Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Blunt Splits With House GOP on Shutdown, Debt Ceiling
CBS St. Louis ^ | October 10, 2013

Posted on 10/10/2013 10:58:12 AM PDT by nickcarraway

Missouri’s Republican U.S. Senator is expressing some frustration with his GOP colleagues in the House of Representatives over a temporary debt ceiling increase proposal and the partial government shutdown.

Sen. Roy Blunt says the shutdown was a strategic error because it is overshadowing the troubled implementation of the Affordable Care Act.

“The President had as difficult an August and early September as any president, second-term president, could have and we figured out how to change the subject,” he said Thursday in a conference call.

Blunt says an offer by House Republicans to temporarily raise the debt ceiling is a missed opportunity to cut spending.

“The debt ceiling, combined with opening the government, gave us at least an end date on when it was likely we could bring these discussions to conclusion,” he said.

House Speaker John Boehner and other top Republicans met with President Obama Thursday afternoon to discuss a short-term proposal by Boehner to raise the nation’s debt ceiling. The White House has called the proposal “encouraging.”


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Missouri
KEYWORDS: 113th; obama; obamalackey; obamasarmy; shutdown
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-84 next last

1 posted on 10/10/2013 10:58:12 AM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

He is right

The President was drowning this year with the NSA/Snowden stuff, the Syria debacle, his Arab spring falling apart, and the implementation of Obamacare

By simply keeping their mouths shut and letting Obamacare collapse on itself, R’s would have made big gains in 2014 in both Houses, rendering the President irrelevant for the rest of his term

This shutdown and now debt ceiling talks has given the Resident new life politically


2 posted on 10/10/2013 11:05:02 AM PDT by MadIsh32 (In order to be pro-market, sometimes you must be anti-big business)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32

Those other realities won’t just go away in 2014. To gain rewards in 2013, the Republican base needs to see that the party is a genuine opposition party too.

Otherwise, all those other things you listed mean nothing.


3 posted on 10/10/2013 11:07:33 AM PDT by Bayard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32
This shutdown and now debt ceiling talks has given the president new life politically

I suppose if you consider 37% approval "new life politically"...

4 posted on 10/10/2013 11:08:43 AM PDT by apillar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Bayard

Bogus

Conservatives would vote for Tea party reps regardless in 2014 even if nothing was done this month.

Getting the Senate back takes more then tea party votes though. There would have been gains in the House, and the Senate most likely would flip.

Right now centrist voters are totally ditching the GOP brand and this will stick the longer the shut down goes on and default is threatened.

The joke of all this is conservatives actually NOT coming out to vote for tea party candidates in 2014. Cons would have been their regardless of this suicide mission occurring or not.

Instead, O has new life and momentum going into 2014, when he should have been rendered an irrelevent lame duck by December


5 posted on 10/10/2013 11:10:52 AM PDT by MadIsh32 (In order to be pro-market, sometimes you must be anti-big business)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: apillar

It gives him a foil, similar to what the 1995 shutdown did for Clinton- he got an antagonist and could paint himself as a good guy.

The whole key to completely shutting down the D agenda beyond midterms was getting a clear majority in the Senate, at least 52 seats so Biden is irrelevant.

More then likely now D’s keep the Senate and have an outside chance at the House, again breathing new life into what should be a dead Presidency.


6 posted on 10/10/2013 11:12:30 AM PDT by MadIsh32 (In order to be pro-market, sometimes you must be anti-big business)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32

He is wrong.
His position is purely political amounting to letting the prez swing slowly in the breeze.
The effect of the shutdown has been to give O the rope he needed to make a noose for himself. Calling him to task for his demand to be given full authority for everything has resulted in an explosion of epic proportions. O is slaying himself every day. It was bad for him before. Now it is untenable. Sticking it to the vets and Srs is always bad business. O is too immature to understand the impact of his temper tantrum.
By sticking to Constitutional principle the House leadership has proven themselves statesmen, not mere politicians.
Kudos, Boehner, for as long as you are able to keep your spine erect.


7 posted on 10/10/2013 11:15:27 AM PDT by Louis Foxwell (This is a wake up call. Join the Sultan Knish ping list.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: apillar
I suppose if you consider 37% approval "new life politically"...

Rasmussen has him at -7:


8 posted on 10/10/2013 11:15:40 AM PDT by Maceman (Just say "NO" to tyranny.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell

The House is on the verge of caving

In a year what will be remember by non red districts in America?

That a few hundred vets couldn’t visit the WW2 memorial, or that GDP shrunk and the debt ceiling was very close to being breached?

Again, conservatives will vote for tea party folks regardless. But we need the Senate, badly, and had a damn good chance of getting it until 10 days ago.

When the House caves this will be an epic failure.


9 posted on 10/10/2013 11:17:42 AM PDT by MadIsh32 (In order to be pro-market, sometimes you must be anti-big business)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

10 posted on 10/10/2013 11:17:57 AM PDT by JPG (Yes We Can morphs into Make It Hurt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

I will NOT vote for this Missouri RINO in the next election. Blunt voted with the Dems on the cloture vote on defunding Obamacare. Blunt will say and do anything to make himself “look” like a good Republican.


11 posted on 10/10/2013 11:18:14 AM PDT by elephant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32

“This shutdown and now debt ceiling talks has given the Resident new life politically”

And you believe all those other things have gone away just because the gubmint is shut down???

Unlike the MSM, we are actually able to walk and chew gum at the same time. This isn’t replacing those other scandals: it’s adding to them!

This is just another worthless RINO that needs to be replaced!


12 posted on 10/10/2013 11:19:19 AM PDT by Stingray (Stand for the truth or you'll fall for anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32

Nonsense. All of the things you mentioned would have been ancient history by the time 2014 rolled around. Wherever the Democrats were hurt politically, the press would have minimized any damage, either through deception or through ignoring the issue.

The storyline, in about 6 months, would have been how ObamaCare was improving, and we would have been presented with non-stop stories of people who were benefiting from it.

ObamaCare will never collapse on itself, any more than any other big bureaucratic entity has. It would have been “fixed”, by idiot Republicans and Democrats alike, as it moved toward its inevitable destination — a very malevolent version of single-payer.

By defunding, we are buying time. Once established, the dependencies become too great, and the system we know of today will be so transformed there will be no going back. Blunt is wrong, or he is secretly one of those people who want it, since ObamaCare will give DC such leverage over the people.

Had Cruz (and the house) not done anything, the election of 2014 would have resulted in an irrelevant, marginal change, one way or the other. Now, we at least have the possibility of stopping this monstrosity before it becomes entrenched.

As Cruz says, it is now up to us, to make sure that we politically have the back of those who took such great personal and political risks. Blunt is an irrelevant fool, and should be treated as such.


13 posted on 10/10/2013 11:19:44 AM PDT by jjsheridan5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32

Sorry to disappooint you. The House will not cave. They cave they die and they know it.


14 posted on 10/10/2013 11:19:57 AM PDT by Louis Foxwell (This is a wake up call. Join the Sultan Knish ping list.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: apillar

Keep in mind, also, that Clinton’s approval also dropped from 52% to 42% during the 1995 shutdown. After it was over, his 1996 approval crept up to 60%.


15 posted on 10/10/2013 11:20:04 AM PDT by Corporate Democrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32
More then likely now D’s keep the Senate and have an outside chance at the House, again breathing new life into what should be a dead Presidency.

You have a lot more faith in the low information voters than I do, I figure the vast majority will have completely forgotten about the shutdown and their "rage" at Republicans a month after the shutdown ends, or as soon as another "shiny" pop culture object is dangled in front of them in the form of a new Lady Gaga album or a crazy Kanye West escapade. Case in point...remember all the "rage" and calls for gun control a month or two after Sandy Hook, with polls showing something like 70% demanded stricter gun laws? Is anybody even talking about gun control anymore? And it hasn't even been a year....

16 posted on 10/10/2013 11:20:29 AM PDT by apillar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Corporate Democrat
Keep in mind, also, that Clinton’s approval also dropped from 52% to 42% during the 1995 shutdown. After it was over, his 1996 approval crept up to 60%.

Yes, but Republican's held the house and actually gained seats in the Senate in 1996. So if anything, the shutdown was a wash...

17 posted on 10/10/2013 11:22:13 AM PDT by apillar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: jjsheridan5

Again, that is bogus.

When people start to see exploding deductables, or plans that only cover individuals and not families, the charade would be over.

It is a bad bad law. And a bad law that would have fallen apart and kept the negatives of the President in the news, along with his awful year in the foreign policy arena.

This was a matter of making the guy irrelevant come January 1 when everyone would be focused on the 2014 midterms.

The House will cave in a week, and surrender. The President will have his victory and new life.

2014, rather then being an R route, as it should be, may end up giving this President more strength going into his last 2 years.


18 posted on 10/10/2013 11:22:48 AM PDT by MadIsh32 (In order to be pro-market, sometimes you must be anti-big business)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: apillar

In correct

Dems made gains in 1996

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections,_1996


19 posted on 10/10/2013 11:23:48 AM PDT by MadIsh32 (In order to be pro-market, sometimes you must be anti-big business)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32

He is right

The President was drowning this year with the NSA/Snowden stuff, the Syria debacle, his Arab spring falling apart, and the implementation of Obamacare

“By simply keeping their mouths shut and letting Obamacare collapse on itself, R’s would have made big gains in 2014 in both Houses, rendering the President irrelevant for the rest of his term

This shutdown and now debt ceiling talks has given the Resident new life politically”

your opinoin is based on a false premise. The rupublicans wouldn’t had support from concervitives after letting the ACA (Obamacare) and raising the debt ceiling.


20 posted on 10/10/2013 11:24:27 AM PDT by PACAP1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: apillar

Legislation is far different from actual votes.

The last thing needed was centrists ditching the GOP en masse, in particular with the potential to pick up the Senate next year.


21 posted on 10/10/2013 11:25:07 AM PDT by MadIsh32 (In order to be pro-market, sometimes you must be anti-big business)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32
In correct

Dems made gains in 1996

Go back and read what I said. I said Republican HELD the house and gained seats in the Senate...

22 posted on 10/10/2013 11:26:31 AM PDT by apillar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: PACAP1

Bull

People like their Congressman and conservatives would have voted for their tea party Congressman as usual. The House would have stayed in R hands

It is the Senate that is big here. Getting the Senate would have allowed Congress to set the agenda for the final 2 years of O’s term, laying the ground work for 2016 when the ACA would have been repealed with an R Congress and an R President

That opportunity has been blown.


23 posted on 10/10/2013 11:26:54 AM PDT by MadIsh32 (In order to be pro-market, sometimes you must be anti-big business)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: apillar

Open seat gains in red states, while losing an incumbent.

2 seats in the Senate doesn’t cut it. Need 5 for a majority, and 6-7 to give insurance against someone getting wobbly.


24 posted on 10/10/2013 11:28:43 AM PDT by MadIsh32 (In order to be pro-market, sometimes you must be anti-big business)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell

Totally agree with you. Now the uninformed can rest easy that the world won’t end...at least for a couple of months.
By then, the government computers will be back on line and the freebie seeking Obamanites will get religion.
(Nice to see the market up 225 points)


25 posted on 10/10/2013 11:30:31 AM PDT by sanjuanbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32; Bayard

Yes, it will collapse in on itself just the way the IRS has, EPA has, the Education and Energy Department have, Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac have vaporized, the way the Fed’s printing of $85 billion a month has led to the Fed’s demise, the way Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare have gone broke and blown away, et al., et al., et al....

The list of our successes in waiting out big goverment is miraculous to behold.


26 posted on 10/10/2013 11:30:34 AM PDT by Fightin Whitey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jjsheridan5

Reading through these posts here and seeing opposing opinions that all make some sense, your post pretty much is enough for anyone to read.

As you said, the MSM via the White House contols the information and that will never change unless we have a bloody revolution and I doubt that will ever happen.

Feel good stories of the awesomeness of the ACA combined with your point that once a massive Federal institution is born, it never dies but just grows means the ACA has to be killed now.


27 posted on 10/10/2013 11:31:28 AM PDT by roofgoat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32
Legislation is far different from actual votes.

The last thing needed was centrists ditching the GOP en masse, in particular with the potential to pick up the Senate next year.

Ok, so lets have it your way. Lets give Obama everything he wants on the budget and not fight Obamacare so we don't make the precious "centerists" mad. While were at it, might as well give him amnesty for illegals, gun control and Cap & Trade after all most polls show those same "centerists" support that as well. Then maybe if were nice enough we might win enough centerist votes to take the Senate in 2014 and then we can REALLY stand up to Obama on...uhhh...uhhm..well not much since we already gave him all of his 2nd term agenda.

28 posted on 10/10/2013 11:31:56 AM PDT by apillar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

I see the so-called government shutdown overreach ‘distract’ Obamacare exchange launch failure meme everywhere, using the republican popularity at all time low as proof unanimously. “Let Dems Own Obamacare” seems to be the new strategy floating this late in the game, WTF?

First, the Republican popularity at all time low is to be expected. We have unprecedented coordinated campaign from Obama admin and legacy media all blame republicans, polls are going to find these low info folks to reflect that.

But the tanking Obama number tell us these low info folks are not as blind and mindless as these so-called party elders make them out to be.

Any signal from GOP to back down even 1 centimeter will be it, the base will leave them and the reason GOPe’s so keen on amnesty.


29 posted on 10/10/2013 11:32:50 AM PDT by Sir Napsalot (Pravda + Useful Idiots = CCCP; JournOList + Useful Idiots = DopeyChangey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32
Conservatives would vote for Tea party reps regardless in 2014 even if nothing was done this month.

It is a false premise to suggest that people would vote for the Tea Party if they act more like establishment Republicans who are similarly loathed by conservative base.

You have to be an opposition party be seen as an opposition party.

30 posted on 10/10/2013 11:35:10 AM PDT by Bayard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: apillar

Non sequitor

R’s were winning the immigration battle and the gun control battle.

R’s lost the Obamacare battle in 2010, again in 2011 and once more in 2012.

Let the damn thing fall apart. The defund strategy has proven to be suicidial, the House is about to cave, and R’s will be routed in 2014

Some conservatives need to read more of Sun Tzu and the Art of War. Suicide missions don’t win battles, they just give you far less soldiers to fight


31 posted on 10/10/2013 11:35:34 AM PDT by MadIsh32 (In order to be pro-market, sometimes you must be anti-big business)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32

Heard this line of thought in dealing with the democrats 1990, 1992, 1996, 1998, 2000, 2004, 2006, 2008, 2012. Now I will concede we won in 2000-2004, but literally by the skin of our teeth. In 1994 conservative came out in force against Clinton and the RINO’s rolled with the win until we started pushing against RINO agenda. In 2002 we picked up some seats purely on 9/11 emotion and the rest of those years we followed the liberal establishments advice, how has that worked out for us?

Had the Congress conceded this time and rolled over yet again those 2014 dreams of big wins would be just that and still may be depending on how this plays out. The conservative base, continually bit*hed slapped by the RINO’s and Party Boys and then told it was the conservatives fault they lose every time isn’t going to cut it anymore. The base is not prepared to take another beating from the RINO’s and is in a very ugly and unforgiving mood. RINO’s take heed.


32 posted on 10/10/2013 11:37:03 AM PDT by sarge83
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Bayard

Nonsense again.

In safe red districts, cons would come out and vote for their tea party reps.

The losses will be in the Senate, once again rendering the House majority obselete because nothing will get through the Senate, thusly nothing to the President’s desk to force his hand.


33 posted on 10/10/2013 11:37:13 AM PDT by MadIsh32 (In order to be pro-market, sometimes you must be anti-big business)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32

The problem isn’t that we have too few senators. The problem is that we have too many senators like McCain and McConnell, and too few like Lee and Cruz. The Democrats understand that it isn’t a numbers game, it’s a high stakes battle revolving around determination and fortitude. Why were they so willing to lose the House in order to pass ObamaCare? Why did the loss of the Kennedy seat not derail them? Why did the political disaster of 2010 (from their perspective) not slow them down?

Because they understand that a few seats here or there doesn’t make a difference. What matters is being more determined and more focused than the other side.

I have no way of knowing whether this helps or hurts the Republicans politically in 2014. And neither does anyone. The shutdown in 95 had, at most, a marginal effect, despite occurring at the worst possible time for the Republicans (tons of vulnerable freshman, a general election involving a popular incumbent against a man as inspiring as whole wheat toast, and, most importantly, a shutdown over an issue that didn’t personally affect anyone).

What I do know is that had we done nothing, the Democrats would have been perfectly fine. Any problems with ObamaCare would have been lost in the water that the media would make as muddy as possible. It would have cost them a few seats, perhaps, but nothing that would have made a difference.


34 posted on 10/10/2013 11:37:18 AM PDT by jjsheridan5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: sarge83

2004 was a BIG win, because W was smart enough not to completely aliente centrists while still pursuing a conservative tax cutting agenda (see the 2003 tax cuts)

2006 was much more a result of Iraq War fatigue and corruption scandals in the White House

2008 was seriously bad headwinds.

2012 was having a completely ineffective candidate at the top.

Again, we can go back to being the people who set the agenda, or be resigned to those who obstruct the agenda.

This is a long war and picking the right battles is key. Suicide missions are just stupid, as this will prove when the House caves and the Senate is lost again in 2014


35 posted on 10/10/2013 11:40:24 AM PDT by MadIsh32 (In order to be pro-market, sometimes you must be anti-big business)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32

“When people start to see exploding deductables, or plans that only cover individuals and not families, the charade would be over.”

Let me help here and I’m not trying to be a jerk Madish. What you posted above is commonly called “Common Sense”. And yes, common sense would say once working people see exploding deductables and poor Healthcare, the villagers will wake up and turn on the President.

The problem is our country has too small of a fraction that excercise common sense anymore. Sure, some will finally see the light, even some Dem voters. But far too many will still lap up whatever the WH/MSM feeds them.

Trust me, there will be some laughable excuses pushed that will still somehow blame the GOP and the whipping boy The Tea Party on why the ACA is a clustergob. And the cluless who have been brainwashed since birth will direct their anger at the wrong sources as they always do every time.


36 posted on 10/10/2013 11:41:28 AM PDT by roofgoat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32
With Cruz's 21 hour speech, something very important happened. The Republicans got out-front of the problems with Obamacare. The Dems can't do what they always try to do, which is blame the 'pubs. Obama owns Obamacare, dems are going to have to campaign on the issue, and Obama's place in history is forever destroyed.

It was a brilliant move. And you know what? It doesn't leave Snowden in the background. The government is out of control, and now everyone knows it.

37 posted on 10/10/2013 11:41:30 AM PDT by grania
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32
And lost 2 Senate seats in that year. In short, 1996 was a wash, by any reasonable measure.

Given your demonstrated ability to cherry-pick data, I should think Zerobama's flunkies would hire you in a NY taxicab minute.

38 posted on 10/10/2013 11:42:28 AM PDT by SAJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: apillar

Yes, but Republican’s held the house and actually gained seats in the Senate in 1996. So if anything, the shutdown was a wash...


Well, Clinton did cruise comfortably to re-election.

And before you say it was Perot’s fault even if Dole had got 100% of Perot’s votes Clinton still would’ve had more votes.


39 posted on 10/10/2013 11:43:56 AM PDT by Corporate Democrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32

“In correct

Dems made gains in 1996”

True — the Dems picked up 8 House seats in 1996 — after the biggest wave election in 40 years in 1994. It was inevitable that a few House seats (like Dan Rostenkowski’s heavily Dem Chicago district) were going to go back to the Dems in 1996, but to lose only 8 and still keep a large House majority in a year when Clinton was on the ballot and re-elected against a horrible GOP candidate at the top of the ticket was at the very worst a wash. Also, during this same election, the GOP added 2 Senate seats to their majority in the upper chamber.

When we look at these facts, we must always examine the context during which they occurred. And all in all, given who was running at the top of the GOP ticket in 96, it’s an awfully big stretch to claim that the GOP “lost” in the congressional elections, let alone tie those so-called losses to the 95 shutdown.


40 posted on 10/10/2013 11:45:51 AM PDT by lquist1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32
Blunt's argument is that we have should have allowed Obamacare to proceed so that when it created huge problems we could later say "I told you so." That sounds like the approach of a guy who I don't want in charge of anything important.

The idea that you shouldn't fight tooth and nail against a program that you know is going to cause huge problems for millions of people because you will get more political mileage out of standing on the side and watching the train wreck occur is the very epitome of why people don't trust politicians.

41 posted on 10/10/2013 11:48:39 AM PDT by vbmoneyspender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32

I think your calculus is overly pessimistic. People don’t follow a lack of leadership. They will not vote for Republicans when votes for Republicans are essentially throwing a vote away. 2012 is one example. Few in the Senate have the spine to be a party which fights for its issues.

That is a perception which is more deadly to the Republican party than you realize.

You can say arguments to the effect that “some spectrum of blue states will never vote conservatives, and that Republicans will never be a factor there and we wont pike up in the senate.”

It is a bogus argument to say Republicans should abandon the important fights. Who votes for a party that does not stand for anything? Rather, what inroads can you make in any of these places if you don’t genuinely represent your position as one which you stand by.


42 posted on 10/10/2013 11:48:47 AM PDT by Bayard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: roofgoat

Thank you. The notion that people are going to suddenly see how bad ObamaCare is and run the Democrats out on a rail is simply naive. The Democrats have an army of scriptwriters who will tell the world that up is down, and that whatever bad happens is because of Republicans. And enough people will believe it, that the political damage to the Democrats would be nowhere near enough to have an effect.

We lose elections when conservatives stay home, and we win when conservatives vote. We do the former, when we are seen as ineffective and “moderate”, and we do the latter, when we take strong, bold stances. Doing nothing was a recipe for disaster, since conservatives would have simply found something better to do on election day.

And the Karl Roves of the world would be left wondering why their brilliantly laid trap failed (yet again).


43 posted on 10/10/2013 11:52:18 AM PDT by jjsheridan5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: grania

-— With Cruz’s 21 hour speech, something very important happened. The Republicans got out-front of the problems with Obamacare. The Dems can’t do what they always try to do, which is blame the ‘pubs. Obama owns Obamacare, -—

The LIVS don’t understand much, but they now understand that Republicans oppose Obamacare. And that is an increasingly important lesson.


44 posted on 10/10/2013 11:58:26 AM PDT by St_Thomas_Aquinas ( Isaiah 22:22, Matthew 16:19, Revelation 3:7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32
He is right

He's wrong, and this whole shut-down thing and the defunding of Obamacare has pointed a big ol' target on his back for the Tea-Party when he is up for election next time.

He is a coward and a traitor.

If he, along with the 27 other GOP Cowards and Traitors in the Senate, had done the right thing, and voted against cloture, it would have been different, but now, we know who they are, and you can bet we will be coming for them next election cycle.

We will not forget!
45 posted on 10/10/2013 12:03:40 PM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jjsheridan5

-— Had Cruz (and the house) not done anything, the election of 2014 would have resulted in an irrelevant, marginal change, one way or the other. Now, we at least have the possibility of stopping this monstrosity before it becomes entrenched. -—

Absolutely. LIVS don’t turn out for mid-terms because they’re stupid and ignorant. Our turnout will be extraordinary, because we now have an unofficial leadership that is worth rallying behind.


46 posted on 10/10/2013 12:04:13 PM PDT by St_Thomas_Aquinas ( Isaiah 22:22, Matthew 16:19, Revelation 3:7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32
...far less soldiers to fight

If Sun Tzu said that, then he wasn't using proper English. He should have said "fewer" instead of "less" because soldiers are countable.

47 posted on 10/10/2013 12:06:35 PM PDT by be-baw (still seeking)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32
That doesn't explain why Obama's approvals are plummeting.

People are just now finding out what Obamacare means to their own budgets. Now is the time to make the distinction.

If congress does not act now we will be saddled with the abomination forever. I swear sometimes I think thats the RINOs' real objective.

48 posted on 10/10/2013 12:07:01 PM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell

We can agree/disagree on the shut down but now isnt the time to whine..its time to fight to the end...these clowns come out now and keep complaining.

We are on the beach you asswipes!


49 posted on 10/10/2013 12:09:49 PM PDT by rrrod (at home in Medellin Colombia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: St_Thomas_Aquinas

Bingo. That is the biggest point of them all, and one that needs repeating. If the Republican house holds firm, conservative turnout will be off-the-charts, at a time when Democrat turnout will be depressed.

If they don’t, however ...


50 posted on 10/10/2013 12:13:13 PM PDT by jjsheridan5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-84 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson