• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why is this dumbass in office?

Oh come on, he's just a gaffe machine. It's part of his charm. They're sort of endearing, really. Just like another politician in the news lately.
 

Why is anyone elected to office? Because the people think that they are better than the alternative. Trump v. Hillary?
His comments are no more* inflammatory and gaffe-ridden than Pelosi's, "Trump wants to make America white again" or Maxine Waters, who said, "Trump is a criminal who should be impeached" Or Biden, who said to a black audience, "They're gonna' put y'all back in chains."

ETA: * grammar correction and added comment.
Why does America keep electing asshats? I wouldn't send any of these people, including King a nickel of my money.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I already read the article. I want you to tell me what it is about that context that makes the comment better.

You asked for the context and you got it. If you cant be bothered to read or understand the context not my problem. Its clear from the context the man is not a raving lunatic you and everyone else is making him out to be, hence why he is still in office as his constituents know better. His district by the way is NOT gerrymandered so his constituents are a wide cross section of Iowa.
 
You asked for the context and you got it. If you cant be bothered to read or understand the context not my problem. Its clear from the context the man is not a raving lunatic you and everyone else is making him out to be, hence why he is still in office as his constituents know better. His district by the way is NOT gerrymandered so his constituents are a wide cross section of Iowa.

He basically is saying that rape is dime a dozen.
 
Person makes observation about human biological history.

Liberals lose their s***.

Triggered liberals?

It must be a day that ends in day.
 
You asked for the context and you got it. If you cant be bothered to read or understand the context not my problem. Its clear from the context the man is not a raving lunatic you and everyone else is making him out to be, hence why he is still in office as his constituents know better. His district by the way is NOT gerrymandered so his constituents are a wide cross section of Iowa.

All you've demonstrated is that you don't know what "context" means. I suspected that, but thanks for confirming it.
 
Did you even bother to read the comment in context? You also know the man is Catholic? In any case he is not by any means perfect, but he is most certainly NOT the monster people claim he is.

OK, here's the quote in context.

"What if we went back through all the family trees and just pulled out anyone who was a product of rape or incest? Would there be any population of the world left if we did that?" he said in Urbandale, Iowa. "Considering all the wars and all the rapes and pillages that happened throughout all these different nations, I know that I can't say that I was not a part of a product of that."

The Kiron Republican was discussing his defense of not allowing exceptions for rape and incest in the anti-abortion legislation he tried to pass in Congress. Republican leadership had prevented bills he sponsored on banning abortions from advancing through the House, despite GOP support for the measures, King said.

Just because a conception happened in bad circumstances doesn't mean the result isn't a person, King, who is Catholic, argued.

"It's not the baby's fault for the sin of the father, or of the mother," he said.

How does citing rape as part of wars and conquest contribute to the moral argument about forcing women who were raped to carry the child for nine months to term? Women in that era had no choice, they were often treated as no more than property, like slaves in the U.S. Let's do what those barbarians did!! It's the moral choice!! WTF?
 
Oh come on, he's just a gaffe machine. It's part of his charm. They're sort of endearing, really. Just like another politician in the news lately.

Can't tell if that's sarcasm or not... :confused:
 
You asked for the context and you got it. If you cant be bothered to read or understand the context not my problem. Its clear from the context the man is not a raving lunatic you and everyone else is making him out to be, hence why he is still in office as his constituents know better. His district by the way is NOT gerrymandered so his constituents are a wide cross section of Iowa.

It's R+22....:roll:

Iowa 4th - 2018 House Forecast | FiveThirtyEight
 
Person makes observation about human biological history.

Liberals lose their s***.

Triggered liberals?

It must be a day that ends in day.

Made comment about history, uses it as a positive argument for forcing women who were raped to carry the baby to term. You forgot that last part.
 
Person makes observation about human biological history.

Liberals lose their s***.

Triggered liberals?

It must be a day that ends in day.

He pretty much is saying that rape victims should be forced to carry fetuses to full term to ensure the survival of humankind.
 
To be clear...this asshat represents 1/4 of Iowa....not all of us

Actually, he represents the CD responsible for electing Republicans statewide, such as Gov. Reynolds in 2018. The other three CDs, which barely elected Dem congressmen in 2018, also barely supported the Dem candidate for governor.

This CD will most likely re-elect GOP Sen. Ernst next year. Iowa leans Trump right now because of IA-04, which is more like the Great Plains states of SD and ND.
 
There you go. Context is everything. People calling him a monster are nuts.
Or, you're defending a monster.

It would be one thing if he said "it is terrible for a woman to become pregnant from rape or incest, but my religious beliefs still do not allow abortion even in those horrific circumstances." That would indicate he had an iota of sympathy for the victims.

Instead, his comments suggest that being compelled by the state to bring a child conceived by rape and/or incest is no big deal.

He then claimed there was a national conspiracy against him, engineered by Democrats, Republicans, the New York Times, and someone who could influence Donald Trump. What "context" explains that particular bit of nonsense?
 
What was quoted in at the link.

Duh.
What he said was that most of us would not exist had every child conceived in rape been killed before birth.
It is a different time; killing the rapist makes more sense than killing the totally innocent baby. The mother will still be a victim in either case.
Totally bullschitt sensationalized headlines and take; not that it takes much to trigger those looking to be offended.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
 
What he said was that most of us would not exist had every child conceived in rape been killed before birth.
It is a different time; killing the rapist makes more sense than killing the totally innocent baby. The mother will still be a victim in either case.
Totally bullschitt sensationalized headlines and take; not that it takes much to trigger those looking to be offended.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

Newp. Not what he said at all.

Why lie about something like that?
 
Yes why lie?

"What if we went back through all the family trees and just pulled those people out that were products of rape*and*incest? Would there be any population of the world left if we did that?"

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
 
I wonder if King is aware that the argument he's using to defend rape and incest is based on exactly the same logic you could use to defend cannibalism.

And the answer is no, because basing your belief system on religious dogma means never having to examine the logical consistency of your beliefs.
 
The squad and Maxine Waters don't hold political positions that force them to defend the virtues of incest and rape.

And, in the case of represntative King, that political position is 'white supremacy ' . He has admitted it, directly.
 
Did you even bother to read the comment in context? You also know the man is Catholic? In any case he is not by any means perfect, but he is most certainly NOT the monster people claim he is.

Who cares if he's Catholic? That has no bearing on if he's a scumbag. And with all of his disgusting racist comments that he continues to make (which is why the GOP has stripped him from everything that they can), plus these new ones, he's not looking to be anything other than a scumbag. And Iowans keep voting for him. If they want to keep voting for a proud and happy racist, then that's on them. But let's not pretend like Steve King is some wonderful guy.
 
Who cares if he's Catholic? That has no bearing on if he's a scumbag. And with all of his disgusting racist comments that he continues to make (which is why the GOP has stripped him from everything that they can), plus these new ones, he's not looking to be anything other than a scumbag. And Iowans keep voting for him. If they want to keep voting for a proud and happy racist, then that's on them. But let's not pretend like Steve King is some wonderful guy.

Were did you ever see me call this guy wonderful? Nowhere. Everybody is piling on him though and I find that to be unfair to the man especially after examining his so called transgressions. He is certainly not a monster. Lame yea I could go with that. Dumb, maybe. Definitely not brilliant. Clumsy with words, holy **** is he ever. However, Iowans know something we dont. Like maybe he not the douche bag everyone makes him out to be. Its popular to dump on the guy, make aspersions about him, kick him for being something he is not.
 
Were did you ever see me call this guy wonderful? Nowhere. Everybody is piling on him though and I find that to be unfair to the man especially after examining his so called transgressions. He is certainly not a monster. Lame yea I could go with that. Dumb, maybe. Definitely not brilliant. Clumsy with words, holy **** is he ever. However, Iowans know something we dont. Like maybe he not the douche bag everyone makes him out to be. Its popular to dump on the guy, make aspersions about him, kick him for being something he is not.

It's popular to dump on the guy, because he's quite crystal clear with how racist he is. All of the flack he gets is from his own words and statements. He doesn't want to be maligned as a racist scumbag? Then he should making racist comments. And with this? He's made himself look even worse, and his image is already in the gutter. Clearly you haven't "examined" him enough, if you think he's even the least bit defendable. He's not, and honestly the GOP would be much better of without him in their ranks.
 
Last edited:
Because anyone with a D after their name is the spawn of Satan. Didn't you know?

My signature is proof I know. ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom