Matthews to Obama protester: Why’d you bring a loaded gun to a town hall with the president?
posted at 7:42 pm on August 11, 2009 by Allahpundit
Good question, especially given the sign this guy was carrying. Considering the lengths to which the Secret Service normally goes to investigate threats against the president, I’m amazed he wasn’t hauled in for questioning at the scene as a potential threat. People are going to beat the Second Amendment drum in the comments, but (a) I doubt it would have sat well with our readers if lefties carrying Bushitler signs had shown up to Dubya’s events packing heat and (b) having a right doesn’t mean you’re obliged to exercise it, particularly in circumstances where it would be provocative to do so. I’ve knocked atheist groups for suing for the right to display a “Darwin tree” or whatever on public grounds next to a Christmas tree, not because they’re not entitled but because they’re being spiteful, incendiary douchebags by doing so. How is Captain Sidearm here any different?
The worst part? According to a new book about the Secret Service, the number of daily threats against Obama is already four times the number Bush faced. Every pair of eyes diverted to watch this tool make his point about liberty is a pair that’s not watching the rest of the crowd.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 9 10 11 12 13 Next »
Keep the rubber side down, amigo.
TinMan13 on August 12, 2009 at 3:30 AM
I think your slip is showing again.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 3:30 AM
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 3:27 AM
there is nothing wrong with his “lets roll” its a gentle reminder to stand up and fight our enemies head on. It honors the patriots on that flight.
Conservative Voice on August 12, 2009 at 3:30 AM
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 3:32 AM
You called me a jackass because of my comments. Your opinion of my opinion.
You would have me want to stop being what you think is a jackass.
How would I do that?
TinMan13 on August 12, 2009 at 3:32 AM
It is very presumptuous on his part and honors no one.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 3:32 AM
Start at the beginning of all your comments and then go on till you have read them all again and then stop.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 3:34 AM
The presumption is yours when you attempt to speak for them, their families, or the rest of us.
Censorship is a liberal trait.
TinMan13 on August 12, 2009 at 3:35 AM
Stop what, bingo?
TinMan13 on August 12, 2009 at 3:35 AM
btw, the reason it mattered (it doesn’t anymore) is because many military stories seem fishy to civilians. I’m sure some of my stories sound fishy. So, I wanted to know the experiences they were drawing upon to judge his story.
blink on August 12, 2009 at 3:37 AM
You stated that you were ok being one. That statement is independent of my opinion. I told you that you shouldn’t be ok being one.
blink on August 12, 2009 at 3:41 AM
Don’t let it throw you Joe Blo!
It’s just my way of saluting the
American Heros who fought back on 911.
“Let’s Roll”
On Watch on August 12, 2009 at 3:42 AM
You are making no sense at all. I am not speaking for them. Your friend is with his tediously repetitious copped “Let’s Roll”. He has not just said it, he has made it part of his signature. HIS signature! Not theirs, HIS. Unless he is speaking for himself and is planning on doing some major rolling soon himself or something. Maybe he is joining the Marines or Army tomorrow. Somehow I doubt it.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 3:42 AM
BTW, where do you get that? I don’t control the “ban hammer”. Wouldn’t use it anyway.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 3:44 AM
I told you that you shouldn’t be ok being one.
blink on August 12, 2009 at 3:41 AM
TinMan13 on August 12, 2009 at 3:44 AM
If it bothers you so much, don’t look.
TinMan13 on August 12, 2009 at 3:46 AM
Then put your money where your hotair is and send their kids some money for school.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 3:47 AM
blink on August 12, 2009 at 3:37 AM
and the reason it doesn’t matter is someone, though wasn’t directly involved, could be educated enough…either by having a relative / spouse in the military…or are well read…
Even if they served, their experiences aren’t the same as someone else’s experiences. So who is to say what is fishy or not right?
As far as this story is concerned…I usually take people at their word…but in this thread mister “libertarian” was a bit over the top with what was considered gun lingo…what were the gun laws and what not, and anyone who disagreed was met with sexual innuendos and other jack assness so it isn’t a surprise people didn’t take him at his word on his war story.
Conservative Voice on August 12, 2009 at 3:48 AM
No. I think you shouldn’t be okay being what you think is a jackass.
blink on August 12, 2009 at 3:48 AM
It doesn’t bother me that much. I am just embarrassed for someone who uses it as his personnel signature.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 3:48 AM
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 3:47 AM
If he pays taxes he is
Conservative Voice on August 12, 2009 at 3:49 AM
Heh. Good one.
But you have no idea what I think is a jackass.
TinMan13 on August 12, 2009 at 3:51 AM
ouch
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 3:52 AM
Hand Salute CV,
I’m proud and humbled that you and other Patriots remember.
“Let’s Roll”
On Watch on August 12, 2009 at 3:52 AM
Stop reading all your own comments after reading them all again. Or do you think that rereading them once is not enough for you to remember all you said?
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 3:52 AM
How can you be embarrassed for someone else? That is either solipsistic, arrogant, or exhibiting a total lack of self esteem. One cannot be offended or embarrassed for someone else, only oneself.
TinMan13 on August 12, 2009 at 3:53 AM
‘You have a truly dizzying intellect.’ Dread Pirate Roberts to Vizzini.
Dude.
TinMan13 on August 12, 2009 at 3:55 AM
Other patriots? What constitutes a patriot to you? Someone who agrees with you on something? Sounds as devalued that way as Hannity’s “Your a Great American!!!” what seems like every few seconds to most everyone who calls him.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 3:57 AM
Not embarrassed for myself as an individual but embarrassed as an American. Why is that so hard to understand?
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 4:00 AM
Sounded to me like he wanted to go a little further than the .000001 cent that gets them.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 4:02 AM
Well I must say that I have had an interesting and lovely evening, although this wasn’t it.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 4:03 AM
So in one post you deride something you do not agree with, and in the next claim the mantle of all knowing collective American.
Do you dance with yourself, too?
TinMan13 on August 12, 2009 at 4:04 AM
I know. But he merely stated:
before he was attacked as a liar. MadisonConservative didn’t even back down when presented by defensive facts. It was very strange.
The fact that his story was attacked (even if NOT true) was over the top for me.
blink on August 12, 2009 at 4:05 AM
Notice the “quotes” and emphasis around the heroic phrase. I’ve tried to remember to include it on every post since 911. Why don’t you try? My sig is On Watch, they are separate and different phrases. Now, return to playing with yourself, you dumbass!
“Let’s Roll”
On Watch on August 12, 2009 at 4:06 AM
It doesn’t matter.
Whatever your definition of a jackass is. You’re ok being it. That’s bad.
blink on August 12, 2009 at 4:07 AM
No, he made several references that were questionable, notably his recollections of the m-14. While his experience might have precluded any other knowledge, his matter of fact pronouncement left him open to serious questions.
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 4:09 AM
Go back and read the thread.
HIS matter of fact pronouncement was that HE used M16’s and M60’s and spent two full tours.
I fail to see how that left him open to anything.
blink on August 12, 2009 at 4:14 AM
Then you obviously missed the part where he stated that the m-14 saw little action in RVN. please re-read…I encourage you.
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 4:16 AM
I am not in the habit of praising something I disagree with. Are you? If so, you have geven not the slightest indication of that tonight.
I have no idea what strange manner of rhyme or reason you used to come to that conclusion.
Never tried that. Is it fun?
Again, I must say that I have had an interesting and lovely evening, and challenging, although this certainly wasn’t it.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 4:21 AM
That was really cleaver. Do the relatives of those you are “honoring” know of your great wit? I am sure that if they did, they would be even more “honored”, so you better let them know.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 4:26 AM
This is a case of you can’t believe everything you read. Define Standardized? While what you wrote is technically true due to the word “standardized”, it is not entirely accurate. When I was in Vietnam in 1965 the Army had been testing the M16 in combat operations while we Marines used the M14. The Armalite AR15 was the prototype for the XM16 made by Colt which the Army was testing. It had problems with jams and failure to load rounds when the magazine was changed. It was also getting caught up in the vegetation. Many soldiers hated the weapon at the time. In 1967 the redesigned M16A1 fixed those problems and the M16 eventually replaced the M14 for all services. This was our answer to the AK47 assault rifle. Until the M16A1 the enemy could out muscle the US military on the shear firepower of the AK47 vs the M14.
kanda on August 12, 2009 at 4:27 AM
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 4:02 AM
I would imagine that a salute and a token of gratitude goes further than the taxpayer money the survivors got.
Conservative Voice on August 12, 2009 at 4:29 AM
Well, on balance, guntotinglibertarian rings true to me, any truer and I would be a little suspicious, and remember, although not at the same time he was, I was there. A minor point to some Shopping Mall Rambos, I realize.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 4:32 AM
I was there in 1971. We used the M16. Never saw an M14 there. In basic, in late 1968, we trained on the M16. Look at my post above about the number of M16′s in “circulation”.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 4:34 AM
M16′s were used during most of the Vietnam war. M60′s were also used. In fact I remember trading two of them that my unit had, but didn’t really need and had no ammo for, to another unit that needed them and had ammo for, for a lot of M16 rounds that we were short of. It is amazing how some who where not there think they know more than those who were.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 4:42 AM
I will not question someone’s statements as to “Been there, done that” on a message board. To many unknowns.
I believe it was you who made the “giving cpr” claim, and having been in other situations where my life was in direct jeopardy (getting hit by a car and literally falling off of a mountain) I can attest to the mind’s ability to observe “fishy” things. that’s why I stayed out of the name calling session.
However, all of my shooting experience and training (10+years) comes from/with three combat veterans of Uncle Sam’s Misguided Children. All of them from Vietnam. Every single one of them (and that soldier from Korea of the same time period)carried an M-14, and not one of them would have let me get away with not knowing that “the .45″ was a 1911 (or A1 variant).
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 4:43 AM
totally unrelated to the post about the m-14 not being used in RVN.
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 4:45 AM
What post said that the m14 was never used in RVN? You seem to know right where it is and I would rather not search for it. It is a side issue anyway as the M16 was the main weapon since probably 1967 and that constitutes the bulk of the war.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 4:51 AM
here.
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 4:53 AM
There was a LOT of war before 71…or even 67.
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 4:56 AM
No that was not me, but why don’t you think that someone would give cpr?
Well we had M16′s in RVN. never saw an M14 there. They must have been their early on, pre 1968 most likely. Most of the war was post 1967. If they would not “let me get away with not knowing that “the .45″ was a 1911 (or A1 variant)” they must be rather strange people to be hung up on that bureaucratize and no one cares about Korea back then.
I can hardly even believe that I am arguing with some one who was not even there.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 4:58 AM
After 66-67 that is true the M14 was little used by the US military in Vietnam. From 60-66 the M14 was the primary weapon used by the Army and the Marines. Variations of the M14 are still in limited use by the US military today. The 45 was the M1911A1 but always to my knowledge was referred to as the “45″ except in training where it was called “Automatic Pistol, Caliber .45, M1911A1″.
kanda on August 12, 2009 at 4:59 AM
Why don’t you ask your Vietnam friends, Fighton, with the nomenclature hang up, what the proper full nomenclature for a 105 howitzer and a 155 howitzer are, both SP and towed? Add in for a 175 and an 8 inch. If they don’t know, and I will give odds that they don’t, then you can “not let them get away with not knowing that”.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 5:02 AM
Strange? hell…they’re marines, and you tell them that their first two tours didn’t constitute “most of the war”.
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 5:04 AM
That sounds right on the money and is very compatible with what I have been saying all along. As you probably know then, the M16 was used for the bulk of the Vietnam war fighting as the bulk of the KIA was post 1966.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 5:06 AM
wanna play whose pecker is longer huh? Too bad…all three carried the above mentioned weapons and know/knew them inside and out. Did you carry your weapon….or your gun?
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 5:09 AM
If they were pre 1967 they most certainly did not.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 5:11 AM
Joe…you’re a grade A blue falcon.
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 5:11 AM
Casualties By Year
1961-1965
Force KIA WIA MIA CIA
US Forces 1,864 7,337 18 unknown
ARVN unknown unknown unknown unknown
NVA/VC unknown unknown unknown unknown
1966
Force KIA WIA MIA CIA
US Forces 5,008 1 29,992 61 unknown
ARVN 11,953 71,584 unknown unknown
NVA/VC 71,473 unknown unknown 3,247
Note 1: there were an additional 1,045 non-hostile deaths for a total of 6,053
1967
Force KIA WIA MIA CIA
US Forces 9,378 1 56,013 113 unknown
ARVN 12,716 76,299 529 unknown
NVA/VC 133,484 unknown unknown 6,065
Note 1: there were an additional 1,680 non-hostile deaths for a total of 11,058
1968
Force KIA WIA MIA CIA
US Forces 14,594 1 87,388 176 unknown
ARVN 28,800 172,512 587 unknown
NVA/VC 208,254 unknown unknown 9,462
Note 1: there were an additional 1,919 non-hostile deaths for a total of 16,511
1969
Force KIA WIA MIA CIA
US Forces 9,414 1 55,390 112 unknown
ARVN 22,000 131,780 683 unknown
NVA/VC 132,051 unknown unknown 5,905
Note 1: there were an additional 2,113 non-hostile deaths for a total of 11,527
1970
Force KIA WIA MIA CIA
US Forces 4,221 1 24,835 101 unknown
ARVN 23,000 137,770 727 unknown
NVA/VC 86,591 unknown unknown 3,934
Note 1: there were an additional 1,844 non-hostile deaths for a total of 6,065
1971
Force KIA WIA MIA CIA
US Forces 1,380 1 18,109 16 unknown
ARVN 19,901 123,545 727 unknown
NVA/VC 19,320 unknown unknown 2,304
Note 1: there were an additional 968 non-hostile deaths for a total of 2,348
1972
Force KIA WIA MIA CIA
US Forces 300 1 3,936 11 unknown
ARVN 25,787 139,731 727 unknown
NVA/VC 4,261 unknown unknown 1,349
Legend: KIA = Killed In Action WIA = Wounded In Action MIA = Missing In Action CIA = Captured In Action
Note 1: there were an additional 261 non-hostile deaths for a total of 561
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 5:12 AM
and my sons godfather held one of the last marines to die in vietnam in his arms after a 122 almost ripped him in half, I don’t give a rats ass when you think the “most of the war” was. Because “most of it” was when you were there.
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 5:15 AM
Blue is Infantry (Queen of Battle). I was Field Artillery (King of Battle) which is red. Don’t know anything about any falcons.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 5:15 AM
I’m sure you don’t.
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 5:17 AM
Most of it was when most of it was. Most of it was before I was there. Very classless of you trying to tie other things into this and it is you insulting those who served and those who died, not me.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 5:20 AM
Fighton03, you are a real piece of work trying to make out like I was insulting any service man. The issue was the M16 v the M14 and which was the main RVN personnel weapon.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 5:22 AM
WOW. Massive defleption from someone who so cavalierly sends me to “my marine friends” to chase down arty models and avoids Vietnam prior to his personal involvement. Follow the posts, I never even hinted that you didn’t have a valid claim and even gave you the benefit of the doubt based on your personal experiences. The only one denigrating people’s service here is you by trying to state that somehow, someones experiences are before “most of the war”. well, your opinion is noted…carry on.
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 5:28 AM
No Joe….what I said was that the inability to distinguish between them led to questions. I have direct experience counter to the statements made, but there were many things outside of peoples individual experience. You wanted to play “my war was worse” games. Well, since you’re still fighting it …maybe it was. Too bad.
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 5:30 AM
You better find another partner for that.
Actually in the artillery the fire power (howitzer) was called a gun or a tube and they were too heavy to carry. The Artillery did not have that gun v weapon hang-up.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 5:30 AM
You are a liar.
I am not still fighting the war. Seems like you still are though. Ironic, is it not?
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 5:33 AM
glad to see you know your place.
and yet you presume to lecture? Interesting, very interesting…..but stupid.
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 5:34 AM
All I can tell you Joe is we were winning when I left and I had an M14. Vietnam was never fought to win. It was fought to not lose. The war in 1969 was different than in was in 1965-66. In 1965 we believed we would win. By 1969 we hoped just to survive. The war dragged on for 9 more years after I left. Together with the 4 years before I arrived that is a long time. In the end, we Americans as a nation, got sick and tired our young men and women dying after 15 years of war. Finally, we abandoned the south. When I see that wall in DC I wonder why….having never lost a battle militarily, why we were defeated by our national lack of will to win. Why did they send us to begin with? My life was so altered by the experience but not as much as those who did not survive. I remember how some antiwar elements treated our military back then. Today it is hard to remember we were very young then. Most of us were drafted in our late teens into the military. Others like myself volunteered. Many of those draftees have their name carved in the wall in Washington DC. As you say the bulk of the KIA’s were after 1966. Blame our politicians for dragging the war our over 15 years.
Some people who never served will never understand the bond shared across the generations by those who served. Whether two years and out or 35 years in, there is that mutual respect that will always be there. Today our young men and women are all volunteers. Are they better Americans than those who have the opportunity but do not serve? You betcha!! I know many Vietnam era protesters who avoided the war who try to apologize for their behavior. I tell them to tell it to those with their names on the wall. But I remember they were young then too. Except for a few I can forgive them.
kanda on August 12, 2009 at 5:34 AM
your opinion is noted. Carry on.
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 5:35 AM
What direct experience is that again? When were you there again? You can not have direct experience there unless you were there.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 5:36 AM
Kanda, I agree with everything you said above. But the truly better ones aren’t so classless as to try and make the case.
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 5:37 AM
Ok then, I’ll give you that. How about first hand knowledge from three independent sources whom I trust with my life? Better?
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 5:38 AM
It is a fact, not just an opinion. Show me where I said anything like “my war was worse” or admit that you are a liar. Either show me or go in defilade.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 5:40 AM
What? You don’t like my characterization? Tough! I mentioned that there was plenty of war before your experiences. You blow that off with
and you don’t like getting hammered for it? Well boo de f’in hoo hoo hoo. Here’s a hanky.
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 5:43 AM
Whom you would trust with your life has no bearing on the main weapon used in Vietnam, M16 v M14, nor whether guntotinglibertarian, whom I believe you essentially called a liar, carried an M16.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 5:44 AM
You seem to be stuck in recycle. I took issue with the statement that the m-14 saw little use in RVN. Especially when it was used to try and give credence to an opinion. However, I even gave you both the out of different expereinces, but you proceeded down the “I was there so shut up path”.
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 5:48 AM
You are becoming almost incoherent. Most of the war was after 1966 and then the M16, not the M14, was the primary rifle used, ergo the M16 was the main RVN rifle. That is just a fact and I have no idea why you would think that I would need your hanky.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 5:49 AM
Not the argument made at the time. Thanks for trying.
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 5:51 AM
Just following you.
You seem to be moving the goal posts. It saw less use than the M16, which is what guntotinglibertarian, whom you essentially called a liar, said he used. I did not say “saw little use” and never said that Marines of you acquaintance never used it. I said less use than the M16 and that the M16 was the main RVN weapon. Show me where I said little use.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 5:56 AM
BTW, neither one of us needs any “out” from you.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 5:58 AM
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 5:59 AM
Joe,Joe,Joe, Remember this little gem? When attempting to present your bona fides as an expert witness, try not to get your stories mixed up. I don’t recall ever actually posting to GTL…maybe I did, but I don’t think so.
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 6:01 AM
maybe you need to get out more?
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 6:02 AM
“Thanks for trying”? Is that some lame empty signature, from over use if nothing else, like “Let’s roll” and “Your a great American” and “Have a nice day”?
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 6:02 AM
….RIIIIIIGHT!
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 6:04 AM
That might be the most intelligent thing you have said tonight. Certainly considering the feigned indignation and nonsense coming from you.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 6:05 AM
You just made me laugh you ignorant gun bunny.
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 6:07 AM
Well listen, it’s really has been delightful but now I must bid ado and get my beauty sleep. Enjoy the rest of your evening and don’t stay up too late.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 6:07 AM
I always stay up early. And joe, I don’t like how you charaterized a lot of things tonight, but I hope I never made you feel like I didn’t value your service.
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 6:10 AM
Joe,
It saw little use and it saw less use are two different things. You appear to be attempting to unsay what I quoted you as saying above. You actually wrote “The M14 was little used in The Republic of Vietnam.” This may be your experience but it is not my experience. Do you think maybe you should just admit you were speaking of the limited time your were there and not make a blanket all inclusing statement that is clearly a subjective opinion. While that may have been true for you it is not true for everyone. Unfortunately your writing style suggests you assume those holding the other opinion are liars when they are in truth exercising the same subjetive opinion as you based on their experience.
kanda on August 12, 2009 at 6:11 AM
OK. Little used by the U.S. Army. Little used = much less than 50%. I will give you half a point on that but zero on everything else.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 6:11 AM
g’night joe.
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 6:13 AM
I don’t recall calling anyone a liar except Fight Guy when he said I said something I did not say at all – that I said my time there was the worst – or words to that effect – when I said nothing of the kind. I also don’t recall being the one who basically called guntotinglibertarian a liar. The fact remains that during RVN the M16, not the M14, was the main rifle.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 6:16 AM
I;m not reading the comments. Too many.
1. Does New Hampshire allow for concealed carry? I know that might be a dumb question. I ask only because I wonder how many folks have carried without people even knowing!
2. I agree that this guy had solid facts, which is why I am more libertarian than otherwise. But, GOSH…this is NOT WHAT WE NEED RIGHT NOW, Pauliacs.
3. Chris Matthews is a tool. But, he did allow this man to speak. I am glad for that. He weathered it well.
Mommypundit on August 12, 2009 at 6:17 AM
I’ve seen joes style before Kanda, I don’t really take offense except to the concept (and I freely admit that I had to take it this way too), that some how before 67 it didn’t really count. That is probably not the way he intended, but it’s how it came across. I’m sure some of it was that he was army, too :).
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 6:17 AM
Say goodnight, Gracie.
Joe Bloggs on August 12, 2009 at 6:17 AM
Do you really want me to call you Gracie?
Fighton03 on August 12, 2009 at 6:18 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 9 10 11 12 13 Next »