Posted on 07/22/2015 6:59:04 AM PDT by cotton1706
What Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) understands about the political system is that policy initiatives are worthless if you are unwilling to harness critical moments and pivotal legislation to relentlessly push that agenda. It’s nice to oppose Obama’s amnesty, funding for abortion, Obamacare, or the Iran deal, but it’s nothing but vapid campaign rhetoric without pursuing a consequential battle over a so-called must-pass bill.
Today, Ted Cruz has introduced 8 amendments to the 1,030-page $300 billion highway bill that will address a number of the critical issues facing this country during these dark times.
Here is the list of the Cruz amendments with some of my notes:
(Excerpt) Read more at conservativereview.com ...
Agreed
It doesn't stop the Iran deal: the way to do that was to defeat Corker, which HE SIGNED ON TO.
This does just the opposite of "exposing" RINOs because it allows them to hide behind, "No, I voted for a highway bill. I never got a chance to vote on Iran/Obamacare." It's just the opposite: he provided perfect cover for them to avoid a public vote.
He hurt himself on #3.
Why do you suppose he has not offered a simple “Repeal Obamacare” bill? No, it wouldn’t get far, but it would be the bill to expose everyone.
I fail to see how this in any way addresses any of that. Quite the contrary, Cruz has provided a smokescreen for anyone to say “Well, I wanted to stop Obamacare/Iran, but the bill I voted for was a highway bill. I never had a chance to vote on a Repeal Obamacare bill because it never came up.”
Well, we disagree. Your ‘smokescreen’ is my bottom line. Any Senator has the option to introduce amendments to a bill, UNLESS his traitorous leadership has circumvented the process to keep that from happening. Any Senator can put a hold on an appointment confirmation; I’d imagine a similar option or way of approaching the bottom line is also available.
Because we disagree on tactics doesn’t mean our goals are different. I’m just done playing around as if the collective RINO leadership in Congress means a f@cking thing to me.
It could be just that Cruz figures that this game has been tried once and a second failure will only label him as an ineffectual maverick senator when he needs to campaign as an effective leader who can get things done.
The real answer is, I just don't know.
If you want to stop the trade bill, why vote for it?
If you want to stop Obamacare, why not maybe introduce a simple repeal Obamacare bill?
You think I want to selectively choose what we, as controlling majority, pass during this Muslim’s remainder in office. I am saying, “Stop ALL of it.” Pass nothing and start over after having assured we don’t have a Jeb Bush as our candidate.
But you haven't answered my question. If Cruz wants to stop Iran deal, why did he vote for Corker? And if he wanted to stop trade deal, why did he vote to give Zero Fast Track authority? These are very troubling votes.
Ted Cruz Ping! He voted FOR congressional review. He voted FOR Fast Track.
Introducing these after the vote means "0".
Ok, I’m not sure I buy that, but why did he vote for Corker bill, which REQUIRES a 2/3 majority to STOP the Iran deal, rather than 2/3 to approve as per the Constitution?
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.