Democratic Diva

06 Aug 2010 10:50 pm
Posted by: Donna

Up until now I wasn’t really following the story about Jonathan Paton’s attack on Rep. Gabrielle Giffords for questions she asked General Petraeus regarding what steps the military is taking to reduce energy consumption. The reason she was asking is that fuel is a major security issue for our troops stationed in Afghanistan. Her opponent in the Congressional race, Paton, immediately jumped on it, issuing an overwrought poorly spelled press release accusing Giffords of asking the General what he was doing to “reduce carbon emissions in Afghanistan” and of being more concerned about solar panels than “soliders (sic) in harm’s way”. Snopes.com explains it all here. The upshot is that Giffords said nothing about carbon emissions and that Paton and others mischaracterized her statements for political purposes.

Righty bloggers are pushing this because it plays perfectly into the anxious masculinity that characterizes much of the GOP base. Gabby Giffords got girl cooties all over General Petraeus! Make no mistake, to people who view everything through a macho culture war lens, that’s what this is all about.

Cole Hickman, Iraq war veteran and Democratic activist, tried valiantly to explain the energy/security nexus to readers of a local conservative blog:

My job in Iraq was helping to direct convoys carrying food, water, ammo and fuel to our troops–lots of fuel. Our military relies on fuel for every level of combat operations–fuel for base generators, for aircraft and for vehicles. Any effort to reduce the amount of fuel troops needs reduces troops exposed to roadside IEDs and therefor reduces casualties.

If any of you actually understood the military and combat operations the way Gabby does, you’d understand why she’s pushing to reduce military fuel consumption. You’d also understand why some of the most ambitious efforts for fuel efficiency by the military, because most military leaders agree with Giffords…

…You all should take a moment to put down your political assumptions and see that energy efficiency makes our military stronger. This isn’t about some Berkeley hippie mentality. This could save lives, like the thousands who have died on Iraq and Afghanstan’s roads transporting tankers full of fuel to troops who could use solar and other renewable resources instead.

Well bless your heart for the attempt, Cole, but there’s no rational argument strong enough to penetrate the deep fear of the girl cooties that grips the soul of the typical wingnut dude.

A sample of some of the comments that followed Cole’s:

She had him talking about insulating buildings for gosh sakes.

Btw, kudos to Giffords for sacrificing her seat to focus on worthwhile issues like energy conservation for our fighting men and women overseas. While others were asking questions about strategy, Giffords stood up against Big Oil and demanded energy conservation from General Petraeus. Way to go, Gabby!!

Shorthand: Gabby Giffords is trying to use insulation and solar panels to sap our manly essences!

havent heard anything this dippy since, oh, the last time kyrsten sinema said anything, about any subject

Kyrsten Sinema is female so mentioning her conjunction with Gabby Giffords, also female, gets you Double Girl Cooties Panic Inducing Points!

But this next one is the best of the lot. “Energy efficiency” passes dudely muster but “conservation”? Totally wussified and means you don’t support the troops and want to infect them with girl cooties. Even if you were/are a troop.

There’s a big difference between energy conservation and energy efficiency. For example, energy conservation would be doing more with less, or doing without (sacrifice). On the flip side, energy efficiency is using technology to get the most out of every unit of energy; reduce consumption without compromise.

I too was in the military, and when you look at where we were 20 years ago to where we are today, efficiency is the name of the game, not conservation. Advanced fighters are being built that can go farther with more payload, M1A1 upgrades that allow the crew to reach out and touch someone at further distances, ships and boats that run on nuclear power, etc. These are all efficiencies that have impacted our war machine, and to some extent, shown the world why we are the greatest nation on earth.

Cole, you have failed to realize that our military is the largest all volunteer force in the world. No one was drafted or made to serve this great country of ours, rather people volunteer because they love our country and what it stands for. People die in war, and anytime we lose a comrade in arms, it is a tragic event. But we prepare for war and make personal sacrifice in hopes that the world will be at peace, and sometimes it doesn’t work out the way we want. For you to wine about having to participate in convoys to haul supplies and fuel to the front line soldier whose life is in jeopardy every second of every day, is a dishonor to all who have served and lost their lives. I believe it is you, sir, who does not understand military operations and the unspoken code of honor that true soldiers live by.

Booyah! He sure told you, Cole. Yeah I know, it doesn’t make any sense to me either. But our problem is that we’re perceiving this as normal people and not anxiety ridden conservative males.

2 Comments

Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a comment

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website