Trump now STRONGLY DEFENDS Bill Clinton

ALAYMAN said:
Just think about if JFK were alive today and all of the fun that the paparazzi could have with Judith Exner. Yeah, presidents and their weakness for shady women, not all as pure as the driven snow like Bill Clinton, lol.
Click to expand...
I think Trump’s been mostly a good president. I just wish he didn’t have all of the baggage. Sometimes it gets old trying to defend him by saying “but what about this guy” or “but look at what he did.”
 
DrHuk&Duck said:
I think Trump’s been mostly a good president. I just wish he didn’t have all of the baggage. Sometimes it gets old trying to defend him by saying “but what about this guy” or “but look at what he did.”
Click to expand...
Agreed, I just get tired of the obvious bias that comes through our media channels.
 
DrHuk&Duck said:
Sometimes it gets old trying to defend him by saying “but what about this guy” or “but look at what he did.”
Click to expand...
So don't.

Trying to defend the indefensible should make a person tired.

If it is a proven falsehood like the "good people on both sides" lie, then the truth should be pointed out. But it doesn't matter what anyone else has done, the Stormy Danials affair and the like should be denounced.

Hopefully the next president won't be as wearying. 🫤
 
I would imagine - and I'm not pointing the finger at anyone in particular on here - that many of the same people who excuse Trump's worst traits because of the good things he's done, are the same crowd who excused the worst excesses of Jack Hyles and his crowd because he had such huge numbers as a "soul-winner."

Too many fundamentalists pay lip service to opposing Catholicism, but then just swap one form of indulgences for another.
 
Ransom said:
I would imagine - and I'm not pointing the finger at anyone in particular on here - that many of the same people who excuse Trump's worst traits because of the good things he's done, are the same crowd who excused the worst excesses of Jack Hyles and his crowd because he had such huge numbers as a "soul-winner."

Too many fundamentalists pay lip service to opposing Catholicism, but then just swap one form of indulgences for another.
Click to expand...

I’m feeling this ain’t a safe space anymore . 😁


But seriously, the moral bar of expectations for a pastor of a church is obviously different than that of a politician.
 
subllibrm said:
So don't.

Trying to defend the indefensible should make a person tired.

If it is a proven falsehood like the "good people on both sides" lie, then the truth should be pointed out. But it doesn't matter what anyone else has done, the Stormy Danials affair and the like should be denounced.

Hopefully the next president won't be as wearying. 🫤
Click to expand...
I will say that I find Trump 2.0 more palatable than in his first term. I think he has toned down some of his crazy rhetoric.
 
ALAYMAN said:
Care to elaborate on this statement?
Click to expand...
Sure. The left misapplies his words to the violence rather than to the question of taking down the RE Lee statue. No matter how many times it is proven that he was talking about the statue the charge continues on that he was excusing the right wing violence during the protests.
 
DrHuk&Duck said:
I will say that I find Trump 2.0 more palatable than in his first term. I think he has toned down some of his crazy rhetoric.
Click to expand...
Is basing every decision on "national security" no matter how weak the link a reasonable approach to governing?

Before you answer, remember that whatever is granted to the current administration must also be accorded the any future administration. President AOC wielding that kind of power is not something I want to see in the future.
 
subllibrm said:
Why?
Click to expand...
There’s a short, and a long answer. I’ll give the former for now.

The office of pastor has explicit descriptors for that office. The president/king does not. His responsibility per the Bible is to restrain evil, not display personal moral virtue.
 
ALAYMAN said:
OK, that was a little different than what I thought you were implying. If there’s any fire where the smoke is, it’ll eventually come out. Like many other conspiracy theories, though, I think it’ll just be a bunch of people speculating and talking based upon their own biased world views, and perspective.

My take on the debacle so far, is just what has been said by republican politicians recently. If the Democrats had anything on Trump they would’ve already brought it out. And why didn’t the Democrats bring all this out in four years when they had the files?
Click to expand...
Because they are guilty of something as well. Both sides are covering for themselves or their donors or something.
 
subllibrm said:
Is basing every decision on "national security" no matter how weak the link a reasonable approach to governing?

Before you answer, remember that whatever is granted to the current administration must also be accorded the any future administration. President AOC wielding that kind of power is not something I want to see in the future.
Click to expand...
Just vote republican no what.
 
ALAYMAN said:
There’s a short, and a long answer. I’ll give the former for now.

The office of pastor has explicit descriptors for that office. The president/king does not. His responsibility per the Bible is to restrain evil, not display personal moral virtue.
Click to expand...
We just gotta vote republican.
 
DrHuk&Duck said:
I think Trump’s been mostly a good president. I just wish he didn’t have all of the baggage. Sometimes it gets old trying to defend him by saying “but what about this guy” or “but look at what he did.”
Click to expand...
Why would you feel obligated to defend him? If he’s guilty he’s guilty.
 
Just gotta keep voting republican and everything gonna be ok. Just keep voting republican. Vote republican no matter what! As long as they got an R, I’m voting for that guy. Republican no matter what.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top