One magpie utters some nonsense, and the other one will swear by it, LOL
Posted on 01/15/2016 12:03:27 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Ted Cruz showed remarkable fighting spirit in the Republican presidential debate last night, lacing Donald Trump with the same kind of brilliant and witty lines that he's used in his fights against Mitch McConnell.
When Trump's bogus charges against Cruz's eligibility to be president were raised, Cruz turned the tables on him, remarking that Trump had no problems with his eligibility several months earlier, giving this incredible one liner:
Since September, the Constitution hasn't changed, but the poll numbers have.
Trump looked very uncomfortable at that. But Cruz was just beginning. He even pointed out that Trump's own mother was not a "natural born" citizen, and that the same tinfoil hat crowd challenging his own eligibility could challenge Trump's. The crowd roared with laughter.
When Cruz pressed Trump on why he was pushing this issue now, Trump admitted it was because Cruz was doing better in the polls, and the crowd roared.
The audience was clearly on Cruz's side, booing Trump not once, but several times when Trump pushed his birther argument.
Cruz also made the point that Trump was relying on Harvard Law professor Larry Tribe, a far leftist who supports Hillary Clinton for president.
Trump was made to look small and petty as Cruz came out as the first candidate to challenge Trump in a debate and beat him.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
He was a registered Republican for the entire 90s and publicly described himself as "conservative" in the early nineties. Perhaps you think that full-page ad he took out in the NYT calling for New York to reinstate the death penalty was a "stone cold liberal" position? How many "stone cold liberals" had concealed carry permits in NYC? In 1988, admittedly a little before the 90s, he attended the Republican National Convention as a guest of Bush. A recent bio of Bush says that one of his people suggested that he consider choosing Trump as his VP. I guess the Republicans wanted a "stone cold liberal" VP at the time. By 2000, he was writing about how much tougher we as a nation need to be on crime and on going after terrorists. I suppose those were "stone cold liberal" positions too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump
Donald John Trump
June 14, 1946 (age 69)
Queens, New York City
Political party
Republican (2012-present; 2009-11; 1987-99)
Previous affiliations:
Independent (2011-12)
Democratic (2001-09 - before 1987)
Reform (1999-2001)
Your ability at judging someone’s “issues”, be it anger or anything else is clearly as faulty as your ability to pick winning candidates.
The fact is, I’m one of the happiest people you’ll never know (because I’m very selective about choosing my friends) but you just prance merrily along in whatever delusion of the day strikes your fancy, ok?
You are correct. He never supported the Kelo decision and never took lands from hard working Americans. Trump makes Reagan look like a communist. I will go and buy a Trump banner for the front of my house so you won’t get mad at me and throw a tantrum.
Trump did those things in New York because Giuliani was mayor and he didn’t want any business problems. He was close friends to the Clintons, and sent them money for their campaigns.
And everybody was talking about being tougher on the terrorists in 2000, even Bill Clinton.
Trump doesn’t care about the NBC question. He just wants everyone to know Ted Cruz was born in Canada. Because that will hurt Cruz by a few percentage points. That’s why the exchange helped Trump.
Trump wins on the “do anything, say anything” approach. Going full birther - something that only worked previously as a scam - shows Trump has severe insincerity in the things he says. His word is and his loyalty are situational, like his ethics. He’s cynical about donations and politics in general, and shows his true colors as a wife-shucking, Clinton-funding, abortion-supporting, money-grubbing phony.
Donald Trump and Eminent Domain
“....Perhaps the only upside to this story is that in neither case did Trump succeed. The Bridgeport plan fizzled. Coking fought in court, and - in part because these were the days before Kelo was decided, no doubt - she was lucky enough to win. In 1998, a judge threw out the case. In 2005, however, Trump was delighted to find that the Supreme Court had okayed the brand of government-abetted theft that he’d twice attempted. “I happen to agree with it 100 percent,” he told Fox News’s Neil Cavuto of the Kelo decision....”
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/265171/donald-trump-and-eminent-domain-robert-verbruggen
“....[Trump’s] word is and his loyalty are situational, like his ethics....”
His NY values.
Thought Trump was strong second-Cruz definitely won debate.
Trump looked very uncomfortable at that.
Nor at all. His response as usual was perfect; he agreed. After all why talk about it if it looked like Cruz had no chance of winning. Now that he has maybe a 4 or 5 percent chance, it merits talking about. And his example that he might want Cruz as a running mate, but he can't pick him with that hanging over Cruz was some brilliant jiu-jitsu.
Cruz was overall very good too, though Rubio was correct about his horrible VAT tax idea.
You seem bent on using old-school, thread disruption tactics to hijack threads you find uncomfortable.
It’s what you do.
And the land is still undeveloped and a massive eyesore in New London, and Kelo gave up and left Connecticut.
And Trump still supports the attempt.
Since September, the Constitution hasn't changed, but the poll numbers have.Really highlights that whole political opportunist flip-flop thing that defines Trump.
I have the debate recorded to watch later, but that is a just plain stupid remark. Trump's mother naturalized four years before he was born, making Trump an undoubtedly natural born child of two citizens.
Remarks like that may play well in the moment, but they often blow back worse a day or two later when people get to ponder them a little longer.
-PJ
http://michellemalkin.com/2011/04/22/donald-trumps-eminent-domain-empire/
Donald Trump’s eminent-domain empire
2011
Don’t be fooled by The Donald. Take it from one who knows: I’m a South Jersey gal who was raised on the outskirts of Atlantic City in the looming shadow of Trump’s towers. All through my childhood, casino developers and government bureaucrats joined hands, raised taxes and made dazzling promises of urban renewal. Then we wised up to the eminent-domain thievery championed by our hometown faux free-marketeers.
America, it’s time you wised up to Donald Trump’s property redistribution racket, too.
Trump has been wooing conservative activists for months and flirting with a GOP presidential run - first at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington and most recently at a tea party event in South Florida. He touts his business experience, “high aptitude” and “bragadocious” deal-making abilities. But he’s no more a standard-bearer of conservative values, limited government and constitutional principles than the cast of “Jersey Shore.”
Too many mega-developers like Trump have achieved success by using and abusing the government’s ability to commandeer private property for purported “public use.” Invoking the Fifth Amendment takings clause, real estate moguls, parking garage builders, mall developers and sports palace architects have colluded with elected officials to pull off legalized theft in the name of reducing “blight.” Under eminent domain, the definition of “public purpose” has been stretched like Silly Putty to cover everything from roads and bridges to high-end retail stores, baseball stadiums and casinos.
While casting himself as America’s new constitutional savior, Trump has shown reckless disregard for fundamental private property rights. In the 1990s, he waged a notorious war on elderly homeowner Vera Coking, who owned a little home in Atlantic City that stood in the way of Trump’s manifest land development. The real estate mogul was determined to expand his Trump Plaza and build a limo parking lot - Coking’s private property be damned. The nonprofit Institute for Justice, which successfully saved Coking’s home, explained the confiscatory scheme:.........”
"......Of all the wackadoo ironies of Trump's emergence as tribune of America's white working class, the strangest of all is that as a billionaire real estate developer, Trump made his fortune in the most corrupt, coddled, and cronyist sector in the modern American economy. One of the reasons the consequences of deindustrialization were ignored by policymakers for so long is that they were masked by the housing boom. Rising home prices stimulated development and home renovation, which in turn generated employment for at least some men with high school or lower education-a disproportionately large share of whom were young immigrants and second-generation Americans living in the Sun Belt, not middle-aged whites languishing in the Rust Belt."....
You don’t think Cruz can beat Hillary? I absolutely do and always have. Always thought that was a uniparty/msm talking point.
“.....The Texas senator noted that Trump had previously said there was “nothing to this birther issue” until Cruz started beating him at the polls in Iowa.
“The legal issue is quite straightforward, but I would note that the birther theories that Donald has been relying on, some of the more extreme ones insist that you must not only be born on U.S. soil, but have two parents born on U.S. soil,” Cruz continued.
“Under that theory, not only would I be disqualified, Marco Rubio would be disqualified, Bobby Jindal would be disqualified, and interestingly enough, Donald J. Trump would be disqualified because Donald’s mother was born in Scotland,” Cruz said, referring to two other GOP presidential contenders...”
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.