I'm looking forward to the debate. Any decent candidate should be prepared to take control and win the debate by playing tougher/smarter than the biased mods and desperate rivals!
They'd just well only have Cruz and Trump up there. That's where the focus will be. The MSM would love to start a fight...
Cruz is going to stick to his strategy. If Trump attacks him in the debate, bet on Cruz responding strongly, but in a way that doesn't really attack Trump.
Cruz is going to continue placating Trump and Carson voters, and frankly it's a brilliant strategy. Unlike JEB!, Cruz was bright enough to realize early on that he couldn't take out Trump, and that trying to do so would only hurt himself.
If Trump wins the nomination, he will have defied all conventional wisdom and defy all precedent and break A LOT of up until now concrete laws of campaign physics.
Cruz is betting that he won't and is positioning himself to pick up the pieces, which is a lot shrewder bet than Kasich, JEB!, Rubio, etc. have made.
I'm looking forward to the debate. Any decent candidate should be prepared to take control and win the debate by playing tougher/smarter than the biased mods and desperate rivals!
On some news show they were asking KRisty cream about his gun control pass...he said it was 20 years ago and that he has learned better....right....the next thing u know he will be a in your face loud mouth dogging gun owners....
On some news show they were asking KRisty cream about his gun control pass...he said it was 20 years ago and that he has learned better....right....the next thing u know he will be a in your face loud mouth dogging gun owners....
SOMEBODY should ask Trump about his much more recent support of assault weapons bans and supporting Schumer and the Clintons.
So far all the JV debate has talked about is Trump. Idiots in the MSM and R party can't figure out that the more they talk about Trump, the better his poll numbers get.
Just curious, if Trump gets elected on a Republican ticket, could he defy convention and appoint Clinton as his VP? or invite other Dems to join his administration?
Just curious, if Trump gets elected on a Republican ticket, could he defy convention and appoint Clinton as his VP? or invite other Dems to join his administration?
Technically he could grab Hillary as a running mate, but she would never agree to that. He could fill his administration with democrats though.
Huckster had the best line of the night thus far. Basically told young people no med dope and no free college but rather the opportunity to serve your country.
If this same line of debate spills over then Cruz and maybe Rubio will own Trump.
Tonight is all about defending the homeland here and abroad.
One thing for certain... it will be the WORLD against Cruz tonight on that stage. We'll see what he's made of.
Yep. Give em hell, Ted!!!
I predict Cruz poll numbers will rise after this debate. And Trumps numbers will fall slightly.
Also, Kasinich, Paul, Carly, Crispy, Jeb, and the Huckster should drop out. And Carson should to. He doesn't have "leadership" qualitys.
After tonight, it should be a three way race between Cruz, Trump, and Rubio. And it's still a very real possibility that the GOP ticket could be Trump / Cruz.
Just curious, if Trump gets elected on a Republican ticket, could he defy convention and appoint Clinton as his VP? or invite other Dems to join his administration?
Anybody who has Hildog as a VP running mate better have a food taster. Hasbeen
Also, Kasinich, Paul, Carly, Crispy, Jeb, and the Huckster should drop out. And Carson should to. He doesn't have "leadership" qualitys.
After tonight, it should be a three way race between Cruz, Trump, and Rubio. And it's still a very real possibility that the GOP ticket could be Trump / Cruz.
This, nothing less, nothing more.
And they had better focus on the Dems, not try to destroy each other...............but I'm not hopeful of any of that happening.
Huck is a solid conservative too bad the American voter won't elect him, Cruz is my man this go around the truest conservative with an impeccable record and resume!
The ONLY thing Trump brings to the table is he's enough of a gimmick, like Zero was, that a good many Dems will crossover and vote for him.
After looking at this so called debate,i have come to the same thoughts as you.
What is it that makes folks think that the constitution is a death pact. Some of these questions from the social sites should not be asked they are some of the lamest i have heard in a long time.
Carly always looks pissed off. Always comes across as an angry woman who cannot stop sucking lemons ( judging by the look on her face). And, for someone who claims to dislike the gender card, she sure throws it out there every chance she gets.
Bush, Kasich, Christie and Fiorina need to get out so we can get on with the serious business. Fiorina is a smart chica, Christie is fat Shmuck, Kasich is a pussy and Bush is a douche.
If you don't believe in conspiracies and the fact that cabals get together and decide elections before they ever even happen, consider that the Republican establishment was going to force feed us Jeb Bush and the primaries and everything else was set up to make him the nominee.
No, way in hell any of the Republican establishment ever thought he could beat Hillary. He is an absolute dufus.
It was foreordained that Hillary was to win the election and the Republicans were going to give her the ONE candidate in the Republican field that she could absolutely trounce and who would look like a an idiot against her.
That was a big blunder on Trump's part to suggest killing families of terrorists. Very poor judgment.
Par for the course. IMHO Trump cannot stand up to scrutiny.
Why? Not PC for you? The families of those San Bernadino murderers knew what they were up to... so... Kill them All - God wills it
"Thou shall not kill"
This goes both ways-the jihadists shall not kill you or me.
We have an inherent right to defend ourselves. In times of grave danger (such as Jihad) we can apply direct force against an enemy.
But targeting family--because they are related to a combatant-is wrong.
BMT
I'm all for leaving God out of the equation completely. They, Muslim terrorists, don't know and don't care if they are killing Jews, Christians, Muslims, Atheists etc etc. They are killing EVERYONE, do you get that?
In Paris were they handing out questionnaires to find out religious affiliation prior to killing 130 people?
All the suicide bombs don't know and don't care.
So, it's a mistake to quote 'Christian' text, because this ain't just Muslims killing Christians, it's Muslims killing EVERYONE.
People need to figure that the f*ck out and right soon.
Did you see when they were walking in at the beginning and Rubio went to touch her back and she moved away from him and gave him a dirty look. She must not have been having a good day, or she's a real piece of work.
They're all a bunch of liars. See the chart, notice that all Republicans told more lies than any Democrat. As I've said before, Trump is an egomaniacal loser, and Carson is just plain nuts. Pants on fire, they are:
That was a big blunder on Trump's part to suggest killing families of terrorists. Very poor judgment.
Par for the course. IMHO Trump cannot stand up to scrutiny.
Why? Not PC for you? The families of those San Bernadino murderers knew what they were up to... so... Kill them All - God wills it
"Thou shall not kill"
This goes both ways-the jihadists shall not kill you or me.
We have an inherent right to defend ourselves. In times of grave danger (such as Jihad) we can apply direct force against an enemy.
But targeting family--because they are related to a combatant-is wrong.
BMT
I'm all for leaving God out of the equation completely. They, Muslim terrorists, don't know and don't care if they are killing Jews, Christians, Muslims, Atheists etc etc. They are killing EVERYONE, do you get that?
In Paris were they handing out questionnaires to find out religious affiliation prior to killing 130 people?
All the suicide bombs don't know and don't care.
So, it's a mistake to quote 'Christian' text, because this ain't just Muslims killing Christians, it's Muslims killing EVERYONE.
People need to figure that the f*ck out and right soon.
It is wrong to kill
It is right to defend life
Killing a combatant is acceptable in the face of Jihad
Killing a combatant's Mom to terrorize the combatant is wrong
Killing his mom because she houses a bomb making factory in her kitchen is fine, however. She is a combatant
BHO says "we are better than them because talk it out"
This is wrong too--BHO fails to defend innocent life when actual threats arise.
Collateral damage is one thing. It is heavily analyzed in targeting approval to mitigate the damage as much as possible. But sometimes unavoidable.
Targeting civilians intentionally, for whatever reason, is in clear violation of the Law of War. Every service member is taught over and over that you have a positive duty to disobey unlawful orders. This applies to the brass as well. And they know it.
If any President attempted to order intentional violations of the law of war, it would be rebuked at the highest level. No Combatant Commander would allow such orders be given his troops. No way in hell.
They're all a bunch of liars. See the chart, notice that all Republicans told more lies than any Democrat. As I've said before, Trump is an egomaniacal loser, and Carson is just plain nuts. Pants on fire, they are:
Just curious, if Trump gets elected on a Republican ticket, could he defy convention and appoint Clinton as his VP? or invite other Dems to join his administration?
Technically he could grab Hillary as a running mate, but she would never agree to that. He could fill his administration with democrats though.
There has been much speculation in the British Press as to Trump's true motives/loyalties. Apparently he is a very good friend of the Clinton's and they have socilised together at several high profile public events in the last couple of years, including weddings ect. The story goes that a month before Trump announced his intenions to run, he phoned Bill Clinton and spent a considerable amount of time talking. Trump has not deigned this, but will not say what was discussed.
The paper went on to speculate that Trump was essentially an undercover Democrate trying to destroy the GOP's from within...They noted that his actions fit perfectly with that..
I have said before that I have a very bad feeling about Trump and I think many folks here are going to be very unhappy when his true colours/motives come out..
Personally, I think he his intentions are to run as a 3rd Party independent and split the GOP vote leaving the road clear for Hillary...Alternatively, if he does manage to get into the Whitehouse, I think he may invite dems to be part of his administration under the guise of "unification of the country" or similar BS...
I hope for you guys I am wrong, but my gut feeling about Trump is not good...
This was the best Debate so far CNN did a great job, What Trump means by America will be great again = to America will be the world bully again... we all saw what happen to US then, 90% of the world was against us.
90 percent of the world hates us anyway. The american culture is being destroyed by immigrants that refuse to learn the language and others that wont assimilate into the main culture. We need to slow this down a good bit for a while and let the country digest who is already here. As far as muslims either Cruz or Trump is right, stop them coming here from countries where ISIS is entrenched and take only as many as you can do a good background check on. So in other words slow that process down a good bit as well.
It does not matter if we like it or not.Everybody plays by the rules,the biggest kid on the block makes the rules.This cant be changed.It will be us or the other guy.Reality just is.
Originally Posted by Outbackandy
This was the best Debate so far CNN did a great job, What Trump means by America will be great again = to America will be the world bully again... we all saw what happen to US then, 90% of the world was against us.
America is a whorehouse. And a cheap one at that. Our populace is full of folks who know nothing of civics, they read and comprehend at middle school level. The average telephone has the entire worlds knowledge at its disposal and its used to look at pictures of cats and posyt what coffee you just had. The country in in the state that it's in because of morons, plain and simple.
That was a big blunder on Trump's part to suggest killing families of terrorists. Very poor judgment.
Par for the course. IMHO Trump cannot stand up to scrutiny.
Why? Not PC for you? The families of those San Bernadino murderers knew what they were up to... so... Kill them All - God wills it
"Thou shall not kill"
This goes both ways-the jihadists shall not kill you or me.
We have an inherent right to defend ourselves. In times of grave danger (such as Jihad) we can apply direct force against an enemy.
But targeting family--because they are related to a combatant-is wrong.
BMT
Lot of killing and war in the Bible, friend. By the most righteous of men, Joshua at the behest of Moses. David. Jesus himself was amazed at the Faith of the Centurion who must have been in battles and killed enemy soldiers and civilians and was not rebuked by Our Lord. Serbs, Croats, BosnianHertz and others who made up Tito's Yugoslavia all engaged in "ethnic cleansing" because of long simmering fueds and injustices of the past. It "is" kill or be killed. Muzzies here in the States do not have our best interests at heart and should leave. Melting pot is and always was bull s*it. The "Kill them All - God wills it" is a movie reference but apropo.
One other thought: God sent the Angel of Death upon Pharohs people in Egypt because Pharoh would not release the Israelites. At the death of every "first born" Pharoh relented. Todays muslims are every bit as stubborn and at war with Western Civilization and in need of disciplining. War and killing to survive a relentless enemy is more than justified.
Killing a combatant is acceptable in the face of Jihad
Killing a combatant's Mom to terrorize the combatant is wrong
Killing his mom because she houses a bomb making factory in her kitchen is fine, however. She is a combatant
Did the jihadist's mother convert to Christianity or renounce Islam? If not, then she is a combatant. All muslims are combatants All muslims are the enemy. ___________________ Kill them All - God wills it !
I hope for you guys I am wrong, but my gut feeling about Trump is not good..
Pete, that is my feeling too. Make no mistake, I will vote for Trump in November if it comes down to him or Hillary, but never in the primary. Rubio was pretty smooth last night, on the parts that I watched. I do not like his gang of eight affiliation, nor his immigration policies, but once again, in November he gets my vote. My main man is Cruz. miles
Did the jihadist's mother convert to Christianity or renounce Islam? If not, then she is a combatant. All muslims are combatants All muslims are the enemy.
I do not think that we can annihilate all of them, but as a last resort, we should try. Target the active ones first, and see how that goes. Don't worry about bombing Mosques or other places where they hide for protection. Innocent deaths, if there are any, will be on their heads. I would not target schools or hospitals without intelligence that the combatants are using them for protection. We should try to do the humane thing as much as possible, but not so much as to hamstring ourselves. miles
BMT, it's "tho shall not murder" at least that is the correct translation of the original text. Later it was changed to "tho shall not kill" the two do not mean the same. If we followed "tho shall not kill" then we could not "kill" to protect ourselves.
IIRC, the radical muzzies in the middle east were big on kidnapping western non-combatants like diplomats back in the Reagan years. They made the mistake of grabbing some Russians but let them go pretty quick after the KGB boys sent them the body parts of their family members. The muzzies never grabbed a Russian again.
I'm not saying that what the KGB did was right, but I understand.
I love the semantics played by the guy that always Blitzes for COCK regarding "killing innocents." What a bunch of fugking morons.
Trump looks almost as annoyed by the collective limp dick'd stupidity displayed on that stage as I am. Almost.
