Patterico's Pontifications

1/26/2006

Treacher on Wusses

Filed under: Dog Trainer — Patterico @ 6:34 am



I’m not advocating that we spit on Joel Stein. All I’m asking is that we read Jim Treacher’s satire of him.

Then maybe we should go back to not caring about him. But read Treacher’s post first.

19 Responses to “Treacher on Wusses”

  1. In this case, spitting is appropriate.

    perfectsense (024110)

  2. Joel Stein was a liberal who finally told the truth (that he, and a lot of libs, don’t support the troops), and he gets absolutely trashed; I thought that he did a valuable public service by admitting what we all knew was true in the first place.

    Don’t look for any other libs to tell the truth about their positions for a couple more years.

    Dana (3e4784)

  3. high-larious!

    Vanderleun is not so kind:

    http://americandigest.org/mt-archives/006007.php#006007

    Tom (ad8087)

  4. Let’s not make the Pauline Kael mistake of assuming that just because we (and the troops) don’t appreciate Stein’s comments that his comments won’t play in Peoria. And just whose votes are they risking? We weren’t voting for them before, were we?

    It’s possible – perhaps not likely, but possible – the Democrats will gain more from finally presenting a coherent front to the voters (trying to maintain the fiction that they support the troops fighting a war they oppose just made them look silly) than they’ll lose from people who actually believed it was okay to vote for the troops before voting against the troops…

    steve sturm (d3e296)

  5. Here’s some good analogous satire for you:

    Yeah, let’s you and him walk across that high-wire without a net! And don’t forget, we’re supporting you all the way! Be careful, but you go get ‘em!

    My point is, “supporting” people to put themselves in potentially fatal circumstances is actually a precarious proposition.

    Psyberian (1cf529)

  6. My point is, “supporting” people to put themselves in potentially fatal circumstances is actually a precarious proposition“…

    Just what the heck does this mean?

    russ (2d4887)

  7. The Psyberian Huskie wrote:

    My point is, “supporting” people to put themselves in potentially fatal circumstances is actually a precarious proposition.

    With that kind of logic, we could never defend ourselves. Surely that isn’t what you wished to say.

    Dana (9f37aa)

  8. Maybe “support” is too vague of a term then Dana. There are numerous types of support. But what sort of support encourages others to put themselves in mortal danger?

    Psyberian (1cf529)

  9. But what sort of support encourages others to put themselves in mortal danger?

    Hmmm, so what are you admitting to here? That the real world hasn’t touched you and you have no clue as to why people (understand this) take a, “chance” with their lives to defend the rest of us because they see a value in it?

    Somehow you see a problem in supporting people willing to take the chance to defend you so you can sit at your keyboard and be fat, dumb, & happy, right?…:lol:

    russ (2d4887)

  10. “But what sort of support encourages others to put themselves in mortal danger?”

    So by this sort of logic one would not want to “suport” police or firefighters either, right?

    JVW (54c318)

  11. JVW, I don’t believe that being a firefighter or policeman is on the same plane of danger as fighting in a war.

    Psyberian (1cf529)

  12. I don’t believe that being a firefighter or policeman is on the same plane of danger as fighting in a war.

    It all depends I suppose.

    Brave men and women agree to put on a uniform and follow orders placing themselves in potential mortal danger for a variety of reasons. The “sort of support” that generally allows them to mentally be able to do that is the affirmation by society that what they are doing matters, that it is important, and that their sacrifices are not in vain.

    To assert that their mission is irrelevant, immoral, a lie, or some other such nonsense is to deny them that “support”. I am absolutely convinced that you cannot oppose the basic mission and simultaneously “support” the troops. The two are mutually exclusive, at least as far as this retired soldier is concerned.

    Harry Arthur (b318a5)

  13. It’s easy to say you support the troops. It’s easy also to make sure it’s for a real and honest cause. That was too difficult for Bush to do. It’s a “free for all” for all the corporate vampires (BushCo.) Giving our troops the truth would be a good way to support and honor them. Unfortunately, the ones making the decisions for them are not honorable.

    General Smedley Butler was one of the most decorated generals of all time. What he said in the 30s is true today as well. The monetary force underlying all of it is now within our government though. It’s called fascism. Here is what General Smedley Butler has to say:

    “I spent 33 years and 4 months in active service as a member of our country’s most agile military force…the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from second lieutenant to Major General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a highclass muscleman for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer for capitalism. I suspected I was part of a racket all the time. Now, I am sure of it. Like all members of the military profession I never had an original thought until I left the service.”

    blubonnet (86405d)

  14. JVW, I don’t believe that being a firefighter or policeman is on the same plane of danger as fighting in a war.

    Planes of Danger? How does that work? Is there some sort of Psyberian Pyramid of Occupational Danger such as:

    Plane of Danger, Level One: Active Duty Overseas Military, Oil Rig Firefighters, Mafia Henchmen, Hollywood Stuntmen. This group should not be supported under any circumstance.

    Plane of Danger, Level Two: Police, Firefighters, NASCAR Drivers, Desk Clerks at Hotels Frequented by Russel Crowe. This groups should be lightly supported with very faint cheers and praise.

    Plane of Danger, Level Three: Vacuum Cleaner Salesmen, Postal Carriers in Pet-Free Condominium Buildings, Poets, Barbers. This group can be supported as much as one wishes without fear of encouraging reckless or immoral behavior.

    Sorry, Psyberian, but I think your argument is starting to get [Joel] Steinian in its incoherence.

    JVW (54c318)

  15. Maybe people would understand Joel Stein’s point better if he used this analogy: Suppose you’re living in the deep South in 1864 and you’re against slavery. Would you say you support the Confederate troops even though you’re against the war to secede? I’m guessing not.

    Ulysses (266178)

  16. When we say that we support a war’s cause and therefore we support the troops, we are actually implying that the cause itself is what is supported, not the troops per se. The troops are, in effect, just an expendable tool to achieve an objective.

    Now this is not to say that the bravery and honor of our military is to be disparaged. That doesn’t follow. Of course our nation needs people willing to put their lives on the line to defend us and they deserve a lot of respect and admiration for that. But to ask them to risk their lives, we should also remember that when we do so, it is in effect saying to these people that the cause itself is worth more than their individual – and collective – lives.

    Psyberian (1cf529)

  17. Psyberian said, “Of course our nation needs people willing to put their lives on the line to defend us and they deserve a lot of respect and admiration for that.”

    So, Psy, how about you? Are you willing to step up and defend our nation and earn some of that respect and admiration for yourself?

    Or, do you expect someone else to do it for you?

    Black Jack (71415b)

  18. Are you willing to step up and defend our nation and earn some of that respect and admiration for yourself? Black Jack

    I like to think that I already have some respect and admiration.

    But to more directly answer your question – yes, I would when the cause is great enough. Most recently, I believe that the war with Afghanistan was a just cause. I’m getting too old for the military now though. They’d probably just laugh at me.

    Psyberian (1cf529)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0762 secs.