Hypocrisy of Chickenhawks
If George Bush believes the operations in Iraq and Afghanistan are such a just war - the kind that he is calling young Americans to shed their blood for - Why isn't nephew George Bush III, Brother-Florida Governor Jeb Bush's son enlisted as a soldier? 
Why isn’t either of his daughters Jenna or Barbara enlisted in military service for their nation?
How ironic that our Commander in Chief is willing to shed the blood of other Americans and yet, none of his family is enlisted in any military branch.
Surely the military could find a 'safe' place say like a National Guard position for members of the Bush dynasty to serve their country - if even symbolically right?
This just serves as another example of the hypocrisy that runs rampant among the neo-con elites. They start wars that poor people with little chance of opportunity are forced to fight because they have no other options available to them. They are not children of privilege so their lives are expendable. 
posted by The Voice @ 12:00 PM
13 Comments:
One word : pathetic.
Well, you can’t expect a president to force his grown children into service. Wouldn’t that be their choice once they came of age? Although we can ask why they aren’t serving we certainly can’t blame it on their father for not forcing them into the military.
Schmedlap,
Thank you for commenting but while your argument sounds good, it lacks merit. This isn’t the first place the notion of the Bush Dynasty’s avoidance of military service has been brought up. Many other people have pointed out how it is far easier for our Commander in Chief to support a war because neither he or his loved ones are being shot at. Succinctly put, words are cheap.
You are right – President Bush cannot force anyone – including his family members - into service - they are adults. But, if he can make an appeal to his countrymen to do it, why not make a symbolic gesture and at least ask his own family to join up? It would do this nation well to see the twins, Jenna and Barbara in military regalia atop a tank, on the front lines. Wouldn’t it be fantastic to see Geroge III sporting a pair of night vision goggles and an AR-15 leading the charge against terrorism? Now that would be a statement.
I, for one believe that if any one of his three family members (and there are way more than that who are of military age) were either in harm’s way directly or worse yet if any of their names were among the 2000-plus American dead soldiers – and we both know that will never happen – The president would behave quite differently. Those kids risking their lives and dying over there are not his loved family members.
The truth is it’s much easier for the Bush Dynasty’s kids to drape themselves in the American Flag by demonstrating their, ‘patriotic duty’ to campaign for Dubya to become president than say to put their lives on the line for a war this president heavily advocates - a war that he misled his country into with misinformation – a war he took us into without an exit plan.
Perhaps the best way to avoid dragging America into yet another Vietnam fiasco in the future is to conscript children of privilege into service. Since the decision makers in Washington have clearly demonstrated in the past that they are not deaf to economic influences, such poorly executed wars as the one lingering on in Iraq - with poor results - could be avoided altogether. As evidenced in the Vietnam War – vis a vis our current president, rich people have a voice regarding whether their children will die in war.
In case you haven’t noticed, this war hasn’t been a smashing success the only people shocked and awed by this farce is the American people who have seen their nation’s standing as a level-headed leader of the world traded for a new label, ”bully.”
I support the troops 100%. I do not support a president who lied and who is directly responsible for their deaths. I do not support a president – elected head of the executive branch of government in this nation - who leads a country according to the Constitution of the United States and who refuses to acknowledge the mother of one of the soldiers who died for his country. Cindy Sheehan is entitled to an answer by the First Amendment – “to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” Why does this president refuse to grant her an audience?
As for blaming George himself for the Bush Dynasty’s children, nieces and nephews – who happen to be old enough to serve their country - who never the less elected not to serve their country; the double standard is stark - if you refuse to see it, no amount of words is going to convince you. The real measure of this question is aimed at a President whose own military service is questionable at best. It is patently clear that we live in America where everyone is created equal - some people just happen to be more 'equal' than others.
J you hit the nail on the head in more ways then one! I agree with Beaver ... this is pathetic. But, like they say, like father like daughters! Thanks for posting this, it reminds me to get out and vote even if it's not counted ... who knows maybe there will be justice in the next election.
Yay!! The old Voice is back...and with vengeance!
I was thinking about how embarrassing that kind of picture would be if someone in my family was in such a highly public position. Then I realized, there are no pictures of me like that. I think I voluntarily posted the most "embarrassing" picture that there is of me on my own site. I may not be active in the war efforts, but at least I can claim to be working towards something to better society instead of improving my alcohol tolerance.
I don’t care what side of this whole thing you’re on, that’s just as Beaver and LP said that’s pathetic!
