Open Letter to Senator Ted Cruz, the Canadian

[JohnL.Burke]

Because in each instance the far right conservatives were supporting the #2 on the ticket. In 2016 they want their candidate to be #1. They blame the losses in 2008 and 2012 on the #1 not being "conservative" enough. If they don't get a Cruz or a Paul at the top of the ticket they will see that as being a problem with the GOP itself.

I'm going to disagree with ya on that point. I don't think anybody (republican or democrat) votes for the #2. Biden proves this.

Disagreement is good. It would be a boring world if we all had the same opinions on everything.

Getting back to your point. The purpose of putting Palin and Ryan on the tickets was to solidify the support from the base since neither McCain nor Romney were confident of their votes in the general election. What subsequently happened was that it was Palin and Ryan who were attracting the crowds at the campaign events. This resulted in the perception of being "held captive" by the far right conservatives. Please note that this is the perception rather than the reality. Both elections were reasonably close but the far right conservatives on the tickets did not help to gain moderate votes. What is more is that in 2012 the GOP stood an excellent chance of taking over the Senate but failed to do so because of the far right conservative candidates who were running for those seats.

The GOP choices for 2016 include Cruze, Paul, Rubio, Ryan and Santorum. All of them stand a chance of being the Republican nominee. Of those only Rubio strikes me as being politically savvy enough to know when to move to the center. If any of the others are at the top of the ticket the GOP will have a hard time "selling" them to the moderate center in my opinion.

I agree with you that the reason McCain and Romney put up conservatives as vice president is that they wanted to attract conservatives. BUT, my point is that the conservatives stayed home because nobody votes for #2. I stand by my observation.
Why did 5 million conservatives stay home? | Political Arena

 

[JohnL.Burke]

354 and 332.

Worked fine for Dems. How'd it go for the GOP in the last two elections for President there skippy?

Sucks to be you.

354 and 332? What's that? The interest rate you're going to be paying on your student loans?

Electoral vote tallies. Eww, I'm sorry is that still a sensitive subject there skippy?

Deal with it bitch.

I'll do my best dude.

 

[Derideo_Te]

I'm going to disagree with ya on that point. I don't think anybody (republican or democrat) votes for the #2. Biden proves this.

Disagreement is good. It would be a boring world if we all had the same opinions on everything.

Getting back to your point. The purpose of putting Palin and Ryan on the tickets was to solidify the support from the base since neither McCain nor Romney were confident of their votes in the general election. What subsequently happened was that it was Palin and Ryan who were attracting the crowds at the campaign events. This resulted in the perception of being "held captive" by the far right conservatives. Please note that this is the perception rather than the reality. Both elections were reasonably close but the far right conservatives on the tickets did not help to gain moderate votes. What is more is that in 2012 the GOP stood an excellent chance of taking over the Senate but failed to do so because of the far right conservative candidates who were running for those seats.

The GOP choices for 2016 include Cruze, Paul, Rubio, Ryan and Santorum. All of them stand a chance of being the Republican nominee. Of those only Rubio strikes me as being politically savvy enough to know when to move to the center. If any of the others are at the top of the ticket the GOP will have a hard time "selling" them to the moderate center in my opinion.

I agree with you that the reason McCain and Romney put up conservatives as vice president is that they wanted to attract conservatives. BUT, my point is that the conservatives stayed home because nobody votes for #2. I stand by my observation.
Why did 5 million conservatives stay home? | Political Arena

Conservatives did not stay home. They all went to the polls. It was Republicans who have left the GOP and became Independents instead that did not turn out to vote for the McCain and/or Romney ticket. The shortfall was not amongst the far right conservatives because they all voted against Obama. For the GOP to succeed in 2016 it needs to find a way to win back those who now self identify as Independents. However that is not the direction that the party is currently headed in. Right now everything hinges on 2014. If the Republicans take the Senate then there will be a far right conservative on top of the ticket in 2016. If they don't then the primaries will become a battle between the far right conservatives and the old guard like Rove.

 

[candycorn]

Rafael isn't making any friends in the senate, thats for sure. His ploy to tie defunding Obamneycare isn't getting enough Republican signatories there last I checked either.

If it doesn't transpire and we don't have this mother of all show-downs; McConnell may be looking for a job next year.

I can't think of a congressman or Senator that shouldn't be looking for a job next year....

We'll likely end up promoting one of them to President--either a current congressperson or a former one.

 

[JohnL.Burke]

Disagreement is good. It would be a boring world if we all had the same opinions on everything.

Getting back to your point. The purpose of putting Palin and Ryan on the tickets was to solidify the support from the base since neither McCain nor Romney were confident of their votes in the general election. What subsequently happened was that it was Palin and Ryan who were attracting the crowds at the campaign events. This resulted in the perception of being "held captive" by the far right conservatives. Please note that this is the perception rather than the reality. Both elections were reasonably close but the far right conservatives on the tickets did not help to gain moderate votes. What is more is that in 2012 the GOP stood an excellent chance of taking over the Senate but failed to do so because of the far right conservative candidates who were running for those seats.

The GOP choices for 2016 include Cruze, Paul, Rubio, Ryan and Santorum. All of them stand a chance of being the Republican nominee. Of those only Rubio strikes me as being politically savvy enough to know when to move to the center. If any of the others are at the top of the ticket the GOP will have a hard time "selling" them to the moderate center in my opinion.

I agree with you that the reason McCain and Romney put up conservatives as vice president is that they wanted to attract conservatives. BUT, my point is that the conservatives stayed home because nobody votes for #2. I stand by my observation.
Why did 5 million conservatives stay home? | Political Arena

Conservatives did not stay home. They all went to the polls. It was Republicans who have left the GOP and became Independents instead that did not turn out to vote for the McCain and/or Romney ticket. The shortfall was not amongst the far right conservatives because they all voted against Obama. For the GOP to succeed in 2016 it needs to find a way to win back those who now self identify as Independents. However that is not the direction that the party is currently headed in. Right now everything hinges on 2014. If the Republicans take the Senate then there will be a far right conservative on top of the ticket in 2016. If they don't then the primaries will become a battle between the far right conservatives and the old guard like Rove.

Actually, the conservatives did stay at home according to all polling data and most of the independents consisted of conservative democrats (blue dogs) that were basically kicked out of the democratic party when the democratic party began to turn far left. It will be interesting to see what happens next.

 

[Snookie]

Rafael isn't making any friends in the senate, thats for sure. His ploy to tie defunding Obamneycare isn't getting enough Republican signatories there last I checked either.

If it doesn't transpire and we don't have this mother of all show-downs; McConnell may be looking for a job next year.

I can't think of a congressman or Senator that shouldn't be looking for a job next year....

Most likely they will then become paid lobbyists, then. That's what the sobs do when they leave office.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I agree with you that the reason McCain and Romney put up conservatives as vice president is that they wanted to attract conservatives. BUT, my point is that the conservatives stayed home because nobody votes for #2. I stand by my observation.
Why did 5 million conservatives stay home? | Political Arena

Conservatives did not stay home. They all went to the polls. It was Republicans who have left the GOP and became Independents instead that did not turn out to vote for the McCain and/or Romney ticket. The shortfall was not amongst the far right conservatives because they all voted against Obama. For the GOP to succeed in 2016 it needs to find a way to win back those who now self identify as Independents. However that is not the direction that the party is currently headed in. Right now everything hinges on 2014. If the Republicans take the Senate then there will be a far right conservative on top of the ticket in 2016. If they don't then the primaries will become a battle between the far right conservatives and the old guard like Rove.

Actually, the conservatives did stay at home according to all polling data and most of the independents consisted of conservative democrats (blue dogs) that were basically kicked out of the democratic party when the democratic party began to turn far left. It will be interesting to see what happens next.

FACT: Conservatives publicly kicked out moderates and liberals from the GOP. Started in the late 1970s.

What conservative Democrats were kicked out of the DNC? btw, you do know Joe Lieberman was a liberal Democrat that got attacked by the anti-war left, and anti-Isreali lobby progressives? They hardly represent the majority of Democrats...

and this from Dante, a loyal liberal Democrat who fled the DNC after the 2008 primary

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Let's be honest though. If Cruz were a democrat then he would keep his Canadian citizenship and piss on the United States.

really? and you base this on what? you do know the chickenhawk hall of shame is loaded with Republicans, and far right conservatives ones at that?

Ever hear of Iraq that had overwhelming support from both sides of the isle? Ever hear of Vietnam that was started by a democrat and ended by a republican? Ever hear of the democrats who are supporting the future attack of Syria? Ever hear of... oh never mind... you are coming from a place of emotion as opposed to a place of fact and logic. Why do I bother?

Emotions? Sorry, but Dante doen't fit your stereotypes or world view. The chickenhawk hall of shame is filled with conservative warmongers,,,you never can honestly deny the fact.

btw, Dante is neither a leftist, nor a progressive, and has never been anti-war as an emotional being. American Generals like Ike and MacArthur were anti war until the dogs were unleashed

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The Left hates Ted Cruz because he's everything Obama is not: accomplished, smart, and loves America.

Still questioning other mens' love of country? How pathetically sad

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Yes, Ted Cruz Can be President

it’s not even that complicated; you just have to look up the right law. It boils down to whether Cruz is a “natural born citizen” of the United States, the only class of people constitutionally eligible for the presidency. (The Founding Fathers didn’t want their newly independent nation to be taken over by foreigners on the sly.)

What’s a “natural born citizen”? The Constitution doesn’t say, but the Framers’ understanding, combined with statutes enacted by the First Congress, indicate that the phrase means both birth abroad to American parents — in a manner regulated by federal law — and birth within the nation’s territory regardless of parental citizenship. The Supreme Court has confirmed that definition on multiple occasions in various contexts.

There’s no ideological debate here: Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe and former solicitor general Ted Olson — who were on opposite sides in Bush v. Gore among other cases — co-authored a memorandum in March 2008 detailing the above legal explanation in the context of John McCain’s eligibility. Recall that McCain — lately one of Cruz’s chief antagonists — was born to U.S. citizen parents serving on a military base in the Panama Canal Zone.

In other words, anyone who is a citizen at birth — as opposed to someone who becomes a citizen later (“naturalizes”) or who isn’t a citizen at all — can be president.

So the one remaining question is whether Ted Cruz was a citizen at birth. That’s an easy one. The Nationality Act of 1940 outlines which children become “nationals and citizens of the United States at birth.” In addition to those who are born in the United States or born outside the country to parents who were both citizens — or, interestingly, found in the United States without parents and no proof of birth elsewhere — citizenship goes to babies born to one American parent who has spent a certain number of years here.

That single-parent requirement has been amended several times, but under the law in effect between 1952 and 1986 — Cruz was born in 1970 — someone must have a citizen parent who resided in the United States for at least 10 years, including five after the age of 14, in order to be considered a natural-born citizen. Cruz’s mother, Eleanor Darragh, was born in Delaware, lived most of her life in the United States, and gave birth to little Rafael Edward Cruz in her 30s. Q.E.D

Yes, Ted Cruz Can be President | Cato Institute

Dante NEVER said Ted could not be President. But a man who hid his dual citizenship and loyalties while running for and sering in the US Senate....a case demanding a judicial decision and maybe a legislative one, or a constitutional amendment

dangerous precedent here

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I think we've had enough liberalism for now....

Exactly what right wingers in the GOP said and acted upon, and look wherethat brought the party and the nation...

 

[GWV5903]

I think we've had enough liberalism for now....

Exactly what right wingers in the GOP said and acted upon, and look wherethat brought the party and the nation...

That spoon scoops up every bit of shit the DNC feeds your dumb ass...

I bet your tongue laps up what your spoon misses...

 

[JohnL.Burke]

Conservatives did not stay home. They all went to the polls. It was Republicans who have left the GOP and became Independents instead that did not turn out to vote for the McCain and/or Romney ticket. The shortfall was not amongst the far right conservatives because they all voted against Obama. For the GOP to succeed in 2016 it needs to find a way to win back those who now self identify as Independents. However that is not the direction that the party is currently headed in. Right now everything hinges on 2014. If the Republicans take the Senate then there will be a far right conservative on top of the ticket in 2016. If they don't then the primaries will become a battle between the far right conservatives and the old guard like Rove.

Actually, the conservatives did stay at home according to all polling data and most of the independents consisted of conservative democrats (blue dogs) that were basically kicked out of the democratic party when the democratic party began to turn far left. It will be interesting to see what happens next.

FACT: Conservatives publicly kicked out moderates and liberals from the GOP. Started in the late 1970s.

What conservative Democrats were kicked out of the DNC? btw, you do know Joe Lieberman was a liberal Democrat that got attacked by the anti-war left, and anti-Isreali lobby progressives? They hardly represent the majority of Democrats...

and this from Dante, a loyal liberal Democrat who fled the DNC after the 2008 primary

I"m not sure FACT means what you think it means.

 

[JohnL.Burke]

really? and you base this on what? you do know the chickenhawk hall of shame is loaded with Republicans, and far right conservatives ones at that?

Ever hear of Iraq that had overwhelming support from both sides of the isle? Ever hear of Vietnam that was started by a democrat and ended by a republican? Ever hear of the democrats who are supporting the future attack of Syria? Ever hear of... oh never mind... you are coming from a place of emotion as opposed to a place of fact and logic. Why do I bother?

Emotions? Sorry, but Dante doen't fit your stereotypes or world view. The chickenhawk hall of shame is filled with conservative warmongers,,,you never can honestly deny the fact.

btw, Dante is neither a leftist, nor a progressive, and has never been anti-war as an emotional being. American Generals like Ike and MacArthur were anti war until the dogs were unleashed

I never can honestly deny the FACT that the chickenhawk hall of shame is filled with conservative warmongers? Seriously, please look up the word FACT.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Personal attacks from right wing idelogues will have to suffice.

 

[JohnL.Burke]

Attempting to bore JohnLBurke to death would take longer than looking up the word FACT in a dictionary.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Attempting to bore JohnLBurke to death would take longer than looking up the word FACT in a dictionary.

Bob Dole and Dante welcome you.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Ever hear of Iraq that had overwhelming support from both sides of the isle? Ever hear of Vietnam that was started by a democrat and ended by a republican? Ever hear of the democrats who are supporting the future attack of Syria? Ever hear of... oh never mind... you are coming from a place of emotion as opposed to a place of fact and logic. Why do I bother?

Emotions? Sorry, but Dante doen't fit your stereotypes or world view. The chickenhawk hall of shame is filled with conservative warmongers,,,you never can honestly deny the fact.

btw, Dante is neither a leftist, nor a progressive, and has never been anti-war as an emotional being. American Generals like Ike and MacArthur were anti war until the dogs were unleashed

I never can honestly deny the FACT that the chickenhawk hall of shame is filled with conservative warmongers? Seriously, please look up the word FACT.

Previously, the term war wimp was sometimes used, coined during the Vietnam War by Congressman Andrew Jacobs (D–Indiana), a Marine veteran of the Korean War. Jacobs defined a war wimp as "someone who is all too willing to send others to war, but never got 'round to going himself"."
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chickenhawk_(politics)

Next you'll be claiming it has historically been liberals and not conservatives (of both major parties) who have been the war hawks.

 

[JohnL.Burke]

You seem to be meandering a bit but I do appreciate the history lesson.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

You seem to be meandering a bit but I do appreciate the history lesson.

We aim to please...hey, thats just water running down your back...yellow rain.