Posted on 02/10/2016 12:10:07 PM PST by knarf
Most Americans are not THAT demanding of a strict definition of conservatism
And no, a few extra pennies for tea isn't worth dying over, but a few pennies wasn't really the issue at hand, was it.
He didn’t fight hard - the country found out about it and burned up the phone lines. But all you really have to do is read up on his position: he is for self deportation, as if the deadbeat illegals receiving all the benefits are going to leave the sanctuary cities. That is foolish. And equally foolish is to assume that they are going to start enforcing current immigration laws under Cruz. The basic fact is that until Trump entered the race immigration wasn’t even on Cruz’s radar.
You're not researching much apparently. It is right in the first paragraph of the Times article you referenced if you bothered to read it:
imposed a 100 percent tariff today on some Japanese-made computers, television sets and power tools.
So, what is your point. I am 100% correct.
You are so lax on reading your own freekin' article I will just say I am 100% correct on the payroll tax: there are countless references in a Google search, you must be kidding:
In 1983, Reagan signed off on legislation to raise payroll taxes and tax Social Security benefits for some higher earners.
That is just the first one right off the top from Politifact. Obviously you are jerking my chain.
Look, I was on the net when there were only a few million between the US and Canada. I have been in countless forums over the years, so I do not suffer the nitpickery of fools who think they are being cute with such responses as,
you were not candid about the nature....did not stipulate that it was levied only on certain goods.
I do not post for your pleasure nor the lack of your grasp of the King's English. You can take the words 'some' and 'stipulate' and cram them. I do not have to use over-qualifiers because you lack the capacity to understand a declarative sentence.
Moreover, here is something that will also trouble your vision about Reagan: Running for his second term he was endorsed by the Teamsters. Now, go and say you cannot find that information anywhere.
No, you seem to be posting for the sole purpose of tearing down Reagan. Which has not been effective. Being fully informative, not using deceptive language and not holding back information would not be defined as “posting for (my) pleasure”.
The Teamsters endorsed Reagan twice, in fact. That does not mean that either Carter or Mondale would have been a better choice for conservatives than Reagan, if that is what you are trying to say, and I can’t think of anything else one can say on that score, with all due respect, unless it is to name some other putatively conservative politician in place of Reagan. Perhaps things under Jackie Presser’s leadership (an informant for the FBI; so was Reagan when he was the head of the SAG union) were not as dogmatically left wing? although the problem with Mafia incursion in the Teamsters was of course ongoing.
And when Trump gives the illegals that are already here amnesty, Conservatives will never win another election in our lifetime.
Your provoking a stupid argument
Everyone from John Kasich to Ted Cruz is claiming to be “the Conservative choice”.
That word has been so bastardized by the DC Political/Media for the last 20 years it has lost all meaning
Take this and cram it too. You were proven wrong on every issue, try to get over it. Basis your idiotic use of the language, you are in no position to tell anybody what 'would not be defined'...
I am a big fan of Reagan and post what I do because fops like you misrepresent him in an attempt to puff up globalists like Cruz.
Instead of saying “some electronics”, you said “electronics” with reference to the short-lived tariffs as if it had a wider compass; not to mention committing the error of omission with respect to there having been a reason for the sanctions thereof. So yes, the language thereof was deceptive and not what a “big fan of Reagan” would do unless it was to promote him as some kind of liberal figure.
And you are parsing my words once more.
Not to mention, I have never once mentioned Cruz. Not once. So on that score, you are an utter deceiver.
Apples and oranges comparison, I think.
And the word has not lost its meaning merely because some candidates lie about it applying to them.
Thank you for the information you’ve provided.
I’m with you, I believe completely that Cruz IS a globalist and how he’s hiding that reality is a sight to behold.
People can scream all they want that Trump is not conservative, well guess what, we kinda already know that he’s not the type of conservative they envision. But to pretend that Cruz is some white knight savior for Americans, is ludicrous.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.