Oh, no, the military has big scary weapons! Color me shocked. What are they supposed to carry, daisies?
New Orleans is not, and has not, been “occupied” in any rational definition of the term.
She’s delusional.
The conundrum I was faced with was how to say to Zoe (and to anyone else who knew Zoe and who knew of my comparison regarding you) that I was hasty and in error in posting what I did, while at the same time not being insulting to you…something I didn’t really want to do for fear of appearing disingenuous to Zoe and the others by appearing to use the occasion to deliver a backhanded insult to you, which is just how it did ultimately sound. So then I considered emailing Zoe privately, but this would leave the others I mentioned with the wrong impression, and, to me, seemed a backhanded way of going about it…talking about you behind your back, in other words. Ultimately, I decided that there was simply no way I could convey to Zoe that I felt myself to have erred in a negative way without simultaneously insulting you in the process…so I decided to do it, but to try to do it in a minimal way. This is why I said I “restrained” myself. My second post, made after you jumped so harshly upon the comments that I had tried so hard to craft in a delicate way, is more along the line of what I would have said without that restraint.
I confess to being somewhat mystified by you. I still sense good qualities in you (qualities evident even in the post I’m answering now) yet there are few posters here who can set my teeth on edge as quickly as you seem able to do. Thus, I decided to investigate a little, and I checked out a fair portion of the posts you’ve made since you came here…and honestly, you don’t seem to be that bad of a person. I almost (:p) felt badly about dumping on you like I did. I think perhaps the problem lies in the fact that you come on so strongly virtually out of nowhere and that you are rather effective at being unpleasant when you want to be.
Correct. A stupid person would consider that a semantic nit-pick.
Are you saying that the defense of a malaprop, in a particular circumstance, implies stupidity?
Or that the use of a malaprop is enough to conclude delusion in the one using it?
I get the feeling you know better. A feeling so strong that I’m not even going to bother to spell it out for you, using numerous current examples in the highest echelon of government.
A stupid person would consider it a “semantic nit-pick.”
We are talking about semantics, but it’s not a nit-pick as there are huge differences in meaning between the terms “occupation” and “rescue mission.” They have completelely meaning and connotations. All that they have in common is that they both entail a presence in a given area.
Only the type of idiot who equates “assault” with “life-saving surgery” would consider the distinction a nit-pick.
That’s why you are an idiot.
I thank you for your apparent honesty, but ask you to consider:
-
War is an unpleasant topic.
-
Maybe your own reaction to me was affected by your assumption that I would behave exactly as your friend would (which is one reason why that type of comparison rarely sits well with the ones being compared).
-
Maybe you are, regardless of other fine qualities, a poor judge of character.
I don’t know you, so I can’t offer a final analyisis. I do wonder why you frequent the Pit, if you expect pleasant discourse.
Even so, I thank you again. Maybe I have hit on something by finding this place at this particular time. Maybe my supposed propensity for unpleasantness (as you’ve mentioned) will cause some people to think through, or re-think, their opinions.
That would be a good thing, no?
I didn’t realize the point of this thread was to prove that I was an idiot.
Maybe I misunderestimated you.
It’s not, and you’re the one that proved it, not I.
I’m just dealing with it.
We could discuss more interesting things.
That’s pretty weak, Scylla. My 9-year-old son could do better than that.
But I agree - there are now more interesting things going on. Things that require your fine mind to disassemble the facts for the benefit of the people.
You have my blessings to argue elsewhere. I’m done here.
The ire directed at Ms. Sheehan is misplaced. She is what she seems. Not articulate, not brilliant, not a leader. Just a woman who’s son’s life has been sacrificed. She believes needlessly, I cannot disagree.
But so what? A couple of years ago, there were similar stories of soldier’s parents blaming Bush, publicly denouncing The Leader. They hit the news for the prescribed 15 minutes, and vanished.
What’s changed is that Ms. Sheehan’s position has legitimacy now. In the beauty shops, diners, truck stops, bowling alleys…people relate to her. Two years ago, GW’s teflon armor would have protected him. But that’s gone.
Mr. Lincoln, it would appear, was right. You really can’t.
Do people similarly relate to her when she’s sticking up for Lynne Stewart, or blaming our foreign policy woes on a Zionist cabal?
Wow, a true pit topic. I’ve been avoiding threads dealing with Katrina after realizing it probably wasn’t doing me any good venting about people’s stupidity. I’ll drop in a few comments here for no reason other than to comment on her article and make some points about failures to help people.
Guys, everyone failed the people of New Orleans and the surrounding region. People are using it to get some shots in against Bush but the state and local governments are at fault also, probably more so than the Feds.
Lack of all basic services, utilities,stores and pretty much anything else while bands of criminals move through the streets. Good reasons to me.
They were devastated by a hurricane.
This makes little sense and contains a few falsehoods obvious to anyone who lives here. Algiers is on the opposite side of the Mississippi river from the Superdome. People were not being forced to cross the bridge from Algiers to the Superdome, especially as stated that there were no police to enforce martial law, much less go around rounding up thousands of people and marching them over 3 miles. People on the Westbank, actually South of the city, evacuate West, not North 3 miles and then cross flooded areas to join thousands of people with no supplies.
I was going to post about the troops Cindy mentioned before this but sadly have not. Since she describes United States soldiers walking around standing on the necks of the poor citizens of Algiers and New Orleans while setting up machine gun nests, I’ll describe what I’ve seen of our troops.
Distribution centers for MREs(which are great food, especially when there is none to be bought), ice, water, tarps to fix your roof, formula and diapers. National Guard troops from Pennsylvania have been standing out in 95 - 100 degree weather all day giving out supplies to civilians pulling up in air conditioned cars. They were nothing but gracious and some even thanked us for stopping by. I still have no idea how those guys do it, I’d have fallen over after an hour.
I saw the 82nd airborne set up a medical clinic while all the hospitals were either closed due to damage/looting or swamped with people. They also traveled door to door helping people. Soldiers secured our neighborhoods and made sure the curfew was enforced. They are heading home now and we will miss them greatly.
By the way Nagin, mayor of New Orleans was the one trying to force people to leave their homes. The National Guard refused.
Anyway, thanks to Pennsylvania and all the other states that sent National Guard troops. Your sons and daughters helped many people. Thanks to everyone who contributed to the storm relief, it has helped with many of the wounds the area has suffered.
I suspect so. They relate to her, and so they will listen. But their willingness to admit that they relate to her is a more recent development, her point of view has become legitimate. As a partisan, I wish she were more informed and articulate, as a parent, I should be ashamed even to pretend to judge.
It would be bad enough to live with your child dying for his country. I cannot fathom what it must be like if you believe he died needlessly. As she does.
I have to disagree here.
People generally are moderate and reasonable, and will relate to Cindy Sheehan if she’s similarly moderate and reasonable. They’ll do so even if they disagree with her on some points.
However, Cindy Sheehan isn’t terribly moderate or reasonable, as any realistic appraisal of her positions and statements show.
Her little movement has been losing steam since she has been more vocal about her political views, which are far out of the mainstream of American politics. For crying out loud, she has vocally defended a woman who aided and abetted known terrorists, and was convicted for such.
Didn’t say “agree with”. Said “relate to”. Very different things. As in my previous example, couple years back, of parents who blamed Bush for their loss. Many people could relate, very few agreed. Now, more people agree as well as “relate”.
Unfortunate wording. I haven’t listened to Ms. Sheehan at all, so I cannot comment. But does she “vocally defend” a terrorist for being a terrorist, or does she defend her by claiming that she has not aided and abetted a terrorist?
Rather than trouble Mr. Moto for a response, why not see what some of the “reasonable moderates that people can relate to” have to say about her? Coulter, Limbaugh, Hannity, Malkin; real salt of the earth, American mainstream types. They’ll give you the Sraight Dope on Sheehan.
I’ll assume it’s early in the morning and I’m still too trip-lagged to miss the whoose here.