It has come to my attention that regular commenter "Unkl Witz" has called into question the armed services bona fides of fellow commenter "True Soldier" in scurrilous terms (see #33 here and #13 here) Allow me to do a rare thing and referee this one.
I have corresponded personally with True Soldier regarding his service both while he has been stateside and while he has served in Iraq, including assisting in gathering some information for some fellows in his unit at his request while they were in the field. He has since been honorably discharged with disability severance pay. As such, related assaults on his integrity are despicable.
Sadly, this is what all too often passes for informed criticism in the loony, anti-military left. It is a permanent stain on their credibility that they are so quick to demonize good men and women. Such vacuous displays of a moral compass often tell us all we need to know about their own character.
And True Soldier, my humble thanks for your service. We are in your debt.
Posted by Eric Earling at May 14, 2008 09:55 PM | Email ThisI am happy you are safely home, and proud as hell of the service you gave to this country.
I want to say I appreciate Soldier's service, but dude is in a war zone and surviving, he is probably as tough as Chuck Norris.
Posted by: WVH on May 14, 2008 10:04 PMThis is the dictionary defintion of outrage:
out·rage (outrj)
n.
1. An act of extreme violence or viciousness.
2. An act grossly offensive to decency, morality, or good taste.
3. A deplorable insult.
4. Resentful anger aroused by a violent or offensive act.
tr.v. out·raged, out·rag·ing, out·rag·es
1. To offend grossly against (standards of decency or morality); commit an outrage on.
2. To produce anger or resentment in: Incompetence outraged him. See Synonyms at offend.
It doesn't imply foaming at the mouth. I think most people appreciate Soldier's service and wish him a safe trip home. Still, this is a blog and it seems the sensibilities are rawer when an opinion is expressed which is not the party line and not a member of the original house party.
If conservatives want to make electoral gain, they will have to be able to argue the issues and convince voters, that they have, as one would say, a better mousetrap. I know that site was originally set up as kinda of a house party where the boys could play, but other than BANNING all opposing viewpoints, there are going to be an occasional dicey comment.
I do join you in thanking Soldier and I bet he is as tough as Chuck Norris.
Posted by: WVH on May 14, 2008 10:42 PMHaving watched the comment threads on the zero for sometime-- I'm never surprised to find out how many raging libs are mentally ill/bipolar/addicts/whatever...and that's not just ripping of Savage's tagline on liberalism being a mental disorder.
Posted by: Andy on May 14, 2008 11:27 PMAnd to all the anti-military lefties out there: Our military has been a great force for good. Just in the last month I have heard two awe-inspiring stories of how people in our military changed the lives of people--one a young woman who'd been head of "Hitler Youth" in WWII who fled when the Hitler regime went bust. She and a friend were found by american troops. They fed her, and treated her kindly, and effectively saved her life. They were not at all what she'd been brainwashed to believe. They were so impressed with their contact with the troops that the one lady made it her dream to get to america one day. She did finally arrive and learned about freedom (something we take for granted, and something she'd never previously known) and is forever grateful to our wonderful military and this country.
The other story is in a book called "The Journey of Private Galione", an army private who walked for five days in WWII in Germany following a hunch and came upon Camp Dora, where hungry, battered jewish prisoners were being forced in slave labor to build a secret ballistic missile that was to be passed over to the soviets. (because of his discovery, we took all those missiles and the soviets never got them, which if he had not it's said we'd all be speaking russian by now) He liberated all those jews by his discovery and caused the U.S. to go looking for other camps. Countless lives were saved because he walked for five days to find something that he initially wasn't sure what he was even going to find. It's a deeply moving story. And frankly amazing, as readers will find out.
Naturally, there are forces out there who would like people to hate on our fine military folk (and I believe it's to discourage our military's efforts to do all the good they do), but when you hear stories like this, you know better. God bless these people.
Posted by: Michele on May 14, 2008 11:35 PMThanks for calling out Unkl Witz. If we call out the loony anti-military, angry, BDS deranged, etc. left it exposes them. If more Americans were aware of the angry idiots who hide behind Internet anonymity to vent their rage, it's just fewer votes for Democrats.
I've communicated with True as well. Definitely a TrueSoldier. Thanks much for your service.
Posted by: Jeff B. on May 15, 2008 12:00 AM"If more Americans were aware of the angry idiots who hide behind Internet anonymity to vent their rage, it's just fewer votes for Democrats."
Does this statement mean the only people on the Internet now and in the past who post using anonymous monikers are those who are not conservative? That certainly is a revelation. You mean there is not even one conservative poster who has ever used an anonymous moniker and ranted?
That concept is simply incredible. Partisans of any stripe are so partisan that balance escapes them. People who embrace all types of political ideology can be guilty of bad behavior, even anonymous conservative posters who like to rant.
This is not to take away from Soldier, but that is the problem with partisans and that is why the ranks of indies are growing.
Um yeah, you have never called anyone here a "racist","bigot", "Duke Supporter", "Shruggie", etc, etc?
If you're going to live in that glass house, may I suggest you not hurl boulders from your doorway.
"I admit some of the comments get tasteless, but is the outrage here sometimes selective?"
No more selective than calling those that do not choose to vote for the black candidate because of his politics a "racist" by someone who uses his skin color as their deciding factor for supporting him.
Thanks for your service to this great country True Soldier.
Semper Fi
Speak up lefties, I CAN'T HEAR YOU.
Posted by: russell garrard on May 15, 2008 07:14 AMFor the record, I have never claimed to be a soldier. I have not served in the military. I did work 23 years at the Naval Shipyard in Bremerton (17 plus as Civilian and 5 plus as a Defense Contractor). I am the same age as Obama and therefore, at that time Military service wasn't necessarily critical. I was the first (or second, I can't be for sure) of the males who had to again register for selective service. I had considered in High School seeking going into the Coast Guard. In college, the offers for $900/mo to go into the Navy's Nuclear program were very tempting, but in the end it was a retired Army Colonel who came to be a Industrial Engineering professor at UW-Platteville (my major) that convinced me to go into civil service after we got out of college.
Posted by: tc on May 15, 2008 07:19 AMThankfully, you flat out disemboweled the Weasel. I don't expect to see him in his Weasel form anytime soon, but I am sure we will see some kind of reincarnation.
And yes, the Weasel stepped over the line with True Soldier. There are probably two posters here I pay attention to more than others and it is because of military service- True Soldier and Medic.
Posted by: swatter on May 15, 2008 07:21 AMSecond – My sincere apologies to True Soldier and the readers of this forum for my posts either doubting or demeaning his service. I would also like to extend my apologies for all of the petty name calling I’ve indulged in over the years. I do indeed realize this adds nothing to my arguments.
Third – Service in the Armed Forces of this country does not convey any special status or expertise in either domestic or foreign policy. It is a life experience shared by hundreds of thousands of our citizens who come to various conclusions as to political and ideological inclinations. It should not be used to intimidate others, or somehow validate your political persuasion.
Finally – In light of all the “scurrilous terms”, insulting names and outright racist epithets posted on this forum, why is this one somehow over the top? I’m not suggesting we need a referee or hall monitor here, but I am saying we can have a robust discussion of ideas without the personal attacks. And yes, I am as guilty of this as any, but hardly alone. I can think of a number of posters who’s only comment is a demeaning personal slur.
Believe it or not, I find a lot of value in this forum and appreciate its existence and the opportunity to vent my ideas and hear opposing views. And I truly value those times when we can develop some level of mutual respect for other’s views even when we don’t necessarily agree. Unfortunately, those are rare moments. And I regret my contribution to the poison in the well.
At some point, I believe we all need to realize this nation is a truly wonderful place to live. And yes, we need a strong and respected military to protect it. But also realize that we as citizens can and will disagree as to the best policies to accomplish the common good. Those disagreements don’t make us enemies or traitors. We are not “libruls” or “cons”, we are not “repug’s” or “dimocrats”. We are all Americans. And just like TrueSoldier, we all deserve respect, even when we disagree.
Thanks for listening.
You seem to have a selective memory. You shouldn't vote for a candidate because of race or gender, but you shouldn't diminish their accomplishments because of race or gender either. You continually called Senator Obama an "empty suit" and made other comments about race. That is what I called you on. I don't think that you would vote for many outside your group no matter what their accomplishments were. We don't have to go over Senator Obama's background, that ground has been plowed as they say. You may chose not to vote for any democrat, but don't call people unaccomplished especially since you would never say what your accomplishments were.
My point, which has not been answered, is conservatives have never even once had a poster who has used multiple phony monikers and annonymous monikers to rant? It is simply incredible that any one would make that statement.
Posted by: WVH on May 15, 2008 07:27 AMWVH: From all of us who have been called names in your postings: Take your whining someplace else, as you've eared our derision.
Posted by: Saltherring on May 15, 2008 07:30 AMRegarding your moniker, I assume you have a valid e-mail address and Swatter is the only moniker you use while posting here. That is not true of all posters. Some post multiple times using phony e-mail addresses. I would be happy to provide you with one example. Their purpose is like those of the Bolsheviks to stifle other opinions. There is quite a distinction.
Posted by: WVH on May 15, 2008 08:03 AMI just wish to copy/paste this for fun. It's so symbolic of the empty suit type people to come up with reasoning this obviously idiotic.
True. As soon as you can provide evidence that Obama is not a political "empty suit", feel free to do so.
"...and made other comments about race."
False. Your bloomers have been knotted ever since I commented that electing Obama would be the equivelent of a Fortune 500 company hiring the janitor as the CEO after working there for 2 weeks because he was amiable and spoke well (or something to that effect). While possibly overexaggerated, it hardly rises to the level of a bigoted or racist remark in any aspect. It was meant to illustrate the disparity between Obama's resume and the qualifications for the position he is seeking. I referenced race at no time. Those are your racial identity hang-ups to deal with, not mine.
Posted by: Rick D. on May 15, 2008 08:27 AMThere is a difference between honest discussion and Trolling/Defamation.
You're too dumb to understand the difference.
Posted by: cliff on May 15, 2008 08:28 AMSame question I have asked others who like to throw around the "empty suit" remark. Do you have a background which matches either Senator Obama, Senator Clinton or Senator Edwards. What exactly makes a person an empty suit. Is it race, gender, or just the fact that you don't match up and are feeling inadequate. I suppose you want me BANNED for asking.
Posted by: WVH on May 15, 2008 08:29 AMThere you go again. As you probably remember, I also provided you with some other examples of comparisons. You can't see beyond your group. If posters here are examples of the best the libertarian and conservative movement have to offer, this will be a one-party state for the foreseeable future. This state is urbanizing and becoming more diverse. I suppose you caprbetbagged here because you didn't fit in the last state, I suspect that you will be thinking of moving again.
Posted by: WVH on May 15, 2008 08:35 AMBased on your logic, what are your qualifications to judge him competent? Do you have any similar accomplishments?
Of course the whole idea that one must be an expert in a field in order judge whether somebody else is competent in that field is ridiculous.
Do you have to be a chef in order to know whether a resturant is good?
Do you need to be a former pro-ball player to see whether a pitcher is decent or not?
Posted by: Ken on May 15, 2008 08:35 AMIt doesn't take much. I have run a small business, had to hire and fire employees, be subjected to the myriad of regulations small businesses enjoy and still make a profit (as modest as it might be). I never aspired to anything more. Bankers, when analyzing my portfolio, have commented I have done well for myself when I think I have just had modest success.
I have worked for the rich, but enjoy working with the poor or middle class more. In the end, all parties were richly rewarded because of my efforts.
So, yes, I feel I am qualified to make those statements. However, there are youngsters here (usually the liberal side) who make these assertions without background knowledge.
And to be truthful, over the years, I think there are many more posters here who have a ton more qualifications than I do. So, yes, we do have a right to make the 'empty suit' comment.
Posted by: swatter on May 15, 2008 08:40 AMMy dossier has been spread all over the web by pudge and Rick D., apparently you missed it.
Yes, I have similiar qualifications and note, I am not calling any other person an "empty suit."
Neither is Caroline Kennedy and others like David Boren and Sam Nunn. According to the Constitution, there is a citizenship and age requirement to be president. Beyond that, it is personal preference. So, if all the people who want to call another an empty suit would please disclose their qualifications to do so, I might respect their opinion. They won't, it is simply a dodge for the real reason. There are policy diffrences between the two parties, so why aren't those discussed?
What office are you running for? If you are better than what the two parties are offering, then run, Swatter, run.
Posted by: WVH on May 15, 2008 08:45 AMMeaning, naturally, that the state is becoming even more liberal.
You can crow all you want about how Republicans may win fewer and fewer elections as the state is flooded with people who agree with the P-I's Editorial Board.
A more interesting conversation might include just what kinds of accomplishments liberals make...besides charging us for shopping bags, and forcing people to wear bicycle helmets.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on May 15, 2008 08:47 AMI am going to throw this out. I have to leave.
This state is moderate and really doesn't like extremes at either end. I don't know if you have lived here all your life, I have. Republicans had good candidates in recent history, they don't at the local level in many races. I think Senator Rossi is one of the better candidates the party has had in a while, I just prefer Governor Gregoire.
Many libertarians have moved to the republican party because they couldn't get elected dogcatcher as libertarians. Libertarian ideas are not going to sell any better under the republican brand. Many of the ideas of the republican party are just not embraced by the electorate who lives increasingly in urban areas. You live in Seattle, when is the last time the republican party ran a viable funded candidate in Seattle? The republicans have ceded Seattle and King County, so don't complain when there is legislation you don't like.
Libertarians and conservatives like to say liberals control everything. There is a market for Scoop Jackson democrats who I guess would be considered RINOS. The republicans seem to have purged every one from their party who could win in moderate and urban areas, so now all you can do is grumble.
Posted by: WVH on May 15, 2008 08:57 AM...or be twice elected to the Governorship of TX
but then, some person's criteria begins and ends with whether or not the candidate has a Uterus.
=)
This would explain how WVH mistakenly identifies herself as an Independent. You speak about carpetbaggers to the state, but I bet you've never stepped foot across the mountains (or for that matter out of your congressinal district). Afterall, your happy with the kool-aid Jimmy McDermott is serving up so why change flavors right?
Oh, and I dont' have a dossier on you. I seem to recall that you put your full name out on one of the threads and now you complain that it's in the archives? Hmmm, me thinks thou doth protesteth too much.
Posted by: Rick D. on May 15, 2008 09:22 AMThat...and a 'brain' might be a welcome change! :)
Posted by: Duffman on May 15, 2008 09:23 AMThat is a wonderful solution you are proposing. When ever you get tired of someone's arguments, just censor them.
To Michele @36:
I have indeed been mean-spirited toward you, and would like to apologize for that.
...that's one write-in vote for Condi Rice....
Posted by: Rick D. on May 15, 2008 09:38 AM"Service in the Armed Forces of this country does not convey any special status or expertise in either domestic or foreign policy. It is a life experience shared by hundreds of thousands of our citizens who come to various conclusions as to political and ideological inclinations. It should not be used to intimidate others, or somehow validate your political persuasion"
Do you disagree with my postition?
If so, why?
Posted by: Unkl Witz on May 15, 2008 10:07 AMI agree with you, I just would take one of her positions and apply the same logic you have given to hers.
Posted by: REBEL on May 15, 2008 10:43 AMObama graduated magna cum laude from Harvard, and taught at the Univ of Chicago, one of the great law schools that we have.
He is young, but I'm guessing that some of the same people who call Obama 'empty suit' complained that Kerry and Dole had been around too long and were too 'inside DC.'
I wouldn't vote for Obama. He is too far left, and he threw away his one redeeming virtue of potentially bridging the racial divide. But I wouldn't call him an 'empty suit.'
Posted by: russell garrard on May 15, 2008 10:56 AMObama graduated magna cum laude from Harvard, and taught at the Univ of Chicago, one of the great law schools that we have.
He is young, but I'm guessing that some of the same people who call Obama 'empty suit' complained that Kerry and Dole had been around too long and were too 'inside DC.'
I wouldn't vote for Obama. He is too far left, and he threw away his one redeeming virtue of potentially bridging the racial divide. But I wouldn't call him an 'empty suit.'
