The Book Of Matt: Matthew Shepard, the Real Story?

I've tried polite with Fred in the past, Fred doesn't respond with a source then either. Fred just can't be bothered. You are welcome to think whatever you want about me PrintSmith.....it's no surprise that you make excuses for Fred while castigating me for not being as polite as even you are incapable of being.

I made no excuses for Fred. I simply provided the courtesy you sought and then opined that it wouldn't have taken you any longer to find it for yourself than it did to type the snark and hit send.

PrintSmith wrote: I made no excuses for Fred. I simply provided the courtesy you sought and then opined that it wouldn't have taken you any longer to find it for yourself than it did to type the snark and hit send.

Let it go PrintSmith....I plan to. From now on I surely hope no one asks me for a source, snarkily or otherwise, I see that not only is it not required, it is n o t even appreciated.

To treat another person as if they are a pathological liar isn't something I would expect anyone to appreciate. Would you appreciate being treated that way? Somehow I'm pretty certain the answer would be no, you would not appreciate being treated in such fashion. You are most certainly not appreciative of my questioning just how hard it actually would be for you to open up a new window in the browser on your cell phone as opposed to typing in a snarky reply and sending it across the airwaves, so I can only imagine just how unappreciative you would be at my intimating that the starting point for all of your posts were that they were lies and fairy tales.

PrintSmith wrote: To treat another person as if they are a pathological liar isn't something I would expect anyone to appreciate. Would you appreciate being treated that way? Somehow I'm pretty certain the answer would be no, you would not appreciate being treated in such fashion. You are most certainly not appreciative of my questioning just how hard it actually would be for you to open up a new window in the browser on your cell phone as opposed to typing in a snarky reply and sending it across the airwaves, so I can only imagine just how unappreciative you would be at my intimating that the starting point for all of your posts were that they were lies and fairy tales.

:faint:

Yeah, like I get treated so well by the conservatives here....I guess I need to learn to whine like they do. You're cracking me up PrintSmith.

:rofllol

To get back to the actual topic of this thread....this seems a lot like another he said/she said crime novel. I will be curious what proof is offered in this book, or is it mostly circumstantial evidence. Whatever, it was an horrific crime and deserved all the media attention it got at the time. If it was not exactly as depicted by the media at the time...that is less important than the dialog it started about the struggles of gays in our society.

archer wrote: Yeah, like I get treated so well by the conservatives here....I guess I need to learn to whine like they do. You're cracking me up PrintSmith.

That's funny, I thought they were taking lessons from you on that subject, and doing very well at learning at the heels of a master of the art.

So you have resorted to neener, neener type posting.I'm sorry you are having such a cranky day. Care to actually discuss the subject of this thread?

FOOD FOR THOUGHT..... http://www.theamericanconservative.com/ ... -casualty/

archer wrote: So you have resorted to neener, neener type posting.I'm sorry you are having such a cranky day. Care to actually discuss the subject of this thread?

You paint with a broad brush and the wonder why others respond to you in kind? You do the professional victim better than anyone out there I am aware of archer.

But I see, 2 pages later, you are actually desiring to discuss the topic raised rather than comment on your perceptions of another's character. Better late than never I always say.

I think home's link provides some very thoughtful commentary about truth being the first casualty of war and the first casualty of a war waged on the current culture. Given that "progressives" are out to "fundamentaly transform" our culture by hook or by crook, is it in any way surprising that the narrative they crafted to beatify Matthew Shephard and advance their "good" cause bears little resemblance to the truth about his life and his death? Should "The Laramie Project" now include a disclaimer in the program as being "based" on a true story (Matthew Shephard was murdered after all, even if the meme presented in the play is a complete fabrication of why) or no longer performed because of the gross inaccuracies it contains? A fair question to ask if what the author of the book, who the author of the piece linked to by home says is more interested in journalism than "The Cause", writes is substantially more accurate and complete than the false narrative contained in the play, don't you think?

And what does this tell us about the meme crafted around the ACA by essentially the same group of people? Or the narrative they are attempting to sell with regards to semi-automatic firearms and standard capacity magazines for same? What should we learn from all of this with regards to the push for "universal" background checks and "universal" health care proposals?

I'm sure this is not precisely what you had in mind when you expressed a desire to discuss the topic of the thread, but I think that this is an important aspect of the topic worthy of discussion.