luthervol
rational (x) and reasonable (y)
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2016
- Messages
- 46,709
- Likes
- 19,757
They were vehemently oppressed to that precedent 4yrs ago and now they believe it should be followed? So funny when that's the very definition of hypocrisy. Dems 4yrs ago believed there should be a vote. If they were consistent they would still believe thatlol.......They asked to follow precedent.
Now they are asking to follow the new precedent that was established.
If I had to allocate hypocrisy points in this: Dems 20 Repubs 80
Repubs will gladly take the hypocrisy hit if it means getting their gal (why appoint a woman) in, and even more importantly sticking it to the dems.
lol.......They asked to follow precedent.
Now they are asking to follow the new precedent that was established.
If I had to allocate hypocrisy points in this: Dems 20 Repubs 80
Repubs will gladly take the hypocrisy hit if it means getting their gal (why appoint a woman) in, and even more importantly sticking it to the dems.
They were vehemently oppressed to that precedent 4yrs ago and now they believe it should be followed? So funny when that's the very definition of hypocrisy. Dems 4yrs ago believed there should be a vote. If they were consistent they would still believe that
Allocate all the points you want because you've shown to be really bad at math. Numbers just aren't your thing
Let's not kid ourselves. When the Rs take the high road and do what's right instead of what's expedient, the Ds will be so impressed they too will start doing right. But it has to be the Rs first. The Ds absolutely will not see their character and integrity as a sign of weakness and attempt to run roughshod over the Rs from then on.But your showing the exact same hypocrisy. If it was wrong before it’s wrong now. You just want to play the “it’s not fair game.” Well Mitch decides to stop playing fair after Dems started screwing with previously help judicial nomination procedures. Not just once either. Shouldn’t have poked the bear. And I am not pro what Mitch has done. But I saw it coming a mile away.
It goes back to my illustration yesterday about your job. If they write you up for non-performance of duties, they don't then say, "Now, to keep yourself consistent, you'd better never perform your duties again, or we'll fire you!"That’s my favorite part...we were right four years ago. But now we just want revenge even though it’s wrong. And to help us win the argument we will point out how those who were actually wrong four years ago are now hypocritically right.
They're in a harms race.Let's not kid ourselves. When the Rs take the high road and do what's right instead of what's expedient, the Ds will be so impressed they too will start doing right. But it has to be the Rs first. The Ds absolutely will not see their character and integrity as a sign of weakness and attempt to run roughshod over the Rs from then on.
Is blue font even needed???
Let's not kid ourselves. When the Rs take the high road and do what's right instead of what's expedient, the Ds will be so impressed they too will start doing right. But it has to be the Rs first. The Ds absolutely will not see their character and integrity as a sign of weakness and attempt to run roughshod over the Rs from then on.
Is blue font even needed???
It seems all of us are more accomplished prognosticators than @lawgator1I'm not one to normally brag about stuff, but I was right on this.