Posted on 03/09/2016 12:10:20 PM PST by M. Thatcher
Trying to explain the significance of the last few days, in relationship to the Ted Cruz candidacy, requires the intellectually honest observer to recognize and/or accept the increasingly likely probability: we have been facing a manufactured “false dilemma” longer than most may be willing to accept.
“False Dilemma” – the fallacy of false choice, or the fallacy of the false alternative, is a type of informal fallacy involving a situation in which only limited alternatives are considered, when in fact there is at least one additional option.
In essence, presidential candidate Ted Cruz has been presented, by those who gain leverage in the presentation, as an option – to the previous “establishment candidates“.
Under this assumption, the intent of the option (Cruz) is to block the observer (electorate / us) from considering any additional alternative which remains outside the control of the presenting entity (the DC power brokers, GOPe, Wall Street donor class).
In order to recognize the fallacy of false choice, the audience must engage the new information while reevaluating their prior assumption, positions and options.
That said, Team Cruz has shown new evidence of being much further aligned with the GOPe than most political observers, and high-information voters, might be willing to accept.
Here’s why:
Adding the entire financial team of Jeb Bush which includes: Paul Dickerson of Houston, TX, Boyden Gray of Washington, DC, Charles Foster of Houston, TX, Reginald J. Brown of Washington, DC, Paula and Jim Henry of Midland, TX, and Nancy and Randy Best of Dallas, TX. shows that Ted Cruz is much further in alignment with the Bush clan than most previously recognized.
In addition, by Ted Cruz adding Neil Bush Cruz is signifying an ideological alignment that is 180° divergent than most of the supporters of Ted Cruz would be aware of. These alignments point to a direct acceptance that much of the story-line behind Cruz’s candidacy was false.
As a direct consequence, the fallacy of false choice within the option of Ted Cruz from the outset gains sunlight.
However, this new reality is challenging for many people to accept. To those who cannot bring themselves to accept this paradigm shift, further evidence surfaces today with the endorsement of consummate insider, Carly Fiorina, who said:
“Last Tuesday we had a primary, and I walked into the ballot box,” [Fiorina] told a crowd of Cruz supporters. “I saw my name on the ballot, and it was kind of a thrill, but I checked the box for Ted Cruz.” (link)
That “last Tuesday” reference highlights Fiorina’s home residence (as we previously shared) in Virginia, not California as many people mistakenly think. Fiorina has been the consummate “inside the beltway” politico, even though she was never in an elected position as a politician.
Fiorina worked for the John McCain campaign in 2008 as a surrogate. She again worked in 2012 as an official campaign spokesperson for Mitt Romney. Indeed, in the beginning of her own presidential bid last year, Carly Fiorina stated she was urged to run in 2016 due to a conversation with Mitt Romney.
So, we re-engage the intellectual honesty with a reminder of Carly Fiorina, and now find ourselves answering a nagging previous question.
Why did the Wall Street funders of the Ted Cruz campaign fund the origin of the Carly Fiorina campaign in 2015?
$500,000 transferred from KtP1 (Keep The Promise) which is Ted Cruz’s Super-PAC, to CfA (Carly for America) Ms. Fiorina’s Super-PAC, in June of 2015. What clarifies now, with this new information, is how the fallacy of false choice was being presented to us by the Wall Street financial team, the Globalists, last year. Remember, even the FEC wanted know what they were doing (LINK).
Cutting through the intent here and getting to the substance of truth is really not too difficult, but you won’t find many outlets (new media or old) willing to go there. However, as you are aware for us the Truth Has No Agenda, and Sunlight Is The Best Disinfectant.
We begin by watching this video of Carly Fiorina appearing on the Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon and the discussion of a Muslim candidate eligible as U.S. President:
Just sticking with raw data, and trying to avoid injecting opinion, now consider this:
CARLY FIORINA – “VISION 2010″: U.S. & ARAB ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES – U.S.-ARAB ECONOMIC FORUM – SEPTEMBER 29, 2003, DETROIT, MICHIGAN:
Thank you for those nice words, Mr. Chairman.
It’s an honor for me to be here this morning. This is the perfect place to host a meeting on the future of the Middle East. The leadership of Arab-Americans in this community – and in the state of Michigan – has been nothing short of dazzling, and I want to thank you for hosting us here this week.
A great deal of time will be spent at the conference this week focusing on the problems of the Arab world. I want to kick things off here today instead by asking you to imagine the possibilities…to imagine what the Gulf region would be like if Arab countries were at the forefront of the global economy…to imagine what the world would be like if Arab nations were the world’s leading force for enlightenment and inclusion…to imagine what the future would be like for a Middle East rooted not in conflict, but anchored in partnership.
Two years ago, less than two weeks after the tragedy of September 11th, I gave a speech in Minnesota in which I said it didn’t take much to imagine that kind of world because we have seen that world before. All it takes is for us to think back to another time, to a civilization that was once considered the greatest in the world.
It was a civilization that was able to create a continental super-state that stretched from ocean to ocean, and from northern climes to tropics and deserts. Within its dominion lived hundreds of millions of people, of different creeds and ethnic origins. One of its languages became the universal language of the world, the bridge between the peoples of a hundred lands.
And this civilization was driven more than anything, by invention. Its writers created thousands of stories. Its poets wrote of love, when others before them were too steeped in fear to think of such things. When other nations were afraid of ideas, this civilization thrived on them, and kept them alive.
While modern Western civilization shares many of these traits, as I said to the audience that day in Minnesota, the civilization I’m talking about, of course, was the Islamic world from the year 800 to 1600, which included the Ottoman Empire and the courts of Baghdad, Damascus and Cairo, and enlightened rulers like Suleiman the Magnificent – rulers who challenged our notions of self and truth; who contributed to our notions of tolerance and civic leadership; whose leadership led to 800 years of invention and prosperity.
As we meet to think about the civilization that exists on that same land today, I ask you to imagine for a moment what a leader like Suleiman would say if he could somehow be here today, and see what the world has become.
I think he would be pleased at how much the world has learned from the example of the open, cooperative society that enlightened the world all those years ago. The Islamic example has helped create a world where democracy and transparency and rule of law are empowering people and taking them to new heights. (read more)
Please read the entire speech and pay close attention to the closing paragraphs.
What you will note is an almost eerie similarity to current Secretary of State John Kerry vis-a-vis the “Jobs for Jihad” program he, and his globalist co-horts, have been advocating for the past three years.
Read everything written by Fiorina and then reference/remember the words used by State Department Spokesperson Marie Harf – they are almost identical.
Next example – look at the following reception by Professor Al-Hassani, the Chairman of FSTC, at the conference “La Deuda Olvidada de Occidente he is responding to the speech of Carly Fiorina and the intended audience in the Mid-East:
[…] In this presentation focus will be on the other manner by which history is distorted: that is, the suppression of centuries of contribution to modern civilisation by the Muslim world. This negligence is apparent in academia, in the media and in the educational curriculum and associated history books, especially those aimed at the general public. The focus on this issue is to alert communities as to the particular significance of the Muslim civilisation and its historical role in giving birth to much of modern science and technology.
The following words by a famous lady well describes this situation and the debt that world history owes to the civilisation created by Muslims. They were pronounced by Mrs. Carleton S. Fiorina, chairman, president, and CEO of Hewlett-Packard Company (1999-2005) in a discourse on 29 September 2003:
[…] When other nations were afraid of ideas, this civilization thrived on them, and kept them alive.
When censors threatened to wipe out knowledge from past civilizations, this civilization kept the knowledge alive, and passed it on to others. While modern Western civilization shares many of these traits, the civilization I’m talking about was the Islamic world from the year 800 to 1600, which included the Ottoman Empire and the courts of Baghdad, Damascus and Cairo, and enlightened rulers like Suleiman the Magnificent.
Although we are often unaware of our indebtedness to this other civilization, its gifts are very much a part of our heritage. (read more)
Professor Al-Hassani was rejoicing that Carly Fiorina was asserting without Islam there would be no U.S.A., no America, no exceptionalism. This is the exact approach of the U.S. State Department, Charles Rivkin Project, we originally exposed in 2012.
The Rivkin Project was/is a U.S. State Department program with a specific goal to remove national pride and identity in favor of a more global worldview of a collective society, a “multi-cultural” society. Again, these are not interpretations of her words, these are Fiorinas’ own words.
And yes, there are those who are now beginning to connect the dots to President Obama’s first foreign policy speech and travel. Where was it delivered? Cairo Egypt.
Does it make sense now how Fiorina came to be in contact with all those “world leaders” she brags about meeting?
If you need to finally stamp out any reservations or doubt you might have about this agenda; consider Carly Fiorina is also closely linked to the Clinton Global Initiative – SEE HERE ( <—scroll down the page) – providing leadership and mentorship within the Bill and Hillary CGI.
Troubled? You should be. Her globalist ideology is thinly veiled, and in my opinion what has unnerved many of the electorate who did not buy what she was selling. Despite claims to the contrary, the U.S. voter is intelligent and have an innate sense when they are being misled:
♦ Carly Fiorina on Immigration: Pass the DREAM Act. For other undocumented immigrants, a direct path to citizenship is unfair. While running for the U.S. Senate in California in 2010, Fiorina said she supports the DREAM Act, which would give legal status to people who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children.
♦ Carly Fiorina on Climate change: It is real and man made. But government has limited ability to address it. Speaking in New Hampshire in February, Fiorina said there is scientific consensus that climate change is real and caused by humans.
♦ Carly Fiorina on Education: Supports Common Core – Set national standards but give local districts maximum control. No Child Left Behind was positive. In a position paper while running for the U.S. Senate in California, Fiorina strongly advocated for metric-based accountability in schools. She praised No Child Left Behind as setting high standards and Race to the Top for using “internationally bench-marked” measures.
♦ Carly Fiorina never hired after HP Job: […] Here are the facts: In the five years that Fiorina was at Hewlett-Packard, the company lost over half its value. It’s true that many tech companies had trouble during this period of the Internet bubble collapse, some falling in value as much as 27 percent; but HP under Fiorina fell 55 percent. During those years, stocks in companies like Apple and Dell rose. Google went public, and Facebook was launched. The S&P 500 yardstick on major U.S. firms showed only a 7 percent drop. Plenty good was happening in U.S. industry and in technology.
It was Fiorina’s failed leadership that brought her company down. After an unsuccessful attempt to catch up to IBM’s growth in IT services by buying PricewaterhouseCooper’s consulting business (PwC, ironically, ended up going to IBM instead), she abruptly abandoned the strategic goal of expanding IT services and consulting and moved into heavy metal.
At a time that devices had become a low margin commodity business, Fiorina bought for $25 billion the dying Compaq computer company, which was composed of other failed businesses. Unsurprisingly, the Compaq deal never generated the profits Fiorina hoped for, and HP’s stock price fell by half. The only stock pop under Fiorina’s reign was the 7 percent jump the moment she was fired following a unanimous board vote. After the firing, HP shuttered or sold virtually all Fiorina had bought. (read more) Against this substantive backdrop, and considering all possible alternative explanations, a reasonable person can only conclude Ted Cruz was a “false choice” all along.
So let’s see Cruz has been a lifelong conservative, Trump has changed parties 5 times. Trump has flipped flopped on every major issue in the last 5 years, while being well into his 60’s.
But it is Cruz who is the secret GOPe plant?
The trumpanzees are eating too many bananas.
You sleep well knowing that While Ted Cruz was fighting to uphold YOUR constitutional Rights,
Yes. I slept well while the Cruz Family made millions from sleazy Goldman Sachs. And gave basically nothing to charity. Ted Cruz is a self serving careerist. Nothing more and nothing less. That’s why he’s fine allying with Bishop Romney and now the corrupt Neil Bush. Thee is simply nothing principled or conservative about his campaign for POTUS.
Cruz has gone out of his way never to insult DT’s base.
False. Cruz is parroting Romney’s viscous lies about Trump. When you smear a persons candidate with a broad brush you smear his supports by association.
But looking at his whole body of work. He is solid. The idea that the establishment wants him is a clown proposition. Just because they hate Trump more doesn't mean they have a love fest with Ted. It is well known they hate Cruz, but the establishment will sell what's left of their soul to beat Trump.
So don't go suggesting that Ted Cruz is a sell-out until you can answer post #73. I'm willing to give Trump my vote if he's the nominee, but the gratuitous trashing of Ted Cruz, one of the dozen or so solid conservatives in the U.S. Senate needs to stop.
Ms. Fiorina’s comments on Islam and immigration are quite disturbing. Her comments are very much like those of Obama.
No, he won two of 9. Most of the cases were not particularly groundbreaking.
Over nine trips to the Supreme Court, Cruz clearly lost four cases and won two. The other three rulings were less clear-cut. Five cases involved the death penalty. One dealt with Texas’ intense efforts to keep a calculator thief behind bars (not Cruz’s finest hour). Dretke v. Haley March 2, 2000 Michael Haley was sentenced to 14 years in prison for stealing a calculator from a Texas Wal-Mart even though the maximum was two years under state law. Haley later challenged his imprisonment, arguing that his original lawyer should have objected to the lengthy sentence. After lower courts found that Haley waited too long to object to the error, Haley appealed to the Supreme Court. Cruz essentially lost, the case was returned to the lower court who freed Mr Haley for time served.
Another was essentially a patent fight over a deep fat fryer.
Another case he was arguing for the Death penalty for mentally ill defendant. Panetti v. Quarterman April 18, 2007
Cruz’s most well-known case, involving convicted murderer José Medellín, reached the Supreme Court twice. Cruz ultimately won, allowing the state to execute Medellín despite an order from an international court and the urging of President George W. Bush to hold off so Medellín could receive a new hearing.
‘Cruz has gone out of his way never to insult DT’s base.’
