Cruz: Maybe alleged clinic shooter is 'transgendered leftist'

Well there you go.

Why would Cruz not simply dismiss the question when he could make a partisan remark, and perhaps exonerate his base (and himself) for any and all hateful rhetoric that perhaps exhorted this fellow into his actions?

I find it amazing, and by that I mean typical, of Cruz in this matter, when he could have said something intelligent he opts instead for saying something hateful. Is he not simply engaging in the same sort of actions his response meant to dismiss? Does his response not simply pander to the lowest common voting denominator?

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/30/polit...ood-transgendered-leftist-activist/index.html

Ted Cruz is condemning the deadly shooting at a Planned Parenthood clinic, but is refusing to blame the attack on the anti-abortion rhetoric that has consumed stretches of the Republican primary campaign.

Speaking about the alleged gunman, Robert Lewis Dear, at a campaign event in Iowa on Sunday, Cruz accused the media of wanting "to blame him on the pro-life movement when at this point there's very little evidence to indicate that." Audio of the comments was posted online by The Texas Tribune.

When a reporter told Cruz that the suspect in the Colorado Springs killings is alleged to have mentioned "baby parts" after his arrest, the Texas senator responded, "Well, it's also been reported that he was registered as an independent and a woman and transgendered leftist activist, if that's what he is."

Cruz was likely citing a report from The Gateway Pundit, a right-wing blog, that uncovered a Colorado state voter registration form which lists Dear's gender as female.

The term "transgendered" is considered offensive by the LGBT community. The appropriate usage when describing an individual, as explained by National Lesbian & Gay Journalists Association, is "transgender person," "transgender man" or "transgender woman."

A spokesperson for the Cruz campaign told Buzzfeed that the candidate was not suggesting anything in particular about the alleged killer's identity, and only made reference to the report in order "to make the point that we don't know all the details."

The Cruz campaign did not have any immediate comment to CNN.

Asked by another reporter if he would describe the attack an act of "domestic terrorism," as former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee did earlier in the day in an interview with CNN's Brianna Keilar on "State of the Union," Cruz declined.

"I would call it a murder, and we'll see what the facts are," Cruz said. "It was a multiple murder of what appears to be a deranged individua

 

Cause he knows leftys will ignore the facts and blame him, no matter what he says.

In short, your post and many others, are the answer to your own question.

 

Oddly, that makes no sense.

What "facts" indicate that this shooting was caused by trasngendered or leftist folks?

 

What's the difference when the media has to choose titles such as 'transgendered leftist' instead of 'Christian fundamentalist' or 'white extremist'?

 

Is Ted Cruz part of the media? Or a fellow running for the Republican nomination for president?

I am leaning towards the latter. The title appears to be based on something Cruz stated. Is that not an accurate basis for the title for an article?

 

<Mod Edit>

Cruz said, according to your own post:

"I would call it a murder, and we'll see what the facts are," Cruz said. "It was a multiple murder of what appears to be a deranged individua

 

No, it appears to actually be a story.

 

Another mental case, a disturbed individual. What is so hard to understand about this?

Was he influenced by political rhetoric? Most likely. Does that make him a poster child for political extremism? Absolutely.

In general does his insane act represent an entire political ideology? Well if there are good Muslims and extremist lunatics distorting an ideology of peace, then there has to be a lunatic fringe out there distorting every belief. You can't have it both ways.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes there is. Another mentally disturbed person, who most likely has displayed examples of instability, has slipped through the cracks again and the results are/were unfortunately, deadly.

 

Ignore the facts like pretending it was a bank robbery gone bad and that the man was saying THEIR EXACT WORDS since the heavily edited PP videos dropped?

Let me guess, you also think the shooter is secretly a Mooslim, right?

 

Yes it is. But the point here being that the Left will not hesitate to use statements such as 'Christian fundamentalist' or 'white extremist' to make their point in certain crimes that occur.

However, if you get someone from the Right - a politician no less - who uses a different 'term' when referring to the same kind of crime, you guys on the Left just can't take it.

 

You left out terrorist.

 

Which is my point, if one was to review the OP, where Cruz seems to be combating that sort of rhetoric by using, well, the exact same tactic only without any basis in reality.

 

lol, just so you know, the unedited videos were also provided, and they back up the edited versions.

Thanks for wasting my time.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh sure its a "story", written by a lefty for no other reason than to attack Cruz.

Im not offended by anything Cruz said.

 

Ted Cruz is qualified for nothing more than a megachurch preacher. He has proven adept at only one thing, bilking idiots out of their money. Rational people often wonder how such a man could get elected, then they discover which state he's from and the wonder fades.

 

Sounds like a pretty reasonable position to me. He's saying we might as well consider all the speculation surrounding this story instead of just picking one politically charged piece in order to advance a left-wing narrative.

 

I tend to think of it as a news story that reiterates something a presidential candidate said. Is what Cruz says not newsworthy?

 

Not newsworthy, but the left will jump on anything that could possibly be used as an attack against Republicans. I expect this to get worse in 2016 as election time draws closer.

 

I tend to think of it more as Cruz pandering to his uber right wing, uber Christian base trying to exonerate them, and himself, from months of hateful rhetoric that perhaps exhorted a mentally ill person into shooting. In doing so, Cruz picked one of the groups that is okay under said right wing, Christian standards to say hateful, derogatory things about in a mocking, sneering manner, that being transgenders.

You see, i don't think that Cruz or his base see transgenders as people. I think that see them as target5s to say things about, to deride, to hate, to mock, all in the name of the loving Christ.

Just my opinion, of course.

 

No, not really. Its not news worthy.

Cruz basically said, he'll wait for the facts to come out, before he makes a statement.

but some moronic lefty wants to make it some kinda capital offense.

Its not news, its the left handed spin cycle

 

I disagree.

I think it is newsworthy, because Cruz is a presidential candidate that said something rather stupid, bigoted, and moronic.

 

Well he did register as a woman.. Perhaps Cruz feels the same way about LGBT i could care less what they consider "Polite"

 

And, unfortunately, people will seek to exploit that mentally disturbed person's actions and point the blame elsewhere for their own political gain. This happens after just about every high profile shooting.

The fact is, we're all surrounded by heated and even hateful political rhetoric, but 99.99% of us somehow manage to restrain ourselves from killing someone for it. Naturally, this begs the question: Is the whipping boy du jour really to blame?

Which is more ridiculous - Cruz's remarks, or the incessant efforts on the parts of people to absolve people of their personal responsibility? In my mind, the latter is far more ridiculous AND tiresome.

 

aka him opening his mouth.

 

Cruz is a partisan fool. What motive would a "transgender leftist" have to attack a planned parenthood facility?

 

And yet here is Cruz doing just that.