Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bastards in Suits verses People in Uniform: for Memorial Day

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
ProfessorPlum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-30-06 09:49 AM
Original message
Bastards in Suits verses People in Uniform: for Memorial Day
The problem is, these yahoos have managed an ugly trick. They have turned criticism of the policies of Bastards in Suits into criticism of The People in Uniform Getting Shot At. This, of course, is completely wrong, as one can easily tell the difference between the Bastards in Suits and The People in Uniform Getting Shot At. One group is in Suits, and Not Getting Shot At, while another is in Uniform, and Getting Shot At. Please, try to grasp this. Not the same.

There is a flip side. Some people confuse supporting the Bastards in Suits for supporting The People in Uniform Getting Shot At. This is, again, ridiculous. If the history of modern warfare has taught us anything, it's that the Bastards in Suits spend an awful lot of time working the kinks out of plans involving The People in Uniform dying unpleasantly. They often screw that up. When they do screw up, it is incumbent upon Bastards in Suits to suffer criticism and fix the situation, as by comparison The People in Uniform are suffering shattered skulls, missing limbs and death. Which is, on my scale, exponentially more traumatic than criticism.

Some people even seem confused on how we are criticizing the Bastards in Suits. The Bastards have a job to do. They are not doing it. Period. Tommy Franks recently trotted out the classic bit of misdirection, attacking critics of Donald Rumsfeld.

"I don't care about your politics. I don't. Don Rumsfeld is an American patriot."

Yes, well, that's lovely. But we're not criticizing his patriotism. We're criticizing his job performance. One of the great mysteries of the last six years was how and when the Bush Administration turned public policy into Special Olympics. "Oh, I know Donny knocked over all the hurdles, but HE LOVES THE RACE, so you SHUT YOUR FILTHY, CYNICAL MOUTH." Jesus H. Christ.

more at http://kfmonkey.blogspot.com/2006/05/lions-led-by-donkeys.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
catnhatnh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-30-06 10:10 AM
Response to Original message
1. Oh My.....
It took me a moment to recognize the truth....I hadn't seen it in a while....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorPlum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-30-06 11:22 AM
Response to Original message
2. Kick for the best Memorial Day article I've read in years
this essay also talks about the difference between an employer/employee contract like arrangment that so many GOPers think we have with the military, and the covenant which we actually do/should have.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lisa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-30-06 08:19 PM
Response to Original message
3. excellent article ...
Edited on Tue May-30-06 08:20 PM by Lisa
And to revisit the Special Olympics metaphor (one of many splendid points brought up by the author, who would have had to turn out a 300-page book to explore all of them) ... ironically, it is the very crowd in power who condemn special exceptions. An extreme version of "tough love" should rule. No affirmative action programs (unless it's the type of thing which benefits them, e.g. Bush's "legacy admission" to Yale). No coddling of drug addicts or convicted criminals or those who are elderly and ailing (remember when the grocery boxes for impoverished old people were cut back?). But they turn around and condemn anyone who insists that their own officials should be held accountable and be punished for duplicity or incompetence, citing special circumstances. Anybody who questioned Bush's qualifications or penchant for delegating responsibility, back in 2000, was pilloried for being "unfairly hard on him" or "elitist".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 12th 2024, 10:42 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC