Generation chickenhawk: Max Blumenthal does the College Republican Convention

Hypocrisy isn’t just for elected Republicans. It’s an important “family value” for the whole cult!

Read Mr. Blumenthal’s post here.

Comments

  1. 1

    RightEqualsStupid spews:

    This is toooooo fucking funny. Reminds me of some other chickenshit, chickenhawks.

    Lush Flimbaugh – had a boil on his ass
    Dickless Cheney – had other priorities
    Karl Rove – deferments
    Handjob Hannity – didn’t have time
    GW Bush – went AWOL after daddy pulled strings to get him into NG

    I purposely find Publicans and ask them if they support the war in Iraq. Then I ask them why they aren’t over there fighting it – same stuff – they stammer and stutter and repeat cowardly talking points engineered by traitors like Rove. Any five-year-old could figure out they’re cowards and hypocrites. Great video.

  2. 2

    YOS LIB BRO spews:

    THIS IS SO GOOD, I’M GOING TO POST IT IN EVERY THREAD FROM NOW ON. (H/T MTR THE WELSHER)

    HOW DO YOU TELL A “REAL” REPUBLICAN? WTF? SHIT, IT AIN’T THAT FUCKING HARD.

    1) THEY’RE MOSTLY BALD, FAT, BUDWEISER-SWILLING, ANGRY WHITE MALES WITH SOME UGLY FACIAL HAIR.
    2) THEY EMBRACE THIEVERY AND CORRUPTION BY THEIR PARTY.
    3) THEY POP A WOODY WHEN A PIECE OF HARDWARE FUNDED BY CORRUPTION MONEY MOWS DOWN A BUNCH OF POOR BROWN PEOPLE IN SOME GODFORSAKEN COUNTRY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WORLD. IT’S BETTER THAN VIAGRA TO THEM!
    4) THEY GO TO WHORE HOUSES TO WEAR DIAPERS.
    5) THEY HAVE NO FUCKING CLUE THAT THEIR CORRUPTION IS DESTROYING THIS COUNTRY.
    6) WHEN THEY LOSE A BET WITH A DEMOCRAT, THEY WELSH ON IT!

    WHAT A BUNCH OF FUCKING LOSERS!

    I’M KIDDING, KIND OF, ABOUT REPEATING THIS OF COURSE.

  3. 4

    spews:

    Darryl, with that stylish mullet and troll beard of yours, I’m guessing you somehow missed serving in the military too. I mean, all those many years chasing your PhD — guess you had better things to do. That’s the advantage of an all volunteer military–those who chose to serve do, those who don’t can do lofty things like bum around on college campuses, indefinitely.

    Tell me, do you bait your students with this chickenhawk bullshit? Or is this something you do from behind the anonymity of the Internet?

  4. 6

    spews:

    Auntie…

    “Darryl, with that stylish mullet and troll beard of yours, I’m guessing you somehow missed serving in the military too.”

    But…but..but Auntie, I don’t support the war. I thought you do support the war. So, what is your excuse? Flat feet? Bad knees? Low IQ? Or are you just another yellow elephant?

    “I mean, all those many years chasing your PhD — guess you had better things to do.”

    Indeed! (Although, as it happened, I was too young for Vietnam and too old for the Gulf war.)

    “That’s the advantage of an all volunteer military–those who chose to serve do, those who don’t can do lofty things like bum around on college campuses, indefinitely.”

    I think you should personally show your support for the war. It’s easy Auntie…really! Visit your local recruiter tomorrow!

    “Tell me, do you bait your students with this chickenhawk bullshit?”

    Naaaaa…I rarely mention Republicans in front of students. No need to traumatize them.

    “Or is this something you do from behind the anonymity of the Internet?”

    Your sentence doesn’t really mean anything. Perhaps you meant to say, “Or is this something you do anonymously on the Internet?”

    “Anonymity?” Am I anonymous?

  5. 7

    spews:

    Darryl, someone has to stay on the home front and keep sasquatch look alike university professors from stabbing our troops in the back. In that sense, I’m proudly a member of the 101st Fighting Keyboardists.

    Using your logic Darryl, “if only a soldier can speak for the war, then how can somebody who is not a soldier speak against the war?” (see Eric Svane for more on the fallacy of the “chickenhawk” epithet).

  6. 9

    Another TJ spews:

    Darryl, someone has to stay on the home front and keep sasquatch look alike university professors from stabbing our troops in the back.

    Dolschtosslegende!!! It’s not just for Nazis anymore!

  7. 10

    spews:

    re 6: Let’s apply your “logic” to bank robbers.

    Is someone who believes in robbing banks, but doesn’t, as guilty as someone who believes in robbing banks, but does?

    Obviously, there is a connection here between what one believes and what one does. That’s the structure of the logic you are using.

    So, if someone believes a war is vitally important to his country’s interests, and that person is fit to serve and doesn’t, then that person is a chickenhawk and deserves no respect and no one shoul listen to their chickenshit opinions on the war.

    Why? Because, logically, it doesn’t make any sense to listen to them.

  8. 11

    DB spews:

    Patrick-
    The problem is that those young republicans (and many members of the 101st keyboarders) say that the “fight in Iraq is the most pressing problem facing America” (or something similar). They know that the force in Iraq is struggling do to lack of troops, and that more troops are needed.

    So if it is the most pressing thing to America and more help is needed, then why don’t they address America’s most pressing need and go and fight. Except as one guy said, they’ve got better things to do (apparently unlike the men and women that die everyday in Iraq).

    Those against the war that are not in the military are putting their money where their mouths are. They don’t believe that the Iraq intervention is worth the loss of American lives. And so they aren’t giving their lives.

    Now, find me the anti-war activist who calls homelessness the biggest problem facing America and refuses to volunteer with Habitat for Humanity (as an example), then you’ll be onto something.

  9. 12

    Don Joe spews:

    Patrick,

    …if only a soldier can speak for the war…

    Huh? Who said you can’t speak for the war? You have a constitutionally protected right to be a hypocrite. That does, however, mean I have an equally protected right to call you a hypocrite when you behave like one.

    Why the sensitivity? You believe this war is a good cause, but you’re not willing to put your life on the line in support of that belief. Is this not an accurate statement of the facts?

    Does the absence of a reciprocal circumstance, which, given the rhetoric of some gun-toting Republicans, might not be all that absent, for those who oppose this war change the nature of the above-mentioned facts?

  10. 13

    spews:

    re 6: …and that applies to this entirer chickenshit chickenhawk administration.

    They are the college republicans of the class of 1968. They had better things to do — like sinking
    America.

  11. 14

    spews:

    Auntie @ 6

    ‘Using your logic Darryl, “if only a soldier can speak for the war, then how can somebody who is not a soldier speak against the war?”’

    That wouldn’t be my logic, squirt. My logic is simply: if you believe in the war then, at a time when our military is stretched, shouldn’t you be signing up??? I’m sure they could put you to good use.

    And as a prominent (former?) College Republican from this area, shouldn’t you be setting an example for others?

    Think about it.

  12. 16

    RightEqualsStupid spews:

    By the way, here’s the difference between Publicans and Dems on this issue. If there were a real, genuine threat against the USA – (and we all know there is none nor has there ever been one in Iraq) Dems would fight while the GW Bush’s of the world would go AWOL!

  13. 17

    Daddy Love spews:

    Right. It’s not “only a soldier can speak out for the war” or “everyone should serve in the military” (plainly an impossibility).

    It’s that maybe one or two, or perhaps even substantial; numbers of an organization that believes that (a) support for the war is to be used as a political bludgeon and (b) this war is of primary importance and an existential conflict (IOW, the existence of the USA is at stake) might actually want to, you know, FIGHT IN SUCH A WAR.

    This expectation does not apply logically to those who believe neither of those things.

  14. 18

    Daddy Love spews:

    There will ne NO POLITICAL SETTLEMENT in Iraq until we leave.

    Iraqis are not crazy, irrational, bloodthirsty mobs. First off, they are mostly people who would like to get on with their lives. Even the members of factions fighting for power would like to get on with their lives. That’s not going to happen while the country is occupied by a foreign army.

    Second, the groups who are contending in Iraq, in general, have well-articulated positions and clear demands for changes to the Iraqi political system. Their positions and demands may be unacceptable to other Iraqis in their current form, but they do offer a starting point for real political talks. Those talks won’t happen while the streets run with the blood of those to oppose the Occupation.

