Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, responded last month to the Obama administration’s efforts to enforce transgender rights in public schools by declaring that he doesn’t want his young daughters “taking showers with little boys.”
Asked by Robert George in a November 25 interview on the EWTN network about a Department of Education ruling that an Illinois school district should have provided a transgender girl access to the girls’ locker room at her school, Cruz said it was a “ridiculous” decision made by “zealots.”
“Well, look,” he said. “This is ridiculous. It shows just how radical and extreme the current administration is. You know, I’m the father of two little girls. Caroline and Catherine are seven and five. I don’t want my daughters taking showers with little boys, I don’t want them when they’re in junior high or high school. And it’s absurd, no parents do. And these are zealots.”
He then pivoted to his pledge to do away with the Common Core standards initiative and abolish the Department of Education entirely.
Mike Huckabee onceagaininsisted that Supreme Court rulings are simply opinions that carry no legal authority if not for the “good will” and “assent” of the legislative and executive branches, this time making the case for defiance of the top court in an interview with Robert George on the Catholic television network EWTN this weekend.
If elected president, Huckabee said, he would “absolutely decline” to enforce the Supreme Court’s marriage equality decision and order the Justice Department to “protect in every way the rights of those citizens who joined in disagreeing.”
“It’s a matter of saving our republic to say that as president, we’re not going to accept this decision, we will ignore it and we will not enforce it,” Huckabee said, adding that he would only recognize same-sex marriages in states that legalize same-sex marriage, or polygamy, for that matter, “by a vote of its people.”
When George asked if conservatives then “couldn’t criticize” President Obama for acting lawlessly “if he refused to enforce” recent Supreme Court rulings on campaign finance reform and gun control, Huckabee responded, “Well, no.” He said that if that were to happen, Congress should then exercise its power to impeach the president or defund the executive branch, seeming to open himself up to impeachment if he decided to defy the courts on same-sex marriage.
In an interview with influential social conservative commentator Robert George on the Catholic television network EWTN last month, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said that the president should defy the Supreme Court’s “fundamentally illegitimate” decision striking down bans on same-sex marriage, which he compared to “Nazi decrees.”
George, the co-founder of the National Organization for Marriage and a mentor of Cruz’s, likened the court’s “tragic mistake” in Obergefell to infamous Supreme Court decisions including Dred Scott, asking Cruz, “Was Lincoln right to defy the court on [Dred Scott] and would you, as president, do that with the Obergefell decision?”
“Lincoln was absolutely right, I agree with President Lincoln,” Cruz responded. “And courts do not make law. That is not what a court does. A court interprets the law, a court applies the law, but courts don’t make law.”
Saying that it is “profoundly wrong” to refer to the gay marriage decision as the law of the land, Cruz said, “I think the decision was fundamentally illegitimate, it was lawless, it was not based on the Constitution.”
Cruz then brought up remarks that Justice Anthony Kennedy made recently at Harvard Law School, in which he discussed when it is the duty of public officials to resign rather than carry out laws that they think are unjust, such as in the case of opponents of marriage equality. Kennedy used the extreme example of judges who resigned under Nazi rule, saying that whether they can morally carry out their official duties is “a fair question that officials can and should ask themselves” and that “great respect … ought to be given to people who resign rather than do something they think is morally wrong in order to make a point.”
This, Cruz declared, amounted to Kennedy comparing “the Supreme Court of the United States to the Nazis.”
“This isn’t me calling them the Nazis,” he said, “this is Justice Kennedy calling the court on which he serves, calling the opinion that he wrote, analogizing that to the Nazi decrees that we must obey.”
George interjected: “Just to be clear, surely Justice Kennedy was not embracing Nazism.”
Cruz hesitated and smiled. “He drew the analogy,” he said, “and the obvious implication was just as you were forced to obey the Nazis, you’re forced to obey us as well … even if we are tyrannical and oppressive. Now, look, certainly he wasn’t embracing all of the horrible things the Nazis did but to make that analogy, that is essentially saying, we wear the jackboot and you must obey us.”
In a blog post on Priests for Life’s website on Friday, the group’s director of African American outreach, Alveda King, insisted that there is a need to “connect some dots” between terrorism and legal abortion, which she called terrorism “in the womb.”
“Terrorism, be it in the womb, from distant shores, behind the domestic walls of our homes, or wherever it occurs, terrorism by any other name is still the same,” she wrote.
Writing that “Killing is fast becoming the choice many people are ‘choosing’ in order to fix their problems,” King asked, “Is there any wonder that mass killings are occurring on a regular, almost daily, basis?”
What we are missing here is the not so subtle connection to what on the surface seems to be random violent outbreaks in the atmosphere. Yet as Rev. Pavone points out, the problems with the Colorado Springs shooting is not the pro-lifers referring to abortion as murder but rather the abortion industry’s utter lack of respect for life and choosing its solution to solving someone’s problem by killing their child.
Although the Colorado Springs shooting was abortion related, we should consider that there is a common denominator; an utter lack of respect for life. Whether there are various underlying causes for the lack of disregard of the rights of others, consequent actions lead to outcomes such as these mass shootings, high abortion rates, high levels of incarceration, suicide and many other threats to the human family.
Terrorism, be it in the womb, from distant shores, behind the domestic walls of our homes, or wherever it occurs, terrorism by any other name is still the same.
Killing has been a part of humanity since Cain killed Abel. Throughout history humans have been killing for greed, convenience, emotional pain, and the like in order to acquire what others have; whether it be land, money, power, or [and we can fill in the blanks here].
Human life has long been devalued to the point that life has often become disposable as long as we can’t see the danger to our own. Herein lies the Catch 22: we disregard others to save ourselves – sadly not realizing that we are universally connected to our human family.
With the passage of time America has joined the rest of the world in rubber stamping the killing of our babies in the womb, as well as the sick, the elderly and in alarmingly increasing numbers, the poor.
With this acceptance of devaluation of humanity, the consciences of men, women and children have been numbed. The answer to one’s problem becomes the dehumanization and elimination of those who would interfere with what someone wants.
Is there any wonder that mass killings are occurring on a regular, almost daily, basis?
Let’s connect some dots.
Have an unplanned pregnancy? Illness? Getting too old? Other problems? Eliminate your problems with abortion or euthanasia.
Killing is fast becoming the choice many people are “choosing” in order to fix their problems. Killing of another or of self both devalue and destroy life.
We must wake up and recognize that the taking of any life, born, unborn, sick, handicapped, elderly, those of faith outside of ours — is wrong.
Ted Cruz's presidential campaign has been openly contemptuous and downright dismissive of anyone who has tried to get the Republican presidential hopeful to explain why he spoke at a conference last month organized and hosted by extremist pastor and radio host Kevin Swanson.
On multiple occasions prior the conference, and twice during the conference itself, Swanson explicitly endorsed the idea of imposing the death penalty for homosexuality, yet the Cruz campaign has cavalierly waved away questions about his appearance along side Swanson at his conference, insisting that Cruz is not some sort of "gay basher":
Recently two left-wing media mainstays, MSNBC and The Daily Beast went after Cruz’s appearance at a religious freedom conference that he and two other candidates were invited to. The two liberal organizations played a video clip from another extreme left group, People for the American Way’s RightWingWatch, and imagined the conference a “kill the gays” event.
Cruz’s response to their misrepresentations was simple. He elected not to respond, “acknowledge or take their bait,” the staffer explained. “We’ve seen their follow up attempts and accusations to place Cruz into their definition of gay bashers, but that’s not even close to who he is. You have to look at his record and history, not what the left wants him to be.”
Cruz's refusal to denounce Swanson and his views is rather interesting, especially since Swanson himself has no trouble denouncing anyone who does not share his "kill the gays" views.
For instance, on a radio program from March of this year, Swanson criticized Bob Jones III for daring to apologize for comments he made 35 years ago advocating that gays be stoned to death.
"As far as I know," Swanson said, "the Apostle Paul has not backtracked on Romans 1, in which he refers to the unnatural relation between males and males, females and females, and says such who does these things are worthy of death ... I'm going to be the last guy who stands up and says whatever Paul was saying when he said they're worthy of death, whatever Moses is saying in Leviticus 20:13 as communicated to God's people as the very law God, from the lips of God himself, I'm going to be the last person to say, well, God's law is unjust. And if anybody wants to say that, I'm going to be standing about 40 feet away, whatever the diameter of lightening is."
Later in that same broadcast, Swanson took issue with those who get outraged at the prospect of the government putting people to death for homosexuality, saying that it is no big deal when compared to the prospect of gay people spending eternity in Hell.
"When people focus on the civil penalty for the sin of homosexuality," he said, "they're diverting attention from the real issue, and that is the judgment of God upon that behavior ... Capital punishment? Execution at the hands of the state? Big deal! Big deal! That's nothing. That's nothing. In comparison with the judgment of God, the judgment of the civil courts, of the human courts, as compared to the judgement of Almighty God? No comparison!"
If Cruz wants to prove that he is not one of those "gay bashers," denouncing Swanson and his rhetoric would be an easy way for him to do so. But so far, Cruz and his campaign have conspicuously refused to that while touting the endorsements of severalotheranti-gayextremists ... and that speaks volumes.
Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said last month that Congress could “absolutely” criminalize all abortion by passing a law giving 14th Amendment protections to fetuses and zygotes, thus bypassing a constitutional amendment overturning Roe v. Wade.
Cruz made the comments in a November 25 interview with influential social conservative commentator Robert George as part of a series of candidate interviews that George is hosting on the the Catholic television network EWTN.
After outlining the personhood strategy, George asked Cruz, “Do you believe that unborn babies are persons within the meaning of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment and, if so, will you call on Congress to use its authority under the 14th Amendment pursuant to Section Five, to protect the unborn? Or do you take the view, as some do, that we can’t do that until Roe v. Wade is overturned either by the court itself or by constitutional amendment? Where do you stand on that?”
“Listen, absolutely yes,” Cruz responded.
“I very much agree with the pope’s longstanding and prior popes’ before him longstanding call to protect every human life from the moment of conception to the moment of natural death,” he added.
“And we can do that by Congressional action without waiting for the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade?” George asked.
“Absolutely yes, under the 14th Amendment,” Cruz responded.
In the second part of his recent interview with David Brody of the Christian Broadcasting Network, which was posted on CBN’s website over the weekend, Marco Rubio said that he will only nominate Supreme Court justices who believe that the court’s rulings on marriage equality and abortion rights are “constitutionally flawed.”
After claiming that Obergefell and Roe have no constitutional basis, the Florida senator added that he would also reverse President Obama’s executive order barring discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity among federal contractors.
In a previously released part of the interview, Rubio told Brody that government officials should flout court rulings on gay rights and abortion because “God’s rules always win.”
Brody: What could a President Rubio do in a situation like that? A lot of folks have talked about maybe religious liberty, the religious freedom act. Mike Huckabee and others have said some things like that.
Rubio: There’s no doubt that we need to be extra vigilant now about protecting the religious liberties of Americans and that includes having a justice department that’s vigilant about ensuring that those who hold traditional values are not being discriminated against. That includes reversing any administrative decisions made by this President that force religious, or religious motivated entities. You may not be owned by a church, but you are a religious school, or your mission is to spread the Gospel and adhere to God’s teachings ensure that people in the private sector and the not-for-profit sector are being protected in living out their faith.
And beyond it, I think one of the biggest things the next President is going to do is appoint justices to the Supreme Court -- justices who understand that the Constitution is not a living and breathing document. It is a document of limitation and it’s supposed to be interpreted and applied based on its original intent. And there is no way that you can read that Constitution and deduce from it that there is constitutional right to an abortion, or a constitutional right to marry someone of the same sex. And what you have is a Supreme Court that wanted to reach a certain policy outcome and so creatively manipulated the Constitution to discover a right that for over two centuries, some of the most brilliant minds in legal history didn’t find.
So you need judges that understand how constitutionally flawed that those two kinds of rulings and others have been and that’s what the most important thing the next President will do is appoint Supreme Court justices that actually will apply the constitution irrespective of their personal feelings about the issue.
Brody: As well as potential executive orders and possibly a strong attorney general in that role.
Rubio: Well, the executive orders would be to reverse the executive orders the President has made on things like gender equality in restrooms. You’ve seen some local districts and others been forced to provide girls access to a boys’ bathroom and so forth. These sorts of things you’ve seen in Illinois for example, but also ensure that we’re not doing anything that at any part in our government that is putting organizations that are either motivated by their faith or organized around their faith from having to violate the tenants of their faith and that includes government contractors.
There are many government contractors and small companies who provide services to the government who are faith-based people, and they are, they are being compelled to sin by government in their business conduct. That is not something that we should be supporting.
In a shocking development, Ted Cruz's pastor says Cruz is "God’s man for this hour, for such a time as this ... The hand of God is on him, and if God’s people rise up, he will be the man."
In equally shocking news, Cruz fanboy Glenn Beck thinks that Cruz is the only candidate who really "has the gravitas" to be president.
Speaking of Beck, his pathological hatred of President Obama and his administration is growing more absurd by the day.
Some intelligent analysis from The Federalist: "Abortion Is The New Three-Fifths Compromise."
Finally, a classy bit of insight from Burt Prelutsky: "It’s as if the world suddenly underwent surgical reconstruction, as a result of which France wound up with the balls and America wound up with the a—hole."
In an enlightening interview with Alex Jones yesterday, conservative musician and NRA board member Ted Nugent declared that Americans need to “cleanse this country” of “subhuman freak” liberals like President Obama and Nancy Pelosi who want people “bending over and taking it in the ass.” The two then laid out how America would be great if only someone like Donald Trump or Ted Cruz were to become president … or maybe Nugent himself.
Nugent fashioned himself as not only a good president, but also as someone who could have thwarted the Nazis had he lived in the 1930s.
Nugent said he simply gives a voice to those who know the truth “about this criminal empire in the government of the United States of America” and “this freedom-hating, America-hating punk president.”
“They now recognize the curse, the self-inflicted curse that is Barack Obama and the liberal Democrats who hate freedom, who hate the Constitution, who hate the Bill of Rights,” he said. “They don’t believe in self-defense, they don’t believe in independence, they don’t believe in being the best that you can be, they are intentionally on a runaway freight train to weaken America and to reward the bloodsuckers while they punish the producers.”
Jones managed to use even more colorful terms to portray America’s current political climate: “The Democrat leadership and their constituents now, more and more, literally hate America and have a death score to settle and want to mount our head on the wall like a trophy when this country and our forbearers gave these spoiled ass bitches everything they’ve got.”
Nugent lamented that military service members feel conflicted because they know “that their commander-in-chief is the enemy,” and began pleading with listeners that “if we don’t vote Republican in 2016, we will become Barack Obama’s dream and that is a suburb of Indonesia where individuality, independence and freedom is gone like a Dodo bird.”
Jones floated the question of whether one of the GOP candidates would tap Nugent as vice president or a cabinet secretary, Nugent said that millions of his fans are “asking me to run for president.”
If he actually became president, he said, he would move to “eliminate welfare because all it is is a carrot for dopes who want free stuff.”
After visualizing his presidency, Nugent then fantasized about being a Jew who was targeted by the Nazis: “I wanted to be a Jew in Nuremberg in 1938. While the Brownshirts were hurling people onto trains, I would have figured out a way to get that Brownshirt, Nazi-punk-ass luger away from him. I would’ve shoved it up his ass and I’d touched off a clip, I would’ve got the magazine and I would’ve got all the other Jews to raise hell. Now I’m not knocking people who fell for it, but I’m telling you, don’t fall for it. Don’t get on the train.” Jones added that “if the globalists down the road want a fight, they’re going to get one.”