Cruz: Those who bolstered Trump 'will bear that responsibility going forward'

[RetBobbyMI]

Steven Colbert on Trump:


https://youtu.be/Eh_GFkdxwbQ

He's pretty much right on the mark. 

[DiogenesLamp]

And... that's a lie.

Sure it is.   That's why a tiny little Island off the coast of Europe brought the several thousand year old Empire of China to it's knees.   

[HonestJohn]

Sure it is.   That's why a tiny little Island off the coast of Europe brought the several thousand year old Empire of China to it's knees.

Oh, I see.  You think all history occurred in the last 200 years.

For it wasn't until the late 1700s that things started to go sour in China vis that tiny island.

But, since you know so much, tell us who ruled China at the time?

(Hint: they weren't Chinese)

[DiogenesLamp]

As long as we're on preambles, here is the preamble to Alabama's state constitution:

We, the people of the State of Alabama, in order to establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure to ourselves and to our posterity life, liberty, and property; profoundly grateful to Almighty God for this inestimable right, and invoking His favor and guidance, do ordain and establish the following Constitution and form of government for the State of Alabama:

California:

We, the People of the State of California, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, in order to secure and perpetuate its blessings, do establish this Constitution.

References to God are ubiquitous in the Constitutions and Charters of the original 13 Colonies. 

From the Massachusetts constitution of 1776:

II.—It is the right as well as the duty of all men in society, publicly, and at stated seasons, to worship the SUPREME BEING, the great creator and preserver of the universe. And no subject shall be hurt, molested, or restrained, in his person, liberty, or estate, for worshipping GOD in the manner and season most agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience; or for his religious profession or sentiments; provided he doth not disturb the public peace, or obstruct others in their religious worship.

III.—As the happiness of a people, and the good order and preservation of civil government, essentially depend upon piety, religion and morality; and as these cannot be generally diffused through a community, but by the institution of the public worship of GOD, and of public instructions in piety, religion and morality: Therefore, to promote their happiness and to secure the good order and preservation of their government, the people of this Commonwealth have a right to invest their legislature with power to authorize and require, and the legislature shall, from time to time, authorize and require, the several towns, parishes, precincts, and other bodies-politic, or religious societies, to make suitable provision, at their own expense, for the institution of the public worship of GOD, and for the support and maintenance of public protestant teachers of piety, religion and morality, in all cases where such provision shall not be made voluntarily.

I'm sure the people of Massachusetts would today be horribly embarrassed by their original State constitution under the USA.   

[DiogenesLamp]

Oh, I see.  You think all history occurred in the last 200 years.

No,   I think in that last 200 years,   the society based on Christianity leapfrogged in power well beyond that of a 4,000 year old society based on another philosophy.   

For it wasn't until the late 1700s that things started to go sour in China vis that tiny island.

One would think they were sour already,  else a tiny Island would never have become such a threat. 

But, since you know so much, tell us who ruled China at the time?

(Hint: they weren't Chinese)

Without looking,  I would have to say the Mongols.    I know they ruled China for quite awhile.   

But the point is not so much about Chinese history as it is about their lack of progress as a society. 

I doubt that the peasant of 1800 lived much differently from the peasant of 2,000 BC.   

Fundamental foundational principles can have a profound long term effect on the direction a society takes.   

[HonestJohn]

No,   I think in that last 200 years,   the society based on Christianity leapfrogged in power well beyond that of a 4,000 year old society based on another philosophy.   



One would think they were sour already,  else a tiny Island would never have become such a threat. 



 


Without looking,  I would have to say the Mongols.    I know they ruled China for quite awhile.   

But the point is not so much about Chinese history as it is about their lack of progress as a society. 

I doubt that the peasant of 1800 lived much differently from the peasant of 2,000 BC.   

Fundamental foundational principles can have a profound long term effect on the direction a society takes.   

In essence, you're agreeing that for the 3,800 out of 4,000 years, the Chinese peasant lived far better than everyone else.

And that'd be correct.  Most of Chinese history (outside of their interregnums) have had their people live in standards about equal to that of Western cities circa the late 1800s, prior to the discovery and use of electricity.

[Sanguine]

And... that's a lie.

...

John, why would you go straight to "you're lying". Couldn't it just be a disagreement? Maybe you have information that DR doesn't and Vice versa

[HonestJohn]

John, why would you go straight to "you're lying". Couldn't it just be a disagreement? Maybe you have information that DR doesn't and Vice versa

To say that the most economically powerful, most scientifically advanced, best administered civilization on earth for 3800 out of the last 4000 years is a stagnant civilization *IS* a falsehood.

It's very difficult for me to understand how an educated person could not even remember who invented paper or gunpowder (or dismiss those inventions as so useless as to be of no note).  And completely dismiss the reason why Marco Polo travelled the Silk Road.

Just *that* alone immediately refutes the claim made.

[Smokin Joe]

The people who captured and sold others into slavery were not Christians! To a very large extent they were Muslims!  And Muslims are the VAST majority of today's slave holders.

The VERY first slave owner in what eventually became the USA was a black man by the name of Anthony Johnson of Virginia!

All true. Now, would someone explain to me why blacks convert to Islam?

We both can understand King Ubutu (or whatever) sitting on the Lion Throne, trading the tribal dead weight, a few captives, and maybe some annoying or ambitious relatives for bling for the missus and some other trade goods (incidentally, the beads traded were pretty much identical to those traded to the American Indians for furs and other goods), and then the Muslim traders turning a profit at the coast. 

Sadly, the issue was not dealt with when the Constitution was signed. We might not only have been able to stay with the Republic concept better, but could have avoided the War, perhaps, as well.

[Smokin Joe]

So you are arguing that they could understand the concept as it applied to themselves,   but they were completely baffled at the idea of applying it to their own slaves?   


I don't think this theory explains the facts very well.

The issue was an issue, but not resolved. The several states were left to their own decisions regarding slavery.

[Sanguine]

To say that the most economically powerful, most scientifically advanced, best administered civilization on earth for 3800 out of the last 4000 years is a stagnant civilization *IS* a lie.

It's very difficult for me to understand how an educated person could not even remember who invented paper or gunpowder (or dismiss those inventions as so useless as to be of no note).  And completely dismiss the reason why Marco Polo travelled the Silk Road.

Just *that* alone immediately refutes the claim made.

So, you've shut down any chance of discussion and created unnecessary dissent.  I find it hard to believe that was your intent.  But, what do I know?

[HonestJohn]

So, you've shut down any chance of discussion and created unnecessary dissent.  I find it hard to believe that was your intent.  But, what do I know?

What do you think we've been having, if not a discussion?  It sounds like you would have preferred no rebuttal proving the OP false.  That the falsehood should have been left here... unchallenged.

[RoosGirl]

May I suggest we all take a step back for a second.  @HonestJohn , I appreciate your knowledge on the subject.  It is clearly something you have studied.  I think the problem is your comment about @DiogenesLamp being a liar was on the harsh side.  If the info that DL presented was incorrect then you are right to try to correct him.  If he is incorrect I'm sure he would appreciate the info, as he seems to have some interest in the subject as well.  "Lying" implies that one is being incorrect on purpose or with ulterior motive and I doubt that was case.

[HonestJohn]

May I suggest we all take a step back for a second.  @HonestJohn , I appreciate your knowledge on the subject.  It is clearly something you have studied.  I think the problem is your comment about @DiogenesLamp being a liar was on the harsh side.  If the info that DL presented was incorrect then you are right to try to correct him.  If he is incorrect I'm sure he would appreciate the info, as he seems to have some interest in the subject as well.  "Lying" implies that one is being incorrect on purpose or with ulterior motive and I doubt that was case.

I'll modify the response.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Steven Colbert on Trump:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eh_GFkdxwbQ&feature=youtu.be

He's pretty much right on the mark.

Good stuff!

[Smokin Joe]

Good stuff!

They are just getting warmed up. We ain't seen nothin' yet.

[XenaLee]

He's right.You may want to save that embarrassment for the general election.

If (when) Hillary wins....and we all can say "I told ya so"..... Trump fans like that one should be the ones that are embarrassed.  But much like the idiot left....

they won't be.

[geronl]

THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION
PREAMBLE
Humbly invoking the blessings of Almighty God, the people of
the State of Texas, do ordain and establish this Constitution.

...

The second section of the first article states:

Sec. 2.  INHERENT POLITICAL POWER; REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT.  All political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit.  The faith of the people of Texas stands pledged to the preservation of a republican form of government, and, subject to this limitation only, they have at all times the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think expedient.

That sounds like something we need to take advantage of more often!!

[libertybele]

I thought I'd give this great thread a bump...in light of everything that is now surrounding the 'Donald' and his insane prompting of Putin to ' look into' Hillary's e-mails, no truer words have been spoken by Cruz:

"Those who bolstered Trump WILL bear that responsibility going forward" ....

[debrawiest]

I thought I'd give this great thread a bump...in light of everything that is now surrounding the 'Donald' and his insane prompting of Putin to ' look into' Hillary's e-mails, no truer words have been spoken by Cruz:

"Those who bolstered Trump WILL bear that responsibility going forward" ....

Yep.  I will accept none of the blame for this freak show.

[libertybele]

Yep.  I will accept none of the blame for this freak show.

To me it looks more like a circus with Trump as the clown and Hillary as the snake charmer.

#NeverTrump

[IsailedawayfromFR]

To me it looks more like a circus with Trump as the clown and Hillary as the snake charmer.

#NeverTrump

Focus on the Congress instead.

The framers chose it wisely to be the true power in this country.  The selection of an Executive is a sideshow only, as Congress acting as per Constitution can control anyone who is President.

[libertybele]

Focus on the Congress instead.

The framers chose it wisely to be the true power in this country.  The selection of an Executive is a sideshow only, as Congress acting as per Constitution can control anyone who is President.

Yes I agree we should vote our conscience and vote down ballot; those results remain of course to be seen.  I am hopeful that conservatism wins.  With an 'ideal' Congress  they should be able to reign in a president Constitutionally; yet we have seen this administration side step Congress, SCOTUS rulings that should have raised more eyebrows and a a corrupt DOJ, attorney general, etc. that has enabled this administration to evade responsibility.  I don't see that changing a whole lot yet and there still is a possibility that we will lose our slim majority in the Senate.  The DEMS of course are fighting to win the majority in the House as well and turn states like TX blue.

[Hoodat]

With an 'ideal' Congress  they should be able to reign in a president Constitutionally; yet we have seen this administration side step Congress

We have seen this Congress do nothing while the President abuses his Constitutional authority.

Congress holds ultimate power over both the Executive and Judicial branches.  Congress has the power of the purse, meaning that it can cut off funding for anything the President wants to do.  And Congress has the power to establish and disestablish courts (except for the Supreme Court), meaning that it can dissolve any court that issues rulings that conflict with the Constitution.

These are great powers which is why our Founding Fathers diluted them amongst a group of geographic legislators representing the diverse will of the people and a second group of legislators representing the will of the States.  But those powers exist nonetheless.  Obama has been able to get away with so much because he recognizes that the Republican Party is made up of cowards who will gladly sacrifice our Constitutional liberties in order to maintain their spot at the receiving table.

[libertybele]

We have seen this Congress do nothing while the President abuses his Constitutional authority.

Congress holds ultimate power over both the Executive and Judicial branches.  Congress has the power of the purse, meaning that it can cut off funding for anything the President wants to do.  And Congress has the power to establish and disestablish courts (except for the Supreme Court), meaning that it can dissolve any court that issues rulings that conflict with the Constitution.

These are great powers which is why our Founding Fathers diluted them amongst a group of geographic legislators representing the diverse will of the people and a second group of legislators representing the will of the States.  But those powers exist nonetheless.  Obama has been able to get away with so much because he recognizes that the Republican Party is made up of cowards who will gladly sacrifice our Constitutional liberties in order to maintain their spot at the receiving table.

   We have one man who has repeatedly stood up to the Washington cartel; he recently gave a speech about freedom and suggested that America vote their conscience and vote down ballot ... yet he was booed, criticized and denied access to a suite afterwards.

Cruz.  Reigniting the Promise of America!