Posted on 02/19/2014 4:18:55 PM PST by servo1969
A leading tea party intellectual has turned against the tea party movements favorite senator.
Economist Thomas Sowell, who has long been revered among conservatives, has slammed Sen. Ted Cruz in his last two columns, accusing the Texas Republican of being self-serving and comparing him to President Obama.
Freshman Senator Ted Cruz says many things that need to be said and says them well, Sowell wrote in his syndicated column Tuesday, before going on to compare Cruz to President Obama. 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.
Sowell continued, suggesting Cruz is only looking out for himself.
Senator Ted Cruz has not yet reached the point where he can make policy, rather than just make political trouble, Sowell wrote. 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.
Sowell seems to have been most recently irked by Cruzs actions surrounding the Senate vote to increase the debt ceiling. Cruz threatened to filibuster, forcing several Republicans to either vote for cloture or force a fight over the debt ceiling increase. Republican leaders were seeking to avoid such a politically-risky fight and another possible government shutdown in order to focus on the failures of Obamacare heading in to the 2014 midterm elections.
Senator Cruzs 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, Sowell wrote in his Wednesday column. 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.
In his Wednesday column, Sowell also lashed out against the so-called Republican establishment.
However unjustified Senator Cruzs 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, he wrote.
I soured on Cruz when I saw he wanted to “double” legal immigration and greatly increase H1-B visas.
With all due respect you do not understand that the Founding
Fathers included the framers of the the Constitution and
that document is rife with compromise.
Making such a claim with no examples turns the claim specious, with equal respect.
World leaders remain astounded at the US Constitution’s brilliance, but know that it would mean their statist designs would come to an end if they ever adopted it in earnest.
There would have to be a good reason to do that. Such a move could not be arbitrary.
I was not fond of Cruz’s undue tribute to Mandela myself.
Maybe Sowell needs a bit more time to understand that Cruz is the real deal.
Cruz just sided with Soros backed protestors in Ukraine.
And he made another bad judgement about something not long ago...memory ain’t kicking in though.
Was it the wrong side in Syria? I know Rand Paul did, and I think Cruz might have too.
http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2014/02/19/cruz-control-n1796356/page/full
This is the full article by Sowell in case anyone wants to read it.
Not sure if you agree?
What kind of squishy opinion is that. Mark Levin (without mentioning Sowell by name) said his opinion was so far off base that he couldn't believe it.
Apparently Sowell thinks that Boehner and McConnell and Karl Rove and the GOPE are the saviors of the Republic and that Ted Cruz is just standing in their way.
He backtracked in a second opinion today, but the fact of the matter is that Sowell is getting excoriated on all the websites that publish his articles.
Personnally I believe that Sowell owes Ted Cruz a public apology for his Nazi analogy in the first article. If anyone is going to lead us down the road to a totalitarian tyranny it is the squishy cowards like McConnell and Boehner and not the solid courageous patriots like Cruz and Lee.
Now you are being argumentative for the sake of argument.
Did you skip the 8th grade?
Here we go:
1. The Great Compromise settled the representation dispute by
settling on a bi-cameral (Senate/House) legislature.
2. Southern slaves were treated as 3/5 of a man for the purposes
of population count. That was a compromise.
3. The Northern anti-slave folks agreed to wait until 1807
to address the slave trade issue, a compromise.
4. The relative powers of the 3 branches of government which
emerged was due to compromise.
5. Various agreements involving trade and taxation like
export tariffs were compromises.
I could cite more but you already know. You got caught with
your myopic glasses on and tried to bluff me down. That
won’t work. I am currently in the hospital for an intestine
issue and I have all sorts of time to respond. But try not to
get too silly. I can get bored.
Modern definitions of what were agreed back in the 1780s are somewhat lacking; using the word “compromise” implies that a better solution could have been in the offing. (The three-fifths “compromise” was due to taxation as well as population count, of course.)
Civics classes replacing “republic” with “representative democracy”, with retrospect to my past pre-college education, makes me question everything.
I stand by my statement with respect to the founding fathers. Any compromise when it came to the war of independence, and no USA. (Perhaps it would be interesting to drive a right-hand-drive car on the left side of the road? We still have some railroads that run on the left hand side.)
Back in post 95 you implied that Sowell’s “conservative card” was being “yanked”. Nobody said anything of the sort; rather it looks to me as if he’s voluntarily turning it in.
Also, bringing up the Founding Fathers minor “compromises” with respect to the Constitution is really a canard. Going further back to what I said in post 88 (about the Founding Fathers ideology), whatever tiny “compromises” exist in the US Constitution has nothing to do with their unified ideology about creating the USA as a republic for a moral and religious people. So thanks for the distractive argument. The Dems continue to be ideologically pure out of the Marxist doctrine they continue to push, and that cannot be denied; the only way to fight them is to return to what the Founding Fathers were all about when it comes to the actual foundation of the USA.
It just proves that even smart men can be bought off and end up doing the GOPes bidding.
My opinion of Thomas Sowell has just plummeted.
“Oh sure, youre a genius. Thats why you fail to understand Sowells main point, and thusly throw out a LIFETIME of the mans record based on your interpretation. I dont necessarily agree with his main point, but he does have one. The difference between you and me is that, for all my possible mental deficiencies, Im still not dumb enough to throw around silly accusations of Thomas freaking Sowell being a RINO.”
******************************************************************
Mama always said “pay attention to detail”. I DID NOT ACCUSE Sowell of “being a RINO”—he frequently has opinions that are based on a conservative political principles.
What I DID SAY, in effect, is that Sowell has (in the linked article and for God knows what reasons) begun to carry the GOPe’s water for them as he unleashed HIS attacks and accusations against Ted Cruz. And he is using what have been, in essense, GOPe and “mainstream media” talking points in their war on the Tea Party and on Ted Cruz. Those who cannot recognize that MAY be mentally deficient-—or at least deluding themselves.
“SHUPNOOB”
****************************
Ahh...very well reasoned and quite persuasive.
I read those. They are bad enough, and somewhat “gossipy” themselves.
With your backtracking, your retro-qualifying statement going from
all Founding Fathers to those only associated w/the Declaration of
Ind and your shoddy attempt to characterise “compromise” you
could certainly qualify for a debating team.....a liberal debating team,
unfortunately.
I could say that for you. After all, your discourse on here started with a criticism of so-called ideological “purity” and digressed into “compromise this/that” with no credit due to the foundation of the USA. Are you trying to claim that the USA started as some aimless, ideologically-impure thought experiment?
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.