Pages Menu
Categories Menu

Posted by on Apr 24, 2016 in 2016 Presidential Election, Politics | 9 comments

Cruz means “sleaze”


At the start of the presidential campaign, Ted Cruz told voters he would be the only “consistent conservative” in a crowded Republican field.

Then he confronted the modern GOP — a fractured party, in which each faction has a different definition of what “conservative” means.

To consistently please all of them, Cruz has had to be inconsistent with himself.

Time and again he has shifted, shaded or obfuscated his policy positions — piling on new ideas which sometimes didn’t fit with the old. …WaPo

Why does this seem so dumb? So unnecessary?

Because it’s old news. But even if you’d been stuck in a snowdrift for the past six months, out of touch, zenning out at the top of Kilimanjaro, one look at the guy’s face and deportment should be enough. Only because his rival is Donald Trump would you even think about Ted Cruz as an acceptable candidate for the presidency. No, really.

Post reporters go on to track Cruz’s policy shifts during recent months. “Sleaze” seems insufficient as a description. Just look at that face.


OOPS! I’m being unfair to faces!

Queen Elizabeth has it. So does fashion designer Victoria Beckham. And actress Kristen Stewart — poor thing, she’s practically the poster girl.

Among the slew of pop culture icons said to be afflicted with so-called Resting Bitch Face (alternatively known as Bitchy Resting Face), the vast majority are women, though Kanye West is among the male examples. All of them have been mocked by Internet commenters for having a certain unintentional expression when their faces are not in motion — a look best described as vaguely annoyed, maybe a little judgy, perhaps slightly bored. …WaPo


You want that face in our White House? In our daily news for four to eight years? On a stamp?


…Like Dick Cheney, Cruz is a warmonger. He’s made it clear that he has no qualms about launching yet more wars in the Middle East. With Cruz, it’s like the lessons of the disastrous Iraq War never even happened. For him, war is always the policy of first resort. Cruz is like Cheney on steroids. What makes Cruz even more scary is his extreme right-wing interpretation of the Bible and his enthusiasm for embracing what would essentially be a theocracy in America. Like many far-right evangelicals, he has no qualms about ramming his twisted interpretation of “Christianity” down the throats of the rest of us. Say what you want about Trump, but he is clearly no extremist right-wing evangelical. …MarcMcDonald,BeggarsCanBeChoosers

Cross-posted from Prairie Weather

Caricature by DonkeyHotey via Flickr

Photo credit: Ted Cruz via photopin (license)

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2016 The Moderate Voice
  • Sal Monela

    “Cruz is like Cheney on steroids.” No – It would be really hard to top Cheney. For all the obvious mistakes Cheney made he learned absolutely nothing from them. He still believes he is right.
    Cruz is a reactionary who from a social perspective would be much happier in the 1950’s and from an economic point of view the 1890’s. Despite has many flaws and inconsistencies, Cruz would have to go a long way to be worse than Dick Cheney on foreign policy.

    • JSpencer

      Agreed. Darth sets a high standard for sociopathy.

      • I third that… Cheney is in a class by himself…. an 8th level of hell

  • dduck

    I abhor Cruz, but one thing I can’t figure out is how he could agree with me by being anti-ethanol.
    No other candidate, Rep or Dem, holds that politically dangerous position; If he is against most fracking, I will really freak out. It’s also amazing that he was a debate champion.

    • Given the reality of ethanol being one of the worst ways for this country to deal with its energy needs, I have to agree with Ted on that one too.

  • Terry Ott

    What is it about Cruz that he deserves the “sleaze” designation, moreso than other candidates? I do not think of Ted Cruz as “Presidential” in terms of his scope and breadth, and perhaps temperament and style, although I think he is “driven” enough, smart enough, tough enough, and is competent in how he has approached campaigning. But, by the same token, I don’t feel comfortable saying about ANY current/recent candidate that he/she appears to be particularly “Presidential”. So, to me he is “just another one” of many, although several of the “many” did not even seem accomplished or even coherent as campaigners and did not connect with large numbers of voters. Cruz has.

    We can tick off the many names of “sleazy” elected officials; the ones who are morally and/or ethically deficient, and others who simply think they are above the law or manage to maneuver around it due to status and connections. I have such a list in mind, but why bother to specify? We all know several of them.
    So, my issue with your commentary is this: Apart from his position or positions, plural, on numerous issues (with which many of us do not agree — nothing new there!), what is it about Cruz that earns him the “sleaze” label, compared to the group he has run against and relative to nationally prominent politicians generally?

    Has Ted done some especially unsavory, immoral, reprehensible or unethical things in his political or personal life? Or is it just that he is overly “flexible” in his positions on issues, and/or spins and stretches the truth, or has bad judgement about what is appropriate to say or do — like most of his fellow career politicians.

    • Terry Ott

      p.s. And not that it matters one iota what I think, but when you comment about the abhorrent prospect of seeing Ted Cruz’s face and hearing him for 8 (or even 4) years, I consider as the likely alternative — Hillary Clinton. Oyyyyyy. Photo finish in that contest!

      • dduck

        Perhaps plastic surgery would help both of them. 🙂

      • JSpencer

        As they say, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. It was bad enough watching GWB for 8 years, but in fairness, most of us are unconcerned about visuals when the substance meets with our approval. As to use of the word, “sleaze”, the word, “immoral” is usually part of the standard definition; as such it could be applied to certain political positions taken or expressed… imo.

Twitter Auto Publish Powered By :