Don't worry, Sophia Parlock, I know how you feel.
I'm sure if you were bigger you would have flipped out and chopped off some heads like I did. I hope you remember this day when you're older so you can look back and laugh at how pathetic and desperate the neanderthal-Americans became before they faded into oblivion.
Update:
Then again.... Interesting stuff.
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Mean Lefties.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.mwilliams.info/mt5/tb-confess.cgi/2794
Hat tip to Allah, but check out this poor girl [via AP]...her Bush/Cheney sign was tore up by Kerry/Edwards supporters...UPDATE: Dislogue has the story too, and a emotional picture of President Bush hugging a girl after losing her mom after 9/11. UPD... Read More
Criticism: People shouldn't make little girl's cry. Bigger Criticism: Parents shouldn't bring little kids to political rallies - especially for the candidate they're against. What the crowd did was mean, yes. But what the father did was stupid. He took... Read More
Serial Republican Victim complains for the THIRD straight presidential election of being assaulted and has his family assist. Read More
A Bush supporter/employer fired one of his employees for supporting Kerry. There are plenty of simple-minded people on both sides of the divide.
I've posted this elsewhere, but here it is again:
I'm very much a Republican, but I'm declaring this one bogus.
According to a Lexus/Nexus search done by one of the DU kooks, the man in the picture - Phil Parlock - is an old hand at causing a scene for the cameras. He did the same routine at a Gore rally in 2000 and before that at a Clinton rally in '96, where his sign bore the conciliatory sentiment "Remember Vince Foster". And the kids are a regular part of the act, sorta like back in vaudeville.
I know the DUers are kooks, but in this case it's a matter of simple cut n' paste fact-checking:
- Charleston Daily Mail (West Virginia)
August 27, 1996, Tuesday
SECTION: News; Pg. P3C
- Charleston Daily Mail (West Virginia)
October 28, 2000, Saturday
SECTION: News; Pg. P1A
I don't think it serves the conservative cause to give support this kind of person, unless we want to wind up on the "Fake But Accurate" road to madness.
Get the word out.
I'll echo what I said in your "About Michael Williams" thread... where the lower picture was shown.
"The sign you were attempting to hold up was just as ridiculous as many that several anti-war protesters were marching around with.
Being anti-war does not equate to being pro-murder, rape, or torture."
The problem with stepping down to your opponent's level is that you don't come out looking any better.
Brian: Yeah, I saw that and posted an update.
Mark: On the contrary, I look great. And I don't need your smugness; I was well aware of the effect my sign would have, and I designed it purposefully.
By making statements that are as ridiculous as those of the other protesters, you don't look any more or less ridiculous than they do.
Physically, you do look good in that picture, though.... as I've mentioned before.
Mark: It's an argument by absurdity! The whole point is to illustrate how foolish the anti-war protesters look. I didn't think it was particularly subtle.
Brian, if it's all bogus then why did the IUPAT Union offer an apology? I doubt they would have done that unless they recognized the man in the IUPAT shirt. They claim to be taking disciplinary action. Who cares if the guy shows up at rallies? He has a right to hold a sign too right?
Here's the apology that Michele Malkin links
http://www.ibpat.org/news/WVa.html
I was well aware of the effect my sign would have, and I designed it purposefully.
Gee, I wonder if maybe the anti-war protestors do the same thing? As in, make deliberately inflammatory and hyperbolic statements in order to create a specific, predictable effect: bringing attention to themselves. Which you give them. And maybe, in this strange universe I envision, people at rallies shouldn't necessarily be taken literally; perhaps, in fact, they are just regular people who, like you, feel strongly about a particular issue and have a wish to express those strong feelings in a group of like-minded people.
Pointless? Probably. Harmful? Only to themselves, when they get conflated by people like you with the true extremists who actually commit violence. Should the more reasonable among them come down harder on the violent ones after the fact? Definitely. But by holding up an equally inflammatory sign while disrupting the rally itself, are you going to keep such rallies from happening, or even reduce the chances of their happening by one iota, or even make the participants consider your point of view for a fraction of a second? No, no, and no. In fact, it's likely to have the opposite effect, and you perfectly well know it, or should.
WS: "Gee, I wonder if maybe the anti-war protestors do the same thing?"
If you're actually wondering, the answer is no. Perhaps you've never been to a "peace" rally, but I can assure you that the participants are generally quite vehement and incredibly serious. If you don't believe me, ask the guy who ripped my sign out of my hands.