Video: Ted Cruz Rips John McCain from Senate floor; does so without saying his name while also using the term 'Wacko Birds'

Another awesome Ted Cruz Senate floor speech. He packs a whole bunch of deliciousness into this one it's difficult to chronicle. First, the root argument. Essentially, at the heart of Cruz's argument is that a super majority threshold should be required to raise the debt ceiling.

Everything else includes the following:

1. Outing his Republican colleagues for engaging in a Kabuki dance.
2. Ripping John McCain more politely than anyone could have possibly done.
3. Getting even more mileage out of McCain's 'wacko birds' comment a few months ago in response to Rand Paul's filibuster.

Though you don't McCain in this video, he was obviously in the room and was likely quite red.

h/t Hot Air

Video: Harry Reid calls Ted Cruz a 'Schoolyard Bully' (Scut Farkus alert)

If there is one thing Democrats have in their DNA, it's projection. Nearly every single criticism that Democrats levy at their opponents is nothing more than an act of projection. In this case, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid - the same guy who helped to ram Obamacare down the throat of the American people who didn't want it - calls Ted Cruz a 'schoolyard bully'. What's particularly interesting is that Reid is the most powerful bully in the Senate. Cruz, a freshman, should be the weakest.

In reality, Reid is like Scut Farkus calling Ralphie a 'schoolyard bully'.

Watch Cruz show his senior colleagues how it's done:

Oh, wait. When the schoolyard bully pushes his victims around for a little too long, this is what usually happens. Reid, the real bully, is behaving like Scut Farkus:

When you're a freshman GOP Senator who gets called a 'wacko-bird' by an establishment RINO Senator, it means you're ruffling feathers. It also means you're exhibiting leadership and showing your colleagues - all of whom have more experience and should already be leading - how to lead as well. When your Democratic colleagues - like Senate Majority leader Harry Reid - calls you a 'school-yard bully', it means you're making life difficult for those who have been running roughshod over the Constitution for far too long. Besides, whenever a Democrat calls you a name, it's usually projection.

The truth is that conservative voters have been screaming for backbone and leadership from their party for over four years now. To this point, no one at Cruz's level has met the challenge.

That he is a freshman should be an embarrassment to the rest of his caucus, who should lead, follow, or get out of the way (that includes McCain).

Via HillTube: 

Obama offers Fast and Furious opportunities to Conservatives at NRA Convention (So far, no takers)

On the same day that the 2013 NRA Convention began in Houston, TX Barack Obama was in Mexico telling an audience that "most of the guns used to commit violent crimes here in Mexico, come from the United States." What he didn't tell that audience was that his administration is responsible for Operation Fast and Furious, a program in which the ATF told reluctant gun store owners to sell high-powered guns to bad guys who would then 'walk' those guns to drug cartels in Mexico.

Yet, Republicans and gun rights activists have avoided bludgeoning those in the administration and on the Democratic side of the aisle by contrasting the exploitation of Sandy Hook with the failed attempt to exploit the consequences of Fast and Furious by pointing to its consequences. Those consequences have been - and continue to be - hundreds of murdered people. The Obama administration wanted to used those consequences to push gun control but couldn't because of whistleblowers in general, and one in particular - ATF Agent John Dodson.

Dodson came forward when one of the guns found at the murder scene of Border Agent Brian Terry on December 14, 2010 was a gun from Operation Fast and Furious. In 2012, Attorney General Eric Holder was found in contempt of Congress and Obama asserted Executive Privilege to prevent documents from coming forward that would reveal the truth about the operation.

Despite all of this, Obama presented every speaker at the NRA Convention with a golden opportunity to draw this contrast. To this point, no one has highlighted this contrast.

Said Obama on Friday, May 3rd, the first day of the NRA Convention:

"I will continue to do everything in my power to pass common sense reforms that keep guns out of the hands of criminals and dangerous people that can save lives here in Mexico and back home in the United States... So we'll keep increasing the pressure on gun traffickers who bring illegal guns into Mexico. We'll keep putting these criminals where they belong - behind bars."

