Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some folks all pissed that American Sniper cleaned up at the box office this weekend and that we didn't all dutifully troop into the theatres to watch Selma like we were supposed to.

$107 million for American Sniper. I bet more blacks saw it than Selma. Oprah is on a downward trajectory and has lost the pulse of the people she once enthralled

Anonymous wrote:Some folks all pissed that American Sniper cleaned up at the box office this weekend and that we didn't all dutifully troop into the theatres to watch Selma like we were supposed to.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't we have nicer kinder snipers that appreciate art.

So snipers get to come home and kill people, beat people, and accuse the federal government of killing dozens of Americans without due process?

We ask them to do atrocious thinks to protect our county, lack the ability to manage mental illness when they return, then you sit iny our warm homes with your high speed internet and degrees you don't use judging them.

He was a simplistic minded person whose dichotomous view of the world (us good, them.bad, ooga booga) allowed him to take delight in killing other human beings. I absolutely feel comfortable criticizing people like him, including the mouth breathing opportunists in our government who led us into an unjustified war by exploiting the ignorant prejudices of people like him, and which accomplished nothing more than to make us less safe. Chris Kyle loved what he did; no one asked him to do shit. He's not MY hero.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am married to a warrior. If you aren't one or don't love one, you will never understand. You are sheep! They are shepherds. Then there is the wolf! I don't want the wolf in my woods. I thank God for the shepherds. You should too! If it were not for them, we would have beheadings right here in the good ol USA! If it were not for them, you would not be able to voice your very ignorant opinion on this forum. BAAAAA

A warrior? Give me a break.

I agree. Liberals hate that they are dependent . Bringing it up hits a nerve of cowardice.

warriors "give you a break" daily. You are a jerk. And utterly clueless!

You have NO idea what these guys go through so you can sit on your ass and shoot off at the mouth! THEY PROTECT OUR FREEDOM! Michael Moore sure as hell isn't protecting anything but you people flock to him like he is God. That is what is wrong with our country, I bet your tune will change when/if you need our WARRIORS right here in the US!!

Sorry, but can you please explain how today's veterans are protecting our freedom of speech? They are (hopefully) protecting us from terrorists. And I thank them for that. But Iraq and Afghanistan are not threatening our freedom of speech. I'm tired of pretending that they are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apparently, there were multiple witnesses that back Kyle:

http://www.startribune.com/local/267170441.html

Well, we should all obviously go out of our way to celebrate a "warrior" who bragged about barroom brawls with B-list celebrities, anyway. What a cool guy.

Anonymous wrote:Apparently, there were multiple witnesses that back Kyle:

http://www.startribune.com/local/267170441.html

Anonymous wrote:I saw the movie and thought it was excellent. It was very true to the changing face of 'the war'. When u send someone to interact with peoole who use drills on children and behead enemies, its fine for me if a reduction to good/evil makes sense to them, makes sense to me .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm liberal and I do not hate the men and women in the military at all. I'm related to a Colonel in the US Army who is a highly intelligent and dedicated man, and I have tremendous respect for him.

But if the way Kyle is being portrayed is at all true, then I do not care for who that man was.

The 'if' is the problem. Any chance you plan to read his book, study up on the man, and make your own decision?

I'll give you that it's problematic. And I'll answer you honestly that I will probably never read the work of a man who told numerous stories that are likely not true.

I love words like "if" and "likely". Essentially, you won't read the book because you might learn something that goes against your liberal viewpoint. You might find out *gasp* terrorists are BAD PEOPLE!

Kyle's estate is on its second appeal of a $1.8M judgment against it for libel and slander. Multiple judges have ruled him a liar; there is nothing "likely" about it.

By Ventura. What a man.

A lie is a lie is a lie.

There was a witness to the fight that backed up Kyle, except for the black eye part. It's SOOO hard to imagine that Ventura would not be spouting liberal bullshit about 9/11. Not Ventura....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm liberal and I do not hate the men and women in the military at all. I'm related to a Colonel in the US Army who is a highly intelligent and dedicated man, and I have tremendous respect for him.

But if the way Kyle is being portrayed is at all true, then I do not care for who that man was.

The 'if' is the problem. Any chance you plan to read his book, study up on the man, and make your own decision?

I'll give you that it's problematic. And I'll answer you honestly that I will probably never read the work of a man who told numerous stories that are likely not true.

I love words like "if" and "likely". Essentially, you won't read the book because you might learn something that goes against your liberal viewpoint. You might find out *gasp* terrorists are BAD PEOPLE!

Kyle's estate is on its second appeal of a $1.8M judgment against it for libel and slander. Multiple judges have ruled him a liar; there is nothing "likely" about it.

By Ventura. What a man.

A lie is a lie is a lie.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm liberal and I do not hate the men and women in the military at all. I'm related to a Colonel in the US Army who is a highly intelligent and dedicated man, and I have tremendous respect for him.

But if the way Kyle is being portrayed is at all true, then I do not care for who that man was.

The 'if' is the problem. Any chance you plan to read his book, study up on the man, and make your own decision?

I'll give you that it's problematic. And I'll answer you honestly that I will probably never read the work of a man who told numerous stories that are likely not true.

I love words like "if" and "likely". Essentially, you won't read the book because you might learn something that goes against your liberal viewpoint. You might find out *gasp* terrorists are BAD PEOPLE!

Kyle's estate is on its second appeal of a $1.8M judgment against it for libel and slander. Multiple judges have ruled him a liar; there is nothing "likely" about it.

By Ventura. What a man.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And before that, Hussein was maiming and killing his own people. Which is apparently NOT ok in Darfur or Nigeria (#bringbackourgirls indeed...) but peachy keen when it's done in Iraq

Back to that old argument, are we? In your view, are there any limits to when and where we should wage all out war? Should we just invade and occupy the entire non-Western world in the name of "liberation" and "spreading democracy?". Wow, we really did a god job of liberating Iraq from terror, didn't we?

Location, location, location. You can't fight terrorist from thousands of miles away.

We actually did a damn good job of liberating Iraq. Then came Obama...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm liberal and I do not hate the men and women in the military at all. I'm related to a Colonel in the US Army who is a highly intelligent and dedicated man, and I have tremendous respect for him.

But if the way Kyle is being portrayed is at all true, then I do not care for who that man was.

The 'if' is the problem. Any chance you plan to read his book, study up on the man, and make your own decision?

I'll give you that it's problematic. And I'll answer you honestly that I will probably never read the work of a man who told numerous stories that are likely not true.

I love words like "if" and "likely". Essentially, you won't read the book because you might learn something that goes against your liberal viewpoint. You might find out *gasp* terrorists are BAD PEOPLE!

Kyle's estate is on its second appeal of a $1.8M judgment against it for libel and slander. Multiple judges have ruled him a liar; there is nothing "likely" about it.