Alumni Voices Weigh in as Nation Grapples With Capitol Mob

Much like a Churchill named Winston,
Many graduates of Princeton
Are using eloquent prose
To punch Ted Cruz in the nose,
If only the man would listen.

Add my name to the list of Princeton alumni who condemn Sen. Ted Cruz for his un-Constitutional rhetoric and fallacious efforts on behalf of President Trump’s fallacious efforts to overturn the election. Their combined actions led to support of the insurrection.

I have rarely written to PAW since graduating in 1959 but cannot ignore the events of Jan. 6 nor the performance of Ted Cruz, from the Class of 1992. I sent the following to Cruz on that infamous day: “As a Princetonian (1959) and life-long Republican until my disenfranchisement by Mr. Trump’s performance and behavior before and since 2016, I’m ashamed and embarrassed by your support for the Senate’s objection to Arizona's Electoral College results.”  

By contrast, I applaud former Senator & UN Ambassador Jack Danforth’s retraction of support for his mentee Josh Hawley’s fist-pumping, crowd-riling seditious behavior  – “The biggest mistake I’ve ever made.” Not surprised, though – Jack’s a Princetonian!

Some Senators and Representatives have felt the need to lead with falsehood in connecting to their constituents. Our own Senator Lankford felt that he should object to the outcome of the election because of the concern of the people of Oklahoma. Ted Cruz ’92 took up the conceit, expressing it vigorously on the campaign trail in Georgia (not his state obviously). Josh Hawley, newly elected from the state of Missouri, is questionably not even a resident of Missouri. They led with a lie saying let’s throw it on the wall and see if it sticks.

Our senior Republican Senator James Mountain Inhofe chose to lead with the truth. He is, however, 86 years old and didn't even bother to debate his opponent in the latest election. Pandering to his base is not a pressing issue.

A true leader should lead with the truth while listening to dissenting opinions. Otherwise, they are simply lending credence to the lie.

If the University can remove Woodrow Wilson’s name from a school because of the man’s disgraceful legacy, can Princeton remove its own name from Ted Cruz’s diploma — for the same reason?

Please add my name to the list of Princeton alumni who wish to condemn the cowardly, dishonest, self-serving and seditious actions of Senator Ted Cruz. His name is a stain on, and threat to everything we hold dear as Americans and I am embarrassed to call myself his classmate.

I fully share all possible disdain for Trump and his supporters whether they are alumni of Princeton or not. But what is the issue here?

Are alumni supposed to have abandoned all their phobias, prejudices, psychological deviations, selfishness, stupidities, and, yes, evil inclinations just because of their post-secondary education? Has their education remedied all their sins and faults? How naive can you get? Senator Ben Sasse of Nebraska, not a Princetonian as far as I know, said it all when he said that the attempted sedition in D.C. and its Oval Office instigator were “wicked.” Yes, he used the word wicked; he does have a vestigial Lutheran tendency to pontificate theologically, but he was correct here. Did Princeton ever promise prospective students to cure their wickedness and sin? Not that I am aware of it.

I join the community of those horrified at the role Princeton alumnus Senator Ted Cruz played in the attempted coup against the U.S. government and attack on the U.S. Capitol building by white supremacists and others. Cruz’s years-long assault on the truth, often punching down against those less privileged than him, contravenes the very concept of public service. Whatever Princeton’s “honor code” may mean, Cruz has brought the antithesis of its spirit to the public arena for too long. His hate-mongering and grandstanding is draped in a brand of pernicious sophistry that is mirrored by the myth of Ivy League superiority and its mirror image, cynical anti-elitism that attempts to cloak incuriosity and demagoguery. I urge our community to be active seekers of the truth from ideologically diverse sources, and to reject passive confirmation of biases that serve the interests of the fortunate few to the detriment of the honorable many.

Please add my name to the growing list of alumni who find Senator Ted Cruz’s participation in the events of Jan. 6 as the most craven, despicable, and self-serving of acts. He now has blood on his hands and he brings shame to Princeton University’s wonderful tradition of public service. I would like to encourage the University to publicly censure Senator Cruz, strip him of his class numbers, and prohibit him from ever speaking on campus or drawing any form of compensation from Princeton. Thank you.

As a psychoanalytic psychotherapist for 30-plus years, I believe that George Will *68’s articulation of fellow Princetonian Ted Cruz ’92’s culpability in the Jan. 6 Trump-supported insurrection at the U.S. Capitol Building provided a succinct statement of desperately-needed, reality-based clarity amid the rampant, delusional thinking of Congressional representatives who we assumed — whether their politics were ours or not — to at least have the moral compass required to execute their congressional roles with integrity.

As a proud fellow Princetonian and a lifelong student of psychopathology, I was deeply saddened by Mr. Cruz’s participation in perpetuating the discredited, unfounded attacks on democracy that culminated in yesterday’s violence; when I saw that his decision was to continue to rationalize his participation in that dangerous, self-serving charade on the Senate floor after the deaths and injuries on the Capitol steps and the destruction within its halls, I was dismayed.

I appreciated Mr. Will’s succinct eloquence; my inclination was to shout to the world, “This is not who we are!”

Last year Princeton did something that you could call the inverse of retiring an athlete’s jersey number.  It retired Woodrow Wilson’s legacy — not by hanging it in the rafters but by putting it out on the curb. The move was the correct one even if it could do nothing to right the appalling wrongs that Wilson did to the lives of so many Americans now long gone — Black Americans who were, for instance, forced by his bigotry to endure a segregated federal civil service.

Difficult as Princeton’s move was, the University now faces one that would be, in its way, even more difficult, but far more timely.  I am one alumnus calling on my alma mater to disown, this time, not a politician from a bygone era but one who still walks among us and in fact occupies a seat in the U.S. Senate. Ted Cruz ’92 turned his back on Princeton when he opted for “in the nation’s disservice” and played a keystone role in a seditious effort against the American Republic, culminating in the horrifying scenes at the Capitol on Jan. 6. As far as I know, no University facilities are named for Cruz, so stripping him from signage and plaques won’t be required. A simpler, fitting measure would simply be the damnatio memoriae of ceasing to refer to him as “’92” in all University publications and communiques.

Motivated by personal political aims (he wants to run for president), Ted Cruz supports lies that he knows will undermine our democracy. I’m ashamed to be his fellow alumnus.

On Jan. 6, I watched in horror as a Princeton alum — and sadly, a classmate — led an effort that resulted in an insurrection on the United States Capitol and democracy itself. Princeton calls on its alums to act “in the nation’s service and the service of humanity.” Sen. Ted Cruz ’92’s actions disrespected the U.S. Constitution, undermined America’s democratic institutions, and emboldened forces around the world that seek to repress freedom and self-government. I call on my classmates and fellow alums to condemn Sen. Cruz’s actions in the strongest possible terms. We are better than this. 

Senator Ted Cruz graduated from Princeton in 1992.  In 2016, he received from his alma mater’s Whig-Cliosophic Society its highest honor: the James Madison Award for Distinguished Public Service. As a former vice president of Whig-Clio, I am deeply saddened by the disrepute into which I feel that Cruz has, however unintentionally, brought the Society. I have in mind the argument that he has, in effect if not intent, abetted President Donald Trump’s effort to cling to power at all costs, notwithstanding the attendant risk to the future of American democracy. 

Consider the speech that Cruz gave on Jan. 6, 2021. He did not criticize Trump’s prevarication and incitement against an election whose fairness and legitimacy had been sustained through multiple recounts and juridical tests. He did not defend the proven integrity of the election. He chose instead to recommended postponing the constitutionally scheduled certification of the voting and its results. That advice, if implemented, could have prolonged Trump’s baseless accusations and further jeopardized a constitutional transition to a legally and electorally deserving Biden administration.

Soon after Cruz’s remarks, supporters of Trump rioted, invaded the U.S. Capitol, and vandalized the halls of American democracy. There is no reason to think that Cruz wanted that to happen. But he did move to block the timely certification of the 2020 election. Rightly or wrongly, that action opened him to the charge of denigrating a free and fair exercise of the right to vote and subordinating public interest to personal desire — Trump’s consuming desire to retain the presidency despite November’s verdict.

Some might suggest that Whig-Clio retroactively withdraw the James Madison Award that Cruz received four years ago. I am not arguing here for that. But I do believe that Whig-Clio should introspectively debate the suitability of the 2016 award in the light of recent events. That would at least reduce the chance that, in a cemetery on the aptly named Constitution Highway in Montpelier Station, Virginia, James Madison may be turning in his grave.