Ted Cruz Would Like To Make Phil Robertson A U.N. Ambassador, Praises Him For Speaking With “Joy”
What’s more horrifying than the thought of President Ted Cruz? It’s got to be U.N. Ambassador Phil Robertson.
While speaking at a campaign event in South Carolina on Friday, Cruz said that, if elected president, he would seriously consider sending the Duck Dynasty patriarch and antigay misogynist to the United Nations to represent the U.S.
“He says the things you’re not supposed to say.”
|
“Just for a thought experiment, imagine for a second: Phil Robertson, Ambassador to the United Nations,” Cruz said Friday at a rally in Myrtle Beach.”How much would you pay to see the Russian ambassador’s face when Phil says ‘What is wrong with you people?’”
The statement was met with uproarious laughter and thunderous applause.
“You know there’s a reason he terrifies the mainstream media,” Cruz continued. “He says the things you’re not supposed to say.”
Cruz then praised Robertson for speaking “with a joy, not with an anger, not with a hatred, with a joy.” Qualities he believes are important for any diplomat to possess.
In the past, Robertson has said gay marriage is “wicked” and “evil,” shared his fantasies of watching an Atheist woman get raped and an Atheist man get castrated, called AIDS “God’s punishment” to the gays for their “immorality,” insisted queers are on a secret mission to “break into women’s bathrooms,” and said gay sex is “just not logical” seeing as how women have buttholes, too.
This article was originally published on Queerty.
Photo: Getty Images
Just for grins, I checked one of the references. To my consternation and surprise…it was false. In fact, Robertson was making the same point, but more crudely, that Bertrand Russell made. Russell, an atheist, said it made him uncomfortable to think the only reason to judge something was wrong was that he didn’t like it. IOW, without a superior being–a divinity–or some higher force, only one’s personal views applied to right or wrong and Russell found that problematic. Robertson’s point was that, no matter how awful something was, if there’s no superior force–God–then we’re left with nothing by which to… Read more »
It’s not surprising to me. By my observation liberals are just as likely as conservatives to shut off their capacity for intellectual thought when presented with someone they disagree with. The demonization of people they disagree with is a common practice. The favourite strategy used these days to slap the label of “hate speech” on anything one disagrees with. It’s so effective Phil Robertson could say he likes duck soup tomorrow and people would just see it as more evidence of his despicable, hate filled heart.