Judge Napolitano flat-out lies about Ted Cruz on Fox News

[erowe1]

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015...ge-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]

No One But Paul is still in effect.

$#@! Ted Cruz. He is better than Peter King but miles away from being a liberty candidate now.

[erowe1]

No One But Paul is still in effect.

$#@! 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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Blarg blarg blarg...

NOBP!

[DamianTV]

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]

I am so disappointed in Judge Napolitano. Beyond words.

From Fox News: http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/03/2...ments-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.

[GunnyFreedom]

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]

I am so disappointed in Judge Napolitano. Beyond words.

From Fox News: http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/03/2...ments-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]

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?

[cindy25]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015...ge-napolitano/

Sorry spinsters, I was right all along:

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

[DamianTV]

So, uh, Ted Cruz's wife works for Goldman Sachs?

[acptulsa]

So, uh, Ted Cruz's wife works for Goldman Sachs?

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]

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]

So, uh, Ted Cruz's wife works for Goldman Sachs?

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]

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?