Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Necrosis on October 16, 2013, 05:26:51 AM
-
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-15/house-delays-vote-on-debt-cap-plan-lacking-party-policies.html
“Instead of trying to help us find a way out of a bad spot -- we won’t be the last political party to overplay our hand, it may happen one day on the Democratic watch,” he said. “And if it did, would Republicans, for the good of the country, kind of give a little?” Graham said, adding that Republicans went “too far” and “screwed up.”
We acted insane and maybe one day you will so help us.
This whole thing was a disaster and cruz is an idiot
-
Is cruz a bit extreme? Of course "We need 100 jesse helms" is not something people say.
But, in a party where they keep picking the anti-gun flipflopper RINOs, WHY NOT try a far right conservative for the job?
Think about 2012... Romney WROTE and SIGNED an assault weapons ban. I mean, WOW. Yet was allowed to squeak on in and win the nomination by just outspending everyone. The 'will of the people' was 80% against Romney. But the system let him swoop in and take the nomination.
So WHY NOT go with a goofy yet brilliant guy like Cruz? He lacks common sense at times, he throws too much red meat to the base, but he would look respectable against Hilary (whereas Rubio would look like a smug kid next to her). And he'd look lean and adult next to hilary (CHristie would look like a sweaty beet-faced pie salesman). Perry? LOL he's still stupid. Santorum? Ugh.
So why not run with Cruz in 2016? Smart guy, not perfect, but run him.
-
Is cruz a bit extreme? Of course "We need 100 jesse helms" is not something people say.
But, in a party where they keep picking the anti-gun flipflopper RINOs, WHY NOT try a far right conservative for the job?
Think about 2012... Romney WROTE and SIGNED an assault weapons ban. I mean, WOW. Yet was allowed to squeak on in and win the nomination by just outspending everyone. The 'will of the people' was 80% against Romney. But the system let him swoop in and take the nomination.
So WHY NOT go with a goofy yet brilliant guy like Cruz? He lacks common sense at times, he throws too much red meat to the base, but he would look respectable against Hilary (whereas Rubio would look like a smug kid next to her). And he'd look lean and adult next to hilary (CHristie would look like a sweaty beet-faced pie salesman). Perry? LOL he's still stupid. Santorum? Ugh.
So why not run with Cruz in 2016? Smart guy, not perfect, but run him.
Because he isn't that smart according to his actions. Defunding Obamacare was impossible and he knew that, yet he initiated a shutdown which hurt many American people, he is not fit for office. His personal agenda is ahead of the people, he solely did all this for attention, however, with that said he probably does believe in his wacky principles.
-
Because he isn't that smart according to his actions. Defunding Obamacare was impossible and he knew that, yet he initiated a shutdown which hurt many American people, he is not fit for office. His personal agenda is ahead of the people, he solely did all this for attention, however, with that said he probably does believe in his wacky principles.
Not smart, eh? Princeton and Harvard educated. Alan Dershowitz called him one of the most brilliant students he ever had. Cruz has also argued 40+ cases at the Supreme Court.
Meanwhile, you have Asperger's and pose as a doctor on the internet because you can't leave your house.
-
Not smart, eh? Princeton and Harvard educated. Alan Dershowitz called him one of the most brilliant students he ever had. Cruz has also argued 40+ cases at the Supreme Court.
Meanwhile, you have Asperger's and pose as a doctor on the internet because you can't leave your house.
So trying to do something that is rationally impossible gets negated because he went to Harvard? I am not impressed with anything he has said, you might be because you aren't that bright, but he isn't some intellectual juggernaut. Law isn't rocket science, but concrete argumentation, put him in a room with Neil degrasse Tyson and it would become apparent which person is "brilliant".
Einstein, Gödel, Tesla, Cruz in no particular order.
-
Is Aspy Boy reporting my posts now? Funny how his constant personal attacks are allowed to stay up on here.
What's with all the Canadian pussies on here?
-
Law isn't rocket science, but concrete argumentation
You again prove yourself to be an utter retard.
Law is nothing but gray areas, why do you think lawyers have the ability to make so much money.
Only a retard thinks the law is black and white
-
You again prove yourself to be an utter retard.
Law is nothing but gray areas, why do you think lawyers have the ability to make so much money.
Only a retard thinks the law is black and white
The law is black and white, purposely moron. The ambiguity comes from the cases of which you have to form cogent arguments based off the evidence. I am not impressed.
Show me some of his brilliant work.
I am not impressed by anyone because of credentials, I have credentials, my friends have them, some of them are stupid as fuck but academically impressive.
Cruz is a moron, he attempted something that is impossible and caused untold economic issues and hurt for many people, I see nothing intelligent about fighting a losing battle.
You might be impressed because you haven't achieved a higher education, or because you can't critically appraise something someone says.
Where are the scientist politicians?
-
Because he isn't that smart according to his actions. Defunding Obamacare was impossible and he knew that, yet he initiated a shutdown which hurt many American people, he is not fit for office. His personal agenda is ahead of the people, he solely did all this for attention, however, with that said he probably does believe in his wacky principles.
It WAS smart politically to go after obamacare. Everyone in congress, on getbig, in america KNEW it wasn't going to get defunded. Obama won that battle when the supreme court humped his leg and gave him the green light. Chunks of it are already in action. It's here to stay.
We all know that.
BUT the redmeat far-right base just LOVES a guy that is still fighting it, however futile. "I fought obamacare long after others gave up, and i'm STILL fighting it!" is VERY SMART POLITICALLY.
It's bullshit that makes you smirk if you have an IQ over 110 and you know exactly what he's doing. but guess what? The "base" of BOTH parties ain't scoring 110 on IQ tests. The extreme 10% on both sides vote using their hearts, not their brains. Every time. Like clockwork. Dems and repubs alike.
Cruz is feeding them red meat to get their support for 2016 primaries. Low-info voters in SC, FL, Iowa, etc... going after obamacare now means nothing to 80% of americans that realize this monstrosity is here to stay. But for the 10% base that decides the GOP candidate, Cruz is fighting for them.
SMART. It's very smart, politically.
-
It WAS smart politically to go after obamacare. Everyone in congress, on getbig, in america KNEW it wasn't going to get defunded. Obama won that battle when the supreme court humped his leg and gave him the green light. Chunks of it are already in action. It's here to stay.
We all know that.
BUT the redmeat far-right base just LOVES a guy that is still fighting it, however futile. "I fought obamacare long after others gave up, and i'm STILL fighting it!" is VERY SMART POLITICALLY.
It's bullshit that makes you smirk if you have an IQ over 110 and you know exactly what he's doing. but guess what? The "base" of BOTH parties ain't scoring 110 on IQ tests. The extreme 10% on both sides vote using their hearts, not their brains. Every time. Like clockwork. Dems and repubs alike.
Cruz is feeding them red meat to get their support for 2016 primaries. Low-info voters in SC, FL, Iowa, etc... going after obamacare now means nothing to 80% of americans that realize this monstrosity is here to stay. But for the 10% base that decides the GOP candidate, Cruz is fighting for them.
SMART. It's very smart, politically.
It is smart politically in a sense, but to the non dummies it's apparent that it's futile and self-serving. Fighting a lost cause and using government shutdown to force there hand is absurd. I can't see how this benefits anyone. After it all they will be like nothing came of this and many people had to suffer for a smart political move? they need to start treating people like they have a modicum of intelligence. Otherwise the GOP will die. The world is becoming more educated, these idiots need to recognize the general education level is increasing, old tactics won't work.
-
It is smart politically in a sense, but to the non dummies it's apparent that it's futile and self-serving. Fighting a lost cause and using government shutdown to force there hand is absurd. I can't see how this benefits anyone. After it all they will be like nothing came of this and many people had to suffer for a smart political move? they need to start treating people like they have a modicum of intelligence. Otherwise the GOP will die. The world is becoming more educated, these idiots need to recognize the general education level is increasing, old tactics won't work.
oh yeah, 80% of americans saw his "I'm gonna stop obamacare in Oct 2013" as pretty phony and obviously fruitless effort. But we don't matter to him, at all. All he (and all 2016 dem/repub potentials) care about is getting that bottom 10% of the population to drool and snarl and cheer for them.
I'm sure the dem candidates are gonna be doing the same weak-ass obvious shit, to suck up to the base.
you might be right, though... they do need to start treating people with a little more honesty. Romney made so many obvious lies that ya just wanted to give him the finger and say "Dude, screw you, you DID say this, here's the damn video..." when asked about the 47% comment, ": 'Actually, I didn't say that'"
so yeah, you're right there, a little honesty goes a long way. Voters get irked and they just stay home, as we saw in 08 and 2012.
-
oh yeah, 80% of americans saw his "I'm gonna stop obamacare in Oct 2013" as pretty phony and obviously fruitless effort. But we don't matter to him, at all. All he (and all 2016 dem/repub potentials) care about is getting that bottom 10% of the population to drool and snarl and cheer for them.
I'm sure the dem candidates are gonna be doing the same weak-ass obvious shit, to suck up to the base.
you might be right, though... they do need to start treating people with a little more honesty. Romney made so many obvious lies that ya just wanted to give him the finger and say "Dude, screw you, you DID say this, here's the damn video..." when asked about the 47% comment, ": 'Actually, I didn't say that'"
so yeah, you're right there, a little honesty goes a long way. Voters get irked and they just stay home, as we saw in 08 and 2012.
There should be mandatory voting for citizenship , it would eliminate the freaks as it has in other democracies
-
There should be mandatory voting for citizenship , it would eliminate the freaks as it has in other democracies
That would fix nothing considering most people are not intelligent. It would simply become a popularity contest
-
There should be mandatory voting for citizenship , it would eliminate the freaks as it has in other democracies
How exactly would that work? Jail people who don't vote? Deport them?
In what other democracies do they have mandatory voting citizenship?
-
How exactly would that work? Jail people who don't vote? Deport them?
In what other democracies do they have mandatory voting citizenship?
Currently 31 countries have a form of mandatory voting, it can go many ways, Australia is the best example. They are doing quite well.
I am not supplying you with evidence everytime I make a statement, that is easily verifiable or common knowledge. Jail or deportation seems excessive, is this the first two ideas that popped into your head? if so that explains your bewilderment.
-
read that as "I can't defend my position, I'm a doctor and your stupid"
-
Not smart, eh? Princeton and Harvard educated. Alan Dershowitz called him one of the most brilliant students he ever had. Cruz has also argued 40+ cases at the Supreme Court.
Meanwhile, you have Asperger's and pose as a doctor on the internet because you can't leave your house.
From what I understand, Obama has never argued a case in a court of law in his life. Law license revoked as well as Moooshells.
-
Currently 31 countries have a form of mandatory voting, it can go many ways, Australia is the best example. They are doing quite well.
I am not supplying you with evidence everytime I make a statement, that is easily verifiable or common knowledge. Jail or deportation seems excessive, is this the first two ideas that popped into your head? if so that explains your bewilderment.
Thank you. You often make statements that have no factual basis, so I really don't accept much of what you say at face value. You obviously don't have to answer anything you don't want to. Not a big deal. It's only the internet. I ignore people all the time. :)
I was asking how a country would enforce "mandatory voting for citizenship." To make something "mandatory" means there has to be an enforcement mechanism. It can be either criminal (like laws penalizing drunk driving) or administrative (like parking ticket fines). I have no idea what you meant.
But I looked up Astrailia. They impose an adminstrative fine.
What happens if I do not vote?
Initially the Australian Electoral Commission will write to all apparent non-voters requesting that they either provide a reason for their failure to vote or pay a $20 penalty.
If, within 21 days, the apparent non-voter fails to reply, cannot provide a valid and sufficient reason or declines to pay the penalty, then prosecution proceedings may be instigated. If the matter is dealt with in court and the person is found guilty, he or she may be fined up to $170 plus court costs.
http://www.aec.gov.au/faqs/voting_australia.htm
-
Thank you. You often make statements that have no factual basis, so I really don't accept much of what you say at face value. You obviously don't have to answer anything you don't want to. Not a big deal. It's only the internet. I ignore people all the time. :)
I was asking how a country would enforce "mandatory voting for citizenship." To make something "mandatory" means there has to be an enforcement mechanism. It can be either criminal (like laws penalizing drunk driving) or administrative (like parking ticket fines). I have no idea what you meant.
But I looked up Astrailia. They impose an adminstrative fine.
What happens if I do not vote?
Initially the Australian Electoral Commission will write to all apparent non-voters requesting that they either provide a reason for their failure to vote or pay a $20 penalty.
If, within 21 days, the apparent non-voter fails to reply, cannot provide a valid and sufficient reason or declines to pay the penalty, then prosecution proceedings may be instigated. If the matter is dealt with in court and the person is found guilty, he or she may be fined up to $170 plus court costs.
http://www.aec.gov.au/faqs/voting_australia.htm
Yes, my statement was factual correct, I can make mistakes sure, but I am never deceptively misleading.
Like the video you questioned the existence of, or the evidence for evolution which I won't walk you through? or debunking Ben Stein's version of jesus Christ superstar? That type of non-factual rhetoric?
This is how most deal with it, there are variations.
read that as "I can't defend my position, I'm a doctor and your stupid"
Not at all, "it's more like how do you not know other democracies enlist this type of voting system? where are you from? a place that knows nothing about the world? somewhere like......."
Listen, Beach Bum has a long list of fantastic beliefs which he would like me to walk him through. He wants evidence that evolution doesn't lead to Hitler, or that a half-duck half human isn't how evolution occurs. So my failure to answer is insane beliefs, no matter how bizarre, must be met with counter evidence. He is unaware of proving the negative and his logic extends to tautology.
-
Yes, my statement was factual correct, I can make mistakes sure, but I am never deceptively misleading.
Like the video you questioned the existence of, or the evidence for evolution which I won't walk you through? or debunking Ben Stein's version of jesus Christ superstar? That type of non-factual rhetoric?
This is how most deal with it, there are variations.
Not at all, "it's more like how do you not know other democracies enlist this type of voting system? where are you from? a place that knows nothing about the world? somewhere like......."
Listen, Beach Bum has a long list of fantastic beliefs which he would like me to walk him through. He wants evidence that evolution doesn't lead to Hitler, or that a half-duck half human isn't how evolution occurs. So my failure to answer is insane beliefs, no matter how bizarre, must be met with counter evidence. He is unaware of proving the negative and his logic extends to tautology.
Well that is news to me. lol. I haven't asked you for any of that. You are protesting too much.
Everyone makes mistakes. I’m not keeping any kind of scorecard, but if I read a statement that doesn’t appear to sound true, and it’s said with conviction, and you’re telling people who don’t agree the statement they are stupid, I might question the statement. But there is no one here to smack your fingers when you just make stuff up. It’s not real life.
I'm from the United States. The greatest country on planet earth. The country you are obsessed with. But I've sort of figured out why we have a number of Canadians (and other foreigners) who are so concerned with what happens in this great country and talk about us so much: living vicariously. You live in a socialist country. You work for the government, whether you're in the "private" sector or not. Your government takes more than half of what you earn. You lack the free speech rights we have in this country. You lack the opportunity. You lack the freedom. That’s why so many of you move here. That’s why people from around the world move here.
But I get it. Things like this message board allow you to enjoy some of the freedoms your country cannot provide. I’m glad we can help. :)
-
Not smart, eh? Princeton and Harvard educated. Alan Dershowitz called him one of the most brilliant students he ever had. Cruz has also argued 40+ cases at the Supreme Court.
Meanwhile, you have Asperger's and pose as a doctor on the internet because you can't leave your house.
He also said this about him
More from Dershowitz
http://news.yahoo.com/dershowitz-throws-constitution-figuratively-ted-cruz-141406725--politics.html
Dershowitz throws the Constitution, figuratively, at Ted Cruz
After praising Cruz as a student, as he had done earlier this year, Dershowitz leveled some harsh claims against him.
“He has to qualify among the brightest of the students,” Dershowitz said, who added that Cruz is deeply principled.
But when it came to the shutdown and debt-ceiling fight, Dershowitz made his case.
“I think it raises very serious constitutional questions of the kind that Ted Cruz should be interested in. Could you imagine Hamilton and Madison sitting around and drafting the Constitution and the Federalist Papers. They’re talking about how the government has to pay its debts, how it has to secure the credit of the United States, how the House of Representatives to originate bills on revenue. Nobody in a million years would have contemplated the power of Congress to shut down the government, to create doubts about our creditworthiness,” he said.
“I think you can make a very strong argument that what Ted Cruz is doing is deeply unconstitutional. Whether a court would accept that or say it’s a political question is another issue, but Cruz is a principled man. He ought to look at the Constitution and look into his heart and ask himself, ‘What would Alexander Hamilton have done,’” Dershowitz said.
-
The law is black and white, purposely moron. The ambiguity comes from the cases of which you have to form cogent arguments based off the evidence. I am not impressed.
those cased become precedent for future legal proceedings dumb ass, only a complete uneducated moron believes the law is black and white
-
The law is black and white, purposely moron. The ambiguity comes from the cases of which you have to form cogent arguments based off the evidence. I am not impressed.
No, the law is interpretive. In fact, you usually can't file an appeal on matters of fact, only matters of law.
Often they will refer to committee notes and testimony and the surrounding circumstances in which the law was created to determine the correct interpretation and how it should be applied in a particular case.
They argue about wording, context, applicability, etc., all in an effort to interpret the law. Nothing black and white about it.
-
So trying to do something that is rationally impossible gets negated because he went to Harvard? I am not impressed with anything he has said, you might be because you aren't that bright, but he isn't some intellectual juggernaut. Law isn't rocket science, but concrete argumentation, put him in a room with Neil degrasse Tyson and it would become apparent which person is "brilliant".
Einstein, Gödel, Tesla, Cruz in no particular order.
::)
When defending your god-king Obama, you certainly thought Harvard was impressive:
you are blinded by hatred, you think they gave him a magna cum laude in 1988 for fun? why because they could tell the future and that he would be a president 20 years later? you are a fear mongering reality denier. Harvard as perhaps the standout institution in the states for academia doesn't hand out free diplomas nor high honors, are you suggesting he did not earn it? if so you are a conspiracy theory nut.
-
::)
When defending your god-king Obama, you certainly thought Harvard was impressive:
Damn, Aspy Boy just got served!!!!
Pretty soon he'll be too scared to log onto the internet, too.
-
I'm fine with Dershowitz dissing obama, but i'm not cool with him attacking Ted Cruz.
-
::)
When defending your god-king Obama, you certainly thought Harvard was impressive:
My quote actually doesn't refute my statement you absolute moron. Read it again dummy. He is obviously smart, his position was unintelligent and frankly absurd. I have not been impressed with his rationale as he often says contradictory things and continues with inconsistencies.
Harvard is one of the best schools in the world. Period. Again I am not impressed with him
-
No, the law is interpretive. In fact, you usually can't file an appeal on matters of fact, only matters of law.
Often they will refer to committee notes and testimony and the surrounding circumstances in which the law was created to determine the correct interpretation and how it should be applied in a particular case.
They argue about wording, context, applicability, etc., all in an effort to interpret the law. Nothing black and white about it.
The end result is black and white, I agree with everything you said. Erin brockovich is my role model.
-
Is cruz a bit extreme? Of course "We need 100 jesse helms" is not something people say.
But, in a party where they keep picking the anti-gun flipflopper RINOs, WHY NOT try a far right conservative for the job?
Think about 2012... Romney WROTE and SIGNED an assault weapons ban. I mean, WOW. Yet was allowed to squeak on in and win the nomination by just outspending everyone. The 'will of the people' was 80% against Romney. But the system let him swoop in and take the nomination.
So WHY NOT go with a goofy yet brilliant guy like Cruz? He lacks common sense at times, he throws too much red meat to the base, but he would look respectable against Hilary (whereas Rubio would look like a smug kid next to her). And he'd look lean and adult next to hilary (CHristie would look like a sweaty beet-faced pie salesman). Perry? LOL he's still stupid. Santorum? Ugh.
So why not run with Cruz in 2016? Smart guy, not perfect, but run him.
Excellent points.
However, there is another school of thought that maintains Romney's loss had nothing to do with his moderate views, and in fact his attempts to reinvent himself as a right winger probably hurt him.