 | | Re: Not Saving Private Ryan. —Thomas Stangl
| | | | (...) Actually, in this case, you're wrong and (shudder), Scott is right. This is NOT semantics. "Made sacrifices" pertains to the Iraqi people as a whole. "Were sacrificed" pertains to the ones actually killed. HUGE difference, don't try to pave it (...) (20 years ago, 30-May-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Not Saving Private Ryan. —John Neal
| | | | | | (...) Well, if they were sacrificed, then by whom to whom? (...) You know, pro-Bush folk would probably be a lot less "rah-rah" if the Left weren't so virulently hateful of Bush as a person, much less as a politician. JOHN (20 years ago, 30-May-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Not Saving Private Ryan. —Lindsay Frederick Braun
| | | | | | | (...) Again, this isn't new; it existed with Clinton, too, though the positions were often reversed, and I'd argue that there was much more "yeah, he's a slimeball sex fiend" admission on the Left during the Lewinsky matter than there is acceptance (...) (20 years ago, 30-May-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Not Saving Private Ryan. —Scott Arthur
| | | | | (...) I managed to catch the start of a dedication ceremony for your WW2 war memorial on Saturday evening. The whoops which greeted Bush, on what I expected to be a reflective event, forced me to switch channel... It may be a cultural thing, but I (...) (20 years ago, 31-May-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Not Saving Private Ryan. —David Koudys
| | | | | (...) The folks that 'whooped it up' should be ashamed of themselves. I read it as 'scoring political points' by showing avid support for Dubya, instead of being, as Scott said, 'reflective', with thoughts of the past and those that sacrificed (...) (20 years ago, 31-May-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | | |
