The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Breaking News => Topic started by: libertybele on January 25, 2016, 08:52:14 AM
-
Rick Perry Endorses Ted Cruz for President
Former Texas Gov. Rick Perry is throwing his support behind a fellow Texan -- Sen. Ted Cruz -- in the race for the Republican presidential nomination.
The Lone Star State endorsement marks one of Cruz's most high-profile backers and aims to give his campaign a much-needed boost just one week before the crucial, first-in-the-nation caucuses in Iowa.
"Of those individuals who have a chance to win the Republican primary, at this juncture, from my perspective, Ted Cruz is by far the most consistent conservative in that crowd," Perry told Politico on Sunday night. "And that appears to be down to two people."
Perry, who gave up his own unsuccessful presidential bid in September after just 97 days on the trail, had been plagued by stagnant polling and lackluster fundraising.
The former Texas governor had been a vocal critic of Trump, especially during the final weeks of his campaign, calling the billionaire a "cancer on conservatism" and bashing his "nativist appeals."
"He knows he's going to surround himself with people who do have that experience, and I'm very satisfied that on Day 1, he will be ready to be commander-in-chief," Perry told Politico.
Cruz's campaign has suffered blows in Iowa over the last week. His leading rival Donald Trump locked up the endorsement of 2008 vice-presidential nominee and former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin in a memorable speech last Tuesday.
Sen. Marco Rubio, currently in third in recent Iowa polling, nabbed the coveted backing of the Des Moines Register newspaper, which has thrown its support behind the eventual Republican nominee since 1996.
And two recent Iowa polls have shown Trump stretching his lead to 11 percentage points in the Hawkeye State, with Cruz's advantage among evangelicals slipping away.
Trump also leads the Republican field by double-digits nationally and in the nation's second contest in New Hampshire, so his opponents see Iowa as a crucial state in which to stop the real estate mogul from gaining early momentum.
Cruz, who has received support from prominent conservative Glenn Beck, served as solicitor general during Perry's administration in Texas, but Perry originally backed his own lieutenant governor David Dewhurst over Cruz during his 2012 run for the U.S. Senate.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/rick-perry-endorses-ted-cruz-president/story?id=36497065
-
Ted Cruz will make a fine VP in a Trump Administration. :-)
-
Ted Cruz will make a fine VP in a Trump Administration. :-)
agreed
-
Cruz as VP? I highly doubt it. Honestly, I don't think Cruz would accept. They started out on friendly terms; the two of them got together and put together a rally against Obama's IRAN nuke deal. They never attacked each other during debates nor really in the press. Then Cruz climbs in the polls overtaking Trump in Iowa. Trump has been relentless in attacking Cruz ... he is now out to destroy Cruz. Ironically, he at one time stated that he would pick him as his VP, so much so that he had his lawyers check into the birther situation and admittedly found that Cruz was eligible. Yet, he attacks him.
Because of Trump's recent statements and actions, I am 100% convinced that Trump has been and is nothing more than a siphon for the Democrats. Making statements such as he needs to become more establishment so that he could get things done and he could shoot someone and his voters would still support him shows his true colors. From the very beginning he proclaimed that he was anti-establishment, but yet now he is saying that he needs to become more establishment? Really? Then talks about shooting someone? This is the idiot people want running this country? His purpose was nothing more than to make sure a conservative like Cruz didn't get in. RINO's like McConnel, McCain, Ryan are scared to death of Cruz. They know that Cruz will NOT pander to the leftists nor to the RINO's. He would put an end to the 'blame game' that BOTH parties hide behind. Cruz will break up the Kingmakers in Washington.
I see Trump no different than Obama. Obama, an unknown duped people into believing that he would bring about the 'hope and change' that this country needs. Trump is duping people into believing that he will make America great again? Really folks wake up. Both men want nothing more than to make themselves great. I tried warning people about Obama and no one listened; no one bothered to check his record in the senate. They only went by what he said and not what he hid. I was right. Obama has been a disaster. I am trying to warn people about Trump; unfortunately he has no record to check. The only thing people can judge him by are his actions; his crass personality and his attacks on people -- do you think he will treat the American people any differently? He was born into wealth, took the money, found loopholes in the tax codes and created businesses ... businesses that became flops and he was billions of dollars in debt over--- if it wasn't for him making back room deals with banks he would have lost his wealth. He will be no different as president -- he will make back room deals with the left (he already stated so) as long as it gets him what HE wants. If not, like Obama he will use his mighty pen. Trump will continue us in the same direction. He talks about immigration and Muslims ... but ... he is ALL talk. He will do what his cronies in Washington want him to do...as long as it makes Trump great.
-
Cruz as VP? I highly doubt it. Honestly, I don't think Cruz would accept. They started out on friendly terms; the two of them got together and put together a rally against Obama's IRAN nuke deal. They never attacked each other during debates nor really in the press. Then Cruz climbs in the polls overtaking Trump in Iowa. Trump has been relentless in attacking Cruz ... he is now out to destroy Cruz. Ironically, he at one time stated that he would pick him as his VP, so much so that he had his lawyers check into the birther situation and admittedly found that Cruz was eligible. Yet, he attacks him.
Because of Trump's recent statements and actions, I am 100% convinced that Trump has been and is nothing more than a siphon for the Democrats. Making statements such as he needs to become more establishment so that he could get things done and he could shoot someone and his voters would still support him shows his true colors. From the very beginning he proclaimed that he was anti-establishment, but yet now he is saying that he needs to become more establishment? Really? Then talks about shooting someone? This is the idiot people want running this country? His purpose was nothing more than to make sure a conservative like Cruz didn't get in. RINO's like McConnel, McCain, Ryan are scared to death of Cruz. They know that Cruz will NOT pander to the leftists nor to the RINO's. He would put an end to the 'blame game' that BOTH parties hide behind. Cruz will break up the Kingmakers in Washington.
I see Trump no different than Obama. Obama, an unknown duped people into believing that he would bring about the 'hope and change' that this country needs. Trump is duping people into believing that he will make America great again? Really folks wake up. Both men want nothing more than to make themselves great. I tried warning people about Obama and no one listened; no one bothered to check his record in the senate. They only went by what he said and not what he hid. I was right. Obama has been a disaster. I am trying to warn people about Trump; unfortunately he has no record to check. The only thing people can judge him by are his actions; his crass personality and his attacks on people -- do you think he will treat the American people any differently? He was born into wealth, took the money, found loopholes in the tax codes and created businesses ... businesses that became flops and he was billions of dollars in debt over--- if it wasn't for him making back room deals with banks he would have lost his wealth. He will be no different as president -- he will make back room deals with the left (he already stated so) as long as it gets him what HE wants. If not, like Obama he will use his mighty pen. Trump will continue us in the same direction. He talks about immigration and Muslims ... but ... he is ALL talk. He will do what his cronies in Washington want him to do...as long as it makes Trump great.
Looks like you hate Trump. At least you did not compare him to the Devil. :lmao:Trump will pick Cruz as his running mate and the two will make a great team.
-
What the he'll is it with the Trumpbots that any little criticism of The Donald means someone hates him?
Everyone here that has criticized him has also at one point or another has said they'd vote for him if he's the nominee.
You're supposed to be critical of the candidates for your party on substantial issues during the primaries.
That’s not hate. That's using your brain.
Just knee jerking to every critique with "you just hate Trump" is dumb and shows you really can't defend him on the issues.
-
Rick Perry Endorses Ted Cruz
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_FekELn6Cqq8/SDSEOFVFw-I/AAAAAAAACL0/vr2fCjJHmmE/s400/Fred_Sanford.jpg)
-
Just knee jerking to every critique with "you just hate Trump" is dumb and shows you really can't defend him on the issues.
What do we say about DUmmies who say we "just hate 0bama"?
Don't fall into the same line of thinking for Trump...
-
What the he'll is it with the Trumpbots that any little criticism of The Donald means someone hates him?
Everyone here that has criticized him has also at one point or another has said they'd vote for him if he's the nominee.
You're supposed to be critical of the candidates for your party on substantial issues during the primaries.
That’s not hate. That's using your brain.
Just knee jerking to every critique with "you just hate Trump" is dumb and shows you really can't defend him on the issues.
When you have to resort to calling supporters of another candidate such as Trumpbots, cultists, worshipers, idiots, etc. that's not exactly called using your brain. It is called tunnel vision. When you have Libertybell comparing Trump to Obama, that verifies that some Cruz supporters are bat shit crazy.
I am not going to waste my time on what Trump said 10 or 20 years ago. People change their opinions.
You claim he is a gun grabber. Truth is that is not so; his two sons are hunters and he has a carry permit which is difficult to obtain in NYC.
News flash: Many voters are tired of ALL politicians and that includes Cruz. Nothing you can say or do will change that.
-
What do we say about DUmmies who say we "just hate 0bama"?
Don't fall into the same line of thinking for Trump...
This seems like circular reasoning. I'm not following you.
-
When you have to resort to calling supporters of another candidate such as Trumpbots, cultists, worshipers, idiots, etc. that's not exactly called using your brain. It is called tunnel vision. When you have Libertybell comparing Trump to Obama, that verifies that some Cruz supporters are bat shit crazy.
I am not going to waste my time on what Trump said 10 or 20 years ago. People change their opinions.
You claim he is a gun grabber. Truth is that is not so; his two sons are hunters and he has a carry permit which is difficult to obtain in NYC.
News flash: Many voters are tired of ALL politicians and that includes Cruz. Nothing you can say or do will change that.
Excuse me. You are entitled to your opinion as am I; but to call me bat shit crazy for my opinion is offensive and uncalled for! I think you have your head up your rear end; but I have refrained from saying it till now.
Cruz is not a Washington insider. If he was, they would have welcomed his rise in the polls and helped him. No they went with a liberal who they know will play their game. IMHO Trump is no different than Obama or Hillary. I believe we have a coup going on ... Trump is part of that coup. Cruz, the most conservative candidate is being crapped on by the establishment of his own party. At one time he was beating Trump in Iowa ... what does the establishment of Cruz's party do ... they crap on him. Trump was meant to take out the conservative candidates; especially Cruz. If the election doesn't go to the DEMS expect Trump to pick someone like Bush or Christie. This was nothing more than a charade by the GOPe. You know sort of like when they ousted Boehner and every was so excited then they put Ryan in ... Mr. conservative himself right?
-
Excuse me. You are entitled to your opinion as am I; but to call me bat shit crazy for my opinion is offensive and uncalled for! I think you have your head up your rear end; but I have refrained from saying it till now.
Cruz is not a Washington insider. If he was, they would have welcomed his rise in the polls and helped him. No they went with a liberal who they know will play their game. IMHO Trump is no different than Obama or Hillary. I believe we have a coup going on ... Trump is part of that coup. Cruz, the most conservative candidate is being crapped on by the establishment of his own party. At one time he was beating Trump in Iowa ... what does the establishment of Cruz's party do ... they crap on him. Trump was meant to take out the conservative candidates; especially Cruz. If the election doesn't go to the DEMS expect Trump to pick someone like Bush or Christie. This was nothing more than a charade by the GOPe. You know sort of like when they ousted Boehner and every was so excited then they put Ryan in ... Mr. conservative himself right?
Opinions are like A-holes. Everybody got one. However, you are the first one that states that Trump is no different than Obama or Hillary. Why don''t you just include Lucifer while you are at it.
Cruzz is a Senator; so that makes him an insider. He knows that if he does not win Iowa or come in a close second, it is all over for him. He will be shooting for VP and Trump and Cruz will make a great team. No way in hell will Trump pick Bush or Christie. That is a rear ender if I ever heard one. BTW, you are excused. :-)
-
Opinions are like A-holes. Everybody got one. However, you are the first one that states that Trump is no different than Obama or Hillary. Why don''t you just include Lucifer while you are at it.
Cruzz is a Senator; so that makes him an insider. He knows that if he does not win Iowa or come in a close second, it is all over for him. He will be shooting for VP and Trump and Cruz will make a great team. No way in hell will Trump pick Bush or Christie. That is a rear ender if I ever heard one. BTW, you are excused. :-)
I don't need you to excuse me. I'm stating my opinion. Trump is no different than Obama, Hillary, Pelosi, and Reid and the rest of the DEMS and RINOGOP country club. He's been party of the 'establishment circuit' for quite sometime...
Here is a history of Trump’s voter registration since 1987:
* JULY 1987: Trump registers for the first time from his Fifth Avenue penthouse. The real estate developer, 41 at the time, reports having previously been registered from his boyhood home in Queens (though his prior party affiliation is unclear). Trump enrolls as a REPUBLICAN.
* OCTOBER 1999: Trump dumps the GOP and enrolls as a member of the INDEPENDENCE PARTY.
* AUGUST 2001: Trump enrolls as a DEMOCRAT.
* SEPTEMBER 2009: After eight years as a Democrat, Trump returns to the REPUBLICAN PARTY.
* DECEMBER 2011: Trump lasts two years before he again abandons the party of Ronald Reagan. He eschews the GOP in favor of siding with no party. On his registration form, “The Apprentice†star checks off the box marked “I DO NOT WISH TO ENROLL IN A PARTY.â€
* APRIL 2012: Trump registers as a REPUBLICAN.
Not to mention his praises and association with the Clintons, especially Hillary:
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/donald-trump-hillary-bill-clinton-relationship-217191
-
I don't need you to excuse me. I'm stating my opinion. Trump is no different than Obama, Hillary, Pelosi, and Reid and the rest of the DEMS and RINOGOP country club. He's been party of the 'establishment circuit' for quite sometime...
Here is a history of Trump’s voter registration since 1987:
* JULY 1987: Trump registers for the first time from his Fifth Avenue penthouse. The real estate developer, 41 at the time, reports having previously been registered from his boyhood home in Queens (though his prior party affiliation is unclear). Trump enrolls as a REPUBLICAN.
* OCTOBER 1999: Trump dumps the GOP and enrolls as a member of the INDEPENDENCE PARTY.
* AUGUST 2001: Trump enrolls as a DEMOCRAT.
* SEPTEMBER 2009: After eight years as a Democrat, Trump returns to the REPUBLICAN PARTY.
* DECEMBER 2011: Trump lasts two years before he again abandons the party of Ronald Reagan. He eschews the GOP in favor of siding with no party. On his registration form, “The Apprentice†star checks off the box marked “I DO NOT WISH TO ENROLL IN A PARTY.â€
* APRIL 2012: Trump registers as a REPUBLICAN.
Not to mention his praises and association with the Clintons, especially Hillary:
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/donald-trump-hillary-bill-clinton-relationship-217191
Unfortunately, you are correct. As much as I want to like trump, particularly because of some of the things he said about immigration and due to his being totally not PC, the reality is that hes spent a lifetime as a lefty liberal.
Has his position changed? Maybe. Maybe not. We already know he can be bought. His statement about Iowa ethanol subsidies proves it. Yeah hes not taking money from special interests, but hes using the potential of doling out public money to buy votes in Iowa, FROM a special interest. Its really not any better. Ethanol is a bad bad deal. It can not survive without subsidies. Because of that, it should be allowed to die rather than be propped up with taxpayer dollars. Anything less, is BIG GOVERNMENT. Subsidizing that which can not exist without subsidies , is the textbook definition.
I'm not even going to vote this round (I'm in a very safe precinct, and other reasons), but if I were, this is where I'd be thinking:
Theres really only one uniquely high priority, which sits above ALL others when it comes to the next election: Supreme Court nominations. Who would President Trump nominate as a justice? Thats a very uncomfortable question to ponder.
The ONLY one I'd trust to nominate USSC justices, is Cruz. Keep in mind that we are just 1 vote away from losing the second amendment. 1 vote away from lefty approved restrictions on speech. One vote away from a change that could last well beyond the rest of our lives regardless whos at the reins.
CMD
-
When you have to resort to calling supporters of another candidate such as Trumpbots, cultists, worshipers, idiots, etc. that's not exactly called using your brain. It is called tunnel vision.
[/b]
And you and a couple others here have a very bad case of that.
When you have Libertybell comparing Trump to Obama, that verifies that some Cruz supporters are bat shit crazy.
Not hardly. Batshit crazy is completely ignoring a candidates voting and donating past and his stances on issues that he's suddenly flip flopped on as late as the summer of 2015.
You're basing your blind devotion to Trump on the fact he's a bully and he's said he'll toss out all the Muslims and build a wall. The last two I'm all in favor of. After those two things...he's really got nothing other than a bunch of fluff about doing "great things with great people". And when he's questioned about his past record and stances on issues...he lashes out and starts a leftist style character assassination of the person that dares question him. Just like his flowers. That's not a plan...that's not a campaign strategy.
That's all hat and no cattle.
I am not going to waste my time on what Trump said 10 or 20 years ago. People change their opinions.
But yet you'll do exactly that to Obama or any Republican not named Trump that's running.
Ok we won't go back 15 or 20 years ago. Lets go back to more recent stances and things Turmp has said and done.
The real estate mogul and "Celebrity Apprentice" host has made more than $1.3 million in donations over the years to candidates nationwide, with 54 percent of the money going to Democrats, according to a Washington Post analysis of state and federal disclosure records.
Recipients include Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.), former Pennsylvania governor Edward G. Rendell, and Rahm Emanuel, a former aide to President Obama who received $50,000 from Trump during his recent run to become Chicago's mayor, records show.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/trumps-donation-history-shows-democratic-favoritism/
Records show that in June 2006, Trump donated $20,000 to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. That was in addition to the $5,000 he sent in April 2005 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. At the same time, Trump Jr. gave the two Democratic committees a total of $22,500.
While the Trumps spent nearly $50,000 to elect congressional Democrats, they donated only $1,000 to the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRSC).
But perhaps the worst outcome that election for Republicans was that Pelosi and Reid became Speaker of the House and Senate Majority Leader, respectively. The pair made a formidable team and did heavy lifting to ensure that Obama was elected in 2008 and that much of his agenda — including Obamacare — was put in place.
<snip>
Topping the flamboyant former TV celebrity’s roster of Democratic benefactors is scandal-plagued New York U.S. Rep. Charlie Rangel. Records show the Harlem-based Democrat has received $26,250 in Trump cash since 1989. Trump Jr., has given heavily to Rangel as well.
New York Sens. Kristen Gillibrand and Chuck Schumer have received $7,950 and $7,900, respectively, in Trump money. And two liberal lions, former Massachusetts Sens. John Kerry and Ted Kennedy, received $5,500 and $5,000.
Trump also arguably helped enable Obamacare in another way — albeit before the health law was a twinkle in any liberal’s eye. Trump supported two of its most ardent supporters in Reid and New York U.S. Rep. Anthony Weiner. He donated $7,400 to the Nevada Democrat. Among those contributions is $2,400 Trump gave Reid ahead of his contentious 2010 run against Sharron Angle, a tea party favorite.
Trump also gave $4,300 to Weiner, a dogged supporter of Obamacare who was forced to resign his seat following a sexting scandal.
http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/03/donald-trump-donated-heavily-to-democrats-especially-during-election-which-put-reid-and-pelosi-in-power/
And lets not forget his love for Hillary
New York real estate mogul Donald Trump and his daughter Ivanka have donated a combined total of at least $105,000 to the Clinton Foundation, records show.
“Donald J. Trump†is listed on the foundation’s website as giving between $100,000 and $250,000 to the charitable organization.
“Ivanka Trump,†meanwhile, is listed as a donor who gifted between $5,001 and $10,000 to the nonprofit.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/242088-trump-gave-at-least-100k-to-clinton-foundation
In 2012, as Obama was running for re-election, Trump called Clinton “terrific†again in an interview with Fox News, saying she performed well as Secretary of State.
“Hillary Clinton I think is a terrific woman,†he told Greta Van Susteren. “I am biased because I have known her for years. I live in New York. She lives in New York. I really like her and her husband both a lot. I think she really works hard. And I think, again, she’s given an agenda, it is not all of her, but I think she really works hard and I think she does a good job. I like her.
And on Fox and Friends on Wednesday, Trump explained why he donated to Clinton’s campaigns.
“I’m a businessman. I contribute to everybody,†Trump said. “When I needed Hillary, she was there. If I say ‘go to my wedding,’ they go to my wedding.â€
http://time.com/3962799/donald-trump-hillary-clinton/
He has a record of supporting letting "refugees" in from Syray...as late as this last summer.
He's pro gay marriage...didn't have a problem with repealing DADT...he wants to start a tariff war with Mexico and China which would kill what little is left of any forward momentum in our economy.
And now he's talking about making deals with Congress. The very establishment types you say people are tired of. He's out there bragging about how he's got establishment types asking to join his campaign.
His negatives are in double digits and the bulk of his support right now isn't coming from Republicans. It's coming from Democrats.
But hey...don't let the facts...things that seriously need to be debated in the primaries...get in the way of your blind following of The Mighty Donald Trump.
You claim he is a gun grabber. Truth is that is not so; his two sons are hunters and he has a carry permit which is difficult to obtain in NYC.
Never said that. Check your facts.
News flash: Many voters are tired of ALL politicians and that includes Cruz. Nothing you can say or do will change that.
People are tired of politicians who lie to them or pretend to be something they aren't. And they certainly don't want someone who is perceived as an "outsider"...to suddenly start engaging in leftist style attacks and rubbing elbows with the RINOs.
-
Has his position changed? Maybe. Maybe not.
And one he's in the WH is not the time we need to find that out LOL!
-
When you have Libertybell comparing Trump to Obama, that verifies that some Cruz supporters are bat shit crazy.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B45Meo3CYAEVS0T.jpg)
Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
@TheRevAl @realDonaldTrump pic.twitter.com/VzAPDwP6nE" Al Sharpton loves "Trump" because he knows I get him, others don't! Check out picture.
12:46 PM - 15 Dec 2014
(http://images.politico.com/global/news/110406_obama_sharpton_328_ap.jpg)
-
With all those negatives, he should be in last place instead of first.
Voters are tired of so called conservative politicians who say one thing and do another when they get to DC. Many have decided to give an outsider a chance to build up the military, bring jobs back home, halt immigration from M.E. countries, secure our southern borders, improve the economy and take back our rightful place as the greatest country in the world. We should be doing more for our own people that are suffering instead of pissing money away on refugees, foreign aid, more wars, funding a large share to the UN and world trade organization and letting other countries to screw over us on trade. Those principals will make America great again.
I believe Trump will be the Repub. nominee because he has a positive message to the country. I think he will pick Cruz as his VP and that they will make us proud. My message is one of getting this country back on track. A third Obama term with Clinton would be devastating.
-
With all those negatives, he should be in last place instead of first.
Voters are tired of so called conservative politicians who say one thing and do another when they get to DC. Many have decided to give an outsider a chance to build up the military, bring jobs back home, halt immigration from M.E. countries, secure our southern borders, improve the economy and take back our rightful place as the greatest country in the world. We should be doing more for our own people that are suffering instead of pissing money away on refugees, foreign aid, more wars, funding a large share to the UN and world trade organization and letting other countries to screw over us on trade. Those principals will make America great again.
I believe Trump will be the Repub. nominee because he has a positive message to the country. I think he will pick Cruz as his VP and that they will make us proud. My message is one of getting this country back on track. A third Obama term with Clinton would be devastating.
Cool story bro
-
Cool story bro
It is a positive message. However, if Trump does not pick Cruz as VP, I will the first to dump on him like shit on stink.
I do have some concerns about S.C. picks. My two favorites are Judge Napo and Judge Jeanie Pirro (sp). Hopefully, Congressional Repubs will not allow another turncoat like Roberts to be confirmed.
-
Theres really only one uniquely high priority, which sits above ALL others when it comes to the next election: Supreme Court nominations. Who would President Trump nominate as a justice? Thats a very uncomfortable question to ponder.
My money is on Hillary.
-
Well count Jerry Falwell Jr. as another Trump endorser as of today. Almost done with Iowa, New Hampshire and possibly the primary contest depending upon outcomes in those two. Assertions hurled at Trump and his supporters are beginning to sound a lot like sour grapes. Some of them have been downright ridiculous.
I may be back after the first contests. Don't feel particularly welcome here these days which I guess was the point for non Cruz fans. So probably not.
-
I may be back after the first contests. Don't feel particularly welcome here these days which I guess was the point for non Cruz fans. So probably not.
Oh now, madam, don't do that, don't be that way.
Most of us are wide open to all (R) candidates. All (R) candidates, period.
<<<am miles and miles away from making any decision; I like them all, each for his or her own reasons.
-
Well count Jerry Falwell Jr. as another Trump endorser as of today. Almost done with Iowa, New Hampshire and possibly the primary contest depending upon outcomes in those two. Assertions hurled at Trump and his supporters are beginning to sound a lot like sour grapes. Some of them have been downright ridiculous.
I may be back after the first contests. Don't feel particularly welcome here these days which I guess was the point for non Cruz fans. So probably not.
Don't throw in the towel. The fun is just beginning! :cheersmate:
Ted Cruz 2016. Reigniting the Promise of America!!!
-
And one he's in the WH is not the time we need to find that out LOL!
Exactly. I don't even know what words to use, to describe how crucial it is to not have any more lefties appointed as USSC justices.
CMD
-
Exactly. I don't even know what words to use, to describe how crucial it is to not have any more lefties appointed as USSC justices.
CMD
One more activist Lefty judge and the 2nd Amendment is history.
-
Don't throw in the towel. The fun is just beginning! :cheersmate:
Ted Cruz 2016. Reigniting the Promise of America!!!
This is the very point most people are missing when criticizing Ted Cruz. He is one of the FEW trying to KEEP the PROMISE most republicans made in 2010, 2014.
I guess too many republicans think promises are to be made during election and then discarded after election, which IS the hallmark of democrats. :banghead:
-
This is the very point most people are missing when criticizing Ted Cruz. He is one of the FEW trying to KEEP the PROMISE most republicans made in 2010, 2014.
I guess too many republicans think promises are to be made during election and then discarded after election, which IS the hallmark of democrats. :banghead:
It is beyond me the appeal of Trump. Those that claim to be conservatives that are behind him I sincerely question. Though never a huge fan of Trump I gave him the benefit of the doubt in the beginning until he made statements like he needs to be a little more establishment in order to get things done. When the RINO's such as Reid state that they prefer Trump over Cruz; that should be another clue. IF Trump is elected, he will have duped those conservatives who felt he was on their side. It will be much too late. He will continue us down Hussein's path. Trump is a liberal progressive. He has made comment that he felt Hillary was a great secretary of state and a very nice woman and thinks she would make a good president. I don't think you can get any more liberal than that.
Trump focused on hot issues and brought them to the forefront and excited a whole lot of people. But if you listen to him carefully during interviews (and debates) he repeats himself rather than going in depth on a particular issue. It is obvious to me he is of little substance and has little in depth knowledge about any issue and then goes on to tell people how great he is and he will make America great. He doesn't say how only that he will. He has no working knowledge of government which in itself is scary. He only states a sentence about the issue, riles his audience and repeats the same sentence over and over. He is a liberal lunatic and people are following this pied piper all the way to the highest office in the land with absolutely no substance or working knowledge of the government behind him. God help us.
-
Trump will win the Presidency and makes us proud despite all the negativity against him.
-
It is beyond me the appeal of Trump. Those that claim to be conservatives that are behind him I sincerely question. Though never a huge fan of Trump I gave him the benefit of the doubt in the beginning until he made statements like he needs to be a little more establishment in order to get things done. When the RINO's such as Reid state that they prefer Trump over Cruz; that should be another clue. IF Trump is elected, he will have duped those conservatives who felt he was on their side. It will be much too late. He will continue us down Hussein's path. Trump is a liberal progressive. He has made comment that he felt Hillary was a great secretary of state and a very nice woman and thinks she would make a good president. I don't think you can get any more liberal than that.
Trump focused on hot issues and brought them to the forefront and excited a whole lot of people. But if you listen to him carefully during interviews (and debates) he repeats himself rather than going in depth on a particular issue. It is obvious to me he is of little substance and has little in depth knowledge about any issue and then goes on to tell people how great he is and he will make America great. He doesn't say how only that he will. He has no working knowledge of government which in itself is scary. He only states a sentence about the issue, riles his audience and repeats the same sentence over and over. He is a liberal lunatic and people are following this pied piper all the way to the highest office in the land with absolutely no substance or working knowledge of the government behind him. God help us.
I don't understand it either. He says he could shoot someone and not lose any votes. That tells me that he has a "cult" following, which will always defend him no matter what. Doesn't that remind you of Obama supporters?
I also notice that his twitter feed reads as if a 12 year old was writing it. His "insults" are middle school grade. He also re-tweeted one of his supporters with the handle of WhiteGenocide. There are a lot of his supporters who are openly racists, and they tweet some vile things.
I'm not 100% sure who I will vote for in the primary (March 1st here in GA). I can tell you with 100% confidence that I will NOT vote for Trump. And if, Lord help us all, he wins the nomination; the Republicans can kiss the White House goodbye. Probably Congress as well. I'll stay home for the first time since 1988 if my choice is Trump vs Hillary.
-
Trump will win the Presidency and makes us proud despite all the negativity against him.
It's not the job of any president to make me proud, or make America great, or to do anything but what the Constitution says he is supposed to do- no more, and no less.
Will Donald Trump do that?
-
It's not the job of any president to make me proud, or make America great, or to do anything but what the Constitution says he is supposed to do- no more, and no less.
Will Donald Trump do that?
So Reagan did not make you proud to be an American. He sure made me but I guess some people just have to ninny pick what others have to say.
Trump will make America great. So the answer to your question is an emphatic YES!
-
So Reagan did not make you proud to be an American. He sure made me but I guess some people just have to ninny pick what others have to say.
Trump will make America great. So the answer to your question is an emphatic YES!
^ This. Hopefully Trump is just the person we need at this time and not just another republican party stooge who gives in the left at any opportunity.
Ted Cruz just hasn't shown me that yet.
Still up in the air but I got a few months before our primary.
-
Here is part of the reason I can't believe the GOPe is really doing all it can to vet every candidate on the right side and not just forcing another RINO down our throats:
The Islamic advocate and fashion-blogger invited by Google and Fox to question the GOP’s 2016 candidates at the Jan. 28 debate is also a supporter of far-left 2016 candidate, Democrat Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)
Noor, who describes herself as an advocate for Islam, earlier posted a video portraying Adolf Hitler in agreement with Trump.
:o
This is less of an issue to me as you really can't hold a child's actions against the parents:
Lewandowski showed how Fox News has been hiding the fact that Fox News Channel Vice President Bill Sammon has a daughter working for the campaign of the Washington establishment-backed Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL)
I like Cruz.
I like Trump.
At this point in time I like Trump a bit more than Cruz. I haven't heard Cruz say anything that really made me want to choose him over Trump. Listening to Yrump at Liberty University really put the difference between DT and Barry O'Bama.
If I had to vote today it would be for a Trump/Cruz ticket.
-
^ This. Hopefully Trump is just the person we need at this time
Why? What qualifies him?
and not just another republican party stooge who gives in the left at any opportunity.
So you're just going to ignore Trump's track record of being a liberal and his current talk about deal making with the very people that have helped put us in the situation we're in?
Why?
-
Why? What qualifies him?
Trump has experience in world business and not just a political point of view. He has dealt with foreign companies and governments successfully. AND, like Bill Wittle expressed in a video not too long ago, there are three major areas I think Trump would do better than the rest:
1) Border Security. I think Trump would do exactly what he says he'll do and build a wall and deport those who need deporting. Trump doesn't have to pay back a shit load of SUPER PAC money or favors for lobbyists and he really doesn't give a shit what people say about him. We can see in Europe now that they are finally waking up and we see Denmark talking about deporting 60,000 and Sweden deporting 20,000 because they realized they ****ed up. I think Trump will do it and the rest would talk.
2) Military. I think Trump would rebuild the military and put us (the military) back on the right path. I was around in uniform when Reagan became President and it was a breath of fresh air for us. We had funding but better than that we knew the President had our backs and morale was great. When Clinton came in things went to shit again. We held on but we all knew that the White House didn't care about us. I know you don't really like G.W.B. but a lot of us loved that man and still do. He was one of us. What pissed us off more than fighting wars in the M.E. was Barry surrendering when we had victory within sight. I think Trump will rebuild the military morale and standing and I think as a successful CEO he will actually listen to the Joint Chiefs and the Intel Chiefs and protect this country. I think Cruz may do this too but the guy just hasn't inspired me yet.
3) Rebuild the US Economic powerhouse. I think Trump would make the US economy the focus and do everything he could to build it up at the expense of our competition in the world. As a business man I think he has the knowledge to do this successfully and, let's face it, Trump just don't give a **** who he pisses off doing it, be it foreign corporations or liberal socialists. I don't see any of the others with the ability to do this.
So you're just going to ignore Trump's track record of being a liberal and his current talk about deal making with the very people that have helped put us in the situation we're in?
Why?
Last election I voted for a person who said they would fix the dem's ****ed up shit and when they all got into office they rolled over and gave Barry everything he wanted. The Speaker of the House, who we all cheered as someone who would finally stand up to Barry caved in and basically swallowed after sucking the Obama cock. I don't trust a single politician to do what he says he will, including Rubio, Cruz, Bush or Christie. I really like Carson but I just don't see him as strong enough to be an effective President.
There is plenty I disagree with Trump on and I have to weigh the merits of each to see if the positives outweigh the negatives. Like I have said before I am not sure who I will vote for during the primary as I have a few months left. I am leaning towards Trump but Cruz is well within the margin of error.
1) I really don't like Trump's view of healthcare. We all know it has to be fixed and I am hoping that Trump will be the one to pound together the plan with both sides a workable solution to Obamacare. I think Trump would actually listen to what the people say instead of just the politicians. I also think big med and big pharma can't buy off Trump.
2) Trump has stated he thinks that bigger government will help and I don't agree at all. On the other hand a strong central government is what we might need heading into the upcoming global war on Islamic radicals. If you don't think that is coming them you are fooling yourself. Either way I'd rather a strong man in the office than not.
3) Trump 'switching sides' numerous times is what I see and a major issue except when you look at it from a businessman's point of view. You want to be friendly with those in power to be successful in business. I don't like it but it's the hard reality of life. Would I rather Trump be a hard core republican all his life? Yeah, but then he would have been as successful as his is and not be running for President.
All the negatives are stacked up against the positives and are balanced with a slight favor towards Trump than against at this time. I also look at who would win against Hillary or Sanders and I think Trump has a better chance than Cruz right now. I think Cruz would put better 'conservative' Justices on the bench of the S.C., but either way I think we'll get two, maybe three on there in the next eight years if we hold the congress and White House. I think long term we'd have a better chance with Trump than Cruz to win in 2020.
That's my thoughts on the matter. Like I have said I am not looking for a fight so I have stayed out of this for a while now but you asked directly and I thought you deserved a good honest answer.
-
So Reagan did not make you proud to be an American. He sure made me but I guess some people just have to ninny pick what others have to say.
Nope. No one made me proud, no one makes me proud. My pride comes from within, and I stand tall because of who I am, not some politician.
I recognize that some people feel that they can't be proud, strong, good, or great on their own, and they need someone else to make them feel that way. But, that's not me.
Trump will make America great. So the answer to your question is an emphatic YES!
That's an awful lot of hope and change you're pinning onto one man, my friend. It didn't work out so well for us the last time.
-
Nope. No one made me proud, no one makes me proud. My pride comes from within, and I stand tall because of who I am, not some politician.
I recognize that some people feel that they can't be proud, strong, good, or great on their own, and they need someone else to make them feel that way. But, that's not me.
That's an awful lot of hope and change you're pinning onto one man, my friend. It didn't worsk out so well for us the last time.
And yet those supporting Cruz or Rubio are in essence supporting candidates with no record of actually getting things done. Sure they've talked alot but in Cruz's case all he's done is manage to alienate every Senator. Just how much can one person DO for the country when he has 100 fighting him every step of the way?
Look, in an idealistic world we could return to a morality that just no longer exists. Although the public whipping and shaming of unwed mothers,, and it did happen in colonialAmerica, not so great. Above all balance must be achieved. It requires people skills Cruz needs to learn, and that Trump has spent a lifetime perfecting.
None of those running besides Trump has created a single job or met one payroll. None of them have that killer instinct. None have actually built tangible structures, under budget and within time limits. Period.
American interests won't be served with more circular parliamentary squabbles with one of their own now occupying the Oval Office. We suffered eight years of that nonsense. Now we have three more Senators imbued with oversized egos seeking to replicate the chaos. NO THANKS!
-
Trump has experience in world business and not just a political point of view. He has dealt with foreign companies and governments successfully. AND, like Bill Wittle expressed in a video not too long ago, there are three major areas I think Trump would do better than the rest:
1) Border Security. I think Trump would do exactly what he says he'll do and build a wall and deport those who need deporting. Trump doesn't have to pay back a shit load of SUPER PAC money or favors for lobbyists and he really doesn't give a shit what people say about him. We can see in Europe now that they are finally waking up and we see Denmark talking about deporting 60,000 and Sweden deporting 20,000 because they realized they ****ed up. I think Trump will do it and the rest would talk.
2) Military. I think Trump would rebuild the military and put us (the military) back on the right path. I was around in uniform when Reagan became President and it was a breath of fresh air for us. We had funding but better than that we knew the President had our backs and morale was great. When Clinton came in things went to shit again. We held on but we all knew that the White House didn't care about us. I know you don't really like G.W.B. but a lot of us loved that man and still do. He was one of us. What pissed us off more than fighting wars in the M.E. was Barry surrendering when we had victory within sight. I think Trump will rebuild the military morale and standing and I think as a successful CEO he will actually listen to the Joint Chiefs and the Intel Chiefs and protect this country. I think Cruz may do this too but the guy just hasn't inspired me yet.
3) Rebuild the US Economic powerhouse. I think Trump would make the US economy the focus and do everything he could to build it up at the expense of our competition in the world. As a business man I think he has the knowledge to do this successfully and, let's face it, Trump just don't give a **** who he pisses off doing it, be it foreign corporations or liberal socialists. I don't see any of the others with the ability to do this.
Last election I voted for a person who said they would fix the dem's ****ed up shit and when they all got into office they rolled over and gave Barry everything he wanted. The Speaker of the House, who we all cheered as someone who would finally stand up to Barry caved in and basically swallowed after sucking the Obama cock. I don't trust a single politician to do what he says he will, including Rubio, Cruz, Bush or Christie. I really like Carson but I just don't see him as strong enough to be an effective President.
There is plenty I disagree with Trump on and I have to weigh the merits of each to see if the positives outweigh the negatives. Like I have said before I am not sure who I will vote for during the primary as I have a few months left. I am leaning towards Trump but Cruz is well within the margin of error.
1) I really don't like Trump's view of healthcare. We all know it has to be fixed and I am hoping that Trump will be the one to pound together the plan with both sides a workable solution to Obamacare. I think Trump would actually listen to what the people say instead of just the politicians. I also think big med and big pharma can't buy off Trump.
2) Trump has stated he thinks that bigger government will help and I don't agree at all. On the other hand a strong central government is what we might need heading into the upcoming global war on Islamic radicals. If you don't think that is coming them you are fooling yourself. Either way I'd rather a strong man in the office than not.
3) Trump 'switching sides' numerous times is what I see and a major issue except when you look at it from a businessman's point of view. You want to be friendly with those in power to be successful in business. I don't like it but it's the hard reality of life. Would I rather Trump be a hard core republican all his life? Yeah, but then he would have been as successful as his is and not be running for President.
All the negatives are stacked up against the positives and are balanced with a slight favor towards Trump than against at this time. I also look at who would win against Hillary or Sanders and I think Trump has a better chance than Cruz right now. I think Cruz would put better 'conservative' Justices on the bench of the S.C., but either way I think we'll get two, maybe three on there in the next eight years if we hold the congress and White House. I think long term we'd have a better chance with Trump than Cruz to win in 2020.
That's my thoughts on the matter. Like I have said I am not looking for a fight so I have stayed out of this for a while now but you asked directly and I thought you deserved a good honest answer.
So basically you're casting a vote this time based more on emotion and the fact you think both sides suck.
Got it.
-
And yet those supporting Cruz or Rubio are in essence supporting candidates with no record of actually getting things done. Sure they've talked alot but in Cruz's case all he's done is manage to alienate every Senator. Just how much can one person DO for the country when he has 100 fighting him every step of the way?
Look, in an idealistic world we could return to a morality that just no longer exists. Although the public whipping and shaming of unwed mothers,, and it did happen in colonialAmerica, not so great. Above all balance must be achieved. It requires people skills Cruz needs to learn, and that Trump has spent a lifetime perfecting.
None of those running besides Trump has created a single job or met one payroll. None of them have that killer instinct. None have actually built tangible structures, under budget and within time limits. Period.
American interests won't be served with more circular parliamentary squabbles with one of their own now occupying the Oval Office. We suffered eight years of that nonsense. Now we have three more Senators imbued with oversized egos seeking to replicate the chaos. NO THANKS!
You're the one supporting the candidate who has zero track record politically in getting anything done.
Zero zip nada.
You like Dutch are basing your vote on hopey changey emotions coupled with the fact you think both political parties suck.
Smh...
-
It is ironic that Obama and Trump are pretty much the same; they are on both sides of issues, neither has a real prior record in government, both are narcissistic, constant personal insults toward opponents.........hope and change all over again ?
One difference, Obama never worked across the isle but Trump promises to work across the isle to further big government.
-
And yet those supporting Cruz or Rubio are in essence supporting candidates with no record of actually getting things done.
I didn't say anything about Cruz or Rubio. Why would you immediately bring them up?
I said, "that's an awful lot of hope and change you're pinning onto one man", specifically about the cult of personality that some Republicans have joined with Trump, and some Donks with the Sandernista.
So, dear lady, please tell me how Donald Trump's past and current positions, evidenced by his actions, are good for the American principles of personal freedom, personal responsibility, and constitutionally limited govrrnment.
-
I didn't say anything about Cruz or Rubio. Why would you immediately bring them up?
I said, "that's an awful lot of hope and change you're pinning onto one man", specifically about the cult of personality that some Republicans have joined with Trump, and some Donks with the Sandernista.
So, dear lady, please tell me how Donald Trump's past and current positions, evidenced by his actions, are good for the American principles of personal freedom, personal responsibility, and constitutionally limited govrrnment.
Pray enlighten me as to who you support, if not Cruz. But you are right re Rubio. I should have left him out of my answer.
I haven't read one attack directed at Trump or his supporters that did not come from an avowed Cruz supporter, so if I erred with you, sorry about that.
As for the rest, none is possible without JOBS and NATIONAL SECURITY. I believe, as do Trump supporters in general, I'd venture to say, that regardless of his personal flaws he's the best leader to accomplish these goals.
If we continue to get our asses kicked economically and by terrorist attacks, we won't have the luxury of the items on your wish list. You may disagree, but you can exercise your right to vote same as me.
-
Pray enlighten me as to who you support, if not Cruz. But you are right re Rubio. I should have left him out of my answer.
I haven't read one attack directed at Trump or his supporters that did not come from an avowed Cruz supporter, so if I erred with you, sorry about that.
As for the rest, none is possible without JOBS and NATIONAL SECURITY. I believe, as do Trump supporters in general, I'd venture to say, that regardless of his personal flaws he's the best leader to accomplish these goals.
If we continue to get our asses kicked economically and by terrorist attacks, we won't have the luxury of the items on your wish list. You may disagree, but you can exercise your right to vote same as me.
I'm a libertarian. You knew that, right? That means I reject the idea of a strong-man president who ignores the Constitution, and tries to rule. I'm sure you know what Ben Franklin (no, not gNads, but the real Ben Franklin), said about people who would sacrifice liberty for security.
So, again, what has Donald Trump done that proves a President Trump will act according to the founding principles of personal freedom, personal responsibility, and Constitutionally limited government?
-
I'm a libertarian. You knew that, right? That means I reject the idea of a strong-man president who ignores the Constitution, and tries to rule. I'm sure you know what Ben Franklin (no, not gNads, but the real Ben Franklin), said about people who would sacrifice liberty for security.
So, again, what has Donald Trump done that proves a President Trump will act according to the founding principles of personal freedom, personal responsibility, and Constitutionally limited government?
Exactly. Trump has done absolutely NOTHING to prove that he will act according to the founding principles and our Constitution. Secondly, he doesn't know the 'ins and outs' of government nor is he versed on Constitutional law.
-
I'm a libertarian. You knew that, right? That means I reject the idea of a strong-man president who ignores the Constitution, and tries to rule. I'm sure you know what Ben Franklin (no, not gNads, but the real Ben Franklin), said about people who would sacrifice liberty for security.
So, again, what has Donald Trump done that proves a President Trump will act according to the founding principles of personal freedom, personal responsibility, and Constitutionally limited government?
Okay, taken to its logical conclusion Ben Franklin would approve of both the Oregon refuge standoff protesters against the over reach of the federal government and the southern states succession from the Union. In the strictest sense, both are examples of preferring liberty over a life on their knees and they were and are fighting for a limited federal government. After all the arguments
have been stripped out of both sides, that is what their stances boil down to, as could be cited for the Whiskey Rebellion, Ruby Ridge and many other instances I'm too tired to research at the moment, it being a very short night's worth of rest for me.
So, BigDog, if electing another President who will make me live on my knees for the rest of my life, when apparently I and the rest of America has been living on them their entire lives, guess I'll continue to kneel. Because while I hate what the Executive Branch has been perpetuating, both in reality and in theory, and sometimes shoot off my mouth to blow steam out, the fact remains that I, like many millions of my fellow Americans, DO prefer security and if not for me, definitely for my grandchild. I want a strong president who will secure our porous and dangerously infiltrated borders, and who creates a friendly and modified laissez faire business atmosphere.
I do not consider myself any label by this point, except American by the grace of God. It may mean different things to different people, to be proud to be an American, but hopefully once these bitter primary wars are over we will unite around whoever the nominee is, no matter how far down we need to choke our bile. Thank the Lord the caucus kicks off the start of this cycle, and we can finally begin to anticipate how it will shake out. Although, apparently only 20% of Iowans bother to actually caucus. Amazing, but nothing a primary wouldn't help fix. I assume the 20% statistic is correct, since it was on FOX.
Plus this year there's a storm rolling in on caucus eve, so I hope all Iowan cavers are safe. We reached 70 yesterday and today's a great chance of some snowfall. Go Arizona, lol.
-
Okay, taken to its logical conclusion Ben Franklin would approve of both the Oregon refuge standoff protesters against the over reach of the federal government and the southern states succession from the Union. In the strictest sense, both are examples of preferring liberty over a life on their knees and they were and are fighting for a limited federal government. After all the arguments
have been stripped out of both sides, that is what their stances boil down to, as could be cited for the Whiskey Rebellion, Ruby Ridge and many other instances I'm too tired to research at the moment, it being a very short night's worth of rest for me.
So, BigDog, if electing another President who will make me live on my knees for the rest of my life, when apparently I and the rest of America has been living on them their entire lives, guess I'll continue to kneel. Because while I hate what the Executive Branch has been perpetuating, both in reality and in theory, and sometimes shoot off my mouth to blow steam out, the fact remains that I, like many millions of my fellow Americans, DO prefer security and if not for me, definitely for my grandchild. I want a strong president who will secure our porous and dangerously infiltrated borders, and who creates a friendly and modified laissez faire business atmosphere.
I do not consider myself any label by this point, except American by the grace of God. It may mean different things to different people, to be proud to be an American, but hopefully once these bitter primary wars are over we will unite around whoever the nominee is, no matter how far down we need to choke our bile. Thank the Lord the caucus kicks off the start of this cycle, and we can finally begin to anticipate how it will shake out. Although, apparently only 20% of Iowans bother to actually caucus. Amazing, but nothing a primary wouldn't help fix. I assume the 20% statistic is correct, since it was on FOX.
In answer to your question, Cruz is the only person who probably would TRY to limit the government as much as you'd like, but I suspect he'd have more of a fight on his hands by Senators on both sides of the aisle pushing back, and we don't know what his donors have demanded as quid pro quo. There's no way these rich people are kicking in money for altruistic reasons, and we all know that. You may have faith otherwise, but history does not bear out the optimism. The deals are never disclosed out in the open, unless someone talks and Trump told us in the first debate how the system operates. Yeah, he gave money and nice words to the Dems AND to the Republicans.
Again, I have asked in this forum although not you specifically, what has anyone besides Trump actually built from the ground up and how many jobs have they created? Has anyone else accomplished anything but lots of talk, and arguing from the Supreme Court to the halls of Congress? None of the talk, including the filibusters of Paul and Cruz, ever accomplished their goals, unless in Cruz's case his constituents were satisfied enough that he tried or Paul's demonstration to limited governmental powers in NSA surveillance. Standing up for your beliefs is all well and good, and should be done whenever feasible, but the way the governmental machine operates, it is not feasible and in the end all the talking in the world got them exactly nothing except pissed off fellow Senators.
Before someone jumps in to defend Cruz, yeah I'm sure he won some of his Supreme Court cases as the Texas Attorney General. He didn't work as well with others as he did, pretty much by himself or rather in conjunction with assistant lawyers whose job it was to support him.
Larry Finnicum died on his feet fighting the overreach of the federal government. Maybe that's enough to comfort his loved ones/ Yes, he did not wish to submit to the federal authority, so at least he isn't on his knees.
Ben Franklin, if you may recall, was not a very moral man in that he was a frequent drunk and a philanderer on a Clintonist scale. Proof that there are no angels here on Earth if you ask me. I don't worship any of the Founders any more than I do Trump, although in both cases I do think they are right more often than not.
As a final thought, Ben was a great compromiser.
-
Again, I have asked in this forum although not you specifically, what has anyone besides Trump actually built from the ground up and how many jobs have they created?
Trump didn't start from the ground up. He went to work for his daddy.
The last businessman turned politician gave us the Great Depression and FDR on a silver platter.
Has anyone else accomplished anything but lots of talk, and arguing from the Supreme Court to the halls of Congress? None of the talk, including the filibusters of Paul and Cruz, ever accomplished their goals, unless in Cruz's case his constituents were satisfied enough that he tried or Paul's demonstration to limited governmental powers in NSA surveillance.
Businessmen...like retired Generals don't make good Presidents. A CEO or a Commanding General are too used to snapping their fingers and those who work for them jump to it without asking why. They are never able to navigate the treachery of Congress in the same way the navigated Wall Street or the Pentagon.
Just because Trump may or may not have done all these wonderful things you keep going on about doesn't matter a hill of beans when you can't get your legislation passed on Capitol Hill.
Cruz and Paul have allies like Mike Lee...Jeff Sessions Ben Sasse and Tim Scott in the Senate. Dave Blatt Louie Gohmert ...Jim Bridenstine and Jim Jordan in the House that can help a Conservative President get his agenda passed.
Trump has no friends there except the RINO's none of us can stand and a bunch of hard left Liberals.
So you tell me who will be more effective if elected President. Another "Pen and a phone" type or a President who can get the party to come along with him?
Standing up for your beliefs is all well and good, and should be done whenever feasible, but the way the governmental machine operates, it is not feasible and in the end all the talking in the world got them exactly nothing except pissed off fellow Senators.
If you have no principals to stand on...if you have no core beliefs to brace you...if you're willing to change your stance on any issue at the drop of a hat or whent here is a change in political winds...what do you have?
Nothing.
-
Okay, taken to its logical conclusion Ben Franklin would approve of both the Oregon refuge standoff protesters against the over reach of the federal government and the southern states succession from the Union. In the strictest sense, both are examples of preferring liberty over a life on their knees and they were and are fighting for a limited federal government. After all the arguments
have been stripped out of both sides, that is what their stances boil down to, as could be cited for the Whiskey Rebellion, Ruby Ridge and many other instances I'm too tired to research at the moment, it being a very short night's worth of rest for me.
So, BigDog, if electing another President who will make me live on my knees for the rest of my life, when apparently I and the rest of America has been living on them their entire lives, guess I'll continue to kneel. Because while I hate what the Executive Branch has been perpetuating, both in reality and in theory, and sometimes shoot off my mouth to blow steam out, the fact remains that I, like many millions of my fellow Americans, DO prefer security and if not for me, definitely for my grandchild. I want a strong president who will secure our porous and dangerously infiltrated borders, and who creates a friendly and modified laissez faire business atmosphere.
I do not consider myself any label by this point, except American by the grace of God. It may mean different things to different people, to be proud to be an American, but hopefully once these bitter primary wars are over we will unite around whoever the nominee is, no matter how far down we need to choke our bile. Thank the Lord the caucus kicks off the start of this cycle, and we can finally begin to anticipate how it will shake out. Although, apparently only 20% of Iowans bother to actually caucus. Amazing, but nothing a primary wouldn't help fix. I assume the 20% statistic is correct, since it was on FOX.
In answer to your question, Cruz is the only person who probably would TRY to limit the government as much as you'd like, but I suspect he'd have more of a fight on his hands by Senators on both sides of the aisle pushing back, and we don't know what his donors have demanded as quid pro quo. There's no way these rich people are kicking in money for altruistic reasons, and we all know that. You may have faith otherwise, but history does not bear out the optimism. The deals are never disclosed out in the open, unless someone talks and Trump told us in the first debate how the system operates. Yeah, he gave money and nice words to the Dems AND to the Republicans.
Again, I have asked in this forum although not you specifically, what has anyone besides Trump actually built from the ground up and how many jobs have they created? Has anyone else accomplished anything but lots of talk, and arguing from the Supreme Court to the halls of Congress? None of the talk, including the filibusters of Paul and Cruz, ever accomplished their goals, unless in Cruz's case his constituents were satisfied enough that he tried or Paul's demonstration to limited governmental powers in NSA surveillance. Standing up for your beliefs is all well and good, and should be done whenever feasible, but the way the governmental machine operates, it is not feasible and in the end all the talking in the world got them exactly nothing except pissed off fellow Senators.
Before someone jumps in to defend Cruz, yeah I'm sure he won some of his Supreme Court cases as the Texas Attorney General. He didn't work as well with others as he did, pretty much by himself or rather in conjunction with assistant lawyers whose job it was to support him.
Larry Finnicum died on his feet fighting the overreach of the federal government. Maybe that's enough to comfort his loved ones/ Yes, he did not wish to submit to the federal authority, so at least he isn't on his knees.
Ben Franklin, if you may recall, was not a very moral man in that he was a frequent drunk and a philanderer on a Clintonist scale. Proof that there are no angels here on Earth if you ask me. I don't worship any of the Founders any more than I do Trump, although in both cases I do think they are right more often than not.
As a final thought, Ben was a great compromiser.
(http://resultsroom.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/diversion.jpg)
-
Okay, taken to its logical conclusion Ben Franklin would approve of both the Oregon refuge standoff protesters against the over reach of the federal government and the southern states succession from the Union.
I believe he would, as would Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, Samuel Adams, and General John Stark.
So, BigDog, if electing another President who will make me live on my knees for the rest of my life, when apparently I and the rest of America has been living on them their entire lives, guess I'll continue to kneel.
That is your choice to make, dear lady.
"Few men desire liberty. Most wish only for a just master."
- Gaius Sallustius Crispus
In answer to your question, Cruz is the only person who probably would TRY to limit the government as much as you'd like
Cruz again? You keep going back to "the other guy" without answering the question about your guy.
Standing up for your beliefs is all well and good, and should be done whenever feasible... Larry Finnicum died on his feet fighting the overreach of the federal government. Maybe that's enough to comfort his loved ones/ Yes, he did not wish to submit to the federal authority, so at least he isn't on his knees.
Some things are worth dying for. Each man must decide what those things are- for himself.
Ben Franklin, if you may recall, was not a very moral man in that he was a frequent drunk and a philanderer on a Clintonist scale.
So? None of those things refute his statement about liberty v. security.
Lets try this again, without deflecting or distracting: what has Donald Trump done that proves a President Trump will act according to the founding principles of personal freedom, personal responsibility, and Constitutionally limited government?
-
BD, Don't forget "property rights".
-
BD, Don't forget "property rights".
:thatsright:
You're right. I apologize for the omission.
-
BigDog, Trump has done nothing to convince anyone he's for the libertarian point of view if that means limited government, personal freedom and personal responsibility. Would you care to enlighten me as to who, in your opinion, has actually done anything towards that end?
OTOH, it's rather easy to spout all manner of ideas and philosophies, much harder to produce any tangible results. I can't make my personal position any clearer than I already have: National Security and Jobs. I believe Trump can accomplish these goals better than the rest of the field. How do I know? I base it on what he has actually done in his life, and for those who don't accept my honest conviction there is nothing else I can say. Frankly, I'm tired of going over the same points. Dutch said it all in a different thread as far as I'm concerned, as to why I favor Trump over the rest of the field.
The most I can do as one voter is move forward and vote my conscience for the best candidate. If it doesn't pass the conservative purity test as defined by some other voter, so be it. Apparently there are plenty of us pragmatic apostates. :shrug:
-
BigDog, Trump has done nothing to convince anyone he's for the libertarian point of view if that means limited government, personal freedom and personal responsibility.
See, that wasn't so hard, was it?
-
BigDog, Trump has done nothing to convince anyone he's for the libertarian point of view if that means limited government, personal freedom and personal responsibility. Would you care to enlighten me as to who, in your opinion, has actually done anything towards that end?
OTOH, it's rather easy to spout all manner of ideas and philosophies, much harder to produce any tangible results. I can't make my personal position any clearer than I already have: National Security and Jobs. I believe Trump can accomplish these goals better than the rest of the field. How do I know? I base it on what he has actually done in his life, and for those who don't accept my honest conviction there is nothing else I can say. Frankly, I'm tired of going over the same points. Dutch said it all in a different thread as far as I'm concerned, as to why I favor Trump over the rest of the field.
The most I can do as one voter is move forward and vote my conscience for the best candidate. If it doesn't pass the conservative purity test as defined by some other voter, so be it. Apparently there are plenty of us pragmatic apostates. :shrug:
That's the idea. You give your opinion on who you think is the best candidate and others give you their opinion on why they believe your incorrect. There's no purity test here.
Personally I don't think Trump is the best candidate due to his support of the Kelo decision. The founders held personal property in high regard, Kelo allows the government to take that property for benefit of the community or as Kelo, the benefit of the developers.
-
Trump's popularity has everything to do with immigration. If he didn't come out with his statement about Mexico in his opening speech, he wouldn't have this support. Every candidate has been wishy/washy on immigration, including Cruz. If Cruz had taken a stronger stance on H1B visas early on, I think he would have run away with the nomination. However, he only moved in that direction after Trump skyrocketed in the polls.
Immigration is the only issue that matters. It controls every other policy.
It's a two person race in my book... Cruz or Trump. I'd gladly vote for either one. I will not vote for Rubio or Bush under any instance. Tired of globalists controlling this party.
-
Immigration is the only issue that matters. It controls every other policy.
No it doesn't.
It's important...but it doesn't control the policy on the 2nd Amendment...on property rights or taxes or the budget.
-
No it doesn't.
It's important...but it doesn't control the policy on the 2nd Amendment...on property rights or taxes or the budget.
However, the more Islamic terrorists that Obama lets in, the 2nd Amendment becomes ever more a matter of life and death.
-
No it doesn't.
It's important...but it doesn't control the policy on the 2nd Amendment...on property rights or taxes or the budget.
The most important issue is the 2nd Amendment ... that is the amendment upon which all of our other amendments hang...without the 2nd amendment - we will have NO rights!
-
No it doesn't.
It's important...but it doesn't control the policy on the 2nd Amendment...on property rights or taxes or the budget.
No. It actually controls all those issues. We are importing a million people a year. A strong majority of them don't support the 2nd Amendment, or property right, or small government.
See California.
-
The most important issue is the 2nd Amendment ... that is the amendment upon which all of our other amendments hang...without the 2nd amendment - we will have NO rights!
Immigrants don't support the second Amendment unless they coming from Eastern Europe. And sadly, most immigrants aren't coming from Eastern Europe.
-
No. It actually controls all those issues. We are importing a million people a year. A strong majority of them don't support the 2nd Amendment, or property right, or small government.
See California.
Sorry. You're wrong.
-
Immigrants don't support the second Amendment unless they coming from Eastern Europe. And sadly, most immigrants aren't coming from Eastern Europe.
That's a really dumb blanket condemnation of all immigrants.
-
That's a really dumb blanket condemnation of all immigrants.
Immigrants vote for Democrats in the 70th percentile. Here's a chart on documenting their love of big government.
And here's a quote about the 2nd Amendment.
"Polls show that whites tend to favor gun rights over gun control by a significant margin (57 percent to 40 percent). Yet whites, who comprise 63 percent of the population today, won’t be in the majority for long. Racial minorities are soon to be a majority, and they are the nation’s strongest supporters of strict gun laws.
The fastest-growing minority group in America is Latinos. Between 2000 and 2010, the nation’s Latino population grew by 43 percent. Hispanics, which make up 17 percent of the population today, are expected to grow to 30 percent of the population in the coming decades.
Gun control is extremely popular among Hispanics, with 75 percent favoring gun safety over gun rights."
-
I'm a libertarian. You knew that, right? That means I reject the idea of a strong-man president who ignores the Constitution, and tries to rule. I'm sure you know what Ben Franklin (no, not gNads, but the real Ben Franklin), said about people who would sacrifice liberty for security.
So, again, what has Donald Trump done that proves a President Trump will act according to the founding principles of personal freedom, personal responsibility, and Constitutionally limited government?
I am also generally libertarian leaning. I don't like it when gov reaches to far, regardless of purpose or on which parties behest it might be at. One side just further enables the other.
Kelo is a deal breaker for people like you and I, and really should be for everyone.
CMD
-
Kelo is a deal breaker for people like you and I, and really should be for everyone.
For some here, they seem to be okay with that.
Unbelievable.
-
For some here, they seem to be okay with that.
Unbelievable.
The way I feel about it is this: Kelo is the almost-but-not-quite-as-ugly little brother of the aca mandate.
I don't see loving liberty and being accepting of either of those, as compatible. I don't want anyone to take that personally, but that is how I see it.
CMD
-
Immigrants vote for Democrats in the 70th percentile. Here's a chart on documenting their love of big government.
And here's a quote about the 2nd Amendment.
"Polls show that whites tend to favor gun rights over gun control by a significant margin (57 percent to 40 percent). Yet whites, who comprise 63 percent of the population today, won’t be in the majority for long. Racial minorities are soon to be a majority, and they are the nation’s strongest supporters of strict gun laws.
The fastest-growing minority group in America is Latinos. Between 2000 and 2010, the nation’s Latino population grew by 43 percent. Hispanics, which make up 17 percent of the population today, are expected to grow to 30 percent of the population in the coming decades.
Gun control is extremely popular among Hispanics, with 75 percent favoring gun safety over gun rights."
You can shut down the border and and go back to 1924 rules where we let zero people in...build the biggest wall you can along the Rio Grande and kick out every illegal that ran jumped or swam here and it won't stop the assault on the Constitution by the left.
Tightening up immigration won't stop the left from trying to repeal the 2nd Amendment. It won't stop the Libtards from pushing mythical "rights" for gays to marry or the "right" to abortion on demand. It won't stop their assault on free speech or the 9th and 10th Amendment.
Illegal immigration isn't the biggest problem we face...Marxist Liberals and their general assault on the Constitution and our way of life is the biggest threat.
-
For some here, they seem to be okay with that.
Unbelievable.
Founding Fathers looked upon private property ownership as one of the basic building blocks of a free society.
Intrude on a persons right to own property...you are restricting their liberty.
Why people are ok with that is beyond me.
-
You can shut down the border and and go back to 1924 rules where we let zero people in...build the biggest wall you can along the Rio Grande and kick out every illegal that ran jumped or swam here and it won't stop the assault on the Constitution by the left.
Tightening up immigration won't stop the left from trying to repeal the 2nd Amendment. It won't stop the Libtards from pushing mythical "rights" for gays to marry or the "right" to abortion on demand. It won't stop their assault on free speech or the 9th and 10th Amendment.
Illegal immigration isn't the biggest problem we face...Marxist Liberals and their general assault on the Constitution and our way of life is the biggest threat.
Yeh. They will just vote the 2nd Amendment out of existence in another generation if immigration isn't stopped. That's the point. Every year the Democrats import another million voters. Every year millions more flood across the border, who will eventually be granted full amnesty, by both party's establishments.
As for Kelo, Donald Trump didn't decide the case. A Republican establishment shill provided that vote. Just like he provided that vote for other cases like Obergeville. And on Obamscare, other Republican establishment shills provided the deciding vote.
Additionally, we had the House, Senate, and Presidency under George W. Bush.
What conservative wins did we achieve?
Justice Alito? That's about it.
And if the Establishment gets W. Deux through to the nominaton with the new "Marco-mentum" I'll sit at home. Or maybe I'll just write in Cruz or Trump.
-
As for Kelo, Donald Trump didn't decide the case.
Yes, but hes very plainly stated that he agrees with it. That is a direct window into his view about the relationship between government and citizens. Anyone espousing that view of the relationship between citizens and government should unconditionally unambiguously scare the hell out of everyone. The answer to everything, is smaller government. We definitely aren't going to get that by electing a guy who goes on the national stage and embraces big government. Cruz is the better candidate in that regard, and its not even close. Again, not singling anyone out, but thats how I see it.
CMD
-
Come on, it's only one house... what does it matter? It's just some old lady. :whatever:
-
Yeh. They will just vote the 2nd Amendment out of existence in another generation if immigration isn't stopped. That's the point. Every year the Democrats import another million voters. Every year millions more flood across the border, who will eventually be granted full amnesty, by both party's establishments.
You have yet to show a logical line between illegal immigration and repeal of the 2nd Amendment. The two aren't connected...except in your head.
And besides the laws are already in place to shut down illegal immigration and better control our borders. We don't need a Republican version of Obama with his pen and a phone claiming he's going to do it singlehandedly.
We need someone that will abide by the Constitution and enforce the laws that are already on the books.
As for Kelo, Donald Trump didn't decide the case.
Never said he did. But he sure as hell supports it.
A Republican establishment shill provided that vote. Just like he provided that vote for other cases like Obergeville. And on Obamscare, other Republican establishment shills provided the deciding vote.
Additionally, we had the House, Senate, and Presidency under George W. Bush.
What conservative wins did we achieve?
Bush wasn't a Conservative. We need a Constitutional Conservative. There's only one in the race.
And if the Establishment gets W. Deux through to the nominaton with the new "Marco-mentum" I'll sit at home. Or maybe I'll just write in Cruz or Trump.
So you'd rather have Bernie or Hillary finish what Obama started?
-
You have yet to show a logical line between illegal immigration and repeal of the 2nd Amendment. The two aren't connected...except in your head.
I think HH is pretty close to what Winkler is saying, which doesn't strain credulity:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/10/19/the-nra-will-fall-its-inevitable/?tid=sm_fb
And besides the laws are already in place to shut down illegal immigration and better control our borders. We don't need a Republican version of Obama with his pen and a phone claiming he's going to do it singlehandedly.
Agreed. All those laws that the current administration ignores could well be put to good use under an administration that respects the rule of law. Obama and his shills respect nothing but their own power.
-
I am also generally libertarian leaning. I don't like it when gov reaches to far, regardless of purpose or on which parties behest it might be at. One side just further enables the other.
Kelo is a deal breaker for people like you and I, and really should be for everyone.
CMD
Agreed.
I figured the "Kelo" statement or the casual "Eminent Domain statement" by Trump would have killed his chances. The significance of Trumps stance is far more troubling than almost anything else he has said to date.
As of early 2015, almost ten years after the Supreme Court upheld the Kelo condemnations, the properties that were the focus of an epic legal battle remain empty and undeveloped. Several plans to redevelop these lots have fallen through. The only creatures making regular use of them in the intervening years have been a colony of feral cats.
http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2015/06/23/10-years-later-heres-what-happened-to-the-land-seized-and-sold-to-developers-in-a-controversial-supreme-court-case/
“The specter of condemnation hangs over all property. Nothing is to prevent the State from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton, any home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a factory.â€
—Justice Sandra Day O’Connor
President Trump is a scary thought.
-
Yes, but hes very plainly stated that he agrees with it. That is a direct window into his view about the relationship between government and citizens. Anyone espousing that view of the relationship between citizens and government should unconditionally unambiguously scare the hell out of everyone. The answer to everything, is smaller government. We definitely aren't going to get that by electing a guy who goes on the national stage and embraces big government. Cruz is the better candidate in that regard, and its not even close. Again, not singling anyone out, but thats how I see it.
CMD
And small government won't exist if immigration isn't changed. He's the one candidate who has emphasized immigration from day one of his candidacy. Ted Cruz is the only real alternative, although it took him a while to change his tune on h1b visa increases.
Rubio ran in Florida as tough on immigration, got the Tea Party's support, then went to DC and pushed amnesty. He's a fraud. I'd vote for Kasich before I'd vote for Rubio, at least Kasich is honest about his politics.
-
Founding Fathers looked upon private property ownership as one of the basic building blocks of a free society.
Intrude on a persons right to own property...you are restricting their liberty.
Why people are ok with that is beyond me.
And the ideals of the Constitution will be no more in a generation or two if we don't stem immigration. Rubio's amnesty bill would have been the end of constitutional conservatism. Amnesty for 30 million illegal immigrants, and a over a 50 percent increase in legal immigration, with an even sharper increase in h1-b visas. Over 70 percent of immigrants are voting for the Democrats, who are hell bent on destroying the Constitution.
Rubio has disqualified himself, and if the Establishment hoists him upon us like John McCain, many, many conservatives will sit out. Better the devil I know then the one I don't
-
I think HH is pretty close to what Winkler is saying, which doesn't strain credulity:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/10/19/the-nra-will-fall-its-inevitable/?tid=sm_fb
Agreed. All those laws that the current administration ignores could well be put to good use under an administration that respects the rule of law. Obama and his shills respect nothing but their own power.
Rubio and Obama have the same views on immigration. Obama, Rubio, Bush, and Clinton have the same war on nation building and proxy wars.
-
You have yet to show a logical line between illegal immigration and repeal of the 2nd Amendment. The two aren't connected...except in your head.
And besides the laws are already in place to shut down illegal immigration and better control our borders. We don't need a Republican version of Obama with his pen and a phone claiming he's going to do it singlehandedly.
We need someone that will abide by the Constitution and enforce the laws that are already on the books.
Never said he did. But he sure as hell supports it.
Bush wasn't a Conservative. We need a Constitutional Conservative. There's only one in the race.
So you'd rather have Bernie or Hillary finish what Obama started?
I haven't shown a logical connection? How about the polling data? Rubio and the establishment are intent on shifting the demographics of the country, along with Obama, Clinton, etc.
In another generation or two, if nothing is done to curb illegal immigration and to fix our disastrous legal immigration, these debates over Kelo and the 2nd Amendment are irrelevant. Contrary to Jeb Bush, you aren't selling immigrants on the virtues of conservatism. The exit poll data doesn't lie.
-
And small government won't exist if immigration isn't changed...
Better the devil I know then the one I don't...
In another generation or two, if nothing is done to curb illegal immigration and to fix our disastrous legal immigration, these debates over Kelo and the 2nd Amendment are irrelevant...
My objection to that argument is, it boils down to "we need larger, more intrusive government which ignores the Constitution now, so we can save the Constitution later", which is like saying "we had to destroy the village to save it"; and it depends on a benevolent despot who will relinquish power once he has achieved your goals. But, once the Constitution is dead, no amount of CPR will bring it back; the State doesn't give up power, once it has taken it; and the benevolent despot is a charming fiction.
-
And small government won't exist if immigration isn't changed. He's the one candidate who has emphasized immigration from day one of his candidacy. Ted Cruz is the only real alternative, although it took him a while to change his tune on h1b visa increases.
Rubio ran in Florida as tough on immigration, got the Tea Party's support, then went to DC and pushed amnesty. He's a fraud. I'd vote for Kasich before I'd vote for Rubio, at least Kasich is honest about his politics.
The difference is, Cruz isn't likely to increase the size scope and power of government, AND he wont appoint another roberts, or any sotomayor or kagen.
Can you say the same about trump?
CMD
-
The difference is, Cruz isn't likely to increase the size scope and power of government, AND he wont appoint another roberts, or any sotomayor or kagen.
Can you say the same about trump?
CMD
I think this analysis is spot on:
http://theresurgent.com/cruz-vs-rubio/
-
I think this analysis is spot on:
http://theresurgent.com/cruz-vs-rubio/
:cheersmate:
-
The difference is, Cruz isn't likely to increase the size scope and power of government, AND he wont appoint another roberts, or any sotomayor or kagen.
Can you say the same about trump?
CMD
I love Cruz, but the writing is on the wall. The Establishment has now shifted to "Marco-mentum" mode. Just put on Fox News for a couple minutes and you will see segments about how Rubio is the only one who can beat Hillary. It's the same nonsense they were doing with Jeb until they realized how awful of a candidate he was.
-
I love Cruz, but the writing is on the wall. The Establishment has now shifted to "Marco-mentum" mode. Just put on Fox News for a couple minutes and you will see segments about how Rubio is the only one who can beat Hillary. It's the same nonsense they were doing with Jeb until they realized how awful of a candidate he was.
Of course they are, that is the establishment, that is what they do. But what they say will only be true if we make it so. We didn't with jeb, and we shouldn't with trump.
CMD
-
I think this analysis is spot on:
http://theresurgent.com/cruz-vs-rubio/
Yup:
“If voters feel like things are coming to an end in this country without drastic action, they really do not have a choice between Rubio and Cruz. They have only Cruz.â€
Exactly, although...
My personal opinion, is that we are well past voting our way out of any of this, and that its only a matter of time before things get...really ugly. When I say really ugly, I mean in a way we haven't seen in roughly 250 years.
CMD
-
And small government won't exist if immigration isn't changed. He's the one candidate who has emphasized immigration from day one of his candidacy. Ted Cruz is the only real alternative, although it took him a while to change his tune on h1b visa increases.
Its a question of priority.
Immigration could wait another 8 years, and could still be turned around.
When one or more of the conservative justices are replaced with the likes of sotomayor or kagan, the game is over. Done. Not tomorrow, not next week or next year, but NOW. For the rest of your life and mine, maybe even permanently. So long as a real conservative majority exists on the USSC, the game is still in play.
If I had to choose between 8 more years of illegals invading but a strong conservative USSC, OR immigration fixed now and a stupid lefty USSC, it wouldn't even be a choice.
We can fix immigration to our hearts content now, but if it means a lefty USSC they'll just come back later and undo the fix, and we'll have done nothing but delay the loss, gaining nothing.
On edit: Think of both immigration and the USSC appointments as bombs. One has a much longer slower fuse than the other.
CMD
-
My personal opinion, is that we are well past voting our way out of any of this, and that its only a matter of time before things get...really ugly. When I say really ugly, I mean in a way we haven't seen in roughly 250 years.
Yup.
-
Its a question of priority.
Immigration could wait another 8 years, and could still be turned around.
When one or more of the conservative justices are replaced with the likes of sotomayor or kagan, the game is over. Done. Not tomorrow, not next week or next year, but NOW. For the rest of your life and mine, maybe even permanently. So long as a real conservative majority exists on the USSC, the game is still in play.
If I had to choose between 8 more years of illegals invading but a strong conservative USSC, OR immigration fixed now and a stupid lefty USSC, it wouldn't even be a choice.
We can fix immigration to our hearts content now, but if it means a lefty USSC they'll just come back later and undo the fix, and we'll have done nothing but delay the loss, gaining nothing.
On edit: Think of both immigration and the USSC appointments as bombs. One has a much longer slower fuse than the other.
CMD
Rubio will deliver amnesty in his first year in office. He already has his pro-amnesty shill in place in Ryan. So if the Establishment is really as smart as they think they are, they will know Rubio isn't delivering the election.
And Christie is hammering him tonight about his robotic platitudes.
-
Rubio will deliver amnesty in his first year in office. He already has his pro-amnesty shill in place in Ryan. So if the Establishment is really as smart as they think they are, they will know Rubio isn't delivering the election.
And Christie is hammering him tonight about his robotic platitudes.
This is possibly true, assuming he gets elected and gets a Congress that is willing to hand him the bill, but thats a maybe within a maybe.
Appointing USSC justices is something that the next president needs no such prior action by Congress to attempt. Personally, I trust Congress less when it comes to approving the suggestions of a president, than I do when it comes to a bill making it all the way through Congress to the president, though even that may be giving them too much credit.
CMD
-
You can shut down the border and and go back to 1924 rules where we let zero people in...build the biggest wall you can along the Rio Grande and kick out every illegal that ran jumped or swam here and it won't stop the assault on the Constitution by the left.
Tightening up immigration won't stop the left from trying to repeal the 2nd Amendment. It won't stop the Libtards from pushing mythical "rights" for gays to marry or the "right" to abortion on demand. It won't stop their assault on free speech or the 9th and 10th Amendment.
Illegal immigration isn't the biggest problem we face...Marxist Liberals and their general assault on the Constitution and our way of life is the biggest threat.
Hi-5! Well stated. The liberal progressive assault on the Constitution is our biggest threat and I believe right now the only thing that is stopping them is our 2nd amendment rights.