Thursday, August 25, 2005

War Mom vs. Peace Mom

Why is this administration (and even more so all the idiot pundits and bloggers on the right) making this into an issue of one against the other? Both of these moms have the right to speak their minds about the war or anything else for that matter, as do all Americans. Seems pretty simple to me.

Posted by

31 comments:

Fixer said...

It's simple because you have common sense and are reality-based, JRH.

Me4Prez said...

If only they did both have the right? Today opposition is seen as treason and it needs to be crushed immediately. The people who are afraid of Sheehan want to make this her against the troops or her against other families. Bush can't win any debate with her, so they need pawns. People who may honestly feel that Sheehan is not right but are being used by those in power to pass the attention from them.

I kind of wish that Sheehan would fade more to the background. I wrote about it a couple of weeks ago that she was at the verge of her cause being lost in politics and that has almost become true. I support her, but wish the situation was handled a little better

beakerkin said...

JRH

You know we disagree on this one. However I stopped by to send best wishes.

John Howard said...

Why do you disagree beakerkin, do you think one of doesn't have the right to express their opinion?

sumo said...

I think the administration hunted the Pruett family down in order to use them as a Sheehan foil deliberately for PR.

john said...

The press once again is complicit with the far right, and they are exploiting a what has become a joke, as far as miss Sheehan. It's a shame that they can't find something better to do. The stuff is really getting old.

Always Sourced, Never Disputed said...

I love you guys (and gals) on the left. The only option I have is to concede that both are pawns but you all will never concede the point. Therefore I can not. Meanwhile we, the Nation, are a divided house. Listen, we can spend the rest of eternity arguing about whether it was prudent to start this. However, right now we should want the same thing success and a drawn down in forces in the region. The only way that happens is with a united front anything less gives hope to our enemies that they can defeat a second great power. We need to see past our petty differences and resolve to finish this as quickly as possible. Unless of course you want Bush to fail so badly that you do not care about the long term ramifications to America.

John Howard said...

Bush is failing just fine without any help from me. And it would be nice if we could have a united front, but that's not possible when the people in charge think they are infallible and cannot recognize any mistakes. Are we supposed to pretend they are doing a good job, just on the off chance that being united is enough to overcome all the stupid decisions?

Always Sourced, Never Disputed said...

Wow you must be an amazing leader.

I think I made it clear in my post, no Republican can agree to admit any miscalculation no matter how small because the result would be calls for his impeachment. Yet Berger admits to stealing classified documents and yet nothing from the left.

As for socalled mistakes, few Generals or military leaders have ever taken up arms and countered every move by the enemy.

Clearly our intelligence was flawed after 8 years of the Clinton Administration.

Did I say anything about pretending? No only lemmiberals think all Republicans are in lock step.

But if our troops need armor then do not vote against the bill for political reasons and let's agree to cut some of the Robert Byrd projects scheduled for WV in addition to some of these programs that do nothing more than reward mediocrety. It is about priorities.

Again you miss the point Bush's failure is a not in the minds of our enemies and even allies Bush's alone it is the USA's.

What USSR General was in charge of the failure in Afghanistan? How about the leader? Answer--no one remembers all we know is that is point where the USSR began it's march to oblivion.

Now in some ways I would be pleased to stop funding the failed Blue States (Mass exempted Mass had the foresight to hire a strong Rep.) However, I kind of like being an American

The Disgruntled Chemist said...

Blogenlust's law in action! Congratulations, ASND, on re-inforcing this law. Only 9 comments before somebody blamed Clinton for one of Bush's mistakes.

John Howard said...

You're right that Bush's failure is not his alone, but the US's, which is why I didn't vote for him, I would prefer not to be associated with anything the idiot does.

You guys can point the finger at Clinton all you like, but the fact is, when Clinton was President things were going pretty well in this country in a lot of different ways, and now they just aren't. Obviously there are a lot of other factors involved, but that's the bottom line. Whether it is Bush's fault how things are now or not, it's still his job to help fix them.

Anonymous said...

Sheehan is typical of most libs. To say we support the troops but not what they're doing is bull?*;/!!!! Your hatred for Bush is your right. But don't belittle those who are brave enough to fight for you and me by talking out of both sides of your mouth. To protest outside Walter Reed is a total discrace to everything her son died for.

Anonymous said...

mr.howard the coward................

John Howard said...

Who is belittling anyone? I've seen plenty on the right belittling Sheehan, but I haven't seen anyone on the left insulting the troops as you suggest.

John Howard said...

And yes, Howard ryhmes with coward, congratulations on that amazing discovery. Interesting coming from someone afraid to put their name on their thoughts.

Anonymous said...

You don't think that to protest the war outside a hospital where the troops can listen to your hatred for the commander in chief, and what they fought for isn't belittling just shows how pointless it is to even waste time trying to get it through your thick skulls how foolish you look.......

John Howard said...

Would you rather they protest in someone's basement where no one can hear them? What would be the point of that? You protest where you will be heard. That's one of the rights we have as Americans. So what is it you think they're fighting for, anyway, if you don't even believe in that?

beakerkin said...

John

Free speech is something we all agree upon and practice in our blogs with a noteable exception. Generally you could come to my blog and find 100% personal attacks with zero content. I can not name a single moderate or Conservative blogger who censors comments. This is readily practiced by the far left that generaly does not include you or even the disturbed Chemist . Both of you are liberals who I can respect but disagree with.

Sheehan is a far left lunatic who associates and voices the rhetoric of three Commie Front Groups UPJ , ANSWER and Code Pink. The media portrayal of Sheehan as a typical military mother is a fabrication. She has also said anti semitic statements including blaming Israel for her son's death. I understand the woman is mourning but a blood libel and questioning the patriotism of Jews is reprehensible.

The truth is the woman is in clear need of medication and profesional help and I do not say that lightly. For the far left to use a mentaly disturbed woman is typical of the boorish behavior of US Communists.

The Disgruntled Chemist said...

Disgruntled, beakerkin. I am disgruntled.

And to the ever-so-brave anonymous commenter above, who said "To say we support the troops but not what they're doing is bull?*;/!!!!", I don't think you understand the anti-war message.

We're only against what the troops are being made to do because of a pack of lies. I blame Bush for that. I don't blame some 25 year old Seargant for US foreign policy - that would just be stupid. My quarrel is with the fact that the Iraq war exists in the first place; it is most certainly not with the soldiers themselves. Hell, I've got a family member in Iraq - do you?

beakerkin said...

No Chemist I think disturbed is more approprite. Disgruntled is reserved for people who work in the private sector. They are over worked under appreciated and under real pressure. They are not appreciated at work or often by their kids. Yet they work every day
and guess what is the first topic of conversation Gas Taxes. I guess ecology comes before the working man.

You work in accademia and I am now part of the government. Neither of us have a right to be disgruntled.

The Disgruntled Chemist said...

Why do you think that the word 'disgruntled' should be reserved for people in the private sector? You never heard of a disgruntled postal worker?

From the Cambridge dictionary online:

disgruntled
adjective
unhappy, annoyed and disappointed about something

Seems like it can work for any kind of person, no matter what their job happens to be. Besides, my job isn't what makes me unhappy, annoyed and disappointed. It's the President of the United States that does that.

Me4Prez said...

I was a troop and still have friends who are troops. They were more upset when I wasn't openly against the war than when I was because they know me and know that it is not any agenda other than getting our troops what they deserve. The problem with this war is that people are more concerned about gas prices than what is going on in Iraq. The working man who is getting screwed by higher prices is getting screwed because the wealthy and now oil companies have been given huge tax breaks.

I don't want to hear a damn thing about liberals not supporting the troops. I am tired of the argument and it is a tired argument. Having ribbons and supporting the president does nothing for the troops. We should have cut all the pork out of the transportation bill, rolled back the tax cuts, and actually supported the military. But, let's be honest and admit that to the people who support Bush, lower taxes are far more important than actually supporting the troops.

Gary said...

Yes and there is also the issue of the American public fixating on media circus shows as their way to get into issues. I don't mean to compare poor Mrs. Sheehan to the Schiavo family, but Geez...are blogs the only place where people are thinking?

beakerkin said...

