Cruz Barn Burner: Strawman or Paper Tiger?


Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) burned the barn to the ground with his 21 hour ‘fauxlibuster’ this week on the Senate floor.  Supporters of Cruz’ increasingly libertarian voice relish his statesmanship and clarity, and conversely, no doubt detractors and skeptics dismissed much of the material content addressed due to Cruz’ rhetorical devices, not limited channeling statist icon Darth Vader while lampooning Senator Mike Lee (R-UT).

The usual political hay has already been spun by the  pundits, including Limbaugh and Coulter, providing color commentary and cold shots alike.  Senator Cruz’ profile is quickly rising, and he is being touted as a quill for the young libertarian porcupine within the halls of congress — alongside the likes of Marco Rubio and Rand Paul.  Indeed, Cruz is more than likely positioning himself for a cabinet post in potential Paul campaign 2016, bidding the GOP base against New Jersey’s increasingly progressive Chris Christie.

It is assumed Hillary Clinton will be the ochlocratic candidate.

Rafael Cruz (Ted’s father) makes impassioned appeals to the ideals of Americana-brand liberty for large crowds of supporters, evoking support from the base of the GOP with the family’s brand; scathing indictments of our Republic’s current state, drawing parallels to Bautistas’ fascist, then Castro’s communist Cuba and the horror of living under a totalitarian regime two times over.  Rafael Cruz escaped Castro and fled to the liberty and free markets in Canada, then here in the US, finding success through a technology connection to the petroleum industry — a familiar Horatio Alger-esque tale — Millitary Fascism to Communism and to Corporate Fascism in less than a generation..

…and then there is  Mrs.Heidi Nelson-Cruz, the senator’s wife.  Ted and Heidi met in the Bush White House, while she was working for Condi Rice.  A Claremont-McKenna and Harvard Business grad, Heidi Nelson-Cruz currently works for Goldman-Sachs as a Vice President.

Texas seems to have a GOP senator with strong ties to petroleum, the Bush White House and good ol’ Goldman-Sachs through his wife.  These observations, coupled with the current political landscape may provide insight the origin and intent of the Senator from Texas’ dazzling libertarian all-nighter.

Cruz may need to spend another 21 hours in an attempt to burn down his own straw man — free markets or corporatism?  If his wife works for the self-same Goldman-Sachs that profited from the TARP bailout rammed through the halls of Congress at the tail end of the Bush regime and spilling into the Obama regime; the Goldman-Sachs that boasts both parties’ presidents and cabinets in their pockets going back to (at least) the Clinton administration, would that not be a conflict of interest?  Cruz made open comment about the excellent health insurance provided Heidi’s Vice-Presidency with Goldman-Sachs.  The banking cartel’s involvement in  and subsequent manipulation of the political sphere is a common link between both ends of the popular political spectrum, and to assume that a politician’s libertarian common sense would be immune to the pressures and normalcy bias of the human condition would be naive.

Ted Cruz talks a good game.  He offers the concepts and economic pedigree libertarians have been waiting to hear from a GOP Senator other than Ron Paul, and presents these concepts in a clear and relatable way.  His voting record as a Senator approaches perfection.  Unfortunately, many of the Tea Party Rockstars* who held great promise for the cause of liberty have proven to be paper tigers.  However liberated Ted Cruz’ economic policy could be, the rigor of skepticism cannot be abandoned by liberty-minded citizens just yet.

As Patrick Henry, liberty lover and skeptic of government, famously remarked of the Constitutional Convention, I smell a rat…and hope on the bones of Lysander Spooner for our Republic’s sake, that I am wrong about the Senator from Texas.

*Rockstar Brand Tea flavored energy beverage is not endorsed by publisher or any so-called Tea Party Rockstars.

Qui Bono,

L.A. Repucci

3 thoughts on “Cruz Barn Burner: Strawman or Paper Tiger?

  1. Well, in most US states private health insurance was distorted by non-libertarian regulation from both sides of the aisle for long. I think neither Republicans nor Demo0crats have a mandate to talk about that sore subject anymore. And they lack the actuarial knowledge anyway.

    • Darragh,

      The ‘insurance’ business is a deeply flawed proposition on it’s face – insurers are a third-party entity which insert themselves between two parties with a contract. Consider auto insurance — should I rear-end another driver, I have direct liability and am bound by common and civil liability to make restitution and remunerate the damaged party. Adding a statute to the books that requires me to empower a third party (insurer) to pay in my stead doesn’t mitigate my direct liability to the victim.

      This point, however salient, skips entirely the fact that based upon the Commerce Clause in the Constitution, the State cannot compel anyone to purchase a product or set a price in lieu of the market. The very idea that the American public has accepted the concept that the government can require citizens to purchase a product or service is the real problem from a libertarian perspective.

      By calling healthcare a ‘tax’ rather than a product or service, the State has circumvented (yet again) it’s constitutional boundaries in an effort to co-opt our liberty and dominate the market. The specious suggestion that that taxes are anything but theft by the government goes ignored in the national dialogue, largely due to the fact that the nation has accepted the yoke of taxation for so long, though taxation was the key evil that led to the revolution. In a civilized (voluntary) society, free people exchange currency for goods and services – and document these transactions with GAAP (accounting). This simple exchange of cash for trade is the bedrock of civilization – and the State’s appropriation and interloping for centuries is a vestigial hold-over from the tithes demanded by the church and the forced tribute of monarchs.

      Once the population comes to the realization that we no longer need a government, they will simply stop funding it. We hand our sovereignty to tyrants – it cannot be taken against our consent. Bondage is chosen by the slave – many people in history have chosen to die free on their feet, rather than live on their knees.

      Thanks for the comment!

      Stiff Knees,

      L.A. Repucci

    • (Sorry, a belated answer) “…though taxation was the key evil that led to the revolution …” Well there are two sides to that tax and revolution story. The revolutionaries said, so I was told in school “no taxation without representation”. That fell short of discussing a much greater but hidden problem people just freeing themselves from the shackles of feudal power never thought through: can a “sovereign” elected by PART of the people actually rule the other half (or often greater part)? And if so, to what degree. Even if one answered affirmative on the former, that would still leave the discussion whether the state, as acting for the represented, could e.g. tell me whom to marry or not (which it even does, today though mostly limited to marrying close relatives, but before it extended to racial and other criteria). Since people accepted taxation as such and never fully established boundaries as to what could be regulated, this is the birth defect of the US constitution and all that followed. But that’s probably too convoluted a subject to discuss in comments only.

Please keep it civil

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s