Taking respect to far

I believe my criticism of things I perceive to be wrong, even when directed towards the government, is actually in the tradition of the patriots of U.S. history. Not that in any way, shape or form I would compare my non-history changing observations to be what Nathan Hale, for instance, gave up...to the best of my knowledge, nobody has threatened my life, much less executed me. In fact, I would be very surprised if any government member at all was even aware of me.
What I mean is that I stand for what I believe to be right and I will not allow things I believe are in error to slide without my commenting on them. My patriotism, such as it is, stems from a wish to see this country, scratch that, to see the world become a place of true, responsible freedom where truth and justice, not self-interest and retribution, lead the way to the path of life.
This, I believe, falls in lines with the philosophy and theory of the original U.S. patriots, men who spoke up when they saw inequities and outright wrongness in the society around them. It is a different time and calls for different behavior...as a pacifist, you will NEVER see me roaming around with a gun shooting at those I disagree with. You will see me doing my protests with mouth and pen...well, keyboard. The similarity is solely in mindset, not at all in actions or importance or level of sacrifice.
I believe I do support the soldiers. As I mentioned recently, I would go a long way to protect their lives, even at frightful cost to those who are or protect the enemy. I have no use for any politician who would reduce or eliminate the benefits promised to the people who sign in to the military. At the same time, I do not justify inhumane or illegal acts performed by them.
People who legitimately earn war honors are very high in my esteem. Whether that honor is a Presidential Medal, a Medal of Honor, or a Purple Heart, it is representative of the cost paid, the sacrifice made, the risk taken by that individual in an attempt to do what they believed their duty to be.
Taking a bullet for ones country means much more than an abstract concept such as "freedom" or "justice", both of which are things that mean different things to different people. Taking a bullet means pain, suffering, and blood loss. Anyone who has been wounded when doing their duty should receive the best medical care available and I truly believe the medal they receive for this event is deserved and, in most cases, honorable.
I will not, in this space, impugn the legitimacy or honor of any Purple Heart. Nor do I mean in any way for what I am about to say reflect negatively on most of the personnel who have served or are serving in our armed forces. However, there is a "controversy" swirling over the Purple Heart right now and I find it...well, to put it mildly, ridiculous.
I am a mild Will Ferrell fan, a bigger Owen Wilson fan, and really enjoy the work of Vince Vaughn. They bring a smile to my face, they make me laugh...that is who they are and what they do. They are comedians. They play the same character over and over, the only difference being who they play opposite and the surroundings. They are very consistent in this.
Right now they have a movie out called Wedding Crashers. Much to nobody's surprise, I have seen this film. Even less surprisingly, I laughed. Is it high art? Well, neither was Picasso in his cubist period. Then again, unlike Picasso in his cubist period, this is entertaining to people who are not so elitist they have to look down their nose to look down their nose.
The premise is simple. 2 guys who like to dance, get free food, and, in the process, hit it with vulnerable girls at weddings, the premise being girls feel romantic and are therefore easy prey for men who want to get laid once and never see them again.
On the surface, this is a horrible thing. It is all about irresponsibility, immorailty, and, at the root of it, "using" girls. Of course, in todays society the guys are heroes because they are players while the girls "deserve it" because they act so slutty. Whatever. We can deal with the stupidity of that paradigm another time. If you don't understand how much I despise that sort of concept then, no offense, but you really are not good enough to be reading my writings. It is not a real advanced concept. What is good for the goose is good for the gander or it isn't good for the goose. Unless, of course, you are talking about laying eggs. That is not so good for the gander. It is also rather unusual.
The two heroes...no, that is the wrong word...the two protagonists, Vaughn and Wilson, work their way into weddings by trying to blend in with the crowd. See if you recognize some of these convenient stereotypes we see in the movie:
Irishmen planning to get drunk, speaking in a heavy brogue.
Jews wearing yarmulkahs and getting drunk.
Men lying to get sex, deceiving innocent, pure girls.
Find any of them perhaps overbearing, inaccurate, or offensive? To be honest, in the context...no, I don't. In the context they are simply a running joke that appeals to the lowest common denominator because lets face it...do you know anyone who does not get the joke about the Irish getting drunk? That is the myth we have established for what makes someone Irish. They get drunk. Patrick's Day is different because they use green beer to get drunk. The stereotype is no more and no less accurate than the stereotype (also in the movie) that athletes have a lot of muscle and no brains.
One of the running gags the guys use is some form of military service. French foreign legion was one...the Yankees (?!?) were one (if you see the movie it is actually a funny moment...the guys lie so much and rely on such stock lines that they get mixed up in them sometimes)...
Well, one other thing they do is break out some Purple Hearts. They comment something about the sympathy and free booze they will get for it.
I suppose I should be more sensitive to this. After all, it has not been too long since I wrote about the Pima Ira Hayes dying because he was to drunk to get out of a drainage ditch...drunk because people gave him free booze because of his military service. I am not proud to say I did not laugh at that story. There is no humor in the story of Ira Hayes, only tragedy.
At the same time, the Purple Hearts were good for a quick laugh, then I was moving on. Now, you want proof that what the networks give you for "news" is not news at all?
http://video.msn.com/video/p.htm?mkt=us&i=0b353f14-cdd4-45e7-8358-9828c9f28872,22a28133-a063-4b2b-ac7c-3caf2b79791e,afeef3cc-fc1a-40b9-b79b-3eaca2539fe1&p=News_NBC%20News&m=News%20-%20Weather&mi=NBC%20News&rf=http://www.msn.com/

Okay, I respect our veterans. Yes, the Purple Heart is a prop for a joke. I think the vets going nuts over it are going overboard. The movie is what it is, and getting upset over the portrayal of the Purple Heart as yet another prop among many is, frankly, hyper-sensitivity at its worst.
I will be the first to admit that humor, at its root, is always making fun of someone or something. If you actually analyze virtually any joke ever told, it is a mocking. That is the basis for humor.
If the Purple Heart recipietns are going to be upset, then so should the following groups (going off the top of my head to list things from a couple weeks ago, mind you)
-men
-women
-flower girls
-angry male children
-the Irish
-the Jews
- the Chinese
- politicians
- guys who live with their mothers
-mentally disabled people, particularly multiple personalities
- people who have been stalked
-homosexuals
- people in the midst of divorces
-attorneys
baseball players
-fiancees
-hunters
I know I am missing a few, but that gives you a rough idea. So here is a message for the nimrods complaining about the use of the Purple Hearts; the only ones demenaing the Purple Hearts in this instance are you, the people looking so hard for something to be offended by that you are offended by a comedy movie. Unless you were out there complaining about A few Good Men, Rules of Engagement, The General's Daughter, Geronimo, Hogan's Heroes, GI Joe (the comic, the card game, the board game, the tv series, the action figures, and th videogames) then frankly, your criticism and complaint ring hollow.
Get a clue, the movie is what it is. A cheap joke riddled, bottom common denominator entertaining bit of comedy. It makes no attempt at social commentary, it does not insult or compliment any member of the armed services, it has no agenda other than fun.
So get off your soap box and recognize that your offense about this portrayal is the only offensive thing about it.
For heavens sake, if you are going to protest something, how about the movie coming up that celebrates a country founded on slavery that every war it ever fought was to protect the rights of their members to continue practicing slavery and extending it as far as possible. Think about that the next time you see the Stars and Bars plastered across your movie screen.