Posted on 09/28/2015 5:05:58 AM PDT by 1010RD
If we had 59 votes in the Senate, 300 in the House and a GOP President, the GOP would find a way to back down. If we had 75 votes in the Senate, we would still be told that we didn’t have enough to actually pass anything...
The real problem is that most of them do not WANT to oppose big government. They LOVE it!
You are a libertarian no doubt. I guess you also believe in the “free” movement of labor as well.
Interestingly, libertarians with teenage daughters do not believe in “free love”.
You used the present tense. Based on what McClintock is saying in this post, I think the past tense would have been more appropriate. He was a very principled conservative. That is why it is sad to see that DC has changed him. You, on the other hand, support Boehner and defend what he has done. That marks you as a supporter of the leftist agenda that Boehner has worked hard to advance.
If Trump murders the GOP, it’ll be liberals and Democrats who benefit, not conservatives.
********************
Respectfully, the above-captioned quote is the flaw in the argument you present.
It’s the current GOP that is murdering conservatives, and will continue to murder conservatives....ask Chris McDaniel.
McClintock is showing his true colors and they aren’t ‘red, white and blue’.
All of that is at the mercy of the DOJ and the federal black-robed Rat judicial tyrants that Lindsay Graham and Orrin Hatch rubber-stamped over the past 10 or so years. Get back to me when you can point out some recent meaningful Conservative successes in the federal Legislative branch.
McClintock actually has always been a bit nutty.
....ahh, that’s got to be the most dishonest, stupid and untrue statement I’ve seen on FR in years. Not even close and no basis for the slur. Go play at DU for a change, you’ll feel right at home.
ymmv
Thank you.
I now remember part of this.
Cheers,
‘Pod.
Hensarling declines to run.
Will support Price for Majority Leader.
https://twitter.com/MEPFuller/status/648519368805085185/photo/1
What do you know about it Mr Texas?
I like McClintock, but he has always been a bit eccentric and his run for Governor was a opportunist move I didn’t like.
Still, he is whom I voted for.
In thinking about who might replace Boner I though of McClintock.
McClintock is a solid conservative fighter and has done more for California liberty than anybody there.
Bookmark
If we didn’t have the Corker bill, what would the options be for the Congress in opposing the Iran deal?
.
It is stunning how much Tom’s letter sounds like Ted Cruz’ book.
His description of the manipulation and deceit bears a strong resemblance to Cruz’ description of the same in the Senate GOP caucus.
.
.
>> “McClintock really turned out to be just another self-absorbed, lying GOP-E loser.” <<
.
That is an absurd comment.
You obviously don’t know Tom.
That’s an awful germane point, and a bigger topic than I can fairly handle.
Primarily though: the President has broad powers to conduct foreign affairs and most of what Obama wants to do, I believe, can be accomplished on his own authority.
Some of it can’t however because it is not within his power and/or laws have been passed that restrict him. I believe this includes many of the sanctions on Iran.
If Obama had followed the Corker bill he would have power to accomplish all he wished, by not doing so he limits himself to being able to do only what he could have done anyway.
I believe the impetus behind the Corker bill was to, firstly, get concessions for Republican donors from Obama and secondarily, to generally limit what he attempted to do with the power it afforded him.
In sum congress would have the same power- judicial determination of what a president can do on his own- as it does now. Only without the distraction of the Corker bill.
But it could have gone differently.
ty for the reply. I was thinking that BC (Before Corker) the congress would have had to approve the treaty and then Obama could sign it, as opposed to now AC (After Corker) where Obama agrees to the treaty and then the Congress has to have a super majority to override it.??
I also though I remember McClintock being in favor of the Corker Bill, which since I thought very highly of McClintock, struck me as unexpected.
Ofcourse, they call it an agreement instead of a treaty and that is allowed to nullify the Constitution. Anyway what I am trying to find out is if the GOP controlled congress, even by using a nuclear option in the Senate could have stopped the Iran deal?
Um, who is “we”, Hoss ? You’re not a Conservative.
72% of GOP voters would disagree with you. Perception is reality.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.