More Things To Ponder

More Things To Ponder:Here are some things I wanted to mention that probably weren’t quite developed enough to merit their own posts…

— Today, Senator Hillary Clinton, the woman many Dems want to run for President said this….

“Asked whether she regretted voting for the war resolution, Clinton said “I’m going to reserve judgment until I see some evidence.”

So she can’t make up her mind about whether she should have voted for the war was or not? Isn’t that just like a woman — kidding, I’m kidding — that’s just a little Vast Right Wing Conspiracy humor. Besides, if being wishy-washy about the war was a female trait, how could you explain John Edwards, John Kerry, & Dick Gephardt?

— This is just poor planning on the part of the Bush administation,

“The Justice Department on Monday refused to produce an al-Qaida prisoner for questioning by terrorism suspect Zacarias Moussaoui, an extraordinary defiance of a judge’s order that could trigger legal punishments.

Excuse me, but why didn’t the Bush administration send this guy to Guantanamo Bay in the first place if they didn’t want this sort of thing to happen? He’s not an American citizen so they could have easily shipped him off to Gitmo, but nooooooo, they decided to send him though the court system. Well, they decided to go that way, so as far as I’m concerned, they should do what the court tells them to do. They made their bed, now they should lie in it.

— The Senate is going to kill “Total Information Awareness“. Given that even Conservatives seem to be largely opposed to the program, it should have been killed by the Bush administration long ago.

— RWN reader Staff Sgt. K, USAF writes…

“Hello Mr. Hawkins. I am a regular reader of your blog, and would first like to say that I really enjoy reading it and thanks, especially for the entertainment sections (ACPOTI, etc.).

However, after reading several stories of “Buck the Marine”, I took a little bit of offense to it. I know it is satire, and I know that you have the greatest respect for those in uniform, (such as myself), but it still seems to portray all serving men and women as illiterate dolts whose only purpose in life is to “kill foreners”.

Don’t get me wrong here, I am not whining about how “politically incorrect” this is, but am simply asking you to use discrection in what kind of satire you choose to post. Thanks.”

Staff Sgt. K

Like you said, I have nothing but respect for our men and women and uniform. So of course, I wouldn’t put up the ‘Buck the Marine’ material if I thought it was disrespectful to our armed forces. But the whole “In my world” series that Buck comes from is part of a style of comedy that emphasizes playing up the stereotypes that liberals have of Conservatives. It’s the same sort of humor that inspired the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy humor that I wrote here, here, & here. Then there’s my favorite image from the Simpsons…

Buck the marine is just meant to be funny, not a slap at the people putting their lives on the line to defend our freedom. So keep that in mind when you read it — oh and thanks for serving our country.

— Boy the media is really reaching for more WMD “scandals”. Just look at this title, “CIA: Assessment of Syria’s WMD exaggerated.” Woah! Sounds big huh? Know what the crux of the story is? “Anonymous sources” claim that John Bolton was going to exaggerate the threat of Syria’s WMD today, but the speech was postponed. Yes, Bolton didn’t actually say anything today, but he was going to exaggerate — really he was — the anonymous sources say so! Bolton was going to lie & people were going to die! Impeach Bush and Bolton now! Now! Wait — does Syria have oil? They do? No blood for oil! (Have I mentioned that I’ve grown to really distrust any controversial story based on anonymous sources?)

— Here’s an interesting theoretical question that we may have to actually consider in the next few months. Let’s say that for whatever reason, we believe there’s a better than high probability that North Korea is on the verge of launching a nuclear strike and starting up another Korean war. The North Koreans are certainly capable of blowing Seoul to pieces with all the artillery they already have in place and although we’re not sure of exactly what their nuclear capabilities are, it’s possible that they may be capable of launching a nuke that can hit Japan or POSSIBLY even the Western United States. If we believed that there was a high chance of war and we believed the only way to keep them from destroying Seoul & launching nukes would be to preemptively nuke them first, would you support it or would you risk the consequences of not acting? That may sound like a fantastic scenario, but it’s not as farfetched as you think. Personally, if I thought there war was likely and I thought nuking them first would make it highly unlikely that they would be unable to respond with nukes, I wouldn’t hesitate to hit ’em and I guarantee you that there are more than a few people in the Bush administration who think the same way. It’s the old, “Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6” philosophy taken to a national level. So when the North Koreans go shooting off at the mouth about their nuclear capacity & making threats, they should understand how fatal it could be if the Bush administration starts to take them seriously.

Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!

Send this to a friend