Arrogance, Thy Name is Arkin.

I've been too busy to comment on Washington Post opinion writer William Arkin's recent piece slamming the troops in Iraq for expressing an opinion, but his latest piece has pegged my rage-o-meter. His apology for calling our troops "mercenaries":

I was dead wrong in using the word mercenary to describe the American soldier today.

These men and women are not fighting for money with little regard for the nation. The situation might be much worse than that: Evidently, far too many in uniform believe that they are the one true nation. They hide behind the constitution and the flag and then spew an anti-Democrat, anti-liberal, anti-journalism, anti-dissent, and anti-citizen message that reflects a certain contempt for the American people.

Mr. Arkin, you didn't just disrespect the U.S. troops in Iraq - you just insulted the majority of Americans in "flyover country."

You know, The American People.

We don't "hide behind the Constitution and the flag," we revere them. It's the liberals, journalists, dissenters and "anti-citizens" who wipe their asses with them, then "hide behind" them when called on it. Mr. Arkin has exposed himself as another Nina Burleigh, someone who despises the military, but that's OK because they choke up when they hear "America the Beautiful." Mr. Arkin exercises "Socially Acceptable Bigotry":

The bigotry of America's Left-leaning intelligentsia is based upon cold logic that unfolds in the following predictable, if venal, fashion: I'm very smart. I'm well educated. So are most of my friends. I give generously to liberal causes. I'm a kind and caring human being. I defer to nobody in my exemplary set of values. I care about equality. I believe in a just society. These values are integrated into the core of who I am. I work diligently to teach these values unto my progeny. And these are just the values that, generally speaking, have been represented by the policies and actions of the Democratic Party.

The corollary logic continues: I don't have much respect for the values of the Republican Party. Oversimplified, Republicans stand for the rich, for the status quo, for selfishness, and for war-mongering. These logical trains of thought are tinged with intellectual arrogance and gross stereotyping. Of course, some liberals who speak ill of Republicans have an ulterior motive. They use the tactic to undermine the credibility of all Republicans, who must be evil, stupid - or both.

Reagan, and his crowd, were a bunch of cowboys. NRA supporters are dumbfucks from Wyoming. The Christian Right is the imbecilic underbelly of the South, led by money-grubbing preachers. George W. may have gone to Yale and the business school, but he's basically a shallow frat boy and - yikes! - a Christian. Locals who line up with such thinking tend to be knee-jerk right-wingers with low IQs.

In short, the justification for bigoted comments directed at those with whom the educated Left disagrees politically is based on two foundations: 1) We're a lot smarter than they are; and 2) We're better people than they are. That logic leads to three inescapable conclusions: We're right. They're wrong. QED: All Republicans are assholes.

And all soldiers are anti-American, apparently.

As far as I can tell, Mr. Arkin suffers from Bush Derangement Syndrome, and extends his illness to the troops because they're the ones carrying out Bush's doctrine. Australian journalist Carole Overington expressed her understanding back in 2004:

Any student of history knows that this is true. America saved the Western world from communism. America saved Australia and, for that matter, France from a system that would stop you from reading this newspaper.

Americans support the war in Iraq and, by extension, Bush because they see it as part of a bigger picture. Like everybody, they now know that Saddam was not the threat they thought he was (at least, not to them) but they still think it was a good idea to deal with him, before he became one.

The price of freedom is high. You might think you would not sacrifice your life for it, but maybe you don't have to. After all, 20-year-old Americans are doing it for you, every day.

While the majority of people polled today may not support the war, I'd imagine the numbers are a bit different in "flyover country" still. Much of the opposition, I'm certain, comes from the Jacksonians who are tired of the rules of engagement that have restricted the actions of our soldiers, and doubtlessly resulted in some of their deaths - it isn't that they're anti-war, it's that they're for unrestrained war. I'm sympathetic to that view, myself, but I know it's the wrong one for what we're trying to accomplish in the Middle East.

Mr. Arkin thinks those troops are "anti-Democrat, anti-liberal, anti-journalism, anti-dissent, and anti-citizen." Interesting how he feels comfortable enough to say that to people who carry guns for a living, isn't it?

After all, it's not like he has to risk his life to exercise his freedom of speech.