It still remains one Senator can do little to nothing insofar as shutting down the government. Those who would wish to hang that accomplishment upon one Senator either don't understand how the Congress and Executive Branch work, or don't want to address the real reasons.
Once again, my point on the shutdown was never that Cruz actually forced a shut down. It is the fact that he is one of the few Senators who constantly attempts to rally his fellow Republicans in forcing all action to come to a halt for this decision or that decision not going the way that he wants it to go. It's more about his advocacy for obstruction that is a hug turn off for me. It isn't about him actually accomplishing what he says he wants in this regard. He never gets much support from his fellow Republican Senators on a lot of these maneuvers, because they aren't a fan of his antics.
If it is the case there is too few Republicans, or representatives in general, that cannot see the overhaul of the government is needed to reduce duplication with states we need more such representatives. The federal government has its' role as designed early on with the assistance of the founding documents. To centralize more than designed, and duplicate such roles at Federal and State Level is protected by omnibus budget process. It is my humble opinion that removal of such a process would expose much of the nonsenses that is occurring.
Cruz, like many Republicans, are silent regarding states' rights when something at the Federal level goes the way they want it to. When things don't go their way, it's "states rights are being trampled" this, and "violation of the 10th amendment" that.
When the first term Senator votes against oligarchy he is delinquent in timing?
This isn't how I would define Cruz, as purely anti-oligarchy.
When he points it out using the filibuster he is shutting down the government.
Not talking about anything being shut down, because nothing ever was shut down.
When he pointed out McConnell's clumsy use of the leadership position and misled he was referred to as a maverick.
I have no issue with him calling out McConnell. The point of that being a reference point is how it turned off many of his colleagues, especially in his delivery.
He was the Tea Party candidate wasn't he?
Yup, he was part of the tea pary revolt.
Yes indeed the Congress, and for that matter the Executive Branch as well, need to pay far more attention to the matters important to the citizens of this nation. I for one am fairly tired of being told who will get what for free, and how our government will manage this transfer of assets, and watch as too many representatives seem to be getting wealthy as our "representatives". And these same representatives seem to be very concerned about altering their roles of both governing and running the government. I believe it should be taught to all from a young age, the role of the federal government and that of the state governments. In that way the down sizing of federal government and authority will become less, perhaps moving closer to the original design and farther from the current cesspool.
Not much disagreement from me there.