‘Democrats hate the military because some staffer used the wrong photo on a website. Clearly you must vote Republican.’
It really is amazing how long they have gotten away with this and how successful they are. Meanwhile, Republicans can be trusted with National Security because they have found a way to elect and keep in power a buffoon who is opposed to military pay raises while getting troops killed on two fronts in losing wars.
Just so we are clear- Bush and company opposed pay raises for our troops, calling them unnecessary. The right-wing blogosphere is in an uproar because Pelosi is increasing veteran’s benefits, but a staffer or webdork used a picture of a Canadian Officer.
Thank goodness the adults are in charge.
ThymeZone
Next to Paris Hilton’s menu for today, I can’t imagine a less interesting result set than comes back from the query “How is the right wing blogosphere doing?”
I used to fly charters with a chief pilot named Don, who would gaze out the cockpit windows on a beautiful day, at the panoramoa below, and say, “I wonder what the stupid people are doing today?”
That’s exactly how I feel about the right wing blogosphere.
Gold Star for Robot Boy
Fixed.
ThymeZone
Has anyone else noticed that the weird image of Fred Thompson over here on the PJM ad looks alarmingly like Homer Simpson?
Jake
It really is amazing that their teeth get stuck together when, for example, Faux Snooze can’t tell black senators apart. Fuck ’em. Fuck anyone who alters his/her/its behaviour because these dickheads can’t go five seconds without shrieking about something.
And since I see him in the side bar, fuck Dick Miniter.
Wilfred
Funny, I thought your link went to Redstate, which also has an image of a Canadian soldier, this time talking to a doctor…about her forced abortion, I think.. What a coincidence.
Zifnab
Oh, thank you. I thought it was just me.
QuickRob
Leaving aside who pays better/cares more for the troops, it really is rather unnerving that the Democrats, who are obviously making a conscious effort to “reach out” to the troops or whatever, cannot even get their marketing campaign right.
Maybe Bush is an idiot or whatever (as if that’s important to this topic, really) but if the Dems can’t get some of the basic facts right, and recognize a Canadian vs US soldier, then can they be trusted with managing the two-front was you speak of?
I don’t think so.
ThymeZone
You’re right, we should leave the whole thing up to Halliburton.
In fact, I was thinking we could just change the name of the country to the United States of Halliburton.
Since, you know, a website photo mistake is a sure sign that a whole political party can’t do anything right.
Right? Isnt’t that the thrust of your very lame spoof post?
QuickRob
ThymeZone
That made no sense. It looked like you were replying to something I said, but, uh, then you went off and started talking about Halliburton.
Are you on crack?
QuickRob
The Democrats screwed up at something simple, but Bush is an idiot and he’s screwing up the war!
Halliburton!!!!
1 + 2 = 12!!!!
ThymeZone
I did? Sorry, I meant Halle Berry.
At least my post was funny. What do you suppose yours was?
I vote for “embarassing.” But that’s just me, let’s let others weigh in.
QuickRob
Alrighty then, this ThymeZone guy is a big infant with a keyboard. I’m taking my toys and going home.
Sorry I wasn’t “funny” enough for you, ThymeZone.
You hide your ignorance with stupid jokes.
Is THAT emabarassing?
Ellison, Ellensburg, Ellers, and Lambchop
Blog Rule #182: Any post or comment that starts with “Shorter” is the dumbest, laziest, and most dishonest interpretation that fits whatever narrative the hack author is flogging.
ThymeZone
Well, I’m on a crack. Yes.
ThymeZone
Well, it happens.
Of course, if you want to claim that your post was serious, now THAT really is funny. Honestly, tears down the face funny.
Well, at least I try to hide it. You could learn from my example.
Bubblegum Tate
Well, not the whole thing–Blackwater should get a piece, too.
Wilfred
Is that a wise crack?
Salty Party Snax
Hey, you voted for the dumb bastard.
Sack cloth and ashes, Johnny! And feed some street people while you’re at it.
Atone! Atone! Your sins are legion!
“My hands, they won’t get … clean! I wash them and wash them and they’re still … dirty!”
DougJ
Shorter Ellison, Ellensburg, Ellers, and Lambchop: I’m a long-winded ass who hates brevity.
jg
It is.
Andrei
It’s realy amazing to me Balloon-Juice still part of Pajama Media.
Andrei
I love Fridays… I’ll try that again:
It’s really amazing to me that Balloon-Juice is still part of Pajamas Media.
ThymeZone
Oh God, I hope so.
Barry
QuickRob Says:
“Leaving aside who pays better/cares more for the troops, it really is rather unnerving that the Democrats, who are obviously making a conscious effort to “reach out” to the troops or whatever, cannot even get their marketing campaign right.
Maybe Bush is an idiot or whatever (as if that’s important to this topic, really) but if the Dems can’t get some of the basic facts right, and recognize a Canadian vs US soldier, then can they be trusted with managing the two-front was you speak of?”
Just to help you out a bit:
F*cking up two wars > f*cking up a photograph.
The Other Steve
I have to admit, that’s rather embarassing and stupid.
But, man is QuickRob on crack or something? Whoa, talk about disjointed logic.
laneman
John,
Please stop making me cry. You find stuff that I (probably just blind-eye as I read it) makes me weep at what this administration has/is done/doing.
Keep up to good work.
Sam Hutcheson
Maybe Bush is an idiot or whatever (as if that’s important to this topic, really) but if the Dems can’t get some of the basic facts right, and recognize a Canadian vs US soldier, then can they be trusted with managing the two-front was you speak of?
A couple of salient points, Rob.
First, Nancy Pelosi isn’t running for President. This is relevant in that her or her staff’s ability to identify stock photo art as US vs Canadian military personell — assuming it would be relevant at all an not some miniscule mistake of a staffer working on the website — won’t have anything bearing on the next Democratic president’s management of foreign policy.
Second, it’s a far stretch to assume such a web intern’s snafu would be relevant, even if it were for a candidate for the Executive. That is, the answer to your question above is “Yes, of course.” They don’t even have to be able to identify Iraq on a map if their foriegn policy directives, handed down to the military establishment whose job it is to implement the civilian government’s policies, are executable and successful.
Finally, the most obvious gain a potential Democratic presidency would provide the country, as well as the military, would be to cease to have a “two front war”, get out of the front that we never should have gone into in the first place and focus on the actual front that is going to shit because the last Executive that knew nothing about the military OR foreign policy got distracted by the second one.
But again, none of that has ANYTHING to do with Nancy Pelosi, who is Speaker of the House and barring a double assassination or some sort of major bombing in DC, will never be the president and thus never have any direct line relationship with the military at all. Rather, she will be involved in funding and pay raises. I wonder where she stands on those things…
dslak
At least Karl Rove has been successful in transforming the running of the government into a perpetual re-election campaign. Maybe we can just divide up the government and subsume all its powers within each of the two political parties. It worked in Nightwatch.
Ted
The ability to identify uniforms with breathtaking speed and ease seems fairly common on the right, even (or especially?) among those who haven’t served in the military. It seems like they really put a lot of time into looking at pictures of men wearing military uniforms. I don’t know why they would want to do that, though.
Zifnab
Until a child was born with extremely awesome supernatural powers who would upset the balance and change the world.
I still need to see the other two movies in that series. The first one was very enjoyable.
Tsulagi
Yep, that bastion of fiscal conservatism just knew a 3.5% pay raise was a threat to the republic. Freedom isn’t free, guys. Not only that, hidden in the Dem bill was language to allow Tricare to negotiate lower drug prices. Evildoers! Everyone knows you support the troops and your country by securing the rights of pharmaceutical companies to charge retail.
Well, even if not nickled and dimed away in fees and charges to their pay, fair chance they would continue to not see their pay at all at times. This GAO report found that 95% of reserve components activated can look forward to pay problems. Often chronic. Which makes for blissful conversations with the spouse at home who is being hounded by creditors, payday loan sharks, and struggling to put food on the table for the kids. Good times. No added stress at all on the marriage or when trying to do your job.
But no worries, guys. The Malkin, Hannity, and RedState uber patriots got your backs. Swapping lemon chicken recipes was getting old in their little pecker parties. Now, thanks to a Nancy staffer they got something new to giggle about. New steel for the special warriors.
grumpy realist
Also noticed that we’re getting a heck of a lot of brain injuries due to the IEDs. Government: “gee, we didn’t realize it was going to cost that much to take care of wounded soldiers!” and “gee, we didn’t realize we were going to get so many wounded soldiers!”
If we were to add in the number of wounded soldiers to those killed and recalculate according to the survival rates we had back in Vietnam, how many close would we be to the number killed in Vietnam?
dslak
I saw the second one, which, although named after the second book, is actually a continuation of events in the first one. I was very disappointed in the second film, though I now plan on reading the new translations of the books.
jake
War is hell. Eggs, omlettes. Sacrifice. Liberty. Moo.
mrmobi
Moo?
Pb
A reminder:
demimondian
Well, speaking as one of the resident math geeks, I would suggest that you’re arguing past your evidence. It may well be irrelevant, but all you know is that they spend a lot of time looking at pictures of men wearing, or next to, portions of military uniforms.
Of course, that doesn’t explain why someone would do that. I do find that very curious.
jake
It starts with a billion dollar pay raise for
the men and women who wearCEOs of companies that make the uniform[s].Adjusted for accuracy.
Redleg
QuickRob (or not-so-quickRob)
The “Democrats” didn’t get the image wrong- some computer staff weenie got it wrong.
Cyrus
Lazy? I am offended, sir, offended. It takes a lot of work to come up with the most dishonest interpretation possible, I’ll have you know!