Image 01 Image 03

Ted Cruz Targets Beto O’Rourke’s Stance on Israel

Ted Cruz Targets Beto O’Rourke’s Stance on Israel

O’Rourke’s track record on Israel is less than stellar

Sen. Ted Cruz’s Senate re-election campaign is running ads swatting at his Democrat opponent, Rep. Beto O’Rourke, for his stance on Israel.

According to Facebook, Cruz’s campaign began running the ads Tuesday.

O’Rourke’s track record on Israel is less than stellar.

In 2015, he refused to attend Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s address to a Joint Session of Congress. In the same year, he wrote an op-ed defending the Iran Deal.

From the Washington Free Beacon:

O’Rourke in 2015 refused to attend an address to a Joint Session of Congress by Netanyahu and has touted the effectiveness of the nuclear deal over Israel’s objections. O’Rourke said that the negotiations with Iran would prevent the country from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

In a 2015 op-ed piece for the El Paso Times, O’Rourke defended the Obama administration’s talks to try to end Iran’s nuclear program.

“In the president’s State of the Union address last month, he outlined the case for allowing the unique and unlikely coalition of the United States, China, Russia, France, Great Britain and Germany (known as the P5+1) to pursue a negotiated resolution to the threat Iran poses as it gets closer to developing the capability to produce nuclear weapons,” O’Rourke wrote.

Monday at an event in San Antonio, Cruz criticized O’Rourke for protesting Netanyahu and supporting the nuclear deal.

“Congressmen O’Rourke was so offended that he boycotted and refused to attend Prime Minister Netanyahu speech,” Cruz said. “There’s a problem. It’s an approach that you saw in the Obama Administration. It’s an approach that Congressman O’Rourke embraces, which is the way to deal with dictators is weakness and appeasement and giving billions of dollars to the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism.”

O’Rourke was one of only eight Congressman who voted against funding for Israel’s Iron Dome Missile Defense system. He explained that he recognizes Hamas as a terrorist organization and supports Israel, but felt the bill was rushed.

According to the Cruz campaign, O’Rourke also opposed “a resolution in the U.S. House that objected to a United Nations measure, UN Security Council Resolution 2334, which undermined the United States’ support for Israel.”

The UN resolution namely contributed to the Boycott, Divest, Sanction (BDS) movement to facilitate the boycott of Israel’s economy and ignored Israel’s sovereignty of its own borders.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Texas is fighting back against Beto.

Texas Republican Party Endorses Marijuana Decriminalization

    This is one of the issues Beto has an advantage with. (There are not many). I predicted Demms would use this issue 7 years ago. I was a little premature.

      Fen in reply to MSimon. | July 17, 2018 at 7:16 pm

      Good read. And I shall tread more carefully now that I’m aware I am in the presence of greatness 😉

      During Operation Restore Hope in Baderra Somalia we encountered a similar issue. The grain we had escorted around to various villages was just beginning to bear fruit, the skeletal figures witnessed on prior runs were filling out. Famine was being beat back.

      “Kat” was regional drug of choice. Somali males usually worked sunrise to noon and spent the rest of the day and night high on Kat. Their “work” usually consisted of herding women around who were laden down like pack mules and performed most the manual labor while their male overlords supervised. Shiftless and lazy.

      One day, at the makeshift dirt airport we had made, a commercial plan landed full of Kat. Our commanding officer seized the plane and had the entire delivery torched. Riots ensued and he was called on the carpet: “the return of the drug trade to Baderra was a good sign, proved the region was recovering back to normal. No more deliveries were to be interveptrd’. The last bit was publicly released and the riots subsided.

      It never seemed to occur to the higher ups that Kat was why the country had become a shithole to begin with.

      I did some research on the prohibition era and was amazed at how closely the complaints of the wives dovetailed with what I saw in Somalia.

      I lean libertarian, so I believe Liberty must include the right to make stupid decisions. The local lottos (gambling vice) are a tax on people who are bad at math, disproportionately affecting the poor. I see them every day, barely able to feed their kids but always budgeting for a Daily Pick, like addicts. But fine – liberty to make bad choices and all.

      I think legalization of marijuana will take us down a similar path. It’s one of those “not hurting anyone” vices who’s evils take generations to be recognized. Shiftless, lazy, demotivated. Wait and see.

        Fen in reply to Fen. | July 17, 2018 at 7:31 pm

        Edit, Google insists it’s spelled Khat not Kat.

