The comedy stylings of John Kerry have provided something else to play into GOP hands besides congressional pages. They’re teeing off on his statement that lack of education “lands you in Iraq,” claiming that he was trash-talking the troops. Everyone knows that lack of supporting the troops has replaced social security as the third rail of politics. Kerry’s response is that he was making a misfired joke about the administration.
Who to believe? Well, putting aside my personal dislike for Bush and the fact that I voted for Kerry, let’s see what makes more sense: The notion that Kerry, who served in the armed forces, would be dissing the troops, or that Kerry, who despises Bush and Co., would be dissing the administration.
To quote that great pundit, Daffy Duck: Pronoun trouble. Displaying the comedic instincts of a California Redwood, Kerry SHOULD have said “we.” “We wind up in Iraq,” which would have made it at least somewhat clearer. Or if he insisted on “you,” then it becomes, “you wind up landing us in Iraq.” Something like that.
Considering word around the campfire is that “Studio 60” may be shutting down soon, perhaps Kerry can draft Aaron Sorkin to write some jokes for him.
PAD
• 
“Often within a few hours of each other.” Two questions, Jerry. One, I hope not by the same people? And two, in your office, it can take HOURS? And just be careful you don’t use that brilliant arguement stopper with members of the NRA, okay?
Seriously, this country has become so divided along party lines(or has it always been this way and I just had my head in the sand?) that if you’re not a dogma-spewing sycophant to either side you’re the FACE of EVIL. I have some liberal views, I have some conservative views, this doesn’t make me schizophrenic(my schizophrenia makes me schizophrenic)it makes me WELL ROUNDED. (First one to bring up weight watchers gets it.) I’m willing to step out of my hula hoop and look at things that might be different. I also don’t proclaim to have all the answers about anything but my writing. Lately all the political ads seem like late night gadget commercials to me. Hawking things that you don’t REALLY need or want, but people are so desperate to get them in your face. Liberal, conservative, Republican, Democrat, why is it that we have such the need to organize things into groups like that? Is it because everyone’s afraid their ideas won’t stand on their own? (I bloody well know I am, at least!) I know that if I talk like this at work, most of the trogs that I work with will either just jab at me for being a Giants fan in Philly or tell me I’m stupid.
Anybody else now picturing Bill Mulligan as Dr. Evil after that Big Boy reference?
Posted by Craig J. Ries:
He said my mom was ok with it. I found out later she wasn’t quite so amused by the prospect – she’s a Republican, but even she recognizes how badly we’ve screwed up with Iraq.
After we got back from our trip, I talked to my dad and he had said that brother wanted to be sent to Iraq. This was not something that my brother had told my mom; again, she wasn’t very amused.
He left for basic in mid-Sept. So, I don’t know what his problem is. And I say it quite openly: if you join the military now, knowing what Bush has done, you’re an idiot.
I’m sorry that you and your family are in that situation. I see recruiting ads for the armed forces on TV these days and think “Nice try.” Guess they work on some people, though. Has he since bothered to explain to anybody why he wanted to go there? If you’re gonna put your life at risk, I’d say that you should at least tell your mother about your plans and tell her why it’s important to you, even if she disagrees with your decision.
Sorry, I should’ve previewed that last post and made sure the entire quote was italicized. The quote ends with the word “idiot” and my respone begins immediately after, just to clear things up for any third parties who are reading it.
So where does the gay-bashing come in, Chimpy McHitlerburton
. He did his compulsory one year tour of duty, and then volunteered for another. I don’t know why he volunteered for the second one. I can only say that he came back disillusioned and embittered.
I suppose there would be a lot of variables to take into account here.
At a guess, I would have to say he obviously wasn’t so disillusioned after his first tour that he felt he was up to a second. Or, along the same lines, maybe it was some particular incident during the second that did it for him.
But even before we went to Iraq, comparisions as to its potential to compare to Vietnam were made evident. And, sure enough, it’s our generation’s Vietnam.
The whole thing comes down to the fact that my brother decided to sign up knowing who was the president, knowing what the situation is in Iraq, and I can only hope that should he get sent over, he doesn’t regret that decision by coming back like your uncle did. Or worse.
“Bill Myers, you’d have a long way to go before you even approach Mike’s trollishness. Trollocity. Whatever.”
Trollhood?
—————–
“And it just gives you further proof that our two-party system is a complete failure right now, because it attempts to force people into simple labels which are then used against you.”
Having more parties doesn’t prevent this problem. sometimes it’s even worse, there are no gradients. On the one hand political parties become tribes, on the other hand the same black and white attitude remains.
I’ve been accused of being a centrist (by an american who probably left the Us because, when asked if he belongs or has ever belonged to the communist party, the answer was yes).
It would be nice if people treat the ideas and concerns of different poits of view with equal seriousness, and then try to realistically balance these concerns.
——————
I’m no authority on this subject. But it is said that soldiers risk their lives not for ideals or for generals but for their friends.
——————
Mike, I can’t believe that you have been arguing with Bill and Bill on two threads based on the ridiculous claim that Bill Mulligan somehow does not take genocide seriously. I can’t believe you actually believe something that silly.
But even before we went to Iraq, comparisions as to its potential to compare to Vietnam were made evident. And, sure enough, it’s our generation’s Vietnam.
Before the first Gulf War, George H.W. Bush assured the country that it would NOT be another Vietnam. He turned out to be right.
Before this war, George W. Bush made no such assurance, at least as far as I know. This despite the allegations that the stakes were higher, that this time it was America being threatened instead of Kuwait. I wonder if he or anybody under him even considered the possibility it would turn out like Vietnam. Obviously his father, whatever you think of him, understood the risks of occupation.
Wikipedia entry on “Desertion” says:
“According to the Pentagon, more than 5500 military personnel deserted in 2003–2004, following the Iraq invasion and occupation. The number had reached about 8000 by the first quarter of 2006. Another report stated that since 2000, about 40,000 troops from all branches of the military have deserted, also according to the Pentagon. More than half of these served in the US Army. Almost all of these soldiers deserted within the USA. There has only been one reported case of a desertion in Iraq.”
Micha,
I’m sorry y’all were educated to disregard the Merriam-Webster dictionary, but that isn’t my problem.
Mike, I can’t believe that you have been arguing with Bill and Bill on two threads based on the ridiculous claim that Bill Mulligan somehow does not take genocide seriously. I can’t believe you actually believe something that silly.
He doesn’t. I’m not sure Mike believes much of anything–if he does it hasn’t been very apparent. It’s just attention getting behavior. I wouldn’t be surprised if he uses other names in other forums arguing the exact opposite of whatever he says here, if that’s what it gets to make people pay attention to him.
And I know Bill Myers and I are guilty of egging the poor sap on but there comes a time in the life of any thread when it becomes Time To Poke The Troll. I know this is not at all an ennobling characteristic but…
Bill Myers–while one of my least favorite claims is the one that says something tothe effect that “if I get complaints from both the left and the right I must be doing something right” (a favorite among bad journalists everywhere) what you are saying is soemthing else entirely. It’s just intellectual laziness on the part of people to try to force everyone into neat little packages–no different really than those insecure church members who MUST try to convert everyone to their own theology. Usually when someone is quick to accuse perfectly reasonable people of being “right wing crypto-fascists” or “commie liberal america haters” they are showing their own doubts about the validity of their views. It’s always the smallest people who make the biggest deal over the slightest thing.
Screw ’em.
Why even pay them any mind? Nobody makes us read Ann Coulture or watch Keith Olberman or any of the others making a buck throwing red meat to the people who need the constant reinforcement. You can find like souls in all kinds of places–blogs devoted to great comic book writers, for instance.
I’m sorry y’all were educated to disregard the Merriam-Webster dictionary, but that isn’t my problem.
Like the proverbial blind squirrel that finds the occasional nut, you have stumbled on a truth, Mike. No, that ISN’T your problem.
You’re assignment for the weekend is to reflect deeply and try to figure out just what your problem is.
I’m sorry y’all were educated to disregard the Merriam-Webster dictionary, but that isn’t my problem.
Your lack of intelligence shouldn’t be our problem either, but it is.
Posted by: Bill Mulligan at November 3, 2006 03:49 PM
Why even pay them any mind?
You mean like my family, friends, co-workers…? It gets hard to ignore them all.
But you’re right. There are a lot of people who “get it.” Like our host and many of the people who hang out here.
Six words: Don’t you think _______ looks tired?
Rick
“Like the proverbial blind squirrel that finds the occasional nut, you have stumbled on a truth, Mike. No, that ISN’T your problem.”
I now have this image of the squirrel from Ice Age (the cartoon) holding a dictionary.
——
It is not that I disregard the dictionary, I just don’t think you are using it correctly.
“But I will say that my situational ideology does seem to make me a pariah wherever I go.”
You think you have it bad? My beliefs generally don’t even fall within the parameters of our political system. I’m registered independent, I tend to vote to the left (sometimes as far left as the Peace and Freedom Party), but I’m not a socialist, and in an ideal world I’d be an anarchist (but this is far from an ideal world). So basically I have no politics, and voting for me usually entails voting for the lesser of two or more evils, based on choices that exist at right angles to my political beliefs.
Try explaining that to your liberal friends and family members. “See, I’m voting this way, but I believe this, and you see, uh, I can’t support that, and, uh…” So I usually don’t try.
“And it just gives you further proof that our two-party system is a complete failure right now, because it attempts to force people into simple labels which are then used against you.”
Exactly.
“And it just gives you further proof that our two-party system is a complete failure right now, because it attempts to force people into simple labels which are then used against you.”
I’m SO mad that this quote has the “right now” in there, because I was all set to go off and say it’s not that the system has failed, it’s that people have failed to understand the potential of the system and this, that and the other thing. I don’t even know who originally posted it, because the aborigines that live in my sinuses are using my head for drum signals. But yeah, right now, it’s not working, but for the reasons I said.
Don’t even get me talking about blind squirrels finding their nuts.
Posted by: Robert Fuller at November 3, 2006 04:22 PM
You think you have it bad?
No. No, I don’t. “Pariah” was far too strong a word. There are places where people are jailed, tortured, even killed for taking a political stand. By comparison, all I have to do is avoid political conversations with certain people and everything’s okay.
Do I think I have it bad? No. I think I have it very, very good.
How does what Bill Mulligan said not match the definition of genocide?
Well, considering the orc-chitter you’ve been caught engaging in, why wouldn’t you suspect others of engaging in that kind of chickenshit?
“It is not that I disregard the dictionary, I just don’t think you are using it correctly.
What I object to is making it worse to penalize a killer for supposedly holding some emotion in their heart, especially if such emotion is only likely to apply to certain racial/ethnic/sexual identity/political affiliation groups.
genocide: the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group
How does what Bill Mulligan said not match the definition of genocide?”
In that 1 is not equal millions
“supposedly holding an emotion only likely to apply” does not match “the deliberate and systematic destruction.”
and “worse to penalize a killer” does not match “not penalizing a killer.”
Posted by Bill Mulligan
He wasn’t slamming the military over Vietnam but rather the policy.
I don’t know…an awful lot of vets felt differently. It’s a sore point at any rate and a smarter man would be careful not to feed the perception of animus.
Are you a Viet Nam vet? I am – not combat, but i was there for a year.
Yeah, some Nam vets were unhappy with Kerry and crew, but some of us felt perhaps they weren’t going far enough.
And an important point to recall is that Kerry did not say “I saw X” or “I did Y” – he said “Numbers of Viet Nam veterans have said that they saw X or they did Y.”
Posted by L. Walker
Bill Mulligan: “The campaign is your entrance exam. It’s the test you take to show you are smart enough for the job.
Furthermore, the results of a campaign can be used to measure intelligence now?
If the electorate elect a stupic candidate, it proves the electorate is stupid this year.
Posted by Jason M. Bryant
“How do you view Senator Kerry’s remark?
A deliberate insult 58%
A botched joke 34%
I’m not sure 9%”
I’d be willing to bet that most of that 58% voted for Bush instead of Kerry in the last election.
And since this was an open AOL poll, with no scientific control, people who have a Srong Opinion (usually negative, at that) are more likely to vote in it than those who, say, “aren’t sure”. Multiple times.
Posted by Megan
Dumb question:
Not dumb. It’s one of those quirks of idiom that even a lot of people who use don’t couldn’t quote you the origin of.
What does “GOP” stand for? What is it’s role? Is it equivalent to the Lower House of Parliament (in a bi-cameral system), or is it something different?
It’s an alternate term for the Republican Party in the US – “Grand Old Party”.
Application of a little google-fu leads me to this squib (from a BBC site, interestingly enough:
The traditional nickname for the Republican Party widely used in American political reporting.
The party’s official history traces the term back to the late 19th century citing an article in the Boston Post headlined “The G.O.P. Doomed”.
The party website suggests the term Grand Old Party may have evolved from the term used to refer to British Prime Minister William Gladstone – the G.O.M or the Grand Old Man.
Posted by Mark L
On the flip side, Limbaugh apologized to Michael J. Fox within the same broadcast of his off-the-cuff comment, and no one paid attention to that apology either.
Fatso’s “apology” consisted of saying “If I’m wrong, I’ll apologise.”
Of course, he gets to determine whether he’s wrong…
Posted by Blue Spider
The Winter Soldier Investigation did not involve, for the most part, genuine testimonies from genuine veterans. The entire project was a hoax formulated by a group called the Vietnam Veterans Against the War. Lt. Kerry was an integral member of the group.
Wanna come up with some actual evidence for points (10 & (2) in your statement? I run across the claim. I never see any evidence advanced, simply variations on your statements above.
Posted by Den
We’re in the era of the political spots featuring naked Betty Boop impersonators.
Uhhh – WHAT? When? Where? Who?
Posted by Den
TW, here’s Republican Media Analyst on last nights Anderson Cooper 306:
This wasn’t a botch joke about an individual that, if you stripped away the context, sounds like an insult to the troops. He’s flat out calling many American voters morons.
George Bush the Lesser is serving his second term as President, the election for one of which he actually won.
The man may have a valid point.
What I object to is making it worse to penalize a killer for supposedly holding some emotion in their heart, especially if such emotion is only likely to apply to certain racial/ethnic/sexual identity/political affiliation groups.
And what the jáçkášš fails to see–and it’s taken this long for him to make this clear–is that what I was saying was that it is the HATE LAW that will not be applied fairly because only those emotions that are directed at certain groups are deemed worthy of the designation. I even gave an example–the guy who ran around shooting white people to the exclusion of other groups but the police were trying to minimize the “hate” aspects of it.
Sorry if this makes me a Nazi in the tiny wrinkles of Mikes, er, “mind”, but I don’t think a crime is instantly worse when committed against a person who is, say, latino, than if it were exactly the same with only the ethnicity of the victim different.
So if Mike acts on his seeming animus against gays and assults someone he suspects of being gay–which, as we have seen, could be anyone–I think he should get the exact same penalty even if the victim actually turned out to be gay.
“”Often within a few hours of each other.” Two questions, Jerry. One, I hope not by the same people? And two, in your office, it can take HOURS? And just be careful you don’t use that brilliant arguement stopper with members of the NRA, okay?”
1) No, not by the same people. Although, we did have a dispatcher that was that nuts once. She was a strange bird and, I think, just a little bit schizophrenic. She would go on for several minutes sounding like X-Ray, get jammed up debate wise and then start sounding like Mike. You would start the conversation being wrong because you were a lib and end it being wrong because you were a conservative. You would also have no idea what she was talking about by the end of it. We were so glad when she left.
2) My office is a wee bit different then yours since I’m a police officer. I may not see more then three of my coworkers in any two to three hour time period.
And, that NRA thing? All I’ll say is,
🙂
Are you a Viet Nam vet? I am – not combat, but i was there for a year.
Yeah, some Nam vets were unhappy with Kerry and crew, but some of us felt perhaps they weren’t going far enough.
Which is why I said “an awful of of vets” not “all vets” or even just “vets”. I would not presume to speak for so diverse a group.
Anyway, I didn’t realize there was someone even older than me here! Where were you stationed? My uncle did 2 tours, but it’s not anything he talks about much. I’d be very interested to hear your perspective on it.
Why even pay them any mind?
You mean like my family, friends, co-workers…? It gets hard to ignore them all.
Yeah, you’re right. In my family we argue politics all the time but it’s more comedy than drama. My former in-laws, who I am still quite fond of, are far more liberal–they may be the only listeners Air America still has. It would hurt their feelings and spoil the dinner if I objected to their opinions, some of which I have considerable disagreement with…so why bother? What do I have to prove? No minds will be changed and some might find the party spoiled so I don’t see the point. But I only see them a few times a year so it’s no sacrifice on my part to keep my big yap shut.
Bill Mulligan,
Yeah, hate crimes are just about the most mind numbingly stupid things in design, intent and execution. Can’t stand the things myself.
You hit on the example I always use. There have been several examples of a black male killing and/or injuring white people only and, while in the act, telling others that they don’t need to worry because they’re not white and thus not his target. Hate crime laws just go out the window because the legal system declines to use them on them. Why? Well, these guys are just examples of poor victims of society and are only acting out of frustration and not hate.
I’ve also always found the intent of the dámņëd things to be laughable as well. One of the things that they tout about them is that the extra sentencing and penalties involved with a hate crime is an extra deterrent against people actually committing the crime in the first place.
Yeah, right.
Remember the two white guys who grabbed the one black man in Texas and dragged him to death behind their truck? They committed murder and they did it just because the guy was black. The penalty for murder in Texas is death. Do you really think that if they had known that they were about to commit a hate crime they would have looked at each other, decided that the extra penalty ON TOP OF THE DEATH SENTENCE wasn’t worth the risk and not done it?
Hëll, they’re also getting to the point that I think victims are crying wolf whenever I hear about it in the news. Backing that up: As I’m typing this, the news is on. They just arrested a UNH student (I think the name is Snell) who is from around here for reporting a false hate crime to the police. Wonder how bad she jammed some poor schmuck up with her original charge?
Micha,
Intent is a requirement to prosecute murder. As for “systematic”:
This applies to systems of belief (2 : something believed; especially : a tenet or body of tenets held by a group). Racism is a system. Bill Mulligan’s “[emotion] only likely to apply to certain… groups” comment describes the selective application of principle — to not kill — for the sake racial/ethnic/sexual identity/political affiliation.
Thus genocide.
I never said it does. I said Bill Mulligan is trying to render the word genocide obsolete, to flatten the distinction between genocide and murder.
I’m just comparing what you said to the definition of genocide, Bill Mulligan. I haven’t addressed your justification for trying to render the word obsolete, but thanks for submitting it anyway.
Y’know, somebody in high school told me that GOP stood for “Government Of The People” which to me sounded like it should be China and also GOTP, which cracked me up for three days straight. Just goes to show don’t listen to everything the smart kids say in high school.
Actually, Jerry, there are days when I’m working that I don’t see anyone at all, but I hear them over my headset. It’s lonely being a videographer. And not nearly as cool as being a police officer. I was going to be one until I found out the police don’t like brain damage, either.
If I could ask a question, who actually decides if something is a hate crime other than just ordinary crime?
Mike, for a person so attached to his dictionary you do a lousy job of using it or the logic such focus on words implies.
Systematic does not refer to a systematic racism, it refers to the organs of a state working systematically to kill a group. In the holocaust this system was the most complex. It wasn’t only racism. It was racism + Nirenberg laws laws + pressure on other countries + propaganda + ghettos + trains + concentration camps + gas chambers — the movement of millions through this system.
the distinction between genocide and murder is not only that one is motivated by racism and the other was not. There is obviously another small difference that Bill, I think, is more aware of than you. A difference that is much more important than the emotional state of mind of the perpetuators of the genocide — namely the systematic killing of millions.
The word genocide means killing of a race or nation
Since Bill is against killing individuals, one can assume that he is also againt killing of a race or nation of people.
The absurdity of your argument against Bill is easily refuted logically (I don’t remember formal logic, so forgive me any mistakes on that regard,but here is the point):
Person X kills Person Y for racist reasons
Group X kills Group Y for racist reasons.
Bill believes in punishing person X for killing Y
but not in punishing person X for hating Y.
ergo
Bill believes in punishing group X for killing group Y
but not in punishing group X for hating group Y.
Shame on you for making such absurd accusations just in order to win a minor political argument (and not even succeeding at that). It’s dirty politics and intellectual dishonesty
Micha, you said in just a few words what i was about to say in way too many. Thanks for saving me the trouble.
I’m not sure if Mike’s wierdness is just a childish refusal to admit he doesn’t know what he is talking about or something more sinister. I’m waiting for him to just take off the mask and show us his true agenda. I’m suspecting it won’t be pretty.
Micha,
Just run for your life and never look back. Getting stuck on Mad Mikey’s Merry-Go-Round of “logic” is a pointless and futile endeavor. You’ll spend hours going nowhere while getting bored stiff, dizzy and more then a little nauseous. And you’ll just walk away wondering what the point of getting on in the first place was.
Plus, unless you really enjoy the sport of Troll whipping, you could easily find a more intellectually fulfilling ways to pass the time. Like, say, picking the lint out of your navel?
“I was going to be one until I found out the police don’t like brain damage, either.”
What makes you think that? Proof of brain damage is part of the hiring process. Comes right after proof of marksmanship.
“If I could ask a question, who actually decides if something is a hate crime other than just ordinary crime? “
God only knows at this point. Whoever has the most money, lawyers and influence? The NAACP? Dumbo and Goofy?
The definition of genocide does not specify a group performing the killing. Otherwise, your summary of Bill Mulligan’s point doesn’t even match what he said:
Thank you for helping me make my point with less and less ambiguity.
Micha, your sophisticated logic is no match for his puny mind.
I’m sorry, Micha, but that’s a match. You may as well argue that the nazi’s weren’t performing genocide because they hadn’t yet established a system to exterminate the Jews in New York and everywhere else. Quibbling over whether the killer succeeded in killing 1 or 2 people to establish the “group requirement” — that’s just divide and conquor. A crude genocide is still genocide.
I think I see Mike’s agenda. By claiming ANY racially motivated murder is genocide he tries to reduce the true horror of real genocide. Classic Holocaust revisionism. Go peddle your hate somewhere else, Eichman.
As defined by the person who coined the word “genocide”:
Go crawl back under your rock.
The act is wearing thin but, as always, the last word shall be yours. Once again I cast the shroud of thread death upon you. You’ll have to try hijacking another thread before I deign to acknowledge your empty existence. Go, and never darken my towels again!
“Plus, unless you really enjoy the sport of Troll whipping, you could easily find a more intellectually fulfilling ways to pass the time. Like, say, picking the lint out of your navel?”
Can’t I do both?
Oy, Mike, how can somebody be so literal minded and yet get everything so muddled is beyond me.
In a world devoid of super villains genocide is likely to be performed by a group. Furthermore, part of what makes the crime so henious — the systematic part — is that it is done by a group of people. Somebody has used the term the banality of evil.
However, you may replace group X with person/s X. It doesn’t matter for the argument.
The fact that the Nazi’s only killed only 6 milion Jews could be interpreted by someone with an obsessively literal mind to mean that they only attempted Genocide. History tells us that they were interested in eliminating the Jews completely. Only a very very literal minded person would suggest that they weren’t attempting Genocide, because some Jews were beyond their immediate plans. However, even all these mental (not logical) games do not change the original argument.
Bill opposes the killing of person Y or group Y by person or persons X, but does not consider their emotional state as relevant.
Your pedantic literal mind has also failed to notice the words likely and supposedly in Bill’s often quoted but completely misunderstood argument. These two words + many other words you have ignored should suggest to a person of less pedantic attitude that Bill’s argument is that it is sometimes difficult to determine whether an action was actually motivated by racial hatred in many cases. In the case of Genocide the actions speak for themselves, since they are part of a systematic effort to marginlize and then kill. Furthermore, the absurdity of your argument can also be demonstrated historically. Many of the people involved in killing Jews did not hate Jews specifically. Some were indifferent, others were sadists jumping on an opportunity, or just following orders. This is the banality of evil.
However, I’m happy to say that thanks to your tenacity, I have now understood your still eronious point. What you are saying in that since person X killed person Y for racial reasons that are similar to reasons that motivate genocides, Person X is actually attempting a very slow or crude genocide. If this is yor argument than I am afraid you both don’t understand genocide and are guilty of trivializing it to the point of absurdity. Unfortunatly, this is happening all too often these days.
Obviously, some, but not all, peole who ommit a hate crime would have liked to have been able to attempt a genocide. Others may just be violent or seeking to terrorize. But even those who would have liked to see a genocide being done to their victims cannot be considered to be actualy engaging in genocide, unless you have actual evidence of a systematic plan. In fact, all this only strengthens Bill’s argument, that it is difficult to know what’s in people’s mind, and that the focus should be on the actions.
——-
I can’t believe I’ve wasted so many words on this. Now to the lint.
