User Profile: RealMenRConservative


Member Since: March 09, 2011


  • [2] October 5, 2015 at 2:15pm

    Would someone please ask her WHO “allowed” it? It was not “allowed by either State Dept. or US Govt. policy so WHO the heck allowed it. The only answer can be the White House and her boss, Pres Obama – who has never said he Allowed it.

  • [2] October 2, 2015 at 5:29pm

    One thing that has clearly changed is the prevalence of violent video games that turn boys and young men into Rambo and totally desensitizes them to murder and mayhem. If you don’t think 3-4 hours of gaming every day on these shoot-em games contributes to this problem you are dead wrong. They absolutely contribute to this social illness being played out in schools and movie theaters across our land.

    Responses (1) +
  • [2] September 26, 2015 at 9:17pm

    Shut up Bill! Hillary only has her arrogant self to blame.

    Responses (1) +
  • [-3] September 2, 2015 at 9:48am

    Excuse me but the bike rider does have a right to use that road and to do so in whatever manner is most safe to himself or herself. They don’t have 3,000 lbs of steel protecting their body. If they are occupying the full lane its because at that point there is no other safe place to be and you should not attempt passing them. Go put yourself on a bike and see what its like. And don’t tell me they shouldn’t be out there. They have every right to be there. Slow down and be courteous.

    Responses (3) +
  • [8] August 21, 2015 at 8:42am

    Truth is truth friend, despite the post-modern philosophy you were indoctrinated with at school.

  • [2] August 20, 2015 at 7:47am

    None of this is true of emails sent from Hillary’ server to other Non-Govt email accounts or to another account on Hillary’s server. By Hillary’s definition these are all personal emails. It is those emails that were destroyed and likely had all kinds of nefarious business in them.

  • August 19, 2015 at 3:35pm

    And when is someone going to have the brains to ask this woman – if she is elected president, is she going to permit members of her Cabinet and Administration to do the same? Will it be OK in Hillary’s presidency for the Sec of State or the Sec of Defense to set up their own e-mail server in their house and conduct ALL of their Government business on it? Will it be OK for them also to hide from the American people any and all emails they choose in blatant disregard for the Federal Laws on records retention. Will it be OK for them to intermingle their personal email with Government emails. Will it be OK for her Cabinet members to carelessly handle classified and even TOP SECRET communications. If not, why not?

  • [2] August 19, 2015 at 3:25pm

    Of course she didn’t sign that document. Hillary was not an actual employee like a normal person. That would be way below her status in life and would imply that she was accountable to someone other than herself. NO – Hillary did not sign anything. Believe me on this one. You see, she was really SUPPOSED to be President and was only PLAYING Sec State until it was her turn to take over the White House. She sure as hell was nobody’s employee and certainly NOT the People’s SERVANT.

    Responses (1) +
  • [3] March 20, 2015 at 6:53pm

    How dare you ask questions I don’t want to answer. Off with your head.

  • [2] February 18, 2015 at 1:32pm

    Moderate – your theology is so messed up I don’t think I can even begin to correct it, so I won’t. I can only say that whatever church you are attending you need to flee from it immediately because it has completely muddled your mind on the LAW of God and the meaning of the GOSPEL. I can only pray you start over and develop a good foundation of Biblical truth with the help of a mature christian to guide you.

  • [19] February 17, 2015 at 4:49pm

    KING – you go further and further off the reservation. You now seem to believe that ANY consensual sex is pleasing to God and is not sin. Where does your shortcutting of righteousness end exactly?

  • [27] February 17, 2015 at 4:27pm

    KING – The simplest interpretation of scripture is usually the correct interpretation. The whole of scripture is very clear on homosexuality being outside of God’s plan, no more or less so than any other sexual sin. While this may be difficult to accept, it is the truth and anyone telling you otherwise is not speaking the truth.

  • [46] February 17, 2015 at 4:04pm

    KING – You did not read Romans for yourself so here is just a bit of it for you. Rom 1:27 Likewise also the men leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.
    Your explaining this away as some other specific form of homosexuality (lusting for “young men”) and not all homosexual behavior is just not supported by the scripture.

  • [62] February 17, 2015 at 3:49pm

    I think Romans 1 is pretty darn clear. Have a read on your own. If you want to be blind and deaf as to what this says that is entirely your prerogative.

  • [95] February 17, 2015 at 3:41pm

    Nothing new under the sun. There have alway been “men of God” who are deceivers and proponents of their own human wisdom. That is not Christianity and despite the age of the “2000 year old letters” Rob Bell refers to, they are no less true and no less relevant today than they were the day they were written. They are the WORD of God. God’s thinking does not change.

    Responses (2) +
  • [2] December 6, 2014 at 3:20pm

    Feminism run amuck. Ms. Maxwell learned her lessons well at whatever feminist left wing university she attended. You can’t blame her now. She is ruined.

    Responses (1) +
  • [1] December 5, 2014 at 2:45pm

    No. They simply wanted revenge. You think there would be peace after a trial and an acquittal? Justice is not aim of these people. Throwing a fit irregardless of the facts is all they want.

  • [7] December 5, 2014 at 11:24am

    First of all she is just too lazy and too damn important to actually read anything as tedious as a transcript. Second of all Sean, you cannot expect post-modernists to have a discussion based on facts and evidence. There is no “truth” to a post-modernist. Therefore my narrative and my truth can be wholly unsupported by fact and be just as valid as yours. So there you go; no CONVERSATION as she believes we should now have, can be based on anything as old fashioned as facts and evidence. Only feelings and baseless opinions will eminate from people like this honarable Congresswoman. This is all the Left has.

    Responses (3) +
  • [6] October 29, 2014 at 8:47am

    There is no gay gene. That too is fiction. Trust me on this one. As an identical twin to a gay twin I can be quite certain he was not born gay.

  • [1] October 18, 2014 at 11:27pm

    Spike has it right. The book of Hebrews is clear. Christ is the superior prophet, priest and King and his priesthood supersedes and replaces the Levitical priesthood that never had the power to save anyone. Having ended the Levitical priesthood there can be no cause whatsoever to establish a new human priesthood. The Church got this wrong somewhere in the 4th or 5th century. Christ is our only mediator in the presence of God and he needs no help from men in fulfilling that role. To suggest he does is to diminish his position and his work on the cross.

Restoring Love