Other
See other Other Articles
Title: Who gives shit if Godwinson post here again?
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Oct 26, 2011
Author: A K A Stone
Post Date: 2011-10-26 11:24:19 by A K A Stone
Keywords: None
Views: 469965
Comments: 595
Who would like to see him post here again?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 290.
#46. To: A K A Stone (#0)
(Edited)
Stone, You are the only forum owner I'm aware of that tolerates being told to 'fuck off' 'suck my dick' 'you are an asshole' 'the site runs better when you aren't here' etc etc etc. Every thread here degenerates to that eventually, at least the ones you happen to post on. As such, yep, the site is sliding downhill faster with each passing week. Combined with your allowing some to use it for personal attack threads, or racial bullshit...it comes down to a simple question: Why bother with LF? You don't give a shit how it looks. You don't give a shit how these kooks talk trash to YOU for God's sake. Which is why even that idiot Goldi gets more respect than you do in her kooky forum. Or JR at Free Republic, or mystery over at GBR. You aren't promoting 'freedom of speech' by allowing this crap, Stone. You simply promote your site isn't to be taken seriously, because nobody here takes YOU seriously. I drop by every day, but honestly, there hasn't been anything here worth commenting on for the past couple of weeks. Its your site, Stone. but the reason it hasn't grown is because you haven't 'grown' as a site owner/operator. This isn't about politics, or anything else, as much as it is kooks talking shit behind absurd screen names in ways they'd NEVER do in the real world. Basically, its a fantasyland for losers that have been banned from legitimate sites for the obvious reasons. As for 'godwincing' posters come, posters go. The rep of the site is what you should be worrying about. Thats the only 'constant' you have any influence over. So far, this site is just as amaturishly run as it was when I signed up. And thats the problem...unless you enjoy being humiliated, taunted, and insulted by people on the internet. Maybe you do. I honestly don't get it, but its your site. Like the song says, you can't always have what you want, but you get what you need, eh? Seeya round.
Thanks for reminding me what a fucking hypocrite you are.
He criticized Neil to no end and even lied to him on elPee - about those two monikers - almost sounds like Monocle.
Bullshit Freddie. Neil was a self appointed 'site manager' who was upset I didn't 1) Agree with him on the election...2) Didn't kiss his ass because I knew he was a flat out fraud. Much later, when he laid down and whimpered in court after all his bravado on the internet, he confirmed my view of him. Which is why he's still my personal internet bitch to this very day (laughing). I never lied to him, like you, he wasn't worth a lie. Nice spin though. Now, why are YOU here, hypocritical freddie?
Good question. The same question could be asked of the other House Commies, but I think we know the answer to that query: To agitate, spam, shill, and otherwise promote Commie propaganda. To their (dis)credit, it's the same reasons Police-Statist fascists frequent and infect conservative forums - to promote their brand of Big Goob control.
I do believe the speakers on your STEREOtype are out of whack, lippie.
I do believe the speakers on your STEREOtype are out of whack, lippie. Go ahead, Mike. re-calibrate MY characterization of your ilk through YOUR eyes....er through my speakers. Btw, I find my new pet name clever. I'll have to reciprocate the favor.
And you will have to forgive me, but as someone who's name can be written as M. Joseph McCarthy, it is terribly comical for me to hear you talking like you are aspiring to become the chairman of a new Senate Un-American Activities committee. ;-D
You DO know that McCarthy was right about every single communist agent he named,right?
Yes he was.
Yes he was. Oh Bullshit...he accused the Secretary of the Army, Robert Stevens, of being a Communist which is how McCarthy lost Eisenhower. That said, McCarthy actually "named" very few people and those he did name were a) from a list that had been compiled by HUAC in 1946/47 and b) were people who were mostly exonerated and remain so to this day. McCarthy focused mainly not on people but on the activities of groups and articles in publications. You've said this before, sneak, and have gotten the smack down.
Maybe he was? Or maybe,McCarthy never made the charge that he was a communist,and this is a lie the media spread to help defame McCarthy? Maybe what McCarthy claimed is that Stephens associated with or was friends with people who were security risks because of their communist connections or leanings,and this became "Joe called him a communist!" which is how McCarthy lost Eisenhower. Eisenhower was nothing more than a overpaid clerk. As far as I know the only really good thing he did personally his whole life was remind everybody to "beware of the military-industrial complex" on his way out the WH door. That doesn't make up for him leading the raid on the Bonus Marchers,though. Which is the closest this General ever got to combat. That said, McCarthy actually "named" very few people Because the list was Top Secret and he couldn't name them without exposing intelligence gathering procedures and spoiling surveillance operations. ...those he did name were a) from a list that had been compiled by HUAC in 1946/47 They may have been on that list,but that wasn't the only list they were on. ..and b) were people who were mostly exonerated and remain so to this day. "Mosty exonerated"? Were some of them a little bit pregnant? What you are trying to say without saying it is that they were never put on trial for their treasonous acts and the left continued to bray about them being innocent. You've said this before, sneak, and have gotten the smack down. Don't confuse your delusions with reality.
You have him confused with his boss MacArthur.
No,I don't. It was Ike that Dugout Doug ordered to make it happen,and it was Ike that ordered Patton into action.
Okay...stipulating to your facrtured fairy tale here, MacArthur ordered it and Paton carried it out. How does that make Ike the man who led the charge against the Bonus Army?
LOL! And were was Ike in your little fairy tale,out getting coffee? How does that make Ike the man who led the charge against the Bonus Army? Because he was Dugout Dougs XO,and as such he was the leader in the field and was on site and gave the command to Patton to move his calvary troops out. Field commanders are said to be the ones leading the armies in battle,even if they are sitting in the rear of the battlefield directing the battle. Directing the battle is considered to be the same as leading the battle.
All that matters is that he was not leading them into "battle" whcih was your original charge.
No,what matters is you are wrong because he WAS on the scene,and he WAS the one who issued the orders to attack the Bonus Marchers.
C'mon Sneak...do I REALLY need to post that pic of MacArthur giving orders for attack on the Bonus Army?
#291. To: war (#290)
Of course not,but the Emperor was above such things as actually mingling with common soldiers. He told Ike to get it done,and it was Ike that was on the ground and giving the orders for the attack to proceed. This means it was Ike leading the attack by ordering Patton to proceed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#70. To: Badeye (#46)
#73. To: war (#70)
#81. To: Fred Mertz (#73)
#92. To: Badeye (#81)
Now, why are YOU here, hypocritical freddie?
#130. To: Liberator (#92)
"To agitate, spam, shill, and otherwise promote Commie propaganda. To their (dis)credit, it's the same reasons Police-Statist fascists frequent and infect conservative forums - to promote their brand of Big Goob control."
#132. To: Ferret Mike (#130)
("To agitate, spam, shill, and otherwise promote Commie propaganda. To their (dis)credit, it's the same reasons Police-Statist fascists frequent and infect conservative forums - to promote their brand of Big Goob control.")
#139. To: Liberator (#132)
"Go ahead, Mike. re-calibrate MY characterization of your ilk through YOUR eyes....er through my speakers."
#162. To: Ferret Mike (#139)
And you will have to forgive me, but as someone who's name can be written as M. Joseph McCarthy, it is terribly comical for me to hear you talking like you are aspiring to become the chairman of a new Senate Un-American Activities committee. ;-D
#174. To: sneakypete (#162)
You DO know that McCarthy was right about every single communist agent he named,right?
#175. To: Badeye, sneakypete (#174)
(Edited)
You DO know that McCarthy was right about every single communist agent he named,right?
#197. To: war (#175)
Oh Bullshit...he accused the Secretary of the Army, Robert Stevens, of being a Communist...
#215. To: sneakypete (#197)
doesn't make up for him leading the raid on the Bonus Marchers,though.
#225. To: war (#215)
You have him confused with his boss MacArthur.
#228. To: sneakypete (#225)
No,I don't. It was Ike that Dugout Doug ordered to make it happen,and it was Ike that ordered Patton into action.
#242. To: war (#228)
Okay...stipulating to your facrtured fairy tale here, MacArthur ordered it and Paton carried it out.
#249. To: sneakypete (#242)
LOL! And were was Ike in your little fairy tale,out getting coffee?
#284. To: war (#249)
All that matters is that he was not leading them into "battle" whcih was your original charge.
#290. To: sneakypete (#284)
Replies to Comment # 290. C'mon Sneak...do I REALLY need to post that pic of MacArthur giving orders for attack on the Bonus Army?
End Trace Mode for Comment # 290.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]