Bill Clinton didn't serve!

[daveman]

I knew it. It's different. Somehow. It just is.

Actually, I explained in detail why it was. But we've already established that you have reading comprehension problems.

Yes, you explained by making up a bunch of shit.

The real explanation is, of course, that Obama Can Do No Wrong.

 

[Dragon]

Yes, you explained by making up a bunch of shit.

I made up nothing at all. When I didn't know something (e.g., Romney's views on Vietnam), I said I didn't know.

The real explanation is, of course, that Obama Can Do No Wrong.

[Shrug.] I've been highly critical of Obama, as you would know if you didn't have a reading comprehension problem. So no.

 

[daveman]

Yes, you explained by making up a bunch of shit.

I made up nothing at all. When I didn't know something (e.g., Romney's views on Vietnam), I said I didn't know.

The real explanation is, of course, that Obama Can Do No Wrong.

[Shrug.] I've been highly critical of Obama, as you would know if you didn't have a reading comprehension problem. So no.

You stacked the deck to favor Obama. Chickenhawk doesn't mean what you say it means.

It means anyone who supports war but didn't serve. The presence or absence of the draft is utterly immaterial.

What kept Obama from enlisting?

 

[Dragon]

You stacked the deck to favor Obama. Chickenhawk doesn't mean what you say it means.

It means anyone who supports war but didn't serve. The presence or absence of the draft is utterly immaterial.

Well, sonny-boy, the difference here is that I was actually alive and able to talk when the word was first coined, so I have some idea of the context in which it emerged, and it has EVERYTHING to do with the draft. In fact, it has everything to do with one war, Vietnam. As you might know, assuming you've read some histories about those times (I know they were before you were aware yourself), it was a very controversial war. There were crowds of people protesting against it, and people who publicly burned their draft cards or ran away to Canada to avoid serving.

Now, the interesting thing is that for the smart, the wealthy, and the connected, there were perfectly legal ways to get out of going to fight. Bill Clinton made use of one of them. George W. Bush made use of another. Dan Quayle made use of essentially the same one Bush used. (Old joke: "How do you say Canada in Republican? Answer: Indiana National Guard.)

Roughly at the same time, the words "hawk" and "dove" came into use to describe people who were for or against the Vietnam War, respectively. "Chickenhawk" is an evolution from that, used to describe someone who was for the war as long as someone else had to go fight it, but personally did not serve.

That's the original meaning of the word "chickenhawk." And you are the one who is trying to redefine it, not I.

Your implication that I'm trying to protect Obama is absurd. Barack Obama is very problematical. He's continued policies he promised to end, gave us a twisted mess for health-care reform when we should have and could have had something much better if he'd given proper leadership, shown himself to be a bought-and-paid-for corporate shill like so many other politicians, and played fast and loose with the Bill of Rights in the same ways Bush did. I am very far from an Obama fan. But there's no point in calling him something he's not just because I don't like him much.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I try to be. I rarely take shots like this against the lib/dems when I know damn well the repubs are also human and just as guilty of hypocrisy and dishonesty.

I am honest and try to avoid hypocrisy, but sarcasm, as this thread was supposed to be, has its place. It's not about Romney, or Clinton; it's about how the right lambasted Clinton for his deferments and how they excused Cheney for his. It is about hypocrisy. I don't care that Romney never served, that's not a necessary requirement for someone to be a successful POTUS.

Sarcasm against all pols for being hypocrites is one thing, but when both parties are guilty of doing the same thing but you only blast one side, that leaves you open to criticism for being unfair. You're obviously entitled to say what you think or feel, and that's fine. But it's too bad people around here aren't more even-handed about it. Kinda destroys their credibility and makes them look like ideologues rather than serious posters.

Maybe I'm wrong and I have psychological filters on but when I listen to contemporary Republicans and their sycophants the honor of most disingenuous and hypocritical goes to the right.

Of course many partisans defend their side inappropriately, and self righteous independents are barely sufferable in their contempt for everyone, but it is all part of the game (of politics). The PROBLEM with the game is their are no rules.

 

[daveman]

You stacked the deck to favor Obama. Chickenhawk doesn't mean what you say it means.

It means anyone who supports war but didn't serve. The presence or absence of the draft is utterly immaterial.

Well, sonny-boy, the difference here is that I was actually alive and able to talk when the word was first coined, so I have some idea of the context in which it emerged, and it has EVERYTHING to do with the draft. In fact, it has everything to do with one war, Vietnam. As you might know, assuming you've read some histories about those times (I know they were before you were aware yourself), it was a very controversial war. There were crowds of people protesting against it, and people who publicly burned their draft cards or ran away to Canada to avoid serving.

Now, the interesting thing is that for the smart, the wealthy, and the connected, there were perfectly legal ways to get out of going to fight. Bill Clinton made use of one of them. George W. Bush made use of another. Dan Quayle made use of essentially the same one Bush used. (Old joke: "How do you say Canada in Republican? Answer: Indiana National Guard.)

Roughly at the same time, the words "hawk" and "dove" came into use to describe people who were for or against the Vietnam War, respectively. "Chickenhawk" is an evolution from that, used to describe someone who was for the war as long as someone else had to go fight it, but personally did not serve.

That's the original meaning of the word "chickenhawk." And you are the one who is trying to redefine it, not I.

Your implication that I'm trying to protect Obama is absurd. Barack Obama is very problematical. He's continued policies he promised to end, gave us a twisted mess for health-care reform when we should have and could have had something much better if he'd given proper leadership, shown himself to be a bought-and-paid-for corporate shill like so many other politicians, and played fast and loose with the Bill of Rights in the same ways Bush did. I am very far from an Obama fan. But there's no point in calling him something he's not just because I don't like him much.

I was alive back then, too.

So save your lectures, kid. I'm not buying your bullshit.

 

[Dragon]

I was alive back then, too.

Oh, so maybe you have memory loss as well as reading comprehension problems. I'm starting to feel sorry for you, Dave.

So save your lectures, kid. I'm not buying your bullshit.

I guess that would be a saturated-market thing, kind of like carrying coal to Newcastle, eh?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You stacked the deck to favor Obama. Chickenhawk doesn't mean what you say it means.

It means anyone who supports war but didn't serve. The presence or absence of the draft is utterly immaterial.

Well, sonny-boy, the difference here is that I was actually alive and able to talk when the word was first coined, so I have some idea of the context in which it emerged, and it has EVERYTHING to do with the draft. In fact, it has everything to do with one war, Vietnam. As you might know, assuming you've read some histories about those times (I know they were before you were aware yourself), it was a very controversial war. There were crowds of people protesting against it, and people who publicly burned their draft cards or ran away to Canada to avoid serving.

Now, the interesting thing is that for the smart, the wealthy, and the connected, there were perfectly legal ways to get out of going to fight. Bill Clinton made use of one of them. George W. Bush made use of another. Dan Quayle made use of essentially the same one Bush used. (Old joke: "How do you say Canada in Republican? Answer: Indiana National Guard.)

Roughly at the same time, the words "hawk" and "dove" came into use to describe people who were for or against the Vietnam War, respectively. "Chickenhawk" is an evolution from that, used to describe someone who was for the war as long as someone else had to go fight it, but personally did not serve.

That's the original meaning of the word "chickenhawk." And you are the one who is trying to redefine it, not I.

Your implication that I'm trying to protect Obama is absurd. Barack Obama is very problematical. He's continued policies he promised to end, gave us a twisted mess for health-care reform when we should have and could have had something much better if he'd given proper leadership, shown himself to be a bought-and-paid-for corporate shill like so many other politicians, and played fast and loose with the Bill of Rights in the same ways Bush did. I am very far from an Obama fan. But there's no point in calling him something he's not just because I don't like him much.

Hawk and dove were along long before the Vietnam war. Hawk was used in the US to describe members of the 12th Congress that supported war with Great Britain. Since that was in 1812 I am pretty sure you can't actually lay the origins of those terms on the Vietnam war. my guess is that date back even further than that.

war hawk: Definition from Answers.com