HenryHill9323 65 Posted March 25, 2015 And yet you tards are constantly accusing the president of hurting businesses with unnecessary taxes and regulations. Get your focking story straight, slapnuts. Privately held companies far outnumber those that are publicly traded on Wall Street, Tard Boy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gocolts 300 Posted March 26, 2015 The GOP is at a crossroads of sorts in my opinion. There are several subsets of the party. You have the Rand/Ron Paul Libertarian Tea Party faction. You have the Religious Conservative Tea Party like Cruz and Huckabee. And you have the more moderate, wants to work with the Democrats like Paul Ryan and Huntsman. I respect the Religous Conservative subset because they know their values and they stick to them come hell or high water. A part of that is respectable to me. My issue is that, in D.C. the unwillingness to compromise causes gridlock and nothing gets done. Rather it makes things worse imo and causes wider gaps with the fringes. I believe you have to give something to get something and move things forward. Some politicans are able to do that, some stick to their beliefs come hell or highwater. But more specifically here are four major things I don't agree with: 1. Cruz favors putting American boots on the ground to fight ISIS. 2. Cruz favors a flat tax. 3. Cruz opposes abortion, even in cases of rape 4. He is against net neutrality While I think he is smart and a terrific speaker, I don't think he is willing to work at all with anyone who's ideals and morals he disagrees with. That is pretty much my concern with him. ETA: They have measurables out there to rate how liberal and conservative a person is based on voting record, public comments on issues, and other factors of the like. Cruz is the most far right conservative of any other canidate in a very long time. He's more Conservative than Santorum, Bachman, Huckabee, Palin. He isn't just far Right, he's all the way Right. It's why he won't win a General Election. Cruz can rev up the far right masses and fringes enough to make noise in the primary but that's about it. Thanks for the serious reply bro. I disagree and think it is imperative that we nominate a conservative and not some establishment moderate/liberal. Reagan ran as a conservative and they said he could not win. He won in two landslides. Not Obama landslides, true landslides. Around 44 and 49 states landslides. Dubya ran as a conservative, even though he wasn't, and he won twice too. Folks had not figured him out when the second election came around, plus, folks did not want to change POTUS in middle of war prolly. Ran what you are talking about last two elections and lost to a guy with virtually no experience at anything. If the GOP runs another moderate, it will just hand the presidency to the democrats. I was just curious as to why you had a problem with this guy. So thanks. ETA: Not sure if you followed what happened in the Israel election, but they all said the same thing about Bibi. He won HUGE. Check it out. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chronic Husker 85 Posted March 26, 2015 Thanks for the serious reply bro. I disagree and think it is imperative that we nominate a conservative and not some establishment moderate/liberal. Reagan ran as a conservative and they said he could not win. He won in two landslides. So, the Reagan Democrats never existed? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gocolts 300 Posted March 26, 2015 So, the Reagan Democrats never existed? Sure they did. EVERYONE wants to vote for a conservative. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Magnificent Bastard 190 Posted March 26, 2015 Sure they did. EVERYONE wants to vote for a conservative. : 1980 Reagan wasn't so conservative by today's standards. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mike Honcho 4,027 Posted March 26, 2015 Sure they did. EVERYONE wants to vote for a conservative. : 1980 Reagan wasn't so conservative by today's standards. Colt's lives in a world where President Bush "W" wasn't a conservative...I believe because he passed prescription medicare expansion & No Child. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Voltaire 4,558 Posted March 27, 2015 .Dammit! I still want to know where you Birther retards are? C'mon he's got a far less serious case for being an American citizen than Obummer for Chrissakes. Explain your dumba$$ selves, please. Or did your brain masters fail to point out your unreason to you? Here's the situation: Obummer - One American one foreign parent, may (or may not ) have been born in the US. Has a Hawaii birth certificate, but is accused of being born outside the US. Cruz - One American parent, definitely not born in the US. Birth certificate says "Canada." So under the worst case scenario Birthers throw at Obummer for not being qualified to be president: where Obummer's mom left modern Hawaii to have witchdoctors in Nigeria deliver her child and faked his birth in Hawaii -under that scenario, he's still got the exact same claim to US citizenship that Cruz does. Birthertards, where you at? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,311 Posted March 27, 2015 .Dammit! I still want to know where you Birther retards are? C'mon he's got a far less serious case for being an American citizen than Obummer for Chrissakes. Explain your dumba$$ selves, please. Or did your brain masters fail to point out your unreason to you? Here's the situation: Obummer - One American one foreign parent, may (or may not ) have been born in the US. Has a Hawaii birth certificate, but is accused of being born outside the US. Cruz - One American parent, definitely not born in the US. Birth certificate says "Canada." So under the worst case scenario Birthers throw at Obummer for not being qualified to be president: where Obummer's mom left modern Hawaii to have witchdoctors in Nigeria deliver her child and faked his birth in Hawaii -under that scenario, he's still got the exact same claim to US citizenship that Cruz does. Birthertards, where you at? Cruz is white and a republican. That is your answer Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 5,890 Posted March 27, 2015 .Dammit! I still want to know where you Birther retards are? C'mon he's got a far less serious case for being an American citizen than Obummer for Chrissakes. Explain your dumba$$ selves, please. Or did your brain masters fail to point out your unreason to you? Here's the situation: Obummer - One American one foreign parent, may (or may not ) have been born in the US. Has a Hawaii birth certificate, but is accused of being born outside the US. Cruz - One American parent, definitely not born in the US. Birth certificate says "Canada." So under the worst case scenario Birthers throw at Obummer for not being qualified to be president: where Obummer's mom left modern Hawaii to have witchdoctors in Nigeria deliver her child and faked his birth in Hawaii -under that scenario, he's still got the exact same claim to US citizenship that Cruz does. Birthertards, where you at? Don't look for logic in bigotry. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thornton Melon 544 Posted March 27, 2015 Cruz is white and a republican. That is your answer No, the answer is he was a citizen the instant he was expelled from his mama's cooch, which you would know if you took 5 minutes to look it up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,311 Posted March 27, 2015 No, the answer is he was a citizen the instant he was expelled from his mama's cooch, which you would know if you took 5 minutes to look it up. And Obummer was not? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thornton Melon 544 Posted March 27, 2015 And Obummer was not? Where the fock did I say he wasn't????? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HenryHill9323 65 Posted March 27, 2015 Cruz is white and a republican. That is your answer Race card playing moron. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Magnificent Bastard 190 Posted March 27, 2015 Race card playing moron. Yeah, worms is a big champion for blacks. Except when it comes to interracial dating. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,311 Posted March 27, 2015 Race card playing moron. Feel free to provide Volty with another explanation...if you can Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thornton Melon 544 Posted March 27, 2015 Feel free to provide Volty with another explanation...if you can What, mine wasn't good enough? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,311 Posted March 27, 2015 What, mine wasn't good enough? Did you miss the part where Obummer is quite obviously a natural-born citizen and yet was treated much differently? Because that's the fockin crux of the matter Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HenryHill9323 65 Posted March 27, 2015 Did you miss the part where Obummer is quite obviously a natural-born citizen and yet was treated much differently? Because that's the fockin crux of the matter Obama refused to release his BC and egged the birth tards on. Cruz put all this to rest a few years ago by releasing his mother's BC. See the difference? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,311 Posted March 27, 2015 Obama refused to release his BC and egged the birth tards on. Cruz put all this to rest a few years ago by releasing his mother's BC. See the difference? Obummer released his birth certificate seven years ago Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HenryHill9323 65 Posted March 27, 2015 Obummer released his birth certificate seven years ago 2011 was 7 years ago? My how time flies...... http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/04/27/obama.birth.certificate/ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,311 Posted March 27, 2015 2011 was 7 years ago? My how time flies...... http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/04/27/obama.birth.certificate/ No but 2008 was, focktard From your own link: Obama released a shorter, legally binding "certification of live birth" in 2008, but failed to persuade members of the "birther" movement. Jesus Christ you are stupid Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thornton Melon 544 Posted March 27, 2015 Did you miss the part where Obummer is quite obviously a natural-born citizen and yet was treated much differently? Because that's the fockin crux of the matter No, the crux of the matter is that Volty's post was illogical. He was wondering why so called "birthers" (God, I hate that term - it's so contrived and awkward) didn't go after Cruz, when the fact is that the "birthers" believe Obama was born in Kenya. No. I didn't "miss" the part where Obama is a natural born citizen, and it has nothing to do with this argument. The argument is about what "birthers" believe, and whether they're being inconsistent. Keep trying kid, you'll get there.