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.
Cruz's talk fest is going to put House Republicans in a tough spot. Cruz is wasting time in the Senate right now which means after the Senate strips out the Obamacare provision and sends it back to the House, they won't have time to do anything other than pass it or let the government shut down. Cruz is a Democrat's best friend right now.
The democrats and republicans are the same at this point. Yes, we know that Cruz probably can't cause a shift in voting, but dammit he is standing up for something he believes in. He's the ONLY one not playing politics in this thing. This is who we want to represent us. Someone that is truly focusing on the country and not votes.
Most people are too ignorant of history to know this, but Reagan was also treated like Cruz when he tried to win the Republican ticket in 1976. He was a "joke" to the republican machine. He was just someone "grandstanding" and could never be taken seriously.
We want strong leaders that won't bow to the rest of congress. Personally, I'm proud Cruz is my representative. We need more folks with the stones to stand up for what they know to be true.
The morally upstanding thing for the Democrats to do would be to pass the resolution which provides for the funding needed to keep the government operational and then go back to work on a separate plan for funding Obamacare. If they were concerned about a government shut down, it seems that this is the approach they will take. Instead, they're going with Obama's plan of "my way or the highway" and risking a government shutdown over a law that the majority of their constituents don't want in the first place.
ACA passed both houses.
The President was re-elected when his opponent said he would repeal Obamacare.
The morally upstanding thing would be for Tea Party/Talk Radio nuts to stop being so damn stupid.
Cruz is "grandstanding" by taking a stand for something that we know is costing Americans jobs, will increase the cost of healthcare all while decreasing the standard and will end in failure.
Wendy Davis speaks in Texas to continue the right to kill the unborn, she's a "hero" to the left.
This is where the left's morals are, America. It's all about the party for them. It's the only thing that matters.
Is there any doubt that the world would be a much better place if there were no leftists in it?
The democrats and republicans are the same at this point. Yes, we know that Cruz probably can't cause a shift in voting, but dammit he is standing up for something he believes in. He's the ONLY one not playing politics in this thing. This is who we want to represent us. Someone that is truly focusing on the country and not votes.
Most people are too ignorant of history to know this, but Reagan was also treated like Cruz when he tried to win the Republican ticket in 1976. He was a "joke" to the republican machine. He was just someone "grandstanding" and could never be taken seriously.
We want strong leaders that won't bow to the rest of congress. Personally, I'm proud Cruz is my representative. We need more folks with the stones to stand up for what they know to be true.
How about if that were Obama? No, what you really want is confrontational, obnoxious leaders like Cruz that promote your position and refuse to compromise. Most of us out here in reality-land, though, want compromise and a way forward.
How about if that were Obama? No, what you really want is confrontational, obnoxious leaders like Cruz that promote your position and refuse to compromise. Most of us out here in reality-land, though, want compromise and a way forward.
Obama bows to anyone that can benefit him. He's a joke. Compromise is great if it's not compromising to win votes. Compromise is NOT acceptable when you're compromising on something that you KNOW will hurt Americans and the economy. There's a difference.
Your idea of COMPROMISE is for those against this Obamacare fiasco to just bow down and give in to whatever you want.
The "Cruz Talkfest" is just to inform the public and go on the record. The CR will go forward, but it's only for 45 days - that's a part of what Harry Reid is stripping out along with the 'defund' stuff. Reid is also stripping out the GOP language about funding to avoid a shutdown. The Democrats are praying for a Government Shutdown and see it as their ONLY path to any kind of Victory in the 2014 elections. Democrats in the House and Senate are not happy that Reid decided to battle Cruz instead of the battle against Boehner over the funding levels. Boehner proposed much lower spending levels in the House bill than the Democrats were willing to accept, but they did accept them - at least for 45 days.
Quote:
Democrats see GOP shutdown threat as opening for 2014 election gains
The key to the Democratic strategy is a belief that a showdown is likely to play out similarly to the government shutdowns of 1995 and 1996, which turned public opinion sharply against the Republican majority.
“It wouldn’t be the worst thing for Democrats if [Republicans] tried to shut the government down,†Hillary Rodham Clinton, the former secretary of state and a potential 2016 presidential candidate, said in New York on Tuesday.
Boehner wins this round and so does Ted Cruz for his distraction. This is only the first of several CR battles - Reid and Obama want to do this over&over&over again in "hope" of a shut down. As I posted earlier - ObamaCare can't be "defunded", it is Mandatory Spending and won't be covered under the CR to the Budget Control Act of 2011. All of this is about the Sequester that IS in the Budget Control Act. I kept trying to figure out why the Media and the Democrats didn't point out that "defund ObamaCare" is not even possible - I think the Media is just clueless and the Democrats actually believe this is a winning strategy for them in 2014 .... plus their base would never be able to understand any of this. They only react to bumper sticker sound bites.
The morally upstanding thing for the Democrats to do would be to pass the resolution which provides for the funding needed to keep the government operational and then go back to work on a separate plan for funding Obamacare.
Funding was passed for Obamacare three years ago. We don't need to do a thing but allow it to roll out, which it will, beginning in six days, no matter how long Cruz bloviates. Sorry, you don't get a do-over because your side didn't get what it wanted.
How about if that were Obama? No, what you really want is confrontational, obnoxious leaders like Cruz that promote your position and refuse to compromise. Most of us out here in reality-land, though, want compromise and a way forward.
Democrats have already agreed to the sequestration spending levels that the House GOP wants. Democrats have already compromised.
Also, I thought the GOP was saying the sequester was a bad thing and was all Obama's fault?
Personally, I support any move which reduces government spending including the sequestration. Then again, I'm not a member of either party and for the most part I don't see any huge difference between Democrats and Republicans.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dman72
ACA passed both houses.
The President was re-elected when his opponent said he would repeal Obamacare.
The morally upstanding thing would be for Tea Party/Talk Radio nuts to stop being so damn stupid.
The ACA passed both houses because the Democrats employed underhanded ways to get it to pass. That doesn't mean it is a good law, nor does it mean that it should be funded without an actual discussion of what that funding is going to cost the taxpayers. They haven't even gotten the regulations related to Obamacare completely written yet, and the exchanges open in a week. How about we finish fleshing out the law before we throw money at it?
Was Obamacare the only issue on the table during the election? I remember there being more discussion of foreign policy and social change than of Obamacare during the election cycle. Believing that a President being elected on a variety of platform issues endows that President with the right to ramrod legislation which is supported by less than half of citizens who elected him is a bit naive.
Perhaps "morally upstanding" is a bit of a misleading term when we're talking about Washington. Neither side has a plethora of morals, quite frankly. Let me rephrase my original sentence and say the following:
The fiscally responsible thing for the Democrats to do would be to pass the resolution which provides for the funding needed to keep the government operational and then go back to work on a separate plan for funding Obamacare.
Not that I expect a whole lot of fiscal responsibility out of Washington, either, but at least there's a greater chance at fiscal responsibility than at morally upstanding behavior.
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.
