Rafael T. Cruz, son of a Cuban who fought for and with Fidel Castro in the revolution

skyraider

Veteran Expediter
US Navy
Re: Rafael T. Cruz, son of a Cuban who fought for and with Fidel Castro in the revolu

For those of us who may not be so informed in the world of politics and chicken fodder, here is the dude that is bringing so much to the table of all Americans, I guess. So , on with the show, Inquiring Minds Want to Know.


Ted Cruz - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 

letzrockexpress

Veteran Expediter
Re: Rafael T. Cruz, son of a Cuban who fought for and with Fidel Castro in the revolu

Go where? You were lamenting why more people don't make an issue of Ted Cruz's father childhood excursion with Castro that he has continuesly denounced. It just doesn't fit izall. Ted Cruz mentions his father's dislike of Castro ALL THE TIME. If they thought Castro was such a swell socialist dictator and liked all the "wonderful" things he has done, I'm sure Ted Cruz would wholeheartedly endorse the 'great' things that Barry is doing such as ObamaCareless. Do you see him doing that? Like I said your argument falls flat.

It does not at all fall flat. You cannot draw any concrete conclusion or discernment about a man from who his father is.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Re: Rafael T. Cruz, son of a Cuban who fought for and with Fidel Castro in the revolu

It does not at all fall flat. You cannot draw any concrete conclusion or discernment about a man from who his father is.

It depends. In the case of a very bad father, one who abandons multiple families, does not stick around to raise them, is a drunk etc, a father like that will likely have a very negative affect on his offspring, their thinking etc. Quite often the children of men like that are easily led and controlled by a "loving" father figure.
 

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Re: Rafael T. Cruz, son of a Cuban who fought for and with Fidel Castro in the revolu

You first.

Hypocrisy: Libs who don't want the government involved with their body such as abortion but endorse the government to dictate the health care we must have for our bodies. (ObamaCareless)
Ta dah !
 

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Re: Rafael T. Cruz, son of a Cuban who fought for and with Fidel Castro in the revolu

It does not at all fall flat. You cannot draw any concrete conclusion or discernment about a man from who his father is.
Oh contrare. Barry has had many dreams about socialism in his ' dreams about his father'.
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
Re: Rafael T. Cruz, son of a Cuban who fought for and with Fidel Castro in the revolu

Hypocrisy: Libs who don't want the government involved with their body such as abortion but endorse the government to dictate the health care we must have for our bodies. (ObamaCareless)
Ta dah !

Equating mandatory health insurance with mandatory & entirely unnecessary medical procedures that no doctor would even consider ordering otherwise [in the same circs] is as brilliant as describing Obama as a radical socialist nutjob. Or calling Obama a Marxist/socialist: Obama is neither.
Except in the radical rightwing nutjob minds, such as they are.
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
Re: Rafael T. Cruz, son of a Cuban who fought for and with Fidel Castro in the revolu

Oh contrare. Barry has had many dreams about socialism in his ' dreams about his father'.

I've had some dreams about - never mind, you don't want to go there, trust me.
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
Re: Rafael T. Cruz, son of a Cuban who fought for and with Fidel Castro in the revolu

"Oh contrare"?
That's funny, right there! :D
 

letzrockexpress

Veteran Expediter
Re: Rafael T. Cruz, son of a Cuban who fought for and with Fidel Castro in the revolu

Oh contrare. Barry has had many dreams about socialism in his ' dreams about his father'.


I believe that is "Dreams Of My Father", not dreams about his father, mon frere...
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
Re: Rafael T. Cruz, son of a Cuban who fought for and with Fidel Castro in the revolu

It depends. In the case of a very bad father, one who abandons multiple families, does not stick around to raise them, is a drunk etc, a father like that will likely have a very negative affect on his offspring, their thinking etc. Quite often the children of men like that are easily led and controlled by a "loving" father figure.

You do know that your first two words proved Letzrock correct, right? Or did you suppose that statements like "very likely" and "quite often" qualify as concrete conclusions?
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
Re: Rafael T. Cruz, son of a Cuban who fought for and with Fidel Castro in the revolu

BUT, how a person was raised, or not raised, DOES make a difference in attitudes, ideas and how they relate to policy etc. That is not a "right" or "left" issue, it is a human issue and, regardless of what many may say, is extremely important.

Good parents can raise a kid who is bad. Bad parents can raise a kid who is good. Lots of parents raise some of both, so making any assumptions of the kid by looking at the parents can lead one very far astray from the truth.
 

letzrockexpress

Veteran Expediter
Re: Rafael T. Cruz, son of a Cuban who fought for and with Fidel Castro in the revolu

Hypocrisy: Libs who don't want the government involved with their body such as abortion but endorse the government to dictate the health care we must have for our bodies. (ObamaCareless)
Ta dah !

You used a different word.
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
Re: Rafael T. Cruz, son of a Cuban who fought for and with Fidel Castro in the revolu

Or calling Obama a Marxist/socialist: Obama is neither.
Except in the radical rightwing nutjob minds, such as they are.
I'm not a radical, nor right wing, nor a nutjob. Nevertheless, Obama is a Marxist by any criteria you choose.

How often have we heard from Obama's lips, "The rich aren't paying their fair share"?

Yet, the CBO reports based on official IRS data show the top 1% of income earners paid 39% of all federal income taxes, three times their share of income at 13%. And, the middle 20% of income earners, the true middle class, paid just 2.7% of total federal income taxes on net that year, while earning 15% of income. That means the top 1% paid almost 15 times as much in federal income taxes as the entire middle 20%, even though the middle 20% earned more income. Moreover, the official data, as reported by CBO and the IRS, show that the bottom 40% of income earners, instead of paying some income taxes to support the federal government, were paid cash by the IRS equal to 10% of federal income taxes as a group on net.

Any normal (non-Marxist, non-Socialist) person would say that such an income tax system is such that “the rich” pay more than their fair share. So why does President Obama keep saying that the rich do not pay their fair share? Is he ignorant? Stupid?

No, he's not ignorant or stupid. The answer is that to President Obama, this is still not fair, because he is a Marxist. To a Marxist, the fact that the top 1% earn more income than the bottom 99% is not fair, no matter how they earn it, fairly or not. So it is not fair unless more is taken from the top 1% until they are left only with what they “need,” as in any true communist system. Paying anything less is not their “fair” share, because in order for it to be fair, they can't have any more than anyone else. Not only is that the logical explanation of Obama’s statements, it is 100% consistent with his own published background.

Notice that Obama keept saying that “the rich” don’t “need” the Bush tax cuts. That "need" word is key. It's lock-step with the fundamental Marxist principle, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.”

Then we have the 2012 campaign where his new slogan was FORWARD, and with Obama's snazzy logo right in the middle of it.
slogan0501_image.jpg

If you know anything about Marxism, that's a logo that should give you pause. The slogan "Forward" reflected the conviction of European Marxists and radicals that their movements reflected the march of history, which would move forward past capitalism and into socialism and communism, precisely what Obama has been advocating with his class warfare and redistribution of wealth. Not only that, but a publication that began in 1844 as a bi-weekly publication of the Communist League, a publication called "Forward" was founded by some dood named Karl Marx, and had articles in it written by Marx, Friedrich Engels, Mikhail Bakunin, and posthumously, Leon Trotsky. Then there's the Social Democratic Party of Germany's official publication, "Vorwaerts" (Deutsch for "Forward").

Coincidence? I hardly think so. But, Obama will tell you (and has stated as much) that "Forward" has nothing to do with Marxism, that it simply is a collective euphemism meaning the progressive understanding of the State. The State has always been seen by the left as the engine of history. When Obama says he's about going Forward, he's saying that he thinks the government is the thing that moves us all forward, that the State is the source of Progress.

Hhhhmmmm, "the state is the source of Progress."

You know that's an actual quote of Karl Marx, right? Marx held that human societies progress through class struggle, even more quickly if you can foster class warfare, and then at that point where capitalism inevitably must self-destruct, to be replaced by a classless society, that of socialism of communism, where the State becomes the sole source of Progress, as everyone is dependent upon the State.
 

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Re: Rafael T. Cruz, son of a Cuban who fought for and with Fidel Castro in the revolu

Equating mandatory health insurance with mandatory & entirely unnecessary medical procedures that no doctor would even consider ordering otherwise [in the same circs] is as brilliant as describing Obama as a radical socialist nutjob. Or calling Obama a Marxist/socialist: Obama is neither.
Except in the radical rightwing nutjob minds, such as they are.
I'm talking about the government getting involved with our healthcare to the point where it wil interfere with what doctor we have chosen in the past to give us the proper medical care for OUR OWN BODIES. Surely if you are against the government meddling with a women's body you would be against the government meddling to the point where we won't be able to see the doctor we have chosen and preferred for the care of our own bodies. You do see the hypocrisy don't you?
 
Top