Tag Archives: Ted Cruz

political news

Perry misses out on GOP main debate event

It was just four years ago, but it seems like a dozen lifetimes.

Rick Perry was the high-flying Texas governor seeking the 2012 Republican presidential nomination. He entered the primary field and rocketed to the top of the heap as an early front runner for the chance to run against President Barack Obama.

Then came the “oops” moment when he couldn’t name the third federal agency he’d eliminate if he was elected president.

Perry dropped out.

Four years later, Perry is no longer Texas governor, but he boned up on the issues. He got plenty of rest. His bad back is healed. He’s running for the GOP nomination once again.

Then he gets punched in the gut. Fox News, which is playing host to the first televised GOP debate this Thursday, relegated TEA Party favorite Rick Perry to what’s been called the “kids’ table.” He’ll be one of seven candidates participating in an earlier debate, but he didn’t make the cut for the main event.

The top 10 GOP hopefuls are there, including fellow Texan, U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/08/04/perry-doesnt-make-cut-first-gop-presidential-debat/

Fox said only the top candidates in the polls would be on the prime-time event. CNN, which is sponsoring the second debate, laid down the same ground rules.

This is not the way to run a presidential debate series. I’m sure that’s what Perry and his team believe.

I’m still pulling for him to make the grade in subsequent debates.

All he has to do — in this media and political climate — is say something so outrageous that he gets everyone talking about him.

national news, political news

Cornyn is correct; Cruz is, um, incorrect

John Cornyn knows how the U.S. Senate functions.

He’s been serving there for some time now as a Republican from Texas.

His whipper-snapper colleague, fellow Republican Ted Cruz, doesn’t know how it works quite so well.

Accordingly, Cornyn took Cruz to task for the attack he leveled at Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. Cruz did so in a speech on the Senate floor in which he called McConnell a liar.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/07/26/cruz-and-cornyn-engage-senate-floor/

McConnell had allowed a vote on the Export-Import Bank, which Cruz and some other Senate conservatives want to eliminate. McConnell, R-Ky., allegedly had promised that a vote wouldn’t occur. Cruz took him to task for it and then decided to say out loud what he could have said in private, which is that McConnell can’t be trusted to keep his word.

Enter the senior senator from Texas, Cornyn.

“I have listened to the comments of my colleague, the junior senator from Texas, both last week and this week, and I would have to say that he is mistaken,” Cornyn said, adding that McConnell did not deceive any senator with his fancy procedural footwork. According to the Texas Tribune: “If the majority leader had somehow misrepresented to 54 senators what the facts are with regards to the Ex-Im Bank, I would suspect that you would find other voices joining that of the junior senator, but I hear no one else making such a similar accusation.”

“There was no misrepresentation made by the majority leader on the Ex-Im Bank,” Cornyn added.

I continue to believe that Cruz — who’s also running for president — hit the floor of the Senate when he took office aiming to make a name for himself. He’s done so quite nicely and along the way incurred the wrath of his GOP colleagues, not to mention the Democrats with whom he must work.

Remember, during former Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel’s confirmation hearing, when Cruz questioned out loud whether Hagel — a former Republican senator from Nebraska and a decorated Vietnam War combatant — was taking money under the table from North Korea? That line of attack drew a sharp rebuke from another noted Vietnam War combatant, Republican Sen. John McCain, who scolded the freshman for impugning Hagel’s patriotism and integrity.

Now the senator who wants to be president has been lectured by his fellow Texan about the rules of the Senate.

You just don’t call another senator — let alone the majority leader — a liar.

national news, political news

Cruz launches missile toward majority leader

1 Comment

Let’s see, Ted Cruz has been a U.S. senator for a little more than two years.

He’s a rookie, still serving his first term; he’s not even halfway through his first term, in fact.

So what does the Texas Republican do? Rather than adhere to the Senate’s rather strict rules of decorum regarding besmirching fellow senators’ reputation — let alone that of the majority leader — he calls the Man of the Senate a liar. In public. In a floor speech.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ted-cruz-calls-mitch-mcconnell-a-liar-on-senate-floor/ar-AAdslYE

Oh, boy. Now he’s done it.

Cruz is running for the Republican presidential nomination. But he took some time this week to accuse Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of going back on his word regarding legislating involving the Export-Import Bank, which Cruz wants to see abolished.

“We know now that when the majority leader looks us in the eyes and makes an explicit commitment, that he is willing to say things that he knows are false,” Cruz, said. “That has consequences for how this body operates.”

What’s the issue? McConnell inserted some amendments into a transportation funding bill that included reauthorization of the Ex-Im Bank. It angered Cruz, who said McConnell had vowed that wouldn’t happen. But it did. Cruz then accused the majority leader of running the place the same way that Democrat Harry Reid did when he was majority leader.

The Senate rules can be a bit tedious. But they’re pretty clear about a few things. One of them is how senators should talk about fellow senators in public.

Rule XIX says this: “No Senator in debate shall, directly or indirectly, by any form of words impute to another Senator or to other Senators any conduct or motive unworthy or unbecoming a Senator.”

Is that clear enough? It is to me. Does the Cruz Missile know about that rule? Well, he surely does now.

This is the kind of thing that a lot of veteran senators have implied that they dislike about many of the new folks who take office in the “world’s greatest deliberative body.” They don’t respect the rules of the institution.

And yet, Cruz continues to flout them — to a rousing ovation of those who like the young man’s brashness.

He mentioned his understanding of “how this body operates.” Memo to Ted: It’s a pretty hidebound place. My guess is that there’ll be some hell to pay for the manner in which he called down the Senate’s main man.

national news, political news

Most entertaining campaign in history is on tap

So help me, I didn’t think it was possible for any campaign to be more entertaining than the 2012 campaign for the Republican Party’s presidential nomination.

Thank you, Donald Trump, for smashing my expectations for the 2016 campaign.

The Donald has managed to do what I thought was impossible: He’s managed to make the likes of Michele Bachmann and Herman Cain look and sound almost reasonable, rational and mainstream.

He’s shot off his mouth about Mexican immigrants who come here illegally, stereotyping them as murderers, rapists, drug dealers — along with “some good people.” He’s called Mitt Romney a “loser” because he got beat in a campaign that he should have won; he’s challenged whether Ted Cruz of Texas is a legitimate candidate for the presidency, given that he was born in Canada.

And now he’s said John McCain isn’t really a war hero, even though he was held prisoner by the North Vietnamese during the Vietnam War, while saying in the next breath that he likes “those who weren’t captured.”

Other Republicans have condemned Trump’s buffoonery. So have Democratic candidates.

It’s been an amazing campaign to date and we’re still months away from those Iowa caucuses and the lead-off New Hampshire primary.

Trump has managed to suck all the air out of every room he enters. The other candidates? They can’t be heard above all the ruckus created by Trump’s amazing ability to call attention to himself.

Four years ago, Bachmann and Cain — along with Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry and even Rick Santorum — tried to raise a stink about this and/or that. They all were “frontrunners” for a time. Then came Romney, with all of his money and political connections, to win the GOP nomination.

Now we have Trump, who reportedly has much more wealth than Romney — and who brags about his portfolio incessantly — making a lot of racket.

But here’s the deal. He won’t be nominated. He’s going out with his guns blazing (figuratively, of course). Someone else will be nominated. If I had to bet on the next GOP nominee, I’d put my money today on either former Florida Gov. John Ellis (Jeb) Bush and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker. But they’re so boring.

Trump has turned this campaign into a circus.

Way to go, Donald. You’ve made the preceding cast of GOP contenders/pretenders look like statespersons.

political news

This is when Donald Trump’s candidacy died

1 Comment

Mark it down.

The weekend of July 18-19 is when Donald Trump’s presidential candidacy came to a screeching halt.

That’s the good news.

The bad news — which in reality is good news — is that (a) he doesn’t realize it, (b) he’ll refuse to realize it and (c) he’ll stay the course for as long as he can.

Trump decided to self-immolate his campaign by declaring to a conservative audience that he preferred U.S. military veterans “who weren’t captured.” That was his inimitable way of denigrating the heroic service of another Republican presidential candidate, 2008 GOP nominee John McCain.

Sen. McCain, of course, was captured by North Vietnam when his plane was shot down in 1967. He suffered grievous injuries, which weren’t treated properly his captors.

He spent more than five years in captivity. He came out in 1973, along with hundreds of other POWs, after the United States agreed to a negotiated end to the Vietnam War.

Trump, though, didn’t serve in the military. He got those deferments, allowing the war to swallow up millions of other young Americans.

He didn’t have a chance in hell of being nominated by the Republican Party, let alone getting elected as the 45th president of the United States.

This latest bit of verbal excess just seals the deal.

If his chance of nominated was next to nil before, it’s now really at — or below — that level today.

But, heck, don’t drop out, Donald. Some of your GOP foes think you’ve disgraced yourself enough. Get out, man, they’re imploring him.

Stay in, Donald. Another fellow GOP candidate, Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, thinks The Donald deserves to be heard. I do, too.

However, he’s going to find it harder and harder to get his message heard above the laughter — and the boos.

political news

What? I’m sticking up for Ted Cruz?

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) gestures as the key speaker at the annual Reagan Republican Dinner in Des Moines, Iowa, Friday, October 25, 2013. (David Peterson/MCT via Getty Images)

I’m feeling oddly out of sorts these days.

Why? Well, I’m feeling a bit of sympathy for a patently unsympathetic politician: U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas.

Readers of this blog know that I do not intend to vote for Sen. Cruz for president of the United States. But two things have happened in recent weeks that make me want to stand with him.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/ted-cruz-feud-new-york-times-119981.html?hp=t4_r

He’s now feuding with the New York Times over the paper’s refusal to include his new memoir, “A Time for Truth,” on its list of best-selling books. It’s selling like crazy, being scarfed up from book shelves by supporters who want to read the junior senator’s words of wisdom and how he intends to rescue the United States of America.

Cruz and his allies say the NYT snub is pure partisanship. The liberal publication won’t give this conservative pol the time of day, let alone list his memoir on its vaunted best-seller list.

Cruz’s feud is going win him more friends on the right. I won’t join his campaign, but it does seem a bit churlish on the Times’s part to exclude him from the best-seller list.

The second aspect involves The Donald, who’s bringing up the “birther” controversy all over again. Sen. Cruz is the target this time. Donald Trump said that because Cruz was born in Canada, he’s not qualified to serve as president. “Natural-born citizen,” in Trump’s mind, means he a candidate must be born in the U.S.; that’s how he interprets the Constitution.

Trump is wrong.

Cruz’s mother is an American citizen. That grants him U.S. citizenship by birth. Cruz could have been born on Mars — which is where I sometimes think is Trump’s place of birth — and he still would be qualified to run for and serve as president in the highly unlikely event he is elected next year.

Trump tried to pull the birther stunt on Barack Obama, even though the president actually was born in Hawaii. He’s at it once again with Cruz.

Hey, I’m just trying to be fair here. I might dislike Cruz’s philosophy and don’t want him elected president of the United States. However, I know mistreatment when I see it. Cruz is getting a bum deal from the New York Times.

As for the birther crap that comes from Donald Trump’s pie hole, well … enough said on that.

political news

The Donald presents so many avenues of disgust

1 Comment

DonladTrumpHair

There’s so much to detest about Donald Trump.

I almost don’t where to begin.

His anti-immigrant rant? As the grandson of immigrants — yes, legal immigrants — I was appalled at his description of Mexicans as “rapists, drug dealers and murders,” and “oh, yes, some good ones.”

How about his birther stance? He still thinks President Obama was born in a foreign country, despite having an American mother, which qualifies him for the office he’s held for nearly two full terms. Now he’s going after Ted Cruz, who actually was born in another country, but his mother is an American as well.

I’m beginning to settle on one aspect of Trump I find most annoying. It’s his insistence that he’s “really rich.”

He brags about it. He boasts of all the money he has. He seeks to parlay that good fortune into what he’d do as president, which is create jobs. “I’m a great job creator,” he says.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/dump-on-trump-119932.html?hp=lc1_4

How do you suppose his boasting about wealth is going to play to the very people he wants to win over if he is to have a prayer of being nominated by the Republican Party, let alone elected president of the United States? My guess is that it won’t play well — at all.

He’s going to brag on TV about his wealth. Imagine being a single parent, struggling to make ends meet. You’ve got several children who need food, clothing and shelter. You can barely provide any of that. And then you’re going to hear someone who wants to become your president keep bragging about his material wealth, about all those tall buildings that have his name on them, all his bling, glitter.

How does that make you feel?

I’m a middle-class guy. I’ve had a nice life. My wife and I don’t need too much to consider ourselves successful.

All that boasting makes me crazy!

He’s going after his fellow GOP candidates. They’re returning fire aggressively, as are the Democratic candidates.

I will await with great anticipation the first Republican presidential joint appearance to see how The Donald handles the blistering he’s going to get.

From now on, though, shut up with the “I’m really rich” crap, OK, Donald?

legal news, national news, political news

Change the federal judicial system? Please, no

What is it with some American politicians?

A court ruling or two doesn’t go their way and they want to toss aside one of the basic tenets of our federal government? They want to elect federal judges, make them stand for “retention” if they make a decision that upsets some of us?

That’s the view of a leading so-called “conservative” U.S. senator who’s also running for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016. Take it away, Ted Cruz of Texas.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/ted-cruz-chris-matthews-supreme-court-119891.html

Cruz jousted this week with MSBNC’s Chris Matthews over the setup of the federal judiciary. Cruz doesn’t like the two recent Supreme Court rulings that (a) upheld the Affordable Care Act and (b) legalized gay marriage in the United States.

The junior senator from Texas now thinks Supreme Court justices should stand for retention to enable voters a chance to decide if they want them to keep their jobs.

Matthews, not surprisingly, went semi-ballistic — which is part of his shtick. He brought up the Bush v. Gore decision that settled the 2000 presidential election. The Supreme Court voted 5-4 to stop the Florida recount. Texas Gov. George W. Bush was leading by 537 votes at that moment over Vice President Al Gore. Gov. Bush was awarded Florida’s electoral votes, which were enough to elect him president of the United States by a single electoral vote.

The five Republican-appointed justices’ overruled the four dissents cast by the Democratic-appointed justices. Politics? Gosh, do you think?

Conservatives hailed that decision. And why not? It was all done according to precisely the manner allowed by the U.S. Constitution. Some of us might not have liked the outcome, but that’s how it goes. The justices made the call.

Cruz didn’t object then, Matthews reminded him.

The nation’s founders set up a system in which the federal judiciary is intended to be free of political pressure. The president appoints judges and Supreme Court justices, who then are subject to approval by the Senate. They get lifetime jobs and, therefore, are able to rule according to how they interpret the Constitution.

This idea that we should now subject justices to the political will of the people is simply not in keeping with what the founders intended when they wrote the Constitution.

Political conservatives, such as Sen. Cruz, keep harping on “original intent.” Well, the founders’ “original intent” was to separate the judicial branch of government from the political tug-of-war that exists in the legislative and executive branches.

Cruz said he is “reluctant to call for elections,” and said it “makes him sad.” He added that he has made that call because “a majority of the justices are not honoring their judicial oaths.”

Yes they are, senator.

Let’s leave the judicial system alone.

political news

Gov. Christie wants a new job … and stay on the job

Chris-Christie

Chris Christie is running for the Republican Party presidential nomination.

He’s already got a day job. He’s the governor of New Jersey. Can he run for one office and continue to hold his current office?

Sure he can. We allow it in Texas and it’s worked out all right for us.

But some of Christie’s fellow New Jersey pols want him to quit his governor’s job if he’s going to run for president.

To which I say: C’mon. Give me a break. The man can multi-task.

The Republican presidential field is chock full of full-time public servants who aspire for the White House. They include: Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, and U.S. Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky. Soon we’ll have Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and Ohio Gov. John Kasich joining the crowd. I know I’m missing someone.

The point is that Christie is able to perform both tasks. Yes, it is possible he won’t be as attentive to state duties as he would be were he not running for president. I’ve even needled Cruz for his many absences from Senate votes while he’s out raising money for his presidential campaign.

We have the “Lyndon Johnson Rule” in Texas. It enabled then-Sen. Johnson to run for vice president in 1960. He was elected VP and had to give up his Senate job. Twenty-eight years later, U.S. Sen. Lloyd Bentsen ran for vice president while still serving in the Senate; he didn’t win the VP job, but stayed on in the Senate until he quit in 1993 to become Treasury secretary.

So, what’s the deal with New Jersey? Gov. Christie notes that with social media — smart phones, I-phones, Skype, whatever — he can stay in touch with any contingency in New Jersey while he’s traipsing through Iowa cornfields, or New Hampshire forests.

Let the man run and keep serving.

legal news, political news, State news

Can’t we get a do-over?

Paul Burka apparently came out of retirement — perhaps just briefly — to write this scathing critique for TexasMonthly.com of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton.

http://www.texasmonthly.com/burka-blog/ken-paxton-problem#.VZaoXwXb5tI.twitter

To sum up Burka’s analysis: Paxton’s public service career has been totally without accomplishment, yet he won the race for AG this past year because the state’s current TEA party golden boy, U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, endorsed him.

Now the AG is facing a possible criminal indictment in his hometown of McKinney. A special prosecutor is going to take a complaint of securities fraud to a Collin County grand jury. If the attorney general is indicted, what happens then?

Burka noted that a Texas Monthly colleague asked Gov. Greg Abbott that question, and the government couldn’t/wouldn’t answer.

This appears to be one of those times when Texas voters should ask for a do-over from the most recent election.

I know it’s not possible, but I can wish for it anyway … can’t I?