Great Debate

A Decaying Mind ^ | September 16th, 2015 | Emerging Dementia

[Mariner]

First of all, kudos to CNN for sponsoring an informative debate.

What we learned is that ANY of these Republicans would be far better than ANY Democrat for out future.

And, we learned a couple of other things.

1. Trump doesn't do details. Nobody killed him so he probably won.

2. They all, truly, want to get along and are fed up with "x said you suck, what do you say in response?"

3. Only money will determine who's on the stage come March, 2016.

All in all, it's the best field the GOP has put up in decades. Too bad some of them still are paid to do things against what they said tonight.

[JRandomFreeper]

I don't do "must", hero. I believe in freedom and thrashing jerks that insist they have the answer and everyone else must behave as the jerk wants. You can get past that.

This is not a republican web site. Or a dem web site. I am neither. And right now, the dems are more honest than the pubs. At least the dems will tell you honestly that they are going to bend you over again.

/johnny

[nathanbedford]

[The following is a reply countering an argument that Ted Cruz fails as a conservative because he was on the wrong side of the Corker legislation]

Yours is a passionate and lengthy reply but a reasoned one. I think it is fair to say the case you make against Ted Cruz is that he is not really a conservative and the evidence for that is his position with respect to Corker's misbegotten legislation on the procedure for legislative approval of the Iran "deal." If that reasoning fails, then your argument falls.

At some point when the TPP (the trade deal not the Iran deal) came into the news I was exercised because I thought that the process was unconstitutional (I still do) in that the Constitution explicitly calls for a treaty to be confirmed by two thirds of the Senate present and the legislation substitutes majority rule by both houses for two thirds confirmation by the Senate. So I researched the matter and I was astonished to learn that I was ignorant, it is well-established constitutional law and practice throughout our American history that instead of submitting a treaty to the Senate it is effective to secure legislation from both houses.

I don't like it, I think the explicit wording of the Constitution is clear but I concede that my initial impression was wrong at least as to how the system actually works as opposed to how it ought to work.

If I recall correctly, Mitch McConnell has stated that the president gets to choose whether or not a "deal" is a treaty and therefore, if Obama declined to submit the treaty to the Senate for approval, the Senate would have no say at all. In the event that has already occurred after a fashion when Obama submitted the treaty to the Security Council before it was delivered to Congress. I am fully aware that Mark Levin has argued that the Senate, in a case in which the president simply does not submit an agreement, could pick the deal up as though it were a treaty and submit it to a vote up or down. I do not think there is any precedent whatsoever for that but it remains an intriguing option. In the event, there was only one vote against the legislative approach so it is not reasonable to expect Cruz to die on that hill fighting that fight which was hopeless.

I further note that forty-five senators joined with Ted Cruz in writing a letter to the leaders of Iran telling them that there could be no deal without Congress approving. Cruz was accused at the time of interfering with the negotiations, yet another example of Cruz standing up for principle and taking flak.

The chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee recommended the legislation which adopted the old alternative method of ratifying a treaty by simply passing authorizing legislation in both houses. Every senator except one, Tom Cotton to his credit, voted with Ted Cruz on this issue. We have no evidence that I am aware of that Donald Trump made any statement opposing this procedure. If he did not, I cannot credit him with conservatism while one faults Cruz on the same issue.

The argument for the legislative approach was that there would be no congressional oversight of the "deal" unless the alternative approach was adopted. Neither one of us knows for sure what would have happened had the legislation not been adopted, that is, whether Congress would have had any oversight whatsoever. We can speculate and pontificate but we do not know. If Congress had no oversight whatsoever because Obama declined to submit the deal but pursued it as an executive agreement and let it have effect as a practical matter because of its passage through the Security Council, certainly conservative principles would not have been served but further damaged.

With all these facts before us, I conclude that Cruz was wrong and his position was wrong but no more wrong than all the rest of the ninety-eight senators, but I cannot conclude that his position was not a conservative position, if he calculated, and there is no reason to believe that he did not especially since he participated in the letter trying to force the parties into submitting the treaty for congressional approval, that the only way to get congressional oversight was the way he and all his colleagues but one voted to get it.

Since the deal began to be leaked, no voice has been more strident in opposition to the deal than Sen. Cruz. I know he will be participating with Donald Trump and Mark Levin in the upcoming rally to protest the deal. Apparently he has not offended these two men to the degree that they think he should be ostracized.

With all of this, there is no warrant to believe that Ted Cruz is not conservative, we may join in believing he made the wrong choice but it was not an unreasonable choice given the circumstances described above and it certainly was not an anti-conservative choice.

Therefore, I reject the conclusion of your well reasoned but miscarried reply that the candidacy of Ted Cruz should be rejected for want of conservative bona fides.

[GGpaX4DumpedTea]

“Does it disqualify Trump?”

Hell No!

[Democrat_media]

Obama trade and Obama’s Iran deal are the WORST THINGS EVER.

And they all voted to trust and empower Obama and at the same time neuter the Senate on those 2 horrible things for America and Americans.

Typical from politicians who pander but never have DONE anything conservative or for America at the national level

[kvanbrunt2]

think Cruz was outstanding. Trump did very well considering the hostility he was facing. Not many people could have weathered that kind of animosity as well as he did. Trump set the stage for Carly’s downfall when he opened up the book on her record at both HP and Lucent.

don’t remember much about lucent other than that business changed a lot at the time kinda like casinos and government dictates. but at HP she did a great job. As i recollect she was badgered by the board on the Compaq deal. i think it was buy something and the crap was called compaq. cheap. i think her choice was a better brand at a higher price. this is my own recollection and i was an active trader at the time.

[SatinDoll]

Trump is not a Liberal, Noobie.

[theoilpainter]

I have known some politicians, a few very well. They were not out to enrich themselves, altho many are - like the Clintons.

It’s is possible to disagree with you without being in a fantasy land. I don’t know what a “paid bot” is.

[Jeff Chandler]

Trump set the stage for Carly’s downfall when he opened up the book on her record at both HP and Lucent.

He got to her there. She was dominating the debate up until that point, but she became rattled and started spouting corporate boilerplate. She more or less composed herself but from then on she looked as if she were sucking on a lemon.

[nathanbedford]

You restated your conclusions how about a word about reasons, about the realities of the executive agreement/Security Council/treaty practice as it actually exists?

How about a word about the degree of oversight obtainable in view of a sellout Senate leadership of Corker and McConnell and whether the option of legislation was better than no oversight at all. No oversight because the leadership of the Senate would see to it that it would not occur, because the leadership of the Senate had already stated its opinion that it is the president who gets to decide whether it is a treaty and had concluded that they would acquiesce in Obama proceeding alone.

How about a word of reasoning about why that decision necessarily disqualified someone as a conservative? How about a word about Donald Trump's position-or convenient absence of a position?

[kvanbrunt2]

communist socialists don’t debate they dictate. you are either ill informed or stupid. flame off/

[Democrat_media]

None of you trump bashers and lovers of corrupt politicians never have answered the question:

What have U.S. politicians ever done that is conservative or for America at the national level? I'm talking as in passing a conservative law that reduces government that really has an effect on reducing government , reducing the debt, really stops illegals etc what? I've seen nothing only the opposite as in the Iran deal and Obamatrade.

politicians have destroyed the USA. and you still trust them?

Trump can't kill a dead corpse.

[BlessingsofLiberty]

CNN was big winner tonight. I am totally impressed. They were professional and conducted a great debate.

[Sam Gamgee]

At the start of the debate Trump was very immature.

[theoilpainter]

Flame on if you must, but I see a material difference between BHO and Romney.

There’s going to be an election, and you can choose not to vote.

I intend to, even if it means voting for Trump, or Cruz, or Rubio etc.

[Mariner]

"Therefore, I reject the conclusion of your well reasoned but miscarried reply that the candidacy of Ted Cruz should be rejected for want of conservative bona fides."

You are absolutely correct in that assertion.

However, he should be rejected because he voted yes on both the Corker Bill and TPS.

Whether conservative or not, his position on those two bills was anti-American.

[Democrat_media]

I see you still don't answer. What have politicians DONE that is pro American or conservative? Nothing but destroy the USA. so they lie and give speeches to play to the conservative crowd but never do anything and you fools keep believing the lies.

None of you trump bashers and lovers of corrupt politicians never have answered the question:

What have U.S. politicians ever done that is conservative or for America at the national level? I'm talking as in passing a conservative law that reduces government that really has an effect on reducing government , reducing the debt, really stops illegals etc what? I've seen nothing only the opposite as in the Iran deal and Obamatrade.

politicians have destroyed the USA. and you still trust them?

Trump can't kill a dead corpse.

[Sam Gamgee]

Not really impressed by Trumps answers. Rubio and Carly had the best answers about Putin.

[octex]

Biggest loser tonight: Megyn Kelly
*************************
Plus FoxNews and Chris Wallace! ....The FNC debate was between the moderators (with snarky questions) and candidates.

CNN did have some tacky questions, but they at least stirred the candidates to semi-debate with one another. That allowed for more visibility of each candidate. ...CNN won this.

[CrimsonTidegirl]

It disqualifies Bush, Rubio, Kasich & Fiorina.

[867V309]

All these politicians are corrupt and owned by foreign interests and rich internationalist donors which give $15 million dollar donations at a time.

Trump is not owned by anyone. did any of the others say they don’t take those $10 million dollar donations? No they didn’t . Only Trump again.

This is why none of them ever say anything against China or Mexico.But only Trump says something against China and Mexico.

Also Trump is the only one who said he will deport illegals. The other politicians play to the conservative crowd but then betray American citizens who voted for them . These politicians have never done anything for U.S. citizens nor anything conservative.

Just 2 recent examples: All the politicians voted for the 2 most anti-American things ever . The Corker bill which made the Iran deal unstoppable (Iranian nukes) and TPA which makes obama trade unstoppable

Trump has 60% in the Drudge poll, that’s more than all the other 10 dwarves combined LOL

Just damn. Couldn't have said it better myself.