Before you elevate Cruz to Deity status read Lauren Stephen’s open letter to Mark Levin. Some uncomfortable info about Teddy that you may not want to know.
That “letter” is nothing more that a somewhat convoluted regurgitation of all the Trump talking points from the last few weeks. She is a hack and a fraud with integrity issues.
I elevate NO ONE to deity status (unlike the Trumpettes).
I analyze the candidates positions and past record/statements, and determine which one BEST represents the conservative principles I hold dear.
In terms of BEST represents, there is no credible competition between (D)onald and Cruz. Sure, Ted misses the mark on some things, but nowhere near as often as the (D)onald.
So, no deification - just careful calculus - although in this particular equation, precision is hardly required to see the massive disparity.
So I read the letter. I find many items on which to disagree:
1. First of all, who is this person really, and why should I give a crap? If they have to spend the first part of their letter establishing bona fides, it means that they are essentially a nobody. If they were someone whose opinion I should care about, I would probably already know their name. But let’s put that aside and get to substance...
2. “ And who can dispute that the [(D)onald] has taste?” Uh... ostentatious display of wealth is not necessarily taste. So, this subjective observation is wildly misaligned with my view of “taste.”
3. “Would ANY of us prefer the Obama family over the Trump family?” Wait - which family? His first, second, or third family? Obama may be an asshat, but at least he’s maintained a core family. So, bad play on this line.
4. “One thing I know for certain and without any reservation whatsoever – Mr. Trump LOVES this country, and dare I say, he is IN LOVE with this country.” Hah. No. He is in love with himself and money. He loves the fact that this country allows him to make money hand-over-fist and use the laws to run away from a bad business deal with no real long term consequences.
5. “The real shame is this: Mr. Trump has been a VERY, VERY generous donor to the GOP, the RNC, the RNCC, and most every other Republican committee in this country.” Ha. Replace “Republican/GOP/RNC” with “democrat” and you’ll find that the statement still holds true. Trump donates to ANYONE to expand his ability to self-aggrandize. “And when I say donate, I mean he wrote many different checks for $30,000.00 each.” Like the $100k to the Clinton foundation?
6. “I would like everyone who is reading this to please watch this video of Donald Trump, from 1988…” Ohhh... sweet. We’re pulling up videos from as far back as 1988! Let’s take some more recent clips, shall we: https://youtu.be/rcUCLwWCihE
7. “After all, if you take away all those “subsidized†jobs, we will end up subsidizing those folks in the welfare system.” Sigh. This person talks like a democrat. The *government* must provide the solution! We must subsidize one way or another. Seriously? You consider this a good open letter?
8. Ah - now we get to the rub! BIG OIL! Eeeeevil big oil! Holy crap - are we sure this person isn’t a member of Greenpeace? Let’s be clear about the difference between “big oil” and “ethanol,” shall we? Big oil subsidies are tax breaks. Guess what? If you start at the root, we as conservatives *shouldn’t be supporting the tax in the first place.* As I posted fairly recently on FR, corporate taxes are a fraud. Companies don’t pay them. They are a cost passed on to consumers. So, when you talk about “subsidizing big oil” what you really mean is “subsidizing the tax payers who will ultimately carry the cost anyway.” Second, the reason big oil “subsidies” are large in comparison is a matter of SCALE. Oil is a much, much bigger industry than ethanol, so naturally, if you give them a tax break it will result in a larger overall dollar figure. Third, ethanol has a frickin’ government mandate for bogus “green” reasons. THEN the government subsidizes. That’s straight up bullcrap. If ethanol is better, let it compete on the free market. So, all of these arguments that Lauren Stephens makes are straight out of the liberal playbook. Nice to know where we are coming from...
9. “So let us not forget it was Cruz who fired the first shot by speaking so horribly of Trump in the undercover audio, which was later released to the public.” LOL! Laughable, at best. “So horribly!” LOL. Did you actually listen to the audio? What a joke! Right away, this writer has lost all credibly right here!
OK, ok.. I have to stop right here, because anyone who classifies THAT audio as “so horribly” is *obviously* delusional. Seriously, completely, and irrevocably delusional. How can you take ANYTHING this writer says seriously after that comment?
(I did read through the rest, but I’m stopping commenting because it’s futile at this point. I could tear the rest of the post up, but why bother? This writer has no credibility left. I might as well write on essay on why Bernie Sanders is wrong.)