Troops Want to Stay In Iraq

[maineman]

Not surprised. It goes against the traits of an open minded lib to want to read opposing points of view

As I said...I anxiously await the time when I can read an opposing point of view that you express yourself.

I read all sorts of news sources on a daily basis...I don't come here to do so.

 

[red states rule]

As I said...I anxiously await the time when I can read an opposing point of view that you express yourself.

I read all sorts of news sources on a daily basis...I don't come here to do so.

You come here to defend libs and slander those who disagree with you

 

[maineman]

You come here to defend libs and slander those who disagree with you

not so.... that is incorrect. I come here to debate ideas.

you never seem to have any of your own beyond peurile oneliners.

 

[red states rule]

not so.... that is incorrect. I come here to debate ideas.

you never seem to have any of your own beyond peurile oneliners.

For someone who says he does not - you sure defend the left and all their lies

 

[Shattered]

Dude.. Just stop. Seriously. You're losing it..

 

[red states rule]

Dude.. Just stop. Seriously. You're losing it..

How? By pointing out the liberal media bias and MM does not like it?

I am calm and rational and he seems to be losing it (if he ever had it)

 

[Shattered]

How? By pointing out the liberal media bias and MM does not like it?

I am calm and rational and he seems to be losing it (if he ever had it)

Nobody needs you to point out liberal media bias - everyone knows it's there. He asked you some serious questions in an attempt to start an *actual* debate devoid of any of your standard cut/paste crap, and based on actual thought.

You ignored every single one of them, and continued with your prerecorded database of standard one-liners which have nothing to do with the questions asked of you.

Seriously, you're what gives Cons a bad name, and gives the Libs something to feed off of.

 

[red states rule]

Nobody needs you to point out liberal media bias - everyone knows it's there. He asked you some serious questions in an attempt to start an *actual* debate devoid of any of your standard cut/paste crap, and based on actual thought.

You ignored every single one of them, and continued with your prerecorded database of standard one-liners which have nothing to do with the questions asked of you.

Seriously, you're what gives Cons a bad name, and gives the Libs something to feed off of.

I have answered his questions - he does not like the answers

Besides, libs like MM are bottom feeders anyway and no matter what you say they will fall back on their lame attempts to deflect and dodge

 

[Shattered]

I have answered his questions - he does not like the answers

Besides, libs like MM are bottom feeders anyway and no matter what you say they will fall back on their lame attempts to deflect and dodge

Must I go pull specific points of his you dodged, and merely tossed a standard lib insult? Come on.

He requests original thought.
You reply he's just a bashing lib.

He states he doesn't log on to read news threads, but logs on to debate.
You reply he's just a lying lib that doesn't like facts.

He says he comes to debate ideas (which he has proven).
You say he comes to slander those who disagree with him (which YOU are most guilty of).

 

[red states rule]

Must I go pull specific points of his you dodged, and merely tossed a standard lib insult? Come on.

He requests original thought.
You reply he's just a bashing lib.

He states he doesn't log on to read news threads, but logs on to debate.
You reply he's just a lying lib that doesn't like facts.

He says he comes to debate ideas (which he has proven).
You say he comes to slander those who disagree with him (which YOU are most guilty of).

OMG- I post facts he replies with spin. I Post articles that support my facts he replies how I posted an article. He constantly slanders Shattered - I respond after he fires the first shot

To this day he defends Dems who have compared our troops to Nazi's, Pol Pot, terrorists, and the new owners of Saddam's torture chambers

A real likable guy, eh?

 

[Shattered]

OMG- I post facts he replies with spin. I Post articles that support my facts he replies how I posted an article. He constantly slanders Shattered - I respond after he fires the first shot

To this day he defends Dems who have compared our troops to Nazi's, Pol Pot, terrorists, and the new owners of Saddam's torture chambers

A real likable guy, eh?

So you're still telling me that everyone who has told you the same thing I have (from BOTH sides of the fence) is just wrong, and you're the only one that's right?

*shakes head*

Believe me, you're not doing anyone any favors in your so-called "defense" of Conservatives.

 

[red states rule]

So you're still telling me that everyone who has told you the same thing I have (from BOTH sides of the fence) is just wrong, and you're the only one that's right?

*shakes head*

Believe me, you're not doing anyone any favors in your so-called "defense" of Conservatives.

I seem to get along fine with other conservatioves

It is only the libs and RINO's who seem to have a problem

 

[Shattered]

I seem to get along fine with other conservatioves

It is only the libs and RINO's who seem to have a problem

Oh, absolutely... But, as my final comment, some food for thought: You're acting like an idiot, and eventually ALL people will cease to acknowledge your existance duue to lack of any real substance.

There's no point in arguing with a brick wall that doesn't even know it's a brick wall.

 

[red states rule]

Oh, absolutely... But, as my final comment, some food for thought: You're acting like an idiot, and eventually ALL people will cease to acknowledge your existance duue to lack of any real substance.

There's no point in arguing with a brick wall that doesn't even know it's a brick wall.

I like you to

 

[Louie]

Perhaps you failed to read the first post of this thread

Your cut n paste jobs, rants and "logic" are as interesting as a hangnail
keep it coming though I'm getting some good chuckles here

 

[red states rule]

Your cut n paste jobs, rants and "logic" are as interesting as a hangnail
keep it coming though I'm getting some good chuckles here

Do we have MM's son here?

 

[Gunny]

were you two seperated at birth?

All he has done is stand shoulder to shoulder with the Dems who have attacked the troops

I call him on it and now you circle the wagons around him

Take a deep breath and try some decaf before posting again

He asked you to support your accusation, and your response was that he's a lib. Followed by a repeat of the question, and response from you totally irrelvant to the question.

The wrost part is you constantly accuse liberals of using the tactics you yourself are using.

You know how long it took me to look up two words in the dictionary? Less time than you spent tap-dancing around the question.

Nobody on this board is tougher on liberals than I am when I don't agree with their argument/ideology. But I see NO point in setting yourself up to be slaughtered by posting your opinion of your interpretation of what some Democrats have said as fact when you cannot support it with evidence.

IMO, both Kerry and Durbin are more guilty of not engaging their brains and considering their choices of words before running their mouthes. Durbin, in fact, came out later and clarified what he meant to say.

Kerry's choice of words was poor as well, but the intent of his statement is obvious. Terrorist is mutually inclusive to terrorize only in a literal sense, but in common use, terrorize does not automatically mean terrorist.

I hate what happened to Trent Lott for a poor choice of words and purposefully misinterpretted intent. I'll bet you agree with me on that.

Well, you're just doing the same damned thing.

 

[red states rule]

He asked you to support your accusation, and your response was that he's a lib. Followed by a repeat of the question, and response from you totally irrelvant to the question.

The wrost part is you constantly accuse liberals of using the tactics you yourself are using.

You know how long it took me to look up two words in the dictionary? Less time than you spent tap-dancing around the question.

Nobody on this board is tougher on liberals than I am when I don't agree with their argument/ideology. But I see NO point in setting yourself up to be slaughtered by posting your opinion of your interpretation of what some Democrats have said as fact when you cannot support it with evidence.

IMO, both Kerry and Durbin are more guilty of not engaging their brains and considering their choices of words before running their mouthes. Durbin, in fact, came out later and clarified what he meant to say.

Kerry's choice of words was poor as well, but the intent of his statement is obvious. Terrorist is mutually inclusive to terrorize only in a literal sense, but in common use, terrorize does not automatically mean terrorist.

I hate what happened to Trent Lott for a poor choice of words and purposefully misinterpretted intent. I'll bet you agree with me on that.

Well, you're just doing the same damned thing.

I use common sense - you seem to be using the MM version of common nonsense

What was racist about what Lott said?

When libs express their ture feelings - called on it -they say they are "sorry" and libs give them a pass

Conservatives like Lott do nothing - say they are sorry - and are still savaged by the left

 

[maineman]

I use common sense - you seem to be using the MM version of common nonsense

What was racist about what Lott said?

When libs express their ture feelings - called on it -they say they are "sorry" and libs give them a pass

Conservatives like Lott do nothing - say they are sorry - and are still savaged by the left

no...you just repeat the same tired old stuff.... and you continue to purposely misconstrue the meanings of words to suit your own partisan purposes. and when you don't do that and avoid taking ownership for your mistakes, you cut and paste editorials.... you really are a very predictable, very disappointing broken record.

And what Trent Lott said - and I am sure he did not MEAN it the way it came out - but what he said was that we would be a better country today if we had elected a man in 1948 who was a bigot and a racist and who wanted to outlaw interracial marriage and continue segregation. Now I am sure that he was only trying to make an old man feel good, but his words have meanings and if you are going to continually MISREPRESENT what Kerry said, I will feel compelled to correctly represent what Trent Lott said.

 

[Shattered]