        And the wive’s complaints during prohibition were about how alcoholism was destroying the family unit and work ethic. And seemingly bizarre claims their men were taking money needed for food to disappear into the saloons for days at a time. Just like our modern crackhouses.

          Milhouse in reply to Fen. | July 18, 2018 at 12:17 am

          Every Scrabble™ player knows it as qat. It’s often pronounced “jat”, but I don’t think that’s a valid English spelling.

          GeorgeCrosley in reply to Fen. | July 18, 2018 at 6:39 am

          Wives’ complaints, plural possessive has the apostrophe after the “s.”

        There is only one question remaining. Who controls distribution.

        Drug Prohibition is socialism for criminals. Says Milton Friedman.

        It is amazing how many “conservatives” love socialism. And for criminals no less.

        Why is our government supporting gangsters. Again. 1920 to 1933 wasn’t enough?

        Drug Prohibition is the demented idea that you can fix the Drug problem by adding a Crime problem

Well, beto, you opposed Iron Dome, which has proven to be quite effective against NUMEROUS attacks from the jihadists. You refused to even LISTEN to PM Netanyahu, and supported the jihadist-loving obama in his blatant attempt to undermine PM Netanyahu’s election. You supported the idiotic iran “deal,” while the Iranian leadership shouted, “death to America!”

As Vinnie Barbarino said many times, “up your nose with a rubber hose,” you phony.

    Rome44 in reply to bear. | July 18, 2018 at 9:11 am

    Iron dome cost the American taxpayer $100 million. WHY ? Israel is not any part of America as a taxpayer I feel a sense of outrage over this. Our Gov. has been giving taxpayer money away that will not be repaid. Still Netanyahu comes before our congress to criticize our president and congressmen give him the nod. But republicans hate Obama so much so they were willing to allow this murdering wretch on hallowed ground.
    It was under Obama’s Admin. the funds for Iron Dome were approved. I too was very upset over Netanyahu’s visit especially with republican legislators. Hurricanes devastated LA. and Puerto Rico, some of those Americans have still not recovered, republicans cut services for our poor. The debt clock in NYC is over 21 trillion but congress still comes up with $3 billion very year for the last 40+ yrs. + an untold amount in military spending for Israel. Just what do we owe the state of Israel why do we treat them better than our own citizens, this is outrageous. We don’t need Israel and we are doing ourselves a disservice, Israel kills a lot of Palestinians and with a propaganda campaign to label all Arabs as terrorists they justify their human rights violations and no one blinks an eye. They have managed to turn Gaza into a concentration camp and bomb it at will. That is the reason Arabs shout “death to America” because we are the enablers that look away as Israel commits it’s atrocities. As for the Iran deal Obama did release Iran’s frozen assets and Iran would curb it’s nuclear ambitions. Trumps comes in destroys the deal before the plan was implemented now Iran is free to proceed developing their nuclear capabilities. That is the work of this “stable genius” as he likes to call himself. O’Rourke is correct we need too cut Israel lose they are engaged in a perpetual war with the Arabs and all efforts by our country are futile and we are pissing money into the abyss with nothing to show for it.

      puhiawa in reply to Rome44. | July 18, 2018 at 8:31 pm

      It was not a give away in the ordinary sense. It was a purchase of all developed technologies, and word is that in fact the Israelis did indeed turn over all tech developed either directly or indirectly including models and actual equipment.

(((Boogs))) | July 17, 2018 at 6:30 pm

Beto is a crypto identitarian socialist whose slim hope is to disguise himself, on the chance that in six years, Texas will have even more people like him.

For normal Texans who vote for this dummy in dummy’s clothing, be prepared to elect the Souter of the Senate. Once he’s in, kiss your rights good bye.

He should target Beto’s stance on going to an orthodontist.

inspectorudy | July 17, 2018 at 6:52 pm

He has a soulmate in NYC. She is as nutty as he is but his chance of getting elected is almost nil.

Let’s not forget that Beta is also an avid gun-grabber and open borders enthusiast.

His name is Robert O’Rourke and while there are many Hispanic people who have Irish family names, he isn’t one of them.

    Paul in reply to Edward. | July 17, 2018 at 11:10 pm

    When he was young he was known as Master Beto

    Milhouse in reply to Edward. | July 18, 2018 at 12:26 am

    He’s not pretending to be Hispanic. He comes by “Beto” at least as honestly as Cruz comes by “Ted”, and if you have no problem with the latter then you have no right to object to the former.

