{"id":6084,"date":"2015-03-26T01:33:25","date_gmt":"2015-03-26T08:33:25","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/lessgovisthebestgov.com\/blog\/?p=6084"},"modified":"2016-09-17T10:11:34","modified_gmt":"2016-09-17T17:11:34","slug":"ted-cruz-decides-to-run-for-president-two-constitutional-wrongs-dont-make-the-texas-senators-presidential-aspirations-right","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lessgovisthebestgov.com\/blog\/ted-cruz-decides-to-run-for-president-two-constitutional-wrongs-dont-make-the-texas-senators-presidential-aspirations-right\/","title":{"rendered":"Ted Cruz Decides to Run for President – Two Constitutional Wrongs don’t make his Presidential Aspirations Right for America."},"content":{"rendered":"

\u00a0\u00a0<\/h1>\n

\"Ted-Cruz-1\"<\/a><\/h1>\n

Are Ted Cruz Presidential Ambitions Right for America?<\/strong><\/h1>\n

\u00a0\u00a0<\/strong>\u00a0<\/p>\n

By Scott Rohter, March 2015<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

“Ambition is a tricky little animal to tame. It is very skillful at concealing itself from its master.\u201d – <\/em>Thomas Jefferson<\/p>\n

“Just because the government makes something legal doesn’t make it right!” <\/em>\u00a0– Unknown<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

The law and the Constitution are\u00a0two\u00a0entirely different things.\u00a0America’s\u00a0sixth\u00a0President, John Quincy Adams said that in the 18th Century. He said: “The law is an artificial human construct, quite arbitrary, and of absolutely no use anywhere else but in a court of law”… \u00a0<\/em>He also said,“The Constitution rests\u00a0upon the good sense and the respect of the American people.\u201d<\/em> <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Have Americans lost our good sense? Have we\u00a0failed to exercise\u00a0sound judgment? If that is true then our Constitution is resting on\u00a0some pretty shaky ground.\u00a0When our nation’s political leaders in Washington D.C. don’t respect the Original Intent of the\u00a0Founding Fathers then the\u00a0cornerstone of\u00a0our\u00a0representative democracy\u00a0becomes of no\u00a0significance\u00a0in our political system\u00a0and\u00a0it\u00a0would\u00a0surely sound the\u00a0death knell for our Constitutional Republic.<\/p>\n

Consider this…\u00a0Seven years after\u00a0moving into the White House there are\u00a0still\u00a0serious questions\u00a0regarding\u00a0the eligibility of Barack Obama to\u00a0serve as the 44th President of the United States. Based upon\u00a0the unconstitutional precedent\u00a0he established in 2008 and 2012 a\u00a0new young,\u00a0Republican Senator\u00a0from Texas named\u00a0Ted Cruz\u00a0is\u00a0preparing\u00a0to do the same thing… to make another unconstitutional\u00a0run\u00a0for the White House in 2016 and just like Barack Obama before him, Ted Cruz will challenge\u00a0the Natural Born Citizen Clause in Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution. Ted Cruz is positioning himself\u00a0to run for the White House in 2016, but who is\u00a0encouraging him to do this?\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

Only inferences can be drawn about those who may have advised him to run for the Office of President.Ted Cruz supports fast-tracking the Trans Pacific Partnership\u00a0which gives\u00a0Barack Obama\u00a0executive power that he does not have under the Constitution<\/a>.\u00a0 This Bill contains a backdoor\u00a0channel to flood America with\u00a0illegal aliens similar to the process by which migrant workers are free to\u00a0travel back and forth\u00a0between and work in the various\u00a0nations\u00a0of the European Union. Apparently the brilliant lawyer who graduated cum laude from Harvard\u00a0and Princeton has a lot\u00a0to learn about\u00a0the ins and outs of the Trans Pacific Partnership or he is\u00a0shilling for the same corporate\u00a0interests as Hillary Clinton and\u00a0Barack Obama.<\/p>\n

