Don Polson The way I see it: On being a hater and warmonger

Full story: Red Bluff Daily News

Don Polson has called Red Bluff home since 1988, is a past president of the Tehama County Association of Realtors, licensed since 1994.

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 20 of60
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Respectful effort

Chico, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Aug 16, 2010
 
Don Polson wrote:
... It is called,, after all, the "Opinion" page for a reason, and I therefore give myself leave from civility to state that those making such untoward, disingenuous accusations are simply idiots....
Why, why leave civility when expressing opinions? Why lower yourself to their level and provide them with more negative ammunition?
Don Polson

Redding, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Aug 16, 2010
 
Respectful effort wrote:
<quoted text>
Why, why leave civility when expressing opinions? Why lower yourself to their level and provide them with more negative ammunition?
Thank you for your query. I'll simply say that there are things and people that simply must be called what they are, IMHO. I'll let the shoe fit those deserving to wear it, whom I did not name, you may notice.
Under God

Chico, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Aug 16, 2010
 
Don Polson wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for your query. I'll simply say that there are things and people that simply must be called what they are, IMHO. I'll let the shoe fit those deserving to wear it, whom I did not name, you may notice.
You did not name them other than to state they appear on the Opinon page with you - Hmmm - who could that be? Fortunately it seems these individuals are not so thinly skinned and insecure in their opinions to concern themselves with your baseless rants.
Orv

San Jose, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Aug 17, 2010
 
"I'll simply say that there are things and people that simply must be called what they are" Then I wonder, Mr. Polson why it seems to upset you so much to be called a Chicken Hawk which you are?
Don Polson

Redding, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Aug 17, 2010
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Orv wrote:
"I'll simply say that there are things and people that simply must be called what they are" Then I wonder, Mr. Polson why it seems to upset you so much to be called a Chicken Hawk which you are?
Said the aforementioned idjit.

“PlainThoughtsDel iveredRoughly”

Since: Aug 07

TheUniverseBendsTowardsJustice

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Aug 17, 2010
 
Don Polson wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for your query. I'll simply say that there are things and people that simply must be called what they are, IMHO. I'll let the shoe fit those deserving to wear it, whom I did not name, you may notice.
Ill name names ... who are these culprits of debotchery and mahem ? Could it be uhhhhhhhhh ... I know LIBERALS ewwwwwwwww!$#@

“PlainThoughtsDel iveredRoughly”

Since: Aug 07

TheUniverseBendsTowardsJustice

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Aug 17, 2010
 
Orv wrote:
"I'll simply say that there are things and people that simply must be called what they are" Then I wonder, Mr. Polson why it seems to upset you so much to be called a Chicken Hawk which you are?
.... Mr. Foghornlegghorn I presume ?
Respectful effort

Chico, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Aug 17, 2010
 
Don Polson wrote:
<quoted text>
....The truth, of course, is that neither I, nor the assembled Republican women, nor Wally Herger, nor conservative letter-writers, nor the local Tea Party Patriots, hate anyone, wish anyone harm, or love war. But, regarding those carrying on the struggle to shape public opinion with such fallacious, erroneous, even malicious, propaganda, it's hard to think they even believe it themselves.....
Would you care to share your thoughts about our Foreign policy in regards how we use our military and the conflicts we've been involved with, post cold war/Reagan era?
Mac

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Aug 17, 2010
 
You sir, are truly a victim of those rascally mischaracterizing liberals. Government reparations are in order. In the meantime, let's have a telethon. Herger the hugger can host. Your theory that Olbermann avidly follows your column is right I just know that you have been named first alternate for "worst person" after several columns, only to get edged out by those less deserving. Please never give up in your efforts to reach the coveted prize.
Don Polson

Redding, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Aug 17, 2010
 
Respectful effort wrote:
<quoted text>
Would you care to share your thoughts about our Foreign policy in regards how we use our military and the conflicts we've been involved with, post cold war/Reagan era?
Thanks again for your query, Re, but I just don't have the time or inclination for such a project. I am writing multiple column for while I am traveling and simply getting ready to go. Way to busy.
Orv

San Jose, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Aug 17, 2010
 
According to the Associated Press.
Statistically, the US-Mexico border is one of the safest parts of the country, and getting safer. Four of the big cities in America have the lowest rates of violent crime? All are in border states: San Diego, Phoenix --- Phoenix -- El Paso and Austin. In 2009, violent crime in all of Arizona declined.
A legitimate concern, which Democratic Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico has brought up, is the possibility of the horrific drug violence in Mexico spilling over the border. In the border areas that are the exception to the decreased violence trend, the violence is indeed from drug smuggling, not people smuggling. solving the drug violence problem has nothing to do with stopping and deporting some gardener or a dishwasher who works in a restaurant, because they rolled through a stop sign.
Orv

San Jose, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Aug 17, 2010
 
sorry bout that double entry
Respectful effort

Chico, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Aug 17, 2010
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Respectful effort wrote:
<quoted text>
Would you care to share your thoughts about our Foreign policy in regards how we use our military and the conflicts we've been involved with, post cold war/Reagan era?
I think it's unfair to call any one political party warmongering. But anyone supporting, in hindsight the US(BOTH parties people!)foreign policies in the past 25 years can be considered a warmonger.

I didn't want to assume, that's why I asked.

Since the cold war era, some 40 years....40 years of warmongering, add the last 25 AND STILL COUNTING...Hobnobbing with CONgressmen and hugging the Republican babes doesn't automatically dismiss you from being a warmonger.
Don Polson

Redding, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Aug 17, 2010
 
Respectful effort wrote:
<quoted text>
I think it's unfair to call any one political party warmongering. But anyone supporting, in hindsight the US(BOTH parties people!)foreign policies in the past 25 years can be considered a warmonger.
I didn't want to assume, that's why I asked.
Since the cold war era, some 40 years....40 years of warmongering, add the last 25 AND STILL COUNTING...Hobnobbing with CONgressmen and hugging the Republican babes doesn't automatically dismiss you from being a warmonger.
I'll consider myself to be under deep suspicion, potentially subject to future penalties. Actually, I wrote extensively over the years from 2005 to early 2009 about the subject of our wars. You might as well just say "ditto" to all the name-calling I endured over that period for defending the Iraq war. Subject closed to me at this point. Adieu.
Glasnos

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Aug 17, 2010
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Respectful effort wrote:
<quoted text>
Would you care to share your thoughts about our Foreign policy in regards how we use our military and the conflicts we've been involved with, post cold war/Reagan era?
I will wade in ... let us take the last two ... Afghanistan ... and the overthrow of the Taliban ... and evil regime if there ever was one ... Women were treated as dogs ... not allowed to be educated ... and beaten on the street with clubs if they dared to show their face. Was it good to overthrow such a regime?
Saddam ... who had ideas of conquest ... making was with Iran ... and then overrunning Kuwait, with eyes on Saudi Arabia and their oil fields ... His use of biologival weapons on the kurds ... and his brutal dictatorship and torture chambers ... Good that his regime was toppled?

Our problem is not defeating such regimes ... our problem begins when the politicians and lawyers come in after, and begin telling our military what they can do and can't do. They bring our troops up on torture charges for putting panties on someone's head? We have done far worse in our college fraternities.
We have military hating progressive politicians who rush in way too soon. Let the military stabalize things ... anyway they see fit, before we allow the liberal media and politicians in. That is the reason we win so easily ... and then fail at keeping peace.
Respectful effort

Chico, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Aug 18, 2010
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Glasnos wrote:
<quoted text>
I will wade in ... let us take the last two ... Afghanistan ... and the overthrow of the Taliban ... and evil regime if there ever was one ... Women were treated as dogs ... not allowed to be educated ... and beaten on the street with clubs if they dared to show their face. Was it good to overthrow such a regime?
Saddam ... who had ideas of conquest ... making was with Iran ... and then overrunning Kuwait, with eyes on Saudi Arabia and their oil fields ... His use of biologival weapons on the kurds ... and his brutal dictatorship and torture chambers ... Good that his regime was toppled?
The answer to those questions is, nothing could be better then to overthrow those types of regimes.

But it's not good when Constitutional checks and balances have been eliminated. It's not good that we've eliminated formal declarations of war. It's not good to prop regimes such as the Shah of Iran and Saddam Hussien, to do our dirty work then have to clean up after ourselves what we set in motion. It's not good to have our Secretary of State testify to the World FALSE reasons to go to war. It's not good to support Afgan warlords, finance and arm them, kiss the women beaters on both cheeks and walk away, let them fester, and repeat the whole need to clean up that which we were guilty of promoting.

Add these things up and all of the sudden the answer might be....no....it's now different questions altogether. Was our Foreign policy wise and really in everyone's best interests? Were all the checks and balances used? Were the people and those asked to give their lives really being told the whole truth when deciding if a war was worth supporting, or when a regime needed to be overthrown?

Add these to the "no" side and let's continue.
Glasnos wrote:
<quoted text>
Our problem is not defeating such regimes ... our problem begins when the politicians and lawyers come in after, and begin telling our military what they can do and can't do. They bring our troops up on torture charges for putting panties on someone's head? We have done far worse in our college fraternities.
We have military hating progressive politicians who rush in way too soon. Let the military stabilize things ... anyway they see fit, before we allow the liberal media and politicians in. That is the reason we win so easily ... and then fail at keeping peace.
This isn't any way to run a war. You correctly identify more reasons why we shouldn't be fighting wars. If you want, I'd bet we could think of even more reasons why we shouldn't do this anymore.

And again, there might be some out there that only are, "suspicious" if they're warmongers. I'm suspicious that they're in denial. And don't get me wrong, I've been a warmonger most of my life. Obviously it's not working well for us anymore.
Respectful effort

Chico, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Aug 18, 2010
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Don Polson wrote:
<quoted text>
I'll consider myself to be under deep suspicion, potentially subject to future penalties. Actually, I wrote extensively over the years from 2005 to early 2009 about the subject of our wars. You might as well just say "ditto" to all the name-calling I endured over that period for defending the Iraq war. Subject closed to me at this point. Adieu.
I'd think that extensive thoughts and efforts, four years about the subject of our wars would produce more then a, "deep suspicion".
Don Polson wrote:
<quoted text>
It's also hard to be magnanimous toward some on the left when they clearly do not know anyone that they write about, nor will they provide quotes to support their inflammatory statements.
Not so fast Mr. Polson. I'm more a passive aggressive and controlled type in regards to inflammatory statements. You and others are more overtly prone, and you are, very much so, revealing who you are in many respects. As well as doing the same when you're intentionally being vague. Those such as the Tea Party'rs I feel aren't getting such a fair portrayal if you are somehow associated with them or are their advocate in this forum.
Don Polson wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for your query. I'll simply say that there are things and people that simply must be called what they are, IMHO. I'll let the shoe fit those deserving to wear it, whom I did not name, you may notice.
Those, "idjits and kooks" seem to play the same game as the, "warmongers, haters, and chicken hawks".
Seems to me the score is tied and we're all loosing.
Glasnos

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Aug 18, 2010
 
Respectful effort wrote:
<quoted text> The answer to those questions is, nothing could be better then to overthrow those types of regimes.
But it's not good when Constitutional checks and balances have been eliminated. It's not good that we've eliminated formal declarations of war. It's not good to prop regimes such as the Shah of Iran and Saddam Hussien, to do our dirty work then have to clean up after ourselves what we set in motion. It's not good to have our Secretary of State testify to the World FALSE reasons to go to war. It's not good to support Afgan warlords, finance and arm them, kiss the women beaters on both cheeks and walk away, let them fester, and repeat the whole need to clean up that which we were guilty of promoting.
Add these things up and all of the sudden the answer might be....no....it's now different questions altogether. Was our Foreign policy wise and really in everyone's best interests? Were all the checks and balances used? Were the people and those asked to give their lives really being told the whole truth when deciding if a war was worth supporting, or when a regime needed to be overthrown?
Add these to the "no" side and let's continue.
<quoted text>
This isn't any way to run a war. You correctly identify more reasons why we shouldn't be fighting wars. If you want, I'd bet we could think of even more reasons why we shouldn't do this anymore.
And again, there might be some out there that only are, "suspicious" if they're warmongers. I'm suspicious that they're in denial. And don't get me wrong, I've been a warmonger most of my life. Obviously it's not working well for us anymore.
Don't know what to tell you. We tried isolationism ... and sat on our hands while Hitler and Mussolini carved up europe ... and Japan brutalized China and Korea ... That philosophy didn't turn out any better ... did it?
I will grant you we get involved in things we shouldn't ... but it is not easy striking the right balance. I think ousting Noriega, and preventing Panama from becoming a Columbia style country ruled by drug lords was a good move on our part and on behalf of the world trade dependent on that canal.
Don Polson

Redding, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Aug 18, 2010
 
Respectful effort wrote:
<quoted text>I'd think that extensive thoughts and efforts, four years about the subject of our wars would produce more then a, "deep suspicion".
<quoted text>
Not so fast Mr. Polson. I'm more a passive aggressive and controlled type in regards to inflammatory statements. You and others are more overtly prone, and you are, very much so, revealing who you are in many respects. As well as doing the same when you're intentionally being vague. Those such as the Tea Party'rs I feel aren't getting such a fair portrayal if you are somehow associated with them or are their advocate in this forum.
<quoted text>
Those, "idjits and kooks" seem to play the same game as the, "warmongers, haters, and chicken hawks".
Seems to me the score is tied and we're all loosing.
Thanks for your perspective. No further comment.
Pat Johnston

Reedley, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Aug 18, 2010
 
Did you and Cal Hunter ever think about getting an education, so you know what your talking about? I suggest starting with the eigth grade. Remember, it was that grade that made you read and test on the Constitution, Bill of Rights and Declaration of Independence. You guys must have fallen asleep or been out terroroizing people of other color or sexuality or different believes and lifestyle other than yours. Maybe, you two didn't pay attention to the Pledge of Allegiance all the way through school? Maybe, you should take at least one college course in American Politics, so you get something right. A class in English 1A will help you write more coherently. A class in Critical Writing would help you analyze and comprehend what you read and make your arguments stronger.

Just get an AA. They're easy to get, especially when your really not doing anything constructive with your lives, except shooting your mouths off about things you don't know anything about. A natrual Science class would challenge the stagnant brains cells that seem to go hand in hand with the big mouths of the Republican Party. No wonder decent Republicans are leaving your party in droves. They still believe in the Constitution and the Republican Party only believe in themselves.

In America, unlike communist and islamic countries, everyone has certain inalienable rights no matter what there religious, sexuality or color. I may not agree with what some people do, who are different than I, but I do not demonize them (except for local politicians who protect and cover-up vile acts at the juvenile hall and the columnist and radio personalities that support them.)
America is a Democracy under a Republic. In otherwards, the majority rules, except when they violate the rights of the minority, then our Constitution kicks in. You know it's that pesky thing Republicans like to wrap themselves in, in order to promote their bigotry and hate, but don't want it applied to anyone else, who does not belong to da' party on the right.

Republicans claim they want less government interference, except when it comes to gay rights, abortion, people of other colors, those "stupid" liberals, women, poor people, immigrants, abused children, patients who smoke marijuana and all other types of so-called "fringe" groups.

You and Cal have supported polticians who protect perverts and cover-ups at the juvenile hall. You support self-serving business people, like Bill Moule, who uses his affilations with the Chamber and TEDC or TLDC or now Rebound, to push through a bad General Plan and every thing else he deems will make him money, by his personal puppet Planning Director George Robson. He did this against the wishes of the majority of the advisory committee and the majority of the citizens, but now you say the majority doesn't rule. No wonder, no one wants to be part of the Chamber anymore and no wonder Tehama County and the City of Red Bluff are going down hill.

It seems to me that with all of these so-called Christian, Conservative leaders in Tehama County, God would be blessing us!
However, since the people running our local government and local media are a bunch of corrupt hypocrites, allowing such vile things to happen to our youth over the years, God seems to be smiting us, instead. How many bad things have to happen to our community before they realize, they are reaping what they have sown and no amount of Rebounding or Branding is going to change that reality. Only when there is a change in our heart and the corruption is cleaned up will God start blessing us, again. This is the essence of the Bible, just like personal guaranteed freedoms are the basis of the Constitution.

It's not surprising that your Editor Chip Thompson and you get along. You, Chip and Cal protect frauds, racism, bigotry, more government involvement for everyone, but rich Republicans and protecting perverts through your silence.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 20 of60
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Other Recent Wally Herger Discussions

Search the Wally Herger Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
California Rep. Dreier announces plan to retire (Feb '12) Mar '12 torch 4
Gloria Darlene Linch, Red Bluff: SmartMeters (Feb '11) Sep '11 Jeanne S 34
Calif. rep. wants shared sacrifice in debt talks (Sep '11) Sep '11 lastoutlaw 10
Herger in downtown Chico on Tuesday (Aug '11) Aug '11 Angry American 8
Marijuana-legalization push gets voice on Capit... (Dec '10) Jul '11 roaddog 288
House Republicans seek IRS probe of AARP (Mar '11) Jul '11 joey 37
GOP calls for IRS probe of AARP (Apr '11) Jul '11 joey 2
•••
•••
•••
•••