Showing posts with label John McCain. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John McCain. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 8, 2016

Ted Cruz Is Being Used By GOP Establishment & He Doesn’t Seem To Care…

Listen To Military Veteran Talk Radio


Posted on March 7, 2016 by DCWhispers
Share29 Tweet24 Reddit0 Tumblr0 2 0



Ted Cruz supporters enthusiastically proclaim Mr. Cruz to be a “political outsider”, choosing to ignore Cruz’s nearly twenty-year long affiliation at the highest levels of the Republican Party. Cruz’s own path to the Senate in fact began with a meeting intended to get the blessing of fellow Republican Texan, George W. Bush, a man whose presidential campaign Cruz worked for in 2000.
While Ted Cruz repeats the mantra that he is an establishment outsider, his actual political history is that of a very motivated and determined political insider willing to do and say whatever he deems necessary to further himself.

That is not so much a slight against Mr. Cruz as it is clarification of his actual political DNA.
The term “self-promoter” is hardly new to the halls of Congress, but it is applied by his own colleagues to Ted Cruz possibly more than any other sitting member of that institution. It is that near-constant, willful self-promotion that has turned Republicans who might ideologically support Cruz’s positions, to ultimately turn against him on a personal level.
(Jeff Sessions, anyone?)
Ted Cruz is so widely disliked among his fellow senators not because of his claims of being anti-establishment, but for the simple fact nobody trusts him. They have witnessed time and again Cruz promising them one thing, and then after his office conducts voter response data, do a sudden 180 and declare himself against that which he initially and quietly suggested he would support.
For Ted Cruz, it is said by his many detractors that the only ideology that truly matters, is Ted Cruz.
These same fellow senators watched Cruz quickly cozy up to Donald Trump during the initial months of the GOP primary race. The Texas senator both saw and heard the positive voter response to Trump’s simple, albeit effective, campaign rhetoric and Cruz wanted to make certain he benefited by affiliating himself with the then-nascent Trump phenomena.
image: http://www.teapartytribune.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/cruz-trump-2016.jpg
Cruz was determined to ride the Trump wave as a means of yet more self-promotion of the Ted Cruz brand.
And it worked.
As other politicians who took Trump on were quickly dispatched, Cruz remained largely untouched, though behind the scenes, he was said to be informing his staff he would happily attack Mr. Trump when the time was right.
That time has clearly arrived for the senator. Just as he rode on the initial Trump momentum, Cruz has just as quickly jumped onto the Republican Establishment’s anti-Trump craze. It is that seeming absence of personal principles that was the motivating factor in Senator Jeff Sessions, long believed to be a Cruz supporter, to instead come out publicly in support of Donald Trump.
image: http://dailysignal.com/wp-content/uploads/160112_CruzSessions-1250x650.jpg
Senator Sessions had seen Cruz’s work up close during the off again on again immigration reform debate, and was left initially perplexed by Cruz’s ability to say one thing and then do another. Ted Cruz’s greatest concern appeared to be keeping his own name and face in front of the media as much as possible. Sessions is among the Senate’s most conservative members, but he is also willing to work with others whose views do not always mirror his own. His time with Cruz indicated to the Alabama Senator that Ted Cruz was a politician who was quick to realize the anti-establishment sentiment coursing through America after several years of a disastrous Obama presidency, and realized that getting things done in the Senate was not nearly so important to his own self-promotion branding as labeling himself a defiant government obstructionist. 
And so, Cruz was marginalized by politicians who found him to be far too political. Few trusted Ted Cruz to do anything that didn’t first and foremost, do something to further Ted Cruz. It is that Cruz-first prospective that has left a trail of dissatisfied colleagues dating back to Cruz’s time at the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice. (Hardly the resume of a political outsider.) For the nearly the entirety of his adult life, Ted Cruz has collected a government paycheck and used those taxpayer-funded jobs to work his way up the Establishment food chain.
And now, with the unlikely emergence of Donald Trump, Cruz finds himself in the position of having that Establishment grudgingly look to him to be their savior – and he is to this point, happily obliging them. 
Pressure has been mounting within the GOP to have some among the Senate endorse Ted Cruz. This plan has taken longer than originally anticipated, because so few in the Senate were willing to do so because of their deep, personal dislike for the Texas senator. Trump’s Super Tuesday victories have forced these personal dislikes to be pushed aside in favor of what some perceive to be a narrowing window to “save” the Republican Party.
image: http://i0.wp.com/blackchristiannews.com/go/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/48515369.cached.jpg?w=500
Ted Cruz has let it be known he is the Establishment’s last best hope to defeat Donald Trump and thus ensure that same establishment continues years into the future. Mr. Cruz enjoys the significant and well-funded pockets of Big Oil, the Legal Lobby, and the Chamber of Commerce, among others, to assist him in this endeavor. 
Ted Cruz didn’t want to destroy the Republican Establishment, he merely hoped to be its newly-anointed ruler.
With that same Establishment now eyeing the mortal threat they perceive to be a Donald Trump presidency, it appears Mr. Cruz might yet be given that opportunity
Read more at http://dcwhispers.com/ted-cruz-is-being-used-he-doesnt-seem-to-care/#jRuj3yuu2hwXsZKb.99

Wednesday, February 24, 2016

Trump Has Won More Votes Than Romney Had At This Point in 2012



Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio iHeart.SmythRadio.com



And many more than McCain had in 2008, too.
8:07 AM, FEB 24, 2016 | By ETHAN EPSTEIN
Donald Trump has yet to win an outright majority in a primary or caucus – though he's getting closer, pulling in 46 percent of the vote in Nevada. But he's winning massive numbers of votes.
Mitt Romney won Nevada's caucus in 2012 with about 50 percent of the vote. He did so by pulling in roughly 16,000 total votes – roughly the same number that second-placefinisher Marco Rubio pulled in this year. Donald Trump, by contrast, more thandoubled Romney's total, garnering 34,500 votes.
That pattern has played out across all of the early states, which are seeing huge Trump-inspired (and, at some level, anti-Trump-inspired) turnout.
Advertisement
2015 Cadillac SRX SUV Piles on Affordable Luxury - CraveOnline
Promoted by Cadillac 
All told, Trump has now won approximately 420,000 votes. After the first four states had voted in 2012, Mitt Romney had won about 311,000 votes. Back in 2008, meanwhile, eventual nominee John McCain had won a little more than 250,000 votes after Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada had voted.
Before the primaries got underway in earnest, many assumed that Trump would fare more poorly than his poll numbers indicated because so many of his supporters had rarely voted in the past. But with this election, the past has not been a reliable predictor of future events.

Monday, January 25, 2016

FLASHBACK – Glenn Beck: John McCain ‘Worse for the Country’ than Barack Obama

AP/Martin

by ALEX SWOYER23 Jan 2016Washington, DC0

Conservative radio host Glenn Beck – who recently erred in alleging that GOP frontrunner Donald Trump voted for President Obama in 2008 – previously said Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) would have been worse for the country than Barack Obama.

“I think John McCain would have been worse for the country than Barack Obama,” Beck said to Katie Couric during an interview with CBS in 2009. “How’s that?”

CBS noted Beck also said,”He may have voted for Hillary Clinton over McCain had Clinton been the Democratic nominee in 2008.”

In a YouTube video posted on September 21, 2009, Beck tells Couric that McCain is “weird, [and] progressive like Theodore Roosevelt was.”

Trump posted a link to the interview onTwitter.

“Failing @GlennBeck lost all credibility. Not only was he fired @ FOX, he would have voted for Clinton over McCain,” Trump tweeted.

Beck called Trump a progressive and compared him to Obama during an interview on Fox News with Bill O’Reilly last week.

“He voted for Obama in ’08, come on Bill,” Beck argued as O’Reilly defended Trump from Beck’s criticism.

Beck later apologized and “pointed to a fake tweet as the reason he initially believed Trump voted for Obama.”

Beck also took part in the recent “National Review Against Trump” magazine edition that resulted in the National Review beingbucked from hosting an upcoming GOP primary debate.

Beck is expected to campaign alongside GOP presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) after recently saying on Fox News, “Cruz is my guy.”

Read More Stories About:

Big Government2016 Presidential Race,Donald TrumpTed CruzPresident Obama,Glenn Beck

Tuesday, January 19, 2016

Fox News: Bill O’Reilly To Correct Glenn Beck’s Trump-Misinformation

Fox News

by JOHN NOLTE18 Jan 20161182

Friday on Fox News’s “O’Reilly Factor,” Glenn Beck spread the false information that Donald Trump voted for Barack Obama in 2008. To back his erroneous claim, Beck cited a fake photoshopped tweet from faketrumptweet.com. Responding to an inquiry from Breitbart News Monday, we were informed by a Fox News source that the record will be corrected on Monday night’s “O’Reilly Factor.”

Beck will not be a guest, we were told, but a segment will cover Beck’s error and by extension inform “O’Reilly Factor” viewers of the truth.

After Trump slammed Beck for falling for the fake tweet, Beck doubled down Saturday with a tweet taunting Trump, “Why do you keep saying things like you didn’t vote for @BarackObama ?… just admit it @realDonaldTrump.

Later Saturday night, after apparently figuring out he’d been duped, Beck finallytook to his Facebook account to apologize for spreading the misinformation.

On Monday, Beck returned to Facebook to argue that while he did fall for a fake tweet, he still believes Trump voted for Obama in 2008. This, despite the fact Trump publicly endorsed Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) in 2008 and was on a committee that raised money for him.

Wednesday, June 25, 2014

Everything You Need to Know About Iraq, WMD and GWB Vindication

    It's year six of the Obama Administration. It seems so long ago that the previous embattled president limped across the finish line having been beaten down for five years over cascading failures that all seem to lead to a common source: No weapons of mass destruction were found during the time we were fighting and occupying Iraq. Eventually Bush and his administration were forced to admit that it appeared as though all of the intelligence was wrong.

    It's important to point out a few things to keep the record straight. First of all, nobody in the Bush Administration "LIED" about WMD. This may come as a surprise to brainwashed Democrats and Low Information Voters, but the fact of that matter is that all you need to know is what was believed and the definition of "lie". To lie, one must knowingly make a false statement. Everyone believed Saddam Hussein had WMD. For starters, he not only had WMD, he USED them to kill 5000 men, women and children in 1988. In 1998, Bill Clinton called Iraq "a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists." If you watch the video below, you'll see that calling Bush a liar for selling to the world that Iraq had WMD or was an imminent threat to be a nuclear power would be calling some of the most powerful Democrats of the past decades liars too:
In addition, many of these claims by Democrats were made in the 1990's while George Bush was only a Governor, so the liberal accusations that Bush was the one behind these beliefs is nonsense.

    The second point to be made is that the war with Iraq starting in 2003 was an internationally, LEGALLY justifiable war. In fact it was simply a continuation of the Gulf War that began in 1990:

    So as you can see, the Iraq War of 2003 was clearly a continuation of the more noble (in the eyes of the UNSC), Gulf War of 1990-91. Not only was it justified, but it should have been done sooner.

    And the last point I wanted to make to keep the record straight, is the answer to the question: Why in 2003? Why not sooner? If Saddam was officially in violation of UNSCR 687 as early as August of 1991 (according to UNSCR 707), then why was nothing serious done until 2003? Well besides the fact that corrupt veto holders at the UN made passing a use of force resolution increasingly difficult, I think a better answer to that question is the attitude of the times. The decade in America between the Collapse of the Berlin Wall and Soviet Union and victory in the Gulf War all the way to the .com bubble bursting in 2000 and 9/11/2001 was without question, the most high-spirited, care-free and peaceful time in American history. I lived the prime of my youth and adulthood during the decade from 1990-2000. I also served in the USMC during this time (1994-1998). I know what the political and economic climate was at the time like no other. There was a sense of naivety about the evils of the world that I not only miss, but also feel bad about knowing that nobody in subsequent generations had the blessings of experiencing it. And boy did it come crashing down on September 11, 2001. That day is the day American innocence was lost. We were angry. Some wanted revenge. I remember serious calls for use of nuclear weapons against whoever was responsible. But more importantly, having recently completing 4 years of military under Clinton, I was VERY concerned that our response was going to be to send two cruise missiles to blow up an unoccupied aspirin factory in Afghanistan and call it a day. I really worried that we were just going to take it like a country hoss too big to notice the wasp that stung him.

    To my relief, George W. Bush took it seriously. It wasn't going to be a slap on the wrist like President Clinton did so many times before. It was going to be a show of massive force. He made the case to the world that he was going to clean up that part of the world. 

    We all know that anyone with half a brain knows it was not Saddam Hussein that attacked us on 9/11. But it was obvious to a HUGE majority in America at the time that given the circumstances of 9/11 and our involvement in Afghanistan, we were absolutely NOT about to put up with a Middle Eastern Dictator who has a history of WMD usage, who refused to comply with UN Security Council resolutions - resolutions that were put in place due to a war that HE was responsible for!

    Now that you know the WHOLE background story about Iraq, let's fast forward to April of 2005: The CIA's top weapons inspector in Iraq reported that there were NO WMD found in Iraq. It seemed more like a final conclusion. It was certainly a final nail in the coffin of the Bush presidency that would have the most grueling and longest pathetically lame duck session imaginable. Making matters worse, Bush's refusal to defend any of his actions or respond to any criticism during this period was so disheartening to the right, and so motivating to the left that it most assuredly played a major roll in the Democratic Presidential Nominee, Senator Barack Obama defeating Republican challenger, Senator John McCain. In fact, Senator Obama ran on the platform of "pulling out of Iraq":
    Unfortunately, tens of thousands of American trained Iraqis have been murdered. US service members feel they have sacrificed their life, limb and sanity in vain. Obama's incompetent decision to pull out of Iraq when and how he did caused a situation where terrorist group ISIS (Islamic State in Iraq and Syria) have nearly completely taken over all of Iraq outside of the inner city of Baghdad (as of the time of this article) This has effectively set the stage where the same type of radicals that killed over 3000 innocent people on American soil will not only lead their own country, but have the kind of funding though oil revenue that they could have only dreamed of if Saddam Hussein himself sponsored all of their activities. Did I mention that President Obama has released the "Dream Team" of terrorist leaders from Guantanamo Bay prison back to the Middle East?

    Compounding this threat to America is the fact that Obama has completely opened the southern border with Mexico thanks to his orchestrated invasion. This flood of humanity has no doubt made it much easier for a Middle Eastern terrorist to get lost in the shuffle. But I digress.

    On June 20, 2014, reports from multiple independent sources said that ISIS in Iraq found Saddam Hussein's WMD stockpile! So it turns out EVERYONE (not just Bush) was right about Saddam's WMD. The big difference is that Bush was excoriated while he did the right thing morally, legally and strategically regardless of whether Saddam had them or not.