Pete Stark - apologizes

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: alchemize
I also think .... Red Dawn .......find amusement in the heads of US soldiers being blown off.

And you came to this conclusion how? :|

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: alchemize
I also think dmcowen674, randym431, dualsmp, senseamp, manowar821, sandorski, umbrella39, Red Dawn, Lemon law, techs, and RightIsWrong find amusement in the heads of US soldiers being blown off.

Of course we do. Just as you and your ilk are amused by sending them to get their heads blown off. :roll:

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: alchemize
I also think .... Red Dawn .......find amusement in the heads of US soldiers being blown off.

And you came to this conclusion how? :|

Why does it matter? Of course I only said it in a forum and not on the floor of the house of representatives.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: alchemize
Ok I'm done. What I *DO* find great amusement that there's not a single leftie that has any problem with a comment like this, and many who openly support it. Kinda reminds me of the Sandy Berger thread

Did I mention your bad reading comprehension?

Craig234:
I don't think his comment here about Bush's amusement is literally accurate, but I think it accurately reflects the level of Bush's concern about the troops - about zero.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: alchemize
Ok I'm done. What I *DO* find great amusement that there's not a single leftie that has any problem with a comment like this, and many who openly support it. Kinda reminds me of the Sandy Berger thread

Did I mention your bad reading comprehension?

I criticized Stark for the phrase 'amusement' as not being accurate, while he accurately captured Bush's callousness. That's a 'single lefty' having an issue with it.

Ah nuance, the savior of the left. Allows them to justify most any action.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: alchemize
Ok I'm done. What I *DO* find great amusement that there's not a single leftie that has any problem with a comment like this, and many who openly support it. Kinda reminds me of the Sandy Berger thread

Did I mention your bad reading comprehension?

I criticized Stark for the phrase 'amusement' as not being accurate, while he accurately captured Bush's callousness. That's a 'single lefty' having an issue with it.

Ah nuance, the savior of the left. Allows them to justify most any action.

Ah accuracy and truth, the savior of the left. Allows them not to justify any action, unlike so many righties who justify things for no good reason all the time.

I thought you said you were 'done'.

 

[manowar821]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: alchemize
I also think dmcowen674, randym431, dualsmp, senseamp, manowar821, sandorski, umbrella39, Red Dawn, Lemon law, techs, and RightIsWrong find amusement in the heads of US soldiers being blown off.

I think you lie.

Maybe, but I think I'm making a point. I think most will miss it...

Oh, your extraordinarily subtle point that demonizing your opponents by saying they find the loss of life amusing is not nice isn't lost on anyone, I'd bet.

Then again, I don't know any of the posters here who have uproariously laughed while making fun of a woman on death row for her plea for life, whose warrant you are signing.

link

If they did, you might have a point about their finding amusement involving the loss of life.

So what you are saying is our soldiers are no better than criminals that should be on death row.

Big man, big man.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: alchemize
I also think .... Red Dawn .......find amusement in the heads of US soldiers being blown off.

And you came to this conclusion how? :|

Why does it matter? Of course I only said it in a forum and not on the floor of the house of representatives.

DOH, you were making a point. OK I'll agree with Craig that his use of the term Amusement was at the very least unfortunate, bordering on stupid but it's not as if those the Right haven't said things just as unfortunate, starting with our Shit for Brains President.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Craig234
Yes, those criticisms are still linked to the person's statements, not the person generally - if someone posts something I see as immoral, you can't discuss that without saying you think it's immoral.

Note in your examples - you don't see any of the general 'insults' that are basically "jerk"; they are all specifically about the content not the person. The comments are vapid. The comments are drivel. The comments are wrong or a lie. The closest I come is the immoral comment; it's hard to say the person's statements are immoral without it being about the person who said them.

As for 'falsely accusatory', you fail to show any of that in my comments, making your remark, well, falsely accusatory.

So, my point stands, and you are not in much position, as someone who admits to the general personal attacks and insults that I don't, to throw stones.

I'm not trying to pretend I'm in any position of moral authority. You are. And you're being pedantic again. If people want they can "ass" to the end of that. You're trying to excuse your own behavior while faulting others for doing the same thing, all while trying to claim a high ground.

btw, here's your latest:

"It's not fake. But you are apparently too childish to understand the difference."

Stop with the pretense and dismount your horse.

Yet more examples of perfectly appropriate comments by me - saying someone who calls my outrage at being told I'm amused by the loss of life 'childish' - that *I'm* wrong there.

Get a clue: when people say ridiculous things, saying they're ridiculous things is the appropriate response, not inappropriate. Civility doesn't mean ignoring such wrongs.

I just had someone offensively slander me by stating that I'm amused by the loss of life, and rather than attach the person generally, I said that their inability to differentiate between the 'fake' outrage with Stark, and the real outrage of their offensive slander, is 'childish' - hardly an overreaction. You can't prove your point, because you're wrong, TLC, the only question is when if ever you will see it, as you post specious example after specious example that I explain to you doesn't prove what you think it does.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: alchemize
Ok I'm done. What I *DO* find great amusement that there's not a single leftie that has any problem with a comment like this, and many who openly support it. Kinda reminds me of the Sandy Berger thread

Did I mention your bad reading comprehension?

I criticized Stark for the phrase 'amusement' as not being accurate, while he accurately captured Bush's callousness. That's a 'single lefty' having an issue with it.

Ah nuance, the savior of the left. Allows them to justify most any action.

Ah accuracy and truth, the savior of the left. Allows them not to justify any action, unlike so many righties who justify things for no good reason all the time.

I thought you said you were 'done'.

Done with my point. But RedDawn asked me a question. One final suggestion, I do think you should check out dictionary.com where you will find quite a different definition between "callousness" and "amusement". Nuance will help you out of that little conflict as well.

Please now feel free to carry on with your partisan hackery.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: alchemize
I also think .... Red Dawn .......find amusement in the heads of US soldiers being blown off.

And you came to this conclusion how? :|

You sided with the left. That automatically makes you a soldiers hater.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: alchemize
Ok I'm done. What I *DO* find great amusement that there's not a single leftie that has any problem with a comment like this, and many who openly support it. Kinda reminds me of the Sandy Berger thread

Did I mention your bad reading comprehension?

I criticized Stark for the phrase 'amusement' as not being accurate, while he accurately captured Bush's callousness. That's a 'single lefty' having an issue with it.

Ah nuance, the savior of the left. Allows them to justify most any action.

Ah accuracy and truth, the savior of the left. Allows them not to justify any action, unlike so many righties who justify things for no good reason all the time.

I thought you said you were 'done'.

Done with my point. But RedDawn asked me a question. One final suggestion, I do think you should check out dictionary.com where you will find quite a different definition between "callousness" and "amusement". Nuance will help you out of that little conflict as well.

I suggest you improve your reading comprehension so that you understand you don't need to tell me there's a difference between amusement and callousness in response to my saying I *disagreed* with his word amusement, and *corrected* that to callousness, because it means something else.

Please now feel free to carry on with your partisan hackery.

Considering the source, I take that as a compliment, but you're projecting, in a desperate flailing to attack in lieu of having any point.

 

[manowar821]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: alchemize
Ok I'm done. What I *DO* find great amusement that there's not a single leftie that has any problem with a comment like this, and many who openly support it. Kinda reminds me of the Sandy Berger thread

Did I mention your bad reading comprehension?

I criticized Stark for the phrase 'amusement' as not being accurate, while he accurately captured Bush's callousness. That's a 'single lefty' having an issue with it.

Ah nuance, the savior of the left. Allows them to justify most any action.

Ah accuracy and truth, the savior of the left. Allows them not to justify any action, unlike so many righties who justify things for no good reason all the time.

I thought you said you were 'done'.

Done with my point. But RedDawn asked me a question. One final suggestion, I do think you should check out dictionary.com where you will find quite a different definition between "callousness" and "amusement". Nuance will help you out of that little conflict as well.

Please now feel free to carry on with your partisan hackery.

You, of all people, are going to lecture others on being (or not being) partisan hacks? Are you just laughing behind your monitor right now, because nobody who can operate a computer can be this stu.... Oh wait, never-mind.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Craig234
Yes, those criticisms are still linked to the person's statements, not the person generally - if someone posts something I see as immoral, you can't discuss that without saying you think it's immoral.

Note in your examples - you don't see any of the general 'insults' that are basically "jerk"; they are all specifically about the content not the person. The comments are vapid. The comments are drivel. The comments are wrong or a lie. The closest I come is the immoral comment; it's hard to say the person's statements are immoral without it being about the person who said them.

As for 'falsely accusatory', you fail to show any of that in my comments, making your remark, well, falsely accusatory.

So, my point stands, and you are not in much position, as someone who admits to the general personal attacks and insults that I don't, to throw stones.

I'm not trying to pretend I'm in any position of moral authority. You are. And you're being pedantic again. If people want they can "ass" to the end of that. You're trying to excuse your own behavior while faulting others for doing the same thing, all while trying to claim a high ground.

btw, here's your latest:

"It's not fake. But you are apparently too childish to understand the difference."

Stop with the pretense and dismount your horse.

Yet more examples of perfectly appropriate comments by me - saying someone who calls my outrage at being told I'm amused by the loss of life 'childish' - that *I'm* wrong there.

Get a clue: when people say ridiculous things, saying they're ridiculous things is the appropriate response, not inappropriate. Civility doesn't mean ignoring such wrongs.

I just had someone offensively slander me by stating that I'm amused by the loss of life, and rather than attach the person generally, I said that their inability to differentiate between the 'fake' outrage with Stark, and the real outrage of their offensive slander, is 'childish' - hardly an overreaction. You can't prove your point, because you're wrong, TLC, the only question is when if ever you will see it, as you post specious example after specious example that I explain to you doesn't prove what you think it does.

Paraphrasing what I've stated in this forum before, many of the things people despise about the other side they find no issue with when it's their side doing it.

Thanks for proving my point.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Harvey
Another national disgrace is lying neocon sycophants calling a real patriot like Stark a national disgrace because he's not afraid to speak the truth. :roll:

Yeah, because we all know Bush just loves watching soldiers die. You are disgusting, Harvey. :thumbsdown: :| :thumbsdown:

 

[Stoneburner]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Harvey
Another national disgrace is lying neocon sycophants calling a real patriot like Stark a national disgrace because he's not afraid to speak the truth. :roll:

Yeah, because we all know Bush just loves watching soldiers die. You are disgusting, Harvey. :thumbsdown: :| :thumbsdown:

How do you know he doesn't?

I see everybody in the media saying "Bush is continuing this war to preserve or create his legacy". What does that mean? Bush is sending other people's children to get killed because he doesn't want to look like a complete idiot? Sure its not as stark as STark's snark, but it's not too far removed really.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Pabster
Yeah, because we all know Bush just loves watching soldiers die.

Of course, Bush doesn't "love watching soldiers die." He was too chickenshit to show up to remain qualified for combat when he was in the Air National Guard, and I doubt he has the guts to actually watch the MURDER of Americans dying for his war of LIES.

That doesn't change the fact that it's happening. As of 10/19/07 3:56 pm EDT, 2,395 American troops have died and tens of thousands more American troops are wounded, scarred and disabled for life for those LIES.

In saying Bush was doing it for his "amusement," I think Stark meant it only as a metaphor for the value of any of the LIES Bush has offered as excuses for starting and continuing his war.

You are disgusting, Harvey. :thumbsdown: :| :thumbsdown:

No, I'm pissed at your TRAITOR IN CHIEF and his cabal of murderers and traitors for those MURDERS and for shredding the rights guaranteed to all Americans under the U.S. Constitution. I'm just as pissed at the lying neocon sycophants who think it's more important to divert attention from their horrendous crimes with feigned outrage about one Congressman's choice of words to express his outrage than it is to focus on stopping the carnage. :roll:

Thanks for thinking of saving our troops and our Constitution, first!

