Tuesday, June 03, 2014

DO YOU REALLY WANT TO GO THERE, TUCKER?

Tucker Carlson's Daily Caller has what it apparently thinks is the definitive conclusion on the subject of Bowe Bergdahl's release:
While the White House scrambles to explain its unilateral decision to trade the five top Taliban commanders held in Guantanamo Bay for captured Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, Google’s top auto-filled suggested search is "bowe bergdahl is not a hero."



Yup, that settles it. Let's not have a discussion of a commander in chief's authority to wind down a war or the tradition of not leaving U.S. troops behind. Let's just let Google decide what we really think!

Um ... if we're going to defer to Google autofill on such matters, maybe we should take a look at how Google autofills the phrase tucker carlson is.

Hmmm....



I guess that's the final word on the subject!

9 comments:

Victor said...

LOL!

Vacuous Virgina said...

Jonah, Jonah

My humble contribution :-) :-)

Life As I Know It Now said...

ha!

Life As I Know It Now said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
BKT said...

Not for nothing, but how many U.S. servicemen are actually "heroes?" Speaking as someone who grew up in a military household, I can attest that the vast majority of our servicemen are just regular folks doing a job.

This is not to diminish those who actually serve in dangerous roles with distinction, but let's face it-- the term "hero" gets tossed around pretty loosely, especially among those who revere the armed services like they were gods among men.

And being a hero has never been required for getting that adulation from right-wingers in the past. What happened to "leave no man behind," and all that POW/MIA propaganda?

Personally, I have no problem with bringing Bergdahl back, deserter or not. In fact, I would see ALL U.S. military personnel returned home and put to better purposes here. I respect that what they do is a difficult job in a very difficult working culture (complete subordination to hierarchy, no room for individuality, omnipresent threat of sexual assault by peers), but frankly I disapprove of almost EVERY assignment our servicemen and women have been dispatched to over the past, oh-- 200 years or so.

I imagine Ten Bears understands this, too. My grandfather told me the things his own father (Northern Cheyenne, born in 1870) told him about the U.S. Army adventures on native lands back when he was growing up, and NONE of the soldiers in those stories could reasonably be called a "hero."

I'm starting to digress here, but I still can't help wondering when conservatives starting caring what a soldier did while in uniform. It's not surprising to see that even their most instinctual modes of operation ("ALWAYS support the troops!")can be dismissed when it serves a partisan goal.

Carol Ann said...

Duckduckgo says he is an idiot and a moron. Bing says he is also a co bag, and I don't want to know what that means.

Pete said...

Show us the kerning on that Google screenshot!

Ten Bears said...

Yes, BKT, it is hard for a rational person to apply the word "hero" to those who cut women's breasts into tobacco pouches and their vaginae into lampshades and waterproof covers for their fancy hats. Indeed, the word "barbaric" comes to mind. Less than civilized.

The term "redskin" was the result of Anglo settlers skinning the natives and presenting them to government officials for a fee. Some of those skins were sold to make lampshades and ladies' gloves made from the skin of dead American Indians. The term "redskin" was used to describe the skin of a dead Indian.

Less than civilized, less than sufficiently evolved. Less than human.

Vic, to answer a question posed some time ago: I am partial to the "Washington Whitedogs", the "Boston Blood-thirsty" and "Pennsylvania Pedeophiles", and I am open to other suggestions.

No fear.

Roger said...

And that's after Google edits out the vulgar descriptors