HokieDC, you seem to have a problem

[oaktonhokie]

with my support of cruz and you allege I did not answer your questions.

Frankly, as the posts on this board get longer with more responses, it gets tougher to read them.

The last I remember, you chastised my defense and admiration of cruz, because I did not address what you described as his duchehbaggery.

Did I understand you correctly? I asked for a definition and some examples. I didn't see any, but I didn't look too hard.

You also criticized me iirc, for not seeing the "signs...?"

I like the guy. I support the guy. Do you really expect me to address his "douchebaggery?" Whatever that is.

Do you really expect me to acknowledge what you think are "signs?"

I admitted that it is possible that I'm being duped. That cruz is just another self promoting politician. I don't see that at all. I see a principled conservative, passionately standing against the most onerous legislation in the history of our republic.

If I misrepresented or misunderstood your meaning, please accept my apology and correct my errors.

[Marine Hokie]

I'm not sure what douchebaggery means, but Cruz supports Social Security, Medicare, and increasing the already inflated military budget. I'm not sure where these fit into fiscally conservative principles.

with my support of cruz and you allege I did not answer your questions.

Frankly, as the posts on this board get longer with more responses, it gets tougher to read them.

The last I remember, you chastised my defense and admiration of cruz, because I did not address what you described as his duchehbaggery.

Did I understand you correctly? I asked for a definition and some examples. I didn't see any, but I didn't look too hard.

You also criticized me iirc, for not seeing the "signs...?"

I like the guy. I support the guy. Do you really expect me to address his "douchebaggery?" Whatever that is.

Do you really expect me to acknowledge what you think are "signs?"

I admitted that it is possible that I'm being duped. That cruz is just another self promoting politician. I don't see that at all. I see a principled conservative, passionately standing against the most onerous legislation in the history of our republic.

If I misrepresented or misunderstood your meaning, please accept my apology and correct my errors.

[HokieFanDC]

Meh. Somehow you saw the post where I alleged you didn't answer my questions, but you didn't see my response to you?

They were in the same thread. But, either way, below is what I said when I responded to your request. I would have never alleged
that I had a problem (that's an exaggeration of how I feel) with your non-respone, had awesomeguy not insisted on dragging it out.
I don't really have a problem with it. It just happens quite often.
You and I agree on a few things, disagree on a lot of things. If the thread had just stopped with your non-response, it would have moved off the board and died a normal death, like most threads here.

"And, yet, you don't address his douchebag characterization of Hagel and Kerry, when he had a chance to serve, and didn't.
He tries to look smart by making Constitutional references...but completely screws up the actual meaning of the amendments, and the SCOTUS rulings on them. It's like he has never paid any attention to the amendments and the rulings based on them.

He makes moronic statements about Communists at Harvard.

He makes bold, meaningless statements like abolishing the IRS. Yet, has no plan for how to fill that void. Grand idea. No substance behind it.

There are more. But you won't address even one of the things he says that are completely wrong.

I'll agree. He is honest. He is resolute. He is principled. He's got a big brain. He's a great debater.
But, that just means that when he is wrong, which is often, he doesn't realize it, and will never admit it when he does.
And when he makes a decision, whether the right one or not, he sticks with it, b/c he thinks he is the smartest guy ever.

It's a nice schtick. But, he needs to ground himself. He is exactly what you expect from an Ivy Leaguer. Arrogant, perfect in his own mind, and so completely sure of himself, he doesn't even know when he's completely missing the boat."

with my support of cruz and you allege I did not answer your questions.

Frankly, as the posts on this board get longer with more responses, it gets tougher to read them.

The last I remember, you chastised my defense and admiration of cruz, because I did not address what you described as his duchehbaggery.

Did I understand you correctly? I asked for a definition and some examples. I didn't see any, but I didn't look too hard.

You also criticized me iirc, for not seeing the "signs...?"

I like the guy. I support the guy. Do you really expect me to address his "douchebaggery?" Whatever that is.

Do you really expect me to acknowledge what you think are "signs?"

I admitted that it is possible that I'm being duped. That cruz is just another self promoting politician. I don't see that at all. I see a principled conservative, passionately standing against the most onerous legislation in the history of our republic.

If I misrepresented or misunderstood your meaning, please accept my apology and correct my errors.

[oaktonhokie]

Not sure how to respond. I'm not aware of his comments on Kerry or Hagel. If they were scathing comments about those rodents, it's fine with me. If you wanna discuss them....

You say he screws up constitutional references. I'm not aware...

Moronic statements about communists at Harvard...? Again, I dunno.

Abolish the irs....ok. I believe THOSE comments were in the context of the fair tax or the flat tax.

You have expressed your opinions on cruz. And proclaim them as fact.

Heck, maybe you're right. I never met the man. Whatever else he is or has done, he is doing a great thing re obamacare. Imo, the biggest disaster of legislation ever perpetrated on our nation. I support that effort fully.

You tend to state your opinion as fact. An unfortunate habit worthy of the minstrual flo himself.

And if you'd like to discuss something, don't ask me why I didn't bang my own guy based on your opinion of unstated events.

Meh. Somehow you saw the post where I alleged you didn't answer my questions, but you didn't see my response to you?

They were in the same thread. But, either way, below is what I said when I responded to your request. I would have never alleged
that I had a problem (that's an exaggeration of how I feel) with your non-respone, had awesomeguy not insisted on dragging it out.
I don't really have a problem with it. It just happens quite often.
You and I agree on a few things, disagree on a lot of things. If the thread had just stopped with your non-response, it would have moved off the board and died a normal death, like most threads here.

"And, yet, you don't address his douchebag characterization of Hagel and Kerry, when he had a chance to serve, and didn't.
He tries to look smart by making Constitutional references...but completely screws up the actual meaning of the amendments, and the SCOTUS rulings on them. It's like he has never paid any attention to the amendments and the rulings based on them.

He makes moronic statements about Communists at Harvard.

He makes bold, meaningless statements like abolishing the IRS. Yet, has no plan for how to fill that void. Grand idea. No substance behind it.

There are more. But you won't address even one of the things he says that are completely wrong.

I'll agree. He is honest. He is resolute. He is principled. He's got a big brain. He's a great debater.
But, that just means that when he is wrong, which is often, he doesn't realize it, and will never admit it when he does.
And when he makes a decision, whether the right one or not, he sticks with it, b/c he thinks he is the smartest guy ever.

It's a nice schtick. But, he needs to ground himself. He is exactly what you expect from an Ivy Leaguer. Arrogant, perfect in his own mind, and so completely sure of himself, he doesn't even know when he's completely missing the boat."

with my support of cruz and you allege I did not answer your questions.

Frankly, as the posts on this board get longer with more responses, it gets tougher to read them.

The last I remember, you chastised my defense and admiration of cruz, because I did not address what you described as his duchehbaggery.

Did I understand you correctly? I asked for a definition and some examples. I didn't see any, but I didn't look too hard.

You also criticized me iirc, for not seeing the "signs...?"

I like the guy. I support the guy. Do you really expect me to address his "douchebaggery?" Whatever that is.

Do you really expect me to acknowledge what you think are "signs?"

I admitted that it is possible that I'm being duped. That cruz is just another self promoting politician. I don't see that at all. I see a principled conservative, passionately standing against the most onerous legislation in the history of our republic.

If I misrepresented or misunderstood your meaning, please accept my apology and correct my errors.

[HokieFanDC]

That's somewhat mind-boggling. You are fond of talking negatively about people that support Obama without knowing who he truly is.

Yet, there are 2 instances that got national media coverage - CNN, Fox, MSNBC, American Thinker, WND, pretty much everywhere - the Kerry/Hagel comments concerning their nominations, and the Constitutional Amendment harangue with Feinstein, that you know nothing about? How is that possible.

To your point about fact, I don't claim anything as fact. It should be clear that an opinion written on message board is just that, an opinion.
And my opinions are based on actual events that have occurred. In this case, I am aware of all the actions he has taken that you admire. And I agree with many of them. But, I am also aware of several things that give me pause.

When you say you think he is great, I make an assumption that you have something more than casual knowledge of who he is, what he has done, and what he has said. It just makes sense that you would.

So, apologies for making that false assumption.
I have given you several examples. You can choose to educate yourself about them, and respond accordingly. Or you can remain ignorant of the full scope of the man you support.

Not sure how to respond. I'm not aware of his comments on Kerry or Hagel. If they were scathing comments about those rodents, it's fine with me. If you wanna discuss them....

You say he screws up constitutional references. I'm not aware...

Moronic statements about communists at Harvard...? Again, I dunno.

Abolish the irs....ok. I believe THOSE comments were in the context of the fair tax or the flat tax.

You have expressed your opinions on cruz. And proclaim them as fact.

Heck, maybe you're right. I never met the man. Whatever else he is or has done, he is doing a great thing re obamacare. Imo, the biggest disaster of legislation ever perpetrated on our nation. I support that effort fully.

You tend to state your opinion as fact. An unfortunate habit worthy of the minstrual flo himself.

And if you'd like to discuss something, don't ask me why I didn't bang my own guy based on your opinion of unstated events.

Meh. Somehow you saw the post where I alleged you didn't answer my questions, but you didn't see my response to you?

They were in the same thread. But, either way, below is what I said when I responded to your request. I would have never alleged
that I had a problem (that's an exaggeration of how I feel) with your non-respone, had awesomeguy not insisted on dragging it out.
I don't really have a problem with it. It just happens quite often.
You and I agree on a few things, disagree on a lot of things. If the thread had just stopped with your non-response, it would have moved off the board and died a normal death, like most threads here.

"And, yet, you don't address his douchebag characterization of Hagel and Kerry, when he had a chance to serve, and didn't.
He tries to look smart by making Constitutional references...but completely screws up the actual meaning of the amendments, and the SCOTUS rulings on them. It's like he has never paid any attention to the amendments and the rulings based on them.

He makes moronic statements about Communists at Harvard.

He makes bold, meaningless statements like abolishing the IRS. Yet, has no plan for how to fill that void. Grand idea. No substance behind it.

There are more. But you won't address even one of the things he says that are completely wrong.

I'll agree. He is honest. He is resolute. He is principled. He's got a big brain. He's a great debater.
But, that just means that when he is wrong, which is often, he doesn't realize it, and will never admit it when he does.
And when he makes a decision, whether the right one or not, he sticks with it, b/c he thinks he is the smartest guy ever.

It's a nice schtick. But, he needs to ground himself. He is exactly what you expect from an Ivy Leaguer. Arrogant, perfect in his own mind, and so completely sure of himself, he doesn't even know when he's completely missing the boat."

with my support of cruz and you allege I did not answer your questions.

Frankly, as the posts on this board get longer with more responses, it gets tougher to read them.

The last I remember, you chastised my defense and admiration of cruz, because I did not address what you described as his duchehbaggery.

Did I understand you correctly? I asked for a definition and some examples. I didn't see any, but I didn't look too hard.

You also criticized me iirc, for not seeing the "signs...?"

I like the guy. I support the guy. Do you really expect me to address his "douchebaggery?" Whatever that is.

Do you really expect me to acknowledge what you think are "signs?"

I admitted that it is possible that I'm being duped. That cruz is just another self promoting politician. I don't see that at all. I see a principled conservative, passionately standing against the most onerous legislation in the history of our republic.

If I misrepresented or misunderstood your meaning, please accept my apology and correct my errors.