I’m pointing out the hypocrisy of liberals needing a fainting couch over things really easy, when they have the tendency to do the same thing (and worse). But then again, most bullies do tend to be shocked when people swing back.Wait, you’re defending a polarizing remark by citing more polarizing remarks?
Enough with the “hypocrisy of the liberals/conservatives/moderates/independents” **** already! We’ve all done it, but we really have to stop with the name-calling, false accusations, finger pointing etc. If you really, seriously can’t tell why CatholicWhovian’s and Rep. Wasserman Schultz’s remarks are polarizing, we’ve got an even bigger problem; that being, that we have been so inundated with bs that we cannot tell the constructive intercourse from the poop.
Seriously, NeedsMercy, I hope you’re near your fainting couch because you seem to need it.
Reminds me of when Jesus threw the moneychangers out of the temple .
It’s not that CatholicWhovian was right or wrong to make that comment about liberals. It’s the juxtaposition of that comment (clearly a polarizing one, whether true or false) along with the comment:
Which seems to be denouncing polarizing politics, unless CatholicWhovian thinks gridlock in matters of governance is a good thing, in which case maybe CatholicWhovian’s remarks are completely consistent. And there is nothing finger-pointing or hypocritical about pointing out this discrepancy.
But he didn’t turn around and bring in a different set of money-changers. That’s where your analogy falls down.
Except in the case of Jesus, you had the virtuous getting rid of the unvirtuous. Here we are just changing the flavor of our lack of virtue.
I think it’s still too early to predict anything concerning Hillary’s chances, if she runs. A lot depends on who runs against her, and of course on the state of the economy and foreign events that occur at that time.
I would say ‘money changing’, which was simply a conversion of currency with a small percentage fee, is nothing compared to the whole sale looting of our currencies value that we have seen under the various ‘Quantitative Easing’ programs we have seen in the last six years. And yes, Bush would likely have done the same thing.
Over-explaining really detracts from the cleverness of estesbob’s original comment.
Well, then please forgive my excessive rhetoric, but the servitude of our elected officials to Wall Streets beck and call leaves me enraged.
Spot on.
At this moment we are fortunate that the Wahabi Saudi Arabs are supporting us as we give their radical proselytizing cover in the Western world as a client state of ours, essentially.
She is a terrible campaigner and has absolutely no record to run on. I hops she runs and I hope she gets the nomination.
Why do I get the feeling you were a Ron Paul supporter? Honestly when Jesus threw out the money changers there were no international bankers or members of the fFed in there! My comment was a JOKE!
Whats one got to do with the other? You think the only people keeping an eye on the Federal Reserve are Ron Paul supporters?
So you gonna toss some Sola Scriptura claims to cover for thieving Wall Street banks and the pols that fetch water for them?
The core to all humor is a slice of Truth, though perhaps it was more Truth than you intended.
I find myself agreeing with this. Particularly after every CLOSE race she campaigned in resulted in better GOP numbers. Her unlikability factor cannot be underestimated. If she runs the Dems should send out Bill instead with and cardboard cutout of Hill … Looking pleasant.
I think of it more as it’s not that she doesn’t have a record, it’s just not one she could win on, you know what I mean?
