Media Idiot Demonstrates Who Is Really ‘Out Of Touch’

Watch the video clip in this story and understand that this media idiot (and I mean idiot) is actually trying to get a former SEAL to say his buddies died for nothing.  Worse, this fool thinks he can get Marcus to agree with his reasoning and the political agenda behind it.  There is no way to explain to someone who has never been around or who has no connection to military personnel just how out of touch this media idiot is.  He simply does not understand Marcus and the people who protect this nation:

‘They Died For Nothing?’: Marcus Luttrell Hits Back at CNN Host In Tense Interview

Now, if this media idiot and all his idiot friends really think the SEALS in this movie died for nothing, then they need to grab some alone time with a mirror so they can talk to the person who really wasted their lives.  It wasn’t the military: we just follow the orders that are given to us by the men this media idiot helps elect and then lies to protect so they can stay in office.

Personally, I think Marcus showed tremendous restraint and discipline in this interview.  Had some self-righteous idiot ever told me my friends died for nothing without apologizing for the role he played in their deaths,…  Well, let’s just say that, IF he survived the encounter, he might finally understand why they call Marines assault troops.

9 thoughts on “Media Idiot Demonstrates Who Is Really ‘Out Of Touch’

  1. Pingback: Media Idiot Demonstrates Who Is Really ‘Out Of Touch’ | GulfDogs

  2. More than anything else, I think this shows the difference in our military culture and those wrapped up in our world of politics. Tapper has done some good reporting and has been involved with veterans issues as well but his political worldview doesn’t allow him to understand that at the tip of the spear, it isn’t about geo-political concerns. These men were willing to die for each other, for duty, honor and for the mission. They would have survived if they had killed the sheepherders that stumbled on their position – but they didn’t.

    A world where a president lies to protect, not his physical life, but his political one, and men without honor pass judgment on those who do is inconceivable to men like Luttrell, Murphy, Deitz and Axelson and yet Tapper lives in it every day. Rather than Tapper making any sort of an individual judgment or statement, we saw the collision of these two worlds.

    • Utah,

      How is it that you can say this is a collision of world views and then excuse Tapper from making a personal judgment? He most certainly did when he made it known that he thought the lives were wasted. That is clearly understood in the wording and tone of his REPEATED questioning on this line. And not realizing this also makes him an elitist idiot. Do you really think Marcus isn’t aware of the differences between their world’s? So why does Tapper seem oblivious to it…unless he’s an idiot?

      IDK: maybe I am biased because I have been on the pointy end of the spear…?

      • I actually agree with Tapper. Lives were wasted.

        Lives were wasted because we have a civilian leadership who is not committed to the mission, does not believe in duty and responsibility and are not committed to winning. In my mind, every life that is lost in an effort where winning is not the objective is wasted. We could lose with those men at home and safe.

        I didn’t “excuse” Tapper, I merely pointed out what I thought was behind the questions.

        Tapper is not anti-military like many in the media are. Tapper wrote a book called “The Outpost” about the courage and sacrifice of those who serve that was very, very pro-military.

        • Utah,

          I was ignorant of the book and his position. I appreciate the education, thanks. :*)

          However, if he is as close to the mi9litary as you say, he is STILL an idiot for thinking he would get Marcus to agree with his question. Marcus probably agrees, too, but he won’t tell Tapper that. I doubt he would discuss it outside the brotherhood.

          Like I said: I am probably hypersensitive to this issue because of my background.

  3. The leading question expresses the viewpoint that Afghanistan is senseless & hopeless and that all of our American deaths there are senseless and hopeless.

    Tapper asked a purposely leading question (a question which has the answer contained within the the question).

    If tapper was not trying to convey that message, then why didn’t he apologize, re-phrase the question, and then “cut ” that question out of the published interview? CNN and/or tapper knew/know exactly what they were doing and did.

    Tapper is probably responding to backlash … If no backlash, he’d merrily go on pushing the same Washington propaganda viewpoint.

    Afghanistan wasn’t senseless & hopeless until after the last 5 years with the current person who occupies America’s whitehouse.

    In fact, Democrat party members who voiced opposition to Iraq, supported Afghanistan, including the current interloper in the whitehouse.

    For comparison consider the cnn style “media” also believes the goal of securing America’s borders is senseless and hopeless…

  4. Ironically, or perhaps not, I agreed with the actor because he sees both sides. I think Wahlberg understands that you’ve got a civilian saying, “Why the heck are we over there losing lives?” And you’ve got a Marine saying, “We’re only doing what we’re told in order that you have these freedoms!”

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.