Posted on 10/30/2014 12:23:27 PM PDT by BurningOak
"Those are his personal choices. I’ll tell you, I love my iPhone," Cruz said.
"Listen, Tim Cook makes his personal decisions, and that is his life. My focus is on the constitutional question of who has the authority to make decisions," he later added.
Cruz said that marriage is a "question for the states" because of the country's federalist system.
"This is something we’ve seen over and over again, which is the federal government and federal courts deciding they don’t trust the people," Cruz said. "They look down on the people, they don’t trust us to make judgments about our own lives, so the federal government and federal courts are going to step in and impose their own policy preferences."
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Then answer this: You pass away and enter heaven and the first person you meet is Tim Cook, who never renounces his sexuality. How do you interpret that? And what does it mean for the passages you quote?
That’s where things are headed. Make room for more, John Galt.
Good chatting with you. Have a great weekend!
In the scripture I have read so far, I don't think that God intends for me to meet up with Tim Cook in heaven.
And may your principles keep you warm in the reeducation camp.
I’m not saying don’t cherish your Christian principles. I’m saying be more realistic about what is Caesar’s (the heads of constitutionally secular civil government) and what is God’s (your commission to share the gospel with individuals for their salvation, and your obligation to tithe and support specifically Christian organizations, which the United States cannot impose as a form of government by law).
Rest assured, those who think they are “without sin” (self-righteous liberal pundits) will cast the first stones — and the last, and those in the middle — at the flawed, imperfect non-Democrat candidates. You don’t need to pile on.
You’re batting 1000 in the arena of implications. In an area of business professionals implications without fact enough times is typically followed by a walk to the door. I have been here about hmm 8-9 years. I was under the name AbsoluteJustice then put it down for quite awhile before I came back. Its probably do well to probe by asking questions first before implying. I’ll respect your views on this. I just don’t hold those views because the country is not a theocracy and for good reason. The act of being a homosexual is not an illegal one. While I don’t condone nor encourage the practice it’s still a matter of one’s own business until it becomes illegal. We can all raise our objections and that is fine and respectful but once it crosses the line of belief that it is our business to poke our heads into the personal business of others and at a governmental and personal level that my friend is DU material. My stance on someone’s personal business was a virtue of Conservatives not liberals as you seem to imply. As someone eloquently put it within these threads the president is to be a leader not a pope. The folks here pushing the meme that Cruz evangelize from the podium is the day he never sees the light of day in the White House. Most get that
You raise some interesting points and some I can even agree wiwith. Within the framework of this article some are stating Cruz didn’t go far enough. His answer as someone running for president was spot on. Had he taken that opportunity to give a sermon his days of being considered would have ended. I too agree with his stance. Some though went even further about the practice of said behavior behind closed doors. To that I do say it is none of my Damn business. I could care less what he chooses to do legally personal. Some in here (not you) remind me of that nosy neighbor always wanting to know every movement and activity. I’d tell that neighbor the same. Stay out of my house and stay out of my bedroom as it is none of your Damn business. The Nazis used that neighbor reporting tactic quite well during WWII
I do not mean any personal disrespect. But when I see a train coming, I warn people to push the baby strollers off the tracks.
Far from the case, in fact, this does nothing, good or bad, to win over my desire to buy an Apple computer. The ones I had I had as gifts, when I was living on my own as I am now, I bought the parts for a computer and built one myself, then ran Windows on it like a charm. Apple simply has tons of expensive products out there. They may be for somebody, but I personally don’t mind if I can build my own from parts for a fraction of the cost, then have a computer that runs up to date on the latest operating system and software, and one which I can pretty much be guaranteed to use for my work, if I need to. I would buy Apple if some of their products had cheaper innovations, and if this has anything to know with the private behavior of their CEO, I totally have no idea. They have had some innovative CPR from time to time, but I am not holding my breath for their management and developmental team to figure out what sells to more of the population.
The iphone is the most expensive option I can see at any given mobile phone store, enough said.
It’s also not the best.
The only thing it has is a cult following. And that will fade as the culture of Steve Jobs wanes.
I was at a major university bookstore the other day (first time in more than 10 years). The only computer equipment they stocked in the way of phones, tablets and laptops were Apple products. I asked “where is the Surface Pro 3?”. The sales gal said “we don’t carry that yet. We only carry Apple”.
I don’t have a problem with what Cruz said. I guess you missed that part.
Similar to computers, they have lost the point of what makes a phone a good sell. Having cheaper product lines makes all the difference. Nowadays, the iPhone sits around as the most expensive phone. You can easily get cheaper phones that take care of the neccessary functions without the high price tag or the top notch system specs. That’s the problem with Apple, they seem to sell based on high system specification numbers, where a lot of people want something that can do the job, for a lower price, but not neccessarily the most powerful system out there either. All I have, for instance, is a cheap Android phone that can get the same functions as an iphone, and while it doesn’t have the fancy 64GB of storage space that the iPhone does, it does what I need to accomplish, with efficiency.
Nowadays, Apple has gone on the wrong path businesswise, they had a little flirt with the less luxurious with their White Macbook, which they discontinued in 2010, real shame, because it was an option that wasn’t as expensive as the Pro In order to sell to a wider customer base, you need the less expensive options, you also need to be creative with the features of the product. If Apple can’t do that, this little news isn’t going to matter much in the long run.
That's been Apple's M.O. since the beginning, and it's worked for them.
Android continues to take more market share beating Apple in many many areas. Android has more market share than Apple.
Morpheus, you’re a bit off about Apple having the high specs. Samsung outshines them in most every feature. And Nokia has hands down the best camera capability (there’s not even a question there).
Apple got ahead when Jobs was at the helm. They have continued to grow but not at a rate that breaks away from the pack; in fact they are lagging Android.
Apple nearly went bankrupt in the 1990s because they thought they would be like the ‘Mercedes’ of computers. The went from the major player in the space to about 5% of the market. And the corporate execs dumped Jobs which took away Apples’s edge in innovation. Microsoft nearly killed them off until Lawrence Tribe was unleashed by Clinton to try and break up Microsoft on grounds of Anti-Trust laws. And Clinton was following instructions from Larry Ellison whose baby was Netscape. Ellison made his billions selling the CIA his relational database and he hated playing second fiddle to Microsoft. Apple was nearly dead so they didn’t matter.
Then Apple near death brought Jobs back and he immediately set about making Apple the one to follow. Now Apple has lost Jobs and their lead is not commanding; now it’s no longer even a lead. It’s growing sales but at a slower pace than others meaning it’s losing market share relative to the spectacular growth of its competitors.
I think Apple repeats the 1990s cycle as Android and Nokia gain more ground. Apple is not the biggest player in the space but they act like they are.
But you are spot on that price for value trumps everything else. That has what made Android a star and also what has made Nokia more attractive than Apple.
Yes, so we take our ball and go home and give ourselves a 0% chance of affecting any outcomes. Good plan!
A purist is someone who will not vote for a candidate unless they agree with them 100% of the time on the issues. And I am more of a constitutionalist than just about anyone on this site.
I stated what I think needs to be done in my previous posts. Go and read them, I am not re-posting them.
I’m getting slightly different answers each time I ask someone on FR what a purist or purism is to them. Not always getting a response either, so...
Thank you.
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.