Ted Cruz Vows to Block Christian Refugees from US

by **notyou2** on Wed Nov 18, 2015 7:46 pm

So Ted Cruz wants to block Christian Syrian refugees from entering the US.

Wow, an immigrant blocking immigrants.

What a hypocrite.

by **Bernie Sanders** on Wed Nov 18, 2015 7:53 pm

notyou2 wrote:So Ted Cruz wants to block Christian Syrian refugees from entering the US.

Wow, an immigrant blocking immigrants.

What a hypocrite.

That's insane!

by **riskllama** on Wed Nov 18, 2015 10:07 pm

i think i heard on the radio today that 10 states are saying "nope" to syrian refugees after the paris attacks...lame.

by **riskllama** on Wed Nov 18, 2015 10:17 pm

also, wasn't it non-christian?

by **thegreekdog** on Thu Nov 19, 2015 8:09 pm

riskllama wrote:i think i heard on the radio today that 10 states are saying "nope" to syrian refugees after the paris attacks...lame.

For whatever it's worth, I'm pretty sure they can't actually do that.

by **Metsfanmax** on Thu Nov 19, 2015 8:12 pm

In 2014, Ted Cruz welcomed Syrian refugees.

by **thegreekdog** on Thu Nov 19, 2015 8:14 pm

Metsfanmax wrote:In 2014, Ted Cruz welcomed Syrian refugees.

Holy shit! Hypocrisy and pandering in politics?!?! This is a new development only applicable to Republicans!

http://www.usnews.com/debate-club/will- ... olitically

by **Metsfanmax** on Thu Nov 19, 2015 8:26 pm

thegreekdog wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote:In 2014, Ted Cruz welcomed Syrian refugees.

Holy shit! Hypocrisy and pandering in politics?!?! This is a new development only applicable to Republicans!

http://www.usnews.com/debate-club/will- ... olitically

Here's a rule of thumb I have about politics: if your first instinct, when someone criticizes a member of a particular party, is to criticize a member of the opposite party in response, then you don't get to complain about how partisan Washington is.

by **thegreekdog** on Thu Nov 19, 2015 8:35 pm

Metsfanmax wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote:In 2014, Ted Cruz welcomed Syrian refugees.

Holy shit! Hypocrisy and pandering in politics?!?! This is a new development only applicable to Republicans!

http://www.usnews.com/debate-club/will- ... olitically

Here's a rule of thumb I have about politics: if your first instinct, when someone criticizes a member of a particular party, is to criticize a member of the opposite party in response, then you don't get to complain about how partisan Washington is.

Good rule of thumb. I don't complain about how partisan Washington is. I think it should be more partisan.

I also have a rule of thumb: If you criticize a member of a particular party for changing his or her mind on a particular issue because of an intervening event or because he or she wants to pander to a particular bloc of voters (or really for any reason), when a member of the particular political party you support has probably already done it, you should probably just focus on the issue and not on the changing position.

by **Metsfanmax** on Thu Nov 19, 2015 8:43 pm

thegreekdog wrote:I also have a rule of thumb: If you criticize a member of a particular party for changing his or her mind on a particular issue because of an intervening event or because he or she wants to pander to a particular bloc of voters (or really for any reason), when a member of the particular political party you support has probably already done it, you should probably just focus on the issue and not on the changing position.

I expect better reasoning from you. My post wasn't about the Republican Party, it was about Ted Cruz. You know, the guy whose name is in the thread title. You're the one making this a party issue. If I want to criticize a politician for some action, in a thread about that politician and that action, I should be able to do it regardless of the party they are from or what party I support. If you can't deal with that without turning it into a party politics discussion, then you're invited to leave the conversation and go participate in one where you might contribute something valuable.

by **thegreekdog** on Thu Nov 19, 2015 9:09 pm

Metsfanmax wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:I also have a rule of thumb: If you criticize a member of a particular party for changing his or her mind on a particular issue because of an intervening event or because he or she wants to pander to a particular bloc of voters (or really for any reason), when a member of the particular political party you support has probably already done it, you should probably just focus on the issue and not on the changing position.

I expect better reasoning from you. My post wasn't about the Republican Party, it was about Ted Cruz. You know, the guy whose name is in the thread title. You're the one making this a party issue. If I want to criticize a politician for some action, in a thread about that politician and that action, I should be able to do it regardless of the party they are from or what party I support. If you can't deal with that without turning it into a party politics discussion, then you're invited to leave the conversation and go participate in one where you might contribute something valuable.

I'm fine with you criticizing Ted Cruz for vowing to block Syrian refugees. I've done so myself. I'm not fine with you criticizing Ted Cruz for first welcoming Syrian refugees and then changing his mind (for whatever the reason). That kind of smells like hypocrisy given how frequently politicians do it, including the politicians you support (presumably). I'm sure you criticized President Obama in 2008 for not being in favor of gay marriage. I'm not so sure you criticized President Obama for changing his mind in favoring gay marriage simply because he changed his mind.

If you posted the link to criticize Ted Cruz for blocking Syrian refugees, good for you and I agree. If, instead, you posted the link to criticize Ted Cruz for changing his mind to pander to voters (which is what I think you did because, well...) then my reasoning is outstanding. I'm not making it a party issue, I'm making it a "c'mon dude, seriously?" issue.

by **Metsfanmax** on Thu Nov 19, 2015 9:16 pm

thegreekdog wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:I also have a rule of thumb: If you criticize a member of a particular party for changing his or her mind on a particular issue because of an intervening event or because he or she wants to pander to a particular bloc of voters (or really for any reason), when a member of the particular political party you support has probably already done it, you should probably just focus on the issue and not on the changing position.

I expect better reasoning from you. My post wasn't about the Republican Party, it was about Ted Cruz. You know, the guy whose name is in the thread title. You're the one making this a party issue. If I want to criticize a politician for some action, in a thread about that politician and that action, I should be able to do it regardless of the party they are from or what party I support. If you can't deal with that without turning it into a party politics discussion, then you're invited to leave the conversation and go participate in one where you might contribute something valuable.

I'm fine with you criticizing Ted Cruz for vowing to block Syrian refugees. I've done so myself. I'm not fine with you criticizing Ted Cruz for first welcoming Syrian refugees and then changing his mind (for whatever the reason). That kind of smells like hypocrisy given how frequently politicians do it, including the politicians you support (presumably). I'm sure you criticized President Obama in 2008 for not being in favor of gay marriage. I'm not so sure you criticized President Obama for changing his mind in favoring gay marriage simply because he changed his mind.

If you posted the link to criticize Ted Cruz for blocking Syrian refugees, good for you and I agree. If, instead, you posted the link to criticize Ted Cruz for changing his mind to pander to voters (which is what I think you did because, well...) then my reasoning is outstanding. I'm not making it a party issue, I'm making it a "c'mon dude, seriously?" issue.

You've got to know me well enough by now that I have zero interest in scoring random internet points by making fun of Ted Cruz for changing his mind. The reason I posted it is to show that folks like Ted Cruz who, after the Paris attacks, can't close the borders fast enough, believe that it's the right thing to do to take in Syrian refugees, and that they're letting fear, or the current political drama, stop them from doing the right thing. I'm not criticizing Ted Cruz "because he changed his mind," I'm criticizing Ted Cruz because he used to believe the right thing and now no longer believes it.

So, c'mon dude, seriously?

by **thegreekdog** on Thu Nov 19, 2015 9:23 pm

Metsfanmax wrote:You've got to know me well enough by now that I have zero interest in scoring random internet points by making fun of Ted Cruz for changing his mind.

You must have changed then.

Metsfanmax wrote:I'm not criticizing Ted Cruz "because he changed his mind," I'm criticizing Ted Cruz because he used to believe the right thing and now no longer believes it

Because he changed his mind. To score political capital. Which happens all the time. Which is why I'm giving you shit.

by **Metsfanmax** on Thu Nov 19, 2015 9:30 pm

thegreekdog wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote:I'm not criticizing Ted Cruz "because he changed his mind," I'm criticizing Ted Cruz because he used to believe the right thing and now no longer believes it

Because he changed his mind. To score political capital. Which happens all the time. Which is why I'm giving you shit.

OK, so in TGD fantasy land, we should never criticize politicians for saying something knowingly wrong to score political points. We should just let them say whatever they want, never hold their feet to the fire. They do it all the time, so it is no longer wrong! We shouldn't even care what they think, we should just argue for ourselves on internet message boards. Because what they think doesn't matter anyway, they have no political power. As long as we are right, everything's good!

Seriously, stop posting until you've reflected on how insane your suggestion is.

by **thegreekdog** on Thu Nov 19, 2015 9:37 pm

Metsfanmax wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote:I'm not criticizing Ted Cruz "because he changed his mind," I'm criticizing Ted Cruz because he used to believe the right thing and now no longer believes it

Because he changed his mind. To score political capital. Which happens all the time. Which is why I'm giving you shit.

OK, so in TGD fantasy land, we should never criticize politicians for saying something knowingly wrong to score political points. We should just let them say whatever they want, never hold their feet to the fire. They do it all the time, so it is no longer wrong! We shouldn't even care what they think, we should just argue for ourselves on internet message boards. Because what they think doesn't matter anyway, they have no political power. As long as we are right, everything's good!

Seriously, stop posting until you've reflected on how insane your suggestion is.[/quote

No, in TGD fantasy land we say "Ted Cruz shouldn't block Syrian refugees." And that's really all that needs to be said. Frankly, I think your reasoning is off. Good thing I'm back.

by **Metsfanmax** on Thu Nov 19, 2015 9:44 pm

thegreekdog wrote:No, in TGD fantasy land we say "Ted Cruz shouldn't block Syrian refugees." And that's really all that needs to be said.

Interesting, then, that you didn't actually say that, despite having the opportunity. And then, when I posted and you had another opportunity to participate and agree that Ted Cruz shouldn't block Syrian refugees, you decided to criticize me, instead of Ted Cruz.

You are not some high-minded, intellectual thinker who has successfully risen above the fray; you're just a normal jackass.

by **Metsfanmax** on Thu Nov 19, 2015 9:58 pm

More importantly, if you're going to pick a Democratic flip-flop to make your point, pick one more recent than 2012. There's plenty to choose from. Picking one that old just makes you look out of touch.

by **thegreekdog** on Thu Nov 19, 2015 10:03 pm

Metsfanmax wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:No, in TGD fantasy land we say "Ted Cruz shouldn't block Syrian refugees." And that's really all that needs to be said.

Interesting, then, that you didn't actually say that, despite having the opportunity. And then, when I posted and you had another opportunity to participate and agree that Ted Cruz shouldn't block Syrian refugees, you decided to criticize me, instead of Ted Cruz.

You are not some high-minded, intellectual thinker who has successfully risen above the fray; you're just a normal jackass.

I did it like 3 posts ago. Perhaps that was too late to comfort you, although in my defense no one was supporting or defending Ted Cruz in this thread. I went into this thread thinking someone would be defending him that I could pounce on. Instead, I found your post adding an irrelevant and hypocritical viewpoint to the whole issue.

But let's keep fighting about this. Eventually I'll have to go to sleep so you'll have won by default.

Metsfanmax wrote:More importantly, if you're going to pick a Democratic flip-flop to make your point, pick one more recent than 2012. There's plenty to choose from. Picking one that old just makes you look out of touch.

To be honest, the first flip-flop that came to mind was Rand Paul acting like a Christian coalition conservative warmonger in the last couple of days. I'm waiting for him to start calling for drone strikes against Syrian refugees. But I needed to pick one from someone you liked and I couldn't pick Bernie Sanders (because I don't think he's ever flip-flopped) and I'm fairly certain you're not a big Clinton fan.

by **Bernie Sanders** on Thu Nov 19, 2015 10:48 pm

thegreekdog wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:No, in TGD fantasy land we say "Ted Cruz shouldn't block Syrian refugees." And that's really all that needs to be said.

Interesting, then, that you didn't actually say that, despite having the opportunity. And then, when I posted and you had another opportunity to participate and agree that Ted Cruz shouldn't block Syrian refugees, you decided to criticize me, instead of Ted Cruz.

You are not some high-minded, intellectual thinker who has successfully risen above the fray; you're just a normal jackass.

I did it like 3 posts ago. Perhaps that was too late to comfort you, although in my defense no one was supporting or defending Ted Cruz in this thread. I went into this thread thinking someone would be defending him that I could pounce on. Instead, I found your post adding an irrelevant and hypocritical viewpoint to the whole issue.

But let's keep fighting about this. Eventually I'll have to go to sleep so you'll have won by default.

Metsfanmax wrote:More importantly, if you're going to pick a Democratic flip-flop to make your point, pick one more recent than 2012. There's plenty to choose from. Picking one that old just makes you look out of touch.

To be honest, the first flip-flop that came to mind was Rand Paul acting like a Christian coalition conservative warmonger in the last couple of days. I'm waiting for him to start calling for drone strikes against Syrian refugees. But I needed to pick one from someone you liked and I couldn't pick Bernie Sanders (because I don't think he's ever flip-flopped) and I'm fairly certain you're not a big Clinton fan.

Yep, Bernie Sanders does not flip flop, cause I trip when I wear them. But, continue on please.

by **mrswdk** on Fri Nov 20, 2015 4:31 am

Politicians changing their mind to make political capital is the very essence of democracy.

'I think X, but most people I represent actually think Y, therefore I had best adopt Y as my position!'

In striving so diligently to make sure his views reflect those of his voters, Ted Cruz is actually demonstrating himself to be a consummate politician. If only there were more like him.

by **thegreekdog** on Fri Nov 20, 2015 7:31 am

Bernie Sanders wrote:Yep, Bernie Sanders does not flip flop, cause I trip when I wear them. But, continue on please.

It appears that Bernie Sanders (avowed anti-PAC guy) just flip-flopped when he got his new PAC funding. I found out about this in the morning today, so my bad.