Posted on 02/02/2016 1:42:06 PM PST by brickdds
Michael Berry Reaches Out to Trump Supporters Link to Audio on Website:
http://www.ktrh.com/onair/michael-berry-13986/michael-berry-to-trump-supporters-stop-14334772/
A Houston Talk show personality who I used to listen to when I was drinking the Republican kool-aid. Hey Berry, kiss my arse! Your opinions mean nothing to me anymore........yuk!
Michael Berry is a great radio talk show host broadcasting from Houston area. Used to be on the City Council before he was term limited. Caused former Mayor Porker a great deal of grief. Continues to bash Sheila Jackson Lee. Is not politically correct. You either love him or hate him. Our family always listens to him and loves him.
Is Berry a homosexual? Not that I’m a “hater,” but I’d suppose “conservative talk radio” is a lousy field for a guy who hangs out in gay bars.
Exactly right.
Check out Andrea Tantaros bashing idiot moron anti Trump buffoon Rich Lowry.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ei6f5F4zIvo
“Too bad Cruz is not NBC and not qualified. The man was a Canadian citizen until he was 43 years old.”
I’m getting so sick of Trump supporters spouting this nonsense. Cruz was a U.S. citizen all of his life. PLEASE...PLEASE...show me in the Constitution or ANY Supreme Court ruling in which NBC is defined!! You can’t because it has NEVER been defined in LAW! And since you can’t then you really should stop making deceitful statements that he is not qualified. It makes Trump supporters look like a bunch of loons.
Longer clip of the discussion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FYOsouQviI
Andrea is awesome.
Thanks.
He’s a good guy. Makes me a little nuts with his libertarian streak at times, but such is life! He has a really good sense of humor.
It’s your choice. So stick with an illegal candidate who has already shown his colors as in TPA. Go right along thinking we need another lawyer lifetime politician to straighten out the problems the rest of the lawyer politicians have put us in. Turn you back on the Constitution and elect someone who has always been a Canadian until a few months ago. Thanks, but I’ll take an AMERICAN who has proven he can get the job done.
Thanks Molly, all the best to you.
So bottom line Cruz and his wife disagree on this whole issue. My husband supports Rubio and I support Cruz. Must a couple think exactly alike. This is very much a non issue. People just trying to find something to hurt Cruz with. None of the candidates are perfect. Some candidates have a lot the left can attack them on. Real issues. War on women comes to mind.
Christianity Today
This sort of political discourse is starting to affect how evangelicals talk about Trump. A notable exception is Russell Moore. He has consistently presented a line of argument—and not just name calling. His major thesis is that Trump is immoral by Christian standards. This is a fact: from Trump’s owning of strip clubs to his bragging about sleeping around to his Nietzsche-esque notions of power. Moore believes that a leader’s moral behavior will affect his leadership, so he argues that no Christian should support a candidate like Trump. This will not convince all Christians, but at least it’s an argument grounded in the fact of Trump’s moral behavior.
Charisma Magazine
“The late Dr. Jerry Falwell Sr. would be rolling over in his grave if he knew the son who bore his name had endorsed the most immoral and ungodly man to ever run for President of the United States,†John Stemberger, president of Florida Family Action, said in a statement Monday. “Trump is a thrice married owner of casing with strip clubs and would give us the first ‘First Lady’ who has proudly posed in the nude while supporting gay marriage and funding Planned Parenthood with taxpayer money.â€
Unique in So Many Ways
Indeed, Trump would be like no president before him.
The first to be married three times, cheating on the first two (and probably the third).
The first whose wife appeared nude in a magazine.
The first to boast of his sexual proclivities, claiming to have had sexual relations with some of the “top women in the world.” (This is who Sarah Palin is supporting?)
He will be the first that has owned casinos with strip clubs.
To proudly proclaim that he will seek revenge against his personal enemies “as viciously and as violently as you can.”
His wife will be the first first lady that has posed for lesbian porn.
And with that last bullet in mind, do you really think for a minute that Trump opposes gay marriage?
http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/54750-evangelicals-please-don-t-let-donald-trump-fool-you
Why Donald Trump Threatens to Trump the Gospel
Donald Trump talked about his Christian faith Saturday, but said he’s never sought forgiveness for his sins.
The event is a gathering sponsored by several socially-conservative Christian organizations, including the Family Research Council, a socially conservative lobbying organization; Liberty University, the world’s largest evangelical university; and the National Organization for Marriage, a group established to prevent the legalization of same-sex marriage.
Trump, who told CNN earlier that he is both anti-abortion and anti-same-sex marriage, said people are surprised to learn about his Christian faith.
“People are so shocked when they find ... out I am Protestant. I am Presbyterian. And I go to church and I love God and I love my church,” he said.
Moderator Frank Luntz asked Trump whether he has ever asked God for forgiveness for his actions.
“I am not sure I have. I just go on and try to do a better job from there. I don’t think so,” he said. “I think if I do something wrong, I think, I just try and make it right. I don’t bring God into that picture. I don’t.”
www.christianitytoday.com/edstetzer/2015/july/morning-roundup-72715.html
I take my comments back! I just saw a picture of Michael Berry BOY OH BOY what a tough looking guy! The confederate flag head lice doo rag and big cigar really make him look scary. /s/
This guy would last two minutes on a street corner in my old sector in the NYPD’s 77 pct in Bedford Stuyvesant.
We’d have to come and save his ass.
They’re not settling. These are the platitudes they’ve been waiting for.
I found this on another thread. I can’t remember who posted it. Apparently their have been some rulings pertaining to this.
http://www.thepostemail.com/2009/10/18/4-supreme-court-cases-define-natural-born-citizen/
I think the purpose of the NBC requirement is to ensure that nobody who was ever a citizen of or owed allegiance to another country could run for President. I am fairly certain that the founders did not intend somebody who was a citizen of another country until he was 43 years old and already running for President to be considered a NBC. Cruz claims he did not know he was a Canadian citizen until the Dallas Morning News pointed it out to him in 2013. I don’t believe for one second that a supposedly brilliant, Harvard trained lawyer did not know his own citizenship status. I think Cruz has been purposely deceitful about this issue.
I don't think so.
...another example of “reaching out,” I see...
Unfortunately, all of the cases cited in the article only discussed, in general terms, that a child born of citizen parents in the country were natural born. The rest of the article is the author’s interpretation of the cases.
None of the cases states that BOTH parents have to be citizens or that there is a specific number of years that the parent must be a citizen before conferring NBC status to the children. In fact, each case states common law as the basis for the interpretation of the NBC definition in which the father, at the time of the cases, could convey citizenship. However, the law at the time of Cruz’s birth allowed EITHER parent to confer that citizenship, which was defined by Congress. So according to these cases, Cruz, if born in the U.S. would no doubt be a NBC.
Furthermore, this interpretation of the NBC definition did not discuss that any children born of citizen parents on a U.S. military base overseas were or were not considered NBC. Yet, both the founders and common law have stated that these children should be considered NBC despite, there has never been any SCOTUS or Constitution definition of the full NBC definition. It would be hard to imagine that displace citizen parents fighting for our country could not confer NBC status. Since this has never been decided by SCOTUS and is not defined by the Constitution then we would have to look at common law, which clearly shows that children born of displaced citizen parents can confer NBC status, which would include Cruz.
“I think Cruz has been purposely deceitful”
You can think all you want, but you can’t prove anything. Cruz may very well have believed that he wasn’t a dual citizen because the citizenship rules vary by country and even in the U.S. the citizenship rules have changed at least 6 different times since 1900. Cruz never accepted his dual status.
Too bad that you seem to trust Trump even though Trump is still lying about his current and recent past liberal positions on the issues. Cruz had a possible excuse, but Trump has none!
Do you believe that a “brilliant, off the charts smart” Harvard lawyer does not know his own citizenship status? I don’t. I guess we will see but there is no way that I can be convinced that a man who was a citizen of another country until he was 43 years old and already running for President is what the founders had in mind as an qualified person.
Do you know each of the citizenship laws and all changes of those laws throughout your lifetime? Have you ever had reason to even research them?
Since Cruz had been a U.S. citizen his entire life and only grew up in the U.S., why would he have even thought to check that he technically had dual citizenship, especially since his mother had always been a U.S. citizen only and his dad had been a U.S. citizen most of his life. His parents may not even of known the laws and assumed Cruz was only a U.S. citizen and told Cruz all his life that he was only a U.S. citizen.
Most people don’t even think about those things or question their parents unless something comes along to cause them to start questioning it or unless the person is into genealogy research.
You are welcome to your opinions, but without proof of Cruz’s knowledge or the founders intent, you should be cautious about making unsupported assumptions.
Just curious...you want to assume Cruz lied, without any proof and you hold that against him. However, I’m guessing you’re a Trump supporter, but you don’t seem to have a problem with Trump lying repeatedly about his liberal positions, to include his recent or current support of Planned Parenthood, government subsidies (welfare), ‘assault’ weapons ban, abortion/pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, and the list goes on and on. All of this is well documented. Trump only “changed” some of these positions within the last 4 months to 2 years, but you don’t question Trump’s honesty even though we all know that Trump is applying for a job and may just be telling us only what we want to hear. Why don’t you hold Trump to the same level of scrutiny that you hold Cruz??
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.