<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">A handy guide to everything Ted Cruz wants to get rid of <a href="https://t.co/YjHQagHWKl">https://t.co/YjHQagHWKl</a> <a href="https://t.co/ImwT6NI6Lv">pic.twitter.com/ImwT6NI6Lv</a></p>— Katie Zezima (@katiezez) <a href="https://twitter.com/katiezez/status/689094981517230080">January 18, 2016</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
So, Bernie Sanders is a crazy old coot who's ideas could never be accomplished...but Cruz shuttering 1/2 the federal government isn't crazy and likely impossible?
Cruz is an outspoken supporter of the Jews, as you and the people at SNL surely know very well. As far as the liberal part, well at least you and they got that part right.
Cruz got booed off the stage for telling a group of Middle East Christians they needed to defend Jews.
The Republican party has been slowly splitting apart at the seems for 12 years. They have been dabbling in this faux populist BS ever since Sarah Palin had some level of success. Now you have Donald "Bullworth" Trump and Ted "ll-Duce" Cruz looking like they have a real shot at the nomination. On the other side you have the North Eastern Socialist and a bag lady fighting it out for the right to run this country into the ground.
If Cruz wins, I can't see him shutting down the IRS, EPA, ED, or HUD. Can't send Jet fighters and B-2s to turn Syria into glowing glass without an Internal Revenue Service. Would Cruz shut down the F35 program, too?
The Executive can't deliver any campaign promises without Congress. That's why Mr. Obama only chipped around the edges with Executive Orders. Cruz, Trump or my man Bernie are just 'framers of the national narrative' candidates. Nothing in law or government radically changes from the precedent. That's what makes this election cycle so strange, it's all about radical ideas when we know none will come to pass. The people should really be looking more for a centrist leader with charisma and statesmanship... oh we've had one of those.
I generally agree. Shifting the Supreme Court one way or another is much more consequential. Today social conservative is a dying breed and they only have a few years left to leave a lasting impact. Seating a very conservative on the SC would do that.
Wrong, it can stop doing things that Congress never mandated. Most regulatory actions falls into that category.
Good for them. They need to look after their interests. Since they are actually in the middle east, unlike Cruz, they see what life there is like, and have a better perspective on how to practice their religion. If some arrogant jack ass like Cruz came and started telling them what they need to do, then they are absolutely right for booing him off stage.
Can't quite agree. Sanders obviously can't get anything done with Republicans in charge of both House and Senate. I think Trump wouldn't get much done, partly from not really wanting to and partly from Congress not cooperating. I think Cruz would though. Congressional Republicans wouldn't like him, but I think they'll lay down for him. They'd sooner go along with Cruz despite misgivings than squander the opportunity of controlling both sides of law-making. They may do a bit of the same for Trump, but some of his ideas are stupid or not very Republican or sometimes both. It's hard to follow that sort of leadership.
You are missing the point. SNL and a previous poster were dishonestly implying that Cruz was bigoted towards Jews. Of course that is a well documented lie, as the example you were responding to demonstrates.
That is a good post. The Republican establishment is fine with Cruz's ideas, his values and his positions on the issues. They just do not like him calling them out on their betrayal of their constituents. If Cruz wins the presidency, from a policy perspective they will work well together. The bottleneck issue will continue to be getting things through the Senate.
Eric Erickson, who has been elected to office and has also been a campaign consultant, weighs in on what a brilliant job Ted Cruz is doing in handling Donald Trump and in managing his overall campaign. I think this is Eric Erikson's new blog. He was formerly the leader of Red State, and has been a regular contributor on CNN. By the way, I believe he endorsed Marco Rubio last week.
Him and Hillary are pretty same coin, different side. Cruz learned politics under Bush Jr and Hillary under Slick Willy.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/UHxz4DyidLA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
So what you are saying is that Ted not understand that "Middle Eastern Christians" are mostly Levantine Arabs or that he said it on purpose to get the boo?
Clearly, Cruz's priority was defending the Jews to a group of Arabs, which shows that he is much more supportive of Israel than Barack Obama or anyone else we have seen on the Democrat left for quite a few years now. So the assertions of antisemitism by SNL and later leftists across the country are more blatant lies by these people. Of course lying appears to come almost as easily as breathing these days for many leftist Democrats, this being just one more illustration of that among countless others.
Well except that while Cruz is pretty good at handling the PR and politicking, Hillary is pretty bad at it. Which, in Republican circles is some kind of feather in his cap. To Democrats, it shows an irrational allegiance to the state of Israel despite Israeli's belligerent behavior that alienates even sympathetic groups like Levantine Christians. I'm always amazed at how Republicans can simultaneously reject the strong socialist principles of Israel and embrace the country itself.
Could you at least try to read up on the BS you're tossing around, dude? President Obama has actually increased US aid to Israel since becoming president. Under Republican George W. Bush, US aid was decreasing. Take special note of the big increase in military grants in aid. With all due respect, you're making yourself look foolish and uninformed. Again.
