1. Somebody get Gail Collins a thesaurus. For "stupendous," try "astonishing." It's got that huffy, aghast tone you seem to be looking for. I know, "stupendous" is tempting because it gives the feeling that you're calling your target stupid, but when you find something "stupendous," you're actually confessing to stupor on your own part, and literally, if you are in a stupor, you are stupid.Ms. Collins in particular and the MSM in general are preparing the battlefield for the tactics of personal destruction to use on Mr. Cruz. If they can marginalize him now, since as a Hispanic Conservative, he (like Sarah Palin before him) is a threat to the whole Liberal meme (they support minorities and women).
2. This woman-defending-woman column ends with a recipe metaphor. Is that good gender politics? It resonates with what I think is Collins's effort to make us see this interplay between 2 U.S. Senators in terms of a man patronizing a woman.
3. Cruz's questions were about the security of our constitutional rights: Why did humor belong in that recipe?
4. Where was this "self-righteousness"? Collins's evidence is that Cruz used the phrases “My... point is," "in my opinion," “I would point out," and "In my view." This phobia about first-person-singular pronouns is silly. It's used against Obama all the time. What does Collins think of all those right-wing bloggers who will inform you about how many times Obama says "I" in a given speech? I'll bet she thinks it's... stupid. I certainly do.
5. Cruz also referred to his role as counsel in Heller (the Supreme Court's biggest 2d Amendment case) — another thing Collins considered self-referential and self-righteous. But Collins began her column building up Dianne Feinstein's stature because of her encounter with the fatally wounded Harvey Milk and George Moscone many years ago. Does personal experience lend weight to political opinion or not? Feinstein said: "I walked in, I saw people shot. I’ve looked at bodies that have been shot with these weapons. I’ve seen the bullets that implode." That's at least as self-referential and self-righteous as Cruz's statement that he was not "unfamiliar" with Heller given that he worked on the case.
If the MSM can successfully marginalize Cruz NOW, he won't be a threat to either Biden, Hillary Clinton or Michelle Obama (yes, she's already being touted as presidential material on the left) in 2016.
We, in the grass roots blogging community need to begin our pushback NOW, BEFORE the narrative is set in concrete. I would urge everyone who has a blog to start publishing pushback against articles on Cruz, so that even Google searches won't be able to hide positive mentions of any minority of conservative.
We have to keep in mind that Mr. Cruz wasn't annointed by the GOP "elite" leadership inside the DC Beltway. He's the choice of the Tea Party movement of Texas. He wiped out the RSCC's choice in the GOP primary and easily won the general election last November. He along with Rand Paul and Marco Rubio are NOT part of the "elite" GOP leadeship. They're outsiders as their support comes from the base of the party and the Tea Party movement.
If the MSM can successfully destroy the credibility of these men by manufacturing a false narrative of wackiness or extremism, they they will be finished in national politics. We in the grass roots base, have the job of trying to push back against the official Democratic Propaganda sources (aka, the MSM). If we can flood the interwebs with good stories, we can overwhelm even GOOGLE's biased, dollars supported searches.
Mr. Cruz, Paul and Rubio are the future of the GOP. If we allow them to be marginalized by the MSM we, the grass roots conservative movement will have failed America.