The liberal news is spouting that Cruz is just like Obama (oh! if only it were true – if Obama were like Cruz we wouldn’t be in the shape we are in)!  Really? From what is documented,  Obama was a “bench warmer” and from what I can see Cruz was anything but a bench warmer. That seems to be what the Washington old timers didn’t like because this young whipper snapper didn’t toe the line like they thought he should.  The Elite keep saying, they don’t like him.  Hmm,  wonder why?  Is it because he isn’t following them and wallowing in the same pigsty they are wallowing in.

Even Rep. Peter King a part of the old-timer Republicans stated Cruz was a carnival barker or a guy with a big mouth and went so far as to say “he would jump off a bridge” if Cruz was elected (only thing he didn’t name the bridge). Then Steve Schmidt a Republican analyst and former campaign manager of John McCain and well-known for setting the campaign on fire when he started criticizing Sarah Palin’s clothes purchases during the campaign which was deliberate – stated Cruz was irresponsible – which was hypocritical.

In fact, these same Elites are blaming Cruz for the shutdown when it was the Democrats.  And then, and then, who put all of the hurt on the American people during the shutdown – Obama.

The people of Texas sent Cruz to Washington to represent the people not the establishment.  Just take a look at the new 2015 budget and the same people who were going to make all of these changes to help the country just fell back into that pigsty after promising the American people if they re-elected them they would make a difference this time.  Well McConnell and Boehner are back in the pigsty. 

New Yorker Scrubs ‘Uppity’ Attack On Cruz; Offers Pathetic Explanation to Breitbart

by John Nolte 25 Mar 2015

Breitbart wasn’t the first to report on the New Yorker using the word “uppity” to describe Hispanic Ted Cruz, but moments after our inquiry to the author (via Twitter) and the publication of our piece, the lofty left-wing outlet removed the word and through a spokesperson sent the following statement:
You  may have seen that John Cassidy has updated his post on Ted Cruz. It no longer includes the word “uppity,” and he’s addressed his choice to remove it, in an update that now appears at the bottom of the post.

Here is that text:

“Update: In describing Senator Cruz’s aggressive actions during his first year in the Senate, I originally used the word “uppity,” which means, according to Webster’s, “acting as if you are more important than you really are, do not have to do what you are told to do, etc.” However, the word also has some disturbing historical connotations that I overlooked, and in applying it to a Latino politician, I goofed. If I gave any offense, however inadvertently, I am sorry.”

Obviously an apology constructed around “If I gave offense” is not an admission of wrongdoing. Breitbart News asked the New Yorker’s spokesperson if the publication’s editorial guidelines have changed since the 2008 publication of this piece that attacked Republicans — not for using the word “uppity,” but for insinuating (which really wasn’t the case) President Obama is uppity:
Meanwhile, the campaign that claims to loathe “just words” has proved expert at their manipulation, from reversals of policy to the outright lies of some of its attack ads (“comprehensive sex education”) and the subtle racial innuendo of a phrase like “how disrespectful” (used to accuse Obama of making uppity attacks on Palin).

Our second question to the New Yorker is just as simple: “Is it now no longer wrong at the New Yorker to use the word ‘uppity’ to describe an outspoken member of a minority group, or is it wrong only when people take offense?”

We will update this post if we receive a response.

From what we now know, it appears as though the New Yorker editorial guidelines are vastly different for Democrats and Republicans. Republicans who use the phrase “how disrespectful” are bigots engaging in “racial innuendo” — using code words for “uppity.” On the other hand, Left-wing New Yorker writers who outright use the racially-coded word “uppity” to attack a Hispanic Republican have done nothing wrong.

Within the proper historical context, this makes sense. Going back to the days of the Democrat-led and founded KKK and Jim Crow South, the Democrat Party has never seen anything wrong with destroying minorities like Cruz, minorities who threaten the Democrat Party’s hold on Power.

The tactics might be different, but it’s a relentless “othering” campaign that makes an example of any outspoken minority or women who dares challenge status quo.

kommonsentsjane