ebonlock | (no subject)

Entry tags:

politics

(no subject)

So apparently Bill O'Reilly is now trying to start a boycott against San Francisco. From his site:

Should Americans who disagree with San Francisco's anti-military stance avoid traveling to the city?
Yes
No

My response is twofold, first anybody who actually believes a single word coming out of that lying, pompous gasbag's hole should absolutely refrain from visiting SF. We neither need nor want your kind around here, so pack up the kiddies (all 9 of them) and head for Kansas instead. You can actually watch time roll itself back to the Dark Ages right before your eyes! It's fun and educational (and by educational I mean in a godly sort of way, none of that elitist "science" stuff).

Second, one wonders if this boycott will have the stunning financial repercussions of his previous ones against France and any department store that instructs its employees to say "Happy Holidays" rather than "Merry Christmas".

via Rising Hegemon

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Like the chickenhawkish, homophobic fuckwits that comprise his audience have ever actually traveled anywhere other than the local Wal-Mart and Promise Keepers rally...

Travel, IMHO, expands one's mind. Gasbag and his dittoheads would have their skulls blown apart if an orginal thought managed to germinate.

Travel, IMHO, expands one's mind. Gasbag and his dittoheads would have their skulls blown apart if an orginal thought managed to germinate.

Is it wrong of me to admit that I would pay good money to see Bill O'Reilly's skull blown apart? It is, isn't it?

I'll bring the popcorn!

Is it wrong of me to admit that I would pay good money to see Bill O'Reilly's skull blown apart? It is, isn't it?

Yes, it is, because then you look like a complete hypocrite when you complain about the Right making similar inflammatory statements about Liberals.

I detest Bill O'Reilly's politics, but I have no desire to see him physically harmed. There's too much of that in the world as it is. Would I like to see him discredited for being the hate-mongering windbag he really is? Of course. Do I want him dead? No way.

Yes, it is, because then you look like a complete hypocrite when you complain about the Right making similar inflammatory statements about Liberals.

Uh, yeah, that's why I was hoping the addition of the "It is, isn't it?" would indicate the sarcasm there. I think you know me well enough to realize I'm not the kind of person to actually advocate such a thing.

Sorry, painkillers making me stupid. And that's one of my pushbutton issues. You know how much it pains me when people casually bandy about words like "hate" and "kill" in everyday conversation.

Sorry, painkillers making me stupid. And that's one of my pushbutton issues. You know how much it pains me when people casually bandy about words like "hate" and "kill" in everyday conversation.

Given that I'm too wimpy to even bring myself to eat animals killed well out of site of me, there's very little chance I'm going to be calling for anybody's blood any time soon. Even infuriatingly stupid and obnoxious pundits, of which we seem to have an overabundance right now. ;)

Given that I'm too wimpy to even bring myself to eat animals killed well out of site of me, there's very little chance I'm going to be calling for anybody's blood any time soon.

You know, I never actually thought of that as being wimpy before. I've always admired you for sticking to your beliefs in regard to being a vegetarian, even when we've disagreed on particular aspects of those beliefs.

Perhaps "squeamish" would be a better word for it?

Okay, that'll I'll agree with. :)

I can't stand Bill O'Reilly. At all. But as a military dependent with two brothers who are military also, an older brother who was, a father who was and most of my friends who are.... I have to admit, it makes me reluctant to want to visit the city, knowing that there is that much if a perceived bias against military members.

Do I really think that people in San Fran hate the military? Most don't, probably not and I know this probably isn't against individual members of the military but instead the policies of the DoD as a whole. It doesn't mean that it doesn't really give us pause about possible visits there. It leaves an unwelcoming aura about the city for people, even if you don't quite see how it could.

I'm sorry but I'm not seeing how disallowing recruiters on school grounds would make people uncomfortable in visiting the city. I suppose if they choose to take the decision as some declaration of an anti-military stance on the part of the city I could see it, but I don't think that's how it was intended. I mean realistically the recuiters are a form of advertising "Hey, join up, it's cool", if schools try to shield kids from advertising of other kinds, why is it such a big deal in this case?

I completely disagree on the take on recruiters. For a lot of people, the military is and will always be a viable, good choice for their lives. I know for a fact it saved my brothers and he chose the Army partially because of our older brother and partially from talking to those same recruiters.

The military is not a choice for all, it's not a choice for MOST but it is a career/life choice. It's one that a lot of people have done. Some hated it, some regreted it, some love it and so on. But equating it with a Coke ad or MTV really really drives me nuts. It implies to me that there's something wrong or negative about that choice that people made and there isn't. It's just different than ones other people made.

I'm not saying it can't be a good choice for some people, but I think you'd be willing to admit that not all of the people who are recruiting for the military are looking out for the kids' best interests. Some of them are just out to fill their quotas. For every story you can come up with where the military had a positive aspect on someone's life, I can come up with one or more to show the opposite, so I don't really think that argument gets us very far.

Again, the Proposition doesn't ban the presence of military recruiters on campuses...actually, here, let me quote this summary (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/11/08/state/n221356S64.DTL&hw=military+recruiting&sn=006&sc=741):

Measure I, dubbed "College Not Combat," opposes the presence of military recruiters at public high schools and colleges. However, it would not ban the armed forces from seeking enlistees at city campuses, since that would put schools at risk of losing federal funding.

So basically the city is asking them not to come to schools and colleges...that's it. This is insulting to military types how again?

Because it's implying that it isn't a legtimate life choice in the same way that recruiters for big companies or (in the case of high schools) colleges.

I've been debating internally how I can explain this---I certainly disagree with you most of the time, which is cool. But you often bring up points of view that I hadn't considered (even if I end up disagreeing with it) so that's a valuable thing.

Like it or not, the military is a career/life choice for people. You may think it's a bad one but that's ok. It's certainly not something for everyone. But by banning it and NOT banning recruiters from companies, colleges and tech schools, San Francisco gives the appearance of saying "You know what? We think college is ok, we think working for companies is ok but the military? that needs to be hidden away and we don't approve of it." Couple this with protests that routinely have signs that say "We'll support our troops when they shoot their officers" (not exactly comforting to see as a wife and sister of officers) and it adds to a rather unfriendly image of a city. Whether that's the intent or not.

As for military recruiters not always telling the truth? They don't. They should and some don't though most do. But then, I was lied to by college and career (teaching) recruiters too. And as for people being hurt by the military, I've seen people leave college with their brains completely baked from things they were exposed to there or dead from alcohol poisoning from binge drinking or so on. But you won't see me saying "bad things can happen at a college so they should be banned from coming into a school". And for ME, that's the way I view it.

However, this will likely be something that we'll never agree on. ;)

I can agree with you on the Target thing though.

It's probably best if Bill O'Reilly's loyal viewership avoids SF anyway, because, you know, we have queers here too.

And they might catch The Gay and then they'd all stop watching his show, and perhaps move to France where they'd insist on wishing others "Happy Holidays"...and then civilization as we know it would end.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only