Who was fired for lying to the Tillman family?

Why does Kevin Tillman hate America and the troops?

Hey Paola
, --It's Clinton's fault that Tillman died.

John D. - It's the Loony Left drumming up falsehoods about the incident. Nothing done wrong here. To tell the truth would embolden the enemy.

The surge is working, is working, progress, progress, repeat phrase, repeat phrase,,,,,

More Bush Administration lies exposed.

So let me get this straight.

Before the real story was known about Tillman's death, the left bashed him for being a blood thirsty gun freak who wanted to kill Arabs because of 9/11 and was an idiot to turn down all that money from the NFL.

Now you learn that he was against the Iraq war and his family is mad at the administration...and you love him and his family, because its one more thing you can use to supposedly justify your hatred of the Iraq war and Bush.

Whichever way the wind blows I guess.

I heard Tillman's mom on the Dan Patrick radio show a few weeks back. In the interview she indicated that Pat Tillman was not for the war in Iraq. He joined to hunt terrorists in Afganistan and believed the Iraq invasion was a mistake. She said that he had kept a diary which the military immediately destroyed due to sensitive information being in it. She said her belief was that he voiced is disapproval with the Iraq invasion in the diary and that is the real reason the diary was destroyed. She also said that the standard practice is that the family always receives the personal effects and that it would not have been within the norm to destroy the entire diary.

Those are not quotes of what she said, it's just based on my memory of the interview(before anyone attacks about accuracy...). I wonder what the general public would have thought about the military's poster boy being against the invasion of Iraq, I guess they were concerned about it too. Either way it appears they've done their job well. A few people will get in trouble for this and nothing more, as always is the case.

I just hope the pro-war crowd doesn't destroy the legacy of this man and his family. It takes bravery to go against this bunch, because attacking the messenger is their most common approach.

Why can't Republics denounce the Pentagon for this mess? Instead they remain silent, obedient.

Gee JohnnyD "JD" I don't recall anyone EVER calling Pat Tillman a "blood thirsty gun freak who wanted to kill Arabs".

I'm sure you'll be providing some links to back up this fantasyland vision of yours, right?

Tillman valiantly died fighting the real terrorists in Afganistan, where it was enemy fire or friendly fire.

The problem is, Bush decided to go with a pr spin, just like they did with Karen McVeigh, to make it sound like something it wasn't to make Bush's presidency sound valiant at the expense of the truth that was told to the families of the soldiers.

Call it swiftboating in reverse.

Good point JD.

Stay off topic, that's the only course of action for you guys here. Keep the attention on the bleeding hearts, not the actual substance of the issue.

It's to bad that a good guy like Tillman had to sign up and lose his life while cheerleaders like JD stay confined in doors and rant for more soldier deaths.No wonder his mentor is Dickless Cheney.

Before the real story was known about Tillman's death, the left bashed him for being a blood thirsty gun freak who wanted to kill Arabs because of 9/11 and was an idiot to turn down all that money from the NFL.
Posted by: JD | Apr 24, 2007 1:19:36 PM

Do you actually have any proof of this? A link maybe? Or are you just blowing in the wind? Pretty much thought everyone thought he was a hero after he enlisted. Maybe I'm wrong but I don't remember anyone bashing him. Of course maybe your just confusing what people thought about him with what people think about you?

Pat Tillman like so many others have been "used and abused" by Bush. It is truly sad that through all this bogeyman go no where reports the truth was never told.

This military family and many others were lied too over and over again:

how they died
where they died
with whom they died
why they died
when they died.

And through the end the family deserves the truth.
Truth will assist with closure.
Lies and more lies cause more pain.
A Soldier

To repeat the substance of an earlier post in another thread:

Tilman was not the first soldier to die from friendly fire...

Nor was he the first whose death was spun into a heroic tale by cynical military brass...

Nor was his the first such "hero's tale" to be used by national politicians...

Yes, boys and girls, that prodigiously sucks...

But it's been going on for centuries. It's standard operating procedure. Which is why the Loon's question in the first post is so, well... loony. Nobody gets fired for standard SOP. (Or if somebody is, it's always an insignificant underling.)

And the Democtraticals would do well the tone down the self righteousness. Are they not also cynically using Tilman?

Family of the Journalist Jose Couso, in Spain, struggle for justice on his death.

Jose Couso was good at his job. He was no kamikaze, nor was he reckless. That is why he decided to stay in Baghdad; and because he was a careful person, starting on April 7 he stayed inside the Hotel Palestine, which was the headquarters for the international media, as commanders knew full well.

There they murdered him, in cold blood. There was no fighting, so there is no excuse. But, Philip Decamp, authorized it; Philip Wolford, gave the order, Thomas Gibson, pulled the trigger. And the three of them knew they ou were killing innocent people, But they did it anyway.

Both families are suffering the same

Are they not also cynically using Tilman?

Posted by: Leo T | Apr 24, 2007 4:43:24 PM

The truth isn't cynical Leo. Finding out the truth is not a cynical task, even if lies are SOP.

Minimizing lies because they are SOP, now that's cynical.

If you're suggesting that I'm "minimizing", Tony, I'm not.

However, to say that this kind of lying is a new and unique phenomenom is either a display of ignnorance, stupidity or cynical dishonesty.

I can't understand how EVERYONE (right, left, or center) isn't completely appalled by the cynical manipulation of the truth that seems to be standard operating procedure for the Bush Administration.

Yes, there have always been friendly fire deaths in war. But the scale of lies about this particular event (not to mention Jessica Lynch!) is extremely disturbing.

I mean, this man VOLUNTEERED! (Unlike so many of the keyboard warriors who "support the troops".) And what did he get for his service? LIES and MORE LIES.
And now the rabid Bushites want to Swiftboat this grieving family.

Classy. Really classy.

To repeat the substance of an earlier post in another thread:
Tilman was not the first soldier to die from friendly fire...
Nor was he the first whose death was spun into a heroic tale by cynical military brass...
Nor was his the first such "hero's tale" to be used by national politicians...
Yes, boys and girls, that prodigiously sucks...
But it's been going on for centuries. It's standard operating procedure. Which is why the Loon's question in the first post is so, well... loony. Nobody gets fired for standard SOP. (Or if somebody is, it's always an insignificant underling.)

And the Democtraticals would do well the tone down the self righteousness. Are they not also cynically using Tilman?
Posted by: Leo T | Apr 24, 2007 4:43:24 PM

Leo Leo Leo come on. Corruption is Standard Operating Procedure. You prodigiously rail against Democrats for conducting "business as usual" after taking over Congress promising change (I disagree with the underlying assertion, but will leave that for another day), yet in this instance, you come to the defense of an UTTER FABRICATION, designed to rally the American people in support of a cause that the gentleman in question, Mr. Tillman, clearly opposed.

Whatever the reason is, it really doesn't matter. The end result is that a TRUE HERO lost his life in combat, and the truth is his courage and patriotism would not have been damaged had they told the truth. It arguably may have damaged the Bush Administration by exposing Americans more acutely to the horrors of war, and of course, the flip-side was tantalizingly delicious. His story was made into a fairy tale, as was Jessica Lynch's and possibly the story of Flight 93. The ends do not justify the means, Leo. The United States Government LIED to the family of a man who gave up guaranteed millions to serve his country. That you are not appalled by this, Leo, has changed my impression of your "moderation."

As for Democrats "cynically using Pat Tillman," just get off of it. The Tillman's are no one's patsy, THEY ARE HEROES. Pat Tillman was an amazing mind (my brother-in-law was good friends with him at U of A), and I have faith his brother and parents are too. They don't need anyone else telling them what to do or how to feel. They know they've been lied to, whether the story was a good one or not. Pat Tillman had HIS DIARY DESTROYED. As a parent or a sibling of his, I would be beside myself to think that the government destroyed his effects because it would have damaged the propaganda for the next war.

As Tony said, the truth is neither cynical nor partisan, Leo. The ends do not justify the means. And its not clear that the Tillmans are Democrats, either.

JD,

You're not going to find anyone out there who did not admire Pat Tillman's courage and I would argue border-line insanity. The reason he is so compelling is because he isn't some guy, he was a STAR NFL player with a big contract, a magnificent mind, and unbelievable courage and patriotism. AND he was inspired to fight in the Just War, not the War of Choice that followed. As Kevin Tillman said, his image and virtue has been CO-OPTED by the Pentagon and Bush Administration.

That the usual partisan hacks are making noise about this in the usual partisan matter makes me sick. It is clear that there are no boundaries and no decency left, and that no issue transcends partisanship. Go on spewing your usual garbage, but every single person here knows or should know that none of us could hold Pat Tillman's jockstrap.

And chickenhawk JD, how about putting your money where your mouth is and SIGNING UP TO FIGHT! Maybe if you're killed by friendly fire the government will make up a fairy tale to tell YOUR family. I'm sure they will be pleased with that. You'd be lucky to be .01% the patriot and warrior that Pat Tillman was.

Bryan,

An earlier post of mine has disapeared (SOP at the Swamp) so I'll repeat:

I'm defending NOTHING here. All I'm saying is that the cynical dissembling and propagandizing that we've seen here is neither new nor unique. And anybody who claims it is is either shockingly naive or cynically dishonest.

Also, because of the celebrity of this particular case and because of politicians (yes, cynically) using it to score points, in the end some heads may possibly roll for this. But they'll be small fry.

Tillman donned a uniform for the best of motives, and he died ignominiously and his death has been used no less ignominiously. I'm every bit as appalled and outraged as you are.

I'm also appalled and outraged that this isn't the first time something like this has happened and it won't be the last.

I mispoke. My earlier post (5:08:58 PM) did not disappear. Apologies to administrator.

Well spoken Bryan.

However, to say that this kind of lying is a new and unique phenomenom is either a display of ignnorance, stupidity or cynical dishonesty.

Posted by: Leo T | Apr 24, 2007 5:08:58 PM

Does it need to be "new or unique" to be exposed for the lie it is and deplored for the shameless manipulation it is?

But once again Leo, King of the "Democrats must be pure as the driven snow" happily gives the Republicans a pass for their actions.

Two months after I came home from Vietnam, my closest friend was KIA when the mini-gun on a cobra gunship mis-fired and struck inside the small Ranger Team's perimeter. Specialist Jaime Pacheco had, only moments before, rushed forward to throw 6 - 8 grenades and cover the withdrawal of his team mates. After Jaime's death, the Company XO sent me a letter detailing how Jaime was killed, including the fact that it was friendly fire. This of course, took nothing away from Jaime's earlier actions to save the team, actions that resulted in award of the Silver Star (Posthumously).

Not until I met Jaime's family in 1998 did I see his Silver Star citation, which was presented to his family after his death. Like the Tillman case, there was no mention of the friendly-fire cause of death. With some unknown "sixth sense", Jaime's mother and siblings, as well as his son, always suspected there was something amiss.

I thought they were aware of the true circumstances of Jaime's death and, after visiting with them and "spilling the beans" I felt quite guilty. Surprisingly, finally knowing the truth after more than 25 years actually brought closure.
Friendly fire deaths are facts of life in combat. The same cobra that took Jaime's life may well have previously samed his own, as well as countless other soldiers. I've always had great sympathy for that pilot, and a proud respect for Jaime's actions. I only wish the Army had told the family the truth in the beginning.

Should anyone wish to read Jaime's story, it is online at http://www.HomeOfHeroes.com/godisgood and there are copies of his Silver Star Citation and the letter from our XO detailing how he REALLY died. Those facts don't take away from his service, his sacrifice, or his heroism. The same is true for Jaime's fellow Ranger of a new generation, Pat Tillman.

All I'm saying is that the cynical dissembling and propagandizing that we've seen here is neither new nor unique. And anybody who claims it is is either shockingly naive or cynically dishonest.

Posted by: Leo T | Apr 24, 2007 8:00:43 PM

Uhhh... Leo. Could you reference the post in here where anybody claims that the instance of the military "dissembling and propagandizing" the death of Tillman is in any way "new or unique", cause I don't see anything remotely like that.

It's ironic that you are finding something that never happened outside the confines of your own imagination "shockingly naive and cynically dishonest". It appears you are shockingly naive and cynically dishonest with yourself.

If the best you can do in defense of your exalted Republican leaders is invent statements from the other side to be outraged by, then maybe it's time to re-examine why you're supporting what you're supporting.

I knew this fellow named Juanito who was shockingly fond of the expression "shockingly naive". Leo T. Juanito, aka "blog mom", do you ever run out of superlatives to express the considerable contempt you harbor for your shockingly inept fellow bloggers?

Bryan is just finding out what swamp rats have known for some time, you're more interested in making moral judgements on other bloggers opinions and comments than you are adding original content yourself. And when you're not moderating everyone else's comments for "purity", over content, your own post are all over the political spectrum.

You may see yourself as an Independent, others might interpret this curious behavior as schizophrenia. You say that "humour is your middle name", but you show an astounding (see, I can do superlatives too) intolerance for anything outside your comfort zone. Take, for instance, that crack you made the other day about "extremely lame" song parodies and "people in glass houses" on "Bomb, bomb, Iran". As if little ole dt's song abominations rate with McCain's, as a point of interest to the Iranian government.

I can't say I agree much with any of the regular conservatives on this blog, but at least I know who I'm dealing with each day. You might as well do the sequel to "The Three Faces of Eve". You could call it the Three Faces of 'Nito, starring Juanito, Leo T. and the composite, "blog mom".

P.S. I remember you were all over Dale for his deception and falsehoods. What about you claiming, under the guise of Juanito, that you don't blog on the front page anymore? What was that about glass houses?

Tony and dave,

I don't understand how you managed to read a defense of the Tilman affair in my comments. Would it do any good at all for me to repeat that it's idefensible and disgusting? I doubt it. Nevertheless, I repeat yet again that I'm not defending it (or the Republicans -- where did THAT come from?) and I'm disgusted and outraged by it.

dt,

Haven't seen you here in quite a while. I'd say "welcome back" but I see you're in the same poisonous mood as the last time we spoke.

If you calm down your writing will be more coherent. I don't know what you're babbling about here, and frankly I don't even want to make the effort to try to unravel your screed.

Take a vallium and try again.

I'd pay to see all you neo-con tough guys walk up to Kevin Tillman and his mother and tell them they're being used by the left for propaganda purposes. Better have your track shoes on boys.

Nah, just play it safe (like always) and keep hiding behind your computers.

Nevertheless, I repeat yet again that I'm not defending it (or the Republicans -- where did THAT come from?) and I'm disgusted and outraged by it.

Gee, Leo do you think it could come from the fact that you come into this thread, say this is "standard operating procedure", that as a result no one should be fired for it (and call the notion that someone should "loony"), and only have words of criticism for the "Democtraticals" who have brought these lies to the attention of the American people?

dt,never heard it said better.Whichever name he chooses,he's still a JOKE.

As far as I'm concerned, there is nothing in the past regarding SOP that justifies the lies told to the bereaved family of Pat Tillman's loved ones. Leo, the fact is that in this instance you choose to pounce on "protocol" as justifying the Pentagon's behavior, when really its unjustifiable, period. And your dissembling that you are not, as a matter of fact, doing so is either disingenuous or dishonest. Why else would you have brought up "well, everyone does it." As I said, everyone "does" corruption too, the GOP far worse than Democrats over the last decade, yet you only get your feathers in a dander when the Dems don't live up to your idea of perfection. You don't need to say "I condone the behavior" when you are defending it by bringing up Standard Operating Procedure. Its the same obfuscation when Republicans bring up "Clinton did it." It is used to excuse bad behavior. Period.

Tony is absolutely right, you appear to have simply no outrage over Republican's misbehavior, but when it comes to Democrats they are held to an infinitely higher standard. Why? Its much like the constant assaults against Israel. Sure Israel has its problems, but its ridiculous to single it out as the root of all evil in the universe. Zimbabwe, Burma, Syria... they are all troubled regimes engaging in appalling human rights violations. Yet no one is making any noise about boycotting these places (granted, Burma is the only place that actually produces anything we use).

Finally, I'd like to hear a little bit more about how the Pentagon regularly fabricates out of whole cloth inspiring patriotic stories based completely on lies. I'm sure there's an example where "Clinton did it," so why don't you lay it on me. The only examples I can think of are Jessica Lynch, Pat Tillman and possibly Flight 93.

As far as I'm concerned, there is nothing in the past regarding SOP that justifies the lies told to the bereaved family of Pat Tillman's loved ones. Leo, the fact is that in this instance you choose to pounce on "protocol" as justifying the Pentagon's behavior, when really its unjustifiable, period. And your dissembling that you are not, as a matter of fact, doing so is either disingenuous or dishonest. Why else would you have brought up "well, everyone does it." As I said, everyone "does" corruption too, the GOP far worse than Democrats over the last decade, yet you only get your feathers in a dander when the Dems don't live up to your idea of perfection. You don't need to say "I condone the behavior" when you are defending it by bringing up Standard Operating Procedure. Its the same obfuscation when Republicans bring up "Clinton did it." It is used to excuse bad behavior. Period.

Tony is absolutely right, you appear to have simply no outrage over Republican's misbehavior, but when it comes to Democrats they are held to an infinitely higher standard. Why? Its much like the constant assaults against Israel. Sure Israel has its problems, but its ridiculous to single it out as the root of all evil in the universe. Zimbabwe, Burma, Syria... they are all troubled regimes engaging in appalling human rights violations. Yet no one is making any noise about boycotting these places (granted, Burma is the only place that actually produces anything we use).

Finally, I'd like to hear a little bit more about how the Pentagon regularly fabricates out of whole cloth inspiring patriotic stories based completely on lies. I'm sure there's an example where "Clinton did it," so why don't you lay it on me. The only examples I can think of are Jessica Lynch, Pat Tillman and possibly Flight 93.

"...you come into this thread, say this is 'standard operating procedure', that as a result no one should be fired for it (and call the notion that someone should "loony"), and only have words of criticism for the 'Democtraticals' who have brought these lies to the attention of the American people?"
Posted by: Tony | Apr 25, 2007 8:10:47 AM

Still have that pesky problem with the reading comprehension, eh Tony?

I said nobody WILL be fired, not "should". Big difference, kiddo. And yes, to expect otherwise is at least naive, if not downright loony.

The only have criticism I have is for the Democraticals? Not true. Not here.

"Whichever name he chooses,he's still a JOKE."
Posted by: Raving Loon | Apr 25, 2007 8:30:33 AM

Ranting Bufoon, that's a rich one coming from you. When have you ever been taken seriously here?

Bryan,

You're generally smarter and saner than the others I've been tangling with here, so I'm disappointed that you should have misread so badly... or that I have been so unclear?... whatever...

In any case...

"As far as I'm concerned, there is nothing in the past regarding SOP that justifies the lies told to the bereaved family of Pat Tillman's loved ones."

I agree wholeheartedly.

"Leo, the fact is that in this instance you choose to pounce on 'protocol' as justifying the Pentagon's behavior..."

Not what I said. Anyway it was not my intended meaning.

"...yet you only get your feathers in a dander when the Dems don't live up to your idea of perfection."

And I will continue to do so because they have been nothing but a failure and disappointment for at least 30 years. There must be a viable alternative to the Republicans. Since the Ds are the only other game in town we thinking electors MUST hold their feet to the fire.

Let the likes of Raving Loon and John E be the unthinking robots. I'm more human than that, and I would have thought that you are too.

What's the matter Little Leo,dt's profile of you got your undies in a bunch. Leo,Juanblabo,our number one "Wanker".

Leo-

Please point out your criticism for the Republicans in your original post in this thread.

You know, the one that never mentions the Republicans or the administration, but calls the Democrats names.

Or how about your second post? You know the one that said :

If you're suggesting that I'm "minimizing", Tony, I'm not.

However, to say that this kind of lying is a new and unique phenomenom is either a display of ignnorance, stupidity or cynical dishonesty.

Posted by: Leo T | Apr 24, 2007 5:08:58 PM

That was some harsh criticism of the Republicans there. Scathing stuff.

"Since the Ds are the only other game in town we thinking electors MUST hold their feet to the fire."

Leo, it's not that you criticize the Democrats, it's that you overwhelmingly criticize the Democrats, and let the Republicans slide. This thread being the perfect example. The Adminstration outright lies about Tillman and Lynch for propaganda value, and your response is to critice the Democrats for bringing it up.

Whatever, Juan. Must be "cause I had the flu for Christmas, and I'm not feeling up to par".

One Valium inspired, "extremely lame" song parody for my buddy Juan and to gypsy, my favorite holler-back girl, who knows of my madness and doesn't judge:

Things are different today
All these neocons will say
Time for us to make are own reality
So they come with shock and awe, no regard for any law
Then they tell us that the world is so much better

And we go running for the shelter of a mothers little helper
Cause we're sick from all this death and misery
But the killing doesn't stop
Stay the course is all we've got
Take these two, and get your act together

Doctor please, some more of these
Outside the door, we take four more
What a drag it is being lied to.

(Sorry Mick, the Valium made me do it).

My final word to you, Tony:

I have said repeatedly that the the Tilman affair is disgraceful.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this thing happened on the Republicans' watch, didn't it? You and the others have been pointing that out from the beginning, haven't you?

My not explicitly criticized the Republicans by name in this thread does not amount to an endorsement of the Republicans. Nor am I endorsing the Republicans by saying that cynicism and propagandizing are bipartisan.

Is that "letting them slide"? I guess in your mind it is, but I really don't care. The Republicans are in descent. They're poised to lose both the White House as well as more Congressional seats. So how much more mileage is to be had from relentless histrionics? Not much.

The more productive tack is to look to the future and to hold the Democrats to a higher standard than before. Let's stop letting THEM slide.

Ok. Leo I accept your final words.

At least we have you now on record admitting that you are only here to bash the Democrats.

Leo,

My question is: WHAT DOES KEVIN TILLMAN'S TESTIMONY HAVE TO DO WITH DEMOCRATS AT ALL? The only connection I make is that they are holding the hearings allowing him to speak. The Pentagon and the Bush Administration have co-opted Pat Tillman's legacy and made up a fairy tale about him to support their own purposes. You've basically dropped your original assertion, that he is being cynically used by the Dems, in favor of dissembing and spinning what you said before.

So, are the Democrats cynically using Kevin Tillman to further their agenda? If so, how? Are the Tillman's capable of coming to their own conclusions without the help of those "cynical" Democrats?

The Pentagon and the Bush Administration made up a story (granted, a very effective one). Kevin Tillman has been given a microphone by the new Democratic majority to try to uncover the real story, this is true. I find it extremely insulting that you are insinuating that he is simply doing this to score some cheap political points for Democrats.

If there is anything we should have learned from the Pat Tillman saga is that he (and I am guessing his family as well) cannot be easily pigeon-holed, and do not necessarily fit into our neat boxes of left and right. I admire Pat Tillman as much as my father and grandfather, the two most important men in my life. I would have NEVER made the decision he and his brother made, and it is obvious he made them for complicated reasons including patriotism, sense of duty, and a profound courage that easily surpasses mine or yours. I reiterate: none of us keyboard warriors are fit to hold Pat Tillman's jockstrap, nor to pass judgment on his family's search for truth.

I am not going to sit back and watch the Tillman legacy besmirched. His actions spoke for themselves and neither he nor his family needed any lies or embellishment from the Pentagon or the Bush Administration. "Business as usual" DOES NOT EXCUSE THIS BEHAVIOR. And to answer your original question: No, as I see it the Democrats are NOT "cynically" using Mr. Tillman. They are simply trying to uncover truth, something that Congress has steadfastly refused to do for 6+ years.

If you weren't defending the Pentagon's actions, you should not have tried to belittle their significance by appealing to "well every body does it, its SOP." You need to look more closely at what you said with a self-critical eye.

P.S.

Leo, could you please provide some evidence to support your assertion that making up tall tales about an American soldier IS, in fact, Standard Operating Procedure.

And further, if I'm misanalyzing your intentions, what exactly DID you intend to add to the conversation by invoking SOP?

Leo.. can you just stop spinning frantically, backpedalling, and parsing long enough to admit that your original post was asinine and partisan in intent and delivery?

Nobody in here (including yourself) is fooled into believing that your original post had any other meaning than to minimize and de-emphasize the Military/Administration's lying about the circumstances of Pat Tilman's death for political purposes, while at the same time blaming Democrats for even thinking of shining some light on the subject.

Can't you just come out and say "you know what... that was wrong. My bad".

We all make mistakes.

Bryan,

I simply don't have time to sift through all of your points and demonstrate how you're just reading things that were never in my remarks. (I do have a job.)

"Leo, could you please provide some evidence to support your assertion that making up tall tales about an American soldier IS, in fact, Standard Operating Procedure."

Friendly fire deaths being covered up are old news. So are fanciful hero's tales for PR purposes. If you honestly never heard about this (I find that hard to believe) then I suggest you Google the subject. I don't have the time or the inclination to document common knowledge.

Since the term "Standard Operating Procedure" seems to be giving you fits, I'll withdraw the term.

So I recant, this isn't "Standard Operating Procedure"... it's just something that has been happening for many years.

PS: Pat Tilman has my deepest respect and his family my heartfelt condolences. I never said otherwise.

dave k,

I have not spun, backpedalled or parsed. Bryan is the over-parsing king here.

I just reread my original post for the umpteenth time, and I'm still baffled by the reaction.

Sometimes the things you think you're reading between the lines just aren't there, folks.

Little Leo's (Juanito) ego is so swollen that he can't possibly consider the fact that it might actually be him who is the "Raving Blog-Mom".

Time to come up with a new post name Juanito, "Leo T" has run it's course.

I just heard the remarks from some general on Wolf Blitzer about Tillman and his "lack of faith".

That he understood the Tillman's family's pain since they are "atheists" and don't believe in the afterlife.

This general made these comments on Dan Patrick's show on ESPN.

So - yes - between this and Jessica Lynch coming out in support of Tillman's family - this is one confused Democrat.

But like "most" Democrats - I try not to be dogmatic - just want to know the truth and for our government to make armageddon-sized decisions based on the truth.

Leo,

To make it simple, in one breath you breazily dismiss this story because it "goes on all the time" (just like corruption, politics and bungling, actions you seem only capable of mustering outrage against when Democrats engage in them, and I've heard your reasoning but won't waste my breath here as to why its logic is asinine) while bringing up, out of nowhere as I see it, Democratic cynicism. The implication is that Kevin Tillman or, in a similar vein, Cyndy Sheehan, aren't thinking, feeling human beings but rather some prop trotted out by Democratic aparatchicks. This unfairly diminishes the message, which I personally believe is being delivered sincerely, while at the same time accusing Democrats of something cynical and nefarious.

I'd like to ask you again:

What was your purpose in adding this nugget to the conversation? What was the point supposed to be, Leo?

I thought you were someone who shot straight and tried to tell it how it is, whether that benefit Democrats, Republicans or neither. Instead you single out Democrats for endless scorn on every subject imaginable while dismissing Republican malfeasance as "old news." What's important is perspective, and your selective outrage or lack thereof on certain issues baffles me. You tell us here every day how bad the Democrats are for adding pork to the supplemental bill, yet you fail to mention that it is LESS pork than what has been included in the other supplementals. There are many other examples of this. Its a lack of perspective or refusal to acknowledge it that discredits your arguments in these cases, or at least your claim to be "independent/ moderate."

Leo,

To make it simple, in one breath you breazily dismiss this story because it "goes on all the time" (just like corruption, politics and bungling, actions you seem only capable of mustering outrage against when Democrats engage in them, and I've heard your reasoning but won't waste my breath here as to why its logic is asinine) while bringing up, out of nowhere as I see it, Democratic cynicism. The implication is that Kevin Tillman or, in a similar vein, Cyndy Sheehan, aren't thinking, feeling human beings but rather some prop trotted out by Democratic aparatchicks. This unfairly diminishes the message, which I personally believe is being delivered sincerely, while at the same time accusing Democrats of something cynical and nefarious.

I'd like to ask you again:

What was your purpose in adding this nugget to the conversation? What was the point supposed to be, Leo?

I thought you were someone who shot straight and tried to tell it how it is, whether that benefit Democrats, Republicans or neither. Instead you single out Democrats for endless scorn on every subject imaginable while dismissing Republican malfeasance as "old news." What's important is perspective, and your selective outrage or lack thereof on certain issues baffles me. You tell us here every day how bad the Democrats are for adding pork to the supplemental bill, yet you fail to mention that it is LESS pork than what has been included in the other supplementals. There are many other examples of this. Its a lack of perspective or refusal to acknowledge it that discredits your arguments in these cases, or at least your claim to be "independent/ moderate."

Leo,

To make it simple, in one breath you breazily dismiss this story because it "goes on all the time" (just like corruption, politics and bungling, actions you seem only capable of mustering outrage against when Democrats engage in them, and I've heard your reasoning but won't waste my breath here as to why its logic is asinine) while bringing up, out of nowhere as I see it, Democratic cynicism. The implication is that Kevin Tillman or, in a similar vein, Cyndy Sheehan, aren't thinking, feeling human beings but rather some prop trotted out by Democratic aparatchicks. This unfairly diminishes the message, which I personally believe is being delivered sincerely, while at the same time accusing Democrats of something cynical and nefarious.

I'd like to ask you again:

What was your purpose in adding this nugget to the conversation? What was the point supposed to be, Leo?

I thought you were someone who shot straight and tried to tell it how it is, whether that benefit Democrats, Republicans or neither. Instead you single out Democrats for endless scorn on every subject imaginable while dismissing Republican malfeasance as "old news." What's important is perspective, and your selective outrage or lack thereof on certain issues baffles me. You tell us here every day how bad the Democrats are for adding pork to the supplemental bill, yet you fail to mention that it is LESS pork than what has been included in the other supplementals. There are many other examples of this. Its a lack of perspective or refusal to acknowledge it that discredits your arguments in these cases, or at least your claim to be "independent/ moderate."

P.S. to Swamp editors:

The posting is extremely unreliable, and it used to work significantly better, even a month or two ago. I find it hard to believe that this can't be rectified as it worked so smoothly and reliably before.

Leo,

To make it simple, in one breath you breazily dismiss this story because it "goes on all the time" (just like corruption, politics and bungling, actions you seem only capable of mustering outrage against when Democrats engage in them, and I've heard your reasoning but won't waste my breath here as to why its logic is asinine) while bringing up, out of nowhere as I see it, Democratic cynicism. The implication is that Kevin Tillman or, in a similar vein, Cyndy Sheehan, aren't thinking, feeling human beings but rather some prop trotted out by Democratic aparatchicks. This unfairly diminishes the message, which I personally believe is being delivered sincerely, while at the same time accusing Democrats of something cynical and nefarious.

I'd like to ask you again:

What was your purpose in adding this nugget to the conversation? What was the point supposed to be, Leo?

I thought you were someone who shot straight and tried to tell it how it is, whether that benefit Democrats, Republicans or neither. Instead you single out Democrats for endless scorn on every subject imaginable while dismissing Republican malfeasance as "old news." What's important is perspective, and your selective outrage or lack thereof on certain issues baffles me. You tell us here every day how bad the Democrats are for adding pork to the supplemental bill, yet you fail to mention that it is LESS pork than what has been included in the other supplementals. There are many other examples of this. Its a lack of perspective or refusal to acknowledge it that discredits your arguments in these cases, or at least your claim to be "independent/ moderate."

P.S. to Swamp editors:

The posting is extremely unreliable, and it used to work significantly better, even a month or two ago. I find it hard to believe that this can't be rectified as it worked so smoothly and reliably before.

Soooo annoyed at the unreliable posting. It used to be the posts would always make it. Now, some of the time you get to the anti-spam screen, and those pretty much always make it in. But I only get to that screen about 20-30% of the time. There's got to be a better way.

Man, after reviewing this thread,
Leo T lies beat up, bruised and de-thonged!
Pretty undignified, dude!

Bryan,
Mine have been all making it recently.

I sometimes think it depends on which individual servers a particular blogger gets routed through.

I was totally denied posting for three weeks in February, much to the relief of my many conservative friends in the Swamp.

I do get the spam verify screen every time I post a link.

Bryan,

To make it simple, I did not "breazily dismiss this story because it 'goes on all the time'".

I did not dismiss this story at all.

I did point out that it goes on all of the time.

I also observed that it has been a political windfall for the Democraticals, and so Pat Tilman continues to be a prop in the political theatrics.

I said nothing beyond that.

If I had said or implied any of the things that you, Tony or dave k are accusing me of saying or implying, I would apologize and recant in a heartbeat.

I didn't, so I won't.

Juanito T. Leo is taking a week's hiatus from the Swamp to "find himself", I guess. I wanted to remind him to load up Zepp's "Dazed and Confused" on the iPOD but I think he's already gone.

spin time...

http://www.denverpost.com/keefe