Thanks, Carly. We appreciate you affirming once again that you're a lying, screeching, kghunt. That quote from Margaret Thatcher showed you at least have a chance in stand-up.
Speaking of comedy... Kasich provided me with some new material for the kids. It's called "A Penguin with Tourette Syndrome."
Did you guys know Kristy was a federal prosecutor? Because he was a federal prosecutor. Not sure if anybody caught that he was a federal prosecutor. But I'm pretty sure he was a federal prosecutor. And he prosecuted stuff at the federal level. When he was a federal prosecutor.
Cruz, calm the fugk down dude. You looked like an angry rat trying to gnaw at a Wolf's face.
I love Paul. He makes a lot of sense and is the only one that brought a pack of bitches to cheer every time he said anything. Will probably climb in the polls amongst blacks.
Can somebody please replace Ricky Ricardo's ears with two big D's? It'd make things a lot easier and would provide Obama with some better handles. What a homo.
Schitty debate overall. Ran way too long, questions had the journalistic integrity on par with my business integrity. (That's not good FYI.)
Thanks, Carly. We appreciate you affirming once again that you're a lying, screeching, kghunt. That quote from Margaret Thatcher showed you at least have a chance in stand-up.
check this new one out for Carly.
The fact that she even participated in this debacle precludes her from any type of public funded position.
BMT, it's "tho shall not murder" at least that is the correct translation of the original text. Later it was changed to "tho shall not kill" the two do not mean the same. If we followed "tho shall not kill" then we could not "kill" to protect ourselves.
"tho"? "Tho" is commonly an abbreviation for "though". I think the word you are looking for is "thou".
Just curious, if Trump gets elected on a Republican ticket, could he defy convention and appoint Clinton as his VP? or invite other Dems to join his administration?
Technically he could grab Hillary as a running mate, but she would never agree to that. He could fill his administration with democrats though.
Oh, she might. But then Trump could expect a fatal "accident".
Just curious, if Trump gets elected on a Republican ticket, could he defy convention and appoint Clinton as his VP? or invite other Dems to join his administration?
Technically he could grab Hillary as a running mate, but she would never agree to that. He could fill his administration with democrats though.
Oh, she might. But then Trump could expect a fatal "accident".
If Trump was elected and nominated Hilary as his VP, what would happen if he stood down after say 2 years? Say due to "ill health"? Would Hilary become Pres or would there need to be another election?
I like what Trump says, and a lot of what he says is right. We do need to halt people coming in from countries who are terrorist HQ's and from countries who have leaders that support terrorist organizations.
But there is something more here. We as a people have had to vote for the lesser of two evils for some time now. Until we have a really good third party candidate that could bust that up, not much will change.
We are back to where you have the Hildabeast leading the democrat side by a large margin and us Conservatives MUST be smart and put someone forth that can beat her. Poll after poll show that Trump can't do it, Carson can barely do it and Rubio can do it.
I think at this point and I hate to say this, a Rubio/Cruz or Rubio/Fiorina ticket is probably the best way we don't have Obama 3.0 aka the Hildabeast and slick willie back in the oral office again...
I would love to see Fiorina debate Hillary directly, she would absolutely destroy her.
If you nominate Bush, not much will change, Christie would be devastitating to gun owners and he would keep Obamacare, Rand Paul whom I really like to see as Pres would probably be better served as Fed Reserve chair or some other auditory function within the Federal government...the rest well.......
Killing a combatant is acceptable in the face of Jihad
Killing a combatant's Mom to terrorize the combatant is wrong
Killing his mom because she houses a bomb making factory in her kitchen is fine, however. She is a combatant
BHO says "we are better than them because talk it out"
This is wrong too--BHO fails to defend innocent life when actual threats arise.
This is why he is despised on a worldwide basis.
Finally!--BMT you got it right.
Trump has explained it several times. Family members in the USA that have knowledge will be charged, family members who have knowledge elsewhere will be treated as enemy combatants--and killed with the rest of the terrorists.
As I said before, when the "good" Muslims begin to stand up and denounce radical Islam, and assist authorities in stopping this crap, then they will have my sympathy.......but until then.......
I like what Trump says, and a lot of what he says is right. We do need to halt people coming in from countries who are terrorist HQ's and from countries who have leaders that support terrorist organizations.
But there is something more here. We as a people have had to vote for the lesser of two evils for some time now. Until we have a really good third party candidate that could bust that up, not much will change.
We are back to where you have the Hildabeast leading the democrat side by a large margin and us Conservatives MUST be smart and put someone forth that can beat her. Poll after poll show that Trump can't do it, Carson can barely do it and Rubio can do it.
I think at this point and I hate to say this, a Rubio/Cruz or Rubio/Fiorina ticket is probably the best way we don't have Obama 3.0 aka the Hildabeast and slick willie back in the oral office again...
I would love to see Fiorina debate Hillary directly, she would absolutely destroy her.
If you nominate Bush, not much will change, Christie would be devastitating to gun owners and he would keep Obamacare, Rand Paul whom I really like to see as Pres would probably be better served as Fed Reserve chair or some other auditory function within the Federal government...the rest well.......
so let me see here...I found this little tit bit of info directly from the koran...
Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing... but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)" (Translation is from the Noble Quran) The verse prior to this (190) refers to "fighting for the cause of Allah those who fight you" leading some to believe that the entire passage refers to a defensive war in which Muslims are defending their homes and families. The historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, however, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries. In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did). Verse 190 thus means to fight those who offer resistance to Allah's rule (ie. Muslim conquest). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is disingenuous (the actual Arabic words for persecution - "idtihad" - and oppression - a variation of "z-l-m" - do not appear in the verse). The word used instead, "fitna", can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation. This is certainly what is meant in this context since the violence is explicitly commissioned "until religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief.
Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah').
Quran (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."
Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"
Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle.
Quran (9:30) - "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!"
Quran (47:3-4) - "Those who disbelieve follow falsehood, while those who believe follow the truth from their Lord... So, when you meet (in fight Jihad in Allah's Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives)... If it had been Allah's Will, He Himself could certainly have punished them (without you). But (He lets you fight), in order to test you, some with others. But those who are killed in the Way of Allah, He will never let their deeds be lost." Those who reject Allah are to be killed in Jihad. The wounded are to be held captive for ransom. The only reason Allah doesn't do the dirty work himself is to to test the faithfulness of Muslims. Those who kill pass the test.
Quran (61:4) - "Surely Allah loves those who fight in His way" Religion of Peace, indeed! The verse explicitly refers to "battle array" meaning that it is speaking of physical conflict. This is followed by (61:9): "He it is who has sent His Messenger (Mohammed) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam) to make it victorious over all religions even though the infidels may resist." (See next verse, below). Infidels who resist Islamic rule are to be fought.
Quran (61:10-12) - "O You who believe! Shall I guide you to a commerce that will save you from a painful torment. That you believe in Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad ), and that you strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with your wealth and your lives, that will be better for you, if you but know! (If you do so) He will forgive you your sins, and admit you into Gardens under which rivers flow, and pleasant dwelling in Gardens of 'Adn - Eternity ['Adn (Edn) Paradise], that is indeed the great success." This verse refers to physical battle in order to make Islam victorious over other religions (see above). It uses the Arabic word, Jihad.
From the Hadith
Bukhari (52:177) - Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."
Bukhari (52:256) - The Prophet... was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." In this command, Muhammad establishes that it is permissible to kill non-combatants in the process of killing a perceived enemy. This provides justification for the many Islamic terror bombings.
Bukhari (52:65) - The Prophet said, 'He who fights that Allah's Word, Islam, should be superior, fights in Allah's Cause. Muhammad's words are the basis for offensive Jihad - spreading Islam by force. This is how it was understood by his companions, and by the terrorists of today.
Muslim (31:5917) - "Ali went a bit and then halted and did not look about and then said in a loud voice: 'Allah's Messenger, on what issue should I fight with the people?' Thereupon he (the Prophet) said: 'Fight with them until they bear testimony to the fact that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his Messenger'." The pretext for attacking the peaceful farming community of Khaibar was not obvious to the Muslims. Muhammad's son-in-law Ali asked the prophet of Islam to clarify the reason for their mission to kill, loot and enslave. Muhammad's reply was straightforward. The people should be fought because they are not Muslim.
Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 484: - “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.’”
Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 992: - "Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah." Muhammad's instructions to his men prior to a military raid.
After reading what the Koran tells a Muslim how to be a Muslim, how do you have "regular" Muslims, as if they don't go by this they are by default NOT following their religion...
The Old Testament in the Bible is rough, but no where in Christianity is it said to go "kill everyone else who don't convert to us" as the Koran does.
I have several Muslim friends who are Kurdish, but they even told me that persons who carry out these acts are practicing Islam in the fullest and all Muslims are supposed to
If Trump was elected and nominated Hilary as his VP, what would happen if he stood down after say 2 years? Say due to "ill health"? Would Hilary become Pres or would there need to be another election?
The VP serves the rest of the term if a president resigns, dies, or is removed from office. Depending if the VP served more or less than half of his/her predecessors then they could run for 1 or 2 more terms, respectively.
Trump has explained it several times. Family members in the USA that have knowledge will be charged, family members who have knowledge elsewhere will be treated as enemy combatants--and killed with the rest of the terrorists.
As I said before, when the "good" Muslims begin to stand up and denounce radical Islam, and assist authorities in stopping this crap, then they will have my sympathy.......but until then.......
Casey
I don't think he ever really "explains" anything. That's the beauty of Trump. He just says he's going to do something and his fans hear that...and more. It's fascinating, and not the first time we've seen the phenomenon.
How do you figure? Who do you think out of the group has the best chance of beating Hillary?
Originally Posted by deflave
Originally Posted by contendershooter
I like what Trump says, and a lot of what he says is right. We do need to halt people coming in from countries who are terrorist HQ's and from countries who have leaders that support terrorist organizations.
But there is something more here. We as a people have had to vote for the lesser of two evils for some time now. Until we have a really good third party candidate that could bust that up, not much will change.
We are back to where you have the Hildabeast leading the democrat side by a large margin and us Conservatives MUST be smart and put someone forth that can beat her. Poll after poll show that Trump can't do it, Carson can barely do it and Rubio can do it.
I think at this point and I hate to say this, a Rubio/Cruz or Rubio/Fiorina ticket is probably the best way we don't have Obama 3.0 aka the Hildabeast and slick willie back in the oral office again...
I would love to see Fiorina debate Hillary directly, she would absolutely destroy her.
If you nominate Bush, not much will change, Christie would be devastitating to gun owners and he would keep Obamacare, Rand Paul whom I really like to see as Pres would probably be better served as Fed Reserve chair or some other auditory function within the Federal government...the rest well.......
I read that CNN changed the rules so Carly qualified, which also let Christie.
I'm a Cruz supporter all the way.... I send him money each month... but here's my take on the debate as objectively as I can make it:
Cruz's task was to not lose ground to Rubio and I think he succeeded in that. If he gains, it will be at Trump's expense ,however.
Like it or not [and I don't] Bush and Christie helped themselves.
Rand Paul had his best debate by far, but whether it helps him is anybody's guess."If you want WWIII, here's your guy" while pointing at Christie, was my favorite part of the "show".
Trump's facial expressions while he was being criticized reminded me of a spoiled rich kid who got beat out for quarterback. Funny how even the MSM made a big deal out of Gore's "sighs" while GWB was talking, but Trump gets a pass.His whining at the moderators fell flat.I think he will drop a few points in the polls.
Carson probably did well enough to stop his slide in the polls. I can't help but like the guy and he might make a surprisingly good POTUS.
I agree that Trump can't be owned, and he is self financing his campaign...but can he beat Hillary straight up? I mean Obama has made a joke of this country and we MUST NOT have 4 more years of another democrap.....
Poll after poll show that Trump can't do it, Carson can barely do it and Rubio can do it.
That is BS. I don't know where you are getting this Hillary vs Trump stuff at, but it's either wrong or it is a lie.
Hillary is a worse candidate than Dukakis.
No...Trump actually mentioned the fact that a poll with him being able to beat Hillary had recently come out.
right Trump said that...but CNN, Fox, and other news sites were quoting a new poll prior to the debates that out of ALL of the Repub candidates, only Carson and Rubio beat Hillary in a head to head matchup.
I like Trump...to a point...he was anti gun, pro choice, pro Obama Care before he ran for Pres and that is just the facts. I do believe people can "see the light" but he is someone you have to take with a grain of salt...
I read that yesterday as well but at this point all these polls aren't worth 10 cents. I don't trust the pollsters anymore than I do the media! The problem is people let some damn poll determine if they are going to get off there ass and vote or not.
The polls don't matter until just before an election. Just like the weather guy on TV, they are never judged by a long term forcast. They are designed to influence people's thoughts, not measure them.
I read that yesterday as well but at this point all these polls aren't worth 10 cents. I don't trust the pollsters anymore than I do the media! The problem is people let some damn poll determine if they are going to get off there ass and vote or not.
I agree...I am not saying I am going off this poll or letting it steer whom I vote for, but the American populous overall does...
I'm convinced that any of them but Kasich, Christie and Bush (on the big stage) can beat Hillary.
I agree.
I said that last night. If you put Paul in front of Hillary for two hours, and he kept his cool and stayed succinct (like he did last night) that dude would sky rocket in the polls.
I'm convinced that any of them but Kasich, Christie and Bush (on the big stage) can beat Hillary.
The American people did vote Obama in twice...so voting in Hillary is not too far fetched of a possibility... True red blood Americans are going to have to get off their arse and vote or the inner cities are going to put in place whom they want to fill their hands with freebies once again
I believe, overall, Rubio edged out Cruz and that Rubio and Christie, along with Cruz and Carson round out the top 5 who have any semblance of hope.
Trump's lead will remain significant and I believe his actual polling numbers are greater than what the national polling suggests, regardless of the lame attempt by the DR to put out a highly criticized poll and one of which was typical of it's anti-Trump agenda since day 1. And, as long as Jeb stays in, Trump has his punching bag and the consequent sound bites will keep him well at the top.
By Friday, I suspect polling from top to relevant bottom to be Trump, Cruz/Rubio nearly tied at 2 and 3,Carson and Christie.
The rest, except Jeb, should consider buying 1 way tickets back home. Paul did well last night but it unfortunately fell upon deaf ears due to the Rubio/Cruz, Trump/Cruz, Trump/Bush sideshows. Fiorina comes across as a constipated Stonehenge bobble-head doll and she's almost as irritating as Kasich's arm and hand tourettes.
Rubio showed once again that he is a traditional slick politician. Exactly what we don't want or need. If I watch and listen to him for long, I feel soiled, and check to make sure my wallet is still in my pocket...
The American people did vote Obama in twice...so voting in Hillary is not too far fetched of a possibility... True red blood Americans are going to have to get off their arse and vote or the inner cities are going to put in place whom they want to fill their hands with freebies once again [/quote]
so if Rubio gets the nomination and he goes against Hillary what are you going to do?
Not shoot Contenders.
Travis
seriously Travis, whom would you vote for? You have to take a side and if you stay home, that is just a plus for Hillary... If its Rubio v Hillary, what would you do...
Trump has explained it several times. Family members in the USA that have knowledge will be charged, family members who have knowledge elsewhere will be treated as enemy combatants--and killed with the rest of the terrorists.
As I said before, when the "good" Muslims begin to stand up and denounce radical Islam, and assist authorities in stopping this crap, then they will have my sympathy.......but until then.......
Casey
I don't think he ever really "explains" anything. That's the beauty of Trump. He just says he's going to do something and his fans hear that...and more. It's fascinating, and not the first time we've seen the phenomenon.
You're right, he doesn't dwell on the "small stuff".
I mean he's got other people for that--Trump obviously doesn't sweat the details.....
Rubio showed once again that he is a traditional slick politician. Exactly what we don't want or need. If I watch and listen to him for long, I feel soiled, and check to make sure my wallet is still in my pocket...
He reminds me of the kid that got his azz kicked every day on the walk home from 4th grade.
Trump sounds different and behaves differently because he can.
He's not owned.
Never said he was "owned"...
Guess we will just have to wait and see what happens..
If he fails to get the nomination and stands third party, would you class that as him pushing the destruct botton on Republication voters???
It would definitely split the vote and walk Hillary straight in the White House. He did say last night again he wouldn't do third party, although Carson is threatening to do so if there is a brokered convention.
I like what Trump says, and a lot of what he says is right. We do need to halt people coming in from countries who are terrorist HQ's and from countries who have leaders that support terrorist organizations.
But there is something more here. We as a people have had to vote for the lesser of two evils for some time now. Until we have a really good third party candidate that could bust that up, not much will change.
We are back to where you have the Hildabeast leading the democrat side by a large margin and us Conservatives MUST be smart and put someone forth that can beat her. Poll after poll show that Trump can't do it, Carson can barely do it and Rubio can do it.
I think at this point and I hate to say this, a Rubio/Cruz or Rubio/Fiorina ticket is probably the best way we don't have Obama 3.0 aka the Hildabeast and slick willie back in the oral office again...
I would love to see Fiorina debate Hillary directly, she would absolutely destroy her.
If you nominate Bush, not much will change, Christie would be devastitating to gun owners and he would keep Obamacare, Rand Paul whom I really like to see as Pres would probably be better served as Fed Reserve chair or some other auditory function within the Federal government...the rest well.......
America is a whorehouse. And a cheap one at that. Our populace is full of folks who know nothing of civics, they read and comprehend at middle school level. The average telephone has the entire worlds knowledge at its disposal and its used to look at pictures of cats and posyt what coffee you just had. The country in in the state that it's in because of morons, plain and simple.
Yep. right on the money. And don't expect change for at least a generation. Hopefully, meth will have wiped out Darwin's failures, and run its course.
For many, the truth hurts and that's why the messenger usually gets killed. The debate was another dog and pony show, with the ponies doing only one trick. We're in for a ride, those of us that are still around after the election. I'm not looking forward to it.
seriously Travis, whom would you vote for? You have to take a side and if you stay home, that is just a plus for Hillary... If its Rubio v Hillary, what would you do...
I like what Trump says, and a lot of what he says is right. We do need to halt people coming in from countries who are terrorist HQ's and from countries who have leaders that support terrorist organizations.
But there is something more here. We as a people have had to vote for the lesser of two evils for some time now. Until we have a really good third party candidate that could bust that up, not much will change.
We are back to where you have the Hildabeast leading the democrat side by a large margin and us Conservatives MUST be smart and put someone forth that can beat her. Poll after poll show that Trump can't do it, Carson can barely do it and Rubio can do it.
I think at this point and I hate to say this, a Rubio/Cruz or Rubio/Fiorina ticket is probably the best way we don't have Obama 3.0 aka the Hildabeast and slick willie back in the oral office again...
I would love to see Fiorina debate Hillary directly, she would absolutely destroy her.
If you nominate Bush, not much will change, Christie would be devastitating to gun owners and he would keep Obamacare, Rand Paul whom I really like to see as Pres would probably be better served as Fed Reserve chair or some other auditory function within the Federal government...the rest well.......
You're nuts.
Travis
no chit, going by what the lying ass media says.
I am basing this on what the fickle American voters have put in control for the past 8 years...all of us on here including myself knows the media are all for the democrats no matter whom they nominate, so we can't continue to blame the media on why our guys don't get in...we have to get out and vote. I know we out number those who like the democrats
Rubio was on my short list when this thing started...I was familiar with his immigration stance, but was willing to chalk that up to youthful indiscretion as a new Senator. It has become painfully evident that I was mistaken that he is a liar. That catches up to even a Politician.
Trump sounds different and behaves differently because he can.
He's not owned.
Never said he was "owned"...
Guess we will just have to wait and see what happens..
If he fails to get the nomination and stands third party, would you class that as him pushing the destruct botton on Republication voters???
It depends.
If Trump lead the delegate count yet didn't get the required 1237 delegates, and the RNC gave its delegates to a candidate who had less than Trump in order to push Trump aside, it would be the RNC who destroyed the GOP by refusing to yield to the majority.
The RNC frequently changes the rules in order to benefit the establishment candidate.
The fact that the party "owns" 437 delegates that they can give to any candidate they choose shows how corrupt their system is.
Essentially, any outsider running for the GOP is playing against a stacked deck.
It's especially stacked this cycle because the party is encouraging so many candidates to continue running in order to split the vote in so many directions that no-one gets the required 1237 delegates,..so the RNC can use their 437 delegates to push whoever they want into winning the nomination,....regardless of who the majority wants.
It's important to note until the Republican field is narrowed any head to head polls are going to be split up against a clear future nominee like Hillary.
His back-pedaling is eloquent and articulate though and that gives him a pass to many who don't take their research up a notch. Rand's attack on Rubio though was a significant uppercut blow though which could help Cruz.
But, with the GOPe desperately hoping for Rubio and, while Cruz rides Trump's draft, I'm thinking the GOPe will begin accepting the imminent realities ahead of them and painfully side up with Cruz as their anti-Trump solution.
As long as Bush,Kasich and Graham stay in the race, Trump will remain at the top. I have to truly question the intelligence of the GOPe powers that be who can not discern from this simple factual reality.
Killing a combatant is acceptable in the face of Jihad
Killing a combatant's Mom to terrorize the combatant is wrong
Killing his mom because she houses a bomb making factory in her kitchen is fine, however. She is a combatant
BHO says "we are better than them because talk it out"
This is wrong too--BHO fails to defend innocent life when actual threats arise.
This is why he is despised on a worldwide basis.
The basis isn't so much target their moms, the basis is, if the terrorists are using mom's place then we are going to bomb where he is. If people don't want to get killed then they need to stop being shields.
So if we know where 50,000 are but they are all living with mom and dad, we can't do anything.
The more conservative they are, the more electable they are. Liberals made up this "gotta get the moderates" crap a few cycles back and idiots have run with it.
I've had a little time to digest the debate, and here's my take.
Rand Paul came back to his senses and quit playing games that he can't win.
Rubio is a lying little POS.
The guys from Ohio and New Jersey are grossly offensive.
It makes absolutely no difference what Trump says, or does. His fans are in love with the persona of the character he is playing.
When Carson speaks, it's time to go to the bathroom or get get a beer, even if he's saying something right.
Pretty good breakdown LT...though not a Trump fan, (go ted) I think he did pretty good last night. He seems to have calmed down a bit...his numbers will rise, mainly because he said he he wouldn't run third party...looks like the RNC follows social media & had a powwow with both Carson & Trump... Trump calling out CNN was priceless...
Trumps numbers will go up a couple points. Cruz will keep pace with him. Paul goes up with them. Carson will either drop a little or stay the same Rubio drops a point or two. The rest will drop... Anybody notice how much Bush was stuttering???
I had to laugh at Paul and some here on killing civilians. Paul said it was against the Constitution. I don't guess we had that during WW 2. Didn't apply to Japan and Germany. Those bombs didn't know the difference. Hasbeen
If Trump lead the delegate count yet didn't get the required 1237 delegates, and the RNC gave its delegates to a candidate who had less than Trump in order to push Trump aside, it would be the RNC who destroyed the GOP by refusing to yield to the majority.
The RNC frequently changes the rules in order to benefit the establishment candidate.
The fact that the party "owns" 437 delegates that they can give to any candidate they choose shows how corrupt their system is.
Essentially, any outsider running for the GOP is playing against a stacked deck.
It's especially stacked this cycle because the party is encouraging so many candidates to continue running in order to split the vote in so many directions that no-one gets the required 1237 delegates,..so the RNC can use their 437 delegates to push whoever they want into winning the nomination,....regardless of who the majority wants.
Trump sounds different and behaves differently because he can.
He's not owned.
Never said he was "owned"...
Guess we will just have to wait and see what happens..
If he fails to get the nomination and stands third party, would you class that as him pushing the destruct botton on Republication voters???
It depends.
If Trump lead the delegate count yet didn't get the required 1237 delegates, and the RNC gave its delegates to a candidate who had less than Trump in order to push Trump aside, it would be the RNC who destroyed the GOP by refusing to yield to the majority.
The RNC frequently changes the rules in order to benefit the establishment candidate.
The fact that the party "owns" 437 delegates that they can give to any candidate they choose shows how corrupt their system is.
Essentially, any outsider running for the GOP is playing against a stacked deck.
It's especially stacked this cycle because the party is encouraging so many candidates to continue running in order to split the vote in so many directions that no-one gets the required 1237 delegates,..so the RNC can use their 437 delegates to push whoever they want into winning the nomination,....regardless of who the majority wants.
It's a messy game they're playing.
they did this to keep ron paul out last time...changed the rules
If Trump lead the delegate count yet didn't get the required 1237 delegates, and the RNC gave its delegates to a candidate who had less than Trump in order to push Trump aside, it would be the RNC who destroyed the GOP by refusing to yield to the majority.
The RNC frequently changes the rules in order to benefit the establishment candidate.
The fact that the party "owns" 437 delegates that they can give to any candidate they choose shows how corrupt their system is.
Essentially, any outsider running for the GOP is playing against a stacked deck.
It's especially stacked this cycle because the party is encouraging so many candidates to continue running in order to split the vote in so many directions that no-one gets the required 1237 delegates,..so the RNC can use their 437 delegates to push whoever they want into winning the nomination,....regardless of who the majority wants.
It's a messy game they're playing.
I get the general jist of whats going on, although as you say, I don't know the "detail"..I am old enough to remember RP running as a 3rd party and that was not a good result the Republicans..
With regards Trump, it really does not surprise me he is close to the Clinton's..
What I don't know is what the outcome of that relationship will be and just where it fits into his motivation for standing...
As I say I hope I am wrong but I guess only time will tell...
You girls can like Trump or not but the simple fact is he or Cruz are the best bets for this country presently. Neither is perfect but no candidate is.
Trump had the moment of the night when he shocked Wolf by stating he was all in with the pubs...the look on Wolf's face was priceless!
Anyone who votes for Clinton is either a hard core progressive (socialist)a pure party hack, and/or a brain dead leech...given her back round from Arkansas to now she has failed numerous times on every level. No partisanship speak here, just looking at her factual record.
I would like to see Cruz win, but he MUST start connecting with everyone. He already has the true conservative vote, the tea party vote, and has a lot of the libertarian vote as they know Paul doesn't have a chance now.
the establishment is going to keep backing Rubio, Bush, Kasich or Christie no matter what. There can't be that much of an establishment voter out there so we need to get out and out number them...
Anyone who votes for Clinton is either a hard core progressive (socialist)a pure party hack, and/or a brain dead leech...given her back round from Arkansas to now she has failed numerous times on every level. No partisanship speak here, just looking at her factual record.
You girls can like Trump or not but the simple fact is he or Cruz are the best bets for this country presently. Neither is perfect but no candidate is.
Trump had the moment of the night when he shocked Wolf by stating he was all in with the pubs...the look on Wolf's face was priceless!
Anyone who votes for Clinton is either a hard core progressive (socialist)a pure party hack, and/or a brain dead leech...given her back round from Arkansas to now she has failed numerous times on every level. No partisanship speak here, just looking at her factual record.
All of your Obama voters will vote for her or any other democrat, the Bill lovers will vote for her as they think he will really be running the office again from behind the scenes, and all of your college professors, textbook makers, big city politicians, American Communist Party (yes that is a real group) and all that want to live off the dole of others will back her as they are being good little democrats... Its an uphill battle with the mentality of today's voting populous
You girls can like Trump or not but the simple fact is he or Cruz are the best bets for this country presently. Neither is perfect but no candidate is.
Trump had the moment of the night when he shocked Wolf by stating he was all in with the pubs...the look on Wolf's face was priceless!
Anyone who votes for Clinton is either a hard core progressive (socialist)a pure party hack, and/or a brain dead leech...given her back round from Arkansas to now she has failed numerous times on every level. No partisanship speak here, just looking at her factual record.
All of your Obama voters will vote for her or any other democrat, the Bill lovers will vote for her as they think he will really be running the office again from behind the scenes, and all of your college professors, textbook makers, big city politicians, American Communist Party (yes that is a real group) and all that want to live off the dole of others will back her as they are being good little democrats... Its an uphill battle with the mentality of today's voting populous
I often imagine what the polling numbers would be if the very bright Cruz was to possess the charisma of a Trump or Christie.
There's something in Cruz's interpersonal communication style that catches many off guard, I believe. It's what helps Rubio and Christie somewhat. I have no doubt that Cruz will lend his support to Trump were he the selected nominee. I also believe the reverse to be true.
Trump: "When I do focus on Hillary I think she is going to fall."
I believe he's going to rip her to shreds. In response, Hillary will play the Democrat race card, war on women, blah, blah, blah that CF Dems fall for repeatedly.
It makes absolutely no difference what Trump says, or does. His fans are in love with the persona of the character he is playing.
I'm pretty horrified that of those who appear to have a chance to win the nomination, I find Trump the least objectionable. That's because I find him pretty darn objectionable.
I disagree with you, though, in that I believe his appeal has more to do with the fact that folks see he doesn't care about criticisms based on political correctness, and he has no respect for the political establishment that seems to run both parties. That and he seems bound and determined to do something about illegal immigration, and even the wrong kind of legal immigration.
You girls can like Trump or not but the simple fact is he or Cruz are the best bets for this country presently. Neither is perfect but no candidate is.
Trump had the moment of the night when he shocked Wolf by stating he was all in with the pubs...the look on Wolf's face was priceless!
Anyone who votes for Clinton is either a hard core progressive (socialist)a pure party hack, and/or a brain dead leech...given her back round from Arkansas to now she has failed numerous times on every level. No partisanship speak here, just looking at her factual record.
All of your Obama voters will vote for her or any other democrat, the Bill lovers will vote for her as they think he will really be running the office again from behind the scenes, and all of your college professors, textbook makers, big city politicians, American Communist Party (yes that is a real group) and all that want to live off the dole of others will back her as they are being good little democrats... Its an uphill battle with the mentality of today's voting populous
All you had to type was 'Yankees and Left Coast'
thanks for allowing me to clean up the coffee I laughed out... :-)
Trump: "When I do focus on Hillary I think she is going to fall."
I believe he's going to rip her to shreds. In response, Hillary will play the Democrat race card, war on women, blah, blah, blah that CF Dems fall for repeatedly.
the sad thing is a lot of people fall for it every time
Lots of lying going on last night regarding foreign policy.
I heard more than one candidate infer that a no fly zone was necessary in Syria in order to stem the flow of Syrian refugees.
That's bullshit.
Both the establishment candidates on the left and right want to implement a no fly zone over Syria because Putin is bombing hell out of the Islamic radicals that the American government is funding in order for them to make war against Assad.
The war refugees coming out of Syria are running from the American government supported Islamic radicals,...not Russia.
I think the Trump/Cruz deal............. you KNOW there is one....... is that they campaign thru Super Tuesday and the one with the fewer delegates gets out and and supports the other.
They could see the writing on the wall that Bristoe laid out that means a candidate must WIN outright to mess up the RNC game plan, and they saw it going in.
Them butting heads in the "winner take all" states would play right into the RNC's hands.
so let me see here...I found this little tit bit of info directly from the koran...
Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing... but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)" (Translation is from the Noble Quran) The verse prior to this (190) refers to "fighting for the cause of Allah those who fight you" leading some to believe that the entire passage refers to a defensive war in which Muslims are defending their homes and families. The historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, however, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries. In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did). Verse 190 thus means to fight those who offer resistance to Allah's rule (ie. Muslim conquest). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is disingenuous (the actual Arabic words for persecution - "idtihad" - and oppression - a variation of "z-l-m" - do not appear in the verse). The word used instead, "fitna", can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation. This is certainly what is meant in this context since the violence is explicitly commissioned "until religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief.
Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah').
Quran (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."
Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"
Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle.
Quran (9:30) - "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!"
Quran (47:3-4) - "Those who disbelieve follow falsehood, while those who believe follow the truth from their Lord... So, when you meet (in fight Jihad in Allah's Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives)... If it had been Allah's Will, He Himself could certainly have punished them (without you). But (He lets you fight), in order to test you, some with others. But those who are killed in the Way of Allah, He will never let their deeds be lost." Those who reject Allah are to be killed in Jihad. The wounded are to be held captive for ransom. The only reason Allah doesn't do the dirty work himself is to to test the faithfulness of Muslims. Those who kill pass the test.
Quran (61:4) - "Surely Allah loves those who fight in His way" Religion of Peace, indeed! The verse explicitly refers to "battle array" meaning that it is speaking of physical conflict. This is followed by (61:9): "He it is who has sent His Messenger (Mohammed) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam) to make it victorious over all religions even though the infidels may resist." (See next verse, below). Infidels who resist Islamic rule are to be fought.
Quran (61:10-12) - "O You who believe! Shall I guide you to a commerce that will save you from a painful torment. That you believe in Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad ), and that you strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with your wealth and your lives, that will be better for you, if you but know! (If you do so) He will forgive you your sins, and admit you into Gardens under which rivers flow, and pleasant dwelling in Gardens of 'Adn - Eternity ['Adn (Edn) Paradise], that is indeed the great success." This verse refers to physical battle in order to make Islam victorious over other religions (see above). It uses the Arabic word, Jihad.
From the Hadith
Bukhari (52:177) - Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."
Bukhari (52:256) - The Prophet... was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." In this command, Muhammad establishes that it is permissible to kill non-combatants in the process of killing a perceived enemy. This provides justification for the many Islamic terror bombings.
Bukhari (52:65) - The Prophet said, 'He who fights that Allah's Word, Islam, should be superior, fights in Allah's Cause. Muhammad's words are the basis for offensive Jihad - spreading Islam by force. This is how it was understood by his companions, and by the terrorists of today.
Muslim (31:5917) - "Ali went a bit and then halted and did not look about and then said in a loud voice: 'Allah's Messenger, on what issue should I fight with the people?' Thereupon he (the Prophet) said: 'Fight with them until they bear testimony to the fact that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his Messenger'." The pretext for attacking the peaceful farming community of Khaibar was not obvious to the Muslims. Muhammad's son-in-law Ali asked the prophet of Islam to clarify the reason for their mission to kill, loot and enslave. Muhammad's reply was straightforward. The people should be fought because they are not Muslim.
Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 484: - “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.’”
Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 992: - "Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah." Muhammad's instructions to his men prior to a military raid.
After reading what the Koran tells a Muslim how to be a Muslim, how do you have "regular" Muslims, as if they don't go by this they are by default NOT following their religion...
The Old Testament in the Bible is rough, but no where in Christianity is it said to go "kill everyone else who don't convert to us" as the Koran does.
I have several Muslim friends who are Kurdish, but they even told me that persons who carry out these acts are practicing Islam in the fullest and all Muslims are supposed to
Yep, the Quran is almost as demonic as the Talmud.
use the drop-down to change the year...what happened to our voters mindset after Reagan?
The list of those on the dole got MUCH larger. That dole includes those who receive welfare and social security checks from .gov as well as those who receive paychecks from .gov.
Both the establishment candidates on the left and right want to implement a no fly zone over Syria because Putin is bombing hell out of the Islamic radicals that the American government is funding in order for them to make war against Assad.
You have to wonder just what Assad has gone to the West that they are backing Muslim radicals over him...
use the drop-down to change the year...what happened to our voters mindset after Reagan?
The list of those on the dole got MUCH larger. That dole includes those who receive welfare and social security checks from .gov as well as those who receive paychecks from .gov.
yep, clinton started the dole increase, Obama has added to it a lot...there has to be more than just that which has caused this stupidity
The more conservative they are, the more electable they are. Liberals made up this "gotta get the moderates" crap a few cycles back and idiots have run with it.
use the drop-down to change the year...what happened to our voters mindset after Reagan?
The list of those on the dole got MUCH larger. That dole includes those who receive welfare and social security checks from .gov as well as those who receive paychecks from .gov.
yep, clinton started the dole increase, Obama has added to it a lot...there has to be more than just that which has caused this stupidity
Actually, Reagan increased the dole considerably with the expansion of the Federal gov't. Clinton and GWB expanded it more, and Hussein is taking it to another level yet.
Both the establishment candidates on the left and right want to implement a no fly zone over Syria because Putin is bombing hell out of the Islamic radicals that the American government is funding in order for them to make war against Assad.
You have to wonder just what Assad has gone to the West that they are backing Muslim radicals over him...
It's not just Assad.
The neocons have been in the business of destabilizing the Middle East for quite some time.
They refer to it as "The Arab Spring",.....claim that they're doing so in order for the poor, downtrodden Muslims can experience Democracy and eventually morph into June and Ward Cleaver.
What they really want is to destabilize the region to such an extent that WW3 breaks out,...and their plan is to collect the spoils of the aftermath.
It sounds crazy,...but the neocons are some seriously crazy bastards.
Baby Boomers had a bunch of kids, because there was a bunch of them and they all started to vote about that time.
Hell, it was the Boomers who gave us Hippies, who gave us Carter, who gave us Clinton (as he is one), and largely gave us Hussein. It's the Boomers that populate the unions, who are the school teachers and professors pumping out the socialist propaganda.
I am not convinced that Trump will be around for the big race. I can't figure out his game yet.
I'm not convinced either...that said, I was surprised he ruled out a third party run & Carson back walked his comment of leaving the party... Maybe they were reassured by the RNC there wouldn't be a brokered convention?
If that's the case, we need to start seeing some of the bottom feeding "establishment" candidates dropping BEFORE the primary elections start...if that doesn't happen???
Reince Priebus was just on tv...talk about a fuggin snake.
I had to laugh at Paul and some here on killing civilians. Paul said it was against the Constitution. I don't guess we had that during WW 2. Didn't apply to Japan and Germany. Those bombs didn't know the difference. Hasbeen
Not even close to what he said. He said the deliberate targeting of civilians was a violation of international treaties on war. The fact that both Churchill and FDR did that during WWII doesn't make that less the case. They were both war criminals, along with Truman. Ike, too. In fact all sides of WWII were replete with war criminals of the highest order. That doesn't justify future war crimes.
Both the establishment candidates on the left and right want to implement a no fly zone over Syria because Putin is bombing hell out of the Islamic radicals that the American government is funding in order for them to make war against Assad.
You have to wonder just what Assad has gone to the West that they are backing Muslim radicals over him...
It's not just Assad.
The neocons have been in the business of destabilizing the Middle East for quite some time.
They refer to it as "The Arab Spring",.....claim that they're doing so in order for the poor, downtrodden Muslims can experience Democracy and eventually morph into June and Ward Cleaver.
What they really want is to destabilize the region to such an extent that WW3 breaks out,...and their plan is to collect the spoils of the aftermath.
It sounds crazy,...but the neocons are some seriously crazy bastards.
The debates are useless as a means of gauging policy or even general suitability for the job. They are all going to lie anyway. And even if they aren't consciously lying, they don't say anything to which they can be held. All it is is a beauty contest where the public gets to decide which candidate is "prettiest".
Trump is riding the wave of voter disgust. He stands the best position to win in this country because the disgust cuts across the aisles. Lots and lots of old school Democrats, the relatively few left, are upset at the American Communist party of Obama and Clinton. They'll vote for Trump and honest polling shows this.
Trump is the only guy in a long time, probably since Reagan, who can actually unite the country across party lines. And like Reagan, he is hated by the establishment.
You've had the Bush, Romney's, and the Rockefellers as power brokers in Republican politics since the early 1960s. Not people like them, but those actual families. And there are a ton more with names you might not recognize but who are there as well.
They don't care about you. This is all a game to them. They take turns trying to beat the other players in the game, the Democrats. And like any game, this one is relatively friendly. The players go hard, sometimes they even play dirty, during the game. But after the game, it is all hugs, handshakes, and promises of "We'll get you next time."
Trump is huge right now because he is the one guy who is saying, "Wait a minute, your game is fricking the country." Everyone else, is merely trying to get in on the game.
Cruz, as good as he sounds, is hard to trust. Not because I think he is lying, but because he is too young and not rich enough. If he is elected, even if he serves eight years, he could live another thirty or forty years after being president. He definitely imagines life AFTER being president. He'll be corrupted, any mortal will with the power and the money that will be thrown his way. He'll have a long life to enjoy the perks.
Trump is old enough that when he is honest for himself, there is not much imagining of life beyond office. This will be the crowning achievement of a long life of accomplishment. He needs to impress no one. He needs no favors or riches. He is the one guy in the field who can survive the temptation. That doesn't mean he'll be a good president. But it means he'll be a relatively honest one and that is probably all we can hope for these days.
I am not convinced that Trump will be around for the big race. I can't figure out his game yet.
I'm not convinced either...that said, I was surprised he ruled out a third party run & Carson back walked his comment of leaving the party... Maybe they were reassured by the RNC there wouldn't be a brokered convention?
If either would have said anything firm about a 3rd party run, it would have alientated a lot of people that hate the establishment old guard but still believe in a unified party.
Lots of lying going on last night regarding foreign policy.
I heard more than one candidate infer that a no fly zone was necessary in Syria in order to stem the flow of Syrian refugees.
That's bullshit.
Both the establishment candidates on the left and right want to implement a no fly zone over Syria because Putin is bombing hell out of the Islamic radicals that the American government is funding in order for them to make war against Assad.
The war refugees coming out of Syria are running from the American government supported Islamic radicals,...not Russia.
I've always thought that attempting to attach rules to war is a pretty silly endeavor.
When big wars break out those involved in it are fighting for their survival.
When it gets into gear, the "rules" go out the window.
The Marines fighting the island hopping campaigns in the Pacific soon learned that the rules would get them killed.
By the time they landed on Okinawa they knew that the only way to defeat the Japanese was to eliminate them. The Bushido code didn't allow for surrender.
There was a bit over 100,000 Japanese troops on Okinawa. The Marines knew by then that they didn't surrender.
It's impossible to go into that situation and play by any rules.
Both the establishment candidates on the left and right want to implement a no fly zone over Syria because Putin is bombing hell out of the Islamic radicals that the American government is funding in order for them to make war against Assad.
You have to wonder just what Assad has done to the West that they are backing Muslim radicals over him...
It's what he stands in the way of vis a vis Israel. Israel has determined a course for itself that involves domination of the region toward what it terms "Greater Israel." Look it up. It requires the breaking down of all Muslim nations that aren't already under Israel's thumb. The US acts, both overtly and covertly, in the region on behalf of Israeli interests. Once you figure that out, everything that's been going on in the region since 9/11 makes sense. If you never figure it out, then you will find it all incomprehensible.
I had to laugh at Paul and some here on killing civilians. Paul said it was against the Constitution. I don't guess we had that during WW 2. Didn't apply to Japan and Germany. Those bombs didn't know the difference. Hasbeen
Not even close to what he said. He said the deliberate targeting of civilians was a violation of international treaties on war. The fact that both Churchill and FDR did that during WWII doesn't make that less the case. They were both war criminals, along with Truman. Ike, too. In fact all sides of WWII were replete with war criminals of the highest order. That doesn't justify future war crimes.
How do you go about distinguishing who is a "combatant" & who isn't? It's pretty hard to find & define an enemy when the enemy is a radical ideology. Judging from video of middle east cities in the aftermath of 9/11, it seems pretty clear to me who the enemy is...
Dealing with ISIS is simple. They claim they are a state. So quit trying to fight them like they are an insurgency. They aren't. They have all the aspects of a nation state within the territory they control. They have schools, courts, public services, licensing bureaus, police, and a military. Simply recognize that and actually declare war on them.
In an actual declared war, the gloves come off. We destroy their forces wherever and whenever they are found. We disrupt their infrastructure and their economies wherever and whenever they are found. We destroy their cities, not for the purpose of killing civilians, but to disrupt their economies and to destroy their wills to fight. We invoke Article 5 of NATO and if Turkey doesn't like it, we remove them from NATO.
We would do all of this if we wanted to actually get rid of ISIS. Obviously, we don't really want to do it because as an actual war, it would be the easiest war we've ever fought.
The debates are useless as a means of gauging policy or even general suitability for the job. They are all going to lie anyway. And even if they aren't consciously lying, they don't say anything to which they can be held. All it is is a beauty contest where the public gets to decide which candidate is "prettiest".
Trump is riding the wave of voter disgust. He stands the best position to win in this country because the disgust cuts across the aisles. Lots and lots of old school Democrats, the relatively few left, are upset at the American Communist party of Obama and Clinton. They'll vote for Trump and honest polling shows this.
Trump is the only guy in a long time, probably since Reagan, who can actually unite the country across party lines. And like Reagan, he is hated by the establishment.
You've had the Bush, Romney's, and the Rockefellers as power brokers in Republican politics since the early 1960s. Not people like them, but those actual families. And there are a ton more with names you might not recognize but who are there as well.
They don't care about you. This is all a game to them. They take turns trying to beat the other players in the game, the Democrats. And like any game, this one is relatively friendly. The players go hard, sometimes they even play dirty, during the game. But after the game, it is all hugs, handshakes, and promises of "We'll get you next time."
Trump is huge right now because he is the one guy who is saying, "Wait a minute, your game is fricking the country." Everyone else, is merely trying to get in on the game.
Cruz, as good as he sounds, is hard to trust. Not because I think he is lying, but because he is too young and not rich enough. If he is elected, even if he serves eight years, he could live another thirty or forty years after being president. He definitely imagines life AFTER being president. He'll be corrupted, any mortal will with the power and the money that will be thrown his way. He'll have a long life to enjoy the perks.
Trump is old enough that when he is honest for himself, there is not much imagining of life beyond office. This will be the crowning achievement of a long life of accomplishment. He needs to impress no one. He needs no favors or riches. He is the one guy in the field who can survive the temptation. That doesn't mean he'll be a good president. But it means he'll be a relatively honest one and that is probably all we can hope for these days.
The debates are useless as a means of gauging policy or even general suitability for the job. They are all going to lie anyway. And even if they aren't consciously lying, they don't say anything to which they can be held. All it is is a beauty contest where the public gets to decide which candidate is "prettiest".
Trump is riding the wave of voter disgust. He stands the best position to win in this country because the disgust cuts across the aisles. Lots and lots of old school Democrats, the relatively few left, are upset at the American Communist party of Obama and Clinton. They'll vote for Trump and honest polling shows this.
Trump is the only guy in a long time, probably since Reagan, who can actually unite the country across party lines. And like Reagan, he is hated by the establishment.
You've had the Bush, Romney's, and the Rockefellers as power brokers in Republican politics since the early 1960s. Not people like them, but those actual families. And there are a ton more with names you might not recognize but who are there as well.
They don't care about you. This is all a game to them. They take turns trying to beat the other players in the game, the Democrats. And like any game, this one is relatively friendly. The players go hard, sometimes they even play dirty, during the game. But after the game, it is all hugs, handshakes, and promises of "We'll get you next time."
Trump is huge right now because he is the one guy who is saying, "Wait a minute, your game is fricking the country." Everyone else, is merely trying to get in on the game.
Cruz, as good as he sounds, is hard to trust. Not because I think he is lying, but because he is too young and not rich enough. If he is elected, even if he serves eight years, he could live another thirty or forty years after being president. He definitely imagines life AFTER being president. He'll be corrupted, any mortal will with the power and the money that will be thrown his way. He'll have a long life to enjoy the perks.
Trump is old enough that when he is honest for himself, there is not much imagining of life beyond office. This will be the crowning achievement of a long life of accomplishment. He needs to impress no one. He needs no favors or riches. He is the one guy in the field who can survive the temptation. That doesn't mean he'll be a good president. But it means he'll be a relatively honest one and that is probably all we can hope for these days.
If you think any old school democrat is voting for Trump then you're sadly mistaken. These good old Dems are the same ass clowns that elected Obama.... twice. Along with all the conservatives who stayed home because they didn't want to vote for Romney the RINO.
This was the best Debate so far CNN did a great job, What Trump means by America will be great again = to America will be the world bully again... we all saw what happen to US then, 90% of the world was against us.
The debates are useless as a means of gauging policy or even general suitability for the job. They are all going to lie anyway. And even if they aren't consciously lying, they don't say anything to which they can be held. All it is is a beauty contest where the public gets to decide which candidate is "prettiest".
Trump is riding the wave of voter disgust. He stands the best position to win in this country because the disgust cuts across the aisles. Lots and lots of old school Democrats, the relatively few left, are upset at the American Communist party of Obama and Clinton. They'll vote for Trump and honest polling shows this.
Trump is the only guy in a long time, probably since Reagan, who can actually unite the country across party lines. And like Reagan, he is hated by the establishment.
You've had the Bush, Romney's, and the Rockefellers as power brokers in Republican politics since the early 1960s. Not people like them, but those actual families. And there are a ton more with names you might not recognize but who are there as well.
They don't care about you. This is all a game to them. They take turns trying to beat the other players in the game, the Democrats. And like any game, this one is relatively friendly. The players go hard, sometimes they even play dirty, during the game. But after the game, it is all hugs, handshakes, and promises of "We'll get you next time."
Trump is huge right now because he is the one guy who is saying, "Wait a minute, your game is fricking the country." Everyone else, is merely trying to get in on the game.
Cruz, as good as he sounds, is hard to trust. Not because I think he is lying, but because he is too young and not rich enough. If he is elected, even if he serves eight years, he could live another thirty or forty years after being president. He definitely imagines life AFTER being president. He'll be corrupted, any mortal will with the power and the money that will be thrown his way. He'll have a long life to enjoy the perks.
Trump is old enough that when he is honest for himself, there is not much imagining of life beyond office. This will be the crowning achievement of a long life of accomplishment. He needs to impress no one. He needs no favors or riches. He is the one guy in the field who can survive the temptation. That doesn't mean he'll be a good president. But it means he'll be a relatively honest one and that is probably all we can hope for these days.
If you think any old school democrat is voting for Trump then you're sadly mistaken. These good old Dems are the same ass clowns that elected Obama.... twice. Along with all the conservatives who stayed home because they didn't want to vote for Romney the RINO.
Your thinking is the same kind of thinking that says, "He look there is a game on. I had better watch and see who wins. Maybe we'll pull it out this time."
I keep asking how much money Cruz has gotten from the Kochs, but nobody will answer.
You can start here if you want to find out who gives what to who. As far as I know, the Kochs haven't given anything to any individuals yet this cycle. Like Trump, they pay politicians that can help them, not people they don't think will win, so it's early yet.
(You'll note that Trump has spent less than $2M of his own money so far.)
I keep asking how much money Cruz has gotten from the Kochs, but nobody will answer.
Does it matter? If so, why?
In politics, the entity that finances you, owns you. The Bible says, to paraphrase, the debtor is the servant of the lender. It would matter if Soros had made big contributions. It matters if the Kochs do. I like living in a representative Republic, not an Oligarchy.
I keep asking how much money Cruz has gotten from the Kochs, but nobody will answer.
Does it matter? If so, why?
In politics, the entity that finances you, owns you. The Bible says, to paraphrase, the debtor is the servant of the lender. It would matter if Soros had made big contributions. It matters if the Kochs do. I like living in a representative Republic, not an Oligarchy.
The U.S. hasn't been a representative Republic in the lifetimes of anyone on this forum, nor in the lifetimes of their parents (or likely even grandparents).
They're all a bunch of liars. See the chart, notice that all Republicans told more lies than any Democrat. As I've said before, Trump is an egomaniacal loser, and Carson is just plain nuts. Pants on fire, they are:
They're all a bunch of liars. See the chart, notice that all Republicans told more lies than any Democrat. As I've said before, Trump is an egomaniacal loser, and Carson is just plain nuts. Pants on fire, they are:
Says the advocate for the most corrupt female (and proven liar) in the history of US politics. What a talent for ignoring facts!
I don't hand out accolades easily,but I'll make an exception in your case.
You are so warped, I think you are damaged goods LOL! You need a shrink. Know any?
Did you look at the chart, dipsh*t? Talk about ignoring facts, but that's easy to do when your head's up your ass, right?
Originally Posted by 4ager
You're only here because in your home state you're viewed as a socialist fool and disregarded out of hand. You're ignored there and politically ridiculed. You're powerless there; emasculated (in many ways), and trolling here is the only thing you can do in order to feel like you've accomplished anything at all toward your socialist utopia.
Dealing with ISIS is simple. They claim they are a state. So quit trying to fight them like they are an insurgency. They aren't. They have all the aspects of a nation state within the territory they control. They have schools, courts, public services, licensing bureaus, police, and a military. Simply recognize that and actually declare war on them.
In an actual declared war, the gloves come off. We destroy their forces wherever and whenever they are found. We disrupt their infrastructure and their economies wherever and whenever they are found. We destroy their cities, not for the purpose of killing civilians, but to disrupt their economies and to destroy their wills to fight. We invoke Article 5 of NATO and if Turkey doesn't like it, we remove them from NATO.
We would do all of this if we wanted to actually get rid of ISIS. Obviously, we don't really want to do it because as an actual war, it would be the easiest war we've ever fought.
You still don't get it??? We've been supplying the "rebels" with arms & intelligence...
Who do you think these "rebels" are?
The "rebels" ARE ISIS...
We instigated & facilitated the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi in Libya by "freedom loving rebels"....guess what those "rebels" became... Yep...ISIS
Now we've got "freedom loving rebels" trying to overthrow Assad... Are you connecting the dots yet?
Our govt. is by & large responsible and has facilitated the current cluster fugg in the mideast...
I keep asking how much money Cruz has gotten from the Kochs, but nobody will answer.
Kosh says they will spend about $300 million directly on the 2016 race, out of the record promised $900 million. Seems as most of that has yet to be spent. As of this summer filings; for Cruz it wasn't the Kosh brothers, it was the Wilks brothers.
7/27/15 Washington (CNN)Two low-profile Texas brothers have donated $15 million to support Sen. Ted Cruz, a record-setting contribution that amounts to the largest known donation so far in the 2016 presidential campaign. Farris and Dan Wilks, billionaires who made their fortunes in the West Texas fracking boom, have given $15 million of the $38 million that the pro-Cruz super PAC, Keep the Promise...
...Keep the Promise is technically four separate committees that give three families more control over their own super PAC. Most of the attention has focused on Robert Mercer, a New York hedge fund magnate who gave the second-most money to conservative groups in 2014 than any other Republican donor. Mercer has given $11 million of the $38 million raised, according to a leader of the super PACs. Another $10 million comes from Toby Neugebauer, a Houston investor and a personal friend of Cruz's.
Together, their donations give Cruz and his allies more money than any other Republican except Jeb Bush...
The debates are useless as a means of gauging policy or even general suitability for the job. They are all going to lie anyway. And even if they aren't consciously lying, they don't say anything to which they can be held. All it is is a beauty contest where the public gets to decide which candidate is "prettiest".
Trump is riding the wave of voter disgust. He stands the best position to win in this country because the disgust cuts across the aisles. Lots and lots of old school Democrats, the relatively few left, are upset at the American Communist party of Obama and Clinton. They'll vote for Trump and honest polling shows this.
Trump is the only guy in a long time, probably since Reagan, who can actually unite the country across party lines. And like Reagan, he is hated by the establishment.
You've had the Bush, Romney's, and the Rockefellers as power brokers in Republican politics since the early 1960s. Not people like them, but those actual families. And there are a ton more with names you might not recognize but who are there as well.
They don't care about you. This is all a game to them. They take turns trying to beat the other players in the game, the Democrats. And like any game, this one is relatively friendly. The players go hard, sometimes they even play dirty, during the game. But after the game, it is all hugs, handshakes, and promises of "We'll get you next time."
Trump is huge right now because he is the one guy who is saying, "Wait a minute, your game is fricking the country." Everyone else, is merely trying to get in on the game.
Cruz, as good as he sounds, is hard to trust. Not because I think he is lying, but because he is too young and not rich enough. If he is elected, even if he serves eight years, he could live another thirty or forty years after being president. He definitely imagines life AFTER being president. He'll be corrupted, any mortal will with the power and the money that will be thrown his way. He'll have a long life to enjoy the perks.
Trump is old enough that when he is honest for himself, there is not much imagining of life beyond office. This will be the crowning achievement of a long life of accomplishment. He needs to impress no one. He needs no favors or riches. He is the one guy in the field who can survive the temptation. That doesn't mean he'll be a good president. But it means he'll be a relatively honest one and that is probably all we can hope for these days.
If you think any old school democrat is voting for Trump then you're sadly mistaken. These good old Dems are the same ass clowns that elected Obama.... twice. Along with all the conservatives who stayed home because they didn't want to vote for Romney the RINO.
Your thinking is the same kind of thinking that says, "He look there is a game on. I had better watch and see who wins. Maybe we'll pull it out this time."
Now that line takes a special kind of stupid right there.
I keep asking how much money Cruz has gotten from the Kochs, but nobody will answer.
You can start here if you want to find out who gives what to who. As far as I know, the Kochs haven't given anything to any individuals yet this cycle. Like Trump, they pay politicians that can help them, not people they don't think will win, so it's early yet.
(You'll note that Trump has spent less than $2M of his own money so far.)
I couldn't tell much from your link Pat. It looks to me like it would take a lot of research into those groups to find out who finances them. The Koch's have a bunch of different groups they've created. IMO they are worthless. I have many libertarian leanings myself even though I'm not a member of the Libertarian Party, but calling the Koch's Libertarians or much of anything is a misnomer. They are totally out for themselves. I found this and Cruz just went up a bunch in my estimation:
I keep asking how much money Cruz has gotten from the Kochs, but nobody will answer.
Kosh says they will spend about $300 million directly on the 2016 race, out of the record promised $900 million. Seems as most of that has yet to be spent. As of this summer filings; for Cruz it wasn't the Kosh brothers, it was the Wilks brothers.
7/27/15 Washington (CNN)Two low-profile Texas brothers have donated $15 million to support Sen. Ted Cruz, a record-setting contribution that amounts to the largest known donation so far in the 2016 presidential campaign. Farris and Dan Wilks, billionaires who made their fortunes in the West Texas fracking boom, have given $15 million of the $38 million that the pro-Cruz super PAC, Keep the Promise...
...Keep the Promise is technically four separate committees that give three families more control over their own super PAC. Most of the attention has focused on Robert Mercer, a New York hedge fund magnate who gave the second-most money to conservative groups in 2014 than any other Republican donor. Mercer has given $11 million of the $38 million raised, according to a leader of the super PACs. Another $10 million comes from Toby Neugebauer, a Houston investor and a personal friend of Cruz's.
Together, their donations give Cruz and his allies more money than any other Republican except Jeb Bush...
I'm aware of the $15mil the Wilks' gave Cruz. I don't know enough about them to comment much but I don't like it when my house shakes.
I keep asking how much money Cruz has gotten from the Kochs, but nobody will answer.
Does it matter? If so, why?
In politics, the entity that finances you, owns you. The Bible says, to paraphrase, the debtor is the servant of the lender. It would matter if Soros had made big contributions. It matters if the Kochs do. I like living in a representative Republic, not an Oligarchy.
They only own you if you let em...You can cite bible verses for justification of just about anything, but reality is a totally different thing.
Dealing with ISIS is simple. They claim they are a state. So quit trying to fight them like they are an insurgency. They aren't. They have all the aspects of a nation state within the territory they control. They have schools, courts, public services, licensing bureaus, police, and a military. Simply recognize that and actually declare war on them.
In an actual declared war, the gloves come off. We destroy their forces wherever and whenever they are found. We disrupt their infrastructure and their economies wherever and whenever they are found. We destroy their cities, not for the purpose of killing civilians, but to disrupt their economies and to destroy their wills to fight. We invoke Article 5 of NATO and if Turkey doesn't like it, we remove them from NATO.
We would do all of this if we wanted to actually get rid of ISIS. Obviously, we don't really want to do it because as an actual war, it would be the easiest war we've ever fought.
You still don't get it??? We've been supplying the "rebels" with arms & intelligence...
Who do you think these "rebels" are?
The "rebels" ARE ISIS...
We instigated & facilitated the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi in Libya by "freedom loving rebels"....guess what those "rebels" became... Yep...ISIS
Now we've got "freedom loving rebels" trying to overthrow Assad... Are you connecting the dots yet?
Our govt. is by & large responsible and has facilitated the current cluster fugg in the mideast...
Well, no schit, Sherlock. Do you want a cookie for figuring out what everyone else figured out 20 years ago? Of course, our government, or at least portions of our government is responsible. Why else do you think that they don't "simply" deal with the problem as I described above?
I keep asking how much money Cruz has gotten from the Kochs, but nobody will answer.
Kosh says they will spend about $300 million directly on the 2016 race, out of the record promised $900 million. Seems as most of that has yet to be spent. As of this summer filings; for Cruz it wasn't the Kosh brothers, it was the Wilks brothers.
7/27/15 Washington (CNN)Two low-profile Texas brothers have donated $15 million to support Sen. Ted Cruz, a record-setting contribution that amounts to the largest known donation so far in the 2016 presidential campaign. Farris and Dan Wilks, billionaires who made their fortunes in the West Texas fracking boom, have given $15 million of the $38 million that the pro-Cruz super PAC, Keep the Promise...
...Keep the Promise is technically four separate committees that give three families more control over their own super PAC. Most of the attention has focused on Robert Mercer, a New York hedge fund magnate who gave the second-most money to conservative groups in 2014 than any other Republican donor. Mercer has given $11 million of the $38 million raised, according to a leader of the super PACs. Another $10 million comes from Toby Neugebauer, a Houston investor and a personal friend of Cruz's.
Together, their donations give Cruz and his allies more money than any other Republican except Jeb Bush...
SLANT/ O7/15/15: Rubio has received the most funding from the Koch brothers out of the 2016 presidential candidates. In 2010, he received $32,200 for his campaign to be Senator. Later, in 2014, Koch Industries contributed $5,000 toward his campaign. Rubio was also a guest speaker at the Koch brothers’ donor retreat in September 2014, he has expressed support of political spending and this past April, he said he agrees with the Koch Brothers on most issues and would welcome their support in his run for president.
Cruz was among the top 10 highest federal candidate recipients in 2012, receiving $23,750 from Koch Industries toward his campaign for Senate.
I keep asking how much money Cruz has gotten from the Kochs, but nobody will answer.
Does it matter? If so, why?
In politics, the entity that finances you, owns you. The Bible says, to paraphrase, the debtor is the servant of the lender. It would matter if Soros had made big contributions. It matters if the Kochs do. I like living in a representative Republic, not an Oligarchy.
They only own you if you let em...You can cite bible verses for justification of just about anything, but reality is a totally different thing.
Untrue. You may think you're still free when you borrow, but you're not. The only way you're still free is if you plan on ripping off the lender and then you're only free if you get away with it. Many in America do. I'm not one of those. I've always paid my debts and I believe the Bible. Anybody who thinks billionaires who give money to political candidates don't expect anything in return is a rank idiot.
[quote=JoeBob]Dealing with ISIS is simple. They claim they are a state. So quit trying to fight them like they are an insurgency. They aren't. They have all the aspects of a nation state within the territory they control. They have schools, courts, public services, licensing bureaus, police, and a military. Simply recognize that and actually declare war on them.
In an actual declared war, the gloves come off. We destroy their forces wherever and whenever they are found. We disrupt their infrastructure and their economies wherever and whenever they are found. We destroy their cities, not for the purpose of killing civilians, but to disrupt their economies and to destroy their wills to fight. We invoke Article 5 of NATO and if Turkey doesn't like it, we remove them from NATO.
We would do all of this if we wanted to actually get rid of ISIS. Obviously, we don't really want to do it because as an actual war, it would be the easiest war we've ever fought.
Well, no schit, Sherlock. Do you want a cookie for figuring out what everyone else figured out 20 years ago? Of course, our government, or at least portions of our government is responsible. Why else do you think that they don't "simply" deal with the problem as I described above?
In the post you describe above, you made no mention of having a clue... reread it...
[quote=JoeBob]Dealing with ISIS is simple. They claim they are a state. So quit trying to fight them like they are an insurgency. They aren't. They have all the aspects of a nation state within the territory they control. They have schools, courts, public services, licensing bureaus, police, and a military. Simply recognize that and actually declare war on them.
In an actual declared war, the gloves come off. We destroy their forces wherever and whenever they are found. We disrupt their infrastructure and their economies wherever and whenever they are found. We destroy their cities, not for the purpose of killing civilians, but to disrupt their economies and to destroy their wills to fight. We invoke Article 5 of NATO and if Turkey doesn't like it, we remove them from NATO.
We would do all of this if we wanted to actually get rid of ISIS. Obviously, we don't really want to do it because as an actual war, it would be the easiest war we've ever fought.
Well, no schit, Sherlock. Do you want a cookie for figuring out what everyone else figured out 20 years ago? Of course, our government, or at least portions of our government is responsible. Why else do you think that they don't "simply" deal with the problem as I described above?
In the post you describe above, you made no mention of having a clue... reread it...
Clue? It makes no difference. I didn't draw a picture, so you wouldn't have gotten it.
I couldn't tell much from your link Pat. It looks to me like it would take a lot of research into those groups to find out who finances them. The Koch's have a bunch of different groups they've created. IMO they are worthless. I have many libertarian leanings myself even though I'm not a member of the Libertarian Party, but calling the Koch's Libertarians or much of anything is a misnomer. They are totally out for themselves. I found this and Cruz just went up a bunch in my estimation:
Braman is both a benefactor and a friend to Rubio, and their close relationship dates back to when the now-presidential candidate was ascending the ranks of the state Legislature. Over dinners at Braman’s Indian Creek Island mansion, which is adorned with priceless artwork and Civil War artifacts, the two bonded over everything from their shared love of football to their affinity for Israel. He employs Rubio’s wife, Jeanette, part time through his charity, the Braman Family Foundation. After Rubio was elected to the Senate in 2010 — a race into which Braman and his wife, Irma, poured nearly $10,000 — the two families traveled together to Israel.
Braman is both a benefactor and a friend to Rubio, and their close relationship dates back to when the now-presidential candidate was ascending the ranks of the state Legislature. Over dinners at Braman’s Indian Creek Island mansion, which is adorned with priceless artwork and Civil War artifacts, the two bonded over everything from their shared love of football to their affinity for Israel. He employs Rubio’s wife, Jeanette, part time through his charity, the Braman Family Foundation. After Rubio was elected to the Senate in 2010 — a race into which Braman and his wife, Irma, poured nearly $10,000 — the two families traveled together to Israel.
[quote=JoeBob]Dealing with ISIS is simple. They claim they are a state. So quit trying to fight them like they are an insurgency. They aren't. They have all the aspects of a nation state within the territory they control. They have schools, courts, public services, licensing bureaus, police, and a military. Simply recognize that and actually declare war on them.
In an actual declared war, the gloves come off. We destroy their forces wherever and whenever they are found. We disrupt their infrastructure and their economies wherever and whenever they are found. We destroy their cities, not for the purpose of killing civilians, but to disrupt their economies and to destroy their wills to fight. We invoke Article 5 of NATO and if Turkey doesn't like it, we remove them from NATO.
We would do all of this if we wanted to actually get rid of ISIS. Obviously, we don't really want to do it because as an actual war, it would be the easiest war we've ever fought.
Well, no schit, Sherlock. Do you want a cookie for figuring out what everyone else figured out 20 years ago? Of course, our government, or at least portions of our government is responsible. Why else do you think that they don't "simply" deal with the problem as I described above?
In the post you describe above, you made no mention of having a clue... reread it...
Clue? It makes no difference. I didn't draw a picture, so you wouldn't have gotten it.
The debates are useless as a means of gauging policy or even general suitability for the job. They are all going to lie anyway. And even if they aren't consciously lying, they don't say anything to which they can be held. All it is is a beauty contest where the public gets to decide which candidate is "prettiest".
Trump is riding the wave of voter disgust. He stands the best position to win in this country because the disgust cuts across the aisles. Lots and lots of old school Democrats, the relatively few left, are upset at the American Communist party of Obama and Clinton. They'll vote for Trump and honest polling shows this.
Trump is the only guy in a long time, probably since Reagan, who can actually unite the country across party lines. And like Reagan, he is hated by the establishment.
You've had the Bush, Romney's, and the Rockefellers as power brokers in Republican politics since the early 1960s. Not people like them, but those actual families. And there are a ton more with names you might not recognize but who are there as well.
They don't care about you. This is all a game to them. They take turns trying to beat the other players in the game, the Democrats. And like any game, this one is relatively friendly. The players go hard, sometimes they even play dirty, during the game. But after the game, it is all hugs, handshakes, and promises of "We'll get you next time."
Trump is huge right now because he is the one guy who is saying, "Wait a minute, your game is fricking the country." Everyone else, is merely trying to get in on the game.
Cruz, as good as he sounds, is hard to trust. Not because I think he is lying, but because he is too young and not rich enough. If he is elected, even if he serves eight years, he could live another thirty or forty years after being president. He definitely imagines life AFTER being president. He'll be corrupted, any mortal will with the power and the money that will be thrown his way. He'll have a long life to enjoy the perks.
Trump is old enough that when he is honest for himself, there is not much imagining of life beyond office. This will be the crowning achievement of a long life of accomplishment. He needs to impress no one. He needs no favors or riches. He is the one guy in the field who can survive the temptation. That doesn't mean he'll be a good president. But it means he'll be a relatively honest one and that is probably all we can hope for these days.
I couldn't tell much from your link Pat. It looks to me like it would take a lot of research into those groups to find out who finances them. The Koch's have a bunch of different groups they've created. IMO they are worthless. I have many libertarian leanings myself even though I'm not a member of the Libertarian Party, but calling the Koch's Libertarians or much of anything is a misnomer. They are totally out for themselves. I found this and Cruz just went up a bunch in my estimation:
Well, you didn't ask how much money they have given Rubio. That's pretty easy to find.
The amount they'd given Rubio was in the link I provided or was in something else I'd seen, so I already knew. It didn't matter though because Rubio is a deal-breaker.
Trump, Rand, Cruz or possibly Carson. The rest should have D's beside their names.
Where do I sign up? Just popped in for a look, somebody said my name was taken in vain but I didn't see it. Good to see all the boys are still fulfilling their assigned role in political debates. Merry Christmas, everybody.
I couldn't tell much from your link Pat. It looks to me like it would take a lot of research into those groups to find out who finances them. The Koch's have a bunch of different groups they've created. IMO they are worthless. I have many libertarian leanings myself even though I'm not a member of the Libertarian Party, but calling the Koch's Libertarians or much of anything is a misnomer. They are totally out for themselves. I found this and Cruz just went up a bunch in my estimation:
Well, you didn't ask how much money they have given Rubio. That's pretty easy to find.
The amount they'd given Rubio was in the link I provided or was in something else I'd seen, so I already knew. It didn't matter though because Rubio is a deal-breaker.
Trump, Rand, Cruz or possibly Carson. The rest should have D's beside their names.
But Trump is the one who's given money to Harry Reid, Hillary, Cuomo, etc etc. He's as much of a D as that douchebag Kasich.
Where do I sign up? Just popped in for a look, somebody said my name was taken in vain but I didn't see it. Good to see all the boys are still fulfilling their assigned role in political debates. Merry Christmas, everybody.
I think it was in the "Cruz says neocon" thread.
I'd find it and link it, but my GAF quota is low today.
I couldn't tell much from your link Pat. It looks to me like it would take a lot of research into those groups to find out who finances them. The Koch's have a bunch of different groups they've created. IMO they are worthless. I have many libertarian leanings myself even though I'm not a member of the Libertarian Party, but calling the Koch's Libertarians or much of anything is a misnomer. They are totally out for themselves. I found this and Cruz just went up a bunch in my estimation:
Well, you didn't ask how much money they have given Rubio. That's pretty easy to find.
The amount they'd given Rubio was in the link I provided or was in something else I'd seen, so I already knew. It didn't matter though because Rubio is a deal-breaker.
Trump, Rand, Cruz or possibly Carson. The rest should have D's beside their names.
But Trump is the one who's given money to Harry Reid, Hillary, Cuomo, etc etc. He's as much of a D as that douchebag Kasich.
You really believe this? I wasn't going to reply because I'm not trying to give offense here, but I'm incredulous.
Believe it or not...some people have very strong ideologies...whether or not it's Bill Gates, the Zuckerburgs, Soros, Kochs....Muslim suicide bombers haven't yet cornered the market on a very strong ideology.
Let's say YOU had $300 billion laying around....you wouldn't throw a couple million towards electing a conservative to the presidency without expecting something in return???? Even if it would help defeat Hillary??? Really???? I'm incredulous!!!
Where do I sign up? Just popped in for a look, somebody said my name was taken in vain but I didn't see it. Good to see all the boys are still fulfilling their assigned role in political debates. Merry Christmas, everybody.
Where do I sign up? Just popped in for a look, somebody said my name was taken in vain but I didn't see it. Good to see all the boys are still fulfilling their assigned role in political debates. Merry Christmas, everybody.
Where do I sign up? Just popped in for a look, somebody said my name was taken in vain but I didn't see it. Good to see all the boys are still fulfilling their assigned role in political debates. Merry Christmas, everybody.
I couldn't tell much from your link Pat. It looks to me like it would take a lot of research into those groups to find out who finances them. The Koch's have a bunch of different groups they've created. IMO they are worthless. I have many libertarian leanings myself even though I'm not a member of the Libertarian Party, but calling the Koch's Libertarians or much of anything is a misnomer. They are totally out for themselves. I found this and Cruz just went up a bunch in my estimation:
Well, you didn't ask how much money they have given Rubio. That's pretty easy to find.
The amount they'd given Rubio was in the link I provided or was in something else I'd seen, so I already knew. It didn't matter though because Rubio is a deal-breaker.
Trump, Rand, Cruz or possibly Carson. The rest should have D's beside their names.
But Trump is the one who's given money to Harry Reid, Hillary, Cuomo, etc etc. He's as much of a D as that douchebag Kasich.
use the drop-down to change the year...what happened to our voters mindset after Reagan?
The list of those on the dole got MUCH larger. That dole includes those who receive welfare and social security checks from .gov as well as those who receive paychecks from .gov.
I assume you don't actually believe those receiving Social Security are on the dole?
use the drop-down to change the year...what happened to our voters mindset after Reagan?
The list of those on the dole got MUCH larger. That dole includes those who receive welfare and social security checks from .gov as well as those who receive paychecks from .gov.
I assume you don't actually believe those receiving Social Security are on the dole?
Figure out all those on social security, for a starter, then get back to me.
They're all a bunch of liars. See the chart, notice that all Republicans told more lies than any Democrat. As I've said before, Trump is an egomaniacal loser, and Carson is just plain nuts. Pants on fire, they are:
use the drop-down to change the year...what happened to our voters mindset after Reagan?
The list of those on the dole got MUCH larger. That dole includes those who receive welfare and social security checks from .gov as well as those who receive paychecks from .gov.
I assume you don't actually believe those receiving Social Security are on the dole?
There are more than a few SSDI's sucking the system hard.
Where do I sign up? Just popped in for a look, somebody said my name was taken in vain but I didn't see it. Good to see all the boys are still fulfilling their assigned role in political debates. Merry Christmas, everybody.
If I'd known you were on, I would've availed myself of your name in vain!
use the drop-down to change the year...what happened to our voters mindset after Reagan?
The list of those on the dole got MUCH larger. That dole includes those who receive welfare and social security checks from .gov as well as those who receive paychecks from .gov.
I assume you don't actually believe those receiving Social Security are on the dole?
There are more than a few SSDI's sucking the system hard.
use the drop-down to change the year...what happened to our voters mindset after Reagan?
The list of those on the dole got MUCH larger. That dole includes those who receive welfare and social security checks from .gov as well as those who receive paychecks from .gov.
I assume you don't actually believe those receiving Social Security are on the dole?
There are more than a few SSDI's sucking the system hard.
use the drop-down to change the year...what happened to our voters mindset after Reagan?
The list of those on the dole got MUCH larger. That dole includes those who receive welfare and social security checks from .gov as well as those who receive paychecks from .gov.
I assume you don't actually believe those receiving Social Security are on the dole?
There are more than a few SSDI's sucking the system hard.
Someone gets it.
SS isn't just a retirement plan for folks who saved poorly during their working years. It has become another welfare distribution system for millions of young/middle age scammers!
OBTW I'm one who's paid into SS for over 35 years and will never live long enough to recoup my money. It's been a scam on working folks since day one!
Poor translation in the KJV. Better word is murder.
Originally Posted by BMT
It is wrong to kill
It is right to defend life
Killing a combatant is acceptable in the face of Jihad
Killing a combatant's Mom to terrorize the combatant is wrong
Killing his mom because she houses a bomb making factory in her kitchen is fine, however. She is a combatant
BHO says "we are better than them because talk it out"
This is wrong too--BHO fails to defend innocent life when actual threats arise.
This is why he is despised on a worldwide basis.
Other than that I agree with you. We like to think we are above killing innocents on purpose, that we take a higher road. It is fine to sit in out living rooms and think that but I can understand our guys in the sand box are often dead before they can decide who are the good guys and who are the bad guys and age and gender don't give any clues.
Still, I am not near ready to fight terror with terror. I doubt I ever will be ready for two reasons. First is the moral issue, committing murder, second if I really doubt the muslim extremist would care. They just want to kill everybody. Hell, they help strap bombs on their own families.
No reason for people not to be proud to accept the social security they've paid in to, either.
Never said they shouldn't. I've met a few able body 'men' getting SSDI.
Ha!!! Don't forget the women & children.... I know a "woman" who was grossing over $2300 a month for herself & minor children who also were "disabled" with "learning disabilities"...
They're all a bunch of liars. See the chart, notice that all Republicans told more lies than any Democrat. As I've said before, Trump is an egomaniacal loser, and Carson is just plain nuts. Pants on fire, they are:
Says the advocate for the most corrupt female (and proven liar) in the history of US politics. What a talent for ignoring facts!
I don't hand out accolades easily,but I'll make an exception in your case.
You are so warped, I think you are damaged goods LOL! You need a shrink. Know any?
Did you look at the chart, dipsh*t? Talk about ignoring facts, but that's easy to do when your head's up your ass, right?
Piddler,
As the OP of this thread, I would like to invite you to stay the fug out of it.
Nobody here cares to hear your liberal drivel.
Now, run and play with the rest of the little girls, while the adults carry on a conversation.
I'll post when and where I like. Somebody has to bring news from the outside world to the pea brains here on the fire. Can any of you refute the data presented in the chart I posted? Nope, didn't think so. Oh and as the OP, you can also feel free to, in the common vernacular here, GFY. And I mean that with all due respect.
Paddler, something that you[and those that think like you-read liberals]will never understand. Just because someone is on the Republican ticket, or running to get on the ticket doesn't qualify that person for sainthood by republicans. As for the democrats, it just doesn't really matter as long as that person has a D next to their name, it's all good and sainthood is granted.
As someone pointed out yesterday....Utah is a red state and therefore their electoral votes will go to the R's...so post away piddler but know that your vote...much like your opinion...doesn't mean chit....
My former stepmother faked a stroke, got some Indian doctor to sign off on it, and milked the SSDI system for years. She might still be doing it for all I know. That's in addition to the several broken down houses she bought for next to nothing, got her crooked insurance agent friend to write a policy on and burned to the ground to collect the insurance. She was quite a piece of work.
There's a huge difference between a retiree collecting social security payments after paying into the system for years (a pension) and someone on SSDI which is a form of welfare. There's also a huge difference between someone drawing a government pension which is compensation for past work and someone on welfare.
Democrats love the equate pensions and social security with welfare because they can use it to shut down criticism of freeloaders on the government dole by saying "look! you're on the dole too because you get social security or a military pension". It's a BS argument because social security and military pensions have been earned by the worker either paying into SS or their labor over the years. It's really no different than the "welfare for the rich" BS they spread. Congress sets tax rates at some ridiculous level then reduces it by 10% via a tax break and the democrats howl that the reduction is welfare for the rich. It's absurd of course, that money belonged to the taxpayer to begin with. Using that login why not just declare all earnings are 100% taxable then everything the government lets you keep is considered welfare. It's like saying I didn't steal your car therefore I gave you a car.
I'll post when and where I like. Somebody has to bring news from the outside world to the pea brains here on the fire. Can any of you refute the data presented in the chart I posted? Nope, didn't think so. Oh and as the OP, you can also feel free to, in the common vernacular here, GFY. And I mean that with all due respect.
