If Biden does transition to the elimination of fossil fuels, how will the rich environmentalists get to Europe to hobnob with the elites?
How will goods be transported over long distances and across oceans?
Is it reasonable or even possible for a president to protect or defend the entire country from every possible attack?
It seems like those folks who rip Trump for lying, should probably at least acknowledge that Biden has been telling a few big ones himself. If honesty is important, then shouldn't it be important on both sides?
I’m amused at all the people who’ve ripped John Piper to shreds for years for his theology, who’ve all of a sudden become his biggest fans.
For all of the progressive Christians who were adamant that Clinton’s character didn’t matter because his failings were in his personal life, I’m glad you’ve decided that character matters again after all these years.
6 comments:
Strange how little we hear from progressives about Biden's character, except to defend him as actually having a good one.
Just like they pretended that Hillary didn’t have character issues. It only took 20 years for the Christian Left to move from their defense of Clinton to acknowledging that character is important. Hell, it’s not like JFK or LBJ were great examples of high character politicians either.
They’re just annoyed that the Christian Right has adopted their character is secondary standard.
I would again like to point out who the alternative has been and is now when discussing the character of of our candidates. I don't see not voting as an option when confronted with such choices. The "lesser of two evils" is a legitimate choice and in no way stands as tolerance, support or promotion of the flawed aspects of a candidate's character.
Those who reject Trump on the basis of his character are one-issue voters, which ignores all other far more important issues which have greater impact. I have no problem continually pointing out my problems with Trump's character if a discussion comes to it. Indeed, that hasn't changed at all, and with respect to whatever influence I have on others, I encourage others to reject adoption of those character flaws.
I'm far more annoyed with any who tries to pretend there's something hypocritical about support for a man like Trump when he's run both times against people I find far more morally compromised and have been in politics long enough to know their character issues haven't been acknowledged, nor have they necessarily repented of them while also promoting policies that are destructive to our nation.
Just saw a Biden ad with a truck driver extolling Joe’s virtues. I wonder if the driver knows that Biden’s phasing out of fossil fuels will put him out of work, or behind a team of horses?
I do see that as one difference between the two sides. Trump voters are honest about making a pragmatic choice, acknowledging that Trump's character is an negative, yet realizing that they're voting for/against policy. On the other side we see this attempt to ignore the character issues and instead to do things like anoint Hillary as "the most qualified candidate ever", or anoint Biden as "decent". I don't think that making the pragmatic decision that Biden's policies are so bad that a Trump vote is a reasonable choice, is hypocritical at all. I think that the problem is that Trump's character issues are so significant that it allows his opponents to hide their significant character issues.
The DFL's biggest failure in the last two cycles is that they've chosen to run candidates that are so bad that Trump looks acceptable by comparison.
I would argue that Trump's character issues are made to seem more significant than they are in order to dissuade people from voting for him. This is even more true now given that the worst of his issues have not manifested during his time in office, and his policies have been, in aggregate, extremely beneficial to all Americans.
I would also encourage keeping in mind that as no perfect human runs for office, putting aside character issues to focus on track record is the primary concern. To be Dan-like for just a moment (and then I'll need another shower), if Trump, or whomever one favors, was a stellar president but was found to rape and murder babies, certainly casting a vote for such a person would not be rationalized by presidential track record. But since things aren't that extreme, we haven't anything so bad that can't be set aside...not "overlooked", "ignored", "OK", "of no concern to people of faith"...when such good work has been done, versus a guy with what seems to be far more problematic issues for a politician to have and no track record or beneficial policy proposals to boot.
Post a Comment