TxHoops Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 Your assertion stands unsupported and is conjecture on your part. Lincoln would absolutely not be a 2014 Democrat!! Period!!!! Obviously your use of exclamation marks makes it true. When an argument lacks foundation, logic, or intellect, overuse punctuation... Mr. Buddy Garrity 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TxHoops Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 To play along though, in addition to obviously being deeply invested in civil rights, Lincoln was very much a progressive. He would likely be vilified by today's GOP, with his core belief in a strong federal government. He created the income tax (gasp!) for goodness sake with the Revenue Act. He created the Federal Bank, the Department of Agriculture, and the Draft. He spoke frequently against the bourgeois wealthy and was a champion of the working man. For Pete's sake he was a proud trial lawyer. Yep he definitely would not have been a 2014 Democrat!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Mr. Buddy Garrity 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthoftheBorder Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 Obviously your use of exclamation marks makes it true. When an argument lacks foundation, logic, or intellect, overuse punctuation... The lack of intellect is the assertion that Lincoln would be a 2014 democrat! He would never support abortion, gay marriage, Christian persecution, Bowe Bergdahl, muslim sympathizing (I could go on for hours listing democratic issues he would not support)! You get the picture! How do you like that for punctuation use! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TxHoops Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 For what it's worth, he wasn't even a Republican for the majority of the time he was on this earth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthoftheBorder Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 To play along though, in addition to obviously being deeply invested in civil rights, Lincoln was very much a progressive. He would likely be vilified by today's GOP, with his core belief in a strong federal government. He created the income tax (gasp!) for goodness sake with the Revenue Act. He created the Federal Bank, the Department of Agriculture, and the Draft. He spoke frequently against the bourgeois wealthy and was a champion of the working man. For Pete's sake he was a proud trial lawyer. Yep he definitely would not have been a 2014 Democrat!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Glad you finally came to your senses!!!!!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TxHoops Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 The lack of intellect is the assertion that Lincoln would be a 2014 democrat! He would never support abortion, gay marriage, Christian persecution, Bowe Bergdahl, muslim sympathizing (I could go on for hours listing democratic issues he would not support)! You get the picture! How do you like that for punctuation use! Yes, use supposition about what you THINK he would not support, rather than examples of what he actually did do during his service. That helps when your argument is severely flawed. Mr. Buddy Garrity 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthoftheBorder Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 For what it's worth, he wasn't even a Republican for the majority of the time he was on this earth. But he came to his senses. My Dad was not a Republican all his life either. He was smart enough to realize when he was no longer a democrat and continue t support a party that is systematically destroying the country the Lincoln helped make one of the greatest on the earth. No pucntuation added. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TxHoops Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 But he came to his senses. My Dad was not a Republican all his life either. He was smart enough to realize when he was no longer a democrat and continue t support a party that is systematically destroying the country the Lincoln helped make one of the greatest on the earth. No pucntuation added. Or spelling or grammar.... Translation: Your dad became a republican when he became senile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthoftheBorder Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 Yes, use supposition about what you THINK he would not support, rather than examples of what he actually did do during his service. That helps when your argument is severely flawed. Prove that he would support abortion. The man called on the Almighty and it is well documented that he was bible believing and a Christian. As for progressive, he was for his times but I have no problem with change that is good for the country instead of tearing it apart! You can try to be a revisionist historian all you like!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TxHoops Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 Or to put it another way, Lincoln would not be a republican for the same reasons Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, the late Steve Jobs, 90 percent of the academics at the elite higher education institutions in this country are not republicans. He was too damn smart to be one. ;) There's an argument you can probably follow! ;) Mr. Buddy Garrity 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthoftheBorder Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 Or spelling or grammar.... Translation: Your dad became a republican when he became senile. Translation: You don't know a damn thing of what you are talking about!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TxHoops Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 Prove that he would support abortion. The man called on the Almighty and it is well documented that he was bible believing and a Christian. As for progressive, he was for his times but I have no problem with change that is good for the country instead of tearing it apart! You can try to be a revisionist historian all you like!! So your assertion is that you cannot be a Christian and pro-choice? Further, you cannot be a Christian and support gay marriage? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TxHoops Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 I am starting to feel like I am in a fist fight with someone with no arms or hands... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthoftheBorder Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 Or to put it another way, Lincoln would not be a republican for the same reasons Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, the late Steve Jobs, 90 percent of the academics at the elite higher education institutions in this country are not republicans. He was too damn smart to be one. ;) There's an argument you can probably follow! ;) Or to put it another way, 90% of the higher education "elites" (your wording not mine) are democrats because it is a safe place for those who do not want to be held to a higher standard and who are socialist and desire a failed governmental model!