Patterico's Pontifications

4/28/2016

Guest Post by Ed from SFV: “Ted and Me”

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 11:11 pm

Our own Ed from SFV met Ted Cruz today. He asked Ted Cruz the second most important question I can think of. (The most important question, of course, would have been: “Do you read the Patterico blog?”) And he got a straight answer. Ed wrote up his experience for us, and what follows is his account. I thank him for writing it up and sharing it with us. — Patterico

I just had a profoundly American experience. I’d like to share some of it with you.

Ted Cruz was in town (South Bend, IN) and the public was more than welcome to come see him. The appearance was planned for the early news window (5 – 6 PM, ET). I decided to not miss this chance and to get there super early so that I might score a front row seat.

I was the first to arrive. Already there was a husband/wife team who were honchoing things with the folks who ran the venue and with local security and police. All I wanted to do was to bring a chair to the entrance to the hall so I could sit for the couple of hours until the event, and be assured of my line position.

They asked if I might be willing to help out a little and I said, “Sure!” So, I became a volunteer for Cruz. It turns out that this gentleman, with his own cash, fronted the campaign some resources and money to help establish a local Cruz campaign office, which had just opened. He’s a retired local policeman and his wife is a PhD in Psychology. They could not have been nicer or more appreciative.

A few minutes later, a very young man from DC, via South Carolina, arrived. He was an actual advance man for the national Cruz campaign. He was very nice and had a very few details he wanted to be sure we handled. The biggie was signage. While he loved that many folks would come out to support Ted with hand-made signs and such, he wanted to make certain that any messaging was well within certain approved parameters. To my knowledge, we had no need to alter or refuse any of the signs which were brought. Pretty basic stuff, eh?

Only a very few minutes before Ted and Carly arrived on site, more national staff appeared, and an obvious Secret Service presence made itself known. I had no interactions with any of these. Well, almost none.

The first thing to do was to figure out how to handle the lines of folks which were sure to develop prior to opening the doors of the hall. You see? It’s the everyday, mundane, that really matters. This wasn’t about high-level concepts or imagery, or highfalutin’ considerations. Or even donating money. It’s just a few folks deciding to help out a little bit, doing a little here, and a little there, to elect a president.

We decided where to place those who had printed off tickets which had been offered the night before. Anyone without such a ticket would be asked to sign in with a name and basic contact info. By NO means was it a requirement to sign in. All were welcome. Full stop. We arranged a couple of tables to facilitate this process. Rocket science, right?

A little while later came about a dozen young, fresh faces asking if they could help out. They were from Notre Dame, St. Mary’s, and Holy Cross College (Yes, the place Rudy first matriculated). The fellas came armed with those fun posters of Ted all tatted up with the cigarette hanging from his mouth, and some more conventional posters, as well. Did we have any tape they could use? Nope. So…we all went on a search for tape. Some was found and they went to town. The long entrance hallway and the environs just outside the hall entrance were soon festooned with Cruz posters.

We had a few of the young college ladies man the tables helping non-ticketed folks sign in, and to go out into the lines which were now growing and ask folks to sign a “Commitment to Ted” card, if they were so inclined. Their energy was very well received by everyone. Go figure, right?

The media started drifting in. We had no specific rules to offer them. There was a stage for them to set up, and an audio multi in which they could plug for direct audio from any speaker’s microphone. I took the chance to chat with the local guy I most respect. I mentioned how Nate Silver of 538 had written that despite the publicly-available poll numbers, he was giving Ted a 53% chance of victory here. [Now up to 58%! — P] He had never heard of this and appreciated the tip. All he knew was that Trump was looking pretty good to win. Well, now he knew otherwise. Because I was there and engaged him.

The doors opened and some care was taken to get various demographics of folks seated so that they might be seen by the cameras. The big concern was what to do with some open areas adjacent to the entranceway Ted and Carly would be using. We quickly confirmed with security that these spaces were meant to be occupied and we made darn sure they were full. Those folks were thrilled that they were assured to be within a very few feet of Ted and Carly. An easy and obvious win-win. But, nobody had really thought that one out in advance. Yet, again, pretty basic, common sense, made it happen.

Oh. Here was my contact with the Secret Service. Apparently, I went through an area which was supposed to have been secured. All I knew, as a brand-spanking new volunteer was that I was to find the local Cruz man so he could seat me. Ooops. An agent was NOT amused. He questioned me aggressively as to how I showed up in his space. I believe he was exasperated that I had so easily, albeit innocently, arrived there. He was going to take me by my elbow and escort me right back to the point I should not have entered. I called out to the local organizer, asking where I was supposed to be. He pointed to a spot. The agent relented, but was sure to escort me there, even if it was the “wrong way” to get there.

I ended up being placed in the very first row behind the stage. Since I had no thought that I was going to be seen on camera, I was dressed down. I looked like a giant blue popsicle. If you see footage from the speeches, you may see me upstage left, behind a big Secret Service dude (different guy).

A high ranking local State Senator came out to emcee. He quickly introduced another local pol who was a preacher. He gave a brief invocation and then led us all in the Pledge of Allegiance. My friends, this was as Norman Rockwell a moment as I have ever experienced. We were then treated to a video of Ted and of Carly. I found it to be inspiring and very well done.

Out came Carly. Her tone was one of gratitude and of awe for America. There was some verbiage attacking DJT and HRC, but her message was decidedly humanizing. She spoke of what it was like to be on the bus with Ted for weeks. She related how when the national championship basketball game was down to Villanova’s final possession, Ted threw down some cash on the table declaring that the Wildcats were going to make the winning basket. They did.

She increased the cadence and urgency in her speech to a rousing conclusion. She brought us to our feet and introduced Ted, Heidi. and their girls. Ted was first with his girls in hand and they stepped up to the stage. I was no more than 10 feet from them as they did. Heidi was right behind. The crowd is cheering wildly and some upbeat music was blaring. I focused on the girls. They were happy, and even started dancing with each other.

Then, Ted went to take the hand of the older one so as to hold it high with him as the crowd was cheering. She resisted, and then looked like she might start crying. A nanny swooped right in and picked her up and took her to the back area behind the curtains. In that moment, I fully felt the pressures and difficulties they must be facing every day. Why should they have to share their Daddy with all these strangers?! Forget laws and politics and governance and ideology. This was basic humanity playing out right in front of me. As much as I appreciate what Ted has been going through, and all the slings and arrows he has endured, it is the sacrifice of his family that I will forever recall.

Ted gave his basic stump speech, adding in a very humorous description of DJT wearing HRC’s blue pantsuit! To my ears, the strongest reaction he got was when he strongly declared his support for Israel. Here, in the middle of Christian Indiana, the most intense feeling was for Israel.

He ended his talk and immediately dove into the front of the audience rope line for pictures, autographs, handshakes, and so on. He gave each person a moment or two and verrrrrrry patiently waited as selfies were being set up. He had two agents, one on either side of him, and a lead campaign staffer right behind him who had a Sharpie pen at the ready when Ted needed it to sign something.

It seemed like forever until he could make his way around to the rear of the stage where I was. Then, oh no! He reversed his course and went right over to some college students who had brought a Holy Cross College sign. He delighted in talking with them. Again, he took a lot of time with them. Eventually, he started making his way around again. As he got closer to me, I was most interested in trying to pick up his vibe. Who was this guy, really? The thing that stood out, from a small distance, was how interested in US he was. An elderly lady was telling him some personal tale of woe, and he could not have been more solicitous. There’s only a few hundred folks who want to shake his hand, but Ted decided she was the important priority. I was later told by national staff that this is how he is at every stop.

So…here he is. I’m going to get a chance to talk to him! STOP. Huh? Oh. A young lady in a wheelchair had been brought up next to where I was standing. Just as Ted was about to grasp my hand, he saw her. (Imagine the sound of metaphorical screeching tires) Ted instantly whirls to the agents, instructing them to make it possible for him to come inside the line to be with her. They did not like this, but grabbed the line up and Ted hunched down under it. I helped him keep his balance. He got close to the profoundly mentally handicapped girl and thanked her for coming to see him. She visibly brightened but did not communicate verbally. Ted got closer and spoke some encouraging…No. Loving, words. Again there was no real response. Ted stayed there, just smiling at her. And he did not move.

Yes, the optics of his visit with the young lady were magnificent. But, I am telling you…that was the last consideration on this man’s mind.

A few seconds in a situation like that can seem like forever. It’s chaotic as heck. Ted had his family waiting for him so they could be together for the rest of the evening (this was the last campaign event for the day). Ted stayed with the wheelchair-bound young lady for at least a full minute altogether. It was a lifetime.

I helped him back up and over to “his” side of the rope and then I took his hand. With all the sincerity I could muster, I said, “Ted, I hope you will, win or lose the election, lead the fight for an Article V Convention.” I had his full attention. He looked me directly in the eye, keeping my hand, with body language indicating congruence with his words, replied that he would fight for “underlying amendments” to get us there. I repeated, “Article V?” He said again, his eyes still locked on mine, with a slight nod of his head, “I’ll fight for necessary underlying amendments.” He was careful to not say the words “Article V.” He did not accept my language by just saying “Yes/No.”

