Though, I don't think that me saying the President should have been more bland/mundane in his comments was calling for a "gut shot".
And, I am very familiar with loving the sinner. But, as I recall, forgiveness is ALWAYS based on repentence. Bill Clinton has never even implied that he was sorry for what he had done. In fact, to the contrary, his "because I could" explanation shows how truly depraved this man is.
As we all know, the President is a Christian and a good man. No dispute. The President is a man of character. He has shown that many times.
But, and this is the last time I'm going to say this, the President simply did not have to be that glowing in his remarks.
He could have been classy, he could have shown his character, and he could have shown how Christian a man he is-- he could have done all of that without the actually saying some of the things that he said.
These people showed how ungrateful they really are when less than an hour after the President's remarks, Klintoon was out slamming the President. Now, it didn't take this incident to show me how low these people are. Alas, we all have known this for a very long time. Which is why, I think, that the President's remarks were so hard to believe.
Now, did Klintoon show himself (again) for the ungrateful bastard that he is? Yes. Of course. But, we didn't need another episode to know this.
Look this issue is over. I have made my point clear. You have made yours. There is one last thing I want to say (and OhioWfan, this next comment is a more general comment, not necessarily directed at you)...
This thread was laced with a lot of BS insinuations about fellow FREEPERs. We are supposed to be having good quality discussions. Sometimes these discussion get heated (sometimes, overheated). We all need to hash this crap out in a semi-civil tone.
When you don't agree with someone, you don't start calling people names and saying that they are democrats or Kerry supporters. That's cheap and it's a very poor way of making a point.
And, while I realize that we have way too many trolls who join to do nothing but cause problems (Lord knows, I like a good ZOT-fest like anyone), you really need to look at the FREEPER's comments "In Forum" before you start lodging those cheap accussations. If you want to know about me, you are welcome to look at my comments in the forum. You will learn a lot about how I am and what I'm all about.
And worse, before you start running to the mods by using the "Report Abuse", when all there really is, is some comments that you don't agree with. As I do, when I suspect someone is a troll, I look at their profile to see when they joined and then I look at their "In Forum" comments. If there comments are consistently troll-like, then, by all means, report them. But, if you don't like someone's comments and you look at their comment history and it is solid conservative, non troll-like comments, you need to refrain from running to the mods.
It happened on this thread and a newer, but very solid FREEPER's account was suspended. That's wrong. We can disagree, but we don't have to be disagreeable. And, I know that the discussion got heated and some things were said that was fuel on the fire. But, we certainly don't need to run to the mods, complaining about someone without due cause. And, if you are going to report abuse and ask for a FREEPER to be suspended or banned, then you should at least look at someone's history of comments, not just one or a few comments on 1 particular thread.
Anyway, I respect all of you all's opinions even if I disagree with them. Funny thing, talk radio this morning was rehashing all of the different perspectives that we ran through yesterday. So, in that regard, we are all 12 hours ahead of the game, which is kind of nice.
FRegards to all....
Long-standing membership does not give one the right to be rude. And when a person is repeatedly asked to change behavior and does not do so, I think asking for a ruling from the moderator is appropriate.
You will notice that the moderator gave said person a chance to quit. Suspension could have been avoided if she had complied with the moderator.
As far as your take on the speech, it seems to me that letting President Bush's courtesy and class make you angry is not very helpful. First of all, he is not going to behave any differently. He will be courteous to Jacques Chirac when he goes to Europe. I couldn't do it, but I am not as nice a person as he is. That is how he is, and you are just going to have to accept it. He is NEVER going to attack someone in a public venue. Period.
One, I don't think you are a 'sinner' because you disagree with the way the President handled this situation, but am sure that he spent time in prayer about it and had others praying for him, and you know as well as I do, that he knows the lack of character of his predecessor.
Two, I still don't think his comments were all that 'glowing.' I haven't read the transcript (it's not that important to me), but I did listen carefully, and most of the things he said were true and were double entendre (i.e. that xlinton and hil had a 'partnership'....i.e. political arrangement and not a marriage that was good for their mutual ambition), some of which made me laugh because they were so well disguised.
Three, the freeper in question had become belligerent and angry, was politely asked to stop by at least four (maybe more) calm posters and kept at it. I don't know if anyone posted abuse, but the Admin Mod asked her to stop, and it was later she was banned.
The mods monitor these things carefully, and warn people who go over the line, so I think your concern over this is unwarranted.
That's all. You're a good example of how a disagreement should be handled. Take care, matt.
Matt, I participated on this thread yesterday, and saw a lot of the heated comments. The Freeper that got suspended was beyond heated - completely uncivil, rude, and didn't heed the moderator when asked to knock it off. I've read your comments and others, and have no problem with the content - in fact, I also think the president did a bit too much praising. Others disagree. I suspect the Freeper that got suspended wasn't suspended for making comments that someone disagreed with, but for uncivil behavior. That Freeper couldn't even accept an apology. Sometimes some people just need a little "time out" to reflect. Maybe when they come back, they can disagree without being disagreeable.
Just my 02 cents.
I wonder if you can tell me how that is done. I was wishing to check out someone's comments.
Appreciated.......