MjM on October 11, 2018 at 9:31 am Ahem. I see what you did there, Owen (hee hee). So, I’ll re-post here with additional notes…. I just finished watching [last night] the Vukmir/Baldwin debate. For those who haven’t seen it, I suggest you do. Do not rely on the Leftstream Media’s chosen snippets. Both danced around some questions (moderators,for the most part, did a good job trying to get them to answer directly). Both spewed the normal talking points. But on a few issues, and overall, safe to say Vukmir kicked Stammerin’ Tammy’s kiester. Baldwin’s response to Tomah fell like a led balloon. “I did this” and “I did that”, while everyone in the room was thinking, “yeah, only AFTER you got caught fast asleep at the wheel”. Vukmir’s heart-felt response to Balwin’s abortion-anywhere-anytime stance left even the moderators stunned for a few seconds. You could hear a pin drop in that room. On the topic of “gender equal pay”, TMJ4’s Shannon Sims dropped her mask and let her liberal slant shine thru when at 35:50, addressing Vukmir, she stated, “It is FACT women earn 20% less than men on the dollar…” (listen closely how she says that line). Now we all know that that so-called FACT has been totally debunked so I was a little surprised Vukmir didn’t catch it and call Sims on it. However, by the same bogus calculation standards used in constructing that so-called FACT, Baldwin lied; she did pay her females $0.74 of what she payed men. Funniest part was closing statements, with Baldwin having multiple Pelosi-like brownouts while trying to tie Vukmir to evil corporations (“and…….[stares off into space]………………pharmaceuticals”), and with Leah’s 10-megaton nuke second sentence (“I have to chuckle..”) pointing out Tammy’s hulking $22 million in special interest campaign cash.
Ahem. I see what you did there, Owen (hee hee). So, I’ll re-post here with additional notes….
I just finished watching [last night] the Vukmir/Baldwin debate. For those who haven’t seen it, I suggest you do. Do not rely on the Leftstream Media’s chosen snippets.
Both danced around some questions (moderators,for the most part, did a good job trying to get them to answer directly). Both spewed the normal talking points. But on a few issues, and overall, safe to say Vukmir kicked Stammerin’ Tammy’s kiester.
Baldwin’s response to Tomah fell like a led balloon. “I did this” and “I did that”, while everyone in the room was thinking, “yeah, only AFTER you got caught fast asleep at the wheel”. Vukmir’s heart-felt response to Balwin’s abortion-anywhere-anytime stance left even the moderators stunned for a few seconds. You could hear a pin drop in that room.
On the topic of “gender equal pay”, TMJ4’s Shannon Sims dropped her mask and let her liberal slant shine thru when at 35:50, addressing Vukmir, she stated, “It is FACT women earn 20% less than men on the dollar…” (listen closely how she says that line). Now we all know that that so-called FACT has been totally debunked so I was a little surprised Vukmir didn’t catch it and call Sims on it. However, by the same bogus calculation standards used in constructing that so-called FACT, Baldwin lied; she did pay her females $0.74 of what she payed men.
Funniest part was closing statements, with Baldwin having multiple Pelosi-like brownouts while trying to tie Vukmir to evil corporations (“and…….[stares off into space]………………pharmaceuticals”), and with Leah’s 10-megaton nuke second sentence (“I have to chuckle..”) pointing out Tammy’s hulking $22 million in special interest campaign cash.
Yeah, thanks for the link, MjM. I was looking for a good replay.
The thud will come from women who heard the GOP candidate
Ignore women’s right to govern their own bodies when they vote in November .
The folks who applauded her “ late term abortion “ description were already
Voting for the woman who voted to take away thei health care .
That’s the # 1 issue this fall and Vukmir swirling and missed badly .
When the Dems beat walker and Vukmir with the least telegenic
Or capable public speake in recent history , what will the excuses be
On this board ?
And since when is the public charmed by a candidate who constantly interrupts with taking points and can’t come up with a single policy to address a question ?
Wait , you’ve me on that one . He became President .
BTW , I just celebrated 38 years of sobriety so when the cowardly ass clown
Responds with the same tired alkie response , I beat you to it
Needle Dick .
Hopefully Baldwin loses so we can improve from total liberal dreck to greatness.
Tammy is one of the good ones! One of the few, like Bernie Sanders, and John Mccain. Do not judge people based on conservative/liberal go for honest ones.
She openly promotes a lifestyle against God’s design for marriage.
Promoting wrong hardly makes one “good”.
So how does the marriage (within and without the burdens of marriage) practices of the current occupant of the WH correspond with God’s design?
