BS: US Senators: Ted Cruz vs Diane Feinstein

22 Sep 13 - 05:29 PM (#3560429)
Subject: BS: US Senators: Ted Cruz vs Diane Feinstein
From: Songwronger

A good video clip, not very long. Been around for a while but I just learned of it.

Cruz asks Feinstein which books she would ban under the First Amendment (freedom of speech amendment in the U.S. Constitution). Since she wants to ban over 2,000 guns under the Second Amendment, which books under the first? And which privacy protections under the Fourth Amendment. She's so flustered, I think she farts at one point in her response. So funny. Sheer ignorant emotion in response to articulate questioning.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjruOE-nImI

CRUZ: "The question that I would pose to the senior senator from California is Would she deem it consistent with the Bill of Rights for Congress to engage in the same endeavor that we are contemplating doing with the Second Amendment in the context of the First or Fourth Amendment, namely, would she consider it constitutional for Congress to specify that the First Amendment shall apply only to the following books and shall not apply to the books that Congress has deemed outside the protection of the Bill of Rights? Likewise, would she think that the Fourth Amendment's protection against searches and seizures could properly apply only to the following specified individuals and not to the individuals that Congress has deemed outside the protection of the Bill of Rights?"

FEINSTEIN: "I'm not a sixth grader. Senator, I've been on this committee for 20 years. I was a mayor for nine years. I walked in, I saw people shot. I've looked at bodies that have been shot with these weapons. I've seen the bullets that implode. In Sandy Hook, youngsters were dismembered. Look, there are other weapons. I've been up — I'm not a lawyer, but after 20 years I've been up close and personal to the Constitution. I have great respect for it. This doesn't mean that weapons of war and the Heller decision clearly points out three exceptions, two of which are pertinent here. And so I — you know, it's fine you want to lecture me on the Constitution. I appreciate it. Just know I've been here for a long time. I've passed on a number of bills. I've studied the Constitution myself. I am reasonably well educated, and I thank you for the lecture."

---

22 Sep 13 - 05:31 PM (#3560430)
Subject: RE: BS: US Senators: Ted Cruz vs Diane Feinstein
From: Songwronger

She doesn't answer his question, either.

---

22 Sep 13 - 06:05 PM (#3560432)
Subject: RE: BS: US Senators: Ted Cruz vs Diane Feinstein
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity

Of course not...she's a 'so-called liberal'!
They don't answer questions, they just stir up and play on people's emotions...often without FACTS to support 'their' position, usually given to them from the highest bidder!...ans/or wanting to be 'relevant!

GfS

---

22 Sep 13 - 06:43 PM (#3560441)
Subject: RE: BS: US Senators: Ted Cruz vs Diane Feinstein
From: Greg F.

Of course she doesn't answer the question- she's taken aback by the sheer stupidity of it.

She also knows Cruz is a brain-dead fundagelical TeaPublican jackass and that the one has nothing to do with the other.

More of the usual horseshit from ShitWringer and his top sycophant.

---

22 Sep 13 - 07:06 PM (#3560450)
Subject: RE: BS: US Senators: Ted Cruz vs Diane Feinstein
From: bobad

Feinstein put Cruz in his place....bravo!

---

22 Sep 13 - 08:05 PM (#3560459)
Subject: RE: BS: US Senators: Ted Cruz vs Diane Feinstein
From: Songwronger

Cruz points out that if you can ban guns contrary to the rights and protections guaranteed under the second amendment, then you can ban books contrary to the rights and protections guaranteed under the first. How does Feinstein respond? She's SEEN violence, Sandy Hook, for the children, she was a mayor, blah blah blah.

She doesn't know how to debate, but she took de bait. What a pinhead.

She doesn't know anything about the constitution, she doesn't care about the constitution, she wipes her ass with the constitution. She should be fairly tried as a traitor and executed. Cruz too probably, in a couple of years, but she's already earned her lethal injection.

---

22 Sep 13 - 08:35 PM (#3560470)
Subject: RE: BS: US Senators: Ted Cruz vs Diane Feinstein
From: Bobert

Feinstein got in here shots...

Cruz is a smart guy academically speaking but ain't got the common sense or empathy it takes for a gnat to blow its nose...

B~

---

22 Sep 13 - 10:19 PM (#3560495)
Subject: RE: BS: US Senators: Ted Cruz vs Diane Feinstein
From: TIA

How many books have been used in mass killings.
Answer that question asshole!

---

22 Sep 13 - 10:27 PM (#3560498)
Subject: RE: BS: US Senators: Ted Cruz vs Diane Feinstein
From: frogprince

So, did Cruz in turn reply, "I have seen the bodies of those battered to death by books"?

Something I haven't seen noted lately: Run down the list of legislators who have been screaming for fear the "my first rifle" people would lose their "second amendment rights" to market a fully automatic version for four year olds. How many of them want to change the Constitutional provision that (with certain limited exceptions) those born on U.S. soil are automatically U.S. citizens.

---

22 Sep 13 - 10:29 PM (#3560499)
Subject: RE: BS: US Senators: Ted Cruz vs Diane Feinstein
From: frogprince

Note Tia's comment, posted while I was composing. Great minds think alike.

---

22 Sep 13 - 11:29 PM (#3560505)
Subject: RE: BS: US Senators: Ted Cruz vs Diane Feinstein
From: Elmore

Farewell TIA.

---

23 Sep 13 - 12:04 AM (#3560510)
Subject: RE: BS: US Senators: Ted Cruz vs Diane Feinstein
From: Elmore

Note: On another thread TIA left Mudcat forever at 9:54 p.m.

---

23 Sep 13 - 12:29 AM (#3560511)
Subject: RE: BS: US Senators: Ted Cruz vs Diane Feinstein
From: Don Firth

I think there are a lot of people here on Mudcat who can explain the differences between the dynamics and history of the First Amendment and of the Second Amendment, and the technology and thinking at the time the Amendments were proposed and adopted--and the technological changes that have greatly altered the situation since the Second Amendment was adopted--but I'm coming to the conclusion that trying to explain it to Songwronger would be like trying to explain quantum physics to a plaster statue of Homer Simpson.

Don Firth

---

23 Sep 13 - 10:51 PM (#3560683)
Subject: RE: BS: US Senators: Ted Cruz vs Diane Feinstein
From: Songwronger

At the time the constitution was adopted, America was recovering from the war of independence. Memories of syphilitic Brits running the country were still fresh in mind, so the second amendment was drawn up in order to insure an armed populace. The founders wanted to make sure the citizens had the freedom to arm themselves in such a way to fight off any future invaders.

Traitors like Feinstein have done what they can to reduce our firepower, but we remain armed. Good thing, too. Our enemies are not so much foreign as domestic now, and you old codgers have avoided being rendered into soap by the prison-industrial complex only because of the sheer number of weapons in the U.S.

Ted Cruz made a simple point: If you can violate the constitution and disarm, then you can violate the constitution and ban books. Feinstein was caught offguard because she never considers the constitution unless she's trying to circumvent it. She knew she was on camera and had to make SOME kind of appeal, so she appealed to your emotions rather than your common sense.

We have a constitution. Cruz pointed out that we need to follow it. Feinstein pointed out that she was a mayor.

---

24 Sep 13 - 03:01 PM (#3560919)
Subject: RE: BS: US Senators: Ted Cruz vs Diane Feinstein
From: Bill D

" If you can violate the constitution and disarm,..."

Gee...I can read a short amendment like the 2nd, and I'm sure Sen. Feinstein would agree with ME that under it, you may have as many flintlock rifles as you wish! Nowhere does it say we can't regulate the types of guns allowed.

I'd type an hour or so explaining the logical fallacies in the original question seeing to equate books & guns...but SW would never comprehend or bother reading.

---