Replies

So, basically all you have are attacks not based in anything I stated huh? Oh well, for fun, I'll take this on. Though I don't owe any explanation for the mud you pull out without any source to back up, this is only what you read into it which I am not responsible for.

So now we must push Ann Coulter and Mark Levin to the lunny wacho fringe if we are to be good Republican huh?

Have you ever heard me call Ann Fringe? You may have read I won't consider her remarks, but did you read why? Because she's engaging in a number of character attacks in the midst of raising concerns. Others have raised concerns and you don't hear me writing them off which brings us to Levin. I haven't written him off, infact I listen carefully to what HE says, I promote Levin quite often, but then he's not engaging in character assassination nor declaring he's going to "war" with the administration. To finish off your third lie, I'm not a Republican. I don't assume everyone posting here is a Republican. So how YOU can state I believe in order to be GOOD "Republican" they must have the view I hold, is a laugh. I take it you've never witnessed my rants on people labeling Republicans' "RINO"'s when they are 86% conservative, or even Liberal? A Good Republican is someone loyal to Party. Not necessarily to a particular ideology, and I've stated this a number of times which is why I'm not a Republican.

Now one must believe that the homosexual life style or anal sex, is a just a normal healthy life style choice and that homosexual sex is the moral equivalent of heterosexual sex in order to be good Republicans.

Amazing how you pull this out of thing air and attribute it to me. Again, another example of you tossing mud and not knowing what the hell you are talking about.

Now we must support the lawyers and laws that normalized deviant sex and is seeking to normalize deviant sex with children to be good Republicans huh?

More garbage I didn't state. Ever tired of slinging mud and having it stick to you? Did I state agreement with the Supreme Court ruling? I've done quite the opposite. Has Roberts stated agreement? Nope. If he had you'd have something far more substiantial than what you put up in this questionable reply. You are really stretching here. You might try reading the reply from an actual lawyer in the first page of the thread that takes quite the different view of his pro bono work than you, but that would be inconvenient to your bias to consider anything that contradicts it.

I'd bet yall wonder why conservatives are fleeing the GOPO as fast as they can.

That is fascinating, isn't it? And yet if true, it's amazing people are still here trying to peddle third parties desperately while the GOP continues winning. If you are going to make a contention like that, I assume you have the research to back it up...right?

For the record, since this seems to have enflamed you and I understand why since I pegged many of you correctly, "credible" posters on this subject don't all agree. I know it escaped your notice (intentionally) but I did note I'd seen some people dissent that I would respect deserve a polite answer. The difference between them, and many in this thread at the time I wrote "credible", is exactly what I noted in my full response. Most of the people whining at that time were/are the people that blast this administation on everything, blast the President on everything, stated he'd pick Gonzales without proof, stated the president was a liar and would never appoint a real constitutionalist even before he'd announced his choice, the same people that have an agenda the very opposite of the majority on the board which is to grow the conservative movement. The very people that can be counted on for a bad word when the news is good, to crawl in a hole and disappear so they won't have to address great news, and always the first to arrive if news is bad. These are not people I have any respect for, and as witnessed in my replies, I make no apologies for it. If that bothers you, TOUGH. The idea that the majority on this board, whether hesitant or fully supportive of Roberts do not know their are "purist" subversives intermingled among the DU operatives on this board is fanciful. I've merely stated what everyone knows and won't retract it.

Now that I've satisfied my "fun" quotient, go stew about this reply or rant and rave back, I don't really care what you have to say but I do wish you a wonderful afternoon. ;-)