Popeman38 Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 popeman, why does she still have your attention to bring to the deserters? To be honest, I read a fair amount of news, and I watch it most nights. I hadn't seen it mentioned till this thread. Why does she still have spotlight unless you are giving it to her? Which dems hitched themselves to her? Some thought she had some points against the war when she spouted what they had already said. She hitched to them, not the other way. They aren't responcible for her like you want to make them. You want to group everybody who is against Bush with her. The rest of us just feel some pity for her and wonder why you care what she says over any other Dem or for that matter anyone not pro Republican all the time. Just to give you some historical perspective, a quick count of who started Sheehan threads here recently: Sarge and Nelms. Hmm, I guess they can join with Ann Coulter in expressing their disapointment. Go back and read the original post. It was in a newspaper, so someone is giving her print space. "At least sixteen Democratic members of Congress signed a letter on August 9, 2005, asking that Bush meet with Sheehan" to name a few. Jesse Jackson took to her cause. That is the Dems hitching to her... The reason I care is that she is, and the media by spinning the story as people who are simply against the war, is lending competence to the soldiers that SIGNED up for the military only to desert when they decide they don't want to really serve the country - only themselves... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 Jumbo,My post was in response to this post: "I guess ugly knows ugly right nelms?" I was just responding in kind, with one big difference. Mine was meant to be light-hearted, his was not. I understand your response and had seen the post. I hope you undertood me because this doesn't change what I said. His doesn't merit a warning. And you gotta be kidding that you expected that to be read as light-hearted, besides, how often are you light-hearted? First, he uses the term "ugly" in exactly the same manner as you used it in your title, which is fine. If the poster wants to respond to the tone of your post(s) as "ugly", as he clearly does here, it's within the realm of normal practice as it's dealing with your content. It's even an appelation that has been ascribed to your posts more than a few times and is reasonably related to tone and content. There's nothing "homo" about his posting tone or content as he doesn't mention having sex with a guy anywhere, and, it's inappropriate as you use it here, and "not ok" at best. Another mod would have been well within his perogative to ban you for inflammatory and direct name-calling unrelated to content. Most interventions we make are well-met with an apology and attitude of "getting" it. Rarely, we get a response where no acknowledgement of our instruction is offered and a sort of rebuttal is supplied instead. No problem, we may have misunderstood something and just like our government, should be open to question . Other times, it is a problem, as it gets into the "let me the poster tell you the mod the rules." Sort of like "Hey, let me explain why it's ok for me to call the guy a "homo." Here, you offer no acknowledgment of any of my instruction to you, but repsond with your version of "but look what he did." I hope you will re-focus on what I said to you and not worry about him. And thanks for the extra work :laugh: . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 Nothing unusual! I served in the reserves for a year and some people that were on the books for a six year hitch only showed up for their annual training for ALL SIX YEARS. So he had a gap. All you have to do is schedule important things on drill weekend and they let you miss it, you just don't get paid... I don't know why Dems make a big deal of Bush missing some drill time, but Kerry can bash the military, call "comrades" murderers, and claim he was somwhere he wasn't and he is a war hero. A little hypocritical? Maybe? Not hypocritical because I could give a rat's ass about John Kerry (and from the 2004 election, it appears that a lot of Dems didn't care for him either). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 I understand your response and had seen the post. I hope you undertood me because this doesn't change what I said. His doesn't merit a warning. And you gotta be kidding that you expected that to be read as light-hearted, besides, how often are you light-hearted? First, he uses the term "ugly" in exactly the same manner as you used it in your title, which is fine. If the poster wants to respond to the tone of your post(s) as "ugly", as he clearly does here, it's within the realm of normal practice as it's dealing with your content. It's even an appelation that has been ascribed to your posts more than a few times and is reasonably related to tone and content. There's nothing "homo" about his posting tone or content as he doesn't mention having sex with a guy anywhere, and, it's inappropriate as you use it here, and "not ok" at best. Another mod would have been well within his perogative to ban you for inflammatory and direct name-calling unrelated to content. Most interventions we make are well-met with an apology and attitude of "getting" it. Rarely, we get a response where no acknowledgement of our instruction is offered and a sort of rebuttal is supplied instead. No problem, we may have misunderstood something and just like our government, should be open to question . Other times, it is a problem, as it gets into the "let me the poster tell you the mod the rules." Sort of like "Hey, let me explain why it's ok for me to call the guy a "homo." Here, you offer no acknowledgment of any of my instruction to you, but repsond with your version of "but look what he did." I hope you will re-focus on what I said to you and not worry about him. And thanks for the extra work :laugh: . That's a very long explanation when... Soon to be suspended says what? <--smiley added only to confuse ...would have been so much more fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popeman38 Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 Not hypocritical because I could give a rat's ass about John Kerry. Fair enough, but why bring up the gap in service? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 Because that gap in service, especially of that length, falls under the label of desertion. That, and I was just stroking some of the people here. Personnally, I don't care if everyone does it when they are in the Guard. To me, if you sign up, then you do what's required of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slateman Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 I thought this was going to be another Ann Coulter thread. Now that would be an interesting cage match Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Terminator Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 You know, I disagree with the reasoning for us being in Iraq, but being a vet of the first Gulf War, these guys should be shot. They volunteered for military service. They were not forced into the military, they agreed to be in. When you volunteer to be in the military, you know that you may have to go to war. It is not your place to question why you go. Your family and friends that are civilians can do this. You made your voice heard with a vote for Commander In Chief. You were sent to war when you were 17? How the hell did that happen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nelms Posted June 21, 2006 Author Share Posted June 21, 2006 No problem, we may have misunderstood something and just like our government, should be open to question . Other times, it is a problem, as it gets into the "let me the poster tell you the mod the rules." Sort of like "Hey, let me explain why it's ok for me to call the guy a "homo." If he would have responded "what?", don't you think I have every right to call him a homo? :laugh: Seriously, it was a light-hearted jab. Sometimes, people take things too seriously on this board. I've been called senile, insane, a retard, an old fart, just to name a few. Do I care? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rictus58 Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 If he would have responded "what?", don't you think I have every right to call him a homo? :laugh: Seriously, it was a light-hearted jab. Sometimes, people take things too seriously on this board. I've been called senile, insane, a retard, an old fart, just to name a few. Do I care? No. You've also been called "gay" quite a few times by Chomerics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nelms Posted June 21, 2006 Author Share Posted June 21, 2006 You've also been called "gay" quite a few times by Chomerics. Oh yeah, I forgot about that. Thanks for reminding me. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 If he would have responded "what?", don't you think I have every right to call him a homo? :laugh: Seriously, it was a light-hearted jab. Sometimes, people take things too seriously on this board. I've been called senile, insane, a retard, an old fart, just to name a few. Do I care? No. We're taking this to PMs. A mod has asked you to tone it down. Tone it down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 and still, please change the title. Thanks in advance. xoxo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 You've also been called "gay" quite a few times by Chomerics. Like Henry said, this thread needs to return to the topic but I will say that after seeing another poster state this same charge in another thread, it was checked and found not to be an accurate representation. Please make any further comments in the form of a PM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 And I wish he was standing up here with these people because he didn't want to go." So, was this the first or 2nd time he volunteered???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 And I wish he was standing up here with these people because he didn't want to go." So, was this the first or 2nd time he volunteered???? I think what she's saying is she wished he didn't want to go. Even so, I agree with the general consensus that she's a crazyperson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 With all due respect for her son's sacrifice and many of the people who share her basic position, she does seem like a nutjob, unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seabee1973 Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 the poster child for everything that is wrong with the country. she has already been cut off from the rest of the family on the ex-husband's side. I am sure Casey would be ashamed at her actions. I think he is from reports i heard dont know if they are true are not she had not seen her son since he was around 15 when she lost a custody battle with his dad and is getting ready to lose another child to a custody battle./ I guess she spoke to her son once in the last some odd years begging him not to go over seas she really knows what her sone wanted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B.Lloyd Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 cindy sheehan makes me :puke: . She looks like a piece of :pooh: . She should wear a :anon: over her head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 I think what she's saying is she wished he didn't want to go. Even so, I agree with the general consensus that she's a crazyperson. Going to have to sign up for the Reading is Fundamental course .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#98QBKiller Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 I thought this was going to be another Ann Coulter thread. My thoughts exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.