It was entirely clear to me that he had seriously contemplated what I was saying and he gave me a truthful answer. It was not exactly what I wanted to hear. Yet, there is no doubt in my mind that he recognizes the peril the Constitution is in and that it needs a lot of support/strengthening – the type that can happen under Article V.

Then Ted was on to the guy next to me. He stayed in that line until he had DOUBLED BACK across the entirety of the stage, giving everyone their moment or three. I was/am blown away.

Carly had also come back out and was very much the same with everyone. She was every bit as lovely and gracious as you can imagine. I chose to not try to take any of her time/energy. I did revel in the good feeling she was bringing. It could not have been more clear that she feels blessed and that she is still experiencing an afterglow at having been named Ted’s VP choice.

The biggest takeaway for me was Ted’s base HUMILITY. It’s of a sort that is unmistakable. It is genuine. It is from a very deep place within. He is extremely comfortable with who he is and he believes fully in this fight. My goodness, what a man.

With all that I am, I declare those who insist that he is creepy, or arrogant, or egotistical, or speak any number of other epithets as to his character, to be LIARS. Their yelps are not coming from a place of truth, nor of love. Most everything Ted says and does, and his very being, are from the very best place for both.

In the morning, I’ll show up at the nascent campaign office and see if some small thing I can do leads to something like the election of a president.

Ed from SFV

64 Responses to “Guest Post by Ed from SFV: “Ted and Me””

  1. Thanks, Ed from SFV! Very interesting and inspiring.

    Patterico (67c3e0)

  2. Yes, thank you, Ed! Well done. This confirms everything I have read or heard about the man from the people who either know him, or have had sufficient contact with him to formulate an informed opinion of him. We would be so fortunate to have him as our president. And it will be such an awful shame if he isn’t.

    RRFCL (ef2ffa)

  3. I was a delegate at the Maine Convention on April 23rd and experienced Ted’s base here too. What astonished me is how many are participating for the first time and also the degree of being informed as well as the “humility” that you speak.

    Trump supporters – MOSTLY NOT ALL – were boorish and mal-informed. Not bias. Just facts.

    One would consider the biggest round of applause would be for LePage who gets solid support from the entire Convention. Not even close. Carly Fiorina blew the roof off.

    Fiorina was introduced by Linda Bean…an icon and supporter of Carly.

    David (23dd69)

  4. Yes, thanks for the effort.

    But you should have at least told him to check us out here at PP, that we have a lot of good advice for him…

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  5. Thank you for sharing. It’s a dark day for David Horowitz Frontpagemag.com. They wrote two puff pieces for Trump. This is the comment I left for them:

    It is profoundly disheartening to see one of my favorite websites becoming a mouthpiece for the Trump campaign. I once regarded David Horowitz as one of the sharpest minds of the right. I never would have imagined him drinking this Kool-Aide. I used to read this journal every day, but this will be my last.

    A holocaust survivor once said that he only recognized two races; the decent and the indecent. When Trump re-tweeted the unflattering video freeze of Heidi Cruz it was the last straw. I could no longer defend this man-child’s candidacy under any circumstances whatsoever. As far as I am concerned, the race between Hillary and Trump is Alien versus Predator. I just hope that whoever wins is too damaged by the debates to complete his or her term.

    Glen Beck, Mark Levin, Michael Medved, and Dennis Prager’s ratings may have taken a hit due to their courageous opposition to Trump. But when Hillary wins in a landslide they are going to get them back. Even if they do not recover all of their listeners, sticking to your principles is the best policy.

    The silver lining for the true conservatives is watching the credibility of all the high-profile Trump supporters go down in flames after this train wreck plays out.

    Tony (ff2fe4)

  6. Ed, what a lovely write-up on the campaign stop. Having been to a Cruz rally in Memphis, he’s someone to behold. Your tell of his time with the wheelchair bound girl brought a tear to my eye. Like so many, I look forward to true compassion and sincerity coming from the White House. We yearn for a time where are leaders truly lead by example, and we know WHO they ARE.

    Pete (871073)

  7. Having met both his dad and Ted at the last Texas state convention in Ft. Worth, I can vouch for every word of this post.

    Rorschach (6fc5f7)

  8. Perhaps he learned some things well as a pastor’s kid,
    “Associate with the lowly” was not one of Trump’s favorite Scriptures.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  9. Great report Ed. Isn’t it strange that the “public” perception of Ted misses so much of reality? This is a great demonstration of the power of the internet. You’ve smashed thru some carefully constructed barriers. I hope the moderator has the courage to scrub the soon to be posted, snarky, ad hominem smears from our usual “contributors”.