Chemist

What have you and your cohorts done for working people ? Raise gas taxes, beer taxes, cigarette taxes and restrict hunting are great with the tofu crowd but it upsets rural folks to no end. I guess being for working people is just a slogan. The locals in Vermont complain about how out of touch some of you are.

Gas taxes hurt rural working people
but pleasing the tofu crowd is more important. When you tax cigarettes beer and gas you are aiming at rural folks lifestyle.

Maybe you should get out from behind your accademic chair and talk to rural folks. I left the big city and am learning every day.
Do not be surprised if VT and NH go Republican. People are fed up and they are talking about gas taxes.

Chemist I worked in the private sector, government and accademia briefy. You have zero clue how tough it is in the real world. Stay in college and be a low rent Chomskyite. It is much easier then
defending your country or working under real pressure in the private sector.

Always Sourced, Never Disputed said...

beakerkin actually the lemmiberals can not read a map whether it is of the MiddleEast or the USA. America goes more red with every election because of the devasting results of DNC policies. I and millions like me have ran from blue states as the factories collapsed and the jobs went over seas and you lemmiliberals can not blaim that on Bush nor can you hide from the fact that Clinton fiddled or should I say diddled.

As for comments about things were good while CLinton was in office curious how the lemmiliberals who cliam Republicans are about money are the ones who always guage the success of the nation on money. Yes the proliferation of computers and internet access gave a great boast to the economy but in the end companies took that productivity and left town to avoid DNC policies and we the little guy are left holding the bag.

Always Sourced, Never Disputed said...

Howard I noticed you never responded directly to my post regarding no you do not have to pretend everything is great.

Since the Chemist has not enetered the real world of gainful employment I'll grant him some slack. However, for the rest of us when was the last time you went into a board meeting to handle a major problem facing you company and chose to spend all of you energy finger pointing and name calling? Pretending is neither useful nor requested however wanting to actually succeed in Iraq is not only requested but imperative.

Chemist--you can not shut me up with your silly blogsphere law. The truth is the truth you blaim Bush for an attack 7 months after he took office. An attack that took a heck of a lot longer than 7 months to plan but someone points out that maybe cutting the intelligence budget and generally ignoring terrorists for 8 years may have had an effect and all you can say is that I am part of the blaim Clinton crowd?

Always Sourced, Never Disputed said...

To anonymous:

Pick a name.

You can not call Howard a coward while you hide. Be proud you of your opinion and do not apoligize for it.

But above all pick a name.

John Howard said...

Ok, so if we want to actually succeed in Iraq, we have to do it better than we are now, but in order for anything to change, we have to point out how badly it is going, but then you say we're finger pointing. It would be nice if our leaders would actually define success in Iraq, then maybe they'd have a better chance of obtaining it.

Always Sourced, Never Disputed said...

What are you talking about?

We must do everything possible to not fail in Iraq.

Please try to keep in mind that our media is fixated on the negative in the World whether it is herre in the US or else where in the World. Just as they fail to report an act of kindness, they fail to report the successes in Iraq. As for measuring success or failure please break open a history book and review how long it took to create a functioning representative republic here in the US, or Turkey, or even post WWII Germany. Only in America do we expect results in 30 minutes or less. By the way, how did that little Bosnian Serbian conflict workout?

John Howard said...

So what do we have to wait until Bush says he's done until we can evaluate his work in any way? The ridiculous expectations were not set by the anti-war people, they were set by the administration. If they aren't happy being judged according to them, then they probably should have been more realistic in the first place.

beakerkin said...

John

I do respect you and have limited respect for the disintered Chemist.
However maybe you should look at the anti semitism comming from the left.

Howard Dean and now even Susan Estrich are noticing. There is a serious problem that I identified.
When bloggers write regularly about
zionist media and Jewish Cabals manipulating the country into war we have veered into hate speech.

There is a problem and it is not you as you are clearly not a bigot.
The Chemist has excused this excess. Now that Howard Dean and Estrich who are not Conservatives
have commented perhaps you should look again. The problem with some of you liberals is you talk a good game about anti semitism . However when a far left bufoon spouts off regularly about Zionist media all of you are silent.

If Falwell spoke of a velvet mafia in Hollywood you would be all over him. I would laugh as it is stupid and agree with you. Anti Semitism on the far left is alive and well.