“Wrong. From the article: Has no differences in principle with the socialist minded Democrats; That is Keyes’ claim - do you find it accurate, given that Brown is opposed to amnesty, just for starters?”
Oh, my.
My, my, my.
Keyes did not claim that Brown “Has no differences in principle with the socialist minded Democrats.”
Here is what the article actually says:
“Scott Brown in Massachusetts is the advance guard for Mitt Romney in the White House (or vice-versa). He becomes the poster child for the RINO clique’s archetypal GOP candidate who:
Has no differences in principle with the socialist minded Democrats...”
Scott Brown becomes the poster child.
It is the RINO clique’s archetypal GOP candidate who has no differences in principle with the socialist minded Democrats, not Scott Brown.
Now, you’ve been calling people liars on this thread. I wonder how you will react to this.
I wonder if you will stretch for a save by saying that, if Brown is the poster child, then every quality of the RINO clique’s archetypal GOP candidate necessarily accrues to Brown.
That’s not true, of course, but I know lots of people who would grasp that straw rather than admit they had misread something.
Uh, yes, he said just that. I cut and pasted that exact quote from the article. If you are willing to deny Keyes' own words, there is no point in further discussion with you. Have a good day.
It is the RINO clique’s archetypal GOP candidate who has no differences in principle with the socialist minded Democrats, not Scott Brown.
And by saying Brown is the poster child, he says Brown epitomizes that. If you are that desperate to defend lying by warping the concept of 'poster child', that is almost as pathetic as the lying itself.