Ted Cruz and Rand Paul - you fucking cowards!

[BigT]

@Trinopus

I am not playing games…

And, no, I’m still confused.

If someone came along and said, “We need to have a big list of all Muslims in the U.S.,” and someone else came along and said, “I don’t think that’s a good idea right now,” I can’t figure what’s wrong with the second guy’s opinion.

I don’t. The “right now” part makes it incorrect, as it indicates that it could be acceptable in the future, under the right circumstances.

Now, if these were someone else with other views, I might think they were softballing it the same way I might softball why a Christian should support gay marriage without flat out saying how bigoted and un-Christian homophobia is. I’d try to get them on my side and then gradually introduce new ideas.

But at least I will come out and say what I believe. I don’t hide the belief, I just don’t press it when trying to convince people. These cowards want to leave the option in, so they can come back and say bigoted shit later if the people would be okay with it.

And, unlike with SSM, there’s not even a reason for the strategy I described. There’s a perfectly good argument here that goes 100% with the Republican wheelhouse. Say it’s wrong to discriminate against people for their religion. Point out that the last thing we want is to let ISIS convince people that we hate all Muslims, meaning more people will join them. Bring up the Constitution that they worship as a second Bible.

This issue doesn’t actually split along party lines. There is nothing about the Republican platform that requires this position. It’s just pandering.

[John_Mace]

@KarlGauss

In other words, you know exactly what Cruz was doing. Can you share with us, then, what the point was of your first quote above?

Two different conversations in the same thread. The first one was about Cruz response to Trump’s comment. He said he was opposed, he just didn’t oppose it the way you wanted him to.

The second was about Cruz, his relative intelligence level, and his knowledge of the constitution. That started when running coach made the comment about it, and I noted that Cruz had clerked for Rehnquist and is surely quite knowledgeable about the consutiion. I have no love for Cruz, and would hate to see him elected president. But he ain’t stupid.

[elucidator]

@xenophon41

…Only took you three minutes…

Servers were kinda slow.

[jz78817]

@KarlGauss

Just in case this is not a disingenuous question, let me try to explain:

Sure, they can oppose the list on the grounds that they oppose all government-kept lists of citizens (except those, no doubt, of certain troublemakers). But, even if they (and not only you) were simply being disingenuous by opposing the proposal on anti-government list grounds, they might have hastened to add a few words to the effect of, “and, of course, all Americans have the right to practice their religion and worship their god without the government singling them out for doing so”.

D’ya follow?

Yes, I follow. They oppose the registration of Muslims because they believe this country shouldn’t single out any one group like that.

they said the correct thing on this issue and you think it deserves a pitting? dafuq is wrong with you?

@John_Mace

The difference is that they are not opposing it in the exact manner that the OP desires. Which makes them cowards, because… well, you know!

yeah, OP is Kevin Hart. “You ever get pissed at your kid because even though he did what you told him to, he didn’t do it in the way you pictured him doing it?”

total weak-ass pitting.

[KarlGauss]

@jz78817

Yes, I follow. They oppose the registration of Muslims because they believe this country shouldn’t single out any one group like that.

As I said:

One bonus of having hate mongers like Trump, Carson, and Cruz around is that it makes for a nice exercise trying to anticipate how their apologists will spin their latest racist screed.

[jz78817]

Goats are like mushrooms; if you shoot a duck I’m scared of toasters.

that’s about how much sense you’re making.

[Smeghead]

That toaster will kill you and your family given the opportunity. They hate our uncooked bready freedom.

[Toastmaker]

The above is not true. The Toaster, yours truly, will tell you the truth.

I note that this forum is where all the leftist progressive loons hang out and bitch about any and all conservative concepts !

Good luck, oddballs. . . :rolleyes:

[running_coach]

@Toastmaker

The above is not true. The Toaster, yours truly, will tell you the truth.

I note that this forum is where all the leftist progressive loons hang out and bitch about any and all conservative concepts !

Good luck, oddballs. . . :rolleyes:

No, just the insane ones.

You’re right. Any and all.

[elucidator]

@jz78817

…if you shoot a duck I’m scared of toasters…

Afraid of the frog
Splashing in the ancient pond
Zenophobia

[Brown_Eyed_Girl]

@Fear_Itself

I give Cruz more credit for intelligence than most of the GOP clown car. He is a calculating, political opportunist who will say anything to achieve his objective. He knows his constituency and how manipulate them, and he knows they will overlook hypocrisy and inconsistency if he feeds them enough fear and hatred. Unlike guys like Huckabee and Santorum who are true believers, I don’t for a second think he actually believes what he is saying. He just knows it will work on low information voters who respond to jingoistic dog whistles. He would gladly burn the country to the ground if he could be President of the ashes.

This. Sooo this.

[Human_Action]

@KarlGauss

Trump and Carson don’t need pitting - their statements are self-pitting. So, I will ignore them here.

But when Ted Cruz and Rand Paul go on record as saying they are against the ‘registration of Muslims’ in the US, and do so by saying that they’re against government registration in principle, because the government shouldn’t keep lists, but not because registration of members of a religious group is UN-AMERICAN and, I would imagine, just a tad unconstitutional, well, pitting is the least that should happen to them.

Neither has the courage to call Trump’s proposal for what it is - racist hate. Neither has the guts to disavow it ‘in principle’.

Fuck them both.

Does this pass muster?

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) says he does not think the U.S. should specifically target Muslim Americans with surveillance programs in the wake of the deadly Paris terror attacks.

“Yes we should follow people who are a risk,” the Republican presidential hopeful said Sunday on CBS’ “Face The Nation.” “Should we talk to their neighbors and friends, should we talk to their Imam? Sure, all of that is legitimate. But should we target mosques and have a database of Muslims? Absolutely not.”

…

Paul, a libertarian-leaning senator who opposes large-scale government surveillance, noted Sunday that such programs didn’t help French authorities stop the terrorist attacks in Paris. He also took aim at Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), another of his rivals for the GOP nomination, for stating that U.S. officials should close down “any place, whether it’s a cafe, a diner, an internet site, any place where radicals are being inspired.”

“I think that’s really disqualified Rubio,” Paul said. “That would require some sort of religious czar that I think isn’t consistent with our freedom.”

Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

[elucidator]

He has his moments. But they are moments.

[Measure_for_Measure]

@Human_Action

Does this pass muster?

Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

I don’t think my bar is high. So yeah, that sort of banal talk, boilerplate and posturing passes muster for me. Still waiting for Ted Cruz’s thoughts on the matter. Because up to now his position is comical.
Hijack! It’s interesting that Rand Paul chose to attack Rubio rather than Trump. Paul has no chance of winning the Presidency in 2016, so I guess he fears Trump’s grade school taunts more than the establishment’s frontrunner. I’m not saying that’s a moral issue: I’m saying it’s an interesting business judgment.