Wry Catcher
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #81
You asked a question. This was my response:
"I will vote to prevent you people from airing out the pockets of the creative and productive in order to purchase your voting bloc of those who produce nothing but urine, feces, crime and terrorism."
Now, tell me how my point of view proceeds from a false assumption. Be specific.
That's thought provoking?
Not to the unthinking, apparently.
I see you live in San Francisco, where constituents shit in the street. Your attitude is no longer a mystery.
Your ignorance is amazing, or maybe you are like most of your kind. A liar.
Which is why you offer such carefully-wrought, erudite refutations.
Post an argument which outlines intended consequences, add enough detail and I'll offer a rebuttal. No one on the right has, ever, IMO. Not even the members of Congress whose side of the aisle you support.
Consider Obamacare, in lock-step the members and leadership seek to repeal it, but no comprehensive replacement has ever been put forward.
A rational response would be for the Congress, now under the control of the Republicans, to rewrite the PPACA, keeping what works and fixing what doesn't.
The reason they won't, is because the right only has wedge issues to put forth. Without God, guns, gays, Obamacare, abortion, Solyndra, Benghazi, Clinton's e-mails and Obama's birth place they would all be struck dumber.