Not many liberals can stand to look at Ted Cruz. His condescending facial expressions are matched only by the ridiculously annoying sound of his holier than thou voice. Indeed, Ted Cruz is more suited for the pulpit than the podium.
His appearance on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert was no different. In under a minute of watching this video you’re bound to be wishing you were at the Ed Sullivan Theater so you could walk up to Cruz with a heavy, blunt object to knock some proverbial sense into him with. Colbert got the rare opportunity to do just that — only with logic and reason, and the result is more satisfying than watching Cruz fall to the floor at the business end of a baseball bat.
Cruz believes what he believes, no matter how misguided, so to watch the look on his face when schooled with reality is absolutely priceless.
Related: Colbert slams Trump like only he can.
Watch Colbert make a fool out of Ted Cruz.
Featured image via screen capture
FACT: Reagan was the biggest “tax cutter” in history
FACT: Reagan deeply regreted the amnisty and, in fact, said it was one of his few regrets while President
Everything else is spin. And Charles Topher is an idiot!
I personally don’t know if your first two facts are correct are not, although I suspect they are. However, I do know that your last one is right on the money! Chuckie SUCKS.
Again… Reagan was stuck with a Dem congress that only wanted to spend more and more… FACT
Reagan may have been the biggest “tax cutter” in history. But during the time of said tax cuts, the national debt tripled. FACT.
Reagan was stuck with a Dem congress that only wanted to spend more and more… FACT
When democrats screw up, it’s all on them. When it’s the Republicans, there’s always some outside reason for it. Your side can’t take responsibility… FACT.
We take responsability for recovering the USA after Carter wrecked it, almos beyond repair… Oh, and winning the cold war too 🙂
Because Reagan didn’t have house and senate like evil Husseinobama did to get his evil plan to end America and her freedoms thru the obamadontcare law! Reagan actually cared and loved America unlike Islam terrorist HUSSEINOBAMA
You might have been aiming for irony but you really got it right
Except for that one time Reagan sold weapons to Iraq. But, why pay attention to facts?
FACT: Reagan Raised Taxes ELEVEN Times.
FACT: Reagan knew how to spell Amnesty.
Ted Cruz should be a comedian.
He obviously doesn’t understand the Constitution or the role of the Supreme Court enough to be a politician.
That guy has six, or seven, wins in front of the Supreme Court versus one loss and you are actually going to say he doesn’t know the constitution?
Where, exactly, is he wrong?
At the end he asks about “5 lawyers in Washington” and why we should
let them decide for America. Well, those 5 lawyers comprise a majority
of the SUPREME COURT, and IT IS THEIR CONSTITUTIONALLY MANDATED JOB to
do exactly what he says they have no right to do.
Make up laws from the bench?
Please read the constitution. You will not find this, or the power to determine which laws are constitutional in there. This is a power the SCOTUS carved out for itself out of thin air…
Maybe you missed the part of the Constitution that says ” No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
It was this part of the Fourteenth Amendment on which the court premised their invalidation of state same-sex marriage bans. If Mr. Cruz doesn’t understand THAT, then yes, he at least doesn’t understand the Constitution.
It was a stretch and they know it.
I can prove it with one simple question: Does this brand new right extend to polygamists?
Twist and tangle yourself all you want, you can’t explain how this right can be so selectively applied. What is so inherently magical about the number two, as in two participants, that isn’t equally magical about saying man and woman? Run to the Loving case, but who a person is attracted to or sleeps with is not an immutable trait as ethnicity is.
Twist yourself into a pretzel if you wish, but Ted Olson couldn’t explain it either…
Its not a stretch and you know that. Same-sex marriage bans, by definition deny same-sex couples equal protection under the law by denying them the same status as straight couples. Furthermore, there is no compelling reason or interest the state has in doing so. imposing a moral agenda is not a compelling state function
Polygamy is does not violate 14th Amendment principles because polygamy is illegal for all people, regardless of whether they’re straight or gay.
Just wait kiddo, that nonsense will be chewed up and spit out.
Rights are not parsed out in such ways…
Yes, they are. You know how I know. I went to law school. And not only a law school, one of the top 20 in the nation. Did you?
You’re what they’re turning out? We have truly slipped…
Says the person that clearly doesn’t understand legal analysis on any level whatsoever. Its hilarious that you think that you know anything about law when you clearly don’t. Reading your posts has been hilarious because its obvious that you have no background or knowledge in anything that you purport to know about. And that’s why most of what you’ve said has been completely, bone-heatedly wrong. You should maybe learn what you’re actually talking about before debating with….anyone.
In fact, if anything is evidence of how far we’ve slipped, its the fact that people like you, who purport to speak on issues on which they clearly have no background and don’t even really understand, exist.
Well, much of Europe is about 10 years ahead of us on this. Marriage rates have plummeted despite more people being allowed to marry. Families are shrinking in size or disappearing altogether.
Think this is good? Think again. It takes 2.1 children per couple just to sustain a culture and this assumes usual marriage rates. Much of native Europe averages about 1.4 children per marriage and native US citizens average 1.6.
Doing things your way we have socially criminalized large families, cheapened marriage with no fault divorce and then further cheapened marriage by bastardizing its meaning.
Doing things your way, we are disappearing from the face of the earth.
Sure you know what you’re talking about?…
Okay, you are really stupid. In order to back up the assertion that any of what you’re citing are the consequences of allowing same-sex marriage, you are going to have to establish a CAUSAL LINK between gay marriage and the statistics you are citing. You know what that means right? It means, give me evidence that gay marriage is to blame for decreased fertility rates and higher rates of divorce. Right now, you’re assuming causation or at least correlation in what is quite obviously simply coincidence.
Also, a not-so-slight distinction you might want to take note of: the rate of 2.1 children per couple is what’s needed to sustain the POPULATION at the CURRENT LEVEL, not the SOCIETY ITSELF. There’s a difference between those two.
And actually, social scientists have already identified that decreased fertility rates are more so linked to the level of development in a country. Conditions in developing countries are much more demanding of high fertility rates than are those in developed regions on account of several factors. (1) Developing countries tend to have higher infant or child mortality rates. Therefore, people in developing countries are incentivized to have more children in order to ensure some of them make it to adulthood. Developed regions, which have access to quality medical care (and therefore lower infant mortality rates) don’t really have this problem. (2) There is a higher incentive in developing countries to have more children because more kids equals more labor. Again, in developed countries, this is not really a factor for determination in having children. And (3) people in developing regions also lack the access to contraception and family planning services that we do here in the developed world, which means that there are a lot more “accidents” if you know what I mean.
So, if anything, lower fertility rates are a sign of higher development and advanced society, rather than the “bastardization of marriage” you are clamoring on about.
And either way, at least in the U.S., fertility is also supplemented by other means of population growth, such as immigration.
So, yes, I do know what I’m talking about on this front too. It would appear, however, that again, YOU DO NOT.
So a highly developed society thinks its way to extinction? It takes a minimum of 2.1 kids per married couple to sustain a society. This is a number based upon modern mortality rates, but relies upon historical marriage rates which are not happening.
We are so smart, we are going extinct…
Uh, lower fertility rates does not mean that a society is going to go extinct. Societies usually tend to hit a peak and then their populations drop off and stabilize around certain levels. Its actually a good thing to have lower birth rates, because guess what, the world has TOO MANY people. Seven billion is way too high a number and we need to bring that down because its one of the leading causes of environmental degradation. That’s why there are so many programs by international agencies that attempt to address the high fertility rates in developing countries and bring them down.
Furthermore, the U.S. is still increasing last I checked. You wanna know why? Because we supplement our fertility with immigration. Because this is a country of immigrants. Its countries like Japan and Denmark that have such tight immigration laws that nobody is allowed to come in that really have something to worry about by low fertility rates.
But, either way, you have done nothing to establish a causal link between low fertility rates and low marriage rates and the propagation of same-sex marriage. You have no evidence and I think I can safely conclude that you have no common sense, either.
Under a 14th Amendment Equal Protection inquiry, the issue isn’t “is this right something that people are entitled to?”; the issue is “is one group being disparately treated from another control group? And if so, is there a compelling interest that the state has in discriminating on this bases (i.e. national security, protecting the peace, etc.)?
Let the American citizens decide……what didn’t you understand?
“Let the citizens decide” half the country thought Bush would be a wonderful President and look where that got us. Why is it when the SCOTUS was rearranging Florida laws for Repubs to “put” (not elect) Bush ’43 in office it’s okay. Yet now all of a sudden when they do their job to pass something you all don’t like then it’s, ” they don’t have the right to do that.” Mr. Cruz wasn’t screaming about SCOTUS when he was helping brother Jeb & Roberts figure out ways to go around those same laws, he’s got a problem with now, to get Bush ’43 in.
Over 70% of the US population thought that interracial marriage was wrong when the SCOTUS ruled on it.
Go ahead, say the SCOTUS was wrong on that. Prove yourself a bigot and a racist.
So your cheering on a autocracy………and you don’t even realize it. Which would mean your the true bigot if you say you love this country but don’t support the Constitutional frame work designed to keep your liberties which the government can not take away from you! Get it?
“So your cheering on a idiocracy…and you don’t even realize it.”
YOU’RE. AN.
The irony…
Weak reply….one loses a debate when they repeat the opponent. Explain why you reject the Constitution. There is a 10th amendment, why wouldn’t you allow the democracy to work? Why do you reject citizens voice?
He doesn’t don’t say it in the constitution. He said it in the 14th, if left out its up to the states to decide. not prez or courts the States! Idiot Libs.
The 14th amendment is part of the constitution and was completely misapplied.
What you will not find is the power the court took for itself in Marbury v. Madison…
Marbury v. Madison….which is a long-standing case whose doctrine has not been overturned by any legislation. If Congress took such objection to judicial review, they’d have passed a statute to prevent it.
How does a statute overturn something SCOTUS created in the constitution?
The constitution would need to be amended to revert back to original intent only for SCOTUS to create it again. As Cruz said, it is a move against our republic for SCOTUS to make such arbitrary decisions which create laws out of nothing…
Judicial Review is an implied power of the federal courts, derived in part from Clause 2, Section 2. So the Constitution doesn’t expressly grant SCOTUS and federal courts the power to review acts of Congress. But if Congress really wanted to preclude the courts from doing so, they could pass a statute. However, the fact that they haven’t done so in 200+ years suggests that they don’t mind the court exercising this power.
Also, it is actually found to have been within the original intent of the Founders that the Courts have the power to review the legislation, treaties, etc. in such a fashion. Most notable was Alexander Hamilton, who wrote that “the interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts.” Federalist No. 78.
Judicial review is an implied function of the Courts, derived in part from Clause 2, Section 2. So, while the Constitution doesn’t expressly grant the Courts the power of judicial review, it has been found to be within the Framers’ original intent that the Courts exercise this power. Most notable was Alexander Hamilton, who wrote on this topic in Federalist No. 78.
No, it is not. The constitution is online. Find the text.
The SCOTUS was charged with being the final stop for the nation’s legal cases. That’s it. Review as it has been applied simply isn’t there.
If it were, why wouldn’t SCOTUS do this from day one? The ability was created out of nothing over a political ax to grind…
Again, I’ve read the text of Article III, and yes, the Constitution does not explicitly grant the power of judicial review. Here’s the thing that you’re missing (other than a law degree). Most analysis of statutes, Constitutions, treaties, etc. doesn’t necessarily stop at the black and white text on the page. In fact, several TEXTUAL analytic approaches don’t stop at what’s printed on the page. For example, there are several textual canons of interpretation that invoke reading the statute/Constitution in context. For example, ejusdem generis, noscitur a sociis, in pari materia, the whole act and whole code canons, etc. are all canons of textual interpretation that require a lawyer to look beyond what is merely printed in the text of the statute, Constitution, etc. On the other hand, there are also several substantive canons of interpretation that don’t necessarily refer to the text of the statute but, where there is ambiguity as to what a statute is meant to do in a specific circumstance, can guide a court as to how to rule. For example, the Charming Betsy canon, the constitutional avoidance canon, the rule of lenity, etc. These canons more so try to interpret the intent of the people who passed the statute.
Now, I’m not saying that these canons were used in Marbury v. Madison, BUT the Court did look to what the Framers of the Constitution INTENDED when they gave Article III courts “the judicial Power” with jurisdiction over disputes arising under federal law. And, as I said, there is plenty of evidence among writings of several founders, such as Alexander Hamilton, Luther Martin, Elbridge Gerry, among others, that the power of judicial review was inherent in the Courts. In fact, it was supposed that the traditional role of courts required this power of judicial review. So, in short, judicial review is an IMPLIED power that is derived from both the language of Article III (granting Courts the “judicial power” understood to include judicial review) and Article VI (the Supremacy Clause) as well as the original intent of the Framers.
“…and yes, the Constitution does not explicitly grant the power of judicial review.”
Stop right there…
Oh, poor baby, is that all you could read because you couldn’t understand anything else? My god, you’ve pretty much just proven my point. People like you should not try to debate about law, because you clearly lack any understanding of the field.
Except, you’ve overlooked the fact that the power is actually derived from the text of Article III, which grants “the Judicial Power” to the courts, which has been traditionally understood to include judicial review. But, I’m not gonna make points I’ve already made over and over again in order to make them digestible to somebody such as yourself. In the meantime, maybe you should pick up “Legal Analysis for Dummies.” It might be helpful for somebody like you.
Everything else is moot after your opening statement.
Extra-constitutional power assumed by any agent of the federal government is tyranny…
Wow you are just an blatant stereotype, aren’t you? You’re going to “tyranny” because you don’t like a specific doctrine, which is actually grounded in Constitutional analysis? Newsflash, extraconstitutional means just that. It means that it is NOT derived AT ALL from the Constitution. For example, many of the plenary powers that the federal government assert give it power of immigration control are derived from extraconstitutional sources, such as the understanding of the very nature of sovereignty and whatnot.
Also, not being in the Constitution does not mean that something is automatically tyrannical. For example, the separation of powers doctrine is not anywhere expressly given form IN the Constitution. However, it is a doctrine that has been inferred from the INTENT of the Framers in drafting the Constitution and has been used to COMBAT tyrannical concentration of power in any one branch of government.
Judicial review is somewhere in the middle of this. It is not expressly stated, but it is derived from the MEANING of ACTUAL TEXT of the Constitution.
So, in conclusion, don’t assume that just because you know words like “extraconstitutional” exist means that you know what they mean. Because its quite obvious that you don’t.
Rant and rave all you want. Your first statement makes the rest moot.
If the power is not in the constitution it should not be exercised. If we needed judicial review so bad the constitution should have been amended. This is the reason article five is there…
Uh, no it doesn’t. And I’ve said multiple times why it doesn’t. Just because you’re too stupid and stubborn to accept that you’re wrong doesn’t make you right. Again, stop pretending that you’re a lawyer or even understand law because you’re not and you obviously don’t.
Again, just because something is not in the Constitution DOESN’T make it unconstitutional. Separation of powers is also not in the Constitution but its one of the major principles of Constitutional law. Should all decisions that invoke that doctrine now be thrown out? Obviously not.
And like I said, judicial review is inferred from what IS in the Constitution. Article III vests “the Judicial power” in federal courts. Several Founding Fathers, Hamilton chief among them, thought that it went without saying that “Judicial power” INCLUDES judicial review. The Founding Fathers, in drafting the Constitution, even rejected certain proposals granting the judiciary other means of revising legislative acts because they stated that it would be redundant because courts would already be presumed to have the power of judicial review. And they went on record stating so. For example, Elbrige Gerry said that “[federal judges] would [already] have a sufficient check against encroachments on their own department by their exposition of the laws, which involved a power of deciding on their constitutionality.” The role of the judiciary in Western society in general included judicial review and the Founding Fathers thought that that went without saying.
Also, the fact that the doctrine of judicial review in the U.S. has been in place for OVER TWO HUNDRED YEARS and not once has Congress even attempted to amend the Constitution or pass even a statute preempting the Courts from being able to exercise this power means that all subsequent Congresses have AGREED with them exercising that power. The fact that Ted Cruz doesn’t approve of it does not make it unconstitutional because, guess what, the majority of Constitutional lawyers disagree with him.
So why doesn’t your uneducated self pick up a book…
You’re an idiot. I have said again and again why its not moot. Again, you need to stop pretending you’re a lawyer or even understand law because its obvious that you’re not and that you don’t. Reading a few articles on Wikipedia does not make you an expert. Sorry to burst your bubble, sport.
Like I said, the power of judicial review is inferred from the Constitution because Article III grants “the Judicial power” to federal courts, which has always been understood by Western society IN GENERAL, to include judicial review. Check what the Founding Fathers said themselves during the Constitutional Convention, especially the comments of Elbridge Gerry and Luther Martin.
I’ve explained to you over and over why that’s not true. Just because you don’t want to admit that your wrong doesn’t make you right. When are you going to stop pretending that you’re a lawyer or even understand law. Sorry to bust it to you, but reading a few Wikipedia articles does not make you an expert, sport.
Like I said, Article III grants federal courts “the Judicial Power,” which has historically been understood by Western society in general to include judicial review. Why don’t you actually check what the Founding Fathers said during the Constitutional Convention. Eldridge Gerry specifically said “[federal judges] would have a sufficient check against encroachments on their own department by their exposition of the laws, which involved a power of deciding on their constitutionality…”
Also, the fact judicial has not been challenged by Congress in it’s 200+ history basically backs up my point that Congress itself has no qualms about the courts exercising this power.
Please stop mistaking the fact that you’ve read a few Wikipedia entries with a formal education in law. Seriously, you’re not a lawyer and you obviously don’t understand law.
Here’s a little tidbit for you: just because something is not IN the Constitution does not make it UN-constitutional. Something is unconstitutional if it is found to CONFLICT with what IS in the Constitution or with the general intent behind the Constitution. Judicial review does not conflict with EITHER what is in the Constitution or with its general intent.
So please, stop embarrassing yourself and worry about things that actually impact you, like the increasingly high cost of spam.
You’re painfully uneducated.
God, there is something fundamentally wrong with you.
Please stop mistaking the fact that you’ve read a few Wikipedia entries with a formal education in law. Seriously, you’re not a lawyer and you obviously don’t understand law.
Here’s a little tidbit for you: just because something is not IN the Constitution does not make it UN-constitutional. Something is unconstitutional if it is found to CONFLICT with what IS in the Constitution or with the general intent behind the Constitution. Judicial review does not conflict with EITHER what is in the Constitution or with its general intent.
So please, stop embarrassing yourself and worry about things that actually impact you, like the increasingly high cost of spam.
Love that reply!
Haha. Thanks.
You mean the same Supreme Court he says doesn’t have the power to pass judgment on state laws?
Sorry, you guys have a boy-crush on a total loser.
It’s obvious Colbert does not understand our rights and our constitution. Cruz was giving Colbert a history and constitution lesson.libs just don’t understand Truth.
Sure, moron.
You sure are, Sternn.
Any other breaking news you want to pass our way?…
Yea, here’s some “news” for the likes of you.
Cruz is a one-trick pony who feeds and feeds off of the gullibility of cretins just like you.
Effing idiot
Yes, you are, but my momma told me not to swear at the handicapped.
Ted Cruz is the only one that understands our constitution! Husseinobama and DEMONcRats only follow Islams constitution-sharia law !
Wow, you are one off-the-rails, stupid mthrfckr.
How can a guy born in Alberta. Canada to a Cuban father , run for President of the United States, when the Republicans said Obama, was a Kenyan not an American.???
Well, because Ted’s mother was an American and Obama’s mother, an American, married a black man.
Pontfadog, Any man, even President OBAMA/Barry Soetero, ran as President without even a birth certificate from the Original Hospital and the grades from ANY of the Colleges in which he supposidly attended. With the FACT that his Father was BORN in Africa or Cuba and furthermore he might have been created in Hawaii where his mother and father was living at the time as they both attended college together and then he was conceived and then born (WHO knows where) (his wife and a grandmother said)that he was BORN in Africa, his Father divorced his mother and left both of them in Hawaii where he started to grow up and then his mother became entangled with another man and they took him overseas where he was raised in a MUSLIM country. He shakes the muslim hands and bows before them. Don’t you think that that is a little different? Have you ever seen a President of the U.S. or England bow and bend before another country leader?
Take some meds.
We know Cruz is Brilliant, his transcripts and resume is out there for all to see… Zeros is under seal so no one can see what a real effffing loser he is.. Leader of the Choom Gang is it
Well, take the lead and show us your transcript.
Derschowitz a lib was Cruz’s professor
Yes…..he did say all that when Cruz was a student. But….what did he have to say about him as a politician? Dig it up and see what you find. You may not like it.
you can’t quite stand so much truth, typical racist lib!
Yep, this is way better than shaking hands… just sayin’
Wild speculation at best. And of course, that reasoning is born out of frustration that a black man won office. So he must have, just must have lied, cheated and stole the election like a black man would, right?
And UNamerican was Husseinobama mother and father antiAmerican! And they were proabortion so why wasnt barry aborted? Because his destiny was to take down America for the lefts dream utopia NewWorldOrder! The islamcaliphate began with the illegal election of one of Islams own as president of US in 2008!
You are a gibbering lunatic, basically.
And you are a blind sheeple lib. Like the rest of Husseinobamasfollowers. Someone finally said HUSSEINOBAMAs plan since his first campaign in 07 to Europe. “Leader of the “citizens of the world. ” dictator of the NewWorldOrder. As lefts puppetmaster mega zillionaire antisemetic nazijew GeorgeSchwatrz Soros said the only standing between me and my NewWorldOrder is the United States.” He’s collapsed every economy. HE promised spoiled child dictatorship of the world Husseinobama never wanted to be president of US he never acted like a president MrNarcisistCelebrityInChief wants to be God. Tho he’s antiGod. With all his visits with pope Francis he’s setting up a government religion.too! Husseinobama friends Chavez Castro achmidinijad yes with the islmoNazi said hi was the 12th imam, and that’s what he’s acted like. But they control the media that’s what the sheeple follo
What time are you due back at the Home?
Libs are such mean condensating hypocrites
Condensating hypocrites? You mean, we change the putrid gases you emit into the recognisable solidity of excrement? Nice one! Very, very accurate, too!
It’s sad that people wearing tin foil hats has went out of style, because at least we could know to avoid you lol
Even better! We need to preserve this post forever! I have to admit, trying to decipher the name strings is making my eyes cross, but someone who can start a rant against Obama and bounce from “nazijew” Soros to ChavezCastro and throw in the term “islmoNazi” -I have got to go to an online dictionary and check on what an “islmo” is…ditto “achmidinijad”-maybe a German genie?-is someone spewing nonsense of such an awesome caliber it simply must be preserved for posterity! And does anyone know what a “sheeple follo” is? I’m fairly familiar with the TP word “sheeple” but I’m assuming that the word follo changes the connotations of “sheeple” in some way…..Can anyone translate for me?
sheeple follo……….look in a mirror
Wow. What a turgid spewing of lies, half-lies and just plain nuttiness! I’m in awe. Someone unscrew this person’s head and add some brains. Or at least dump out all the trash!
because Cruz isn’t black or a Democrat.
If you would actually read the naturalization law at it existed at the time of both President Obama and Ted Cruz’s birth you would know.
The parent who was a citizen of the United States at the time of the birth of the child would’ve had to live in the United States a certain number of years after their 18th birthday. If President Obama were born in Kenya he would not qualify as being a citizen at birth…
“If President Obama were born in Kenya he would not qualify as being a citizen at birth.” But he wasn’t he was born inn Hawaii. get over it.
I was pointing out how the law applies to each person. Get over yourself…
Just like another blind sheeple lib. Will be led to the slaughter! He’s not following our constitution but I stilling his- sharia law! The islamcaliphate began with the illegal election of one of Islams own as president of US in 2008! Making him dictator of the”citizens of the world!”NewWorldOrder.
He was an anchor baby illegal aliens
No Hillary Clinton said that FIRST … You libs tend to forget.. Just as you forget who wrote the Jim Crow laws.. Democrats !! Or who was the the a sitting Senator and ex KKK member until he passed .. Robert Byrd.. A Democrat..
You do know that the Democrats of that time would be the Republicans of now, right?
Absolutely not… No Republican today stands for any of the sh*t Democrats have ever stood for. Look at the 16 Presidential candidates on the GOP side.. As diverse as can be.. Look at the left.. What a stark contrast.. Just this week the POS president blocked a 13 yr old black boy from following him on twitter because he’s conservative and the prez has thin skin
Only thing Dems stand for today is to get rid of America and socialism wanting their dream utopia NewWorldOrder! The difference between parties are republican are idiots and democrats are Evil!- DEMONcRats from lucifer their playbook is RulesFor radicals and dedication is to lucifer the father of lies!
I read your posts and I hear the music from The Twilight Zone.
I have been looking at the candidates on the GOP side, especially that guy Trump who called all Mexican immigrants to the U.S. rapists and cheered on a guy who said derogatory remarks about President Obama being a Muslim….and then SURGED in the polls because of it. Also, there’s that guy Ben Carson who said that a Muslim should never ever be eligible for the U.S. Presidency, regardless of the fact that we have enshrined in our Constitution that religion would not be a prerequisite for holding office. Plus, you did miss the whole about how the first African American President we’ve ever had IS a Democrat. The Republicans of today would be the same people who opposed the passage of the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s. If you don’t know that, then you just basically don’t know modern American history.
And because this one conservative kid was blocked Obama’s Twitter (which he probably doesn’t PERSONALLY administer), that translates to Obama being racist? Please. Now I know you’re trolling.
First off Trump never said all Mexicans . He said Mexico sends a lot of bad actors to this country and there is absolutely no denying that. Every sanctuary city must be defunded immediately. Trump is neither a Republican or Democrat . He’s actually more of a Democrat if you go by his past. I agree with Ben Carson there should never be a Muslim in the WH. Everyone should agree on that if you’re watching what’s going on in the world. You think Republicans are far right ? Muslims are so far right they’re off the map. You need to wake up buddy. Go see what’s happening in Britain , how the Muslims are taking to the streets and beating women for not covering up . What do you think Muslims do to gays? Is that the type of religion you want leading this nation ? Muslims are not tolerant and its not a peaceful religion. If you believe so you’re more blind than Stevie Wonder. One last thing Trump never cheered the Muslim plant at his rally.. He ignored him. And by the way it was proven to be a Democrat plant.. Kim Davis the lady from Kentucky who refused to issue gay marriage licenses.. A lifelong Democrat. Your party is the party of racism. Let’s not forget who wrote the Jim Crow laws.. DEMOCRATS
Oh, so he was just referring to Mexican immigrants…yeah, that’s not better. I’ll remember those statements next time the statistics come in, which show that the majority of immigrants are NOT violent offenders. Did you know that between 2010 and 2014, only about a thousandth of a percent of illegal immigrants were charged with violent crimes? Or that data offered by the CRS shows that immigrant populations are overall LESS likely to commit crimes than those foreign born? No, of course you don’t. Because you would rather hate than look at cold hard facts.
Guess what? All of the Muslims I know are leftist democrats. They respect gays and women and preach peace and nonviolence.
And lets not forget that the KKK is a christian terrorist network that is 5,000 to 8,000 strong right HERE in the U.S.A. Where’s the outrage that Christians shouldn’t be allowed in the White House because of their terrorist activities, huh? According to Interpol reports, 99.6% of terrorists are NON-Muslim and NON-Muslims carried out more than 90% of all terrorist attacks on U.S. soil.
And you’re forgetting that there is such a thing as video. I saw video of Trump at his rally. He said verbatim “I like this guy” to the guy who screamed derogatory remarks about Muslims.
Your attacks on the Democratic Party for being the party of racism is about 60 years too late. You do realize it was Northern Democrats’ support for the passage of the Civil Rights Act that led to the schism between Northern and Southern Democrats and caused the Southern ones to flock to the REPUBLICAN party, don’t you? If not, you’re obviously a complete and utter idiot. Although, that was obvious already.
Also, guess what Kim Davis is now…a Republican. Its the same thing that happened back in the 60s with the Civil Rights Act. The mainstream Democrats took the position of tolerance, so the bad actors flocked over to the party of INTOLERANCE: the REPUBLICANS.
Do you not see the irony of you trying to paint Democrats as intolerant racists all while you cast racist assertions on not only Muslims but Mexican immigrants.
The Left pick and choose what they want to hear and believe. Not the Truth. -oxyMorons. The left from lucifer the father of lies. HUSSEINOBAMA the LyinKing. Him and adviCzar administration. Husseinobama only education two playbooks dedicated to Lucifer the father of lies is RulesFor Radicals and the Quran. Making our constitution his shariah law.
oxyMorons!!! Hahahahahaha!
Do your homework on CJ Pearson. You’ll find that no one is directing him unlike the Muslim bomb/clock maker whos father is an activist . It was also confirmed this week that this family has pulled this stunt a couple of years ago with the boys older sister. Talk about directed , when questioned the boys family told him what to say. He couldn’t answer without being spoon fed the answers . That story was told by Mark Cuban a Democrat who called the boy to get the full story. Cubans analysis after talking to the boy is that they’re all lying and full of sh**
Here’s what we need to know about Ahmed Mohamed, the 9th grade boy that you call a bomb maker: (1) It WASN’T a bomb; (2) he was arrested by the police even after they had already confirmed it WAS NOT A BOMB. So please, take your crazy somewhere else, psychopath.
Husseinobama open likes the boy because he’s him a child of “Muslim faith. “. The Left dream utopia NewWorldOrder IS the islamcaliphate which started with the illegal election of one of Islams own as president of US in 2008!
Next time in English please.
Please write your yarns in your original birth language, then use one of the many translation apps available to convert it into readable English.
Dems don’t stand for anything America stands for
CJ Pearson a 13 yr old dared to take to social media backing Ted Cruz and the President blocked him
Proof? I mean, really….proof. I note that you named no names.
True History is proof. Not lib progressive history starting with Woodrow Wilson. Every progressive president since old Woodrow started Americas decline.
I’ve posted the pic directly off the kids twitter page on this thread a couple of times .. Go to CJ Pearson’s twitter page you’ll see it
Absolute rubbish. That rumour was proven wrong 4+ days ago. Not only was he NEVER blocked, but the “post” sent to his adoring minions showing the purported screen grab was typed in fonts not used on Twitter. It was a fabrication. Also, others reported seeing him still following @POTUS!
Well on the way to being a solid Rethug: he lies very badly - which is sad for a 13 year-old.
Yes john Kennedy would be a Republican today
No. He wouldn’t.
Does he really strike you a smart enough to grasp that?
Well, obviously he’s not. But I try to speak truth to idiocy wherever I find it. Whether its this one or that other one who believes he’s a lawyer, but is obviously not.
…And AbeLincoln who freed the slaves was a republican. Who freed the people. Dems are oxyMorons. Dems are the ones that say they’re against war but every war was states by a dem. there is no Dems anymore they’re all socialistprogressive! That hate America.
You need to go back on your meds, kiddo. Let’s recount, shall we.
Invasion of Grenada - Reagan (Republican)
First Gulf War - Bush I (Republican)
Afghanistan War - Bush II (Republican)
Iraq War - Bush II (Republican)
Yes Right Wing Crazies used to be Democrats, Actually ever since Liberal Lincoln freed the Slaves. They ran back home to the GOP 60 years ago when the Dems embraced Civil Rights. You’re only a half a Century behind the times, not too bad for Wing Nut.
Cruz is a legal citizen unlike illegal alien Husseinobama. Libs make their own rules and only listen to themselves and their lies. No truth in Libs.
See Available strains Good medical marijuana 4 4 3) 7 3 2-5 7 7 0
for Pain, cancer, insomnia We got some MEDICAL marijuana/weeds real
Mary Jane good for and we do also provide medical cards to all our
clients willing to buy meds for their sick and doesn’t have a card NHGHHGG
I do not remember Cruz or any other Republican complaining about 5 lawyers (the Supremes) deciding to stop counting votes (and give the election to Bush) or when they stretched credibility and inflicted us with Citizens United!
The votes were counted four times. Chris Matthews had to acquiesce to this point when he interviewed Ted Cruz. How many more times was the nation supposed to wait while the Florida Supreme Court altered Florida statutes in order to continue counting votes?
Maybe if Florida would have had another governor other than the Bush, we might have had an election that reflected the will of the people. Instead we got closed polls, polling places changed without notice at the last minute, and crazy ballots that were difficult to figure out, with the democrat candidate’s box not matching the square for the vote. Add to this the travesty of the hanging chads, and you can see that the small percentage that allowed Bush the win was manipulated and that the whole Republican victory was a sham.
1) The will of the people was reflected.
2) The polls were not closed.
3) All ballot locations were published before election day. Many republican polling places changed as well.
4) A democrat designed that ballot and an example appeared in the paper prior to election day. No one complained.
5) The only way you get dimpled or improperly punched chad is to put more than one ballot in the slot at a time. No one could duplicate either of these occurrences on even the oldest of machines.
6) Governor Bush led through the entire process. At no point whatsoever did VP Gore lead in the count.
7) The only way the VP had a chance of winning Florida is if there were a state wide recount using the preponderance of the rest of the ballot to divine an intent for the voter to count all under votes with all other ballots.
This means even ballots in which no marking appeared near any choice for president would be assigned to a candidate based on the balance of other choices.
What could have possibly gone wrong?…
Al Gore won the popular vote. There’s no rewriting history, here, ok.?. Plus, Jebba Bush and his cohort Katherine Harris, removed tens of thousands of legal voters from the voting rolls, all in Democratic areas. It’s called “purging.” Plus, the recount was almost complete when it was shut down by the Supremes acting on the Bush’s many lawyers behest.
Too bad the popular vote is meaningless.
No legal votes were removed. The option to swear an oath and file a contested ballot was available to everyone if a mistake was made. The problem is if the person is found to be lying they would face charges. Oddly some people simply walked away. Hmmmm…
The votes were counted four times and the fifth count was a week away from being complete. Many counties stopped counting because it would be impossible to complete even with the unlawfully extended deadline.
The SCOTUS slapped down the Florida SC because they were making new laws from the bench, not applying them equally and completely the send down SCOTUS sent them earlier…
“Too bad the popular vote is meaningless.” I bet you wouldn’t echo that statement if a Republican lost because the Electoral College decided NOT to use the popular vote.
Conservatives always whine and complain about institutions when the results don’t go their way, but praise those same institutions when it does.
Yes, I would. I am a conservative federalist. We do not decide the presidency via popular vote. We decide using the electoral college. Until that is changed via amendment, no whining about the popular vote is allowed. Do not pretend you know me.
I sense a great deal of projection in your post…
It’s irrelevant who won the popular vote. We are a Constitutional Republic, not a Democracy.
And the the Democrats refused to allow miltary absentee ballots to be counted. Popular vote does not decide the election the Electoral Collage does and it does it so every State Large and small has a say in who is President. This is Democratic Republic not a Democracy
BS!
Because Dems are liars and theives their playbook rulesforradicals was dedicated the the ultimate father of lies- Lucifer!
First of all there was a law a recount. And according to law only one recount was allowed not multiple ones.
And as usual the dens kept the military overseas vote from being counted! Look it up! How many military bases are in Florida ?
How long were we supposed to wait? Until Every Vote Was Counted. The Florida Court didn’t change any statutes, that’s ridiculous and you know it. Have you read the Supremes’ Decision in Bush v Gore? It said that W’s right to “equal protection” trumped the rights of 130,000,000 voters. That was the most disgraceful decision since Korematsu.
Until there was an honest unobstructed counting.
Will that happen with the hippies spoiledchildrenn demoncrapsocialistparty in charge as president and adviczar administration
Your statement are sounding more ridiculous with every post. Good show!
There was. The media consortium found the only way Gore could possibly win Florida was if the recount were statewide and ~all~ under votes were counted for a presidential candidate, even if no indication whatsoever was present, based on the preponderance of the rest of the ballot.
This means if the rest of the ballot went majority Dem a vote would be assigned to Gore even if no marking appeared anywhere in the presidential space. The same would go for Bush on a majority Rep ballot. In other words, Gore lost. Get over it already.
Put it this way, if Gore won his home state the presidency was his. The people who knew him best rejected him…
How quickly we forget Al Franken pulling boxes of ballots unsecured by the way from the trunk of a car to be counted to beat Norm Coleman to give the Communist Party 60 votes in the Senate and Unconstitutional POScare
Dave you need to learn the facts the Supreme Court ruled because the Florida Supreme Court over stepped it’s authority. That is why the Chief Justice of the Florida Supreme Court did not take part in the 2nd ruling when the US Supreme Court send back their first ruling.
Libs only hear what they want to hear not the truth. For Libs have NoTruth and NoGod. While conservatives have Know Truth because they KnowGod.
Can’t have something that doesn’t exist.
Umm, Reagan was elected in 1980 and inaugurated in 1981. So anything happening in 1978-1980 was not on Reagan, Mr. Cruz.
He’s saying that things were crappy from 78-82. Reagan made changes that started having an effect in 82. That’s all.
Yes there was a lot of good Reagan wanted to do but didn’t have the house and senate because Dems are so partisan and never worked with repubes..
Actually its an historical fact how well Reagan and the Democrats worked together. Just another example of a Right Winger who has no clue on the actual history of the Reagan Administaration.
TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS REAGAN … IF HE WERE ALIVE TODAY … WOULD BE A DEMOCRAT … AND NOT A MEMBER OF WHATS LEFT OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY!
Truth of the matter is, (actually) Reagan started as a Democrat. And just because the Republican leadership has mostly lost its way (by caving to Democrats) (which is what Colbert is advocating, by the way) doesn’t mean Reagan would go all the way, and cave fully to the liberal agenda, by becoming a Democrat again.
No Reagan would not be a Democrat today if he was alive he hated Communism and Socialism and that is what the Democrat Party is tofay
Democratic socialism is a political ideology advocating a democratic political system alongside a socialist economic system, involving a combination of political democracy with social ownership of the means of production.
There is no suggestion that the ‘means of production’ be taken over by the government by anyone running of office so your argument is a red-herring.
And I guess then Repubilcants can be associate with the hate groups in this country and the KKK. And associate themselves with the ultra rich like the Kock brothers, who seem to be running the repubs anyway. Or at least Mitch McConnell seems to be so beholding to them.
The KKK was a creation of southern WASP democrats like Sen Robert Byrd!! It actually began in the southern part of Indiana. They hated everyone that was black, brown, red yellow, Jewish or Catholic, or any religion other than Protestant……
Byrd repented his bad choices unlike other Dixiecrats who joined the GOP. Google “Southern Strategy.”
hate groups, that would be the whole of the progressive socialist party…..
I’m sorry but the KKK is a democratic idea. If you tried to do a little research, I know its hard, you would find out that the Koch Bros contribute to the democrats too and have some liberal ideas. Do you also hate Soros who gives the democrats lots of money? Whats it like to walk through life a moron?
the democrats of the past where also more conservative. thats not the democrats of today
The KKK is a racist idea, not a Democratic idea. The Dixiecrats were often KKK supporters but after the passage of the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts the opposition became located in the GOP. The racist party today is the GOP.
It’s the Democratic Party and it has nothing to do with socialism. Socialism is where the government owns all the companies and pays all the wages. Read a book.
that is total BS, you have no clue what Reagan stood for and accomplished, it certainly wasn’t want dems stand for today, which is a society of leaches.
Who told you that, Rush? Check your information sources.
There is no way Reagan would be a socialist or a communist!
Neither is Bernie.
…….i dont think so. he wouldnt believe in the Republican party today but still would be Republican. he already switched parties once
He was a democrat before he switched parties. When he decided to run for office of the Presidency, he changed his affiliation to Republican.
Reagan Never! Even JFK would be a republican today. There is no demoncratparty the Dems they’re all antiamerican socialists.
SCHOOL that boy who wants to be an Irishman. That iddyutt just hypes his lies and misinformation.
Liberal demoncrapsocialistparty are the ones filled with lies and misinformation.. They are the professional liars and Husseinobama is the LyinKing controlled by mega zillionaire George Soros evildude who controls everyone plus the lamestream media! No republican has as much money as the democrat
The liberal agenda is the only one that works..Republicans just want a theocracy and to worship that criminal Ronald Reagan.
Bovine excrement, John!!!
The Theocratic designs of many of the Clown Car candidates are clear. You can;t govern all the country if you are only catering to Fundamentalists.
works for the leach party, what cha gonna do when other peoples money runs out? liberals are destroying our country and handing it to islam and mexicans and the chineese
Racist much?
No, that’s corporations, but I see their PR has you fooled.
And you expect an educated man to make sense of this? If you went to public school (Doubtful), used a library (highly doubtful), put your kids (again, highly doubtful) in public school, used police, fire, bridges, highways, received welfare and food stamps (highly likely) then YOU, Mister Wannabe-Irishman, are a SOCIALIST, TOO! Iddyutt.
Endless incorrect nonsense strung together. Alcohol? Meth? Oxy? What makes your brain function this poorly? Enquiring minds want to know.
Nope it’s you Libs that spout lies and misinformation! Never knowing the truth! Because Libs father the father of lies-Satan.
You lib just proved my point and disproved your own. That Reagan worked with Dems but Dems never worked with reps.
You are NO SAINT and there is absolutely no freaking way you could EVER be a St Patrick, so please don’t even try. Not even on March 17, please just stay away. You are just another rethug spewing his lies and hate and MISinformation. (And if you are curious, the ending of MY name IS PATRICK!) arsewhole.
stpatwanabe KevinFitzz
a few seconds ago
Liberal demoncrapsocialistparty are the ones filled with lies and misinformation.. They are the professional liars and Husseinobama is the LyinKing controlled by mega zillionaire George Soros evildude who controls everyone plus the lamestream media! No republican has as much money as the democrat
0
Did you read what B4Cons just wrote? He is correct. 100% correct, wannabe Irishman.
yes reagen knew how to keep ammo from marines ,so that 221 got killed plus some other troops oct 23 1983 Beruit Lebanon ,he and traitor Tip o”Neil covered it up ,
Umm, you should probably re-watch this and pay attention this time, thanks.
You should probably not be so condescending, thanks.
See my reply to Scott above.
You only paid attention to what you wanted to hear, listening only to lib Colbert not really listened to conservative Cruz.
need to go back and listen to the statement again
I listened to it the first time. And also the second time, and what he said was:
“You know when Reagan came in from 1978 to 1982, economic growth averaged less than 1% a year… blah blah blah…”
try again
No thanks. Three times was enough.
Reagan admitted he “wasn’t perfect after all I was once a democrat!” But the democrats back then isn’t the democrat today! Today’s Democrat are evil socialists. And true (noRinos or Dino’s)republicans care for the Republic as we were created (for and by the people) not as a democracy…a democracy is what Chavez and Castro has.
you need to relisten to what he says, he says Reagan’s predecessor.
Ah, he made the mistake of underestimating Colbert’s intelligence - which is formidable. He thought he was just another comedian and he could snowplow his way through the interview the way he usually does. Not this time Mr. Cruz.
Typical bias opinion…Cruz clearly won the argument and quieted the morons
If you are referring to the audience as the morons, I believe it was Mr. Colbert who silenced them - which was a very classy thing to do. And, what argument are you referring to? There was none only the stating of facts which is always difficult to argue.
This guy just makes my skin crawl. Point 1: At the end he asks about “5 lawyers in Washington” and why we should let them decide for America. Well, those 5 lawyers comprise a majority of the SUPREME COURT, and IT IS THEIR CONSTITUTIONALLY MANDATED JOB to do exactly what he says they have no right to do. Point two: If you LISTEN to what he says here and then LOOK AT HIS RECORD you will find that he does exactly the opposite of what he says here. I firmly believe this man is a Russian mole in our government. The last time he led the effort to shut down the government, and it did, Putin moved on the Crimea and the Ukraine. Since the government was “closed” we could do nothing until it was too late. Cruz is talking about shutting down the government again, just as Putin has moved forces into Syria. Watch and see what happens. Personally, I hope I’m completely wrong, but I doubt it.
HHMMM… Interesting.
Just looking at this scumbag Cruz makes me want to hurl. Make him go away PULEEZE!
I couldn’t bring myself to watch Colbert the night Cruz was on because I just want to punch him in the throat. However, Cruz seems to conveniently forget that the Constitution that he says he believes in allows for the separation of powers into the 3 branches of our government. One of those branches allows for the Supreme Court. I hope Stephen reminded him of that.
The Supreme Court does not make law………..they interpret the existing laws. There is no law pertaining to marriage in the constitution and the 14th Amendment never included marriage.
Welllll then, I guess we should just roll back all civil rights legislation as well. Take us allll the way back? Why not, that seems to be what republikkkans want.
The Jim Crow laws were written by Democrats.. Margret Sangers mission for planned parenthood was to exterminate all blacks yet its she who Democrats are wanting to make the face of the $20 bill. Ever heard Killarys voice when she goes to the south to rally.. Listen closely , suddenly shes no longer white
Look at that, another Obama Democrat with absolutely nothing to say!
Oh, I’ve got plenty to say, you’re just too stupid to hear it.
Really? And where did YOU get YOUR law degree, idiot?
Its basic 7th grade Civics dumbf**k..
Colbert is a clown!
Yes, move to Cuba and take the US Constitution with you. Some people ^ don’t want that old rag.
Actually Colbert is a comic. It’s Cruz, along with almost the entire republican field of candidates that are the real clowns.
Total B/S!!! Cruz could never be bested by some politically ignorant left wing wannabe comic!!!
Oh, but he was though!
Colbert is a Douchebag .. Ted was being extremely kind to him
Ted Cruz whipped Colbert not the other way around! Ted showed Steve our rights as Americans. Colbert is a selfish idiot.lib.
78-82 Reagan came in in 80…
Cruz doesn’t insult his opponents he says. Yet he just called The President of the United States the most powerful Communist in the world, and that he belonged in Leavenworth Prison. I’m pretty sure he meant that as an insult.
No I believe he was talking about Killary when he said Leavenworth
Another issue for the states is who can vote for President — yet the Constitution lays out parameters who who may not be excluded from voting, like women and anyone 18 or over. It also rules that people may not be excluded from voting because of their race.
So to a degree, Cruz is right — marriage is a states’ issue. The Constitution only points out who may not be denied the right to marry, and now the states may not refuse marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
Clearly, the republican party is the party people with IQs under 80 join.
Bullshit is your name so just keep spewing more Bullshit .. Sadly you’ve began believing your own bullshit
No matter what liberals watch they twist it to meet their needs whether it’s the truth or not. In point of fact, Cruz educates Colbert in this video after Colbert tries to put words in Cruz’s mouth.
Hey Pot, meet Kettle…
As usual, so many knee-jerk comments here revealing that most of you liberals either don’t understand the Constitution or merely mouth platitudes about it that untrue. Just know that the day is coming……………………………………
Sure it is…
Ted Cruz is nothing more than a snake oil salesman
Hate to say it, but sounds like Cruz schooled Colbert on more than just Reagan. I guess the author was scoring by the applause level after Colbert asked the question. Apparently, he didn’t listen to the answers. Selective listening…….a common disease on the left.
No, you loved saying it.
However, you could not be more wrong, so it doesn’t matter.
That’s your reply? You don’t win many debates on substance, do you?
Dummass, this is the internet.
When was the last time you saw “substance” anywhere on it?
You guys crack me up.
He says he believes in the Constitution, but then he asks why we would want 5 unelected people to decide our rights. Uhh, I don’t know, but just guessing here, Ted. Maybe because those 5 unelected people are a majority of the Supreme Court, which was created by the Constitution.
What I just watched was a great example of what’s severely lacking in our country: good political debate.
No one ‘schooled’ anyone. I wish we had more of this type of back and forth instead of the political ‘gotcha’ game that goes on all the time.
These repubs out here have themselves convinced with manufactured numbers and avoid the facts to push their jihad. They will be good Arabs.
Cruz is a pandering hack. It’s preposterous to suggest that
marriage rights should be left up to the states. If that were the case the
“majority’ would be voting on the basic human rights for all including the
minority. The majority should not decide the rights of the minority
population. If we allowed ‘rights’
to be voted on then African-American’s would not be allowed to marry White
people, least of all the other provisions decided by the civil rights act. . The seed of American Democracy, the
Declaration of Independence states clearly that “…….all men are created equal, that
they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among
these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” For Cruz to suggest
that a person’s right to pursue happiness should be left up to a vote is in
direct conflict with the most basic tenet of American Democracy.
Did Ronald Regan walk on water? I must have missed that.
Conservatives have very selective memories.
on 9/11 we were attacked by a group of Saudi’s ….. Bush’s response was to invade Iraq which is their enemy (look up Shiites and Sunnis) … talk about bowing to a Prince …… Dumbya bent over and took it.
Not like the islambrotherhood terrorist LyinKing Husseinobama ! Libs just can’t see anybody s opinion but their own.
No, we just dismiss opinions from people that share the same intelligence and ability to communicate as your average lawn chair.
Did anyone here watch the video? If you didn’t read the horribly biased and ridiculous page it is posted on, you would think that this sounded like a very reasonable conversation between two men. I am no fan of Cruz, but in no way did anyone school anyone here. This page is just more hyper-partisan garbage to add to the pile of them across the internet.
I’ve looked at your many, many comments and I have a few thoughts. First, I am glad you’re a republican, because progressives and democrats don’t want to be associated with lunatics. Secondly, perhaps you might want to lay off the caffine or diet pills or meth or maybe it’s simply hate fueling your tirade, but whatever it is, it’s unhealthy to be using it in such high doses because it’s obviously affecting your mind and behavior. Did you know that hateful, delusional people die at a much higher rate than rational, kind people? It’s a fact, look it up.
Someday Liberals and Conservatives will realize the Democrats and Republicans want you all fighting over nonsense. You all should take a closer look at what the Democrats and Republicans agree on. The list is a lot longer than you think. We never change position on these topics. Ever wonder why our foreign policy never really changes, or our military spending remains high? How about focusing on the problems we have with corporations controlling the politicians. Until we break the partisanship of the Democrats and Republicans bankrolled by the super rich, we are going to continue on a downward spiral as a nation.
There is no more parties! Just greedy political class. Repubes became Dems and Dems became socialist. And the Dems just vote D not for the person. Repubes are idiots and DEMONcRats are Evil. That’s why Carson Carly and trump radiate with the people they’re not party people they like America. UNlike politicians on antiamerican antisemetic nazijew GeorgeSchwatrz Soros dime along with the media who all want NewWorldOrder oneworld government little do the politicians know Husseinobama is the head of the islamcaliphate UNder Shariah
Law.
CRUZ IS AN UN-ELECTABLE TWIT!
I believe Ted Cruz schooled Colbert, this is Ted Cruz at his best, although being booed and applause from Colbert audience he was right on target. Way to go Ted you are looking better every day, hang in there I’m pulling for you. God bless you and God bless America again.
Inconvenient fact #1: Reagan tripled the national debt. Inconvenient fact #2: The 14th Amendment says that no state can “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” So state laws (including marriage bans) that discriminate against gay people are contrary to the US Constitution. I wish someone would ask Cruz about Loving v. Virginia, the Supreme Court ruling legalizing interracial marriage nationwide- it was decided on the same basis.
Reagan compromised with the democrats regarding amnesty because they said they would fund reinforcing the border. As usual, republicans owned up to their end of the bargain and dems defunded theirs.
The problem I have with the last remark by Cruz when he said “Change the laws by going to the ballet box,” well…if people voted it is ok to kill your neighbor on Sunday, according to his argument….that would be ok if it was voted for.
Obama has separated us like no other. That’s why we have the racial tension that we didn’t have before he came. Also between parties, it’s harder to even want to compromise because of the atmosphere he has created, so I don’t blame Mr Cruz for not agreeing to want to compromise.
Can you list the ways Obama separated us? You mean, by lowering the unemployment rate? Or by getting enemy no. 1 Osama bin Laden? Or do you mean by putting our economy back in better shape than when the previous president left it? Do you mean getting out of two wars under his watch and saving tax payer money by not getting into any other wars? Or do you mean getting more people than ever before covered with health insurance? What are those divisive things to which you are referring?
The title of this clip is amusing. Because it’s Colbert that gets schooled, after his narrow perspective comments are thrown out.
Um, no, not at all.
Colbert did not school Cruz on who Reagan was. Because Colbert got everything he said about Reagan wrong look up the facts. Colbert did not have a clue as to what he said
I do not see the interview as you revisionist socialists do! Much of it was cut at the end where Sen. Cruz was about to take the comedian to the woodshed. I voted for Reagan, I remember. He lowered taxes. He agreed with the soon to be Socialists to amnesty if a fence were built. His major fault was the dems never built the fence! Supply side economics work! He proved it! But George H Bush called it Voodoo Economics and raised taxes after he promised not to!
“Facts are Stubborn things” Ronald Reagan
made it to 2:38, and I heard myself screaming through my headphones!
one little click and you and your lies are gone!
Govt grew more under Reagan than any previous president. Raised taxes 8 times. Tripled the deficit, which was more than Washington to Carter combined. He supported the Brady Bill, which was the largest gun control bill ever passed. Signed the first bill in the U.S. legalizing abortion as Governor of California. Anything else you want to know.
Reagan admitted he “wasn’t perfect after all I was once a democrat!” But the democrats back then isn’t the democrat today! Today’s Democrat are evil socialists. And true (noRinos or Dino’s)republicans care for the Republic as we were created (for and by the people) not as a democracy…a democracy is what Chavez and Castro has.
you are really that stoopid, aren’t you?
Who’s the stupid one the one who can’t spell stupid- you idiot lib
So you’re saying the Dems had all the control? With that logic, then all the gains that Cruz is suggesting were the results of Reagan - were actually the results of the Democrats - because - as you say, they had all the control. Which is it. Can’t have it both ways. Bad things because dems controlled everything and wouldn’t work with Reagan….or Good things because - Reagan is Magic?
Ron M - there you go again being rational and logical
Rethugs refused to work will Obama coming in the door!! and calling people names because they dont agree with you is so…………old!!
No you have no facts! The Dems are the thugs that refused to work with the republicans. Obama Reid Peloshit and Dems never worked with the republicans. Li berals are liars.and HUSSEINobama is the LyinKing.
These Republicans think that compromises means doing what they want. There isn’t a partner to compromise with.
You got your facts wrong. Repubes work with Dems. It’s Harry Reid and Pelosi and the demoncRat party that refused to work with the republicans.
The record is clear and you are not correct. GOP members know they will get primaried by their base if they stray on taxes or the ACA or the Abortion issue, so they have no incentive to compromise. They just try sneaky games to get their way while obstructing the President.
You are confusing rep for Dems. You are so partisan you can’t see what’s actually happening. No one stops this president he ignores congress and the American people and does Ebeeything executive order. Reid Never Wirked with republicans
He has fewer executive orders than any Predient since Grover Cleveland. You should check out that ignorance thing before you have any kids, it could be congential. How does it feel to be so wrong but think you are right?
Ask yourself that question how does it feel to be so wrong thinking you’re always? Left are very seldom Right.
I’m right about the executive oreders though. aren’t I genius. About a lot of things compared to you. I guess the smart conservatives are laughing at rubes like you who help them grab the big bucks and play divide and rule. Enjoy the Clinton Administrations.
The problem wasn’t Reagan the problem. Was every progressive president since Woodrow Wilson! They all work for Saul alinsky and George soros. Soros was behind the clintons and Obamas. The Left playbook a RulesForRadicals book dedicated to Lucifer-the father of lies. Bought and paid for by Soros another evildude For his NewWorldOrder.
FDR worked for Saul Alinsky and George Soros? You are too much. Proof positive that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. On the GOP side there are ten+ donors who give more than Soros. Too much Infowars, stpatwannabe.
Never said fdr work for alinsky but that is the progressive playbook. Wake up. Before our God given freedoms are gone.
They were given by the Constitution, not a god and we are fighting for freedom.
There finally, figured out your problem. You’re atheist. Nuf said
Of course I am an atheist, there’s no evidence for the thousands of gods humans have invented.
Humans didn’t invent God. God invented humans. Who created you, how do you exist? Why do you exist?
evil socialist, yet nearly everyone in the United State is also a socialist and if you can’t figure that out, go back and finish third grade.
You’re the idiot socialist. Grow up. You sad lib.
Don’t use big words when you don’t know what they mean.
You are nearly too ignorant to reply to.
Only an idiot lib spouts to name calling. Reagan didn’t have the house or senate under his control the way the obomba did with idiots Reid and Peloshit. Anything bad you say Reagan did it was the Dems that did the bad. Just like the Dems with Reid and Peloshit blaming Bush for their antiamericanism.
HAHAHAHAHAHA. Too ignorant.
Not ignorant maybe naive. But it’s better than what you are name calling lib of idiocracy. Hahaha
It’s not name calling. Ignorance is a state that can be changed. You can learn, it’s okay.
You’re correct, however the cause was the fact Reagan had a democrap House for 8 years & a demonrat Senate for 6 of his 8 year tenure!!! He did have a way of connecting with the American people to get what he wanted. To me, Ronald Wilson Reagan was the greatest president of my lifetime, which began during FDR’s first term!!
He only had a Democratic Senate for the last 2 years.
Disagreed: Pres Reagan had a democrat Senate for all but two years. Note: it is the democrat party, not the “democratic” party - there’s nothing democratic about the socialist bas tards!
The name of the party is The Democratic Party of the United States of America. That’s a fact and you don’t get to have an opinion on that.
After reading 3 of your comments directed @ me, it is clear you haven’t the slightest connection to the truth! Alas, it is endemic amongst the looney liberal left……..
That’s the best you can do? I’ll hang up my gloves and go for a beer.
It’s customary to offer evidence, otherwise you are just throwing worthless opinion around.
Indeed democratic party. Not democrat. The fist is an adjective. The second is a noon. A “trick” devised by republicans in the 80’s to imply that the party has no ideas or principles. Just warm bodies!!
Reagen was a dem. before he was a traitor
Poodle, do you get social security? If you do, then you’re a socialist.
Look poodle, are you saying that Reagan is more stupid than Obama? Obama has managed to run circles around his oppositional legislature, are you saying that Reagan wasn’t smart enough to do the same? The fact is that he and the Democrats, particularly Tip O’Neal, worked together to get some of what each of them wanted. It is called politics, the art of what is possible, something we are sadly lacking today. Reagan was mostly all hat and no cattle. You forget that he signed California’s abortion law when he was governor? You forget that he negotiated an arms deal with Iran? You forget that his response to the terrorist attack on the Marine Barracks in Beirut, that killed over 281 of my fellow Marines, was to cut and run? I could go on, but why don’t you do a little research yourself? Really you republican’ts should pick up a book some time. Here is one called “Tear Down This Myth: How the Reagan Legacy Has Distorted Our Politics and Haunts Our Future.” I dare you to find something in it that is false…
I have been preaching about the traitor for years after ,he caused marines to be killed in beruit oct 23 1983 ,USMC vet 1957 /63
Keep up the good work, Kenneth. The TRUTH shall bury them. Truth to Power! Everything you stated there is 100% correct. The Truth hurts them and hurts them hard! Keep on keepin on!
Libs don’t know truth and will never open their eyes to real truth.
I think Cruz made Colbert look like the fool he is! Ted Cruz is absolutely right!
I always get a kick out of people saying that Reagan made some principled move when he went from Roosevelt Democrat to mid-century Republican. Fact is, there were two things that changed him and neither was particularly principled. First was falling in love with Nancy Davis and meeting her father and his circle of friends, who were extremely conservative (basically reactionary), and wanting their approval.
Second, and the one he admitted, was when he started making big money and saw how much the progressive tax system was taking of his income. So there were no great principles involved. There rarely are when it comes to politics.
seriously, you must have forgotten?
Who really cares what Colbert thinks!
Reagan was among the best presidents we have ever had. “Compromise” means to let the liberals have their way. They are not willing to give or take. I love Ted Cruz.
That’s what the Dem party is - the.communist party. You don’t know Reagan your education. Is on full filling commie Woodrow Wilson wishes of ending America for the BHO NewWorldOrder
Headline, a complete mischaracterization of the video. Colbert, a complete mischaracterization of what happened in 1986. What happened to the border security and enforcement of immigration law. The Democrats never put any teeth into it. The Democrats were the failure of the 1986 Immigration act. If they would have done what was supposed to be done, we would not be here today. Even NPR states that Reagan would not sign immigration today, without enforcement first.
Ronald Reagan may have not been the worst President ever, but he’s certainly in the top two or three. Most corrupt administration ever, and that’s going some when you consider the administrations of Harding and Grant. Turned tail and ran when the Iranians blew up the Marine barracks in Lebanon, after which he was often refered to as “Cut and Run Ronnie. But he redeemed himself by having our forces attack Grenada. He then traded weapons to the Iranians for hostages fully knowing the Iranians were behind the bombing of the Marine Barracks. When first called out about his illegal dealings with the Iranians he swore holes through pewter pots he wasn’t trading weapons for hostages, at l;east not in his heart.
Why wont anyone ask Ted Cruz about his true PARTY. He is a DOMINIONIST and DOMINIONIST principles want to have a THEOCRACY!
They wanna get rid of our constitution and install the Bible and out populate the “sinners”!
Hateful, homophobic piece of garbage!
When Reagan took office, unemployment was about 7%. It jumped to over 10% and dldn’t get back down to less than 5% for 7 years. My mortgage in June of 1983 was at 12% and didn’t come down to 6% until 1986.
He doesn’t realize he just gave a shout out to Obama at the 1:31 mark he says the only other time we had economic growth like that was from 2008-2012, checking my records but isn’t that under the Obama presidency
“Five lawyers”… Gee, I thought there were more JUDGES on the Supreme Court
I guess you forgot that Reagan was a democrat and a union leader
I didn’t forget Jacka** .. Who doesn’t know that ?
Use of expletives and hate just shows your status in life, the fear you must live with and the lack of education with which you must deal with that. I am sorry you’ve failed in your dreams.
Reagan was a progressive compared to the present day group of fascist Republicans that have taken over their party. Having said that, he still managed to be one of the most destructive presidents in our history, taking down the middle class, and transferring all of the wealth to the top 2 percent, not to mention his Supreme Court appointments that to date have destroyed the 4th amendment and protection against illegal search and seizure.
Really, the truth of Reagan is, he was a B list actor, he destroy the mental health system in California, he shut down the hospitals and put the patients into the prison system, he took money from Social Security to fund buy arms for the Iran (Iran/Contra) and Oliver North was thrown under the bus for that. He gave amnesty to millions of people, and he is held up as the Golden Boy of the Republicans, and he did everything that the Reps are not against, except fund a war. So you tell me what is so great about Reagan, other than he seems to be their go to idol every 4 years.
No one was as bad as carter and as evil as HUSSEINobama. The decline of America came from every progressive president since evil Woodrow Wilson.
Ted Cruz is America’s kidney stone: irritating, painful, utterly useless, and soon to pass from the body (politic)
Wow! Did Cruz really say that he’s against the Supreme Court? There are three branches of government and the Supreme Court is one of them. Would Cruz do away with that court which was established by the Constitution? Cruz is becoming much more scary than I had previously thought. Frightening!
John Tweedie, Reagan passed the first gun control laws into effect while governor of California. He also passed the first abortion rights legislation into law. Didn’t you know that?
Actually, fktrd, I can spell quite well. But, I don’t like having to deal with the censors so I spell it in a way that always gets through.
Do you really have so little imagination?
For me, it’s the intellectual equivalent of a cat playing with a mouse. He knows the mouse can never win, but the cat prolongs the process just to see the mouse try and fail over and over. Like your response to me, laced with insult and profanity, it’s the lame argument of a guy who knows he has already lost. I just keep pushing your buttons and you keep squealing. Fun. Pissed, aren’t you?
No, because I choose not to partake of your obvious delusion.
Alas, I understand the internet and you obviously do not.
No one, and I do mean no one, comes here for intellectual stimulation. You said so yourself as far as your own motives.
Only problem is, you don’t have the game to go with the bravado.
You are obviously too smart for me. I know when I have been beaten. Wow, how articulate and insightful you are. It’s almost as if you know what you just said.
Ah, how cute.
Well, a faux surrender still counts, I guess.
It’s okay, kid. The trick is to have absolutely no investment in the conversation.
You’ll get it some day.