Posted on 10/01/2013 1:25:32 PM PDT by Maelstorm
Peter, you can’t negotiate with a guy who WANTS a shutdown.
“What a useless fool.”
Yeah, for sure. I suppose by King’s comments we can assume he no longer aspires to be our El President’e? Aww, so sad....
Somebody posted a graphic of which states benefit premium-wise from Obamacare and New York was the biggest beneficiary among a very few states to actually benefit. Most states saw increases in healthcare premiums.
King appears to have had some economic vested interest in some aspect of Obamacare so it would be logical that he is throwing a tantrum about it.
I will place any money that King’s the first to get booted out of the running.
Sounds like racist hate speech. Typical of a left of center New Yorker.
I thought King was ok, especially on national security. I don’t agree with him but I guess this is his opinion. Or he just can’t be conservative on fiscal matters because of his district?
King had probably won some support around the country with his frequent comments concerning terrorism and related topics. But now he’s making a fool of himself and seems obsessed with Cruz to an unhealthy degree, psychologically unhealthy.
Lately, on this issue, he’s coming across as a nutcase to me and I’m sure I’m not the only one.
They could censure peter king and remove his privilege to vote on the floor.
Ithink that would be a good idea.
At one time I actually thought this guy, with his stance against Muslims, was the real deal.
Boy, was I wrong. I despise him....what a pathetic, blubbering disgrace. Cruz is a true leader, something this puke wouldn’t recognize.
When you say north east Republican, I think, undercover Democrat.
Aw, it’s OK Pete. We’ll never forgive you, either.
Had it not been for courageous "extremists" whose desire for liberty outweighed their comfort level in being subjects instead of free individuals, the so-called "miracle of America" never would have been.
If Republicans, such as King, keep doing the same things they've done already, then we can expect the same results we've been getting--compromises that throw away the liberty of future generations.
On the other hand, if we have Congressmen and Senators who can articulate and explain the Founders' ideas, even if they appear to "lose" a current scuffle, they will have planted the seeds of liberty in the hearts and minds of potential voters. Those seeds will bear fruit for the future, because once the ideas of liberty are understood, individuals may no longer voluntarily submit themselves to slavery to government.
Those who "fold" on principle are not likely to plant those seeds, because if they understood them, they would sacrifice their "lives, liberty and sacred honor" rather than compromise on issues of limiting government, spending, taxation, etc.
Short-term gain, numbers wise, may lead to long-time loss.
Quoted here are words from Zacharias Montgomery, a man who was denied a federal position because of his firm dedication to a principle. Following that are words from Thomas Jefferson's First Inaugural remarks on "essential principles" and what should be done if we depart from them.
Zacharias Montgomery: "If I have learned anything from the reading of history, it is that the man who, in violation of great principles, toils for temporary fame, purchases for himself either total oblivion or eternal infamy, while he who temporarily goes down battling for right principles always deserves, and generally secures, the gratitude of succeeding ages, and will carry with him the sustaining solace of a clean conscience, more precious than all the offices and honors in the gift of man."
Thomas Jefferson:
"These principles form the bright constellation which has gone before us and guided our steps through an age of revolution and reformation. The wisdom of our sages and the blood of our heroes have been devoted to their attainment. They should be the creed of our political faith, the text of civic instruction, the touchstone by which to try the services of those we trust; and should we wander from them in moments of error or of alarm, let us hasten to retrace our steps and to regain the road which alone leads to peace, liberty, and safety."
For too long, however, our public discourse has been based on "issues" and short-term political goals, with not enough emphasis placed on how this or that question relates to a principle essential to our very liberty as a nation. We must return to the "road" described by Jefferson as he took office if liberty is to survive the assaults by both major Parties over the past 100 years.
Recall Peter King into retirement.
Does he really represent the attitudes of central Long Island?
-PJ
That explains that sound heard all day from the Senate cloak room. It was Ted Cruz weeping uncontrollably.
Two words: New York
Might be better, Travis, to call them Vichy Republicans. Of course none of the current or recently graduated folks from public schools would even understand the reference.
:::sigh:::
Republicans who voted against Article I were Amo Houghton (N.Y.), Peter T. King (N.Y.) and Mark Edward Souder (Ind.).
I’m so sick of that jerk.
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.