Skip to main content

I love selective outrage....

... like the current donviti post at Delawareliberal that has discovered that retired General Barry McCaffrey has turned into a defense industry lobbyist.

Quoth the outraged dv:

Oh look a 4 star general pimp’d himself out. Why am I not surprised…but don’t read the article, it’s from the MSM and they hate america….


If dv bothered to read beyond the MSM story du jour, he'd have discovered:

1) McCaffrey has been laboring under a cloud since he was nearly cashiered for misconduct in the First Gulf War.

2) He then went on to be Clinton's drug czar, and get into another scandal by playing games with network advertising.

More to the point, if dv had been paying any attention whatsoever during the Presidential campaign, he'd have noticed that Barack Obama literally surrounded himself with former admirals and generals turned into defense industry lobbyists. He even cut a video of their endorsements. I published it all here, but what the hell, it's not important when our guy does it, except that....

McCaffrey was a Democratic appointee, and far from being the exception to the pattern, he's the rule.

Both wings of the Demopublican party humble themselves (you might say, go down on their kneepads) to the military-industrial complex, which is why the three highest Senatorial recipients of defense contributions were Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John McCain.

So if Delaware's former hottest(air) blogger wants to tout himself as the outraged champion of the people being screwed over, he really ought to--I don't know--actually do a little research next time.

Comments

Anonymous said…
This post is a pure beauty. Linking it at the Stress Blog.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...