  15. 19

    George W. Goldstein spews:

    Yeah, there’s nothing like losing a war to concentrate the mind. So here’s a golden oldie from AllanPrellHell, a greatest hit from those golden years when we had a real warrior president:

    Earlier today, I ordered America’s armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq’s nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.

    Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world.

    Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.

    I want to explain why I have decided, with the unanimous recommendation of my national security team, to use force in Iraq; why we have acted now; and what we aim to accomplish. …

    Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them. Not once, but repeatedly. Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq.

    The international community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again. …

    [Full text here:
    http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS /stories/1998/12/16/transcrip ts/clinton.html ]

  16. 21

    chadt spews:

    Buzzzz Buzzzz Buzzzz. The horseflies are really swarming lately; Their world is collapsing. Republican shit will disappear along with the repubs.

    Too, too funny!

    Clever little buggers, er, bugs. Buzzing aimlessly around for our amusement.

  17. 22

    spews:

    re 19: “Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.”

    He probably would not have, except that BushI and REagan gave him the gas and biological weapons to use against the Iranians.

    Doesn’t that make the U.S. culpable, as well? Should everyone feel free to attack us?

    “Will mendacious hypocrisy come back to bite our country in the ass? Heavens to Betsy! And hold the phone! Of course!” Donald Rumsfeld

  18. 23

    Whoopi Goldstein spews:

    Think you mean Carter. Peanut Jimmy indentured us to Saddam in his attempt to use him as a counterweight to Khomeini. (Remember Carter’s excellent Iran policy? World hasn’t been the same since. That’s the world that RWR & GHWB inherited.)

  19. 24

    Whoopi Goldstein spews:

    Pronouns got muddled in #23: Carter used Saddam as a counterweight to Iran … that’s the antececent of the Iran/Iraq genocide that continued for a decade.

  20. 25

    spews:

    Carter’s naive humanism was beginning to be informed by the true evil that lurks in the human soul. Playing Iraq against Iran was a good strategy. However, it was undercut by Reagan making a secret arms for hostages deal with Iran BEFORE the election (and you bitch about Nancy Pelosi — hypocrite diaper wearer.

    Most importantly, Carter never supplied Iraq with poison gas and biological weapons, as Reagan/Bush did.

    So, what was the actual situation? Carter was attempting to play Iraq against Iran while Reagan, who was not even a government official, was mucking things up by secretly promising Iran arms for hostages and subsequently arming both Iran ans Iraq.

    You Republicans are 100% responsible for rhis mess!

  21. 27

    Daddy Love spews:

    23 WG

    Peanut Jimmy indentured us to Saddam in his attempt to use him as a counterweight to Khomeini.

    That could use a bit of source referencing, it seems to me. Exactly what did President Carter do to “indenture” us to Saddam Hussein to counter a man who did not come to power until 1979? Do tell, and back it up.

  22. 29

    Broadway Joe spews:

    Okay, that was bad. But having to google it, then find it on Wikipedia, that’s deep, man.

  23. 31

    Daddy Love spews:

    RET. AIR FORCE LT COL. SAM GARDINER
    Gardiner, a simulations expert at the U.S. Army’s National War College, after leading a “war game” on Iran: “After all this effort, I am left with two simple sentences for policymakers. You have no military solution for the issues of Iran. And you have to make diplomacy work.” [12/04]

  24. 32

    Daddy Love spews:

    RAY TAKEYH, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
    “To properly address the complexities of the Iranian challenge, Washington should appreciate that its policy of relentlessly threatening Iran with economic coercion and even military reprisals only empowers reactionaries and validates their pro-nuclear argument.” [4/4/06]

  25. 33

    Thomas Jefferson spews:

    @32

    Yeah, definitely no ideological axe to grind there, eh? The guy works for left-wing think tanks. Wtf do you think he’s going to say?

  26. 34

    Goldy Davis Jr. Jr. spews:

    Headcase Lucy, as usual, is confused: “Reagan, who was not even a government official, was mucking things up by secretly promising Iran arms for hostages and subsequently arming both Iran ans Iraq.”

    I think he’s conflated sick Gary Sick’s fiction about an October (1980) Surprise with, surprise!, the arms-hostages fiasco of 1986 when RWR was way in government.

    As for Jimmy Peanut’s tilt to Iraq, it followed his Desert 1 fiasco when he tried to trade crashed helicopters for hostages. Jimmy’s boys, Andrew Young & Sandy HotPants Berger, thought the Ayatollah would be a nice Goldycrat progressive. Wrong, as usual. Carter’s only remaining card in the losing hand he dealt himself was Saddam.

    Douglas Brinkley, Jimmy’s official suck-up biographer, is a good place to start with your remedial education. When you finish lip-reading the early chapters from the bio, go to his discussion of Carter’s treachery/treason in 1990-1991.

  27. 35

    Just a thought spews:

    The ironic thing is the people protesting the war on terror have the most to lose. Carver public school in san diego has allowed time out for muslim prayer. A college in Michigan is putting in footbaths for muslims. The Aclu would protest taking time away from class for Christmas prayer. The people that will suffer most will be democrats. Sure, the extreme right think homosexuality is a sin, but they don’t believe in stoning to death. Once Muslims get enough power to demand an end to abortion, women’s rights, gays and a whole plethora of other “rights” democrats believe in, what will happen then?

  28. 36

    Kenny Boy Goldstein spews:

    Poison gas? Biological weapons? Hypocrite diapers?

    Think you’re thinking of the canard that Reagan’s CIA gave weapons to bin Laden’s muj in Afghanistan. That’s flat-out fucking wrong because bin Laden was his own little isolated evil empire during the Soviet invasion. He wasn’t part of the muj who, according to George Crile of 60 minutes, were being liberally supplied by the drinking liberals of Congress. Tip O’Neill was a self-appointed state department, running guns and CIA assets into Pakistan for trans-shipment to Afghanistan.

    Then O’Neill drank himself into retirement and Jimmy Carter took over as Secretary of State.

  29. 38

    Kenny Boy Goldstein spews:

    Muslim footbaths … Muslim prayer rooms. Reminds me of Seattle Schools and the WEA: Last I heard **, they installed prayer rooms here and restructured class schedules around face-East time. Muslims, only, need apply for this special dispensation, this exemption from the holy, Constitutional separation of church & state (that isn’t in the Constitution.)

    ** Policy was posted on their official site in 2006. Don’t know where it’s at now.

  30. 39

    spews:

    re 34 http://www.iranian.com/Opinion.....index.html

    “Think back to the SUMMER OF 1980. JIMMY CARTER WAS RUNNING FOR REELECTION AS PRESIDENT. The Mullah’s in Iran had turned against him holding Americans hostages at the US embassy in Tehran (even though he had brought about the Shah’s demise). CARTER HAD ALSO BEEN SECRETLY BRIEFED ABOUT PRIVATE MEETINGS BETWEEN THE MULLAH’S AND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY… TO HOLD THE HOSTAGES UNTIL AFTER NOVEMBER ELECTIONS… TO HUMILIATE HIM AND ENGINEER HIS LOSS. The Mullah’s had betrayed him. “

  31. 40

    spews:

    re 34: abt. 39: I got this information from an anti-Carter source. I don’t understand why you are talking about the shameful arms for hostages deal that Reagan did later in his presidency.

  32. 41

    ArtFart spews:

    Hey, I really LUUUURVE Tom DeLay’s assertion in his little speech that we all should have more kids so they can work cleaning toilets and picking lettuce for less than minimum wage.

  33. 42

    spews:

    Kenny Boy Goldstein says:

    the holy, Constitutional separation of church & state (that isn’t in the Constitution.)

    Uhm, yeah it is. It’s called the Establishment Clause. The government cannot establish a state religion.

    Wingnuts and jesus freaks are the stupidest fucking people around. I’ll bet you think the Earth is 6,000 years old in the face of a mountain of geological evidence to the contrary.

  34. 44

    GBS spews:

    You know who else didn’t serve because of medical problems?

    KVI’s very own Kirby Wilbur. And, like father, like son, Kirby’s son couldn’t join the marines because of a “bad back.”

  35. 45

    GBS spews:

    Army Raises Maximum Enlistment Age

    “For the second time in six months, the Army is raising the maximum enlistment age for new recruits, this time from 40 to 42, recruiting officials announced Wednesday.
    The increase to age 42 applies to both men and women,”

    http://www.military.com/featur.....39,00.html

    Any Republican – male or female – aged 42 or less, who believes we have to fight them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here, are FUCKING anti-American pussies if they don’t enlist today!

    No arguments, no excuses, and fro God’s sake, NOTES from your DOCTOR will not excuse you. This is not gym class you panty wastes!

    It’s put up or shut up time for you fucking hypocritical pussies.

  36. 47

    Richard Milhaus Goldstein spews:

    Yass. The Establishment Clause, Constitutional, differs from the extra-Constitutional separation of church & state, which was articulated first by President Jefferson in a private letter in 1802. The Establishment Clause has been twisted off its original mooring and meaning: it was intended to prevent Congress from making a law that would make an official religion.

  37. 48

    spews:

    Richard Milhaus Goldstein parroted the following right-wing talking point, just like a good little Nazi:

    The Establishment Clause has been twisted off its original mooring and meaning: it was intended to prevent Congress from making a law that would make an official religion.

    You are correct that the Establishment Clause prevents the government from establishing a state religion. Yet that is exactly what the fundie wingnuts are unfortunately succeeding at doing.

    For instance, they don’t want children to be taught the sound science of evolution in schools. Why? Because the buy-bull says it isn’t so. Yes, they want our secular public policy based on a book that is:

    — stylistically inconsistent,
    — internally inconsistent and self-contradictory,
    — historically inaccurate,
    — bears the mark of being written by a mishmash of very human authors, and
    — comprised largely of mistranslations from documents of (1) dubious provenance that were (2) written decades, if not centuries, following the occurrence of the alleged events its describes and (3) many of which are absurd as being contrary to the laws of physics.

    Rather, they want pseudoscientific creationism dressed up as “Intelligent Design” taught to children in our schools. They say evolution is “only a theory” as if to imply that there is disagreement within the scientific community about its validity as the explanation for the origin of life on Earth. The truth is, evolution is only a “theory” in the sense that germ theory is “only” a theory. But since it contradicts the buy-bull, the fucking imbeciles suppress sound science.

    Another example: Honest scientific work has given us Gardarsil, a vaccine for young girls that is 100% effective against the Human Papilloma Virus, an STD that causes cervical cancer later in life. The trouble is, since the buy-bull says that Mary was a virgin when she birthed Jesus, sex is naughty, bad, evil, dirty, etc. The end result is that their daughters are denied a potentially lifesaving vaccine.

    Another example: Bush’s only veto so far has been of a bill that would have funded embryonic stem cell research. This is the most promising way to find cures for spinal cord injuries and various other problems. Trouble is, because the imbeciles believe that a 20 celled blastocyst is a human being, we can’t do it. Never mind the fact that the human body spontaneously aborts 80% of all conceptions, making god the most prolific abortionist of them all.

    Class dismissed.

  38. 49

    Godless Atheist spews:

    The Establishment Clause has been twisted off its original mooring and meaning: it was intended to prevent Congress from making a law that would make an official religion.

    “You are correct that the Establishment Clause prevents the government from establishing a state religion. Yet that is exactly what the fundie wingnuts are unfortunately succeeding at doing.”

    So you agree that the Establishment Clause is not a Separation Clause or a Santa Clause. Then you lapse into hate speech and non sequiturs … but that’s what fashionable left-wing fascists like to do. You’re the fun people who put the socialism back in National Socialism.

    Here’s the non sequitur: Belatedly “discovering” — like the day before yesterday — that a public creche or a pine tree in a public building is an establishment. Although Mark Twain made a few noises 100 years ago about ‘In God We Trust’ on our coinage, our culture and our courts accepted for two centuries that public demonstrations of of majoritarian symbols and mores did not infringe minority rights and did not establish a state religion.

    Then, starting with Earl Warren, Republican, the courts discovered emanations and penumbras of un-Constitutional rights while discovering that majoritarian rights should be infringed for the majority’s own good, dammit. For about 200 years a school prayer was not an establishment of religion. Then a few old men in long black dresses said it was. Horseshit, say I, particularly since public schools, including Seattle’s, have discovered a compelling need to accommodate Muslim prayers during scheduled school hours.

    And I resent your misstatement of the textbook issue. Darwin is not (yet) settled science. A few school districts, and maybe Kansas, simply wanted to state that inconvenient truth up front. Literally. With stickers on textbook covers.

  39. 50

    Godless Atheist spews:

    HPV: Yep, that one’s rather strange. Usually it’s the Left that shrieks and screams about compulsory vaccination: measels shots = autism.