Reality Versus John Gibson II

Yes, it's big bad, super macho man John Gibson at it again. I'm sure this sounds like a broken record by now, but it's amazing to me how many of these Republican/neoconservative talking head mouthpieces can be easily pointed out for blatant hypocrisy, and yet still allowed to go on the air daily to keep repeating such crap about other people.

The prelude to his latest My Word column says it all: Does Barack Obama think wars are won by refusing to fight them?

Now before I even get into the text of his My Word, can macho man Gibson even be serious? Really, this is all too easy! There is no greater example of someone refusing to fight a war than John Gibson. Born in 1946 to what might have been the two worst parents in the world, Gibson was of more than prime fighting age during the entire Vietnam Conflict and never once did Gibson go fight. When his country desperately needed him the most, Gibson refused to fight. Not only did he refuse he went out of his way to get multiple deferments. When Bill Clinton did this, he was called a draft dodger. When John Gibson and Rush Limbaugh do this, they are considered super serious patriotic American tough men. Refusing to fight a war is your history John Gibson; you are the epitome of everything you hate.

But what in the world is macho man even talking about? Let's look at the Obama quote that he uses to show that Obama supposedly doesn't want to fight.

"...Much of the violence has been reduced because there was an agreement with tribes in Anbar Province... Sunni tribes... who started to see after the Democrats were elected in '06... you know that, the Americans may be leaving soon, and we're going to be left very vulnerable to the Shias. We should start negotiating now."

Macho man says that this boils down to Obama pretty much stating that wars are won by not fighting them. What wars is he talking about? Does Gibson want more war, maybe with Iran and Syria? The Anbar Province has already been supposedly secured three different times only to have it return to chaos in a matter of months. Obviously fighting hasn't done the trick. Besides, where does Obama say that he doesn't want to fight a war? And where does he say wars are won by not fighting them? Gibson, you're just making stuff up. Obama never says any of those words.

Now if someone wants to argue that Obama is stretching the fabric a little too far with the break in violence is due in large part to Democrats in Congress, then I'm fine with that. But to state that what Obama really meant was that wars are won by not fighting them is garbage, and totally unethical for a journalist. Of course I could easily argue macho man is no journalist.

Johnny boy, let's face it. You missed your war when your country needed you and you just can't face reality.