From today’s Los Angeles Times:
And from later in the article:
What’s next? Jimmy Carter challenging George W. Bush to a fistfight?
He’s right.
I’d pay a dollar to see that! 
Cheney is a wuss. He tries to make up for his lack of manhood by shooting friends in the face and then making them apologize for it, but he’s fooling nobody.
Wow, avoided war through deferments? Bush and Cheney both?
Damn good thing there hasn’t been a recent President that sent troops into harms way after taking any deferments.
Even better that there hasn’t been another recent VP who built himself a ‘bat cave’ cuz he was scared of the big mean terrorists.
Wow, Cheney is taking some major stick today. He called Harry Reid’s withdrawal plan “defeatism”, andReid shot right back:
I am really starting to like Harry Reid.
Now that they’re in charge, maybe the Democrats will rediscover those things chafing their inner thighs.
-Joe
I think the record McGovern was referring to was their combined number of days in combat.
Regarding a certain recent CIC, how many of those troops were harmed or killed? Was there a well thought strategy? What was the outcome? In the end, was it morally just?
You really don’t need any combat experience to lead a nation in war, do you? You just need to be smarter than your enemy.
Bush don’t stand a chance, do he?
But how do we know that McGovern flew those combat missions? He could be just making it up! And he probably nominated himself for the DFC!
In other words, we have yet to hear from the B-24 Veterans for Truth.
dunno. I think he’s done a bang-up job as President Lowest Common Denominator, don’t you?
More of the chickenhawk argument. I have no use for this, as I have said many times. And frankly, I would have expected better of Senator McGovern, a man who I respect personally, despite our political differences.
CLINTON GOT A BLOWJOB!
putz.
None lower; so far, anyway.
I believe that at some point you must be in the right.
You’re right. I hate the term "chickenhawk. " A better description would be “chickenshit.” The two of them have been compensating for making excuses when their country called them by starting a war that has no apparent end. You would think the fact that they’d started planning it in February 2005 would mean they would have had some sort of strategy. If Cheney’s approval rating is 9%, it’s still higher than he deserves.
The Dems need to do a few things, include win votes, and sound-bites like this are what win votes. As long as they are consistent with the Dems’ political and moral objectives, what’s wrong?
Part of what makes the “chickenhawk” argument telling is that these men are sending others to fight an immoral and unwinnable war, when they wouldn’t go to war themselves. Yes, Clinton got out of military service too, and yes, he sent the troops into military action, but he had sound moral reasons for sending troops into the Balkans, and the action had achievable goals.
And Clinton ducked Vietnam because he quite rightly had moral objections to it. Bush and Cheney just chickened out.
Umm…part of what makes the “chickenhawk” argument telling is that it’s 100% accurate.
-Joe