Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by likemyorbs, Nov 16, 2012.
Another one bites the dust. How do these hypocrites sleep at night?
Just another R hypocrite.
So you have a problem with those against abortion except in cases of the mother's life in danger or I'm a Republican politician who would take the rights I exercise away from others? Your partisanship is showing.
At least they didn't have to board an abortion ship to get one.
Both! One is socially regressive, the other is demagoguery.
It all depends on who's pig baby is being gored aborted.
I'd also suggest it's I'm a politician who'll espouse pro life values in order to get elected, when in reality I don't adhere to those values myself.
Politically expedient hypocrisy.
Thanks for that link.
Well, no **** Sherlock. Just like gambling vessels, FM radio vessels, and the like.
You don't like the laws of a country, sail away from it, and into International Waters. Where the Captain is a god.
And these word mincers give me a pain in the ass. Something clandestine is a coat-hanger in a back room some where, not a big ****ing boat!!!
Actually, I can even just about, (by gritting my teeth, closing my eyes, stoppering my ears....) tolerate the argument of political expediency here....After all, most of what passes for economic debate during an election campaign is political expediency of the crudest - and most incompetent - and economically illiterate - variety.
What I cannot stomach is a version of political expediency that takes the form of being "pro-life" or anti-abortion on a public platform - incidentally, a form of expediency which seeks to deny or remove the full rights as adult human beings of other citizens (namely, pregnant women), while at the same time, blithely behaving in a manner diametrically opposed to one's publicly (and invariably, loudly and intolerantly) expressed views.
In practice, what this means is that in public, such a creature denies women's rights on such matters, and even seeks to deny women a voice in having a say in determining whether or not they wish to remain pregnant. And, it also means that in private, this loathsome individual doesn't give two hoots about the foetus that he spends, and expends, so much energy, time, and effort defending against the vile world's threats. So, someone who seeks to legislate against women in public, while busily contriving to reconcile the sort of moral contortions no three dimensional model could begin to describe. What a disgusting hypocrite. What an utterly amoral creep.
The side bar box has a red-faced scowling icon which says it is 'mad'. "Mad" doesn't do justice to my feelings for this creep. Incandescent is more like it.
And, a brief note to his electorate: This guy merits rejection at the polls. Principles, ethics, morals, simple core values are all self-evidently absent. Just. Vote. Him. Out. Whenever the opportunity next presents itself, of course....
Another example of Republicans demise.