During the 2004 election, when the Democrats had a Vietnam vet running for the Presidency against George Bush who had just served in the National Guard, we heard quite a bit about "chickenhawks."

For example, here's Frank Lautenberg taking a line we heard again and again from liberals,

"Lautenberg pointed to a poster with a drawing of a chicken in a military uniform that defined a chicken hawk as "a person enthusiastic about war, provided someone else fights it."

"They shriek like a hawk, but they have the backbone of the chicken," he said.

"We know who the chicken hawks are. They talk tough on national defense and military issues and cast aspersions on others. When it was their turn to serve where were they? AWOL -- that's where they were," Lautenberg said.

"And now the chicken hawks are cackling about Senator John Kerry. And the lead chicken hawk against Senator Kerry is the vice president of the United States -- Vice President Cheney.

"He was in Missouri this week claiming that Senator Kerry was not up to the job of protecting this nation. What nerve. Where was Dick Cheney when that war was going on?" Lautenberg said."

Note that you haven't been hearing much about "chickenhawks" since the GOP selected John McCain, a Vietnam vet and POW as our nominee, to run against noted chickenhawks, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

Now, you might say, "John, it's unfair to call Obama and Clinton chickenhawks!" Really? Well, aren't they both chickenhawks by the exact same standards that the Left used in 2004?

Don't both of them claim to want to keep American troops fighting in Afghanistan? Didn't "chickenhawk Hill" just threaten to obliterate Iran if it attacks Israel? Didn't "Barack the chickenhawk" threaten to invade Pakistan?

Yet, how much time has Barack Obama spent in the military? Not one day. But, that's understandable, right? I mean those barbarians probably don't even provide soldiers with arugula for their MREs. But still, I guess it would be fair to say, as Senator Lautenberg put it, that Obama shrieks, "like a hawk, but (has) the backbone of the chicken."

Isn't it funny how the whole "chickenhawk argument" was such a oft-discussed, "crucial" point back in 2004, but today, now that the shoe's on the other foot, not a liberal soul who was making that argument seems to think it has the least bit of validity any more?

Also see,

What Did You Do In Vietnam, Chickenhawk?
Taking The Chickenhawk Argument To Its Logical End
The Chickenhawk Slur