Nutjobs Ranting About Politics.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
Can we agree to start doing the work on figuring out which of them are fakers and malingerers, rather than wait 30 years to narrow it down to just the ones who run for some kind of office as Democrats?

If you say you are a lawyer, and I point out and prove that you cheated on the bar exam, am I attacking the process of training and certifying lawyers? Am I denigrating all of those who have passed?

Certainly not. Your point is without merit, and disingenuous.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by bilmore
Your point is without merit, and disingenuous.

Is this motto taken by anyone?

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Is this motto taken by anyone?

2

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by bilmore
If you say you are a lawyer, and I point out and prove that you cheated on the bar exam, am I attacking the process of training and certifying lawyers? Am I denigrating all of those who have passed?

Certainly not. Your point is without merit, and disingenuous.

Maybe it is and maybe it isn't. We don't know yet, because you haven't addressed it.

My point is that your party has called into question the way military medals for injury and valor were awarded in the Vietnam Era. Surely the fact that several prominent anti-Administration politicians have this rare, odd fact in common can be put aside for the moment, and we can agree that it behooves no one to award these medals too freely. It cheapens the process. These awards' overapplication dilutes the impact for those truly deserving, like the way everyone at a bank is a "Vice President" or Bush is a "conservative." Some of our brave fighting men and women left behind Republican limbs and lives in Vietnam, and it is they who are dishonored by Kerry's Cracker Jack box medals. True, you're not necessarily calling the Purple Heart process into question by attacking John Kerry. I am.

The past month has shown that it is exceedingly difficult to say with certainty which of the conflicting records and witnesses is telling the truth after the passage of 30 years. Shouldn't we be taking steps to assure that there are no social climbers and other opportunists who volunteered for Iraq and received superficial wounds there merely to build a future political career --- in either party? Does it concern no one that we haven't been shown how the American military has acted to ensure there are no more John Kerrys? Maybe if we could say Yale no longer has NROTC, we could proudly say to the people of 2034 that we did our best.

If John Kerry's Purple Hearts dishonor those who truly sacrificed, I want assurance that those 7,000 Gulf War II vets don't get a free ride to the Senate, ketchup heirdom, and the White House. Capiche?

[Jean Socteau]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
The past month has shown that it is exceedingly difficult to say with certainty which of the conflicting records and witnesses is telling the truth after the passage of 30 years. Shouldn't we be taking steps to assure that there are no social climbers and other opportunists who volunteered for Iraq and received superficial wounds there merely to build a future political career --- in either party? Does it concern no one that we haven't been shown how the American military has acted to ensure there are no more John Kerrys? Maybe if we could say Yale no longer has NROTC, we could proudly say to the people of 2034 that we did our best.

True realism consists in revealing the surprising things which habit keeps covered and prevents us from seeing.

-- Jean Socteau

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
Maybe it is and maybe it isn't. We don't know yet, because you haven't addressed it.

Then I missed it, or it changed.

My point is that your party has called into question the way military medals for injury and valor were awarded in the Vietnam Era.

No, a portion of my party has called into question, with evidentiary support, Kerry's honesty as he made application for an award in a system that depends, to a large part, on the honor of the applicants and detailers. To criticize this is in no way a criticism of other recipients, or of the system. West Point lives and dies by the honor system. Periodically, cheaters are discovered. Yet, we continue to hold the other students in esteem partly because of that system, and partly because they have adhered to it. The system works when it encounters honorable people - it is predicated on honorable people. The fact that it has survived . . well, forever . . . shows that it remains viable. The fact that Kerry is being called out for violating it simply means that some people think standards should be enforced. If Kerry did what he is accused of, and it is proven, then the honor to the others is even higher, because there has been a showing that cheaters can't easily game the system.

To blast valid criticism of Kerry in this situation because it "might cheapen what others have done" in an honor system is quintessential misdirection. Kerry should not get slack because other, more honorable people might somehow be tarred. Kerry's alleged dishonesty is what supplies any dishonor to the system that is present. If Kerry did what is claimed, and he is outed for it, other medal holders' honor is only enhanced.

(ETA: I should add that, if one has truly gamed the system, one would be well advised not to trumpet that award for years as a primary indication of honor and primary qualification for honor. The higher you ride a lie, the further you have to fall.)

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by bilmore
Then I missed it, or it changed.

No, a portion of my party has called into question, with evidentiary support, Kerry's honesty as he made application for an award in a system that depends, to a large part, on the honor of the applicants and detailers. To criticize this is in no way a criticism of other recipients, or of the system. West Point lives and dies by the honor system. Periodically, cheaters are discovered. Yet, we continue to hold the other students in esteem partly because of that system, and partly because they have adhered to it. The system works when it encounters honorable people - it is predicated on honorable people. The fact that it has survived . . well, forever . . . shows that it remains viable. The fact that Kerry is being called out for violating it simply means that some people think standards should be enforced. If Kerry did what he is accused of, and it is proven, then the honor to the others is even higher, because there has been a showing that cheaters can't easily game the system.

To blast valid criticism of Kerry in this situation because it "might cheapen what others have done" in an honor system is quintessential misdirection. Kerry should not get slack because other, more honorable people might somehow be tarred. Kerry's alleged dishonesty is what supplies any dishonor to the system that is present. If Kerry did what is claimed, and he is outed for it, other medal holders' honor is only enhanced.

Ah, but your system would rely on the people of 2034 accurately to discern which Gulf War II vets (a.) had lied 30 years before and (b.) were now registered Democrats.

