Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
Cowards the lot of them .
excellent short film this is exactly how i pictured these kids to be in denial with complete disregard for for anything but the agenda written out for them by the republican/neocon rulers.
ignorant brats.
32–Peter–you can recite the defintion of ad hominem, and seem to agree it is “not valid” but then you go ahead and justify ad hominem analysis for abortion and war in Iraq positions?
I’ll say it again slightly differently. “Whether an advocate would or would not serve in the army is irrelevant to whether or not GOUSA should or should not be in Iraq.”
and
“Whether or not you have had, or would have, an abortion is irrelevant to whether or not abortion should or should not be legal.:”
Do you agree or NOT? (((Joke alert–and recall that Schopenhauer is on my side!))
Later we can determine the “relevance” of hypocritical statements==but in general they go NOT to the “idea” being discussed but rather to the character of the speaker====but often not even that. BONUS–I don’t want to clean sewers. Does that mean I cannot offer the opinion that sewers should be cleaned?
How you might respond will develop the analysis further.
30–Awake==you should answer the above yourself (without moving your lips).
Ok I think all of those so called “Medical Conditions” are really just their way of saying they think they are too good to serve, but the rest of us Joe Blows need to serve because they can’t find the balls to say the truth or defend their own actions. I may not be as educated as some of these A-holes but I am smart enough to know when i am being screwed and this gov’t and these stupid idiots and soon to be more idiots are trying to screw us all!!
Why didn’t the interviewer ask a college Republican woman why she was not serving? I think he is a bigot.
Bobbo, why do you keep avoiding the real topic?
pj
38–I’ll bite. Whats the real topic?
My position–invading Iraq was against GOUSA’s interest and contrary to public opinion, it was pretty obvious at the time of the invasion. I don’t care who says we should stay there either. Bankrupt ideas, like businesses, by definition won’t admit it as long as they are funded.
Abortion is any womans right. I would personally extend it to include infanticide for those live births who are not wanted. It should all take place with full information and free choice of the woman. I don’t care who says otherwise or what reasons they have.
What other issues am I avoiding?
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2007/5/14/221922/325
40,
OK, they’re not chickenhawks, they’re INCOMPETENT FOOLS who think they know about war and foreign policy when they are really a bunch of spoiled children who can’t think past their own selfish hypocritical interests.
40—Malren, nice addition. You’d think that identifying a thought process with a mechanism so defective that it has a latin name would end a discussion? But it doesn’t.
38–Peter, sorry I got lazy on you and just went for what flitted thru my brain at the moment. What I think is “on topic” is that the Iraq War is right or wrong regardless of what people who don’t want to serve in the war think.” If there are “other topics,” happy to talk about them.–I’ll be back in a few hours to pick up on any loose threads.
I respect any of your ideas, as long as you live by them and don’t force me to.
That’s the underlying story of this video:
How credible is someone who touts an idea and refuses to live by it.
I say not credible, and in this case not even honorable.
pj
43–Well Peter, simply put, you are wrong.
The question as to whether USA should be in Iraq or not is totally different than whether or not someone is willing to serve in the Army.
Now, most likely, many of those in the video are hypocrite enough to in fact be unworthy human beings. But not on the evidence presented so far–ie any piece with single questions and answers is propaganda and not analysis which requires 8-9-10 followup questions==kinda like a Presidential Press conference.
And thats why ad hominem arguments are so common and powerful. They appeal to people who don’t make the distinctions–even when they are aware of the concept. Well, maybe that will come with reconsideration.
If you REALLY, REALLY believe in something, you are willing to put your life on the line for it. I didn’t see that with these young Repuplicans and I’ve never ever seen it with the old ones. They are all hypocrites and cowards.
The number of Democrats in both the House and Senate who have actually served in the Armed Forces is staggering, especially when compared with the very few Republicans in the House and Senate who have. It’s very one-sided. Those who have actually experienced war are the ones most likely to oppose it.
>>Is it just me, or did they all say the same thing.
No, it’s not just you. Chickenhawks are not known for their ability to formulate independent opinions on topics. If Anal Cyst Limbaugh and Dumbya say it, it’s good enough for them.
KILL! KILL! KILL!! Just don’t ask me to pick up the bayonette. I’ve got a scholarship.
Theses kids are serious denial, it’s amazing how they can puff up there chests or breasts and talk like John Wayne about to slaughter Native Americans. But when asked why they are not serving they become Steve Urklers, and suddenly everyone of them have 4F status.
3:10 “Ohh my goodness!” LOL, “I prayer it to God, and know for a fact I’m not gay” ROFLMAO T A chicken-hawk and a closet case to boot, gotta love these young patriots.
Temet Nosce (Know Thyself!)
For college students, they sure are stupid and obviously can’t think for themselves. Each one repeated the same lame Bush catch phrase line “fight them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here”. What a bunch of chickenhawk IDIOTS!
General Petraeus, remarks that he hasn’t enough boots on the ground in Iraq. Well Mr General Sir, we have a solution for you. The Young Republicans!! there’s a whole bunch of them who are Intellegent, fit, Strong, patriotic and really committed in fighting them Irakeees over there…..as long as it isn’t them.
What idiots, they’ve been wrapped in cotton wool and probably have had there 4rses wipped for them for most of their 20 something years.
What is sad, as one commenter put it, is that one of these numb nuts will probably end up running the country in years to come.
>>What is sad, as one commenter put it, is that one of these
>>numb nuts will probably end up running the country in
>>years to come.
Let’s hope that with Dumbya’s 8-year legacy of fuckups, we won’t “elect” (speaking loosely) another chickenhawk to office for at least a generation.
Anyone dumb enough to join the US military after many years of sending young men and women to die on the thinnest of pretexes (or non-existant ones in the case of Iraq) gets everything that is coming to them.
Bobbo is totally right – why should rich, privileged, greased pole-climbing dorks die like horrible smelly poor people in pointless wars? Like everything else in their lives – someone else will do it for them – it doesn’t matter that these people are rote-learned fools with no ideas of their own, that should never matter – what does matter is making sure that at least some idiot goes thus allowing these dumb fucks to freely spout meaningless rhetoric like ‘we’re fighting them there so we don’t have to fight them here’
This entertains me very much.
Blatant hypocrisy is the best way to describe these young rejects. They certainly are not Christian; nor are they truly conservative. They; like the ilk they follow, are nothing more than treasonous low-lifes.
If either of my sons were like those lechers, I would disown them.
Coincidentally Glenn Greenwald has an excellent article published today in Salon.com on this very subject:
http://tinyurl.com/2momjy
Well worth reading if you are intellectually interested in this topic at all. Of course, if you are in the 25% of those that still thinks that Bush is doing a good job, then you probably are too illiterate to understand the article anyway, so I guess this is a little like “preaching to the choir” to ask you to go read this.
Chickenhawks secretly are in favor for illegal immigration.. because a lot of the U.S. infantry and soldiers in iraq happen to be hispanic!!!
55–An analogy==it is everyone’s DUTY to pay taxes as required by the Code. It is recommended that everyone find every single deduction or shelter possible to reduce their taxes as much as possible. Is it hypocritical to say we should all pay taxes when the speaker is not?
Would it be different to say, we should all pay taxes as required by the Tax Code while they do not?
This discussion about the Chickenhawks is (I hope) much like this. The right question is very close to the wrong question and no one is recognizing the close similarity between the two.
OUTSTANDING!!! major kudos!
Now this is what we should be up to.
Bobbo, I have come to the conclusion that you are a troll.
If you really don’t recognize the difference between seeking to minimize the amount of tax you pay (while still paying your taxes) and asking that other people go fight a war you “support” but are not willing to dirty your hand with personally, I have nothing further to say.
And no, you’re not going to talk me to death. Again.
Not a thing has changed – you are what you own in the US – mini cronies, christ, they are younger than me and twice as dumb – the invasion of Iraq is illegal, there is no weapon more dangerous than a humiliated nation.
(a saying from Ireland)
All war is about money – Sun Tzu “The Art of War”
Iraq = chi-ching
59—Mustard, you are “almost there.” Now, should people who are not willing to volunteer to go to war still have a voice about whether or not we go to war? Do they have anything to contribute to the discussion or should they be dismissed ad hominem?
The site at Post #40 goes to this point and is quite valid, in my view.
Grasshopper, perhaps you missed my earlier post. You are not the teacher, and I am not the student. Please recognize that.
As to what people have to “contribute to the discussion” it’s kind of a grey area. People may talk about anything they wish. But when people with blood-lust in their eyes repeat robotically “we have to fight them there so we don’t have to fight them there”, but refuse en masse to do any of the “fighting them there”, huh. Kind of suggests cowardice more than patriotism, hm? And when they get into a position like Dumbya, of actually sending young Americans to die for something they were unwilling to do, it’s more than a suggestion.
61 – – -Well, thats all pure ad hominem projection. You are saying that its invalid to think we need to fight them there or here unless you are willing to enlist and go fight. So, we are back on my original post #11, the site at post #40, and the power of defective argumentation via the ad hominem attack==the route used by those who cannot win an argument on its merits.
And since you have raised it 2-3-4 times now, I have never claimed teacher or student status. That too is a projection on your part. You may be having vague feelings of needing to learn something, but that does not make me your teacher, nor a troll. I just post on point as long as you post off point or repetitively. Call that what you will.