Well, there was my initial challenge. And then there was Mr. Erl's rebuttal. Notice anything missing? Give it time ... it'll come to you.
P.S. Regarding this amusing opening of yours, Mr. Erl:
It was nice of you to reply to my little peice...no...thats not the right word...my wildly popular piece (that's better) condemning you for your harassment of one Mrs. Wanda Watkins.
If I were you, Mr. Erl, I'd take the time to learn the actual definition of the word "harassment," before you embarrass yourself any further. Just some friendly advice.
As for the illogic of the rest of your post, well, I'm just going to leave that for posterity. Even posterity needs the entertainment once in a while.
my wildly popular piece (that's better)
Nice bragging. Must be hard to stretch around and pat himself on the back like that.
Sounds more like an admission that he really doesn't give a rats ass about Wanda, soldiers dying or anything other than being in the popular 'cool club'.
Oh, come on, E ... I was hoping you'd pick on some of the bigger howlers in Mr. Erl's post, like this one:
"Watkins is different. She was telling people NOT to use her son's death as grounds for making a lame-ass political statement."
When, in fact, the whole rationale for this thread is that that's exactly what she was doing -- using her son's death to make a political statement to "support the mission."
Do I have to explain everything to you people? :-)
So Mrs. Watkins made this political and you didn't?
Of course CC made it political, Mrs. Watkins made it political too, although that may not have been her intent, but you damn well that those who cry, "You can't support the troops unless you support the mission" would have and are using her statement for political purposes.
No matter who you slice it, pro or con, for or against, on this issue it will always be political.
No, Zorph ... I did not make it political. Watkins made it political; I simply called her on it. There's a difference.
Yes and no, you also stepped onto the field, whether you like it or not, you are pointing out her intentional or un-intentional political consequences of her public statement. When you step onto the field it becomes political because that is the perception, and politics is all about perception. You can't have it both ways CC, and that's the rub.
I'd have to agree with CC here, Zorph. Ms. Watkins made the first political statement, and it may have been a heartfelt one or a carefully considered one or just something the PMO thrust into her hand or just a hastily spoken emotional reaction -- but it was a political statement. I don't agree with the way CC said it, but I do agree with what he was trying to say.
Post a Comment