Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) is fast becoming the king of useless fights and empty gestures. First came his destructive government shutdown gambit. Then came his half-baked idea for fighting the Islamic State. Then he set up a showy albeit unnecessary confrontation with a Christian group, managing to be the only one on the right these days magnifying differences between Jews and Christians — unlike, say, Gov. Mike Huckabee, who rallies Christians and Jews to a shared fight against jihadists bent on slaughtering both. And now Cruz is pushing a constitutional amendment to prevent federal courts from vindicating the rights of individuals who challenge state bans on gay marriage. (Consider how he would holler if the left came up with an amendment to prevent Second Amendment claims against gun bans from being heard.) And where would the states come from to pass such an amendment? Wouldn’t state courts still overturn anti-gay marriage bans — or is he running roughshod over those as well? Never mind — it is all about fighting.
On foreign policy he began strongly, dousing the sparks of isolationism with very solid speeches on Russia and Iran. In his trip to Israel and Eastern Europe he came across as informed and poised. But also showed himself to be erratic, joining with the isolationists in opposing enforcement of the red line in Syria. As the National Review reports:
Cruz has repeatedly said he embraces a Reaganite foreign policy. He made headlines in recent weeks for walking out of an event when a group of Arab Christians booed his vocal defense of Israel, and he has used his seat on Armed Services Committee to travel abroad during his time in office. But those I spoke with were, across the board, unimpressed. They universally characterized his worldview as shallow, opportunistic, and ever shifting to where he perceives the base of the party to be.A former senior Bush administration defense official criticized the Texas senator in particular for his failure, as a member of the Armed Services Committee, to advocate for raising the defense budget. “He’s basically not done anything that I’m aware of to put an end to the hemorrhaging in the Defense Department, so it rings a little hollow,” he says. “It’s one thing to posture, it’s another thing to have a consistent policy. That doesn’t mean he couldn’t develop one. I don’t want to write him up as a lost cause, but he has a long way to go before he could be considered on the same bar as [Sen. Marco] Rubio, considered to have a coherent world view.”
And in that vein he now is imploring the president to come to Congress for war authorization (so far so good), but simultaneously spouting talking points that reflect both a lack of political courage (e.g., like Obama he won’t acknowledge ground troops are essential), denigrating the political work that is essential to rally the Sunni tribes in Iraq and spinning hooey that air power may be sufficient to defeat the Islamic State that has captured Fallujah and Mosul. On some points — suggesting the Free Syrian Army that has long been battling the Islamic State is not “interested” in fighting the jihadists — he is flat out wrong. Indeed, all this confirms that he is in fact “shallow, opportunistic, and ever shifting to where he perceives the base of the party to be.”
Ironically, at a time when the voters feel the wheels are coming off the bus and crying out for responsible leadership, Cruz is providing no sign he could be that anti-Obama. Maybe it was too much to expect that a freshman senator with zero legislative accomplishments would be ready for a presidential run.
Contrast that with the serious and deliberate moves we have seen from Texas Gov. Rick Perry (on national security, the border crisis and now Ebola), the thoughtful foreign policy address from Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (championing increased defense spending), the foreign policy remarks and reform agenda championed by Indiana Gov. Mike Pence and the comprehensive domestic agenda and support for enhanced defense spending we have heard from Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.). Whether or not any or all of these men run, they are acting responsibly to enhance national security and promote an attractive conservative agenda. They do not antagonize for the sake of antagonizing nor support silly stunts (all opposed the shutdown) and then refuse to admit error. They are credible presidential contenders.
If Cruz is trying to act presidential, he is failing miserably. If he is trying to replace Sarah Palin as the darling of the far right who is accountable to no one and responsible for nothing, he is doing a bang-up job. It is a shame and a waste for a man as intelligent and capable as Cruz. It is, one suspects, the triumph of ambition and arrogance over reason and good judgment.