The New York Times has a hit piece aimed at Ted Cruz's dad that basically says that maybe his dad wasn't as big of an anti-Batista rebel as he says he was. Really? I just don't get how this has anything to do with anything. They don't argue that he was anti-Batista, but the degree he was anti-Batista (was he blowing up buildings or just spray painting?). I don't remember them going after Obama's father who had multiple wives, was a drunk and a wife-beater. To me that is much more serious than if someone embellished stories from 60 years ago. Regardless, there is almost no way to prove this through eye witness accounts as the Times tries to do. If you ask people who knew me my senior year in high school, which wasn't 60 years ago, they would say I was a nice kid who never got into trouble and wouldn't remember me getting 2 weeks worth of detention.
I guess though that it's a good sign if this is the best they can come up with for Ted Cruz.