No that is your “logic”. You are saying there is no difference: Manson v. Gacey.
I have pointed out the difference:
“Much as I disagree with Bush on borders and illegals, he did bring us lower taxes, better Supreme Court appointments and except for the borders is very serious about the WOT.
We would have had none of that with the libs in power now. And we may get gun control, higher taxes, and the return of the “fairness doctrine” aka muzzling of conservative talk radio. Libs are talking about doing all of that and more.”
If you really can’t see the difference, you aren’t even trying. And my examples are actual events/situations that happened.
Thanks for allowing me to make my point again.
When you read your own response in the morning you might regret your last line, because you didn't. You didn't touch my point either.
There is more of a difference between Manson and Gacey than between Rudy and Hillary. Further, I will not hold my nose and vote for any one of the four.
Let me know if you still don't understand my point.
“Giuliani: Gun Control has ‘No Effect on Hunters’
Rudy Giuliani addressed a potentially troublesome issue with conservative voters, saying his policies as mayor to get handguns off the street helped reduce crime in New York.
“I used gun control as mayor,” he said at a news conference Saturday during a swing through California. But “I understand the Second Amendment. I understand the right to bear arms.”
He said what he did as mayor would have no effect on hunting.”
Matches your tagline. At least Manson doesn’t want to take my guns like both Julie and Hillary. I still cannot vote for Manson. Even though he has had fewer people killed than Bill Clinton and has murdered fewer than Teddy Kennedy.
This is why I will not vote for a RINO. There really is no difference of value.