Posted on 02/20/2014 4:34:46 AM PST by harpu
Thomas Sowell 'nails it', again...
Parts 1 & 2
Freshman Senator Ted Cruz says many things that need to be said and says them well. Moreover, some of these things are what many, if not most, Americans believe wholeheartedly. Yet we need to remember that the same was true of another freshman Senator, just a relatively few years ago, who parlayed his ability to say things that resonated with the voters into two terms in the White House. Who would disagree that if you want your doctor, you should be able to keep your doctor? Who would disagree with the idea of a more transparent administration in Washington, or a President of the United States being a uniter instead of a divider? • There are many things like this that freshman Senator Barack Obama said that the overwhelming majority of Americans -- whether liberal or conservative -- would agree with. The only problem is that what he has actually done as President has repeatedly turned out to be the direct opposite of what he said as a candidate.
Senator Ted Cruz has not yet reached the point where he can make policy, rather than just make political trouble. But there are already disquieting signs that he is looking out for Ted Cruz -- even if that sets back the causes he claims to be serving.
Those causes are not being served when Senator Cruz undermines the election chances of the only political party that has any chance of undoing the disasters that Barack Obama has already inflicted on the nation -- and forestalling new disasters that are visible on the horizon.
ObamaCare is not just an issue about money or even an issue about something as important as medical care. ObamaCare represents a quantum leap in the power of the federal government over the private lives of individual Americans.
Chief Justice Roberts' decision declaring ObamaCare constitutional essentially repeals the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, which declares that powers not given to the federal government belong to the states "or to the people."
That central support of personal freedom has now been removed. The rest of the structure may not last very long, now that the Obama administration is busy quietly dismantling other bulwarks against the unbridled power of the government in general, and the unbridled power of the presidency in particular.
The Federal Communications Commission, for example, is already floating the idea of placing observers in newspaper editorial offices to "study" how decisions are made there. Nothing in the Constitution grants the FCC this dangerous power, nor is there any legislation authorizing any such activity.
But what the federal government can do is not dependent on what the Constitution authorizes it to do or what Congressional legislation gives them the power to do.
The basic, brutal reality is that the federal government can do whatever it wants to do, if nobody stops them. The Supreme Court's ObamaCare decision shows that we cannot depend on them to protect our freedom. Nor will Congress, as long as the Democrats control the Senate.
The most charitable interpretation of Ted Cruz and his supporters is that they are willing to see the Republican Party weakened in the short run, in hopes that they will be able to take it over in the long run, and set it on a different path as a more purified conservative party. Like many political ideas, this one is not new. It represents a political strategy that was tried long ago -- and failed long ago.
In the German elections of 1932, the Nazi party received 37 percent of the vote. They became part of a democratically elected coalition government, in which Hitler became chancellor. Only step by step did the Nazis dismantle democratic freedoms and turn the country into a complete dictatorship.
The political majority could have united to stop Hitler from becoming a dictator. But they did not unite. They fought each other over their differences. Some figured that they would take over after the Nazis were discredited and defeated.
Many who plotted this clever strategy died in Nazi concentration camps. Unfortunately, so did millions of others.
What such clever strategies overlook is that there can be a point of no return. We may be close to that point of no return, not only with ObamaCare, but also with the larger erosion of personal freedom, of which ObamaCare is just the most visible part.
Senator Ted Cruz is a hero in some Republican circles -- and the opposite among many of his Senate Republican colleagues.
At this crucial juncture in the history of America, internal battles within the only party that can turn things around are the last thing Americans need. Moreover, each side in this political civil war has all too many valid criticisms of the other.
The Republican establishment's criticisms of Senator Cruz are criticisms of his rule-or-ruin strategy, which can destroy whatever chance Republicans have of taking back the Senate in 2014 and taking back the White House in 2016. And, without political power, there is no real hope of changing things in Washington.
Senator Cruz's filibuster last year got the Republicans blamed for shutting down the government -- and his threatened filibuster this year forced several Republican Senators to jeopardize their own reelection prospects by voting to impose cloture, to prevent Cruz from repeating his self-serving grandstand play of last year. The Republicans need every vote they can get in the Senate -- plus additional votes by defeating some Democrats who are running for the Senate this fall. It can be a very close call. Jeopardizing the reelection of current Republican Senators is an act of utter irresponsibility, a high risk with zero benefits to anyone except Ted Cruz -- and the Democrats.
However unjustified Senator Cruz's actions, the very fact that a freshman Senator can so quickly gain so many supporters, with so much enthusiasm, ought to be a loud warning to the Republican establishment that they have long been a huge disappointment to a wide range of Republican voters and supporters.
One of their most maddening qualities has for decades been their can't-be-bothered attitude when it comes to explaining their positions to the American people in language people can understand. A classic example was Speaker of the House John Boehner's performance when he emerged from a meeting at the White House a while back. There, with masses of television news cameras pointed at him, and a bank of microphones crowded together, he simply expressed his disgust at the Obama administration, turned and walked on away.
Here was a golden opportunity to cut through the Obama administration rhetoric and set the record straight on the issues at hand. But apparently Speaker Boehner couldn't be bothered to have a prepared, and previously thought out, statement to present, conveying something more than his disgust.
Unfortunately, Speaker Boehner is just the latest in a long line of Republican "leaders" with the same disregard of the need to explain their position in plain English.
That takes work. But it is work that any number of conservative commentators on radio and television do every day of the week. And they are very successful in getting across arguments that Republican politicians do not bother to try to get across.
Democrats are constantly articulating their talking points. Less than 24 hours elapsed after the Congressional Budget Office reported that ObamaCare was likely to cause many workers to have their hours cut back, before Democrats were all talking about the "freedom" this would give workers to pursue other interests, rather than being "locked-in" to long hours on a full-time job.
It was a slick and dishonest argument, but the point here is that Democrats immediately saw the need for articulation -- and for all of them to use the same words and phrases, so as to establish their argument by sheer repetition.
Nor was this the first time that Democrats coordinated their words and phrases. A few years ago, Senator Chuck Schumer was secretly recorded giving fellow Democrats the word to use whenever describing Republicans -- namely, "extreme."
When George W. Bush first ran for president in 2000, the word among Democrats was that he lacked "gravitas." People who had never used that word in years were suddenly saying "gravitas" 24/7.
The Republican establishment has more than a tactical deficiency, however. They seem to have no principle that they offer or follow with any consistency. Their lack of articulation may be just a reflection of that lack of principle. It is hard to get to the point when you have no point to get to.
Ted Cruz filled a void. But the Republican establishment created the void.
Prof Sowell has gotten too comfortable in the beltway.
No, he's comparing Cruz with Hitler's fragmented opposition.
Nails it? You mean he nails Cruz to the cross.
Sowell has been justly excoriated for this column by his previously loyal fans. He needs to issue an apology.
Cruz is not the problem. It is the constant appeasement of the GOPe that is leading this country down the road to tyranny, not Ted Cruz.
Nails it?
If carrying water for Karl Rove is your idea of nailing it, then he did a bang up job.
""The most charitable interpretation of Ted Cruz and his supporters is that they are willing to see the Republican Party weakened in the short run, in hopes that they will be able to take it over in the long run, and set it on a different path as a more purified conservative party. Like many political ideas, this one is not new. It represents a political strategy that was tried long ago -- and failed long ago."
Cruz is not trying to weaken the Republican Party, he's trying to strengthen it. A weak, RINO, accomendationist GOP is worthless. Sowell also gets this wrong. The GOP, as currently constituted will not change the direction of the county. The slide into socialist statism will continue. Therefore, if you want to make a U-turn towards freedom, the GOP is not a tool, until it is changed.
Sowell's really off track on this one.
"What such clever strategies overlook is that there can be a point of no return. We may be close to that point of no return, not only with ObamaCare, but also with the larger erosion of personal freedom, of which ObamaCare is just the most visible part."
The GOP, as currently constituted will compromise their way pass the point of no return. Without change, the GOP is worse than worthless.
Did you only read the last sentence? The entire article is a not so subtle hit piece on Cruz. Comparing him to the weak opposition to the Nazis and calling him a divider because he sticks to his principles. The last sentence doesn’t fix the rest of his screed.
“just get us elected first, THEN we’ll fix stuff, we promise.”
When facing an existential threat, it’s not about “fixing stuff”, it’s about preventing the house from burning to the ground. I’ve wrote here before that the only rational grounds for not working to elect whatever Republican can WIN is a lack of recognition of the threat we face. If we knew with 100% certainty that Obama were the Anti-Christ, then no one would argue. He isn’t, but he isn’t too far behind. Look around, our very system of government is under an unprecedented attack.
Your right.
Does Professor Sowell have any evidence that the current republicans in congress have any will, passion, or desire to address the actions of this regime?
Is he advocating that we should be satisfied with their weak condemnations and then WAIT, again, for the time when they have control and say they will do something?
The real question is who is at fault Ted Cruz or the GOP establishment? Of course I see it as being the GOP establishment as they have bent over backwards to ignore conservative principles. But the reality may be that both share the blame. One thing is for sure, a house divided will surely fall. If conservatives are not seeing or experiencing the fall, wake up. We are falling and the speed is accelerating.
Plus your talking about divide and conquer? What do you think the GOPe is doing to the Tea Party? Sowell is a good man but completely wrong in this instance.
BUMP!
______________
I see another factor in Sowell’s writing - - - I see an intellectual paralysis seeping into his usually well-reasoned writings.
” - - - Senator Ted Cruz has not yet reached the point where he can make policy, rather than just make political trouble. - - - “
The above quote from this thread’s article has two main topics relative to Senator Cruz, and by extension , ANYONE that tries to change the status quo.
The first topic is vague: “- - - not yet reached the point where he can make policy - - - “, as if there is a timely procedure to be followed.
If Sowell objects to an elected US Senator who stands on Principle instead of following his timely procedure, than what must Sowell think of us, the unelected taxpayers?
We, THE PEOPLE, must be held by Sowell to be incapable of Principled action.
My conclusion is that Sowell is an Elitist, an Elitist dedicated to Conserving the RINO Timely Procedure Method.
___________
The second topic is more specific: “ - - - make political trouble. - - - .”
Here Sowell shows his basic fear: Abolition of the Hallowed RINO Way.
Sowell is a Loyalist to the way things are now.
Although Sowell claims to be upset that Senator Obama lied as a Candidate, (Imagine! A political candidate actually telling even just one lie in order to con us out of our votes! Who knew?), his concern seems to be that any change to the RINO Way would somehow help Obama.
Sowell’s above apparent logic is irrational, but expected from one whose motivation is irrational fear.
Sowell, like most RINOs have placed their RINO Wing of the Republican Party above the Principles of the United States of America.
Sowell is a Political Party first, Country be damned, RINO Loyalist.
Defend yourself Sowell, because I am calling you out!
DONT TREAD ON ME
How else is a motivated individual going to work into a position to execute their agenda?
The charge says more about the person making it.
I understood that but in bringing up Hitler, Sowell draws a parallel to the Hitler Era. When comparing Cruz to Nazi Germany, Sowell goes off the deep end. It shows he has lost his sense of proportion.
Sowell sees a weakened GOP but he fails to see how winning seats in the Senate under the current GOP leadership is an advantage. It is clearly not.
The current GOP leadership are big government lovers and growers same as the democrats. A GOP Senate under McConnell will not repeal Obamacare, will not stop increasing the debt ceiling, will not defend the 2nd and 4th amendments, will not back House impeachment of Obama for lawlessness, will not reverse court appointments made under Reid’s nuclear change of rules by defunding these courts, will not enact substantial and much needed tax reform, because they are complicit and because Obama will veto. A McConnell-Boehner Congress will bide their time and then support Romney, Christie, Jeb Bush or any number of unprincipled mealy mouth false conservatives for 2016 and end up losing to Hillary Clinton. This course is INSANE.
The only sane course is to take back the GOP for the 30 million + strong conservative GOP base, the 25 million + strong conservative leaning independents, the 6 million + strong Perot blue collar GOP conservatives (who sat out in 2012 and handed Romney a defeat), the 5 million + strong Reagan democrats, and the wake effect of a clear winner.
The current GOP leadership will NEVER be winners, NEVER. This is why Sowell needs to see his neurologist.
I usually have a lot of respect for Sowell but I’m not buying this one. I do not believe Ted Cruz is a Barack in waiting. I do think he’s a purist and right now we need a few purists to cleanse the republican party of the quislings who are ruining it.
Those republicans just voted to take the borrowing cap completely off. And they are pushing amnesty.
No, the existential thread comes from liberal republicans first. Once they are gone, then the existential threat is gone.
/johnny
I've met Ted Cruz several times before he rose through the lime light and got himself elected in Texas. AND, I do believe in him but Sowell is foretelling the future of how the media (for the RATs) and GOPe is going to take Cruz apart at the next level beyond the present. Sowell's words, although painful, speak to what Senator Cruz (and his disciples) are going to have to bare.
Trust me, I don't like Sowell's article but because of who he is, and what he has written in the past, I continue to read it over and over looking for what Sowell is really trying to warn conservatives about.
Then how can you say he "nailed it"?
His fear is that the GOPe status quo will become the Democrate status quo, as in a rerun of 2008, after which the Dems ram through yet an Obamacare equivalent for a different sector of the economy.
Slow walking is all we can do. It started with the imposition of a federal income tax a century ago. Reagan's term was a long slow walk to ruin. He abolished no cabinet departments and tacked on amnesty. Clinton increased the speed. Bush II increased it a little further. Obama installed a moving sidewalk. At this rate, we will begin teleporting ourselves to ruin instantaneously.
I am not going to buy that line again
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.