November 11, 2007

Alright, Motherfucker

You wanna troll, fine. Don't do it in my Veterans Day post.  And yes, I hid your post, I haven't decided if I wanna delete it, or leave it as a testament to your ignorance. Maybe I'll post a copy here, I haven't decided. And yes, I'm crushing your dissent or whatever, that's how us evil authoritarian conservatives fucking roll...ignore the fact that I've railed against the GOP/conservative Morality Police here several times.

Know what?  Here you go, I'll post the text of what you wrote, so people know that you're a run of the mill, tedious lefty bitch.

Since you've got such a hard-on for all things military, I know you're gonna run right down to your local recruiter to sign up for the real thing, right?

Anyway, on to your tired-ass Chickenhawk Lefty talking point.  Going by your assumed definition of chickenhawk,  lemme reverse it and ask you, are you a chickendove?  Have you withheld tax money for Bush's evil wars?  Do you go to protests? Have you gone over to Iraq or Afghanistan to try to convince the jihadis to lay down their weapons, act as human shields, tried to engage in civil disobedience to stop or slow our own guys deployment?  I doubt it, so by your definition, you're probably a chickendove. 

But you know what, I reject your implied definition of chickenhawk.  I'll use one of your lefty allies definition of chickenhawk, its from the ever tedious and wordy sockpuppetmaster Glenn Ellers Ellensburg Greenwald, you probably know what his dick tastes like, so I assume you approve of his definition,

Something more than mere support for a war without fighting in it is required to earn the "chicken hawk" label. Chicken-hawkism is the belief that advocating a war from afar is a sign of personal courage and strength, and that opposing a war from afar is a sign of personal cowardice and weakness. A "chicken hawk" is someone who not merely advocates a war, but believes that their advocacy is proof of the courage which those who will actually fight the war in combat require.

I've never claimed supporting a military action was proof that I had enough courage to go into combat.  I've never equated any support of military action I've had with actual combat or military service.   You'll never hear me try to claim myself as their equal, unless I should join the Armed Forces myself and see action.  So using Glenn Greenwald's definition...troll, you are full of

Look, it replied! 

Actually, you made your point quite well - "I've never claimed supporting a military action was proof that I had enough courage to go into combat."

As you say, you've got a hard-on for snazzy pictures that show equipment and action (thought nothing that depicts the messy parts of war), but you're basically chickenshit.

It's a common story. Most wingnuts are chickenshits.

I like this, somehow, it argues that posting of action shots of the Armed Forces in action as a tribute, I've equated myself to the courage of our military, and it points to the bit in quotation.  So, Rightwingsnarkle, for the stupidest non-sequitir ever, you get
a new helmet,
and some pudding cups, YAAAAAAY!

You seriously need to do better, or I'm gonna ban your ass, you're already beginning to bore me.

Ah, it responds by claiming I just wanna focus on the cliche stuff and not the grisly element of war.  Uh, no shit, its a fucking Veterans Day post?  You know, a day set aside to honor Veterans?  My guess is they don't wanna revisit the grisly side of war on Veterans Day, so I posted action shots.

Snarkle, since you have such a hard-on for showing the grisly side of war on Veterans Day, why don't you do it on your shitty blog?

Posted by: doubleplusundead at 10:37 AM | Comments (32) | Add Comment
Post contains 647 words, total size 5 kb.

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
18kb generated in CPU 0.0129, elapsed 0.1554 seconds.
62 queries taking 0.148 seconds, 145 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.