2018 Senate (& House)

[bystander]

Good news, according to the latest from Cuomo -- America became Great sometime during the last 48 hours

In my opinion...

America is GREAT relative to the rest of the world. We were not great internally in many ways. But the American hegemony has SAVED the world and is the sole factor in keeping the world in an uneasy peace. Think of a Soviet or Chinese hegemony. It would be awful. That is the greatness. We have the greatest capacity for good, for helping in a disaster, for protecting our friends and for withstanding economic hardship. And it is personally upsetting to me to see him knocking the greatness of our country concerning it's place in history solely because of Trump and his desire to help Democrats regain power.

It is my understanding that Stalin and Khrushchev among others stated that without the lend-lease program of the UNITED STATES they would have lost the war to Germany. That is an example of relative greatness. We hear about moral relativism but what about relative realism? The clear attack on our country by the arrogant, corrupt and unrepetant Cuomo is calculated to win votes by catering to people living with severe personal hang-ups. EVERY COUNTRY has had problems. But THIS COUNTRY STANDS ALONE.

His "apology" is clear. F. U. That's what he is saying.

 

[bystander]

None of it makes any sense. It's like they think the job is working for all the people of earth rather than representing American citizens in their body politic. The oath of office means nothing to them. They think individual rights under the Constitution extend to any and all persons no matter where they are situated, not just citizens of the United States.

This is going to have to be dealt with at some point. The federal courts never want to wade into what are traditionally 'political issues,' and with good reason, but on this they may be forced to.

In some ways the easiest thing in the world is to be a Liberal politician. Sanctimony sells. Constitutional arguments are considered heartless. They know exactly how it works. They know that to hold up a small child destroys the validity and merit of the Constitution.

It makes no sense to for Liberals to support the immigration of people from Latin America BASED UPON THEIR STATED CORE BELIEFS of the Left. I've said it before; the classic Liberal position is feminist, atheist/secular, green, highly educated (science) and tolerant of all sexual preference (or whatever the proper term is). In my opinion, being the sum of a Cuban immigrant and having lived on the Texas border for years and years, the Liberal profile is the exact opposite of what is heading north (and I haven't even mentioned the contribution to the poverty rate in America as these new immigrants depress wages due to their willingness to accept these wages and lack of benefits; what Liberal/union advocate would support that?). That is a cultural observation based upon what I consider to be the facts. We hear about how Conservatives reject science but is there a science of culture or anthropology? We know the fancy word for climate change is anthropomorphic which means human related or generated. But when it comes to cultural behavior patterns beyond our carbon footprint we are not allowed to be honest.

In this regard I feel the platform of the open border Liberals to be one of the most cynical feats of political opportunism in recent memory. And as an aside, if you think the refugees from the ME are Liberals then I have a bridge across the Rio Grande to sell to you.

Here is a very politically incorrect Liberal (former member of Greenpeace and considered an eco-terrorist) who takes a biodiversity first position and pulls no punches concerning immigration. But he is an unwelcome voice on the Left. It's an interesting example of how political power flattens out opinion to the preferred matrix without room for dissent (how ironic) or open debate and compromise.

Paul Watson puts case against high immigration | (We) can do better

 

[Mr. Deez]

QUOTE="bystander, post: 1586993, member: 36718"]sexual preference (or whatever the proper term is).[/QUOTE]

Nope, you're not allowed to use the term "sexual preference," because it suggests that we have a choice in our sexuality. Off you go to sensitivity training.

 

[Mr. Deez]

Mr D
Political signs are not allowed until 90 days before election which was a few days ago And the Cruz campaign is handing them out now

Well, somebody needs to be filing complaints against these Beto supporters for hustling a head start, and Cruz needs to get on the ball asap. It looks terrible. (Side note - it's flagrantly unconstitutional to prohibit an individual from putting up a yard sign at any time. If I want to put up a campaign sign and leave it up year round, that is my business and my First Amendment right.)

I have asked some people what policies they like of his ; sanctuary cities? Open boarders? Hatred of Israel? His restrictive stand on our second amendment?
No one actually knew any of his positions but just didn't like Cruz or Trump.

They don't know what he stands for, and they don't care. Most people don't vote according to policy preferences but based on who they like. Beto seems likeable. Cruz seems aloof and sanctimonious. (I've known Cruz since 2003, and he is actually neither aloof nor sanctimonious. However, he comes across as such.)

 

[Horn6721]

Mr D
So the Texas law and most others states as well are un
constitutional? I wonder if anyone has ever sued over that, or HOA rules against signs?

As far as calling out O'rouke for violating the Texas laws I thought about it but decided it was not that important.
Interesting that all the other campaigns for offices of all kind followed the rules and Wow did the signs bloom everywhere once the 90 days hit.
O'rouke has no respect for laws. The violation of illegal signs is just one example.

 

[Horn6721]

BTW I agree with your opinion on Cruz. I met him Feb 2011 in a grocery store parking lot rally when he was just beginning his campaign. There were all of 25-30 people there.
I volunteered for and worked hard for his campaign. I like to think I delivered several north Dallas/Plano David Dewhurst neighborhoods for him. Not really true but works for me.

Interesting that anyone who has ever seen him in person and heard him speak knows he is real and down to earth. But once the idea that he was aloof and arrogant got into the media it stuck. Most of the media didn't like him because they knew he would not be a gentleman establishment go along to get along kind of Senator. Heck His hometown paper, Houston, blasted him and slobbered over Dewhurst every chance they got.

 

[Joe Fan]

It's entirely anecdotal, but I've been in Plano for the last week and have seen a ton of Beto signs and literally not a single Cruz sign. The GOP wins Texas reliably by crushing the Democrats in big suburbs like Plano - by enough of a margin to offset the big cities. If that cracks, Texas becomes purple. Cruz needs to get with it.

We have many Beto signs in my hood as well. One Cruz sign Ive noticed. However, the yards with no signs of any kind vastly outnumber the yards with a sign. And I promise you every single home in the subdivision has been asked, most probably twice. We have been blanketed in note-taking, door-to-door activists.

My analysis of these facts is that Cruz still has the edge but folks here just dont want to point it out by putting a sign in their yards --
-- maybe they dont want to lose friendships with their Dem neighbors over it (we all know by now Dems will drop friendships over political preferences), or
-- maybe they dont want to risk damage to their yards/plants/homes/animals. There is no question these people are becoming increasingly violent. Why risk it?

Here is one personal anecdote. One of my neighbors is a 'community organizer' for Beto. Cars with both Cal and TX plates regularly pull up to his house, fill up their SUVs with signs and head out. Every one of them I have seen or spoken too (thanks to my inquisitive, friendly dog) is a heavy-set, middle-aged white female (100% of them). None of them were particularly friendly or talkative (despite my obvious handsomeness and dashing personality). They all acted as though they were engaged in serious business -- had their game faces on. They have the look of professional Hillary supporters out for revenge.

Ted Cruz is confident he will blow up Beto in the debates. While most state incumbents refuse debates, Cruz has gone the exact opposite direction, offering to debate Beto 5 times on TV. He loves to debate.

Personally, I dont think we need 5 Cruz-Beto debates. One will do. By my estimation, all Cruz has to do it point out Beto is for Open Borders, challenge him to explain how that would be good for Texas, then sit down and shut up. Or perhaps even just drop the mic and exit stage left. It would be a gift to Cruz if Beto equivocated or changed the topic without ever really answering. This would allow Cruz tro just keep pounding him on it. Liberals here are hanging their hats on the separation of illegal-immigrant parents and children issue -- the liberal media here (i.e., all media) covers it daily. They think this will let them win this issue. I dont. Open Borders is not a winner in this state.

 

[Joe Fan]

....It is my understanding that Stalin and Khrushchev among others stated that without the lend-lease program of the UNITED STATES they would have lost the war to Germany.....

I sometimes wonder if we should have delayed D-Day for the sole purpose of letting those two destroy each other further. Come in and mop up later. Would have saved many US, Brit, Canadian lives and perhaps minimized the subsequent Russian capture of so much territory.

Has anyone ever been f'd more by geography than the poor Poles?

"Nazis to the left of me, Commies to the right, here I am, stuck in the middle with ...."​

 

[Horn6721]

JF?
Did you ask them what positions of beto they liked?

 

[Mr. Deez]

Mr D
So the Texas law and most others states as well are un
constitutional?

Yes. Putting up a yard sign is political speech, which is supposed to be the hardest to regulate or restrict. If we were talking about signs at polling places or public areas, that would be different. However, a ban on signs on the private property of a person's residence? No serious reading of the First Amendment would permit that.

Interesting that all the other campaigns for offices of all kind followed the rules and Wow did the signs bloom everywhere once the 90 days hit.

Well, I hope so. I fly home tomorrow, so I won't see it. Either way, it was depressing to see all these Beto signs. I'm not going to go vandalize the signs like a liberal would to a Cruz sign in a Democratic area, but it's pathetic.

 

[Joe Fan]

....In this regard I feel the platform of the open border Liberals to be one of the most cynical feats of political opportunism in recent memory. And as an aside, if you think the refugees from the ME are Liberals then I have a bridge across the Rio Grande to sell to you....

I can remember arguing with my law school classmates about this in the 1980s. None of them were from Texas. They didnt get it. Some of them LOLd at me, others just looked at me quizzically, not understanding what I was saying. The New Yorkers, of course, thought they knew all. And, of course, they did not (those people can be so parochial). I can specifically remember telling them, "If you dont understand now, you will someday, this is going to become a huge issue. One more difficult to deal with the longer we wait."

I give two people credit for making this the singular issue of our current time -- Ann Coulter and Donald Trump. Many folks wrote and discussed it before them (like Pat Buchanan for example), but these two are the people who brought it all front and center. When Trump came down the escalator to announce, he had already read a galley proof of her not-yet-published book on the topic, and basically adopted her positions as his own. There is a thread somewhere in here where we discussed it at the time. To his great credit, it was one of the things Trump lead with. He said things none of the other Rs could or would say (out of fear of losing financial support). Trump's early position on immigration filled a giant void that had been left open for decades in the political machinations of this country. The same was true with Trump on trade deals. He got it. He went where no one else would go (or no one since the failure of Perot i guess). And I would argue that these two issues alone (with immigration being the #1), more than anything else, are what propelled Trump to victory.

 

[Joe Fan]

JF?
Did you ask them what positions of beto they liked?

We got off to a poor start when they pointed to his fundraising, I asked how much of it was from in-state vs. out of state. But they did like my dog at least

 

[Vol Horn 4 Life]

I'm wondering why the libs aren't introducing him with his real name.....Francis.

 

[mchammer]

Mr D
So the Texas law and most others states as well are un
constitutional? I wonder if anyone has ever sued over that, or HOA rules against signs?

As far as calling out O'rouke for violating the Texas laws I thought about it but decided it was not that important.
Interesting that all the other campaigns for offices of all kind followed the rules and Wow did the signs bloom everywhere once the 90 days hit.
O'rouke has no respect for laws. The violation of illegal signs is just one example.

Beto has been arrested for burglary, DWI, and self reported for breaking a law regarding cashing in on IPO’s as a congressman. He must know Dems aren’t convicted unless you did a bad job covering your tracks or offered as a sacrifice.

 

[Joe Fan]

It was more than just a slap

 

[mchammer]

It was more than just a slap

Come on! Who hasn’t gotten a little slap happy every now and then? /sarc

 

[Horn6721]

mc
Until you posted that I had no idea.
I see he was never tried for the burglary charge. Wonder if his father being a judge had anything to do with it.
Then I read about his Mother being convicted of tax fraud.
Funny since beto has talked about the importance of collecting sales tax.

 

[Mr. Deez]

Interesting that anyone who has ever seen him in person and heard him speak knows he is real and down to earth. But once the idea that he was aloof and arrogant got into the media it stuck. Most of the media didn't like him because they knew he would not be a gentleman establishment go along to get along kind of Senator.

The narrative works (somewhat) because it fits his personality at least on the superficial level. To make up for it, he needs to meet one-on-one with people as much possible.

Heck His hometown paper, Houston, blasted him and slobbered over Dewhurst every chance they got.

I never understood the appeal that Dewhurst had with the media nor the fear other politicians had of him. He got into politics in the worst way. He was a super rich guy with no experience and no connection to the grassroots who bought the Land Commissioner's office by spending money like a presidential candidate. I interviewed him once, and he seemed every bit as aloof as Cruz does. He wasn't a jerk, but he wasn't especially likable either. Just bland and a little weird and awkward. He just always seemed more beatable to me than people thought.

He did have massive hands though. Trump would have been impressed. My hands are about average-sized, and I felt like a little kid shaking a NBA player's hand. The dude could palm a full sized watermelon with one hand.

 

[bystander]

QUOTE="bystander, post: 1586993, member: 36718"]sexual preference (or whatever the proper term is).

Nope, you're not allowed to use the term "sexual preference," because it suggests that we have a choice in our sexuality. Off you go to sensitivity training.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, my inability to snap off the proper term is clearly a sign that I'm up for some training (interestingly, I've been signed up for an unconscious bias in hiring training class; it's company-wide, so it's not a hint). Should it be sexual orientation?

I am oriented towards woman of age; my preference is that they be hot.

 

[bystander]

I can remember arguing with my law school classmates about this in the 1980s. None of them were from Texas. They didnt get it. Some of them LOLd at me, others just looked at me quizzically, not understanding what I was saying. The New Yorkers, of course, thought they knew all. And, of course, they did not (those people can be so parochial). I can specifically remember telling them, "If you dont understand now, you will someday, this is going to become a huge issue. One more difficult to deal with the longer we wait."

I give two people credit for making this the singular issue of our current time -- Ann Coulter and Donald Trump. Many folks wrote and discussed it before them (like Pat Buchanan for example), but these two are the people who brought it all front and center. When Trump came down the escalator to announce, he had already read a galley proof of her not-yet-published book on the topic, and basically adopted her positions as his own. There is a thread somewhere in here where we discussed it at the time. To his great credit, it was one of the things Trump lead with. He said things none of the other Rs could or would say (out of fear of losing financial support). Trump's early position on immigration filled a giant void that had been left open for decades in the political machinations of this country. The same was true with Trump on trade deals. He got it. He went where no one else would go (or no one since the failure of Perot i guess). And I would argue that these two issues alone (with immigration being the #1), more than anything else, are what propelled Trump to victory.

I've brought this disconnect up to other Liberals and like you say, they either don't get it or just insult me. I personally believe it stuns them to believe that their sacred holier than thou position is flawed or hypocritical. I have a new employee from New York of all places and he's very outspoken. In short he's a typical New Yorker. Has no clue about manners and the southern way. He's in his twenties (I just turned 60) and very sure of himself. He had a very high GPA and seemed very smart so I hired him for my department (Accounting; planning and forecasting). His personal manner is snide-like and he was argumentative within days of being hired. In fact, just this past Friday I was forced to tell him to let me finish my thought right in front of my boss. I was a little chagrined at my own aggressiveness but to his credit he apologized to me right after the meeting and my boss later told me he had it coming. I'm hoping he's used to getting it back as good as he gives. Maybe that's what people from New York expect and maybe they respect the hard-nosed conversation without harboring a grudge. Some of you may have some insight about that.

This same employee and I have discussed politics and it's very clear he is a big time Liberal. He is ready to ridicule anyone within a hint of being a Conservative. He has strong opinions about gun laws (but he's not against people having guns for hunting; he said his father hunted in New York) and was going on about the Florida stand your ground law (he said it did not require you to attempt to flee which he felt was "stupid"). Anyway, I described the culture down in Laredo where I grew up and how the high school kids took their deer rifles to school with them; i.e. the old gun rack. I told him nobody batted an eye at this and to this day they are all heavily armed and it's no big deal. He muttered something about that's why New Yorkers don't like Texans and their gun culture... I dropped the matter because I was getting hot under the collar because he was basically insulting my friends. But what I wanted to tell him was this:

95.2% of the local population is Hispanic.

https://statisticalatlas.com/place/Texas/Laredo/Race-and-Ethnicity

 

[Sangre Naranjada]

