A good America

[lifeloyalsigmsu]

go cats...reread the second line...or are you so wrapped up in the flag that you can't comprehend anything but spastic patriotism....???

life long...doesn't mean that at all...the cynic in me just would not let me varnish the club...

i'll try harder next time to be more pc...

Please, couloir, don't ever be PC.

Just my opinion. I wasn't ripping into your opinion but it seems the usual suspects think I didn't read the speech w/any depth.

Forgive my role in sort of being a devil's advocate.

[iaafan]

Very true catamaran. I think the speech should stand on its own rather than be tagged a soapbox, political rant. But I also think those who tag it as such should be exposed.

I agree the speech should stand on its own and that I would be happy to discuss his points and debate with the speaker. However I was the one that called it a soapbox because do you really think a high school graduation speech is an appropriate forum to share an opinion filled speech? I personally don't, and that is my only issue with the topic.

I respect that, but I can't think of a graduation speech that I've heard that wasn't filled with opinions on the topic of the day. So, personally, I don't have a problem with this.

[iaafan]

Well thought out, grizbeer (by Wikipedia and ya'll used great references to refute the other side My main thoughts on this takes me bck to the argument Jefferson presented the rest of the framers of the constition for allowing "the commoners the right to vote" and his justifiable and prophetic argument was, to paraphrase...those that could be affected won't vote anyway...and will simply complain about no control over their destiny...

I didn't know there was a side taken, so what's to refute? Until someone brought political persuasion into this thread there was no argument and nothing to agree or disagree about.

Regradless of party affiliation, we should all be together in wanting to see America be as good a place as it can be, so we should always be seeking to make it better.

You can't see the quote from the speech being clarified by how Wikpedia interprets de Tocqueville Oh well...

What? I don't understand what you just said.

[Cat Grad]

Very true catamaran. I think the speech should stand on its own rather than be tagged a soapbox, political rant. But I also think those who tag it as such should be exposed.

I agree the speech should stand on its own and that I would be happy to discuss his points and debate with the speaker. However I was the one that called it a soapbox because do you really think a high school graduation speech is an appropriate forum to share an opinion filled speech? I personally don't, and that is my only issue with the topic.

Man, is this true! However, ya'll realize we'll have to fire virtually every public school civics teacher, most English teachers (hell, virtually every public school instructor) because this is the same soapbox they climb in all of their classes Check what texts are used and while we're at it, we're going to have to go after the humanities that have somehow infiltrated even schools of logic such as MSU by watering down our curriculum with the baffle with b.s. line of reasoning

[lifeloyalsigmsu]

go cats and ponycat...

if you have served congratulations and i salute you...

but i don't believe either of you have judging by your brief but cavalier remarkage...

i have a suggestion...since the body count for this particular war is past 2500 (us service personnel) why don't both of you put your asses on the line by enlisting....?????...with a little first hand experience killing people you may not be so quick to make goofy remarks about someone else's opinion...you might learn tolerance and respect for others opinions...

So are you saying that you have no tolerance and respect for the first 2 posts made on this thread?

Those comments and yours are just what Cornell was talking about when he said people are afraid to actually look into something with any depth. Instead you just choose to respond with a quick, easy answer for everything.

If you say so.

Maybe you're a little dense, but where in this thread have I given my opinion of the speech? Where in your infinite knowledge are you aware of whether I read the speech or not.

Other than your thinking that I didn't read it and that I just offered up a quick easy answer, what basis do you make this statement?

For someone who was so quick to admonish me a few weeks ago for my words directed towards you (not knowing you were in the military), maybe you should follow your own advice and not presume anything about me.

The irony is that I agreed w/a lot of what he said and though I don't think it was addressed to an appropriate audience, he made some good points that I agree with. I would discuss it more, but you already have it in your mind that I didn't read it and just made a knee jerk comment.

[lifeloyalsigmsu]

Very true catamaran. I think the speech should stand on its own rather than be tagged a soapbox, political rant. But I also think those who tag it as such should be exposed.

I agree the speech should stand on its own and that I would be happy to discuss his points and debate with the speaker. However I was the one that called it a soapbox because do you really think a high school graduation speech is an appropriate forum to share an opinion filled speech? I personally don't, and that is my only issue with the topic.

I respect that, but I can't think of a graduation speech that I've heard that wasn't filled with opinions on the topic of the day. So, personally, I don't have a problem with this.

Is there any chance that you'd be raising holy hell if someone like Bill O'Reilly stood on the exact same podium and gave an address that had a slant that you so grudgingly hate?

[iaafan]

go cats and ponycat...

if you have served congratulations and i salute you...

but i don't believe either of you have judging by your brief but cavalier remarkage...

i have a suggestion...since the body count for this particular war is past 2500 (us service personnel) why don't both of you put your asses on the line by enlisting....?????...with a little first hand experience killing people you may not be so quick to make goofy remarks about someone else's opinion...you might learn tolerance and respect for others opinions...

So are you saying that you have no tolerance and respect for the first 2 posts made on this thread?

Those comments and yours are just what Cornell was talking about when he said people are afraid to actually look into something with any depth. Instead you just choose to respond with a quick, easy answer for everything.

If you say so.

Maybe you're a little dense, but where in this thread have I given my opinion of the speech? Where in your infinite knowledge are you aware of whether I read the speech or not.

Other than your thinking that I didn't read it and that I just offered up a quick easy answer, what basis do you make this statement?

For someone who was so quick to admonish me a few weeks ago for my words directed towards you (not knowing you were in the military), maybe you should follow your own advice and not presume anything about me.

The irony is that I agreed w/a lot of what he said and though I don't think it was addressed to an appropriate audience, he made some good points that I agree with. I would discuss it more, but you already have it in your mind that I didn't read it and just made a knee jerk comment.

There's no statement by me in this thread (I 'suggested' that maybe the case in an other thread) that says you did or didn't read this, so I never presumed anything and didn't make a knee jerk comment in that regard. I just referenced what Cornell was saying, which was that people don't care to look at things in any depth and would rather just give the quick, easy (black and white) response. I then related it to the short, simplistic responses provided by a couple posters, including yourself. Cornell then goes on to say that form of response is what people are being programmed to do via the world of 15 second sound bites. But even though he says this, posters here do it anyway in this thread.

Who might be a little dense. The other thing I admonished you for was your condescending attitude and your personalizing the conversation. You start with "Maybe you're a little dense" then go to sarcasm with "your infinite wisdom." So a little maturity would be nice.

[iaafan]

Very true catamaran. I think the speech should stand on its own rather than be tagged a soapbox, political rant. But I also think those who tag it as such should be exposed.

I agree the speech should stand on its own and that I would be happy to discuss his points and debate with the speaker. However I was the one that called it a soapbox because do you really think a high school graduation speech is an appropriate forum to share an opinion filled speech? I personally don't, and that is my only issue with the topic.

I respect that, but I can't think of a graduation speech that I've heard that wasn't filled with opinions on the topic of the day. So, personally, I don't have a problem with this.

Is there any chance that you'd be raising holy hell if someone like Bill O'Reilly stood on the exact same podium and gave an address that had a slant that you so grudgingly hate?

Just thinking of Bill O'Reilly is like raising holy hell. But Bill O'Reilly over years of pompous behavior has earned that. If I had no idea who B.O. was and he was a virtual nobody, like Cornell, then no I wouldn't be raising holy hell. Re-read my post on McCain and that should answer this question.

[lifeloyalsigmsu]

go cats and ponycat...

if you have served congratulations and i salute you...

but i don't believe either of you have judging by your brief but cavalier remarkage...

i have a suggestion...since the body count for this particular war is past 2500 (us service personnel) why don't both of you put your asses on the line by enlisting....?????...with a little first hand experience killing people you may not be so quick to make goofy remarks about someone else's opinion...you might learn tolerance and respect for others opinions...

So are you saying that you have no tolerance and respect for the first 2 posts made on this thread?

Those comments and yours are just what Cornell was talking about when he said people are afraid to actually look into something with any depth. Instead you just choose to respond with a quick, easy answer for everything.

If you say so.

Maybe you're a little dense, but where in this thread have I given my opinion of the speech? Where in your infinite knowledge are you aware of whether I read the speech or not.

Other than your thinking that I didn't read it and that I just offered up a quick easy answer, what basis do you make this statement?

For someone who was so quick to admonish me a few weeks ago for my words directed towards you (not knowing you were in the military), maybe you should follow your own advice and not presume anything about me.

The irony is that I agreed w/a lot of what he said and though I don't think it was addressed to an appropriate audience, he made some good points that I agree with. I would discuss it more, but you already have it in your mind that I didn't read it and just made a knee jerk comment.

