Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jlallen who wrote (19868)	8/26/2002 12:23:50 AM
From: E	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

LOL, jla! The social message one can take when perusing the chickenhawks list does not have anything whatever to do with the principle and tradition we have in this country that the military should answer to civilian authority. Nothing whatever. The civilian authority to which the military answers is of course made up of different kinds of individuals. Some have one type of past, some another. Powell and Rumsfeld didn't evade service, for example. The link makes some points about the pasts of some specific now-bellicose (they won't be fighting now) civilian individuals. The points are more interesting and socially illuminating in the striking aggregate than individually, of course. Patterns are interesting. It is merely amusing, perhaps, that, as individuals, the bellicose Rush Limbaugh got out of Vietnam because he had anals cysts or an ingrown hair on his bottom, and that the bellicose Buchanan got out for arthritis in his knees but became an avid jogger and that Jack Kemp's knee was too bad for soldiering allowed him heroically to continue as a National Football League Quarterback for 8 more years? It's a loooong list. Which is why it's interesting. Check it out again. nhgazette.com There is no tradition in this country, JLA, of making the military answer necessarily to chickenhawk authority! Not that chickenhawks are exempt from higher office! No, we know that's not the case, don't we?! Think Bill, think Dubya. The irony of it all is very funny. Check out how many of the chickenhawks are Republicans! I'm sure the explanation isn't that Republicans are more hypocritical than Democrats; it's likely that they came from families that could get them out of service by sending them to college or some such thing. (JLA, I'm teasing you, you know. This isn't about Republicans or Democrats. It's about some of the ironies of life.)