Refuting The Stupid Arguments Of Your Wingnut Friends, Part V

Yup, the wingnuts are still out there, and their arguments are stupider than ever.

This week we hear from Mike from Golden Valley, Minnesota. Mike took the time from his own wingnut blog to set ol' Goldstein straight, and by jingo, he deserves a response.

In my prior post, I lamented the loss of the America I remember, the country that didn't kick your ass unless you threw the first punch. Mike responded, "the first punch was thrown or are you just going to let them have that one." This is a common misconception among wingnuts, who tend to confuse Al Qaeda with Iraq. Mike, Iraq didn't throw any punches. If you have any evidence that Iraq was involved in 9/11, I suggest you contact the 9/11 commission. Their bipartisan report found no evidence of Iraqi collaboration in 9/11. Mike, you might spend a little less time pounding the brewskis while ice fishing up there in Minnesota and brush up on your current events.

I noted that the America I remember had the patience and persistence to keep the cold war cold, and kept its nukes holstered until those folks in Russia came to their senses. Mike asked "did the Soviets really come to their senses? Or was it because we made them?" If you'll recall Mike, we didn't knock down the wall, they did. We didn't "liberate" them, they liberated themselves, just like the Iraqis should have. If we made them dump communism, it was because of our patience and persistence, not because fools like you were duped into a war against the U.S.S.R. by an unscrupulous warmonger like the Deserter.

I made reference to the fact that there didn't seem to be many John Kennedy's or John Kerry's or similar men of privilege enlisting to fight in Iraq; that by contrast to World War II and the Vietnam war, the sons and daughters of our representatives in Congress are virtually absent from our fighting forces. The fact is, Mike, that blacks are fighting and dying in Iraq in numbers approximately twice their representation in the population as a whole. The fact is, Mike, that whereas privileged young men like George H.W. Bush, 41st President of the United States, fought in large numbers in World War II and Vietnam, they're as scarce in Iraq as the Deserter at a National Guard base. Wouldn't a draft more fairly allocate the burdens of the war to all classes, most importantly those affluent segments of society that tend to wield disproportionate influence in our politics?

I didn't argue that today's enlisted men and women are ignorant or uneducated; they're ambitious and intelligent or they wouldn't seek opportunity in the armed forces. As for your observation that the average soldier is "smarter and more able" than their civilian counterpart, I must agree. Certainly most of our soldiers know the difference between Iraq and Al Qaeda, something you still seem confused about.

Mike left me with this admonition: "My advice to you is to do your own discovering instead of repeating the idioms of the ignorant." Thank you, Mike, your concern is appreciated. I know that we on the left can get a little strident at times, and so in the interest of fostering better understanding between the left and the right in this country, I'll follow the example of our esteemed Vice President, he of the many varied deferments from service in Vietnam, and offer you a little advice of my own:

Go fuck yourself.