Douche bag being douchie

| November 19, 2012

Meet Lindsey Stone, a self-proclaimed douchebag. See that picture? She thinks it’s hilarious because she’s being her douche bag self. Of course, she’s at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldiers, and she thinks that doing what she’s doing is like smoking under a “No Smoking” sign.

This is just us, being the douchebags that we are, challenging authority in general

Whose authority, Lindsey? The folks enforcing the “Silence & Respect” are soldiers. The Tomb is property of the Army, more accurately, the soldiers who are interred there. Of course, the sign is just supposed to remind you of your own proper conduct, the proper conduct you were not taught by your parents, apparently. There is no authority to challenge, really, well, except your upbringing, which by the looks of things is lacking.

Of course, the reason that you think this is funny is because popular culture tells you that the more outrageous you are, the more popular you’ll be. I believe your generation calls it “pushing the envelope” or something. Congratulations, Lindsey, you found the outer edge of the envelope, outside the limits of what we as a civilized society will accept.

Of course, Lindsey’s friends told her that she was wrong, but she left the picture up on her Facebook thingie – right through Veterans’ Day, so she wasn’t chastised quite enough to make her feel any measure of shame for her behavior.

Thanks to JP for the link.

Edit by NSOM:

Pending a follow up from Jonn, do not post home contact information for anyone you think may be Stone. It may not actually be her, innocent third parties may live there and just because YOU’RE mentally stable doesn’t mean the next person to read her home address is too. Her workplace and work number are fine, home addresses are not.

Category: Shitbags

Comments (462)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Hondo says:

    Ex-PH2: rb325th isn’t Stone. He’s been commenting here at TAH for quite a while (over a year).

    And while I’m not sure what the “rb” stands for, I’m pretty sure the 325th part stands for “325th Infantry”. That particular unit has a rather distinguished history – 3 PUCs (Salerno, St Mere-Eglise, and Iraq) and 4 VUAs (all from Iraq). I’m guessing rb325th was assigned to that unit at one time.

  2. Ex-PH2 says:

    Sorry, Hondo. Mea culpa. I am a bit PO’d to see that anyone still doesn’t GET how stupid that very stupid young woman is about the long-term consequences of what she did.

    I find it difficult to understand why people don’t GET what the internet does to your job prospects.

    And I’m still angry, as if you can’t tell. I’ll go away now.

  3. HopewellKat says:

    Jesus taught us to forgive. That doesn’t mean there should not be consequences for bad judgement and blatant disrespect. Still, we should forgive and pray for her. She probably will be fired and she is definitely suffering the consequence of harsh public opinion (kill her? she should be raped with barbed wire? shot? burned? Seriously?) Sure, what she did is awful, but we should pray for her as we are told to pray for our enemies. Jesus taught this. Jesus. So, if you also are one to post about your righteousness, you may want give a thought to what that means. Pray for her. Forgive. I imagine she is suffering. I imagine we’ve all done some stupid, stupid stuff and hurt others. Pray for her. Forgive.

  4. Here is the Official apology from Lindsay Stone(One on the Picture), and Jamie Schuh(One that took the picture).

    “We sincerely apologize for all the pain we have caused by posting the picture we took in Washington DC on Facebook. While posted on a public forum, the picture was intended only for our own amusement. We never meant any disrespect to any of the people nationwide who have served this country and defended our freedom so valiantly. It was meant merely as a visual pun, intending to depict the exact opposite of what the sign said, and had absolutely nothing to do with the location it was taken or the people represented there. We never meant to cause any harm or disrespect to anyone, particularly our men and women in uniform. We realize it was in incredibly poor taste, and are deeply sorry for the offense we have caused.

    We also sincerely apologize to LIFE, Inc. It is an amazing organization that provides invaluable services to adults with learning and developmental disabilities. We are beyond remorseful that our actions have caused them such undue public scrutiny. The disrespect implied by our picture has nothing at all to do with LIFE’s mission statement or values. We regret having caused any suffering to the staff members, residents, families and friends.

    Again, we very sincerely apologize to everyone who took offense to the photo. We realize that it was an ignorant and distasteful thing for us to do, but we truly meant no harm. We are deeply sorry.”

  5. Hondo says:

    HopewellKat: as I said elsewhere – from my perspective, forgiveness comes after a demonstration of both repentance and changed behavior. So far, I haven’t seen much evidence of either. And that includes their so called “apology” in the Boston Herald, which reads more to me like a cynical attempt at damage control vice actual contrition.

  6. MCPO NYC USN (Ret.) says:

    The apology was written by a PR firm as confirmed by this office!

  7. The apology actually pissed me off again, this part in particular,
    “While posted on a public forum, the picture was intended only for our own amusement.”
    The next time she want’s to be amused, she should pick a group to insult that is less tenacious than veterans.
    We should remember, many of her friends advised her to remove the pic that was posted just before Veterans Day, and she refused.
    I also agree that the sincerity seems to be lacking in her apology.

  8. NHSparky says:

    the picture was intended only for our own amusement

    Translation: You fuckers weren’t supposed to see this shit, and we’re only sorry you did.

  9. OWB says:

    @390: “and on what proof do you base your assertion that she “intended to insult”?”

    Only responding to HER words that she was pushing the envelope. Now, in response to my query, what does that phrase mean (in this context) other than intending to insult at least some people?

    “Is it a statement she made to that effect? Eyewitness testimony of people there who heard her make statements to that effect? Seriously, what are you basing your conclusion that she fully intended to insult the Fallen of this Nation?”

    As previously stated, several times now, based upon HER statement about the intent of the pic, and other pics. And where exactly are you getting that whole bit about my conclusion? Figment of your imagination perhaps? And why are you ascribing it to me?

    “That this was nothing more than a very poor lapse in judgment in the choice of location for her photo?”

    Again, for umpteenth time, based on HER statements that she likes to “push the envelope” against authority blah, blah, blah. Still waiting for you to explain which part of that phrase I am misunderstanding.

    “I will go on the fact that she immediately apologized to her friends over a month ago, long before anyone of us knew about the photo or her ver existence.”

    Please furnish us a copy of that apology. All we have seen so far is quite the opposite – all we have seen is her refusal to apologize while she stubbornly left the offending pic posted. Was it over a month ago or do we only know that it was prior to Veterans Day?

    “So please tell me how this kid deserves to have her liffe threatened and ruined… Come on I am waiting for the evicence of her crime you have convicted her of. A photo itself does not prove intent, it only proves an action took place. Tell me how you know her intent.”

    What kid? This is a grown adult who is being paid to care for others. And where did I say that she deserves to have her liffe threatened?

    I have no idea why you are even addressing your drivel toward me, but if you seriously want to do that, I suggest that you bring a much better example of your A-game than this.

  10. rb325th says:

    Pushing the envelope? Seriously? Did you miss the fucking part where she said it was never her INTENT to dishonor or insult… You read between the lines and found what you wanted to see, so you can use it to justify your blood lust to see her destroyed.

    Be careful what you post folks… be careful someone does not ever photograph you in public in an unflattering light, you can be the next one to be “made famous”… I hate that she did what she did where she did it, but you will not convince me she meant it as you want to believe she did. Too late for you to turn back the hatred now, it is all out there that she was/is Jane Fonda reborn… that she was doing it as a direct insult to the fallen, intentionally disrespecting them and all who have served. Too late to dial back the rhetoric…
    no, you all live in your group think little fantasy to prove to yourselves that you did not go so much farther over the line by intentionally going out to destroy her over a stupid photgraph, that had none of the intent you thought it did on first glance.

  11. Hondo says:

    rb325th: OK. I’m certain Serrano meant no disrespect to the Catholic Church – or Christians in general – by his work “Piss Christ” either, and was just trying to make an “artistic statement”.

    My point? Lack of intent does not always erase or excuse inappropriate actions. A drunk driver virtually never intends to kill anyone. But when they do, they can indeed be prosecuted for (at a minimum) vehicular manslaughter if not negligent homicide. And in some jurisdictions, I believe they can be prosecuted for murder – just not premeditated murder, which does indeed require specific a priori intent.

    Here, the lady sowed the wind. She – and possibly also her photographer accomplice – acted like an idiot. She was told the photo was inappropriate by her friends. Rather than remove it, she chose to leave it up for a month with a truly lame “no offense intended, just being a douchebag” disclaimer.

    After a month, people noticed. She then, predictably, reaped the whirlwind.

    Yeah, for her that sucks. Too bad. Sometimes life is tough when you’re really stupid.

  12. Nik says:

    “Did you miss the fucking part where she said it was never her INTENT to dishonor or insult”

    Ok. If she didn’t mean to dishonor or insult…why did she leave it up? Her friends said it wasn’t cool, that it was disrespectful. She chose to leave it up anyway.

    If I’m humming a song, and you say “hey, stop that, it’s annoying” and I continue to do so, it’s reasonable to assume that I intend to annoy you. If I hang a picture in a public space and you say “Hey, that picture makes me sad”, and I leave it there, it’s reasonable to assume that my intent is to make you sad.

    She put up a picture in a public space. She was told it was disrespectful. She chose to leave it up anyway. Therefore, it’s reasonable to assume she meant to disrespect.

  13. OWB says:

    @ #410: So, was she lying when she said that she enjoys pushing the envelope? Or is it perhaps SHE who does not understand what the phrase means? Which is it?

    Perhaps you, rb325th, need to understand that neither you nor I can appropriately respond to a complete stranger’s intent without making quite a few assumptions based upon nothing. I only responded to her actions and her words. You wanna play the guess her intent game, you can do it without me.

    And just so you know, rb325th, some of us actually ARE already careful about what we post. It’s called being an adult and paying attention to detail.

    Evidently you have nothing substantive to add to the conversation since in response to legitimate questions you resort to the use of words which her middle finger represented in the pic under discussion. Oh, well.

  14. Nik says:

    Reportedly this is her page:

    Evidence offered as proof:

    Go read the vitriol she’s posted there and tell me how sorry she is. A little quote from the page:

    “The soldiers current and ex on here are getting their camo knickers in a twist because they seem to deem themselves above all rebuke, as if they have some divine right to unconditional awe and reverence.”

    Self-absorbed much?

  15. Hondo says:

    Nik: yeah, it would appear that Lindsey kinda blew her cover in the second link there by referring to herself in the first person.

    Sock puppets ain’t cool, ‘lil Lindsey. Not even on your own site. And especially when they prove you’re a liar.

  16. Anonymous says:

    @ Hondo: I think there’s a big difference between the ‘Piss Christ’ nonsense and this. Here, the picture was clearly mocking the SIGN, not the soldiers – hence the ‘yelling’ and ‘disrespect’ in contrast to the request for silence and respect.

    That it happened at the Tomb is what makes it a hugely stupid thing, as opposed to merely someone being an ordinary idiot. The evidence we have indicates a desire to mock the sign, not the soldiers. Without additional evidence indicating an animosity towards soldiers, it’s a bit of a leap to assume she’s *intentionally* doing so.

    Unintentionally? Hell yeah. And hence a justifiable uproar, to a degree. The ‘Piss Christ’ was intentional, no question.

  17. Nik says:

    Ok. I’ve seen the post where she outs herself with my own eyes. It’s here:

    So, in the interest of verification, I screenshotted it, in case she deletes it.

  18. Intent does not matter. If she was only mocking the sign, it was still disrespectful to the fallen that are honored there! People need to understand, it is not as much about what she was meaning! It is about where she was doing it!

  19. 2-17 Air Cav says:

    @47. She puts out her own eyes? Wow, I guess she really is sorry.

  20. Anonymous says:

    @418: Intent certainly matters. Or are you telling me if someone gets suddenly ill and incontinent and defecates on the steps at the Tomb they should be villified just as much as someone who intentionally does so?

    It’s obviously not completely analogous as ‘intent’ is not a black and white situation as in the above in that she had AN intent, this wasn’t an accident, but her intent may not have been to dishonor the dead, even if in effect that’s how it’s been taken by many. Her intent was to be an idiotic jackass. Still not good, but not as bad as someone intentionally giving the finger to our fallen.

  21. CSE CSC says:

    @414, 415, 417: Wow. I am now truly stunned. Color me incredulous. If that really is her with the Hire Lindsey Stone page and those comments about camo knickers and all that, well…her ignorance is apparently boundless and she has not learned one tiny lesson from the events of the past couple of days. (Yes, the first person post implies that she is writing that stuff, but to be fair there were posts on this very board yesterday that “looked” like other people posted them. So I will reserve judgement on that.)

  22. Nik says:


    If she did that, THEN I would believe her.

  23. Nik says:

    Surely this is the longest string of comments about someone who wasn’t stealing valor. Isn’t it?

  24. Hondo says:

    Anonymous: Certainly intent matters. But lack of intent is not equivalent to “no harm no foul”. Kill someone in an auto accident while speeding excessively or driving recklessly and you can still end up in jail for vehicular homicide. “Reckless disregard” is what I believe the legal theory justifying that is called.

    Further, you might want to check out her “Hire Lindsey Stone” site (see links above). If the comments the site owner – which, based on comments identified in 417, does indeed appear to be Ms. Stone herself – makes are any indication, I don’t think you can discount the possibility that she did this with intent. She certainly seems to have a low opinion of the military.

    And someone should tell her the military (well, the Army anyway) doesn’t issue “camouflage knickers” – just solid-color ones in white or sand. (smile)

  25. Hondo says:

    Nik: dunno – I seem to remember that there was a 600+ comment string from 2009 on a largely political topic, but I may be wrong. And I can’t remember if that one started out as a SV string and got sidetracked or not.

  26. Hondo says:

    CSE CSC: I think that “Hire Lindsey Stone” requires a Facebook or other login to leave a comment. Harder to forge comments if that’s the case. Don’t do most social media, so I can’t test that. Perhaps someone else can.

    TAH doesn’t require a login, so forged comments can be an issue here when a dung-flinging monkey decides to show up.

  27. Nik says:


    FB does require authentication. A user supplied email address and password.

    Looking at the timing of the comments, the avatar made me pretty sure that it was her.

    The ultimate test however, was clicking on the name “Hire Lindsey Stone”. That links right back to the page, showing that the account who started that page is the one who made that comment.

  28. Green Thumb says:


    The Army’s tight brownies taught me to roll “commando”.

    Much more field expedient and comfortable, I might add.

    Oh, the bad memories…

  29. Nik says:


    One less thing to put on in the morning. That’s HSLD right there.

  30. Hondo says:

    Green Thumb: yeah, I remember the dark brown issue T-shirts and skivvies too. And I’ve seen OD ones as well, but I wasn’t quite old enough to get issued any of those.

    Pretty sure the brown ones aren’t issued any more, though – just sand and white.

  31. Green Thumb says:

    Actually they serve many utilitarian roles as well…

    Rags for weapons cleaning kits, rags for cleaning the latrines, etc..

    The funny thing, though, was when you would have to do those asnine layouts for schools, CI, etc.

    Nobody had any because no one wore them except the “lifers” and “hard charging heros”.

    Biggest scam in the Army as you then had to go purchase them from clothing and sales.

    What a scam.

  32. Mr. Blue says:

    I wonder if “intent” would work for other potentially career ending utterances? Say, in a sexual harassment case? Or if one was caught telling really racist jokes? How many political figures have been ruined when they’re said or done something they didn’t ” intend to be taken that way”?

    “Intend” is a poor excuse.

  33. Nik says:


    Interesting point. If this was a Title X issue, nobody would care about intent, just that someone was offended.

  34. CSE CSC says:

    @426: yes, Facebook requires authentication, but AFAIK that authentication is tied to nothing more than an e-mail address. So it can be anybody. If Facebook discovers that a user sets up multiple accounts, they shut down accounts. But I don’t know how vigilant Facebook is about finding multiple accounts. Not to mention that the community owner account called “Hire Lindsey Stone” is different than an individual user account. Exactly how, I do not know and I do not care enough to try to figure out.

    So, if we don’t know for certain the person who set up the “Hire Lindsey Stone” community, we sorta don’t really know anything beyond a reasonable doubt.

    I’m just playing devil’s advocate here. The first person usage in the post by the FB identity know as “Hire Lindsey Stone” is circumstantial evidence, but it says a lot to my ear. Thus, I have my own opinions about it, all I said is that I am reserving judgement.

  35. Retired Mil says:

    If she’s a 30 year-old, maybe just maybe she should leave this douchebaggery to someone who can actually blame it on youth and stupidity? Ooh smoking next to a “no smoking” sign…real edgy. Real challenge to authority… Been done. A Lot. Get original and GROW THE F UP and realize that your actions have consequences and the internet is everywhere.

  36. Anonymous says:

    @434: I actually take the opposite view – the first person view in the FB identity of ‘Hire Lindsey Stone’ seems TOO obvious, and I’m guessing it’s a prankster / troll who is just trying to rile people up. Successfully.

    There are millions of those people out there and one Lindsey Stone. After all this flak she’s getting, I doubt the first thing she’s going to do is go on, create a new FB profile about her, and start leaking identifying info.

  37. Ex-PH2 says:

    Still on this subject?

    Well, it’s now on the front page of MSN’s news section:

    As I have said here and elsewhere, NEVER GONNA DIE.

    I don’t know whether or note she started the “Hire Lindsey Stone” Facebook page, or had a hand in it. Whoever did it is definitely in the attention-seeking mindset there.

    This entire episode has been based on childish behavior in a 30-year-old someone who seems to think it’s okay to act like she’s 11, and it backfired badly, right in her face. If that doesn’t demonstrate how easy it is for something to get completely out of hand, then what will?


  38. Nik says:


    You’re much more forgiving of the human race than I.

    I can totally see a spoiled brat who thinks she hasn’t done anything wrong doing exactly what is believed by some in creating the “Hire Lindsey Stone” page.

    Now I haven’t pawed through all the comments, but the speaking in first person bit doesn’t seem to be common. That leads me to believe it was an accidental slip.

    Of course we’ll never reach a Sigma Six level of certainty. Hell, for all we know you could be Lindsey trying to throw us off the path. I doubt it, but the possibility exists.

    Given the remarkable lack of judgment she’s show thus far, I don’t put logic at the top of her list of skills.

    Logically, at minimum, she should keep her trap shut. She should try and keep people from defending her so society would move on to the next big thing.

    Then again, logically, she should never have taken that picture. Barring that…

    Logically she should never have posted on FB. Barring that…

    Logically she should have marked it as “private”. Barring that…

    Logically she should have taken it down when those around her were saying it was disrespectful.

    So, while it’s not logical for her to make an anonymous FB page in an attempt to defend herself, logic doesn’t figure into her plans too often.

    Logically, given that she works with folks who are disabled, she shouldn’t have been mocking them in public where someone with a camera could catch her doing it.

  39. Nik says:

    May as well chuck this in here, for people who aren’t following all the threads on this:

    “We wish to announce that the two employees recently involved in the Arlington Cemetery incident are no longer employees of LIFE. Again, we deeply regret any disrespect to members of the military and their families. The incident and publicity has been very upsetting to the learning disabled population we serve. To protect our residents, any comments, however well-intentioned, will be deleted. We appreciate your concern and understanding as we focus on the care of our community.”

  40. Ex-PH2 says:

    Thanks for posting that, Nik. Don’t have Facebook, so I can’t get past the “must log in” page.

    I hope someting good comes out of this, maybe some of the so-called millenials finally realizing that what you say and do has consequences that you may or may not want. Life is far too short as it is.

    You all have a nice Thanksgiving. And be grateful that we all live some place where we can speak our minds in freedom.

  41. rb325th says:

    @OWB, I think it is you who have little to offer to the conversation other than making assumptions about others motives and intentions.

    And yes, intent is everything. Intent is what makes a difference between someone being convicted of a crime or being found not guilty, or guilty of a lesser offense.
    In this case, they were guilty of taking a stupid photo in the wrong place. That is all they are guilty of. Not of being anti military, anti American, being Jane Fondas twin, of intentionally disrespecting anyone or anything. The disrespect was UNintentional… grab a dictionary and look up the words and their meanings.

    The comparison to the Piss Christ “art work” is utter nonsense. In that case the INTENT was clear that the artist sought to shock, demean, and insult Christianity.

    The fact is that an apology was given a month ago for this. Why did the photo remain on facebook? Ask the one who took it and posted it, it was not Lindsey though was it? She only apologised and stated that it was not their intent to be disrespectful the way it has been taken. The one whose album it was n should have deleted it… or at least not left her album open to the public… but that does not give anyone the right to go out and INTENTIONALLY try and destroy her life because the uninformed impression you would get from the photo is that she was being a world calls bitch disrespecting our fallen…Again though, that was not the case. It was not what she was thinking when the picture was taken, it is not what she was doing. It is what you see, nothing else matters but what you see regardless of the explanation and apology given a month ago.

    You all win though. You destroyed her life. Not likely she will see a decent paying job again anywhere, not likely the one she had was to begin with. That is okay though because you all righted a wrong that really did not exist… Seriously, Intent does matter no matter what how you try and worm your way away from it. Go sit in on a trial some time and see if Intent plays no role.

    I walk up to someone with a loaded gun, put the barrel to their head and pull the trigger the intent would be to kill them. If I had the same loaded gun and had a negligent discharge, it would not have been my intent to kill but the result would have been the same. The punishment from the court would be far different… It is why we have a legal system in this country and got away from Lynch Mobs.

  42. Nik says:

    Oh good lord. Her life is not destroyed. Hell, she lives in Mass. Liberal Central. If the Far Left had a center, that’s where it would be.

    Half the people in Boston would give her a medal for disrespecting the military.

    Now re-read this:

    “Of course, Lindsey’s friends told her that she was wrong, but she left the picture up on her Facebook thingie ”

    Hers. Lindsey’s. She chose to leave it there.

  43. rb325th says:

    Well Nik, it shows how little you know about the State I live in… Also, it was not Lindsey’s page the photo was on. OOPS… it was someone elses, the other one who got fired. Good to know you have your facts straight though.

    Oh and Plymouth is actually a conservative area in our State, not liberal but again good to know you have your facts straight

  44. Jonn Lilyea says:

    Sorry, it was indeed on Lindsey Stone’s FB page. that’s where I got the picture before it got yanked.

  45. Yat Yas 1833 says:

    @ 441-rb325th: “I think it is you who have little to offer to the conversation other than making assumptions about others motives and intentions.” Isn’t that what you’re doing too? Unless you’ve done an extended interview with her, you’re making assumptions. That being said…

    IMHO this airhead is a spoiled brat that didn’t care what she was doing. Thirty y/o and still living at home?! Acting out “douchebagness”? “Pushing the envelope” by smoking under a “No Smoking” sign? “Bucking authority” by doing the exact opposite of what the sign said in one of the most hallowed sites in the US? Well now she cares…maybe. I can only judge people by comparing my own life’s experiences. By the time I was 24 I had been a crew chief, section leader and acting Plt Sgt. By the time I was 30 I had graduated from Arizona State, had three kids and was working as an Operations Analyst for the city of Phoenix, Az. I was being an adult, thoughts of doing her cheap crap never crossed my mind. By the time my kids hit 30 they wouldn’t have thought about it either.

  46. CAs6 says:

    This dude is claiming his dad is a Navy SEAL in this chick’s defense. It would be interesting to find out if he really was.

    • Jonn Lilyea says:

      I noticed that everyone at that HuffPo link knows how veterans should feel because their dad or someone else they know was a vet. Like I know about racial issues because I have a black friend.

  47. OWB says:

    “@OWB, I think it is you who have little to offer to the conversation other than making assumptions about others motives and intentions.”

    Now you accuse me of making assumptions about others motives and intentions? Again, based upon exactly what do you make that accusation? Not anything I said, of course, because it is simply not true.

    But if it makes you feel better to make such statements, why just go on ahead and make them because all this is, you know, all about you and how you feel, after all.

    Or maybe it’s just another red herring. Or simply an inability to think logically. Whatevers.

    And, Yat, love ya, hermano mio, but it’s not what he is doing too. It’s just what he is doing. 😉

  48. Nik says:


    “Good to know you have your facts straight though.”


    “Sorry, it was indeed on Lindsey Stone’s FB page. that’s where I got the picture before it got yanked.”

    I’m sorry…I was distracted. What were you saying about facts?

    “Oh and Plymouth is actually a conservative area in our State, not liberal but again good to know you have your facts straight”

    “Senate President Therese Murray held onto her Plymouth seat, fighting off Republican challenger Tom Keyes in a second straight election, while a trio of incumbent GOP lawmakers fell victim to Democratic challengers.”


    I’m sorry. I got distracted again. Tell me how conservative Plymouth is again, please.

  49. Hondo says:

    Anonymous (416): Serrano reputedly disclaims political intent in making his famous photo. To any reasonable person, the subject matter of the photo itself screams otherwise. I don’t believe him; you choose to believe the obvious as well.

    Stone claims no disrespect was intended in her famous photo. The subject matter (gesture and location) argues otherwise, as do her subsequent statements on “Hire Lindsey Stone” which evidence disrespect for the military and a narcissistic personality. I don’t believe her; I believe the evidence my own eyes give me.

    Ignore the evidence your own eyes give you if you wish. It’s still a free country.

  50. Anonymous says:

    @ Hondo (#450): I agree that she’s showing disrespect in her now famous photo, but the target of that disrespect seems to be some vague notion of authority, as conveyed by a sign requesting silence and respect. Not the military, soldiers, the dead, etc. Had the photo shown the Tomb itself, the soldiers guarding it, gravestones, etc., I’d be more inclined to think otherwise.

    And I’d bet that ‘Hire Lindsey Stone’ is just someone trolling. Much in the same way that fake Twitter accounts of famous (or infamous) people are pretty common. I can’t be certain, but I’d give you a ten beers to one odds on that.

    So, to me, it isn’t ignoring evidence, it’s taking it into effect. We certainly agree people are free to draw different conclusions, though.