    Fox and Drudge are reporting some serious violence perpetrated by protesters outside a California rally for DJT. It would be nice if Cruz condemns the violence without linking it to Trump. The hooligans will get around to Ted soon enough.

    BobStewartatHome (404986)

  10. Nice work, Ed. You had me feeling I was right there with you.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  11. #5: Tony, I think a lot of old leftists, like Horowitz and Medved, have never really given thought to constitutionally limited government. They know that the socialists/communists are tyrants and thugs disguised as caring neighbors, and they know that the prescription for utopia offered by these characters is a fiction, but they haven’t figured out that utopia will never be possible under any regime. So they fall for the “strong man” myth, believing in their candidate’s good intentions while dismissing the tyrannical aspects of his (or her) behavior. They are basically progressives who admire JFK and (perhaps) Teddy Roosevelt, with little care for the similarities with Woodrow Wilson, FDR, LBJ and Obama. Medved has been a committed opponent to Cruz until very recently, and he still seems to think Cruz is a flawed man because he didn’t get along with his “colleagues” in D. C. Needless to say, what Medved sees as a fault, I see as a virtue.

    BobStewartatHome (404986)

  12. Thanks for the great write-up, Ed. What a wonderful opportunity for all of us to catch a first-hand glimpse of Cruz apart from any media bias and narrative. It shows how vital it is to get this accurate picture of him out there to counter the charges that he’s Lucifer.

    Dana (0ee61a)

  13. Thanks for this Ed. Will be sharing it with others.

    njrob (a07d2e)

  14. Well no, they won’t because hillary is going to shut them down, have you not been paying attention. Horowitz is different he understands political warfare, like burnham and chamber’s did.

    narciso (d8c19d)

  15. Medved still thinks Obama gives inspiring speeches for example.

    narciso (d8c19d)

  16. Citizens United was a response to one of Hillary’s raids Against thenfirst amendment, have maverick helped put in place.

    narciso (d8c19d)

  17. Yes,
    Horowitz knows they are evil
    Medved thinks they are wrong

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  18. 15.Medved still thinks Obama gives inspiring speeches for example

    Obama’s speeches remind me of Wagner’s Der Ring des Nibelungen, and have about the same bearing on reality. A tiny bit of the work has some value when used for helicopter assaults on beaches in Vietnam when the surf is up.

    BobStewartatHome (404986)

  19. “Yes, the optics of his visit with the young lady were magnificent. But, I am telling you…that was the last consideration on this man’s mind.”

    Oh please, great behind the scenes story but don’t ruin it by trying to convince me Cruz is a saint.

    mark johnson (f22aea)

  20. This was almost the same experience I had when I attended a Cruz rally in Houston. He was most gracious and each and every person was important to him. He had another two rally’s to get to after ours but he took time with each person, listened and was VERY personable. What I took away was his honesty and his careful consideration, serious consideration of each person’s comments and questions. He didn’t give sound bites, he gave real answers.

    Marci (c7079f)

  21. Supporting Cruz is an easy choice for me. My problem with Trump is that I visualize him as
    the reincarnation of P.T. Barnum.

    Bar Sinister (c62a89)

  22. Awesome writeup. He definitely seems like a genuinely good guy, at least any politician can be. Glad to have voted for him.

    Patrick Henry, the 2nd (ddead1)

  23. I appreciate the write-up; you have confirmed my instinct that Ted Cruz’s best attribute is his humility. May God bless us with the courage to endure to the end.

    Susan (f0e3b3)

  24. Thank you, Ed. Like Colonel Haiku, you made me feel I was there and both you and Cruz are inspiring.

    DRJ (15874d)

  25. An Article V convention would be a very bad idea. Yes, it could accomplish a lot in a short time, much faster than a set of amendments. But there’s no guarantee that what it does will be the right things. It could be hijacked by the Left. The result could be stripped of the strong protections in the current Bill of Rights and filled with “Social Justice” language.

    And the constraints on the convention could be bypassed. A “runaway” convention could take up issues not mentioned in the summoning resolutions. It could call for ratification of the rewritten Constitution by 51% majority in a national referendum instead of separate actions by 3/4 of the states. It would be very hard to claim that would be illegitimate.

    Don’t forget that the original Philadelphia Convention also “ran away”: it was convened to consider amendments to the Articles of Confederation, which required unanimous ratification by all the states of any changes. Instead the Convention wrote an entirely new constitution, and declared that it could be put into effect by only 9 of the 13 states.

    Rich Rostrom (d2c6fd)

  26. Fantastic report, Ed. Reading your write-up is the next best thing to being there in person.

    JVW (eabb2a)

  27. Ed: Thanks for this report! Good for you, and good for the people of Indiana!

    Patterico: Thanks for making this a post of its own, it wouldn’t have gotten as much attention as it deserves if it were merely in the comments.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  28. Ed, the part of your tale about Article Five was my very favorite part of your anecdote, and I appreciate the care with which you told it, because it matches the care with which Cruz answered you. Was the response you got the response you expected?

    Did you ponder what reaction you might have gotten if you’d been able to ask Donald Trump about Article Five conventions? You might as well ask Trump in Klingon for all the good it would do him in trying to figure it out.

    It makes me wonder what I’d have asked or said to Cruz if I had been in your shoes. Everyone’s choice would be different, and I’m going to have to ponder that a bit.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  29. 21. …My problem with Trump is that I visualize him as
    the reincarnation of P.T. Barnum.

    Bar Sinister (c62a89) — 4/29/2016 @ 7:30 am

    .

    Signore Sinestre, you do realize the comparison is insulting to P.T. Barnum.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2016/04/28/cruz-signs-copy-of-communist-manifesto-with-blunt-message/

    …After handing the book back, Cruz turned to the press, “There you go and for the record the note I wrote on the Communist Manifesto is ‘Millions have suffered because of this.’ Turning back to the student he added, “And I note this as the son of a Cuban immigrant whose family has seen first hand just exactly what Communism has rendered. Cruz then shook the young man’s hand and thanked him for coming out to the rally.

    Kudos to Cruz for not falling for the prank and handling it well…

    Trumpy the insult clown on the other hand would have liked the book.

    Steve57 (52b365)

  30. 25. An Article V convention would be a very bad idea. Yes, it could accomplish a lot in a short time, much faster than a set of amendments. But there’s no guarantee that what it does will be the right things. It could be hijacked by the Left

    Rich Rostrom (d2c6fd) — 4/29/2016 @ 10:35 am

    How is this “hijacking” supposed to take place?

    http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/constitution/article-v.html

    Article V

    The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.

    Please voxsplain me the nuts and bolts of this “hijacking.”

    When 3/4 of state legislatures have to ratify any amendment proposed at an Article V convention before it means jack blankety-blank.

    I’m a bit fuzzy on the hijacking dealio. I place my worries about the left hijacking an Article V convention right up there with my worries about not having enough silver bullets and holy water just in case Vlad the Impaler rises from the dead and takes personal offense at my continued existence.

    Just in case anyone’s wondering, I don’t keep silver bullets or Holy Water on hand for that eventuality.

    But I’m open to new ideas. How’s this “hijacking” supposed to work? All I hear is:

    1. Article V convention
    2.???
    3.????
    4.?!?!?
    5. “GAME OVER MAN, GAME OVER!!” No more Second Amendment.

    Steve57 (52b365)

  31. There is no control once the Article V Convention begins. It can completely rewrite the Constitution, eliminate any Amendment it wants, completely rewrite the ratification process, or any number of other things. The Constitutional Convention, as noted, chose not to stay within the strictures it was given. It was only to modify the Articles of Confederation, and a unanimous by state vote was required to ratify. But at the Convention, they chose a complete rewrite, including the ratification process.

    No, Steve, it is not VOXsplaining. It’s historical fact. And that is the great danger of an Article V Convention.

    John Hitchcock (4b6cdd)

  32. So then, if we ignore the fact there’s a ratification process that must take place subsequent to an Article V convention of the states before anything PROPOSED at said convention can ever become part of the Constitution, I am being entirely too cavalier in my toward my attitude to stocking up on silver bullets, Holy Water and Wolfsbane.

    One thing flows just a logically as the other.

    In all serious, John, there is no rational argument for claiming an Article V convention can be “hijacked” by the left. It can not “rewrite” the ratification process unless 3/4 of the states ratify that PROPOSAL. You are under the impression that Article V provides for a process that Article V categorically prohibits. You are under the impression that the Constitution permits an unconstitutional amendment process. You can be forgiven this as it’s what the Democrats in general and their Supreme Court justices in particular believe. But it’s just not true.

    You assert historical facts that are not facts in any sense. You can not back up your argument. A convention that can rewrite the Constitution at whim is NOT an Article V Constitution. You’re afraid the appointees to an Article V convention will behave like the SCOTUS; i.e. that a convention whose only justification to exist at all is written into the Constitution can impose its will entirely independent of the Constitution as if that document didn’t exist at all. In defiance of its reason to exist.

    Plain truth. A body that can do what you are worried about is NOT an Article V convention.

    Only an entity that behaves as if Article V and indeed the entire Constitution doesn’t
    exist can do what you are worried about. Never the twain shall meet.

    Steve57 (52b365)

  33. In that case, Steve57, our entire Constitution is unconstitutional, as it violated the Articles of Confederation and the charter under which the authors wrote it. Your mocking tone shows your ignorance of history. But do carry on, ignorant wonder.

    John Hitchcock (4b6cdd)

  34. Thanks to everyone for your kind comments.

    Beldar – My hope was he would readily and eagerly talk about some type of radical re-alignment away from the crazy usurpation of power by SCOTUS and the abrogation of duty by Congress. I didn’t expect him to say any particular thing. I imagined he could have given me a fluff answer and I thought he might have agreed to specifically calling for a convention. With a mind like his, and the pressure of being a candidate, most anything was in play.

    mark johnson – I readily acknowledged the optics piece of it all. What he did went so far beyond such considerations it is truly indescribable.

    On Article V dangers – It would be fraught with peril. Well, where are now, with the system we have, and the overwhelming breadth of wilful ignorance in our people, with the horrid culture we’ve created? The only real hope is for a new start, led by unusually enlightened and wise folks, just like we were blessed with in the 18th Century the last time there was such a convention. I believe we would have a fighting chance if Ted were to lead it all.

    Ed from SFV (3400a5)

  35. Small update on the campaign – Bernie will be in South Bend on Sunday night in the same part of the venue Ted was at yesterday. DJT will be here for what is said to be a massive rally Monday. The media is reporting that many thousands are expected for the Trump rally and that the biggest possible space at the same venue is being reserved.

    The weather on Tuesday is expected to be spectacular. Huuuuge turnout is expected.

    Ted got very favorable media yesterday on his stops in Elkhart and South Bend. I honestly have no complaints. The tone of every report I saw or heard was positive. Shocking, I know. One fella on TV even went out of his way to mention the 538 projection!

    On an entirely personal note – My moment with Ted was shown in one TV news report (WNDU). I didn’t realize it, but he had his left hand on my right arm – as if an embrace. He did that with a lot of folks. Now I have to figure out how to transfer and save that video from my DVR. :)

    Ed from SFV (3400a5)

  36. Do what the kids on YouTube do when they “pirate” TV shows. Play it on your TV and video your TV screen with your digital camera or mobile device. The most important thing seems to be managing to hold it steady. And hold the phone sideways, not vertically.

    nk (dbc370)

  37. 538 now projects/gives Cruz a 65% chance of winning Indiana.

    An IPFW (Indiana University/Purdue University at Fort Wayne) poll has Ted PLUS 16. Wow.

    http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/primary-forecast/indiana-republican/?ex_cid=538twitter

    Ed from SFV (3400a5)

  38. 33. In that case, Steve57, our entire Constitution is unconstitutional, as it violated the Articles of Confederation and the charter under which the authors wrote it. Your mocking tone shows your ignorance of history. But do carry on, ignorant wonder.
    John Hitchcock (4b6cdd) — 4/29/2016 @ 2:20 pm

    Let’s start small. Can you point out the words in the Constitution where a Constitutional convention can according to the Constitution act unconstitutionally.

    You seem to think is obvious so it shouldn’t be hard to direct me to the text that shows I’m an idiot. Please, do.

    Steve57 (52b365)

  39. Indiana is a very big deal, so the IPFW +16 is very encouraging! A solid win for Cruz will raise the bar considerably for Trump.

    Does anybody know anything more about PA other than Trump has the 17 at-large delegates? The remaining 54 Congressional District delegates are the real prize. If Cruz can grab even 12 it could make a difference.

    BobStewartatHome (404986)

  40. Steve, Mr. Hitchcock seems to overlook the fact that each state was given the opportunity after the Convention to ratify it, or to reject it, and they all ratified it. If four had not, the convention would be nothing but a footnote in an alternate history that would defy imagination. It would begin with British control of our seaborne commerce, and Napoleon would not have sold the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers, and points west, for fifty million francs. Moreover, a hundred thousand “Homeland Security” thugs did not descend on Rhode Island and North Carolina to force them to make it 13 out of 13. We’ve gone a long way since then.

    To throw it all away with so little thought is appalling.

