1 - 10 Next
In response to:

Wise Warren and Crazy Cruz

Cardinal5671 Wrote: Dec 17, 2014 1:18 PM
Cruz is definitely not a tactician. This will dog him if/when he tries to run for President.
In response to:

Wise Warren and Crazy Cruz

Cardinal5671 Wrote: Dec 17, 2014 1:17 PM
The shutdown was clearly a team effort. But what is undeniable is Cruz insisted on the bill with no strategy for getting it passed by the Senate.
It matters not who did not sign the Geneva Conventions. What matters is that WE did sign on to it. Therefore it is binding on us.
The GOP was spared the effects of the shutdown by the Obamacare rollout and faceplant, But that is not really the point. In both cases, what I saw was a Senator making a stand to improve his own standing NOT to achieve any tangible and meaningful results. THAT is what I have a problem with - it was a purely political move to make himself look good and fracture the GOP.
I am genuinely curious what Cruz and Lee actually accomplished through their actions. They did not (and could not) stop the bill, They might have provided the Dems with a chance to push controversial nominations (or at the very least accellerated their consideration). I'm struggling to see what positive good came out of it other than Cruz polishing his conservative credentials for 2016. A fractured GOP will not be able to make much headway against the Dems and will only lead to the Dems getting back in power in 2016. Make no mistake, I don't like the Cromnibus, but engaging in futile battles seems a poor use of anyone's time.
Agreed. Of course they might have if not given the opportunity to do so.
The filibuster is nowhere to be found in the Constitution. It was a procedural thing the Senate implemented under its authority to establish its own rules. So there is nothing that says there must be a filibuster.
Let's be clear. There is nothing in the Constitution that requires the filibuster exist in the Senate. The Constitution allows the House and Senate to set their own procedural rules and that is where the filibuster came from. So constitutionally, there's no issue with not having the filibuster, It is however interesting that after all the complaints about how there is no difference between the Republicans and Democrats that these same voices want the Republicans to act like Democrats.
In response to:

Place Your Bets

Cardinal5671 Wrote: Dec 03, 2014 3:31 PM
That's not the point now is it? All of your examples show that the current system seems to not be working very well. But that is not a proof that a different system would work better. It also is not a description of what the better system would look like. Bear in mind, I agree with you that the current system is broken. But to replace it you must be able to say what your are going to replace it with and be able to make the argument that it will be better.
In response to:

Place Your Bets

Cardinal5671 Wrote: Dec 03, 2014 1:09 PM
"the proof is not on those of us who are against big government to prove that those programs don't work." Time to join us in the real world. Since you want to see theses assistance programs changed, the burden is on you to prove that people will be better off without them. Sorry, but that's just the way the world works.
1 - 10 Next