home

Revving Up the Sheehan Venom

By Jeralyn, Section War In Iraq
Posted on Sat Aug 27, 2005 at 08:58:41 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Via Crooks and Liars: Oh those high class Repubs:

One more you are all familiar with, but for me, as the mother of a kid who is in the draft-age range, it's the one that really gets my heartstrings going.

I think military recruiters who target teenagers in high school when our country is in engaged in an unnecessary war are the source of evil. My response to them as a mother is, "Over my dead body." True, I'm blessed to have a kid who realizes that repaying educational loans is preferable to promises of a free education by military recruiters. For kids who don't recognize the distinction, or who don't understand that loans are out there for everyone, ask yourselves, what's the benefit of a promise of a free future education if you're dead?

[second graphic via Buzzflash]

Update: Atrios on Mitch Romney's kids.

Two more:

and

< Frank Rich Shines in 'Echoes of Vietnam' | Too Real? >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Revving Up the Sheehan Venom | 59 comments (59 topical)
    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#1)
    by glanton on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:50 PM EST
    With that sign the GOP base sums itself up so perfectly, so perfectly, I'm glad they're there.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#2)
    by scarshapedstar on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:50 PM EST
    Classy. Tbogg has a hilarious post about the protest-protesters. Apparently the brownshirts from Move America Forward attacked the brownshirts from Protest Warrior. If the best these schmucks can do is stomp on each other's signs, hell, maybe I'll charter a bus for Freepers to come join the fracas. With any luck the whole lot of them will get busted for meth.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#3)
    by cpinva on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:50 PM EST
    don't be too harsh, they're just saying what momma bush is thinking.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#4)
    by scarshapedstar on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:50 PM EST
    Yeah, really. And now we'll have to listen to all this talk about how this is terrible and they respect Cindy Sheehan, just like when Bush made his big applause line at the Convention about how he calls on all Republicans to respect Kerry's patriotism. You know, at the height of the Swiftboat BS. When does the Kabuki show end? When will the wingnuts admit that this is what they've all been wanting to say all along? Because while our politicians may be stupid, we are not. If the wingnuts mean to tell me that this guy doesn't speak for Republicans, well, Dick never did apologize for his cheery "go f*ck yourself", now, did he? So... ask him what I think.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#5)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:50 PM EST
    I'm a uniter, not a divider ~ El Presidente Chimpanzee

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#6)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:50 PM EST
    Widows Accomplished. Pretty 'funny' stuff at enjoy the draft

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#7)
    by Darryl Pearce on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:50 PM EST
    This isn't the first time in history when the original reasons for a confrontation have been obscured by subsequent grudge vengeance and revenge. Bush and his neocon possé has failed at being a "uniter, not a divider."

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#8)
    by Wile ECoyote on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:50 PM EST
    TL: Now we are starting to get to the bottom of it. It really is the soldiers who follow orders who are the problem.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#9)
    by john horse on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:50 PM EST
    Wile, It is the person giving the order that is the problem. No soldier should be asked to fight and die for light and transient reasons.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:50 PM EST
    TL - Glad your son is going to college and has no interest in the military, but I never can quite follow why the L keeps brining up this draft canard. I live in a very mixed neighborhood (all well-to-do, some smart and others Democrat) and I swear to gosh that I could ask that one single question and determine their political leaning by their answer. -C PS - Good to see that you are exposing the stupidity going on in the road in Crawford. Going to give us a good post on Sheehan's amazing views on Jews and freedom fighters soon?

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#12)
    by Wile ECoyote on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:50 PM EST
    John Horse: TL's post: "I think military recruiters who target teenagers in high school when our country is in engaged in an unnecessary war are the source of evil." seems to disagree. Of course there were people here in the states that even disagreed with WWII military service (quakers). Evil existed even then.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#13)
    by jarober on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:50 PM EST
    You say: "I think military recruiters who target teenagers in high school when our country is in engaged in an unnecessary war are the source of evil. My response to them as a mother is, "Over my dead body." " Who died and made you king? Who gets to decide what is and is not an unnecessary war? I'll give you a hint - it's the President and Congress. We had an election over this issue in 2004, and it seems that the majority does not agree with you. Were recruiters evil in the 90's, when soldiers died in Sudan, and were at risk in the Balkans? How about the early 50's, when the Korean war raged? I'd ask about the 60's, but I think I know your answer.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#14)
    by Mreddieb on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:50 PM EST
    James Are you bloging from Iraq? are your (Of age chldren,siblings\ and fellow supporters of this fiasco of a war in Iraq? I would like a simple and direct answer ? Chickenhawk = Coward should shut up or put up!

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#15)
    by glanton on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:50 PM EST
    "We had an election over this issue in 2004" Yeah, right. What we had was a referendum on boys kissing.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#16)
    by jen on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:50 PM EST
    Who died and made you king? Who gets to decide what is and is not an unnecessary war? I'll give you a hint - it's the President and Congress.
    Well, many of us christians might respond: "Jesus" Your position implies we murdered people in Nuremberg, since "I was following orders" becomes not only a legitimate excuse but a duty. You imply that if the president, congress, and 51% of the people say so, the other 49% are not allowed to think differently. This is your America then?

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:50 PM EST
    "True, I'm blessed to have a kid who realizes that repaying educational loans is preferable to promises of a free education by military recruiters. For kids who don't recognize the distinction, or who don't understand that loans are out there for everyone, ask yourselves, what's the benefit of a promise of a free future education if you're dead?" Not to mention, while it may seem that you've got to pay an arm and a leg to send a kid to college these days, it can become the all-too-literal truth if the kid enlists.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#19)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:51 PM EST
    Everyone knows James is king, just ask him. As with most of the hard core apologists, he wants no dissent and will tolerate no question of the the great leader. Let me give you a hint, a war is truly unnecesary when the leaders who took us to war can't explain why we are there, and choosing from a long list of ever changing rationales is not clearly stating a reason, and all the reasons they gave at the beginning were bald faced lies.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#20)
    by John Mann on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:51 PM EST
    Were recruiters evil in the 90's, when soldiers died in Sudan, and were at risk in the Balkans? How about the early 50's, when the Korean war raged? I'd ask about the 60's, but I think I know your answer.
    I don't know whether or not the recruiters were "evil", but the U.S. had no business sticking its nose in any of the locations you mention. People who think the way you do, James, never understand that in none of the conflicts you toss out was the United States in any danger of being attacked. WW11 was a different story; the U.S. was defending itself against an aggressive enemy, but not surprisingly, took the low road by dropping nuclear bombs on a country that was beaten. Since WW11 ended, every war the U.S. has been involved in was a war of American aggression. The U.S. has become that "rogue state" Mr. Bush is so fond of talking about.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#21)
    by jackl2400 on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:51 PM EST
    For kids who don't recognize the distinction, or who don't understand that [college] loans are out there for everyone
    Except those many, many kids (up to a peak 750,000 last year alone) arrested for possessing a small amount of marijuana who are foreclosed from getting loans by the Higher Education Act's ban on college loans for supposed "druggies" pushed by hard-core prohibitionists like fundie zealot Rep. Mark Souder.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#22)
    by Mreddieb on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:51 PM EST
    If a Stranger came into your local High School and lured your barely 18 year old daughter into his car and wisked her off to god knows where through duplicity. We all would be up in arms and issue an immediate "AMBER ALERT". This is how it feels to a parent when an Army/marine recruiter takes their Child from them. I would go out of my mind if they did this to one of my three daughters!

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#23)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:51 PM EST
    Jen – I don’t think Jesus died to make you King, or Queen. Ed Beckman – Wars are fought by young men, and now women. It has been that way forever, as you well know. Your calling people cowards who support the war is, of course, nothing but an attempt to change the subject. We all know that, and it won’t work. Glanton – I must have dreamed all that hoopla over the service records of Kerry and Bush. DA – I could almost read your comment, however it was but a fleeting moment. But I did note some errors in your grammar. Thanks for again showing us why you are trying to hide in deliberately screwed up writing. Et al – I thought you believed protest was good, yet I note a distinct tone of aggravation in your comments. What is the matter? Don’t like competition? BTW – Cliff wouldn’t tell you, but I will. Mrs. Sheehan’s comments were:
    "You get America out of Iraq and Israel out of Palestine and you'll stop the terrorism," Sheehan declares.
    That demonstrates such a complete lack of understanding of the issues involved that it is obvious that the MSM only wants her as a useful tool to beat up on Bush. The Left only wants her because the media wants her. Commonsense teaches us that if we do something that pleases our enemies we have hurt our selves. The Left can cry that they support the troops, but as along as they demonstrate against the war the troops are involved in they are, in fact, doing what the terrorists want. What is next? Spitting and yelling at them as they walk through airports? Some "baby killer" signs? [Ed. note this thread is about venom and Sheehan, not about Israel and Palestine, so don't try changing the topic.]

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#24)
    by glanton on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:51 PM EST
    "Glanton – I must have dreamed all that hoopla over the service records of Kerry and Bush." Oh yeah, for a merciful moment I forgot about John O'Neil. Thanks for bringing me back. You also forgot Janet Jackson's nipple. God what a screwed up nation we're on our way to becoming. So it was a referendum on boys kissing and a well-marketed pack of lies by the SwiftLiars. How did the Dems respond to such framing? Poorly. Incompetently. They had the opportunity to steer things away from redneck rhetoric and failed, too busy airbrushing Kerry and trying to beat up on Bush for doing the same thing every other rich kid did in Vietnam. But whatever you want to say about it, nobody in their right mind would agree with JR's wonderfully stupid post that "issues" had anything to do with the election. Anyway, that sign at the top of JM's thread really says it all about the GOP base to which JR and PPJ faithfully adhere.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#25)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:51 PM EST
    pPJ [name calling deleted] Drudge has published many things that weren't true, how about some real proof. I know why don't you apply the same standards of proof to these comments as you have applied to publications critical of Bush. For you to repeat the old NSM carnard is also truly pathetic since the MSM has been in Bush's corner from the start,people like Miller help bush promote the war, although single negative comment about your leader is considered too much. To continue to make assertions without proof. The insurgency will go on as long as there are enough people to support it.But just go ahead keep up for tranparent and pathetic attempt to get a head start on blaming the left for yet another failure of the right. No comments about the bad planning, bad execution, too few troops, all you can come up with is to try and surpress freedom of speech.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#26)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:51 PM EST
    BTW these drudge comments you cite are the cleaned up ones, not the ones that were making the rounds on the right wing press, TV.radio and blogs. The fact that you reject out of hand the quotes you cited, shows you have no idea of whats going on. Oh I forgot the US should be able to do anything it wants any time it wants, by any means it wants. Is that the right propaganda.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:51 PM EST
    Heck-even the war's cheerleaders won't send their kids: -Gov. Mitt Romney,... The Herald posed the question as Romney - a potential 2008 White House contender and backer of President Bush's Iraq policy -was honored by the Massachusetts National Guard after he signed a bill extending pay for state workers on active duty. ``No, I have not urged my own children to enlist.I don't know the status of my childrens' potentially enlisting in the Guard and Reserve,`` Romney said, his voice tinged with anger. What's he angry about? If he believes in the Iraqi war so much, why does he expect others to support the war with their blood, when he won't even urge his own?

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#28)
    by Andreas on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:51 PM EST
    off-topic, deleted. You and PPJ can't hijack this thread.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#30)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:51 PM EST
    One for the goose-steppers:
    How to wreck your country in 30 lies by The B*stard in the White House
    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#31)
    by MikeDitto on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:51 PM EST
    The counter-protestors and the bile being spewed by the likes of Mike Rosen and Dave Kopel in the Rocky Mountain News, and the sleaze-pundit with long blond hair seem to be exclusively anti-Sheehan, as opposed to pro-anything. Rather than focus on the merits of the war and defending the noble cause, they seem to spend all of their energy spitting vitriol on a grieving mother and her impolitic statements.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#32)
    by Andreas on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:51 PM EST
    OT: Interesting. It seems to be ok to smear Cindy Sheehan as an Anti-Semite in comments but not ok to oppose such comments. [Ed. Name-calling is not allowed on TalkLeft. If you can send me an email with the names of the commenters calling her an anti-semite I will delete them.]

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#33)
    by jen on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:51 PM EST
    Dark Avenger: Thank you, yes that was my meaning. I note he ignored rest of my post with the explanation in simple words and a question.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#34)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:51 PM EST
    This is taking the quote out of context
    Commonsense teaches us that if we do something that pleases our enemies we have hurt our selves. But wasn't the number one demand from back in the 90's consistently through 9/11 that we take our troops out of Saudi Arabia. And wasn't that the first thing we did after we defeated Saddam. Also I would argue that the whole point of 9/11 was to finally get our attention (all the things he did over seas in the 90's didn't seem to work)so that we would come after him on his playground. The only reason I ever thought was valid for going to war (that Saddam still had WMD's with all the attention, inspection and satalite spying just wasn't credible)was to show the rest of the world they couldn't go off the dollar oil wagon without consequences. The second,first thing we did I believe was to take Iraq off the Euro and put it back on the Dollar. At that point we should have declared victory and came home.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#35)
    by Deb on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:51 PM EST
    The guy with the b*tch in the ditch sign has been arrested. [Ed. Thanks, but please put links in html format or they skew the site. We fixed this one. Instructions are in the comment box.]

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#37)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:51 PM EST
    Jim also has a new habit of stirring up WWII and other unrelated TROLL topics, and then LEAVING once people have responded. Sure, he gives to the site, and that's a good thing. But he has become a full-fledged TROLL. He is nonresponsive, will not address actual disputes about his data, posts drivel and distractions from the topic, and has NOTHING to offer other readers in 99% of his posts. That said, I'm glad that Mrs. Sheehan can help expose the real rifts that Bushliar's genocidal policies have created. The Muffled Media keeps on with its Pretense Defense, but the real facts are visible on the street, where over the last two weeks EVERYONE has honked as they drove by, including people who NEVER would have before their gasoline went to $3 on the watch of the Oil Man from Hell, and who needed a widow to show them WHO is at fault. Here's a clue: It ain't Cindy. She's blameless, whatever comes, whatever she says, whatever public breakdown ensues from the Destruction Politiks of the neo-Nazi rightwing.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#38)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:51 PM EST
    [Ed. note this thread is about venom and Sheehan, not about Israel and Palestine, so don't try changing the topic.] I thought Sheehan had made this about Israel and Palestine.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#39)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:51 PM EST
    My apologies for the bad formatting above.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#41)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:51 PM EST
    SD – If you have proof that Mrs. Sheehan did not say what she is quoted as saying, please bring it forward.
    Nice try you made the charge you back it up. Of course Liddy says shes a anti-semite for using the word neocon. The right likes to be the bully and play victim all at the same time.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#42)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:51 PM EST
    PPJ
    Here’s another one, this one from Slate. (Slate, of course, is a well known Right Wing Mouthpiece.) “My son joined the army to protect America, not Israel.”
    This was written by Hitchens who is a well known right wing Bush apologist. So you are 0 for 2.
    MSM provides an amplifier because it makes them feel like they have returned to the days when they could take down a president
    The MSM is pro-Bush and does not report on much negative. You just don't want any negative. Miller hyped the war and the NYT continues to carry the Admin's water. You better come up wih something other than knee jerk responses and cliches.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#45)
    by scarshapedstar on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:52 PM EST
    Jesus, I think Jim really needs to join the 4-post list at the very least. Each post is a mountain of non sequiturs bigger than the last. His brand of kneejerk contrarianism to "et al" really adds very little to the site.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#46)
    by glanton on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:52 PM EST
    From deb's link, we get a classic example of brownshirts in sheep's clothing--though some remained honest, at least: “To all the media here, this sign is not representative of the crowd here today,” Taylor announced. Some of the crowd around Robinson came forward to shake his hand, while others chanted, “Idiot, go home.” Nuff said.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#48)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:52 PM EST
    PPJ-It aint true just caus you utter it over and over like a rolling drunk. We all know that Smirk has told us that protest is unamerikun, where do you get your data, other then that from the WH zoo, that protests endanger our troops.
    What is next? Spitting and yelling at them as they walk through airports? Some "baby killer" signs?
    Nice rhetorical flourish, very visual, and aural too. Have you been having bad dreams, flashbacks, or just a spate of projected self comtempt.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#49)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:52 PM EST
    cliff-Shut-up or back it up. We are still waiting for all those links you 'promised' last week that would back up your horse pucky refrain that Sheehan is an Anti Semite.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#51)
    by Deb on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:52 PM EST
    There was another quote in the article that I posted earlier.
    Some, including those at much larger simultaneous rallies in Crawford supporting the president and the troops, have questioned Sheehan's morals, patriotism and even her religious convictions.
    Maybe it was unintentional, but it makes it seem as if Cindy et al don't support the troops, and that is not the case.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#52)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:52 PM EST
    SD writes:
    “Nice try you made the charge you back it up.”
    I gave you two quotes, backed up with two links. Your turn. I mean you know so very much… BTW – I haven’t said she was anti-Semite, she just makes nutty off the wall comments. Quit trying to change the subject. Glanton writes:
    , as well as to show that "they aint no homos"?
    Outside of yourself I don’t know of anyone who has brought the subject up. Scar writes:
    Jesus, I think Jim really needs to join the 4-post list at the very least.
    Ah yes, the Left’s version of free speech. “You cannot disagree.” DA – Catch a clue. People talk and write in fragments. Is that the best you can do???
    “You had three errors in your first post here, so I'm still ahead on points.”
    And what exactly does that do for you? I mean your self-esteem must really be terrible. BTW – You say whom, I say who. Let’s NOT fall in love. ;-) My program says who is okay. Adept – I make a reasonable statement and you snark it. I always get reminded you can't be nice to some people. Squeaky – Whether I say it once, or a million times, it is true. And your sensitivity to the subject shows that you know it is true. Deb writes:
    Maybe it was unintentional, but it makes it seem as if Cindy et al don't support the troops, and that is not the case.
    Deb, I know you don’t want it to be true, but demonstrating against the war is doing something the terrorist like. It encourages them by increasing their belief that the Left will eventually place enough pressure on the politicians that the US will withdraw. In the meantime, of course, the terrorist continue to kill US troops.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#53)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:52 PM EST
    SD writes: “Nice try you made the charge you back it up.” I gave you two quotes, backed up with two links. Your turn. I mean you know so very much…
    I guess if all you have is documented liars I guess you have nothing. And trying to pass off the salon article as liberal as if no one would check, nice touch. PPJ get new material. no one is buying your crap.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#54)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:52 PM EST
    PPJ- Blowhard: Captain Bobadil, Gascon, Texan, big mouth, blower, blusterer, boaster, brag, braggadocio, braggart, fanfaron, gasbag, gasconader, hector, hot-air artist, miles gloriosus, rodomontade, windbag, windjammer, windy.... Backing up bold statements with facts evidently does not fit your profile. Question:
    Where do you get your data...that shows anti-war protests endanger our troops?
    Answer:
    Whether I say it once, or a million times, it is true
    .

