The Boston Globe and 2 local papers didn't give him a chance. He didn't win a single county in Massachussetts 4 days earlier. Did Cruz really win EVERY county in Maine?
The head of the Ted Cruz campaign has said Heidi is Ted's closest adviser. The FEC violations involve her current employer. No personal attacks, just a necessary professional evaluation of Heidi Cruz's role in the Cruz Crew.
As a self-described "constitutional expert" Canadian born Cruz could do us all a great service to stop illegal immigration by simply answer 4 teeny weeny questions...
Reagan was attacked by the Establishment, but people LIKED him. Cruz on the other hand is despised by mild mannered Huckabee and "sealed lips" George W. There is a reason. Here is an (almost) complete compendium of Cruz lies.
There is a lie being told that "Natural Born Citizen" is not defined anywhere in the Constitution. That's True. What's Not True is that it is NOT settled by the Supreme Court. (It has)
In honor of @pmbasse, a descendant of one of the original 300 Texas settlers, I want to tell you WHY I LOVE TEXAS. As they say, I wasn't born here but I got here as soon as I could. And for me that was 3 times.
When you see who REALLY is running Ted's campaign, you realize how "inside" this pretend outsider is. The top CIA, Goldman Sachs executives are LITERALLY running his campaign.
The most rewarding and frustrating experience on Twitter has to be the concept of Follow Friday. I have a solution. See where PolitiJim gets his news, and twinteraction from.
I did something I've never done before. I "worked the polls" for Ted Cruz. It was funny, fascinating and frightening. I was called a racist and a patriot; I witness joy and anger; and I learned some very valuable lessons about myself and this county. I now see why listening to your friends and reading the blogs is no substitute for “getting on the ground.” In Texas, there is a revolution brewing.
For the whole story and video interviews, visit:
You would think that following up two near runs at the playoffs over the past 10 years with the worst record in baseball would make any sports fan embarrassed to wear the jersey of their favorite team if not winning the World Series for 192 years wouldn’t it. (I know but it FEELS like 192 years.)
Or, certainly finding out the most successful, charismatic Cub since “MR. Cub” was a doped, cork drilling, dinger-defrauding narcissist would make you at little less willing to call yourself “die-hard.”
Not me. The only negative expression seen on me is proudly wearing road gray’s the day after going 71-91 or 66-96. And part of the reason for that is that the widely acknowledged Cub fan was hopeful, saavy, big hearted and undyingly loyal, and not some fly-by-nighter that starts showing up when Pujols is signed.
Even the town rags were trying to make fun of us for filling seats and making the Ricketts a bit richer during the depressing first few months of the season - an incomprehensible action to the US Cellular crowd.
When the Sun-Times ran an article early in the week that Cub fans on Twitter were all worked up over Ryan Dempster’s nixing of the young Dodger pitching prospect deal, I thought it was just more bored Chicago sportswriters trying to make hay.
However, castigating comments toward Ryan ran about 4 to 1 against, and I was shocked. This man only has a few years left of maximum earning potential before he has see if his shtick will perpetuate his comedy career in places like Akron, Ohio. (Can you ever get tired of a Harry Carey impersonator?)
Didn’t he make fan life a little easier during the Middle Milton Bradley Ages and personally cut the Cubs Carlos Z psychiatry bills in half? How many of your young pitchers learned how to adjust not just physically, but mentally to the game because of Ryno 2.0?
This is a guy who came back from a 6.54 ERA, 3-7 season in 20 starts AND Tommy John surgery to climb his way back into the bullpen, then closer and rotation near-ace. We all knew he SHOULD have been the #1 pitcher during Z’s last two years, but he never went to the media or complained a lick. He just went out, did his job and threw a few whipped cream pies in front of the WGN cameras for our entertainment.
He lived with payments of left over stadium peanuts for the first few years until we realized the character of someone WE saw as one of us. The winner buried within the ankle weights of failure. And let’s not mention the medical demands on his family as well, that the Dempsters turned into a tireless effort to help many more than just themselves through Chicago and beyond.
And these idiot fans want to complain?
When Kerry Wood came back from the Yankees at a fraction of his value, and then didn’t perform as expected, there were a few light-in-the-mental-lobe losers who complained of Wood’s lackluster performance. But most of us realized that he gave up cash money to retire a Cub, and we were still grateful.
Shouldn’t we be equally thankful for a guy who knows that if he hadn’t earned his no trade option, Theo and company would have already shipped him off? Shouldn’t we be thankful that he told the new front office, that he wanted to retire a Cub, rather than stick through what everyone knew (and was told) would be two to three years of dim cellar dwelling in the NL Central?
These fans embarrass me. They do NOT exemplify the hopeful, good faith, appreciating of players who not only give their all – but their hearts to the worshipers at Wrigley.
While we Cub fans have lived through losing Greg Maddux, Rafael Palmeiro, Dennis Eckersley, (and of course, Lou Brock), we have more than enough reason to be gleefully hopeful for what is coming in the next two or three years. If you want greedy and boorish – skedaddle to the South Side with your Occupy Wall Street friends. Those are the folks that think other’s people efforts should come under their control.
In this age of pessimism, cynicism and selfishness, one of the great things we held as Cubs fans, was that we WERE a bit different.
No – we ARE different. And we aren’t going to let you idiots corrupt the character of the Chicago Cubs. So, STFU!
And Ryan, know that you are loved and appreciated not only for what you have done for the Cubs and we fans, and if at all possible – most of us would love to have you back after you’ve taken care of what is best for your family.
It couldn’t get much worse than the Obama Administration deciding not to enforce immigration law and effectively implementing the DREAM Act for 300,000 illegals under 30 who came here before they were 16 years old, right? Wrong. And not just “wrong” – terribly, disastrously and outrageously wrong.
It is unthinkable that every GOP Congressman and leader is not calling for Barack Obama and Eric Holder’s resignation DAILY over this.
Read my full article and watch the video at:
An Iraq War veteran has decided to make a symbolic gesture to protest the disintegration of the United States and the United States military under Barack Obama.
Full article with video at:
Today Dan Patrick, founder of the Tea Party Caucus in the Senate, endorsed Lt. Governor David Dewhurst for the US Senate race. It’s not a surprise that Dan Patrick has been secretly supporting Dewhurst. Reports from Austin and Houston claim that Dan Patrick has been strong arming other Texas congressmen for weeks for Dewhurst.
The petulant and unbalanced Dan Patrick interview of Ted Cruz, and the Dewhurst campaign’s dishonest, NBC-like editing in still another attack ad, have left voters furious. Voters across Texas have been calling the Dewhurst campaign to express their displeasure and one Tea Party activist in Houston told PolitiJim that although they voted for him for Lt. Governor, they were contacting the campaign to tell them the gross distortion by his campaign has permanently cut off all support for him in this race and the future. One voter (video embedded) who actually went and listened to the entire show after hearing the ad, was incensed that both Dan Patrick and Dewhurst were falsely slandering Ted Cruz.
Finally, Dan Patrick makes public what he has already been doing (and what he lied to Ted Cruz he was doing on that very radio show) and formally endorsed the Lt. Governor. Despite attempts by the Dewhurst campaign to insinuate that Dan Patrick’s endorsement was significant of the sentiments of the grassroots, Tea Party leaders were QUICK to counter that assumption. From the Austin American Statesman:
“The Dewhurst campaign today seizing on Patrick’s endorsement as some kind of TEA Party prize is premature and nothing but desperate spin. When Senator Dan Patrick calls Lt. Governor David Dewhurst ‘conservative’ in his endorsement of Dewhurst for US Senate, Dan Patrick does not speak for us!”
The full PDF press release is here. And it is even stronger:
JoAnn Fleming, chair of the advisory committee to the Texas Legislature’s TEA Party Caucus today made it clear that Senator Dan Patrick does not speak for the TEA Party Caucus Advisory
Committee.Fleming stated, “While Senator Patrick is indeed the founder and leader of the Texas Tea Party Caucus in the Senate, I want to make it very clear, in the strongest terms, that Senator Patrick in no way speaks for the Advisory Committee to the TEA Party Caucus.
Maria Martinez, Executive Director of Immigration Reform Coalition of Texas -- IRCOT, explains how immigration reform died under the leadership of David Dewhurst. She recounts personal slights she from the Lt. Governor to address serious immigration reform and the bombshell:
In the last legislative session,David Dewhurst did not go out of his way to pass EVEN ONE of the 60+ bills that were filed on illegal immigration.
Dewhurst was most recently embarrassed by revelations that not only did he support full amnesty for illegals in a speech given in 2007, but that he directed state employees to hide the speech on taxpayer funded, public websites when the issue came to light.
Breitbart.com, and most major national conservative blogs have condemned Dewhurst for his scurrilous and dishonest accusations against Ted Cruz on illegal immigration.
Special thanks and hat tip to Donna Garner and Katrina Pierson
More of the Texas Legislature’s TEA Party Caucus press release:
While I will not speak for individual members of the Advisory Committee, I can assure Senator Patrick that
the Advisory Committee is not pleased with the following facts regarding Dewhurst’s track record:
Fleming said, “Given these facts, here’s why a majority of the TEA Party Caucus Advisory Committee wants to make it clear that Senator Dan Patrick does not speak for us in this US Senate race when he calls Dewhurst “conservative”:
I came down pretty hard on Big Jolly’s Goebbels-like,“Why I support Dewhurst,” endorsement last week, and his report of Monday’s Cruz/Dewhurst debate has my “justice” juice pumping at full pressure.
First, Mr. Jennings leads with a suggested summation OF THE ENTIRE Monday Night, Cruz/Dewhurst DEBATE with this:
There was a moment near the end of the debate last night that defined the contest between Lt. Gov. Dewhurst and Mr. Cruz. A question was asked about the Castle Doctrine, a common term for the law that allows citizens to defend themselves without having to retreat. Mr. Cruz answered first, stating that he had once debated a lawyer from DC about the need for the law in the capital city. Mr. Dewhurst said simply, I passed it in Texas.
Really? What debate did he attend? Was it the one where Dewhurst got tepid applause walking out and Ted Cruz got a raucous standing ovation? Was it the debate where even the FOX post debate panel, kept emphasizing how poor Dewhurst performed (“he often seemed very uncomfortable”) – one of the top 3 CENTRAL purposes of junior Senator? Was it the debate where the “neutral” FOX panel member admitted that Dewhurst was “less of a fighter, more of a compromiser” and “wouldn’t be able to effect change in D.C?”
What is so hard about being honest for Big Jolly Politics that they have to use Soviet/Saul Alinsky tactics to manipulate their readers rather than respecting their intelligence?
Here, David. Let me help you. As you know I’m supporting Cruz. Here is an honest way to have written that paragraph if I was a Dewhurst supporter:
The strength of Dewhurst came from his ability to lay claim to many legislative victories of the Texas Senate in his role of Senate President. Ted Cruz could only cite what he would do if elected and show that he, at least, was knowledgeable of the issue. An example was the Castle Doctrine question, to which Cruz recalled debating a D.C. lawyer. Dewhurst was able to claim “I passed it in Texas.”
Of course, like his GOP establishment master, Jennings STILL isn’t giving the full picture. As President of the Senate, Dewhurst himself has very minimal input on the crafting of legislation, and while rarely speaking on the floor itself advocating a position of the bill. Jennings keeps saying we don’t have time to for Cruz to “learn the job” although it’s strange that true conservative legislators who DO that job such as Jim DeMint, Pat Toomey, Rand Paul, Mike Lee and Tom Coburn do not. And unlike the establishment Republicans who gave us the out of control spending under Bush, these are PRODCUTIVE Senate members who fiercely dedicate themselves to writing and championing bills that actually WOULD start to reverse the out of control government spending and bureaucracy. But somehow Mr. Jennings knows better It seems he thinks it is better to have a corrupt and mediocre owner of an auto builder that takes shortcuts over quality, rather than a brilliant mechanic who has can actually FIX the car.
And exactly WHAT Senate legislation has David Dewhurst every authored? NONE. What major conservative initiative has he actually championed and passed, arguing for it on the Senate floor? NONE. Instead we have a litany of conservative legislation he has gone out of his way to kill when victory was assured. Sanctuary Cities and the Anti-Groping TSA bill just to name two. As mentioned in my last piece, Donna Gardner points out that the Lt. Governor Mr. Jennings wants to portray as a “conservative” not only collaborated with the corrupt and cowardly gambling pawn Joe Strauss to unseat at least 10 great conservatives in redistricting, but when given the opportunity – Dewhurst only appointed ONE out of 40 committee chairmanships to a true Tea Party conservative.
If one was to fairly judge Dewhurst in his “Senate President” duties as Lt. Governor, you would have to say he did indeed schedule some conservative legislation during his terms, and totally undercut many key conservative initiatives and conservative appointments even enlisting the help of Democrats to defeat it. And none of those skills would be helpful for a Junior Senator from Texas.
In his disingenuous coverage of the Cruz/Dewhurst debate, Big Jolly David wraps himself in fawning praise for Tea Party debate host King Street Patriots, while dropping names of the Kingwood Tea Party without ONCE disclosing that the audience was almost unanimously Cruz supporters.
But at least Big Jolly didn’t pull the mainstream media journalistic malpractice like ABC’s “investigative reporter” Brian Ross who falsely insinuated a Tea Party member was behind the Colorado Batman movie massacre. He came close though by again – shading and editing facts to try and puff up his candidate and smear the opponent. Get this:
I had the opportunity to meet Marine Corps Capt. Dan Moran (ret.). Capt. Moran is an ardent Dewhurst supporter that has had to put up with terrible attacks from a prominent Cruz supporter because he was burned in an IED explosion in Iraq.
What Mr. Jennings refuses to report (apparently for cheap political points) is the following:
This is Bill Clinton/Barack Obama/Saul Alinsky stuff! Go out and falsely smear a private citizen who as the nerve to use their 1st Amendment right to free speech. Will David Jennings now denounce the lies of the Dewhurst campaign and unprecedented attacks on a minority Tea Party single mom who immediately apologized? Will David Jennings denounce the tactics of the Dewhurst campaign Jim Bognet for trying to physically bully Katrina into silence when she asked Dewhurst why he would not show up at the first 35 grassroots debates. Or do we only defend trumped up attacks on military vets? Will he denounce the lies of the Dewhurst campaign on the Ted Cruz China issue or the abhorrent and vicious lies like this:
This has been covered by numerous major sources with much disgust at Dewhurst. Of course, Ted Cruz is an appellate attorney for a large law firm that NEVER represented this lowlife scum EITHER personally, or criminally. He was one of many lawyers who worked on a APPEAL of an insurance company issue. WHERE IS DAVID JENNINGS BIG OUTRAGE OVER THIS? And the David Dewhurst campaign PAID for an ad to do worse to a private single mom?
But Big Jolly apparently ONLY wants to run to the side of Dewhurst supporting military veterans who themselves aren’t big enough to either accept Katrina’s apology OR protect a single mom from being smeared by the campaign he supports. You can quote me on this – the Captain is dishonoring his uniform by allowing this lie to stand. Ms. Pierson seemingly shows much more character and courage. She commented for this article:
I have been on the front lines encouraging people to get off their couches and get involved. I encourage all to speak out and fight for what it right. Most of us are not public speakers and politicians, therefore fear speaking. The average person mispeaks and as humans, we have the right to misspeak. By withstanding the attack, I have walked my talk. Silence is consent.
Erick Erickson of RedState.com has lost enormous respect for both Dewhurst and his campaign team to the point of now naming him “DewCrist” in referencing Florida Governor Charlie Crist who also pretended to be a “conservative” before endorsing Barack Obama when his slimy tactics didn’t keep him in office. As pointed out by Cornell Law School Professor William Jacobson and “Culture of Corruption” author Michelle Malkin (right), the Dewhurst campaign is stooping to the dregs of immorality to make false accusations against Ted Cruz.
What kind of man is so intent on winning, that he tries to lay the terrible molestation of a child, and then uses the family to falsely attack his opponent’s character who was only involved in an appeal of corporate civil lawsuit on a civil matter?
He also has done the same on the ambush of Ted Cruz regarding his interview on the Dan Patrick radio show. Some consider Patrick “very conservative” although he he has refused to meet with grassroots people on significant legislation. Never the less, the Dewhurst campaign launched a campaign that “even Dan Patrick says Ted Cruz lied.” Like the Democrat party that plays Willie Horton-condemning ads, the Dewhurst campaign is counting on Texans to take is word for it. THEY AREN’T. At early voting in West Harris County yesterday, a lady heard the Dewhurst ad, and although leaning toward Ted Cruz, felt it was her civic duty see if these charges were true. She investigated herself. AND was angry when she got to the voting location that Dewhurst would lie so brazenly. (Video at right.)Texas Voter Angry At Dewhurst Lies
Thank God, real patriots can see through the lies that Big Jolly and Dewhurst keep perpetuating. And perpetuate the lies he surely does:
As for the debate itself, I thought that Lt. Gov. Dewhurst started strong and won the first half of the debate but that Mr. Cruz finished strong and took the second half. That has nothing to do with substance, it is just a reflection on how they seemed to come across in the room. If it is substance you want, then Lt. Gov. Dewhurst is clearly your candidate. If it is style and the ability to quickly answer a question with a series of bullet points, then Mr. Cruz is your guy.
Mr. Jennings is certainly entitled to his opinion, although I think a pretty good case has been made to question it based on his omissions already noted. Cruz had multiple crowd acknowledgements (and laughter) throughout the first half to none – that I could see – for Dewhurst, so maybe DJ of BJ is grading on a NEA sliding scale. But he screws the pooch (and proves our point) with his next folly. He calls into question the turn of the debate – that in his mind was weighted toward Dewhurst – in favoring Ted Cruz because he “got in Dewhurst’s space.” I kid you not.
Perhaps it is a debating technique of Mr. Cruz but he seemed to lose his composure a couple of times. I say that it might be a debating technique because it did seem that the Lt. Gov. wasn’t as strong after the two incidents. The first incident is widely reported and has to do with a flyer that Mr. Cruz claims questions his patriotism. He moved away from his podium and clearly got into the Lt. Gov.’s space.And, he wouldn’t let up even after the moderator reminded him that there were no rebuttals allowed.
He claims Cruz “lost composure” when he held up the brochure sent by the Dewhurst campaign to Mr. Cruz’s father, showing Ted in front of Chinese flag with the words, “Mr. Cruz betrayed our country.” Notice how Jennings conveniently doesn’t bring this up. Also – WATCH THE VIDEO YOURSELF at the 24 minute mark. Mr. Cruz turns to address the Lt. Governor but NEVER comes from behind his podium. I actually would suggest it is Mr. Jennings who has lost his composure, as well as any scruples and ability to tell the truth.
Jennings apparently condones such illicit lies and tactics by Dewhurst since not once does he rebuke his candidate for it. Again – someone who is bringing up “character” in his review of Mr. Cruz, might want to buy a few more mirrors at Sam’s Club.
What is insane – is that Big Jolly thinks that his argument HELPS the cause of David Dewhurst. Dewhurst is supposed to be a prospective Senator who is supposed to represent “don’t mess with Texas” was so intimidated by a young lawyer “getting in his space” that he cowered and lost his concentration.
What would he do if Harry Reid or Barbara Boxer did the same in the 11th hour of an ObamaCare debate!??
Jennings claims Cruz “lost his composure” in multiple incidents. The second was on a fluff question about daughters to “attack” Dewhurst.
Mr. Cruz decided to use this simple question to attack the Lt. Gov., basically saying that he was raising his daughter better because he wasn’t saying negative things about the Lt. Gov. Bizarro to me, especially since I’ve followed this campaign very closely for over eighteen months and the Cruz camp has been far more negative on the whole and has attacked much more personally, again, on the whole. How many times has Mr. Cruz himself called Lt. Gov. Dewhurst spineless, weak, timid, tired, or old? Mr. Cruz himself set the tone that causes his supporters to be so vicious in their attacks. Pot meet kettle and I think that to use a man’s child as a political target is way over the top.
Again, perhaps this is strange to David is because he is living in Bizarro Liar World. Dewhurst had JUST claimed that Cruz had “defended a pedophile” a lie proven to completely untrue. (Links below). WHY IS DAVID JENNINGS TRYING TO PRETEND THAT CRUZ WASN’T SIMPLY CORRECTING THE RECORD?
It is because David Jennings must think his readers are absolutely ignorant or gullible. His moniker, “Because truth matters” should be “Where truth tatters.”
How exactly has $10 million in Dewhurst paid negative ads, equate to NOT A SINGLE CHARACTER ATTACK AD by the Cruz campaign. (Remedial education tip #1 to Big Jolly: CHARACTER is not POLICY. Remedial education tip #2 to Big Jolly: SuperPAC ads are not the domain of the Cruz campaign.)
Mr. Jennings OUT RIGHT LIES in this post, that the Cruz “campaign” has been more negative. How so? Cruz has never called Dewhurst “spineless” or “timid” but he has said we need people who are not. (Backing down in the face of Eric Holder by the way IS timid, spineless and cowardly by definition.) Can Mr. Jennings send me a link to a simple negative TV ad, paid for by the Cruz campaign, that does anything but point out Dewhurst’s failure in HIS JOB?
Meanwhile, David Jennings is acting all girly by a simple request by Cruz to quit telling his parents he is a communist, Big Jolly totally ignores the incident when a fellow Dewhurst supporter broke the instructions given to the audience by shouting out “liar” when Cruz was speaking. Cruz was simply recounted VERIFIABLE FACT of Dewhurst’s unequivocal support for amnesty in a 2007 speech (and his ensuing direction for state employees to hide it) for what has already been widely reported in the Houston Chronicle and elsewhere.
To me it seems like David Jennings whole baseless “composure” insanity, is his attempts to merely try and find any false insinuation to falsely level Cruz’s advantage in public speaking while hiding the truth from his readers. (And it is just like a Dewhurst supporter to break the rules by lying about a lie. Perhaps he picked it up by studying Mr. Jennings tactics.)
Furthermore, Jennings completely skips over the long monologue by Cruz PRAISING Dewhurst’s military and public service
Jennings says if you want style you go for Cruz but if you want substance you go for Dewhurst. Again. Really? Did David ever take a critical thinking course in college? Perhaps he still believes we should be believe Obama because he says he won’t raise taxes on the middle class. Certainly just because Dewhurst is trying to cover up his public speeches supporting full on amnesty and expanding Medicaid is no reason NOT to believe he’ll do that once he is in Washington D.C. when it REALLY matters, right?
And what about that “substance” which Mr. Jennings claims Dewhurst came out ahead on. Here (essentially) was the “substance” Mr. Dewhurst used in the debate:
Q: What does Constitutional Conservative mean to you?
A: My daddy was killed by a drunk driver when I was a kid so I stutter.
Dewhurst then said he was a “do-er” and talked about the bill against same sex marriage which, in fact, not only never answered the question – but was only something Dewhurst scheduled for a vote that already had overwhelming support. In contrast, Cruz laid out why the law on the drilling moratorium (for which Cruz represented the US Chamber of Commerce) was not constitutional. Cruz further pointed out that the Senate has the power to hold the President to the Constitution unlike any other branch of government.
Is it “substantive” answer what being a “constitutional conservative” is with telling the people you want to represent that you can’t talk well – but somehow you should get a disadvantaged childhood affirmative action pass, regardless of how it disadvantages Texas representation on the floor of the Senate?
Now, Cruz also has talked about his rough childhood and it is important to hear this kind of stuff for context. But DAVID DEWHURST used the “my daddy was killed” like SEVEN TIMES DURING THE DEBATE! If Mr. Jennings believe that is substantive, perhaps he is in the wrong party. How many times you try get people to vote for feeling sorry for you is NOT a conservative value.
Early in the debate, Cruz is asked if he will "stay conservative if elected.” Cruz makes a good point that escapes Big Jolly. He says “yes,” but says “if you had 50 conservatives up here – they would all say yes.”
And that’s the problem. Dewhurst brazenly lied in the first debate that he never advocated a tax increase despite reporters from the Wall Street Journal and the Statesman proving otherwise. During his time to answer that same question (whether he would stay a conservative), not only did he never say “yes,” he claims he reduced taxes and did not expand government – something (unfortunately) is not quite accurate. Indeed our state has increased population by 14% and state spending has increased slightly less – but Texas has grown it’s public debt by almost 60%. It seems like our current President, Dewhurst likes balancing the budget on the backs of future Texans who can’t vote yet.
Jennings ends his piece with this:
Sure, rhetoric is fun and it sells books and gets people to rallies, but the plain truth is that that is all rhetoric does. It doesn’t “move the debate” as people claim. In fact, the debate moves right past those that are shouting the loudest and the longest.
I’m a conservative. I demand more from politicians than loud, angry rhetoric.
Tell me this Mr. Big Jolly: If rhetoric is so overrated, why is it that Obama got elected, or Reagan, or Disraeli, or Winston Churchill. Ahhhh – it is because their SPOKEN WORDS MOVE PEOPLE TO ACTION. Do you know the #1 people are fired from their jobs? A failure to communicate. Do you know how you convince constituents and fellow lawmakers to support your bills? BY BEING PERSUASIVE IN YOUR SPEECH.
It is a sad day when people like Jennings hijack the word “conservative” to intentionally lie. Shame on you.
EIGHT HOURS after posting My comment on the Big Jolly site it is still “awaiting moderation.” No doubt he is to afraid for his readers to know the truth. (Hint: Being CONSERVATIVE means being willing to allow free debate and expression of contrary opinions flow.)
No David, you are not “a” conservative. You support a man who:
- Went to Democrat leaders to kill the anti-TSA groping law and refused to bring it to the floor when the “conservatives” had the vote.
- Uses blatant lies in attack ads like the one released by his SuperPAC insinuating Ted Cruz defended a criminal (with NO condemnation from the Dewhurst camp)
- Purposely shielded Joe Strauss in redistricting that eliminated dozens of TRUE conservatives
- Appointed only ONE (out of 40) committee chairmanships to people with conservative records.
- Blatantly lies about his documented (WSJ, Statesman) comments on Income tax.
- Blatantly lies Ted Cruz’s support of amnesty (Breitbart) then lies about his own support for Immigration in a 2007 speech, then directs STATE EMPLOYEES to remove his speeches from STATE websites, likely a violation of law.
- Killed SB 9 (Sanctuary Cities) in committee requiring Perry to call a special session.
- Had a Sharia law PROHIBITION stripped from legisilation.
- Attracted not a single major Tea Party “conservative” endorsement, but does attract
The even the uber-liberal Houston Chronicle who would call John Boehner or Mitch McConnell “extereme” calls Dewhurst a “moderate.” Is your sycophantic relationship with the Chron so tight you have to compromise REAL conservative ideals to keep on their site? Please don’t tell me you’re getting money from them too.
No, if I may suggest, you are NOT a “conservative,” in the vein of the Tea Party at all, but au unprincipled, bug establishment thief of the conservative label that refuses to condemn your own candidate for deplorable attacks on Tea Party leaders like Katrina Pierson.
Conservative Equals PRINCIPLED truth, as much as LIMITED government.
You’re certainly entitled to your endorsement, but quit trying to wrap yourself in the “Tea Party” associations to sell Texans the man that just had a fund raiser with the Obama Socialist John Podesta.
According to a two week sampling of voter registrations in Galveston County, Texas, 47% of all NAACP voter registrations are definably suspicious, if not fraudulent. Widowed senior, Barbara Gibson, received a such a voter registration almost to the week of the 10 year anniversary of her husband Mike’s death in Harris County a few weeks ago, and more are showing up across Texas.
Continued on:
This is the REAL response we would like to see from Mitt Romney over the Obama campaign’s constant drumming for more Mitt Romney tax returns.
PolitiJim's Animation by PolitiJim
(Please credit PolitiJim.com for your posts)
MOBILE & Tablet Users – see YouTube version here.
The Top 10 things Obama has not released.
The status of missing records for Barack Obama:
Original, vault copy birth certificate — Not released (lawyers’ fees greater than $2,000,000 ~ birth certificate is $15)
Certification of Live Birth — Released — Counterfeit
Amended Certification of Live Birth — Released — Counterfeit
Obama/Dunham marriage license — Not released (if one exists)
Obama/Dunham divorce — Released (by independent investigators)
Noelani Kindergarten records — Records lost (this is a big one — read two frames)
Soetoro/Dunham marriage license — Not released
Soetoro adoption records — Not released
Fransiskus Assisi School School application — Released (by independent investigators)
Punahou School application — Missing
Punahou School records — Not released
Noelani 3rd Grade records — Not released
Soetoro/Dunham divorce — Released (by independent investigators)
Selective Service Registration — Released — Under suspicion
Social Security Number — Released (by independent investigators) — Under suspicion
Occidental College records — Not released
Financial Aid Records — Not released
Passport — Not released and records scrubbed clean by Obama’s terrorism and intelligence adviser
Columbia College records — Not released
Columbia thesis — “Soviet Nuclear Disarmament” — Not released
Harvard College records — Not released
Harvard Law Review articles — None
Illinois Bar Records — Not released
Baptism certificate — None
Medical records — Not released — nor is the source of this nasty scar
Illinois State Senate records — None
Illinois State Senate schedule — Lost
Law practice client list — Not released
University of Chicago scholarly articles — None
White House Visitors list — The complete list
The Blagojevich Interview — judge denies access to the FBI report
The Illinois State Archives told Judicial Watch that they never received any request from Senator Obama to archive any records in his possession.
In 2007, Obama told Tim Russert that his records were “not kept.”
According to a former law enforcement officer (and now talk show host) there is not a single piece of forensically verifiable evidence that Barack Obama is even a US citizen. The consequences of which are startling.
Watch below:
Can anyone name what the 3 top proficiencies are for an effective, conservative Senator of the United States Congress? No? How about just naming what a Senator does?
| Apparently some Republicans in Texas are so wrapped up in gaining the favor of political celebrities they neglected to actually vet a candidate for the job according to what is required for it. | A printable and downloadable PDF of this article may be downloaded |
My short list of what a Senator does would be:
It seems some Texas Republicans don’t even have any of these in their top 10. They instead seem to suggest the qualifications are:
I emailed an appeal a week ago to a well respected blogger here in Texas, Big Jolly Politics, to reconsider his support of David Dewhurst. It followed the blatant crimes committed by Dewhurst of instructing state employees to hide damaging speeches he made FOR AMNESTY only 5 years ago. I’ve never met “Big Jolly David” and saw him write some good things including the “outing” of former Malcolm X indoctrinator Richard Johnson who was trying to pass himself off as a Tea Party Republican while running for the board of the Harris County Department of Education.
Today his blog offers a post from a Joanna Raynes, upping the ante on their Dew-moist love, while blatantly lying about proven exonerations of Dewhurst attacks on Ted Cruz. Some of these lies I personally documented for Mr. Jolly since his by line is “because truth matters.” Apparently he will need a new logo which I’ve fixed for him in the title graphic.
The essence of the article against Ted Cruz flows this way:
Frankly it’s typical of unprincipled Chicago/Alinsky politics. It is all one sided smears without acknowledging counter arguments or intelligent reason. Cruz is ALL BAD and Dewhurst is ALL GOOD, according to the Big Jolly Blog of GOP Establishment crime and grime. I frankly don’t care if that’s the way Texas politics “is.” We in the Tea Party are trying to elect people that start governing on MERIT and INTELLECT, rather than political muggery and inside crony politics.
They open their blog-sphame’ of Ted Cruz this way:
Because Cruz is a master debater and David a stutterer, debates are not the best format for David to shine. But frankly, I don’t believe that should be the test anyway.
Wait. Let me get that correct. A job that requires using rhetorical speech to argue for and against key pieces of legislation like repealing ObamaCare or making our Federal business tax internationally competitive shouldn’t be the test? WTH?
I suppose being a near blind alcoholic shouldn’t be the test of a truck driver either, then if it stands in the way of getting your uncle a job right? Can you imagine Abraham Lincoln EVER having been put in a position to free the slaves if it wasn’t for his rhetorical power to match Douglass? PEOPLE (and fellow Senators) are not just logically persuaded by speech, they are MOTIVATED to action. Remember how disappointed we were with Senator Bob Dole’s performance a Presidential candidate? Imagine Dewhurst coming up with a convincing argument for the repeal of ObamaCare or the abolition of the TSA on the Senate CSPAN coverage when the nation hangs in the balance. Whoops. Given Dewhurst’s complicity with Joe Strauss and his pro-amnesty speeches – we don’t know if he would even be for that, right?
And yet I get ahead of myself. The Big Jolly blog now thinks public speaking isn’t all that important of a criteria to being an effective Senator of the United States or to represent the views and positions of the greatest state in the Union. Well surely he would fight for the views of Texas and conservatives no matter what the personal embarrassment, wouldn’t he?
Ted Cruz disclosed that when both attended a recent church service, Dewhurst only attended AFTER getting assurances from the clergy staff that he would not be seated next to Mr. Cruz. (MP3 audio here.)And although Cruz has put no conditions on debates, David Dewhurst skipped all 35 grassroots debates leading into the primary statewide and then PERSONALLY attacked Katrina Pierson, a Tea Party leader who supports Cruz.
If he attacks a grassroots single mom conservative, and runs from debates to let Texans meet him and tell him their concerns in a political race – what in Gods name will he do in office!?
Raynes goes on to say the TOP qualification for Dewhurst is that he happens to be LIEUTENANT Governor of the state that is #1 in the country for business. If it wasn’t for the second in command who merely appoints committee chairmen and schedules votes in the Senate we would end up like…California! Clearly with logic like this, I’m guessing then that she also believed George H.W. Bush was responsible for all of Ronald Regan’s success? Or that Michael Bloomberg is a great Republican Mayor because New York City is the biggest city in America. But, it is her political opinion, and she’s entitled to all of it.
Raynes goes on to list these amazing other credentials of DD that qualify him for a job that entails writing and debating laws:
Frankly, you would hope that people who were reading this would be intelligent enough to question how these “conservative accomplishments” can resolve to an executive branch Lt. Governor, who did not “vote” or “pass” a single bill. His job was not to craft legislation but to determine which legislation was brought to a vote or not. Dewhurst is NOT running for the President of the United States Senate, but as a Junior Senator who will sit on committees to review, write and pass LAW.
Now, Jimmy Carter was a successful businessman (and also a fairly successful executive branch Governor) and it didn’t mean a hill of beans in Washington DC. I fail to see how his father serving in World War 2, his service in the USAF or his ability to learn how to deceive people by working at the CIA translates into writing detailed legislation and arguing for (or against) it on the floor of the Senate.
I did not know, however that no pro-life bills made it to the Senate before he was Lt. Governor, and I give him props on that once I verified that it was true. But can anyone tell me, what in Halifax Nova Scotia, any of this has to do with the JOB of being Senator. Or a single thing that this indicates his very short (and unflattering) stint at the General Land Office was a qualification even for Lt. Governor when members of the Texas House said of him:
"People hold him in no regard. Not high. Not low. No regard," said one Democratic member of the house. "He's never shown himself to be knowledgeable or assertive on any issues. He's just inept."
Let’s look at what Dewhurst did while Lt. Governor shall we? I cite the watchdog of Austin politics, Donna Gardner:
As the chair of the Texas Senate, David Dewhurst's responsibility is to appoint the committee chairs and committee members of the Senate. By looking at the ratings of the people Dewhurst appointed during the 82nd Legislative Session, it is obvious that there was a deliberate attempt on his part to keep conservative bills from gaining momentum.
The only conservative bills that were passed were done so "in spite" of David Dewhurst and Speaker Joe Straus.
We can’t possibly cover just how poorly Dewhurst performed when given the chance with the ONLY role he had to play that would help rein in government and help conservative causes, but the detailed appointment by appointment, and play by play of Dewhurst petty politics is available here.
And unlike the Big Folly of Dewhurst Fawning, let’s discuss precisely HOW we came to these conclusions shall we?
Bottom line: Neither the anti-groping nor the Sanctuary Cities bills became law because David Dewhurst refused to exercise leadership on these two important issues. Dewhurst also made sure that the redistricting maps were deliberately drawn so as to oust conservative leaders (e.g., Gail Lowe from the Texas State Board of Education, Rep. Wayne Christian, Rep. Leo Berman, etc.).
So when Raynes writes “Washington is a mess and on the verge of bankrupting our children’s future,” it is shocking that she thinks Dewhurst would actually make any difference. He has subverted REAL conservatives in Texas constantly. She even cites an endorsement by the Houston Chronicle but somehow seems to miss that their editorial board said Dewhurst was “a moderate, not a conservative,” on May 15th of this year.
Mark P. Jones, a political scientist at Rice University and the pundit the Houston Chronicle uses to analyze in state races says this after careful analysis and research of Dewhurst’s last session:
,,,Dewhurst frequently used his powers of agenda control to help pass legislation opposed by the most conservative members of the Republican delegation. In addition, the best estimate of Dewhurst’s location along the liberal-conservative continuum which dominates voting in the Texas Senate suggests he is significantly less conservative than approximately one-third of the Republican delegation. . . .
(Hint to Ms. Raynes: Here is what a balanced, honest article does.) It is important to note that Jones says Dewy does vote about even with 2/3rds of the Senate, and - since Texas is more conservative than most other states – he would like be a “mainstream conservative in the Senate.” Of course, you may be aware that those “mainstream conservatives” in Congress like John Boehner also refused to stand toe to toe against Harry Reid on the budget ceiling debate, immediately broke their “Pledge to America” after taking control in 2010 and end up voting more liberal than their states or districts that elected them.
It is somewhat ironic to me that Big Jolly goes on to praise the King Street Patriots Tea Party but sees no disconnect in supporting the antithetical TEA Party Candidate who couldn’t get a SINGLE true fiscal conservative on the national stage to endorse him. (No, Rick Perry who still has to live with him if he loses doesn’t count.) After all, the people responsible for the GOP success in 2010, and those TEA leaders who are truly committed to cutting government UNANIMOUSLY support Ted Cruz.
Hilariously, Ms. Raynes then claims that the support of Jim DeMint, Sean Hannity, Rand Paul, Pat Toomey, Sarah Palin are his “handlers” without whom he can not make a move. You know, THE TRUE CONSERVATIVES WHO STAND UP TO THE HIGH SPENDING GOP ESTABLISHMENT THAT LOST CONTROL OF THE CONGRESS TO PELOSI AND REED. Yeah. Nice try. I hope you make it to the confessional Sunday. Not only are these the MOST fiscally conservative mouthpieces in the country with actual track records of standing up against that whole “bankrupting our children’s future” concern she claims to care about, HE HAD NONE OF THEIR SUPPORT WHEN THEY STARTED.
Meanwhile, the Cruz website notes that, David Dewhurst, the man who the Houston Chronicle called a “moderate,” is guilty of these infractions:
He killed e-verify, and pulled a Bill Clinton on in-state tuition for illegals among other things, which did not escape the attention of those of us in the Tea Party who have long memories.
The disingenuous Raynes also alludes the support of the most American of patriots is also “insider Washington money.” An accusation that takes true gall. (Come to think of it, perhaps Ms Raynes never enters a church?) Not only are these the epitome of the reformers of the Washington establishment, Dewhurst held a campaign event for DC lobbyists at a house owned by top Obama crony Tony Podesta.
If you want a REAL picture of what the Austin GOP mafia thinks Cruz versus Dewhurst – just read this conversation overheard between a big Strauss advisor and a lobbyist. These GOP insiders for Dewhurst don’t even see us grass roots conservatives as having to get “their consent” to govern, much less respect fiscal conservatism. This conversation alone should prove that Dewhurst is the “insider politician” who lacks honesty and integrity.
Worse, she claims to know the mind and heart of Ted Cruz by saying “Texas is not Cruz’s first priority. Cruz is endorsed by DC SuperPacs who are looking for a puppet.” Of course, aside from the association with the most conservative, God fearing and independent Republicans in the GOP she gives absolutely no reference for her knowledge of Mr. Cruz’s motives. But she has decided to state it as fact. Shame on you. It’s people like you that have turned the party of Reagan into the party of RINO.
Mr. Big Jolly Jennings; are you and Ms. Raynes ok with a politician using government money to hide information from the taxpayers as Mr. Dewhurst has done? Where is your acknowledgement of his abuse of government power if “truth matters?” The Young Conservatives of Texas have filed a Freedom of Information Request to get all of the speeches Mr Dewhurst has directed be buried at Texas taxpayer expense. This is most likely a criminal action if directed by the Lt. Governor and undoubtedly is cowardly and morally reprehensible. Yet not a single word of acknowledgement on your blog to be fair and honest.
Especially when Dewhurst used his personal wealth to falsely accuse Mr. Cruz of being FOR amnesty, when in these speeches he is trying to hide from Texans he said:
“I support a guest worker program for those here today illegally. Labor and skilled workers are critical to our Texas economy.”
Breitbart.com, Tea Party Express and the Dallas Morning News BOTH found the Dewhurst ads complete lies. No apology or retraction from Dewhurst of course. I’m not sure if he thinks he can “buy” Texas voters with cheap liberal tactics or what.
So let’s look at the whole “integrity” thing then shall we? The Big Jolly of folly makes many accusations against Cruz that deserve serious attention. And since the Big Jolly doesn’t have the journalistic integrity to give both sides – we will. But we’ll have to dissect it slowly since she plays the old Saul Alinsky trick of dumping a bunch of accusations together to make them seem like they are related.
CLAIM: Cruz lied about Dewhurst supporting a state income tax.
What now should give a warning to EVERYONE in Texas about Big Jolly, is that I emailed him the quote that was confirmed by The Statesman over a week ago before he allowed this lie to be restated on his blog. Even the WALL STREET JOURNAL reiterated that it was in fact an income tax. RESULT: 20’ Pinocchio nose for Dewhurst and a snout, ears and Lampwick jackass tail for BIG JOLLY can not be trusted to properly present information or retract incorrect information. (Go watch the 1940 Disney movie if you don’t get the obscure references. And if you are anyone associated with Big Jolly – it might be helpful for you to watch it a few times for the moral lessons involved.)
CLAIM: Eighteen of 19 Senators wrote a letter disputing that Dewhurst ever raised taxes.
Not only has the prestigious National Review published multiple reports of Senators being threatened with committee appointments and delays of their legislation if fealty is not paid to their overlord Lieutenant Governor, it turns out the letter was written by Austin lobbyist Michael Grimes and NOT the Senate. PolitiJim is not disputing that these Senators did not give their approval, but if Cruz donors have been threatened as NRO reports, certainly mafia tactics would be used on these Senators as well. This is laughing at your boss’s jokes around annual review time. RESULT: 3’ Pinocchio nose for the soprano Lieutenant Governor and a Monstro whale omission by Big Folly.
CLAIM: Cruz has no understanding of the legislative process or public finance or budgeting.
This is partially a fair point in my opinion. On public finance and budgeting, the Senate doesn’t originate finance or budgeting bills, and with great conservative instincts and friends like DeMint and Toomey, I don’t see at all how this is a detriment to Cruz who is admittedly a very sharp guy. (Which know one says about Dewhurst who isn’t on his campaign team.) On the legislative process, how could you get any worse than having a 0.025 average of appointing conservatives to key chairmanship positions and thwarting the TSA bill, sanctuary cities prohibition (it was Perry who called them back into session) who intentionally redistricts conservatives out of office and who threatens fellow Senators to endorse him. It is very fair to say however that Cruz would need to be wise as a serpent going to Washington to keep his compass pointed to a true North. Especially when we learn that most of Tea Party freshmen elected in 2010 ended up being not so principled in their conservatism. I shudder to think of John Roberts could become Ruth Bader Ginsburg, where Dewhurst would end up after six years. RESULT: We don’t know how much pressure was put on Ogden to make the statement, but as Finance Chairman he’s certainly entitled to his view. But I don’t see how knowing the inner political games of Austin is any better than knowing how to mix paint versus painting. Dewhurst would likely completely trust his staff to write and/or read legislation and would likely miss huge points because he is NOT a lawyer. And fitting in better with the RINO’s in the Senate who almost caved on LOST isn’t a benefit in my book. But I think this is the first fair political argument that Raynes makes without distorting the truth.
CLAIM: A bad interview with Dan Patrick means Ted Cruz will fail as a Senator. Actually her concluding sentence is, “If he can’t get along with even the conservative leadership in Texas, how can he hope to be effective for Texans in divisive D.C.?”
How has the whole “getting along” thing worked out with Mitch McConnell, and John Boehner who are still letting the Democrats run roughshod over them (except Grassley/Issa)? The GOP House passed another terrible spending bill and neither stood up to Obama during the budget debate that has gutted our military. It was the people who support Cruz like DeMint who wouldn’t cave and bend to either the GOP establishment who keep yielding more freedom. It’s Rand Paul who is pushing legislation against unwarranted drone use by the EPA that the “get along” RINO’s are keeping in committee. You can’t both accuse Cruz of being the lapdog of the most conservative legislators in Congress and also not getting along them. It’s illogical. I admit the Dan Patrick interview was not Cruz’s best, and that he was unprepared for the ambush. But his facts remained that Dewhurst was quoted by major papers advocating taxes and amnesty. If Dan Patrick wants to avoid “facts” and get self defensive of his conservative cabal that didn’t stop the TSA, caved on redistricting and wouldn’t challenge Joe Strauss who is paid by mafia money, who cares? RESULT: Put Pinocchio playback on pause.
CLAIM: He’s done bad work as an Solicitor General because he flubbed one of his first cases, and admitted looking silly. Raynes says, “ Not the reaction I want from my Senator.”
Once again, Rayens seems to have a double standard. Cruz actually ADMITS his mistake – something Dewhurst has never done on anything. Instead Dewhurst overtly lies about his avocation for state taxes and amnesty. Ms. Raynes, if you want a politician who reacts to mistakes that will inevitably be made with more lies, rather than admission of truth – I think you are in the wrong party. There’s an expert at that in the White House you might want to vote for. As for his work as Solicitor General, he has the backing of his boss, Greg Abbott. Are you calling into question the integrity and judgment of the guy who actually REVIEWS Ted Cruz’s performance? If so, just say it. His record is quite spectacular to almost other comers, and the fact that not a single attack ad is run about his performance tells me that even the Dewhurst campaign knows this is a non-starter. RESULT: Big Jolly is banished to Stromboli's puppet show until the Austin cabal is broken.
