Posted on 07/20/2015 7:28:48 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Sen. Ted Cruz insists he won’t wage “violence” on Republicans–which is part of the reason why he won’t condemn Donald Trump’s comments about immigrants and prisoners of war.
The Wall Street Journal isn’t holding back, though.
The paper’s conservative editorial board slammed Cruz and praised former Gov. Rick Perry for their starkly different responses to Trump’s claim that Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., “is only a war hero because he got captured. I like people who weren’t captured better.”
Perry, an Air Force veteran, had one of the quickest and most forceful condemnations of Trump, insisting the real estate mogul wasn’t fit to be commander in chief and should drop out of the race.
But Cruz, who met with Trump last week and has praised him for drawing attention to illegal immigration, defended McCain but refused to comment about Trump.
The Journal’s editorial board wrote Monday that Perry should get “full credit” for criticizing Trump, but said Cruz was “revealing his own lack of political character” and rebuked his reasons for staying out of the fray.
“Mr. Cruz recently released a book whose main theme is an attack on other Republicans,” wrote the editorial board. “It’s central to his campaign strategy. The Texas Senator must be hoping to inherit Trump voters once the casino magnate flames out.”(continued)
(Excerpt) Read more at trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com ...
So is Ted proud to serve along side McCain when McCain called Ted a "Wacko Bird"? Or is he proud to serve with McCain when McCain calls Trump supporters "crazies". Or maybe Ted is proud to serve with McCain when McCain is arming ISIS in Syria, or seeking to install the moslem brotherhood in Egypt. Or maybe Ted is proud to stand with McCain as McCain sells out the country to the Chamber of (cheap labor) Commerce. Oh I know, Ted is proud to serve with the man that calls the folks that elected Ted "Tea Party Hobbits".
The WSJ likes the effectiveness of RINOs in funding 0bama's socialism SO MUCH that this is their indictment of Cruz?
That Cruz opposes 0bama actually?
WSJ's closeness to 0bama reveals 'lack of character'.
I dumped this open borders rag about 5 years ago....could not stand it any longer.
If Trump/Cruz/Palin/Paul/Lee/Sessions would start a political party the GOP is the third party.
This POS sought (at globalist Roger Ailes's behest, I'm sure) to tie Cruz to Trump simply because Cruz refused to denounce Trump.
I truly believe that if Trump were not in the race, the media/left/Obama Inc worshipers would be going after Cruz even more viciously.
“I listened closely to what Trump said and he did not say McCain was not a war hero. However, this is a free country and Mr. Trump has the right to say whatever he believes”.
***********
As for the first part of your comment, Cruz couldn’t have so replied because Donald DID SAY that McCain was not a war hero, lest there would be no controversy. Eh? (Yes, Donald did ultimately back down and say that McCain was a war hero.)
In the end, both Trump and Cruz both said McCain was a war hero.
Additionally, unlike the others, Cruz did not denounce Trump or call upon him to apologize— which is why Cruz is being criticized by the WSJ.
For those who dislike Cruz, find another reason to come down on him-— here, he’s been the only GOP guy not to abandon Trump and he’s taking hits for it.
He did not have to say anything, but saying “he is proud to serve in along side him (McCain)” was way to much [sic]
*********
Both Trump and Cruz ultimately identified John McCain to be an American war hero. Accepting their affirmations, why then would someone not be proud to serve along side an American war hero?
You target policy differences— that’s a different matter. Ted Cruz has consistently opposed McCain on policy.
Ted Cruz is a gentleman, an attorney and an accomplished debater. Such a person does not engage in ad hominem against his adversaries, he solely defeats them in substantive debate.
Trump’s number one priority is himself. The guy was all for Hillary when it was expedient for him.
Trump is a demagogue, and if you really think all his blustering will result in anything then you’re in for a rude awakening.
I believe that too. Absolutely!
When the establishment buys Bush’s nomination (and they will) and Cruz wholeheartedly endorses him, will everyone admit we have a system that won’t allow a real conservative to rise in leadership? At that point, we can start effectively dealing with the problem.
At least Trump fights.
South Carolina hates lindsey, and he knows it. He’s gotten re-elected through party machinations and manipulations. SC republicans would vote for trump just to spite LG.
Palin endorsed McCain in his next senate run. Remember? I’m sure Ron Reagan endorsed Jerry Ford in 1976.
All my awakenings have been rude. When Mitch and BooHoo sold us out this winter and spring—I’m ready to vote for Hillary if Jeb gets the nom
Cruz is a gentleman
Reeson, Weakly Standard, National Purview, The Wall Street Urinal—all the liberal fagazines are stepping up.
For that, I will never vote for Sarah Palin for any office. I would hope that Reagan, seeing where the country is now, would be smart enough to at least withhold his endorsement. Perhaps if he had ran third party back then, we’d have a party who represents conservatives today.
It’s one thing to give up and say, “all we’re ever going to get is an R who’s a little bit worse than the Rat, so we’d better pull the lever every election.” I reject that. If Cruz won’t, then he’s part of the problem. His vote for McConnell, TPA, and the Corker bill tells me a lot.
And what if Bush wins the nomination? With no third party option, we’re 100% certain to have Bush or Clinton as president.
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.