Ted Cruz's 'slow and steady' path to victory

[AirPo]

In other words the court just one day decided same sex marriage was a constitutional right.

In actual words, no.

 

[JustOneWay]

You claimed that a recent declaration of "constitutionality" wasn't being defended by Cruz.

When did I claim that?

Why would he defend something which was never in the constitution or even in any of the amendments to it ... but rather simply a modern "interpretation" of something which never was.

The constitution is under constant interpretation. Why do you think we have so much trouble?

He seeks constitutional clarification of the matter ... the way a strict constitutionalist should.

I understand. Cruz wants to defend the constitution by changing it so it is clear to the strict constitutionalist....

 

[NightHawkeye]

The constitution is under constant interpretation. Why do you think we have so much trouble?

Yes, it is. I'm surprised you and I agree on that.

I understand. Cruz wants to defend the constitution by changing it so it is clear to the strict constitutionalist....

Incorrect. He seeks to amend the constitution so as to negate the recent interpretation unequivocally.

 

[JustOneWay]

Incorrect. He seeks to amend the constitution so as to negate the recent interpretation unequivocally.

No, it is you who is again incorrect. Cruz wanted to change the Constitution before the Supreme Court ruled on gay marriage.

 

[NightHawkeye]

No, it is you who is again incorrect. Cruz wanted to change the Constitution before the Supreme Court ruled on gay marriage.

We are curiously agreed then that he has been consistent in his constitutional stance.

 

[JustOneWay]

We are curiously agreed then that he has been consistent in his constitutional stance.

I wish you would stop putting words in my mouth. It is old. I maintain that his agenda comes before his precious love affair with the constitution.

He is a politician posing as an honest man. At the end of the day, few like the man.

 

[NightHawkeye]

I wish you would stop putting words in my mouth.

Just celebrating our agreement. Which I admit is curious ... but it is what it is.

It is old. I maintain that his agenda comes before his precious love affair with the constitution.

You are entitled to your opinion ... but you yourself agreed that his constitutional stance on the matter under discussion is the same now as it was well before the more recent supreme court decision.

He is a politician posing as an honest man. At the end of the day, few like the man.

Sometimes the measure of a man is best taken by looking at his enemies. Few in the mainstream media like Ted Cruz. Few of the political elite like him.

Ted Cruz has been perhaps the most consistent conservative in the Senate judging by his record, if not the single most consistent conservative in Washington currently.

 

[stamperben]

Just celebrating our agreement. Which I admit is curious ... but it is what it is.

You are entitled to your opinion ... but you yourself agreed that his constitutional stance on the matter under discussion is the same now as it was well before the more recent supreme court decision.

Sometimes the measure of a man is best taken by looking at his enemies. Few in the mainstream media like Ted Cruz. Few of the political elite like him.

Ted Cruz has been perhaps the most consistent conservative in the Senate judging by his record, if not the single most consistent conservative in Washington currently.

And once again I'll ask, just exactly who is this political elite you keep bringing up? Is it the Koch's? Anderson? Wall Street bankers? I think we agree that money equals power in this country at this time, so is this elite group the ones with money?

 

[bhsmte]

Just celebrating our agreement. Which I admit is curious ... but it is what it is.

You are entitled to your opinion ... but you yourself agreed that his constitutional stance on the matter under discussion is the same now as it was well before the more recent supreme court decision.

Sometimes the measure of a man is best taken by looking at his enemies. Few in the mainstream media like Ted Cruz. Few of the political elite like him.

Ted Cruz has been perhaps the most consistent conservative in the Senate judging by his record, if not the single most consistent conservative in Washington currently.

Being consistent can be good, or it can be bad. Consistent can mean someone is stubborn and not willing to look at opposing views to find compromise, or most importantly, to acquire and acknowledge new information that could indicate their position may not be the best. Changing one's mind is a sign of strength, not weakness.

It does help to determine what you can expect from a politician though and we will see how many voters approve of what they would expect from Cruz.

 

[bhsmte]

And once again I'll ask, just exactly who is this political elite you keep bringing up? Is it the Koch's? Anderson? Wall Street bankers? I think we agree that money equals power in this country at this time, so is this elite group the ones with money?

I asked this question as well and never got an answer.

 

[stamperben]

I asked this question as well and never got an answer.

Heck, I even started a thread about it.

 

[NightHawkeye]

I asked this question as well and never got an answer.

That's an outright falsehood, bhsmte. It's been answered multiple times by numerous posters, including myself.

Noting that this thread is about Ted Cruz though. Please tend to the topic. Thanks in advance.

 

[bhsmte]

That's an outright falsehood, bhsmte. It's been answered multiple times by numerous posters, including myself.

Noting that this thread is about Ted Cruz though. Please tend to the topic. Thanks in advance.

Can you kindly refer me to where you answered this question, I must have missed it.

 

[NightHawkeye]

Can you kindly refer me to where you answered this question, I must have missed it.

It seems you did. The forum has a search function. The easiest way for you to find the answer might be to search on when you've asked the question previously.

Again, this thread is about Ted Cruz. Thanks in advance.

 

[JustOneWay]

Just celebrating our agreement. Which I admit is curious ... but it is what it is.

I never agreed to what you claim I agreed on....I never claimed Cruz was consistent on anything. I never even made any comment close to saying he is consistent. Those are your words, not mine.

First he was the best defender of the constitution, now you claim he is the most consistent. Both are subjective comments and are merely opinions. You can make these comments all day, just stop claiming that they are also my opinions.

 

[AirPo]

We are curiously agreed then that he has been consistent in his constitutional stance.

Consistantly wrong is still wrong.

 

[bhsmte]

That's an outright falsehood, bhsmte. It's been answered multiple times by numerous posters, including myself.

Noting that this thread is about Ted Cruz though. Please tend to the topic. Thanks in advance.

I asked you the question; who the noble elite were in post 82 of this thread. You replied with; the entitlement class and that was self explanatory.

Now, if you have defined an entitlement class in your own mind, this is not self explanatory to the rest of us. I asked you for examples of this entitlement class and you have yet to respond.

So, can you give specific examples of what you deem to the the "entitlement class"?

 

[NightHawkeye]

I asked you the question; who the noble elite were in post 82 of this thread. You replied with; the entitlement class and that was self explanatory.

Now, if you have defined an entitlement class in your own mind, this is not self explanatory to the rest of us. I asked you for examples of this entitlement class and you have yet to respond.

So, can you give specific examples of what you deem to the the "entitlement class"?

How many times should I ask you to stay on topic?

 

[bhsmte]

How many times should I ask you to stay on topic?

I simply asked you for clarification of a topic you yourself introduced; what you define as the entitlement class.

 

[stamperben]

I asked you the question; who the noble elite were in post 82 of this thread. You replied with; the entitlement class and that was self explanatory.

Now, if you have defined an entitlement class in your own mind, this is not self explanatory to the rest of us. I asked you for examples of this entitlement class and you have yet to respond.

So, can you give specific examples of what you deem to the the "entitlement class"?

The entitlement class would be that group of folks who think they are entitled to something like an elected office. It disregards the elite class who sponsor or fuel that entitlement mindset. I want to know who the elites are that he mentioned in THIS VERY THREAD! Heck, I even gave him some suggestions.