Posted by: russell garrard on May 15, 2008 10:56 AMWith that said, I'm sure Unkl Witz would not have said jack-diddly against True Soldier had he/she know True soldier personally. One of the great advantages/disadvantages of blogs is anonymnity (SP?). No one knows anyone else, generally, so we can say what we want and attack mercilessly those with which we disagree. The same business goes on over at Goldy's blog, just flavored a little differently.
Posted by: Politically Incorrect on May 15, 2008 11:02 AMI truly respect all the people here who have served but I believe True Soldier/Army M/V/etc have the balls to stand up and defend themselves quite passionately without you stepping in and crying foul Eric. Witz has is nothing compared to the local closet racist known as PBJ.
And "community organizer"? No one has told me what that means.
And choice of churches? Obama hasn't disclaimed the good pastor, but only has mildly rebuked him since all Obama was there for was to get 'noticed'.
And Ayres? Chum up with terrorist so he can get 'noticed'.
And Rezko? Claim to be upstanding and a uniter and then get involved with shady deals as a US Senator.
And NAFTA? Tell the sheep in Ohio, Wisconsin you are going to rewrite the law, and then go wink, wink to Canada and tell them you are just saying that to get votes.
Empty suit? You betcha.
Posted by: swatter on May 15, 2008 11:45 AMTo Eric... you picked a scab dude, or perhaps it's healthy debriding.
To Witz... your apology is admirable.
Sometimes we forget there are people, ordinary, hard working people and not just a great clump of ideology, behind the passionate rhetoric. We often forget that our typed words have to stand alone without benefit of intonation, expression and context. It just cracks me up because I laugh so hard at the indignation of some and of course, it spurs me (and I suspect many others) on to to push them farther. Too easy and oh so rewarding.
Now Witz, will I still pick on you? Well, DUH! of course I will... and you on me... somewhere in our insult, our points WILL get through ... hopefully MINE to you! :)
Isn't it quite fascinating that in this thread of group catharsis there are some that still make it all about themselves?
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on May 15, 2008 11:46 AMIn other news: Pelosi talking about "dignity" and "Unkl" speaking to "respect" on the same day. My virus-checker just popped up with a "hypocrisy alert". Guess I'll run a system scan....
Posted by: Zarro on May 15, 2008 12:01 PMYou wrote:
"Finally In light of all the scurrilous terms, insulting names and outright racist epithets posted on this forum, why is this one somehow over the top?"
The reason why I found your comments to be "over the top" is because you denigrated the service of veterans to our country, which is quite a different thing than calling someone "elbow", "kneecap", or other, less-tasteful, portions of the anatomy.
That said, I commend you for being big enough to admit your wrongs and apologize for them.
Posted by: ewaggin on May 15, 2008 01:09 PMon a comparative note:
I've never heard of any Hospital Doctors finishing their residency and then ascending to the title of Surgeon General after 3 years.
...If anyone can point one out, I will happily concede the point.
Posted by: Rick D. on May 15, 2008 01:23 PMMeans you organize the community that your in to archive a goal. Get out the vote, plan rallies, fight for your cause. You know like Susan B. Anthony used to do to get women the right to vote.
And choice of churches? Obama hasn't disclaimed the good pastor, but only has mildly rebuked him since all Obama was there for was to get 'noticed'.
Pastor schmastor, personally I don't give a damn about McCain's nutzo biblical Armageddon lovin pastor either. You may because you look for excuses.
And Ayres? Chum up with terrorist so he can get 'noticed'.
He's chumming it up with him? Got photos? Bush was chummy with Ken "Kenny Boy" Lay who likely hurt more people than Ayers ever did.
And Rezko? Claim to be upstanding and a uniter and then get involved with shady deals as a US Senator.
Keating 5 ring a bell? Wasn't one of George Bush's bothers involved in the S&L scandal as well? Guilt by association.
And NAFTA? Tell the sheep in Ohio, Wisconsin you are going to rewrite the law, and then go wink, wink to Canada and tell them you are just saying that to get votes.
Actually it was later revealed it was Hillary's campaign who did that.
Empty suit? You betcha.
