# "Democrat" Zell Miller to Honour Swift Boat Vets?!! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [December 17, 2004, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrat-zell-miller-to-honour-swift-boat-vets/280421 "2004-12-17T21:27:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2004, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrat-zell-miller-to-honour-swift-boat-vets/280421/121 "2004-12-24T16:47:11Z")
Its not just the word “occupier”, its intonation, and setting. Look at this tape. Here’s GeeDubya, standing before a screen with the words “The Leader Loves The Heroes, The Heroes Love The Leader”, over and over. When he says “occupier”, he’s got a hoarse tone of a man nearly breaking into manly sobs, choked with emotion by his throbbing love for strapping young men in uniform. (Probably thinking back on his days of desperate struggle with Viet Cong aircraft in the Battle of Amarillo. “Never have so many gotten away with so much for so long!”) Now here’s Kerry. Notice the way he pronounces “occupier” with a slightly French accent! How his lip very nearly curls in disdain and contempt, his stiff and woodern delivery when a _real_ patriot would be blubbering with patriotic devotion and fervor. And notice that gesture? He’s wiping his ass with the flag! You can’t see it from this angle, but I know a guy over at Freep who’s an expert in flag-ass forensics, and he says that’s what it is, and the guy’s a patriot! It’s all real simple when you know how to look at stuff. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2004, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrat-zell-miller-to-honour-swift-boat-vets/280421/122 "2004-12-24T16:53:27Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Its not just the word “occupier”, its intonation, and setting. > > Look at this tape. Here’s GeeDubya, standing before a screen with the words “The Leader Loves The Heroes, The Heroes Love The Leader”, over and over. When he says “occupier”, he’s got a hoarse tone of a man nearly breaking into manly sobs, choked with emotion by his throbbing love for strapping young men in uniform. (Probably thinking back on his days of desperate struggle with Viet Cong aircraft in the Battle of Amarillo. “Never have so many gotten away with so much for so long!”) > > Now here’s Kerry. Notice the way he pronounces “occupier” with a slightly French accent! How his lip very nearly curls in disdain and contempt, his stiff and woodern delivery when a _real_ patriot would be blubbering with patriotic devotion and fervor. And notice that gesture? He’s wiping his ass with the flag! You can’t see it from this angle, but I know a guy over at Freep who’s an expert in flag-ass forensics, and he says that’s what it is, and the guy’s a patriot! > > It’s all real simple when you know how to look at stuff. Yup. That’s why Bush won. Oh, by the way, did I mention that Bush won? The election? And he’ll be the President? For another four years? That’ll he will decide when we leave Iraq, and on what terms? Not Kerry. Bush. In case you missed it. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2004, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrat-zell-miller-to-honour-swift-boat-vets/280421/123 "2004-12-24T18:29:32Z")
Hell, **Bricker** if Bush _could_ decide when we will leave Iraq, and under what terms, we wouldn’t have much of a problem. But he can’t. And he won’t. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2004, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrat-zell-miller-to-honour-swift-boat-vets/280421/124 "2004-12-24T18:38:00Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Yup. That’s why Bush won. > > Oh, by the way, did I mention that Bush won? The election? And he’ll be the President? For another four years? That’ll he will decide when we leave Iraq, and on what terms? Not Kerry. Bush. > > In case you missed it. Just like Johnson did? ::d&r:: ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2004, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrat-zell-miller-to-honour-swift-boat-vets/280421/125 "2004-12-24T19:11:28Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Not the truth. “We are in Iraq to occupy (and subjugate, and get their oil, and pillage, and whatever else …” is not the truth. We are in Iraq to remove a brutal dictator and assist in the establishment of a functioning democracy. What happened to finding and eliminating the weapons of mass destruction and the imminent threat to our security? That used to be the truth. How about ending the systematic torture of prisoners there? That used to be the truth too. But now we’re at war with Eastasia, and you don’t even remember any different. > [@](#): > > Bush’s view is that we will stay until the job is done. We will assist a fledgling democracy take wing, make sure it has the tools and support to survive, and leave. He’s said as much again and again. Bush has NEVER said that we are to stay forever. Note that I said “indefinite”. That means “not definite”, and furthermore, “not even moving in that direction”. Meanwhile, what we’re doing there can only be called, well, what? Got any ideas? > [@](#): > > But the reason Kerry wants to us to leave is he views our troops presence as an occupation, and he doesn’t want to do that. It isn’t really the President’s view of what we’re doing that matters. This war is now, reputedly, about winning Iraqi hearts and minds. If they think this is an occupation, then that’s what it is. The hundreds of attacks on our troops every single fucking day should give you a hint about that. Bush’s view was, is, and will be for the indefinite future, a fantasy. Kerry’s is realism. > [@](#): > > Thankfully, the election results assured his relatively inability to effect his plans. And instead, Iraq will be a hellhole, with our people getting blown up every day by the Iraqi people trying to get us out, and with no end in sight. You’re thankful for that, you tell us. Tell you what, go down to the Guard recruitment office Monday, after your safe and happy Christmas with your family, and go sign up to help. What? You wouldn’t do that? Why not? > [@](#): > > When “reasonable” parses as “leftist” and “easily fooled” parses as “stubbornly unwilling to buy the liberal mindset,” then “reasonable” people will obviously see I am “easily fooled.” You’ve been asked repeatedly to support your arguments, and this is what you do instead. Case dismissed. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Svinlesha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/22d042/32.png) [@Mr.Svinlesha](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Svinlesha)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2004, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrat-zell-miller-to-honour-swift-boat-vets/280421/126 "2004-12-24T19:45:18Z")
**Bricker** and **gobear** : Point of order, if you don’t mind, regarding the debate on the previous two pages. **gobear** wrote: _”The worst my side will do is argue with you, but your party **wants** to enact laws to stifle criticism,”_ to which **Bricker** replied: > [@](#): > > \*” My side IS in power. We control both houses of Congress and the White House, and have for the past four years. What laws have we passed that stifle criticism. > > And if you have an answer: SPECIFICALLY, what does that law do to stifile criticism?\* Just for the sake of clarity here, **gobear** never claimed that the Republican party had actually _passed_ any laws that “stifled criticism,” merely that they _wanted_ to. So the proper frame of reference for this debate would be: how reasonable is it to suspect that the right in general, or at the very least influential members of the right, would like to pass laws stifling criticism, if they could? Speaking for myself, I find that the right has a frighteningly pliable sense of freedom, and that members of the right tend to lean towards a “means justifies ends” kind of morality. They speak quite high-mindedly of liberty when it pleases them, but are the first to strip away basic rights when those rights get in the way of specific goals. You certainly don’t hear folks accuse those who support the war of a lack of patriotism, even though to me supporting this war, unprovoked and based on a tissue of lies, is far more unpatriotic than opposing it. But there has been a non-stop cacophony from the right about the lack of patriotism expressed by those who oppose. Not an open discussion of the issues, mind you, but an attempt to shut down the discussion by means of ad hominim. **Bricker** : > [@](#): > > - By the way, we seem to be operating on a consensus here that the war in Iraq WAS a bad idea. Amazing, if that is so, that a majority of voters gave the man responsible another term, eh?\* With all due respect, this is a really stupid argument. It’s also a logical fallacy, isn’t it, something along the lines of the _10,000 Frenchment can’t be wrong_ school of thought? Anyway, the mere fact that a majority of Americans (or anyone, for that matter) believe something to be right doesn’t in and of itself make it right. Not to Godwinize the thread, for example, but the majority of Germans thought Hitler was right to invade Poland. **Max** : > [@](#): > > - Zell Miller took a hyperbolic point (anyone who ever uses the word “occupier” to refer to US troops in any context is automatically unfit to be president) and spoke on it, at great length, with many examples and tear-jerking supporting sentences and examples, on national TV. And then someone else (gobear maybe) typed one sentence of hyperbole on a message board. And I’m seriously supposed to treat those two occurrences in the same way?\* One of the great strengths of the right in the US is their capacity to ignore the beam in their own eye so as to better focus on the mote in the other’s. Thus, the propaganda promulgated by Judith Miller in the Grey Lady receives nary a word of condemnation, but an off-hand reference to a plastic turkey in a movie review in the back pages of the LA Times ranks its own pit thread. Nice trick that. Good enough to steal! Finally: Merry Christmas, everyone! ---
**Author:** ![annaplurabelle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/919ad9/32.png) [@annaplurabelle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/annaplurabelle)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2004, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrat-zell-miller-to-honour-swift-boat-vets/280421/127 "2004-12-24T20:05:20Z")
Yep…_definitely_ my favourite sin… Happy holidays. Peace and long life. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2004, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrat-zell-miller-to-honour-swift-boat-vets/280421/128 "2004-12-24T23:42:24Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Tell you what, go down to the Guard recruitment office Monday, after your safe and happy Christmas with your family, and go sign up to help. What? You wouldn’t do that? Why not? Not eligible. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2004, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrat-zell-miller-to-honour-swift-boat-vets/280421/129 "2004-12-24T23:47:31Z")
> [@Mr. Svinlesha](#): > > Point of order, if you don’t mind, regarding the debate on the previous two pages. > > **gobear** wrote: _”The worst my side will do is argue with you, but your party **wants** to enact laws to stifle criticism,”_ > > to which **Bricker** replied: Just for the sake of clarity here, **gobear** never claimed that the Republican party had actually _passed_ any laws that “stifled criticism,” merely that they _wanted_ to. So the proper frame of reference for this debate would be: how reasonable is it to suspect that the right in general, or at the very least influential members of the right, would like to pass laws stifling criticism, if they could? Point taken. I agree. > [@](#): > > Speaking for myself, I find that the right has a frighteningly pliable sense of freedom, and that members of the right tend to lean towards a “means justifies ends” kind of morality. They speak quite high-mindedly of liberty when it pleases them, but are the first to strip away basic rights when those rights get in the way of specific goals. That’s why I mentioned control of the House, Senate, and White House. Your inference carries some weight, I agree. But stronger than your inference is the FACT that, notwithstanding their control of both houses needed to pass laws, and the president’s pen to sign the laws, no such laws have actually been passed. In short: if your vision of the right is correct, why haven’t these draconian laws come to pass? > [@](#): > > **Bricker** :With all due respect, this is a really stupid argument. It’s also a logical fallacy, isn’t it, something along the lines of the _10,000 Frenchment can’t be wrong_ school of thought? Anyway, the mere fact that a majority of Americans (or anyone, for that matter) believe something to be right doesn’t in and of itself make it right. Not to Godwinize the thread, for example, but the majority of Germans thought Hitler was right to invade Poland. No, it proves nothing… except that the purpose of debate is to persuade an audience of the validity of one’s position. The audience that needed to judge this contest has done so. You may claim they chose wrongly, but the EFFECT of their choice was to validate the course chosen thus far. - Rick ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2004, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrat-zell-miller-to-honour-swift-boat-vets/280421/130 "2004-12-24T23:58:18Z")
> [@annaplurabelle](#): > > …Happy holidays. Peace and long life. And a Serene Solstice to you as well. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2004, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrat-zell-miller-to-honour-swift-boat-vets/280421/131 "2004-12-25T02:20:52Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Not eligible. You know damn well what the point of the question was, and so does anyone else reading this thread. Your refusal to address it says everything necessary. > [@Bricker](#): > > In short: if your vision of the right is correct, why haven’t these draconian laws come to pass? The bulk of the practical effect isn’t from written laws but from executive action, compliance with the law being coincidental (viz. the torture of prisoners that somehow fails to arouse even indignation in you). One might have expected that point to be clear to you as well, and your failure to address that either says even more. So, tell us, what argument do you still truly believe you have left? \*\*annaplurabelle \*\* and **elucidator** , may you also find the joy of the seasons in your hearts and help to foster it the hearts of others. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2004, 2:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrat-zell-miller-to-honour-swift-boat-vets/280421/132 "2004-12-25T02:30:51Z")
Bah! Bumhug! ---
**Author:** ![Spavined\_Gelding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/958977/32.png) [@Spavined\_Gelding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spavined_Gelding)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2004, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrat-zell-miller-to-honour-swift-boat-vets/280421/133 "2004-12-25T02:37:43Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Not the truth. “We are in Iraq to occupy (and subjugate, and get their oil, and pillage, and whatever else …” is not the truth. We are in Iraq to remove a brutal dictator and assist in the establishment of a functioning democracy. Just like Cortez went to Mexico City to assist the Aztecs in coming to the One True Faith. Conquistadores for Jesus, I think they called themselves. On that note, a Merry Christmas to you all. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2004, 6:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrat-zell-miller-to-honour-swift-boat-vets/280421/134 "2004-12-25T06:58:02Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Not eligible. Well, isn’t that _conveeeeeeeeeeeeeeenient._ Amazing how chickenhawks are always saved by Dame Fortune from the bother of actually having to show up and fight the wars they cheer for. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2004, 7:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrat-zell-miller-to-honour-swift-boat-vets/280421/135 "2004-12-25T07:07:44Z")
> [@rjung](#): > > Well, isn’t that _conveeeeeeeeeeeeeeenient._ > > Amazing how chickenhawks are always saved by Dame Fortune from the bother of actually having to show up and fight the wars they cheer for. I’m fairly liberal, but this sentiment is starting to get on my nerves.\*\* Bricker\*\* may be too old, or have infirmities, or what not. I’m having a little trouble with the implication that only those who can serve should get to voice an opinion on the matter…or have a say in the decision. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2004, 11:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrat-zell-miller-to-honour-swift-boat-vets/280421/136 "2004-12-25T11:46:01Z")
Ain’t the point, **spooje**. The implied preface perhaps should have been stated: _If you were eligible to go fight_, would you? Why or why not? If you wouldn’t go yourself, how can you justify asking anyone else to go? We know what the answer of all the relevant decisionmakers in the Iraq war was, based on their own actions. We don’t know what this board’s own chickenhawks would answer. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2004, 12:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrat-zell-miller-to-honour-swift-boat-vets/280421/137 "2004-12-25T12:40:17Z")
Even if the answer were “Because I’m a cringing, craven yellow-bellied coward” it would make no difference, an argument is independent of its advocate, to be judged on its own merits. This is precisely why an _ad hominem_ argument is a false argument. If one makes an argument about racism, it makes no difference at all whether the advocate is black, white, or polka-dotted. Friend **Bricker’s** personal valor, or entire lack thereof, is of precisely zero consequence. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2004, 12:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrat-zell-miller-to-honour-swift-boat-vets/280421/138 "2004-12-25T12:42:18Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Friend **Bricker’s** personal valor, or entire lack thereof, is of precisely zero consequence. It is of zero value to the discussion the validity/sucess of the war in Iraq, but it is not of zero value when getting at the content of the character of those who support the war. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2004, 12:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrat-zell-miller-to-honour-swift-boat-vets/280421/139 "2004-12-25T12:58:58Z")
The content of my character means exactly zilch. I’m a blackguard, a poltroon and a despoiler of maidens. I’m also right. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2004, 1:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrat-zell-miller-to-honour-swift-boat-vets/280421/140 "2004-12-25T13:05:28Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > I’m also right. Yes, and no. Yes, an argument cannot validly be won on the basis of ad hominem attacks due to the fallacious nature of that mode of reasoning. However, in debates that go beyond the policies in question, and/or when someone just wants to hammer on another person, the content of one’s character becomes fair game. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrat-zell-miller-to-honour-swift-boat-vets/280421.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrat-zell-miller-to-honour-swift-boat-vets/280421.md?page=8)