. .
Posted on 10/29/2014 2:48:46 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer projected a big win for the Republicans in November, giving them a 70 percent chance of winning the Senate.
(VIDEO-AT-LINK)
“If the GOP can’t win back the Senate in a climate like this, maybe the party ought to look for another country,” he told Fox News host Bill O’Reilly Tuesday.
Krauthammer explained why he thinks the climate is ripe for the win:
"The reason is this is essentially a referendum on Obama. In 2010 it was a referendum on his ideology. The overreach with Obamacare, the stimulus, cap and trade, and now, six years in, it’s referendum on ideology, but now added on to that, it’s on shear competence.
When you are not only the party in government, you are the party of government, and you preach about the glories of government and in fact you get Hillary saying the other day, you know, it’s not corporations that create jobs. The implication being it’s government, then if you are incompetent and lose the confidence of the people you are in trouble. You have every scandal there is. Everything from the VA, to the Obamacare rollout to the Secret Service and now with Ebola. Where they are running around, have no idea what to do and they change the protocols every other day.
So, given the climate, I think it would be, you know, if the GOP can’t win back the Senate in a climate like this, maybe the party ought to look for another country."
You took the words right out of my mouth, Karl !
Yeah, I hear you. It is like Republicans are battered wives. They keep returning for the abuse.
But abandoning the opportunity to remove the rodents this year is just plain self-defeating.
Even a RINO is better than a rodent.
Plug your nose and vote the rodents out. In 2016 vote the RINOS out.
Between now and then, publicly with great fanfare position the TEA party and vett candidates for the TEA party.
Anything less at this point is national suicide.
I hate suicide.
Nope, I promised myself in 2008, after the shameful act of voting McCain/Pailin, that I would never again hold my nose
and vote.
I'll vote doe someone that I can vote for, even if it means write-in or third-party.
In 2016 vote the RINOS out.
That's not the way this game works — the Republican party will take any wins to mean that their platform of acquiescence and capitulation on topics like amnesty and ObamaCare.
(Remember that they retroactively changed rules in the primaries to ensure Romney was their candidate.)
Hey, it’s up to you. If the rodents retain control of the senate, it would be helpful to not complain about it.
I will crawl through flaming broken glass to ensure that my vote will go to keep the rodents out and to not let any new rodent in.
This is America, you must make your own choices. Choose wisely.
Do you have a link for that?
Intelligent people change over time ... say 30 years.
Stupid tends to be frozen in time.
and the country should look for another party.
I haven't said anything at all about rodents retaining the senate — but let me ask: are they really worse than the Republicans, when the Republicans have allowed (or aided) them in their agenda? (That is, what actual difference is there between Republican and Democrat?)
I will crawl through flaming broken glass to ensure that my vote will go to keep the rodents out and to not let any new rodent in.
Even to the extent of voting in Rats with an (R) next to their name?
This is America, you must make your own choices. Choose wisely.
I am — I refuse to heed the lesser of two evils
argument any more, now I only vote for someone.
Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.
— John Quincy Adams
He’s called conservative by a bunch of lefties, so you think he’s conservative. Pathetic.
By what justification do you allow yourself to prefer only one or two translations of Scripture? God’s Word is Holy in all of His translations.
Because I find those ones to be the most accessible to me — can you find one place where I disparage any translation?
Why do you not equally state that all Scripture is good for everyone? You have no justification to say some translations are accessible to you over others, as your preference is only born from your own weaknesses.
All translations of His Word are equally good in all ways.
Well, I do think that all scripture is good for everyone, because, well, as Paul put it:
2 Timothy 3:16 — All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,
You have no justification to say some translations are accessible to you over others, as your preference is only born from your own weaknesses.
What a ridiculous statement, I couldn't read a Russian or Taiwanese bible so they would be utterly inaccessible to me; or, as Paul put it:
1 Corinthians 14:11 — If then I do not know the meaning of a sound, I will be a foreigner to the speaker and the speaker a foreigner to me.
So there is obviously value in being understood, thus one translation being more accessible
(i.e. understandable) is a perfectly valid criterion for stating an objectively subjective preference.
I think they ought to anyway.
We could use a different 2nd party.
Bite me, Jerko. Go on, check my homepage and stats, then try again...
Got anything to offer, or are you just trolling? :
THANK YOU #1
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.