Nattering neocon Dori Monson (KIRO m-f, 1-4p) devoted (way too much) time Tuesday going on about his college-shopping for his matriculating 17-year old daughter.
It was boring in that adenoidal bragging/complaining way that Dori has, but listener Randy wrote posing a great question:
What did Dori do to encourage his little girl to enlist to Serve Our Country? Why didn't he drag her down to an Army recruiter so she could do what's right and patriotic?
After all, the Eastlake brabbler supported the invasion, the surge, and every militaristic utterance and imperialistic inclination out of the White House.
So why not nag and browbeat, his daughter (the way he does the rest of us) until she joins up to help fight the War on Terror?
Dori's a quick draw on other people's hypocrisy.
As Randy put it, "After all, Monson strongly supported the
invasion of Iraq, because he believed that every person, including
Iraqis, have a god-given right to freedom – a right so binding that
Americans should serve in Iraq to provide it to them."
We won't be holding our breaths- Dori's patriotism apparently stops at his
daughters edge- he complained that he'd fear for her safety if she even lived near the USC campus in downtown LA.
We're guessin' downtown Baghdad would be out, then.
Only the poor and those with colored skin fight in Bush's war. Dori would pee himself if ever faced with a dangerous situation..he is quite brave behind the microphone.
Posted by: sparky | March 20, 2007 at 06:25 PM
You NEVER know how someone is going to react in combat. I've seen the seemingly meekest, mildest, and timid become the best soldier you'd ever want around you protecting your back (so to speak)...and the other way around. But you have a point (in general) it's the same with our Pres Bush: why hasn't he encouraged his daughters to enlist and help the 'cause'; why doesn't he commit himself and his family to this nobel cause after office by moving there and devoting his life to it. Isn't THAT important to him?
Posted by: Duffman | March 20, 2007 at 06:46 PM
Sparky, we've already covered the topic of of poor/people of color in the service. So just stop it, on the other hand, sure why didn't he look into the military academies? I dunno, maybe he has instilled his daughter with a sense of self, and will let her chose her own road.
Posted by: Recife | March 20, 2007 at 06:51 PM
paul harvey and william buckley now
believe the war was a tragic blunder.what does monson see that
these 2 guys are missing. monson will always be a bush boot licker.
Posted by: lulu the wonder farting dog | March 20, 2007 at 07:05 PM
Ahhh, Sparky checks in yet again with what even for him is one one of Blatherwatches most ignorant statements of the century. Is your ignorance a result of living in an alternate reality or are you a just a pathological DUMBASS!
Posted by: PeakLimiter | March 20, 2007 at 07:38 PM
It's fun to say "if you support the war then why won't you fight in it?" but all our tax dollars support the war, so he could argue that she's doing the country and all of its causes a service by striving to maximize taxable earnings.
I don't want to join the army either but mostly because my talents very clearly lay elsewhere, but I'm not going to say the country should never again engage in any military action just because I'm not best suited for combat.
By the way BlatherWatch, thanks for living up to your slogan by bootlegging Dori Monson's material and enabling me to get whatever benefit there was to be had from his hard work without having to listen hear his awful voice or support his sponsors.
Posted by: Andrew | March 20, 2007 at 07:42 PM
Snarky
"Only the poor and those with colored skin fight in Bush's war. Dori would pee himself if ever faced with a dangerous situation..he is quite brave behind the microphone."
Do you have any hard evidence of this? DOD numbers would suggest that your wrong in terms of combat deaths.
(Cue in crickets chirping as Snarky runs to her google machine :)
Posted by: Pugetsound | March 20, 2007 at 07:56 PM
I am looking for some more current numbers but based on the first 2000 combat deaths -around October of 2005 this has some data comparing combat deaths by race to the general population by race. HERE
Just to make clear, I personally don't care what the race is of our soldiers who pay the ultimate sacrifice, all of them are heroes. I just wanted to correct a misconception that some use to score political points. I could be wrong so if people can show data that draws a different conclusion I sincerely welcome it.
Posted by: Pugetsound | March 20, 2007 at 08:12 PM
Bush' constitutional crisis(as we speak) seems to echo the nutjobs who come in here to lavish more praise on that bastard and his failed invasion. I love it, Bush looks more and more like tricky Dick by the minute. The 30 percenters look more and more foolish as they go over the cliff with Bushler.
Posted by: coiler | March 20, 2007 at 08:24 PM
Dori and Frank. Two narcissists who take it as a given that we're breathlessly waiting for the next lengthy, verbose installment of their personal family life involving their daughters. We aren't.
Posted by: Tommy008 | March 20, 2007 at 08:37 PM
putsie: Do you have any hard evidence of this? DOD numbers would suggest that your wrong in terms of combat deaths.
Still waiting for that carbon trading you were going to research? How's it going, putsie? Steve and I are waiting with bated breath. . . show your stuff, big guy! Make me proud . . . :)
Just a thought but I would think that since Bush usurped the National Guard to do his bidding, the diversity over there would be pretty good. Lots of guard and lots of reservists. FCS, Bush is taking anybody and everybody he can lay his hands on . . . from psychos with waivers to the best we have to offer up.
He's killing without regard to race, religion or income bracket . . . as long as they were already signed up.
Posted by: joanie | March 20, 2007 at 08:40 PM
My my, I hit a nerve. Please, continue to flame me...
Posted by: sparky | March 20, 2007 at 09:44 PM
What a bunch of frickin' whiners you all are. The ol' "Why don't you send your own kids to the war in Iraq?" instead of sending her to college in order to prove you really believe in what you say is truly one of the lamest things I've heard on here in a good, long while. So lame frankly, it made me post.
So, rake me over the coals like you all usually do when someone new ventures on here to disagree with any of you but I'll tell you this... Sometimes, talk radio isn't all about the host's politics or views about anything. Sometimes it's just a story about your oldest kid getting ready to go off to college.
You would all do yourselves a favor if EVERYTHING you disagree with didn't ALWAYS lead back to Bush.
FYI, Dori really isn't a big Bush-Licker. He has beome quite un-fond of him over this last year. So, in the future, let's try and speak about what we know rather than conjecture about what we don't.
Posted by: BeeBee | March 20, 2007 at 10:21 PM
He has beome quite un-fond of him over this last year
So he's a weathervane then. What have we learned in the past year that we didn't know three years ago? Not a damn thing. Now all of you fance walkers are feigning surprise and outrage.
Posted by: Andrew | March 20, 2007 at 11:44 PM
Joanie says,
"from psychos with waivers to the best we have to offer up."
Now is this the Randi version or the Rooney version. I heard both and they are quite different with Randi's version more absurd. Which one Joanie, the liar Randi's or the old fart Rooney's?
Posted by: Steve | March 21, 2007 at 12:09 AM
Anyone catch Dave's show today (tuesday) around 9:30. I caught the end of this segment with the guy telling Dave that "Every soldier ariving in Iraq starts counting the days till he goes home." Now was this jerk a guest or a caller. To say Soldiers are against the war because of this is totally absurd and ridiculous and the guy doesn't know squat about the military.
Posted by: Steve | March 21, 2007 at 12:18 AM
"What have we learned in the past year that we didn't know three years ago?"
Apparently we have learned the same things that most Dems and Repubs in DC have... well AFTER they voted "Yes" for just about everything fed to them.
Color me surprised but I thought your kind of type would be thrilled to have one of your biggest dissenters jump on your band-wagon... or is it just not "cool" to agree with anyone finally coming around? Is that because it is more fun to be in the group fighting for the peace seekers and unique righteous thinkers rather than being suddenly coined as "main stream"?
And... Puhleez... "Feigning surprise and outrage"??? C'mon... Me thinks you've been watching a bit too much O'Reilly???
Posted by: BeeBee | March 21, 2007 at 12:49 AM
I need to get a radio to sit along side my computer because I try listening to Dave on kiroradio.com but the constant
AAA commercials make me want to put a gun I have handy in my mouth and end it all.
Posted by: Andrew | March 21, 2007 at 12:51 AM
I'm not welcoming any dissenters onto this boat who voted for an obvious failure of a president (I think he's mildy retarded) and then complains about the war on the grounds that it's being mismanaged.
Posted by: Andrew | March 21, 2007 at 01:04 AM
Also,
"So he's a weathervane then."
Yah... What's your point? Most people, when coming to a way of thinking, a belief or even a fundamental life choice... at some point agree with some "weathervane" style of thinking.
I am truly surprised you weren't able to come up with a better metaphor. Then again, I'm not.
Posted by: BeeBee | March 21, 2007 at 01:05 AM
Joanie and anyone else, If I here one more word about the reserves or the guard I swear I’ll bust. That Jackass (Clinton, the one who did not trust me with a loaded weapon in Bosnia) is the reason why our guard/reserves are where they are now. I believe the briefing was called “No More Task Force Smith”
(August 1994, Fort Polk, La.) in which it was laid out that we would never be caught with our pants down. No pun intended I was there, I heard it. I knew it was a pack of lies then and I know it now. Meanwhile Al Gore was selling our Navel Reserves (OIL) to the Chinese. Oh I know, I’m a wacko, so Chuck and Steve, don’t bother defending me. But one last question for you all. Who of you told your, children, granchildren, sons or daughters to volunteer for ANYTHING. Regardless of who was in office? Who amongst you said hey Jimmy/Sally you know what? How about you think beyond yourself, how about you think about your country and what it may need? I’ll bet half a years pay that less than nothing ever said that. Including Bla’m and the rest, so if your blood ain’t in the fight quit yer bitchen, if it is, then wail away.
SSG (P) J Wilson
13B30Xray5
E 1st Cn trng Bn
B Btry 2/3 FA
A Btry 1/30 FA
539th HEMCO
22nd Supcom
2 CSG, I corp
25th FA (TAB)
Yeah been there done that, and don’t want your whimpering ass along!
Posted by: Recife | March 21, 2007 at 01:15 AM
Bush gave notice to the Congress today that you don't mess with the smirking chimp. Heil Chimpler! Heil Chimpler! Sieg Heil!
Posted by: Tommy008 | March 21, 2007 at 01:25 AM
Ray Taliaferro on KGO810 is a bit too leftwing, unfair and hysterical for me as a general rule, but his nightly Bushbashing sessions have become absolutely virtuouso permformances in the art of insulting. You go, Ray! Preach, Ray, preach!!
Posted by: Tommy008 | March 21, 2007 at 01:35 AM
Most people, when coming to a way of thinking... agree with some "weathervane" style of thinking
You should have known the war was misnaged in '04 when soldiers were gluing spare parts to the sides of their humvees to protect themselves as Bush was trying to make tax cuts permanent, yet you re-elected a strangely monkey-like man to continue managing the war you jingoistically supported. Oh, let me guess, Rumsfeld had you at "in war..."
Posted by: Andrew | March 21, 2007 at 01:36 AM
Andrew:
You're right. I should have known.
You're also wrong.
Rumsfeld NEVER had me.
Posted by: BeeBee | March 21, 2007 at 02:32 AM
"If I here one more word . . . "
Where would you like me to put that word, Recife?
how about you think about your country and what it may need?
And just what has the mess in Iraq done for our country?
You sound like someone else I recently knew who puts symbols and words over lives and caring for what our country really needs. Swallow all the BS you want, Recife, it doesn't make it right. Start thinking for yourself.
Your service I honor. Your brainwashed thinking is embarrassing.
Posted by: joanie | March 21, 2007 at 05:13 AM
Wow joanie you get up early!
A favor? When you refer to God, w/you kindly make sure you capitalize the 'G'. Only proper.
Thanx.
Posted by: Duffman | March 21, 2007 at 05:44 AM
Sorry, Duff. I purposely don't always capitalize it. No reason I should, right?
Posted by: joanie | March 21, 2007 at 05:48 AM
Well, there is for me but guess if you think there's no reason for you I guess there isn't. Just thought I'd ask...as it has always bothered me. (but probably all the more reason for you to not, eh?)
Posted by: Duffman | March 21, 2007 at 05:56 AM
Recife:
If you're using the National Guard extensively to fight a 4-year long war, you are really a fuck-up.
Posted by: Tink | March 21, 2007 at 05:59 AM
And Recife, I googled your reference and am reading about our military readiness.
But, it isn't the military that I'm complaining about. It is the use of the military by a group of chicken hawks who never saw a day of service and an egotistical megalomaniac.
Afghanistan - okay. Iraq - a frivolous use of our young and older soldiers be they reservists, guard or active. And the Guard is not defending America in Iraq.
Why can't you see the complexity of all this? Why can't you see how wars differ and that sending our soldiers into war must be a thoughtful and prudent process?
Posted by: joanie | March 21, 2007 at 06:08 AM
Tommie: but his nightly Bushbashing sessions have become absolutely virtuouso permformances in the art of insulting.
You should check out Mike Malloy's Bushbashing sessions. They're pretty good, too.
Posted by: joanie | March 21, 2007 at 06:44 AM
"Why can't you see the complexity of all this? Why can't you see how wars differ and that sending our soldiers into war must be a thoughtful and prudent process?"
Given that Iraq was/is a mistake.
So, just curious: how far would you let Iran go in it's nuclear weapons build-up before doing something about it? [Something other than what the UN is doing - which appears to be nothing]
Posted by: Duffman | March 21, 2007 at 07:29 AM
Well, at least he didn't use the time to bore us with more godawful stories of his dog, Star. (Or is it "Starr"?)
Posted by: bj | March 21, 2007 at 07:51 AM
every time i think of dori the same four words come to mind:
"dori is an ass." i can't help it.
Posted by: howieinseattle | March 21, 2007 at 08:03 AM
Dori is a 'radio personality', simple as that. Radio folks do what they do to get ratings and maintain and enhance ad sales. Can you really/fairly determine his personal character from this...the answer is no. None of us truly know him yet we offer our opinions of him constantly. This is exactly what he (& others) are trying to extract from the public; controversy and interest. Obviously, to that end he is very successful!
Posted by: Duffman | March 21, 2007 at 08:14 AM
Ahh topics near and dear to my heart.
Dori Monson: I don't like him because I think he's a hypocrite (I do see that he has talent which keeps him valuable to the station however). You can always count on him to bless anything Bush's administration does on the big issues and typical of Bush-apologists, will quibble about very minor things and declare himself an independent fellow. He even buries his so-called libertarian values when they diverge from Bush's actions. Perfect example - recall when he had Ron Paul (possible Libertarian Party presidential candidate) on his show and Paul raked the Bush Administration over the coals for their adventure in Iraq and violations on our liberty. Monson offered a milk-toast defense of Bush and totally abandoned his libertine principles. We've seen this over and over from the guy and it should be no surprise. OK I am done talking about the guy...I feel kind of slimly now.
Soldier's racial/ethnic/socio-economic status: I have not seen a real study done on this in all fairness. Lots of data is missing from the numbers people are throwing around. The pro-Bush crew simply throws up DoD numbers and then correlates them directly with the number of that minority in the general population. This just doesn't work, for a lot of statistical reasons that are more complicated than "you're either with us or against us." I will try and explain.
The DoD numbers simply classify a solider as white, Black or Hispanic, however this ignores the standard Census (and indeed DoD deployment statistics) separate race and ethnicity. Hope you are still with me... When you look at the facts we see that Blacks have a slightly lower death rate and Hispanics have a slightly higher death rate. Please see the statistics here normalized for race/ethnicity: http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=psc_working_papers
Now this only tells a fraction of the story. I still have never seen a breakdown of the socio-economic status of the soldiers who serve in Iraq, so it's not really possible to quantify that factor. Also consider that the death rate of our soldiers is extremely low compared to past conflicts due to advances in combat medical care and triage. In short, I don't think we can prove one way or the other the claim that Bush is throwing the poor/minorities into the meat grinder.
Lastly, we do know that the armed forces have been struggling to meet recruiting commitments and have been lowering standards...now I may be a bit slow but I think it also stands to reason that when you lower expectations you get more variation on the wrong end of the scale.
Posted by: cowpotpi3 | March 21, 2007 at 09:07 AM
Recife,
If I had kids, you would owe me a half years pay. I believe in volunteerism (as does B'lam for that matter) - just not for war. There are plenty of other opportunities and I've done a fair amount myself. Wish I could take you up on your offer.
Posted by: meow | March 21, 2007 at 09:10 AM
Dori is a Libertarian wanna be.
As much as I cannot tolerate his voice (a happy moment in my day is when I switch stations after RR goes off air), I must suggest that he is not the person to decide if his daughter joins the military. That would be her decision. Same goes for the two chimp-ettes.
Posted by: AprilMayJune | March 21, 2007 at 10:17 AM
Cow3..of course you are right. i said what I said up at the top to get a reaction and Puts and all the others performed admirably. You guys are so predictable.
The fact that it even crossed my mind comes from a lot of sources...what I see ( the requiem for the first 1000 dead soldiers on Nightline) and what I read, what i hear ( interviews with kids in the service who came from towns that had high unemployment rates) and some personal experience from families i know who have kids over there..If there is a racial connection at all, it is because of the economic factor that sends kids who have few other options to serve, in hopes they can get out and get a college education when they are done. Unfortunately, those who have the fewest options tend to be minority young people.
There is a website called OperationYellowElephant.com which focuses on attending meetings of College Republicans around the country. It is interesting to read how wealthy Bif and Muffy justify why they should not have to serve their country. Until we have a draft, kids who have options in life might choose to serve in the military anyway, because they want to. But I would be interested if someone did a study on how many of the military come from wealth.
Posted by: sparky | March 21, 2007 at 10:24 AM
You are right, AMJ....nobody should be "forced" to join.
The point some of us are making is, there are a tremendous number of people who whole -heartedly support the war who would NEVER let their own children enlist because of the extreme danger. Yet they strongly support Bush sending over an endless stream of OTHER people's children because it won't affect them.
Posted by: sparky | March 21, 2007 at 10:28 AM
You certainly know how to get a 'reaction'...ha. 'Bif', 'Muffy' - there you go again..very cute.
Very informative! I heard a recent analysis that purported that our 'all-voluntary' military is not as good as our military with the draft? Any one have data or specific source on that.
Posted by: Duffman | March 21, 2007 at 10:31 AM
My favorite signs at the peace rally in Washington DC this weekend were on the PRO-WAR side of the street
" ANTI-WAR is ANTI-AMERICAN"
and
"PEACE SUCKS"
Posted by: sparky | March 21, 2007 at 10:31 AM
Think this has pretty much been beat to death - what say we go help pay the rent at KUOW.
Posted by: Duffman | March 21, 2007 at 10:53 AM
Republicans don't care what Bushler does as long as he doesn't raise taxes, ya know?
Posted by: Waiting for Duffman | March 21, 2007 at 11:45 AM
Cute/clever Merci!
Posted by: Duffman | March 21, 2007 at 11:49 AM
WFD: You've turned that up to 11 I see...that's one past 10 you know...
Posted by: Duffman | March 21, 2007 at 11:56 AM
I believe the phrase Nigel uses in the film is "it's one louder."
Posted by: WFD | March 21, 2007 at 12:22 PM
Indeed you are correct sir. A very funny part especially for me (I spent a good deal of time on the road with a rock band in the 80's)
ha...too funny.
Posted by: Duffman | March 21, 2007 at 12:25 PM
It occurs to me that there are more wingers than usual about today. Must be that temper tantrum the boy king had yesterday. Got all their juices flowing.....
Oh, and Recife your right I didn't tell my son to volunteer for the military and being old enough to remember Viet Nam I wouldn't trust those bastards with Dori's kids or anyone else's. Let alone mine.
What I did tell him was if he wanted to do something good for his community he could be a cop or a firefighter or a EMT.
As for the "poor and people of color fighting" argument, how the hell can anyone trust any numbers that come from this administration on anything? I'd look out side if the SOBs said the sun was shining. Anytime they get numbers they don't like they either stop counting, or they "change the formula" so that the numbers reflect what they want them to.
Robinz
Posted by: robinz | March 21, 2007 at 01:06 PM