Ted Cruz Plays to Sheldon Adelson on Israel and Iran

Ted Cruz can agree with the Israeli government position without being so untruthful about the position of the Obama administration.  The sub-headline to this story reads,”The Texas senator says he believes the Obama administration thinks it is “perfectly acceptable” for Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon.”   Obama spoke to AIPAC in 2012 and said very clearly that preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapon is a national security interest of both Israel and the United States and that has been his position ever since.  Cruz can disagree with Obama’s negotiation tactics without lying about Obama’s basic position.  Pandering to the base or sucking up to powerful potential donors is not a reason to flat out lie, so shame on Senator Cruz once more.

Click here to read the full story of March 2, 2015 from BloombergPolitics, which I quote in part below:

Senator Ted Cruz is unabashed about his support for Israel and his contempt for Iran, and Monday he made sure that mega-donor Sheldon Adelson knows it.

A day before Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses a joint meeting of the U.S. Congress the Texas Republican was the only lawmaker to join Elie Wiesel, the Nobel Peace Prize-winning Holocaust survivor, in a Senate hearing room Monday for a panel discussion titled “The Meaning of Never Again: Guarding Against a Nuclear Iran.”

In the talk, which was moderated by American Orthodox Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, Cruz’s criticism of President Barack Obama was pointed and included a claim that the administration doesn’t really want to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

The only “natural” consequence of Obama’s efforts to negotiate with Iran, “is that Iran will have a nuclear weapon,” said Cruz, as casino and hotel magnate Adelson, who is Jewish, looked on from the audience.

“Those who are leading this negotiation fundamentally don’t understand who it is they are negotiating with,” Cruz said. “I think their view is it’s perfectly acceptable for Iran to have nuclear weapons, and they will be part of the rational community of nations.”

Was Ted Cruz right to claim inequality worsened under Obama?

It turns out that Ted Cruz was wrong when he said financial inequality has gotten worse in the U.S. under President Obama.  Yes, the very rich are doing well now that Obama turned the economy around from the disaster that befell us at the end of the last Bush Administration, but the bottom 90% are even better off than they were.

Click here to read this Washington Post story of February 17, 2014 and see those pesky facts Cruz overlooked when he attached President Obama on ABC News last Sunday.

Politicians on both sides of the aisle are talking about how to ensure that everyone, not just the wealthy, benefits from economic growth, with conservatives accusing the Obama administration of protecting banks and corporations at the expense of the middle class. “I chuckle every time I hear Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton talk about income inequality, because it’s increased dramatically under their policies,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) said last month.

That’s not true, though. As David Leonhardt writes in The New York Times, federal policy effectively blunted the pain of the financial crisis for most American families, according to data from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. When incomes decline, people pay less in taxes. When people lose their jobs, they qualify for benefits like unemployment insurance and food stamps. The fiscal stimulus expanded many of those programs. As a result, writes Leonhardt, while disposable incomes for the richest percentile declined 27 percent between 2007 and 2011, they remained constant for the nine-tenths of the country that isn’t very rich.

Income inequality is still at its highest level in decades, but it’s declined slightly since 2007, Leonhardt writes.

As a Lawyer, Ted Cruz Defended Huge Jury Awards. As a Politician, He Opposed Them

The Jeb Bush media team will use stories like this for their attack ads if they become too worried about Senator Cruz.

Click here to read what the liberals at Mother Jones News wrote about Ted Cruz on February 11, 2014.

As a politician, Ted Cruz, the junior Republican senator from Texas, has championed tort reform—the nationwide effort pushed by conservatives and business interests to restrict malpractice and other wrongful injury and death lawsuits, limiting how much a jury can award a harmed individual for pain and suffering and in punitive damages. When Cruz ran for Senate in 2012, his website declared he had defended a landmark pro-business tort reform law passed in Texas in 2003 that severely constrained the ability of consumers to sue medical professionals and nursing homes and to collect punitive damages in other cases. Cruz also boasted that when he had been a policy adviser on George W. Bush’s first presidential campaign he developed Bush’s pro-tort reform proposals. During the Senate race, the Texas Civil Justice League, a supporter of tort reform, enthusiastically endorsed Cruz. After becoming a senator, Cruz told the Austin Chamber of Commerce that Texas-style tort reform—which places a cap of $750,000 on punitive damages—ought to be a national law.

Yet, as a lawyer in private practice, Cruz—at least twice, in 2010 and 2011—worked on cases in New Mexico to secure $50 million-plus jury awards in tort cases prompted by corporate malfeasance. These are precisely the kind of jury awards that the tort reform Cruz has promoted would abolish. That is, Cruz the attorney, who sometimes billed clients $695 an hour, made money defending jury awards that Cruz the politician wanted to eliminate—and he did so at the same time he was running for Senate as a pro-tort-reform candidate.

Insane, Lying Ted Cruz Insists That Democrats are The One Percent Party

Some liberal critics too hung up on the truth suggest Senator Cruz is crazy and untruthful to suggest the Democrats are to blame for wealth in American being controlled by the top 1%, as if Republicans did not make looking after the super wealthy their number one priority.

Here is the full rant from The Ring of Fire dated February 9, including a video of Senator Cruz’s remarks to ABC.

On ABC News with host George Stephanopoulos, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) had the audacity to insist yesterday that Democrats are the “top one percent” party, reported Raw Story.

Stephanopoulos was interviewing Cruz about the current economy and Hillary Clinton’s prospects of running for president in 2016. Stephanopoulos noted that there were one million new jobs added to the American labor market in the last three months.

“Look, if Hillary Clinton wants to run by telling Americans that the economy is doing great and that you can credit President Obama and Hillary Clinton for that, I would encourage her to follow that strategy,” said Cruz. “Because the simple reality is that’s true for the wealthy.”

“The top 1 percent under President Obama, the millionaires and billionaires that he constantly demagogues, earn a higher share of our income than any year since 1928. Those with power and influence, who walk the corridors of power of the Obama administration, have gotten fat and happy under big government.”

Sen. Cruz is attempting to hijack the liberal narrative of pointing out that the nation’s one percent are the ones who’ve been reaping the benefits of the economic recovery. We on the left have been saying that for years. The reason is not big government, and it’s not Obama.


By making the GOP look like the party of the working man, he’s trying to appeal to blue-collar Americans who are still suffering from the 2008 economic collapse. He’s pushing the fact that wages have stagnated, a liberal talking point. The sad thing is that some people will pay attention to this drivel, believe it, and take it with them to the polls.

Ted Cruz says 92 million Americans aren’t working

Cruz gets another “Mostly False” assessment from Politifact for criticizing President Obama because 92 million American are not working when Cruz is counting the young and elderly, housewives and students.

Click here to read this February 10, 2014 article from the website Cruz detests the most: Politifact.com.

The federal government may have announced a good jobs report just days earlier, but Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, wasn’t impressed with the state of the American labor market.

On the Feb. 8, 2015, edition of CNN’s State of the Union, host Dana Bash asked Cruz whether he would run for president. He responded:

“I think we’re facing enormous challenges in this country. The Obama economy has led to the lowest labor force participation since 1978. Ninety-two million Americans aren’t working. Obamacare is a train wreck. We’re seeing our constitutional rights under assault. And abroad the Obama-Clinton-Kerry foreign policy is an unmitigated disaster. Leading from behind doesn’t work.


Still, we don’t see much justification for Cruz counting high-school-age kids (roughly 10 million) and Americans 75 and up (17.6 million). Even this far more restrictive definition leaves almost one-third of Cruz’s number questionable.

Another point worth noting: Just because someone in the prime working-age range (25 to 64) isn’t working doesn’t mean that they are unemployed. They may be disabled, taking care of children full-time or have gone back to school. The actual number of officially unemployed Americans in January was a little under 9 million — just one-tenth of the figure Cruz cited as “not working.”

Our ruling

Cruz said that “92 million Americans aren’t working.” Once you strip out senior citizens and school-age Americans, the number is less than half that. The statement contains some element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression, so we rate it Mostly False.

UPDATED, Feb. 11, 2015: After this fact-check was published, Cruz’s office got back to PolitiFact with sourcing for the statistic. The statistic, they said, came from the Bureau of Labor Statistics — Table A-1, for the total civilian, non-institutionalized population not in labor force, seasonally adjusted, for January 2015. The total for that month was 92.5 million. Spokeswoman Catherine Frazier said that Cruz was “relying on objective federal labor statistics” in making his statement. However, our fact-check didn’t question the veracity of the BLS statistics – only their relevance to Cruz’s point. We continue to believe the statistic includes Americans too young and too old to be expected to work, and we stand by our rating of Mostly False.

Ted Cruz: Confused About Cicero

A professor of classics suggests that Senator Cruz should not have quoted the ancient Roman Senator Cicero as he did.

Click this link to learn about Cruz, Cicero and Cataline in this Nov. 21, 2014 article in Atlantic.

For better than two millennia, politicians have invoked classical Greek and Roman literature to construct, defend, and challenge ideologies of power. On Thursday, November 20, Senator Ted Cruz channeled his inner Cicero and delivered his own rendition of “In Catilinam (Against Catiline)” to denounce President Obama’s planned executive actions on immigration reform. “The words of Cicero—powerfully relevant 2,077 years later,” said Cruz, who adapted Cicero’s text to fit his 21st-century American context. In quoting Cicero, Cruz reached back to Harry Truman and Thomas Jefferson, who also were avid readers of the Roman philosopher, statesman, and orator.

cicero and cruz

As a classics professor, I am on one level pleased to see the legacy of Greco-Roman antiquity alive and well, informing debate around our most pressing issues. The problem is that Cruz dangerously misused Cicero. A deeper look at the speech Cruz adapted shows that the senator not only accused the president of overstepping the constitutional bounds of his authority (a legally dubious claim), but also challenges the legitimacy of the Obama presidency, accuses the president of treason, and perhaps even advocates for his violent punishment. And in speaking from the position of Cicero, Cruz presents himself as a decidedly undemocratic oligarch. (Cruz’s speech can be read in its entirety, alongside an English translation of the Ciceronian original, here.)

Fact checker: Ted Cruz’s claim that one of Obama’s ‘very first acts’ was returning a bust of Churchill

Click to read the full Fact Checker article of Jan. 27, 2015 from the Washington Post.

“One of the very first acts President Obama did upon being elected was sending Churchill’s bust back to the UK, and I think that foreshadowed everything that was to come the next six years.”

–Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.), remarks at Iowa Freedom Summit, Jan. 24, 2015

This story keeps popping up, so let’s try to once and for all explain what happened. It’s a complicated story, involving two busts of Churchill and lots of misreporting, so at this point it’s almost become farce.

Did Obama purposely snub the British by returning a bust of former British prime minister Winston Churchill that had been sitting in the Oval Office?


To sum up, the Churchill bust loaned to Bush was returned, but a virtually similar bust by the same artist resides in White House residence. There is no evidence that Obama personally decided to return the bust; given the economic crisis at the time, one imagines he had bigger issues on his mind. Perhaps someone on his staff should have recognized the symbolic value in retaining the bust, but the odds are the machinery of the transition just moved forward on its own.

We wavered on whether this was Two or Three Pinocchios. Cruz, without evidence, states that this was clearly Obama’s decision—“one of the very first acts”—and then imbues great significance to that fact. But he’s really creating a mountain out of a molehill.

Two Pinocchios