Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

93henfan wrote:You people are slipping!

kalm wrote:G8 was right. That punching bag has been worn out.

Grizalltheway wrote:http://www.theonion.com/articles/who-is-ted-cruz,38278/

http://www.theonion.com/articles/ted-cr ... f-b,38279/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chizzang wrote:

Grizalltheway wrote:http://www.theonion.com/articles/who-is-ted-cruz,38278/

http://www.theonion.com/articles/ted-cr ... f-b,38279/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Is it just me or is this (below) actually completely spot on (plus funny) but funny second to being accurate..?

"LYNCHBURG, VA—Announcing his 2016 presidential bid before thousands of students at Liberty University, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) boldly declared Monday that the nation had done absolutely nothing to deserve a better candidate than himself. “I want you to take a good, hard look at me, America, because this is exactly what you’ve got coming,” said Cruz, adding that the country was kidding itself if it thought it was worthy of higher-quality leadership than exactly what he was prepared to offer. “Deep down, you know you’ve got no business supporting anyone else. I’m all you’re entitled to, so just give me your vote and watch what happens. You earned it.” Cruz went on to say that, in some ways, he might actually be a better candidate than the nation deserved."

CID1990 wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
Is it just me or is this (below) actually completely spot on (plus funny) but funny second to being accurate..?

"LYNCHBURG, VA—Announcing his 2016 presidential bid before thousands of students at Liberty University, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) boldly declared Monday that the nation had done absolutely nothing to deserve a better candidate than himself. “I want you to take a good, hard look at me, America, because this is exactly what you’ve got coming,” said Cruz, adding that the country was kidding itself if it thought it was worthy of higher-quality leadership than exactly what he was prepared to offer. “Deep down, you know you’ve got no business supporting anyone else. I’m all you’re entitled to, so just give me your vote and watch what happens. You earned it.” Cruz went on to say that, in some ways, he might actually be a better candidate than the nation deserved."

Equally apropos if you substitute Hillary or Obama in there

Except for the Liberty part

Baldy wrote:

CID1990 wrote:
Equally apropos if you substitute Hillary or Obama in there

Except for the Liberty part

Cruz (unlike the Hildabeast) won't get a standing ovation if he ever addresses the press at a function, either.

JohnStOnge wrote:
I just don't get how this is a story.

DSUrocks07 wrote:American politics: where you can be criticized by a group for following a law that THEY wrote and supported.

CID1990 wrote:

JohnStOnge wrote:
I just don't get how this is a story.

It ISN'T a story.

It's a troll, and a pretty good one too. Cruz got the media in a tizzy, put the spotlight directly on him. Then he has the pulpit to demonstrate deference to the law.

It was a pretty shrewd political move.

The senator is correct. For the most part, individual behavior is distinct from political belief and institutional preference. A billionaire taking tax breaks isn’t a hypocrite for wanting higher rates and more social services; neither is a climate activist who flies around the world, or a rich liberal who sends his kids to private schools but wants more money for public education.

There are limits to this idea. It is hypocritical to oppose drugs but indulge for yourself, or, a little differently, to value labor but exploit unpaid work. But for most ideological concerns, the political and the personal are separate spheres that only occasionally overlap. To think otherwise is to fall into the dangerous—if widespread—belief that you can make political change through personal consumption or other atomized actions.

That’s not to say you shouldn’t try to live your political ideals or that your personal beliefs (secular, religious, or otherwise) shouldn’t reflect on your politics. But it’s unreasonable and unfair to expect a one-to-one correspondence, especially on something like health care reform. Cruz can take advantage of Obamacare to get health insurance, and also—as he said—believe that “it is killing millions of jobs in this country and … has caused millions of people to lose their insurance, to lose their doctors and to face skyrocketing insurance premiums.” He’s wrong, but that’s a separate story.

If there’s a problem with Cruz and Obamacare, it’s not hypocrisy, it’s empathy. Insurance under the ACA is far from perfect. It’s pricey even with subsidies, and less comprehensive than many employer plans. But the actual comparison isn’t with an ideal, it’s with the pre-reform status quo, in which millions of Americans had either no insurance or junk plans that were worse than useless in an emergency. Against that alternative, Obamacare is a huge improvement. Even now, as health reporter Sarah Kliff writes for Vox, “f Cruz surveyed the market for individual insurance, he’d probably learn pretty quickly that the exchange is almost certainly his best option.”

kalm wrote:

CID1990 wrote:
It ISN'T a story.

It's a troll, and a pretty good one too. Cruz got the media in a tizzy, put the spotlight directly on him. Then he has the pulpit to demonstrate deference to the law.

It was a pretty shrewd political move.

Yes. I sure he's playing chess here.

But I do agree it's a mountain out of a mole hill of which both sides get to claim victory.

The senator is correct. For the most part, individual behavior is distinct from political belief and institutional preference. A billionaire taking tax breaks isn’t a hypocrite for wanting higher rates and more social services; neither is a climate activist who flies around the world, or a rich liberal who sends his kids to private schools but wants more money for public education.

There are limits to this idea. It is hypocritical to oppose drugs but indulge for yourself, or, a little differently, to value labor but exploit unpaid work. But for most ideological concerns, the political and the personal are separate spheres that only occasionally overlap. To think otherwise is to fall into the dangerous—if widespread—belief that you can make political change through personal consumption or other atomized actions.

That’s not to say you shouldn’t try to live your political ideals or that your personal beliefs (secular, religious, or otherwise) shouldn’t reflect on your politics. But it’s unreasonable and unfair to expect a one-to-one correspondence, especially on something like health care reform. Cruz can take advantage of Obamacare to get health insurance, and also—as he said—believe that “it is killing millions of jobs in this country and … has caused millions of people to lose their insurance, to lose their doctors and to face skyrocketing insurance premiums.” He’s wrong, but that’s a separate story.

If there’s a problem with Cruz and Obamacare, it’s not hypocrisy, it’s empathy. Insurance under the ACA is far from perfect. It’s pricey even with subsidies, and less comprehensive than many employer plans. But the actual comparison isn’t with an ideal, it’s with the pre-reform status quo, in which millions of Americans had either no insurance or junk plans that were worse than useless in an emergency. Against that alternative, Obamacare is a huge improvement. Even now, as health reporter Sarah Kliff writes for Vox, “f Cruz surveyed the market for individual insurance, he’d probably learn pretty quickly that the exchange is almost certainly his best option.”

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_ ... bouie.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Slate quoting Vox



By the way, they never mention Cruz having been on record saying he thinks all members of Congress should be required to sign up... or does it?

CID1990 wrote:

kalm wrote:
Yes. I sure he's playing chess here.

But I do agree it's a mountain out of a mole hill of which both sides get to claim victory.



http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_ ... bouie.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Slate quoting Vox



By the way, they never mention Cruz having been on record saying he thinks all members of Congress should be required to sign up... or does it?

kalm wrote:

CID1990 wrote:
Slate quoting Vox



By the way, they never mention Cruz having been on record saying he thinks all members of Congress should be required to sign up... or does it?

Right on cue. I'm curious, which part of the quoted do you disagree with?

CID1990 wrote:

kalm wrote:
Right on cue. I'm curious, which part of the quoted do you disagree with?

I disagree with this being the (liberal) media shiny object, period.

kalm wrote:

CID1990 wrote:
I disagree with this being the (liberal) media shiny object, period.

Good for you! So again, which part of the quoted did you disagree with?

Baldy wrote:

kalm wrote:
Good for you! So again, which part of the quoted did you disagree with?

Pretty much all of it.
1. It's not cheaper.
2. Countless people have lost their jobs.
3. It's grotesquely expensive.
4. Millions have lost coverage.

kalm wrote:

Baldy wrote: Pretty much all of it.
1. It's not cheaper.
2. Countless people have lost their jobs.
3. It's grotesquely expensive.
4. Millions have lost coverage.

Reading comprehension fail.

Cruz can take advantage of Obamacare to get health insurance, and also—as he said—believe that “it is killing millions of jobs in this country and … has caused millions of people to lose their insurance, to lose their doctors and to face skyrocketing insurance premiums.” He’s wrong, but that’s a separate story

Baldy wrote:

kalm wrote:
Reading comprehension fail.

There were four paragraphs in your QUOTE, and in your QUOTE it contained this little gem:

Cruz can take advantage of Obamacare to get health insurance, and also—as he said—believe that “it is killing millions of jobs in this country and … has caused millions of people to lose their insurance, to lose their doctors and to face skyrocketing insurance premiums.” He’s wrong, but that’s a separate story

You asked, "which part of the QUOTED did you disagree with?".

I answered it for you...

Learn what da fuq the word QUOTE means, please.