Modified Chickenhawk Technique?

major john on August 4, 2007 at 12:49 PM

Not at all — but he had that coming based on his last post to me.

Jaibones on August 4, 2007 at 2:45 PM

No slap at Bush from me – I thought he hit 26% at some point. For starters.
- Iraq war? Support it and feel it was won a few years ago. Problem is that Bush has let the Democrats frame it as a loss when he should have been sticking to point about winning the peace.
- Immigration bill? supported Bush’s stance.
- Bush’s stand on taxes? support that too.

If I were going to be categorized I suppose moderate independent would be the closest.
Where we may disagree is in the lack of accomplishments by republicans over six years in power and hearing from some how we “really need to get the majority back”. They had a chance to reform social security, pass a better immigration bill, and a host of other initiatives. It is not a high school rivalry and the Republicans are going to have to really convince me if they want my votes for the house and senate.
But in these parts moderate is viewed as RINO, CINO, traitor, etc. on too many occasions. I used to think the Republicans were the party of inclusion but not so much anymore.
Even you can’t resist from the name calling because you think you know my party affiliations. It almost seems as people want the Republicans to get blown out next year. Persuading the moderates and left of center dems to vote R requires a different strategy.

- Soltz seemed to wait to caution him until he got the gist of the message, in opposition to his own douchebag leftism. So much for just being concerned that the soldier might speak about politics while in uniform.

- Wasn’t this forum addressing the wider issue of the military and military policies in the eyes of the attendees, and not necessarily partisan politics? And if so, isn’t the application of this policy very much a gray area?

LOL faithfully and perfectly to a leftist line? Now that is funny. One of the 26% that supports George Bush disqualifies me from the elite left off the bat I would think.
This is the internet – am I supposed to be all that worried if someone thinks I’m credible? I’m not a tool for either party. Where do you stand?

Bradky on August 3, 2007 at 3:58 PM

If I understand your response, you are claiming to be a Bush supporter, even though your “26%” quote would seem to be wrong, and seems to be a slap at the President. But then, I am not sure what you support him in, so maybe I’m missing the point.

I read HotAir pretty faithfully, and have probably read 200-300 of your posts over the last year, but maybe I somehow have the wrong impressive of “where you stand”. Little help, folks? Anyone else have Bradky figured as a supporter of Bush and persona non grata among the Moonbats? I am ready and willing to stand corrected.

As for where I stand, I guess that depends on the issue, but I count myself as a conservative, and not necessarily a Republican. I am not a registered Republican, if that means anything. I never vote for Democrats, Bill Clinton having cured me of that in 1992. The only Democrat in the country that I know of that I could support would be Phil Bredesen of Tennessee.

I have commented ad nauseum on my problems with the GOP over the last year, from spending to ethics to the war on terror to immigration. Does that answer your question?

Marine Cpl. Adam Kokesh has already been discharged. He has every right enshrined under the Constitution, including those of free speech and peaceful assembly.

And anyone that thinks otherwise, quite frankly, is legitimately and objectively un-American.

Oh, the irony.

Not at all political, is it?

Pablo on August 4, 2007 at 1:47 PM

Didn’t you know that truth is political?

The democrats have been on a role the last few days. They apparently have decided to do whatever is necessary to get their approval ratings out of the basement, even if it means taking on tactics that would do Stalin proud.
In this video of the Yearly…

Pajamas Media has video of the SGT’s question

Not at all political, is it?

He was wearing part of his uniform but not all – decorations for sure. If you remove the rank and nametags it is okay to wear – not my choice but some do, more common to see people with the fatigue jacket only which is pretty comfortable.

Best to check AR 670-1, no more mixing of uniform parts/PT gear, etc.

SGT should probably have skipped the uniform. If not a violation, it sure is a distractor from the point he was trying to make.

Bradky –

Did you ever serve? Insult me all you like – it doesn’t change the fact that you are talking out of your rear.

Modified Chickenhawk Technique?

Seems to me that the moderator was trying to save this good soldier from getting himself into trouble. Say what you will about the merits of the regulation, but it is a regulation. Don’t get angry at those at YKos for this one–it makes you all look bullheaded. You’re blaming them for an Army regulation that you do not like in this instance. Take it up with DoD.

That’s baloney. He didn’t want to hear the question. He was looking at where the soldier was standing all along while Clark was talking and then he treid to end it quickly. He even said “We’re out of time.” If this is a violation then the soldier was already in violation being there. If the moderator was legit(not a dishonest, whining leftist in other words) he would have let the soldier speak, allowed comments and then took the soldier aside and informed him he was in violation of a regulation. His anger at the questioner shows all. The moderator’s all about changing the military except for that one rule?

I guess only certain political view should be addresed. Since you can’t see the audience I’ve got to wonder if there were any leftist thinking soldiers in the room or wandering around the convention involved in any other discussions. Apparently the guy in the audience didn’t have any trouble getting into this discussion.

csdeven on August 3, 2007 at 8:23 PM

I had seen you mention that before. Best regards for his safety from an old vet.

right2bright on August 3, 2007 at 10:51 PM

Did you ever serve? Insult me all you like – it doesn’t change the fact that you are talking out of your rear.

Except that his First Shirt might be annoyed to be bothered about it by a sanctimonious outsider officer because the SGT probably wanted to annoy the piss out of some wingnuts.

Mission Accomplished!

But if he had been critical of the war you would have branded him as a coward, not worthy of wearing the uniform, blah blah blah.

You have your mind made up and set in stone – kind of like your arch rivals the Kos kids. Only ideology makes you different. Rules fit when convenient.

Bradky on August 3, 2007 at 7:54 PM

This may be hard for you to believe, but I do have standards and beliefs, those standards are that when you wear the uniform you represent the U.S. honorably…or take it off. He wore it proudly.
You obviously think that having any ideology is wrong. And you think all ideology is different but wrong. And you know there are different ideiologies but you think they are the same. What a weird way of thinking. Which is why I chose the foxhole analogy, in time of crisis, you would buckle because you cannot tell the difference between right (honorable service) and wrong (dis-honoring our service).

Your the type of person who thinks Christianity and Islamic religion is the same evil. Or that we were just a wrong as the communist country’s during the cold war.

Aren’t you embarassed by exposing yourself with that argument?

See? That was easy…even you can now understand where you are weak, and that soldier was strong…he has ideals, you think all ideals are the same. I honor our service people, Kos dis-honors them…you think I am the same as Kos. I think you have the reasononing ability of a baboon.