When bitter, intellectually dishonest former military officers attack
0 Comments Published by Ryan on 11/19/2007 at 5:53 PM.
I have several family members that have either served, or are currently serving in the U.S. military. Suffice it to say I was more than a little reluctant to comment on LTC Bob Bateman's attempted assault on Victor Davis Hanson and his book, Carnage and Culture.
(Bateman's writing can be found by scrolling down here: http://mediamatters.org/altercation/index)
To his credit, the admirable Hanson took the high road throughout this "debate" and refused to debase himself by joining in the name-calling and mud slinging.
Bateman began his "critique" of Hanson's scholorship by chest-thumping about his upcoming "takedown" of Hanson's book. Bateman followed that up by referring to Hanson's work as "feces." Seriously. And it only got worse from there.
For those who may have missed out on Bateman's "takedown," here's essentially what happened:
1. Bateman reads Carnage and Culture.
2. Bateman completely misunderstands the thesis of the book.
3. Bateman misinterprets an innocent discussion - over the future of the Western military tradition - as a personal insult against his own military service.
4. Bateman writes leftist hit-piece "Altercation" seeking soap-box to air his perceived grievance, under guise of scholarly criticism.
5. Bateman writes four-part "takedown" - which instead only shows Bateman's complete lack of basic reading comprehension, logic, and critical thinking skills.
6. A very patient VDH responds point -by-point to Bateman's hit-piece, and confirms that Bateman is little more than a shrill, childish, and intellectually dishonest ideologue.
(Bateman's writing can be found by scrolling down here: http://mediamatters.org/altercation/index)
To his credit, the admirable Hanson took the high road throughout this "debate" and refused to debase himself by joining in the name-calling and mud slinging.
Bateman began his "critique" of Hanson's scholorship by chest-thumping about his upcoming "takedown" of Hanson's book. Bateman followed that up by referring to Hanson's work as "feces." Seriously. And it only got worse from there.
For those who may have missed out on Bateman's "takedown," here's essentially what happened:
1. Bateman reads Carnage and Culture.
2. Bateman completely misunderstands the thesis of the book.
3. Bateman misinterprets an innocent discussion - over the future of the Western military tradition - as a personal insult against his own military service.
4. Bateman writes leftist hit-piece "Altercation" seeking soap-box to air his perceived grievance, under guise of scholarly criticism.
5. Bateman writes four-part "takedown" - which instead only shows Bateman's complete lack of basic reading comprehension, logic, and critical thinking skills.
6. A very patient VDH responds point -by-point to Bateman's hit-piece, and confirms that Bateman is little more than a shrill, childish, and intellectually dishonest ideologue.
From the land down under:
There'll be no ho, ho, ho this Christmas. Aspiring Santas have been told not to use the term "ho" because it could be seen as derogatory to women.
Thirty trainees at a Santa course in Adelaide last month, held by recruitment company Westaff, were urged to replace the traditional festive greeting with "ha, ha, ha".
A Santa veteran of 11 years who attended the course told the Sunday Mail the trainer was very clear in spelling out no to "ho".
Two Santa hopefuls reportedly left the course after the trainer's edict.
A letter from Jimmy Carter to his sister-in-law, dated May 13, 1990.
Photo: Mat Honan
As for the letter itself - who in their right mind shoots at a cat? Even if Carter's intention was "only to sting it," there have to be literally thousands of quicker and less lethal ways to chase a cat away from bird feeder. Seriously. Carter could have just as easily thrown a rock, or a shoe for that matter. (Though honestly, who throws a shoe? Really?)
Instead, Carter presumably had to take the time to retrieve his shotgun, load it with bird shot, and then fire at his sister-in-law's cat.
The fact that this country survived the late '70s is amazing.
Photo: Mat Honan5/13/90This picture reminded me of an episode of "The Simpsons" from years ago. When the town of Springfield is unable to afford a statute of Abraham Lincoln, they're forced to settle for a statute of Jimmy Carter instead. When it's unveiled, someone shouts, "Jimmy Carter? He's history's greatest monster!" and a riot ensues.
To Sybil,
Lamentably, I killed your cat while trying just to sting it. It was crouched, as usual, under one of our bird feeders & I fired from some distance with bird shot. It may ease your grief somewhat to know that the cat was buried properly with a prayer & that I’ll be glad to get you another of your choice.
I called & came by your house several times. We will be in the Dominican Republic until Thursday. I’ll see you then.
Love, Jimmy
As for the letter itself - who in their right mind shoots at a cat? Even if Carter's intention was "only to sting it," there have to be literally thousands of quicker and less lethal ways to chase a cat away from bird feeder. Seriously. Carter could have just as easily thrown a rock, or a shoe for that matter. (Though honestly, who throws a shoe? Really?)
Instead, Carter presumably had to take the time to retrieve his shotgun, load it with bird shot, and then fire at his sister-in-law's cat.
The fact that this country survived the late '70s is amazing.
