So Jeb Bush forgot to renew his domain name, https://www.jebbush.com. Guess who bought it?
I bet it wasn't that Canadian liar! ![Wink ;)](https://cigarbanter.com/forum/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Don't worry, he's next on the radar!
To be fair, I have to agree with the Donald. When I watch and listen to Cruz, he does have those "polished", professional politician responses. To me, he looks the least trustworthy... not that any of them wouldn't say anything to get the votes. He just doesn't pass the eye test.
Yeah, but on resumé and experience he's the most qualified candidate in the race from either party. So...I dunno. It's all ugly this time around. I wish Paul Ryan was running.
Morning, muchachos.
He's also head of the Subcommittee on Space, Science and Competitiveness, yet doesn't believe that climate change is a real thing. So yeah, not sure if he's the most qualified of anything.
He's still the most qualified. Princeton, Harvard Law, organized George W's legal team, years in private practice representing huge clients, argued 9 cases before the US Supreme Court, won 5 of them, has written over 70 briefs for the Supreme Court, including the amicus in support of Heller on behalf of 31 states, etc. Hating his positions, opinions, or face is of course anyone's right, but the man knows law and he knows how the government works. Alan Dershowitz, no Republican he, called Cruz "off-the-charts brilliant". None of the other candidates have a judicial or legislative record with that weight.
That doesn't mean I'm gonna vote for him or that I think anyone should, but he's got the credentials.
My argument would be that someone can't really be "off-the-charts-brilliant" if they ignore scientific fact, but facts have very little place in political debate anyhow.
The only "facts" about climate change are that the average temperature is rising and there is more Carbon in the atmosphere than at any time in the past several hundred million years. There are no scientific "facts" that explain why that is, just observations and hypotheses.
Now, the observations seem to support the hypotheses, and you and I look at it and say, "uh, dude, it's the pollution." But there are still some scientists out there that aren't convinced it isn't a natural cycle.
So, I don't think taking a fringe position on climate change outweighs other credentials. Hell we've got astronauts who believe in UFO's.