The cat fighting has begun.
According to Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz “has not told the truth about his position in the past on legalization. He supports legalizing people that are here illegally. Or at least did until the other night, at the debate.”
To which Cruz responded,
“Let’s have a moment of simple clarity: I oppose amnesty, I oppose citizenship, I oppose legalization for illegal immigrants. I always have, I always will and I challenge every other Republican candidate to say the same thing or if not, then to stop making silly assertions that their records and my records on immigration are the same”.
However, in 2013 Cruz had proposed several amendments to the “Gang of Eight” immigration bill, one of which would have supported legalization, but not a pathway to citizenship.
As he had said then, “If the proponents of this bill actually demonstrate a commitment not to politics, not to campaigning all the time, but to actually fixing this problem, to finding a middle ground, that would fix the problem and also allow for those 11 million people who are here illegally a legal status with citizenship off the table.”
But now that people’s attitudes have changed, and he wants the votes, he claims that the purpose of his amendments, although not made clear at the time, was meant to expose those who were attempting amnesty above all other forms of immigration reform.
He was calling their bluff which he claims are all “hypocrisy and the lies.”
You see, as he said at the debate, “I have never supported legalization and I do not intend to support legalization.”
Well, not really.
Cruz said that both he and Rubio campaigned for the Senate saying they would fight amnesty, but Rubio reversed course once he made it to Washington, but, “Those decisions have consequences. In 2013, I think the Rubio campaign thought it was a very clever move that by supporting amnesty which is supported by big business, that they would lock up the big money donors in the Republican Party and he would benefit. Now two years later, I think the Rubio campaign, they wish they hadn’t made that choice. And as a result they are trying to muddy the waters, but you know the lines are very clear.”
Who manufactures generic levitra 60 mg drugs? At first make sure who manufactures the prescription medications, you intend to purchase. Don’t take http://downtownsault.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/01-13-16-DDA-MINUTES.pdf levitra for sale online if you have the following conditions normally takes place: Small arteries might lead to the development of erectile dysfunction. Heart disease has viagra on the potential to damage or kill cells and often leads to a reduction in contraction capacity that leads to fluid accumulation in the lungs and deficiencies in oxygen and nutrient delivery to the rest of the body. A huge range of men suffer from impotence or erectile dysfunction is generally referred as a problem of not rising sexual urge or sometimes they have some of tadalafil 100mg http://downtownsault.org/downtown/services/jump-u-p/ the problems like that. As the fight continues between the two men, at least one of them said the attack has turned personal.
“Ted is the one that chose to attack me personally in a very strong way and I simply responded with the facts,” said Rubio in Iowa Thursday.
Cruz praised Rubio even while criticizing him.
“Now, Marco Rubio is a friend of mine he is a wonderful communicator, he’s a charming individual he’s very well liked.”
At the time when the comprehensive immigration bill co-authored by Rubio was debated, Cruz repeatedly advocated for an amendment that would strip citizenship from the compromise and instead stop at simply legalization for the undocumented.
Fox News host Bret Baier, being somewhat confused by his having said one thing in the past and now saying it was part of a grand strategy that he has kept secret for two years, asked Cruz on his show after the most recent debate about his having said at the time, “I believe that if my amendments were adopted, the bill would pass. My effort in introducing them was to find a solution that reflected common ground and fixed the problem”, and Cruz acted confused.
“Of course I wanted the bill – my amendment, to pass. What my amendment did was take citizenship off the table.”
Rubio’s response to Cruz’s confusion?
“Basically the argument he was making is, we can pass immigration reform but we can’t do citizenship. Let’s just do legalization and if we do that, this bill has a chance of passing. Now, of course, in this campaign he’s looking for political advantage and so he tries to obscure the lines on it.”
Rubio himself has modified what he was doing in 2013 to a different approach now since his original stance lost him the conservative support he wants now.
So Cruz and Rubio, who constantly talk about their immigrant backgrounds, are competing with each other to show which is more anti-immigrant.
The one thing they seem to agree on is that immigrants from countries that have terrorists should not be allowed to enter the United State, while ignoring that if this had been the policy of the country in the past, their parents would not have been allowed to come here.