Wren wrote:
RL and SR are engaged in disingenuous fraud. SR has used that tactic for years here. He, nor does RL, represent the GOP. Conservative values are abhorent to him: he likes large government, large government payrolls, corporate cronyism with government, and international adventurism. All neo-cons do, and that is why they are on the way out.

McCain is going to win, and the neo-cons are going to go bye-bye for good.

Despicable fraud is what you have just indulged in.

SilentReader wrote:

We are with McCain on the War and on being fiscally concervative. What we were not with him on was McCain-Feingold, immigration, not supporting the tax cuts, and the Gang of 14 (McCain has justifed that by saying he wanted to get things done).

Since he has gained the nomination McCain has stated that he will make permanent the Bush tax cuts, and he will secure the border. I believe him. Whatever McCain is, I think he is a man of his word. And we will hold him to it.

You are right, he is a man of his word. And his word is to purge neo-cons. Good bye, SR.

Every once and a while I do actually read one of RushReader's long winded posts. It helps to have a couple of beers first, just to help deaden the pain of reading such tripe. That said, I'm going to comment on a couple of things from his latest installment.

SilentReader wrote:
So, if you think I hate Obama. I do not. What I detest is the fact that he sat in his pastor's pews for 20 years and didn't confront him, or leave.
Actually, I think you really do hate anyone you brand as "liberal". It shows in your posts. This pastor thing is just your latest reason for foaming at the mouth against Obama. If not this, something else. And if Obama was not the front runner, you would be railing on Hilary about something, as you have done in the past. You assume that every one of Wrights sermons were controversial, but have shown no evidence of that, or even that the majority or even just 5 % were. I ask you again to present your evidence on that. I know some active LDS who occasionally do not like what one particular LDS Apostle says about various issues. Should they get up and leave the Church over it?

If you don't hold people accountable for their disgusting acts and contemptible words as they occur you are condoning those disgusting acts and contemptible words.
Let's see, did you want to hold Scooter Libby accountable for perjury? Do you want to hold Bush and Cheney and the other members of his administration accountable for lying to the American people in the lead up to the Iraq War? I believe one study was done and pegged that figure at 935 lies, give or take.

http://www.publicintegrity.org/WarCard/

A war that has now cost about 4,000 US Troop lives, untold Iraqi civilian deaths, and has cost over half a trillion dollars, with no end in sight on any of the above figures. Do you want to hold them accountable? These are just a couple of examples, RushReader. Show us how you really do care about holding people accountable,and are not just giving the words one-sided, partisan lip service.

Oh, one more thing. Do you now support John McCain, given what you said about him earlier? In case you have forgotten, here it is...again.

SilentReader wrote:
McCain will not win. We, the conservatives, won't let him. For if he were to win it would destroy the Republican Party and everything it has stood for over the many years.
Your answer is awaited. The silence is deafening.

Wren wrote:
SilentReader wrote:

We are with McCain on the War and on being fiscally concervative. What we were not with him on was McCain-Feingold, immigration, not supporting the tax cuts, and the Gang of 14 (McCain has justifed that by saying he wanted to get things done).

Since he has gained the nomination McCain has stated that he will make permanent the Bush tax cuts, and he will secure the border. I believe him. Whatever McCain is, I think he is a man of his word. And we will hold him to it.

You are right, he is a man of his word. And his word is to purge neo-cons. Good bye, SR.

He has never said that.

truthhurts wrote:
Every once and a while I do actually read one of RushReader's long winded posts. It helps to have a couple of beers first, just to help deaden the pain of reading such tripe. That said, I'm going to comment on a couple of things from his latest installment.

SilentReader wrote:
So, if you think I hate Obama. I do not. What I detest is the fact that he sat in his pastor's pews for 20 years and didn't confront him, or leave.
Actually, I think you really do hate anyone you brand as "liberal". It shows in your posts. This pastor thing is just your latest reason for foaming at the mouth against Obama. If not this, something else. And if Obama was not the front runner, you would be railing on Hilary about something, as you have done in the past. You assume that every one of Wrights sermons were controversial, but have shown no evidence of that, or even that the majority or even just 5 % were. I ask you again to present your evidence on that. I know some active LDS who occasionally do not like what one particular LDS Apostle says about various issues. Should they get up and leave the Church over it?

If you don't hold people accountable for their disgusting acts and contemptible words as they occur you are condoning those disgusting acts and contemptible words.
Let's see, did you want to hold Scooter Libby accountable for perjury? Do you want to hold Bush and Cheney and the other members of his administration accountable for lying to the American people in the lead up to the Iraq War? I believe one study was done and pegged that figure at 935 lies, give or take.

http://www.publicintegrity.org/WarCard/

A war that has now cost about 4,000 US Troop lives, untold Iraqi civilian deaths, and has cost over half a trillion dollars, with no end in sight on any of the above figures. Do you want to hold them accountable? These are just a couple of examples, RushReader. Show us how you really do care about holding people accountable,and are not just giving the words one-sided, partisan lip service.

Oh, one more thing. Do you now support John McCain, given what you said about him earlier? In case you have forgotten, here it is...again.

SilentReader wrote:
McCain will not win. We, the conservatives, won't let him. For if he were to win it would destroy the Republican Party and everything it has stood for over the many years.
Your answer is awaited. The silence is deafening.

On the first, neither Scooter Libby, Bush, Cheney or their cabinet lied.

On the second, the Jihadists and al Qaeda were responsible for the Iraqi deaths. Our troops were responsible for ridding them of a fascist murderer-executioner Saddam and liberating them.

On the third, since Hillary Clinton is an abomination and Obama is the apocalypse we conservatives have no alternative. We will support the nominee of the GOP and continue to push for the things we genuinely believe in. As I have already said we are with McCain on the War against Jihadism.

Let me remind you. When Joe Lieberman disagreed with his fellow Democrats on the issue of the war you kicked him to the curb. Discarded him like an old shoe. When we disagreed with John McCain on issues of immigration and tax cuts we still can support him on the issues that we do agree with him on, like the War.

SilentReader wrote:
Wren wrote:
SilentReader wrote:

We are with McCain on the War and on being fiscally concervative. What we were not with him on was McCain-Feingold, immigration, not supporting the tax cuts, and the Gang of 14 (McCain has justifed that by saying he wanted to get things done).

Since he has gained the nomination McCain has stated that he will make permanent the Bush tax cuts, and he will secure the border. I believe him. Whatever McCain is, I think he is a man of his word. And we will hold him to it.

You are right, he is a man of his word. And his word is to purge neo-cons. Good bye, SR.

He has never said that.

Do you really think he would tell Pod and the others to their faces they are going to go once he gets elected? He has a use for them right now, but afterwards, they are gone. He will rely on the Powell and Rice network to staff State and Defense, then remove the military commanders who are still left who supported the woefully inadequate invasion of Iraq.

Yes, it will be good bye to you and your ilk.