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:
- Writes and reviews legislation (aka “laws”)
- Debates that legislation to convince other Senators (and their constituents) of it’s merits or detriments.
- Researches and prosecutes opinions on Executive Office appointments.
It seems some Texas Republicans don’t even have any of these in their top 10. They instead seem to suggest the qualifications are:
- Someone who is closely tied to corrupt the GOP Establishment.
- Someone who uses Saul Alinsky style politics.
- Someone who has absolutely no professional training in writing or debating the “law,” but knows how to play backdoor politics by determining WHO gets to write the law and set the rules.
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:
- Never mind the fact Dewhurst can’t speak correctly.
- Texas is #1!! And Dewhurst is in Texas Government!
- Dewhurst served in the military and made a lot of money as a businessman.
- All the liberal newspapers endorse David Dewhurst!
- Cruz lied, lied, lied, lied, lied.
- Cruz isn’t qualified because he was born in Canada and all successes in the attorney general’s office were because of Greg Abbott. (No mention that Abbott strongly supports Cruz.)
- Cruz supports pedophiles.
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:
- He served in the Air Force and the CIA.
- His dad served in WW2. (No kidding, this was a reason.)
- He is a self-made businessman.
- He cut taxes and and cut spending 51 times while also “passing” tort reform, Loser Pays, Voter ID, the sonogram bill to protect the unborn, defunded planned parenthood, passed the defense of marriage, legislation to protect the right to pray in schools, and Jessica’s Law.
- He has lived the American dream. (Again, no kidding.)
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?
- The anti-groping bill (SB 29) died because David Dewhurst adjourned the Senate early; the House refused to accept SB 29 as it was worded without there being a chance to negotiate the terms with the Senate.
- On the Sanctuary Cities bill (SB 9), the House passed it; but the Senate kept it bottled up in committee during the regular session. When it was finally voted in committee, the vote was 19-12 not to send it to the Senate floor for a vote.
- It was Gov. Perry who put Sanctuary Cities on the Special Session agenda, and the Senate passed SB 9 almost at the end of the Special Session. Unfortunately, the House did not allow SB 9/HB 9 out of the state affairs committee; and the Sanctuary Cities bill died.
- Out of 40 possible chair/co-chair positions Dewhurst could have appointed conservatives to, he appointed only a single chairmanship and four co-chair appointments. (The complete shocking analysis and more by Donna here.)
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:
- Dewhurst himself proposed a statewide “wage tax” that the Wall Street Journal said was nothing more than “a fancy disguise for a personal income tax.”
- Dewhurst himself raised state tax revenue by 49%.
- Dewhurst himself raised state spending by 62% — and he calls a $72 billion increase a “spending cut.”
- Dewhurst himself appointed 32 Democrats to committee chairs and worked with them to kill conservative legislation.
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.
0 comments:
Post a Comment