| PING! Tinyowl has written a beautiful, martial arts inspired comment. Trump's tigers are defending the cultivated gardens of private property, I-built-that, and self-reliance -- and against the forces of politically correctness.
|
Posted on 03/26/2016 2:04:33 AM PDT by true believer forever
Mr. Cruz’s own attempts at humor sometimes missed the mark. In one debate, he proposed a method to detect infidelity in which God should “give women a hymen that grows back every time she has intercourse with a different guy, because that will be a ‘visible sign’ of the breach of trust,” according to a recollection by David Kennedy published in a Harvard debate team reunion booklet in 2001.
Mr. Kennedy’s debate partner mocked Mr. Cruz’s knowledge of the subject matter by contorting herself to see how the anatomy in question could be “visible,” according to the booklet.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
But yeah they are different in many ways. I think that in the way they see the world as devoid of human beings because they are disconnected (that's theoretical about Cruz by the way - I'm not guaranteeing any of that - don't know him very well, just picking thing up) and that they toss out lofty speech to manipulate the mob ... they are very very similar.
They don't realize it, but they look down on you not so much as thinking they are better, but they don't see a human being in anyone.
| I agree that the headline of this post cherrypicks the juiciest part of an otherwise well-balanced analysis of Cruz's personality during his debating years. Still, it's a very well written piece and I encourage everyone to read it for insights on Cruz. And I commend you, poodle, on your reasoned response to tinyowl who also has some valid points. I'll tell you what I would like to see, and I have not seen posted in the last six months I have been an FR member, and that's some positive stories -- even pure puff pieces -- on Ted Cruz as a person. With Trump there are many stories from his books, business colleagues, and a few guys like Wayne Root have written pieces that praise Trump's skills, smarts, and positive human qualities. However I fully admit that the stories that trash Trump outnumber the positive ones 50 to 1. That imbalance has encouraged me to write a few vanities on FR that show the positive side of Trump such as: Generally these vanities have been well-received, though I've certainly taken a few lumps in the comments too. So Cruzers, please point me to your favorite puff piece or two about Cruz. I'm interested in reading a few stories about his life accomplishments and other good deeds. Maybe some accounts explaining his work in the Senate and as Solicitor General in Texas? Thanks. |
so Rafael was quite the womanizer in college...
On his worst day Cruz has more class than Trumps best day.
| PING! Tinyowl has written a beautiful, martial arts inspired comment. Trump's tigers are defending the cultivated gardens of private property, I-built-that, and self-reliance -- and against the forces of politically correctness.
|
Just when we thought this wasn't weird enough... ISIS monsters have their sex slaves undergo surgery to replace the hymen - ups the price...
Two things: (actually I think 3 - sorry - unedited - I have to go meet some people to fill in holes in our dirt road) Interesting, are you claiming victim status
Not at all, I'm pointing out weakness in debate skill or nature-of-cruz-supporter. "You're stupid" is not a very strong debating position, but it's 80% of what I read. It's half as much as the Trump supporters. A further difference is there are 3.5 Trump supporters on this site to every Trump supporter. You're a physics man, that math is easy.
I would say I was making an insult, except that since I'm only reporting the truth, it's not insult. I'm pointing out a fact which I bet would pan out true under analysis.
Second -> The initial poster chose to cherry-pick a comment ... I encourage everyone then to ignore the title that was cherry picked and read the whole thing. For every man who clearly should not be president, there are a ton of good things to say about them. But I think anyone who reads that and also reads the letter from the guy with whom Trump went to military school, will start to get a sense that these negatives and ... darkish oddities ... are not smears but merely honest observations by people and the reader is free to take from them what for them matters. Third -> But I graduated Magna cum Laude and went on to an MS in physics. I know a smear campaign when I see it and I see it here. As a software developer who worked in Cambridge MA for 10 years and I'll just leave it that I did fine in school and post-high-school work, I have very little respect for academic intelligence above 'it is what it is,' however, congratulations on this accomplishment -> I'm not belittling it. However, in my work in Cambridge, I was surrounded by, worked with, respected, managed, was managed by, just what you have labeled yourself - Chemistry PhD's, MIT Engineers, Mathematics PhD's, my mentor was an MD PhD. Recently I worked with a guy who was going to Cornell for his EE PhD but decided he just wanted to do software. Great, super smart people, none of them social misfits as some academics are. Some liberal, only a very few conservative (that was Cambridge MA I remind you.) Academic accomplishments I promise do not make you better at reading things like this - evidently you haven't noticed that. The fundamental defining trait of people in Cambridge was this same pride that you display -> and it turned most of them liberal -> that because I think it, and because I have a degree from Harvard, MIT -> it must be so. I can't tell you how much top notch thinking in science I observed followed by the absolute silliest and irrational emotion based analysis of a social or political situation. It would have been funny if I weren't keenly aware these academics were installed in government everywhere. The degrees actually shut off their thinking process in many ways. I should say "They were unencumbered by a thorough and rational process of examination" ... Thankfully, these were not the ones I work with. Software guys tend to be a rather practical bunch regardless of level of IQ or academic certificate holding-> the computer is constantly telling us what we just did is wrong, that we didn't think this or that through, so we don't have the luxury of becoming proud. We may be come relatively confident, but not proud. This is something I appreciate about software. It's like God is always there to say 'you're not really that smart, tough guy.'
Check yourself on that -> you needed to tell me how smart you are, all your degrees, believe me it doesn't lend you credence in my eyes, except to think that you are a prime candidate to let pride get in the way of a full and complete rational thinking process that knows it's own holes. Doesn't mean you're wrong ... just that I've seen and heard the "I have this or that degree" stuff, not one of the people I worked with used it, but Cambridge in general is ripe with it - men who were once Tom's who demand to be called Thomas. You're not in good company if you're announcing your degree to lend you credence, you should let your argument stand on its own - or in he first place actually make the argument, which you didn't, rather, you substituted your MS for an argument. I didn't buy it, and I recommend you not practice it.
As negative as that may sound - it's a good day for all of us to take a look at where we are proud as in Prideful, and frankly it's hard with all this bickering and out-arguing each other (and defending against the YOUR STUPIDs!!! coming from both sides but at a rate 7 times greater on the Cruz side as I proved earlier - just kidding) to not let the lower parts of the ego take hold, so I will start my Easter Sunday by readily confessing that I am often a prideful windbag entirely wrapped up in the illusion of self -defending and promoting it. I believe that makes me different from Cruz in that ... he doesn't know that that's what he is (it's what we all are.) OK strike that parting shot.
Have a great Easter!
I am not making a case for either Cruz or Trump....I am smacking people across the face for poor behavior, namely eating our own. You have no idea who I support (I have probably defended Trump at least as often here as I have Cruz), and you lie - there are lots of trumpsters here calling Cruz and Cruz supporters all sorts of names.
Your words, in the post to which I responded:
“a mal adjusted kid with soiopathic tendencies”
Not calling Cruz names? Don’t break your arm patting yourself on the back oh self-righteous one.
elsewhere in this thread:
“you Cruz losers”
“exposing the putrid life of Ted Cruz”
“a creepoid like Cruz”
“would be one of the usual suspects when 10 year old girls go missing”
“Cruz is a sick pup”
“Cruz had a boozehound/addict family.”
“so Rafael was quite the womanizer in college”
Yes, I can find similarly stupid posts smearing Trump. But to what end is this mutually assured destruction beneficial?
We have two possibilities as of now....but at the rate the conservatives are going, we are going to make dust of both of them. I am beginning to think that in spite of being on the right side, conservatives are simply IDIOTS!! I’m thinking now that the fault does not lie with the GOPe....but rather with moronic “conservatives”. Every election cycle conservatives behave like high-school girls during the primaries - sniping, in the most vile ways, at everyone else. I look to Ronald Reagan as my example of intelligent conservative behavior.
If one continues to do stupid things, then calling them stupid is simply speaking the truth. Conservatives continuing to rip the “other guy” at every opportunity is STUPID.
“Stone is a man for whom a term was coined for copulating with a rodent. Let me be clear. Donald Trump may be a rat, but I have no desire to copulate with him.” -- Ted Cruz, now
Someone put this guy on a teleprompter. His off-the-cuff instincts *suck*.
+10
You chide me, and say I am not helping my cause....let me tell you something about where I am. I don’t know for whom I will vote....but your post, the one to which I first responded in this thread, has pushed me a tiny bit farther from voting for Trump - so you are hurting your cause. My cause is simply this: STOP THE STUPID POISONOUS POSTS!!! Can you not promote Trump by talking positively about him? Can Trump only win if you all tear Cruz down? If so, you have a very, very poor candidate...the same goes for Cruz supporters who tear at Trump with every opportunity.
This is stupid behavior, and only complete imbeciles cannot recognize how idiotic it is.
Sounds like something Bernie would (did) write.
"You all are as stupid as the GOPe!!"
So I guess I'm confused as to who posted poison.
I believe Cruz very well may be toxic. I'm not going to hold my tongue on that. There was a time when I supported Cruz, then I supported Trump slightly over Cruz. Since then - I don't trust him. Many don't. I could be wrong, we all could be, be I'll be damned if I'm not going to talk about and I'll be damed if I'm going to listen to you call me stupid and then lecture me about poisonous posts.
Do you not SEE the hypocracy in it? You call me stupid, I respond, without calling you stupid, and you call my post poisonous.
What am I missing in that equation?
My standard is not to post good or bad, positive or negative. My standard is the truth. The only truth I know is the truth I see, and I regularly add the disclaimer that I could be wrong. But you'll see an actual argument in their backed up.
You just come out and call me stupid.
Are you blind to your own action? Have I called you stupid? It's quite remarkable to me. I get that there are Trump supporters who are out there calling people stupid ... but don't lump me in with them unless you've got evidence. And if you call me stupid, I'm going to hit you back for it.
If anything I've said is, in context, incongruent with what's above, please point it out to me, it's entirely possible I've slipped somewhere or misinterpreted something you've said. But I think I'm not the guy you need to be lecturing, there are others who fit what you're saying - go get 'em! But not just because they actually think Cruz might be very bad for the country just at a time when there is a chance of at loosening up at least some of the cemented corruption.
So I don't really want to discuss anything so long as logic is not the coin of the realm.
I read an interesting note on 'blessed are the pure of heart' ... that it doesn't mean pure as in moral necessarily. Better translated, it means 'blessed are those of a single heart' ... which speaks directly to 'double minded'.
One may not like Trump's direction, and that's one thing, but there is only one direction, there is no forked tongue - I can allow for a little BS'ing from a man who is a salesman at heart - there is no split purpose, there is no one-purpose-on-the-inside-and-the-need-to-hide-it-on-the-outside-in-order-to-manipulate-people-into-fullfilling-that-purpose-for-only-your-own-gratification.
The passages that caught my eye are assessments of the Cruz strategies, and his foibles.
“Ted was not about responding to anything,” Mr. Panton said. “He would reframe the whole debate.”
“Nobody was better at setting traps,” said Austan D. Goolsbee, a Yale debater who became a leading economist for President Obama. He recalled Mr. Cruz’s attempts to control debates with carefully constructed arguments that always seemed to anticipate his opponents’ rebuttals.
But Mr. Goolsbee and other top debaters on the circuit who frequently beat Mr. Cruz discovered it was easy to get under his skin, especially with humor. “It would unravel him,” Mr. Goolsbee said.
Wish I could be more specific, more detailed, but I found the conservation most interesting and enlightening.
Hyman Roth! We never knew ya!
If you refuse to hold your tongue, then don't be hypocritical and demand that I hold mine regarding your stupidity in that.
What you are missing in the equation is that it is stupid to encourage the undecided voters to vote against your candidate....as you have done, and continue to do. What you are missing in the equation is that it is STUPID to destroy the viable conservative candidates, thereby helping the liberal efforts. What is REALLY stupid is to continue to do that time after time.
You are confused about who posted the poison? You call Cruz a mal adjusted kid with sociopathic tendencies and you whine because someone calls that stupidity, “stupid”? Arrre ye daft, man???
HERE is the hypocrisy - you claim that none of the Trump supporters badmouth Cruz, after you have done it, and insist you are going to continue doing it. No, I don't see the hypocrisy in intelligently recognizing how stupidly you are behaving and pointing it out. I do not see the hypocrisy in pointing out stupid behavior in both camps. I DO see hypocrisy here when you claim only Cruz supporters are making nasty, negative comments.
You continue to validate my position.
You have to be kidding me. Show me where I claimed that ... good luck.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
