The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: rangerrebew on November 13, 2017, 04:41:08 pm
-
Libs would keep a guilty Bob Menendez, but want Moore gone without so much as a trial
November 13, 2017 | Luis Miguel | Print Article
“Do as I say, not as I do” is one of the chief slogans from the Democrat playbook, and it’s on full display in the left’s attacks on Alabama Republican senate candidate Roy Moore.
Democrats have no qualms about calling for Moore’s withdrawal from the race over sexual misconduct allegations–even though none of the accusations have been proved.
http://www.bizpacreview.com/2017/11/13/libs-keep-guilty-bob-menendez-want-moore-gone-without-much-trial-562074
-
But . . . but . . . but that's different.
-
Never mind Menendez,what about Bubba Bill and all the women he raped?
Not to mention the young Monica he had oral and "cigar sex" with right in the WH.
-
Welcome to "Justice" in America 2017.
A lot more to come in like manner.
-
The greatest evil here is that liberals are holding Conservatives to a standard that they themselves do not believe in.
-
The greatest evil here is that liberals are holding Conservatives to a standard that they themselves do not believe in.
Alinsky's Rule No. 4: Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the church can live up to Christianity.
This tactic is genius in its simplicity. It discredits your enemy by pointing out the ways in which they fail to be perfect. No one is perfect and so the rule is not only powerful, but permanently keeps your target on defense without the ability to push forward with ideas or a cause.
-
Libs would keep a guilty Bob Menendez, but want Moore gone without so much as a trial
For a party that not only put up with Bill Clinton, but defended him at every turn, anyone on their side who says "sexual impropriety" should get their mouth punched.
-
We all know the libs excel at situational ethics. That hardly provides a justification for conservatives to do the same.
Michael Brendan Dougherty writes in the current National Review:
Every social conservative who supports Moore is increasing the cynicism of American society and justifying widespread skepticism about the sincerity of Christian belief among conservatives.
That's what's at stake, folks - defend the indefensible and all of a sudden your good will and credibility is shot. Can Christians and conservatives risk that?
-
Michael Brendan Dougherty is dead wrong.
-
We all know the libs excel at situational ethics. That hardly provides a justification for conservatives to do the same.
Michael Brendan Dougherty writes in the current National Review:
That's what's at stake, folks - defend the indefensible and all of a sudden your good will and credibility is shot. Can Christians and conservatives risk that?
Yeah, let the Democrats shred the Constitution, but hey, you'll still have your credibility.
-
We all know the libs excel at situational ethics. That hardly provides a justification for conservatives to do the same.
Michael Brendan Dougherty writes in the current National Review:
That's what's at stake, folks - defend the indefensible and all of a sudden your good will and credibility is shot. Can Christians and conservatives risk that?
You have ZERO credibility to lecture any of us on this board about morality or Conservatism. Your posting history possesses neither.
-
Michael Brendan Dougherty is dead wrong.
Why? Are you advocating for situational ethics?
-
You have ZERO credibility to lecture any of us on this board about morality or Conservatism. Your posting history possesses neither.
Pot, meet kettle. (And, as always, thanks for bumping my posts.)
-
Pot, meet kettle. (And, as always, thanks for bumping my posts.)
Keep living in your delusions. They at least make us laugh at you frequently.
-
For a party that not only put up with Bill Clinton, but defended him at every turn, anyone on their side who says "sexual impropriety" should get their mouth punched.
@DiogenesLamp
Well,that's as good an excuse as any.
Providing of course you think you need an excuse.
-
For a party that not only put up with Bill Clinton, but defended him at every turn, anyone on their side who says "sexual impropriety" should get their mouth punched.
Amen. They defended Bill against proven allegations. They do not care if you're a democrat.
But Republicans ... they will believe and swear to any lame allegations against ... not just Repubicans, but actual conservative Republicans.
-
We all know the libs excel at situational ethics. That hardly provides a justification for conservatives to do the same.
Michael Brendan Dougherty writes in the current National Review:
That's what's at stake, folks - defend the indefensible and all of a sudden your good will and credibility is shot. Can Christians and conservatives risk that?
Jazzhead, you would serve your cause better if you defended everyone from false accusations.
-
Jazzhead, you would serve your cause better if you defended everyone from false accusations.
It might serve Republicans better if they acknowledged wrongdoing and unacceptable behavior among their own, instead of engaging in the situational ethics the Dems are known for.
And indeed - dozens of prominent Republicans and conservatives are urging Roy Moore to step down. No shower for them - and I'm glad to be on the side for which character matters.
-
No shower for them - and I'm glad to be on the side for which character matters.
If it's perverts demanding to force Christians to bake them cakes and cater their "weddings"; ObamaCare and forced insurance to cover the irresponsible; higher taxes to pay for more government projects already proven a black hole of waste; championing abortion as an inalienable right; infringements on gun owners with convoluted schemes intended to end in confiscation - yup - you are right there for the kind of Big Government, Corrupt, evil and perverted character traits that matters to most Democrats and Leftists.
-
It might serve Republicans better if they acknowledged wrongdoing and unacceptable behavior among their own, instead of engaging in the situational ethics the Dems are known for.
Hey <removed by Mod4>. We always do acknowledge it and then immediately panic and throw people out whether it is true or not. What good has it done us. Time to let voters decide if someone is a crook. Since no one on the board is a current voter in that state, who gives a shit what happens either way on their election.
Direct Insults of fellow members violates established rules and will not be tolerated, Frank
-
Alinsky's Rule No. 4: Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the church can live up to Christianity.
This tactic is genius in its simplicity. It discredits your enemy by pointing out the ways in which they fail to be perfect. No one is perfect and so the rule is not only powerful, but permanently keeps your target on defense without the ability to push forward with ideas or a cause.
I love this place. Exactly two posts down from this post of yours, our resident Leftist is gleefully applying the exact Alinsky rule you just defined. Damn, you're good....
-
Hey <Removed by Mod4>. We always do acknowledge it and then immediately panic and throw people out whether it is true or not. What good has it done us. Time to let voters decide if someone is a crook. Since no one on the board is a current voter in that state, who gives a shit what happens either way on their election.
Shhh! Don't disturb him. He's working Alinksy Rule 4.
-
Exactly two posts down from this post of yours, our resident Leftist is gleefully applying the exact Alinsky rule you just defined. Damn, you're good....
Not really.
I just know our resident enemy and I am not ignorant of his devices.