So I am revoking it and we can remain foes as it should be.
I was there during the amnesty battles here over immigration and got a sabbatical for my efforts.
I remember you quite well along with many other who fled over Rudy.
Maybe you didn't run off or maybe you posted as an anti-freeper under another nick like plenty of others did who have now slunk back....who knows...Ivan's little experiment crashed and burned given all those giant egos...good lord they even banned him.
If you don't like me having a memory that's tuff hon....btw plenty of others here pay attention and not just me
since I know you can't help yourself ..flame away..and you will get last word.
If you choose to remain foes, it will be because you choose not to see the truth, but to revel in your vague and faulty memories.
I think it's hilarious that you think I "fled over Rudy." I never in a million years would have supported Rudy. I am staunchly pro-life and a strong social conservative, and Rudy, as admirable as he was as mayor of NYC, would never have been my choice for President.
Wrong on accusation one.
The place where I posted was not "anti-freeper," and I left for one reason, and one reason alone. The attacks on my son's Commander in Chief here, while we were at war became vile and ugly, and things were permitted that were against the FR rules. I oppose profanity, name-calling and lies, so I took a break.
Wrong on accusation two.
I didn't 'slink back'. Someone posted an article I had written as anonymous and someone else let me know about it, so I had some freeper friends notify the mods that I wanted to post (I had been banned because JimRob understandably thought I had opused, though I had not). I came back with Jim's blessing, started posting, and have been back almost a year.
Wrong on accusation three.
There was wierdness that went on with a few people at that site (some of those Rudy people were just plain nuts!), but they left, and all was well until it crashed. There were the same kind of discussions we have here, but without the vile, crudeness that is permitted here. I liked it, and nary a word against FR was allowed.
Wrong on accusation four.
Your memory is entirely faulty. Your presumptions are entirely wrong and based on fabricated evidence, and there is no reason in all the world you and I should be enemies.
But that is clearly the way YOU want it to be. I am here to work with fellow conservatives to rid the nation of the festering wound of Marxism in Washington.
If you prefer to call me the enemy because of your errant "memories" and my refusal to tolerate them, so be it. If defending the truth against being called a "harpy" is being "haughty" to you, so be it.
You want me to flame you, wardaddy? OK. I will. I thought you were more of a man than this. But you're not. You're a coward who can't handle disagreement.
I really did think better of you, wardaddy. I knew you were a sexist and a bit rude, but I didn't think you were afraid of a little honest confrontation.
This post of yours has just proven me very wrong.
If you got to the end of this post, you know the truth. What you do with that truth is up to you.
I just want to repeat that I'm really disappointed that you prefer to consider me an enemy, and that you prefer to believe what is patently false.
If you think I'm "haughty" for defending myself against some bizarre accusation complete with name-calling, I can't do much about that. But you do your share of haughty, wardaddy, so where I may be guilty of condescension, you are not innocent of the same offense.
I really, really hope you think about this more, understand that what you think occurred in the past did not, in fact, occur, and realize that we are on the same side, fighting the same battle for this great nation that we both love.
Once again, I apologize for where I stepped over the line. Be well, wardaddy.
Let's fight the bad guys together, OK? Not as enemies, but as partners.
If we meet on another thread, I will treat you as an ally, and not as a "foe."
Because that is what we are. Allies. Not foes.