Once again, the GOP is foisting responsibilities properly belonging to today's licentious freeloaders off on the next generations, in the false hope that they will somehow be better equipped to find and clean up our messes than we. Whether it be deficits, tax shifts, environmental controls, or Purple Heart grade inflation, the GOP is the party of the short-sighted libertine. You're living on a moral credit card, friend, and your kids are going to get a nasty call from that great Providian accounts receivable department in the sky.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
Once again, the GOP is foisting responsibilities properly belonging to today's licentious freeloaders off on the next generations, in the false hope that they will somehow be better equipped to find and clean up our messes than we. Whether it be deficits, tax shifts, environmental controls, or Purple Heart grade inflation, the GOP is the party of the short-sighted libertine. You're living on a moral credit card, friend, and your kids are going to get a nasty call from that great Providian accounts receivable department in the sky.

Pretty. However, your point remains that we cannot question an alleged liar because it might impugn honest people. That is, perhaps, Kerry's greatest defense.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by bilmore
However, your point remains that we cannot question an alleged liar because it might impugn honest people.

Quite the contrary. My point is that if you are going to question Democratic presidential candidates regarding 30-year-old circumstances leading to their employers' commendation, you should have the guts to question all recipients of those medals. The same way that candidates traditionally disclose their 1040s, but everyone --- even non-candidates --- can be audited at any time. I suspect there are many people in the Pentagon wearing ribbons they didn't earn, many of whom have been sharpening knives for Kerry since '72.

Is Kerry a shameless self-promoter? Yes. Garry Trudeau said so. 'Nuff said. So? Bush is a shameless self-promoter. Remember, he thinks he did more for human rights than Lincoln.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
Quite the contrary. My point is that if you are going to question Democratic presidential candidates regarding 30-year-old circumstances leading to their employers' commendation, you should have the guts to question all recipients of those medals.

I think it's valid to wait on that questioning until someone says "I saw Bill in Quang Tre and he wasn't hurt at all, but he got a medal for it", and then backs it up with at least colorable evidence. I'm not going to question all West Pointers as you suggest. I would only do so if my true interest was deflecting criticism of a cheater.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Is this motto taken by anyone?

I have "your arguments are the height of Sophistry." Personally I think the new one is confusingly similar, but call my bluff.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
Quite the contrary. My point is that if you are going to question Democratic presidential candidates regarding 30-year-old circumstances leading to their employers' commendation, you should have the guts to question all recipients of those medals. The same way that candidates traditionally disclose their 1040s, but everyone --- even non-candidates --- can be audited at any time. I suspect there are many people in the Pentagon wearing ribbons they didn't earn, many of whom have been sharpening knives for Kerry since '72.

Is Kerry a shameless self-promoter? Yes. Garry Trudeau said so. 'Nuff said. So? Bush is a shameless self-promoter. Remember, he thinks he did more for human rights than Lincoln.

Quick question. You weren't on kobe's defense team, were you?

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by bilmore
Pretty. However, your point remains that we cannot question an alleged liar because it might impugn honest people. That is, perhaps, Kerry's greatest defense.

Let me get the lies straight.

The gist that I'm hearing from the SBVFT is this: Kerry tried to run away to France, of all places. When that didn't work out he volunteered for one of those luxury divisions of the military (i.e. the US Navy) to go to Vietnam (hey, it was a French colony once, there's another connection...), volunteered for a "cushy' job in a swift boat. When that gig turned out to be a real bummer, he did everything he could to get the fuck out, while also looking like a hero, so he could lord it all over eveyone thirty years later when he ran for President. He blew up his own ass, conned the rest of his crew into going along with him in his efforts to amass medals (the new guy, as part of the crew hazing ritual, was even went so far as to fall off the boat to give cred to the Lt.'s heroism; they agreed afterwards to stay apart for 30-something years so as to not arouse suspicion of the grand plan) when guns were going off in the area so it could be argued that everything he did was under fire. He showed up to the infirmary for every mosquito bite and paper cut, just in case someone noticed the bleeding and gave him a medal. And, hey, the Navy, stupid fucks that they are, (oops, we're not saying that....) ate it all up and went along with it and gave him all the medals so he could go home to his cushy protesting gig back home. Unfortunately, everyone in South East Asia happened to see all of this, and they kept meticulous notes of his whereabouts while in Vietnam at all times, so they could alert the Navy that the medals were erroneously given under false pretenses. Of course, they couldn't file that report until they managed to raise funds (from a very generous Texan who builds crappy, ugly houses), and their method of filing the report was by airing advertisements and publishing a book. Hopefully the Navy will catch wind of this and do the right thing and take back his medals.

ETA: I just hope that the Navy opens a huge ass investigation on this, because there are some people down here in Texas who go so far as to lord their Purple Hearts on their license plates, and I wouldn't want to open up a lane for some bastard who was just looking to get out from under heavy fire.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by bilmore
I'm not going to question all West Pointers as you suggest.

All cadets get Purple Hearts? That must be some hazing. Oh, right, Band-Aids count.

I think we've pretty well established how far even the principled Republicans will go in defense of this Administration. Deficits? Irrelevant. Interventionism? Mandatory. Protectionism? Negotiable. Torture? Justifiable. Constitution? Amendable. Voluntary military service? Opportunism.

Mind you, I'm not sad to see the sacred cow of a candidate's military service slaughtered, as I didn't serve, and it was doomed by the rise of a specialist career officer corps. I just didn't expect it would be ground up in quite so fine a goo. And by Bob Dole, no less.

They say there is a non-religious branch of the GOP; I don't think that's true. Rather, let's say instead there is an atheist branch that directs its supernatural beliefs and ecstatic fervor toward non-deities.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Quick question.

I invented this.