Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The 1990s are Back, Glenn Greenwald is Worried About Angry White Racist Militias
Publius' Forum ^ | 2/24/09 | Warner Todd Huston

Posted on 02/24/2009 7:41:29 AM PST by Mobile Vulgus

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 last
To: papertyger

No offense, but WTF are you talking about?

Did you even READ my post?


21 posted on 02/24/2009 8:35:10 AM PST by WayneS (Respect the 2nd Amendment; Repeal the 16th)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Mobile Vulgus

Just wait til you see a real militia Glenn.


22 posted on 02/24/2009 8:36:39 AM PST by Sir Gawain (With Obama's "tax cut" I can afford a torch and a pitchfork in just TWO WEEKS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WayneS

None taken.

Your second point seemed to accept the validity of greenwhatever’s accusation conservatives went to sleep during the bush administration.


23 posted on 02/24/2009 8:42:25 AM PST by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: papertyger

By denying his claim I somehow validated it?

I clearly stated that I did NOT “go away” during the Bush administration.

So, how exactly does that statement validate his accusation that I “went away” during the Bush administration.


24 posted on 02/24/2009 8:45:26 AM PST by WayneS (Respect the 2nd Amendment; Repeal the 16th)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: WayneS

Please pardon the missing question mark.

I will try to make up for it by providing one random question mark in th?is post.


25 posted on 02/24/2009 8:47:47 AM PST by WayneS (Respect the 2nd Amendment; Repeal the 16th)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: WayneS

No, by saying “I, for one, did not ‘vanish’” you could be understood to be contrasting yourself with those who supposedly *did* vanish.

That is a tacit acceptance of his duplicitous premise.


26 posted on 02/24/2009 9:05:30 AM PST by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: papertyger
That is a tacit acceptance of his duplicitous premise...

No, it is not.

It is OVERT acceptance of the fact that I am only able to speak for myself, and not for others.

PLEASE - Feel free to speak for YOURSELF; but do NOT accuse me of saying, thinking, or doing something that I was NOT saying, thinking or doing.

27 posted on 02/24/2009 9:13:08 AM PST by WayneS (Respect the 2nd Amendment; Repeal the 16th)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: WayneS

Whatever you say, sport.

Don’t blame me if your writing can’t keep up with your meaning.


28 posted on 02/24/2009 9:17:39 AM PST by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: papertyger

You’re the one with the reading comprehension problem, not I.


29 posted on 02/24/2009 9:23:31 AM PST by WayneS (Respect the 2nd Amendment; Repeal the 16th)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson