Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    17 Dec '15 21:35
    YouTube

    Trump does not care about the Constitution.

    In fact, what exactly is conservative about Trump?
  2. Hy-Brasil
    Joined
    24 Feb '09
    Moves
    175970
    17 Dec '15 21:40
    Originally posted by whodey
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0R_YUygoZ4

    Trump does not care about the Constitution.

    In fact, what exactly is conservative about Trump?
    There is nothing conservative about Trump.
  3. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    17 Dec '15 21:47
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    There is nothing conservative about Trump.
    Ted Cruz is said to be the most conservative candidate in the GOP, yet he says nothing to attack Trump.
  4. Hy-Brasil
    Joined
    24 Feb '09
    Moves
    175970
    17 Dec '15 22:011 edit
    Originally posted by whodey
    Ted Cruz is said to be the most conservative candidate in the GOP, yet he says nothing to attack Trump.
    I agree.
    I will go so far as to say that Cruz is the only conservative on the stage. The way the Republican "establishment" treats him is proof of that.

    As far as not attacking Trump goes I say he is playing it smart. And its really not his style. He is too disciplined for that.

    Obviously, Trump has a rabid base of supporters.
    When Trump falls, those supporters will most likely shift to Cruz.
    Cruz would be foolish to alienate them now over some petty attacks.
  5. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    13026
    17 Dec '15 22:033 edits
    Originally posted by whodey
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0R_YUygoZ4

    Trump does not care about the Constitution.

    In fact, what exactly is conservative about Trump?
    Rand Paul was first talking about what the Democrats did wrong. The Republican were not the ones that armed the Syrian rebels. That was the Democrats with Libya and Benghazi before that he was talking about. Later he talked about the 2013 Obama plan to overthrow Assad by arming the Syrian rebels that some of the Republicans on the stage agreed with. However, Trump was not one of those.

    But concerning Trump, Rand Paul is stupid not to realized that the First Amendment to the Constitution does not need the internet. It existed long before the intenet and if the internet was to disappear, it would not effect the First Amendment or the Constitution one bit. Also his reference to the Geneve Convention is ridiculous.

    I thought Trump's reponse. "So they can kill us, but we can't kill them" showed Rand Paul's statement for what it was, nonsense.
  6. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39949
    17 Dec '15 22:221 edit
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    Rand Paul was first talking about what the Democrats did wrong. The Republican were not the ones that armed the Syrian rebels. That was the Democrats with Libya and Benghazi before that he was talking about. Later he talked about the 2013 Obama plan to overthrow Assad by arming the Syrian rebels that some of the Republicans on the stage agreed with. Howeve ...[text shortened]... hey can kill us, but we can't kill them" showed Rand Paul's statement for what it was, nonsense.
    Speaking of stupid ......................................................................

    It's frightening that you think restrictions on the internet raise no 1st Amendment issues (can the government control all expression but those written in quill pens?) and that a proposal to kill innocent civilians merely because they are related to a terrorist is acceptable.
  7. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    17 Dec '15 23:251 edit
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    Rand Paul was first talking about what the Democrats did wrong. The Republican were not the ones that armed the Syrian rebels. That was the Democrats with Libya and Benghazi before that he was talking about. Later he talked about the 2013 Obama plan to overthrow Assad by arming the Syrian rebels that some of the Republicans on the stage agreed with. Howeve ...[text shortened]... hey can kill us, but we can't kill them" showed Rand Paul's statement for what it was, nonsense.
    If Obama restricted your use of the internet you would be screaming that your Constitutional rights have been violated, or do you think Obama should be allowed to control your internet use?

    And lastly, how can you simply kill the relatives of terrorists, especially if they are American citizens?

    I think that the election of Trump would be a Constitutional travesty. As I said before, we will one day look at Obama in 20 years or so and think he was a conservative and not so bad. As bad as he is now, I realized that is hard to fathom, but it is most certainly possible.

    The way check and balances have been destroyed over the years, I don't see any other scenario other than having a revival for Constitutional rule.
  8. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    17 Dec '15 23:31
    Originally posted by whodey
    Ted Cruz is said to be the most conservative candidate in the GOP, yet he says nothing to attack Trump.
    because he is fishing for the crazies that currently support trump
  9. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    13026
    18 Dec '15 00:42
    Originally posted by whodey
    If Obama restricted your use of the internet you would be screaming that your Constitutional rights have been violated, or do you think Obama should be allowed to control your internet use?

    And lastly, how can you simply kill the relatives of terrorists, especially if they are American citizens?

    I think that the election of Trump would be a Constitution ...[text shortened]... r the years, I don't see any other scenario other than having a revival for Constitutional rule.
    GOP Debate: Best One-Liners | MSNBC

    YouTube
  10. Standard memberbill718
    Enigma
    Seattle
    Joined
    03 Sep '06
    Moves
    3298
    18 Dec '15 00:56
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    I agree.
    I will go so far as to say that Cruz is the only conservative on the stage. The way the Republican "establishment" treats him is proof of that.

    As far as not attacking Trump goes I say he is playing it smart. And its really not his style. He is too disciplined for that.

