posted on October 13, 2004 10:15:29 AM new
Linda, I'll leave that crazy post for Rawbunzil to correct. But I just want to point out your outrageous interpretation of liberals. Remember not too long ago when you blamed our liberal society for allowing priests to molest children? Such ludicrous allegations make your posts nonsensical and your knowledge of political philosophy questionable to say the least. "Liberal" has, over the past few years largely been defined by it's enemies...such as people like you who don't know what they are talking about.
John F. Kennedy said, "if by a 'liberal' they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people - their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights and their civil liberties someone who believes that we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a 'liberal,' then I'm proud to say that I'm a 'liberal."'
Some of the programs championed by liberals to which the short sighted, self serving "conservatives" objected:
Social Security, Medicare , Medicaid, Women's right to vote, GI Bill, Marshall Plan, NATO, Americans With Disabilities Act, Minimum Wage Law, Bank Deposit Insurance, Earned Income Tax Credit, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Family and Medical Leave Act, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Public Broadcasting, Universal Public Education, National Weather Service, Product Labeling/Truth in Advertising Laws, Morrill Land Grant Act, Rural Electrification, Public Universities, Peace corps, Civil rights movement, The Tennessee Valley project, Labor Laws, Environmental Laws, Food safety laws, Workplace safety laws, Space Program, Operation Head Start, Civil Rights Act of 1964, Voting Rights Act of 1965, Interstate Highway System, 8-hour workday, Water Quality Act, Clean Air Act, First Man on the Moon, Women's Suffrage Amendment, Workers Compensation Act, Unemployment Compensation Act, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Federal Home Loan Program, Securities & Exchange Act, Guaranteed Student Loan Program, School Lunch Program, Motor Voter Act, Balanced budget in 1998 as a result of the Balanced Budget Act of 1993, etc., etc.
posted on October 13, 2004 10:49:57 AM newedited to add to logansdad - On your butt you posted - [mooning]....looks a little red to me...might want to have a doctor check it out...might be something serious you've caught.
No Linda it was your butt after your son decide to ride your bones after your wedding ceremony, only he didn't know which hole to aim for. That was something they forgot to teach him in basic training.
There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again." —George W. Bush, Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002
----------------------------------
Let's have a BBQ, Texas style, ROAST BUSH
------------------------------
On This Week with George Stephanopoulos, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld declares: "the area… that coalition forces control… happens not to be the area where weapons of mass destruction were dispersed. We know where they are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat."
------------------------------
posted on October 13, 2004 10:51:46 AM new
helen - I never said any such thing. Once again you are twisting my words. Not surprisingly...
---------------------
And back on topic.....what democrats STILL don't get...while they complain about the reason we went to war in Iraq....and what they also refuse to believe is ALL the dems, just like kerry, who for 14 years believed and spoke about the threat saddam present to the world....here are but a few examples....
Notice the obvious change as soon as the Massachussets liberal decided to embark for the White House.
June 2003
Kerry Said"It Would Be Irresponsible To Draw Conclusions"¯ That Suggest President Misled On WMD. ABC's GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: I know you said you're agnostic about whether or not he misled the public on weapons of mass destruction. But do you have a hunch on whether you think they hyped the intelligence?¯
KERRY: "George, again, I think it would be irresponsible of me at this point to draw conclusions prior to all the evidence being on the table."¯ (ABC's This Week,¯ 6/15/03)
March 2003
As War Began, Kerry Said Saddam Chose To Make Military Force The Ultimate Weapons Inspections Enforcement Mechanism." Senator John F. Kerry had lambasted Bush's diplomatic efforts, despite voting last fall in support of a congressional resolution authorizing military action to disarm Iraq of any weapons of mass destruction. "[b]It appears that with the deadline for exile come and gone, Saddam Hussein has chosen to make military force the ultimate weapons inspections enforcement mechanism[b]," Kerry said. (Glen Johnson,
Critics Of Bush Voice Support For The Troops,¯ The Boston Globe, 3/20/03)
Kerry Said Saddam Hussein's WMD Are A Threat. "I think Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction are a threat, and that's why I voted to hold him accountable and to make certain that we disarm him." I think we need to (NPR's All Things Considered,¯ 3/19/03)
February 2003
Kerry Said Leaving Saddam Hussein Unfettered With Nuclear Weapons Or Weapons Of Mass Destruction Is Unacceptable.¯ (Jill Lawrence, War Issue Challenges Democratic Candidates,¯ USA Today, 2/12/03)
Kerry Described Secretary Of State Colin Powell's Evidence Of WMD In Iraq As Real And Compelling.¯ [Kerry] said the Bush administration has taken too long to make its case for military action, "but nonetheless I am glad we've reached this moment in our diplomacy." Kerry added: "Convincing evidence of Saddam Hussein's possession of weapons of mass destruction should trigger, I believe, a final ultimatum from the United Nations for a full, complete, immediate disarmament of those weapons by Iraq. "Over the next hours, I will work with my colleagues in the Senate to fully examine the evidence offered by the secretary for a complete and close reading. But, on its face, the evidence against Saddam Hussein appears real and compelling."¯ (Wayne Washington, Kennedy, Others Question Timing Of Attack But Presidential Hopefuls Back War With Iraq,¯ The Boston Globe, 2/6/03)
January 2003
Kerry Said, "If You Don't Believe Saddam Hussein Is A Threat With Nuclear Weapons, Then You Shouldn't Vote For Me." (Ronald Brownstein, On Iraq, Kerry Appears Either Torn Or Shrewd,¯ Los Angeles Times, 1/31/03)
Kerry Described Threat Of Saddam Hussein With WMD As Real, But Not New. "We need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. He miscalculated an eight-year war with Iran. He miscalculated the invasion of Kuwait. He miscalculated America's response to that act of naked aggression. He miscalculated the result of setting oil rigs on fire. He miscalculated the impact of sending scuds into Israel and trying to assassinate an American President. He miscalculated his own military strength. He miscalculated the Arab world's response to his misconduct. And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm."¯ (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks At Georgetown University, Washington, DC, 1/23/03)
October 2002
Mr. Kerry Said Iraq's Weapons Of Mass Destruction Posed "A Real And Grave Threat" To The United States.¯ (Dave Boyer, Key Senators Of Both Parties Back Bush On Iraq War,¯ The Washington Times, 10/10/02)
Kerry Questioned Saddam's Actions With Respect To His WMD Capability. "Why is Saddam Hussein pursuing weapons that most nations have agreed to limit or give up? Why is Saddam Hussein guilty of breaking his own cease-fire agreement with the international community? Why is Saddam Hussein attempting to develop nuclear weapons when most nations don't even try, and responsible nations that have them attempt to limit their potential for disaster? Why did Saddam Hussein threaten and provoke? Why does he develop missiles that exceed allowable limits? Why did Saddam Hussein lie and deceive the inspection teams previously? Why did Saddam Hussein not account for all of the weapons of mass destruction which UNSCOM identified? Why is he seeking to develop unmanned airborne vehicles for delivery of biological agents? Does he do all of these things because he wants to live by international standards of behavior? Because he respects international law? Because he is a nice guy underneath it all and the world should trust him?." (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 10/9/02, p. S10171)
[b]Kerry Called It "Naive To The Point Of Grave Danger"¯ To Leave Saddam "To His Own Devices."¯ "It would be naive to the point of grave danger not to believe that, left to his own devices, Saddam Hussein will provoke, misjudge, or stumble into a future, more dangerous confrontation with the civilized world." (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 10/9/02, p. S10171)
Kerry Said "Threat Of Saddam Hussein With Weapons Of Mass Destruction Is Real."¯ "The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation."¯ (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 10/9/02, p. S10171)
Kerry: "I Am Prepared To Hold Saddam Hussein Accountable And Destroy His Weapons Of Mass Destruction"¯ (Ronald Brownstein, Democratic Presidential Hopefuls Differ On War In Iraq,¯ Los Angeles Times, 10/6/02)
September 2000
[b]Kerry Said "There Is Nothing More Destabilizing Or Threatening [To The World] Than Weapons Of Mass Destruction." "I think all of us are deeply concerned about the degree to which certain countries seem to be contributing to the potential of instability in the world. Obviously, there is nothing more destabilizing or threatening than weapons of mass destruction. We have spent an enormous amount of time and energy focused on Iraq, on Iran, on Russia, on loose nukes, on nuclear materials, and of course on China and on the issue of the transfer of technology to Pakistan." (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 9/11/00, p. S8321)
December 1998
Kerry Defended Clinton's 1998 Attacks Because Saddam "Is Pursuing Weapons Of Mass Destruction."¯ "Americans need to really understand the gravity and legitimacy of what is happening with Saddam Hussein. He has been given every opportunity in the world to comply. The president does not control the schedule of UNSCOM. The president did not withdraw the UNSCOM inspectors. And the president did not, obviously, cut a deal with Saddam Hussein to do this at this moment. Saddam Hussein has not complied. Saddam Hussein is pursuing a program to build weapons of mass destruction."¯(Sen. John Kerry, Press Conference, 12/16/98)
September 1998
Kerry Said, "We're Going To Have To Make Some Fundamental Decisions About Whether To Follow A Policy Of Containment Or Deprive Iraq Of Its Weapons Of Mass Destruction."¯ (Eric Schmitt, U.N. Arms Inspector Who Quit Is Told He Can't Make Policy, The New York Times, 9/4/98)
February 1998
Kerry Said Saddam Had Already Used WMD And Had Intent "To Do So"¯ Again. "There are set of principles here that are very large, larger in some measure than I think has been adequately conveyed, both internationally and certainly to the American people. Saddam Hussein has already used these weapons and has made it clear that he has the intent to continue to try, by virtue of his duplicity and secrecy, to continue to do so. That is a threat to the stability of the Middle East. It is a threat with respect to the potential of terrorist activities on a global basis. It is a threat even to regions near but not exactly in the Middle East."¯ (Sen. John Kerry, Press Conference, 2/23/98)
Kerry Said That If Saddam's Weapon Capability Was Not Eliminated "We Will Be Called On To Send Our Ships And Our Troops At One Point In The Future Back To The Middle East." "Saddam Hussein has violated that standard [against using weapons of mass destruction] on several occasions previously and by most people's expectation, no matter what agreement we come up with, may well do so again. The greater likelihood is that we will be called on to send our ships and our troops at one point in the future back to the Middle East to stand up to the next crisis."¯ (Sen. John Kerry, Press Conference, 2/23/98)
December 1997
Kerry Urged U.N. To Eliminate Iraq's Suspected Infrastructure For Developing And Manufacturing Weapons Of Mass Destruction.¯ Democratic Senator John Kerry has said: "The Security Council should authorize a strong UN military response that will materially damage, if not totally destroy, as much as possible of the suspected infrastructure for developing and manufacturing weapons of mass destruction[/b]." He added that "[b]Saddam Hussein has intentionally or inadvertently set up a test which the entire world will be watching, and if he gets away with this arrogant ploy, he will have terminated the most important multilateral effort to defuse a legitimate threat to global security[b]."¯ (US Lawmakers Threaten Military Action Against Iraq, Agence France Presse, 12/12/97)
November 1997
Kerry Warned U.S. Senate Of Saddam's WMD Capabilities. "It is not possible to overstate the ominous implications for the Middle East if Saddam were to develop and successfully militarize and deploy potent biological weapons. We can all imagine the consequences. Extremely small quantities of several known biological weapons have the capability to exterminate the entire population of cities the size of Tel Aviv or Jerusalem. These could be delivered by ballistic missile, but they also could be delivered by much more pedestrian means; aerosol applicators on commercial trucks easily could suffice. If Saddam were to develop and then deploy usable atomic weapons, the same holds true."¯ (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 11/9/97, pp. S12254 -S12255)
January 1991
Kerry Acknowledged Saddam Working Toward Development Of WMD "For Years." "If we go to war in the next few days, it will not be because our immediate vital interests are so threatened and we have no other choice. It is not because of nuclear, chemical, biological weapons when, after all, Saddam Hussein had all those abilities or was working toward them for years....¯ (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 1/12/91, p. S369)
October 1990
Kerry Said "Iraq Has Developed A Chemical Weapons Capability."¯ "Today, we are confronted by a regional power, Iraq, which has attacked a weaker state, Kuwait....The crisis is even more threatening by virtue of the fact that Iraq has developed a chemical weapons capability, and is pursuing a nuclear weapons development program. And Saddam Hussein has demonstrated a willingness to use such weapons of mass destruction in the past, whether in his war against Iran or against his own Kurdish population."¯ (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 10/2/90, p. S14330)
-----------------------
And even following the take over of Iraq, kerry continue to praise the war efforts. It wasn't until the terrorists started fighting....when things started getting rough...did kerry, all-of-a-sudden start changing his position...to where it is now....the wrong war and this President is the ONLY one to be blamed. Think the Iraqi's want saddam back in power? I don't.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"And they, the interrogator went through all of these statements from John Kerry. He starts pounding on the table. 'See here, this naval officer, he admits that you are a criminal.'" Excerpt from "Stolen Honor"
- James H. Warner Former Vietnam POW
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I will never submit America's national security to an international test. The use of troops to defend America must never be subject to a veto by countries like France. The President's job is not to take an international poll -- the President's job is to defend America." --President George W. Bush
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Re-elect President Bush
posted on October 13, 2004 10:55:31 AM new
logansdad said: [i]No Linda it was your butt after your son decide to ride your bones after your wedding ceremony, only he didn't know which hole to aim for. That was something they forgot to teach him in basic training[/b].
You're a very sick person, logansdad. And you give other gay people a terrible reputation when they see one speaking as you do. No wonder many think gays are perverts....you give aid and comfort to their beliefs.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"And they, the interrogator went through all of these statements from John Kerry. He starts pounding on the table. 'See here, this naval officer, he admits that you are a criminal.'" Excerpt from "Stolen Honor"
- James H. Warner Former Vietnam POW
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I will never submit America's national security to an international test. The use of troops to defend America must never be subject to a veto by countries like France. The President's job is not to take an international poll -- the President's job is to defend America." --President George W. Bush
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Re-elect President Bush
posted on October 13, 2004 10:57:31 AM new
Thank you, Helen, for the great post!
It's still a shot through the heart whenever I read something Kennedy said or did and then compare him to what we got stuck with now. America has hit the skids if you judge it by the quality of the present administration.
But I think it's useless talking to the neocons on this board(and some other places).
They are dead inside, no heart, no soul, no feelings for anyone but themselves.
That's why we're often referrd to as "bleeding heart" Liberals.....WE have a heart.
That difference between us and the "me, myself, and I" neocons is why we will never agree with them.
posted on October 13, 2004 11:04:24 AM new
Obviously linduh chooses to ignore the sick crap hetero's like "twelve" say.
I think enjoying the death of others is about as sick as YOU can get.
Plus, with her selective reading ability she has missed the weird sexual posts of her fellow "straight" neocons.
They don't call her "tunnel-vision linduh " for nothing!
Oh, linduh, another long, boring, meaningless C&P doesn't help....it's just your usual crap.
It's old(1998!) and the situation has changed.
Intelligent people THINK and may change their minds as situations change.....what happened 6 years ago may not have relevance today....it's a different situation. The inability to be flexible, to think, to reason, is a sure course to disaster ....like the disaster in Iraq. The world says it's a mess but does our president rethink his failing "plans"??? No, let's just be "steadfast", "work hard" and it will all just go away..............
[ edited by crowfarm on Oct 13, 2004 11:09 AM ]
posted on October 13, 2004 11:31:55 AM new
Linda_K, when I saw the disgusting filth that logansdad posted, my first thought was, 'aha, another volunteer for being ignored.'
There is no call for such outrageous defamation on this forum. I call on Vendio to draw the line somewhere before such remarks and castigate the poster accordingly. I am doing my own castigating and putting logansdad on ignore.
So, now I have on ignore:
crowfarm
maggiemuggins
bigpeepa
logansdad
A select group of miscreants that contribute minimally to the forum community, but offend decency. If you are new here just put them all on ignore now, and save yourself exposure to nastiness and #*!@ stirring trolls.
IMHO, I am Parklane64 and I definitely approve this post.
posted on October 13, 2004 12:05:58 PM new
Oh pricklane, get over yourself. You're starting to sound like that self-righteuos, pompous asp, linda!
YOU are as guilty of slinging the ship as anyone else!
Ha! If you have us all on ignore as you REPEATEDLY state then WHY do you keep commenting on our posts??
You deadbeat, quit telling others what to do....you weren't elected, or even appointed, to be ruler of the chat room.
posted on October 13, 2004 12:09:41 PM new
parklane - A while back we had moderators and statements like that would have called for suspension of the poster - no doubt. But for quite a while now, we've been on something similar to an honor system using 'self moderation'. Some just don't have the self-control it takes to not be crude and vulgar. As you've clearly seen.
I believe it lets the person who spews such filth be seen as the anomalous person they are though, because the majority are not like that. It appears to be too difficult, while hiding behind their monitors anonymously, for them to remain civil.
posted on October 13, 2004 12:12:50 PM new
Linda get over it. I see you have no problem giving out insults but you can't take them. If you don't like getting them then don't bother posting them. Furthermore I don't see you reprimanding any other posters for their insults made to me or other people.
What comes around goes around. I can't help it I am little more quick witted than you in your old age.
There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again." —George W. Bush, Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002
----------------------------------
Let's have a BBQ, Texas style, ROAST BUSH
------------------------------
On This Week with George Stephanopoulos, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld declares: "the area… that coalition forces control… happens not to be the area where weapons of mass destruction were dispersed. We know where they are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat."
------------------------------
posted on October 13, 2004 12:59:39 PM newhelen - I never said any such thing. Once again you are twisting my words. Not surprisingly
Linda, you said, "To me ALL who molest children should be locked up....not the just priests who molest. And they should be locked up for good. But not in our liberal society. The laws let them out so they can do the same thing again. But I see few getting so upset about that. I see more agruing that 'they've served their time'. Yes, they have and time and time again they go out and molest again."
When you say that our liberal society prevents the jailing of priests allowing them to repeat their crime, you are blaming the liberal society for the molestation of children by priests.
posted on October 13, 2004 01:00:52 PM new
logansdad - Not at all the same...being able to 'hand something out' but not being able to 'take it'.
You're crude, repulsive, vulgar and untrue post was totally inappropriate, uncalled for and not the only time you've made similar comments to me and about those living in the South.
Since I've NEVER, ever made such sick, perverted statements to others....there's no way what I've 'given' is being 'returned' to me. Because I've never lowered myself to your level of vulgarity.
You stand alone giving gays a bad reputation by the comments, like these that you make. Doesn't make those on the receiving end of your nastiness look sick or perverted...just you.
posted on October 13, 2004 01:19:58 PM new
helen - First you say: "Remember not too long ago when you blamed our liberal society for allowing priests to molest children?"
Not what I said at all. You're getting very desperate helen.
Next you say: "When you say that our liberal society prevents the jailing of priests allowing them to repeat their crime, you are blaming the liberal society for the molestation of children by priests."
Which also isn't what I said. Wrong twice now.
I did not say that "our liberal society prevents the jailing of priests allowing....." NOR did I say that our liberal society prevents the jailing of priests.
It's YOUR twist of my words helen...neither of your statements about what I said are correct.
here's what I said:
To me ALL who molest children should be locked up....not the just priests who molest.
And they should be locked up for good. But not in our liberal society. The laws let them out so they can do the same thing again. But I see few getting so upset about that. I see more agruing that 'they've served their time'. Yes, they have and time and time again they go out and molest again.
Does the way the ACLU pays the cost to defend groups like NAMBLA upset you just as much as these priests do?"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"And they, the interrogator went through all of these statements from John Kerry. He starts pounding on the table. 'See here, this naval officer, he admits that you are a criminal.'" Excerpt from "Stolen Honor"
- James H. Warner Former Vietnam POW
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I will never submit America's national security to an international test. The use of troops to defend America must never be subject to a veto by countries like France. The President's job is not to take an international poll -- the President's job is to defend America." --President George W. Bush
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Re-elect President Bush
posted on October 13, 2004 01:22:30 PM new
Whatever Linda. You see things the way you want to. Everyone else is wrong and you are always right.
Now run along and go get sympathy from your other neocoon bible thumper supporters.
Even your response is typical. You can make assumptions about homosexuals and what they may or may not do, but GOD FORBID if any one else makes a stereotype about a Bible Thumper or someone living in the South.
You don't like my remark because it hit a nerve with you. My bite is worse than my bark. So watch out, I can play with the big boys unlike you Linda. If you can't take the heat, then take up knitting or something else you old people like to do. Better yet just go to Church and pray.
There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again." —George W. Bush, Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002
----------------------------------
Let's have a BBQ, Texas style, ROAST BUSH
------------------------------
On This Week with George Stephanopoulos, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld declares: "the area… that coalition forces control… happens not to be the area where weapons of mass destruction were dispersed. We know where they are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat."
------------------------------
posted on October 13, 2004 01:28:27 PM new
Linda, your quote EXACTLY "To me ALL who molest children should be locked up....not the just priests who molest. And they should be locked up for good. But not in our liberal society. The laws let them out so they can do the same thing again. But I see few getting so upset about that. I see more agruing that 'they've served their time'. Yes, they have and time and time again they go out and molest again."
Linda, I quoted your remark directly from the thread word for word - in context, with a link to that same post.
How can you say that you didn't say that?
If you didn't intend to say that, what did you mean to say about our "liberal society" and it's relationship to molestation of children?
posted on October 13, 2004 02:06:46 PM new
Helenjw, trying to reason with you is like trying to reason with a teenager that 'knows' they need to take the car, TONIGHT! You are trying to twist the intent of Linda's post to meet your own demented cause.
The only reason that I can figure she argues with the likes of you is that she likes a daily mud bath to keep her complexion young looking.
BTW, Helenjw, your posts are often non sequitur and amusing.
posted on October 13, 2004 02:22:47 PM new
I have no interest in your opinions, parklane64 because they have no value in my opinion.
I have asked linda, very politely as a matter of fact, "If you didn't intend to say that, what did you mean to say about our "liberal society" and it's relationship to molestation of children?" That's a fair question especially in view of her outrageouse attacks on liberals.
posted on October 13, 2004 02:48:51 PM new
Okay logansdad - You obviously have absolutely no remorse for what your vulgar statements to me. So, I will give you this warning. Should this treatment continue again, I will report you to Vendio and hopefully you'll be suspended for your continued, outrageous, vile comments to me. So...you 'play' however you wish to...but don't again make these crude comments to me. EVER.
posted on October 13, 2004 03:21:03 PM new
You did make a provocative remark, linda when you said, "On your butt you posted - [mooning]....looks a little red to me...might want to have a doctor check it out...might be something serious you've caught." Although I'm not trying to defend what Logansdad said I think it would be wise to avoid such remarks which only invite responses that are equally crude or even worse.
If you follow that route you can avoid becoming a vendio snitch.
posted on October 13, 2004 03:29:53 PM new
helen - Once again...it's none of your business. You take care of helen....and I'll take care of Linda.
Get this...Linda doesn't need, want and hasn't asked for helen's advice.
logansdad posted a red butt to me and I responded. You once got upset over the mention of your drinking....and your daughter...do you remember me coming into the thread and telling YOU that it was your own fault that happened?
posted on October 13, 2004 03:46:09 PM new
I'll post whatever I want, Linda. I was simply trying to offer you some helpful advice...take it or leave it. No big deal.
I don't drink and that's why I was upset about that remark. On the other hand, you "have" engaged in this tit for tat stuff with logansdad.
So, I think that it's a mistake to become a snitch. In my opinion it would be better to avoid the conflict in the first place. Now, I have said what I think.
BTW...If you have a need to keep something private this is not the place, Linda.
Helen
[ edited by Helenjw on Oct 13, 2004 03:47 PM ]
posted on October 13, 2004 04:17:29 PM new
Linda, do you what you feel is necessary. I don't respond to threats. I speak my mind and if you are offended that is your problem not mine.
There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again." —George W. Bush, Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002
----------------------------------
Let's have a BBQ, Texas style, ROAST BUSH
------------------------------
On This Week with George Stephanopoulos, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld declares: "the area… that coalition forces control… happens not to be the area where weapons of mass destruction were dispersed. We know where they are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat."
------------------------------
posted on October 13, 2004 04:51:36 PM new
logansdad - Be clear....it wasn't a threat...it was a warning...and a promise if it happens again. Vendio does have community guidelines and you've gone WAY over the line....twice now.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"And they, the interrogator went through all of these statements from John Kerry. He starts pounding on the table. 'See here, this naval officer, he admits that you are a criminal.'" Excerpt from "Stolen Honor"
- James H. Warner Former Vietnam POW
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I will never submit America's national security to an international test. The use of troops to defend America must never be subject to a veto by countries like France. The President's job is not to take an international poll -- the President's job is to defend America." --President George W. Bush
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Re-elect President Bush
posted on October 13, 2004 09:15:53 PM new
But I have to admit that I have a strong aversion to snitches. I believe that we should handle our own problems with other posters. Being a snitch is childish like being a tattle tale in elementary school.
Excerpt from "Stolen Honor"
I did not say that "our liberal society prevents the jailing of priests allowing....." NOR did I say that our liberal society prevents the jailing of priests.
