GOP Announces Formation of Committee to Elect Hillary Clinton

GOP Announces Formation of Committee to Elect Hillary Clinton March 23, 2015

First out of the gate in that endeavor, committee chair Ted Cruz, whose appalling abuse of persecuted Christians in the Middle East set the gold standard for sheer cynicism last fall.  It will be fascinating to see if he completes the Campbellesque Hero’s Journey story arc from “Guy who stands on a mound of Mideast Christian corpses to insult the dead as anti-semites and grift for money” to “God’s Anointed Republican whom we must support or face the wrath of heaven in the Most Important Election of Our Lifetime”, as is the custom with GOP candidacies.

"It seems Mark made clear the type of dissenting Catholics he was discussing (that type ..."

Where Peter Is has a nice ..."
"Huh? You "heard" priests got spat on so that means asserting Junipero Serra abused Native ..."

Where Peter Is has a nice ..."
"Maybe struggle to make distinctions. Observing that the Catholic Church abused Native Americans doesn't mean ..."

Where Peter Is has a nice ..."
""And they have never refused". Ah. *never*.This doesn't sound like they refused the blessing.The Catholic ..."

Where Peter Is has a nice ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Catholic
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Mark S. (not for Shea)

    I doubt Cruz will make the final cut. He’s too clownish even for the three ring circus that the GOP has become. Don’t get me wrong. He’ll be a hoot in the debates. I can’t wait to see him and Rick Perry onstage together, trying to out-ridiculous each other. But I don’t see him surviving the primaries.
    .
    And I think even he is smart enough to know this. This “campaign” is simply an audition for his talk show and the next three years of $50k per speaking gig.

    • ManyMoreSpices

      Well, he was Solicitor General of Texas for five years, so I’m pretty sure that he’s (i) not as dumb as you assume, and (ii) pretty good on his feet.

      But hey, Republicans are always dumb, right?

      • Dave G.

        Yeah. Duh. I’ve heard that since I began paying attention to politics in the early 80s. Racists, too. Oh, and sexists. Warmongers. Bigots. Homophobes didn’t come around until a little later. But I’m sure they were. Which is why, of course, I was not a Republican. For my generation, it would have been like jumping in bed with the Nazis, but without the classy outfits.

      • IRVCath

        I don’t question his intelligence. I question what he’s using it for, and who exactly he’s trampling over to get into power. Like Middle-Eastern Christians, and to a lesser extent, people who aren’t Evangelical Protestants.

  • Marthe Lépine

    I saw in cbc.ca last night that he was born in Calgary, Alberta, but his mother was a US citizen, and he found a way to claim that he had renounced his dual (Canadian-US) citizenship, which apparently make it ok. Maybe it works if one has the correct skin colour… Where are those birthers when we need them?

    • chezami

      It’s different for, you know, white people.

      • HornOrSilk

        Plus, we all know the truth about Obama anyway:

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLg8_EhmNq8

        • Newp Ort

          JFK was a Muslim. So it probably wasn’t Obama.

      • prairiebunny

        Demagogues got to demagogue.

        • petey

          i agree, cruz is pretty awful that way

  • It’s like they WANT to lose the election. The NYT magazine had a profile of Ben Carson (who sounds like he was a reasonable guy before he started meddling in politics). Is there not a single decent GOP candidate?

    • chezami

      No. No there isn’t. It’s what comes of voting the lesser of two evils all these years: nothing but lessers and evils.

      • Evan

        I’d modify that slightly to read: “It’s what comes from believing we’re morally required to vote for the lesser of two evils…”

        Because, (obviously) we’re not. Voting for the lesser of two evils is not inherently sinful, and can be permissible as long as our conscience tells us it’s prudent to do so and as long as we’re voting for a candidate in spite of his evil stances. We may also abstain or vote 3rd party.

        Anyway, if Cruz gets the nomination (which, thankfully, probably won’t happen) and if I get the “you MUST vote for the lesser of two evils” BS like I did in 2012, I’m going to respond by saying, “Okay. I wasn’t planning to, but I’ll now consider voting for Hillary (or Warren).”

      • Newp Ort

        You’re right but you voted for Ron Paul lol

        • chezami

          I set my bar super low.

      • Obpoet

        Given the degree of evil, I will gladly take a lesser.

  • Tom Beigel

    So enlightening to hear an intelligent discussion of issues here. Sigh….

    • Petey

      Including your contribution Tom.

      • Tom Beigel

        Too early in the game to get too excited about someone running for president. Cruz is a long shot. Too divisive and not enough experience. With the federal bureaucracy as large as it is, I’d like to see someone with proven management experience who has a vision for reform. Tall order in these divided times. Have to admit, I’m not too hopeful.

        • Petey

          what I see with cruz is the right limit of the range moving further right, either with his own candidacy or by forcing bush right. Imagine clinton and cruz were the candidates, two corporate shills and catamites for likud, we’d be in desperate straits.

  • AquinasMan

    What difference does it make?

  • Peggy

    One can argue rationally for or against Ted Cruz….somewhere else, I guess.

    When Obama forces you to vote, it won’t be for Cruz. Never fear.