Ted Cruz: Majority of Violent Criminals Are Democrats
“The media doesn’t report that.”
You may have noticed that the narrative around violent crimes changes depending on who committed the act. When someone with a Muslim sounding name is the suspect, we’re repeatedly told by the media and public officials not to rush to judgement.
If however, there’s even the slightest chance that the perpetrator is in any way conservative, people start talking about violent Republican rhetoric and everyone right of center is suddenly urged to reexamine their views.
It’s a scenario we’ve documented on this blog multiple times:
- James Holmes
- Jared Loughner
- The Cabby Stabber
- The “killer” of Bill Sparkman
- Amy Bishop
- The Fort Hood Shooter
- The IRS Plane Crasher
- The Pentagon Shooter
Ted Cruz is sick of this narrative and talked about the issue with Hugh Hewitt.
Debra Heine reports at PJ Media:
In an interview with radio talk show host Hugh Hewitt on Monday, GOP presidential hopeful Senator Ted Cruz dropped an inconvenient truthbomb on the left’s current narrative about how the “hateful rhetoric” of “abortion foes” caused a lunatic to shoot up a Planned Parenthood in Colorado…
Now listen, here’s the simple and undeniable fact. The overwhelming majority of violent criminals are Democrats. The media doesn’t report that. What they report, and there’s a reason why the Democrats for years have been viewed as soft on crime, because they go in and they appoint to the bench judges who release violent criminals. They go in, and they do what Barack Obama tried to do, which is appoint a lawyer voluntarily represented for free, a cop killer, to a senior Justice Department position.
They go in and fight to give the right to vote to convicted felons. Why? Because the Democrats know convicted felons tend to vote Democrat. And so the media never reports on any of that, doesn’t want to admit any of that, but you can see in every one of these, every time there’s a terrible crime, they’re so excited, come on, please, one of these be a Republican so we can try to paint the other side. It is one of the more egregious examples of media bias, and it’s something we see over and over and over again.
Here’s the audio:
Left leaning Politifact and the liberal Washington Post Fact Checker have already rushed to the Democrats’ defense, thus proving one of Cruz’s points.
The Post’s Glenn Kessler summarizes his position this way:
It is certainly an undeniable fact that a huge percentage of African Americans vote for Democrats, just as white males tend to favor Republicans. But Cruz is wildly off base when he claims that across the United States the “overwhelming majority of violent criminals are Democrats.”
The data that is the source of his statement was based on the party registrations of mostly black and Hispanic prisoners in just three states — and does not make a distinction between violent and nonviolent felons. Cruz earns Four Pinocchios.
Perhaps Cruz could have gotten a better rating if he somehow tied the issue to climate change.
Featured image via YouTube.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Cruz will take it, successfully, to the press, the democrats, and the democratic nominee. After awhile the press will have even more difficulty ignoring him.
I think they’d like to ignore him because they simply can’t get him with any gotcha questions. He’s been going into the lion’s den since he became a senator. Cruz once said that the media want to put him – or any other Republican – on a table and filet them. He ends up filleting them instead. It’s always such a pleasure to watch him do it too.
The “fact checkers” really aren’t even bothering to pretend to check facts anymore, are they?
“He can’t prove what he claims…” is very different from “that’s a lie”.
Every study that’s been done on the subject *suggests* Cruz is right. None contradict him. Right. What an outrageous lie.
Fact: 3% of the population commits 30% of the crime. Remove them and USA crime stats fit with Western Europe. That 3%? Young black males – who do vote democrat.
Umm, I don’t think you’re allowed to say things like that.
Cruz is the man. (See the period?)
Nor is Cruz to be confused with a “cisman” ever.
Cruz was born a man and will die a man.
And everything in between those two events will be man o man, what a man.
Plus, it should observed to Cruz deniers that Cruz and Chuck Norris occupy the same state. 😎
Devaluing capital and labor (e.g. multi-trillion dollar deficits, denigrating individual dignity (e.g. class diversity), and debasing human life (e.g. selective-child, clinical cannibalism) tends to trigger people. Perhaps Democrats need a better class of principles and friends.
I really don’t care about the fact the claim is true under any reasonable standard. He should not have said it, he was foolish to have said it, and neither he nor the nation stand to benefit in any significant way from saying it. He may have raised a lot of money, but he’s obviously short-handed if he keeps having to be his own bad cop full-time. I say this as a fan of Cruz’ humor and wit: he needs graciousness, especially at times like this. He’s not using it, at the very least.
I think it’s about time we give it right back to the left- wing media. And who’s better than Cruz to do it? It gets people talking and thinking.
“A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.”
I believe Mr. Twain had you in mind.
Can’t be telling the truth because it’s just not gracious.
Many of the post Civil War train and back robbers were adherents of an explicitly anti-Republican and pro-Democrat ideology. In one of the big political disputes of the late nineteenth century, the Democratic Party was bought out by the side that wanted to flaunt state and local law. Big city Democratic Party political machines often had close ties to big city organized crime.
Some of the Presidential elections won by the Democratic Party in the twentieth century would have been lost except for electoral votes that they had reserved by terrorism backed fraud.
It isn’t illegal to say that Democrats should be judged unfit to practice law on ethical grounds. Presenting it as a political solution would escalate the stakes, causing harm. Actual implementation should not be attempted.
Cruz’s statement is a valid talking point, as Democratic talking points made it relevant.
My state has pretty weak sentencing laws written by the democrats who controlled the state for 60 years. I always figured it was because they knew they or their family members would eventually get caught and they didn’t want extended prison time.
Rags, that was a sexist microaggression.
What if we just assume that the party identification of violent felons is the same as the general population? Here’s a back-of-the-envelope calculation:
According to some 2006 data I found, the racial breakdown of persons convicted of violent felonies in state courts is:
White – 58%
Black – 39%
Other – 3%
Source: http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fssc06st.pdf , Table 3.2.
The above lumps Hispanic with non-Hispanics of the same race. To simplify things, let’s assume that Hispanics have the same rates of party identification as non-Hispanics of the same race. (That’s not true, of course, but if anything the assumption underestimates the number of Hispanic felons that identify as Democrats.)
In 2006, party affiliation by race in the general population was:
White, non-Hispanic: 44% Repub/Lean Repub, 43% Dem / Lean Dem
Black, non-Hispanic: 11% Repub/Lean Repub, 79% Dem / Lean Dem
Let’s assume that the party identification people in the “Other” racial category is the same as non-Hispanic whites. Again, this will tend to underestimate the number of Democratic violent felons.
Doing the math gives us the following breakdown of violent felons by party affiliation:
White: 26% Repub/Lean Repub, 25% Dem/Lean Dem, 7% Independent
Black: 4% Repub/Lean Repub, 30% Dem/Lean Dem, 5% Independent
Other: 1% Repub/Lean Repub, 1% Dem/Lean Dem, 1% Independent
Total: 31% Repub/Lean Repub, 56% Dem/Lean Dem, 13% Independent
So, even under this very generous (to Democrats) set of assumptions, 56% of violent felons identify as Democrats, or at least lean Democratic. That’s certainly a majority. Is it an “overwhelming” majority? I don’t know. It would depend on how you defined “overwhelming”. But it is 80% larger than the next largest group. I would think that would be enough for Cruz’s statement to earn a “Mostly True” rating, at least.
Weird that PolitiFact and WaPo didn’t attempt to do an analysis like this themselves.
yea, weird alright. really surprising. I’m just baffled.
Weird that the media doesn’t do research and report facts? You’re kidding, right?
Clearly, “Pinocchios” have a new meaning. Inverse of the old.
Or, one might conclude the WP is populated by left wing hack liars.
If Cruz’s statement was ruled false by these fact checkers, they should be able to state what the majority actually are. Are they majority independent, or are they Democrat? They have to be majority something.
Cruz is a lawyer. He doesn’t state something like that without knowing that he’s correct. I love when he gets the media in a frenzy.
But exactly WHICH four pinocchios did Cruz receive? If they were Hillary, Barack, Nancy and Harry, I wish him luck finding enough bull-shit to keep them fed!
Since poor, uneducated, young, and black are four groups with very low voter registration, violent offenders are most likely unaffiliated.