Replying to criticism that was leveled against what he had
said with regard to patrolling Muslim neighborhoods in America, Senator Ted
Cruz wrote an article that was published under the headline: “Ted Cruz replies
to Bill Bratton on NYPD's demographics unit and the fight against Jihadist
terrorism,” and appeared on March 28, 2016 in the New York Daily News.
The two debaters made their points with clarity, and I have
no desire to interfere with that. Having gone through the sayings of Ted Cruz,
my intent is to discuss what he may have revealed about his own state of mind.
In doing so, I take into account the background against which Cruz's mind is
operating at this time. It is that he is involved in a heated campaign to be
elected president of the United States, and he is running against an opponent
that gives back as much as he receives – doing so in spades, and then some.
That opponent is also a wealthy man having the means to
finance his own campaign. By contrast, Ted Cruz relies on the donations of
individuals who became wealthy, not by giving away politico-charitable
donations, but by demanding a hefty quid pro quo for every dollar they lay out.
And no one – I mean absolutely no one – plays this game more cunningly than the
Jews. Among them is the gambling mogul named Sheldon Adelson who is considered
the patriarch of Jewish fanaticism. He is known to move mountains for every
inch of land that the Jews dare to snatch from the Palestinians, be it by hook or
by crook.
It is the wealth of that man which is obsessing Ted Cruz; it
is where Cruz's attention is fixated; it is the motivation that's animating his
brain and his mouth. In fact, what Ted Cruz has said about patrolling Muslim
neighborhoods in America
is exactly what Sheldon Adelson expects from someone relying on his financial
contributions.
To be clear, I never understood how someone can be obsessed
or fixated about a concept as abstract as quid pro quo. It was four decades ago
that I was introduced to the idea for the first time. It happened when the
vogue infesting the media was to say that the late President Richard Nixon had
an “anal fixation.” I didn't know what that was at the time, and I don't
believe I fully understand what it is even now. But I came across a few things
that may shed some light on the subject – or may not. Here they are anyway:
First, I saw a piece of writing that said zebras and wild
jackasses walk in line – one behind the other – because they are genetically
programmed to train their eyes on the rear end of the one that's ahead of them.
It could be that this is a form of anal fixation.
Second, I saw a piece of writing that said most animals in
the wild leave their scent around a territory they claim as their own. Some
animals have special glands that produce a scent they rub against a twig or a
rock. Other animals urinate or defecate in and around the territory to leave
their scent there. Still other species of animals rub their rear end against
the grass to mark it with their scent. Maybe this too is a from of anal
fixation.
Third, I had the opportunity to study the mentality of
politicians who sit at the helm of so-called democracies … America being
one of these. Some of the politicians say and do the assholish thing of talking
about subjects they do not differentiate from their assholes. They soon
discover they have been silly, and then spend a lifetime trying to locate their
assholes to find out what made them act in such a stupid manner. Maybe this too
is a form of anal fixation.
Fourth, I have studied, and I continue to study the journey
of tons of politicians as they gradually develop an obsession for the donating
moguls whose ass they die to kiss. I am almost certain that the phenomenon has
something to do with these characters having caught the affliction of anal
fixation.
I am convinced this is the stage at which Ted Cruz is now
operating. However, the concern ought not to be about him; it ought to be about
the children he professes to protect from the sleaze of other politicians. They
too may be sleazy, but they are no better and no worse than him. They are his
peers after all, his equals and his comrades in arms.