Archive for the ‘Ted Cruz’ Category

Icicles must be forming in hell because Ted Cruz will meet with Alyssa Milano in Sen. Cruz’s Senate office to discuss gun control and the Bible in the spirit of I Peter 4:8. For those not familiar with that verse (I wasn’t), it says “And above all things have fervent love for one another, for ‘love will cover a multitude of sins.'” Here’s my sincere prayer that that’s the spirit that this political odd couple will meet.

This all started when Miss Milano initially tweeted “I’d love to come in and meet with you on the gun issue and many other issues that include life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, @tedcruz and also, 1 Peter 4:8. I’ll be in DC next week. We can live-stream the meeting so the American people can hear your bullshit 1st hand.” Cruz then replied, saying “I’d be happy to sit down & visit next week about uniting to stop gun violence & about the Constitution. If we can have a civil & positive conversation—in the spirit of 1 Peter 4:8 as you suggest—despite our political differences, that might help resolve the discord in our Nation.”

I don’t doubt Sen. Cruz’s sincerity. He’s a solid Christian man who isn’t afraid of a debate. Since he’s said that he wants to have a conversation “in the spirit of I Peter 4:8,” then I’ll accept that as Sen. Cruz’s intent. What’s interesting is Miss Milano’s reply:


Sen. Cruz’s reply might’ve surprised Miss Milano:


There’s more to Sen. Cruz’s reply, which I’d recommend everyone read, but you get the picture. Nonetheless, Miss Milano replied thusly:


This should be interesting. I’d love it if all of the cable networks covered it live. If they did, I’m betting that they’d get monstrous ratings. I’d be surprised if each network couldn’t find a major sponsor to allow them to cover the discussion/debate without interruption.

Perhaps, this odd couple might even do something positive that would help break the partisan logjam on this and other issues.

Like their national brethren, the DFL is late in expressing outrage at what’s happening at our southwest border. As is often the case, the DFL isn’t offering solutions to the crisis. They’re just offering outrage. Shame on them for being the Do-Nothing Democrat Obstructionists. The DFL’s pattern is to blame Republicans after Nancy Pelosi refuses to negotiate in good faith will the crisis build to unprecedented proportions.

There are members of the DFL’s congressional delegation who are part of the Problem Solvers Caucus. Thus far, Rep. Phillips hasn’t presented a single proposal to fix what’s happening at the border. If the DFL is only about expressing outrage, then they’re utterly worthless. If they’re only about expressing outrage because they don’t want to do what’s right because President Trump is in office, then that’s worse by a country mile.

That’s the definition of being un-American. Republicans aren’t perfect but quite a few of them have stepped forward with legislation that would fix the immigration crisis, starting with Lindsey Graham, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and Dan Crenshaw.

Thus far, no Democrats have stepped forward with a solution. Ken Martin, the chair of the DFL, has offered outrage, however:


Outrage won’t fix the crisis, Little Kenny. The next time you want to express outrage, couple it with a solution. You’d be amazed how good it feels to fix a crisis. (I thought I’d tell you since you obviously never fixed a crisis before.)

Meanwhile, AOC keeps getting pounded for her lies. Chairman Martin and the DFL have a solutions crisis. They really don’t have a solutions-oriented mindset. Consequently, I haven’t seen them provide solutions to the biggest issues of the day. Whatever you think of President Trump’s personality or tweets, it’s impossible to say he hasn’t fixed lots of things in his first half-term.

The economy is cruising. The world is getting safer. We’re becoming a net exporter of energy. We now control our destiny in terms of manufacturing our own things. If Democrats actually start working with Republicans on President Trump’s immigration agenda, I don’t doubt that they’ll fix that. If, however, Democrats continue being the obstructionist jerks that they currently are, we’ll have a border crisis until we fire Democrat politicians.

Ken Martin can spin that but he can’t deny it..

Like the Democrats she leads, Speaker Pelosi keeps getting more radical by the minute. She recently told the NYTimes that she’s “worried President Trump might not step down if defeated in 2020”, saying “We have to inoculate against that, we have to be prepared for that”, urging Democrats to “win the debate that matters most to many voters inside the party: electability. ‘Own the center-left, own the mainstream.'”

First, Democrats of 2019 aren’t center-left. Which of you reading this thinks that Steven Cohen, David Cicilline or Jerry Nadler represents the mainstream of American politics? Next, there’s this:

Pelosi also said that in order to beat Trump, liberals have to play at his level, and the best way to do that is to win big, so he can’t challenge the results. “If we win by four seats, by a thousand votes each, he’s not going to respect the election,” she said. “He would poison the public mind. He would challenge each of the races. He would say you can’t seat these people.”

Thanks to the Democrats’ investigation-only agenda, Democrats won’t keep their majority in the House. According to this, Democrats can only afford to lose 17 seats if they want to keep their majority. The likelihood of that happening isn’t high. Here in Minnesota, the likelihood of flipping the Second and Third districts back to the Republicans looks quite possible. Don’t be surprised if Republicans regain House seats in California, Virginia and Pennsylvania, too. The Democrats’ majority is anything except rock-solid.

Last Wednesday, Pelosi pushed out a statement taking aim at the Trump administration in the aftermath of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report, blasting the president as “immoral, unethical, corrupt and unpatriotic.”

That’s rich coming from the political party that lied to the American people that President Trump committed treason and had obstructed justice, then had to scamper after the special counsel’s grand jury determined the opposite. Now Michael Horowitz, the DOJ Inspector General, is investigating whether Democrats abused “the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act” when they investigated “President Trump and associates of his 2016 campaign.”

Finally, there’s this:

It isn’t easy to get Bill Barr to smile, much less laugh. Ted Cruz accomplished those things during his questioning of Attorney Gen. Barr:

In laying things out so beautifully, Sen. Cruz demolished Speaker Pelosi’s arguments. The good news for Speaker Pelosi is that she doesn’t have to worry about getting exposed because the MSM, aka the media wing of the Democratic Party, won’t cover Sen. Cruz’s questioning of Bill Barr.

When Paul Wellstone was essentially the face of the DFL, the average citizen thought that he was wrong on the issues but that he was a generally trustworthy person. That’s how he got elected. This isn’t the ‘Party of Wellstone’ anymore.

These days, the DFL is the party of Al Franken and Keith Ellison. Sen. Franken groped a Hollywood actress. Ellison was accused by his ex-girlfriend of dragging her off the bed after grabbing her legs. That’s just here in Minnesota.

In DC, Democrat activists chased Sen. Cruz and his wife from a restaurant:

In the Senate, once the greatest deliberative body in the world, idiots like Richard Blumenthal make wild, unsubstantiated accusations in the corridors of power. He insisted that Judge Kavanaugh’s third accuser swore in an affidavit that Kavanaugh had committed rape.

Wrong:

“That affidavit is so deeply flawed and so open-ended that any good lawyer, any good defense attorney would be able to tear that apart in 30 seconds,” Dershowitz began. “It’s an embarrassment to the law that anybody would file an affidavit like that filled with hearsay, filed with ‘well I was raped but he didn’t rape me, he was there, he saw it, where was he, there are witnesses people told me, it happened ten times, I went back, I knew there were rapes going on but I went back to the party.’ This is such a deeply flawed affidavit.”

“If there were gang rapes like that, how did it not get to the police? It’s a shocking affidavit. Any lawyer who loves cross-examination would love nothing more than to examine a witness holding that affidavit in his hands and saying, ‘here, here, here.’ But Avenatti doesn’t care about that. All he cares about is getting the headline,” he continued.

Blumenthal is from a deep blue state so he can pretty much say anything and get away with it. That’s what he did in this instance. The party of Wellstone, Humphrey and Moynihan wouldn’t have pulled the stunts that the party of Schumer, Hirono and Gillibrand have pulled.

It isn’t that Democrats don’t have solutions. It’s that Democrats aren’t interested in the truth or justice.

Sen. Hirono, Sen. Feinstein and Sen. Schumer have each insisted that, because Judge Kavanaugh isn’t involved in a criminal or civil trial, he isn’t entitled to the presumption of innocence. Most lefty pundits have accepted that as Gospel fact. I don’t accept that as Gospel fact or anything like it. In fact, I dispute it vehemently.

The first question that the outrageous left hasn’t answered is straightforward: at what point does a person lose the presumption of innocence? Do we really want to live in a society where uncorroborated accusations were enough to destroy a person’s life? Right now, the Hate-Filled Left is targeting Brett Kavanaugh but let’s suppose that he withdraws his nomination. There’s a decent possibility that Amy Coney-Barrett would be President Trump’s next nominee. Isn’t it virtually guaranteed that the Hate-Filled Left will attack her with uncorroborated accusations?

