Previous 11 - 20 Next
In response to:

Giuliani Versus Obama

Ken1984 Wrote: Feb 24, 2015 7:47 AM
Since Obama's own political henchman has admitted that he lied when he said before being elected that he was opposed to gay marriage, why should anyone believe what he says? Oh, and "if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor" and a whole host of other proven lies, I don't think it is out of the question to doubt his word. And lying to the American people is unAmerican. Then there is that whole bit about fundamentally changing America, which no one would want to do if they loved the country. No, the outrage against the N.Y. mayor is simply phony and done by the phony press to diss Republicans. I think EVERYONE knows the guy doesn't love America, doesn't love what it stands for, doesn't love capitalism, which is what America was built on, doesn't love enterprise, also what America was built on, doesn't think anyone created any business, also what America was built on. He wants to turn America into a socialist state, and he hasn't a clue that socialism and its fellow traveller communism have never worked and will never work. No, he doesn't love America! That is simply obvious. KenC
When you want to fundamentally change something, that is proof in itself that you don't love it very much. KenC
Don't forget, the president lied about now believing in gay marriage. Why should anyone believe anything he says? Truth be known, he lies about one H..... of a lot of things. KenC
Obama says he loves America. But he also said he did not support gay marriage. Only later did it emerge that he had lied about his support for gay marriage. So, the big question is, did he also lie about loving America? It seems that a certain former mayor of New York thinks he lied about loving America. Given the other lie, I'd say the question is a toss-up. Now when Scott Walker is asked whether he thinks Obama loves America, I would suggest he answer: Why not ask Obama whether he loves America. Why ask me. After all, perhaps Obama was not telling the whole truth, just as he did about gay marriage. Oh what a web we weave when we choose to deceive. KenC
Actually, kids start out being hedonistic, selfish and entitled. It is up to society to educate them to see that this isn't necessarily in their best interests. We should also understand that morality is dead when religion is absent. The current generation is still cruising on their parents' religious or semi-religious upbringings. Once that has gone, then we fall back on "natural morality." Not sure exactly what that might be, but it is common knowledge that lions eat other animals to live. That survival is the most important thing in life and that cheating and lying is OK if you don't get caught. Or is there some other moral code I'm not aware of that might point people in the right direction? If so, what is its basis? KenC
You should keep in touch with what is going on in Wisconsin where a nursing-school professor put out a hit against a small business that had the nerve to display a campaign poster for someone "not approved of". She decided to boycott any business that the small business was getting from the college and urged fellow professors to do the same. Seems, even though this violates the school's ethics code, nothing much is happening about this. KenC
Maybe they are unwilling to engage in debate because they feel they have already won the battle. Why debate when you are winning and debate could only serve to weaken their position. I suspect they think that the ship has already sailed on abortion, Christianity and the ways of the "past." And, alas, they may be right. Aside from Muslims determined to return the world to the 7th Century, the Western world seems determined move in a godless direction, unencumbered by morality and bent on make everything "fair", regardless of who has to pay for this fairness (somewhat of a conundrum). Until their is a seismic change in the attitudes in the West and in the rest of the world as well, it is hard to see your group making significant headway in this godless society we live in. Still, I am sure you are doing the right thing. And, even in our brave new world, you would still think that reason, logic and debate would be needed more than ever. Apparently, most people don't seem to agree. KenC
On top of everything, this federal court decision means that there is no need for the House to add money in the DHS budget for the president's illegal amnesty program since there is now an injunction by the court prohibiting money being spent on this latest amnesty BS. The House bill should be quickly passed by the Senate and go on to his majesty for signing. Won't sign? Then it is all on the president. His argument will be entirely theoretical, since the court has forbidden him to carry out an amnesty. KenC
It is no thanks to Chris Wallace and other lazy newsmen and commentators that Republicans get the blame for this. However, all this now becomes totally beside the point, since the Texas federal court ruling on amnesty stops the feds from enforcing the amnesty. As such, there is no reason for the feds to spend any money on implementing amnesty. When, or if, the courts rule that Obama's amnesty is legal, the president can come back to Congress and ask for money for that item. Until then, the money isn't needed, since the amnesty plan cannot be carried out, due to the injunction imposed by the court. KenC
This ruling will mean that Senate has no reason not to adopt the House bill on DHS funding. The House has provided all money needed by DHS that can be legally expended. The fact that the House bill specifically does not allow money to be spent on Obama's amnesty should make no difference, since the amnesty program has been legally halted by the Texas Federal Court. Thus no money could be spent on it anyway pending a reversal of the court's judgement. The House, therefore, was right not to provide money for this illegal purpose. The Court states that the State of Texas is likely to win on the merits in its suit against the federal government. KenC
Get McConnell to go back to Harry Reid's rules, they could go around the Democrats. KenC
Previous 11 - 20 Next