• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Was Ted Cruz Right?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...tor-remarks/?tid=sm_tw&utm_term=.9ae9912c076b



Attacking qualification in this context is still attack upon the person as per their judgement of themselves.



Only when he ran for office? Sorry I do not buy such a radical and convenient turn.



So you hang around people that you think are pathological liars, racist, etc? After all that is what being said about Trump now. What do you think such a view would say about your own character? Think about it. This is why people like Cruz, Clinton and other politicians are scumbags that only care when votes matter.
Yeah. Anyone can watch the videos you posted and see that (1) your descriptions of them were misleading, and (2) Clinton’s campaign ad against Obama was very different from the way Cruz and others personally went on TV and totally trashed Trump as a human being.

I’m happy to leave it there and give you the last word. I invite anyone reading to watch the videos you posted, then watch the Cruz video in the OP, and decide for themselves if one went well beyond the standard criticism of an opponent in a primary.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
According to the article it wasn’t the Clinton campaign that started it. It was started by chain emails and conspiracy theorists who supported Clinton and then perpetuated for years by people like Trump.

Clinton had no issues using it. Now you have issue with Trump using it. Hilarious.

You didn't read the article closely. You have conflated the Muslim claim with the Birther claim. It was started by Clinton supports. It was used and propagated by her campaign.



That is a very different fact pattern from, hypothetically, Clinton saying on live TV that Obama is a pathological liar, narcissistic bully, unfit, clown, etc as Republican leaders said about Trump. To try to equate the two is just silly.

Tone does not change the attack upon Obama and his views of himself and his qualifications into something else. Pointing out he has no qualification yet is running for office thinking he is suitable for the position is an attack upon his judgement and perception. It is a nice way of saying Obama has an ego or even more delusional view of himself in contrast to Clinton and her own record in private and public life. You are not reading between the lines here. You only notice language used not what the message's intention.
 
Last edited:

Shad

Veteran Member
Yeah. Anyone can watch the videos you posted and see that (1) your descriptions of them were misleading,

No, just wrong in my conclusion.

and (2) Clinton’s campaign ad against Obama was very different from the way Cruz and others personally went on TV and totally trashed Trump as a human being.

Being nice while insulting someone is still insulting someone.

I’m happy to leave it there and give you the last word. I invite anyone reading to watch the videos you posted, then watch the Cruz video in the OP, and decide for themselves if one went well beyond the standard criticism of an opponent in a primary.

This is the problem with US politics. People dress up their insults in niceties thus fool the public then call it "standard" as if that is a thing. They call Trump this and that mean while Obama bombs US citizens which is not only a war crime but completely against the Constitution yet Americans do not even blink an eye. Yet you do not even consider that some actions reflect character as well. However as it is not direct you have issues figuring it out.
 
You didn't read the article closely. You have conflated the Muslim claim with the Birther claim. It was started by Clinton supports. It was used and propagated by her campaign.
Yes, the people who originally perpetuated it were Clinton supporters, as I acknowledged. But where does the article say Clinton, or the Clinton campaign, used and propagated birtherism? That would be quite different. Perhaps I missed it.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
Yes, the people who originally perpetuated it were Clinton supporters, as I acknowledged. But where does the article say Clinton, or the Clinton campaign, used and propagated birtherism? That would be quite different. Perhaps I missed it.

As I said my conclusion was wrong.

7 News Stories from 2008 that PROVE Hillary Started Obama 'Birtherism' - Media is LYING!

Ignore the title. It is click bait. Read the article. Various campaign members had no issues using the perception that Obama is not American for the campaign.
 
No, just wrong in my conclusion.



Being nice while insulting someone is still insulting someone.



This is the problem with US politics. People dress up their insults in niceties thus fool the public then call it "standard" as if that is a thing. They call Trump this and that mean while Obama bombs US citizens which is not only a war crime but completely against the Constitution yet Americans do not even blink an eye. Yet you do not even consider that some actions reflect character as well. However as it is not direct you have issues figuring it out.
I honestly don’t see the Clinton 3am ad that you posted as “insulting” to Obama ... to insinuate I’m qualified and he’s not - that’s politics. To call someone a narcissist and a dangerous pathological liar - that’s treatment only Trump gets, because in Trump’s case it’s so obviously true.

Every president including Obama is flawed. Many were disturbed by Obama’s drone campaign. I don’t think we reduce unnecessary violence by supporting a man who proudly supports more torture, killing the families of terrorists, threatens he will attack “cultural sites” in Iran, etc. Maybe in spite of that rhetoric, Trump’s actions will be less violent. I just don’t know why we should take that gamble with a toddler when there are so many adults in both parties to choose from.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
I honestly don’t see the Clinton 3am ad that you posted as “insulting” to Obama ... to insinuate I’m qualified and he’s not - that’s politics.

It goes into why Obama thinks he is qualified when merit is not on his side while it is was on Clinton's as per their records. You are ignoring the context of the ad instead focusing on the system it is within. Like I said niceties.


To call someone a narcissist and a dangerous pathological liar - that’s treatment only Trump gets, because in Trump’s case it’s so obviously true.

A two term senator with zero legislation accomplishments, no military experience at any level, no foreign policy experience thinking they can be POTUS is ego and narcissism in my view. Trump is just overt with his flaws.

Every president including Obama is flawed. Many were disturbed by Obama’s drone campaign. I don’t think we reduce unnecessary violence by supporting a man who proudly supports more torture, killing the families of terrorists, threatens he will attack “cultural sites” in Iran, etc. Maybe in spite of that rhetoric, Trump’s actions will be less violent. I just don’t know why we should take that gamble with a toddler when there are so many adults in both parties to choose from.

Trump's actions are already less violent. By Obama's 3rd year he had already topple a government turning it into an hellhole. It is called Libya. Look at your comparison. You worry about threats and rhetoric. You worry about the overt and ignore the covert is my point.

The gamble is lesser of two evils as the two parties have a stranglehold on the US system. Until people start dropping those parties completely a level of corruption will always be acceptable as you have no choices nor are willing to clean house so to speak. Sanders could have separated himself from the Dems but he didn't. Lost chance in my view. Up here whole parties have died after their blunders in office. Think about it.
 
It goes into why Obama thinks he is qualified when merit is not on his side while it is was on Clinton's as per their records. You are ignoring the context of the ad instead focusing on the system it is within. Like I said niceties.




A two term senator with zero legislation accomplishments, no military experience at any level, no foreign policy experience thinking they can be POTUS is ego and narcissism in my view. Trump is just overt with his flaws.



Trump's actions are already less violent. By Obama's 3rd year he had already topple a government turning it into an hellhole. It is called Libya. Look at your comparison. You worry about threats and rhetoric. You worry about the overt and ignore the covert is my point.

The gamble is lesser of two evils as the two parties have a stranglehold on the US system. Until people start dropping those parties completely a level of corruption will always be acceptable as you have no choices nor are willing to clean house so to speak. Sanders could have separated himself from the Dems but he didn't. Lost chance in my view. Up here whole parties have died after their blunders in office. Think about it.
Thanks, I’ve said my piece and will let anyone reading look at the videos we each posted and draw their own conclusions. I’ll let you have the last word.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
Thanks, I’ve said my piece and will let anyone reading look at the videos we each posted and draw their own conclusions. I’ll let you have the last word.

I would add that people need to look up Clinton's comments as it is about her husbands crime bill.
 
Top