Dewhurst denies the obvious in debate
Patricia Hart:
Dewhurst has alienated voters with his unfair and misleading attacks on Cruz. It could very well cost him the election that he came into as the favorite.
I voted early today and was told the turnout has been heavy so far. I voted for Ted Cruz.
Toward the end of Monday night's debate between the Republican candidates in the runoff for the U.S. Senate, David Dewhurst gestured patronizingly to his opponent, Ted Cruz, as if to pat the shorter man on the head."You know perfectly well, Ted, that I have total respect for you, your patriotism," Dewhurst said reassuringly.It was too much for Cruz: "Then why does your mailer say different?" he shot back. After all, he was holding in his hand a Dewhurst campaign mail message that his own father had received, with the black-and-white accusation that "Ted Cruz worked against our country."I'm guessing that I am not the only Texas reporter who empathized with Cruz's frustration. Throughout his tenure as lieutenant governor, Dewhurst has displayed a maddening tendency to deny inconvenient facts. Those who challenge him with evidence are dismissed with a wave of the hand. And that's the end of that.
...It reminds me of the old Richard Pryor line when caught with a lover by his wife, he denied what was happening and told his wife, "Are you going to believe me or your lying eyes?" Perhaps Dewhurst did not read his own mailer, but that does not excuse him for misrepresenting what the document actually said.
Dewhurst has alienated voters with his unfair and misleading attacks on Cruz. It could very well cost him the election that he came into as the favorite.
I voted early today and was told the turnout has been heavy so far. I voted for Ted Cruz.
About 20 years ago, I was in the seminary studying to be a priest. Our moral theology professors had a brother who was was the lead defense attorney for Jeffrey Dahmer. When asked about the morality of taking the case, our prof gave the an answer that can be summarized as follows — In our system, everyone has rights. It is a moral imperative for lawyers to take the cases even of the most despicable people and strive to defend those rights, even if they do not personally agree with their client — and that means even if their client is a cannibal who had gay sex with his victims (including underage boys) before killing them eating them, and freezing the leftovers. So long as a lawyer do not break the rules — knowingly presenting false evidence and the like — then they are abiding by the highest of moral standards, not the lowest. After all, if such clients cannot find representation then we cannot have justice done in our courts.
ReplyDeleteThen I listen to David Dewhurst, whose argument is quite the opposite — that representing a client imputes all the client imputes all the moral guilt of the client to his legal advocate. Dewhurst therefore seeks to present Ted Cruz as unpatriotic because one of his clients was a firm owned by the Chinese government — I’d argue that position is unAmerican.