What’s g-dubya say?

“Shoot your mouth off and let others pay for it.” ???

…The dumbest thing ever uttered by any President ever.

That alone endangered and undermined our troops FAR greater than any sound byte or comment by any other legislator, candidate, or political pundit.

He might as well have just said “I *DARE* you…”

Nate, you tipped your hand when you attempted to defend the atrocious remarks made by Kerry, Kennedy, Durbin and the like. You defended them with as much tenacity as we defend the military. Think about that for a moment. Not one of those comments made by those legislators was clarified to mean that they were trying to make the military better, stronger, etc. They were cheap shots aimed at rallying the support base.

Nate, the vast majority of the military would not consider your rhetoric “support”.

You do this and they do that. Of course, there’s no connection here in your fantasy.

That’s how you, in fact, support the terrists.

I KNOW you’ve read that terrorists fire from schools and hospitals, virtually directing the return fire to the same spot where the pallywood producers will “document positive proof” of anti-muslim terror.

I sincerely hope that it’s simple innocence that prevents you from comprehending what actually transpired and not the slime of the fifth column.

This bloody battle mayhem is only half of a weapon of the terrorists, YOU being the other half. The one they murder’ em’ all for. Without you providing free high-grade propaganda for al jizzeroo, their weapon is useless.

They cannot win by force. They need YOU! YOU are wayyy too happy to comply. I find that unsettling.

If you actually believe that US, IDF and the others are purposely considering unarmed civilians a strategic target of value, when hitting them returns only damaging news-grief then you know nothing of warfare, are simply too uneducated to enter the debate, and/or YOU are the enemy.

BTW, if you really thought Dubya was a bona-fide terrorist, you’d be falling all over yourself to appease his pants off.

There you go again, stacking the deck. I have made it clear that the politicans in question were calling the architects of bad military policies on the carpet, and even if I grant you that the language they used was sloppy (which I don’t), that doesn’t take away from the fact that their intent was clearly not to malign our soldiers.

I’ve had it with this parsing of language, this seizing of every little critical comment as being unsupportive of the troops. Call it the curse of being “militarily correct”, the right-wing equivalent of being politically correct. You guys are right-wing Al Sharptons and Jesse Jacksons, ready to pounce any perceived slight to the military and hold a big media and blog blowout in solidarity with the troops. Well I for one support the troops, and I do so by speaking what is on my mind regarding military affairs and refusing to cave into the “militarily correct” police.

I’m not looking for your praise. I’m refuting your claim that calling people to the carpet for bashing our soldiers is somehow “smothering the debate”.

“I am saying that by setting the terms for what constitutes “supporting the troops” you are stacking the deck and branding certain lines of criticism as unpatriotic.”

So are you saying that publicly declaring that our soldiers are “terrorizing women and children”, are equal to “Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin and Pol Pot”, and are “murderers” is “supporting” them?

Your Kerry quote is way off-base. Terrorize is a verb. We terrorized the people of Iraq when we bombed them. We terrorize children when our soldiers burst into their homes. That does not make us terrorists in any reasonable sense of the word, any more than a soldier who kills an enemy combatant should be labeled a killer.

I’m not saying you overtly support banning free speech. I am saying that by setting the terms for what constitutes “supporting the troops” you are stacking the deck and branding certain lines of criticism as unpatriotic, therefore reducing the comfort level of people to express themselves. It’s a sleight of hand move, and one that smothers discussion of the war in any meaningful way since people are worried about folks like you branding them unsupportive of the troops.