• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Republican obstruction dressed up as bipartisanship. Again.

But frankly mr. cole, I’ll be happier when you get back to telling us to go fuck ourselves.

The poor and middle-class pay taxes, the rich pay accountants, the wealthy pay politicians.

Conservatism: there are some people the law protects but does not bind and others who the law binds but does not protect.

They are lying in pursuit of an agenda.

Something needs to be done about our bogus SCOTUS.

Accused of treason; bitches about the ratings. I am in awe.

If you’re pissed about Biden’s speech, he was talking about you.

Thanks to your bullshit, we are now under siege.

Wow, you are pre-disappointed. How surprising.

Sitting here in limbo waiting for the dice to roll

This fight is for everything.

This really is a full service blog.

… pundit janitors mopping up after the GOP

A lot of Dems talk about what the media tells them to talk about. Not helpful.

They love authoritarianism, but only when they get to be the authoritarians.

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

It’s always darkest before the other shoe drops.

I’d like to think you all would remain faithful to me if i ever tried to have some of you killed.

It may be funny to you motherfucker, but it’s not funny to me.

Their freedom requires your slavery.

And we’re all out of bubblegum.

The republican caucus is already covering themselves with something, and it’s not glory.

White supremacy is terrorism.

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / Glad We Cleared That Up

Glad We Cleared That Up

by John Cole|  August 14, 20055:48 pm| 184 Comments

This post is in: Politics

FacebookTweetEmail

This post on Cindy Sheehan, Perfect Weapon, has given me nothing but heaps of shit from you all. Glad the folks at Kos have cleared things up:

But Jeff hits on something here, and raises a different type of possibility — a visible anti-war movement centered around a broad-based unassailable concern, a mother’s concern for her children.

But really- who am I to question the motives of those trumpeting the concerns of a grieving mother? She is, unassailable, you see. A perfect weapon, someone might say. Not that this has gone unnoticed by the Kossacks and others on the left before today:

We are making errors with references to Cindy Sheehan.

What are we trying to accomplish with promoting her? …

1. We should call her “Mother Sheehan”. We should never call her Cindy; I don’t know her. “Mother Sheehan” is her title, and expresses her ceremonial status as a bereaved mother, calling forth over the dead body of her son. She is not a person now, she is a mother, which is not an expression of her individuality, but rather the expression of her eternal character: the mother, the bringer of life who has been wronged by state power.

I know, I know. I hate America, I am part of the right-wing smear machine, I am heaping vitriol on the woman, you thought I was an ‘intellectually honest conservative,’ yadda yadda yadda.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Best XBOX Games
Next Post: Watching A Train Wreck »

Reader Interactions

184Comments

  1. 1.

    Joe Albanese

    August 14, 2005 at 6:13 pm

    Oh… poor John.. .such a victim of the bad bad liberals.

  2. 2.

    Alan Smithee

    August 14, 2005 at 6:35 pm

    she. is. happily. leading. the. anti. war. movement. there. get. it. through. your. head.

  3. 3.

    Eural

    August 14, 2005 at 6:35 pm

    Somebody explain to me what the big deal is – don’t all political ideas and movements eventually center around or become symbolized by somebody, some event or something like that? Whether the association is correct or incorrect is another whole argument – but to act “outraged” over Sheehan’s association with the anti-war movement seems overblown to say the least. Although I often disagree with the right I will admit that they have in fact done a great job of doing exactly that. The use and manipulation of symbolic people and “moments” (a la 9/11) to further their political goals has been strikingly successful. Now, Sheehan is becoming the same thing for the left and the right-wing has a tizy. Bush supporters have to face the fact that this administration has a lot to answer for and she is becoming the symbolic focal point of those questions. As someone, somewhere has said – let’s answer the basic question regardless of personalities involved (Bush or Sheehan’s) – why are we in Iraq and what are we going to do about it? I honestly think that aside from the extremes on both left and right most of us would like to have an honest and straightfoward discussion. I applaud John for at least taking some steps in that direction.

  4. 4.

    MisterPundit

    August 14, 2005 at 6:37 pm

    We should call her “Mother Sheehan”. We should never call her Cindy

    Revolting.

  5. 5.

    Pb

    August 14, 2005 at 6:40 pm

    Amazing how you quote that particular diary–as far as I know, it was never on the front page; it did get 93 comments but only four recommends, with most people disagreeing with the poster. One might wonder where you found a reference to something so obscure in the first place.

    I am part of the right-wing smear machine

    Aha, that would explain it! At least you admit that much (heh); keep working on that intellectual honesty.

  6. 6.

    John Cole

    August 14, 2005 at 6:40 pm

    It isn’t that she is a symbol, it is that she is chosen as a symbol because she is ‘UNASSAILABLE.’ They are trying to turn the natural sympathy for a mourning mother into a political weapon.

    Who doesn’t feel sorry for her? Honestly? But don’t look at what she is saying or what the groups she is aligned with and promoting her are saying, because then you are HEAPING VITRIOL ON THE WOMAN! SHE LOST HER SON, DON’T YOU KNOW!

  7. 7.

    Stormy70

    August 14, 2005 at 6:41 pm

    Does the left really want to get on board the radical “It’s the Jews!” train? That kind of talk is for the far, far fringe of the right and the left. She’s already got a fan in this guy, which should give one pause, I would hope. She’s gone a little beyond the pale at this point in her grief and rage.

  8. 8.

    metalgrid

    August 14, 2005 at 6:42 pm

    Wow, flashbacks to the Butleriah Jihad.

  9. 9.

    hadenoughofthisyet

    August 14, 2005 at 6:43 pm

    That was a diarist on Daily Kos who posted that — not Kos or one of the other frequent posters. Plus, I just read through some (not all) of the comments and they seemed to me to be tending towards not wanting to “frame” this.

    A dairist on KOS is just that — some guy (dataguy as a matter of fact) — who is voicing his opinion. I don’t see any broad consensus or strategizing by the powers that be here.

  10. 10.

    Kathleen

    August 14, 2005 at 6:48 pm

    Pb – I totally agree with you. I think it is really dishonest of John Cole to like to the “mother Sheehan” diary and try to use it as an example of “the left”. If your argument is so good Mr. Cole, why resort to such cheap shots?

  11. 11.

    Kathleen

    August 14, 2005 at 6:48 pm

    oops – supposed to be “to link to”

  12. 12.

    mere mortal

    August 14, 2005 at 6:53 pm

    “I am part of the right-wing smear machine”

    “This isn’t about Cindy Sheehan. Andrew, Atrios, all the folks at dKos couldn’t give a SH*T about Cindy Sheehan.”

    Heh. Indeed.

  13. 13.

    John Cole

    August 14, 2005 at 6:53 pm

    Oh Jesus. Are they conservatives? Centrists? Dkos is a liberal site for liberals, is it not?

    What about the front page stuff I linked to? And btw- most of the people disagreed not with the substance of his post, that this issue needs to be refined, but that the use of the word ‘Mother’ sounds stupid. Which it does.

    I can’t wait until you guys get what you want- a massive confrontation of mothers of dead soldiers who hate Bush and mothers of soldiers who support Bush. Should be a fine spectacle.

  14. 14.

    Caroline

    August 14, 2005 at 6:58 pm

    One thing that seems to be missing is accountability. No one in the Bush administration has ever been held accountable. If someone had been held accountable for not finding WMD’s, etc. then it wouldn’t have even come to this.

    The ever changing mission is insane. Democracy? Looks like the Islamic Republic of Iraq is about to form.

  15. 15.

    Kathleen

    August 14, 2005 at 6:59 pm

    yes, that is obviously what “we” want. what piercing discernment. Liberals hate America AND mothers. We can wipe both out with one big brawl. you found us out.

  16. 16.

    John Cole

    August 14, 2005 at 7:01 pm

    Kathleen- It inevitable. The idiot brigade led by Mike Gallagher and the chorus of ‘We Don’t Care’ should have been the first sign of theimpending nastiness.

    I hope I am wrong.

  17. 17.

    chadwig

    August 14, 2005 at 7:02 pm

    Of course you can attack Sheehan’s beliefs and opinions. Just do a better job than the swings and misses you have so far conjured.

    Funny how the right is so quick to defend their attacks on Sheehan. At the same time, if you say a cross word about Bush then you’re a “Blame America First” traitor.

    Having their cake and eating it too is making the faux-conservative 101st Fighting Keyboardists very fat and lazy indeed. A long slumber is imminent.

  18. 18.

    PotVsKtl

    August 14, 2005 at 7:06 pm

    Nice work finding a random person’s thoughts and assigning them to the entire left. Of course you’re not smearing anyone. Bit of a reach, wouldn’t you say?

  19. 19.

    chadwig

    August 14, 2005 at 7:11 pm

    “Does the left really want to get on board the radical “It’s the Jews!” train? That kind of talk is for the far, far fringe of the right and the left. She’s already got a fan in this guy, which should give one pause, I would hope. She’s gone a little beyond the pale at this point in her grief and rage.”

    I don’t think you can blame someone for the idiot beliefs of all the fringe nuts who wander into the temporary spotlight you posses.

    Just as Randall Terry- a bonifide fruitcake- did not speak for Terry Shiavo, the only things that can be pinned on Sheehan are her actions and expressed opinions.

    Face it, when the spotlight shines, the kooks come out in full force like moths to a flame. Just look at that 100% flaming idiot Ghalliger the Greyhound General and his force of thicko’s.

  20. 20.

    Pb

    August 14, 2005 at 7:11 pm

    Thank you, Kathleen, and John; maybe we can have a discussion here yet. Did you post about said “idiot brigade” before?

  21. 21.

    StupidityRules

    August 14, 2005 at 7:13 pm

    George W. Bush is the “war president”. I’m guessing Cindy Sheehan is perfectly happy being the “peace mother”.

  22. 22.

    John Cole

    August 14, 2005 at 7:13 pm

    Nice work finding a random person’s thoughts and assigning them to the entire left. Of course you’re not smearing anyone. Bit of a reach, wouldn’t you say?

    Did you even read the comments? This is an entire community, praising the value of a grieving mother as the political symbol, the universal archetype? It isn’t one person.

  23. 23.

    Nate

    August 14, 2005 at 7:16 pm

    John,

    you take on Sheehan’s role as “unassailable”, which I see scares the bejesus out of you and out of the warmonger establishment (of which you are a part. You obviously forget, with your aggrieved, injured tone, how “unassailable” Bush has been as war president and inheritor of 9/11. Those who questioned Bush’s anti-terror priorities pre-9/11? Traitors. Those who questioned a questionable war? Traitors as well. Those who questioned the Republican’s use of 9/11 for their own agenda? Traitors, damn them!

    I can’t imagine Al Gore doing the same and so dividing the country. And you deserve all the horrible “abuse” we your supporters (else we would not be here) have heaped on you. Learn from it.

  24. 24.

    ppGaz

    August 14, 2005 at 7:22 pm

    She is, unassailable, you see.

    Wow, she sounds just like your typical blogmaster, John.

    We know how they, as a group, yearn to be assailed.

  25. 25.

    John Cole

    August 14, 2005 at 7:23 pm

    Nate:

    And you deserve all the horrible “abuse” we your supporters (else we would not be here) have heaped on you. Learn from it.

    Do you even try to make sense from thread to thread? An example of your ‘support’:

    P.S. Why aren’t you, DougJ and John Cole over there if you think this is so marvelous a plan? Or is heaping abuse on grief-stricken mothers more your sort of thing?

    Why aren’t you ‘over there,’ protesting? You know what you can do with your chickenhawk nonsense as well as your ‘support.’

  26. 26.

    PotVsKtl

    August 14, 2005 at 7:24 pm

    Did you even read the comments? This is an entire community, praising the value of a grieving mother as the political symbol, the universal archetype? It isn’t one person.

    Did you? Very first comment:

    Enough with the framing already. Not everything is a pr event to be managed and advertised.

    Another:

    lay off the Jungian Kool-aid. She’s a person, not a “universal archetype”.

    Etc. Sure, there are a few people who just chime in that “Mother” sounds bad. But insinuating that this diary is representative of the left is dishonest. The only person in the comments really pushing the “idea” is the original writer.

  27. 27.

    docG

    August 14, 2005 at 7:29 pm

    John, rebuilding the ol’ Republican street cred, I see. Al la Rove, attack the messenger, ignore the message. The American activity in Iraq has been and continues to be an poorly planned, poorly executed mess. Those using Cindy Sheehan, and vice versa, may be manipulative and even profane, but to call a mess a mess is factual, and the facts are recognized and resonating with more and more people all the time.

  28. 28.

    ppGaz

    August 14, 2005 at 7:29 pm

    I can’t wait until you guys get what you want- a massive confrontation of mothers

    And what is that you want, John? If I were nasty, I’d frame the question in terms of your Sheehan posts today. But of course, I am not nasty.

    To make the inquiry more interesting, what is that you, or anyone for that matter, wants of these mothers? Unity?

  29. 29.

    srv

    August 14, 2005 at 7:32 pm

    Boy, the party is over. I was nearby in Granbury TX last month, and thought the hesitant comments about Bush from former kool-aid drinkers was an aberation. If busing in ~200 Bush supporters from Dallas is the best the right can do in TX (hell, you could almost walk over from Ft. Hood), he better be praying for a fall surprise.

    Should John get what he wants (mother-on-mother violence) – it would be worth getting George off that faux-ranch of his for the rest of his term. As the locals say, all hat and no cattle.

  30. 30.

    ppGaz

    August 14, 2005 at 7:39 pm

    This is an entire community, praising the value of a grieving mother

    Gee, that’s almost as bad as a president trying to pimp grief over 9-11 in his campaign.

    An “entire community?” Really. I’m a DKos member, and I haven’t said a frigging word over there about it. Last time I looked the latest membership numbers were in the tens of thousands. Speaking as a member of this “community,” I’d say that nobody speaks for it, including Markos himself, and least of all, and I mean least in the most literal sense possible, you.

  31. 31.

    MisterPundit

    August 14, 2005 at 7:47 pm

    Cindy Sheehan picks up another endorsement :

    David Duke: Why Cindy Sheehan is Right!

    Remember, it’s not about the Jews folks.

  32. 32.

    Kimmitt

    August 14, 2005 at 7:48 pm

    John — is Ms. Sheehan’s status as a symbol of the antiwar movement more or less manipulative than Rosa Parks’s status as a symbol of the civil rights movement, and if so, how?

  33. 33.

    John Cole

    August 14, 2005 at 7:54 pm

    PPGAZ- I thought you knew me a little better than that, but I will tell you what I don’t want.

    I do not want the demands for an immediate withdrawal to be heeded. If you think things are a disaster right now, imagine what retreat, leaving the place to fall into a full-scale civil war would look like. And let’s not mention the hundred other things that would happen in the region. Things WOULD get worse.

    I don’t want fringe groups who spout anti-Israel rhetoric dictating foreign policy, let alone mainstreamed.

    I don’t want a nasty sort of victim v. victim fight over the war. I don’t want a bunch of people who are just getting used to dealing with their grief to feel like they have to go public and start a nasty public spectacle in which we witness nastiness at a new level. I similarly don’t want a movement that is going to go around and tell every soldiers family that he ‘died for nothing.’

    I don’t want a group who pushes bizarre ‘War for Oil/Halliburton’ bullshit being given equal time any more than I want Chris Buttars on the op-ed page of USA Today spouting the pros of ID.

    You have been reading me for 6 months, you should be aware my disgust with the GOP is at an all-time high, and I certainly am not voting for Cheney should he run in 2008. I probably will not vote for any Republicans in national races in 2006 (unless they nominate some non-lunatic to run against Byrd, who has been on my hit list for his spending for YEARS).

    If this were more than just about partisan politics, and ‘making Bush pay,’ it would be thing. But all it is about from where I look is retribution by the left for several years of real and perceived slights, and while Cindy Sheehan certainly wants to be doing what she is doing, in my most charitable I would claim the groups lining up behind her have suspect motives.

  34. 34.

    Jim Treacher

    August 14, 2005 at 7:55 pm

    Wow, she’s Rosa Parks now. Next up: Casey Sheehan was a virgin birth!

  35. 35.

    jg

    August 14, 2005 at 7:56 pm

    It isn’t that she is a symbol, it is that she is chosen as a symbol because she is ‘UNASSAILABLE.’ They are trying to turn the natural sympathy for a mourning mother into a political weapon.

    And the right uses 9/11 which is unassailable. Are you outraged at the choice of weapon there?

    But don’t look at what she is saying or what the groups she is aligned with and promoting her are saying, because then you are HEAPING VITRIOL ON THE WOMAN! SHE LOST HER SON, DON’T YOU KNOW!

    The exact opposite being don’t say anything at all against the war because then you hate the troops.

  36. 36.

    MisterPundit

    August 14, 2005 at 7:57 pm

    Wow, she’s Rosa Parks now. Next up: Casey Sheehan was a virgin birth!

    Amen.

  37. 37.

    jg

    August 14, 2005 at 8:01 pm

    I do not want the demands for an immediate withdrawal to be heeded.

    Me either. What I want is to be told what our plan is so maybe I can get behind it (or not). I hate being told to get behind it because its an American endeavor and I’m an american so I should support my president.

    Wow, she’s Rosa Parks now. Next up: Casey Sheehan was a virgin birth!

    So comparing her to an historical figure means she’s being made equal to that figure? Who changed the rules?

  38. 38.

    Kimmitt

    August 14, 2005 at 8:02 pm

    John — we’re cutting and running. Bush lied too much, and he’s out of rope; the Dems are too incompetently lead to make anything good come out of this. Basically, there isn’t a Dem in the wings to clean up the Republican mess this time, so we’re just going to have to suffer through it.

  39. 39.

    ppGaz

    August 14, 2005 at 8:03 pm

    I thought you knew me a little better than that

    I don’t know what to say to that. You could be right.

    I do not want the demands for an immediate withdrawal to be heeded.

    Nor do I.

    I don’t want a nasty sort of victim v. victim fight over the war.

    Well, nobody reasonable would. But we live in an age of victim v. victim. What will abate it?

    I don’t want a group who pushes bizarre ‘War for Oil/Halliburton’ bullshit being given equal time

    Not sure what group that is, but I don’t see a lot of War for Halliburton around these days. And just so you’ll know it’s really me, I don’t out WFH on any different plane than WBOWSH (World Better Off Without Saddam Hussein). I consider them both bullshit. Yeah, I know, Saddam is a sociopath, but that’s not, and never was, a valid justification for this war. As I’ve said numerous times, proof of my assertion is that this argument was not made, and was not sustainable, before the war, on its own merits. The country was never offered a chance to make that choice.

    I don’t question your RINO credentials. What I wonder is, as people bark at the moon over Sheehan, is what they want from her …. or any mother? Sorry to put that question on your head, but hey, who else am I going to hang it on? I didn’t raise this subject. I was out of town for two days.

  40. 40.

    Jim Treacher

    August 14, 2005 at 8:05 pm

    So comparing her to an historical figure means she’s being made equal to that figure? Who changed the rules?

    Same one who forcefed you those lemons, I guess.

  41. 41.

    MisterPundit

    August 14, 2005 at 8:06 pm

    And the right uses 9/11 which is unassailable. Are you outraged at the choice of weapon there?

    Only inasfar as reminding people like Michael “there is no terrorist threat” Moore that yes, there is in fact a terrorist threat. Sorry for the inconvenience.

  42. 42.

    rkrider

    August 14, 2005 at 8:10 pm

    It’s been amazing watching the little battle unfold.

    John Cole defends a Republican operative for calling a grieving mother, (who’s exercising her first amendment rights), a whore. But in his opinion, it’s Atrios, Kos, Andrew, etc. who don’t care about her?

    I guess the absolute worst outcome (for the right), of this war of choice, is one in which they’ll have to admit (if only to themselves) that the left was right all along.

  43. 43.

    tb

    August 14, 2005 at 8:14 pm

    Personally, I’m of the opinion that since she sacrificed a child for this country she should be able to say whatever the fuck she wants without every fat dorito-stained fuck who can afford dial-up shitting on her for it. You deserve that much respect when you surrender a child for this country. I’m such a dumbfuck liberal that I think you deserve that respect when you leave three goddamned limbs in Vietnam serving this country. But hey, go after the war mother all you want. It’s not like there are rules or anything. Tear her apart. It’s the principled thing to do, right?

  44. 44.

    ppGaz

    August 14, 2005 at 8:14 pm

    Sorry to put that question on your head

    Just to show you, John, what a saint and mensch I am, I’ll take a crack at my own question, and I will offer my answer as advice to the president:

    Bring Ms. Sheehan and any other mothers in her situation into the ranch. Close the door and have a no-holds-barred dialogue. Listen, and somehow, earn enough trust from them to convince them that you are really listening, and that you deserve their help.

    Then, ask for their help. Explain that you need their help. You need their help to bring the country together and hold it together while we finish the job in Iraq. Tell them clearly and unambiguously what the goal is, and how we will get there. Negotiate. Lead.

    Then, go in front of the microphones and tell the country what you told them.

    I have five bucks that says if you can do this, you can take a large step toward some kind of unity.

    Of course, this advice is for someone who wants unity. I don’t know if Bush wants it, or not. That’s why Sheehan is out there by the side of the road. She doesn’t know either.

  45. 45.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 8:15 pm

    Yes more of that I’m a victim BS! That is so yesterday come on you can do better than that can’t you john…

  46. 46.

    John Cole

    August 14, 2005 at 8:20 pm

    Todd Bishop- What is ShipDrummer?

  47. 47.

    tb

    August 14, 2005 at 8:21 pm

    That’s me.

  48. 48.

    John Cole

    August 14, 2005 at 8:22 pm

    Band?

  49. 49.

    capelza

    August 14, 2005 at 8:24 pm

    Wow…was just over at that certain scoop right wing blog and in their “red hot” section was this little gem.

    “Continuing the march toward rule by loud-mouthed women”

    It was concerning a 9/11 mother wanting some investigation. Is this what is bothering so many fo the Right? Loud mouth women? I don’t know, really I didn’t know where else to post this. Maybe it does some bias over there and elsewhere. God save us from loud mouth uppity women and all that. Women should seen and not heard? Or maybe the poster is just a jerk. Taken all together, little bits like this DO add up. I hate to use the word “sexist”, but after reading that. Oh, never mind.

    I do think you all are being pretty hard on John Cole though, he does say why he feels the way he does, though I don’t agree neccessarily.

  50. 50.

    tb

    August 14, 2005 at 8:24 pm

    No, brand. I do graphic design and I’m also a professional musician.

  51. 51.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 8:26 pm

    No but really why aren’t all you guys that support this war over there. SERIOUSLY that is a question that alot of the people I know want answered. The recruiting is down they could sure use you guys.

    I just don’t get it you all think this war was the right thing to do and you say you support it well how exactly do you support it. By posting BS on the web. The army isn’t gonna make it’s quota this year it looks like so how about supporting the troops by replacing them. I’m not trying to be sarcastic here I really mean it WHY NOT…

    Please respond in a tone that doesn’t make you sound the a rabid retard. 123 duck

  52. 52.

    Jim Treacher

    August 14, 2005 at 8:26 pm

    Of course, this advice is for someone who wants unity. I don’t know if Bush wants it, or not. That’s why Sheehan is out there by the side of the road. She doesn’t know either.

    Hmmmm…

  53. 53.

    ppGaz

    August 14, 2005 at 8:32 pm

    Yes, well that proves my point better than I could.

    Bush is the goddamned president. He has the power to turn Sheehan’s appearance into a plus.

    As long as he ignores her, he loses. As soon as he embraces her, he … and the country … win.

    The biggest loser of all, in the latter circumstance, are the talking-points brigades. By the simple expedient of reaching out to Sheehan, Bush shows the rightie hyenas that something more might be required of citizens these days than laughing at the people who don’t agree with them. and he shows the rabid left that he’s bigger than they are, and bigger than they thought he was.

    It’s pretty obvious. Which is probably why he won’t see it.

  54. 54.

    Otto Man

    August 14, 2005 at 8:35 pm

    It isn’t that she is a symbol, it is that she is chosen as a symbol because she is ‘UNASSAILABLE.’ They are trying to turn the natural sympathy for a mourning mother into a political weapon.

    I’m sorry, but I just don’t understand the right’s outrage on this point. So much of the movement for the war in Iraq has been made on emotional appeals. It started with the dissembling that linked 9/11 to Saddam in a number of ways, but it continued throughout the war, as countless human interest stories were pushed forward to justify the war.

    First, we heard endless stories from Chalabi and the other exiles which supposedly proved we needed to go in and we’d be adored upon doing so. (Wrong.) Then, during the war, countless other human interest stories on the troops, culminating with the made-for-TV saga of Jessica Lynch. (Wrong again.) Next, the stories about how we’d freed Iraq of rape and torture. (Dropped after Abu Ghraib revelations.) Then, all the purple-thumbed voters at the State of the Union. And so on.

    The administration has pretty much based its entire rationale for the war on stories fit for People Magazine. How can you be outraged that now, 30 months into it, the left is doing the same thing?

  55. 55.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 8:36 pm

    Bush let this get way out of hand. If he would have just spoke to her instead of letting his political minders tell him what to do all this back and forth would not be happening. This is what george allen a repub sen. that I really don’t care for said…

    “I think the president ought to meet with this mother,” said Sen. George Allen, a Virginia Republican. “What I would say to her is her son will always be remembered as a great hero and a patriot, advanced freedom in Iraq and the Middle East, has made this country more secure.”

    Maybe he said that cause he wants to run I don’t know but I’m sorry bush jr squanders everything he gets involved in.

  56. 56.

    Captain O

    August 14, 2005 at 8:38 pm

    What a colossal waste of time and energy. This isn’t legitimate public discourse and it never will be. The whole “debate” and “controversy” is entirely without merit, as it now centers almost exclusively on Sheehan’s personal motives and not on legitimate questions about America’s foreign policy. The Left won’t admit this because it wants to use Sheehan as a guided missile and the Right is too busy being a pack of ghoulish jackals to care.

  57. 57.

    hadenoughofthisyet

    August 14, 2005 at 8:39 pm

    Did you even read the comments? This is an entire community, praising the value of a grieving mother as the political symbol, the universal archetype? It isn’t one person.

    That diary had 4 recommendations. Out of the 80 to 90 readers only 4 thought it a topic worth recommending. Certainly not a sterling performance. To put it in a little perspective — the top 3 diaries over at KOS now have 380, 292, 121 recommendations respectively.

  58. 58.

    MisterPundit

    August 14, 2005 at 8:41 pm

    Personally, I’m of the opinion that since she sacrificed a child for this country she should be able to say whatever the fuck she wants without every fat dorito-stained fuck who can afford dial-up shitting on her for it.

    I’m not going to let her use her “grief” to indulge herself in some Jew baiting. That ship has sailed.

  59. 59.

    MisterPundit

    August 14, 2005 at 8:42 pm

    I’m sorry, but I just don’t understand the right’s outrage on this point.

    Clearly, neither do you.

  60. 60.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 8:42 pm

    While we are supporting the troops and all does anyone know if they have the proper body armor yet. I mean it has been 3 years surely they have the proper support from this adminstration and all the body armor and ammo they need right, right, right? OF COURSE THEY DON’T THEY JUST LIKE TO SAY THEY SUPPORT THE TROOPS.

    Surely they have the proper medical care when they get back? What’s that you say the repubs cut funding by billions last year for the VA.

    REPUBLICANS=HYPOCRITES

  61. 61.

    Otto Man

    August 14, 2005 at 8:43 pm

    I’m not going to let her use her “grief” to indulge herself in some Jew baiting. That ship has sailed.

    Yeah! And I’m not going to let her turn people into Soylent Green either!

    Any evidence of that Jew baiting?

  62. 62.

    Otto Man

    August 14, 2005 at 8:46 pm

    I’m sorry, but I just don’t understand the right’s outrage on this point.

    Clearly, neither do you.

    Was that supposed to be a slam of some kind?

    I said I didn’t understand it, and your comeback is that I didn’t understand it?

    Zing!

  63. 63.

    hadenoughofthisyet

    August 14, 2005 at 8:47 pm

    Any evidence of that Jew baiting?

    Drudge — in between his man-has-sex-with-(fill in the blank)-animal postings — has been harping this. Consider the source…

  64. 64.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 8:48 pm

    No Otto that is the latest talking point tho that they are using to deflect and it truely is pathetic.

    It’s like watching a fish flop around out of water…

  65. 65.

    Otto Man

    August 14, 2005 at 8:49 pm

    Drudge—in between his man-has-sex-with-(fill in the blank)-animal postings—has been harping this. Consider the source…

    Yeesh. So what… Is Sheehan supposedly blaming the war on the Protocols of the Elders of Zion?

  66. 66.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 8:54 pm

    Go check out the reading at rawstory.com. Good stuff there on republican sen. Pat Roberts all the righties should go read what he has been up to and make sure you check out the timeline. This was one hell of a job reporting.

  67. 67.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 8:56 pm

    So why are we in Iraq again???

  68. 68.

    MI

    August 14, 2005 at 9:10 pm

    John is merely a pawn for those on the right who think the left is using Cindy Sheehan.

    but seriously

    This is an entire community, praising the value of a grieving mother as the political symbol

    I can’t quite get my mind around what your complaint is. Yes, a grieving mother who’s against the war is a pretty powerful anti-war symbol, she puts a human and sympathetic face on the true cost of war. She brings the sacrifice home to people, so it’s just not something that’s happening “over there”….and? and what? She wants to end the war and bring the troops home, that’s her mission, that’s the mission of the people at Kos, they share a common cause so they’re teaming up. So what’s the problem?

    Do you just think they’re being crude about it? Or insincere? or what? Maybe you’re not effectively articulating what precisely your problem is with this whole thing. or maybe people like me are just being thickheaded. I dunno.

  69. 69.

    MisterPundit

    August 14, 2005 at 9:13 pm

    I said I didn’t understand it, and your comeback is that I didn’t understand it?

    Hey, I’m just making sure you understand that you don’t understand. LOL.

  70. 70.

    Joe Albanese

    August 14, 2005 at 9:13 pm

    I really have a hard time understanding the right’s outrage regarding the left using Cindy Sheehan as a symbol. Is this something new? A symbol is something that is able to bring an issue to the consciousness of those that might not have otherwise paid attention. Bush surrounding himself with “snowflake babies” to illustrate the stem cell debate for instance. Or the “saving” or Private Lynch for demonstrating the valor and bravery of our American soldiers. At every State of the Union speech I will guarantee you that Bush will have a couple of “symbols” sitting next to his wife in the balcony. But I guess the left is not allowed to have symbols, just the right.

    Or perhaps it is John’s point that she was called “unassailable”. Well, that needs to be put into context doesn’t it John? When anyone that goes against this adminstration is viciously attacked it is important for the left to have spokespeople who are a bit more difficult to smear in this way. Remember the attacks on Paul O’neil, on Richard Clark, on Dan Rather, on the Dixie Chicks on, on Senator Durbin, on…. oh.. you get the point don’t you John? You can’t really be outraged that the left is applauding someone speaking up that will be more difficult to target as an anti-American traitor that doesn’t care about our troops when she made the ultimate sacrfice. Is the left “using” her? Of course. With her consent. And I see nothing wrong with that at all.

  71. 71.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 9:16 pm

    Let me break it down for you all… It is really quite simple the republicans=hypocrites. Seriously keep that thought in the back of your mind when you read articles, talk, or debate with them.

  72. 72.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 9:17 pm

    Any outrage that the troops that you support still don’t have the adequate armor after 3 years. A little murmur would do, anything, fart for gods sake…

  73. 73.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 9:21 pm

    I wonder how that helps recruiting when people hear the troops still aren’t adequately protected with body armor they disserved to have before they went into harms way. Oh yea this was a cake walk, welcomed as liberators, flowers.

    And the always elequant you go to war with the force you have not the force you would like. That was so deep rummy you never cease to amaze.

  74. 74.

    Peter T.

    August 14, 2005 at 9:21 pm

    In other parts of the country they just write letters to the editor.

    CRAWFORD, United States (AFP) – A frustrated local farmer fired shots into the air near hundreds of protestors who began their second week of demonstrations against the
    Iraq war outside
    President George W. Bush’s ranch.

    Larry Mattlage, who lives next to the Bush ranch where the president is spending a five week vacation, complained about the 200 protestors, media and government security officials occupying the road outside his own residence after firing a rifle into the air several times.

    “Five weeks of this is too much. We live here, this is our community,” Mattlage said in footage show by CNN television, while insisting the gunshots were just him “getting ready for dove season.”

    “I shot at a bird, and missed it a while ago,” he said.

    Asked if the gunshots had another message, Mattlage told reporters: “Figure it out for yourself.”

  75. 75.

    MI

    August 14, 2005 at 9:21 pm

    HA! Joe Albanese, we made the same point within minutes of each other. I think you said it better though.

  76. 76.

    Gary Farber

    August 14, 2005 at 9:21 pm

    “This post on Cindy Sheehan, Perfect Weapon, has given me nothing but heaps of shit from you all.”

    I’m fairly sure not from me, actually. I don’t find her a helpful metonym.

  77. 77.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 9:24 pm

    Why are we in Iraq

  78. 78.

    airmail

    August 14, 2005 at 9:27 pm

    John (Cole)-
    The reason why the left is looking for someone like Cindy Sheehan, someone unassailable is because they saw what happened to John “I like to shoot myself ”Kerry, Max “I get drunk and belly flop out of helicopters onto my own grenades” Cleland, Richard ”My. Hair. Is. On. Fire.” Clark, Paul “I lisp and wet myself if you give me nicknames” O’Neil, John “Ignore the illegitimate black child” McCain and others. Anyone one has that has gone against the administration has been crucified. But that’s not the frustrating part. It is that a lot of seemingly reasonable people have gone right along with the character assassination. Approved of it, condoned it, and reveled in it like Bill O’Reilly at a loofah convention. I simply think the left is beyond frustrated and are looking for someone that might strike a chord on their own merits, some one able to get past the bloodlust. Anyway for what it is worth, despite the fact that I disagree with a lot of your opinions, keep fighting the good fight against the god squad and the war on drugs and you’ll always be in my good graces

  79. 79.

    Joe Albanese

    August 14, 2005 at 9:33 pm

    I think what the right is really upset about is that Cindy Sheehan is EFFECTIVE. Her message is getting through. Is making people stop and think of what she his saying. Is making people re-evaluate their views of the war and its consequences. And that is the very last thing the supporters of this war want. Its no mystery why Bush hardly talks about the war and why FOX is fixated on missing white girls in Aruba. The less said about Iraq the better. But Cindy, has brought the war front and center. They just won’t admit that so they have to use all sorts of truly absurd arguments about her being “used” or being put forth as “unassailable”. What is really getting to them is that we took a page from their book, and are effectively using the MSM to getting the anti-war message out.

    This from John Cole is revealing:

    I do not want the demands for an immediate withdrawal to be heeded. If you think things are a disaster right now, imagine what retreat, leaving the place to fall into a full-scale civil war would look like. And let’s not mention the hundred other things that would happen in the region. Things WOULD get worse.

    So just admit it John, you are upset that she may cause a result that you disagree with. You are pissed because there are almost as many reporters outside of her tent as there were outside of Terry Schiavo’s hospice room. And you are concerned because you believe she may be effecting public opinion. Fine. I have no problem with that. I dont’ want an immediate withdrawal either, but you are attacking her because she is on the other side of the argument and for nothing more – just like the slime merchants on the right. I thougth you were better than that.

  80. 80.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 9:36 pm

    Joe I agree this is killing them and the support which the polls show is in the shitter. This war is coming to a end and as Frank Rich said today someone needs to tell the president the war is over.

  81. 81.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 9:39 pm

    Read

  82. 82.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 9:39 pm

    Read

    Sorry.

  83. 83.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 9:42 pm

    Here is your great leader in all his glory.

  84. 84.

    Joe Albanese

    August 14, 2005 at 9:45 pm

    alphaOmega Frank Rich was brillian, as usual.

  85. 85.

    Joe Albanese

    August 14, 2005 at 9:45 pm

    even brilliant

  86. 86.

    John Cole

    August 14, 2005 at 9:45 pm

    Alpha Omega- Quit comment spamming. Try to limit yourself to less than 100 comments an hour.

  87. 87.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 9:50 pm

    Sorry John I really didn’t mean to cause a problem I hope you will sleep tonight. I don’t control when people post so I didn’t do it on purpose.

    Only 100 come on…I have so much info that clearly your readers need to absorb so they can be better informed than they clearly are now… But I will take a break it really is getting boring at this point and the same tiring excuses are just that tiring and excuses.

  88. 88.

    John Cole

    August 14, 2005 at 9:59 pm

    It just makes it easier to read if you would post the 30 or so 1-2 word comments in ONE OR TWO comments, rather than 85 successive ones 2 minutes apart.

  89. 89.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 10:00 pm

    Easier to read huh! ok ok ok! 85 huh ok ok ok!

  90. 90.

    Zifnab

    August 14, 2005 at 10:01 pm

    Common Dreams is hardly an unbiased source and while the Resume was funny, there were as many snarky comments in there as actual facts.

    Not that I didn’t enjoy the links, but this is a right wing site. You might as well link to DKos for all the love you’ll get on the other two.

  91. 91.

    AlanDownunder

    August 14, 2005 at 10:01 pm

    People who read what Mrs Sheehan writes and listen to what she says can’t sensibly call her a political pawn. Some examples to be found here.

    http://coldfury.com/reason/?p=866

    http://coldfury.com/reason/?p=868

  92. 92.

    DougJ

    August 14, 2005 at 10:14 pm

    I think what the right is really upset about is that Cindy Sheehan is EFFECTIVE.

    I have to disagree. The public will quickly tire of her shameless self-aggrandizing and realize that this is just another example of the loony left jihad to take down a president.

    President Bush is more than a politician. He is part Sunday school teacher, part village magistrate, part prophet. Against Clinton, what Sheehan is doing might have worked. But the public has a faith in president Bush that transcends politics, that is spiritual, even mystical. Ultimately, they will side with the wise leader who has guided us for the past half decade and reject the histrionics of a left-wing extremist.

  93. 93.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 10:17 pm

    Sorry John but part prophet JHC you are retarded dougj.

  94. 94.

    ppGaz

    August 14, 2005 at 10:17 pm

    But the public has a faith in president Bush that transcends politics, that is spiritual, even mystical. Ultimately, they will side with the wise leader who has guided us for the past half decade and reject the histrionics of a left-wing extremist.

    Doug, if you’re serious, then you are officialy as nutty as a fruitcake. Delusional. Living in some parallel universe.

    If you are not serious, you’ve blown your cover.

    You need a new handle, and some new material.

  95. 95.

    Joe Albanese

    August 14, 2005 at 10:19 pm

    DougJ are you ok? You’re talking kinda funny.

  96. 96.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 10:19 pm

    LOL

  97. 97.

    Bob

    August 14, 2005 at 10:28 pm

    What’s the big deal of Sheehan being a symbol? Everything is either a symbol or the real thing. The Repub noise machine has been generating symbols, people or otherwise, for five years. What was the Tillman guy but a symbol?

    I think the problem is that Sheehan as symbol is trumping anything symbolic the administration can muster.

    It’s all coming down. The only thing that can save the Repubs is getting those Diebold machines into every precinct. Otherwise, the game is over.

  98. 98.

    MisterPundit

    August 14, 2005 at 10:30 pm

    Sheehan vs Israel :

    http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/000644.html

  99. 99.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 10:31 pm

    I just want you to know Dougj that I saved that for prosperity. I damn near wet myself I laughed so hard! Are you on shrooms… That was deep! The real question is John did you laugh inquiring minds want to know…

  100. 100.

    MisterPundit

    August 14, 2005 at 10:35 pm

    I just want you to know Dougj that I saved that for prosperity.

    Prosperity? Damn, I’m saving it too.

  101. 101.

    JC

    August 14, 2005 at 10:37 pm

    This is WAY far down, and I don’t know if Cole will read this – but in case he does –

    1. The term “Media Whore”. Well, clearly Sheehan is using the media to criticize a President she doesn’t believe in. But “Media Whore” is usually reserved for PAID members of the media class – not for the “volunteers”, so to speak.

    2. Also, to speak out is her right as a citizen, yes? If YOU believed that your son was lost in a useless war, wouldn’t it be incumbent upon you, and brave of you, to speak up and step out about it?

    3. The “shoe” is constantly on the other foot – in the sense that the President is continually using members of the military as photo-ops, to advance his agenda – some would say very cynically, in certain cases. Can you imagine, however, if someone were to call those military who vocally support the President “media whores?”. That would be disgusting.

    So you have a double standard here, in that if a mother who deeply supports President Bush, and does political activism for Bush (gets on the shows, etc, etc), to call THAT mother a “media whore” would be quite out of bounds.

    At least I would find it disgusting, and I found Erick Erickson’s use of the word disgusting as well.

    4. You are forgetting the reason why this is resonating. It’s a pretty intractable problem when the President sold this particular war on a false premise that’s a HUGE problem. And a mother asking “I lost my son because Saddam was an imminent threat. But that’s not true. So what are going to do about that? Why did my son have to die for a lie?”

    Now, as far as I’m concerned, Bush has already met with the woman, so I don’t see any need for him to meet with her again. But issue number 4 above is why this is resonating.

  102. 102.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 10:40 pm

    Prosperity in the sense that my friends and I will laugh and laugh more everytime we read it forever! It was that good…

  103. 103.

    Otto Man

    August 14, 2005 at 10:43 pm

    Here’s the only quote from Sheehan on the website offered by MisterPundit as proof of what he calls Sheehan’s “Jew baiting” tactics:

    “You get America out of Iraq and Israel out of Palestine and you’ll stop the terrorism.”

    She thinks Israel’s withdrawal from Palestinian areas would reduce terrorism, and for that she’s an anti-Semite? Funny, that’s Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s position and policy, too. Does that make him a self-hating Jew, too?

    I guess that would make sense if I were on the right-wing. Sort of like Mormon Orrin Hatch accusings Catholic Ted Kennedy, Catholic Dick Durbin, and Catholic Pat Leahy of “anti-Catholic bigotry” because they opposed a guy who also happened to be Catholic.

    And, of course, this fits in with the Dobsonite view of the world. Just because we don’t legislate his version of reality, we’re all oppressing Christians. Even the Christians who are doing the oppression.

    Have fun with the tin-foil hat, pal.

  104. 104.

    Brad R.

    August 14, 2005 at 10:49 pm

    I really have a hard time understanding the right’s outrage regarding the left using Cindy Sheehan as a symbol. Is this something new? A symbol is something that is able to bring an issue to the consciousness of those that might not have otherwise paid attention. Bush surrounding himself with “snowflake babies” to illustrate the stem cell debate for instance. Or the “saving” or Private Lynch for demonstrating the valor and bravery of our American soldiers. At every State of the Union speech I will guarantee you that Bush will have a couple of “symbols” sitting next to his wife in the balcony.

    Joe- I think this is an interesting point, and it’s exactly why I have an allergic reaction to the whole Cindy Sheehan ordeal- it’s reminds me of something straight out of Bush’s playbook.

  105. 105.

    Mike

    August 14, 2005 at 10:49 pm

    MI Says:
    “She brings the sacrifice home to people, so it’s just not something that’s happening “over there”….and? and what? She wants to end the war and bring the troops home, that’s her mission, that’s the mission of the people at Kos, they share a common cause so they’re teaming up. So what’s the problem?”

    Because that’s a lie.

    If that’s her “mission”, then why is she now using her 10 minutes of fame to call for Israel leaving Palestine? What’s next? Leave Afghanistan as well? Give control of the country over the UN? Take 50% of everyone’s money so it can be wasted by government bureaucrats?

    Kos and the other Klowns don’t give a damn about this woman nor do they particularly give a damn about Iraq. Nor do I think many of them particularly care about America. In fact, I’d wager quite a few don’t even like America, regardless of who’s in charge. This is the hate Bush crowd, evil Rethuglicans, America the evil, blah, blah, blah, nothing more, nothing original. They should be ignored and they should be defeated at every turn to the point where they grow so frustrated they all move to Canada. That’s the best thing that could happen to the country.

  106. 106.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 10:50 pm

    This is what I got out of it. He actually calls it a war mess!!!

    She wants to make a public splash by allowing critics of the unjustified war in Iraq to use her as a human bazooka against Bush, who got us into this war mess.

    But yea other than a few things not much to see. And little green footballs? Didn’t they post a picture of the spanish car that we shot up and killed Nicola Calipari when he was saving that reporter and it was a different car all together…

  107. 107.

    Brad R.

    August 14, 2005 at 10:51 pm

    President Bush is more than a politician. He is part Sunday school teacher, part village magistrate, part prophet. Against Clinton, what Sheehan is doing might have worked. But the public has a faith in president Bush that transcends politics, that is spiritual, even mystical.

    Doug, that is the most hilariously cracked-out thing I’ve ever heard- it’s even more over-the-top than a Debbie Daniel column. I mean, you’re not even brownnosing Bush- you’re blatantly tossing his goddamned salad.

  108. 108.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 10:52 pm

    You know there sure seems to be a lot of kos penis envy on this site… What is that all about?

  109. 109.

    Stormy70

    August 14, 2005 at 10:53 pm

    “It’s the Joos! for prosperity!”

    She has alligned herself with the fringe left anti-semitic left groups, and drawn a kindred soul in David Duke. I don’t think her message is going to resonate, especially since she is hanging out at the hippy headquarters in Crawford, aka the Crawford Peace House.

  110. 110.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 10:54 pm

    Not gonna resonate huh? Where have you been all week?

  111. 111.

    Brad R.

    August 14, 2005 at 10:55 pm

    You know there sure seems to be a lot of kos penis envy on this site… What is that all about?

    *sigh* I don’t have a problem with Kos himself, but a lotta people who comment there are just lefty freepers.

  112. 112.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 10:57 pm

    Ok brad good enough but have you read some of the stuff posted around here. lol

  113. 113.

    Brad R.

    August 14, 2005 at 10:59 pm

    Well, Doug might just be the stupidest troll I’ve ever seen, but my general problem with the whole Kos Kommunity is that it’s so relentlessly dogmatic and conspiratorial- even Kos recognized how insane it was becoming after a while, which is why he purged a lot of diaries.

  114. 114.

    Stormy70

    August 14, 2005 at 10:59 pm

    Alpha – I have a real job I use for prosperity. I do not think this word means what you think it means. :)

  115. 115.

    Otto Man

    August 14, 2005 at 11:01 pm

    If that’s her “mission”, then why is she now using her 10 minutes of fame to call for Israel leaving Palestine?

    She’s not. But once again, the right-wing noise machine has decided that they can’t rebut her actual question — why are we in Iraq? — and so they’ve decided to gin up a phony controversy to get their delicate panties in a wad over.

    The neoconservatives’ PNAC plan isn’t working out? Well, if you criticize them, you must just hate Jews. William Pryor is a nutball judicial candidate? Well, if you say that, you must just hate Catholics. And now, you want to know why the administration rushed to war in Iraq? You hate the Jews. Wash, rinse, repeat.

    Seriously, you all should mix in some other religions or ethnicities in there that we supposedly hate whenever we point out the fallacy of your ideas. How about the next time someone points out that privatization wouldn’t make Social Security more solvent, you all denounce that person as being hateful towards Buddhists? Or if someone suggests that the recent highway bill was overloaded with pork, maybe you can decry their bigotry against the people of Lichtenstein?

    Come on, stretch your legs. This Jew-Catholic repetition is getting boring.

  116. 116.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 11:03 pm

    I meant it the joke that will keep on giving for ever and ever!!!

  117. 117.

    MI

    August 14, 2005 at 11:04 pm

    I haven’t heard her say anything about Israel and Palestine, if she has, yeah that’s a bit ridiculous.

    As for the rest of your post, you’re just being silly. C’mon now, no one here hates America and people are genuinely concerned about the direction the war has taken. I know this to be fact, because I’m one of those people.

    I had this same conversation here last night. You’re just going to have to accept that there are a ton of God fearing, red blooded, patriotic Americans who don’t like what’s going on in Iraq. The fact that Michael Moore shares that opinion doesn’t invalidate it.

    I like the band Spoon. If michaelmoore.com makes Spoon the site’s band of the month, that doesn’t mean Spoon sucks, nor does it mean I America for listening to them.

  118. 118.

    Otto Man

    August 14, 2005 at 11:04 pm

    How about the next time someone points out that privatization wouldn’t make Social Security more solvent, you all denounce that person as being hateful towards Buddhists?

    You know, as soon as I hit “submit,” I remembered the administration sort of did this already. Not with Buddhists, but with blacks. Remember the argument that since black men died earlier than men from other races, privatization was actually a movement for black empowerment?

    I guess it’s official. This administration has moved beyond sarcasm.

    They’ve gone to plaid.

  119. 119.

    MI

    August 14, 2005 at 11:05 pm

    *hate

  120. 120.

    Caroline

    August 14, 2005 at 11:12 pm

    Shorter DougJ:
    Bush is Jesus. He is the truth, the way and the light.

    And Republicans get upset when Dem’s call them kool aid drinking cultists? Darn, this sounds just like a Jim Jones follower or a moonie.

  121. 121.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 11:12 pm

    Has anyone read this article.

  122. 122.

    John Cole

    August 14, 2005 at 11:13 pm

    Seeing as how you have now posted it on three threads, I don’t see how they could have missed it.

  123. 123.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 11:16 pm

    Well know one has commented boo on it so I just figured I would ask again. Are you in a bad mood or something? Don’t answere that!

  124. 124.

    Otto Man

    August 14, 2005 at 11:16 pm

    Seeing as how you have now posted it on three threads, I don’t see how they could have missed it.

    Hey, he’s the beginning and the end. Omnipresent.

  125. 125.

    djc

    August 14, 2005 at 11:22 pm

    Heh.
    Indeed,

    And prosperous. Or is that posterious?

    100 comments a hour is known to fend off prostateious cancer

  126. 126.

    MisterPundit

    August 14, 2005 at 11:23 pm

    I haven’t heard her say anything about Israel and Palestine, if she has, yeah that’s a bit ridiculous.

    Sadly, Sheehan doesn’t just stop at “get Israel out of Palestine”. She also claims the US is doing Israel’s bidding, ie. the US is an Israeli puppet. Wow, such insight. This type of rhetoric is straight out of Hamas and Islamic Jihad handbooks. Then there’s stuff like this :

    “That lying bastard, George Bush, is taking a five-week vacation in time of war,”

    “You get that maniac out here to talk with me in person.”

    “He died to expand American imperialism in the Middle East.”

    “They need to be tried on war crimes and go to jail.”

    Nobody in their right mind is going to just there sit and take that kind of idiotic abuse without insisting she answer a couple of questions of her own.

  127. 127.

    Randolph Fritz

    August 14, 2005 at 11:26 pm

    “Why considerest thou the mote in thy brother’s eye, and not the timber in thine own?”

    If Bush hadn’t lied about the nukes, and if the administration hadn’t been so utterly incompetent in the prosecution of this war, probably no-one would be paying attention to Ms. Sheehan; she is effective because she’s speaking for a lot of unhappy, angry people. You would like to see her lose the argument? Then fix the damn administration’s problems!

  128. 128.

    Mike

    August 14, 2005 at 11:29 pm

    MI Says:

    “As for the rest of your post, you’re just being silly. C’mon now, no one here hates America and people are genuinely concerned about the direction the war has taken. I know this to be fact, because I’m one of those people.”

    You think MY POST WAS SILLY!!!
    NO. THIS is silly:
    Nyah, Nyah, you’re a poop-head…

    Sorry, I just think we need to lighten up some. :))

    And you’re probably right, I shouldn’t paint an entire group of people with such a brush just because of the stupid website they frequent.

    “I had this same conversation here last night. You’re just going to have to accept that there are a ton of God fearing, red blooded, patriotic Americans who don’t like what’s going on in Iraq.”

    Okay, I’ll buy that. I’m not thrilled myself about everything going on, but I think cutting and running is a mistake. I also think we need to understand what constitutes victory, I’m not sure myself. I’ll bet we at least agree there huh?

    “The fact that Michael Moore shares that opinion doesn’t invalidate it.”

    Maybe not, but it really, really doesn’t help. :)

    You reasonable guys such as yourself and a few others here have just GOT to get rid of some of the baggage that hangs out with the Democratic Party. Course I guess the same could be said of my side. I’ll tell you what, we’ll get rid of Delay if you’ll get rid of say, California. ;)

    “I like the band Spoon. If michaelmoore.com makes Spoon the site’s band of the month, that doesn’t mean Spoon sucks, nor does it mean I America for listening to them.”

    Never heard of them. ;)
    But I DO like Pink Floyd.

  129. 129.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 11:32 pm

    well this probly will get you in trouble but I agree with what your droppin mike!

  130. 130.

    Stormy70

    August 14, 2005 at 11:32 pm

    Heh.
    Indeed,

    And prosperous. Or is that posterious?

    100 comments a hour is known to fend off prostateious cancer

    Were you sitting on your posterior while typing out this post?

    You are a procacious sort, are you not?

  131. 131.

    JC

    August 14, 2005 at 11:32 pm

    Alphaomega –

    I saw that, but it isn’t really relevant to this thread. But very quickly – that whole Senate Intelligence report was politicized, and the first evidence of this were the comments at the end of the report specifically inserted by Republicans, and not signed off by Democrats. Those shouldn’t have been in there, so playing politics on the report happened from the beginning.

    John – feel free to delete this comment, since it’s not pertinent – it really belongs in a Plame thread or open thread, or something…

  132. 132.

    Brad R.

    August 14, 2005 at 11:33 pm

    Okay, I’ll buy that. I’m not thrilled myself about everything going on, but I think cutting and running is a mistake. I also think we need to understand what constitutes victory, I’m not sure myself. I’ll bet we at least agree there huh?

    OK, now THIS is the discussion we need to be having- WTF are our goals in Iraq? If it entails keeping our troops there until there’s a fully functioning democracy that will inspire revolution throughout the Middle East, forget about it- it ain’t happenin’.

    So short of that, what are our goals?

  133. 133.

    MI

    August 14, 2005 at 11:35 pm

    Hey MisterPundit, how are things in the great white north tonight?

    Hoping off Sheehan train for a minute, what do you think about deserters feeling to Canada?

    I was just reading something about it tonight, apparently over 5,000 soldiers have deserted since the war started. Not all to Canada of course. But that number surprised me a bit.

  134. 134.

    Mike

    August 14, 2005 at 11:38 pm

    “AlphaOmega Says:
    well this probly will get you in trouble but I agree with what your droppin mike!”

    Well.
    It’s been nice John, I’ve enjoyed your site.
    I’m gonna go shoot myself now.

  135. 135.

    MI

    August 14, 2005 at 11:39 pm

    haha great post, Mike.

    Maybe not, but it really, really doesn’t help.

    heh, you’re telling’ me!

  136. 136.

    John Cole

    August 14, 2005 at 11:39 pm

    Desertions are actually down:

    Washington, DC, Dec. 16 (UPI) — The number of annual military desertions is down to the lowest level since before 2001, according to the Pentagon.

    The Army said the number of new deserters in 2004 — 2,376 — was just half the number of those who deserted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. That number was 4,597.

    The numbers of deserters has dropped annually since the Sept. 11 attacks on New York and Washington. The fiscal year 2004 total number of Army deserters is the lowest since before 1998, according to Army data.

    Cumulatively, more than 6,000 service members from all branches have deserted the military since fiscal year 2003, when the war with Iraq began. About 3,500 military service members have deserted their jobs in the last 14 months.

    Can’t verify it off hand, but that is the report I remember reading.

  137. 137.

    Kimmitt

    August 14, 2005 at 11:41 pm

    AlphaOmega, look, man, I agree with some of what you’re saying, but you gotta lay off the “Submit Comment” button for a while. Consider this an intervention.

  138. 138.

    MI

    August 14, 2005 at 11:42 pm

    Oh, and we can definitely find common ground as it concerns Pink Floyd.

    Did you enjoy Live 8? Was that a stupid question?

  139. 139.

    MisterPundit

    August 14, 2005 at 11:44 pm

    I was just reading something about it tonight, apparently over 5,000 soldiers have deserted since the war started. Not all to Canada of course. But that number surprised me a bit.

    Hey bud. I remember seeing that too, but I also remember seeing a debunking of it. Anyway, there was only one deserter that actually made any headlines here – forget his name – but I believe he was told to get his butt back to the US. LOL.

    Along the same lines – all those Kerry supporters who promised to leave the US for Canada :

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050805/od_nm/usa_immigration_dc

    Phew! We have enough crazy libs over here, thank you :-)

  140. 140.

    MI

    August 14, 2005 at 11:49 pm

    was just half the number of those who deserted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. That number was 4,597.

    When are they counting from? like from the inception of the military to 9-11, or what? I think i’m missing something kina obvious there and I’m gonna look like an ass. Oh well, won’t be the first time.

    And why so many desertions during peace time? I mean I’m sure there are numerous reasons, but are there one or two that are more or less the norm?

    thx for the numbers John

  141. 141.

    AlphaOmega

    August 14, 2005 at 11:50 pm

    This will be my last post on this site. I’m sure john somewhere is smiling, and john if you want to delete my posts that’s cool with me I really wouldn’t care. I obviously got here by mistake…

    Hope I didn’t offend to much I know I pissed John off so sorry and good luck…

    ps kimmet that was funny…

  142. 142.

    MI

    August 14, 2005 at 11:54 pm

    Here’s the story I was referring to so everyone can get a look at it. Can’t vouch for the source blah blah all that jazz.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/01/09/wus09.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/01/09/ixportal.html

  143. 143.

    Mike

    August 14, 2005 at 11:54 pm

    “MI Says:
    Oh, and we can definitely find common ground as it concerns Pink Floyd.

    Did you enjoy Live 8? Was that a stupid question?”

    I enjoyed the Pink Floyd part. ;)
    Mike

  144. 144.

    John Cole

    August 14, 2005 at 11:56 pm

    I amalos not sure how easy it is to desert when you are deployed in the Middle East. When I was there, I was always with at least 3 other people. Always. Besides, where would you go? Syria?

  145. 145.

    djc

    August 14, 2005 at 11:57 pm

    AlphaOmega,

    Live long and poster.

  146. 146.

    MI

    August 15, 2005 at 12:03 am

    Phew! We have enough crazy libs over here, thank you

    haha. you might have to put up with one more someday, at least for a long weekend anyway. I’ve always loved Canada, there’s something tranquil about, serene like, or at least that’s how I envision it. Plus I grew up on Degrassi reruns!

    How do things like legalizing same sex marriage go over with your average Canadian Joe? Do you think it’s an honest reflection of a generally more progressive society or is it soley the homosexual agenda that deserves the credit? :p

  147. 147.

    MI

    August 15, 2005 at 12:15 am

    Besides, where would you go? Syria?

    ha, there was that one dude who faked his kidnapping and took off to Lebanon. I think he had family there though, which makes it slighty less ridiculous.

  148. 148.

    MisterPundit

    August 15, 2005 at 12:52 am

    haha. you might have to put up with one more someday, at least for a long weekend anyway. I’ve always loved Canada, there’s something tranquil about, serene like, or at least that’s how I envision it.

    Canada is a wonderful place – moonbats, Frenchies, separitists and all :-). As far as scenery goes, there just isn’t any place like it for me. I love taking my 4 y/o daughter fishing on weekends. The wilderness is so peaceful, so vast. It allows you to forget about all the day-to-day fluff we have to deal with, and focus on what is really important.

    How do things like legalizing same sex marriage go over with your average Canadian Joe? Do you think it’s an honest reflection of a generally more progressive society or is it soley the homosexual agenda that deserves the credit?

    It depends a lot on where you are. Alberta is the land of the neo-cons and therefore – not surprisingly – the wealthiest province with the most jobs. Ontario is home to the Canadian moonbat :-) Quebec is where we keep our crazies – the socialists. Every now and then they threaten to separate, but since they are a welfare state wholly dependant on Federal aid, they never do. The rest of Canada secretly hopes they would just go ahead and do it. God knows we need the tax break.

    As far as gay marriage goes, it’s funny you should ask because opinion polls suggest there is an even split. I was quite surprised that there doesn’t seem to be greater support for it. Most of the people I know who don’t support gay marriage do so on religious grounds – not surprisingly – except that a lot of them also vote for the Liberal Party. In the Liberal Party itself, there is quite a bit of opposition to gay marriage. I believe one Liberal Party MP even quit the party over it. I fully support gay marriage myself so I couldn’t be bothered. It’s legal. Sanity prevailed.

  149. 149.

    JohnGalt

    August 15, 2005 at 1:21 am

    Couldn’t let that go by. Long-time lurker, first-time poster.

    While Alberta is the land of *some* neo-cons, that has about as much to do with its wealth as ID has to do with reality (see? I can keep my post topical!)

    That’s because it also happens to be the Canadian province that was fortunate enough to be situated over huge oil reserves. That’s like saying Saudi Arabia has a wealthy upper class because they are an Islamic theocracy.

    MisterPundit’s simplifications aside (the socialist party was actually formed in Saskatchewan in the 30’s, achieving majority party status there between the 40’s and 60’s), I heartily agree with him about the beauty of our (mostly) pristine national parks and wilderness.

    And look! I didn’t have to use this post as an opportunity to call anyone anything (e.g., moonbat). Nor did I have to resort to hyperbole (e.g., Quebec is *wholly* dependent on Federal aid). Most Canadians are actually rather conciliatory. So c’mon up! Your dollar won’t go as far as it used to, these days, but our beer is stronger than yours.

  150. 150.

    MisterPundit

    August 15, 2005 at 1:47 am

    JohnGalt, virtually ALL of what I wrote there satirical, i.e. tongue-in-cheek. Notice the smilies?

  151. 151.

    MisterPundit

    August 15, 2005 at 1:48 am

    Oops…

    … there *was* satirical.

    It’s late :-)

  152. 152.

    tb

    August 15, 2005 at 1:58 am

    Still waiting for evidence of “Jew-baiting” on Ms. Sheehan’s part, by the way.

  153. 153.

    Kimmitt

    August 15, 2005 at 2:02 am

    Yeah, I was under the impression that Alberta’s relative success had a lot more to do with oil rents than with policy. I mean, Ontario’s got the second-highest per-capita GDP, so I have a hard time crediting conservative policy if Ontario’s run by “moonbats.”

    According to the charts here, the real malingerers seem to be the folks on the eastern side, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland.

  154. 154.

    MisterPundit

    August 15, 2005 at 2:08 am

    * Satire Alert. Humour ahead. *

    Welcome to Canada, Eh?

    * End Satrire Alert *

  155. 155.

    John Cole

    August 15, 2005 at 2:31 am

    I just deleted six commeents that were nothing but ‘f… y..’ and ‘no, f… .y..’

    Knock it off. Debate all you want, but if all you are going to do is enter pissing contests, try emailing each other.

  156. 156.

    mac Buckets

    August 15, 2005 at 3:10 am

    Any idea who sent you all the noob lefty flame-traffic, John? This thread was more of a train-wreck than Courtney Love at the Friar’s Club.

  157. 157.

    MisterPundit

    August 15, 2005 at 3:13 am

    Any idea who sent you all the noob lefty flame-traffic, John? This thread was more of a train-wreck than Courtney Love at the Friar’s Club.

    I thought this thread is pure comic gold. I am re-reading it as we speak. LOL.

  158. 158.

    MisterPundit

    August 15, 2005 at 3:18 am

    Sorry. Forgot the * satire alert * for the more sensitive readers in the above post.

    (Note to self… stop saying “LOL”)

  159. 159.

    mac Buckets

    August 15, 2005 at 3:44 am

    I remember the good-old days, like last week, when ppgaz was the most deranged lefty poster (and he’s alright, most of the time). This new crop of flaming idiots make him look like Bill Freaking Buckley.

  160. 160.

    MisterPundit

    August 15, 2005 at 4:15 am

    This new crop of flaming idiots make him look like Bill Freaking Buckley.

    Mac, now that’s just mean :-)

    I think the reason lefties like John Cole and Michael Totten attract so many “flaming idiots” on the left is that, when it comes to the war in Iraq, they dared to stray from the flock. And you know what happens when you stray from the flock, Mac. That’s right. Baaaaaahhhd things happen to you. Baaaaahhhhd things, I tell you :-)

    Anyway, shifts over. Since they installed these damn porn filters at work, I’ve been reduced to making sheep jokes at Balloon Juice.

    G’night everyone.

  161. 161.

    Bruce Moomaw

    August 15, 2005 at 5:56 am

    Yep, her comments that the war was entirely to defend “Israel and oil”, and that all terrorist attacks on us would end if the US would just pull out of Iraq, and the Israelis out of Palestine, are cretinous. You’d have a hard time proving they’re more cretinous, however, than many of the arguments frequently used against her.

    http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/08/14/peace.mom.ap/index.html :
    ” ‘To be perfectly honest, I think it is disgraceful,’ said bookkeeper Diana Kraft of Vacaville, whose son is in the Navy. ‘I don’t know the loss she’s feeling to lose a son because, thank goodness, I haven’t had that, but we’re in this war and we have to support the troops.’ ”

    My, my. How many times have we heard that one? So let’s just say that Mrs. Sheehan’s cretinism neutralizes that other very common type and leave it at that.

  162. 162.

    Dave Straub

    August 15, 2005 at 9:19 am

    Greg Gutfeld nails the whole situation in one sharky- er, snarky post. Click my name above for link.

    I have to say that it’s a credit to Arianna Huffington that she continues to host Gutfeld’s contrarian viewpoints.

  163. 163.

    MisterPundit

    August 15, 2005 at 9:57 am

    ‘To be perfectly honest, I think it is disgraceful,’ said bookkeeper Diana Kraft of Vacaville, whose son is in the Navy. ‘I don’t know the loss she’s feeling to lose a son because, thank goodness, I haven’t had that, but we’re in this war and we have to support the troops.’

    My, my. How many times have we heard that one? So let’s just say that Mrs. Sheehan’s cretinism neutralizes that other very common type and leave it at that.

    You think the bookkeeper’s comment was “cretinous”? Are you for real?

  164. 164.

    Cyrus

    August 15, 2005 at 11:08 am

    ‘To be perfectly honest, I think it is disgraceful,’ said bookkeeper Diana Kraft of Vacaville, whose son is in the Navy. ‘I don’t know the loss she’s feeling to lose a son because, thank goodness, I haven’t had that, but we’re in this war and we have to support the troops.’…

    You think the bookkeeper’s comment was “cretinous”? Are you for real?

    I’d agree with Bruce, this Kraft is not someone I’d want on my town’s school board. “We’re in this war and we have to support the troops.” Does she mean that all dissent is taboo? No questioning of the need for it? Not even of the methods or policies? If you disagree with the government, you’re morally obligated to keep quiet? That’s undemocratic. And I’m not throwing around insults here, I’m using very careful language. If she thinks debating the issues should be suspended just because we’re in a war, let alone already is suspended, there’s something wrong with her.

  165. 165.

    stockintrade

    August 15, 2005 at 11:19 am

    You know, I started coming here because of John’s willingness to write with dignity and without the blinders of partisanship. But John’s whole approach to the Sheehan issue is as contemptible as anything on Drudge.

  166. 166.

    Nash

    August 15, 2005 at 11:38 am

    If this were more than just about partisan politics, and ‘making Bush pay,’ it would be thing. But all it is about from where I look is retribution by the left for several years of real and perceived slights, and while Cindy Sheehan certainly wants to be doing what she is doing, in my most charitable I would claim the groups lining up behind her have suspect motives.

    John, I agree it’s all about partisan politics. I’ve been agreeing with you on that for any number of threads now. What doesn’t make sense to me is why on earth you think it needs to be about more than partisan politics. Why not just acknowledge that it’s partisan politics and “retribution by the left for several years of real and perceived slights” and be done with debating the basis for it, even in the face of claims by the left that it’s some honorable fight. Turn around and give as good as you get. Be aggrieved. It’s the continued childishness of your pique that I can’t fathom.

    It’s true that Cindy Sheehan is being used by some one the left as a self-described “unassailable” cudgel with which to bludgeon the right. So fricking what. You act like the argument stops there, so unfair to you, how dare her users use her while calling her “unassailable.” Is this actually the first time you’ve faced a relatively unfair argument made in a totally unfair manner? Do you honestly think there is some uber-arbitrator you can convince to make the other side talk nice? Or to feel shame? Do you intend to set yourself up as that arbitrator? Do you have a right to do so?

    Why the hell can’t someone who disagrees with you have suspect motives? Have your motives always and ever been above reproach?

  167. 167.

    DougJ

    August 15, 2005 at 11:38 am

    If “We’re in this war and we have to support the troops” is cretinous, I don’t want to be smart.

  168. 168.

    Blue Neponset

    August 15, 2005 at 11:46 am

    I think it scares the Right that they can’t directly attack Cindy Sheehan. It is really the only tactic they know.

    So instead of encouraging Dubya to answer Ms. Sheehan’s questions the pundits on the Right are attacking the usual suspects. According to John and his compatriots on the Right, Micheal Moore and his ilk have brainwashed poor Ms. Sheehan to do their bidding.

    I have noticed that no one on the Right seems to be lining up to answer the question: What good cause did Casey Sheehan die for?

  169. 169.

    Rome Again

    August 15, 2005 at 11:49 am

    “Five weeks of this is too much. We live here, this is our community,” Mattlage said in footage show by CNN television…”

    Hypothetically replying to Mr. Next Door Neighbor:

    Well, perhaps you should have thought of that five years ago when Mr. “I’m going to be President” bought up property next door. With the President living next door several weeks out of a year, it was bound to happen that your community would be met with some excitement.

  170. 170.

    Rome Again

    August 15, 2005 at 11:53 am

    Mike Says:

    They should be ignored and they should be defeated at every turn to the point where they grow so frustrated they all move to Canada. That’s the best thing that could happen to the country.

    I feel so sorry for you Mike that you feel your country only belongs to half of its citizens. Unfortunately, my ancestors have been here since 1601 and I’m not going anywhere, so you’ll just have to live with it. I have just as much right to be here as you do.

  171. 171.

    Nash

    August 15, 2005 at 11:57 am

    Here, two quick examples of the silliness by Blue Neponset.

    I think it scares the Right that they can’t directly attack Cindy Sheehan. It is really the only tactic they know.

    I’m one of those lefties and I don’t think this is remotely true, but the left wants to make it seem like it is true. Of course the right can directly attack Cindy Sheehan, and they have. Have at her. And it’s certainly not the only rhetorical trick in the right’s playbook.

    I have noticed that no one on the Right seems to be lining up to answer the question: What good cause did Casey Sheehan die for?

    Don’t you just love definitive statements presented as fact that aren’t fact? Of course select people on the right, including you, have lined up to answer the question. Either some on the left don’t listen or reject the answers and then re-ask the question as if it hasn’t been answered.

    But my point to you, John, remains–why the hell get all surprised and pissed that this is going on? It’s the nature of our discourse and the left didn’t invent it in a vacuum.

  172. 172.

    DougJ

    August 15, 2005 at 11:59 am

    I have just as much right to be here as you do.

    No one disputes that you have a RIGHT to be here, but a lot of us — 53% to be exact — believe that we’d better off if all of you did move to Canada. Then we could finally bring the country back to what the Founding Fathers wanted — a strong, moral, Christian nation, where traditional values and support for our leaders are the rule of the day.

    Note: we don’t bear you any ill-will. We wish you well in Canada, we just want to be able to run this country the way it was meant to be run, without interference from the black-robed tyrants, the librul MSM, and the ACLU.

  173. 173.

    Blue Neponset

    August 15, 2005 at 12:10 pm

    Nash,

    What tactics of the Right did I ignore?

    What is the answer to the question?

  174. 174.

    Rome Again

    August 15, 2005 at 12:20 pm

    I do not want the demands for an immediate withdrawal to be heeded. If you think things are a disaster right now, imagine what retreat, leaving the place to fall into a full-scale civil war would look like. And let’s not mention the hundred other things that would happen in the region. Things WOULD get worse.

    Well, if the Sunnis keep getting treated like second class citizens of Iraq, I’m afraid you’ll have that sooner rather than later, and our troops don’t even have to leave for that to happen. They may need to pull out just to not suffer mass casualties if when the civil war ensues. The process of creating a constitution has hit a real snag, the time for the constitution to be finished has been extended two extra hours. Things apparently aren’t looking good.

    Clock Ticks on Iraq Constitution – BBC News

  175. 175.

    Mike

    August 15, 2005 at 12:41 pm

    “Rome Again Says:
    I feel so sorry for you Mike that you feel your country only belongs to half of its citizens.”

    Nah, it belongs to all of us, but I do wish that the mere 25% or so of self-described moonbats would hurry up and discover the wonders of Canada. I mean many of them DID promise to do so after the last election. How many do we have to win in order for you guys to leave? C’mon, gimme some hope, a number, 4? 5?

    “Unfortunately, my ancestors have been here since 1601 and I’m not going anywhere, so you’ll just have to live with it. I have just as much right to be here as you do.”

    Well don’t you think it’s time for a change? I mean your family’s been here for over 400 years, don’t you think you should go discover somewhere new? I hear they like Socialism up there. Doesn’t that sound like your kinda place? C’mon, give it a shot, you can always buy a really heavy coat. You don’t even have to change your TV viewing habits.

  176. 176.

    ron

    August 15, 2005 at 1:02 pm

    John you wrote..
    “you thought I was an ‘intellectually honest conservative,’ yadda yadda yadda.”
    nope…never did.

  177. 177.

    ron

    August 15, 2005 at 1:07 pm

    These are quotes offered up by Republican leaders back when President Clinton was committing U.S. troops to Bosnia. Reading them, you can almost feel like you’ve fallen through the looking glass…

    From the Huffington Post

    “Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is.” — Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)

    

”You can support the troops but not the president.” — Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

    

”Well, I just think it’s a bad idea. What’s going to happen is they’re going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years.” — Joe Scarborough (R-FL)

    

”Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?” — Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99

    

”[The] President . . . is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation’s armed forces about how long they will be away from home.” — Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA)

    

”I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning . . I didn’t think we had done enough in the diplomatic area.” — Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)

    
The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our over-extended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today” — Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

  178. 178.

    Rome Again

    August 15, 2005 at 1:19 pm

    No one disputes that you have a RIGHT to be here, but a lot of us—53% to be exact—believe that we’d better off if all of you did move to Canada. Then we could finally bring the country back to what the Founding Fathers wanted—a strong, moral, Christian nation, where traditional values and support for our leaders are the rule of the day.

    The Founding Fathers wanted a Christian Nation? Get off the Kool-Aid DougJ, it’s making you look simply foolish.

    Notes on the Founding Fathers and the Separation of Church and State – Theology.edu

    Thomas Jefferson was NOT a Christian – from a Christian site, “Jesus is Savior.com” (and personally I would have to agree with Jefferson’s views)

    Such-And-So Founder Was A Pious Christian! So There!

    Article 11 of the 1796 Treaty of Tripoli:

    As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen,-and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

    Jefferson on Wikipedia – scroll down about halfway for his views on religion (which I mostly agree with, by the way)

    Axis of Logic (Deists include George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, and James Madison) Read the article.

    Guess what, I’m not leaving this country, so too freaking bad!

  179. 179.

    Rome Again

    August 15, 2005 at 1:23 pm

    Well don’t you think it’s time for a change? I mean your family’s been here for over 400 years, don’t you think you should go discover somewhere new? I hear they like Socialism up there. Doesn’t that sound like your kinda place? C’mon, give it a shot, you can always buy a really heavy coat. You don’t even have to change your TV viewing habits.

    No, I don’t. I’m not leaving, so sue me.

  180. 180.

    Mike

    August 15, 2005 at 3:33 pm

    Rome Again Says:
    “No, I don’t. I’m not leaving, so sue me.”

    I don’t sue people.
    That’s a Liberal kinda thing, along with support from the sleazebags (Trial Lawyers) that get rich doing it.

  181. 181.

    Rome Again

    August 15, 2005 at 5:47 pm

    I don’t sue people.
    That’s a Liberal kinda thing

    Really? I’m a liberal and I’ve never sued anyone for anything with the exception of divorce… and I didn’t take the car, the house, the bank account, or the children (thought they should stay with the house and the dad who had a job earning a good income when I wasn’t earning anything – he wouldn’t let me work so how was I supposed to support them?). I took a couple of boxes of my belongings and that was it. Hmmm, I guess I’m too “liberal”.

  182. 182.

    tb

    August 15, 2005 at 5:56 pm

    No one disputes that you have a RIGHT to be here, but a lot of us—53% to be exact—

    I don’t think I want to know where you pulled THAT number out of. Have you seen Bush’s approval ratings lately, by the way?

    believe that we’d better off if all of you did move to Canada. Then we could finally bring the country back to what the Founding Fathers wanted—a strong, moral, Christian nation, where traditional values and support for our leaders are the rule of the day.

    Yeah, well, I want you to move out of your house so I can live there, but we can’t have everything, can we? Anyway, don’t you think that if the founding fathers wanted a state religion they would have mentioned it in the constitution somewhere?

  183. 183.

    Pro Marihuana

    September 16, 2005 at 7:29 pm

    If you read carefully, you will find that the founding fathers wanted democracy, and democracy has no preference about religions.

Comments are closed.

Trackbacks

  1. Toys in the Attic - formerly North Georgia Dogma » Blog Archive » The Paul Wellstone Memorial/Pep Rally part II says:
    August 15, 2005 at 1:06 pm

    […] The comment of the day comes from John Cole: It isn’t that she is a symbol, it is that she is chosen as a symbol because she is ‘UNASSAILABLE.’ They are trying to turn the natural sympathy for a mourning mother into a political weapon. […]

Primary Sidebar

Recent Comments

  • Andrya on War for Ukraine Day 402: Putin Has Signed a New Foreign Policy Concept. (Apr 1, 2023 @ 10:49pm)
  • Alison Rose on Saturday Afternoon Open Thread (and reminder, BJ zoom tonight at 7 pm) (Apr 1, 2023 @ 10:49pm)
  • mrmoshpotato on Saturday Afternoon Open Thread (and reminder, BJ zoom tonight at 7 pm) (Apr 1, 2023 @ 10:41pm)
  • Chetan Murthy on War for Ukraine Day 402: Putin Has Signed a New Foreign Policy Concept. (Apr 1, 2023 @ 10:33pm)
  • Gin & Tonic on War for Ukraine Day 402: Putin Has Signed a New Foreign Policy Concept. (Apr 1, 2023 @ 10:30pm)

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Seattle Meetup coming up on April 4!

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
Classified Documents: A Primer
State & Local Elections Discussion

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice Events

5/14  The Apocalypse
5/20  Home Away from Home
5/29  We’re Back, Baby
7/21  Merging!

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!