This is why Ted Cruz must not be elected President:
Gov. Chris Christie on Wednesday pardoned a U.S. Marine sergeant working as a recruiter in the early voting state of New Hampshire of all gun and ammunition charges filed against him in Hudson County last Labor Day weekend.
Joshua Velez, 26, of Davers, Mass., works as a recruiter out of offices in both Boston and New Hampshire.
Christie, a candidate for the 2016 Republican nomination for president, is polling in fourth place in New Hampshire. The New Hampshire primary is 48 days away, scheduled for Feb. 9, 2016.
According to a statement from the governor's office released to media, "during the 2015 Labor Day Weekend, Velez and his cousin visited his brother, who resides in North Bergen."
On the evening of Saturday, Sept. 5, Velez was stopped by police for failing to use a turn signal, and the officer discovered Velez's unloaded Ruger 9MM handgun, "which he inadvertently brought to New Jersey in the locked glove compartment of his truck," according to a statement from the governor's office.
Velez, who the Governor's office said had "lawfully purchased" his firearm and was "licensed to carry the handgun in Massachusetts" cooperated with the police, identifying both the location of his license and the ammunition, which he had stored separately in the vehicle, but was arrested and charged with unlawful possession of a handgun and possession of hollow point bullets.
I know, I know. During this campaign for the heart-and-soul of far-right (i.e., Republican) voters, Christie has pardoned several individuals who ran afoul of New Jersey firearm laws. Additionally, Sgt. Velez currently works in New Hampshire and is a member of the military, creating what a few years ago would have been obnoxiously termed "a perfect storm."
Still, pardoning Sgt. Velez, who cooperated with police, evidently is a solid citizen, and may have been unaware of New Jersey's interest in gun safety, may have been justified. The patchwork of laws, pertaining to gun control and other matters, through these United States is a travesty.
A very intelligent guy, Ted Cruz probably understands this, and it suits him fine. In a recording recently made at a Cruz fundraiser at a tony law firm in Manhattan
During the question period, one of the donors told Cruz that gay marriage was one of the few issues on which the two disagreed. Then the donor asked: “So would you say it's like a top-three priority for you — fighting gay marriage?”
“No,” Cruz replied. “I would say defending the Constitution is a top priority. And that cuts across the whole spectrum — whether it's defending [the] First Amendment, defending religious liberty.”
Soothing the attendee without contradicting what he has said elsewhere, Cruz added: “People of New York may well resolve the marriage question differently than the people of Florida or Texas or Ohio. ... That's why we have 50 states — to allow a diversity of views. And so that is a core commitment.”
Cruz derided the Politco article, responding in part "In fact it was striking, Politico runs this banner headline, 'Secret Tape!' when it was almost word for word what I said on Jay Leno and Stephen Colbert. It ain't very secret --I know Colbert may not have a ton of viewers-- but saying it on national TV, is not a great plan for keeping something secret. "
But Mike Allen of Politico had conceded that Cruz had told Stephen Colbert on The Late Show (news report with the pathetic Carol Costello, below) "I support marriage between one man and one woman. ... But I also think it’s a question for the states." More troubling is, as "one Republican operative not affiliated with a 2016 campaign said by e-mail" to Allen, "Wow. Does this not undermine all of his positions? Abotion, common Core- all to the states?... Worse, he sounds like a slick D.C. politician- says one thing on the campaign trail and trims his sails with NYC elites. Not supposed to be like that."
It may be that, however, if one's governing philosophy is: whatever the individual state wants. A court clerk in Kentucky issues marriage licenses without her, or the county's, name affixed so as not to imply the county's approval of marriage. In the absence of Hodges v. Obergefell, a married gay couple from a state which recognizes same-sex marriage moves to a state which prohibits it,begging the question of recognition of the union in the latter state. A pregnant woman residing in a state which believes abortion is God-forbidden killing travels hundreds of miles to a state with less restrictive laws to obtain an abortion. And a fellow living in a state without gun safety laws is arrested in a state with relatively strict regulation for violation of the latter state's laws. After conviction, he then gets pardoned for an offense for which a long-time resident of that state itself would not receive the same privilege.
It's all O.K. with Ted Cruz because "different states can make different decisions depending on the values of their citizens." We tried that in this nation once before. Then we fought the Civil War.