    BobStewartatHome (404986)

  41. Cruz is not winner this is why he had to adopt a carly-pup from the shelter

    he needs a prop

    so ugly she’s cute!

    happyfeet (831175)

  42. Like General Anthony McAuliffe told the Germans at the Battle of the Bulge … hint, it was not “Nuts!”, the newspapers cleaned it up.

    nk (dbc370)

  43. In that case, Steve57, our entire Constitution is unconstitutional, as it violated the Articles of Confederation and the charter under which the authors wrote it. Your mocking tone shows your ignorance of history. But do carry on, ignorant wonder.

    And then what happened? It went to the STATES to be ratified, and until 9 of them did it was just a piece of paper. Honestly, I know it’s comforting to have a boogie man to worry about, but what you’re saying just isn’t true.

    Weirddave (ada0c3)

  44. Bob Stewart – I read where 33 of the 54 unbound PA delegates pledged to stay with the winner of their given CD. This was Trump in all instances.

    Ed from SFV (3400a5)

  45. Weirddave, that’s right, until 9 of the 13, unlike what the Articles of Confederation required: 13 of the 13 or it meant nothing. You’re proving my point.

    John Hitchcock (4b6cdd)

  46. Steve, the Articles of Confederation were the Supreme Law of the Land. And in them, it required Unanimous ratification by states. The Constitution only required 3/4, which overruled the Supreme Law of the Land at the time of ratification, which would make it unconstitutional, according to the constitution under which they were operating at the time. So, by your own words, you’re an idiot.

    And Bob Stewart, yes, all 13 did finally ratify it, but it already became the Supreme Law of the Land prior to all 13 ratifying it, nullifying the previous Supreme Law of the Land, which strictly prohibited such less-than-unanimous ratification, but was ignored.

    John Hitchcock (4b6cdd)

  47. I don’t even understand what you’re trying to argue anymore. You just admitted that it had to be ratified by…whatever number of states, and yet you were going on about a runaway Article V convention that could somehow unilaterally change the Constitution without ratification. Your argument is contradictory.

    Weirddave (ada0c3)

  48. No, Weirddave, you are not following. You see, prior to the Constitution there was this thing called the Articles of Confederation. In those Articles of Confederation, there was this rule that all the states had to agree or it didn’t count. Then the people were told to go work together on a way to make the Articles of Confederation more better. So they wrote something and said “don’t worry about what the rules say because we’re not going to follow the rules,” and they didn’t. They decided the rule that everyone had to agree or it didn’t count… didn’t count.

    Are those words small enough for you? Or do you need it written in crayon?

    John Hitchcock (4b6cdd)

  49. John Hitchcock – The current 10th Amendment has a similar meaning the AOC did – EACH state is sovereign and absent incredibly compelling and specific needs arise, all power is retained by them, and the people.

    Have you noticed a lot of that going on lately?

    We have already gone well past the Rule of Law you are so obstinately defending. If you want your point granted, I am happy to do that. Kindly grant mine, and many others, that the abrogation of the current Constitution by the empowered, with the acquiescence of the know nothing people, has rendered it a practical nullity. As Pat has demonstrated with any number of learned essays, the original words – the most powerful in our law – have no meaning anymore.

    That being the case, insisting that a 2/3 ratification by the several States today is somehow extra-judicial seems moot, if not pointless.

    Ed from SFV (3400a5)

  50. Ed from SFV is correct that an Article V convention would not be dangerous. I used to think it would be, but then I got educated. I should probably blog about this more, to educate others.

    If Trump gets the nod, which I still doubt, there will be scads of time for stuff like that.

    Patterico (86c8ed)

  51. Although the point John Hitchcock just made about the 1787 Constitutional Convention is a very good one, and is not to be ignored. It is by far the best argument against the point I made in the previous comment.

    All I can say is that nothing is impossible, but we still have enough rational states that I am not worried about leftists going haywire and getting enough states to agree. But all sides should be respectful of disagreement on this, because none of it is obvious.

    Patterico (86c8ed)

  52. Yup. In 1789, the States were realistically still a confederation even under the new Constitution. No strong central government. The basis for their cohesion was their respective willingness to cohere.

    nk (dbc370)

  53. I’m pretty sure that was the first time in my life that I’ve used the word “cohere”.

    nk (dbc370)

  54. Great. I’m being lectured by an antifederalist 229 years too late.

    The fact that you’re missing, John, is that the states had to ratify the Constitution before they were bound by it – and Rhode Island almost didn’t. RI was told that is they failed to ratify, then they would be considered a foreign nation by The United States, and in the end, they did. Once 9 states ratified the document, it didn’t apply to all 13 states, it only applied to those nine. Va, NY, NC and RI could have gone it alone, and in fact there was a great debate in those states over doing just that.

    I suppose your fevered imagination dreams of a scenario where a convention produces a document that requires Islam to be practiced by all Americans containing a clause stating that as soon as one state ratifies it it applies to all. Michigan rushes to ratify this document, and before you know it we’re all down on our knees banging our heads into the ground 5 times a day.

    This is patently absurd. Any document that came out of an Article V convention would only go into effect if 38 states ratified it, or, if it was a replacement of the Constitution, it would only effect those states that ratified it. Those states that didn’t would remain a nation under the 1787 Constitution while the states that accepted the new document would form a new nation. To believe otherwise is the height of idiocy.

    Weirddave (ada0c3)

  55. Holy crap just when I thought it would be safe to vote for Cruz in California–I read all of this Article V fervor from his fans.

    Danube River Guide (76b104)

  56. Danube River Guide, Ed from SFV, and everone else, let me point out a couple things:
    * Cruz cannot do anything to bring about an Article V convention, beyond campaigning for it and voting as a common voter. The Senate can only approve standard amendments and has no Constitutional role in Article V conventions, while the President has no Constitutional role whatsover in either amendment procedure.
    * Currently, 29 states of 34 needed to get a convention have filed a petition. The states where the “Balanced Budget Amendment Task Force” says they have sponsors for a petition in the Legislature are (presidential results in parentheses):
    Maine, Idaho, Wyoming, Winsconsin, Oklahoma (Cruz)
    Arizona, Virginia, Kentucky (Trump)
    Minnesota (Rubio)
    Washington, Montana (primary pending; IIRC, Montana leans Cruz; the last from Washington was that in January, Rubio was the favorite)

    As a result, I doubt very much that anyone’s vote in the California primaries will have any influence on whether there’s a convention of the states.

    Ibidem (970323)

  57. Holy crap just when I thought it would be safe to vote for Cruz in California–I read all of this Article V fervor from his fans.

    Danube River Guide (76b104) — 4/29/2016 @ 10:21 pm

    So what exactly is wrong with an Article V? We have n Executive that genuinely thinks it’s a power unto itself, a Congress that isn’t much better than a rubber-stamp for that Executive, a Judiciary that thinks they get to write, rather than interpret the law, and federal agencies that have wildly, spun out of control, thinking they ARE the law. It becomes more apparent with each passing day that the whole point to the government is to a) criminalize any and all behavior and b) control that behavior by any means necessary.

    An Article V is a last step before open rebellion against a government that has forgotten it’s place.

    Bill H (dcdd7b)

  58. Aricle V, Article V, Article V. If you have two-thirds of the state legislatures, you’re not going to have two-thirds of Congress to do it by amendment?

    nk (dbc370)

  59. You do know that Congress has the authority to strip the federal courts of all their jurisdiction except the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court (big deal); reduce the Supreme Court to One Chief Justice and two Associate Justices; and make the Supreme Court Building a tent furnished with three orange crates in the Mojave Desert, right? If it would only do it, which was what this election was all about before it was hijacked by a New York snake-oil peddler and the bottom 3% of the IQ curve?

    nk (dbc370)

  60. And anyway, voting Cruz will have no effect on how California reacts to an Article V. You have no idea just how liberal this state has become. Even with Cruz as President, this state will fight tooth and nail to remain he utopia the left wishes to inflict on the rest of the nation. Further, a President Cruz won’t have anything to do with an Article V- he Constitutionally can’t. That was why he was so very careful to tell Ed that he would work for the necessary amendments, but would not actually commit to an Article V.

    So vote away for Cruz as you wish. I know I am.

    Bill H (dcdd7b)

  61. …..reduce the Supreme Court to One Chief Justice and two Associate Justices; and make the Supreme Court Building a tent furnished with three orange crates in the Mojave Desert, right?

    That’s a funny thought. But in my imagination that leads to justices running amok in Death Valley, naked.

    Well, now, they almost have to. Black absorbs heat.

    Bill H (dcdd7b)

  62. Ok, we’ll keep them in DC.

    nk (dbc370)

  63. Ok, we’ll keep them in DC.

    nk (dbc370) — 4/30/2016 @ 11:27 am

    But I still like the thought of them decorating their chambers like a struggling batchelor. Bean bags, milk crates, and cinder blocks.

    Bill H (dcdd7b)

  64. I was the Holy Cross student with the flag. Absolutely stunned with how well both Ted and Carly treated us. What a thrill it was to support two great conservative leaders as well as our great school.

    Patick (f005ab)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.6654 secs.