If This is A “Pussy”, We’d Say We Need More of Them

We mentioned in a previous post that we found a Trump supporter’s accusation that Cruz is a “pussy” a bit harsh. Those were our words. We were trying to restrain our usual self. Uncharacteristically, we know, but still. We don’t want to alienate people who are just as pissed off as we are, even if our idea of a solution differs from theirs.

We’re still on the same team, and we’ll be damned if we’ll forget it and hand the GOPe a victory by letting them divide and conquer as per fucking usual.

And we had this memory of a perfect example of how Ted Cruz is anything but a “pussy”, only we couldn’t quite put our finger on a where it was. It’s not like there was only one, it’s just that we couldn’t quite pinpoint the perfect one. Fortunately, LC & IB Francis Porretto did our homework for us (as is so often the case) and provided us with the link.

Francis is a national treasure. I can’t count the times when we’ve had a thought in our head and he just crystallizes it for us in a way that makes us think “why didn’t we think of that?”

There’s a man, a lone piranha in a swimming pool full of GOPe sharks, calling Mitch McConnell out for what he is and always has been: A liar. A shameless, backstabbing, underhanded, amoral liar, right on the floor of the Senate. Openly, with cameras rolling, saying what every single one of us knew and had wished that somebody, anybody would actually have the balls to state out loud.

There he is, when he had the clear option to do what 99.9999999999999999% of previous “great hopes” had already done, which was to immediately suck on the teat of the Chamber of Commerce and betray every single promise they’d ever made to the people voting for them (hi there, Marco! Yes, we’re looking at you!) and secure a fat, rich, risk free future for himself and his family, openly pissing in their cereal and throwing away any hope of a sinecure that he might have otherwise had.

There he is, clearly articulating the frustration and anger of ordinary Americans who DON’T have millions to bribe politicians with, who DON’T have K Street lobbyists at their beck and call, making enemies of the entire GOPe when it would be so much easier for him to just go along and secure for himself a lifetime of riches on the backs of the hardworking Americans who voted for him. Like, say, Rubio.

That’s a “pussy?”

We need more “pussies”, then.

Thatisall.

14 comments

  1. 1
    LC Xystus growls and barks:

    What’s the date on this clip?

  2. 2
    fporretto growls and barks:

    Thank you for the kind words, your Majesty!

  3. 3
    DJ Allyn, MPSE growls and barks:

    This is fun!

  4. 4
    LC Mike in Chi growls and barks:

    DJ Allyn, MPSE says:

    This is fun!

    You should see it from this side of the grist mill.

    LC Xystus:

    What’s the date on this clip?

    Sez, “15-06-15 Created by Cable Offered as a Public Service.” on the video stamp.

  5. 5
    L.C. Mope growls and barks:

    My dear Emperor of these universes and outlying counties,

    Francis Porretto is indeed a very good man. Unfortunately, he has demerits accumulated from his absence from a certain show. A studious man, but certainly out of the loop, blinded by faith in one man.

    Behold: I bring you proof of the chicanery.

    Thus:

    And

    Thus:

    When Neal Katyal, defender of Obama’s eligibility, defends Cruz’s eligibility, you know chicanery is in the air.

    Like Rand Paul, darling of the TEA Party before him, he too fell into the wrong crowd and now must pay the price.

    For this revolution to have consequences, all of the oldguard RINO types, and their hangers-on must go. We cannot be divided and conquered by people that claim to support our positions only to be beholden to the likes of Mitch McConnell or that turn-coat Paul Ryan. That’s how McConnell set upon the TEA Party to destroy it last time. No more.

  6. 6
    Emperor Misha I growls and barks:

    L.C. Mope @ #:

    I’m in the position that it doesn’t matter for me who wins at this point as the two front runners are both individuals I can vote for.

    I have to admit, though, that I find it surprising that Mitch McCockless is allegedly heading up a pro-Cruz Super PAC, particularly knowing how much McCockless hates Cruz for putting a bright, blazing spotlight on his pro-Prozi “deals” and calling him out for what he is on the Senate floor.

    As to Cruz’s eligibility, I can only say what I’ve always said: There’s no doubt that there’s a “there” there as the matter has never been settled by a court. I think it’s silly, after all it means that any American, even one born to parents who are BOTH American citizens, loses his or her eligibility for the office if mom goes into labor outside of the U.S., but that doesn’t mean that the question isn’t there, and if it isn’t settled by October, then we all know that the Prozis are going to bring it out in their late October traditional drive-by shooting.

  7. 7
    L.C. Mope growls and barks:

    That is there usual modus operandi – set up a candidate that claims to be a TEA Party candidate and as soon as the step foot in Washington it all changes. Or they get gerrymandered out of a seat, like Allan West. (Who I gave a mulligan to for his Pigford settlement vote.) The RNC and RSSC will never open the wallet for a TEA Party type candidate, just look at the way they paid democrats to vote in the Mississippi 2014 primary run-off. And if David Brat hadn’t beaten Eric Cantor hours before the amnesty vote, we’d all be singing “La Cucaracha” before sporting events already.

    Yes, the Dems will be waiting for Cruz and his eligibility issue in the fall. Right now Neal Kaytal, defender of Obama’s eligibility, is defending Cruz. So it is just a matter of time before he realizes he was wrong and Cruz gets tossed under the bus. I’d say it gets timed to implode right about a week before the election.

    Trump has his own problems with the RNC. None of those weasels will ever support a non-GOPe candidate. They will probably try their luck at a floor fight at the convention. It sucks when you can’t even support your front-runner. But it does show the RINOs can fight when they want to.

  8. 8
    L.O.R. Ankle biter growls and barks:

    I cannot support Donald Trump. His very “malleability” to borrow a word from Jimmy Carter’s observation, is most of the reason. You don’t have to look too far back to find him taking liberal positions or being gratuitously insulting. He strikes me as just another squish, but a good talker. The fact that he is self-financing his campaign means nothing to me.

    A bit off topic for the thread, but I’m afraid my eyes, useless as they are, are about to fall out of my head because they’re doing so much rolling. I saw a tweet just now from fox news talking about Rubio breaking a tooth on a candy bar. This is newsworthy? Seriously?

  9. 9
    readerjp growls and barks:

    Muslim refugee inflicts ‘carnage’ inside Ohio restaurant

    A Muslim man from Somalia, likely a refugee or son of a refugee, attacked patrons at a restaurant owned by a Christian Arab Israeli in Columbus, Ohio, Thursday night but police are refusing to release the suspect’s name.

    CBS News was first to identify the attacker, who entered the Nazareth Mediterranean Restaurant with a machete and began slashing people, as a Somali man named Mohammad Barry.

    “He came to each table and just started hitting them,” one of the diners, Karen Bass, told CBS News. “There was a man on the floor bleeding, there was blood on the floor. It was awful. It was just carnage.”

    Four people were wounded in the machete attack, one critically.

    The owner of the restaurant, Hany Baransi, who is a Christian Arab from Israel, said he had not taken a day off since Jan. 2 but took off Thursday night because of a migraine headache. He is a proud Israeli citizen who flies the Israeli flag in his restaurant.

    Columbus is home to the second-largest Somali-American community after Minneapolis.

    CBS News homeland security correspondent Jeff Pegues reported that investigators were searching for a motive, running down leads to try to determine if the attack was “somehow tied to terrorist organizations.”

    http://www.wnd.com/2016/02/muslim-refugee-unleashes-carnage-inside-ohio-restaurant/#3UzPoFspripBfKSq.99

  10. 10
    LC SecondMouse growls and barks:

    The eligibility issue will be interesting to watch, but there are serious hurdles to addressing it in any meaningful way. There are too many members of the so-called silent majority who will not comprehend how it is that Ted Cruz is somehow less American than Barack Obama. The issue of eligibility has become an entirely partisan one, which will likely render it insoluble.

    The current administration might like to force a decision here, but they have a huge problem. Hillary Clinton remains unindicted, and while this is true, they will not be able to maneuver Cruz out of the race on this issue. It would be the straw that breaks the camel’s back in flyover country.

    The more interesting thing to watch will be what would happen if Cruz got into office. He is likely the only candidate that would not shrink from shining a light into the dark crevices of the Obama administration. Trump is too much the deal-making political operator and populist to even consider it, but Cruz’s Constitutionalism would likely send him into this work, knowing that a constant stream of criminal revelations would support the government reforms he wants to make.

  11. 11
    single stack growls and barks:

    I utterly despise Trump and I hate him a little more every time he opens his mouth. I think it’s a sad commentary on the depths to which this criminal enterprise that replaced our Republic has sunk that he is taken seriously at all, much less that he’s even a viable presidential contender.
    If you ignore the BS of Trump and other Democrats and study the history of presidential eligibility as well as the legal statute defining “natural born citizen” it becomes clear that Cruz is eligible.
    Cruz’s history shows that “pussy” is not a word that applies to him in any way.

  12. 12
    LC SecondMouse growls and barks:

    To my mind, Trump is the Republican analog of Obama. Both men are strident populist demagogues. Both have gone to some lengths to hide or obscure their pasts due to the fact that their pasts stand in contrast to the positions each has taken during the campaigning process. Both are clearly narcissists. And both have attracted large bases of deeply committed adherents. Both have demonstrated their anger at the state of domestic affairs as a means of consolidating their leads in the polls during the campaign. They both are also expert manipulators of the media.

    I have been following Ted Cruz since before his run for the Senate here in Texas against the then-popular Lt. Governor, David Dewhurst. His campaign here was a model for all future office holders to follow, and was marked by his deep capacity for work. He out-worked, out-messaged, out-planned and out-thought the Dewhurst campaign, who refused to take Cruz seriously until it was too late to do anything about it (disclosure – I know Dewhurst and saw him at least a half-dozen times during the campaign – which was awkward, BTW).

    It is a mistake to underestimate Cruz on the national stage as well. No one is outworking him, and I seriously doubt he has an intellectual equal in the contest. He is not perfect – to my mind, social conservatives have an affinity for government involvement in areas I do not believe government should be in, which is usually the fault I assign to progressives.

    From my survey of the candidates, I believe Cruz to be the best overall choice to address the critical state of affairs we find ourselves in. I also believe I would like his choices for SCOTUS better than those of Trump, who I think would trend moderate when we need strong conservatism at the bench if we are going to do the hard work of steering back to the Constitution.

    Your mileage may differ, but I read Trump’s presence on the national political scene as a clear indicator that the cognitive and moral weaknesses we like to attribute to the progressive voter base are equally endemic to the rank and file on the right as well.

  13. 13
    Emperor Misha I growls and barks:

    LC SecondMouse says:

    Your mileage may differ, but I read Trump’s presence on the national political scene as a clear indicator that the cognitive and moral weaknesses we like to attribute to the progressive voter base are equally endemic to the rank and file on the right as well.

    Populism has always worked very well. As a matter of fact, unless your opponent sucks even worse at it, you just can’t win without using it.

    It’s all very well to have all of the talking points and the entirety of the conservative canon memorized, along with the most lovely Power Point presentations and Excel spreadsheets ever made, but that won’t get the average Joe to the poll on election day.

    Getting him out of the chair and yelling “fuck yeah!” will.

    Now, Cruz does have a very good ability to connect and to draw real life parallels as well as an amazing intellect, which is why he’s my ideal candidate too. He could be stronger in the discipline of “getting people to stand up and shout”, but he’s far from the unmitigated “mine eyes glaze over” disasters that were McShame and Mittens. Those two buffoons could put a meth-addicted squirrel to sleep in seconds.

    Problem for Cruz is that he’s a senator, and people just don’t trust anybody that are even remotely connected to DC anymore. If Jesus Christ came back as a Congressman, nobody would listen to a word he had to say (no, I’m not comparing Cruz to Jesus).

    He’s got the taint of being “one of those sumbitches in DC”, even though it’s wildly unfair and undeserved in his case, and that’s what he’s fighting. That and his lack of name recognition compared to Trump, of course, but that’s becoming less and less of an issue with every day.

    People, myself included, are ANGRY at being pissed on for decades by every single damn syphilitic, lying, backstabbing clownfuck to set foot in DC, on both sides, and that tends to cloud their judgment when they have to choose candidates.

    It’s not that the electorate is more or less susceptible to populism this year as opposed to past elections, that bit has never changed, it’s a constant in human nature. It’s just that American politicians generally suck at using it. Because it works every time.

    You win by reaching the masses, because only the masses win elections.

  14. 14
    LC SecondMouse growls and barks:

    I must beg to differ, your Imperial RINO Killer-ness. I believe there is an antidote to demagoguery. Our culture is so carefully tuned by media and technology to respond to the strident populist that it is difficult to apply the antidote, but it can be done. In fact, it must be done, because the people and their leaders will be lost to history if all we are now capable of is assigning blame on our race to the bottom.

    That antidote is the principled leader. In my opinion, what has been missing from politics for decades is any conversation about the meaning of life in America. Do we in fact believe in individualism, or are we too ignorant or feckless to care? Would we rather be wards of the state, so we can lie in our beds all day and cry ourselves to sleep? Or is there still an American Dream, the one where we go and get it ourselves and the gargantuan federal government does not assign one to us?

    Our crime as Americans has been a long and abiding disinterest in our national principles. Even a cursory inspection of the state of affairs in key public and private institutions in our nation reveals a stunning decay of our moral imperatives, to the point where many of the moral truths we once relied on these institutions to enact have been replaced with polar opposites. Most people can sense that things are deeply wrong in our country. The problem is that charlatans can harness this uninformed dismay and bend it to their purposes. And our government is full of them, at every federal level.

    The single solution to this, if there is to be one, will be ushered in by the efforts of the so-called ‘one-eyed man’. The individual whose moral conviction begins to animate the same dormant fibers in our own body politic. It has been my hope that Ted Cruz could possibly be this man. He has demonstrated strength far beyond his contemporaries, reminiscent of Reagan, or others in our past that have been capable of radiating a high degree of moral clarity.

    He is not yet the great orator he needs to become to succeed at this, and the truth of the matter is that even if he were perfectly designed for the task he could still easily fail due to circumstances beyond anyone’s control. But without the leader who understands the roots of our illness; who will speak the truth with moral clarity and act correctly regardless of the pain, there is no sufficient focal point for the rebirth of our identity as a nation in any way which saves us from ourselves.