Does anyone know what’s up with Ted Cruz?
When we’re all so occupied complaining about Donald Trump, it’s hard to tell. Everyone from Fox News to MSNBC to John Oliver can’t get enough of the business mogul.
A Trump presidency would be terrifying, damaging and probably laughable. But while he is unpredictable, he isn’t a completely unreasonable ideologue. He doesn’t stand fast to many hard-line ideological convictions and is a negotiator by trade. I could see him cutting a deal on health care or climate change, even just to say he did.
Meanwhile Ted Cruz, the Republican closest to Trump in the polls, is as strict a zealot as they come and he’s been holding fast to his radically conservative positions throughout the campaign. But media personalities and voters desperate for an alternative to the billionaire are not paying attention to Cruz. We’re not giving him as much public scrutiny as he deserves. And it’s time we start.
There has been just as much questionable rhetoric surrounding Cruz and his campaign as there has been for Trump’s. Its message includes extreme, and often outright violent, anti-gay statements and support for extreme Christian beliefs.
If Trump is unacceptable because of the racial and religious bigotry his ideas invite, Cruz’s own support for bigoted rhetoric should be equally alarming. Cruz has rallied a pack of very passionate — and very prejudiced — endorsers behind him. But the problem isn’t just that these people support him, it’s that Cruz readily associates himself with them.
One of his followers is Mike Bickle, the minister leader of the International House of Prayer, an evangelical megachurch that launches missionary projects in Uganda to preach the evils of homosexuality. Bickle donates money to churches and organizations in Uganda with explicitly anti-gay agendas, praising the Ugandan government for “The Uganda Anti-Homosexuality Act, 2014” — better known as the “Kill the Gays Bill.”
Bickle has also openly stated his belief that Jews will be exterminated if they don’t embrace Jesus and that homosexuality “opens the door to the demonic realm.” Cruz has wholeheartedly embraced Bickle’s support, saying he is grateful for his “dedication to call a generation of young people to prayer and spiritual connection.”
Joining Bickle is Phil Robertson, the reality TV star from A&E’s “Duck Dynasty.” He’s been known in the past for his ignorant and bigoted takes on homosexuality and race. He had previously denied the struggles of blacks in the Jim Crow South saying, “I never, with my eyes, saw the mistreatment of any black person … They were happy, no one was singing the blues.”
Robertson opened a Cruz rally in Iowa in early February by calling marriage equality ‘‘evil,’’ ‘‘wicked’’ and ‘‘sinful,’’ saying, “They want us to swallow it … We need to run this bunch out of Washington, D.C. We need to rid the earth of them. Get them out of there.”
Cruz took the stage shortly after without commenting on Robertson’s speech but did take the time to praise his values. “What a voice Phil has to speak out for the love of Jesus. What a joyful, cheerful, voice of truth,” Cruz said.
In a similar situation in November, Cruz attended a National Religious Liberties Conference hosted by Kevin Swanson, a Christian pastor with a history of being radically anti-gay.
Swanson gave a passionate speech at the conference in which he railed against “Harry Potter” and “How to Train Your Dragon” for their homosexual messages. Swanson also advocated for all homosexuals in America to face the death penalty — after they’ve been given time to repent, of course.
The day before the conference, CNN’s Jake Tapper asked Cruz if he thought it would be appropriate to attend such an event, citing Cruz’s complaints about “liberal intolerance.” Tapper wondered if it was hypocritical to support such “conservative intolerance.”
Sen. Cruz effectively dodged the question, claiming he knew nothing about Swanson’s record. But Cruz’s father and political influence, Rafael Cruz, was one of the head speakers at the event. Obviously the ideological gap between the Cruz family and Swanson is not especially massive.
Former Republican candidates Bobby Jindal and Mike Huckabee joined Cruz at Swanson’s conference, but Right Wing Watch reported that there was a fourth Republican hopeful who had committed to attend and later withdrew after a simple Google search revealed the nature of Swanson’s beliefs.
Either Cruz was comfortable enough to appear or his staff failed to do basic research into who the candidate supports. But neither backing of these ideas or careless social association are acceptable in a president.
Cruz did admit his attendance at the conference was a mistake in late February — four months after the fact.
Even if Cruz knew nothing of the pastor’s radical views before taking the stage, this doesn’t let him entirely off the hook. Politicians can’t embrace the personal values of endorsers and pretend their accompanying statements never happened. Republicans happily reminded President Obama of that when they attacked Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
David Barton, president of Cruz’s Super PAC fundraiser, Keep the Promise, has spoken in defense of Cruz saying, “Unless the candidate himself personally associates himself and makes that a part of what he does, the guilt by association is ridiculous. Where do you stop and at what level do you call association?”
To me, it’s fair to call something an “association” when a presidential candidate continually presents himself around people and speeches that argue for radical, violent ideas and action.
Sure, Cruz isn’t preaching the hatred himself. It’s true that Cruz isn’t openly endorsing gay genocide. While he personally doesn’t believe in gay marriage, he says he’s simply a federalist — preferring to leave it up the states.
But these arguments are presented at his own events and in his name, and he says nothing about the speakers beyond praising supposed strong faith and character. This is no better than Trump supporters rallying behind xenophobia at his events, but Cruz’s supporters brush it off as part of defending the Constitution.
All of the candidates have some questionable endorsements — Trump has former Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard David Duke and a host of other white supremacists supporting him. The larger problem here is that few people seem to be critiquing Cruz in a comprehensive way like they do other candidates. Cruz is able to sit back and avoid the intense scrutiny that would normally weaken and deflate his campaign.
Rachel Maddow did some brief coverage of the Swanson event on MSNBC, as did CNN’s Jake Tapper — but other than that there’s been nothing more than a smattering of blogs and online articles.
And where is the GOP on this? Cruz has hoped that the Evangelical vote will win him the nomination, but his campaign’s radical rhetoric should have many questioning Cruz’s ability to capture moderate Republicans in a general election.
It works two-fold. The media isn’t reporting on Cruz in this way because no one is pressuring them to, and nobody knows a lot about it because nobody’s talking about it in the news.
They’re all too busy with the cornucopia of sound bites that is Donald Trump.
It’s easy to view Cruz as the more favorable option than Trump, especially considering the information the media gives us about the two. In a normal election, Cruz would be handling a large amount of heat that he’s simply not getting this year because of Trump.
Republicans are stuck playing the “lesser of two evils” game in this election. That they have to make a choice doesn’t mean one option is actually better than the other. Trump seems terrible, but Cruz is just as dangerous.
If we’re going to criticize bigots as serious candidates, we might as well be fair to all of them.
Write to Amber at [email protected]