Say Anything Blog

Would you have the same sentiment if president Bush wore the bracelet?

This soldier is not being portray as a “confused child”. He may well have wanted to be there and served his country well and with honor.  That is mother gave a bracelet to Obama to wear is what she is thinking about the war not her son.  It is her way of showing what she thinks and certainly is her perogative to do so.

That you don’t like it is neither here nor there.  This statement you wrote Rob,and I quote

“Which means that Barack Obama shouldn’t presume to speak for them either, or cast them as confused and needy victims which they most assuredly are not.”

That there are mothers and fathers out there that want the war to end and are supporting the democrats is what is really behind your misleading post.

And I might add that if he had worn the bracelet after she gave it to him and then taken it off, pictures would be flying all over the internet at how unpatriotic Obama isand how he hates our soldiers cuz he refuses to wear the bracelet.

Puzzled,

This soldier is not being portray as a “confused child”.

What Obama actually said:

I meet mothers and family members all over the country who are still mourning their children but are also thinking about the young men and women who are still over there and wondering when it will end.

See how subtle that is?  Soldiers are children in Iraq who are wondering when it all will end.

As oblique as that may be, it’s still insulting.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Yeah Turtle, I see your point.
He should have said young adults.

“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

So a mother can no longer refer to her offspring as her children?  Get real, an adult will always be a mother and father’s child. It does not in any way denote “childish” as you are clearly claiming. 

Get real,Rob.  You will always be your mother’s child. And it is not insulting, I’ll bet she is proud you are her child.

What we have here is one more bit of evidence, as if any was really needed, that no matter which Democrat is nominated, the party that gave us Harry Truman, JFK, Scoop Jackson, Richard Russell and Sam Nunn, is essentially dead.  The legacy of honor among Democrats is gone.  National Defense now reverts to the Clintonian “Meals-on-Wheels” with Barack Obama handingout snacks and Kool-Aide before nap time.

What happened, Puzzle?  Democrats used to be a pretty classy bunch.  As appropriate as the Jackass is as a symbol of Democrats, a capon would be very bit as appropriate.  When did destroying your partisan opponents become more important to you guys than destroying your country’s?

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Since the republicans went to war with the citizens of America.

Riiight.  The party that won the last two Presidential elections is “at war with the citizens of America.”

Sell crazy somewhere else.

As for this:

So a mother can no longer refer to her offspring as her children?

You know what I’m talking about.  You defended Michael Moore when he was trying to get Republicans to sign their kids up for war.  You also defended other liberals when they’ve talked of sending “our children” off to war.

Again, they aren’t children, though I understand why that term - which paints them as helpless victims instead of warriors who volunteered for the mission - is useful for your political agenda.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Got your back Puzzle, not that you need it.

Rob,

Because you cleverly bold the words you select, doesnt change any meaning of the sentence at all.  Allow me to do the same.

“I meet mothers and family members all over the country who are still mourning their children but are also thinking about the young men and women who are still over there and wondering when it will end.”

What Obama is saying is that the MOTHERS and FAMILY MEMBERS are wondering when will it end, not the soldiers.

He calls them children because to parents, they will always be their child.  Some of them at age 18, are children. 

You may play coy with that fact to suit your pathetic, partisan position on this particular argument.  But we know how you and many would feel if your children were having abortions or getting married at that age.  So why don’t you admit there is some grey area when it comes to calling some folks “children”?

Hannitized, you do actually know how to read don’t you?  This is what you’re saying now:

What Obama is saying is that the MOTHERS and FAMILY MEMBERS are wondering when will it end, not the soldiers.

This is what Obama actually said:

are also thinking about the young men and women who are still over there and wondering when it will end

Do I need to explain to you what Obama means by “over there” or do you get it now?

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

No, you don’t need to explain, need a course in grammar to understand nouns, verbs and modifiers.  To wit, it is the mothers and family members who are thinking about the men and women overseas and it is they who are wondering when it will end.

Read for comprehension,Rob, not for your partisan coomprehension.

The way I read it, Obama is talking of family members who are thinking of their loved ones in Iraq who are, in turn, wondering when it all will end.

I really don’t see how there’s any other way to read it, but really it’s not like this statement is the only thing the “soldiers as children” narrative hat can be hung on.

Liberals have been using this endlessly.  Asking Republicans to sign their children up (as though that were even legal).  Talking about the “children” fighting in Iraq.  It has happened time and again, and you’ve defended it in the past though this time you’re trying to claim that Obama isn’t doing it.

He is. It’s subtle, but it’s there.  And it’s still insulting and tiresome.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Ah, but the subject of the sentence is mothers and fathers, and the “but” is conjunctive thus again is about mothers and fathers.

And you continue to equate children with “childish and that is wrong.  There is nothing wrong with the term children in this context.  That you find it insulting is neither here nor there.

I’m glad that you’ve shown us that you know the word “conjunction,” Puzzled, but your third grade grasp of grammar doesn’t change what he said.

But I’ll not beat a dead horse.  How about we point out how wrong Obama is about the war?  He says the war is on the ballot.  Given how things have turned there, that’s not good news for him or his defeatism.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

As well as not understanding grammer you can’t read either, I said “conjunctive” not “conjunction”.  Ask your third grade teacher who is right, Rob, she or he will set you straight.

As well as not understanding grammer (sic) you can’t read either, I said “conjunctive” not “conjunction”.

Puzzle,

Language ain’t your strong suit, Old Girl.  Most third grade teachers I know can spell the word “grammar.”

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

"I meet mothers and family members all over the country who are still mourning their children but are also thinking about the young men and women who are still over there and wondering when it will end.”

The point you are trying to make is a sophism.

Good catch B O.
It’s good to know that Aunt Spelling Bee sees all.

I don’t know why Neiman was so upset earlier because I was going to let you or poof correct his spelling mistake. You boys seem to take such pleasure in it that I didn’t want to spoil your fun. Oh well, Neiman is what Neiman is.

Say, why is it that I don’t see you correcting nutters?

“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

why is it that I don’t see you correcting nutters?

We try correcting you all the time, but it’s a full time job!

A troll is someone who only wants to stir up trouble, not have an honest debate.  Some signs that a poster is a troll:
* Dodges questions from other posters * Refuses to give sources
* When one of its arguments is shown to be false, either ignores the proof or moves the goalposts.  Heh. (From the LGF faq)

Oh, come on now.  Surely you’re not defending someone who critiques the language skills of another, disparagingly, while misspelling the word “grammar.”

Hell, that’s like listening to Nancy Pelosi talk about Intelligence, or some twit like “Hannitized” lecturing about naval strategy.

That sort of self-deluded fantasy deserves to be smacked around.

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Still going with the italic/bold thing huh?

“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

Did I not compliment you B O?

“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

Still going with the italic/bold thing huh?

Still going with the commenting when you don’t have anything to say thing, huh?

A troll is someone who only wants to stir up trouble, not have an honest debate.  Some signs that a poster is a troll:
* Dodges questions from other posters * Refuses to give sources
* When one of its arguments is shown to be false, either ignores the proof or moves the goalposts.  Heh. (From the LGF faq)

Hell, that’s like listening to Nancy Pelosi talk about Intelligence, or some twit like “Hannitized” lecturing about naval strategy.

Oh look.  Bat can’t get over the little battle we had bout the rights overly hostile and aggressive reaction to the Iranians running around in their speed boats.

Yes, clearly BAT was the superior reference of knowledge.  Clearly I didn’t know what I was talking about when I said you were all acting like a bunch of little league parents shouting like maniacs from the sidelines.

So clarify for me again BAT, who won that debate?

See where this conversation went Puzzle?  They can’t stand it when we constantly point out their stupid, illogical and false conclusions.

They talk a lot about the left’s intelligence and their superiority over us, but they rarely, RARELY ever get even the small and simple things right.  Instead, they are reduced to pointing out spelling and grammar errors.  Morons!

I love this site, because it’s ripe with delicious nuggets like this one.

Bring it punks.

Instead, they are reduced to pointing out spelling and grammar errors.  Morons!

Like the twit who likes to point out when I use italic and bold! Someone is projecting again!

A troll is someone who only wants to stir up trouble, not have an honest debate.  Some signs that a poster is a troll:
* Dodges questions from other posters * Refuses to give sources
* When one of its arguments is shown to be false, either ignores the proof or moves the goalposts.  Heh. (From the LGF faq)

BTW, go back to school, finish fourth grade and maybe we won’t have to point out so many grammar problems!

A troll is someone who only wants to stir up trouble, not have an honest debate.  Some signs that a poster is a troll:
* Dodges questions from other posters * Refuses to give sources
* When one of its arguments is shown to be false, either ignores the proof or moves the goalposts.  Heh. (From the LGF faq)

C’mon now.

You Leftards have made great hay about it’s not what you say, it’s who says it.

Imus gets impaled and boiled alive for saying Nappy-headed Ho’s. Your average rapper and hip-hop ‘artist’ uses the word Nigger like the rest of us use commas.

Same holds true of doing.

Bob Packwood gets eviscerated for hugging female staffers and having the temerity to call them Honey.

Clinton can feel up Katherine Willy and rape Juanita Broaddrick and gets a pass, indeed, MoveOn.org makes its debut to change the subject to something less embarrassing.

Now you have Leftoid on Roids intoning his reverence for the memory of a missing soldier.

Ahem.

We’ve known since ‘Nam that Leftists only love enemy soldiers.

This new-found respect smacks of alligator tears.

How did Uncle Jack put it?:

We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something.

You use them as a punchline!

...for great justice

Like the twit who likes to point out when I use italic and bold! Someone is projecting again!

Proof,

I do believe you have me confused with someone else.  I can’t imagine why I would ever point out descrepancies about using italics and/or bold.

Care to back up your claim with some evidence??

Care to back up your claim with some evidence??

I was not referring to you, but to your fellow traveler rbb, who had made the same pointless comment a mere half dozen posts before.

My point was, focusing on trivia is not the exclusive purview of the left or right.

A troll is someone who only wants to stir up trouble, not have an honest debate.  Some signs that a poster is a troll:
* Dodges questions from other posters * Refuses to give sources
* When one of its arguments is shown to be false, either ignores the proof or moves the goalposts.  Heh. (From the LGF faq)