Liberal Hate Towards the Military... ON MEMORIAL DAY 'Uncomfortable' Calling Killed Soldier 'Heros'

[Anonymous]

OP you are absurd and as usual, taking someone's statements out of context.

The pundit was not dissing the actual soldiers. He was referring to the fact that we tend to try to lionize the WAR by cloaking it in hero language. Dressing up/making somehow more acceptable this apalling loss of life in words that try to make it seem like a worthy, noble sacrifice.

All the super liberals I know hate the war, not the soldiers. We blame the politicans, not the soldiers. We support the troops, not the conflict.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP you are absurd and as usual, taking someone's statements out of context.

The pundit was not dissing the actual soldiers. He was referring to the fact that we tend to try to lionize the WAR by cloaking it in hero language. Dressing up/making somehow more acceptable this apalling loss of life in words that try to make it seem like a worthy, noble sacrifice.

All the super liberals I know hate the war, not the soldiers. We blame the politicans, not the soldiers. We support the troops, not the conflict.

not the OP but as i stated earlier, this ultra new angle at looking at this was the wrong way to go.

one then assumes that people are brainwashed to connect hero with support of a war. it also opens up a whole can or worms which ive read across the internet. for example, ive seen several times people who support hayes claim that even if someone did something deemed "heroic" they shouldnt be called that if its for an unjust war. does that make sense to you? while i may not be ok with the iraq war nor call troops hero per se, i would take no issue with a soldier who died saving 20 lives in combat being seen as a hero. my position against the war doesnt change my thought that was that person did was beyond the call of duty.

bottom line, if anything discussing the concept of hero opens a discussion to places it doesnt need to go and that why im against what hayes said.

average people dont think in these 3 dimensions most liberals like to pontificate about and we (dems) are better off directing our anger/dislike for a war to our politicians. inviting troops into the discussion even for some exercise to look into the matter on some different dimension isnt accomplishing or strengthening the point.

[Anonymous]

this is why only 20% of americans identify themselves as liberal. nobody wants to be associated with this crap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous



this is why only 20% of americans identify themselves as liberal. nobody wants to be associated with this crap.

This a conservative thing, protesting at the funerals of US soldiers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:this is why only 20% of americans identify themselves as liberal. nobody wants to be associated with this crap.

But they actually want what liberals provide. Go ahead conservatives. Get rid of social security, Medicare, and repeal abortion. See how many votes you get.

[Anonymous]

Why do conservative hate this country? B/c there is a democrat in office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Admitted liberal here with the utmost respect for the military (long family history of military service). I find it absurd that every dead soldier is called a hero. Not all of them are heroes. Some are just dead. Hero means someone who has taken heroic action - performed an act of heroism - not just someone who happened to be riding in a supply truck when it exploded. I don't believe that everyone who joins the military does so out of a burning desire to throw themselves in harm's way protecting our way of life. I think a lot of them do it for the money - or because they have no other options. (I'm thinking across the spectrum from doctors who signed on before med school in order to afford their education to poor high school grads with no economic prospects in a financially distressed community.)

Many of the people dying were really just doing their jobs, but not in a spectacularly heroic fashion. I completely agree that it diminished the meaning of "hero" to have it applied to any person who dons a military uniform. Honorable? Sure. Courageous? Sure. Heroic? Not automatically. That should require something more, beyond having had the misfortune to die.

I really do respect the military but I do agree that "hero" is not the appropriate term to apply unless there was true heroism involved - above and beyond the call of duty.

+1

but according to a previous poster, thinking about it on this level is more than the electorate can take and why only 20% of the public is liberal. Fine, I'm part of the liberal elite - I'd rather think not blindly accept things and actually think about them.

BTW, I'm married to a former military member. One who continues to serve his country as a security contractor because he loves his country and wants to protect it. I believe even he would agree with the above statement. Oh, wait, what - there are liberal soldiers? Shocker, I know.

[Anonymous]

I would bet that quietly many people agree that the word "hero" is overused. But they saw what happened to that poor guy who said it. Why aren't teachers called "heroes"? They save kids from poverty, lives of crime, etc. Other professions should too be called "heroes". Military folks who don't serve in the line of combat are basically doing office jobs like everyone else. Why are they "heroes"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would bet that quietly many people agree that the word "hero" is overused. But they saw what happened to that poor guy who said it. Why aren't teachers called "heroes"? They save kids from poverty, lives of crime, etc. Other professions should too be called "heroes". Military folks who don't serve in the line of combat are basically doing office jobs like everyone else. Why are they "heroes"?

Some teachers are heros but many are part of unions that hold tax dollars hostage and provide minimal services or value.

looks like another win is coming for freedom!

http://reason.com/archives/2012/05/31/scott-walker-retains-lead-in-latest-poll

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would bet that quietly many people agree that the word "hero" is overused. But they saw what happened to that poor guy who said it. Why aren't teachers called "heroes"? They save kids from poverty, lives of crime, etc. Other professions should too be called "heroes". Military folks who don't serve in the line of combat are basically doing office jobs like everyone else. Why are they "heroes"?

you prove why hayes should have just shut up.

i think everybody knows in general that not all military folks fight in wars or are good people and even immoral. does that change the fact that in general that as a group,the people that serve deserve some respect.

i can destroy your teacher argument too. what about the teachers that go around fucking their students, or not giving a flying fuck about their profession? they are heroes too?

this is why the nuance and parsing the argument is pretty dumb and why hayes wasted everyone's time with his argument. there is not one group of people in a profession, race, ethnicity, etc etc that is 100% pure. we can all pick bad apples in a bunch and try to look at smart by pontificating about how the one common term used to describe them doesnt apply. whats the point?

if you who wrote this wants to see teachers as heroes, i frankly dont give a damn. im not so anal where i need to point out to you that there are bad teachers out there because i get that your assignment of the word hero are for those teachers that bust their butt everyday to make students better. its the same thing with our military. give up the crap about picking and choosing if the office person deserves the hero label just the same as the guy/gal who saved 20 people. its dumb

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this is why only 20% of americans identify themselves as liberal. nobody wants to be associated with this crap.

But they actually want what liberals provide. Go ahead conservatives. Get rid of social security, Medicare, and repeal abortion. See how many votes you get.

social security is fine , people pay in...if the spenders would stop stealing it. everybody knows the elderly need some system for medical care . Medicine is the U S most competative sector and a engine of wealth ...until Obamacare. What people want is 1)a strong military 2?social security (which they pay for) and 3) medicare or something like it and 4)low taxes. looks like the Ox that will get gored is the Federal work force...slash everything that isnt military/ss or medicare. then tweak ss (later retirement) and discipline medicare fraud.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this is why only 20% of americans identify themselves as liberal. nobody wants to be associated with this crap.

But they actually want what liberals provide. Go ahead conservatives. Get rid of social security, Medicare, and repeal abortion. See how many votes you get.

social security is fine , people pay in...if the spenders would stop stealing it. everybody knows the elderly need some system for medical care . Medicine is the U S most competative sector and a engine of wealth ...until Obamacare. What people want is 1)a strong military 2?social security (which they pay for) and 3) medicare or something like it and 4)low taxes. looks like the Ox that will get gored is the Federal work force...slash everything that isnt military/ss or medicare. then tweak ss (later retirement) and discipline medicare fraud.

Socialist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this is why only 20% of americans identify themselves as liberal. nobody wants to be associated with this crap.

But they actually want what liberals provide. Go ahead conservatives. Get rid of social security, Medicare, and repeal abortion. See how many votes you get.

social security is fine , people pay in...if the spenders would stop stealing it. everybody knows the elderly need some system for medical care . Medicine is the U S most competative sector and a engine of wealth ...until Obamacare. What people want is 1)a strong military 2?social security (which they pay for) and 3) medicare or something like it and 4)low taxes. looks like the Ox that will get gored is the Federal work force...slash everything that isnt military/ss or medicare. then tweak ss (later retirement) and discipline medicare fraud.

Socialist.

Once again you seem not to know what socialism is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this is why only 20% of americans identify themselves as liberal. nobody wants to be associated with this crap.

But they actually want what liberals provide. Go ahead conservatives. Get rid of social security, Medicare, and repeal abortion. See how many votes you get.

social security is fine , people pay in...if the spenders would stop stealing it. everybody knows the elderly need some system for medical care . Medicine is the U S most competative sector and a engine of wealth ...until Obamacare. What people want is 1)a strong military 2?social security (which they pay for) and 3) medicare or something like it and 4)low taxes. looks like the Ox that will get gored is the Federal work force...slash everything that isnt military/ss or medicare. then tweak ss (later retirement) and discipline medicare fraud.

Medicine is the US most competitive sector? That's really funny because so many Americans are going abroad for treatment at places like this -- run btw by an American:

http://www.bumrungrad.com

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paNRv---Adw

[Anonymous]

I'm a vet and i've never liked the idea of calling people heroes simply because they have been killed. Whenever a soldier is killed it is tragic, but that does not make them a hero. A hero is a person who in some extraordinary way places themselves at imminent danger to prevent harm to others. To me all who die in the service of their country are patriots, but not necessarily heroes.