RascalRiley wrote:
These are all true. This is why some do not what him leading. Sure, his economic policies were great. But at what cost to the nation if these values are excused?
Let's say for the sake of argument there is merit to the aspersions listed, and that explains why "some do not want him leading" despite the admitted great economic policies. Who, in your mind, would be a more welcome choice to lead?
Anyone who witnessed the evacuation of southwest Florida to points north and east along interstates 75 and 4 had to immediately recognize how electric vehicles could not endure the hours-long idling inherent in such a mass movement of people in a finite time period. EVs would have long exhausted their battery life in the bumper to bumper crawl, and a methodology for recharging on-the-go does not exist. The lesson learned here is if EVs were to become the de facto mode of private t***sportation, vehicular evacuations would become obsolete and only those privileged enough to flee by boat or helicopter would escape natural disasters. The rest of us would be relegated to sheltering in place with no power, no water.
No politician, no g***n e****y activist, no media outlet, no academic, has come forward in the face of this reality to offer solution or mitigation to this very real shortcoming of the EV revolution. This highly-touted mass migration to EVs is too much, too fast, too shortsighted to ever succeed, except for the select few who profit (enormously) from the climate hysteria industry.
Peewee wrote:
And you stand by e******n thieves and control freaks. You prefer your party of baby k**lers, perverts, and h**ers; we prefer our party of tolerance, love, Bible, and guns. You guys tend to murder those that oppose you and we allow a lot more freedom. That's why you hide so many things, like H****r's computer. And keep J** 6th people locked up without a trial for a year and a half, and keep harassing cake makers and photographers while keeping your g****r porno teachings secret. Your party is bad for everyone, even yourselves. That's how stupid you really are. You're not the smart ones. That's just another lie.
You're not even hiding it anymore. It's obvious you want to destroy our nation. And replace it with what? China, Russia, s***e masters? People aren't that stupid. You can't even tolerate 50 i******s. Your way of dealing with most things is to k**l it in court or from behind. Brave your not. Money doesn't make evil better. Now you're running out of money. The J** 6th people are asking to be moved to GITMO where they'll be treated better and can see the sunshine again and smell the salt air. At least if the grid goes down they won't freeze to death. How much more money do you think NYC will lose when people find out their beaten on a regular basis?
Slo-Joe is still selling our strategic oil reserves. That's for war and our military. He already believes the people's money is his. How much more evidence does a dipstick need?
And you stand by e******n thieves and control frea... (
show quote)
Nice rant. You hit many of the high notes and pulled the curtain back on the death wish that the political left intends for this country. One item you may wish to reconsider: when you say "people aren't that stupid", I don't know; too many have shown they indeed are.
moldyoldy wrote:
No problem, the fbi already knows the laptop is f**e. So, they might find some influence peddling on h****rs part, maybe. Trump failed the mueller investigation. Barr protected him and lied about the results.
I cannot expend anymore energy on someone who's that far down the rabbit hole. Whether you're a paid troll or a bot or, God forbid, someone who actually believes what you post, I can't engage with someone so closed minded. Peace out.
TexaCan wrote:
And if that woman gets pregnant, do the responsible thing and carry HER baby to full term. She can then put the baby up for adoption if she chooses not to keep it. A newborn baby is a gift that many couples can never have unless they adopt! I simply don’t understand how any Mother can murder her own baby out of convenience!…….And that is the reason most women have a******ns. A very minute percent of a******ns are performed because of health, rape, or incest! Many rape victims chose to keep their babies. They realize that the baby is their baby and it is not the babies fault and should not pay the ultimate price! Many women suffer from depression and guilt for many years after their decision to abort their baby……..and sadly, some never give it a second thought and do it multiple times!
And if that woman gets pregnant, do the responsibl... (
show quote)
I don't disagree with your opinion. You express what would surely be the desired outcome. But for the women who do not want to live up to your definition of the "responsible thing to do", it should not be compelled by law that she do so. One can hope a******n is "safe, legal, and rare", but the moral compass of the nation is not there yet, let alone lining up behind abolition. Reasonable limits can be imposed, but an outright ban to satisfy the views of the self-righteous is an overreach.
moldyoldy wrote:
Let’s compare.
Yeah. Yeah. Another poor man's powerpoint of bulls**t. Why not answer the one honest question: could Biden withstand a Mueller-level investigation, conducted by a partisan team, into his entire career in public service and come out unindicted and unscathed? Forget all this amateur sleuthing you love to post and answer that with a straight face.
American Vet wrote:
If I were a woman, I would not want to be compelled to carry a baby to term that I didn't want.
Then why did the woman participate in an activity that could result in pregnancy? It's called 'personal responsibility.
Yes. And there are frequent lapses in personal responsibility that have terrible consequences; such as living with the burden of having aborted a fetus. And that doesn't even touch on the incalculable instances of forced insemination that in no way suggests a lapse in personal responsibility. This is an issue where zero tolerance just cannot apply.
woodguru wrote:
It's this crap about dirt that is about the very things the republican party not to mention christian and conservative values are supposed to be about.
If your party is about values these people have to be done, finished, all through with a career in politics.
At this point the GOP would be hard pressed to find any republican who has any values in their personal lives, and that goes double for trumpist whack jobs. Hershel was toxic from the beginning of his run...
https://www.rawstory.com/herschel-walker-and-donald-trump/?utm_source=push_notifications
It's this crap about dirt that is about the very t... (
show quote)
Has there ever been anyone more unfit that Joe Biden? Medically unfit. Morally unfit. Bought & paid for by America's adversaries. Bribe-taking influence-peddler for decades. Plagarizer on a breathtaking scale in matters large and small. Not safe for children. Talk about standing by a POS candidate regardless of what you find out. Sheesh. Pot. Kettle. Black.
RandyBrian wrote:
I'll start.
A******n k**ls a living creature. Is it a human being? I absolutely believe YES, he/she is a child and a human being. My reason for believing this is science and common sense. Others feel strongly that it is not. But can they give any REASONS for their belief other than the simple statement that it is NOT?
Maybe we'll see.
Here is a brief article about the subject, and the Protecting Unborn Children from Painful Late-Term A******ns Act.
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/lindsey-graham-a******n-bill-sensible-despite-false-attacks
Before you respond, please bear in mind that this has nothing to do with religion, nor any attempt to 'force' religious convictions upon people. The need to end all a******ns not seriously threatening the mother's life is based solely on the conviction that a******n is murdering an innocent child, and is based on exactly the same logic that murdering a wife, a friend, a stranger, or anyone else is and should be illegal throughout our country. Religious convictions AGREE with this, but is not the reason behind it.
Comments?
I'll start. br A******n k**ls a living creature. ... (
show quote)
Euthanasia k**ls a living creature, but I believe there are circumstances that warrant it.
Capital Punishment k**ls a living creature, but I believe there are circumstances that warrant it.
A******n, too, k**ls a living creature; albeit a creature with no say in the matter. And therein lies a difference.
Perhaps that is why reasonable restrictions need to be imposed. If I were a woman, I would not want to be compelled to carry a baby to term that I didn't want. Yet, I don't condone the right to simply terminate a life I allowed to grow and mature to the point of viability, unless for a medical necessity. How far beyond the first trimester choice should prevail is something society should decide. And religion should not be the arbiter of that decision.
RandyBrian wrote:
I regretfully agree with your reasoning. I wish I did not, but at some point we need to be realistic if we want to save our freedoms.
Trump will continue to have an important role to play, no matter what, but it needs to be in the background.
Of course, no matter WHO the Republicans nominate, the left will center their attack on Trump and claim the candidate is a Trump puppet. But we have a chance of dealing with that......as long as Trump is not on the ticket.
Thank you for endorsing this point of view. I think it is critical to success. And I don't believe Independents are going to buy the fear mongering promulgated by dems if Trump is not in the ticket. Compared to the l*****t empty suits the dems are contemplating running, the independents will surely come back home to an alternative candidate. Job one is to assauge Trump's feelings not to run as an independent, which is a death sentence for a GOP ticket. Job two is to make sure the cndidate is not a RINO but an America First believer to keep the base enthused. The path is there for a resounding win if the GOP would only play its cards right. Trump can be an asset and hislegacy preserved if he would get on board.
Mikeyavelli wrote:
So, if the lefties are adamant that Trump not become president again, yet will accept another as an opponent, then Trump is the one that they fear the most. So much so, that they will do anything to keep him out of the Whitehouse.
In other words, he's the only one who can take them down.
I think there are others up to the task, probably with more tact and less vitriol, but focused on the same outcome. And to be clear, I don' think the "lefties", as you call them, would be accepting of another opponent, they would just be more hard pressed to dispatch a candidate who did not bring the DJT aura that galvanizes the opposition to madness.
[quote=Mikeyavelli]So, the lefty smear campaign worked. Trump is toast?[/quo
Not so much with the e*****rate, only with the e*******l process needed to get him elected -- a fair shake from the media, no dirty tricks from the DCCC, getting the deep state DOJ to take their fat thumbs off the scales, legitimate oversight of polling stations, and a watchful, engaged judiciary prepared to right wrongs.