There's no statement by me in this thread (I 'suggested' that maybe the case in an other thread) that says you did or didn't read this, so I never presumed anything and didn't make a knee jerk comment in that regard. I just referenced what Cornell was saying, which was that people don't care to look at things in any depth and would rather just give the quick, easy (black and white) response. I then related it to the short, simplistic responses provided by a couple posters, including yourself. Cornell then goes on to say that form of response is what people are being programmed to do via the world of 15 second sound bites. But even though he says this, posters here do it anyway in this thread.

Who might be a little dense. The other thing I admonished you for was your condescending attitude and your personalizing the conversation. You start with "Maybe you're a little dense" then go to sarcasm with "your infinite wisdom." So a little maturity would be nice.

Well you "suggested". I interpreted that as a post directed towards me and with your attitude towards me and vice versa, how would you have taken these remarks. I'm not in the field of mind reading, so I responded to you as such.

My "short and simplistic comment" was a question directed towards someone and IT WAS NOT DIRECTED TOWARDS YOU. However, you felt the need to chime in with your attitude which you are sporting towards me. It was simply a question and just because I don't feel the need to write a thesis on my thoughts about the speech doesn't make my input any less credible than yours.

My comments about you being dense and then my sarcastic comment is my posting nature. I tend to be quite sarcastic. If you don't like it, don't friggin' read it.

And for the maturity speech you're trying to get across, you can shove it. You sit there and whine about stuff I say towards you and act all sanctimonius when I make comments directed back towards you. The PM you sent me had that subtle flavor as well. You tend to bring up personalization. I suppose you'll deny getting "personal" towards me when you talk out of one side of your mouth saying I need to be a little more mature.

Respect towards you, from me, will be met when you can do the same. Until then, I value what you say about as much as bearbac.

Here's the funny part. I agreed w/a great deal of what was said in that speech. Of course, I hadn't posted that before you chimed in with your drivel directed towards me. If you're looking to just start crap with me on this site, maybe again you should take your own advice regarding maturity.

[iaafan]

go cats and ponycat...

if you have served congratulations and i salute you...

but i don't believe either of you have judging by your brief but cavalier remarkage...

i have a suggestion...since the body count for this particular war is past 2500 (us service personnel) why don't both of you put your asses on the line by enlisting....?????...with a little first hand experience killing people you may not be so quick to make goofy remarks about someone else's opinion...you might learn tolerance and respect for others opinions...

So are you saying that you have no tolerance and respect for the first 2 posts made on this thread?

Those comments and yours are just what Cornell was talking about when he said people are afraid to actually look into something with any depth. Instead you just choose to respond with a quick, easy answer for everything.

If you say so.

Maybe you're a little dense, but where in this thread have I given my opinion of the speech? Where in your infinite knowledge are you aware of whether I read the speech or not.

Other than your thinking that I didn't read it and that I just offered up a quick easy answer, what basis do you make this statement?

For someone who was so quick to admonish me a few weeks ago for my words directed towards you (not knowing you were in the military), maybe you should follow your own advice and not presume anything about me.

The irony is that I agreed w/a lot of what he said and though I don't think it was addressed to an appropriate audience, he made some good points that I agree with. I would discuss it more, but you already have it in your mind that I didn't read it and just made a knee jerk comment.

There's no statement by me in this thread (I 'suggested' that maybe the case in an other thread) that says you did or didn't read this, so I never presumed anything and didn't make a knee jerk comment in that regard. I just referenced what Cornell was saying, which was that people don't care to look at things in any depth and would rather just give the quick, easy (black and white) response. I then related it to the short, simplistic responses provided by a couple posters, including yourself. Cornell then goes on to say that form of response is what people are being programmed to do via the world of 15 second sound bites. But even though he says this, posters here do it anyway in this thread.

Who might be a little dense. The other thing I admonished you for was your condescending attitude and your personalizing the conversation. You start with "Maybe you're a little dense" then go to sarcasm with "your infinite wisdom." So a little maturity would be nice.

Well you "suggested". I interpreted that as a post directed towards me and with your attitude towards me and vice versa, how would you have taken these remarks. I'm not in the field of mind reading, so I responded to you as such.

My "short and simplistic comment" was a question directed towards someone and IT WAS NOT DIRECTED TOWARDS YOU. However, you felt the need to chime in with your attitude which you are sporting towards me. It was simply a question and just because I don't feel the need to write a thesis on my thoughts about the speech doesn't make my input any less credible than yours.

My comments about you being dense and then my sarcastic comment is my posting nature. I tend to be quite sarcastic. If you don't like it, don't friggin' read it.

And for the maturity speech you're trying to get across, you can shove it. You sit there and whine about stuff I say towards you and act all sanctimonius when I make comments directed back towards you. The PM you sent me had that subtle flavor as well. You tend to bring up personalization. I suppose you'll deny getting "personal" towards me when you talk out of one side of your mouth saying I need to be a little more mature.

Respect towards you, from me, will be met when you can do the same. Until then, I value what you say about as much as bearbac.

Here's the funny part. I agreed w/a great deal of what was said in that speech. Of course, I hadn't posted that before you chimed in with your drivel directed towards me. If you're looking to just start crap with me on this site, maybe again you should take your own advice regarding maturity.

Good greif. I'll just let your posts speak for themselves and leave it at that. Which is to say I've given up on trying to get you to conform to anything resembling a civil conversation.

[iaafan]

go cats and ponycat...

if you have served congratulations and i salute you...

but i don't believe either of you have judging by your brief but cavalier remarkage...

i have a suggestion...since the body count for this particular war is past 2500 (us service personnel) why don't both of you put your asses on the line by enlisting....?????...with a little first hand experience killing people you may not be so quick to make goofy remarks about someone else's opinion...you might learn tolerance and respect for others opinions...

So are you saying that you have no tolerance and respect for the first 2 posts made on this thread?

Those comments and yours are just what Cornell was talking about when he said people are afraid to actually look into something with any depth. Instead you just choose to respond with a quick, easy answer for everything.

If you say so.

Maybe you're a little dense, but where in this thread have I given my opinion of the speech? Where in your infinite knowledge are you aware of whether I read the speech or not.

Other than your thinking that I didn't read it and that I just offered up a quick easy answer, what basis do you make this statement?

For someone who was so quick to admonish me a few weeks ago for my words directed towards you (not knowing you were in the military), maybe you should follow your own advice and not presume anything about me.

The irony is that I agreed w/a lot of what he said and though I don't think it was addressed to an appropriate audience, he made some good points that I agree with. I would discuss it more, but you already have it in your mind that I didn't read it and just made a knee jerk comment.

There's no statement by me in this thread (I 'suggested' that maybe the case in an other thread) that says you did or didn't read this, so I never presumed anything and didn't make a knee jerk comment in that regard. I just referenced what Cornell was saying, which was that people don't care to look at things in any depth and would rather just give the quick, easy (black and white) response. I then related it to the short, simplistic responses provided by a couple posters, including yourself. Cornell then goes on to say that form of response is what people are being programmed to do via the world of 15 second sound bites. But even though he says this, posters here do it anyway in this thread.

Who might be a little dense. The other thing I admonished you for was your condescending attitude and your personalizing the conversation. You start with "Maybe you're a little dense" then go to sarcasm with "your infinite wisdom." So a little maturity would be nice.

Well you "suggested". I interpreted that as a post directed towards me and with your attitude towards me and vice versa, how would you have taken these remarks. I'm not in the field of mind reading, so I responded to you as such.

My "short and simplistic comment" was a question directed towards someone and IT WAS NOT DIRECTED TOWARDS YOU. However, you felt the need to chime in with your attitude which you are sporting towards me. It was simply a question and just because I don't feel the need to write a thesis on my thoughts about the speech doesn't make my input any less credible than yours.

My comments about you being dense and then my sarcastic comment is my posting nature. I tend to be quite sarcastic. If you don't like it, don't friggin' read it.

And for the maturity speech you're trying to get across, you can shove it. You sit there and whine about stuff I say towards you and act all sanctimonius when I make comments directed back towards you. The PM you sent me had that subtle flavor as well. You tend to bring up personalization. I suppose you'll deny getting "personal" towards me when you talk out of one side of your mouth saying I need to be a little more mature.

Respect towards you, from me, will be met when you can do the same. Until then, I value what you say about as much as bearbac.

Here's the funny part. I agreed w/a great deal of what was said in that speech. Of course, I hadn't posted that before you chimed in with your drivel directed towards me. If you're looking to just start crap with me on this site, maybe again you should take your own advice regarding maturity.

Good greif you're the closest thing to being functionally illiterate as I've ever seen. I'll just let your posts speak for themselves and leave it at that. Which is to say I've given up on trying to get you to conform to anything resembling a civil conversation.

Unlike an illiterate, someone who is functionally illiterate is able to read and write text in his native language. However, he does so with a variable degree of grammatical correctness, speed, and style, and cannot perform fundamental tasks as: filling out an employment application; following written instructions; reading a newspaper; reading traffic signs; consulting a dictionary; or understanding a bus schedule. In short, when confronted with printed materials, adults without basic literacy skills cannot function effectively in modern society.

Functional illiteracy also severely limits interaction with information and communication technologies (i.e.: using a personal computer to work with a word processor, a web browser, a spreadsheet application, or using a mobile phone) adequately and efficiently. Functional illiteracy probably explains survey results that show one third of the population say they are "computer-phobic".



[/b]

[lifeloyalsigmsu]

go cats and ponycat...

if you have served congratulations and i salute you...

but i don't believe either of you have judging by your brief but cavalier remarkage...

i have a suggestion...since the body count for this particular war is past 2500 (us service personnel) why don't both of you put your asses on the line by enlisting....?????...with a little first hand experience killing people you may not be so quick to make goofy remarks about someone else's opinion...you might learn tolerance and respect for others opinions...

So are you saying that you have no tolerance and respect for the first 2 posts made on this thread?

Those comments and yours are just what Cornell was talking about when he said people are afraid to actually look into something with any depth. Instead you just choose to respond with a quick, easy answer for everything.

If you say so.

Maybe you're a little dense, but where in this thread have I given my opinion of the speech? Where in your infinite knowledge are you aware of whether I read the speech or not.

Other than your thinking that I didn't read it and that I just offered up a quick easy answer, what basis do you make this statement?

For someone who was so quick to admonish me a few weeks ago for my words directed towards you (not knowing you were in the military), maybe you should follow your own advice and not presume anything about me.

The irony is that I agreed w/a lot of what he said and though I don't think it was addressed to an appropriate audience, he made some good points that I agree with. I would discuss it more, but you already have it in your mind that I didn't read it and just made a knee jerk comment.

There's no statement by me in this thread (I 'suggested' that maybe the case in an other thread) that says you did or didn't read this, so I never presumed anything and didn't make a knee jerk comment in that regard. I just referenced what Cornell was saying, which was that people don't care to look at things in any depth and would rather just give the quick, easy (black and white) response. I then related it to the short, simplistic responses provided by a couple posters, including yourself. Cornell then goes on to say that form of response is what people are being programmed to do via the world of 15 second sound bites. But even though he says this, posters here do it anyway in this thread.

Who might be a little dense. The other thing I admonished you for was your condescending attitude and your personalizing the conversation. You start with "Maybe you're a little dense" then go to sarcasm with "your infinite wisdom." So a little maturity would be nice.

Well you "suggested". I interpreted that as a post directed towards me and with your attitude towards me and vice versa, how would you have taken these remarks. I'm not in the field of mind reading, so I responded to you as such.

My "short and simplistic comment" was a question directed towards someone and IT WAS NOT DIRECTED TOWARDS YOU. However, you felt the need to chime in with your attitude which you are sporting towards me. It was simply a question and just because I don't feel the need to write a thesis on my thoughts about the speech doesn't make my input any less credible than yours.

My comments about you being dense and then my sarcastic comment is my posting nature. I tend to be quite sarcastic. If you don't like it, don't friggin' read it.

And for the maturity speech you're trying to get across, you can shove it. You sit there and whine about stuff I say towards you and act all sanctimonius when I make comments directed back towards you. The PM you sent me had that subtle flavor as well. You tend to bring up personalization. I suppose you'll deny getting "personal" towards me when you talk out of one side of your mouth saying I need to be a little more mature.

Respect towards you, from me, will be met when you can do the same. Until then, I value what you say about as much as bearbac.

Here's the funny part. I agreed w/a great deal of what was said in that speech. Of course, I hadn't posted that before you chimed in with your drivel directed towards me. If you're looking to just start crap with me on this site, maybe again you should take your own advice regarding maturity.

Good greif you're the closest thing to being functionally illiterate as I've ever seen. I'll just let your posts speak for themselves and leave it at that. Which is to say I've given up on trying to get you to conform to anything resembling a civil conversation.

Unlike an illiterate, someone who is functionally illiterate is able to read and write text in his native language. However, he does so with a variable degree of grammatical correctness, speed, and style, and cannot perform fundamental tasks as: filling out an employment application; following written instructions; reading a newspaper; reading traffic signs; consulting a dictionary; or understanding a bus schedule. In short, when confronted with printed materials, adults without basic literacy skills cannot function effectively in modern society.

Functional illiteracy also severely limits interaction with information and communication technologies (i.e.: using a personal computer to work with a word processor, a web browser, a spreadsheet application, or using a mobile phone) adequately and efficiently. Functional illiteracy probably explains survey results that show one third of the population say they are "computer-phobic".



[/b]

So you question my literacy and/or grasp on the language? This is laughable coming from you.

Since you're so quick to say so, point out where I'm so wrong or so functionally or grammatically illiterate. Since you're so quick to point out what I'm so lacking in, I guess I'll take the time to tell you that this is the correct spelling of "grief".

Find it! Post it! Prove how I'm as you describe.

Why don't you just admit that you take issue with me because you don't like the stance I take socially and/or politically?

My posts speak for themselves just fine. Again, you try to get personal (which I'm sure that you'll deny, once again, since you didn't address it in my prior post) with illiteracy comments. I love your ability to be so friggin' oblivious about your own hypocrisy.

Why don't you give it a rest? Until you have all of this infallable proof of my functional illiteracy (read: my inability to get along with you politically) or my grammatical issues, why don't you just STFU!

Let's see if you can think of something on your own without the help of Wikipedia or some other source that lines exclusively with your way of thinking.

To think you were educated at MSU is downright depressing.

[lifeloyalsigmsu]

go cats and ponycat...

if you have served congratulations and i salute you...

but i don't believe either of you have judging by your brief but cavalier remarkage...

i have a suggestion...since the body count for this particular war is past 2500 (us service personnel) why don't both of you put your asses on the line by enlisting....?????...with a little first hand experience killing people you may not be so quick to make goofy remarks about someone else's opinion...you might learn tolerance and respect for others opinions...

So are you saying that you have no tolerance and respect for the first 2 posts made on this thread?

Those comments and yours are just what Cornell was talking about when he said people are afraid to actually look into something with any depth. Instead you just choose to respond with a quick, easy answer for everything.

If you say so.

Maybe you're a little dense, but where in this thread have I given my opinion of the speech? Where in your infinite knowledge are you aware of whether I read the speech or not.

Other than your thinking that I didn't read it and that I just offered up a quick easy answer, what basis do you make this statement?

For someone who was so quick to admonish me a few weeks ago for my words directed towards you (not knowing you were in the military), maybe you should follow your own advice and not presume anything about me.

The irony is that I agreed w/a lot of what he said and though I don't think it was addressed to an appropriate audience, he made some good points that I agree with. I would discuss it more, but you already have it in your mind that I didn't read it and just made a knee jerk comment.

There's no statement by me in this thread (I 'suggested' that maybe the case in an other thread) that says you did or didn't read this, so I never presumed anything and didn't make a knee jerk comment in that regard. I just referenced what Cornell was saying, which was that people don't care to look at things in any depth and would rather just give the quick, easy (black and white) response. I then related it to the short, simplistic responses provided by a couple posters, including yourself. Cornell then goes on to say that form of response is what people are being programmed to do via the world of 15 second sound bites. But even though he says this, posters here do it anyway in this thread.

Who might be a little dense. The other thing I admonished you for was your condescending attitude and your personalizing the conversation. You start with "Maybe you're a little dense" then go to sarcasm with "your infinite wisdom." So a little maturity would be nice.

Well you "suggested". I interpreted that as a post directed towards me and with your attitude towards me and vice versa, how would you have taken these remarks. I'm not in the field of mind reading, so I responded to you as such.

My "short and simplistic comment" was a question directed towards someone and IT WAS NOT DIRECTED TOWARDS YOU. However, you felt the need to chime in with your attitude which you are sporting towards me. It was simply a question and just because I don't feel the need to write a thesis on my thoughts about the speech doesn't make my input any less credible than yours.

My comments about you being dense and then my sarcastic comment is my posting nature. I tend to be quite sarcastic. If you don't like it, don't friggin' read it.

And for the maturity speech you're trying to get across, you can shove it. You sit there and whine about stuff I say towards you and act all sanctimonius when I make comments directed back towards you. The PM you sent me had that subtle flavor as well. You tend to bring up personalization. I suppose you'll deny getting "personal" towards me when you talk out of one side of your mouth saying I need to be a little more mature.

Respect towards you, from me, will be met when you can do the same. Until then, I value what you say about as much as bearbac.

Here's the funny part. I agreed w/a great deal of what was said in that speech. Of course, I hadn't posted that before you chimed in with your drivel directed towards me. If you're looking to just start crap with me on this site, maybe again you should take your own advice regarding maturity.

Good greif. I'll just let your posts speak for themselves and leave it at that. Which is to say I've given up on trying to get you to conform to anything resembling a civil conversation.

Practice what you preach. I'm DONE being civil with you.

Remember, your comments on this thread reopened "the wound" and in case you've forgotten, my initial post on this thread was not directed towards you at all. Simply put, you were just starting s**t.

[iaafan]

Yikes! To borrow from Sgt. Hulka on Stripes. "Settle down Francis."

It's OK, I'm sure there are some support groups for the functionally illiterate. Enjoy those now. Buh-Bye.

You can't be done being civil with me, because you never were.

[lifeloyalsigmsu]

To borrow from Sgt. Hulka on Stripes. "Settle down Francis."

It's OK, I'm sure there are some support groups for the functionally illiterate. Enjoy those now. Buh-Bye.

You sure got me. I congratulate you for your efforts to show how I'm functionally illiterate. I guess if I were you, I'd deflect from the conversation as well.

[lifeloyalsigmsu]

Yikes! To borrow from Sgt. Hulka on Stripes. "Settle down Francis."

It's OK, I'm sure there are some support groups for the functionally illiterate. Enjoy those now. Buh-Bye.

You can't be done being civil with me, because you never were.

I tried some, but I won't waste my time anymore.

[iaafan]

Yikes! To borrow from Sgt. Hulka on Stripes. "Settle down Francis."

It's OK, I'm sure there are some support groups for the functionally illiterate. Enjoy those now. Buh-Bye.

You can't be done being civil with me, because you never were.

I tried some, but I won't waste my time anymore.

Thanks. That's the most civil thing you've said yet.

Actually it was "Lighten up, Francis." Don't want to piss off any Stripes fans out there.

[lifeloyalsigmsu]

Yikes! To borrow from Sgt. Hulka on Stripes. "Settle down Francis."

It's OK, I'm sure there are some support groups for the functionally illiterate. Enjoy those now. Buh-Bye.

You can't be done being civil with me, because you never were.

I tried some, but I won't waste my time anymore.

Thanks. That's the most civil thing you've said yet.

Actually it was "Lighten up, Francis." Don't want to piss off any Stripes fans out there.

I'm generally always civil. I even can be towards you. Reciprocation sometimes helps though.

[couloir41]

wow...

let's get back on task...

my point initially was that some people who post here have only one narrow perspective on political issues that we all should be paying close attention to...they could take the blinders off...and at least consider the opposition before they post a cavalier remark...

my point has evolved to: that i think some people who post here cower behind a "patriotic" facade to validate an otherwise near indefensible narrow and frankly weak position on our current foreign policy debacle...

there are some issues i am very conservative on...for example...osama and the taliban...kill'em...yesterday...and do it descively (sp)...deficet (sp) spending and illegal immigration...(those who employ them should be imprisoned)...ok maybe fined...

so that said i don't have any problem at all setting fire to a flag that wrapped around someone who is so blatantly closed to any opinion but theirs...

[Ponycat]

wow...

let's get back on task...

my point initially was that some people who post here have only one narrow perspective on political issues that we all should be paying close attention to...they could take the blinders off...and at least consider the opposition before they post a cavalier remark...

my point has evolved to: that i think some people who post here cower behind a "patriotic" facade to validate an otherwise near indefensible narrow and frankly weak position on our current foreign policy debacle...

there are some issues i am very conservative on...for example...osama and the taliban...kill'em...yesterday...and do it descively (sp)...deficet (sp) spending and illegal immigration...(those who employ them should be imprisoned)...ok maybe fined...

so that said i don't have any problem at all setting fire to a flag that wrapped around someone who is so blatantly closed to any opinion but theirs...

I sure do preciate the help knowing when I've "considered the opposition"

Get off your high horse.