Support Our Troops Weekend

This weekend is support our troops weekend. Now, I realize that most of the time the Democrats don't support the troops.

Most of the time those radical leftist liberal Stalinists are just hoping and praying that the men and women over in Iraq will get blown up by a car bomb or shot by a sniper or decapitated on poor-quality video.

But this weekend we're just asking the Democrats to stop hating, if only for a couple minutes, and open up their cold little hearts to our brave men and women who are fighting for Christian principles against the terrorists and Osama bin Laden and the WMDs.

Please join us this weekend in Washington as we sing hearty and supportive songs and yell foul abuses at Cindy Sheehan and her Communist, Stalinist, Satanist cohorts. Here's an example of the kind of thing you'll get to do.

You could be holding that banner; you could be the one out there supporting our troops! Hooray troops!

Cindy Sheehan — did I mention that she and her shrill little army of whiners doesn't support our troops? Well, she doesn't. They don't. Here are just a few things that she's said:

"For the more than 1,800 who have come home this way in flag-draped coffins, each one... was a son or a daughter, not cannon fodder to be used so recklessly, ... Amazing Grace."

"Last night I had fire ants crawling all over me, ... Physically it's very uncomfortable, but I think of all the soldiers in Iraq who, when it's too hot or too stormy, can't go into town for refuge. As bad as we have it here, it's nothing compared to how bad they have it over there."

You can see the Communism, the fascism — err, the Communo-fascism shining through in these comments. If she really supported our troops she would be calling for more guns, more bombs, more armor, and more MOABs. If she really cared about our troops she wouldn't be complaining about fire-ants.

What I mean to say here is that the Republicans support the troops, the Democrats don't support the troops. Republicans yes, Democrats no. I hope everyone understands now.
quick ed:NB

Article tags

Spread the word
Bookmark and Share
Read comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own
  • No image found

Article comments

— go to most recent comments
  • 1 - Scott Butki

    Sep 25, 2005 at 12:18 am

    This post is filled with so much anger, conflicting messages and partisan crap I hardly know where to start.


    ok, let's start with the beginning:
    "
    This week-end is support our troops weekend. Now, I realize that most of the time the Democrats don't support the troops."

    Ok, first of all, do you mean the weekend that is now ending? Because if so isn't this request a bit late in coming?

    Second, do you have any proof Democrats don't support the truth or is that just when Fox tells you?

  • 2 - Dave Nalle

    Sep 25, 2005 at 12:48 am

    Scott, it's Satire, or more specifically sarcasm, or an attempt at something like that. He's trying to write as if he's a loony right-winger who hates all leftists, but not having any examples to go on he doesn't do a very convincing job of it.

    Dave

  • 3 - Bill B

    Sep 25, 2005 at 1:30 am

    Most good satire gets it's energy from making fun of relatively indisputable truths - especially absurd ones. This is in itself an absurd truth as a caricature of a simplistic view, and as such is good fodder for satire.

    Maybe Blogcritics would consider a new category heading for this article - Trash.

  • 4 - The Fifth Dentist

    Sep 25, 2005 at 8:14 am

    "He's trying to write as if he's a loony right-winger who hates all leftists, but not having any examples to go on he doesn't do a very convincing job of it."

    Now that's funny. Good one Dave.
    But seriously folks, it's hard to satirize somthing that is already a parody. For example, it would be very difficult to satirize the "Airplane" films which are themselves a parody of the "Airport" films. Where do you go with a character like George Bush who is already a pretty hilarious parody of a leader? The people continuing to cheer on the president's performance present an even greater problem for the satirist. How does one make them more stupid and raving than they already are without writing the article in the author's own faeces?

  • 5 - Michael Moore

    Sep 25, 2005 at 1:02 pm

    I feel that we need to be more open minded to Michael Moore's change of sexual orientation. He is entitled to do whatever he wants in this great country of ours. The Right Wing Christian Conspiracy has no right blocking these priveleges. It is his constitutional right. He also should be able to marry Phil Donahue, Al Franken and that other guy named Hillary creating one big happy family. Anyone who disagrees is a racist and should not be heard. NeoCons rule!

  • 6 - Scott Butki

    Sep 25, 2005 at 1:08 pm

    Hmm, was it labelled satire initally?If so I didn't see it.

  • 7 - Fred

    Sep 25, 2005 at 1:57 pm

    This post doesn't have one bit of truth in it. Your shrill whining and rhetoric is what is filled with hate. As a registered Democrat, a veteran of the "War on Terror," and somebody who cares about this country, I hope your satisfied having denigrated my service. I hope you feel big now that you've put that trouble maker Cindy Sheehan in her place. I hope you open your eyes.

  • 8 - Sam Jack

    Sep 25, 2005 at 2:07 pm

    It's satire, folks, satire. It might be good, it might be crap, but read the label. Satire. Fred-- satire. Gah.

  • 9 - Leoniceno

    Sep 25, 2005 at 2:15 pm

    "This is in itself an absurd truth as a caricature of a simplistic view, and as such is good fodder for satire."

    Can I ask you to elaborate? I'm not sure what you mean.

  • 10 - Demi

    Sep 25, 2005 at 2:34 pm

    I don't think it's funny at all.

  • 11 - Scott Butki

    Sep 25, 2005 at 7:28 pm

    I'm sure someone will come along to say that satire doesn't have to be funny to be good but I really don't find comments about people hating America too funny.

  • 12 - Joanie

    Sep 25, 2005 at 8:49 pm

    One cannot claim to support our troops when they support those who seek to destroy them.

    I wonder what Cindy would say if she fully understood that the groups she is now associating with have given money to groups funding the insurgents...oh well, we KNOW what she'd say, "what??"

    As the daughter of a sailor, someone who was raised in a military town, and a member of Protest Warrior, I'm proud to say that I support our troops. I don't have to agree with our government on everything. Not in the least. But I do, unreservedly, support our troops and hope that they come home safely when the job is done.

  • 13 - RogerMDillion

    Sep 25, 2005 at 8:57 pm

    "One cannot claim to support our troops when they support those who seek to destroy them."

    The Bush administration gave the Taliban money for their efforts in the drug war while they were harboring Bin Laden in early '01, well after his attacks on us.

    I wonder what you would say about that, Joanie.

  • 14 - PLEASE

    Sep 25, 2005 at 10:05 pm

    The Bush administration gave the Taliban
    NEGOTIATIONS & CONTRACTS THAT RUN OUT.
    STOP TRYING TO CONNECT THE DOTS & STAY AWAY FROM THE KOOL AID.

  • 15 - The Duke

    Sep 25, 2005 at 10:09 pm

    I would say that War is Hell and is in no way, shape, or form funny, satirical, or common. It is grueling, cruel, vicious, deadly, and accepts no nonsense. Someday child-man, you may just understand the raw terminology, inner secrets and hidden mechanisms humans exercise to endure it. When that revelation comes to you (if ever), you will understand. Right now, you don't.

    War really isn't something to joke about. It's deadly, and it's serious.

  • 16 - Scott Butki

    Sep 25, 2005 at 10:32 pm

    Best way to get the troops out of harm's way is to get them out of their.

    Especially the ones who signed up for
    national guard not combat duty.

  • 17 - Leoniceno

    Sep 25, 2005 at 10:53 pm

    I think it is possible to engage in debate on issues of war and peace while still respecting the hardships that warriors endure. Satire is an element of public discourse; I can't think of anything that should be automatically exempted.

  • 18 - Bill B

    Sep 25, 2005 at 11:23 pm

    RE # 9

    OK. As I see it for satire to be truly funny and clever it must have a basic foundation of truth off of which the parody and exageration plays.

    I don't know your take and for all I know you may be disgusted with both the right and left and thus both are targets in your piece.

    The left is definitely the main target of the piece and for this reason I feel it lacks the required resonance with truth.

    I feel (undoubtedly tainted by my own opinion) that the rights criticism of the left as being America haters and not supporting the troops, while baseless (of course, my opinion), is much more prevalent and "truthful" than the lefts supposed lack of support for the troops and hating America. Thus the better target for satire in this piece would be the right.

    Hopefully without getting into a full blown debate about what "supporting the troops" means, I'd say Democrats simply support the troops differently and don't hate America as much as they simply have problems with or even hate the current administration. Much different than hating America. There are certainly some who do but I'd guess not many do not make the distinction I suggest.

    On the other hand it sure seems like the idea that Democrats do indeed hate America and don't support the troops is much more accepted on the right and therefore better fodder for satire.

    In reading it over again my usage of the term "trash" may have been a tad "rash".

    Anyway I didn't find it humorous.

    Maybe the subject matter is too close to the too real concept of dead soldiers and Iraqies for me to find a chuckle.

    RE # 17

    The piece doesn't give me the impession that discourse is the main point.

    The main point seems to be to portray an irrational rant.

    As far as whether or not anything is off limits, of course you're right.

    But because you can, doesn't mean you should.

  • 19 - Sam Jack

    Sep 25, 2005 at 11:33 pm

    I am unsure of where you got that the left is the main target of this piece. It takes the perspective of someone very far to the right and then makes it sound ridiculous (although admittedly it is difficult to make this perspective much more ridiculous).

    The 'target' of this piece is most assuredly the right.

    If it's this difficult to tell who I'm attacking, you're right, I must have done a very poor job.

  • 20 - NO SPIN

    Sep 25, 2005 at 11:48 pm

    WHAT DO YOU SAY ABOUT RADICAL TERRORISTS THAT WANT TO FLY ANOTHER AIRPLANE INTO A SKYSCRAPER OR SET OFF A DIRTY BOMB.DID WE FORGET? WHAT IS THE SOLUTION TO THIS? SHOULD WE REALLY TAKE OUR TROOPS HOME? SHOULD WE KEEP POLITICIZING THIS WAR? SHOULD WE FIGHT AMONGST OURSELVES? I SAY THIS DARN THING WOULD BE OVER IF WE ALL WERE UNDER ONE PATRIOTIC ANTI PC TOUGHT. THIS DIVISION IS WHAT TERRORISTS COUNT ON, ITS GOT TO END. YOU CANNOT IGNORE THIS MENTAL HIJACKED RELIGION AND HOPE FOR SUNNY DAYS. NEGOTIATIONS DO NOT WORK, THE ONLY ONE THING THAT THEY UNDERSTAND AND RESPECT IS THE IRON FIST. THIS IS NOT VIETNAM UNLESS YOU IGNORE THE PROGRESS AND CONTINUE TO ONLY FOCUS ON THE FEW BOMBINGS A DAY. DID WE NOT EXPECT THIS? DID WE JUST THINK IT WOULD BE A WALK IN THE PARK? ARE WE SO ACCUSTOMED TO THIS IMPATIENT SOCIETY WE LIVE IN? WE SHOULD ALL KISS THE GROUND WE WALK ON, FOR WE ARE FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITIES OF BEING PROUD OF OUR COUNTRY OR MAKING AN ASS OUT OF OURSELVES. JUST LOOK AT THE IDIOTS AT THE LAST PROTEST. THEY ARE ANGRY ABOUT ANYTHING BUT A BONG HIT AND SOCIALIST TO ANARCHIST CHANGE, A BUNCH OF DECONSTRUCTIONALISTS SUBVERTING THE TRUTH TO GAIN FOR THEIR DESPERATE CAUSE. DID YOU KNOW THE COMMIE ANTI WAR GROUP "ANSWER" WAS CALLING UPON AMERICANS BY PHONE ASKING THEM TO JOIN THE "SUPPORT THE SOLDIERS EVENT". DECEPTION IS A DESPERATE TACTIC. YOU WOULDN'T EVEN SEE MR. HILLARY SOCIALIST CLINTON ASSOCIATE WITH THIS SHIT. THE MORE EXPOSURE WE HAVE OF THIS, THE BETTER. WE GET TO SEE HOW CRAZY THESE EMOTIONALLY DAMAGED, DRUG USING COLLEGE REJECTS REALLY ARE. THEY ARE THE ONES WHO ARE TURNING THE WAR INTO ANOTHER VIETNAM AND LOVING EVERY MINUTE OF IT. ANY EXCUSE TO GET INTO SOME TROUBLE & BELONG TO SOMETHING THAT THEY BELIEVE THIER PARENTS CAN'T UNDERSTAND. FREAKIN BRATS NEEDED A GOOD ANTI PC CAN OF WHOOP ASS!

  • 21 - Bill B

    Sep 26, 2005 at 6:22 am

    Alright Sam. I see. Tough topic to pull off for satire imo.

  • 22 - Shark

    Sep 26, 2005 at 6:32 am

    Shark is for the war, but against the troops.

  • 23 - Dave Nalle

    Sep 26, 2005 at 8:53 am

    Shark is referring to himself in the third person. Shark is maybe a little unhinged.

    Dave

  • 24 - David R. Mark

    Sep 26, 2005 at 10:55 am

    Your premise is wrong.

    Democrats absolutely support our troops.

    I know that the conservative noise machine has told you otherwise, repeatedly portraying Democrats as a bunch of terrorist-hugging, latte-drinking, French-speaking vegans, but that's just a blatantly false stereotype.

  • 25 - billy

    Sep 26, 2005 at 12:00 pm

    comment 20 is perfect. since the vast majority of the country is against the iraq war, we should all unify, get rid of bush and the republicans and get out of iraq. we only win with unity and this disgusting anti-american pro war minrotiy needs to just give up and join the majority of the country or get the hell out and go work with the terrorists!

Add your comment, speak your mind

Personal attacks are NOT allowed.
Please read our comment policy.
Please preview your comment.

blogcritics lists for May 21, 2013

fresh articles Most recent articles site-wide

fresh comments Most recent comments site-wide

most comments Most comments in 24hrs

top writers Most prolific Blogcritics for April

top commenters Most prolific Commenters in 24 hrs