Mike Pence vs Kamala Harris Debate

  • Thread starter Thread starter YHWH_Christ
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ProVobis said:
I didn’t learn much last night except that out of 50 federal judges appointed by Trump and McConnell none of them were black.
Click to expand...
Planned Parenthood doesn’t like them either. Maybe it should be less about the color of skin and more about the content of character.
 
Last edited:
jeannetherese said:
40.png
Nepperhan:
The fact is and the cases show that Roe v. Wade never authorized abortions up to the date of birth. Biden has never stated support for abortions up to the date of birth. To state something to the contrary is ignoring facts and is just plain wrong. Pence should know better.
Click to expand...
If you read more than the part you pulled out of context, you’ll see that the article notes that it authorized doctors to authorize the abortions.
Click to expand...
Abby Johnson blogged about late-term abortions and the fact that they are done all the way to 9 months of pregnancy for any or no reason. To be fair, she says as of 2016, only about 10 doctors in these United States were willing to do so.

http://abortionworker.com/abbyjohns...formed-now-tell-me-about-the-right-to-choose/
 
Last edited:
I’ve read some of it and at the base if the argument that Catholics who feel an obligation to their moral conscience and wish to oblige by their sacred Church should recuse themselves from such cases where they have to pick the law or the church. I agree with that. But I don’t agree with the manner of Feinstein being a Californian saying that the ”Dogma lives loudly with in you and that’s of concern”. Judge Barett in a legal sense did the right thing in writing that paper as a precounsel for those who fare down that path. FEinstein had no right to comment on Barett’s personal practice of her faith by saying if it’s of concern when in similar cases people where people of faith wear it on their on the sleeves.nIt shouldn’t be done in order to get some sort of score with the current administration and I’m sorry to say many Catholics in California weren’t happy with that
 
Last edited:
BlessedYoungCatholic said:
Einstein had no right to comment on Barett’s personal practice of her faith by saying if it’s of concern when in similar cases people where people of
faith wear it on their on the sleeves.
Click to expand...
What was Feinstein’s entire comment about dogma and what was the context?
 
Nepperhan said:
I’ve seen persecution. It is not happening to 'strong, serious Catholics".
Click to expand...
So have I but here’s the deal it’s like being colored like I am. If your not colored you can’t fully understand the extent of harm discrimination In This country does to you. Same thing unless you hold conservative views You won’t feel it
 
Last edited:
Will say though this debate was much better than Trump vs biden
 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ominee-of-being-too-christian/?outputType=amp

This should help. She was upset that Barett might adhere to more traditional catholic thought such as abortion and because she wrote papers for Catholic judges but If you see fully Judge Barrett often says that it’s highly inappropriate for your personal beliefs to conflict with the law and to impose your personal beliefs on the law and she has repeatedly stated that. So Feinstein really shouldn’t of had a reason to say that her personal beliefs would conflict just because she spoke it very Christian law or organizations.
 
Last edited:
Let’s look at the President’s words as stated and not filtered through left wing liberal media.
TRUMP: I will tell you something. I watched those very closely, much more closely than you people watched it. And you have — you had a group on one side that was bad, and you had a group on the other side that was also very violent, and nobody wants to say that, but I’ll say it right now. You had a group — you had a group on the other side that came charging in without a permit, and they were very, very violent.
Click to expand...
Q: Do you think that the — what you call the alt-left is the same as neo-Nazis?

T: Those people — all of those people — excuse me. I’ve condemned neo-Nazis. I’ve condemned many different groups. ** But not all of those people were neo-Nazis, believe me. Not all of those people were white supremacists, by any stretch. Those people were also there because they wanted to protest the taking down of a statue, Robert E. Lee.

So — excuse me. And you take a look at some of the groups and you see — and you’d know it if you were honest reporters, which in many cases you’re not, but many of those people were there to protest the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee.
You know, you all — you really do have to ask yourself, where does it stop? But they were there to protest — excuse me. You take a look, the night before, they were there to protest the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee.

Q: Mr. President, are you putting what you’re calling the alt-left and white supremacists on the same moral plane?

T: I’m not putting anybody on a moral plane. What I’m saying is this. You had a group on one side and you had a group on the other, and they came at each other with clubs and it was vicious and it was horrible. And it was a horrible thing to watch.

But there is another side. There was a group on this side, you can call them the left. You’ve just called them the left — that came violently attacking the other group. So you can say what you want, but that’s the way it is.
(CROSSTALK) T: Excuse me, excuse me. (inaudible) themselves (inaudible) and you have some very bad people in that group. But you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides. You had people in that group — excuse me, excuse me — I saw the same pictures as you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.
…And you had people, and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally. But you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists.
Click to expand...
Continued
 
Q: … treated unfairly (inaudible) you were saying. You were saying the press has treated white nationalists unfairly? (inaudible) understand what you’re saying.

T: No, no. There were people in that rally, and I looked the night before. If you look, they were people protesting very quietly the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee. I’m sure in that group there were some bad ones. The following day, it looked like they had some rough, bad people — neo-Nazis, white nationalists, whatever you want to call them.
Click to expand...
Now take a look at his own words. No where in there does he say neo nazis or white nationalists are fine people. The fine people he is talking about consistently are those who came to peacefully protest the removal of the statue. He acknowledged there were people from both sides of the political spectrums among those peacefully protesting.

What the President condemned was the extremist on the left AND on the right who made it a violent event. I didn’t even read the WaPo article you put up because I know it would have been a carefully edited piece intended to “prove” President Trump said something he never did.

Here is a link to the full transcript of that press conference. In his own words: President Trump on Charlottesville protest | Fox News
 
This transcript of a press conference was published in August of 2017. But I guess you didn’t notice the continued bit at the bottom to get the whole idea being presented. Much like the left wing reporters, lets just pick one tiny slice of something and make a meal of it.
 
Horton said:
Let’s look at the President’s words as stated and not filtered through left wing liberal media.
Click to expand...
Why don’t we start with his remarks on August 12, instead of leaping ahead to the Aug 15 news conference?

The press conference was in reaction to the uproar over the original comments, and you would expect he would address the issues raised. Unfortunately he persisted in equating “both sides”, leaving intact the impression from his Aug 12 comments. That his handlers inserted the politically correct ideas does not help.

I recommend you read the article I provided, so you at least know what the issues are.
 
Dovekin . . . .
Why don’t we start with his remarks on August 12, instead of leaping ahead to the Aug 15 news conference?
Click to expand...
I have and the President didn’t say anything inappropriate there either.
 
Dovekin said:
Why don’t we start with his remarks on August 12,
Click to expand...
Okay: Here is a transcript of Trump’s remarks in full.
Thank you very much. As you know, this was a small press conference, but a very important one. And it was scheduled to talk about the great things that we’re doing with the secretary on the veterans administration. And we will talk about that very much so in a little while. But I thought I should put out a comment as to what’s going on in Charlottesville. So, again, I want to thank everybody for being here, in particular I want to thank our incredible veterans. And thank you, fellas. Let me shake your hand.

They’re great people. Great people. But we’re closely following the terrible events unfolding in Charlottesville, Virginia. We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides, on many sides. It’s been going on for a long time in our country. Not Donald Trump, not Barack Obama, this has been going on for a long, long time. It has no place in America. What is vital now is a swift restoration of law and order and the protection of innocent lives. No citizen should ever fear for their safety and security in our society. And no child should ever be afraid to go outside and play or be with their parents and have a good time.

I just got off the phone with the governor of Virginia, Terry McAuliffe, and we agree that the hate and the division must stop, and must stop right now. We have to come together as Americans with love for our nation and true affection-- really, I say this so strongly, true affection for each other. Our country is doing very well in so many ways. We have record – just absolute record employment. We have unemployment the lowest it’s been in almost 17 years. We have companies pouring into our country, Foxconn and car companies and so many others. They’re coming back to our country. We’re renegotiating trade deals to make them great for our country and great for the American worker.
Click to expand...
Continued below
 
We have so many incredible things happening in our country, so when I watch Charlottesville, to me it’s very, very sad. I want to salute the great work of the state and local police in Virginia. Incredible people. Law enforcement, incredible people. And also the National Guard. They’ve really been working smart and working hard. They’ve been doing a terrific job. Federal authorities are also providing tremendous support to the governor. He thanked me for that. And we are here to provide whatever other assistance is needed. We are ready, willing and able. Above all else, we must remember this truth: No matter our color, creed, religion or political party, we are all Americans first. We love our country. We love our god.
Click to expand...
We love our flag. We’re proud of our country. We’re proud of who we are, so we want to get the situation straightened out in Charlottesville, and we want to study it. And we want to see what we’re doing wrong as a country where things like this can happen. My administration is restoring the sacred bonds of loyalty between this nation and its citizens, but our citizens must also restore the bonds of trust and loyalty between one another. We must love each other, respect each other and cherish our history and our future together. So important. We have to respect each other. Ideally, we have to love each other. Bolding Mine.
Click to expand...
This was on VOX August 12, 2017. Following these remarks was a video of some woman telling all of you how to feel about what President Trump said about. She wove meaning into words that were not there. You all were taken for a ride. Does you WaPo article mention any of this? Or were those parts left out.

Remember, these are the words of President Trump regarding Charlottesville on August 12, 2017 quoted in an piece by a very left wing liberal new outlet. You all got played, the words “there were very nice people” are not in this quote at all.
Dovekin said:
The press conference was in reaction to the uproar over the original comments, and you would expect he would address the issues raised. Unfortunately he persisted in equating “both sides”, leaving intact the impression from his Aug 12 comments.
Click to expand...
That would be the manufactured by left wing media uproar as I see it.
 
Last edited:
Horton said:
This was on VOX August 12, 2017. Following these remarks was a video of some woman telling all of you how to feel about what President Trump said about. She wove meaning into words that were not there. You all were taken for a ride. Does you WaPo article mention any of this? Or were those parts left out.
Click to expand...
What are you talking about?

This is the speech from Aug 12. Before he left the room, Trump was asked if this was a sufficient condemnation of the violence.

Two hours before this, a self identified neo nazi drove his car into a group of protesters, killing a woman and sending 20 others to the hospital, some in critical condition. How did Trump’s words address that situation? They come off as victim shaming, suggesting the victim and her killer were equally deserving of condemnation.

The only voice telling anyone how to feel about these words is yours. Going to the press conference 3 days later is intended to take the words iut of context. Then you pontificate on how Trump’s words should be understood, as if your opinion is better than the voice on VOX. If you can say how these words should be understood, so can she.

The Washington Post article at least talks about how the controversy started. You initial analysis of Trump’s politically correct press conference does not even seem to know there was a controversy, or earlier remarks.
 
Dovekin said:
The only voice telling anyone how to feel about these words is yours. Going to the press conference 3 days later is intended to take the words iut of context. Then you pontificate on how Trump’s words should be understood, as if your opinion is better than the voice on VOX. If you can say how these words should be understood, so can she.
Click to expand...
Did you read the words? The actual words Trump spoke. Where in there does he say one side was to blame and another side is blameless? Where in these words above did President Trump say the young woman was to blame for her own death?
Horton said:
We’re proud of who we are, so we want to get the situation straightened out in Charlottesville, and we want to study it. And we want to see what we’re doing wrong as a country where things like this can happen. My administration is restoring the sacred bonds of loyalty between this nation and its citizens, but our citizens must also restore the bonds of trust and loyalty between one another. We must love each other, respect each other and cherish our history and our future together. So important. We have to respect each other. Ideally, we have to love each other.
Click to expand...
Where is President Trump sowing hatred & bigotry in the words above?
Dovekin said:
The only voice telling anyone how to feel about these words is yours.
Click to expand...
Please point out where I am interpreting these words into something they don’t mean? Please point out where I am assigning meaning to these words that is not there?

I’m not trying to tell you what these words mean, I’m trying to get you to read these words and decide for yourself what they mean with the media filter. I have no interest in anything the Washington Post has to say about anything.
 
Horton said:
I have no interest in anything the Washington Post has to say about anything.
Click to expand...
It is a shame you choose to offer an uninformed opinion on these matters. One more time:

A neo nazi killed a woman and injured 20 others.

Trump condemned the violence “on many sides, on many sides.”

This was viewed as an inadequate condemnation from the start.

He issued another statement and then had a press conference that talked about “fine people on both sides.”

When you read these words, you leave out the context and try to portray them as innocuous. When Trump said on many sides he stretched his condemnation to encompass the counterprotesters, including the woman who died.

He had a chance to correct this wrong impression, but persisted in talking about both sides. This effectively nullified the politically correct language his handlers had him say. Yes there are condemnations of neo nazis, white supremacists, but they are mixed up in the jumble of both sides that he equates. That you understand these words differently does not mean you understand them correctly nor that any other interpretation is a distortion.

If you do not understand this, read what other Republicans said on August 12-13. Trump is an outlier, alone in condemning the violence on many sides, instead of the violence that killed and injured counterprotesters.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top