CLAIM: Cruz is representing Robert Mericle, the dirtbag behind the Kids for Cash scandal – insinuating sinister associations with gays and pedophilia.
Really? You want to go there with the long standing rumors about your candidate who wore makeup to the General Land Office? Sure, why not. According to the Dallas Morning News (7/12/12) and the Texas Tribune (7/12/12), and as disclosed for over year, Cruz has NEVER represented Mericle in the criminal proceedings, only the APPEAL of a civil lawsuit against his insurance company. AND – had Cruz won, the injured would have received $1.75 Million MORE. Why do you want to deprive the injured kids from getting more compensation? The Big Jolly blogger says of course, attorneys can have sleaze bags for clients, but they won’t be her Senator. Are you aware, Ms. Raynes that John Adams represented a British soldier accused of firing on revolutionary patriots at the same time he was writing letters about a possible Declaration of Independence? Not only did you lie about the facts of the case to attempt to falsely accuse Mr. Cruz of wrongdoing while working for an international law firm, you seem to be confused about the entire concept of judicial rights upon which this nation was founded. RESULT: Forget Pinocchio, please just get some remedial civics and social science lessons.
You also make lies about Cruz being “paid for” by out of state forces despite the Federal Elections Commission verifying that less than 30% of Cruz’s donations are out of state. It’s easy to claim your opponent is raising money from “outside Texas” when you can raise it from your own bank account to the tune of $4 Million. While Dewhurst uses it as an attack, intelligent people see it for what it is. More actually PEOPLE support Cruz with their cash.
Dewhurst also tries to saddle Cruz with “Chinese clients” that stole blueprints when they are in fact Americans who did business in China. The heavily liberal and biased Politifact Texas has now twice actually exonerated Cruz on facts, but then concluded their “rating” with political opinion as they did here. Perhaps Big Jolly and the Texas GOP Establishment take Texans for rubes, or idiots who will just fall for similar tactics used by Barack Obama’s campaign.
I guess Raynes likes dirty, dishonest politics who deploy things like this caught by Erick Erickson of Redstate. Paid Dewhurst consultants had to pose as Floridians to spread the false China lies on the comments section of their blog:
Using the user name “Liberty Patriot,” Dewhurst’s consultants have dropped by four times to attack Ted Cruz at RedState.
Ironically, they’ve noted that “convictions in your beliefs are important” even while David Dewhurst was altering his official Lt. Governor’s website to cover up his amnesty position.
Erickson traced their IP addresses DIRECTLY back to the Dewhurst campaign. And he’s not the only one who has seen a pattern of duplicity and corruption in Dewhurst. Let’s go BACK to the political scientist used by Houston Chronicle:
I’ve known Ted Cruz slightly since the late 1990s, since shortly after he clerked at the Supreme Court for Chief Justice Rehnquist. A very solid guy. I’ve also had a very unpleasant run-in with Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst. Last year my writing partner Ken Green and I wrote a study for the Texas Public Policy Foundation about the energy sector in Texas, in which, among other things, we argued that the state government should not use its heavy hand to tilt the playing field against coal and toward natural gas, even though Ken and I are both great fans of natural gas. We think the market should decide. (And it is–the winner is: natural gas.) The study made no mention of Dewhurst, but he took offense anyway, and summoned me to his office in the capitol building in Austin and worked me over for about an hour. It became clear that he is an old fashioned petty corrupt pol who believes in using the power of government to help his friends and favored interests (he made his own personal fortune in the natural gas business). I’ve met a lot of politicians over the years, but he was perhaps the single most unappealing and offensive one I’ve ever met, in either party.
Integrity.
You want to know who has integrity? It’s the guy who was hired by Dewhurst to consult on the Voter ID bill but wouldn’t disclose it for cheap political points because it would violate attorney client privilege. Yes – Mr. Cruz was hired by Mr. Dewhurst.
We HAVE done the homework. We don’t blindly see perfection in Mr. Cruz, but we do see habitual political tyranny that Dewhurst has already used in this campaign. Cruz hasn’t personally attacked Dewhurst ONCE – even continuing to laud his military service. And he has FORCEFULLY articulated a much more detailed and conservative plan on everything from fiscal policy to Senate approvals to foreign policy.
In both debates, Mr. Dewhurst not only couldn’t answer direct questions that didn’t require great oratory, he outright lied about positions that were easily proven by reporters who contemporaneously took notes on his positions.
I could not represent any better reasons TO vote for Ted Cruz – than how Erick Erickson has below:
In my post recounting the Gathering, I wrote the following:
In fact, the most inspiring speech for me personally was the one given by Ted Cruz. It was fascinating to hear how he ended up where he is. His father was a Cuban immigrant who was active with the pro-Castro forces in the Cuban Revolution who escaped to the US after it was clear he couldn’t stay in Cuba any longer. He showed up in Austin, TX, with the clothes on his back, $100, and nothing else to attend the University of Texas. Ted Cruz is clearly a product of, and is living, the American Dream, but he made the point that, however, extraordinary his father’s story, this sort of thing is still quite common in America. He pointed out just how great this country has become, despite being formed mainly of the cast-offs of other countries. He also made a point of telling us how he fought for conservative causes and Texas’s interests as the solicitor general of his state. He will be a fine attorney general for his state.
And from time to time, I still happen upon my copy of the bio of him by National Review that I picked up at the Gathering that year. Of course, it’s now just over three years old, but worth reading all the same. Though I can’t find a video of his speech from that Gathering, Moe Lane interviewed him afterwards, and here’s Moe’s interview from the 2011 RedState Gathering in Charleston.
Now, Ted Cruz didn’t end up becoming Attorney General, but regardless, there are few people out there who I am interested in seeing further their political careers than Ted Cruz. When I saw that he would be running for Kay Bailey Hutchison, I was predictably excited. I’d love to see him as a Senator. A bona fide conservative Senator from a bona fide conservative state. So that I am enraged by the sort of tactics employed by Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, whom Erick has so aptly called DewCrist so much that I have to continually remind myself that isn’t actually his name. You don’t need to pay much attention to understand this about Dewhurst’s attacks: you can smell the fear.
Cruz was the Texas Solicitor General from 2003 - 2008. Cruz is now an appellate lawyer -- a lawyer who argues to courts of appeals and helps ensure that U.S. law is properly applied. He works for an international law firm that has 1,200 lawyers all over the world. He also has the support of nearly every major Tea Party leader in the country.
