Replies

Au contraire, skeeter. It is not the defense, but rather the criticisms that are Pavlovian, and in this case, highly inaccurate based on personal emotions and not facts.

It always makes me wonder what the fundamental issues are for people who feel the need to attack when the report and article about the President and First Lady are so benign.

Need to prove something, perhaps? We "groupies" don't. We KNOW we admire a man and his wife who are in all ways admirable, and we have nothing to prove.

The President's character proves it all, so we don't have to draw attention to ourselves by saying silly things.

Many W acolytes here are highly defensive of anything resembling criticism. They can't seem to grasp that their reaction provokes more vitriol.

As highly as I think of RWR, I do not feel the need to sling personal insults at those who criticise him in earnest.

BTW seeing as though some here like the indirect form of ad hominum, I tried it myself to see how it felt. Verdict; its chickensh*t & I didn't like it. If you felt my comments were directed at you personally, I apologize.