Cruz and Clinton Show Their True Colors

Right From the Start

Right From the Start

Last week, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) was extended an invitation to speak during prime time before the Republican National Convention as it endorsed Donald Trump as its presidential nominee.  To the surprise of many at the convention – but not to those of us who have observed Mr. Cruz over his brief career – he used his time not to endorse Mr. Trump but rather to encourage voters to vote their conscience and vote for someone who would uphold the constitution – meaning him and only him.  Mr. Cruz is, as John Bright once said of Horace Greeley:
“He is a self-made man and worships his creator.”

I don’t like Mr. Cruz – never have.  In a column in early February I wrote:
“He is a small-minded man given to petty grievances and demagogic and personal attacks – it is no wonder that he is universally disliked in the United States Senate.  He rivals former President Bill Clinton (D) in parsing words and dissembling the truth.  He is a divisive character in a time in which we need healing.  Basically, he is Barack-Obama-on-the-right.”
A month later I wrote:
“Hidden from view was the growing reputation that Mr. Cruz was gaining in the United States Senate as an orator who played fast and loose with the truth; as a back-stabber willing to sacrifice his colleagues for his own ambitions; and as an “ally” that could never be trusted.  When those things began to be made public, Mr. Cruz promptly blamed others and declared that he was running against the “establishment” and that the criticisms were merely the “slings and arrows” that he had to endure from the powerful.
“But that characteristic of moral relativism carried over into his presidential campaign.  His inner circle was composed of people, like him, who would do anything to win.  His campaign literature (ads, flyers, and speeches) began attacking other candidates using innuendo, half-truths and outright lies.”
*         *          *
“When confronted with these facts, Mr. Cruz dissembled.  He embraced moral relativism.  He never answered for his own wrongdoing but rather said that others were worse.  In an interview this past Sunday with FOX News, when the host Chris Wallace read him the litany of his half-truths and dirty tricks, Mr. Cruz accused Mr. Wallace of reading from a Trump press release.  And when Mr. Wallace quickly disabused Mr. Cruz of that notion and asked for an answer, Mr. Cruz instead asserted that others had done similar things and had not been called to account.”
Mr. Cruz lost the nomination, and for good reason.  And that good reason was on display again in his speech before the Republican National Convention.  Everything about his speech was contrived and everything about the crowd’s response was real.  He was booed widely.  He was criticized by politicians, pundits and contributors uniformly.  No one rose to his defense.
Mr. Trump missed an opportunity to crush Mr. Cruz and to demonstrate his efforts to build party unity.  Mr. Trump could have simply shrugged off Mr. Cruz’s comments and allowed that Mr. Cruz was, is, and always will be, his own worst enemy.  Instead Mr. Trump engaged in a fiery denunciation and promised to create a superPAC in an attempt to deny Mr. Cruz re-election to the Senate in 2018.  He needn’t have done either – those efforts by others were already underway by the time Mr. Cruz left the auditorium.
*          *          *
Hillary Clinton, former Secretary of State under President Barack Obama has been running for president forever.  She lost to Mr. Obama in the Democrat primary in 2008 but has never stopped planning, organizing and manipulating to succeed him in 2016.  So completely did she dominate the national and state Democrat parties that she was from the very beginning of 2015 the “presumptive nominee” of the Democrat Party.
But Ms. Clinton cheats.  She cheats at everything.  She lies about everything.  And so cheating in an effort to secure the Democrat nomination came as second nature – actually probably first nature.
First, she secured control of the national Democratic National Committee (DNC) in order to control appointments and command loyalty from the multitude of special interest groups.  Next, she used that influence to control the appointment of the so-called “superdelegates” – a group initially created to ensure that the party bosses could not control the nominating process but which has morphed into precisely the instrument by which the party bosses do control the process by controlling who becomes a superdelegate.  Before the first ballot was cast in the first Democrat primary, Ms. Clinton had virtually secured the nomination through the use of the superdelegates, the overwhelming majority of which were pledged to her from the very beginning.
And now we know that in addition to rigging the delegate selection, Ms. Clinton’s loyalists at the DNC were actively involved in ensuring that no other candidate – principally Sen. Bernie Sanders (Socialist – VT) – would get a fair shake.  And for Ms. Clinton there is no loyalist quite like Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-FL), the recently deposed head of the DNC.  Ms. Wasserman Schultz is easily the most hateful person to ever head a national party.  When her mouth opens she spews venom in every direction.  There is no white, male, or Republican individual about whom she cannot find the most vile things to say.  She is so vicious she makes pitbulls cower.
During the primary season, Mr. Sanders complained bitterly about the scarcity and timing of the debates for the Democrat candidates.  We now know that Ms. Wasserman-Schultz and other officials at the DNC were responsible and they did it deliberately to minimize positive exposure for Ms. Clinton’s opponents and negative exposure for her given her propensity for lies and gaffs.  Ms. Wasserman-Schultz and her colleagues at the DNC sought to paint Mr. Sanders as an atheist and diminish his Jewish heritage.  And there is likely to be more to come – much more.
The reaction to yet another disclosure of Ms. Clinton’s propensity for lying and cheating is taking place at the Democrat National Convention in Philadelphia.  Reuters report Tuesday:
“Chaos broke out ahead of the U.S. Democratic Party convention on Monday as protesters jeered the party chairwoman over leaked emails showing Democratic officials worked to undermine Bernie Sanders in his presidential primary battle with Hillary Clinton.
“Hours before the start of the four-day gathering to nominate Clinton for the White House, outgoing Democratic National Committee head Debbie Wasserman Schultz struggled to be heard above boos as she spoke to the Democratic delegation from her home state, Florida.”
In a further attempt to mollify disaffected Democrats and Sanders’ supporters, the Democrat National Committee offered a further apology:
“On behalf of everyone at the DNC, we want to offer a deep and sincere apology to Senator Sanders, his supporters, and the entire Democratic Party for the inexcusable remarks made over email. These comments do not reflect the values of the DNC or our steadfast commitment to neutrality during the nominating process.  The DNC does not — and will not — tolerate disrespectful language exhibited toward our candidates.  Individual staffers have also rightfully apologized for their comments, and the DNC is taking appropriate action to ensure it never happens again.”
Who believes that?  Nobody will be punished.  Nobody, with the exception of Ms. Wasserman-Schultz will lose their job and the Clinton machine immediately hired her (organized crime always protects its own) – thus confirming what everyone suspected.  And even if they are to be punished it comes too late.
Given how close the Democrat presidential primary races was between Ms. Clinton and Mr. Sanders, were it not for the cheating – not for “thumb on the scale – there is every probability the Mr. Sanders would have won the primary and Ms. Clinton would have once again lost the big prize – primarily because of her own dishonesty.  And now all of those Democrat operatives can be assured that the Clinton machine will take care of them – unless.
There’s not a lot of difference between Mr. Cruz and Ms. Clinton.  Let’s hope that the general election provides them one more commonality – LOSER.

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 05:00 | Posted in 2016 Presidential Election, Bernie Sanders, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, Donald Trump, Ethics, Government corruption, Hillary Clinton, Ted Cruz | 38 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)