Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have always loved that metaphor for its perfect encapsulation of stubborn-heeded obstinate idiocy. "The more people disagree with you, the more right you are." That's not the thinking of a rational individual.
But you're right - it sure applies to Cruz these days.
Irrational would be for the Republicans to take advice from liberal Democrats. Suppose the Chicago Bulls say to the Miami Heat: "sit Lebron James down on the bench, for gosh sakes. You're going to wear him out if you don't." Would the reaction from the Heat be a) "excellent point, we're taking that advice" or b) LOL!?
I have always loved that metaphor for its perfect encapsulation of stubborn-heeded obstinate idiocy. "The more people disagree with you, the more right you are." That's not the thinking of a rational individual.
But you're right - it sure applies to Cruz these days.
You left out a critical point in your effort to lie.
The more people who oppose you disagree with your actions, the more right you are."
Like Democrats would EVER say anything that wasn't totally self serving? You serve ONLY your agenda, via any means, including deception, lies, dishonesty and cheating. Taking your word would be only what a fool does.
Cruz is probably the only Republican left in DC not bought and paid for by big business.
He raised an impressive $14.3 million war chest for his senate race. Banks, law firms and Goldman Sachs all gave at the office. Then there's the Koch Freedom Works.
His fundraising ranking was 10th place out of 5( senate candidates.
His spending ranking was 11th place out of 59 Senate candidates.
Irrational would be for the Republicans to take advice from liberal Democrats. Suppose the Chicago Bulls say to the Miami Heat: "sit Lebron James down on the bench, for gosh sakes. You're going to wear him out if you don't." Would the reaction from the Heat be a) "excellent point, we're taking that advice" or b) LOL!?
They did a ton of this after the last election. Quite a few threads from liberals concerned about the death of the Republican party and offering their advice for how it could be saved. Invariably the advice involved Republicans acting more like Democrats.
Our need for an active federal government simply does not exist. The only reason it exists is to manage foreign policy, defense, and make sure the states don't get into trade wars with each other.
speak english please I don't understand blabbering nor can I understand someone who thinks himself some sort of political scholar. And by the way "an active federal government" ?? Is that anything like a "non-working foremen" ?
It's a no-brainer for the Republican congress, and losing game for Reid.
Even if Reid is able to remove the defunding to 0bamaCare, and sends the 'dead on arrival' bill back to Boehner, it will die there. Then the house sends smaller, targeted CR bills, with one to fund social security, medicaid, and Medicare, then another to fun SNAP and all the other social welfare programs, and another CR bill to fund various agencies. What will Reid to, not pass those funding bills?
I can see Reid refusing to pass funding for WIC, Welfare, Unemployment, and SNAP going over like a lead balloon. Reid will have to fund those CR bills, and then he will be standing with egg on his face waiting for the funding bill for 0bamaCare that never arrives.
speak english please I don't understand blabbering nor can I understand someone who thinks himself some sort of political scholar. And by the way "an active federal government" ?? Is that anything like a "non-working foremen" ?
Who says I'm a "political scholar"?
Not me.
I'm just a guy who read the Constitution and Declaration of Independence, and a few scribblings by some rather brilliant people both now and in the past.
When I said "we", I meant "us, the people". When I said "active" it means just that, a federal government that is active in the people's lives. When I said "we" don't need an active federal government, I mean that "us the people" have no need for a federal government that is active in our daily lives.
Nothing complex at all about that statement, nor hard in ANY way to understand.
It's true, I'm just a hick from the sticks, with no Washington DC credentials. Just like the founders who quite brilliantly designed a nation safe from the predations of the powermongers.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