He does not openly speak against and advocate a perversion of it.
So “Grab ’em by the $%#@& ! is OK in your book?
No one said it was Le Roy duh Floored. To use your idiotic tripe… “This is a discussion about Baldwin and Vukmir, please cite where either said such a thing.” Troll somewhere else.
I already said it was not OK to say that, but he, ALLEGEDLY, said it in a locker room over 10 years ago.
He has not said that openly as President. Not even close.
Baldwin has advocated her perversions of God’s design for marriage while Senator.
You are mistaken, it isn’t alleged when it is on tape, and it wasn’t in a locker room. Is there a time limit on being a pig?
If god created us all, why is Baldwin a perversion of god’s design?
The tape alleged to exist, but I have not heard it. We only have word of liberals who thrived on covering any of Bill Clinton’s perversions up. So sourcing is not trustworthy.
You question about Baldwin assumes she has no control over her carnal choices. We all choose to act with good or evil, that includes good or evil in our carnal choices. If we act on perversion, that is because one chooses it.
No, the tape exists and millions have heard it. Denying that it never happened doesn’t make it so, except in your noggin.
You sure are hung up on the “carnal choices” of others. Maybe you can get treatment for that. Never too late to try.
You were the one that foolishly implied Baldwin was “born that way” when it comes to carnal choices. I had to correct you when you went off on the liberal identity politics. I am disgusted by identity politics. It implies our carnal choices are not choices at all. That is an utterly ridiculous position to protect any and all carnal perversions.
I have not heard the tape. Have not looked into any authenticity issues and frankly don’t worry too much about men’s locker room talk. I already said if it happened, it is ridiculous and stupid. In scale, of open, liberal, sexual perversion advocacy, this is a nothing burger. If Trump was asked to say it was wrong, he would say it was stupid and foolish. Unlike liberals, they never say carnal choices on any level are wrong, including rape when it is done by a liberal like Clinton.
Where did I say that?
He said it, never denied he did. It must be tough living with all that cog dis going on…..
When you said “why is Baldwin a perversion of God’s design”.
You are clearly implying a “born that way”, amplifying disgusting liberal identity politics.
If you are not implying perv carnal choices are not choices with that statement, what are you implying?
Nope, I didn’t say that. You are clearly implying things that I did not say. You are the creationist, not me..
I quoted you direct.
I even asked: if you did not mean victim identity politics with Baldwin question, what did you mean?
Still waiting to hear what you did mean by your Baldwin question.
My answer was clear. God did not make Baldwin that, she choose here own path in rejecting God’s design.
Yup, I said that, but you omitted complete sentence and the context. Once again you are making stuff up to fit into your very narrow world view. Why wait for my answer as you made one up that fits your view.
The part about God creating us all? I still kept that context.
Explain how I took you out of context?
What I did was: totally destroy your liberal identity politics argument.
Nope. It was a question asked of you.
Nope, the only thing you destroyed was the opportunity to answer the question. I wasn’t even hoping for a truthful response.
And I explained, clearly, that Baldwin is not a victim of her carnal choice perversions as you implied.
She chooses to advertise her carnal choices, which set a bad example for all.
Keep your carnal choices to yourself.
Could you give some factual examples of how or when Baldwin “advertised” her carnal choices?? Did she advertise like your idol with a “grab em by the $#@@&” statement?
Why are you so hung up on perversion, and the carnal choices of others? A little jealousy, perhaps?
“Baldwin said she ran “to make a difference” and not to make history.”
That’s a lot more subtle than the “grab ’em” attitude of your idol.
Nord took issue with my calling out Baldwin’s ongoing advocacy of her carnal choices.
There are far more important issues. That is the main problem with Baldwin, she puts carnal choice advocacy as her top priority.
There is no denying that.
We need a serious Senator that is not consumed with the issue like Nord is.
That would be Leah.
Again, who cares!
Clearly, Nord does.
I’m glad her sexuality is a non issue with you, Kevin.
It’s only an issue when she is shouting her carnal choices out loud as something good and right.
She can’t keep her carnal choices to herself, which is the problem.
What happen to Clinton liberal standard: “it’s a private matter”?
You didn’t see Bill Clinton shouting his heterosexual pride in Oval Office. He had good sense to keep his carnal choices to himself.
Oh, okay, it is an issue. And I thought it was an issue only for Nord.
I guess I haven’t been paying enough attention as I don’t recall her shouting her carnal choices. I’m surprised Leah or some of her special interest groups haven’t included any of Tammy’s carnal choice sound clips in commercials. Maybe it’s a non issue for them.
You are once again exaggerating beyond belief. How can you turn, “Baldwin said she ran “to make a difference” and not to make history” into “It’s only an issue when she is shouting her carnal choices out loud as something good and right” ? She did no such thing.
Nort craps: “She did no such thing.”
You make it too easy.
Lesbianism is her only game.
Nord never lets facts get in way of his feelings….
“Nord never lets facts get in way of his feelings”.
And this is from the guy that believes the earth is only 6000 years old, denies science, and says the pope isn’t a christian, and relishes the post factual world created by his idol where truth isn’t truth.
Here is a great quote that certainly applies, “The ultimate ignorance is the rejection of something you know nothing about, yet refuse to investigate”.
mjm: I was correct in that the “proof” k provided proved none of his claims. What is your game?
Again with Pope misquote.
What I said was: if the Pope believes in a gospel other than Jesus for forgiveness and salvation from our sin, he teaches a gospel other than the Christian gospel.
I am concerned he teaches a gospel other than Christ from time to time.
Try to quote me accurately. You have a big problem with that.
Who cares if the Pope believes, or doesn’t believe what you think he should. And who cares if Baldwin is gay and says she is. If I read the constitution correctly, both of these are none issues.
Nort trips: I was correct….
No. You, as usual, were, are, and forever shall be wrong.
Either because of your known inability to comprehend what you read or because you simply can’t read. And since you, here on this blog of text, stalk Kevin every chance you get like some deranged pervert, I’ll hafta stick with the former.
The article cited by Kevin is chock full of Baldwin’s self-proclaimed “ELECT ME I’M GAAAYYYY!’ track record. Perhaps it is news to you, but it’s been well documented and demonstrated for nigh three decades.
My game? Well, kickn yer arse, for one. (1≠3)
I did not bring Pope up, Nord did.
He brings up irrelevant topics when he loses an argument.
I merely corrected his false witness against me.
He has done it more than once.
If Democrats are going to have this spate of morality, we have to talk about the carnal choice advocacy Baldwin openly embraces. Unless liberals are only allowed to spout off about morality these days, which is not morality at all, it is all about finding conservatives guilty of not being liberal. So if we can live with that liberal perversion as morality, we certainly can talk about he advocacy of liberal perversions.
Again Kevin, who cares who she chooses to love or who you choose to love.
When you say “love”, you mean “carnal choices”, not spiritual love of a marriage under God’s design, one man, one woman, correct?
What do you think I mean?
I think you mean unfettered, irresponsible, carnal choices outside of marriage of God’s design that results in high rates of VD, health care costs, and social chaos….but I just wanted to be sure.
Sure sounds like it.
What do you mean then?
You are rivaling Nord when it comes to being unclear on what you mean.
I thought I was clear. You should go back a read what I’ve said again.
I’m more nuanced.
So I was hoping you could be clear.
I’m not sure what you’re attempting to get me to say. My leaning is more constitutional than biblical when it comes to Baldwin’s, or your, sexual orientation. Both are, constitutionally, irrelevant.
Was I clear?
I am not suggesting going against constitution, but talking about the open, and active moral example the elected official sets for his/her constituents.
Like Randy Bryce, we don’t want an unapologetic, immoral, deadbeat Dad elected, do we?
Election time is the time to evaluate immorality and character of the candidate.
You say that is irrelevant?
You really don’t want to have the discussion about “morality and elected officials again do you?? That dead horse has been beaten too many times.
When a candidate is up for re-election, or election, yes.
You are the one that wants to beat the dead horse about elections already decided 2 years ago.
Election time is the time to discuss a candidate’s immoralities.
Why do you want to bury Baldwin’s obvious flaws to traditional morality?
For the sake of humoring you, I’ll bite.
Besides Baldwin being gay, what wrongs is she committing morally, and based on what?
Not just that, but her active advocacy of carnal choices that have severely high STD rates which ends up in a ton of health care costs.
She is saying carnal choices with huge STD rates are just dandy.
That is reckless and completely irresponsible.
That’s why you should care.
“She is saying carnal choices with huge STD rates are just dandy.”
Can you give me the direct quote for that.
We have already linked to her advocating of gay carnal choices.
The CDC has ton of data of high STD rates in gay culture.
It was a statement I made about her political position, Baldwin will never talk about the dangers of her carnal choice advocacy.
But stated that she said, “carnal choices with huge STD rates are just dandy.” Is that a direct quote that she made?
If you were truly concerned about STD, why no concern about the trump/Daniels get together?
Do you know the definition of nuanced?
Never claimed she said it like that.
We know gay carnal choices have skyrocketing STD’s for some time.
We know Baldwin openly advocates those carnal choices.
Is your objection to me using the word “dandy”?
I did not know you were the PC police. Can I see your thought police badge number?
His past behavior is disgusting, and I have always denounced it, but he is not openly advocating carnal choices outside marriage of God’s design like Baldwin is.
There is a difference between doing evil, which Trump probably did, and Baldwin who does evil, but says it is not evil. The last one is openly unrepentant about the evil they do.
The latter is way worse.
You did claim she said that. You stated that she said that, “carnal choices with huge STD rates are just dandy.” Sounds like that was a lie. Kevin, why do you embrace evil?
To describe someone’s obvious political advocacy of something as “dandy”, is a very valid description of her position on the matter.
If you declare that a “lie”, you are the most sensitive, overly-political correct, whiner I have ever met. Have you seen what Democrats did to Kavanaugh. “Dandy” is 1/1024th of that liberal political hardball at worst!
What words would you ALLOW me to use to describe her gay advocacy and encouraging carnal choices that result in high STD rates?
Glad you admit that Baldwin didn’t make that statement and it was only your opinion. Opinions don’t necessarily represent the truth. Thanks for clearing that up.
My statement is fact utilizing my own language to describe her position.
There is nothing untrue about my factual statement.
“There is nothing untrue about my factual statement.“
Find me anywhere where Baldwin has verbally advocated directly for STDs and irresponsible sex.
Kevin said, “My statement is fact utilizing my own language to describe her position.”
Is that the same as alternative facts. How Trumpian of you.
When you normalize and advocate gay carnal choices, you end up advocating higher STD rates according to CDC.
There is consequence to advocating certain carnal choices.
You deny truth if you deny this.
Heterosexuals give each other STDs.
Not nearly at the rate of gay carnal choices and behavior.
Does it matter? It still happens.
If her advocacy encourages unhealthy carnal choices, yes, it does matter.
These are same liberals that generate foaming outrage at morality of using plastic straws just a few months ago.
Priorities. They are skewed, and insane, in liberal lexicon.
So homosexuals getting STDs through their “carnal choices” is worse than heterosexuals getting STDs through their “carnal choices. Who do you blame for heterosexual carnal choices?
I’m against spreading of heterosexual std’s as well, that’s why anyone advocating sex outside God’s design for marriage should be criticized for encouraging lifestyles resulting in more public health care costs.
…but you get all hacked off at even discussing the topic by accusing me of lying when my statement was completely accurate. Your only bitch seems to be language I use. I rail against the PC police.
It’s not PC I’m calling out. It’s your alternative facts I’m calling out.
I’ll ask again; whose god?
CDC is clear on this, stop denying science.
The CDC blames Baldwin? Show me that science.
Kevin, would you like to apologize for saying that the CDC blames Baldwin for gay people getting STDs?
As soon as you point to where I said that.
Weren’t you blaming Baldwin for STD rates in the gay community?
I was blaming her for encouraging high risk sexual activity outside marriage of God’s design.
That is awful…..and meets your definition of evil.
Blaming Baldwin for “encouraging high risk sexual activity” resulting in STDs, is like me blaming you for encouraging obesity resulting from people eating too much of the unhealthy fast food you sell.
People have an individual responsibility for watching what they eat, and the choices they make. Blaming you would be a big mistake.
People also have an individual responsibility for practicing safe sex. Blaming Baldwin for someone else’s irresponsible choice is a mistake.
There is a big difference between a politician encouraging or discouraging sex outside marriage of God’s design.
One is irresponsible from a moral and health standpoint, the other is not.
Again, you violate your own definition of evil by overlooking Baldwin’s encouraging advocacy for unhealthy choices.
I’m still trying to see where, “Baldwin’s encouraging advocacy for unhealthy choices.” From what your saying, it appears it’s because she’s gay.
By encouraging gay carnal choices as normal, she encourages unhealthy carnal choices with higher rates of disease.
Kevin said, “By encouraging gay carnal choices as normal, she encourages unhealthy carnal choices with higher rates of disease.”
Again, how so???
But what is Baldwin doing that encourages individuals to not take personal responsibility for their own actions?
She is encouraging choices that have a much higher danger of disease and consequence by normalizing gay carnal choices as no big deal.
Again, you haven’t said what she’s doing to normalize and encouraging gay carnal choices. And who do you blame for heterosexuals carnal choices that lead to dangerous STDs?