Posted on 02/15/2014 8:38:41 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
These days, it’s popular to claim that Senator Ted Cruz is only looking out for himself. And this is undoubtedly true. Much in the same way John McCain is only looking out for himself and Chuck Schumer is only looking out for himself, and every millionaire Senator looking to hold on to his or her seat in perpetuity is looking out for #1. Cruz just happens to be better at it.
Take the kerfuffle over the debt-ceiling vote. When Mitch McConnell met with Senate Republicans colleagues this week, he proposed that they allow a vote on the House debt limit bill without GOP objection, a tacit surrender that would allow passage with a simple 51-vote majority. The 55 Senate Democrats, who would rather see the government shut down than concede to compromise, would win and then save the GOP from the inevitable political blowback that accompanies capitulation. (Now, if only the Republicans deployed the same level of creativity in their battles as they do in their surrenders, victory would be theirs!)
Rather than allow this expedient maneuver to place, Cruz demanded the Senate reach a 60-vote threshold, forcing five Republicans to join Democrats in the hike. This, predictably, infuriated the GOP establishment. McCain accused Cruz of instigating “needless drama that helps to explain why Republicans remain a minority.”
Yeah, that’s why.
What’s Cruz’s sin here? That he forced the GOP to be transparent about its position — a position that seems pretty reasonable considering the political realities of the situation. According to Betsy Woodruff’s reporting, most Republicans had no interest in voting for an increase. It’s preposterous to claim, no matter how often the Tea Party does, that moderate GOPers are “no better” than liberals simply because they’re losing on this issue. But if the debt ceiling isn’t a hill worth dying on – and it certainly isn’t – leadership should have explained this explicitly rather than leading on the base. It was only back in January when McConnell told the faithful on national television that some of “the most significant legislation passed in the past 50 years has been in conjunction with the debt limit. I think for the president to ask for a clean debt ceiling when we have a debt this size of our economy is irresponsible.” What McConnell should have added then is: but there’s nothing we can do about it right now. We have to work on winning more seats, and then we can stop this endless cycle of irresponsible spending.
In a recent piece, National Review’s Charles Cooke defends the GOP establishment’s handling of this and other battles: “In my estimation, the only thing of which Mitch McConnell and John Boehner have been guilty in the past few years is to have worked tirelessly within political reality and to have reacted sensitively to the hands that they were dealt.” Overall, I agree. Moreover, the House doesn’t get enough credit for putting a hard stop to the Democrats’ overly ambitious progressive agenda. Obstructing bad legislation is as valuable, if not more valuable, than working to make terrible legislation marginally less terrible. The GOP House successfully brought balance to Washington after a hard left turn by Democrats.
But life’s not fair. McConnell and Boehner don’t lead, they manage. And they’re about to lose the party. For starters, any fresh conservative ideas in the Senate are coming from Mike Lee, Rand Paul and Marco Rubio (who’s on thin ice, I know). They, like Ted Cruz, and like Senator Barack Obama before him, understand the appeal of idealism over pragmatism to those out of power. Obama voted against what is the now-sacred debt ceiling hike because he had nothing to lose and everything to gain. If you’re going to surrender, at the very least don’t make it look easy. And don’t try to cover up the terms.
As much as some of us are fans of “dysfunction,” tactically speaking, playing defense forever is no strategy. Yes, the establishment works tirelessly within the political realities of the day. Cruz, it seems, is more interested in changing the reality of his situation. Forcing a 60-vote threshold on the debt ceiling wasn’t only about the debt ceiling (which Cruz surely understood would be hiked), and it wasn’t only about his presidential ambitions (which he surely has), but creating the type of problems for the GOP that will help bring a bunch of Matt Bevins into the Senate and solidify his position.
If they attain more power, Tea Party conservatives may accept that tactical victories can often have more impact than a hollow but self-gratifying stand. At some point, they may accept that one of most effective weapons in policymaking — one that the Left uses with great success — is incrementalism. Fair or not, though, the problem with today’s Republican Party is that the only incrementalism people see is incremental surrender. Like the completely unnecessary debt ceiling lose. And if the establishment doesn’t turn that perception around in a hurry, they won’t be the establishment for much longer.
