DEVELOPING: SECRET SERVICE CONCERN AFTER LOS ANGELES TIMES COMIC DEPICTS 'BUSH ASSASSINATION'
Posted on 07/20/2003 5:02:20 PM PDT by ConservativeMan55
DEVELOPING: SECRET SERVICE CONCERN AFTER LOS ANGELES TIMES COMIC DEPICTS 'BUSH ASSASSINATION'
http://elections.harpweek.com/1Cartoons/cartoons-1868f.asp?UniqueID=26&Year=1868
"This front-page Thomas Nast illustration appeared just a few days before the presidential election. A corresponding news story, "The Policy of Assassination," reported that Democratic vice-presidential nominee Frank Blair and certain Democratic newspapers were predicting that, if elected, Republican presidential nominee General Ulysses S. Grant would establish a military dictatorship. Some observers claimed that Blair sanctioned Grant's assassination during the Democratic candidate's speech in St. Louis. The caption below the cartoon quotes the New York Democrat as also apparently threatening Grant's assassination if Democrats consider his victory to be the result of vote fraud."
Michael Martinez gave us the eGray Hooker!
:^() I just posted tonight because I was hoping to get a civil exchange going on the cartoon and I was quite delighted at the response.
Quit reposting everything we've said to one another on every post, I don't need the map to follow the discussion.
"You seem to be advocating that once a man is selected to run on the top of the Repbulican ticket, no conservative can disagree with him until he is
elected and serves out his eight years in office."
Don't put words in my mouth, and then criticize me for something I did not say.
I said what I said, if you don't understand it, get help.
668 posted on 07/20/2003 10:11 PM PDT by Luis Gonzalez (Cuba será libre...soon.)
Luis, I post the way I do to make it easy for people to follow the conversation. If I post the words we stated right next to my response, there's no question what I'm responding to. You don't need to take personal offense.
Then perhaps you can explain it Luis. You paint with a broad brush those on this forum who repsectfully disagree with "some" of the president's polices, lumping them in with the democrats.
Please feal free to explain how I've mischaracterized your post. As for getting help, you should be the most qualified to provide that help since these are your comments we're talking about.
I feel that the invasion of Iraq was a stroke of strategic brilliance, due to the direct slap at Saudi Arabia and the 2x4 applied to the sensibilities of the indigenuous Arabic populations of the Mideast.
You're a person with education - do your insides tell you different?
Wouldn't you agree that Jim does a pretty good job of keeping trouble-making democrats off this forum? That pretty much leaves folks here to truly do want a conservative government, but simply disagree with Bush on certain issues.
Who would Luis' comments be addressing on this forum, if not conservative dessenters? I dont' like being lumped in with democrats by folks who make careless comments on this forum. I do disagree with Bush on a number of issues. That by no stretch of the imagination means I support the democrats, or should be lumped in with them as was done by the above statement.
What a pompous ass, to think that the posters at FR can't follow a normal conversation without you "special" help.
Amazing that bulletin boards have survived this long without your oversight.
It was a real simple statement DO, make what you want of it, you will anyway.
I can't take your HTML, never been able to, so...later.
You two are well-known here. Luis isn't lumping you in with democrats, no how, no way.
You're both stand-up FR guys - work this out.
:^{)</b?
I don't actually recall having mentioned Ron in my post.
"...I had a dream there were clouds in my coffee, clouds in my coffee, and..."
"Luis, I post the way I do to make it easy for people to follow the conversation."
What a pompous ass, to think that the posters at FR can't follow a normal conversation without you "special" help. Amazing that bulletin boards have survived this long without your oversight.
That's okay Luis. You're welcome to think anything you like of me, and you can call me all the names you like. I addressed a statement you made. I made it abundantly clear why. You have chosen to avoid the discussion of that issue in three posts to me, choosing instead to call me names and attack me for my posting style. You felt that it was your duty to lump dessenters on this forum regarding some of Bush's policies in with democrats. That was where my disagreement with you centered and that's what I've addressed.
It was a real simple statement DO, make what you want of it, you will anyway.
Yes I will. The discourse on this forum is unacceptable at times. Each of us has a different view of what it is to be a good conservative. If I disagree with someone on a point, it doesn't need to devolve into a fight, or signify that I am an ally of the democrats. I disagreed with your statement. You could have qualified your statement and perhaps I would have agreed. Instead you sought to attack me for responding to the issue you raised. How productive was that? Why is it that you couldn't just respond to my comment and explain what it was you really meant? Was that really asking too much?
I can't take your HTML, never been able to, so...later.
Luis, I post the statements made by others as a courtesy. I could make them go back up the thread to find the coments. Instead I provide that service for the person I'm discussing an issue with. I don't see why this should treaten you or offend you.
As for HTML, I simply post things in different colors so that you can follow quickly distinguish my comments from yours.
690 posted on 07/20/2003 11:03 PM PDT by Luis Gonzalez (Cuba será libre...soon.)
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.