Check this out....

cspeier1

WOW!! LINK

AlanAllen

I read the original article... the University president is correct that's it's intellectually immature. The whole crux of it is that the war in Afghanistan is unjustified, so anyone who voluntarily goes to fight for the USA there deserves to die. It was such a poorly reasoned and written article that it didn't even raise my hackles.

Joe

cspeier1

AlanAllen-- Are you the guy I purchased the Dorsett Rookie from? If so, I've been meaning to thank you and tell you the card is nice. Chad

Tipem

Interesting read no doubt.You have to give the newspaper credit for printing an article that they knew would be very controversial. I don't want to sound obtuse or have this taken out of context but Tillman probably wouldn't have ever had a plaza named for him if he had just played for Arizona.I don't know if he would have even obtained star status.I am not that familiar with his background. There will always be two views of everything.


Vic

CON40

Just goes to show you that even tasteless cheap-shot crap "journalism" like this can find an audience among the left-wing wacko media! I welcome the story as it's the author's first amendment right to write it, but jeez, does the national media have any right whatsoever to pay attention to it? Especially since his family is still grieving, how can anyone say he died for nothing!!!

I think the author needs to do a little tour of duty to get a sense of what our troops are going through...

AlanAllen

Yeah, that was me Chad. I'm glad you like the card.

Joe

pandrews

<< <i>Just goes to show you that even tasteless cheap-shot crap "journalism" like this can find an audience among the left-wing wacko media! I welcome the story as it's the author's first amendment right to write it, but jeez, does the national media have any right whatsoever to pay attention to it? Especially since his family is still grieving, how can anyone say he died for nothing!!!

I think the author needs to do a little tour of duty to get a sense of what our troops are going through... >>



Amen! the author is very ignorant..

toppsgun

UMass.

Right smack dab in the middle of that bastion of liberalism. Get all the benefits of freedom without lifting a finger. Many Pat Tillmans fought to give that journalist the right to write what he wrote. Many are buried in Revolutionary War graves and they may be turning over in them right about now.

One thing these liberals don't realize is, "Don't mess with patriotism." It's a battle they'll lose everytime.

qualitycards

The writer is an ass! My son is a Marine and even voluntered to get sent to Iraq, as did half his unit.
While his mother and I hope he doesn't get called and go into harms way, I think its a noble gesture that
he wants to defend our freedoms and help his fellow soldiers & Marines. But according to the student
author, he shouldn't be there, so its no big deal if he gets wounded or dies. ...jay

envoy98

Ok, at the risk of being savaged because of my avatar, I'll still post on this thread. I for one whole-heartedly disagree with the author's stance, though I can agree with the paper/university's decision to print it. On one hand you have to stand for the ideals that people such as Pat Tillman and the millions of others who will forever remain nameless & faceless to the masses of us, have fought for. However ignorant, insensitive and disgusting this article is to most anyone who will read it, the author does have the right to think it, say it and print it. The nice thing is that it does spark debate, whether you find all of it offensive and none of it reality, some of each or entriely all true is what makes this such a great country.

What I think best supports Pat's case as a hero is not that he left behind a 3 million dollar contract, or that he was a professional football player, but rather that he was those things and had a spotlight shone on him and he rejected the media and realized that he was no different than any other person fighting. I personally think that shows his character and his motivation, which is the polar opposite of the "Rambo" mentality the author suggests. I believe his heroism comes from his defending his country, or, depending on your beliefs, the fight for the greater good on behalf of his country where he gave the ultimate sacrifice so that schleps like the author could write this kind of garbage.

CON40, I always like your posts, but the "finding an audience among the left-wing wacko media" comment seems a bit of a stretch. I think you would agree that the author does have a right to print the article, and in fact, think and say what he/she thinks. While personally I, and everyone else on this thread seem to agree it is tastelss, insensitve and completely contrary to the truth. But, the author does have that right. What is interesting is that all of us have become an audience and it sparked debate, does that make all of us left-wing wackos for reading it, and does it mean all democrats are wacko's? I certainly don't buy into two cents of what this author wrote and I don't believe Pat Tillman was a Rambo, and even if that were his motivation, does it really make a difference?

I think Tipem makes a great point, while it might be a tough pill to swallow, he does have a point. How many soldiers from AZ have died over there? Do they have plaza's named after them? Certainly it's a genuine thought and certainly it is with sincerest regards that they are doing that, but is it patronizing to the other soldiers? It's always nice, well, nice isn't the right word, but it's beneficial when a higher profile individual sacrifices and it benefits the common good. For example, ALS? What's ALS...oh you mean Lou Gehrig's disease. Sometimes, when they put a high profile face to a problem/epidemic it raises awareness and much greater things can be accomplished. So my question is, if they put a memorial in that plaza not of just Pat Tillman, but of all the soldiers from AZ that died would that make a difference to anyone, I don't mean us on this board, I mean to the families?

Ok that's my 2 cents. Well, maybe a nickel.

Let the debate continue. Though I think we are all in agreement the author is a tool that deserves little in way of even acknoledging this distasteful piece of trash that was given more attention than it deserved.

Stone193

As a veteran of Vietnam and Desert Storm, I am neither a hawk nor a dove. We defend Gonzalez's freedom of expression and celebrate the spirit of the constitution. I was in a band in 1990 and played to a packed house in a large university in Erzurem , Turkey. After our first song, they booed us and filed out - a small group remained which we played to. The University Prez came over and apologized. I told him, they are young, bright eyed and extremely idealistic. We accept your sensitivity but no apology necessary. That's how I feel about the writer. With time, everyone sees things differently. I know I am not the same person I was 25 years ago. Just my take. Always smiling.
Mike

CON40

CON40, I always like your posts, but the "finding an audience among the left-wing wacko media" comment seems a bit of a stretch. I think you would agree that the author does have a right to print the article, and in fact, think and say what he/she thinks. While personally I, and everyone else on this thread seem to agree it is tastelss, insensitve and completely contrary to the truth. But, the author does have that right. What is interesting is that all of us have become an audience and it sparked debate, does that make all of us left-wing wackos for reading it, and does it mean all democrats are wacko's? I certainly don't buy into two cents of what this author wrote and I don't believe Pat Tillman was a Rambo, and even if that were his motivation, does it really make a difference?

envoy;

Thanks... I know I'm a little hard on that statement, but I truly believe the media is very liberally biased... take for example the soldier who came home on leave a couple months ago (Hispanic name I cannot recall)... after arriving he held a press conference to announce he did not intend to return because he didn't believe in the war... what was the media's response to this soldier who was committing a punishable crime (desertion)... he was hailed as a hero trying to bring to light the struggles of serving in the Middle east... in my opionion, that is a very misguided slant on the actual story that he was a deserter. He did not deserve air time for his beliefs... I do not recall any "right wing" media (aside from Limbaugh) criticizing him because at the end of the day, he has a right to say as he feels and face the consequences for his actions.

Compare the story of that one soldier against the press that this very ignorant, small minded individual has has garnered for a truly hateful article... the media should be ignoring it as extremist hate. He can say it and believe it, but does the media have to cow tow to such a lunatic fringe ideology? No, they are just fanning the flames of negativity regarding our involvement in the Middle East war.

Democrats have nothing to do with it. It's the complete lack of respect for our nation and patriotism on the part of the national media that I am villifying.

I hope this makes my point a little clearer and focused.

67standup

There's the issue of the troops - their valor, giving of their lives - and the political decision to be over there. Often when this topic arises, the distinction is not made. Most people only understand black&white, two sides to every issue, winner & loser, zero sum game, etc.

In regard to the "author", it was probably written for shock value; a nameless writer has now probably caused a national outcry. Many virtual unknowns would leap at such an opportunity; an obscure Ebayer in a wedding dress comes to mind.

Regardless of the writer's stance, it's just poor taste. This was less about the freedom of speech, than "look at me."

envoy98

I don't recall the "deserter" story, but if that was in fact the case, he absolutely deserves to be condemned, not lauded as some national hero speaking on behalf of those who "want to say it, but don't have the guts". I absolutely agree with your position on that.
I do understand your position a little better, not that either of us wouldn't have slept just fine tonight either way, but it does seem less "Right Wing v. Left Wing" then I initially thought, and I appreciate your candor.

I don't know to what extent this story has made the national press, I guess ESPN is as close as some of us might get to "National News".

As for 67Standups remarks, you could very well be right that the article was less about sparking debate and a distorted view being cast upon the readership in the name of free speech, which by the way, was granted by the very people he is choosing to villify, and more about showmanship and "look at me"

Phew, long winded, but I think we agree.