Cheney: Obama Lied!

[DeistPaladin]

*Eagerly raises her hand*
So how do we, as a nation, overcome the very serious problems facing our country when one side refuses, and actively denies reality? How can our two party government possibly function given these conditions? Furthermore, there's the problem of the side which denies actual, factual based reality, not recognizing their own denial and blames the other side for lying or being misleading. How do we get them to see how crazy it all is? Where do we go from here?

Well this is a serious problem and one that has ironically been created by the Information Age. If you are one who wants to believe conspiracy theories or accounts of alternate reality, you'll probably frequent websites that will spoon feed you the propaganda to confirm what you already believe. Fox Noise and right wing hate talk radio, along with conspiracy nuts like Glenn Beck and Alex Jones, are other sources of alternate reality media that perpetuate the problem.

A great example of the effect of the alternate reality bubble is the stunned reaction to the 2012 election by the right wing and on Fox. "But... but... we nailed him on Benghazi". They believed their own propaganda and so they didn't see the defeat coming. When you live in a fantasy world, you can't cope with or anticipate reality. Unfortunately, you really can't reason with people like this either. People like A Theist are totally brainwashed. They are gone. Luckily, they're dying off as they age.

Worse still, the Democrats have become the center-right party, having chased the Republicans to the right as the latter have moved to crazy town. There really is very little representation for progressives in this country and we often have to hold our noses and vote conserva-dem.

But all is not lost. Long term prospects for progressives will look increasingly better as all the cranky-old-white-men die off and are replaced by a new generation of voters. Demographics are already looking grim for the GOP. They need to move to the center but they can't and they know it. The minute any of them budge slightly to the center, they'll be primaried by the crazy wing.

In my opinion, our immediate goal should be to expose and debunk the "both-sides-do-it" meme. That's the big lie that makes all the little lies possible. It's the lie that's repeated by pseudo-centrists in the mainstream media and on Sunday talk shows (even John Stewart dipped into that well in his "Rally to Restore Sanity"). It's purpose is to give cover to conservatives whenever they get caught being corrupt, crazy, stupid, bigoted, abusive, incompetent or criminal. It's a tactic that's executed in one of three ways:

1. "Hippie Punching": Create imaginary liberals who are "just as bad"
2. False Equivalence: Hype up or exaggerate liberal infractions (i.e. sure Glenn Beck is crazy but look how angry Keith Olbermann is)
3. Diffused Responsibility: When Republicans abuse the filibuster, report it as "Democrats and Republicans are unable to reach across the aisle" and then cry salty tears over "the lack of bipartisanship on both sides".

The Glenn Becks, Rush Limbaughs and Michelle Malkins of the world are not what we should be concerned about. They are pigs and pigs will go "oink". Of course they say offensive and crazy things. And of course their brainwashed followers will eat it all up and not listen to reason. They are lost.

What gives them cover is the "both-sides-do-it" lie. But for that, they could be marginalized and take their rightful place screaming on the street corner as they sell pencils.

It's the David Gregories, the David Brooks', and Tom Brokaws that are the problem. These pseudo-centrists run cover for and help legitimize the pig-people like Newt, Rush, et al. They need to be confronted with one simple message:

Both
Sides
Don't.

[DeistPaladin]

In classic fashion typical of the pompousass left, notice how DP once again resorts to the diversionary tactic of long winded ranting and bloviating after he fails to meet the challenge of burden of proof.

Therefore, you're still FOS

Why are you still on the stage? The debate is over.

Would the teaching assistants please escort the specimen back to the lab?

[Minimalist]

[A Theist]

Why are you still on the stage? The debate is over.

Would the teaching assistants please escort the specimen back to the lab?

I don't think they're able to...why don't you try it?

[festive1]

P.S. A Theist, I still would like to see the link of your source of the 23,000/8,700 National Guardsmen being deployed to Vietnam, pretty please.

Here's the link for festive ...see "Acceptance in National Guard", 1rst paragraph...I posted this link twice already but here it is again just for you...I don't even know why I'm bothering to post the link for a third time, you'll just deny it anyway.

I do appreciate you re-posting the link for me I must have missed it.

I'm not going to deny it. I'm going to explain why it's an inaccurate figure for demonstrating support for your claim, which is: The National Guard was not a safe haven for those seeking to avoid service in Vietnam.

Reading through your link and through the source of the 23,000/8,700 National Guardsmen issue again, it states:

However, military documents show during the Vietnam War, almost 23,000 Army and Air Guardsmen were called up for a year of active duty;

So, 23,000 Army and Air Guardsmen were called up for a year (note: this does not say EACH year) of active duty during Vietnam. This
does not mean 23,000 Guardsmen were sent to Vietnam, rather this means 23,000 Guardsmen were called for active duty during Vietnam. Which could mean being called up in response to a natural disaster or other things, like managing all those protests and race-riots the 1960's is so famous for. This 23,000 figure is simply the total number of active duty Guardsmen during Vietnam.

Some 8,700 were deployed to Vietnam.

Now this number, clearly states these troops were deployed to Vietnam. As I stated earlier, around 2.8 million men and women served in Vietnam from 1961 until 1974. If 8,700 of that 2.8 million were National Guardsmen, which is what this states, that is a very small minority of the overall people who served in Vietnam (0.3%).

The percent of Guardsmen on active duty AND sent to Vietnam is about 38%... Which means 62% of ACTIVE DUTY National Guardsmen were not sent to Vietnam, which is a far lower percentage than that of the other military branches who served in Vietnam.

But wait... it gets better...

However, all of this is not taking into account the Reserves.
So the percentage chance of joining the National Guard, being called to active duty, and thereafter being sent to Vietnam would drop either a little or a lot dependent upon the total number of Reservists during this time. A man could be in the National Guard, on reserve, not be one of those 23,000 called to active duty and not even face that 38% chance of being sent to Vietnam.

But, you're probably saying, "We don't know how many Reservists there were," right?

Well, I found a decent estimate from a reputable source: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=t...E7u8scr-tQ
The figure I'm using appears on table 3, page 10 of this PDF document. This is the proposed restructuring of reserve forces, presented by Secretary of Defense McNamara in 1965, as entered into the Congressional Record on March 25, 1965. This is an annual number, I'm going to be nice and only use the military requirement reserve forces, which does not include non-military personnel and is significantly larger.
Total number of National Guard Reservists in 1965 was (drumroll please): 261,000 for the Army National Guard Reserves, which does include Air Defense (Bush's department, so he's being counted, or rather would be in a couple years once he joined).
Because all the figures we're using up to this point are for the duration of the Vietnam War (1961-1974), this is somewhat of an issue. I'm reluctant to simply multiply the 261,000 reservists by the 13 years duration of the war, and looking at this source shows that McNamara wanted to expand the number of reservists significantly.

But certainly you can see, if only in 1965, there were 261,000 National Guard Reservists, and from 1961-1974 there were a total of 23,000 Active National Guardsmen, that a person's chances of joining the National Guard, getting called for active duty, and then being sent to Vietnam (a 38% chance once on active duty) are small.

Thereby, making the National Guard about as safe of a haven for those wishing to avoid service in Vietnam as could be. The fact that 8,700 Guardsmen did serve in Vietnam (from 1961-1974), is tiny in comparison to the ONE YEAR number of total National Guard Reservists, of 261,000 for 1965. Joining the National Guard was also legal and, in some circles, more socially palatable/acceptable than fleeing the country or facing criminal charges.

*TA DA*

ETA: I incorrectly identified McNamara as the Secretary of State, he was the Secretary of Defense, fixed it

[A Theist]

Here's the link for festive ...see "Acceptance in National Guard", 1rst paragraph...I posted this link twice already but here it is again just for you...I don't even know why I'm bothering to post the link for a third time, you'll just deny it anyway.

I do appreciate you re-posting the link for me I must have missed it.

I'm not going to deny it. I'm going to explain why it's an inaccurate figure for demonstrating support for your claim, which is: The National Guard was not a safe haven for those seeking to avoid service in Vietnam.

Reading through your link and through the source of the 23,000/8,700 National Guardsmen issue again, it states:

However, military documents show during the Vietnam War, almost 23,000 Army and Air Guardsmen were called up for a year of active duty;

So, 23,000 Army and Air Guardsmen were called up for a year (note: this does not say EACH year) of active duty during Vietnam. This
does not mean 23,000 Guardsmen were sent to Vietnam, rather this means 23,000 Guardsmen were called for active duty during Vietnam. Which could mean being called up in response to a natural disaster or other things, like managing all those protests and race-riots the 1960's is so famous for. This 23,000 figure is simply the total number of active duty Guardsmen during Vietnam.

Some 8,700 were deployed to Vietnam.

Now this number, clearly states these troops were deployed to Vietnam. As I stated earlier, around 2.8 million men and women served in Vietnam from 1961 until 1974. If 8,700 of that 2.8 million were National Guardsmen, which is what this states, that is a very small minority of the overall people who served in Vietnam (0.3%).

The percent of Guardsmen on active duty AND sent to Vietnam is about 38%... Which means 62% of ACTIVE DUTY National Guardsmen were not sent to Vietnam, which is a far lower percentage than that of the other military branches who served in Vietnam.

But wait... it gets better...

However, all of this is not taking into account the Reserves.
So the percentage chance of joining the National Guard, being called to active duty, and thereafter being sent to Vietnam would drop either a little or a lot dependent upon the total number of Reservists during this time. A man could be in the National Guard, on reserve, not be one of those 23,000 called to active duty and not even face that 38% chance of being sent to Vietnam.

But, you're probably saying, "We don't know how many Reservists there were," right?

Well, I found a decent estimate from a reputable source: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=t...E7u8scr-tQ
The figure I'm using appears on table 3, page 10 of this PDF document. This is the proposed restructuring of reserve forces, presented by Secretary of Defense McNamara in 1965, as entered into the Congressional Record on March 25, 1965. This is an annual number, I'm going to be nice and only use the military requirement reserve forces, which does not include non-military personnel and is significantly larger.
Total number of National Guard Reservists in 1965 was (drumroll please): 261,000 for the Army National Guard Reserves, which does include Air Defense (Bush's department, so he's being counted, or rather would be in a couple years once he joined).
Because all the figures we're using up to this point are for the duration of the Vietnam War (1961-1974), this is somewhat of an issue. I'm reluctant to simply multiply the 261,000 reservists by the 13 years duration of the war, and looking at this source shows that McNamara wanted to expand the number of reservists significantly.

But certainly you can see, if only in 1965, there were 261,000 National Guard Reservists, and from 1961-1974 there were a total of 23,000 Active National Guardsmen, that a person's chances of joining the National Guard, getting called for active duty, and then being sent to Vietnam (a 38% chance once on active duty) are small.

Thereby, making the National Guard about as safe of a haven for those wishing to avoid service in Vietnam as could be. The fact that 8,700 Guardsmen did serve in Vietnam (from 1961-1974), is tiny in comparison to the ONE YEAR number of total National Guard Reservists, of 261,000 for 1965. Joining the National Guard was also legal and, in some circles, more socially palatable/acceptable than fleeing the country or facing criminal charges.

*TA DA*

ETA: I incorrectly identified McNamara as the Secretary of State, he was the Secretary of Defense, fixed it

All that effort and it still doesn't prove that Bush joined the Air National Guard to avoid the draft...Clinton on the other hand was a true draft dodger who organized anti war rallies in Great Britain...and then became commander in chief of the armed forces...there seems to be more of a hypocrisy coming from the left...

[DeistPaladin]

I don't think they're able to...why don't you try it?

I'll be right there. Just have to take this phone call...

Hey, you'll never guess.
[...]
Yeah, tell me about it.
[...]
Of course they never learn. That would require a memory function, something conservatives don't have. Otherwise, they wouldn't be conservatives, now would they?
[...]
No, no. That won't work. Minimal brain tissue and abnormally thick skulls. Use the cattle prod.
[...]
Right. *Click*

We'll be right with you.

[festive1]

Funny how my stated purpose had nothing to do with Bush being a draft dodger, yet you assume it does. Re-read it, at no point did I mention Bush, as that was not the purpose of the exercise. The intended and stated purpose was to refute your claim that the National Guard was not a haven for draft dodgers, which I accomplish by disproving your evidence of the 23,000/8,700 National Guardsmen who your source claimed served in Vietnam. Your evidence doesn't pass the test to support your claim. I was priviously unaware that any Guardsmen served in Vietnam and was curious to do some digging. I did, and proved your evidence is weak.

[A Theist]

I don't think they're able to...why don't you try it?

I'll be right there. Just have to take this phone call...

We'll be right with you.

We?...Yeah I guess you'll probably need some help...(Oh good God! I'm really in for it now! The attack of the nerds!)