Crooks and Liars has the video: Lawrence O'Donnell passionately argues in favor of Rangel's proposal that we reinstate the draft - not because it provides Bush and Cheney with more cannon fodder - but because it personalizes the war; it brings the war home. Guys like Holtz and Scarborough prove how much they don't get it, as they condemn O'Donnell for getting "personal" :
making the war personal is exactly what Rangel and O'Donnell (and I), think has to happen.
O'Donnell is an unhinged, utter fool. In his universe, only a semolier is qualified to critique a wine. Only a chef may order, then criticize a meal. It is foolish. It is without substance. It is argumentum ad hominem. It flies in the face of all that our forefathers (historically accurate term that the gender sensitive crowd takes issue with) held about the relationship between military and civilians. It is, in fact, the "chickenhawk" argument that is trotted out by the anti-war crowd because they are unable to put forth any rational argument beyond "I'm afraid". This argument, ironically, legitimizes only those voices who favor war. If the only legitimate opinion on war is that which is held by the military and ex military, then we as a nation, are overwhelmingly in favor of being in Iraq. Surely you grasp the silliness of that argument? Do they advocate abandonment of civilian control of the military? If not, then what are they advocating?
We are at war to save western civilization. We are going to be at war for more than a generation and Rangel and O'Donnell would have our military infected by those without a desire to be there? If you have a word beyond stupid that you prefer, you may insert it at this time. Not to worry though, it's going to become "personal" enough to suit both you and O'Donnell.
Posted by: Rick | November 23, 2006 at 04:41 PM
Welcome Back Rick!!!
In your absence your sense of proportionality seems to have vanished like the bouquet of a fine wine on a windy day. Advising someone on which wine to order, is not remotely equivalent to ordering someone into war. The analogy fails on another level as well: it's not that only a somelier should be allowed to critique a wine, it is whether or not you should follow the instructions of a somelier who has never even tasted wine.
More disturbing of course is your characterization of the more than 16,300,000 men who were inducted into our armed forces betweeen 1917 and 1973 as an infection.
(By the way your suggestion that currently serving military are wildly in favor of the war is utterly without basis.)
Posted by: bbbustard | November 23, 2006 at 05:39 PM
Happy Thanksgiving. I hope it was a very good day for your better half. (You also of course).
I will pay closer attention and not allow your thinking to careen so wildly off course in the future.
Posted by: Rick | November 23, 2006 at 06:01 PM
One cannot become a semolier (sommelier as you prefer the French version) unless by invitatuion and merit. No? You may rethink your analogy. No charge. We'll call it a mulligan.
Posted by: Rick | November 23, 2006 at 06:14 PM
I too hope that you and those fondest to you had a great day.
As a non-golfer, I'm confused about the mulligan reference. I do however defend my right to spell a French word as the French might, and to hope that the concept of merit would not be as foreign to our selection of our President, as it has been in the last two elections.
Posted by: bbbustard | November 23, 2006 at 07:29 PM
Hmm..
Your bloggings are great, I've just started my own blog too.
Posted by: Gilian | November 22, 2007 at 05:56 AM
It is glad to see this blog, it is good and detailed fun to read this, nice informative blog, Thanks for share this article.
Posted by: Term Papers | December 12, 2009 at 02:43 AM
Its really a useful article, I really admire this i mean Its really looks interesting I like it so much.you are doing well job
Posted by: Term Papers | January 07, 2010 at 12:53 AM
Wright County Egg of Galt, Iowa, is voluntarily cheap timberland boots recalling specific Julian dates of shell eggs produced by their farms because timberland chukka boots sale they have the potential to be contaminated with timberland boots sale Salmonella, a food-borne bacteria. The company is making this voluntary recall of products because testing at timberland chukka shoes online the company's farm showed some of the eggs may contain the bacteria.
Consumers should return the eggs in the timberland boat shoes original carton to the store where they were purchased for a full cheap timberland chukka boots refund. Eggs affected by this recall were distributed to food wholesalers, distribution centers timberland shoes outlet and foodservice companies in California, Illinois, Missouri, timberland chukka boot Colorado, Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Iowa. These companies distribute nationwide.
Eggs are packaged under the following brand timberland mens shoes names: Lucerne, Albertson, Mountain Dairy, Ralph's, Boomsma's, Sunshine, Hillandale, Trafficanda, Farm Fresh, Shoreland, Lund, Dutch Farms and Kemps. Eggs are packed timberland mens chukka in varying sizes of cartons (6-egg cartons, dozen egg cartons, 18-egg cartons) with Julian dates ranging timberland womens shoes from 136 to 225 and plant numbers 1026, 1413 and 1946. Dates timberland classic boat and codes can be found stamped on the end of the egg carton. The plant number begins with the letter P and then the number. The Julian timberland shoes online date follows the plant number, for example: P-1946 223.
Consumers are reminded that properly storing, handling and timberland mens classic shoes cooking eggs should help prevent food-borne illness. The mens timberland boots Egg Safety Center and the Food and Drug Administration recommend that eggs should be fully cooked until both the yolks and the whites are firm, and consumers cheap timberland classic boots should not eat foods that may contain raw or undercooked eggs. For more information timberland classic boots on proper handling and preparation of eggs and answers cheap timberland classic boots to other frequently asked questions, visit www.eggsafety.org.
The chance of an egg containing Salmonella timberland mens shoes Enteritidis is rare in the United States. Several years ago, it was estimated that 1 in 20,000 eggs might have timberland classic boat been contaminated, which meant most consumers probably wouldn't come in contact with such an egg timberland mens shoes but 1 time in 84 years. Since that time most U.S. egg farmers mens timberland boots have been employing tougher food safety measures to help protect against food-borne illness. Chief among timberland mens shoes these methods are modern, sanitary housing systems; stringent rodent control and bio-security controls; inoculation timberland classic boat against Salmonella Enteritidis; cleaning and sanitization of cheap timberland boots poultry houses and farms; and testing. http://www.timberlandofficial.com
Posted by: mens timberland boots | August 30, 2010 at 09:41 PM