Ted Cruz\u00a0has been positioning himself\u00a0to be our 45th President ever since he\u00a0arrived in Washington\u00a0a little\u00a0more than\u00a0a year ago. The\u00a0paint\u00a0in his\u00a0Senate office\u00a0 had barely\u00a0dried\u00a0before the junior\u00a0Senator from Texas\u00a0was putting himself in front of\u00a0 T.V. cameras\u00a0and playing up to the conservative base of the Republican Party.\u00a0Now he has just declared his intention to seek the Republican nomination for President. I think\u00a0this is a bad idea and I want to be one of the first\u00a0commentators to say why.<\/p>\n

In a word\u00a0his candidacy is going to be\u00a0divisive.<\/strong>\u00a0It will\u00a0split\u00a0conservative voters over the question\u00a0of his eligibility to\u00a0be\u00a0the 45th President of the United States because Ted Cruz was not born in the United States. He is the son of a Cuban immigrant… a Cuban immigrant to\u00a0Canada<\/strong>. Ted Cruz was born in\u00a0Calgary, Alberta. \u00a0His candidacy\u00a0will\u00a0divide conservatives\u00a0over the issue of his\u00a0eligibility to be President and his campaign\u00a0will further divide the conservative\u00a0base\u00a0of the Republican Party\u00a0between, three or more candidates. The danger is\u00a0that his campaign might allow Jeb Bush to actually win the Republican nomination.\u00a0 Ted Cruz’s desire to be\u00a0America’s 45th President is\u00a0un-constitutional and it is not in America’s best interests.\u00a0That is why\u00a0his\u00a0presidential aspirations are not right for America. Two constitutional wrongs\u00a0make a\u00a0bad\u00a0precedent, but they do not make\u00a0something constitutionally right.<\/p>\n

\"James<\/a>

James Madison<\/p><\/div>\n

The principle architect of\u00a0the United States Constitution\u00a0is America’s fourth President James Madison.\u00a0He said this: “Freedom has more often been lost in small steps by progressive incrementalism than it has been lost by catastrophic upheavals such as violence or war.\u201d\u00a0 <\/em>In other words\u00a0our freedom is in greater danger from enemies within our country than it is from enemies without our country.<\/p>\n

Ted Cruz makes a\u00a0fine Senator. He should\u00a0stay right\u00a0where he is for now,\u00a0in the United States Senate. That is where America needs him the most. I hope he becomes the next\u00a0Majority Leader replacing Mitch McConnell, or maybe he could be the next appointment to the Supreme Court. He would make a fine\u00a0Attorney General, but he is ineligible to be the next President of the United States because\u00a0he is not a Natural Born Citizen of the United States.\u00a0So why do some Republicans especially those from Texas keep pushing him for President?\u00a0\u00a0Is it because he is their favorite son or is it because of something else. I don’t know. If I lived in Texas I\u00a0would vote for\u00a0him a thousand times for U. S. Senator,\u00a0but I will not\u00a0vote\u00a0for him, not\u00a0even once for President of the United States even though I agree with virtually all of his positions on the issues. He is ineligible to be President. He is just as ineligible as Barack Obama\u00a0is.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5<\/a> of the Constitution\u00a0states that in order to be the President (of the United States) someone must be a\u00a0Natural Born Citizen of the United States. It\u00a0does not\u00a0actually\u00a0mention\u00a0the\u00a0words “United States”,<\/em>\u00a0nevertheless it is implied. By the same token\u00a0the Constitution\u00a0doesn’t\u00a0actually define what it means to be a Natural Born Citizen<\/em>,\u00a0but the people\u00a0who were alive at the time of the adoption of the Constitution knew what\u00a0that meant, and people of\u00a0reasonable intelligence who are alive today can arrive at reasonable conclusion about what it means. The problem is that there are not many reasonable people in politics today who want to know what it means.\u00a0The Founding Fathers \u00a0referred to\u00a0Vattel’s treatise… THE LAW OF NATIONS<\/a>\u00a0in their writings.\u00a0 The Founding Fathers\u00a0knew that a Natural Born Citizen\u00a0was someone who was born in the United States\u00a0and whose parents were\u00a0American citizens…\u00a0both parents.<\/p>\n

In addition to being born in Canada, Ted Cruz’s parents were not both American citizens at the time of his birth.\u00a0His father was a Cuban immigrant to Canada as I have\u00a0indicated and for these reasons Ted Cruz is not constitutionally\u00a0eligible to be\u00a0President.\u00a0This is\u00a0the same reason\u00a0that Barack Obama\u00a0is not\u00a0 constitutionally\u00a0eligible to be\u00a0the 44th President of the United States.\u00a0 His father was not an American citizen.<\/p>\n

The United States is a Constitutional Republic,\u00a0however without respect and adherence to the Constitution we\u00a0will not remain\u00a0one for\u00a0much longer. Ted\u00a0Cruz’\u00a0father became a naturalized American citizen in 2005\u00a0<\/a>when\u00a0Senator Cruz was\u00a0 already 35 years old, but between 1957 and 2005 Raphael Cruz\u00a0was\u00a0 a\u00a0Canadian citizen.\u00a0\u00a0Senator Cruz\u00a0recently renounced his\u00a0Canadian citizenship\u00a0in 2014 <\/a>at the age of 44\u00a0in order satisfy\u00a0concerns over his dual citizenship while he seeks the Republican nomination for President in 2016. \u00a0My question is\u00a0why did he wait so long to renounce his Canadian citizenship? It seems\u00a0rather convenient and opportunistic to me.<\/p>\n

You can change your citizenship on paper but you can’t\u00a0change your actual place of birth. Ted Cruz will never be able to say that he was born in the United States.\u00a0 He will always be a natural born Canadian. He can be anything he wants to be\u00a0in the United States except the President of the United States because he will always be a naturalized\u00a0American\u00a0citizen.\u00a0It doesn’t matter what he did at\u00a0the age of 44 when he\u00a0finally renounced his dual Canadian citizenship in order to\u00a0run for the Office of President of the United States.\u00a0 Those are the facts. I like to keep things plain and simple. Ted Cruz\u00a0loved\u00a0America so much that he waited until he was 44 years old to give up his Canadian citizenship.\u00a0 You cannot be a Natural Born Citizen of two countries, and two constitutional wrongs don\u2019t make\u00a0his presidential ambitions\u00a0right for America. If Barack Obama is constitutionally ineligible to be our President than so is Ted Cruz.\u00a0<\/em><\/a>\u00a0<\/p>\n

\"John<\/a>

John McCain<\/p><\/div>\n

Supporters of Ted Cruz frequently argue that Harvard legal scholars\u00a0say\u00a0he is eligible to be President, but there are just as many scholars who say he is not eligible. Here is\u00a0the proof\u00a0 that most members of\u00a0the United States Senate\u00a0know\u00a0that a person seeking the Office of President must be born in the United States or on U.S. soil. They know\u00a0if you were born in a foreign country than you are not in fact a Natural Born Citizen and you are not\u00a0eligible to be President.\u00a0The proof is found in a little known special act of Congress Senate Resolution S511 <\/a>passed by Congress in 2008 which\u00a0conferred upon John McCain (who was born in Panama City while his father was serving in\u00a0the\u00a0United States military in the Panama Canal Zone) all the rights of natural born citizenship\u00a0so he could run for President without\u00a0a challenge\u00a0to his eligibility. If he didn’t need to be born in America\u00a0in order\u00a0to\u00a0run for President\u00a0than why did it take a special Act of Congress to make\u00a0John McCain\u00a0a\u00a0legitimate Presidential\u00a0contender in 2008?\u00a0 The proof that\u00a0 Ted Cruz is ineligible to be\u00a0President is found in\u00a0that special Senate resolution pertaining to John McCain…\u00a0It\u00a0proves that members of Congress\u00a0know\u00a0that Ted Cruz is not eligible to be the President because he was born in Canada. An interesting side note\u00a0about this\u00a0Senate Resolution\u00a0which pertained to John McCain is that one of\u00a0the principle sponsors of the bill is the current ineligible President, Barack\u00a0Obama.<\/p>\n

There has been a long standing argument in America about what it means to be a \u201cNatural Born Citizen\u201d.<\/em> The phrase is used only once in the entire Constitution. It is used only when it comes to the qualifications for the Office of President. It is not used anywhere else in the Constitution. It is not mentioned when it comes to the qualifications to be a member of the\u00a0House of Representatives or a member of the Senate. The phrase \u201cNatural Born Citizen\u201d<\/em> is unique to the qualifications for the Office of the President. It\u00a0should not\u00a0be taken lightly\u00a0the way\u00a0the Democrats did in 2008\u00a0when they\u00a0nominated Barack Obama and\u00a0it should not be taken lightly the way\u00a0some Republicans are\u00a0willing to do\u00a0now by supporting Ted Cruz\u00a0in the\u00a02016 Republican Presidential Primary. I\u00a0define the phrase “Natural Born Citizen”\u00a0in the strictest possible way as a matter of national security.<\/p>\n

I can support Ted Cruz as a United States Senator but I cannot support him running for President and my\u00a0position does not depend on which side is\u00a0right or wrong in the\u00a0238 year old\u00a0debate over the meaning of the phrase, \u201cNatural Born Citizen\u201d.<\/em> It does not\u00a0depend on Emerich de Vattel ‘s treatise\u00a0The Law of Nations. I\u00a0 believe\u00a0that the definition of a Natural Born Citizen\u00a0falls into\u00a0a gray area of constitutional law\u00a0which\u00a0may never be definitively settled as long as\u00a0free people\u00a0are\u00a0allowed to think differently. The Supreme Court of the United States said as much in 1875 in a case called Minor v. Happersett<\/a>. In their\u00a0decision the Court\u00a0issued the following opinion,\u00a0“It was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.<\/strong> Some authorities go further and include as citizens the children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their\u00a0parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first class. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens.”<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

Since then the Naturalization Act of 1790 <\/a>was passed which states that children born overseas to citizens of the United States become natural born citizens of the United States… Note is says “citizens” (plural… as in both parents). Then the Naturalization Act of 1795 <\/a>was passed which repealed the Naturalization Act of 1790… In Section 3 of the Naturalization Act of 1795 it says the following….<\/p>\n

SEC. 3.\u00a0 And be it further enacted, that the children of persons duly naturalized, dwelling within the United States, and being under the age of twenty-one years, at the time of such naturalization, and the children of citizens of the United States, born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, shall be considered as citizens of the United States:\u00a0\u00a0 Provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons, whose fathers have never been resident of the United States:\u00a0 Provided also, That no person heretofore proscribed by any state, or who has been legally convicted of having joined the army of Great Britain during the late war, shall be admitted a citizen as foresaid, without the consent of the legislature of the state, in which such person was proscribed.<\/p>\n

SEC. 4.\u00a0 And be it further enacted, That the Act intituled, \u201cAn act to establish an uniform rule of naturalization,\u201d passed the twenty-sixth day of March, one thousand seven hundred and ninety, be, and the same is hereby repealed.<\/p>\n

Note: It still uses the word citizens (as in two parents) BUT IT CHANGES THE WORD USED TO DESCRIBE THE OFFSPRING OF SUCH PEOPLE BORN ABROAD FROM A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN TO JUST A CITIZEN….<\/p>\n

Since the Minor v Happersett\u00a0Supreme Court opinion in 1785 and the Naturalization Acts of 1790 and 1795\u00a0modern day lawyers\u00a0have been working hard to undermine the original intent of the Constitution.\u00a0Some Universities don’t even\u00a0bother teach a course on Constitutional law anymore. In any case it would be correct to say that modern day law and\u00a0those who practice it\u00a0are no friends of the\u00a0idea of Original Intent.. Chief among the transgressors are Harvard, Princeton, and Yale.<\/p>\n

