Posted on 08/11/2017 1:39:03 PM PDT by Hojczyk
The Republican-led Senator lied to the American people. They promised to repeal the failed Obamacare law for seven-and-a-half years. They ran their campaigns on repealing Obamacare. But they all lied.
And then Mitch McConnell had the gall to blame President Trump for expecting too much from the senate!
.Sens. tweeting support of McConnell: ▪️Cornyn ▪️Corker ▪️Tillis ▪️Isakson ▪️Collins ▪️Hatch ▪️Gardner ▪️Heller ▪️Flake ▪️Young ▪️Capito.
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
Not surprised about Isakson. He needs to go.
Thank you and I commend you for paying attention.
I understand your self righteous explanations perfectly, I reject them.
The fact that you can't accept that politicians lie about their positions when you know they do is unfathomable.
“I understand your self righteous explanations perfectly”
No, you don’t. It’s classic Dunning–Kruger effect.
“I reject them.”
You reject only your own misunderstandings.
“The fact that you can’t accept that politicians lie about their positions when you know they do is unfathomable.”
It would be if I had done any such thing. Your accusation serves only to show once again that you don’t understand this issue.
You are a self righteous azzhole that overestimates his intelligence.
“You are a self righteous azzhole that overestimates his intelligence.”
You claim to understand things that your statements show clearly that you don’t understand. When I dumbed it down for you, you didn’t understand that either.
If you’re looking for an explanation, refer to Arthur Conan Doyle: “Mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself.”
You started out dumb and got dumber. Throw in some capital letters when you make those learned quotes that have nothing to do wit your first ignorant statement.
Your premise was that voting for a pro abort democrat was a mortal sin and went down hill from there. You have attacked my faith and my intelligence in an effort to justify that ignorant statement and still you flounder.
“Your premise was that voting for a pro abort democrat was a mortal sin”
See, you didn’t even get that right.
Your premise was that people should vote for a dim to get rid of a RINO. I pointed out the obvious truth that voting for a pro-abort is a mortal sin. Your response was to say that your RINO was also a pro-abort.
You pointed out that a person can be deceived into voting for a pro-abort if that politician lies about his position, as though that disproved the obvious truth that voting for a pro-abort is a mortal sin. Or perhaps you merely intended that argument to demonstrate that I must have violated my own principle many times.
What you overlook, either intentionally or negligently, is that a mortal sin requires the full consent of the will. That one thing renders groundless every attempt you have made here to impeach my character.
You dare complain that I have attacked your faith when attacking mine was the intent and purpose of your every utterance here? You dare complain that I have insulted your intelligence when you have conflated the intentional with the unintentional, the guilty with the innocent, and then claimed you had refuted an obvious truth?
It breaks down like this. (These are not quotes, but summaries that accurately capture the sense of the exchange.)
Me: Voting for a pro-abort, which implies full consent of the will, is a mortal sin.
You: You could vote for a pro-abort accidentally, so that’s not true.
Me: Being deceived is not the same thing as acting with full consent of the will.
You: Since so many politicians are pro-aborts, you have almost certainly voted for many. Therefore, you are an idiot and voting for pro-aborts is not a mortal sin.
You never had a point to make. You did not understand the point I was making. You were insulting in every post. And you have the nerve to complain.
Go away.
>
Actually, every two -term + politician needs to be gone. The presumption is a career politician (anyone more than two terms in office) is corrupt (he puts the future of his own career ahead of America’s future). That means guys like Ryan are preemptively corrupt and should be thrown out on their keisters.
>
Concur, it’s a given. Graft, corruption, greed and more have ALWAYS been the hallmark of govt.
>
The presumption can only be rebutted by the politician himself producing clear and convincing evidence to the voters he is not corrupt. Other wise he should be gone. He is guilty until HE proves himself innocent. If they don’t like that then the shouldn’t run for office. They are our employees.
>
Were we again a Constitutional Republic, it would be quite hard to ‘show’ such proof: Fedzilla has such a LIMITED scope. “Here’s a bill I voted NO”?? Just look at the dog/pony-show votes we just had, count enough votes for the desired outcome, then allow the rest to ‘vote their conscience’ (aka fool the voters).
>
Without a term-limit constitutional amendment (long-term solution), this will be hard to do without giving the Lying Left a majority which we must not do. Somehow we’ve got to rid ourselves of corrupt GOP congressmen without giving the Lying Left the baton. Not sure how to do that.
>
Sorry, here I can find no difference between the two (again, noting their are MORE than 2 options on every ballot). One only wishes to go 50MPH vs. the other at 80MPH. Each believes their own form of Fascism/Socialism is ‘good’ and manageable (IE: they can pilfer the public Treasury to line their own pockets).
Like O’Care, IMO, the People should get EXACTLY what they need: A swift kick in the cojones. Bend over, People, for the govt you DESERVE.
THEN, and maybe only then, might they wake up. Unfort., I still don’t see it happening even then.
Well, now we know who to continue to demonize, in addition to McTurtle, of course: Cornyn, Corker, Tillis, Isakson, Collins, Hatch, Gardner, Heller, Flake, Young, Capito, and of course, McStain and Murkowski.
And EVERY DEMOCRAT, TOO!
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.