Cruz eviscerates Reid on the Senate floor. Which one do you agree with?

[WVPATX]

Kate's Law would mandate a 5 year minimum sentence for every illegal alien which has an aggravated felony conviction and caught re-entering the country

On the Senate floor Wednesday, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) asked for unanimous consent for Kate’s Law, a bill he introduced after 32-year-old Kate Steinle was murdered by an illegal immigrant who had been deported numerous times. The legislation would place a mandatory minimum sentence of five years in prison for any undocumented immigrant who reenters the country illegally.

Cruz noted that Americans are on his side on this issue, as indicated by recent polling. The senator also pointed to Tuesday's sheriff election in San Francisco, in which voters booted pro-sanctuary city Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi from office. “Even in the bluest of blue states, Americans are tired of politicians standing with criminal illegal aliens,” Cruz said.

After Cruz’s emotional speech, Democratic Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid immediately voiced his objection to the legislation, arguing it would require a burdensome amount of spending.

That’s when Cruz went off on the senator. Reid objects to Kate’s Law because it would “cost too much,” Cruz said. “We need to spend the money to lock up murderers…It’s cheaper to lose our sons and daughters.”

Reid’s argument highlights “the cynicism of the modern Democratic party,” he added, noting it’s shameful that Democrats would rather side with “violent, felon illegal immigrants” than law-abiding American citizens.

 

[Airport]

Cruz is the best at debate in the senate and in the presidential primary. For the fun of it, I would pay to see Cruz go after Hillary or Obama. Neither are in his league. Cruz hit Feinstein in a committee meeting about which of the amendments she would prohibit, she was at a total loss of words. The next day, she came back but 24 hrs doesn't cut it in a debate.

 

[RichardPeterJohnson]

Cruz is the best at debate in the senate and in the presidential primary. For the fun of it, I would pay to see Cruz go after Hillary or Obama. Neither are in his league. Cruz hit Feinstein in a committee meeting about which of the amendments she would prohibit, she was at a total loss of words. The next day, she came back but 24 hrs doesn't cut it in a debate.

If Cruz is such a great debater, why isn't he doing better in the actual debates? He sucks. That's why.

 

[easy91_rivals]

I agree with Ted Cruz on this one. I also agree that he is the best debater of all the candidates. I'm not aware whether any folks on here were on the band wagon about Obama's birth status; if so, doesn't Ted Cruz face the same issue due to being born outside the US? This is an honest query--not one to flame or be devisive.

 

[RichardPeterJohnson]

I agree with Ted Cruz on this one. I also agree that he is the best debater of all the candidates. I'm not aware whether any folks on here were on the band wagon about Obama's birth status; if so, doesn't Ted Cruz face the same issue due to being born outside the US? This is an honest query--not one to flame or be devisive.

the main difference is Obama was actually born in the US and Cruz wasn't. But you point is well taken. Cruz was born outside the US to an American mother and a foreign father. Obama's mother was American and his father was foreign. So even if Obama had been born outside the US, he'd have been a "naturalized" citizen-just like Cruz. Funny how that works.

 

[WVPATX]

the main difference is Obama was actually born in the US and Cruz wasn't. But you point is well taken. Cruz was born outside the US to an American mother and a foreign father. Obama's mother was American and his father was foreign. So even if Obama had been born outside the US, he'd have been a "naturalized" citizen-just like Cruz. Funny how that works.

Do you agree with Cruz or Reid on this issue?

 

[easy91_rivals]

I understand the legal basis for the arguments. Section 1 of Article 2 in the Constitution states that only “a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President,” Section 301(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act automatically extends naturalized citizenship to anyone born of an American citizen. This was enacted to preclude Alexander Hamilton from being eligible for the presidency. I find it hypocritical that what's good for the goose isn't good for the gander.

 

[RichardPeterJohnson]

Do you agree with Cruz or Reid on this issue?

It's pretty simple, if you are convicted of an aggravated felony, you should be in jail. You think Reid doesn't agree with that?

 

[WVPATX]

It's pretty simple, if you are convicted of an aggravated felony, you should be in jail. You think Reid doesn't agree with that?

Once again, you avoided my question. Let me type this slowly. An illegal immigrant convicted of an aggravated felony gets deported. He re-enters the country and is caught. Cruz wants a mandatory minimum of 5 years (Kate's Law) to discourage vicious illegals from trying to re-enter. Reid is against Kate's Law claiming it is too expensive.

Do you support Kate's Law?

 

[RichardPeterJohnson]

Once again, you avoided my question. Let me type this slowly. An illegal immigrant convicted of an aggravated felony gets deported. He re-enters the country and is caught. Cruz wants a mandatory minimum of 5 years (Kate's Law) to discourage vicious illegals from trying to re-enter. Reid is against Kate's Law claiming it is too expensive.

Do you support Kate's Law?

On the surface, I have no problems with that. But I'd like to hear the other side of it too. The world isn't always black and white. People can have legitimate objections. I doubt that your "source" (unattributed again...imagine that) is telling the whole story.

 

[WVPATX]

On the surface, I have no problems with that. But I'd like to hear the other side of it too. The world isn't always black and white. People can have legitimate objections. I doubt that your "source" (unattributed again...imagine that) is telling the whole story.

Reid's objection per the article was cost. His real reason doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out. He is bowing to the liberal Hispanic vote.

Under what circumstances would you support enabling the reentry of illegals that have committed aggravated felonies? That defies all sorts of common sense.

 

[bornaneer]

It's pretty simple, if you are convicted of an aggravated felony, you should be in jail.

 

[WVUBRU]

n illegal immigrant convicted of an aggravated felony gets deported.

I don't have much time at the present and didn't read the unreliable crap the Troll posted in the original post. But any immigrant, illegal or otherwise, is convicted in the US justice system should serve his sentence in an American prison. Upon release if they are released, I'm in favor of deporting. Are you saying upon conviction they should be deported? Is that what Cruz wants? If so, I am against it.

 

[WVPATX]

I don't have much time at the present and didn't read the unreliable crap the Troll posted in the original post. But any immigrant, illegal or otherwise, is convicted in the US justice system should serve his sentence in an American prison. Upon release if they are released, I'm in favor of deporting. Are you saying upon conviction they should be deported? Is that what Cruz wants? If so, I am against it.

Kate's Law is very simple. If an illegal immigrant is caught re-entering the country (after being deported) and they have committed and been found guilty of an aggravated felony, they get a mandatory minimum of 5 years in a federal prison. This would greatly discourage these criminals from trying to re-enter the country.

I believe these felons first serve their time in a state or federal prison before they are deported. But that has nothing to do with Kate's Law.

 

[bornaneer]

I don't have much time at the present and didn't read the unreliable crap the Troll posted in the original post. But any immigrant, illegal or otherwise, is convicted in the US justice system should serve his sentence in an American prison. Upon release if they are released, I'm in favor of deporting. Are you saying upon conviction they should be deported? Is that what Cruz wants? If so, I am against it.

If you want them deported AFTER they serve time,why should we go to the expense of warehousing them after they were convicted. So the reason you would be against deportation right after conviction is solely because of Cruz?

 

[WVUBRU]

If you want them deported AFTER they serve time,why should we go to the expense of warehousing them after they were convicted. So the reason you would be against deportation right after conviction is solely because of Cruz?

No, not what I said at all. Why do you constantly put words in other's peoples mouths? Leads to people not wanting to talk to you.

Crimes committed in this country are covered under the Constitution and the Justice system is in place to take care of it. I'm not in favor of violating the Constitution. Why are you?

I want to deport all convicted illegal aliens and am in favor of very stiff penalties if a previously deported ex-con illegal re-enters the country. Hell, I don't know if 5 years is even enough. Not up on the issue enough to form a firm opinion.

 

[bornaneer]

No, not what I said at all. Why do you constantly put words in other's peoples mouths? Leads to people not wanting to talk to you.

Crimes committed in this country are covered under the Constitution and the Justice system is in place to take care of it. I'm not in favor of violating the Constitution. Why are you?

I want to deport all convicted illegal aliens and am in favor of very stiff penalties if a previously deported ex-con illegal re-enters the country. Hell, I don't know if 5 years is even enough. Not up on the issue enough to form a firm opinion.

Did not mean to put words in your mouth. My point was why go to the expense of warehousing them. I also asked you a simple question about your opposition to the idea if it was Cruz's. Your last sentence clearly indicated your thought on the matter. I'm no expert on the Constitution , is it against the law to deport someone right after convection? If it is, we could sentence them to a week in jail and then deport them. Does that work for you? It sure would save us tons of money and help un-clutter our overburdened prison systems.

 

[WVUBRU]

Did not mean to put words in your mouth. My point was why go to the expense of warehousing them. I also asked you a simple question about your opposition to the idea if it was Cruz's. Your last sentence clearly indicated your thought on the matter. I'm no expert on the Constitution , is it against the law to deport someone right after convection? If it is, we could sentence them to a week in jail and then deport them. Does that work for you? It sure would save us tons of money and help un-clutter our overburdened prison systems.

I don't base all my opinions on whether it is financially expedient to just sweep the problem under the rug. I believe in freedom, rights and fairness and attempt to form opinions around those values. I also believe and want crimes committed in this country to punish those in this country and do it humanely and properly based on the laws of the country. I also want to pass laws to reduce the chances of these type of things happening at the rate they are currently happening. So, playing a hypothetical game that is not realistic because it is not acceptable under the Constitution and subsequent laws and SC decisions is downright stupid. Sorry. Find someone else to play your game with.

 

[dave]

If Cruz is such a great debater, why isn't he doing better in the actual debates? He sucks. That's why.

Just because it goes over your head doesnt make him bad.

 

[easy91_rivals]

If any non-citizen is convicted of a crime, he has to serve the sentence in the jurisdiction where he was served (either state or federal). Certain felonies make the non-citizen deportable after he has completed his sentence. Deportation is a separate action governed by federal immigration law. Kate's Law would make it a federal offense for any previously deported non-citizen who was convicted of an aggravated felony to re-enter the US again. If a previously deported aggravated felon is in the US without legal justification, Kate's law would mandate that the non-citizen would have to serve a mandatory minimum sentence of five years in federal detention upon conviction if he is located after entering illegally.
This would require that the US house the non-citizen in a federal detention center for five years. Reid says that the cost of this detention and subsequent second deportation would not justify the punitive and deterrent intent of the legislation. Cruz says that the cost is worth it. Reid's response is a hard sell given his history of supporting governmental spending.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

I don't base all my opinions on whether it is financially expedient to just sweep the problem under the rug. I believe in freedom, rights and fairness and attempt to form opinions around those values. I also believe and want crimes committed in this country to punish those in this country and do it humanely and properly based on the laws of the country. I also want to pass laws to reduce the chances of these type of things happening at the rate they are currently happening. So, playing a hypothetical game that is not realistic because it is not acceptable under the Constitution and subsequent laws and SC decisions is downright stupid. Sorry. Find someone else to play your game with.

This is a most bizarre response to a discussion.

 

[WVPATX]

If any non-citizen is convicted of a crime, he has to serve the sentence in the jurisdiction where he was served (either state or federal). Certain felonies make the non-citizen deportable after he has completed his sentence. Deportation is a separate action governed by federal immigration law. Kate's Law would make it a federal offense for any previously deported non-citizen who was convicted of an aggravated felony to re-enter the US again. If a previously deported aggravated felon is in the US without legal justification, Kate's law would mandate that the non-citizen would have to serve a mandatory minimum sentence of five years in federal detention upon conviction if he is located after entering illegally.
This would require that the US house the non-citizen in a federal detention center for five years. Reid says that the cost of this detention and subsequent second deportation would not justify the punitive and deterrent intent of the legislation. Cruz says that the cost is worth it. Reid's response is a hard sell given his history of supporting governmental spending.

It's a hard sell because you are letting violent criminals roam the streets in sanctuary cities. Lives are being lost.

 

[easy91_rivals]

In regard to "hard sell", I'm not commenting on the merits of the matter. I'm simply saying that he loses credibility by wanting to spend on Monday and cut soending on Tuesday.

 

[WVPATX]

In regard to "hard sell", I'm not commenting on the merits of the matter. I'm simply saying that he loses credibility by wanting to spend on Monday and cut soending on Tuesday.

That's true

 

[bornaneer]

This is a most bizarre response to a discussion.

Yes it is. This poor guy must spend his days muttering to himself. Can't answer a simple question and then plays the victim. He made the statement being against something because Cruz was for it. Who cares about the merits of the idea. Any logical person knows exactly what he meant. I have tried to be civil with some who post here, but they are almost impossible to deal with. This is why the country is in the shape its in.

 

[WVUBRU]

LMAO at two individuals.

Good to see two people that have whined so bad about personal attacks and one saying he wouldn't continues to make personal attacks. I will stay above it as again, I believe in something that is called character. Go on and keep commenting. It is amusing.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

LMAO at two individuals.

Good to see two people that have whined so bad about personal attacks and one saying he wouldn't continues to make personal attacks. I will stay above it as again, I believe in something that is called character. Go on and keep commenting. It is amusing.

And in 2 weeks I've made one. I'm guessing you are up in years, late 50s early 60s?

 

[WVUBRU]

And in 2 weeks I've made one. I'm guessing you are up in years, late 50s early 60s?

False. You have made more than one but who is counting? LMAO

Everyone can tell what type of person you are and no one had any expectation of anything that shows anything different. So go on, make another. Doesn't matter.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

False. You have made more than one but who is counting? LMAO

Everyone can tell what type of person you are and no one had any expectation of anything that shows anything different. So go one, make another. Doesn't matter.

Ok Bru. Whatever you say man. I struggle following you.

 

[WVUBRU]

Ok Bru. Whatever you say man. I struggle following you.

Yes, you do. Some of us understand why.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

Yes, you do. Some of us understand why.

Cool. Why is that?

 

[Airport]

If Cruz is such a great debater, why isn't he doing better in the actual debates? He sucks. That's why.

If you think he sucks as a debater, why was he, a conservative and well known, the debate champion at liberal Princeton U? He is good, just because you don't like him doesn't make it so. He had the best line when he called the demo debate a contest between the bolshovics and the menshovics. Sorry, he's young and not well known. He will be though.

 

[dave]

LMAO at two individuals.

Good to see two people that have whined so bad about personal attacks and one saying he wouldn't continues to make personal attacks. I will stay above it as again, I believe in something that is called character. Go on and keep commenting. It is amusing.

Biggest hypcrite on the internet.

 

[Airport]

If Cruz is such a great debater, why isn't he doing better in the actual debates? He sucks. That's why.

If you think he sucks as a debater, why was he, a conservative and well known, the debate champion at liberal Princeton U? He is good, just because you don't like him doesn't make it so. He had the best line when he called the demo debate a contest between the bolshovics and the menshovics. Sorry, he's young and not well known. He will be though.

 

[RichardPeterJohnson]

If you think he sucks as a debater, why was he, a conservative and well known, the debate champion at liberal Princeton U? He is good, just because you don't like him doesn't make it so. He had the best line when he called the demo debate a contest between the bolshovics and the menshovics. Sorry, he's young and not well known. He will be though.

A college debate competition is completely different than a political debate-especially given the format of these presidential debates. Cruz comes across poorly. If he was a such a great debater, his words would have propelled him at least close to the lead. He's at about 10% the last time I looked and that's probably generous. The fact is, even members of the GOP apparently don't think he's such a great debater. And you've pointed out his only good moment is any of the debates so far-and that was a play to the conservative audience that the "liberal media" wasn't being fair. Talk about your low hanging fruit. Cruz is a populist rabble-rouser.

 

[Airport]

A college debate competition is completely different than a political debate-especially given the format of these presidential debates. Cruz comes across poorly. If he was a such a great debater, his words would have propelled him at least close to the lead. He's at about 10% the last time I looked and that's probably generous. The fact is, even members of the GOP apparently don't think he's such a great debater. And you've pointed out his only good moment is any of the debates so far-and that was a play to the conservative audience that the "liberal media" wasn't being fair. Talk about your low hanging fruit. Cruz is a populist rabble-rouser.

You are completely wrong on Cruz. He is the best of the bunch as far as landing blows. He, like Rubio, are in their mid 40's and their best days are probably ahead of them. I had a person in my office today who supports Warner here in Va, and she said the same thing, he is a top flight debater. She's very educated and level headed, except for Warner!

 

[WhiteTailEER]

If you think he sucks as a debater, why was he, a conservative and well known, the debate champion at liberal Princeton U? He is good, just because you don't like him doesn't make it so.

What difference does it make if he's a good debater or not?

A leader has to lead, not argue. A leader has to make decisions, not argue. A leader has to solve problems, not argue.

Maybe he is such a great debater that he can convince everybody the sky is green ... what good does that do? It doesn't matter how good you are at arguing your position if your position isn't based in reality, or isn't the best solution.

Our biggest issue is the divisiveness ... there is no way in hell that Cruz is going to bridge the gap between the aisles.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

What difference does it make if he's a good debater or not?

A leader has to lead, not argue. A leader has to make decisions, not argue. A leader has to solve problems, not argue.

Maybe he is such a great debater that he can convince everybody the sky is green ... what good does that do? It doesn't matter how good you are at arguing your position if your position isn't based in reality, or isn't the best solution.

Our biggest issue is the divisiveness ... there is no way in hell that Cruz is going to bridge the gap between the aisles.

Great post.

 

[WVPATX]

What difference does it make if he's a good debater or not?

A leader has to lead, not argue. A leader has to make decisions, not argue. A leader has to solve problems, not argue.

Maybe he is such a great debater that he can convince everybody the sky is green ... what good does that do? It doesn't matter how good you are at arguing your position if your position isn't based in reality, or isn't the best solution.

Our biggest issue is the divisiveness ... there is no way in hell that Cruz is going to bridge the gap between the aisles.

Who on the lib side is a uniter?

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

Who on the lib side is a uniter?

This thread is not about anyone on the left. It is about Cruz. To answer your question though, no one currently running. I would argue of all the candidates that Hillary is THE most divisive.