Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think Boehner's biggest gripe with Cruz is that he interferes in Boehner's territory by firing up the tea part caucus to split with Boehner.

The funny part? Tea Party saw through Boehner a long time ago. He has lied constantly. Cruz simply was someone in office who saw it as well, along with Lee, Paul, Gohmert, Gowdy, et al.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think Boehner's biggest gripe with Cruz is that he interferes in Boehner's territory by firing up the tea part caucus to split with Boehner.

The funny part? Tea Party saw through Boehner a long time ago. He has lied constantly. Cruz simply was someone in office who saw it as well, along with Lee, Paul, Gohmert, Gowdy, et al.

What the fuck planet are you living on? The Tea Party are the ones out there who have been the WORST LIARS GOING, LYING THEIR ASSES OFF about things like "death panels" and "healthcare rationing" and "government funded abortions" and all of the other ACA gloom and doom that turns out to be completely false. Not to mention their constant batshit crazy "Obama is an illegal Kenyan Muslim Communist" and "Jade Helm is Obama invading Texas to confiscate guns and round up conservatives to send them to FEMA death camps"

Tea Party = Delusional Morons

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think Boehner's biggest gripe with Cruz is that he interferes in Boehner's territory by firing up the tea part caucus to split with Boehner.

The funny part? Tea Party saw through Boehner a long time ago. He has lied constantly. Cruz simply was someone in office who saw it as well, along with Lee, Paul, Gohmert, Gowdy, et al.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The very reason we have a Senate is to keep the government running. For a sitting Senator to willfully cause the government to stop running, yes, that makes him a jackass.

It's actually not. A senator has the job of representing his constituents. What the executive branch wants is not priority. The branches are co-equal.

Nobody said the will of the executive should be his priority. But his priority should be to keep our federal government functioning. If he can't get his preferred legislation through Congress and the President (either by signature or overriding veto), then he has to accept that while something might be the will of his particular constituents, it is not the will of the nation as a whole and so it's not going to prevail. To shut down the government over the interests of a small portion of our population, is irresponsible and a dereliction of duty.

If a senator feels a law is going to hurt not only his constituents, but the population on the whole, it's his responsibility to come forward and stand strong, not cave. And, as it turns out, according to Gruber, we WERE being lied to. But liberals have no problem with that.

What a bunch of bull. It was not necessary to shut down the government because of ACA and the shutdown hurt ALL Americans needlessly.

I think it's necessary when the American people were deliberately lied to.

Please tell me you're from Texas, not local, so that Cruz is actually representing you.

The thing is, I know a lot about the ACA, what we had before it, the long negotiating process before it's passage, the way it has been revised after passage, the lawsuits, etc. Gruber was a tiny part of all of that.

It doesn't matter how tiny his role was. Lies are lies. When you start with lies, you negotiate on lies, you revise on lies, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The very reason we have a Senate is to keep the government running. For a sitting Senator to willfully cause the government to stop running, yes, that makes him a jackass.

It's actually not. A senator has the job of representing his constituents. What the executive branch wants is not priority. The branches are co-equal.

Nobody said the will of the executive should be his priority. But his priority should be to keep our federal government functioning. If he can't get his preferred legislation through Congress and the President (either by signature or overriding veto), then he has to accept that while something might be the will of his particular constituents, it is not the will of the nation as a whole and so it's not going to prevail. To shut down the government over the interests of a small portion of our population, is irresponsible and a dereliction of duty.

If a senator feels a law is going to hurt not only his constituents, but the population on the whole, it's his responsibility to come forward and stand strong, not cave. And, as it turns out, according to Gruber, we WERE being lied to. But liberals have no problem with that.

What a bunch of bull. It was not necessary to shut down the government because of ACA and the shutdown hurt ALL Americans needlessly.

I think it's necessary when the American people were deliberately lied to.

Please tell me you're from Texas, not local, so that Cruz is actually representing you.

The thing is, I know a lot about the ACA, what we had before it, the long negotiating process before it's passage, the way it has been revised after passage, the lawsuits, etc. Gruber was a tiny part of all of that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The very reason we have a Senate is to keep the government running. For a sitting Senator to willfully cause the government to stop running, yes, that makes him a jackass.

It's actually not. A senator has the job of representing his constituents. What the executive branch wants is not priority. The branches are co-equal.

Nobody said the will of the executive should be his priority. But his priority should be to keep our federal government functioning. If he can't get his preferred legislation through Congress and the President (either by signature or overriding veto), then he has to accept that while something might be the will of his particular constituents, it is not the will of the nation as a whole and so it's not going to prevail. To shut down the government over the interests of a small portion of our population, is irresponsible and a dereliction of duty.

If a senator feels a law is going to hurt not only his constituents, but the population on the whole, it's his responsibility to come forward and stand strong, not cave. And, as it turns out, according to Gruber, we WERE being lied to. But liberals have no problem with that.

What a bunch of bull. It was not necessary to shut down the government because of ACA and the shutdown hurt ALL Americans needlessly.

I think it's necessary when the American people were deliberately lied to.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The very reason we have a Senate is to keep the government running. For a sitting Senator to willfully cause the government to stop running, yes, that makes him a jackass.

It's actually not. A senator has the job of representing his constituents. What the executive branch wants is not priority. The branches are co-equal.

Nobody said the will of the executive should be his priority. But his priority should be to keep our federal government functioning. If he can't get his preferred legislation through Congress and the President (either by signature or overriding veto), then he has to accept that while something might be the will of his particular constituents, it is not the will of the nation as a whole and so it's not going to prevail. To shut down the government over the interests of a small portion of our population, is irresponsible and a dereliction of duty.

If a senator feels a law is going to hurt not only his constituents, but the population on the whole, it's his responsibility to come forward and stand strong, not cave. And, as it turns out, according to Gruber, we WERE being lied to. But liberals have no problem with that.

What a bunch of bull. It was not necessary to shut down the government because of ACA and the shutdown hurt ALL Americans needlessly.

Anonymous wrote:I think Boehner's biggest gripe with Cruz is that he interferes in Boehner's territory by firing up the tea part caucus to split with Boehner.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The very reason we have a Senate is to keep the government running. For a sitting Senator to willfully cause the government to stop running, yes, that makes him a jackass.

It's actually not. A senator has the job of representing his constituents. What the executive branch wants is not priority. The branches are co-equal.

Nobody said the will of the executive should be his priority. But his priority should be to keep our federal government functioning. If he can't get his preferred legislation through Congress and the President (either by signature or overriding veto), then he has to accept that while something might be the will of his particular constituents, it is not the will of the nation as a whole and so it's not going to prevail. To shut down the government over the interests of a small portion of our population, is irresponsible and a dereliction of duty.

If a senator feels a law is going to hurt not only his constituents, but the population on the whole, it's his responsibility to come forward and stand strong, not cave. And, as it turns out, according to Gruber, we WERE being lied to. But liberals have no problem with that.

Nobody gives a shit about Gruber. Let it go and move on.

Anonymous wrote:I think Boehner's biggest gripe with Cruz is that he interferes in Boehner's territory by firing up the tea part caucus to split with Boehner.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The very reason we have a Senate is to keep the government running. For a sitting Senator to willfully cause the government to stop running, yes, that makes him a jackass.

It's actually not. A senator has the job of representing his constituents. What the executive branch wants is not priority. The branches are co-equal.

Nobody said the will of the executive should be his priority. But his priority should be to keep our federal government functioning. If he can't get his preferred legislation through Congress and the President (either by signature or overriding veto), then he has to accept that while something might be the will of his particular constituents, it is not the will of the nation as a whole and so it's not going to prevail. To shut down the government over the interests of a small portion of our population, is irresponsible and a dereliction of duty.

If a senator feels a law is going to hurt not only his constituents, but the population on the whole, it's his responsibility to come forward and stand strong, not cave. And, as it turns out, according to Gruber, we WERE being lied to. But liberals have no problem with that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The very reason we have a Senate is to keep the government running. For a sitting Senator to willfully cause the government to stop running, yes, that makes him a jackass.

It's actually not. A senator has the job of representing his constituents. What the executive branch wants is not priority. The branches are co-equal.

Nobody said the will of the executive should be his priority. But his priority should be to keep our federal government functioning. If he can't get his preferred legislation through Congress and the President (either by signature or overriding veto), then he has to accept that while something might be the will of his particular constituents, it is not the will of the nation as a whole and so it's not going to prevail. To shut down the government over the interests of a small portion of our population, is irresponsible and a dereliction of duty.

If a senator feels a law is going to hurt not only his constituents, but the population on the whole, it's his responsibility to come forward and stand strong, not cave. And, as it turns out, according to Gruber, we WERE being lied to. But liberals have no problem with that.