Colbert is hilarious
Comment(s) »
» Leave a comment
- Your E-mail address is never displayed. If you enter it, it will only be visible to the blog author
- Since there already are comments to this post, your eventual comment might trigger a notification e-mail to the persons that commented before you.
- The line and paragraph breaks automatically





















Comment by Brooke— 2006/12/21 @ 06:55 AM — (Reply)
I watch her/listen to her ALL the time. Bagdad Amy.
Comment by Farmer John— 2006/12/22 @ 02:24 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/12/22 @ 02:42 AM — (Reply)
EB,
Apologies, but I just tagged you!
Comment by Always On Watch— 2006/12/22 @ 06:03 AM — (Reply)
No I missed that...
Mele Kalikimake, brah! No grinds too much kao-kao, oh you opu stay growing.
Comment by Farmer John— 2006/12/22 @ 06:08 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/12/22 @ 11:32 AM — (Reply)
Democracy Now is my inspiration.
Amy suggests that reporters shouldnt embed with US forces. That would mean that they would have to rely on the insurgents for protection. Reporters cant just walk around Iraqi warzones because the insurgents target them. So in order to do so they would have to negotiate with the terrorists and will be forced to compromise their "subjectivity".
When embedded with US troops they are under no other condition than to refrain from giving out information that would reveal operational security and endanger the soldiers that they are embedded with.
She clearly favors Iraqi terrorists to American troops and is willing to sacrifice her subjectivity in the name of "protecting" her subjectivity.
Nice!!!!!!!!!!
Comment by Freedom Now— 2006/12/22 @ 12:04 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Ernie Els— 2006/12/22 @ 12:13 PM — (Reply)
Fern, isn't it everybody's?
Your "Dickens" post was excellent by the way.
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/12/22 @ 12:27 PM — (Reply)
EB,
I hate to break it to you since you commended my last post so nicely, but I am concerned for your welfare.
It is illegal to call me Fern. Only Nanc and TMW have that right. I'm just a good samaritan and I wanna make sure you dont get arrested.
Comment by Freedom Now— 2006/12/23 @ 12:34 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/12/23 @ 12:36 PM — (Reply)
Whether a soldier says a war is worth it depends on what the soldier thinks justifies a war. For some, a war is to repel an attack on the US. The geopolitical intricacies of this conflict don't raise to the Pearl Harbor level for a lot of soldiers. If that were the standard, probably 90% of American conflicts wouldn't be "worth it."
www.nelsonguirado.com
By the way, how do I contact you?
Comment by Nelson Guirado— 2006/12/30 @ 07:53 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/12/31 @ 05:36 AM — (Reply)
IMHO 9/11 was much worse than Pearl Harbor. 9/11 was an attack on innocent civilians as opposed to a military target.
I'd be interested in what reference you cite for your statistics and whether or not you served. On what basis do you assert that it "wouldn't be worth it"?
Otherwise based on my experience, 20 years in the Navy and how well I know my comrades in arms I'd say you were way off base.
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/12/31 @ 08:32 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/12/31 @ 08:54 AM — (Reply)
You misunderstood. I'm not opposed to the war and I was there last year (I'm an officer in the Army reserve). I'm just saying that soldiers may say that the war is unjustified because some hold on to the romantic notion that the only conflicts that are morally justified are those in which we repel an invader. This war isn't like that and some soldiers fail to grasp its larger significance-or, more commonly, don't think about it at all.
Comment by Nelson Guirado— 2006/12/31 @ 09:30 AM — (Reply)
Thanks for your service my family and I owe you a debt
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/12/31 @ 10:27 AM — (Reply)