PDA

View Full Version : Judge Napolitano flat-out lies about Ted Cruz on Fox News




TaftFan
03-23-2015, 02:26 PM
I am so disappointed in Judge Napolitano. Beyond words.

From Fox News: http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/03/23/judge-napolitanos-constitutional-disagreements-ted-cruz

"Napolitano also said his "heart sank" when he heard Cruz talk about a "federal right to education"

Naturally, I had to find out the truth. I watched the speech. Here is what Ted Cruz said in his speech, word for word:

"Instead of a federal government which seeks to dictate curriculum through Common Core. Imagine repealing every word of Common Core. Imagine embracing school choice as the civil rights issue of the next generation. That every single child, regardless of race, regardless of ethnicity, regardless of wealth or zip code, every child in America has a right to a quality education."

phill4paul
03-23-2015, 02:33 PM
I am so disappointed in Judge Napolitano. Beyond words.

From Fox News: http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/03/23/judge-napolitanos-constitutional-disagreements-ted-cruz

"Napolitano also said his "heart sank" when he heard Cruz talk about a "federal right to education"

Naturally, I had to find out the truth. I watched the speech. Here is what Ted Cruz said in his speech, word for word:

"Instead of a federal government which seeks to dictate curriculum through Common Core. Imagine repealing every word of Common Core. Imagine embracing school choice as the civil rights issue of the next generation. That every single child, regardless of race, regardless of ethnicity, regardless of wealth or zip code, every child in America has a right to a quality education."

Someone has to pay for it. Is Cruz for getting rid of the D.O.E.?

TaftFan
03-23-2015, 02:36 PM
Someone has to pay for it. Is Cruz for getting rid of the D.O.E.?
His point is that poor kids should not be trapped in public schools. Put the money with the child, not the school. Allow competition in education.
Yes, he is for eliminating the Doe.

ThePaleoLibertarian
03-23-2015, 02:41 PM
The idea that "every child has a right to a quality education" and viewing education as a right instead of a good is a very proggy idea.

orenbus
03-23-2015, 02:43 PM
Is the sticking point the word "federal"? What if he meant individual state right to education, assuming k-12? How is any of this any different than what we have now?

TaftFan
03-23-2015, 02:44 PM
The idea that "every child has a right to a quality education" and viewing education as a right instead of a good is a very proggy idea.

When people say a kid has a right to an education, they aren't being philosophical. In the context of this, the point is that they are being deprived from it thanks to the federal and state governments.

We are getting away from the topic of the thread, which is that Napolitano claimed Cruz supported a "federal right to education" which is obviously a falsehood.

Brian4Liberty
03-23-2015, 02:46 PM
The idea that "every child has a right to a quality education" and viewing education as a right instead of a good is a very proggy idea.

Yeah, that's probably the rub with Napolitano. Defining goods or services that must be provided by others as "rights" sometimes leads to problems.

The statement by Cruz was fairly vague, but certainly leads to questions about how this new "right" to "quality education" would be implemented.

TaftFan
03-23-2015, 02:47 PM
Is the sticking point the word "federal"? What if he meant individual state right to education, assuming k-12? How is any of this any different than what we have now?
I believe Napolitano put the word "federal" in Cruz's mouth because he wanted to show Cruz as not being as constitutionally-strict as Rand Paul.

And as I mention below, this wasn't a philosophical discussion on rights. Cruz's point is that government is making it hard for children to get a quality education. That is wrong. A quality education is something we should all want for children.

Henry Rogue
03-23-2015, 02:48 PM
Does school choice mean voucher? Vouchers for public schools may not have much of an affect on prices, but vouchers for private schools could have a devastating affect on the market clearing price. Subsidies distort markets.

Brian4Liberty
03-23-2015, 02:49 PM
His point is that poor kids should not be trapped in public schools. Put the money with the child, not the school. Allow competition in education.
Yes, he is for eliminating the DoD.

The DOD? Now that would be news. ;)

Sola_Fide
03-23-2015, 02:49 PM
I am so disappointed in Judge Napolitano. Beyond words.

From Fox News: http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/03/23/judge-napolitanos-constitutional-disagreements-ted-cruz

"Napolitano also said his "heart sank" when he heard Cruz talk about a "federal right to education"

Naturally, I had to find out the truth. I watched the speech. Here is what Ted Cruz said in his speech, word for word:

"Instead of a federal government which seeks to dictate curriculum through Common Core. Imagine repealing every word of Common Core. Imagine embracing school choice as the civil rights issue of the next generation. That every single child, regardless of race, regardless of ethnicity, regardless of wealth or zip code, every child in America has a right to a quality education."


What? There is a RIGHT to education? That is completely tyrannical.

TaftFan
03-23-2015, 02:50 PM
Does school choice mean voucher? Vouchers for public schools may not have much of an affect on prices, but vouchers for private schools could have a devastating affect on the market clearing price. Subsidies distort markets.

The distortion is that private schools would be more competitive with public schools.

acptulsa
03-23-2015, 02:51 PM
Someone has to pay for it. Is Cruz for getting rid of the D.O.E.?

The Department of Energy?

They ran out of alphabet, so the Department of Education is officially the E.D.


His point is that poor kids should not be trapped in public schools. Put the money with the child, not the school. Allow competition in education.
Yes, he is for eliminating the DoD.

The Department of Defense will be eliminated over Cruz' gory bones.

As for Judge Nap, I think he assumed facts not in evidence. But considering the context of that speech at that moment, I can certainly see how it happened...


Instead of a federal government that wages an assault on our religious liberty. That goes after hobby lobby, that goes after the little sisters of the poor, that goes after Liberty University. Imagine a federal government that stands for the first amendment rights of every American.

Instead of a federal government that works to undermine our values, imagine a federal government that works to defend the sanctity of human life. And to uphold the sacrament of marriage.

Instead of a government that works to undermine our second amendment rights, that seeks to ban our ammunition. Imagine a federal government that protects the right to keep and bear arms of all law abiding Americans.

Instead of a government that seizes your emails and your cell phones, imagine a federal government that protected the privacy rights of every American. Instead of a federal government that seeks to dictate school curriculum through common core imagine repealing every word of common core.

Imagine embracing school choices the civil rights issue of the next generation. But every single child, regardless of race, regardless of ethnicity, regardless of wealth or zip code, every child in America has a right to a quality education.

If he changed the subject, he certainly did an abrupt job of it.

TaftFan
03-23-2015, 02:54 PM
What? There is a RIGHT to education? That is completely tyrannical.

I think if you pinned him down on it, he would not say that.

He was just using general language to emphasize that the government is messing up education and that the less involvement, the better.

Henry Rogue
03-23-2015, 02:58 PM
The distortion is that private schools would be more competitive with public schools.

The distortion is that prices will increase, making it more expensive for people who previously didn’t need vouchers to send their kids to private schools. It's the exact opposite of competition. Competition pushes prices lower.

Sola_Fide
03-23-2015, 02:59 PM
I think if you pinned him down on it, he would not say that.

He was just using general language to emphasize that the government is messing up education and that the less involvement, the better.

I disagree. Cruz is a Roman Catholic and as a matter of theology he believes that he must fight for "the common good" and that some property is common. Read my thread called "The Roman Catholic Socialist Agenda" to find out more.

acptulsa
03-23-2015, 03:00 PM
The distortion is that prices will increase, making it more expensive for people who previously didn’t need vouchers to send their kids to private schools. It's the exact opposite of competition. Competition pushes prices lower.

Speaking of health care, and a thousand other examples...

phill4paul
03-23-2015, 03:00 PM
The Department of Energy?

They ran out of alphabet, so the Department of Education is officially the E.D.

Thanks for the correction. Can't hit you for a rep presently.

Henry Rogue
03-23-2015, 03:03 PM
Speaking of health care, and a thousand other examples...
Exactly.

acptulsa
03-23-2015, 03:04 PM
Thanks for the correction. Can't hit you for a rep presently.

Of course, there are other reasons for things like that. I don't suppose I need to explain why the USDA is not fond of the acronym DOA...

TaftFan
03-23-2015, 03:06 PM
I disagree. Cruz is a Roman Catholic and as a matter of theology he believes that he must fight for "the common good" and that some property is common. Read my thread called "The Roman Catholic Socialist Agenda" to find out more.
Judge Napolitano is ALSO a Roman Catholic. That has nothing to do with it.

ThePaleoLibertarian
03-23-2015, 03:07 PM
I disagree. Cruz is a Roman Catholic and as a matter of theology he believes that he must fight for "the common good" and that some property is common. Read my thread called "The Roman Catholic Socialist Agenda" to find out more.
Catholicism does have a socialist tradition, but there are very right wing and libertarian Catholics out there.

Matt Collins
03-23-2015, 03:17 PM
I think if you pinned him down on it, he would not say that.

He was just using general language to emphasize that the government is messing up education and that the less involvement, the better.Perhaps, but then he should choose his language more carefully... and his background. :o

Brian4Liberty
03-23-2015, 03:17 PM
I think if you pinned him down on it, he would not say that.

He was just using general language to emphasize that the government is messing up education and that the less involvement, the better.

The statement in isolation was vague, so it was open to interpretation. The term "right" sets off alarm bells for some though.

So it starts a conversation where more questions and details are warranted, especially at the Federal level, as Cruz is a US Senator seeking to be POTUS. Cruz said he want to "repeal every word of Common Core". That's a start. Does he want to repeal every word of no child left behind? Does he want to completely eliminate the Federal Department of Education? Does he want to eliminate all regulations, requirements, benefits and subsidies related to education from Federal Code?

William Tell
03-23-2015, 03:22 PM
I disagree. Cruz is a Roman Catholic and as a matter of theology he believes that he must fight for "the common good" and that some property is common. Read my thread called "The Roman Catholic Socialist Agenda" to find out more.

No, Ted Cruz is a Southern Baptist. Judge Nap is a Catholic.

Sola_Fide
03-23-2015, 03:25 PM
Judge Napolitano is ALSO a Roman Catholic. That has nothing to do with it.

Yeah, he disagrees with his church.

The Catholic Catechism calls for a state that promotes the common good, and a one world government.

specsaregood
03-23-2015, 03:26 PM
What? There is a RIGHT to education? That is completely tyrannical.
How is a right to an education any different than a right to bear arms or right to freedom of speech or any other right? Saying one has a right doesn't mean others are required to provide it to you.

donnay
03-23-2015, 03:26 PM
God Bless Judge Napolitano for speaking the truth!

acptulsa
03-23-2015, 03:27 PM
No, Ted Cruz is a Southern Baptist. Judge Nap is a Catholic.

Try again.

But I'm pretty sure it will go in one ear and out the other no matter how often you say it.

TaftFan
03-23-2015, 03:28 PM
The statement in isolation was vague, so it was open to interpretation. The term "right" sets off alarm bells for some though.

So it starts a conversation where more questions and details are warranted, especially at the Federal level, as Cruz is a US Senator seeking to be POTUS. Cruz said he want to "repeal every word of Common Core". That's a start. Does he want to repeal every word of no child left behind? Does he want to completely eliminate the Federal Department of Education? Does he want to eliminate all regulations, requirements, benefits and subsidies related to education from Federal Code?

He has been campaigning from the beginning to eliminate federal involvement in education, including repealing the department of education.

I will support Rand. But I won't go along with dishonest attacks, of which I have seen far too many coming from Paul supporters on a whole litany of areas.

TaftFan
03-23-2015, 03:29 PM
God Bless Judge Napolitano for speaking the truth!
Not surprised you would see a demonstrated falsehood as the truth. After all, your worldview depends on "researching" falsehoods and assuming them to be true.

Cruz said nothing of a federal right to education.

TaftFan
03-23-2015, 03:30 PM
How is a right to an education any different than a right to bear arms or right to freedom of speech or any other right? Saying one has a right doesn't mean others are required to provide it to you.

This is also a really good point and an excellent way of phrasing it. In the context of Cruz bashing federal overreach, this makes complete sense.

acptulsa
03-23-2015, 03:31 PM
I won't go along with dishonest attacks, of which I have seen far too many coming from Paul supporters on a whole litany of areas.

Neither will we. And considering Cruz had been talking a out imagining a federal government that... for five minutes straight, I think not giving Judge Nap the benefit of reasonable doubt constitutes a dishonest attack. Even if he is wrong.

And I did say 'if'.


Not surprised you would see a demonstrated falsehood as the truth. After all, your worldview depends on "researching" falsehoods and assuming them to be true.

I don't suppose you'd like to prove this unwarranted attack is an honest attack...?

William Tell
03-23-2015, 03:33 PM
How is a right to an education any different than a right to bear arms or right to freedom of speech or any other right? Saying one has a right doesn't mean others are required to provide it to you.

One could look at it that way. But when you hear "right to healthcare" for example, do you think of a free market?

specsaregood
03-23-2015, 03:35 PM
...

donnay
03-23-2015, 03:37 PM
No, Ted Cruz is a Southern Baptist. Judge Nap is a Catholic.


The Texas senator, 43, is part Cuban, part Italian and part Irish. He comes from a Roman Catholic family but was converted by his parents to Southern Baptism at a young age.
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/politics/2014/09/11/ted-cruz-booed-during-speech-about-religion-walks-off-stage-after-scolding/


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2ZVihACwQ0

William Tell
03-23-2015, 03:41 PM
Well, I do; but its fair enough to say that most people think of rights as shit they are entitled to get from the mother tit for free.

To me at least, its all about the difference between a right to and a right to pursue. You have a right to keep and bear arms. You do not have a right to arms. You have a right to pursue education and healthcare. But you really have a right to pursue anything good and decent. Its a shame we need to specify more and more of them.

Sola_Fide
03-23-2015, 03:43 PM
No, Ted Cruz is a Southern Baptist. Judge Nap is a Catholic.

Oh, he's a Southern Baptist now? That's even worse. Southern Baptists are some of the worst statists in America (and the worst ion theology as well).

Stratovarious
03-23-2015, 03:51 PM
I am so disappointed in Judge Napolitano. Beyond words.

From Fox News: http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/03/23/judge-napolitanos-constitutional-disagreements-ted-cruz

"Napolitano also said his "heart sank" when he heard Cruz talk about a "federal right to education"

Naturally, I had to find out the truth. I watched the speech. Here is what Ted Cruz said in his speech, word for word:

"Instead of a federal government which seeks to dictate curriculum through Common Core. Imagine repealing every word of Common Core. Imagine embracing school choice as the civil rights issue of the next generation. That every single child, regardless of race, regardless of ethnicity, regardless of wealth or zip code, every child in America has a right to a quality education."

This is an extremely ambiguous statement from Cruz, I love tons of things I've heard from Napalitano, not sure how he took the statement was
quite LOADED.
Common Core out , good , it should be up to states, does Cruz go on somewhere about his actual Plan ?
The Federal Gov has overstepped in every issue, they need to have nothing to do with education.

, ,
.

muh_roads
03-23-2015, 03:57 PM
Is Ted Cruz an Israel Firster?

otherone
03-23-2015, 04:00 PM
I think if you pinned him down on it, he would not say that.

He was just using general language to emphasize that the government is messing up education and that the less involvement, the better.

spiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiinnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

zactidwell
03-23-2015, 04:01 PM
When I hear the name Ted Cruz, this image immediately pops to mind. The puppet master/war criminal at work with his new pawn.......

http://cdn5.freedomoutpost.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/kissingercruz.png

erowe1
03-23-2015, 04:01 PM
I am so disappointed in Judge Napolitano. Beyond words.

From Fox News: http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/03/23/judge-napolitanos-constitutional-disagreements-ted-cruz

"Napolitano also said his "heart sank" when he heard Cruz talk about a "federal right to education"

Naturally, I had to find out the truth. I watched the speech. Here is what Ted Cruz said in his speech, word for word:

"Instead of a federal government which seeks to dictate curriculum through Common Core. Imagine repealing every word of Common Core. Imagine embracing school choice as the civil rights issue of the next generation. That every single child, regardless of race, regardless of ethnicity, regardless of wealth or zip code, every child in America has a right to a quality education."

Based on the quote you just provided, how did Napolitano lie?

erowe1
03-23-2015, 04:02 PM
Is Ted Cruz an Israel Firster?

Yes. Big time.

otherone
03-23-2015, 04:04 PM
Not surprised you would see a demonstrated falsehood as the truth. After all, your worldview depends on "researching" falsehoods and assuming them to be true.

Cruz said nothing of a federal right to education.


That every single child, regardless of race, regardless of ethnicity, regardless of wealth or zip code, every child in America has a right to a quality education."



HOW is this different than "a chicken in every pot"?
A "Taft fan" believes in positive Rights?

erowe1
03-23-2015, 04:05 PM
I believe Napolitano put the word "federal" in Cruz's mouth because he wanted to show Cruz as not being as constitutionally-strict as Rand Paul.


No. He put "federal" in Cruz's mouth because it was a speech announcing Cruz's run for a federal office.

Also, Cruz said, "every child in America," not "every child in Texas."

erowe1
03-23-2015, 04:05 PM
Cruz said nothing of a federal right to education.

Yes he did, right there in the quote that you yourself provided in the OP.

specsaregood
03-23-2015, 04:06 PM
,,

erowe1
03-23-2015, 04:08 PM
I'd say you have a right to an education and a right to pursue an education. Can somebody take your education from you? You do NOT have a right to be educated.