I've brought this disconnect up to other Liberals and like you say, they either don't get it or just insult me. I personally believe it stuns them to believe that their sacred holier than thou position is flawed or hypocritical. I have a new employee from New York of all places and he's very outspoken. In short he's a typical New Yorker. Has no clue about manners and the southern way. He's in his twenties (I just turned 60) and very sure of himself. He had a very high GPA and seemed very smart so I hired him for my department (Accounting; planning and forecasting). His personal manner is snide-like and he was argumentative within days of being hired. In fact, just this past Friday I was forced to tell him to let me finish my thought right in front of my boss. I was a little chagrined at my own aggressiveness but to his credit he apologized to me right after the meeting and my boss later told me he had it coming. I'm hoping he's used to getting it back as good as he gives. Maybe that's what people from New York expect and maybe they respect the hard-nosed conversation without harboring a grudge. Some of you may have some insight about that.

This same employee and I have discussed politics and it's very clear he is a big time Liberal. He is ready to ridicule anyone within a hint of being a Conservative. He has strong opinions about gun laws (but he's not against people having guns for hunting; he said his father hunted in New York) and was going on about the Florida stand your ground law (he said it did not require you to attempt to flee which he felt was "stupid"). Anyway, I described the culture down in Laredo where I grew up and how the high school kids took their deer rifles to school with them; i.e. the old gun rack. I told him nobody batted an eye at this and to this day they are all heavily armed and it's no big deal. He muttered something about that's why New Yorkers don't like Texans and their gun culture... I dropped the matter because I was getting hot under the collar because he was basically insulting my friends. But what I wanted to tell him was this:

95.2% of the local population is Hispanic.

https://statisticalatlas.com/place/Texas/Laredo/Race-and-Ethnicity

I went to High School in a small town in the lower valley. 95+ % Hispanic there too. I know exactly what you're driving at. The NE liberal mindset has an image of Hispanic people as ones who will naturally agree with them on social issues and therefore fall in line and vote for lefty politicians. This is not at all true. Not to say none of them vote with the D's, but to point out the Hispanic home culture is very much at odds with left wing politics, and many, many of the people they pander to know it and vote against them.

 

[Mr. Deez]

Should it be sexual orientation?

For the next 5 - 10 years, yes. But I'm sure somebody will come up with a more politically correct term at some point. It's a little like how morons and idiots became "retarded people" which became "mentally challenged" which became "exceptional persons."

I am oriented towards woman of age; my preference is that they be hot.

Ditto, but the older I get the more I appreciate that a woman has brains than that she is hot.

 

[bystander]

For the next 5 - 10 years, yes. But I'm sure somebody will come up with a more politically correct term at some point. It's a little like how morons and idiots became "retarded people" which became "mentally challenged" which became "exceptional persons."



Ditto, but the older I get the more I appreciate that a woman has brains than that she is hot.

I keep stepping in it. Yes, I too want a woman with some brains. I've been down several roads and I don't like problems. I also don't like coming home to an executive who can't turn it off. It has to be just right as they probably would hope to get from me.

I was thinking about the orientation versus preference labels. Anne Heche is/was an interesting case in that regard. She famously was Ellen DeGeneres' lover then switched to men. I was mentioning this on a very Liberal web-site and was slapped around with a resounding, "SO?" I learned that being born gay or not doesn't matter and carries no weight whatsoever concerning the rights accruing to a human being concerning their sexuality. We are to accept whatever a person "chooses." So preference may be just that; whatever one prefers at the moment.

 

[Phil Elliott]

Political signs are not allowed until 90 days before election which was a few days ago And the Cruz campaign is handing them out now

Well that explains why I just saw my first Ted Cruz sign yesterday on my way home from church. I thought it was because Austin.

 

[Phil Elliott]

I'm wondering why the libs aren't introducing him with his real name.....Francis.

Well to be fair, his first name is Robert. Francis is his middle name.

I would like to know just how long he has been known as "Beto"? Is this a nickname he has had since childhood? Or is it some moniker he acquired once he started to run for office to give him some street cred with Hispanics? He's a Dem so nobody will look into it and he knows this.

 

[bystander]

I went to High School in a small town in the lower valley. 95+ % Hispanic there too. I know exactly what you're driving at. The NE liberal mindset has an image of Hispanic people as ones who will naturally agree with them on social issues and therefore fall in line and vote for lefty politicians. This is not at all true. Not to say none of them vote with the D's, but to point out the Hispanic home culture is very much at odds with left wing politics, and many, many of the people they pander to know it and vote against them.

I've thought about this far and wide and I'm convinced the Liberal elite only care about power. They will say and do anything in that regard including ignoring the demographic issues I mentioned. If the true Liberal vision of America is what they say it is then they would not want poor people from Mexico or Muslims from the ME to dilute the pot. But the America they seek is for a very narrow strip of progressives. It is a feudal political system based upon a Lord protecting the vassals who don't know better from the evil racists. It is what I call the Liberal Patronage Industrial Complex as in return for their vote, the vassals will receive a stipend that will permanently lower the ceiling but leaves their cultural pride intact within their own small space.

I do have many Hispanic friends from Laredo who support Trump. They are called coconuts by their bretheren. I see the viciousness going back and forth on my Facebook page. The Trump supporters on the whole are vocally Catholic and very patriotic; many of whom served.

 

[Clean]

Beto has a very enthusiastic/aggressive group of supporters. I've had about 10 "we hope we can count of your vote for Beto" messages on my mobile phone. I've had zero from Cruz. I've seen several long TV commercials for Beto too. He's got a pocketful of California money and is using it effectively.

Beto's pro-health care for everybody, pro-immigration, pro-marijuana, free this, free that message is going to play well with a lot of segments of the population. Plus Beto is a fresh-faced, young, good-looking guy. Cruz is in a dogfight whether he wants to admit it or not.

 

[bystander]

Well to be fair, his first name is Robert. Francis is his middle name.

I would like to know just how long he has been known as "Beto"? Is this a nickname he has had since childhood? Or is it some moniker he acquired once he started to run for office to give him some street cred with Hispanics? He's a Dem so nobody will look into it and he knows this.

It's an either/or situation. You're either a Liberal or your not. You either vote for another Sotomayor on the Supreme Court or another Gorsuch. There is nothing you can say to a Beto supporter just as there is nothing you can say to a Trump supporter. We have two choices. The stakes are very high. Gaining control of Congress is huge. Getting rid of Cruz is huge. That's all that matters. But the use of the name Beto is in keeping with the cynicism of the Liberal elite; they believe the Hispanics are too stupid to figure it out.

 

[Horn6721]

bystander
how many times have we heard from Dems that they think the average American is so stupid they can be "led", this is not limited to Hispanics.
Congressman Sam Johnson R, A POW who was in Congress for 3rd District for many years is leaving office.
So for the primary the Dems ran a man named Sam Johnson. He was black but Dems hoped people would be too stupid to not know Congressman Sam Johnson was not the one on the ballot.
the Dem Sam Johnson did not win the primary. In fact the Dem Sam Johnson is a bright engaging person whose views more align with conservative. I suspect he will run again and maybe switch sides before he does.

btw the use of the name beto is likely aimed at Hispanics but he has used the name before. I am betting there will not be that many Hispanics who would for for him just on that name.

 

[bystander]

bystander
how many times have we heard from Dems that they think the average American is so stupid they can be "led", this is not limited to Hispanics.
Congressman Sam Johnson R, A POW who was in Congress for 3rd District for many years is leaving office.
So for the primary the Dems ran a man named Sam Johnson. He was black but Dems hoped people would be too stupid to not know Congressman Sam Johnson was not the one on the ballot.
the Dem Sam Johnson did not win the primary. In fact the Dem Sam Johnson is a bright engaging person whose views more align with conservative. I suspect he will run again and maybe switch sides before he does.

btw the use of the name beto is likely aimed at Hispanics but he has used the name before. I am betting there will not be that many Hispanics who would for for him just on that name.

Some of my Hispanic friends are offended by it. They let their Beto supporting friends know about it too.

I think I remember that Sam Johnson episode. The interesting thing about them not realizing Johnson was closer to Conservative than Liberal is how the Left jumped on the Ron Paul bandwagon for a bout five minutes because he criticized the Republican elite; but upon closer look at his political philosophy they later said, "Nevermind."