WWTBAM Bored

Can't wait to see what is spewed out in this thread.

Ted is the first candidate to announce officially, I have read. So as of now he has my support.

He will keep my support unless he does or says something I cannot support. That will have to come from his own mouth or his own actions. Not by any news report that interprets what he says or does, not from any democrat (or even republican) propaganda and certainly not from the kind of trash that BJ digs up. If you are tempted to believe what information comes out of these sources about him, just think "Hands Up, Dont Shoot" and extrapolate. They are reporting narrative, not fact. He has some obstacles to overcome, because he has been fully painted by the character assassination squad of the democrat party, aided by the establishment republicans. But I hope, if he can get his message out, he can overcome that the way Reagan did.

Senator Cruz knows the Constitution, and unlike most of his colleagues in Washington, has so far kept his oath to support and defend it. And whether you agree with them or not, he sticks to his principles. We are sorely in need of a leader like that. We have not had a true conservative to vote for in a long time.

Please try and limit the profanity.....

flockofseagulls104 wrote:Can't wait to see what is spewed out in this thread.

Ted is the first candidate to announce officially, I have read. So as of now he has my support.

Does this mean that you will not be supporting Rand Paul, scheduled to make his announcement next month?

earendel wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:Can't wait to see what is spewed out in this thread.

Ted is the first candidate to announce officially, I have read. So as of now he has my support.

Does this mean that you will not be supporting Rand Paul, scheduled to make his announcement next month?

I will most probably support the republican candidate over Hillary or Warren. Probably over anyone who the Dems are likely to nominate. Walker is a close second. Rand Paul a more distant third at this time. But I will support a more conservative third party candidate if, God forbid, Jeb Bush, Romney or any other RINO is nominated.

Princeton students want Obama to run again. I would vote for Spongebob Squarepants before I'd vote for Obama. Spongebob would have more respect for the Constitution, plus be more interesting to listen to.

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

earendel wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:Can't wait to see what is spewed out in this thread.

Ted is the first candidate to announce officially, I have read. So as of now he has my support.

Does this mean that you will not be supporting Rand Paul, scheduled to make his announcement next month?

I will most probably support the republican candidate over Hillary or Warren. Probably over anyone who the Dems are likely to nominate. Walker is a close second. Rand Paul a more distant third at this time. But I will support a more conservative third party candidate if, God forbid, Jeb Bush, Romney or any other RINO is nominated.

Princeton students want Obama to run again. I would vote for Spongebob Squarepants before I'd vote for Obama. Spongebob would have more respect for the Constitution, plus be more interesting to listen to.

One thing's for sure - there will be a plethora of candidates to choose from - Bobby Jindal, Marco Rubio, that doctor from Colorado (whose name I can't remember), to name but three aside from Walker and Bush (I think Romney has decided not to run again).

flockofseagulls104 wrote:Can't wait to see what is spewed out in this thread.

Ted is the first candidate to announce officially, I have read. So as of now he has my support.

He will keep my support unless he does or says something I cannot support. That will have to come from his own mouth or his own actions. Not by any news report that interprets what he says or does, not from any democrat (or even republican) propaganda and certainly not from the kind of trash that BJ digs up. If you are tempted to believe what information comes out of these sources about him, just think "Hands Up, Dont Shoot" and extrapolate. They are reporting narrative, not fact. He has some obstacles to overcome, because he has been fully painted by the character assassination squad of the democrat party, aided by the establishment republicans. But I hope, if he can get his message out, he can overcome that the way Reagan did.

Senator Cruz knows the Constitution, and unlike most of his colleagues in Washington, has so far kept his oath to support and defend it. And whether you agree with them or not, he sticks to his principles. We are sorely in need of a leader like that. We have not had a true conservative to vote for in a long time.

Please try and limit the profanity.....

So you're saying you support everything he's done and said? Why am I not surprised.

Those birthers that were all over Obama are strangely silent when it comes to the fact Cruz was born in Canada and had dual citizenship until just last year, IIRC.

Only a small contingent of the really whacko birthers are all over that story.

Jeemie wrote:Those birthers that were all over Obama are strangely silent when it comes to the fact Cruz was born in Canada and had dual citizenship until just last year, IIRC.

Only a small contingent of the really whacko birthers are all over that story.

Obama Birthers are a narrative. A big exaggeration to outrage the left.

Bob Juch wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:Can't wait to see what is spewed out in this thread.

Ted is the first candidate to announce officially, I have read. So as of now he has my support.

He will keep my support unless he does or says something I cannot support. That will have to come from his own mouth or his own actions. Not by any news report that interprets what he says or does, not from any democrat (or even republican) propaganda and certainly not from the kind of trash that BJ digs up. If you are tempted to believe what information comes out of these sources about him, just think "Hands Up, Dont Shoot" and extrapolate. They are reporting narrative, not fact. He has some obstacles to overcome, because he has been fully painted by the character assassination squad of the democrat party, aided by the establishment republicans. But I hope, if he can get his message out, he can overcome that the way Reagan did.

Senator Cruz knows the Constitution, and unlike most of his colleagues in Washington, has so far kept his oath to support and defend it. And whether you agree with them or not, he sticks to his principles. We are sorely in need of a leader like that. We have not had a true conservative to vote for in a long time.

Please try and limit the profanity.....

So you're saying you support everything he's done and said? Why am I not surprised.

If you only vote for someone who is right about everything, there are only two possible candidates: yourself and God. I am not surprised at anything you are not surprised at.

Pretty much so, but I don't know everything he's said and done. And you only know the propaganda you've been fed. "Hands up, don't shoot".

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

Jeemie wrote:Those birthers that were all over Obama are strangely silent when it comes to the fact Cruz was born in Canada and had dual citizenship until just last year, IIRC.

Only a small contingent of the really whacko birthers are all over that story.

Obama Birthers are a narrative. A big exaggeration to outrage the left.

You keep telling yourself that...

flockofseagulls104 wrote:And whether you agree with them or not, he sticks to his principles.

I agree with almost nothing Sen. Cruz says, but you're right, he sticks to his principles through thick and thin.

flockofseagulls104 wrote:Princeton students want Obama to run again.

You do know the Princeton students were kidding, right? They do know that much about the Constitution.

Jeemie wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

Jeemie wrote:Those birthers that were all over Obama are strangely silent when it comes to the fact Cruz was born in Canada and had dual citizenship until just last year, IIRC.

Only a small contingent of the really whacko birthers are all over that story.

Obama Birthers are a narrative. A big exaggeration to outrage the left.

You keep telling yourself that...

Name ONE serious conservative that pursued that line of opposition against Obama. Just one. Whether it's true or not, he was elected, and it should have been settled before he even was nominated. It was reported way out of proportion as a narrative, as a tool to discredit the opposition. If it's a problem for Cruz, at least we are talking about it now, and he's not hiding anything.

jarnon wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:And whether you agree with them or not, he sticks to his principles.

I agree with almost nothing Sen. Cruz says, but you're right, he sticks to his principles through thick and thin.

flockofseagulls104 wrote:Princeton students want Obama to run again.

You do know the Princeton students were kidding, right? They do know that much about the Constitution.

You know what? I think Obama knows enough about the Constitution to realize he is making a mockery of it. But he doesn't care, does he.

flockofseagulls104 wrote:You know what? I think Obama knows enough about the Constitution to realize he is making a mockery of it. But he doesn't care, does he.

Pres. Obama, a former Constitutional law professor, knows enough about the Constitution to have a good idea of what he can get away with. And the Republican-majority Supreme Court has agreed with him most of the time. (He lost on recess appointments IIRC.) Presidents and Congresses have been doing that since before the ink on the Constitution was dry. I know it drives you insane.

jarnon wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:You know what? I think Obama knows enough about the Constitution to realize he is making a mockery of it. But he doesn't care, does he.

Pres. Obama, a former Constitutional law professor, knows enough about the Constitution to have a good idea of what he can get away with. And the Republican-majority Supreme Court has agreed with him most of the time. (He lost on recess appointments IIRC.) Presidents and Congresses have been doing that since before the ink on the Constitution was dry. I know it drives you insane.

That's fine if you think it's ok to have our representatives try and get away with whatever they can. When you realize the Constitution exists to protect US, the citizens, from government, it's not such a game anymore. It's got to stop, and Cruz is one person who realizes it.

I won't debate Obama's credentials as a professor. Not enough factual information.

[quote="flockofseagulls104"]But I will support a more conservative third party candidate if, God forbid, Jeb Bush, Romney or any other RINO is nominated.
[quote]


Amen.

Jeb/Romney/Christie/Graham = RINO

I will either vote third party as well or sit it out if it's one of them or another RINO who might jump in later.

I don't know who I am supporting at present, but he or she will have to be fiscally conservative and, more importantly, enforce the law, and follow the Constitution.

I am disgusted by the GOP. They have the Congress and they are either impotent or actively collaborating with those who are ignoring the Constitution while bankrupting our nation.

Those on the left that are cheering on the current Administration's usurping of the Constitution won't if/when someone of a different political stripe does the same.

I could not believe the Democrats in the Senate going along with Obama's trampling of their Senatorial rights and privileges in the past. Old school institutionalist like former KKK leader Byrd would not have stood for such. Unlike the "He's articulate, light-skinned, and clean looking" Reid's tenure. Once lost, such power is not easily regained by the legislature.

Deliberately ignoring the principles of our Constitution is not good for anybody, left or right.

Flybrick wrote:I am disgusted by the GOP. They have the Congress and they are either impotent or actively collaborating with those who are ignoring the Constitution while bankrupting our nation.

Where is the evidence that the nation is at risk of bankruptcy? Hell, how is it even possible for a nation to go bankrupt as long as it retains the power to print its own currency?

You have noticed that the market (in the form of interest rates on U.S. sovereign debt) doesn't seem to have any measurable concern about the risk of a U.S. bankruptcy, haven't you? As I understand it, conservatives are usually enamored of the wisdom or free markets. Why is this one wrong? --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

Flybrick wrote:I am disgusted by the GOP. They have the Congress and they are either impotent or actively collaborating with those who are ignoring the Constitution while bankrupting our nation.

Where is the evidence that the nation is at risk of bankruptcy? Hell, how is it even possible for a nation to go bankrupt as long as it retains the power to print its own currency?

You have noticed that the market (in the form of interest rates on U.S. sovereign debt) doesn't seem to have any measurable concern about the risk of a U.S. bankruptcy, haven't you? As I understand it, conservatives are usually enamored of the wisdom or free markets. Why is this one wrong? --Bob

Bob, I've asked this before and you've quoted Paul Krugman to me. I still don't understand it: When should we get concerned about our national debt? At 15 trillion (oops, passed that). 20 trillion? (are we there yet?) $30 trillion? $50 trillion? When, Bob? When will it start coming down?

If we can go into as much debt as we want because we print our own currency, why don't we just print everybody $2 billion and give it out, Bob? I have noticed our credit rating has been degraded.

And what does the free market have to do with this?

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

Jeemie wrote:Those birthers that were all over Obama are strangely silent when it comes to the fact Cruz was born in Canada and had dual citizenship until just last year, IIRC.

Only a small contingent of the really whacko birthers are all over that story.

Obama Birthers are a narrative. A big exaggeration to outrage the left.

The Donald is now a Cruz Birther.

Bob Juch wrote:The Donald is now a Cruz Birther.

Where was the Donald in 2008, when John McCain, born in Panama, ran for President? And Mitt Romney's father, who was a candidate for the Republican nomination in 1964 & 1968, was born in Mexico. His opponent Barry Goldwater couldn't say much, because he was born in Arizona territory before it was a state. That's a far back as I can remember, but I bet there were birther controversies even before those.

flockofseagulls104 wrote:Bob, I've asked this before and you've quoted Paul Krugman to me. I still don't understand it: When should we get concerned about our national debt? At 15 trillion (oops, passed that). 20 trillion? (are we there yet?) $30 trillion? $50 trillion? When, Bob? When will it start coming down?

If we can go into as much debt as we want because we print our own currency, why don't we just print everybody $2 billion and give it out, Bob? I have noticed our credit rating has been degraded.

And what does the free market have to do with this?

We should be concerned about it either when inflation begins significantly increasing or when the free market tells us that our sovereign debt needs to pay interest at a rate significantly above inflation. Neither is true now.

The reduction in our credit rating (brought to you by the same folks who gave mortgage-backed securities AAA ratings) is irrelevant. (And in any event, the reduction was triggered by the near-refusal of Republicans to honor our debts by raising the debt limit.) What's relevant is the interest rates demanded by the market (denominated in dollars) for U.S. sovereign debt. The last time I checked, that interest rate is some miniscule fraction of a percent. That means that people with real money on the line have concluded that the U.S. is so certain to repay its debts in full that they are willing to lend us their money virtually for free. So people with real money on the line certainly don't seem to be worried about the U.S. government going bankrupt. And if they're not worried, why should I be?

I don't listen to Krugman because he's Krugman. I listen to Krugman because his macroeconomic predictions have been (I'll say it) right on the money. The so-called "experts" of the right can't say the same thing -- they've been predicting ruinous inflation for years, and we're still waiting for it to appear. --Bob

Bob Juch wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

Jeemie wrote:Those birthers that were all over Obama are strangely silent when it comes to the fact Cruz was born in Canada and had dual citizenship until just last year, IIRC.

Only a small contingent of the really whacko birthers are all over that story.

Obama Birthers are a narrative. A big exaggeration to outrage the left.

The Donald is now a Cruz Birther.

I said one SERIOUS conservative.

Bob78164 wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:Bob, I've asked this before and you've quoted Paul Krugman to me. I still don't understand it: When should we get concerned about our national debt? At 15 trillion (oops, passed that). 20 trillion? (are we there yet?) $30 trillion? $50 trillion? When, Bob? When will it start coming down?

If we can go into as much debt as we want because we print our own currency, why don't we just print everybody $2 billion and give it out, Bob? I have noticed our credit rating has been degraded.

And what does the free market have to do with this?

We should be concerned about it either when inflation begins significantly increasing or when the free market tells us that our sovereign debt needs to pay interest at a rate significantly above inflation. Neither is true now.

The reduction in our credit rating (brought to you by the same folks who gave mortgage-backed securities AAA ratings) is irrelevant. (And in any event, the reduction was triggered by the near-refusal of Republicans to honor our debts by raising the debt limit.) What's relevant is the interest rates demanded by the market (denominated in dollars) for U.S. sovereign debt. The last time I checked, that interest rate is some miniscule fraction of a percent. That means that people with real money on the line have concluded that the U.S. is so certain to repay its debts in full that they are willing to lend us their money virtually for free. So people with real money on the line certainly don't seem to be worried about the U.S. government going bankrupt. And if they're not worried, why should I be?

I don't listen to Krugman because he's Krugman. I listen to Krugman because his macroeconomic predictions have been (I'll say it) right on the money. The so-called "experts" of the right can't say the same thing -- they've been predicting ruinous inflation for years, and we're still waiting for it to appear. --Bob

I am not going to argue with you, Bob. I'm not an economist. But there are many people who say Krugman is full of crap, and Krugman is not shy about saying that anyone who disagrees with him is full of crap. They seem to be telling us contradictory stories. So who's telling the truth and who is lying? Who's smart and who's dumb? I don't know.

All I know is that 20 trillion dollars is a lot of money. And more money is piled on to the debt everyday. And the same people who trumpeted Bill Clinton's (actually Newt Gingrich's) 'surplus' in the 90's seem to be saying a $20 trillion dollar debt is no big deal. There must be a reason that throughout history nations tried to keep their sovereign debt under control. Is there anyone in Washington even concerned with debt control anymore? They more often talk about the 'deficit' being reduced. That's the same thing as buying something you don't need because it's on sale. It still adds to the debt.

So pardon me for being ignorant, but weighing both options: Spending like drunken sailors until we see inflation starting and then trying to figure out what to do about it, or balancing our budget and gradually reducing our debt to a manageable and reasonable level, I would pick the second option. There will be some pain involved, but nothing like the pain we will all have when the debt reaches the point of no return.

Bob...do you work hard at being so stupid, or does it just come naturally to you?

flockofseagulls104 wrote:I am not going to argue with you, Bob. I'm not an economist. But there are many people who say Krugman is full of crap, and Krugman is not shy about saying that anyone who disagrees with him is full of crap. They seem to be telling us contradictory stories. So who's telling the truth and who is lying? Who's smart and who's dumb? I don't know.

That's easy. The ones who make correct predictions are smart. The ones who make incorrect predictions are dumb. And that's something you can check. All you have to do is put away your ideological blinders. --Bob