Cornyn and McConnell Will Not Back Ted Cruz

[The Annoyed Man]

Cornyn and a bunch of other Republican senators voted with the Harry Reid led Democrats to end cloture, knowing all the time that Reid would strip out the House defunding provision. In the context of his cloture vote, Cornyn's later vote against the stripped senate bill was meaningless, and he knew it. It is somewhat misleading for Cornyn to claim that he has done everything he could do to defeat Obamacare. He did not fight cloture when he had the opportunity to do so. After all the dust settles, it is Cruz who comes out on top, because he did all he could to bring political heat to bear on the topic. It remains to be seen how much trouble this causes for Cornyn.

I do believe Cruz ALSO voted for cloture. The only difference I see between Cornyn's actions and Cruz's are that he stood around grandstanding for 20 hours.

Expect the market to crash today. Thanks for that.

A market whose strength is buoyed by bad government is a weak market with weak underpinnings. And I don't say that dismissively. A chunk of my retirement is going to disappear today. So be it.

[Cedar Park Dad]

Cornyn and a bunch of other Republican senators voted with the Harry Reid led Democrats to end cloture, knowing all the time that Reid would strip out the House defunding provision. In the context of his cloture vote, Cornyn's later vote against the stripped senate bill was meaningless, and he knew it. It is somewhat misleading for Cornyn to claim that he has done everything he could do to defeat Obamacare. He did not fight cloture when he had the opportunity to do so. After all the dust settles, it is Cruz who comes out on top, because he did all he could to bring political heat to bear on the topic. It remains to be seen how much trouble this causes for Cornyn.

I do believe Cruz ALSO voted for cloture. The only difference I see between Cornyn's actions and Cruz's are that he stood around grandstanding for 20 hours.

Expect the market to crash today. Thanks for that.

A market whose strength is buoyed by bad government is a weak market with weak underpinnings. And I don't say that dismissively. A chunk of my retirement is going to disappear today. So be it.

Its not buoyed by bad government. It can be however, slammed by bad governance, which is what will occurr today.

Again. How did Cruz actually vote thats different then Cornyn or the Democrats?

[mojo84]

That is a lot of our problem, people continue making decisions based on their own self interest and not what is good for the country. Continuing to increase the debt and printing more money is doing more damage to the financial health of our country than a stock market correction. I am more concerned with main street than I am Wall St.

[K.Mooneyham]

Cornyn and a bunch of other Republican senators voted with the Harry Reid led Democrats to end cloture, knowing all the time that Reid would strip out the House defunding provision. In the context of his cloture vote, Cornyn's later vote against the stripped senate bill was meaningless, and he knew it. It is somewhat misleading for Cornyn to claim that he has done everything he could do to defeat Obamacare. He did not fight cloture when he had the opportunity to do so. After all the dust settles, it is Cruz who comes out on top, because he did all he could to bring political heat to bear on the topic. It remains to be seen how much trouble this causes for Cornyn.

I do believe Cruz ALSO voted for cloture. The only difference I see between Cornyn's actions and Cruz's are that he stood around grandstanding for 20 hours.

Expect the market to crash today. Thanks for that.

No, Senator Cruz did NOT vote for cloture. Here is a link to an article that lists who did and did not vote for cloture among the Republicans in the Senate.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/terence ... e-majority

[Cedar Park Dad]

No, Senator Cruz did NOT vote for cloture. Here is a link to an article that lists who did and did not vote for cloture among the Republicans in the Senate.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/terence ... e-majority

I stand corrected. Thanks for the link!

[The Annoyed Man]

No, Senator Cruz did NOT vote for cloture. Here is a link to an article that lists who did and did not vote for cloture among the Republicans in the Senate.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/terence ... e-majority

I stand corrected. Thanks for the link!

The whole purpose of Cruz's "grandstanding" as you put it was to prevent cloture.

[atticus]

I've heard a lot of news pundits calling Cruz' 21 hour speech grandstanding. It's a common criticism. Harry Reid, John McCain and their ilk all called Cruz names. It's sort of like calling a fireman, who's trying desperately to put out a dangerous fire, a grandstander. Depends on your perspective, I suppose. I, for one, perceive a real danger to our republic posed by Obamacare. Something like a fire.

[Cedar Park Dad]

No, Senator Cruz did NOT vote for cloture. Here is a link to an article that lists who did and did not vote for cloture among the Republicans in the Senate.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/terence ... e-majority

I stand corrected. Thanks for the link!

The whole purpose of Cruz's "grandstanding" as you put it was to prevent cloture.

No. he had an agreed time for his tales of Dr. Seuss.

[The Annoyed Man]

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics ... xas/69976/
Meet Congress' New Third Party and Its Leader, the Junior Senator from Texas

But a report from The National Review's Robert Costa following the Senate's rejection of that idea on Friday indicates that the vaguely-defined caucus already has a leader. Costa begins:

On a Thursday conference call, a group of House conservatives consulted with Senator Ted Cruz of Texas about how to respond to the leadership's fiscal strategy. Sources who were on the call say Cruz strongly advised them to oppose it, and hours later, Speaker John Boehner’s plan fizzled.

That's a stunning development, one that Costa suggests has driven House Republican leaders to "fury." On Thursday, we articulated the extent of Republican disapproval of Cruz. Now we realize that it may be time to try and articulate Congress' new third party.

The republican party is in deep DEEP kimchee, and they have ONE way forward to survival as a party: give up trying to be popular at beltway cocktail parties and LISTEN to and ACT UPON the desires of their conservative constituencies. Here's why: the days of wooing conservatives at election time, and then knifing them in the backs once Congress is in session are over. The "dastardly" Tea Party movement turns out to REALLY BE a grassroots movement of people who are extremely dissatisfied with the party's gradual drifting into complacency and this "go along to get along" mentality of beltway republicans. In the words of the immortal Howard Beal, they are "mad as heck, and they're not going to take it anymore." (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGIY5Vyj4YM)

Beltway republicans can either accede to that reality and start representing the conservative constituents they so ardently wooed at election time, or they can die of irrelevance as a party. "Representing" means that if your constituents are "mad as heck," then YOU get mad as heck and you refuse to take anymore of it, on behalf of your constituents. There is a certain arrogance, even among reputed conservatives, to say that you are going to dampen the expression of the ardor of your constituents because you know better than they do. That is what has gotten the republican party in trouble, and that is why I left it.

I have written a number of times that I believe that the republican party is at the same crossroads that the Whigs found themselves at in 1851. Some have dismissed that statement of mine by saying that this is hardly the first time that someone has said the same thing. Well that's fine. Some may have cried wolf in the past. Until recently, I have not been inclined to do so because I had faith in the system, because I believed/hoped that if republicans actually represented their constituents, without apology, and without giving a rip as to what the media thinks about them, that these problems would eventually correct themselves. The problem is, THIS time the wolf really is at the door, and republicans dismiss that at their own peril as a party of significance in American politics. The problems won't correct themselves because 51% of the voters are stupid, ignorant, venal, shiftless, greedy, self-involved and unpatriotic people, who are happy to fiddle while Rome burns.

Yes, the nation IS polarized like seldom before. The difference this time is that the major party that would have previously represented the conservative pole has become more and more a "free radical" which harms by failing to represent its traditional base. Nature abhors a vacuum. If republicans won't fill it, then a third party will.

No, Senator Cruz did NOT vote for cloture. Here is a link to an article that lists who did and did not vote for cloture among the Republicans in the Senate.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/terence ... e-majority

I stand corrected. Thanks for the link!

The whole purpose of Cruz's "grandstanding" as you put it was to prevent cloture.

No. he had an agreed time for his tales of Dr. Seuss.

Hey, you can mock it all you want. I can read. And he might be one of the only ones not living in a fairy tale.........the fairy tale that if republicans bow to democrat inevitability, it will all be better. Here's why it is a fairy tale, because that 51% of the voters that I mentioned above will accept the ACA they don't want (according to most polls) in order to avoid having to admit that they were DOUBLY stupid, ignorant, venal, shiftless, greedy, self-involved and unpatriotic people, happy to fiddle while Rome burns, when they voted for that monster in the oval office TWICE. Cornyn, McCain, et al, will go softly into that no so gentle night........and they will drag the rest of us down with them.

I don't give a hoot what Cruz said (or read to his daughters from Dr. Seuss), he used time in a time-honored tactic of filibuster. The entire history of filibuster is replete with people using the time they've been given to read recipes into the congressional record, sing songs, quote poetry, whatever. Cruz's effort was no different. IF he had a little support, his effort might have succeeded. He had no support. His effort failed. And you stand among mockers of the same caliber as the WaPo's Dana Milbank, The Atlantic's Molly Ball, NBC's David Gregory, and other stalwart "neutral observers."

People make fun of Ted Cruz for being a Tea Party favorite, but they are largely ignorant about the Tea Party's motives. Here is their published agenda (http://www.teaparty.org/about-us/):

1. Illegal aliens are here illegally.
2. Pro-domestic employment is indispensable.
3. A strong military is essential.
4. Special interests must be eliminated.
5. Gun ownership is sacred.
6. Government must be downsized.
7. The national budget must be balanced.
8. Deficit spending must end.
9. Bailout and stimulus plans are illegal.
10. Reducing personal income taxes is a must.
11. Reducing business income taxes is mandatory.
12. Political offices must be available to average citizens.
13. Intrusive government must be stopped.
14. English as our core language is required.
15. Traditional family values are encouraged.

These are worthy standards. In exactly what way did the "moderate" wing of the republican party uphold any of these ideals while aiding Harry Reid to steamroll Obamare care over us?

See, this is why I don't invest too much of my caring anymore in the outcome, or in what other people who disagree with me think about it. I know what's coming, and I can't give to much value to what people say who claim to speak conservative but make fun of others when they actually speak it.

[Cedar Park Dad]

I'd love to see multiple parties. Its healthier for democracy.

[The Annoyed Man]

I'd love to see multiple parties. Its healthier for democracy.

On that, we can agree. That speaks to another one of the institutional weakness of the republicans. They've made their choice. Now they have to sleep with it. From now on, they will only ever govern by coalition, and that weakens their position even further. In the other corner, the commies are all happy little bots because they get free stuff.

[Cedar Park Dad]

I'd love to see multiple parties. Its healthier for democracy.

On that, we can agree. That speaks to another one of the institutional weakness of the republicans. They've made their choice. Now they have to sleep with it. From now on, they will only ever govern by coalition, and that weakens their position even further. In the other corner, the commies are all happy little bots because they get free stuff.

Lots of Republicans get free stuff off the government too. Every government contract out there is someone's meal ticket.

[TexasCajun]

I'd love to see multiple parties. Its healthier for democracy.

On that, we can agree. That speaks to another one of the institutional weakness of the republicans. They've made their choice. Now they have to sleep with it. From now on, they will only ever govern by coalition, and that weakens their position even further. In the other corner, the commies are all happy little bots because they get free stuff.

Lots of Republicans get free stuff off the government too. Every government contract out there is someone's meal ticket.

You can't intelligently equate someone living on welfare, using their obamaphone, and soon getting their medical through obamacare to a company being awarded a government contract.

[Tic Tac]

Expect the market to crash today. Thanks for that.

If it does, it's because B'rat Obama threw a temper tantrum.

The House passed a spending bill that was workable. In an ideal world it would have been leaner. More fiscally responsible. But despite its flaws, it would have funded everything important, plus a pile of pork. However, because it didn't include funding for the brat"s namesake legislation, he threw a tantrum and got his sycophants to reject something workable for America because he cares more about his ego than the hard working Americans in flyover country.

Pathetic and despicable.

[VMI77]

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics ... xas/69976/
Meet Congress' New Third Party and Its Leader, the Junior Senator from Texas

But a report from The National Review's Robert Costa following the Senate's rejection of that idea on Friday indicates that the vaguely-defined caucus already has a leader. Costa begins:

On a Thursday conference call, a group of House conservatives consulted with Senator Ted Cruz of Texas about how to respond to the leadership's fiscal strategy. Sources who were on the call say Cruz strongly advised them to oppose it, and hours later, Speaker John Boehner’s plan fizzled.

That's a stunning development, one that Costa suggests has driven House Republican leaders to "fury." On Thursday, we articulated the extent of Republican disapproval of Cruz. Now we realize that it may be time to try and articulate Congress' new third party.

The republican party is in deep DEEP kimchee, and they have ONE way forward to survival as a party: give up trying to be popular at beltway cocktail parties and LISTEN to and ACT UPON the desires of their conservative constituencies. Here's why: the days of wooing conservatives at election time, and then knifing them in the backs once Congress is in session are over. The "dastardly" Tea Party movement turns out to REALLY BE a grassroots movement of people who are extremely dissatisfied with the party's gradual drifting into complacency and this "go along to get along" mentality of beltway republicans. In the words of the immortal Howard Beal, they are "mad as heck, and they're not going to take it anymore." (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGIY5Vyj4YM)

Beltway republicans can either accede to that reality and start representing the conservative constituents they so ardently wooed at election time, or they can die of irrelevance as a party. "Representing" means that if your constituents are "mad as heck," then YOU get mad as heck and you refuse to take anymore of it, on behalf of your constituents. There is a certain arrogance, even among reputed conservatives, to say that you are going to dampen the expression of the ardor of your constituents because you know better than they do. That is what has gotten the republican party in trouble, and that is why I left it.

I have written a number of times that I believe that the republican party is at the same crossroads that the Whigs found themselves at in 1851. Some have dismissed that statement of mine by saying that this is hardly the first time that someone has said the same thing. Well that's fine. Some may have cried wolf in the past. Until recently, I have not been inclined to do so because I had faith in the system, because I believed/hoped that if republicans actually represented their constituents, without apology, and without giving a rip as to what the media thinks about them, that these problems would eventually correct themselves. The problem is, THIS time the wolf really is at the door, and republicans dismiss that at their own peril as a party of significance in American politics. The problems won't correct themselves because 51% of the voters are stupid, ignorant, venal, shiftless, greedy, self-involved and unpatriotic people, who are happy to fiddle while Rome burns.

Yes, the nation IS polarized like seldom before. The difference this time is that the major party that would have previously represented the conservative pole has become more and more a "free radical" which harms by failing to represent its traditional base. Nature abhors a vacuum. If republicans won't fill it, then a third party will.

No, Senator Cruz did NOT vote for cloture. Here is a link to an article that lists who did and did not vote for cloture among the Republicans in the Senate.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/terence ... e-majority

I stand corrected. Thanks for the link!

The whole purpose of Cruz's "grandstanding" as you put it was to prevent cloture.

No. he had an agreed time for his tales of Dr. Seuss.

Hey, you can mock it all you want. I can read. And he might be one of the only ones not living in a fairy tale.........the fairy tale that if republicans bow to democrat inevitability, it will all be better. Here's why it is a fairy tale, because that 51% of the voters that I mentioned above will accept the ACA they don't want (according to most polls) in order to avoid having to admit that they were DOUBLY stupid, ignorant, venal, shiftless, greedy, self-involved and unpatriotic people, happy to fiddle while Rome burns, when they voted for that monster in the oval office TWICE. Cornyn, McCain, et al, will go softly into that no so gentle night........and they will drag the rest of us down with them.

I don't give a hoot what Cruz said (or read to his daughters from Dr. Seuss), he used time in a time-honored tactic of filibuster. The entire history of filibuster is replete with people using the time they've been given to read recipes into the congressional record, sing songs, quote poetry, whatever. Cruz's effort was no different. IF he had a little support, his effort might have succeeded. He had no support. His effort failed. And you stand among mockers of the same caliber as the WaPo's Dana Milbank, The Atlantic's Molly Ball, NBC's David Gregory, and other stalwart "neutral observers."

People make fun of Ted Cruz for being a Tea Party favorite, but they are largely ignorant about the Tea Party's motives. Here is their published agenda (http://www.teaparty.org/about-us/):

1. Illegal aliens are here illegally.
2. Pro-domestic employment is indispensable.
3. A strong military is essential.
4. Special interests must be eliminated.
5. Gun ownership is sacred.
6. Government must be downsized.
7. The national budget must be balanced.
8. Deficit spending must end.
9. Bailout and stimulus plans are illegal.
10. Reducing personal income taxes is a must.
11. Reducing business income taxes is mandatory.
12. Political offices must be available to average citizens.
13. Intrusive government must be stopped.
14. English as our core language is required.
15. Traditional family values are encouraged.

These are worthy standards. In exactly what way did the "moderate" wing of the republican party uphold any of these ideals while aiding Harry Reid to steamroll Obamare care over us?

See, this is why I don't invest too much of my caring anymore in the outcome, or in what other people who disagree with me think about it. I know what's coming, and I can't give to much value to what people say who claim to speak conservative but make fun of others when they actually speak it.

The fact that the political establishment and the media are in full attack mode tells me all I need to know about Senator Cruz. Anyone drawing fire from these sources has to be a good guy. The more withering the fire, the better he is. Just about anyone under attack by these two groups of traitors and scoundrels has got to be good for the Republic. He currently the only Senator I have any respect for. He's the only one in the battle against the forces destroying the country.