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthoftheBorder Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 So your assertion is that you cannot be a Christian and pro-choice? Further, you cannot be a Christian and support gay marriage? Yes, and that is a difficult truth. Calling your self a Christian doesn't make you one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TxHoops Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 Yes, and that is a difficult truth. Calling your self a Christian doesn't make you one. So Bill Clinton, who was raised southern Baptist, and has gone into detail when he became born again, is going to hell? You really are way up "North" to be able to make those calls... Mr. Buddy Garrity 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TROJANSWIN Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 To play along though, in addition to obviously being deeply invested in civil rights, Lincoln was very much a progressive. He would likely be vilified by today's GOP, with his core belief in a strong federal government. He created the income tax (gasp!) for goodness sake with the Revenue Act. He created the Federal Bank, the Department of Agriculture, and the Draft. He spoke frequently against the bourgeois wealthy and was a champion of the working man. For Pete's sake he was a proud trial lawyer. Yep he definitely would not have been a 2014 Democrat!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why do democrats consider themselves for the "working man"? They take away from the working man to give to the non-working man. They kill jobs with their policies that a true "working man" would be glad to have. Paying someone to sit on their butt for 2 years and draw unemployment isn't helping a working man. A working man got off his butt the next week and found some kind of job to get a paycheck. Maybe it wasn't his dream job in a corner office, but it was something that got him money to support himself and/or his family. A true "working man" doesn't need the governments help. If they show up on time, bust their butt all day, pass a piss test, and come back the next day they will have a job. Taking a kickback from a union or giving out free stuff doesn't make a democrat a job creator. Doesn't do it for a republican either, but then they are all for the wealthy business owner who doesn't care about their employees, and are the evil scum we must rid the world of so that more people can need free stuff and vote for us. thetragichippy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenash Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 They do it because a number of people have swallowed that theory just as they have that the democrats are the "party of compassion". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenash Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 I watched Mr. Obama being interviewed by, if my memory is correct, someone from 60 minutes. This was before he was elected. The discussion centered around taxation and his feelings that some were not paying their fair share. The interviewer asked him this: If it could be statistically proven to you that keeping taxes where they are or actually reducing them slightly would INCREASE government revenues more than a tax hike would, would you support that. He said, without hesitation, no. When asked why would he not support something that would provide more revenue, he stated ( and I heard and saw it with my own eyes and ears) that the "fairness" of increasing taxes on the rich was far more important than the amount of revenue coming into the government coffers. Folks, anyone who cant see that this ideologue values his interpretation of social justice over the health of our economy and jobs available to people, is lost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TROJANSWIN Posted June 7, 2014 Report Share Posted June 7, 2014 So Bill Clinton, who was raised southern Baptist, and has gone into detail when he became born again, is going to hell? You really are way up "North" to be able to make those calls... Probably, but for way more reasons than these, and we will probably see him when we get there. Sitting in a church and calling yourself a Christian doesn't make you one, just like sitting in a garage and calling yourself a car also won't work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big girl Posted June 7, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 7, 2014 Please elaborate and show proof of your assertion!!! the parties switched ideologies during Roosevelt's tenure, I believe it was his presidency,, but they did swap ideologies. I cant believe you didnt know that. Look it up. Smh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big girl Posted June 7, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 7, 2014 Probably, but for way more reasons than these, and we will probably see him when we get there. Sitting in a church and calling yourself a Christian doesn't make you one, just like sitting in a garage and calling yourself a car also won't work. if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that that he was raised from the dead then you WILL be saved. ROMANS10:9 TxHoops 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big girl Posted June 7, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 7, 2014 I watched Mr. Obama being interviewed by, if my memory is correct, someone from 60 minutes. This was before he was elected. The discussion centered around taxation and his feelings that some were not paying their fair share. The interviewer asked him this: If it could be statistically proven to you that keeping taxes where they are or actually reducing them slightly would INCREASE government revenues more than a tax hike would, would you support that. He said, without hesitation, no. When asked why would he not support something that would provide more revenue, he stated ( and I heard and saw it with my own eyes and ears) that the "fairness" of increasing taxes on the rich was far more important than the amount of revenue coming into the government coffers. Folks, anyone who cant see that this ideologue values his interpretation of social justice over the health of our economy and jobs available to people, is lost. why in the world would a poor or middle-class person care if billionaires or taxed more. Warren Buffet and Bill Gates dont mind paying more so why do you feel sorry for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big girl Posted June 7, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 7, 2014 Why do democrats consider themselves for the "working man"? They take away from the working man to give to the non-working man. They kill jobs with their policies that a true "working man" would be glad to have. Paying someone to sit on their butt for 2 years and draw unemployment isn't helping a working man. A working man got off his butt the next week and found some kind of job to get a paycheck. Maybe it wasn't his dream job in a corner office, but it was something that got him money to support himself and/or his family. A true "working man" doesn't need the governments help. If they show up on time, bust their butt all day, pass a piss test, and come back the next day they will have a job. Taking a kickback from a union or giving out free stuff doesn't make a democrat a job creator. Doesn't do it for a republican either, but then they are all for the wealthy business owner who doesn't care about their employees, and are the evil scum we must rid the world of so that more people can need free stuff and vote for us. you dont know what you are talking about. What has the Republicans done for the middle-class? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big girl Posted June 7, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 7, 2014 Or to put it another way, 90% of the higher education "elites" (your wording not mine) are democrats because it is a safe place for those who do not want to be held to a higher standard and who are socialist and desire a failed governmental model!! no, they are democrats because they are intelligent enough not to believe the lies spewed by fox news. They are too smart to be brainwashed by the GOP and vote against their best interest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.