The Hate-Filled Left is parading out one woman after another with stories that can’t be verified to prevent a judicial conservative from being confirmed for the Supreme Court. They’ll certainly keep doing that until President Trump nominates another Ruth Bader-Ginsberg.

The ruthless lefties don’t just think conservatives are wrong. They think we’re evil. Don’t believe me? Check this out:

Bill O’Reilly nails it in this interview with Wayne Allen Root:

Without question, the Democrats have a script they’re following on SCOTUS nominees. They’ve been doing that since Ted Kennedy lied through his teeth about Robert Bork. The only difference is that today’s Democrats would make Ted Kennedy look mild.

That should frighten everyone who cares about civil rights.

Is Doug Jones toast in Alabama? While it’s too early to answer that question affirmatively, it isn’t too early to say that Donald Trump’s statements about Jones didn’t help Jones’ campaign. Specifically, President Trump said “We don’t need a liberal person in there, a Democrat, Jones. I’ve looked at his record. It’s terrible on crime. It’s terrible on the border. It’s terrible on military. I can tell you for a fact we do not need somebody who’s going to be bad on crime, bad on borders, bad for the military, bad for the Second Amendment.”

That’s a pretty good signal to Alabama Republicans to stop thinking about staying home or voting for Doug Jones. That’s a good start but it isn’t enough by itself to defeat Jones. What this represents, though, is a turning point. Moore has to focus his campaign on bread-and-butter conservative issues like the Second Amendment, being pro-life and cutting taxes.

Jones has done better-than-expected thus far because it’s been a personality-driven race. It hasn’t been about Jones’ support for partial-birth abortion and gun control. Jones peddled the notion that he’s a moderate. Appearing on Outnumbered today, Guy Benson blew that storyline to smithereens:

If Moore can convince enough Alabama Republicans to turn out, he’ll defeat Jones. I’ve thought from the start that Jones’ support was more about trying to convince Moore to drop out than it was about supporting Jones. It’ll be interesting to see how Alabama voters react to Trump’s criticism of Jones.
Guy wasn’t finished beating up the Democrats:

Here’s his exchange with Zac Petkanas:

GB: I understand why you’d be on a high horse, morally, about this because sometimes there are very bright distinctions when it comes to politics. But I would challenge you — maybe not directly, but a lot of Democrats — if Bill Clinton were up for election again…let’s say he ran for president and were the nominee in 2020. He was credibly accused of forcible rape. Would they vote for him over a Ted Cruz? I think history shows the answer is ‘yes.’
ZP: Look, I was 15 years old when Bill Clinton left office. That’s the age when Roy Moore goes after most of his girls…
GB: That’s a fair shot…
ZP: So I can’t speak to that, however I…
GB: Would you vote for Bill Clinton if he ran again?
ZP: I think that all of these women need to be believed, and that we need to hold everybody accountable, whether it’s Al Franken or whether it’s John Conyers, or whether it’s Bill Clinton, or whether it’s Donald Trump.
GB: So you wouldn’t vote for Bill Clinton for president against Ted Cruz?
ZP: Would you vote for Donald Trump?
GB: I didn’t. Your question. Back to you.

As you saw in the video, Guy’s final reply all but officially finished that debate.

One of my pet peeves is watching people use euphemisms that don’t fit the situation. It isn’t a major thing, especially considering the crisis that’s striking southeast Texas. Still, it’s a point worth making. Repeatedly, I’ve heard Sen. Cruz and other public officials use the term ordinary people in describing acts of ‘committing’ incredible acts of heroism.

I’ll first say that this isn’t a criticism of Sen. Cruz. In many ways, the people committing acts of heroism have unassuming, low-key personalities. They don’t seek the spotlight but they gravitate towards helping people. Some people, though, are part of organizations that do incredible things. One of the organizations fitting that description is Samaritans Purse. This article highlights what they’re doing to help the people of southeast Texas.

According to the article, “One of our disaster relief units is already on the scene in Victoria, and volunteer teams have begun work. They are tarping damaged roofs, chainsawing fallen trees, and cleaning up storm debris. Faith Family Church, located at 2002 E. Mockingbird Lane, serves as our host church.”

Then there’s stories like this:

I’ve said it before but I’ll repeat it right here. There’s no other nation on earth that could do what we’re seeing happening in southeast Texas. Whether it’s Samaritans Purse sending truckloads of supplies or Bass Pro Shops contributing boats, life vests and high protein snacks for flood victims and first responders, people are doing incredible things. Whether it’s convention centers taking in literally thousands of people or Houston McDonalds telling first responders that they’re welcome to stop past any of their restaurants for a meal on the house, people are doing incredible things.

If I could wave a magic wand and make a wish come true, I’d wish that Washington, DC, would learn from this response from the ‘ordinary’ heroes working tirelessly side-by-side to provide the basics that families need. I’d love to see Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer to tell the leaders of #Resistance to take a hike. I’d love to see the Tuesday Group and the Freedom Caucus to start providing solutions rather than fighting ideological battles, then not finding a solution.

That likely won’t happen but it’s worth putting pressure on politicians to think in terms of real solutions rather than just fighting 24/7.

Technorati: , , , , , , ,

Al Franken’s attempt to sink Sen. Jeff Sessions’ confirmation as the 84th Attorney General of the United States failed. It failed partly because Sen. Franken is a buffoon. It failed partly because Sen. Franken essentially called Sen. Sessions a liar. Mostly, though, Sen. Franken failed because he attacked Sen. Sessions by basing his questions on an op-ed written by an attorney named Gerald Hebert. Sen. Cruz highlighted the problem with that during his time on the clock.

Sen. Cruz started by saying “It is unfortunate to see members of this body impugn the integrity of another senator with whom we’ve served for years. It is particularly unfortunate when that attack is not backed up by the facts. Sen. Franken based his attack on an op-ed by an attorney Gerald Hebert. There is an irony in relying on Mr. Hebert because, as you well know, in 1986 during your confirmation hearing, Mr. Hebert testified then and attacked you then, making false charges against you then and, indeed, I would note that, after the 1986 hearing, two days later, Mr. Hebert was forced to recant his testimony to say that he’d given false testimony and to apologize for giving false testimony and to say “I apologize for any inconvenience I might have caused Mr. Sessions or this committee.”
Here’s the video of Sen. Franken accusing Sen. Sessions of lying:

Here’s the video of Sen. Cruz utterly dissecting Sen. Franken’s attacks:

Sen. Franken is a disgusting excuse for a human being. As a senator, he’s a joke. Personally, I’d rate him and Gov. Dayton as the worst senators in Minnesota’s history.

I’d finally add that Sen. Sessions will fly through confirmation. The hype surrounding Sen. Sessions’ confirmation has disappeared.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

In his primetime speech Wednesday night, Ted Cruz self-destructed because he put a higher priority on political opportunism than he put on keeping his promise. The opening of the speech was actually pretty good, drawing lots of applause from those in the hall. Unfortunately for Sen. Cruz, to use a gymnastic metaphor, he didn’t stick the dismount. Actually, that’s being charitable.

Last night, Ted Cruz showed, above all else, that he’s a political opportunist masquerading as a principled conservative. Let’s be clear. It isn’t that I think Sen. Cruz isn’t a principled conservative. It’s that I think he’s a political opportunist first and foremost. Let me explain.

At the first debate last summer, Ted Cruz raised his hand and pledged to support the nominee whoever it was. Amanda Carpenter, appearing on CNN’s panel, said that Sen. Cruz should have the right to renege on that promise after Trump criticized Sen. Cruz’s wife and after Trump all but accused Sen. Cruz’s father of being part of the team that assassinated JFK in 1963. That’s a fair argument that reasonable people can see from the other person’s perspective.

If Sen. Cruz wanted to be a principled conservative and not endorse Donald Trump, the thing to do is to say outright that he wouldn’t support Trump in a statement, then explain why he wasn’t endorsing Trump. That would’ve been the honorable thing to do.

Instead, Sen. Cruz wanted to have it both ways. He didn’t want to endorse Trump but he definitely wanted a primetime speaking slot at the Convention in the hopes of positioning himself for a presidential run in 2020.

In the end, the activists in the hall booed him:

After getting booed off the stage, Sen. Cruz tried visiting Sheldon Adelson’s booth. It didn’t go well:

On the donor suite level, people approached Cruz and insulted him, a source told CNN’s Dana Bash. One state party chairman reacted so angrily that he had to be restrained. Cruz, who has long sought the support of GOP megadonor Sheldon Adelson, was turned away when he tried to enter Adelson’s suite.

Andy Abboud, a senior aide to the Las Vegas casino magnate, said Cruz was initially invited to come up to visit the Adelsons, but when he failed to endorse Trump the invitation was rescinded. “When he didn’t endorse, they were stunned and disappointed,” Abboud told CNN. “We could not allow Ted Cruz to use the Adelsons as a prop against Donald Trump,” he added. “The Adelsons support Donald Trump and made that clear. They like Ted Cruz, but there was no way the Adelsons were going to be the first stop after not endorsing. That would be disrespectful to our nominee.”

I can’t help but believe that there’s now a ton of bad blood between the activists in the hall and Sen. Cruz. If Donald Trump doesn’t win this November, those activists will blame Sen. Cruz’s speech as being a major contributing factor for that loss.

Michael Reagan’s tweet and Gen. Michael Flynn’s tweet said it all. First, here’s what Michael Reagan said:

Was Cruz thinking about 2020 not 2016. Is that why he didn’t endorse? How does that unite the Republican Party. Sad and Selfish

Here’s Gen. Flynn’s tweet:

I’m sorry, but tonight Ted Cruz demonstrated he is willing to place self before country.

I’ll just add that, as a strategist and as an opportunist, Sen. Cruz isn’t too bright.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

Since the start of 2016 or earlier, pundits have predicted that Democrats would retake their majority in the US Senate. That’s been the conventional wisdom pretty much the entire year. According to this article, those predictions might be greatly exaggerated.

This article isn’t the only thing that points to a contrary outcome in November. The latest Quinnipiac Swing State Poll brought smiles to the NRSC leadership team. Quinnipiac’s poll starts by saying “Republican incumbent U.S. Senators in three critical swing states fare better today as Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida leads either of two Democratic challengers, while Pennsylvania Sen. Pat Toomey outpoints his Democratic challenger and Ohio Sen. Rob Portman is in a dead heat with a well-known challenger, according to a Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll released today.”

It then highlights the fact that “Sen. Rubio leads U.S. Rep. Patrick Murphy 47-40 percent and tops U.S. Rep. Alan Grayson 48-40 percent.” Amelia Chasse talked about the Florida race in a rather unflattering light towards Democrats:

Another DSCC primary pick, Florida’s Patrick Murphy, has had his inflated resume methodically torn apart by a series of investigative reports, to the point where Salon called him a “disaster candidate.”

Prior to that, Chasse spoke about Katie McGinty, the Democrats’ candidate in Pennsylvania in an unflattering light:

Establishment groups spent nearly $5 million to drag Katie McGinty, a bureaucrat with a revolving door problem, through another contentious primary, only to have her claim to be the first in her family to attend college immediately exposed as a lie.

According to Quinnipiac’s Swing State Poll, McGinty trails incumbent Pat Toomey “49%-40%.” That isn’t the type of margin that’s likely to produce a November nailbiter. In Ohio, pundits predicted Rob Portman’s demise. That might not happen:

Sen. Rob Portman is in a dead heat with former Gov. Ted Strickland in Ohio. But that is an improvement for Portman, who earlier in the campaign was down as much as 9 points.

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to notice that Republicans are leading in the 2 biggest swing states and that they’re in much better shape in Ohio than they were a couple months ago.

Then there’s Ron Johnson. Though that race is tight, Wisconsin’s GOP GOTV operation is a powerful machine. Further, Feingold is running into difficulty explaining why he did nothing to fix the VA hospital in Tomah after getting notified about its difficulties.

That’s before talking about some potential GOP pickups. This video shows why Darryl Glenn has positioned himself well in Colorado:

Talking about a recent case of black-on-black violence in San Bernardino, CA, Glenn said that BLM wasn’t part of the solution before saying that what’s required is for policy leaders, community leaders and law enforcement to get together in a room and have a substantive conversation about the things that need to happen to end the distrust between law enforcement and minority communities. Couple the fact that he’s endorsed by Ted Cruz and that much of Cruz’s GOTV operation is now working for Glenn. That’s a powerful combination in Colorado.

Finally, don’t think that Harry Reid’s seat isn’t in play, too. If these things come together, it isn’t impossible to see Republicans holding a similar margin in 2017 as they have right now.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,