Cruz's Brilliant and Funny Ads

[fargonic]

In the US, there is so little actual "hunger" that advocates for the poor have changed to the term "Food Insecurity" instead.

And you think that's OK in the wealthiest nation on earth? (And to be fair I don't think the shift to "food insecurity" was quite that simplistic. You can read about it here: http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food...y-in-the-us/definitions-of-food-security.aspx)

This term reflects the fact that while the poor may not actually be starving they do not always know where their next meals are coming from.

And this makes Conservatives feel good? Hmmm. You guys sure do have a dim view of how great America can be. But I understand...Conservatives always want FREE STUFF (free roads, free bridges, free clean water, free infrastructure) and they don't like to pay taxes. So why should caring for other Americans be any different?

Isn't it interesting that the poor seem to be taken care of in this regard?

If we set the bar low enough Conservatives can have a free nation like they want and they don't have to care about the poor!

All in order to keep a few shekels. It must be nice when one can reach in their pocket and feel their god!

 

[KarateCowboy]

In the US, there is so little actual "hunger" that advocates for the poor have changed to the term "Food Insecurity" instead. This term reflects the fact that while the poor may not actually be starving they do not always know where their next meals are coming from.

Isn't it interesting that the poor seem to be taken care of in this regard?

IIRC, in the USA, when you bring in the 'poverty level' income, then you are still in the top 11% of the world.
The USA has been prosperous because of our freedom. Giving more corruptive power to the government is not a good idea.

 

[KarateCowboy]

And this makes Conservatives feel good? Hmmm. You guys sure do have a dim view of how great America can be. But I understand...Conservatives always want FREE STUFF (free roads, free bridges, free clean water, free infrastructure) and they don't like to pay taxes. So why should caring for other Americans be any different?

This should make everyone feel good. It means that actual poverty has been almost destroyed.

Selling your vote to get other people's tax dollars is not caring for other people. It's putting a guy in power to expropriate other people's property. People who believe in expropriation tend to be the least charitable people in society. Why not volunteer at a hospital to decrease costs of professional care?

All in order to keep a few shekels. It must be nice when one can reach in their pocket and feel their god!

It must be even nicer to reach into someone else's pocket and feel your god! Though, it must be pretty socially awkward. Kind of like Kim Jung Un's hairstyle. He's into socialism and expropriation. You don't want to be like him, right?

Totalitarians spend so much time and effort trying to get other people's stuff. Are your ideas so bad AND expensive that you have to fund them coercively? Why can't you crowdfund or something? The internet makes it so easy to collaborate these days. Expropriation is out-dated.

 

[Willtor]

...

It must be even nicer to reach into someone else's pocket and feel your god! Though, it must be pretty socially awkward. Kind of like Kim Jung Un's hairstyle. He's into socialism and expropriation. You don't want to be like him, right?

Totalitarians spend so much time and effort trying to get other people's stuff. Are your ideas so bad AND expensive that you have to fund them coercively? Why can't you crowdfund or something? The internet makes it so easy to collaborate these days. Expropriation is out-dated.

It's telling that you cite North Korea. You feel that your point would fail if you cited, e.g., Norway?

 

[KarateCowboy]

It's telling that you cite North Korea. You feel that your point would fail if you cited, e.g., Norway?

The joke would have failed, since Norway doesn't have a PM with a notoriously bad hair style

 

[super animator]

The joke would have failed, since Norway doesn't have a PM with a notoriously bad hair style

Talk about back tracking.

 

[KarateCowboy]

Talk about back tracking.

Nah. I could say plenty bad about Norway. Like how Oslo is, or at least was until recently, the rape capital of Europe. How they have a violent crime rate higher than NYC. Or how they dissolve companies that don't have 'enough' women on their leadership boards. Or how the government takes more of your wages than you do --citizen slavery. Or how they don't have basic human rights like freedom of speech. Or how authorities take note and it's an issue when parents teach their kids that God punishes sin. Or I could talk about the rampant oikophobic bigotry in their culture. I've read about some really, really corrupt politicians there. But, none of those presented an opportunity for a bit of humor. We know that humor isn't big about socialists --whether national, soviet, or american, but you should try it some time.

 

[EinsteinsGirl]

Where did I claim she is a Christian and why would she need to be one? Is Cruz solely a candidate for Christians? Are non-Christians not good enough to be given forgiveness? And how do you know she is "unrepentant? I guess you know here personally and can see into her soul, as well as her relationship to God?

Maybe you're somehow ignorant of the fact that Cruz IS A CHRISTIAN...

I already explained this twice, but apparently you are somehow not comprehending, so let me try again:

1. - Cruz REMOVED the ad because HE is a Christian.

2. - Christians are instructed clearly, in 1 Cor 5, to HAVE NOTHING TO DO wit people who "CLAIM" TO BE CHRISTIANS who are involved in immorality.

3. - Let me now be more clear: The porn gal in the advertisement 'claims' to be a Christian. She's one of those "Christians" today who thinks it's ok to just go out and do whatever they want and think God's "grace" makes it all ok.

God's GRACE is not a license to sin. GRACE is God's empowerment and strength to STOP sinning.

The above was presented in elementary foundational language.
I hope it's understood this time.

 

[EinsteinsGirl]

Seriously, it's not up to you who is or isn't a Christian.
tulc(thought it should be pointed out)

Good grief.
Read the post above this one.
Can you understand it?

 

[EinsteinsGirl]

It is a central principle of Christianity that nobody is "good enough" to be given forgiveness. Grace means unmerited favour.

However, that said, as Cruz himself pointed out: He's not running to be Pastor-in-Chief. He's running for President of the US. That is all of the US, not just Evangelicals.

While Cruz is a Christian, he is more so a Constitutionalist in terms of how to govern. i believe that he would welcome this woman's support if indeed she supports him.

i agree that the post you are replying to is "over the top". The poster, unless she knows the woman personally (and has knowledge of her 'heart', something reserved to an almighty God) is out of line. This is one of the problems that i have in mixing Christianity and contemporary US politics.

I fail to understand how some people come to their strange conclusions, saying I'm "over the top".
Are you a born again Christian and do you believe the bible is God's Word and Instruction?

I already explained this twice, but apparently you are somehow not comprehending, so let me try again:

1. - Cruz REMOVED the ad because HE is a Christian.

2. - Christians are instructed clearly, in 1 Cor 5, to HAVE NOTHING TO DO wit people who "CLAIM" TO BE CHRISTIANS who are involved in immorality.

3. - Let me now be more clear: The porn gal in the advertisement 'claims' to be a Christian. She's one of those "Christians" today who thinks it's ok to just go out and do whatever they want and think God's "grace" makes it all ok.

God's GRACE is not a license to sin. GRACE is God's empowerment and strength to STOP sinning.

The above was presented in elementary foundational language.
I hope it's understood this time.

 

[tulc]

Good grief.
Read the post above this one.
Can you understand it?

...uhmm...so? Still not up to you. Word it any way you like, wrap as many religious sounding phrases around it as you think will cover over what you're doing. The fact remains that you think you can decide who is or isn't a Christian. And that's simply not true.
tulc(is going to need a lot more coffee soonish)

 

[EinsteinsGirl]

...uhmm...so? Still not up to you. Word it any way you like, wrap as many religious sounding phrases around it as you think will cover over what you're doing. The fact remains that you think you can decide who is or isn't a Christian. And that's simply not true.
tulc(is going to need a lot more coffee soonish)

Don't be daft.
I discern that you do understand what I've explained, you simply don't want to attest to it.
Here's a little reading material to drive the thorn of conviction in further for you

I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people; 10 I did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the world. 11 But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called "brother" (believer/Christian) if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler—not even to eat with such a one. 12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church? 13 But those who are outside, God judges. Remove the wicked man from among yourselves. - 1 Cor 5 (bracketed mine)

have a good night's sleep darling

 

[tulc]

Don't be daft.
I discern that you do understand what I've explained, you simply don't want to attest to it.
Here's a little reading material to drive the thorn of conviction in further for you

I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people; 10 I did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the world. 11 But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called "brother" (believer/Christian) if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler—not even to eat with such a one. 12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church? 13 But those who are outside, God judges. Remove the wicked man from among yourselves. - 1 Cor 5 (bracketed mine)

So...they're Christians right? Because I'm not seeing where Paul said they aren't Christians.

have a good night's sleep darling

I always do. Thank you for the good wishes though.
tulc(who sleeps like a rock after finishing his last cup of coffee just before going to bed)

 

[Willtor]

Nah. I could say plenty bad about Norway. Like how Oslo is, or at least was until recently, the rape capital of Europe. How they have a violent crime rate higher than NYC. Or how they dissolve companies that don't have 'enough' women on their leadership boards. Or how the government takes more of your wages than you do --citizen slavery. Or how they don't have basic human rights like freedom of speech. Or how authorities take note and it's an issue when parents teach their kids that God punishes sin. Or I could talk about the rampant oikophobic bigotry in their culture. I've read about some really, really corrupt politicians there. But, none of those presented an opportunity for a bit of humor. We know that humor isn't big about socialists --whether national, soviet, or american, but you should try it some time.

The crime rate stuff doesn't jive with what the U.S. Dept. of State says about them. Also, you compare it to New York City, which actually has a lower than average crime rate for a U.S. city, today. Also, they seem to have pretty good freedom of speech, though IMO, the U.S. and Norway seem to be better in different areas. On the balance, I'd say we're better off, but I'm not advocating changing that dimension of our society.

As to the rest of it, I imagine you're referring to something specific, but I don't know what about so it's hard to evaluate.

 

[KarateCowboy]

The crime rate stuff doesn't jive with what the U.S. Dept. of State says about them. Also, you compare it to New York City, which actually has a lower than average crime rate for a U.S. city, today. Also, they seem to have pretty good freedom of speech, though IMO, the U.S. and Norway seem to be better in different areas. On the balance, I'd say we're better off, but I'm not advocating changing that dimension of our society.

As to the rest of it, I imagine you're referring to something specific, but I don't know what about so it's hard to evaluate.

All right, well.... can I have my Kim Jung Un joke? We can agree to poke fun at him, right?

 

[Willtor]

All right, well.... can I have my Kim Jung Un joke? We can agree to poke fun at him, right?

Yes. Go nuts on that.

 

[Willtor]

(sauce)

 

[Maren]

Maybe you're somehow ignorant of the fact that Cruz IS A CHRISTIAN...

I already explained this twice, but apparently you are somehow not comprehending, so let me try again:

1. - Cruz REMOVED the ad because HE is a Christian.

2. - Christians are instructed clearly, in 1 Cor 5, to HAVE NOTHING TO DO wit people who "CLAIM" TO BE CHRISTIANS who are involved in immorality.

3. - Let me now be more clear: The porn gal in the advertisement 'claims' to be a Christian. She's one of those "Christians" today who thinks it's ok to just go out and do whatever they want and think God's "grace" makes it all ok.

God's GRACE is not a license to sin. GRACE is God's empowerment and strength to STOP sinning.

The above was presented in elementary foundational language.
I hope it's understood this time.

By what you are saying, Cruz shouldn't be running for President, nor should he be Senator. As Senator, he is forced to work with immoral people who claim to be Christian -- just as he would if he is President.

As for the woman who acted in soft core porn, are you claiming you know her personally and can know read her "heart". How do you know what she believes? Instead, you appear to be making judgments based solely on the fact that she once acted in soft core movies and, since that time, you are not aware that she has asked God for forgiveness.

I'd suggest that you might be worried about the way God will judge you, when you seem more than happy to judge people you don't know, where you have no idea what is actually in their hearts. I don't think you want God judging you based on innuendo and rumor, much less judging you for what maybe an overly harsh judgement of others.

 

[Calvinist Dark Lord]

I fail to understand how some people come to their strange conclusions, saying I'm "over the top".
Are you a born again Christian and do you believe the bible is God's Word and Instruction?

i am what is described on both my profile page and the description given under my avatar. That leaves you with...whatever that leaves you with. i am also distressed that you don't seem to have an understanding of basic Christian Doctrine, the nature of grace, or the church.

I already explained this twice, but apparently you are somehow not comprehending, so let me try again:

Oh, i understand perfectly. i also understand that you need to learn a bit of basic Christian Doctrine before you presume to pontificate on points that you know not the first thing about. Specifically below:

1. - Cruz REMOVED the ad because HE is a Christian.

Or because it caused a controversy amongst the Evangelicals that Cruz is attempting to attract --unsuccessfully it seems-- to his campaign.

2. - Christians are instructed clearly, in 1 Cor 5, to HAVE NOTHING TO DO wit people who "CLAIM" TO BE CHRISTIANS who are involved in immorality.

You need to change the tense of your statement, lest you condemn those such as Rahab the harlot and Mary Magdalene to the flames of hell. Perhaps you need to examine the recent projects that the woman in question has been involved with before you pass judgement on whether or not she is presently involved in immorality.

- Let me now be more clear: The porn gal in the advertisement 'claims' to be a Christian. She's one of those "Christians" today who thinks it's ok to just go out and do whatever they want and think God's "grace" makes it all ok.

And you would know this about the woman...how?

God's GRACE is not a license to sin. GRACE is God's empowerment and strength to STOP sinning.

Uh huh...pay particular attention to verses 9 and 10. As i said, you need to learn some basic Christian Doctrine.

The above was presented in elementary foundational language.
I hope it's understood this time.

Condescend much? Bottom line, you made a judgement that was not yours to make. You got stepped on for it. Accept it and learn from it. While you're at it, LEARN SOME BASIC CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE.

 

[Fantine]

If Cruz really wanted to promote marriage and end abortion, he would have more progressive economic views.

If he really cared about families, he wouldn't support an immigration policy that deports fathers and separates families.

Obamacare (or the ACA, my preferred name for the program) is not only projected to save many billions by 2020, but also contributes strongly to economic growth. Living in a small city, I have seen a huge amount of medical construction and new jobs because of the ACA. Cost savings plus economic growth, a win-win. If you add the ethical considerations, it's a win-win-win. Could it be done better? Sure! Ask Bernie Sanders! But considering what an uphill battle it was to get this far, we are fortunate.

Cruz contributed to the last economic shutdown which cost our country $29 billion in lost revenues. As we have seen in Europe, drastic budget cuts not only hurt people (which may be of no concern to some conservatives) but raise deficits. When a nation goes into an austerity recession, economic stagnation and decline results in lower tax revenues. The tax revenue losses are often greater than the budget cuts.

Drastic budget cuts make people who depend on government programs (many of them earned "entitlements") suffer, and I realize some conservatives don't care about that. On the other hand, they make everyone suffer--small businesses, large businesses, people who are laid off, etc., etc.

And, BTW, Time Magazine linked the decline in marriage to the decline in the middle class (no surprise there!) And many women choose abortion due to economic pressure.

Vote for Cruz--Lose, Lose, and Lose! How fortuitous that his name rhymes with his projected effect on society. Less marriage, more abortions, recession, economic stagnation, higher deficits!

If you allege (as Cruz does) that you want good outcomes but have bad plans to achieve them, your allegedly "wanting" isn't a good enough reason to get my vote.