Smiling JOe said:
Wow! I didn't realize that I was jealous and envious of you. Now I see the light. Yes, followed the symptoms directly to the problem. How insightful. Now, I am a new person since you have shown me the light. Thank You!
Hogwash! BMBV, you must get down off that pedastal on which you climbed. I believe you may be the only one who sees yourself up there. ;-)
Dear Smiling JOe,
Of all the people on all these threads, I thought I could depend on you for moderation. You've let me down this time in a big way.
....NO, not really.
You, my friend, were set up. Yep, I expected everyone else to "bite", but not you. Perhaps after I explain this post in greater detail, you and I (and I hope others) will continue our dialogs.
It's kind of like the old tuna fishing techniques where there were unwanted takes of dolphin. Yes you, my friend are an intelligent dolphin swimming in a school of tuna. ;-)
I apologize for yanking you in the way I did. Honestly.
I was hoping based on past dialog, that you, of all people wouldn't turn your back on me so quickly.
BUT this was the only way that I could see to REALLY MAKE THIS POINT....
I said exactly the following,
"All this bad blood that exists is because
on Walton beaches, extravagant homes for the rich and connected dominate the landscape."
Do you notice the bold text in the above text?
Guess what?
That didn't come from me.
That's right, I didn't originally say it nor do I believe it. Nor do I believe the bad blood part (for the most part - of course there may be exceptions

).
Then why in the world did I post this?
Remember the "freedom of the press" question that I poised to ecopal in the other thread. I asked him if he believed in "freedom of the press"? Remember all the boring case law he quoted when I said a simple yes or no would suffice?...even suggesting that one could be held liable if the terminology was akin to "fighting words" and that was not covered under freedom of the press.
OK OK.....I'll get to the point.
Shelly posted a link to an article in the very first post of this thread that the Pensacola News Journal published.
With me so far? Maybe now you remember and are now seeing the method to my madness, but I'll continue anyway....
The 9th paragraph of that Pensacola News Journal article is quoted below:
"On Walton beaches, extravagant homes for the rich and connected dominate the landscape."
That's all there was in that one sentence paragraph, PERIOD. That's it. Nada mas!
CALL ME CRAZY (which many of you have done already), but if it looks like a dead skunk, smells like a dead skunk, has about as much use as a dead skunk then it MUST be a dead skunk.
This article in the Pensacola News Journal is the epitome of class warfare. I didn't write it. I just read it and saw it for what it is.... toilet paper.
Gannett should be ABSOLUTELY EMBARASSED to allow an article such as this to be generated and not classified as an editorial. Maybe it is an editorial.
Either way it "STINKS" to high heaven !!
Smiling JOe, I hope you now see why I did what I did (posting the "inflamatory" remark).
You and everyone else need to really walk a mile in our (GF) shoes and see some of this non-sense for what it is. It's a lot easier to spot when one is non-biased and slanted by the likes of ecopal.
Oh, just for the record, there are many of us GF property owners that are not as "rich" and are not "well connected" as this article would lead the average reader to believe.