Just because the Democrats\u00a0have played foot loose and fancy free with the Constitution in 2008 when they nominated\u00a0Barack Obama doesn\u2019t mean that the Republican Party should\u00a0do the same thing with\u00a0Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio in 2016. \u00a0Just because the Democrats nominated someone whose father was not an American\u00a0citizen doesn’t mean that the Republicans\u00a0should do the same thing. It doesn’t mean they\u00a0should nominate someone\u00a0who was born in Canada. Two constitutional wrongs don\u2019t make a constitutional right. The debate\u00a0about Ted Cruz eligibility is\u00a0not about\u00a0his resume, his loyalty,\u00a0or his conservative credentials. This\u00a0is\u00a0about the next\u00a0foreign born citizen of the United States\u00a0who wants to run for President whose\u00a0brother\u00a0could be the\u00a0President of Iran or whose\u00a0uncle could be the King of Saudi Arabia because we have opened the door wide enough for this to happen.<\/p>\n

In light of the Obama Administration’s recent nuclear negotiations with Iran let me point out that there\u00a0would be\u00a0no legal way to prevent the Iranian born son of an American mother and the President of Iran… or the Saudi born son of an American mother and a royal Saudi prince from becoming the President of the United States unless\u00a0we\u00a0slam the door shut on\u00a0anymore foreign born nationals or the children of foreign born nationals from\u00a0ever becoming our President. If all it takes is just one American parent to be the President of the United States then something like that is going to happen.\u00a0We have never been more at risk than we are now. It’s too late to do anything about Barack Obama, but we can\u00a0stop\u00a0America’s slide down\u00a0the\u00a0slippery slope\u00a0by\u00a0 preventing\u00a0Ted Cruz from becoming President. <\/span><\/p>\n

Consider this: The wife of former King Hussein of Jordan is Queen Noor. She is an American by birth… If Barack Obama and Ted Cruz are both eligible to be President, and if all it takes to be President of the United States is just one American parent then by what legal means could you prevent\u00a0any of Queen Noor’s four Jordanian born\u00a0children from\u00a0running for President if they wanted to?\u00a0<\/p>\n

It is\u00a0quite \u00a0simple. Ted Cruz was born in Canada and his father was\u00a0Cuban-Canadian. Ted Cruz\u00a0is not a Natural Born Citizen of the United States and neither is Barack Obama. <\/span>We\u00a0must stop interpreting the Constitution liberally<\/strong> and start interpreting it literally, <\/strong>the way that it was\u00a0intended to be understood when it was written.<\/strong> A Natural Born Citizen is someone who\u00a0was born in America to American parents (plural). That is what Vattel\u00a0said in\u00a0 The Law of Nations.\u00a0That is what the Founding Fathers understood it to mean. That is what the early Supreme Court ruled in\u00a0the Minor v Happersett\u00a0decision in 1875,\u00a0and that is precisely what it\u00a0means today.<\/p>\n

\"Jeb<\/a>

John Ellis Bush (Jeb)<\/p><\/div>\n

I have heard the argument that anyone who\u00a0doesn’t support\u00a0Ted Cruz\u00a0for President\u00a0is buying\u00a0into\u00a0a liberal\u2019s agenda.\u00a0That is not true. On the contrary the progressives in the Republican Party are\u00a0actually very happy that Ted Cruz has thrown his political hat in the ring because his candidacy\u00a0will\u00a0divide conservatives over the issue of his eligibility and it will\u00a0further split the conservative vote this ensuring that no conservative candidate will\u00a0get a majority of votes to be nominated. Thus it\u00a0could\u00a0pave the way for\u00a0Jeb Bush to win the Republican\u00a0nomination in a brokered convention. Ted Cruz’s campaign for the Republican nomination\u00a0might\u00a0prove to be\u00a0the divisive wedge that allows Jeb Bush to win in spite of his poor overall performance in the polls. Even if\u00a0Cruz\u00a0never says\u00a0a single\u00a0bad word about any of the other candidates in the race his\u00a0bid to be President\u00a0is going to be divisive.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Anyone whose constitutional eligibility is\u00a0questionable under Article II\u00a0Section 1 should\u00a0not seek\u00a0the highest office in the land nor trouble the country the way that Barack Obama\u00a0did in the last two elections. It will only reinforce\u00a0the bad precedent\u00a0of disregarding the Original Intent of the\u00a0Founding Fathers. I prefer to err on the side of safety when rightly dividing something as important as the qualifications for the Office of President. Modern day law and lawyers are also no friends of the Constitution or of the\u00a0idea of Original Intent. Most legal decisions\u00a0concerning the Constitution have\u00a0only sought to water down the original intent of the\u00a0Founding Fathers. As proof of this simply consider the direct taxation of individuals by the Federal Government,\u00a0the direct election of Senators, the creation of the Federal Reserve Board, the Patriot Act and the Affordable Care Act which are all violations of the Constitution…\u00a0yet they\u00a0are all the law of the land and they have\u00a0all been\u00a0upheld by the\u00a0United States Supreme Court. When\u00a0descending down a\u00a0slippery slope it is wise to\u00a0chose\u00a0one’s steps\u00a0carefully.<\/p>\n

If someone wants to be the President so bad that he is willing to put\u00a0the Nation and the Constitution through another test\u00a0like the\u00a0one\u00a0that Barack Obama put\u00a0us through twice in the last two Presidential elections than he is not worthy of holding that office no matter how conservative he is\u2026 A love and respect for the Constitution is of the utmost importance to me when I make my next choice for President in 2016.<\/em><\/p>\n

If you enjoyed reading this article please let me know by clicking the LIKE Button below. Thank You<\/p>\n

Corroborating Source Material<\/strong><\/p>\n

https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/110th-congress\/senate-resolution\/511\/text<\/a><\/p>\n

http:\/\/context.montpelier.org\/document\/175?gclid=CJSe4J3C7MQCFRaTfgodq1wA7g<\/a><\/p>\n

http:\/\/www.fourwinds10.net\/siterun_data\/government\/us_constitution\/news.php?q=1308252582<\/a><\/p>\n

http:\/\/www.constitution.org\/vattel\/vattel_01.htm<\/a><\/p>\n

https:\/\/www.law.cornell.edu\/supremecourt\/text\/88\/162<\/a><\/p>\n

http:\/\/www.foxnews.com\/politics\/2014\/06\/10\/ted-cruz-renounces-canadian-citizenship\/<\/a><\/p>\n

http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Ted_Cruz<\/a><\/p>\n

https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=cozMqBTMI9Y<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"\"\"

The junior Senator from Texas, Ted Cruz has just declared his intention to run for the Republican Presidential nomination in 2016. I think it is a bad idea and I want to be one of the first to say why. In a word his candidacy will be divisive. It is going to split the conservative vote over the question of his natural born citizenship and it will allow Jeb Bush to win the nomination. If I lived in Texas I would have voted for Ted Cruz in his successful campaign to become a United States Senator. I would vote for him a thousand times for Senator but I will not vote for him once in his bid to be the next President of the United States. Here’s why…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":6085,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[20],"tags":[612,611],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lessgovisthebestgov.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6084"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lessgovisthebestgov.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lessgovisthebestgov.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lessgovisthebestgov.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lessgovisthebestgov.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6084"}],"version-history":[{"count":201,"href":"https:\/\/lessgovisthebestgov.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6084\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":9314,"href":"https:\/\/lessgovisthebestgov.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6084\/revisions\/9314"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lessgovisthebestgov.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/6085"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lessgovisthebestgov.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6084"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lessgovisthebestgov.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6084"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lessgovisthebestgov.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6084"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}