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,311 Posted March 27, 2015 No, the crux of the matter is that Volty's post was illogical. He was wondering why so called "birthers" (God, I hate that term - it's so contrived and awkward) didn't go after Cruz, when the fact is that the "birthers" believe Obama was born in Kenya. No. I didn't "miss" the part where Obama is a natural born citizen, and it has nothing to do with this argument. The argument is about what "birthers" believe, and whether they're being inconsistent. Keep trying kid, you'll get there.... Obummer put it to rest in '08. And his focking mother was born in kansas anyway, so as Volty astutely pointed out, even if Obummer *were* born in Kenya he would have just as much claim to bring natural-born as Cruz does. And why do you hate the term "birther"? Because it makes those people sound like the racist dumbasses they are? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Magnificent Bastard 190 Posted March 27, 2015 Obummer put it to rest in '08. And his focking mother was born in kansas anyway, so as Volty astutely pointed out, even if Obummer *were* born in Kenya he would have just as much claim to bring natural-born as Cruz does. And why do you hate the term "birther"? Because it makes those people sound like the racist dumbasses they are? There you go again, calling others racist and yet you won't acknowledge your own racism. Weak man, weak. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thornton Melon 544 Posted March 27, 2015 Obummer put it to rest in '08. And his focking mother was born in kansas anyway, so as Volty astutely pointed out, even if Obummer *were* born in Kenya he would have just as much claim to bring natural-born as Cruz does. And why do you hate the term "birther"? Because it makes those people sound like the racist dumbasses they are? No, if Obama was born in Kenya, he wouldn't have been born a citizen, based on the laws in effect at the time. That was the whole point of the eligibility issue. And the term "birther" is just a pathetic example of the modern media trying to boil down the description of a group of people to one single, "catchy" term. Focking "birther".....sounds like a term to describe someone who assists in births, like a midwife, or some guy a farmer calls to help him with his cows. Again, it's an awkward and contrived term that sounds ridiculous, but it certainly isn't "racist", as you imply. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,311 Posted March 27, 2015 No, if Obama was born in Kenya, he wouldn't have been born a citizen, based on the laws in effect at the time. That was the whole point of the eligibility issue. Explain. Cruz was born in Canada. His mother was born in the US. His father was born in Cuba. Obummer was (let's pretend) born in Indonesia or Kenya or wherever. His mother was born in the US. His father was born in Kenya. How are those different? Tick. Tock. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thornton Melon 544 Posted March 27, 2015 Explain. Cruz was born in Canada. His mother was born in the US. His father was born in Cuba. Obummer was (let's pretend) born in Indonesia or Kenya or wherever. His mother was born in the US. His father was born in Kenya. How are those different? Tick. Tock. Obama's mother was too young at the time to confer citizenship on her son, with her not having resided in the US for 5 years after her 14th birthday. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jerryskids 5,197 Posted March 27, 2015 Obummer put it to rest in '08. And his focking mother was born in kansas anyway, so as Volty astutely pointed out, even if Obummer *were* born in Kenya he would have just as much claim to bring natural-born as Cruz does. And why do you hate the term "birther"? Because it makes those people sound like the racist dumbasses they are? I never overly cared where he was born, although I've felt that his being intentionally obtuse about it justified the suspicions that some people had. I was more concerned that he spent a lot of his formative years in Indonesia. But, that is irrelevant for his legal qualification to be POTUS. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,311 Posted March 27, 2015 Obama's mother was too young at the time to confer citizenship on her son, with her not having resided in the US for 5 years after her 14th birthday. Got a link for that? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thornton Melon 544 Posted March 27, 2015 Got a link for that? That was the whole point of the so called "birthers" argument....I thought everybody knew this This is from Snopes, in their article refuting the eligibility claims of the so-called "birthers" The item quoted above posits that Barack Obama does not qualify as a natural-born citizen of the U.S. because the law in effect at the time he was born specified that "If only one parent was a U.S. citizen at the time of your birth, that parent must have resided in the United States for at least ten years, at least five of which had to be after the age of 16." Since Barack Obama only had one U.S. citizen parent (his mother), and his mother had not been residing in the U.S. for at least five years after the age of 16 when Barack was born (because she herself was only 18 at the time), then he's not a natural-born citizen. I see it was age 16, not 14 as I stated. http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/citizen.asp Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,311 Posted March 27, 2015 That was the whole point of the so called "birthers" argument....I thought everybody knew this This is from Snopes, in their article refuting the eligibility claims of the so-called "birthers" I see it was age 16, not 14 as I stated. http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/citizen.asp There is no law on who is a "natural born citizen" for the purposes of Article II, Section 1 of the constitution. The term is not defined. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/natural_born_citizen http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born-citizen_clause So I don't know where Snopes is getting that from, but it seems they're probably wrong Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 5,890 Posted March 27, 2015 I thought it was hilarious how Obummer let the birthtards work themselves into a years-long lather before releasing his birth certificate. The funny thing is that some of them doubled down on the crazy and still say he's a foreigner. You can't fix stupid. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 719 Posted March 27, 2015 No, if Obama was born in Kenya, he wouldn't have been born a citizen, based on the laws in effect at the time. That was the whole point of the eligibility issue. And the term "birther" is just a pathetic example of the modern media trying to boil down the description of a group of people to one single, "catchy" term. Focking "birther".....sounds like a term to describe someone who assists in births, like a midwife, or some guy a farmer calls to help him with his cows. Again, it's an awkward and contrived term that sounds ridiculous, but it certainly isn't "racist", as you imply. It should be a terrible description because that group of people were focking idiots. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thornton Melon 544 Posted March 27, 2015 There is no law on who is a "natural born citizen" for the purposes of Article II, Section 1 of the constitution. The term is not defined. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/natural_born_citizen http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born-citizen_clause So I don't know where Snopes is getting that from, but it seems they're probably wrong I would think Snopes would've done their due diligence and researched whether the law existed, especially when its non-existence would support their position. This has nothing to do with the "Natural Born Citizen" clause. The law I'm referring to was in effect from 1952 to 1986, and it's referring to people born outside the US when only one parent is a US citizen. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HenryHill9323 65 Posted March 27, 2015 I would think Snopes would've done their due diligence and researched whether the law existed, especially when its non-existence would support their position. This has nothing to do with the "Natural Born Citizen" clause. The law I'm referring to was in effect from 1952 to 1986, and it's referring to people born outside the US when only one parent is a US citizen. Worms has never entered a legal argument where he didn't emerge a bloody pulp. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,311 Posted March 27, 2015 I would think Snopes would've done their due diligence and researched whether the law existed, especially when its non-existence would support their position. This has nothing to do with the "Natural Born Citizen" clause. The law I'm referring to was in effect from 1952 to 1986, and it's referring to people born outside the US when only one parent is a US citizen. Really? Because that's what determines whether a person is eligible to be president. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,311 Posted March 27, 2015 Here's what Article II of the United States Constitution says: No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States. https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleii So I don't know what "law" you're holding close to your vest Thornton, but I can pretty much guarantee you that it is irrelevant to the matter at hand. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Magnificent Bastard 190 Posted March 27, 2015 Birther argument. Awesome. If Hillary wins can we have a Vince Foster discussion too? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thornton Melon 544 Posted March 27, 2015 Here's what Article II of the United States Constitution says: https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleii So I don't know what "law" you're holding close to your vest Thornton, but I can pretty much guarantee you that it is irrelevant to the matter at hand. It was a Congressional ruling on people born outside the US in which only one parent was a US citizen, in effect from December 23,1952 to November 13,1986. It is completely relevant to the matter at hand, because the matter at hand is whether the "birthers" are being hypocrites by not complaining about Cruz's eligibility. The "birthers" argument was that if Obama had been born in Kenya, he would not have citizenship at birth because of this Congressional ruling. I'm really surprised you are acting like you just heard about this, as this was the whole point about the birth certificate flap right from the beginning. http://www.westernjournalism.com/obama-not-a-citizen-thanks-to-his-own-mother/ I can't find a link right now, but I read that Cruz's mother met the eligibility under this rule, that's why his citizenship isn't in question. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
