Thursday, October 31, 2013

Rafael Edward "Ted" Cruz DNA Mutation: Like Father, Like Son

Fruit of the Looney

The Looney


We all know the depth of Cruz's warped views and he never surprises us, practically on a daily basis, with some new TEA-flavored crap. Now we know where he got his brand of madness from: his father.

Papa “The Reverend” Cruz and his Mitt “47 Percent” Romney moment. Presented here for your enjoyment, anger, or disgust:

During the home stretch of his son’s Texas campaign for the U.S. Senate, Rafael Cruz told a Texas TEA party gathering that they needed to “send Barack Obama back to Kenya.”


After an exegesis on various U.N. encroachments onto U.S. law, Cruz named Obama as one of the organization’s big supporters, and ended up saying: “So we have our work cut out for us. We need to send Barack Obama back to Chicago. I’d like to send him back to Kenya.”

The TEA sippers shout with joy about their newly-minted “leader.” But, I seriously wonder: What kind of electorate sends a man like Ted Cruz to the United States Senate.

Cruz’s latest rant is this from The Hill: In a recent interview with Fusion TV network, a joint venture between ABC News and Univision, Cruz was asked if the president has been abusing his executive powers.  “I think he has absolutely been abusing his power and when you have a president who has said: Regardless of whether Congress acts, I'm going to force my agenda on the American people. That is wrong, and that's not consistent with our constitutional protections,” Cruz said. 

Then Fusion host Jorge Ramos recounted a comparison Cruz’s father, Rafael, made (in the above clip) between Mr. Obama and ex-Cuban dictator Fidel Castro, asking Ted Cruz if he agreed with his father’s statement, but the freshman senator didn’t answer the question directly, saying “look, obviously there are enormous differences between President Obama and Fidel Castro.” 

Talk about being evasive. Cruz is a master of that technique. But, what a huge pile of Texas hörsëshït. So, how does he get the shït back in the horse?

No comments: