[cdad]

Hello again, dad:

It's true. Political action IS dangerous. Shortly after I returned from Vietnam, and was still very much a supporter of that war, I went to an anti war march - NOT to march, but to see just who those hippies were. I wore my uniform, and was standing on the curb when the riot broke out. Didn't matter to the cops. They STILL beat me with their night sticks...

Not long after, I gave up my support for that war.

excon

Im sorry you had to go through that. Many veterans from that war weren't treated as they should have been.

On a side not: If you were attending a rally for someone you support and a person comes rushing from the crowd towards your candidate. I think alarms would start going off in your head.

[excon]

If you were attending a rally for someone you support and a person comes rushing from the crowd towards your candidate. I think alarms would start going off in your head.

Hello again, dad:

Oh, I UNDERSTAND vigilantism. That's why I don't go to those events. I'm subject to throw things.

excon

[smoothy]

Idiots on the lefty propaganda stations that call themselves NETWORK stations are claiming her head was stomped on when its abundently clear it was her shoulder in the very videos they were playing... and they ignore the fact she is a left wing whack job that goes globetrotting getting in trouble... No innocent victim that witch is. She got EXACTLY what she went trying to find, she went to cause trouble... and she found it from people not afraid of her worthless kind.. Personally she should have REALLY gotten seroiusly stomped...

[excon]

The law is the law....how do you think you became an excon? Seriously. Didn't learn anything from that?

Personally she should have REALLY gotten seroiusly stomped...

Hello again, smoothy:

Spoken like a true Tea Partier, a real gentleman, and the person who just told me the law is the law. Dude!

excon

[smoothy]

That *itch is no innocent, nice person... she is a well known and documented troublemaker... she deserved getting her butt kicked by people exercizing THEIR free speech rights, you know.. exactly like Greenpeace does... you did know she was part of that group? Got anything to say about their tactics?

Oh... you mean like Liberals treat Obama Protesters?

Man Arrested For Holding ?Impeach Obama? Sign >> Four Winds 10 - fourwinds10.com So much for freedom of speech when the Messiah is involved as the target.

[excon]

Oh...you mean like Liberals treat Obama Protesters?

Hello again, smoothy:

The reason you LOSE arguments is because you think beating the sh*t out of a woman cause she carried a sign, is equivalent to some guy being arrested cause he carried a sign... You're sense of BALANCE is wayyy out of whack.. But, that's how you Tea Partiers are. I'm used to it.

excon

[tomder55]

Yeah it isn't no big thing someone rushing a candidate or shoving a camera in their face...

But I remember a day in 1968 when Bobby Kennedy was trying to leave the hall after winning the California primary.. and was being jostled by attendees...

Nuff said .

[smoothy]

yeah it aint no big thing someone rushing a candidate or shoving a camera in their face ....

But I remember a day in 1968 when Bobby Kennedy was trying to leave the hall after winning the California primary ..and was being jostled by attendees .......

nuff said .

Exactly... but ex will argue that's a talking point...

[smoothy]

Hello again, smoothy:

The reason you LOSE arguments is because you think beating the sh*t out of a woman cause she carried a sign, is equivalent to some guy being arrested cause he carried a sign.... You're sense of BALANCE is wayyy out of whack.. But, that's how you Tea Partiers are. I'm used to it.

excon

Liberals try to change the topic when they are caught... like the arrest of the Obama protestor who very much UNLIKE this nutcase woman at the Rand Paul event... was doing nothing threatening.
And unlike the typical lies the left wing media contantly spews with Democrat Propaganda... the video shows nobody ever stepped on her head... Not even her neck... the video clearly shows the shoulder after she rushed a Political Candidtate in disguise... but the Democrats don't care about facts when they can just lie and despite video evidence of the contrary.. will believe like sheeple just what they are told to believe by their handlers.

[excon]

Exactly.....but ex will argue thats a talking point...

Hello again, smoothy:

No. That's an argument, and a good one too. If only you could tell the difference??

excon

[smoothy]

Hello again, smoothy:

No. That's an argument, and a good one too. If only you could tell the difference???

excon

Oh its clear... if YOU say it, its an argument... If I say it then it's a talking point...


What did I get wrong about that?

[excon]

What did I get wrong about that?

Hello again, smoothy:

Ok, I'll give this a shot. Anything tom says that RELATES to the discussion at hand, IS an argument.. Anything tom says that has NOTHING to do with the discussion at hand, but is instead, a general put down of his opponents SIDE is a talking point.

excon

[tomder55]

I've often been accused of "liberally" engaging in both.

[smoothy]

Hello again, smoothy:

Ok, I'll give this a shot. Anything tom says that RELATES to the discussion at hand, IS an argument.. Anything tom says that has NOTHING to do with the discussion at hand, but is instead, a general put down of his opponents SIDE is a talking point.

excon

And that differs from much of your posts exactly how?

[excon]

And that differs from much of your posts exactly how?

Hello again, smoothy:

I'm sorry you don't pay more attention... It COULD be a good discussion if you did. The facts are, that tom, Steve and I relate with each other totally DIFFERENT than you and I do. The difference is OBVIOUS, but NOT to you. I can't teach you how to argue here. I've tried. It doesn't work. You just don't know how to do it, and you're not willing to learn.

I know that WHATEVER I say here, you're going to HEAR something different... But, let me ask you this? Do you notice that when you and I get into things, tom and Steve DON'T come to your rescue?? Do you wonder WHY?? I don't. Do you wonder WHY the arguments I have with tom and Steve DON'T devolve into these shouting matches?? I don't.

It's because we do it substantially DIFFERENT than you and I do, and you're unable to see the distinction. I don't know why. It's been pointed out to you time and time again, but you don't/cant get it. Bummer. No, really. It's a BUMMER, because I LOVE to argue, and I can't with you.

Tom and Steve watch you and me from the sidelines.. They don't say anything. Now, might be good time for them to weigh in...

excon

[tomder55]

Now, might be good time for them to weigh in...

I don't questions someone's stated credentials for starters .
I have no reason to think Ex did not serve the country and have no reason to dispute his contention that he holds security clearance. I know of people who kept them well after their military service was through . So that part was a pretty pointless exchange.

I'll just say that after a certain point there is a futility in engaging in debates that devolve into endless regurgitation of things previously stated ,and personal comments against the opponent in the exchange. I generally bow out at that point and leave the counterpoint unchallenged . Anyone reading the exchange should be able to divine why .

[spitvenom]

Here is what I think is funny Tom makes a big deal about two guys (I believe Thugs was the word he used) one with a baton who harmed no at a polling location. But when a tea bagger stomps on a lady's shoulder THEN head (and YES his foot was on her head watch the video again tea bagger smooth) it was passion's running high. Who are the real Thugs here!

[tomder55]

Spit . I think I made the distinction in my Bobby Kennedy comment .

In the case of the NBP thugs ,they were intimidating voters going into a polling place. (and here I thought voters rights were a liberal cause )

In the Rand Paul case ,the women was approaching the candidate looking for a reaction I believe that is similar to what transpired . I found out the "teabagger" was in some way associated with the Paul campaign and had reacted to what he thought was a security risk. He went way over the line with the stomp ,and if you read my earlier comments on this op ,I made it very clear that I though he should be charged .

Now let's go back to the example I gave of the Phillies and Eagles games. What do you suppose happens to a fan ,who runs out onto the field of play ,by the security personel ? It isn't pretty .They generally do their theraputic massaging where no cell phones are present .

[smoothy]

Hello again, smoothy:

I'm sorry you don't pay more attention... It COULD be a good discussion if you did. The facts are, that tom, Steve and I relate with each other totally DIFFERENT than you and I do. The difference is OBVIOUS, but NOT to you. I can't teach you how to argue here. I've tried. It doesn't work. You just don't know how to do it, and you're not willing to learn.

I know that WHATEVER I say here, you're going to HEAR something different... But, lemme ask you this? Do you notice that when you and I get into things, tom and Steve DON'T come to your rescue???? Do you wonder WHY??? I don't. Do you wonder WHY the arguments I have with tom and Steve DON'T devolve into these shouting matches???? I don't.

It's because we do it substantially DIFFERENT than you and I do, and you're unable to see the distinction. I dunno why. It's been pointed out to you time and time again, but you don't/cant get it. Bummer. No, really. It's a BUMMER, because I LOVE to argue, and I can't with you.

Tom and Steve watch you and me from the sidelines.. They don't say anything. Now, might be good time for them to weigh in...

excon

I am not asking Tom and Steve to come to my aid... nor do I care if they do or not... its up to them.

You have a pretty distorted view of things... you just can't stand when someone doesn't buy into your perspective.

I have seen things first hand from a perspective NONE of you have... and many times I really can't go into why and how I do. Not because I would'n't like to... but because I can't and won't get into trouble to attempt to satisfy someone who can't see the forrest for the trees.

The problem is YOU have two sets of standards... one you follow... and another for everyone else that doesn't agree with you. You know if YOU held your own side to the same standards you expect my side to meet... you would find far less issues exist.

[NeedKarma]

I have seen things first hand from a perspective NONE of you have....and many times I really can't go into why and how I do. Not because I would'n't like to....but because I can't and won't get into trouble

That's what I normally hear on the internet from someone who rarely leaves their house.