# Ben Stein telling it like it is...



## The Gabba Goul (Feb 11, 2005)

I just came across this article that was written by Ben Stein...I'm sure I'll get jumped on for posting this...but, I find that for the most part it is very true...I dont necessarily aggree with his assessment of big oil "doing their best"...but as far as his views on Hollywood...I think that he's 100% spot on...

_Now for a few humble thoughts about the Oscars.

I did not see every second of it, but my wife did, and she joins me in noting that there was not one word of tribute, not one breath, to our fighting men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan or to their families or their widows or orphans. There were pitifully dishonest calls for peace -- as if the people we are fighting were interested in any peace for us but the peace of the grave. But not one word for the hundreds of thousands who have served and are serving, not one prayer or moment of silence for the dead and maimed.

Basically, the sad truth is that Hollywood does not think of itself as part of America, and so, to Hollywood, the war to save freedom from Islamic terrorists is happening to someone else. It does not concern them except insofar as it offers occasion to mock or criticize George Bush. They live in dreamland and cannot be gracious enough to thank the men and women who pay with their lives for the stars' ability to live in dreamland. This is shameful.

The idea that it is brave to stand up for gays in Hollywood, to stand up against Joe McCarthy in Hollywood (fifty years after his death), to say that rich white people are bad, that oil companies are evil -- this is nonsense. All of these are mainstream ideas in Hollywood, always have been, always will be. For the people who made movies denouncing Big Oil, worshiping gays, mocking the rich to think of themselves as brave -- this is pathetic, childish narcissism.

The brave guy in Hollywood will be the one who says that this is a fabulously great country where we treat gays, blacks, and everyone else as equal. The courageous writer in Hollywood will be the one who says the oil companies do their best in a very hostile world to bring us energy cheaply and efficiently and with a minimum of corruption. The producer who really has guts will be the one who says that Wall Street, despite its flaws, has done the best job of democratizing wealth ever in the history of mankind.

No doubt the men and women who came to the Oscars in gowns that cost more than an Army Sergeant makes in a year, in limousines with champagne in the back seat, think they are working class heroes to attack America -- which has made it all possible for them. They are not. They would be heroes if they said that Moslem extremists are the worst threat to human decency since Hitler and Stalin. But someone might yell at them or even attack them with a knife if they said that, so they never will.

Hollywood is above all about self: self-congratulation, self-promotion, and above all, self-protection. This is human and basic, but let's not kid ourselves. There is no greatness there in the Kodak theater. The greatness is on patrol in Kirkuk. The greatness lies unable to sleep worrying about her man in Mosul. The greatness sleeps at Arlington National Cemetery and lies waiting for death in VA Hospitals. God help us that we have sunk so low as to confuse foolish and petty boasting with the real courage that keeps this nation and the many fools in it alive and flourishing on national TV._

...forgive the politically motivated post (I usually try to remain neutral on such things)...but I've been saying the same exact thing as Mr. Stein for some time now...I'm glad I'm not the only one who is repulsed by Hollywood and thier nonsense...

*****
[image]https://radio.weblogs.com/0119318/Screenshots/rose.jpg[/image]"See...What I'm gonna do is wear a shirt only once, and then give it right away to the laundry...eh?
A new shirt every day!!!"​


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

GG,

Ben Stein is a national treasure and what he wrote is spot on. Few people know he began his career in the Nixon White House but for those of us of a certain age we will always remember him as the monotone voice taking roll - "Bueller, Bueller?"


Karl


----------



## jamgood (Feb 8, 2006)

Mr. Stein used to gush about Hollywood in _The American Spectator_ years ago. Seems he's altered his view of tinseltown.

My favorite is the environmental activist Laurie David, wife of Larry David of "Sienfeld" wealth. She reportedly drives a Prius, but jets around in private Gulfstreams. Seems "Gulfstream Liberal" has replaced the now declasse "Limousine Liberal".

...................................................................................................
Southern Semi-literate Rural Rustic Cou Rouge www.scotshistoryonline.co.uk/********/********.html

jamgood on ebay > https://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZjamgoodQQhtZ-!


----------



## Thomas (Jan 30, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by James C. Goodwin_
> 
> Mr. Stein used to gush about Hollywood in _The American Spectator_ years ago. Seems he's altered his view of tinseltown.


Here is the last article Ben Stein wrote for E! explaining his change of view on Hollywood:
https://www.eonline.com/Gossip/Morton/Archive/2003/031220.html
"I no longer think Hollywood stars are terribly important. They are uniformly pleasant, friendly people, and they treat me better than I deserve to be treated. But a man or woman who makes a huge wage for memorizing lines and reciting them in front of a camera is no longer my idea of a shining star we should all look up to."

My thoughts exactly.


----------



## odoreater (Feb 27, 2005)

Couldn't agree more with Ben Stein. It's really a shame that nobody stepped up to honor our troops. 

Aside: was I the only one who read this to himself in the Ben Stein voice?


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

Ben Stein's greatest moment was repeating the word "Bueller" in a dull monotone in a Hollywood movie.

Other than that he is a self-important prig who seems to think a movie awards show should be dedicated to whatever his current cause celebre is. Amusing that he descibes his thoughts as humble - I can think of several other words for them.....

Boring. Next right wing rant please!

------------------


----------



## odoreater (Feb 27, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by gmac_
> 
> Ben Stein's greatest moment was repeating the word "Bueller" in a dull monotone in a Hollywood movie.
> 
> ...


You're forgetting his role as the host of "Win Ben Stein's Money" and his various appearances on Saved by the Bell.


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

Yes - fascinating. How many times during 'Win Ben Stein's Money' were there such moments of silence? How much of Ben Stein's money is manipulated by tax-evasion professionals in order to avoid funding those very 'patrols in Kirkuk'?


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Gmac,

I think we all agree that you are an expert when it comes to self important prigs. Is there anyone or anything (save your wife and children) that you like? The Gmac seal of approval seems as rare a Nessie sighting.

JLPWCXIII - a bit disappointing from you! Now obeying the tax code is immoral or are you accussing Mr. Stein of tax evasion? Did you take any deductions on your road to serfdom?

Karl


----------



## jeansguy (Jul 29, 2003)

> quote:_Originally posted by gmac_
> 
> Ben Stein's greatest moment was repeating the word "Bueller" in a dull monotone in a Hollywood movie.
> 
> ...


Wow...you just don't get along well with anybody.

If you don't support the US troops in Iraq, do you at least support the Canadian troops in Afghanistan? Or is that just a quest for oil and power too?

www.thegenuineman.com


----------



## I_Should_Be_Working (Jun 23, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by gmac_
> 
> Ben Stein's greatest moment was repeating the word "Bueller" in a dull monotone in a Hollywood movie.
> 
> ...


Next rant, come on. I think even you could admit these comments approach ranting. Take the observation on its face value: no one at the Oscars mentioned the troops. That is a fact, something worthy of discussion given Hollywoods tendency to comment on everything.

***Warning: Contains Rant*** We can be all but certain if some cop killing gang member cum Group hug Islamic socialist was on death row, the ribbon brigade would be out in full force.***Rant Completed***

Take away Ben Stein. Ignore the clutter and static. Does Hollywood consider our troops to be lacking in buzz?.


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by I_Should_Be_Working_
> 
> Take the observation on its face value: no one at the Oscars mentioned the troops. That is a fact, something worthy of discussion given Hollywoods tendency to comment on everything.


I played soccer last night (and scored twice!) and in the pub after nobody mentioned the troops _once_! Alert Ben Stein!

Conversely, I have yet to have any Hollywood producer contact me regarding my match winning performance and making it into a move, despite Hollywood's tendency to comment on everything.



> quote:_Originally posted by I_Should_Be_Working_
> ***Warning: Contains Rant*** We can be all but certain if some cop killing gang member cum Group hug Islamic socialist was on death row, the ribbon brigade would be out in full force.***Rant Completed***


A comment as tediously stupid as anything we could expect from Mr Stein.

------------------


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Karl89_
> 
> Gmac,
> 
> I think we all agree that you are an expert when it comes to self important prigs.


This section of AAAC has certainly broadened my knowledge of that particular category and be assured you can take some of the credit for that Karl.



> quote:_Originally posted by Karl89_
> 
> Is there anyone or anything (save your wife and children) that you like? The Gmac seal of approval seems as rare a Nessie sighting.


Its not handed out lightly, let me assure you of that, and clowns like Ben Stein are unlikely to ever receive it.

What are you looking for, a list of those I approve of? Or the criteria by which they may reach that exalted status?

------------------


----------



## J. Homely (Feb 7, 2006)

I can't say I'm positive, but I could swear I remember some respectful mention of the troops on that broadcast. But if not, he's absolutely right to say it should have been included. There should be much less hollow railing against "The Man" and more positive action. But that's not a Hollywood affliction, particularly.

Having said that, Stein's own whining and generic "Hollywood"-bashing is embarrassing for a man of his intelligence. It's now fashionable for "rich white guys" to take their turn at wallowing in victimhood. Gah.


----------



## I_Should_Be_Working (Jun 23, 2005)

> quote:
> 
> A comment as tediously stupid as anything we could expect from Mr Stein.
> 
> ------------------


Did I not at least use a disclaimer? I'm sure if the troops were devout buddhist vegetarians they'd at least garner a comment from Richard Gere.


----------



## J. Homely (Feb 7, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by I_Should_Be_Working_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No, because even a whiny, cynical, Bush-hating, red-tinged blue-state Hollywood liberal draws a distinction between supporting the troops and supporting the war. This idea that 'Hollywood' hates America or that they're is 'out of touch' with 'American values' is simplistic, limp and childish.


----------



## I_Should_Be_Working (Jun 23, 2005)

Despite more than a few asserting eminent moves to France following various elections, I don't believe Hollywood "hates America". More than a handful of those typically thought of as left leaning have given generously of their time by entertaining the troops. Robin Williams, for instance, doesn't come to mind when I think of conservative, but I know he has made many trips abroad. 

I do believe, however, that "supporting the troops" is a bit too pedestrian of a cause for many of these types. It needs an angle, originality, and some buzz. Dalai Lama, yes. The Pope, no. Cop killers, yes. Inside traders, no.


----------



## J. Homely (Feb 7, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by I_Should_Be_Working_
> I do believe, however, that "supporting the troops" is a bit too pedestrian of a cause for many of these types.


Hardly a "Hollywood" or "leftist" issue. It's an awards show. I don't think many 'tributes to the troops' were going on most elite social events anywhere, including those with right-heavy guest lists. So BS' (heh) shrill carping just rings hollow.

I think what's behind this is that he showed up for his first major part in some big Hollywood film, and heard the director screaming into the phone at an agent: "Who the hell is this clown? I said "STILLER, you idiot! STILLER!"


----------



## Srynerson (Aug 26, 2005)

> quote:But not one word for the hundreds of thousands who have served and are serving, not one prayer or moment of silence for the dead and maimed.
> 
> Basically, the sad truth is that Hollywood does not think of itself as part of America, and so, to Hollywood, the war to save freedom from Islamic terrorists is happening to someone else.


Others have already commented on this point, but I'll simply chip in that this is one of the stupidest statements I've ever seen. I attended a banquet last week honoring a law professor at my alma matter for forty years of teaching and there was no mention of military personnel or moment of silence/prayer. Does this mean that the Colorado legal community "does not think of itself as part of America"? And when I attend a BBQ tomorrow, I guess I'll have to demand that my host call for a moment of silence or I'll be forced to walk out on an un-American gathering.


----------



## mpcsb (Jan 1, 2005)

I guess the difference between Ben Stein and Michael Moore is that they are on opposite sides...of the same coin. That coin coin being radical fringe.


----------



## I_Should_Be_Working (Jun 23, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Srynerson_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You are clearly missing the point. The Oscars ceremony is an annual event aiming to attract the attention of millions both here and abroad. The event has been known as a platform for making social statements and tributes for many years. More than a few involved saw fit to criticize the current president the past several years, and countless causes have been hawked having varying degrees of relevance. I seriously doubt some came forward at the banquet for the law professor speaking of East Timor or AIDS.


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by mpcsb_
> 
> I guess the difference between Ben Stein and Michael Moore is that they are on opposite sides...of the same coin. That coin coin being radical fringe.


Another difference being that a new Michael Moore movie is a major event (at least in movie terms), like him or not.

The new Ben Stein movie? Not so much.......

------------------


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

For me, here is at least part of the difference between Micheal Moore and Ben Stein:



> quote:Ben Stein (Benjamin J. Stein) was born on Nov. 25, 1944 in Washington, D.C. He graduated from Columbia University in 1966 with honors in economics and as valedictorian of the 1970 Yale Law School class. He has worked as a poverty lawyer, a trial lawyer, and a university adjunct (American University, University of California at Santa Cruz and Pepperdine University).





> quote: Michael Moore was born in Flint, Michigan April 23 1954. He studied journalism at the University of Michigan-Flint but dropped out...


Now I am in now way saying one makes the other better or inferior, but I do find it an interesting comparison.

Warmest regards


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

It would suggest that they both ought to stick to what they are good at.

Ben Stein is a well educated lawyer. Michael Moore is a highly succesful filmmaker.

Difference is, I don't see Moore trying to be a lawyer....

------------------


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by gmac_
> 
> It would suggest that they both ought to stick to what they are good at.
> 
> ...


Let us not confuse commercial success with anything other than making money. Bill O'Rielly is a highly successful author and TV personality, but I am willing to bet you do not consider him a "good" author.

I agree, MM is a very successful film maker, I wish I had his millions, his stock portfolio (documented that he has a large one after swearing multiple times not to own a single stock), and the house he has on a private lake in Michigan. I will freely admit to being jealous of his material wealth.

Warmest regards


----------



## I_Should_Be_Working (Jun 23, 2005)

Michael Moore is one of the few remaining valid reasons for the continuance of whaling.


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

Michael Moore has been awarded an Oscar, generally regarded as being the premium recognition by your peers in his industry.

While we're at it, let's not confuse highly educated with highly succesful. I've no idea what Ben Stein's law practise is like - but I'd be interested to hear if he had been recognised by his peers in the way that Moore has.

The education certainly hasn't helped him much in his showbiz career, although admittedly he has done better than most by being immortalised for repeating a single word. I may have missed his Academy Award nomination for that role.

------------------


----------



## whnay. (Dec 30, 2004)

Yes and Yassar Arafat was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

___________

"My problem lies in reconciling my gross habits with my net income." 
~Errol Flynn


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by whnay._
> 
> Yes and Yassar Arafat was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.


Yes.

Do you have a point or are you simply acclaiming the late Mr Arafat's attempts to bring peace to the Middle East?

------------------


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by gmac_
> 
> Michael Moore has been awarded an Oscar, generally regarded as being the premium recognition by your peers in his industry.


After listening to Samuel L. Jackson talk about how his Oscar card got filled in.....

What did Moore win for anyways? Documentary?


----------



## I_Should_Be_Working (Jun 23, 2005)

"Supersize Me" got me thinking back when it came out. Why not do a documentary on what Michael Moore eats that keeps him so fat.

What is really telling is how Mr Moore is an utter jackass when the camera is turned on him. I'd pay ticket fare to watch that lard squirm like...lard in the frying pan.


----------



## whnay. (Dec 30, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by gmac_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Is that what you call it?

___________

"My problem lies in reconciling my gross habits with my net income." 
~Errol Flynn


----------



## tintin (Nov 19, 2004)

No doubt the men and women who came to the Oscars in gowns that cost more than an Army Sergeant makes in a year...

Well, we know one thing. Ben has no idea what a Sgt makes. Make that, " A gown that cost more than a Army Sergeant (I assume an E-5) makes in 5 years. In some cases 10 years. And in a few cases 20 years." 

Having said that, I respect Ben. His book on HWood. Anyone here will crap in their pants laughing over his description of Blade Runner on late night TV. And those Hermes ties with the Navy Blazer and the Converse shoes...Real style in my book. But did Ben ever serve in the military?


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by whnay._
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's what the Nobel committee called it.

------------------


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by gmac_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 But surely they're all tax-loving Commies? I bet they don't even carry pistols! [:0]


----------



## clothesboy (Sep 19, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by jeansguy_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Will somebody please tell me, *exactly*, what this phrase means?

quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

"But then, a woman is only a woman and an EG is a shoe." - Will

Michael


----------



## Patrick06790 (Apr 10, 2005)

> quote:
> Wow...you just don't get along well with anybody.
> 
> If you don't *support the US troops in Iraq*, do you at least support the Canadian troops in Afghanistan? Or is that just a quest for oil and power too?
> ...


Now that it's been co-opted by every gang of brainless jabbering apes with a wild ideological hair up their keisters...

Not a damn thing. 23 Skidoo.


----------



## Lord Foppington (Feb 1, 2005)

I can't believe at tax time anybody's really asking whether any of us do not support the troops. God, do we ever (--except war tax resistors,of course).

Stap my vitals!


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

'Support our troops' has become a euphemism for 'support my war.' I shall not join the masses shouting praises to Big Brother neurotically fearfull lest my enthusiasm be judged lacking.This Nation has work to do. Right wing AND left wing slackers standing around holding up shovels will not accomplish that.


----------



## Lord Foppington (Feb 1, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Kav_
> 
> 'Support our troops' has become a euphemism for 'support my war.' I shall not join the masses shouting praises to Big Brother neurotically fearfull lest my enthusiasm be judged lacking.This Nation has work to do. Right wing AND left wing slackers standing around holding up shovels will not accomplish that.


Yes, it's so obviously a piece of ideology of the crudest kind. That's why Ben Stein and his type _need and promote_ the idea of "not supporting our troops" more than anybody else, in Hollywood or anywhere.

In the Vietnam era, God knows, there were people who said "I don't support our troops" (though there have been studies that show this too was wildly exaggerated).

But now, it's not what you say, it's what you don't. If you _don't_ say "I support our troops! I support our troops!" at every opportunity you're accused of not supporting our troops.

At a time when every gas-guzzling SUV, Democrat and Republican, is plastered with magnetic (easily removed) "Support Our Troops" ribbons, we have Ben Stein to thank for keeping the idea alive that people all over the place don't support our troops.

In fact I've only encountered one, ONE person, in print, who said "I don't support our troops." He was a loon, a right-wing one whose son was in the military in Iraq. He said "I support the war, but not the troops...my son and the people he serves with are no better than anybody else and don't deserve my support." Weird guy.

Stap my vitals!


----------



## In Mufti (Jan 28, 2005)

The American leftâ€”and that means just about everybody in Hollywood--is viscerally anti-military whether we are at war or not. Itâ€™s not political, itâ€™s culturalâ€”actually itâ€™s pathological for most of them. 

Joel Stein of the LA Times actually wrote what this group thinks in his January 24th column entitled, â€œI Donâ€™t Support Our Troops.â€ Joel Stein is a pathetic excuse for a man. He spends most of his time writing idiotic articles gushing about Madonna or Angelina Jolie. But at least he was honest about his contempt for the military. I have included Ms Steinâ€™s piece below for your reading pleasure.

The thing that Hollywood and most of Americaâ€™s self-appointed â€œeliteâ€ donâ€™t getâ€”is that their opinions on this sort of thing donâ€™t really matter. Most of it reeks of jealously anyway. On a gut level, Americans like and respect soldiers, policemen and firemen. They are brave young folks who have chosen to serve and make great sacrifices rather than live in mom and dadâ€™s basement. People respond to that. The young folks serving now are the best of their generation, just like their fathers who fought in Vietnam and their grandfathers who fought in World War Two and Korea. They have courage--and courage doesnâ€™t have anything to do with politicsâ€”itâ€™s about character. When it comes to character, some have it, some donâ€™t. It has nothing to do with who the president happens to be.

I think what really drives these pampered little guys nuts is they know deep down--despite all of their money, fame and expensive educations--a regular olâ€™ army sergeant from Iowa is still a â€œbetter man.â€ The soldier is a better man because he had what it takes as a man in the most severe test. It comes down to gutsâ€”and you canâ€™t buy them on Rodeo Driveâ€”no matter how much money you have.

It was impressive to see that Prince Harry understands this.

There is nothing new about this. Even Shakespeare remarked that the men who were back in England--safely in bed--while Henry and his soldiers fought at Agincourt, were condemned to be haunted by the â€œcheapness of their manhood.â€ Nothing has changedâ€”except some of them try to cover it up now by writing snarky little articles for the LA Times. 



I Donâ€™t Support Our Troops by Joel Stein

â€œI DON'T SUPPORT our troops. This is a particularly difficult opinion to have, especially if you are the kind of person who likes to put bumper stickers on his car. Supporting the troops is a position that even Calvin is unwilling to urinate on.

I'm sure I'd like the troops. They seem gutsy, young and up for anything. If you're wandering into a recruiter's office and signing up for eight years of unknown danger, I want to hang with you in Vegas

And I've got no problem with other people â€” the ones who were for the Iraq war â€” supporting the troops. If you think invading Iraq was a good idea, then by all means, support away. Load up on those patriotic magnets and bracelets and other trinkets the Chinese are making money off of.

But I'm not for the war. And being against the war and saying you support the troops is one of the wussiest positions the pacifists have ever taken â€” and they're wussy by definition. It's as if the one lesson they took away from Vietnam wasn't to avoid foreign conflicts with no pressing national interest but to remember to throw a parade afterward.

Blindly lending support to our soldiers, I fear, will keep them overseas longer by giving soft acquiescence to the hawks who sent them there â€” and who might one day want to send them somewhere else. Trust me, a guy who thought 50.7% was a mandate isn't going to pick up on the subtleties of a parade for just service in an unjust war. He's going to be looking for funnel cake.

Besides, those little yellow ribbons aren't really for the troops. They need body armor, shorter stays and a USO show by the cast of "Laguna Beach."

The real purpose of those ribbons is to ease some of the guilt we feel for voting to send them to war and then making absolutely no sacrifices other than enduring two Wolf Blitzer shows a day. Though there should be a ribbon for that.

I understand the guilt. We know we're sending recruits to do our dirty work, and we want to seem grateful.

After we've decided that we made a mistake, we don't want to blame the soldiers who were ordered to fight. Or even our representatives, who were deceived by false intelligence. And certainly not ourselves, who failed to object to a war we barely understood.

But blaming the president is a little too easy. The truth is that people who pull triggers are ultimately responsible, whether they're following orders or not. An army of people making individual moral choices may be inefficient, but an army of people ignoring their morality is horrifying. An army of people ignoring their morality, by the way, is also Jack Abramoff's pet name for the House of Representatives.

I do sympathize with people who joined up to protect our country, especially after 9/11, and were tricked into fighting in Iraq. I get mad when I'm tricked into clicking on a pop-up ad, so I can only imagine how they feel.

But when you volunteer for the U.S. military, you pretty much know you're not going to be fending off invasions from Mexico and Canada. So you're willingly signing up to be a fighting tool of American imperialism, for better or worse. Sometimes you get lucky and get to fight ethnic genocide in Kosovo, but other times it's Vietnam.

And sometimes, for reasons I don't understand, you get to just hang out in Germany.

I know this is all easy to say for a guy who grew up with money, did well in school and hasn't so much as served on jury duty for his country. But it's really not that easy to say because anyone remotely affiliated with the military could easily beat me up, and I'm listed in the phone book.

I'm not advocating that we spit on returning veterans like they did after the Vietnam War, but we shouldn't be celebrating people for doing something we don't think was a good idea. All I'm asking is that we give our returning soldiers what they need: hospitals, pensions, metal health and a safe, immediate return. But, please, no parades.

Seriously, the traffic is insufferable.â€


Regards,


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

Thank-you for the Stein article. It is intelligent and funny.

I don't think that those who stayed home rather than 'fight' at Agincourt had a 'cheapened manhood'. Throughout history, with gong-like regularity, groups of men have marched off to slay other groups of virtually indistinguishible men. For what? Usually because of perceived offences against some imaginary line or another, or some imaginary god or another. And those who stayed home are the cheap ones? Boo.


----------



## Lord Foppington (Feb 1, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by In Mufti_
> 
> I think what really drives these pampered little guys nuts is they know deep down--despite all of their money, fame and expensive educations--a regular olâ€™ army sergeant from Iowa is still a â€œbetter man.â€ The soldier is a better man because he had what it takes as a man in the most severe test. It comes down to gutsâ€"and you canâ€™t buy them on Rodeo Driveâ€"no matter how much money you have.


This sounds like wishful thinking on your part. I doubt Joel Stein is driven nuts at all by thoughts like this, however "deep down." His position is perfectly consistent, and I'm sure holding it makes him feel just fine about himself.

Thanks for posting the piece though. Of course I didn't know about it; otherwise I wouldn't have said no one dares express lack of support of the troops in print.

Still, "I support the troops" has become such an empty, frozen gesture, devoid of meaning, content, and for that matter any actual "support," that there are bound to be people fed up with the slogan for various reasons.

Stap my vitals!


----------



## clothesboy (Sep 19, 2004)

What *exactly* is wrong with Joel Stein's piece?

quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

"But then, a woman is only a woman and an EG is a shoe." - Will

Michael


----------



## J. Homely (Feb 7, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by In Mufti_
> 
> Supporting the troops is a position that even Calvin is unwilling to urinate on.


Who's Calvin? His brother?

Silly as the article is, he does raise an interesting point -- how can you claim to support people who are willingly engaged in something you supposedly believe is wrong?


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

I oppose our 'splendid little war' aka sandbox war, Iraq or whatever one wishes to call it. But I see no conflict in 'supporting the troops.' My support is actively working toward our withdrawal with as little further political and human loss as possible. Service to the Nation is Honourable in intent. That the military often finds itself carrying out debateable missions is not a flaw, but reality of our political system. The reverse option of military systems dictating the political bent of a nation is far worse. On a personal level, I support our troops by treating them how I wanted to be treated once.


----------

