In the end it is the media's fault for creating this 47-year-old child star. They told him he was brilliant and charming and special and now he goes out on the debate stage and is summarily beaten by each of his opponents until they no longer find the sport in it.
Now it is time for the Beto experiment to come to an end and for us all to forget that it ever happened. Just like with Jar Jar.
He transcended modern politics with cool, Generation X flare. simply put, he’s an idiot
BETO SLAPPED DOWN BY THE LEFT----Left-wing activists and liberal journalists
mocked “Beto” after he told Vanity Fair that he was “born” to run for president.
The left says he "reeks of white male privilege." (Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
I’m almost 65 and I’ll wager I can out skateboard Beto and bomb steeper hills. He is what they call “a poser”.
It would be great to hear an interview with Betzero’s Billionaire Father-In-Law. The guy has to wonder how his daughter got involved with Betzero and ended up marrying him. What a great choice for a Son-In-Law!
“Hell yes...” The Stalin-like, Mao-like, Chavez-like, anti-American UNCHALLENGED GOVERNMENT SPOKESMAN should...
Napoleon Dynamite
Cruz beat Beto like a drum despite the so called “narrow margin”.
Had it not been for all the DNC money funding this jerk Tx and the world would have never know who he is.
>>Beto was a creation of the media who saw him as the new floppy-haired hope a few years ago. He transcended modern politics with cool, Generation X flare and almost gave Ted Cruz a run for his money in Texas.
Butthole was a nobody until LAST YEAR when he challenged Ted Cruz for a senate seat.
Bozo spent more than any other candidate in history on that Senate race (so much ‘a run for his money’). He out spent Cruz 2-1.
The media was quiet over Francis O’Rourke’s sadistic fantasy about running over small children with his car. Likewise his fantasies about using stormtroopers to go collect your guns.
The Bob O’Rourke on record today is not the “close challenger” of 2018. He’s on record now with very far left rhetoric and divisive language.
However, he was the lighting rod for campaign donations and some other Senate races that might have gone Democrat with some of the money that went to RFOR went Republican instead.
O’Rourke’s biggest legacy in Texas was motivating 100,000 additional Democrats in Houston to vote straight party and toss out all of the Republican judges and officials. 2018 was the last ballot with straight party voting.
Democrats won all 5 major cities in Texas in 2018, the Republican governor lost in all 5 of them. In some by a large margin (66% to 33%).
But O’Rourke did not win. He was a media creation and mythical. One year to take a meteoric rise and then crash and burn on the national stage.
Journalists embargoed his file.
I gotta say, there is something to be said for a Democrat in the primaries who blatantly states what all the others have always favored, but were too politic to say - that Democrats intend to override the Second Amendment and the free exercise clause of the First Amendment.The entire Bill of Rights was composed to be non-controversial; if anything in it were widely perceived to be a “poison pill” designed to subvert the passage of the BoR, that would have delegitimated the ratification of the entire Constitution.
For that reason, it is a disgrace for any politician to sail “close to the wind” of the Bill of Rights.
On that point, in its unanimous 1964 New York Times v. Sullivan decision the Warren Court did exactly that. In holding that the First Amendment required that government officials clear an insuperable hurdle in order to sue for libel, SCOTUS erred. Because by design, the First Amendment did not change libel law. At all. “The freedom . . . of the press” preexisted the Constitution - as the “the” was intended to indicate - and it did not include the right to print porn or to libel anyone.
The right to sue for libel is an unenumerated, Ninth Amendment, right. If you want to claim that under the Constitution public officials cannot sue for libel, you have to make the case that that rule existed before the Constitution was adopted. To simply say, “freedom of the press,” is to make an unserious, handwaving argument.