Bush is an empty suit too if you take away all the silver spoon things his Daddy had done first (Yale, military service, TX Governor, just look at his WH staff, full of people who worked for his Daddy). W's just riding on Daddy's coattails. Why did he beat Ann Richards..because she made fun of his Daddy. Shame on her. ;)
Odd... was it just 2004 when the leftists were attempting to convince all of just the opposite? How come it was such a big deal and huge advantage then to Kerry among the democrats, but is now meaningless?
Is rank hypocrisy a requirement to be on the left? Because I must tell you: if "Kerry the Warrior" was important to the left in 2004, then it should be at least as important now.
I would love to have someone defending Obama the Empty Suit explain to me why Kerry's military service was SUCH a decisive factor in 04... but is so utterly worthless now.
Situational ethics aside, I mean.
1) GHW Bush was never Governor of Texas
2) Bush was likely a "legacy" admission at Yale
3) As Barack Obama was likely a "legacy" admission at Harvard (B.O.Sr. Graduated from there in 1965)
4) Bush signed up for and completed his military service (did the poster serve a day?).
You also need to read more on Rezko, the guy who financed Obama's house with Saudi money.
Posted by: swatter on May 15, 2008 02:24 PMAns: somebody who habitually spreads rumors.
Q: What is a 'rumormonger'
BINGO!!!!!!!!! :)
Posted by: Duffman on May 15, 2008 02:36 PMHis Daddy represented Huston in the House, a major metropolitan area that I'm sure gave him lots of Texas exposure.
"Poor George (HW) Bush. He can't help it. He was born with a silver foot in his mouth" - Ann Richards
2) Bush was likely a "legacy" admission at Yale
He was a legacy admission, and like Kerry, didn't do so well.
3) As Barack Obama was likely a "legacy" admission at Harvard (B.O.Sr. Graduated from there in 1965)
Maybe, but he has his BA from Columbia. He only has his Law Degree from Harvard. I doubt his daddy pulled any strings for him since he'd written him off long ago.
4) Bush signed up for and completed his military service (did the poster serve a day?).
I'm sure a lot of other Congressmen sons somehow managed to get into the scarce positions in the National Guard while a Draft was going on to fight a war happening overseas. I bet those darn commies in Mexico were shivering their pants knowing the Texas Air National Guard was keeping the borders secure.
Haha, I think the Bush family with their oil interests have deeper connections with countries that breed terrorists than Obama does.
A: This president was so effective, he singlehandedly created a mental illness among his detractors known as B.D.S
Who is G.W. Bush , Alex!
You are correct, sir
Posted by: Rick D. on May 15, 2008 03:11 PMYou saying it's not fair to compare current Presidents with his possible future replacement? Who's whining now Ricky.
Seems like you have O.D.S. =P
OBTW~ There's no crying in Politics, but for just this once, we'll let you sulk a bit and stomp your feet yelling "damn that Bush!"
Just let us know when your tantrum has completed though will ya?
Cheers!
Posted by: Rick D. on May 15, 2008 03:26 PMIn your opinion he is, Nixon had all the experience in the world and was arguably one of the worst presidents in history. Maybe an empty suit would be the best thing for this country.
McCain seems to be on the flip-flop express. After criticizing Romney in the primary for setting Iraq timetables he sets one himself...troops home by 2013.
Bush is still president, i think it's fine to compare Obama to him, as well as McCain. Your just upset because you want Bushie to stay and hate that Mr. Magical Underpants went negative too early causing the party flocked to McCain.
You keep bringing up the education as some sort of indicator of a superior person. Yet you will not test your theory when confronted about it. I will again ask you this every time you start up about it.
Consider this person. I will give you their qualifications, but not their name. Then you must tell me if they are an "empty suit" or a "quality indidivual."
Since this is a blind test, I suspect you will once again dodge the question because you know your theory is bunk.
Call this person, Subject A.
Subject A graduated from Law School and amongst the first notable cases were civil rights cases, most of which the subject won. The subject started their own law firm and was awarded several awards from the NAACP amongst others.
Is this a "quality" indivisual under the WVH theory of human valuation?
Has your faux brother-in-law disowned you yet?
So what happens when Barack Obama is asked a serious question about what he's going to do to help
the American Auto Workers?
Well naturally, he not only dodges the question, but manages to use a sexist remark to the female reporter while doing so.
I believe they call this behavior 'Hubris'
Posted by: Rick D. on May 15, 2008 05:51 PMAl Capone, Aldoph Hitler, V.I. Lenin, Ho Chi Minh, Rev Jones (grape cool-aid anyone?), Pol Pot and Fidel Casro were all "community organizers". All of them were enviromentalists and political progressives.
And, supported by American Liberals/Democrats. Oh, before I forget: Bill Clinton changed his name for political purposes like the above named did for their community organizing purposes.
Is there a referee in the house??
I believe he Hopes that he's not asked a serious question and when he is, he Changes the subject and then Hopes no one notices...
Yup, "Hope" and "Change" is what this election is all about and nobody can bring it to the American public like Senator Obama.
Any takers on #71?
Posted by: Rick D. on May 15, 2008 07:06 PMRev Jones was a Religious Leader much in the same spirit as Rev. Hagee. People will believe all sorts of stupid stuff when it involves religion.
Oh you mean this part?
"But Rezko also has helped Republicans, including former Gov. Jim Edgar, and he co-chaired a fundraiser for President Bush."
Compared to the level of scum that most politicians hang out with this Rezko guy is small potatoes.
So what happens when Barack Obama is asked a serious question about what he's going to do to help the American Auto Workers?
Maybe they should have read his speech.
Well naturally, he not only dodges the question, but manages to use a sexist remark to the female reporter while doing so.
Naturally he apologized to her later. You can even hear the voice mail. I suspect you don't really care cause your more interested in gaffes than actual policy.
Right. Afterall, speeches are much more telling of ones attitude than spontaneous and off the cuff remarks videotaped in a live setting with a reporter asking a "serious issue" question. I stand corrected Cato.
inre: the apology for the un-sexist remark while dismissing the female reporter who asked the question about American auto worker's future that Mr. Obama did not answer....
"Naturally he apologized to her later."
..and I'm sure it was just as sincere as his apology to the "bitter" Pennsylvanian voters who he said "cling to guns and religion".
I just hope he keeps talking. He's sounding more and more like Michelle as we get closer to the election.
So!....... who's wants waffles?
Not even close. That moron Carter made him look like a genius.
"Sweetie's" suit is so empty, it carries and echo of the crickets chirping.
Posted by: Hinton on May 15, 2008 09:38 PM" If more Americans were aware of the angry idiots who hide behind Internet anonymity to vent their rage, it's just fewer votes for Democrats."
One of the class acts in this sandbox, Jim Miller, sent a message to both me and poster, pbj, privately. The e-mail address for pbj is
pbj@cc.net
I replied to both Jim and pbj. I received this:
"The original message was received at Tue, 13 May 2008 07:10:50 +0100
from web36601.mail.mud.yahoo.com [209.191.85.18]
----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
(reason: 550 pbj@cc.net... No such user)
----- Transcript of session follows -----
... while talking to [66.9.53.240]:
>>> DATA
... User unknown
The topic of this post is "Keep It Civil." One poster said this:
" If more Americans were aware of the angry idiots who hide behind Internet anonymity to vent their rage, it's just fewer votes for Democrats."
One of the class acts in this sandbox, Jim Miller, sent a message to both me and poster, pbj, privately. The e-mail address for pbj is
pbj@cc.net
I replied to both Jim and pbj. I received this:
"The original message was received at Tue, 13 May 2008 07:10:50 +0100
from web36601.mail.mud.yahoo.com [209.191.85.18]
----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
(reason: 550 pbj@cc.net... No such user)
----- Transcript of session follows -----
... while talking to [66.9.53.240]:
>>> DATA
... User unknown
Now in response to pbj, who won't come from under his sheet, this is a partial answer to his post at #69:
"Is this a "quality" indivisual under the WVH theory of human valuation?
Posted by pbj at May 15, 2008 04:24 PM
Whoever you are, you are not a quality individual. You want people BANNED and then attempt to mouth Free Speech principles because you really are just a propoganda merchant. You don't have the ability to argue and debate if you can't control the context of the discussion. It is totally about control for you.
I bet folks would be surprised at pbj's identity.
Now, keeping it civil, those who are intellectually honest realize that partisans of either the right or left can hide behind sheets, burn crosses, and send nooses through the mail.
Posted by: WVH on May 15, 2008 10:31 PMYou said:
"to be insulting, race baiting, narcissistic and threatening all in one whining post under the guise of civility."
On these subjects, one really needs to look to you for leadership. No one does it better than you.
Posted by: WVH on May 15, 2008 11:10 PMI accept you appology and want you to know that you have shown that you are truly a better man than most. I also want to point out that you have given me some food for thought with your words and I too will stick to arguing the issues and not attacking the poster. Thank you for pointing that out to all of us as it is a lesson that I am sure we all can use.
Posted by: TrueSoldier on May 15, 2008 11:48 PMThanks for the kind words and extending your hand in reconciliation. You too, are a better man than most. I really do think we all have a whole lot more in common than what divides us here. Sometimes, even Ragnar's comments start to make sense (and that's pretty scary).
Also, in an effort to improve the civility here, and because WVH has shamed me into it, I have included a real, live e-mail address with my name link below. All should feel free to fill it up with comments, hate mail, death threats, etc.
Rush Limbaugh gets slammed for calling actual fake soldiers "fake soldiers." But the left habitually questions both the patriotism and legitimacy of REAL soldiers.
At least Witz owned up to it and apologized, unlike dK.
Posted by: pudge on May 16, 2008 07:42 AMAnd what nerve would that be, fatso? You can't make a logical argument on any issue can you?
Now, here are some issues you might want to comment about, should Governor Gregoire and Senator Rossi call each other names or should they discuss their differences on issues like children's health care and transportation? Better yet, should Senator Rossi talk about how he plans to take Your advice on lowering taxes to the same rate as Mississippi and turn this state into Mississippi? Even Governot Haley Barbour doesn't want Mississippi to stay Mississippi.
Posted by: WVH on May 16, 2008 03:37 PMThe one where you ASSume everyone is referring to you and only you all the time and the one where you recogniize yourself in every comment even when no one specifically mentions you by name.
The question is, is it insecurity or plain old narcissism?
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on May 16, 2008 08:01 PM87. Bingo! WVH clearly has that very same raw nerve as the Bitter appeaser!
Rags, don't you even read what you wrote?
Posted by Ragnar Daneskjold at May 16, 2008 11:48 AM
So, if you don't expect a response on a personal level, then don't address your lame comments to a specific individual.
Ok, fatso, any discussion on the issues or has your brain cell been killed off by fantasy of being a pirate?
Posted by: WVH on May 16, 2008 10:09 PM"And what nerve would that be, fatso?"
"Really Fat A$$, this is what YOU said"
...sounds like something I'd hear on the playground at an elementary.
My Advice....Grow up!
Posted by: Rick D. on May 17, 2008 10:57 AMYou whined about my post (#81), immediately (#82), ASSuming it was all about you, to which I roared with laughter at #87.
I gotta tell ya Pavs Pup, your knee jerk reflex works as well as the Bitter Appeasers... to quote Mark Steyn: "Honestly. What a bunch of self-absorbed ninnies."
Good luck living a happy life..
LMAO... and keep the predictable fun coming, Pavs Pup!
OH! ... and ps... the "fatso" is getting boring. Surely one with a "PhD", however affirmatively attained, should be able to come up with something new every now and then. Let me help: rotund... zaftig... corpulent... porcine... putto... Rubenesque... falstaffian... baroque... embonpoint...
LMAO!
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on May 17, 2008 11:55 AMTo continue to quote Mark Steyn:
"It says something for Democrat (strike: ADD Pav's Pup/any liberal) touchiness that the minute a guy (who me?? LMAO) makes a generalized observation about folks who appease terrorists and dictators (strike: ADD add any comment what so ever) the Dems (strike: ADD Pav's Pup/any liberal) assume: Hey, they're talking about me. Actually, he wasn't - or, to be more precise, he wasn't talking ONLY about you."
LMAO! Too much fun!