Sure. But you're talking about something different than what Cruz was. Cruz is talking about tax payer funded schooling.

phill4paul
03-23-2015, 04:09 PM
Not surprised you would see a demonstrated falsehood as the truth. After all, your worldview depends on "researching" falsehoods and assuming them to be true.

Cruz said nothing of a federal right to education.

Well, aren't you quite the asshole.

TaftFan
03-23-2015, 04:11 PM
No. He put "federal" in Cruz's mouth because it was a speech announcing Cruz's run for a federal office.

Also, Cruz said, "every child in America," not "every child in Texas."

I support drug legalization throughout America. Does that mean I support the federal government overriding state decisions? No. I support Voter ID throughout America, does that mean I think it is a federal issue? No.

Cruz, in fact, repudiated a federal role in education in his same speech!

specsaregood
03-23-2015, 04:13 PM
...

ThePaleoLibertarian
03-23-2015, 04:32 PM
This is such a minor issue. It seems to me to be a semantic issue at best, and a misunderstanding on Napolitano's part at worst. Cruz is a neocon, who's good on immigration and little else. I'd vote for him over Hillary, but he's still pretty lousy.

acptulsa
03-23-2015, 04:53 PM
Oh, he's a Southern Baptist now? That's even worse. Southern Baptists are some of the worst statists in America (and the worst ion theology as well).

Surely that's not it.

Oh, come on. There are still a few million registered Republicans you have not yet mortally offended for us. No point in leaving your job half done. There may never be a thread to do it in that more of them will see than this one.

dillo
03-23-2015, 05:08 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7m5VcpMCtU

Sola_Fide
03-23-2015, 05:21 PM
Surely that's not it.

Oh, come on. There are still a few million registered Republicans you have not yet mortally offended for us. No point in leaving your job half done. There may never be a thread to do it in that more of them will see than this one.

Grow some thicker skin if you are offended at everything you read. It's my opinion. Take it or leave it.

jllundqu
03-23-2015, 05:21 PM
I am so disappointed in Judge Napolitano. Beyond words.

From Fox News: http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/03/23/judge-napolitanos-constitutional-disagreements-ted-cruz

"Napolitano also said his "heart sank" when he heard Cruz talk about a "federal right to education"

Naturally, I had to find out the truth. I watched the speech. Here is what Ted Cruz said in his speech, word for word:

"Instead of a federal government which seeks to dictate curriculum through Common Core. Imagine repealing every word of Common Core. Imagine embracing school choice as the civil rights issue of the next generation. That every single child, regardless of race, regardless of ethnicity, regardless of wealth or zip code, every child in America has a right to a quality education."

I agree that words matter and using the words "right" to an education made my ears perk up... but I don't believe that's what Cruz was advocating. I don't agree it should be framed that way and makes the Judge look nit-picky.

jllundqu
03-23-2015, 05:31 PM
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/politics/2014/09/11/ted-cruz-booed-during-speech-about-religion-walks-off-stage-after-scolding/


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2ZVihACwQ0

I'm sorry, but Cruz f-ed up in this vid. He basically said if you criticize Israel, you're full of hate and he walked off stage. Sorry but sucking Netanyahu's cock is not in the defense of liberty. I care about what happens in the US... The Israeli government has as much blood on its hands as any tyrannical government. History is replete with examples of Israel slaughtering the innocent as much as muslim countries doing the same. Israel has one interest... and it aint the USA... Israel would nuke the US if it were in its interest.

They can take care of themselves and Cruz can become a preacher if that's what he wants. I won't support him for POTUS with his narrow view of the world.

erowe1
03-23-2015, 05:52 PM
I support drug legalization throughout America. Does that mean I support the federal government overriding state decisions? No. I support Voter ID throughout America, does that mean I think it is a federal issue? No.

Cruz, in fact, repudiated a federal role in education in his same speech!

He wasn't talking about legalizing education. And he didn't repudiate a federal role in education. He repudiated one specific federal role and promoted another in its place.

acptulsa
03-23-2015, 06:02 PM
Grow some thicker skin if you are offended at everything you read. It's my opinion. Take it or leave it.

I know this is a completely foreign concept to some, but I was not actually thinking of myself.

TaftFan
03-23-2015, 06:03 PM
He wasn't talking about legalizing education. And he didn't repudiate a federal role in education. He repudiated one specific federal role and promoted another in its place.

That is BS and you know it. He did not promote a federal role in it's place. School choice is occurring nationally but on the state level and something all Republicans support.

acptulsa
03-23-2015, 06:06 PM
That is BS and you know it. He did not promote a federal role in it's place. School choice is occurring nationally but on the state level and something all Republicans support.

He didn't talk about school choice in the speech where he announced his candidacy for U.S. President because he was promising to make vouchers a reality on a federal level?

erowe1
03-23-2015, 06:08 PM
That is BS and you know it. He did not promote a federal role in it's place. School choice is occurring nationally but on the state level and something all Republicans support.

I don't get where you're getting all this. You provided the quote in the OP that settles it. Cruz is definitely promoting a federal school choice program. Bush did the same thing. This is the opposite of getting the federal government out of education. The fact that he's against common core doesn't change that. He's pulling the same trick Romney did with his repeal and replace talk.

How do you make all 50 states have school choice without having a federal role in education? And since when do all Republicans support that?

roho76
03-23-2015, 06:09 PM
You have a right to educate yourself but you don't have a "right" to an education. You don't have the right to something, only the right to pursue it. And then your right is only as good as your ability to protect that right from those who would rob you of it.

It wouldn't surprise me that Mr. Ted was speaking from a Dept of Ed angle.

jmdrake
03-23-2015, 06:14 PM
The distortion is that private schools would be more competitive with public schools.

The private schools that took the government money and the strings that will invariably be attached. As someone in the past who has personally paid for other people's kids to be able to go to private school, I am apprehensive about vouchers.

jmdrake
03-23-2015, 06:17 PM
This is such a minor issue. It seems to me to be a semantic issue at best, and a misunderstanding on Napolitano's part at worst. Cruz is a neocon, who's good on immigration and little else. I'd vote for him over Hillary, but he's still pretty lousy.

I agree with you that this is a minor issue. Frankly it's no worse than the word dances Rand does on foreign policy. (If you take a couple of drinks and read between the lines the right way it doesn't sound so bad.) I wouldn't vote for Cruz or Clinton though.

Christian Liberty
03-23-2015, 06:26 PM
No, Ted Cruz is a Southern Baptist. Judge Nap is a Catholic.


Oh, he's a Southern Baptist now? That's even worse. Southern Baptists are some of the worst statists in America (and the worst ion theology as well).
That has struck me as generally true WRT Southern Baptists, but you know how it is with congregational churches, there's a lot of variety even in the denomination. There are some Southern Baptists who are solidly Reformed. That said, its definitely not my favorite denomination.

TaftFan
03-23-2015, 06:28 PM
I don't get where you're getting all this. You provided the quote in the OP that settles it. Cruz is definitely promoting a federal school choice program. Bush did the same thing. This is the opposite of getting the federal government out of education. The fact that he's against common core doesn't change that. He's pulling the same trick Romney did with his repeal and replace talk.

How do you make all 50 states have school choice without having a federal role in education? And since when do all Republicans support that?

I wonder how he will have a federal school choice program when he is also eliminating the department of education?

In the past, Cruz has blasted Bill De Blasio for rejecting school choice. That was on the local level.

TaftFan
03-23-2015, 06:28 PM
The private schools that took the government money and the strings that will invariably be attached. As someone in the past who has personally paid for other people's kids to be able to go to private school, I am apprehensive about vouchers.

I only support them with no strings attached.

Brian4Liberty
03-23-2015, 06:34 PM
This is such a minor issue. It seems to me to be a semantic issue at best, and a misunderstanding on Napolitano's part at worst. Cruz is a neocon, who's good on immigration and little else. I'd vote for him over Hillary, but he's still pretty lousy.

He spoke about immigration in his speech today. It seems to amount to "secure the border" and then streamline the immigration process so that we can officially import masses of new people to do jobs Americans are too lazy or stupid to do.

jmdrake
03-23-2015, 06:39 PM
I only support them with no strings attached.

There is no such thing as government money with no strings attached.

Sola_Fide
03-23-2015, 06:53 PM
That has struck me as generally true WRT Southern Baptists, but you know how it is with congregational churches, there's a lot of variety even in the denomination. There are some Southern Baptists who are solidly Reformed. That said, its definitely not my favorite denomination.

Yes, there are like 5% or some small number that are Reformed Baptists in the SBC, but my church is not part of it. I think it goes against the independent Baptist tradition to be involved in conventions anyway.

jmdrake
03-23-2015, 07:02 PM
I wonder how he will have a federal school choice program when he is also eliminating the department of education?

In the past, Cruz has blasted Bill De Blasio for rejecting school choice. That was on the local level.

We had federal funding for colleges and universities without a Department of Education.

https://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/fed/role.html

ThePaleoLibertarian
03-23-2015, 07:06 PM
He spoke about immigration in his speech today. It seems to amount to "secure the border" and then streamline the immigration process so that we can officially import masses of new people to do jobs Americans are too lazy or stupid to do.
I'd have to see what he said specifically, but a "pathway to citizenship" is probably an unfortunate inevitability. I'd rather have a secure border, no net immigration and deportations, but I would take one of the three instead of none of them as it would be under any Democrat.

erowe1
03-23-2015, 07:12 PM
I wonder how he will have a federal school choice program when he is also eliminating the department of education?


He won't. He'll keep the DOE.



In the past, Cruz has blasted Bill De Blasio for rejecting school choice. That was on the local level.

But now he's talking about the federal level.

erowe1
03-23-2015, 07:13 PM
I only support them with no strings attached.

So parents can say they're home schooling their kids and then spend the voucher money on drugs and lottery tickets for themselves?

brushfire
03-23-2015, 07:15 PM
I must have missed something - where did the good Judge lie?

TaftFan
03-23-2015, 07:38 PM
He won't. He'll keep the DOE.



But now he's talking about the federal level.
Ok, so you are going to believe what you want to believe. Even though he supports ending the department and never suggested a federal voucher program. I'm done.

The Gold Standard
03-23-2015, 07:52 PM
I must have missed something - where did the good Judge lie?

He didn't. Truth is treason in the empire of lies, and the empire is trying to infiltrate this place just like everywhere else on this planet. I'm proud that I only see one guy fighting on behalf of that pig Cruz.

Christian Liberty
03-23-2015, 08:39 PM
Yes, there are like 5% or some small number that are Reformed Baptists in the SBC, but my church is not part of it. I think it goes against the independent Baptist tradition to be involved in conventions anyway.

OK, fair enough. I'm leaning more Presbyterian at this point, but kind of still deciding. I've still got time to figure out secondary issues like that.

jmdrake
03-23-2015, 08:47 PM
Ok, so you are going to believe what you want to believe. Even though he supports ending the department and never suggested a federal voucher program. I'm done.

Here's a question. There is currently no federal barrier to state school voucher programs. So.....what was Ted Cruz's point?

idiom
03-23-2015, 08:51 PM
Does school choice mean voucher? Vouchers for public schools may not have much of an affect on prices, but vouchers for private schools could have a devastating affect on the market clearing price. Subsidies distort markets.

And Public schools are not a subsidy?



If a federal candidate is talking about school choice as part of his platform, he is talking about a federal program.

It may be a far more efficient allocation of federal money, but it is still an allocation of federal money.

If it was a clean streamlined voucher program, it would be a huge step forward from the current system.

erowe1
03-23-2015, 09:14 PM
Even though he supports ending the department

I don't see how he can do this and stick with what he said in the quote your provided in the OP, unless he just wants to put his federal education stuff in some other department.


and never suggested a federal voucher program. I'm done.

A federal voucher program wouldn't be the only way he could pursue the campaign promise he made in the quote you provided. I think it's more likely that he'll propose something where states will have to have school choice programs at the state level in order to get federal money.

But whatever he does, I don't see how you can construe that quote somehow to mean he wants to get the federal government entirely out of education. What Napolitano said is a lot more true to what Cruz meant than what you seem to be saying.

Brett85
03-23-2015, 09:31 PM
I don't care. I'm not a Cruz supporter. I still think that Rand is night and day better than him.

cindy25
03-23-2015, 10:07 PM
there is a huge difference between federal right to education, and right to education. common core entrenches federal influence

TaftFan
03-24-2015, 06:41 AM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/23/ted-cruz-campaign-addresses-two-key-criticisms-from-prominent-libertarian-judge-napolitano/

Sorry spinsters, I was right all along:

The campaign spokesperson told TheBlaze Cruz absolutely was not claiming that every person has a federally guaranteed right to education, and he never mentioned the federal government in making the point. Instead, the spokesperson said Cruz was advocating for “bottom-up” education reform centered around school choice, the “right” to choose.

paleocon1
03-24-2015, 07:15 AM
I am so disappointed in Judge Napolitano. Beyond words.

From Fox News: http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/03/23/judge-napolitanos-constitutional-disagreements-ted-cruz

"Napolitano also said his "heart sank" when he heard Cruz talk about a "federal right to education"

Naturally, I had to find out the truth. I watched the speech. Here is what Ted Cruz said in his speech, word for word:

"Instead of a federal government which seeks to dictate curriculum through Common Core. Imagine repealing every word of Common Core. Imagine embracing school choice as the civil rights issue of the next generation. That every single child, regardless of race, regardless of ethnicity, regardless of wealth or zip code, every child in America has a right to a quality education."

Yeah well you would do better to be disappointed in Ted Cruz. Just where does the USA Constitution give the Feds or the Prez ANY roll in educating kids? For that matter where does the US Constitution give foreign born, foreign parented sorts such as Cruz leave to be President? Cruz is a whitewashed obama in an elephant suit.

Ender
03-24-2015, 08:20 AM
I'll take the Judge any day- Cruz can take a hike.

JK/SEA
03-24-2015, 08:23 AM
I'll take the Judge any day- Cruz can take a hike.

this.

pcosmar
03-24-2015, 08:27 AM
That is BS and you know it.

You should change your name to CruzFan and be done with it.
I have never seen that private schools are any better than public schools anyway.

kids will get "educated" regardless.. Life educates.

erowe1
03-24-2015, 08:43 AM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/23/ted-cruz-campaign-addresses-two-key-criticisms-from-prominent-libertarian-judge-napolitano/

Sorry spinsters, I was right all along:

Your use of the word "spinster" is ironic.

I don't get how the spin in that explanation helps your case one bit.

Conspicuously absent is any explanation of what he thinks his role will be as POTUS in making sure that this bottom-up education reform centered around school choice, that he claims every child in America has a right to, happens.

Suffice it to say, he's not talking about the federal government merely getting out of the way and letting whatever happens happen.

Cleaner44
03-24-2015, 08:56 AM
No One But Paul is still in effect.

Fuck Ted Cruz. He is better than Peter King but miles away from being a liberty candidate now.

erowe1
03-24-2015, 09:12 AM
No One But Paul is still in effect.

Fuck Ted Cruz. He is better than Peter King but miles away from being a liberty candidate now.

We can't afford to hedge our bets. If both Cruz and Paul are in the race, they will assure one another's defeat. We need to go no holds barred against Cruz and kill his chances early. You are all in or Rand Paul, or you're not for him at all. Cruz isn't a tolerable consolation prize in case Rand loses, he is public enemy number 1.

ETA: I have no problem with anyone who would rather sit the election out entirely than support Rand. But Cruz supporters have no conceivable use to us whatsoever other than as targets to proselytize.

AuH20
03-24-2015, 09:37 AM
We can't afford to hedge our bets. If both Cruz and Paul are in the race, they will assure one another's defeat. We need to go no holds barred against Cruz and kill his chances early. You are all in or Rand Paul, or you're not for him at all. Cruz isn't a tolerable consolation prize in case Rand loses, he is public enemy number 1.

ETA: I have no problem with anyone who would rather sit the election out entirely than support Rand. But Cruz supporters have no conceivable use to us whatsoever other than as targets to proselytize.


That's insane. Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton are public enemy #1.

erowe1
03-24-2015, 09:44 AM
That's insane. Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton are public enemy #1.

No way.

I don't know why you even mention Hillary. She's not a Republican. She may or may not get the Dem nomination, but if she does, she'll be easy for any Republican to beat. And Rand won't have a chance of being that Republican until he first gets the GOP nomination.

In order to get that GOP nomination, Rand needs to consolidate the anti-establishment Republicans behind himself. He won't be the establishment's pick. He can't. Jeb probably will. And if Jeb doesn't, someone else besides Rand will. That candidate will automatically have a huge advantage over all others. In order for Rand to be able to beat that candidate he first has to eliminate Cruz and plunder Cruz's potential support.

AuH20
03-24-2015, 09:46 AM
No way.

I don't know why you even mention Hillary. She's not a Republican. She may or may not get the Dem nomination, but if she does, she'll be easy for any Republican to beat. And Rand won't have a chance of being that Republican until he first gets the GOP nomination.

In order to get that GOP nomination, Rand needs to consolidate the anti-establishment Republicans behind himself. He won't be the establishment's pick. He can't. Jeb probably will. And if Jeb doesn't, someone else besides Rand will. That candidate will automatically have a huge advantage over all others. In order for Rand to be able to beat that candidate he first has to eliminate Cruz and plunder Cruz's potential support.

