Overwhelming â€“ List of Ted Cruz Supporters

Do you understand that the school dropout rates, out of wedlock births, economic wealth gap, poverty levels, incarceration rates, between blacks and the rest of the population are very different?

The black population of the US is about 40 million or 13.2% of the total population. Without abortion it would be 80 million. How do you these increased numbers would be reflected in the data below:

This data comes from Pew: "Marriage rates have fallen for all groups since the 1960s, but more sharply for blacks than for whites. In 1960, 74% of white adults were married, as were 61% of black adults... By 2011, the black marriage rate had fallen to 56% that of the white rate: 55% of whites were married, compared with 31% of blacks."

Donald Trump, a Typical New York City Liberal Then and Now

Ronald Reagan, Typical California Liberal, Then and Later

1967 - Reagan signs most liberal abortion rights law in nation, 6 years before Roe v. Wade.

13 years later: 1980 - Reagan changes his views, elected as "conservative," "pro-life" president.
1983 - Reagan pens "Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation" editoral expressing his strong (and relatively new) pro-life views

I guess Ronald Reagan was a "New York Values" Liberal Progressive, according to Ted Cruz, Glenn Beck and Steve Deace.

It's an old joke; lighten up Francis.

You are just repeating impugnations about Trump. But fine...hate him, call him names, stay home when he is the nominee.

Donald Trump, a Typical New York City Liberal Then and Now

Ronald Reagan, Typical California Liberal, Then and Later

1967 - Reagan signs most liberal abortion rights law in nation, 6 years before Roe v. Wade.

13 years later: 1980 - Reagan changes his views, elected as "conservative," "pro-life" president.
1983 - Reagan pens "Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation" editoral expressing his strong (and relatively new) pro-life views

I guess Ronald Reagan was a "New York Values" Liberal Progressive, according to Ted Cruz, Glenn Beck and Steve Deace.

With Trump’s ego, and bad temper, he might say something REALLY bad, and then the Dems win.

Plus, even IF Trump won the election, we’re still getting a liberal on too many issues.

For instance, and more about these are right here on FR:

Just last summer Trump said before defunding Planned Parenthood, we should look at their â€œgood aspects.â€

And what is your position on amnesty? Here’s what Trump said:

“We are not talking about positions he has taken years ago before he became a Republican. In 2013, conservatives were fighting for dear life to oppose open borders, while Trump was not only supporting the Dream Act, but echoing the liberal politically correct talking points behind it. In August of 2013, he reportedly told a group of illegal aliens, â€œYou have convinced meâ€ of the need to pass the Dream Act.”

more: https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/01/trumps-questionable-political-history

Now here’s a couple of Trump quotes:

Trump said this in 2013: “I think pretty strongly that (Bill de Blasio will) end up being a good mayor, maybe a very good mayor and I don’t think he’s going to want to kill the golden goose. ...I think he’s a smart guy that knows what’s going on really big league and I think he is not going to want to destroy New York. I think he is going to want to make New York [B]great[/B]” [B]Haha, is that the kind of “great” he has in mind for America?[/B]

(Michael Bloomberg is) “a friend of mine. He’s been an excellent mayor of New York City. He’s a great guy and he means very well.” Trump said this in 2013 as well.

Agreed

Yeah, no one likes ‘nasty’ Cruz.

/Sarc.

And ...

Trumpâ€™s Support for Ethanol Is Bad for Taxpayers and Their Cars
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3386468/posts

And ...

“Ted Cruz: Trump Will Let Deported Immigrants Back In, I Won’t”
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3379878/posts

And ...

Cruz: ‘We Need Quite A Few Constitutional Amendments’
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3381654/posts

~~~

But ...

1. How strident will public dissent be about his ineligibility?

2. Is he as courageous as Trump against powerful tyrants?

3. There are few Presidents in US history with Trump’s practical executive experience ... have to go back to Ike to find one.

4. Does Cruz have a glass jaw politically? When will he put Professor Tribe in his place?

One more point in Cruz favor. I respect him all that more for calling McConman a liar. That is a sign of courage. But was it just a moment of anger though? Can he routinely stare down evil?

Do you understand that the school dropout rates, out of wedlock births, economic wealth gap, poverty levels, incarceration rates, between blacks and the rest of the population are very different?

The black population of the US is about 40 million or 13.2% of the total population. Without abortion it would be 80 million. How do you these increased numbers would be reflected in the data below:

It is clear that you rely heavily on charts to make whatever point it is that you think they make. Nevertheless, I'm still curious why you are being so evasive about answering a simple question:

Is the United States better off or worse off as the result of killing 20 million black babies? YES or NO

Now, you've accused me of having a "reading comprehension problem" because I questioned your assertion that:

Abortion is murder. But facts are facts. The black population would be double what it is now assuming all other factors remained the same. The poverty, healthcare, unemployment, social, and electoral impact would be very significant.

Now, this has NOTHING to do with who anyone supports in the primaries, it goes to the very core of principle that all men are created equal and have an unalienable right to life. So, once more:

Is the United States better off or worse off as the result of killing 20 million black babies? YES or NO

There's no need to obfuscate your opinion with graphs, just a simple yes or no.

It is clear that you rely heavily on charts to make whatever point it is that you think they make. Nevertheless, I'm still curious why you are being so evasive about answering a simple question:

The charts represent facts and reality. Blacks in the US have been mired at the bottom of the economic ladder in this country for over 50 years, by almost any metric you want to use. Adding 20 million or 40 million to that total will only add to the number of poor and disadvantaged. It wouldn't matter what color they were assuming the same circumstances exist for any group.

You want to avoid this question:

Would the United States be better off or worse off with the addition of 40 million black babies?

Is the United States better off or worse off as the result of killing 20 million black babies? YES or NO

Who is doing the killing? It is not the government, but rather a matter of individual choice. Ask each black parent of an aborted child if they are better or worse off. They are doing the killing.

Now, this has NOTHING to do with who anyone supports in the primaries, it goes to the very core of principle that all men are created equal and have an unalienable right to life.

Again, blacks and others that choose abortion are doing so under the Rule of Law in this country. They believe they have the right to have an abortion. They don't believe the unborn child has any rights. This is a philosophical difference for those of us who believe that all human life is precious and even the unborn have rights.

You need to describe what you mean by "worse or better off" as far as the United States is concerned. I have provided real data showing how blacks in this country are faring materially and morally. Poverty, out of wedlock birthrates of 73%, out of proportion incarceration rates and just of welfare just to name a few. There is no doubt that doubling the black population in this country will have fiscal and social consequences similar to what we have now.

In urban areas a black youth without a HS diploma has a 95% unemployment rate. Our cities are tinder boxes waiting to explode with places like Ferguson and Baltimore the tip of the iceberg.

Again, would the US be better off with the addition of 40 million black babies?

The charts represent facts and reality. Blacks in the US have been mired at the bottom of the economic ladder in this country for over 50 years, by almost any metric you want to use. Adding 20 million or 40 million to that total will only add to the number of poor and disadvantaged. It wouldn't matter what color they were assuming the same circumstances exist for any group.

Conservatives understand that this is primarily due to the assault on black families by the left.

You want to avoid this question:

Would the United States be better off or worse off with the addition of 40 million black babies?

Now you are accusing me of avoiding a question that YOU NEVER ASKED.

Nevertheless, the answer is self-evident. ALL people enjoy the right to life from the moment of conception. If God didn't intend for this person to enter the world, they would not have been conceived. So, yes, we would be better off if ALL of the babies killed in the American Holocaust, regardless of race.

Would some of those born grown up to be criminals? Certainly. But some of those born may very well have grown up to cure cancer. The belief that society can be improved by preventing the births of certain groups of people is the very definition of eugenics.

To my question, Is the United States better off or worse off as the result of killing 20 million black babies? YES or NO, you answer:

Who is doing the killing? It is not the government, but rather a matter of individual choice. Ask each black parent of an aborted child if they are better or worse off. They are doing the killing.

More obfuscation. I find it very curious that you refuse to answer my question.

Again, blacks and others that choose abortion are doing so under the Rule of Law in this country. They believe they have the right to have an abortion. They don't believe the unborn child has any rights. This is a philosophical difference for those of us who believe that all human life is precious and even the unborn have rights.

Slavery existed under the "rule of law." Every genocidal dictator in history has acted under the "rule of law." The rule of law IS NOT something that one can hide behind to avoid morality.

You need to describe what you mean by "worse or better off" as far as the United States is concerned. I have provided real data showing how blacks in this country are faring materially and morally. Poverty, out of wedlock birthrates of 73%, out of proportion incarceration rates and just of welfare just to name a few. There is no doubt that doubling the black population in this country will have fiscal and social consequences similar to what we have now.

It's true, groups of people who are targeted for extermination often act differently than those groups that aren't.

In urban areas a black youth without a HS diploma has a 95% unemployment rate. Our cities are tinder boxes waiting to explode with places like Ferguson and Baltimore the tip of the iceberg.

We're discussing killing babies, not the actions of adults.

Again, would the US be better off with the addition of 40 million black babies?

Unlike you, I answered this the first time you asked.

Conservatives understand that this is primarily due to the assault on black families by the left.

Whatever happened to the conservative concept of personal responsibility? Blacks are not victims of the system.

Nevertheless, the answer is self-evident. ALL people enjoy the right to life from the moment of conception. If God didn't intend for this person to enter the world, they would not have been conceived. So, yes, we would be better off if ALL of the babies killed in the American Holocaust, regardless of race.

Better off in a material sense? Let me get this straight, you believe that a doubling of the black population to 80 million would be better off for the US? Forget the issue of abortion, because it really doesn't matter how the additional people are added to the population. You are delusional if you think this country would be better off materially if we increased the number of poor people in this country.

Why not just open our borders and invite all the poor from the rest of the world to enter here. Where is the money coming from to provide the healthcare, schools, infrastructure, etc. to support such numbers?

Would some of those born grown up to be criminals? Certainly. But some of those born may very well have grown up to cure cancer. The belief that society can be improved by preventing the births of certain groups of people is the very definition of eugenics.

There you go again making up a phony strawman. This isn't eugenics. Blacks use abortion to a greater extent than the general population per capita. They are choosing to abort their children. It is not government policy to decide who should and should not be aborted. All races and ethnic groups have individuals who decide to abort their child. It is a matter of individual choice.

More obfuscation. I find it very curious that you refuse to answer my question.

I gave you my answer on the morality of abortion. I oppose it and consider it murder. It doesn't matter what race the baby is. Is America better off morally by sanctioning abortion? No. But my point has to do with the material consequences of abortion as it pertains to blacks. Since blacks are disproportionately represented in poverty, incarceration rates, unemployment rolls, the uninsured in healthcare, etc., the doubling of that population will increase these numbers. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand the impact.

Slavery existed under the "rule of law." Every genocidal dictator in history has acted under the "rule of law." The rule of law IS NOT something that one can hide behind to avoid morality.

Who is hiding behind the Rule of Law? I am describing reality. Abortion on demand is legal in the US. It is not a crime. We have the most liberal abortion laws in the world. You need to change the laws, just like we did with slavery and racial segregation. You are conflating morality with the existing laws. The government isn't imposing abortion on blacks like it once did with slavery and segregation. Blacks have a choice as to whether to abort a child or not, the same choice every person in the US has.

It's true, groups of people who are targeted for extermination often act differently than those groups that aren't.i>

Who is targeting blacks for extermination? The black birthrates are higher than whites. From the Bureau of the Census:

The non-Hispanic white population is projected to peak in 2024, at 199.6 million, up from 197.8 million in 2012. Unlike other race or ethnic groups, however, its population is projected to slowly decrease, falling by nearly 20.6 million from 2024 to 2060.

Meanwhile, the Hispanic population would more than double, from 53.3 million in 2012 to 128.8 million in 2060. Consequently, by the end of the period, nearly one in three U.S. residents would be Hispanic, up from about one in six today.

The black population is expected to increase from 41.2 million to 61.8 million over the same period. Its share of the total population would rise slightly, from 13.1 percent in 2012 to 14.7 percent in 2060.

The Asian population is projected to more than double, from 15.9 million in 2012 to 34.4 million in 2060, with its share of nation's total population climbing from 5.1 percent to 8.2 percent in the same period.

Among the remaining race groups, American Indians and Alaska Natives would increase by more than half from now to 2060, from 3.9 million to 6.3 million, with their share of the total population edging up from 1.2 percent to 1.5 percent. The Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander population is expected to nearly double, from 706,000 to 1.4 million. The number of people who identify themselves as being of two or more races is projected to more than triple, from 7.5 million to 26.7 million over the same period.

The U.S. is projected to become a majority-minority nation for the first time in 2043. While the non-Hispanic white population will remain the largest single group, no group will make up a majority.

We're discussing killing babies, not the actions of adults.

Babies become adults. Doubling the number of black youths in our cities will not make things better. Denial just ain't a river in Egypt.

Whatever happened to the conservative concept of personal responsibility? Blacks are not victims of the system.

So, blacks are responsible for the eugenics programs that have been directed toward them for the past century?

Better off in a material sense? Let me get this straight, you believe that a doubling of the black population to 80 million would be better off for the US?

What I said is that America would be better off if ALL of the victims of the American Holocaust had been allowed to live.

Forget the issue of abortion, because it really doesn't matter how the additional people are added to the population.

So, you oppose abortion when it's convenient and dismiss it as immaterial when it isn't?

You are delusional if you think this country would be better off materially if we increased the number of poor people in this country.

So, your charts tell you that all blacks born will be poor? Do those charts somehow indicate that blacks "demand" that abortuaries be built in all inner cities?

The abortion industry TARGETS blacks and countless undercover videos have established this as FACT.

Why not just open our borders and invite all the poor from the rest of the world to enter here. Where is the money coming from to provide the healthcare, schools, infrastructure, etc. to support such numbers?

So you classify the murder of AMERICANS with stopping immigration?

There you go again making up a phony strawman. This isn't eugenics. Blacks use abortion to a greater extent than the general population per capita. They are choosing to abort their children. It is not government policy to decide who should and should not be aborted. All races and ethnic groups have individuals who decide to abort their child. It is a matter of individual choice.

You are correct, but you failed to address what I actually wrote when I defined eugenics. Let's try again:

Would some of those born grown up to be criminals? Certainly. But some of those born may very well have grown up to cure cancer. The belief that society can be improved by preventing the births of certain groups of people is the very definition of eugenics.

I gave you my answer on the morality of abortion. I oppose it and consider it murder. It doesn't matter what race the baby is. Is America better off morally by sanctioning abortion? No. But my point has to do with the material consequences of abortion as it pertains to blacks. Since blacks are disproportionately represented in poverty, incarceration rates, unemployment rolls, the uninsured in healthcare, etc., the doubling of that population will increase these numbers. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand the impact.

So, you agree abortion is murder, but you proceed to list what you consider the "consequences" of ending it.

Who is hiding behind the Rule of Law? I am describing reality. Abortion on demand is legal in the US. It is not a crime.

No, I am saying that it's wrong to hide behind it.

The government isn't imposing abortion on blacks like it once did with slavery and segregation. Blacks have a choice as to whether to abort a child or not, the same choice every person in the US has.

So, government funding of abortionists who are known to target blacks isn't the same as the government imposing it?

Who is targeting blacks for extermination? The black birthrates are higher than whites. From the Bureau of the Census:

Changes in birthrates have NOTHING to do with targeting.

Babies become adults. Doubling the number of black youths in our cities will not make things better. Denial just ain't a river in Egypt.

Chief Justice Holmes expressed similar sentiment:

It is better for all the world if, instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind.
- Buck v. Bell (1927)

bump!

So, blacks are responsible for the eugenics programs that have been directed toward them for the past century?

Be specific on what government "eugenics programs" you are referring to.

What I said is that America would be better off if ALL of the victims of the American Holocaust had been allowed to live

Use of the loaded word "Holocaust" is totally inappropriate. Abortion is not the same as the Nazis rounding up Jews and others and sending them to their deaths in concentration camps. Abortion is a voluntary act taken by the parent, not ordered by the government. You lose all credibility using such terms. And it diminishes the victims of the Holocaust.

So, you oppose abortion when it's convenient and dismiss it as immaterial when it isn't?

Nonsense. There are two different issues involved. One is a moral issue about abortion and the other is about the practical consequences of doubling the black population. I gave you my opinion on both.

So, your charts tell you that all blacks born will be poor? Do those charts somehow indicate that blacks "demand" that abortuaries be built in all inner cities?

Do you understand how to read the charts? Did I say all blacks would be in poverty. We do know that a significant percentage would be in poverty and the child of a single parent. Eliminating abortion will not change these data. Blacks support PP overwhelmingly. And many of the PP abortion mills are located in black areas.

The abortion industry TARGETS blacks and countless undercover videos have established this as FACT.

There you go with your blacks as victims meme. Are blacks so stupid that they can be easily targeted and swayed to have abortions? Rather patronizing of you. The bigotry of low expectations. Your conspiracy theory of targeting blacks rings hollow. Are they so stupid that they fail to realize that is what is happening? Give me a break.

So you classify the murder of AMERICANS with stopping immigration?

No, I am describing the impact of increasing the numnber of poor in this country. And yes our immigration policies are importing poverty. About 50% of immigrant headed households use at least one welfare program. Immigrants use welfare to a greater extent than the native born.

Would some of those born grown up to be criminals? Certainly. But some of those born may very well have grown up to cure cancer. The belief that society can be improved by preventing the births of certain groups of people is the very definition of eugenics.

Who is preventing the births of certain groups of people?

So, you agree abortion is murder, but you proceed to list what you consider the "consequences" of ending it.

Eureka. You finally get it.

No, I am saying that it's wrong to hide behind it

I am not hiding behind anything. I am stating a provable fact. It is called reality.

So, government funding of abortionists who are known to target blacks isn't the same as the government imposing it?

Technically, the government is legally prohibited from funding abortion. Regardless, there is no targeting of blacks.

Changes in birthrates have NOTHING to do with targeting.

There is no targeting. You must prove such an assertion. This is tinfoil hat stuff.