<bart> are we ready to rumble?
<bigbillhaywood> who gets the first
shot? the home team or the visitors?
<bart> I'm missing the vanessa marcil
show for this...
<bart> BBH, we may be alone - are you
there?
<bigbillhaywood> i am
<bart> Fud, Enk, do we need a whistle
to start?
<bigbillhaywood> start whenever Bart...you're
the home team
<bart> OK, you introduced yourself with
"I volunteer to argue the 'soldiers are bad' side of this debate"
<bigbillhaywood> yup
<bart> why would you say such a fool
thing?
<bart> did a soldier once break your
heart?
<bigbillhaywood> the us armed forces
aren't citizen soldiers bart
<bigbillhaywood> you're living in the
past
<bart> what?
<bigbillhaywood> US soldiers are pros
<bart> you mean they get paid?
<bigbillhaywood> tell me one time in
history that pro soldiers were friends of democracy
<bigbillhaywood> america has a history
of a small standing army...you agree?
<bart> your attack consists of "tell
me one time?"
<bigbillhaywood> it's not an attack
bart
<bart> remember we're just starting
this conversation
<bigbillhaywood> when the US adopted
an all volunteer army we broke our tradition
<bigbillhaywood> get it?
<bart> sure, things changed then...
<bigbillhaywood> professional armies
are no friends to democracy
<bart> volunteers can't be friendly?
<bigbillhaywood> so you're saying we
HAVE an exception to history?
<bart> I'm trying to figure out what
church we're in - then we'll talk pews
<bigbillhaywood> bart...how do soldiers
vote?
<bart> I guess they vote on paper
<bigbillhaywood> 69% claim allegiance
to the republican party
<bart> OK, I see...
<bigbillhaywood> funny....no they vote
republican
<bart> so the military is 69 percent
bad?
<bigbillhaywood> the republicans aren't
bad?
<bigbillhaywood> i'm shocked at you
bart!
<bigbillhaywood> I thought we could
agree on that one
<bart> We're failing to communicate
<bigbillhaywood> no, you're failing
to address points
<bart> I guess everyone talks in short
cuts, I'm just missing some of yours
<bigbillhaywood> army times...oct 11
2004...78% of the current military support bush
<bigbillhaywood> ...and you support
THEM, right?
<bigbillhaywood> is there a logical
inconsistency here?
<bart> I thought we both agreed the mil
is mostly GOP - right?
<bigbillhaywood> yup, and the worst
kind of GOP
<bart> so all this time we were preparing
for a debate, your point is
the military votes GOP and the GOP = evil so the military = evil?
<bigbillhaywood> I don't support big
republican institutions...why do you?
<bigbillhaywood> if you want to defend
republicans go right ahead
<bart> I support the guy charging the
machine gun because I'm an agnositic pussy
<bigbillhaywood> because you will find
no more republican an institution than the US military
<bart> what about the 31 percent that
aren't evil?
<bigbillhaywood> yeah...it's smaller
that 31% Bart
<bigbillhaywood> maybe you can support
the southern baptists in our next debate?
<bart> if they take bullets for me -
sure
[17:14] <bigbillhaywood> no one's ever taken
a bullet for me
[17:14] <bigbillhaywood> and I ask no one
to do so
[17:14] <bart> how old are you?
[17:14] <bigbillhaywood> about your age, bart
[17:15] <bart> never served?
[17:15] <bigbillhaywood> nope, but I live
right next door to a large base
[17:15] <bigbillhaywood> I'm a social worker
[17:15] <bart> this anti-mil is leftover from
the 60s?
[17:15] <bigbillhaywood> lol
[17:15] <bart> I'm serious
[17:15] <bigbillhaywood> I'm not anti-military
[17:15] <bart> have you hated them for 35-40
years?
[17:15] <bigbillhaywood> Nope
[17:16] <bart> you just recognize their inherent
evility?
[17:16] <bigbillhaywood> I think you misunderstand
what the modern military is, bart
[17:16] <bart> I never said I was too smart...
[17:16] <bigbillhaywood> give me your definition
of the modern military
[17:16] <bart> my definition is the one the
world uses - you're the extremist in this debate, so you tell me
[17:16] <bigbillhaywood> do you mix with the
military often? I do
[17:17] <bart> and they kick sand in your
face?
[17:17] <bigbillhaywood> I vist the beaten
wives....the abused children
[17:17] <bigbillhaywood> i deal with
the gang members who come in with the troops
[17:17] <bart> the domestic abuse is up lately,
I assume?
[17:17] <bigbillhaywood> it doesn't go down
bart
[17:18] <bart> so combat has no effect?
you're sure?
[17:18] <bigbillhaywood> combat? I guess you're
referring to PTSD?
