Some consider the Nation’s Capital as “Fantasyland on the Potomac”. Other outsiders are “Fed Up” with the Federal City. It's better to consider D.C. as “the District of Calamity” (sic).
During the Republican National Convention in Cleveland which nominated Donald Trump (R-NY) as the GOP Presidential standard bearer, the candidate granted a 45 minute interview to the New York Times on Defense and Foreign Policy issues. His expressed policies point toward an America First priority, a slogan which has an unfortunate history of being associated the Charles Limbergh and 1940 American isolationism. But Trump thinks this is a brand new, modern term which connotes "We are going to take care of everyone in this country before we worry about everyone else in the world." To his credit, Trump did not pussy foot around a self interested, national weltanschaaung in seeking to "Make America Great Again.". Trump demurred from dictating how Turkey should resolve their internal politics, noting that "America has to fix its own mess" before trying to alter the behavior of other nations. In fact, Trump mused: "How are we going to lecture when people are shooting policemen in cold blood?” So moral equivalence, a politically correct thought, shuts down America speaking against evil in the world. Trump reiterated his threat to pull back American troops deployed to keep stability around the world. Trump chided “We are spending a fortune on military in order to lose $800 billion [in America's trade loss]. That doesn’t sound very smart to me.” Trump thinks that if there is a threat to the United States, we can deploy troops from our shores. Trump echoed his ambition to pull out of NAFTA in a split second, unless Canada and Mexico can be bullied to renegotiate more favorable terms for the United States. And probably that Mexico will pay for a border wall. What was truly shocking was Trump's ambivalence to adhering to Article V of the NATO Treaty for joint defense. When pressed on whether the United States would come to the defense of the Baltic States if there was an invasion by the Russian Federation, Trump implied that there would be a cost benefit analysis which was premised on whether those nations are "fulfilling their obligations to us." So signed and ratified treaties are only bargaining positions in Trump's World. Well, at least Trump seemed to know that Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania are under the NATO security umbrella, unlike Ben Carson. Former Reagan Foreign Policy and current American Enterprise Institute Resident Scholar Gary Schmitt, the Trump America First policy is likened to a child who picks up his ball and goes home to lock himself up in a room.
Senator Ted Cruz (R-FL) took to the Senate floor and stood for 21 hours and 19 minutes to speak against voting for the cloture motion on the House Continuing Resolution legislation (House Res. 59) . But detractors like Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) are quick to insist that it was not a filibuster. It is said that the Freshman Senator from Florida could not have a filibuster as his effort was not intended to delay or prevent legislative action. A broader understanding of filibuster is an effort to prevent action by making a long speech. The 21 hours and 19 minutes of floor time certainly qualifies as a long speech. Consider the aim of Senator Cruz’s effort. He was speaking against a cloture motion. Cloture is the procedure that a 60 vote majority in the Senate cuts off debate. Those who deny that Senator Cruz’s control of the Senate Floor for nearly a full day was not a filibuster are less interested in abiding by proper political parlance. They know that the public generally considers a filibuster a noble effort of a Senator to abide his conscience and speak what he understands as the truth until he can stand no more. Filibusters evoke memory’s of the Frank Capra film “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” (1939).
[L] Frank Capra's Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939) [R] Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) during filibuster
But if Cruz just was giving a very long speech, then he can be framed as just wasting the Senate’s time, even though Majority Leader Reid was appraised and approved of the talkathon. All of this between-the-beltways trivialities about filibusters illustrates one of Senator Cruz’s concerns. Early on in his filibuster, Senator Cruz alleged that most people don’t give a flying flip about a bunch of politicians in Washington, DC with cheap suits and haircuts. A filibuster may empty the Senate chamber, but it can generate considerable attention and audience via CSPAN as well as alternate media and the internet.
But couching the Senate floor action as a non-filibuster against the cloture vote on the Continuing Resolution (House Res. 59) which it’s technically correct, it is smoke and mirrors to confuse the public of the real work. The Continuing Resolution is a budget matter. The Senate had not passed a budget in four years, and so Continuing Resolutions which used prior spending levels as a metric for stop gap funding have been used. For Fiscal Year 2014, the Senate had not passed any specific appropriation bills and the October 1st fiscal new year loomed. So the House of Representatives passed a Continuing Resolution for two months of funding of all federal programs, save the yet to be implemented Obamacare. The White House and Senate Democrats under the direction of Senate Majority Leader Reid want to strip the defund Obamacare provision, which many ayes in the House were premised. The cloture motion was meant to cut off debate. If passed, Senate rules for budget bills then only allow for 30 hours of debate. Senator Cruz and other tea party sympathetic conservatives were concerned that Senator Reid would present a clean bill, which stripped the defund Obamacare provision and not allow for any amendments. Cruz’s filibuster sought to educate the public of the Senatorial shenanigans. Cruz alleged that some Republicans wanted to vote for cloture and then vote against final passage. This DC two step allows what detractors call RINOs (Republicans In Name Only) to say that they voted against the bill, but their vote was a purely symbolic measure and the Democrat majority gets its way to continue to impose an overarching takeover of the health care system (aside from Congress and Federal workers, who were extra juridically exempted by President Obama over specific legislative provisions).
