T-shirt earns exit from House gallery
Beverly Young, the outspoken wife of U.S. Rep. C.W. Bill Young, says officers objected to her "Support the Troops" shirt.

WASHINGTON - Beverly Young, wife of Rep. C.W. Bill Young of Indian Shores, said she was ejected from the House gallery during Tuesday night's State of the Union address because she was wearing a T-shirt that said "Support the Troops - Defending Our Freedom."

Young said she was sitting in the gallery's front row, about six seats from first lady Laura Bush, when she was approached by someone from the Capitol Police or sergeant-at-arms office who told her she needed to leave the gallery.

She reluctantly agreed but argued with several officers in the hallway outside the House chamber.

http://www.sptimes.com/2006/02/01/Worldandnation/T_shirt_earns_exit_allforums.netallforums.net.shtm l
++++++++++++++++++++++
What Really Happened.
by CindySheehan
Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 01:19:44 AM PDT

Dear Friends,
As most of you have probably heard, I was arrested before the State of the Union Address tonight.

I am speechless with fury at what happened and with grief over what we have lost in our country.

There have been lies from the police and distortions by the press. (Shocker) So this is what really happened:

This afternoon at the People's State of the Union Address in DC where I was joined by Congresspersons Lynn Woolsey and John Conyers, Ann Wright, Malik Rahim and John Cavanagh, Lynn brought me a ticket to the State of the Union Address. At that time, I was wearing the shirt that said: 2245 Dead. How many more?

After the PSOTU press conference, I was having second thoughts about going to the SOTU at the Capitol. I didn't feel comfortable going. I knew George Bush would say things that would hurt me and anger me and I knew that I couldn't disrupt the address because Lynn had given me the ticket and I didn't want to be disruptive out of respect for her. I, in fact, had given the ticket to John Bruhns who is in Iraq Veterans Against the War. However, Lynn's office had already called the media and everyone knew I was going to be there so I sucked it up and went.

I got the ticket back from John, and I met one of Congresswoman Barbara Lee's staffers in the Longworth Congressional Office building and we went to the Capitol via the undergroud tunnel. I went through security once, then had to use the rest room and went through security again.

My ticket was in the 5th gallery, front row, fourth seat in. The person who in a few minutes was to arrest me, helped me to my seat.

I had just sat down and I was warm from climbing 3 flights of stairs back up from the bathroom so I unzipped my jacket. I turned to the right to take my left arm out, when the same officer saw my shirt and yelled; "Protester." He then ran over to me, hauled me out of my seat and roughly (with my hands behind my back) shoved me up the stairs. I said something like "I'm going, do you have to be so rough?" By the way, his name is Mike Weight.

The officer ran with me to the elevators yelling at everyone to move out of the way. When we got to the elevators, he cuffed me and took me outside to await a squad car. On the way out, someone behind me said, "That's Cindy Sheehan." At which point the officer who arrested me said: "Take these steps slowly." I said, "You didn't care about being careful when you were dragging me up the other steps." He said, "That's because you were protesting." Wow, I get hauled out of the People's House because I was, "Protesting."

I was never told that I couldn't wear that shirt into the Congress. I was never asked to take it off or zip my jacket back up. If I had been asked to do any of those things...I would have, and written about the suppression of my freedom of speech later. I was immediately, and roughly (I have the bruises and muscle spasms to prove it) hauled off and arrested for "unlawful conduct."

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/2/1/31944/23746
++++++++++++++++++++

Morons.org shows that it is clearly illegal in both cases:
http://web.morons.org/article.jsp?sectionid=2&id=6753

Notice the difference in the way the 2 women were treated? One refused, argued and was merely asked to leave; the other was arrested and shoved out the door and into jail. The difference is the messege on their shirt.

Originally posted by 500lbguerilla

Notice the difference in the way the 2 women were treated? One refused, argued and was merely asked to leave; the other was arrested and shoved out the door and into jail. The difference is the messege on their shirt.

If the truth could ever be known, i would not be surprised to find that Young's wife was placed there in that t-shirt strictly as a stalking horse, so that she COULD be removed from the room to give the fascist, police-State scum of this Administration some veneer of political cover for their wrongful treatment of Sheehan.

And it WAS wrongful treatment.....the Capitol police Chief has publicly admitted it.

"" He ran over to me, hauled me out of my seat and roughly (with my hands behind my back) shoved me up the stairs.......his name is Mike Weight""________Cindy Sheehan, in describng how she was treated

No, Cindy.

His REAL name is -- *Welcome to the Fascist Police State of 21st Century America*

A place where those who dare dissent will be hated, villified and treated harshly......

...but where those sheepish drones who go along meekly and wave the flag properly will be handled gently by their masters.

Baaaaa!!!! BAAAaaaaaa!! BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!

.

all i can say is i dont agree with kicking ANYONE out due to what a T-shirt says...

as for what REALLY happened... why would you trust what Cindy Sheehan says? Human beings always twist reality to make themselves look better. I would be interested to hear what the security guards version of what happened is, so i can take both into account.

Originally posted by Decka
as for what REALLY happened... why would you trust what Cindy Sheehan says?
Why wouldn't you? What has she done in the past to make you not trust her?

Originally posted by Overdose
Why wouldn't you? What has she done in the past to make you not trust her?

why dont you trust Sam Alito? You say he's a "bad choice".. but he SAID he would do everything in his power to uphold the constitution....

again, different people-different standards by you..

Why dont I trust her? because she is stomping on her son's memory to gain her own political agenda... which is obvious to most people in the world, but there are ALWAYS a few "overdose's" around who dont see it.

Perhaps the message is that garments should not display any type of political message inside of government buildings.

Originally posted by Decka
why dont you trust Sam Alito? You say he's a "bad choice".. but he SAID he would do everything in his power to uphold the constitution....
You're a dumbshit. HE HAS A HISTORY AND EXAMPLES OF VOTING IN WAYS I DONT APPROVE OF. WHAT EXAMPLES DO YOU HAVE FOR YOUR DIS-TRUST IN CINDY? I'M WAITING. I POSTED EXAMPLES OF ALITO. WHERE ARE YOURS FOR CINDY?

Originally posted by Decka
again, different people-different standards by you..
You're a liar. Stop lying.

Originally posted by Decka
Why dont I trust her? because she is stomping on her son's memory to gain her own political agenda... which is obvious to most people in the world, but there are ALWAYS a few "overdose's" around who dont see it.
Prove she was "stomping" on it.

Originally posted by Overdose
You're a dumbshit.

Shut up fruitcake

Originally posted by Overdose

HE HAS A HISTORY AND EXAMPLES OF VOTING IN WAYS I DONT APPROVE OF. WHAT EXAMPLES DO YOU HAVE FOR YOUR DIS-TRUST IN CINDY? I'M WAITING. I POSTED EXAMPLES OF ALITO. WHERE ARE YOURS FOR CINDY?

Prove she was "stomping" on it.

Since this is pretty much the same question... i'll answer both at once.

First off, As a JUDGE you cant hold what Alito's views are against him. EVERY judge has views, but they are SUPPOSED to keep them seperate, and instead just uphold the constitution. Therefore, any decision he made in the past is no argument against his ability to be a supreme courter at all. He SAID he'd keep them seperate, so why cant you trust Sam Alito? you obviously will blindly trust Cindy Sheehan... different standards again.

The way Sheehan is stomping on her son's memory is simple and has been explained before. The moment she strays off the topic of her son and the iraq war, she is merely using the popularity she gained from stalking the president outside his house in the name of her son to advance her own political agenda. She has no credentials to be challenging ANYONE on ANYTHING... Like i said if Sheehan gets X amount of political popularity, then EVERY OTHER mom who has a son who died in iraq is entitled to the EXACT same amount. Maybe all the other mothers have something called "decency".. they realize that going out and getting arrested isnt going to bring their sons or daughters back. Now hey anyone can have any view they want, but do it the right way. Vote in someone who thinks like you do in your county, state, etc.... dont be a media prostitute and think because you get a bunch of press that you are suddenly more enlightened...

Originally posted by Overdose

You're a liar. Stop lying.


You're a liar for saying that im lying, liar

Originally posted by Decka
Shut up fruitcake
Well, now you're a bigot. You can call me a dumbshit or whatever word you choose but don't attack my sexuality. Because that is going below the belt. So, Decka, are you happy being a bigot?

Originally posted by Decka
First off, As a JUDGE you cant hold what Alito's views are against him. EVERY judge has views, but they are SUPPOSED to keep them seperate, and instead just uphold the constitution.
Oh my fucking god you are a dumbass. Alito has judged cases and has shown how he is going to rule on the Supreme Court. Sure he has his personal opinions. But he has his court opinions as well that I've looked at and do not trust.

Originally posted by Decka
Therefore, any decision he made in the past is no argument against his ability to be a supreme courter at all. He SAID he'd keep them seperate, so why cant you trust Sam Alito? you obviously will blindly trust Cindy Sheehan... different standards again.
You are incorrect, wrong and an idiot. His court decisions in the past were also made in trying to uphold the constitution. You have to uphold the constitution no matter what level of judge you are. So his past rulings are proof I shouldn't trust him on the Supreme Court. I do not hold people to different standards. You're a liar.

Originally posted by Decka
The way Sheehan is stomping on her son's memory is simple and has been explained before. The moment she strays off the topic of her son and the iraq war, she is merely using the popularity she gained from stalking the president outside his house in the name of her son to advance her own political agenda.
Incorrect. She only has strayed onto other topics because they were current at the time. Every American talks about current topics as they are currently occuring. Why can't she talk about them? People want to hear what she has to say, not just about the Iraq War. She has every right to talk about these other topics. The only way you can prove she is using her son's death to talk about other issues is if you can prove she knew Katrina and Alito were going to both happen. Which I highly doubt is true.

Originally posted by Decka
She has no credentials to be challenging ANYONE on ANYTHING... Like i said if Sheehan gets X amount of political popularity, then EVERY OTHER mom who has a son who died in iraq is entitled to the EXACT same amount.
Why? Have they protested as much as Sheehan has? And to blame her for her being popular is retarded. The media and the republicans have made her popular. That isn't her fault, nor should it be blamed on her. As for her having no "credentials"...well, most Americans don't have any either. And we are freely allowed to protest and have opinions. Why can't she? Holding people to different standards?

Originally posted by Decka
Maybe all the other mothers have something called "decency".. they realize that going out and getting arrested isnt going to bring their sons or daughters back. Now hey anyone can have any view they want, but do it the right way. Vote in someone who thinks like you do in your county, state, etc.... dont be a media prostitute and think because you get a bunch of press that you are suddenly more enlightened...
Why are you so against average people going out and sharing their opinions? That is what has made America great, being allowed to publicly protest things you find incorrect.

Originally posted by Decka
You're a liar for saying that im lying, liar
Good one Decka.

Originally posted by Overdose
Well, now you're a bigot. You can call me a dumbshit or whatever word you choose but don't attack my sexuality. Because that is going below the belt. So, Decka, are you happy being a bigot?
Being a "fruitcake" has nothing to do with your sexuality, OD. Dop's a fruitcake. Now, on the other hand, if Decka referred to you as a fruit, then he'd be insulting your sexuality. As it stands right now, he's just calling you nuts.

From your sig line, OD:

"Why is it that, as a culture, we are more comfortable seeing two men holding guns than holding hands?" - Ernest Gaines

Oh, how profound. The implication being that "holding guns" is "wrong" in some way. Clearly then, why would seeing something that Mr. Gaines personally views as "wrong" be any worse than witnessing two men holding hands? Well, the way I see it, there are only three things required to understand his philosophy: first, I guess you have to accept the premise that holding a gun is inherently "bad" or "evil" in some way. Second, you have to divorce yourself from reality. Third, and lastly, you simply have to forget about what's socially accepted and what's taboo.

Just out of curiosity, why are you so preoccupied with your sexual persuasion, OD? Does everything in your life amount to a civil rights struggle, or is it just my imagination?

Bush's new world order: You can now be arrested for your thoughts. It is illegal to have anything that goes against his agenda displayed on a t-shirt and according to you numbskulls we should never trust the individual being arrested because they lie and the government doesn't.

The America of my youth had more individual freedoms than we have under the bush regime. King george will not tolerate descent.

Beware, the defenders of fascism will reap what they sow.

Originally posted by The Praetorian
Being a "fruitcake" has nothing to do with your sexuality, OD. Dop's a fruitcake. Now, on the other hand, if Decka referred to you as a fruit, then he'd be insulting your sexuality. As it stands right now, he's just calling you nuts.
Actually, I would say "fruitcake" does have something to do with my sexuality. What are gays typically called and associated with? Being "fruity" and saying "fruitcake" implies homosexuality. So, I don't care what you have to say on the topic. I personally find it hurtful on a deeper level then just saying "dumbass" or something around that nature.

Originally posted by The Praetorian
Oh, how profound. The implication being that "holding guns" is "wrong" in some way. Clearly then, why would seeing something that Mr. Gaines personally views as "wrong" be any worse than witnessing two men holding hands? Well, the way I see it, there are only three things required to understand his philosophy: first, I guess you have to accept the premise that holding a gun is inherently "bad" or "evil" in some way. Second, you have to divorce yourself from reality. Third, and lastly, you simply have to forget about what's socially accepted and what's taboo.
What the fuck are you talking about? You are making no sense what-so-ever. It says that we are more comfortable seeing people hold guns than holding hands. If you are holding a gun you are typically holding it because there is something going on that is wrong or bad. When police hold guns that implies there are bad people about. When our soliders hold guns that implies there are bad people about the world. And guns typically imply the thought of killing something. We are more comfortable thinking of bad things, bad people and killing then seeing two men holding hands.

Originally posted by The Praetorian
Just out of curiosity, why are you so preoccupied with your sexual persuasion, OD? Does everything in your life amount to a civil rights struggle, or is it just my imagination?
How do you get one quote in my signature line to mean everything in my life is about my sexuality? Yes, of course a lot of my life does have to do with it. But not everything. And I bring this issue up a lot because friends of mine deal with harassment daily. Friends of mine get their "striaght jock" students sending them messages saying, "Let me stick my dick in you, I've always wanted to know what it feels like to stick my dick in a fag" and they threaten to beat my friends up and sometimes they are beaten up. And until that stops I won't shut up about it. And until we are given equal rights, I won't shut up about it.

Originally posted by Overdose
How do you get one quote in my signature line to mean everything in my life is about my sexuality?
It wasn't "one" quote that helped me arrive at that conclusion, OD. That aside, sorry I asked.

Originally posted by The Praetorian
It wasn't "one" quote that helped me arrive at that conclusion, OD. That aside, sorry I asked.

If you were oppressed, made fun of, harassed and discriminated against to the extent that gay men are, it would be a big part of your life too. It never goes away for them. It is at the grocery store, concerts, on the street, in school, everywhere they go. They can’t get away from it. Lucky for you, you were born a white male in America and don't have the slightest idea of what REAL oppression is.

Originally posted by Overdose
Why wouldn't you? What has she done in the past to make you not trust her?

Originally posted by Decka
why dont you trust Sam Alito?

Originally posted by Overdose
HE HAS A HISTORY AND EXAMPLES OF VOTING IN WAYS I DONT APPROVE OF.

And Decka takes the things she has said and done, and the people she has met with or associated with, as something he disapproves of if I am not mistaken. He has a history of voting in ways you dislike, so if he solemnly swears to uphold the Constitution you throw it out the window. Sheehan has a history of using her son's death to her political advantage, if she talks about her son in a way to espouse support, why should Decka believe her?

You can call me a dumbshit or whatever word you choose but don't attack my sexuality.

Actually, whether Decka is aware of it or not, as Prae pointed out fruitcake refers to a crazy person. You are choosing to take it as an attack on your sexuality, despite the fact "fruit" is the term you're looking for.

I personally find it hurtful on a deeper level then just saying "dumbass" or something around that nature.

Oh my fucking god you are a dumbass.


And what if someone else doesn't? You're holding them to your standards of decency in conversation. Using the term regarding God and the f-bomb, is insanely aggressive and hurtful to some theists that may be in the discussion. Why the double standard for yourself? Don't insult someone's deity that way if you don't want them to disrespect you for your sexuality. You can sit around pointing out differences between sexuality, religion, and intelligence in regards to insults and slander, but in the end it all comes down to a certain amount of respect. If you can't conjure that up to have a mature conversation, then don't bother.

fyi, the phrase is "Nutty as a fruitcake"

Cindy was evicted for her t shirt, Beverly Young was removed because of her. Sheehan was arrested for failing to obey a lawful order.

Saying that Beverly Young was a plant so that the evil conniving Republifascists could get at Sheehand just sounds a "little" far fetched.

It was a dress code issue! In case you didn't know, everybody else was dressed up. Sheehan could have respected decorum, but she chose not to.

To Evakian

And Decka takes the things she has said and done, and the people she has met with or associated with, as something he disapproves of if I am not mistaken. He has a history of voting in ways you dislike, so if he solemnly swears to uphold the Constitution you throw it out the window. Sheehan has a history of using her son's death to her political advantage, if she talks about her son in a way to espouse support, why should Decka believe her?
Evakian I suppose you don't read correctly. What examples, specific examples has Decka given? I posted a whole thread on specific examples on Alito. He has yet to give specific examples in regards to Cindy. Just general "things" Decka does not like. As for him "swearing" to uphold the Constitution. Well he said that when he was a judge on the lower court and he ruled in ways I find horrible. So I fail to see the point you're trying to convey.

Actually, whether Decka is aware of it or not, as Prae pointed out fruitcake refers to a crazy person. You are choosing to take it as an attack on your sexuality, despite the fact "fruit" is the term you're looking for.
Actually, the word to me implies something to do with my sexuality. When Decka called me it in another thread he didn't say the whole "it has nothing to do with your sexuality" because he knew that he was trying to offend my sexuality. He also, in that same thread called me "dick breathe" so chances are he meant it in a bigot'ish way. But thanks Evakian for being the parent on this whole matter.


And what if someone else doesn't? You're holding them to your standards of decency in conversation. Using the term regarding God and the f-bomb, is insanely aggressive and hurtful to some theists that may be in the discussion. Why the double standard for yourself? Don't insult someone's deity that way if you don't want them to disrespect you for your sexuality. You can sit around pointing out differences between sexuality, religion, and intelligence in regards to insults and slander, but in the end it all comes down to a certain amount of respect. If you can't conjure that up to have a mature conversation, then don't bother.
Religion is something you choose to believe in. And your political opinions is something you choose. Your sexuality isn't something you "choose" So I'd say making fun of someone's sexuality is far worse because you cannot choose it. I don't care to have a mature conversation, actually. But don't take it to the next level of making fun of race, sex and sexuality.

Originally posted by Overdose
Evakian I suppose you don't read correctly. What examples, specific examples has Decka given?

Why are explicit examples required to change his opinion on the woman? If you didn't name specific cases regarding Alito, how would that change your view of him?

Well he said that when he was a judge on the lower court and he ruled in ways I find horrible.

But the question at hand is whether they are unconstitutional or not.

So I fail to see the point you're trying to convey.

Then don't bother spending time telling me to "learn to read".

Actually, the word to me implies something to do with my sexuality.

Then you've mixed up the understanding, as has Decka.

When Decka called me it in another thread he didn't say the whole "it has nothing to do with your sexuality" because he knew that he was trying to offend my sexuality. He also, in that same thread called me "dick breathe" so chances are he meant it in a bigot'ish way.

So attack him back instead of demanding an apology and warning?

Religion is something you choose to believe in. And your political opinions is something you choose. Your sexuality isn't something you "choose" So I'd say making fun of someone's sexuality is far worse because you cannot choose it.

That doesn't mean it is any less disrespectful and immature.
If you spend the time to reply to this, I'm not so sure I will reply back regardless of the points, as I can tell right now it would amount to a persistant argument involving pointless mudslinging and nitpicking. Try being more respectable sometimes if you would please, so that debating with you will be worthwhile.

Originally posted by Evakian

But the question at hand is whether they are unconstitutional or not.


a VERY good question Evak... the thing is, OD doesnt care if its constitutional obviously.. he just wants it to fit his agenda. Hey, to bring another topic in, i DISAGREE with the state of oregon's choice to allow assisted suicide, but i applaud that it was done correctly, voted on and put in place properly. Hey just because i disagree with it does not mean it somehow was dishonestly put in place.

OD needs to seperate the two, because im guessing he only looked at the final outcome, and not the circumstances that Alito faced and the steps he took to reach his decision....

Originally posted by Evakian
Why are explicit examples required to change his opinion on the woman? If you didn't name specific cases regarding Alito, how would that change your view of him?
You aren't making any sense. I posted specific examples regading Alito. Did you not see the thread and the links I provided? As for why are explicit examples required, well, don't you think it makes for a much better point if you have specific examples? He has none for Cindy and I have them for Alito. But I suppose that isn't the issue. The issue is that Decka is saying I'm holding people to different standards. I'm trusting Cindy's word but not Alito's. But the reason I am trusting Cindy's and not Alito's is because I have specific examples to make me not trust Alito, but I've yet to see any examples regarding why I shouldn't trust Cindy. I'm not holding people to different standards because I've looked into Cindy and Alito and looked at their specific examples and found Cindy to be someone I can trust and Alito someone I cannot trust. So until I see a specifc example on why I shouldn't trust Cindy, why should I be told not to trust her? Just because Decka has these general "feelings" against her? I don't think so. And why should you not trust Alito? Well go look at the thread I posted, please, with examples. Proving I do not hold people to different standards.

Originally posted by Evakian
But the question at hand is whether they are unconstitutional or not.
I never denied that was the question. And the way he has ruled has in my view been unconstitutional (IE: HORRIBLE).

Originally posted by Evakian
That doesn't mean it is any less disrespectful and immature.
If you spend the time to reply to this, I'm not so sure I will reply back regardless of the points, as I can tell right now it would amount to a persistant argument involving pointless mudslinging and nitpicking. Try being more respectable sometimes if you would please, so that debating with you will be worthwhile.
Cry me a river, Evakian. Oh, and one of the best tactics is to say "I might not reply back for ________ reason" as a way so you can escape debate before I reply. Yeah, good one.

Originally posted by Overdose
He has none for Cindy and I have them for Alito.

If he presented evidence of why he dislikes Cindy, would that change your mind about her? I have an itch that it would be a resounding 'no'. Is this true?

I'm trusting Cindy's word but not Alito's. But the reason I am trusting Cindy's and not Alito's is because I have specific examples to make me not trust Alito, but I've yet to see any examples regarding why I shouldn't trust Cindy.

You've looked into Alito and Sheehan, as stated, however-
Regardless of Decka presenting evidence or not (it would be best suited he do so if he wanted to have a stronger basis for debate), you probably know a great deal about Sheehan, and agree with it because of your predisposed political outlook; this is all extrapolation of course.

To put it quickly, I believe if presented the reasons why Decka distrusts her, you won't come to distrust her anyway. Similarly, he doesn't distrust Alito because he either trusts in the oaths and responsibilities he has being on the SCOTUS, and/or because he agrees with the way of his rulings. There is a difference in that you can prove whether his rulings were unconstitutional or not, while Sheehan's behavior relies on knowing what she is actually thinking; not just what they believe she is or certain things she is known for doing. So the idea of using them as parallels doesn't work out so well.

I'm not holding people to different standards because I've looked into Cindy and Alito and looked at their specific examples and found Cindy to be someone I can trust and Alito someone I cannot trust.

You distrust Alito because he has voted to "the right", sometimes in a way contradictory to the Constitution, so your distrust is warranted. What makes you come to gain trust from Sheehan?

So until I see a specifc example on why I shouldn't trust Cindy, why should I be told not to trust her? Just because Decka has these general "feelings" against her? I don't think so.

Thank you for stating your case clearly, but I suppose Decka should revisit this thread and get typing. ;)

Cry me a river, Evakian. Oh, and one of the best tactics is to say "I might not reply back for ________ reason" as a way so you can escape debate before I reply. Yeah, good one.

Yes OD, I'm terrified of having to reply so I tried to wriggle out of it beforehand :rolleyes:. Perhaps people get tired of the debate? Perhaps people might be busy with future engagements and not be able to reply? Perhaps the debate is fruitless because of the rehashed points or behavior of the posters?
It is best to not assume the primary motives for why people do what they do, often they don't even know themselves, or you end up wrong entirely.

Your attempt to reel me back in succeeded, so here I am with another reply. Where would you have it go now? You may reply, be it angrily or pleasantly (the latter is preferred :D), but do you want Decka to come up with reasons here and now or not?

To Evakian

If he presented evidence of why he dislikes Cindy, would that change your mind about her? I have an itch that it would be a resounding 'no'. Is this true?
It would have to be evidence he can defend and clearly show is a reason for why I should dislike Cindy. If he cannot defend it against my questions I have against his "example" it isn't good evidence nor a reason to hate her.

Regardless of Decka presenting evidence or not (it would be best suited he do so if he wanted to have a stronger basis for debate), you probably know a great deal about Sheehan, and agree with it because of your predisposed political outlook; this is all extrapolation of course.
Me agreeing with her message has nothing to do with anything. Decka and others seem to think she is using her son's death to spread her message and is betraying her son because she's doing that. I don't think she is betraying her son when spreading her message. Even if you agree or disagree with the message she is sending you can still understand that she isn't stomping all over her son's grave through the actions she's taken.

To put it quickly, I believe if presented the reasons why Decka distrusts her, you won't come to distrust her anyway. Similarly, he doesn't distrust Alito because he either trusts in the oaths and responsibilities he has being on the SCOTUS, and/or because he agrees with the way of his rulings. There is a difference in that you can prove whether his rulings were unconstitutional or not, while Sheehan's behavior relies on knowing what she is actually thinking; not just what they believe she is or certain things she is known for doing. So the idea of using them as parallels doesn't work out so well.
Firstly, if he wants to argue why Alito's decisions were correct he can. He can take my thread and reply to it. He hasn't. But I've at least presented specific examples that could have been debated. He hasn't even done that. He is just relying on general feelings and things Cindy has done. Secondly, I will distrust her if he can prove to me his examples are correct. I'm willing to debate the specific examples I've presented on Alito, it is just no one has taken the time to challenge them but I've at least presented them. Thirdly, I wasn't the one who brought up the comparision. It was Decka.

You distrust Alito because he has voted to "the right", sometimes in a way contradictory to the Constitution, so your distrust is warranted. What makes you come to gain trust from Sheehan?
What makes me come to trust Sheehan? Well, I've seen nothing or anything she's done to make me dis-trust her. I'm waiting for those examples and I'd rather air on the good side of people and their movtives then the bad.

Yes OD, I'm terrified of having to reply so I tried to wriggle out of it beforehand :rolleyes:. Perhaps people get tired of the debate? Perhaps people might be busy with future engagements and not be able to reply? Perhaps the debate is fruitless because of the rehashed points or behavior of the posters?
It is best to not assume the primary motives for why people do what they do, often they don't even know themselves, or you end up wrong entirely.
Yeah, OK Evakian. I won't "assume" anymore, lol. Don't tell me what I can and cannot do. And just because you came up with all of those other "reasons" why people wouldn't reply does not mean you aren't lying just to make yourself appear better in this debate.

Originally posted by Overdose

It would have to be evidence he can defend and clearly show is a reason for why I should dislike Cindy. If he cannot defend it against my questions I have against his "example" it isn't good evidence nor a reason to hate her.

You've already made up your mind about sheehan, so have i... i'll agree to disagree. If she quits being a media whore i might start to respect her, but anyone who INTENTIONALLY tries to be arrested and such just to keep her name in the paper gets no respect from me... end of story.

Originally posted by Overdose

Me agreeing with her message has nothing to do with anything. Decka and others seem to think she is using her son's death to spread her message and is betraying her son because she's doing that. I don't think she is betraying her son when spreading her message.

Gee, big suprise
Originally posted by Overdose

Even if you agree or disagree with the message she is sending you can still understand that she isn't stomping all over her son's grave through the actions she's taken.
h
Well i think its OBVIOUS what is happening because she throws a tantrum in her son's name, and now she's threatening to run for the senate... gee nothing going on there.

If her son didnt die, she wouldnt be getting all this press that she is just eating up and loving.

Her son dying is probably the best thing that has ever happened to her.

Originally posted by Overdose

Firstly, if he wants to argue why Alito's decisions were correct he can. He can take my thread and reply to it. He hasn't. But I've at least presented specific examples that could have been debated. He hasn't even done that.

I have... i commented on your "proof" that Sam Alito isn't fit to be judge.. and its all pretty much "i dont agree with the decision"... not "the decision is unconstitutional"... there's a big difference. You are just crying over spilled milk IMO.
Originally posted by Overdose

He is just relying on general feelings and things Cindy has done.

Well.. since she's not a judge, politician, or actually ANYTHING... its all i can go off of, just like you go off "general feelings" about Bush. You don't have smoking gun proof, but yet your convictions allow you to come to preemptive conclusions when nothing is known for sure. Im just using this as an example.. but how can YOU know Bush lied and i CANT know that Sheehan has an agenda? Spare me the BS OD...
Originally posted by Overdose

Secondly, I will distrust her if he can prove to me his examples are correct. I'm willing to debate the specific examples I've presented on Alito, it is just no one has taken the time to challenge them but I've at least presented them.

Ive already said why i dont like Sheehan... go ahead and disagree with me if you want.
Originally posted by Overdose

Thirdly, I wasn't the one who brought up the comparision. It was Decka.

Dang right i did... to show that you hold different people to different standards.. and just because YOU refute it doesnt mean it actually IS refuted. Id like an outside party to judge that.

Originally posted by Overdose

What makes me come to trust Sheehan? Well, I've seen nothing or anything she's done to make me dis-trust her. I'm waiting for those examples and I'd rather air on the good side of people and their movtives then the bad.

Listen to yourself... the ONLY reason you dont "trust" Alito is because he's conservative. the ONLY reason you actually TRUST sheehan is because she's liberal... its a total partisan issue with you... making it insane to actually try to debate it.
Originally posted by Overdose

Yeah, OK Evakian. I won't "assume" anymore, lol. Don't tell me what I can and cannot do. And just because you came up with all of those other "reasons" why people wouldn't reply does not mean you aren't lying just to make yourself appear better in this debate.

Didnt these words come out of your mouth?

'd rather air on the good side of people and their movtives then the bad.

Well.. why dont you TRUST evak? But wait, he's arguing against you... so he must be evil right?

geez, this partisan talk by OD is laughable.

Originally posted by Overdose
Me agreeing with her message has nothing to do with anything.

Obviously we differ, you said Alito was insane for the reason that you disagree with his political stance, that signals a bunch of flags when you support the controversial Mrs. Sheehan.

I don't think she is betraying her son when spreading her message.

The son volunteered for the military, and signed up to go to Iraq from my understanding-that shows a support of the war. Unless she has special insight via her son's writings or conversations with her, that she has failed to speak of, then it is reasonable to say she is betraying her son by stepping on his death for a cause he devoted himself to.

Even if you agree or disagree with the message she is sending you can still understand that she isn't stomping all over her son's grave through the actions she's taken.

If it was clearly understandable like that, there would be no controversy.

He is just relying on general feelings and things Cindy has done.

And things Cindy has done, just like how you rely on the things Justice Samuel Alito has done. If Decka chooses to cite sources like you did, he will do it if he wants.

What makes me come to trust Sheehan? Well, I've seen nothing or anything she's done to make me dis-trust her. I'm waiting for those examples and I'd rather air on the good side of people and their movtives then the bad.

Then why later in this post do you hint that I'm lying? That would be "on the bad side".

Yeah, OK Evakian. I won't "assume" anymore, lol.

You laugh, but you are making assumptions and showing you feel they are correct despite being blatantly false.

And just because you came up with all of those other "reasons" why people wouldn't reply does not mean you aren't lying just to make yourself appear better in this debate.

No quotations necessary, they are perfectly viable reasons.
A) Why do you automatically assume I am lying, yet trust the words of Mrs. Sheehan?
B) What is the point of making something up that that "to appear better in the debate"? I see no point in doing such, perhaps you can show it.

To Decka

You've already made up your mind about sheehan, so have i... i'll agree to disagree. If she quits being a media whore i might start to respect her, but anyone who INTENTIONALLY tries to be arrested and such just to keep her name in the paper gets no respect from me... end of story.
No, I haven't made up my mind about Sheehan. If you can offer some evidence as to why I shouldn't like her and you can defend your evidence I shall change my opinion. And she didn't intentionally try to get herself arrested. Do you have any sources to support that?

Well i think its OBVIOUS what is happening because she throws a tantrum in her son's name, and now she's threatening to run for the senate... gee nothing going on there.
How was she suppose to know the media and the Republicans were going to blow her protests so out of proportion? Instead of ignoring them they started rival protests and did many things to provoke Cindy. And now that she has been forced into the political world even more (by Republicans pushing her) she has decided to use it in other means such as maybe running for office.

If her son didnt die, she wouldnt be getting all this press that she is just eating up and loving.
That isn't the point.

Her son dying is probably the best thing that has ever happened to her.
Yeah, having tons of people hate you and destory everything about you is such a great thing for someone.

I have... i commented on your "proof" that Sam Alito isn't fit to be judge.. and its all pretty much "i dont agree with the decision"... not "the decision is unconstitutional"... there's a big difference. You are just crying over spilled milk IMO.
Well, seeing as how you haven't actually looked at my thread and or questioned what I've said in that thread I don't know how you could have come to this conclusion.

Well.. since she's not a judge, politician, or actually ANYTHING... its all i can go off of, just like you go off "general feelings" about Bush. You don't have smoking gun proof, but yet your convictions allow you to come to preemptive conclusions when nothing is known for sure. Im just using this as an example.. but how can YOU know Bush lied and i CANT know that Sheehan has an agenda? Spare me the BS OD...
Actually I do have proof about Bush. Is there WMD's or massive amounts of WMD's in Iraq? No. Did Bush say there were? Yes. That seems like evidence to me.

Ive already said why i dont like Sheehan... go ahead and disagree with me if you want.
No you haven't. You've just given general things you don't like about her.

Dang right i did... to show that you hold different people to different standards.. and just because YOU refute it doesnt mean it actually IS refuted. Id like an outside party to judge that.
If you don't reply to what I've refuted then you are automatically saying my point is better or you would have taken the time to reply. And I don't hold people to different standards. I've looked into Bush, Alito and Cindy. And I've decided based on specific examples who I should and shouldn't trust.

Listen to yourself... the ONLY reason you dont "trust" Alito is because he's conservative. the ONLY reason you actually TRUST sheehan is because she's liberal... its a total partisan issue with you... making it insane to actually try to debate it.
Actually, that isn't true what-so-ever. I trust John McCain and he's a Republican. And this is because of his past events and things he has said. It does not matter to me about party, it matters to me about their history and past and if I can or cannot trust them.

Well.. why dont you TRUST evak? But wait, he's arguing against you... so he must be evil right?
Because I've talked to him and I know I shouldn't air on the good side of him.

-----------

To Evakian

Obviously we differ, you said Alito was insane for the reason that you disagree with his political stance, that signals a bunch of flags when you support the controversial Mrs. Sheehan.
Assumption much?

The son volunteered for the military, and signed up to go to Iraq from my understanding-that shows a support of the war. Unless she has special insight via her son's writings or conversations with her, that she has failed to speak of, then it is reasonable to say she is betraying her son by stepping on his death for a cause he devoted himself to.
He devoted himself to the cause because he thought the cause was actually factual and realistic. Did Saddam have weapons and links to terrorism? Hardly. The cause he devoted himself to and got killed for wasn't a factual cause. She has every right to be pissed off.

And things Cindy has done, just like how you rely on the things Justice Samuel Alito has done. If Decka chooses to cite sources like you did, he will do it if he wants.
What has she done? I'm waiting for quotes and examples. I've given them on Alito, where are they for Cindy?

Then why later in this post do you hint that I'm lying? That would be "on the bad side".
What are you even tlaking about?

You laugh, but you are making assumptions and showing you feel they are correct despite being blatantly false.
No, I just think you're a liar and a kid who likes to deny things and appear like something he's not.

No quotations necessary, they are perfectly viable reasons.
A) Why do you automatically assume I am lying, yet trust the words of Mrs. Sheehan?
I assume you are lying because I've talked to you before and I don't trust your character. I have had conversations with you and I don't trust you. Duh.

B) What is the point of making something up that that "to appear better in the debate"? I see no point in doing such, perhaps you can show it.
Ego? You have nothing better in life but to appear smart on this forum? I mean, it appears like you don't have anything better in life, so I'd assume you are lying to make yourself feel better.

Originally posted by Overdose

No, I haven't made up my mind about Sheehan.

well you sure do defend her alot, and i dont think you've said ONE negative thing about her... and for someone so obviously cooky... that says something about you.
Originally posted by Overdose

If you can offer some evidence as to why I shouldn't like her and you can defend your evidence I shall change my opinion.

i dont care if you dont like her or not, im not here to change your opinion. Ive said why i dont like her many times, scroll up if you want to know them again.
Originally posted by Overdose

And she didn't intentionally try to get herself arrested. Do you have any sources to support that?

Do you have any sources to support that you are gay? No? well you must not be gay then....

Im just going off common sense.. its obvious (to me anyway) that she was trying to get press by going to the SOTU... i mean hey, i wish everyone would just ignore the dumb broad but hey we all know that aint gonna happen. Cindy is an extreme lefty, and media LOVES giving those types their moment in the sun.
Originally posted by Overdose

How was she suppose to know the media and the Republicans were going to blow her protests so out of proportion?

ummm she stalked the president outside his house, im pretty sure that is going to get press, and i dont even know how that isn't trespassing. "how was she to know"... that is funny. The republicans havn't "blown"(no pun intended) her protests out of proportion... they are calling a crazy woman crazy in my opinion.

Originally posted by Overdose

Instead of ignoring them they started rival protests and did many things to provoke Cindy.

So that gives her the right to do what now?
Originally posted by Overdose

And now that she has been forced into the political world even more (by Republicans pushing her) she has decided to use it in other means such as maybe running for office.

Oh she's been "Forced"??? Now thats just a lie.
Originally posted by Overdose

Yeah, having tons of people hate you and destory everything about you is such a great thing for someone.

Well she brought it on herself. So if someone says "I hate homos".. could they say "all you guys hate me" and not mention WHY they all hate him???

Now she has an ace up her sleeve with the media to get her own message out. Her selfish argument... protesting the least bloodiest war ever... and wondering why HER son had to die... Her son who signed up for the military... well if it wasn't your son cindy it would be someone elses... argue the war all you want but do it the right way... dont be a media whore...
Originally posted by Overdose

Well, seeing as how you haven't actually looked at my thread and or questioned what I've said in that thread I don't know how you could have come to this conclusion.

I did reply.. you must not have looked into it.
Originally posted by Overdose

Actually I do have proof about Bush. Is there WMD's or massive amounts of WMD's in Iraq? No. Did Bush say there were? Yes. That seems like evidence to me.

Actually.. look at my other thread... "food for thought"... it questions all that stuff.. and singles idiots like you out who arrive at solid conclusions on no proof, only assumptions.
Originally posted by Overdose

No you haven't. You've just given general things you don't like about her.

Isn't that WHY i dont like her? What is the difference.
Originally posted by Overdose

If you don't reply to what I've refuted then you are automatically saying my point is better or you would have taken the time to reply.

I did reply idiot
Originally posted by Overdose

And I don't hold people to different standards. I've looked into Bush, Alito and Cindy. And I've decided based on specific examples who I should and shouldn't trust.

Good for you... go you. It doesnt suprise me at all.

Originally posted by Overdose

Actually, that isn't true what-so-ever. I trust John McCain and he's a Republican. And this is because of his past events and things he has said. It does not matter to me about party, it matters to me about their history and past and if I can or cannot trust them.

A nice way to fend it off.. a change of subject also.. but i think your arguments speak TEN TIMES louder than your defense you just uddered.
Originally posted by Overdose

Because I've talked to him and I know I shouldn't air on the good side of him.

Which one is it... are you innocent until proven guilty.. like sheehan? or guilty until proven innocent.. like Evak, bush, and Alito?

Originally posted by Overdose
Well, now you're a bigot. You can call me a dumbshit or whatever word you choose but don't attack my sexuality.

Dose, These are some of the photos you've treated us to:
This is how I dress to go clubbing,
Look at the size of my tongue,
Here I am with makeup.

And then you don't want comments on your sexuality. You're like the girl wearing a low cut blouse saying "quit looking at my boobs."

Whether you were gay or straight, your persona invites certain nicknames. In some ways you embarass your "sexuality" more than a word does. Sorry.

you want proof she's cooky????

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/060129/060129_ven_hmed_1p.hmedium.jpg

nuff said......

Originally posted by Overdose
Assumption much?

"Signals a bunch of flags" because of past behavior may be construed as an assumption, but not an unwarranted one.

She has every right to be pissed off.

Of course she has every right to be pissed off, that isn't the issue that is causing the most trouble; should she be using her son to further that agenda that he didn't support?

What has she done? I'm waiting for quotes and examples. I've given them on Alito, where are they for Cindy?

I thought Decka was the one in charge of that mission, are you changing your mind?

What are you even tlaking about?

Even when I was not lying, you assumed I was.

No, I just think you're a liar and a kid who likes to deny things and appear like something he's not.

Then you think wrong.

I assume you are lying because I've talked to you before and I don't trust your character. I have had conversations with you and I don't trust you. Duh.

A) IF that is enough reason to distrust whatever I say, then "not trusting one's character" is enough for Decka to distrust Mrs. Sheehan.
B) I shall take this time to enact your style, and say:
And just because you came up with all of those other "reasons" why people wouldn't reply does not mean you aren't lying just to make yourself appear better in this debate.

Ego?

No, I am neither lying nor attempting to boost my ego. Whether you believe that or not is not my problem, it is the truth and you've nothing else to go on, so it will be sufficient.

You have nothing better in life but to appear smart on this forum?

"I'm a paralyzed guy sitting in a hospital all day spending time at one website to pass the hours by"
LOL, you don't know me, or what I do with my life.

I mean, it appears like you don't have anything better in life, so I'd assume you are lying to make yourself feel better.

It appears that you are utterly wrong, so I'll assume you are not much of a person when you take off to insult someone else without proper reason or evidence.

Originally posted by Decka
you want proof she's cooky????

Poor Cindy, being manhandled by that Venezuelan brute. :D

Seeing a picture of her getting cozy with Uncle Hugo isn't exactly concrete proof that she is "crazy or wrong or crooked".

Originally posted by Brooks
Whether you were gay or straight, your persona invites certain nicknames. In some ways you embarass your "sexuality" more than a word does. Sorry.

It may invite nicknames or insults, but that doesn't detract from the fact that it would be wrong to prey on someone's personality. He might be wise to expect such commentary, but he has every right to defend himself. Who a person is isn't fair game to debase them.

To Decka

well you sure do defend her alot, and i dont think you've said ONE negative thing about her... and for someone so obviously cooky... that says something about you.
So just because I haven’t said something bad about her means by default I won’t change my opinion on her and that by default means I like her based solely on her opinions?

i dont care if you dont like her or not, im not here to change your opinion. Ive said why i dont like her many times, scroll up if you want to know them again.
You haven’t given specific examples, only broad things, actually. And if you aren’t here to debate and change other people’s minds why did you join this forum?

Do you have any sources to support that you are gay? No? well you must not be gay then....
The fact that I say I’m gay is source enough. Did she say she intentionally got arrested? No.

Im just going off common sense.. its obvious (to me anyway) that she was trying to get press by going to the SOTU... i mean hey, i wish everyone would just ignore the dumb broad but hey we all know that aint gonna happen. Cindy is an extreme lefty, and media LOVES giving those types their moment in the sun.
No proof or sources. Just general things you like to throw out there. Typical and expected.

ummm she stalked the president outside his house, im pretty sure that is going to get press, and i dont even know how that isn't trespassing. "how was she to know"... that is funny. The republicans havn't "blown"(no pun intended) her protests out of proportion... they are calling a crazy woman crazy in my opinion.
It wasn’t trespassing. She was outside of his ranch. And of course she wanted to be known for her protests, but the extent at which she is known for it is extremely ironic.

So that gives her the right to do what now?
I never said it gave her the right to do anything? I’m just saying that the Republicans helped fuel her popularity.

Well she brought it on herself. So if someone says "I hate homos".. could they say "all you guys hate me" and not mention WHY they all hate him???
She never said she hated Bush. She is just freely disagreeing with her government. She has a right to do this and even if you disagree with her, she isn’t calling for harming or hurting anyone. There is no reason for her to have these people hating her. She did not bring it on herself.

I did reply.. you must not have looked into it.
Nope, you didn’t.

Actually.. look at my other thread... "food for thought"... it questions all that stuff.. and singles idiots like you out who arrive at solid conclusions on no proof, only assumptions.
I looked at it and I’ve had debates over all the things you’ve presented before. Look in tons of past threads I’ve had before you even got here.

Which one is it... are you innocent until proven guilty.. like sheehan? or guilty until proven innocent.. like Evak, bush, and Alito?
They were all innocent until I found out information on them that suggests they aren’t innocent, but guilty. I’ve yet to see the information on Cindy and you’ve yet to present it.

--------------

To Evakian

"Signals a bunch of flags" because of past behavior may be construed as an assumption, but not an unwarranted one.
You didn’t answer my question. Assumption much?

Of course she has every right to be pissed off, that isn't the issue that is causing the most trouble; should she be using her son to further that agenda that he didn't support?
How do you know he wouldn’t have supported that agenda? He died before a lot of the truth had come out about the Bush Administration. I’d say she is a better judge on what her son would and wouldn’t have supported.

Just admit it. I don’t hold people to different standards and you were wrong to take Decka’s side? You’ve hardly replied to the debate, just focused on me calling you a liar, because you are one and you denying it does not change my personal opinion that you are one because of your social, family and emotional state and your want to feed your ego. Deny it all you want, because I don’t have to believe you.

Originally posted by Overdose
You didn’t answer my question. Assumption much?

I'm sorry, but the statement I made answered your question.

How do you know he wouldn’t have supported that agenda?

How do you know he would have changed his mind?
The fact still stands that he did not have his mother's outlook, and she used him as a factor in a protest.

I’d say she is a better judge on what her son would and wouldn’t have supported.

You're assuming that he would have changed his mind, it would be most reasonable to go off his own mother's standpoint, but it still remains as not his.

Just admit it. I don’t hold people to different standards

Why would I admit to something I haven't seen to be true?

you were wrong to take Decka’s side?

I don't recall vilifying Sheehan, especially not in Decka's manner. I didn't take Decka's side, nor do I view his or yours completely invalid.

You’ve hardly replied to the debate, just focused on me calling you a liar

I have addressed the other points you have brought up, and continued to be in the discussion, I fail to see how this holds up that I haven't been partaking in the debate. Also, you calling me a liar functions as a part of the debate I am entitled to reply to at my leisure, and you've no place to tell me I can't defend myself.
To quote you (verbatim): Don't tell me what I can and cannot do.

because you are one and you denying it does not change my personal opinion

So you are denying both my testimony, which happens to be the most truthful and accurate assessment of my feelings (obviously), in favor of what you want me to be.

your want to feed your ego.

I have been through the step of denying this claim, it isn't true no matter how many times you care to reiterate it.

Deny it all you want, because I don’t have to believe you.

From this, I can conclude that:
A) You are unfair and narrow-minded
B) Decka has no reason to believe Cindy Sheehan for anything she says or does.
C) It is near-impossible to have a discussion with you, because you are making the situation in the way you want it to be-not the way it actually is.
D) You don't have to believe me, but you also don't have to be right, and when it involves the inner-workings of someone else's brain (something you could never know unless you are that person), that person is more accurate regarding that issue than you would ever be.

To Evakian

How do you know he would have changed his mind?
He very well could have. I'm just saying that he thought he was fighting against a man who had WMD's and extreme ties to terrorism. He wasn't. And his mother has a right to be pissed her son was lied to and died for this lie.

The fact still stands that he did not have his mother's outlook, and she used him as a factor in a protest.
So? She used him to express why she was so deeply hurt, not that her opinion was more valid then anyone else's because of his death. Having your son die is something that is very hurtful and if he died for something that he didn't need to die for she has every right to protest and every right to say her son dying is the reason that lead her to such drastic measures.

You're assuming that he would have changed his mind, it would be most reasonable to go off his own mother's standpoint, but it still remains as not his.
So? She isn't saying that because of her sons death her standpoint is more correct. She is just saying that she is expressing her standpoint in a more extreme way because something so devastating happened to her.

Why would I admit to something I haven't seen to be true?
How am I holding people to different standards? I've shown why I don't trust Alito with specific examples, examples he has done as a judge while saying he was up-holding the constitution. I've yet to see any specific examples suggest to me why I shouldn't trust Cindy.

I have addressed the other points you have brought up, and continued to be in the discussion, I fail to see how this holds up that I haven't been partaking in the debate. Also, you calling me a liar functions as a part of the debate I am entitled to reply to at my leisure, and you've no place to tell me I can't defend myself.
When did I say you couldn't reply to me calling you a liar? All I'm saying is that is the majority of your posts because the actual debate about me holding people to different standards is basically not true, so you aren't focusing on it as much.

So you are denying both my testimony, which happens to be the most truthful and accurate assessment of my feelings (obviously), in favor of what you want me to be.
Yes.

From this, I can conclude that:
A) You are unfair and narrow-minded
If you denying being a liar makes me narrow-minded, so-be-it.

B) Decka has no reason to believe Cindy Sheehan for anything she says or does.
Ah, I never said she was someone to trust. Decka and others however, said she was someone to not trust and that she was a media whore and or stepping on her sons grave. So since they brought up a hard position on her they should have to provide specific examples regarding why they feel this way. I've asked, they haven't given me any because there are none as it appears to give. I air on the good side of people, until they give me doubt. I've seen no examles to give me doubt in regards to Cindy.

C) It is near-impossible to have a discussion with you, because you are making the situation in the way you want it to be-not the way it actually is.
Okay. You win. haha.

D) You don't have to believe me, but you also don't have to be right, and when it involves the inner-workings of someone else's brain (something you could never know unless you are that person), that person is more accurate regarding that issue than you would ever be.
Or they are just lying about the issue? Sure you know more about your emotions then I do. I've never said I knew more about you and your emotions. But that does not stop you from lying about being a liar. Basically it is your word against mine. And nothing you say will change how I feel, because you "knowing more about yourself" has nothing to do with people having denial as being apart of their personality.

Originally posted by Overdose

So just because I haven’t said something bad about her means by default I won’t change my opinion on her and that by default means I like her based solely on her opinions?

Its quite obvious to most that you definitely have a bias... im sure YOU dont see it.

Originally posted by Overdose

You haven’t given specific examples, only broad things, actually. And if you aren’t here to debate and change other people’s minds why did you join this forum?

Im not here to change your opinion.. ill gladly debate, but when its with leaners like yourself its tough.

Well, even though i HAVE given some examples.. ill list them off for you:

1. Sheehan demands answers from Bush- She wanted to know the "cause" of her sons death.. well that is easy. He got shot by terrorists. But for some reason that explanation wasn't good enough for her, maybe its some ego thing, maybe she just cant except that her son is dead.

2. Sheehan stalks president Bush- waiting outside for him outside of his house in NOT the way to do things... if Cindy is allowed to do that then Bush is allowed to wiretap LOL. Hey, i'll go and just sit outside someone's house for awhile.. think i wont get the cops called on me? You're lying if you say i wont.

3. Sheehan supports Chavez- Hugo Chavez has pretty much been accused of EVERYTHING bush has, AND SOME... electoral fraud, human rights violations... and he makes probably more money than ANY american off oil.

4. Sheehan attends "world social reform organization"... so she's a socialist.. i disagree with her basic principles already.

5. Sheehan wants "troops home now"... thus handing iraq back over the terrorists. Then of course, if and when we get hit again, it will be Bush's fault for NOT DOING ENOUGH.

6. After her son gets killed by terrorists.. she calls BUSH a terrorist.. oh thats classic.

7. Sheehan demands Bush's impeachment... hey i can understand if ACTUAL POLITICIANS say that, but you are just some mom who's son died... lets listen to the other 2000 moms and see what they ALL say.

8. "My word is mightier than yours".. which is basically what sheehan is saying. Why dont you go vote in people who think like you do lady? Why do you have to whore yourself out? She gets no respect from me for that. But hey most lefties LOVE hollywood, so they LOVE media whores too...
Originally posted by Overdose

The fact that I say I’m gay is source enough. Did she say she intentionally got arrested? No.

Oh like she would admit it. Come on now... i cant say FOR CERTAIN.. but i have a hunch, and alot of people agree with me. But you cant say she UNINTENTIONALLY got arrested either.

Originally posted by Overdose

No proof or sources. Just general things you like to throw out there. Typical and expected.

I dont see any sources for you being gay.... LMAO
Originally posted by Overdose

It wasn’t trespassing. She was outside of his ranch. And of course she wanted to be known for her protests, but the extent at which she is known for it is extremely ironic.

Ironic? only 35% agree with her in recent polls. Thats almost down to liberal-run Bush polls.. so you know its bad.

Like i said, go sit outside someones house and see what happens.
Originally posted by Overdose

I never said it gave her the right to do anything? I’m just saying that the Republicans helped fuel her popularity.

Maybe a little bit, most of her popularity came from newspapers though.. which are overly liberal.
Originally posted by Overdose

She never said she hated Bush. She is just freely disagreeing with her government. She has a right to do this and even if you disagree with her, she isn’t calling for harming or hurting anyone. There is no reason for her to have these people hating her. She did not bring it on herself.

Hey she can do WHATEVER SHE WANTS.. i just dont approve of what she does, and i think she's a wack job. I think she is playing all of you media-crazy lefties for fools.

She obviously HEAVILY DISLIKES bush...
Originally posted by Overdose

I did reply.. you must not have looked into it.
Nope, you didn’t.

Yes, i did, here is what i wrote in my FIRST POST:

Everyone keeps forgetting.. judges aren't politicans... it doesn't matter what his personal views are if he keeps to only interpreting the constitution.. which tons of people say he will and what he swears to do. I dont care what you agree with or dont agree with, the guy has a sparkling record and is very much fit to be on the supreme court....

And i REPOSTED again and said THIS:

Oh he's "insane" now huh? So what does that make you?

I havn't heard that 90% stat... do you have a link?

Here is the downlow.... each case is different.. so you cant clump them all together. Unless there is a CLEAR agenda, and the guy CLEARLY goes AGAINST what SHOULD be... then its up to the circumstances of the case.

I did read what you posted.. and all it sounded like was...

"I dont disagree with this guy on alot of issues, so he's dumb and insane and im smart.. weee"

I dont even get why you would bring up abortion, among a bunch of other subjects.

Plus, the way the paragraphs are worded... they are filled with "he tends to" and such, meaning it is their interpretation.

So yea, welcome to the real world Overdose... not everyone agrees with you.. but as a judge, i think he'll not get caught up in an agenda and do what the law says. If he DOESNT do that, then i will say bad choice... but its impossible to know right now. There arent any GLARINGLY bad things he's done.

So you can take that "you never replied" crap and stuff it up your loose ass.
Originally posted by Overdose

I looked at it and I’ve had debates over all the things you’ve presented before. Look in tons of past threads I’ve had before you even got here.

Well you obviously cant refute it or else you would have taken the time to do so :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Overdose
I'm just saying that he thought he was fighting against a man who had WMD's and extreme ties to terrorism.

Do you have proof that this was his reason for joining the military and going to Iraq? How do you know that was his motivation, you're merely guessing because it seems the most likely.

And his mother has a right to be pissed her son was lied to and died for this lie.

Especially as his mother, she has every right to be upset.

So? She used him to express why she was so deeply hurt, not that her opinion was more valid then anyone else's because of his death.

You say that, but I doubt all people got that-I heard exactly the contrary from political commentators during her protests in Crawford.

She isn't saying that because of her sons death her standpoint is more correct. She is just saying that she is expressing her standpoint in a more extreme way because something so devastating happened to her.

So you've turned into Cindy Sheehan and know what she is thinking now?

How am I holding people to different standards? I've shown why I don't trust Alito with specific examples, examples he has done as a judge while saying he was up-holding the constitution. I've yet to see any specific examples suggest to me why I shouldn't trust Cindy.

Well, given these "examples" from Decka regarding Mrs. Sheehan, I would place money on it that you'd blow them off as invalid. Also, you say you do not trust me "because of my character", you never will believe what I say, but feed off of Mrs. Sheehan's words-why can you trust her, but not say Decka should/can distrust her because of what he percieves as "low character".

All I'm saying is that is the majority of your posts because the actual debate about me holding people to different standards is basically not true

If it wasn't true, would there be debate?

so you aren't focusing on it as much.

And?

Yes.

You're admitting to being crooked, way to go.

If you denying being a liar makes me narrow-minded, so-be-it.

You are calling me a liar and someone of low character and accused me of thinking things I wasn't. Being myself, I would know this-you wouldn't, and because I have shot down these false claims, they are the most reliable and truthful claims in the entire debate. You shoot down my opinion, in favor of what you think is right-regardless of it being wrong. So, by transitive property I could consider you narrow-minded.

Ah, I never said she was someone to trust.

Okay then, thank you for clarifying your point in the paragraph.

Okay. You win. haha.

Victory! ::dances:: :D

Or they are just lying about the issue?

You can't know that (that respecting these sort of issues), it is they who know they are lying or not, it is they who know what they are thinking; not you. If they shoot down the claims of what you say they are thinking, or that you say they are lying, it is what has to be taken in as the most correct notion. You are relying on false speculation, and have said you will continue to do so, and because of that you are being bigoted and wrong.

Funny how this thread devolved into a bullshit name calling fight instead of actually discussing the issue at hand. But then again its what tends to happen when sertain people don't want to deal with an issue...

Oh like she would admit it. Come on now... i cant say FOR CERTAIN.. but i have a hunch, and alot of people agree with me. But you cant say she UNINTENTIONALLY got arrested either. read the goddamn article. She crlearly stated that if she wanted to make a scene she would have done it in the middle of Bush's speech. This makes far more sense.

To Decka

1. Sheehan demands answers from Bush- She wanted to know the "cause" of her sons death.. well that is easy. He got shot by terrorists. But for some reason that explanation wasn't good enough for her, maybe its some ego thing, maybe she just cant except that her son is dead.
That wasn’t the “cause” she was speaking about Decka. The cause she is speaking of is the cause for this war. Yes, he got shot. But for what cause?

2. Sheehan stalks president Bush- waiting outside for him outside of his house in NOT the way to do things... if Cindy is allowed to do that then Bush is allowed to wiretap LOL. Hey, i'll go and just sit outside someone's house for awhile.. think i wont get the cops called on me? You're lying if you say i wont.
Firstly she was outside of his house. And he has a ranch. There is no way she can see inside of his home or anything around or near the President. That is far different then standing outside of someone’s house and it is far different then wiretapping.

3. Sheehan supports Chavez- Hugo Chavez has pretty much been accused of EVERYTHING bush has, AND SOME... electoral fraud, human rights violations... and he makes probably more money than ANY american off oil.
Did he make the final decision for war or did Bush do that? And I’d like proof she still supports him.

4. Sheehan attends "world social reform organization"... so she's a socialist.. i disagree with her basic principles already.
So because she is a socialist you can call her names? Isn’t this the nation about freedom and respect of others opinions?

5. Sheehan wants "troops home now"... thus handing iraq back over the terrorists. Then of course, if and when we get hit again, it will be Bush's fault for NOT DOING ENOUGH.
That has nothing to do with what she is really saying.

6. After her son gets killed by terrorists.. she calls BUSH a terrorist.. oh thats classic.
Explain to me how he isn’t one?

7. Sheehan demands Bush's impeachment... hey i can understand if ACTUAL POLITICIANS say that, but you are just some mom who's son died... lets listen to the other 2000 moms and see what they ALL say.
Just because more mom’s support Bush does not invalidate her opinion.

8. "My word is mightier than yours".. which is basically what sheehan is saying. Why dont you go vote in people who think like you do lady? Why do you have to whore yourself out? She gets no respect from me for that. But hey most lefties LOVE hollywood, so they LOVE media whores too...
Do you have examples on how she is saying her word is mightier than yours?

I dont see any sources for you being gay.... LMAO
If someone says they are gay that is a source, actually.

Ironic? only 35% agree with her in recent polls. Thats almost down to liberal-run Bush polls.. so you know its bad.
Just because the majority disagrees with her does not mean they are right. The majority thought blacks should be second class citizens. Were they correct?

The fact is you still haven’t provided specific examples and or quotes. Good job, Decka.

------

To Evakian

Do you have proof that this was his reason for joining the military and going to Iraq? How do you know that was his motivation, you're merely guessing because it seems the most likely.
Everyone or most go into the military to protect their nation. Or at least the vast majority. And they trust that what they are being told to do is for protecting our nation. And the war in Iraq isn’t. And again, I think Cindy would know far more about what her son thought then we would. And regardless of what her son thought, what she is doing isn't "stepping on his grave" and what he thought does not mean Cindy can't protest against Bush.

You say that, but I doubt all people got that-I heard exactly the contrary from political commentators during her protests in Crawford.
Did you now. Care to link it?

Well, given these "examples" from Decka regarding Mrs. Sheehan, I would place money on it that you'd blow them off as invalid.
Yes, I would blow them as invalid. And I will tell him why they are. But if he can keep debating and prove to me they aren’t, then I will admit she isn’t a good person. That’s the whole point of “debate”

Also, you say you do not trust me "because of my character", you never will believe what I say, but feed off of Mrs. Sheehan's words-why can you trust her, but not say Decka should/can distrust her because of what he percieves as "low character".
You aren’t making a point. He has no proof or reasons to view her as a “low character” or he hasn’t proven it yet. But I have my reasons I have to view you as having a low character. I’ll discuss them with you in private if you want.


You are calling me a liar and someone of low character and accused me of thinking things I wasn't. Being myself, I would know this-you wouldn't, and because I have shot down these false claims, they are the most reliable and truthful claims in the entire debate. You shoot down my opinion, in favor of what you think is right-regardless of it being wrong. So, by transitive property I could consider you narrow-minded.
Call me what you want. I won't deny it because there is nothing I can do to change your mind because I won't change my view on you.

You can't know that (that respecting these sort of issues), it is they who know they are lying or not, it is they who know what they are thinking; not you. If they shoot down the claims of what you say they are thinking, or that you say they are lying, it is what has to be taken in as the most correct notion. You are relying on false speculation, and have said you will continue to do so, and because of that you are being bigoted and wrong
Bla. Bla. Bla.

Originally posted by Overdose

That wasn’t the “cause” she was speaking about Decka. The cause she is speaking of is the cause for this war. Yes, he got shot. But for what cause?

He got shot for signing his life away to the miliitary...

A. Mommy can't come save you in the real world

B. Why didnt she oppose the war BEFORE her son got shot?

C. If she DID oppose the war, why does her son getting shot give her any more credentials than before?

D. If Bush has to meet with EVERY person who EVER questions him... ANY old cooky person... then he'd either be dead or would be booked through 2010. I do wish Bush would be more cut and dry and just come out and say whats going on... and LEAD... but as for Sheehan she really doesn't mean a whole lot.
Originally posted by Overdose

Firstly she was outside of his house. And he has a ranch. There is no way she can see inside of his home or anything around or near the President.

What does that have to do with anything? The question is.. did she get a permit to be out there? If she didnt she was stalking the president.. no ifs ands or buts about it.
Originally posted by Overdose

That is far different then standing outside of someone’s house

Ummm Cindy sheehan=stood outside someones house... stalker=stands outside someones house.... yea big difference.
Originally posted by Overdose

and it is far different then wiretapping.

Now HERE is a good one. As for wiretapping.. i LOVE how lefties are blowing it up as a "domestic" issue, when it's really just national security. The only time they really do it is if you are talking to somone from al quida or someone supposedly connected to them. I sure as hell dont mind that. If they abuse the power, then yea its bad.

Originally posted by Overdose

Did he make the final decision for war or did Bush do that?

Its just interesting that she's buddy-buddy with someone who is "just as EVIIILLL" as Bush... that shows to me that she's just a fanatic about Bush, she's obsessed. If she really stood for what she claims to she wouldnt be friends with Hugo Chavez..
Originally posted by Overdose

And I’d like proof she still supports him.

Um, her showing up to his conference and taking mass pictures with him does me fine.
Originally posted by Overdose

So because she is a socialist you can call her names? Isn’t this the nation about freedom and respect of others opinions?

Oh yea like you respect anyone's opinion... cut the crap OD. I only said i "disagree with her basic principles"... am i NOT allowed to disagree? Its amazing how you can cry "respect others opinions!!" but yet anyone who disagrees with you is a bigot. Respect is a two way street. Why don't you try some of your own advice.

Originally posted by Overdose

That has nothing to do with what she is really saying.

Ummm that is her big agenda.. to get the troops home. What planet are you from? She's not looking out for anyone else. What about all the iraqi people who are prospering now? What about the women who now have rights? If we just up and leave we'd be shitting on all of those people.

Originally posted by Overdose

Explain to me how he isn’t one?

I would say he is one IF.. and thats the biggest IF i've ever said.... all the stuff the left says is true. But alas there's no smoking gun, and nothing really even close.

So how IS he a terrorist OD?

Originally posted by Overdose

Just because more mom’s support Bush does not invalidate her opinion.

She's welcome to have it, the opinion that is, but when a high percentage thinks opposingly to what you think.. it might invite you to rethink your beliefs and/or methods.
Originally posted by Overdose

Do you have examples on how she is saying her word is mightier than yours?

Hell no... it's what i get from her. When you meet someone who is real pissed off.. they dont SAY "im pissed off".. but you can still come to the logical conclusion. Oh sorry, am i not allowed to make observations OD?

Originally posted by Overdose

If someone says they are gay that is a source, actually.

Well, here' s a source that Cindy sheehan is a nut:

"I think cindy sheehan is a nut"
-Decka-

There, we both quoted ourselves.

Originally posted by Overdose

Just because the majority disagrees with her does not mean they are right. The majority thought blacks should be second class citizens. Were they correct?

O geez, bringing the race card into it. First off i realize majority doesnt EQUAL right... but its a good measure of how mass amounts of people view things.

And as for Blacks... time has changed, the north and the south were like different countries.. now that everything is all connected people won't be so segregated. Its a HUGE stretch to compare blacks during the civil war to whether or not people like Cindy Sheehan.. nice try though
Originally posted by Overdose

The fact is you still haven’t provided specific examples and or quotes. Good job, Decka.

OD: What is 1 + 1

Decka: umm... 2

OD: You still havn't answered me... I guess you dont know.

Originally posted by Decka
Now HERE is a good one. As for wiretapping.. i LOVE how lefties are blowing it up as a "domestic" issue, when it's really just national security.

Since they're spying on U.S. citizens domestically, I'd say that's a domestic issue.

Originally posted by Decka
The only time they really do it is if you are talking to somone from al quida or someone supposedly connected to them. I sure as hell dont mind that.

See, here's the thing that no one for this has ever explained. Since there's a legal way to do it, why does the administration insist on doing it their way? I don't mind wiretapping Al Queada operatives that are American citizens either, I just would like to see it done legally.

To Decka
A. Mommy can't come save you in the real world
She isn’t trying to save him Decka, she is trying to fight for what she believes in.

B. Why didnt she oppose the war BEFORE her son got shot?
Why didn’t she? Because she still believed the President was telling the truth at the time?

C. If she DID oppose the war, why does her son getting shot give her any more credentials than before?
She has never said she deserves more credentials nor has she said her son getting shot makes what she says more important.

D. If Bush has to meet with EVERY person who EVER questions him... ANY old cooky person... then he'd either be dead or would be booked through 2010. I do wish Bush would be more cut and dry and just come out and say whats going on... and LEAD... but as for Sheehan she really doesn't mean a whole lot.
That hasn’t nothing to do with making her a bad person.

What does that have to do with anything? The question is.. did she get a permit to be out there? If she didnt she was stalking the president.. no ifs ands or buts about it.
You only have to get a permit on private property.

Ummm Cindy sheehan=stood outside someones house... stalker=stands outside someones house.... yea big difference.
Did she follow him every time he left the ranch?

Now HERE is a good one. As for wiretapping.. i LOVE how lefties are blowing it up as a "domestic" issue, when it's really just national security. The only time they really do it is if you are talking to somone from al quida or someone supposedly connected to them. I sure as hell dont mind that. If they abuse the power, then yea its bad.
They are abusing power. You have to get a permit to wiretap American citizens. That is what the law says. Thus, they are abusing their power by saying they can just skip the law. Yes, there are exceptions in the name of national security, so why didn’t he go to Congress (since his party is in the majority) and ask for an extension?

Its just interesting that she's buddy-buddy with someone who is "just as EVIIILLL" as Bush... that shows to me that she's just a fanatic about Bush, she's obsessed. If she really stood for what she claims to she wouldnt be friends with Hugo Chavez..
You can’t stand for something while being friends with someone of the opposite view? I guess I can’t because I’m friends with some conservatives.

Um, her showing up to his conference and taking mass pictures with him does me fine.
That’s not proof, just assumption.

Oh yea like you respect anyone's opinion... cut the crap OD. I only said i "disagree with her basic principles"... am i NOT allowed to disagree? Its amazing how you can cry "respect others opinions!!" but yet anyone who disagrees with you is a bigot. Respect is a two way street. Why don't you try some of your own advice.
No, I have conservative friends. But they don’t make fun of my sexuality and mock it. You do. So, that thus makes you a bigot.

Ummm that is her big agenda.. to get the troops home. What planet are you from? She's not looking out for anyone else. What about all the iraqi people who are prospering now? What about the women who now have rights? If we just up and leave we'd be shitting on all of those people.
She seems to be looking out for the troops and our nation.

So how IS he a terrorist OD?
I asked you first, I never said he was or wasn’t one. You are the one who made the defiant stance.

She's welcome to have it, the opinion that is, but when a high percentage thinks opposingly to what you think.. it might invite you to rethink your beliefs and/or methods.
Are you dumb? The majority of the entire WORLD thinks this war is wrong. The only country that has a population that half way supports it is the United States. Maybe you should RE THINK your opinion since the majority disagrees with you. Lord, conservatives thinking America is the only nation in the world.

Hell no... it's what i get from her. When you meet someone who is real pissed off.. they dont SAY "im pissed off".. but you can still come to the logical conclusion. Oh sorry, am i not allowed to make observations OD?
Sure, you can make them. But if you have nothing to support it then it is a blank observation and worthless.

Well, here' s a source that Cindy sheehan is a nut: "I think cindy sheehan is a nut" -Decka- There, we both quoted ourselves.
No, because I am talking about myself. Which makes it a fact. You are talking about someone else, which makes it an opinion since you are not Cindy.

O geez, bringing the race card into it. First off i realize majority doesnt EQUAL right... but its a good measure of how mass amounts of people view things.
Then the mass views the war in Iraq wrong.

And as for Blacks... time has changed, the north and the south were like different countries.. now that everything is all connected people won't be so segregated. Its a HUGE stretch to compare blacks during the civil war to whether or not people like Cindy Sheehan.. nice try though
I’m not comparing their cause or their methods. I’m comparing the majority vs. the minority opinion in this situation.

Where are your specific examples and quotes and instances again?

Originally posted by Overdose

She isn’t trying to save him Decka, she is trying to fight for what she believes in.

Yea, and the only reason her voice is being heard is because of HER SON. She is USING her son to get HER OWN voice heard....

Originally posted by Overdose

Why didn’t she? Because she still believed the President was telling the truth at the time?

So now you are answering for her? Thats what you think... but then again, you CANT prove that Bush lied. He might have just been plain ignorant, or uninformed... but noone can ever prove he lied. Its like the baseball scandal in steroids... And hey i WISH we could get to the bottom of it all, but its not gonna happen.

Originally posted by Overdose

She has never said she deserves more credentials nor has she said her son getting shot makes what she says more important.

Well then why aren't there any other mothers getting so much publicity for their views?

Originally posted by Overdose

You only have to get a permit on private property.

hmmm isn't there something called "loitering"?... i dont know im not a law expert, but i would say waiting outside of someone's house is wrong.
Originally posted by Overdose

Did she follow him every time he left the ranch?

No, she waited outside of his house like an obsessed lunatic. She should have protested at washington.
Originally posted by Overdose

They are abusing power. You have to get a permit to wiretap American citizens. That is what the law says. Thus, they are abusing their power by saying they can just skip the law. Yes, there are exceptions in the name of national security, so why didn’t he go to Congress (since his party is in the majority) and ask for an extension?

Hey i agree.. But its obvious the democrats are trying to scare the public by making more out of this than what it actually is.

Originally posted by Overdose

You can’t stand for something while being friends with someone of the opposite view? I guess I can’t because I’m friends with some conservatives.

LMAO

Why would Cindy Sheehan go across the world to a conference with Hugo Chavez??? Does she live down the street from him? Your example is of people who live down the street from each other or go the same school... this is an ENTIRELY different bag of apples...

She OBVIOUSLY supports Hugo Chavez...

Originally posted by Overdose

That’s not proof, just assumption.

Yea... well so are all of your arguments of Bush lying.

Originally posted by Overdose

No, I have conservative friends. But they don’t make fun of my sexuality and mock it. You do. So, that thus makes you a bigot.

just get over it... people give you a hard time in life OD. When you call me a dumbfuck and a dumbass of course im going to come back and rip into you. IF you cant stand the heat then just get out of this forum, or go join the "World's Emotionally Strongest Man" contest....
Originally posted by Overdose

She seems to be looking out for the troops and our nation.

Thats a little greedy dont you think?? What about the MILLIONS who will benefit over there? It is only taking a few thousand of our troops so far... whether you agree or not, what we are doing in iraq COULD be a huge success... but we wont know that until 10-20 years down the road.

Originally posted by Overdose

I asked you first, I never said he was or wasn’t one. You are the one who made the defiant stance.

That question is too dumb to answer... i feel like i would be wasting my time to even begin to reply because its either he IS or he ISNT.. and we dont have enough proof to show either one.. so to come out and say he IS a terrorist is just plain dumb.
Originally posted by Overdose

Are you dumb? The majority of the entire WORLD thinks this war is wrong.

Do they? or does our media reflect it that way?
Originally posted by Overdose

The only country that has a population that half way supports it is the United States.

proof? link?
Originally posted by Overdose

Maybe you should RE THINK your opinion since the majority disagrees with you. Lord, conservatives thinking America is the only nation in the world.

I would gladly rethink my opinion if there is an overwhelming majority against what i think.... but i havn't seen it yet.
Originally posted by Overdose

Sure, you can make them. But if you have nothing to support it then it is a blank observation and worthless.

As are your "reasons" for not liking Alito. You put a bunch of rulings he handed down that YOU disagree with... those are just your opinions. You don't like how he "tends" to rule, even though every case is different. Well i hate to break it to you OD, but someone CAN be qualified for a position even if they don't share your rainbow-covered views.

Originally posted by Overdose

No, because I am talking about myself. Which makes it a fact. You are talking about someone else, which makes it an opinion since you are not Cindy.

Okay, you got me on that one. But you still cant prove you are gay..
Originally posted by Overdose

Then the mass views the war in Iraq wrong.

Really? What is "mass".. what proof do you have that this "mass" views the war as wrong?
Originally posted by Overdose

I’m not comparing their cause or their methods. I’m comparing the majority vs. the minority opinion in this situation.

well hey you wont get any argument from me that the little guy CAN be right.....
Originally posted by Overdose

Where are your specific examples and quotes and instances again?

Geez can you not read? Why do i have to keep reposting this stuff..... These are my examples and reasons of why i dont like cindy sheehan

1. Sheehan demands answers from Bush- She wanted to know the "cause" of her sons death.. well that is easy. He got shot by terrorists. But for some reason that explanation wasn't good enough for her, maybe its some ego thing, maybe she just cant except that her son is dead.

2. Sheehan stalks president Bush- waiting outside for him outside of his house in NOT the way to do things... if Cindy is allowed to do that then Bush is allowed to wiretap LOL. Hey, i'll go and just sit outside someone's house for awhile.. think i wont get the cops called on me? You're lying if you say i wont.

3. Sheehan supports Chavez- Hugo Chavez has pretty much been accused of EVERYTHING bush has, AND SOME... electoral fraud, human rights violations... and he makes probably more money than ANY american off oil.

4. Sheehan attends "world social reform organization"... so she's a socialist.. i disagree with her basic principles already.

5. Sheehan wants "troops home now"... thus handing iraq back over the terrorists. Then of course, if and when we get hit again, it will be Bush's fault for NOT DOING ENOUGH.

6. After her son gets killed by terrorists.. she calls BUSH a terrorist.. oh thats classic.

7. Sheehan demands Bush's impeachment... hey i can understand if ACTUAL POLITICIANS say that, but you are just some mom who's son died... lets listen to the other 2000 moms and see what they ALL say.

8. "My word is mightier than yours".. which is basically what sheehan is saying. Why dont you go vote in people who think like you do lady? Why do you have to whore yourself out? She gets no respect from me for that. But hey most lefties LOVE hollywood, so they LOVE media whores too...

Sheehan demands answers from Bush- She wanted to know the "cause" of her sons death.. well that is easy. He got shot by terrorists.

"He got shot by terrorists"?

Are on duty soldiers in the middle of a hostile land really being killed by terrorists?

You go on to say:

6. After her son gets killed by terrorists.

The mentality that everyone who is attacking our soldiers are terrorists is a stupid mentality. Perhaps those that attack civilians could be called terrorists, but it would be hard to even extend the word "terrorist" to those bombing police stations and police recruiting. Those that are bombing, mining, and shooting at our soldiers cannot be labeled as terrorist. This is simply desperate guerilla warfare, and these actions are far from terrorism. It is your foolish label of "terrorist" that helps you justify this war and justify your hatred of those who protest it. If those shooting at our soldiers are terrorists then we must certainly place that same label upon ourselves today and throughout our history.

To Decka

Yea, and the only reason her voice is being heard is because of HER SON. She is USING her son to get HER OWN voice heard....
Incorrect. The reason she decided to protest was because her son died. But the way in which she protested is what caused national attention. It had nothing to do with her son dying.

So now you are answering for her? Thats what you think... but then again, you CANT prove that Bush lied. He might have just been plain ignorant, or uninformed... but noone can ever prove he lied. Its like the baseball scandal in steroids... And hey i WISH we could get to the bottom of it all, but its not gonna happen.
Actually it is fairly proven he did lie. I've talked about it in other threads. But you said why didn't she disagree with the war beforehand, and I expalined why. Because before she didn't think she was being lied to. It had nothing to do with her sons death as you liked to fasely suggest.

Well then why aren't there any other mothers getting so much publicity for their views?
Because they didn't protest in the way Cindy did? And the Republicans wanted to target someone and so they picked Cindy?

hmmm isn't there something called "loitering"?... i dont know im not a law expert, but i would say waiting outside of someone's house is wrong.
She was protesting, not "loitering".

No, she waited outside of his house like an obsessed lunatic. She should have protested at washington.
Outside of the White House? That's the President's home as well. Dumbass.

But its obvious the democrats are trying to scare the public by making more out of this than what it actually is.
Scare the public? It is something to be scared about. The President broke the law, Decka. And he lied and said he wasn't. What he did and said go directly against the law. What he has done is far worse then what Clinton did. And you guys sure made that into more then it actually was.

Why would Cindy Sheehan go across the world to a conference with Hugo Chavez??? Does she live down the street from him? Your example is of people who live down the street from each other or go the same school... this is an ENTIRELY different bag of apples...
No it isn't. She has a friend who is conservative. Big deal. Everyone has friends who have different viewpoints.

just get over it... people give you a hard time in life OD. When you call me a dumbfuck and a dumbass of course im going to come back and rip into you. IF you cant stand the heat then just get out of this forum, or go join the "World's Emotionally Strongest Man" contest....
Calling someone a dumbfuck (which you are) and a dumbass (which you are) isn't attacking someone for something they cannot control. What you did was far more harsh than what I said.

Thats a little greedy dont you think?? What about the MILLIONS who will benefit over there? It is only taking a few thousand of our troops so far... whether you agree or not, what we are doing in iraq COULD be a huge success... but we wont know that until 10-20 years down the road.
Assumption. Something you shouldn't risk with people's lives and a countries security.

That question is too dumb to answer... i feel like i would be wasting my time to even begin to reply because its either he IS or he ISNT.. and we dont have enough proof to show either one.. so to come out and say he IS a terrorist is just plain dumb.
Figures you won't answer it.

proof? link?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/2747175.stm
Majority of Europe is against the Iraq War. And America is split. Suggesting the majority think this war is a bad idea. Proving that you should re think your ideas if you think people should do that if they are in the minority.

I would gladly rethink my opinion if there is an overwhelming majority against what i think.... but i havn't seen it yet.
Look above. And if you don't "trust" that, just look at the protests worldwide and the general feelings a country gives when asked of the Iraq War.

As are your "reasons" for not liking Alito. You put a bunch of rulings he handed down that YOU disagree with... those are just your opinions. You don't like how he "tends" to rule, even though every case is different. Well i hate to break it to you OD, but someone CAN be qualified for a position even if they don't share your rainbow-covered views.
Yes, and I gave reasons. And if you think they are correct why didn't you argue them and prove my "opinion" wrong like you do on a forum?

Okay, you got me on that one. But you still cant prove you are gay..
Ummmmm, why can't I?

Really? What is "mass".. what proof do you have that this "mass" views the war as wrong?
Look above.

Geez can you not read? Why do i have to keep reposting this stuff..... These are my examples and reasons of why i dont like cindy sheehan
I replied to your reasons. They are not specific nor reasons that stand up to truth. Unless you can argue your reasons and prove they are correct your examples fall flat. You've yet to prove them against my rebuttal.

Originally posted by Overdose

Incorrect. The reason she decided to protest was because her son died. But the way in which she protested is what caused national attention. It had nothing to do with her son dying.

Okay.. let's be oblivious to two things that are OBVIOUSLY connected, but make excuses for her anyway......

[/sarcasm]

Originally posted by Overdose

Actually it is fairly proven he did lie.

Bullshit... im not the type that loves bush, but you people sure make me look like it. What pisses me off is people like you who make a bunch of assumptions and then pass them off as fact. I have not seen any smoking gun saying bush lied. The sad thing is we won't know. I would absolutely like to know if our president is lying... but the fact is we dont. Obviously you have an agenda....
Originally posted by Overdose

But you said why didn't she disagree with the war beforehand, and I expalined why. Because before she didn't think she was being lied to. It had nothing to do with her sons death as you liked to fasely suggest.

Yea im sure... its amazing how differently you treat different people OD. She can "suspect" lies all she wants.. the FACT is there isn't secure proof. She would be rather stupid to cause this much uproar on an assumption.

Originally posted by Overdose

Because they didn't protest in the way Cindy did?

Bingo... just because Sheehan wants attention doesn't make her any more special. So why should we have to put up with her media whore-ness.
Originally posted by Overdose

And the Republicans wanted to target someone and so they picked Cindy?

Republicans simply called it like it was... some lady is doing stupid stuff and the press is egging her on.
Originally posted by Overdose

She was protesting, not "loitering".

So if my girlfriend breaks up with me... can i "protest" and wait outside her house?
Originally posted by Overdose

Outside of the White House? That's the President's home as well. Dumbass.

Yet its where he works, and a much more logical place to do things... fruitcake.
Originally posted by Overdose

Scare the public? It is something to be scared about. The President broke the law, Decka. And he lied and said he wasn't. What he did and said go directly against the law. What he has done is far worse then what Clinton did. And you guys sure made that into more then it actually was.

Oh really? Worse than Clinton???

-In 1994 the Clinton Justice Dept. resorted to covert tactics to implement the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act(CALEA) to make wiretapping easier.

-In 2000, The Clinton Justice Dept. tucked an unseen provision into an anti-drug bill that would allow searches of homes, vehicles, and workplaces without any notice.

"No president since Woodrow Wilson has been so hostile to civil liberties and the Constitution as Bill Clinton" -David Kopel, recearch director for the Independence Institute.

Save the shit OD... Its not as bad as our liberal friends in the media would like us to think.
Originally posted by Overdose

No it isn't. She has a friend who is conservative. Big deal. Everyone has friends who have different viewpoints.

LMAO!!! Okay, Cindy and Hugo are just innocently friends... im sure their political views have NO REASON for it... they just were walking down the street one day, saw each other, and had coffee....

Geez you are naive OD
Originally posted by Overdose

Calling someone a dumbfuck (which you are) and a dumbass (which you are) isn't attacking someone for something they cannot control. What you did was far more harsh than what I said.

Dont dish it out if you can't take it... if you disrespect me then i can surely disrespect you. So i can surely call you dickbreath (which you have) and a fruitecake (which you are) ... have a nice day
Originally posted by Overdose

Assumption. Something you shouldn't risk with people's lives and a countries security.

Thats funny... OD lecturing me on a countries security.. thats like me lecturing him on Gay rights.

Pretty much you didnt even answer the question... thanks for trying.to cover it up but obviously you just dont know.
Originally posted by Overdose

Figures you won't answer it.

Hey OD... recite the entire novel of War and Peace for me...

thats about what you are asking me

If Bush is a terrorist, then so is Clinton.

Originally posted by Overdose

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/2747175.stm
Majority of Europe is against the Iraq War. And America is split. Suggesting the majority think this war is a bad idea. Proving that you should re think your ideas if you think people should do that if they are in the minority.

Oh no.. France thinks the war is bad... well no crap. they only talked about the countries who dont like us in the article. Europe really doesn't matter too much.. they havn't been hit as hard as we have. Im sure if the Eiffle Tower was flown into by a terrorist-flown plane many frenchmen would change their minds.
Originally posted by Overdose

Look above. And if you don't "trust" that, just look at the protests worldwide and the general feelings a country gives when asked of the Iraq War.

I see the protests... war does suck. It's not good to go to war IMO. Maybe all leaders SHOULD look to the unbiased for council.. but that won't happen.

As for general feelings.. im sure there are different "general feelings" here in Ohio than over in Oregon

Originally posted by Overdose

Yes, and I gave reasons. And if you think they are correct why didn't you argue them and prove my "opinion" wrong like you do on a forum?

I already did... and i reposted it.. and yet i "still havnt answered them"... hmmmm
Originally posted by Overdose

Ummmmm, why can't I?

You could be lying

Originally posted by Overdose

I replied to your reasons. They are not specific nor reasons that stand up to truth. Unless you can argue your reasons and prove they are correct your examples fall flat. You've yet to prove them against my rebuttal.

LOL yes of course in your expert and unbiased opinion my reasons dont "stand up to truth" and "are not specific"... good one OD... OF COURSE they "fall flat"... thats like me asking a waitress if the meatloaf is good at a restaurant. you KNOW she won't say its bad. The only TRUTH is... it seems you aren't here to discuss. You are only here to be "right"..

Your reasons you listed for Alito weren't even "facts".. they were filled with phrases like "tends to"... which means its all speculation.