I guess I shouldn’t expect more from someone who calls himself RudePundit, but this line of nonsense needs to be addressed:
Let’s get another thing straight: the moment when Safia Taleb al-Suhail embraced Janet Norwood, whose son was killed in action in Iraq, resides in a stomach-churning netherworld between revolting and disturbing. It was revolting for its exploitation of the pain of this mother as a political prop for Bush’s speech. Byron Norwood, a Marine Sergeant from good ol’ Texas, was killed in the destruction of Fallujah. It was disturbing because the media’s perception of the hug was such a product of desired delusion: please, please, please don’t let this mother’s son have died in vain, please don’t let that man on the podium have sold us a bill of goods.
A.) The Norwood’s wrote to Bush, not the other way around. I seriously doubt that the letter read “Please, please, exploit my pain for political purposes.” They were proud to be there, and they have this moment to help them remember their son for the rest of their lives. Fuck you for trying to cheapen it or take it away from them.
B.) For two years, you wingnuts have been dishonestly stating that Bush has been hiding the pain and sorrow of the families of those who have been injured or killed, to includ your despicable campaign to claim that Bush avoids visiting war injured and refuses to go to military funerals. Now, Bush honors our war dead, acknowledges the loss, and you call it poison politics.
C.) It is no wishful delusion on the part of the media or the Norwood’s that their son did not die in vain. He didn’t- ask Taleb al-Suhail.
(via Atrios, who links uncritically to this bile)