« OMG DUD U WR TOTLY PWNED!!! THNX 4 THE ADD!!! | Main | Judge Dismisses ACLU Lawsuit Against Rumsfeld »

Who's Your Favorite 'Chickenhawk'? - Poll

A new poll from The New Editor, repeating a question they asked last year: Who's Your Favorite 'Chickenhawk'? Vote at the link preceding.

Last year, Ben Franklin won, but it seems Lincoln and FDR are off to a lead in the early results.


I was always amused by the ignorance of the antiwar morons throwing that term around. Don't they understand what chicken hawks EAT?


UPDATE 28 MAR 1:52 p.m.: Some in comments claim Lincoln isn't eligible, as he served in the Illinois militia. Unfortunately, there are no records which prove Mr. Lincoln ever met his commitments. Perhaps they were removed by influential friends? Dan Rather should investigate . . .


Comments (59)

right on .. and it is about... (Below threshold)
Rick:

right on .. and it is about feeding time

That's easy: <a href="http:... (Below threshold)
mantis:

That's easy: Henery Hawk.

I've never used that label.... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

I've never used that label. It's stupid and is evidence of a weak arguemnt as much as the "traitor" ot "hate america" label is.

Who are you people and who ... (Below threshold)
A. S. Helgeson:

Who are you people and who has stolen your brains and your humanity?

Foghorn Leghorn... (Below threshold)
VagaBond:

Foghorn Leghorn

Lincoln was in the Illinois... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

Lincoln was in the Illinois militia, so you can't hide behind him.

The only neocon I can think of that WASN'T a chickenhawk is Rumsfeld. And the most egregious chickenhawk is Cheney, who based his family planning schedule on the revised requirements for avoiding the draft: the neccessity of a minor child to support. 9 months later a child is born, Halleluja!

Of course, any able-bodied supporter of the Iraq Invasion under 43 years of age, should enlist.

I used the term "chickenhaw... (Below threshold)
RPC24:

I used the term "chickenhawk" around my kids and discovered that it is now teen slang for a pedophile. A new term might be in order.

"Of course, any able-bodied... (Below threshold)
Bryan:

"Of course, any able-bodied supporter of the Iraq Invasion under 43 years of age, should enlist."

Of all the retarded things you've said on this blog, that tops the list.

Do you think we should be doing more to fight AIDS in Africa? If so, why aren't you over there helping out? It's the same kind of twisted stupid logic that nitwits who sling the perjorative "chickenhawk" around use.

bryand is an idiot.<p... (Below threshold)
Drago:

bryand is an idiot.

Rumsfeld is a paleo-con. Always has been. See, that's what gives him the "paleo" part.

"Neo-cons" are former Democrats (former social-liberal, foreign-policy hawks Democrats) who became concerned with the incredible weakness and naivete demonstrated by leaders of the Dem party starting in the 60's, and coming over fairly completely by the election of Ronald Reagan in the 80's. Intellectual leaders who comprised a significant portion of this group were Jewish (Irving Kristol, et al). Others might include Bill Bennett, though you could make an argument that he was not as socially liberal as others.

There's a great story about how Mondale was so concerned about falling support during Carters admin that he (Mondale) invited Jeane Kirkpatrick and a handful of others to come on down to meet with Jimmah Carter, and then how Carter basically told them to get lost.

In just a few months after that, Kirkpatrick met Ronald Reagan for the first time at a dinner party in NYC. Naturally, the host sat RR next to Kirkpatrick, knowing that over the course of the evening, the image of RR put forth by the left would be dispelled by her simply conversing with him.

Just about 9 months later, Kirkpatrick was our new Rep to the UN.

So, you see Bryand, Rumsfeld is not a neo-con. Bush is not a neo-con. Cheney is not a neo-con.

They are all Paleo-cons.

If you disagree, at least make an attempt to define "neo-con" so we can operate off the same page in discussions.

Don't worry, we won't hold our breath. It's

RPC24, The pedophilic use o... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

RPC24, The pedophilic use of "chickenhawk" far preceeds the other. Probably to Victorian times when child-sex euphemisms abounded. I.e. "flower girls" didn't REALLY sell flowers. It was code for "de-flowering", etc.