    Obviously, Trump has a rabid base of supporters.
    When Trump fall ...[text shortened]... most likely shift to Cruz.
    Cruz would be foolish to alienate them now over some petty attacks.
    If you think Ted Cruz stands a chance of being elected President I have a bridge I'll sell you...cheap! 😏
  11. Hy-Brasil
    Joined
    24 Feb '09
    Moves
    175970
    18 Dec '15 01:03
    Originally posted by bill718
    If you think Ted Cruz stands a chance of being elected President I have a bridge I'll sell you...cheap! 😏
    I don't recall saying that bill718.
    Mind pointing out where I said that ?
    My position MAY change in the future but so far I have not endorsed anyone.
  12. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    13026
    18 Dec '15 01:04
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Speaking of stupid ......................................................................

    It's frightening that you think restrictions on the internet raise no 1st Amendment issues (can the government control all expression but those written in quill pens?) and that a proposal to kill innocent civilians merely because they are related to a terrorist is acceptable.
    If you are a moron, you could interpret Donald Trump’s statements in the GOP debate tonight to mean he wants to start shutting down specific websites or services on the internet. He clarified later that he was talking about geography: limiting access to, say, Syria or wherever Islamic State is operating from.

    Trump is right not only that limiting or knocking out the internet is the best way of hampering Islamic State, but also because there is at least one solution that is eminently feasible. It’s just that sneering commentators aren’t educated enough to know about it.

    It’s technical, so don’t expect to follow this all the way through if you don’t know what a URL or an IP address is, or if you work for Buzzfeed. But I’ll lay it out as simply as I can without penning a research paper.

    The ownership of IP addresses, which are labels attached to any device connected to a network, are determined by announcements using a protocol called the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP). Anyone with sufficient access can make a BGP announcement.

    Now, all the internet service providers that together comprise the core of the internet are American. That’s what Trump means when he says the internet is “ours.” Announcements from American ISPs are thus the most respected and listened-to announcements.

    In theory, all President Trump would have to do is have the FCC exercise its regulatory authority over telecommunications infrastructure and arrange to make announcements for the IP addresses owned by Islamic State.

    Any traffic intended for Islamic State, on about 95 per cent of the internet, could be redirected to the United States and then “nullrouted” — essentially, dumped into a black hole, perhaps after being analyzed by the NSA or the military. Problem solved.

    Would this completely remove ISIS from the Internet? For the most part, yes. All but the most tech savvy jihadis would be gone, and while there would be plenty of ways to get around this fix they would be time consuming, expensive, technical and easy to locate.

    For instance, there would be satellite links and Inmarsat phones left. But such devices are easily traceable for airstrikes. With the regulatory authority to do so, a Trump administration could knock out most of Islamic State’s internet capability in a matter of days.

    That, at least, is the solution many self-described hackers have been discussing on Twitter over the past few days. Their disagreements seem to be limited to ethical boundaries, rather than the efficacy of the technical solution proposed.

    Because BGP is a system for routing entire networks, called autonomous systems, and not for shutting off individual websites and services, and because there’s not enough room in routing tables for a lot of data entry, BGP is no good for explicit censorship. It can’t really be used as a tool to close down specific information or close discrete websites.

    So you see, “shutting down” parts of the internet isn’t as bonkers as it first sounds. Although it requires more technical literacy than most commentators possess to understand what kind of software solutions are available and would be effective in the fight against Islamic State, that doesn’t mean Donald Trump is wrong.

    But, as a nuclear option to knock out the internet connectivity of, say, a rogue terrorist state, it works just fine.

    http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2015/12/15/heres-why-trump-is-right-about-shutting-down-parts-of-the-internet/
  13. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    13026
    18 Dec '15 01:16
    Originally posted by whodey
    If Obama restricted your use of the internet you would be screaming that your Constitutional rights have been violated, or do you think Obama should be allowed to control your internet use?

    And lastly, how can you simply kill the relatives of terrorists, especially if they are American citizens?

    I think that the election of Trump would be a Constitution ...[text shortened]... r the years, I don't see any other scenario other than having a revival for Constitutional rule.
    Trump is not going to restrict my use of the internet. He is talking about ISIS and the terrorists. They don't have our Constitutional rights, numbnuts.

    As Trump might say concerning the killing of the relatives of terrorists, So they can kill our relatives but we can't kill theirs?

    The Near Genius 😏
  14. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39949
    18 Dec '15 02:43
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    Trump is not going to restrict my use of the internet. He is talking about ISIS and the terrorists. They don't have our Constitutional rights, numbnuts.

    As Trump might say concerning the killing of the relatives of terrorists, So they can kill our relatives but we can't kill theirs?

    The Near Genius 😏
    That's the reasoning of a child, not someone who should be President of the United States.

    No, you can't deliberately kill innocent civilians or you are a criminal.
  15. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    13026
    18 Dec '15 06:59
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    That's the reasoning of a child, not someone who should be President of the United States.

    No, you can't deliberately kill innocent civilians or you are a criminal.
    Your reasoning is like Satan the devil. It is irresponsible and immoral to claim those closely associate with terrorists are innocent civilians. They should know what is going on.
Back to Top