Friday, September 23, 2011

Supporting our troops

Where does the GOP get these debate audiences? Oh wait, scratch that, they get them from the same place they get their debate candidates:

Not a single candidate thanked a soldier in Iraq for his service.

Even the right-wing National Review is somewhat baffled by that. Okay, so yes, Stephen Hill is gay (and one big buff bohunka of a gay, if I say so myself, if I was gay I could see myself going totally yummy over him), and was asking a question about the recently-repealed Don't Ask Don't Tell which allowed him to come out of the closet, but he's also a soldier serving in Iraq. And Republicans support our troops, right?

-- Badtux the Not-so-buff Penguin


  1. The thugs always seem to stand for exactly the opposite of what they say. On every issue.

    Their "harsh" stance on drugs lets the illegal drug trade flourish.

    Their "war on terror" makes terrorism far more likely, and far more justified.

    Their "support" of the troops makes them the biggest enemy of our troops in the whole world.

    Their "patriotism" is eroding the country's soul.

    Their "fiscal responsibility" is simply looting the country.

    Their "job creators" are job destroyers, which have dismantled the country's manufacturing capability.

    The list goes on.

  2. The tea partiers and other cronies and rightard sympathizers make a big show of their super patriotism. No one is as 100% American as they are. But everything God's Own Party does shows a hatred of working people and a hatred of America itself. If a solution isn't harsh and harmful to the powerless, they want none of it.

  3. I am not sure they see homosexuals as people deserving of praise. One observation I have made of people I know who tend to be on the conservative side is that they are more prone to seeing things in term of black and white. People are either good or they are not good and the idea that a person could be something they consider not good (like homosexual) while being something they consider good (like being a soldier) at the same time is beyond them. My guess is that they see that soldier as a homosexual and therefore a bad person unworthy of any thanks no matter what he had done other than having sex with men.

  4. Rethugs don't support the troops, they support war. People who support the troops worry about things like their healthcare and reintigration with society after their duty is done. And they vote to send them to war in the first place very, very reluctantly and with good reason.

    Rethugs and DINOs -- a group which includes most elected Dems today -- support wars: wars for oil, wars on "terrorism", etc.

  5. There's a phrase I learned from that "Political Ponerology" book about sociopaths: "conversive language." That's when words are twisted to signify the opposite of what they ostensibly mean. That's why Repigs do what Nang mentioned.

    They don't support the troops; they support death. Their cult will be the death of the United States. And many of the people in it.

  6. I think the difference between DINOS and moderate Republicans (there are some in the population, if not in public office) on the one hand and Rethugs and lizard people on the other is that the former support wars for some purpose, whether worthy or not. The latter are really quite enthusiastic about death, for its own sake.



Ground rules: Comments that consist solely of insults, fact-free talking points, are off-topic, or simply spam the same argument over and over will be deleted. The penguin is the only one allowed to be an ass here. All viewpoints, however, are welcomed, even if I disagree vehemently with you.

WARNING: You are entitled to create your own arguments, but you are NOT entitled to create your own facts. If you spew scientific denialism, or insist that the sky is purple, or otherwise insist that your made-up universe of pink unicorns and cotton candy trees is "real", well -- expect the banhammer.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.