Petition For Boot Camp Reparations

[phoenix_fire]

Don't need material. Have plenty of ammunition on stockpile, thanks much.

As to the content of the letter, I was simply making a point about the lack of attention paid to content.

[dilligras]

Quote by: phoenix_fire Don't need material. Have plenty of ammunition on stockpile, thanks much. As to the content of the letter, I was simply making a point about the lack of attention paid to content.

It's a valid point, why not test it, as you suggested?

We could even try the same test on a few other congresscritters as well, just for the sake of balance.

Go ahead and compose a letter opposing the continued occupation troop levels and let's send both to a jointly selected bunch of politicians, just to see if they have different "canned" responses.

I think it would be interesting to see the results, myself.


Carry on.

[Osborn F Enready]

I will play along Dilli......

I am so used to the canned responses from my elected officials, it should be a hoot.

I will write them tomorrow, and drop a line when I get a reply, if I do.

[dilligras]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready I will play along Dilli...... I am so used to the canned responses from my elected officials, it should be a hoot. I will write them tomorrow, and drop a line when I get a reply, if I do.

OK.....just post their email addy here, so I can send mine and we can put their responses together for comparison, analysis, etc.

Who should we pick for the test? How about an equal no. of Dems and Reps, some new and some "tenured", and include a couple of front-runners in the '08 Presidential elections.

For Dems I would suggest Obama, Clinton, and maybe a couple of your own state's members,

For Reps, maybe Rudy, McCain, Cornyn, and Hutchison.

Others could do it for their own 'critters', even using copy and pasted versions of our own "complaints", and then post the results as well.......maybe we should start a separate thread....it doesn't matter to me, one way or the other.

Laissaiz bon temps rollez!!



Carry on

[ZNFYRH]

Why should the government pay reparations to people for something they volunteered to do? Or am I not understanding what the letters is asking for?

[Osborn F Enready]

Don't feel bad for not understanding with ease. Dilligras is great at using excessive, flamboyant verbosity with great velocity to hide his methodology and intent.

Once you get through seperating straw-men, fallacy and root, there isn't much left to chew on except a good vibrant chuckle.

Deductive reasoning is highly under-rated by some, still.

This thread was a carry-over from another thread, if I remember correctly.

[ZNFYRH]

So not really understanding the first post doesn't mean my logical reasoning abilities are crippled, just that the language used is overly complicated?

Maybe that's why the letter got an unrelated carbon copy response.

[Osborn F Enready]

I have only had one political representative return a personal reply, ever.

It was a specific request for direct action of rights issues, however, which no carbon-copy letter would address.

[ZNFYRH]

Maybe you could start a new thread and post the letter and the response, just so we can see what kind of thing actually merits attention.

[dilligras]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Don't feel bad for not understanding with ease. Dilligras is great at using excessive, flamboyant verbosity with great velocity to hide his methodology and intent. Once you get through seperating straw-men, fallacy and root, there isn't much left to chew on except a good vibrant chuckle. Deductive reasoning is highly under-rated by some, still. This thread was a carry-over from another thread, if I remember correctly.

Ooooo, flattery.....that'll go real far in working with others.

Next, someone will no doubt suggest that communication takes place only when the one speaking adheres to some as yet undelineated (and thus wholly open to subjective interpretation) set of rules, with absolutely no obligation on the part of the listener to be able to decipher clear english sentence structure and to entertain a vocabulary sufficient to an early Marvel comic book.

There is no requirement to participate in any conversation one does not understand, just as I assume the freedom to decline to explain every detail of innuendo or inference in my gross bloviations.


Oh yeah, As You Were.

[Osborn F Enready]

Dilligras said: Ooooo, flattery.....that'll go real far in working with others.

And here I thought you would get a chuckle.

Why don't you like it when I dish the same stew you're always serving?

Too much pepper?

[dilligras]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready And here I thought you would get a chuckle. Why don't you like it when I dish the same stew you're always serving? Too much pepper?

Pepper?

Naw, I like pepper......what you're dishing out is more akin to dumping a half shaker of salt onto my cheerios.

I just doesn't seem to invoke a spirit of cooperation in what I thought was about to be a joint effort at uncovering possible politically motivated spin from our electied representatives.

Somehow when you said you'd "play", I took it to mean you wanted to participate in that exercise........but apparently, you would rather revert back to some previous game, in which I am only useful as the target of your insults and derrogatory accusations; a game founded only in your adolescent need for both agreement in all things and the approval of your percieved peer group.

That's ok, just don't let me hear you bleating about your concern for the true nature of our governance from now on, because it's pretty clear that your priorities place your outrage somewhere far below your desire for that approval.

Making your post #66 merely another in what I suspect is a long chain of failures to address anything meaningful in order to accomplish anything productive.

So, you can either get on with the aforementioned exercise by posting your letter to the congressmen, or go play with yourself.........as for me, I shall either find that once again I have given another more credit than their previous behavior warranted; or that my trust was, however temporarily, justified.........at least insofar as a small exercise of common interest is concerned.

In either case, the amount of significance I attach to these proceedings may be detected by the simple recounting of the acronym that is my screen name.


As you were.

[Osborn F Enready]

Dilligras said: Pepper? Naw, I like pepper......what you're dishing out is more akin to dumping a half shaker of salt onto my cheerios.

My apologies, it was meant as good humor, with sarcasm, at your expense. Didn't seem much different than what you directed at me in our other thread of back and forth.

Dilligras said: I just doesn't seem to invoke a spirit of cooperation in what I thought was about to be a joint effort at uncovering possible politically motivated spin from our electied representatives.

Spirit of cooperation? I have yet to see much of that come from your side as of yet either Dilli, but regardless, its beside the point.

I don't mind cooperating in this case at all. I often write my politicians, my state, as well as other states, and the national and local.

I was trying to explain to a new poster in this forum, why he didn't understand the motivation for this thread, from what was posted. Does it bother you that aafter 4 pages, the thread has no coherant message to a new, non-biased interpreter?

I was trying to shed some light on why, and explain there is backstory to the motivation for this thread........am I wrong on that?

Dilligras said: Somehow when you said you'd "play", I took it to mean you wanted to participate in that exercise........but apparently, you would rather revert back to some previous game, in which I am only useful as the target of your insults and derrogatory accusations;

Dilli, you started most of the derogatory accusations, by mislabeling me as a leftist, several times, after telling you I have nothing to do with what is "considered" left in this nation anymore.

I corrected you, and you continued, I became derogatory in return, you continued, therefore I assumed it was your INTENT to be derogatory.

Silly me.....

Dilligras said: a game founded only in your adolescent need for both agreement in all things and the approval of your percieved peer group.

I am perfectly fine with agreeing to disagree, and while I chuckle, I can't help but notice this was a war waged by exuberance on both sides.

You want to call names, but pretend they aren't meant as derogatory.
Then you become mad when the same tone, and names are used against you??

Sounds like a hypocrite.

Dilligras said: That's ok, just don't let me hear you bleating about your concern for the true nature of our governance from now on, because it's pretty clear that your priorities place your outrage somewhere far below your desire for that approval.

Well, news to Dilli, I was here to debate, not to make friends and have group hugs.

Dilli said: Making your post #66 merely another in what I suspect is a long chain of failures to address anything meaningful in order to accomplish anything productive.

Thats because of your subjective views of what is meaningful, which aren't the same as mine.

Dilligras said: So, you can either get on with the aforementioned exercise by posting your letter to the congressmen, or go play with yourself.........as for me, I shall either find that once again I have given another more credit than their previous behavior warranted; or that my trust was, however temporarily, justified.........at least insofar as a small exercise of common interest is concerned.

Thanks for outlining what "I can do" with your approval, you know it means a lot to me.

Dilligras said: In either case, the amount of significance I attach to these proceedings may be detected by the simple recounting of the acronym that is my screen name.

Hence my eagerness to join you in self gratification of your ideals. Your name says all I will get for cooperation.

Regardless, I am participating, I just haven't posted the letter draft to the forum yet, as I haven't finished drafting it.

Dilligras said: As you were.

Have been, all along.

[dilligras]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready I was trying to explain to a new poster in this forum, why he didn't understand the motivation for this thread, from what was posted. Does it bother you that aafter 4 pages, the thread has no coherant message to a new, non-biased interpreter? I was trying to shed some light on why, and explain there is backstory to the motivation for this thread........am I wrong on that?

Why yes, as a matter of fact, you are mistaken. My motivation for writing the letter that opened this thread was William Arkin's libelous transgression in referring to our troops as mercenaries.

Is it really always about you in your world?

Dilli, you started most of the derogatory accusations, by mislabeling me as a leftist, several times, after telling you I have nothing to do with what is "considered" left in this nation anymore. I corrected you, and you continued, I became derogatory in return, you continued, therefore I assumed it was your INTENT to be derogatory. Silly me.....

Two things here....instead of expecting me to agree with your recollection of events, and expecting those not familiar with them to accept your version, why not just link to the post where I, "started most of the derogatory accusations", and let the proof speak for itself?

Second, as I have told others who make quacking sounds and then complain of my recognizing their duck-like position, It is the quacking itself that points to your indesputable duckedness, rather than the mere instance of my taking notice of them, n'est pas?

I am perfectly fine with agreeing to disagree, and while I chuckle, I can't help but notice this was a war waged by exuberance on both sides. You want to call names, but pretend they aren't meant as derogatory. Then you become mad when the same tone, and names are used against you?? Sounds like a hypocrite.

Nooooo, sounds like another unsupported charge. Can't find the "quote" button yet?

Well, news to Dilli, I was here to debate, not to make friends and have group hugs.

Come now, it's obvious you've succumbed to the pressure of your lefty peers........whose opinion do you think more opposes the concensus here, yours or mine? You are just pandering to a cheering audience, like a Volconvo Dixie Chick -- while I valiantly seek the combat of windmills, jousting with a veritable plethora of consonant verbiage and crass insubordination.

Thats because of your subjective views of what is meaningful, which aren't the same as mine.

My views are more than subjective, mon ami; they are also remarkably effective when put into practice, remarkably accurate compared to others, and remarkably remarkable in their ability to draw fire from ideologues of any stripe.


As you were

[Osborn F Enready]

Dilli, a link to an article on this issue.
What does writing your Congressman accomplish? - Homeland Stupidity

Dilli said: Is it really always about you in your world?

Yes, unless your world is different than mine. I thought you lived here in the U.S., where individuality means something, and enumerated rights were created to back that up in law.

I apologize, honestly and without embarrasment if I have wrongly misrepresented you, but, I have never seen an expression of the same from you toward me, so suffice to say who is being forthright and without deception. You can accept that as the apology it is, or not....

I don't rely on my words to paint you as I see you, to the other readers. I rely on your words to paint you as you see you to the other readers.

Dilligras said: Second, as I have told others who make quacking sounds and then complain of my recognizing their duck-like position, It is the quacking itself that points to your indesputable duckedness, rather than the mere instance of my taking notice of them, n'est pas?

You just can't accept the REALITY that there is more than left and right......thats beind duped, or in denial.

Everyone who disagrees with you, you dub a leftist. A trait common among many posters these days on internet forums, who deny the facts of what make up the political equation, and rule of law in this nation.

Speaking of ducks:
YouTube - Pirates and Emporers

The link will take you to a 3minute 44 second class about why your defense of the war on terror, and Herr Bush's policy is flawed.

Dilli said: Nooooo, sounds like another unsupported charge. Can't find the "quote" button yet?

You deny calling me a leftist?
Do I really need to quote that?

Dilli said: Come now, it's obvious you've succumbed to the pressure of your lefty peers.....

Look, I didn't even have to leave the post to find a quote.... :rolleyes:

Dilli said: You are just pandering to a cheering audience, like a Volconvo Dixie Chick -- while I valiantly seek the combat of windmills, jousting with a veritable plethora of consonant verbiage and crass insubordination.

Yea, valiant..... :rolleyes:

Dilli said: My views are more than subjective

At least you are coming around to admitting it....

making progress.....

Dilli said: they are also remarkably effective when put into practice

As effective as any hedgemony I guess, that depends on force based on one view, that negates much of the world.

Dilli said: remarkably accurate compared to others

When in denial of other factual information, surely.....

Dilli said: and remarkably remarkable in their ability to draw fire from ideologues of any stripe

you forgot to say "and I am modest to." :eek:

Really..... (in my best Thurston Howell III voice.)

[dilligras]

Dilli, a link to an article on this issue. What does writing your Congressman accomplish? - Homeland Stupidity

The comments were more interesting than the "article".

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Quote by: dilligras Is it really always about you in your world? Yes, unless your world is different than mine. I thought you lived here in the U.S., where individuality means something, and enumerated rights were created to back that up in law.

And you accuse ME of strawman arguments. I said you mistakenly attributed my motive for starting this thread to yourself.......individuality may indeed mean something in the US, but that has nothing whatsoever to do with this discussion.

I apologize, honestly and without embarrasment if I have wrongly misrepresented you, but, I have never seen an expression of the same from you toward me, so suffice to say who is being forthright and without deception. You can accept that as the apology it is, or not....

Well, it started out sounding like an apology..........and then came the "but".

I apologize when I recognize I have wronged someone........if you have evidence that you deserve it, produce it and recieve the apology you claim I owe......otherwise, stop making accusations without support and calling them apologies.

I don't rely on my words to paint you as I see you, to the other readers. I rely on your words to paint you as you see you to the other readers.

If that were true, I would have been unable to point to any ad hominem attacks by yourself during our "debates"............I feel certain that any cursory examination of them by any impartial reader will quickly dispel such a notion. Of course, without searching them myself, I suppose it's entirely possible that I have you confused with RickSp or Patrick Henry.

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Quote by: dilligras Second, as I have told others who make quacking sounds and then complain of my recognizing their duck-like position, It is the quacking itself that points to your indesputable duckedness, rather than the mere instance of my taking notice of them, n'est pas? You just can't accept the REALITY that there is more than left and right......thats being duped, or in denial.

Of course there's more than left or right.........there's also the middle, a place you likely have never seen, judging from your posts.

But again you construct the argument of straw, since I never mentioned there only being a left or right, but rather whether your position on the topic at hand is one that places you anywhere besides the left..........maybe you could address that, instead of making shit up about what reality I accept.

Everyone who disagrees with you, you dub a leftist. A trait common among many posters these days on internet forums, who deny the facts of what make up the political equation, and rule of law in this nation.

Wrong again (there IS something to be said for consistency, I suppose), pilgrim.......I myself take the position of the left on some topics (legalize all drugs) so, I am fully aware of the limitations of labels and have mentioned it more than once in my musings. Perhaps it is the topics we have addressed that seem to consistently place you on the left of left, and conversely, me on the right of right.

At least I don't try to deny the nature of my position as being conservative, when it is..........so who is it that is being, "forthright and without deception", eh, bunky?

Speaking of ducks: YouTube - Pirates and Emporers The link will take you to a 3minute 44 second class about why your defense of the war on terror, and Herr Bush's policy is flawed.

Sorry.........my pc's sound has crapped out on the motherboard, so I don't get much from video's right now. Frankly, it looked a bit too simplistic to be very profound.......and I don't see what it has to do with your duckedness.

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Quote by: dilligras Nooooo, sounds like another unsupported charge. Can't find the "quote" button yet? You deny calling me a leftist? Do I really need to quote that?

I deny calling you anything before you started your seemingly obligitory ad hominem attacks in this thread, yes.

From the SECOND POST in the thread:

Once again, using broad strokes, with brushes the size of Texas, to paint anyone who disagrees with THIS war, or ANY war as non-patriotic, un-American enemies of the state and its people....... Dismissing valid points, ignoring historical facts being released at an ever increasing rate via the FIA and investigative reports, in prefrence for patriotic fervor, loyalty to nation above national mission. Based in "reparations" no less..... This is one ex-service member who will not be signing any such petititon.

----snip----

From your third post:

As usual, anyone who disagrees with you is a "leftist" or liberal. Do you live with Ann Coulter, or just ride her jock as a hobby?

It should be noted that previous to that last one, I had not called anyone liberal or leftist in this thread. Nor had I mentioned Annie in any context.

So who is addressing the man rather than his position? Who is manufacturing arguments of straw? Surely, not the masterdebaters seen on these few pages.....

I know, I know.....don't call you Shirley.

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Quote by: dilligras Come now, it's obvious you've succumbed to the pressure of your lefty peers..... Look, I didn't even have to leave the post to find a quote....

Ignoring, of course, the fact that you made the accusation BEFORE I said what you quote here.

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Quote by: dilligras and remarkably remarkable in their ability to draw fire from ideologues of any stripe you forgot to say "and I am modest to."

Why would I want to claim to be a city in California? And why Modesto, of all places?


Go ahead, entertain us a bit more with this foolishness.......just don't forget your self-appointed mission to write letters.


Carry on.

.

[Osborn F Enready]

Well Dilli, in the intrest of saving the readers more back and forth, I will stop my replies to you on this case, since it will go nowhere, we both feel we were wronged by the other.

We can agree to disagree, or we can keep up the back and forth, which I don't see being productive since it hasn't been in any other thread.

I've said my piece, you've said yours.

[RickSp]

I read this exchanage and shake my head. Dilly is annoyed because he wrote a bullshit letter demanding millions in reparations based on a news story that he heard on O'Reilly. In response to his nonsense, he gets a form letter which is probably more than the letter deserved.

I have gotten personalized responses from Congressman and Senators. Doesn't happen often, but from time to time I get a response that specifically references comments made in my letter. And, no doubt, the responses are written by staffers and not the politician. Neverthelss the response are occassionally personalized if the letter is well argued. (Lunatics demanding cash do not get such responses.)

In any case, the reason I write my representatives has nothing to do with whether I get a personal response, a form letter or no response at all. Senatororial and congressional staffs keep track of the number of letters for or against an issue. They know that for every letter written by a motivatred constituent, there may be a hundred who share the view but can't be bothered to write. My writing a letter is just a way of letting my "vote" on a particular issue be recorded. Does it do any good? On the margins perhaps. Certainly better than sitting silently.

[dilligras]

Once again Rick, you wrap your few cogent points in a cloak of insults and personal remarks.......I'm beginning to think you must be the one paying the bills for the site, since you so blatantly flaunt your personal attacks with apparent impunity.

I will decline to argue any points with you, even though you say a few things that prompt a response, simply because I refuse to encourage your behavior by ignoring it. You have enough enablers already.

Your life will be more pleasant if you avoid those whom you dislike enough to continually ridicule and verbally abuse, n'est pas? I promise, I won't be offended if you avoid me for awhile, for the sake of your peace of mind.

After all, reason dictates that It can't be all that pleasant to continually immerse oneself in abject antagonism, and frankly, I think I might even enjoy a brief respite, your few salient bon mots notwithstanding.

"And may a sick camel relieve himself through the sunroof of your new Mercedes." [/The Great Karnak]


As you were.

[RickSp]

Dilly given the number of time that you have called me traitor or worse, your self-serving whining is pretty silly. Why bother?