"I`M Leaving On A Jet Plane"

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by Ronald Cherrycoke

Yeah...right....at least she tried....Haaaaaa....haaaaaa...

Is that your only response?

[Ronald Cherrycoke]

Is that your only response?


Yawn.!..just another liberal complaining about her right to represent the "REAL" people...."Some People Are More Equal Than Others"..you don`t get it do you?

[piercehawkeye45]

I think senators should ride commerical unless they specifically need to fly direct or quickly. I'm not defending her but you always do the Haaaaaaa haaaaaaaaaaa thing when you have no response.

[Aliantha]

I think this particular 'scandal' if you could even call it that, is pretty small in comparison to the larger issues one could discuss.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by Aliantha

I think this particular 'scandal' if you could even call it that, is pretty small in comparison to the larger issues one could discuss.

The White House said the same thing yesterday.

To presidential spokesman Tony Snow, "This is a silly story and I think it's been unfair to the speaker."

the article also says it's a smear campaign by Republicans and is not necessarily based in reality:

Republicans, led by aggressive junior lawmakers, seized on the most extreme possibility: Pelosi's flying on the military equivalent of a Boeing 757 with the latest in travel comforts.

also

"I have never asked for any larger plane," Pelosi said. "I have said that I am happy to ride commercial if the plane they have doesn't go coast to coast."

And finally:

spokesman Tony Snow further stated "Ronald Cherrycoke is nothing but a common troll."

[xoxoxoBruce]

Republican leaders have also stated — with no tangible evidence....

And echoed by asshole cherrycoke. He has nothing substantial to add, so pages of huge, spread out posts, consisting of unnecessary quotes, and stupid cracks to avoid any meaningful dialog. In other words a troll.

[BigV]

Ronald Cherrycoke gets the same intelligence everyone else does, but how does he use it?

From here.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi did not request a larger plane for personal use to travel cross-country without stopping, Bill Livingood, the House sergeant at arms, said Thursday.

Livingood said the request was his, and he made it for security reasons.

"The fact that Speaker Pelosi lives in California compelled me to request an aircraft that is capable of making non-stop flights for security purposes, unless such an aircraft is unavailable," Livingood, who has been at his post for 11 years, said in a written statement.

"I regret that an issue that is exclusively considered and decided in a security context has evolved into a political issue," the statement said.

I'd say his remarks "were not illegal or unauthorized," they "did not provide the most accurate analysis of intelligence to senior decision makers" or the dwellars or other readers of this forum. While the justice system has no mechanism for responding to this sort of misbehavior, the cellar does.

Ronald Cherrycoke, you are hereby found guilty of trolling. While lumberjim finds sport in your type, I do not, you "context-shaving liar". You have been condemned to my ignore list. May you rot there in silence.

[Ibby]

I think banning is in order for RC if he doesnt shape up fast.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

I disagree, citing the "he must be silenced" attitude of Ibram and V -- far too censoriously leftist-totalitarian, guys. You don't want to wrap yourselves up in a red flag.

[Ibby]

Uh...

He's being a troll. His political views are irrelivant to that fact. I don't call for you to be banned for the filth you believe; if you were a troll I would say you should be banned, even if you agreed with every single word I said.

[richlevy]

I think his viewpoint is valid if factually inaccurate, in that he has a right to his viewpoint. Unfortunately, his approach is annoying. I vehemently disagree with UG, but at least UG is sufficiently literate and has a low ratio of noise to content. RC appears to be UGs much stupider clone.

Personally, I don't think he deserves to be banned. Of course, I also didn't think Mari deserved to be banned and I will state that RCs body of work seems similar to hers in terms of attitude and reason (or lack thereof).

In 10 years on various incarnations of the Cellar, only one person ever made it on a permanent basis to my ignore list and I'm pretty sure that it was really a bot. RC really has my mouse twitching on the button.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by richlevy

I think his viewpoint is valid if factually inaccurate, in that he has a right to his viewpoint. Unfortunately, his approach is annoying.

Bingo, on the money, Rich.

My objection is the proliferating white space and quoting a whole long post just to say, I agree/disagree. It makes it tedious to follow a thread and discourages debate.

[Ronald Cherrycoke]

Originally Posted by BigV

Ronald Cherrycoke gets the same intelligence everyone else does, but how does he use it?

From here.



I'd say his remarks "were not illegal or unauthorized," they "did not provide the most accurate analysis of intelligence to senior decision makers" or the dwellars or other readers of this forum. While the justice system has no mechanism for responding to this sort of misbehavior, the cellar does.

Ronald Cherrycoke, you are hereby found guilty of trolling. While lumberjim finds sport in your type, I do not, you "context-shaving liar". You have been condemned to my ignore list. May you rot there in silence.

So I post an article three days ago from a legitimate news source and it turns out to be not entirely true and I`m guilty of being a troll and a liar? Wow wouldn`t be the first time the news is wrong.

P.S. Ignore buttons are for cowards.


THE WASHINGTON TIMES
February 7, 2007

[Ronald Cherrycoke]

Originally Posted by Ibram

I think banning is in order for RC if he doesnt shape up fast.

Ow....that hurts me to the heart!

Haaaaa...Haaaaaa...

[glatt]

Originally Posted by Ronald Cherrycoke

Haaaaa...Haaaaaa...

Troll