Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: C. Edmund Wright

I guess you’re saying that Mitch can stand on principle because he’s a “leader”. If that’s the case, I wonder exactly how long and how high up the ladder does Gowdy think one must be to stand on principle?

However, Gowdy says the senate, not the senate “leaders”, should stand on principle. Can you blitheringly understand that?

I’ll say it one more time so you may grasp it. Gowdy tells the SENATE, not just the ML, to stand on principle. But he doesn’t do it himself.

Trying to have a discussion with you is like trying to have a discussion with a democrat. It’s a blithering waste of time.


90 posted on 12/23/2011 2:44:15 PM PST by Terry Mross (I'll only vote for a second party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies ]


To: Terry Mross

I am typing very slowly so that you can understand. Basically your entire argument ignores the entire reality of leadership and authority and the notion that leaders in every walk of life have a higher responsiblity because they have more authority.

Since you ignore that reality of all of life, you and I are done here. Go enjoy your irrelevant purity.


92 posted on 12/23/2011 2:55:24 PM PST by C. Edmund Wright (Moderator of Florida Tea Party Convention Presidential Debate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson