Cruz not swayed by Romney attack

Cruz not swayed by Romney attack

There are 756 comments on the Politico story from Oct 1, 2013, titled Cruz not swayed by Romney attack. In it, Politico reports that:

Sen. Ted Cruz is not deterred by his critics, including former presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who have lambasted him for spearheading the strategy of attaching anti-Obamacare provisions to the government funding bill.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Politico.

TGO

Hernando, FL

#545 Oct 8, 2013
Le Jimbo wrote:
<quoted text>Oops, there went another one.
Those are my posts disappearing.
kuda

Cincinnati, OH

#546 Oct 8, 2013
mjjcpa wrote:
<quoted text>
No.
They are part of the intelligentsia, unlike you.
I've read about half a dozen history books a year, and usually one on economics for about two decades now.
Don’t feel bad. Some people don’t even read that much.

Speaking of the intelligentsia, bottlecap, who is one of our fellow contributors here and I surmise is probably pretty conservative, has reported that they are spearheading a one-world-government takeover conspiracy along with the Trilateral Commission. I enjoy conspiracy theories and have encouraged him to write more. Do you believe the intelligentsia are an evil power? I suppose not because you seem to trust their opinions.
kuda

Cincinnati, OH

#547 Oct 8, 2013
TGO wrote:
<quoted text>
Those are my posts disappearing.
Why do you believe some of your posts have been disappearing?
TGO

Hernando, FL

#548 Oct 8, 2013
kuda wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you believe some of your posts have been disappearing?
Oh I don't know.......

maybe because I posted them?

Ya think?

lol

Since: Feb 08

Hypoluxo Fl

#549 Oct 8, 2013
TGO wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh I don't know.......
maybe because I posted them?
Ya think?
lol
No one is deleting your posts. You and the rest of the teabaggers need to keep exposing your ignorance, stupidity, and hypocrisy.

“Hillary, thirty years of lying”

Since: Nov 08

Paris

#550 Oct 8, 2013
Responsibility wrote:
<quoted text>
You really are a silly man and have no depths of understanding about the real world outside your trailer park and the norms and customs of other countries and courtesy shown to others.
Btw, what did it make bushbaby when he kissed and held hands with a Saudi prince = a two bit tyrant or more or less.
Social Security Warns Benefits Could Get Cut

Washington Wire HOME PAGE »

The Social Security Administration has begun warning the public it cannot guarantee full benefit payments if the debt ceiling isn’t increased.

When asked by the public, the agency is notifying beneficiaries that “Unlike a federal shutdown which has no impact on the payment of Social Security benefits, failure to raise the debt ceiling puts Social Security benefits at risk,” according to a person familiar with the agency directive.

Obama again using scare tactics to harm and scare the old and sick. What a man, what a scum bag.

Number one, if Obama wants a war, let it start here. Everyone has parents, grandparents and relatives on Social Security. Go to the Social Security Office, half of the people there are hispanic and can't speak english. They don't even know when their number is called. If Obama wants to cut, let him cut all the illegals and frauds that are on the system.
kuda

Cincinnati, OH

#551 Oct 8, 2013
TGO wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh I don't know.......
maybe because I posted them?
Ya think?
lol
If only we could solve this mystery, you’d have some clue about keeping your posts from disappearing.
Canon

Texarkana, TX

#552 Oct 8, 2013
Le Jimbo wrote:
<quoted text>Social Security Warns Benefits Could Get Cut
Washington Wire HOME PAGE »
The Social Security Administration has begun warning the public it cannot guarantee full benefit payments if the debt ceiling isn’t increased.
When asked by the public, the agency is notifying beneficiaries that “Unlike a federal shutdown which has no impact on the payment of Social Security benefits, failure to raise the debt ceiling puts Social Security benefits at risk,” according to a person familiar with the agency directive.
Obama again using scare tactics to harm and scare the old and sick. What a man, what a scum bag.
Number one, if Obama wants a war, let it start here. Everyone has parents, grandparents and relatives on Social Security. Go to the Social Security Office, half of the people there are hispanic and can't speak english. They don't even know when their number is called. If Obama wants to cut, let him cut all the illegals and frauds that are on the system.
He must be a scared old man to resort to these tactics.
CZars_R_Us

Orlando, FL

#553 Oct 8, 2013
Le Jimbo wrote:
<quoted text>Social Security Warns Benefits Could Get Cut
Washington Wire HOME PAGE »
The Social Security Administration has begun warning the public it cannot guarantee full benefit payments if the debt ceiling isn’t increased.
When asked by the public, the agency is notifying beneficiaries that “Unlike a federal shutdown which has no impact on the payment of Social Security benefits, failure to raise the debt ceiling puts Social Security benefits at risk,” according to a person familiar with the agency directive.
Obama again using scare tactics to harm and scare the old and sick. What a man, what a scum bag.
Number one, if Obama wants a war, let it start here. Everyone has parents, grandparents and relatives on Social Security. Go to the Social Security Office, half of the people there are hispanic and can't speak english. They don't even know when their number is called. If Obama wants to cut, let him cut all the illegals and frauds that are on the system.
The old scare the old folks and kids is a typical liberal strategy. Problem is is it isn't even an election year.!!
CZars_R_Us

Orlando, FL

#554 Oct 8, 2013
Responsibility wrote:
<quoted text>
You really are a silly man and have no depths of understanding about the real world outside your trailer park and the norms and customs of other countries and courtesy shown to others.
Btw, what did it make bushbaby when he kissed and held hands with a Saudi prince = a two bit tyrant or more or less.
What??? 2 dipshitz don't make a peanut. I'll agree with that.

Since: Jan 09

Central NJ

#556 Oct 8, 2013
Wow You string your words together real purty like! I am not sure just what you're trying to say, but I'll try to answer as I understand it. Go back to our Founding fathers who had just gotten out from under from British rule. It was generally believed That "He who governs least, governs best!" Meaning of course, that governments should not try to be all things to all people. Yet the temptation is great. Politicians are "People Pleasers" and sincere cries for help are hard to resist. Yet they must be resisted! If they are not resisted, at what point do we say no to them? What comes first, their satisfaction or our bankruptcy? Are we caring for too many? Can you believe that the administration and regulation of too many well intentioned government programs interferes with the smooth operation of the economy? Go back to school and learn how things really work, not just wishful thinking.
My president was elected by dead people!
Regards, Terri
kuda wrote:
<quoted text>
What “names” do you believe I called you? Please be specific.
I continue to deplore the behavior of your heroes and especially challenge you to “articulate what you would construct to improve our system of government, rather than shamefully gloat over having obstructed its missions.”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#557 Oct 8, 2013
TerryE wrote:
It was generally believed That "He who governs least, governs best!"
<quoted text>
David Thoreau.

Liberal as they come.

Quote after founding fathers were rotting in the grave.
kuda

Cincinnati, OH

#558 Oct 8, 2013
TerryE wrote:
Wow You string your words together real purty like! I am not sure just what you're trying to say, but I'll try to answer as I understand it. Go back to our Founding fathers who had just gotten out from under from British rule. It was generally believed That "He who governs least, governs best!" Meaning of course, that governments should not try to be all things to all people. Yet the temptation is great. Politicians are "People Pleasers" and sincere cries for help are hard to resist. Yet they must be resisted! If they are not resisted, at what point do we say no to them? What comes first, their satisfaction or our bankruptcy? Are we caring for too many? Can you believe that the administration and regulation of too many well intentioned government programs interferes with the smooth operation of the economy? Go back to school and learn how things really work, not just wishful thinking.
My president was elected by dead people!
Regards, Terri
<quoted text>
Thank you, Terry, for your compliment that you offer, even if it’s with certain reservations. I understand your premise advocating minimalistic government, a matter concerning which our founders were not in complete agreement. Nevertheless, I accept that basic libertarian principle as a guide to guard against extravagance. I also accept that each of us has his own definition of those limits.

Would politicians were “people pleasers,” especially at this particular moment. The right wing extremists are ignoring that motive if it’s even there in the first place. Instead, they’re clearly acting concerned only about saving their own skin from “getting primaries.” Under John Boehner’s “leadership,” they’re trembling in fear of not pleasing the Koch brothers.

Back to political theory, I disagree with you about “administration and regulation of too many well intentioned government programs interferes with the smooth operation of the economy.” The road to hell may be paved with good intentions, but the road to heaven certainly is. Redistribution of wealth is inevitable and necessary in an enlightened and advanced society. We’re already paying for other people’s health care, but just not efficiently or cost-effectively The present issue is how to redistribute it both more equitably and more efficiently. Progressive taxation is a measure in service to the first question, while cutting Obama Care addresses the second.

Speaking of going back to school, your homework assignment is a brief essay about how would you design an ideal system?

“Hillary, thirty years of lying”

Since: Nov 08

Paris

#561 Oct 9, 2013
Canon wrote:
<quoted text>He must be a scared old man to resort to these tactics.
You must be a commie bastard.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#562 Oct 9, 2013
Le Jimbo wrote:
You must be a commie bastard.
You must be a fat NAZI.

“BILLARY 2016 ”

Since: Aug 07

Location hidden

#563 Oct 9, 2013
mjjcpa wrote:
<quoted text>
You obviously don't read books.
Which Generals said we couldn't win? When? Where? Generals are like economists. It's easy to find one that matches your opinion if you look hard enough.
We liberated millions in Iraq, turning an enemy into an ally. Al qaeda realized a Democracy in the middle of their caliphate would be a major blow, so they decided to fight. Bush surged and won.
barock put joe biteme in charge of negotiating the status of forces agreement. He failed, no surprise there.
There are proven tactics to fighting an unconventional war where there are no trenches and the enemy is amongst the civilian population. The reason we lost in Vietnam was Westmoreland was a tanker who tried to fight an unconventional war conventionally.
Putting lots of troops in Afghanistan was a major error in my opinion. barock was an idiot to do so. We should have went with a light footprint there.
I recommend you check out stratfor.com for some real unbiased geopolitical information.
Which General?
General David McKiernan
I guess it's your turn to "read a book".

Now, pay close attention. We spent trillions in Iraq and Afghanistan using high tech equipment, highly trained soldiers and guess what kicked our asses there?

$15.00 IED's.

Oh, and we didn't liberate them. Their country has been reduced to rubble and most days they only get electricity for a few hours. They hate us, btw, for killing over 100,000 of them to obtain WMD's that weren't there. Thank W for that. His little lie is why Britain wouldn't join us in the Syrian conflict. Our closest allies don't even trust us thanks to that idiot, Bush.

Thanks to the ingenuity of IED's created by Al Qaedas poor little sand flea army, our so called "greatest military in the world" will never be able to fight another conventional war. That's where the genius of President Obama, drones and special ops come in. Unfortunately, as Al Qaeda and Al Shabab become more savvy, they too will probably have drones in the air at some point and then we'll have to counter with some other type of warfare.

I think most world leaders are now realizing that peace is much easier and far cheaper than war especially when something like a $15 IED can be used anywhere, anytime.

PS: The decision for the surge happened under George W. Bush, not President Obama. Again, read a book, bean counter.
spOko

Oakland, CA

#564 Oct 9, 2013
Ted Cruz, It turns out, is covered by his wife's health care policy. As a millionaire top executive at Goldman Sachs, she and her family are given gold-plated Cadillac coverage by the Wall Street giant. Goldman pays some $40,000 a year for her and Ted's policy (more than most families make in a year)— a benefit-cost that the firm passes on to us taxpayers by deducting it from its corporate tax bill. Hilarious, maybe?
bottlecap

Orlando, FL

#565 Oct 9, 2013
kuda wrote:
<quoted text>
...Redistribution of wealth is inevitable and necessary in an enlightened and advanced society....
WOW!! That is just what the International BANKSTERS Advocate!
More MONEY for the 1%!

And Obama, as well as "W", have helped them along the way.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/11/29/1040... #

"The first top-to-bottom audit of the Federal Reserve uncovered eye-popping new details about how the U.S. provided a whopping $16 trillion in Secret Loans to bail out American and foreign banks and businesses during the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression."
==========

Yes, the Rich get Richer and the Poor get Poorer.-----Now is it not strange, that despite this being an audit done by the Government Accounting Office, the Main-Stream Media buried this story. ha ha

“Hillary, thirty years of lying”

Since: Nov 08

Paris

#567 Oct 9, 2013
TerryE wrote:
<quoted text>Wow You string your words together real purty like! I am not sure just what you're trying to say, but I'll try to answer as I understand it. Go back to our Founding fathers who had just gotten out from under from British rule. It was generally believed That "He who governs least, governs best!" Meaning of course, that governments should not try to be all things to all people. Yet the temptation is great. Politicians are "People Pleasers" and sincere cries for help are hard to resist. Yet they must be resisted! If they are not resisted, at what point do we say no to them? What comes first, their satisfaction or our bankruptcy? Are we caring for too many? Can you believe that the administration and regulation of too many well intentioned government programs interferes with the smooth operation of the economy? Go back to school and learn how things really work, not just wishful thinking.
My president was elected by dead people!
Regards, Terri
You're confusing the bots. Founding fathers and the constitution wasn't taught in their indoctrination classes.

“Hillary, thirty years of lying”

Since: Nov 08

Paris

#568 Oct 9, 2013
spOko wrote:
Ted Cruz, It turns out, is covered by his wife's health care policy. As a millionaire top executive at Goldman Sachs, she and her family are given gold-plated Cadillac coverage by the Wall Street giant. Goldman pays some $40,000 a year for her and Ted's policy (more than most families make in a year)— a benefit-cost that the firm passes on to us taxpayers by deducting it from its corporate tax bill. Hilarious, maybe?
Class envy becomes you parasite.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

US News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News California AG bans state travel to Texas, 3 oth... 2 min Gremlin 93
News Melania Trump keeps DC entry low key; Barron dr... 3 min Red Crosse 175
News Feds looking into Bernie Sanders' wife over rea... 4 min go bernie go 6
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 5 min Homer 1,549,630
News Democrats aim to blast Trump for favoring wealthy 7 min Red Crosse 16
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 8 min Limbertwig 274,945
News Victory for Donald Trump as US Supreme Court re... 9 min Red Crosse 21
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 12 min Aura Mytha 7,871
News POLL: Americans Trust James Comey Over Trump 41 min Trump is a joke 688
News News 11 Mins Ago Top Republican to press for $7... 1 hr Bill Dunning 40
More from around the web