Principled Ted Says You Just Don’t Support the GOP Party For the Sake of Supporting the Party – So Why Did Principled Ted Sign a Pledge To Support the GOP Nominee? – IOTW Report

Principled Ted Says You Just Don’t Support the GOP Party For the Sake of Supporting the Party – So Why Did Principled Ted Sign a Pledge To Support the GOP Nominee?

Thursday, 21 July 2016, 14:07 BFH Uncategorized 69

The delegates confronting Ted Cruz in this video are not asking the right questions.

Bouncing on the balls of his feet, Cruz thinks he’s too clever to ever be made to look like the fool. It’s not a matter of him being too smart, it’s a matter of the questioners not being smart enough.

Cruz goes on a long-winded rant about his pristine principles and how he won’t just willy-nilly support the GOP because it’s not a fraternity.

Then why did he sign a document to pledge to support the GOP nominee?

Where was his speech then?

 

69 Comments on Principled Ted Says You Just Don’t Support the GOP Party For the Sake of Supporting the Party – So Why Did Principled Ted Sign a Pledge To Support the GOP Nominee?

  2. Cruz is not Reagan. If he is the closest thing we have to Reagan than we are in real trouble.
    Trump didn’t shoot at anyone until they shot at him. Cruz hiding behind a PAC that put out derogatory Melania ads isn’t very principled. Not condemning those ads if he really had nothing to do with them is also not principled. Agreeing with the leftist violent thugs overtaking Trump rallys against the right to assemble peacefully also not principled. You have to live a principled life to actually use that effectively.

  8. I don’t understand the strategy.
    This is betting Trump loses so he can run in 2020
    But if sHillary becomes President what of the damage she does to my country?
    Is the damage that Hilary does to the Country acceptable to Ted Cruz in the long view of his career?
    If not, why the hell did you not keep your word?
    If so, what kind of asshole attitude is that?

  9. “You Just Don’t Support the GOP Party For the Sake of Supporting the Party.”

    Okaaaay…thanks, Cruz, for so clearly and openly admitting YOU – not Trump – used the GOP and its Convention for your self-serving purposes.

    My, how clever of you, young man.
    Now: go away and stay the f*ck away from the GOP.

  10. I’m listening to the Newt and it sounds like he turned ‘Cruz at the bat’ into a positive. He pointed out that Trump did not require anyone he ran against to give him a blood oath of allegiance to speak and furthermore he cited Cruz’s own words to make it clear that there is only one option and it is Trump.

    I’m feeling better.

    I have a fever and the only prescription is more Newt.

  11. “You Just Don’t Support the GOP Party For the Sake of Supporting the Party.”

    That wasn’t the story when you expected us to hold our noses and vote for the crap sandwiches the party nominated for most of the I don’t know how many elections. You want people to support the party for the sake of supporting the party as long as the elites get what they want. When the elites don’t get what they want, then they go home mad.

  14. @Lazlo

    I don’t think he thinks that far ahead.

    Ted has serious character flaws. He carries a lot of resentments in his head for a man who is supposed to be so spiritual and annoited by God.

    He’ll be in rehab for alcoholism after Heidi divorces him.

  15. Loco, you are loco. Cruz, Kasich, Jeb!, Carly have demonstrated that they never intended to honor their written pledge.
    Demonstrate to me where Donald, after he signed the pledge, dishonored it?

  16. The very last thing that Cruzborgs want are details:

    As Joe Dan would say, “To wit”:

    On about 3/22, the pro-Cruz super PAC, Make America Awesome, ran ads in Utah in advance of the state primary. Though, like Cruz, himself, his acolytes have said and will say that it was a ‘fair’ attack on Melania Trump and the Trump campaign, the fact is it was overwhelmingly received as a ‘slut-shaming’ attack on the character of Mrs. Trump, directly, and of course it was meant to call into question the overall moral and social character of Donald Trump. (It may have had a greater, national impact if Melania had been a semi-cute 7th grade teacher who got caught with a butt-load of provocative, nude selfies on Instagram or FB, but that wasn’t the case and we all know why.)

    Two Things:
    1) Donald Trump began this race by telling EVERYONE that he doesn’t initiate attacks. This is something the Cruzborgs must have thought everyone forgot. No. Trump has underscored his fighting ethic time and again. He doesn’t take the first swing, but when attacked he “will hit back twice as hard.” (When it comes to having the woman you love being called a slut, most husbands would have done a lot more to Cruz than the mild Tweet — I’ll come to it — he made in response.)

    2) Some of you may remember Liz Mair, the well-known paid Republican strategist who left Scott Walker’s campaign. She was the leader of the Make America Awesome super PAC, and also a close associate (friend?) of Carly Fiorina. She is/was also a close associate of Ted Cruz. Mair is a Cruz booster, but the super PAC was funded for the sole purpose of bringing Trump down; it was one of the various PACs that sprung up as part of the #NT/Anti-Trump ‘movement’ begun by NR, Beck, Erickson, Romney, et al.

    2.a) This is just a footnote for further thought: It was learned sometime in mid-March and written about on 3/28 by Craig Cowger at CowerNation, that Liz Mair’s Make America Awesome PAC shares the same P.O. mailing address (not just the office space) as Carly Fiorina’s Carly For America PAC. On 3/29, Sierra Spaulding posited two theories about the transfer of $500,000. to the Carly For America PAC (not straight to the campaign, to the PAC). And although Fiorina dropped out, she later resurrected a multi-candidate PAC, also called Carly For America.

    In summary of Cowger’s piece, he raises the facts that although Ted Cruz may look squarely into the camera with his puppy dog eyes and say he had no personal involvement in the GQ Melania picture attack, his very close associations with others doesn’t make his hands clean in the matter. He will not get off with plausible deniability, because in addition to that PAC’s campaign, his other close associate, Glenn Beck, publicly called Mrs. Trump a “lesbian porn star” and called Trump’s mother a “b*tch.”

    This is as good a time as any to remind all you ‘principled’, Christian Cruzborgs that Beck is/was the guy Cruz deferred to as a quasi spiritual advisor and prayer partner.

    http://cowgernation.com/2016/03/28/ted-cruz-carly-fiorina-and-liz-mair-connected-to-attacks-on-trumps-wife/

    https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Ted-Cruz%E2%80%99s-super-PAC-give-500-000-to-Carly-Fiorina%E2%80%99s-super-PAC

    (See Rufus T. Firefly’s chronology for the Twitter war. I was writing this when Geoff C. pointed out that RTF had already posted his comment.)

    File under: ‘What Goes Around Comes Around’
    On Tuesday the Utah delegation had a shock when it was discovered, because of a misfiling with the RNC, that every one of their votes went to Donald Trump. Not that he needed them. All of this so-called outrage about Trump attacking Cruz’ wife started because of a dirty political attack on the wife of the leading candidate. Where? In Utah.

    In any event, Cruz is lying his ass off about his motives yesterday. Again, he is trying to manipulate the sympathetic sensibilities of people in an effort to cover up his raw ambitions. We’ve seen this sort of twisted, hell-or-high-water political determination from Hillary Rodham-Clinton for decades.

  17. Ted doesn’t know the 1st rule of Holes.

    He’ll be in China by later today.

    All of us that at first started to feel uncomfortable with him later turning to disgust(and beyond) have been vindicated.

  19. That’s not what this post is saying LOCO. You’re not addressing it.

    If Cruz is not at all about supporting the party for the sake of supporting the party, WHY DIDN’T HE SAY THAT WHEN THE PLEDGE AGREEMENT TO SUPPORT THE NOMINEE WAS FLOATED??

    That would have been the perfect time to make his speech.
    He didn’t. He signed a pledge that said I support the GOP nominee, willy nilly.

    So, is he just a fuknard who will do whatever it takes at the time for the sake of political expedience, or is he “principled”?

  20. To whoever it was who just TD’d my comment 32 times in a row (mere seconds after I posted it). I am writing to BFH for the first time to have you banned from this site. You are not using the TU/TD widget to disagree, you are using it as a means of stealing my free speech.

  21. Comment of Note ——- Abigail Adams said-

    The very last thing that Cruzborgs want are details:

    As Joe Dan would say, “To wit”:

    On about 3/22, the pro-Cruz super PAC, Make America Awesome, ran ads in Utah in advance of the state primary. Though, like Cruz, himself, his acolytes have said and will say that it was a ‘fair’ attack on Melania Trump and the Trump campaign, the fact is it was overwhelmingly received as a ‘slut-shaming’ attack on the character of Mrs. Trump, directly, and of course it was meant to call into question the overall moral and social character of Donald Trump. (It may have had a greater, national impact if Melania had been a semi-cute 7th grade teacher who got caught with a butt-load of provocative, nude selfies on Instagram or FB, but that wasn’t the case and we all know why.)

    Two Things:
    1) Donald Trump began this race by telling EVERYONE that he doesn’t initiate attacks. This is something the Cruzborgs must have thought everyone forgot. No. Trump has underscored his fighting ethic time and again. He doesn’t take the first swing, but when attacked he “will hit back twice as hard.” (When it comes to having the woman you love being called a slut, most husbands would have done a lot more to Cruz than the mild Tweet — I’ll come to it — he made in response.)

    2) Some of you may remember Liz Mair, the well-known paid Republican strategist who left Scott Walker’s campaign. She was the leader of the Make America Awesome super PAC, and also a close associate (friend?) of Carly Fiorina. She is/was also a close associate of Ted Cruz. Mair is a Cruz booster, but the super PAC was funded for the sole purpose of bringing Trump down; it was one of the various PACs that sprung up as part of the #NT/Anti-Trump ‘movement’ begun by NR, Beck, Erickson, Romney, et al.

    2.a) This is just a footnote for further thought: It was learned sometime in mid-March and written about on 3/28 by Craig Cowger at CowerNation, that Liz Mair’s Make America Awesome PAC shares the same P.O. mailing address (not just the office space) as Carly Fiorina’s Carly For America PAC. On 3/29, Sierra Spaulding posited two theories about the transfer of $500,000. to the Carly For America PAC (not straight to the campaign, to the PAC). And although Fiorina dropped out, she later resurrected a multi-candidate PAC, also called Carly For America.

    In summary of Cowger’s piece, he raises the facts that although Ted Cruz may look squarely into the camera with his puppy dog eyes and say he had no personal involvement in the GQ Melania picture attack, his very close associations with others doesn’t make his hands clean in the matter. He will not get off with plausible deniability, because in addition to that PAC’s campaign, his other close associate, Glenn Beck, publicly called Mrs. Trump a “lesbian porn star” and called Trump’s mother a “b*tch.”

    This is as good a time as any to remind all you ‘principled’, Christian Cruzborgs that Beck is/was the guy Cruz deferred to as a quasi spiritual advisor and prayer partner.

    http://cowgernation.com/2016/03/28/ted-cruz-carly-fiorina-and-liz-mair-connected-to-attacks-on-trumps-wife/

    https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Ted-Cruz%E2%80%99s-super-PAC-give-500-000-to-Carly-Fiorina%E2%80%99s-super-PAC

    (See Rufus T. Firefly’s chronology for the Twitter war. I was writing this when Geoff C. pointed out that RTF had already posted his comment.)

    File under: ‘What Goes Around Comes Around’
    On Tuesday the Utah delegation had a shock when it was discovered, because of a misfiling with the RNC, that every one of their votes went to Donald Trump. Not that he needed them. All of this so-called outrage about Trump attacking Cruz’ wife started because of a dirty political attack on the wife of the leading candidate. Where? In Utah.

    In any event, Cruz is lying his ass off about his motives yesterday. Again, he is trying to manipulate the sympathetic sensibilities of people in an effort to cover up his raw ambitions. We’ve seen this sort of twisted, hell-or-high-water political determination from Hillary Rodham-Clinton for decades.
    !snip!

    —Let’s see this get 35 thumbs down. I love it. I get paid every time you refresh the page. So keep it up. I’ll just resurrect the comments I like and highlight them in a BFH comment and keep the ones I don’t like buried. -bfh

  22. Fur, what I gleaned from this post is that Cruz needs to honor a pledge that Trump was never going to honor.
    Therefore Cruz needs to be more of an honorable man.

    Evidently, there was never any pretense that Trump is an honorable man.
    Therefore, no one would expect him to honor such a pledge.

  25. The timing of Trump’s move to not honor the GOP nominee was late March, when his nomination was essentially secured but NeverTrump was making noises about cheating the system. It was a rather different situation than the one Cruz was in yesterday.

  26. Mr. Hat I think its time to disable the tu/td for awhile there is no way someone can get 32 td in less than 1 minute. I think I hold the td record with 64.

    No Geoff – the thumbs will stay. It’s some of the people that will be disabled, for good. -bfh

  30. OK, let’s cut to the chase here. In my humble opinion:

    It doesn’t matter if Cruz failed to honor his pledge to support the nominee. He had his reasons why he felt that pledge had been negated, and I’m sure he felt they were valid.

    It doesn’t matter if Trump would have failed to honor his pledge to support the nominee, either. He had already stated that he no longer felt bound to do so.

    What DOES matter is that Cruz accepted an invitation to speak at the RNC, where one is expected to promote Party unity by endorsing the chosen candidate, and he failed to do so. If he couldn’t do that, he should have begged off, as many others did, but he did not. And that’s where he seduced the canine.

    Am I wrong about this? I still have a lot to learn about politics, I know.

  32. As we used to teach in the military, one “aw shit” cancels 10,000 “atta boys”. Cruz just stepped on his wing-wang and had his “aw shit’ moment. Now STFU and STFD.

  34. “… wouldn’t pledge not to go “third party”.”

    Not to pledge not to do something, or not pledging to do something, is hardly the same as pledging to do something and NOT doing it.

    What the fuck is the point of a pledge if it can be un-pledged?
    (assuming that the pledge was pledged honorably, and that the “conditions” of the pledge haven’t changed) (is a “conditional” pledge a pledge, at all?)

    If I “pledge allegiance to the Flag, and to the Republic for which it stands” does that pledge become meaningless for a few thousand dollars? Or if I get pissed about something? The only thing that can absolve me of that pledge is if the Republic, for which it stands, no longer exists.

    If I pledge to support the Republican nominee, then I should support that nominee – and if I fail to support that nominee, then I am an oath-breaker.

    But if I pledge to support the nominee only if it’s ME, then I should make THAT pledge – not the other.

    PERIOD.

    izlamo delenda est …

  36. Fur, what I gleaned from this post is that Cruz needs to honor a pledge that Trump was never going to honor.
    Therefore Cruz needs to be more of an honorable man.

    Evidently, there was never any pretense that Trump is an honorable man.
    Therefore, no one would expect him to honor such a pledge.

    LOCO,
    Trump didn’t need to honor a pledge. Trump won the primary and is the Republican nominee. So, with that single fact your continual attempts “to sting” Trump are seemingly juvenile. I have laughed out loud at some of your posts on other threads and I’m sure I will still see the humor you usually exhibit.

  37. This is a bad flip flop for Ted. He signed the pledge and he either needed to honor the pledge or not speak at all, otherwise it’s making him look really bad.

    Take a peak at Right Scoop. They have literally gone nuts and are living in an echo chamber the size of a pea. Sad because that used to be a great site.

  39. Let me see if I can summarize LocoBlancoSaltine’s argument; Ted Cruz broke his pledge but that’s OK because (he somehow knows) Trump would have broken the pledge too. That is just plain stupid. Trying to defend the indefensible. Laura Ingraham nailed it (as proven by Lying Ted’s statement after last night), Ted put his personal feelings and ego ahead of the good of the country. What a putz. I can’t believe that once upon a time I liked him.

  42. I just saw this comment over at the Right Scoop and about choked on my dinner.

    Dr.: I am sorry it is cancer
    Conservatism: How bad?
    Dr.: It’s a Trump tumor: full of isolationism, big government, anger, pandering, lack of morality, support and adoration for foreign strongmen, the list goes on and on…
    Conservatism: Options?
    Dr.: Go with it and you will suffer a long slow death.
    Conservatism: Any other options?
    Dr.: Chemotherapy. Four years of Clinton should wipe out the Trump tumor and you will be strong again, ready to come back.
    Conservatism: Let’s do this. Hillary 2016 -> Cruz 2020

    Is this guy serious?! Honestly the people over at the Right Scoop are actually advocating for Hillary to win just so they can get their Teddy in 2020?! These people aren’t dying of cancer. They’re committing suicide. Worse, it’s a murder suicide because they’re going to take us all with them.

    Excuse my French, but what kind of fuckers are these people?!

  43. How does one get twice as many thumbs down as there are commenters on a thread? I don’t comment very often but read IOTW regularly and am always promoting it to my friends and family but am seriously rethinking my opinion. I understand the rules but some of you people are acting like idiots. People disagree but when you go out of your way to silence someone, you need to move to a liberal site. New viewers are turned off and you all just appear to be pathetic babies who need to grow tougher skin. I hate that someone’s comment is obliterated as it confounds a reader and makes it impossible to make sense of the responses. You know who you are and you need to stop.

  44. Wow, I actually agree with Gwenn.

    This site used to be perfect.
    No ignorant moderator with no sense of humor.
    If people didn’t like your post you were told in the comments.
    Any disagreements were hashed out there.

    Then along comes the Chinese auto-bot to banish non-group think thought crimes to Shanghai.

    AA actually mentioned having her free speech stolen from her.
    Yet she is first to refresh and banish others comments to the red depths.

    The truth is, this site no longer enjoys free speech.
    That is the iotw guys prerogative.
    Sad, I expect crap like that from Huffpo but not here.

  46. I find it hilarious that the people who were spamming others with down twinkles are getting it done to them.
    That’s why it never bothered me. I always knew it was a few cowards whose word skills peaked at cut and paste.
    Seething with the frustration of lacking the intellectual ability to defend themselves they would whirl into a panicked frenzy of reloading the page and down twinkling the post that made them feel inadequate.

  48. JohnS, as you know once you get a reputation here, you can say “Mother Teresa was a gift from God” and have three down votes within two minutes.

    I don’t worry about the thumbs down so much but why bother commenting if you are automatically in red figures with your comment banished because of sensitive snowflakes?

    These snowflakes that need safe spaces are supposedly conservatives?
    Huh? WTF?

  49. Loco, they aren’t conservatives. That is why they have to cut and past in order to comment.
    Just note how angry they get at the idea of pushing Trump to the right. They applaud every leftward motion and shout down anyone who disagrees with it.
    They are lefty trash that are drawn to Trump due to his star power, not anything approaching rational deliberate thought or reason.

  50. Thank you, Eugenia. I had no clue I could do that nor would a newcomer to this site. Loco, you can agree with me anytime! Believe it or not, even if I disagree with someone, I’m all for their right to state differing views. I learn from EVERYONE that comments.

  51. Interesting how the Trumpeters hated “lying Ted” during the primaries, tore him down and blasted him for being so flawed, now conveniently found value and ethics in the man. What changed? Did they really want the endorsement of a lying and flawed politician? Is there something good about Lying Ted (now) that would justify you wanting the endorsement of an overbearing lawyer, divisive legislator, and husband of a croney Goldman Sachs executive, hmm? You’d think the whiners would be happy to NOT get his endorsement.

  56. Brilliant come back Brad.
    A few more hours, and a dozen or so more shots, and you will be sending more of the same at me long after I have gone to bed.
    It’s all good, I get a morning chuckle, you get a hangover.

  59. The speech is great until he stepped on his own dick and bitchily chose his words in order to say “you don’t have to vote for Trump, vote your conscience.”
    THAT’S what he said despite you’re not wanting it to be so.
    You are in the minority on what you think it meant.

    He went to the convention and made an asshole of himself. His dumb message only appeals to people who do not want Trump to win.

    Stop arguing this.
    Cruz was damaged.
    And furthermore…
    people already voted their conscience, that’s why he lost.

  60. A Cruz endorsement was not required.
    Never was.
    What was not necessary was his bitchy little stupid message at the end that was meant to get even with Trump.
    He tried. It failed.
    Live with it.

  62. He said don’t vote for Trump? Hmm, I must have missed that part. His non-endorsement doesn’t mean shit anyways, so quit you’re whining. We aren’t mind numb robots. I don’t know of any Cruz supporters who aren’t voting for Trump. I’d say almost all will. Stop wasting your time and energy on this crap and get back to tearing that bitch apart. Good grief.

  64. Navigator, you ignorant slut. “He said don’t vote for Trump? Hmm, I must have missed that part.”

    Pretending to be all naive, when you know that the whole “conscience” schtick is a #NeverTrumper call to vote for libertarian or other 3rd Party just so you don’t vote for Trump…nudge nudge wink wink.

    You can go back to your Vox home now, jacka§$.

  65. So according to your half thoughts (stay away from the bong), my conscience tells me to vote for anyone but Trump, thereby helping grant Hillary the nomination, and further sinking this nation? I want that on my conscience? You really are the naive one here, Czar of Defunction. My conscience will be CLEAR (unlike your thoughts) when I vote for Trump. Now piss off, dopey. I have better things to do than arguing with nitwits.

  66. Can I just say… how amusing it is to see Cruz supporters trip over themselves trying to rationalize how rotten and unprofessional Tedward was in his RNC speech? I used to support Ted Cruz, but then I learned quite a few things about him I very much did not like, I also used to like Faux News, but then I learned things about them and they were proven things.

    If a ‘hero’ falls, you don’t need to defend them if it’s something that isn’t worthy of defense.

    Acting like a spoiled little booger brat who didn’t get his presidency, so he wants to encourage people to not vote for Trump… [and in so doing he’s essentially endorsing a proven corrupt soul named Hillary Clinton.] That doesn’t seem very ‘noble’ or intelligent of Tedward. Not in the least.

  67. Rotten and unprofessional? The man have a great speech and said vote your conscience. That was it. Vote your conscience. Oh the fucking horror!! You dopeys are the ones looking stupid for blowing this way out of proportion.

  68. Navigator, whore of irrationality.
    At least your rants are *slightly* less constipated and irrational as JohnSh!tForBrains…but not by much.

    Why do you troll here, moron?!?
    Especially when you have more fruitful fields like HotGas and TownHall to polute?!?

  69. I’m not trolling. I’m more of a sporadic fire kind of guy, because unlike you, I have a life – been out boating all day with my hot wife (no, wasn’t trolling out there either). You’ve been blogging while sitting in your underwear in your poor mom’s basement. But you know what’s slightly more interesting? You think I’m a troll, yet you have no problem feeding me with fodder. Shmuck. Who’s the moron again? Catch you on another thread, Czar of Dysfunction.

Comments are closed.

iOTWreport.com ©2024 ----- iOTWreport is not responsible for the content of comments. All opinions in comments are solely the commenter's.