I don’t understand the word “human” to mean “degraded”, so admitting our troops are “human” is easy for me – and does not convey quite the meaning Gilda may have wanted.

…who gave angry and misinformed editorial replies on “Weekend Update” on topics such as “sax and violins on television”, the “Eagle Rights Amendment”, “presidential erections” and “protecting endangered feces”. Once corrected on her misunderstanding, Litella would end her segment with a polite “Never mind”…

That’s the tribute I had in mind, in picking up Peter’s invention. But I notice our Gilda lacks the courtesy, or rationality or something, to get as far as saying “…Never mind”

Regards,
Peter H.

Actually, gilda (since I’m the one that coined your moniker), it is more like the reference to Veronica Lake’s movie of the same name. You are both blinded by your own vanity and can’t see past your own eyelids.

Checkmate.

Regards,
Peter H.

gilduh’s increasingly shrill and desperate defense of Beauchamps’s smear

and

9-11 Twoofers’ (comments) Denouncing The History Channel’s Tear-Down of their insane conspiracy theories.

…[Beauchamp’s] narratives showed that indeed soldiers are humans subject to the same frailties as anyone else. Which is all liberals want conservatives to acknowledge.

I said, as I have said many times in the past, in different (or various) words:

I hereby explicitly acknowledge… that “indeed soldiers are humans subject to the same frailties as anyone else.”

Was Gilda satisfied? Was that, indeed, “all [that] liberals want conservatives to acknowledge”? No. That Gilda has a further and different agenda was obvious to most of us all along – and, should now be obvious to Gilda.

But of course, it still isn’t obvious to her. Gilda went on to claim with a straight face:

If [Beauchamp] would have wrote the John Wayne type narrative that [Gilda imagines] the right wants to hear, TNR still would have printed it.

Iraq, at the moment, is overflowing with budding soldier-authors and soldier-journalists. Dozens, if not hundreds, of them have made names for themselves as honest, skilled and articulate non-fiction bloggers (i.e., samples of their work are readily available). Whether by design or mere sloth, TNR located and chose the one blogger who (we now know from astounding admissions on his own blog) had joined the military because he hated it, and wanted to be able to write more convincing anti-military fiction. And who had practiced what he would be saying in his “Iraq diaries” while he was still in Germany.

What a coincidence, that TNR found that one. Or, as respected milblogger John Noonan has said it better:

…of the 160k troops in Iraq, TNR choose a real dirtball to serve as their correspondent. When other soldiers are out building schools, providing medical care, and running security operations for the Iraqi people, TNR decided to highlight a real slug of a mechanic who mocks the disfigured and disrespects the dead for kicks.

Anti-war veterans have no problem seeing through Beauchamp. As Richard Peters of Iraq Veterans Against the War has put it:

…“case closed” on this Scott Thomas [Beauchamp] fellow. People like him really get under my skin. The trouble with the antiwar movement is one of image, when losers like him spread elaborate lies it only weakens that image and the message is lost.

So Gilda, what’s your problem? Mmmm… sweet, sweet crazy.

And NDT, I have never degenerated the mil.
You charging that is proof yet again of your countless lies.
Why don’t you hold yourself to the same standard as you have held Beauchamp ?

Let’s face it — Beauchamp’s writings had a particular point of view, and one that appealed to TNR’s editors. Beauchamp wanted to write about how the war dehumanized American soldiers, and he wasn’t content to write non-fiction to make that point. TNR’s editors didn’t care to fact-check his exaggerations and outright fiction, probably because, as Chait suggests, they found Beauchamp edifying.

– Captains Quarters

So this is “idol worship”.

They are highly trained professionals who volunteered and have gone through an exhaustive program to develop and hone their skills, their capabilities, and their ability to deal with dangerous and hostile situations.

The fact that you scream and whine about that statement demonstrates rather convincingly that this is not about you “humanizing” the military; it is about you denigrating them, their training, their organization, and their performance under the guise of “caring”.

Put bluntly, you are trying to drag them down to your pathetic level — even if you have to slander and lie about them to do it.

I’ve no idea what you’re talking about with this “idol worship” nonsense. We have pointed out the a**holes including Young, Kerry, Murtha etc. Yes it’s disappointing, but the reality is that not all of our soldiers are like that.

You and other liberals, however, want us to believe that they’re all a**holes. You hate them no matter how “human” or “frail” they are. If you did give a damn about them, you wouldn’t cheerlead for douchebags who try to use them as pawns in a political game and you wouldn’t molest yourself with casualty reports.

Consistently denying the large body of evidence against Beauchamp leaves you clinging to a very thin thread, and demonstrates how desperately you need to preserve the fantasy that allows you to spit on the troops.

What? Like Lilli Von Shtupp?