Paul in January: Say, that Bradley Manning is a patriotic, heroic kind of guy, isn’t he?

posted at 2:05 pm on December 21, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

This clip has been making the rounds last night and today, but it’s not new — it’s actually from a clip featured by Wikileaks, for obvious reasons, last January. Still, it’s not as if the parameters of the Bradley Manning case have changed significantly in the last eleven months, or at least not in any way that mitigates Manning’s alleged crimes. The enlisted soldier transmitted a vast trove of classified government communications, primarily diplomatic cables but also some internal military information, and sent it to Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks. Jazz Shaw has a good update on the case on the front page today, for those who haven’t followed it closely. Bear in mind that Ron Paul wants to become Commander in Chief, which raises all sorts of questions about how a President Paul would safeguard classified information:

So if we have an American citizen, and he’s willing to take it, uh, take the consequences and practice civil disobedience, say “This is what our government’s doing!” Should he be locked up and in prison? Or should we, you know, see him as a political hero? Maybe he is a true patriot who reveals what’s going on in government.

We’ve heard that a lot from Manning’s apologists, that he’s a true hero and not a criminal, but this is absurd on many levels.  First, the disclosures didn’t pertain to some objectionable course of action that Manning couldn’t abide; he released everything he could grab to Assange and Wikileaks regardless of the topic involved.  There was no discrimination at all.  That’s not the profile of a whistleblower, but it does fit the profile of someone harboring a grudge, and wanting to lash out only to inflict damage.

Next, as anyone who has held a clearance can attest — and I’ve held a few myself — a clearance doesn’t give one the right to declassify information.  Anyone who has a clearance knows exactly what consequences will follow from exposing classified material, regardless of the reasons for the disclosure.  Furthermore, as anyone who has held a clearance also knows, processes exist to communicate violations of the law or ethics discovered in classified material.  Those processes include using your own chain of command, contacting an Inspector General’s office — or even contacting a member of Congress, like Ron Paul himself.   The options most certainly do not include passing classified material to journalists, American, Australian, or otherwise.  There is no evidence at all that Manning ever tried any other option — because Manning is nothing more than a disgruntled nut, not a whistleblower of any kind.

Besides, if Paul thinks Manning was “willing to take the consequences,” why not just let him?  The consequences of deliberately stealing and exposing classified material are a long prison sentence and a pretty miserable life.  That’s because exposing classified material isn’t “civil disobedience.”  It’s theft and espionage, a difference one would presume that a Congressman and a man who wants to be taken seriously as a presidential candidate would know.

Finally, consider the fact that the responsibility for protecting classified material lies with the executive branch — up to and including the President.  Paul’s declaration that we should be celebrating a man who deliberately exposed that material because of the supposed eeevil done by the American government sounds like a man who’s more interested in his own paranoid fantasies than he is in conducting the duties of the Commander in Chief.  The clip may be a year old, but there’s no reason to think that Paul has gotten a year wiser.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5 6 7

Ron Paul is not an enemy of the United States. Get it out of your heads.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:20 PM

Got it? And that’s an order. Ein Befehl.

spiritof61 on December 21, 2011 at 5:23 PM

Here again is the faulty logic of Paul that has permeated the minds of his bots. They think liberty is always good and it solves all problems. That Ron Paul defends things likes this in the name of liberty is not a virtue, but instead shows he unqualified to lead not our nation, but any nation. Ron Paul’s logic taken to his logical conclusion is that there should be no laws, because people should be completely free. Furthermore, if there are laws that restrict your liberty than break them.

So for Ron Paul it is ok if a business owner will discriminate based on race, sex, or religion because that is their liberty. This is probably why he printed the racist newsletter even if he didn’t write them, it was the liberty and freedom of the individuals to express those types of views and he shouldn’t try to stop them.

RonDelDon on December 21, 2011 at 5:16 PM

Not often you see someone willfully come out against liberty, but here you are.

You’ve never heard of anarcho-capitalism, have you? Do yourself a favor and learn about liberty, libertarianism, and the nature and purpose of government.

Dante on December 21, 2011 at 5:24 PM

Ron Paul is not an enemy of the United States. Get it out in your heads.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:20 PM

Fixed it…

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on December 21, 2011 at 5:22 PM

Crap, fixed it poorly…

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on December 21, 2011 at 5:24 PM

You think I’m just going to float there like a rubber duck when break out the Paultard insults?
Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:20 PM

Shutup Paultard. Bend over and vote for Romney or Newt. You’ll be happy you did. Paul’s a racist, sexist, geriatric, senile, loony, conspiracy theorist, anti-semite and anti-dentite. If you support him because you believe the president should follow the constitution, you are just as loony and un-patriotic as him!

Oh yeah…PAULTARD!

RightXBrigade on December 21, 2011 at 5:25 PM

Not often you see someone willfully come out against liberty, but here you are.

You’ve never heard of anarcho-capitalism, have you? Do yourself a favor and learn about liberty, libertarianism, and the nature and purpose of government.

Dante on December 21, 2011 at 5:24 PM

WOW! I was thinking the EXACT same thing!

RightXBrigade on December 21, 2011 at 5:26 PM

What the hell is an anti-dentite?

Oh. Never mind.

spiritof61 on December 21, 2011 at 5:26 PM

Shutup Paultard. Bend over and vote for Romney or Newt. You’ll be happy you did. Paul’s a racist, sexist, geriatric, senile, loony, conspiracy theorist, anti-semite and anti-dentite. If you support him because you believe the president should follow the constitution, you are just as loony and un-patriotic as him!

Oh yeah…PAULTARD!

RightXBrigade on December 21, 2011 at 5:25 PM

Shut your piehole, fake marine!!! :) You probably think Paris Island is a resort in Vegas. :)

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:26 PM

Here again is the faulty logic of Paul that has permeated the minds of his bots. They think liberty is always good and it solves all problems.

RonDelDon on December 21, 2011 at 5:16 PM

Silly me, I thought liberty was a good thing… It’s comments like this that make me feel smart, keep them coming.

rndmusrnm on December 21, 2011 at 5:26 PM

Re.fatlibertarianinokc

Then stop endorsing treasonous acts by our government.

Great….

“Paul, as President would attempt to reveal all secrets because it’s OUR GOVERNMENT.”

Go upstairs and tell your mom she has a fat rear end you will see that there are some secrets that ought to be kept.

V7_Sport on December 21, 2011 at 5:28 PM

Disguising bigotry and anti-Americanism as Constitutionalism is as low as it gets.

Paul has earned his crackpot status.

contrarytopopularbelief on December 21, 2011 at 5:29 PM

Apparently you didn’t read my whole comment. Here it is buddy.

RightXBrigade on December 21, 2011 at 5:12 PM

Oh, I read your entire comment, the problem of course is, neither I nor anyone here, besides you Ronulians, are actually as stupid as you Ronulians think everyone here is.

Your ancillary denunciation of documented evidence by way of proxy transposition of contradictory opinion as a substitution for rational thought didn’t fool anyone.

In other words, your baseless assertion that the relevant facts are irrelevant because they are inconvenient and contradictory to the narrative you are attempting to push doesn’t make any of the bullshit you are selling real.

SWalker on December 21, 2011 at 5:29 PM

Meanwhile, back at the topic–I believe we were talking about the need for whistleblowers in the Military Intelligence branch. Rep. Paul, advocating liberty as always, was saying something like “One man’s traitor is another man’s whistleblowing hero,” or words to that effect. More clarification needed, no?

spiritof61 on December 21, 2011 at 5:30 PM

So for Ron Paul it is ok if a business owner will discriminate based on race, sex, or religion because that is their liberty. This is probably why he printed the racist newsletter even if he didn’t write them, it was the liberty and freedom of the individuals to express those types of views and he shouldn’t try to stop them.

RonDelDon on December 21, 2011 at 5:16 PM

Does it bother you that Mitt Romney is a member of an organization that discriminated and did not let blacks join until 1978?

Sounds pretty racist to me.

tetriskid on December 21, 2011 at 5:30 PM

Meanwhile, back at the topic–I believe we were talking about the need for whistleblowers in the Military Intelligence branch. Rep. Paul, advocating liberty as always, was saying something like “One man’s traitor is another man’s whistleblowing hero,” or words to that effect. More clarification needed, no?

spiritof61 on December 21, 2011 at 5:30 PM

A whistle blower in the ex-Soviet Union would be looked upon as…….

P.S. I love stirring trouble.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:31 PM

Does it bother you that Mitt Romney is a member of an organization that discriminated and did not let blacks join until 1978?

Sounds pretty racist to me.

tetriskid on December 21, 2011 at 5:30 PM

That’s not exactly correct. There have been Black Mormon’s from the beginning of the Church.

And Mitt’s Father was one of the men who was responsible for the change.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on December 21, 2011 at 5:32 PM

Shut your piehole, fake marine!!! :) You probably think Paris Island is a resort in Vegas. :)

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:26 PM

It’s spelled “Parris” Island… Something else you shouldn’t be lecturing about.

V7_Sport on December 21, 2011 at 5:32 PM

His comments weren’t racist, haven’t you read anything?

He was – as he does on everything – SPEAKING TRUTH TO POWER!!

He didn’t write those newsletters! Well, he didn’t write all of them. Well, they were only published under his name for over a decade. You can’t expect the guy who was editor of the newsletter to know whats in it, can you? Could happen to anyone, really. Anyway, he took responsibility for them, even though he also hasn’t, depending on the year and season. And who can blame the guy for profiting from something he had no idea about? All of these are just details, really. Can’t we get back to the work at hand?

He has never actually came out and blamed America for anything, except of course when he has. Its only been a few times though, honest. Everyone has a little bit of ‘Hate America’ in them, amIright? If you’re being intellectually honest, of course you do!

He has never voted for one earmark – ever! True story! I know he put them in all those bills and requested over $30BILLION dollars of them over the years… Again, just details. But he never voted for them. Yeah, he got them anyway and accepted the money, sure. Just like any TRUE, PRINCIPLED, CONSERVATIVE, AMERICA LOVING POLITICIAN WOULD DO! But he never voted for them – aren’t you listening to me?

Of course he wants other investigations into 9/11. Who wouldn’t? Who’s afraid of simply asking questions? No one who’s after TRUTH, that’s for sure – or who isn’t controlled by the Jews in the MSM, AMIRIGHT?! The 9/11 Commission report was a sham anyway. Don’t you know who was on the committee? Jews, that’s who. It was the Mossad after all that brought down the Twin Towers. Although it could have been rogue elements of the CIA, probably working with those dirty Jew Bastards, but that’s why he says we need another investigation. Any real American would want the truth (about those dirty Jews), *wink*!

As far as his huge support from racists and white supremacists and anti-semites, hey! I never hear anyone on Hot Gas (pffft) writing posts about our current Presidents associations with the Black Panthers and folks like Jeremiah Wright and America haters like Bill Ayers or his wife… What? Really? That many? For years?

Whatever man, your just deflecting now, aren’t you. Typical of you non-intellectual neo-con warmongers who hate the Constitution and are really stooges of the elitist Zionists…btw, have you ever heard of the Bilderbergers? Bohemian Grove? I know this great radio guy you could listen to, his name is Alex Jones. If he’s not your cup of tea, there’s another guy, a great guy, Lew Rockwell? Or if you want the real truth, head over to this website, its for this group called Stromfront… Yeah, they love him.

Your not afraid of your European Whiteness…are you?

catmman on December 21, 2011 at 5:33 PM

What the hell is an anti-dentite?

Oh. Never mind.

spiritof61 on December 21, 2011 at 5:26 PM

Anti-Dentite

whatcat on December 21, 2011 at 5:33 PM

Oh, I read your entire comment, the problem of course is, neither I nor anyone here, besides you Ronulians, are actually as stupid as you Ronulians think everyone here is.

Your ancillary denunciation of documented evidence by way of proxy transposition of contradictory opinion as a substitution for rational thought didn’t fool anyone.

In other words, your baseless assertion that the relevant facts are irrelevant because they are inconvenient and contradictory to the narrative you are attempting to push doesn’t make any of the bullshit you are selling real.

SWalker on December 21, 2011 at 5:29 PM

Aww. That IS a shame! Here I was really trying to convince you to support the guy! My bad.

RightXBrigade on December 21, 2011 at 5:33 PM

Seriously though, who’s coming to CPAC? I’ll buy Troy a drink. Maybe it will calm him down.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:33 PM

A whistle blower in the ex-Soviet Union would be looked upon as…….

P.S. I love stirring trouble.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:31 PM

So we are the equivalent of the Soviets now… I thought w were Nazis.. Why don’t you go find somewhere else to live?

V7_Sport on December 21, 2011 at 5:34 PM

It’s spelled “Parris” Island… Something else you shouldn’t be lecturing about.

V7_Sport on December 21, 2011 at 5:32 PM

You’ve never been to the Paris Resort and Casino?

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:34 PM

So for Ron Paul it is ok if a business owner will discriminate based on race, sex, or religion because that is their liberty. This is probably why he printed the racist newsletter even if he didn’t write them, it was the liberty and freedom of the individuals to express those types of views and he shouldn’t try to stop them.

RonDelDon on December 21, 2011 at 5:16 PM

It is not that it is OK, and Paul has never said that. Things like personal choice and liberty and freedom, they can be messy. You want need and orderly, go to North Korea.

But when you allow government to decide what is fair behavior and what is not, even when it has all of the best intentions such as preventing a business from discriminating against someone, you surrender your liberty. Remember the testimony of Elena Kagan. She couldn’t think of something the government could not regulate for the people.

And when that ability is given to 535 congressman, 9 judges, and 1 president, over 309 million souls there is no way that their decisions can be anything but arbitrary and broad and limiting to freedom and liberty.

So don’t be surprised when they not only prevent discrimination but do things like take away your ability to use an incandescent light bulb or make you pay for your neighbors health care.

And if you want to prevent discrimination then get together in your town and state governments and create those laws where they were intended to be created in the first place by the constitution.

ReformedDeceptiCon on December 21, 2011 at 5:34 PM

Bull, you don’t have a constitutional right to tell other people what they can do with their aircraft. No one searches me… I fly myself.

V7_Sport on December 21, 2011 at 5:07 PM

You sure don’t read what’s on the page. I didn’t say anything about what people can or can’t do with their aircraft. The government, however, is expressly forbidden to search me and my belongings without probable cause and without a warrant. This is a fact.

Dante on December 21, 2011 at 5:34 PM

Seriously though, who’s coming to CPAC? I’ll buy Troy a drink. Maybe it will calm him down.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:33 PM

Wont you be busy rigging the straw poll with the rest of the dishonest crackpots?

V7_Sport on December 21, 2011 at 5:35 PM

You sure don’t read what’s on the page. I didn’t say anything about what people can or can’t do with their aircraft. The government, however, is expressly forbidden to search me and my belongings without probable cause and without a warrant. This is a fact.

Dante on December 21, 2011 at 5:34 PM

In Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967), the Supreme Court ruled that the amendment’s protections apply only when the searched party has a “reasonable expectation of privacy”.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on December 21, 2011 at 5:36 PM

Oh and for the record I have a Gold American Express card as opposed to an EBT. Drug sales have been good to me, though aluminum foil has been rising in price unfortunately. (I keed.)

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:36 PM

The US military murdered journalists from a helicopter and the neocons are more worried about the person who delivered the truth. Disgusting.

Lord

Hey scumbag, the “reporters” were assisiting the terrorists in targeting our soldiers. They were taking pics of the command vehicle and then showing them to the terrorists so they would know which one to launch the RPG at.
Having seen THE WHOLE video and not just the edited attempt at a frame up, those cameras looked like weapons thru the gun cameras.
Another fact is the vehicle shot up was seen earlier delivering armed insurgents to the battle.
But yeah, it was murder. If you rontards hate America so much, please leave.

Hard Right on December 21, 2011 at 5:37 PM

Navy Chief Warrant Officer (ret.) John A. Walker was a

a) traitor
b) transvestite
c) transgendered servicemember
d) trainspotter
e) whistleblower

spiritof61 on December 21, 2011 at 5:38 PM

Here again is the faulty logic of Paul that has permeated the minds of his bots. They think liberty is always good and it solves all problems.

RonDelDon on December 21, 2011 at 5:16 PM

Silly me, I thought liberty was a good thing… It’s comments like this that make me feel smart, keep them coming.

rndmusrnm on December 21, 2011 at 5:26 PM

Yes, it is “silly you”, because I never said liberty was not a good thing, I said “liberty is always good”. Even Paul and his Bots should know absolute liberty in every aspect ends up in anarchy. Absolute liberty would mean there are no laws. Now I know Paul doesn’t believe there should be no laws, but his simplistic answer calling for liberty is why he ends up praising Manning, Nader, McKinney, and other wacky individuals. I hope you still feel smart for missing the obvious.

RonDelDon on December 21, 2011 at 5:38 PM

Oh…waaa.waaa..waaaaa. Grow up.

Do you feel like your rights are being “trashed” when you are asked for identifcation for any reason? Are your rights being violated by the speed limit?

Here’s the thing..I’ll type slowly.
You choose to fly.
You choose to drive.
You choose to have a credit card etc.
If you don’t like the procedures inherent in flying…don’t fly.

Once a person chooses to use a service, you accept the regulations that are inherent in the business, service or product.
Do you agree with this?

Mimzey on December 21, 2011 at 5:13 PM

Wow. Look at all of these conservative, limited government types defending the TSA and constitutional violations. Our constitutionally-guaranteed rights are not conditional. Just because I choose to fly does not mean I give up my rights. It isn’t the airlines doing it; it’s the government.

Dante on December 21, 2011 at 5:38 PM

Oh and for the record I have a Gold American Express card as opposed to an EBT. Drug sales have been good to me, though aluminum foil has been rising in price unfortunately. (I keed.)

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:36 PM

And we’re supposed to believe you… why? Claim what you want, your still a stark raving idiot.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on December 21, 2011 at 5:38 PM

You sure don’t read what’s on the page. I didn’t say anything about what people can or can’t do with their aircraft. The government, however, is expressly forbidden to search me and my belongings without probable cause and without a warrant. This is a fact.

Dante on December 21, 2011 at 5:34 PM

They are searching you as a prerequisite to getting on someone else’s plane. If you weren’t seeking to get onto someone else’s aircraft they wouldn’t be searching you. This is something else the paultards do: Everything they don’t like is “unconstitutional”.

I don’t have a 4th amendment right to enter your house without you asking me to wipe my feet. You don’t have a 4th amendment right to enter someone else’s aircraft without them asking that you be searched.

V7_Sport on December 21, 2011 at 5:40 PM

Wont you be busy rigging the straw poll with the rest of the dishonest crackpots?

V7_Sport on December 21, 2011 at 5:35 PM

No. I’m saving up to be at the Republican convention in Tampa. I think old man Bush may have a heart attack when he sees Ron on stage ready to accept the nomination. :) It’s going to be DE-LIGHT-FUL.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:40 PM

Seriously though, who’s coming to CPAC? I’ll buy Troy a drink. Maybe it will calm him down.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:33 PM

I don’t drink. I also don’t mindlessly assault strangers at political events who say unkind things about me online…well, okay, I might clock a neo-nazi. Who wouldn’t?

troyriser_gopftw on December 21, 2011 at 5:40 PM

And we’re supposed to believe you… why? Claim what you want, your still a stark raving idiot.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on December 21, 2011 at 5:38 PM

It’s true. I’ll upload JPG images. I love dispelling these Paultard myths like we’re the untermensch of the Republican Party.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:42 PM

don’t drink. I also don’t mindlessly assault strangers at political events who say unkind things about me online…well, okay, I might clock a neo-nazi. Who wouldn’t?

troyriser_gopftw

I would too. Especially Illinois nazis…

Hard Right on December 21, 2011 at 5:42 PM

No. I’m saving up to be at the Republican convention in Tampa. I think old man Bush may have a heart attack when he sees Ron on stage ready to accept the nomination. :) It’s going to be DE-LIGHT-FUL.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:40 PM

I will look forward to you being extremely disappointed.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on December 21, 2011 at 5:42 PM

Aww. That IS a shame! Here I was really trying to convince you to support the guy! My bad.

RightXBrigade on December 21, 2011 at 5:33 PM

Yes that, despite your proclaimed denunciation of said effort, was glaringly obvious. The attempted deconstruction of the factual documented record was a dead give away.

SWalker on December 21, 2011 at 5:42 PM

Shutup Paultard. Bend over and vote for Romney or Newt. You’ll be happy you did. Paul’s a racist, sexist, geriatric, senile, loony, conspiracy theorist, anti-semite and anti-dentite. If you support him because you believe the president should follow the constitution, you are just as loony and un-patriotic as him!

Oh yeah…PAULTARD!

RightXBrigade on December 21, 2011 at 5:25 PM

Yeah, and I bet they celebrate Festivus, too!

Dr. ZhivBlago on December 21, 2011 at 5:43 PM

I don’t drink. I also don’t mindlessly assault strangers at political events who say unkind things about me online…well, okay, I might clock a neo-nazi. Who wouldn’t?

troyriser_gopftw on December 21, 2011 at 5:40 PM

I want to hear some service tales. They better be good. I like vets, despite the fact that many here think I’m typing from the confines of a sanitarium.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:43 PM

No. I’m saving up to be at the Republican convention in Tampa. I think old man Bush may have a heart attack when he sees Ron on stage ready to accept the nomination. :) It’s going to be DE-LIGHT-FUL.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:40 PM

You truly are delusional. This is Ron Pauls last shot. (thankfully) and he stands no chance of being the nominee. None. He’s just an embarrassment.

V7_Sport on December 21, 2011 at 5:45 PM

Yeah, and I bet they celebrate Festivus, too!

Dr. ZhivBlago on December 21, 2011 at 5:43 PM

Being the cult members they are, they must!

RightXBrigade on December 21, 2011 at 5:45 PM

I will look forward to you being extremely disappointed.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on December 21, 2011 at 5:42 PM

I’m a Cleveland Browns, Indians and Cavs fan. I grew up living in disappointment!

RightXBrigade on December 21, 2011 at 5:47 PM

Navy Chief Warrant Officer (ret.) John A. Walker was a

a) traitor
b) transvestite
c) transgendered servicemember
d) trainspotter
e) whistleblower

spiritof61 on December 21, 2011 at 5:38 PM

Come on. Take the Ron Paul Challenge. If your answer is “e” or if you want to write in “Depends…” (the verb, not the underwear)–Today you are a Ronulan, my son.

spiritof61 on December 21, 2011 at 5:47 PM

It’s true. I’ll upload JPG images. I love dispelling these Paultard myths like we’re the untermensch of the Republican Party.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:42 PM

Now I know your insane… make sure you get all the credit card numbers nice and clear so someone other than ME can have a much happier Xmas on your dime.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on December 21, 2011 at 5:47 PM

Oh and for the record I have a Gold American Express card as opposed to an EBT. Drug sales have been good to me, though aluminum foil has been rising in price unfortunately. (I keed.)

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:36 PM

Color us surprised. Let us know when your Black Pearl comes in the mail.

RickB on December 21, 2011 at 5:48 PM

You truly are delusional. This is Ron Pauls last shot. (thankfully) and he stands no chance of being the nominee. None. He’s just an embarrassment.

V7_Sport on December 21, 2011 at 5:45 PM

If he can separate and be the populist choice against Romney, all bets are off. He has the potential for staying power on the account that Paultard nation has deep deep pockets for a bunch of drooling lobotomy victims. He needs to win Iowa though. If he can’t win Iowa he’s done and the spark is extinguished.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:48 PM

If you support him because you believe the president should follow the constitution, you are just as loony and un-patriotic as him!

Oh yeah…PAULTARD!

RightXBrigade

If you believe that HE stands for that and ignore all other facts about him that prove him to be a loon, yes you are.

Hard Right on December 21, 2011 at 5:50 PM

No. I’m saving up to be at the Republican convention in Tampa. I think old man Bush may have a heart attack when he sees Ron on stage ready to accept the nomination. :) It’s going to be DE-LIGHT-FUL.
Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:40 PM

You truly are delusional.
V7_Sport on December 21, 2011 at 5:45 PM

I dunno – Ron has a pretty good shot at the National Socialist USA nomination.

whatcat on December 21, 2011 at 5:50 PM

If he can separate and be the populist choice against Romney, all bets are off. He has the potential for staying power on the account that Paultard nation has deep deep pockets for a bunch of drooling lobotomy victims. He needs to win Iowa though. If he can’t win Iowa he’s done and the spark is extinguished.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:48 PM

Paul is not going to win Iowa. I’d bet Sanatorium takes it.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on December 21, 2011 at 5:50 PM

Color us surprised. Let us know when your Black Pearl comes in the mail.

RickB on December 21, 2011 at 5:48 PM

They wanted to give me platinum but it’s a waste with the annual fee and I don’t really attend operas and plays that much. That black card is reserved for Jon Corzine types. I’m single A compared to that robber baron.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:50 PM

Paul is not going to win Iowa. I’d bet Sanatorium takes it.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on December 21, 2011 at 5:50 PM

If anal mixture wins Iowa, I’ll be disappointed.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:52 PM

If he can separate and be the populist choice

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:48 PM

Then Unicorns really will fly out of Obama’s ass shitting magic fairy dust all across the land.

If he can’t win Iowa he’s done and the spark is extinguished.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:48 PM

News Flash, He’s already done and the spark has been long since extinguished.

SWalker on December 21, 2011 at 5:52 PM

If anal mixture wins Iowa, I’ll be disappointed.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:52 PM

He’s the latest Not-Mitt to be spiking, and he’s doing it at the right time. If the trend follows, his peak will hit about the time they go to the polls.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on December 21, 2011 at 5:53 PM

Wow. Look at all of these conservative, limited government types defending the TSA and constitutional violations. Our constitutionally-guaranteed rights are not conditional. Just because I choose to fly does not mean I give up my rights. It isn’t the airlines doing it; it’s the government.

Dante on December 21, 2011 at 5:38 PM

Absolutely. It is fascinating the way the ascendency of Ron Paul has revealed the fissures and contradictions within the so called “small government movement.” I’ve always given the movement a side eye since it was paired with some pretty statist Moral Majority conservatism. But in order to knock down Paul we’ve had one poster in this thread who agreed that there are compelling reasons to regulate business activity, to prevent racial/sexual discrimination o all things (did I stumble onto Kos?) and arguments for “nanny state” safety regulations (and yet anti-pollution efforts which are all about personal safety are bad?). Let’s be real, Paul demonstrates that most of “small government” movement is actually about a large government that is favorable towards large corporations. Why not just call themselves the “pro-corporate” movement instead of the “small government” movement.

libfreeordie on December 21, 2011 at 5:53 PM

It is not that it is OK, and Paul has never said that. Things like personal choice and liberty and freedom, they can be messy. You want need and orderly, go to North Korea.

False choices. There are many better points in between North Korea and absolute liberty(i.e. anarchy). Even Paul understands this, but his minions are acting out of robotic loyalty and support and they go places even Paul himself would not go.

But when you allow government to decide what is fair behavior and what is not, even when it has all of the best intentions such as preventing a business from discriminating against someone, you surrender your liberty. Remember the testimony of Elena Kagan. She couldn’t think of something the government could not regulate for the people.

Once again a false choice. Elena Kagan or Ron Paul, both are wrong. Based on your reasoning there should be no laws it should be survival of the fittest. Why do we even need laws and a judicial system to determine what is fair and right behavior?

And when that ability is given to 535 congressman, 9 judges, and 1 president, over 309 million souls there is no way that their decisions can be anything but arbitrary and broad and limiting to freedom and liberty.

So you don’t like our system of government? Do you think we all should just throw out everything and drink the Paul kool-aid and trust him?

So don’t be surprised when they not only prevent discrimination but do things like take away your ability to use an incandescent light bulb or make you pay for your neighbors health care.

Can you make an argument that is not based on false dilemmas? I can stand against all those things and likewise against discrimination based on race , sex, and religion. In your case you move from one extreme to the other. It is like running from a lion but crashing into a bear.

And if you want to prevent discrimination then get together in your town and state governments and create those laws where they were intended to be created in the first place by the constitution.
ReformedDeceptiCon on December 21, 2011 at 5:34 PM

Aaaah, so what about the liberty of the people at the local level? Suppose they buck the local laws as Private Manning because they FREEEEEEDOOOOOOM! Would Paul praise them also?

RonDelDon on December 21, 2011 at 5:53 PM

I probably would. O has done more for Conservatives than anyone else in the field can.

Notorious GOP on December 21, 2011 at 2:12 PM

“I have lung cancer, so shooting myself in the head is the only way to get better!”

effing moron

stefanite on December 21, 2011 at 5:55 PM

I could only handle about 5 minutes of this 14 minute video, though I’m sure his supporters will love it if they haven’t seen it already.

Ron Paul on The Morton Downey Show in 1988.

TheDC Video Vault: In 1988, an animated Ron Paul attacked drug laws, Cold War policies

Flora Duh on December 21, 2011 at 5:55 PM

So, we can expect the “patriotic and noble” staffers at Ron Paul for President to leak Ron Paul’s entire e-mail account and historical e-mails?

Or would that somehow be wrong?

gekkobear on December 21, 2011 at 5:55 PM

You just outlined why I refused to join the military. I pulled out at the last second because I didn’t feel like being assimilated into the criminal Hive Mind. You sound like you’d advance very high with the Third Reich.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 2:27 PM

You just called our soldiers Nazis.

May that post haunt you in every thread you post in from now on.

stefanite on December 21, 2011 at 5:57 PM

That’s not exactly correct. There have been Black Mormon’s from the beginning of the Church.

And Mitt’s Father was one of the men who was responsible for the change.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on December 21, 2011 at 5:32 PM

That’s not exactly correct.

Although Joseph Smith once converted a negro (who, btw, did not stay “Mormon”), upon Smith’s death, the Mormon leadership beginning with Brigham Young until 1978 refused to ordain anyone of African genetics (the mark of Cain) to the Mormon Priesthood. And throughout the Book of Mormon, you will read Joseph Smith’s fanciful descriptions of those who enjoy God’s favor being “white” and those cursed for disobedience and being blood thirsty as “dark” and “loathsome” in the sight of God. Hence, the skin tone distinction between (white) Nephi and his (dark skinned) brothers Laman and Lemuel and subsequent generations though from the exact same genetic heritage.

Mormonism is a perfect American example of revisionism for political expedience, given enough generations. Joseph Smith’s direct revelations required a lot of revisions along the way, to the point of receiving absolute denial by the current generation of Mormons. 1. “Celestial Marriage” being POLYGAMY, a requirement in order to achieve the highest degree of glory as a god yourself. 2. Blood oath covenants as “temple endowments” illustrating the manner that death would be delivered should one decide later to leave that Church or disobey a direct order from a church authority. 3. Unique Mormon Communism, “The United Order”.

George Romney was NOT a General Authority of the Mormon Church when the Church’s President (Prophet) decided that he had a revelation terminating the Mormon dogma that prevented Blacks from holding Mormon’s priesthood. Being a Regional Rep is not being one of the Quorum of the Twelve.

But never let the truth get in the way of your wishful thinking.

maverick muse on December 21, 2011 at 5:58 PM

If anal mixture wins Iowa, I’ll be disappointed.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:52 PM

I’ll never doubt Dan Savage again. If Santorum’s proper definition is being used even on Hot Air? Wow, that’s effective google damage.

libfreeordie on December 21, 2011 at 5:58 PM

That’s not exactly correct. There have been Black Mormon’s from the beginning of the Church.

And Mitt’s Father was one of the men who was responsible for the change.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on December 21, 2011 at 5:32 PM

That’s not exactly correct.

Although Joseph Smith once converted a Black American (who, btw, did not stay “Mormon”), upon Smith’s death, the Mormon leadership beginning with Brigham Young until 1978 refused to ordain anyone of African genetics (the mark of Cain) to the Mormon Priesthood. And throughout the Book of Mormon, you will read Joseph Smith’s fanciful descriptions of those who enjoy God’s favor being “white” and those cursed for disobedience and being blood thirsty as “dark” and “loathsome” in the sight of God. Hence, the skin tone distinction between (white) Nephi and his (dark skinned) brothers Laman and Lemuel and subsequent generations though from the exact same genetic heritage.

Mormonism is a perfect American example of revisionism for political expedience, given enough generations. Joseph Smith’s direct revelations required a lot of revisions along the way, to the point of receiving absolute denial by the current generation of Mormons. 1. “Celestial Marriage” being POLYGAMY, a requirement in order to achieve the highest degree of glory as a god yourself. 2. Blood oath covenants as “temple endowments” illustrating the manner that death would be delivered should one decide later to leave that Church or disobey a direct order from a church authority. 3. Unique Mormon Communism, “The United Order”.

George Romney was NOT a General Authority of the Mormon Church when the Church’s President (Prophet) decided that he had a revelation terminating the Mormon dogma that prevented Blacks from holding Mormon’s priesthood. Being a Regional Rep is not being one of the Quorum of the Twelve.

But never let the truth get in the way of your wishful thinking.

maverick muse on December 21, 2011 at 5:59 PM

You just called our soldiers Nazis.

May that post haunt you in every thread you post in from now on.

stefanite on December 21, 2011 at 5:57 PM

I referred to one of our servicemen as a Nazi ranking officer because I wanted to illustrate how dangerous the premise of “I was just following orders” is. I apologize to the man for my insensitivity and crassness. But someone has to be on the side of the road, with flares in hand, screaming that the bridge is out.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:59 PM

Not often you see someone willfully come out against liberty, but here you are.

You’ve never heard of anarcho-capitalism, have you? Do yourself a favor and learn about liberty, libertarianism, and the nature and purpose of government.

Dante on December 21, 2011 at 5:24 PM

Silly you, I’m not coming out against all liberty I’m coming out against the liberty being espoused by Paul and his bots. Is Paul on record saying he is an anarcho-capitalist? I’ve never heard him say he was and his bots definitely don’t say they are or know what it is based on my conversation with them.

RonDelDon on December 21, 2011 at 6:02 PM

Our constitutionally-guaranteed rights are not conditional. Just because I choose to fly does not mean I give up my rights. It isn’t the airlines doing it; it’s the government.

Dante on December 21, 2011 at 5:38 PM

Did I already say this??:
Oh waaaa..waaa…waaa Grow up.

You didn’t address one thing that was posted.

I’ll try and type even slower….You do not have a right to fly your your own conditions of travel.
Do you understand this?
Yes_
No _

If you decide to travel, you are bound by the regulations of the mode of travel you choose…plane..train..car.. balloon, etc.
Do you understand this:
Yes_
No _

Mimzey on December 21, 2011 at 6:02 PM

But someone has to be on the side of the road, with flares in hand, screaming that the bridge is out.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:59 PM

What a hero. But not as big a hero as Brad, the Man from GLAAD, or The Doctor Himself.

spiritof61 on December 21, 2011 at 6:04 PM

stefanite on December 21, 2011 at 5:57 PM

It won’t.

He calls us Nazis and then tries to hide behind a reasoned comment or two about what he was really doing…and two comments later he’ll be making accusations of baby killing, etc (or was the baby killing stuff Dante?).

But he loves vets and the military…/

catmman on December 21, 2011 at 6:04 PM

Ed needs to give me an exclusive corner for guest commentary. Something like “Paleo Palpations” or “Pitchfork Up Your Arse”

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 6:05 PM

And if you want to prevent discrimination then get together in your town and state governments and create those laws where they were intended to be created in the first place by the constitution.
ReformedDeceptiCon on December 21, 2011 at 5:34 PM

*blink* What on earth would have incentivized the solid Democratic South from ending Jim Crow (or the solidly racist north from abolishing restrictive covenants) without federal intervention via Supreme Court or Congressional legislation. Jim Crow in the south was deeply cultural and it was also a means of maintaining a certain class of sub-income labor (its not a coincidence that the end of Jim Crow in the south coincides with the beginning of the major growth of Mexican farm labor). Jim Crow prevented the oppressed minority (and majority in some areas) from voting and participating in the political process. In the case of South Africa, for example, it practically took a war! Is that what African Americans in the south should have done instead of appealing to the federal government?

libfreeordie on December 21, 2011 at 6:05 PM

But someone has to be on the side of the road, with flares in hand, screaming that the bridge is out.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:59 PM

What bridge is out?

Mimzey on December 21, 2011 at 6:08 PM

What a hero. But not as big a hero as Brad, the Man from GLAAD, or The Doctor Himself.

spiritof61 on December 21, 2011 at 6:04 PM

I’m no hero nor am I a GREAT AMERICAN as one television pundit frequently declares. Regardless of what you think Manning did was right or wrong, it took beach ball sized cajones for him to follow though with his convictions, being completely aware of the fate that awaited.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 6:08 PM

You just called our soldiers Nazis.

May that post haunt you in every thread you post in from now on.

stefanite on December 21, 2011 at 5:57 PM

I referred to one of our servicemen as a Nazi ranking officer because I wanted to illustrate how dangerous the premise of “I was just following orders” is. I apologize to the man for my insensitivity and crassness. But someone has to be on the side of the road, with flares in hand, screaming that the bridge is out.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 5:59 PM

You called them Nazis, pedophiles, denigrated our servicemen repeatedly. Yeah, that and the truther BS pretty much invalidates you as someone who should be taken seriously. You undoubtedly don’t get this kind of attention in real life, so congratulations you got a reaction. All you had to do was mock the uniforms that guard you while you sleep.

V7_Sport on December 21, 2011 at 6:08 PM

Ed needs to give me an exclusive corner for guest commentary. Something like “Paleo Palpations” or “Pitchfork Up Your Arse”

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 6:05 PM

Ummm, No, at best Ed would be well advised to ignore you.

SWalker on December 21, 2011 at 6:10 PM

You called them Nazis, pedophiles, denigrated our servicemen repeatedly. Yeah, that and the truther BS pretty much invalidates you as someone who should be taken seriously. You undoubtedly don’t get this kind of attention in real life, so congratulations you got a reaction. All you had to do was mock the uniforms that guard you while you sleep.

V7_Sport on December 21, 2011 at 6:08 PM

I didn’t denigrate anyone. Beside the Nazi snipe, where did I attack our servicemen? I like the grunts. The high level guys with stripes on their arms, not so much. Since when are you guys a collective? Don’t prove my point. It doesn’t help your argument.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 6:11 PM

So you don’t like our system of government? Do you think we all should just throw out everything and drink the Paul kool-aid and trust him?

I like the one we created in 1789.

Can you make an argument that is not based on false dilemmas? I can stand against all those things and likewise against discrimination based on race , sex, and religion. In your case you move from one extreme to the other. It is like running from a lion but crashing into a bear.

These are not extremes. The federal government regulates these things already.

Aaaah, so what about the liberty of the people at the local level? Suppose they buck the local laws as Private Manning because they FREEEEEEDOOOOOOM! Would Paul praise them also?

If you don’t like things at your local level you have much more ability to change it, or more opportunity to pick up and move elsewhere.

ReformedDeceptiCon on December 21, 2011 at 6:11 PM

What bridge is out?

Mimzey on December 21, 2011 at 6:08 PM

The one that connects both hemispheres of his brain.

SWalker on December 21, 2011 at 6:11 PM

But never let the truth get in the way of your wishful thinking.

maverick muse on December 21, 2011 at 5:59 PM

I guess–as a kind of public service–you’re giving us a preview of the unremitting, day-and-night Mormon-bashing coming our way if Romney wins the GOP nomination.

I frankly don’t care about the finer points of Mormon belief. I grew up in an area of rural Indiana that happened to have a large Mormon community, counted several Mormon kids as friends and remain friends with some of them to this day. They are, by and large, good and decent people. More to the point: Romney’s faith has no bearing on his ability to do the job. His Mormon beliefs are a flaming non-issue as far as I’m concerned.

And those who do find Romney’s faith concerning? Let them compare faiths then: Romney’s Mormonism and Obama’s Marxism. Which do they prefer?

troyriser_gopftw on December 21, 2011 at 6:11 PM

, it took beach ball sized cajones for him to follow though with his convictions, being completely aware of the fate that awaited.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 6:08 PM

LOL, Idiot, he smuggled out some files on a thumb drive and gave them to someone who promised him anonymity. Shockingly enough, you don’t know anything about courage.

V7_Sport on December 21, 2011 at 6:12 PM

The government, however, is expressly forbidden to search me and my belongings without probable cause and without a warrant. This is a fact.

Dante on December 21, 2011 at 5:34 PM

No..it a strawman.

Is it really possible that Ronatrons are this dense??

Don’t like the procedure?..don’t CHOOSE to use the service.

Mimzey on December 21, 2011 at 6:13 PM

LOL, Idiot, he smuggled out some files on a thumb drive and gave them to someone who promised him anonymity. Shockingly enough, you don’t know anything about courage.

V7_Sport on December 21, 2011 at 6:12 PM

And he thought he was going to get away with it? Really?

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 6:13 PM

I didn’t denigrate anyone.
Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 6:11 PM

Like hell you didn’t. You called US Military personal NAZI’s and that is as denigrating as you can get.

SWalker on December 21, 2011 at 6:15 PM

The government, however, is expressly forbidden to search me and my belongings without probable cause and without a warrant. This is a fact.

Dante on December 21, 2011 at 5:34 PM

That I suspect may have some truth involved. :)

Mimzey on December 21, 2011 at 6:15 PM

Re.Pitchforker

I didn’t denigrate anyone.

Backpedal much? Coward? It’s up there for anyone to see.

Beside the Nazi snipe, where did I attack our servicemen?

Pedophiles, hive mentality…

I like the grunts

Shove it.

Since when are you guys a collective?

When someone who lives and enjoys the security and prosperity provided to you by better men and women decides to spit in their eye that tends to get people to close ranks.

V7_Sport on December 21, 2011 at 6:17 PM

Ed needs to give me an exclusive corner for guest commentary. Something like “Paleo Palpations” or “Pitchfork Up Your Arse”

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 6:05 PM

Something more fitting would be

“Behind Herr Doktors Zipper, with Pitchforker.”

“Knee pads? Who needs ‘em! with Pitchforker”

“Truther Tales and other Stories of the Paranoid, with Pitchforker”

Stuff like that.

catmman on December 21, 2011 at 6:18 PM

Regardless of what you think Manning did was right or wrong, it took beach ball sized cajones for him to follow though with his convictions, being completely aware of the fate that awaited.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 6:08 PM

It is indeed a pity that Brad should want to dispose, so to speak, of those golden beachballs, but such are the ironies of these exciting times.

spiritof61 on December 21, 2011 at 6:19 PM

And he thought he was going to get away with it? Really?

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 6:13 PM

Done in secret with the expectation of anonymity… And you think he is courageous.

V7_Sport on December 21, 2011 at 6:19 PM

The government, however, is expressly forbidden to search me and my belongings without probable cause and without a warrant. This is a fact.

With the risk of being pedantic, not entirely true.

In exigent or emergency situations, they can search you or your belongings. They don’t need probable cause.

It’s considered, under the circumstances, a reasonable search.

Also, border and border searches are permissible. That’s also considered reasonable.

There are a few more exceptions but I’m too tired to look them up.

SteveMG on December 21, 2011 at 6:20 PM

The neoconservatives who don’t like Paul’s philosophy have now largely stopped defending liberty in order to never admit that we’ve made mistakes as a nation. As a result, they’re now arguing for government violation of the rights they’re sworn to defend.

The only principle you guys seem to have is that you don’t “hate America first”. Liberty first, America second. Without her liberty, America’s no longer worth defending.

fatlibertarianinokc on December 21, 2011 at 6:20 PM

With the risk of being pedantic, not entirely true.

I guess I should have said that the Supreme Court has upheld those searches, e.g., border, exigent, sobriety checkpoints.

Whether that’s a correct reading of the Constitution is another matter.

SteveMG on December 21, 2011 at 6:23 PM

LOL, Idiot, he smuggled out some files on a thumb drive and gave them to someone who promised him anonymity. Shockingly enough, you don’t know anything about courage.
V7_Sport on December 21, 2011 at 6:12 PM

And he thought he was going to get away with it? Really?
Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 6:13 PM

So you also don’t know anything about stupidity?

If you made that claim about literally any other subject – or even every other subject – I would trust you implicitly. But that’s where I have to draw the line.

logis on December 21, 2011 at 6:25 PM

The neoconservatives who don’t like Paul’s philosophy have now largely stopped defending liberty in order to never admit that we’ve made mistakes as a nation. As a result, they’re now arguing for government violation of the rights they’re sworn to defend.

The only principle you guys seem to have is that you don’t “hate America first”. Liberty first, America second. Without her liberty, America’s no longer worth defending.

fatlibertarianinokc on December 21, 2011 at 6:20 PM

What is your definition of neo-con.

RickB on December 21, 2011 at 6:26 PM

Without her liberty, America’s no longer worth defending.

fatlibertarianinokc on December 21, 2011 at 6:20 PM

Ronulians always claim to know and understand the US Constitution, yet never seem quiet capable of comprehending the English language that the US Constitution is actually written in. Fascinating really.

SWalker on December 21, 2011 at 6:27 PM

What is your definition of neo-con.

RickB

I shall answer for them.
Jooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Hard Right on December 21, 2011 at 6:34 PM

Ed needs to give me an exclusive corner for guest commentary. Something like “Paleo Palpations” or “Pitchfork Up Your Arse”

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 6:05 PM

Actually, Ed needs to give you the boot. But, good.

kingsjester on December 21, 2011 at 6:35 PM

Although Joseph Smith once converted a Black American (who, btw, did not stay “Mormon”), upon Smith’s death, the Mormon leadership beginning with Brigham Young until 1978 refused to ordain anyone of African genetics (the mark of Cain) to the Mormon Priesthood.

That’s true, but it wasn’t the original statement…

Does it bother you that Mitt Romney is a member of an organization that discriminated and did not let blacks join until 1978?

tetriskid on December 21, 2011 at 5:30 PM

Link

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on December 21, 2011 at 6:35 PM

Someone was ignorant enough to say that the U.S. military has no similarities whatsoever with Penn State and we saw firsthand that they certainly do and then some. I don’t know why some people are outraged. Child pedophilia is entrenched at high levels of society everywhere. This isn’t a newsflash.

Pitchforker on December 21, 2011 at 4:03 PM

No, someone was ignorant enough to make blanket accusations that all who serve are nazis or pedophiles. And you’re surprised that those of us that served honorably and served with many others who served honorably are upset? Why ever would we be upset that while many of us gave up years of our lives to protect ungrateful sacks of crap like you we still have to come home and be insulted by people who are nothing more than the whiny libtardian offspring of worthless Vietnam generation scumbags who think that because they play Call of Duty or Battlefield 3 on the PS3 or Xbox they know something about an institution they were too cowardly to even go into themselves?

What’s next? You want to insult my cousin who died in Iraq from an IED as a war criminal? Maybe you think that my grandfather who won a Silver Star at the Battle of the Bulge was a warmonger because he killed those poor nazis or my other grandfather who was at Iwo Jima and Okinawa was a war criminal because he killed those poor innocent Japonese who only attacked us because we provoked them in 1941?

You can justify your garbage however you want either by supposedly giving to Wounded Warrior or whatever but I think I speak for many others that served too when I say who cares, you can stuff it. If you think that just because you give a few dollars it means you care about the military you are seriously deluded.

Also I hate to point out one little fallacy with your anti-military screed. Just because you can cherry pick incidents doesn’t mean the whole bunch is rotten we could do the same thing in the civilian world too in the universities and in the business world in just about any institution. What do you expect in a group of at least 2 million or so? That everyone is perfect? That is highly unrealistic. At least we had the stones to step up and actually give back to our country as opposed to only taking from it and then crying that you haven’t been able to take more. However, I realize I am wasting my breath trying to explain concepts such as honor, duty, sacrifice, pride and love of country to someone who has none.

bbinfl on December 21, 2011 at 6:42 PM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5 6 7