<With all of your cheerful gloating over the progress of a war you had no part in, of the tons of bombs you did not drop, of the risks that you did not take, please don't extend your ignorance to trying to hang a pejoritive lable on those that do not share your childish glee.
This argument, often lumped under the "chickenhawk" label (suddenly fashionable again after eight years of Clinton), never held any water.
I supported our war effort from day one, and the fact that I'm not fighting personally does not mean I am not entitled to that opinion.
Liberals strongly support massive social spending programs that they do not personally administer, and that certainly they do not personally pay for. Is that relevant to whether or not they are entitled to support such things? Of course not.
Off Topic » in reply to This requires explanation....just whom do you think is included in this grouping?
Re: explanation
The whole thread (42 posts)
- For the "Better Red Than Dead" crowd.
- Another Perspective (a better one)
- This requires explanation....just whom do you think is included in this grouping?
- Re: explanation
- He supported building those bombs...Did you?
- To be a little more precise...
- offered as an aid to your precision......
- Moral 'profit and loss'
- Re: Moral decisions
- Thank you, Robert
- the failure in your logic...
- I mentioned no one specifically. Ears burning? (n/t) (n/t)
- Maybe that open letter resonnated a little too clsoe to home? n/t (n/t)
- Wow, Pub, that's just sour. Someone piddle in your cornflakes? ;-) n/t (n/t)