You ran from my question - twice. I don't bother a third time.
My apologies. It is no wonder we had a disconnect. I jumped right into the discussion without recognizing the fact that most McCarthey and Trump supports have no idea what character actually is. Forgive me.
Let's start what character is. According to
Websters, a man of character is a man "moral excellence and firmness" . That would seem to rule out liar's and flip-floppers. McCarthey both flipped flopped on Trump's culpability, then lied about what he said, even though it was on tape.
He said the President bears responsibility for what transpired on 1/6. What did he do, specifically, to ensure the President faced responsibility for his actions? Answer: nothing. He lacked the character of his "convictions" (because there were no convictions, because McCarthey has no character)
But, here is a more thorough description of character.
https://www.artofmanliness.com/char...r-its-3-true-qualities-and-how-to-develop-it/
It speaks of three characteristics:
Moral Discipline
Moral Attachment
Moral Automomy
It seems the common denominator is about morality. How does Kevin McCarthey (or Trump) for that matter measure up? Something like this, I suppose, where Kevin is Dave (insignificant).
You can read this for yourself, as I know I am introducing a new concept and you will want to learn more. I did, however, particularly like this passage:
.I
t should not be thought, however, that character is synonymous merely with personal tastes, temperaments, and preferences. Things like how you dress, your favorite music, or whether you are introverted or extroverted have little to nothing to do with character. Rather, character is defined in how your habits, motives, thoughts, and so on relate to morality, particularly as it concerns integrity. Character was defined as “your moral self,” the “crown of a moral life,” and referred to as a “moral structure,” something you built through virtuous behavior.
Bruce writes:Character is nature and nurture. It is nature cultured and disciplined, so that natural tendencies are brought under the sway of the moral motive. His natural individuality marks off a man from his fellows by clear and specific differences. But this individuality may be non-moral. To produce character it must be brought under discipline, and organized into the structure of a true moral being . . .
Above all, [character] includes a choice, a settled habit or bent of will, so that it can be seen in its outcome in conduct. Character takes up the raw material of nature and temperament, and it weaves these into the strong, well-knit texture of a fully moralized manhood.
Now, I again refer you to
post #57 which shows why Kevin McCarthey does not even remotely fit any of this definition. Those cites consistently paint him as a self-serving liar, including the lie that he would uphold the constitution, yet participated (and/or sanctioned persons) in overturning the results of the 2020 election and then looking the other way in the fifteen months years since. That is not upholding the Constitution. As per above, he renounced Trump, then denied he did and then validated him. There is NO character (moral quality) to any of his actions, because he is a man without character.
So, I get it, the concept of character is new to you. I am sorry that I assumed you knew what it was and thus could debate intelligently. Of course, you know what that say about assumption. Perhaps in this case its just 'assu'?
Duly noted by all of us, you can not actually defend McCarthey's character, seemingly conceding the point to focus on me. Shoot the messenger when you can't handle the message. We all get it. It is obvious to us all. I would respond to posts where you actually have something to say; clearly this issue is above your pay grade. Its no wonder, however, as I don't believe there is anyone that can defend McCarthey's character as, back to my original point, he has none.