RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Reich writes: "Cruz is a true believer. Trump has no firm principles except making money, getting attention, and gaining power. But Cruz really does detest the federal government, and has spent much of his life embracing radical right economic and political views."

Robert Reich. (photo: Richard Morgenstein)
Robert Reich. (photo: Richard Morgenstein)


5 Reasons Ted Cruz Is Even More Dangerous Than Donald Trump

By Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Facebook Page

22 January 16

 

ive reasons Ted Cruz is even more dangerous than Donald Trump.

  1. He’s more fanatical. Trump is a bully and bigot but doesn’t hew to any sharp ideological line. Cruz is a fierce ideologue: He denies the existence of man-made climate change, rejects same-sex marriage, wants to abolish the Internal Revenue Service, believes the 2nd amendment guarantees everyone a right to guns, doesn’t believe in a constitutional divide between church and state, favors the death penalty, opposes international agreements, embraces a confrontational foreign policy, rejects immigration reform, demands the repeal of “every blessed word of Obamacare,” and takes a strict “originalist” view of the meaning of the Constitution.

  2. Cruz is a true believer. Trump has no firm principles except making money, getting attention, and gaining power. But Cruz really does detest the federal government, and has spent much of his life embracing radical right economic and political views. When Cruz said “we are facing what I consider to be the epic battle of our generation,” he wasn’t referring to jihadist terrorism but to Obamacare.

  3. He’s Smarter. Trump is no slouch but he hasn’t given any indication of a sharp mind. Cruz is razer-sharp: It’s not just his degrees from Princeton and Harvard Law, along with an impressive record at Harvard, or even his winning arguments before the Supreme Court. For his entire adult life he's been a fierce debater with a intensely-logical debater’s mind.

  4. He’s more disciplined and strategic. Trump is all over the place, often winging it, saying whatever pops into his mind. Cruz hews to a clear script and a carefully crafted strategy. He plays the long game (as he’s shown in Iowa). Cruz’s legal career entailed a sustained use of the courts to achieve conservative ends, and he plots his moves carefully.

  5. Cruz is a loner who’s willing to destroy institutions. Trump has spent his career using the federal government and making friends with big shots. Not Cruz. Most of his Republican colleagues in the Senate detest him. And Cruz is eager to destroy: He has repeatedly crossed to the other side of the Capitol and led House Republicans toward fiscal cliffs. In the Fall of 2013, Cruz’s strident opposition to Obamacare – including a 21-hour talking marathon -- led in a significant way to the shutdown of the federal government.

Both men would be disasters for America, but Cruz would be the larger disaster.

What do you think?

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+53 # tswhiskers 2016-01-22 21:35
I think any politician who would shut down the entire federal govt. because he can't get his way on policy is a man to avoid at all costs. I'm surprised that Trump and not the Dems chose to use Cruz's Canadian birth against him. Commentators seem to consider this fact a very minor point and not worth the mention. But given Cruz's politics I hope that it will be pursued, if only as a means of disqualifying him from running. Sorry if I seem petty but the man is a creep frankly, and I don't want to see a real fundamentalist in the WH. We need to disavow both Trump and Cruz as unfit and incompetent to be president. The Rep. Party needs to stop allowing creeps and fools to run for the presidency and set a system to encourage educated, competent individuals to run. Most of the current Rep. field have no business running let alone winning.
 
 
-72 # jazzman633 2016-01-23 13:29
Agree. The (self-)selectio n process is abysmal. Unfortunately, as with Nixon and others, personality disorder does not disqualify you for the White House.

BTW, whatever Obama's failings as Pres., he was great to listen to. If Trump or Cruz is elected, I dread what Presidential speechmaking will become.
 
 
-72 # Texas Aggie 2016-01-23 20:41
When you talk about "the Republican Party," you have to realize that these creeps ARE the republican party, so it's useless to hope that they will be ejected. There is more and more evidence that Cruz's mother may not have been a US citizen at the time he was born, so that would make him a noncitizen. If that turns out to be the case, and he has rejected his Canadian citizenship, does that make him a Cuban?
 
 
-47 # David Starr 2016-01-25 09:51
Quoting: "I'm surprised that Trump and not the Dems chose to use Cruz's Canadian birth against him."

YES, and the justification is there. What the hell are the Dems waiting for? Say he's ineligible!
 
 
-7 # David Starr 2016-01-28 10:01
Disclaimer: I'm not giving Trump the benefit of the doubt.
 
 
+4 # ericlipps 2016-02-05 05:53
Quoting tswhiskers:
I think any politician who would shut down the entire federal govt. because he can't get his way on policy is a man to avoid at all costs. I'm surprised that Trump and not the Dems chose to use Cruz's Canadian birth against him. Commentators seem to consider this fact a very minor point and not worth the mention. But given Cruz's politics I hope that it will be pursued, if only as a means of disqualifying him from running. Sorry if I seem petty but the man is a creep frankly, and I don't want to see a real fundamentalist in the WH. We need to disavow both Trump and Cruz as unfit and incompetent to be president. The Rep. Party needs to stop allowing creeps and fools to run for the presidency and set a system to encourage educated, competent individuals to run. Most of the current Rep. field have no business running let alone winning.

No, Cruz's Canadian birth can't be used against him, because he was born to U.S. citizen parents living abroad and a law passed by the First Congress states that such people count as "native-born" Americans.

I think the guy is crazy, but he is eligible, and the Democrats had more sense than the Rump in not bringing up his birthplace.
 
 
-43 # economagic 2016-01-22 22:56
Razer-sharp?! Whatever, I'm still not voting for Hillary. I believe she would also be a disaster, perhaps a somewhat different one, but drawn out over a longer period of time in which we would be unable to address any of the real problems that most Republicans and ALL "centrist" Democrats either deny or ignore, or simply pay lip service to.
 
 
+45 # vilstef 2016-01-22 23:17
I'm not crazy about Hillary, but I will vote for her rather than sit it out or vote for which ever hater/reactiona ry runs against her. Bernie remains my top choice.
 
 
-9 # lfeuille 2016-01-22 23:59
I was thinking the same way, but I've decided that since I live in DC, which is bluer than NY and Massachusetts and will never go Republican, I can afford to write in Bernie. I wouldn't if I were in a swing state, but in DC it won't hurt.
 
 
+40 # Thomas Martin 2016-01-23 00:36
Ifeuille - your concern and commitment is admirable, but we are not even there yet! ... we are not yet having to accept ineptness and/or dishonesty in who we vote for for President! ... we have an impressively rising star, and we should work for and trust that his name will appear on all ballots!!!
 
 
-18 # bmiluski 2016-01-23 15:34
" I can afford to write in Bernie....
-----------------------
Even if Bernie asked you to NOT write him in?
 
 
-28 # rayb-baby 2016-01-27 02:38
I certainly want Bernie to win, but I'm getting sick of hearing from the Bernie ONLY purists, even if they are in safe states. If all of the Bernie ONLY purists stick to their guns, maybe some of those safe states won't be so safe anymore.
Bernie has long ago said that he will support whoever wins the Dem primary, so you Bernie ONLY purists will being going AGAINST Bernie at that time. THINK ABOUT IT.
 
 
-7 # bobhintz 2016-01-23 11:42
Hear hear! A pause in the journey is vastly preferable to a flipping U-turn.
 
 
-6 # James38 2016-01-23 03:05
economud: Amazing that you can continue to justify this ridiculous stance. You and like - "minded" folks are fortunately in a small minority.

Your obdurate clinging to prejudice is truly astonishing. Have you ever thought about taking a long step back from the idea of "reality" you have boxed yourself into, and actually considering the consequences? Obviously not.

Even a modest amount of logical thought would show you that being this obstinate, if it elected any of the Rethuglicans, would be the worst of the possible choices.
 
 
-16 # bmiluski 2016-01-23 16:06
I agee James38...It almost makes you wonder if he/she is just a repug in Bernie clothing trying to undermine someone who he/she thinks can win.
 
 
-15 # randrjwr 2016-01-23 11:38
Quoting economagic:
Razer-sharp?! Whatever, I'm still not voting for Hillary. I believe she would also be a disaster, perhaps a somewhat different one, but drawn out over a longer period of time in which we would be unable to address any of the real problems that most Republicans and ALL "centrist" Democrats either deny or ignore, or simply pay lip service to.


OK, don't vote for Hillary, but for Heaven's sake, don't vote for Cruz, or any other Rethuglican, either. I'm with vilstef.
 
 
-15 # bmiluski 2016-01-23 15:32
Way to keep on point..economag ic...just keep beating up on Hillary. Makes me wonder just how scared are you that she will win.
 
 
-52 # ronjazz 2016-01-24 11:42
Hillary is the only other qualified candidate besides Bernie.
 
 
+64 # Shades of gray matter 2016-01-22 23:16
Ted's dark personality, pathological character scare me more than his "razor sharp" debating capacity within a questionable paradigm. Watching & listening to him is scary. Literally a face of evil. He is extremely manipulative of his own loyal "followers." How do they swallow the Wall Street connectivity?
 
 
-22 # bmiluski 2016-01-23 16:19
I agree shades. Just look how he manipulated Trump into bringing up NY elites. Trump thinks he won that point. He did not. Cruz played that whole east coast morality crap to the voters in Iowa. And believe me, they were listening and guess who they'll vote for in the Iowa caucuses.
Let's not forget, that cruz has accepted the endorsement of a man who preaches that God sent Hitler to punish the Jews.
 
 
+50 # Thomas Martin 2016-01-22 23:50
Since Cruz is said to be the worse of two evils, I'll focus on him, and particularly on whether he is smart. If he believes in what he's said to believe in, he is not smart. Take global warming ... what can't he understand about the theoretical basis for global warming, or the empirical evidence for it happening? If he truly can't see this, in spite of the whole scientific community supplying evidence that it is, then he's ignorant! And if he denies it for his own selfish purposes, then again he's not smart, he's evil and sinister. It's troubling that we're paying lip service to either Cruz or Trump!
 
 
-12 # moonrigger 2016-01-23 12:14
I would say this, that Cruz is smart in that he knows how to manipulate his constituency, and that he learned this valuable skill from his Dominionesque preacher father. He's been groomed for this role since he was knee-high in the 1980s! His dad "anointed" him like some biblical king. Geezis! However, he's not clever enough to outrun the mounting evidence that his parents were Canadian citizens when he was born, because of the voting records. What needs to happen next--and any decent genealogist worth his or her salt can do this--is to ferret out Rafael Sr.'s divorce record from his first marriage, and also his second wife Eleanor's death certificate, which would indicate her place of birth as well. Rafael Sr. was fortunate enough to emigrate here on a student visa at first, then applied and immediately got a green card, which rarely happens these days, because at the time we got into it with Cuba. I'm not sure how he got the dinero to attend University here, but I would imagine it was on the taxpayer's dime.

Questions remain about why he and his 2nd wife, Teddy's mom, really emigrated to Canada. Ted says it was to start an oil-related business, but I wonder if he skipped out on taking care of his two daughters by the first wife. Either way, Rafael Sr. is an opportunist, and taught Teddy well by example how easy it is to manipulate the gullible Christian right, and the US as well, into providing their "manna from heaven." Disgusting!
 
 
-27 # JJS 2016-01-24 16:09
Thumbs up times 100.
Thanks, moonrigger, for your post.

Also, Canadian oil and mining is reeking destruction on the planet:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/24/opinion/sunday/a-canadian-threat-to-alaskan-fishing.html?_r=0
 
 
-29 # mmcmanus 2016-01-25 11:43
For a while Cruz's father was a communist, so why is anyone surprised that Cruz is another type of extremist--a nazi.
 
 
-16 # Texas Aggie 2016-01-23 20:47
The man's mind is not oriented towards facts. As moon rigger says, he is smart in the sense that he can manipulate words and influence people the same way that demagogues since before the Middle Ages have manipulated people for their own personal gain. He is following in the footsteps of Joe McCarthy (you surely have noticed the physical and behavioral resemblance. It almost makes you believe in reincarnation) and other people like him, only now he has a bigger audience to talk to.
 
 
+17 # allencu@tx.rr.com 2016-01-25 17:35
If you think global warming has anything to do with this then you are the kind of person who would convict someone on flimsy circumstancial
evidence.
 
 
+40 # Pikewich 2016-01-23 01:04
I think it appalling we re even having this conversation.

How evil does it have to get before voting for the lessor evil is suicide?
 
 
-77 # brycenuc 2016-01-23 01:42
Reich says: " Cruz is a fierce ideologue: He denies the existence of man-made climate change, . . . " Odd that Reich would list the only good thing about Cruz as the first of his evils. Cruz is joined my a large and growing group of competent scientists who are denying the existence of man-made climate change.
 
 
+18 # Farafalla 2016-01-23 03:07
Trolls should be sent to place where they can be converted to Soylent Green®.
 
 
+7 # James38 2016-01-23 03:19
Barf. UGH. What the hell was in that piece of Soylent Green?
 
 
-8 # bmiluski 2016-01-23 16:10
It was brycenuc...it has it's own flavor.
 
 
+21 # James38 2016-01-23 03:12
brycenuc, you are simply ignorant of the science. You desperately need some real information. Please read a few decent books on the subject. Recommended:

"Storms of My Grandchildren" by James Hansen
"With Speed and Violence" by Fred Pierce
"Merchants of Doubt" by Naomi Oreskes
.
The idea of climate change denial is totally indefensible. All so-called evidence for that completely unreal non-option is false. If you wish to clearly state any such "evidence", go ahead. I will come back and respond. But before you do that, read at least one of the books I mentioned. It will save you some trouble.
 
 
+10 # Ray Kondrasuk 2016-01-23 04:15
Rather, bryce, a small and shrinking group of denialist scientists, though Cruz managed to pack his hearing committee with them, save for the solid testimony of Admiral David Titley.

Watch it at

http://climatecrocks.com/2016/01/16/watch-admiral-titley-deconstruct-ted-cruz/
 
 
+16 # treerapper 2016-01-23 05:04
Hey brycenuc - the only scientists on record for denying man-made climate change are scientists who are in the pocket of the likes of ExxonMobil. Not exactly the sort of credentials that makes an opinion credible.

Cruz is so caught up in his own brand of zealotry that he's demonic. Wonder what's in our water that anyone would by into the absolute drivel that comes out of the mouths of the entire GOP offering.
 
 
+4 # reiverpacific 2016-01-23 10:26
Quoting brycenuc:
Reich says: " Cruz is a fierce ideologue: He denies the existence of man-made climate change, . . . " Odd that Reich would list the only good thing about Cruz as the first of his evils. Cruz is joined my a large and growing group of competent scientists who are denying the existence of man-made climate change.


I'm soooo glad that you can have a like-minded Troll, even in his own already deranged political party, to support; must make you feel like a real individualist.
Now to the "res"; can you give us an example from a CREDIBLE source, of that "large and growing group of competent scientists who are denying the existence of man-made climate change".
They may well be from Betelguese 111.
 
 
-5 # brycenuc 2016-01-23 11:49
You, of course, will not consider it CREDIBLE, but you can google "Watts up with that" for a large and growing group of competent scientists who don't deny that CO2 can modestly warm the atmosphere and that humanity produces some CO2, but do deny that CO2's and humanity's effect on climate is anything other than negligible.
 
 
0 # Jim Rocket 2016-01-23 12:40
"produces some CO2"? A few grams here and there perhaps? How many "hottest years on record" in a row do you need before you realize that something is out of whack?
 
 
-8 # bmiluski 2016-01-23 16:12
HA HA HA HA ...you'd be sooo cute, brycenuc, if you weren't so irrelevant.
 
 
+3 # TJ_in_Virginia 2016-01-23 16:56
When people that have chosen to engage in dialog with you ask for credible sources behind your claims, suggesting they google the name of a blog site is not indicative that you yourself have done much homework. How about a peer reviewed paper on a study not funded by an entity with a conflict of interest? How about a book by someone with the credentials James Hansen has which James38 suggested to you? By the way, the blog you referenced is run by an AM radio weatherman without a college degree. A frequent contributor of man-made climate change denial on that blog is a British nobleman with degrees in the classics who makes a living as a politician and journalist. One credible source there is Fred Singer who is a well credentialed scientist but he writes as a skeptic not a denier and loses credibility with me when he offers his belief that global warming would be good for us. Make an effort, do some real homework and offer some substance. I will get you started. A 1997 paper,"What do we really know about the Sun-climate connection?", was published through the International & Area Studies Academic Program of UC Berkeley by Eigil Friis-Christens en and Henrik Svensmark entitled . It was peer reviewed and accepted for publication in "Advances in Space Research". The paper casts doubt on how well we understand climate change factors drawing attention to changes in solar output. Note that I am not saying this paper supports of all your claims. You need to find more. Good Luck.
 
 
+1 # Texas Aggie 2016-01-23 20:51
Can you give any reason whatsoever to consider Watts up with that to be a credible source? Do you also consider The Onion to be a credible source? I had a classmate who considered The Red Star from Mao's China to be a credible source. Are you him?
 
 
-8 # JJS 2016-01-24 16:34
Even if you dispute the "green-house" effect and climate change of human induced increases of CO2 you cannot dispute the very detrimental, malnourishing and suffocating effects on plants, animals, fish. You also cannot dispute the ocean acidification of increased, human induced atmospheric CO2 and its effects on the food chain, as well as the environment challenges that result, generally.
Conserve, GO SOLAR and WIND!

http://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/effects-of-rising-atmospheric-concentrations-of-carbon-13254108

http://coralreef.noaa.gov/aboutcrcp/strategy/reprioritization/wgroups/resources/climate/resources/oa_royalsociety.pdf
 
 
+6 # randrjwr 2016-01-23 11:40
Quoting brycenuc:
Reich says: " Cruz is a fierce ideologue: He denies the existence of man-made climate change, . . . " Odd that Reich would list the only good thing about Cruz as the first of his evils. Cruz is joined my a large and growing group of competent scientists who are denying the existence of man-made climate change.


Care to provide a list of names?
 
 
-5 # bmiluski 2016-01-23 16:13
Of course he can't, randrjwr, he's a troll. Trolls only spew useless shiiiiiteeee.
 
 
+4 # moonrigger 2016-01-23 12:18
Brycie, there is no LARGE and GROWING group of competent scientists denying climate change. There are a few oddballs out there who espouse this notion, just like there are a few who are damned sure man never walked on the moon, etc. etc. Go away!
 
 
-2 # bmiluski 2016-01-23 16:09
Oh hi brycenuc....wel come to our site. Just be warned that your posts are irrelevant as we here do our research instead of just blindly spewing repug vomit.
 
 
+3 # brycenuc 2016-01-23 16:58
If you and your cohorts actually did your research you would notice that the many millions of years of history (including 21st- century history) of both carbon dioxide and atmospheric temperature show absolutely no correlation between the two. You warming alarmists have been 100% wrong on both your forecasts and your hindcasts. With such a record do you expect the public to believe your scare stories?
 
 
-1 # Jim Rocket 2016-01-23 17:22
Now that it's come out that Esso and other oil companies studied the issue back in the 70's and came to the conclusion that global warming was real and we were causing it and, instead of sounding the alarm, spent many tens of millions creating the denier community, you just sound like a silly chump.
 
 
0 # Anarchist 23 2016-01-23 18:53
Yep...it is just SO Normal that crocus are beginning to show up in January in Seattle and that here in the mountains of NM the melting snow is forming mire and standing pools in the ruts and that back in NYC in Dec. they could wear shorts. Nope, nothing unusual to see here; go about your business...just not in Fla since the tides are now rising over the streets and back-washing in the storm gutters spewing lots of salt water on to lawns, destroying trees by poisoning them with salt. Nothing to worry about here, nope, never.....
 
 
-8 # James38 2016-01-23 20:44
Brycie, you say "the many millions of years of history (including 21st- century history) of both carbon dioxide and atmospheric temperature show absolutely no correlation between the two."

But that is simply not true. You made that one up out of thin air - or someone did and you are just repeating trash you didn't check out with serious research. Read the book I recommended by James Hansen, "Storms of My Grandchildren". That would get you started in the right direction. Take some time checking out the extensive bibliography and references.

Or go to an earlier book by one of the pioneers of modern climate research, "Fixing Climate" by Wallace Broecker. He gives examples of the first heros of Climate Science, along with their exploits getting ice core samples from the Greenland ice mass, ocean floor cores, and many other specific sources of information that forms the basis of our growing knowledge - knowledge that makes nonsense of your baseless and fact-free assertions.

You go on to say, "You warming alarmists have been 100% wrong on both your forecasts and your hindcasts." But that also is just blather and hot air propaganda. You are lying. You are giving nothing but invented nonsense designed to confuse the ignorant.

Thus far you have acted just exactly like a Denialist foot-soldier. A little drone following orders. Do the Koch brothers send a courier with instructions?
 
 
-8 # Texas Aggie 2016-01-23 20:59
We've done the research and have found that yes, indeed, there is a strong relationship between Greenhouse gases and rising temperatures. Furthermore the 100% wrong that you've seen on the forecasts is that they were too conservative and what they were predicting in the middle future happened even while they were speaking. For instance the loss of ice in the Arctic Ocean and on Greenland. Even in Antarctica ice is flowing into the ocean faster than predicted. The ocean is rising faster than predicted and the rate is accelerating. The Gulf Stream is slowing faster than they predicted, and it goes on and on. And it's beginning to look like the prediction that the glaciers in the Himalayas would melt soon that was so derided by the deniers may actually turn out to be true. So the only "errors" that were made were on the side of the deniers. The situation is even worse than was originally thought.
 
 
-9 # James38 2016-01-24 02:19
Well stated Tex. That is one consistent thing I have noticed since I began studying climate change in earnest about 15 years ago - that the predictions were always too conservative, often by a lot.

I started making my own predictions to see how well I was understanding the real situation. I was able to correctly anticipate several major changes well before the general consensus caught up.

The phrases you keep hearing, and have been hearing for many years are "Sooner than predicted", "more rapidly than anyone thought", "far worse than was expected", etc., etc.

Unfortunately, and frighteningly, this is still going on.
 
 
-18 # ronjazz 2016-01-24 11:45
There are no competent scientists denying global climate change. not a single one.
 
 
-10 # Helga Fellay 2016-01-24 13:57
brycenuc - all of this "large and growing group of competent scientists who are denying the existence of man-made climate change" are either on the payroll of polluting corporations, or are heavily bribed by them. Monsanto's own scientists have also claimed for years that Round-up is not dangerous. By the way, your "competent scientists" denying climate change is not a "large group" - merely a small, single-digit percentage.
 
 
-4 # rayb-baby 2016-01-27 02:50
Oh, go away, moron. The ONLY ones that you'll convince here are the 2 or 3 other regular trolls that comment here. Now go find a porno site. It'll be time better spent for you.
 
 
+47 # mh1224jst 2016-01-23 02:44
Cruz may have a razor-sharp mind, and debating skills, but with his views he has to be a complete sociopath. How are people supposed to live, in his scheme of things? And his religious pathology? No wonder a religious fanatic who thinks Oprah is the devil endorses him. It doesn't get much crazier.
The scary thing is that someone like him can attract so much support. How in the world does Scott Walker get elected? Too many sickos out there.
 
 
+44 # James38 2016-01-23 03:16
I think the simplest explanation is our lousy education system. We desperately need to understand that a good educational system is essential for a society to have a future. We must develop a National policy that puts spending on education at the highest level of priority. Cutting education budgets is the quickest way to make sure the United States falls further and further into a death spiral.
 
 
-3 # JJS 2016-01-24 18:04
I agree, James. Primary/seconda ry public school funding shouldn't be dependent or based on local property taxes as is now the case. Public schools should be federally funded with oversight of local control.
 
 
-1 # allencu@tx.rr.com 2016-01-25 17:44
Our educational system has been taken over by parents and politically motivated idiots instead of teacher. Put teachers back in charge, not parents or government.
 
 
0 # Pickwicky 2016-01-25 19:20
I agree--our educational system is deplorable. The sooner this country realizes that our future is in peril because of our education weaknesses the better. Have to disagree with Allen--I believe that teachers are agents of government in that an excellent education for children is our best defense.
 
 
-2 # Jim Rocket 2016-01-23 12:31
I would dearly love to hear some psychologists do a profile on Cruz. As Jed used to say, "There's something wrong with that boy".
 
 
-7 # Pickwicky 2016-01-25 19:22
Jim Rocket--oh boy, so would I. That profile would no doubt entail a cold, dark, descending spiral. Br-r-r-r-r-r!
 
 
+26 # jlarson 2016-01-23 02:56
From JP: Frankly I have not noticed Cruz's "razor-sharp mind" cutting through anything, except others' throats. This media/political meme that he's a terrific debater should have died by now. He really isn't all that good.
If we think the presidential (esp Republican) debates are debates, we all should go back to college and start over. You don't effectively refute another's arguments with illogic, lies, slurs, propaganda, and nonsense, no matter now nonsensical your opponent may be. The very idea of a man who "hates the federal government" becoming President is a non sequitur. Instead, the logical thing to do would be for Cruz to take up his God-given weapons (nevermind the Constitution) and join the out-of-state ranchers in Oregon to lead a second, very bloody American revolution. He would then be properly labeled (if the FBI does its job) as a subversive, a "violent extremist," rather than a great debater.
If the US is to be destroyed, let's do so in the name of higher collective ideals than the "arguments' of this self-serving jerk. My hope is that Sarah Palin's raw-voiced endorsement sinks Cruz's campaign. If not, America is in even deeper trouble than we thought. And it's cavernous already.
 
 
-2 # bmiluski 2016-01-23 16:21
Sarah Palin endorsed trump, not cruz. But since then, I think trump has dumped her.
 
 
-2 # Texas Aggie 2016-01-23 21:04
I think that is what he was saying. Since Palin endorsed Trump, Cruz's ship is sinking.
 
 
+31 # James38 2016-01-23 03:23
Ted Cruz is disgusting. But if you watch him speaking to his supporters, you can definitely see a master manipulator at work. He is diabolic and relentless in his ability to manipulate and lie.

His supporters are totally fooled by his clever machinations.
 
 
-6 # Jim Rocket 2016-01-23 12:33
Good point. He is really more of a cult leader than a politician.
 
 
-15 # Pickwicky 2016-01-25 19:25
Jim Rocket--you nailed it! Cruz is a natural born cult leader. All his foolish followers are lapping up the poison.
 
 
+10 # sharsand 2016-01-23 06:44
Nazi Germany--here we come. Hitler/Cruz--on e and the same. White Christians only welcome here.
 
 
-8 # randrjwr 2016-01-23 11:46
Quoting sharsand:
Nazi Germany--here we come. Hitler/Cruz--one and the same. White Christians only welcome here.


If not Hitler/Cruz, then Hitler/Trump. As James38 points out in the case of Cruz, Trump also is using Hitler tactics and strategy to whip audiences into a frenzy.
 
 
-5 # ronjazz 2016-01-24 11:48
Trump is Mussolini, not Hitler.
 
 
+6 # JJS 2016-01-24 18:11
And Hillary is Hirohito!?!
 
 
+14 # christianadvocate 2016-01-23 09:15
I agree that Cruz is unhinged in many of his positions and suffers from a lack of diplomatic integrity. Although I would favor Trump over Cruz without hesitation, I think Trump has some deep-seeded psychological issues. I have never seen an adult of normal social skills that speaks like he does. He is almost child-like in his use of superlatives and grandiose adjectives, and he does so with such bragging. He reminds me of my grandchild and how we have to tell her that it is not nice to brag and that she should learn to say nice things about others. Trump has those same qualities, and it is really quite unusual in an adult. I can only conclude it is who he is, and that is very troubling.
 
 
+7 # Jim Rocket 2016-01-23 12:35
I'm a mere amateur but the term Narcissistic Personality Disorder comes to mind when I hear Trump.
 
 
-3 # Citizen Mike 2016-01-24 00:04
Quoting Jim Rocket:
I'm a mere amateur but the term Narcissistic Personality Disorder comes to mind when I hear Trump.

You are exactly correct, I have dealt with this kind of person before. Trump has an obvious case of malignant personality disorder wide enough to drive a beer truck through. He is antisocial and vastly more dangerous than Cruz. With President Trump we can expect ethnic concentration camps for Muslim citizens and and ad hoc militias encouraged to pogrom black neighborhoods. Torture will be added to our repertoire of criminal penalties and kangaroo courts will be convened to convict anyone Trump does not like, including elected officials.
 
 
+6 # dbrize 2016-01-24 13:34
Quoting Citizen Mike:
Quoting Jim Rocket:
I'm a mere amateur but the term Narcissistic Personality Disorder comes to mind when I hear Trump.

You are exactly correct, I have dealt with this kind of person before. Trump has an obvious case of malignant personality disorder wide enough to drive a beer truck through. He is antisocial and vastly more dangerous than Cruz. With President Trump we can expect ethnic concentration camps for Muslim citizens and and ad hoc militias encouraged to pogrom black neighborhoods. Torture will be added to our repertoire of criminal penalties and kangaroo courts will be convened to convict anyone Trump does not like, including elected officials.


Put the flamethrower away. Then get off the caffeine and take a nap. You sound crazier than Trump. The only "concentration camps" we've had came under the sainted FDR, need I remind you.

We are not electing a dictator and Trump should he somehow prevail, will quickly find out that in the Imperial City there are many masters, all of whom cede power grudgingly.

Trump is a typical deal maker, all bluster and bluff, the kind that give up half the loaf as long as he can declare himself the winner. Not the greatest presidential choice but a long way from your overwrought forecast.

Opponents from Democrats, bitter GOP outliers, libertarian sorts and a host of other interest groups aren't going to go quietly into the night just because Trump's in town.

Calm down.
 
 
-2 # JJS 2016-01-24 18:16
Hi christianadvocate.
FWIW the term is "deep-seated" not "deep-seeded".
 
 
+1 # dbrize 2016-01-24 18:57
Quoting JJS:
Hi christianadvocate.
FWIW the term is "deep-seated" not "deep-seeded".


Maybe he inherited it from his father.
 
 
+11 # Kootenay Coyote 2016-01-23 09:41
Some choice.
 
 
-5 # moonrigger 2016-01-23 12:26
If Cruz wins, we're well on our way to the reality imagined by Margaret Atwood in the Handmaid's Tale. His father is a dominionist preacher, and both of them are biblical literalists, despite all the evidence to the contrary (or even, say, common sense) that the earth is only ~6,000 yrs old, and created by this pathological ancient Canaanite entity called Yahweh, who reputedly wiped out tens of thousands on a whim (like if incense smoke blew the wrong way), and made the earth stand still. Saints preserve us!
 
 
-1 # goodsensecynic 2016-01-23 13:29
About 53 years ago, I was told by my undergraduate philosophy professor that it was wrong to make an "ad hominem" argument.

I have spent the past half-century trying to understand why.

When confronted with frauds, fools and just plain evil people, how is it wrong to call them out for the vile, venal and venomous creatures that they are?

More important, however, is the practical political question of how monsters like these get so close to power. The fact that dolts (e.g., Dan Quayle) and nut-jobs (Sarah bin-Palin) are taken seriously in American politics is scary enough; but, the notion that Donald Trump and Ted Cruz represent the finest in American society and are seemingly credible candidates for your country's highest office is terrifying.

I won't waste your time criticizing the entire inventory of Republican aspirants or the putative front-runner for the Democratic nomination - that unreconstructed "Goldwater Girl" from 1964 - but I will beg and beseech my American friends to think deeply about a political culture that would throw up such individuals as potential chief magistrates of your so-called "exceptional" society.

Upon reflection, Bernie Sanders' invocation of the concept of "revolution" seems not merely desirable, but utterly essential both for the future of your nation and for the rest of us who are increasingly at risk of being dragged down with you.
 
 
-1 # JJS 2016-01-24 18:24
Quoting goodsensecynic:
.....the notion that Donald Trump and Ted Cruz represent the finest in American society and are seemingly credible candidates for your country's highest office is terrifying.
.....

Not the "finest", only the most popular of the Republican Party primary candidates. We still have the primary and the general
elections to go. Let's hope the true "Best and Brightest" prevail.
 
 
-2 # MarthaA 2016-01-23 13:47
TRUMP'S Planning to Shaft the Greater Majority of Americans

How would Trump build a wall with Mexico's money between the USA and Mexico???

Trump has stated plainly that Mexico will pay for the wall that he will build between the USA and Mexico!!!

The reason why Trump is sure that Mexico will pay for the wall that he will build between Mexico and the USA is because Trump was a part of the Financializatio n and Deindustrializa tion Scheme of the CONSERVATIVE RIGHT-WING REPUBLICAN EXTREMISTS; that extended from the 1960's to the collapse of the USA Economy in 2008, and continues to the present; and knows that a tiny part of Mexican access to American Markets for expatriated American industry from USA deindustrializa tion and resultant USA financializatio n in Mexico looking for markets for their production WILL PAY FOR THE WALL between the USA and Mexico, and that Mexico's Economy will benefit at the expense of the USA Economy.

The real issue for Trump is CHEAP LABOR in Mexico and Trump pushing the benefit of the Mexican Economy at the expense of the USA Economy and then bragging that by doing so that he can construct a wall between the USA and Mexico and Mexico will pay for it.

YES!!! MEXICO WILL PAY FOR THE WALL at the expense of the USA ECONOMY!!
 
 
-7 # MarthaA 2016-01-23 13:49
Is paying for the wall at the expense of the USA Economy what the USA wants?? You can follow Pied Piper Trump or Ted Kruz and neither intend to protect the best interest of the 99%. It is always best to follow your own best interest and Bernie Sanders is the ONLY candidate for POTUS that is concerned about the protection of the best interest of the 99%.

People have to start talking about CORPORATE PRIVATISM, because corporate privatism is what is happening. We have avoided talking about corporate privatism since 1917 and pretended that corporate privatism is capitalism. Corporate Privatism is Corporate Privatism and needs to be talked about as Corporate Privatism and NOT Capitalism, because it is NOT Capitalism. Capital and Capitalism is about an asset that provides a revenue stream and privatism is the attitude of being uncommitted to or avoiding involvement in anything beyond one's immediate interests.

Trump says U.S. companies 'moving into Mexico more than almost any other place right now'
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/27/donald-trump/trump-says-us-companies-moving-mexico-more-almost-/


As Ties With China Unravel, U.S. Companies Head to Mexico
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/01/world/americas/as-ties-with-china-unravel-us-companies-head-to-mexico.html?_r=0

Global Companies Manufacturing in Mexico
http://tacna.net/companies-succeeding-in-mexico/
 
 
-3 # dargreb 2016-01-23 17:22
I agree completely with Dr. Reich's description of Cruz, although I think it is an open question as to whether a true believer with bad beliefs like Cruz is more dangerous than a totally unscrupulous, power hungry pathological liar with no beliefs like Trump. As an aside, Dr. Reich needs a good proof reader: razOr, not razer, and aN inherent, not a inherent.
 
 
-14 # James38 2016-01-23 20:59
ctcrow gets that distinction. At least the "totally unscrupulous, power hungry pathological liar with no beliefs like Trump" is capable of self-interest.

Cruz would chew off his own foot if it got him the power he wants to destroy without limitation. He reminds me of a creature on a planet invented by a Science Fiction writer whose name I can't remember. This creature loved the taste of blood so much that the way you could defeat it was to crawl into a cave too narrow for it to follow, wedge a knife between some rocks, and smear a little blood on the knife. The creature would lick the blood off the knife, cutting its tongue, and then would bleed to death continuously licking the knife and bleeding more and more, drinking its own blood.

That is what Cruz looks like to me.
 
 
-4 # Robbee 2016-01-23 18:55
comments - # bmiluski 2016-01-23 15:34
" I can afford to write in Bernie....
-----------------------
Even if Bernie asked you to NOT write him in?

- how ironic that those who pledge to write-in bernie can't stand what he says! - best think of them as GOP trolls!

listen to bernie! DON"T pledge to, or write him, in! - go bernie!
 
 
-2 # ctcrow 2016-01-23 19:46
Better an amoral opportunist than a zealous crusading bomb-thrower... a dilemma for anyone who wants neither..
 
 
+30 # allencu@tx.rr.com 2016-01-25 17:10
After a some thought about you description of Cruz I decided "What's wrong with that?" That is almost everything I agree with. I also might add "No guts, no glory.". I also like Cruz's alternate plan for taxes. BTW, I do like most of Trump's ideas, but Cruz's plans are more thought out and just plain better.
 
 
-13 # thiagosantiro 2016-01-26 17:43
Ted Cruz is not an originator of his ideas. He takes the advice of others and writes legislation for them based on their agendas. He made attempts to raise the H-1B visa limits by 500% from 65,000 to 325,000 and AFTER Trump met with Sessions to develop his anti H-1B agenda it was then that Cruz totally changed from increasing the limits to now blocking it. This flip flop shows that he is unable to grasp the needs of american workers. http://www.computerworld.com/article/3014365/it-careers/sen-ted-cruz-wants-minimum-h-1b-wage-of-110-000.html
 
 
+25 # infinitewisdom4u 2016-01-27 10:46
First I would point out the irony in which this site bemoans the "vitriol" in comments, yet promotes the misleading rhetoric of Mr. Reich. Cruz, and many others using facts and reason, described the future budgetary and economic failures of Obamacare that would spiral out of control. The truths have become obvious to even some hard-line backers of the legislation yet Reich, who as a liberal can't comprehend the long term destruction that arises from such insidious liberal ideological policies despite historical evidence showing failure after failure, demonizes an individual who stood his ground and made a very clear case, against the potential crippling legislation.
Cruz has the same view of the federal govt. that most have who have attempted to change or counter any "govt. approved" actions that are improper and sometimes even dangerous. A review of ANY Federal govt.'s agency has uncovered multitudes of actions improper and sometimes criminal. VA-establishing a bonus system based on a system that manipulates data and veterans suffer, to pay out bonuses and the executives knew about it. The Bureau of Land Mgt. has been cited many times in which they over reached yet it is nearly impossible to get a resolution without a lengthy and expensive court battle. The EPA is totally politicized at the top and generates reckless policies.
Eager to destroy? How about fix and make the govt. accountable? Or do you want less accountability? You will get it with Clinton or Sanders.
 
 
+25 # TopAssistant 2016-01-28 10:11
Isn't Robert Reich still a communist and hates our Constitution?
Trump is nothing but a schoolyard bully!
Cruz could recite our Constitution at the age of 13 and would stop oru destruction.

We are $18.5 trillion dollars in debt today and I read what Dr. Ben Carson’s wife, Lacena, aka Candy said, if we paid $10 million a day it would take a little over 5,065 years to do so to pay it off!

WAKE UP AMERICA, WE WILL BE DESTROYED!
 
 
-1 # flareb 2016-01-28 17:00
i'm not sure i trust any of the 3 top ones right now
 
 
+31 # 4Freedom 2016-01-29 08:07
Precisely that is what America needs. Obama and the DemocRats are the ones destroying the country.

TED CRUZ For President in 2016
 
 
+24 # strongerAmerica 2016-01-30 15:10
I wonder if they are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol if you are disagreeing with the premise of this article. I wonder if they ramp of the moderation ( I E delete comments ) only if they perceive you to be mean to their sensitive liberal opinions. OK let me try my first amendment rights here. Everything I read in that article makes me want to go for Ted Cruz more. He is solid he is consistent he does what he says and he says what he means. I've already cast my vote for him here in Michigan.
 
 
+20 # jgramm 2016-01-31 12:13
LOL! Everything that was said in comments could just as easily be said about Obama. And I am not surprised that you don't see that.
And BTW, worse can be said about Obama. Some call him a dictator and a traitor, just to name two.
 
 
+17 # jgramm 2016-01-31 12:14
And BTW, the word traitor does not mean what most liberals think it means. People are tired of you changing the definitions of words to fit your agenda.
 
 
+23 # fixer 2016-01-31 19:06
Ted Cruz is more dangerous to who?? Liberal,big government, one world order socialists?? GOOD!!!
 
 
+24 # Ha99y 2016-01-31 20:38
Ted Cruz is the man of integrity we need. Everything Reich despises, we love. Go Cruz!
 
 
+7 # Barrel 2016-02-02 11:45
Odd that we have the opportunity to have a president that will be a staunch defender of our constitutional rights & he is called a dangerous ideologue. It is also disheartening that establishment republicans can't stand to think someone will come to Washington & upset their little fiefdoms & the taxpayer money they get to play with. Cruz would be a great president to challenge the status quo of DC.
 
 
+9 # Allen72642 2016-02-02 20:21
I’m confused. You say Ted Cruz is dangerous because he supports the founding fathers’ interpretation of the constitution, because he sticks by what he believes and doesn’t waffle like some “people” I won’t name, because he's smart, because He’s more disciplined and strategic, and because he’s willing to get rid of the same-old same-old? These sound like attributes of a leader. Would you rather have someone who disdains the constitution, who constantly waffles and changes his/her views, who isn’t very smart, who isn’t very disciplined and has no clear strategy, and who wants more of the same old centralized big brother ways we’ve had for the last seven years. If so, then vote for Hillary.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN