(03-23-2016 11:49 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Since many of you think this is a good idea, perhaps you should explain exactly how this is going to work.

1. What constitutes a "Muslim neighborhood". How many Muslims does it take in one neighborhood to be worthy of patrolling?

2. How exactly do you patrol Muslims before they become radicalized?

3. How does one determine which Muslims to patrol before being radicalized?

Just a few questions I have for Ted.

Obviously, he'll have to answer these questions, but I'd imagine you'd take it down by enforcing the RICO statutes just like any other organized crime groups. You use intel, get a warrant, and follow what they are doing. When you get a smoking gun, you make arrests and cut deals with the common thugs to take out the bosses.

(03-23-2016 12:09 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 12:05 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 11:58 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Put the breaks on all immigration.

That is exactly the kind o knee jerk reactions that republicans have that is so ignorant and off putting.

Maybe you could explain to me why we need more immigrants at this time.

I'm interested in the response as well.

The West is going to struggle to figure out how to face this ideology. There is no Western equivalent.

(03-23-2016 12:25 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  The West is going to struggle to figure out how to face this ideology. There is no Western equivalent.

One thing is for sure, we're not going to hug it into submission.

(03-23-2016 12:22 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 11:49 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Since many of you think this is a good idea, perhaps you should explain exactly how this is going to work.

1. What constitutes a "Muslim neighborhood". How many Muslims does it take in one neighborhood to be worthy of patrolling?

2. How exactly do you patrol Muslims before they become radicalized?

3. How does one determine which Muslims to patrol before being radicalized?

Just a few questions I have for Ted.

Obviously, he'll have to answer these questions, but I'd imagine you'd take it down by enforcing the RICO statutes just like any other organized crime groups. You use intel, get a warrant, and follow what they are doing. When you get a smoking gun, you make arrests and cut deals with the common thugs to take out the bosses.

I wouldn't have a problem with that if they have reasonable cause but Cruz wasn't specific. It will be interesting to see what he meant specifically.

(03-23-2016 12:14 PM)Okie Chippewa Wrote:  One does not need to be a liberal to be offended when Cruz calls New York police officers "henchmen".
One does not need to be a liberal to be offended when Cruz calls for "securing" Muslim neighborhoods in America.
One does not need to be a liberal to be offended when Cruz now equates the broad term "Islamism" with murdering people.

Forty-nine U.S. senators are not fond of Ted Cruz. This morning's despicable language by Cruz demonstrated why.

I'm not offended by any of his comments. Frankly speaking, I'm actually a fan of somebody who is almost universally hated in Washington.

(03-23-2016 12:51 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 12:14 PM)Okie Chippewa Wrote:  One does not need to be a liberal to be offended when Cruz calls New York police officers "henchmen".
One does not need to be a liberal to be offended when Cruz calls for "securing" Muslim neighborhoods in America.
One does not need to be a liberal to be offended when Cruz now equates the broad term "Islamism" with murdering people.

Forty-nine U.S. senators are not fond of Ted Cruz. This morning's despicable language by Cruz demonstrated why.

I'm not offended by any of his comments. Frankly speaking, I'm actually a fan of somebody who is almost universally hated in Washington.

Yep. Cruz is friends with those in the Senate that are actually worth a damn -- Mike Lee and Ben Sasse.

(03-23-2016 12:14 PM)Okie Chippewa Wrote:  One does not need to be a liberal to be offended when Cruz calls for "securing" Muslim neighborhoods in America.

No, just stupid. If its in America, it should be an American neighborhood. Anything else needs to be secured and fixed. We dont have no-go zones here in America. If you want that, go to Brussels.

Quote:One does not need to be a liberal to be offended when Cruz now equates the broad term "Islamism" with murdering people.

No, just stupid. What term do you want to use to depict Islamic Terrorists who murder people?

Quote:Forty-nine U.S. senators are not fond of Ted Cruz. This morning's despicable language by Cruz demonstrated why.

Incorrect by the count. Also, I'm sure anyone who filibusters tax and spend legislation is going to be on the stupid people's hate list.

(03-23-2016 12:09 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 12:05 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 11:58 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Put the breaks on all immigration.

That is exactly the kind o knee jerk reactions that republicans have that is so ignorant and off putting.

Maybe you could explain to me why we need more immigrants at this time.

We don't. However this would most likely make illegal immigration even more of a problem than we already have.

(03-23-2016 12:14 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 11:48 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 11:10 AM)Kronke Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 10:41 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 10:01 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  "We need to empower law enforcement to patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods before they become radicalized,"


Link

The failiure to do so led to Paris and Brussles. You want no-go zones?

God help us when common sense becomes worthy of outrage. It's sickening when leftists choose to double-down every time there's an attack to reinforce their support for the enemy.

Your apparent assertion that everyone on the left in America somehow approves of or supports terrorism is despicable.

Considering what has happened to Europe via leftist ideology, it really isn't far fetched. Do I think the left actively supports and cheers on terrorism? Of course not. But their policies consequentially weaken our position, strengthen home grown terror, and is based strictly on academic theory and not reality. I think for the most part the left is good intentioned and naive. Leftism and political correctness in Europe brought them uncontrolled Islamic immigration and no-go zones. That is the recipe for Paris and Brussels and I truly feel that unrestrained leftist ideology would bring that here, not as the goal, but as the actual result.

With all due respect, that's completely ridiculous.

(03-23-2016 12:38 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 12:22 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 11:49 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Since many of you think this is a good idea, perhaps you should explain exactly how this is going to work.

1. What constitutes a "Muslim neighborhood". How many Muslims does it take in one neighborhood to be worthy of patrolling?

2. How exactly do you patrol Muslims before they become radicalized?

3. How does one determine which Muslims to patrol before being radicalized?

Just a few questions I have for Ted.

Obviously, he'll have to answer these questions, but I'd imagine you'd take it down by enforcing the RICO statutes just like any other organized crime groups. You use intel, get a warrant, and follow what they are doing. When you get a smoking gun, you make arrests and cut deals with the common thugs to take out the bosses.

I wouldn't have a problem with that if they have reasonable cause but Cruz wasn't specific. It will be interesting to see what he meant specifically.

Well he opposes the Patriot Act and has been consistently against warrentless electronic surveillance of Americans so I am making an assumption until I hear a change of position.

(03-23-2016 12:09 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 12:05 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 11:58 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Put the breaks on all immigration.

That is exactly the kind o knee jerk reactions that republicans have that is so ignorant and off putting.

Maybe you could explain to me why we need more immigrants at this time.

You just need to go through it with a fine tooth comb and pay attention to the religious, social, and political backgrounds of people that come into the country.

I don't like Reagan too much, but he was right when he mentioned that the walls of the USA need to have doors - and those doors need to be open and accessible to all those who are here with good intentions.

Once again, the only way to defeat what they REALLY said is to claim they said something else and argue with that.

It seems obvious that just as there are areas where gangs have a foothold, there are areas where RADICAL Islam has a foothold.

Not Muslim neighborhoods.... but 'isolated, radical Muslim neighborhoods' or 'any area where there is a higher incidence of radical Islamic terrorism'.

The reason the Terrorists 'win' is because some morons think its 'cool' to misquote people/take them out of context.

It seems obvious to anyone with a pulse that 'Islam' isn't the problem.... and while it is certainly more expedient to talk about Islam than to go into all of these 'ISIL, ISIS, Daesh, Taliban' nuances that are fundamentally meaningless (because we don't really CARE what a terrorist groups end-game is... only that they are killing innocent people in order to accomplish it)... We ALL know what these people mean by it. It's not immigrants... it's ILLEGAL immigrants. It's not Islam, it's RADICAL Islam...

The problem is, I think most of you know this... you just don't care that YOU are the ones providing the impetus for recruiting Jihadists, not Cruz, or even Trump... OR EVEN OBAMA.... but all of you who KNOW what they mean, but argue that they meant something else for political gain.

Shame on you all.

No. We need to ban and deport.

(03-23-2016 02:20 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Once again, the only way to defeat what they REALLY said is to claim they said something else and argue with that.

It seems obvious that just as there are areas where gangs have a foothold, there are areas where RADICAL Islam has a foothold.

Not Muslim neighborhoods.... but 'isolated, radical Muslim neighborhoods' or 'any area where there is a higher incidence of radical Islamic terrorism'.

The reason the Terrorists 'win' is because some morons think its 'cool' to misquote people/take them out of context.

It seems obvious to anyone with a pulse that 'Islam' isn't the problem.... and while it is certainly more expedient to talk about Islam than to go into all of these 'ISIL, ISIS, Daesh, Taliban' nuances that are fundamentally meaningless (because we don't really CARE what a terrorist groups end-game is... only that they are killing innocent people in order to accomplish it)... We ALL know what these people mean by it. It's not immigrants... it's ILLEGAL immigrants. It's not Islam, it's RADICAL Islam...

The problem is, I think most of you know this... you just don't care that YOU are the ones providing the impetus for recruiting Jihadists, not Cruz, or even Trump... OR EVEN OBAMA.... but all of you who KNOW what they mean, but argue that they meant something else for political gain.

Shame on you all.

(03-23-2016 02:20 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Once again, the only way to defeat what they REALLY said is to claim they said something else and argue with that.

It seems obvious that just as there are areas where gangs have a foothold, there are areas where RADICAL Islam has a foothold.

Not Muslim neighborhoods.... but 'isolated, radical Muslim neighborhoods' or 'any area where there is a higher incidence of radical Islamic terrorism'.

The reason the Terrorists 'win' is because some morons think its 'cool' to misquote people/take them out of context.

It seems obvious to anyone with a pulse that 'Islam' isn't the problem.... and while it is certainly more expedient to talk about Islam than to go into all of these 'ISIL, ISIS, Daesh, Taliban' nuances that are fundamentally meaningless (because we don't really CARE what a terrorist groups end-game is... only that they are killing innocent people in order to accomplish it)... We ALL know what these people mean by it. It's not immigrants... it's ILLEGAL immigrants. It's not Islam, it's RADICAL Islam...

The problem is, I think most of you know this... you just don't care that YOU are the ones providing the impetus for recruiting Jihadists, not Cruz, or even Trump... OR EVEN OBAMA.... but all of you who KNOW what they mean, but argue that they meant something else for political gain.

Shame on you all.

But you see, that IS the problem. Candidates are specific on what they meant so ignorant, uneducated people repeat the same thing and take it to heart. So you no longer have people saying that they want to stop terrorism but instead ban all Muslims. Or they no longer say they want to secure the border but instead say stop all immigration.

So the blame isn't on average Americans who know what they meant and played the gotcha game. The blame is on the candidates themselves for not being specific and on their supporters for spreading that none specific nonsense.

Don't pretend for a minute that they don't do it on purpose either.

(03-23-2016 11:36 AM)Okie Chippewa Wrote:  No; here is what is sickening. Ted Cruz doing his best impersonation of Adolph Hitler for five minutes on this morning's CBS news show.

What's next Ted? Force the nearly three million Americans of Islamic faith to wear badges?

he's a media pandering ho' of the worst kind....what a douche on the loose that guy is....

he's now trying to play trump instead of going rubico court against the donald.....

it's beyond transparent and pathetic....the rnc has nothing left in the tank.....

(03-23-2016 02:20 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Once again, the only way to defeat what they REALLY said is to claim they said something else and argue with that.

It seems obvious that just as there are areas where gangs have a foothold, there are areas where RADICAL Islam has a foothold.

Not Muslim neighborhoods.... but 'isolated, radical Muslim neighborhoods' or 'any area where there is a higher incidence of radical Islamic terrorism'.

The reason the Terrorists 'win' is because some morons think its 'cool' to misquote people/take them out of context.

It seems obvious to anyone with a pulse that 'Islam' isn't the problem.... and while it is certainly more expedient to talk about Islam than to go into all of these 'ISIL, ISIS, Daesh, Taliban' nuances that are fundamentally meaningless (because we don't really CARE what a terrorist groups end-game is... only that they are killing innocent people in order to accomplish it)... We ALL know what these people mean by it. It's not immigrants... it's ILLEGAL immigrants. It's not Islam, it's RADICAL Islam...

The problem is, I think most of you know this... you just don't care that YOU are the ones providing the impetus for recruiting Jihadists, not Cruz, or even Trump... OR EVEN OBAMA.... but all of you who KNOW what they mean, but argue that they meant something else for political gain.

Shame on you all.

completely agree....it's the people that fuel the media/political propaganda train.....

(03-23-2016 11:49 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Since many of you think this is a good idea, perhaps you should explain exactly how this is going to work.

1. What constitutes a "Muslim neighborhood". How many Muslims does it take in one neighborhood to be worthy of patrolling?

2. How exactly do you patrol Muslims before they become radicalized?

3. How does one determine which Muslims to patrol before being radicalized?

Just a few questions I have for Ted.

Hey genius, police patrol white neighborhoods, black neighborhoods, Hispanic neighborhoods, Jewish neighborhoods, and so on. Why shouldn't they patrol a Muslim majority neighborhood?

Patrol every neighborhood without worrying about the demographic neighborhood and there's no dicrimination.

(03-24-2016 07:01 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 11:49 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Since many of you think this is a good idea, perhaps you should explain exactly how this is going to work.

1. What constitutes a "Muslim neighborhood". How many Muslims does it take in one neighborhood to be worthy of patrolling?

2. How exactly do you patrol Muslims before they become radicalized?

3. How does one determine which Muslims to patrol before being radicalized?

Just a few questions I have for Ted.

Hey genius, police patrol white neighborhoods, black neighborhoods, Hispanic neighborhoods, Jewish neighborhoods, and so on. Why shouldn't they patrol a Muslim majority neighborhood?

Patrol every neighborhood without worrying about the demographic neighborhood and there's no dicrimination.

So Muslim neighborhoods are the only ones that weren't being patrolled?