Ted Cruz: 2nd Amendment Is 'Ultimate Check Against Government Tyranny'

[Derideo_Te]

It was an idiotic thing for Cruz to say and designed to get an emotional reaction from ignorant knee jerkers.

Maybe he can get Sharon Angle as his running mate.

Cruz is self aggrandizing egotist who will say anything to pander to the gullible gun fetishists. That they swallowed his BS and defend it tells me that he knows exactly how to manipulate them. His defenders in this thread don't have a clue that he is doing exactly that. Then again they aren't exactly known for rational thinking given their obsession with their penis substitutes.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

It was an idiotic thing for Cruz to say and designed to get an emotional reaction from ignorant knee jerkers.

* * * *

^ Which is the traditional lib way of saying "we can't dispute what Cruz actually said on a factual or historical level."

 

[IlarMeilyr]

It was an idiotic thing for Cruz to say and designed to get an emotional reaction from ignorant knee jerkers.

Maybe he can get Sharon Angle as his running mate.

Cruz is self aggrandizing egotist who will say anything to pander to the gullible gun fetishists. That they swallowed his BS and defend it tells me that he knows exactly how to manipulate them. His defenders in this thread don't have a clue that he is doing exactly that. Then again they aren't exactly known for rational thinking given their obsession with their penis substitutes.

The always simple minded faux analysis ^ of laughable liberals like Dizzy underscores what their true agenda is.

Such an attack against Cruz for saying something that is actually and demonstrably correct tells a tale. These trite sycophantic liberals are simply trying to get into the GOP nomination game in the hope that they can somehow have an ultimate say in WHICH Republican gets the nod and the chance to go up against Her Thighness.

 

[rightwinger]

What a massive quivering quibble.

So, let's just recap, shall we? Yes. We shall. YOU are feeling all triumphant because the portion of the quote ATTRIBUTED to Jefferson may not have been said by him. The Part? The part about "last resort."

Man. You are a magnificent stud of quoting others' work, when they conclude (and perhaps correctly) that Jefferson's alleged words may not have been his actual words.

But here's the rub. Jefferson DID say the first part (in all three drafts)!

No freeman shall be debarred the use of arms.

So you libs who wish to disarm the citizenry are at odds with Thomas Jefferson AND the Constitution itself AND the SCOTUS analysis of the legal and historical purpose of the 2d Amendment.

The second part is what you are fallaciously trying to use to justify Cruz's sedition.

Too bad you were caught lying about Jefferson because you didn't do your homework.

Next time try not to whine so much, 'mkay?

I can't remember the last presidential candidate who advocated armed insurrection against our government

So what? You can make the hollow and dishonest claim that Cruz is somehow a candidate who has advocated for it. But that would be quite fully dishonest of you. That is clearly NOT what Cruz said.

More reason to support my claim that Cruz is not a serious candidate for President. Serious about being proclaimed leader of the far right......but not serious about winning

Throwing raw meat to gun nuts is not responsible

Being accurate in what he said, an historical fact, is somehow now throwing raw meat to "gun nuts." ?? Nah.

Your sophistry is particularly weak today.

And it is curious why you would CARE whether Cruz is or is not a "serious" candidate.

Don't you far left wing liberal Democrat Parody hacks have more important fish to fry? Like HOW can you support most fully the candidacy of Shrillary? Do you think it helps Shrillary to toss around simple-minded and baseless claims about a right wing Republican candidate?

Why do I care?

Because this is a political message board......why the hell else am I here?

 

[rightwinger]

It was an idiotic thing for Cruz to say and designed to get an emotional reaction from ignorant knee jerkers.

Maybe he can get Sharon Angle as his running mate.

Our Constitution was designed for second amendment remedies

Why do we need all that shit about freedom of speech, freedom of the press and a right to vote when we have a second amendment?

 

[Truth Detector]

Bet that title got your attention.

It may seem like fiction, but it's not. Ted Cruz just said that.

Ted Cruz 2nd Amendment Is Ultimate Check Against Government Tyranny

It's a given that every Republican presidential candidate will run for president as a strong supporter of gun rights.

But Texas Sen. Ted Cruz is arguing that the Second Amendment includes a right to revolt against government tyranny, a point of emphasis uncommon for mainstream presidential candidates.

"The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution isn't for just protecting hunting rights, and it's not only to safeguard your right to target practice. It is a Constitutional right to protect your children, your family, your home, our lives, and to serve as the ultimate check against governmental tyranny -- for the protection of liberty," Cruz wrote to supporters in a fundraising email on Thursday, under the subject line "2nd Amendment against tyranny."

This "insurrectionist" argument, as Second Amendment expert and UCLA law professor Adam Winkler calls it, is popular among passionate gun owners and members of the National Rifle Association. But major party candidates for president don't often venture there.

"Most presidential candidates who support Second Amendment rights focus on self defense. In the past many have also emphasized hunting," said Winkler, author of the 2011 book Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America. "It's pretty rare for a presidential candidate to support the right of the people to revolt against the government."

Hmmmmm, interesting.

A declared presidential candidate who is for armed insurrection.


Hmmmmmmm, interesting.

Ted Cruz says that this 2nd Amendment remedy is for the protection of Liberty.

I wonder how he would exactly define "Liberty".

Either way, I think he just won the "We came unarmed --- this time" crowd.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------


Discuss. Is this maybe a bit extreme, or is this the necessary fight against the ebbil ebbil gubbermint?

What is the first thing any tyrannical Government does to sustain it's power?

 

[IlarMeilyr]

The second part is what you are fallaciously trying to use to justify Cruz's sedition.

Too bad you were caught lying about Jefferson because you didn't do your homework.

Next time try not to whine so much, 'mkay?

I can't remember the last presidential candidate who advocated armed insurrection against our government

So what? You can make the hollow and dishonest claim that Cruz is somehow a candidate who has advocated for it. But that would be quite fully dishonest of you. That is clearly NOT what Cruz said.

More reason to support my claim that Cruz is not a serious candidate for President. Serious about being proclaimed leader of the far right......but not serious about winning

Throwing raw meat to gun nuts is not responsible

Being accurate in what he said, an historical fact, is somehow now throwing raw meat to "gun nuts." ?? Nah.

Your sophistry is particularly weak today.

And it is curious why you would CARE whether Cruz is or is not a "serious" candidate.

Don't you far left wing liberal Democrat Parody hacks have more important fish to fry? Like HOW can you support most fully the candidacy of Shrillary? Do you think it helps Shrillary to toss around simple-minded and baseless claims about a right wing Republican candidate?

Why do I care?

Because this is a political message board......why the hell else am I here?

As though THAT were the question --

or the true answer.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

It was an idiotic thing for Cruz to say and designed to get an emotional reaction from ignorant knee jerkers.

* * * *

^ Which is the traditional lib way of saying "we can't dispute what Cruz actually said on a factual or historical level."

Read the thread. Several have ripped his idiotic statement to shreds.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Bet that title got your attention.

It may seem like fiction, but it's not. Ted Cruz just said that.

Ted Cruz 2nd Amendment Is Ultimate Check Against Government Tyranny

It's a given that every Republican presidential candidate will run for president as a strong supporter of gun rights.

But Texas Sen. Ted Cruz is arguing that the Second Amendment includes a right to revolt against government tyranny, a point of emphasis uncommon for mainstream presidential candidates.

"The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution isn't for just protecting hunting rights, and it's not only to safeguard your right to target practice. It is a Constitutional right to protect your children, your family, your home, our lives, and to serve as the ultimate check against governmental tyranny -- for the protection of liberty," Cruz wrote to supporters in a fundraising email on Thursday, under the subject line "2nd Amendment against tyranny."

This "insurrectionist" argument, as Second Amendment expert and UCLA law professor Adam Winkler calls it, is popular among passionate gun owners and members of the National Rifle Association. But major party candidates for president don't often venture there.

"Most presidential candidates who support Second Amendment rights focus on self defense. In the past many have also emphasized hunting," said Winkler, author of the 2011 book Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America. "It's pretty rare for a presidential candidate to support the right of the people to revolt against the government."

Hmmmmm, interesting.

A declared presidential candidate who is for armed insurrection.


Hmmmmmmm, interesting.

Ted Cruz says that this 2nd Amendment remedy is for the protection of Liberty.

I wonder how he would exactly define "Liberty".

Either way, I think he just won the "We came unarmed --- this time" crowd.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------


Discuss. Is this maybe a bit extreme, or is this the necessary fight against the ebbil ebbil gubbermint?

What is the first thing any tyrannical Government does to sustain it's power?

Betcher gittin ready to say that KenyanMuslimCommieSocialistFascist gun grabber prez is takin' yer guns, right?

 

[Statistikhengst]

Bet that title got your attention.

It may seem like fiction, but it's not. Ted Cruz just said that.

Ted Cruz 2nd Amendment Is Ultimate Check Against Government Tyranny

It's a given that every Republican presidential candidate will run for president as a strong supporter of gun rights.

But Texas Sen. Ted Cruz is arguing that the Second Amendment includes a right to revolt against government tyranny, a point of emphasis uncommon for mainstream presidential candidates.

"The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution isn't for just protecting hunting rights, and it's not only to safeguard your right to target practice. It is a Constitutional right to protect your children, your family, your home, our lives, and to serve as the ultimate check against governmental tyranny -- for the protection of liberty," Cruz wrote to supporters in a fundraising email on Thursday, under the subject line "2nd Amendment against tyranny."

This "insurrectionist" argument, as Second Amendment expert and UCLA law professor Adam Winkler calls it, is popular among passionate gun owners and members of the National Rifle Association. But major party candidates for president don't often venture there.

"Most presidential candidates who support Second Amendment rights focus on self defense. In the past many have also emphasized hunting," said Winkler, author of the 2011 book Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America. "It's pretty rare for a presidential candidate to support the right of the people to revolt against the government."

Hmmmmm, interesting.

A declared presidential candidate who is for armed insurrection.


Hmmmmmmm, interesting.

Ted Cruz says that this 2nd Amendment remedy is for the protection of Liberty.

I wonder how he would exactly define "Liberty".

Either way, I think he just won the "We came unarmed --- this time" crowd.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------


Discuss. Is this maybe a bit extreme, or is this the necessary fight against the ebbil ebbil gubbermint?

What is the first thing any tyrannical Government does to sustain it's power?

Well, obviously it let's crazy-assed nutter kooks write all sorts of incendiary shit on anonymous internet forums WITHOUT the black helicopters showing up in the night, n'est ce pas, little Rookie?

 

[IlarMeilyr]

I don't spend a lot of time worrying about who (Shrillary) the liberal Democrat Parody will nominate (Shrillary) as their next Presidential nominee (Shrillary).

I don't believe in cross party primaries (and the empire State doesn't allow that shit anyway).

So, I resign myself to the fact that the odds on favorite liberal Democrat Parody candidate for President (Shrillary) will win that Party's nod as nominee, and THEN I'll concern myself with doing what I can to highlight her massive (thighs) inadequacies for the job.

Yet lots of the liberal Democrat Parody hacks here at USMB spend massive amounts of time discussing the various GOP candidates' qualifications for (and objections to the prospect of their winning the nod as) GOP nominee. Hm.

 

[Truth Detector]

Most of the Clown Car Candidates know they have no chance and think they can make up for lack of experience by making a lot of noise.

Its not called "politics" fer nuthin'.

Im amused that you think that Obama or Hillary had experience. What is their experience? One was a freaking Community Organizer who hasn't been OFF campaign mode for seven years and the other's only claim to fame has been being the complacent wife of a sexual predator and philanderer.

Democrats define hypocrisy when they whine about "lack of experience", "corruption" and "deficit spending."

 

[IlarMeilyr]

It was an idiotic thing for Cruz to say and designed to get an emotional reaction from ignorant knee jerkers.

* * * *

^ Which is the traditional lib way of saying "we can't dispute what Cruz actually said on a factual or historical level."

Read the thread. Several have ripped his idiotic statement to shreds.

Wrong. They have tried and proven themselves to be miserable abject failures in the process.

You cannot "rip to shreds" a simple and correct declaration of an accurate historical and factual contention.

 

[Statistikhengst]

I don't spend a lot of time worrying about who (Shrillary) the liberal Democrat Parody will nominate (Shrillary) as their next Presidential nominee (Shrillary).

I don't believe in cross party primaries (and the empire State doesn't allow that shit anyway).

So, I resign myself to the fact that the odds on favorite liberal Democrat Parody candidate for President (Shrillary) will win that Party's nod as nominee, and THEN I'll concern myself with doing what I can to highlight her massive (thighs) inadequacies for the job.

Yet lots of the liberal Democrat Parody hacks here at USMB spend massive amounts of time discussing the various GOP candidates' qualifications for (and objections to the prospect of their winning the nod as) GOP nominee. Hm.

So, was it good for you, l'il welcher?

How we got from the 2nd amendment (which is the topic of this thread, btw....) and your secret love affair with Hillary is a magnum mysterium.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

It was an idiotic thing for Cruz to say and designed to get an emotional reaction from ignorant knee jerkers.

* * * *

^ Which is the traditional lib way of saying "we can't dispute what Cruz actually said on a factual or historical level."

Read the thread. Several have ripped his idiotic statement to shreds.

Wrong. They have tried and proven themselves to be miserable abject failures in the process.

You cannot "rip to shreds" a simple and correct declaration of an accurate historical and factual contention.

Which is the traditional rabid RW way of saying "I can't dispute what anyone else said on a factual or historical level."

There. Fixed it for you.

 

[Truth Detector]

Betcher gittin ready to say that KenyanMuslimCommieSocialistFascist gun grabber prez is takin' yer guns, right?

Nothing like a nice fabricated LWNJ strawman to start your Sunday eh?

I bet you think that cops arrive at the scenes of crimes before they happen too? How about the tooth fairy; do you believe in them as well?

 

[IlarMeilyr]

I don't spend a lot of time worrying about who (Shrillary) the liberal Democrat Parody will nominate (Shrillary) as their next Presidential nominee (Shrillary).

I don't believe in cross party primaries (and the empire State doesn't allow that shit anyway).

So, I resign myself to the fact that the odds on favorite liberal Democrat Parody candidate for President (Shrillary) will win that Party's nod as nominee, and THEN I'll concern myself with doing what I can to highlight her massive (thighs) inadequacies for the job.

Yet lots of the liberal Democrat Parody hacks here at USMB spend massive amounts of time discussing the various GOP candidates' qualifications for (and objections to the prospect of their winning the nod as) GOP nominee. Hm.

So, was it good for you, l'il welcher?

How we got from the 2nd amendment (which is the topic of this thread, btw....) and your secret love affair with Hillary is a magnum mysterium.

First off, as you knew before you just lied, I never welshed. Period. That's ok, credibility aint yer strong suit anyway.

We got to the topic of Shrillary, for those weak minded sots such as you who cannot follow the line from A to B, by wondering why some dolt liberal Democrat loyalist hacks give a rat's ass about the assertion of GOP candidate Cruz in the first place. It's not like you would ever vote for him one way or the other.

The 2d Amendment is NOT the topic of this thread, either. The TOPIC is the Cruz contention that the 2d Amendment had a purpose of serving as an ultimate check against tyrannical government. It started off as an attack on a GOP candidate for allegedly saying something sinister and stupid.

It was neither. It was, instead, a correct historical and factual contention about one of Amendments in our Bill of Rights.

I wonder if Shrillary would dispute its accuracy (assuming she were capable of addressing a Constitutional question in the first place)?

 

[IlarMeilyr]

It was an idiotic thing for Cruz to say and designed to get an emotional reaction from ignorant knee jerkers.

* * * *

^ Which is the traditional lib way of saying "we can't dispute what Cruz actually said on a factual or historical level."

Read the thread. Several have ripped his idiotic statement to shreds.

Wrong. They have tried and proven themselves to be miserable abject failures in the process.

You cannot "rip to shreds" a simple and correct declaration of an accurate historical and factual contention.

Which is the traditional rabid RW way of saying "I can't dispute what anyone else said on a factual or historical level."

There. Fixed it for you.

No. You fucked it up again.

I happen to be right since what Cruz said about the 2d Amendment was factually and historically accurate -- from jump street.

 

[Truth Detector]

Which is the traditional rabid RW way of saying "I can't dispute what anyone else said on a factual or historical level."

There. Fixed it for you.

What do rabid left wing nut jobs know about facts or history? Obviously they think that only the Government should have guns; forget the history of tyranny.


I bet the German people didn't believe the Germany Army would support and show fealty to Hitler as well back in 1936.


But it does mirror the foolish hypocritical naiveté of Liberals thinking that Government is good; but only if THEIR deciders are in charge.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Betcher gittin ready to say that KenyanMuslimCommieSocialistFascist gun grabber prez is takin' yer guns, right?

Nothing like a nice fabricated LWNJ strawman to start your Sunday eh?

I bet you think that cops arrive at the scenes of crimes before they happen too? How about the tooth fairy; do you believe in them as well?

In the liberal fantasy comic book version of "reality" cops take time off from shooting innocent, unarmed hood wearing young men of color only to congregate at donut shops. And when they DO show up at crime scenes, it is only to commit crimes under color of law.