Reagan: "Dems fine with being 'surrender monkeys'"
You might like to think that the Courier carries this moron to prove there's someone the editors can point to who's so far out to the right that they, by comparison, appear centrist. Then you look at the original ("Going Wobbly," May 10), compare it against the Courier's changes and the choice of headline, and it's hard not to conclude that the editors think Mike Reagan isn't quite right-wing enough and they need to punch him up a bit.
What's interesting is that Reagan's tortured-pretzel logic and bug-crazy hysteria is so easy to see for what it is, you gotta wonder why the Courier editors don't see it as well.
There are plenty of sane writers on the right to choose from, and that's the path to credibility for the Courier. Do the editors care?
1 comment:
Mike Reagan is yet another chickenhawk: that is to say, someone who believes strongly in using our military to crush opposing factions in the world and yet, he himself "had other things to do at the time" and never served.
Is this hair-splitting? If you've ever:
1. felt your sphinter crinkle as rounds went past your K-pot
2. considered that its good that the civilians boss the guys with the guns in our country
3. realized that the job of these civilians is not to piss away our troop's lives to solve problems they weren't man enough to solve on their own
You may have come to the realization that we are fighting the wrong war against way more than our actual enemy.
No Iraqis attacked our country on 9/11. No WMA's have ever been found in Iraq. The Iraqi leadership was from the complete opposite side of the Shia/Sunni dogfight as Al-Queda. They aren't now.
And, as I've been pointing this out: Mike Reagan cashed another paycheck for providing ideological reasons to stay in Iraq, fighting the wrong fight.
A much larger paycheck than he would have received had he ever stood in harm's way in uniform.
-Andrew Johnson-Schmit, vet
1LT, IN
Post a Comment