None of the Republican candidates have condemned the PP shooting

[Bull Moose Base]

Can someone change the title because we know it's incorrect now?

Even when one of them condemns it, the delay is still scandalous. None are qualified for job.

Like the democrats you have a socialist, a liar and Martin O'Malley

Conservatives don't like Democratic candidates and vice versa. Obviously.

My point was on the specific subject of the OP, the cowardice of the GOP candidates is disqualifying.

Being qualified for the job has nothing to do with my post. The title says no Republican has condemned the shooting and that is false.

The point of the original post was that it was abhorrent that no Republican presidential candidate had at that time commented on the attack. Your post about the subject being wrong once one or two finally did comment was implicitly arguing it was no longer an offense the party should be called out for. My point is they're not off the hook for finally addressing it because the delay in saying anything about a high profile terror attack committed on American soil (the point of the original post) should disqualify all of them from the presidency.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Do any of these candidates have the backbone to drop this PC facade and call this what it really is? This is radical Christian terrorism, plain and simple.

Nowhere in Scripture is this sort of act condoned under the New Covenant.

Islamic terror, OTOH, is specifically justified in Qu'ranic scripture.

[Enduro]

Is there an obligation for presidential candidates to condemn every tragedy in the United States?

As President, they will be required to respond to every tragedy in America, so yes it's part of the job.

Have you read the constitution?

[Higgs]

Can someone change the title because we know it's incorrect now?

Even when one of them condemns it, the delay is still scandalous. None are qualified for job.

Like the democrats you have a socialist, a liar and Martin O'Malley

Conservatives don't like Democratic candidates and vice versa. Obviously.

My point was on the specific subject of the OP, the cowardice of the GOP candidates is disqualifying.

Being qualified for the job has nothing to do with my post. The title says no Republican has condemned the shooting and that is false.

The point of the original post was that it was abhorrent that no Republican presidential candidate had at that time commented on the attack. Your post about the subject being wrong once one or two finally did comment was implicitly arguing it was no longer an offense the party should be called out for. My point is they're not off the hook for finally addressing it because the delay in saying anything about a high profile terror attack committed on American soil (the point of the original post) should disqualify all of them from the presidency.

Oh give me a break. Because they took a day before tweeting something out about the shooting they're disqualified from the Presidency? Jesus...

[Blue3]

Do any of these candidates have the backbone to drop this PC facade and call this what it really is? This is radical Christian terrorism, plain and simple.

Nowhere in Scripture is this sort of act condoned under the New Covenant.

Islamic terror, OTOH, is specifically justified in Qu'ranic scripture.

Have you read the Qur'an? I am right now.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Do any of these candidates have the backbone to drop this PC facade and call this what it really is? This is radical Christian terrorism, plain and simple.

Nowhere in Scripture is this sort of act condoned under the New Covenant.

Islamic terror, OTOH, is specifically justified in Qu'ranic scripture.

Have you read the Qur'an? I am right now.

]]

Do any of these candidates have the backbone to drop this PC facade and call this what it really is? This is radical Christian terrorism, plain and simple.

Nowhere in Scripture is this sort of act condoned under the New Covenant.

Islamic terror, OTOH, is specifically justified in Qu'ranic scripture.

Have you read the Qur'an? I am right now.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/023-violence.htm

[Negusa Nagast 🚀]

Do any of these candidates have the backbone to drop this PC facade and call this what it really is? This is radical Christian terrorism, plain and simple.

Nowhere in Scripture is this sort of act condoned under the New Covenant.

Islamic terror, OTOH, is specifically justified in Qu'ranic scripture.

Have you read the Qur'an? I am right now.

]]

Do any of these candidates have the backbone to drop this PC facade and call this what it really is? This is radical Christian terrorism, plain and simple.

Nowhere in Scripture is this sort of act condoned under the New Covenant.

Islamic terror, OTOH, is specifically justified in Qu'ranic scripture.

Have you read the Qur'an? I am right now.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/023-violence.htm

What a hack site. Maybe you should reference a more objective reporter, or actually read the source text yourself. Christianity is far more violent and something must be done about radical Christians.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124494788

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

It's clear that Fuzzy Bear has no idea how my religion works, so it makes sense that he uses a blatent anti-Muslim site....typical..

[publicunofficial]

Mike Huckabee & Carly Fiorina have both answered questions on the topic:

Huckabee made the boldest statement by far, calling the attack domestic terrorism:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Fiorina's response was much less concillatory:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Likely Voter]

Ted Cruz...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Simfan34]

That's a surprisingly strident condemnation from Huckabee.