Anonymous wrote:Only in the mind of a liberal can Chris Kyle, a man credited with SAVING American lives be considered “disgusting,” but Beau Bergdahl, a deserter who put American lives at risk, can be considered a hero.

True this...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, nobody wants to talk about his Katrina stories? He Claimed that he and other snipers were ordered to kill dozens of looters in the aftermath of Katrina. This is a pretty serious allegation and NOBODY is talking about it. If it's not true, he should be held accountable. If it is true, the Bush Administration should be held accountable.

It's another lie. The New Yorker and the Washington Post did extensive profiles on Kyle and found absolutely nothing to substantiate the Katrina story.
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/06/03/in-the-crosshairs
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/07/30/the-complicated-but-unveriable-legacy-of-chris-kyle-the-deadliest-sniper-in-american-history/

I watched Kyle's interview with Bill O'Reilly and he was more decent and thoughtful in that than many articles are claiming he was.

But the lies about New Orleans? And the lies about the guys who were trying to steal his truck? That doesn't warrant criticism?

The funny thing about New Orleans? That tale was told by a guy in a bar who said Kyle said it. I've never, in all the interviews I have heard Kyle give, heard anything like that. I've seen it propagated in liberal media though. You'll notice those publications say "allegedly lied" etc.

Now go and find the Conan O'Brien interview with Kyle. You, again, will see a more thoughtful and decent man than the left wing media portrays him. Do you think, perhaps, it's the left's disdain for the military and absolute hatred for guns in general that might be driving their vitriol? Perhaps it's because Kyle shot 'brown people' in Iraq? The fact these same 'brown people' that he shot were members of Al Qaeda, the same group that shot innocents in Paris recently is of no never mind. Just an inconvenient truth.

The men the left seek to protect would murder them at a moment's notice, simply because they are not radical Islamists. Yet the left seems to believe tea, cake and understanding will protect them. Daniel Pearl thought the same. He was wrong.

Only in the mind of a liberal can Chris Kyle, a man credited with SAVING American lives be considered “disgusting,” but Beau Bergdahl, a deserter who put American lives at risk, can be considered a hero.

Haven't seen any proof Katrina comment happened, and if it did and the way its accounted it sounds more like a claim about black water. He doesn't say he shot anyone. Gas station sounds like a vigilante tall tale and nothing remotely racist about it. For what its worth, last I checked car jackers and bank robbers were criminals and it would be a simple self defense tall tale. I can't get too spun up about that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please disprove it. I'm curious as to whether you think desegregation is less important or King was not instrumental.

The floor is all yours pp.

I am not the PP you are referring too but just because someone has an opinion that one person may be more influential than another person, in their opinion, does not make them racist. It just doesn't.

In this particular case, I see no plausible reason for the opinion other than racism. Are we to assume that 160 kills is worth more to america than ending segregation?

Ugh, go away already. We get it. You overuse the race card. It is always black vs white. I really wish Kyle was black so you would just drop this racism BS.

If Kyle was black, I'd say the same thing. Anyone in America who thinks that MLK's life achievements do not dwarf 160 kills has a racial screw loose. This is not a general thing. This is not "always black vs. white". In this specific instance, I can find no logic to explain the opinion other than racism. Once again, I look to you to provide a plausible non-racist explanation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please disprove it. I'm curious as to whether you think desegregation is less important or King was not instrumental.

The floor is all yours pp.

I am not the PP you are referring too but just because someone has an opinion that one person may be more influential than another person, in their opinion, does not make them racist. It just doesn't.

In this particular case, I see no plausible reason for the opinion other than racism. Are we to assume that 160 kills is worth more to america than ending segregation?

Ugh, go away already. We get it. You overuse the race card. It is always black vs white. I really wish Kyle was black so you would just drop this racism BS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please disprove it. I'm curious as to whether you think desegregation is less important or King was not instrumental.

The floor is all yours pp.

I am not the PP you are referring too but just because someone has an opinion that one person may be more influential than another person, in their opinion, does not make them racist. It just doesn't.

In this particular case, I see no plausible reason for the opinion other than racism. Are we to assume that 160 kills is worth more to america than ending segregation?

A little maybe, not much. Isn't he from Texas...Pecos Bill..Tall Tales. Who cares if he spun the sh**, honestly? Would you like to be called on every conversation you've had or claim you made to pals? Is it in his memoir these things?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, nobody wants to talk about his Katrina stories? He Claimed that he and other snipers were ordered to kill dozens of looters in the aftermath of Katrina. This is a pretty serious allegation and NOBODY is talking about it. If it's not true, he should be held accountable. If it is true, the Bush Administration should be held accountable.

It's another lie. The New Yorker and the Washington Post did extensive profiles on Kyle and found absolutely nothing to substantiate the Katrina story.
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/06/03/in-the-crosshairs
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/07/30/the-complicated-but-unveriable-legacy-of-chris-kyle-the-deadliest-sniper-in-american-history/

I watched Kyle's interview with Bill O'Reilly and he was more decent and thoughtful in that than many articles are claiming he was.

But the lies about New Orleans? And the lies about the guys who were trying to steal his truck? That doesn't warrant criticism?

The same Rolling Stone that glorified a terrorist on their cover? Do you REALLY take this publication seriously?

Is that the same Rolling Stone that published a false story about rape at UVA?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the Rolling Stone review said it best:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/american-sniper-is-almost-too-dumb-to-criticize-20150121?page=2

The same Rolling Stone that glorified a terrorist on their cover? Do you REALLY take this publication seriously?

They need to focus on music.

Yeah seriously. If you think Rolling Stone can say it best, it just looks bad on you.

Anonymous wrote:I think the Rolling Stone review said it best:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/american-sniper-is-almost-too-dumb-to-criticize-20150121?page=2

The same Rolling Stone that glorified a terrorist on their cover? Do you REALLY take this publication seriously?

They need to focus on music.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean seriously. Its INAPPROPRIATE now to remember or admire people who were successful.in wartime? So strike baron von Steuben from the monuments? Bump George Washington down a notch??

It is pure penis envy on the liberal side. Just ignore

Actually this PP was talking to me - a military spouse whose DH did 2 tours in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. In order to get context of what I ACTUALLY said, you should read the post she is responding to.

As an aside, it kind of sucks that folks turn everything into a Lib/Con or a Black/White discussion. All it does is dumb down whatever discussion we are having.

I have a military spouse too PP. And I think it's laughable that you think it's INAPPROPRIATE to celebrate someone who did their job in war extremely well. We have halls filled with people who we celebrate in that manner. Petreaus was a successful planner, George Washington was a successful leader, Kyle was a successful sniper. They did their war jobs extremely well. Inappropriate? I just don't get it. Well, that's why when people generalize about military and their families they go astray...we have at least proven here we are all cut from different cloth.

I thought that odd too. How many of our American boys would have died were it not for Kyle and others like him? It could have been PP's husband. I think she should thank God that he came home alive.

And PP, my spouse has done plenty of tours. But I speak for myself....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean seriously. Its INAPPROPRIATE now to remember or admire people who were successful.in wartime? So strike baron von Steuben from the monuments? Bump George Washington down a notch??

It is pure penis envy on the liberal side. Just ignore

Actually this PP was talking to me - a military spouse whose DH did 2 tours in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. In order to get context of what I ACTUALLY said, you should read the post she is responding to.

As an aside, it kind of sucks that folks turn everything into a Lib/Con or a Black/White discussion. All it does is dumb down whatever discussion we are having.

I have a military spouse too PP. And I think it's laughable that you think it's INAPPROPRIATE to celebrate someone who did their job in war extremely well. We have halls filled with people who we celebrate in that manner. Petreaus was a successful planner, George Washington was a successful leader, Kyle was a successful sniper. They did their war jobs extremely well. Inappropriate? I just don't get it. Well, that's why when people generalize about military and their families they go astray...we have at least proven here we are all cut from different cloth.