Ted Cruz says 'consenting adults should be able to do whatever they want in the bedroom' as he promises his account will never like porn again

[jpsb]

And do you know IN FACT that DIDN'T HAPPEN? Have you considered that perhaps Cruz DID walk in but was denied? Or that Cruz had enough on his plate already, and couldn't become involved?

At best, your blaming of Cruz is by inference only (by association), and that with no knowledge of internals or of any circumstance.

Such an accusation is simply absurd.

Maybe you're right maybe, but the accusation is not absurd. Cruz represented Texas in its' banning of selling or advertising sex toys but did not represent Texas in its' banning of sodomy? Something does not compute.

[jpsb]

As a consultant you have the power to strongly recommend for or against a particular action. You often get to lay out your case for your recommendation. In some instances I was literally shouted down, and proved to be right in the long run. Had I been listened to, or had I the authority to make the decisions, I could have saved companies millions in wasted effort, and quite possible made them millions with other recommendations. 
I still know of an untapped unconventional gas field that no one listened about.

Wait for prices to go up and then ..... Wildcat!

I would hate being a consultant way to much time in hotels and airplanes.

[Smokin Joe]

The problem with what you wrote is that Trump confirms with his tweets.  Like he already confirmed that there would be a wall.  He said they are going to fix portions of the existing fence.

VDonald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump · Sep 14 


 More
 


The WALL, which is already under construction in the form of new renovation of old and existing fences and walls, will continue to be built.

24,454 replies   23,736 retweets   102,348 likes   

 Reply
 24K   

 Retweet
 24K   
Like  102K 

Renovations, but he continues to tell different stories about the wall.  It would be impossible to know the truth.  But since he typed it himself putting it in writing on his twitter page I believe the wall is patches in the existing fence.

I thought the 1.6 billion came from this: May 26, 2015
https://visawolf.com/immigration-reform-by-executive-order/

    Executive Order to Secure the US-Mexico Border

    I, BARACK OBAMA, by the authority vested in me as President by the United States Constitution, including Article II, Sections 1 & 2, and laws of the United States, including sections 212(f) and 215(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, as amended (8 U.S.C. §1182(f) and 8 U.S.C. §1185), 3 USC §301, 10 USC §111, 10 U.S.C. §2802, the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. §7418(b)), the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. §1323(a)), the Noise Control Act (42 U.S.C.  §4903), the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. §6961(a)), the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. §300(j)(6), and CERCLA (42 U.S.C. §9620(j)) and the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. §1536(j)), hereby proclaim and order as follows.

    Section 1-101 Border Security Improvements

    (a) Findings.

    1) I hereby find that the national security of the United States is threatened by the lack of a secure physical barrier along the US-Mexico Border and that it is in the national interest to construction such a barrier.

    2) I hereby find that the national security of the United States is threatened by a shortfall in funding to construct a barrier along the US-Mexico border and the funding of laws ordering the Executive to strengthen border security and detain and remove persons unlawfully present in the United States. This shortfall shall be called the “Border Security Shortfall.” Any activity undertaken to remedy the Border Security Shortfall shall be known as “Border Security Shortfall Activity.”

    3) I hereby find that all Border Security Shortfall Activities are in the paramount interest of the United States and therefore suspend the application of the following laws from these activities: the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, Noise Control Act, Solid Waste Disposal Act, and Safe Drinking Water Act, and CERCLA.  I hereby find that exemption from the provisions of the Endangered Species Act is necessary, for reasons of national security, to carry out out these Border Security Shortfall Activities.

    (b) Authority. Underthe United States Constitution, Article II, Section 1, as Commander in Chief, the President is empowered and obligated to allocate funding authorized and appropriated to the Department of Defense to address any threat to the national security of the United States. Under 10 USC §111(b)(10), the President is authorized to designate any national security activity under the Department of Defense.

    (c) Summary. Section 1 of this Executive Order directs that the shortfall infunding to strengthen border security and detain and remove persons unlawfully present in the United States be paid from funds authorized and appropriated by Congress to the Department of Defense.

    (d) Order.  I hereby order the current and annual calculation of the Border Security Shortfall, that any Border Security Shortfall Activity is hereby deemed an activity of the Department of Defense under 10 USC §111(b)(10), and that the cost of any such Border Security Shortfall Activity be paid from funds authorized and appropriated by Congress to the Department of Defense.   I hereby order the Secretary of Homeland Security and Secretary of Defense to implement changes in the government’s interpretation of the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”)  and 10 USC §111(b), consistent with Section 1 of this Executive Order. The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that sufficient resources and personnel are allocated to carry out these functions.

    (e) Delegation of Authority. The Secretary of Homeland Security and Secretary of Defense are hereby designated and empowered to exercise in respect of the subject matter of Section 1 of this Executive Order the authority conferred upon the President by §215(a)(1) of the INA and 10 USC §111(b), respectively.

    (f) Notice.  The 60 day advance Notice to Congress of the Border Security Shortfall Activity is hereby provided per 10 USC §111(c).

    Section 1-102

    (a) TheAttorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security are directed to publish a joint Notice in the Federal Register detailing the Border Security Shortfall, including the law(s) passed by Congress and the annual budget to fully fund any Border Security Shortfall Activity required by such laws.

    (b) The Notice described in Section 102(a) of this Executive Order shall be published within 60 days of the effective date of this Executive Order, and within 60 days after the start of any federal fiscal year thereafter.

    Section 1-103.

    The Secretary of Defense is directed to publish a Notice in the Federal Register detailing the accounts of the Department of Defense which will be reduced by any Border Security Shortfall Activity, within 60 days of publication of Notice under Section 1-102 of this Order.

    Section 1-104.

    The Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security are directed to reasonably spend all funds allocated to all Border Security Shortfall Activities from the budget of the Department of Defense, within 30 days of publication of Notice under Section 1-103 of this Order.

    ______________________________

    Barack H. Obama

    President of the United States of America

 

Or is this ANOTHER 1.6 billion?

[Oceander]

Maybe you're right maybe, but the accusation is not absurd. Cruz represented Texas in its' banning of selling or advertising sex toys but did not represent Texas in its' banning of sodomy? Something does not compute.

Because the argument for banning sex toys is easier to make on neutral grounds than for anti-homosexual laws.

[roamer_1]

Maybe you're right maybe, but the accusation is not absurd. Cruz represented Texas in its' banning of selling or advertising sex toys but did not represent Texas in its' banning of sodomy? Something does not compute.

It computes fine. He had limited or no autonomy in either circumstance.

[Chosen Daughter]

I thought the 1.6 billion came from this: May 26, 2015
https://visawolf.com/immigration-reform-by-executive-order/

Or is this ANOTHER 1.6 billion?

All I can say is we have been duped by Donald Trump.  It appears he is only executing the action which has already been given approval by Obama and Congress already.  Patches in the fence.

[Hoodat]

Well then I guess you will buy any old excuse lying Ted comes up with.

Such as?  Let's hear it once and for all.  Where is the lie?

[Bigun]

As a consultant you have the power to strongly recommend for or against a particular action. You often get to lay out your case for your recommendation. In some instances I was literally shouted down, and proved to be right in the long run. Had I been listened to, or had I the authority to make the decisions, I could have saved companies millions in wasted effort, and quite possible made them millions with other recommendations. 
I still know of an untapped unconventional gas field that no one listened about.

I have never understood the logic of going to the doctor  (hiring a consultant) and then refusing to follow his advice but, like you, I have had that experience many times.

[jpsb]

Because the argument for banning sex toys is easier to make on neutral grounds than for anti-homosexual laws.

Gov bans certain behaviors all the time. Nothing new about that. If gov thinks the behavior is bad for society (drug use, prostitution, suicide) it will ban that behavior.

I am tired of this topic, no minds are going to be changed and the argument is becoming circular. I think Abbott and Cruz took a pass on a not very PC case, probably would have lost in court anyway, but I would have liked to see them try. Looking back with 20/20 they should have tried.

[Hoodat]

Cruz had a chance to stop the homosexual agenda

How so?  Should he have quit his job at the FTC, petitioned the USSC to remove Charles Rosenthal as lead council for the defense, and appoint Cruz in his place?

[Smokin Joe]

I have never understood the logic of going to the doctor  (hiring a consultant) and then refusing to follow his advice but, like you, I have had that experience many times.

It is frustrating, but as long as the check doesn't bounce, it's their money. Did I say it's frustrating?  As a consultant, it's easy to get painted with projects that you counseled against, and inevitably someone in the company will take the credit for the good you do.

[Smokin Joe]

Gov bans certain behaviors all the time. Nothing new about that. If gov thinks the behavior is bad for society (drug use, prostitution, suicide) it will ban that behavior.

I am tired of this topic, no minds are going to be changed and the argument is becoming circular. I think Abbott and Cruz took a pass on a not very PC case, probably would have lost in court anyway, but I would have liked to see them try. Looking back with 20/20 they should have tried.

I think the blame for  not taking the case should reside with the guy who had the authority to give the go/no-go order. That's at the top, for whatever reason.

[Cyber Liberty]

Maybe you're right maybe, but the accusation is not absurd. Cruz represented Texas in its' banning of selling or advertising sex toys but did not represent Texas in its' banning of sodomy? Something does not compute.

The accusation may not be absurd, but to argue the point for 200 posts, doing one's best to insult every other person on the way, is.  The only thing that's clear is that nobody here can know exactly why things happened the way they did.

[Cyber Liberty]

Because the argument for banning sex toys is easier to make on neutral grounds than for anti-homosexual laws.

Apparently not.   

[XenaLee]

Maybe you're right maybe, but the accusation is not absurd. Cruz represented Texas in its' banning of selling or advertising sex toys but did not represent Texas in its' banning of sodomy? Something does not compute.

What doesn't compute is your thinking process here.  For instance.... if you "think" that you are getting back at the anti-Trumpers ....ie anyone that supports Cruz.... you're wrong about that, too.

You refuse to accept the fact, truth and reality that Cruz did NOT have the authority to do what you claim he should have done.  Get the >bleep< over it already.  Sheesh.

  MOD2

Ooops....hehe.  Sorry about that.

[jpsb]

The accusation may not be absurd, but to argue the point for 200 posts, doing one's best to insult every other person on the way, is.  The only thing that's clear is that nobody here can know exactly why things happened the way they did.

I try to be civil and hardly ever personally insult anyone. I sometimes use sarcasm when I lose patience with a poster.  Referring to you as "the expert on everything" was sarcasm. You dish it out pretty good, never figured you to be a thin skinned snowflake.

[RoosGirl]

I try to be civil and hardly ever personally insult anyone. I sometimes use sarcasm when I lose patience with a poster.  Referring to you as "the expert on everything" was sarcasm. You dish it out pretty good, never figured you to be a thin skinned snowflake.

@Cyber Liberty is the farthest one here from a thin-skinned snowflake.

[Cyber Liberty]

@Cyber Liberty is the farthest one here from a thin-skinned snowflake.

It's a fair trade, in my book.  I call him pedantic, he calls me a thin-skinned snowflake.

[Hoodat]

Trump now has more Conservative accomplishments than Cruz,

Trump has rolled back Obama's executive orders, acted on social conservative issues.

Here's a challenge for you, Tom.  You list all of Trump's Conservative accomplishments.  And I will make a bet with you that I can find double that number coming from Ted Cruz.

Likewise, you list all the liberal positions that Ted Cruz has held.  And I will wager that I can find triple that number coming from Donald Trump.

So how about it?  You keep repeating this lie that Trump has more Conservative accomplishments than Cruz.  Let's hear it.  Name them.  Post your list.  Then we can compare the actual evidence instead of hearing you reiterate your Trump fantasies.

[jpsb]

It's a fair trade, in my book.  I call him pedantic, he calls me a thin-skinned snowflake.

Quit playing the victim. I never called you a thin skinned snow flake. I said I didn't (has in
did NOT) figure you for a thin skinned snow flake. Keep playing that victim card and
I might change my mind.

[Cyber Liberty]

Quit playing the victim. I never called you a thin skinned snow flake. I said I didn't (has in
did NOT) figure you for a thin skinned snow flake. Keep playing that victim card and
I might change my mind.

Oh, my bad. You were being sarcastic again (sarcasm about being sarcastic.  A new word!  Metasarcasm):

I try to be civil and hardly ever personally insult anyone. I sometimes use sarcasm when I lose patience with a poster.  Referring to you as "the expert on everything" was sarcasm. You dish it out pretty good, never figured you to be a thin skinned snowflake.

Whatevah.   You really have to work on your sarcasm skills. 

[jpsb]

Here's a challenge for you, Tom.  You list all of Trump's Conservative accomplishments.  And I will make a bet with you that I can find double that number coming from Ted Cruz.

Likewise, you list all the liberal positions that Ted Cruz has held.  And I will wager that I can find triple that number coming from Donald Trump.

So how about it?  You keep repeating this lie that Trump has more Conservative accomplishments than Cruz.  Let's hear it.  Name them.  Post your list.  Then we can compare the actual evidence instead of hearing you reiterate your Trump fantasies.

There is quantity and then there is quality.

Name one thing that Cruz has done to advance the conservative agenda that matches up
with Trumps' court appointments. The Supreme Court in particular.

[Oceander]

Gov bans certain behaviors all the time. Nothing new about that. If gov thinks the behavior is bad for society (drug use, prostitution, suicide) it will ban that behavior.

I am tired of this topic, no minds are going to be changed and the argument is becoming circular. I think Abbott and Cruz took a pass on a not very PC case, probably would have lost in court anyway, but I would have liked to see them try. Looking back with 20/20 they should have tried.

That's fine.  Looking back they shouldn't have tried, and furthermore, the charges should never have been brought.  There was stupidity all around except for the states decision to let the idiot county sink on its own.

[RoosGirl]

Quit playing the victim. I never called you a thin skinned snow flake. I said I didn't (has in
did NOT) figure you for a thin skinned snow flake. Keep playing that victim card and
I might change my mind.

Oh... my...   

[jpsb]

That's fine.  Looking back they shouldn't have tried, and furthermore, the charges should never have been brought.  There was stupidity all around except for the states decision to let the idiot county sink on its own.

I don't want to jump to any conclusions here but it sounds like you are OK with the
homosexual agenda. Am I mistaken?