Wednesday, August 24, 2005

Careful, partner ... there's a new meme in town.


There's a new self-serving rationale running loose in the streets of East Wankerville these days, and it's how all of those gung-ho, pro-war, 101st Fighting Keyboarders who don't actually want to, you know, fight in person aren't really a bunch of gutless, lily-livered, wimp-ass, chickenshit, cowardly hypocrites. Not really.

And who better to explain the nuances of gutless, chickenshit hypocrisy than Weasel Boy himself:

Many liberals like to trot out the old "if you support President Bush and the war in Iraq so much, why haven't you enlisted, chickenhawk" line as if it is the end all and be all of comebacks. It actually is lacking in both logic and reason. I think this person on CQ put it well in the first comment to this post:

The whole chickenhawk argument is ludicrous anyway.

I have no intention of joining the fire dept., but when I see a house burning down I expect those that did to handle it. I have no intention of ever becoming a cop, but I think those that did should attempt to stop a bank robbery. In either case, the need for professionals to perform the functions they volunteered for and trained to do is obvious to me, and I don't see why expecting them to perform their function requires me to be willing to perform it as well.

So all you liberals who think the whole "chickenhawk" bit is a slam-dunk, I suggest you think about why you haven't joined the fire and police departments if you support the fighting of fires and crimes. By your own "logic" (such as it is), you're hypocrites.

Have at it. This one's so easy, it isn't even challenging.

P.S. And don't forget to read the adorable comments, like this one:

Enlistments are up, recruiters are exceeding their quotas, and I'd be willing to bet that MOST of these new recruits (around 90 percent, give or take a few percentage points) ARE young Republicans. The military has always been somewhere around 80-90 percent Republican for many decades now. If the military suffers from a lack of something, it isnt a lack of Republicans signing up.

I don't make this stuff up. I don't have to.

6 comments:

dAVE said...

Sometimes I imagine these guys trying to explain this position to a Klingon. Would the Klingon kill them on the spot, or merely beat them and enslave them? What do you think?

catherine said...

Oh, Dave, what a fine image that is. Worf - listening to one of these chickenhawks. Is there a more devastating stare than that of the Worf? And maybe Belanna, too, who's half Klingon.

Cynic, doesn't it make your head explode to read these people (I use the term loosely)? You don't need to martyr yourself on our account. Really enjoy your blog.

mergenow said...

Okay, if they want to use that analogy, let's draw this baby out all the way to make it truly accurate.

If we're going to take the Iraq war and stuff it into an analogy with cops and firefighters, then we'd have to have Conservative Pundits and Bloggers who were vehemently Pro-Crime and Pro-Fire. And really, in the case of the Iraqmire, it would be Pro-Arson. And when we questioned the Arson, we'd hear that:"Questioning the fires undermines our firefighters!"

The ChimpAdmin would create a Coalition of Firefighters, and send them into Iraq, and they'd set fire to people's homes and businesses, then fight the resulting blazes. When people questioned the logic and wisdom of the operation, we'd hear that we need to fight fires abroad so that we don't have to fight them at home. We'd have op-eds worrying that our strapped volunteer fire companies didn't have the manpower to handle domestic fires and rescue tree-stranded kitties.

The Administration would talk about supporting our firefighters, but would send them over there without sufficient oxygen tanks and under-powered pumper trucks. Rumsfeld would proclaim:"You have to fight fires with the Hose Company you have, not the one you wish you had."

And inevitably, this would result in pissed-off radical muslim arsonists flocking into Iraq to set more fires which the Coalition Firefighters would have to put out. And we'd hear that our firefighters would come home as soon as the Iraqi fire departments were capable of putting out the inferno by themselves.

And then, when we questioned the Pro-Arson Conservative bloggers, and asked why, if they were so strongly in favor of our Iraqi Firefighting Operations, they didn't sign up themselves, we'd have to muddle through some kind of tortured analogy about garbage men.

dAVE said...

mergenow -
That is funny!

catherine - thanks!

dAVE said...

Oh man! I just checked in on the comment I made on Weasel Boy's blog, and he erased it. These guys just can't tolerate a dissenting opinion. Really downright UnAmerican!

(no offense to youse Canucks)

teseract said...

the mnore conservatives that enlist... the more liberals we will have in a few years. once they see for themselves how much the dod pays its employees versus it tech-contractors they will understand the sort of this those yammering liberals are talking about reforming. pay the soldiers a fair wage, take care of their families when they are maimed or killed and equip them properly instead of diverting taxpayer dollars to your buddy's "start-up tech company" with a nice fat sub-contract. I wish all y'all would pay more attention.