Annie,

While you and I, and no doubt Mr. Walton's fellow soldiers, may be impressed and thankful for his courageous service, the left would view it as just further evidence that he was a "killer".

annie, stop banging your head on the wall; I find it better to mutter, "Tut, tut," while shaking my head ruefully. It's less painful, doesn't leave scars, and is just as effective in dealing with those who do not see.

yes, pursuit, but medics are non-combatants! for pete's sake.

Ah, but he was saving the lives of killers!

Ms. Annie...

You might want to check with Matt over at Blackfive but I don't think Special Forces medics are noncombatants...

Yes, it seems that John Walton committed the biggest crime against humanity, he had money. It's a shame, I am sure. It's too bad that he isn't as talented as Micheal Moore because he is such a positive role model for society. He has money, but he is all about helping out the poor - right? I'm sorry, I am digressing.

Actually you are spot on. The LJ'er couldn't be bothered about finding out the actual truth about the man. All she needed to know was that he had money. But it's odd, I doubt that she will ever say anything nasty about all those celeBRATies who have all that money...

Since when do idiots permit facts, reason, and logic to get in their way?

And talking ill about a man who died a day prior in a PLANE CRASH -- how classy can you get?

sure - she/it was way to busy hating the man for being successful to actually research what he was all about ... and being a proud member of the lower 49%.

/TJ

annie,
take victor's advice.

i wonder if this guy was the guy/father that got into that naming fiasco at the u of mizzou a couple years ago.
although i don't condemn the rich, i do wonder out loud sometimes how people that are as dumb as dirt, read as THK, can fall into a pile of shit and come out smelling like a lincoln rose.
trust fund babies.

It makes me so sick that someone could make that kind of statement. Disgusting.

Annie,

Thank you for the additional information about John Walton. It gives us information on the kind of man he was.

It is wrong that some people assume because a person has a lot of money, that person is a jerk.
Appears to me to be just the opposite.

Again, thank you.

Don't hurt your head! Its such a pretty head. And filled with Civil War knowledge....

i'm new to this site. it's so much fun to see passive-aggressive right-wingers pat each other on the back! it's almost so obvious that we shouldn't speak ill of this man who died the other day that you all shouldn't have to reassure yourselves so much. almost. it's great to watch though, you all took that one disgusting comment from some clueless webmonger and used it not only to defend something that hadn't been attacked (the monied class, or whatever) but to attack the imaginary attackers. you rightwingers have used this imaginary-attacker-siege-mentality to great effect recently, mostly defending yourselves from the phantom "attacks" by the left on things like marriage (gasp! gay marriage will kill america!) and religion (gasp! we're under fire because everyone doesn't agree with us!). don't you realize that defending something that hasn't been attacked makes you seem weak? anyway. i look forward to your snarky, passive-aggressive pile-on of responses. it'll be funny to see what happens when you aren't in the majority anymore and you have to figure out what you're really about again. endless power and enlargement of government aren't exactly bedrock republican principles, but you seem to have made an exception for bush.

by the way, however full of shit that LJ bitch was, the reason some reasonable people don't like wal-mart is that it has put small businesses out of business and basically shuttered whole regions of the country. in the red states mostly. where's the outcry.

now answer a question i didnt ask, defend against something that wasn't attacked, and spew the party line! it's fun and simple!

how about i just fucking ignore you?

well you're enlightened and that's what bush wants so enjoy. :) so much anger.

Here's the accusation:

(Take a) comment from some clueless webmonger and use...it not only to defend something that hadn't been attacked...but to attack the imaginary attackers.

And here's the accuser doing that very thing:

don't you realize that defending something that hasn't been attacked makes you seem weak? anyway. i look forward to your snarky, passive-aggressive pile-on of responses.

Nice!