Gay Patriot Header Image

Hunky Marines Pose For Calendar To Help Fellow Vets

The group Freedom Isn’t Free has put out a beefcake calendar featuring real-life American heroes.

Some of the hottest hunks in the Marine Corps are posing for the America’s Heroes 2007 Calendar to raise money for wounded service members and their families. Sergeant Rodolfo “Rudy” Reyes, and 9 other members of the elite Reconnaissance Marines are leaving women panting and men wanting to enlist. The ten men who pose in the America’s Heroes 2007 Calendar are all current or former elite Reconnaissance Marines with combat experience. None are professional models (but they could be!) So move over Matthew McConaughey and Patrick Dempsey, “sexiest men alive,” you may have some stiff competition.

From WRAL TV news item:

The “America’s Heroes” calendar is being sold by Freedom is Not Free, a San Diego-based nonprofit group that helps injured service members and their families with such expenses as travel, mortgage and utility bills and special beds for burn victims.

All twelve months of the hunky American warriors can be found here.  Below is “Mister March”.

3mar.jpg

………………….I’m sorry, what were we all talking about……..???

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Share

60 Comments

  1. Hot damn, these guys look good!

    Ooh rah!

    Julie the Jarhead
    “You don’t have to be an opera buff to appreciate a beauitful aria.”

    Comment by Julie the Jarhead — October 14, 2006 @ 7:50 am - October 14, 2006

  2. Can you imagine a “Heroes of the Anti-War Movement” calendar? Shudder.

    Comment by V the K — October 14, 2006 @ 9:32 am - October 14, 2006

  3. I may not agree with us being there, but we have some damn fine looking men. I only hope and pray they come back alive.

    Comment by Kevin — October 14, 2006 @ 9:37 am - October 14, 2006

  4. I haven’t seen this mentioned here, but I thought it was a really nice story.

    http://southernvoice.com/thelatest/thelatest.cfm?blog_id=9531

    Comment by Carl — October 14, 2006 @ 9:49 am - October 14, 2006

  5. I was also reading some article in the SF Chronicle which said they thought these calendars were designed more for gay men than women. I don’t know if that’s true or not, but they’re very hot and I expect a lot of gay men will buy them (kind of like mainly gay men buy Playgirl, magazine supposedly for women).

    Comment by Carl — October 14, 2006 @ 10:11 am - October 14, 2006

  6. YOWZA!! I’ll do my part for the war effort – I’ll buy a calendar for EVERY DAMN ROOM IN THE HOUSE!!

    Sorry, Hubby – you are my one and only but hot damn, look at Mr. October and those guns!

    And I’m not talking howitzers, either.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — October 14, 2006 @ 11:09 am - October 14, 2006

  7. Not to rain on the parade, but i’ve dated better looking military guys. March and June look pretty good, but the rest of the guys could have been replaced, imo. July might look good, but his isa bad angle for a shot.

    Comment by Chase — October 14, 2006 @ 11:57 am - October 14, 2006

  8. I love how Mr. March subtly re-appears in Mr. June’s pic. Any subtext there? 😉

    Comment by Calarato — October 14, 2006 @ 12:30 pm - October 14, 2006

  9. #8 – Cal—who cares? They are BOTH hunks.

    I guess that is what our imagination is for….

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — October 14, 2006 @ 5:49 pm - October 14, 2006

  10. Isn’t this the exact conservative reason why gay men and women shouldn’t serve in the military – because we’d ogle and be a disruptive influence. Shame, shame.

    Comment by Just A Question — October 14, 2006 @ 5:52 pm - October 14, 2006

  11. I love how Mr. March subtly re-appears in Mr. June’s pic. Any subtext there?

    Comment by Calarato
    —————

    Maybe something like:
    In like a lion. Out like a lamb. ?? 🙂

    monty

    Comment by monty — October 14, 2006 @ 10:09 pm - October 14, 2006

  12. #10. LOL! True, true… But there’s a difference between a fetish and actually doing something. Just look at Young Republicans all around the nation: they supposedly love the military and the war, but they won’t sign up themselves…

    Comment by jimmy — October 15, 2006 @ 1:37 am - October 15, 2006

  13. On the day that the Air Force Memorial is dedicated, you gratutious gay queens fawn over cheap soft porn. The cause is good. Buy two calendars or three fof kissmyass or handucuff presents. But don’t call yourselves a gay patriot. That you are not.

    Comment by A NON E MOUSE — October 15, 2006 @ 1:56 am - October 15, 2006

  14. Just look at Young Republicans all around the nation: they supposedly love the military and the war, but they won’t sign up themselves…

    And you have evidence to back this claim up?

    Comment by just me — October 15, 2006 @ 8:02 am - October 15, 2006

  15. I agree. We don’t know how many young people in either party are joining up, and besides, just being a Republican doesn’t mean you have to enlist, just as being a Democrat doesn’t mean you have to oppose the war. The generalizations are pointless.

    Comment by Carl — October 15, 2006 @ 9:58 am - October 15, 2006

  16. You see, now this is why the country is in trouble. Instead of being able to sit around together at our computer screens and appreciate (aka drool over and worse) pixs of made-in-the-image-of God US soldiers, we have to start talking politics and being catty and even nasty (with “gratutious” misspellings). What ever happened to traditional American values??!!! Mr Jan/Dec, now he’s a real American value…

    Comment by EssEm — October 15, 2006 @ 11:35 am - October 15, 2006

  17. #15 and #16, I agree. But here’s more.

    Facts:

    — The majority of people in the military are young.

    — The majority of people in the military in the 2004 election voted Republican, and (temporarily excusing all my fellow Independents) register Republican at higher rates than they register Democrat.

    It follows inevitably that some goodly chunk of the military consists of young Republicans.

    Since everyone in the military has to “sign up”, every few years: it follows inevitably that some goodly chunk of young Republicans sign up for the military.

    I’d have to do some research to put numbers on “goodly chunk”. But – in advance of that research, I’d be quite happy to bet that young Republicans sign up at higher rates than young Democrats – and far higher rates than young lefty protestor types, or young Greens.

    Short version: Young Republicans are, in reality, signing up and doing the fighting.

    Comment by Calarato — October 15, 2006 @ 11:47 am - October 15, 2006

  18. P.S. So when you look at the calendar hunks, consider that you are quite possibly, if not PROBABLY, looking at a sexy young Republican!

    And EssEm, yeah – Some people have shown an amazing capacity to be pissy queens here.

    Comment by Calarato — October 15, 2006 @ 11:54 am - October 15, 2006

  19. #18-19: Well said, Cal.

    And for what it’s worth – the US Army has not only met but exceeded its recruiting goal for the last month. Something the Drive-By Media has conveniently overlooked.

    Also – given DADT, I wonder how many of these “straight” calendar boys are not…?

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — October 15, 2006 @ 2:40 pm - October 15, 2006

  20. Did you see the one of the soldier peering from behind the bushes? Man, I could swim in those blue eyes.

    Comment by Bla — October 15, 2006 @ 3:46 pm - October 15, 2006

  21. #18. 19, 20 — You know why I think lefties like to throw out the ‘chickenhawk’ fallacy? I think they know, on some level, that it’s wrong for them to be rooting for the enemy. Calling people who support the troops ‘chickenhawks’ helps them rationalize what they should be ashamed of.

    Let’s face it. The only real chickenhawks are guys like Mark Foley and Gerry Studds.

    Comment by V the K — October 15, 2006 @ 5:20 pm - October 15, 2006

  22. * THUMP *

    //Vera faints ~

    Comment by Vera Charles — October 15, 2006 @ 5:21 pm - October 15, 2006

  23. Kewpie, (the old-timers here will know who / what initials I mean by that,) you just don’t give up, do you? LTM 🙂

    Comment by Calarato — October 15, 2006 @ 6:01 pm - October 15, 2006

  24. Yeah the leftists are wrong. 70% of the military votes Republican. If we waited for the left wing pinkos to defend us we wouldn’t be speaking English that’s for sure.When I went in the Army I was a liberal. When I left I was a right wing patriot. But hey, I’m just one guy. “Freedom isn’t Free” isn’t just a cute slogan.

    Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — October 15, 2006 @ 10:13 pm - October 15, 2006

  25. Humm and ANTI WAR CALENDAR….
    January…Teddy the swimmer, either naked or in swim trunks.
    February …Danny Glover, from Lethal Weapon, him sittin on the toilet
    March…Cong Murtha, when the soldier asked him in his district why he ripped on the soldiers.

    Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — October 15, 2006 @ 10:17 pm - October 15, 2006

  26. #27 – Gene, how about these glittering jewels of colossal liberalism for the anti-war calendar:

    April – you get a twofer: Keith Olbermann blowing David Corn
    May – Sandy Burglar with his pants off (stuffed with 9/11 papers, of course)
    June – Michael Moore in a speedo (eeewww….)
    July – Harry Reid posing on his illegally-bought land
    August – Jimmy Carter in his Habitat for Humanity overalls
    September – Slick Willie with a cigar (need I say more?)
    October – Russ Feingold blowing David Corn (what can we say, he’s NEEDY…)
    November – John Kerry in his very clean Vietnam vet uniform (barely used)
    December – Vintage picture of Gerry Studds and his backside turned to the House (insert joke here…)

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — October 15, 2006 @ 10:27 pm - October 15, 2006

  27. #22 “Let’s face it. The only real chickenhawks are guys like Mark Foley and Gerry Studds. ”

    On this blog it is a two-fer. You get a bunch of 40-somethings who didn’t serve drooling over a bunch of 20-somethings who did.

    Comment by Sydney Talon — October 15, 2006 @ 10:46 pm - October 15, 2006

  28. You get a bunch of 40-somethings who didn’t serve drooling over a bunch of 20-somethings who did.

    And a bunch of douchebags hellbent on destroying both.

    – The majority of people in the military in the 2004 election voted Republican, and (temporarily excusing all my fellow Independents) register Republican at higher rates than they register Democrat.

    Of course. You don’t think Algore was trying to throw out liberal military votes?

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — October 16, 2006 @ 1:05 am - October 16, 2006

  29. I’m looking forward to the 101st Fighting Keyboards calendar. That should be hilarious.

    #18. There’s a difference between Young Republicans and young Republicans. Furthermore, you completely miss the point: those that are cumming in their shorts over this war business (more Young Republicans than College Democrats) don’t act very often on their beliefs and don’t sign up. The comparison to Democrats is pointless, since they were smart enough to know ahead of the rest of the country that the war in Iraq is a failure.

    Comment by sean — October 16, 2006 @ 6:36 am - October 16, 2006

  30. So much for trying to convince the “fundies” within our own party that we AREN’T a bunch of SEX MANIACS… 🙁

    Comment by Jeffrey Williams — October 16, 2006 @ 11:44 am - October 16, 2006

  31. Well here’s one top we can all agree on I suppose. Finally a post to bring us all together.

    Comment by Britton — October 16, 2006 @ 11:59 am - October 16, 2006

  32. [Comment deleted.  This commenter has been repeatedly banned under other names he uses.]

    Comment by Frank Felcher — October 16, 2006 @ 12:08 pm - October 16, 2006

  33. But according to lefties, manly men are the problem.

    Left Wing Sissy-Wuss Declares “Masculinity is Bad”
    I guess Robert Jensen would prefer a calendar of Metrosexuals getting their nails done.

    Comment by V the K — October 16, 2006 @ 12:20 pm - October 16, 2006

  34. Has Vera recovered from her faint yet?

    Quick – someone get her a martini, NOW!

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — October 16, 2006 @ 12:30 pm - October 16, 2006

  35. From the article I link to in #34, Robert Jensen bleats, “I don’t think the planet can long survive if the current conception of masculinity endures. We face political and ecological challenges that can’t be met with this old model of what it means to be a man. At the more intimate level, the stakes are just as high. For those of us who are biologically male, we have a simple choice: We men can settle for being men, or we can strive to be human beings.”

    Comment by V the K — October 16, 2006 @ 1:00 pm - October 16, 2006

  36. LOL….V the K, I loved these paragraphs in that article:

    We need to get rid of the whole idea of masculinity. It’s time to abandon the claim that there are certain psychological or social traits that inherently come with being biologically male. If we can get past that, we have a chance to create a better world for men and women.

    And later on:

    Of course there are obvious physical differences between men and women — average body size, hormones, reproductive organs. There may be other differences rooted in our biology that we don’t understand. Yet it’s also true that men and women are more similar than we are different, and that given the pernicious effects of centuries of patriarchy and its relentless devaluing of things female, we should be skeptical of the perceived differences.

    What we know is simple: In any human population, there is wide individual variation. While there’s no doubt that a large part of our behavior is rooted in our DNA, there’s also no doubt that our genetic endowment is highly influenced by culture. Beyond that, it’s difficult to say much with any certainty. It’s true that only women can bear children and breast-feed. That fact likely has some bearing on aspects of men’s and women’s personalities. But we don’t know much about what the effect is, and given the limits of our tools to understand human behavior, it’s possible we may never know much.

    Of course, this is nothing more than Jensen, who is a leftist moonbat if ever there was one, trying to pander to so-called “feminists”.

    But, hilariously, what he doesn’t realize is that his “biology has nothing to do with behaviors” theory neatly blows a hole in the “biology determines sexual orientation” theory.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 16, 2006 @ 1:14 pm - October 16, 2006

  37. If sexual orientation was a behavior you might be right, but I think therein lies the question. I think there’s a strong argument that it is not a behavior in the sense that one is conditioned to be homosexual. Whereas you can be gay and masculine or straight and not masculine.

    Comment by Britton — October 16, 2006 @ 5:02 pm - October 16, 2006

  38. There’s a popular feeling that masculine is bad. That masculine is anti-civilization. It seems to me that civilization is represented by the ability to build (yet another way to naturally develop a classically masculine physique) and to defend. I don’t know how someone can say that these traits have become counter productive to civilization and say it with a straight face.

    Build and defend are probably the heart of classical feminine virtues as well, but differently expressed.

    Comment by Synova — October 16, 2006 @ 5:48 pm - October 16, 2006

  39. Gay Patriot
    Comments
    RSS feed for comments on this post.
    The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://gaypatriot.net/2006/10/14/hunky-marines-pose-for-calendar-to-help-fellow-vets/trackback/
    Hot damn, these guys look good!
    Ooh rah!
    Julie the Jarhead
    “You don’t have to be an opera buff to appreciate a beauitful aria.”
    Comment by Julie the Jarhead — October 14, 2006 @ 7:50 am – October 14, 2006
    Can you imagine a “Heroes of the Anti-War Movement” calendar? Shudder.
    Comment by V the K — October 14, 2006 @ 9:32 am – October 14, 2006
    I may not agree with us being there, but we have some damn fine looking men. I only hope and pray they come back alive.
    Comment by Kevin — October 14, 2006 @ 9:37 am – October 14, 2006
    I haven’t seen this mentioned here, but I thought it was a really nice story.

    Comment by Carl — October 14, 2006 @ 9:49 am – October 14, 2006
    I was also reading some article in the SF Chronicle which said they thought these calendars were designed more for gay men than women. I don’t know if that’s true or not, but they’re very hot and I expect a lot of gay men will buy them (kind of like mainly gay men buy Playgirl, magazine supposedly for women).
    Comment by Carl — October 14, 2006 @ 10:11 am – October 14, 2006
    YOWZA!! I’ll do my part for the war effort – I’ll buy a calendar for EVERY DAMN ROOM IN THE HOUSE!!
    Sorry, Hubby – you are my one and only but hot damn, look at Mr. October and those guns!
    And I’m not talking howitzers, either.
    Regards,
    Peter H.
    Comment by Peter Hughes — October 14, 2006 @ 11:09 am – October 14, 2006
    Not to rain on the parade, but i’ve dated better looking military guys. March and June look pretty good, but the rest of the guys could have been replaced, imo. July might look good, but his isa bad angle for a shot.
    Comment by Chase — October 14, 2006 @ 11:57 am – October 14, 2006
    I love how Mr. March subtly re-appears in Mr. June’s pic. Any subtext there?
    Comment by Calarato — October 14, 2006 @ 12:30 pm – October 14, 2006
    #8 – Cal—who cares? They are BOTH hunks.
    I guess that is what our imagination is for….
    Regards,
    Peter H.
    Comment by Peter Hughes — October 14, 2006 @ 5:49 pm – October 14, 2006
    Isn’t this the exact conservative reason why gay men and women shouldn’t serve in the military – because we’d ogle and be a disruptive influence. Shame, shame.
    Comment by Just A Question — October 14, 2006 @ 5:52 pm – October 14, 2006
    I love how Mr. March subtly re-appears in Mr. June’s pic. Any subtext there?
    Comment by Calarato
    —————
    Maybe something like:
    In like a lion. Out like a lamb. ??
    monty
    Comment by monty — October 14, 2006 @ 10:09 pm – October 14, 2006
    #10. LOL! True, true… But there’s a difference between a fetish and actually doing something. Just look at Young Republicans all around the nation: they supposedly love the military and the war, but they won’t sign up themselves…
    Comment by jimmy — October 15, 2006 @ 1:37 am – October 15, 2006
    On the day that the Air Force Memorial is dedicated, you gratutious gay queens fawn over cheap soft porn. The cause is good. Buy two calendars or three fof kissmyass or handucuff presents. But don’t call yourselves a gay patriot. That you are not.
    Comment by A NON E MOUSE — October 15, 2006 @ 1:56 am – October 15, 2006
    BTW, I’ve been dreaming of licking Aug08 all over for two days.
    Comment by A. NON E. MOUSE — October 15, 2006 @ 2:08 am – October 15, 2006
    Leave a comment
    Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed:


