Jackk-
“The issue was that he was lying under oath about a personal relationship. They did not feel that deserved impeachment.”
Are you saying that it’s OK to lie under oath if it’s about a personal relationship? Also- the senators should have been voting to uphold the law- not based on their feelings. If they want to change the law there’s a process for that but they were elected to uphold the law. That’s one of the issues I have with the supreme court nominee- she’s had too many rulings overruled by higher courts. Either she doesn’t know the Constitution or she’s been ruling based on her feelings. Something really scary for someone on the highest court (that can not be overruled).
Next point- There’s a big difference between redefining the word “marriage” to include unions that are not between one male and one female and to go ahead and execute people that are in those kinds of relationships. If what they do is behind closed doors and it affects no one else- let them do what they want. When it comes to redefining what marriage is- that’s when it becomes everyone’s business and any G-d fearing Yid should not stand behind that party.
“Sorry, Democrats don’t encourage stealing or lawlessness.
FYI – Americans that vote republican are very good at stealing and lawlessness also. The jails are full of them.”
The very fact that these people are in jail shows that it’s not lawlessness. Whenever there are laws there are going to be people that break them. The point is to throw the violators in jail, that is a sign of lawfulness. The lawlessness that I was referring to is the laws that allow people to steal (in full view of security guards and police) and not face any consequences. (E.g. Not prosecuting for thefts under $950 and no cash bail…) This encourages (or at least does nothing to discourage) theft and violent crime.
“That is a good idea. Bring up to the next republican candidate that you vote for.”
I didn’t have to bring it up to the last Republican candidate that I voted for. Former President Donald Trump knew it very well and had great policies to bring jobs back the U.S. thereby decreasing the dependencies on Government handouts for many able bodied people.
“Agreed. But in our capitalistic society, if the government doesn’t take care of them, then nobody will.”
I think we both know good and well that no matter how right wing a Republican government is- they will still take care of those that simply can not take care of themselves.
“You did not answer on how you support a party that does not care for the widows , poor, orphans, immigrants etc ..? All the social programs have been done by the democratic party.”
I sure did- read my post again. “The majority of Republicans would have no issues helping out in a productive way.”
Also- the Democratic party that started these programs is not the same Democratic party we have nowadays- except it’s name. The social programs were started by the Democratic party that Frum Yidden were able to vote for. There was a slow transition from the Democratic party of yesteryear to the Democratic Party we have nowadays. I don’t condone the personal behavior of Former President Bill Clinton but I think his policies were acceptable. In my personal opinion Former President Obama brought the party way too far to the left and anti the Torah values we as Yidden are proud of.
I noticed that you neglected to refute my point about G-d fearing Yidden not being able to stand behind a party that fights for the right to kill unborn babies for no reason other than it being an inconvenience for the person who is carrying them. Does that mean that you agree with me or did it just slip your mind?