@whosiwhatzit - 

"I think you've been brainwashed by soaking yourself in left-wing propaganda for too long. You honestly think you know things because you read what some like-minded idiot wrote. You've fallen into an ideological trap. You're repeating liberal drivel because it makes sense to you, but you are mistaken. It's probably not entirely your fault. I suspect you haven't ever been given the opportunity to really consider anything other than what you have been taught. If you are constantly in the company of people who reinforce these ideas it's easy to see how you would adopt them as facts because it gives you comfort among your people. Sad, really sad. Not uncommon - just a shame."

 Well, considering that my father's side of the family, my Aunt on my Mother's side, most of the people with whom I attended church at an Apostolic Establishment called "Christian Life Center", over 60% of my co-workers since 2001 as well as over half of my city's population are about as conservative as BOOsh himself; your premise that I've not exposed myself to that mindset is WAY OFF. Hell, I INTENTIONALLY engage the right in debate, because I have an open mind to all views.

 Do I read left-wing blogs? Yes. However, they are far from my only source of information. Most of my teachers growing up were avowed Repugs (and openly so), which actually molded my worldview. I've watched a variety of news sources, but tend to favor those that are more independent.

 To tell you the truth, I once thought the same way that I suspect you do. Hell, I probably went further:

 I once advocated that homosexuality be banned, that abortion be prosecuted and that we adopt a more theocratic approach to governance. I merely - as you hoped - came to "recognize the truth"; which is that what makes this country so great is the ability to make your own choices and be personally responsible for them so long as they don't interfere with the public's interest (i.e.: jobs, economy, healthcare, etc.). I repeat liberal drivel only if it is truthful or liberal insults because they are funny, plain and simple. The only ideological trap I fell into was believing - at one time - that people like my former Pastor at the aformentioned church or the idiotic Sergeant mentioned above had it all figured out and that common sense, intellectual approaches to resolve our greatest problems were to be shunned. For Heaven's sake, I've engaged in discussion a number of elected repugs in my locale and have sparred - in person - with elected Democrats as well. So don't you lecture me about being hesitant or even intimidated by the prospect of testing my views with others. I do it often and thoroughly enjoy, and HAVE YET TO LOSE!

"It seems you, like so many people who roam the internet these days, are suffering from a deep rooted sadism. I'm not a professional, but this sort of lashing out at people with vile insults is sometimes a sign of an internal self loathing. It's a desire to make others feel pain and suffering as you do. You probably should work out these hostile emotions with a professional. You need help. I hope you get it."

 Ahh, so yes, I'm a sadist who hates myself and must satisfy such a passion for transferring that rage and pain onto others by insulting them. May I ask your impression of the very man to whom I was responding so publicly? I assume that he must fit this description as well, or is he exempt from such as a veteran? This is the kind of double-standard bullshit that brings our nation down the shithole we presently find ourselves. If I truly loathed myself as much as you suggest, then I guess I would be too intolerant to raise my son (who - born three months prematurely - is a bit slower than everyone else), or my daughter (who screams alot). I wouldn't have been able to have so much fun with my brother-in-law, who suffers from Cerebral Palsy, I'd refrain from extending a polite hand to help ANYONE who I see that is in need or even tolerate the likes of you by responding politely to your overbearing ignorance.

 If I was so unwilling to address my faults, would I air them as I often have on this blog? What about those who disagree with me? If I was so afraid to consider their views, would I leave their commentary on this blog intact?

 The problem here is not people like me, who consider and accept the truth, it is - in fact - your ilk; who refuse to do the same by remaining in a self-loathing denial of what your mindset has dealt us. Instead of lashing out at how I've come to believe what I do, or how I espouse it; try addressing or even contesting the substance of it? Hopefully we can debate on this matter further, but I presently have some matters to attend to.

TAKE CARE AND GOD BLESS (Or is that too self-loathingly intolerant for you?)

I sincerely apologize for the belated response, but in all due respect to both you and Our Lord and Savior; there are a number of things that Jesus isn't going to smile upon, including the numerous lies spread by the hate-filled Sgt. Mjr. who we discuss my response to at this moment. Were my closing statements a little over the top? Maybe. Immoral? Somewhat. Was my anger justified given the ramifications for the willful ignorance that Pendry represents? Damn Straight. I at least extended Pendry the courtesy of wishing him a "pleasant" roasting in his trip to the eternal abyss.

TAKE CARE AND GOD BLESS

@usmc171 - First things first, thanks for your service to this country. Without your willful sacrifice, our freedoms would be vulnerable to foreign enemies and the rest of us would be forced to submit to a military draft. I - for one - am wholeheartedly grateful that a brave American such as yourself serves in my stead.

 Now that I've gotten passed the initial greeting; on to your sentiments regarding the deranged Sergeant at issue: There's no doubt that Pendry typed up a grossly misleading and vitriolic message that reflects what many others of his ilk are thinking. Then again, serving our country doesn't mean you are eternally exempt from being wrong.

 It doesn't take a whole lot of effort to conjure up a pile of bullshit like Pendry's letter, nor does it require a keen intellect to accept it as the gospel truth.

 Having read a little about Kopechne's life (a woman who dedicated her life to politics, teaching and the work of God beyond), I certainly agree that the controversy surrounding her death is very unclear. The authorities very likely displayed some leniency towards a man related to practical American royalty, but here is what's clear about the case:

 1) It was purely ACCIDENTAL.

 2) Kopechne and Kennedy never engaged in sinful behavior together.

 3) Kennedy was attempting to transport Kopechne from a reunion of former volunteers for Robert Kennedy to a ferry that was to be the last to depart for her residence in ample time.

 4) Kennedy attended Kopechne's funeral (amidst all of the concerns pertaining to his involvement in her death) and he confessed to unlawfully fleeing the scene of the accident.

 As far as I've learned, the status of his alcohol level that night has never been confirmed, but it may be a little difficult to imagine a man not drinking at a party thrown to commemorate his second brother to be assassinated. At this point, considering everything that we know (from Kennedy's admission to wrongdoing and even electing to attend the funeral of the woman he inadvertently killed), it is time to forgive him for this deed and move on.

 Furthermore, is it possible for you people who just love resorting to injecting a man's personal sins into a political discussion to actually stick to the subject? More and more, everyday, I see neoconservatives stumbling all over themselves in an attempt to get a grip on a coherent message (or even respone to a message). So, what you revert to is this approach that requires almost indiscriminate labeling of every political opponent instead of offering a counter-argument. Please, stop this ignorance (and STOP DISGRACING your uniform with said ignorance), get informed and return with a more intelligible, specific attack on a politicians actions than just issuing a blanket accusation of "traitor".

 Seriously, compile a list of actions - taken in office - by Ted Kennedy and others with whom you disagree and specify what it is that boils your blood so much. What exactly has Senator Kennedy done in office that "borders treason"?

 I assume you supported Gov. Sarah Palin for Vice President. Know you not that she and her husband were involved with a political institution known as the Alaskan Independence Party? They advocate secession from the union (a treason act since the Civil War) and that incompetent hussy actually issued a brief address to the party in question, telling them to "keep up the good work". This is true treason.

 However, you ignore that. What about the BOOsh Regime's choice to out a covert agent (who was investigating the proliferation of WMDs from Iran to our enemies) for political reasons? Is that not "aiding and abetting" our enemies? It seems you have a lot to learn. Stop marching in lockstep behind the ignorant who share your great uniform, and take it upon yourself to develope a familiarity with the truth by conducting a little research.

 Despite all that I've said, I will do what I feel obliged to do, by saying a prayer with you in mind, and bidding you goodnight.

Take Care and God Bless

I think hell is going to be hotter than you think there buddy... I have many many points to counter you on, but seeing as you wander form topic to topic I'm going to stick to the basics on this one, take it one at a time you know? First off, I have never disgraced my uniform, NO service member has ever disgraced their uniform by THINKING something, or even expressing an opinion. When certain actions are taken it can disgrace the uniform (check amendment 1 for more information), and most notably my uniform is disgraced when crackpots like the westboro baptist church open their mouths in protest. When people like John Murtha claim my marines are murderers, that's when my uniform is disgraced."

A uniform can only be disgraced or defiled by the individual wearing it. How can the truth - spoken by another - disgrace your outfit? Simply thinking or expressing an opinion can't disgrace your uniform. What does disgrace your uniform is hiding behind it to justify your peddling of the myriad of lies that Pendry's despicable letter was chalk full of. I "jump" from one subject to the next because I have a deeper thought process than you. I like to think long term (as most liberals do) and reflect such in my debates by undercutting your nonsensical arguments (which you still fail to underline) pre-emptively. It just seems simpler. However, your ilk prefers the hard way of going about your business, so it doesn't surprise me that you would feel a bit confused in attempting to keep up with me.

 How can the exercise of the first amendment (which provides the rights to free speech, press, religion and religious expression) disgrace your uniform? Are you threatened by free speech? The right to oppose unlawful and unnecessary military acts? Or is it the right of the people to know what their military is up to through the media? I'll just laugh my ass off if you suggest that practicing religious beliefs freely is a threat. Would you rather we live in an authoritarian dictatorship where free speech and a free press would be nonexistent? People have opposed military acts since the revolutionary war, and it has NEVER endangered the lives of our soldiers, nor has the free access to information through the media!

 Does the truth hurt? In Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, World Wars One and Two, Korea, so forth and so on, the military has killed - intentionally at times - scores of innocents. Has this included every soldier? No. There is - however - quite a bit of evidence (not just from the "liberal media") available from the testimony of brave soldiers, victims and eyewitnesses to verify these incidents. Am I saying you'll be a murderer too (beyond what duty calls for)? No, and I honestly hope you never become one.

 I do have to agree with you about the deplorable misrepresentation of faith by Westboro. I've never believed that protesting at a funeral was acceptable, but it - as far as I know - is not presently forbidden.

"When you speak of research, you mean in the New York Times? CNN.com? conspiracy theories for idiots? I mean, were is this great database of information because all I see and hear is liberal pundits screaming for hope change, and enough money to fund a socialist movement which even the Bolsheviks would be jealous of. You could do yourself a favor and quit believing everything that spews from the mouth of your demi-gods "kennedy, pelosi, murtha, carter and so on and so on." You call yourself a Christian? Your lack of faith in Christ is apparent by your simple act of claiming allegiance to the liberal regime (I prefer to refer to it as the Fourth Reich) You support men who not only condone abortion but support and vote to spend MY MONEY on it, like thats bad enough I pay for abortions in other ****ing countries! Did you know I still pay federal income tax on the money I make defending your leaders rights to bash, insult, and accuse my marines of murder? You probably don't even care."

 LOL!! Why must you assume that my ONLY source of information is confined to the New York Times, CNN and conspiracy theories? If the New York Times was so damned liberal, then why did they sit on the scoop involving the Domestic Surveillance Program for a year at the behest of Bush and Company? CNN = Liberal? I think I just puked in my mouth. Look into recent analysis of how ALL the cable news stations devote time to pundits of one or the other political view. I was even stunned by what I found; Fox News was the only station that gave near equal time to pundits of both parties (which is countered by the fact that roughly 90-95% of their programming is neoconservative based; largely because Rupert Murdoch - an ideologue of the right -  owns the station and the wall street journal), the rest displayed a leniency towards repugs pundits by a large margin and have been getting worse since Obama became President. Did you know that Rick Santelli's CNBC tea party rant was staged? Liberal Media my ass.

 Liberal pundits are nearly nonexistent as we are mostly stuck with a group of ass kissing centrist-Demugs who dare not to even as much as question an act that appears reminiscent of BOOsh, and chastise any real talk about him doing what would be sufficient to resolve our many issues. You think that Obama is a socialist? Please, please conduct THOROUGH research into what it means to be a socialist, compare the President's views and actions in every position he has held and see if that position holds true.

 If he was, Medicare would be en route to an expansion that would cover every American, he wouldn't hesitate to support the Employee Free Choice Act and most certainly wouldn't allow the financial industry and big business get away with the raping of our economy. On that note, Obama isn't even a liberal, but I wouldn't expect you to understand why. (I've commented numerous times on this blog on that issue) The pathetic stimulus that was passed by Congress and signed by Obama was not nearly enough to revive our economy. There shouldn't have been any tax cuts, but the President wanted to keep that promise and was successful in doing so.

 By the way, I don't believe half of what I hear from most people in D.C. Especially in the so-called leadership of the Democratic Party. You can find evidence of this throughout my previous posts.

 Now you have to drag my faith into the discussion? Who are you, a puppet of the military and thusly the government, to tell ME that I lack faith in the son of God merely because I support a woman's right to choose what happens with her body and her life? Murder, whether in war, an individual conflict, carrying out a death sentence, or any other careless act of taking a life, is forbidden in the laws of God.

Quite frankly, I don't believe that life genuinely starts until the second trimester, and that a soul isn't designated until birth. Thankfully, that'll never have to be a decision that I personally make, but seeing how a dear loved one of mine had an abortion when she was younger; I don't take too kindly to an accusation of her murdering what was never meant to be. Is it a shame that abortions exist? Yes. Is it necessary at times? I think so, dependent upon the circumstances surrounding the issue. It is not murder to destroy an embryo, because...it's a fucking embryo. Dumbass. Do I claim allegience to any regime? Only God's. Sincerely. I'm not blindly loyal to any establishment and am always open to learning anything new. I read from scripture and pray every day, with comprehension and sincerity. I engage loved ones, strangers and co-workers in discussion about God and his many great wonders and gifts. There have been many cases where I've convinced one of these people to convert, and other cases where I at least led them to consider it. All by the grace of God Almighty. Your accusation is not grounded in truth and it is you who will have to answer for such blind ignorance through your judgement of my faith.

"You will be held accountable, not to men, but to God for the things you say and the things you do. Bashing this great man (SGTMJR. Pendry) For simply expressing his opinion (extremely factual opinions from planet earth's point of view) but on the internet none-the-less, then you attack me for simply thanking and agreeing with this man. It's okay though. Civilians will be civilians. I bet you have lots and lots of thoughts on the Middle East and what war is, and what dictates war but you have no idea. You can't even fathom what it's like in any theatre of war, but it's cool. Please keep exercising your right to free speech because before long a fairness doctrine will be passed. Hate speech will be outlawed, guns will be non existent and we will finally live in that Utopia all liberals believe is possible. Grow up, act like you own a pair and stand behind our cause. Not in front of it, thats all we ask."

  I welcome accountability for my deeds, because I know where I stand with the Lord and with the facts. On what basis are the opinions of Pendry anything but ill-informed? Seriously, do marines like you and Pendry get a mandatory brain transplant to switch with a chimp upon completion of training? I was unaware that the Earth could even have a point of view, absent a series of eyes that would make me very uncomfortable.

 Would it be a bad thing to outlaw hate speech? Honestly? I think I could live without hearing such duragatory expressions used at the expense of a group of people based on anything other than a political view. The fairness doctrine is far from approval in congress, unfortunately, let alone support from this President; tis a shame, but you would know that already, being a marine with your monkey brain and all. The outlaw of guns? Riiiiiight. LMAO!! I know many liberals who own guns. My grandpa has been an avowed Democrat all his life, and owns a few of them. Do I own one? No. Not necessary to, but I support the right of any American to own one, unless it be an Urban Assault Weapon. I would love a Utopia, but that's a far cry from what we are headed toward right now. The present establishment in power is too indebted to corporate interests to ever take the necessary action for the change we need.

 I believe we are having this debate because I do have a pair and merely stand in the way of those who threaten our nation's tip-toe progress. Why would I want to stand behind the cause of those who promote illegal war, torture, the subversion of our constitution, abolishing a woman's right to choose, suppressing free speech, free press, and the right of workers to organize? I swear, you all never cease to amaze me. This debate is far from over.

Take Care and God Bless.

@ConservativeConstitutionalist - Conservative Constitutionalist? That seems to be more of an oxymoron after the BOOsh years. Anyways, real quick, my age has nothing to do with it. I've conducted extensive research beyond what I learned in school from Republican teachers! LOL. I've done so by reading a ton of literature and watching hours of documentaries of all kinds. I never say anything that I know to be false. Once I'm proven wrong, I admit it, publicly. So, out of all my responses; can you prove me wrong? Honestly, I challenge you to do so and I will own up to my folly and acknowledge your achievement in my next entry. Tough luck though, because I really have done my homework.

 As for your "doubt that Jesus the Christ EVER used the kind of language that (I) have used. As a matter of fact, we are warned against the use of foul language." None of the biblical verses you cite reference to foul language, but rather an evil manner of speaking that includes gossip, unrighteous judgement, lies, etc. No mention whatsoever about the use of what we now know as cuss words, which I use on occasion to emphasize my anger towards something. Something that Christ certainly wouldn't have done was spread lies as did Pendry.

 Yet again, if you can prove to me - with citation - that I'm wrong on anything (including cussing); I assure you that your accomplishment will be recognized and hailed by myself, on a public scale.

TAKE CARE AND GOD BLESS

BTW, I've done more research, and understand the fact that Shah Muhammad Reza Pahlavi was a monarch and that said monarchy had stood for over two thousand years. This doesn't detract from the fact that he was a dictator, appointed by means of inheritance. Prime Minister Mossadegh, who was democratically elected, became a threat when he spearheaded an effort to re-establish a democratic system and constitutional monarchy in addition to nationalizing the oil reserves, thusly endangering the clout of the British in the region. The CIA and SIS launched two coups (the first failed) to depose the elected leader, while the Shah appointed a military leader as a replacement. This whole incident empowered the Shah and set the stage for the Iranian Revolution in 1979.

 Mossadegh had hoped that we - a land that purports to stand for liberty and democracy - would stand by those principles as it pertained to Iran, but our government threw him, not the Shah, under the bus. Furthermore, the hostage crisis was a retaliation against our government for granting the Shah asylum after a bit of reluctance on the part of President Carter in permitting his entrance into the country. Carter wasn't perfect...far from it...but he DID work tirelessly to resolve that crisis.

 Just because the hostages were released the day Reagan was sworn in doesn't dispute the FACT that Carter secured the release (with the help of an Algerian diplomat serving as the negotiator).

 Again, thank you for reading.

TAKE CARE AND GOD BLESS

When the facts don't fit your view, make them up. You are wrong on every count but to take the time to go through each lie and exaggeration would be good time wasted."

Translation: You know full well that you can't debunk ANYTHING that I have discussed in this entry. Period. This is merely intellectual laziness. It always seems that when the facts don't align with the view of neocons, the policy is then to dismiss said facts as being "liberal lies". I await your decision to change course and TRY to refute what has been addressed here. Please, I do appreciate being corrected when it is necessary.

"Here's just one Pendry assertion: Kerry came back from Vietnam and lied about American troops killing and slaughtering. That's right, he did. I'm sure there are those vets who see the war against communism the way Kerry did but that doesn't make them correct. Atrocities? Plenty. I saw the results of them but they weren't from Americans killing Vietnamese. They were from Vietnamese killing Vietnamese. Did some Americans exceed their sworn duties and lose control? Yes. Was it American policy? No. Was it tactics? No. Not the way it was for the Cong and NVA."

 Factcheck.org completely disputes any charge that Kerry ever lied about his record in Vietnam. I've yet to find any evidence that he lied in his 1971 testimony before Congress, if you can find such evidence, please (and I'm being serious) post it here. As for your claim that war crimes were not committed as a part of military policy; ever hear of Agent Orange?

"I don't have to use expletives and sublimation to describe you and those who think like you. You are simply mentally incompetent and you take the real world and easily documented facts and filter through your radically distorted concepts of right and wrong."

Do I really? I mean, I know that I have a worldview that is a bit more liberal than the mainstream of even my own party, but that doesn't effect how I receive information. If liberals are proven wrong on an issue; I acknowledge it. Mentally incompetent? For the love of God above, you and others of your ilk who've left comments on my blog keep making such charges but have yet to provide anything of substance that proves it. As always, I AM WAITING. My only problem is that I'm 24, and have only learned about the past from a historical vantage point. Then again, neocons like to charge that history has a liberal-tilt as well. The funny part about this is that much of what I've learned has been gained from Republican teachers...LOL.

"Bush(es) was/were evil and Ted Kennedy is a patriot. Uh huh! Just like John Kerry, who served it Vietnam, never lied to further his own political career. To quote an actual patriot compared to the people you defend, 'you betcha."

 Actions speak louder than words. Now, both Ted Kennedy and Dubya used their fathers to escape participation in an ongoing war, but while in Government, Kennedy's defense of our constitution, support for our soldiers in increasing their pay, benefits, limiting their tours to a year and serving as a champion of the people has established him as a patriot. While BOOsh, on the otherhand, spent his tenure in the White House aggrandizing the power of the branch he hijacked while subverting our constitution and empowering the wealthy at the expense of the downtrodden and those caught in the crossfire (a.k.a., the middle class).

 Am I to understand that you just called Sarah Palin a TRUE PATRIOT...BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!

"Now throw a fit and bite a tire or something while I smilingly delete this URL along with the other garbage on the www"

 What? Delete this URL? LOL, do you work for Xanga now? LMAO!!! Throwing a fit is something that I rarely do, and only do as it pertains to personal matters. I assume that your suggestion of biting a tire is metaphor for holding back anger, but I am filled with glee at this point.

"By the way, there is a hell and you live there."

AMEN!! As someone who was told that he was being laid off on July 1st, not due to the economy, but rather politics within Goodwill; I feel the heat of such hell inundating me with worries. I do believe in a spiritual hell as well though, if this comment was meant to infer that I didn't. Then again, our nation is in a hell wrought by neoconservative philosophy; empowered by the complicity of incompetent DINOs over the course of a decade.

TAKE CARE AND GOD BLESS

@Richard - 

 ...and thank YOU for reading, your support and sharing this information.

TAKE CARE AND GOD BLESS

(which immediately gives the rant credence in the eyes of most who possess a right-wing view, regardless of whether or not the source is actually credible) - can serve to incite panic and even, in the worst case scenario, lead to violence.

 Furthermore, it's not just that Pendry is railing against Democrats and Democrats alone for their purported misdeeds; the claims themselves are devoid of facts. There should be no question as to whether or not I hold Democrats and Repugs to the same standards, because I rant against Democratic failures and idiocy as well. Despite this, I'm often accused of being blindly loyal to a party. To be honest, as of this past Tuesday, I'm no longer a registered Democrat. I don't donate to the party at any level anymore, and even spoke out against the candidacies of Obama and my Democratic Congressman last year. Why? Their actions or lack thereof in Congress was often at the behest of BOOsh; so, I felt compelled to act in defense of the very principles I believed they endangered. I only cast a vote in the Obama column in an effort to stave off the disasterous prospect of a McCain/Palin administration.

 Have there been missteps in Obama's short tenure thus far? Most assuredly. Many of which will be highlighted in my next entry that is in the works, but these shortfalls most certainly do not amount to what many in the right-wing are asserting; which is that Obama is a Socialist, Marxist, Fascist Dictator, hell-bent on dominating the market and destroying this country! If those inflammatory claims are not meant to instill fear and anger, then I'm not sure what they're for, because their purpose - being warped to begin with - is certainly not to inform.

 One thing is for sure, though; we as Americans (Liberals, Liberatarians, Conservatives, Populists, etc.) have a lot of work to do before any semblance of national unity is ever restored.

TAKE CARE AND GOD BLESS

Ron, there is no substantial evidence to support that assertion (pertaining to the alleged drunk-driving). However, if there was, it wouldn't disqualify a blessing from God. All sins - except blasphemy of the Holy Spirit - can be forgiven, if such is genuinely sought by the sinner. Aside of a sin he either did or didn't commit (you don't sin in the event of an accident), the man has been a champion of the American people, peace, justice and the pursuit of our happiness.

Let's assume, for a minute, that he did drive drunk and kill Mary Jo Kopechne after an affair. Can you honestly say that you've never done something stupid or made a mistake that resulted in something bad? Whether it was hurting someone you love by lying out of fear, cheating on your significant other, thusly leading your "better half" to leave you, or even allowing your greed to consume you to the point of losing everything, each of these (as well as many other scenarios) are equal to the worst case scenario involving Kennedy and Kopechne in the all-seeing, merciful and just eyes of God.

 In his service to the American people; I see the Holy Spirit at work. The very second any of you, who despise him so much, can cite an example otherwise - outside of that near-40 year old story - I'll be all ears.

 Until then, TAKE CARE AND GOD BLESS

P.S: My Xanga is acting screwy, my responses are coming out incompletely.

“Daniel, I am unable to proceed with a comentary because you really have not answered my questions.  You stated that my questions were answered previously??????   Where????  Sir if you were not there how can you be a historical authority on war.  Please answer the questions!!!!!”
 
 There really was no need for the exclamation marks, because I am not dodging you. How have I not answered your inquiry? Observe the following examples of my responses pertaining to this entry that could serve as indirect answers:
 
“My only problem is that I'm 24, and have only learned about the past from a historical vantage point.”
 
“First things first, thanks for your service to this country. Without your willful sacrifice, our freedoms would be vulnerable to foreign enemies and the rest of us would be forced to submit to a military draft. I - for one - am wholeheartedly grateful that a brave American such as yourself serves in my stead”
 
 If the examples I’ve cited here aren’t sufficient as responses to your questions, then I don’t know what else there is to be said. On the issue of my “historical authority” on war and anything else that transpired without my participation or even my mere existence: how has mankind ever been able to address or develop an opinion about the past? By researching various perspectives thereof (provided that a variety is available). I’ve been obsessed with history since grade school and have advanced my knowledge thereof by adopting the same approach in doing so that others with the same interest as I have. What other option do I have? There are no time machines to enable travel for the likes of me to a day an age that precedes me.
 
 Look, by what I’ve already read from you, I can conclude that you aren’t pleased with what I’ve written on this blog. That’s understandable. It can be difficult for anyone to acknowledge when their country has fallen from grace, especially when that person is a veteran of such a vile and controversial conflict.
 
 I can not possibly empathize with your experiences, and I’m sure that the world is a better place for your personal sacrifice to this nation. For your willingness to give your life in place of mine; I thank you, with everything in me.
 
 However, your service and corollary vantage point doesn’t dispute the reality of the atrocities that I’ve highlighted here, just like my working for Goodwill doesn’t necessarily translate into omniscience regarding anything that occurs beyond my involvement therein.
 
 If I’ve offended you, please forgive me. Offending you or any other veteran of any conflict with slander or libel is not my intent, but rather the expression of my opinion on what is factually accurate.
 
 Now, once again, I reiterate my eagerness to hear from you. Feel free to express yourself, as you will not be censored, but I do urge you to remain civil.
 
DO TAKE CARE AND GOD BLESS

@Bostonredsock5 - 

“Here what you site should be called. I'm a pussy who was never man enough to serve so I blog. Lets arrange a meeting between you and the Sgt major, and after your done shitting your pants you can apologize.”
 
 Hmm, one does not have to serve in the military to be deemed a “man”. Afterall, Christ never served in a military, nor did any of his apostles. Does that necessarily mean they lacked the necessary credentials to be recognized for what they biologically were? As for your proposal, I accept it. God is the ONLY one who intimidates me, and I am not afraid to express myself to anyone. My father was an MP and is an avid Repug, and debating him in person and seeing his seething anger from the truth that I espouse only energizes me more. I will only apologize if what I’ve said is untrue, which is certainly not the case.
 
“Illegal war. Hey fuck bag Bin Laden was with the Taliban. Guess 3,000 American dead means nothing to you. Further proof any moron can have a blog”
 
 Umm, first of all, I don’t know where you get your information, but Bin Laden leads an extremist group known as al Qaeda and was harbored by the Taliban. The Taliban and al Qaeda are merely allies. They are not synonymous. 3,000 dead people (from this country and numerous others) means a lot to me, but that doesn’t justify launching an aggressive war against a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 (that country being Iraq).
 
 Were we justified in pursuing Bin Laden into Afghanistan? Yes, but there should’ve been a formal declaration of war, which wouldn’t have been hard to pass, seeing how the so-called authorization to use force in response to 9/11 had broad bipartisan support from even the likes of a common sense politician like Kucinich (though I still believe in the unconstitutionality of that very resolution).
 
 You show me proof – that hasn’t been debunked by even BOOsh’s Regime – that Iraq was connected to 9/11 and I’ll personally spend the money required to pay you a visit and bow before you.
 
 Please educate yourself before you spew nonsense on this blog.
 
TAKE CARE AND GOD BLESS

“You Sir, and I use the term loosely, are a HERITIC by all definition”
 
I know you mean “heretic” (notice the “e” that you mistakenly substituted an “i” for), and – according to Dictionary.com – the three listed definitions therefore are as follows:
 
“1) a professed believer who maintains religious opinions contrary to those accepted by his or her church or rejects doctrines prescribed by that church.
 
2) Roman Catholic Church. a baptized Roman Catholic who willfully and persistently rejects any article of faith.
 
3) anyone who does not conform to an established attitude, doctrine, or principle.”
 
Well, I do not reflect number two, because I’m not a Catholic. I am emblematic of the third, in that I strongly reject the present attitude, doctrine and “principles” of mainstream beliefs that seem to uphold a perverse interpretation of God’s Word while disregarding all of the parts they don’t favor. This is obviously driven by one of a few motives such as a pursuit of greater power or even an effort to deflect from their own shortfalls.
 
 Hmmm, but that first definition; should it redundantly represent the same point the third definition lays out, then I am guilty. However, if this pertains simply to contradicting the word of God, then I have to disagree.
 
 I reject selfish doctrines of “faith” wherein the Word of God is twisted and mangled to fit a select individual and/or group’s worldview. Now, I realize that you would argue that I am doing the same here, but I must disagree once more.
 
 Why? How can I possibly suggest that I am not guilty of the first cited definition of heresy? The Bible. I aspire to learn from the Word of God by actively reading it, researching the meaning of what I’m ambiguous on, and seeking out God’s guidance – in prayer – to help me comprehend it appropriately.
 
 Does this mean that I don’t make mistakes? Of course not, and I’m sure I’ve misinterpreted a few verses lately, but that is in no way, shape or form intentional. I’m only 24 years old and will continue to learn more from my relationship with God as my life continues.
 
 A heretic, am I? Only in the same way that Christ was in his time. (LOL, please don’t mistake this for being some claim to Christhood)
 
“A member of the Democratic Party believes it it OKAY to be Gay and to kill infants, in-utero, out of conveneince”
 
 Thanks for applying the adjective to a reference to the Democratic Party. I’ve never said that it was ok to be gay or to kill infants; just that these people have a right that should not be infringed upon by the imposition of a religious philosophy. I personally feel that homosexuality is sinful as it is described in scripture. I’m also hesitant to support late-term (third trimester) abortions (the stage in which the aborted could be deemed an infant), but can not possibly support any effort to prohibit a mother from choosing to save her life or criminalizing any doctor who would act in her interest.
 
 No religious belief or political view of mine is EVER out of convenience. BTW, not every Democrat supports gay rights or subscribes to a pro-choice viewpoint, just as not every Republican holds opposing viewpoints to the above mentioned rights, as I’ve described.
 
“Neither of which is beneficial to the species and is narcisistic in itself”
 
 Do you ever spell check? Anyways: (yet again, I cite dictionary.com)
 
“nar⋅cis⋅sism
1)  inordinate fascination with oneself; excessive self-love; vanity.
2) Psychoanalysis. erotic gratification derived from admiration of one's own physical or mental attributes, being a normal condition at the infantile level of personality development”
 
Um, I can see part of your point, but it is slightly misguided. Some homosexuals, not all, elect a lifestyle of homosexuality out of self-loathing. Vanity may emerge later as a product of their distorted self-perception, but it certainly isn’t a root cause from what I’ve observed.
 
 As for abortions, a minority of abortions stems from one’s unwillingness to permit the natural adjustments made to the body during the process of fetal development.
 
 On the other hand, most cases are the product of underage pregnancy, poverty, danger to a mother’s life, rape, and incest. None of these cases are borne out of selfishness (aside of the poor choices of underage pregnant women, but neither are all of them pregnant by choice), but rather a lack of preparedness, fear of death, inability to afford the altered living conditions that a birth can bring about, and the unenviable consequences of being violated.
 
 To properly address abortion, one must have empathy, or - at the very least - sympathy. Put yourself in their position and ask yourself what you would do under each of these various circumstances. Should you draw an unchanged conclusion, then there is no way you’ll ever understand.
 
 I do agree with you that neither case aids our species (except for the unintentional result of countering overpopulation), because they ensure at least one case where reproduction will have been hindered.
 
“The ideology of the Democratic Party is in opposition to the standing beliefs of a follower of Christ, it is morally corrupt and ethically bankrupt”
 
 In some areas, my fellow Democrats fail to recognize their missteps (like Vietnam, Korea, failure to address slavery and civil rights, etc.), but I argue that the same charge can be levied against the Republican Party as well. Just look at what appears to be the Republican base’s support for pre-emptive war, torture, and a near-hostile approach to the rest of the world.
 
 Just because a party appears to coddle to the fundamentalists of a religious belief doesn’t necessarily make them religious, just like a lack of pandering to fundamentalists doesn’t translate into anti-religious beliefs.
 
 Read the platform of the Democratic Party and tell me what is contrary to Christ’s teachings. The pursuit of peace is Christian, as is empowering the poor, demanding equality for all and fighting for the environment. To humor you, I’ll read the platform and get back to you with any qualms I may have therewith.
 
 If anything, the Republican base’s choice to politicize Christ’s doctrine is a perversion thereof, as Christ did not concern himself with political disputes. Instead, he cautioned against a deliberate distortion of God’s Word for any purpose.
 
“If you deviate in order to follow the world, then you are of the world and NOT of God”
 
 I’m not a follower of the World Order, but rather of God’s law. Any deviation thereof would merely be out of naïveté, not of ambition.
 

“You are one with Satan in that sense and with Satan at war wit God, I am at war with you.

It is a spiritual war for now, pray it does not become a hot one.”

 My struggle is with the works of the devil, not with the body of Christ. Christ said the following of condemning a fellow Christian:

“(Luke 9:50 KJV) And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us.”

 As for the caveat at the conclusion of your commentary; what good would prayer do for me if I was supposedly on Satan’s side? Didn’t think that one out now did you?

 Please come back again, I look forward to your return and the waging of what you perceive as a war against me.
 I presume that you are no more than a sadly ill-informed Christian, so I will not deny you the following conclusion.
TAKE CARE AND GOD BLESS
P.S: If I am to construe your comments as some kind of prospective threat to my well being, I shall alert the authorities.

@jmesr15 - 

Your vitriol is as humorous as it is sad. The ONLY country I love and honor is the United States. Just because I am capable of seeing and recognizing our wrongdoing doesn't necessarily make me anti-american. In fact, this openness to the truth makes me a realist. There's isn't a single country on the planet with a clean slate, especially amongst the wealthiest nations on the western world. I've said these things (although, with less knowledge than I have now to assist me) to a veteran before; my father. He, a devout repug and veteran MP SGT, used to tell me that he'd never respect me unless I served for no less than two years, but I knew then as I do now that one doesn't have to don the uniform in order to serve or display his or her affection for this great nation.

 My passionate stances on various issues are derived from the very same abiding love for country that drives many to volunteer for military service. It is the driving force behind my preparing for a return to school so that I can studie political science and prepare for a principled career in politics and public service. Your choice of words in lambasting me as a "coward" and a "pinhead" seem to reflect your ignorance as to what the two words really mean. Were I so cowardly, I would prefer to remain silent in these troubled times when our constitution is under siege. If I truly exhibited the characteristics of a pinhead, then I wouldn't have the temperance - let alone the knowledge - necessary to handle comments like yours.

 Do I diminish the fact that you, the servicepeople in the military and I bear an equal affection for this country? No, and I never will. I merely give pause to the rationale behind certain actions such as your comment, those of Pendry's, President Obama and his dictatorial predecessor. In the end, it's all for the benefit of our beloved nation.

 I sincerely thank you for taking time out of your day to visit and comment on my blog.

TAKE CARE AND GOD BLESS

 In the interest of clarification, I unintentionally left out the fact that both sides of Vietnam persecuted opposing views. As for the dictators we installed; we didn't act alone. The British and the French were both intimately involved as well in empowering the monarch. Not every dictatorial act of the monarch was supported by our government, but neither were the interests of democracy.

@anonymous - 

 And, if that first group of words in your rant was a "paragraph", then I suggest that you invest in some language arts tutoring. Please use punctuation and proper grammar, it "discredits" your opinion otherwise.

@woodneye - Of course, no legitimate charge of "fantasy" directed at this weblog entry comes with proof. The only thing exhaustive about it is attempting to comprehend the lack of grasp on reality that those who make such charges have.

@Binx - Point well taken sir. While I disagree that a profane mouth reflects a feeble mind in general, I have already vowed within the comment section of this entry to keep my comments clean. This is not an acknowledgement of fault of any kind, but rather a new effort to respect the preferences of all readers.

Thank you for reading/commenting...

TAKE CARE AND GOD BLESS

@ClinicalThinker - 

 While I can not speak as witness to certain events as they transpired, I can only speak of what I learn regarding such. The fact is that the lies about Kerry have been thoroughly debunked as I've cited previously in this blog. Just go to factcheck.org to see for yourself. Should you disagree with their findings, take it up with them. As far as I'm concerned, your brother and the others who agreed with him in their assessment of Kerry's service are entitled to their opinion, but it is only that; an opinion.

 As for Kennedy, the ONLY two people who knew what happened that terrible night were he and Kopechne. I have my own opinion about that night and take the wise approach by considering the numerous possible outcomes, but the actual facts surrounding the matter are too few to properly make a judgement.

 In the end, God knows what's ultimately true and will judge accordingly. If I say things on this blog that are not factual, it is by no fault of my own, as I strive to always be truthful. Unfortunately, my retrospection is limited by my age, thusly forcing me to rely heavily on historical references.

 Maam, I do appreciate your having read my entry and subsequently leaving a comment. Please take care of yourself and may God extend his blessings to you continually.

@ClinicalThinker - It is always funny to me when conservatives and the like comment about how big government has gotten when their leaders in congress and the white house of the last near-30 years have done more to make the government more invasive in private matters than Democrats ever will. All of you complain now about the national debt only because it is a Democrat adding to it instead of a Repug.

 The national debt (which has stood for almost two hundred years, since 1837) would have been paid off, with the long effort from Democrats and Republicans alike, by this century had Reagan, Bush 41 and BOOsh not contributed so much to it. You defy history by claiming that a debt that represents nowhere near the percentage of our GDP that stood after World War Two will cause our economy to collapse. Where was this concern when BOOsh lied us into the quagmire of Iraq? Silent you were then, because he was blowing away sand niggers, right?

 Fox guarding the hen house? Sounds like a reference to BOOsh's last legacy on the constitution if you ask me.

 That's right, I'm distorted by liberal bias in the media and history, which is only an issue when the facts presented thereby don't aid your delusions. Nothing at this point in your decrepit existence will convince you of your ignorance, so there is no point in discussing facts with you any further.

@ClinicalThinker - I understand the idiom and the reference to BOTH parties. However, I tend to be realistic and consider that not every elected official is evil. Democrats and Repugs are, indeed, both to blame, so I cede that to you.

 As for English, I aced it throughout my public school years and have yet to take advanced classes on such in college. I graduated with a 3.4 and presently have a 4.0 in Ashford University. The tantrum you speak of is all in the eye of the beholder, because I guess it's based on what political perspective you read it from.

 I'm reviewing the links you provided now, thank you. As for Kerry's service; if that story is indeed true, then I would concur that his actions were no less than utterly cowardice.

 I'll return with my thoughts on the links cited, please have a nice day.

 One more thing, the comments about President Kennedy were disgusting. I would NEVER say such a horrible thing about any dead Republicans, period. Arguing about Teddy's personal actions are pointless, as whatever happened is between he, Kopechne, and God. His actions in public life have benefited the American people, especially the poor, and that is solely what I praise. My attempts to try and address the hatred of Teddy, fueled by his actions, are morally and not politically based. I feel the same about any liberal or Democrat judging a republican about their personal conduct, it is simply none of our business.

@John - There's no such thing as a "real truth", only truth and lies. Indeed, discussing facts can be pleasing, although not always stress-free. This is due to the fact that neoconservatives are usually dead-set on a particular view point, thus leaving little room for logical revision of such. Feel free to revisit this blog at any time, and please let me know if I'm spreading falsehoods (w/ citation).

TAKE CARE AND GOD BLESS

@Tom - Sir, it is rather difficult to find anything disagreeable in your post. There are those who do manipulate the system in order to benefit from it. My mother, who is severly disabled and receives benefits as a result, is not amongst them. Neither am I, and my family requires assistance due to my poor financial situation. Though, I've seen people misuse and abuse these entitlement programs. Oversight is there, it's just that the awareness of how to circumvent such is increasingly abound. If anything, enforcement of the law merely needs to be improved, and the guiding principles behind such should be modernized.

 I thoroughly enjoyed reading your comments. Please return anytime.

TAKE CARE AND GOD BLESS

“First and foremost, it sounds like you are distinctly anti-military, and furthermore - have never served a day in service to your country, in any capacity.”

 …and I’ve stated numerous times that I haven’t served at all, nothing new here. Am I anti-military? Depends, if you are referring to our soldiers, then the answer is no. On the other hand, if you were talking about the establishment (a.k.a., Pentagon, Military Industrial Complex) then it would be an emphatic yes.

“Secondly, you appear to worship at the feet of extremely liberal democraps, and glorify them to no end... Most grievious amongst those so gloried was the murderer Ted Kennedy...  He never should have made it into politics, and in fact should have served time for his cowardly actions in regard to the young lady whose death he caused, in particular his callous disregard for the fact that had he acted quickly, there is a chance she may have survived.  The marks left on the inside of the car indicated she was alive for at least some minutes before she eventually drowned...”

 Round and a round you people go with constant references to his inaction on that fateful night. I do not defend his personal conduct, period. I also don’t claim to know what could’ve been. I merely admire the man for his many outstanding accomplishments as an elected representative of the people. He’s dead, and God will repay him for his deeds. Leave it at that.

“The final note I wish to make, is that if your response had been more towards the facts than in attempting to shame the Sergeant, you got off on an obscenity laced diatribe, which in my opinion negated much of what you said.  Sticking to the facts - without the invective would have better served your purpose.  You come off sounding more like a fanatical crackpot...”

 I stuck to the facts and chose to add a little color to it. I’m allowed to get as impassioned as I want, when I want, on this blog. The facts were not negated for the logical, but your kindergarten eyes just can’t take it, I’m sssssorry.

 Once any of you can prove that I’m wrong, I welcome it.

“Sargent Major Pendry is 100% correct in his stated opinions. I was in Vietnam with kerry and he is a self-idolater and a coward. He was in country for a matter of weeks and awarded himself a purple heart for a accidental scratch that had nothing to do with enemy action. That is a fact!

 Clintoon could have and should have cleaned out the “skinneys” big time. He has d the reason and means and chose not to engage. He had opportunities to arrest and or shoot OBL and walked away. His weak reaction to the Islamic threats encouraged them to only increase the pr5ewssure resulting in 9/11. This is undeniable. I loved 3 years in the ME and learned what the IDF knows. The Arab fears and respects only overwhelming force.

Peloosee, Ried, dodd and the faggot frank et all are a disgrace to America. Obama is a cheap community organizer who hates whites along with his wife. And the rev wright……He wants to destroy this country. He will fail!”

 I actually feel a little nauseous after reading that. You sir are a bigot and are a disgrace to the uniform you’ve just defecated on. Military records, coupled with the testimonies of fellow servicemen, confirm that Kerry earned each award. Clinton responded on numerous occasions to al-Qaeda’s attacks, but because he didn’t nuke in retaliation, you people interpret that as weakness. If anything, BOOsh’s failure to respond to the CIA’s findings regarding AQ’s involvement in the Cole attack in conjunction with the fact that – despite warnings from the Clinton Administration - terrorism took a backseat to North Korea, as a policy of his regime, before 9/11 makes him culpable. Then again, the facts never set in well with your ilk.

 On second thought, anonymous comments will be the only ones blocked. I made this decision when it became apparent that in order to do what I wanted to with the blog, I would've had to render my entries private. So, any commentary that deviates from the topic or fails to offer citation to dispute what I've said will be dismissed as being no different than the other comments of the like and will not see a response. I maintain that all comments will remain, because I strongly feel that every word posted should be left on display. Again, thank you to all who visit, read, and take the time to comment.