Flame-throwing Ann Coulter provides an interesting take on

[Geezah]

John Kerry....

By Ann Coulter:

Kerry was indisputably brave in Vietnam, and it's kind of cute to see Democrats pretend to admire military service. Physical courage, like chastity, is something liberals usually deride, but are tickled when it accidentally manifests itself in one of their own. One has to stand in awe of Kerry's military service 33 years ago. Of course, that's where it ends, including with Kerry -- inasmuch as, upon his return from war in 1970, he promptly began trashing his fellow Vietnam vets by calling them genocidal murderers.

But if Bush can't talk to Kerry about the horrors of war, then Kerry sure as hell can't talk to anyone about the plight of the middle class. Kerry's life experience consists of living off other men's money by marrying their wives and daughters.

For over 30 years, Kerry's primary occupation has been stalking lonely heiresses. Not to get back to his combat
experience, but Kerry sees a room full of wealthy widows as "a target-rich environment." This is a guy whose
experience dealing with tax problems is based on spending his entire adult life being supported by rich women.

What does a kept man know about taxes?

In 1970, Kerry married into the family of Julia Thorne -- a family estimated to be worth about $300 million. She got depressed, so he promptly left her and was soon seen catting around with Hollywood starlets, mostly while the cad was still married. (Apparently, JFK really was his

mentor.)

Thorne is well-bred enough, to say nothing ill of her Lothario ex-husband.

He is, after all, the father of her children -- a fact that never seemed to constrain him.
When Kerry was about to become the latest Heinz family charity, he sought to have his marriage to Thorne anulled, despite the fact that it had produced two children. It seems his second meal ticket, Teresa Heinz, wanted the first marriage annulled -- and Heinz is worth more than $700 million.

Kerry claims he will stand up to powerful interests, but he can't even stand up to his wife. Heinz made Kerry sign a prenuptial agreement, presumably aware of how careless he is with other people's property, such as other people's Vietnam War medals, which Kerry threw on the ground during a 1971 anti-war demonstration.



At pains to make Kerry sound like a normal American, his campaign has described how Kerry risked everything, mortgaging his home in Boston to help pay for his presidential campaign.

Technically, Kerry took out a $6 million mortgage for "his share" of "the family's home" -- which was bought with the Heinz family fortune.

Why should he spend his own money?
He didn't throw away his own medals.

I'm sure the average working stiff in Massachusetts can relate to a guy who borrows $6 million against his house to pay for TV ads.

Kerry's campaign has stoutly insisted that he will pay off the mortgage himself, with no help from his rich wife. Let's see: According to tax returns released by his campaign, in 2002, Kerry's income was $144,091.

But as The Washington Post recently reported, even a $5 million mortgage paid back over 30 years at favorable interest rates would cost $30,389 a month or $364,668 a year.

The Democrats' joy at nominating Kerry is perplexing. To be sure, liberals take a peculiar, wrathful pleasure in supporting pacifist military types. And Kerry's life story
is not without a certain feral aggression.

But if we're going to determine fitness for office based on life experience, Kerry clearly has no experience dealing with problems of typical Americans since he is a cad and a gigolo living in the lap of other men's money.

Kerry is like some character in a Balzac novel, an adventurer twirling the end of his mustache and preying on rich women.



This low-born poseur with his threadbare pseudo-Brahmin family bought a political career with one rich woman's money, dumped her, and made off with another heiress to enable him to run for president.

If Democrats want to talk about middle-class tax cuts, couldn't they nominate someone who hasn't been a poodle to rich women for the past 33 years?

Don't forget -- John Kerry is strong on defense:



* He voted to kill the Bradley Fighting Vehicle

* He voted to kill the M-1 Abrams Tank

* He voted to kill every Aircraft carrier laid down from 1988

* He voted to kill the Aegis anti aircraft system

* He voted to Kill the F-15 strike eagle

* He voted to Kill the Block 60 F-16

* He voted to Kill the P-3 Orion upgrade

* He voted to Kill the B-1

* He voted to Kill the B-2

* He voted to Kill the Patriot anti Missile system

* He voted to Kill the FA-18

* He voted to Kill the B-2

* He voted to Kill the F117

In short, he voted to kill every military appropriation for the development and deployment of every weapons systems since 1988 to include the battle armor for our troops. With Kerry as president our Army will be made up of naked men running around with sticks and clubs.

He also:

* voted to kill all anti terrorism activities of every agency of the US Government

* and to cut the funding of the FBI by 60%,

* to cut the funding for the CIA by 80%,

* and cut the funding for the NSA by 80%.

But then he voted to increase OUR - the USA's - funding for U.N. operations by 800%!!!

If you are interested in the character of the next President of the United States, please forward this to those you want to inform. We do not need a "character"
as President.


No link, I recieved this via email.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

While I can't verify the accuracy of other details in the article, there's really no way to argue with math.


I'm sure the average working stiff in Massachusetts can relate to a guy who borrows $6 million against his house to pay for TV ads.

Kerry's campaign has stoutly insisted that he will pay off the mortgage himself, with no help from his rich wife. Let's see: According to tax returns released by his campaign, in 2002, Kerry's income was $144,091.

But as The Washington Post recently reported, even a $5 million mortgage paid back over 30 years at favorable interest rates would cost $30,389 a month or $364,668 a year.

Exactly how is that accomplished on his salary? Just nother obvious lie that the press glides over without a moments hesitation.

[KB]

Kerry married his money. Bush relied on Daddy's buddies for his.

Neither one of them is a Bill Gates, Ted Turner or John Malone.

[Secret Squirrel]

There's so much bull**** in that email it's hard to actually wade through it all. The list of weapons systems has been addressed over and over but I guess some prefer to remain ignorant. Feel free to use the search button. Also, the intelligence cuts, which were proposed in the 1990s, amounted to about 1% of the budget and they were proposed when republicans wanted larger cuts (there were issues with intelligence agencies not actually spending the money they were given). And finally, you can find this bull**** at http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=11975. ;)

[BarkingSquirrel]

Funny isn't it? Everyone else is expected to back up their own claims/counter-claims. However he's above that, we have to find his backup for him. Search for it this, search for it that.

[Secret Squirrel]

Funny isn't it? Everyone else is expected to back up their own claims/counter-claims. However he's above that, we have to find his backup for him. Search for it this, search for it that.

What's really funny is your pathetic trolling. Are you bored again?;) When Geezah participated in discussions about the above republican claims, I would expect he'd would have either continued the discussion if he still had issues with the thread or went back and bumped the threads.

[BarkingSquirrel]

My bad, I forgot if it went against your great and wonderous wisdom that it's trolling. My apologies master. Please dont whip me.

[scm77]

rofl rofl Secret Squirrel is acusing someone of trolling. rofl rofl rofl

[Geezah]

But then he voted to increase OUR - the USA's - funding for U.N. operations by 800%!!!


I find this amusing, the "Global Test", I say F#ck the U.N.!

If Kerry makes it in, this Great Nation will become the lapdog of those that run the U.N. :(

[BarkingSquirrel]

rofl rofl Secret Squirrel is acusing someone of trolling. rofl rofl roflhttp://www.beavton.k12.or.us/jacob_wismer/leahy/2001/idioms/kettle1_small.jpg

[California Joe]

Holy Christ, the same motherf*ckers that are pissed at Jon Stewart for being a comedian are praising the gospel according to this psychopathic, anorexic, pathologically lying, and just plain annoying c*nt? Are you all under the influence?

[Mark Sman]

Who cares. Nobody here thinks Kerry is any sort of prize. Don't even pretend otherwise.

[California Joe]

Apparently rich women do. What's your point?

[Trigger]

Maybe she's not really a woman... p-)

[California Joe]

good point.

[mocking_loudly_died]

I'm sitting in my undies, eating a bacon bun and I'm reading more nonsense on military forums.... man this is one of those "not quite" mid life crisis’s.

I'm going to buy a motorbike.

[walford]

I still don't understand why Kerry is continually touting his tour in 'Nam. Is his ideological support base impressed by military service? They would be more impressed by what he did AFTER serving 5mos. in Viet Nam [testifying that it was not aberrational, but routine that the US military "cut off ears, heads and limbs, burned villages, raped and pillaged in a manner reminiscent of Ghengis Khan"]

...and his extensive voting record in the Senate after that.

He should be much more proud of THAT part of his history, but the only time he discusses his post-Viet Nam history is when those who oppose him bring it up: "My opponents insist upon distorting my record..."

Otherwise, he'd just as soon not talk about it. Why is that?

[OB Kenobi]

I still don't understand why Kerry is continually touting his tour in 'Nam.

Because Republicans and their attack dogs can't stop bringing it up.

Kerry might be a typical demagogue, but Bush is a war-profiteering robber baron, and an AWOL one at that.

[aartamen]

I admire Ann Coulter. And she's hot. Not to mention much smarter than OB Kenobi. Actually, squirrels in her backyard are smarter than OB Kenobi, so it's no great fit.

[[SAB]Grey]

Ann Coulter is possible one of the most VILE people on the planet. Her ideas are so far off the mark it is unfair to call her ignorant, she's just stupid.

[Geezah]

Grey]Ann Coulter is possible one of the most VILE people on the planet. Her ideas are so far off the mark it is unfair to call her ignorant, she's just stupid.

And Michael Moore tells the truth "their is no terrorist threat" rofl

[walford]

And Michael Moore tells the truth "their is no terrorist threat"
Actually there is a terrorist threat. It is George W. Bush, because he deployed the US military w/o the permission of Kofi/Jacque/Vlad/Gehardt/etc.

[Geezah]

And Michael Moore tells the truth "their is no terrorist threat"
Actually there is a terrorist threat. It is George W. Bush, because he deployed the US military w/o the permission of Kofi/Jacque/Vlad/Gehardt/etc.
rofl

[Maine Finn]

And Michael Moore tells the truth "their is no terrorist threat"
Actually there is a terrorist threat. It is George W. Bush, because he deployed the US military w/o the permission of Kofi/Jacque/Vlad/Gehardt/etc.

And I bet he forgot to ask you too, right?

[walford]

And I bet he forgot to ask you too, right?
Worse. He forgot to ask Secret Squirrel & OB Kenobi.

[Maine Finn]

And I bet he forgot to ask you too, right?
Worse. He forgot to ask Secret Squirrel & OB Kenobi.

Oh the horror!

:roll:

[fokket]

Ann Coulter is a fooking bitch who said Max Cleland blew a grenade by purpose for political gain.

Why the hell should I listen to piece of **** like that?

I want to mutilize her body whenever I hear that.

[aartamen]

What the **** does "mutilize" mean?

And Cleland should not pose as a combat amputee.

[moughoun]

Grey]Ann Coulter is possible one of the most VILE people on the planet. Her ideas are so far off the mark it is unfair to call her ignorant, she's just stupid.

And Michael Moore tells the truth "their is no terrorist threat" rofl
No,Moore and Coulter occupy that same area of the bs zone just from opposite side's

[moughoun]

"
aartamen"]What the f*** does "mutilize" mean?

[b]And Cleland should not pose as a combat amputee
when your in a combat zone and a grenade take's your arm's and leg's it's a combat wound, but seeing as you've never served a Day, you wouldn't know that p-)

[HooyahCQB]

Yep, friendly fire (grenades) suck.

Ann Coulter said Cleland blew 2 legs and an arm off on purpose?

Weird, although, i've never read or listened to her, that's extreme.



I can tell you one thing though:


My dad says Cleland is an asshole.



He used to mow his lawn, before he got blown up.

[walford]

Ann Coulter said Cleland blew 2 legs and an arm off on purpose? Weird, although, i've never read or listened to her, that's extreme.
Well if you haven't read her, perhaps you should before attributing any statements to her. Here is what she actually wrote this past Feb:

http://www.anncoulter.org/columns/2004/021104e.htm
...if we're going to start delving into exactly who did what back then, maybe Max Cleland should stop allowing Democrats to portray him as a war hero who lost his limbs taking enemy fire on the battlefields of Vietnam.

Cleland lost three limbs in an accident during a routine noncombat mission where he was about to drink beer with friends. He saw a grenade on the ground and picked it up. He could have done that at Fort Dix. In fact, Cleland could have dropped a grenade on his foot as a National Guardsman –- or what Cleland sneeringly calls "weekend warriors." Luckily for Cleland's political career and current pomposity about Bush, he happened to do it while in Vietnam.

There is more than a whiff of dishonesty in how Cleland is presented to the American people. Terry McAuliffe goes around saying, "Max Cleland, a triple amputee who left three limbs on the battlefield of Vietnam," was thrown out of office because Republicans "had the audacity to call Max Cleland unpatriotic." Mr. Cleland, a word of advice: When a slimy weasel like Terry McAuliffe is vouching for your combat record, it's time to sound "retreat" on that subject...

... Cleland wore the uniform, he was in Vietnam, and he has shown courage by going on to lead a productive life. But he didn't "give his limbs for his country," or leave them "on the battlefield." There was no bravery involved in dropping a grenade on himself with no enemy troops in sight. That could have happened in the Texas National Guard -- which Cleland denigrates while demanding his own sanctification.

[moughoun]

Ann Coulter said Cleland blew 2 legs and an arm off on purpose? Weird, although, i've never read or listened to her, that's extreme.
Well if you haven't read her, perhaps you should before attributing any statements to her. Here is what she actually wrote this past Feb:

http://www.anncoulter.org/columns/2004/021104e.htm
...if we're going to start delving into exactly who did what back then, maybe Max Cleland should stop allowing Democrats to portray him as a war hero who lost his limbs taking enemy fire on the battlefields of Vietnam.

Cleland lost three limbs in an accident during a routine noncombat mission where he was about to drink beer with friends. He saw a grenade on the ground and picked it up. He could have done that at Fort Dix. In fact, Cleland could have dropped a grenade on his foot as a National Guardsman –- or what Cleland sneeringly calls "weekend warriors." Luckily for Cleland's political career and current pomposity about Bush, he happened to do it while in Vietnam.

There is more than a whiff of dishonesty in how Cleland is presented to the American people. Terry McAuliffe goes around saying, "Max Cleland, a triple amputee who left three limbs on the battlefield of Vietnam," was thrown out of office because Republicans "had the audacity to call Max Cleland unpatriotic." Mr. Cleland, a word of advice: When a slimy weasel like Terry McAuliffe is vouching for your combat record, it's time to sound "retreat" on that subject...

... Cleland wore the uniform, he was in Vietnam, and he has shown courage by going on to lead a productive life. But he didn't "give his limbs for his country," or leave them "on the battlefield." There was no bravery involved in dropping a grenade on himself with no enemy troops in sight. That could have happened in the Texas National Guard -- which Cleland denigrates while demanding his own sanctification.

well, atleast he was in Vietnam, and it was an active battle zone, but damn it politic's seem's to corrupt everything :|

[HooyahCQB]

Well I didn't mean that I believe that's what she said. I wouldn't think that she said that...I mean...who could accuse someone of blowing themselves up for political purposes.

Anyway, I think I remember a few years back a fellow member of Cleland's unit came out saying there was another guy who straightened the pins on his grenades, so it my not have been Cleland's grenade...

Don't know what happened to the story, and i'm too tired to do research

[BarkingSquirrel]

I still don't understand why Kerry is continually touting his tour in 'Nam.

Because Republicans and their attack dogs can't stop bringing it up.

Kerry might be a typical demagogue, but Bush is a war-profiteering robber baron, and an AWOL one at that.You mean that was a Republican standing on a US flag behind a podium while saluting and saying "Reporting for Duty" during his acceptance speech?

[fokket]

Ann Coulter said Cleland blew 2 legs and an arm off on purpose? Weird, although, i've never read or listened to her, that's extreme.
Well if you haven't read her, perhaps you should before attributing any statements to her. Here is what she actually wrote this past Feb:

http://www.anncoulter.org/columns/2004/021104e.htm
...if we're going to start delving into exactly who did what back then, maybe Max Cleland should stop allowing Democrats to portray him as a war hero who lost his limbs taking enemy fire on the battlefields of Vietnam.

Cleland lost three limbs in an accident during a routine noncombat mission where he was about to drink beer with friends. He saw a grenade on the ground and picked it up. He could have done that at Fort Dix. In fact, Cleland could have dropped a grenade on his foot as a National Guardsman –- or what Cleland sneeringly calls "weekend warriors." Luckily for Cleland's political career and current pomposity about Bush, he happened to do it while in Vietnam.

There is more than a whiff of dishonesty in how Cleland is presented to the American people. Terry McAuliffe goes around saying, "Max Cleland, a triple amputee who left three limbs on the battlefield of Vietnam," was thrown out of office because Republicans "had the audacity to call Max Cleland unpatriotic." Mr. Cleland, a word of advice: When a slimy weasel like Terry McAuliffe is vouching for your combat record, it's time to sound "retreat" on that subject...

... Cleland wore the uniform, he was in Vietnam, and he has shown courage by going on to lead a productive life. But he didn't "give his limbs for his country," or leave them "on the battlefield." There was no bravery involved in dropping a grenade on himself with no enemy troops in sight. That could have happened in the Texas National Guard -- which Cleland denigrates while demanding his own sanctification.


There are several articles that she wrote, will write more about this soon

[Geezah]

I still don't understand why Kerry is continually touting his tour in 'Nam.

Because Republicans and their attack dogs can't stop bringing it up.

Kerry might be a typical demagogue, but Bush is a war-profiteering robber baron, and an AWOL one at that.You mean that was a Republican standing on a US flag behind a podium while saluting and saying "Reporting for Duty" during his acceptance speech?

This should be a good indication of what Kerry thinks about the Stars and Stripes
http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/461_1098448434_tns_dustjacket(custom).jpg

[Mr Gently Benevolent]

Holy Christ, the same motherf*ckers that are pissed at Jon Stewart for being a comedian are praising the gospel according to this psychopathic, anorexic, pathologically lying, and just plain annoying c*nt? Are you all under the influence?
You do have a way with words CJ :D

[walford]

The fact is Kerry has been the one who initiated touting his 5mos. service. Certainly it is not because he thinks that such service would impress his support base. They despise anyone who has served in combat, especially in Viet Nam.

No, he keeps bringing it up because he knows that in post-9/11 America, he must 'appear' to be capable of protecting us. [This is all for the benefit of those he and Tear-ay-sa consider to be the cornfed nobodies who live in flyover country.] The reality is, of course he would be among the first to appease anyone who kills us and to defer when, where and how our military is deployed to the UN -- his protestations to the contrary notwithstanding.

The Swift Boat Vets finally had enough of Kerry bragging about how he led people in combat and thus he knows how to...bla bla bla. They were sick of hearing his bull**** being unchallenged, so they produced their 'attack' ads. I do not agree with that tactic personally. JFKerry should instead be confronted with what he did AFTER the war and his execrable voting record in the Senate.

Kerry, you'll notice, doesn't want to talk about that very much.

BTW about 6,000 people in the Nat'l Guard were deployed to Viet Nam. 100 or so KIA.

[aartamen]

"
aartamen"]What the f*** does "mutilize" mean?

[b]And Cleland should not pose as a combat amputee
when your in a combat zone and a grenade take's your arm's and leg's it's a combat wound, but seeing as you've never served a Day, you wouldn't know that p-)

He got blown uop stateside I heard. But even if not, it was not as a result of combat. But that would be nitpicking.

[walford]

What the f*** does "mutilize" mean?
It is a derivative of the Three Stooges' murdalize

He got blown uop stateside I heard. But even if not, it was not as a result of combat. But that would be nitpicking.
No, he was in an non-combat accident in Viet Nam. See the quoted passage by AC that I posted above. And it is certainly not nitpicking. There is a significant difference between a wound in combat and what Cleland went through.

That's why you don't get a Purple Heart for being hit by a truck back at headquarters.

[Root]

This should be a good indication of what Kerry thinks about the Stars and Stripes
http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/461_1098448434_tns_dustjacket(custom).jpg

Displaying the American flag upside down, despite what many pundits will claim, is a signal for distress, not disrespect.

http://www.uni-muenster.de/PeaCon/global-texte/g-a/Upside%20down%20flag%20is%20distress%20signal%20-%209-28-01%20-%20NCTimes_net.htm

http://users.nwol.net/~tonyb/flag.htm

http://flagspot.net/flags/xf-flip.html

Those men in that picture have fought for that flag and have great respect for it. I leave it up to you to recognize the message they are displying.

[aartamen]

Ask them or anyone who flies the upside down flag what they mean.

Checked Clelands story. His wounds were combat related. But not enough to get a PH. Quite amazing in Kerry's decorations context. He also was pretty dumb to pick an UXO. He suffered a horrific accident due to his own negligence while serving his country. Later he turned into a political prostitute.

I still find Ann Coulter much sexier then either of them.

[Root]

Ask them or anyone who flies the upside down flag what they mean.

I just posted three articles explaining that very thing, which you obviously didn't bother reading.

example from the first article:


OCEANSIDE ---- In the wake of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, D.C., Vietnam veteran Dana Rickard began flying his flag upside down, a move which he said caused him to be harassed by some people.

Rickard said flying the flag upside down is a standard military distress signal and was never intended to be disrepectful.

"It means we need some help here. That's American heritage, it has nothing to do with saying anything bad about the flag," said Rickard, an Oceanside resident.

Sure there have been people who have abused this, but that picture is not one of them.

[aartamen]

but seeing as you've never served a Day, you wouldn't know that p-)

Actually depending on your defintion of "serve" I served anywhere from 1 month to a half a year. Just to clarify the issue.

[walford]

Checked Clelands story. His wounds were combat related. But not enough to get a PH.
Link please. That contradicts what Coulter wrote on the subject [excerpted above].

I still find Ann Coulter much sexier then either of them.
I met her last year at a book signing. She's a bit skinny but very nice indeed -- better in person in fact.

[Geezah]

This should be a good indication of what Kerry thinks about the Stars and Stripes
http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/461_1098448434_tns_dustjacket(custom).jpg

Displaying the American flag upside down, despite what many pundits will claim, is a signal for distress, not disrespect.

http://www.uni-muenster.de/PeaCon/global-texte/g-a/Upside%20down%20flag%20is%20distress%20signal%20-%209-28-01%20-%20NCTimes_net.htm

http://users.nwol.net/~tonyb/flag.htm

http://flagspot.net/flags/xf-flip.html

Those men in that picture have fought for that flag and have great respect for it. I leave it up to you to recognize the message they are displying.

It might help if you read the links you provide,


The upside down U.S. flag is an official signal of distress. It is not meant to be, and is not officially recognized as any type of disrespect when so displayed for the right reasons. To the contrary, here is the relevant part of the US Code of Laws regarding how to fly the flag when in distress:
THE FLAG CODE
Title 36, U.S.C., Chapter 10
As amended by P.L. 344, 94th Congress
Approved July 7, 1976

§ 176. Respect for flag: No disrespect should be shown to the flag of the United States of America; the flag should not be dipped to any person or thing. Regimental colors, State flags, and organization or institutional flags are to be dipped as a mark of honor.
(a) The flag should never be displayed with the union down, except as a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property.

Most individuals who have served in the military service of our nation will (or should) recognize this signal. As a result of the unconstitutional acts, legislation and atrocities passed and/or committed by government agencies and officials against increasing numbers of US citizens and their life, liberty and property ... and as a result of policies that have allowed (and continue to allow) enemies of this nation to enter in large numbers through a porous immigration policy, I believe the life, liberties, freedom and property of US Citizens are in extreme and dire danger and distress.


Our Constitution has become a mockery and a toy of the atheist anti-God, anti-Christian, anti-Freedom, pro-ACLU, pro-communist movement that has perverted our founding and gained strength in tearing down the heritage and sacrifices that established this once great country. We have reduced ourselves to mere slaves of tyranny and accepted it!



Some that have served see it as a sign of disrespect ;)

[Root]

It might help to avoid semantics.;)

Yes, I did read that part actually, but if you can't understand the symbolic statement in that picture, then you're beyond trying to to convince otherwise.

Edit:Also it might help to if you'd read the date the code was revised

[aartamen]

Checked Clelands story. His wounds were combat related. But not enough to get a PH.
Link please. That contradicts what Coulter wrote on the subject

Yes it does.

I-net resources are not authoritative. From what I saw the consensus is - He basically flew out to erect an antenna to improve the comms with units that were in contact at Khe Sahn (sp?). He dismounted from a chopper, saw a grenade, reached for it and it exploded. There were no enemies in the immediate vicinity.

Ann Coulter's qualification of the incident stand in stark contrast with that consensus, and I could not find any supporting links for her version of the story - bar, beer, dropped grenade.


http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/04/02/con04074.html

[Geezah]

It might help to avoid semantics.;)

Yes, I did read that part actually, but if you can't understand the symbolic statement in that picture, then you're beyond trying to to convince otherwise.

Edit:Also it might help to if you'd read the date the code was revised

It might help if you provided a good link, but that doesn't change the fact that some view it as a sign of disrespect.

[Root]

It might help if you provided a good link, but that doesn't change the fact that some view it as a sign of disrespect.

I've provided plenty, more than enough for you to cherry-pick from. The ones who view that picture as a sign of disrespect are sadly misinformed, and they need to stop listening to political pundits and read up on American heritage they claim to know so much about. Is the symbolic message behind that display not plainly obvious?

BTW, not to spout the ultra-jingoistic banter that I despise, but where do you get off questioning these native countrymen's morals on displaying their own flag that you clearly knew nothing about until I posted those links, other than "some view it as a sign of disrespect?" Oh, because it was on John Kerry's book, so that automatically makes it evil...