Posted on 04/24/2015 7:26:03 AM PDT by cotton1706
I’m starting to pine for the days when the media could come up with really serious stories, like that one about how Mitt Romney supposedly cut a gay kid’s hair in school. The New York Times’ trolling of Ted Cruz is remarkably weak.
First, a snide piece on his time debating. This is the sort of thing that some Ivy Leaguers might care about. It relies on quotes from former opponents who disliked Cruz, fails to interview his black debating partner for some reason despite using him in two photos, and suggests that his debating weaknesses include not liking when someone insults his father.
Second, Ted Cruz fundraiser at the home of a gay man. The article got such minor things wrong as the date of the event, but played up Ted Cruz saying that he would love his daughter just as much if she were gay to try and paint him as a flip-flopper.
Again I’m not sure who the target here is. I presume conservatives, but the New York Times is not your ideal venue for a hit piece aimed at conservatives.
The secondary media coverage picks up this theme by eliminating the quotes and summarizing the coverage. The summaries then conclude that Ted Cruz isn’t crazy. He’s a hypocrite.
The Catch 22 gambit is that if Ted Cruz interacts with gay people and doesn’t hit them with a baseball bat, he’s clearly a hypocrite who doesn’t match up with the artificial image that the media created for him.
It’s a weak effort. Where’s the Ted Cruz eating babies? Where’s Ted Cruz giving dogs haircuts while riding on top of a car?
(Excerpt) Read more at frontpagemag.com ...
Well, I don’t know, maybe those guys who think my slight disagreement with their ideas makes me unable to last three seconds in the presence of someone who is homosexual without attacking the person are actually hateful toward me and those who disagree with them, not to mention FOS...
Another thread on the topic...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3282507/posts
Ted Cruz just held a campaign event at the home of two gay
businessmen, you know
I am sure that Ted is right now preparing for all the gotcha questioning.
The New York Times feels if a person is against gay marriage on principle it means they hate all gay people. They’re wrong... as usual.
I feel it would be a disaster for businesses if the minimum wage was raised to $30 an hour... it’s doesn’t mean I hate people who work for minimum wage. And yes, I would attend a wedding of a person making less than thirty bucks an hour...
Anybody who is a threat to the left’s stranglehold on power has to be eliminated.
All the more reason to support him.
If someone donates to Ted Cruz, or hosts a fund raising event, that means they agree with his positions, not the other way around.
The rats and their lapdogs in the media are desperate. It’s fun to watch them make things up because they are afraid of him.
Note to MSM, Nothing you can say outside of Cruz has a secret homosexual lover or runs his own abortion clinic behind his DC townhouse is going to change conservative votes. Also note that since Cruz is so far down in the polls, you would think that he would be Hillary’s easiest opponent to beat and you would be pushing for that race.
Or that they agree with many, but not necessarily all, of his positions.
It's been 10 years and I'm still waiting on the New York Times to dig up some comments from Barry's classmates about Barry. They seem to have no problems finding Repulican classmates.
The last time lies were told about Ted Cruz he trounced his GOPestablishment candidate 57 to 43. That was a major stomping.
Which leads me to believe that when a candidate decides to uphold God and His laws, then God will return the favor.
The left doesn’t understand conservatives. I doubt there are many of us who hate homosexuals. We hate the act and the militant in your face activism, but we pray for the people that do it.
One doesn’t have to oppose homosexual “marriage” to oppose (for example) a nuclear-armed Iran.
thats the most important factor in this race that most “analysts” cant see.
The thought that some people might not be as mentally ill as they are is alien to them.
I read the two articles referenced, and my impression was the articles were positive for Ted Cruz. Granted they were not fawning at the feet of Cruz, but they were fair and presented Cruz in a good light. What I do not understand, is why so many conservative authors like the one above have their hair on fire about it. My guess is one of two possibilities, one, the writers are just not that bright, two, they are pandering to the kneejerk brigade. Either way, I wish they would cut it out, it’s embarrassing.
The one I read (on his debate years) is best summarized thusly: Ted Cruz was good at debating but was unliked by everyone because he was clueless and arrogant. Followed by several examples of Cruz acting arrogant (example: losing because he arrogantly offered his opponent choice of topics and they stalled until his time was up), being clueless (example: making awkward unfunny jokes during debates) or being shut down by his peers (example: being blocked for presidency of the debate club). No example of him winning or making a positive impression.
Positive?
NYT Refuses To Publish Pushback Letter From Cruz’s Debate Partner
http://dailycaller.com/2015/04/24/nyt-refuses-to-publish-pushback-letter-from-cruzs-debate-partner/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.