Wednesday, January 9, 2013

Ted Cruz Joins Rand & Amash On The Slippery Slope

By, Chris Rossini
Email | Twitter

It looks like another Ron Paul coattail candidate is taking a ride down the slippery slope.

When Ted Cruz won his Senate seat, this is what The New York Times had to say (my emphasis):
“We did it,” Mr. Cruz told the cheering crowd gathered at a Marriott Hotel in Houston to claim victory. “Millions of Texans, millions of Americans are rising up to reclaim our country, defend liberty and restore the Constitution.”...

[Cruz] turned out to be a natural campaigner, and with his implacable opposition to big government, he won the enthusiastic support of Tea Party activists in Texas and around the country.

...Mr. Cruz relentlessly portrayed his opponent as a creature of the establishment who is too quick to compromise.
I remember my Twitter feed when Cruz won the election. The excitement was as if Ron Paul had just become President.

But, alas....unless you hold your "implacable" ground (like Ron Paul did) your chances of coming through on your campaign rhetoric are teetering around 0%.

WND reports on Ted Cruz now:
In an opinion piece in the Washington Post on Friday, Cruz criticized the Republican approach to finances and called for an “alternative course,” which he defined as “opportunity conservatism.”...
Opportunity Conservatism?...That sounds very fishy, kinda like the term "inclusive capitalism" which is being thrown around by the fascists.

Where's Cruz going with this?

He elaborates:
“We should assess policy with a Rawlsian lens, asking how it affects those least well-off among us. We should champion the 47 percent,” he wrote.

Rawlsian lens?

WND fill us in:
Cruz was referring to John Rawls, the American political philosopher who was one of the 20th century’s most influential theorists on so-called equality.

Rawls laid the foundations for what became the “economic fairness” movement of future progressives and may have informed President Obama’s economic politics...

Rawls’ principals of equality changed over time, with the professor eventually settling on two basic concepts:
  1. Each person has an equal claim to a fully adequate scheme of basic rights and liberties, which scheme is compatible with the same scheme for all; and in this scheme the equal political liberties, and only those liberties, are to be guaranteed their fair value.
  2. Social and economic inequalities are to satisfy two conditions: First, they are to be attached to positions and offices open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity; and second, they are to be to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged members of society.
That was quick Ted.

Say hello to Rand and Amash on your way down.


  1. 'Opportunity conservatism' sure sounds like 'compassionate conservatism,' coined by that cabal family transplanted to Texas, the Bushes.

  2. Ted Cruz has always been an establishment man. He clerked on the Supreme Court for Rehnquist. He was the solicitor general of Texas where he effectively defended the death penalty before the US Supreme Court. He has argued a number of cases before SCOTUS. He only got his first private sector job about 5 years ago to work at a DC based law firm. What made anyone think that Cruz was some sort of hard-line conservative, liberatrian, anti-establishmentarian?

    I could see the anti-establishmentarian creds in Rand at one time, but not really ever in Cruz.

  3. There will never be another Ron Paul. He is one in a million. Maybe the type of person that could try, perhaps, is someone who's made their money already and could afford to ignore special interests and lobbyists (Like Mr. Paul).

    1. That someone? JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO, the first Italian-American president of the United States!

    2. You mean the guy that's on a sympathy trip in America's 51st state right now?

    3. Problem with rich people is that a lot of them are rich because of cronyism.

  4. Cruz also sees a boogieman in Iran as he has made motions that he will vote against Chuck Hagel for this reason.

  5. i dont know IF i would put cruz in the same company as rand or amash.
    it goes Amash is best
    rand is good
    cruz is one step removed from establishment assholes

  6. I don't trust people who want to get into politics.

  7. So far the only one to not completely piss me off of these recent candidates running on Ron Paul's coattails has been Thomas Massie in Kentucky. He introduced a bill to repeal the "safe schools gun free zone" act the other day, and voted against the Iran sanctions. He also has a class 3 machine gun license, which by itself is just pretty cool.

    We will see how it plays out with him, but Amash, Rand, Cruz, etc have all done as expected, so I don't have high hopes.

    1. "Thomas Massie told me in an interview in the forthcoming March Reason that he doesn’t want Ron Paul’s mantle." - Bryan Doherty, Reason Magazine.

      Can you guess what he means by that?

    2. Oh I don't know and I can only speculate but maybe because he wants to be his own man. Why is it that honesty, strong moral character, and obeying your oath of office are only traits we can attribute to one man? It's only because he's the only one with whom we see those traits. Politicians should be a dime a dozen. If they betray their constituents it's up to them to deliver the pink slip. If they SERVE (not usurp) the people then they should be rewarded with re-election period.