It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Ted Cruz' Presidential Bid Is Nothing But a Clever GOP Srategy

page: 8
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in


posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 06:17 AM
All I know is, whoever took away american citizens's right not to be seized and searched for no cause, is a Nazi. Call me a Marxist any day.

posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 07:09 AM

originally posted by: guitarplayer

I would much rather point out how some the candidates through their political and personal history have demonstrated that it does not mean anything to them. Some I would say have through their actions that they are above law and the laws do not apply the them.

Er ... okay. Do that then. Is it a secret?

Provide some evidence of what you're claiming; I'm interested to know about these potential candidates that are against the Constitution, by word or deed or genetic predisposition or star sign or whatever metric you choose.


posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 07:23 AM

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
a reply to: Krazysh0t
Which has been done ad nauseum by many many Scientist and Studies......all one needs to do is a damn google search...

Yet those studies are swept under the rug, thrown out as heresy against the popular belief system, and its authors are disparaged into obscurity losing their livelihoods...

Ah yes, the go to conspiracy of science is trying to keep certain studies from seeing the light of day. This is such bs. Science works by trying to disprove other science. It's called the peer review process. A scientist who could adequately disprove climate change would make his career. He'd be pretty famous.

If an organization is pushing faulty studies then those studies would get debunked and discarded in short order. Like I said, science isn't just performed in the United States.

Tell me, if the science is settled, then why are so many who dont tow the line punished so hard for their viewpoints? Since when does "Science" TRUE science say, that if you have data that shows something different you destroy the person that presented it?

Tell me why you are repeating right wing talking points. Who are these people who have had their lives destroyed for posting conflicting data? Don't tell me to google the answer either. I'm not the one asserting this claim.

By the way, pushing flawed science and getting your papers dismissed isn't the science community destroying your career. That is YOU destroying your own career for pushing flawed science. Have you actually LOOKED at the papers that end up getting dismissed, gone over the science with a fine tooth comb and determined that it was sound? Have you read up on the peer review rebuttals on those papers to see if they aren't sound? OR are you just repeating what you've heard on various right wing web sites or on this website?

Really hard to combat popular theory when those who present it are made a target...and dont say it doesnt happen

It doesn't happen.

because honestly if your rebuttal is that anyting ive said is un true, then you have NOT done your research on this subject...

Uh huh...

Cruise is Right, the science is not settled, and there should be continued investigation on the science , to make sure its sound before ANYONE tries to pass ANYTHING to cost people more money.....

Now, I have money to make
have a great day

Yeah certainly. Cruz is just making sure everything is in order before wanting to make changes. It can't be because he has sympathies with the oil industry who pushes most of the anti-climate change science. Nah, he's COMPLETELY altruistic on this despite trying to create scientific conflict (as a politician nonetheless and not an actual scientist) on a matter that the rest of the world has agreed is a real thing. Yeah, I'm COMPLETELY sure that Cruz is thoroughly read up on the science he is dismissing. He's totally NOT acting like every other politician ever who dismisses science based on lobbying issues. /sarcasm
edit on 26-3-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 08:32 AM

originally posted by: beezzer
The Constitution also makes no mention of internet porn, so I don't really see your point.

I have to ask, "Are you implying that our founding fathers were not only men of great vision, but psychic as well?" I mean, how would they know what the Internet was? Much less Internet porn?

FYI, The Constitution was never intended to cover every issue individually. It was intended to serve as a baseline of fundamental rights and principles on which more specific statutes could be based.

Truth be told, Ted Cruz is just another in the long list of GOP candidates who thinks that God spoke to him and tasked him with "fixing" this country through the imposition of "Christian" law.
edit on 26-3-2015 by Flatfish because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 10:24 AM
a reply to: Flatfish

Your post reminded me of something Thomas Jefferson said in a letter to A. Coray, 1823

Whatever be the Constitution, great care must be taken to provide a mode of amendment when experience or change of circumstances shall have manifested that any part of it is unadapted to the good of the nation.

posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 12:10 AM
a reply to: Gryphon66

Do you Control the Party you happen to be part of ? No , you are a Dupe then .

new topics

top topics
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in