Hate Mongering Republican Presidential Candidates Who Would Disgrace The Office Of The Presidency!

There are anywhere from 15 to nearly 20 potential Republican Presidential candidates, and one can find faults and shortcomings with most of them, but there are only a few who can be labeled, by their utterances, to be hate mongers, wishing to stir up fear and incite audiences with their rhetoric. One is held accountable for what one says and what he promotes, and therefore, disqualify themselves for the honor of residing in the White House!

Those who would qualify for this dubious “honor” include:

Dr. Benjamin Carson
Texas Senator Ted Cruz
Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee
Former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum
Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal

All of these five have been reckless in their desire to divide the American people, and have advocated lawlessness and disobedience of the federal government, including the court system and the Supreme Court in particular.

They have promoted hate and fear of gays and lesbians; immigration; women’s rights; racial justice; and have shown no concern about the poor and the sick, particularly on the issue of health care.

Interestingly, all five constantly invoke Christianity in their political pitches, and specifically, hard line Christianity of the evangelical and right wing Catholic variety, a total repudiation of the teachings of Jesus Christ, and a defiance of the principle of separation of church and state under our political system! And they all criticize Pope Francis and his liberal, open minded view of the meaning of Jesus Christ and his teachings!

Any of these five would totally disgrace the office of the Presidency!

Fortunately, it is highly unlikely that any of these five will win the nomination of the Republican Party, but if so, the odds of such an individual winning the Presidency are very low!

13 comments on “Hate Mongering Republican Presidential Candidates Who Would Disgrace The Office Of The Presidency!

  1. Max May 18, 2015 11:33 am

    Interesting phraseology..”racial justice”? Shouldn’t justice be blind???

  2. Ronald May 18, 2015 11:58 am

    Max, I meant civil rights by the term “racial justice”, as there has been unfair treatment of African Americans and Latinos at times by law enforcement!

  3. Max May 18, 2015 2:28 pm

    I see, but in any event have those not been individual cases and has not the Justice system run its course? Also have no white person ever in the history of law enforcement been treated unfairly? Or for that matter Asians, Italians, Spaniards, Russians etc.?

  4. Ronald May 18, 2015 2:34 pm

    Of course, Max, there have been cases of other racial and religious groups that have not been treated properly, including whites, but much higher percentage of African Americans and Latinos, historically and recently.

  5. Max May 18, 2015 2:51 pm

    So you sustain that there is still today institutionalized racism? That these are not individual cases but part of policy? Interesting.

  6. Ronald May 18, 2015 3:03 pm

    There are cases of institutionalized racism, but not everywhere, of course, but to deny it is to have one’s head in the sand, and deny reality.

  7. Max May 18, 2015 3:22 pm

    There are? Please enlighten me where. Seriously, with evidence if possible.

  8. Ronald May 18, 2015 3:28 pm

    If you read the newspapers and follow electronic media, there are plenty of such cases, just recently in Ferguson and Baltimore, along with Milwaukee and Cleveland, and even New York City, but I am not going to spend time debating with you, as you have accepted the Fox News version, which is your right, but I do not wish to spend valuable time arguing over it, as I have better things to do with my time.

    On the other hand, I acknowledge that MOST police officers do a good job, and that they have tremendous stress daily. But having unarmed people being shot and killed is a sign of a basic need for reforming our police departments, so that they are not seen as a military, but as a group that works to avoid such tragedies, when there are alternatives.

  9. Max May 19, 2015 9:54 am

    Oh I see. So if someone just happens to question anything you post, then you automatically say they are Fox News viewers. Oh well, you don’t even know me nor what I think. I consider myself a straight down the center independent, that means I have a mind of my own. And if I am not mistaken when you talk about “reforming our police departments” you mean the Federal government must do it, or must it be done locally?

  10. Ronald May 19, 2015 11:32 am

    It is clear, Max, that a combination of federal involvement and local engagement is needed, and if I was too judgmental, I withdraw my comment in that regard, but law enforcement needs reform desperately.

  11. Max May 19, 2015 12:55 pm

    But are not the so called “police powers” (security, safety, sanitation, public health etc.) constitutionally local, that is they belong under state jurisdiction. That’s why I get chills when the likes of Sharpton and others call for the abolition of local police and the creation of a national police force. Finally I am not that sure about all this hype regarding the police. I mean in Ferguson we now know that all this “hands up don’t shoot” was a fairytale. Yet some keep talking about it as if it were true. In Baltimore, 3 out of the 6 cops are black, the Chief of Police is Black as is the Mayor, and Democrats have governed Baltimore since 1939! So are you telling me that they, the Democrats have established and promoted institutionalized racism in Baltimore in collaboration with black officials since then??? And shouldn’t we wait till there is a trial and verdict to know what actually happened? Just questions I have.

  12. Ronald May 19, 2015 3:13 pm

    You are correct in what you say, but there are other situations around the country that require SOME federal intervention. I have never heard Sharpton advocate the end of local police forces, unless I missed that, and if so, I agree with you that is preposterous, but some oversight is needed without doubt, in my opinion. Thanks for your input, Max!

  13. D May 22, 2015 8:14 am

    You can shake off all these Republicans like a dog does with many fleas. They only tend to stick around for some camera time. (And, behind the scenes, any money given them by suckers with more money than brains.) For the subversive…they exist to provide them with some entertainment. But, in reality, not one of them is viable. Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, Bobby Jindal—shake off all five of these pests!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.