    Top of Form 1
    Name
    E-mail
    URI
    Your Comment

    Bottom of Form 1
    Live preview of comment
    Close this window.
    0.210 Powered by WordPress

    Comment by George — October 16, 2006 @ 5:52 pm - October 16, 2006

  40. Hey, March is in the side mirror of June.

    Comment by Synova — October 16, 2006 @ 5:52 pm - October 16, 2006

  41. It’s all relative, isn’t Britton? I’ve never met a str8 acting, masculine gay guy who didn’t blip loudly on my radar screen as gay but the prissy, preening, high maintenance gay on his 3rd tummy tuck thinks that guy is 1000% masculine and is shocked, shocked I tell you, to discover the “masculine” guy is gay.

    The truth is, even the most masculine acting guys in our community don’t do a very good job of hiding the fact they’re gay. When discovered, the light usually glows bright “Ahh, I thought he was gay”.

    And Peter, those are violet contacts on the bushman… have a pair… luckiest contacts I own. wink.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — October 16, 2006 @ 5:58 pm - October 16, 2006

  42. ND30, as someone at another blog put it, masculinity is a concept with which Robert Jensen has no first-hand experience.

    Comment by V the K — October 16, 2006 @ 7:26 pm - October 16, 2006

  43. #42 You think he has contacts? His eyes look normal, if quite striking, to me. My eyes have rings like that. How blue they look depends on the light.

    Comment by Synova — October 16, 2006 @ 7:45 pm - October 16, 2006

  44. I gotta hand it to the Recon Marines in this calendar… they ought to be out front recruiting. We’d get all the GayLeftBorg to enlist and they might fight in a war for once.

    Recon Marines are a tough, dependable, loyal group. Some bigname anti-war Democrats could learn a thing or two from their service.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — October 16, 2006 @ 10:12 pm - October 16, 2006

  45. Big words from a little chickenhawk.

    Comment by Sydney Talon — October 16, 2006 @ 11:32 pm - October 16, 2006

  46. CindyTalon, you need to head back over to OutSports… the trolls are looking for you –you’re team captain this week.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — October 17, 2006 @ 9:50 am - October 17, 2006

  47. Big words from a little chickenhawk.

    And you volunteered to fight in Afghanistan, when?

    Any Democrat who uses the phrase “chickenhawk” is invariably able to come up with the reasons why they didn’t rush to volunteer for the Afghan war — or admit that they opposed it in the first place.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 17, 2006 @ 12:08 pm - October 17, 2006

  48. I still say lefties only throw out the word ‘chickenhawk’ because it makes them feel better about siding with the enemy.

    Comment by V the K — October 17, 2006 @ 12:34 pm - October 17, 2006

  49. #48 and #49. Chickenhawks of the 101st Fighting Keyboards, both of you. Bin Laden loves you. What would you type without him?

    The best thing about these wars: the calendars.

    Comment by sean — October 17, 2006 @ 12:49 pm - October 17, 2006

  50. Oñoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!

    Comment by Henry — October 17, 2006 @ 1:41 pm - October 17, 2006

  51. V, thanks for pointing that out. Great insight! Lefties characteristically scream “chickenhawk” when they are trying to make themselves feel better about their siding with the enemy.

    In addition, I think they do it because they want to make themselves feel better about their denigration of military service in general. The viewpoint and values that are necessary (and honored) in serving America militarily are anathema to the “committed” post-WW2, hippie, Vietnam-era type of leftie.

    I suspect that everything in modern leftie ideology and politics ultimately revolves around two prime goals: (1) de-valuing and de-legitimizing military values, as above, whether openly or subtly; and (2) preserving or achieving an absolute freedom to abort fetuses.

    Why would I suspect that? Because I see lefties constantly subordinating everything to those two goals. No matter what the many twists and turns and hypocrisies of modern leftie politics, those two bedrock points are something they always protect. As we’ve seen with Foleygate, lefties will gladly throw gays under the bus, if it seems tactically expedient.

    Bush is not someone I necessarily admire all that much, but he is particularly annoying to lefties (Bush-hatred) because he so directly threatens their two real goals. Bush seriously does think we’ve gone too far with abortion rights, and, at least in his early life and again in the last 15 years, he seriously does appreciate and live by pro-American, disciplined, quasi-military values. The latter aspect is particularly threatening to lefties, so they do everything they can to smear Bush’s early service, smear his character today, etc.

    Sorry to get so philosophical, but you made a great point and got me going.

    Comment by Calarato — October 17, 2006 @ 4:30 pm - October 17, 2006

  52. Sorry Mr. Thirty, my war was the Gulf War – the one we won, I mean. Not that it was much of a Navy war, but I was serving while you were probably snorting coke in some Oak Lawn bathroom.

    Comment by Sydney Talon — October 17, 2006 @ 10:01 pm - October 17, 2006

  53. The latter aspect is particularly threatening to lefties, so they do everything they can to smear Bush’s early service, smear his character today, etc.

    Sorry to get so philosophical, but you made a great point and got me going.

    Comment by Calarato
    _______________________

    Oh, brother. What a 6 paragraph load of hooey!!

    You statements need little rebuttal as they, alone, reflect your loss of reality and pathological hatred of anything “left”.

    However, in re of your comments above: “He who lives by the sword….etc.” Bushes’ early service (snicker)…..
    Smearing his character (bwahahahaha)….Please stop. 🙂

    BTW….Castrato.
    There’s nothing philosophical about your post. No deep thoughts pouring out. Just talking points from your dog-earred GOP memo.

    monty

    Comment by monty — October 17, 2006 @ 10:45 pm - October 17, 2006

  54. Calarato, you nailed it accurately. The GayLeftBorg particularly and liberals in general like to use chickenhawk as a taunt. Like sean-of-the-lower-case-clan’s not so inventive 101st Keyboard nonsense.

    For a group of liberals who are the first to duck for cover and tremble when America’s enemies rise in the field… they are amazing forgetful and brave in hindsight. Very brave indeed.

    Like CindyTalon’s claim to have served… or more recently the sockpuppet version, “William”. Syntax and grammar comparisons have them at 94% identical… sockpuppet artistry isn’t just limited to the raj/Ian/blah nexus… and it keeps going.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — October 18, 2006 @ 10:30 am - October 18, 2006

  55. Sorry Mr. Thirty, my war was the Gulf War – the one we won, I mean. Not that it was much of a Navy war, but I was serving while you were probably snorting coke in some Oak Lawn bathroom.

    Come now, Sydney; why say “probably”, when you know it so vehemently to be true?

    And if you don’t know it to be true, why did you say it in the first place?

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 18, 2006 @ 12:29 pm - October 18, 2006

  56. NDXXX, Cindy’s lawyer advises her not to dignify your pointed questions with a response. You know it was a smear. It’s the politics of personal destruction and the GayLeft is queen of the artform.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — October 18, 2006 @ 2:16 pm - October 18, 2006

  57. Lord have mercy! I knew there was a reason I preferred working out at the gym on Camp Foster!

    Comment by James — October 18, 2006 @ 5:05 pm - October 18, 2006

  58. #56 “why say “probably”, when you know it so vehemently to be true?”

    I don’t know it to be true. Whatever pathetic thing it was, I’m certain you weren’t then or ever serving your country in uniform.

    Comment by Sydney Talon — October 18, 2006 @ 11:20 pm - October 18, 2006

  59. Well, Sydney, previously you were “certain” that I was doing cocaine in a bathroom in Oak Lawn. Now you’re “certain” of something else — and, after that, I have no doubt that you will be “certain” of something else.

    What seems obvious at this point is that you’re more interested in smearing people than you are in facts, so I see no reason to waste my time in giving you any.

    nn

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 19, 2006 @ 2:17 am - October 19, 2006

  60. Someone commented how collections were being made for injured solders and their families. Wouldn’t it be better if there was no war and the solders and their families didnt need money for special beds for burned people or mortgages etc?

    Comment by Gus — July 10, 2007 @ 9:49 pm - July 10, 2007

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.