--diaphanous frauds

LOVE that term. Weren't the Diaphanous Frods the adversaries of the Vermicious Knids? Or did they open on the Monkees' last tour? ;D

wiatrol

your post and those calling Palin the "c" word are worthless.

they say more about you than anything anyone might say about Palin. Are you a republican in drag?

-- Paris Pace

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

Where did I call Palin the "c word?" I've called her an ignorant bitch; but never the "c word."

kilchis said:

--I'm not ashamed of having served

You misquoted him and got it wrong.

See my new public service initiative:

http://bgladd.com/SkinGrafts4Sarah.org

I know we're all suffering from compassion fatigue these days, but this is vital to the nation.

Pay it forward.

I get that you're proud. That's cool. And you apparently don't read very closely. Just sayin'.

Palin's attorney is objecting to rumors of an allegation that don't exist, i.e., "embezzlement." The actual rumors concern a "kickback" of some of the money spent to build the Wasilla sports complex to build the Palin's home.

Palin's attorney seems to be straining mightily to deny allegations of embezzlement, when embezzlement has never been alleged. It's as if he's trying to change the subject.

Actually, kilchis asserted twice in that post that he's not ashamed of having served.

Sorry--He was an F-4C pilot; specifically, the EF-4C Wild Weasel IV.

Kilchis wrote-"I'm not ashamed of having served.."

Virtue wrote-"I truly doubt you were ever in Vietnam.

The fact that you say you were "ashamed of having served" gives you away bigtime...You, on the other hand, are a phony asshole."

Are you going to apologize to Kilchis? You were wrong after all, and insulting to boot Just wondering.

"kilchis said: I'm not ashamed of having served.

Emphasis on NOT. I got it wrong. You're correct and I apologize.

However, his attitude on the service committed to our country on behalf of myself and my brothers rings false to those of us who were actually there. Trust me, only we can smell it. And a mile away, I might add.

I got attacked on the other thread as a typical lib for complimenting you, Faulkner, Jr. and X.Hutman for your thoughtful and intelligent commentary. The gist of that post seemed to be that liberals don't think for themselves but accept only liberal talking points (is that the pot calling the kettle something?).

Well, all I can say is, at least I know about the Sullivan case, which seems to be more than Ms. Palin's lawyer knows. Every beginning lawyer learns how to posture and threaten in a letter but, thankfully, most of them do their legal research before they begin writing.

Virtue--- Sergeant 1st Forces, 1969,Pleiku,Ban Me Thout,Cheo Reo,Dragon Mountain,now are you man enough to re-read my post and apologize or not?

Lighten up, son. Demeaning adjectives and wildly defensive flailing away doesn't mask the fact that your heroine is far too immature to ever hold high Federal elective office.

You asked for proof that the Palin camp was smearing Mr. Letterman, and I provided it. You're confusing factual analysis with elitism, and as Bonnie and others have so effortlessly handed your posterior to you on a platter...I understand the debilitating helplessness you're encountering.

However, it will not lessen the embarrassment and utter defenselessness you embrace with a load like Sarah-love to carry around.

Good luck with that.

This is as relevant as Salon's harping on John Edward's sex life. They are BOTH over.

--However, his attitude on the service committed to our country on behalf of myself and my brothers rings false to those of us who were actually there. Trust me, only we can smell it. And a mile away, I might add.

-- virtue001

Mm... I don't trust you. My father fought for this country. Both my grandfathers, my father, and my uncle, were all soldiers. My father and my uncle were nonetheless quite capable of saying so when faced with a corny government slogan that wasn't really accurate. I have never doubted that most of our soldiery joined up in order to make unimaginable sacrifices, most of them for noble ends. After 9/11, many did join up in order to make these sacrifices in defense of our country, which was attacked. I can even believe that many who fought in Vietnam believed that they were fighting in order to ensure freedom for the Vietnamese, or even because they honestly worried that the Russians and Chinese would all get in boats and invade America one day.

However, if you're saying that anyone disagreeing with that couldn't possibly have fought in Vietnam, then no, I don't trust you. Who made you God and arbiter? You could be lying about your service just as easily. Other Republicans have done so.

No, I don't trust you.

Good old “virtue.” He’s always up for flinging GOP talking points, but he can’t be bothered to actually read the comments he’s condemning. And he certainly ignores any comment that questions his character. I’d frankly like a response to my comment about Vietnam service, and he owes Kilchis an apology. I guess the Bible is right: You CAN tell a tree by its fruit.

Kilchis, thank you for your service in an ugly and demoralizing war.

I'm hanging in here for the end of an exciting weekend.

The "rumors" did have me a little concerned, but the FBI statement seemed to quell them. Also, the "Daily Beast" story seemed somewhat tongue in cheek, with its overt disclaimer that it had any basis in fact. Looked to me like a smart play for a quick buck on the liberal appetite for a scandal. (Joan, I take back my prior critique of your man Max. He's just doing his job, like everyone else).

As for the Post and NYT, this relates back to convention '08. If reports can be believed, the Post ran a story on the fact of rumors (that Palin was not the mother of her child) in the Atlantic. And, the NYT ran its famous mistress story on McCain last year, then settled out of court. Palin may have figured: it won't be long before reporters run with the house rumor, too. This "silliness-gate" deserves an early demise.

One final thought on Palin. In her statement this weekend, she said she could still serve well without a title. That is pure Princess Diana -- i.e., her brother's eulogy, which noted that Diana needed no royal title to work her unique magic. There is an Argentine, dramatic quality to Sarah, and I love it.

Her critics remind me a bit of Procopius, who denounced the empress Theodora in harsh, personal terms during the early Byzantine empire. You can go to Ravenna and see a mosaic of Theodora. There are no mosaics of her critics.