R
Road-Worrier
Guest
Dude, just join the Episcopalians. They dropped opposition to abortion and embraced every trendy “social justice” cause years ago.
There’s no mention of Nazis in Kennedy’s speech. I made the mistake of qualifying a statement by mentioning them here:I must have missed the part of Little Joe’s speech about Nazis…
The result was a discussion about should or should not the term “Nazi” be used in reference to the group that marched in Charlottesville carrying torches and chanting “Jews will not replace us.” The topic developed a life of its own.The speech was about the values that Americans have shared over time - obviously not shared by every single variety of American such as the Nazis that marched in Charlottesville - just the predominant values that built this country.
There’s one out of however many else where there. Just kind of proves my point.One of the Charlottesville racists did kill a person there.
It IS demonstrably true.It is unrelated to what you had been asked to prove, having claimed it to be “demonstrably true”.
No, it’s not.Also as a proposition on its own is its truth is unclear since the subject is not quantified - all some, three, … people at Charlottesville …
Nah. None of that disproves my own point. I’m satisfied with my statements and will continue to make them as required.Maybe you would like to continue this discussion on this thread. I think 7 Sorrows would appreciate that…
I thought this summed it up well:I thought Rep Joe Kennedy III’s speech seemed hollow. He was not passionate.
There he was, a grandfathered-in congressman worth a reported $18 million, product of Stanford and Harvard Law, standing in front of a gleaming car, an American flag and a Bengals banner at a vocational school — all those condescending, blue-collar signifiers. He wore a tie and shirtsleeves, the car’s hood open as though he’d just been tinkering with it.
He did try to talk like Obama. It is odd.The only remarkable thing about Kennedy’s speech was his odd delivery: not reminiscent of his clan’s Boston Brahmin accent, but a cadence and an oratory meant to evoke Barack Obama — the last young Democrat to come out of nowhere, light up the electorate and slay a dynastic sure-thing.
Which does go to show that, unlike the Republicans, have a motivation that is humanitarian and not self-serving. I used to be a Republican, but I left it decades ago because they were elevating money over people, plus their increase in the number of racists after they absorbed the vast majority of the “Southern Democrats” (“Dixiecrats”) starting in the late 1960’s after LBJ got the Civil Rights Acts passed.Yea, the Dem rank and file should be concerned about that.
They are spending their political capital on people that aren’t even citizens
ignoring the needs of their actual constituency.
Supporting our refugee program is humanitarian.Which does go to show that, unlike the Republicans, have a motivation that is humanitarian and not self-serving.
Yes that was a good article. To the democrats, as long as they can put someone out there with the last name Kennedy, they think they don’t have a thing to worry about. The democrats are really out of touch.7_Sorrows:
I thought this summed it up well:I thought Rep Joe Kennedy III’s speech seemed hollow. He was not passionate.
Dems offer us a Clinton and a Kennedy — will they ever learn?
There he was, a grandfathered-in congressman worth a reported $18 million, product of Stanford and Harvard Law, standing in front of a gleaming car, an American flag and a Bengals banner at a vocational school — all those condescending, blue-collar signifiers. He wore a tie and shirtsleeves, the car’s hood open as though he’d just been tinkering with it.He did try to talk like Obama. It is odd.The only remarkable thing about Kennedy’s speech was his odd delivery: not reminiscent of his clan’s Boston Brahmin accent, but a cadence and an oratory meant to evoke Barack Obama — the last young Democrat to come out of nowhere, light up the electorate and slay a dynastic sure-thing.
We’ve offered a path to that end.Dreamers, including a pathway to citizenship?
Actually it undercuts it.There’s one out of however many else where there. Just kind of proves my point.
then demonstrate the truth of it.It IS demonstrably true.
A distorted sense of Catholic History.Protecting human life is a traditional Catholic value.
All it takes is just one. A plate of cookies with one of them being laced with poison makes the whole plate bad.There’s one out of however many else where there. Just kind of proves my point.
Would you still take one?“Here is a plate of cookies, please take one, oh by the way one of them is poisoned”
So protecting human life isn’t a traditional Catholic value?A distorted sense of Catholic History.