Like Son, Like Father

By Mark Esposito, Guest Blogger

hqdefaultWell, the guy who ushered in the recent government shutdown with a 21 hour filibuster sure gets it honest. Texas senator Ted Cruz, that darling of the Tea Baggers, is no longer the Harvard educated political mystery man who chides the administration at every turn and who rabble rouses what is loosely referred to as the Republican base. Seems he learned the techniques of fact-free demagoguery at daddy’s knee and not amid the ivy in Cambridge (or at Princeton as Elaine M reminds me). That’s right, the Right (as in far) Reverend Rafael Cruz has embarked on his own freewheeling magical mystery tour armed only with the credential that he sired that darling of the Rebel flag wavers. Cashing in on sonny boy’s status among some on the right, Rafael Cruz is now touring the country demanding Obama “go back to Kenya” and turning the Treaty of Tripoli* on its head claiming divine sanction in decreeing that the land of the free and home of the brave is also the exclusive dominion of the Christian. And if that isn’t a big enough stain on his vestments, the representative of the Savior commands all Tea Baggers to shinny on up to the latest polling place to vote Republican.

IRS are you listening?

Speaking to the faithful at a Republican rally in Hood County (no pun intended), Texas, the elder Cruz gave us a new spin on two centuries plus of  previously settled American history. Ignoring the fact that most of the movers and shakers who founded the nation were deists (and not Christians as currently subscribed), Cruz said “the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution were signed on the knees of the framers” and were a “divine revelation from God, yet our president has the gall to tell us that this is not a Christian nation…The United States of America was formed to honor the word of God.”  Amen brother, pass the plate.

Cruz the elder added this little historical revelation to his earlier intelligence blockbuster that President Obama is really an “outright Marxist” who “seeks to destroy all concept of God.” “Back to Kenya” he goes was our man of God’s solution to the crisis of faith facing the nation.

Perhaps sensing that daddy might be more useful in the attic behind a locked door or maybe as a guest at an institution where falling down or colliding with walls is never a worry, Senator Cruz dismissed the rantings. “He is a pastor. He is a man of deep integrity. And he made a joke.”  Sonny didn’t disagree or distance himself from the remarks, however. Hardy Har Har.

Yep, those fire and brimstone guys are a laugh a minute. Lewis Black look out!  Raffy Cruz is stealing your material. Here is the jokester at his best before an audience that seems more than happy to pay the two drink minimum from that Comedy Central of the right

I’m guessing the beverage is Jonestown Kool-ade:

Those Cruz’ are a riot.

For those who think that the Ivy League schooled Sen Ted Cruz may have educated himself out of this lunacy, I suggest that you ask too much genetic engineering from mere college professors.

Source: Huff Post

~Mark Esposito, Guest Blogger

* From the treaty ratified by the Senate and signed by President John Adams:

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen ],—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan  nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

127 thoughts on “Like Son, Like Father”

  1. Jack,
    Thank you for your pettifogging commentary. You are free to continue to be as supercilious as you wish. That is how it works around here. Carry on. :mrgreen:

  2. Wow. A law professor has a blog, and all these commenters on it don’t comprehend the First Amendment.

    If the good professor bothered to moderate and employ civil sub-bloggers, maybe he would also enlighten these folks and explain that the First Amendment has nothing to do with allowing a name-calling contributor to lower the civility standard here. Nor is moderation censorship. The ethical values involved are called fairness and respect. “Teabagger” is a slur, and you know it. Slurs are not conducive to productive discourse. If you can’t make your argument without resorting to slurs, you don’t have sufficient skills to blog in the first place.

    1. “Teabagger” is a slur, and you know it. Slurs are not conducive to productive discourse.”

      Jack Marshall,

      It was the “Tea” people who first used “tea bagger” name themselves, stupidly not researching the term to discover it had a sexual connotations. Actually though given the real roots of the “tea baggers” which is as pawns for the very wealthy one can say that they were unknowingly, or knowingly teabagging the elite who brought them into being. It is a phony movement created by misdirection and chicanery. As I wrote about it here:

      and here:

      Given that it is an illegitimate movement set up to service the needs of some very rich, selfish people I think “tea baggers” is a reasonable appellation because it heaps ridicule on those who deserve it. Perhaps if you are really interested in having productive discourse you might first try to understand the history of that which you defend. Respect is something to be earned by acting with intelligence and integrity and you tea baggers have shown precious little of each. Besides I love this country and in the clumsy stupidity of this movement your are trying to destroy it and thus are subversives.

      1. Mike Spindell wrote: “It [the Tea Party Movement] is a phony movement created by misdirection and chicanery.”

        What is phony is the conspiracy theory claiming that the Tea Party Movement is fake, created by wealthy and exploitative special interests for nefarious reasons. It is foolish to try to claim that the Tobacco industry created the party. I’ve been to Tea Party rallies and never heard tobacco mentioned once. The closest you can come is Tea Party congressman Ron Paul opposing the war on drugs and his libertarian view that people should be free to do what they want. Someone like David Koch is a great libertarian American and philanthropist who long ago embraced the values that resonate with the Tea Party. The fact is that his message has resonated with many Americans, especially the middle class. This ideology is what has created a grassroots movement known as the Tea Party which incidentally has no central organization. It is ideology driven, mostly supported by people like me in the middle class, and it has the support of many organizations and individuals who agree with the ideology.

  3. Infiltrate, divide & conquer the people’s organic movements.

    The neo con supporters, disillusioned by the Idiot/Anti-American piece of Trash GW Bush, Karl Rove & others herded their former supporters, like ticks & fleas off a dead dog over to bury Ron Paul’s Freedom & Liberty movement.

    What will the baastards morph into next? Has Rand Paul sold out or was he always? Ted Cruz, we can see his history starting to show up.

    Are we the people so stupid we ourselves can not organize, even with the internet now? We’ll see!

    It’s the same game as always, we end up being screwed over by wallst bank/insur trash, the Koch bros or the Buffet types & their banking trash.

    That is if we let them continue their scams.

  4. Jack, OS and Mespo are actually too kind. The ‘slur’ was a known one and used initially by the teabaggers as a slur on and an insult to liberals and Democrats. Once it boomeranged the whining started. If ever there was a true political example of “I’m rubber you’re glue, whatever you say bounces back and sticks to you” that is better than this one I don’t know what it is. Here’s an excerpt from an article that might explain it to you in greater depth:

    “Enough with the whining! ‘Teabaggers’ actually introduced the term they now claim is a slur”

    “…. Moreover, as Jay Nordlinger at National Review admits, the term “teabagger” was introduced to the political lexicon by Tea Party movement leaders:

    The first big day for this movement was Tax Day, April 15. And organizers had a gimmick. They asked people to send a tea bag to the Oval Office. One of the exhortations was “Tea Bag the Fools in D.C.” A protester was spotted with a sign saying, “Tea Bag the Liberal Dems Before They Tea Bag You.” So, conservatives started it: started with this terminology. But others ran with it and ran with it.

    Tommy Christopher at Mediaite has it about right:

    The origin of the term is relevant in determining the relative size of the Tea Party’s violin. What wasn’t pointed out to Tapper is the fact that the Tea Partiers not only invented the term, they did so in order to inflict a similar double entendre onto the President, the Democrats, and liberals in general. Hence, it’s a violin so small, you need an electron microscope with a zoom lens to see it.

    Now, they’re trying to re-cast the term as a slur, on a par with the “n-word,” hurtful to all the Tea Party members who are just ordinary moms, dads, sons, and daughters. The latter point has some resonance, but the former is ridiculous in the extreme.

    In emails, protest signs, t-shirts, and online, early Tea Party literature urged protesters to “Tea Bag the White House,” and to “Tea-bag the liberal Dems before they tea-bag you.” continues

    I actually think that the media gurus of the far right knew exactly what they were doing and wanted it to fly under the radar of teabag constituents. I believe that the constituency was being insulted, in a calculated risk, by the founders of the movement (Republican extremists and fat cat donors) because they are not respected and are looked on as simple tools by their own leaders. They got too clever by half and it bit them in the butt. I just wish the teabagers would come to that realization; their masters don’t respect them or work for their benefit, not really.

  5. OS:

    “Yes,” he said wistfully, “If only Elvis were still here crooning things would be far different.”

  6. OS:

    While I was scribbling away you perfectly answered our aristarch far better that I did. Kudos.

  7. Jack Marshall:
    I would think Prof.Turley would be more responsible than to entrust his blog to someone who uses the vulgar,sex-themed epithet “tea-bagger.” Neither civil,clever or fair—it demeans the blog, Turley, and anyone who reads it.

    Spare us the sanctimonious indignation, Jack. Professor Turley entrusts his blog to folks who share his admiration for the First Amendment. I’m not sure what bothers you about a word. Maybe it’s the sexual prudishness or your tender sensibilities on display but the bottom line is that it’s accurate. You know full well the moniker “Tea-bagger” is the foolish name the mass movement originally gave itself until it realized just how silly it was. I think it perfectly depicts the clumsy and oblivious approach its subscribers take in most any political endeavor from their thinly veiled racism to their neo-confederate yearnings. These folks are fooling no one in their anarchistic ways and self-proclaimed ethicists like yourself should at least admit the truth about them — or isn’t the truth always ethical in your paradigm?

  8. Mr Marshall,
    This is a comment driven blog. Professor Turley and the rest of us who hang out here try to defend the First Amendment as best we can. No one is going to tell a commenter they cannot express an opinion. It is the opinions and speech we disagree with most that need the most protection. The only thing that will bring down the banhammer is a personal threat or “outing” someone’s personal information.

    Interesting position for a self-proclaimed ethicist to take. Prior restraint no less. Don’t like something? The best way to deal with offensive speech is more speech. As for the term “teabagger,” it was the so called tea party faction of the Republican Party that first used the term. It stuck. It was only after a certain level of derision was reached that their leadership discovered it had a second meaning. I guess having egg on one’s face is better than having Santorum on it.

    May I suggest that you reflect on the ethics of suggesting censorship on a First Amendment blog. Furthermore, Professor Turley does not “…entrust his blog…” to anyone. He throws the door open to lively discussion. That is what comments are for.

  9. I would think Prof.Turley would be more responsible than to entrust his blog to someone who uses the vulgar,sex-themed epithet “tea-bagger.” Neither civil,clever or fair—it demeans the blog, Turley, and anyone who reads it.

    1. “I would think Prof.Turley would be more responsible than to entrust his blog to someone who uses the vulgar,sex-themed epithet “tea-bagger.” Neither civil,clever or fair—it demeans the blog, Turley, and anyone who reads it.”

      Anyone familiar with the movement’s history know that the appellation was fine until they realized the terms connotation. The description is apt because that is the position they assume as the service their corporatist benefactor to get even more fund.

  10. “Tea Baggers”??? Really? Very professional article here. Must be chocked full of accurate information. (sarcasm off)

    1. “Tea Baggers”??? Really? Very professional article here. Must be chocked full of accurate information.”

      Why should a group bought and paid for by the Koch Bros. be addressed with presupposed dignity?

  11. Great explanation Mike A. Dominionism is a big threat because its adherents are true believers in the nonsense. You cannot convince true believers with facts. They only see the god facts.

Comments are closed.