At least you can post your argument here without getting booted off the site because of your views...hell, you can even post obnoxious schitt & hurl insults if you like...try giving a well thought out response with links to some of the drivel posted on any site that is on the left side & see what happens...you don't even have to cuss or insult anybody to get the boot...You really wanna see some pea brains??? Try this one... https://www.facebook.com/OccupyDemocrats/
If they see you as a threat in providing factual, accurate information disproving their twisted version of "the truth", they'll take away your posting "privilege"...
targeting family--because they are related to a combatant-is wrong. BMT
Agreed.
The United States not a hostage taker.
At the same time, Obama shackling the military by skipping 1,000s of target opportunities because there's a non-zero chance of accidental collateral damage is equally wrong.
Let the military do their job and TRY not to hurt innocents, and never intentionally target non combatants. But if some get hurt when we take out high priority targets, so be it. War sucks and sometimes innocent people get hurt.
The key here is INTENTION. Intention to hurt non combatants is immoral and makes us no different than the terrorists. We can still take the fight to them, leveraging our superior equipment, superior intelligence, superior operators and superior training and ALSO limit collateral damage to accidents only.
use the drop-down to change the year...what happened to our voters mindset after Reagan?
The list of those on the dole got MUCH larger. That dole includes those who receive welfare and social security checks from .gov as well as those who receive paychecks from .gov.
I assume you don't actually believe those receiving Social Security are on the dole?
Figure out all those on social security, for a starter, then get back to me.
Obviously, there are a lot of people on social security with most (but not all) having been forced to pay into it. I consider "being on the dole" to be more akin to unemployment benefits, welfare, charity or SSDI. Having paid both sides of SS for over 35 years, if they would only send me back what I paid in (even without interest) I would be more than happy to "get off the dole".
Obviously, there are a lot of people on social security with most (but not all) having been forced to pay into it. I consider "being on the dole" to be more akin to unemployment benefits, welfare, charity or SSDI.
Unemployment benefits are not "being on the dole", that's another fallacy the democrats have fostered. Your employer pays for the unemployment insurance which means YOU pay for it, it's part of your compensation. You can only collect it if you lose your job through no fault of your own, you can't collect if you get fired for cause. It's insurance, you were forced by law to pay the premiums and if you collect it you're recouping your own money.
If you hit a deer and file an insurance claim are you "on the dole" for taking the insurance money? No, you paid for that insurance. Same with unemployment insurance. It is NOT welfare, welfare is an unearned entitlement, it's being "on the dole". Unemployment, social security (not SSDI), government pensions are things you paid for, they're not welfare.
The Wilks Bros, the Billionaires backing Ted Cruz are both out of the oil business [which helps explain WHY they are Billionaires] and are retired. One is a Preacher.
They watched what Cruz did in Texas to get in the Senate. His ideology matches up with theirs, so they support him for President. They live simple lives, so what else can they do with a couple hundred million bucks that would bring them as much pleasure as helping defeat Hillary Clinton?
And 200 million is not a lid. They are committed to seeing that Cruz doesn't lose due to being outspent as long as he continues to raise money from the small contributors.
They have a large extended but close knit family that allows them to contribute money where it does the most good, campaign or Pacs.
Cruz has no need for money that comes with strings.
I don't understand why they are giving any time to candidates who are within the margin of error in polling. There are 6 candidates that should be left out of the debates.
Actually I do understand - the reason why they aren't is they want Bush going after Trump, they want Christie and Rand going at it, they want Rubio and Cruz going at it.
The fact that Jeb Bush has been polling in single digits from the start of his campaign and still has millions of dollars to stay in the race tells you everything you need to know about what the American people want versus what the people who profit from politicians want.
The longer these guys who are clearly not wanted by the voting public stay in the race, especially Bush with his big donor bankroll, the more resolved people are to stay with Trump.
To many Trump represents their chance to break up the current version of the GOP
At any rate - at this point in the process, having 2 debates with a stage full of people who have no shot to be president screaming for attention out of desperation only helps the Democrats.
I don't understand why they are giving any time to candidates who aren't within the margin of error in polling. There are 6 candidates that should be left out of the debates.
I believe the rule is that all candidates are entitled to equal airtime.
I don't understand why they are giving any time to candidates who aren't within the margin of error in polling. There are 6 candidates that should be left out of the debates.
I believe the rule is that all candidates are entitled to equal airtime.
I don't think thats true because Fox excluded Ron Paul in 2008
I don't understand why they are giving any time to candidates who aren't within the margin of error in polling. There are 6 candidates that should be left out of the debates.
I believe the rule is that all candidates are entitled to equal airtime.
They can make the rule whatever they want. But if we insist on everyone getting airtime, make the undercard 9 people and the main debate 4 people, not the other way around!
He's great at exposing Rubio but too many Americans see him as an isolationist. Rand would be easy to minimize by the others and the democrats in the unlikely chance he'd get any traction.
Cruz is taking the votes Rand was hoping would be his - and Trump's populist message killed any momentum fringe candidates were hoping for.
In late 2014 Rand was named by Time magazine the most interesting man in politics. Trump and Cruz has made that a distant memory.
I'd have no problem voting for Rand if he was the GOP nominee - but he's a distant 3rd choice for me.
Paul got dirty early in this campaign and I don't think he liked it. I believe he is a true patriot and realizes that the best he can do at this point is help the cause.
He's great at exposing Rubio but too many Americans see him as an isolationist. Rand would be easy to minimize by the others and the democrats in the unlikely change he'd get any traction.
Cruz is taking the votes Rand was hoping would be his - and Trump's populist message killed any momentum fringe candidates were hoping for.
In late 2014 Rand was named by Time magazine the most interesting man in politics. Trump and Cruz has made that a distant memory.
I'd have no problem voting for Rand if he was the GOP nominee - but he's a distant 3rd choice for me.
Twelve percent third place with Drudge readers is significant, regardless.
Hey,....SEMPER COONASS, and all the best for Christmas / New Years !
I'd note that the reputed psychedelic effect of Green Mesquite smoke in confined areas is being tested here,....have heard from day one that it made the Apache, Navajo and Yaqui violent and bellicose, too.
Hope the tester doesn't BITE anyone.
other than that, just all the usual Drang und Sturm.
Paddler, something that you[and those that think like you-read liberals]will never understand. Just because someone is on the Republican ticket, or running to get on the ticket doesn't qualify that person for sainthood by republicans. As for the democrats, it just doesn't really matter as long as that person has a D next to their name, it's all good and sainthood is granted.
Completely wrong. As the chart clearly shows, Republicans lie far more than Democrats. Carson's statements were false 84% of the time, Trump's were false 76% of the time. Why would you listen to a douche who lies 3 times out of 4? Don't make no sense. You all ignore facts because these [bleep] tell you what you want to hear. Good luck with that.
Paul got dirty early in this campaign and I don't think he liked it. I believe he is a true patriot and realizes that the best he can do at this point is help the cause.
He really showed his ass when he attacked Trump in the first debate, apparently toadying to the very people who have been trying to marginalize him ever since he got elected to the Senate.
Rand has done some very good things but he is really clueless about strategy.
I always liked Ron Paul but honestly, lately Ron is whacked out taking up for Muslims and such.
The Wilks Bros, the Billionaires backing Ted Cruz are both out of the oil business [which helps explain WHY they are Billionaires] and are retired. One is a Preacher.
They watched what Cruz did in Texas to get in the Senate. His ideology matches up with theirs, so they support him for President. They live simple lives, so what else can they do with a couple hundred million bucks that would bring them as much pleasure as helping defeat Hillary Clinton?
And 200 million is not a lid. They are committed to seeing that Cruz doesn't lose due to being outspent as long as he continues to raise money from the small contributors.
They have a large extended but close knit family that allows them to contribute money where it does the most good, campaign or Pacs.
Cruz has no need for money that comes with strings.
I've met Farris Wilks and talked to him a couple of times at a LGS. Seems like a really nice fellow, and you wouldn't know that he had a dime to his name if you met him.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) on Wednesday squared off with Fox News anchor Bret Baier over comments Cruz made in 2013 as the Senate considered an immigration reform bill.
Baier began the interview by quoting Cruz in Tuesday’s GOP presidential debate saying that “I’ve never supported legalization, I do not intend to support it.”
The anchor then played a 2013 Senate speech by Cruz promoting his own amendment to the immigration reform bill, calling on “people of good faith on both sides of the aisle” to pass a bill “that allows those that are here illegally to come in out of the shadows.”
Asked to respond to the clip, Cruz said his amendment would “remove citizenship.”
“The fact that I introduced an amendment to remove part of the Gang of Eight bill doesn’t mean I support the rest of the Gang of Eight bill,” he added.
But Baier replied with a series of statements Cruz made in 2013 that indicated he wanted the rest of the bill to pass. He quoted the Texas Republican calling the legislation “the compromise that can pass” and saying: “If my amendment were adopted, this bill would pass.”
Cruz stammered in his response, saying that “of course I wanted my amendment to pass. … It doesn’t mean I supported other aspects of the bill.”
In an attempt to prove his amendment wasn’t a tacit endorsement of the rest of the bill, Cruz cited the fact that Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) voted with him.
“The problem, though, is that at the time you were telling people … this was not a poison pill,” Baier said in response. “You said you wanted it to pass at the time. Looking back at what you said then, and what you said now, which one should people believe?”
Where do I sign up? Just popped in for a look, somebody said my name was taken in vain but I didn't see it. Good to see all the boys are still fulfilling their assigned role in political debates. Merry Christmas, everybody.
If I'd known you were on, I would've availed myself of your name in vain!
Hey Stevers, how are you doing?!
Casey
Hanging in amigo How's it up on the high plains? 77 in little Somalia right now
I couldn't tell much from your link Pat. It looks to me like it would take a lot of research into those groups to find out who finances them. The Koch's have a bunch of different groups they've created. IMO they are worthless. I have many libertarian leanings myself even though I'm not a member of the Libertarian Party, but calling the Koch's Libertarians or much of anything is a misnomer. They are totally out for themselves. I found this and Cruz just went up a bunch in my estimation:
Well, you didn't ask how much money they have given Rubio. That's pretty easy to find.
The amount they'd given Rubio was in the link I provided or was in something else I'd seen, so I already knew. It didn't matter though because Rubio is a deal-breaker.
Trump, Rand, Cruz or possibly Carson. The rest should have D's beside their names.
But Trump is the one who's given money to Harry Reid, Hillary, Cuomo, etc etc. He's as much of a D as that douchebag Kasich
So Kasich is your man?
Your comprehension has not improved in the past year, I see.
Hey,....SEMPER COONASS, and all the best for Christmas / New Years !
I'd note that the reputed psychedelic effect of Green Mesquite smoke in confined areas is being tested here,....have heard from day one that it made the Apache, Navajo and Yaqui violent and bellicose, too.
Hope the tester doesn't BITE anyone.
other than that, just all the usual Drang und Sturm.
GTC
Yeah, it's kind of comforting that nobody has changed position in the last year. when you know you're right, why should you?
As a lifelong democrat, you have no idea what he'll give us. But I'm sure you're hung on every word Do you get a tingle up your leg?
First Bush gives us Obama, then Obama is giving us a conservative (thank gawd).
With the apparent demise of the NeoCons, you must be biting nails in half.
If Trump gets elected, we're gonna have a pool to see how long it takes you to chew through a railroad spike........
Casey
Obama is giving us Hillary. The GOP will take a nosedive. Anybody refute the data in the chart I posted? Can't be done. Your only hope is that the majority of the electorate is as blind, stupid and bigoted as yourselves.
I keep asking how much money Cruz has gotten from the Kochs, but nobody will answer.
Does it matter? If so, why?
In politics, the entity that finances you, owns you. The Bible says, to paraphrase, the debtor is the servant of the lender. It would matter if Soros had made big contributions. It matters if the Kochs do. I like living in a representative Republic, not an Oligarchy.
You fret too much. The Kochs' are good people and Ted Cruz can't be bought !
I keep asking how much money Cruz has gotten from the Kochs, but nobody will answer.
Kosh says they will spend about $300 million directly on the 2016 race, out of the record promised $900 million. Seems as most of that has yet to be spent. As of this summer filings; for Cruz it wasn't the Kosh brothers, it was the Wilks brothers.
7/27/15 Washington (CNN)Two low-profile Texas brothers have donated $15 million to support Sen. Ted Cruz, a record-setting contribution that amounts to the largest known donation so far in the 2016 presidential campaign. Farris and Dan Wilks, billionaires who made their fortunes in the West Texas fracking boom, have given $15 million of the $38 million that the pro-Cruz super PAC, Keep the Promise...
...Keep the Promise is technically four separate committees that give three families more control over their own super PAC. Most of the attention has focused on Robert Mercer, a New York hedge fund magnate who gave the second-most money to conservative groups in 2014 than any other Republican donor. Mercer has given $11 million of the $38 million raised, according to a leader of the super PACs. Another $10 million comes from Toby Neugebauer, a Houston investor and a personal friend of Cruz's.
Together, their donations give Cruz and his allies more money than any other Republican except Jeb Bush...
Believe it or not...some people have very strong ideologies...whether or not it's Bill Gates, the Zuckerburgs, Soros, Kochs....Muslim suicide bombers haven't yet cornered the market on a very strong ideology.
Let's say YOU had $300 billion laying around....you wouldn't throw a couple million towards electing a conservative to the presidency without expecting something in return???? Even if it would help defeat Hillary??? Really???? I'm incredulous!!!
Great retort ! Maybe it'll shut e'Wads and real BlindEye up. Their 1 string banjo duet is b o r i n g ..... They should team up with RJordan and form a string trio... add a cat in heat and you've gotcher quartet !
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dogbreedinfo.com/images23/YorkieYorkshireTerrierLiliDog5.jpg)