<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for ReluctantR</title><link>http://disqus.com/by/ReluctantR/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://disqus.com/ReluctantR/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 15:46:18 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: The Christian Left</title><link>http://www.conservatismlives.com/?p=482#comment-12711788</link><description>&lt;p&gt;The only element of "fear" involved for me personally, is "fear" of the damage that is being done and or will be done to the country; specifically in regards to its moral fabric and economic stability. &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">The Reluctant Republican</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 15:46:18 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Who &amp;#8220;Inherited&amp;#8221; What Deficit, Exactly?</title><link>http://www.conservatismlives.com/?p=440#comment-7565408</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks for reading.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">The Reluctant Republican</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 27 Mar 2009 14:33:36 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: &amp;quot;Obamalogic&amp;quot; on &amp;quot;Reducing the Number of Abortions&amp;quot;</title><link>http://www.conservatismlives.com/?p=412#comment-7248787</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Ah, my friend, as usual you miss my point. Nowhere here do I say or imply that removing a doctor's right to refuse to perform "procedures" to which he/she morally objects will cause a skyrocket in the number of abortions performed. My point is that conservatives, moderates, and evangelicals in particular were sold something by Obama that is nothing short of a flat out lie on his supposed "stance" on the abortion issue. He claimed to, first and foremost, be interested in pursuing courses of action that "reduced the number of abortions". Literally EVERYTHING he has done since taking office in regard to the issue has either directly increased the number of abortions that will be performed (green lighting the use of U.S. foreign aid to fund overseas abortions) or in this case, knocked down a barrier to an abortion being performed. Or more to the point in this case, not only knocked down a barrier (assuming he actually signs the bill) but setting up a situation in which health care providers can be PUNISHED either criminally or civilly for refusing to do what they believe constitutes murder. I have not seen one item come out of his office aimed at "reducing the number of abortions". Every single item is about one thing and one thing only; increasing access to abortion. &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">The Reluctant Republican</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2009 00:35:07 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Tracking Obama&amp;#8217;s Promises</title><link>http://www.conservatismlives.com/?p=383#comment-6184683</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Martin,&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Honestly, I don't even know where to begin these days. The sheer volume of BS flowing out of D.C. is staggering. I'm working on something for you though. I hope to have it up before I leave this weekend.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">The Reluctant Republican</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:01:27 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Yet Another Clinton Retread</title><link>http://www.conservatismlives.com/?p=330#comment-3895821</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I'm glad you find the site entertaining, even if not for the reasons intended. If you would like to have a reasonable discourse about substantive issues on the site or would simply like to make comments about our posts you are welcome to do so. However, in so doing, please be respectful. Simple name calling is not useful to anyone. Additionally, I'd be more than happy to use my "simpleton" logic and my dim wits to debate you on the topic of your choice. For future reference, comments that consist of nothing more than a string of insults will be deleted.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">The Reluctant Republican</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2008 11:22:02 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Mission: Failed</title><link>http://www.conservatismlives.com/?p=248#comment-3772277</link><description>&lt;p&gt;It is a short clip, so I'll agree that there's a possibility that there's a broader context. So, worst case, she's just a poor choice to illustrate the point. But my main disappointment is that I still think a large number of voters voted on the basis of what they can "get".&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">The Reluctant Republican</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2008 11:21:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The New Democratic Talking Points: &amp;#8220;Change Nothing.&amp;#8221;</title><link>http://www.conservatismlives.com/?p=314#comment-3766718</link><description>&lt;p&gt;G. Norman lives! And delivers a masterpiece. &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">The Reluctant Republican</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2008 00:17:58 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Mission: Failed</title><link>http://www.conservatismlives.com/?p=248#comment-3724675</link><description>&lt;p&gt;While your video is certainly effective at pointing to an extreme it misses the point. Your southern redneck woman isn't making any claims that in ANY way resemble anything from McCain's campaign platform. Obama, on the other hand, DID in fact run on a platform of increased "free" social programs including universal health care, free college tuition,  moratoriums on home foreclosures, etc. That is my point. I understand that some portion of voters (how much exactly remains to be seen) voted for Obama as a reaction to President Bush, the economy, the war, etc., but I simply cannot believe that Obama's "freebie" programs weren't a huge motivating factor for many voters, particularly when he made many of them central points to his campaign.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">The Reluctant Republican</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2008 19:24:13 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Mission: Failed</title><link>http://www.conservatismlives.com/?p=248#comment-3678865</link><description>&lt;p&gt;The irony of this is that I thought my take and use of the verse was somewhat original. The point, to me, in using the verse isn't about the candidate or the party, its about the voters. The people of Israel were unhappy with the distributed power structure of government that had been set up for them with the Judges. Instead, they demanded an actual King that would "provide" for them and their fiscal and financial security even though it was made clear to them that it would carry significant costs to their personal freedoms. America was built on individual freedom and liberty. It was built by a majority of people who were interested in taking risks and creating wealth; not just for themselves, but for others as well. I see a huge amount of Obama voters who are not interested in creating wealth. They are interested in taking it. Watch this woman: &lt;a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI"&gt;http://www.youtube.com/watc...&lt;/a&gt; . I don't think she's atypical. My hope is that we haven't crossed the line where we have more people interested in taking wealth than in creating it. My hope is that enough people voted for Obama for other reasons, but with the platform he ran on (free healthcare, free college, etc), its hard to believe that's the case.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">The Reluctant Republican</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2008 10:10:36 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Obama: Forget What I Said Before</title><link>http://www.conservatismlives.com/?p=304#comment-3674936</link><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://NakedEmperornews.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="NakedEmperornews.com"&gt;NakedEmperornews.com&lt;/a&gt; is doing an "Obama Promise Watch", although they're going a bit further than I would tracking things like "Ocean Levels Lowering".&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">The Reluctant Republican</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2008 19:45:32 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>