Posted on 01/16/2016 10:43:21 AM PST by TBBT
Ted Cruz has taken more heat for his comments about “New York values†than he has anything else he has said since he was elected in 2012. Naturally, since most of the mainstream media is based out of New York, it has been high horse riding time as so many have gotten their panties in a wad over the comments. Ironically, they take more offense at what Cruz said than in Donald Trump’s blatant birtherism. Being a birther is cool now that it’s not Barack Obama who is the subject of Trump’s comments.
Unfortunately for Trump, who deftly (but at the same time shamelessly) evoked 9/11 as a means of responding to Ted Cruz’s comments, he cannot escape the very things he has said over the course of the last 15 years. Trump, as I have said on prior occasions is a charlatan. He is not a conservative at all. He is not now and never has been one. Outside of immigration (which is far more based on phony populism than policy), his views on taxes, healthcare, foreign policy and trade carry all the hallmarks of a progressive Democrat.
(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...
It really is hard to keep up with so called conservative values... Because you obviously do not have a clue who the antichrist is, not voting against the antichrist is a vote for him. Trump does not hold a candle to the literal antichrist.
You do not vote for trump, no biggie... Not my point. I could care less who you vote for... But any Christian worth his/her salt knows who the antichrist literally is and would vote against him.
“Dude. Vattell’s Law of Nations was not translated until 10 years after the ratification of the Constitution and the writings of Swiss philosophers who never stepped foot in the United States have no bearing on constitutional law.”
The statement, “the writings of Swiss philosophers who never stepped foot in the United States have no bearing on constitutional law” is a lie. Many of the Founding Fathers and their assistants were fluent in reading French. George Washington borrowed a copy of Vattel’s book from a library to use during the drafting of the Constitution, and it was finally returned to the library after being overdue for more than two centuries. Madison purchased a copy of Vattel’s book for use by the Congress during its deliberations. You had a duty to check the facts before negligently coming forth to state falsehoods in denial of these historical facts. Consequently, you lied, whether with deliberation or by negligent failure to research the readily available truth. Vattel’s law of Nations was a major contribution to the drafting of the Constitution, and Thomas Jefferson established a school of law in Virginia on the Law of nations that explicitly used Vattel’s Law of Nations as the basic textbook for those college studies.
Then we simply must agree to disagree. I see Trump as a self-serving egomaniac who will say anything to get elected and has no guiding principles whatsoever as evidenced by his constant switching of parties and positions. I guess you could say he exemplifies NYC values, if he has any values at all.
Those values are not mine.
If I were you, I would drop the subject and hope no one noticed.
I did and I won’t forget.
"NO."
Fail. And no sale.
Actually, Queen Catherine, Trump was speaking, Mark H interrupted him with the question, at which Trump said, No. what I was talking about was ...
Truth, let it be.
The “de Vattel definition†of “natural-born citizen “did not exist at the time the Constitution was framed.
1. De Vattel wrote in French, not English. As such there is no evidence that the phrase “natural-born citizen†ever was a product of either his lips or pen. What he actually wrote was, “Les Naturels ou indigènes font ceux qui font nés dans le pays de Parens Citoyens.â€
2. The first English translation was published in 1759, in London. It translates “Les Naturels ou indigènes…†to read “The natives or indigenes…†The phrase “natural-born citizens†is nowhere to be found. And the currently intuitive “naturels†is translated to “natives,†while “indigenes†is left completely untranslated.
3. There were 3 different English editions of the work published prior to 1787 and therefore available to the Framers of the Constitution. They were London:1759, London:1760, and New York:1787. All of them translated “Les Naturels ou indigènes…†to read “The natives or indigenes…â€
4. Additional English editions were printed in Dublin:1792, London:1793, and New York:1796. All of them translated “Les Naturels ou indigènes…†to read “The natives or indigenes…â€
5. The first appearance of the phrase “natural-born citizens†appears in the London:1797 edition, and it is a translation of the French word “indigènes,†not the French “naturels.†This was ten years after the Constitution was written, and 30 years after de Vattel’s death.
6. At the time of the framing of the Constitution, the “de Vattel†definition did not exist.
7. There was a single definition of “natural-born citizen/subject†that existed in 1787 and was available to the Framers, and it was that of English Common Law. That definition was exclusively tied to place of birth, the citizenship status of parents was irrelevant.
Your argument here, to be true, would require the Framers to be capable of time travel. While they were undoubtedly gifted men, being able to rend the time-space continuum was probably among the things they were good at.
Regards,
The Dude
Courtesy of HistorianDude
You can apologize anytime.
Look out, Jane, or I will play the Smitty card on you.
I just took the dear little thing on a walk around dead dog’s curve.
Hah!
Let’s still be doggy friends, okay?
We agree to disagree.
I really don’t like accusations based on when a poster joined Free Republic.
Whether it was pre-2000 or yesterday, I welcome them all.
This is a great forum.
LOL. So you don’t go for the affluenza defense?
You repeatedly said I had no idea who the AntiChrist is. Do you not understand that is the meaning of the word "nature"?
" You said you would not vote for trump if he ran against the antichrist.. A vote for the antichrist... A simple deduction"
LOL, no, I'm afraid not, unless you failed second-grade addition and subtraction.
" and equating trump as being equal to antichrist. "
Show me where I said Trump is the same as the AntiChrist. Specifically. Words mean something, and you can't just assign any meaning to them you want. So, show me.
"Ignorant statement for a Christian to make."
But it wasn't made, and you continue to lie. Why? Do you need to lie in order to support your candidate? That would indicate a problem, I'd think.
" If you knew who the antichrist literal is, you maybe would not have made your proclaimation. I gave you a big pass of ignorance."
I'll give you one, too, because I'm wondering if English might be your second language.
For the record, let me clear up any doubt in your mind. I'll say it again---I would not vote for that lying liberal sleaze, Donald Trump, even if he were running against the AntiChrist. Okay?
"It really is hard to keep up with so called conservative values... Because you obviously do not have a clue who the antichrist is, not voting against the antichrist is a vote for him. Trump does not hold a candle to the literal antichrist."
But you didn't answer my earlier question. How could voting or not voting for the AntiChrist derail God's plan?
But I know what you mean about conservative values. I think the exact same thing when I hear a conservative say they support progressive Trump.
"You do not vote for trump, no biggie... Not my point."
Oh, I think it's precisely your point.
" I could care less who you vote for... But any Christian worth his/her salt knows who the antichrist literally is and would vote against him."
Yeah, I know.
If you’re a conservative, you’d understand what was said and why .. even if you don’t support Cruz.
I mentioned in another post - say all you want against Atlanta’s liberal values, you’d have agreement from me and tens of thousands like me who got the heck out....although not to the level of depravity of NY City politics - Atlanta seems to be on that path and dragging the surrounding areas with it.
If you can leave, do it and don’t look back.
Love it! Smitty gets me, every time. I can play the Duke card. Duke is the reason other dogs and meanies tremble :)
Duke can offer Smitty protection.
Doggie friends, indeed!
WHAT?
Yet not one of them will fall to the ground outside your Father’s care.
-Matthew 10:29
Our Father MOST CERTAINLY deals with every living thing on a ‘case by case basis’. Please read your Bible.
Amen
Exactly. I had to check the URL to double-check to make sure I was still on FR!!
What. The. Heck???
Bashing Cruz?
Bashing Trump?
Looks like JR needs to start the pre-election purges early.
(j/k, Jim)
But, puhleasssse, Freepers, let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water!!!!!
And just to clarify from my previous post...
I am a Cruz supporter, but I will support Trump as my number 2 choice and will happily vote him into office for POTUS.
And I will not even have to hold my nose to do so. :)
And you are quite the proficient accuser when it serves your nature.
I’m sorry, but you are rambling and I don’t understand what your point it.
He does not have individual Commandments.
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.