Mary Cheney, the vice president’s openly gay daughter, is pregnant. She and her partner of 15 years, Heather Poe, are “ecstatic” about the baby, due in late spring. […] The circumstances of the pregnancy will remain private, said the source close to the couple.
Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?
Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!
I’d say the odds are at least 50/50 that this sixth Cheney grandchild will end up a Democrat, if not the child of married parents.
The “Virgin Birth” hed was stupidly insulting.
RJ @2,
It was not a “headline,” but I’ll accept your characterization of “insulting” as you are entitled to perceiving it any way you choose. As for “stupid”, that would be saying “the circumstances of the pregnancy will remain private.”
It’s a lesbian couple. The circumstances are clear.
I’d say there’s a good chance that Osama crawled out of WHAT A DICK Cheney’s car trunk, snuck into Mary’s bedroom, did the deed, and then crawled back into the trunk. . . all undetected by our republican-led CIA.
David Crosby strikes again.
Just to reacp the salient points here.
Mary Cheney and Heather Poe have been dating for 15 years.
They (presumably) live together.
They (presumably) sleep together.
Now they are having a child together.
Assuming you believe that homosexuality is as bad as all that (I don’t), if the vice-president’s daughter can carry on an open, long-term gay relationship that will soon have a child, what possible social benefit exists in having a “Defense of Marriage Act”?
The culture has already changed. The law needs to change to reflect that.
THOSE TWO WOMEN ARE LIVING AN IMMORAL LIFESTYLE AND GOING STRAIGHT TO H.E. DOUBLE TOOTHPICKS.
SO SAYETH THE TYPICAL VOTER THAT MAKES UP DUBYA’S 30 PERCENT APPROVAL.
God, I wonder what Grandma Lynn Cheney has to say about this one…. Can anyone spell hypocrisy?
It’s a lesbian couple. The circumstances are clear.
Yep. Heather Poe is a man.
A man walked into a very high-tech bar. As he sat down on a stool, he noticed that the bartender was a robot. The robot clicked to attention and asked “Sir, what will you have?”
The man thought a moment, then replied, “A martini, please”.
The robot clicked a couple of times and mixed the best martini the man had ever had. The robot then asked, “Sir, what is your IQ?”
The man answered, “Oh, about 164.”
The robot then proceeded to discuss the theory of relativity, inter-steller space travel, the latest medical breakthroughs, etc……..
The man was most impressed. He left the bar, but thought he would try a different tactic. He returned and took a seat. Again, the robot clicked and asked what he would have.
“A martini, please .”
Again it was superb. The robot again asked, “What is your IQ, sir?”
This time the man answered, “Oh, about 100″.
So the robot started discussing NASCAR racing, bass fishing and what to expect the Jets to do this weekend.
The guy had to try it one more time. So he left, returned and took a stool…. Again a martini, and the question, “What is your IQ?”
This time the man drawled out “Uh…..’bout 50.”
The robot clicked, then leaned close and slowly asked,
“A-r-e y-o-u-r p-e-o-p-l-e r-e-a-l-l-y g-o-i-n-g t-o n-o-m-i-n-a-t-e H-i-l-l-a-r-y-?”
Remember when loon granny Lynn went of the reservation over Edward’s remarks at debate. Perhaps she will write another book!
Okay, I’ll keep this silly debate going:
Definitions of headline on the Web:
the line which commonly appears at the top of each printed page, typically showing the book title on the left-hand side and chapter title on the right; sometimes also incorporates the folio. Sometimes also known as a running head.
http://www.publishers.org.uk/p.....D80057F556
The display-size text, usually placed at the top of an article or advertisement, that summarizes the message or acts as an attention-getter.
http://www.rainwater.com/glossary/h.html
Large type running above or beside a story to summarize its content; also called a head, for short.
highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/0072407611/student_view0/glossary.html
The words printed across the top of a newspaper article to catch the reader’s attention.
http://www.newspapersineducati.....y_eng.html
The title of an article or story.
http://www.teleplex.net/jr/www.....sary_h.htm
The extra large opening statement used in a layout, used to grad the reader’s attention and sometimes summarizes what the text is about.
http://www.proximasoftware.com.....erms/h.htm
The title of a newspaper story
www1.thetimesnews.com/tn_nie/terms.html
the primary display line of type in an ad that serves as an attention getting device.
http://www.garyeverhart.com/gl....._terms.htm
The line above which the bodies of letters within a line of writing rise no higher, ie excluding ASCENDERS.
http://www.slais.ubc.ca/people.....itions.htm
the length of rope or wire in a trawl to which the top wings and cover netting are attached.
http://www.spc.org.nc/coastfis.....0terms.htm
line of type running across the top of a page above the main body of text
members.tripod.com/bibliomane/g_h.htm
Words in large type at the top of a story telling what the story is about; also called head
http://www.usfca.edu/classes/A.....ossary.htm
the title of an article or press release hit: a visit to a particular page on a web site by a web visitor house organ: a newsletter produced by a company for the employees of that company hype/hyperbole: overdone exaggeration implied endorsement: the character the public often assigns to non-paid neutral or positive media coverage of a company, its products or services industry authorities: respected individuals or publications within an industry ink: space devoted to a company, its products …
http://www.bandbowner.com/public/118.cfm
The most significant type in the visual hierarchy of a printed communication.
http://www.onealliance.com/cli.....ossary.htm
publicize widely or highly, as if with a headline
the heading or caption of a newspaper article
provide (a newspaper page or a story) with a headline
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
A headline is text at the top of a newspaper article, indicating the nature of the article below it.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headline
r.,j.,
I have no idea what you’re trying to say here ( @ #11).
Let’s face it, Mary is simply acting as a surogate for Dick Cheney’s clone. Once they harvest the heart, the Cheney in ’08 signs will go up.
r,j. @ 11:
To clear things up for you, because you seem to have lots of time but not so much in the way of observational skills:
The title of this post is: “Open thread”.
#2 –
While we’re on the subject of stupid insults, include
Full post here.
TJ at 12: Just that “Virgin Birth” is a headline, contrary to Goldy’s claim at 3, supra.
r,j. @ 16: No it isn’t.
affair anyone??
i can see it now….Momma (or Darth) Cheney wanted Mary to try the Hetro way and got caught
I’m just wondering how they decided who would be the mother. It might have been less conspicuous (newsworthy) if Cheney’s partner was chosen to carry the child.
Okay, this topic sheds an interesting bit of light upon objections by Republicans to the new five-day working schedule for the House of Representatives.
As I mentioned in my (off topic) post to the preceeding topic “Out of Bounds”, Republicans were complaining that it was too much for them to work beyond a half-day on Tuesday, a full Wednesday, and a half-day on Thursday:
Rep. Kingston, (R-GA)said:
“Keeping us up here eats away at families. Marriages suffer. The Democrats could care less about families, that’s what this says.”
So, in light of Ms. Cheney’s pregnancy, the Republican “Defense of Marriage Act” and various proposed Constitutional Amendments, and their claim that working more more than three days a week harms families, perhaps we should re-check their record on votes regarding the Family Leave Act. Perhaps Mr. Kingston would be willing to give Ms. Cheney’s partner time off to be with their new child, since they seem to be a stable family, and families are so important to Republicans that they don’t think they should have to work more than three (partial) days a week?
Perhaps Mr. Kingston would be willing to author legislation which makes it mandatory that no employer require workers to work more than three (partial) days a week, in order to protect families?
rhp @ 20
My, you’re not demanding that Republicans’ rants be consistent with their voting records, are you?
Hey isn’t Jim Baker a republican? So will the righties here and elsewhere start attacking him, his family etc and calling names given the fact that old Jim Baker and his Iraq study group are saying the Dems have been right all along?
How will you right wing chickenshit, chickenhawks spin this one? I can’t wait to find out.
TJ at 12: Just that “Virgin Birth” is a headline, contrary to Goldy’s claim at 3, supra
Oh, then by your own sources, it isn’t. It’s “Open thread.” Thanks for clearing that up.
Moonbat kook poll:
ISG came up with the following “…It urged Bush to embrace steps he has thus far rejected, including involving Syria and Iran in negotiations over Iraq’s future.”
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....raq06.html
How many of you think that Iran and Syria have any interest whatsoever in helping us.
CROCODILE TEARS
I saw in the news that Bush Sr. got all teary-eyed over his son Jeb’s defeat in the 1994 Florida governor’s race, alluding to “dirty tricks” in the final days of the campaign. According to the Associated Press,
“The final debate between Chiles and Bush is largely seen as the turning point in the closest governor’s race in state history. But just before the election, the Chiles campaign made 70,000 bogus phone calls to elderly voters claiming to be from independent groups. Callers portrayed Bush as a tax cheat and said his running mate, Tom Feeney, wanted to abolish Social Security and cut Medicare.”
http://tinyurl.com/yy3fbp
But wait! Let’s suppose the Chiles campaign DID make those calls … according to the Florida Secretary of State’s official website, the actual vote was:
L. Chiles – 2,135,008
J. Bush – 2,071,068
http://tinyurl.com/y3vb55
That’s a difference of 63,940 votes. To believe the “bogus calls” changed the election outcome, you have to believe that:
1. All of the 70,000 people who were called voted;
2. At least 92% of them would have voted for Jeb; and
3. All of the 92% switched their votes to Chiles …
4. Because of the phone calls.
That’s quite a leap of faith. A far more plausible explanation of Jeb’s 1994 defeat is offered by Wikipedia:
“A Republican tide swept the country in that year, and Bush ran ahead of Chiles for much of the campaign. Then, with only a few weeks left before the election, Chiles responded to a reporter’s inquiry about his floundering campaign with the line ‘the old he-coon walks just before the light of day,’ an old Southern reference to the oldest and wisest raccoon in a pack. The metaphor, which won over many who understood it, pointed up Bush’s status as a political novice who was largely pre-scripted; Chiles came from behind to win a narrow victory in the election, celebrating his victory on election night wearing a coonskin cap on his head.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawton_Chiles
So, the truth is, Jeb was a political novice who ran a clumsy campaign against a popular incumbent who came across as folksy compared to the stiff, wooden, scripted Jeb. And Jeb lost, despite the huge lift he got from the 1994 national GOP tide. And his ex-president dad (who lost his own re-election bid just 2 years earlier because of a lame performance in office) is crying over THAT?
Nevertheless, I could sympathize with Bush Sr. getting upset over election dirty tricks — if his outpouring of grief for politicians victimized by “dirty tricks” by their opponents wasn’t so fucking selective. For example, where were 41’s tears when over 57,000 black voters were falsely branded as “felons” and tossed off Florida’s voter rolls only 6 years later — by his son Jeb and Katherine Harris — handing a presidential election to his son George that George did not win?
Where were 41’s tears when, in 2004, thousands of black soldiers in Iraq were disenfranchised in Ohio by the “dirty tricks” of GOP operatives, handing another presidential election to his son George that George did not win? http://tinyurl.com/jv9nf Like I said — pretty fucking selective.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m against dirty tricks by either party. Like the bogus sex offender robo-calls to Washington voters, for example. But I’ll tell you what. If Republicans make a fuss over Democrats doing it, then it’s reasonable to expect them to clean up their own house, or at least raise Cain when their own party does it. But they don’t. And since Republicans are responsible for 90% of the dirty tricks in U.S. politics, old man Bush’s whining smacks of sanctimonious hypocrisy. So, fuck him! He’s just another whiny, sore-loser, crybaby Republican.
BREAKING NEWS — Searchers found the body of a man who has been missing for several days after becoming separated from his family after they were snowed in on an Oregon highway.
2 R, J. says: The “Virgin Birth” hed was stupidly insulting. 12/06/2006 at 9:39 am
So what? Everything Republicans say is “stupidly insulting.” For example, it was stupidly insulting for Dubya to call James Webb’s son — a soldier in Iraq — “boy” after dissing Kerry for his “stuck in Iraq” bungled joke. Fuck you.
I see in the news that an idiot driver in I-5 express lanes who was looking at his Blackberry instead of the car in front of him caused a 5-vehicle pileup (including a city bus) in which a baby was injured. And all he got was a “following too close” citation. http://tinyurl.com/ycwrsk
I think the Legislature should make using electronic devices (including cell phones) while driving a felony.
These fucking idiot drivers who don’t pay attention to where they’re going have run over 1,206 of my relatives in the last 12 months.
That’s not counting the fucking Republican in a speeding SUV who ran over my mommy. (sniffle)
(sob) boo hoo …
I could understand Bush Sr.’s weeping if some fucking Republican had run over HIS mommy … (sniffle) (sob) … by crying over his son Jeb losing an election?
HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR
I swear, these fucking Republicans must think they’ve got a divine right to occupy these public offices, no matter what the voters want. Fuck him!
6 Where’s the Republican hue and cry over Dick Cheney’s daughter raising a child in a lesbian relationship? Why aren’t the wingnut blogs all over this? Guess anything is OK, as long as the child of a prominent GOP politician does it. Wingnuts think Republican pols are above criticism. Fucking hypocrites.
16 r., j. says: TJ at 12: Just that “Virgin Birth” is a headline, contrary to Goldy’s claim at 3, supra. 12/06/2006 at 11:35 am
Is that the most important thing you can think of today?
16 (continued)
How many more American soldiers died in Iraq today?
Are we any closer to catching Osama than we were yesterday?
How much was added to the national debt today?
How many more Americans lost their health coverage today?
Will Bush let the Democratic congress address the nation’s problems, or obstruct everything congress does for the next 2 years?
As you can see, wingnut, there are more important things to discuss here than your nit-picking, pissant complaining over a “headline.” But you wingnuts have always had your priorities fucked up, so it’s not surprising.
23 “Hey isn’t Jim Baker a republican? So will the righties here and elsewhere start attacking him, his family etc and calling names given the fact that old Jim Baker and his Iraq study group are saying the Dems have been right all along?”
Of course they will. Isn’t it FUN to watch Republicans EAT THEIR OWN? — Of course it is!!! :D
Roger Rabbit @ 34
“Is that the most important thing you can think of today?”
I know you weren’t talking to me, but I was thinking that Open Threads rarely lead to Virgin Births.
25 Pay your gambling debt, welsher.
Can any of you wingnuts explain why the so-called “liberal media” made headline news out of Kerry’s “stuck in Iraq” gaffe for a solid week, but is sweeping under the rung Bush’s offensive reference to Jim Webb’s soldier son as “boy?”
40 Answer: Because, believe it or not, the MSM — which is owned by conservatives — is conservative-biased! Du-uh. This whole “liberal media” thing is just another rightwing lie.
Hey Redneck — I see in the news that a THIRD construction crane in Bellevue is defective … has cracks … looks like another MARKET FAILURE to me … can you explain how the profit motive gets contractors to inspect and repair cranes when there’s no government regulation? Three defective cranes in 2 weeks — how’s that “invisible hand” working to protect the public from cranes crashing down on their heads? Pay your fucking gambling debt, double-welsher. You have no credibility on this board.
Army Ranger Says He Robbed Bank Because of War Crimes
“PEACHLAND, B.C. — Luke Sommer, the former Army Ranger accused of masterminding the takeover robbery of a Tacoma bank in August, … says … his motives were political.
“‘ … [T]he Canadian Extradition Act says … I cannot be extradited if the reason … for a crime is political,’ Sommer said. ” … I can prove in court that the reasons that I had were political. …’
“He hopes to use the notoriety from the heist as a platform to expose war crimes by the U.S. military in Iraq and Afghanistan, Sommer said ….
“A total of seven men, including the five Army Rangers, have been charged in connection with the robbery. As the alleged mastermind, Sommer faces numerous charges ….
“Scott Byrne, a fellow Army Ranger charged last week with aiding and abetting the robbery, told FBI investigators that Sommer told him he planned to start a crime family to rival the Hell’s Angels for control of drug-running and extortion rackets in Kelowna, B.C., according to court papers. …
“Sommer’s allegations of U.S. involvement in war crimes stem from incidents he claims to have witnessed while on combat deployments in Iraq in 2004 and Afghanistan in 2005.
“Among his most sensitive allegations: Sommer claims he saw an Iraqi woman raped by a member of the Army’s elite Delta Force while guarding prisoners in Baghdad in 2004. He said he was outraged and expressed concerns to two superior officers, who told him to forget about it. He also claims he has proof that a Navy Seal unit executed 12 to 17 prisoners in Afghanistan.
“The Army has confirmed Sommer saw combat in Iraq in 2004 and in Afghanistan in 2005. But details of Ranger missions are classified. Sommer said he will lay out his accusations, and the evidence to support them, in a Canadian court to fight his extradition. …
“He said he didn’t tell any of the other alleged bank robbers about his political motives, both to protect them and because he felt he needed to give them each their own reasons to get involved. …”
Quoted under Fair Use; for complete story and/or copyright info, see http://tinyurl.com/y9vopu
Roger Rabbit Commentary: If this isn’t the lamest, stupidest, most asshole, excuse for robbing a bank I ever heard! The alleged war crimes may, or may not, have occurred — but that sure as hell doesn’t excuse robbing banks! Fuck this guy, lock him up and throw the key away.
Meanwhile, I saw in a separate news story about a week ago that the Pentagon is so desperate for manpower it has granted 6,000 to 8,000 “moral waivers” so criminals can join the armed forces — while Republican congressmen trumpet that “we don’t need a draft.” Yeah right. To fill the ranks, they’ve lowered mental requirements, raised age limits, kept people in service beyond their enlistment contracts, subjected Guard and Reserve units to multiple deployments, shortened rotations home — and enlisted criminals. Why should we be surprised that atrocities are being committed in Iraq on practically a daily basis when the administration authorizes torture of innocent Iraqi civilians and lets criminals join the military? Another fucked-up operation brought to you by the incompetent Bushco boobs.
Hey wingnuts — you still haven’t answered my question — why is it okay for Bush to call a soldier in Iraq “boy”?
44 Isn’t that disrespectful to the soldier?
rhp6033 says:
Perhaps Mr. Kingston would be willing to author legislation which makes it mandatory that no employer require workers to work more than three (partial) days a week, in order to protect families?
–
I can´t remember any Republican doing anything to protect any family…..
The prime example is unfunding the 100,000 cops on the street program. Yep laying off 100,000 cops at a time all our jobs are going overseas sure makes me feel safe….
Roger Rabbit says:
6 Where’s the Republican hue and cry over Dick Cheney’s daughter raising a child in a lesbian relationship? Why aren’t the wingnut blogs all over this? Guess anything is OK, as long as the child of a prominent GOP politician does it. Wingnuts think Republican pols are above criticism. Fucking hypocrites.
–
Yer right bunny man. Why isn´t Rev Dobson, the stupidest person on the earth protesting outside the Cheney compound?????
I will tell you why. Because hypocracy is his real religion.
I am still waiting for the wingnuts to name one thing Bush, and the Republican congress has done in the last 6 years that has been good for America.
(crickets been chirping for 6 months now)
“Roger Rabbit Commentary: If this isn’t the lamest, stupidest, most asshole, excuse for robbing a bank I ever heard! The alleged war crimes may, or may not, have occurred — but that sure as hell doesn’t excuse robbing banks! Fuck this guy, lock him up and throw the key away.”
So, he ran away to Canada and now he has to show political motive to fight extradition? If the rape happened, he needs his ass kicked for watching and failing to do anything to stop it! He’s just another LT Watada…….
Dick and Lynn love and support their daughter and they both believe that gays should be allowed to be married!
When it’s your kid, it opens your eyes!
The Army ranger who was arrested in Canada is playing a high-stakes game of bluff with the U.S. Government. He is hoping that since the missions were classified, that the U.S. will decide not to pursue extradition/prosecution because in order to do so it might be forced to reveal details of the missions to counter his allegations. Also, he’s hoping that a sympathetic Canadian judge or political pressure might just swallow the excuse, at least to the point of not allowing extradition and granting “amnesty” since he could argue that prosecution in the U.S. would be a persecution for his political statements and revelations of U.S. war crimes, rather than for bank robbery.
In Canada, the argument has a minimal chance of success. But considering that he is facing a VERY LONG prison term in the U.S., I can understand why he would at least take a chance at it. If the Canadians does extradite to the U.S., his arguments will be ruled irrelevent in a pre-trial motion, and he won’t get a chance to argue them at all, unless he argues temporary insanity caused by his wartime experience, or he wants to submit them as mitigating factor in the sentencing phase of the trial.
Won’t Mary and Heather’s child be surprised the first time Grandpa sez, “Go fuck yourself.”
Read the Iraqi Study Grp. Report…..ain’t much there to hang the neocon beanie on.
The under reporting of violence to fit admin policy is especially odious.
rhp6033
I think you are right, but how do you tell a judge that you watched a rape and did nothing as a mitigating factor. Why not just tell the judge you are a total fuckup and don’t care about morals or values?
“sgmmac says:
“Roger Rabbit Commentary: If this isn’t the lamest, stupidest, most asshole, excuse for robbing a bank I ever heard! The alleged war crimes may, or may not, have occurred — but that sure as hell doesn’t excuse robbing banks! Fuck this guy, lock him up and throw the key away.”
So, he ran away to Canada and now he has to show political motive to fight extradition? If the rape happened, he needs his ass kicked for watching and failing to do anything to stop it! He’s just another LT Watada…….
12/06/2006 at 2:32 pm”
Do you have any idea, whatsoever, why LT Watada refused to serve in Iraq? Because believes it’s an illegal war making it a war crime to serve there. Sort of like raping innocent women and children in Iraq is a war crime.
Its time to grow up. sgmmac.
@ 52:
Amen! It’s what the mature and correct thinking Liberal adults have been saying all along.
How many soldiers would be alive today if necons like MTR DIDN’T support Bush?
See, that’s what I mean when I say you cannot support Bush and support the troops at the same time. It is truly an oxymoron.
GBS,
Watada is a coward who found an excuse to not to go to Iraq. Nobody drafted his ass. He freely accepted the free college education and the committment for service that went with it. He didn’t want to go – fine – be a man, stand up and say you don’t want to go and you will face a courts-martial.
When you go downtown and join a anti-war leftist movement and let them pay for your legal defense, you are a coward.
And thankfully, he is being courts-martialed for it and I hope he learns what manual labor is all about in Leavenworth!
You wanna rob a fucking bank – rob it, but don’t blame it on someone else.
It is time to accept the consequences for our behaviors, GBS.
GBS,
Watada served in Iraq for a year……… his missed deployment was his second year.
49 sgmmac says: So, he ran away to Canada and now he has to show political motive to fight extradition? If the rape happened, he needs his ass kicked for watching and failing to do anything to stop it! He’s just another LT Watada…….
12/06/2006 at 2:32 pm
You lost me, Mac — I don’t see any similarity between this bank robber and Lt. Watada, who did not rob a bank or attempt to use Iraq as an excuse for avoiding prosecution for robbing a bank. Lt. Watada is a conscientious objector. This guy is a bank robber. No connection between the two.
But I have a question for YOU, Mac. Do you think it was disrespectful of Bush to refer to a soldier in Iraq as “boy?” Do you think Bush’s reference to Sen. Webb’s soldier son as “boy” was less disrespectful, as disrespectful, or more disrespectful than Kerry’s “stuck in Iraq” gaffe? P.S., it would be fine with me if Kerry didn’t run in ’08.
52 There isn’t a snowball’s chance in hell the Canadians will give this guy asylum. Why would they want to import bank robbers from the U.S.? They already have enough home-grown criminals, so why would they want ours. This guy will be back in the U.S. inside of two months.
Roger,
Watada isn’t a conscientious objector. I would have a lot more respect for him if he was. He claims the war in Iraq is illegal and that’s why he couldn’t bring himself to go back for another tour there. He said he would go to Afganistan instead. Well, soldiers don’t get to pick and choose where they go to combat. His unit was designated to go to IRAQ and Afganistan wasn’t an option for him and he knew before he said it.
Yes, it possibly disrespectful. I don’t know how Bush meant it or said it. Some people use the term boy without meaning disrespect. I find it interesting that Webb replied ” that’s between me and my boy” He could have said that sarcastically and been offended by the term boy, or he could use the term boy himself. I try not to use the term boy, but I have used the term girl.
I hate Webb! He is a sexist pig and he hasn’t changed one little bit. As for Bush knowing that Webb was sensitive about his son, I doubt it. Unless Webb’s son is getting some serious preferential treatment, Webb wouldn’t have known about what happened to his son the day before. I also find it hard to believe that his son called him and told him he had almost been killed. Most soldiers in combat zones will go to great extremes to not tell their families anything that would make them worry………
58, 59
Unfortunately, Mac, you’ve got some of your facts wrong — and I got one of mine wrong.
Factual Error #1 (Mine): “Watada has said he is not a conscientious objector because he is not opposed to war as a principle, only the war in Iraq” (see below).
Factual Error #2 (Yours): Watada did NOT get a “free college education.” He graduated from college BEFORE he enlisted in the Army.
Factual Error #3 (Yours): Watada did NOT serve a previous tour in Iraq. “Watada first served a tour in Korea, … then returned to the United States in June 2005 and reported to Ft. Lewis army base, where he was to begin preparation for deployment to Iraq.” (see below)
Factual Error #4 (Yours): Watada is NOT a coward who claimed the Iraq war is illegal to get out of serving in a war zone. He served in Korea, one of the most dangerous places on earth. And even the Army acknowledges that Watada’s beliefs about the legality of the Iraq war “appear to be sincere”: “Lt. Col. Mark Keith has recommended Watada for court martial on all charges, saying, however, that he thinks that Lt. Watada appears to be ‘sincere in his beliefs’, and that this sincerity may mitigate future punishment.” Finally, by refusing to deploy, Watada has subjected himself to certain imprisonment, not to mention dishonorable discharge and public condemnation — hardly the actions of a “coward.” A coward would flee to another country to avoid serving in Iraq — and avoid the public spotlight. In addition, Watada volunteered to serve in Afghanistan as an alternative to Iraq — hardly a cushy or safe assignment, and hardly the actions of a “coward.”
Next time, do some fact-checking before shooting form the hip, Mac. And Rabbit — slap yourself on the wrist for erroneously calling Watada a “conscientious objector.” (slap!) There … now it’s your turn, Mac — kick yourself in the butt, hard. So you’ll remember to fact-check next time.
“An Eagle Scout and near straight A student, he graduated from Hawaii Pacific University in 2003 and joined the US Army after the war in Iraq began. Claming that after 9/11 he was motivated ‘out of a desire to protect our country’, he paid $800 for a medical test to prove that he was qualified for service. Watada first served a tour in Korea, where he was rated by his superiors as ‘among the best’ and ‘exemplary’, and also recommended for early promotion ahead of his peers. Watada then returned to the United States in June 2005 and reported to Ft. Lewis army base, where he was to begin preparation for deployment to Iraq.
“Upon discovering that he would be going to Iraq, Watada began conducting research on the war. After reading about International Law and the history of Iraq, articles by scholars and governmental and non-governmental agencies, and speaking with veterans returning from Iraq, he developed strong doubts about the legality of the war, so much so that in January 2006 he submitted a resignation request, declaring that he would not serve in Iraq. Based on this research, Watada claimed, the war was illegal, violating the Constitution and War Powers Act which ‘limits the president in his role as Commander in Chief from using the armed forces in any way he sees fit’, as well as the UN Charter, the Geneva Conventions, and the Nuremberg Principles, which ‘bar wars of aggression.’ Further, he asserted that the war was based on misleading or false premises such as the existence of Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, alleged links between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda, and that the occupation itself does not follow the Army’s own legal rules of conduct for occupying a country. For all of these reasons, claims Watada, he cannot morally participate in the war.
“The Army refused his resignation. Watada has said he is not a conscientious objector because he is not opposed to war as a principle, only the war in Iraq, and so offered to serve in Afghanistan, which he regarded as ‘an unambiguous war linked to the Sept. 11 attacks.’ This was also refused. Watada, in turn, refused an offer for a desk job in Iraq without direct combat involvement.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ehren_Watada
Roger Rabbit Commentary: The U.S. Government has put soldiers like Watada in an impossible dilemma. On the one hand, Nuremberg jurisprudence, the aftermath of My Lai, and the Abu Ghraib torture prosecutions make it clear that the U.S. Government will hold soldiers criminally liable for actions that violate the rules of war — even if they’re following superior orders. In other words, every member of the U.S. Armed Forces, from generals down to privates, are expected to make their own individual evaluation of the legality of what they’re ordered to do — and can go to prison or face execution if they guess wrong. On the other hand, Watada is being prosecuted for disobeying an order he believed to be illegal. So which is it? You’re damned if you do, and damned if you don’t. Watada sought an honorable way out by volunteering to fight in Afghanistan, the legality of which he doesn’t question. The Army refused and decided to court-martial him instead of sending him to Afghanistan, where officers of his talent surely are sorely needed. Who’s being unreasonable here, Watada or the Army? Yeah, I understand the principle the Army is trying to protect — that soldiers can’t refuse assignments or choose their own assignments. But there are times when you opt for an expedient resolution that works for everybody instead of pushing the principle in a way that serves no one. That’s why God gave us brains capable of reasoning and judgment. Watada could have been assigned to Afghanistan with no publicity, as a one-time exception, with an accompanying statement that “this is a one-time exception that sets no precedent.” And there would have been no problem, no publicity, no rush of soldiers volunteering for Afghanistan to get out of deploying to Iraq, and the Army would have kept a promising young officer. So who’s right, and who’s wrong, here? I say the government, at a minimum, needs to clarify what the fucking rules are. Either you’re off the hook for obeying orders (even if the orders are unlawful), or a sincere belief in the illegality of an order is a valid defense to a charge of disobeying the order. The government can’t have it both ways. That’s not fair to the soldiers. And why would ANYONE enlist in the Army if they’re wrong — and will be held criminally liable — no matter what they do?
sggmac:
Do you read your own fucking posts???
In one post you call him a coward, in the next post you explain how he SERVED one tour of duty and missed the second.
That makes him brave and honorable. He’s also publicly stated he’d serve in Afghanistan but not Iraq. He knows Bush is conducting a poor, if not illegal, war in Iraq.
I know you righties hate the military and it won’t fly unchecked while I’m here.
Ohhhh, I can’t wait for January to roll around.
A new DEMOCRATIC led congress, oversight, subpeonas, investigations, 5 DAY WORK WEEKS, balanced budgets, and no more hyperbole votes on flag burning and gay marriage and most importantly, no more criminals and pedophiles in charge.
GBS,
You can say a lot of things about me, but hating the military isn’t one of them.
I didn’t spend 30 years in the Army, because I hated the military. More like, I love the damn Army!
I also find it hard to believe that his son called him and told him he had almost been killed. Most soldiers in combat zones will go to great extremes to not tell their families anything that would make them worry………
Mr. Webb is well aware of combat and is unlikely to be afraid of the truth from his son which I am under the impression he is very tight with. Sounds like they are very good friends & one speaks ones fears to friends because that is part of what friendship is.
Well, maybe you wouldn`t know about that…
Roger,
Now, why do you get a easy slap and I get a hard kick?
I rechecked the articles on Watada, it was his unit’s second tour, his first, but the article wasn’t clear on his first. So, I’ll give that one, but it just makes it easier to say he’s a coward looking for an excuse not to go.
As for the college, I didn’t read anything saying that he wasn’t in ROTC getting that free ride……….
Officers arn’t commissioned in the Army until after they graduate. Officers don’t enlist, they are commissioned. They go to OCS, West Point or ROTC at hundreds of colleges around the US.
As for him going to Afganistan, units are sent to combat zones, not individuals, unless they are replacements. His officers and even the Commanding General couldn’t have sent him to Afganistan. It would have meant reassigning him to a unit at a different Army post that was going to Afganistan.
The soldiers working under Watada talked about him after he had his press conferences like he’s a total dog. My daughter came home from work and she had installed a car stereo in one of his soldier’s cars. She said they called him every bad name under the sun.
There really isn’t a double standard on the rules of war and following illegal orders. Soldiers receive lots of training on the MCM and the rules of war.
@ 66:
I never said you hated the military, I said you hate the soldiers that you don’t agree with.
I figured you for a grunt given your screen name sgmmac, Sergeant Major “MacDonald” perhaps?
Well, that’s two strikes against you:
1) Army
2) Lifer
You know there is a hierarchy to the military according to your IQ. The order goes like this from smartest to dumbest:
Most intelligent:
1) Navy
2) Air Force
Average intelligence:
3) Coast Guard
Below average intelligence;
4) Army
And really fucking dumb:
5) Marines
When you can tell me that military trusts the Army with intercontinental ballistic nuclear missiles and nuclear powered vehicles and multi-billion dollar tanks or flying the space shuttle into outer space we can chat about the Army’s standing in the military’s hierarchy.
Until then, well, stick to what ya know.
Hey, sgmmac, I’m leaving now, but I’ll check your response later.
I gotta take me a big ol’ stinky “Army” and then wipe my “sergeant major” with an Army FM 27-10 chp 8, 504c.
MTR @ 26:
How many of you think that Iran and Syria have any interest whatsoever in helping us.
Before I answer that question, let’s turn it around. Do you think that Iran and Syria’s foreign policy is 100% targeted towards fucking with the United States and Israel, and that they have no other interests whatsoever?
No. Neither of them are natural allies. Both of them are frankly going to be a real pain to deal with. Remember at the same time that countries (or governments) generally don’t emotionally hate other countries. They have a national interest. National interests tend to be partially economic, and partially political. The political side is very heavily invested in anti-Americanism, and will continue to be for the forseeable future. That does not preclude some under-the-table cooperation. It just frames how that cooperation can be done, and under what terms.
The ISG is right that Iran and Syria have to be engaged, because, Hello! that’s where the outside money and logistic support is coming from.
It’s not going to be an easy or comfortable set of negotiations. I am glad I’m not the one who has to do those. Moreover, I suspect Iran and Syria might be inclined to lie, cheat, or otherwise not act in good faith.
However, I don’t see a lot of other good options. How’s that “giant sea of glass” one working out so far?
GBS,
“I know you righties hate the military and it won’t fly unchecked while I’m here”
You didn’t say that – it wasn’t you!
grunt……….
They don’t let women into the infantry, sorry!
67
There is a big difference in you doing something dangerous and one of your kids doing something dangerous……
There is also a big difference in friendship and protecting your family from unnecesary worry………..
The General weighs in on the virgin Mary Cheney:
http://patriotboy.blogspot.com.....9709227978
Evidently, the good news for the Christianist right is that Mary Cheney can’t be a lesbian.
Unless Webb’s son is getting some serious preferential treatment, Webb wouldn’t have known about what happened to his son the day before.
It wasn’t the day before. Please start getting your facts straight for a change.
68 Roger, Now, why do you get a easy slap and I get a hard kick?
Because I made only 1 error to your 3, and my error was minor whereas yours were egregious.
69 GBS — keep in mind that Sgt. Mac is a woman.
73 I wrote approximately 120 letters to my parents during the 380 days I spent in Vietnam, and I was always candid with them about where I was, what I was doing, and what action I was involved in.
Hey Mac — do you think Bush should get a free pass on calling a soldier in Iraq “boy”? Or do you think — as I think — that’s equally offensive as Kerry’s “stuck in Iraq” gaffe?
63 (continued)
Continuing my discussion of Lt. Watada, it’s evident he’s a bright guy who spent considerable time and effort researching the legal status — and possible ramifications for himself — of Bush’s war in Iraq. One of those ramifications is that other countries might consider the war illegal, and try to prosecute American soldiers who fought in it. For example, a German court is trying to prosecute Donald Rumsfeld. Maybe Watada is worried that if he fights in Iraq, he’ll never be able to travel abroad for the rest of his life without fear of being arrested by a foreign government, tried in a foreign court, and jailed in a foreign country as a “war criminal.” Maybe he’s worried that if he crosses the border into Canada for a little shopping or sightseeing 20 years from now, some European country might try to extradite him. Or that he might be denied a visa or otherwise denied entry to a country he wants to visit because he fought in Iraq. These concerns are not merely fanciful. Rumsfeld can’t travel to Germany without fear of arrest.
It seems to me that Watada made reasonable efforts to resolve the issue, and it’s the Army that chooses to be stubborn and unyielding. Watada offered:
1) to serve in Afghanistan in lieu of deploying to Iraq;
2) to resign his commission and leave the Army.
What he did NOT do was go AWOL or flee from military authorities — he submitted to arrest, and subjected himself to the military court martial system, making no effort to avoid almost-certain imprisonment for his stance.
What guarantees did the U.S. government offer Watada that, if he went to Iraq, he would never face legal liability for going to Iraq? None.
What accomodation did the U.S. government offer Watada? None.
What efforts did the U.S. government make the resolve the situation without a legal confrontation? None.
In fact, the government went out of its way to create a legal confrontation by refusing to consider a different assignment, or to consider releasing him from his remaining service obligation. He had already served an overseas tour, and the Army in the past has handed out early-outs like candy. I got one; I was released from the rest of my active duty upon completing my Vietnam assignment, as were hundreds of thousands of other Vietnam veterans. The Army got a full tour of exemplary service from Watada in Korea; it seems they’re pushing for this court-martial just to prove they can.
Where are all the wingnuts who decried Kerry’s “disrespect for the troops”? Why aren’t they saying anything about Bush’s disrespectful reference to a soldier in Iraq as “boy”? Because they don’t care about the troops, they only care about their partisan agenda. And because they’re fucking hypocrites.
If someone had called me “boy” after I came home from Vietnam, he would have gotten — at a minimum — a stare-down.
Our troops in Iraq are “men” and “women,” not “boys” and “girls.” If some guy on the street called a soldier “boy” you’d say, “that guy needs a good whack upside the head.” Well, we can’t say that about Bush, because he’s the president and you can’t go around saying the president needs a good whack upside the head, even when he does. All you can say is, “the president was disrespectful to the troops and should apologize.” That’s what Republicans said about Sen. Kerry when he bungled his Iraq joke (shoulda stuck to the prepared script instead of trying to ad-lib it), well where is their indignation now that Bush has gone and done the exactly the same thing?
re: 80
Roger Rabbit says:
For example, a German court is trying to prosecute Donald Rumsfeld.
German court affirms dismissal of war crimes complaint against Rumsfeld
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/pap.....of-war.php
Rabbit, you need to read something besides the Stranger and you won’t embarrass yourself. Your logic is alittle strained as well when you state in effect that Watada chose to suffer certain imprisonment for failure to report to duty to avoid some future prosecution from some yet unnamed country when he is shopping in Canada. Whatever makes you little liberal world go around though is fine with me.
85 rob: Do you think it was disrespectful of Bush to call a soldier in Iraq “boy”?
85 (continued) Ah … rob … not sure how to break this to you … it’s YOU who is embarrassingly ignorant of current events.
Your link refers to the 2005 dismissal of charges filed against Rumself in Germany in 2004. Germany has a more leftist government now, and those charges have been revived, and have been accepted for review by the current German prosecutor.
If you’d read a real newspaper once in a while, you’d know that.
rob, a word of advice for you. Next time, do a little research before shooting from the hip, to save yourself from making a public fool of yourself.
rob, I’ll add that we liberals take pride in factual accuracy, whereas I’ve never met a wingnut who cared about that his statements were inaccurate or just plain false. Wingnuts are liars, period. At least we liberals have the decency to feel embarassed when we make a misstatement.
Why Rumsfeld Can Rest Easy Over German Charges
http://www.time.com/time/natio.....24,00.html
I will be back in a bit my dinner is ready. You can read this while you are waiting.
Roger Rabbit says
Germany has a more leftist government now, and those charges have been revived, and have been accepted for review by the current German prosecutor.
silly rabbit: she doesn’t sound to leftist to me?
From wikipedia
[edit] Political platform
Merkel supported a substantial reform agenda concerning Germany’s economic and social system and was considered to be more pro-free market (and pro-deregulation) than her own party (the CDU); she advocated changes to German labour law, specifically, removing barriers to laying off employees and increasing the allowed number of work hours in a week, arguing that existing laws made the country less competitive because companies cannot easily control labour costs at times when business is slow (see [1]).
She argued for Germany’s nuclear power to be phased out less quickly than the Schröder administration had planned.
Merkel advocated a strong transatlantic partnership and German-American friendship. In the spring of 2003, defying strong public opposition, Merkel came out in favour of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, describing it as “unavoidable” and accusing Chancellor Gerhard Schröder of anti-Americanism. This led some critics to characterize her as an American lackey. She criticised the government’s support for Turkish Membership in the European Union and favoured a “privileged partnership” instead. In doing so, she was seen as being in unison with an overwhelming majority of Germans in rejecting Turkish membership in the European Union, particularly due to fears that large waves of immigration may impose an unbearable burden on Germany and that there would be too much Islamist influence within the EU.
Re: 86: You are really grasping at straws rabbit. He didn’t call any soldier in Iraq a boy. He asked a father how his boy was doing. Freinds of mine ask me all the time how my “girls” are doing and I don’t take offense to it. Webb was just trying to show what a prick he can be and succeeded.
Re: 89…read 91
Roger Rabbit says:
85 rob: Do you think it was disrespectful of Bush to call a soldier in Iraq “boy”?
12/06/2006 at 7:13 pm
Rabbit, do you believe it was disrespectful for Webb to call a soldier in Iraq a boy?
From The Hill
“That’s between me and my boy, Mr. President,” Webb said coldly, ending the conversation on the State Floor of the East Wing of the White House.
http://www.raisingkaine.com/sh.....aryId=6150
Rabbit, do you believe it was disrespectful for Webb to call a soldier in Iraq a boy?
From The Hill
“That’s between me and my boy, Mr. President,” Webb said coldly, ending the conversation on the State Floor of the East Wing of the White House.
http://www.raisingkaine.com/sh.....aryId=6150
Roger,
Tours in Korea are 13 months. Watada would have faired better had he not held press conferences being disrespectful to President Bush. He was going to be charged for his remarks, but that charge were dropped by the CG. He backed the Army into a corner and they felt obligated to court-martial him. If they let a commissioned officer get away with not deploying – what kind of example does that set for the junior enlisted in that unit?
The Army doesn’t hand out early discharges like candy anymore, most especially to soldiers who refuse to deploy. As for the Army doing anything for him, why should they give him any type of preferrential treatment? When he refused to go -another officer got fucked into a no-notice combat deployment.
I do have a smidgen of respect for him – in that he didn’t run……………..
“As for the college, I didn’t read anything saying that he wasn’t in ROTC getting that free ride……….”
Yes, you did — if you read the Wikipedia article, which says:
“Watada was born in Honolulu, Hawaii. An Eagle Scout and near straight A student, he graduated from Hawaii Pacific University in 2003 and joined the US Army after the war in Iraq began. Claming that after 9/11 he was motivated ‘out of a desire to protect our country’, he paid $800 for a medical test to prove that he was qualified for service.”
From this, it’s clear that (a) Watada enlisted because of 9/11, after he had already graduated from college, and (b) had to prove medical fitness at that time. He wouldn’t have gone through ROTC if he hadn’t already passed a physical, would he? But if further clarification is needed, this biographical comment from a web site run by his supporters should set the matter to rest:
“Following his graduation from Hawaii Pacific University in 2003, Lt. Watada enlisted in the Army as an officer candidate. He received no financial assistance for college or replaying loans from the Army.” http://tinyurl.com/yn3t4s
From this, it’s clear he got his commission via OCS. But in describing how officers get commissions (i.e., “OCS, West Point or ROTC”), you left one out: Direct commission. For example, many (if not most) Army doctors, nurses, and lawyers received direct commissions.
69 Uh, well, GBS, I think your characterization is a little, um, global. Lots of smart guys served in the Army and Marines. I served in the Army because I couldn’t pass a military physical and the Army was the only branch willing to take me — but that didn’t make me dumber than, say, an Air Force pilot whose eyesight score was higher than mine. Frankly, a 9 lb. rabbit only 16 inches high with 20/400 eyesight isn’t jet pilot material, if you know what I mean. I couldn’t tell for sure who I was shooting my M-16 at in Vietnam, either, which created some interesting situations although it wasn’t a problem for me personally since I was behind the muzzle. I did, at one point, get ordered on threat of court-martial to avoid combat and was told I could not volunteer for any more combat assignments, and spent the final month of my Vietnam tour typing reports. I guess they didn’t like it when I told the First Sergeant that I couldn’t tell the difference between him and a Viet Cong at a range greater than 25 feet, which was true. And, you can imagine that the Navy would not want me steering a ship … but none of this made me dumb. I suppose you could argue it was dumb not to take a 4-F when everyone else was trying to get to Canada. I enlisted, you see. It’s kind of hard to explain, but my reasoning was something like this: As long as other people had to go, I didn’t want special treatment, I didn’t want to be a privileged character, I didn’t consider myself too good to go to Vietnam; I considered myself good enough to go with the rest.
70 Now be nice, GBS. The Army isn’t that bad. Well, yeah, it is that bad. But be nice anyway. Just humor The Rabbit, just this one time, please. They wouldn’t let me in the SEALS, so I had to join the Army. The Army doesn’t give a shit whether you can see what you’re shooting at, yu just point in the general direction and hold the trigger down, but that would be a problem in the SEALS, as you know.
73 You wouldn’t believe the crap I wrote to my parents. “Nothing to worry about … nothing going on here … this post hasn’t been attacked for a year … all the fighting is much farther south …”
90 I don’t see Rummy booking a vacation to Germany.
92 “He didn’t call any soldier in Iraq a boy.”
Like hell he didn’t.
101, when are you going ?
102, as did the boy’s dad
101: Hasenpfeffer
I would say you would be in more trouble in Germany than Donald Rumsfeld Rabbit
96 “Watada would have faired better had he not held press conferences being disrespectful to President Bush.”
Of course he would have. The Army has been quietly discharging soldiers who quietly refuse to go to Iraq while consistently court-martialing the noisy ones. Maybe recruiters need to do a better job of explaining to potential recruits that you give up your right to free speech when you sign enlistment papers.
Back in World War I, they shot you for this sort of thing.
104 rob says: 102, as did the boy’s dad 12/06/2006 at 11:34 pm
That’s horseshit and you know it. As I’ve already explained, Webb was simply reading back to Bush what Bush had called his son. You’re taking Webb’s response out of context and giving it a meaning it didn’t have. You’re inventing. Lame. Very, very lame.
What you are is a wingnut hypocrite. You assholes took Kerry’s joke out of context and gave it a meaning he never intended. Well, I think Kerry was stupid and opened himself up to it. He should know by now what kind of scumbags Republicans are, and what they’ll do to any verbal misstep he might make. He should’ve stuck to the prepared script, that’s what scripts are for.
And Bush is not better at ad-libbing than Kerry. He called Webb’s son, a serving soldier in Iraq, “boy.” It was demeaning, and more importantly, was intended to be demeaning. Bush was angered by Webb bringing up the subject of withdrawing from Iraq, so like a fucking coward, he vented his anger by making a snide remark about his son. That’s the difference between Bush and Kerry, and Bush and Webb — Bush intended to do it, he had guilty intent.
And Bush is a fucking coward who not only dodged his generation’s war but didn’t even have the decency to go through the motions of fulfilling his Guard enlistment. And he and other Republican cowards who dodged Vietnam have savaged people who went — Max Cleland, who lost three limbs; Kerry, who served 2 tours and was wounded 3 times; and Webb, who has every decoration for bravery there is except the Medal of Honor and probably deserved that, too.
What Bush dislikes most about Webb, though, is that Webb used to be a Republican. Webb turned his back on what the GOP has become, and became a Democrat because he could no longer countenance what Republicans are now. So they consider him a turncoat. Republicans, as much as they hate Democrats, reserve their greatest hatred for ex-Republicans who went over to the Democratic side. (I predict there will be a lot of more of that in the next few years.) So a boy-president who was a coward when it was his turn to defend our country takes a cheap shot at a soldier in Iraq to get back at his Dad. It speaks for itself, and you’re a fucking apologist for him.
Fuck you, and fuck your ilk.
105 Of course I would! They EAT rabbits there. Fucking barbarians! Truman should’ve finished them off when he had the chance — or let Stalin do it.
108: of course Kerry would never say anything bad about the troops.
From wikipedia:
,” Kerry alleged that the military had “created a monster” in the form of violence-prone American soldiers, and recounted that soldiers had personally recollected stories of having “personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads,” of Vietnamese citizens and rampaging across Vietnam “[razing] villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan”. That these acts were “not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command.”[24]
And as for taking that asshole webbs comments out of context rabbit, I was just quoting him, you are the one making up stuff to cover for the prick.
109: well we sort of agree on one thing rabbit, after all look at what they are trying (again) to do to Rumsfeld.
110 “asshole webbs comments”
Why am I not surprised that you no more respect for our troops than any other Republican has. You’re a scumbag.
Some more of Kerry’s wisdom for you rabbit:
WASHINGTON (AP) – During a Vietnam-era run for Congress three decades ago, John Kerry said he opposed a volunteer Army because it would be dominated by the underprivileged, be less accountable and be more prone to “the perpetuation of war crimes.”
112: Feeble try rabbit, Webb isn’t a troop he is a politician these days.
Hey rabbit, here is some more of your hero John Kerry supporting the troops on CBS with Bob Sheifer
“And there is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the – of – the historical customs, religious customs,” Kerry said Sunday. “Whether you like it or not … Iraqis should be doing that.”
110 ”Kerry alleged that the military had ‘created a monster’ in the form of violence-prone American soldiers, and recounted that soldiers had personally recollected stories of having ‘personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads,’ of Vietnamese citizens and rampaging across Vietnam ‘[razing] villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan’. That these acts were “not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command.'”
This quote is taken from Kerry’s appearance before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, in which he acted as a spokesman for an organization of Vietnam veterans opposed to continuation of the Vietnam war. Kerry was not speaking from personal experience, but rather informing the senators of what various veterans had publicly testified about atrocities they had witnessed in Vietnam.
Subsequently, both the testimony of these veterans and Kerry (for publicizing the veterans’ allegations) were vehemently attacked by rightwing, pro-war, partisans. However, the rightwingers utterly failed to debunk the atrocity stories that Kerry relayed to the committee.
“The organizers of the Winter Soldier Investigation took several steps to guarantee the validity of the participants.
Each veteran’s authenticity was checked before the hearings by the … organizers, and subsequently by reporters and pentagon officials. In addition, they also gave specific details about their units and the locations where the alleged events had occurred. Those who wanted to testify were carefully screened by the officers of VVAW, and care was taken to verify the service records and testimony of the veterans … the organizers … made the credibility of the participants a top priority. …
“… [E]ach veteran’s authenticity and testimony were checked after the hearings by Nixon’s ‘plumbers.’ … Although military documentation was provided, some media organizations such as the Detroit News made further inquiries into the hearings by questioning the authenticity of the testifying veterans. Discharge papers were closely examined; military records were checked against the Pentagon records; after all their digging, not one fraudulent veteran was found. The Detroit Free Press reported daily of participants that had been confirmed by the Pentagon as veterans. …
“Fritz Efaw, a Chapter Representative of VVAW, stated: ‘The claims that the WSI hearings contained falsified testimony from men who were not veterans is an old one, and it’s definitely false. The testimony was startling even at the time it took place: startling to the general public, startling to the military and the Nixon administration, and startling to those who participated because each of them knew a piece of the story, but the hearings brought a great many of them together for the first time and provided a venue in which they could be heard for the first time. It’s hardly surprising that those on the other side would set out almost immediately to discredit them. …
“In addition, the Army found the allegations made by 46 veterans at the hearings to merit further inquiry ….”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W.....estigation
I’m sorry you don’t like what Kerry told the Senate about the conduct of some American troops in Vietnam, rob. But Kerry was just the messenger, and his rightwing detractors have never proved the soldier testimony he relayed to the Senate wasn’t true despite massive efforts to discredit those veterans.
The truth is, U.S. troops in Vietnam were badly led — their officers (especially the top generals) and civilian leaders failed them, and failed the country. The truth is, U.S. strategy in Vietnam was fatally flawed. The truth is, things got out of control in Vietnam, and some American troops, under extreme stress, were allowed to get out of control. Some of them had the decency to later regret it. But even today, rightwing ideologues with a partisan axe to grind who never got anywhere near the war themselves continue to find fault with disclosure of these failures. And these scum, who are promoters of war and killing, have no compunction about lying about who said what, and what actually happened.
Vietnam was a waste. It wasted 58,000 American lives. It wasted over 2,000,000 Vietnamese lives. It laid waste to one of the world’s most beautiful and bountiful landscapes, and to a 2,000-year-old culture. All for nothing. And rightwing warmongers are still pissed off because the U.S.A. didn’t continue the killing and carnage. These war-lovers wanted to fight for another 100 years — spilling other people’s children’s blood, of course, certainly not their own. Rightwing warmongers are scum.
Kerry was a decent man with a conscience who believed that what our country was doing in Vietnam was wrong. In retrospect, from the perspective of 35 years later, he was right and the rightwing warmongers were wrong.
The military did create the killers we turned our young men into. Some of them did rape, burn, and murder. Cutting off ears of slain enemy soldiers was a common practice among many of the infantry units in Vietnam. Razing villages was official policy, and was ordered by commanders. Some people in the States — and even some soldiers in the ranks — did think these things were “war crimes” or at least were troubled by them.
But not the rightwing warmongers. To them, a Vietnamese was a “gook” and the “only good gook” was “a dead gook.” Fucking armchair warriors.
Many Vietnam veterans did have problems after they came home. Many received psychological counseling, many had alcohol and drug problems, and a tremendous number became suicides. Much of this had its genesis in the brutality of the war.
Of course, war is brutal by its nature, and always the greatest death and suffering is borne by the innocent civilians caught up in it. War is evil, war is a horror, war should always be a last resort. But you fucking rightwingers want to rush into every situation with military force — and wage your wars with restraint or decency.
A typical wingnut reaction is to hate the soldiers who exposed the illegal brutality against Iraqi prisoners, the vast majority of whom were innocent civilians, at Abu Ghraib prison. Wingnuts lied about what happened there, trying to downplay it. What happened at Abu Ghraib and other U.S.-run detention centers is that prisoners were beaten, shocked, suffered broken bones, and dozens died in U.S. custody from injuries inflicted by U.S. torturers or their proxies. And wingnuts’ response to these atrocities was to hate the people who told us about them. Fuck you barbarian scumbags!
Kerry was right, you’re wrong, you’re no patriot, go fuck yourself rob.
So I guess you surrendered rabbit. What a chickenshit you are.
correction
should read “and wage your wars without restraint or decency”
117 Say that to my face sometime, dipshit.
What war did you fight in, rob? No lying now.
Unless you’ve personally seen combat, you’ve got no business calling a war veteran like me a “chickenshit.”
How about it, rob? What war did you fight in?
Thought so. This debate is over. Come back tomorrow to get your ass kicked again, rob!
Interesting how the right wing trolls still like to attack John Kerry. Let’s see, Kerry is still in office and you turds lost your hero Santorum, you lost your hero Jim Talent – Hell you asswipes lost everything you could loooooose in this last election. So if you think attacking a war hero will help, keep it up. Or didn’t you notice that doesn’t work anymore?
Now for important news. The right wing morons are going absolutely nuts at WHAT A DICK Cheney’s lesbo daughter’s new child. Man this if funny. In fact, there’s nothing funnier than watching the righties implode!
Roger:
I agree that I wouldn’t want to see a 9lbs rabbit that is only 16 inches tall fly a F-4, but how the hell did you shoot a M-16. The kick has to be murder.
And, while we are talking about Webb and Bush’s insult, you did hear that Bush was informed before the meeting to be careful around Webb since his son had just had two solders in a humvee next to him killed in an explosion a day or two before. Of course, Bush being Bush, he ignored the advice, and instead insulted one of our brave fighting men and his father. Great article from a Bush Sr. adviser on why Bush was wrong here:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/.....=110009321
The latest example of a lack of grace in Washington is the exchange between Jim Webb and President Bush at a White House Christmas party. Mr. Webb did not want to pose with the president and so didn’t join the picture line. Fair enough, everyone feels silly on a picture line. Mr. Bush approached him later and asked after his son, a Marine. Mr. Webb said he’d like his son back from Iraq. Mr. Bush then, according to the Washington Post, said: “That’s not what I asked you. How’s your son?” Mr. Webb replied that’s between him and his son.
For this Mr. Webb has been roundly criticized. And on reading the exchange I thought it had the sound of the rattling little aggressions of our day, but not on Mr. Webb’s side. Imagine Lincoln saying, in such circumstances, “That’s not what I asked you.” Or JFK. Or Gerald Ford!
125 Funny how Peggy Noonan, a former Reagan speechwriter, changed Bush’s words from “How’s your boy” to “How’s your son,” isn’t it? Wingers never stop lying, not even for a minute.
Roger, Roger, Roger @ 98 & 99:
“Roger Rabbit says:
69 Uh, well, GBS, I think your characterization is a little, um, global.”
Ummmm, of course my remarks were @ 69 were a bit global, I was referring to the entire armed forces of the United States! How could I be anything but global in my comment?
Any time you’re generalizing about an organization as large as the military you have to paint it with a broad brush.
By using a broad brush does that mean there aren’t exceptions to the rule? Of course not. Just because you served in the Army does that make you dumb? No. Does it mean that you’re the ONLY smart guy to have ever served with the “grunt monkeys?” Absolutely not.
Obviously, you’re an exception to the rule. I’d even go as far as to say that sgmmac is an exception as well.
But, I stand behind my characterization that overall you have to have a higher degree of intelligence when you’re dealing with things like:
Nuclear weapons.
Nuclear power plants.
Space shuttle pilots.
Multi-billion ships.
ICBM’s.
High performance fighter/interceptors.
Cruise missiles.
And, of course, the most elite fighting force in the world.
Naturally, most of my comments are good ol’ fashion inter-service ribbing. But like every other stereotype, it’s based in some modicum of truth.
The truth is a double-edged sword, Roger Rabbit. It can “set you free” or it can “hurt.” It just depends of your perspective. As far as the branches of the armed services are concerned it sets me free. How does it make you feel?
Oh, and Roger, just because we’re both Lib’s don’t think I won’t provoke you by poking at the “crazed bunny” with a sharp stick when it comes to inter-service rivalries.
Of course, the stick has to be long enough to avoid being ripped apart by your razor sharp claws. Hey, even a SEAL is smart enough to know that if “you mess with the bunny, you get the claws!”
I’ll give you the Navy eats better. Lima Beans And Ham (read: C-rats) don’t compare with fresh garden salad! I ate better on the Navy hospital ship than I did on the ground. But the Navy wouldn’t take me. It was Army, or 4-F.
35 years later, I’m still farting from the lima beans.
114 rob says: 112: Feeble try rabbit, Webb isn’t a troop he is a politician these days. 12/07/2006 at 12:14 am
You didn’t serve, did you? You clearly don’t understand the Marines. There’s no such thing as an “ex-Marine.” Once a Marine, always a Marine. Ask a Marine explain it to you sometime. Ask him what the “Semper” in “Semper Fidelis” means.
127 It’s always been my view that the “elite” were the infantry grunts who walked around in the jungle all day, with 60-pound field packs and ammo loads in 110 degree heat and 110 percent humidity, following whatever orders they were given without question, no matter how stupid the orders were, looking for people to shoot at them. Not everyone can do that. It’s especially difficult for people considered “intelligent” by conventional measures to do that, because you really don’t want to think very much in that job. Trying to make rationale sense of what you’re doing, and trying to rationally calculate your odds of surviving it, aren’t good for your mental health. On the other hand, you need a sergeant who can read a fucking compass and map. (It doesn’t matter that the lieutenant can’t.)
114 (continued) rob, take my advice, play with your tinkertoys — leave the military talk for the grown men and rabbits.
127 (continued)
One of the measures of intellect is capacity to learn. By this measure, one of the most intellectual people I’ve ever met was a young Marine I met while waiting in line at a PX:
Me: If you don’t mind my asking, why did you join the Marines?
Marine: Because my old man didn’t want me to.
Me: So … what do y ou think of the Marines?
Marine: Should’ve listened to my old man.