Tucker Carlson Bow Tie FREAK!

His 800 number if anyone needs to let out a bit of steam on this piece of shit! 1-877-TCARLSON

Why we can't abandon Iraq immediately (Tucker Carlson)


It's one thing when Nancy Pelosi attacks the war in Iraq. Pelosi is from San Francisco, and she represents her constituents well. Just about every word that emerges from her mouth is shrill, amusingly leftwing and easy to ignore. Jack Murtha is another story entirely. The Pennsylvania congressman is one of the most conservative Democrats in the House, hawkish on defense and a 37-year veteran of the Marine Corps. It's impossible to imagine him shopping for soy milk at Whole Foods. He is not for the Transgender Amendment.

But he is for an "immediate" withdrawal of American troops from Iraq. As he put it in an emotional statement on Thursday, "continued military action in Iraq is not in the best interests of the United States of America." Notice the wording: Murtha is not arguing, as so many on the Left do, that the U.S. is unworthy of bringing democracy to Iraq (War for Oil! Abu Ghraib!). He is arguing almost precisely the opposite: The war is bad for us. It's a compelling position. It may even be a conservative position. Ultimately, I think it will be a winning argument. In the meantime, here are two problems with what Murtha said:

An immediate withdrawal would cause Iraq to become Somalia in about a week. There would be chaos and civil war. Many thousands would die. Turkey, Syria and Iran would immediately move to fill the power vacuum in the country. The region would become more unstable than it already is. The White House says it is impossible at this point to withdraw from Iraq safely and with honor. As frustrating as it might be, the White House is right.

Also, a small but I think significant complaint: In his speech today, Murtha attacked Dick Cheney as someone who received "five deferments" in Vietnam. This is true, but unfair. The implication is, if you didn't serve, you've got no right to send others to die in battle; only war heroes get to make war policy. There's an emotional appeal to this argument, but it doesn't hold up if you think about it. For one thing, it wasn't long ago (I remember it vividly) that the Democratic Party lionized Vietnam War resistors as moral heroes. When did that policy change? For another, what about Bill Clinton? And Sandy Berger? Not to mention the countless women in foreign policy posts -- Madeleine Albright, Condoleezza Rice -- who've had no opportunity to serve in combat? And finally, we have civilian control of the military for a reason. We choose our commander in chief by election. This past election, the voters preferred a man who did not serve to a man who did. Get over it.

Keep those e-mails coming to Tucker@msnbc.com

thanks

As opposed to the halcyon Eden Reborn that's the status quo now.

And Tucker? Murtha wasn't implying that "if you didn't serve, you've got no right to sent others to die in battle." See, that's called a "straw man" argument. What Murtha actually said was that idiots who didn't serve, who nevertheless send other people's kids to fight and die, shouldn't ignore and ridicule the experienced advice of people who have actually been in combat.

See, if English instead of partisanship was your first language, Mr. Carlson, you'd know that.

As opposed to what's happening now?

about a year ago on some 'fact finding mission'

He came back pale as a ghost, said things were fucked up beyond belief and that it was a mistake to invade.

Guess his long term memory is fading with the checks from the RNC hitting his bank account

Fucker Carlson is such a tool

:rofl:

Wasn't that why Dan Rather and Mary Mapes had to go? Because they said he didn't really serve? huh.

Oh Tucker, you bow-tied jackass. You're a LAME-O and the cool kids will never like you. Get over it.

is his opinion or the opinions of those he is digesting something to take seriously as opposed to informing the people he has helped mislead over the years?

His modest role(then he would have no job) would be to educate the people on the facts long denied them, the consequences of everything- not as if "staying the course" won't lead to WORSE than what he is whining about.

If he thinks it so important HE can go back there with a bag full of valium and put his life on the line. Giving his two cents on a par and to more victimized audiences than the Dems are allowed to reach is a scornful shame. In itself, much less his ruined ideas.

Let the schmuck run for office if he wants to see how he and his ideas are really valued.

"... withdraw from Iraq ... with honor?! Teach us about honor, TC. Sign up and join the military. Show us the way.

Dick Cheney (and by extension you too) Viet Nam War resisters and moral heroes?!?? Really???



Bush Lied. Peopel Died. Media Cheered.

"A man's cravat should accentuate the loins, not the ears."

Oh why do I take the time

Tucker,

Got a chuckle out of your implication that to find any element of hypocrisy in Cheney's position is "unthinking".

Cheney actively avoided the military, as did President Bush and President Clinton. The big difference between Clinton and Bush: Clinton knew that attacking a sovereign nation outside of self-defense is not only stupid, but is a war crime. And we are reaping the rewards of our carelessness and arrogance everyday in human sacrifice.

So "an immediate withdrawal would cause Iraq to become Somalia in about a week". Well last time I checked, Somalia would be a major improvement. Chaos and civil war have already overtaken the country. And avoiding Murtha's noting that 80% of Iraqis want us the hell out further confirms that the most honorable thing the US could do is exit and do so as soon as possible.

Your cavalier attitude toward sacrificing the blood of others makes it plain you never got within a country mile of a recruiter's office. Please, Tucker, explain to me what is not the height of hypocrisy about asking others to give their lives for their country when you're not willing to do so yourself?

Think about it. Then get over it.

wtmusic

I on the other hand was too pissed, I think it was the cutesy "looky me, I can tie a bow" 3 frames at top of the article that first set me off....so I called the bastard and if it were aired (and Im sure it wont be) It would sound like an episode of Jerry Springer.......you, bleep, bow tie......bleep,bleep.......bleepidy, bleep...........

:shrug: :rofl:

I sense that they are counting the calls. I won't recognize him and give such credit. Ignoring him is our best friend.

speech in which he essentially called war critics cowards. Murtha never suggested that non-combat vets shouldn't be able to "send others to die in battle".

Is Carlson really that stupid?

and it's not complimentary.

Redstone

by the wingnuts. None of us are saying that only current or former soldiers are allowed to speak on the Bush administration's Iraq policies. We do acknowledge their service and appreciate their perspective. We are angered that the right consistently speaks as though they own the military. They don't.
My son is a Marine with two tours in Iraq. He's a liberal. He voted for Kerry. And he is not alone.
All Americans have a voice. And the right's attempt to squash the embarrassment of their chickenhawk squawking must be confronted.
We're not the ones glorifying war...from our sofas. They are. And when we point that out, they scream that we're not allowing their voices. The diffrence is, we really do appreciate the troops.
They use the troops.
The latest poll of military personnel shows that 53% oppose Bush's policies.
Carlson and his brethren are attempting to muddy the waters. As always.
More scummy tactics from the desperate.

...another chickenhawk is made uncomfortable and defensive.

oh nevermind.........:rofl: duh.