Eligibility: How Ted Cruz Got Totally Tripped up in his Tangle of Lies

by Nomad

If Ted Cruz is eligible, says one blogger, then he has been caught in yet another lie. Like Cruz, Obama's mother was American. If Obama is eligible, why have the Birthers like Cruz been slandering the president for so many years?

AMERICAblog writer, Jon Green, makes a valid point worth highlighting about Ted Cruz and the revived question of his eligibility to run as president.  

With a great deal of schadenfreude,  we on the Left can thank Donald Trump for bringing up this issue. Is Canadian-born Ted "Rafael" Cruz actually constitutionally eligible to run for president?

It's doubtful whether there's much validity to Trump's argument but it is everso enjoyable to watch Cruz squirm in the heat of the media attention. After years of leading a completely ridiculous crusade against the President's eligibility. it is fun to see the table turned. Over the years, Cruz (and Trump too) propagated vague theories about Obama's unfitness for office. And that had the easily-deceived birthers eating from Ted's palm. He didn't get to be a Tea Party favorite by his good looks and shining intellect. 

Trump's question about Cruz's eligibility appeared to be fairly simple to resolve. Cruz produced his birth certificate proving that he was born to an American mother, thus satisfying the qualifications. No matter where he was born, Canada or Russia or Kenya, so long as his mother had an American passport, he could claim American citizenship.
But the debate wouldn't die. Some leading constitutional lawyers still openly disagreed about the issue.  The Washington Post states:

In Cruz's case, nobody is disputing the underlying facts of the case -- that Cruz was born in Canada to a Cuban father and a mother who was a U.S. citizen. ... that makes him a U.S. citizen himself, but it's not 100 percent clear that that is the same thing as a "natural-born citizen" -- the requirement for becoming president.

The Post adds that while most scholars think the terms mean the same thing and that Cruz "most likely" qualifies, nobody is quite sure. It's mighty satisfying to watch Cruz getting a taste of his own bitter medicine. 

Jefferson's Take: Why Separation of Church and Government is Necessary

by Nomad

The Iranian Nuclear Accord and the True Faith and Allegiance of Senator Ted Cruz

by Nomad

As the Iranian Nuclear Accord becomes a fact, Presidential candidate and Senator Ted Cruz a strange inability to understand how the US Constitution works. Or perhaps he simply refuses to respect the process it established.

According to the Constitution, the powers of the executive branch have two very important limitations. The president cannot declare war (yet, paradoxically perhaps, he/she is also the commander of the US military.)
Additionally, the president cannot make treaties or appointments without the "advice and consent of the Senate."

When it came to the historic nuclear agreement with Iran, Republican-led Congress took that limitation as a tool to stop dead any kind of lifting of sanctions or a less bellicose approach to the Iranian Republic.
Here are some highlights.

Cotton's Overreach

About a year ago at this time, the debate on the four-nation nuclear deal with Iran was ongoing and by summer, it was in full swing. Given adversarial and generally obstructionist attitude in Congress, nobody was surprised that the Republican majority seemed determined in every way to give Obama a lesson he would not soon forget. 

It didn't turn out as planned.

With GOP in Complete Disarray, Trump Offers Establishment Some Difficult Choices

by Nomad

The results from the last Republican debate are in and it must have a lot of people in the Republican party extremely jittery. And they really ought to be.

After the sixth debate, Trump is still holding his commanding position, the reins of Republican Party power seem to be in his hands and he isn't going anywhere.  

MarketWatch reports:

The political establishment — in places like New York, Washington and Los Angeles — has been waiting for months for the Trump movement to flame out of its own accord. In the past few weeks they have finally woken up to the shock that this may not happen.

The choices for the ruling elite (whose authority Trump seems to be directly challenging) are stark. Either take Donald Trump with all his political warts, all of his toxic rhetoric and his inane policies or take a 50-50% risk that he will walk away and escort his supporters over to his third party. 

Even the Best Case Isn't So Terrific

According to one source, all this uncertainty and instability is having a negative effect on Wall Street. While blaming the decline in stocks on the political confusion might seem like a stretch, there is a bit of logic to that claim.

Above all else, Wall Street likes certainty and predictability. It's their security blanket and, at this point, things, especially in the Republican Party, could hardly be anymore uncertain. Here are two possible outcomes and both are fairly awful for investors. 

Even in Wall Street’s best-case scenario, the parties will only pick establishment candidates after months of bruising primary battles. In a worst-case scenario (for investors, at any rate): They’ll pick one or two heterodox outsiders who will threaten to turn everything upside down.

So, you have the Republican party being led by a rabble-rousing billionaire that cannot be bought and on the other side, there's a competition among the Dems about which candidate can appear more aggressive on Wall Street accountability.

For the Republican Party, the options are fraught with existential danger, namely, an acrimonious split in the GOP that will not be easily mended.
Analysts are looking at the possibility of having an unelectable candidate or an unwinnable campaign. 

Overlooked Provision in Omnibus Spending Bill Throws Lifeline to Struggling Food Banks

by Nomad

If austerity-minded organizations, like the Heritage Foundation, or the Tea Party might have been roaring in anger about the omnibus spending package, some people thought certain provisions in the deal provided a much-needed ray of hope.

Republican members of Congress didn't really look forward to their constituents dwelling too much on the $1.1 trillion omnibus spending bill signed into law by President Barack Obama right before Christmas.

Better to think of happier things, seasonal joys and the promise of the new year. It's no wonder too. Far-Right Activists could understandably claim that once again they have been hoodwinked by politicians who promised a lot of things they had no intention of delivering upon.

The worst offender, according to their point of view, was Speaker of the House Paul Ryan. He was supposed to replace the cowardly crybaby John Boehner.  Fox News regaled Ryan back then. All of the cliches were present and accounted for: "a new day" and "turning a page."  

That was only in October. By Christmas, the honeymoon was definitely over. The annulment has already begun. It's really not his fault, though, that American government doesn't actually function the way some people think it does.