And when he beats Cruz's head in, how will he consolidate Cruz's voters? When you alienate his supporters, those votes are gone for good.

erowe1
03-24-2015, 09:51 AM
And when he beats Cruz's head in, how will he consolidate Cruz's voters? When you alienate his supporters, those votes are gone for good.

That's why we can't let it get that far. I didn't say "support," I said "potential support." Cruz has to go down in flames ASAP. That must be the priority. Jeb can wait.

jllundqu
03-24-2015, 10:10 AM
I'd like to see Rand and Cruz work together to move the whole party towards liberty issues. Once the votes are counted, whoever is left standing should support the other.

Just my humble 2 cents

AuH20
03-24-2015, 10:12 AM
I'd like to see Rand and Cruz work together to move the whole party towards liberty issues. Once the votes are counted, whoever is left standing should support the other.

Just my humble 2 cents

Yes, I agree. Both are long shots. But Rand's brand is stronger.

Anti Federalist
03-25-2015, 09:17 PM
Blarg blarg blarg...

NOBP!

DamianTV
03-27-2015, 05:37 PM
Ted Cruz is being used as nothing more than a Vote Splitter, intended to steal chances away from those we want as real presidential candidates.

In elections prior to Ron Paul, it usually only took one person to split the vote and cause the other party to win. I did find it hilarious, yet very concering that it took no less than SEVEN vote splitters to supress Ron Paul, who was treated by the MSM like the 13th floor of a Hotel that was infected with Ebola.

GunnyFreedom
03-27-2015, 05:59 PM
I am so disappointed in Judge Napolitano. Beyond words.

From Fox News: http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/03/23/judge-napolitanos-constitutional-disagreements-ted-cruz

"Napolitano also said his "heart sank" when he heard Cruz talk about a "federal right to education"

Naturally, I had to find out the truth. I watched the speech. Here is what Ted Cruz said in his speech, word for word:

"Instead of a federal government which seeks to dictate curriculum through Common Core. Imagine repealing every word of Common Core. Imagine embracing school choice as the civil rights issue of the next generation. That every single child, regardless of race, regardless of ethnicity, regardless of wealth or zip code, every child in America has a right to a quality education."

Sounds like he said exactly what Nap said he said to me. :confused:

GunnyFreedom
03-27-2015, 06:07 PM
What does he think a 'right' to quality education even means? Isn't that an awful lot like a 'right' to healthcare? Ok so he didn't say 'federally guaranteed,' but what exactly does he think is going to provide the teacher-slaves to fulfill this 'right?'

The rebuttal in the Blaze is just spin. Whether it's Washington DC providing the gunpoint teacher-slaves, or DC forces the individual States to round up teacher-slaves at gunpoint by themselves, ANY alleged 'right to a quality education' boils down to teaches being enslaved at gunpoint to provide for that 'right,' and in context it is Washington DC pressing that point.

PierzStyx
03-27-2015, 06:44 PM
I am so disappointed in Judge Napolitano. Beyond words.

From Fox News: http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/03/23/judge-napolitanos-constitutional-disagreements-ted-cruz

"Napolitano also said his "heart sank" when he heard Cruz talk about a "federal right to education"

Naturally, I had to find out the truth. I watched the speech. Here is what Ted Cruz said in his speech, word for word:

"Instead of a federal government which seeks to dictate curriculum through Common Core. Imagine repealing every word of Common Core. Imagine embracing school choice as the civil rights issue of the next generation. That every single child, regardless of race, regardless of ethnicity, regardless of wealth or zip code, every child in America has a right to a quality education."

The Judge was right on. Think about it, who ensures your rights are being protected? The government, in this current age the Federal government. If you have a right, if all people have an equal right to a baseline equality defined as "quality education" there is only one way you're going to get that-by using the Fedgov as the great "equalizer." The Judge is right on in pointing this out. Giving Cruz the benefit of the doubt he is probably like most statists, oudly proclaiming ideals without realizing the totalitarianism it'll require to get there. There is nothing here suggesting getting rid of the D.o. E., in fact if he plans to ensure all people have their "rights" to a "quality" education (a definition of which can also only be obtained through the government) then he will absolutely need the D.o.E. The Judge didn't lie, he just has much clearer vision than you do.

heavenlyboy34
03-27-2015, 07:34 PM
Ted Cruz is being used as nothing more than a Vote Splitter, intended to steal chances away from those we want as real presidential candidates.

In elections prior to Ron Paul, it usually only took one person to split the vote and cause the other party to win. I did find it hilarious, yet very concering that it took no less than SEVEN vote splitters to supress Ron Paul, who was treated by the MSM like the 13th floor of a Hotel that was infected with Ebola.

U still take elections srsly, bro? :eek:

cindy25
03-27-2015, 09:39 PM
Cruz serves a purpose, the same purpose that Gary Johnson should have but did not in 2012 (and both sides were at fault). Rand can't be the only Libertarian/semi Libertarian on the stage when there are 12 or more.

LibertyEagle
03-27-2015, 10:15 PM
The distortion is that private schools would be more competitive with public schools.

Maybe, but when private schools are forced to accept vouchers from the federal government, then the federal government can stick their noses into every aspect of that private school.

acptulsa
03-28-2015, 06:16 AM
Maybe, but when private schools are forced to accept vouchers from the federal government, then the federal government can stick their noses into every aspect of that private school.

That's how it works. In fact, that's why they're inflating the middle class away and trashing the economy.

Want your Obamacare? Want food stamps? Make your life an open book to us. Jump through these hoops. Here's a list of things we'll be sucking your blood out to make sure you aren't doing. Behave, slave. It may be our fault you can't stand on your own two feet like your grandfather did, but we'll keep telling you it's your own fault until you believe it.

tod evans
03-28-2015, 06:23 AM
His point is that poor kids should not be trapped in public schools. Put the money with the child, not the school. Allow competition in education.
Yes, he is for eliminating the Doe.

This approach is severely flawed too.

Children who really need "the money" have parents, or more likely a single parent, that will use said money for other purposes.

I don't see a good solution but rest assured government of any stripe is more of a problem than a solution.

PaulConventionWV
03-28-2015, 07:32 AM
I think if you pinned him down on it, he would not say that.

He was just using general language to emphasize that the government is messing up education and that the less involvement, the better.

lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol

PaulConventionWV
03-28-2015, 07:40 AM
How is a right to an education any different than a right to bear arms or right to freedom of speech or any other right? Saying one has a right doesn't mean others are required to provide it to you.

It does imply it. You have the right to your life, liberty and property. The "right" to an education is a right to a certain end rather than the right to pursue those ends. If you have a right to an end, then that means it must be provided to you if you don't have it. You have the right to pursue a quality education, not to get it. It can certainly be interpreted vaguely, but that's the problem. Society has begun to view rights as this moniker for things people should get rather than the ability to pursue those things.

PaulConventionWV
03-28-2015, 07:43 AM
This is also a really good point and an excellent way of phrasing it. In the context of Cruz bashing federal overreach, this makes complete sense.

You would never hear Ron Paul phrase it like that. There's a reason for that. Cruz is every bit as plastic as Mittens.

PaulConventionWV
03-28-2015, 07:53 AM
I'd say you have a right to an education and a right to pursue an education. Can somebody take your education from you? You do NOT have a right to be educated.

If you can't pay for it, hellz yeah.

PaulConventionWV
03-28-2015, 07:57 AM
I agree that words matter and using the words "right" to an education made my ears perk up... but I don't believe that's what Cruz was advocating. I don't agree it should be framed that way and makes the Judge look nit-picky.

I don't believe that's what he advocates either... because he doesn't actually advocate anything. He just puts his finger to the wind.

PaulConventionWV
03-28-2015, 08:05 AM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/23/ted-cruz-campaign-addresses-two-key-criticisms-from-prominent-libertarian-judge-napolitano/

Sorry spinsters, I was right all along:

Wow, his campaign spokesperson said something politically expedient! I am shocked!

DamianTV
03-28-2015, 08:14 AM
So, uh, Ted Cruz's wife works for Goldman Sachs (http://www.hangthebankers.com/ted-cruz-goldman-sachs-wife/)?

acptulsa
03-28-2015, 09:04 AM
So, uh, Ted Cruz's wife works for Goldman Sachs (http://www.hangthebankers.com/ted-cruz-goldman-sachs-wife/)?

Not exactly. She took a leave of absence. So her hands are clean and she's innocent as a lamb and pure as newfallen snow. For at least a year.

Ender
03-28-2015, 09:14 AM
Maybe, but when private schools are forced to accept vouchers from the federal government, then the federal government can stick their noses into every aspect of that private school.

And THAT is the purpose of vouchers.

Vouchers must never be implemented; the answer is to GET .GOV OUT OF EDUCATION.

tod evans
03-28-2015, 09:15 AM
So, uh, Ted Cruz's wife works for Goldman Sachs (http://www.hangthebankers.com/ted-cruz-goldman-sachs-wife/)?


Not exactly. She took a leave of absence. So her hands are clean and she's innocent as a lamb and pure as newfallen snow. For at least a year.


Corporate whores are still whores...

Male or female and from here they're a matched pair...

Henry Rogue
03-28-2015, 09:48 AM
And Public schools are not a subsidy?
Of course Public schools are a subsidy. They are wholly and completely subsidized. That's why I wasn't sure if another subsidy would affect prices on an already subsidized "public bad". It may be that a federal voucher rather than a state voucher may drastically increases prices, IDK. Further more, I'm not sure prices are a relevant term in public education, prices are derived from voluntary transactions. Public schools have costs, and then demand tribute from Taxpayers.



If a federal candidate is talking about school choice as part of his platform, he is talking about a federal program.

It may be a far more efficient allocation of federal money, but it is still an allocation of federal money.

If it was a clean streamlined voucher program, it would be a huge step forward from the current system.
What does a clean streamlined system entail? Just to clarify, which system are you talking about, Public Bureaucracy or Private Markets? How is making a "market good" more like a "governmemt bad" a step forward?

LibertyEagle
03-28-2015, 09:53 AM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/23/ted-cruz-campaign-addresses-two-key-criticisms-from-prominent-libertarian-judge-napolitano/

Sorry spinsters, I was right all along:

Really? Then tell me, then why would someone in the federal government and running for a federal office be advocating for how the states should handle education? Wouldn't he instead be trying to get the federal government out of the picture?

Feeding the Abscess
03-28-2015, 09:40 PM
His point is that poor kids should not be trapped in public schools. Put the money with the child, not the school. Allow competition in education.
Yes, he is for eliminating the Doe.

A sizable chunk of poor children do not have parents that can afford to send their children to school. They are, in fact, subsidized by wealthier families. How do you propose sending poor children to school without transfers of wealth?

heavenlyboy34
03-28-2015, 09:48 PM
A sizable chunk of poor children do not have parents that can afford to send their children to school. They are, in fact, subsidized by wealthier families. How do you propose sending poor children to school without transfers of wealth?

Churches and charities are the old-fashioned, tried-and-true way. What's wrong with that?

Feeding the Abscess
03-28-2015, 09:50 PM
Churches and charities are the old-fashioned, tried-and-true way. What's wrong with that?

Nothing. I'm trying to get Taftfan to see that vouchers for poor children don't solve the problem of wealth transfers.

heavenlyboy34
03-28-2015, 09:51 PM
Nothing. I'm trying to get Taftfan to see that vouchers for poor children don't solve the problem of wealth transfers.

Natch. Didn't read back that far. Sorry to disrupt your conversation. :o ~hugs~

otherone
03-29-2015, 06:39 AM
A sizable chunk of poor children do not have parents that can afford to send their children to school. They are, in fact, subsidized by wealthier families. How do you propose sending poor children to school without transfers of wealth?

As an aside, who actually benefits from public education?

http://www.rhinoden.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/cubicles.jpg