Yeah, I'll vote for whoever becomes the nominee. It beats the alternative, but I can see NO ONE out there like this man:
Not sure if these videos can be embeded here.
Read the story and watch the vid. THIS is a great man.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/09/10/Ted-Cruz--Opposition-to-Israel-Led-to-Me-Leaving-Event (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/09/10/Ted-Cruz--Opposition-to-Israel-Led-to-Me-Leaving-Event)
I am a huge fan of Cruz. He has the backbone, intelligence, integrity, knowledge and resolve to lead this country in a much better direction and I believe with his leadership that the United States of America would once again prosper and be held in esteem around the world.
Can you imagine Ted Cruz as president with a Republican House and Senate? I hope the RNC will get behind him. IMO he is a candidate that would have the Democrats scrambling to find someone who could beat him. Time for us to turn the tables on the Democrats. I've said it before; Ted is golden!
I would vote for him, but he is a warmonger. I would like him to explain how killing more people in Iraq is going to end better than killing 650,000 did before.
Quote from: carlb on September 11, 2014, 03:21:35 AM
Yeah, I'll vote for whoever becomes the nominee. It beats the alternative, but I can see NO ONE out there like this man:
Not sure if these videos can be embeded here.
Read the story and watch the vid. THIS is a great man.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/09/10/Ted-Cruz--Opposition-to-Israel-Led-to-Me-Leaving-Event (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/09/10/Ted-Cruz--Opposition-to-Israel-Led-to-Me-Leaving-Event)
Let me be blunt and derail your thread for a moment. IDIOT!!!
Voting for whomever the GOP forces on us will never kill off this cancer, at some point you have to say enough is enough and have the courage to vote your values.
Dole, McCain, Mitten, how long are you going to keep failure in charge?
Come on people, are you sheep or Conservatives?
Vote TEA. ONLY!!!
Quote from: dashvinny on September 11, 2014, 04:35:26 AM
I would vote for him, but he is a warmonger. I would like him to explain how killing more people in Iraq is going to end better than killing 650,000 did before.
???? ....hmm if preventing ISIS from continuing their barbaric massacre and the same taking place on U.S. soil is being a warmonger then you and I have quite a different definition of what a warmonger is.
I guess I don't quite understand your logic, ISIS beheads an American journalist and they are on a rampage over in the Middle East against Christians. They have threatened to raise the flag of Allah in the White House. The Saudi king has warned that ISIS will be to the U.S. within two months. It is becoming more and more apparent that ISIS militants are already in our cities and you're calling Cruz the warmonger for wanting to play defense?
Saudi militants were here on 9/11 and we didnt bomb Saudi Arabia. Again, we killed 650,000 in Iraq we got Isis. I know you dont want to hear this but alot of people have been beheaded in Iraq from bombing on all sides, including Shia militias. What is the difference in a body being decapitated by a bomb and a beheading on a video?
Iran, our new good buddy, ripped apart thousands of american soldiers with IED's. Why arent we bombing Iran?
The GOP doesn't "force" anyone on us. YOU and everybody else has the power of the vote. MAKE YOUR CASE TO THE REST OF THE USA IN THE PRIMARY and you'll get the Tea Party candidate.
If you can't convince them, YOU failed. The only rational alternative is to follow William Buckley & Ronald Reagan and vote for the most conservative candidate who has a possibility of winning. Do anything else, and you sabotage any chance of changing the course America is on.
But this thread is about Ted Cruz' CHARACTER, not my theory of winning elections.
We're both interested in achieving the same goal, only the plan to get there differs. The Communists KNOW that they can win in baby steps with a long term goal constantly in mind. You want all or nothing -- NOW. and that's what you'll end up with -- NOTHING.
BTW, did you know that my thread was about Ted Cruz being booed off the stage? Of course my take on it was what it means about his character, so that was the focus of my title
Quote from: Solar on September 11, 2014, 05:19:00 AM
Let me be blunt and derail your thread for a moment. IDIOT!!!
Voting for whomever the GOP forces on us will never kill off this cancer, at some point you have to say enough is enough and have the courage to vote your values.
Dole, McCain, Mitten, how long are you going to keep failure in charge?
Come on people, are you sheep or Conservatives?
Vote TEA. ONLY!!!
Quote from: dashvinny on September 11, 2014, 06:46:57 AM
Saudi militants were here on 9/11 and we didnt bomb Saudi Arabia. Again, we killed 650,000 in Iraq we got Isis. I know you dont want to hear this but alot of people have been beheaded in Iraq from bombing on all sides, including Shia militias. What is the difference in a body being decapitated by a bomb and a beheading on a video?
As Solar would say, "IDIOT"! A dull knife to the neck as vou feel the blade sawing every fiber and muscle, or a bomb that blows you apart before your nerve endings have a chance to transmit any perception of pain. Give me a few hours to think over the choice :lol:
Quote from: carlb on September 11, 2014, 03:34:44 PM
The GOP doesn't "force" anyone on us. YOU and everybody else has the power of the vote. MAKE YOUR CASE TO THE REST OF THE USA IN THE PRIMARY and you'll get the Tea Party candidate.
If you can't convince them, YOU failed. The only rational alternative is to follow William Buckley & Ronald Reagan and vote for the most conservative candidate who has a possibility of winning. Do anything else, and you sabotage any chance of changing the course America is on.
But this thread is about Ted Cruz' CHARACTER, not my theory of winning elections.
We're both interested in achieving the same goal, only the plan to get there differs. The Communists KNOW that they can win in baby steps with a long term goal constantly in mind. You want all or nothing -- NOW. and that's what you'll end up with -- NOTHING.
BTW, did you know that my thread was about Ted Cruz being booed off the stage? Of course my take on it was what it means about his character, so that was the focus of my title
Then never make concessions to the crony socialist establishment, if you're serious about taking back the country...
And no, I didn't see it, which is why I prefer members use thread titles that reflect the content of the article, it also helps search engines when people are looking for the article.
Quote from: dashvinny on September 11, 2014, 04:35:26 AM
I would vote for him, but he is a warmonger. I would like him to explain how killing more people in Iraq is going to end better than killing 650,000 did before.
What? When did Cruz kill 650,00 people?
Quote from: The Boo Man... on September 12, 2014, 10:43:55 PM
What? When did Cruz kill 650,00 people?
This too was news to me. I did read he once hurt someone's feelings, but 650,000 killings, all on his head? Wow! Next thing you know we'll look at LBJ, a Democrat who killed 67,000 of OUR people...all for a war we utterly lost politically but won militarily.
Oh. Wait. This is about that monster, Hannibal Cruz. :rolleyes:
Quote from: suzziY on September 11, 2014, 06:33:31 AM
???? ....hmm if preventing ISIS from continuing their barbaric massacre and the same taking place on U.S. soil is being a warmonger then you and I have quite a different definition of what a warmonger is.
I guess I don't quite understand your logic, ISIS beheads an American journalist and they are on a rampage over in the Middle East against Christians. They have threatened to raise the flag of Allah in the White House. The Saudi king has warned that ISIS will be to the U.S. within two months. It is becoming more and more apparent that ISIS militants are already in our cities and you're calling Cruz the warmonger for wanting to play defense?
The Saudi King is fearing for this life as his power is slipping away from him, most Saudi teenagers do not work and live apathetic life, if ISIS is able to turn ethnic norwegians into worshipping ALLAH and fighting for ISIS then you can bet your ass Saudi teenagers will flock to ISIS.
So of course the Saudi King is going to say Hannibal will be at your gates if you don't help him maintain his power. Please THINK ahead of what the Media tells you! Don't believe every supposition the Muslims and MSM throws at you, take in the facts first, reflect and then come to a conclusion.
Quote from: Mountainshield on September 13, 2014, 03:38:16 AM
The Saudi King is fearing for this life as his power is slipping away from him, most Saudi teenagers do not work and live apathetic life, if ISIS is able to turn ethnic norwegians into worshipping ALLAH and fighting for ISIS then you can bet your ass Saudi teenagers will flock to ISIS.
So of course the Saudi King is going to say Hannibal will be at your gates if you don't help him maintain his power. Please THINK ahead of what the Media tells you! Don't believe every supposition the Muslims and MSM throws at you, take in the facts first, reflect and then come to a conclusion.
:thumbsup:
No he's not. Not by a mile.
Quote from: supsalemgr on September 13, 2014, 08:18:52 AM
Could you advise us why not?
I already have check the other thread. :cool:
Quote from: washington on September 13, 2014, 08:23:07 AM
I already have check the other thread. :cool:
Stop the BS. As much as you may think, the people on this board are not impressed enough with you to commit all your posts to memory. Now please answer the question.
Quote from: supsalemgr on September 13, 2014, 08:36:24 AM
Stop the BS. As much as you may think, the people on this board are not impressed enough with you to commit all your posts to memory. Now please answer the question.
I'm not going to copy and paste duplicate posts. Go to the only other cruz thread and read like an adult. Thank you very much, and good morning btw..
I bumped the thread to the top for you, fyi.
Quote from: washington on September 13, 2014, 08:54:32 AM
I'm not going to copy and paste duplicate posts. Go to the only other cruz thread and read like an adult. Thank you very much, and good morning btw..
As Solar has said, your time is running out young man. Someone called BS, now back it up. We don't do your home work, it's up to you.
fine, I'll give in,
What has Cruz done in Congress that has garnered bipartisan support or support within his own party? The American people will never not for a long time after this President vote for any candidate that has never lead anything with bipartisan support and accomplished what he set out to accomplish. Another words you need way more than a big mouth. Voters learn. This will be the number 1 thing they look for in the next President.
On the completely different subject of bipartisan support the reason why congress has such a low approval rating which shatters the Presidents FYI, is because the lack of working together. See Newt Gingrich proved that you don't have to sacrifice core principles to accomplish things in congress with the other side, and he also did it with a democrat president. Whether you have done it on the federal level or state level as a Governor doesn't matter as long as you have experience in Government doing it on a high profile level. This will be the type of candidate that's the next president. In a way Cruz is like Obama in th sense that he was a new lone wolf in congress before running for president. We've learned our lesson.
Also 1 key point I want to make - Because the American public doesn't realize that harry reid has stopped all GOP legislation from advancing they just see a disfunctional congress as a whole. This is why Rand Paul and Cruz really have nothing to go on. Our next president wont be coming from congress.
To speak of cruz as a viable candidate right now is potentially making the same mistake the libs made by electing Obama.
Quote from: washington on September 13, 2014, 09:02:50 AM
fine, I'll give in,
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs.rimg.info%2Fa25f3b4082c38113c4e596bff86d4cf0.gif&hash=e6dca0aeaeabff7be6afce23fe327eb3d1d89fc4)
Quote from: walkstall on September 13, 2014, 09:07:11 AM
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs.rimg.info%2Fa25f3b4082c38113c4e596bff86d4cf0.gif&hash=e6dca0aeaeabff7be6afce23fe327eb3d1d89fc4)
I still think you guys are lazy and I made it very easy for you, but whatever...
Quote from: washington on September 13, 2014, 09:02:50 AM
fine, I'll give in,
What has Cruz done in Congress that has garnered bipartisan support or support within his own party? The American people will never not for a long time after this President vote for any candidate that has never lead anything with bipartisan support and accomplished what he set out to accomplish. Another words you need way more than a big mouth. Voters learn. This will be the number 1 thing they look for in the next President.
On the completely different subject of bipartisan support the reason why congress has such a low approval rating which shatters the Presidents FYI, is because the lack of working together. See Newt Gingrich proved that you don't have to sacrifice core principles to accomplish things in congress with the other side, and he also did it with a democrat president. Whether you have done it on the federal level or state level as a Governor doesn't matter as long as you have experience in Government doing it on a high profile level. This will be the type of candidate that's the next president. In a way Cruz is like Obama in th sense that he was a new lone wolf in congress before running for president. We've learned our lesson.
Also 1 key point I want to make - Because the American public doesn't realize that harry reid has stopped all GOP legislation from advancing they just see a disfunctional congress as a whole. This is why Rand Paul and Cruz really have nothing to go on. Our next president wont be coming from congress.
To speak of cruz as a viable candidate right now is potentially making the same mistake the libs made by electing Obama.
Bipartisan support, working together, Newt Gringrich = (https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffc08.deviantart.net%2Ffs70%2Ff%2F2014%2F256%2Fd%2F4%2Fsuicide_by_gunman006-d7z0s8v.gif&hash=291b3e09a8238eff8d9bfa92722c6f04996415a7)
Quote from: Mountainshield on September 13, 2014, 09:24:40 AM
Bipartisan support, working together, Newt Gringrich = (https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffc08.deviantart.net%2Ffs70%2Ff%2F2014%2F256%2Fd%2F4%2Fsuicide_by_gunman006-d7z0s8v.gif&hash=291b3e09a8238eff8d9bfa92722c6f04996415a7)
During the GOPS full controll of governemnt during the bush years they didn't really include the dems, so in return the dems didn't include the republicans and shut them out 100%. What goes around comes around which = very low approval ratings when deadlock happens. Common sense. Don't make same mistake twice.
Quote from: washington on September 13, 2014, 09:29:50 AM
During the GOPS full controll of governemnt during the bush years they didn't really include the dems, so in return the dems didn't include the republicans and shut them out 100%. What goes around comes around which = very low approval ratings when deadlock happens. Common sense. Don't make same mistake twice.
Meh ... if "bipartisan support" is dead, the mortal wound was the Ds' annual
Reagan's-Budget-Is-DOA ritual-mockery some 20 years earlier. And the original
Borking was the coup de grace.
Quote from: washington on September 13, 2014, 09:29:50 AM
During the GOPS full controll of governemnt during the bush years they didn't really include the dems, so in return the dems didn't include the republicans and shut them out 100%. What goes around comes around which = very low approval ratings when deadlock happens. Common sense. Don't make same mistake twice.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-JjjMuJ2YOf8%2FUnf2msjKO1I%2FAAAAAAAAA60%2FztHoM6w71F4%2Fs640%2Fbullshit_everywhere-e1345505471862.jpeg&hash=70d38ff89f6bfeac79a66531ef9e32f5f16595f7)
Quote from: Mountainshield on September 13, 2014, 09:41:59 AM
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-JjjMuJ2YOf8%2FUnf2msjKO1I%2FAAAAAAAAA60%2FztHoM6w71F4%2Fs640%2Fbullshit_everywhere-e1345505471862.jpeg&hash=70d38ff89f6bfeac79a66531ef9e32f5f16595f7)
You and the GOP keep making that mistake and see where it gets you in the long run.
Quote from: washington on September 13, 2014, 09:02:50 AM
fine, I'll give in,
What has Cruz done in Congress that has garnered bipartisan support or support within his own party? The American people will never not for a long time after this President vote for any candidate that has never lead anything with bipartisan support and accomplished what he set out to accomplish. Another words you need way more than a big mouth. Voters learn. This will be the number 1 thing they look for in the next President.
On the completely different subject of bipartisan support the reason why congress has such a low approval rating which shatters the Presidents FYI, is because the lack of working together. See Newt Gingrich proved that you don't have to sacrifice core principles to accomplish things in congress with the other side, and he also did it with a democrat president. Whether you have done it on the federal level or state level as a Governor doesn't matter as long as you have experience in Government doing it on a high profile level. This will be the type of candidate that's the next president. In a way Cruz is like Obama in th sense that he was a new lone wolf in congress before running for president. We've learned our lesson.
Also 1 key point I want to make - Because the American public doesn't realize that harry reid has stopped all GOP legislation from advancing they just see a disfunctional congress as a whole. This is why Rand Paul and Cruz really have nothing to go on. Our next president wont be coming from congress.
To speak of cruz as a viable candidate right now is potentially making the same mistake the libs made by electing Obama.
One sure way to guarantee a GOP loss is to try and work with democrats. The way to win is tp present a true conservative message and beat democrats, not join them.
Quote from: supsalemgr on September 13, 2014, 09:45:56 AM
One sure way to guarantee a GOP loss is to try and work with democrats. The way to win is tp present a true conservative message and beat democrats, not join them.
Clue - I'm talking about after we win.
Quote from: washington on September 13, 2014, 10:18:26 AM
Clue - I'm talking about after we win.
So, are you saying Cruz could win and are asking what the strategies would be with him as POTUS?
Quote from: supsalemgr on September 13, 2014, 10:29:24 AM
So, are you saying Cruz could win and are asking what the strategies would be with him as POTUS?
Cruz wont win because he can't even get the support of his own party let alone bipartisan support, so the answer is no.
Quote from: washington on September 13, 2014, 11:00:25 AM
Cruz wont win because he can't even get the support of his own party let alone bipartisan support, so the answer is no.
OK. Cruz won't win, but the GOP will. Now, tell us who the candidate will be that will win.
Quote from: supsalemgr on September 13, 2014, 11:15:32 AM
OK. Cruz won't win, but the GOP will. Now, tell us who the candidate will be that will win.
He fails to understand the significance of the 2010 slaughter of RINO, as will be an even bigger event in Nov, meaning TEA will have solid influence over the direction and Committee seats in the party.
Quote from: washington on September 13, 2014, 11:00:25 AM
Cruz wont win because he can't even get the support of his own party let alone bipartisan support, so the answer is no.
That's right! he has to run against Hillary who enjoys wide bipartisan support! Were doomed!
Quote from: carlb on September 13, 2014, 11:39:45 AM
That's right! he has to run against Hillary qho enjoys wide bipartisan support! Were doomed!
I hope that was sarcasm.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcontent.gallup.com%2Forigin%2Fgallupinc%2FGallupSpaces%2FProduction%2FCms%2FPOLL%2Fs3tk5ql5nu2val4uz0jymq.png&hash=8c7e6180490ecce5428f6fc1f7b5ac4c12c8121a)
Of course solar. Do you think Hillary has the support of both parties?
Quote from: washington on September 13, 2014, 11:00:25 AM
Cruz wont win because he can't even get the support of his own party let alone bipartisan support, so the answer is no.
Never say that Cruz won't win. The term bipartisan is only a fancy term for playing the blame game. Quite frankly, I am sick of the Republicans blaming the Democrats and the Democrats blaming the Republicans. It has accomplished absolutely nothing and merely an excuse for nothing getting done. Most Republicans and Democrats are all in the same ole country club. Secondly, I don't want a president who the GOP establishment wants. The GOP establishment is scared to death of Ted Cruz because they will need to straighten up their acts and the RINO's will be out the door! Ted isn't going to play ball with the RINO's and Democrats rather the RINO's and Democrats need to play ball with him. There is a huge difference between leading and uniting the party to do what is in the best interest of the country rather than allowing Congress to lead them to do what's in the best interest of the RINO cronies in Congress.
To support a candidate because you think they can win is ridiculous, ignorant and what got us into the mess that we are in. Support the candidate who is the best person for the job.
We need TEA in the Congress, Senate and Oval Office.
Ted is Golden! He is the United States Senator from Texas and the FIRST Latino to hold that office. Do yourself a favor and look at his education and background as both will be a tremendous asset to campaigning for his presidency and I feel he will trounce any candidate Republican or Democrat. His name is out there, he is tough, he has backbone, he has resolve and he is TEA!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Cruz (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Cruz)
Quote from: supsalemgr on September 13, 2014, 11:15:32 AM
OK. Cruz won't win, but the GOP will. Now, tell us who the candidate will be that will win.
Gingrich, Kasich, or Gowdy at the moment.
Quote from: suzziY on September 13, 2014, 11:48:52 AM
Never say that Cruz won't win. The term bipartisan is only a fancy term for playing the blame game. Quite frankly, I am sick of the Republicans blaming the Democrats and the Democrats blaming the Republicans. It has accomplished absolutely nothing and merely an excuse for nothing getting done. Most Republicans and Democrats are all in the same ole country club. Secondly, I don't want a president who the GOP establishment wants. The GOP establishment is scared to death of Ted Cruz because they will need to straighten up their acts and the RINO's will be out the door! Ted isn't going to play ball with the RINO's and Democrats rather the RINO's and Democrats need to play ball with him. There is a huge difference between leading and uniting the party to do what is in the best interest of the country rather than allowing Congress to lead them to do what's in the best interest of the RINO cronies in Congress.
To support a candidate because you think they can win is ridiculous, ignorant and what got us into the mess that we are in. Support the candidate who is the best person for the job.
We need TEA in the Congress, Senate and Oval Office.
Ted is Golden! He is the United States Senator from Texas and the FIRST Latino to hold that office. Do yourself a favor and look at his education and background as both will be a tremendous asset to campaigning for his presidency and I feel he will trounce any candidate Republican or Democrat. His name is out there, he is tough, he has backbone, he has resolve and he is TEA!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Cruz (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Cruz)
Bingo!!!
Quote from: carlb on September 13, 2014, 11:48:52 AM
Of course solar. Do you think Hillary has the support of both parties?
Ah... But she has the support of her own party by a wide margin unlike Cruz with a huge record of accomplishments, unlike Cruz.
Quote from: suzziY on September 13, 2014, 11:48:52 AM
Never say that Cruz won't win. The term bipartisan is only a fancy term for playing the blame game. Quite frankly, I am sick of the Republicans blaming the Democrats and the Democrats blaming the Republicans. It has accomplished absolutely nothing and merely an excuse for nothing getting done. Most Republicans and Democrats are all in the same ole country club. Secondly, I don't want a president who the GOP establishment wants. The GOP establishment is scared to death of Ted Cruz because they will need to straighten up their acts and the RINO's will be out the door! Ted isn't going to play ball with the RINO's and Democrats rather the RINO's and Democrats need to play ball with him. There is a huge difference between leading and uniting the party to do what is in the best interest of the country rather than allowing Congress to lead them to do what's in the best interest of the RINO cronies in Congress.
To support a candidate because you think they can win is ridiculous, ignorant and what got us into the mess that we are in. Support the candidate who is the best person for the job.
We need TEA in the Congress, Senate and Oval Office.
Ted is Golden! He is the United States Senator from Texas and the FIRST Latino to hold that office. Do yourself a favor and look at his education and background as both will be a tremendous asset to campaigning for his presidency and I feel he will trounce any candidate Republican or Democrat. His name is out there, he is tough, he has backbone, he has resolve and he is TEA!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Cruz (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Cruz)
By that logic we should elect Newt Gingrich. Or Newt Gingrich should have been president.
Quote from: washington on September 13, 2014, 11:49:38 AM
Gingrich, Kasich, or Gowdy at the moment.
Gowdy hasn't said a word about running, and Newt is the quintessential RINO, so he's dead before he enters the gate.
Newt...No wonder you have such a warped view of the political landscape.
Newt may be a brilliant guy, but he, like all his brethren, are more interested in keeping the status quo.
Quote from: Solar on September 13, 2014, 11:57:46 AM
Gowdy hasn't said a word about running, and Newt is the quintessential RINO, so he's dead before he enters the gate.
Newt...No wonder you have such a warped view of the political landscape.
Newt may be a brilliant guy, but he, like all his brethren, are more interested in keeping the status quo.
Do your research on Newt Gingrich before you pronounce judgement. 19 years on the outside looking in can really change a man. Everything he accomplished in the mid 90's balanced budgets the only ones in our lifetime and welfare reform wouldn't have passed without Newt. Here is a great place to do your research,
http://www.gingrichproductions.com/ (http://www.gingrichproductions.com/)
Quote from: washington on September 13, 2014, 11:51:12 AM
Ah... But she has the support of her own party by a wide margin unlike Cruz with a huge record of accomplishments, unlike Cruz.
By Party, you mean the elites in Washington . He has the support of REPUBLICANS in "flyover country ". Hillary not so much
Quote from: carlb on September 13, 2014, 12:06:31 PM
By Party, you mean the elites in Washington . He had he support of REPUBLICANS in "flyover country ". Hillary not so much
Democrats would swarm to vote for her. She has their support. Cruz and Paul are alone.
Also, had newt had Romney's money for campaigns during the primary he would have run away with it after SC.
Quote from: washington on September 13, 2014, 12:00:42 PM
Do your research on Newt Gingrich before you pronounce judgement. 19 years on the outside looking in can really change a man. Everything he accomplished in the mid 90's balanced budgets the only ones in our lifetime and welfare reform wouldn't have passed without Newt. Here is a great place to do your research,
http://www.gingrichproductions.com/ (http://www.gingrichproductions.com/)
Would a Conservative support the leftist cause of AGW? Would a Conservative support farm subsidizes?
Would a Conservative support ethanol in fuel, corn subsidies?
Would a RINO? I think you know the answer, after all, you're a genius, right? :rolleyes:
Quote from: Solar on September 13, 2014, 12:10:07 PM
Would a Conservative support the leftist cause of AGW? Would a Conservative support farm subsidizes?
Would a Conservative support ethanol in fuel, corn subsidies?
Would a RINO? I think you know the answer, after all, you're a genius, right? :rolleyes:
Would a current congressman or conservative/republican or democrat support new technology? Think very hard before you answer.
Quote from: washington on September 13, 2014, 12:00:42 PM
Do your research on Newt Gingrich before you pronounce judgement. 19 years on the outside looking in can really change a man. Everything he accomplished in the mid 90's balanced budgets the only ones in our lifetime and welfare reform wouldn't have passed without Newt. Here is a great place to do your research,
http://www.gingrichproductions.com/ (http://www.gingrichproductions.com/)
I am not a political genius like you, but as I recall Newt resigned as prompted by his own party (hardly bi-partisan support) for ethics violations. He was looked at as being responsible for his party losing the House. His time has come and gone. He didn't well at all in the 2012 run-offs and unless people have miraculously changed their opinion of him because he was booted out by his own party and had multiple affairs during his marriages, I don't see him as a viable contender in 2016.
Read my post 4 posts up from this one suzzy.
Quote from: washington on September 13, 2014, 12:13:21 PM
Would a current congressman or conservative/republican or democrat support new technology? Think very hard before you answer.
Nope! You can't sidestep the question.
Quote from: Solar on September 13, 2014, 12:20:03 PM
Nope! You can't sidestep the question.
Actually they are connected, so answer my question and you will have my answer.
Quote from: washington on September 13, 2014, 12:23:20 PM
Actually they are connected, so answer my question and you will have my answer.
So you're rewriting standard rules?
I asked first, so get busy.
Quote from: Solar on September 13, 2014, 12:25:09 PM
So you're rewriting standard rules?
I asked first, so get busy.
I made your question meaningful so answer mine.
Quote from: washington on September 13, 2014, 12:26:05 PM
I made your question meaningful so answer mine.
Last chance.
Quote from: Solar on September 13, 2014, 12:27:03 PM
Last chance.
It's a free country and I don't answer irrelevant questions.
Quote from: washington on September 13, 2014, 12:15:16 PM
Read my post 4 posts up from this one suzzy.
If you are talking about Gingrich productions as doing research -- I beg to differ. I have listened and watched very closely speech after speech by Gingrich especially during the time that "W" was president. I listened to some of his RINO remarks. Yes he is indeed intelligent. He re-emerged in 2012 with viewpoints that were now different than before. Obviously with his poor showing the baggage that he brings along with him hasn't been forgotten.
Would I vote for Gingrich over Bush or Christie? Yes. Would I vote for Gingrich over Cruz, Perry, Jindal, Palin, Haley, Walker, Carson, Rice or Santorum? Absolutely, definitely NO!
I am not a political genius like you, but I would lay you odds that if Hillary is the Democratic candidate and the GOP choices are Gingrich, Bush or Christie, she will win hands down.
Quote from: suzziY on September 13, 2014, 12:30:54 PM
If you are talking about Gingrich productions as doing research -- I beg to differ. I have listened and watched very closely speech after speech by Gingrich especially during the time that "W" was president. I listened to some of his RINO remarks. Yes he is indeed intelligent. He re-emerged in 2012 with viewpoints that were now different than before. Obviously with his poor showing the baggage that he brings along with him hasn't been forgotten.
Would I vote for Gingrich over Bush or Christie? Yes. Would I vote for Gingrich over Cruz, Perry, Jindal, Palin, Haley, Walker, Carson, Rice or Santorum? Absolutely, definitely NO!
I am not a political genius like you, but I would lay you odds that if Hillary is the Democratic candidate and the GOP choices are Gingrich, Bush or Christie, she will win hands down.
Gingrich already beat Hilary in the early 90's on Hilarycare. He's my safe pick.
Quote from: washington on September 13, 2014, 12:29:00 PM
It's a free country and I don't answer irrelevant questions.
Why yes it is, in fact we have a First Amendment guarantee, but you don't have the Right to force others to listen to your nonsense.
So take a day off to think about it, then come back and answer my question, which better be the first post you make.
Is that clear, genius?
Quote from: washington on September 13, 2014, 11:51:12 AM
Ah... But she has the support of her own party by a wide margin unlike Cruz with a huge record of accomplishments, unlike Cruz.
Ding, ding, ding, liar, liar, pants on fire! :cursing: :cursing:Now you're reaching. What exactly qualifies Hillary to be our next president? We're anxiously waiting on that one. She's as destructive as Bozo ever had time to be and she thrives on scandal. Hell, what does it matter anyway?
Quote from: keyboarder on September 13, 2014, 01:30:08 PM
Ding, ding, ding, liar, liar, pants on fire! :cursing: :cursing:Now you're reaching. What exactly qualifies Hillary to be our next president? We're anxiously waiting on that one. She's as destructive as Bozo ever had time to be and she thrives on scandal. Hell, what does it matter anyway?
Agreed. Keep in mind, that she, "Hillary Clinton" LOST to Obama. She accepted the position of Secretary of State and racked up more scandals and LIES; namely Benghazi and Fast 'n Furious.
Yes there is no doubt, she has a boat load of experience and along with it a boat load of baggage. Let her run. She'll lose. Her latest book sales flopped ... she tried to do some damage control and it failed.
Quote from: suzziY on September 13, 2014, 01:55:04 PM
Agreed. Keep in mind, that she, "Hillary Clinton" LOST to Obama. She accepted the position of Secretary of State and racked up more scandals and LIES; namely Benghazi and Fast 'n Furious.
Yes there is no doubt, she has a boat load of experience and along with it a boat load of baggage. Let her run. She'll lose. Her latest book sales flopped ... she tried to do some damage control and it failed.
True that and while You mentioned books, have you got a copy of the book out by the survivors of the raid on Benghazi yet? We got a copy last night and I'm having a time getting it out of the "sheriff's" hands to read it. The name of it is "13 Hours".
Quote from: Solar on September 11, 2014, 05:19:00 AM
Let me be blunt and derail your thread for a moment. IDIOT!!!
Voting for whomever the GOP forces on us will never kill off this cancer, at some point you have to say enough is enough and have the courage to vote your values.
Dole, McCain, Mitten, how long are you going to keep failure in charge?
Come on people, are you sheep or Conservatives?
Vote TEA. ONLY!!!
[/quot
I still think we would be much better off with Romney as President now. Obama has allowed such destruction to this country in a really short time. He was not a perfect choice, but would have been way better for the country than what we are stuck with for 2 more years.
For example, once he let all these illegals in, doubt they'll EVER be forced to leave. The economy continues to HURT most every American. The world has become much LESS stable.
But, now we are stuck with it. I pray for the right candidate. I would be fine with Cruz.
DaisyJane
Quote from: DaisyJane on September 13, 2014, 04:55:53 PM
I still think we would be much better off with Romney as President now. Obama has allowed such destruction to this country in a really short time. He was not a perfect choice, but would have been way better for the country than what we are stuck with for 2 more years.
For example, once he let all these illegals in, doubt they'll EVER be forced to leave. The economy continues to HURT most every American. The world has become much LESS stable.
But, now we are stuck with it. I pray for the right candidate. I would be fine with Cruz.
DaisyJane
No doubt he'd have been better, but history has a way of teaching, especially RINO when they lose election after election.
They won't be running as big a RINO, they will be compromising, like it or not. (think Nov bloodbath)
But more importantly, it woke the country up, regardless of all the damage the Marxist has done, he proved the leftist agenda is an extremely destructive one, an agenda that shocked all the frogs boiling away, suddenly the heat was turned all the way up, they saw communism in it's beginning stages.
For this, I thank the Marxist, he has done more for the country than he realizes, enough good to offset all the damage that occurred under Reid Fuglousy and the Marxist child.
The nation is wide awake and pissed, so much so, the Dim party as we know it is dead.
Sure, Mitten would have done a great job, I have no doubt, but his term would have been more of the status quo, in a continuation of falling further left, loss of freedoms, more pandering to moneyed interests.
At some point, you just have to stand your ground and say, Enough is Enough!
Vote TEA!
I like CRuz but I am anti Israel, which takes USA tek for free, using politics, then has the balls to sell it back to our military getting more tax money. I think they all out are against atomic power, which if used with nasa to blast debris into sun from cleaner french tek, would end the need for oil, as fuel cells and other things could replace internal combustion and seawater could be cleaned for drinking and for ox and hyd to run the fuel cells. Israel is sand and usa welfare money. PS I am white american blue eyes and polytheistic not muslim.
Hope this helps.
The perfect politics is pro free market and anti israel.
Republicans screw themselves by supporting forign war, foriegn aid, a policing the world.
I would never vote democrat aka for communism.
I wish rand, ted, cruz, or walker were next pres/vp combo any of the 4.
end obama care end the fed end public school
kock bros are good guys
Quote from: kyfho on September 14, 2014, 01:58:47 PM
I like CRuz but I am anti Israel, which takes USA tek for free, using politics, then has the balls to sell it back to our military getting more tax money. I think they all out are against atomic power, which if used with nasa to blast debris into sun from cleaner french tek, would end the need for oil, as fuel cells and other things could replace internal combustion and seawater could be cleaned for drinking and for ox and hyd to run the fuel cells. Israel is sand and usa welfare money. PS I am white american blue eyes and polytheistic not muslim.
Hope this helps.
The perfect politics is pro free market and anti israel.
Republicans screw themselves by supporting forign war, foriegn aid, a policing the world.
I would never vote democrat aka for communism.
I wish rand, ted, cruz, or walker were next pres/vp combo any of the 4.
end obama care end the fed end public school
kock bros are good guys
Could you explain WHY you have to be ANTI Israel? You're not anti every Muslim nation?
Quote from: carlb on September 14, 2014, 03:02:50 PM
Could you explain WHY you have to be ANTI Israel? You're not anti every Muslim nation?
Sorry, I had to boot his ass, he wouldn't stop creating worthless with extremely poor grammar.
Sure he meant well, but believe it or not, we do have standards. :biggrin:
Quote from: Solar on September 13, 2014, 12:39:05 PM
Why yes it is, in fact we have a First Amendment guarantee, but you don't have the Right to force others to listen to your nonsense.
So take a day off to think about it, then come back and answer my question, which better be the first post you make.
Is that clear, genius?
Yes. Ging did support those about 19 years ago and he's been out of politics for 18.
Quote from: keyboarder on September 13, 2014, 01:30:08 PM
Ding, ding, ding, liar, liar, pants on fire! :cursing: :cursing:Now you're reaching. What exactly qualifies Hillary to be our next president? We're anxiously waiting on that one. She's as destructive as Bozo ever had time to be and she thrives on scandal. Hell, what does it matter anyway?
I'm not a democrat so don't ask me such questions.
Quote from: washington on September 14, 2014, 05:04:34 PM
Yes. Ging did support those about 19 years ago and he's been out of politics for 18.
Wrong!!! That's not an answer, try again. Let me refresh your memory, and by the way, it's a simple yes or no answer.
Would a Conservative support the leftist cause of AGW? Would a Conservative support farm subsidizes?
Would a Conservative support ethanol in fuel, corn subsidies?
Would a RINO? I think you know the answer, after all, you're a genius, right?
Quote from: Solar on September 14, 2014, 05:10:05 PM
Wrong!!! That's not an answer, try again. Let me refresh your memory, and by the way, it's a simple yes or no answer.
Would a Conservative support the leftist cause of AGW? Would a Conservative support farm subsidizes?
Would a Conservative support ethanol in fuel, corn subsidies?
Would a RINO? I think you know the answer, after all, you're a genius, right?
Of course he did.
19 years and 18 of being out of politics. You don't believe people can change? I'm starting to feel bad for you if you really have this view.
I'll put it another way you don't think the people that were once apart o the GOP are sick of the GOP and are not considered conservative?
Quote from: Solar on September 14, 2014, 05:10:05 PM
Wrong!!! That's not an answer, try again. Let me refresh your memory, and by the way, it's a simple yes or no answer.
Would a Conservative support the leftist cause of AGW? Would a Conservative support farm subsidizes?
Would a Conservative support ethanol in fuel, corn subsidies?
Would a RINO? I think you know the answer, after all, you're a genius, right?
Wile E. Coyote
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.apres.co.uk%2Febay%2Fimg%2Fbadges%2Fsuper_genius.jpg&hash=80099629a1079d13b9ba55be904eb3d2d50aa2d2)
Quote from: SVPete on September 14, 2014, 05:23:54 PM
Wile E. Coyote
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.apres.co.uk%2Febay%2Fimg%2Fbadges%2Fsuper_genius.jpg&hash=80099629a1079d13b9ba55be904eb3d2d50aa2d2)
lol: :lol: Looks like the name "genius" wannabe is gonna stick for awhile and of course he is entitled to his opinion. I however feel Ted Cruz is the best choice. Cruz is absolutely without a doubt golden! There are a couple of others that I think would also serve our country well; Santorum, Perry, Haley, and King (IA) though he hasn't even been considered as a contender. My 3rd category of possible acceptable candidates would be Paul, West, Carson, Palin and Bachmann.
Too many RINO's still standing in our way.
tp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_presidential_candidates,_2016
Quote from: washington on September 14, 2014, 05:15:03 PM
Of course he did.
19 years and 18 of being out of politics. You don't believe people can change? I'm starting to feel bad for you if you really have this view.
Oh, this is like shooting fish in a barrel. Nineteen years, eh? How about 2012 kid?
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/05/12/gingrich-feels-heat-global-warming-ad-pelosi/ (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/05/12/gingrich-feels-heat-global-warming-ad-pelosi/)
http://thespeechatimeforchoosing.wordpress.com/2011/11/07/newt-gingrichs-curious-love-of-ethanol-subsidies-follow-the-money/ (http://thespeechatimeforchoosing.wordpress.com/2011/11/07/newt-gingrichs-curious-love-of-ethanol-subsidies-follow-the-money/)
One more time son.
Would a Conservative support the leftist cause of AGW? Would a Conservative support farm subsidizes?
Would a Conservative support ethanol in fuel, corn subsidies?
Would a RINO? I think you know the answer, after all, you're a genius, right?
Quote from: SVPete on September 14, 2014, 05:23:54 PM
Wile E. Coyote
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.apres.co.uk%2Febay%2Fimg%2Fbadges%2Fsuper_genius.jpg&hash=80099629a1079d13b9ba55be904eb3d2d50aa2d2)
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Quote from: Solar on September 14, 2014, 06:56:05 PM
Oh, this is like shooting fish in a barrel. Nineteen years, eh? How about 2012 kid?
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/05/12/gingrich-feels-heat-global-warming-ad-pelosi/ (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/05/12/gingrich-feels-heat-global-warming-ad-pelosi/)
http://thespeechatimeforchoosing.wordpress.com/2011/11/07/newt-gingrichs-curious-love-of-ethanol-subsidies-follow-the-money/ (http://thespeechatimeforchoosing.wordpress.com/2011/11/07/newt-gingrichs-curious-love-of-ethanol-subsidies-follow-the-money/)
One more time son.
Would a Conservative support the leftist cause of AGW? Would a Conservative support farm subsidizes?
Would a Conservative support ethanol in fuel, corn subsidies?
Would a RINO? I think you know the answer, after all, you're a genius, right?
The same conservatives that called for state run high risk pools.
Quote from: washington on September 15, 2014, 12:36:01 AM
The same conservatives that called for state run high risk pools.
Quit dodging the question. Do I need to ask it in your every post?
You see, you aren't as smart as you think, your mommy and daddy lied, you aren't Spetchal (genius), you're just a run of the mill troll that bit off more than he could chew.
So either man up, if that's even possible, (be a Conservative) and simply answer the question directly with a yes or no.
By the way, I'm not your only problem, I'm just the gate keeper.
Quote from: Solar on September 15, 2014, 06:26:03 AM
Quit dodging the question. Do I need to ask it in your every post?
You see, you aren't as smart as you think, your mommy and daddy lied, you aren't Spetchal (genius), you're just a run of the mill troll that bit off more than he could chew.
So either man up, if that's even possible, (be a Conservative) and simply answer the question directly with a yes or no.
By the way, I'm not your only problem, I'm just the gate keeper.
I'm pointing out that conservatives can have moderate points of view. I am answering your question, and you don't even know it. The answer is yes.
Quote from: washington on September 15, 2014, 06:29:27 AM
I'm pointing out that conservatives can have moderate points of view. I am answering your question, and you don't even know it. The answer is yes.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F%5Burl%3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fs.rimg.info%2Fa25f3b4082c38113c4e596bff86d4cf0.gif%255Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fs.rimg.info%2Fa25f3b4082c38113c4e596bff86d4cf0.gif%255B%2Furl%255D&hash=7eb67a1c2011e700269788c5548cc9f2f3e602c2)
Quote from: washington on September 15, 2014, 06:29:27 AM
I'm pointing out that conservatives can have moderate points of view. I am answering your question, and you don't even know it. The answer is yes.
Bull shit, you weren't answering, you were dodging!
So why didn't you just admit Newt's a RINO in the first place, admit you were wrong and move on?
And no, Conservatives have a set of core values that cannot be compromised, if you do, you're not a Conservative.
Would you compromise your values?
Quote from: Solar on September 15, 2014, 06:58:21 AM
Bull shit, you weren't answering, you were dodging!
So why didn't you just admit Newt's a RINO in the first place, admit you were wrong and move on?
And no, Conservatives have a set of core values that cannot be compromised, if you do, you're not a Conservative.
Would you compromise your values?
Newts not a RINO he's apart of what will be the new transformed GOP, which will be way more conservative. See... It's all coming together. You can get things done with the other side and not compromise your own values. FYI.
Quote from: washington on September 15, 2014, 07:34:47 AM
Newts not a RINO he's apart of what will be the new transformed GOP, which will be way more conservative. See... It's all coming together. You can get things done with the other side and not compromise your own values. FYI.
The "new transformed GOP"...? You mean the go-along-to-get-along chumps like Senator Smirk?
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.fotki.com%2F1_p%2Csbtbsdffgfdkrtrxbqfqsbrwqdbw%2Cvi%2Ftwsskkwtgxrkgrqqbkd%2F1%2F1595431%2F9682616%2Fphoto-vi.jpg&hash=03aaa4b44e6122e7e4701dfa67185461798c9878)
Quote from: quiller on September 15, 2014, 08:28:53 AM
The "new transformed GOP"...? You mean the go-along-to-get-along chumps like Senator Smirk?
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.fotki.com%2F1_p%2Csbtbsdffgfdkrtrxbqfqsbrwqdbw%2Cvi%2Ftwsskkwtgxrkgrqqbkd%2F1%2F1595431%2F9682616%2Fphoto-vi.jpg&hash=03aaa4b44e6122e7e4701dfa67185461798c9878)
What a cute photo! :smile:
Be patient and wait for the new congress to be sworn in and be happy.
Quote from: washington on September 15, 2014, 08:57:47 AM
What a cute photo! :smile:
Be patient and wait for the new congress to be sworn in and be happy.
Don't worry, we are patiently waiting on the cleansing of the congress. The replacements will surprise you! :smile:
Quote from: washington on September 15, 2014, 08:57:47 AM
What a cute photo! :smile:
Be patient and wait for the new congress to be sworn in and be happy.
Troll, I am the least patient person here. I'd have banned you, not let you back in.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.fotki.com%2F1_p%2Crswwggrdgtqgdkgxbqfqsbrwqdbw%2Cvi%2Frkdqsbtsqxwqwqkttsg%2F1%2F1595431%2F12751961%2Fs_2015_going_to_better_placevi-vi.png&hash=73c6d070e09fda0e5c082570ed7acfb6fab281b5)
Quote from: washington on September 15, 2014, 07:34:47 AM
Newts not a RINO he's apart of what will be the new transformed GOP, which will be way more conservative. See... It's all coming together. You can get things done with the other side and not compromise your own values. FYI.
I just proved Newt is part of the establishment RINO in his backing of the global warming scam, backed farm subsidies, refused to do anything about the ethanol scam, yet you claim he's a Conservative?
Son, you have no concept of what it means to be a Conservative, Conservatives do not grow govt, in fact, they shrink it at every occasion.
Refusing to go after the corn ethanol scam, AGW, govt controlled farming is more aligned with a socialist, which is exactly what the RINO are, crony capitalist/socialists.
Yes, your mentor is nothing but a big govt socialist, so what does that make you?
Quote from: Solar on September 15, 2014, 06:58:21 AM
Bull shit, you weren't answering, you were dodging!
So why didn't you just admit Newt's a RINO in the first place, admit you were wrong and move on?
And no, Conservatives have a set of core values that cannot be compromised, if you do, you're not a Conservative.
Would you compromise your values?
CORE VALUES and the very principles upon which this great country was founded upon. Disregarding those core values and principles are the reason why the GOP is in the pathetic shape it's in filled with RINO's who have deviated from not only the principles of the party but the very backbone of our country; our Constitution. Why? To gain votes, payoffs, etc. and to appeal to moderates and to the leftards in hopes of winning an election --- which they lost miserably and as a result we got Obama.
Quote from: suzziY on September 15, 2014, 10:09:38 AM
CORE VALUES and the very principles upon which this great country was founded upon. Disregarding those core values and principles are the reason why the GOP is in the pathetic shape it's in filled with RINO's who have deviated from not only the principles of the party but the very backbone of our country; our Constitution. Why? To gain votes, payoffs, etc. and to appeal to moderates and to the leftards in hopes of winning an election --- which they lost miserably and as a result we got Obama.
Exactly! RINO are nothing but the very worst of Capitalism, they are the leaches on the middle class, they produce nothing.
In my book, they rank below Unions and lawyers, which many are, and now the establishment is pandering to the Unions.
Could it get any worse?
Quote from: Solar on September 15, 2014, 10:44:50 AM
Exactly! RINO are nothing but the very worst of Capitalism, they are the leaches on the middle class, they produce nothing.
In my book, they rank below Unions and lawyers, which many are, and now the establishment is pandering to the Unions.
Could it get any worse?
Young rich kids that
think they know everything.
Quote from: walkstall on September 15, 2014, 10:56:21 AM
Young rich kids that think they know everything.
Aw, come on, cut them some slack. :lol: They go through our very liberal biased educational system and voila ... they come out geniuses! They are taught to act and think like liberals; "good" Republicans should be moderates and those Republicans who are conservative constitutionalists are evil, corrupt, liars, don't pay enough taxes, warmongers, and just aren't in touch with the time! I could go on, but nausea is starting to set in.
Quote from: suzziY on September 15, 2014, 12:25:43 PM
Aw, come on, cut them some slack. :lol: They go through our very liberal biased educational system and voila ... they come out geniuses! They are taught to act and think like liberals; "good" Republicans should be moderates and those Republicans who are conservative constitutionalists are evil, corrupt, liars, don't pay enough taxes, warmongers, and just aren't in touch with the time! I could go on, but nausea is starting to set in.
Well that was the last generations. :lol: This new generations is putting them to shame.
Quote from: washington on September 15, 2014, 07:34:47 AM
Newts not a RINO he's apart of what will be the new transformed GOP, which will be way more conservative. See... It's all coming together. You can get things done with the other side and not compromise your own values. FYI.
??? Good grief. What planet are you on? Newt not a RINO? Since when??? During "W"'s term he went on national television and gave his "opinon" on immigration which was just shy of granting amnesty and was all for a guest worker program. Then tried to argue objectionably when asked then if he wanted to grant amnesty. Yes, he is slick with words and very convincing, but double talk doesn't cut it. Amnesty is just that. Amnesty. Illegals have broken the law period. They should not be rewarded with a damn job and benefits. They should be deported. We spend billions catering to illegals who haven't contributed dime one! Secondly,in 2011 he announced on Meet The Press that he was in favor of forced health care mandates ... he didn't come out and exactly say Obamacare ... but he might as well have.
Sorry. Newt has been around for awhile. He was booted out by his own party while in office. If you recall, his party blamed him for their losing. He tried to resurface and reinvent himself for the presidency last election. It obviously didn't work. He didn't even come close. The CONSERVATIVE base knows he's a RINO. Perhaps he has some of the moderates and liberals RINO'd but not the base he needs to get elected. WE conservatives don't want moderates or RINO's -- slowly but surely we will get rid of them one by one, vote by vote, election after election.
Your statement the "new transformed GOP" which will be way more conservative has left me baffled. Are you under the impression that all of a sudden the "GOP establishment" (predominately RINO's and moderates) are going to become more conservative? If that is what you are implying, all I can say is, if you honestly believe that b.s., than obviously you are NOT a genius.
RINO is RINO. Moderate is moderate. Conservatives are neither!!
Quote from: quiller on September 15, 2014, 09:31:41 AM
Troll, I am the least patient person here. I'd have banned you, not let you back in.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.fotki.com%2F1_p%2Crswwggrdgtqgdkgxbqfqsbrwqdbw%2Cvi%2Frkdqsbtsqxwqwqkttsg%2F1%2F1595431%2F12751961%2Fs_2015_going_to_better_placevi-vi.png&hash=73c6d070e09fda0e5c082570ed7acfb6fab281b5)
Dude, the GOP will take over congress. You are a right winger right?
Quote from: Solar on September 15, 2014, 09:42:50 AM
I just proved Newt is part of the establishment RINO in his backing of the global warming scam, backed farm subsidies, refused to do anything about the ethanol scam, yet you claim he's a Conservative?
Son, you have no concept of what it means to be a Conservative, Conservatives do not grow govt, in fact, they shrink it at every occasion.
Refusing to go after the corn ethanol scam, AGW, govt controlled farming is more aligned with a socialist, which is exactly what the RINO are, crony capitalist/socialists.
Yes, your mentor is nothing but a big govt socialist, so what does that make you?
Your entitled to your "opinion." The answer to your question is it make me a conservative.
Quote from: suzziY on September 15, 2014, 01:07:44 PM
??? Good grief. What planet are you on? Newt not a RINO? Since when??? During "W"'s term he went on national television and gave his "opinon" on immigration which was just shy of granting amnesty and was all for a guest worker program. Then tried to argue objectionably when asked then if he wanted to grant amnesty. Yes, he is slick with words and very convincing, but double talk doesn't cut it. Amnesty is just that. Amnesty. Illegals have broken the law period. They should not be rewarded with a damn job and benefits. They should be deported. We spend billions catering to illegals who haven't contributed dime one! Secondly,in 2011 he announced on Meet The Press that he was in favor of forced health care mandates ... he didn't come out and exactly say Obamacare ... but he might as well have.
Sorry. Newt has been around for awhile. He was booted out by his own party while in office. If you recall, his party blamed him for their losing. He tried to resurface and reinvent himself for the presidency last election. It obviously didn't work. He didn't even come close. The CONSERVATIVE base knows he's a RINO. Perhaps he has some of the moderates and liberals RINO'd but not the base he needs to get elected. WE conservatives don't want moderates or RINO's -- slowly but surely we will get rid of them one by one, vote by vote, election after election.
Your statement the "new transformed GOP" which will be way more conservative has left me baffled. Are you under the impression that all of a sudden the "GOP establishment" (predominately RINO's and moderates) are going to become more conservative? If that is what you are implying, all I can say is, if you honestly believe that b.s., than obviously you are NOT a genius.
RINO is RINO. Moderate is moderate. Conservatives are neither!!
Solar believes it. He said he agreed that they'd have to cave to the right on the debt and Government spending. That's a big conservative principle. Smaller Government.
Quote from: suzziY on September 15, 2014, 12:25:43 PM
Aw, come on, cut them some slack. :lol: They go through our very liberal biased educational system and voila ... they come out geniuses! They are taught to act and think like liberals; "good" Republicans should be moderates and those Republicans who are conservative constitutionalists are evil, corrupt, liars, don't pay enough taxes, warmongers, and just aren't in touch with the time! I could go on, but nausea is starting to set in.
I'm very old school.
Quote from: suzziY on September 15, 2014, 01:07:44 PM
??? Good grief. What planet are you on? Newt not a RINO? Since when??? During "W"'s term he went on national television and gave his "opinon" on immigration which was just shy of granting amnesty and was all for a guest worker program. Then tried to argue objectionably when asked then if he wanted to grant amnesty. Yes, he is slick with words and very convincing, but double talk doesn't cut it. Amnesty is just that. Amnesty. Illegals have broken the law period. They should not be rewarded with a damn job and benefits. They should be deported. We spend billions catering to illegals who haven't contributed dime one! Secondly,in 2011 he announced on Meet The Press that he was in favor of forced health care mandates ... he didn't come out and exactly say Obamacare ... but he might as well have.
Sorry. Newt has been around for awhile. He was booted out by his own party while in office. If you recall, his party blamed him for their losing. He tried to resurface and reinvent himself for the presidency last election. It obviously didn't work. He didn't even come close. The CONSERVATIVE base knows he's a RINO. Perhaps he has some of the moderates and liberals RINO'd but not the base he needs to get elected. WE conservatives don't want moderates or RINO's -- slowly but surely we will get rid of them one by one, vote by vote, election after election.
Your statement the "new transformed GOP" which will be way more conservative has left me baffled. Are you under the impression that all of a sudden the "GOP establishment" (predominately RINO's and moderates) are going to become more conservative? If that is what you are implying, all I can say is, if you honestly believe that b.s., than obviously you are NOT a genius.
RINO is RINO. Moderate is moderate. Conservatives are neither!!
That's not what Newt said at all about illegals. Quote him warmly and accurately.
Quote from: washington on September 15, 2014, 03:09:45 PM
Your entitled to your "opinion." The answer to your question is it make me a conservative.
Check your grammar on that reply, because it made no sense.
Quote from: Solar on September 15, 2014, 07:10:34 PM
Check your grammar on that reply, because it made no sense.
You're. Makes. Satisfied? Also it's didn't make any sense.
Quote from: Solar on September 11, 2014, 05:19:00 AM
Let me be blunt and derail your thread for a moment. IDIOT!!!
Voting for whomever the GOP forces on us will never kill off this cancer, at some point you have to say enough is enough and have the courage to vote your values.
Dole, McCain, Mitten, how long are you going to keep failure in charge?
Come on people, are you sheep or Conservatives?
Vote TEA. ONLY!!!
IMO, its better to vote for a "war monger" than what we have in the white house now. He has to be dragged off the golf course kicking and screaming to pay attention to what's happening.
Quote from: washington on September 15, 2014, 03:08:32 PM
Dude, the GOP will take over congress. You are a right winger right?
Congratulations, you got it precisely backward on what that image meant.
Looks like Neddy is going to take the noob to the woodshed. Mother always said there was something nasty in the woodshed...
Quote from: The Boo Man... on September 16, 2014, 01:23:06 AM
Looks like Neddy is going to take the noob to the woodshed. Mother always said there was something nasty in the woodshed...
Isn't that where you hang, skin and tan the hides of the liberal trolls?
Quote from: quiller on September 16, 2014, 01:31:10 AM
Isn't that where you hang, skin and tan the hides of the liberal trolls?
Yes. Yes it is.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on September 16, 2014, 01:40:58 AM
Yes. Yes it is.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.fotki.com%2F1_p%2Crwdqsqqgdbdgkswxbqfqsbrwqdbw%2Cvi%2Fkgwwtrsfbxwtdrgbktk%2F1%2F1595431%2F10163839%2Foh_goody-vi.png&hash=cadb398e68e00952f140a0462c98ad4ebcc9e7c3)
What-ho, Neddy, time for the extra-wide cricket-paddle. It leaves a better blister on the backside needing it most.
Quote from: washington on September 15, 2014, 08:04:56 PM
You're. Makes. Satisfied? Also it's didn't make any sense.
Like aligning with Marxists, it's safe to say you're a commie, so the same applies with Newt an establishment RINO.
Look, I like Newt because he's a great debater that runs circles around the Dims, but none of his new found "Come to Jesus" moments is what anyone would consider Conservative.
I get it, it's like discovering your dads a pedophile. You'll do whatever it takes to convince yourself he's merely confused, he actually loves kids.
Denial is the first of 5 stages towards recovery. Let me know when finally get pissed, that's when the real recovery begins.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.petsolutions.com%2Fimages%2FProducts%2F18281420a.jpg&hash=dfe5face5294a1a4877cf3f4376a4b2e2e401809)
Quote from: Solar on September 16, 2014, 06:42:20 AM
Like aligning with Marxists, it's safe to say you're a commie, so the same applies with Newt an establishment RINO.
Look, I like Newt because he's a great debater that runs circles around the Dims, but none of his new found "Come to Jesus" moments is what anyone would consider Conservative.
I get it, it's like discovering your dads a pedophile. You'll do whatever it takes to convince yourself he's merely confused, he actually loves kids.
Denial is the first of 5 stages towards recovery. Let me know when finally get pissed, that's when the real recovery begins.
None of what you said about Newt Makes him a Commie. None of what you posted I didn't already know. We are both conservatives.
Quote from: washington on September 16, 2014, 09:59:48 AM
None of what you said about Newt Makes him a Commie. None of what you posted I didn't already know. We are both conservatives.
Read it again, I didn't call him a commie or Marxist, he's nothing but a rino.
Quote from: Solar on September 16, 2014, 10:09:32 AM
Read it again, I didn't call him a commie or Marxist, he's nothing but a rino.
You calling either one of us a commie you are referring to both of us. We are conservatives.
Quote from: washington on September 16, 2014, 10:36:35 AM
You calling either one of us a commie you are referring to both of us. We are conservatives.
What is your definition then of conservative and how does your definition apply to TEA?
Quote from: washington on September 13, 2014, 06:12:39 AM
No he's not. Not by a mile.
Of course not. He's a conservative.
Quote from: washington on September 13, 2014, 09:02:50 AM
fine, I'll give in,
What has Cruz done in Congress that has garnered bipartisan support or support within his own party?
Why would we want that?
Quote
The American people will never not for a long time after this President vote for any candidate that has never lead anything with bipartisan support and accomplished what he set out to accomplish. Another words you need way more than a big mouth. Voters learn. This will be the number 1 thing they look for in the next President.
Wrong. The American people are tired of liberalism and Marxism being shoved down their throat. Ted Cruz is American, and represents what normal Americans want.
Quote
On the completely different subject of bipartisan support the reason why congress has such a low approval rating which shatters the Presidents FYI, is because the lack of working together. See Newt Gingrich proved that you don't have to sacrifice core principles to accomplish things in congress with the other side, and he also did it with a democrat president.
...who takes credit for Newt's accomplishments. Being on the right side of a position isn't politics. It's just the right thing to do.
Quote
Whether you have done it on the federal level or state level as a Governor doesn't matter as long as you have experience in Government doing it on a high profile level.
Worked great for Dole, McCain, and Romney.
Quote
This will be the type of candidate that's the next president. In a way Cruz is like Obama in th sense that he was a new lone wolf in congress before running for president. We've learned our lesson.
Wrong.
Quote
Also 1 key point I want to make - Because the American public doesn't realize that harry reid has stopped all GOP legislation from advancing they just see a disfunctional congress as a whole. This is why Rand Paul and Cruz really have nothing to go on. Our next president wont be coming from congress.
You're ignoring McConnell's role in this why?
Quote
To speak of cruz as a viable candidate right now is potentially making the same mistake the libs made by electing Obama.
For someone who claims to be a genius, you sure are an idiot.
Quote from: washington on September 13, 2014, 11:00:25 AM
Cruz wont win because he can't even get the support of his own party let alone bipartisan support, so the answer is no.
Cruz doesn't have influence?
Quote from: washington on September 14, 2014, 05:15:03 PM
Of course he did.
19 years and 18 of being out of politics. You don't believe people can change? I'm starting to feel bad for you if you really have this view.
Try again, dummy:
Nancy Pelosi and Newt Gingrich Commercial on Climate Change (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qi6n_-wB154#)
Quote from: washington on September 15, 2014, 12:36:01 AM
The same conservatives that called for state run high risk pools.
And mandatory purchase of health insurance.
http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/gingrich-health-care-insurance/2011/05/15/id/396426/ (http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/gingrich-health-care-insurance/2011/05/15/id/396426/)
Gee, what a conservative.
Quote from: Solar on September 15, 2014, 07:10:34 PM
Check your grammar on that reply, because it made no sense.
He thinks Gingrich is conservative because he is more conservative than Bill Clinton.
Wow.
Quote from: washington on September 16, 2014, 10:36:35 AM
You calling either one of us a commie you are referring to both of us. We are conservatives.
Boy are you thick! Or one of the dumbest SOB's on the planet.
Quote from: taxed on September 16, 2014, 11:58:27 AM
He thinks Gingrich is conservative because he is more conservative than Bill Clinton.
Wow.
:lol:
Lowering the bar, 12 notches at a time.
Quote from: Solar on September 16, 2014, 02:06:50 PM
:lol:
Lowering the bar, 12 notches at a time.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F9XZmwq9.jpg&hash=30260c0086492d15d69665c0b55bb0daf7fc5250)
Quote from: taxed on September 16, 2014, 02:09:30 PM
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F9XZmwq9.jpg&hash=30260c0086492d15d69665c0b55bb0daf7fc5250)
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
How long have you been hanging onto that one?
Quote from: Solar on September 16, 2014, 02:15:03 PM
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
How long have you been hanging onto that one?
Since Sioux left.
Quote from: taxed on September 16, 2014, 02:18:56 PM
Since Sioux left.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi37.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fe85%2Fftby24%2FSmilies%2FremoteImage-4.gif&hash=96d2a22c4ee3eb3bb82320dac587db5ab49e8d21)
Quote from: taxed on September 16, 2014, 11:45:30 AM
Cruz doesn't have influence?
Nope not at all. Case and point.
Quote from: washington on September 16, 2014, 03:44:50 PM
Nope not at all. Case and point.
He is sure scaring the hell out of the lib's and Hillary Clinton for a nobody. :lol:
Quote from: taxed on September 16, 2014, 04:58:39 PM
Wrong.
TAXED, YOU'RE ARGUING WITH A 28 YEAR OLD POLITICAL GENIUS. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Quote from: Solar on September 16, 2014, 05:48:05 PM
TAXED, YOU'RE ARGUING WITH A 28 YEAR OLD POLITICAL GENIUS. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F%5Burl%3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fparty.evilgeniuscomics.com%2Fimages%2Fcoyote0.png%255Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fparty.evilgeniuscomics.com%2Fimages%2Fcoyote0.png%255B%2Furl%255D&hash=fc818bf674aedec89d5dc69fa9301914c5e309b3)
Quote from: Solar on September 16, 2014, 05:48:05 PM
TAXED, YOU'RE ARGUING WITH A 28 YEAR OLD POLITICAL GENIUS. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
You mean someone smarter than him.
Oh lord. Do we have another "I'm a better conservative than you" poster?
Quote from: walkstall on September 16, 2014, 04:03:26 PM
He is sure scaring the hell out of the lib's and Hillary Clinton for a nobody. :lol:
We will have somebody MUCH more better and qualified than Cruz as our candidate. btw.. there's MANY reasons why Clinton should be worried right now.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on September 16, 2014, 07:19:19 PM
Oh lord. Do we have another "I'm a better conservative than you" poster?
I am a conservative, but in this discussion that's beside the point.
Quote from: washington on September 16, 2014, 07:35:05 PM
We will have somebody MUCH more better and qualified than Cruz as our candidate. btw.. there's MANY reasons why Clinton should be worried right now.
What, like a self appointed 28 year old kid, political genius?
You really have no clue just how stupid you look, do you? You and Fuglousy have sooo much in common.
I hope this better qualified than Cruz candidate doesn't say things like "more better"...
Quote from: Solar on September 16, 2014, 07:54:02 PM
What, like a self appointed 28 year old kid, political genius?
You really have no clue just how stupid you look, do you? You and Fuglousy have sooo much in common.
Is fuglously a political genius also? :tounge:
btw... I'm not ruling out running for office in my lifetime. I'd love to "help" people on a wide scale, mainly with jobs, and shrinking the size of government. I'm also an economic smart ass.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on September 16, 2014, 07:56:32 PM
I hope this better qualified than Cruz candidate doesn't say things like "more better"...
Have you ever had one of those days where you woke up and realized you'd wish you were an only child?
Quote from: washington on September 16, 2014, 08:40:36 PM
Have you ever had one of those days where you woke up and realized you'd wish you were an only child?
Every boy who has a sister wishes that rather often...
Quote from: The Boo Man... on September 16, 2014, 10:12:58 PM
Every boy who has a sister wishes that rather often...
Yeah....... I got 2 older sisters........
Yeah, my sister called me an ass and took a swing at me yesterday, because she was moody and I asked her if she was on her period. Boy, that was a mistake. :rolleyes:
Quote from: washington on September 16, 2014, 08:39:11 PM
Is fuglously a political genius also? :tounge:
btw... I'm not ruling out running for office in my lifetime. I'd love to "help" people on a wide scale, mainly with jobs, and shrinking the size of government. I'm also an economic smart ass.
Yeah,if you think using the standard of "Sign it first, so you can see what's in the contract" as a measure of political genius and the power over a party that shares the mentality of an eggplant in Dim Representatives as genius.
Quote from: washington on September 16, 2014, 07:17:08 PM
You mean someone smarter than him.
You? Smart? Smart enough I reckon to be Tax's latest chew toy. Keep it up, it's entertaining the heck outta' the rest of us. :lol: :lol:
Quote from: washington on September 16, 2014, 07:17:08 PM
You mean someone smarter than him.
You didn't even know that Gingrich is a RINO.
Quote from: washington on September 16, 2014, 07:36:00 PM
I am a conservative, but in this discussion that's beside the point.
No you're not. You think politicians who support AGW and mandated insurance coverage are conservative.
Try again.
Quote from: taxed on September 17, 2014, 09:52:30 AM
You didn't even know that Gingrich is a RINO.
He's not. He's between a rino and a conservative more conservative.
Quote from: washington on September 17, 2014, 01:06:41 PM
He's not. He's between a rino and a conservative more conservative.
He believes in AGW. That makes him a liberal. Only dumb people believe in AGW, and only dumb people support politicians who believe in AGW. Guess what that makes you, "genius".
Quote from: washington on September 17, 2014, 12:32:26 AM
Yeah, my sister called me an ass and took a swing at me yesterday, because she was moody and I asked her if she was on her period. Boy, that was a mistake. :rolleyes:
No more of a mistake than you posting such trash as this. TMI and who cares?
Quote from: keyboarder on September 17, 2014, 01:48:43 PM
No more of a mistake than you posting such trash as this. TMI and who cares?
That post was for the poster i was responding to. I don't care what you think of it.
Quote from: taxed on September 17, 2014, 01:44:23 PM
He believes in AGW. That makes him a liberal. Only dumb people believe in AGW, and only dumb people support politicians who believe in AGW. Guess what that makes you, "genius".
No, he's a hell of a lot smarter than you. :lol: Try again.
Quote from: washington on September 17, 2014, 01:51:28 PM
No, he's a hell of a lot smarter than you. :lol: Try again.
I'm dumb, but he's dumber. I know you look up to him, sorry.
Quote from: washington on September 17, 2014, 01:51:28 PM
No, he's a hell of a lot smarter than you. :lol: Try again.
How do you know that? You are beginning to look more and more like a troll.
Quote from: washington on September 17, 2014, 01:06:41 PM
He's not. He's between a rino and a conservative more conservative.
So now you finally admit he's not a true Conservative, yet you emulate him as a mentor?
Quote from: washington on September 17, 2014, 01:06:41 PM
He's not. He's between a rino and a conservative more conservative.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fangrywhitedude.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads2%2F2009%2F10%2FNewt-RINO-300x300.jpg&hash=3c16ad7ee8c1b2fbd5e6d972427685fde22f5d9c)
Quote from: taxed on September 17, 2014, 01:58:10 PM
I'm dumb, but he's dumber. I know you look up to him, sorry.
Why would you insult yourself like that? Don't.
Quote from: Solar on September 17, 2014, 02:15:10 PM
So now you finally admit he's not a true Conservative, yet you emulate him as a mentor?
Yes he is a political mentor. Do you know the difference? Look you can learn a lot of good things by keeping your ears open to people on the right that aren't as far right as you.
Quote from: washington on September 17, 2014, 03:09:16 PM
Yes he is a political mentor. Do you know the difference? Look you can learn a lot of good things by keeping your ears open to people on the right that aren't as far right as you.
Obviously you didn't.
Like learning how not to lie and break promises they never planned on keeping in the first place, like RINO.
If that's what you mean by learning from "Your Mentor"
Mentor: A wise and
trusted guide and adviser, Serve as a teacher or
trusted counselor.
Quote from: Solar on September 17, 2014, 03:47:47 PM
Obviously you didn't.
Like learning how not to lie and break promises they never planned on keeping in the first place, like RINO.
If that's what you mean by learning from "Your Mentor"
Mentor: A wise and trusted guide and adviser, Serve as a teacher or trusted counselor.
Yes, on politics.
Quote from: washington on September 17, 2014, 04:02:08 PM
Yes, on politics.
I see you don't live in the Washington state Cesspool of RINO's.
Quote from: Solar on September 17, 2014, 02:15:10 PM
So now you finally admit he's not a true Conservative, yet you emulate him as a mentor?
At one point he was! I use to love Newt when he was minority whip and I think he was a really good Speaker( at least better then Boner) but I also think he moved to far to the center when he ran for president. He kind of lost me, But there are far worse RINO's out there then Newt. I wish he would move back to his conservative roots. :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:
Quote from: washington on September 17, 2014, 03:07:57 PM
Why would you insult yourself like that? Don't.
You're not smart enough to know how stupid you are. Leave the politics to the adults.
Quote from: taxed on September 17, 2014, 04:28:42 PM
You're not smart enough to know how stupid you are. Leave the politics to the adults.
Ok, I'll be the adult and handle the politics since I'm so far the only one who can, and you handle the denial that you and some others here aren't apart of the real GOP.
Quote from: washington on September 17, 2014, 04:40:09 PM
Ok, I'll be the adult and handle the politics since I'm so far the only one who can, and you handle the denial that you and some others here aren't apart of the real GOP.
Yeah, with such brilliance, like Newt is a conservative. Great job!
Quote from: redbeard on September 17, 2014, 04:28:41 PM
At one point he was! I use to love Newt when he was minority whip and I think he was a really good Speaker( at least better then Boner) but I also think he moved to far to the center when he ran for president. He kind of lost me, But there are far worse RINO's out there then Newt. I wish he would move back to his conservative roots. :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:
Of course there are, they're called socialists, like Boner and McCain, but don't be fooled, Newt is damn close to them.
Quote from: redbeard on September 17, 2014, 04:28:41 PM
At one point he was! I use to love Newt when he was minority whip and I think he was a really good Speaker( at least better then Boner) but I also think he moved to far to the center when he ran for president. He kind of lost me, But there are far worse RINO's out there then Newt. I wish he would move back to his conservative roots. :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:
Newt has move to the dark side. As he can make more money there.
Quote from: walkstall on September 17, 2014, 07:38:16 PM
Newt has move to the dark side. As he can make more money there.
He has to make more money to pay off his donors from the last election. Perfectly understandable.
Quote from: washington on September 17, 2014, 09:51:40 PM
He has to make more money to pay off his donors from the last election. Perfectly understandable.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.reactiongifs.us%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F08%2Fwho_gives_a_shit.gif&hash=24ac90ea0765cc4ee84f27ec9d9dd6411fb54957)
Quote from: washington on September 17, 2014, 09:51:40 PM
He has to make more money to pay off his donors from the last election. Perfectly understandable.
Nobody has a problem with him making money, dummy.
I'm being serious, are you on any psyche medication?
Quote from: taxed on September 17, 2014, 10:20:36 PM
Nobody has a problem with him making money, dummy.
I'm being serious, are you on any psyche medication?
I DON'T NEED A HOSPITAL!!!
Quote from: washington on September 17, 2014, 11:19:26 PM
I DON'T NEED A HOSPITAL!!!
Oh? So they turned your arse loose with the bottle of pills? They couldn't stand you either so they turned you loose on us, that's it!
Quote from: washington on September 17, 2014, 11:19:26 PM
I DON'T NEED A HOSPITAL!!!
Hmm.... he protests too much, you don't need a HOSPITAL to get psyche medication. Even I know that. How old is this kid? :lol:
Quote from: keyboarder on September 18, 2014, 09:41:22 AM
Oh? So they turned your arse loose with the bottle of pills? They couldn't stand you either so they turned you loose on us, that's it!
yeah, they have what is called a "standing order" with Solar. :lol:
Good lord. This is tiresome.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on September 18, 2014, 08:50:45 PM
Good lord. This is tiresome.
As you can see I'm tired talking about Cruz...
Quote from: washington on September 18, 2014, 11:43:19 PM
As you can see I'm tired talking about Cruz...
So stop talking about him for fucks sake. We're still waiting for you to articulate why he won't be president. Step up or move on.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on September 19, 2014, 12:41:57 AM
So stop talking about him for fucks sake. We're still waiting for you to articulate why he won't be president. Step up or move on.
See the Paul thread same reasoning applies.
Quote from: washington on September 19, 2014, 03:09:08 AM
See the Paul thread same reasoning applies.
Troll, answer the question and not ask others to do your homework for you.
Quote from: quiller on September 19, 2014, 03:13:37 AM
Troll, answer the question and not ask others to do your homework for you.
Do I really need to repeat myself?
What has Cruz done in Congress that has garnered bipartisan support or support within his own party? The American people will never not for a long time after this President vote for any candidate that has never lead anything with bipartisan support and accomplished what he set out to accomplish. Another words you need way more than a big mouth. Voters learn. This will be the number 1 thing they look for in the next President.
Gaining support from you own party. Has he done that on anything?
Case closed.
When the right candidate comes along I will tell you if he has a shot of winning.
Quote from: washington on September 19, 2014, 03:20:41 AM
Do I really need to repeat myself?
What has Cruz done in Congress that has garnered bipartisan support or support within his own party? The American people will never not for a long time after this President vote for any candidate that has never lead anything with bipartisan support and accomplished what he set out to accomplish. Another words you need way more than a big mouth. Voters learn. This will be the number 1 thing they look for in the next President.
Gaining support from you own party. Has he done that on anything?
Case closed.
When the right candidate comes along I will tell you if he has a shot of winning.
If garnering bipartisan support is necessary to be president, please share with us what Obama did in the senate to do same?
Quote from: washington on September 19, 2014, 03:20:41 AM
Do I really need to repeat myself?
What has Cruz done in Congress that has garnered bipartisan support or support within his own party? The American people will never not for a long time after this President vote for any candidate that has never lead anything with bipartisan support and accomplished what he set out to accomplish. Another words you need way more than a big mouth. Voters learn. This will be the number 1 thing they look for in the next President.
Gaining support from you own party. Has he done that on anything?
Case closed.
When the right candidate comes along I will tell you if he has a shot of winning.
No. Please don't repeat yourself; that is equally as annoying as saying "case closed". Are you making that statement because no one is buying into your b.s. or is it that you don't want to discuss Cruz anymore because you really don't know what you are talking about and opened your mouth and have inserted your foot?
There has been a lot of speculation of who is going to run in 2016 but no one has actually made that announcement...."when the right candidate comes along you'll let us know" ... wow, genius, we can hardly wait! So, instead of trying to get yourself off the hook, I have a question for you, since you are the political guru here. Of ALL the possible 2016 candidates, both Republican and Democrat who is going to win and why?
Here, I'll help you: :rolleyes: :popcorn:
http://2016.republican-candidates.org/#Potential-Republican-Candidates (http://2016.republican-candidates.org/#Potential-Republican-Candidates)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_candidates,_2016 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_candidates,_2016)
Quote from: supsalemgr on September 19, 2014, 04:13:01 AM
If garnering bipartisan support is necessary to be president, please share with us what Obama did in the senate to do same?
I'm telling you people have learned their lesson from Obama and that's the basis for my point. Thank you for making it for me.
Quote from: suzziY on September 19, 2014, 04:48:56 AM
No. Please don't repeat yourself; that is equally as annoying as saying "case closed". Are you making that statement because no one is buying into your b.s. or is it that you don't want to discuss Cruz anymore because you really don't know what you are talking about and opened your mouth and have inserted your foot?
There has been a lot of speculation of who is going to run in 2016 but no one has actually made that announcement...."when the right candidate comes along you'll let us know" ... wow, genius, we can hardly wait! So, instead of trying to get yourself off the hook, I have a question for you, since you are the political guru here. Of ALL the possible 2016 candidates, both Republican and Democrat who is going to win and why?
Here, I'll help you: :rolleyes: :popcorn:
http://2016.republican-candidates.org/#Potential-Republican-Candidates (http://2016.republican-candidates.org/#Potential-Republican-Candidates)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_candidates,_2016 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_candidates,_2016)
Well you can rule out all the females... That's pretty obvious that none of them has hilary's balls.
The only one on the list that has a chance is Jason Chaffetz. I'd add John Kasich and Newt Gingrich to the list all 3 of these men can win, and have the experience and support to make a serious run. Kasich and Gingrich both have the most history and experience beating the clintons than anybody that could run. They both also have the most federal and state accomplishments to back it up.
Quote from: washington on September 19, 2014, 05:21:04 AM
I'm telling you people have learned their lesson from Obama and that's the basis for my point. Thank you for making it for me.
People learned their lesson from Obama? Perhaps I'm not understanding what lesson exactly you are referring to. However, many people remain uninformed and don't even have a clue who their elected officials are let alone hold Obama responsible for what he has done to this country. Liberals still believe that all that ails this country is Bush's fault even though we are into the 6th year of his presidency. They believe that what happened in Benghazi was nothing more than a Republican led witch hunt (even though new evidence keeps surfacing) and that Republicans don't pay taxes and are just evil warmongers.
Some of the Kennedy family (they are divided on the issue) and liberal progressive groups right now are trying to take down Hillary (Democratic establishment) and rallying around and trying to persuade Elizabeth Warren to run. So no, many people have NOT learned their lesson from Obama as Warren is in ways further to the left than he.
http://nypost.com/2014/08/03/kennedys-pushing-warren-to-run-against-hillary-in-2016/ (http://nypost.com/2014/08/03/kennedys-pushing-warren-to-run-against-hillary-in-2016/)
http://downtrend.com/robertgehl/report-obama-to-snub-hillary-and-endorse-elizabeth-warren/ (http://downtrend.com/robertgehl/report-obama-to-snub-hillary-and-endorse-elizabeth-warren/)
We have the Democratic establishment vs. the progressive liberals vs. the Republican establishment vs. conservatives (TEA). Both parties are divided.
However, in my humble opinion the Democrats are toast and have been for quite some time. They are scrambling to do some damage control which is only causing them to self-destruct even further. On the other hand, the Republicans have started to seat some true conservatives and the GOP establishment knows that their days are numbered and some are starting to back track and swing more to the right ... however, we know who they are and RINO's and will eventually be voted out of office.
If your point is, that because of Obama, more people are starting to realize (those that voted RINO, etc.) that we need to get back to our principles set forth by our founding fathers, our core values and our Constitution, then I agree with your point. By the way in consideration of the point just mentioned, and in my humble opinion that is why if Cruz decides to run, he is GOLDEN!
Perhaps if you have not seen this video yet, it may be of interest to you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdS6fyUIklI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdS6fyUIklI)
Quote from: suzziY on September 19, 2014, 06:09:27 AM
People learned their lesson from Obama? Perhaps I'm not understanding what lesson exactly you are referring to. However, many people remain uninformed and don't even have a clue who their elected officials are let alone hold Obama responsible for what he has done to this country. Liberals still believe that all that ails this country is Bush's fault even though we are into the 6th year of his presidency. They believe that what happened in Benghazi was nothing more than a Republican led witch hunt (even though new evidence keeps surfacing) and that Republicans don't pay taxes and are just evil warmongers.
Some of the Kennedy family (they are divided on the issue) and liberal progressive groups right now are trying to take down Hillary (Democratic establishment) and rallying around and trying to persuade Elizabeth Warren to run. So no, many people have NOT learned their lesson from Obama as Warren is in ways further to the left than he.
http://nypost.com/2014/08/03/kennedys-pushing-warren-to-run-against-hillary-in-2016/ (http://nypost.com/2014/08/03/kennedys-pushing-warren-to-run-against-hillary-in-2016/)
http://downtrend.com/robertgehl/report-obama-to-snub-hillary-and-endorse-elizabeth-warren/ (http://downtrend.com/robertgehl/report-obama-to-snub-hillary-and-endorse-elizabeth-warren/)
We have the Democratic establishment vs. the progressive liberals vs. the Republican establishment vs. conservatives (TEA). Both parties are divided.
However, in my humble opinion the Democrats are toast and have been for quite some time. They are scrambling to do some damage control which is only causing them to self-destruct even further. On the other hand, the Republicans have started to seat some true conservatives and the GOP establishment knows that their days are numbered and some are starting to back track and swing more to the right ... however, we know who they are and RINO's and will eventually be voted out of office.
If your point is, that because of Obama, more people are starting to realize (those that voted RINO, etc.) that we need to get back to our principles set forth by our founding fathers, our core values and our Constitution, then I agree with your point. By the way in consideration of the point just mentioned, and in my humble opinion that is why if Cruz decides to run, he is GOLDEN!
Perhaps if you have not seen this video yet, it may be of interest to you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdS6fyUIklI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdS6fyUIklI)
Lack of experience is why. Also, Ted Cruz isn't Golden because gold isn't made out of Clay.
Quote from: washington on September 19, 2014, 03:20:41 AM
Do I really need to repeat myself?
What has Cruz done in Congress that has garnered bipartisan support or support within his own party? The American people will never not for a long time after this President vote for any candidate that has never lead anything with bipartisan support and accomplished what he set out to accomplish. Another words you need way more than a big mouth. Voters learn. This will be the number 1 thing they look for in the next President.
Gaining support from you own party. Has he done that on anything?
Case closed.
When the right candidate comes along I will tell you if he has a shot of winning.
There is no such thing as bipartisanship. Open your eyes and think for yourself.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on September 19, 2014, 08:50:56 PM
There is no such thing as bipartisanship. Open your eyes and think for yourself.
His youth and inexperience has overcome his political genius.
Quote from: supsalemgr on September 20, 2014, 04:53:58 AM
His youth and inexperience has overcome his political genius.
You hatred and pain and suffering has overcome your ability to see.
Quote from: washington on September 20, 2014, 05:25:40 AM
You hatred and pain and suffering has overcome your ability to see.
You are now babbling.
Quote from: supsalemgr on September 20, 2014, 04:53:58 AM
His youth and inexperience has overcome his political genius.
Romper Room at work.
Quote from: walkstall on September 20, 2014, 06:16:57 AM
Romper Room at work.
Sounds about right.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.fotki.com%2F1_p%2Csgbqrbqbwtsrbfwxbqfqsbrwqdbw%2Cvi%2Fwwrdgks%2F1%2F1595431%2F10201489%2Fbabytrollexplores299x400-vi.jpg&hash=ce9a6ec4e0fcd95034d497b26de354ac24fb5714)
Quote from: quiller on September 20, 2014, 10:33:13 AM
Sounds about right.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.fotki.com%2F1_p%2Csgbqrbqbwtsrbfwxbqfqsbrwqdbw%2Cvi%2Fwwrdgks%2F1%2F1595431%2F10201489%2Fbabytrollexplores299x400-vi.jpg&hash=ce9a6ec4e0fcd95034d497b26de354ac24fb5714)
Padded cell. :glare:
Quote from: quiller on September 20, 2014, 10:33:13 AM
Sounds about right.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.fotki.com%2F1_p%2Csgbqrbqbwtsrbfwxbqfqsbrwqdbw%2Cvi%2Fwwrdgks%2F1%2F1595431%2F10201489%2Fbabytrollexplores299x400-vi.jpg&hash=ce9a6ec4e0fcd95034d497b26de354ac24fb5714)
and you'd be wrong again. Learn from you mistakes.
Quote from: washington on September 20, 2014, 01:17:36 PM
Proper term would be reasoning.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi46.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff114%2Fmaxicomm%2FMegazip%2FROFLMAO.gif&hash=18f41ddbcb9823d1dafa4e62b3e2da79c5df1b98)
Quote from: washington on September 20, 2014, 01:18:37 PM
and you'd be wrong again. Learn from you mistakes.
:lol: He has, he is just be nice to you right now.
So bored. Sooooo bored...
Quote from: walkstall on September 20, 2014, 05:51:07 PM
:lol: He has, he is just be nice to you right now.
He's the type that doesn't learn. He can say it all he wants as many times as he wants, but he will always be wrong.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on September 20, 2014, 10:06:00 PM
So bored. Sooooo bored...
\
I know....... We need another Bengahzi hearing!
Quote from: washington on September 20, 2014, 01:18:37 PM
and you'd be wrong again. Learn from you mistakes.
YOU mistakes, you blithering halfwit?
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.fotki.com%2F1_p%2Csbrgfbwgbdtbtbwxbqfqsbrwqdbw%2Cvi%2Ftbkfqgtsgxrtqgrtk%2F1%2F1595431%2F10201489%2Fmr_natural_dim_bulb-vi.png&hash=680fc9157a3640c9404a6e0559d82bedb01736d4)
Quote from: washington on September 20, 2014, 10:28:47 PM
He's the type that doesn't learn. He can say it all he wants as many times as he wants, but he will always be wrong.
Then prove it.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.fotki.com%2F1_p%2Csbdbqfkgdrksbwwxbqfqsbrwqdbw%2Cvi%2Fktgkdbggs%2F1%2F1595431%2F10201489%2Fliberal_logic-vi.png&hash=e0e0ca0d8c503a1106467ecbdbb65f5e40b173fe)
Quote from: quiller on September 21, 2014, 01:46:11 AM
Then prove it.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.fotki.com%2F1_p%2Csbdbqfkgdrksbwwxbqfqsbrwqdbw%2Cvi%2Fktgkdbggs%2F1%2F1595431%2F10201489%2Fliberal_logic-vi.png&hash=e0e0ca0d8c503a1106467ecbdbb65f5e40b173fe)
What? For the last time I'm a conservative who isn't extreme.
Quote from: washington on September 21, 2014, 04:15:36 PM
What? For the last time I'm a conservative who isn't extreme.
Define extreme.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.imimg.com%2Fdata3%2FCB%2FBL%2FMY-7110466%2Fbadminton-shuttlecock-500x500.png&hash=cdd36f46452404e8711e9ad8b137d8330e17d32b)
Quote from: walkstall on September 21, 2014, 04:35:36 PM
:lol: Have him Define Conservative.
I asked the political genius his definition of conservatism ... still waiting. Trying to converse with him is a waste of time really. We know he's definitely not TEA, nor a conservative who claims he's a political genius ... why bother?
Quote from: suzziY on September 21, 2014, 06:11:53 PM
I asked the political genius his definition of conservatism ... still waiting. Trying to converse with him is a waste of time really. We know he's definitely not TEA, nor a conservative who claims he's a political genius ... why bother?
washington no facts no data just a lot of Hot Air.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-2EY21VW1N1g%2FUIyVJ7A2LLI%2FAAAAAAAAPZU%2F3agfh1NHsXQ%2Fs1600%2FTroll%2Bat%2Bwork.bmp&hash=9caa8577b6cd08a864acb4867aa28774485abe9b)
Quote from: walkstall on September 21, 2014, 04:35:36 PM
:lol: Have him Define Conservative.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
RINO, in his book.
Quote from: Solar on September 21, 2014, 08:14:17 PM
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
RINO, in his book.
I have a page for him, lets see if he can stay inside the lines.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.timtim.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fpaintertool_drawings%2Flarge%2F1323203093_-1_Troll.jpg&hash=de5b2f62ebb2071bbc678dc218561ad0c70a97ca)
Quote from: washington on September 21, 2014, 04:15:36 PM
What? For the last time I'm a conservative who isn't extreme.
Someone who's views are so extreme they are unwilling to reason and therefore accomplish anything. Bringing people to the right is a slow process and it takes "some" compromise or move to the left to begin to take 2 steps to the right.
Quote from: walkstall on September 21, 2014, 04:35:36 PM
:lol: Have him Define Conservative.
Conservative is a discriptive word that can only be used to discribe individual view or perceptions. Another words conservative in what?
Quote from: washington on September 21, 2014, 10:27:19 PM
Someone who's views are so extreme they are unwilling to reason and therefore accomplish anything. Bringing people to the right is a slow process and it takes "some" compromise or move to the left to begin to take 2 steps to the right.
So you're willing to compromise your values and the goal of Conservatism for what?
I can assume you have no issue with the destruction of tradition and watering down the values of what it means to be a Conservative, if it means what?
Are you saying we should allow NAMBLA, "New" black panthers, KKK, code pink into the movement, if it helps attain your goals, or pander to leftist groups if it builds our numbers?
Your immature understanding of what it means to be Conservative exposes sooo much about what it is you don't know.
You see, it's like watching a toddler taking it's first steps, only you're the toddler claiming expert status on walking, while you have yet to experience running.
Compromising ones core values is not Conservative. Obviously you're not what you purport too be.
Quote from: Solar on September 22, 2014, 05:33:43 AM
So you're willing to compromise your values and the goal of Conservatism for what?
I can assume you have no issue with the destruction of tradition and watering down the values of what it means to be a Conservative, if it means what?
Are you saying we should allow NAMBLA, "New" black panthers, KKK, code pink into the movement, if it helps attain your goals, or pander to leftist groups if it builds our numbers?
Your immature understanding of what it means to be Conservative exposes sooo much about what it is you don't know.
You see, it's like watching a toddler taking it's first steps, only you're the toddler claiming expert status on walking, while you have yet to experience running.
Compromising ones core values is not Conservative. Obviously you're not what you purport too be.
Never said that. There's a way to compromise while sticking to you values. Conservatives can accept a budget that decreases the debt, but just enough to get democrats on board. Even though they want to do it more. That can be done at another date. See my point.
Quote from: washington on September 22, 2014, 06:56:54 AM
Never said that. There's a way to compromise while sticking to you values. Conservatives can accept a budget that decreases the debt, but just enough to get democrats on board. Even though they want to do it more. That can be done at another date. See my point.
That's naive. The GOP does that all time but a few hundred billion cut in a country with trillions in unfunded liabilities achieves nothing.
The only way to decrease the debt is to cut government programs. The Democrats won't do that.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on September 22, 2014, 07:57:29 AM
That's naive. The GOP does that all time but a few hundred billion cut in a country with trillions in unfunded liabilities achieves nothing.
The only way to decrease the debt is to cut government programs. The Democrats won't do that.
Especially when libs & dems call budget growth "a draconian cut"....when it's less of a growth than they wanted.
When you're dealing with 24/7 GD Liars, no compromise is ever real, or possible. They prove every day, and have for 40 years, that their "compromise" is something between 95 and 99 % what they want. And always an out, to renege on the 1 or 2% that they "gave". See "secure the border" for the last 40 years. Always a damned lie.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on September 22, 2014, 07:57:29 AM
That's naive. The GOP does that all time but a few hundred billion cut in a country with trillions in unfunded liabilities achieves nothing.
The only way to decrease the debt is to cut government programs. The Democrats won't do that.
That's because they are in control for now, but that will change.
Quote from: washington on September 22, 2014, 09:59:45 AM
That's because they are in control for now, but that will change.
Why then would the GOP have to settle for tiny cuts in spending if they are in control?
The 60 vote filibuster
Quote from: washington on September 22, 2014, 12:25:47 PM
The 60 vote filibuster
So unless the GOP gets a filibuster proof majority they are being held captive by the Democrats?
They can't pass anything they want and will have to be bipartisin. You know that word you extremists can't ever hear.
Quote from: washington on September 22, 2014, 01:01:33 PM
They can't pass anything they want and will have to be bipartisin. You know that word you extremists can't ever hear.
That's because bipartisan means complicity to the dems and the only others to use that word are rinos. You can't agree with democrats because they just slam the door shut on proposals, refuse to hear proposals. Hell, they just check out when they hear that some rep or conservative has got a plan. Yet, supposedly the dems have offered to work with members across the aisle but we won't let them. Sounds like childsplay up in the WH to me and we're paying them to do it. :angry:
Quote from: washington on September 22, 2014, 01:01:33 PM
They can't pass anything they want and will have to be bipartisin. You know that word you extremists can't ever hear.
Harry Reid opened the door on a simple majority this past year with the nuclear option. He may live to regret that. It is already that way for budgetary issues. A GOP controlled congress could pass budgets. Then Obama would have the option of shutting down the government.
Quote from: washington on September 22, 2014, 01:01:33 PM
They can't pass anything they want and will have to be bipartisin. You know that word you extremists can't ever hear.
Why am I extreme? Because I believe in passing legislation that solves problems?
Quote from: washington on September 22, 2014, 06:56:54 AM
Never said that. There's a way to compromise while sticking to you values. Conservatives can accept a budget that decreases the debt, but just enough to get democrats on board. Even though they want to do it more. That can be done at another date. See my point.
Bull Shit!, that's exactly what you said. You said "move left".
Quote" it takes "some" compromise or move to the left "
Quote from: Solar on September 22, 2014, 05:38:31 PM
Bull Shit!, that's exactly what you said. You said "move left".
I like his position Solar. Think about it. His position is Conservative polices are great but extreme if they are implemented. We have to get along with the Liberals in order to be accepted. We've never done that before right? :rolleyes:
Quote from: The Boo Man... on September 22, 2014, 07:05:39 PM
I like his position Solar. Think about it. His position is Conservative polices are great but extreme if they are implemented. We have to get along with the Liberals in order to be accepted. We've never done that before right? :rolleyes:
Not in the last hour or two. :wink:
Quote from: The Boo Man... on September 22, 2014, 07:05:39 PM
I like his position Solar. Think about it. His position is Conservative polices are great but extreme if they are implemented. We have to get along with the Liberals in order to be accepted. We've never done that before right? :rolleyes:
Oh, I get it. All we have to do is give libs what they want and they won't call us extremists?
Quote from: Solar on September 22, 2014, 07:55:48 PM
Oh, I get it. All we have to do is give libs what they want and they won't call us extremists?
Yes! That's how we get on talk shows with David Brooks...
Quote from: Solar on September 22, 2014, 05:38:31 PM
Bull Shit!, that's exactly what you said. You said "move left".
Move left from extreme right means you are still right leaning. What is the gibberish are you talking about? We started bombing Syria tonight. Should break out the small controlled nukes. Obama thinks this is progress. I think he has been diagnosed with mental retardation.
I'm really irritated and angry right now. I drove by Taco bell and didn't stop tonight. Now my whole night is screwed.
Quote from: washington on September 22, 2014, 08:23:07 PM
Move left from extreme right means you are still right leaning. What is the gibberish are you talking about? We started bombing Syria tonight. Should break out the small controlled nukes. Obama thinks this is progress. I think he has been diagnosed with mental retardation.
So "extreme" conservatives advocate nuking countries? You re silly and boring.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on September 22, 2014, 08:34:31 PM
So "extreme" conservatives advocate nuking countries? You re silly and boring.
I'd call that view point of 80% of the nation. 20% still think we use gun axes and Bows.
Quote from: washington on September 22, 2014, 08:38:22 PM
I'd call that view point of 80% of the nation. 20% still think we use gun axes and Bows.
I await your source with bated breath....
Quote from: washington on September 22, 2014, 08:23:07 PM
Move left from extreme right means you are still right leaning. What is the gibberish are you talking about? We started bombing Syria tonight. Should break out the small controlled nukes. Obama thinks this is progress. I think he has been diagnosed with mental retardation.
Not when it's a compromise, you're not!
And what has bombing Syria to do with anything?
Quote from: The Boo Man... on September 22, 2014, 08:39:18 PM
I await your source with bated breath....
Dude do I really need to tell you people 25 and younger are morons?
Quote from: Solar on September 22, 2014, 09:15:59 PM
Not when it's a compromise, you're not!
And what has bombing Syria to do with anything?
Yes you are.
Just thought I'd break some wind tonight.
Quote from: washington on September 22, 2014, 08:29:12 PM
I'm really irritated and angry right now. I drove by Taco bell and didn't stop tonight. Now my whole night is screwed.
CAUTION our resident RINO running free.
Quote from: walkstall on September 22, 2014, 09:29:08 PM
CAUTION our resident RINO running free.
I'm not a Rino. btw.. I have a $400 GPS so I know where I'm going.
Quote from: washington on September 22, 2014, 09:36:05 PM
I'm not a Rino. btw.. I have a $400 GPS so I know where I'm going.
washington it's bed time, don't for get your med's.
Quote from: washington on September 22, 2014, 09:36:05 PM
I'm not a Rino. btw.. I have a $400 GPS so I know where I'm going.
Get you're money back. You are more lost than a Bishop in a brothel..
Quote from: walkstall on September 22, 2014, 09:57:45 PM
washington it's bed time, don't for get your med's.
Don't forget that forget is 1 word not 2. I'm going to stay up for a wile. getting my second wind. I'm a night owl.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on September 22, 2014, 10:09:12 PM
Get you're money back. You are more lost than a Bishop in a brothel..
No they only attend brothels that have young boys.
Quote from: washington on September 22, 2014, 10:18:11 PM
No they only attend brothels that have young boys.
As if no one saw the catholic-molestation reference coming.
Do better
Be original.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on September 22, 2014, 10:23:21 PM
As if no one saw the catholic-molestation reference coming.
Do better
Be original.
How can you be original when talking about Bishops? If i was a bishop I'd have a nun orgy 1 day a year. I'd see nothing wrong with that. However, that might be my Libido kicking in.
Quote from: washington on September 22, 2014, 10:26:37 PM
How can you be original when talking about Bishops? If i was a bishop I'd have a nun orgy 1 day a year. I'd see nothing wrong with that. However, that might be my Libido kicking in.
Do better
Quote from: The Boo Man... on September 22, 2014, 10:27:19 PM
Do better
Fine.... I'd introduce nun discipline. Whips, paddles and spankings as preferred methods. They would have to call me father. Ok, this is just getting BAD. Don't get me going....
Quote from: washington on September 22, 2014, 10:29:52 PM
Fine.... I'd introduce nun discipline. Whips, paddles and spankings as preferred methods. They would have to call me father. Ok, this is just getting BAD. Don't get me going....
Do better. Be interesting. Be original. Don't be boring.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on September 22, 2014, 10:31:08 PM
Do better. Be interesting. Be original. Don't be boring.
Some things are better off unsaid.
Quote from: washington on September 22, 2014, 10:35:11 PM
Some things are better off unsaid.
Such as every post you've made here.
Quote from: washington on September 22, 2014, 10:26:37 PM
How can you be original when talking about Bishops? If i was a bishop I'd have a nun orgy 1 day a year. I'd see nothing wrong with that. However, that might be my Libido kicking in.
You forgot your I should be capitalized. :rolleyes:
Quote from: The Boo Man... on September 22, 2014, 10:09:12 PM
Get you're money back. You are more lost than a Bishop in a brothel..
OMG! LMAO! Exactly. True definition of our resident political genius/RINO.
Back on topic. Ted Cruz IS the only worthy choice due to his knowledge, education, experience, backbone, tenacity, voting record, constitutional mindset and has proven he is a leader rather than a follower. In addition, he is young, articulate and charismatic. He also would pull in the Latino vote! Ted Cruz is Golden!!
Quote from: walkstall on September 23, 2014, 05:30:22 AM
You forgot your I should be capitalized. :rolleyes:
The trolls are getting dumber and it's getting tougher to train them, but keep at it, kemo sabe. Something to talk about until any adults show up to waste the community electrons.
Quote from: suzziY on September 23, 2014, 05:38:24 AM
Back on topic. Ted Cruz IS the only worthy choice due to his knowledge, education, experience, backbone, tenacity, voting record, constitutional mindset and has proven he is a leader rather than a follower. In addition, he is young, articulate and charismatic. He also would pull in the Latino vote! Ted Cruz is Golden!!
But, but, but our resident genius said he's too extreme. :rolleyes:
However, everything you stated is true and exactly the reason the base loves him. :thumbsup:
Quote from: quiller on September 23, 2014, 05:57:14 AM
The trolls are getting dumber and it's getting tougher to train them, but keep at it, kemo sabe. Something to talk about until any adults show up to waste the community electrons.
At my age I find my brain and fingers do not always work as one. :lol:
Quote from: walkstall on September 23, 2014, 06:24:49 AM
At my age I find my brain and fingers do not always work as one. :lol:
At your age (or mine for that matter!) be glad anything works at all. :wink:
Quote from: quiller on September 23, 2014, 08:22:53 AM
At your age (or mine for that matter!) be glad anything works at all. :wink:
Crap! somebody mentioned things that are't working right sometimes? That was my cue since nothing is working like it used to. :rolleyes Oh well, tomorrow's another day and another opportunity.
Yes, they are petrified of Sen Cruz and everything
he stands for. Read this one:
This one will blow your mind. The Wall
Street Journal, same on which I have commented in the
not so distant past has gone completely to hell with
the takeover by web mentality journalists, good chance
infiltrators who eased in with the ownership change,
ran this piece on Ted Cruz.
Be sure to note the correction supplied by
Sen. Cruz's office,which states that the reported
source, who claimed to be a Cruz adviser, was an
impostor, not known to the Cruz organization and
in no way an adviser.
http://blogs.marketwatch.com/capitolreport/2014/09/29/ted-cruz-virtually-certain-to-run-for-president-adviser-says/ (http://blogs.marketwatch.com/capitolreport/2014/09/29/ted-cruz-virtually-certain-to-run-for-president-adviser-says/)
Now, there is more to the story. First, when a
magazine is presented (or caught) with a situation,
what is the right way to handle it? Stay with
me on this, because it gets interesting.
Sequence of Events
1) The WSJ has published a false and misleading
article quoting a fictitious "Ted Cruz adviser." The WSJ
placed a prominent 2"X2" link, which there are normally
about twenty, a link to the article with photo of Ted and
in big letters, "Ted Cruz 90% certain to run for President
in 2016."
2) It turned out the "Cruz adviser" was a fake, if she
even existed.
3) The WSJ leaves the link on the home page, leaving
the headline as it stood, and inserts a paragraph at the
end of the article, a paragraph which is the memo to the
WSJ from Sen. Cruz informing them that the information
and the source were false.
Wait, it gets better. As soon as the article appeared,
the comments section, which you have to take a moment to
let load, was absolutely flooded with vitriolic, vish-uuus
childish troll bait in which Ted Cruz and the Tea Party
were raked over the coals by very single minded,
very similarly worded and toned comments.
You have to go to the early comments to get the
full force. By now, readers have caught the drift, and
are starting comments of their own. Make that #4.
4) A flood of "Cruz attack" comments followed.
--------------------------------
I'm going to take screen shots of all of this, since it is so bizarre.
Explanations:
1) The negative comments came from the NY machine, organized.
2) The comments came from RINOS as part of the war on conservatives.
3) The paper itself is part of a hit on Ted.
4) Wall Street itself is petrified of Ted Cruz and what he might come to
represent.
5) Wall Street would much prefer Obie in their back pocket.
Did I miss any possibilities?
There is absolutely no excuse for this.
We are talking about the nation's financial magazine, here,
not some supermarket rack joke mag, which happens to be the
specialty of the new owner of the WSJ.
I'm taking screen shots of the main features of this WSJ hit. Remember,
and this is important, NYC became a media center not because it was
catering to the people in New York, but because for many years it was
able to provide the news to the nation. New York just happened to
be the most convenient headquarters. What happened was that the local
left wing gradually worked their way into the media in New York City.
They moved in and took it over. Now they are using the positions gained for
maximum power before the nation catches on, on account of they have
ruined the business and it is on its last legs. We no longer have to
wait for journalistic reform. It is already here, and what are reading
now is just a part of it.
What a pathetic outcome for the nation's financial journal.
Here is a comment from the other side of the coin.
This comes from a fed up reader. Not endorsing his
view or language, mind you, but this givesyou an idea
of what the early comments were like, without taking
the time to seek them out. Man after my own heart.
--------reposted recent comment in reader's comments----------
Ken A 3 hours ago
it is entertaining to read the anti-Cruz spew by the same trolls
that wallow in the ineptitude and sleaze of the effeminate racist,
America-hating, Kenyan Islamist Hussein O Bamah....
Recommend that you stay calm.....the elderly, brain-damaged,
neo-grand matron of extreme Leftwing psycho-babble....the Beast
of Benghazi Hillary.....is Botoxed up and is reassembling the
Clinton sleaze machine, and is practicing her much anticipated
"woman with big rump waddle" to the podium for nomination as
the latest Democrat Marxist...
Let the fun begin...
Quote from: red_dirt on September 30, 2014, 07:17:52 AM
Yes, they are petrified of Sen Cruz and everything
he stands for. Read this one:
This one will blow your mind. The Wall
Street Journal, same on which I have commented in the
not so distant past has gone completely to hell with
the takeover by web mentality journalists, good chance
infiltrators who eased in with the ownership change,
ran this piece on Ted Cruz.
Be sure to note the correction supplied by
Sen. Cruz's office,which states that the reported
source, who claimed to be a Cruz adviser, was an
impostor, not known to the Cruz organization and
in no way an adviser.
http://blogs.marketwatch.com/capitolreport/2014/09/29/ted-cruz-virtually-certain-to-run-for-president-adviser-says/ (http://blogs.marketwatch.com/capitolreport/2014/09/29/ted-cruz-virtually-certain-to-run-for-president-adviser-says/)
Now, there is more to the story. First, when a
magazine is presented (or caught) with a situation,
what is the right way to handle it? Stay with
me on this, because it gets interesting.
Sequence of Events
1) The WSJ has published a false and misleading
article quoting a fictitious "Ted Cruz adviser." The WSJ
placed a prominent 2"X2" link, which there are normally
about twenty, a link to the article with photo of Ted and
in big letters, "Ted Cruz 90% certain to run for President
in 2016."
2) It turned out the "Cruz adviser" was a fake, if she
even existed.
3) The WSJ leaves the link on the home page, leaving
the headline as it stood, and inserts a paragraph at the
end of the article, a paragraph which is the memo to the
WSJ from Sen. Cruz informing them that the information
and the source were false.
Wait, it gets better. As soon as the article appeared,
the comments section, which you have to take a moment to
let load, was absolutely flooded with vitriolic, vish-uuus
childish troll bait in which Ted Cruz and the Tea Party
were raked over the coals by very single minded,
very similarly worded and toned comments.
You have to go to the early comments to get the
full force. By now, readers have caught the drift, and
are starting comments of their own. Make that #4.
4) A flood of "Cruz attack" comments followed.
--------------------------------
I'm going to take screen shots of all of this, since it is so bizarre.
Explanations:
1) The negative comments came from the NY machine, organized.
2) The comments came from RINOS as part of the war on conservatives.
3) The paper itself is part of a hit on Ted.
4) Wall Street itself is petrified of Ted Cruz and what he might come to
represent.
5) Wall Street would much prefer Obie in their back pocket.
Did I miss any possibilities?
There is absolutely no excuse for this.
We are talking about the nation's financial magazine, here,
not some supermarket rack joke mag, which happens to be the
specialty of the new owner of the WSJ.
I'm taking screen shots of the main features of this WSJ hit. Remember,
and this is important, NYC became a media center not because it was
catering to the people in New York, but because for many years it was
able to provide the news to the nation. New York just happened to
be the most convenient headquarters. What happened was that the local
left wing gradually worked their way into the media in New York City.
They moved in and took it over. Now they are using the positions gained for
maximum power before the nation catches on, on account of they have
ruined the business and it is on its last legs. We no longer have to
wait for journalistic reform. It is already here, and what are reading
now is just a part of it.
What a pathetic outcome for the nation's financial journal.
Here is a comment from the other side of the coin.
This comes from a fed up reader. Not endorsing his
view or language, mind you, but this givesyou an idea
of what the early comments were like, without taking
the time to seek them out. Man after my own heart.
--------reposted recent comment in reader's comments----------
Ken A 3 hours ago
it is entertaining to read the anti-Cruz spew by the same trolls
that wallow in the ineptitude and sleaze of the effeminate racist,
America-hating, Kenyan Islamist Hussein O Bamah....
Recommend that you stay calm.....the elderly, brain-damaged,
neo-grand matron of extreme Leftwing psycho-babble....the Beast
of Benghazi Hillary.....is Botoxed up and is reassembling the
Clinton sleaze machine, and is practicing her much anticipated
"woman with big rump waddle" to the podium for nomination as
the latest Democrat Marxist...
Let the fun begin...
Oh, it's been started. Liked this article.
Quote from: keyboarder on September 30, 2014, 02:10:24 PM
Oh, it's been started. Liked this article.
Glad you could stick with it. I just can't follow red_dirt's posts.
The 'comments sections' of newspapers, networks, etc., aren't moderated with a strict standard of integrity, like forums, which prevent crass vulgarity and the twitterization of opinions by posting rules-of-conduct.
You won't get banned from CBS-news, but your comment will be.
The WSJ got hammered by not only Cruz supporters, but
by readers across the spectrum who were disgusted at the lack
of professionalism. This is not the first time the WSJ has attacked
Ted Cruz. Willing to bet that Wall Street's nightmare would be
a reform ticket with the likes of Cruz, Gowdy, Issa, and Paul heading
up the charge.
Wall Street loves having Obama in there. If we can believe Obama's
former body guard, the White House is a revolving door of deals and
favors, in his words, "Worse than you can imagine."
I posted at 7:00 AM this morning, as the WSJ was getting pounded
by readers, 70-80 on line at any time on that article alone. By 8:52 AM
the home page link had been removed. The article still remains with the
amateurish disclaimer.
I tried to post the following comment, but could not log in.
----------------------
http://blogs.marketwatch.com/capitolreport/2014/09/29/ted-cruz-virtually-certain-to-run-for-president-adviser-says/ (http://blogs.marketwatch.com/capitolreport/2014/09/29/ted-cruz-virtually-certain-to-run-for-president-adviser-says/)
---------------------
A thinly disguised hit piece on a Tea Party candidate, nothing but a platform to launch a troll attacks in the comments section. Sen. Cruz, of all people, one of the only bright spots of the lot of them. Run a fake article and turn the faithful loose in the comments section. Sorry, WSJ, not this time. This is a perfect example of why NYC is no longer qualified or capable of being the nation's news and media center. This web site is crap. Loaded with https and goodness only knows what else.
Could be that Sen. Cruz makes Wall Street a little uncomfortable. Is it all that middle American morality New Yorkers love to make fun of that has WS concerned?
At one time, the WSJ was the nation's financial journal. Now look at it. It belongs in the magazine rack at Safeway. :)
---------
Quote from: red_dirt on September 30, 2014, 09:00:21 PM
The WSJ got hammered by not only Cruz supporters, but
by readers across the spectrum who were disgusted at the lack
of professionalism. This is not the first time the WSJ has attacked
Ted Cruz. Willing to bet that Wall Street's nightmare would be
a reform ticket with the likes of Cruz, Gowdy, Issa, and Paul heading
up the charge.
Wall Street loves having Obama in there. If we can believe Obama's
former body guard, the White House is a revolving door of deals and
favors, in his words, "Worse than you can imagine."
I posted at 7:00 AM this morning, as the WSJ was getting pounded
by readers, 70-80 on line at any time on that article alone. By 8:52 AM
the home page link had been removed. The article still remains with the
amateurish disclaimer.
I tried to post the following comment, but could not log in.
----------------------
http://blogs.marketwatch.com/capitolreport/2014/09/29/ted-cruz-virtually-certain-to-run-for-president-adviser-says/ (http://blogs.marketwatch.com/capitolreport/2014/09/29/ted-cruz-virtually-certain-to-run-for-president-adviser-says/)
---------------------
A thinly disguised hit piece on a Tea Party candidate, nothing but a platform to launch a troll attacks in the comments section. Sen. Cruz, of all people, one of the only bright spots of the lot of them. Run a fake article and turn the faithful loose in the comments section. Sorry, WSJ, not this time. This is a perfect example of why NYC is no longer qualified or capable of being the nation's news and media center. This web site is crap. Loaded with https and goodness only knows what else.
Could be that Sen. Cruz makes Wall Street a little uncomfortable. Is it all that middle American morality New Yorkers love to make fun of that has WS concerned?
At one time, the WSJ was the nation's financial journal. Now look at it. It belongs in the magazine rack at Safeway. :)
---------
:thumbsup:
If you are interested, Supsalemgr, I'll make it brief and apologize once for the
hurried nature of some of my too lengthy posts. Problem is, the devil is in the
details.
Basically, the WSJ online published a report that Ted Cruz was going to run. This after a history already of WSJ anti-Cru, anti Tea articles. The source turned out to be a fake,
not an adviser to Cruz. The Senator's office complained, so they added his memo of denial to the article, and let it run, including the prominent link to it on the home page.
That's the story.
What followed in the comment section was a barrage of childish slurs on Cruz and the Teas. Considering the readership, likely either RINOS or paid trolls.
According to what I witnessed, my best guess is the true Conservatives reacted
with force and vigor, using their keyboards.
The link was pulled down by 9:00 AM. It is a story of Conservative vigilance and sincerity.
Quote from: red_dirt on October 01, 2014, 06:15:51 AM
If you are interested, Supsalemgr, I'll make it brief and apologize once for the
hurried nature of some of my too lengthy posts. Problem is, the devil is in the
details.
Basically, the WSJ online published a report that Ted Cruz was going to run. This after a history already of WSJ anti-Cru, anti Tea articles. The source turned out to be a fake,
not an adviser to Cruz. The Senator's office complained, so they added his memo of denial to the article, and let it run, including the prominent link to it on the home page.
That's the story.
What followed in the comment section was a barrage of childish slurs on Cruz and the Teas. Considering the readership, likely either RINOS or paid trolls.
According to what I witnessed, my best guess is the true Conservatives reacted
with force and vigor, using their keyboards.
The link was pulled down by 9:00 AM. It is a story of Conservative vigilance and sincerity.
Red, it has nothing to do with that, it's the strange structuring of sentences, that makes it difficult to read.
Using a comma, then hitting the
enter key, and creating short sentences that get cutoff
midstream, then hitting the space bar several times
when starting a new sentence. I butchered my response so you could see how your replies look to us.I am not attacking you, you aren't the only one with structure issues (being dyslexic I have my own) that I usually pass off as cell phone posting.
We just want you to know, if it's too hard too hard to read, we just ignore the post, as I usually skip yours because they are too hard to read.
Let me add, from what few of your posts I've read, you appear to be on the money.
Quote from: Solar on October 01, 2014, 07:50:08 AM
Red, it has nothing to do with that, it's the strange structuring of sentences, that makes it difficult to read.
Using a comma, then hitting the
enter key, and creating short sentences that get cutoff
midstream, then hitting the space bar several times
when starting a new sentence. I butchered my response so you could see how your replies look to us.
I am not attacking you, you aren't the only one with structure issues (being dyslexic I have my own) that I usually pass off as cell phone posting.
We just want you to know, if it's too hard too hard to read, we just ignore the post, as I usually skip yours because they are too hard to read.
Let me add, from what few of your posts I've read, you appear to be on the money.
Thanks Solar. As you indicated, it is not anything about the content, just the structure of the posts.
Red, never ever post without linking to the original site, under any circumstances, if you can't source it, don't post it! I collected a couple of paragraphs of Dinesh
D'Sousa's comments from a Breitbart article.
Then I lost the link.
We have a very intelligent man on out hands, here,
this Dinesh. He is in the prime of his career and is
doing some very good things for us and his country.
Here are a couple of copy and pastes I felt were
noteworthy.
Quote---------------------------
D'Souza said that the political left has institutionalized itself in America, taking over education, Hollywood, and other entertainment distribution channels and other parts of the culture.
"The left is dominant in that it has the huge institutions on its side," D'Souza said. "What helps us is we are at a huge moment of opportunity at which the business models of these institutions are obsolete. These gigantic studios, these tyrannical unions, colleges cost way too much, a lot of the old media models are crumbling. So out of this chaos comes hope, and what I'm hoping to do is to create some new institutions in these areas, take advantage of the free market system and technology to not only make rival movies but create a business model that works better than theirs."
Because of the left's dominance in American culture, D'Souza said that the right needs to expand its influence on the culture as well—and do things like his do$#%entary films rather than just writing books or fighting day-to-day political and policy battles.
---------------------
Moving forward and heading into the 2016 presidential cycle, D'Souza said the Republicans will lose the White House yet again if the GOP keeps shunning the different elements of the conservative movement—national security conservatives, social conservatives, and libertarians or fiscal conservatives.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/09/29/Exclusive-Dinesh-D-Souza-Holder-s-Next-Job-Crime-Boss (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/09/29/Exclusive-Dinesh-D-Souza-Holder-s-Next-Job-Crime-Boss)
We might take some comfort and inspiration in those words.
As examples, Home Schooling, self learning, and distance
education might be seen as the new paradigm. (Kind of like
Phoenix rising from the ashes.) Suddenly, having been
home schooled becomes this unique advantage for those
interested in working within the new model.
Here is another article about Denish D'Sousa, this one about
a time he got fired for criticizing Obama.
http://www.alan.com/2012/10/19/dinesh-dsousa-accused-obama-for-attacking-traditional-values-a-week-before-forced-resignation/ (http://www.alan.com/2012/10/19/dinesh-dsousa-accused-obama-for-attacking-traditional-values-a-week-before-forced-resignation/)
I am looking at all the heat Ted Cruz is taking for standing
up to Washington and the Democrats. Cruz is not the only
one. Col. Brown of SOF has written scathing criticisms, especially
starting about a year ago with Parliament's balking at following
this administration into Syria and Obama's pathetic response to
last year's attack of Camp Ashraf.
If the press can succeed in putting the spot lite on Cruz, it
will take away from the reality that this administration is in shambles.
Quote from: red_dirt on October 04, 2014, 09:13:05 PM
Here is another article about Denish D'Sousa, this one about
a time he got fired for criticizing Obama.
http://www.alan.com/2012/10/19/dinesh-dsousa-accused-obama-for-attacking-traditional-values-a-week-before-forced-resignation/ (http://www.alan.com/2012/10/19/dinesh-dsousa-accused-obama-for-attacking-traditional-values-a-week-before-forced-resignation/)
I am looking at all the heat Ted Cruz is taking for standing
up to Washington and the Democrats. Cruz is not the only
one. Col. Brown of SOF has written scathing criticisms, especially
starting about a year ago with Parliament's balking at following
this administration into Syria and Obama's pathetic response to
last year's attack of Camp Ashraf.
If the press can succeed in putting the spot lite on Cruz, it
will take away from the reality that this administration is in shambles.
Hmm...public interest is high for a Ted Cruz run at the presidency. This forum and this thread alone has generated 2700 reads. Like this but folks are gonna have to translate their interest in a moving way, like beating feet to the elections and doing everything they can to support an honest change in Washington. It is not enough to read about change and transparency, feet must be put on it.
Exchange:
Did the Democrats know in advance how spineless Congress, the public, and the Washington crowd really is? Did it come as a surprise, or did Obama just keep pushing the envelope, meet with little resistance, so he pushed some more. It seems like that is the way it went.
Obama has to be delighted. He pushed the Harvard faculty around as a student in the 1970's. He no doubt, and we have heard about this, bullied his way around the Chicago Democratic Machine to the point those tough old Chicago boys trembled and ran. How could he, in his wildest dreams, imagine himself pushing around Congress, the Pentagon, and the national press. I am guessing that when he got in, his left wing associates such as Bill Ayers, must have said, "The hell with it, go for it. What do you have to lose." So he did.
---------------
Response from Kz:
I think you are absolutely right. He pushed around on the floor and found it to be soft so be broke through. He found it to be so easy that he continued to break through the barriers with impunity. He is shocked at how easy it was. And he still has more than two years to rule through Regulations and EOs. Who needs Congress? He can accomplish virtually anything he wants with the stroke of his pen!
If you remember, he said earlier that he could do nothing about amnesty because he didn't have the Constitutional power. Apparently someone told him to "go for it" and see what happened. So he gave amnesty to a certain category of people through an EO. There was a lot of noise for a few weeks, but nothing bad happened to him. So, phase two of amnesty looms just after the November election. The sky is now the limit. He knows that no one will stop him. And the liberal activist courts will protect him.
Must be a very heady feeling!!!
This is a pretty good article about the differences between Rand Paul and Ted Cruz. They are currently leading the pack for 2016. Although I don't agree with everything said in this article, I think it fairly accurately delineates the differences between the two.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/oct/8/ted-cruz-rand-paul-competition-could-reshape-repub/ (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/oct/8/ted-cruz-rand-paul-competition-could-reshape-repub/)
Bottom line..... Ted is the ONLY candidate that totally sticks to his guns and does not say anything for political reasons. He speaks from the heart based upon personal convictions.