Challenge Yourself - and your Toadies

Yesterday, I ripped on Atrios' take on this article, about Pat Tillman's funeral.

I termed the article a "hatchet piece". Was I hasty? Perhaps a bit, although on a fourth read I'm still not sure.

The piece is a bit of a fraud; it wraps itself in Tillman's challenge to the false, unthinking piety of others (the "others", natch, being the middle-Americans who might both support the war and, horror of horrors, believe in God), and yet in its subtext it entirely supports the even-more-vacuous, self-satisfied piety of the anti-Bush, anti-war audience.

Which brings us to the original Atrios piece.

In the comments to my original post, someone named "TK" wrote:

Of course "He's F---ing Dead" is a quote from the actual article.

You did read the article didn't you?

Or, maybe, like your President, you are waiting for some toady to read it for you?

Sure, "TK", but brownnosing bloggers in other peoples' comments section hardly qualifies as true "toadying" experience. Sorry, buddy; you'll need to put on some pants and get a real job.

However - yes, I read the article. And I thought, before I wrote my original post - "of all the things that Mr. Atrios could have chosen as a slugline for his piece, why his brother's "he's f*cking dead"? There were many other things said about Pat Tillman at the funeral, after all; things just as jarring, things much more revelatory, things that actually taught us something. But at the head of all that was the brother's repeated "he's f*cking dead", delivered by a guy who'd seem to have been really horribly (and justifiably) affected by his brother's death (and, if it were a child of mine pissing on mourners like that, I'd kick his or her ass after the service, Ranger or no; it's not about you.) Why, oh why indeed?

Because in the context of Atrios' site - essentially an online tribal hangout for the "Hate Bush Now!" crowd to drink Koolaid and engage in their Sixty Seconds of Online Hate - it's the part that best expresses the Crushing Irony that the left wants us all to be left with when it comes to Tillman; it was expressed most clearly by Ted Rall's cartoon on the subject (Tillman was really a racist thug - it's the only reason anyone's join the Army, after all - and the fact that he died merely proves he was a sap and an idiot, doncha know). Atrios' selection of that line - and that line only - as his headline, in the context of the rest of his publication - is a nod to the same idea; "he fought for that thing we hate most [Bush], and now he's f*cking dead! His brother said it himself!"

Atrios disputed the notion of the added meaning in a later comment;

no added meaning, mitch. I had nothing but respect for Tillman from what I knew previously, which wasn't much, and then I had some more after reading the article.

I liked the unscripted unconcerned personal expression of his brother. I always like when people at memorial services feel free to say what they want to say, rather than what they're supposed to - especially when TV cameras are there.

Fair enough. I'll take that - at least the bit about the admiration - at face value; a cursory Google didn't turn up any examples of Mr. Atrios ridiculing Tillman before his death.

Question, then, Mr. Atrios: Why did you like "the unscripted unconcerned personal expression" of the brother?

I'll admit I have a preconception here - I suspect you admire it because it's a metaphor for what the left wants all all of America to think about the war - heroism come to naught. Am I wrong?

Because if the brother had said instead "He's f*cking dead, but he's in Heaven, and he was proud to be a Ranger, and you better vote for Bush, a***oles", I suspect it's more likely you'd have ripped the brother's "unscripted expression", and used a different headline.

Maybe "Ranger Wore A Dress"?

Posted by Mitch at May 5, 2004 03:35 AM