The original Markus Kloos short story it's taken explores the anthropormorphized relationship between a pilot and a ship in a superstitious and interesting way...The wartime autobiographical memoir that the genre seems taken from is similar to Robert Mason's book on his experience as a Vietnam era Huey pilot---"Chickenhawk"...

depends on how you define "maximum nasty" @enoch

There was a time where I thought for sure we were heading towards another civil war. My assumption was that the gun nuts and other right wing lunatics would eventually take up arms against their country but ultimately lose.

But as I think about it more, for all their bluster and rhetoric. Chickenhawks are ultimately cowards and even gun-nuts really don't want to sacrifice their lives for their interpretation of the 2nd amendment. When it comes right down to it, most people don't want to fight and kill their fellow countrymen despite how much they want to try and demonize the "other"

The core issue as I see it that is preventing our political system from being more effective is private money in our politics and I don't think that's going to be fixed without a constitutional amendment prohibiting it. Thanks to the internet age, elections should be 100 percent publicly funded and lobbying and donations should be outlawed, because anyone can e-mail/blog and thus influence their elected officials without bribes or gifts or perks being involved. Money is not free speech

income inequality is going to get worse and worse until it reaches a tipping point that galvanizes the 99 percent but we're just not there yet. While I'm sure there will be some bloodshed during this process, I think on a national level it will be relatively bloodless and relatively peaceful.

as always, it's just going to be painful and it's going to take time. One of the problems with change is that you usually have to wait for people with bad ideas to die of old age before better ideas are implemented.

Or a chickenhawk...

never say never.

you don't honestly think that if there were a continuous stream of shootings that people wouldn't change their attitude towards guns?

Hell, there would probably be a period where even more people started getting guns out of fear (already happening) but as more shootings occur, it would be shown that more concealed carry holders don't necessarily stop shit like this happening. A CC holder will eventually accidentally shoot an innocent instead of the active shooter if it hasn't happened already and LaPierre's myth of "only thing that can stop an armed bad guy is an armed good guy" will be shattered.

yeah I think it's likely that a sustained stream of unnecessary death and carnage will slowly change people minds, but it's the standard meme of "it gets worse before it gets better" a lot of people are going to have to die to educate people that maybe only those with significant and continuous training should have weapons.

It will also be another cliche of how politicians typically never change their mind unless it happens to them. You put a chickenhawk politician in the trenches of war, suddenly he's not so supportive of war. Take a politician that has been anti-gay and give them a gay family. suddenly their opinion changes. Take a politician who is anti-abortion and force them to make a choice between the life of the baby and life of the mother and guess what, their opinions will probably change.

So never say things will never change.

just another chickenhawk pussy talking shit.
isnt this the same guy that berated a woman at a coffee shop for making him actually have to formulate a counter argument to her question?
yeah...that was classy.

and wasn't something similar done to a congressman in georgia a few years back? i cant remember his name but he had lost two legs in vietnam and they made him out to be a pinko commie.

ah..politics.where only the true blue whores reside.

I'd never criticize anyone for avoiding getting drafted into that war. It ended a couple of years before I was eligible for the draft, but I definitely had my escape plans ready. What I criticize are those fucking hypocrits that start promoting wars and talking shit as soon as they were no longer at risk of having to serve themselves.

I'd honestly love to see every last chickenhawk sent over to whatever war we are currently involved in...at least then our innocent youngsters could be spared. I'm for damned sure that our wars would be far fewer and far smaller, if those who called for them had to serve in them.

>> ^Ryjkyj:

Now I'm not one to call draft-dodgers cowards, and certainly not "the biggest coward in America." Dodging the Vietnam draft can probably just be chalked up to critical thinking, but it certainly is interesting to hear this story. As someone who threatens to kill people every day of his life for various reasons, it truly shows Nugent for what he really is: all talk and no cock. It also puts his "hunting makes me so tough" schtick in an entirely different light, namely: "I can kill a bear from really far away with a gun, but I'd never put myself in any actual danger."

Maybe it's just because Nugent's a whacko chickenhawk.

Let's give Tucker everything he wants- tanks, planes, submarines- whatever he thinks he needs, then send him, and him alone, into Iran to accomplish his goal.

Maybe the other cowardly chickenhawks like W, Cheney, Fromme, Quantummushroom and the like can go as well, but only the true believers. The rest of humanity gets to sit this one out.

it's my favorite neocon chickenhawk: Wolfie!

>> ^NetRunner:

Not much of a hornet's nest. More of a political posture to make a point.
The idea isn't that Charlie Rangel wanted to continue the wars, and make sure we're adequately prepared for new ones with Iran and North Korea. Out of context quotes makes it look that way, but of course it was just a ploy to make Republicans put up or shut up.
If the war in Iraq was about an existential threat to the US, the case for a draft should be airtight. If Republicans don't want a draft, then aren't they just full of shit?
If they do want a draft, what better way to focus people's attention on the war, and get them to really start organizing in opposition to it, even if the bill fails on a narrow party-line vote (or even better, a Bush veto).
I'd say that's a pretty ballsy gambit to drive the national debate. The problem, as always, was the Democrats didn't really form a coherent strategy or message to go along with it, and the bill got voted down without anyone really paying attention to it.


Yes, that is the context, but I still think this Should be our national policy. No more chickenhawks sending other peoples kids to war.

But, that's not why The-User-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named posted this, is it? He doesn't want informed conversation: shit stirrer.

Miller gets lumped into the same category I toss Nugent...loonies that I just don't care to support any more. Miller MAY be slightly less offensive than the chickenhawk gun nut.

I would certainly be surprised to see either one of them given any airtime for their political views on any channel other than Faux News.

Kinda starting to look that way.

I have no doubt the military-industrial complex is working hard to ensure this happens. So are American oil companies, wall street, and other uber-rich folks. Obama promised change - changing the the country you invade doesn't count. If I were Iran, I would be building nukes.

It'll be interesting to see what other Dem's have to say about this (if any).>> ^blankfist:

Obama = Bush?

>> ^MarineGunrock:
Just ask any of the Iraqi citizens that cheered, waved, said thank you to me and my brothers-in-arms. Ask the dozens more that I had the opportunity to have conversations with that tell me that they don't want us leaving, because when we do "bad men come."


We have asked the Iraqi citizens these questions, and every poll shows that %85 want us the fuck out of their country, and %75 think it's OK to fire at US soldiers.

When you have armored humvees filled with rednecks with big guns and itchy trigger fingers trapsing through your village, of course you're going to appear nice to them. When you have events like fallujah and Abu Ghraib, these people know better than to fuck with anyone wearing a US flag on their shoulder. It's common sense, not some misguided feeling that they're happy to have had USA destroy their country, torture and kill their citizens, and send over a million children into the underground sex industry.

>> ^oohahh:

For a fun game, watch the body language. Note when the respondents look down, look to the sides, and blink.
Body Language of Lies:
• Physical expression will be limited and stiff, with few arm and hand movements. Hand, arm and leg movement are toward their own body the liar takes up less space.
• A person who is lying to you will avoid making eye contact.
• Hands touching their face, throat & mouth. Touching or scratching the nose or behind their ear. Not likely to touch his chest/heart with an open hand.
- from http://www.blifaloo.com/info/lies.php


Don't believe everything you read about liars. Good liars can make eye contact and lie. Great lairs can make you believe it.

Also, it's not a lie if they believe it.

Jerry, just remember, it's not a lie if you believe it.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0098904/quotes

>> ^choggie:

closet homosexual @ 4:44
repub=democrat=red team=blue team
(draw a diagram chog, they still are blind)


Yeah, that guy is classic.