GOP Debate Moderator Smears Cruz
Yesterday John Harwood, who was a debate moderator not that long ago, tweeted this:
Harwood caused many people to believe that Cruz had been referring to our soldiers. Here’s a representative example from a BuzzFeed buzzer:
Oh my. https://t.co/57F3ibm2vP
— McKay Coppins (@mckaycoppins) February 7, 2016
The tweet to which Coppins refers is gone, because Harwood has since deleted the tweet . . . because it was totally misleading. Cruz had, of course, not been comparing our soldiers to psychopaths, but the enemy:
The idea that their government would forcibly put them in a foxhole with a 220-pound psychopath trying to kill them doesn’t make any sense.
The idea that our male soldiers would be “trying to kill” our female soldiers doesn’t make any sense either.
Again: Harwood helped moderate a debate. He’s perfectly willing to distort the record in an outrageous way and quietly correct it later. And the RNC keeps allowing people like this to be moderators.
Pathetic.
roobs wants to force your daughter to sign up for the draft
happyfeet (a037ad) — 2/8/2016 @ 7:58 amJohn Harwood is a nasty guy.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/8/2016 @ 8:05 amhonestly he is nothing but objective,
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/harwood-says-cantwell-is-nothing/article/3504
narciso (732bc0) — 2/8/2016 @ 8:12 amMcKay Coppins re-tweeted it because he hates Republicans.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/8/2016 @ 8:15 amHarwood is the guy who got his head handed to him at the CNBC debate by Cruz, Trump, and Rubio, not just for his partisanship (Cruz) but also for bald-faced lying (Trump and Rubio). And I understand that the Boy Scouts of America have a restraining order against him — he is not allowed to be within 500 feet of minor children.
nk (dbc370) — 2/8/2016 @ 8:16 amin Marco Sleazio’s America, if america goes to war all the young womens will have to hide like Anne Frank
happyfeet (a037ad) — 2/8/2016 @ 8:17 amI could be wrong about the restraining order.
nk (dbc370) — 2/8/2016 @ 8:17 amMcKay Coppins bears a resemblance to the late Truman Capote. Although Coppins appears to be a lot bigger in size. Maybe he’s eaten more breakfasts, lunches, and dinners at Tiffany’s than Capote did.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/8/2016 @ 8:34 amyes, also arnim zola from the captain america film, fried butter does seem a favorite entree,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/8/2016 @ 8:35 am30 minute 02 second mark
mg (31009b) — 2/8/2016 @ 8:54 amhttp://www.c-span.org/video/?404325-1/ted-cruz-town-hall-meeting-peterborough-new-hampshire
You don’t need to look beyond Patterico’s comments section to find exactly the same dishonest tactics, it’s a commonplace habit of the hatemonger. Everyday some malicious knucklehead distorts someone else’s comment, twists the meaning, or draws presumptuous conclusions, and goes on the attack with their self-manufactured straw man as a bludgeon.
Yes, Cruz Supporter, I’m pointing the finger straight at you.
ropelight (e3ae15) — 2/8/2016 @ 9:27 amOh, ropelight. Nobody likes Mondays. Try decaf. Or green tea.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/8/2016 @ 9:37 am@JohnHarwood you can’t delete the fact that you’re 220 lbs of steaming pile. #DemOperativeWithByline
Colonel Haiku (bf0388) — 2/8/2016 @ 9:45 amBull! Try Knob Creek Bourbon.
Rev. Hoagie™ (f4eb27) — 2/8/2016 @ 9:48 amTFG can’t be outta there soon enough!
http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/226165/
Colonel Haiku (bf0388) — 2/8/2016 @ 9:51 amThe draft sucks. Really truly sucks. But IF we are actually going to be a society that is blind to sexual differences, then we must be blind here, too. Crap, most people don’t want their SON in that foxhole either. And if there is ever a war where a draft is necessary, and women are exempted while men fight and die, any social structure based on sexual equality will utterly and completely die.
Now, maybe it should die. But that ship seems well past the jetty, and this is just a logical and necessary extension. Reducio ad absurdum or not
Kevin M (25bbee) — 2/8/2016 @ 10:10 amStill, John Harwood is a nasty guy.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 2/8/2016 @ 10:11 amany social structure based on sexual equality will utterly and completely die.
Any social structure based on sexual equality will utterly and completely die. No need for qualifiers, ifs, buts, or maybes.
nk (dbc370) — 2/8/2016 @ 10:29 amJohn Harwood. Educated at Harvard and Duke. Senior Washington Correspondent for NBC and contributor to The New York Times. Salaries: confidential. Net worth: Undisclosed. Residence: Silver Spring, MD RE values $1,000,000+. Caucasian male, sexual proclivities undisclosed, marital status undisclosed. Card carrying member of the elitist white privileged journalist club known as the MSM. There is absolutely no reason for a person with that resume to moderate a Republican debate.
Rev. Hoagie™ (f4eb27) — 2/8/2016 @ 10:31 amNo media organization should sponsor a political debate, and no one employed in the media industry should be allowed to moderate a debate. Reporters have an obligation to the public to report the event accurately and fairly, but any direct participation crosses the line between being an observer and being an element in determining the outcome.
Participation in formulating questions or asking them violates the ethics of the Journalism profession and should be eliminated entirely. Crossing the line should be grounds for condemnation.
ropelight (e3ae15) — 2/8/2016 @ 10:42 amI think we need to fight these battles in the political arena, Kevin M, aND nit use the militart to make political/social points. Using the military to make such points works, but at what cost?
DRJ (15874d) — 2/8/2016 @ 10:42 amRinse Prepuce wanted to 1) make Trump, Cruz and (possibly) Rubio look bad and 2) make Jeb look good, with lefty-bias questioning. It didn’t work. The CNBC talking heads were out of their league against practiced speakers like Cruz and Rubio, and nobody can out-bull Trump; and in the end Jeb might as well not have been there.
nk (dbc370) — 2/8/2016 @ 10:45 amReeses Precipice
Colonel Haiku (bf0388) — 2/8/2016 @ 10:49 amHeh! I don’t have autocorrect but my Note has suggest and sometimes I click it by accident or on purpose if it’s funny.
nk (dbc370) — 2/8/2016 @ 10:55 amThat first “many people” link isn’t working for me; it seems to be malformed. Anyone else have that problem?
CayleyGraph (353727) — 2/8/2016 @ 10:57 amJohn Harwood. Educated at Harvard and Duke. Senior Washington Correspondent for NBC and contributor to The New York Times.
Colonel Haiku (bf0388) — 2/8/2016 @ 10:59 amSalary Range: prevailing d-bag/water-carrier rate
Net worth: Zilch
Residence: Silver Spring, MD RE values $1,000,000+.
Race: Milksopian
Sexual proclivities: caninus varietus (Heinz 57)
Marital status: Onanist
If your last name is “Priebus,” why would you name your son ‘Reince’?
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/8/2016 @ 11:00 amWhy not give some balance to an already difficult surname and choose something that all of his future classmates in kindergarten will be able to pronounce. Something like “John” or “Michael.” Or even “Walter.”
I don’t know. John Harwood just misunderstood. What exactly did Cruz say?
The reasons he might have misunderstood are:
1) John Harwood expects Ted Cruz to give dishonest reasons for his positions, so, although theidea that some of the male soldiers would attack women – actually not an unreasonable idea at all – it happens and it’s a problem, and there is his issue of unsuitable people being accepted into the military – is implausible to him, the idea that Ted Cruz would say would not be unreasonable to him. Usually men try to rape women, but maybe a few would try to kill them.
2) Who is more frequently found in the same foxhole? Fellow soldiers. You wouldn’t think of enemy soldiers being in the foxhole. They’d get shot before they got there!
3) Cruz can be understood as saying – in fact has to be understood as saying – that occasionally there’d be a psychopath trying to kill them in the foxhole. But this psychopath would more often be an American soldier, rather than an enemy soldier even if proportionately more enemy soldiers were psychopaths.
4) Harwood knows, of course, that most enemy soldiers are not psychopaths. It never would have dawned on him that enemy soldiers would be called psychopaths.
Now here you see, if taht’s what Cuz meant,you have something that is Ted Cruz’s fault. he wa maybe pretending that people from al Qaeda and ISIS were psychopaths. The attackers are simply misguided, followers of an evil religion, and probably pretty stupid. some may be forced or intimidated into it. Although you might possibly think of isolated terrorists as psychopaths, the enemy in the kind of combat situation they would encounter would be more disciplined – even suicide/homicide bombers should not be described as psychopaths. A psychopath has to be acting on his own, and not following orders.
The idea that they could be described as psychopaths is actually unreasonable, but not so unreasonable to suppose that the military might have a few psychopaths in it. Here is an
Op ed article from the New York Daily News today about bad soldiers:
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/john-spencer-army-sound-mind-body-article-1.2521975
Of course, this interpretation makes Ted Cruz into something of a feminist, but it still makes more sense than the other way, because how do the enemy soldiers get into the foxhole? A foxhole is for protection against long range enemy fire. You don’t wait forteh enemy to jump in. You don’t allow that possibility.
Sammy Finkelman (1a8d7e) — 2/8/2016 @ 11:04 amCruz Supporter, if your last name is Reince for heaven’s sake change it. Then worry about the kid’s first name.
Rev. Hoagie™ (f4eb27) — 2/8/2016 @ 11:09 amWell in trench warfare—as we saw in WWI, you may find yourself facing an enemy soldier with a sharpened spade who wants to–and will–kill you. Unless you kill him first. Or if the trench is a zig zag trench, a Mills bomb (hand grenade) will be lobbed over from the next diagonal. It wasn’t much cleaner in WWII–lots of banzai bayonet charges. Nasty fighting with flamethrowers although they’d laid off the poison gas by then. White phosphorus sticking in your flesh and burning. Korea–back to the mass bayonet charge by hordes of Chinese soldiers. Viet Nam–booby traps with pongee stakes smeared with excrement.
Mr. Cruz quite properly doesn’t want to send the graduates of Miss Lilly’s School for Young Ladies (or heckfire, even a female graduate of the mean streets of Oakland or Watts) into such a situation. The fact that you’ve got a certain number of female officers in the armed services who need to get their promotion ticket punched by having a combat unit command tour does not, and should not, mean that we have to draft women for ground combat units.
Comanche Voter (1d5c8b) — 2/8/2016 @ 11:10 amMohammed Ali tried to dodge the draft by deliberately failing the IQ test (at least it was claimed it was deliberate). It’s hard enough now to get highly-motivated women volunteers to pass the physical. How much success will DOs have with unwilling women draftees?
nk (dbc370) — 2/8/2016 @ 11:16 amMr. Harwood may have been projecting his opinion of men who serve in the military.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/8/2016 @ 11:16 amSpecial, Col.
mg (31009b) — 2/8/2016 @ 11:18 amHad to look up onanist.
laughing.
Yep, that was a clear smear against Cruz.
HOWEVER, regarding whether or not women should register for the draft, there is one, and only one, acceptable reason why not; if they aren’t useful in some roll to the military. That contention has been proven false (women have served in many military roles, and have done so since long before they were allowed in combat), so there is no acceptable reason why women should not face the same registry requirements as men. (the military does not have to assign women who are unsuitable to front line ground combat, anymore than it does males who are physically unsuited.)
I wasn’t aware that Cruz, whom I support, was against selective service equality (it’s a burden we should all have to bear), so this was unwelcome news to me. It’s not enough to change my vote, but it sure puts me a lot closer to doing so. It’s not just this issue itself, but the fact it throws Cruz’s ethics into doubt.
Therefor, while the Harwood quite is a smear, the far more effective attack on Cruz’s campaign appears to come from the Cruz himself.
Arizona CJ (da673d) — 2/8/2016 @ 11:18 amWe might see a lot of 4Fs due to pregnancy, nk. Bad news for Planned Parenthood.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/8/2016 @ 11:18 amin retrospect, it seems his conscientious objector status was curious,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/8/2016 @ 11:18 amArizona CJ,
If there is equality, you can’t assign a woman to a non-combat role solely due to her gender. So I think this would be a burden on a well-functioning military.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/8/2016 @ 11:20 amEspecially since the military has changed the rules to make it easier for women to qualify.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/8/2016 @ 11:21 amI think that’s part of Cruz’s point about this being PC.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/8/2016 @ 11:22 amThat too, DRJ.
Sigh. Equality in the eyes of the law and in the eyes of God does not mean “same”; and war is very politically incorrect and does not believe in affirmative action.
nk (dbc370) — 2/8/2016 @ 11:22 amI swear by the Olds 442.
Steve57 (f61b03) — 2/8/2016 @ 11:34 amLeave women out of signing up for Selective Service. Fighting is a man’s job. Women can volunteer for support roles, enough already do, but don’t punish today’s young women for the idiotic nonsense of their stupid grandmothers.
ropelight (e3ae15) — 2/8/2016 @ 11:37 amWhen a Trump idolator uses homoerotic slurs to attack someone who isn’t a Trump idolator, he loses all rights to attack anyone for being uncivil. I’m looking at you, Ropelight Hood.
John Hitchcock (6dce1b) — 2/8/2016 @ 11:37 amArizona CJ,
If there is equality, you can’t assign a woman to a non-combat role solely due to her gender. So I think this would be a burden on a well-functioning military.
Agreed that you can’t assign solely by gender, nor did I say you should. What I meant was a physically unsuited-for-infantry woman could be assigned to, say, logistics, the same way a smaller male would be. And, in cases where the woman is physically suited for infantry duty, why on earth not assign her to line duty the way an equivalent male would be?
If, and it’s a big if, having women in combat is detrimental to the military, I’d be all for barring women from combat roles (because readiness and effectiveness matter vastly more than any other consideration, equality included). However, that’d apply to the volunteer system we use today; the military still could use (in case of draft) women in support/logistics roles (which are actually are more numerous than frontline troops).
Arizona CJ (da673d) — 2/8/2016 @ 11:39 amJohn, if you’re queer, it isn’t my problem.
ropelight (e3ae15) — 2/8/2016 @ 11:52 amCanada crud is a sociopath. Tricky dick nixon without the charm! Do you want to vote for nixon II? Rubio is a punk. The three gov’s are sleepy dopey and goofy.
trumpet (071b0b) — 2/8/2016 @ 11:54 amYep, Ropelight Hood, you’ve lost all credibility. I highly doubt it’s possible for you to gain it back.
John Hitchcock (6dce1b) — 2/8/2016 @ 11:58 amnonono Mr. ropelight has many credibility
i like to read his thinkings cause of how he’s not super-biased against Mr. Trump like some people are
it’s refreshing!
happyfeet (a037ad) — 2/8/2016 @ 12:00 pm#45, trumpet, you’re every bit as detrimental to Trump’s candidacy as CS, Kevin, Gerald, and Hitchcock are to Cruz’s candidacy. No one with the intention of helping put their candidate in a positive light would view any of the bizarre idiocy coming from hatemongers as anything but a turn off. It doesn’t matter if you’re a troll, a moby, or just a miscellaneous fool – all you’re going to accomplish is to trash the electoral process.
ropelight (e3ae15) — 2/8/2016 @ 12:07 pmThe electoral process needs to be trashed and trump is doing it! He can’t be bought like crud or the punk and gov’s sleepy dopey goofy. No more nixons’s southern strategy to get social conservatives to vote for corporate republicans to get want they want and only lip service to the base and reagan democrats.
trumpet (071b0b) — 2/8/2016 @ 12:14 pmropelight, can’t you wait until later in the week, such as Wednesday or Thursday, before you start accusing everyone of being gay? Normally on Mondays, you like to tell us that we’re stupid jerks.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/8/2016 @ 12:17 pmHitchcock, my credibility depends on the accuracy and integrity of what I write, not on if you approve or not. I support Trump, you support Cruz. Primary elections exist to sort out just such differences. Life goes on. But some of us will never be the same, or look at each other in the same way. Obviously, my support for Trump disappoints you. So what? Your opinion doesn’t count when it come to my vote. That’s the way it is and the way it’ll always be. Happy Trails.
ropelight (e3ae15) — 2/8/2016 @ 12:18 pmJohn Hitchcock, if either you or I declares candidacy for elective office, I don’t think we’re going to be able to depend upon ropelight for the maximum contribution.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/8/2016 @ 12:23 pmropelight why don’t you think Patterico is detrimental to Trump’s candidacy?
Gerald A (5dca03) — 2/8/2016 @ 12:25 pmYes, Ropelight, and your writings are neither accurate nor remotely affiliated with integrity.
John Hitchcock (6dce1b) — 2/8/2016 @ 12:25 pmShould have said
ropelight why don’t you think Patterico is detrimental to Cruz’s
Trump’scandidacy?Gerald A (5dca03) — 2/8/2016 @ 12:25 pm
Gerald A (5dca03) — 2/8/2016 @ 12:28 pmTrumpet is a poopoohead.
nk (dbc370) — 2/8/2016 @ 12:30 pmCrud suppository canada crud is a lying sociopath just like trick dick nixon. Ask ben carson about this slimeball.
trumpet (071b0b) — 2/8/2016 @ 12:30 pm#53, Gerald asked, ropelight why don’t you think Patterico is detrimental to Trump’s candidacy?
I don’t. I think his over the top criticisms of Trump are detrimental to Cruz’s candidacy.
ropelight (e3ae15) — 2/8/2016 @ 12:32 pmHitchcock, that’s a pretty low blow and it’s one I won’t forget.
ropelight (e3ae15) — 2/8/2016 @ 12:34 pmIt’s accurate, Ropelight. Stop your idolatry and your homoerotic slurs against people who don’t bow down to your idol.
John Hitchcock (6dce1b) — 2/8/2016 @ 12:40 pmropelight, you just want to fight everybody, huh?
The actual enemies of Western Civilization are ISIS, Iran, North Korea, China, Russia, and the Left.
Fighting supporters of Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio is totally misguided.
Try meditation. And yoga might be helpful to you, especially since you’re already used to being all tangled up like a pretzel.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/8/2016 @ 12:42 pmCrud suppository isis is a minimal threat to are well being compared to the corporate establishment sending are jobs overseas. remember highs tool lone to nixon same as canada cruds loan from goldman sucks. Which both forgot to report to try and fool the voters.
trumpet (071b0b) — 2/8/2016 @ 12:49 pmspell checks gets me again thats Hughes tool loan.
trumpet (071b0b) — 2/8/2016 @ 12:51 pmWell, that makes one of you.
Steve57 (f61b03) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:03 pmPerry is off his meds. Again.
JD (34f761) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:07 pmI’m not looking for a fight. I’m supporting the Constitution. The natural born citizen requirement is there for a reason. both Cruz and Rubio aren’t eligible. Stating that has brought the fighters out after me calling for my scalp.
It’s the truth that supporters of both Cruz and Rubio want to move on, pretend it’s a settled issue. Whistle past the graveyard and assume it won’t come up in the general election. Like the left doesn’t have a long track record of trying to disqualify opponents. We’ve all seen this movie before.
You CS are among the most vociferous and most dishonest of my attackers. Your every comment directed at me is an invitation to fight. You’re on the prod, following me from thread to thread with smarmy insults. You’re the would be instigator.
I’m not fighting against Cruz or Rubio, I’m pointing out they’re ineligible and their supporters are trying to shut me up, or smear me just like Democrats who don’t want Benghazi to be examined, or to have Hillary’s emails made public.
You don’t like the message so you want to kill the messenger.
ropelight (e3ae15) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:07 pmWhat’s Pat’s most over the top criticisms of Trump?
Gerald A (5dca03) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:07 pmthe Olds 442.
Steve57 (f61b03) — 2/8/2016 @ 11:34 am
Me, too… make it a ’66… Or a ’65 GTO… or a ’69 Roadrunner… or a…
Colonel Haiku (b4e26d) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:17 pmropelight, were did you get the idea I want to kill the messenger.
I think you’re wrong is all. Just that.
Steve57 (f61b03) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:17 pmRopelight, your birtherism is insane. And your demands, against the Law and the Constitution, do not hold up. Other than that, keep telling those homos, fags, lesbians, teabaggers to be civil or you won’t vote for their non-Trump candidate.
John Hitchcock (6dce1b) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:17 pmOh ropelight, it’s Monday. Stop rolling around on the floor like a victim. You do more name-calling than a barker at a four square dance on a Saturday night in Kentucky in 1927. And you spend more time with the Straw Man than Judy Garland did in “The Wizard of Oz.”
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:21 pmWhat’s Pat’s most over the top criticisms of Trump?
Take your pick, or quit trying to pick a fight.
ropelight (e3ae15) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:23 pmSteve, I don’t believe I included you in the category of wannabe messenger killers. We disagree, but you do it without resorting to stupid insults or gotcha games. I respect that.
ropelight (e3ae15) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:26 pmcoronello, honesty forces mt to admit I traded the ’68 Charger for a Nimitz class carrier. And the AWG-9 radar. And it was a good trade.
Steve57 (f61b03) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:27 pmIt was a 440 and not just a magnum. It was a 440S. The forged NASCAR bottom end.
That hurt. But my country called.
Steve57 (f61b03) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:32 pmHitchcock, like I said before, your obsession with deviant sexuality is your problem, not mine. Read Freud on projecting, your own guilty proclivities onto others, it’ll help.
ropelight (e3ae15) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:32 pmJust after Operation Preying Mantis.
Steve57 (f61b03) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:34 pmCheck out Operation Blue Light.
ropelight (e3ae15) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:36 pmNo, Ropelight, you levied those charges against others. I’m just pointing out that you have been doing that. And you’re being dishonest yet again.
John Hitchcock (6dce1b) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:37 pmSince Cruz isn’t a citizen, he should be forced to give up his Senate seat. Now. He has never been naturalized, and ropelight knows better than everyone else that he isn’t a natural born citizen.
JD (34f761) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:41 pmJD, Ropelight should hate Trump now, because Trump has refused to rule out non-citizens as veep possibilities.
John Hitchcock (6dce1b) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:42 pmCurz is a citizen, he’s just not a natural born citizen. That stipulation only applies to the president and vice president, not to Senators. There’s a hint in that distinction.
ropelight (e3ae15) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:44 pmQuit shoulding on me, Hitchcock.
ropelight (e3ae15) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:45 pmropelight, your obsessive obsession with commenters’ private lives is…well, obsessive. You know very well that you can’t make the intellectual case for Donnie Trump’s candidacy, so you have to stoop to accusing his detractors of being “gay.” You do that regularly. A couple weeks ago, you were accusing Megyn Kelly of being a “lipstick lesbian.”
You may stay up late at night wondering what other people do in the privacy of their own bedroom, but I’d sure as hell prefer Ken Mehlman to Barney Frank.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:46 pmThen again, Barney Frank seems to be on your mind. Hmmm? (LOL)
Operation Blue Light? Help me out. You were, if I’m correct in my understanding, a crew chief in a C141. A fine and noble thing. Please don’t start talking about special forces.
Steve57 (f61b03) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:52 pmThat’s a bald faced lie. I never accused Megyn Kelly of being a lipstick lesbian. CS, you’re up to your typical dishonest misrepresentation and twisting of comments to suit whatever nefarious dirty trick you’re up to at the moment (see my comment #11). Even Perry displays more integrity than you.
ropelight (e3ae15) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:56 pmBut he has never been naturalized, ropelight.
JD (34f761) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:56 pmJust to clear things up, if they need clearing, I was no one special.
Steve57 (f61b03) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:59 pmI was a paper-pusher.
Steve57 (f61b03) — 2/8/2016 @ 1:59 pmC-141s are heavy lifters. When the war fighters are on a mission we often give them a ride or deliver their equipment. Not very glamorous work until you need a brigade combat team anywhere in the world in 72 hours.
ropelight (e3ae15) — 2/8/2016 @ 2:03 pm1968 Plymouth Barracuda Convertible
mg (31009b) — 2/8/2016 @ 2:05 pmThere we go, Ted Nugent, a big Trumpster, has shared a blatantly anti-Semitic Facebook post. Just another in a very long list of anti-Semites for Trump.
http://twitchy.com/2016/02/08/repulsive-ted-nugent-shares-despicable-anti-semitic-meme-on-facebook-screenshot/
John Hitchcock (6dce1b) — 2/8/2016 @ 2:12 pmropelight, I played a small role in getting that team where they where needed.
And the wives got paid.
What would the SPECWAR guys do without us, working the logistics?
Steve57 (f61b03) — 2/8/2016 @ 2:12 pmSilver could be had by Ted.
mg (31009b) — 2/8/2016 @ 2:13 pmhttp://www.texastribune.org/2016/02/08/the-brief/
The Texas Tribune, mg?
Steve57 (f61b03) — 2/8/2016 @ 2:21 pmOh, ropelight.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/8/2016 @ 2:23 pmYou very cleared called Megyn Kelly a “lipstick lesbian” a couple weeks ago.
Be a man and stand behind your nasty accusations, huh?
Earlier in this thread, you accused John Hitchcock of being “gay.”
So, please stop with your denials that you use that type of language.
You’re an angry retired guy, and you grasp for straws.
ropelight –
mg (31009b) — 2/8/2016 @ 2:24 pmwith love, brother
https://pjmedia.com/blog/what-no-one-seems-to-know-about-ted-cruzs-past/1/
Steve57- just following the primary, where it takes me I have no idea.
mg (31009b) — 2/8/2016 @ 2:30 pmProve it! I neither called Megyn Kelly a lipstick lesbian any more than I called Hitchcock queer. See my comment #44:
Which was in response to his #42:
This is a test CS, prove you can read and write the English language.
ropelight (e3ae15) — 2/8/2016 @ 2:30 pmropelight, you’re such a congenital liar—and a bad one, at that. You called Megyn Kelly a “lipstick lesbian.” Be a stand-up guy and stand behind what you wrote.
This is what you wrote a week and a half ago;
“Maybe I’m beating a dead horse but Megyn Kelly looks too much like a lipstick lesbian for it to be an accident.”
ropelight (565a43) — 1/28/2016 @ 7:55 pm
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/8/2016 @ 2:40 pmWait one. I’m not liking this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeNhjPaP53I
That’s better.
Steve57 (f61b03) — 2/8/2016 @ 2:41 pmEartha Kitt
mg (31009b) — 2/8/2016 @ 2:47 pmthanks,steve57
Yes, I stand behind what I wrote. I said she looks too much like a lipstick lesbian for (the look) to be an accident. Not that she was an lesbian but that her butch looks were intended to hint at that message.
She looked like a lipstick lesbian to me and I commented on it. I know she’s married with 3 children and I don’t believe she’s a lesbian, and I never did.
CS, you’re the liar.
ropelight (e3ae15) — 2/8/2016 @ 2:48 pmropelight, when you say that a woman’s “lipstick lesbian” appearance is NOT an accident, then you’re concluding that it’s because she is one. That’s what “not an accident” means. There’s no wiggle room in that.
Two or three times a week, you’re throwing the “homosexual” accusation at someone. Why is that, ropelight? I wish you would be a masculine man and have the courage of conviction to stand up behind what you write.
This is what you said about Megyn Kelly; “Maybe I’m beating a dead horse but Megyn Kelly looks too much like a lipstick lesbian for it to be an accident.”
ropelight (565a43) — 1/28/2016 @ 7:55 pm
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/8/2016 @ 2:55 pmshe looks like she’s a big stupid slurpee-drinker i think
like she hangs out in front of 7-11s sucking on slurpees all day
her mama didn’t raise her right
but one must be kind
happyfeet (a037ad) — 2/8/2016 @ 2:56 pmblack lives matter, mg.
Steve57 (f61b03) — 2/8/2016 @ 2:56 pmI can say this because the Northern Italians despised me as Africani.
And I tip my hat to Manilla John.
Steve57 (f61b03) — 2/8/2016 @ 2:59 pmSame stupid gotcha game, even if you have to lie and pretend in order to do it. I was commenting on her look, not on her sexual preferences. You deal in slime.
ropelight (e3ae15) — 2/8/2016 @ 3:01 pmropelight, if someone were to say that it’s no accident that you LOOK like a child molestor, you would probably accuse them of having just called you a child molestor. So please stop with the denials about what you said about Megyn Kelly.
Come on, big guy, we can all have differences of preference for the GOP primary, but let’s lot play silly games about what the definition of “is” is.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/8/2016 @ 3:04 pmCS, look in the mirror if you want to know what a child molester looks like. I understand you can’t tell a book by the cover.
ropelight (e3ae15) — 2/8/2016 @ 3:08 pmropelight, a week and a half ago you were questioning Megyn Kelly’s sexual orientation, and today you’re questioning John Hitchcock’s sexual orientation. You do a lot of questioning of people’s sexual orientation. And this is all just within the context of being angry at each of them because they each allegedly oppose Donnie Trump’s candidacy. You haven’t even MET either of them before.
So what in God’s name does their sexual orientation have to do with support for Donald Trump?
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/8/2016 @ 3:09 pmCS, your obsession with deviant sexuality is offensive. I don’t care who you support for the presidency but your behavior here is likely to drive voters away from Cruz, which I suspect is your true purpose. Troll.
ropelight (e3ae15) — 2/8/2016 @ 3:14 pmropelight, you wrote this a week and a half ago;
“Maybe I’m beating a dead horse but Megyn Kelly looks too much like a lipstick lesbian for it to be an accident.”
ropelight (565a43) — 1/28/2016 @ 7:55 pm
ropelight, do you have prurient knowledge of what ‘lipstick lesbians’ look like? Or were you just channeling your inner Donnie Trump and talkin’ trash? (LOL)
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/8/2016 @ 3:14 pmShe makes everything better, don’t she?
Steve57 (f61b03) — 2/8/2016 @ 3:19 pmI can tell a hawk from a handsaw. And, I recognize a Philistine when I encounter one.
ropelight (e3ae15) — 2/8/2016 @ 3:21 pmIndeed.
mg (31009b) — 2/8/2016 @ 3:25 pmBeautiful voice.
Jezus, ropelight. Do you have to do this?
I mean, I can understand going down fighting…
Steve57 (f61b03) — 2/8/2016 @ 3:28 pmropelight, it’s interesting that you’re regularly contemplating people’s sexual orientation when you’re debating the virtues of Trump VS the rest of the GOP field.
If I were to say that you look like a homeless person, you would react as if I just called you a homeless person. So, please, when you say that Megyn Kelly LOOKS like a lipstick lesbian, don’t sit here and give us a drunken lecture about how you didn’t technically CALL her a lipstick lesbian.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/8/2016 @ 3:29 pmSteve57, I’m all for snark and dry humor, but ropelight likes to throw hand grenades, and then he denies that he threw them. And it’s not just media personalities or politicians that he insults, he actually says this stuff about commenters in the SAME thread, and then a couple hours later, he won’t even take ownership of it.
Anyhow, Steve, I just saw a nice Plymouth Valiant—probably a ’64—driving down the road. Since you’re obviously a car guy, you might have appreciated that.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/8/2016 @ 3:35 pmCS, for the last time, I mentioned Kelly’s lipstick lesbian look as too convincing to be accidental. The sentence construction was such that it’s possible, but inaccurate, to conclude the subject was her sexual preferences.
Any decent individual would have asked about the ambiguity, but not you. You’re a waste of human energy, an obnoxious crazy dog barking for his own sick amusement.
I’m through with you.
ropelight (e3ae15) — 2/8/2016 @ 3:44 pmwhat do you get when you cross a lipstick lesbian with a FREE chipotle burrito?
happyfeet (a037ad) — 2/8/2016 @ 3:44 pmare you effing kidding me you should never ever EVER cross a lipstick lesbian
happyfeet (a037ad) — 2/8/2016 @ 3:45 pmI’m not just a car guy. The first new car, from a dealer, was a ’65 Valiant.
From a dealer.
My senior chief dad was so proud.
Steve57 (f61b03) — 2/8/2016 @ 3:47 pmIt’s a good thing to be proud of your dad.
Steve57 (f61b03) — 2/8/2016 @ 3:50 pmSlant six.
Steve57 (f61b03) — 2/8/2016 @ 3:52 pmArizona CJ:
I think that’s reasonable. My preference would be for everyone to serve the way they do in Israel, but my concern is that the military has become so PC that we would have the worst of both — PC gender equality so everyone is treated the same, even when their abilities/size/etc. makes them different.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/8/2016 @ 4:02 pmDrafting women is a horrid idea. Not because we shouldn’t draft them, but because all draftees suck. If women insist on equality to men in every aspect then they should be forced to accept the responsibility that goes with it. And I’d blame it on Hillary!.
However, having been in the field with draftees who pissed and crapped themselves every time a 155 howitzer fired a round the idea of being with female draftees is a nightmare. For the most part draftees spent their field time shivering and soiling themselves between intermittent shouts for God or their mothers. They do not make a good, strong and victorious army regardless of their sex and anything in the field that bleeds a week and doesn’t die is unnatural.
Rev. Hoagie™ (f4eb27) — 2/8/2016 @ 4:14 pmWhen I read the comments on this thread, why am I reminded of this? http://youtu.be/C5P5eQiKNQs
Colonel Haiku (b4e26d) — 2/8/2016 @ 4:18 pmBut did that Valiant have a push-button transmission?
Colonel Haiku (b4e26d) — 2/8/2016 @ 4:19 pmDRJ, I agree with you regarding the risks of a PC-run system. Those, no matter what the subject, unerringly produce the worst possible results.
I’d much prefer a system where everyone needs to register for SS at 18, no exceptions (not even for the disabled) and then the military, if a draft occurs, picks who it needs and puts them into the roles it needs filled as it deems appropriate.
Arizona CJ (da673d) — 2/8/2016 @ 4:22 pmIf there is a draft, you must draft both men and women. If you do not, then even the most incompetent lawyer can show that the draft discriminates against men, given the whole last 30 years of civil rights law. Unless you think this line of decisions is going to be walked back any time soon. And if it is, it will be because there are consequences that are not acceptable. Like this.
If you saw this question come up in the debate Skeletor seemed aghast at the thought that women’s equality might lead to women being drafted to go in harm’s way. And I thought “The penny drops!” I was also reminded of a scene from Downton Abbey (yes, I watch that) set during WWI, where local young women have taken it upon themselves to publicly shame young men who, for whatever reason, have not yet joined up. I think Skeletor would have been one of these.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 2/8/2016 @ 4:32 pmWhat is more important, and I would love to know the Israeli attitude towards this, is a serious attempt to enforce the war crimes provisions of the Geneva Accords, particularly with respect to sexual attacks on prisoners-of-war (not to mention failure of offer quarter by unlawful combatants).
Kevin M (25bbee) — 2/8/2016 @ 4:37 pmWhat’s an unlawful combatant?
Rev. Hoagie™ (f4eb27) — 2/8/2016 @ 4:42 pmMy preference would be for everyone to serve the way they do in Israel, but my concern is that the military has become so PC that we would have the worst of both — PC gender equality so everyone is treated the same, even when their abilities/size/etc. makes them different.
Well, this is of course in need of correction. Equality of opportunity, and equality of obligation as citizens does not imply that equality of ability must be assumed or that we must get to equality of results. Or even that results must be reasonable. This is the ARMY after all, and the ARMY is often unreasonable. At some point the lawyers have to STFU.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 2/8/2016 @ 4:43 pm133- Jeb
mg (31009b) — 2/8/2016 @ 4:45 pmNo they don’t, ask’em.
Rev. Hoagie™ (f4eb27) — 2/8/2016 @ 4:46 pmIt’s in the Geneva Convention. Perhaps I have the term wrong, I’m an old far and subject to the oddest cross-wring. But: does not wear uniform or other indication of combatant status; does not carry weapons openly; does not belong to a recognized command structure responsible for his actions; does not give quarter. Such persons fighting on a battlefield have no rights whatsoever.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 2/8/2016 @ 4:47 pmNo they don’t, ask’em.
It used to be the guys with the guns would just tell ’em.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 2/8/2016 @ 4:48 pmIf we can lock up Japanese-descended citizens in wartime, we can draft women only. Congress’s power to raise armies is plenary, and the courts defer to Congress and the President in wartime to the point of knee-pads, Chapstick and throat lozenges. There will be lawsuits but they’ll be decided the same way as Korematsu.
nk (dbc370) — 2/8/2016 @ 4:57 pmwe can draft *men* only
nk (dbc370) — 2/8/2016 @ 4:59 pmMegyn Kelly is as much a ‘journalist’ as Lois Lane, Brenda Starr, Miss Polly Purebred, Ted Baxter and Ron Burgundy.
DCSCA (a343d5) — 2/8/2016 @ 5:00 pmI think they may need these women, if the draft returns. I talk to people who train young men for various jobs that require what would probably be considered some – not much – upper body strength and I hear many talk of a lack of ANY strength, how these young’uns have looked down at their smart devices and flailed away for most of their post-adolescent lives, no real physical activity to speak of “we are doomed”, etc. Not very encouraging. Perhaps there will be some manly women among the draftees to carry the load?
Colonel Haiku (b4e26d) — 2/8/2016 @ 5:02 pmI just can’t see it that Ted Cruz was talking about enemy soldiers.
Consider:
Sammy Finkelman (1a8d7e) — 2/8/2016 @ 5:32 pmIt’s official… https://t.co/IuIBeJRzpP
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 2/8/2016 @ 5:33 pmPretty sure you would not get the same ruling about the Japanese detention in 2016.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 2/8/2016 @ 5:33 pmI didn’t close the quote. The first paragraph is what Cruz said, with emphasis mine.
Sammy Finkelman (1a8d7e) — 2/8/2016 @ 5:34 pmOT: I’ll be spending the night in Fontana. Yay me.
John Hitchcock (6dce1b) — 2/8/2016 @ 5:36 pmScalia thinks so, too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korematsu_v._United_States
Kevin M (25bbee) — 2/8/2016 @ 5:39 pmThis ain’t 1942 nk. There is no way we could put anybody in detention camps and women can be drafted.
Rev. Hoagie™ (f4eb27) — 2/8/2016 @ 5:42 pmIt is also worth noting that the Solicitor General lied to the Court about the likelihood of espionage or sabotage, a fact that Korematsu later used in getting his conviction vacated.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 2/8/2016 @ 5:42 pmI remember, in perhaps 1988, when California(!) had an initiative to quarantine all AIDS patients in camps, much like the Cubans were doing. Failed handily.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 2/8/2016 @ 5:46 pmWow. A smokey, gorgeous chanteuse and iconic muscle, American Iron style. Get past the s**t fit being thrown and the thread gets pretty good. I’ll toss in my 2 cents worth: Angie Dickinson, and the GTX.
Bill H (dcdd7b) — 2/8/2016 @ 6:18 pmJD, ropelight has never denied that Cruz was born a citizen. He just denies that that’s what “natural born citizen” means. If you want to present arguments against his position, please make them honest ones, i.e. ones that acknowledge what his position is.
Cruz Supporter, if I say that it’s no accident that a teenager looks like a gangster, or like a hoodlum, I’m not saying that he is one, I’m saying that he’s deliberately imitating one. Ropelight claimed that Megyn Kelly deliberately affects a lesbian look, not that she actually is one. This may or may not be true, but the only valid arguments against it are either (1) she doesn’t look like that, or (2) she looks like that by accident, not (3) she isn’t one.
Re Ted Nugent, it would be nice to think that someone cracked his password, or that he unwisely trusted someone with it. Or that he’s had a stroke. It would be creepy to think that he’s always been like that, and has hid it all these years.
Milhouse (87c499) — 2/8/2016 @ 6:20 pmDon’t know the exact definition, but I think it has to do with a civilian fighting with or for a military, and isn’t identifiable or isn’t a member of such. Partisans without any identification insignia I’m guessing would qualify.
Bill H (dcdd7b) — 2/8/2016 @ 6:25 pmRe the draft, I’m with Milton Friedman and Robert Heinlein. It’s slavery, pure and simple, and never justified. Israel doesn’t do it because it needs to, it does it to indoctrinate young people with the preferred political message of the entrenched left-wing elite. That this indoctrination is not 100% successful doesn’t mean it isn’t happening.
Milhouse (87c499) — 2/8/2016 @ 6:25 pmOT: I’ll be spending the night in Fontana. Yay me.
John Hitchcock (6dce1b) — 2/8/2016 @ 5:36 pm
“Fontana Lace”
“Hello, baby
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 2/8/2016 @ 6:25 pmYeah, this is the Big Truckah speakin’
Ha ha ha ha ha, oh you sweet thing
Do I what?
Will I what?
Oh baby, you know what I like
Fontana lace had a horsey face
And a dingy-dong a-hangin’ down
A wiggle in the walk
And giggle in the talk
Makes the world go ’round
There ain’t nothin’ in the world
Like a big boy-girl
That makes me feel so funny
Make me spend my money
Make me feel real loose, like a long necked goose
Like a girl, oh baby, that’s what I like”
Just kiddin’, John!
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 2/8/2016 @ 6:26 pmI thought she looked like Aunt Peg with that hairdo, but if you don’t know who Aunt Peg is I will not be the one to besmirch your innocence.
nk (dbc370) — 2/8/2016 @ 6:27 pmI like the original, Haiku.
John Hitchcock (6dce1b) — 2/8/2016 @ 6:31 pmI thought you might…
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 2/8/2016 @ 6:31 pmHere’s a much better one… http://youtu.be/Adw9L7wjQ2c
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 2/8/2016 @ 6:33 pm#151 Milhouse,
That’s not what ropelight said. He said it’s “no accident” that Megyn Kelly looks like a “lipstick lesbian.” When he says it’s “no accident,” he’s thereby saying it’s NOT a “look.” Duh! Jesus Christ, run that academic goofball nuanced logic at a sports bar on Saturday night, and tell me how far it gets you before you get pounded in the parking lot. Seriously! (LOL)
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/8/2016 @ 7:25 pmropelight has a history of casually accusing people of being “gay” as a complete non-sequitir to a political disagreement…in this thread, no less.
Huh? When he says it’s no accident that someone looks like something, he’s saying they don’t look like it?! (See how I turn your own style on you? I know you didn’t say that, just as you know he didn’t say what you put in his mouth.) Try this one: Remember Hillary Clinton’s “pretty in pink” press conference, 22 years ago? She looked innocent, and believe me that was no accident. And you know very well that I’m not saying she was innocent!
Milhouse (87c499) — 2/8/2016 @ 7:44 pmYou are persevarating, CS.
nk (dbc370) — 2/8/2016 @ 7:44 pmMilhouse, sometimes the inhabitants of the Conservative Universe create their very own Twilight Zone.
ropelight is saying that Megyn Kelly looks like a “lipstick lesbian.” And that it’s “no accident.” So, if it’s not an accident, then it must be for another reason, huh?! Gee, Milhouse, what could that reason be?
ropelight also has a history of suggesting to people in the middle of a political disagreement that they’re “queer.” In this thread, no less.
I’ve got a project for you, Millhouse. Go to a sporting event and find a family. Go up to the father and tell him he looks like a homosexual. And then when he says, “What, man, are you calling me, ‘gay’?!”
You just try explaining to him with your nuanced logic, “Oh, no, Sir, I’m not saying you ARE gay—I’m just saying you LOOK gay!”
And then report back to me how many stitches you end up getting at the ER. (LOL)
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/8/2016 @ 8:03 pmMilhouse – he has created a new layer of citizenship, people who are born citizens but not natural born citizens. The simple fact is that he is a child born of a US citizen, while they were out of the country. Even the Illinois Bosrd of Elections laughed at the Birther claim when presented with it.
JD (f36f05) — 2/8/2016 @ 8:07 pmOne time, I wore pink heart-shaped earrings, the magnetic ones that look like you have pierced ears, at a Fourth of July neighborhood block party, and a gay guy told me that looked gay. I couldn’t bring myself to hit him … he’s so cute.
nk (dbc370) — 2/8/2016 @ 8:13 pmHe’s said what he thinks the reason is: that she’s deliberately cultivating that look.
So you’re saying that you’re a brainless thug? (Again, I know you’re not saying that, but I’m using your own rhetorical tactic, I believe correctly.)
Yes, what’s unusual about that? Ropelight hasn’t created it, it’s a very commonly held theory (though not necessarily in the form he holds it), and you have presented no argument why it can’t be so.
“Even”?! Since when are they experts in teh matter?
Milhouse (87c499) — 2/8/2016 @ 8:15 pmJD’s right…you’re either a natural born citizen. Or a naturalized citizen. There’s not a third category.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/8/2016 @ 8:16 pmMilhouse – I don’t have to make up an imaginary scenario for something that doesn’t exist.
JD (f36f05) — 2/8/2016 @ 8:22 pmSo you keep asserting. Have you any proof?
Milhouse (87c499) — 2/8/2016 @ 8:24 pmWhen was the first time you ever heard this theory, that “natural born citizen” means citizen at birth? Did you ever hear of it before 2008? What were you taught in school about who can become president?
Milhouse (87c499) — 2/8/2016 @ 8:26 pmMilhouse, you and ropelight should run on a political ticket together. You can champion the third form of citizenship which doesn’t exist, and you can also run around telling people they ‘look’ gay, and then explain to them that you weren’t technically insinuating that they ARE gay. It’d be like a third form of conversing with people.
And if you go to West Virginia and explain to the residents there that technically West Virginia was illegally made into a state by Lincoln during the Civil War, you could convince them to re-assimilate back into Virginia. And then you guys could have a nuanced discussion about whether the Civil War was technically referred to as “The War Between the States,” or if the Civil War is an acceptable name for it.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/8/2016 @ 8:28 pmThere are so many angles you guys could work. (LOL)
Going on and on and on about something in over a dozen comments like some bitchy little broad on the rag … now how would you describe that? You did it with happyfeet and now you’re doing it with ropelight, it’s a waste of bandwidth, and it seems you can’t take a hint.
nk (dbc370) — 2/8/2016 @ 8:33 pmDo you have any proof for this assertion, or do you just expect everyone to take it on faith? When did you first hear it? What was your original understanding of the presidential eligibility clause?
Milhouse (87c499) — 2/8/2016 @ 8:34 pmnk, I hear ya. Eh, I type fast. ropelight was actually pretty nasty to John Hitchcock. But aren’t most of the comments a waste of bandwidth? (LOL)
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/8/2016 @ 8:41 pmSince it’s been in the Constitution for 200+ years, I’d be surprised if any adult in the US hadn’t heard the term before 2008. As for me, it would have been in 8th grade civics class, which for me was while Nixon was still in his first term.
I was taught that only a natural born citizen could become President. And that was distinct from a Representative or Senator, who only had to be a citizen for part of their lives; “natural born citizen” meant “citizen from birth”.
Chuck Bartowski (57c71d) — 2/8/2016 @ 8:45 pmIt’s good to see you, Chuck Bartowski. I hope you and your family are doing better. God bless you.
Dana (86e864) — 2/8/2016 @ 8:57 pm165-nk
mg (31009b) — 2/8/2016 @ 9:05 pmtears of laughter.
Another dishonest argument. I did not ask whether you’d heard the term before 2008. Of course you had. I asked whether you’d heard the definition everybody now seems to be pushing, before 2008. Because I don’t think that is the definition you were taught.
Milhouse (87c499) — 2/8/2016 @ 9:45 pmMilhouse,
Didn’t you finish reading his comment?
He went on to answer you.
I was taught the same thing in roughly the same epoch,
MD not exactly in Philly (deca84) — 2/9/2016 @ 5:33 ama citizen from birth.
You could argue that it was wrong, I guess,
I mean I also learned that FDR and JFK were great presidents…
How on earth would you know what I was taught in 8th grade? Were you there? Do you even know what school I attended?
And don’t characterize my response as dishonest, I merely misread your post. I apologize for misunderstanding your point before, but my response contains an answer to the question as you intended: back in 8th grade, I was taught that “natural born citizen” meant “citizen from birth”. The Constitution requires that a Representative be a citizen for 7 years, and Senator be a citizen for 9 years. In contrast, the President must be a natural born citizen. Given that Senators and Representatives don’t have to be citizens at birth, it is easily inferred that the President must be.
Chuck Bartowski (11fb31) — 2/9/2016 @ 8:03 amThank you, Dana. We’re all muddling through. I’m in the process of packing up and moving, I will be vacating Las Vegas at the end of this week.
And a special thanks to JD, who reached out to me privately. I deeply appreciate it.
Chuck Bartowski (11fb31) — 2/9/2016 @ 8:04 amFor the record, this is my account of the stupid controversy provoked by CS and Hitchcock. It’s not required reading for the sane and balanced among us. However, I wanted to get my side down in case any of the odious rats scurrying around in the shadows tries bring it up again and again and again.
——
Yesterday, I walked away in disgusted contempt for both CS and Hitchcock after my comment addressed to CS at #121:
Although CS has been stalking me for the last couple of weeks, following me from thread to threas with insults and baseless accusations, Hitchcock does chime in from time to time with his own shallow brand of homo innuendo and underhanded character assassination. This specific iteration of CS’s and Hitchcock’s bullying over imaginary homophobic slurs began when Hitchcock wrote to me at #43:
To my knowledge, this was the first mention of homosexuality in this thread. I assume Hitchcock was referencing my remark on a previous thread on Megyn Kelly’s lipstick lesbian look for the first FOX NEWS debate, the one where she took the lead in attacking Trump with a gotcha first question.
I was offended at the string of false accusations. I’m not an idolater of any sort, much less for any political candidate, ever. My comment about Kelly’s look wasn’t an attack on her – she’s entirely free of any constraints imposed by me on her appearance. To say otherwise is absurd. That’s what her look looked like to me and I said so.
Granted, I said what I said, and that’s all I said. That and nothing else. The PC bullies can whine and complain till the cows come home. They can try to put their words in my mouth. It’s not my problem. (And, what’s up with the uncivil accusation? Was it gratuitous or is there some basis for it other than my refusal to knuckle under to the lies and insults of bullies?) I don’t sit still and let jerks misrepresent my positions. Yes, I call names right up to the point Patterico tells me to tone it down. Which I do till the dirty so-in-sos provoke me.
I responded to Hitchcock in kind (see below). He claimed I was an idolator using homoerotic slurs against someone who isn’t a Trump idolator (again, if that’s a reference to Megyn Kelly, I flat out deny any such intention. I remarked on her look. If anyone doesn’t understand the term look it up. It’s more than common in the fashion industry, it’s a daily commonplace.
At #45 I responded to Hitchcock’s outrageous accusation:
Now, I have no reason to think Hitchcock is a poof, but if he’s going to trade in those terms he’s going to get the same crap right back in his impudent face.
ropelight (f6c4db) — 2/9/2016 @ 8:04 am