[17:18] <bart> can you explain that in words
I'll understand?
[17:18] <bigbillhaywood> I already have
[17:18] <bart> yes, "the American military
as it always was, is no more"
[17:18] <bart> what's that mean?
[17:19] <bigbillhaywood> the demise of the
citizen soldier
[17:19] <bart> we've been there, I didn't
recognize your shorthand
[17:19] <bigbillhaywood> the american military
has it's own society...they aren't part of ours
[17:19] <bart> so do go-go dancers and guitar
players
[17:19] <bigbillhaywood> they're republicans
bart....isn't it fun to defend them?
[17:19] <bigbillhaywood> lol
[17:20] <bart> recognizing facts isn't necessarily
"fun"
[17:20] <bigbillhaywood> …and ALL armies are
by definition conservative institutions….why are you
supporting the conservatives, bart? why ?
[17:20] <bart> You see the police, fire dept
and soldiers as all different, right?
Sidebar: As you can see, we're making
no progress.
His point SEEMS to be ALL military people
are evil because MOST are GOP.
But I can't pin him down to anything due to
the debate format where he's not compelled to answer questions
I see the military as necessary as the police
and fire departments, so I'm trying to get him
to agree or disagree with that, but he refuses
to take a stand - because how could he?
He's either got to say the military does NOT
provide order and safety, like a cop,
OR he's got to say America doesn't need a
police force or fire department, which is crazier, still.
The BartCop Quiz has always been set up this
way:
Answering the question will FORCE you to agree
with me, so his best (or only) chance is to not answer the question.
[17:20] <bigbillhaywood> I think you might
be a bit older than me....so you held onto a few more of your romantic
notions
[17:20] <bigbillhaywood> no i don't
[17:21] <bart> soldiers = evil
[17:21] <bigbillhaywood> no
[17:21] <bart> cops are evil or good?
[17:21] <bigbillhaywood> not at all
[17:21] <bigbillhaywood> neither
[17:21] <bart> splain it to me
[17:21] <bigbillhaywood> are republicans good?
are soldiers republicans?
[17:21] <bigbillhaywood> you splain it to
ME bart
[17:21] <bart> most soldiers are GOP, yes
[17:21] <bigbillhaywood> how are republicans
good?
[17:22] <bigbillhaywood> and therefore?
[17:22] <bart> you see GOP and soldiers are
the same thing
[17:22] <bigbillhaywood> no...my premise is
that soldiers are the worst kind of republicans
[17:22] <bigbillhaywood> you support them?
[17:22] <bart> the soldiers, yes
[17:22] <bigbillhaywood> and that you shouldn't
support them
[17:22] <bart> they CAN be, (the worst
kind of republicans) but your brush is ten miles wide
[17:22] <bigbillhaywood> no...it's realistic
[17:23] <bart> "people from Oklahoma are stupid"
many of them are, but not enough
to say that about the whole state
[17:23] <bigbillhaywood> you don't see repubicans
defending institutions that are 70% democratic, do you? do you?
[17:23] <bart> they defend your commie ass
[17:23] <bigbillhaywood> lol
[17:23] <bart> (joking)
[17:23] <bigbillhaywood> I thought we were
to be gentlemanly?
[17:24] <bart> they follow orders
[17:24] <bart> tongue-in-cheek on the commie
ass
[17:24] <bigbillhaywood> ok...are you going
to present the nuremburg defense?
[17:24] <bigbillhaywood> or the rumsfeld defense?
[17:24] <bart> the nuremburg defense, no
[17:24] <bigbillhaywood> ok...then it's RUMMIE
time!
[17:24] <bart> but soldiers DO have to follow
orders unless they're insane on their face
[17:25] <bigbillhaywood> no they don't
[17:25] <bigbillhaywood> ever heard of Ghandi?
[17:25] <bart> yeah, they killed him
[17:25] <bart> I've heard of MLK, too
[17:25] <bigbillhaywood> you defy the immoral
and passively accept the consequences
[17:26] <bigbillhaywood> you've read Conason's
article...the one on your webpage?
[17:26] <bart> In general, is "Take Fallujah"
a war crime?
[17:26] <bigbillhaywood> it seems the torture
orders came right down the chain of command
[17:26] <bigbillhaywood> Was guernica a war
crime? and if it was were only the officers guilty?
[17:27] <bart> dunno about guernica
[17:27] <bigbillhaywood> i do
[17:27] <bart> use another example
[17:27] <bigbillhaywood> so did picasso
[17:27] <bigbillhaywood> my lai?
[17:27] <bigbillhaywood> the ludlow massacre?
[17:27] <bart> my lai was a bad thing
[17:27] <bigbillhaywood> sand creek?
[17:28] <bigbillhaywood> wounded knee?
[17:28] <bart> you can stop now
[17:28] <bigbillhaywood> ok
[17:28] <bigbillhaywood> does that mean I
win? (:
[17:28] <bart> picking out a dozen atrocities
and slurring tens of millions of men,
many who died without the Jesus guarantee, is a wrong thing
[17:28] <bigbillhaywood> maybe, maybe not
[17:29] <bart> that's why we're here
[17:29] <bigbillhaywood> I say that individuals
should bear the responsibility
[17:29] <bart> you just let Bush off the hook
[17:29] <bigbillhaywood> no i didn't
[17:29] <bigbillhaywood> and those who are
aware of the perpetrators should expose them
[17:29] <bart> I say hold Bush rsponsible,
let the 19 year old go home
[17:30] <bigbillhaywood> after the 19 year old has committed murder?
[17:30] <bart> EnK, is your offer to moderate still open?
Sidebar: EnK is a moderator, or boss
of the chat room.
He offered to referee, and at this point I
needed help because we were going nowhere
and it was either change gears or turn out
the lights.
[17:30] <bart> BBH, hold on, we need a translator
[17:30] <bigbillhaywood> what's the problem,
bart?
[17:30] <bart> we're not speaking the same
argument
language
[17:30] <bigbillhaywood> ok...reframe it
[17:31] <bart> we're arguing "what is the meaning
of bad?"
[17:31] <bigbillhaywood> actions define evil...good
enough?
[17:31] <bart> your paint brush is so wide,
I can't see any margins
[17:31] <bigbillhaywood> look closer
[17:31] <bart> your argument is wider than
the Pacific
[17:32] <bigbillhaywood> I'm not anti-military
[17:32] <bigbillhaywood> once again....the
army of today is NOT representative of america
[17:32] <bart> So, you think a DRAFTED soldier
is better than a volunteer?
[17:32] <bigbillhaywood> It is made up of
people who are supporters of anti-american right wing extremism
[17:33] <bigbillhaywood> you better believe
it bart
[17:33] <bigbillhaywood> I know a LOT of ww2
vets....
[17:33] <bart> OK, you semi have a point -
they are more likely to own guns and be for Bush, true the majority
[17:33] <bigbillhaywood> and they're the best of the best, a true cross section of america
[17:33] <bart> first, they are WILLING to join,
that says the most
[17:33] <bigbillhaywood> I think that's who
you REALLY support....
[17:33] <bigbillhaywood> but they ain't there
no more
[17:34] <bart> losing the draft meant trouble?
[17:34] <bigbillhaywood> yes, exactly
[17:34] <bigbillhaywood> and democracy will
suffer as a result
[17:34] <bart> you realize you're alone on
that?
[17:34] <bigbillhaywood> no i'm not
[17:35] <bigbillhaywood> any country that
develops a 'warrior' class loses democracy
[17:35] <bigbillhaywood> talk to soldiers
bart - listen to them
[17:35] <bart> soldiers or ex-soldiers?
[17:35] <bart> so we lost this in 1973 or so?
[17:35] <EnK> Okay y'all
[17:36] <bigbillhaywood> I once had to
protect my 71 year old mom from some
shaved head punks in uniform who overheard her
insulting bush
Sidebar: This may have been the most
telling sentence of the debate.
Earlier he said he "knew" military guys and
I asked of they kicked sand in his face.
This is human nature.
People who have been mugged by blacks are
more likely to dislike blacks.
Having a run-in with some military types seems
to have given BBH the idea
that ALL military are punks who'd use violence
on old ladies.
This is an understandable reaction, but it's
a bad foundation for forming policy
that leads to "all military men are evil"
wrong conclusions.
[17:36] <bigbillhaywood> it damned near came to blows
[17:36] <EnK> BBH - you need to be on focus
with your point: Are you saying all military folks are bad?
Or, perhaps you're saying that it's gotten a hell of a lot worse!
[17:36] <EnK> Clarify your point for us...
[17:36] <bigbillhaywood> I'm saying that the
institution of the US military IS bad
[17:36] <bigbillhaywood> and an institution
is made up of it's componenets
[17:37] <EnK> The Institution itself then?!
[17:37] <bigbillhaywood> yes, and WHAT is an institution other than it's members
[17:37] <EnK> Ah... Bart !! You want to chew on this or clarify your own point?
[17:37] <bart> I see your point, BBH, but how
is the military diff from cops & firemen?
[17:38] <bigbillhaywood> you can argue that
the soldiers are propagandized...but so are southern baptists
[17:38] <bigbillhaywood> you don't know the
difference? firemen wear funnier hats, for one
[17:38] <bart> stay with me - no army is like
no cops, right?
Isn't a flawed army better than a 280,000,000 person cage match?
[17:38] <bigbillhaywood> I'm not arguing for NO army
[17:39] <bart> so you're pro evil?
[17:39] <bart> how can you live with yourself?
[17:39] <bigbillhaywood> I'm saying that we
fall into a republican trap by being
forced to voice support for a republican institution
[17:40] <bigbillhaywood> and there is no larger
a group of republicans than the us military
[17:40] <bart> so you call the soldiers "GOP"
and then what, you want them disbanded?
[17:40] <bigbillhaywood> no
[17:40] <bart> what is your solution?
[17:40] <bigbillhaywood> I think I've
been clear that i prefer the military as it has existed throughout our
history
[17:40] <bart> give me a date - it changed
when?
[17:41] <bigbillhaywood> ...and that the development
of a large standing professional army is WRONG
it changed when it went all-volunteer....
[17:41] <bart> OK,. so tell me what's RIGHT
[17:41] <bigbillhaywood> why do I have to keep repeating myself?
[17:41] <bigbillhaywood> what's right is a
small army... with draftees when needed
[17:42] <bigbillhaywood> so a large politically
biased army doesn't corrupt democracy
[17:42] <EnK> BBH : I'm curious, perhaps
this might help. Are you saying that when they dropped the draft
in 1974, the US military became a GOP institution - hence rendering it
a "bad institution"?
[17:42] <bigbillhaywood> no..it evolved quite
naturally into one
[17:42] <bart> I think you're who Rush
has in mind when he says "we can't trust the liberals with our freedom"
[17:43] <bigbillhaywood> that's pretty silly
bart...and beneath you
Sidebar: No, I think this is exactly
on-point.
When you stand up and say "The military is
an evil institution," the voters know Osama wants us dead
and they know they cannot vote for the anti-military
party - another reason I wanted Wesley Clark.
[17:43] <bigbillhaywood> have you read the
history of the Abraham Lincoln brigade?
[17:43] <bart> BBH, you seem incapable of
capsulating your point
[17:44] <bigbillhaywood> need I repeat myself
again?
[17:44] <bart> please, no
[17:44] <bigbillhaywood> lol
[17:44] <EnK> Well - let's change the venue
and look at this another way:
[17:44] <EnK> Bart - perhaps you can help
us understand what's GOOD about the US Military!
[17:44] <EnK> BBH - you can look for bart's
points and chew on them from that angle....
[17:44] <bart> First, they keep foreign tanks from riding thru town
[17:44] <bigbillhaywood> simple bart...you
can't support the troops without supporting the institution,
bart...and the institution is as right wing as they come
[17:45] <bart> soldiers are like cops, I'm hearing "disband the police force" yet you fail to explain yourself
[17:45] <bigbillhaywood> I won't attack the
concept of soldiers, bart...so you really shouldn't defend the concept
[17:45] <bigbillhaywood> you're hearing something
I'm not saying, then
[17:46] <bart> I feel we have hit a brick wall
[17:46] <bigbillhaywood> no...
[17:46] <bart> let's open up and let everybody
in
[17:46] <bigbillhaywood> just answer my question...why
are you defending republicans?
[17:46] <bart> why do you have a tail?
[17:46] <bart> I don't play that
[17:46] <bigbillhaywood> no fair
[17:46] <nuvee-scribn> don't you have any
Republican friends, Big Bill?
[17:46] <bigbillhaywood> lol
[17:46] <EnK> <chuckling> Okay
folks... are we done or do you want to go on for a bit longer?
[17:47] <bart> nah... we're done
[17:47] <bigbillhaywood> thanks for the opportunity
Bart....you're a great guy
[17:47] <bart> BBH, at least you were polite
[17:47] <bigbillhaywood> yeah...that's 'cause
I like you
[17:48] <bart> maybe it's because I've been
typing my thoughts for 10 years,
but I can get most points made in 50 words or less
[17:48] <bigbillhaywood> anyone else want to jump me?
[17:48] <EnK> You're okay BBH... You did just fine buddy...
[17:48] <ramper> Logical fallacy on Bart's
part: false choice.
"If you don't think all soldiers are heroes,
then you should disband the police."
[17:49] <bart> ramper, let's talk about that
Sidebar: We do, some, on Thursday's
page
[17:49] <bigbillhaywood> I think our military
in ww2 was the finest that ever existed
Sidebar: This too, made me question
his motives.
Absent other possibilities, BBH SEEMS to want
to climb into the Wabac Machine
and return to the days when things were better.
That's not an answer to anything.
When I asked for his solution, the closest
he got to answering was "a smaller army,"
which is a guaranteed loser for any candidate,
especially a Demo candidate.
Maybe we'll have better luck at the next debate.