Gay General Slams Republicans

[Pablo Sanchez]

Duncan Hunter's response--
The man has discovered a way of saying the fairly neutral word "homosexual" that just reeks of disgust and hate. You can tell that every time he says "homosexual" he's thinking "sodomite." Also, I'm not sure about this, but Duncan Hunter apparently agrees with Colin Powell. Maybe if he had said it a few more times, it would have been clearer. Since he only said it like five times in thirty seconds, I'm not sure it got across.

Mitt Romney's response--
He looked really uncomfortable, as I'm sure I would be if I got nailed for being a hypocritical, waffling douche-bag on a bread-and-butter conservative issue like this. As an added bonus, the moderator who took the opportunity to get all up in his face happened to be open-secret gay anchorman Anderson Cooper. And again, passing the buck. He can't form an actual opinion on the question because he needs the military to tell him what he thinks. This got his ass booed, as it should. In that clip he looks like just about the limpest, most plastic candidate possible.

He ought to get down on his knees and thank Mormon God for all the money people give him, because apart from his nicely shaped head and piles of cash, he's pretty much the worst candidate in the race.

[Chardok]

I think I speak for all concerned that that was pure, unadulterated liberal pr0n of the highest order. It was so delicious that If I could can it somehow, and preserve it, I'd be a billionaire.

I fapped.

In my mind.


I was mind-fapping.

[Ericxihn]

Duncan Hunter's response--
The man has discovered a way of saying the fairly neutral word "homosexual" that just reeks of disgust and hate. You can tell that every time he says "homosexual" he's thinking "sodomite." Also, I'm not sure about this, but Duncan Hunter apparently agrees with Colin Powell. Maybe if he had said it a few more times, it would have been clearer. Since he only said it like five times in thirty seconds, I'm not sure it got across.

Mitt Romney's response--
He looked really uncomfortable, as I'm sure I would be if I got nailed for being a hypocritical, waffling douche-bag on a bread-and-butter conservative issue like this. As an added bonus, the moderator who took the opportunity to get all up in his face happened to be open-secret gay anchorman Anderson Cooper. And again, passing the buck. He can't form an actual opinion on the question because he needs the military to tell him what he thinks. This got his ass booed, as it should. In that clip he looks like just about the limpest, most plastic candidate possible.

He ought to get down on his knees and thank Mormon God for all the money people give him, because apart from his nicely shaped head and piles of cash, he's pretty much the worst candidate in the race.

I'd actually prefer Romney to any other republican candidate. He is a pussy who won't stand up for any position, but considering some of the grounds that the Republicans are running on, that's a good thing. Besides, he's not a closet fascist and has actually proven himself to be competent in the past.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Duncan Hunter's response--
The man has discovered a way of saying the fairly neutral word "homosexual" that just reeks of disgust and hate. You can tell that every time he says "homosexual" he's thinking "sodomite." Also, I'm not sure about this, but Duncan Hunter apparently agrees with Colin Powell. Maybe if he had said it a few more times, it would have been clearer. Since he only said it like five times in thirty seconds, I'm not sure it got across.

Duncan Hunter also is responsible for this fiasco, of course:

"According to the July 2007 edition of Pacific Flyer, Hunter and Cunningham had pressured the Department of Defense to "...advise DARPA to put an immediate halt to bureaucratic delays and get on with the DuPont Aerospace DP-2 testing." The DP-2 is a Vertical Take-Off and Landing, or VTOL, aircraft designed by DuPont Aerospace to transport special operations forces, but has been repeatedly rejected by the Navy, Army, Air Force, NASA, and DARPA. The design, of which all four constructed models have crashed, has had $63 million appropriated to it since 1991, not including a suggested $6 million for fiscal year 2008. Despite the rejections and reports by multiple military and civilian experts that the aircraft will not fly or hover and will incinerate Special Operations forces rapelling out of the aircraft, Hunter has allegedly repeatedly added funding for the DP-2 in "earmarks" and defended the aircraft in recent testimony to the Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight of the Committee on Science and Technology. Hunter has received $36,000 in donations from DuPont Aerospace."

[Adrian Laguna]

Ah the sweet smell of pork.

[Lonestar]

Some of the Youtube comments are really vexing me.

[Einhander Sn0m4n]

Some of the Youtube comments are really vexing me.

http://xkcd.com/202/

That's all I need to say. Blame the American school system.

[TithonusSyndrome]

Ah the sweet smell of pork.

Spec Ops don't smell that sweet, I wouldn't think.

[Adrian Laguna]

http://xkcd.com/202/
That's all I need to say. Blame the American school system.

The last comment is brilliant though. Pure and simple mockery.

Spec Ops don't smell that sweet, I wouldn't think.

Human beings taste like pork, it would stand to reason that when cooked they smell similar.

[sketerpot]

I can't stop thinking of Gay General as a cabinet position like Attorney General or Surgeon General. This leads naturally to ghastly politics fanfic:

The Gay General caressed Donald Rumsfeld's thigh with his long, thin fingers. Truly, this would be a night of shock and awe. Rumsfeld laughed as they laid the Attorney General on the table; doped as he was with GHB, he would not recall the night's events. He would be conscious, if not exactly in command of any of his faculties, so it would not be rape. "The US does not rape," George had always said, with a knowing smile on his lips.

*shudder*

[darthbob88]

I can't stop thinking of Gay General as a cabinet position like Attorney General or Surgeon General. This leads naturally to ghastly politics fanfic:

The Gay General caressed Donald Rumsfeld's thigh with his long, thin fingers. Truly, this would be a night of shock and awe. Rumsfeld laughed as they laid the Attorney General on the table; doped as he was with GHB, he would not recall the night's events. He would be conscious, if not exactly in command of any of his faculties, so it would not be rape. "The US does not rape," George had always said, with a knowing smile on his lips.

*shudder*

You, sir, owe me some bleach to get rid of that mental image.

[Covenant]

Why do you think Rummy never sat down to do his office work? It wasn't because he's hard working, that's for sure.

[DPDarkPrimus]

Some of the Youtube comments are really vexing me.

http://xkcd.com/202/

That's all I need to say. Blame the American school system.

From what I've seen on YouTube, the Russian school system has just as much to answer for.

[Aaron]

Human beings taste like pork, it would stand to reason that when cooked they smell similar.

Cooking human or burning human resembles the smell of a burning hot dog.

[Resinence]

Some of the Youtube comments are really vexing me.

http://xkcd.com/202/

That's all I need to say. Blame the American school system.

From what I've seen on YouTube, the Russian school system has just as much to answer for.

"Oh but <<random>> are just as bad" is really not that best attitude to have about something that needs to be fixed, regardless of whether it makes people feel better.

[Sidewinder]

Duncan Hunter also is responsible for this fiasco, of course:

"According to the July 2007 edition of Pacific Flyer, Hunter and Cunningham had pressured the Department of Defense to "...advise DARPA to put an immediate halt to bureaucratic delays and get on with the DuPont Aerospace DP-2 testing." The DP-2 is a Vertical Take-Off and Landing, or VTOL, aircraft designed by DuPont Aerospace to transport special operations forces, but has been repeatedly rejected by the Navy, Army, Air Force, NASA, and DARPA. The design, of which all four constructed models have crashed, has had $63 million appropriated to it since 1991, not including a suggested $6 million for fiscal year 2008. Despite the rejections and reports by multiple military and civilian experts that the aircraft will not fly or hover and will incinerate Special Operations forces rapelling out of the aircraft, Hunter has allegedly repeatedly added funding for the DP-2 in "earmarks" and defended the aircraft in recent testimony to the Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight of the Committee on Science and Technology. Hunter has received $36,000 in donations from DuPont Aerospace."

Shouldn't this guy be arrested for accepting bribes?

Back to the DP-2.

The DP-2 has only one competitor currently in service, the V-22 Osprey. The services have been actively seeking an alternative to the Osprey, a slower and lower-flying aircraft that has experienced several fatalities as well as hardware and software problems throughout its $12 billion development cycle.

I recently read a Time article criticizing the V-22 for being damn unsafe to fly. The same article also noted that one-third of all AV-8 Harriers built have crashed. Someone should free the Pentagon, and the congressmen shoving pork down the Pentagon's throats, from their delusion that VTOLs other than helicopters will be useful in combat.

[Ryan Thunder]

Someone should free the Pentagon, and the congressmen shoving pork down the Pentagon's throats, from their delusion that VTOLs other than helicopters will be useful in combat.

Why wouldn't they be? Obviously they need to safe, but is the concept of a vehicle that can fly like a fighter jet, but not require a runway for landing or take-off really that terrible?

If so, why?

[Beowulf]

Campaign donations aren't bribes, because the receiver doesn't profit from it directly. It'd be impossible to change it because everyone gets campaign donations from corporations, so they don't want to change it.

[Duckie]

Campaign donations aren't bribes, because the receiver doesn't profit from it directly. It'd be impossible to change it because everyone gets campaign donations from corporations, so they don't want to change it.

This is of course a less direct way of stating the obvious: That the system is entirely the slave of corporate interests and that it can't be changed because the corporations who run the government don't want it to.

[Ryan Thunder]

Someone should free the Pentagon, and the congressmen shoving pork down the Pentagon's throats, from their delusion that VTOLs other than helicopters will be useful in combat.

Why wouldn't they be? Obviously they need to safe, but is the concept of a vehicle that can fly like a fighter jet, but not require a runway for landing or take-off really that terrible?

If so, why?

Sorry folks, I messed up; it should read "Obviously they need to be safe [...]" etc.

[The Dark]

Someone should free the Pentagon, and the congressmen shoving pork down the Pentagon's throats, from their delusion that VTOLs other than helicopters will be useful in combat.

Why wouldn't they be? Obviously they need to safe, but is the concept of a vehicle that can fly like a fighter jet, but not require a runway for landing or take-off really that terrible?

If so, why?

Sorry folks, I messed up; it should read "Obviously they need to be safe [...]" etc.

Usually the trade-offs aren't worthwhile. To lift any sort of heavy mass involves massive thrust levels - some early jet VTOLs were known to shatter runways. The fuel consumption for vertical flight likewise is highly intensive, meaning that if you carry any significant payload, you've got the combat radius of a mite. The transition from horizontal to vertical flight is one of the most dangerous "routine" maneuvers possible, since it involves a flight profile that includes deliberately stalling the plane, meaning you have only active lift holding you airborn (as opposed to the "passive" lift of the airstream going over the airfoils). STO operations (short take-off) are mort worthwhile - this is the British and Russian method of using a ski-ramp to help aircraft get airborne with a short run, but true VTOL ops are of questionable worth IMO.

[Ryan Thunder]

Why wouldn't they be? Obviously they need to safe, but is the concept of a vehicle that can fly like a fighter jet, but not require a runway for landing or take-off really that terrible?

If so, why?

Sorry folks, I messed up; it should read "Obviously they need to be safe [...]" etc.

Usually the trade-offs aren't worthwhile. To lift any sort of heavy mass involves massive thrust levels - some early jet VTOLs were known to shatter runways. The fuel consumption for vertical flight likewise is highly intensive, meaning that if you carry any significant payload, you've got the combat radius of a mite. The transition from horizontal to vertical flight is one of the most dangerous "routine" maneuvers possible, since it involves a flight profile that includes deliberately stalling the plane, meaning you have only active lift holding you airborn (as opposed to the "passive" lift of the airstream going over the airfoils). STO operations (short take-off) are mort worthwhile - this is the British and Russian method of using a ski-ramp to help aircraft get airborne with a short run, but true VTOL ops are of questionable worth IMO.

Well, yes, this is a good explanation of the troubles with modern VTOL aircraft.

But I was referring to the concept, not the mechanism used to achieve it. Really, what I mean is, imagine a vehicle that can hover like a gunship or book it like a jet if it needs to. Forget how it does this, for the moment.

Would you not want a vehicle that could do that (assuming a safe mechanism were worked out)? It would certainly make it easier to launch/retrieve them. The wider range of potential maneuvers couldn't hurt, either.

[aerius]

Well, yes, this is a good explanation of the troubles with modern VTOL aircraft.

But I was referring to the concept, not the mechanism used to achieve it. Really, what I mean is, imagine a vehicle that can hover like a gunship or book it like a jet if it needs to. Forget how it does this, for the moment.

Would you not want a vehicle that could do that (assuming a safe mechanism were worked out)? It would certainly make it easier to launch/retrieve them. The wider range of potential maneuvers couldn't hurt, either.

You might as well wish for a 10kg meteorite made of diamond to crash into your home.

[Pablo Sanchez]

I'd actually prefer Romney to any other republican candidate. He is a pussy who won't stand up for any position, but considering some of the grounds that the Republicans are running on, that's a good thing. Besides, he's not a closet fascist and has actually proven himself to be competent in the past.

I completely disagree. It's obvious that, not only does Romney not really believe in the stuff he's saying in his effort to become president, but he also did not really believe the things he said to become governor of Massachusetts. He has no real opinions of consequence and will take whatever position his advisers tell him is best in a given situation. Reading up on how Romney runs his campaign (e.g., the excellent article from the November issue of Harper's on his South Carolina machinery) it becomes clear that he is completely a manufactured creature at the mercy of his staff. He is the very definition of the empty suit.

This is not in any way a good thing. President Bush runs his administration in a similar way, with the proviso that while he does have opinions of his own, the actual decision-making process is completely in the hands of apparatchiks like Rove, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al. Why should anyone think that Romney, who is likely to hire all the same people anyway, and is spineless to such an extent that it's even worse than W's manifest incompetence, would be any better? American voters often set too much store by meaningless criteria like a politician's "steadfastness", but I have to admit that I consider it vital for a politician to have some vision for America. Mitt Romney has no ideas, and no vision, except for his desire that he himself should be the first mollusk to be elected President of the United States.

[Sidewinder]

But I was referring to the concept, not the mechanism used to achieve it. Really, what I mean is, imagine a vehicle that can hover like a gunship or book it like a jet if it needs to. Forget how it does this, for the moment.

"How it does this" is the exact problem we have with VTOLs other than helicopters, i.e., unless someone invents repulsorlifts or some other anti-gravity device, we don't have a way of making it work without taking great financial and technological risks and placing the crews and passengers of the damn VTOLs on the Grim Reaper's list.

Would you not want a vehicle that could do that (assuming a safe mechanism were worked out)?

As stated, safe mechanisms were NOT worked out for VTOLs other than helicopters.