    Really, you might as well accuse John Kerry of pretending to be Irish; yes, he may owe his senate career to many Massachusetts voters assuming it, but he did not encourage them. It wasn’t his decision to change the family name from Cohen, and O’Rourke became Beto when he was too young to be aware of such ethnic calculations, but Cruz adopted his nickname as a teenager for the express purpose of appearing more Anglo.

      puhiawa in reply to Milhouse. | July 18, 2018 at 1:59 am

      If you consider a 13 year old adopting a name that is one of the nic names of Edward,his middle name, you might be right. Or you might be wrong. Texas was more than familiar with Spanish names and Cruz had little need to adopt one other than a derivative of his given name. His nic at the time was the family nic of “Felito”, or an infantile designation. And an inappropriate name for a boy entering puberty. His decision to assume a more adult name as he entered high school was a family decision, advanced by his parents and likely had little to do with your implication he sought advantage.

        Milhouse in reply to puhiawa. | July 18, 2018 at 8:24 am

        Ted is a standard nickname for Edward, just as Beto is for Robert. The difference is only that Cruz consciously chose to adopt Ted because it made him seem Anglo, while O’Rourke did not choose to adopt Beto because it made him seem Hispanic.

        And Cruz’s choice was not “a family decision, advanced by his parents”. His father was upset at it, precisely because he correctly saw it as young Ted’s feeling ashamed of being perceived by his peers as Hispanic and wishing to fit in better (just as when O’Rourke got to Yale he temporarily became “Rob”). O’Rourke’s nickname, however, probably was “a family decision, advanced by his parents”, since he was too young to have much chance of pushing such a thing through on his own.

          puhiawa in reply to Milhouse. | July 19, 2018 at 2:06 am

          Please. ‘Beto’ is not a standard nic for Robert. It is a nic for Roberto. I do not believe this fellow is named ‘Roberto’. Further, it is not even a favored nic for Roberto, it is in the cellar, as such things go.
          Your insistence that you are always right, even when evidently wrong is a bit obnoxious.

      Edward in reply to Milhouse. | July 18, 2018 at 8:15 am

      Don’t tell me what rights I do, or don’t, have. I get to vote against that POS and unless you are a registered voter in Texas, you have no skin in the game.

      You never fail to take things far beyond that which is reasonable, making me think that perhaps your icon is a self-selected disclosure of self. It truly seems that you thrive on “down votes”, so I’ll try and stop giving you credit for the times when you are correct as it might irritate you. Seeking negative attention denotes problems beyond addressing in comments on LI.

      And I don’t call the Senator “Ted”, I have addressed him as “Cruz” or “Senator Cruz” in the five times I have voted for him so far (Senate primary, primary run-off, senate general, Presidential primary and Senate Primary). I hope one day to vote for him in a Presidential General Election, but I’ll settle for a SCOTUS seat, preferably replacing Roberts as Chief Justice.

        Milhouse in reply to Edward. | July 18, 2018 at 8:36 am

        Why shouldn’t I tell you what rights you have or don’t? You tell me and everyone else what rights we have. You just did right now, when you ordered me not to tell you that.

        The fact is that whether you like it or not, if you do not object to Cruz going by Ted then you have no right to object to O’Rourke going by Beto. It is outright dishonest and shameful. Beto is O’Rourke’s genuine name, just as Ted is Cruz’s. In neither case is it the formal name that appears on their legal papers, but in both cases it is their actual name by which they have been known to all for decades, which legally makes it their genuine name. And of the two of them, Cruz consciously chose it for its ethnic implications, while O’Rourke is unlikely to have done so, considering how young he was when he became known by it. (I don’t know whether he chose it himself, but if he did so it could not possibly have been with the sort of conscious calculation that a significantly older Cruz had.)

        Milhouse in reply to Edward. | July 18, 2018 at 8:39 am

        How you vote and what you think of the two men’s prospects is completely irrelevant. Did I tell you how to vote?! Did I imply in any way that O’Rourke is a good candidate, or that Cruz is a bad one?! No, I didn’t, but 99% of your comment is designed to give the implication that I have something against Cruz, or urged you not to vote for him. That was dishonest of you, since you know very well how I would vote in this race were I eligible to do so.

Cruz is blessed with an opponent who is at least 8 innings short of a complete game, maybe 8-2/3.