Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Miss David Brooks does not like the crease in Ted Cruz’s pants [Darleen Click]

missdavidbrooks_01Sniff

What’s going on in the House, and a bit in the Senate, too, is what you might call the rise of Ted Cruz-ism.

And Ted Cruz, the senator from Canada through Texas, is basically not a legislator in the normal sense, doesn’t have an idea that he’s going to Congress to create coalitions, make alliances, and he is going to pass a lot of legislation. He’s going in more as a media protest person.

And a lot of the House Republicans are in the same mode. They’re not normal members of Congress. They’re not legislators. They want to stop things. And so they’re just being — they just want to obstruct.

And the second thing they’re doing, which is alarming a lot of Republicans, is they’re running against their own party. Ted Cruz is running against Republicans in the Senate. The House Republican Tea Party types are running against the Republican establishment. That’s how they’re raising money. That’s where they’re spending their money on ads.

And so they’re having a very obstructive role which is going on this week, and I think it’s going to make John Boehner’s life even more difficult.

58 Replies to “Miss David Brooks does not like the crease in Ted Cruz’s pants [Darleen Click]”

  1. Drumwaster says:

    Wouldn’t that make Barry Soertoro the President from Hawaii through Indonesia, basically not a President in the normal sense?

    I have never argued that Barry wasn’t a citizen, just that he wasn’t “American”. He was raised during his formative years in foreign countries. He wasn’t raised as an American during those years where young boys play ball and pull pigtails and join the Boy Scouts and are influenced by the dominant culture. And what influence from Americans he did get are all from those who see America as the problem, not the solution.

    Of course, I denounce myself for not pointing out that he is half-white.

  2. leigh says:

    Ted Cruz gives a rat’s ass what Our Miss Brooks thinks.

  3. happyfeet says:

    Remind us Mr. Brooks how much legislation did Captain Food Stamp pass when he was a senator?

  4. Ernst Schreiber says:

    He was too busy being Senator from New York to California.

    Thats what made it okay. He flew over flyover country.

    Except for that time he moved across the Big Muddy to camp out in Iowa.

  5. McGehee says:

    Ted Cruz gives a rat’s ass what Our Miss Brooks thinks.

    It’s amazing how much Sen. Cruz has in common with productive, intelligent, patriotic Americans. One might almost suspect he’s one himself.

  6. geoffb says:

    … doesn’t have an idea that he’s going to Congress to create coalitions, make alliances,

    Coalitions are not an end but a means. When pushed as being a good thing in and of itself, as an end, it is done by those who are using that very “ideal” as a means to get something that they otherwise could not. Brooks in domestic affairs. Others do like wise in foreign policy.

    Our own leaders didn’t prize the liberty-based civilization of the West as different from – and better for liberty lovers than – the world based in and dictated by Islam. On such denial an “international coalition” would arise. To our leaders, this coalition was always more important than our liberty.

    This coalition, … “identifies the enemy as generic ‘terrorists’ who commit generic ‘terrorism.’ By opening the doors of alliance to an array of Arab nations whose embrace of such ‘terrorists’ ranges from tight, to secret, to (at best) arm’s-length, the United States could very well create a broad-based coalition – but one marked by a grievous moral vacuum that would surely undermine any American-led war effort to save the civilized world from the forces of violence, fear and instability.”

    If you form an alliance with those who would destroy what you value most, you have lost before you began to fight.

  7. LBascom says:

    doesn’t have an idea that he’s going to Congress to create coalitions, make alliances, and he is going to pass a lot of legislation

    No, no he doesn’t. His constituents, the people that elected him and to whom he is representing, want him to do the opposite of “pass a lot of legislation”. They want him to take a meat ax to a lot of legislation that’s already been passed. Plus as many departments, agencies, and bureaucracies as possible.

    It’s called limited government, dumbass…

  8. geoffb says:

    Coalition building.

  9. Shermlaw says:

    Shorter Brooks: How dare Cruz not compromise his principles?

  10. sdferr says:

    Brooks says “They want to stop things.”

    I wouldn’t disagree, so far as it goes. But I’d complete the picture, rather than leave the characterization short and misleading, as Brooks wants to do.

    I’d say instead, they want to stop bad things, or wrong things, from happening. If there were good things proposed by their lights, they wouldn’t be obstructing those in the least. So Brooks lies, by design.

  11. Blake says:

    David Brooks: making metrosexuals look manly since 2000.

  12. serr8d says:

    OT…Darleen, you’re a fan of high-speed photography, no? Tell me what you see at the top of this image?

  13. SmokeVanThorn says:

    Someone wants a hand on his thigh.

  14. Blake says:

    Umm, Brooksie, Cruz making life difficult for Boehner is a feature, not a bug.

  15. leigh says:

    Brooks is going to wet himself when he sees what’s in store with the Continuing Resolution.

    Game on, Obama.

  16. Blake says:

    leigh, I wrote my congresscritter and told him in no uncertain terms I was paying attention and not interested in anything Cantor put forth.

    I can’t wait to see what kind of response I get.

  17. palaeomerus says:

    Maybe Chris Matthews’ tingle was similar to Spider-Man’s spider-Sense and he was too dumb to equate it with incoming danger.

  18. Hrothgar says:

    Why it is almost like Cruz and a very few other men in Congress understand the principle of placing the representation of your constituents above that of legislating for personal gain or to further a statist agenda.

    I wish Juan McCain would take notes!

  19. newrouter says:

    I wish Juan McCain would take notes!

    my friends there are countries to bomb. i have no time for this.

  20. newrouter says:

    good allan it is raining in seattle

  21. McGehee says:

    That never happens!

  22. Darleen says:

    serr8d

    nice! looks like a blob of paint or chewed bubble gum …

  23. leigh says:

    Blake, there’s nothing that sharpens a congresscritter’s focus like a bunch of angry constituents on the eve of an election year.

  24. sdferr says:

    Looks like a white housecat sitting upright on its haunches to me, in a bipedal manner, left forearm outstretched.

  25. newrouter says:

    call ghost busters

  26. LBascom says:

    Huh. my last comment in that extra long thread is “awaiting moderation”.

    That bodes ill.

    Or at least un-PW.

    Accept me or ban me, but please don’t Judas me!

  27. LBascom says:

    huh-oh…ALL my comments are awaiting moderation.

    Is it just me? Am I being shunned?

  28. LBascom says:

    Oh well, me and Ted Cruz. Totally uninterested in creating coalitions.

    Armed EPA raid in Alaska sheds light on 70 fed agencies with armed divisions

  29. Spiny Norman says:

    …doesn’t have an idea that he’s going to Congress to create coalitions, make alliances, and he is going to pass a lot of legislation.

    Miss Brooks apparently has never heard the old gag truism that no man’s life, liberty or property is safe while Congress is in session.

    What a twit.

  30. Spiny Norman says:

    Did I say something naughty?

    “Awaiting moderation”? When did that start?

  31. serr8d says:

    I saw the cat too, sdferr. Darleen, chewed bubble gum? Really?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4fOp_xQMkc

    )

  32. serr8d says:

    “your comment is awaiting moderation”

    Huh? That’s a YouTube linky, Silly WordPress.

  33. BigBangHunter says:

    *** Washington Navy yard shootings ***

  34. BigBangHunter says:

    – Live blog on latest Navy yard developments.

  35. McGehee says:

    OT: Clown Disaster gave a speech and the war on terror was over. Maybe he needs to give that speech again.

  36. sdferr says:

    The Party is busily righting The Disaster’s ship. Que Richard Rodger’s Victory at Sea.

  37. BigBangHunter says:

    – WTOP ongoing live coverage and news conference…..

  38. leigh says:

    Shooter is daid. Anyone say if he was a Muslim, yet?

  39. leigh says:

    What the hell? “Your comment is awaiting moderation”

  40. palaeomerus says:

    Am I on auto-moderation for some reason?

  41. Drumwaster says:

    It isn’t terror any more, it’s “man-caused disasters”. Because someone setting out to shoot up a crowd of innocent people is exactly the same as an earthquake or hurricane.

  42. cranky-d says:

    Per McGehee’s link, we obviously need more gun control.

  43. serr8d says:

    ‘Your comment is awaiting moderation’ x2.
    WordPress, it is busted.

  44. McGehee says:

    I didn’t do it, nobody saw me do it, you can’t prove anything.

  45. palaeomerus says:

    “I didn’t do it, nobody saw me do it, you can’t prove anything”

    I didn’t know you worked in the State Department. Or Justice department. Or EPA. Or NSA. Or IRS….

  46. leigh says:

    E-I-E-I-O.

  47. sdferr says:

    Angelo Codevilla: The Obama-Boehner Project

    *** If accounts of Barack Obama’s and John Boehner’s doings during the week of September 9 had appeared in the parody newspaper The Onion, they would have been occasion for laughter. But since the President of the United States and the Speaker of the House really did transact the nation’s business with laughably low levels of intelligence and integrity, the past week’s events sadly confirm the quality of elites that our ruling class’ Democratic and Republican wings promote and produce.

    Obama proposed a plan for striking Syria with cruise missiles, carefully designed to avoid accomplishing any meaningful military result; while Boehner proposed to hold votes in Congress nominally to prohibit funds for the 2010 Health Care Law while actually appropriating them. These disparate plans were identical in essential respects. First, both violated the logic of the fields in which the activity of each was to take place – war and legislation, respectively. Second, Obama and Boehner assumed that the American people would neither notice the deception and nonsense, nor care. Third, although polls showed that the American people oppose both striking Syria and retaining Obamacare, Obama and Boehner were confident of each other’s support, and assumed that the ruling class’ unity would be enough for success. In fact however each withdrew his plan in the face of public scorn. ***

  48. Blake says:

    Beck went visigoth today and called for the impeachment of Obama, Boehner and McCain, because of the arms being sent to Al Quaida inSyria. Some little thing about aiding and abetting foreign enemies.

  49. Squid says:

    No, no, no, no, no! The brave rebels in Syria are not our enemies, they’re the enemies of our enemies. And they’ve promised — pinky sworn! — that they would never, ever, ever, ever in a bazillion years ever turn those weapons back toward us or our allies.

    Pinky swearsies, people! What more could you possibly want?

  50. Blake says:

    Let me see if I have this correct: The American Embassy in Benghazi was attacked because we were running guns to rebels.

    Our president is again running guns to rebels in Syria, though embassy duties have been transferred to the embassy in Jordan.

    Call me crazy, but it seems to me moving the embassy from Syria to Jordan doesn’t really make our people any safer.

  51. Blake says:

    I also seem to recall a little affair known as “Iran-Contra” in which the Reagan administration got in a lot of trouble for running guns to rebels.

    It’s almost like Obama is being protected by the media. How very strange.

  52. McGehee says:

    Reagan got in trouble because the rebels he was arming were pro-American.

  53. sdferr says:

    Reagan got in trouble because the rebels he was arming were pro-American.

    True, if also anti-totalitarian, anti-communists and gasp, even possibly embracing a smattering of Roman Catholics roaming amongst them . . . shudder.

Comments are closed.