2016 Election

Status
Not open for further replies.
#6,977
#6,977
SpaceCoastVol said:
No that is what you want to see. I am not defending him. I don't know enough about the man to render an opinion one way or the other. The one thing about him I will say is that he was elected a Tea Party conservative and from what I gather he is representing his constituents as such. that is in no way to be construed as a defense of the man. If you view it as such, that is your problem.

Hillary made available to - God knows who - compartmentalized secrets. Knowingly, and in the process wrecklessly endangering American operatives in the field.
Click to expand...



This is almost as bad as Fox showing a film of Cruz supporting the immigration bill then Cruz say he was not in favor of the bill, one in which he added an ammendment and stated we need that bill to pass.
 
#6,978
#6,978
SpaceCoastVol said:
I don;t think she could be rendered powerless by Congress. Not THIS one anyway. They have shown zero backbone so far in dealing with the idiot king. She knows where the bodies are buried. I'll betcha she has enough dirt on everybody in DC to pass just about anything she wants. I get what you are saying though. Hopefully the FBI will make the Clinton/Cruz argument moot anyway.
Click to expand...
There are enough old school liberal men who can't stand her that she'd lose support as soon as she starts hen pecking all us non-femenazi uneffeminent regular dudes.
 
#6,979
#6,979
$
83f2205c45b18495e5a09ad007cb4f2a.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#6,982
#6,982
Gramps said:
rvk2c.jpg
Click to expand...
Politifact found 119 "pants on fire" lies by Republicans or Conservatives, and only 13 by Democrats or Democrats. Of all elected officials , it found a ratio of 6.4 lies by conservatives or Republicans. compared to every 1 lie by liberals or Democrats. Poltifact is a hack organization, run by people like LG.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#6,984
#6,984
1972 Grad said:
Politifact found 119 "pants on fire" lies by Republicans or Conservatives, and only 13 by Democrats or Democrats. Of all elected officials , it found a ratio of 6.4 lies by conservatives or Republicans. compared to every 1 lie by liberals or Democrats. Poltifact is a hack organization, run by people like LG.
Click to expand...


What does Politifact say Cruz lied about that he did not?
 
#6,987
#6,987
Gramps said:
In other words Christi showed he was smarter and thinks on his feet much quicker than Rubio. Christi saw he rattled Rubio and poured it on. Rubio did not know how to respond. That should give those supporting Rubio a pause. I think it shows he is not ready.
Click to expand...

So I'm finally back home and can address this properly.

As I said, smarter is subjective. Christie cornered Rubio about the lack of executive experience. And basically tossed out "you're not fit to be President of the United States" or words pretty much to that effect. Which was (IMO) uncalled for regardless if I'm supporting Rubio or not. That could have been said to any of the candidates, and I wouldn't have thought it to be proper. No matter what, that wasn't the proper forum for that dialog.

You say Christie is smart. I say he came with a below the belt hit and Rubio got stunned. The problem was, as you correctly noted, Rubio wasn't as quick on his feet to counter the argument. Does that make Christie smarter? Not necessarily. Rubio attempted to counter with the New Jersey credit rating being downgraded, but it was overshadowed by the smack to the face from Christie. And Christie's counter?

"You do a drive by with lies and then on to your 25 second prepared speech."

The thing about it is, Rubio was right. New Jersey has had their credit downgraded a total of eight times by three different agencies. But that point got lost in the exchange as Rubio wasn't able to recover from the verbal slap in the face. So you can say Christie is "smarter" than Rubio all you want, but Christie is a straight up liar for claiming Rubio's information was false. You want to go on the integrity check of the candidates? You need to make sure the ones being called liars aren't actually telling the truth and it gets overshadowed by the moment.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...new-jersey-has-had-7-credit-downgrades-chris/

Rubio's problem was the fact he stuck with the "Obama knows WTF he is doing to this country" spiel in the aftermath. And hammered it home two more times after that when he should have left well enough alone. And as I stated last night, he has a valid point in the matter that nothing that has been happening in this nation is a result of incompetence. Now whether it can be directly attributed to Obama is one thing. But make no mistake, someone within that Administration knows exactly what's going on and it's going according to their plan. But Rubio should have let the matter drop instead of going right back to it.

Gramps said:
Compare the way Rubio responded when attached vs Cruz when he is attacked. I don't like Cruz but he is a fast thinker, much quicker than Rubio. I have now marked Rubio off my list of possible candidates to support.
Click to expand...

If you want to drop your potential support for Rubio, that's your choice. But you and I both know that entire exchange was a straight up hatchet job by Christie on his way out. And I'd love to know who was pulling the strings on that one, because it damn well wasn't Christie.
 
#6,988
#6,988
Grand Vol said:
So I'm finally back home and can address this properly.

As I said, smarter is subjective. Christie cornered Rubio about the lack of executive experience. And basically tossed out "you're not fit to be President of the United States" or words pretty much to that effect. Which was (IMO) uncalled for regardless if I'm supporting Rubio or not. That could have been said to any of the candidates, and I wouldn't have thought it to be proper. No matter what, that wasn't the proper forum for that dialog.

You say Christie is smart. I say he came with a below the belt hit and Rubio got stunned. The problem was, as you correctly noted, Rubio wasn't as quick on his feet to counter the argument. Does that make Christie smarter? Not necessarily. Rubio attempted to counter with the New Jersey credit rating being downgraded, but it was overshadowed by the smack to the face from Christie. And Christie's counter?

"You do a drive by with lies and then on to your 25 second prepared speech."

The thing about it is, Rubio was right. New Jersey has had their credit downgraded a total of eight times by three different agencies. But that point got lost in the exchange as Rubio wasn't able to recover from the verbal slap in the face. So you can say Christie is "smarter" than Rubio all you want, but Christie is a straight up liar for claiming Rubio's information was false. You want to go on the integrity check of the candidates? You need to make sure the ones being called liars aren't actually telling the truth and it gets overshadowed by the moment.

Claim: New Jersey has had 7 credit downgrades since Chris Christie took office | PunditFact

Rubio's problem was the fact he stuck with the "Obama knows WTF he is doing to this country" spiel in the aftermath. And hammered it home two more times after that when he should have left well enough alone. And as I stated last night, he has a valid point in the matter that nothing that has been happening in this nation is a result of incompetence. Now whether it can be directly attributed to Obama is one thing. But make no mistake, someone within that Administration knows exactly what's going on and it's going according to their plan. But Rubio should have let the matter drop instead of going right back to it.
Click to expand...

Rubio did not have the intellect to stop. You could see it in his eyes and facial expression. He did not have a clue as to how to handle it. I will give Rubio credit, he did settle down and the later part of the debate I think he did well.



Grand Vol said:
If you want to drop your potential support for Rubio, that's your choice. But you and I both know that entire exchange was a straight up hatchet job by Christie on his way out. And I'd love to know who was pulling the strings on that one, because it damn well wasn't Christie.
Click to expand...

I do not think it was a hatchet job. Christi has a history of being a bull. He flat out saw Rubio was rattled and took full advantage of the situation.

I will not be voting for Rubio in the primary. That exchange showed how easily he is rattled which shows me he is not ready yet. We have a one term senator in the WH now who was not ready, do we need to experiment with another.
 
#6,996
#6,996
hog88 said:
At the time the constitution was written militias were compromised of common every day citizens. How the hell do get that they didn't intend what was actual fact at the time?
Click to expand...

Militias were necessary at that time due to the very small federal military, hence the inclusion of the term militia in the 2nd Amendment. Essentially, the militia were acting a lot like our regular military does today. However, due to the size of the military since the civil war militias are no longer necessary and therefore the 2nd Anendment is essentially null and void. If the framers intended everyday people to have the unfettered right to possess firearms, then they would have said citizens instead of militia or just left the first part out altogether.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6,998
#6,998
bnhunt said:
Militias were necessary at that time due to the very small federal military, hence the inclusion of the term militia in the 2nd Amendment. Essentially, the militia were acting a lot like our regular military does today. However, due to the size of the military since the civil war militias are no longer necessary and therefore the 2nd Anendment is essentially null and void. If the framers intended everyday people to have the unfettered right to possess firearms, then they would have said citizens instead of militia or just left the first part out altogether.
Click to expand...

So you don't live in reality AND you think the 2nd Ammendment is outdated? That would make the others outdated. Do you really want the Bill of Rights to be rewritten?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6,999
#6,999
bnhunt said:
I think gun ownership is at an all-time high right now.
Click to expand...

I'll look into that (doubtful), but you avoided the first question

http://www.researchscape.com/library/public-opinion/gun-ownership

Gun ownership has been decreasing with each passing decade.
 
Last edited:
#7,000
#7,000
bnhunt said:
Militias were necessary at that time due to the very small federal military, hence the inclusion of the term militia in the 2nd Amendment. Essentially, the militia were acting a lot like our regular military does today. However, due to the size of the military since the civil war militias are no longer necessary and therefore the 2nd Anendment is essentially null and void. If the framers intended everyday people to have the unfettered right to possess firearms, then they would have said citizens instead of militia or just left the first part out altogether.
Click to expand...

Why is the 2nd Amendment, according to your interpretation, the only portion of the Bill of Rights that doesn't refer to an individual right if the founders hadn't intended it as such?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement





Back
Top