Replies

If Peggy had written a column praising Bushs speech to the stars...to the point of going over the top, and somebody got on this site and criticized her...by saying she was paid off to write the column, or had written the speech herself, or was having a bad PMS day...what would have been the response?

Obviously to ask for your evidence that she was being "paid off" or had not written it. Your response then would be to offer any phrasings she or others in the know had made that buttressed payment or you would post side by sides of her other columns and point to how she uses certain phrases normally but this latest uses words she is not known for.

Honestly, I agree some have been over the top in coming down on her, but most of those same people did not just bash her, but backed up why they thought the way they did.

It is then up to those who think she has a point to explain what that point is and offer citations to back up why you agree. That's what I've done in posting why I disagree with her.

I stated I don't think it was jealousy, but I do think some who have opined it is have explained logically why they deduce that is the case.

And btw, the answer to your "will we use force" question is that in some cases, yes, in other cases, no.

What you are saying sounds reasonable to me.

Some of the responses on this thread bothered me, thats why I made my points.

People seemed to be keying in on the emotions of the moment, rather than examining her actual thesis. Ive seen it on Michelle Malkin threads, now Peggy, and Im predicting it will be Laura next, when the immigration legislative debate heats up. Some of the people piling on dont seem to have much of a posting history around here, either.

Peggy didn't help her cause, however, by writing an unfocused article, and her timing was not so hot.

I still don't buy the title, it doesnt work with the content of the article...and it doesn't seem consistent with Peggy and her belief system. Peggy is a solid Catholic. Maybe her editor chose the title.