I'm Dave-El and today is another part of my ongoing series of posts (When will they ever end?) examining the statements of one of the candidates for US President , taking a measured and scholarly review (mixed in with a wee bit of anger) of this particular individual's expressions in speeches, debates and comments to the media and looking deep into the meanings of words and the very concepts of truth (whatever is left of it) itself.
I call this series of posts...
Without further delay, let's move forward with today's analysis.
A Ted Cruz TV ad ran in South Carolina in the weeks prior to the primary. The ad blamed President Obama for “threatening 3,000 jobs at Fort Jackson.”
Well, yes jobs were at risk at Fort Jackson due to budget cuts forced by the sequestration which was the kill switch built in Congressional budget deals. If Congress couldn't agree on a budget deal, automatic cuts would occur. So the threat of job cuts in Fort Jackson were not due to a direct action or directive from the President but from the inability of Congress to make a deal on the Federal budget.
The potential loss of 3,000 jobs was a worst-case projection from a 2014 U.S. Army report which is long out of date. And the events that threatened such a massive loss of jobs at Fort Jackson never occurred.
The president and Congress agreed to reverse the sequester cuts in the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015, a two-year deal that increased defense spending for fiscal years 2016 and 2017. As the Washington Post reported when the bill passed Oct. 30, 2015, “The deal will lift the so-called sequester spending caps and increase discretionary spending by about $80 billion over two years, an amount that will be split equally between defense and domestic programs.”The bill passed by a vote of 64 to 35.
Ultimately jobs were cut at Fort Jackson but the number of jobs lost was 180, nowhere near the 3,000 in the U.S. Army's worst case scenario or as given in the Ted Cruz TV ad.
By the way, guess who voted against the October 2015 bipartisan budget deal.
Go on, guess!
Yes, it was Ted Cruz who voted against the bill, blasting the “Washington Cartel of John Boehner and Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell and Harry Reid" and his party’s leadership for agreeing to increase spending without paying for it.
Now here's the thing. If Ted Cruz wants to take a hard line on spending, that's cool. I actually agree that Congress shouldn't spend money it doesn't have. But then to turn around and blame Obama for threatening significant job losses that were in fact prevented by Obama's signature to a bill that Ted Cruz voted against, this is the height...or the depth, you pick...of hypocrisy.
__________________________
We've got a primary coming up in North Carolina and given the current state of disarray the Republican Party is in right now, we're going to get slammed with ads radio, TV and social media. Get a load of this ad that's popping up on my Twitter feed.
To be fair, this has nothing to do with my harangues against Ted Cruz for being an LFB* but rather more with my own personal discomfort at his personal appearance.
This is supposed to be a PRO-Ted Cruz ad. Why does Ted look like he's about to cry? Really, can he not control that? He always looks like a lost toddler at an amusement park crying for mommy! It's bad enough he's a constant liar, does he have to look like that while doing it?
I really must apologize. This has nothing to do with Ted Cruz being an LFB* and I acknowledge this undermines the integrity of my Ted Cruz is a LFB* premise. I am sorry.
*Lying Fuck Bastard, in case you forgot.
_____________________________
So that's that for this week's edition of...
TED CRUZ IS A LYING FUCK BASTARD.
Sadly, I can't say we're done with Ted Cruz yet with more victories to be added to Cruz's delegate total after the most recent round of primaries and caucuses. For all the push back from GOP leadership against Donald Trump, it seems any voters not enchanted with Donald are moving towards Ted Cruz. But all this means is we've replaced one consummate liar with another.
But if Ted does start to make headway against the Trump machine, perhaps the upside of that is that others will start paying attention more to what Cruz says and believes in. If you think Donald Trump as President would be detrimental to women and minorities, Ted Cruz I firmly believe would be worse because, unlike Donald, Ted Cruz actually believes in the shit he says.
Click here for an analysis of Ted Cruz from 3 months back that pretty much paints the same picture.
Thank you for coming by the blog today and I'll be back with another post tomorrow.
Until then, remember to be good to one another.
No comments:
Post a Comment