[***] In between renditions of Dr. Seuss’ Green Eggs and Ham for the Cruz childrens’ storytime, there was probably more substantive debate about Obamacare’s adverse effect on the health care delivery system and retarding economic growth during Cruz’ s filibuster than what occurred when the so called Affordable Care Act was passed by the Senate on Christmas Eve, 2009.
The filibuster drew more ordinary people outside of the District of Calamity (sic) to pay attention to detailed arguments against than the sweet lies put forth by the White House and the lapdog Lamestream Media. While procedurally Senator Cruz's efforts might not amount to much, this is not the only battle to be found in defunding Obamacare. Even if Senator Reid is successful in passing a Continuing Resolution which strips the defund Obamacare provisions through the Senate, the House must act. Either the Republican majority in House must acquiesce to Senator Reid's jam down with a "clean" C.R., the Chambers must conference or the House can pass another legislative vehicle which the Senate may not approve prior to October 1st. There are suggestions that revised House legislation might include a one year delay in Obamacare, revoking the Congressional Obamacare exemption, or approving XL pipeline, which would be a tough pill for Senate Democrats to swallow. Mr. Smith Goes to Washington illustrated how people in the heartland became engaged in a filibuster by dumping an alluvia of telegrams on the Senate floor. Senator Cruz is hoping that in the internet age, public opinion can be galvanized by social media. C-SPAN allowed for internet 2.0 peer to peer engagement with Cruz reading Twitter messages on the Senate Floor. Cruz is counting on alternate media and social media to work around the Lamestream Media and produce a groundswell of support which changes the static between the beltway certainty that an unpopular, flawed law like Obamare can be ramrodded into implementation. Senator Cruz's filibuster drew back the curtain on the complacency of the Cocktail Party in both parties between the beltways. The vitriolic reaction that senior Senator John McCain (R-AZ) unleashed against Cruz after stopped speaking reveals his true self. Freshman Senator John Boozman (R-AR) reportedly dressed Cruz down for all the out of state phone calls about Obamacare. And Senate Minority Leader Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY) refused to support the renegade rhetoric. This internecine sniping prompted former Governor Sarah Palin (R-AK) to note: "We already have three parties: the Liberal Democrats, the RINO Republicans and 'the good guys.' ".
The nearly day long debate also had a couple of remarkable colloquies with "friends" on the other side of the aisle. [***]
In trying to generate groundswell support in the grassroots, Senator Cruz's filibuster popularized the mantra "Make DC Listen". This slogan may energize the Tea Party Caucus, possibly be the touchstone of a third party or a Presidential campaign. Nevertheless, "Make DC Listen" taps into public discontent and shows social media savvy. So even though Senator Cruz was not successful in his immediate tactic to prevent cloture on the C.R., we ought to give a flying flip about his filibuster as it may be a harbinger for real change in the District of Calamity (sic). SEE MORE at DCBarroco.com
His expressed policies point toward an America First priority, a slogan which has an unfortunate history of being associated the Charles Limbergh and 1940 American isolationism. But Trump thinks this is a brand new, modern term which connotes "We are going to take care of everyone in this country before we worry about everyone else in the world."
Trump echoed his ambition to pull out of NAFTA in a split second, unless Canada and Mexico can be bullied to renegotiate more favorable terms for the United States. And probably that Mexico will pay for a border wall. 
What was truly shocking was Trump's ambivalence to adhering to Article V of the NATO Treaty for joint defense. When pressed on whether the United States would come to the defense of the Baltic States if there was an invasion by the Russian Federation, Trump implied that there would be a cost benefit analysis which was premised on whether those nations are "fulfilling their obligations to us." So signed and ratified treaties are only bargaining positions in Trump's World. Well, at least Trump seemed to know that Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania are under the NATO security umbrella, unlike Ben Carson.
