The Senators spoke to a group including Larry Nuckols and I, who were in DC representing the National Pawnbrokers Association.
Be very proud of our Texas Senators Cruz and Cornyn. They are fighting for rights — the right to speak, the right to read books, the right to keep and bear arms.
Watch the video! “Do they need a bazooka?” Senator Feinstein could just as well ask, “Do they need those books? Do they need all those words?” I say, Ma’am, rights are not to be limited except to save life in the case of immediate threat.
The Senate Judiciary Committee approved a ban on the sale and manufacture of more than 150 types of semi-automatic weapons with military-style features Thursday in a party-line vote.
The 10-8 vote came after a heated exchange between Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who Feinstein scolded for giving her a “lecture” on the Constitution.
It’s the fourth piece of gun control legislation to make it out of committee and perhaps the one with the longest odds of becoming law, given opposition from Republicans to a new ban on the weapons.
Committee Democrats first beat back four amendments offered by Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) that would have carved out exceptions to the ban. Cornyn asked for exceptions for victims of domestic violence, military veterans and those living on Southwest border states that he said were affected by Mexican gang violence.
Feinstein, the sponsor of the underlying bill, called the amendments “an effort to nip it and tuck it and create exceptions.”
Cornyn said it would Feinstein’s bill would leave citizens with “peashooters” and outgunned by criminals.
via Panel approves assault weapons ban; Cruz, Feinstein get heated – The Hill’s Video.
A friend asked us what to do about the latest “American Community Survey,” received from the US Census Bureau. There is a possibility of a $100 to $5000 fine for not filling out the questionnaire, although I can’t find a record of anyone ever being prosecuted.
Seriously, I don’t care what sort of security or “confidentiality” the Bureau promises, do you want to tell any stranger what time you leave your house to go to work? And isn’t it bad enough that we already have to tell the IRS exactly how much your income was last year and exactly where it came from?
If, like me, you think these are too many questions, questions that are too personal and invasive, take the time to call your Congressman and our Texas Senators.
Representative Lamar Smith – Congressional District 21 Washington Office (202)225-4236 San Antonio Office (210)821-5024
Senator John Cornyn Washington Office (202)224-2934 San Antonio Office (210)224-7485 Austin Office (512)469-6034
Senator Ted Cruz Washington Office (202)224-5922 San Antonio Office (210)340-2885 Austin Office (512)916-5834
Espousing unconstrained majoritarianism, (Theodore Roosevelt) disdained Madison’s belief that the ultimate danger is wherever ultimate power resides, which in a democracy is with the majority.
George Will. Read more: http://www.timesunion.com/opinion/article/Will-Forgotten-heroes-of-1912-3758656.php#ixzz22Z0xb3FN (link to bio by me, BBN)
Have we in the Republican Party really come so low that we only look at charisma and ethnicity?
Slate.com is a long time online and very left leaning news site. Today, the article by David Wiegle, “The Inescapable Logic of Nominating Ted Cruz for Senate” proves that they don’t think very highly of Republicans, especially Conservative Republicans.
…Only toward the end of the editorial do we get some sound logic for Cruz.
“[A]s the Houston-raised son of a Cuban immigrant, he is proof positive that the American dream is very much alive and well — if in desperate need of defenders within the political system. Mr. Cruz can provide that defense in a way that Mr. Dewhurst simply is not equipped to do.”
Ah, there we go. Cruz is 42 and Hispanic. Dewhurst is 66 and white.
So there you have it: This man believes that a “white man” in his 60′s can’t represent the American Dream, no matter his humble beginnings and his own evidence that the American Dream of success is possible.
I don’t believe the bulk of Conservatives have reached that point, yet. The trouble is that a lot of our Party members are young and/or just got out of their recliners to join in our electoral process. They are vulnerable to the loudest and most brash of our “leaders” who deceive them about the process and possibilities of legislative elective office.
The fact is that inertia is built into the system of Government, both at the State (especially) at the Federal level. Most of the time that’s a good thing!
David Dewhurst knows the ins and outs of government, he can balance budgets, convince men and women to form coalitions and get things done. Most of all, he knows how to move that inertia we call Government to success as in ‘The Texas Miracle.” (The year-round Senate in DC will probably seem too much, too long to him.)
Please consider voting for David Dewhurst for US Senator from the great State of Texas!
jroger777: So
if the #TeaParty fails to show up and the retirees get real excited about voting for Dewhurst then @tedcruz won’t be our next #TXSen (Twitter comment on a poll showing that people over 65 are more likely to vote for David Dewhurst)
By now, we’ve all heard that there’s a runoff race on for Texas’ U.S. Senator Republican candidate. Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst has received the endorsement of Governor Rick Perry, 18 of 19 Republican State Senators, and the bulk of State-Wide office holders. Former Texas Solicitor General Ted Cruz is backed by many leaders of the “Tea Party,” especially those most interested in controlling illegal immigration. South Carolina’s Senator Jim DeMint recruited former Texas Solicitor Ted Cruz to run last year and has been campaigning with him this past weekend. We’ve seen the fanfare with Sarah Palin, Glen Beck, and Rick Santorum. A few know that Norman Adams, who masterminded the “Texas Solution” guest worker Plank in the Republican Party of Texas 2012 Platform, endorsed Cruz in the Primary.
But who are the grassroots supporters and what do they say in support of and against the candidates? One way to get an idea is to follow the race, the candidates and their “fans” on the social networking sites. The most popular are Facebook and Twitter. A cadre of supporters of both candidates post on Twitter, gathering together under the “hashtag” (see my “Primer” below) #TxSen, That’s why I’ve been putting the # in the title of most of my posts for the last month or so.
I posted about the news coverage and fallout from one conversation on Twitter back in early June, when Katrina Pierson, founder of Garland, Texas Tea Party and Grassroots Texans Network, and volunteer for Cruz, called former Marine Captain Dan Moran “a deformed disabled vet.”
That was about the time I got wrapped up in Facebook and Twitter – especially Twitter – - okay, addicted to Twitter - political social networking. I also started saving a few of the more notable Tweets sent by the Cruz crowd. (Sometimes derogatorily called “Cruzbots.” I wouldn’t do that. I call them the #CruzClan.)
Unfortunately, the conversation above is not that unusual, except that it got some press. The @DavidHDewhurst fans (voters) tend to be polite and rule followers. In contrast, the @tedcruz supporters follow a different drummer. I’ve argued politics on the Internet for nearly 20 years and have never seen the spite and name calling that comes from the #CruzClan, even when talking to atheists, pro-aborts and RonPaulers. That last statement reads like an incredible exaggeration, even to me, but just watch #TxSen or my “feed” after this blog is published.
The biggest surprise came in the form of questions indicating that some of the #CruzClan might not agree with their candidate, who says he’s pro-life and believes in laws protecting marriage as “one man and one woman,” on “social issues,” such as abortion and marriage. Here are a few examples:
I had a several-day discussion about the Constitution and abortion with this Cruz supporter:
Even with a limit of 140 characters, the discussion followed the same old pattern that all such conversations do.
Wonder how popular Cruz will be with his fans in a couple of years, if he’s elected, but proves more or less Conservative – and effective in the designed-to-be-immovable-Senate than they expect him to be?
If you are reading this on your computer or phone, you have all the skills necessary to be a social networker on Twitter. Join in!
If you want to see – or “follow” - the real time conversation, you have to sign up for Twitter at Twitter.com. (Hint: Pick the shortest name you can, so you don’t eat up the 140 character limit!) If you are interested in a topic or person, enter the word or name in the search box at the top. You can save the search to return to it over and over. You may have to pick the most appropriate result, or find your specific interest as a “hashtag” – subjects that appear frequently enough to form a subheading or group of Tweets – in the list of Tweets given. “Top Conservatives on Twitter” is a good place to start, #tcot. Or #TxSen/#txsen, “Texas Senate” will allow you to follow that subject through the election.
You’ll also see a list of people who tweet about your subject. People are contacted and referred to by @TheirName. I’m @bnuckols.
I received this in my e-mail, this morning. As a mother, a grandmother and long time advocate against the abuse of children and for smaller government, and fewer laws, with appropriate punishment for REAL crimes, I couldn’t agree more!
To the voters of Texas,
Police and Law enforcement put their lives on the line to protect the public from those who would hurt our most vulnerable, our children.
Ted Cruz chose to defend a man, Robert Mericle, who took part in a judicial kickback scheme the resulted in 4000 children being incarcerated for profit. This scheme was reprehensible and exploited these children so that Cruz’s client and the corrupt judges he bribed could make millions in profits.
Now Ted Cruz’s campaign is sending out a mailer to Texans claiming that this felon and child exploiter helped prosecutors. Ted Cruz should be ashamed of himself for making this claim, when he knows his client is a convicted felon who hurt kids.
Ted Cruz tried to get his client Mericle out of paying his victims, the children, the damages Cruz’s client owed them. And now Cruz is trying to paint this villain as a hero.
To follow the chain of Cruz’s logic–every cornered criminal who cooperates with prosecutors to save their skin would be treated as a hero.
Ted Cruz needs to answer whether he personally approved this mailer his campaign sent out. Does Mr. Cruz really believe his client Robert Mericle is someone who should be applauded for his role in this scandal?
Ted Cruz’s inability to admit that his client was a convicted felon who exploited children raises serious questions about whether he has the judgment and character to represent Texas in any way.
Sincerely,
Charley Wilkison
Combined Law Enforcement Associations of Texas (CLEAT)
At Monday night’s debate in Houston between Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst and Ted Cruz, Republicans in the runoff for the US Senate race(Twitter #TxSen), I met a couple who said they were still “undecided” about who to vote for. They asked why I was supporting Lt. Governor David Dewhurst over Ted Cruz. They were surprised that I believed his record is so strong and hadn’t even heard about Ted Cruz’ speculation to reporters that Governor Perry wanted to get Lt. Governor Dewhurst elected because he wanted Dewhurst out of Austin. The fact that these two went to the effort to attend a debate on a Monday night made me believe that they are actually informed voters, but that if these two people don’t know the issues, perhaps many others don’t either.
I’ve covered some of this in other posts on WingRight, including my last Post, “An Open Letter to Texas Voters,” and you can read about the support David Dewhurst received from 18 of the 19 Republicans in the 31 member Texas Senate, here. Here are more specific reasons why I support pro-life, pro-marriage, small government candidate Lt. Governor David Dewhurst for US Senator from Texas.
As I’m sure you know, Texas has a quirky system, where our Lieutenant Governor is more powerful than our Governor in many respects. If you want to know what Lt. Governor Dewhurst will do in the US Senate, look at just some of the laws he’s helped pass over the last 10 yrs:
Governor Perry, with the help of Lt. Gov. Dewhurst and the Texas Senate, refused to accept those “Stimulus funds” for education and unemployment insurance that would have forced us to change our laws in 2011. Yes, we used some stimulus funds that didn’t require us to change our laws, but, as our former Senator, Phil Gramm said,
“(I)f the Congress had a vote on whether to build a cheese factory on the Moon, I would oppose it based on what I know now, and I cannot imagine the circumstance under which I would support it. But on the other hand, if Congress in its lack of wisdom decided to start a cheese factory on the Moon, I would want a Texas firm to do the engineering, I would want a Texas construction firm to do the construction, I would want the milk to come from Texas cows, and I would want the celestial distribution center to be in Dallas, Texas, or College Station, Texas, or somewhere else in my State.”
These are just the highlights of a career that began the same year that 11 Democrat Senators left Austin on a supporter’s plane in order to hide out in Albuquerque New Mexico for a full month in order to deny the Senate a Quorum and avoid losing the votes on Congressional redistricting.
You might have read that Dewhurst increased taxes, with the misleading statistic that our revenues went up over the last 10 years. Increased revenues do not necessarily mean increased taxes! They also go up with the growth of the economy. Texas’ population went up over 20% and our State added more jobs than all the other States combined in the same time period. These were good jobs, and they went to legal residents who come into our State at the rate of 1000 people a WEEK! The fact is that even the Club for Growth, who is now backing Mr. Cruz, stated last year that Texas’ spending has actually gone down over the last 10 years, when adjusted for population and inflation.
How did we spend that money? Mr Cruz knows exactly how: he was the lawyer who worked out a deal in Federal Court when he was Solicitor General that bound the State to increase spending on Medicaid. He uses this spending from his agreement against the Lt. governor.
You might also read that Dewhurst supported a “payroll tax,” or even an “income tax.” These accusations are based on words in a press release and an editorial against the Lt Governor, from 2006. These weren’t the words used in the Bill that is bandied about, and that Bill never became law. In the law that was eventually passed, there are three ways to calculate our State business franchise tax. One of those is a tax based on employee pay, minus benefits. But there are two other ways, and the business chooses the best way for them. More telling is that our Attorney General won the case proving that the tax is not an income tax, last November. Cruz knew that his claim was wrong as from the beginning of his ads and web campaign against Dewhurst.
You can find my other posts on the US Senate race here.
My last video post might have seemed too cryptic or as though I left out a few details. In addition, you might have heard or read that the case was a “private civil suit.”
Mericle plead to a lesser offense ( not a real fan of that, either) of tax fraud carried out to hide his participation in the Cash for Kids crime. Two judges have been convicted ofsending juveniles to jail for frivolous charges. Sometimes for years.
Mericle was also sued in civil court for his part in the scheme. He lost, but didn’t think he should actually have to give up his profits – out of his own pockets, for pity’s sake – to the victims! So, he then then tried to sue his insurance company, Traveler’s, to pay for the settlement! Not surprisingly, Traveler’s balked at covering Mericle for his “damages,” incurred during the commission of a crime. And he lost, again.
The “Civil appeal” was a repeat effort to force Traveler’s insurance to pay the civil suit judgement against Mericle. After all if at first you lose in court, sue, sue again!
Mericle and Cruz lost that go ’round.
More victims, if Cruz had had his way, would have been everyone with insurance through Travelers, whose premiums would have gone up.
Texas Senate candidate Lt Governor David Dewhurst’s New web ad shocks, with Ted Cruz’ own recorded words in defense of his client, the developer who helped exploit children and the juvenile justice system in Pennsylvania courts.
Here’s where to find the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ce2L-OhuNiE&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Ted Cruz has campaigned on his record as an attorney and “fighting” for Conservative values. He has made the cases he argued the basis for his qualification to be Texas’ next US Senator. We should look at all of his record.
When he worked for the State of Texas as Solicitor General, he argued the cases he was assigned by Attorney General Greg Abbott. When he went into private practice as an appellant lawyer, what sort of cases did he choose?
From the Dallas Morning News:
“Ted Cruz chose to represent a convicted felon who masterminded a bribery scheme to fill the beds of his private prison to enrich himself by unlawfully jailing and terrorizing thousands of children,” said Dewhurst spokesman Matt Hirsch. “Ted Cruz should be ashamed.”
Hirsch said Cruz’s acceptance of the work “brings into question [his] integrity and judgment. … Is there anyone Ted Cruz won’t represent if the price is right?”
Dewhurst already has centered much of his campaign’s attack advertising on Cruz’s representation of a trademark-infringing Chinese tire maker.
In briefs for Mericle, Cruz argued that nearly $2.2 million in “finder’s fees” that the businessman and a partner paid to the two judges were an effort to get the judges to close a publicly run facility in Wilkes-Barre, Pa., and let him build two new ones.
The partner, attorney and developer Robert Powell, managed the private facilities and was the one whose acts swayed the judges to harm children, Cruz said.
Cruz argued that the only crime Mericle was guilty of — failing to report tax evasion — hurt only the Internal Revenue Service, not the children imprisoned, meaning that Travelers should have to pay under Mericle’s insurance policy.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court tossed about 4,000 convictions issued by one of the judges between 2003 and 2008, saying he violated the constitutional rights of the juveniles, including the right to legal counsel and the right to intelligently enter a plea.
In one case a 16-year-old girl with no prior record was held in juvenile detention for six months after gesturing with her middle finger at a police officer called during a custody dispute involving her parents and sister, according to The Christian Science Monitor.
Both judges have been sentenced to long prison terms. Mericle, who has testified for prosecutors in other corruption cases, is awaiting sentencing but is expected to serve less than three years.
Did you see how diplomatically the Texas Senate Republican Caucus worded their letter, without mentioning Cruz’ name? They just corrected the distortions he’s spread for a year about their actions in the Senate.
In contrast, Cruz wrote an “Open Letter” addressed directly to Lt. Governor Dewhurst, calling him a liar — which means he’s calling all the other Senators liars, too.
Not only that, but – even though the letter from the Senators was signed by 18 respected Republican Texas Senators – Cruz went to the trouble of opening the “Properties” folder for the letter (composed in Microsoft Word 97-2003) and publishing a screen shot, accusing the man whose name appears of writing the letter.That may seem a logical assumption to anyone who is already looking for conspiracies and goes to the trouble to open the Property folder in the first place.
. However, it seems that no one called Mr. Grimes. Mr. Grimes says he didn’t write the letter. He said he used the computer at one time, but doesn’t work for that firm anymore:
I had absolutely nothing to with this letter,” Grimes told Roll Call. “And if the Cruz folks had called me beforehand and asked me, I would have told them, but they didn’t.”
Other sources say that the letterhead was designed by a staffer at a consulting firm called The Eppstein Group. Grimes, who is no longer at the firm, once used that computer and the sources say that is how his name surfaced in the computer software.
Cruz didn’t need to go to all the trouble of working up a conspiracy between the City of Austin and the Lieutenant Governor. (Is he at all familiar with Austin politics? The City of Austin is farther to the left than the cities surrounding his almae matres, Princeton and Harvard). Erick Erickson of RedState.org has already figured out what happened and wrote that “arm twisting” was going on in the Senate. They, along with everyone else in Austin, are supposedly afraid that they’ll never get another Bill passed if they don’t back up the Lt. Governor.
So, let’s get this straight:18/19 Republican Senators – an easy majority in the 31 member Senate – didn’t mean what they signed their names to — because they are collectively – all 18 of them – afraid of David Dewhurst? They can’t gang up on Dewhurst, but can on Cruz? Without mentioning his name in the letter?
Even Jane Nelson, one of the most poised and competent Legislators in the Nation? Even Florence Shapiro and Steve Ogden who aren’t running again? We’re supposed to believe that Chris Harris, Dan Patrick and John Carona are afraid of anyone? Do they all lie out of fear?
Well, there’s one Senator that Cruz believes. The unnamed “senior Senator,” who was anonymously quoted by that reliable source, the Texas Monthly – and now, Ted Cruz, the Baptist preacher’s son. Now we all know that it’s a badge of Conservatism to be named among their Worst List. We also know that unattributed quotes from the TM are worth less than the paper this blog isn’t printed on.
Nevertheless after listing his distortions once again in the “Open Letter” to David Dewhurst, Cruz gratuitously went farther:
“. . . if the Texas Senators had to vote on whether David Dewhurst should be considered one of the Ten Worst Legislators in Texas, the vote “would be 31 to nothing.”” (link included in original)
So much for diplomacy. Or even Christian decency.
Which Senator lies to support David Dewhurst but can be trusted to tell the Texas Monthly anything truthful?
One thing is certain. He has no idea how much he’s going to need these people, whether or not he wins on July 31. If there’s “fear,” perhaps it should be on Cruz’ part: that they’ll hang him out to dry on Augut 1 and in January if he does get to DC.
The Houston Area Village Republican Women are saying what a lot of us have been saying for a while:
“We don’t want to hear from them about their opponents,” Ingersoll said. “We want to hear about themselves …We don’t want to hear anymore why we shouldn’t vote for their opponents. We want to hear how they’re the best ones to represent us in Texas.”
via Village Republican Women forum features Cruz, Dewhurst – Your Houston News: News.
Tonight, the Texas Senate Republican Caucus, 18 of the 19 Republicans in the Senate, took the unprecedented step of writing a letter to refute some of the stories you’ve been hearing about Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst.
The letter pretty much speaks for itself and is an example of the consequences when Republicans forget who the opposition is and begin attacking the record of one of our own.
Texas State Senate Republican Caucus Sen. Robert Nichols, Chair Open Letter to Texans July 8, 2012Setting the Record Straight:
An Open Letter to Texans Dear Fellow Texans: In the U.S. Senate primary race, statements have been made that are untrue regarding the records of Lt. Governor David Dewhurst, the Republican Texas Senators, as well as Governor Rick Perry. This letter is to set the record straight.
The Anti-Sanctuary Cities Bill
Many members of the Texas Senate and the Lt. Governor felt strongly about outlawing the practice of sanctuary cities for illegal immigrants. During the Regular Session, the Anti-Sanctuary Cities Bill was blocked by the Democrats through the use of a parliamentary procedure. The Lt. Governor asked Governor Perry to call a special session, removed the parliamentary block, and the bill then passed the Senate along party lines early in Special Session on June 14th. The bill was sent to the House early in the Special Session where it failed to move and died. We are confident that the Senate will again pass the bill in the upcoming 2013 Legislative Session.
Controlling & Cutting State Spending
Governor Perry, Lt. Governor Dewhurst and the Republican-led Texas Legislature have always been committed to balancing the state budget without raising taxes, and have repeatedly done so since 2003. Most recently, the state budget was balanced in 2011 by cutting $14 billion in overall spending. Budget watchdog groups have repeatedly praised Texas for being a low tax, low spending state and specifically for keeping state spending lower than the rate of population and inflation growth since 2003. To characterize the Texas record as one of reckless spending is simply untrue.
The TSA Anti-Groping Bill
The Senate Republicans and the Lt. Governor wanted to protect travelers from unwanted and unlawful intrusion, so Lt. Governor Dewhurst requested that Governor Perry add the TSA Anti-Groping Bill to the agenda for the Special Session. The Texas Senate passed S.B. 29, the TSA Anti-Groping Bill, with enough time remaining in the Special Session for the House to take up and pass the bill. The bill was a tougher version than that of the House, but ultimately died as a result of opposition on the House side.
State Income Tax, Wage Tax and Payroll Tax
We the undersigned, and the Lt. Governor, have always opposed a state income tax for Texas, as well as a wage or payroll tax. Newspaper fact checks clearly confirm this.
Texans deserve to know the truth in this important election.
Signed by Senators John Nichols (Chairman), John Corona, Bob Duell, Robert Duncan, Kevin Eltife, Craig Estes, Troy Fraser, Chris Harris, Glen Heger, Joan Huffman, Mike Jackson, Jane Nelson, Steve Ogden, Dan Patrick, Kel Seliger, Florence Shapiro, Jeff Wentworth, and Tommy Williams.
Not signing was Senator Brian Birdwell – I’m sure we’ll read the story on that, soon.
An advocate for Ted Cruz has commented on the June 30th WingRight review of the confrontation between Texas State Senator Dan Patrick and Ted Cruz, here.
My reply:
“Cruz is a champion of the advice from the Sun Tsu’s Art of War: “Call your enemy what you are.” That’s not my favorite lesson from the book, and it’s not an upright, ethical philosophy for life except in life and death struggles.
“Cruz shouldn’t have gone on the offensive right off the bat. He sure shouldn’t have said flat out that Senator Patrick, a respected and respectable radio news commentator, has been fed questions from the Dewhurst campaign. He impugned Patrick’s honor and his journalism. He then claimed to have “seen” the Senator repeatedly acting as a “surrogate” for Governor Dewhurst.
“The occasions in which Patrick said negative things against Dewhurst were said in anger, between May 24 and June 2 – all from a single episode on May 24. As he said, he is not angry at Dewhurst anymore. He’s probably regretting words he said in anger in the presence of a reporter. While “all’s fair in love and war,” Cruz should remember Patrick’s advice: he needs to learn to ask advice and that, come August, we will all have to learn to work together as Republicans.
“Everyone may listen to the interview/confrontation for themselves, so we’ll let them decide whether or not Cruz “handled himself well. I obviously think he showed us a side of himself that he’s been trying to conceal – the angry, conspiracy-weaving side that will not accept any criticism.
“Senator Dan Patrick has said that he won’t endorse in this race, although he could be forgiven after the accusations by Cruz in this interview. Why do you accuse him of not meaning what he says?”
“Every time I go on the radio, you ask the questions that the Dewhurst campaign want you to ask.”
This, from the guy who got caught red-handed trying to influence debate questions by a fellow candidate in order to team up against Lt. Governor Dewhurst!
Listen to the radio confrontation between Ted Cruz and Texas Senator Dan Patrick on Patrick’s “The Bell and Patrick” radio show, for yourself:
Mr. Cruz argued with Patrick for 30 minutes on the Baker and Patrick Radio Show that airs on KSEV radio in the Houston area at 4 PM, week days. He unfortunately began with the flat statement that Senator Patrick had endorsed Dewhurst in the Senate race. You would think that a man would know that sort of thing, right? As Patrick said, if he’d done so, it would be public knowledge.
Cruz actually claimed that all Republicans and Democrats play a “game” with legislation they don’t want to pass, by entering into a conspiracy to pass a bill in one chamber in Session, and then in the other the next, but cheat to keep them from passing to law.
Senator Patrick spent quite a bit of time explaining the complicated workings of the Texas Senate, especially the work on the Sanctuary Cities Bills (SB 29 and HB 41) during last Summer’s Special Session of the 82nd Texas Legislature.
The two discussed the “Rose Bush Rule,” which requires 21 members of the Senate to vote in favor of bringing any issue up for a vote. Patrick reminded Cruz that the Senate members, not the Lieutenant Governor, vote on the rules of the Senate. Patrick also explained that the Lieutenant Governor has the authority to suspend that rule in a Special Session, but not in a Regular Session.
Cruz asked Patrick whether Patrick would have been able to pass Sanctuary Cities if he had been Lt. Governor. Patrick said, “No,” because “the only thing you can do is pass it out of the Senate.” Patrick said that Dewhurst had warned the Democrats in the Regular session that if they blocked the bill in the Regular Session, he would suspend the 21 vote rule in the Special Session. Patrick reported that Dewhurst did suspend the rule as he said, in order to pass the Sanctuary Cities Bill with over two weeks left in the SS and spoke of the frustration of having the Bill sit in Committee in the House.
He also told Cruz that all 19 Republican Senators had met on the issue and decided to pass SB29 as a separate Bill, rather than to try to tack HB41 as an amendment to the School Finance Bill. They were concerned that the school funding bill would be held up, preventing schools from knowing their budget until August.
Cruz ignored Patrick’s admonition to campaign on his own merits and plans, returning again and again to statements about what people “intend,” “know,” or ” believe.” Cruz accused Patrick and others of working against him, assigning underhanded motives to them, such as how much “better” for Patrick it will be to get Dewhurst out of Austin.
The creepiest bit of Cruz’ argument was this line, delivered with a strategic lowering of the voice at the last: “You have been acting as a surrogate for Lt. Gov. Dewhurst and I have seen you do it.”
I’ve described Cruz’ reactions to me when I was still a supporter asking him to cut back on the negative campaigning. At our County forum in February and then in New Braunfels. At the New Braunfels meet, he couldn’t walk away so he engaged me in debate. He kept coming at me for twenty minutes although others had questions.
Here’s a news report about another episode of over-reacting to questioning by another woman in Fort Worth at the RPT convention.
Cruz is not a “fighter” in any good sense of the word. Rather than a champion or defender, he’s a bully and a brawler. When faced with even mild opposition, he goes out of his way to prove the other person absolutely wrong. As Patrick said, he can “make numbers lie,” and has no problem with stretching the truth if it has what he calls “a basis in fact.” He sprinkles his speeches with dramatic descriptions of imagined conspiracies such as the ones above, and the notion that “Austin” Republicans had all agreed to make sure that “no one with a ‘z’ in his name is elected to State-wide office.”
For other summaries of the episode, each with their own twist, see the Houston Chronicle and Texas Tribune. But listen to the actual recording if you want the real story.
In a two page letter in a November, 2008 mailer from The National Law Journal, Ted Cruz (then a new partner in a global law firm) wrote a letter endorsing John McCain for President.
Many of us supported Senator McCain in 2008. Like Cruz, we may have commended McCain for his military service, for voting on principle, and for his efforts to fight the war on terror. Some of us may have cast our vote for Sarah Palin or against Obama.
However, Mr. Cruz specifically praises John McCain for his “moderation,” for being a ”centrist,” and for his avoidance of “divisive” issues: abortion, marriage, tort reform, free trade, and union “bosses.”
National Law Journal: Why I Choose McCain (By Ted Cruz)
Obama, to his credit, speaks often of bipartisanship. But there are virtually no issues of consequence where he has dared to part with the far left of his party. Trial lawyers, union organizers, protectionists, and advocates for gay rights and abortion rights make up some of the core constituencies of the modern Democratic party. And, predictably, Obama has pledged to oppose tort reform; to abolish secret elections for union organization (which would render workers vulnerable to being strong-armed into voting for union bosses); to oppose free trade with allies like Colombia and to “renegotiate” NAFTA; to oppose a federal Marriage Amendment; and to sign legislation repealing restrictions on “partial-birth” abortion, parental notification, and government funding of abortion.
McCain’s record, in contrast, reflects far greater moderation. Rather than advocate on these divisive issues, McCain has focused his passion on fighting and winning the global war on terror.
I’ll admit that the only reference I can give is a link posted in a “hit piece” on the David Dewhurst for Texas Senator campaign website. Nevertheless, the letter is reproduced in full and says what it says. He doesn’t pull punches when it comes to Islamic terrorism or the importance of naming Supreme Court justices. Why does he focus his praise, his whole endorsement, on what many of us on the right would consider Mr. McCain’s weaknesses?
I was reading an amateur pop-psychology post on the differences between Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst and would-be-Senator-for-life, Ted Cruz. After dispensing with the body language voodoo, the author inserted the obligatory quotes that I’ve heard Cruz repeat for four years.
Or should I say, “all my life?”
What always gets me is Cruz’ “my whole life” line, as in, “I’ve been fighting for the Constitution my whole life.”
- As though law school and law clerk are equivalent to service in the Air Force and CIA;
- As though debate club is the same as World class cutting horse competition in your 60′s; or
- As though becoming one of 1200 partners in what he calls a “global law firm” while running for first one, and then another office is the same as scratching out a $200+ Million successful energy business and then running for and winning first one, and then another, State-wide elective office.
Of course, there’s also Cruz’ claim that Dewhurst is a “career politician,” although the Lieutenant Governor didn’t run for office until he was 10 yrs older than Cruz is now and after accomplishing all of the above. Does Cruz truly believe that running for two different offices for the last 4 years makes him any less a “career politician” than actual service in two different elected office for 13 yrs?
Vote @DavidHDewhurst 4 #TxSen for life of service, not spin.
Has anyone considered that the real reason David Dewhurst speaks so quietly is that he was not only an officer in the Air Force, but a case officer for the CIA in South America and knows the consequences of angry words and challenges?
And yet, he knows what the problem is and has solutions that will work. From the Dewhurst for Texas website:
“The Supreme Court’s partial ruling on the Arizona immigration law only spotlights the abject failure of the federal government to secure the border. Today’s decision reinforces the need for conservatives in Congress to once and for all quit talking and secure the border. The first step is triple the size of the Border Patrol and authorize them to fight back. Congress must make states and local communities partners in securing the border, allowing them the tools necessary to enforce the laws of our Nation. Any legislation that provides a pathway to citizenship for illegal aliens must be dead on arrival, and we must look at all the tools in our arsenal to address the influx of illegal immigrants, the threat of narco-terrorists and drug cartels.”
In stark contrast, Ted Cruz, who has never served a day in the military or elected office, used his announcement to make false charges against Lt. Governor Dewhurst.
“This makes clear that sanctuary cities exist only because of state and local decision-making; it highlights that we have sanctuary cities in Texas only because Lt. Gov. Dewhurst killed the bill that would have ended sanctuary cities. Had the Texas Legislature passed that bill—had Lt. Governor Dewhurst not run from the fight and prevented its passage—then today’s decision would have upheld that Texas law as well.”
While the Supreme Court’s ruling does not prove anything about Sanctuary Cities. And, in fact, the Sanctuary Cities Bill passed in the Senate in the Special Session on June 15, giving the House 2 weeks to address it.
This press release was not the time to attack a fellow Republican. He doesn’t seem to understand that on August 1, we’ll all be Republicans working to vote out Obama.
But then, that’s been the Cruz’ campaign’s problem all along and why I switched from Cruz to Dewhurst.
Description of a fighter and doer, vs. a talker, from the Dewhurt for Texas website:
In his early 20s, his son, David Dewhurst, entered the United States Air Force. In his early 20s, Ted Cruz was the 1992 North American Debate Champion while matriculating at Ivy League universities.
In his mid-20s, David Dewhurst entered the Central Intelligence Agency, serving abroad during the Cold War. In his mid-20s, Ted Cruz began his career as a lawyer and bureaucrat in Washington, where he has spent nearly half of his career.
In his 30s, David Dewhurst founded Falcon Seaboard from scratch, a company that created hundreds of American jobs. Ted Cruz spent the overwhelming majority of his 30s as a bureaucratic staffer or running for public office. One of the most significant “fights” that Ted Cruz lost as a result of his incompetence was Kennedy v. Louisiana, which gutted Jessica’s Law. When his ineptitude was discovered by the New York Times, his first instinct was to find excuses so he did not “look silly.”
In his 40s, David Dewhurst continued growing his successful business located in Houston, Texas. In his 40s, Ted Cruz began running full time for political office and recruiting reprehensible yet highly lucrative clients across the globe, and enabling a foreign company to destroy jobs here in America.
Not until his 50′s, after a very successful business career that David Dewhurst entered public service. After years in Washington, Ted Cruz refused to pledge to limit himself to two terms in the U.S. Senate, and seeks to spend the rest of his life as an elected official in Washington, D.C.
Ted Cruz may claim to be a fighter, but David Dewhurst knows that freedoms aren’t defended in the court rooms. They are defended by the men and women serving our country in the Armed Forces.
During the Friday night televised debate between Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst and Ted Cruz, Cruz asked the Lieutenant Governor whether he had ever “supported a payroll tax.” The Lt. Governor answered “No.” This “When did you stop beating your wife” tactic has been the subject of much crowing from Cruz supporters who accuse the LG of lying.
In fact, the LG was telling the truth and the whole issue is baseless spin, resulting from cherry picking two words out of hundreds in a Press Release from May 12, 2005, reproduced in part, here:

That highlighted sentence says, “Texas businesses will have a choice of paying either a low-rate revised franchise tax or a payroll tax.”
The LG definitely praised parts of HB 2 and HB 3, but the release doesn’t mention “payroll tax” until a brief note in the 4th paragraph about alternatives for calculating the tax owed by the businesses.The word “payroll” is not found in the Bill passed out of the Senate. It is not found in “quotes” in this document, so is not part of a statement made by the Lt. Governor.
The falsehoods don’t stop there. Early last Fall, Cruz has used a Wall Street Journal editorial to blur the line between the Business Franchise Tax and a State “income tax.” Editorials are simply opinion, they are not news reports and are not sufficient evidence of anything except someone’s opinion.
Cruz himself, admitted in New Braunfels last month that the “payroll tax” is in reality a hundred-years-old business tax and that he knows that Attorney General Greg Abbott successfully defended against the claim that it is an income tax on businesses, in front of the Supreme Court last November. Anyone who wants to understand the tax, could just read the AG’s response to the lawsuit, submitted to the Court in August, 2011.
Cruz’ supporters go even farther than Mr. Cruz and claim over and over on Twitter and in blogs that the LG supported or proposed not just a “payroll tax,” but a “personal income tax.”
Neither the “gotcha” question from Mr. Cruz nor this press release is something that the Cruz campaign should have based its criticism on. It certainly is not support for the false claims – beginning in the Fall of 2011 – that Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst supported either a “payroll tax” or an “income tax.”
Governor Rick Perry released the following statement last night in response to Ted Cruz’s false attacks:
“Earlier this evening Ted Cruz falsely characterized my rationale for endorsing my friend and conservative colleague David Dewhurst for the US Senate. David Dewhurst championed and passed multiple tax cuts, billions in spending cuts, major tort reform and strong pro-life measures. David will build on that Texas conservative success in the US Senate to overhaul Washington, block President Obama’s socialist agenda and restore the 10th amendment of the US Constitution. Making false statements about my motives or David Dewhurst’s conservative record is a disservice to Texas voters.”
via teDCruz Ruse #5: Ted Cruz attacks Gov. Rick Perry for endorsing David Dewhurst | Dewhurst for Texas.
Together, Governor Rick Perry and Lt. Governor David Dewhurst worked to:
- Defund Planned Parenthood
- Pass 51 tax cuts for a savings of over $14.5 billion for Texas taxpayers
- Pass the largest tax cut in Texas history
- Pass Photo Voter ID
- Pass landmark tort reform to make the trial lawyer agenda obsolete
That doesn’t sound like a man who is being “expedient.” He isn’t just praising Texas’ success in general. No, Governor Perry is giving credit to Lieutenant Governor Dewhurst for his conservative leadership.
And yet, Ted Cruz, “fighter,” believes he knows the Governor’s real motive.
From the press conference after the debate:
DALLAS — U.S. Senate candidate Ted Cruz is questioning Gov. Rick Perry‘s support for opponent David Dewhurst, saying Perry only supports Dewhurst to “get him out of Austin.”
Cruz saved his sharpest comments for reporters after he and Dewhurst exchanged words in an hour-long KERA/Channel 13 debate, dominated by Cruz’s criticism of Dewhurst for “negotiating” and “cutting deals” with Democrats in 10 years as the presiding officer in the Texas Senate.
First, Cruz told reporters the “Texas political establishment” is opposing him because “there are a lot of folks in Texas who would very much like to get him out of the state legislature and send him to Washington.”
Later in the press conference, Cruz named Perry, saying Perry and Dewhurst “have fought tooth-and-nail” over state budgets but “It is in [Perry's] political interest to get rid of David Dewhurst and get him out of Austin and send him somewhere else.”
My husband received this in the mail yesterday from a fellow Texas Republican and his wife. The only problem I can find is the description of the law firm as “Democrat.” Cruz calls it a “global law firm.” I might have added a comparison of their charity giving, but maybe some of that is covered in the “Republican Activity.”

At work on Monday morning, I received a call on my cell phone from Jessica with the Ted Cruz campaign, stumbling over “Mrs. Nuckols” and offering me the chance to be a “host” at their fundraiser next week.
I guess someone didn’t get the memo that I switched my support to Texas’ Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst for Texas Senator months ago. Or that after being invited by several emails and phone calls – two on my cell phone, a couple at home – I challenged Mr. Cruz at a “meet and greet” here in New Braunfels back in May. Jessica’s call inspired me to revive this post I’ve been editing, on and off, since June 1.
Why would I change from one candidate to the other, even after donating money?
It comes down to principles.
As I’m sure is true for many of you, I don’t just listen to what candidates and those who endorse them say. I look at how candidates make their decisions and conduct their campaigns.
The Conservative reveals his principles by how he reaches his conclusions every bit as much as by his decisions and the end results of those decisions. Evaluating the decision process is especially important when the candidate has no voting or legislative history to back his rhetoric.
Ted Cruz’ problem is not only that he can’t match David Dewhurst’s solid record of Conservative victories in the Texas Senate. It’s that he hasn’t demonstrated that he acts from solid principles. In fact, rather than basing his campaign on a solid ground of philosophy, talent and plans for reform that would have strengthened the Conservative movement, Cruz set out to destroy the reputation of a good Conservative Texas Legislator by spinning half-truths and lies into campaign issues.
Mr. Cruz doesn’t even take responsibility when proven wrong or when called out for trying to cheat.
Perhaps one of the most out of control moments of Cruz’ spin - at least until the recent attack on a veteran by one of his supporters – was the day last September 9, 2011 when he exchanged snide remarks about Dewhurst with the Texas Tribune’s Evan Smith. Both ignored the fact that the Lt. Governor was Acting Governor dealing with the wildfires in Bastrop and in other areas of Texas. Evidently, lost lives and homes don’t trump campaign ops or opportunities for Mr. Cruz.
At that meeting in New Braunfels, Cruz gave us example after example of his spin:
Don’t we get tired of the combative political campaign spin that’s all jargon and no judgement? The way out of the stall that causes a plane to spin is to turn out of the spin and regain thrust, rather than continue to corkscrew into the ground.
Have y’all been following the insult to Former Marine Dan Moran by Katrina Pierson? She called him “deformed” and said he is being exploited because he endorsed Lieutenant David Dewhurst for Texas Senate. Here’s the archived page.
(I received the whole thing through retweets, since I blocked Pierson on Sunday, before all of this happened.)
Follow @danmoran on Twitter to see his side of the conversation. Pierson deleted the “offening” comment on her account.
The Twitter debate continued for a few hours, and caught the notice of Texas’ press, including the Austin American Statesman and the Texas Tribune, where Cruz is now demanding that the Dewhurst campaign apologize to Pierson. He posted similar comments on his website, claiming that it’s paid staffers, rather than those of us who are voluntarily supporting Dewhurst. Like Captain Moran and Katrina, we are all independent agents able to decide what we do, without being “exploited.”
Here’s Dan’s tweet: “”Daniel Patrick Moran @DanMoran_ My face might be “deformed” but not my character & honor! MT“@KatrinaPierson: Dewhurst exploits deformed disabled vet in intro video”#txsen”"
Here’s Katrina’s “apology:” “”Katrina Pierson @KatrinaPierson @DanMoran_ I apologize if my comments toward Dewhurst offened you. This is not about you, however. Have we lost the 1st amendment? #txsen “”
Contrary to what many seem to believe, the Founding Fathers didn’t spring full grown from the Liberty Bell on July 4, 1776. They had served in their various Colonial legislatures for years before the Declaration and held other offices, both elected and appointed. George Washington served in the Virginia House of Burgesses for 15 years before his two terms with the Continental Congress. Jefferson served 7 years alongside Washington in the Burgesses, two terms as Virginia’s Governor, two terms on the Continental Congress, body and then became the “establishment” Secretary of State, Vice President, and President for two terms in the nascent United States.
However, the anti-establishment cry to “throw them all out” - that men and women who have served the public for years should be replaced with untried political neophytes for no other reason than that they have served for years and are now considered “establishment” – has become an emotional, knee-jerk reaction that has nothing to do with any other quality or qualification of the candidates.
For example, my email is full of pleas to help Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin, who faces a recall election this week, alternating with demands to defeat Lt. Governor David Dewhurst of Texas in his race for US Senator. The complaint against Dewhurst is that he is “establishment” and a “professional politician.” There are no similar complaints against Governor Walker who has been in political office of one sort or another most of his adult life. In contrast, Dewhurst served in the Air Force, worked for the CIA, and built a very successful business before running for office in his 50′s. In addition, he’s no more “establishment” than Governor Walker, having led the Texas Senate to passage of the Defense of Marriage Act, Voter ID, de-funding Planned Parenthood, Jessica’s Law, defending our State and Nation’s border and cutting relative and actual dollars from the State budget.
When all the newly political activists got tired of yelling at their TV’s and jumped up off their couches and recliners to join our Taxed Enough Already (TEA) Party over the last 4 years, who welcomed them and gave them somewhere to start? It was the more seasoned of us in the Republican Party, since, at least until recently, virtually every Conservative was a Republican. If you look at the Tea Party, you will see the Conservative foundation, the remnant that have opposed “centrists” and “moderates” for years. We are the ones who have known all along what the Dems re-learn each election cycle, but some of our own never seem to: Americans are conservative, to the right of center.
In politics, as in the rest of life, “new” is not always “improved.” New candidates are not better than the incumbent just because they’re new any more than the old guys earn their promotions by merely sticking around. By the same token, long time Conservative leaders may or may not be more able to judge policy and candidates than newer or younger members of our group. But a record of experience and training is – or should be – considered an advantage, not a “dissed”-advantage.
Or, as my husband says, “Age and cunning trump youth and enthusiasm.” Every time.
I was researching a rumor that I read that Ted Cruz’ wife was a member of the Council on Foreign Relations until June, 2011 and that she was a Vice President at Goldman Sachs. I was curious how such a young woman could become a member of the CFR, an organization that I assumed only admitted (old) heads of State and incredibly powerful business interests.
I found this CFR Task Force report, “Building a North American Community,” which lists Heidi Cruz as a member of the Task Force which “applauds the announced ‘Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America,’ but proposes a more ambitious vision of a new community by 2010 and specific recommendations on how to achieve it.” The news release also notes that Mrs. Cruz worked for Condyleeza Rice in the Bush White House National Security Council and had been a banker at Merrill Lynch and J. P. Morgan.
Just wow! Mrs. Cruz is much more accomplished than I’d imagined.
Further searching yielded this bit of video from Ben Smith’s October 27, 2011 blog at Politico. (There’s a break in the middle, indicating editing and the source is not “conservative,” but that’s Ted saying what he’s saying. The title is also Politico’s.)
Smith comments,
Ted Cruz, the former Texas solicitor general and tea party favorite for the Republican nomination for Senate, has been focusing some of his harshest campaign trail rhetoric on that longtime villain of those suspicious of U.S. internationalism: The Council on Foreign Relations.
The New York-based group, Cruz said at a speech to a Republican women’s group in Sugarland, Tex., last week, is “a pit of vipers.”
When asked about the Council at another event in Tyler, Tex., on Oct. 15 — Texas, home of Ron Paul and Alex Jones, is the sort of place this comes up a lot — Cruz called the organization “a pernicious nest of snakes” that is “working to undermine our sovereignty,” according to video provided by someone who opposes his candidacy.
Well, Cruz should know: The candidate’s wife, Heidi S. Cruz, was an active member of the Council on Foreign Relations until this June. She was a member until June on a 5-year “term membership” program, an official at the organization confirmed.
The video and Cruz’ comments are commented on in several news and blog sites on the ‘Net, so I don’t know how I missed it and Cruz’ play-acting for his East Texas audience.
Texas Tribune is hyping their poll as proof that there will likely be a run off in both the Republican and Democrat primary races for US Senator. But the big news should be how well informed and politically involved Texas voters appear to be.
It’s not just the disapproval of Obama (58% total and 46% “Disapprove strongly”) or the probable vote for Mitt Romney in the graphic above. Take a look at some of the information gathering questions.
Out of 800 registered Texas voters, 48% are “extremely interested in politics and public affairs. 32% vote in every election and another 35% vote in almost every election.
73% were able to identify the majority party in the US House of Representatives. (I wish they’d cross-checked that with the same question about the Senate.) 69% correctly stated that it takes a 2/3 vote to over turn a presidential veto. And 66% correctly identified Greg Abbott as our Texas Attorney General.
Yes, we’re probably in for a couple of run off elections, and yes,it will get even uglier. But the voters are better informed than I was afraid.
So went Ted Cruz’ lament on the Mark Levin radio show. Perhaps Mr. Cruz should go to work at a real job and build his own successful business and fortune before he runs for office – and begs for our hard-earned dollars – again.
(If you missed it, as I did, you can listen on the Internet, here. The ten minute segment begins at about 92 minutes into the May 15 program archive.)
You would think that the author of Liberty and Tyranny and Ameritopia would be celebrating David Dewhurst as the living example that free markets and the American work ethic do work, and as the Citizen Legislator that he is.
Sadly, Mr. Levin didn’t do his homework. Without giving any examples or sources for the broad accusations he made during the radio spot, he proved himself clueless about the strong Conservative credentials of Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst. He did note that Lt. Gov. Dewhurst is worth “a quarter of a billion dollars” but falsely claimed that Dewhurst – who first ran for office 13 years ago, when he was about the same age that Levin is now – is a “pretty much a career politician.”
Neither Cruz nor Levin give Lieutenant Governor Dewhurst credit for being the self-made man that he is. They ignore the fact that Dewhurst served our Nation in the Air Force and CIA before going to work to build that “quarter of a billion dollar” business from the ground up, and only then successfully running for office to serve Texas as Land Commissioner and then Lieutenant Governor.
Cruz has never been in business, made a payroll or held an elected office. After Harvard Law School, where he founded the Harvard Latino Law Review, he held only government jobs until he decided to run for Attorney General of Texas – before he even turned 40 years old. After withdrawing from that race in 2009, rather than face current Attorney General Greg Abbott, Cruz began his run against Governor Dewhurst for Kay Bailey Hutchison’s Senate seat. In the meantime, he’s been working for a large legal firm, once again proving that he’s a successful staffer, but not a policy maker, and certainly not a decision maker.
If spending a career working at government jobs and running for office for the last four years isn’t the definition of “pretty much a career politician,” then what is?
Revised grammar, 5/16/12, BBN.