This is a big fuck you to all the anti-war protesters out there who think that one of the best arguments you can make against the Bush Cabal is how the war makes disabled people.

#$%^ you. For real.

Bag News post that starts me off today…

A picture of a wounded Iraq veteran who is visably disfigured wins a prize. Guess which one it is:

A. The one where he is shot in unforgiving light and made to look distant to his bride.


B. The one(s) where he is shot in a relaxed pose, with his wife tenderly embracing him.

I don’t have direct links because I’m not sure what the copyright stuff is for these images. But really do click through on both. And question why one wins an award. And the other is ignored. Might we already have the plot, and like so many these days, be looking to sex up the data to fit our program?

One commenter volunteers that seeing the one image gives the impression: “Ty gazes at his bride with almost a puppy-like tenderness, as if certain he will lose her eventually. She, for her part, seems resigned to a show of braveness. Her faraway gaze and air of detachment speak volumes.”

After seeing the rest, they correct themselves, but only slightly. Another adds: “I immediately thought of the photo as depicting an archtype: beauty and the beast, hunchback of notre dame, the elephant man,etc.”

As i said there……this photo is meant to tell a story about how monstrous and unlovable a disabled or disfigured person is.

it’s bigotry.

anti-war, sure. but you really want to sink that low to make the point?