"A new term might be in order" Pussy, perhaps?

Bryan said:
"Do you think we should be doing more to fight AIDS in Africa?"

No.

Drago, the children at NRO ... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

Drago, the children at NRO threw the term "paleo-con" at conservatives who would not go along with the neocon war, who weren't "with it"; Dinosaurs. Like the British calling the rebels Yankee Doodle Dandies. The antiwar conservatives then adopted it.

Read this so you won't embarrass yourself in future:

http://www.antiwar.com/orig/lind1.html

Sorry, bryanD, you've come ... (Below threshold)
John Irving:

Sorry, bryanD, you've come off on the short end of the stick, accurately called out for misuse of "neo-con," and for continuing to use the submoronic "chickenhawk" meme. Not to mention linking to "antiwar.com," an equally wasteful use of pixels and bits as the chickenhawk garbage.

For another thread, perhaps... (Below threshold)
nikkolai:

For another thread, perhaps: "Who is your favorite Copperhead?" Mine would be John Conyers, or anyone associated with Code Pink.

EARTH TO J.I.: "Chickenhawk... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

EARTH TO J.I.: "Chickenhawks"is the subject of the post. Glad it's struck bone, though! Classic term, that!

Foghorn Leghorn... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Foghorn Leghorn

He's a rooster, not a chickenhawk.

I LOVE IT when bryan's own ... (Below threshold)
Drago:

I LOVE IT when bryan's own links disprove his very points.

It's quite hilarious.

Bryand continues to impress with his/her stunning inability to grasp simple concepts.

In this case, we engage on the issue of bryand's use of the term "neocon".

For the record, as a 25yr subscriber to National Review, I am very aware of how National Review editors and SOME contributing authors used the term "neocon". They used it in a clear way to identify former Democrats, who were social liberals and Anti-Soviet hawks.

What a surprise!! That's how I use the term "neocon".

However, Bryand once again AMAZES us with the ability to link to crazy lefty sites that actually disprove his own thesis!!

Here's how the crazy lefty site describes "neocons":

1) They are called "neoconservatives" because many of them started off as anti-Stalinist leftists or liberals before moving to the far right. (Note: to these crazies, moving away from anti-Stalinist implies you are far-right. very telling indeed)

2) "Inside the government, the chief defense intellectuals include Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy secretary of defense. He is the defense mastermind of the Bush administration; Donald Rumsfeld is an elderly figurehead who holds the position of defense secretary only because Wolfowitz himself is too controversial"

3) "Most neoconservative defense intellectuals have their roots on the left, not the right. They are products of the influential Jewish-American sector of the Trotskyist movement of the 1930s and 1940s, which morphed into anti-communist liberalism between the 1950s and 1970s and finally into a kind of militaristic and imperial right with no precedents in American culture or political history"

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

Bryand = laughable.

his own links, to his own crazy lefty sites, CONTRADICT his own crazy lefty spewing-points.

How is this possible?

How can one be so illiterate as to misunderstand the rantings of ones own political bedfellows?

It's a mystery.

But what's not a mystery is this: Bryand cannot read, or if he can read, then he cannot comprehend what he is reading, or if he can read, and can comprehend what he is reading, is simply a liar.

bryand, just in case you ar... (Below threshold)
Drago:

bryand, just in case you are too stupid to "comprehend" the point of my post above:

Your post specifically referred to Rumsfeld, Bush, Cheney et al as neocons.

I told you that was incorrect.

You "corrected" me not by making an assertion which could be backed up in some meaningful way (obviously beyond your undergraduate capacity), but by linking to a crazy lefty site, which itself contradicts you.

Got it now?

What was that about embarrasing yourself? Don't worry, you couldn't possibly embarrass yourself more than you already have in the past.

As for the term chickenhawk, since you are too cowardly to have served your country, plus you are too lazy to have engaged in acts of civil disobedience against actions you consider illigitimate, makes you least "impressive" conveyor of this "argument".

Thanks again for linking to us to proof of your stupidity.

I couldn't have asked for more on this beautiful Wednesday morning.

bryand: "Lincoln was in the... (Below threshold)
Drago1:

bryand: "Lincoln was in the Illinois militia, so you can't hide behind him."

Actually, simple residence in a community and being an "able-bodied male" is what qualified one to be "in the Illinois militia".

Of course, since bryand is too cowardly to have ever served his country, it's not surprising that he doesn't know this.

I'm sure that he will provide a "link" in a moment which he thinks will suffice as a "refutation" to my above point, and I'm just as sure that the link will offer evidence to the contrary of whatever "point" bryand is trying to make.

That's bryand MO.

BTW, my favorite Chickenhawk is Thomas Paine. Could there be a more forceful advocate for actions not undertaken by the speaker?

Plus, Paine is beloved on the Left.

Even better.

Drago = Drago1, but is more... (Below threshold)
Drago:

Drago = Drago1, but is more handsome.

Howard Cosell,He t... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

Howard Cosell,

He talked alot about sports, but never played them.

YIKES! Drago on Drago Actio... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

YIKES! Drago on Drago Action!

Let's see: Your comprehension is poor, but I understand antiwar.com could have given you pink eye (get it?). Here's a link from another perspective regarding the neocon network:

http://www.newoxfordreview.org/article.jsp?did=1205-editorial


Regarding the Illinois militia: Lincoln was ACTIVE during the Black Hawk War.

"Of course, since bryand is too cowardly to have ever served his country"

I was a machinegunner 0331, C 1/7, USMC.

How about you?

but I understand a... (Below threshold)
Heralder:
but I understand antiwar.com could have given you pink eye

Actually, I got the pink eye from Scott Baio.

drago, while I await your t... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

drago, while I await your touche, here's a classic article on the neocon purge of National Review, which is now run by bearded clams.

http://english.pravda.ru/letters/2002/02/07/26286.html

Chickenhawk: A bird of prey... (Below threshold)
Scrapiron:

Chickenhawk: A bird of prey. I have one that visits my property on a daily basis. It's fun to watch the cowardly birds and rodents scurry for cover when he arrives. Most of the time the Chickenhawk has a rodent in his jaws and is gone in minutes. I'd much rather be a Chickenhawk conservative than a cowardly Rodent (democrat) any day. ROFL
Do these people know there really is a bird of prey called a chickenhawk because it's primary food supply at one time was the farmers 'chickens'?

Like the British calling... (Below threshold)
Taltos:

Like the British calling the rebels Yankee Doodle Dandies.

Oringinally the Brits used the term to poke fun at the colonials during the french and indian war because they considered them uneductaed bumpkins. However during the revolution the Americans co-opted the terminology and often used the song Yankee Doodle to taunt British troops. Sort of a haha the rubes are beating your ass now huh thing.

Poor Bryand. He has to fla... (Below threshold)
Drago:

Poor Bryand. He has to flail faster and faster to keep the focus off his obvious lies.

To recap:

Bryand claimed that the major players in the Bush Admin were neocons.

I told him he was wrong.

He directed me to a site that specifically ruled out Rumsfeld, Bush, Cheney etc as neocons. The site only claimed that the "neocons" had taken "control" of this admin.

I cited specific quotes from bryan the morons own link that refuted his very point.

Bryand's response? Well, exactly what you would suspect.

He simply points to other links (which themselves do not support his assertions.)

What Bryand hasn't done:
1) provide a coherent explanation of what, exactly, a neocon is, and
2) why Rumsfeld, Bush, Cheney etc fit that description sufficiently to labeled as such.

Typical.

Bryand: "I was a machinegunner 0331, C 1/7, USMC."

I would say you are a liar.

It's simply not possible for you to have served and then exhibit the extraordinary level of ignorance about military history, tactics, etc.

You would not be the first lefty poster who claimed a military background in order to increase your blog "cred". What's funny is how morons like you think its so easy to bluff your way through.

I've seen this in AofSpades, Polipundit, and now Wizbang.

Let me guess Bryand, you were in the same "unit" as Jesse Macbeth, right?

Scrapiron: "Chickenhawk: A ... (Below threshold)
Drago:

Scrapiron: "Chickenhawk: A bird of prey. I have one that visits my property on a daily basis. It's fun to watch the cowardly birds and rodents scurry for cover when he arrives."

Exactly. In flight school during the boxing evolution, we had a Marine pilot who looked exactly, and I mean EXACTLY like the Chickenhawk character in the cartoon. It took all of about 5 minutes in our first class meeting for the Marine instructors to label him as such.

I ran into him about 9 years later on my last cruise. The name had stuck.

I wonder what he thinks now of the use of that term?

So some nutbag named Drago ... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

So some nutbag named Drago calls someone a coward ( a favorite slur of the nutbag righties) when whining on a post which is about the term chickenhawk ( a favorite slur of the nutbag lefties). Don't that just beat about all?

Hey bryand, thanks for the ... (Below threshold)
Drago:

Hey bryand, thanks for the link to PRAVDA!!!

Could there be a more perfect, PERFECT, example of bryand's intellectual masters?

First he links to a non-supportive article at the Marxist anti-war.com site.

Then, when exposed, he then links to a virulently anti-semitic article in PRAVDA.

Wow.

bryand, is Rove paying you directly?

Hugh: "So some nutbag named... (Below threshold)
Drago:

Hugh: "So some nutbag named Drago calls someone a coward ( a favorite slur of the nutbag righties) when whining on a post which is about the term chickenhawk ( a favorite slur of the nutbag lefties). Don't that just beat about all?"

Actually, Hugh, you have a point here. To be consistent, I would have to refrain from using a slur such as "coward" when posting about others using slurs.

Pretty straightforward.

Which is why I only use that word when responding to individuals who, obviously without having served themselves, have no difficulty labeling others chickenhawks. I have a real problem with Bush being labeled that as I have far too many associates who are actually in the Air National Guard.

Feel free to continue "policing" my posts for consistency Hugh. It's more than fair.

Drago:Nice to see ... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Drago:

Nice to see you own your mistake. God knows, I know it's not always easy to do.


Just so you know I am a liberal and I detest the use of the chicken-hawk argument - to me it's just a sign of a weak argument. Of course I feel the same about the use of traitor or America hater.

Drago said: "Bryan... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

Drago said:

"Bryand: "I was a machinegunner 0331, C 1/7, USMC."

I would say you are a liar."

Quiz me!

And have you served? 2nd time asking.

Draaaago, You made an alleg... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

Draaaago, You made an allegation, namely:

"Of course, since bryand is too cowardly to have ever served his country,"

To which I answered:

C Co. 1st Battallion 7th Marine Regiment

to which you called me a liar(!)

So now DO TELL! (since YOU brought it up) How you have served your country, if at all. And paying taxes doesn't count.

Feel free to make something up ;)

drago,So you don't... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

drago,

So you don't flub it too badly on your fake resume': 1st battalions only contain companies A-C, 2nd battalions only contain companies D-E, etc.

And field marshall isn't a rank

make that D-F, AND STILL WA... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

make that D-F, AND STILL WAITING :)

This is really funny. Way t... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

This is really funny. Way to go bryan :-)

Hugh, And I was ju... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

Hugh,

And I was just sticking to the guidelines.

Hugh/Bryand, sorry to have ... (Below threshold)
Drago:

Hugh/Bryand, sorry to have left you hanging. Urgent business you know (new carpets and such.)

I notice that bryand has not yet addressed why he linked to articles from Pravda and the crazies at anti-war.com that did not support his original thesis that the principals in the Bush Admin were neocons.

I also notice that Hugh, whose diligence in perusing and holding accountable posters of a more conservative bent is unwavering, becomes downright "mute" when confronted with obvious obliviousness on the part of "more liberal" posters.

Why might that be, Hugh?

My military background? 11 yrs Active, 10 years Reserve, Naval Flight Officer, (Over 300 traps), Gulf War I kind of guy, Flag Staff Officer, even had the pleasure of working as the AirOps staff weenie for the Commodore of the ESG (that's Expeditionary Strike Group Bryan) working directly with the 24MEU (You know, "your marine" pals). A great bunch of guys actually, even if they are marines. I don't hold the ground-pounders in low-esteem, I assure you, as my brother-in-law is a Green Team Cobra Driver and LCOL.

And I'll say it again, the ignorance displayed by bryand makes it most difficult to believe that he has any actual military experience.

Why, if my Gunny were here, he would have a few things "to say" to bryan.

bryan: "And field marshall ... (Below threshold)
Drago:

bryan: "And field marshall isn't a rank"

Actually, it is (just not in any US branch of service.)

Care to try again?

When folks get called down ... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

When folks get called down on the facts, it's amazing how fast they disappear. Happens all the time with Lorie and kim, They never respond when challenged with the truth.

These guys just can't believe a l;liberal ever was in the service. I get called out on it on it all the time too. Was in the Army 70-76, they never believe it. But I still hatethat chicken-hawk label.

Drago:My turn to a... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Drago:

My turn to apologize. I was wrong.

Hugh: "When folks get calle... (Below threshold)
Drago:

Hugh: "When folks get called down on the facts, it's amazing how fast they disappear."

Uh, still here.

Hugh: "These guys just can't believe a l;liberal ever was in the service."

Nonsense. In fact, people are often surprised when I tell them about all the liberals who happen to have been Naval Officers (a particular interesting subject to me)

For instance, Tom Harkin was a Naval Aviator. Unfortunately, he did attempt to make his flying seem more "combat related" than it actually was. He was actually a Ferry pilot, flying planes back and forth from Vietnam to Japan. Nothing wrong with that. That was his role.

LBJ was a Naval Officer as well (although his Silver Star was quite undeserved (awarded for one flight as passenger in a combat zone where the aircraft never even came under fire (see Robert Caro's book))).

Kennedy, Kerry, Carter etc.

Hugh: "I get called out on it on it all the time too."

I would only "call you out on it" if you stated something that appeared to be completely "out to lunch" in terms of military knowledge.

Hugh: "Was in the Army 70-76, they never believe it."

Can't understand why anyone would find that hard to believe.

Hugh: "But I still hatethat chicken-hawk label."

Perhaps you could provide further counsel to bryand on that point (it's apparently "not sticking")

Hugh: "My turn to apologize... (Below threshold)
Drago:

Hugh: "My turn to apologize. I was wrong."

Hugh, if we keep up with all this apologizing and admitting when we are wrong, when will we have time to launch gratuitous attacks upon each others stated policy positions?

Drago:I'm trying t... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Drago:

I'm trying to turn over a new leaf. I can get real bombastic when riled up and have gone beyond the pale more than once.

back to the issue. I am no military expert. I was commissioned a 2d Lt in the Infantry, was rifted in 1971 and assigned to the Reserves where I was able (as a lawyer) to change branches to JAG. I served till 76. I know a little about military government but that's about it.

Hey, bombastic is my middle... (Below threshold)
Drago:

Hey, bombastic is my middle name.

However, I do try to keep it consistent, lucid, coherent, and rational.

Not always easy (especially when I've been directed to a PRAVDA site for "proof" of the neocons vileness.)

I mean, come on. Who can put up with such silliness?

Anyway, gotta run.

hugh and drago: get a room ... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

hugh and drago: get a room :)

drago: I'm floored! A fucking squid! (see, I'll roll with it! It's the internet!)

Of course, any ab... (Below threshold)
Bill Ramey:
Of course, any able-bodied supporter of the Iraq Invasion under 43 years of age, should enlist.

Why? How does supporting a war obligate the supporter to participate in the war?

Why wouldn't you? The troop... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

Why wouldn't you? The troops are being extended in country and are pulling multiple tours of duty. I don't think it's a radical idea, and since we weren't attacked, supporters should be tested.

BryanD, Suicide Charley? T... (Below threshold)
SCSIwuzzy:

BryanD, Suicide Charley? Theater?

scsi, Bingo! I was in 79 - ... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

scsi, Bingo! I was in 79 - 82. Just the Okinawa-ROK-PI tour. And Iceland.(Marine Barracks, USNAS Keflavik)

Why wouldn't you?... (Below threshold)
Bill Ramey:
Why wouldn't you?

That doesn't answer the question. Let me make it more explicit. Suppose X makes the claim that the war is just. How do we get from "X says the war is just" or "X supports the war" to "X should fight in the war"?

I suppose we could get one from the other if we endorse a principle such as the following: those who support a war ought to fight in that war. But then why endorse such a principle in the first place? Indeed, it strikes me as a rather dubious principle. Every citizen has a right to an opinion on American foreign policy just by virtue of being an American citizen. A citizen doesn't have to become a soldier first.

Now if X supports a draft for the war and then evades the draft, then X can rightly be criticized. Why? Because "X should fight in the war" does follow from "X thinks that all able-bodied adults should be drafted to fight in the war." In this case, X's claim entails an obligation that is binding on X.

The upshot is this. In order for the "chickenhawk argument" to succeed, one must show that supporters of the war are obligated by virtue of supporting the war to fight in the war. Given that we're citizens of a representative democracy with an all-volunteer military, that's a hard road to hoe. Moreover, even if successful, what is the argument supposed to show? If the war is unjust, it is still unjust; if the war is just, then it is still just. Hence the argument is a textbook example of the ad hominem fallacy, because it has no relevance to whether or not the war is just; it's just an attack on one's opponents.

bryanD[elusional]<... (Below threshold)
marc:

bryanD[elusional]

Lincoln was in the Illinois militia, so you can't hide behind him.

I'm a little late with this but....

Bawwawawawhahahaha...

And you can't hide behind Bush because he was in the National Guard.

Bill Ramey, Isn't ... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

Bill Ramey,

Isn't a principle immutable by the holder?
So deciding to stand on "principle" EXCEPT if it effects oneself, seems to mean support for this war is only a situational/relativistic POSITION ruled by other considerations.

bryanD[elusional]<... (Below threshold)
marc:

bryanD[elusional]

drago: I'm floored! A fucking squid! (see, I'll roll with it! It's the internet!)

Hey...what's wrong with being a squid!!!

(OSCS SW USN ret) USS H.B.Wilson (geesh what a hunk of tin that was!), USS England, USS Halsey, USS O'Brien, 13 years San Diego, 7 years Japan.

Gulf War War 1, in gulf for Clinton's retaliation to Saddams assassination plot, 6 other Gulf deployments, 3 other Asian deployments, and was flight following (from it's Misawa, Ja base) the EP-3 that was forced down and seized by the Chinese. (THAT was a cluster fuck of the first order.)

marc, I remember you. Assho... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

marc, I remember you. Asshole. :)

PS. That's 3 (count 'em THREE) times I've been called out THIS WEEK! Screehawk was most memorable. I think he may have been a house mouse attached to some think tank. Or DIA. But I flatter myself.

The Chickenhawk argument is... (Below threshold)
Jim:

The Chickenhawk argument is simply a tool used by many on the left to silence their enemies. I thought the left was open to all points of view. Guess I was mistaken.

As someone pointed out earl... (Below threshold)
Jim:

As someone pointed out earlier, in regards to the chickenhawk argument and the example of AIDS in Africa one must keep his mouth closed unless he is to personally become involved to be consistent. So if the argument is valid...... keep your mouth shut about fighting crime, pollution,corruption, and issues in other countries unless you are ready to pick up and leave to combat whatever the problem. Got it.

The use of "chickenhawk" is best left to the intellectually lazy and those who fear free speech.

Lastly, I contend, that if the chickenhawk argument is valid only those that have actually been in combat have the right to speak on the subject as they would only know the true cost of war.

Amdocs is blackmailing Amer... (Below threshold)

Amdocs is blackmailing America's "leaders." That's why they're making such insane decisions: http://dinoberry.googlepages.com/home

George Bush sux.... (Below threshold)
Zippo Dernce:

George Bush sux.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy