You put yourself there with your behavior. If you don't like it, then
change the way you act.


(which was an ad hominem attack to my discussion of a principle)


Well, let's see:

About this time last year you were frantically calling
everybody names whom you thought might not vote for
Bush/Cheney. At the time, I pointed out that when
considering the facts, they had not done a very good job
running the country. For that, you called me even more names.

Now you agree with me.

Clearly you are very consistent in your principles.





Maxprop wrote:
.... I tend to believe you are among the most
liberal of posters herein, only slightly to the right of Bubbles. You, of
course, are in constant verbal denial of this, but the facts speak for
themselves:

Yep- I am in favor of a strong military, a fiscally
responsible gov't, enforcement of the Constitution, and own
several guns. Hmm, I don't see any bumper stickers for a
liberal like me!


.... you've supported one of the most liberal of democrats ever to
run for president

1- Who is "the most liberal"? Kucinick? I didn't support him.

2- So did 49.9% of the rest of the country. Do the math

.... and you have regurgitated much of the same dogma that I
see on the far left websites.

Like what?

... You've branded any of the current
conservative players in the political mess to be corrupt, illicit, and
without morality.

Like what?

... You call them all "neocons,"

No, I call neo-cons neo-cons. Usually that's what they call
themselves.

... as if this is an abberation
of your brand of "conservatism."

No, it's an aberration of conservatism. Neo-cons themselves
say so.


... None of the conservatives I know
personally have any of these viewpoints.



So far you haven't mentioned a single one of my viewpoints,
nor have you addressed any actual facts. So far, it looks
like your ad-hominem attacks are merely a pattern of
far-right-wing hate-mongering and peurile fantasy. Maybe you
shouldn't be so hard on Bubbles, really you're quite a bit
like him.

DSK