Look at how Bill Mulligan shelters his racism:
As defined by the person who coined the word “genocide”:
What Bill Mulligan, Bill Myers, Jerry C, Craig J Ries, and Micha deny is genocide-apologism:
Pitiful.
Is ridiculouser a word?
Micha, welcome to the club. It’s unfortunate that al of this has been focused around The Shrouded One since there really IS an interesting discussion to be had about genocide and the fight against it. Most people, for example, mistakenly think that the Gen part stands for genetic, making the word not appropriate in cases where the killing is not against specific racial or at the very least ethnic groups. Actually it was originally going to also apply to political or ideological groups but the Soviets refused to allow it be used in the definitions.
Anyway, good luck with the lint. You’ll find the endeavor more rewarding.
Sean Scullion –
I’m SO mad that this quote has the “right now” in there, because I was all set to go off and say it’s not that the system has failed, it’s that people have failed to understand the potential of the system and this, that and the other thing.
Well, it was my quote. 🙂
But seriously, on another site, somebody asked the question of whether our system of government has failed. I said basically what you said: no, the system of government hasn’t, the people have.
But, I think the two-party system, which is separate from the government itself (or should be) sucks obscene things, and should be rid of. 🙂
Bill Mulligan –
I’m suspecting it won’t be pretty.
Are we talking Michael Jackson pretty or Halloween-Michael Meyers pretty?
Mike –
What Bill Mulligan, Bill Myers, Jerry C, Craig J Ries, and Micha deny is genocide-apologism:
I’d really like to know how my name got lumped in with such a wonderfully distinguished group of individuals.
I mean, apparently by coming to my own, independent conclusion that Mike is a dûmbášš, I am a genocide-apologist… or some weird crap like that.
I think Mike has attempted to jump from point D to point V, but managed to get lost somewhere along the way, like, oh, around point A.
Posted by: Mike at November 3, 2006 02:43 PM
So where does the gay-bashing come in, Chimpy McHitlerburton
There is no gay-bashing at Chimpy McHitlerburton’s, the finest fast-food chain run by chimpanzees anywhere in the Northeastern United States.
What’s the secret behind our discrimination-free, mouth-wateringly tasty fast food? Our hamburger beef comes from nothing but the finest homosexual cows!
Come to Chimpy McHitlerburton’s, where the beef is gay and you’ll be happy.
Posted by: Mike at November 3, 2006 07:34 PM
Intent is a requirement to prosecute murder.
Yeah, that reminds me, Mickey — you’re still under investigation for this inventing the rain and the sky thing. I’ve just learned that a lot of people have been killed falling from the sky over the years, and others have drowned in floods caused by excessive rainfall. This has just become a murder investigation, and you’re the prime suspect.
Moreover, three people died of boredom reading your drivel.
Three. Good. People.
You won’t recognize their names because they were lurkers. But I swear to you, I’ll see you rot in jail for this, Mickey.
(I know I made this big emotional thing, hand nailed to forehead, flagellating myself for being a troll on a par with Mike and vowing to stop. Blame Bill Mulligan. He gave me a pep-talk via e-mail and now I’m back, worse than ever.
(Oh, yeah, there is a post I wrote earlier today that got caught in the spam filter, and once it’s posted, it’ll make me look a bit schizo. But you know what? I am a bit of a nutter and I’m at peace with it.)
Posted by: Craig J. Ries at November 3, 2006 02:43 PM
I can only hope that should he get sent over, he doesn’t regret that decision by coming back like your uncle did. Or worse.
Thankfully, things worked out for my uncle. He has a loving wife (his first and only marriage), two grown daughters, and a successful career as an engineer. I daresay he’s happy, even with the scars he’s had to carry.
Again, I hope for the best possible outcome for your brother and the rest of your family.
And Craig? For what it’s worth… in my book, your brother’s service is honorable. It’s the administration in Washington that’s not.
Just one little point to all the people brainwashed by the swiftboaters. Kerry was not “slamming the troops” to congress. He was recounting the personal testimony of over 150 veterans. He was reading THIER testimony. He even states in his testimony that he personally didn’t witness any of these acts himself. Google “Winter Soldier” and you’ll get the whole story. Google “Kerry testimony” and you’ll get the whole story. For God’s sake just google anything and do some thinking for yourself! This is the biggest thing that scares me about Republicans is the “dittohead” precedent that’s been set by the talking heads. By God if they tell you to believe it you do (that is pretty much what “dittohead” means, yes? If he says it then I think it!) and if anyone dares question otherwise or point out things like one of the swiftboaters recanted his testimony, then recanted his recant (flip-flopper!) then we are called anti-American. One of the swifties is seen on video saying John Kerry is the bravest man he ever met–during Kerry’s campaign ten years before all this nonsense. They railroaded you folks because they knew a decorated war hero (whose military record had never been in question the 32 years before the election) would be a problem for them image wise. It’s easy to find this out for yourself, but none of you ever bother to because it’s so much easier to say “no way was I wrong, it’s just the liberal media trying to trick me.” They told you Kerry applied for a Purple Heart and you took their word for it–thereby cheapening every Purple Heart ever given, since they’re apparantly handed out like candy. The military opened an investigation because of these self-serving dìçkhëádš, and found NOTHING out of the ordinary. You see, Purple Hearts are only awarded if specific conditions are met. You don’t ask for them. (for full disclosure: you can request a board review a situation if you feel one was in order but wasn’t awarded. A very rare circumstance and something Kerry never did. He released his full military records in 2005 by the way. They contained nothing interesting and nothing that hadn’t already been beaten to death in the media) A review board looks over the reports and decides if the situation merits awarding one. I bet this is news to most republicans. Google “Purple Heart”. It’s easy. The very first hit actually lists the requirements by the military that explain the circumstances that have to be met in order for one to be awarded. And anyone stupid enough to bash Kerry for deciding to leave Vietnam when he could…show me your Purple Heart.
Chimpy McHitburgers? Taken from lesbian cows? Not a happy visual. But darn tasty.
Craig, just so you know (and so it’s not connected in any way to any response to our resident crimbil) I’m thinking of you, your brother and your family. I just really hope that he doesn’t see any action, same as I hope for all the uniformed types.
Craig,
Same from here.
Posted by Bill Mulligan
Anyway, I didn’t realize there was someone even older than me here!
Turned 58 two weeks ago.
I seem to recall a post or two from at least one other ‘Nam vet, but neither when, on what topic, or who.
Where were you stationed? My uncle did 2 tours, but it’s not anything he talks about much. I’d be very interested to hear your perspective on it.
Communications station at Cam Ranh Bay, 1969 to 1970. Right across the street from the HQ of Operation Market Time, one of the swift boat/brown water navy operations.
Thankfully, things worked out for my uncle. He has a loving wife (his first and only marriage), two grown daughters, and a successful career as an engineer. I daresay he’s happy, even with the scars he’s had to carry.
“drive on”, by Johnny Cash, who spent a year (or most of one) in-country, on his own dime, living in a trailer on a firebase entertaining the troops before they went in, after they came back, and in the hospitals and aid stations…
You might ask your uncle if he’s heard that song – it’s on the first “American Recordings” album… or, if he has, what he thinks about it.
And, for those who want to get a feel for what it was like for the real combat troops in Nam, may i recommend David Drake’s SF – particularly the novels Rolling Hot – a science-fictionalised vesion of the Tet Offensive (currently aailable in his collection, The Tank Lords – and Redliners, a look at how some people looked at us (“…toxic waste that occasionally explodes without warning…”) when we came back from The Bad Place, and about a orm of the redemption so many of us never got.
It’s thirty-plus years and more, but some of us here at home are still in that jungle, fighting that war, and nobody seems to be thinking much about them anymore…
And does anyone think, if i live to be ninety, that i’m going to see the vets of this year’s little military misadventure treated any better?
Posted by: mike weber at November 4, 2006 02:55 AM
It’s thirty-plus years and more, but some of us here at home are still in that jungle, fighting that war, and nobody seems to be thinking much about them anymore…
My mother has told me her brother doesn’t like to talk about what happened. I choose to respect his wishes. If he wanted to talk… to spill his guts and recount every last horror in cinematic, gut-wrenching detail… I’d listen. But it’s his choice.
Oh, and Mike Weber, thank you for your service to this country. I regret that your sacrifices have been met with apathy and antipathy. I don’t believe the Vietnam war should have been fought, but that is the fault of the government that sent you there. Those who answered the call of duty — whether they volunteered or were drafted — deserve nothing but respect, and, when in need, our help.