First there was the voter violation form in Iowa:
This is despicable. Particularly if you consider that some, if not many people who received this probably thought it was legitimate. The Iowa Secretary of State certainly took exception to it, and launched an investigation.
At about the same time, Cruz's campaign put out the news that Ben Carson had dropped out of the race. They knew he hadn't, but that didn't stop this man or his campaign from telling voters and potential voters that he had.
http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/02/05/ben-carson-campaign-releases-tape-of-ted-cruz-worker-spreading-rumors/
In Utah, the bastion of Mormanism which has peculiar ideas about sexual right and wrong (polygamy is still not entirely unheard of in this day and age, but showing off your nude body is morally wrong), one of Cruz's many superPacs plastered billboards of Melania Trump's naked body all over the place.
I'm not going to post that here - you can look for it if you want - but please note:
1) She was a professional model doing her job during that photo shoot (and she's gorgeous!); and,
2) That photo was taken before she was Mrs. Donald Trump and long before Mr. Donald Trump decided to run for president.
3) A woman doing her job before she was married to a political candidate should be strictly off-limits, and any decent human being would have left it alone.
But Cruz's campaign through its super PAC didn't pay any attention to that, and Ted Cruz didn't denounce it as he would if he had just one speck of any moral standing at all. Just one speck of decency and he would have both denounced that attack and he would have demanded that the superPAC take those billboards down and issue an apology. At the very least, he would have done the morally right thing and would have publicly apologized to the Trumps for that slimy stunt.
Tellingly, he didn't. Not before, not during and not since. Then, doubling down on duplicity, he's put on a great show of being outraged by Trump's response - the Tweet and re-Tweet of an unflattering picture of Cruz's wife.
Then, on Friday, the National Enquirer came out blaring in lurid headlines that Ted Cruz is a sex machine (five mistresses - what stamina!). Cruz instantly accused Donald Trump of being behind it. He made that accusation without any fact or foundation - and he did it on live national television.
Since then the boil has simmered down and it's come out - spread all over the internet - that the rumor was floated to the mainstream media back in late January and early February by the Rubio campaign.
That's right - Little Marco Rubio was prepared to float that rumor, and was trying to shop it long before it boiled up in the National Enquirer. This is being reported by Salon and the Huffington Post.
So here we have a Ted Cruz who waves his Christianity in the air like a battle flag defaming Donald Trump by blaming Trump of doing something he didn't do.
Sounds an awful lot like bearing false witness to me - and it has not been rescinded. Cruz has not been a man. He has not been honest and clean. He has not stepped forward and apologized to Trump for accusing him of doing something he did not do or to his wife for the slimy tactics of his super PAC - which no doubt altered the political landscape in Utah.
Now, is that the Christian thing to do, to stand by a lie instead of admitting it was a mistake? Is it the decent thing to do not to apologize to someone who should have been left alone during a campaign being dragged into it, as Melania Trump had done to her?
Is it any wonder at all that Donald Trump consistently refers to Ted Cruz as 'Lyin' Ted'? I don't think so. And, further supporting Trump's label, Politifact has the following 'file' on Ted Cruz:
Just 6% of Ted Cruz's assertions are true. 94% of his assertions range from Mostly True to Pants on Fire so 'Lyin' Ted' fits.
For someone to trash another man's wife - even if doing it at arm's length and with a wink and a nod - and then to accuse that woman's husband of trashing him is despicable.
It deserves retaliation - which Trump has not done. Yes, he put up an unattractive picture of Heidi Cruz next to a lovely picture of Melania, but he hasn't trashed Mrs. Cruz in any substantial way.
Katrina Pierson, a Trump spokeswoman disclosed salient information about Mrs. Cruz while being interviewed on MSNBC - but if the statements made are true, I don't see a problem with it.
First, the allegation about Mrs. Cruz working for Goldman Sachs is documented, as is the fact that Ted Cruz 'forgot' to disclose the loan from Goldman on his financial disclosure forms. There's a direct tie to the Wall Street banks that have caused such pain in the US economy during the past decade.
Second, and potentially more important, is the allegation of Heidi Cruz being associated with the Council on Foreign Relations. This is true - she was for five years under a 'term membership' affiliated with this group.
What is this Council? According to some, it is a group that has plans to wipe sovereignty from the global map - no sovereign nations, a one world order with the UN as the government.
During his first run for the Senate Ted Cruz called this organization a 'pernicious nest of vipers'.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/ben-smith/2011/10/a-pit-of-vipers-also-his-wife-040327
Heidi Cruz was an active member of this 'pernicious nest of vipers' for more than five years, so which is it?
According to the article linked above, she served for 'five years'. However, it's documented on the CFR website that she worked on a task force to write a report entitled "Building A North American Community". This was a plan which would irrevocably tie Canada, the United States and Mexico together and was issued in 2005 - six years before the linked article says she left her 'five year' membership.
Here is a link to this report which you can open as a PDF or download.
http://www.cfr.org/canada/building-north-american-community/p8102
Her name is in it as a contributor - and an advocate - and if you read the recommendations starting on page 7, it's pretty clear that the borders between the three countries would be virtually eliminated. There would be no independent and sovereign Canada, no independent and sovereign United States of America, and no independent and sovereign Mexico.
So he lies to us every single time he opens his mouth and says he is 'for' a sovereign United States of America that includes a wall between here and Mexico.
Obviously, his wife worked for more than a few years for an organization that supports no such thing. Obviously they discussed her work there - it's what any married couple does. They talk about work, about what they're doing.
If he truly believes in a sovereign America, why did he not insist that she quit that 'pernicious nest of vipers'? Could it be that he was in silent agreement with their goals?
I don't know, but it sure looks suspicious - which is more reason why I will never, ever vote for Ted Cruz - not even for dog catcher.
Best~
Philippa
Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/PhilippaStories
No comments:
Post a Comment