All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 4.
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • -1
    Posted by sumitch 10 years ago in reply to this comment.
    You're right. It's a shame that most candidates support religion. Better they should be atheists or better yet a lying Muslim.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by sumitch 10 years ago in reply to this comment.
    There's news. Who would have guessed that Hillary isn't running in the Republican party. Last I heard she hasn't said she's running for anything. But Hillary is a proven liar so she's the obvious pick of the two.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • -1
    Posted by sumitch 10 years ago in reply to this comment.
    But Obama's great oratory and pocket full of lies that got him into office gets a pass. Makes perfect sense to me. Let's all go out and campaign against Senator Cruz because he's not afraid to show his thanks to God.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by SaltyDog 10 years ago
    I have my beliefs and I don't pretend to understand anyone else's mysticism. With that said, one thing that I can say from experience: whenever someone starts out a business deal by telling you what a great Christian they are, GRAB YOUR WALLET!!!
    I've learned over long experience to simply say, "Don't tell me, show me."
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 10 years ago in reply to this comment.
    There are a lot of things about Obama that give us the creeps and worse. But what is meant here is a different sense of that phrase: someone who talks with contrived flourishes of dramatic rhetoric and a glazed expression like he's crazed and out of touch with reality, trying to emotionally manipulate like an evangelical preacher building up a crescendo as his listeners lose their sense of reality and drift into a fervent trance. It's the Jim Jones kind of creepiness and isn't restricted to politics.

    He seems to have developed his style deliberately, just when we need the opposite: someone who can lead with rational explanation.

    That is the creepiness he is exuding, despite the fact that behind it he is an intelligent man who understands and supports Constitutional principles better than most of them, but you have to wonder if he is stable and consistent enough to credibly act on them.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jdg 10 years ago in reply to this comment.
    All I've seen of the CFR is that they publish the magazine "Foreign Affairs" -- which is incredibly naive. I subscribed to it for a year; it was stupid.

    If those guys are the best our opponents can come up with to rule the world, I won't lose any sleep over them.

    (I'm undecided whether Soros is any smarter than they or not. At least Soros has the brains to keep his mouth shut about his plans, most of the time.)

    I can't see Cruz being a communist stooge, though. He's not smart enough to hide an agenda like that.

    As far as the banksters, I don't support everything bankers now do. But there are good and bad ways to regulate them, and the Democrats have been doing it badly. I would repeal Dodd-Frank, with its unaccountable board, if the Supreme Court doesn't do it first (but they probably will).
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 10 years ago in reply to this comment.
    He's campaigning for what he believes in. What we are left with is the lesser of two evils.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 10 years ago in reply to this comment.
    Hillary isn't running in the Republican primary.

    Both parties pay lip service to religion but generally don't embrace an evangelicalism like a demagogic preacher.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • -1
    Posted by UncommonSense 10 years ago in reply to this comment.
    Fair enough. However, Cruz is anything but a 'grass-roots' guy. His wife works for the banksters. Wall Street and Washington have had an incestous relationship for over 100 years, and where has it gotten the country?

    Communists do export their own you know. To spread the ideology. I stand on my view: he is a stooge. I have no doubt he's also a member of the CFR ~ the organization that's had a death grip on the WH since FDR and it hasn't changed since.

    You could argue Pres Reagan wasn't in the CFR and that may be true, but his ENTIRE staff were all CFR members, thus Reagan was effectively controlled.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 10 years ago in reply to this comment.
    80% claim to be Christians. What % then go out and vote for the lesser or greater of evils. We have a Government that talks but does not produce. A party that thinks talking about something is doing something and now, although overtly anti-religion claims to be religious.

    The statistics don't support each other.

    He's still a Republican. Hillary is still a Democrat. Figure it out for yourself.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 10 years ago in reply to this comment.
    That is all we can do (for an election), but I don't think they are all that bad in promoting and relying on religion. Jindal and Santorum (who was once very good in some ways before having some kind of Catholic vision that probably cost him his Senate seat) have both already exhibited similar outbursts, but not most of the rest. At the other extreme have been establishment candidates like Bush and Christie who are very dangerous in other ways for their Pragmatic statism and pandering.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 10 years ago in reply to this comment.
    I don't think he's pandering for votes without regard for ethics. He means it,. His campaign emphasis may be somewhat skewed appealing to the evangelicals in the primary, but he clearly has an unhealthy fervor for it..

    If he were nominated to the Supreme Court and started emphasizing religion instead of the Constitution it would be a big problem for a lot of people.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 10 years ago in reply to this comment.
    All the conversation about his running for president, which he had previously announced, is not about religion. He made it about religion in his first campaign ad.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 10 years ago in reply to this comment.
    I agree and disagree. I don't know what to think. I have seen so many politicians pandering for votes from religious groups. If I knew Cruz, I would be able to tell if he is sincere. I know he is a politician so I lean toward thinking he is saying what he thinks will get him more votes without any regard to ethics or morality.
    If I was running for POTUS, I would avoid all mention of religion because I think it has little to do with doing the job of POTUS. I would concentrate on actions demonstrating that I acted in a way that proved I could be trusted to do the job of POTUS. Part of that would be to prove my ethics and my philosophy. That philosophy would either prove or disprove my acceptability to someone who is religious. If being the same religion as a voter is the most important criteria to a voter then that voter would not be the target for my ad.
    Clearly I will not be selected by the GOP as their candidate in this timeline.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by peterchunt 10 years ago in reply to this comment.
    Unfortunately most, if not all, candidates for the Republican nominee will be supporting religion. As I said I can live with that, even though I am an atheist. I look to their ideas, which will take time. I haven’t said I support Cruz, and indeed, I right now favor some other candidates, but I am waiting to see all the policies of all the candidates, and then make the decision which is probably who is the least worst.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • -2
    Posted by sumitch 10 years ago
    Amazing. The man announces that he's running for president and all the conversation that ensues is about religion.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo