Quote of the Day: Enormous Blessings

 

“I think it’s an enormous blessing to be the child of an immigrant who fled oppression, because you realize how fragile liberty is and how easily it can be taken away.” – Ted Cruz

“I was so horrifically bad at tennis” — Ted Cruz

I like Ted Cruz a lot, and have grown to like him even more in the last few years. He doesn’t mince words, and is brutal and fearless when he challenges people who are either seeking appointments or testifying about their corporate actions. He’s also very articulate, has a deep understanding of the Constitution, and a great sense of humor.

When I saw the first quotation above, I couldn’t help but appreciate how he translated his experiences in Cuba into a love and commitment to liberty in this country. I think that attitude is true of many immigrant Cubans; we see them becoming very successful, especially in southern Florida.

But why do other immigrants who come from oppressive countries not have the same reaction? Why do they bring some of the archaic and primitive beliefs with them, especially the very reasons they have fled their native countries?

Do we pin the problem on Joe Biden because he has made it so easy for migrants to break the law? What about the illegals in New York, who expected comfortable accommodations and to be served food they preferred?

Finally, I added the second quotation because some people mistaken Cruz’s self-confidence for arrogance. Any man who admits to being terrible at a sport can’t be all bad.

Published in Group Writing
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 38 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    Arahant (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):
    cattle reallocation specialist

    Yeah. I come from a higher class of folk.

    Puttin’ on airs even then, I see.

    • #31
  2. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    Percival (View Comment):

    Arahant (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):
    cattle reallocation specialist

    Yeah. I come from a higher class of folk.

    Puttin’ on airs even then, I see.

    Hey, he’s got a descendant who is the only female PotUS in history. (Unless one counts Barry.)

    • #32
  3. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Arahant (View Comment):

    The Reticulator (View Comment):
    I don’t think any of my immigrant ancestors had a working knowledge of English when they came here. Some of them never learned English, but didn’t need it because they were part of a supportive community. Their offspring all learned it, though.

    Depends on when and through where. Ellis Island’s facility did not open up until 1892. A lot of folks came in before that, and for awhile it was wide open and the Wild West.

    Most of my ancestors came before that.  My paternal grandmother came after that, and didn’t know any English when she came.  Her children taught her English after they started school. 

    • #33
  4. David C. Broussard Coolidge
    David C. Broussard
    @Dbroussa

    Globalitarian Lower Order Misa… (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Douglas Pratt (View Comment):

    Nice one. I like Cruz. Would have been happy with him as President, although I think governors are better; Senators run committes, governors run bureaucracies.

    I get the impression that, in his present position, he is free to speak his mind. I like the fact that he does so.

    To many leftists, Cruz was a “Trump” before DJT entered national politics.

    And to way too many on the Right as well. Cruz had the “outsider” lane for the nomination in ’16 until Trump appeared. I think he could have won the nomination and would have, absent Trump, because many who supported Trump would have liked Cruz. However, I am of the opinion that Cruz could not have won in ’16 using Trump’s path, and it is unlikely that he could have won using a more traditional path.

    I think Cruz was the outsider among the insiders. There was also Rand Paul who’s not in the club, and Carly Fiorina and Ben Carson were not even politicians. I think “rough insider” may apply to Cruz, but not outsider.

    I disagree, but only from the standpoint that Cruz wanted to be President, and he chose as his “lane” the outside lane to run from.  However, being the Solicitor General of Texas (not an elected position) was not a job that was a stepping stone to the White House.  He couldn’t run for Governor and beat Rick Perry which would have been the other logical stepping stone.  So, he ran for Senate where he caucuses with the GOP but stuck his finger in their eye when he could.  His filibuster in 2013 angered Sen. McConnell and many other GOP Senators.  This was all part of his effort to have a platform that was legitimate to run for the White House, but also allowed him to style himself as an outsider who felt that the GOP wasn’t doing enough, or even trying in many cases to resolve the issues the base cared about.

    • #34
  5. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    Globalitarian Lower Order Misa… (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Douglas Pratt (View Comment):

    Nice one. I like Cruz. Would have been happy with him as President, although I think governors are better; Senators run committes, governors run bureaucracies.

    I get the impression that, in his present position, he is free to speak his mind. I like the fact that he does so.

    To many leftists, Cruz was a “Trump” before DJT entered national politics.

    And to way too many on the Right as well. Cruz had the “outsider” lane for the nomination in ’16 until Trump appeared. I think he could have won the nomination and would have, absent Trump, because many who supported Trump would have liked Cruz. However, I am of the opinion that Cruz could not have won in ’16 using Trump’s path, and it is unlikely that he could have won using a more traditional path.

    I think Cruz was the outsider among the insiders. There was also Rand Paul who’s not in the club, and Carly Fiorina and Ben Carson were not even politicians. I think “rough insider” may apply to Cruz, but not outsider.

    I disagree, but only from the standpoint that Cruz wanted to be President, and he chose as his “lane” the outside lane to run from. However, being the Solicitor General of Texas (not an elected position) was not a job that was a stepping stone to the White House. He couldn’t run for Governor and beat Rick Perry which would have been the other logical stepping stone. So, he ran for Senate where he caucuses with the GOP but stuck his finger in their eye when he could. His filibuster in 2013 angered Sen. McConnell and many other GOP Senators. This was all part of his effort to have a platform that was legitimate to run for the White House, but also allowed him to style himself as an outsider who felt that the GOP wasn’t doing enough, or even trying in many cases to resolve the issues the base cared about.

    He filibustered Obamacare, and that ticked off the Murder Turtle? Tough.

    • #35
  6. carcat74 Member
    carcat74
    @carcat74

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):
    So you think if they are starving peasants, they aren’t going to appreciate the advantages of liberty? You might be right.

    Some of that is Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. When you are starving you seek food, shelter, and comfort. When all those needs are met and you have stability, you seek self-realization. When we look at some immigrants to the US, the Cubans as one example, they were the elites under Batista and usually successful. They came here with nothing but they built something because they had done it before and could do it again. When you take a person who was poor in their homeland and bring them here, they aren’t likely to become wildly successful, or even moderately successful (note I said likely, it can and does happen). They are, often, looking to be poor in the richest country in the world because being poor here is middle to upper class where they came from. They didn’t come in search of liberty, but economic improvement. This pattern has repeated itself for a very long time…really to Jamestown and Plymouth Rock. Those original settlers were motivated to come to the US, and it was expensive. They were not poor, though they were when they got here. They built, often from nothing, something of value as they had at home. This was true of most immigrant waves, because even in the midst of the Eastern European waves, the Irish, the Southern Europeans…it was expensive to immigrate. You had to buy a ticket on a ship and it was one-way. That is a tough decision to make and only the motivated did it. Now, it’s a long walk, but that is about it. Much easier to come and thus we get less motivated people. Often they come with the intention of going back home or sending money to family back home. They are here to make money not be Americans.

    The desperately poor do not have the resources to migrate. They might be transported by a generous private or public benefactor. Otherwise they are stuck at home.

    I wonder how the ‘desperately poor’ have been managing the $5000 a person to make the journey?

    • #36
  7. DaveSchmidt Coolidge
    DaveSchmidt
    @DaveSchmidt

    carcat74 (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):
    So you think if they are starving peasants, they aren’t going to appreciate the advantages of liberty? You might be right.

    Some of that is Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. When you are starving you seek food, shelter, and comfort. When all those needs are met and you have stability, you seek self-realization. When we look at some immigrants to the US, the Cubans as one example, they were the elites under Batista and usually successful. They came here with nothing but they built something because they had done it before and could do it again. When you take a person who was poor in their homeland and bring them here, they aren’t likely to become wildly successful, or even moderately successful (note I said likely, it can and does happen). They are, often, looking to be poor in the richest country in the world because being poor here is middle to upper class where they came from. They didn’t come in search of liberty, but economic improvement. This pattern has repeated itself for a very long time…really to Jamestown and Plymouth Rock. Those original settlers were motivated to come to the US, and it was expensive. They were not poor, though they were when they got here. They built, often from nothing, something of value as they had at home. This was true of most immigrant waves, because even in the midst of the Eastern European waves, the Irish, the Southern Europeans…it was expensive to immigrate. You had to buy a ticket on a ship and it was one-way. That is a tough decision to make and only the motivated did it. Now, it’s a long walk, but that is about it. Much easier to come and thus we get less motivated people. Often they come with the intention of going back home or sending money to family back home. They are here to make money not be Americans.

    The desperately poor do not have the resources to migrate. They might be transported by a generous private or public benefactor. Otherwise they are stuck at home.

    I wonder how the ‘desperately poor’ have been managing the $5000 a person to make the journey?

    Excellent question.  

    • #37
  8. Fritz Coolidge
    Fritz
    @Fritz

    carcat74 (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):
    So you think if they are starving peasants, they aren’t going to appreciate the advantages of liberty? You might be right.

    Some of that is Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. When you are starving you seek food, shelter, and comfort. When all those needs are met and you have stability, you seek self-realization. When we look at some immigrants to the US, the Cubans as one example, they were the elites under Batista and usually successful. They came here with nothing but they built something because they had done it before and could do it again. When you take a person who was poor in their homeland and bring them here, they aren’t likely to become wildly successful, or even moderately successful (note I said likely, it can and does happen). They are, often, looking to be poor in the richest country in the world because being poor here is middle to upper class where they came from. They didn’t come in search of liberty, but economic improvement. This pattern has repeated itself for a very long time…really to Jamestown and Plymouth Rock. Those original settlers were motivated to come to the US, and it was expensive. They were not poor, though they were when they got here. They built, often from nothing, something of value as they had at home. This was true of most immigrant waves, because even in the midst of the Eastern European waves, the Irish, the Southern Europeans…it was expensive to immigrate. You had to buy a ticket on a ship and it was one-way. That is a tough decision to make and only the motivated did it. Now, it’s a long walk, but that is about it. Much easier to come and thus we get less motivated people. Often they come with the intention of going back home or sending money to family back home. They are here to make money not be Americans.

    The desperately poor do not have the resources to migrate. They might be transported by a generous private or public benefactor. Otherwise they are stuck at home.

    I wonder how the ‘desperately poor’ have been managing the $5000 a person to make the journey?

    Soros-backed NGOs? Cartels buy-on-time plans?

    • #38
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.