This is gall-dacity.



Despite this low-hanging fruit, even Ted Cruz and Sarah Palin have avoided contrasting Obama's exploitation of Sandy Hook with his failure to do so in Fast and Furious... because he got caught.

It's hard to explain why conservatives are avoiding the one argument that will deliver the most severe blow. They don't even use it when they're being taunted by Obama.

Makes. No. Sense.



Here is Cruz. Good speech but he also avoided Fast and Furious vs. Sandy Hook:

Must-See Video: Ted Cruz rips RINOs over Gun Control

There are many reasons to like Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX). First and foremost, the Sarah Palin effect, which is that the more a political figure is ridiculed by the mainstream media and the left, the more that political figure should be supported by conservatives. The second indicator is when RINOs like John McCain calls you a 'wackobird'.

There is another reason that comes across in this video from Freedom Works and it has to do with the ability to inspire and encourage.

Right out of the gate, Cruz doesn't just tell the audience what he knows they want to hear - that they are 'winning' - but he does it in such a way that it's believable. He then proceeds to make the case by citing what happened in the recent gun control debate. The story he relays from a Senatorial luncheon is classic and has John 'wacko bird' McCain written all over it.

Via NRO:

Look, the Tea Party in particular and the conservatives in general started becoming demoralized and a bit more crestfallen each day it became more apparent that Mitt Romney was going to be the Republican nominee. Rock bottom was hit on election night. Establishment Republicans in office began caving to the Obama agenda almost immediately. Conservatives were so de-energized that they did little more than watch in disgust.

If there has been a consistent theme among conservatives since the election - perhaps even since the 2010 mid-terms - it's been disgust over the Republican Party's willingness to admit the truth and fight the Obama agenda.

Ironically, Cruz said establishment guys who wanted to cave in to the gun control push, yelled at him for not going along with the program. It's a self-evident truth that such political hacks are more comfortable yelling at a principled member of their own caucus than they are at our "Muslim socialist" president.

By the way, those aren't my words; they're Obama's:

Audio: Is Ted Cruz separating himself from the Rand / Rubio Immigration Chaff?

Conservatives are looking for someone - anyone - in the halls of power to actually assert his / her power. In the House, there are a handful of courageous Republicans (Bachmann, Gowdy, Gohmert, and a few others) but in the upper chamber, where more power is wielded and more weight is carried by each Senator, the battle has seemingly come down to three people.

Rand Paul (R-KY), Marco Rubio (R-FL), and Ted Cruz (R-TX).

In a world where a few hot-button issues rotate to the front burner with increasing frequency and intensity, immigration appears to be taking its turn. In this battle, Cruz has taken the lead among conservatives and that is evident when comparing the recent positions / activities of the three men, coupled with Cruz's stated positions on Sean Hannity's April 1st radio show.

Let's take a look at the three Senators who are attempting to tap into the most passionate and sought after voting bloc of the Republican Party - the conservatives.

Paul won major points with conservatives when he decided to filibuster for twelve hours over a response he did not get from the Obama administration over the use of drones to kill Americans on U.S. soil. Regardless of where one comes down on the issue, Paul exhibited a fighting spirit that is far too often lacking from Republican leaders. However, when it comes to the issue of immigration, Paul has deviated from the conservative position and has called for a pathway to citizenship, which in the minds of conservatives, is a pathway to amnesty. Helping Paul among conservatives was the way he confronted Hillary Clinton over Benghazi.

Rubio essentially began his dance with the devil when he joined the gang of eight, which included Socialist Democrats Durbin, Schumer, and Menendez along with RINOs McCain and Graham to cut a deal over comprehensive immigration reform. Rubio's achilles heal with conservatives has long been his rather vague stance on immigration. His decision to join the gang of eight didn't help him much, though to his credit, he is calling for open and robust debate, which just might scare the rest more than the prospect of not getting a deal done. Rubio was also incredibly weak when he had five minutes alone with Hillary Clinton over Benghazi.

Cruz appears to be separating himself from the other two in the pack when it comes to the immigration debate. He understands that until everyone agrees - and then demands / acts on that agreement - to secure the border before any other discussions take place, will get us nowhere, at best. Every time something is done about immigration (Rubio and Rand should listen up), it comes with an empty promise to secure the border after granting amnesty to illegal aliens.

Cruz isn't falling for it. As a result, his stock among conservatives will undoubtedly rise faster than will Rubio or Paul on the issue of immigration, which is a big one.

Via MediaIte:

Ted Cruz gets very close to hitting Obama on Fast and Furious

With his March 28th press release, Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) came closer than anyone in Congress, to rebuking Obama's exploitation of Sandy Hook by pointing to Operation Fast and Furious. Though he didn't name it specifically or highlight the most relevant contrast, he gets very close (hits on the year it was at its height - 2010 - as well as criminals buying guns). In fact, if Senators Cruz, Paul, Lee, et. al. follow through on their filibuster threat and begin hammering on that contrast, it could be devastating for the Democrats in general and Obama in particular.

First, Cruz's press release:

In any conversation about how to prevent future tragedies such as Sandy Hook, our focus should be on stopping criminals from obtaining guns. Unfortunately, the Obama Administration has failed to make this a priority — in 2010, out of more than 15,700 fugitives and felons who tried to illegally purchase a firearm, the Obama Justice Department prosecuted only 44. That is unacceptable.

It is saddening to see the President today, once again, try to take advantage of this tragic murder to promote an agenda that will do nothing to stop violent crime, but will undermine the constitutional rights of all law-abiding Americans. I am committed to working with Sens. Rand Paul, Mike Lee, Marco Rubio, and Jim Inhofe--and I hope many other colleagues--to use any procedural means necessary to protect those fundamental rights.

In response to that press release in my inbox, I sent the following email to Cruz's press office:

Nice release.

Obama never did presser with the families of Fast and Furious victims (hundreds of Mexicans / Brian Terry) standing behind him.

Why? Because Fast and Furious was his administration's fault.

Would love to see this point hammered home during the upcoming filibuster.

Here is one of Obama's most shameless and despicable acts - exploiting Sandy Hook by pushing for gun control with the parents of shooting victims standing behind him. I couldn't even watch the whole thing. More power to you if you can make it to the end.

Ted Cruz on the 'defeatist attitude' of Republicans

In an interview with the Dallas Morning News, U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) gave some extremely interesting answers to Todd Gillman's questions. Perhaps the most insightful exchange came when Cruz gave his psychological assessment of Republicans inside the beltway.

Via DMN:

Q. You’re 10 weeks on the job. What have you learned? Has anything surprised you? Is there anything that you’ve needed to retool in your approach?

A. The biggest surprise has been the defeatist attitude of many Republicans in Washington. A lot of Republicans felt beaten down, and that there was nothing they could do to stop the erosion of liberty in this country. I have been encouraged that the last several weeks have demonstrated that there is a great deal we can do to turn things around. Indeed, if you look at the vote on sequester, the filibuster on drone strikes and the vote on defunding Obamacare, for three weeks in a row, Republicans have stood together for principle. And in doing so I believe we are winning the argument. We are doing what the American people expect us to be doing, which is standing for principle, defending liberty and defending the Constitution. I am hopeful the pattern of the last three weeks will prove a recurring pattern going forward. I believe that’s the direction Republicans need to go.

Q. This defeatism is among incumbent senators?

A. Yes. I’m referring to those who have been here a long time and have suffered some difficult election results and who I think were discouraged about being able to get anything done.

