[lupire]

This is a fascinating comment.

Taken alone, it is concise, correct, and well-cited. It does lack a crux, though.

But in context, seeing the commenter's previous comment, there is an implied Cruz that is the opposite of the truth, since a reader assumes that any comment is implicitly in support of the commenter's previous comment, and in opposition to the proximate comment it is in reply to, unless otherwise indicated.