Cady™ 💛

katie | #swiftie | i'll never stop crying over dean winchester | eat the rich | #GoPackGo #WinchestersForever

[bONGO 🌐 @wariocolosseum]

has everyone lost their goddamn minds

[Cady™ 💛 @texasbowlegs]

@bonniehuh omg I'm sorry, I should have untagged you! lmfao

[Amelia @amelia_tweetz]

I need somebody to explain why every subscription started off at $4.99 and somehow we’re all paying $17.99 now.

[Cady™ 💛 @texasbowlegs]

@m1rdock @bonniehuh @SPNFamily We're clearly not going to agree on how much weight one sentence at a con panel should carry. I'll leave it here.

[Cady™ 💛 @texasbowlegs]

@m1rdock @bonniehuh @SPNFamily So wanting soldiers to have this guy's qualities doesn't automatically mean endorsing every deployment or policy decision, the way praising someone's skill at husband stitches would endorse that specific act. That's the actual gap in the analogy, not something incidental.

[Green Bay Packers @packers]

ALL. THE. WAY.

81-YD PUNT RETURN FOR WILL SHEPPARD!

📺: Packers TV Network

[Cady™ 💛 @texasbowlegs]

@m1rdock @bonniehuh @SPNFamily You're still doing the same move: taking incidental phrasing from a live, off-the-cuff conversation and treating it as if it were a deliberate policy statement. People don't talk like policy briefs at fan conventions

[Cady™ 💛 @texasbowlegs]

@m1rdock @bonniehuh @SPNFamily If someone says "I want more teachers like the one who taught overseas" you don't read that as an endorsement of whatever education policy existed in that specific country.

[Cady™ 💛 @texasbowlegs]

@m1rdock @bonniehuh @SPNFamily Jensen didn't praise a specific harmful act the vet committed. He praised general qualities. For your analogy to actually match, he'd have to say something like "I want soldiers to [specific harmful act] like he did" — naming the harm and endorsing it. He didn't.

[Cady™ 💛 @texasbowlegs]

@m1rdock @bonniehuh @SPNFamily That analogy doesn't hold up. In your example, the specific harmful act (husband stitches) is the thing being praised ("I want doctors doing X to do it like him") where X is the harmful practice itself. That's a direct endorsement of the practice.

[Cady™ 💛 @texasbowlegs]

@m1rdock @bonniehuh @SPNFamily Wanting the ppl who do a job to be good at it/decent people isn't the same as endorsing the institution or policy that put them there.

[Cady™ 💛 @texasbowlegs]

@m1rdock @bonniehuh @SPNFamily By your logic, anyone who says "I want our doctors to be like Dr. X" is endorsing every decision the hospital administration makes. That's not how conditional statements work.

[Cady™ 💛 @texasbowlegs]

@m1rdock @bonniehuh @SPNFamily Saying you want soldiers to be like him ≠ saying you support what they were sent to do. That's the jump you're making, not something Jensen actually said.

But I don't think we'll ever come to an agreement here so I'm cool with ending the conversation tbh. I was just chiming in

[Cady™ 💛 @texasbowlegs]

@m1rdock @bonniehuh @SPNFamily I don't think I'm going to ever quite understand the jump in logic here. "that's the kind of soldier I want representing us" is still a comment about the person's qualities (capability, character), not a statement about US military conduct abroad.

[Matt C @MattfromKC]

The absolute classic… her sister was a witch!

[Cady™ 💛 @texasbowlegs]

@m1rdock @bonniehuh @SPNFamily If literally any positive remark about a service member's competence (physical or otherwise) counts as glorifying imperialism, then nobody could ever say anything kind to a veteran without it being political. That's not a reasonable standard for a panel Q&A.

[Cady™ 💛 @texasbowlegs]

@m1rdock @bonniehuh @SPNFamily Plenty of vets critical of US wars still appreciate a compliment on their character. Those aren't contradictory 🤷🏼‍♀️