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#55)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:52 PM EST
    Commonsense, Squeak. You should try and use it every now and then. SD - Prove'em wrong, if you can. I mean instead of just flapping your jaws.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#56)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:52 PM EST
    PPJ your rules have always been prove what you say. cant stand up to the pressure of your own rules? You and common sense have been estranged for a long time.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#57)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:52 PM EST
    PPJ-Common sense? Do you mean this:
    The laying a Country desolate with Fire and Sword, declaring War against the natural rights of all Mankind, and extirpating the Defenders thereof from the Face of the Earth, is the Concern of every Man to whom Nature hath given the Power of feeling; of which Class, regardless of Party Censure, is the AUTHOR.
    hmmm. sounds like you have neither class nor common sense.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#59)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:53 PM EST
    SD - I provide links and you say they are wrong. Drudge lies, Slate lies. Everyone lies but SD. Uh-huh, sure. Squeak - Nice sounding quotations do not substitue for commonsense. DA – Business correspondence is full of fragments. And this is called commenting, not writing reports. You know. Like wow! Gosh! I noticed you never worried about sentence fragments until I started checking you out and nailing the spelling, typing and errors in grammar, like “hear” for “here.” “Andno” space between words. You then started deliberately writing thnges lyke thise to avoid being subjected to what you had been passing out. You often write about bullies. That is a true bully act. Start a fight and then run off and hide. And it is “kettle” not “mirror”. And no, I’m not going to show you your exact errors. You can find’em yourself. You may, of course, continue to point out mine. It is, as I have noted several times, a huge waste of time, but it is your time. And my channeling tells me you have lots of it on your hands. Use some of it to find the several errors you made in your last comment, kettle.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#60)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:53 PM EST
    Yesterday I was approached by a military recruiter on my way out of a wedding, the catering hall was next to a recruiting office. We got to talking after I made clear absent an invasion of a foreign force I will not take up arms against strangers, the recruiter said Iraq has made his recruiting life miserable. He said after 9/11 and the Afghan invasion he had no problem meeting his recruiting goals, but Iraq has made his job hopeless. Nice guy, I was impressed with his candor, and I regret the position the current admin. has put him in. Iraq has done untold damage to our militray strength and readiness.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#61)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:53 PM EST
    Squeaky – Your request for an explanation of commonsense really deserved better than I gave you. Consider this. We have two groups. Terrorists and anti-war demonstrators. The terrorists want the US out of Iraq. The anti-war demonstrators want the US out of Iraq. They have the same goal. That’s a fact. The terrorist will fight as long as they think they have a chance of winning. The anti-war demonstrators are trying to force our politicians to pull our troops out. The terrorists’ morale is improved by this action. They see this as help. That’s a fact. If you support our troops you won’t do anything to hurt them. Demonstrating does because it helps their enemies. That’s a fact. Commonsense says that even though you have the right, you won’t demonstrate. That is a rational, reasonable action to take. If you support our troops. kdog - Well, so far so good.
    The general did say the Army has surpassed its re-enlistment projections so far for fiscal year 2005. The Army's active duty re-enlistment rate is 107 percent of projected estimates, with 58,480 soldiers re-enlisting between Oct. 1, 2004 and July 31, 2005. The Army was hoping to re-enlist 54,510 soldiers during that time. Lovelace said the Army National Guard and Reserve re-enlistment rates are also exceeding 100 percent of projections
    Link

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#63)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:53 PM EST
    SD - I provide links and you say they are wrong. Drudge lies, Slate lies. Everyone lies but SD. Uh-huh, sure.
    All you have to do is trace it to some primary sources. Can't do it can you. And I was not condeming slate, nice misdirection btw, but commenting on Hitchens who has a well documented history as does Drudge. So if its true you should have no trouble coming up first a 1st line source instead of someone who is rehasing things.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#64)
    by glanton on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:53 PM EST
    "We have two groups. Terrorists and anti-war demonstrators." Ahh, the comforts of buying into Bush's simple little world. Vote Republican: It's easier than thinking.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#65)
    by roger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:54 PM EST
    Only 2 groups? How about Iraqi`s who want us out, but dont commit acts of terrorism? How about Repubs who want us there at any cost? How about people with such little imagination that they can only think of two sides to an issue?

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#66)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:54 PM EST
    [By the way, TL, the title on this thread is wrong. It is not the "Sheehan Venom," it is the ANTI Sheehan Venom."] *Please make a note of it.*

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#67)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:54 PM EST
    PPJ-Facts are sooo difficult for you that you insist on making them up
    If you support our troops you won’t do anything to hurt them. Demonstrating does because it helps their enemies. That’s a fact.
    The Fact is, that if your version of support for our troops means not demanding that Bush withdraw all troops from his illegal war so they can get killed for another several years you are sick and stupid. Send your daughters over there, that would show real support, support for death.
    Commonsense says that even though you have the right, you won’t demonstrate. That is a rational, reasonable action to take.
    Obvioulsy you have not been reading your Thomas Paine or simply have no Common Sense.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#68)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:54 PM EST
    "If you support our troops you won’t do anything to hurt them." That's hiliarious. SINCE you support THE POLICY, you DO NOT support the troops. *Please make a note of it.*

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#69)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:55 PM EST
    Paul- Well put! Lets all make a note of it.

    Re: Revving Up the Sheehan Venom (none / 0) (#70)
    by jarober on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:56 PM EST
    1) I'm 43, past enlistment age. Not to mention that I had a Congressional Nomination to West Point at 18, and didn't get in - 4F based on my eyesight 2) (1) is irrelevant anyway. Last time I checked, this country wasn't Heinlein's world (Starship Troopers), where only veterans get to vote 3) As to this: "You imply that if the president, congress, and 51% of the people say so, the other 49% are not allowed to think differently. This is your America then?" Well, having looked at the Constiutution, yes, that's pretty much how it works (other than the disagreement part). If Congress authorizes war (which it has), then it's legal. You can disagree with that all you want, but calling it "illegal" just makes you look foolish. I rather suspect that if I tried to apply your argument to something like abortion rights, you would pitch a fit.

    Revving Up the Sheehan Venom | 59 comments (59 topical)