So Paul was the only one not to jump on the “new thing” and bleed main street to send money we don’t have to some shitty corrupt combloc nation?
MSN
www.msn.com
- Thread starter TurboTrout
- Start date
The whole thing is fucking ridiculous. 40 fucking billion, tax payer dollars, for any other country is insane. I know I’m preaching to the choir but $7B for a border wall, that creates jobs, for people who pay taxes, no. $40B for some eurotrash, that may or may not have nazis mixed in, (almost) unanimous approval.
He blocked it only to ask for someone to oversee the spending; he was NOT opposed to the aid or the bill.
And FYI, the bill passed the House today.
And FYI, the bill passed the House today.
This was all planned out. These miserable F stains, F'n cried over Trumps wall, but, send money to a shithole, communist, money laundering, F'n 3rd world, yeah, we got the $$ for that! Shits GOT to CHANGE!! Mac
The guys building the wall do not buy their children's art for millions of dollars.This was all planned out. These miserable F stains, F'n cried over Trumps wall, but, send money to a shithole, communist, money laundering, F'n 3rd world, yeah, we got the $$ for that! Shits GOT to CHANGE!! Mac
From: https://www.cslewisinstitute.org/resources/reflections-august-2012/
In his book, The Abolition of Man, C. S. Lewis was prophetic in pointing out that relativism—the idea that there are no absolute truths—would lead to the decay of morality and a lack of virtue within society. Without a belief in and the teaching of universal moral laws, we fail to educate the heart and are left with intelligent men who behave like animals or as Lewis puts it, “Men without Chests.” Read slowly to follow Lewis’s apologetic:
It still remains true that no justification of virtue will enable a man to be virtuous. Without the aid of trained emotions the intellect is powerless against the animal organism. I had sooner play cards against a man who was quite skeptical about ethics, but bred to believe that ‘a gentleman does not cheat’, than against an irreproachable moral philosopher who had been brought up among sharpers.
In battle it is not syllogisms (logical arguments) that will keep the reluctant nerves and muscles to their post in the third hour of the bombardment.
The crudest sentimentalism … about a flag or a country or a regiment will be of more use. We were told it all long ago by Plato. As the king governs by his executive, so Reason in man must rule the mere appetites by means of the ‘spirited element’. The head rules the belly through the chest—the seat, as Alanus tells us, of Magnanimity, of emotions organized by trained habit into stable sentiments. The Chest-Magnanimity-Sentiment—these are the indispensable liaison officers between cerebral man and visceral man.
It may even be said that it is by this middle element that man is man: for by his intellect he is mere spirit and by his appetite mere animal. The operation of The Green Book (a book promoting relativism) and its kind is to produce what may be called Men without Chests. … A persevering devotion to truth, a nice sense of intellectual honour, cannot be long maintained without the aid of a sentiment... It is not excess of thought but defect of fertile and generous emotion that marks them out. Their heads are no bigger than the ordinary: it is the atrophy of the chest beneath that makes them seem so.
And all the time—such is the tragi-comedy of our situation—we continue to clamour for those very qualities we are rendering impossible. You can hardly open a periodical without coming across the statement that what our civilization needs is more ‘drive’, or dynamism, or self-sacrifice, or ‘creativity’. In a sort of ghastly simplicity we remove the organ and demand the function. We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honour and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful.
In his book, The Abolition of Man, C. S. Lewis was prophetic in pointing out that relativism—the idea that there are no absolute truths—would lead to the decay of morality and a lack of virtue within society. Without a belief in and the teaching of universal moral laws, we fail to educate the heart and are left with intelligent men who behave like animals or as Lewis puts it, “Men without Chests.” Read slowly to follow Lewis’s apologetic:
It still remains true that no justification of virtue will enable a man to be virtuous. Without the aid of trained emotions the intellect is powerless against the animal organism. I had sooner play cards against a man who was quite skeptical about ethics, but bred to believe that ‘a gentleman does not cheat’, than against an irreproachable moral philosopher who had been brought up among sharpers.
In battle it is not syllogisms (logical arguments) that will keep the reluctant nerves and muscles to their post in the third hour of the bombardment.
The crudest sentimentalism … about a flag or a country or a regiment will be of more use. We were told it all long ago by Plato. As the king governs by his executive, so Reason in man must rule the mere appetites by means of the ‘spirited element’. The head rules the belly through the chest—the seat, as Alanus tells us, of Magnanimity, of emotions organized by trained habit into stable sentiments. The Chest-Magnanimity-Sentiment—these are the indispensable liaison officers between cerebral man and visceral man.
It may even be said that it is by this middle element that man is man: for by his intellect he is mere spirit and by his appetite mere animal. The operation of The Green Book (a book promoting relativism) and its kind is to produce what may be called Men without Chests. … A persevering devotion to truth, a nice sense of intellectual honour, cannot be long maintained without the aid of a sentiment... It is not excess of thought but defect of fertile and generous emotion that marks them out. Their heads are no bigger than the ordinary: it is the atrophy of the chest beneath that makes them seem so.
And all the time—such is the tragi-comedy of our situation—we continue to clamour for those very qualities we are rendering impossible. You can hardly open a periodical without coming across the statement that what our civilization needs is more ‘drive’, or dynamism, or self-sacrifice, or ‘creativity’. In a sort of ghastly simplicity we remove the organ and demand the function. We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honour and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful.
You dumb fuck, Rand is opposed to all foreign aid like this. He cannot stop the bill only ask for oversight. What did your Senators do?
Also a doctor just like his dad, the videos of him rag dolling fauchi are rather fun to watch.
Dear You don't know what you are talking about:
BREAKING: Senator Rand Paul Stalls Uniparty Bill Giving $40 Billion in More Funding to Ukraine | The Gateway Pundit | by Joe Hoft
Senator Rand Paul On Thursday stalled the bill for $40 billion more funding to Ukraine. Yesterday The Gateway Pundit reported on the House’s bill that passed and gave $40 billion to Ukraine.
www.thegatewaypundit.com Despite the high-profile pressure from the two leaders, Paul refused to blink, meaning that Schumer will need to take procedural steps to overcome his objection, which could take several days, but will ultimately lead to passage of the supplemental spending bill sometime next week.
No redirection of funds. Just oversight.
Last edited:
Dear You don't know what the fuckyou are talking about:
BREAKING: Senator Rand Paul Stalls Uniparty Bill Giving $40 Billion in More Funding to Ukraine | The Gateway Pundit | by Joe Hoft
Senator Rand Paul On Thursday stalled the bill for $40 billion more funding to Ukraine. Yesterday The Gateway Pundit reported on the House’s bill that passed and gave $40 billion to Ukraine.
Despite the high-profile pressure from the two leaders, Paul refused to blink, meaning that Schumer will need to take procedural steps to overcome his objection, which could take several days, but will ultimately lead to passage of the supplemental spending bill sometime next week.
No redirection of funds. Just oversight.
So if you’re the proverbial holy diver deep who’s been down too long in the swamp, take a small possible win, or a obvious loss
I apologize, I should not have called you a dumb fuck. Procedure only allows limited options. One Senator, my Senator, can not stop the bill, only delay it’s passage hoping othe Senators might reconsider. Again, what are your Senator’s doing?Dear You don't know what the fuckyou are talking about:
BREAKING: Senator Rand Paul Stalls Uniparty Bill Giving $40 Billion in More Funding to Ukraine | The Gateway Pundit | by Joe Hoft
Senator Rand Paul On Thursday stalled the bill for $40 billion more funding to Ukraine. Yesterday The Gateway Pundit reported on the House’s bill that passed and gave $40 billion to Ukraine.
Despite the high-profile pressure from the two leaders, Paul refused to blink, meaning that Schumer will need to take procedural steps to overcome his objection, which could take several days, but will ultimately lead to passage of the supplemental spending bill sometime next week.
No redirection of funds. Just oversight.
Well unless your senator is R Paul, that’s the case.
My Senators (Virginia) Mark Warner and Tim Kaine are both sucking Joe's dick.
Kaine a socialist and Warner supports after birth abortion.
FJB
and
Attachments
Translation
Its all about strategy and tactics
He's shamed them into pausing so that constituents had more of an opportunity to voice opposition and potentially derail the whole bill
If all of us arent on the phones/writing to our senators then we get what we deserve
Its tough to expect politicians to do the right thing is each of us isnt doing our job to vigorously encorage them
Similar threads