Not seeing that. Running dirty ads against a candidate alienates the supporters. For example, when Cruz claimed DT had made himself rich by using eminent domain. A, that was a lie. B, it alienated—you could say insulted if you like—me as a Trump supporter
Then explain why TC is DT’s supporters second choice at 3X the rate of vice-versa.
Tread carefully.
Recognizing that someone you admire and looked up to may be playing you is a hard thing to do. It took me awhile.
I was on the Cruz bandwagon the day he announced and thought Trump was a joke the day he announced.
A few things before Trump jumped in had started doubts about Cruz, the cloture vote enabling TPA and the Corker bill, which stands the Constitution on its head.
The addition of Bushbots to the campaign is on top of all the Goldman Sachs/CFR/NorthAmerican Union revelations.
As the campaign has developed I listened to Trump and started to understand that he was serious about winning.
I watched as he pushed back on The Ministry of Propaganda successfully.
Personally the more I saw of Trump, the more I liked and the opposite is true for me about Cruz.
I’m not counting we political junkies who take gutshots whenever our candidates go idiot... I mean the regular voters.
NY Values...Cruz trashed the whole state and by association when he expanded his remarks, NJ as well. That was while he was supping at the NYC trough, chowing down on Wall Street donations.
That was the also beginning of the end of my respect for him as an astute politician, a man of character and a President for all Americans.
“.. but the gratuitous trashing of Ted Cruz, one of the dozen or so solid conservatives in the U.S. Senate needs to stop.”
There is absolutely nothing gratuitous about my comments regarding Ted Cruz. I started out being a supporter, but in the intervening timeframe, he’s done and said some very disturbing things, which have lead me to believe that he may well not really be who he claims to be. Sorry, but that’s how I see it, and I am not trashing him, just saying what I see in him. As for the Senate, given their record, and the fact that very few if any of the “conservatives” will stand up to the RINO “leadership,” leaves me to wonder about just exactly where they are as well.
As for GHWB as Reagan’s VP, my view is that he was the GOPe “price” for their support and he and his children have been working 24/7 ever since trying to undo what Reagan had started. This time, it cannot be a repeat performance. We have to slay the GOPe for once and for all!
Mr Trump is not just going to have problems with the Cruz base, but also supporters of Bush, Rubio, Fiorina and Paul. If he can’t mend fences, it will take a lot of cross over democrats to make up the difference.
As with you, I intend to vote for whoever gets the nomination.
Ted Cruz is the closest thing out there to Ronald Reagan. And even Reagan, in a far more educated country than we have now, had to pick a Bush for the VP slot to make it across the finish line. What he accomplished in those eight years hasn’t even been completely undone by a radical anti-American POTUS. Yet.
So don’t go suggesting that Ted Cruz is a sell-out until you can answer post #73. I’m willing to give Trump my vote if he’s the nominee, but the gratuitous trashing of Ted Cruz, one of the dozen or so solid conservatives in the U.S. Se
I have a right to repost and discuss FACTS PRESENTED IN THE ARTICLE posted on this thread...It was not a “gratuitous trashing.” I have what I deem legitimate concerns about CRuz; just like I have some concerns about Trump.
This article presented FACTS about Cruz hiring nearly a dozen Bush campaign workers ....Is that a sell-out? You tell me.
Trump did not hire a dozen of Obama’s top strategists for his campaign. The article outlined Carly Fiorina’s globalist insider credentials and how Senator Cruz gave her $500,000 for her campaign (which FEC is looking into) and now she returned the favor thru an endorsement....This article does not outline the funding Ted received as a a Senate candidate from the Gay founder of PayPal nor his attempted support from Singer, a gay hedge fund manager which also concern me plenty!
So you are now saying that a Cruz/Bush ticket is OK because Reagan had Bush on his ticket??? Boy, that is logic I don’t follow.
Reagan was a great president, but he made some mistakes, and everyone pretty much agrees putting Bush on the ticket is one of them as Bush sought to immediately dismantle and disavow the Reagan agenda.
Sorry, I won’t vote for a Bush on any ticket.
I was an early Cruz supporter who drifted over to Trump, surprising even myself.
What you wrote is truth, the muslim moratorium is what finally brought me over.
Some of what Cruz did to appeal to that demographic had the exact opposite effect on others.
That’s right: neither side has to worry about respecting their candidate now. Let’s rumble.
No one is a bigger insider than Chris Christie.
Heck the dude is the head of the governors association!
Chris Christie is the very definition of an insider.
Sorry FRiend, Cruz may have positioned himself as an outsider in the Senate, but prior to his Senate term and since his foray into the presidential arena, he did/ is doing some insider things...
Ok. But how recent is your data? Is it not possible that as the—for want of a better word—nasty, attacks on Trump proliferate, enthusiasm for Cruz as second choice could wane?
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.