Gay Patriot Header Image

Ted Cruz: Up next for destruction?

From Rich Lowry’s brief profile of Senator Cruz at Politico, he sounds pretty smart, like he might be an effective leader for small government (or the Tea Party, if you prefer).

So…is he next? As the Left has proven with Sarah Palin, Herman Cain, and others: Any small-government leader with a bit of effectiveness or charisma MUST. BE. DESTROYED. REGARDLESS OF TRUTH. Especially if they could hold some appeal for women, blacks, or Hispanics.

Jammie Wearing Fools has gathered a few links on the nascent Cruz Derangement Syndrome.

Share

21 Comments

  1. Unfortunately, Herman Cain’s past did him in. Frustratingly, that past would have been an irrelevant triviality for any Democrat.

    Sarah Palin is by no means ‘destroyed’ despite the continual effort and continues to be the mistress of her own destiny. Same with Ted Cruz.

    The fun part is watching PDS/CDS patients getting hysterical from being completely ignored.

    Comment by BigJ — August 26, 2013 @ 4:44 pm - August 26, 2013

  2. Unfortunately, Herman Cain’s past did him in.

    Cain is responsible for his past actions, to be sure. But don’t you think the media leapt on him eagerly and held him to a tougher standard than they did, say, Bill Clinton?

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 26, 2013 @ 4:49 pm - August 26, 2013

  3. Not intending to be argumentative, but the question begs: What past?

    To my knowledge, and listening to him every morning on the way to the office, I don’t remember a shred of real evidence. I might have missed it, so I will reconsider the question if there was hard evidence.

    Comment by mixitup — August 26, 2013 @ 6:38 pm - August 26, 2013

  4. Need any further proof that the left is intellectually AND morally bankrupt?

    Comment by Bastiat Fan — August 26, 2013 @ 9:02 pm - August 26, 2013

  5. Cruz has a lot going for him. I don’t think he’ll allow the Democrat smear machine to run over him. On the other hand, Hillary, the likely Democrat candidate, has absolutely nothing going for her and a lot of skeletons in her closet, especially the four dead in Benghazi.

    Comment by Lisa — August 26, 2013 @ 9:05 pm - August 26, 2013

  6. There’s a reason Democrats want Christie to be the Republican nominee; and it ain’t because “he can beat Hillary.”

    Comment by V the K — August 26, 2013 @ 9:12 pm - August 26, 2013

  7. Ted Cruz – is he going to labelled a “white Hispanic”? or will he be labelled “that Canadian Texan”?

    Comment by Charles — August 26, 2013 @ 11:24 pm - August 26, 2013

  8. Well, Charles, the Ds don’t dare let Cruz be called ANY kind of Hispanic, so it looks like Canadian Texan. (It might be different if we had millions of illegal Canadians voting in our elections.)

    Comment by Polly — August 27, 2013 @ 12:02 am - August 27, 2013

  9. Senator Cruz was able to come from behind and defeat The Establishment´s efforts to deny him the Party nomination. There is no doubt in my mind he´ll meet the dragon, (I mean the jackass) head on and the Left just might meet their Waterloo. I noticed that he refers to Democrats as the radical left, and rightly so. The Democrat Party has been hijacked, about 60 years ago, by the radical Americans for Democratic Action; founded by communist sympathizers and fellow travelers. Back then, Party regulars claimed an ADA endorsement of a candidate was the kiss of death, Now candidates are kissing their collective asses for an endorsement. If the media were fair they would refer to any Democrat as a radical leftist, as they do now calling the TEA Party, the radical right. Maybe those in the contemporary media need to take an impartial course on the Constitution of the United States and learn that TEA Party is not radical unless following the principles in the Constitution is radical.

    Comment by Roberto — August 27, 2013 @ 1:17 pm - August 27, 2013

  10. Sarah Palin & Herman Cain destroyed themselves. When you give foolish people a microphone it only takes a short while for themselves to prove themselves.

    Cruz is smarter then those two and I think he can withstand it. But I doubt he can move to the center enough to win any national election and keep his credibility.

    Furthermore, the birther folks who came out against Obama are in a bind on this one. It will be fun to watch those wacko’s walk back as Cruz tries to win the presidency.

    Christie vs Clinton in 2016!

    I’m looking forward to it. People like me who sit in the middle win either way!

    Clinto vs Cruz in 2016 leaves me with dread. Because then I would be forced to support yet another Dem.

    Comment by mike — August 27, 2013 @ 11:10 pm - August 27, 2013

  11. People can bash all they want, but I’ll take this position on Cruz anyways.

    He’s not ready to be President now.

    He needs time in the Senate. He needs time to do things internationally. He needs to reach out to the American people again and again.

    He might be ready in 2016, but– even then– I would rather pick someone that has been a longtime governor with a solid record that could point to having helped job growth (that logic gave us the pic of Reagan in 1980, after all).

    Comment by SwiperTheFox — August 28, 2013 @ 12:57 am - August 28, 2013

  12. Destruction??? Liberals don’t support conservatives; conservatives don’t support liberals. Liberals criticize conservatives; conservatives criticize liberals. If the general public agrees with criticisms of a candidate, that candidate won’t win. Politics is, by definition, about convincing the public you are right. A good politician will fight back and not be defined by his opponents. In short, if Ted Cruz is a good politician, then the public will support him. (That’s not the same as saying his policies are good; but rather saying he is good at politics, in that case.) If he gets destroyed, then that will indicate he is a bad politician. All of the above candidates you mentioned who had their political lives cut short were examples of bad politicians.

    Comment by Mitch — August 28, 2013 @ 7:09 am - August 28, 2013

  13. Furthermore, the birther folks who came out against Obama are in a bind on this one. It will be fun to watch those wacko’s walk back as Cruz tries to win the presidency.

    Of course they are Mikey. They’re already going after him, just like they did Obama and McCain.

    Hint, the birther movement came from the left.

    Oh mikey boy…
    The facts the facts are calling.

    Comment by The_Livewire — August 28, 2013 @ 7:36 am - August 28, 2013

  14. Does anyone have a recommendation about where one can examine the characteristics and political and social hot buttons of “the center.”

    It seems that “the center” is always in control of who gets elected to the Presidency. So, if Hillary Clinton appeals to “the center” what comprises her list of strengths that play to “the center”?

    Apparently, Ted Cruz scares “the center.” What comprises his list of nasties that turns “the center” off on him?

    Why is it taken for granted that “the center” is a monolith of like thinking?

    Perhaps the much vaunted “center” is largely made up of generally low interest people who vote according to their notions of the moment. Honestly, how could anyone be “undecided” in the week before the election when the candidates are Carter v. Reagan, Mondale v. Reagan, Dukakis v. Bush, Bush v. Clinton, Clinton v. Dole, Bush v. Gore, Kerry v. Bush, Obama v. McCain, Obama v. Romney?

    “The center” is where both parties go to shake out the marginal votes that will put them across the finish line by at least a nose.

    Is “the center” capable of believing in personal responsibility and the work ethic? Can “the center” see government as something other than a feed sow? Is “the center” so stuck in moral relativity and situation ethics that it is without foundational principle?

    The Carl Rove, David Axelrod, Michael Barone, et al numbers crunchers look at “the center” as classes of bacteria to be sorted, inoculated, fed, isolated, frustrated, coerced, coaxed and played. Fine. That is their field and forte.

    But this idea that “the center” holds the source of national wisdom which will get the country on the correct path is beyond my understanding.

    Any help I can get in understanding the power and primacy of “the center” will be much appreciated.

    Apparently, Cruz is abrasive to “the center.” Well, send in the clowns. Let’s discover all of the messaging Cruz needs to avoid, soften, adapt, adopt and promote to make him the darling of “the center.”

    Thanks in advance for all of the help that will come pouring in.

    Comment by heliotrope — August 28, 2013 @ 12:14 pm - August 28, 2013

  15. Hint, the birther movement came from the left.

    Exactly; I think Hillary Clinton started it.

    That makes mike’s quote:

    Furthermore, the HILLARY CLINTON CAMPAIGN-birther folks who came out against Obama are in a bind on this one. It will be fun to watch those wacko’s walk back as Cruz tries to win the presidency.

    Which is kind of funny :)

    As for whether Cruz could or should run for president: The possibility never crossed my mind, until reading this thread. I will have to think about it. I assumed that he does what he does, simply out of conviction. And that he won’t be seasoned enough to be president, for awhile yet. Interesting, that some of his political opponents are already fearing it, or building him up to it.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 28, 2013 @ 1:56 pm - August 28, 2013

  16. Senator Cruz has a a visable track record in Texas. Obama was just a pretty face in the Illinois State Senate with a record of ¨present¨ votes to show for it. However, he would be a better prepared candidate in 2020. We don´t need another novice in the WH. He probably could hold his own in debates with Hillary, with all her negatives and baggage, but her name recognition will carry her by the marginal voter. God help us.

    Comment by Roberto — August 28, 2013 @ 4:16 pm - August 28, 2013

  17. Most Clinton supporters would never support Cruz anyway so I don’t think they will be walking back anything.

    Its the tea party folks who are going to have to walk back their previous comments on what it means to be a “natural born citizen” suddenly being a “dual citizen” and not born in America won’t be as important when the person has a “R” in front of his affiliation…

    Comment by mike — August 29, 2013 @ 12:49 am - August 29, 2013

  18. Hint, the birther movement came from the left.

    Exactly; I think Hillary Clinton started it.

    The birther movement was made up of many conservatives who didn’t support Obama. One of the most prominent birthers is extremist fringe Republican candidate Andy Martin who appeared on Hannity’s show to attack Obama once. Obviously saying Obama isn’t eligible is something some people might grab onto in an attempt to get Obama out of office.

    The vast majority of conservatives aren’t birthers. Just a few crazy ones are. Those crazy birthers should be denounced.

    Comment by Mitch — August 29, 2013 @ 6:12 am - August 29, 2013

  19. Its the tea party folks who are going to have to walk back their previous comments on what it means to be a “natural born citizen” suddenly being a “dual citizen” and not born in America won’t be as important when the person has a “R” in front of his affiliation…

    Most of the birthers are irrelevant crazy people. They won’t really have to walk back their comments except maybe for some of the TV commentators who did birtherism. Donald Trump, perhaps.

    Some of the crazy people are perhaps so crazy that they will oppose Ted Cruz anyway even though they agree with him on policies.

    Comment by Mitch — August 29, 2013 @ 6:13 am - August 29, 2013

  20. Actually, malicious bigot and racist mike, you lie, because you supported and endorsed Bob Filner despite actual proof of his sexually harassing people.

    Why is that, malicious racist mike? Why did your Barack Obama and Obama Party scream that accusations of sexual harassment made Herman Cain unfit for office, while you supported and endorsed actual sexual harasser Bob Filner?

    Of course you won’t answer, because you’re a racist liar.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — August 30, 2013 @ 5:58 pm - August 30, 2013

  21. Its the tea party folks who are going to have to walk back their previous comments on what it means to be a “natural born citizen” suddenly being a “dual citizen” and not born in America won’t be as important when the person has a “R” in front of his affiliation…

    littlelettermike establishes his ignorance once again. (It seems boundless.)

    Apparently, littlelettermike does not know the working definition of “natural born citizen.” The TEA Party is comprised largely of people who understand and care more for the Constitution than littlelettermike understands.

    There is no parallel between the TEA Party and “the birthers.” That is not to say that a limited subset of TEA Party adherents are not “birthers.”

    Let us assume that littlelettermike is not aware that Obama went to great lengths to hide his birth certificate and has left a trail of curious problems concerning his student era passport, his social security number(s), how he identified his citizenship on college applications and registration for the draft. His writer’s book bio is at least curious. But, only if you are capable of non-ideologue curiosity.

    Perhaps littlelettermike can lay out how the questions regarding Obama’s effort to shield the common facts of Obama’s past compare with the actions of Ted Cruz.

    Comment by heliotrope — August 30, 2013 @ 6:36 pm - August 30, 2013

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.