During the gathering, according to two attendees, Mr. Cruz said he would have no problem if one of his daughters was gay.
FReepers are not as stooooooooopid as you apparently choose to think they are (yes, "choose," since the word "problem" was CLEARLY USED IN THE ARTICLE posted at the top of this thread, THIRD PARAGRAPH, first line ...). You are MISTAKEN, and it is very clear and easy to confirm that you are mistaken.
Check the article at the link, not as posted at the top of this thread. You will note that the text posted on FR is different than the NYT article. The word "problem" does not appear.
Now I am inclined to believe that the NYT caused this problem rather than the OP, so I sent the following to the Cruz campaign:
In yesterday's NYT article entitled "Ted Cruz Is Guest of Two Gay Businessmen", the third paragraph began with "During the gathering, according to two attendees, Mr. Cruz said he would have no problem if one of his daughters was gay." Sometime early this mornng, that text was changed to "During the gathering, according to two people present, Mr. Cruz said he would not love his daughters any differently if one of them was gay."
The original text achieved wide distribution in the blogosphere, e.g. Red State, and had the effect of suppressing support for Sen. Cruz.
The NYT did not note or acknowledge that they made the change, though they did so for two other corrections to the same article.
Ted Cruz:
“One person further asked how Heidi and I would react if we found out one of our (4- and 7-year-old) daughters were gay. My reply: ‘We would love her with all our hearts. We love our daughters unconditionally,’” Cruz said.
“A conservative Republican who is willing to meet with individuals who do not agree on marriage and who loves his daughters unconditionally may not reflect the caricature of conservatives promoted by the left, but it’s hardly newsworthy.”
Check the article at the link, not as posted at the top of this thread. You will note that the text posted on FR is different than the NYT article. The word "problem" does not appear.A bump for your earlier post with my emphasis added.Now I am inclined to believe that the NYT caused this problem rather than the OP, so I sent the following to the Cruz campaign:
In yesterday's NYT article entitled "Ted Cruz Is Guest of Two Gay Businessmen", the third paragraph began with "During the gathering, according to two attendees, Mr. Cruz said he would have no problem if one of his daughters was gay." Sometime early this morning, that text was changed to "During the gathering, according to two people present, Mr. Cruz said he would not love his daughters any differently if one of them was gay."
The original text achieved wide distribution in the blogosphere, e.g. Red State, and had the effect of suppressing support for Sen. Cruz.
The NYT did not note or acknowledge that they made the change, though they did so for two other corrections to the same article.
Thanks for following this and sending your findings to the Cruz for President campaign.
I am certain the important change in the text (and title) of the article was the doing of the NYT. It is in character for the NYT to intentionally misrepresent what Ted Cruz said on a hot-button issue and then correct it without acknowledging the change after the damage is done in the blogosphere. I think we've come to expect biased, unethical behavior from the NYT on a variety of topics concerning conservative politicians.