Holder doesn't do anything without Obama's approval. That includes ignoring state and federal laws ie. ignoring the Constitution and violating states rights. The same reason Clyde is giving as to why he doesn't like Cruz and apparently is the reason he is "whacky."

 

And I have never seen Clyde defend Obama or Holder. I have seen him question views that oppose Obama but I have never seen him defend Obama or Holder. Asking questions isn't defending. To this day I honestly couldn't tell you if Clyde is a democrat or republican or libertarian.

And I have never seen Clyde defend Obama or Holder. I have seen him question views that oppose Obama but I have never seen him defend Obama or Holder. Asking questions isn't defending. To this day I honestly couldn't tell you if Clyde is a democrat or republican or libertarian.

 

I didn't say he defended him. He's also never been as critical to Obama as he was towards Cruz earlier in the thread. He cited his reasoning and called it whacky.

 

Just wondering if he uses the same litmus test for all candidates.

And Bluegrasscard' date=' I bet the government is already spying on him...[/quote']

 

A government big enough to give you all you need is big enough to take all you have.

Holder doesn't do anything without Obama's approval. That includes ignoring state and federal laws ie. ignoring the Constitution and violating states rights. The same reason Clyde is giving as to why he doesn't like Cruz and apparently is the reason he is "whacky."

 

He is whacky based on his unrefuted comments about the govt wanting to eliminate paved roads and golf courses. He just seems to not understand the nullification issue. Two different things.

I didn't say he defended him. He's also never been as critical to Obama as he was towards Cruz earlier in the thread. He cited his reasoning and called it whacky.

 

Just wondering if he uses the same litmus test for all candidates.

 

The President supports violating the constitution in ghe name of fighting terrorism and I have consistently criticized that stance. Doesnt make him whacky - just wrong.

He is whacky based on his unrefuted comments about the govt wanting to eliminate paved roads and golf courses. He just seems to not understand the nullification issue. Two different things.

Cruz graduated *** laude from Princeton University and magna *** laude from Harvard Law School. His professor Alan Dershowitz said of him, "Cruz was off-the-charts brilliant." Cruz clerked for Chief Justice William Renhquist, served as an associate deputy Attorney General of the United States, served five years as the Texas Solicitor General, and has argued nine cases before the U.S. Supreme Court. That is a very abbreviated resume. We already know more about Cruz's background than we know about Obama's after five years in office and two autobiographies.

 

Yet based on left wing blog sites, you have concluded that Cruz is a "whacky" guy who does not understand the "nullification issue." Do you understand how crazy that sounds?

Cruz graduated *** laude from Princeton University and magna *** laude from Harvard Law School. His professor Alan Dershowitz said of him, "Cruz was off-the-charts brilliant." Cruz clerked for Chief Justice William Renhquist, served as an associate deputy Attorney General of the United States, served five years as the Texas Solicitor General, and has argued nine cases before the U.S. Supreme Court. That is a very abbreviated resume. We already know more about Cruz's background than we know about Obama's after five years in office and two autobiographies.

 

Yet based on left wing blog sites, you have concluded that Cruz is a "whacky" guy who does not understand the "nullification issue." Do you understand how crazy that sounds?

 

Are you saying he didnt say what was reported?

Are you saying he didnt say what was reported?

I am saying that you should never trust a politically biased website to provide context for a short quote. Cruz obviously knows a lot more about state's rights under the U.S. Constitution than you or I will ever know. If you are looking for "whacky" you don't have to read many UN resolutions to find it.

 

If the liberals' strategy to keep Ted Cruz out of the White House is to convince people that he is "whacky" and does not understand the law, then good luck with that. You would have a better chance of succeeding by recycling the birthers' arguments against Obama's eligibility.

 

You really should watch Cruz speak for a few minutes before you go any further out on the limb to convince everybody that he is nuts. This man speaks as well without a teleprompter as Obama speaks with one. He did not win top speaker awards at both the U.S. and North American debating competitions by making crazy statements. (Cruise was later a semi-finalist at the 1995 World Universities Debating Championship.)

Are you saying he didnt say what was reported?

 

I find it intellectually dishonest to hold different parties to different standards on what is considered Looney. I can find multiple ideas and quotes from Obama I find much more crazy than the one you are harping on with Cruz. Its a pattern on the left to frame any politician on right deemed a threat to be crazy. Its comical and predictable.

I am saying that you should never trust a politically biased website to provide context for a short quote. Cruz obviously knows a lot more about state's rights under the U.S. Constitution than you or I will ever know. If you are looking for "whacky" you don't have to read many UN resolutions to find it.

 

If the liberals' strategy to keep Ted Cruz out of the White House is to convince people that he is "whacky" and does not understand the law, then good luck with that. You would have a better chance of succeeding by recycling the birthers' arguments against Obama's eligibility.

 

You really should watch Cruz speak for a few minutes before you go any further out on the limb to convince everybody that he is nuts. This man speaks as well without a teleprompter as Obama speaks with one. He did not win top speaker awards at both the U.S. and North American debating competitions by making crazy statements. (Cruise was later a semi-finalist at the 1995 World Universities Debating Championship.)

 

I apologize for not being clear in my question. I am asking if you are saying that the quote in the link I provided about the govt wanting to take away golf courses and paved roads was not uttered by Mr Cruz?

I find it intellectually dishonest to hold different parties to different standards on what is considered Looney. I can find multiple ideas and quotes from Obama I find much more crazy than the one you are harping on with Cruz. Its a pattern on the left to frame any politician on right deemed a threat to be crazy. Its comical and predictable.

 

 

You're saying you can find a quote by President (or Candidate) Obama that is crazier than saying the govt wants to take away golf courses and paved roads? I'll wait.

I am saying that you should never trust a politically biased website to provide context for a short quote. Cruz obviously knows a lot more about state's rights under the U.S. Constitution than you or I will ever know. If you are looking for "whacky" you don't have to read many UN resolutions to find it.

 

Meet The New Nullification, Just as Unconstitutional as the Old Nullification | ThinkProgress

 

So the link above QUOTES Mr Cruz directly and then says where he is wrong in his understanding of the Constitution and you think they're being "biased?" Tell me what part of their assertion that you disagree with.

And I have never seen Clyde defend Obama or Holder. I have seen him question views that oppose Obama but I have never seen him defend Obama or Holder. Asking questions isn't defending. To this day I honestly couldn't tell you if Clyde is a democrat or republican or libertarian.

 

It's just easier to be a simple thinker and yell "LIBERAL" instead .

 

 

Like you he has no freaking clue as to how I lean.

For the record, we don't need to continue to tell me how smart he is. I'm not saying he's not smart.

 

Heck, if the interpretation stated in the link I provided is correct then he knows it's not correct BUT he is trying to fool those he is talking to.

I apologize for not being clear in my question. I am asking if you are saying that the quote in the link I provided about the govt wanting to take away golf courses and paved roads was not uttered by Mr Cruz?

You were perfectly clear. Your link was to a left wing blog, which along with other left wing blogs is on a crusade to convince us that Ted Cruz is nuts. You are using the same left wing sources to make the argument that you know that Ted Cruz does not understand states rights as well as you do. Yes, your approach is perfectly clear. Forgive me if I am more inclined to accept the ultra liberal Alan Dershowitz's assessment of Cruz over your own.