal support, Cruz also picked up Wisconsin Family Action PAC’s official endorsement. The organization has the ability to immediately reach out to hundreds of thousands of evangelicals in the Badger State.

He has a 100% pro-life voting record, and specific pro-life actions in his record. We don’t have to take his word for it, like we do with other candidates who say they are pro-life, but have a record of donations to pro-abortion Democrats, and a record of being “very pro-choice” and supporting partial birth abortion.

What about Donald Trump?

What about a person who has never thought about the pro-life view before, and who has no pro-life actions in his record? What happens when they are asked about abortion?

The Wall Street Journal reports on the latest Trump blunder:

The first-time candidate showed how little he understands about the politics of abortion by suggesting that “there has to be some kind of punishment” if abortion were made illegal.

“For the woman?” asked progressive partisan Chris Matthews of MSNBC. Mr. Trump: “Yeah, there has to be some form.” He added that men who impregnate women who have an abortion should not be punished.

[…]Not even the most fervent abortion opponent favors punishing a woman who has one. If Roe v. Wade were overturned, opponents would try to pass laws that punish abortion providers or the clinics where they take place. Mr. Trump’s remarks were thus a political gift to Democrats and the left, who would like nothing better than to stereotype abortion opponents as misogynists who want to put women in jail.

[…]Mr. Trump’s loyal GOP partisans have been willing to ignore his rhetorical mistakes and excesses, but Democrats will be merciless. So will the media if he secures the GOP nomination. His abortion blunder is doubly troubling because it will reinforce his growing unpopularity among women voters in both parties. Imagine his Wednesday remarks playing as part of a national advertising loop from June to November.

Anyone who has thought about the pro-life issue for more than 2 minutes knows the answer to the question: “who should be punished if abortion becomes illegal?” Answer: the person who provided the abortion, of course. That’s why pro-lifers want to regulate and defund abortion providers.

David French: it’s time for Rubio and Kasich to drop out

I’ve always been a bit annoyed at David French for backing that horrible RINO Mitt Romney in 2012. It made me think that he was very liberal, because Mitt Romney is moderate. But lately, I’ve been reading David French columns, and I’m not so sure that he is moderate.

Look at this one from National Review. You would expect him to back a moderate conservative like Rubio or a moderate liberal like Kasich, if he was moderate, right?

Well, he doesn’t:

[…][B]ecause normal political rules didn’t apply to Trump, other candidates falsely believed they were immune as well. But it turns out that when you don’t attack the front-runner, he tends to remain the front-runner. It turns out that when you start an epic losing streak, it’s virtually impossible to come back. It turns out that when you make crass personal attacks, it diminishes you more than the target. It turns out that math is still math, and building strategies around winning your first big state halfway through the primaries looks not just foolish, but vain.

Can we wake up yet? Can we do math? Can we do politics? Here’s what our actual political experience tells us: Donald Trump is not going to beat himself, he will win a four or even a three-man race, and he is entirely capable of winning the GOP nomination with roughly 35 percent of the vote — indeed, he’s doing it now.

Here’s what the math says: John Kasich and Marco Rubio, you have no hope of becoming the GOP nominee. Even if you win your home states, the only thing that will do is maintain the four-person dynamic under which Trump thrives. Even if you are fortunate enough to work cooperatively to deny Trump an absolute majority of delegates, do either of you — in your right mind — believe that a convention dominated by Trump and Cruz delegates is going to unite behind you? They’d sooner riot (and I’m only partially joking).

We’ve given the multi-candidate “blind ambition tour” exactly 23 states and one territory to work, and here’s the score: Trump 15, Cruz 7, Rubio 2, and Kasich . . .  zero. I think that’s a sufficient sample size. Let’s try something else. Let’s try uniting around the person who’s beaten Trump more than anyone else — a person who happens to be a constitutional conservative, who would replace Justice Scalia with a judicial superstar, who is unquestionably pro-life, who is unyielding in his defense of religious liberty, and who actually understands the dynamics of the global economy, trade policy, and national security.

[…]After 24 contests, the pattern is emerging. Cruz battles Trump for first, while Rubio and Kasich tend to battle each other for last. This is true in the South, the West, the Northeast, and the Midwest. Can conservatives finally get serious? Can we finally unify, now, before Trump starts sweeping winner-take-all states with 35 percent of the vote? If not, then a foolish GOP will richly deserve its fate.

This seems to make sense to me. And it’s likely that Rubio and Kasich voters would break for Cruz more than they would for Trump.

A recent Monmouth poll said this:

With all the discussion about hands in this election, Monmouth decided to test how Rubio and Cruz would do mano a mano against Trump. Although Rubio is struggling to make the delegate threshold in a four-way race, he would virtually tie Trump in a hypothetical two-person contest – 46% for Rubio and 45% for Trump. Cruz, though, does better, beating Trump 48% to 41% head to head. In the Rubio-Trump contest, both Cruz and Kasich voters would split at more than 2-to-1 for Rubio. However, in the Cruz-Trump matchup, Rubio voters would go 3-to-1 for Cruz, while Kasich voters would split at half for Cruz and less than 1-in-5 for Trump with another 1-in-4 saying they would not vote at all.

Seems to me that if Kasich, and especially Rubio, dropped out, then we could get a real conservative to run against Hillary. And Cruz does much better against Hillary than Trump does.

Two polls from Wednesday show that:

Trump performs poorly against Clinton in the general election
Trump performs poorly against Clinton in the general election

If we were really serious about beating Hillary in November, seems to me that we should be putting pressure on Rubio and Kasich to get out. This isn’t the time for big egos. We need to beat Hillary.