Now you idiots tell me how my Blog is not correct!

You have the guts to call us idiots? I notice that in NO way can you respond to MasonM. And since he's hauling in the equipment that you and your source are claiming doesn't exsist, it sort of makes people wonder. Both you and your source claim there's a shortage of equipment. But if Mason is hauling it in, then your source is "wrong". So your blog is wrong. You can claim Mason is wrong "all" you want. But I'll be willing to bet he has bills of lading for what was loaded on his truck. Which means "verifiable" proof. Can you say the same?

Funny how the people being quoted are Democrats isn't it? No politics there.

Your own quoted article says that Congress is allocating the additional funds, so once again you have provided the proof that you're way off in the deep end as usual.

Idiot.

drmiler

How about this answer:

Reply By: COL Gene Posted: Thursday, August 03, 2006
MasonM

You are like a tick on a leaf that by your limited view predicts what the forest looks like.

I trust the TOP generals about the condition of our military equipment not your limited view from trucking what amounts to a drop in the bucket with regard to the total military equipment.

Good point

I sighted several articles that quote the Head of the National Guard and the heads of the military services. What better sources would you like to suggest?

Go and tell us how a truck driver knows more about the condition of our military equipment then the top generals responsible for our military forces!

Allow me to remind you the Commander-in-Chief gives orders to his generals, not the other way round. Furthermore, the risk of an attack across either of our borders or upon either of our shores would seem to be rather small, though I suppose Cuba might try to invade Florida.

Dementia is incurable, obviously.

#18 by COL Gene Thu, August 03, 2006 6:59 PM

You truly are a fool.

Good point I sighted several articles that quote the Head of the National Guard and the heads of the military services. What better sources would you like to suggest?

I didn't say you were lying. I actually said you may have a legitimate point. But it's impossible to tell from reading your article. You didn't even provide any firsthand source until comment #5 to back up the article you wrote. And even then, internet protocol is to provide the link, so you can't be accused of changing anything in the article, either via ommission or commission, or otherwise attempting to deceive the reader in anyway.

Good Point


You and people like you on this Blog site are in denial. All you or anyone needs to do is go to Google like I do and you can bring up all the sources I used. I copy the articles and you say I might have changed the articles. Go and look the subject up and you will see they are accurate.

Today on the front page our two top Generals not admit to Congress that Civil War is possible in Iraq and that the violence is getting worse. Bloggers on this site tell me I am wrong and every day the attacks become more vicious. Many on JoeUser are just like Bush—NEVER admits that you are wrong. STAY THE COURSRE no matter where the course leads. Knock your selves out boys. As I have said, I am on record with my book. In the future we can all look back and see who was MORE correct—I am confident that the positions I have taken will be shown to be accurate over time.

Good Point You and people like you on this Blog site are in denial. All you or anyone needs to do is go to Google like I do and you can bring up all the sources I used. I copy the articles and you say I might have changed the articles. Go and look the subject up and you will see they are accurate.

Excuse me? People like me? What kind of people would that be? How am I in denial if I fucking said you may have a point. Why don't you read comment #9 that I wrote to you again. Better yet, I'll quote it myself:

Colonel, even if you do have a valid point in your articles (and every once in a while you do), it's lost in your presentation. Personally, I think you've brought up a valid point, and if you can write an intelligent article, citing reliable sources, or link to a few that do, you might actually get somewhere. Why did you write the article you wrote instead of just supplying a link to the article you ended up wholly copying and pasting in comment #5? In your mission to demonize everything about the President, you draw out reflexive defenses of Bush. Even someone like me who thinks the President is one of the worst this country has ever had, I find myself compelled to jump in on GWB's behalf.

When you want to quote something here in your comments, you can put (quote)text(/quote) and replace the parentheses with the respective brackets.

When you want to make an argument, it's up to YOU to provide the source, not to the reader to do the research. Is that what you did in your book? You just wrote a lot of text and then copied someone's article without an endnote or a footnote? Links are one way of using endnotes or footnotes on the internet.

Good Point ( NO Point)

The sources are at the top of the two articles. This has NOTHING to do with sources it has everything to do with you WILL NOT admit when you are wrong. JUST LIKE BUSH!

Source Post 5


Posted on Thu, Jun. 29, 20
Congress stiffs Army, Marines on fixing worn-out equipment
By JOSEPH L. GALLOWAY
McClatchy Newspapers

This is the SOURCE from # 14 the story about the active military equipment

Tuesday, August 1, 2006; Posted: 8:43 p.m. EDT (00:43 GMT)

story.guard.gi.jpg
More than two-thirds of the Army National Guard's brigades are not ready for war, according to Lt. Gen. Blum

WASHINGTON (AP)