Thanks so much for the info!
The next President....
The GOP (Bohner) has sent their fourth survey in three months asking what’s important to me as a loyal Republican.
This survey is the work of fools and an obvious pander for money. The Rinos are in deep trouble and they know it.
My money, along with most conservatives today, goes to individual candidates. Unfortunately, my conservative candidates always loose, and the future of conservativism also appears to be in deep trouble.
I spent my last enlistment in the mess hall (properly called a dining facility today), and I can tell you that cooks are smart enough to know that Cruz is doing a great job.
/johnny
A look at the age of tea party elected congressman vs. GOPe congressmen will tell that the tea party is a generational shift for the republican party. This is exactly what happened with the 60s generation moved into the democrat party.
Sir, with all due respect, read Cruz’s resume posted on this same thread and then just read up on him generally. Your comments in my mind would likely take 1st place if we ever held a contest on Free Republic for THE MOST WRONG POST.........of all time on FR. Congratulations.
I can’t help but wonder if you in truth are just a trolling “Democratic Strategist”.
WOW, such power. In most states it requires Hundreds of thousands.
Ted Cruz Ping!
If you want on/off this ping list, please let me know.
Please beware, this is a high-volume ping list!
/johnny
“I have no doubt that with a surname like ‘Cruz’ he will one day cave on amnesty.”
Boy! You didn’t even comes close on this one. Ted Cruz is FIRST and FOREMOST an AMERICAN. I happen to KNOW for a fact that the “hyphenated” Latin-American or Highspanic-American is no way acceptable to this true American Patriot.
He will never cave on the AMNESTY issue as he puts our Constitution above political expediency each and every waking moment.
Powerful and personable. What a combination.
For me, Cruz is a litmus test for Repubs, similar to Palin.
If they stand with him, or her, I figure they are with me.
And if they attack him, or “damn him with faint praise” then they have exposed themselves as one of the ones who need to be retired. And ignored. And kept far away from the public purse.
/johnny
Neither does Mitch McConnell.
Would you rather have him representing you in the Senate? Surely you wouldn't want your unit to be full of "go along to get along" guys who had no interest in fighting the enemy.
I voted for Cruz and will again and again.
Put it this way, if Cruz was in your unit, he’d be the only one arguing about the ROE and making quite a stink when supposed Afghan friends shoot our boys in the back
A serious question... what is your definition of "team" in a pre-17th amendment Senate?
Today's reality is that the "team" is the "party," and the goal is the party agenda, not each state's self-interest.
When each state sent its own chosen Senator instead of electing them, would you still have expected them to form some national "team" at the expense of their state's individual interest?
-PJ
Excellent article, and I think it sums up the situation pretty well. If Senators McConnell and Cornyn voted on the debt limit because they felt a costly battle couldn’t be won at this point, then they cannot possibly blame conservatives for being irate about it. Are we to be blamed if we find their motives suspect? I don’t think so.
I can’t speak for anyone other than myself, but I find it very insulting when politicians tell me one thing to my face and then appear to work at cross purposes behind my back. Tell me what you’re really thinking and show me how you’re really my ally, even if it means we can’t win right now, and I’m more likely to respect you.
Okay....I didn’t mean to cast aspersions on the cooks in the mess halls.
Then again, I wouldn’t want to offend the Motor-T guys, either.
Semper Fi.
I start to worry when I see this kind of undermining sabotage on our guys start up again. I think that kind of attack-from-within is what gave us Romney for a candidate last go-around.
I especially worry when the post is absolutely untrue. Cruz has guts and is saying everything that I believe. He's fighting the D.C. establishment and God love him for it, a true hero in my books.
He has single handedly put the business as usual crowd on their collective asses and turned the system on it's head and is laying waste to the status quo, armed with nothing but principle and courage.
He is Sampson with a jawbone destroying the Philistines. A political Rambo.
"I view Cruz as a self serving individual, totally void of principle"
Project much there, Old Retired Army Guy?...
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.