Cruz Burns CNBC Moderators: This is Why Americans Don't Trust the Media

[Whatshername]

In the grand scheme of things, I actually gave him credit for his campaign tactics, but somebody must have missed that part, judging from the ruby.  Now, to your question.  Green Eggs and Ham on the Senate floor for starters....and the denouncing of his Canadian citizenship bothers me a bit.  I also believe he will be even worse than Obama when it comes to negotiating with the other party.  Because of his constitutionalist stance, which I applaud and understand, he will never bend.......that is dictatorial, not leadership.  Now, I also refer to Ozzy Osborn as "Crazy Train".....I hope none of his fans get offended.  I should be more careful.    

 

GO RV, then BV

Refresher... He read the bedtime story Green Eggs and Ham to his daughters during a marathon filibuster in support of defunding obamacare. Then he told them it was time for bed and went on to compare the Dr. Seuss story to America's 'distaste' for socialized medicine. He loves his children and has the good sense to recognize generational theft when he sees it.

Why would it bother you that he denounced his Canadian (duel) citizenship? He's an American... he passionately loves this country. He's 100% about The United States of America.

And just in case you still don't understand after the many excellent posts above ^^^... "negotiating with the other party" is highly overrated! How do you think we got in this mess? The Constitution is the Law of the Land. It clearly defines the LIMITS of government. there is nothing "dictatorial" about following the law and limiting the overreach of big government on the people. If you "applaud and understand" that then where is there room for criticism of Cruz? Do you just prefer style over substance? The cool kids (obama and the liberals) crap on our brilliant Constitution and wipe their butts with the Bill of Rights every chance they get. Do they negotiate... EVER? Of course not. They just resort to lying, tricks and political maneuvering to take the power away from us and limit our freedoms. Is THAT what you call "leadership"? I call it TYRANNY.

You really should be more careful because even from your perch on the fence, you're smart enough to know better. It's past time to undo the disastrous policies of the current regime. You seem more concerned about offending Ozzy fans than Freedom-Loving Constitutionalists. We would appreciate that same thoughtfulness.

Pollster Frank Luntz: THIS debate line scored highest in 20-year history of focus group

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2015/10/29/pollster-frank-luntz-this-debate-line-scored-highest-in-20-year-history-of-focus-group-268953

[RV ME]

This is the very point I was trying to make with my first post.  In hindsight, that inauspicious "Crazy Cruz" beginning was an unfortunate misnomer.       Oh well.....woulda, shoulda, coulda.    

 

GO RV, then BV 

 

Pretty sure it wasn’t the Crazy Cruz line, but the uncompromising Constitutionalist = dictator line that bothered me and Jax.

 

I'm sure, based on my rudimentary communication skills, I am going to fumble trying to get my opinion across lucidly.  I would like to see a slimmed down balanced budget with a mid range goal of erasing our national debt.  I would not use the debt ceiling as a bargaining chip.  I don't believe defaulting on our payments is the proper move.  I would also like to see special interest groups and lobbyists run out of town on a rail.  Super PACs, which candidates are beholden to, even Ted Cruz, would be a thing of the past.  I probably didn't do a very good job of describing my vision, but there it is.    

 

GO RV, then BV 

 

If you are against the debt ceiling being used as a political bargaining chip, then I would think you would be outraged by recent history because that is what all it has been used for.  We are told that the only way to avoid defaulting on our obligations is by borrowing more money, that’s . 

 

I’m not advocating using the threat of default as a bargaining chip, I advocate using the debt ceiling as an actual ceiling and to force professional politicians to take the necessary steps to see that we do not scrape our collective heads on said ceiling.

 

But since the professional politicians are not willing to do that hard work we get the debt limit treated as a political poker chip and ultimately increased every time it is reached.  The most perfect example would be then Senator Obummer stating in 2006

 

“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. government can’t pay its own bills. ... I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit.”

 

And as President, Obummer proved he was correct as Senator since he has raised the ceiling 10 times during his leaderless Presidency.

 

Obummer notwithstanding, being against raising the debt ceiling is not necessarily playing politics.  Not if the ceiling is used by a leader like a nine pound hammer to force Congress to address their deficit spending addiction.  That’s not politicking, that’s leadership.

[DinarDavo]

Just had an amazing thought......how's bout the Republicans, Democrats, Independents, and whoever else, all follow the US Constitution as long as they are participating the United States government. Problem solved.

Edited October 29, 2015 by DinarDavo

[Xtaxguy]

My recommendation to ALL of the GOP candidates:  tell the RNC to revise the future debate schedule by eliminating all NBC affiliated stations.  NBC needs to learn that news and political debate are about something more than which of their idiot talking heads can out-snark the others.  Let other stations pick up the significant ad revenue the "debates" generate.  See whether CBS and/or ABC gets the message.  Simulcast future "debates" free on the internet. 

 

And hey, RINOs:  in some states [like California] everybody can vote in any party's primary - so you've let the Democraps change the law so that they may pick who runs on the Republican ticket??  It's likely that the Senate race to replace the idiotic Babs Boxer will, on the final November ballot be between two Democrats! 

 

So affiliation is now no bar to participation, just as citizenship is no prerequisite to voter registration??  OK, RINOs, see ya for dinner at the Bohemian Grove, the Senate Dinning Room, and Hairless Reid's backyard, soon - before you become extinct!

Edited October 29, 2015 by Xtaxguy

[divemaster5734]

leanonme, on 29 Oct 2015 - 04:21 AM, said:

RV ME, on 29 Oct 2015 - 07:36 AM, said:

 

dog53, on 29 Oct 2015 - 07:48 AM, said:

 

 

 

Pluses to everyone.

 

You guys get it.

 

Now, if we can just educate another 349,999,992 others how to live by constitutional guidelines, we'll be OK....

Edited October 29, 2015 by divemaster5734

[kcw]

FYI  Mr. Cruz has an autographic memory.  That is why he was able to repeat back to the moderators their questions in the exact same order as they were asked.  I can't copy and paste the article here with explorer and don't have time to switch to chrome.    I think The Wall Street journal and I know theblaze.com has articles on this

[Whatshername]

 

 

Cruz turned this into a pretty good ad...

 

[Sage449]

I thought Cruz right on. What irks me is DA O making fun of the Republicans wanting to review the next set of questions. If the media quit throwing "soft ball" questions at the democrats and kissing dem-a$$, it would be a more level moderator playing field.

Go ahead, neg and flame away for my opinion.