The Republican presidential primary has utterly devolved into a festival of crotchety buffoons whose most steadfast goal is to attract more publicity than their current front-runner, Donald Trump. However, it says something rather pitiful about a collection of GOP candidates that are repeatedly upstaged by a boorish TV reality show host. That’s gotta hurt.
Consequently, every so often one of them will take a wild swing for fences to see if they can sponge up a little attention. Doing so almost never involves contributing something meaningful to the discourse on government, politics, or society. No, it usually means sinking to lower levels of dumbfuckery than Trump himself. And the latest contestant to step up to the plate is Sen. Ted Cruz, who in the pre-Trump era was the undisputed champion of the lunatic fringe.
Speaking at gathering of wealthy Republican donors sponsored by the wealthiest of them all, the Koch brothers, Cruz addressed the subject of Climate Change. He began by making the bizarre assertion that the vast majority of scientists whose studies prove that Climate Change is a real and imminent threat, are “Flat-Earthers.” That’s right, he used the phrase that ordinarily mocks those who reject science against actual scientists. And he used it to reject science.
You have to give Cruz some credit for managing to pull off this daring escape from reality with a straight face. And undoubtedly the imbeciles listening to this tripe will soak it up eagerly since they have already demonstrated that their capacity for rational comprehension is at or near zero. Cruz went on to dismiss Climate Change as a hoax saying that…
“If you look at satellite data for the last 18 years, there’s been zero recorded warming. The satellite says it ain’t happening … They’re cooking the books.” […and that…] “It is always disturbing to hear science use the language of theology. Deniers. Heretics. That’s not what science is supposed to be about. Science should follow the facts.”
Indeed. Science should follow the facts. And with 97% of scientists who have studied Climate Change agreeing that it is real and is caused by humans, the facts are not in doubt. What’s more, Cruz’s complaint about the “language of theology” comes entirely from his warped imagination. The term “deniers” was previously used mostly with reference to fake historians who claimed that the Holocaust never occurred. That is not a theological reference. And I would wager that Cruz could not cite a single instance of someone referring to Climate Change deniers as heretics.
As for Cruz’s claims about satellite data, cooked books, and the alleged absence of any recorded warming, he is obviously working from materials provided by the same Exxon lobbyists who previously worked for cigarette companies on the health benefits of tobacco. Because if he had asked the scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration they would have told him that the planet has been steadily warming for decades and that 2014 was Earth’s warmest year on record. And that 2015 is on track to surpass 2014.
This isn’t the first time that Cruz has wondered from the realm of reality by flipping the concept of flat-Earthers. Back in May he said much the same thing while adding that he and other science-deniers were modern-day Galileos. The only problem with that is that it is bass-ackwards. Galileo was persecuted for advocating theories derived from scientific method (like the 97%). His critics, mainly the Catholic Church, rejected his work because they were committed to preserving long-held myths that benefited the status quo (like Koch brothers). So Cruz assuming the mantle of Galileo is a complete reversal of logic. He’s the one using an unsupported belief system to supplant today’s Galileos who rely on actual science.
Perhaps the funniest diversion from sanity in Cruz’s speech was his ludicrous reasoning for why Democrats are pursuing Climate Change as an issue. First, he says that they plan to use it as a means to assert total control over … EVERYTHING! It’s all part of a grand conspiracy that concludes with universal slavery to environmental dictators forcing people to live with clean air and water in a habitable climate. The fiends! And even worse, Democrats only pretend to care about the issue in order to please the army of environmentalist billionaires (we all know how numerous and bloodthirsty they are) and to gain access to their campaign donations. Keep in mind that Cruz was offering this ominous conspiracy theory to a room full of some 450 wealthy campaign donors assembled by the Koch brothers from whom he is seeking donations.
News Corpse Presents: The ALL NEW 2nd volume of
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.
The only question for Cruz is, is this blockheaded stunt crazy enough to steal back some of Trump’s thunder? In ordinary times it would have more than sufficed. But these are not ordinary times. Trump has advanced the idiocracy to new, unforeseen heights. If Cruz really wanted to clinch the deal he should have accused the scientists of aiding and abetting ISIS, or thrown in a reference to environmentalist Nazis like Mike Huckabee did with Planned Parenthood. Now that’s how you out-Trump Trump.
10 thoughts on “Flat-Earther Ted Cruz Makes A Valiant Effort To Out-Trump Trump”
I have long noticed that RWNJs frequently just string together a number of buzz words in the hopes that this will somehow make a coherent point. It usually falls flat since the individual buzz words have already been debunked. It is, therefore, very disheartening to see this strategy used by a Republican presidential contender. It does not bode well for both the target audience as well as the intelligence level of Republican leaders trying to discuss policies.
That is the biggest problem with so called “repuclican” leaders and candidates like Ted Cruz – they don’t know or won’t actually say what they truly believe, they just recite talking points that will get them where they want to go – Sarah Palin is a perfect example of this. Too many of the republican party candidates at all levels don’t actually believe anything remotely close to anything conservative anymore – unless is religious nonsense – and it’s totally transparent. They are trying to satisfy establishment party leaders and donors – so they need to have script that doesn’t piss off the establishment power brokers. So now we have zombie candidates trying to fool their way through to a position of power – and voters aren’t buying it.
I’ve heard that a 1000 monkeys typing on a word processor will eventually produce a best seller. Pretty much the same with the Republican candidates. Spew enough crap and something, someday, might be accurate.
Watch this guy! steve in york makes a good point with the Sarah Palin example of reciting talking points, however, Sarah Palin is a certifiable idiot. Ted Cruz is, “scary smart”. Cruz knows he can probably get the extremist evangelicals, (Trump has blown that one asserting that he is without sin, makes no mistakes). Cruz may be deranged but he is a master debater. Don’t underestimate this sly one, when he goes head to head with any of the current clown bus passengers, he will chew them up, however, if the “powers to be” have truly anointed Jeb, then it shall be Jeb who goes up against, most likely, Hillary. I would prefer Bernie, but there are still too many ‘mericans who don’t know or understand the concept of Democratic Socialist.
I know that Cruz has a reputation as a debater from his college days, but it’s hard to imagine that his skills are still sharp when he says things like those above, or posts idiotic videos like this: Ted Cruz Makes Bacon With A Machine Gun.
Well, after watching the Ted Cruz Makes Bacon With A Machine Gun video, I concede. Cruz may have been, “scary smart”, but this? This makes Sarah Palin and Ted Nugent seem like sane, intelligent people in comparison. Too freakin weird.
Well, he may be smart, but he isn’t showing it too much (I guess I’m agreeing with Mark). It would be smarter to just speak intelligently on the issues vs. putting on stunts like the bacon video – that doesn’t help. I like my guns as much as anyone, but his video doesn’t convince me that he should be trusted with the responsibility of president. The GOP really does act stupid – it’s soooo frustrating. Stunts and political theater won’t win any thinking person over – which maybe is the point.
And that democratic socialist statement – I’ve seen it before on this website and I’m curious as to what you think that will accomplish that actual free market capitalism (with honest money) won’t accomplish. If you’re trying to fix the problems with today’s economic system – you should understand why it’s the way it is and how it works to transfer wealth from the masses to the few. Then proposing an alternative will make more sense. An economic system based on the free choices of individuals is the best way to assure equality and better wealth distribution – and that won’t happen with democratic socialism. Actual free market capitalism is already democratic and more so than what you’re proposing. It worked well prior to 1913 and led to the industrial revolution and our dominance as an industrial power.
In Bernie’s words, “Democratic socialism is taking a hard look at what countries like Denmark, Sweden, Norway (and) Finland … have done over the years and try to ascertain what they have done that is right, in terms of protecting the needs of millions of working families and the elderly and the children. And I think there’s much that we can learn from those countries that have had social democratic governments and labor governments or whatever. If you look at the issues — you don’t have to worry about the word ‘socialist’ — just look at what I’m talking about. If you go out and ask the American people: Is it right that the middle class continues to disappear while there has been a massive transfer of wealth from working families to the top one-tenth of 1%? Trillions of dollars in the last 30 years have flown from the middle class to the top one-tenth of 1%. And the American people say, ‘No, that’s not right.’ And if you ask the American people: Do you think it’s right that despite an explosion of technology and an increase in worker productivity, the average worker is working longer hours for low wages? They say no. And what the American people are saying pretty loudly and clearly is they want an economy that works for ordinary Americans. For working people. Not an economy where almost all of the income and all of the wealth is going to the top 1%. That’s what we have now.”
Well, if he wants to win over people who are skeptical (in a general election) – I would think NOT using the term democratic socialism and actually delineating those SPECIFIC things he supports specifically may actually help. Democratic socialism sounds very communistic to me and I’m sure others. Maybe in a democratic primary some variation of socialism and/or communism is fine, but I can’t believe that would work in a general election. We can agree on some of your ends (ie helping out the middle class, etc) – the means is up for debate and is the real fight. Empowering individuals and NOT government to achieve those goals you note is the core disagreement.
Cruz tried floating this crap back in March, and it got him a “mostly false” from Politifact, and the WaPo actually went to the trouble of contacting Carl Mears, the guy Cruz’s campaign cited as their “evidence,” who had this to say:
Mr. Cruz (and others who seek to minimize the threat posed by climate change) likes to cite statistics about the last 17 years because 17 [now 18– ChrisV] years ago, the Earth was experiencing a large ENSO [El Nino-Southern Oscillation] event and the observed temperatures were substantially above normal, and above any long-term trend line a reasonable person would draw.
Get it? That little scamp Cruz simply cherry picked as the beginning point for his sample the wild warm spike of the January 1998 El Nino event (gotta be 18 years, can’t be 17 or 19, they won’t work).
Mears went on to wonder why Cruz used his satellite (lower Troposphere) measurements in the first place, when the surface (both sea and land) temps are clearly more relevant.
Yeah, Ted, why you do that?
Right, why’d I ask.
Comments are closed.