Friday, December 10, 2004

Today's Political Rant

As I've probably mentioned before here, I've never quite understood the admonition to "support our troops." What is it that I might do that would constitute non-support of the men and women fighting over in Iraq? Mock their haircuts? Every time I've heard someone accuse someone else of showing disrespect or a lack of support for "the troops," it seems to be code for "Don't dare suggest that their leaders are not running the war properly or are getting anyone killed needlessly." This was true back in the 'Nam days. It's true now.

The only real, meaningful definition I can come up with about supporting our troops is that we should make sure they have the best possible equipment and protection, that they're not sent into battle needlessly, that they're paid decently, that the wounded receive proper medical care, and that no man or woman returns from service to a life of poverty. These things are not happening, at least not to the extent they should. The exchange one G.I. had the other day with Donald Rumsfeld about body armor is suddenly getting diverted into a debate over the propriety of the question and whether it was "planted." That's a small matter. The larger matter, which no one seems to be denying, is that our troops have not had the best-possible protections in a war that was started on our timetable, not the enemy's. To me, that's a much greater example of "non-support" than anything a guy with a picket sign might commit.

Meanwhile, according to this article, veterans are starting to show up at homeless shelters in this country. This article [Record Online, registration intermittently required] details the financial struggle of one man who lost an arm in Iraq and this piece says that while by some methods of counting, the death rate in Iraq is lower than some past wars, loss of limbs is occurring at a higher-than-usual rate. We have an unfortunate tendency to count the "human loss" of war only in terms of folks who actually die. There are also great costs in those who are injured and emotionally-scarred, and those people are too often hidden and neglected.

Except for a few extreme nutcases, everyone in this country — whether they're for the war in Iraq or ag'in it — wants to see the soldiers return home safely and to be properly compensated for their service. I'd like to see "support our troops" turn into a demand for the government to make that the norm. Too often lately, it's used as a club against those who criticize Bush, Rumsfeld and all the rest who are actually running the war that's getting some of those we support killed and driving others to homeless shelters.

• Posted at 1:37 PM · LINK

About About Comics

As a couple of comic news sites have reported, About Comics has cancelled its series reprinting DNAgents and Crossfire after one volume of each. The marketplace is so screwy these days, especially for small publishers, that I'm not surprised. I was very happy with the job that my pal Nat Gertler did in packaging and publishing the material, and I'm sorry for all of us that it didn't work out. Maybe another time...

• Posted at 11:12 AM · LINK

Moments to Remember

As a couple of folks (including Stan Tychinski and Fred Hembeck) have informed me, the full list of The 100 Most Memorable TV Moments is not a grand secret. It was printed in full in the current issue of TV Guide. I rarely read past the first few pages of that magazine unless the checkout line at the market is unusually long.

I know it's silly to quibble with any list of this sort, but I could only think of two "moments" that surprised me in their omission. One was Walter Cronkite announcing the death of President Kennedy. The other was President Johnson surprising the nation and newsmen alike with his announcement that he would not seek a second term. The entertainment ones are too subjective to weigh, but Kennedy's death and Johnson's abdication were actually instances where, on live TV right before your eyes, you could feel the world change.

And of course, I'd have tossed in my first screen credit. That is, if historians haven't bulk-erased all the old tapes of The McLean Stevenson Show.

• Posted at 10:32 AM · LINK