After all the proof of the Bushwhackos' crimes, anyone who still supports them and continues to spew their lies is part of the problem. They are as disgusting as the Bushwhackos, themselves. :thumbsdown: :| :thumbsdown:

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Wow... Pelosi slapped Stark upside the head.

"While members of Congress are passionate about their views, what Congressman Stark said during the debate was inappropriate and distracted from the seriousness of the subject at hand?providing health care for America's children," Pelosi said.

You know you messed up when you take a swipe at Dubbya and Nancy effin' Pelosi from San Francisco takes you to task for it.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Wow... Pelosi slapped Stark upside the head.

"While members of Congress are passionate about their views, what Congressman Stark said during the debate was inappropriate and distracted from the seriousness of the subject at hand?providing health care for America's children," Pelosi said.

You know you messed up when you take a swipe at Dubbya and Nancy effin' Pelosi from San Francisco takes you to task for it.

B...b...but. Bushwackos? Lies? Traitor in Chief? Truth to Powa? Shift + F8 even!

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

B...b...but. Bushwackos? Lies? Traitor in Chief? Truth to Powa? Shift + F8 even!

Mmm-m-m-m... Maybe it TastesLikeChicken, but everything he posts sure SmellsLikeBullshit. :laugh:

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

B...b...but. Bushwackos? Lies? Traitor in Chief? Truth to Powa? Shift + F8 even!

Mmm-m-m-m... Maybe it TastesLikeChicken, but everything he posts sure SmellsLikeBullshit. :laugh:

You have that one on a macro too Harvey?

Do you even have an original thought anymore?

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

B...b...but. Bushwackos? Lies? Traitor in Chief? Truth to Powa? Shift + F8 even!

Mmm-m-m-m... Maybe it TastesLikeChicken, but everything he posts sure SmellsLikeBullshit. :laugh:

You have that one on a macro too Harvey?

Do you even have an original thought anymore?

From the guy who's never thought, at all, let alone come up with something original. :roll:

We don't need no stinking original thoughts when replying to redundant hacks like you. :laugh:

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

B...b...but. Bushwackos? Lies? Traitor in Chief? Truth to Powa? Shift + F8 even!

Mmm-m-m-m... Maybe it TastesLikeChicken, but everything he posts sure SmellsLikeBullshit. :laugh:

You have that one on a macro too Harvey?

Do you even have an original thought anymore?

From the guy who's never thought, at all, let alone come up with something original. :roll:

We don't need no stinking original thoughts when replying to redundant hacks like you. :laugh:

Harvey with the pee-wee herman comeback :roll:

Thank you Geico for the Harvey Chatty Cathy commercial!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSPXpc5N6Kg

""While members of Congress are passionate about their views, what Congressman Stark said during the debate was inappropriate and distracted from the seriousness of the subject at hand?providing health care for America's children," Pelosi said. "
Kudos to Pelosi for at least saying something, more than you can say for the hacks in here.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

B...b...but. Bushwackos? Lies? Traitor in Chief? Truth to Powa? Shift + F8 even!

Mmm-m-m-m... Maybe it TastesLikeChicken, but everything he posts sure SmellsLikeBullshit. :laugh:

You have that one on a macro too Harvey?

Do you even have an original thought anymore?

Thank you Geico for the Harvey Chatty Cathy commercial!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSPXpc5N6Kg

""While members of Congress are passionate about their views, what Congressman Stark said during the debate was inappropriate and distracted from the seriousness of the subject at hand?providing health care for America's children," Pelosi said. "
Kudos to Pelosi for at least saying something, more than you can say for the hacks in here.

:laugh::laugh::laugh:

 

[Pabster]

Pelosi Rebukes Stark For Iraq Comments

:thumbsup: