Something has gone seriously haywire with the Republican Party. Once, it was the party of pragmatic Main Street businessmen in steel-rimmed spectacles who decried profligacy and waste, were devoted to their communities and supported the sort of prosperity that raises all ships. They were good-hearted people who vanquished the gnarlier elements of their party, the paranoid Roosevelt-haters, the flat Earthers and… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (1673)Kate.
I have voted often for the libertarian and the green party and probably will in the future.I will restrict my voting to below the presidential vote this year,because of the importance of getting Bush out of office. Ed P.
Posted by Ed Pleskovitch on Sep 10, 2004 at 4:29 PM The Real Bernie’s Last Stand
Private HWC Bernie Ellis reporting for duty, one last time. I’m glad that I remember the password to this battlefield, because it’s become clear in the past three days that there are enemies afoot who’ll stop at nothing to win. (Thanks again to inthesetimes.com for banishing Scott (“Bizarro Bernie”) from our midsts.)
It has been pretty quiet on the western front since last night, though I see 6Gun is still out there in the bushes. And 6Gun, last night, I didn’t say to you: “Don’t go away mad—just go away.” I did ask that you tone down the volume, which you’ve done, and that’s much appreciated. And I’ll tell you, if there really is a Vast Conspiracy and all of our internet transmissions are being monitored, those of us on this thread will drive the spooks crazy trying to figure out why we now have so many links to so many different strains of political persuasion. But it’s still a free country and I for one am thankful for having been exposed to so much new and varying information as well as for doing anything to put the spooks’ panties in a twist.
A few nights ago, I had indicated that the trip to Atlanta had given me a little time to think about this exchange and to try to put it into some perspective. In between the dueling spit-ballers (with which both sides are well-endowed), I have learned much. Though some pundits commenting on this year’s Presidential race have questioned the value of going back 30+ years to debate each candidate’s service (or non-service, as the Bush may be) to country, this thread has taken us back 230+ years to discuss the role of religion in our democracy and the limits of government, as envisioned by our founding parents. Others have tried (successfully) to pull our vision beyond our shores and to encourage us to reconsider what being a member of the “family of nations” in the 21st century means. By that effort, they have reminded us that even “family values” as a concept has many different meanings, all worthy of consideration and thought.
We have been invited to define, and then pressed to defend, the bedrock principles that define our own political beliefs and actions. And in so doing, we have found fellow travelers around the country to join this thread and to encourage us in our beliefs (and opponents who have helped us strengthen those beliefs by demanding that we defend ourselves AD NAUSEUM). Repetition is not always a bad thing, as my old football coach would say (his favorite saying at practice was “One more time…”) Practice does make perfect, though some of us may have overused some keyboard muscles (though certainly not the “delete” key) as we’ve practiced here for the Big Show – the next less-than-two months left before the most important election of our lifetimes. Inthestimes.com has given us a chance to practice, to hone our skills and to pick up lots of new plays (i.e., talking points) from our comrades in the process. Now I think all of us are better prepared than we were two weeks ago to say, “Put me in coach, I am READY to play this game.”
And play (actually, work) we must, until Fat Tony sings (and I hope the song is “Stop, in the name of love, before Kerry breaks my heart!!”) For me, (almost) every minute spent on this thread until now has been worth it (thought I wish today’s “cut and paste” numb-nuts would nod off soon). But I am not registering any new Tennessee voters sitting in front of this computer screen. So it’s time for me to get two dozen more country stores to serve as voter registration sites (as well as barber shops and beauty parlors and small town cafes). It’s time for me to suit up, show up and finally shut up (at least as far as this thread is concerned.) Rest assured, I will continue to monitor the proceedings and if either side concedes defeat ... (no need to finish that thought, ‘cause that’s not going to happen.) I will remain an interested observer, but this member of the newly Silent Majority has better things to do than to say (and keep saying) to (Dred) Scott and 6Gun (aka Out of Ammunition): “I know you are, but what am I?”
But before leaving, I thought I would apply my own education and experience at least one more time to understanding the process we’ve been going through together. As an epidemiologist, I am one of those despised “numbers crunchers” (disliked equally by all sides of this debate, I’m sure.) And with all the charges of media bias being thrown around on and off this thread, I thought it would be interesting to look at how our own process had played out. Are we, as Misfire keeps says, a left-wing dominated discussion? Are we, as the lefties have pointed out, being dominated in this discussion and in this country by a few, LOUD voices who don’t even represent their own side of the political chasm very well. Well, let’s look at the tape, shall we.
As I mentioned earlier, because of my Atlanta trip, I didn’t get a chance to visit the thread for almost a day. So when I returned, I downloaded the discussion I had missed (from 8:55 pm on 9/7 to 6:44 pm on 9/8) into a word processing file. The discussion during that day filled up 67 pages in a WordPerfect file, a staggering amount of verbiage. And looking at all that “stuff”, I thought it would be fun to put on my epidemiological thinking cap and analyze the participants engaged in our Great Debate and the volume (not content) of their contributions. Here’s what I found. For me, I think it does say something about the process we’re engaged in, on this thread and off.
During that recent day in early September, 36 separate people posted comments on this thread – 18 males, 13 females and three whose gender was not clear. 22 of these folks were Kerry supporters or leaning that way, 13 were Bushies (or at least shrub-like) and only one of us was still truly confused. During that day, there were a total of 122 separate posts by our 36 games-people, and when I counted up the number of separate pages on which each participant appeared at least once, there were 171 “pages” represented. (I know, that last stat is a bit unclear, but think about it and it will make sense. If it still doesn’t, remember that we numbers crunchers have to make a living also, so everything we do can’t be instantly intuitive.)
Contrary to the charges of liberal bias thrown at this thread, the number of posts for each Presidential camp were as close as last election, with the Bushies squeaking out a Florida-like victory (58 Kerry posts, 63 Bush posts, and one post whose chad was still dangling.) If you divide the total number of page/poster comments (the 171 number mentioned above), the Bushies lead grew somewhat (Kerry - 80, Bush - 90, really confused - 1). So with 51.6% of the posts and 52.6% of the “pages”, the Bushies would be able to declare victory. (Thank my Higher Power, this is a test ... and only a test.)
But, as Paul Harvey would say, let’s look at the rest of the story. Among the 33 posters whose sexual identity was known, 60% of the men and 75% of the women were Kerry supporters. So how did Duh-bya win on this playing field? To paraphrase my granddaddy, “It’s not the number of dogs in the fight, but the size of the mouths on the dogs in the fight that matter”. At least so far in this analysis. So let’s look at those mouths a bit, shall we.
In the far-right corner, we have the two most frequent posters for Bush – Dred Scott and Out of Ammunition. In the leftish corner, we have our co-nominees for Lake Wobegon Sweet Potato Princess: Joanne and Daydreamer. (Speaking for this smart alecky liberal, I’m happy that it turned out to be the men against the women, because as every Deadhead knows, “... that’s right, the women are smarter in every way ....”) These four folks definitely weighed in the most during that one day of combat, but they didn’t weigh in equally. Incredibly, ole Dred and OutGunned accounted for 75% of the posts and 76% of the “pages” (now even I’m getting confused) for the Bushies. And try as they might to counter-punch, Joanne and Daydreamer only accounted for 36% of the pages and 44% of the “pages” for the forces of good karma supporting Kerry. So, if we take out our four main combatants, we end up with a very different picture of our process. Without our four main combatants, 64% of the remaining posters were Kerry supporters and 67% of the remaining “pages” went for Kerry. And just like there is occasionally a pony in a big pile of shit, I think there is a very important lesson at the end of this equally fragrant pile of numbers.
This year’s Presidential race may appear to be leaning for Bush (although the Rasmussen poll I have referred to many times has Duh-bya ahead by only 7/10ths of one point this morning) because a relatively few Bushies are screaming the longest and the loudest and – in so doing – are affecting the public perception of the likely outcome. But if we tone down the volume a bit (by sending the main combatants to their corners for a “time out” without dinner), the majority of posters (and hopefully the majority of Americans) as well as the majority of earth’s people (based on yesterday’s news story) are clearly pulling for Kerry. (And if we could give the animals and the plants a vote, it would be Kerry – roots and paws down!!).
So what we have to do is clear in the time we have left. We need to drop 50 cents in the cups of those who are ranting at us from the street corners of Pasadena and other walled-in communities, telling us that Bush-Rove/Cheney are our only saviors and ask the well-heeled ranters to call Rush (or “the Savage Nation”) and tell someone who still cares what they think. And the rest of us need to do what we can to empower everyone else so that ALL our voices can be heard by registering as many people as possible and then ensuring that all those people vote AND that their votes count.
But I don’t want us to surrender any battlefield between then and now – we also need to being shouting from the rooftops for sanity, sensitivity and inclusiveness – in two words, for Kerry/Edwards. So, once again, I look forward to reading what Joanne, Daydreamer, Lyle, Michael, Ed P, JIMBOY, Anna, Grandma, Geoff, MN, Southern Republican and, yes, even Brooks (as well as the rest of you) will have to say in the next days. For me, this is the final word on this thread. But I would be happy to hear from, and correspond with anyone who stays on the battlefield. So, against perhaps my better judgement (but certainly in the spirit of being unafraid to keep speaking truth to power or to toad-stooly cat turds), here’s my email address: tracevu@bellsouth.net.
I hope that I have come to be known by my principles on this thread and that I can keep living by them hereafter. My Higher Power reminds me every day that my job is still the same – to be of service to Spirit, my country and my fellow creatures (including humans) every day. I hope that the next-to-last words said at my funeral will confirm that I had lived that life path. But most importantly, I hope the last words the preacher says, as they start lowering the lid on my coffin are: “Wait a minute!! I think Bernie’s still breathing!!”
Goodbye all, it has been a pleasure and a privilege to make your acquaintance. Work hard and honorably between now and the election, regardless of your beliefs. Because as far as our democracy and our world is concerned right now, the Hopi Elders have it right: “We are the ones we have been waiting for.”
Posted by Bernie Ellis on Sep 10, 2004 at 4:42 PM From Snotty boy-“Lastly, if you would care to show some mercy, to help me out, would you please establish exactly how you came to know that we have been brainwashed (according to the dictionary definition of the word)? My small mind has so far not been able to grasp the concept that simply because I have the gall to actually have come to different conclusions than your own, that that in and of itself would lead one to believe I had been brainwashed. So please, explain yourself very thoroughly and specifically”.
Answer to you snotty boy is that you have the same facts as the rest of us and yet you can only come up with bs. I only leave this subject to everyone else’s conjecture as your words speak for themself. You cannot have a creative thought therefore, if you are not brainwashed what’s the problem with your brain then? Your thoughts all spin around out of control lacking any caring or compassion or human understanding. You quite frankly seem like a cold hearted I, Me, Mine type of guy. A perfect little republican. If you had a creative mind you would not be the person that you are because you could not say the type of things that you have said. Whether or not you are technically brainwashed (by the dictionary or not) you are truly lost.
You see Snotty old boy I am talking about a concept here. So you can take your self-awarded so-called intellect and just shove it because it scores a big fat 0 for this type of thinking.More -“Also, in that you have not rebutted my last exchange with you, but rather skipped ahead and made the present insightful proclamation, would you help me to understand how that means you’ve won the argument”?
Answer- I didn’t read your last so-called rebutal and I won’t be reading it as I have a limited amount of time for this game. Besides unlike many, I don’t waste my time answering bs except to call it out for what it is or to completely ignore it. Same tactic many of your kind uses. Really itches you doesn’t it snotty boy?
I have no illusions as to the fact that I have or haven’t won any argument Scotty.
What I say comes from my heart and can not be challenged by you or anyone else. I answer only to myself and to my Father.
No one can challenge what I know in my heart.
No one can question my motives.
I am what is good in everyman,
I am your brother.
From -0gun (woo how much he has fallin) “When will they, and the Left, learn that cheaters never prosper”:
Bad idea to say that dude. And thanks for hangin yourself. Have a nice day!!!!! tick tick tick.Hey GM who was that again that you said will win? LMFBFAO.
Posted by JIMBOY on Sep 10, 2004 at 4:43 PM The adults that are left will continue to try and make sure that you can go to the shopping mall without some Islamist radical sending you and your children into chicken-nugget sized pieces sliming down the walls of Abercrombie and Fitch from a belt bomb.
Really? Because I could go to the gun store down the street from my house, and buy all the gunpowder they have in stock (for ammo reloaders & black powder enthusiasts), build a crude but effective bomb with a timer, put it in a shopping bag and leave it at my local mall to detonate any time I want and off a bunch of my fellow citizens. The administration has done absolutely NOTHING to curb this. There are as few cops at my local mall now as there were three years ago. To say that because there have been no attacks on US soil since 9/11/01 means we’re safer is specious reasoning, and you know it.Perhaps the most fitting story of the week is that Green activist the Dave Matthews Band (led by a man so precious that he is simply called Dave, much like Cher), which talks about the environment, and electing Democrats, etc., etc., showered a hundred people on a boat with human waste—illegally dumping the tour bus van’s contents (which is really bad for the environment, by the way). Nothing like hypocrites, showering us with loads of waste. Which brings me back to why I had to respond . . . .
He’s so called by his fans because when he makes a mistake, he takes responsibility for it and makes amends. Check out their statement on their web site: http://www.dmband.comConsider that the modern Demo party is entirely Socialist; both in practice and philosophy. In turn Socialism is the arrogant, dishonest, we-know-better theft of property, time, and resource by government, an experiment with a 100% record of failure.
Absolutely! Just look at the UK, Germany, Sweden, France, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Spain, Italy. All dismal failures. Not to mention all the socialist ideas that have been tried in this country: the 40-hour work week, 8-hour day, child labor laws, Pure Food and Drug Act, workplace safety regulations, unemployent compensation, etc. These have just made this country a living hell. Seriously, dude, did you quote this from Rush Limbaugh? It sounds just like something he would say: reactionary chest-thumping without even a nod to the facts. Do you have any idea what socialism is? Socialism is, essentially, workers control the means of production. Communism is the state controls the means of production (i.e. factory workers, making, say, shoes or cars are government employees). So, allowing workers to form a union is socialist, despite that thing in the Constitution about the right of the people to peacably assemble.
...political party whos shining stars are nothing more than a pathetic patchwork of elitist tree-hugging, Birkenstock-wearing, backpack toting, granola-eating, pot-smoking, Patchouli-wearing, Jetta-driving, rainbow flag-waving lunatic liberal Democrats.
Woohoo! Count me in! (I drive a Beetle, though).I will never understand why rich, out of touch Hollywood liberals think anyone actually cares what they think. Reality is the last thing they are qualified to comment on.
Like Arnold Schwarzenegger?...pathetic political party…
I agree, the Democrats are pathetic. They don’t have the unity or singleness of vision the Republicans have. The Reps say “We may disgree on a few details, but we’re all together,” whereas the Dems tend to bicker and infight over the details, and that has cost them dearly over the years.But still, I support abortion rights (with limits), workers’ rights, the environment, free speech for Howard Stern, etc., and don’t think Christianity should be a guiding principle in our government. That’s why I am, and always will be, a Democrat.
have read DeLay, and I completely disagree with his ideas on moving religion ‘back’ into government. But his beliefs, however misguided, are in no sense comparable to the intentions of the Islamist mullahs and the murderous actions of their followers. Beware moral relativism in this regard:
We’ve already seen violence against abortion providers: bombs, sniper attacks, etc. The fact that this is at all tolerated tells me that extreme tactics vis-a-vis other issues isn’t far off.As for the Garrison Keillor essay, it was exactly that, an essay. He doesn’t need to provide facts, and can engage in all the name-calling, invective and diatribe he wants. It’s an essay.
Posted by New Scott on Sep 10, 2004 at 4:49 PM Are you better off than you were four years ago?
Let’s see, four years ago:
the economy was good
the twin towers were standing
We weren’t at war
We had a balanced budget
Gasoline was 40% cheaper
The dollar was worth 20% more (against other major currencies)
2.6 million more people had jobsNope, he fails there.
“I’m a uniter, not a divider.” Look at the postings on this board. It’s a shouting match, not a discourse. His administration/aparachiks have only ratcheted up the rhetoric, so he has flunked there.
Abu Graib/Guantanamo Bay - another president who thinks he’s above the law
FMA - the first proposed amendment to seek to keep a group of citizens from being granted rights. It doesn’t matter whether you’re for or against gay marriage, it’s the principle of it - that’s how Hitler started - by stripping the Jews of certain civil rights. It’s a dangerous precedent.
I say it’s time we outsource Bush.
Posted by BootmanDC on Sep 10, 2004 at 4:50 PM You guys know me better than to know I can ever say the last word. For some reason, my email address didn’t appear in my previous last post. Here it is again. Hopefully, it will show up on the thread this time: )if not, I’ll just stop trying.)
t r a c e v u @ b e l l s o u t h . n e tHappy trails to all of us. See you at the polls (Democrats and other principled voters) “this” November. Asta-lumbago. We gone.
Posted by Bernie Ellis on Sep 10, 2004 at 4:53 PM Interesting how people quote Dante and obviously have never read Inferno (The Divine Comedy). I’ll bet they don’t even know what “inferno” really means. A new circle of hell may have been created for all who agree with Garrison’s invective. You will spend all eternity listening to the Garrison sing the theme song of A Prairie Home Companion, oh, and after a few eons his voice is going to get horse.
Inscribed above the door to the Kerry inauguration (I think he’s unfortunately going to win):
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here!
-Dante Alighieri
Posted by Steve Dallas on Sep 10, 2004 at 5:00 PM MN,
I want to thank you for the Polly Toynbee article. Fundamentally (n.p.i,;-), the Moslem communities in different countries are separating themselves from the taint of terrorism in varying ways, some half-heartedly, some with genuine courage. I was struck by a piece by Nonie Darwish already referred to on this forum and located at
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/article.php3?id=4151
Also, there are some real heroes starting to emerge within the Palestinian Authority:
http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/470429.html
Every day, I wonder how long Khatami will hold out in Iran—a particularly fascinating demographic case, since the newer generation is more and more impatient with the regressive mullahs who are putting such restraints on Khatami. Khatami is so popular with the people now and his party holds such a stable majority now that the mullahs may ultimately resort to cancelling any further elections altogether or staging outright martial law and closing down Parliament. We shall see.
As to our colloquy regarding Continental Europe’s “waking up and smelling the coffee” <G>, while I am mindful that there have been no lapses in security there yet, it still seems unfortunate, IMO, that the French and German people may have to pay a heavy price down the road (God, I hope I’m wrong!!) for their governments’ _possible_ truculence.
Please, putting aside the question of whether or not Bush or Kerry has less negative baggage in transforming the _possible_ truculence among the powers that be in Continental Europe, I’m still sincerely interested in your own take on a broader question: What might be—ultimately—the best way to address the apparent truculence in Continental Europe today _in_ _case_ it may lead to tragic carelessness on their part in future? Is there, in your opinion, a possible way to do so effectively _before_ we have some kind of a Breslan or Madrid over there?
Sincere thanks,
Geoff
Posted by Geoff on Sep 10, 2004 at 5:03 PM The evidence that the Killian memos were forged is extremely doubtful at the moment. Don’t believe everything that you read—and don’t disbelieve it, either. Learn about both sides of the story. Don’t leap to conclusions.
My guess is that the White House knew these documents might surface someday, and had its spin prepared in advance. What is everyone talking about now—the damaging allegations in the memos, or whether Democrats forged them to hurt Bush? The latter, of course. It’s more sensational that way.
Of course, if they are never conclusively proven or disproven as forgeries, and this turns out to be another unverifiable Bush camp allegation, that won’t be very sensational at all. “Well, I guess some people believe in these memos and some don’t,” the newscasters will say, and that’s where the story will end. An incriminating piece of evidence against Bush will have been transformed into a vague hint of wrongdoing from the Kerry camp. Mission accomplished!
If you really care about what the Killian memos have to say about Bush, follow the story beyond its first-day headlines on Google News. If they turn out to be real, ask why the Bush campaign had its forgery story so well-prepared. If they turn out to be fake, find out who faked them. Otherwise, you’re just following the herd.
Posted by Valentine on Sep 10, 2004 at 5:28 PM I have a question that I would appreciate others input on. I realize that I can expect a firestorm on this,but I still would like to hear.
My opinion is that when Kerry is elected president that we still need to stay and finish the onerous job of attempting to establish a stable government in Iraq.I want you all to understand that I have never been in favor of the invasion of Iraq.It was a mistake from the very start,but we have our foot in it now and I don’t see any benefit in just opting out and not finishing what Bush started. I hate that we are pouring billions of dollars into Iraq when that money could do so much good here in the U.S..There are tons of programs that could be funded and other programs that could be funded properly with that money.The environment;new technology for the energy sector to free us from the yoke of the oil cartels;new technology for health care. We could be a great country again with the right people to direct this country,and I don’t just mean democrats or republicans.I know this ramble is a little disjointed,but I try to speak from the heart and don’t always use good sentence structure. So opinions? You know what they say opinions are like assholes,everybody has one. Ed P.
Posted by Ed Pleskovitch on Sep 10, 2004 at 5:43 PM Joanne Roush wrote:
“Pardon me, but the local MP stated in the article that it sounded like incitement, which I assumed was a legal term, and that he was reporting the imam to Scotand Yard. My point remains, that the British authorities are investigating and I think your level of hysteria is out of proportion to the situation which so far consists of a Muslim gassing away in much the same fashion as many of the Republicans on this blog”A British MP saying he’s going to report something to Scotland Yard is like a Representative in Congress saying he’s going to notify the FBI. Means nothing at all, and certainly not that the “authorities” are “investigating”. In fact, the British are well behind France and Germany when it comes to controlling hate speech and, shall we say, world sedition. The British have been dancing around this imam for years.
The Rationale behind “Londonistan”?
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/307I don’t hear anyone on this blog advocating kidnapping women and children or excusing their murder if they get caught in the “crossfire”.
[...]
“Have you ever asked yourself what these people are fighting for? Here in the USA we’ve been told that Islamic fanatics hate us for our freedoms. Why do they hate Russians? For their freedoms? It’s all bullshit, MN.”
In the case of the terrorists who attacked Beslan, they hate Russians because they are infidels, i.e. not fundamentalist Muslims.
“The British imam’s words were prophetic in terms of children and women dying in the crossfire. They always do. Here in the US we just call it collateral damage. That’s a nice, tidy term for the blood and breath of innocent children and adults. “
The imam is mendacious beyond belief. The children were deliberately chosen to make a point and they were murdered by the jihadi in cold blood. This is not “crossfire”.
“You can’t have it both ways, MN. You can’t seek violent solutions to things that scare you unless you are willing to accept all the violence. There is no picking and choosing. You’re in or you’re out. My advice to you is to pluck up your courage, and then take the nearest exit.”
I highly recommend Michael Ignatieff’s book. He essentially predicted Abu Ghraib a year before it happened. One of his points is that there are times you have to fight to defend yourself and when you do you have to send warriors to fight warriors. Since the psychological and social structures in both warrior groups tends to be similar the challenge to democracies is to avoid a downward spiral into excessive violence and nihilism.
Michael Ignatieff: “The Lesser Evil : Political Ethics in an Age of Terror”
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0691117519/qid=1094833575/sr=1-1/r ref=sr_1_1/102-5169543-8669734?v=glance&s=books
( http://tinyurl.com/6vpbb )“Work for peaceful resolution to conflict. It’s what everybody in the world wants, but only a few will stand for.”
Not everybody.
There were/are two Chechen wars. The Russians lost the first one and signed a peace treaty. Then the extremists in Chechnya began attacking the surrounding countries and Russia itself:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Chechen_War
The area around the Black Sea is filled with brutal people. They aren’t interested in compromise or negotiation, and war and ethnic cleansing have been going on for thousands of years:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abkhazia
Posted by MN_native-MA_voter on Sep 10, 2004 at 5:46 PM Garrison, your article is nothing but gratuitous assertions which anyone can just as gratuitoulsy deny. I’ve listened to Prairie Home Companion for more years than I can remember and this is just another well spun story, with one exception, the anger and hatred is bubbling at the surface. You speak of the Republicans’ anger. Have you not listened to Michael Moore, George Soros, moveon.org, et al? They have their rights but please, spare me the hypocracy of labeling the Republicans as angry and hateful.
And Margo, take Alec Baldwin with you.
Posted by Pat on Sep 10, 2004 at 5:53 PM All veterans please read:
(Loudon, TN) Message reads: I belong to another military group and they sent
me a message yesterday to inform me of a situation that members of our club
might want to learn about and take whatever action they deem necessary.
Apparently the National Personnel Record Center that is responsible for
maintaining archives of our military records is automating their storage and
management of our military records. When this is complete they plan to
destroy the hard copies of our records unless requested by the veteran or a
deceased veteran’s family to send those records to them. If a veteran or
members of the veteran’s family wants to request those records be sent to
them instead of being destroyed they can make their request by mail to:
National Personnel Records CenterMilitary Personnel Records9700 Page Ave.St.
Louis, MO 63132-5100 or: make their request online at:
http://vetrecs.archives.gov I just submitted my request online and have sent
them my authorizing signature form that is downloadable from the web site
and mailed it via USPS. The National Personnel Records Center has already
sent me an e-mail acknowledging my request. Please forward this message to
all the members of the Tellico Village Military Retiree’s Club. Thank you.
Al Porell
Fwded by 35th Inf. AssociationCacti forever!
Posted by Lyle Shargent on Sep 10, 2004 at 6:00 PM First, I dropped by with a “starter link” for those interested in the Killian memos. If you really care whether they are real or not, why not see what CBS and 60 Minutes have to say about them? It’s a good place to start, isn’t it?
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/06/politics/main641481.shtml
Second, in response to Ed P. above—I agree entirely that we’ll need to “finish the job” in Iraq, whatever that ends up meaning. So does Kerry. He hasn’t EVER said he plans to run away from Iraq. Kerry does say he’ll try to bring our troops home within four years, but, you know what? I hope our troops can come home after four more years of this misery, too. And if they can’t, I trust Kerry to realize that, and to keep them there as long as necessary. I also trust him to recognize a quagmire when he sees one, and if our troops can no longer do Iraq any good—if this stupid and ill-advised experiment fails—I trust him to bring them home, instead of pridefully leaving them there to die.
I won’t lie, I’m a solid Democrat. I think investing in the poorest, neediest segments of society yields the best results for everyone, whether rich or poor. That holds true for crime, education, job growth—the works. Call it “trickle-up economics.” It’s just like trickle-down economics, except this version is actually supported by economic science. But even if I were a Republican, I would vote against Bush this year. Why? Because I’d believe in fiscal discipline, military strength and pragmatic foreign policy, and Bush has given us none of those things in the past four years.
Thanks for posting, Ed. It’s great to meet people who are actually asking questions about the candidates instead of making proclamations.
Posted by Valentine on Sep 10, 2004 at 6:00 PM “In the case of the terrorists who attacked Beslan, they hate Russians because they are infidels, i.e. not fundamentalist Muslims.”
Nope, you should look into it deeper. They hate Russians because Russians refused to grant Chechnya independence, and in trying to control the resulting insurgency used ‘scorched earth’ policies and tactics to force them in line.
If we really want to fight terrorism, we’re going to need a better understanding of their rationale rather than just ‘they hate us’.
Posted by Moderates4Truth on Sep 10, 2004 at 6:03 PM Thank you, Garrison. May God bless America in November, and may Americans do the right thing.
Posted by Gene Wohlsdorf on Sep 10, 2004 at 6:23 PM Thanks,very much Lyle on the headsup about veterans records.I had not heard about the destruction of hard copy records.A person should have those records.You know how the government is about wanting paperwork to prove anything that you have to prove.You probably also know how they are good at losing things.They still have my original birth certificate for when I went into the army back in 1966.I have never been able to get that back,and maybe I won’t now,but there is always a chance that they will screw up in reverse,lol.I will pass it on to others who might not know.Again thanks. Ed P.
Posted by Ed Pleskovitch on Sep 10, 2004 at 6:27 PM FYI for Lyle. I went to the website for vet.records and right at the top of the page it said that they were not destroying paper records,but that they were putting said records in the computor so that they would not have to handle fragile paper copies. Whatever.I sent for a copy of my DD214 anyway.I have the original,which had to be corrected because they did not have my purple heart on it.This way I will see if the correction was made.Ed P.
Posted by Ed Pleskovitch on Sep 10, 2004 at 7:27 PM I think your article, which appeared in the Register-Guard, is despicable and so are you. I once saw you in person at the Oregon State Fair and often have listened to your PBS radio program, but never again!
Posted by Carolyn on Sep 10, 2004 at 7:37 PM MN, I apologize for referring to you as hysterical yesterday. I allowed my frustration to take me way over the top. Now that I am rested up, let me thank you once again for the many interesting links you’ve been posting in support of your point, which still is not entirely clear to me. Could you share with us a summary of your position on the threat posed by Islamic terror (a) worldwide, (b) domestically, and (c) in terms of current administration policy, both foreign and domestic? I think we all agree that a threat exists. From my vantage point, the discussion is about the means by which we address it.
As to the inclusion of Checnya, I’ve been doing quite a bit of reading on the incident in Beslan. It seems that the picture is changing rapidly, as all the various media dig, and the pundits and reporters line up to tell us what to thiink. Initially it seems the assumption was made that this was the work of Al Quaeda, then it became Chechens, then they had to add a few other nationalities to the list of criminals. How long will it take to discover what really occurred and why? Until then, I think it is unwise to rely upon this horrible incident to make a case one way or the other about US policy regarding containment of terrorist threats.
One thing that has been troubing me about the links I’ve followed from your posts and those of others, is that there seems to be a very great difference in the conclusions stated by the authors and the conclusions referenced by posters. We all have our filters, and I know I have one. My filter is to recognize proposed solutions that do not endorse military intervention as a first or even favored response to terrorism. My filter is also very sensitive to comments that agree with my position that all forms of religious fundamentalism are dangerous to those who do not share a given RF group’s beliefs. This is what I heard in Toynbee’s piece, and she included George Bush as an example of a negative influence in this regard.
Now to respond to some of your points in order. I will take it as an article of faith that you know more than I about the inner workings of law enforcement in the UK than do I, particularly if you can confirm that. I believe the British have the right to free speech, and I’ve read a lot of posts by conservatives on this thread who object to any abrogation of free speech, especially when it is labeled as hate speech. So, I’d like to know where you stand on this. Who defines hate speech, in your opinion? For that matter, who defines sedition? I think it’s important and I am eager to hear your thoughts on this.
Back to Chechnya. Children and their parents were herded into the school. They were caught in the crossfire. Apparently some inept criminal started the conflagration when trying to move a bomb, which detonated. Then chaos, panic, and the bullets began to fly. In other words: shrapnel, crossfire, collateral damage on all sides. This is what happens in armed conflicts around the world, non-stop, every day of every week of every month of every year.
I would propose to you that some, though not all, on the ‘left’ are fighting very hard to resist the downward spiral into brutality and…nihilism. Interesting that that was the word repeated hurled at me and others on this thread. Having read your links, all the posts here, I return to my favorite of all Garrison’s labels: Nihilists in golf pants.
We obtained a treaty with Germany after WWI. The result, according to mainstream historians was WWII.
As to your final comment about the history of violent conflict, ethnic cleansing, and never ending war - isn’t that the nihilist speaking?
I truly don’t want to insult you or your obvious intelligence or evidently voracious reading habit. But I can’t help repeating what I said to you earlier: buck up and exit that losing strategy. You say that ‘not everyone’ in the world wants peace. Does that include you? I don’t believe it, but I could be wrong.
What I’ve found is many people see no hope for peace, so they will settle for a feeling of safety. The only positive thing that may come from the terrorists now plaguing the world is the recognition, finally, by the overwhelming majority that peace is not for cowards, that our times call for us all to be heroes, and that by reaching out to one another, and embracing common goals, we can eliminate this threat. We can and we must stop looking to violent means to resolve our problems, prop up our economies, and give us an illusion of safety.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 10, 2004 at 7:55 PM Hey, Geoff - I’m grinning as I write this - I have a great plus for you on the Kerry side: Teresa! God knows she’s been accused of truculence and she speaks five languages. Who better to send over to Europe to whip them into shape? As the Brits would say, “Brilliant!”
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 10, 2004 at 8:00 PM I received the following message from a friend. The website to which it refers makes many of Garrison Keillor’s points, less colorfully but with ample documentation. There’s nothing in it that could be called hatred—merely regret, alarm, and a call to action.
—
Hello,
I am concerned with the ethics of the Bush administration and how it operates. This issue has not received enough attention, so I have created a website that gives the facts, with references:
http://www.howbushoperates.info/
In my opinion, the facts are devastating, and I can’t see how anyone who knows them all and also believes in ethics and integrity would vote for the Bush administration.
Can I ask you to read the website. Then, if you agree, email others about it. The whole country needs to know about this, especially those on the fence. If I email 250 people, and each mails to 20 more, we are well on our way to letting the country know.
Posted by Hamilton Richards on Sep 10, 2004 at 9:44 PM Mr. Keillor is a smart, amusing man whose politics I like. However, he should know better than to use terms like “deaf” and “dumb” as pejoratives, and alongside “dangerous,” no less.
I’m not trying to be a language cop—or maybe I am—but people with disabilities don’t appreciate such words being used figuratively and negatively, especially in an ostensibly progressive context.
Posted by Ray Pence on Sep 10, 2004 at 10:25 PM Another problem: not one word here about John Kerry. Not even his name. If Garrison could put his passion and wit into something proactive instead of reactive I might be inspired. But this essay epitomizes the problem: the Republicans have control of the discourse and we Democrats are back on our heels, trying to survive.
Posted by Ray Pence on Sep 10, 2004 at 10:43 PM I would like to print and distribute this article to people. I would like everyone to be able to read it. Does anyone know how I can get permission from Garrison Keillor to do so?
Posted by Dana on Sep 10, 2004 at 10:48 PM Joanne,
LOL!
This is a hoot. Thank you.
Being incorrigible, I would still like, for the sake of argument, to jettison my conundrum from any considerations of whether or not it is Bush or Kerry who brings less negative baggage to “whipping Europe into shape”, as you put it.
Ultimately, regardless of who in the White House is saddled with effecting any transformation in Continental Europe’s attitude, the overriding question remains: What might be an effective way of bringing about a less truculent attitude over there _before_ rather than _after_ they have a possible “Beslan”(sp.?) or “Madrid”? That’s the query I look forward to our redoubtable MN addressing, particularly since MN appears much better-read than I am.
For myself, I cannot help feeling that nothing less than a rock-solid dragnet around the entire industrialized Free World will be sufficient toward definitively depriving Al Qaeda of “oxygen”. This is why effectively addressing Continental Europe’s possible disaffection today is key to which lever I will pull on Election Day.
Sincerely,
Geoff
Posted by Geoffrey Riggs on Sep 10, 2004 at 10:56 PM “Ultimately, regardless of who in the White House is saddled with effecting any transformation in Continental Europe’s attitude, the overriding question remains: What might be an effective way of bringing about a less truculent attitude over there _before_ rather than _after_ they have a possible “Beslan”(sp.?) or “Madrid”? That’s the query I look forward to our redoubtable MN addressing, particularly since MN appears much better-read than I am.
“For myself, I cannot help feeling that nothing less than a rock-solid dragnet around the entire industrialized Free World will be sufficient toward definitively depriving Al Qaeda of “oxygen”. “
Yo?! Am I the only one who sees no new messages around here since my last one quite a number of hours ago?!Spooked, <G>
Geoff
Posted by Geoffrey Riggs on Sep 11, 2004 at 1:21 AM I’m looking for moral stability, rationality, security, humility, honor, and grace. One of the candidates offers these, one offers none.
Posted by Ted on Sep 11, 2004 at 1:29 AM Gee, Geoff, looks like it’s down to you and me. I guess we know who can’t get a date on a Friday night!
Since you were amused by my latest idea for world peace, but want to hear more serious commentary on the truculence issue from MN, I’ll take a different tack.
Would you mind elaborating a bit on your concept of a rock-solid dragnet around the Free World? Since, according to our current leadership and its Olympic commercials, much of the world now counts as ‘free’, how would something like this look? Would it be on the order of the wall the Israelis are building between themselves and Palestinian terrorists? Or are we talking about something more, say, metaphysical or metaphorical?
Very much looking forward to your expanded thoughts on this.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 11, 2004 at 2:07 AM Ed P. and Jimboy - If you guys are still around, I’ve been meaning to send you a link:
www.bartcop.comYou’ll like it - especially the Monkey Mail feature. This guy is a hoot!
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 11, 2004 at 2:13 AM Ray,Ray,Ray.This isn’t exactly a site for the Kerry campaign.John Kerry is brought up here quite often.Most often what you see here is stuff to show up Bush and show how badly he is screwing the country.This site is something like 37 pages long and has been going on since august 24th.There is a lot of stuff going on here Ray and you have alot of catching up to do.Better get started. Ed P.
Posted by Ed Pleskovitch on Sep 11, 2004 at 2:24 AM Joanne Roush wrote:
“It does no good whatsoever to pretend that the USA arms industry is not an ongoing major player in this problem. We create most of the new technologies of death, and then we bestow them upon a waiting world. We arm tyrants and train terrorists and torturers with OUR TAX DOLLARS (excuse me for shouting) and then we are dismayed and outraged when they turn against us. Just like the morons who keep pit bulls and then are horrified and sorrowful when their own children are bitten, rather than just the mailman or a neighbor.”Oh, I agree completely. And it’s not just us, it’s all the industrial nations. Arms are a real money maker, not least because of planned obsolesence. Not only that, but they are an excellent economy booster: even though the product is useless, and mostly scrapped, employment is increased and the economy is more vibrant.
And every pint pot dictator values his success by how much armament he’s got. Look at Iraq, it was one big ammo dump. Look at North Korea. Starving to death, dark at night viewed from space, but they have a hell of a military, and maybe the bomb.
All we have to do is stop. That’s not a plank in either party’s platform, though. Why is that? Because there really isn’t any significant difference between the Democrats and the Republicans. Every election cycle the two parties dance around each other and swap issues, giving up just enough ground so they think they can win. So we stagger towards Armageddon, first as Democrats and then as Republicans.
Congress is owned by the corporations and the country is run by the bureaucrats. People may project their problems on Bush or Kerry, but each is just one man, and influential for only four or eight years. Every cycle we choose a new pair of voodoo dolls and spend all our energy sticking pins in them.
The real problems take decades to develop and decades to solve. We have met the enemy, and he is us.
Further, ‘great’ nations always want to meddle in issues outside their borders. Washington and Jefferson warned about “entangling alliances”. Unintended consequences always arise. The world is reaping its meddling from the Balfour agreement through support for Saddam Hussein and support for the jihad in Afghanistan against the Soviets.
It seemed like a good idea at the time.
You have to pick your wars carefully. Should we not have entered WW2 in Europe? What would history have been if we had not?
Should we have let Iraq develop nukes? What about Iran? (Stay tuned)
Oh, and as far as technology goes, you ain’t seen nothing yet. On 10 Sep 2001 we were worried about the machines taking over in the next 30 years (the ‘discontinuity’). I never would have thought that the great challenge of the 21st century would be 7th century religious wars fought with 21st century technology. How about DNA synthesizers as an affordable computer peripheral?
===
I have an amusing theory: You know why we haven’t found any other civilizations in the universe? Well, it takes about two billion years for life to develop. During that time there is no detectable signature, at least with our current detection methods. Then that life form develops intelligence and eventually advanced technology. From that point until the ‘civilization’ annihilates itself either through nuclear war or other WMD (or accidently creates a black hole while doing scientific research) takes about 200 years. That’s the only time we might observe it. So two billion divided by 200 ==> one chance in 10 million.This is not so far fetched. Life is basically competitive - success comes from colonization of ecological niches. It follows that intelligence is competitive. Mix in technology and the attractions of leisure and you have a witches brew. Wisdom comes too late.
My wife and I have a standing joke when we run across the latest societal excess: “Where’s Osama when you need him?”
Posted by MN_native-MA_voter on Sep 11, 2004 at 3:04 AM Hi guys and Joanne,
Just arrived home and seem to have missed everything. Had a very nice e-mail from Bernie.Wish him the best. Makes me almost want to be there with him. Got the clearance for surgery today but no date yet Joanne. Ya, another Friday night alone.I’ll take the last watch while you guys sleep. What time is reveille? Sleep tight and don;t let the Republican bed bugs bite.
Posted by Lyle Shargent on Sep 11, 2004 at 3:30 AM Ed P. wrote:
My opinion is that when Kerry is elected president that we still need to stay and finish the onerous job of attempting to establish a stable government in Iraq.I want you all to understand that I have never been in favor of the invasion of Iraq.It was a mistake from the very start,but we have our foot in it now and I don’t see any benefit in just opting out and not finishing what Bush started. I hate that we are pouring billions of dollars into Iraq when that money could do so much good here in the U.S..
***********There is no need to stay. The truth is that parents can not prevent their kids from dealing with life. We can not act like overprotective parents for the Iraqis. The Iraqis know what is best for themselves and need to go through the growing pains.
Could the English or French have occupied the USA and told us how best to write our constitution? We still needed to go through a civil war to establish the USA as our own democracy. The Iraqis are no different. We cannot prevent the inevitable and necessary civil war that they need in order to establish their new government for them to make it their own nation.
We only have credibility in our support of their democracy after we leave it to them to make that democracy and give honest advice from the outside and not as occupiers.
Posted by Gregory Wonderwheel on Sep 11, 2004 at 5:16 AM Brooks wrote:
“A plain reading of Jay’s Federalist #2 refutes your position. “. . .Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people—a people descended from the same ancestor….”I’m going to say what Joanne said in a different way. The problem with your thesis is that you cannot prove it by quoting from the Federalist Papers because they were propaganda intended to to sell the Constitution. Advertising is never substantive evidence of the product. Jay was writing to an audience in order to sell to that audience.
Taking Jay’s comments as representative of the whole is no more valid than taking Bush’s comments about the Constitution as the basis for what it really means.
I can prove that there were alternate views by providing even one alternate view. You can not prove that there were no alternate views by presenting the view you claim has no alternative.
Posted by Gregory Wonderwheel on Sep 11, 2004 at 5:39 AM There are two issues here. One is the Republican Party which still includes a LOT of people worth respecting and admiring but which as GK says has been taken over by mostly unelected, arrogant and uninformed people, notably the so-called neo-conservatives.
The second issue is the Democrats. Gore avoided running proudly on the best domestic performance record in sixty years. Now it appears that Kerry may not really run against what is the worst international and national security performance in the history in 216 years, that is since the founding of the Republic.
As an American overseas and as a former diplomat and naval officer I can say that I never witnessed even imagined such a truly bad political management as in Iraq. If anybody is interested in reality, this message has to be put across.
Erwin von den Steinen
Posted by Erwin von den Steinen on Sep 11, 2004 at 8:45 AM Gregory,
In a word, preposterous.
The Federalist Papers are serious discussions on the principles engendered in the Constitution. Jay was the first chief justice of NY and the first chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court and you would denigrate his serious writing as mere advertising and propaganda.
The idiocy of that position is downright malicious.
I’ve spent enough time in this nut factory.
Out.
Brooks
Gregory Wonderwheel just responded to the entry you subscribed
to at In
These Times.
Brooks wrote:
“A plain reading of Jay’s Federalist #2 refutes your position. “. .
Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one
united people—a people descended from the same ancestor….”
I’m going to say what Joanne said in a different way. The
problem with your
thesis is that you cannot prove it by quoting from the
Federalist Papers
because they were propaganda intended to to sell the Constitution.
Advertising is never substantive evidence of the product. Jay
was writing
to an audience in order to sell to that audience.
Taking Jay’s comments as representative of the whole is no
more valid than
taking Bush’s comments about the Constitution as the basis for what it
really means.
I can prove that there were alternate views by providing even
one alternate
view. You can not prove that there were no alternate views by
presenting the
view you claim has no alternative.
Posted by Brooks on Sep 11, 2004 at 1:53 PM Welcome, Irwin! I hope you’ll stay with us for awhile and lend a perspective to this thread that has been unrepresented. Other than a few Canadians, I don’t think we’ve had much contribution from expats, and I’m hoping you can take time to share more of the view from the ground there - wherever you are.
MN - Thank you for your latest post. I’ve been really hoping that once we built a small common foundation, based on the links you provided, that you would bring forth some more personal analysis.
I seem to have left the impression that my chosen platform for international relations and disarmament is on the order of “Just Say No.” It’s gotten to the point that if one speaks for peace in this country, people stand in line to point out the impossibility of the task and imply that the call for peace is evidence of an immature mind.
Your calculation regarding the likelihood that any intelligent species in the universe may have extinguished itself in the ‘normal’ course of development reveals your deeply rooted pessimism, and I don’t condemn you for that. As I said earlier, there are many people who have given up hope and retreated from their highest selves into a desire to simply feel safe. Feel safe, not BE safe. (Not shouting, but would have liked to italicize that.)
My reference to WWI/WWII was an unclear response to your statement about the Russians having signed a treaty with Chechnya. The terms of treaties often contain the seeds for future wars, as history shows clearly. Treaties are never an indication of defeat, but rather of exhaustion on both sides in terms of resources, manpower, and will. Generally they are dictated by the side still standing to the side that is on its knees. Ancient people knew this and so fought to the death with the enemy. We call this genocide today. They called it self preservation.
(Note to readers: I have eliminated frequent insertions of IMO and IMHO. While I appreciate the good manners, I sometimes find this distracting. Please bear with me and let me assure you that if I could convey tone of voice, you may or may not find my statements pompous or condescending. I don’t mean them that way.) (Perhaps if we had heard Garrison deliver his essay verbally, we could have heard the sorrow as well as the anger in his voice, the gentleness of purpose along with the strength of his convictions. I think this would have been a very different thread in that case.)
I agree that Congress is owned by corporations. I have already indicated that rather than grass roots political action to elect more compromised candidates, we need to rouse ourselves from our consumerist slumbers and seek, as a people, to strip the powers of corporations that give them rights to which they should never have been entitled. Corporations are chartered by the 50 states individually, so it will take a nationwide effort of people willing to demand that their state bureaucrats be revoke the charters of abusive corporations. If the Republicans have their way with tort reform, I am hopeful that all the unemployed personal injury lawyers will join this effort. ;-) Such a movement will force the hands of both parties to declare to the people who they actually represent. The grass roots network to start such a movement is already in place in the form of Greens and other independent parties.
So why support John Kerry instead of George Bush in this election? Here’s why I am working for Kerry:
1. I see clear signs that the Bush administration, under the guise of the war on terrorism, is actually seeking to expand and legitimise repressive measures directed at the American people in the areas of free speech, free association, and shrinking personal privacy. I believe this will abate under a Kerry administration.2. Most important specific item: the appointment of Supreme Court justices that will occur during the next four years. I believe that it is crucial for multiple viewpoints to be present on the bench, and that will be lost if Bush picks the next justices. If you accept the common wisdom that this country is more or less evenly divided between left and right, what do you think will be the outcome of packing the court with right wing idealogues? This is a recipe for social unrest. The political right has plenty of representation at all levels of the Federal Courts. It’s time to balance that with some moderate/liberal voices. To do otherwise will disenfranchise an enormous segment of the population and we do this at our very great peril.
3. I believe that the Bush administration has shown itself over 3 years to be ineffectual in creating and strengthening the alliances we need to effectively combat terrorism. I’m not going to go into all the reasons I think Kerry would be more effective, though I think the case can be made, because there is bounteous evidence that four more years of Bush will pull us farther away from our most powerful allies, without whom we cannot begin to address this pressing issue.
4. Bush has done more to divide and polarize the population of this country than any leader in our history except perhaps Lincoln. Now I know the left claims Lincoln as their own shining hero often times, but the fact remains that he was unable to avert a Civil War in this country. That, to my mind, is not a success. I agree that the intractability of his opponents may have made that impossible given the times and the issues. But these times are different. We are facing external threats that did not exist then, and it is absolutely imperative that we face them together as a nation. The sense of this is what makes so many of us believe that this is the most important election of our lives. I don’t believe that Bush has what it takes to pull us together. In fact, the conduct of his campaign alone would indicate that he sees his power in thevery divisiveness that handicaps us so severely.
4. The ongoing efforts of the radical right to impose their religious dogma on the nation as a whole, and to present their face to the world as a representation of America as a whole, is dangerous. It is clear that there is an element that does in fact wish to respond to Islamic fundamentalism on ITS terms, i.e. Christian fundamentalism. This will be fatal for many and probably fatal to our republic.
I could go on, but this post is too long. MN, I feel a kinship with you and your wife, and I hope you’ll be able to relocate the spark of hope in your hearts before November 2. I know Kerry isn’t perfect, but I see his election as a first step. I think he will provide the space we need to start talking among ourselves again. I am pleading with you to cast off your pessimism and replace it with skepticism if possible. Again - a first step. Look out around you - there are millions of people in this world working for peace. Even the outrage of a Muslim terrorist can be heard as a cry for justice, for something better for his/her children. I truly believe that if one acknowledges and addresses the causes of despair, the anger will diminish and we will be left with a much smaller class of unrepentant criminals with little support in the human family. Remember the tale of the Unabomber, whose own brother turned him in. That was a great act of compassion for humanity and we will see more of that when we show that we are genuinely serious about working for peace and justice rather than just mouthing platitudes about freedom.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 11, 2004 at 1:55 PM What’s with this statement Kerry made this week:
From the CBS news website:
“...Kerry said. “Every law enforcement officer in America doesn’t want us selling assault weapons in the streets of America, but George Bush, he says, ‘Well, I’m for that.’”That’s a plain lie. Law officers are as divided on the issue of gun control as the rest of the populace. Here is a link that shows the lie:
http://www.leaa.org/index.html
Posted by Napple on Sep 11, 2004 at 2:57 PM Alas, we have lost Brooks and the factory now has one less nut! ;-)
Wonderwheel, my hat is off to you. When the opposition declares your points preposterous and stalks off in a huff, you know you’ve hit a nerve. I can’t help gloating a little over the fact that try as he might, Brooks was unable to satisfactorily frame this issue to his advantage, nor was he ever intellectually honest enough to admit he was framing.
Bluster and bombast cannot overcome common sense in the end. Knowledge is power. In the words of another of our comrades:
Power to the People!
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 11, 2004 at 3:00 PM Brooks:(paraphrase)I’ve spent enough time in this nut factory. He really means that he is alone and has no support here and can’t cause enough disruption,so he’s going to take his ball and go home. Ed P.
Posted by Ed Pleskovitch on Sep 11, 2004 at 3:12 PM We keep copies by our front door and hand them out to every political worker who knocks on our door, as well as Jehovah’s Witnesses, etc.
Posted by Lynn on Sep 11, 2004 at 3:12 PM Hey, I mistakenly thought this place would amount to more than a mutual admiration society of pinko zealots. We all make mistakes.
Posted by Brooks on Sep 11, 2004 at 3:20 PM Well, Brooks, you thought right in the first place. It’s your most recent conclusion that’s flawed. Just a few days ago we had Scott and 6Pack to spoil the dialogue with name calling and bluster, not to mention disgusting profanity and subterfuge on the part of Scott. For the most part, you’ve been a more reasonable voice. Why the about-face?
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 11, 2004 at 3:34 PM Geoff - Here’s a link that I think you may find interesting. It speaks to your concerns about Europe’s truculence being the biggest stumbling block to the effective interdiction of terrorists. I think you’ll agree that the problem is closer to home.
http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=370&row=0
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 11, 2004 at 3:37 PM I like the move from the Federalist Papers to McCarthyism. Should all of us pinko commies expect to be grilled by Ashcroft and his goon squad now? I still have my passion and my patriotism and even more the love of my country to be willing to endure the pain of old wounds to maybe get it right this time. YOu guys want absolutes, here’s a couple for ya; You are born and you will die. Everything else in life is just a maybe. Maybe you will be smart, maybe you will be rich, maybe you will have children,maybe maybe maybe. How you live your life and what you hold to as truth is for you and you alone.
Nut jobs, ok, how about Pinko Nut Jobs? I rather believe it should be welcome to middle America, a people committed to knowing the truth and willing to live it.
Posted by Lyle Shargent on Sep 11, 2004 at 3:40 PM THIS IS AN OVERSIMPLIFICATION.
1-THE REPUBLICS IN HISTORY HAD VERY LITTLE SOCIAL STRATIFICATION. THEY
HAD 2 CLASSES RICH AND POOR.
2-AS YOU ADD STRATA YOU ADD COMPLEXITY AND BREAK DOWN CLASS ALLIANCES
SO THAT THERE IS MORE SYSTEMIC DURABILITY SINCE THERE ARE NOW MULTIPLE
CLASSES AND MORE COMPLEX INTERCLASS LOYALTIES.
3-WE HAVE NO POST-INDUSTRIAL EXAMPLES AS GUIDES.
4-OUR SOCIETY DOLES OUT OR ATTEMPTS TO DOLE OUT REWARDS IN A FASHION
THAT DULLS THE HISTORICAL ANTECEDENTS.
Posted by AMS on Sep 11, 2004 at 3:42 PM Umm, just a link to anyone opposing the lifting of the assault weapons ban, we only have a day and a half left. My sister and brother-in-law are police officers (he’s a homicide detective) and I don’t want them to face criminals with assault weapons. I don’t know about every cop’s opinion about it, but the police chiefs of America are against the lapse in the ban. You may remember in LA several years ago when 2 criminals armed with automatic machine guns kept 350 law enforcement officers at bay for a day or 2?
Good luck all!http://action.csgv.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=19782
Posted by daydreamer on Sep 11, 2004 at 4:11 PM Here’s another falsehood:
“.....but the police chiefs of America are against the lapse in the ban.”
I remember the Hoollywood bank robbery well:
“You may remember in LA several years ago when 2 criminals armed with automatic machine guns kept 350 law enforcement officers at bay for a day or 2?”
So where did the police get guns more effective than their issue pistols?From the local gun store.
Posted by Napple on Sep 11, 2004 at 4:38 PM Hmmm - Pretty quiet here today and this will be my last missive for awhile. I’d post a link for this, but it’s too important to rely on enough eyes to follow up, so here it is. This is a blurb on Graham’s new book, and I especially hope that Geoff and MN will read this:
From the Publisher | “Intelligence Matters”
In this explosive, controversial, and profoundly alarming insider’s report, Senator Bob Graham reveals faults in America’s national security network severe enough to raise fundamental questions about the competence and honesty of public officials in the CIA, the FBI, and the White House.
For ten years, Senator Graham served on the Senate Intelligence Committee, where he had access to some of the nation’s most closely guarded secrets. Following the attacks of September 11, 2001, Graham co-chaired a historic joint House-Senate inquiry into the intelligence community’s failures. From that investigation and his own personal fact-finding, Graham discovered disturbing evidence of terrorist activity and a web of complicity:
•At one point, a terrorist support network conducted some of its operations through Saudi Arabia’s U.S. embassy–and a funding chain for terrorism led to the Saudi royal family.
•In February 2002, only four months after combat began in Afghanistan, the Bush administration ordered General Tommy Franks to move vital military resources out of Afghanistan for an operation against Iraq–despite Franks’s privately stated belief that there was a job to finish in Afghanistan, and that the war on terrorism should focus next on terrorist targets in Somalia and Yemen.
•Throughout 2002, President Bush directed the FBI to limit its investigations of Saudi Arabia, which supported some and possibly all of the September 11 hijackers.
•The White House was so uncooperative with the bipartisan inquiry that its behavior bore all the hallmarks of a cover-up.
•The FBI had an informant who was extremely close to two of the September 11 hijackers, and actually housed one of them, yet the existence of this informant and the scope of his contacts with the hijackers were covered up.
•There were twelve instances when the September 11 plot could have been discovered and potentially foiled.
•Days after 9/11, U.S. authorities allowed some Saudis to fly, despite a complete civil aviation ban, after which the government expedited the departure of more than one hundred Saudis from the United States.
•Foreign leaders throughout the Middle East warned President Bush of exactly what would happen in a postwar Iraq, and those warnings went either ignored or unheeded.As a result of his Senate work, Graham has become convinced that the attacks of September 11 could have been avoided, and that the Bush administration’s war on terrorism has failed to address the immediate danger posed by al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, and Hamas in Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, and Somalia. His book is a disturbing reminder that at the highest levels of national security, now more than ever, intelligence matters.
About the Authors | “Intelligence Matters” | back to top
BOB GRAHAM, a former two-term governor of Florida, is now in his third term in the United States Senate. While recognized for his leadership on issues ranging from health care to environmental preservation, Senator Graham is best known for his ten years of service on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence–including eighteen months as chairman in 2001—2002, during which he co-chaired the House-Senate Joint Inquiry into the intelligence community’s failures prior to 9/11. Following the release of a declassified version of the Joint Inquiry’s final report in July 2003, Senator Graham advocated reform of the intelligence community and sponsored legislation to bring about needed changes.
JEFF NUSSBAUM has worked as a speechwriter for Vice President Al Gore and Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle. He is the co-author, with Democratic strategist James Carville, of Had Enough? A Handbook for Fighting Back. A graduate of Brown University, he currently lives in Washington, D.C.
No killing the messenger allowed! In a discussion where everyone really involved is a partisan, we need to set aside partisanship and deal with information backed up by hard facts. Add this book to the list of those written by true insiders who are raising the alarm.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 11, 2004 at 5:02 PM On the Anniversary of September 11, here are a couple of essays that are well worth reading:
“Remembering S11” (Chrenkoff)
http://chrenkoff.blogspot.com/2004/09/remembering-s11.htmlLileks on the War (written last year)
This one brought me to tears.
http://www.lileks.com/bleats/archive/03/0903/091103.html
Posted by MN_native-MA_voter on Sep 11, 2004 at 5:23 PM Joanne,
You asked about my notion of a rock-solid dragnet against Al Qaeda around the entire industrialized Free World. In a way, I was talking metaphorically. I would add, though, that I feel many practical steps can be taken that are at least doable—barely—and are being done only partly or not at all today.
I don’t envisage these steps in the fullest detail (wish I could), but they do entail, at the least, the closest hand-in-glove cooperation among all the intelligence and special forces of all the industrialized democracies around the world. This kind of close-working methodology is not necessarily pie-in-the-sky since it’s pretty much what the Allied Powers in WWII already did in cracking codes together, etc. But it is dauntingly complex.
I realize that we may have no definite way, here on this blog, of knowing if precisely such cooperation may be developing today after all. But the degree to which all the faulty intelligence on Iraq was developed primarily by Europe and the U.N. and yet interpreted radically differently by different democracies who should have been allies together speaks for itself, IMHO. The very fact that some interpreted the Iraq threat as part of the Al Qaeda threat and others didn’t speaks for itself, IMHO.
Multiple Allied efforts would entail financial enforcement and prevention through the tracing of money trails, bank accounts, etc. It would entail vigorous intelligence, military participation, diplomacy, international law enforcement, and so on. In fact, I don’t view it as far-fetched to suppose that the International Criminal Court would be useful to us after all for precisely such crises. As I’ve said elsewhere, it might be worthwhile to expand the court’s reach to cover global maniacs like Osama Bin Laden—and others captured in his wake.
Roughly, this effort means emboldening all the democracies of the industrialized world to address, aggressively and proactively, this growing threat through an application of their strongest resources in a coordinated multi-pronged effort in many arenas, legal, military, civilian, etc., where this effort has to be waged. There are already built-in structures like INTERPOL, and so on, which could be tapped by all democracies around the world in a more intense and far-reaching way than we’ve yet seen.
Intangibles in this effort also entail a basic common ground of mutual respect such as existed among the Allies in WWII and which certainly does not exist among all the industrialized democracies of the Free World today.
The ultimate goal would be to leave not a single Al Qaeda cell any footing anywhere in any industrialized metropolis in the Free World. This is why any fragmentation of even the smallest kind among the world’s industrialized democracies torpedoes the entire effort against Al Qaeda. If such efforts—intelligence, Special Forces operations, banks surveillance, etc.—are not globally shared and acted on in concert, Al Qaeda could slip in anywhere between the cracks. The least fragmentation among our various democracies is fatal. Only one democracy being left out of the loop—either in terms of tracing bank accounts, maintaining intelligence, coordinating field operations military or otherwise, or whatever—is all Al Qaeda needs to wreak further horror. Segmentation of our efforts of even the slightest kind spells automatic disaster, IMO.
This is why—ultimately—nothing strikes me as of such paramount importance as developing a way by which all the industrialized democracies, no exception, can work in the closest possible way together across the board before events such as another Beslan(sp.?) or another Madrid overtake them as a possible result of any fragmentation.
Candidly, a shrug of the shoulders in the face of such a necessity is no longer an option. Will it be hard to pull off such possibly unprecedented cooperation everywhere? No, it will be more than hard, in fact staggeringly difficult and complex. But it will be just as essential for all of that. And, at the risk of repeating myself, I’d say that assuming such close coordination is altogether impossible is no longer an option. If I thought that, I and my wife might seek out right away some underground bunker and spend the rest of our lives there, not even bothering to vote, ever.
Since the point when I started writing this, you supplied us that link to a story of a memo that led to a number of revelations showing that members of the Bush family were obliviously cosy with elements in Saudi Arabia who associated with Al Qaeda. Actually, the fact that too many functionaries here at home also had blinders on doesn’t surprise me. And at the end of the day, the fact that certain functionaries here may be appallingly careless doesn’t mean that elements abroad couldn’t—potentially—be just as careless, given the bad blood that, IMO, already exists between us and certain state capitals in Continental Europe. Division simply does not encourage efficient intelligence without fear or favor—including intelligence on Saudi sheiks.
BTW, you remarked, in a clearly friendly way, that MN seems ocasionally unduly pesimistic. Well, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet. I feel that some ghastly horror down the road that makes 9/11 seem a mere tea party is not merely possible absent the close global coordination I’ve described, but inevitable. I doubt that MN is quite there yet. In fact, I’m looking to MN to respond to my concerns as to how such close coordination across the Free World may still be possible, given the complexities involved.
Now, MN has merely suggested that Kerry may be no better than Bush at galvanizing the totality of the Free World. However, I’m suggesting that if Kerry were to be no better at that than Bush, then we face inevitable annihilation or something close to it! Try and top that for gloomy.
Ultimately, putting both Bush and Kerry aside, someone has to come up with some scenario that produces the total no-exceptions Free-World dragnet I’ve described and that we’re nowhere near having today, or this entire exchange becomes academic, possibly within less than a year, IM pesimistic O. MN, where are you? I’m drowning!;-)
Geoff
Posted by Geoffrey Riggs on Sep 11, 2004 at 6:15 PM WOW. If only Kerry would just deliver this speech over and over until everyone has heard it. The Woebegon Woes. By far the most eloquent and summative articulation of how I feel (for the most part) yet. This should be mandatory reading for every american. It should be read at school assemblies, at political rallies, at town hall meetings, in “church” gatherings, etc. It reminded me of Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” in its enunciation of fundamental ideals, values, and beliefs.
Posted by Lucius on Sep 11, 2004 at 6:37 PM I’ll see your links with these:
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/091204X.shtml
and
http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/911-preventable.htm
That second one brings me to tears of grief over the prospect of having these people remain in power, gain more power, and achieve the perception of a mandate from the American people.
Last one, which is most important. These are the American men and women dying and suffering as part of our misguided response to 9/11:
http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/coffin_photos/dover/
There is a link on this page to the stories of wounded soldiers.
The fate of Iraqi and Afghani citizens wounded in the fighting is much worse given the challenge of providing medical care in a war zone. Also, our war casualties are all adults who volunteered for military service. We do not have civilian casualties, unless you count the victims of the events of 9/11. Even if you do, surely we are not justified in failing to look for alternatives to the ongoing carnage.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 11, 2004 at 6:37 PM Umm, just a link to anyone opposing the lifting of the assault weapons ban, we only have a day and a half left. My sister and brother-in-law are police officers (he’s a homicide detective) and I don’t want them to face criminals with assault weapons. I don’t know about every cop’s opinion about it, but the police chiefs of America are against the lapse in the ban. You may remember in LA several years ago when 2 criminals armed with automatic machine guns kept 350 law enforcement officers at bay for a day or 2?
Good luck all!http://action.csgv.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item; m=19782
Posted by daydreamer on Sep 11, 2004 at 6:53 PM It seems Lucias advocates forced indoctrination. Sadly this anti-American emotion has been promoted a number of times on this board.
Lucias writes: “This should be mandatory reading for every american.”
Aside from the obvious logistical problems such a program would raise, would that Democratic, Lucias?
Also, Joanne, you skoffed at the notion that a credible poll could show Bush leading Kerry by more than 10 points. It Time is credible, it appears true, and appears to date from Sept 2nd:
http://www.time.com/time/election2004/article/0,18471,695528,00.html
Posted by Horace English on Sep 11, 2004 at 6:55 PM Horace, 9 days is an eternity in an election season. Bush has leads and Kerry has leads. If you’re willing to be discomfited by contradictory (to your point) but comprehensive analysis, go here: http://www.electoral-vote.com/
Today’s NYT features an editorial by Ariel Dorfman. Here is the link: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/11/opinion/11dorfman.html?th It is worth registering to read this. Here is an excerpt that will give you a taste of who he is and what he’s about:
“Over the years, Ariel Dorfman has written movingly and often brilliantly of the cultural dislocations and political fractures of his dual heritage. Dorfman has, in an impressive body of work, done justice to the two languages that have battled for his voice and the two countries that claim his allegiance.” —Shashi Tharoor, New York Times Book Review
“Let me tell you, America, of the hopes I had for you,” Dorfman writes after the fall of the Twin Towers, remembering back to an earlier September 11 in 1973, when he was on the staff of Salvador Allende, then president of Chile, the day he was removed from office and murdered in a coup in which the U.S. government was complicit. “Beware the plague of victimhood, America. . . . Nothing is more dangerous than a giant who is afraid.”
In the essay “A Different Drum,” Dorfman asks, “Isn’t it time, as war approaches yet again, to tell each other stories of peace over and over again?” Over and over in these jewel-like essays, his best shorter work of the last quarter-century, Dorfman weaves together sentiment and politics with his sense of the larger historical questions, reminding Americans of our unique role in the world, so different from the one put forward by the current administration: the power to resist and to imagine.
Imagine…“you may say that I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one. I hope someday you’ll join us…”
-John Lennon
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 11, 2004 at 8:01 PM Well, Geoff, I’m never going to get the third and final layer of flooring pulled up in my kitchen if I don’t get off this blog. Tomatoes are also waiting to be lifted from vines, but I want to respond to your long and thoughtful post.
In general, I think it’s a tendency of many of us to get bogged down in a particular train of thought and to then find it difficult to look at things differently. I often remind myself that if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. While your thinking about security from terrorists encompasses many elements (law enforcement, military, international cooperation, enforcement of banking regulations, etc., etc. , etc.) it appears to me in my most humble (and I mean that sincerely) opinion to miss looking at the real area of strength that is within our grasp. These methodologies will not be effective to protect us EVER if we do not build a new relationship with Arab and Muslim people around the world. Period.
I agree that we will most likely suffer another attack, and it may well be much worse than 9/11/01. Given the course of events of the past three years, I have no doubt that our ability to cope with such an event is now seriously impaired - on a psychological level more than on the practical. I say this because most people have been lulled into believing that color coded terror warnings and the macho posturing of our government have successfully intimidated our enemies; that invading Iraq has made the world a safer place; that we can fight our enemies ‘over there’ and prevent them from fighting us on our own soil. All of this is utter nonsense.
After the initial attack , the descent into tyranny began here and our progress down that slippery slope has continued with little to slow it. The current administration has managed to brand anyone who questions their motives or actions as unpatriotic. The terms ‘sedition’ and ‘treason’ are back in vogue. We’ve seen it all on this blog for over two weeks now.
I believe, as Garrison said, that there is much to do and we’re not getting any younger. Our first priority must be to strengthen our relationships with our allies, who are perhaps less frightened and more resolved than we are due to their long experience with modern terrorism.
And take heart. I think that Islamic terrorists are not completely stupid. They still rely on passive support from the Muslim community. If their attacks become too outrageous, they will suffer such a backlash that they will find it difficult to survive, as Daniel Pipes himself has pointed out. That is why I don’t think even mildly reactionary Muslim clerics will be eager to defend the actions in Beslan other than to call attention to the long history of Russian atrocities in the area and to point to the military’s behavior in the siege. To attack a civilian population with WMD anywhere in the world would be extremely self-destructive on the part of the jihadis.
The problem we confront right now is the inept and even corrupt management of the war on terror to date by this admiinistration. All of the measures you cite will not be possible if Bush is returned to power in November, period. Why? Because they are not interested in actually stopping this madness. They inflame it at every turn, particularly by their actions in Iraq.
Further, given the actions of this administration, it should not be surprising that so many Islamic extremists have jumped on the bandwagon of retaliation. We now see little self-appointed groups grabbing people off the street and beheading them. Why are moderate Arabs and Muslims so muted in their response to this? Well, maybe they see this as proportional retribution for what we are doing in Iraq and Afghanistan. Can you consider this possibility?
Take, for example, our conduct in regard to the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib. No real accountability in the form of sanctions higher than the second tier of command structure. Innocent Iraqis, even minor children, were subjected to extreme and humiliating treatment, torture was clearly used, people died and were mocked even in death. Who has suffered anything that could even be considered metaphorically proportional on the side of the perps? Rumsfeld could have helped enormously if he had been willing to resign in disgrace. Bush could have done even better to have summarily fired him and condemned these activities in withering terms. But nooooooo. Instead the Arab world saw a lukewarm insincere ‘apology’ on behalf of the American people on a pro-American Arab language news program. I am so deeply ashamed of this bungling booby, I could scream sometimes.
And this is the person who, for even one moment, you could consider worthy of the respect that will be necessary to build a true coalition to place a dragnet around the free world to suffocate Al Quaeda? :-o
I believe that we can do much better than to agonize over what others around the world are doing, I believe we can demand course correction, right now, and begin today to take our share of responsibility on a personal level for the chaos and destruction that are spreading around the world. It’s simply no good to sit back and do nothing, say nothing while our country runs amok. What do you think Bush needs worse than anything else right now? Some would say a good ass kicking, and that’s what you can do by putting a Kerry sign on your lawn and a Kerry sticker on your car. You can tell every person you know why you won’t be voting for Bush - I bet you have a lot of friends and relations who respect your opinions and will listen to you. If his poll numbers start heading down a little faster, we may get some results before January.
It will speak volumes to the world if Bush becomes a lame duck in the next few weeks. Have you seen the international polls? They can’t stand him, they think he’s a dangerous man, and the more educated and wealthy they are, the more they want him out. Should we vote for a president based on what the citizens of our greatest allied nations think? Well, no. But maybe just for once we should consider why they think the way they do, since we want to get the ‘truculence factor’ under control. ;-)
So don’t descend into the nihilism, pessimism and darkness of the heart that I believe is the root of the Republican Party right now. Buck up and head for the exit! I can’t say it often enough. Work for change. Work for peace. Work for justice at home and around the world. Defeat Bush and his crony-capitalist, dare I say it, chickenhawk brigade. Only Armageddon lies that way, and unless you’re confident of your Rapture- worthiness, I suggest you and your wife should get cracking!
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 11, 2004 at 9:03 PM The year I turned 18 there were no major elections. Clinton was in the middle of his second term and the country was sitting pretty despite the media focus on his personal life crisis and oratorical incongruencies regarding what he considered to be sexual acts, etc. At 18, and especially as a female, you rarely focus on the national deficit (or surplus as it happened to be for the first time in my lifetime at least), tax cuts, social security issues, foreign policy or government spending. Your brain is far more focused on the clubs you’re finally old enough to enter, the college parties you’ll get to attend, whether or not you parents will guy you a new care for graduation, and the fact that you can buy smokes and die for your country but not buy alcohol (oh the injustice!). We are politically ill educated and, frankly, we liked it that way. In fact, I made a promise to myself right then and there that since I had no real working knowledge of the political issues and, frankly, I also wasn’t in a age bracket that was overly affected by the decisions made on Capitol Hill that I just wouldn’t bother to vote.
Coming from a family of staunch Southern Democrats from none other than Hope, Arkansas (and a rather liberal area of New Jersey paternally), I felt confident that despite his personal transgressions, Clinton was going to leave the country in a position nearing Zen balance that would take a truly clueless troglodyte with even more antediluvian practices to destroy. Perhaps my political naivety and youthful idealism is to blame for my supreme “shock and awe” at how quickly the walls came crashing down after an election with candidates that, in my opinion, were simply carbon copies of one another that had been souped up to look like political race cars, each bearing their party’s animal mascot emblazoned on the sides to distinguish them fro one another. A band with an appropriate enough title even focused on the similarities of the candidates’ campaign “promises” and “issues” in a music video, taking clips of speeches where Gore and Bush literally reworded identical phrases in a vain attempt to show some degree of separation of their political platforms and played them in a split-screen style during one of the band’s music videos. The similarities were obvious to anyone under the age of dead. It was no surprise to me then that the margin of victory (or thievery, depending on your perspective) for the 2000 election was marginal at best. I remember watching the TV as hundreds of exit polls were conducted showing Gore as a narrow but solid shoe-in for the presidency and then being macramé’d to my couch while the controversy of The Chad unfurled before the masses. While I was not in the least bit surprised that this controversy occurred in the first place, I was even less shocked that it happened in a Bush-run state. After all, when people base their votes more on which candidate is the lesser of two evils (come on, Gore was no picnic either…) because the candidates really never made a case for their causes that set them apart from one another with enough certainty, the country can’t really be surprised when there isn’t a grand enough vote surplus to bail out the only slightly more favored Gore. Thus we entered a time of tax refunds we didn’t need and tax breaks for people who don’t need them. So goes the world…
I was only 3 months into my 21st year of existence when it happened. I was sharing an apartment with 6 other people (correction: I was letting 6 other people squat while I worked crazy shifts and attended classes 3 days a week) and had just gone to bed from the night shift before when one of them pounded on my door so loudly that I literally jumped out of the bed and was vertical before my eyes had even opened. As we all crowded onto my futon to watch the horror unfold, I couldn’t help but feel a mixture of sadness, anger and fear. These were reactions that countless Americans were feeling at this time, but my fear wasn’t stemming from concerns of more attacks or for the lives of family and friends. No, even then the thought of what would happen when the dust cleared had begun to ache in the back of my mind. What would “the shrub” do now and how long before he struck back?
The answer would come rather quickly and with more venom than I had originally imagined. The cries of patriotism at its finest quickly disseminated into a game of “You messed with my daddy, now I’m gonna kick your a$$” The horror of a country became a justification for the most frivolous and costly war effort since Vietnam. The “War on Terror” faded into an international game of “seek and destroy” on near global proportions. As country after country began to realize that Bush’s efforts became increasingly focused on Iraq without any credible proof that Hussein had anything to do with the 9/11 tragedy, his support here at home also began to diminish. In summation, his gross negligence in the national security arena coupled with his staunch refusal to admit any wrongdoing has forced Americans to either love him for his persistence and perseverance to a cause which nearly everyone has concluded was poorly planned and even more poorly executed at the very least or to hate him for the arrogance to continue on with the same plan without plausible justification for the countless lives lost and dollars spent at the mercy of a vindictive ruler with a grudge.
It didn’t take dueling country singers or Hollywood activists to sway my original decision. It wasn’t even the fact that the man can’t complete a sentence without flubbing at least one word, thereby changing the entire meaning of what were probably rather important (?!) pieces of political information. It certainly wasn’t Kerry’s controversial success in publicly doing what so many Vietnam vets had tried and failed to do (show their pride for having served their country but opposing the people and policies which made it necessary). No, the one factor, the numero uno reason I will be taking my little card to the nearest elementary school cafeteria and waiting in line for the chance to scrunch into a little cubicle and punch/circle/pencil-in my choice for our next president after swearing off politics for life lies in these questions I recently asked myself:
Do I honestly think that the country as we knew it before “the shrub” will be salvageable after another four years of deception and corruption and, if so, do I really want to be stuck in the voiceless generation that has to deal with the fall-out and subsequent clean-up of a mess made by a man you didn’t support and his “Crusade” to carry out personal vendettas shoddily masquerading as a War on Terror and costing the lives of countless more American soldiers - mothers & fathers, brothers & sisters, wives & husbands, sons & daughters - and dishonoring those who were stripped of their lives for the very government which wishes to deify them for the personal and political gains of the men and women who run this country? Could I live with myself and call myself a true American if I didn’t at the very least make the effort to have my voice heard, to let it be known that I DO have an opinion and it DOES matter what happens in the government because it WILL affect me in the future?
I was always of the faction that says “I don’t vote, therefore I am not entitled to an opinion.” I was always happy with my neutrality, my well-planned avoidance of responsibility for the country’s well-being. As I get older, however, I’ve realized that this Swiss attitude has left my generation in a very dangerous position. If we choose to stay neutral and let the “grown-ups” deal with the issues at hand we’ll have no one to blame but ourselves when the country goes to Hades and it comes time for us to play janitor. While Hollywood promotes it and the marketing savvy cash in on it, the fact that millions of the younger generations are registering to vote this election year isn’t necessarily a positive sign for the politicos vying for the presidency. It means that we have collectively reached the point where we won’t stand for other people telling us what’s good for us any more. We are those 18 year-olds again telling our well-meaning but wholly antiquated parents that we’re grown ups now and can make our own decisions. We realize that, like most 20-somethings in America, we still need our parents’ help and guidance from time to time to help keep us focused and on the right track, but we are now legally able and obligated to care for ourselves both locally and nationally speaking. We may not have the wealth of political knowledge that comes with age, experience and extensive research, but we’re intelligent enough to decipher the hidden political agendas embedded in every candidate’s political persona and to realize that what’s good for the goose isn’t always good for the gander. To quote the delightfully tacky and obtuse 80’s band Twisted Sister, “We a’int gonna take it any more!”
At the ripe old (?!) age of 24 I have officially changed my opinion on voting. Rather than forfeiting my right to play a part in the political system, I will exercise my opinion and obligation to help ensure that candidates with policies and agendas so horrendous that I’d rather choke on a pretzel and die than be forced to suffer four years of their presence and possibly decades of after-effects are expunged from the governmental hierarchy as permanently as possible. All that having been said, I’m going to purchase a big bag of Rolled Gold pretzel sticks, locate my nearest elementary school, cram into the little booth with my ballot in hand and exercise my Constitutional right to make a conscious effort to avoid another four years of the metaphorical nettle pokes, bug infestations and pesticide drownings that come from living under a Bush.
Posted by Voting Convert on Sep 11, 2004 at 9:05 PM The year I turned 18 there were no major elections. Clinton was in the middle of his second term and the country was sitting pretty despite the media focus on his personal life crisis and oratorical incongruencies regarding what he considered to be sexual acts, etc. At 18, and especially as a female, you rarely focus on the national deficit (or surplus as it happened to be for the first time in my lifetime at least), tax cuts, social security issues, foreign policy or government spending. Your brain is far more focused on the clubs you’re finally old enough to enter, the college parties you’ll get to attend, whether or not you parents will guy you a new care for graduation, and the fact that you can buy smokes and die for your country but not buy alcohol (oh the injustice!). We were politically ill educated and, frankly, we liked it that way. In fact, I made a promise to myself right then and there that since I had no real working knowledge of the political issues and, frankly, I also wasn’t in an age bracket that was overly affected by the decisions made on Capitol Hill that I just wouldn’t bother to vote.
Coming from a family of staunch Southern Democrats from none other than Hope, Arkansas (and a rather liberal area of New Jersey paternally), I felt confident that despite his personal transgressions, Clinton was going to leave the country in a position nearing Zen balance that would take a truly clueless troglodyte with even more antediluvian practices to destroy. Perhaps my political naivety and youthful idealism is to blame for my supreme “shock and awe” at how quickly the walls came crashing down after an election with candidates that, in my opinion, were simply carbon copies of one another that had been souped up to look like political race cars, each bearing their party’s animal mascot emblazoned on the sides to distinguish them from one another. A band with an appropriate enough title even focused on the similarities of the candidates’ campaign “promises” and “issues” in a music video, taking clips of speeches where Gore and Bush literally reworded identical phrases in a vain attempt to show some degree of separation of their political platforms and played them in a split-screen style during one of the band’s music videos. The similarities were obvious to anyone under the age of dead. It was no surprise to me then that the margin of victory (or thievery, depending on your perspective) for the 2000 election was marginal at best. I remember watching the TV as hundreds of exit polls were conducted showing Gore as a narrow but solid shoe-in for the presidency and then being macramé’d to my couch while the controversy of The Chad unfurled before the masses. While I was not in the least bit surprised that this controversy occurred in the first place, I was even less shocked that it happened in a Bush-run state. After all, when people base their votes more on which candidate is the lesser of two evils (come on, Gore was no picnic either…) because the candidates really never made a case for their causes that set them apart from one another with enough certainty, the country can’t really be surprised when there isn’t a grand enough vote surplus to bail out the only slightly more favored Gore. Thus we entered a time of tax refunds we didn’t need and tax breaks for people who don’t need them. So goes the world…
I was only 3 months into my 21st year of existence when it happened. I was sharing an apartment with 6 other people (correction: I was letting 6 other people squat while I worked crazy shifts and attended classes 3 days a week) and had just gone to bed from the night shift before when one of them pounded on my door so loudly that I literally jumped out of the bed and was vertical before my eyes had even opened. As we all crowded onto my futon to watch the horror unfold, I couldn’t help but feel a mixture of sadness, anger and fear. These were reactions that countless Americans were feeling at this time, but my fear wasn’t stemming from concerns of more attacks or for the lives of family and friends. No, even then the thought of what would happen when the dust cleared had begun to ache in the back of my mind. What would “the shrub” do now and how long before he struck back?
The answer would come rather quickly and with more venom than I had originally imagined. The cries of patriotism at its finest quickly disseminated into a game of “You messed with my daddy, now I’m gonna kick your a$$” The horror of a country became a justification for the most frivolous and costly war effort since Vietnam. The “War on Terror” faded into an international game of “seek and destroy” on near global proportions. As country after country began to realize that Bush’s efforts became increasingly focused on Iraq without any credible proof that Hussein had anything to do with the 9/11 tragedy, his support here at home also began to diminish. In summation, his gross negligence in the national security arena coupled with his staunch refusal to admit any wrongdoing has forced Americans to either love him for his persistence and perseverance to a cause which nearly everyone has concluded was poorly planned and even more poorly executed at the very least or to hate him for the arrogance to continue on with the same plan without plausible justification for the countless lives lost and dollars spent at the mercy of a vindictive ruler with a grudge.
It didn’t take dueling country singers or Hollywood activists to sway my original decision. It wasn’t even the fact that the man can’t complete a sentence without flubbing at least one word, thereby changing the entire meaning of what were probably rather important (?!) pieces of political information. It certainly wasn’t Kerry’s controversial success in publicly doing what so many Vietnam vets had tried and failed to do (show their pride for having served their country but opposing the people and policies which made it necessary). No, the one factor, the numero uno reason I will be taking my little card to the nearest elementary school cafeteria and waiting in line for the chance to scrunch into a little cubicle and punch/circle/pencil-in my choice for our next president after swearing off politics for life lies in these questions I recently asked myself:
Do I honestly think that the country as we knew it before “the shrub” will be salvageable after another four years of deception and corruption and, if so, do I really want to be stuck in the voiceless generation that has to deal with the fall-out and subsequent clean-up of a mess made by a man I didn’t support and his “Crusade” to carry out personal vendettas shoddily masquerading as a War on Terror and costing the lives of countless more American soldiers - mothers & fathers, brothers & sisters, wives & husbands, sons & daughters - and dishonoring those who were stripped of their lives for the very government which wishes to deify them for the personal and political gains of the men and women who run this country? Could I live with myself and call myself a true American if I didn’t at the very least make the effort to have my voice heard, to let it be known that I DO have an opinion and it DOES matter what happens in the government because it WILL affect me in the future?
I was always of the faction that says “I don’t vote, therefore I am not entitled to an opinion.” I was always happy with my neutrality, my well-planned avoidance of responsibility for the country’s well-being. As I get older, however, I’ve realized that this Swiss attitude has left my generation in a very dangerous position. If we choose to stay neutral and let the “grown-ups” deal with the issues at hand we’ll have no one to blame but ourselves when the country goes to Hades and it comes time for us to play janitor. While Hollywood promotes it and the marketing savvy cash in on it, the fact that millions of the younger generations are registering to vote this election year isn’t necessarily a positive sign for the politicos vying for the presidency. It means that we have collectively reached the point where we won’t stand for other people telling us what’s good for us any more. We are those 18 year-olds again telling our well-meaning but wholly antiquated parents that we’re grown ups now and can make our own decisions. We realize that, like most 20-somethings in America, we still need our parents’ help and guidance from time to time to help keep us focused and on the right track, but we are now legally able and obligated to care for ourselves both locally and nationally speaking. We may not have the wealth of political knowledge that comes with age, experience and extensive research, but we’re intelligent enough to decipher the hidden political agendas embedded in every candidate’s political persona and to realize that what’s good for the goose isn’t always good for the gander. To quote the delightfully tacky and obtuse 80’s band Twisted Sister, “We a’int gonna take it any more!”
At the ripe old (?!) age of 24 I have officially changed my opinion on voting. Rather than forfeiting my right to play a part in the political system, I will exercise my opinion and obligation to help ensure that candidates with policies and agendas so horrendous that I’d rather choke on a pretzel and die than be forced to suffer four years of their presence and possibly decades of after-effects are expunged from the governmental hierarchy as permanently as possible. All that having been said, I’m going to purchase a big bag of Rolled Gold pretzel sticks, locate my nearest elementary school, cram into the little booth with my ballot in hand and exercise my Constitutional right to make a conscious effort to avoid another four years of the metaphorical nettle pokes, bug infestations and pesticide drownings that come from living under a Bush.
Posted by Voting Convert on Sep 11, 2004 at 9:19 PM Whoops! Sorry for the double post… computer’s going haywire on me! Have a great day everyone!
Posted by Voting Convert on Sep 11, 2004 at 9:21 PM Garrison Keillor doesn’t have the slightest idea who’s in the Republican party, any more than Michael Moore or any of the other delusional liberal amateurs who’ve been babbling nonsense lately. What a crock, and shame on you people for encouraging such dilettantism.
“Sneered at the thought of public service”? What a pompous load of bullshit, especially odious from the kind of pampered liberals we hear bleating their fearful treason lately. I sure hope the people who are putting their careers, reputations and lives on the line to make this world a better place find a way to forgive you ungrateful assholes.
If you’re not going to be part of the solution, at least stop bein g part of the problem. And pardon the rest of us while we ignore your pathetic whining.
Posted by Uncle Mikey on Sep 11, 2004 at 10:00 PM To Voting Convert:
Bravo!! And thanks for joining this thread. Your piece was worth reading twice, so don’t worry about the mechanics of posting—that’ll come naturally soon. If I’m not mistaken (and I’ve read this entire blog opus), you’re the only young’un to speak up and identify as such. And you said your piece and described your short journey so well from apathy and/or non-involvement to a fire in your belly that will really warm you on a cold day in early November, in that little cubicle where you sign on to protect America, now and in the future. (And believe me, voting will become a good karma habit and something you won’t want to live without.)
So join the teachers, old soldiers, small businesspeople, grandmas, farmers, waitresses, professors, factory workers, health professionals, truck drivers, philosophers, surfer dudes, artists, house-husbands, reformed Republicans and thoughtful Independents for Kerry on this thread, and speak up some more.
All of a sudden, I feel like I can trust someone under 30.
Keep it up and bring more of your friends and fellow generational travelers to this discussion. But more importantly, make sure they are all registered to vote—in most states, we only have about three more weeks to get that done.
Unite the generations—we can all fit on the same futon!! Protect all our futures (some longer than others). Defeat Bush.
Posted by Overqualified for Kerry on Sep 11, 2004 at 10:30 PM Hey, do you have to sign up anywhere other than here to get a message on this thing…?..I sent one at 11:00 this A.M. Nothing happened.
Posted by Gary Lundstrom on Sep 11, 2004 at 10:58 PM Where is Bernie Ellis, the inimitable listmaker, when we need him to respond to Uncle Mikey? I’m not as good at it, but let me give it a shot. You all jump on and help out.
Uncle Mikey, here is a list of people who have made real sacrifices in the service of this country, unlike most members of the current administration who have sacrificed some privacy, but little else while enriching themselves and causing misery here and abroad:
Veterans Against the War
Iraq Veterans Against the War
Diplomats & Military Commanders for Change
Richard Clarke
Joe Wilson
Senator Bob Graham
Senator and soon to be President John Kerry
Al Gore
Max Cleland
Anonymous (CIA agent who wrote book about agency incompetence and politicization under Bush)I could go on all day. If you are a RINO (Republican In Name Only) or in any way moderate in your politics, visit the website of the Club For Growth. They want you to shape up or get out of the Republican Party. Start there, and then check back with us for some additional information. You could start by reading this thread. There’s plenty of real whining going on from Republicans, who, in spite of being in posession (temporarily) of all the levers of power, do nothing but whine about the ‘liberal’ menace.
I’d like to remind you, sir, that your point of view does not reflect that of the majority of the people in this country, or in the world for that matter. You may wish to get some additional perspective.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 11, 2004 at 10:59 PM OK, I’ll try again with a “thank you” to Garrison Kiellor and a letter I submitted today to my city newspaper. I welcome feedback from someone who can really explain to me where I’m wrong…or support from those that know that most of us on this board are right.
To the editor:
Is George Orwell’s “1984 “ coming true? Our administration tells us hate is Christian, war is peace, ignorance assures safety, and spending ourselves into oblivion brings prosperity, and that to stand up for our rights is unpatriotic and subversive!
The United States of America is at a most crucial crossroads. Half of America, through fear and uncertainty, has been lulled into a trance by a slick, slight-of-hand, corporate-owned, warmongering administration that is slashing through every major principal that our democracy stands for. The other half is trying desperately to remind those bent on throwing the baby out with the bathwater, that to forfeit our freedoms for security, will assure us neither!
Yesterday, an educated and intelligent friend and I were sharing views of the present State of the Union. She remarked that we’re in a more dangerous time than the sixties! She stated, “Where are the massive public demonstrations and and outrage?” I replyed, “We’re too fearful to show opposition for being targeted as a danger to national security or worse yet, terrorists”. Remember people, since 9-11, and the oxymoronic “patriot act”, all it might take is a phone call from an angry neighbor to the “Right” person on the other end.
America will make the collective decision as to our country’s direction. Will it be a continued path of mass-deception by a down-home-country-boy puppet who puts a friendly face on on a dark future of spiralling fear and debt? Or will we wake up and say to Cheney, Rumsfeld and Bush…”We’re sick and tired; and we’re not going to take this anymore”!?
If you don’t believe we’re being played, then who do we have to thank, with crude oil at an all-time high, for falling gas prices, thereby helping the complacency? Bush and his Big Brother… er, big oil buddies?
Posted by Gary Lundstrom on Sep 11, 2004 at 11:26 PM Gary, I’ll give you my enthusiastic support for speaking your mind in a public forum despite your recognition of the possible consequences! I write the maximum allowed one letter per month to my newspaper, and my neighbors cheer me for it. It’s amazing how many people are coming out of the closet with their real views, which are not pro-Bush. And I live in a ‘pink’ or at best light blue state. So cheers to you, and keep on writing and speaking out against the madness!
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 11, 2004 at 11:35 PM tHanks Joanne,
And I hope this isn’t too piggy, but I will submit another letter I wrote that was published in May. Then I’ll be quiet with the diatribes for today. FYI…I got a tearful call from a Vietnam vet, thanking me for this letter.To the editor:
I write this in honor the protester,who during a Bush visit to Platteville, WI last month, was arrested for holding up a sign with the letters “FUGW”.
Cherish real American freedom, for it can be gone in an instant. By word or by deed, defend it’s foundations against attack from without, or worse yet, from within. Treat it not with bullish pride, but treasure it with vigilance, unwavering respect and humble reverence. Act responsibly with your words and actions, while always keeping in mind that to diminish another individual, group or their point of view is to diminish one’s self and shut the door on healthy debate or the opportunity to learn. Beware those who claim our freedoms and constitution are derived of one faith or belief system, for that is theocracy and it is dangerous and wrong. Stand up for fairness and strive for equality. Above all, be wary of those who cloak themselves in the flag while blindly pledging allegiance to any policy or action our government may take in the name of “Homeland Security”, ie. reporting certain books checked out from the library. For this is by far the most dangerous form of fear-based control and leads to abuse of power. It is creeps across the land like a shadow, vowing protection while laying waste our hard-won freedoms. This is fascism and it is here now! When law enforcement cited that law abiding protester last month, they were acting as thought police, because for all they know, the “FUGW” could have stood for what they and the Feds in Hermantown two years ago represented – “Fascism Under George W”. But, as long as my city newspaper can and does publish letters like this one, I will know we’re not living in 1930s Nazi Germany–yet.
Posted by Gary Lundstrom on Sep 11, 2004 at 11:44 PM [MN]
“In the case of the terrorists who attacked Beslan, they hate Russians because they are infidels, i.e. not fundamentalist Muslims.”[Moderates4Truth]
“Nope, you should look into it deeper. They hate Russians because Russians refused to grant Chechnya independence, and in trying to control the resulting insurgency used ‘scorched earth’ policies and tactics to force them in line.”
That was the first Chechin war. The current events are due to the Islamist Shamil Basayev and his Islamist thugs. His goal reaches beyond Chechnya to the entire Caucasus, and terror is his preferred weapon. See below for links.
“If we really want to fight terrorism, we’re going to need a better understanding of their rationale rather than just ‘they hate us’.”
Sure. The Islamist jihadi hate us and want us dead because we are infidels. The intermdediate goal here is to force the Russians to abandon the Caucasus so the Islamists can establish a caliphate in that area. Doing that will result in extensive deaths and dislocation in the non-muslim population.
[Joanne Roush]
“As to the inclusion of Checnya, I?ve been doing quite a bit of reading on the incident in Beslan. It seems that the picture is changing rapidly, as all the various media dig, and the pundits and reporters line up to tell us what to thiink. Initially it seems the assumption was made that this was the work of Al Quaeda, then it became Chechens, then they had to add a few other nationalities to the list of criminals. How long will it take to discover what really occurred and why? Until then, I think it is unwise to rely upon this horrible incident to make a case one way or the other about US policy regarding containment of terrorist threats.”
It’s clear what happened. Islamist jihad. All the ‘terrorists’ are Islamist jihadi.The problem is a Russian problem. We can declare solidarity with Russia and get a better understanding of our Islamist enemy. Our policy remains the same.
“Ruthless rebels who dream of an Islamic empire”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/09/05/wosse505.xml“Thoughts on Beslan”
http://windsofchange.net/archives/005468.phpMark Steyn: No other word for it but slaughter
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,10677436^7583,00.h html[Joanne Roush]
“Back to Chechnya. Children and their parents were herded into the school. They were caught in the crossfire. Apparently some inept criminal started the conflagration when trying to move a bomb, which detonated. Then chaos, panic, and the bullets began to fly. In other words: shrapnel, crossfire, collateral damage on all sides. This is what happens in armed conflicts around the world, non-stop, every day of every week of every month of every year.”You keep saying, “They were caught in the crossfire” as if the children walked into a running gunbattle, even though I’ve pointed out that the facts are they were kidnapped in a preplanned operation, brutalized, blown up, and shot in the back. What is driving you to persist with this view? As Mark Steyn said, it was a slaughter.
Weapons and explosives had been hidden in the school months before. This was a planned terror operation by Basayev.
Aside from the knifing of kids and extreme brutality during the attack, when the bomb went off kids started escaping through the windows. The jihadi then proceeded to shoot them in the back. When the Russians saw that they felt they had to shoot back and all hell broke loose.
“This is what happens….” What is your point? It’s no big deal if it doesn’t happen in my backyard?
Maybe you should go talk some sense into Basayev.
Posted by MN_native-MA_voter on Sep 11, 2004 at 11:45 PM Well put Garrison! We are Americans first, humanitarians second, and Republican/Democrats third (take your pick).
Our founding fathers would be marching our Redcoats back to England if they only knew the mess we’ve created.
Let’s try and bring back some old fashion ‘common sense’ and make this country the great nation it truly is.
Posted by J. Dine on Sep 11, 2004 at 11:57 PM Or maybe you feel the criminals should be less “inept” so they can better state their “demands”?
Posted by MN_native-MA_voter on Sep 12, 2004 at 12:04 AM MN,
I realize I’m starting to sound like a stuck CD:-), but do you, like me, now feel that another Beslan in the heart of Conrinental Europe is a virtual certainty? Putting aside the two Presidential candidates, is there no scenario that we can come up with whereby the powers-that-be over there can change their attitudes _before_ they have their own Beslan and not _after_?
Incorrigibly :-),
Geoff (the pessimist)
Posted by Geoff on Sep 12, 2004 at 1:01 AM Joanne Roush wrote:
“...to take our share of responsibility on a personal level for the chaos and destruction that are spreading around the world”OK, there it is. We should apologize, bring everyone home, and wait for the Islamists to nuke New York harbor.
You go right ahead and take your share of responsibility for September 11 and Beslan. Lie right down and make it easy for them when they pull out that long knife. The rest of us are going to do our best to defend this country from an /implacable/ enemy. In the words of Mark Steyn:
===
What happened in one Russian schoolhouse is an abomination that has to be defeated, not merely regretted. But the only guys with any kind of plan are the Bush administration. Last Thursday, the President committed himself yet again to wholesale reform of the Muslim world. This is a dysfunctional region that exports its toxins, to Beslan, Bali and beyond, and is wealthy enough to be able to continue doing so.You can’t turn Saudi Arabia and Yemen into New Hampshire or Sweden (according to taste), but if you could transform them into Singapore or Papua New Guinea or Belize or just about anything else you’d be making an immense improvement. It’s a long shot, but, unlike Putin’s plan to bomb them Islamists into submission or Chirac’s reflexive inclination to buy them off, Bush is at least tackling the “root cause”.
If you’ve got a better idea, let’s hear it. Right now, his is the only plan on the table. The ideology and rationale that drove the child-killers in Beslan is the same as that motivating cells in Rome and Manchester and Seattle and Sydney. In this war, you can’t hold the line against the next depravity.
===
If you’ve got a plan, let’s hear it. But it has to go beyond “AB ‘George W. Bush’ and that’s ‘W’ for WRONG” or “We’re going to do it smarter and better.” Sen. Kerry has said that he’s not going to say what he’s going to do until he’s elected. So it’s going to be a surprise. But better.
It comes down to character. Bush has it, and Mr. “I don’t fall down, the son of a bitch knocked me down” does not.
It comes down to leadership. Bush is a leader, and the Senator, who didn’t vote on the Prescription Plan for Seniors, or much of anything else, is not.
Sen. Kerry is a loser. If the Democrats had put up Sen. Hillary Clinton or Sen. McCain I could be tempted. But I’d vote for Al Sharpton before I voted for Sen. Kerry. Honest Injun.
Posted by MN_native-MA_voter on Sep 12, 2004 at 1:21 AM Geoff,
I’m afraid that in my opinion, it will take a nuked city to drive the non-Muslim world together.
The truculence of France and Germany towards the USA is partially reflective of internal dissension in the EU. They are scared to death of being attacked and also of offending anyone, especially their Muslim population. As I posted previously, there are other factors, including France and Germany’s shameful trading with Iraq, against the UN mandate, right up to the point when our forces entered the country.
Their plan to control Islamic nukes completely escapes me. In fact, they have been supplying machine tools and parts which support proliferation. It’s mind-boggling.
I suspect that the situation is self-correcting. Chirac and Schroeder are in trouble. Let’s see what the next generation brings.
It doesn’t make any sense to me to select a President based on a supposedly higher probability (not a surety) of rapprochement with France and Germany, while ignoring the bigger picture.
Islamist terrorism is handled as a police action, so long as a given country is committed to defeating it. You don’t want to do it via martial law. It’s bad enough that we have so many intelligence organizations. Just how much world cooperation between police organizations do you really want?
The highly partisan “bipartisan” 911 committee excoriated the FBI and CIA for not working together despite knowing perfectly well that legislation that they had enacted forbidded exactly that. BTW, I happen to agree that the CIA and FBI should not work hand and glove. There should be an interface, and it should be supervised. The methods of these two organizations are different: historically, the CIA was not supposed to operate inside the USA. I also don’t believe in an Intelligence Czar. Every position with the title of Czar in this country has been a joke. It’s just another layer to slow things down.
In my view, ‘conventional’ terrorism isn’t a nation-threating problem. Look at it this way: we lost 3,000 in 9/11, and since then we’ve lost 150,000 in auto accidents and over 200,000 due to medical mistakes. It’s the damage to the psyche that matters.So even if Europe isn’t 100% successful defending against the equivalent of 9/11, or worse, (and they won’t be, since you can’t defend 100% against someone who wants to die) it won’t be the end of civilization as we know it. If they take out major infrastructure it’s going to be terrible, but we’ll survive.
Islamists with nukes are a different issue.
In many ways it was more important to go into Iraq than into Afghanistan. But Pakistan is a very tenuous situation, being a nuclear power with a large fundamentalist population, so we had to start next door and break the Taliban.
Since everyone at the time believed that Saddam had a WMD program (and I still do) and that the old fox could string the inspectors along forever, and no one know how far along he really was, it was important to get the job done quickly amd move into Iraq. (Saddam’s biggest strategic mistake was to go into Kuwait before he had the bomb.)
We may not be able to hold off the Islamist/nuke situation forever. I truly hope that we can work with the Muslim moderates to cut off and exterminate the extremists before it’s too late:
“The Whole World Is Watching” (Hanson)
http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson200409100700.asp“They want to kill us all” (Mark Steyn, two years ago)
http://www.steynonline.com/index2.cfm?edit_id=35“Muslims Must Arm Themselves: Mahathir”
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=4§ion=0&article=32109&d=17&m=9 9&y=2003“Iran: Playing With Nuclear Fire”
http://windsofchange.net/archives/004080.phpI leave you with this - Armageddon:
“The Three Conjectures”
http://belmontclub.blogspot.com/2003/09/three-conjectures-pew-poll-finds-40-of.h htmland
The Making of a Hawk
http://www.thestreet.com/funds/smarter_up/10039994.html
Posted by MN_native-MA_voter on Sep 12, 2004 at 2:34 AM From tonight’s National Review Online’s “The Corner”. http://nationalreview.com/thecorner/corner.asp:
Subject: Unbelievable
Date: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 10:09 AMI’m not going to tie up the phone lines long, but I wanted to tell you that we’re okay. My dad phoned this morning to say, “The World Trade Center is on fire. Go look out your front door.” You can see them clearly across the harbor from our front door.
“Oh my God! Julie come see!” I said.
I ran down to grab my reporter’s bag, knowing I’d have to go over to the fire. At that point, we didn’t know what caused the fire. Then, while downstairs, I heard a tremendous explosion and screams.
I ran out to the street. “A plane just hit the second tower!” a man screamed.
I knew the subways would be out, so I decided to walk across the Brooklyn Bridge to get to the scene. There was a steady stream of people sobbing, coming out of downtown over the bridge boardwalk. I interviewed several of them. They told absolutely horrifying stories of seeing people jump out of windows from high floors, their ties and coats flailing as they plunged to their deaths. One woman’s knees were bleeding from having been pushed down by the terrified crowd.
“The Pentagon has been bombed!” a man screamed.
I made it to the last pillar of the Brooklyn Bridge before going into downtown. I ran into a colleague of mine. She said, “We better not go over there. Those towers are going to blow up.”
One minute later, the south tower fell in on itself. I nearly fainted. It ... well, I can’t describe it now. I’m too shaken. Everybody on the bridge screamed. Some collapsed in tears. A woman started to vomit. My knees went weak, and a huge plume of soot and smoke barrelled toward us. I decided to turn around and go home.
A stout black woman, covered with sweat, screamed to no one in particular, “Every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess! It ain’t over people!”
An F-16 fighter flew overhead. The cloud of soot reached us, and it was like being in a volcanic eruption. Everybody had to breathe through their shirts. Cell phones didn’t work. I rushed home to see Julie. When I opened the door, she was sobbing and shaking.
Now I’m learning that the second tower has collapsed, and the Pentagon has been bombed. The sky outside is black with soot and smoke.
There is no World Trade Center anymore. I can’t believe we’re seeing this.
It’s war, you know.
R.
Posted by Horace English on Sep 12, 2004 at 2:44 AM Thank you MN, “The Three Conjectures” is staggering:
“The so-called strengths of Islamic terrorism: fanatical intent; lack of a centralized leadership; absence of a final authority and cellular structure guarantee uncontrollable escalation once the nuclear threshold is crossed. Therefore the ‘rational’ American response to the initiation of terrorist WMD attack would be all out retaliation from the outset.”
One wonders if Prairie Home Companion will be doing a skit on THIS.
Posted by Horace English on Sep 12, 2004 at 2:49 AM OK, MN. I haven’t had the visceral response you’ve had to Beslan, that’s clear. I read a half dozen news articles about it yesterday, but have not followed up since. I may be focusing more than you on the unique circumstances due to the long history of Russian involvement, the brutal conditions in which the population has been forced to live for over ten years, and the attending despair of pretty much the entire population of the region.
I join you in your deep sadness over the loss of lives. I can’t respond to you fully tonight, but I will tomorrow.
Of course it is a big deal. Every life lost is a big deal. This cycle of violence is a huge deal, particularly for those caught up in it on all sides.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 12, 2004 at 3:16 AM MN - Take a look at this for a quick overview of why I don’t believe Bush is serious about rooting out Islamic terrorism.
http://www.hermes-press.com/BushSaud.htm
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 12, 2004 at 4:05 AM Good am MN please check out this link. May help shed some light for you.
http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/8/4129
>
Posted by Lyle Shargent on Sep 12, 2004 at 4:29 AM MN,
Thanks for a thorough and thoughtful reply. You put a lot of time and effort in it, and I am very grateful. This is the most patient and detailed exchange I have yet had with a Bush supporter. Thank you. Whether or not some might reckon you one of the more moderate Bush supporters or one who fairly represents the mainstream, I’m grateful that you were considerate enough to try and understand where my chief concerns lie.
Unfortunately, since I am quite sure that only a rock-solid fully aligned dragnet around the entire Free World will successfully prevent WMD proliferation and a WMD attack, and since you feel that a fully coordinated Free-World effort is apparently not in the cards either for anti-WMD proliferation, or for the most vigilant deprivation of Al Qaeda’s “oxygen”, and so on, that leaves me just as pessimistic as ever.
On the one hand, I’ve yet to meet a Bush supporter (and I’ve discussed this with many) who expects the alliance to become any more global (among industrialized democracies, that is) than it is today. On the other hand, I don’t see how it makes sense to think of our anti-Al Qaeda efforts as anything other than “walking in place”, possibly even slipping back a step or two(!), if the alliance grows no bigger than it is today.
Those twin assessments together, yours and mine, leave me profoundly discouraged. I figured something pragmatic might emerge from our exchange, however much it may have dealt in hypotheticals. Instead, we merely appear to have reinforced each other’s most discouraging expectations. I think we understand each other fairly well, and that’s to the good, I suppose. But having one’s gravest doubts confirmed re the prevailing situation is sobering….....
Ultimately, the very act of voting is an act of hope. It presupposes a future where problems facing the voters are constructively addressed eventually, however sophomoric some of the actual campaign may be.
But hope is what I no longer have if we both agree that the alliance shows no signs of taking in _all_ the industrialized democracies any time soon, and if I accept your premise that neither candidate would meet with better success in the near future (a premise I’m still re-examining, admittedly).
The image of the legendary Hydra’s heads comes to mind. If one corner of the world is vigilant, a new “head” springs up elsewhere instead. If vigilance is only maintained elsewhere, a new “head” springs up closer to home, etc. Not an encouraging prospect.
I see my choices as either
1) accepting the assessments of Bush supporters and Bush detractors alike that the alliance can not expand any time soon in today’s circumstances, thus prodding me to vote for another candidate (which is about where I was at the start of this colloquy);
2) or I can accept such an assessment of Bush’s chances as slim at expanding the alliance while also assuming that no one else could have any more success either;
3) or I can allow other considerations altogether to sway my final voting decision.
Option 1 is predicated on hope, the hope, however slender, that where one candidate already tried but failed at continuous expansion of the alliance, the other candidate might succeed.
Option 2 would—frankly—lead me not to vote at all, the first time I will have done so since I was 18, making a decision not to vote a gesture of real despair for me—but perhaps reflective of my real feelings right now.
Option 3 is hard for me to imagine. I simply cannot fathom anything more important than galvanizing the entire Free World around the fight with Al Qaeda. The coming conflagration could well be bone-chilling. I cannot fathom anything taking priority over that. I suppose I could make the assessment based on which candidate seems more disciplined with the domestic budget, but oddly enough, in this instance, it seems to be the Republican who’s more comfortable with a high deficit, at least in the short term—IMO (even though Kerry has certainly not been as specific as I would like either).
Clearly, no one can help me choose among these three options. It’s just discouraging that I find myself actually reasoning along these lines at all.
That underground bunker is starting to look more and more attractive…...........
Thanks for talking this out with me. I’m only sorry it’s left me more disheartened than ever—which is _my_ problem, of course, not anyone else’s.
Best, and thanks,
Geoff
Posted by Geoff on Sep 12, 2004 at 7:33 AM Good to see an article from someone who, like me, feels that Nixon was the last of the good Republican Presidents. As someone who believes he is a conservatve at heart, I have been unable to follow a Republican party who now is manipulated/run by big business and the far, far intolerant “Christian” right.
Posted by Craig on Sep 12, 2004 at 12:31 PM hypocrisy is the trademark of a true liberal! The Democratic party has been taken over by the harcore socialists,druggies, and deviants. You show your absolute hypocrisy by the name calling you do to the traditional people that made America. You read enough crap with an “open mind” sooner or later your mind will be full of mindless crap . Quit attacking my president! When conservatives say any thing you call them racist,sexist or gasp-homophobes as if hetro’s were the one with the problem.Yeah normal people are the ones with the problem,Just keep telling yourself that! Just stop whining and stop the mean spirited(as you people call it) attacks. Stop being so jealous because more people list to Rush and watch Fox. Pay attention and maybe you will learn something. And if you really want to read something try reading the constitution and REALLY read it (even the gasp- second ammendment)maybe you’ll really learn something.
Posted by Chris on Sep 12, 2004 at 1:37 PM It’s like the old fairy tale, “The Emperor has no Clothes;” doesn’t anyone really see?
Perhaps we should have professional readers read the many articles done by so many intelligent, knowledgable folks, insiders and out, to the American people, mandatory listening/watching, depending on your electronics of choice, of course…we could have the readings done to videos directed by the latest, hottest directors! SOMETHING HAS TO SHAKE THESE DULLARDS UP…anyone who does not earn at least $250,000 a year (single person), should NOT VOTE REPUBLICAN. How tough is that to see? Has this country become so numb and ignorant? please say no!!!
Posted by alice defontes on Sep 12, 2004 at 1:50 PM It looks like Alice is the latest to promote forcing us to accept Garrison Keillor’s column.
Is this the Clockwork Orange or America?
“Perhaps we should have professional readers read the many articles done by so many intelligent, knowledgable folks, insiders and out, to the American people, mandatory listening/watching,”
Posted by Horace English on Sep 12, 2004 at 2:31 PM “Option 2 would—frankly—lead me not to vote at all, the first time I will have done so since I was 18, making a decision not to vote a gesture of real despair for me—but perhaps reflective of my real feelings right now.”
Geoff, you /must/ vote. No matter how bad it seems or how poor the choice, get to the polling area and vote. Encourage all your friends to do the same!
Sometimes it’s like eating at a bad restaurant: you eliminate all the things you don’t want to eat and choose the one that’s left.
Sometimes it makes sense to go al la carte. Continuing the analogy, split your ticket. Vote for the senators and representatives who align with your views. I’ve almost always voted Republican, but I’m registered as an Independent and I intend to remain one. I’m not one for litmus tests, life is much more complicated than that.
For example, the Patriot Act is a bipartisan piece of legislation which is subject to revision. As I’ve said before, I believe it over-reaches because it denies due process. I have no problem locking up a terrorist incommunicado for a month or two so you can track down his associates (assuming you have got a proper warrant to follow that procedure). But at some point you need to follow due process and bring him to justice.
Write your senators and representatives. Tell them what changes you would like to see, and why.
“Presidential push fails to quell GOP fear of Patriot Act”
http://www.hillnews.com/news/051204/patriot.aspxOtter Bill on Strengthing Civil Liberties:
http://thomas.loc.gov/bss/d108query.htmlSearch on H.R.3352
“Title: To amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 and title 18, United States Code, to strengthen protections of civil liberties in the exercise of the foreign intelligence surveillance authorities under Federal law, and for other purposes.”
====
But VOTE!
Over 95% of the citizens of Afghanistan have registered to vote. They are very enthusiatic about participating in a democratic society. I hardly need point out that but for the USA and our brave soldiers the Afghani would still be forced into the sports stadiums to observe public beheadings for infractions of the sharia.
“Good News from Afghanistan” (Part 3 - Chrenkoff)
http://chrenkoff.blogspot.com/2004/08/good-news-from-afghanistan-part-3.html
(also see the link at the bottom for the first two parts. In addition there are a number of links to “Good News from Iraq” which contain information that is just not available on the news wires.)
Posted by MN_native-MA_voter on Sep 12, 2004 at 4:17 PM I’ve been monitoring this thread in silence for a while and the tone has definitely improved. Unfortunately, I guess the readers of, and the writers in, this discussion will always have to contend with a steady influx of right-wing screamers and name-callers. I notice today that Scott and 6Gun have been replaced by Chris and Horace English. Maybe if we ignore them, they will go away too. Hopefully before they start talking about their sexual proclivities….
I am posting because I have a few questions for MN. (And by the way, the ongoing discussion between MN, Geoff, Joanne and Lyle has been both informative and restrained, which is a double blessing.) MN, in one of your final posts last night, you stated clearly that you support Bush both because he is a leader and he has a plan. Since I for one don’t see any “plan” other than continually denigrating Islamists, ignoring the real funders of terror (e.g., Saudi Arabia) and equal threats to the world’s security (e.g., North Korea) and trying to keep American citizens in a constant state of anxiety that (according to Cheney) only the Republicans can reduce, I would like you to say more about those characteristics of leadership that you see Bush displaying, and exactly what you believe his plan is. For now, let’s focus on “the leadership thing”.
From my vantage point, I don’t see Bush as an effective leader. To me, there are several important characteristics of a good leader that Bush utterly lacks:
1) An effective leader in the global fight against terrorism would be able to stay the course. I know that “flip-flop” is the favored epithet against Kerry, so can we just say that Bush “zig-zagged” pretty quickly from Afghanistan to Iraq? In so doing, he muddied the focus and stretched our resources away from the first military campaign, where we had defined enemies who had clearly done us harm, to a new theater where we had neither. In so doing, he lost us the international political capital that Geoff has correctly pointed out is necessary to even come close to winning the war on terrorism. And, in so doing, he has escalated the recruitment of new terrorist supporters from throughout the Islamic world, rather than reduced that activity. As a result, despite our White House statements to the contrary, we have not stabilized either Afghanistan or Iraq in ways that are in our best interests, either domestically or internationally. Do you see it differently?
2) A good leader has the intellectual capacity to be able to process information effectively and continually from a wide variety of sources, is able to withstand and respond to hard questions from his political and policy opponents and from the citizenry, and is able to articulate how his plans can accommodate and adjust to new realities and to input from all quarters. Bush demonstrates his intellectual limitations daily, he has admitted that he reads almost nothing from the national media, and he functions in a self-imposed insulation and isolation “bubble” from principled dissent that his handlers keep him in both in the White House and on the campaign trail to avoid hard questions from the Congress, our media, his own military brass, other world leaders and US citizens. As a result, Bush lacks the intellectual capacity, strength, sensitivity, courage and flexibility that are other important criteria for effective leadership. Do you see Bush displaying these characteristics and, if so, could you cite examples?
3) The most effective leader—by definition—is one who can attract and retain the most followers. After four years of Bush, our country is more divided than we are united (and the battle-lines have become more heavily and deeply drawn, as evidenced by this thread.) And Bush’s leadership and “plan” have squandered the unanimity of support that developed after 9/11 in this country and abroad, when almost all of us, whether citizens of this country or not (including the French and citizens of many Islamic countries), stated with sympathy, resolve and determination, “We are all Americans.”
The evidence of our country’s loss of support around the world was clear in the poll released last week that showed that citizens in 30 out of 35 countries who were polled want Bush removed from office. So if unanimity and singleness of purpose must be developed and maintained among the world’s nations to defeat (or at least contain) terrorism, the path that W has been leading us down is clearly marked “the Wrong way.” If you don’t think so, how do you assess effective leadership when fewer and fewer people and countries want to play on Bush’s team?
While I know that your contribution to this discussion has been primarily focused on the international arena and on the war against terrorism, I want to end by discussing briefly two issue that reflect an appalling lack of interest by the Bush administration in maintaining the domestic security of our citizens and, most importantly, of our “first responders”—the police men and women, the firefighters and EMS personnel who have to deal daily with the domestic “wars” on the streets of this country. It is a given that much street crime (and most home invasions, robberies and burglaries) are fueled by the need for money to buy hard drugs like heroin (but also including cocaine and methamphetamine). How have we become safer in this country—or indeed in Europe and in other industrialized nations—by allowing the Afghani regional warlords to now be overseeing and controlling the largest opium harvest in that country in years? And how have we (and our brothers and sisters who protect us every day by donning police, firefighter and EMS uniforms) become safer by allowing the assault weapons ban to expire? (See today’s Washington Post editorial below that discusses that issue.)
I want a President who is capable of reducing the threats to my safety—and the safety of my family, friends, neighbors and country—both at home and abroad. With the few examples I have given above, I don’t see Bush embodying worthy plans for our country, on the home front or abroad. I also don’t see him possessing either the intellectual capacity or the judgement and plan-based charisma to “grow” support for his leadership, either here or abroad. I find those qualities in John Kerry, which is why he has my vote.
One last word to Geoff: By all means, do vote. We can’t afford to lose people with your knowledge, intelligence and analytic ability from the body politic. Just remember—there are a host of reasons to cast your vote one way or the other. If the positions of Bush and Kerry on the war on terrorism are a “wash” for you, look at the budget, look at the environment, look at how our domestic needs are (not) being addressed, look at honesty and integrity in office and on the campaign trail. Look at the capacity for leadership that Bush has demonstrated over the past four years. On all those fronts, I trust that your final decision will be easier to make. But, by all means, vote. We are now at grave risk of losing our democracy and that risk heightens every time someone like you opts out of the process.
Bringing On the Guns
Washington Post editorial, Sunday, September 12, 2004; Page B06PRESIDENT BUSH doesn’t care, and neither do the Republican House and Senate leaders. They’re content to open up the streets to the pointless and exceptionally deadly gunfire of assault-style weapons. Their cold political calculation: Let the assault weapons ban expire Monday night, and let the police in particular and everybody in general fend for their lives. After all, that’s the way people like it—or so claims Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) who, unlike other doctors who have treated shooting victims, thinks this is what the people want. “I think the will of the American people is consistent with letting it expire, so it will expire,” Mr. Frist told reporters last week.
That’s dead wrong. As Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) responded, “The ‘will of the American people’ has been carefully evaluated by poll after poll that show two-thirds to three-fourths of the people support the ban.” The most recent national poll, conducted by the University of Pennsylvania’s National Annenberg Election Survey, found that 68 percent of Americans wanted to extend the ban, including 57 percent of those with a gun in their household. A Frist aide said the majority leader was referring to a lack of pressure from within the Senate. Ms. Feinstein noted that she had written Mr. Frist asking him to schedule a vote on the issue.
In the House, Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) calls the assault weapon ban “a feel-good piece of legislation” that does nothing to keep weapons out of the hands of criminals. He’s partly right; it’s a feel-better ban for police on the front lines and citizens who would be far better protected if the ban were extended to cover the knockoff models that the gun industry has been peddling to circumvent the law.
What’s the point of flooding the country with weapons that are modeled for killing people, not the hunters’ prey? Why bring back bayonets, flash suppressors and multi-round magazines designed for quick and heavy gunfire that can help mow down a crowd in the streets or kids in a school? Why ignore the pleadings of D.C. Police Chief Charles H. Ramsey, who stood together with more than 70 other police executives Wednesday in support of extending the ban? At least 2,000 sheriffs, police chiefs, law enforcement groups and prosecutors from around the country have asked Mr. Bush to help keep these weapons off the market. Joseph M. Polisar, president of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, noted that the White House ignored the chiefs’ request for a meeting and said Republican leaders in Congress rejected their request for an immediate vote.
Whose “will” do these leaders respect? Most Americans have a will to live without these especially lethal and absolutely unnecessary weapons in their midst. Again, why won’t the president act?
Posted by Tenase Hillbilly on Sep 12, 2004 at 4:35 PM MN,
Hmmmmmmmmm…...By agreeing with me that any further binding together of all of Continental Europe’s democracies and of other free countries of the industrialized Free World is unlikely in the current circumstances, by echoing my own misgivings (which I had not even stated yet!) regarding the lack of due process in the Patriot Act, and by (?)apparently(?) not demurring with me when it comes to my concerns about the high deficit, you may be prodding me in the general direction of Kerry after all;-) Do you really want that?:-)
I appreciate your bringing up the sacrifice entailed in giving Afghanis the vote.
Look, what I may do is just vote my preferences further down the ballot (I rarely vote a straight party ballot anyway) and ignore the top spot unless polls indicate that my state (New York; I live in Manhattan only a few miles up from Ground Zero, so yesterday was painful for me, frankly) has a fairly close race going for President.
If it appears that a close race is at all likely, I will probably vote for Kerry at this point. But if there are unequivocal indications of a landslide one way or the other, I may just stick to the local races instead.
We’ll see,
Geoff
Posted by Geoff on Sep 12, 2004 at 4:47 PM Joanne Roush,
There’s a lead article in the New York Times today which gives a history of the conflict in Chechnya:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/12/international/europe/12russia.html?hp
The article covers the Al Qaeda participation and the international money flow. Well worth reading.
An encouraging note is that the current estimate is that there are only 400 - 700 Islamists left fighting in those mountains.
===
“Ibn al-Khattab, an Arab veteran of war in Afghanistan and Tajikistan, was one benefactor. He built training bases in areas under Mr. Basayev’s command.“Mr. Ignatchenko, the F.S.B. spokesman, said agents infiltrated those camps and observed a curriculum for jihad: classes on weapons, explosives, tactics and ideology. He said Al Qaeda financed it through Al Haramein, although other officials say a direct link is not clear.
“Al Qaeda’s interest in the region is undisputed. As early as 1997, Mr. bin Laden said Chechnya was an incubator of religious war. In an interview with CNN, he said fighters from Afghanistan had “spread to every place in which nonbelievers’ injustice is perpetuated against Muslims.”
“Their going to Bosnia, Chechnya, Tajikistan and other countries is but a fulfillment of a duty, because we believe that these states are part of the Islamic world,” he said.
“Among those drawn to Chechnya was Ayman al-Zawahiri, who would later become Mr. bin Laden’s top deputy. At the time, Dr. Zawahiri led the Egyptian Islamic Jihad. Late in 1996, Russian authorities detained him. He was held for six months.
“He had four passports, in four different names and nationalities,” Mr. Ignatchenko said. “We checked him out in every country, but they could not confirm him. We could not keep him forever, so we took him to the Azerbaijani border and let him go.”
Posted by MN_native-MA_voter on Sep 12, 2004 at 5:58 PM Tenase Hillbilly:
____“I’ve been monitoring this thread in silence for a while and the tone has definitely improved. Unfortunately, I guess the readers of, and the writers in, this discussion will always have to contend with a steady influx of right-wing screamers and name-callers. I notice today that Scott and 6Gun have been replaced by Chris and Horace English. Maybe if we ignore them, they will go away too. Hopefully before they start talking about their sexual proclivities…. “
____Tenase, aside from ignoring your horrible last sentence, I must say that I find your tone common, but sadly not among responsible free-thinkers who encourage the same in others. Rather, such expression reminds me of those who would dominate free speech, and chase away dissenters.
Given that such strategy is also part and parcel of an authoritarian government and society at large, may we assume you to be a liberal?
Surely this isn’t your intent. If it is, I can see why this blog is populated only the way it is. Good day.
Posted by Horace English on Sep 12, 2004 at 6:08 PM Geoff, MN, and all who will join us today - it’s late and I don’t have much time, so this will be short. No, really!
I was up til 2:30 a.m. and back in front of my computer six hours later, reading all the links provided by MN, and wandering around links from those sites. It was a very interesting journey, and it left me with an indelible impression.
From the beginning of this thread, most responses to Garrison’s comments and those of fellow posters on the thread have been based on strong emotions. Indeed, Garrison’s deeply felt, and for many disagreeably expressed, message is one of sorrow over the loss of a level of common purpose, civility, and decency that so many of us recall from as recently as three years ago today. On September 10, 2001 we were divided into two camps in this country. On September 12, 2001 we stood together and tolerated one another’s different perspectives, and the world held its breath and hoped for the best possible outcome.
Now we find ourselves living in what appears to many to be a new world. The explosion of information sources on the internet has paralleled the hardening of positions on both sides. But this is not a new world in the enduring sense. Violent conflict has always occurred, and weapons of, shall we say, ‘increasing’ destruction have never ceased being developed by every society with the resources to create them. We won the race to create the mother of all WMD - nuclear weapons - and we were the first, and so far the only nation to employ them…on a civilian population. We have led the way in developing chemical and biological weapons, quickly followed by those we deemed or who identified themselves as our enemies. We now spend more on our military than the rest of the world combined.
Few people in the USA view themselves as a threatening entity and most have a very difficult time understanding why others around the world fear us, even hate us. We don’t generally view our own growning fundamentalist religious leaders as the same ilk as those identified as jihadis. We don’t recognize the real cost to real people in other nations of those cheap goods that flood our discount stores. This lack of perspective is not the cause of a particular terrorist attack, but it is a contributing factor in our inability to win the hearts and minds side of the battle.
So, to sum up, I searched all morning for the plan that MN challenged me to produce. Since I’m not a foreign policy expert, I had to read many proposals until I came upon one that strikes me as practical, balanced, and in touch with all of the pertinent realities. You can find it here:
http://www.fpif.org/papers/04terror/index.html
Unfortunately, and this may be good news for the Republicans reading this thread, the same organization has analyzed the Kerry/Edwards record in regard to combatting terrorism and as of this July article they saw little hope for dramatic change from the current policies. Here is the link:
http://www.fpif.org/commentary/2004/0407edwards.html
I hope as many people as possible will read the first link and weigh in. I offer this in the most sincere hope that at least this tiny group can set aside partisanship, paranoia, and mutual frustration to come together and discuss the merits of a real plan to increase security for all, and work to create the conditions that will make terrorists of all types find no safe havens in this world.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 12, 2004 at 6:20 PM I guess all the libs care about is getting permission from the UN or France to defend America. I really don’t give a rats ass what anyother country thinks. It’s something your candidate needs to take notice of…it’s called leadership . Oh and by the way to the writer who commented on sexual proclivities I am a white heterosexual male who loves America and believes in the Constitution.I know I am not covered by your policies,after all we are the cause of the world’s problem’s right?? Hey all you liberals out there! stop trying to turn America into a third world socialist cesspool! This election is important it’s all about stopping the Feinsteins ( who benefits from the protection of assault weapons herself..she has armed guards) Kennedys, Moores, Frankens, Ellen Goodmans,Keillors,and other wackos who live in their own head so much that they are out of the mainstream of normal thought. Like I said read the constitiution and tell me what part of “shall not be infringed” in the second ammendment do you not get. I hate to inform you but the American people are starting to wise up about your socialist ideas and silly little agendas. I really do hope you put down your communist manifestos & pot pipes long enough to see reality. Hey there is always Canada or France if you don’t like it.
Posted by Chris on Sep 12, 2004 at 6:28 PM Horace English - Let me step up here briefly on behalf of Tenase. I’m not sure if you’ve read the entire thread, or just the part where your particiipation began. Some of us have been participating for two weeks, and we had an unfortunate incident with some extremist right wing posters who generally used a very harassing tone with everyone they disagreed with, and particularly directed toward the women. This culminated in one of them appropriating the name of one of our members (Bernie Ellis) and making lewd and suggestive comments of an outright obscene nature toward one of the women. This identity theft was reported and traced by In These Times, and you can read the saga, minus the offending posts, by tracking back through the thread. The offensive material has been removed in consideration of both Bernie and Anna.
This incident has perhaps heightened our sensitivities a bit, particularly since a call from the ‘left’ to the ‘right’ to join us in condemning this behavior was met with silence. It very much reminded me of the immediate aftermath of Watergate and Nixon’s resignation when one was hard put to find anyone who had voted for him.
I’m sure you can understand that while we all welcome you here to discuss issues, and even to join in some good natured name calling and stereotyping, we’re all making a conscientous effort to head off the really angry scathing stuff before it degenerates once again.
Hope you’ll come back and join us in spirited and informed debate!
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 12, 2004 at 6:35 PM Lyle - where are you? Chris needs to hear from you before you move out of the country!
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 12, 2004 at 6:37 PM For anyone not familiar with what Chris is talking about (aside from the all-too-familiar insults) here is the amendment:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
And here is the accompanying discussion of infringement:Infringe
infringe vb [Latin infringere] 1: violate, transgress 2: encroach, trespass Source: NMWIn the context of the Constitution, phrases like “shall not be infringed,” “shall make no law,” and “shall not be violated” sound pretty unbendable, but the Supreme Court has ruled that some laws can, in fact, encroach on these phrases. For example, though there is freedom of speech, you cannot slander someone; though you can own a pistol, you cannot own anuclear weapon.
Both items from this site: http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst.html
Now, how about a discussion about where freedom falls on the continuum from handgun/hunting rifle to nuclear weapon? Chris, you’re up to bat.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 12, 2004 at 6:45 PM I always enjoyed hearing Lake Wobegon when I could find it on the radio but after reading this I don’t think I like Keillor much any more. I’ve rarely heard such a blanket ridicule and condemnation of a group before. His words seem to convey alot of hate and anger, yet he says that This is a great country, and it wasn’t made so by angry people.
I’m a Republican and I don’t think his discription of Republicans fits me. Sounds like there are some things that Republicans may have done that he doesn’t like so he has lumped us all together in his hate speach. Kinda like saying that ALL Muslims are murdering terrorists.
As far as the single greatest failure of national defense in our history, I think that history shows that the attack on Pearl Harbor holds that distinction not the tragedy of 9/11. There were several factors that contributed to 9/11, one being that we are a free country with fairly open borders. Another has to do with what we have been taught by “those who know”. We have been told that if we should ever be taken hostage, our best chance of surviving is to NOT resist. I guess this was a reasonable idea in the past but now we are dealing with terrorist fanatics who plan on dying with their victims. When the people on the last plane discovered what had happened to the other planes they pulled together and went after the hijackers. As a result that plane never reached it’s intended target. If all passengers had resisted the hijackers instead of rolling over and being nice, I’m sure that none of those planes would have reached their targets and thousands of lives would have been spared.
“and to hell with anybody who opposes them”. Sounds just like Kerry’s wife last week when she said that anyone who doesn’t agree with her husbands healthcare plan “is an idiot”. So obviously that attitude is not exclusive to Republicans… I have NEVER had that attitude toward others… even Democrats.
As far as people who believe Neil Armstrong’s moonwalk was filmed in Roswell, New Mexico, In all my years I’ve only known one person who believed that and he wasn’t a Republican or a Democrat. He had never ever voted or registered to vote. I think he thought the world was flat too.
Here is the one statement that Keillor made that shot his entire tirade down in pathetic flames of flatulent: (just doing my imitation of Keillor)
the misty-eyed flag-waving of Ronald Reagan who, while George McGovern flew bombers in World War II, took a pass and made training films in Long Beach.
Even I knew that Reagan hadn’t taken a “PASS”. I knew that it was related to his physical exam and that he had only been authorized for “limited” service. Since little old me knew that, I think Keillor did too. I guess truth must not be important to him when he’s trying to do such a noble thing and demean and denigrate everyone who doesn’t agree with him. If you can’t trust him to tell the truth about something that can be checked and verified….........
Several years after graduating from college and while employed as a sports announcer by a radio station in Iowa, Ronald Reagan began taking home-study U.S. Army Extension Courses. He enrolled in the program on Mar. 18, 1935 and by Dec. 1936, had completed 14 courses. He then joined the Army’s Enlisted Reserve Corps at Des Moines, Iowa on April 29, 1937 as a private in Troop B, 322d Cavalry. On May 25, 1937 he was appointed a second lieutenant in the Officers’ Reserve Corps of the Cavalry and on June 18, 1937, he accepted his officer’s commission.
Following the Japanese attack of Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941, Lt. Reagan interrupted his acting career and on April 19, 1942, went on active duty. This was not achieved without some difficulty because when Lt. Reagan took his first physical exam, he was not accepted for active duty due to eyesight difficulties. His persistence finally triumphed and he was given another exam which he passed. However, he was classified for limited service only, which permanently denied to him his ambition of serving overseas. His first assignment was at the San Francisco Port of Embarkation, Fort Mason, Cal., as Liaison Officer of the Port and Transportation Office.At this time, the AAF and Warner Brothers Studios were planning a feature motion picture to be entitled “Air Force” and wanted Lt. Reagan for the leading role, so on May 15, 1942, he applied for transfer from the Cavalry to the AAF.
Posted by Allen on Sep 12, 2004 at 6:51 PM Joanne, thanks for the post, but this will be my last message here. I too have read the entire thread and I find that while you (and notable others) may disagree on points of debate, I feel it is the more liberal among you who shame what I’ve understood to be the basis of our country.
I refer to basics such as what I suppose I too would call Constitution ethics, a strong national defense against proven adversaries, freedoms of speech and expression in a thread like this one, and the presumption of innocence.
Instead there are inumerable posts here by advocates of Garrison Keillor’s rather emotional position that certainly appear to call for a forced reading of his column, or a forced politicizing of similar views as if doing so would reset national policy in the only correct course.
Obviously this smacks of a high authoritarianism, and I can see how and why the “name-callers” on the conservative side of the issue would take offense, at least with this view.
Likewise, I must say, in many of the from-the-left messages, including some of yours, I detect a subtle or not so subtle tone of superiority as well as a lead-in that may be intended to de-stabilize the opponent. There is also a detectable filtering of content in many posts from the liberals, as I believe you’ve admitted, and so not all points raised receive the full benefit of a comprehensive rebuttal.
Were all of the negatively personal commentary contained in the entire thread counted, there would be no less of it from the liberals than from the so-called Bush supporters.
An irony is that the core of this next election seems to be a presidential race coming down to beating a broad-brushed candidate rather than electing a proper statesman solely on his own merits. On this we can agree.
Wishing all of you the best,
HE
Posted by Horace English on Sep 12, 2004 at 6:58 PM There’s that word again.Treason,from uncle mikey this time. Treason is a word not to be thrown around lightly,mikey.This is a word that means,to me,that a person wants to destroy there country and is against their country.I will speak for myself here.I do not want my country destroyed and I am not agaist my country.I am for building my country up and making it something to be respected and something to be emulated.I think that we can help to build democracies around the world alot better by example rather than by force.When a leader shows a total disregard for what his/her people want than perhaps that word"treason” should be applied to that leader.Do a little research mikey and find out what our economy is like and why.Check into our environment and see that the emphasis is on making money from it and not protecting and preserving it.Then translate the health of our environment into the health of our citizens and see that we are not a healthy race of people.We have the best health care in the world,but what good does it do when only the wealthy can afford to use it.Wealthy people from all over the world come here to be cared for,but an ordinary citizen of this country has to mortgage their house and their children have to forego college to have the same care.Yeah,and what about college?Who can afford to go to college on their own hook now a days?Only the well to do.The rest of us have to put ourselves in hock for ten or fifthteen years to get and education and that isn’t for an Ivy league education either.I think that you had better take back the treason word and apply it to government leaders(democrat and republican)who show a total disregard for the welfare of it’s people. Ed P.
P.S.Thank you joanne for the links to the electoral votes site.
Posted by Ed Pleskovitch on Sep 12, 2004 at 7:29 PM Well, Horace I’m sorry you fee that this has been so one-sided and that the negativity is predominantly on the liberal side of the debate. But I suppose I could go to a thread started off with a conservative polemic and mirror your comments. That’s pretty much the crux of the problem with polarization. I’m sorry you feel I’ve taken a superior tone in my posts. Can we both acknowledge that when one feels strongly about one’s beliefs and has taken the trouble to expend the time and perform the research necessary to formulate an informed opinion, that it is easy to ‘sound’ superior?
I hope you’ll read the two links I posted earlier as you may find that we share much in common. I could object, strenuously as a matter of fact, to your characterization of me as somehow less American than you, or that I should be ashamed of myself in some way. But why bother? This is exactly the sort of attitude that poisons the well. Authoritarian? Hmmm. As in judging the character of another based on your personal understanding of the ‘basis of our country?’
As to constitutional ethics, I have resisted the imposition of restrictions on my civil rights for my entire adult life. I see those rights threatened at this time.
As to my ‘admission’ of having a filter - I was actually asking for all participants to acknowledge that they have them, and offered an honest assessment of my own, which may have struck you as self-serving or disingenous. As far as attempting to destabilize an ‘opponent’ in a discussion, you are correct in a sense, though why you should find this suspect, I do not know. Naturally, if we disagree, I would wish to cause you to reveal as much of your underlying assumptions and principles as possibe. Anything less would allow you to be disingenous and offer persuasive, but flawed, arguments without challenge. That’s not what I show up for.
As to your final statement on the two candidates, return to my comments on framing the debate and add this: just becuz you say it over and over and over, don’t make it so.
Best to you as well,
JR
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 12, 2004 at 7:32 PM Thank you Garrison Keillor for rekindling the idealistic fervor that were instilled in me upon my arrival to America as an Irish immigrant at the age of 12. Sadly, the divisiveness and fascism of the corporate/military/political right wing in America left my wife and I no choice but to return to Europe (Ireland) to raise our children. We met as immigrants in America - she is from Finland. I don’t think we can ever return. Among one of many seemingly irreconcilable differences is the North/South issue. As one of the comments so cynically points out:
“So you were foolish enough to swallow the Stinkbait and now the poison’s numbing your extremities?
Die.”
And we taught to believe that it was “One Nation under God” until we realized that there was more than one God.
The Civil War has never been resolved to the satisfaction of many Southerners. This was a recurring experience of mine during my years in the US Navy and afterwards. It is a poison that pits American against each other to this day, and I often think that the country would have been better off dividing into two along the Mason Dixon Line.
Until America returns to a more just and democratic form of government - campaign contribution reform, lobbying reform, national health care, monitored elections, abolition of the Electoral College, gun control, an increase in the number of years of mandatory public education - the list goes on - there is little hope of a better America.
Posted by Kiernan Burke on Sep 12, 2004 at 7:39 PM Why can’t we debate the issues without all this name calling? Why must the disagreement be so hateful? I suspect Mr. Keillor doesn’t know any Repulicans personally. I’m a Republican but do not fit into any of Mr. Keillor’s pigeon holes. I am not a racist, I love all people. I give at least 10 percent of my income to charities, mostly those supporting the poor all over the world. I never cheat on my taxes, do not have a hairy back, and have never thought the lunar landing was a hoax! So much for painting with such broad strokes. Let’s discuss the issues with less hatred, please.
Posted by Don on Sep 12, 2004 at 10:44 PM Garrison has always been a funny guy, but he is a phony. His sponsors include Lands End, the clothing company, with sweat shops in Latin America. No problem for Garrison, as long as he gets paid. Same with Powell’s Books in Portland. Doesn’t bother Garrison that the workers there have been fighting management for better pay. He would take Enron for a sponsor if they had any money left.
I’ve been a democrat since 1968, but I’m sick of phonies taking over this party. Kerry is sickeningly unlikable, an elitist who will go down in flames this fall. Why couldn’t we have nominated someone else? The Christmas in Cambodia remarks prove that our nominee is a pathological liar. What were we thinking?
I read in the New York Times that Kerry’s estate in Idaho is draining a trout stream dry to keep his lawn green. What a self-absorbed phony he is, and the country senses it. We don’t have a prayer in November. Should have stuck with Lieberman. At least he has integrity.
Posted by Goyito on Sep 12, 2004 at 10:53 PM To Don:
I think Garrison probably knows a number of Republicans and there are many whom he no doubt respects very much. As a former Republican myself, I think Garrison’s piece says that there are many respectable people who are also good Republicans who may feel that their Party has been highjacked by a particular strain of rabid right-wingers whose behavior, beliefs and bamboozling bombast don’t resemble anything that many lifelong moderate Republicans would recognize as their own.
For comments from two other people on this thread who have also voted Republican in the past, I would refer you to the comments of Bernie Ellis (page 3 of this blog) and Southern Republican (page 26 of this blog). Those posters are only two of many current and former Republicans who have expressed their frustration and disgust with the far-right direction that Bush and his handlers have taken the Republican Party lately. If their sentiments are similar to your own, you might also consider voting for John Kerry this fall (or at least anyone but Bush) so that the Republican Party can move back toward the sensible center.
Posted by Tenase Hillbilly on Sep 12, 2004 at 10:59 PM To Goyito:
Welcome to the non-Twilight Zone. On this blog, posters usually provide links to any “news” they want to share with the rest of the readers, so that others can confirm that the stories are made of at least some cloth. (We accept red or blue cloth equally—it just can’t be woven entirely from smoke and mirrors.) Since your “John Kerry draining the Idaho trout stream dry” story sounded a tad outrageous, I just went online to the New York Times archives and searched for articles with the words “John+Kerry+Idaho+trout+stream” in them. Guess what. No such article has appeared in the NYT for the past eight years.
So either you’re posting from a parallel universe OR you’re yet another in a long (and discredited) group of non-Democrats posing as someone/something they’re not on this blog OR you’re both (and maybe even more). Consequently, if you want your credibility back, how about sharing with us the link to your NYT story, s’il vous plait? Or speaking your own real mind, ok?
Posted by Tenase Hillbilly on Sep 12, 2004 at 11:27 PM Here’s your story about the Kerry’s and their water problems:
“Teresa Heinz, wife of Democratic frontrunner John Kerry, is one of the country’s most generous and high-profile environmental philanthropists. She’s given hundreds of millions of dollars to green activist groups, research centers, and nongovernmental organizations.
But even eight-figure checks can’t guarantee that a landowner won’t have environmental fights in her own backyard. Literally, in the case of Heinz.Back in 1999, the lawn of Kentucky bluegrass surrounding Heinz’s ski lodge in Sun Valley, Idaho was drying out as the region suffered a “fairly severe” drought by Department of Agriculture standards. (The Heinz lodge itself is built from a 15th-century barn that she and her late husband imported from England beam-by-beam.) The size of Heinz’s lawn is disputed — the Boston Herald reported it as five acres, while former Blaine County Commissioner Len Harlig recalls it as being between a half-acre and an acre at that time.
Initially, Heinz’s landscapers dug a well, apparently without the required permit. But the well’s water use may have remained within limits, because property owners are entitled to drill a well for domestic use and up to half acre of landscaping, according to Harlig.
But soon it was clear that maintaining Heinz’s property would need more water. So she and her neighbor, Las Vegas casino mogul Steve Wynn, applied for a permit to build a pipeline and take water from the Big Wood River, which is adjacent to her property, up the hill to water her lawn and maintain her landscaped greenery. But the county had just passed a new policy and ordinance preventing that type of transfer.
And with that, Heinz stepped into one of the most passionate and divisive issues facing western communities: water rights.
“The dispute was not unusual,” said Rick Johnson, executive director of Idaho Conservation League. “This is a dry place, and what’s happening in much of state is a conflict between the old agricultural west and the new, the tourist or second home dynamic. We have a phrase out here, ‘whiskey’s for drinking and water’s for fighting over.’”
From: http://www.nationalreview.com/geraghty/geraghty200402050908.asp
Posted by Napple on Sep 12, 2004 at 11:50 PM This was in the St. Pete Times this morning. Well said, the Republicans make me so angry I always lapse into profanity, but I don’t have your way with words. I am e-mailing this to all the people I know.
Posted by Robert J. Zeman on Sep 13, 2004 at 12:22 AM All Keillor says about W is true. But who else can you US-ers vote for? Bush DID unseat Saddam and Taliban. The only good thing about Kerry he is A-B-B-B (Any Body But Bush). Kerry will continue the war, support Israel’s wall, create terrorists, maintain the ban on Canadian softwood and cattle and make US the hatedest nation on earth. If I were American (thank goodness I’m not) I’d write in Barack Obamo. I fear W will be re- (what do you mean, re?) elected. He’ll start popular wars against Iran and Syria, he’ll spend all that health, ed and welfare money on weapons, he’ll ruin our environment, he’ll hold illegally those 600 in Guantánamo, he’ll deprive you of civil liberties, he’ll pass antiabort amendment, he’ll recloset gays, and bankrupt US. Bush’s firm determined unwavering hand is on the tiller of a fast steamer on the upper Niagara heading for Lake Ontario. Most Canadians are strongly pro US. That’s why we feel so bad now.
Posted by Eugene Lehman on Sep 13, 2004 at 12:29 AM To Napple:
Thanks for the link to the National Review article (which is decidedly not the New York Times). I’m surprised a democrat(sic) like Goyito would confuse the NYT and the National Review. And, as usual, your providing the link helps us all to be able to read “the rest of the story”. Because the rest of this story tells us that no water was ever pumped out of the river for use in watering the Kerry’s lawn.
As a long-time reader of this blog, Napple, I appreciate your playing by the rules (unwritten as they are so far). By allowing all of us to read the full story (as well as to assess the objectivity of the source), we can put Goyito’s original statement to rest. ‘ppreciate it.
Posted by Tenase Hillbilly on Sep 13, 2004 at 12:46 AM Napple,
That’s a pretty amusing article. You have to read the whole thing to get the whole story.“Ultimately, the county rejected Heinz and Wynn’s water use request, and while Heinz had the option to appeal, she didn’t. Today the property uses water from Ketchum.
“[Commissioner] Harlig calls the incident an overblown tempest in a teacup, and his praise for Heinz is effusive. “Her environmental record has been outstanding, and I’ve never had a bone to pick with her,” he said, having earlier told the Associated Press, “I don’t think anyone walks on water, but she’s as close as it gets.” While there’s no reason to doubt Harlig’s account of the water controversy, it is worth noting he attended a campaign reception for John Kerry thrown by Democratic senatorial candidate Alan Blinken in 2002. (“I was there, and go to all of those events for both Democrats and Republicans,” he said. “As a public official, it’s almost required of you.”)
and
“Was there a concern that a wealthy, prominent resident could get special treatment? You bet,” Johnson said. “But there’s also a culture of keeping a grip on that here. Let me put it this way, there is not a shortage of big houses in Sun Valley. They come here, and they build them — and I’m not pegging Heinz alone with this — and they make assumptions about what they can do. In some ways, it’s how America works. That’s where people like me come in.”
In the end, the permit was denied, because the authorities didn’t want to encourage that use, in spite of their feeling that it wasn’t particularly extravagent.
I can’t see why this should be an issue. It’s just a typical dispute that landowners get into and it was resolved equitably. The process (involving the local authorities and the local citizens) worked.
Would you irrigate a large lawn in that area? I wouldn’t, it’s the most wasteful use of water there is - it goes straight into the sky, unlike, say, a toilet, where it goes back into the water table.
If you’re looking for further amusement, take a look at Barbra Streisand suing someone for taking a picture of her house from a helicopter:
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0521041babs1.html
Posted by MN_native-MA_voter on Sep 13, 2004 at 12:49 AM Here I is Joanne.
To try to answer somewhat Chris’s questions:
First of all I have never tried drugs. Sorry about that. I was what is know as a juicer, i.e. I drank alcohol. Secondly I probably will never try drugs. Again Sin Loi. Next unless you want me to call you names I would ask that you cease trying to compartmentalize me or anyone else with inflammatory words. Next off with the diagnosis of Crohn’s disease in 1974 and subsequent surgery in 1978 I lost that ability to use alcohol to escape from reality.
Which brings us now to the Constitution: I believe it starts out with “We the people”...... That phrase denotes a connection between all the parties however diverse they might have been and a willingness to give up differences in order to unite for the common good. According to most scholars the second article deals with the militia or what has become in today’s language our standing military. The militia at the time of the founding of our country was made up of volunteers who came and went pretty much as they felt like it. They stayed to fight when it was what they wanted and left to go home to tend their farms when it no longer siuted them. The muskets they brought with them to the battles were their own private weaponery. As they left they took their muskets with them. Again as the weaponery has changed and we perfect better and more awesome ways to kill each other the need for us to take our muskets home with us is no longer a valid point. No one I know has a need for an assault weapon within the private citizenship of this counrty.
We kill over 11,000 people every year with handguns alone in America, the next closest country, less than 10. It would appear we pay a very high price for our interpretation of the wording of the second article.
Personally after returning from my year in Viet Nam, I sold all my weapons and quit hunting. I do eat game others have harvested but I choose not to hunt myself. If you enjoy hunting and owning and shooting weapons I have no problem with that whatsoever. If you feel you need to have an automatic rifle shooting full metal jacket rounds used by the military as an anti personnel weapon, then I have reservations as to why a weapon designed to be used against people should be granted usage to you a private individual.
Posted by Lyle Shargent on Sep 13, 2004 at 1:36 AM I emailed Mr Keillor’s ‘We’re Not in Lake Wobegon Anymore’ to my GOP (died in the wool, types)friends. They won’t like it and will probably sent me their vitriolic remarks. Though I told them to write to you. Heh, heh… You are SO right about the GOP!! It is NOT the party I grew up with, nor the party of my parents or grandparents! It’s no wonder I changed my affiliation. Mr. Keillor, keep up the good work. We need your voice ‘crying in the wilderness’!! Speaking the truth to those who will listen.
Posted by Angel on Sep 13, 2004 at 1:38 AM Joanne Roush,
From the FPIF site:
“Kerry and Edwards, like Bush and Cheney, lied about Iraq having weapons of mass destruction in order to convince the American public to support the U.S. takeover of that oil-rich country.Kerry and Edwards, like Bush and Cheney, insist on maintaining the U.S. occupation in the face of a growing and increasingly radical armed opposition.”
and
“Kerry’s choice for his running mate contrasts dramatically with that of independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader, who chose Peter Camejo, a forceful and articulate advocate of human rights and international law widely respected among peace and justice activists.”
In addition, despite their strong objection to the Iraq war, they published the following article:
“The Iraq Jobs Crisis: Workers Seek Their Own Voice”
“Given the missteps and corruption rampant in U.S. reconstruction projects, all reconstruction funding should be directed to a UN-supervised public works program that will put people to work immediately. Reconstruction should emphasize the employment of Iraqi managers and workers to build institutional capacity and promote employment.”
Well, that’s enough for me. The same UN that still hasn’t investigated the graft under the Oil for Food program. Right.
Delete bookmark.
Posted by MN_native-MA_voter on Sep 13, 2004 at 1:50 AM Thanks to MN for reviewing the Kerry/Idaho river story and coming to the same conclusion that I did. And thanks again to Napple for providing the link to allow both of us to do that. Nothing like the whole story to set things straight—would that it were so simple for the other contentious issues (like what constitutes effective leadership) that we’re wrestling with together on this thread.
And since I’ve been a very close reader of this thread, I did want to point out that Joanne made a small mistake earlier today when she said that no one on the right spoke out against Scott’s misappropriation of Bernie’s name and the criminally sexist shenanigans he tried to get away with thereafter. After Scott’s naughty behavior was uncovered by inthesetimes.com, MN rightly labelled Scott as the “cat turd in the moonlight” who was once among us. (Does anyone miss Scott? I sure as hell don’t).
Speaking for myself, MN, I think you are one of those thoughtful, grounded and decent Republicans that Garrison’s piece is pining for. Good luck recapturing your party, for all of our sakes. From here, it sure looks like an uphill battle.
Posted by Tenase Hillbilly on Sep 13, 2004 at 2:09 AM You Democrats are all nuts. I’m tired of the government taxing my butt off & wasting it on some social program that doesn’t work,or using it to line their pockets,or some pork barrel project. Get rid of the whole damn bunch…an honest politician is about as real as the Tooth Fairy.
Posted by charlie on Sep 13, 2004 at 2:22 AM I see how we go from a statement that Kerry’s wife has drained a stream to keep her lawn green, to the actual article that merely states she and a neighbor have applied for a permit to use some of the water from the stream for private purposes. I too feel if she has applied for a permit in a very dry area that this may be insensitive but it is also not an act of having already ceen committed but one of sedking permission to. I feel it is a big difference and until she begins to illegally drain the stream then I have to give her the benifit of the doubt.
If someone doesn’t like a particular candidate it is very much ok to say so and state why. No one here has a problem with that, To make up stories to give a reason why you don’t like someone is very unethical. You do not like them or their family, ok no problem, I understand and respect that. Anyone here on this thread have a problem with someone not likeing whomever we support? Bush or Kerry?
Posted by Lyle Shargent on Sep 13, 2004 at 2:36 AM I did fail to say thank you to napple for providing the link to this 1999 article. It sure cleared up any questions I had and I like that. Hard evidence is hard to come by these days. A lesson here for all of us to provide backing for what we say here. Thank you for the lesson and the help.
Posted by Lyle Shargent on Sep 13, 2004 at 2:41 AM Don, You have a point about broad brushstrokes… and thank you for your input.
Goyito, Just because Garrison takes Lands End’s money, it doesn;t make him a hypocrite! You try finding a piece of clothing in our marketplace that is made here…and can be easily afforded by Joe middleclass…not gonna happen…Why?...because (and I believe this is the main reason our two-breadwinners-per household-country is going to have hell to pay) corporations got so damn greedy with finding cheap overseas labor, so they could VASTLY increase their bottom line, thereby handing obcene profits to the top dogs, and shrinking the US industrial workforce in the process…to the point where al we will have in a short time is either Walmart or Needless..I mean Neiman Marcus and Saks. nothing in between.
I am a small business man doing my own designs in a tourist market where I have had to compete with cheap imports for 7 years…this year I got smart. I tried to get a deck of lighthouse playing cards printed in the US…no dice… Bicycle Cards wanted an order of no less than 10, 000 decks! I resorted to India. Got a great job done and could afford it. They are selling like hotcakes in my region and so help me if I get to where I can afford a 10,000 deck order?...I’ll do my best with “Bicycle”, but are you going to pay $10.00 retail for my deck, whereas before they were $6? I don’t think so….
On a better note…I just had a lighthouse/landmark jigsaw puzzle done…Printing was done in my town….and I was able to afford to have them done in Buffalo, NY!...and they retail at a competitive price. I’ll do my damndest to keep work here, but the greed of the 80’s and beyond, plus outsourcing is making that scenario less and less of a reality. We’re in a catch 22 now…and i don’t see a way out of what we have wrought.
Posted by Gary Lundstrom on Sep 13, 2004 at 2:48 AM Thank you MN for also providing an update for even more clarification.
When I wrote earlier about “WE THE PEOPLE”..... to me it showed a connection between all the peoples in this new land and to connect that is the only way possible by becoming we, not I or you or they or them but we. People untied for a common purpose Respecting our differences, valuing those differences but uniting in a common mission together. That is what makes this a GREAT COUNTRY. The tolerance for our individual differences.
In the book “Rise of the Vulcans” the author James Mann chronicles the movement within the Democratic Party around the time of the Carter Presidency of a group who were neo-cons. Their particular viewing of Carter as being too liberal for them was the cause of their leaving the Democratic Party and becoming Regan Democrats. Unfortunately most continued to drift further to the right and have become to many, the Rad Cons. Meaning radical conservatives. Mann takes no sides in presenting what he sees. He offers no conclusions and only states facts. I highly recommend the book for everyone’s enjoyment. Not required reading but one I found very helpful in understanding the movement.
Posted by Lyle Shargent on Sep 13, 2004 at 2:54 AM Gary great points. I am down here in furniture land and textiles, ooops they are almost all gone now, and it is interesting to note that China is now sqwaking because of the shift of these industies to Viet Nam where the people will work for less than the Chinese do. Didn’t take long for these American companies to once again move to increase their bottome lines.
Scary to note that the Chinese will have more vehicles than we do by 2030 and right now they are our closest rival for petroleum. THe Chinese use every bit of increase in production the world is able to come up with right now to fuel their industralization.
One question I would have would be. To the companies doing manufactoring business in the Asian nations, why do we not see a reduction in pricing we should see relative to the reduced costs to manufactor and deliver these goods to the consumer? Another loss for us the people is the taxes paid to another country is tax deductible here so in essence we are subsidizing these companies higher profits by exempting them from paying taxes here.
Posted by Lyle Shargent on Sep 13, 2004 at 3:17 AM Let me repeat, I read in the New York Times that the Kerry estate was draining a trout stream. Yes, it was on the editorial page, it appeared about three months ago, perhaps a bit longer, and I know it was a Saturday, because that day and Sunday are the only times I look at that paper, drawn by its challenging crossword puzzle.
I will reluctantly go down to our local library and find the exact editorial for you, loath as I am to walk into a place that is inhabited by reeking, piss-drenched street people who will keep voting to increase our taxes until they get a healthy 70% of everything we earn. Some are talking of free housing for everyone. I can’t wait to pay for that.
In any case, I don’t want to be accused of making things up (see the rants of others above) so I will get you the source. Give me a couple of days. Need to put in 15 hours tomorrow, starting at 6:00 a.m., so that death row inmates may receive organ transplants and government mail sorters may continue to get their 80 thousand a year. Have a wonderful evening.
Posted by Goyito on Sep 13, 2004 at 3:19 AM Goyito,
Speaking for myself, you needn’t bother to do anything else on my account, as Napple has already provided a link for all of us (which you can also access) to the non-story you presented (about a 1999 non-draining of the Idaho river by the non-pipeline that Theresa Kerry non-built) that the National Review wrote about (in a very balanced way) in February, 2004.
As overworked as you are, I can see how you could confuse National Review with the New York Times (well ... not really). And I wouldn’t want you to have to associate with people less fortunate (or fortitudinous) than yourself at the public library. Heavens, you might have a change of heart (and political persuasion), start capitalizing the “D” in democrat and actually remember what you read and where you read it. Now that would really be a burden.
So thanks for giving those of us who have come to understand and appreciate the power of this blog a clear example of the possibility of polite communication and consensual conclusions across the political chasm that divides this country. Napple’s important contribution—though perhaps not intended—was to allow MN, Lyle and me to look at the same information from the same original source and draw the same conclusions from it. (You might try that in the future if/when you have other “non-news” items to share.)
That says to me that if we can ever return to playing by the same rules in this country again, put our cards honestly on the table and respect that—despite our differences—we are all Americans, we would be well on the way to mending the rifts in the country now. Thanks for giving us the opportunity to model that possibility.
Now get some rest, Goyito—the welfare state needs your sweat and money again tomorrow. Organ transplants for prisoners and free housing for all the rest of us won’t wait for any man, even a democrat (sic).
Posted by Tenase Hillbilly on Sep 13, 2004 at 3:41 AM MN - I’m glad you enjoyed my second link pointing out the shared Bush/Kerry posture toward Iraq. The second article you quote from is not one I’ve read - can you provide the link?
I was under the impression that Paul Volcker, former head of the Federal Reserve, was conducting a massive investigation of the Oil for Food Program irregularities. My understanding is that this may take up to a year due to the compexity of the transactions and the difficulty of obtaining information from private sector companies involved in the allegedly fraudulent transactions.
It is my further understanding that the OFP was under the direct control of the 5 most powerful members of the UN Security Council. This included, of course, the US represented by John Negroponte. He is now the US ambassador to Iraq, in control of the largest embassy in the world (or soon to be). He is a Bush appointee. Do you smell something funny in here?
Now, you asked me to present you with a plan that I think could be effective in combatting terrorism. I worked hard to find one that I believe is workable, and I sent it to you in the first link. You have not commented on that. Are we off that subject now and on to more important issues like Barbara Striesand watering her lawn or whatever the hell it is? I like a good bit of gossip as much as the next Republican, but I thought we were conversing about national security. My bad. Shouldn’t have taken an afternoon off and missed all the fun.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 13, 2004 at 3:51 AM May I inquire as to who was the largest purchaser of petroleum under the Oil for Food Program?
Posted by Lyle Shargent on Sep 13, 2004 at 3:55 AM Georgie Anne Geyer | ‘I Thought We Were Different’
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/091304F.shtmlSweig and Kornbluh | Amid Cheers, Terrorists Have Landed in the U.S.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/091304L.shtml
Posted by Lyle Shargent on Sep 13, 2004 at 4:05 AM Hi there Gary Lundstrum, I don’t claim to be a big businessman,but I have enough years and I have paid attention as I have worked in the business world. That aside,I think that if we put our money and effort into alternative energys that that would cut cost for all kinds of businesses.All businesses and most all occupations use energy in one form or another.In the process of developing and using energy other than oil,we strengthen our economy,build jobs,and don’t have to “fuel” the oil economys of radical countrys that we don’t want to deal with because of their politics.It’s a win win solution,especially for the environment and for all economys of the world,even the third world.God knows that the third world countrys could use a break.They would not have to polute their own lands and could put more of their monies into health care,agriculture,etc.,etc..Not to mention putting up with terrorist for protection and or just for financial gain.
I know that some one out there is going to say that that is a pie in the sky ideal.No,it is not.The solar industry and the wind industry is up and going and viable and functional right now.The hydrogen for fuel and electricity industry is not on line yet.Mostly this is because we don’t have the infrastructure in place,ie.storage,transportation,and distribution points.All of this is do able just like when we first got on the oil teat.The oil companies are already investing in solar mirror sites in the southwest right now.Sorry about the lack of references,but that is not my schtick.So sue me.The information is there.Look it up.
The point is that it is possible to regain control of our economy and our country through the very same methods that made us a great economic power;hard work,ambition,inventiveness,and intellegence.Ed P.
Posted by Ed Pleskovitch on Sep 13, 2004 at 4:29 AM Joanne,
The link to the article “The Iraq Jobs Crisis: Workers Seek Their Own Voice” is
http://www.fpif.org/commentary/2004/0409iraqlabor.htmlRegarding your first link on that site to “A Secure America in a Secure World”, it turned me off at first because of the unnecessary invective regarding the Bush administration’s failures. However, if I skip past all that stuff to their actual recommendations, I find they are very reasonable. The exception is that they don’t view the Iraq war the same way I do: it’s not about specific terrorists, it’s about a rogue state that has destabilized the area historically, and if it was allowed to go nuclear it would have been an unmitigated disaster.
OTOH, the recommendations are about what I’d expect to see in a Kerry/Edwards plan. Not bad at all. I’d like to see Bush pick most of them up.
===
The link you posted earlier about the Bush/Saudi connection started out well and seemed reasonably accurate and useful until about three quarters of the way through, when it suddenly descended into unattributed ‘facts’, urban legend, and invective. The tip-off was in the ‘update’ at the end:
“Documentation that Bush Junior and James Bath both served together in the National Guard at Ellington Air Force Base and were suspended for failure “to accomplish annual medical inspection”
What’s that doing there? Could there be an agenda here?
From what I know, there isn’t much connection between Osama and the rest of the bin Ladens, except that the latter won’t turn him in because of blood ties.
Well, as far as a Bush/Saudi connection goes: I surely would expect that one could weave a web of connections between the TX oil patch and Saudi Arabia. After all, the sheiks don’t do anything themselves, they hire American companies to exploit the oil. And it’s not unreasonable for them to invest back into TX or even to cut a couple of sweetheart deals. Not really illegal, just ‘doin bidness’. You know how those big corporations work together.
Do I think this compromises GWB? No. He’s less compromised than most anyone in Washington. I believe he’s an honest man.
I think he got into the White House, fat, dumb :-), and happy, and eight months later the sky falls in. We’ve all had a lot of catching up to do. We now realize that the roots of Wahabianism go back over a century and when the Arabs struck it rich this inconsequential desert sect suddenly realized power beyond its dreams. They used some of the wealth to establish Madrassas all over the world and raised two generations of haters.
We were asleep for 40 years, at least. To load it all on the GWB voodoo doll is disingenuous.
We (the world) have to shut down all those Madrassas and then wait 30 years for all that testosterone to fade. It isn’t going to quick and easy.
Posted by MN_native-MA_voter on Sep 13, 2004 at 5:02 AM Geoff,
I haven’t forgotten about your dilemma. Although Joanne Roush has labelled me a pessimist, I’m really not. I do see great challenges ahead, but I believe the democracies will pull through.
One of the things we have on our side is the incredible fragmentation of the Islamic religion. They can’t agree on anything. Of course, the bad news is that’s also why there isn’t anybody to negotiate with.
“On clerics, fatwas and terrorism “
http://healingiraq.blogspot.com/archives/2004_09_01_healingiraq_archive.html#109 9474369097574055Note that on the right sidebar of that link there are links to other Iraqi blogs. Yes, the Iraqis are blogging like crazy. They also have talk radio and it’s extremely popular.
Besides “Healing Iraq”, I recommend “Iraq the Model”. It’s written by, I believe, a couple of doctors. They have started their own political party and will probably become part of the Iraqi government at some point. “Hammorabi” and “The Mesopotamian” are also good.
As terrorist attacks occur in your “truculent” countries they will become less so. It’s already happening:
“[The Russian Defense Minister] added that the United States was best placed to understand Russia’s situation because it had also been the target of major attacks, and he said he had discussed the issue with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld twice this week.
“In this sense it seems easier to find grounds for an understanding with the United States than with some European states,” Ivanov said.”
“Russia Moves Towards US After Terrorist Attacks”
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/002497.php
(click through to the Reuters artice and read the whole thing)
What is important is to have a defined policy towards Islamists (and terrorists in general). The winds may blow around us, but allies will gather if we are a steadfast leader.
Posted by MN_native-MA_voter on Sep 13, 2004 at 5:39 AM Sad but true. I can not follow anyone with a second grade education(equivilant) I think GWB makes the usa the laughing stock of the world. The “leader of the freeworld” what a fucking joke.
It seems like the majority are fooled by the sound-bites there sold on traditional media.
Posted by Jason on Sep 13, 2004 at 8:45 AM Most of what you write about Bush, Garrison Keillor, is correct but you did not mention the cause of W’s popularity: He DID unseat Taliban and captured Saddam. He used terror to do this but from a Fundy Christian viewpoint, that is OK. God is on your side. Bible believers cite Deuteronomy Chapter 20, verses 10-20, where Yahweh actually orders genocide of the Canaanites. They deserve it because they don’t worship the true Deity. W’s strong firm hands are decisively and unwaveringly guiding a fast ship on the Upper Niagara heading toward Lake Ontario. He will be re (what do you mean, re?) elected; he will wage popular successful wars against Iran and Syria. He’ll avoid N Korea because they actually HAVE nuclear weapons. He will cut taxes. He will reduce spending on education, health and welfare, but still have a bigger defitict. He will cause the death of US servicemen mounting to 5 digits. And US will go belly up. We Canadians love US. We don’t want to see this. That is why we are so sad. Kerry’s only strong point is A-B-B-B (Any Body But Bush). But who can you vote FOR? Kerry will continue the war, support Israel’s frightful wall, encourage Putin to deny independence to Chechnya, maintain the ban on Canadian softwoods and cattle,... Nothing will improve. If I were American (thank goodness I’m not) I’d write in Barack Odamo.
Posted by Eugene Lehman on Sep 13, 2004 at 10:59 AM Eugene….I’m afraid that you’re right. My “Fundy” Aunt yesterday remarked that she believed the second coming is near…I bit my tongue to keep from saying, “Yes, and Bush is the anti-Christ”.
Posted by Gary Lundsrom on Sep 13, 2004 at 12:31 PM MN – Where to begin? I’ll take your points in order.
First, can we agree to ignore the very mutual invective being hurled at the candidates from/by both sides of the issue? I try to simply take note of it and then move on to content and ask you do same.
Glad you find the recommendations reasonable, and if Kerry’s web site you will indeed see that most of the positive proposals have been incorporated into what the RNC describes as Kerry’s nonexistent Iraq policy. Far from keeping it a secret, every sign and every speech directs voters to the web site for information to fill in the sound bites.
Rather than relying on Bush to actually incorporate such common sense recommendations, which he has already had ample time to do, why not just vote for the candidate who has already adopted these worthy goals?
Regarding the so-called ‘agenda’ in referring to widely available government documentation, which is not denied or contradicted by Bush, regarding his failure to take a physical and his suspension from the Guard – perhaps the agenda is getting the facts in front of voters like you so you can make your own decision. Apparently you have decided to adopt the Limbaugh line and ignore facts, preferring to label them ‘urban legends’ and worse. You have ample company in this, but I would hesitate to label it good company.
Recent investigations have in fact revealed a number of connections to terrorist financing in general and money transfers to bin Laden affiliated organizations by members of the Saudi royal family, most recently through Riggs Bank. You know this and it is completely disingenuous of you to pretend otherwise. If this was simply a discussion of a petty real estate transaction such as Whitewater, I could excuse your attempt to mislead readers of this blog for the sake of a political point. However, as you have so earnestly discussed in your earlier posts, we’re talking about great loss of life here.
You dismiss the well documented connections between the Bush family and the House of Saud as mere coincidence not worthy of investigation. You also dismiss the well documented connections between the Saudi rulers and terrorist financing and support. You decline to make a connection between all the factions of Wahhabism if it means including the Saudi rulers. Isn’t it a bit difficult to maintain this subterfuge in your own worried mind? I take back what I said in a spirit of charity about you being a pessimist – what you are I have no words for in my vocabulary at the moment.
It was a large segment of the American public that was fat, dumb and happy when Bush got into the White House (and thank you for at least not saying ‘elected’). Four years on, I would say that most are arguably still fat, even dumber, but uneasy. For myself, I’m 35 pounds lighter, a lot more informed, and downright alarmed by intelligent thinking individuals like yourself who cherry-pick every piece of information that comes their way, then pose as an informed person intent on swaying the opinions of others with this false construct.
When all else fails, the most powerful individual in the world is presented to us as a blameless victim of circumstances, and his inability to have anticipated in any meaningful way (read Richard Clarke) what was coming at us is excused by judging his capabilities by standards lower than you would apply to the mechanic who works on your brakes.
Then, when your brakes fail and your car is wrecked and innocent people have perished, you return to that mechanic for a new set of brakes on your battered vehicle.
Honestly, at this point, I think there’s way too much testosterone on all sides of the conflict with the Muslim world. One certainly could point to President Codpiece in his flight suit for evidence of that. I don’t think 30 years of war will reduce the levels – what we need is some estrogen to balance this out. Perhaps you should take another look at your candidates, who sneer at the word “sensitive” while using it at their own convenience. Take a look at their plan to address the terrorist threat: a decades long occupation of Iraq, war on Syria and Iran, and continued rape of the American taxpayers to pay for no-bid contracts awarded with increasing frequency and expanding secrecy.
And while you’re at it, I would encourage you and others on this thread to take the time to read the entire link you posted on the Iraqi jobs issues. I notice you were very eager to point out the problems being investigated with the UN Oil for Food program without referring to the numerous investigations of fraud, accounting failures, and misappropriation of funds by the Coalition Provisional Authority, headed by J. Paul Bremer on behalf of the American people, occupiers of Iraq.
I’m sorry to take such a harsh tone with you, MN. And I do appreciate your efforts to make your case on this blog and tie your points to support for another four years for this administration. You evidently hold our current president in high esteem and have some personal affection for him. Under normal circumstances, that would probably be sufficient reason for people to vote for him. But you yourself have made the case that we are at a crossroads. As comforting as it is to surf the right wing web sites, please – and yes I am begging you – get out of there and find some balance before you make your final decision. Your facts and conclusions don’t agree with reality, only a vision of a dark reality that will come to be if we don’t change course soon.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 13, 2004 at 1:24 PM To all the posters,
You need to get the momentum going.
Have you seen Fahrenheit 9/11?
If not go and see it.I felt sad, disgusted and horrified seeing that moron Bush. All he has to do is open his mouth and the bullshit bingo comes spewing out.
I wanted to cry, I wanted to shout obscenities at the screen, I wanted to get out of the cinema at least 5 times while the film was showing.
Even if you are republican, go and see the film. Put your pride in your pocket and do yourself that favour.
Posted by Watson on Sep 13, 2004 at 1:37 PM RE: Amendment II
Lyle, Your take on the 2nd Am. contains a fundamental misconception, i.e. that the 2nd Am. only provided for a militia. On the contrary, the principal thrust of the 2nd Am. was to enable citizens to protect themselves against standing armies as a means to secure their fundamental rights against an oppressive government.
See: http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/tocs/amendII.html for links to historic documents on the nature of the right to keep and bear arms.1.Statute of Northampton 2 Edw. 3, c. 3 (1328)
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendIIs1.html2.Sir John Knight’s Case
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendIIs2.html3.Bill of Rights, sec. 7, 2, 16 Dec. 1689
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendIIs3.html4.William Blackstone, Commentaries 1:139, 1765
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendIIs4.html5.Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776, Declaration of Rights, art. 13
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendIIs5.html6.House of Representatives, Amendments to the Constitution, 17, 20 Aug. 1789
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendIIs6.html7.St. George Tucker, Blackstone’s Commentaries 1:App. 300, 1803
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendIIs7.html8.Bliss v. Commonwealth
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendIIs8.html9.William Rawle, A View of the Constitution of the United States 125—26 1829 (2d ed.)
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendIIs9.html10.Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution 3:§§ 1890—91, 1833
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendIIs10.html11.State v. Mitchell
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendIIs11.html
SEE ALSO:
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendIIs12.html
Posted by Brooks on Sep 13, 2004 at 1:46 PM Time for a Popgun flyby. That sound you hear is your blood pressure rising:
Wow, still all that emotionalism from the Left. Keillor really shook the Leftist bushes (I crack myself up) and look what dropped out. All the malcontents us folks with normal values are willing to die to protect.
Poor Watson’s going to explode from all the—what was it, Phoebe?—invective being hurled from the screen, and every other Leftwing Dimnut post screams for the wristclamps and bright lights until, dammit, we pay attention to what every man, woman, and child needs to see! Let’s MAKE ‘em watch 9/11 and MAKE ‘em hear Keillor until their eyes fall out and their votes change! YEEAAARGH!
You people don’t really don’t want a free democratis republic, you want a one-party, politically-correct gulag.
And about my claim the Left is wrecking the country with hatred of equal rights and hatred of free speech, zealous political correctness, and sheer, mind-numbing irrationality, try this: http://www.musil.blogspot.com/2004_09_05_musil_archive.html#109476216591524324.<
That’s what happens when you crap on American principles.
OK, your move, Phoebe. Kill the messenger with sanctimonious utterances and lofty airs.
Posted by 6Gun on Sep 13, 2004 at 2:21 PM RE: Bush v. Gore
In a recent speech on the occasion of solicitor general Olson’s stepping down from the office, he characterized Bush v. Gore as follows.
AUDIENCE QUESTION: “What was your most memorable argument before the Supreme Court and why?”
THEODORE B. OLSON: “Well, I think the answer to that has to be Bush v. Gore, and I have this opportunity now on television to say [that] although a lot of people characterize the ultimate decision by the Supreme Court as a 5 to 4 decision and as somewhat of an interventionist act by the Supreme Court of the United States, I like to remind people that the Court was reacting to decisions by the Florida Supreme Court that had changed the rules of elections and the counting of ballots in a presidential election, and that the United States Supreme Court vacated the first Florida Supreme Court decision 9 to 0, and that the fundamental constitutional questions raised in the second case were decided, equal protection issues, were decided 7 to 2, and it was only the stay that was a 5 to 4 decision. So I like to remind people that the voting by this Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore cases was, on the fundamental issues, 16 to 2.”
Posted by Brooks on Sep 13, 2004 at 2:29 PM Speaking of invective hurlers, here’s the Left’s latest cheerleader on acid: http://asia.news.yahoo.com/040912/ap/d8529ktg1.html
Posted by 6Gun on Sep 13, 2004 at 2:39 PM Brooks - another typically self-serving commentary served up by a Bush operative to an uninformed audience. Notice that, in true right wing fashion, Olson failed to answer the question as to why this was the most memoroable of his appearances before the SOCUS. True answer: because he won, and in doing so assured himsef a place in the new administration. His last argument before SOCUS, earlier this year, was a total loser on behalf of the administration’s right to suspend habeus corpus and hold prisoners in the new American security gulag, of which GITMO is only one facility, without charge, representation, or recourse, indefinitely. His argument was based on the usual “Trust Us” premise, which probably would have been more effective if the Abu Ghraib photos hadn’t appeared in the media during the court’s deliberations.Olson went out on a losing streak, retiring about the time of the decision. Sadly, he also lost his wife, a strident right wing commentator and frequent guest on Larry King Live, on 9/11. I guess it could be said that he has sacrificed much for his loyalty to the neocon cause.
If anyone reading here is interested in the constitutional issues surrounding the Supreme Court decisions that fulfilled their intention to install an unelected president in the White House, you can read Supreme Injustice by Alan Dershowitz who, unlike Brooks, is a contitutional expert. Brooks is still working his way through the Federalist Papers - or the portion of them that he WISHES were the adopted Contitution of the USA .
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 13, 2004 at 2:42 PM PHOEBE f
Usage: English, Greek Mythology (Latinized), Biblical
Pronounced: FEE-bee
Latin form of the Greek name Phoibe, which meant “bright, pure” from Greek phoibos. Phoibe was an epithet of the Greek moon goddess Artemis. A moon of Saturn bears this name in her honour. This name was also borne by a female minister in the church at Cenchreae mentioned in Paul’s epistle to the Romans in the New Testament.
How sensitive of you to choose such a flattering name for me. I also happen to be, astrologically, a moon child! Life is full of rich irony, is it not, 6Pack? Crawl-by is a better description of your activities.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 13, 2004 at 2:47 PM 16 to 2 Joanne, notwithstanding your sanctimonious utterances and lofty airs.
Kudos to shooter for the adjectives.
Posted by Brooks on Sep 13, 2004 at 2:48 PM Brooks, you really are a fool. Perhaps when I have more time I can do the completely irrelevant math on SOCUS decisions with which you agree. Each decision stands on its own, and such tallying of the justice’s decsions does a disservice to the very institution which has already deeply discredited itself by installing Bush. As usual, you play foollish games with democracy, simply to score cheap points. Shame on you. If you can’t play the game without cheating, you merely discredit your own position and rely on simpletons to back you up. I see you have one or two behind you today.
Apologies to all readers for the many annoying typos in my posts. I’m wearing out the keyboard on my laptop, which indicates to me I’ve been over-posting - a point already made by Bernie. I appreciate your willingness to overlook the occasional misplaced letter or missing word.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 13, 2004 at 2:54 PM 16 to 2 on Bush v. Gore cases Joanne. Read it and weap.
Don’t call me a fool.
Don’t call my points cheap.
Don’t heap shame on me.
Don’t accuse me of cheating.
Don’t discredit me or my friends.
Don’t call my friends simpletons.Put up or shut up.
If all you can bring to the table is ad hominem when the facts go against you, your client is going to jail.
Posted by Brooks on Sep 13, 2004 at 3:02 PM Here’s a quote from 6Pack’s link about invective-hurling:
Pollster Andy Kohut, director of the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, said Gore is “emblematic of happier days” to many Democrats.
But Kohut cautioned that “swing voters tend to be moderate, and if he comes across as too over the top, there’s a risk.” The pollster added, though, “Certainly he’s not any more over-the-top than Dick Cheney.”
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 13, 2004 at 3:19 PM Brooks, your last post would have more credibility if you had ended with a vow to stop calling me names, supporting your friends who call me names, and lacked the veiled threat that has become a pattern in your posts to me. It would also be nice if you would finally step up to the plate and condemn the despicable identity theft and , if it had occurred in a work setting, criminal sexual harrassment of a female posting to this thread. You have failed to do so, despite ample opportunity. You and your cronies are precisely the despicable element that has taken over the GOP that is the subject of Garrison Keillor’s essay.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 13, 2004 at 3:26 PM I just finished reading Garrison Keilor’s spot-on impression of Al Gore and was amused at seeing further evidence of the present liberal meltdown.
Speaking of liberal meltdowns, what do you guys think of Dan Rather and CBS News trying to influence a Presidiential election in John Kerry’s favor with forged documents? Specifically, do you agree that the end justifies the means?
Also, how badly do you think Kerry will lose if it is revealed that the forgeries came from someone in the Kerry camp?
Posted by York on Sep 13, 2004 at 3:44 PM Here’s an interesting and humorous scenario for all to consider. Note to Republicans: How does President Pelosi sound to you? Every cloud for us has a silver lining!
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0409.greenfield.html
The way things are going, this may be the best way for us to get our first woman president. Shiver in your boots, guys. She’s far left of Kerry.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 13, 2004 at 3:46 PM I implore you, for the fourth time, to please unsubscribe me from the thread involving the (splendid) Keillor piece.
I find myself absolutely inundated with unwanted messages and don’t know how else to get out from under than to appeal to you.
Please unsubscribe me, or do whatevr else it takes.
Many thanks.
ErnestNagy@Starpower.net
Posted by Ernie Nagy on Sep 13, 2004 at 3:51 PM York, I would propose to you that CBS and every other media outlet in the nation attempted to influence the election by making sure the discredited claims of the not-so-Swift boaters stayed in the news for, what, a month now? And according to whom are the documents forged? Experts have annihilated the main objection, regarding the superscript ‘th’. What’s left? The same characters appear in documents already released and endorsed by the White House.
How badly do you think Bush will lose if it is revealed that the documents are forgeries planted by Karl Rove?
This is silly. Why don’t you settle down and tell us specifically how you think a new Bush administration will cope with the serious issues facing this country? If possible, match your thoughts with examples that illustrate, based on the public record, of how Bush will address the serious threats to our nation posed by global terrorism, spiralling deficits, falling incomes in the middle class, skyrocketing health care costs and numbers of uninsured, tax inequity, the looting of Social Security by the Republican Congress, the impending energy shortages, international relations in a shambles. When you get done with those, I have a few more pertinent questions about your candidate.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 13, 2004 at 3:56 PM Ernie - there are two ways to unsubscribe. First, when you post your next plea, look below the big white box for the little check box asking if you want to be notified. UNCHECK the box. If that’s too much trouble, on each email notification is a link to unsubscribe. If you can’t follow these guidelines, you’re going to have to use your delete key until this board is taken down by ITT.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 13, 2004 at 4:02 PM For those who prefer math to reading in this grammar school, here are some numbers to crunch”
Bush by Numbers: Four Years of Double Standards
by Graydon Carter
1 Number of Bush administration public statements on National security issued between 20 January 2001 and 10 September 2001 that mentioned al-Qa’ida.104 Number of Bush administration public statements on National security and defense in the same period that mentioned Iraq or Saddam Hussein.
101 Number of Bush administration public statements on National security and defense in the same period that mentioned missile defense
65 Number of Bush administration public statements on National security and defense in the same period that mentioned weapons of mass destruction.
0 Number of times Bush mentioned Osama bin Laden in his three State of the Union addresses.
73 Number of times that Bush mentioned terrorism or terrorists in his three State of the Union addresses.
83 Number of times Bush mentioned Saddam, Iraq, or regime (as in change) in his three State of the Union addresses.
$1m Estimated value of a painting the Bush Presidential Library in College Station, Texas, received from Prince Bandar, Saudi Arabia’s ambassador to the United States and Bush family friend.
0 Number of times Bush mentioned Saudi Arabia in his three State of the Union addresses.
1,700 Percentage increase between 2001 and 2002 of Saudi Arabian spending on public relations in the United States.
79 Percentage of the 11 September hijackers who came from Saudi Arabia.
3 Number of 11 September hijackers whose entry visas came through special US-Saudi “Visa Express” program.
140 Number of Saudis, including members of the Bin Laden family, evacuated from United States almost immediately after 11 September.
14 Number of Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) agents assigned to track down 1,200 known illegal immigrants in the United States from countries where al-Qa’ida is active.
$3m Amount the White House was willing to grant the 9/11 Commission to investigate the 11 September attacks.
$0 Amount approved by George Bush to hire more INS special agents.
$10m Amount Bush cut from the INS’s existing terrorism budget.
$50m Amount granted to the commission that looked into the Columbia space shuttle crash.
$5m Amount a 1996 federal commission was given to study legalized gambling.
7 Number of Arabic linguists fired by the US army between mid-August and mid-October 2002 for being gay.
George Bush: Military man
1972 Year that Bush walked away from his pilot duties in the Texas National Guard, Nearly two years before his six-year obligation was up.
$3,500 Reward a group of veterans offered in 2000 for anyone who could confirm Bush’s Alabama guard service.
600-700 Number of guardsmen who were in Bush’s unit during that period.
0 Number of guardsmen from that period who came forward with information about Bush’s guard service.
0 Number of minutes that President Bush, Vice-President Dick Cheney, the Defense Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, the assistant Defense Secretary, Paul Wolfowitz, the former chairman of the Defense Policy Board, Richard Perle, and the White House Chief of Staff, Karl Rove ú the main proponents of the war in Iraq úserved in combat (combined).
0 Number of principal civilian or Pentagon staff members who planned the war who have immediate family members serving in uniform in Iraq.
8 Number of members of the US Senate and House of Representatives who have a child serving in the military.
10 Number of days that the Pentagon spent investigating a soldier who had called the President “a joke” in a letter to the editor of a Newspaper.
46 Percentage increase in sales between 2001 and 2002 of GI Joe figures (children’s toys).
There’s more here: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0903-04.htm
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 13, 2004 at 4:09 PM -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Garrison Keillor
- A Foul Tragedy
Democrats fled in the face of danger - We’re Not in Lake Wobegon Anymore
How did the Party of Lincoln and Liberty transmogrify into the party of Newt Gingrich’s evil spawn and their Etch-A-Sketch president, a dull and rigid man, whose philosophy is a jumble of badly sutured body parts trying to walk?
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1979 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
462 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
427 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2004 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