Q. So it sounds like you’ve been teaching them a few lessons. Is there anything that you’ve learned on the job yet?

A. What I think all of us have learned together is the power of leaders standing for principle. You asked what I learned. I can tell you the most inspirational moment since I’ve been here has been Rand Paul’s filibuster. When Rand Paul went to the floor at 11:47 am, many of his colleagues viewed what he was doing as curious if not quixotic, as an endeavor that was doomed to failure. … It captivated the attention of the American people as millions of Americans watched Rand Paul and others standing for principle and began engaging directly in the process, on Facebook and email and Twitter….. As a result of Sen. Rand Paul’s courage, the Obama administration was forced to concede in writing that it lacks the authority to kill a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil.

It is amazing that elected Republican officials felt beaten down because their conservative base felt beaten down by the unwillingness of those officials to fight for them.

Read it all.

Why are CAIR, Code Pink, Van Jones and Cenk Uygur all supporting Rand Paul?

Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) made big headlines this week in a showdown with the Obama administration over the latter's refusal to unequivocally state that it would not use armed drones to kill Americans on American soil who posed no imminent threat to the country. Paul was relegated to eating candy bars during his twelve-plus hour filibuster while establishment types like Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) were dining with Barack Obama.

The conservative base ate it up. Finally, the new guard was doing what the old guard never seemed interested in doing; Paul was taking Obama on while standing on principle and the establishment didn't like it one bit. McCain referred to the Senator from Kentucky as well as Senator Ted Cruz as 'wacko birds'.

However, in addition to winning over conservatives and libertarians, Paul has garnered the support of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a Muslim Brotherhood front in America; Turkish Current TV (Al Jazeera) host Cenk Uygur; former Obama Green Jobs czar Van Jones, who is a fellow at the Center for American Progress (CAP) - a George Soros entity; and Code Pink, a far left group who was behind the 2010 Gaza flotilla.

CAIR's Executive Director - Nihad Awad - said the following in a press release:

"We welcome Senator Paul's efforts to press for a firm answer as to whether drones may legally be used to kill American citizens on U.S. soil. Unfortunately, the initial administration response to that question left room for doubt. We acknowledge today's statement by Attorney General Holder and hope that it represents a clear and unequivocal rejection of that obviously unconstitutional authority."

Uygur, long recognized as a far left commentator who left MSNBC to work at Current TV, said the following in reference to Paul's filibuster:

“I don’t care what his (Paul's) opinions on other things are — you can call him anything you like, but here he happens to be a constitutional hero.”

Uygur's employer - Current TV - was recently sold to Al Jazeera, another arm of the Muslim Brotherhood.

How about Van Jones? Here is a guy who worked very closely with the inner circles inside the Obama administration when he was the Green Jobs czar. Jones resigned in 2009 amidst a string of scandalous revelations about his past, which included his signature appearing on a 9/11 Truth document. When he left the administration, he became a senior fellow at CAP, an entity TIME Magazine referred to as the Obama administration's "idea factory".

Here is what Jones had to say about the Rand Paul filibuster:

"Well let me just say, I might shock a lot of people as somebody, you know I love this president and I respect this president, Rand Paul was a hero yesterday, and what I've been hearing is a lot of shame from liberals and progressives who felt like geez, we should be up there sticking up for civil liberties and we should be the ones asking those tough questions."

As for Soros, he supported the 'Arab Spring' and has some very distinct ties to the Muslim Brotherhood himself. This would at least theoretically explain why both Jones and CAIR are on the same page here.

Then, of course, there is Code Pink's Medea Benjamin, who said of Paul:

"...compared to the Democratic senators who have, with few exceptions, remained either silent or support of President Obama's killer drones, Rand made a heroic stand. In gratitude, progressives should "Stand with Rand."

In 2010, Benjamin worked with Obama friends Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn - through the Free Gaza Movement - to coordinate the Gaza flotilla that attempted to break the Israeli blockade. This was a pro-Hamas movement as well; Hamas is the Muslim Brotherhood.

There are two traits we've come to associate with left-wing groups. One is that when they want to collectively push a narrative, there's a cross-polination of shared words embedded in that narrative that supposedly independent groups all use. Note that in the examples above, Jones, Uygur, and Benjamin all refer to Paul as being a 'hero'. The second trait is that leftists - especially those in positions of prominence - don't break ranks. When Van Jones outwardly expresses a view that is in support of someone who is in direct opposition to Obama on a particular issue, it's both noteworthy and curious.

Conservatives are always talking about how they can't trust leftists. Now, all of sudden, because the leftists are agreeing with a conservative / libertarian Senator's stand against the Republican establishment, we're to take them at their word? Why isn't it possible that these leftists see an opportunity to further divide the Republican Party?

Remember, one of Saul Alinsky's rules states, in part:

Keep the pressure on. Use different tactics and actions and use all events of the period for your purpose.

This is not meant to say that Paul is wrong and the likes of Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) are right. In actuality, on balance, Paul is more right than they are.

McCain and Graham are an interestingly bizarre pair. Both have supported - and continue to support - arming Muslim Brotherhood rebels to fight dictators. McCain called such Libyan rebels his 'heroes' while backing NATO's efforts to oust Gadhafi. Both Senators have continued to back support for the Syrian rebels as well.

So, McCain and Graham seek to empower the Muslim Brotherhood abroad but want more latitude to attach them domestically. Conversely, Paul rightfully wants to stop funding the likes of Egypt's Mohammed Morsi and the Syrian rebels while at the same time, he gains the support of Nihad Awad, the head of a Muslim Brotherhood group in America.

In an interview with Fox's Megyn Kelly, Paul said the following about McCain and Graham:

They think the whole world is a battlefield, including America, and that the 'laws' of war should apply. The laws of war don't involve due process.

In reality, the whole world IS A BATTLEFIELD in the eyes of the Muslim Brotherhood, which consists of CAIR, Hamas, and Al Qaeda. The problem for the likes of Paul, McCain, and Graham is that they do not understand that America is also a political battlefield in the eyes of the Muslim Brotherhood groups here.

Again, this goes back to one very simple reality; The United States did not sufficiently identify its enemy after 9/11 (all Muslim Brotherhood groups in America and Saudi Arabia by extension). As a result and as a nation, we are confused about how best to confront that enemy almost twelve years later.

Until then, internecine battles like this one will continue.

Video: Ted Cruz smacks down Eric Holder on usage of Drones on American soil

As Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) took to the Senate floor to filibuster the confirmation of John Brennan as CIA Director over the latter's unwillingness to unequivocally state that drones would not be used to kill Americans on American soil, Attorney General Eric Holder was in front of a Senate panel that included Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX). Cruz wanted Holder to say it was unconstitutional to kill Americans with drones on American soil if said individuals posed no immediate threat.

Shockingly, Holder equivocates three times before ultimately giving Cruz the answer the Senator from Texas was looking for.

Amazing piece of video.

Via MediaIte:

Video: Interview with Ted Cruz

In an interview with CBN, U.S. Senator from Texas, Ted Cruz said two very significant things that resonate with true conservatives. One was that Barack Obama is the 'most radical' president we've ever seen. The other is that by failing to stand on principles, many Republicans should share some blame for that 'most radical' president being elected in the first place (ain't that the truth!).

The biggest frustration among conservatives is an unwillingness (cowardice) to fight on the part of Republicans. It's early but Cruz is showing signs of galvanizing such conservatives. A consequence of that - as we found out with Sarah Palin - is relentless media attacks. The good news? Cruz's effectiveness will rise in direct proportion to how much he is attacked in the media.

Via CBN:



Here is the perfect example to demonstrate how best to deal with the media (pay attention, Boehner). After the mainstream media dredged up what they thought would be considered outrageous comments by Cruz years ago - that the Harvard faculty is rife with Marxists - the Senator from Texas did not go on defense; he went on offense with a super-appropriate tweet.

Via Ted Cruz:

MSNBC is shocked -- shocked -- to discover that there are Marxists on the Harvard faculty... youtube.com/watch?v=SjbPi0…
— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) February 23, 2013

Video: Senator Ted Cruz Rips Defense Secretary Nominee Chuck Hagel

This is a must-see. Cruz lays in to Barack Obama's nominee for Secretary of Defense pretty darned good - and even throws a few clips from interviews Hagel did with Al Jazeera.

Two observations.

1.) It would have been nice to see Senators this tough with Hillary Clinton last week.
2.) It'd be nice to see Democrats this critical of their own (Hagel is a Republican)

Ted Cruz Video: Romney 'French Kissed Barack Obama' in third debate

This is great on so many levels. First of all, our newly elected U.S. Senator from Texas Ted Cruz is absolutely right here. Mitt Romney did french kiss Barack Obama in the third debate. The first debate between the two won a lot of people over to Romney's side because it was the first time we saw the Republican nominee actually fight. He surged in the polls, gaining about 5 percentage points.

In the third debate - which was supposed to be about foreign policy at a time when Barack Obama was on the ropes over Benghazi - Romney stopped fighting.

I can honestly say that as the sages were championing Romney's performance as brilliant and presidential, I was yelling at my television in real time and didn't even watch the entire debate. It was truly pathetic.

It's also nice to see someone talk like this after winning an election.

Via Washington Examiner: 

Tea Party victory in Texas; Cruz Cruises past Dewhurst

It was supposed to be Texas Lt. Governor David Dewhurst's 'turn' in the Senate. Backed by Rick Perry and the Republican establishment, Dewhurst won a plurality of the vote in the primary but Ted Cruz was able to force a runoff two months later. That runoff was yesterday and the establishment lost.

Via Texas Tribune:

Defying all early expectations and upending long-standing conventional wisdom in Texas Republican politics, former Texas Solicitor General Ted Cruz handily won the Republican runoff for an open U.S. Senate seat Tuesday night.

He moves on to the general election against former state Rep. Paul Sadler, who defeated retired educator Grady Yarbrough in the Democratic runoff.

Cruz defeated Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst after a lengthy, contentious political battle in which Cruz painted a longtime statewide elected official backed by Gov. Rick Perry as a moderate.

“Tonight is a victory for the grass roots,” Cruz said Tuesday night. “It is a testament to Republican women, to Tea Party leaders and to grass-roots conservatives.”

In a short concession speech, Dewhurst said he was proud of the race he had run.

“We got beat up a little bit, but we never gave up,” Dewhurst said. “And we stand tall in knowing that we never compromised any of our values.”

Then, in a classic case of projection, Sadler actually attempted to charge that the Republican Party had been 'hijacked' and that he would seek to recruit Dewhurst supporters.

In a statement, Sadler made clear that he will fight for Dewhurst’s supporters ahead of the Nov. 6 general election.

“Tonight, I stand alone as the only nominee of a major political party in Texas because the Texas Republican Party has been hijacked by the Tea Party,” Sadler said in a statement.

Uh, not so much, Mr. Sadler. The Tea Party is desperately trying to bring the Republican Party back from the abyss and it is YOUR party that has been hijacked - by Communists.

Then again, commies lie.

Here's a montage of the campaign between Cruz and Dewhurst. Make no mistake. If Cruz defeats Sadler in November, he will be a MAJOR upgrade to Kay Bailey Hutchison. To be fair, Dewhurst would have been as well.

One last point. Many of Dewhurst's problems stemmed from the Kabuki theater that took place during last year's special legislative session. It was obvious that the establishment in both the State House and Senate, which Dewhurst led, didn't want to pass the tough Sanctuary Cities Bill or the TSA anti-groping bill (brought up by Cruz in the video below). House Speaker Joe Straus and Dewhurst attempted to point fingers at the other house.

Each should have been held solely responsible, not just equally responsible, for not getting those bills passed. Last night, Dewhurst was held accountable, in part, for his Special Session performance.