Obama: "If Ted Cruz calls somebody a communist, then you know they're in my cabinet"

[compromise]

http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2013/03/obama-jokes-that-sen-ted-cruz-sees-communists-in-his-cabinet.html/

WASHINGTON– Seems that freshman Sen. Ted Cruz has caught the eye of President Barack Obama, and not in a good way. At tonight’s Gridiron Dinner, an annual white tie dinner that brings out the capital’s top politicos and journalists for an evening of topical humor and song, Obama wove the Texas tea partier into a joke about musical chairs in his second term Cabinet.

“With all these new faces, it’s hard to keep track of who is in, who is out. And I know it’s difficult for you guys as reporters. But I can offer you an easy way of remembering the new team. If Ted Cruz calls somebody a communist, then you know they’re in my cabinet,” Obama said.

That was a reference to Cruz’s 2010 assertion, recently dredged up, that the faculty at Harvard Law School (Obama, class of 1991, Cruz, class of 1995) was stocked with Marxists — more, in fact, than Republicans.

And that wasn’t the only Cruz reference of the evening. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., invoked him to make fun of CNN’s recent wall-to-wall coverage of a stricken cruise ship. “In this town,” she said, “when we hear about a tough cruise, we don’t know if it’s Carnival or Ted.”

Quite a spotlight for a guy Sen. John McCain deemed a “wacko bird” a day earlier.

Obama, Klobuchar and the GOP speaker, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, poked fun at each other, themselves, and leaders in both parties at the 128th annual Gridiron Club and Foundation dinner.

“My administration recently put out a photo of me skeet shooting and even that wasn’t enough for some people. Next week, we’re releasing a photo of me clinging to religion,” Obama joked.

“Because of sequester, they cut my tails,” he told the crowd, and his joke writers were furloughed. “I know a lot of you reported that no one will feel any immediate impact because of the sequester. Well, you’re about to find out how wrong you are.”

Jindal, a potential 2016 contender, told the crowd he’d supported Texas Gov. Rick Perry early in the 2012 GOP presidential contest for three reasons — though, of course, he could only remember two. Perry’s post-Oops resurrection effort took a huge leap forward when he knocked ‘em dead at last year’s Gridiron.

[FSP-Rebel]

Making light of things is the only thing Obama's got atm.

[Christian Liberty]

Is Ted Cruz being lightheared as well? Calling liberals "Communists" is a good way to lose credibility for no reason, considering that they technically aren't. Ron Paul was much more accurate when he called Obama "Corporatist."

[KingNothing]

These light-hearted, self-congratulatory events are so far beneath the office of the Presidency that I'm amazed they ever began. We're talking about people's personal activities, livelihoods, faiths, freedoms and lives... and they just mock it all. It is repulsive. Anyone who takes part in these things should be ashamed.

Could you imagine a stoic, Serious, president like Calvin Coolidge taking part in this nonsense?

I just don't understand how stick-in-the-mud'ish attempts at comedy from people who are far too dull for it are par for the course now. And I say this all as a life-long troll and fan of offensive comedy. Their jokes are always bombs. They're groan-inducing. They'd get zeros from a non-sycophantic audience. But the press is always there, assuring the politicians that they are Hilarious and Amazing and Superior.

...As they're marginalizing things that impact hundreds of millions of people!

"Make fun, buddy." - Ron Paul

[AuH20]

Is Ted Cruz being lightheared as well? Calling liberals "Communists" is a good way to lose credibility for no reason, considering that they technically aren't. Ron Paul was much more accurate when he called Obama "Corporatist."

There is very little difference between corporatists and communists. Ownership of the means of production being the only real difference, but generally the methods & goals are the same.

[satchelmcqueen]

im glad the bastard can make jokes as he kills my country and way of life.

[Christian Liberty]

There is very little difference between corporatists and communists. Ownership of the means of production being the only real difference, but generally the methods & goals are the same.

Communists technically want to abolish the state and share everything in common. I think Rothbard was correct when he said it was ridiculously utopian and impossible (Even if it were possible, I'm not sure why it would be desirable either). But that's still what Marx, Engles, exc. believed in.

It doesn't really bother me when people call Obama a socialist or whatever even if its technically not accurate (Well, unless its a part of a "Vote for Romney, he's our only hope" type crap appeal) but its technically not accurate and may damage our PR. I don't mind damaging our PR if there's a good reason for it. I completely disagree with the poster who said "We shouldn't get into fights about legalizing drugs" or whatever. If its for a good cause, by all means, turn off 99% of the populace. Same thing with our foreign policy view. We shouldn't apologize for it. But if its an issue of empty rhetoric, I don't see the point of ticking off liberals without cause. Even though I do it all the time.

[kathy88]

Is Ted Cruz being lightheared as well? Calling liberals "Communists" is a good way to lose credibility for no reason, considering that they technically aren't. Ron Paul was much more accurate when he called Obama "Corporatist."

Calling liberals communists is a good way to get establishment old guard republicans to take notice. And considering the constant name calling the libs do, this is pretty tame.

[AuH20]

Communists technically want to abolish the state and share everything in common. I think Rothbard was correct when he said it was ridiculously utopian and impossible (Even if it were possible, I'm not sure why it would be desirable either). But that's still what Marx, Engles, exc. believed in.

It doesn't really bother me when people call Obama a socialist or whatever even if its technically not accurate (Well, unless its a part of a "Vote for Romney, he's our only hope" type crap appeal) but its technically not accurate and may damage our PR. I don't mind damaging our PR if there's a good reason for it. I completely disagree with the poster who said "We shouldn't get into fights about legalizing drugs" or whatever. If its for a good cause, by all means, turn off 99% of the populace. Same thing with our foreign policy view. We shouldn't apologize for it. But if its an issue of empty rhetoric, I don't see the point of ticking off liberals without cause. Even though I do it all the time.

That's the grand lie they sell to the gullible public, so as to consolidate power. Party insiders in the Soviet Union lived like kings. And the inner circle in the PRC enjoy similar privileges and luxury while their people wallow in squalor. Secondly, Communists are not averse to utilizing violence to achieve their goals. So I don't think Cruz was too far off with his classfication. Communism, when you strip away it's propagandized layers is very similar to corporatism.

[FSP-Rebel]

There is very little difference between corporatists and communists. Ownership of the means of production being the only real difference, but generally the methods & goals are the same.
There you've gone and done it.. Hope you got time on your hands for a lengthy debate on the nuances between corporatists and communists as I feel you're going to get one from the Mr. Libertarian credentialing committee.

[emazur]

Is Ted Cruz being lightheared as well? Calling liberals "Communists" is a good way to lose credibility for no reason, considering that they technically aren't.

They have more in common than you may think:
Do they advocate the income tax (2nd plank of the Communist Manifesto)? Yes.
Do they advocate a central bank (5th plank of the Communist Manifesto)? Yes.
Do they advocate universal government schooling (10th plank of the Communist Manifesto)? Yes

That's 3 out of 10 planks right there. Most other planks are partially implemented one way or another. For instance, try not paying your property taxes and you'll see just how "private" your property really is.

[AuH20]

There you've gone and done it.. Hope you got time on your hands for a lengthy debate on the nuances between corporatists and communists as I feel you're going to get one from the Mr. Libertarian credentialing committee.

Most of the communists in the world are wanna-be corporatists without the necessary bloodline and guile to become such. FACT :)

[AuH20]

Calling liberals communists is a good way to get establishment old guard republicans to take notice. And considering the constant name calling the libs do, this is pretty tame.

I think the liberal politicians and "intellectual class" are closer to the Communist model than the average liberal on the street who may have some misgivings about utilizing the state as a battering ram.

[Brian4Liberty]

Ted Cruz is right. They are all ideological descendents of Marx (and Lenin and Trotsky). They have evolved their ideology over time, but the essence is the same. Call it Neo-Marxism, Reformed Marxism, Marxist Corporatism, or whatever you want. They have most of the Marxist planks, but now they combine it with corporatism. Marxism paid for by an elite, inter-connected corporate class.

"Marxists become Fascists the minute they become rich, yet they retain the Marxist rhetoric."

[Brian4Liberty]

That's the grand lie they sell to the gullible public, so as to consolidate power. Party insiders in the Soviet Union lived like kings. And the inner circle in the PRC enjoy similar privileges and luxury while their people wallow in squalor. Secondly, Communists are not averse to utilizing violence to achieve their goals. So I don't think Cruz was too far off with his classfication. Communism, when you strip away it's propagandized layers is very similar to corporatism.

Got that right!

It's the Democrats that preach neo-Marxism that are the most connected behind the scenes.

[Michigan11]

In a way if we chose not to use these labels of communist or corporatists, how would we define these individuals is something that might bring more clearity possibly. Minus labels, what are their actions and benefits, goals, etc....?

[Brian4Liberty]

In a way if we chose not to use these labels of communist or corporatists, how would we define these individuals is something that might bring more clearity possibly. Minus labels, what are their actions and benefits, goals, etc....?

Power. Control. Domination. Wealth. Disguised with a false veneer of "it's for the people".

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

[MaxPower]

Calling liberals communists is a good way to get establishment old guard republicans to take notice. And considering the constant name calling the libs do, this is pretty tame.
It sometimes seems that Washington establishment left liberals will call absolutely anyone who wants to make any even slightly-perceptible cut to the federal budget a dangerous extremist and right-wing ideologue.

[anaconda]

Thanks, Barry, for helping to make Ted Cruz a household name.

[parocks]

Is Ted Cruz being lightheared as well? Calling liberals "Communists" is a good way to lose credibility for no reason, considering that they technically aren't. Ron Paul was much more accurate when he called Obama "Corporatist."

That was a reference to Cruz’s 2010 assertion, recently dredged up, that the faculty at Harvard Law School (Obama, class of 1991, Cruz, class of 1995) was stocked with Marxists — more, in fact, than Republicans.

[parocks]

Ted Cruz is right. They are all ideological descendents of Marx (and Lenin and Trotsky). They have evolved their ideology over time, but the essence is the same. Call it Neo-Marxism, Reformed Marxism, Marxist Corporatism, or whatever you want. They have most of the Marxist planks, but now they combine it with corporatism. Marxism paid for by an elite, inter-connected corporate class.

"Marxists become Fascists the minute they become rich, yet they retain the Marxist rhetoric."

Wasn't he talking about the faculty of Harvard Law School? And didn't he use the word "Marxist"? There are professors in colleges and law school that call themselves
Marxists. You find them in the social sciences. Marxist economics, Marxist political science, Marxist sociology. Gramsci, Frankfurt School. All scholarly Marxism. It's different than calling a politician a Communist.