Yeah? You seemed pretty pissed at Cervaise’s post from that thread.
I give it a 9.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999…
Which we can argue is actually a 10. 
Naw, I was just kind of exasperated. I get tired of monkeys like Cervaise slinging shit all the time, so I slung a little back. Vibatronica really is being a drama queen about the whole business, though.
Yeah, because if you, like, actually explained what you did mean in that post it would, like, be giving in. Can’t have that. It’s much better to just post some vague invectives and then refuse to defend them. That way you remain in the power position. Right?
Y’know, it occurs to me that as I am someone who was opposed to this clusterfuck from before the get-go, maybe LP is calling me coward, quisling, fool, and defeatist.
I wonder what the protocol is for this; should I take offense to his implication here, or go start my own Pit thread? With the prevailing anti-war sentiment around here, I guess that could make the front page kinda crowded; I’ll just do it here:
And I’ll use poetry, too, just like Jackmannii:
Lonseome Polecat don’t be a jerk,
STFU and GBTW.
I don’t think vib’s a traitor, but I’m starting to lean toward “whiner”.
And I personally doubt LP ever had a girlfriend.
Uh, so basically, you’re a bitch? That’s fair enough. Do you not want to take the oppurtunity to be nice, though?
So why not just answer the question? If it’s not worth getting upset over, it’s not worth the power rush you’re getting from spiting vibotronica.
Vibotronica’s too was a foolish response, and that too suggests that she doesn’t want to answer the question. I’m glad we’re in agreement.
Quite possibly; but those aren’t reasons for not answering the question, just ones that remove motivation* for* answering it. As it is, LP clearly feels no need or compunction to answer the question, but neither does he/she show any reasonable reason for not, beyond (apperently) spite. Forgive me for thinking that it’s a ripe oppurtunity for LP to be the bigger man/woman here, but i’m just seeing an oppurtunity wasted.
I’m male.
I don’t know if he was talking about me, because he won’t answer the question when I posed it to him directly. I said as much in the original thread, and in this one. Try reading. I have been called a traitor over and over again by people who were advocating an illegal and disasterous war and who absolutely insisted that Iraq had nuclear anthrax and was just about to use it. Those people were wrong, and a whole lot of people are dying as a result of their wrongness. Why isn’t everyone mad?
LonesomePolecat is a dispicable coward. I took offense to his broad brush use of the term “quisling” because it is never appropriate for one American to use that term about another American. Period. LonesomePolecat should either apologize or shut the fuck up like the coward he is.
And that is exactly the point. The cowardly LonesomePolecat will gladly throw around the terms “quisling” and “traitor” when he thinks there’s no chance anyone will get angry because, you know, he’s not talking about you, he’s talking about those other war opponents who are quislings and traitors. But when actually confronted with someone who holds these “treasonous” views, he doesn’t have the guts to say “Yeah, you there, with the face. You’re a traitor because you oppose the President.”
But…were you called a traitor by LP? Forget about asking him…ask yourself. DID he call YOU a traitor?
Unless…the term fits them. If it doesn’t fit you, then it doesn’t fit you, and then I guess you could assume he wasn’t referring to you.
Who should he apologize to?
This makes no goddamned sense at all. Why should I ask myself? I know I’m not a traitor. The coward LonesomePolecat said people who opposed the war were quislings. I oppose the war. I asked him if he thought I was a traitor. If he stands by his earlier statement, then he should show his superior patriotism to call me a traitor to my face. If he doesn’t stand by his earlier statement, then he needs to apologize to war opponents. Did I really need to spell that out? Haven’t I already said as much in two threads?
Me. I opposed the war. I opposed it from the beginning. And now he’s calling me a traitor. He should apologize to me. Especially since I was right from the very beginning and he is still very, very wrong.
I didn’t say to ask yourself if you were a traitor. You have been demanding for LP to tell you if HE was calling YOU a traitor. This is what I want you to ask yourself…was HE calling YOU a traitor? Maybe you could figure out for yourself if he was referring to you or not. He never said ALL war opponents were traitors…at most, he said that some were. And perhaps some are.
This is a terrible sentence. It should have been chopped into about five different sentences; perhaps his poor writing is a way to introduce ambiguities into his words so that some tone-deaf (or merely disingenuous) fellow traveler with a talent for legalism could excuse him for what he said.
But I don’t think there is any defensible interpretation for it. If Saddam could “count on cowards, quislings, fools and defeatists” to “turn a blind eye”, he could only count on them if they formed enough of a cohesive political force to influence policy. Certainly a few of the above - particularly the fools - will be completely unaware of anything that goes on outside this country. But Saddam could only “count on them” if indeed they could somehow ensure that he wouldn’t be watched closely or held to account for his actions.
These “cowards, quislings, fools and defeatists” are of no use to Saddam and would not be even a matter for him to consider unless said “cowards, quislings, fools and defeatists” somehow influenced the United States’ actions towards him. While sadly the anti-war crowd was not able to influence politics much at all in the run-up to Bush’s War in Iraq, which is why we are still enmeshed in the “last throes” of the resistance. But surely there is no other group besides the anti-war left that Saddam could possibly “count on” to “turn a blind eye”. There is no other intepretation for LP’s statement then to assume that the sets of those of us who opposed the war and his set of “cowards, quislings, fools and defeatists” are congruent.
The fact that he doesn’t have the balls to take some responsibility for what he said and at least honestly accuse his political opponents of treason just makes him the more pathetic - though his eternal tack of argument through namecalling is pathetic enough and shows the pure intellectual bankruptcy underlying his politics.
Oh my goodness…he called you a traitor, too? Are you sure? I don’t recall him naming any names at all.
“cowards, quislings, fools and defeatists” -
Wasn’t this a top 40 hit by Cher?
What is it with all the pussyfooting and equivocating that Weirddave, LP and Sarafeena are wallowing in? I opposed the war. LP keeps talking about “those” people. Which “those”? Who are were the fools and the traitors? It is obvious to me that he is trying to call me a traitor without having to stand up for his words. If I’m wrong then he can tell me exactly who the fuck he was calling fools and quislings in his post. It it was me, then he needs to step up and take responsibility for it.
You know what? I’ll step up and call LP a chickenhawk. A stupid one at that, if he still believes that load of bullshit this administration blew up his ass in order for him to get his flag waving and his dander up about the fools, traitors and quislings. And yet, just like a chickenhawk, when he is called on it he runs behind a “I didn’t mean you specifically” coward’s shield.
Put up or shut up, you fucking coward.
I’ve got a few names for you. Pussyfooter. Equivocator. Chicken.
Quis-lings, cowards and fools,
We’d hear it from the people like LonesomePolecat
Then why the fuck do you care if some spineless, brainless schmuck on the internet calls you one?