Paging Henry Bowman...Paging Henry Bowman...
1 posted on
01/24/2006 8:58:53 AM PST by
DCBryan1
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
To: DCBryan1
But I'm not for the war. And being against the war and saying you support the troops is one of the wussiest positions the pacifists have ever taken and they're wussy by definition. It's as if the one lesson they took away from Vietnam wasn't to avoid foreign conflicts with no pressing national interest but to remember to throw a parade afterward.
2 posted on
01/24/2006 9:01:16 AM PST by
mnehring
(Perry 06- It's better than a hippie in a cowboy hat or a commie with blue hair.)
To: DCBryan1
To: DCBryan1
Thanks for reminding me why I don't read or subscribe to the LA Slimes....
4 posted on
01/24/2006 9:03:05 AM PST by
antceecee
(Reagan Democrat and now a Bush Republican...)
To: DCBryan1
I may find his position disgusting, but at least he's honest. Which is a lot more than I can say about 99% of the left.
And he's right. As someone "remotely" (via marriage) associated with the military, I probably could kick his ass.
To: DCBryan1
He goes on to write that the Koso intervention was a conflict against ethnic genocide...obvious Clinton apologist. Geee, Joel, I guess Saddam never thought of that...how many tyrannical regimes did Bubba J Clintoon depose...try a whapping O, chief.
This joker is just pissed that his boyfriend won't take him to go see Brokeback.
pathetic, but it's the LA Times.
6 posted on
01/24/2006 9:04:56 AM PST by
in hoc signo vinces
("Houston, TX...a waiting quagmire for jihadis. American gals are worth fighting for!")
To: DCBryan1
I DON'T SUPPORT our troops. You know, Mr. Stein, I am sure they would not be surprised at your lack of support for them.
Nor would they be much disturbed by your lack of supportassuming they were to give you any thought at all.
7 posted on
01/24/2006 9:05:03 AM PST by
Logophile
To: DCBryan1
"
I know this is all easy to say for a guy who grew up with money, did well in school and hasn't so much as served on jury duty for his country. But it's really not that easy to say because anyone remotely affiliated with the military could easily beat me up, and I'm listed in the phone book."
Do we have an alert beyond barf level?
8 posted on
01/24/2006 9:06:14 AM PST by
gondramB
(Democracy: two wolves and a lamb voting on lunch. Liberty: a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.)
To: DCBryan1
I suppose the Hollywood elite will sleep better tonight knowing that Stein will protect them with his word processor as opposed to our military.
10 posted on
01/24/2006 9:06:44 AM PST by
jazusamo
(A Progressive is only a Socialist in a transparent disguise.)
To: DCBryan1
Calvin, of Calvin and Hobbes does not urinate on anything. His creator, Bill Watterson, refused to license his popular character because he wanted to keep the magic and mystery alive. He hates the illegal, unlicensed bumper stickers that are sold without his permission doing something he has said Calvin would never do.
16 posted on
01/24/2006 9:14:42 AM PST by
sportutegrl
(People who say, "All I know is . . ." really mean, "All I want you to focus on is . . .")
To: DCBryan1
Cowards like this jaded gremlin spit on a whole generation of Vietnam soldiers simply because they could in a society of declined morals. These poltroons do not have the courage to spit on the new groups of returning troups because they are likely to get their small yellowed spines ripped from their bodies. Gad, these people must leave a slug trail when they walk.
Muleteam1
To: DCBryan1
People get paid to write this stuff?
To: DCBryan1
I'll give him credit for one thing, he states accurately the position of his fellow democrats when he writes "being against the war and saying you support the troops is one of the wussiest positions the pacifists have ever taken and they're wussy by definition.AMEN to that!
He then goes on to show us in crystal clear fashion the flip-flop moralism of the Democrats when he states "I'm not advocating that we spit on returning veterans like they did after the Vietnam War...". The liberals used to spit on American's defending freedom and called them "BABY KILLERS". Now these same lower than maggot squeeze neo farts can't wait to KILL BABIES. What hypocrisy!
25 posted on
01/24/2006 9:30:23 AM PST by
Arcy
To: DCBryan1
Brave men and women throughout history have given their lives to protect the admonitions of meaningless f_cks like this guy.
The fact that he makes it into print at all is what galls me more.
26 posted on
01/24/2006 9:31:04 AM PST by
RightResponse
(What if the Left, just got up and .....)
To: DCBryan1
Sometimes you get lucky and get to fight ethnic genocide in Kosovo any war for a darling DemocratI know this is all easy to say for a guy who grew up with money, did well in school and hasn't so much as served on jury duty for his country. But it's really not that easy to say because anyone remotely affiliated with the military could easily beat me up, and I'm listed in the phone book.
Could this wuss make a case for himself any better for both being a wuss and deserving a pummeling from someone who served?
27 posted on
01/24/2006 9:43:21 AM PST by
101st-Eagle
(An appeaser is one who feeds his friends to a crocodile hoping to be eaten last-W. Churchill)
To: DCBryan1
"Warriors and wusses-Why I DON'T SUPPORT our troops."
Well, at least he's honest.
To: DCBryan1
To: DCBryan1
I bet they lose even more subscribers after this!
To: DCBryan1
At least this guy's honest. He's not one of those but-monkeys who say, "I support the troops, BUT . . . ."
34 posted on
01/24/2006 12:02:37 PM PST by
colorado tanker
(I can't comment on things that might come before the Court, but I can tell you my Pinochle strategy)
To: DCBryan1
Blindly lending support to our soldiers, I fear, will keep them overseas longer by giving soft acquiescence to the hawks who sent them there and who might one day want to send them somewhere else. Trust me, a guy who thought 50.7% was a mandate isn't going to pick up on the subtleties of a parade for just service in an unjust war. He's going to be looking for funnel cake. As opposed to Clinton, who thought that 43% gave him a mandate in 1992.
Ask a Democrat sometime to name the last three Democrat presidents who won with more than 51% of the popular vote. It drives them crazy. (Hint, one of them is Andrew Jackson).
35 posted on
01/24/2006 2:05:50 PM PST by
Bubba_Leroy
(What did Rather know and when did he know it?)
To: DCBryan1
I guarantee this twerp is about 5'6" and 120 pounds. Probably got "bullied" all through high school.
Sounds like a typical journalist to me!
38 posted on
01/24/2006 3:08:24 PM PST by
GianniV
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson