Maddow on Ted Cruz and Jesse Helms


After Ted Cruz said that we needed 100 more Jesse Helms’ in the U.S. Senate, Rachel Maddow did an excellent job of documenting Helms’ long history of racist politics. That Cruz, a racial minority himself, would sing the praises of a blatantly racist legislator is pretty appalling. That Helms is not poison in the Republican party is much worse.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Comments

  1. says

    Ed:

    For GOD’s sake! Jesse Helm was just a man of his times, a man who didn’t realize until quite late in life that black people were actually, PEOPLE. Cut the man some slack.

    And, Cruz, well, he’s Mexinadian or Canacubian or something so he’s not really a “minority”, more like a Nanonority.

  2. zero6ix says

    100 poop flinging gibbering lunatics, driving the us we call government. I thought that was already a thing.

  3. raven says

    That Cruz, a racial minority himself,..

    ???? Sigh.

    Cuban or Hispanic is nor a racial classification, any more than American. It is an ethnic or national origin.

    The pictures I”ve seen of Rubio or Cruz look like “white” and almost certainly what they self identify as.

    BTW, I worked with a Cuban who was a Spanish language and Gloria Estaban fanatic. He had blond hair and blue eyes.

  4. R Johnston says

    The good news here is that after this even the nattering nabobs of newsiness ought to realize that Ted Cruz can never be a serious candidate for President. He might struggle to break 27% of the popular vote if he were a nationwide candidate. Outside the hardcore kooks, Jessie Helms is actually poison.

    Ted Cruz is about as likely to become President as he is to win an NAACP Image Award.

  5. raven says

    Cruz’s mother was born and raised in Wilmington, Delaware,[11] in a family of Irish and Italian descent.[14][21]

    ] Cruz’s mother and father divorced after he left home.[15]

    Cruz’s mother is Irish and Italian. If being half Cuban makes you a “racial” minority, does being half Irish-Italian make you “white”. Someone should ask the racial specialists of the KKK or Xian Identity Nazis but I’m almost certain they love Ted Cruz.

    His SBC parents are divorced. Tea Party family values in action. That must have happened during a short bout of atheism.

  6. says

    raven “BTW, I worked with a Cuban who was a Spanish language and Gloria Estaban fanatic. He had blond hair and blue eyes.”
    Well, Cuba was a Swedish colony. It still would be, but they lost the little Allen wrench.

  7. R Johnston says

    democommie @7:

    Romney was a vastly better candidate than Cruz would be, and Romney was a pretty bad candidate. Ted Cruz is the candidate you’d get if you rolled Paul Ryan, Sarah Palin, and David Duke all into one.

  8. colnago80 says

    Re R. Johnston @ #11

    Yet another commenter underestimating Ted Cruz. IMHO, Cruz is the most dangerous Rethuglican in the Congress because, unlike the Gohmerts, the Bachmanns and the Kings, he is a smart guy. A smart guy who can demagogue like Cruz is always dangerous.

  9. R Johnston says

    colnago80 @12:

    You severely overestimate Cruz because of his paper “qualifications.” Look at his actual record and listen to what he actually says. He’s never actually said anything all that smart in public. He says that we need 100 Jesse Helmses in the Senate; the commercials write themselves. Every time he opens his mouth or issues any sort of a statement he writes a free commercial for any hypothetical Presidential opponent. He stakes out the far right of the Republican party on both economic and social issues. He combines Paul Ryan’s economic policy with David Duke’s social policy and Sarah Palin’s blindness to her own tokenism. We live in an age where it’s much harder than ever before, much harder than even the recent past, for a politician to segment his audience appeals, and Cruz has decided to forgo the possibility of appealing to almost anyone beyond the nonhispanophobes among the rightmost crazies of the Republican primary electorate.

    What’s the plan for Cruz to get any significant number of Democratic votes? What’s the plan for him to break 40% of the vote with the ignorant mushy middle? What’s the plan for him to not do worse with minority and younger voters than Romney did? What’s the plan for him not to lose the vote of Republicans who would never vote for a Hispanic for President?

    Now if the Republicans manage to run a candidate without a public track record of being completely crazy and the Democrats implode then I’d be awfully scared of the possibility of Attorney General Cruz, but I just don’t see any realistic path to the Presidency for Cruz given his very public record or being a racist and an idiot. Maybe he isn’t really spectacularly inept and stupid as a potential Presidential candidate, but if you actually listen to what he has to say rather than lose yourself staring at shiny paper diplomas and clerkships then you’re going to conclude that he’d be an absolutely terrible candidate for President.

  10. colnago80 says

    Re R Johnston @ #13

    You might consider Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz’s assessment of Cruz, based on having him in a course. According to Dershowitz, the only student in his experience that equaled Cruz was his fellow Senator Elizabeth Warren.

    But Senator Cruz is not stupid, and he knows it. He exudes self-confidence and swagger wherever he goes. Famed Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz, who taught Cruz, told The Daily Caller this past May, “Without a doubt he is among the smartest students I’ve ever had… I’ve had great students but he has to be at the top of anyone’s short list, in terms of raw brain power.”

    I stand by my statement, which, by the way our distinguished host agrees with, that Senator Cruz is a very dangerous man. Anyone that smart who can demagogue like Cruz is dangerous.

    http://goo.gl/xjFhle

  11. coffeehound says

    You severely overestimate Cruz because of his paper “qualifications.” Look at his actual record and listen to what he actually says. He’s never actually said anything all that smart in public

    While generally I’d agree that stupid is as stupid does, he’s never had to say anything smart based on who he’s pandering to for votes. I think it’s a mistake to put him in the King, Bachmann, Gohmert mold; by all accounts he’s quick on his feet , a great debater,and photogenic, all the things that make a great looking candidate. This is American GOP politics; he can spout the craziest stupidest bullshit, but if he does it with the right look and makes his opponent with the thoughtful, reasoned response look slow or cautious, he wins.

  12. says

    “democommie @7:

    Romney was a vastly better candidate than Cruz would be, and Romney was a pretty bad candidate.”

    Romney got 47% of the vote. Six months prior to the election, most people said Romney had NO fucking chance. Ignore Cruz at your peril.

  13. sbuh says

    Romney got 47% of the vote. Six months prior to the election, most people said Romney had NO fucking chance.

    These aren’t mutually exclusive. You’re almost never going to stray far from the 50 yard line in a two-party system.

    And the people making those (correct) predictions weren’t looking at the popular vote anyway. They were looking at what actually matters: The Electoral College.

  14. postwaste says

    Cruz was the commencement speaker at my son’s graduation a few months back. He did not impress me as being particularly smart. He got many basic facts wrong. He also apparently doesn’t know the difference between a university commencement and a political rally.

  15. raven says

    He did not impress me as being particularly smart.

    This is the Tea Party we are writing about here.

    Being not very bright is a basic requirement.

  16. says

    “These aren’t mutually exclusive. You’re almost never going to stray far from the 50 yard line in a two-party system.”

    I’m not sure what you’re saying. Are you saying, “Fuck it, who cares?”, because that’s sort of what it sounds like.

  17. bluentx says

    And I thought I had a good reason to be depressed before!

    Tell me I misread the above comments; 1) T.Cruz (whimper, whimper: one of my the Texas Senators):
    (2) A. Dershowitz , possibly the biggest douchnozzel in academia

    AND
    (3) Elizabeth Warren (at this time,) one of the very few (possible) bright spots in politics today….

    Is this implying that they are all negatively CONNECTED?

    Please tell me it’s just my reading comp (on #3’s connection) that is off and misguided. I gave up on ‘Heros” long ago but ya gotta have some hope! I was STRONGLY hoping EW was one I could count on for the long haul!

    DID I miss the gist of this completely!?

  18. sbuh says

    democommie

    I’m not sure what you’re saying. Are you saying, “Fuck it, who cares?”, because that’s sort of what it sounds like.

    No, not at all. You were criticizing those who predicted (again, correctly) that Romney had no chance at winning because he happened to get 47% of the popular vote. My point was that this fact does not contradict their predictions at all. They were basing this prediction on the Electoral College, not the popular vote, and Romney as predicted lost in a landslide. The arithmetic that would have allowed him to scrape a win was so wildly unrealistic that they were fully justified in saying he had no chance.

  19. colnago80 says

    Re bluenix @ #23

    Apparently bluenix is rather dense today. The connection between Warren and Cruz is that they both were students at Harvard Law School and took a course in constitutional law from Prof. Allan Dershowitz (apparently not at the same time), and currently, they are US Senators. Other then that, there is no connection at all as a vast gulf separates their ideologies. The point that Dershowitz was making that based on discussion in his class, not grades on tests, he found that Cruz and Warren were among the smartest students he ever head, not that he agreed with their arguments. As a matter of fact, his position in the political spectrum is very much closer to Warren then to Cruz.

    A. Dershowitz , possibly the biggest douchnozzel in academia

    Apparently, bluenix is unfamiliar with such academics as Arthur Butz, Pat Michaels, Richard Lindzen, and our own Sir Lancelot or he/she wouldn’t be making a preposterous claim like that.

  20. colnago80 says

    Re coffeehound @ #17

    I think it’s a mistake to put him in the King, Bachmann, Gohmert mold; by all accounts he’s quick on his feet , a great debater,and photogenic, all the things that make a great looking candidate. This is American GOP politics; he can spout the craziest stupidest bullshit, but if he does it with the right look and makes his opponent with the thoughtful, reasoned response look slow or cautious, he wins.

    Coffeehound hits the nail on the head. How he says something is as important as the content of what he says.

  21. says

    @24:

    I love being wrong about thinking that meatlumps like Mittunswillard and Ted BORNINASOCIALISTWORKER’SPARADISE Cruz could become PotUS. I remember, though, another pair of candidates which I thought had no chance of being PotUS, St. Ronnie and the Shrub. Much pain ensued from those two “unlikely” elections.

    The GOP has demonstrated that winning elections is their reason for being. Governing, sensibly at least, is not in their purview. They have proven since 2010 to be incapable of actually doing anything to help the country, instead using their House majority to block all sensible legislation and push idiotic, ideological legislation that is KKKristianist and xenophobic.

    I will stop worrying about a guy like Cruz when he’s safely in the ground.

Leave a Reply