Thinking Right

By Captain Freedom

May 2, 2007 8:22 AM | Link to this

And a belated kudo to jbmlaw for pointing us to Dr. Sowell’s specific genius yesterday. I especially liked this one:

“When I see the worsening degeneracy in our politicians, our media, our educators, and our intelligentsia, I can’t help wondering if the day may yet come when the only thing that can save this country is a military coup.”

Ah, the Captain’s thighs go all a-tingle at this kind of thinking. Our Leader himself has said that he would prefer his position to be Dictator. At last, perhaps, we see the beginnings of a popular groundswell to do away with those pesky trappings of “democracy” so we can begin to enjoy True Freedom!!!

Back soon with Deep Thoughts about the Fresh Prince of Windsor.

By Captain Freedom

May 2, 2007 8:30 AM | Link to this

Mr Wooten hits the nail squarely on the head today. Having prominent citizens, or the children of the prominent, serve in the military would undermine the effectiveness of the military.

But this is old news, and is the very reason the children of prominent war supporters (like Mitt Romney’s 27 children by his 5 wives, or Jenna and Not-Jenna Bush) have stayed away in droves.

It is far more effective to have ordinary citizens serve in Iraq and Afghanistan. When these people die, nobody really cares (well, except their family and friends, but these are the ordinary, common people, so no matter). But if the Romney fils (pardon my damnable French) were to be injured, or if God help us, Jenna Bush were captured while drunk’n’syumbling and deep-kissing another female soldier, the propoganda machine of the Islamoloving MSM would have a field day.

No, it is better that the prominent citizenry stay in the US and fight the War on Terror here on the home front. Someone has to keep the economy moving, and who better than the people with fame and money?

By jbmlaw

May 2, 2007 8:32 AM | Link to this

Good morning all. I respectfully part company with Jim Wooten today, for the reasons he anticipates in his essay. [By coincidence, the example of the “president’s daughter held by terrorists” was always a hypothetical case I used to teach ethics to middle schoolers in Sunday school. Many useful dimensions.] The fact that the government is spineless is insufficient rationale for an individual to avoid service; that is merely an argument for replacement of the government. I would feel better about excusing Prince Harry’s service obligation if he were spineless himself, which he obviously is not. Honorable military service - meaning, “killing the evil-doers” - is always a right Kantian act, utilitarian cowardice arguments notwithstanding.

By harold

May 2, 2007 8:33 AM | Link to this

wasn’t there a big veto or something?

didn’t bush decidered that he did not want to continue funding his lost war because he would be admitting that he had lost it?

and didnt he say he didnt want to play politics by budgeting for his KNOWN AND EXPECTED war in the first place because budgeting would be playing politics or soemthing?

6.5 straight years of april fools day so far. 1.5 years to go. here’s hoping we survive this catastrophe

By jbmlaw

May 2, 2007 8:36 AM | Link to this

Dear Captain @ 8:22, I liked these by Dr. Sowell:

Sometimes it seems as if everybody is trying to rip off his own little piece of America, until we are all torn apart.

A reader writes: “Liberals hold us individually responsible for nothing but collectively responsible for everything.”

Too many people in positions of responsibility act as if these are just positions of opportunity — for themselves. The ones who simply steal money probably do less harm than teachers who propagandize their students, media who slant the news or politicians who sell out their country’s interests in order to get re-elected.

A reader wrote: “Have you ever noticed that opinion polls ask the opinions of people who have no expertise in the subject on which they are being polled and publish these opinions as if they were gospel truth instead of group ignorance?”

Judging by the polls, Republican voters’ memories do not seem to be as short as Senator John McCain may have thought. Judging by press coverage, the media’s memory does not seem to have been as long as he may have thought when he played to that gallery.

Some of the biggest cases of mistaken identity are among intellectuals who have trouble remembering that they are not God.

Our education system, our media, and our intelligentsia have all been unrelentingly undermining the values, the traditions, and the unity of this country for generations and, at the same time, portraying as “understandable” all kinds of deviance, from prostitution to drugs to riots.

By harold

May 2, 2007 8:37 AM | Link to this

anyhow back on topic yeah sure put prince harry in a can and send him to iraq so his limey compadres can “friendly fire” his a* so the enemy doesnt seek to destroy the whole unit for PR points like Tillman

By jbmlaw

May 2, 2007 8:46 AM | Link to this

One more note before I head off to my wars: Theodore Roosevelt, Jr.

By Captain Freedom

May 2, 2007 8:49 AM | Link to this

Yep, those are good ones, jbm, but you can’t beat a call for a military coup. That remains Dr Sowell’s defining moment.

C’mon, admit it….you know you want it, too.

By Aquagirl

May 2, 2007 8:50 AM | Link to this

Go Captain! You are correct in your reasoning that if only the little people die, who cares? My schooling in this matter is clearly inferior. I was under the impression that English Kings and other royal types had led their troops into battle since the days of Egbert, Ethelwulf, and other guys with funny unpronounceable Anglo-Saxon names.

I will revise my earlier thinking that your alma mater is Liberty University. You show all the signs of matriculation from Leona Helmsley U.

By Van

May 2, 2007 8:56 AM | Link to this

Here in America, we have a proud tradition of famous or important people going to war. many of the big stars of Hollywood during WWII served. Jimmy Stewart(bomber pilot), Charles Bronson(tail gunner on B-29’s), Audie Murphy(Most Decorated serviceman of W.W.II), etc.

FDR’s son was a Marine in WWII. Joe and John Kennedy, the sons of Ambassador Joseph Kennedy, was also in that war.

John McCain was the son of Admiral John S. McCain, Jr, during the Viet Nam war.

There are others, but the point is people with some status or position have always served and accepted the responsibility of that action. If the young Prince wants to server his country and Queen, let him.

By Captain Freedom

May 2, 2007 8:58 AM | Link to this

Aside from the cogent reasoning offered by Mr wooten, there are further considerations regarding Prince Harry’s proposed service.

True, as Aquagirl points out, that history is rife with the brave exploits of British Royalty in battle. I still get a kick out of the way Good King Hal pounded those damnable cheeseeatingGitanesmokingsurrendermonkeys at Agincourt.

But those days are sadly, far behind.

Years of indolence and inbredding have made the British royal stock suitable for not much more than feeble waving from a passing carriage and “torrid” trysts amongst first cousins and siblings.

This has led to, among other things, a horrible tendency to macular degeneration. (I could link to a photo of Camilla to prove my point, but you can google it yourself…I suffer enough!!!) Prince Harry, with his degraded eyesight and horrible deformed DNA, would be a liability in service. As have the entire Brit cut’n’run crew ever since we saved their hash in WW 1 and 2.

So enough, I say, with this dangerous talk of sending the children of prominent people to war. Better they attend Duke Universit where they can learn how to succeed in business without “really” lying.

By Peter

May 2, 2007 9:01 AM | Link to this

Gee How funny the baloney is today….

WOW, as the building of Power, and Greed continues for the upper class, we see the Republican’s want to send in the lower and middle class to fight the battles and die.

How is anyone alive more valuable than another ????????

This is just the type of selective thinking we have from the “Politically Wrong”.

Perhaps the poor, the black, the Mexican and anyone of non wealth decent should do all the bidding for the rich wealthy “CHICKEN HAWKS” that want to start WARS based on lies so they can build wealth.

Mr Wooten, today’s article shows just the type of person you are, and the type for thinking that divides this country.

YOU are for the RICH, the Powerful, the
“Important” of the society…….

“All men are created equal”

Not on your watch!

By Van

May 2, 2007 9:24 AM | Link to this

Peter,

You sound like a anarchist jack-a*, I hope I am wrong.

By Peter

May 2, 2007 9:34 AM | Link to this

VAN…if you think that way ……….YOU are the one!!!!!!!

Such a joke here……

All you thinkers that say MAN is NOT created Equal…….. and that some in society are more valuable than others are Bigots!

America was founded on freedom and benefits for all………you sound very non American!

Since you have started the name calling……go ahead call me what you want, but I know there is not another person alive that is more important than anyone else!

Selective crap is all we have today!

By Rod

May 2, 2007 9:38 AM | Link to this

Predictable as usual. Wooten doesn’t want high profile (read between the lines - rich) folks off on the front lines. He likes to have wars, but only for the poor people to fight and actually die.

Wooten wants blacks and poor people on the front line dying, while richer white people stay back out of harm’s way - typical racist opinion.

By getalife

May 2, 2007 9:43 AM | Link to this

Yes, he should go.

So should the twins, all neocon and gop kids.

By deegee

May 2, 2007 9:48 AM | Link to this

This is the second time in the last week that we have heard about high-value soldiers based on their celebrity status. That’s sickening and insulting to the people that send their loved ones off to a war zone. What if General Petraeus was caught by Al Qaeda in Iraq? Wouldn’t he be considered a high-value target? I don’t understand the reasoning that says to capture a high-value target would break the will of the American people. Wouldn’t it stand to reason that capturing a general would energize the war effort?

Okay, so send Prince Harry but keep him off the front lines. Put him on latrine duty where he will only be a distraction to the flies.

By DebbieDoRight

May 2, 2007 9:59 AM | Link to this

But if the Romney fils (pardon my damnable French) were to be injured, or if God help us, Jenna Bush were captured while drunk’n’syumbling and deep-kissing another female soldier, the propoganda machine of the Islamoloving MSM would have a field day.

Cap’n you do me proud!!! I was laughing so hard, (I’m stuck in a meeting), my boss looked at me and asked me what was so funny about the upcoming project!! Luckily I saved myself and said I was laughing at his tie!!! (that always works)

By Dusty

May 2, 2007 10:04 AM | Link to this

Well, Peter Peter pumpkin eater has arrived and already forgotten we are talking about the British.

Captain Frame’em Freedom is formenting his usual fortuitously false fragments of longevity while grinning like the undercover donkey Democrat that he is.

Meanwhile Aquagirl bubbles away over the satirical saga of her dear capitan del falsetto. Such devotion!!

Fortunately we have a few thinking people who still value our country and the governmental system by which we live. So thanks to jbmlaw and Van for realizing that we are most fortunate.

But a closing mention of Harold of the open mind(from one side to the other) for trying to use Tillman for propaganda against our country, the very one for which Tillman died. Perhaps Harold should study the behavior of Prince William who knows how to be “royal”. Harold could use a few lessons on exhibiting the finer qualities of loyalty.

By Peter

May 2, 2007 10:10 AM | Link to this

Dusty…Please read below……same as above….

Frankly, if President Bush had a son eligible to serve on the front lines in Iraq, I’t argue against that, too, for the same reason. We saw already how the Brits responded to the capture of 15 sailors and marines. Prince Harry in the hands of terrorists would break the country’s will. That probably wouldn’t be the case with the son of an American President, but why take the risk?

Perhaps you have trouble reading between the lines, or reading the actual lines themselves!!!!!

BREAK the Countries WILL……. HA HA HA……

By harold

May 2, 2007 10:13 AM | Link to this

Tillman didn’t die for the United States. Iraq posed no danger to the United States. Tillman died for absolutely nothing as have thousands of others whose lives have been wasted by Bush Inc.

Prince Harry in a Can could go over there and get killed and also it’d be for nothing.

Harry shouldn’t be there, but only because nobody should be there. Harold says bring them all home.

Anybody notice the BBC reported they “lost” all their footage from 9/11 after it was realized that they’d announced the collapse of WTC-7 20+ minutes before it collapsed? Their newsperson was talking with WTC7 visible in the background about how it had already collapsed. Umm… The live feed then mysteriously breaks up. Now the footage is all “lost.” The footage from the biggest news day in 60+ years. “Lost.” by the BBC. Fortunately the internets did not lose that footage. It’s out there. 911 was an inside job!

By Jack

May 2, 2007 10:17 AM | Link to this

Harold. Take your meds now. Please.

By Van

May 2, 2007 10:19 AM | Link to this

harold ,

Tillman did not die in Iraq, it was that other country, the one below Iran, Afghanistan.

By harold

May 2, 2007 10:22 AM | Link to this

Great, so he died pointlessly in Afghanistan. There might’ve been a point had Bush not cut and run and let the Taliban take back over, but Bush cut and run because he doesn’t want Bin Laden caught because a Bin Laden capture would reveal the truth: 911 was an inside job.

Jack, all the meds on earth dont change the fact that BBC reporters knew WTC7 was going to collapse although it was hit by no plane and had no “jet fuel” burning inside it “to weaken the steel”

Jack you go take your meds.

By Dusty

May 2, 2007 10:35 AM | Link to this

Harold @ 10:13,

Would you try and get your anti-war propaganda correct? Tillman died in Afghanistan while fighting for a war for which he volunteered. And 9/11 was an inside job??? Wow..OK.OK..down boy!! Be calm!!

Debbie-Do-Right @ 9:59,

Glad you got a big laugh from Captain “the Fool” Freedom when he posted those “hilarious” nasty insinuations about the President’s daughters.

That was almost as humorous as your remark yesterday at 3:02 about young Republicans when you posted “What a waste of good bullet bait.”

I bet anyone in the military, like your husband, would think that is soooo funny.

We’ve really got the jokers here today.

By Shar

May 2, 2007 10:36 AM | Link to this

Prince Harry rummaged among his very limited career options, chose the military, and trained extensively for his mission. He should go to Iraq if his unit goes. To do otherwise would surely degrade unit cohesion. Besides, the rationale for the arduous conditions faced by American troops, regular and National Guard, is that “they volunteered”, so complaint is superfluous. Why should it be different for a 22 year old Brit?

His uncle served in the Faulklands theater of war. These ‘spares to the heir’ have few options for personal success, and certainly combat service is a prerequisite to serious advancement in a military career. From a public relations standpoint, Harry’s great grandmother knew the immense value of her insistence on remaining in harm’s way during the Blitz, when Hitler called her “the most dangerous woman in Europe” for her effect on British morale. If Harry were deemed too special to serve, his own career would be tainted and the service of ‘less than special’ Brits would be denigrated.

Yes, if Harry were killed, maimed or captured during his service the general public would feel some measure of the grief that military families now bear alone, and not just in the UK. It would exert more pressure to justify why anyone should be fighting there. It would personalize the war for the decision makers and the taxpayers who fund it.

No one would wish that calamity for the prince, but no one should blithely accept it for other military members, either.

By Katie

May 2, 2007 10:40 AM | Link to this

If he’s in the military he should go where ever they want to send him. Just because he’s royalty I don’t feel he should get special treatment. He should face the same risks as everyone else-period…

By harold

May 2, 2007 10:42 AM | Link to this

dusty van already corrected that tillman was reportedly killed in afghanistan. not sure how him being killed is antiwar propaganda. it’s actually fact, not propaganda, unless you think they are lying and he is not dead.

yeah whoa buddy, could somebody fill harold in on how the bbc reported WTC7 as having collapsed prior to its collapse? no plane hit that building, no fuel was burning inside it, the bbc reported it had collapsed. 20 minutes later, it did.

By getalife

May 2, 2007 10:55 AM | Link to this

“A recent worldwide poll showed that under the Bush presidency, America has become the third most unpopular country in the world — right behind Iran and just ahead of North Korea. Why do you believe that has that happened?”

It not the liberals idiots, the buck stops with w and his party.

By harold

May 2, 2007 10:57 AM | Link to this

Well Dusty if you are so sure 911 was not an inside job then let’s see how well you brain works on something nonpolitical where you havent had decades of brainwashing.

Tofu Turkey is called Tofurkey.

What is Tofu Duck called?

By JK

May 2, 2007 11:02 AM | Link to this

WTC7 collapsed neatly and quietly into its own footprint like every other planned, controlled demolition you’ve ever seen on the news.. EVER. No way it just “fell down” in a perfect little pile all by itself just because the buildings around were hit by airplanes. No f—-king way.

Rod said, “Wooten wants blacks and poor people on the front line dying, while richer white people stay back out of harm’s way - typical racist opinion.” Rod, when Mr. Wooten talks to the BUCKHEAD YOUNG REPUBLICANS next week, Thur. May 10, Copelands, 7 p.m., surely he’s going to ask all these white yuppie movers & shakers to give up their fast-track-to-success, moneyed lifestyles and support the surge by enlisting right away. You’ll see, Mr. Wooten isn’t for double standards, ‘cause that would make him UN-American!!! Right Mr. Wooten?

By Cletus Snow

May 2, 2007 11:04 AM | Link to this

What possible reason would be acceptable for Prince Harry’s failure to deploy with his unit?

By Van

May 2, 2007 11:06 AM | Link to this

Peter - Re: your 9:34

You have confirmed my impression. I did not call you anything, I said you sounded like something and added, I hope I was wrong.

Your response shows everyone what a hot head you are, please try to control the temper.

By harold

May 2, 2007 11:07 AM | Link to this

WELL??? WHAT IS TOFU DUCK CALLED?

By Redneck Convert

May 2, 2007 11:09 AM | Link to this

Well, the libruls is all over this blog today. Making fun of My President and rich people.

I say leave this Prince Harry at home. The ragheads have already said they plan to cut off his ears and send him back to his grandma when they catch him. He would look downright silly being a King without ears. Every time he would talk people would laugh. Not that his grandma listens much to anybody either. Leave the fighting to the illegal people and the people that don’t have no money. I’m with Wooten on this one. Good god-fearing conservatives oughtn’t to have to fight. Their job is to start the wars, not fight them. If God wanted them to fight wars they would have been borned into poor familys.

I think Jenna and her sister should go, though. I hear they can drink up a storm and fit right in. Down in South America they are still figuring up the bar bills and sending them out. Maybe they could be comfort women like Japan had. Anyway, the ragheads probly wouldn’t cut off their ears. Leastwise the sisters could be cheerleaders for our troops. And My President could make a big speech about how his fambly is making a big sacrafice for the war. He could have pictures of the girls on his desk in little fringed uniforms when he talks to us.

I agree mostly with Sister Dusty. It’s a bunch of trader libruls that are trying to make good conservatives look bad. Much as I hate to agree with Sister Dusty. Sister Dusty, she don’t like me none. We need that war and we are going to fight that war. It’s the southren way. When everybody is dead is the time to end the war. Besides, sooner or later the ragheads is going to run out of bombs. Then we’ll get ‘em.

Well, another beer run to make. The Baptists have their prayer meeting tonite and they like to get oiled up before they go and listen to another boring sermon that don’t have nothing to do with how they think or act.

By Jack

May 2, 2007 11:09 AM | Link to this

Look at the films. WTC7 did not collapse into a “neat” pile. It fell over due to the infrastructure holding it up was compromised when the other towers fell.

The prince is a good example for others as he wants to go unlike our gutless politicos.

By MnM

May 2, 2007 11:09 AM | Link to this

Just because he is royalty does not excuse him from battle. If you sign on the line you have to do the time. I did my time in the Army and decided that if war started again I don’t think I could kill for something I did not believe in. You know the risks that are involved. If you don’t then you are a moron for joining.

By Capt. Spaulding

May 2, 2007 11:12 AM | Link to this

Much as I hate to do it, I gotta side with Wootie on this one. I’d love to see him go, though. He’s an extremely low-value target and he’d be excellent IED fodder.

Y’all be sure to come on down to Capt. Spaulding’s to load up on my famous fied chicken and Capt. Spaulding for president T-shirts. And don’t forget to see Mary the Monkey Girl and bring the kiddies. She’ll scare the holy guacamole out of ‘em.

By HAROLD

May 2, 2007 11:12 AM | Link to this

WHY SHOULD PRINCE FIGHT? DUBYA DIDN’T. HE DODGED HIS SERVICE. HARRY SHOULD DODGE HIS SERVICE AND GO HAVE SOME RUM AND SOME COKE LIKE DUBAI DID. UHHHHH DUBYA NOT DUBAI

By John

May 2, 2007 11:13 AM | Link to this

Did I read this correctly? While the “fiscially responsibile” General Assembly and the Governor continue to fight over who should get a tax refund, the Governor, typical of most big government, big spenders, is going to beg for money from the federal government to fight fire in South Georgia?

If we have enough tax revenue that would allow for refunds, shouldn’t we first spend that surplus on fighting fire in South Georgia (or, heaven forbid, begin restoring the five straight years of “austerity” cuts to public education) before considering giving it back to the taxpayers and certainly before asking big government to pay for something the state appears to be adequately funded to cover?

By Dusty

May 2, 2007 11:14 AM | Link to this

JK@11:02

Before you “collapse neatly and quietly” into your own little propaganda promulgation, maybe you could answer harold’s question (since you seem to travel in the same stratosphere of sanity).

Harold wants to know “What is Tofu Duck called?”

I don’t care for tofu or tiresome twits so maybe you could answer his question.

By Cletus Snow

May 2, 2007 11:16 AM | Link to this

As usual the bovine excretement is flying hard and fast.

By harold

May 2, 2007 11:20 AM | Link to this

poor dusty is too boondoggled to even dodge answering the question about how/why the BBC reported 20+ minutes early that WTC7 had collapsed.

maybe if dusty ate less carcinogens the brain would comprehend chronology and sequential dependencies

This is how things should happen 1. WTC7 falls 2. News reports it

This is how it happened 1. BBC reports it 2. WTC7 falls later

By Bandit

May 2, 2007 11:39 AM | Link to this

Hey Cletus, keep the foot hard on that pedal and son, never mind them brakes. Let it all hang out ‘cause we’ve got a run to make.

By Lane

May 2, 2007 11:41 AM | Link to this

jbmlaw and Thomas Sowell quotes, “Liberals hold us individually responsible for nothing but collectively responsible for everything.”

William Blake wrote “To generalize is to be an idiot.”

I think Mr. Blake was right. jbmlaw and Mr. Sowell are idiots.

By Dusty

May 2, 2007 11:41 AM | Link to this

Harold @11:12

Putting your pointless lies in capital letters does not make them true. Just a little more obnoxious, but we are accustomed to that with you.

And our second-rate comic RedNeck returns followed by third rate Captain Spaulding. Like I said, lots of comics here today.

But, as to today’s subject, it is always a pleasure to see Prince William embody the usual British spirit of bravery. He is but a child of the long ago “Battle of Britain” when retreat or withdraw from enemies was never considered by the British.

By Captain Freedom

May 2, 2007 11:47 AM | Link to this

Captain Spaulding,

I suspect you are a Marxist.

Hurrah hurrah hurrah.

By Capt. Spaulding

May 2, 2007 11:48 AM | Link to this

Obviously you don’t know who Capt. Spaulding is. Google me and learn why it’s best not to mess with the captain.

By Captain Freedom

May 2, 2007 11:50 AM | Link to this

Spaulding -

You are also a schnorer, you african explorer.

By Capt. Spaulding

May 2, 2007 11:59 AM | Link to this

Captain Freedom is obviously a pink tutu wearing pansy. She, too, along with Wooten, would make excellent IED fodder.

By DebbieDoRight

May 2, 2007 12:03 PM | Link to this

*Debbie-Do-Right @ 9:59, Glad you got a big laugh from Captain “the Fool” Freedom when he posted those “hilarious” nasty insinuations about the President’s daughters. That was almost as humorous as your remark yesterday at 3:02 about young Republicans when you posted “What a waste of good bullet bait.” *

Glad you liked it!! I’m here every weekend at 8:00 — don’t forget to tip! Smoochies!!

By Dusty

May 2, 2007 12:04 PM | Link to this

Ah, now we have guessed. Tofu Duck is known as harold.

Now,about 9:11, Tofu Duck. Perhaps there was a incorrect time listing. Perhaps some terrorist pilot notified their intentions early. Perhaps BBC was guessing from propaganda. Perhaps there was an eclipse. Perhaps there was an ant still crawling after 9/11 therefore it could not have happened!! The ant was alive!! Perhaps the British were reading tea leaves after tea time. Maybe BBC had a fortune teller. Maybe ET told BBC what was coming. Maybe someone typed incorrectly. Maybe someone lied!!!!

Have I listed enough “possibilites” to help your carcinogen-crocked brain create more fantasy?

Enough for today. Bye now!!

By Matthew

May 2, 2007 12:09 PM | Link to this

The British royalty have a history of being able warriors and getting in harm’s way.

So, yes, he should go to Iraq, especially since he himself insists on it.

By jbmlaw

May 2, 2007 12:11 PM | Link to this

Dear Captain @ 8:49, perhaps you would be steeled by the intellectual foundation for the lament by Dr. Sowell (that seized your imagination), explained today, by coincidence, @ http://www.opinionjournal.com/federation/feature/?id=110010014. Most of our leftist friends can deal only in sound bites, but I am certain you will want to study the argument.
From another view, you surely understand now why I advocate so vigorously for our 2nd amendment rights - cannot start the second revolution without guns.

Thanks, Dusty @ 10:04 – I am always honored to be mentioned in the same breath as our friend Van. It crosses my mind that perhaps Mr. Wooten is toying with our leftist friends today. The notion of service to the country is a deeply-ingrained Conservative position (whether stated as the traditional duty of the overlord – noblisse oblige – or as a traditional Christian obligation @ Luke 12:48 – “to whom much is given, much is expected.”) Mr. Wooten phrases an avoidance-argument that is (normally) irresistible to our leftist friends. He employs the constantly-shifting “moral relativism” language, or uses a utilitarian “cost-benefit” or “pain/pleasure” analysis to support the argument, avoiding our usual Conservative “do the right thing” approach. The result is that he has effectively goaded our leftist friends into a knee-jerk response that mirrors the traditional Conservative view. I think Mr. Wooten has intellectually cornered our leftist friends. Not that there is anything wrong with toying with leftists. I think he does that for his own amusement. If any leftists bothered to read this far, suggest you substitute the name of any deserter – they are all lionized by the left - for Prince Harry, and you will see how little the Conservative argument changes, and how much yours will.

By jbmlaw

May 2, 2007 12:21 PM | Link to this

Dear Lane @ 11:41, you will be disappointed that I am unmoved by the rantings of a lunatic, but you will be heartened by my affirmation that Blake’s thought process mirrors yours.

By harold

May 2, 2007 12:26 PM | Link to this

sure dusty it was just a clock error that made the BBC woman talk about how the WTC7 building had collapsed while it was clearly visible intact in the skyscape directly behind her dumb arse

By Al Einstein

May 2, 2007 12:28 PM | Link to this

Jim Wooten is not intellectually equipped to “toy” with anyone.

By The Truth Hurts

May 2, 2007 12:30 PM | Link to this

Dusty accusing someone else of using Tillman for propaganda is hilarious. Like the military DIDN’T use him, or Jessica Lynch, or God knows who else. Oh yeah, I forgot, they corrected their error when all the facts were learned.

Nice try, Dusy.

Tillmans’s uniform was ordered burned immediately. Ever heard of that happening before? Another soldier was ordered immediately not to disclose what happended. It didn’t take 3 months to learn all the facts. Dusty’s inablity to admit the military made a mistake, then made a bigger mistake by lying about it, then tried covering it up, is why she has no credibity on here. Admitting they made a mistake and lied about it does not abonish the entire military, just those involved.

But she has so much “loyalty” stuck up someplace that she can’t see facts.

Blind loyalty has made many look mighty foolish over the years.

By getalife

May 2, 2007 12:31 PM | Link to this

Israel’s Foreign Minister Calls For Olmert’s Resignation:

“I Told The Prime Minister…[It’s] The Right Thing To Do”

Yes, the right thing to do.

This is an example of right vs wrong.

We should do the same to the Bushies.

It is the right thing to do.

By jm

May 2, 2007 12:37 PM | Link to this

Nice to see Mr. Wooten has such a low opinion of the Brits. It is amazing that any high profile individual would want to go only to have the service mocked later on, like Senator Kerry (remember the purple bandages, i wonder how many of those good republicans are serving in Iraq), former Vice President Gore, Senator McCain (Rove’s boys did a number on him in South Carolina), former Senator Max Cleland (nice job by Saxby Chambliss) and former Vice President Quayle’s and even president Bush’s service in the guard.

By msteven

May 2, 2007 12:43 PM | Link to this

I think he along with Bushes daughters newphews cousins should go to war.no citizen should be exempted from serving their country.

By stacey

May 2, 2007 12:49 PM | Link to this

No one should be exempted. It would be just like draft dodging. My child is just as important as any other. If he would have to go, so should the son of the President.

But then again, when has it ever been an equal nation.

By Dusty

May 2, 2007 12:56 PM | Link to this

Truth Hurts @ 12:30.

You are ruining my ham sandwich but I will give a little try at reason.

I never use Pat Tillman’s patriotism and sacrifice for anything but praise. That is what he deserves.

The military made much of his bravery and his life. That was very true. They did hold back information until facts were verified, much like your insurance agent telling you to give only minimal information about accidents until the facts are written and verified by police.

I am sorry that his grief stricken family was predictably upset. Is there ever an easy way to tell a family their son is dead? Their objections seem only an outlet for their unhappiness.

And poor little Jessica Lynch speaks against the very soldiers who risked their lives to rescue her from an Iraqi hospital. Now that is real gratitude.

If liberals want to make a big suspicious deal out of the military’s efforts at praising a hero, I will not agree with them. The military method may not have been perfect, but I believe their intent was good.

You will have to be the one who looks for fault in our military to make our President “look bad”. I will not join you. I support the military and the Commander-in-Chief.

By Cane

May 2, 2007 1:01 PM | Link to this

Sure he should not! It will make Combat dodger George Bush look bad!

By DebbieDoRight

May 2, 2007 1:02 PM | Link to this

The notion of service to the country is a deeply-ingrained Conservative position

jbmlaw at 12:11 thinks that conservatives have a hold on the tradition of serving one’s country. BushSh#t!!! To serve one’s country has nothing to do with your political affiliation.

By Peter

May 2, 2007 1:02 PM | Link to this

Hey VAN…………HA HA HA…..HOT HEAD!

HA HA HA……. nice try………

It appears you have little to say but let the poor go fight your WAR!

By Dusty has nothing ...

May 2, 2007 1:04 PM | Link to this

to offer but blind loyalty to and belief in the Bush propaganda machine. Lynch did not diss the grunts who saved her, just the brass who lied.

By jim d

May 2, 2007 1:04 PM | Link to this

Parting from the wisdom of previous bloggers I’d agree with jim and say make him stay home.

But then thats the way I feel about every american over there as well.

BRING THEM HOME! and let the folks over there sort this crap out.

By deegee

May 2, 2007 1:06 PM | Link to this

Harry has a chance over there. Sending the Bush progeny would be the wrong thing to do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWidr0Uwj8E

By Curious Observer

May 2, 2007 1:07 PM | Link to this

I can’t wait to see how much Dusty supports her commander-in-chief when it is a Democrat.

Convenient memories these Republicans have. As Governor Bush, our current president spoke out to insist on timelines for withdrawal from Kosovo. Of course, the president at the time was a Democrat. Now, the same Bush insists that announcing timelines for withdrawal from Iraq is tantamount to inviting the enemy to regroup and wait us out.

So which is it, Dusty? Are you always supportive of your commander-in-chief, or is your support conditional upon the political party to which that commander-in-chief belongs? I strongly suspect the latter, but I’m willing to wait until after the 2008 election to confirm my suspicion.

By harold

May 2, 2007 1:09 PM | Link to this

What is patriotism, exactly? Is it love of one’s land? No that’s environmentalism. So what is it? Well it’s a love of your government. It is a celebration of those who hold power over you. Why anyone should feel “patriotic” is beyond reason. Governments exist to suppress personal rights and keep people in line and in check. Being patriotic is to be proud that your government tells you it suppresses your rights less than other governments suppress the rights of other people in faraway lands where you are unlikely to verify. Fact is, your government lies. We are more suppressed than a whole lot of people. So you can stick your patriotism up your butt.

By Genius of Dusty

May 2, 2007 1:12 PM | Link to this

Dusty wrote, “The military…did hold back information [about Tillman’s death] until facts were verified…”

Hey Dusty,

I see that you’re not one to let a little smoke [and mirrors] bother you. I have some prime real estate in Southeast Georgia that you might be interested in purchasing.

By Dusty

May 2, 2007 1:22 PM | Link to this

Debbie do Little

Jim Wooten did not say that ONLY conservatives serve their country. He said it was “a deeply ingrained Conservative tradition”.

You know. If I say that marching in anti-war protest parades is “a deeply ingrained liberal tradition”, it does not mean ONLY liberals are anti-war protestors.

Assumptions cannot be called facts.

By Peter

May 2, 2007 1:29 PM | Link to this

Well Dusty has pseudo threatened me before, as she stated…… her “Sons would love to meet me……..”

Gee I wonder why they should meet ME ??????……..but I think since she is such a staunch supporter of this WAR…………….She should by all means send her sons there to fight, as she implied they would want too do so upon meeting me…….of course Dusty would never endorse violence to another American…..HUMmmmmmmmmmmm…….

Go Dusty……. send your sons, we will have a quick end to this made up WAR!

By getalife

May 2, 2007 1:31 PM | Link to this

Thats bullsh-it Dusty,

You do not support the military, you support the failed President and his failed party .

You are for pushing the military to its breaking point.

Stop with the fake patriotism, you are a criminal enabler and an accessory to the illegal occupation.

By George W. Bush

May 2, 2007 1:36 PM | Link to this

“I think it’s also important for the president [Clinton] to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn.”

6/5/1999

By JK

May 2, 2007 1:39 PM | Link to this

Jack, I watched the video again. It fell neatly into its footprint in less than seven seconds, even though the majority of the structure was not consumed with fire, which by the way, is not hot enough to melt steel anyway, and if it were, then the outside of the building would have been toasted first, and it would have fallen in chunks. Also consulted with a family member who is a building engineer and a former US military fighter pilot. He says no way that wasn’t a planned demolition. But YOU go watch the video again, Dude. Unless of course the truth is too scary, and you need to have your head in the sand in order not to drink. Can I buy you a drink at Copelands next Thursday? I want to watch Mr. Wooten redeem himself on the “Really, you should support this military effort!” thing. Healthy, well-fed Young Republicans would be a nice boost to our tired, battle-weary forces.

By Cane

May 2, 2007 1:42 PM | Link to this

Hey Everyone; Remember This

Today’s Terror Threat Level Is……..

Answer; A bunch of Crap just like it was Before!

The Administration used this as part of their Fear campaign to scare you fly by night patriotic people just because the oil enemies of Bush look threatning to you Suburban moms and hillbillies.

After Bush got re-elected, you heard no more of that Crap.

Try this for patritosm: No more racism, prejudice, and discrimination.

By Peter

May 2, 2007 1:56 PM | Link to this

Why would anyone believe George Bush will win ANY WAR anywhere, when he cannot take care of his OWN PEOPLE!

How do we trust this administration with all the issues going on with OUR food supply here at home???????

NEW YORK (CNN) — People have eaten millions of chickens that were given feed tainted with recalled pet food, federal officials said Tuesday, though they said the threat to human health is minimal.

The announcement came after an investigation of chicken farms in Indiana found that 38 of the facilities had given contaminated feed to poultry raised for human consumption, and that 2.5 million to 3 million people ate them.

The officials added that they expect to discover that chickens on possibly hundreds of farms in other states were also given tainted feed.

Gee I wonder what Mr Bush or anyone in his administration has to say….

I hear NOTHING…….YES and guess where the BAD feed comes from… of course CHINA……..WOW the country we are the most in debt too……

Gee where is the tough talk to CHINA about sending us BAD FEED…..

There is NO TOUGH TALK….they OWN US……..

I guess we will all just take our chances at the grocery store…..

Thank you for making “AMERICA SAFE” MR. BUSH!

By Dusty

May 2, 2007 1:57 PM | Link to this

Well…

Curious Observer @ 1:07

Give me a “Truman” and I will support him. a Clinton.=.”burp”!

haold aka TofuDuck @1:09

Civics class for you. A little appreciation might help also.

Genius @ 1:12

I already own several pieces of real estate in Georgia, thank you.

Peter Peter pumpkin eater @ 1:29,

Poor baby, when did I pseudo threaten you? Sorry I frightened you. But why do you think my sons would want to meet you? I don’t even want to meet you much less my oldest son who has already trained and served years in the army. And what are YOUR military credentials?

getalife….delete…delete…..

By harold

May 2, 2007 2:07 PM | Link to this

Here are some videos to watch!

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/bbcwtc7videos.html

Go watch them then go take some more medzzzzzors!

By Peter

May 2, 2007 2:14 PM | Link to this

Dusty, you don’t have to “POOR BABY” me..but thank you for the concern……..

I guess you don’t remember all the crap you add to this silly site……OR what you say to folks…….

BUT hey I understand, the administration can’t remember what they said either….starting with Gonzales!!!!!

By jbmlaw

May 2, 2007 2:17 PM | Link to this

Dear Dusty @ 12:04, suggest you allow the leftists to wear their tin hats – we want all of America to see their thought processes.

By Jack

May 2, 2007 2:33 PM | Link to this

I would love for you to buy me a drink but not around that crowd. Nothing will make me believe that 9/11 was a conspiracy performed by anyone other than radical Islamists. If it was as you think, how did they time the explosions? hy did they not do it later in the day so that thousands more would have died?

By Dusty

May 2, 2007 2:36 PM | Link to this

Poor Baby Peter Pumpkin Eater,

If you want to quote me, please go to the Archives. You might be a bit more accurate that way.

Now, don’t be afraid. As jbmlaw said “we want all of America to see their(your) thought processes”.

Yes indeed. I am happy that jbmlaw THINKS that you have “thought processes”. I myself had some doubt.

By harold

May 2, 2007 2:38 PM | Link to this

jack why do you believe 911 was a conspiracy performed by radical islamists?

what evidence is there which you have seen indicating that radical islamists performed 911?

well, easy, there are news stories only. just like the one on the BBC repoting wtc7 had fallen before it did

since all you got is what the TV tells you, when the TV gets caught with its pants down, you might not get even a LITTLE bit inquisitive?

why belive 100% what the TV said on 9/11/2001?

when what the TV said was obviously and readily apparently in-your-face false why still accept it? (ie the bbc woman talking about hwo it had fallen though you can see it hasnt right behind her)

Come on Jack, did you watch 911 on fox news and thus wont believe bbc?

By Peter

May 2, 2007 2:41 PM | Link to this

Go Dusty…..I guess that getting old thing has you confused….be my guest go to the Archives, and find your statement!

As far as a “thought Process”…..tell me how being a lemming has one…….

HA HA HA HA HA ……..

Send your sons…….we need this MADE UP WAR to END!

By Paul Merkowitz

May 2, 2007 2:42 PM | Link to this

Hi, I’m a Ports Authority accountant and I’m looking out my north tower office at the south tower. 9-11 is one big fabrication.

By Jack

May 2, 2007 2:45 PM | Link to this

Harold. Please take your meds. Did you not watch PBS’s Why the Towers Fell? Splains it all. (now you’ll say that the documentary was fabbed too, silly me)

By harold

May 2, 2007 2:52 PM | Link to this

Jack that PBS alleged documentatary was on television long before video archivists noticed in Feburary that the BBC reported wtc7 had fallen before it did, so no, PBS didnt esplain how or why the BBC had advance knowledge of the wtc7 falling or why BBC considered it past tense when it had yet to happen and though it supposedly happened spontanoeously

But why do you choose to belive a PBS tv show and choose not to believe the BBC reporting?

bush knew al qeeda was going to fly airplanes into the 9/11 buildings. that is why they made sure it was relaly bad and demolished the buildings soon after the planes hit, to make excuses for this false war without end.

seeing as how everying since 911 has been proven to be lies, how it is so difficult to see 911 was lies too?

yeah bind laden buddies flew planes into the buildings but that was just the oppourtinity bush was hoping for. an excuse for war without end.

Jack is too scared to look at the bbc clip. Jack can’t handle the truth

By His Excellency Saddam Hussein

May 2, 2007 2:53 PM | Link to this

It’s my understanding American TV has been running a four-year mini-series about a fictional war against Iraq in which I am overthrown, tried and hung. My sons and I love war movies. Can anyone tell me how to order a copy from Time-Life?

By Dusty

May 2, 2007 2:57 PM | Link to this

Poor Baby Peter Pumpkin Eater @ 2:42

Do tell us about that ” getting old thing”. And while you are at it, tell us about YOUR military record. Now when was that? WWII??

Oh, if you want to make dubious claims about my posts, YOU look in the archives and get it right. Otherwise, we might think you are …well…lying.

By JK

May 2, 2007 3:00 PM | Link to this

Jack dear, I didn’t SAY it was a conspiracy, let alone by whom, or what that conspiracy might entail. Why is it when one questions something questionable, they’re immediately accused of wearing tinfoil hats? What I said was, that building fell from a controlled demolition. There could be any number of reasons the authorities ordered it (as witnesses have asserted), not the least of which being the safety of the rescue and recovery personnel in the area. What I DO believe is that there are lots of things about which we are NOT being told the truth. I don’t claim to know what that truth is, but I know for sure we aren’t getting it in its entirety, and I don’t believe we ever will. I have trouble trusting a President and VP who (a) opposed the formation of the 9/11 commission, then (b) refused to testify, then (c) agreed under pressure to testify, but only together, and without oaths or records of any kind. That’s neither my imagination nor a reefer-induced hallucination, but rather an indicator, in any arena, that information is being intentionally withheld. Take MY word for nothing; search for answers yourself and start adding it up. Or just trust whatever any authority figure tells you if you’ll sleep better at night. Your choice.

By Peter

May 2, 2007 3:00 PM | Link to this

Yes Dusty saying all the silly stuff…..I guess I can tell the truth today, I am part of the BUSH family, and we as a whole we ALL lie……

HA HA HA…….. MO Moo

By harold

May 2, 2007 3:00 PM | Link to this

anybody with basic physics knows that with the fire temperature stated on PBS it would take longer than it did for “the structural steel to melt”

the steel would convey the heat throughout the entire building. ever touched the handle of a hot pot and got burned? the handle had the heat transferred to it. same thing.

there was not anywhere enough time for the steel to “melt” given the temperatures described, not that the steel would melt at the temperatures described…

but anyway to believe in 911 is to belive you can take a hot pot off the stove barehanded without getting burned by the handle

so go home and cook up a pot real hot and then grab the handle with your bare hands and think hard about the stories they sold you on

By Beorge M. Gush

May 2, 2007 3:00 PM | Link to this

No Musty, er, Dusty, you are the liar. You said hours ago that you were leaving. So why don’t you go? Huh? Huh?

By jbmlaw

May 2, 2007 3:05 PM | Link to this

Dear Dusty @ 2:36, you correctly suggest I was negligent in omitting the scare quotes surrounding “thought processes.” Mea culpa. In the meantime, I am enjoying the moonbats’ essays on 9/11. Poor, decent Southern Democrat, he’ll be too embarrassed to post under that name again.

By Disgusted

May 2, 2007 3:09 PM | Link to this

Would someone please fix the WTC elevators going up to Windows on the World? It took me almost 10 minutes to get up there this morning.

By Maxine

May 2, 2007 3:11 PM | Link to this

I think he stands to be a huge risk but not just for himself but for the men that are in his command. They could very well be killed in their efforts to protect the young prince. I think it would be in the best interest of everyone if he stayed behind. It would also be a good idea in the future for the media/press to not report the intentions of a person of high profile such as Prince Harry. They run the risk too of getting him hurt or killed by broadcasting his every move and actions.

By harold

May 2, 2007 3:15 PM | Link to this

you neednt be an extremist to watch the bbc woman reporting for 20 minutes that WTC7 had fallen when it’s clearly not fallen right behind her and then have her signal mysteriously break up and then 5 minutes later it does fall, and wonder to yourself WTF. You can still love AMeriker and Jesus because it’s the BBC that done it. It’s ok, they are foreigners and some might even be illegal immigrants.

By Dusty

May 2, 2007 3:23 PM | Link to this

Dear Gush @3:00,

You are absolutely correct. I demolished my ham sandwich in double time. Forgive me for returning after lunch. But…the “company” is soooo entertaining!!!

Now, don’t cry but I am honestly saying that I have to leave AGAIN!!! Perhaps you will be here long enough to read PETER’S MILITARY RECORD, that which he is going to present proudly. Maybe he even got a Purple Heart. Surely we shall see. Au revoir..

By Peter

May 2, 2007 3:27 PM | Link to this

Well to all the 911 crazies out there……

911 WAS REAL….no question about it….SAD BUT TRUE!

Please ask an architect….they will tell you the steel framework has a spray on heat insulation…..about 4-5 inches think..

BUT because of the amount of Jet Fuel on board the, the fire would have been much HOTTER than speck would have allowed for…….

The jet fuel fire melted that insulation away exposing the bear steel…..and YES because of too much heat…….. the steel became pliable and didn’t have the normal strength it would have……….. as the fire moved down the building, each floor just collapsed on itself……..YES nice and neatly…..

This is the one argument I will say Is truly totally silly by those that believe the Trade Towers were taken down by a demolition team.

George Bush may be allot of things, but I don’t believe for a minute he was part of destroying the Twin Towers.

By harold

May 2, 2007 3:35 PM | Link to this

speck is spock’s nephew, right? what he got to do with it?

so tell us, why dont jets melt into steel butter when they crash and burn?

peter tell us, how did the BBC report that an erect building HAD collapsed, and then 20+ minutes later it did collapse?

was it a mistake? well, no. they were right, just early with the announcement. how were they early? do tell.

By HAROLD

May 2, 2007 3:39 PM | Link to this

HOW WAS THE BBC ABOUT 25 MINUTES EARLY WITH THEIR STORY THAT THE WTC7 BUILDING HAD COLLAPSED? HOW HOW HOW HOW?

SHEER COINCIDENCE? HA.

THEY HAD A PSYCHIC EMPLOYED PERHAPS? DOUBLE HA.

OR BECAUSE THE DEMOLITION WAS SCHEDULED? B-I-N-G-O B-I-N-G-O B-I-N-G-O B-I-N-G-O BINGO WAS HIS NAME-O

By Jack

May 2, 2007 3:40 PM | Link to this

JK. Sorry if I misread you my Dear. I trust very few people much less authority figures. I really didn’t think you would share the same opinion of 9/11 as my buddy Harold the Mental. Foil hats work pretty good at keeping the gamma rays from going through my head. Lord knows I have enough stuff going through my head. :)

By Jets Malone

May 2, 2007 3:41 PM | Link to this

Airliners break into 472 trillion little pieces scattered all over heck and back, Hal. Many untouched by burning fuel.

By JustMe

May 2, 2007 3:46 PM | Link to this

Comparing Prince Harry to a hypothetical Bush son is ridiculous. Prince Harry and his parents had nothing to do with the events leading up to the war and they are not politicans. The same could not be said for a hypothetical Bush son.

Prince Harry should do as he likes. While he does have responsbilities to