I couldn't agree more, J. Thanks for a thoughtful post.
Yeah, there exists a great paradox in the US where many of the activists against the war are those who are Veterans of other wars, or who have family/close friends who have fought and/or died in wars. Meanwhile, the heads of state, many who have never set foot near a battlefield, stick to a rhetoric that they know what is best and those who were actually have no clue. And somehow the public buys that.
Then again, Bush does think that he did his service (for in his mind the National Guard counts).
As for #3? Kids of privilege in Dubya's day went into the Guard instead of the Navy. Kids of privilege today, I guess, get to be socialites instead of having to go into the Guard. Oh, what a hard thing war is for the politically powerful!!! Someone do something to save that poor boy from enduring the horror of attending dinner parties and spending Daddy's money!!! The atrocity!
George and Laura must be so proud...
Yeah that photo is horrible -- those girls are acting like Kennedys
Attaboy Schmedlap,
The 'distributed responsibility' argument - something akin to, 'nanny nanny boo boo, the Kennedys do it too"
Newsflash: Anyone who acts like an ass is an ass - Kennedys included. What the Kennedys do - or do not do - has no bearing with this current president in office or his spawn.
You are full of diversionary tactics. On the one hand you point to the president's lack of accounbtability for his family members refusal to serve their country. Yet, you then lean on this distributed blame notion. C'mon Schmedlap which one is it? And you call liberals 'flip floppers?'
Good God man make up your mind - which is it going to be? What ever happened to your sense of accountability?
Oh no, I wasn't distributing blame.. I just thought it was funny. They (the "spawn") are all responsible for their actions (or lack thereof). If my daddy was President I'd be in service, because that's the kinda' guy I am. I've got friends in the giant bloody sandbox right now sending me emails after they get back to camp. Sorry for thinking the picture funny but dammit it sort of is, its just joking to show that both "sides" are hypocrites. Also, don't assume I accuse "liberals" of anything, I was a Regan Democrat I admit, but I'm more a "green" by voting record since then. My preferred candidates never got past the primary. Sorry to make jokes but hey, I spent all last week at funerals and memorials for two old friends who were killed just doing their job and I needed to lighten up.
Point I was making is that we would all be embarrassed if they were our kids, and they could be anybody's kids. It is not imperative to have your kids shot to lead in a war, but apparently that at least would buy you credibility in some people's eyes.
One point on Iraq, it got people who were blowing things up in Africa, Asia, the Balkans and here to all go to one place and put themselves in harms way fighting us. They are busy there and will eventually lose there (hopefully)..... but either way it is a way to quarantine the enemy (radical Islamic terrorists) in more or less one area.. And that is probably more good than bad.
I can't believe you "profiled" me that way and assumed I am a right winger who accuses liberals of bad things, hell I met Clinton and thought he was a fun guy and probably would be the only living president it would be fun to hang out and get a beer with. Should the rich kids in America go in the military? You bet they should, for some poor kids where I grew up that was the only way to get to college or get a trade so most had no choice if we wanted to "succeed" in life. But now having been in public service for (almost) 23 years, I got to admit, it still would have been better to have been born rich.
As to my sense of accountability, it is intact; I am accountable for the things I've done, the lives taken and saved, and the future and safety of my community and my own family. I'm accountable for thinking that most rich kids are spoiled brats at that age regardless of party affiliation of their parents. I am accountable for making a joke at the expense of both the Bush and Kennedy family. I pointed out earlier that the pres. isn’t able to order grown kids into service, plus at this point, if they were assigned anywhere that place would become a terror target of incredibly high threat, honestly, would you like to be in the same camp with them or would you figure they were going to draw a lot of attention and attacks? This is not to say I think they would join or even should join up.
I guess I just have a jaded opinion about what makes one a leader in wartime, but having actually been shot at a few times changes your world view. Vaya con dios my friend, I’ll agree to disagree with you on this “kids in harms way” making you a better leader thing.
Lunch time is over, I'm going back to work sir.
Schmedlap out .
Schmedlap said,
“Oh no, I wasn't distributing blame.. I just thought it was funny.”
Evidently, you found it 'funny' enough to bring the Kennedys into the mix – I would say those are interesting people to pick for this discussion considering they are among the most well known Democrats in America – My friend, the only person who appears to have polarized the issue here is you.
Schmedlap said,
“They (the "spawn") are all responsible for their actions (or lack thereof). If my daddy was President I'd be in service, because that's the kinda' guy I am.”
Good point – we agree. I too am that same kind of guy – but this post wasn’t about you or me. It was about the children of privilege. I believe neither you or I fit that, ‘profile.’
Schmedlap said,
“I've got friends in the giant bloody sandbox right now sending me emails after they get back to camp.
I have friends and seven family members over in that ‘giant bloody sandbox.’ One of them is my God son. When I think of sandboxes, I think about children – I have to tell you that metaphor really rubs me wrong – young men and women are not over there playing, they are dying. Blood and sandboxes create cognitive dissonance for me. It turns my stomach. Something I'd prefer to avoid for the next few weeks.
Schmedlap said,
“Sorry for thinking the picture funny but dammit it sort of is, its just joking to show that both "sides" are hypocrites.
Like I said before, I never picked a side in this – you polarized it as such. What do they call that when some one uses slippery rhetoric? Oh yes, “Plausible deniability.” Then again, maybe I should just give you the benefit of the doubt.
Schmedlap said,
“Also, don't assume I accuse "liberals" of anything, I was a Regan Democrat I admit, but I'm more a "green" by voting record since then. My preferred candidates never got past the primary.
That makes two of us. My preferences wash out too. But really, it’s none of my business how you vote – it is your right and I am glad you are responsible enough to exercise it.
Schmedlap said,
“Sorry to make jokes but hey, I spent all last week at funerals and memorials for two old friends who were killed just doing their job and I needed to lighten up.
So did I - Mike and I chatted at the District Courthouse two days before he was killed. We talked about him getting out of APD. We were supposed to have breakfast this week. Believe me, I feel your pain and I sincerely hope you are doing okay. This has been a heart-wrenching experience. I pray for Smith and King and I pray for their families everyday. You are right – last week was a mess and right now I am just angry as hell. Since two weeks ago, nothing much strikes me as funny. I’ll read your post later on and I will probably see the humor in it. I am sorry I dumped on you. It looks like I need to lighten up as well.
Schmedlap said,
“Point I was making is that we would all be embarrassed if they were our kids, and they could be anybody's kids.”
I agree – and that was why I said the Kennedys were not exempt either. Their behavior at times has been just as reprehensible as the Bush kids or even Bill’s kid brother, Roger. On the other hand there have been presidents such as FDR and Eisenhower whose sons did enter into military service. They just don’t make Americans like they used to.
Schmedlap said,
“It is not imperative to have your kids shot to lead in a war, but apparently that at least would buy you credibility in some people's eyes.”
It is not imperative any kid get shot - especially in this war. Moreover, as I said before, if defending this country is necessary then, children of privilege should also be serving their country but the historical reality is that the same kind of poor kids are fighting the lion’s share of this war as they have in all of our wars. There are more to kill and their deaths don’t seem as important – that is all I am griping about in a nutshell.
Schmedlap said,
“One point on Iraq, it got people who were blowing things up in Africa, Asia, the Balkans and here to all go to one place and put themselves in harms way fighting us.” They are busy there and will eventually lose there (hopefully).....
I agree – perhaps it is time to review why these people hate the US so much. As a police officer you are eminently aware that for every effect there is an underlying cause. Considering you use such logic every day – why is it so difficult for you to look into the ‘why’ of terrorism? I mean, if it works in community policing then why not Iraq? Just as an aside, if we had sworn police officers in Abu Gharib and Guantanamo Bay, that crap would never have happened.
Schmedlap said,
“…but either way it is a way to quarantine the enemy (radical Islamic terrorists) in more or less one area.. And that is probably more good than bad."
Here we disagree totally Schmedlap; what is happening here is the enemies are concentrating because we are there – this is a chicken and egg argument. If your quarantine argument really holds – please explain the bombings in Spain and Great Britain for starters. If we are to believe the Whitehouse’s Scott McLellan or Donald Rumsfeld, there are other incidents occurring outside Iraq. Then again they are the ones who intimated the connection between Saddam and Bin Laden, WMD’s in Iraq and the biggest whopper of all time, Saddam’s connection with the World Trade Center and Pentagon attack of 9/11.
Now about the word, ‘probably’ – try taking that logic to a courtroom. “Probably” gets cases thrown out because it is ‘probably’ a stretched argument. I never saw anyone convince a judge with ‘probably.’
Schmedlap said,
I can't believe you "profiled" me that way and assumed I am a right winger who accuses liberals of bad things,”
I believe it was you who kicked the Kennedys’ name into this thread. It is amusing to me that you can be shocked and awed at being ‘profiled' as you refer to it, because that's exactly how I took your remark when I read it. Like I said before, it sure smells of plausible deniability. Again, I will give you the benefit of the doubt.
Schmedlap said,
“…hell I met Clinton and thought he was a fun guy and probably would be the only living president it would be fun to hang out and get a beer with.”
Having a beer with him and voting for him as president are two different things. And, to borrow your line - Hell, I’d probably enjoy clearing brush with Dubya and his chainsaw. That does not mean I’d vote for him though.
Schmedlap said,
“Should the rich kids in America go in the military? You bet they should, for some poor kids where I grew up that was the only way to get to college or get a trade so most had no choice if we wanted to "succeed" in life.”
So we do agree, the brunt of this war is being fought by poor kids.
Schmedlap said,
“But now having been in public service for (almost) 23 years, I got to admit, it still would have been better to have been born rich.”
We agree – no argument there.
Schmedlap said,
“As to my sense of accountability, it is intact; I am accountable for the things I've done, the lives taken and saved, and the future and safety of my community and my own family. I'm accountable for thinking that most rich kids are spoiled brats at that age regardless of party affiliation of their parents. I am accountable for making a joke at the expense of both the Bush and Kennedy family.”
Friend, I never questioned your accountability - ever. I never meant to impugn your integrity. If you took it as such, then I apologize. Please review what I originally asked. You are taking the question out of context or you are being duplicitous. I don’t know which. I am opting for the former. Judging from our past dialogue, you have given me no reason to disbelieve you.
The question was; do you believe in accountability of the president? And, Do you agree the Bush kids are responsible for their actions? – regardless of what the Kennedys have done in the distant past?
Schmedlap said,
“ I pointed out earlier that the pres. isn’t able to order grown kids into service, plus at this point, if they were assigned anywhere that place would become a terror target of incredibly high threat, honestly, would you like to be in the same camp with them or would you figure they were going to draw a lot of attention and attacks? This is not to say I think they would join or even should join up.”
I already covered that – I suggested they could do like their father – join a national guard and simply not show up - rich kids apparently can do that. When poor kids do the same thing, it is called, desertion. But I digress... Like I said before, if even one of the younger Bush Dynasty signed up, at least there could be a much needed photo-op for Dubya whose approval ratings are swirling in the toilet these days.
Schmedlap said,
“I guess I just have a jaded opinion about what makes one a leader in wartime, but having actually been shot at a few times changes your world view.
Indeed being shot at does have an effect on your outlook. So does being lied to, spit at and mistrusted at every turn. However, remember the caveat emptor in the police Academy? If you don’t want to get hit with a baseball, don’t go to a baseball game – knowing the risks places the person making such decisions in control – there is an attendant risk to being at baseball games – just as there is an associated risk with being a police officer.
Being shot at, spit upon, struck, lied to and yes, even thanked and appreciated are all part of being a police officer. The rewards far outweigh the disadvantages in my opinion. I have never had a complaint about that. I’ve never been the ‘woe is me’ sad sack type and before you take exception to that remark, I am not accusing you of being that either. I really don’t think our world views are all that much different.
Schmedlap said,
“Vaya con dios my friend, I’ll agree to disagree with you on this “kids in harms way” making you a better leader thing.”
Yes, we disagree. I am okay with that. We just do not agree and that is fine because that is what made this country great.
Schmedlap said,
“…Lunch time is over, I'm going back to work sir.
Schmedlap out .
I wish you well too and thank you for what you do. No one ever realizes how dangerous the job is until something as sobering as King and Smith's deaths visits us. But, knowing Mike King, and – according to what he told me that two Wednesdays ago - as he smiled after I ranted about how dangerous the job is; police work is indeed a thankless job but, Mike still felt the need to be there. He did so because it is a tremendously rewarding job as well.
Two weeks ago, Officers Smith and King lost their lives being of service to Humanity. I respect both of those men and I admire their courage for doing a job that could spirit them away so quickly and so finally. It doesn’t make you or I or their families miss them any less. God bless those two fallen officers. May we all look forward to meeting up with them again in heaven some day. And God bless our officers on the street as well – may they all be safe as well.
Be safe out there Schmedlap – I respect you for your words and your dedication. Thanks for spending your lunch break here. It was great.
Vaya con Dios mi amigo
Whew .. I am glad I came back. That was some interesting dialouge going on there ...
Post a Comment
<< Home