home

Few Show Up to Support the War

By TChris, Section War In Iraq
Posted on Sun Sep 25, 2005 at 09:14:07 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

by TChris

One day after a "massive" anti-war protest in Washington (among other places), the pro-war voices had their chance to be heard. They could barely muster a whisper, as about 400 people -- "far fewer than organizers had expected" -- gathered today on the National Mall.

So here's the unofficial count of those who rallied in Washington this weekend:

Pro-war: 400.

Anti-war: 100,000.

< Another Scopes Trial | Dylan Documentary Airs Tonight on PBS >

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

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Few Show Up to Support the War | 52 comments (52 topical)
    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    If the pro-war side did get 400 people to show up, and we the stop-the-bloodshed-now committed are credited with 400,000 (C-SPAN estimated 600,000 and they were quoted by CNN at that figure, at least until Rove’s new hire over there somehow got to the News Department and quickly replaced that figure with the DC cop’s lowball 100,000, which you erroneously and lazily regurgitate) if they got as many as 400 (unpaid?) then even at that 400,000 figure we outnumber these misguided people by 1000 to one. Why is this fact missing in the media, to say nothing of your own Talk Left blog?

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#2)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    Can we pleeeeeze get the 400 names and give them to military recruiters?

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    Pat Tillman was “an American original — virtuous, pure and masculine like only an American male can be.” After Bush got done with him, he didn't have a head. Lying Liars 'Investigate' How to Hide Their Crimes Hey, cheer up, Bin Laden survived!

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    Oh, I forgot to mention: Turns out Pat Tillman disliked Bush, and opposed the Iraq invasion -- he just wanted to kill Osama Bin Laden. Too bad Bush didn't feel the same way. "I don't even think of him much any more." A favorite author of Tillman's was...you guessed it: Noam Chomsky.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    I don't think the preceding comments deserve any kind of a reply, so I'll only point out that even the DUmmies had several threads in which they said run - don't walk - away from ANSWER. Apparently the people in DC weren't that concerned about being affiliated with a group linked to Ramsey Clark, the IAC, North Korea sympathizers, etc. etc.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#6)
    by bad Jim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    There was no particular reason for pro-war advocates to demonstrate, since they've already got a war to cheer, if little reason to cheer that war.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#7)
    by LorettaNall on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    Ya know Some Alabamians are such an embarassment to this great state.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#8)
    by kipling on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    well, 400,000 whatever. Obviously they're just poor misguided dummies brainwashed by the liberal media, who all obviously would prefer if Saddam were still in power. And anyway, WE WON! Game over! Case closed. And it's called irony, folks.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    The punchline: They doubtless think of themselves as representing a too-refined -to-say-anything majority.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    I see TChris is being selective again. The WaPo claimed 20,000 for the Pro-War rally (a number I don't believe - I think the estimates for all these sorts of rallies are exaggerated). But he believes that the WaPo's 100k number (also absurd) for the Anti-War rally is accurate. So TChris is reduced to selecting the numbers he likes, and ignoring the ones he doesn't like. Remind me again - you're a lawyer? Isn't there some kind of code of ethics for that profession?

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#11)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    Patriotism, the last refuge of scoundrels. Misguided patriotism at that. What kind of person cheers the deaths of others? Not a very good one, IMO.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    kdog:
    What kind of person cheers the deaths of others? Not a very good one, IMO.
    Holy Screw 'em Kos, Batman! I gotta agree with you.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#13)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    JR accusing TChris of precisely what JR himself does.pot kettle etc. oh yeh hypocrite too

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#14)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    JR told a lie. From the WaPo "On Sunday, a rally supporting the war drew roughly 500 participants, far below the 20,000 expected by event organizers."

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    soccerdad - in my day job, I'm a "Product Evangelist" - i.e., I'm paid to spread the word about a product. That makes what I post as part of my work pretty clearly labelled. As opposed to TChris, who scans the papers for facts he likes, all the while omitting ones he doesn't like. To be blunt, he's a partisan hack. You might spend some time on the right wing blogs. You'll find that people on that side are hardly "rah rah" about this administration. What we have is a fairly frustrated group who would like an honest alternative - but when we see the kinds of stupidity espoused at the Saturday rally, we end up holding our noses and voting Republican. What you don't realize is just how turned off the center is by the left fringe that is currently controlling the Democratic party's message. You see it in the blogs - where the talking points are identical here (when TChris posts - Jeralyn is a much better advocate than he is, and far more independent minded), and on Eschaton, and on Kos... - it's all one unified set of crap, spoon fed from Media Matters. You can dislike people like Michelle Malkin all you want, but she doesn't qualify as a mindless cheerleader. Nor does Glenn Reynolds, or "Captain's Quarters". Or PowerLine, which is probably the closest thing to a rah rah right wing blog there is. The biggest left wing blogs are on the same page as Ann Coulter - more interested in cheers from the bleachers of like minded people than in actually convincing anyone. You want to start winning elections? Then ditch mindless haters like Kos, send TChris to the hate pit he belongs in, and stop paying attention to the kooks at International ANSWER (who back North Korea, for gosh sakes). Come up with policy stands that amount to more than gainsaying - you sound like nothing so much as the Republican party circa 1935, who couldn't get past "That Man" (FDR) being in office. The public may have been ambivalent about FDR at times, but they thought the Republican vitriol was absurd. Bush isn't a tenth of the politician that FDR was, but the Left still empowers him by relentless hate mongering - and the public, while clearly ambivalent, sees the visceral hatred - and continues to hold it's nose and vote Republican.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#16)
    by TChris on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    JR-- both numbers came from the same linked article. Nothing selective about it.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#17)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    JR - thats the most nonsense I've read in awhile. Its also completely uninformed. If you actually think that the left fringe controls the Dems message, then you don't know what you are talking about and are just repeating the same old tired out right wing crap. I think you will find that as the economy goes in the toilet over the next 2-3 years, the ranks of the Bush "haters" as you call them will swell to great proportions. Based on the war, the mortgaging of our economic future, the destruction of America's image abroad, the promotion of geopolitical instability , the harm to our environment, as well as having played a role in the recent proliferation of nuclear weapons history will judge GB as worst president ever. BTW I read right wing blogs daily. Your characterization certainly isn't true.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#18)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    the 400 people showed up, based on what I read, to protest the anti-war protestors, not support the war. Parsing of words? Could be I suppose, but I certainly wouldn't go to a rally to support a war. I would go to a rally to support troops or another cause. I'd like to see what signs the "pro-war" protestors were carrying. Any links?

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#19)
    by roger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    Some observations: I am sure that organizers always inflate attendance, I do not believe that the DC police do (and do you mean DC police, Capital police, or others?). The left has ANSWER, the right has Pat Robertson; we both have "spokespeople" that most of us disagree with. I dont think that Randall Terry speaks for Jim, please do not think that ANSWER speaks for me. Likewise, anti-semitism. Many on the left are anti-semetic, and love to glorify the Palestinians. Why? I have no clue, probably just to p*ss off the rest of us. Some righties (LWW comes to mind) are also anti-Israel. See my comment above. I gotta agree with Patrick on this. A rally to support a war (any war) is far different from supporting the troops. Anyone got pictures?

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    You guys can call what I posted "a load of crap" all you want - but you might look at the results of the 2002 and 2004 elections. The issues then were the same as the ones now, and your side took a beating, both times. You can keep deluding yourselves that the constant hate mongering is helping, or you can grow up. Read Atrios' and Kos' blog for a few days, and see how often profanity shows up. "So what?", you ask? Well, middle america is not impressed with profanity. Swearing is not an argument, as much as those two clowns seem to thyink it is. When they graduate from 7th grade level punditry, you might have something.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#21)
    by roger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    Charlie, Ok, then you support David Duke. I guess that I get lumped in with ANSWER, even though I didnt attend, or even watch the rally. I'd rather be a commie than a Nazi anyway

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#22)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    JR - Times they are a chanhing. The war is going worse, we are not safer, we cant respond to a diaster that we have advanced warning for, and the current account deficit continues to grow. The deficits are not sustainable. Crony capitalism is not going to be popular given that most of us are not cronies. The average person is getting tired of fundamentalist christian shoving their agenda down our throats. Some profanity has your underwear all in knots? Well boo hoo. I've read the crap on LGF, Malkin, Rush, O'Reilly etc. You certainly do not occupy the moral high ground. BTW even Malkin is tired of the idiots that bush appoints to high level positions. THe Repub base is splintering under the weight of big government, record deficts, a failed war, a diasterous response to NO, etc. But then again you guys have Diabold and are putting the necessary pieces in place for Marshall law.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    The anti-war people clearly outnumbered the pro-war people. Righties, get a clue: the above means that the publich doesn't support Bush's war, no matter how you toy with numbers and spin the results. Case closed, game over.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#24)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    "You can fool some people sometimes..." In this case, some people is around 400.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#25)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    Soccerdad.... If you actually think that the left fringe controls the Dems message, then you don't know what you are talking about As long as the Dems align themselves with the likes of Micheal Moore ...(who had a ringside seat at the DNC) as well as other 'hollywood' wacko types too numerous to mention here... we have no choice but to 'think' that. The war is going worse, Says who? we are not safer Says who? No attacks on American soil in 4 years plus! we cant respond to a diaster that we have advanced warning for, That's the State of loosianna's fault. Fla. & Texas did quite well. (as they have in the past) But then again you guys have Diabold and are putting the necessary pieces in place for Marshall law. LOL..... yeah...that's happening. It's all a huge conpsiracy. You played right into JR's point....If you can't win an election blame the voting machines, don't look inward & see what's wrong.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    What is up with the right wing wacko troll infestation on this board today? BTW: Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan are gods.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#27)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    BB - you never have had a clue. Rebutting your nonsense in the past has been a waste of bandwidth. You and JR obviously don't pat attention to the positions of the Dem. leadership. Or maybe you do, so the only way you can disparge the left is go after Moore et al. Exactly how many Dems voted against the war. Exactly how many Dems are insisting that the troops come home now. You are a clueless fraud.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#28)
    by roger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    Charley, I'll gladly take Moore, seeing how you already agreed that David Duke represents you! ps- thread on anti-war rally

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#29)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    Lab13, they are getting desperate and the shrill whine of their cognitive dissonance has become an amplified standing wave of solipsistic screech.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#30)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    Soccerdad.... Rebutting your nonsense in the past has been a waste of bandwidth. Ok..was Mikey Moore invited to the DNC or wasn't he? Did he have a prominent seat with some big shot Dems or was that his clone I saw? (Oh please God I hope there aren't two of him walking around.... LOL..having said that I realize that one of him actually equals 2...but that's another story) You and JR obviously don't pat attention to the positions of the Dem. leadership. I can't speak for JR ... but I try not to pay too much attention to blowhards like Moore... this is true. Ok... I'll bite. Exactly what do the Dems stand for? From Labrynth13.... "Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan are gods". I rest my case!

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    BB wrote:
    From Labrynth13.... "Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan are gods". I rest my case!
    O.K., you've rested your case. Now go away.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    I dislike ANSWER profoundly. I don't find them particularly peaceful or progressive. But it's convenience for the rightierobots on this thread and elsewhere that ANSWER gets so much attention. Why? Because then we can argue just about how bad ANSWER is instead of talking about the nearly 2000 dead soldiers, crumbling political "process" in Iraq, impending civil war there, or the clear lack of support for the war and Bush's conduct of it found in every major poll I've seen lately. You won't find me defending ANSWER. But for some reason, despite all rational evidence to the contrary, y'all keep supporting this war and this administration. At some point, you're going to have to choose. Do you love your country? Or do you just love the wacko wing of the Republican party? Unfortunately, I think we all know the "ANSWER" to that one.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#33)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    Whether this war is/was right or wrong is a point people will never agree on. For some, war is not the answer...for others, it is always the answer. So be it. What baffles me is how some people can think it is in our best interest.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#34)
    by Lww on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    Well as Cindy(MY Goddess) Sheehan has been saying it's not in our best interest. It's in Israels best interest. Yeah Roger and I stll beat my wife...

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#35)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    actually, a good chunk of the "pro-war" rally consisted of family members of servicemen killed in action who didn't want the memories of their loved ones destroyed by those actively in favor of those doing the killing.
    "Those doing the killing" are those who started the war. Except they aren't really DOING the killing...or more importantly, the DYING. Three more dead today. I guess if the pro-war rallies are really made up of families of those killed, then Bush is trying his best to make sure the numbers keep increasing, eh? But his family will never be one of them.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#36)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    what is their ANSWER to 2000 dead soldiers? you know they don't give a damn about american casualties.
    Perhaps you need to TBYS (think before you spew). Their answer is to stop the war before there are 3,000 casualties. Your answer is to keep them dying until Bush decides enough money has been made or, less likely, enough political damage has occurred to stop it. So it appears that they, in effect support the troops by wanting to keep them alive. You support them by wanting them to keep right on dying. And for what? You can only come up with rhetoric that fades fast in the face of reality. So these commies are better Americans (and people) than you are. But that logic is rather inapplicable in your bIZZARO wORLD.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#37)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    Roger writes:
    I'd rather be a commie than a Nazi anyway
    If you don't mind I think I will remain a social liberal.... ;-) But.... if you are known by the company you keep...
    The veil came off, as we noted in our release on Friday, when one of the leaders of the WWP and ANSWER posted an article urging "solidarity" with the "Iraqi fighters" and "resistance" killing American troops and innocent civilians in Iraq. The article, "Iraqi resistance earns world's respect," is posted on the web site of the Workers World Party (WWP) and is written by John Catalinotto, a WWP veteran who also represents International ANSWER, the WWP front organizing and sponsoring the protest. You can read the article here.
    Link

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#38)
    by roger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    Jim, If you scroll up a bit, I was poking fun at a rather inane comment that I get ANSWER, and you get David Duke. I agree with ANSWER about as much as (I imagine) you agree with Duke. Please check out my post higher up, I think that you would approve

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#39)
    by john horse on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    PPJ (Satire Alert!) According to a recently declassified Al Queda report the lack of support for the war as demonstrated by the few people who showed up at a recent rally "gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses...We were elated when supporters of the war were so ashamed of American actions in the war that they refused to show their support.... those people represented the conscience of America .... part of it's war- making capability, and we turned that power in our favor." The refusal you and others to publicly support the war has demoralized the morale of our troops and has given aid and comfort to our enemy.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#40)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    Support the war? WHY SHOULD WE? "The refusal you and others to publicly support the war has demoralized the morale of our troops and has given aid and comfort to our enemy." Our enemy is the Dictator Bush and you warhawk racists, and your counterparts in Islamic society. 6 Major White-Supremacist Terrorist Plots in US Each Year Let's see -- how many Iraqi terror plots in the US each year. How many ANY year. Oh, I see -- ZERO. Our 'enemy' is wearing a white hood.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#41)
    by john horse on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    Paul, My comments were not meant to be taken at face value. One of the reasons that I wrote "satire alert" at the beginning of my comments was to clue folks in. I was addressing the arguement that those who demonstrate against the war lower the morale of our troops and give aid and comfort to the enemy. If that is the case then the low turnout in support of the war also lowered morale and gave aid and comfort to the enemy. PPJ could probably tell you where I got the fake Al Queda quote.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#42)
    by Lww on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    Paul in LA,Lab,sailor, some others: the answer to all the questions about why Bush and the right show so much dominance among the middle American electorate. Absolute intolerance for the views of others. Hyperbole to the nth degree. Viscious slander. Transparent racism. Thank you all.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#43)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    • Absolute intolerance for the views of others. "We should invade their countries...and forceably convert them to Christianity." -- Ann Coulter • Hyperbole to the nth degree. Wow, that's a tough one. I guess we'll have to look to LWW and his famous homophobic pronouncements of last week. • Viscious slander. Gee, you mean like impuning the moral and personal anger of a Gold Star mother because she SMILED? • Transparent racism. 130,000+ Iraqis, killed in order to dismantle their country for AIRBASES and an insane, pig-defying money lust, by non-combatants. All while shouting Kill Them All. Yep, you are definitely describing yourself.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#44)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    John, oh, nevermind. Pretending to be a pig is dangerous while all the machetes are swinging this far into the work.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#45)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    Roger - I know, didn't you see the smiley?? John H - Satire or not, you are wrong. et al - Anyone bother to read the link? PIL - So? What's your point? That we should tolerate Moslem terrorists because we have some white boy terrorists? What kind of logic is that. BTW - I don't remember any large demonstrations in support of these people. Did I miss one?

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#46)
    by roger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:21 PM EST
    Jim, I just wanted to make sure, after publicly professing to be a commie ;-) I assume that Duke is not your man either

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#47)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:23 PM EST
    "PIL - So? What's your point? That we should tolerate Moslem terrorists because we have some white boy terrorists? What kind of logic is that." YOUR logic. My point is simply that with SIX major terrorist plots by white supremacist citizens, the US has a lot more problems domestically with RACISTS than it does with ARABS. And many of those white supremacist terrorists support Bush, for obvious reasons. Invading Iraq on the theory that all Arabs are the same is Collective Guilt Theory, the same theory Hitler used to justify HIS genocide. None of the 130,000+ dead Iraqis was involved in Nine-eleven. NOT ONE. So what was their 'crime'? Brown skin. And oil that costs money.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#48)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:23 PM EST
    charley, How's it feel to you seeing rallies where normal US patriots and citizens are being outnumbered 4,000 to 1 by commies? Wow, with those numbers, commies sure must be doing well in US elections. It's gotta be a frickin' takeover, and by democratic methods, even? Who knew? Oh, wait.... That's not happening.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#49)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:23 PM EST
    Beliefs, values, etc., and not organizations or leaders, provide a foundation for the anti-war cause. It's perhaps revealing that such a concept wouldn't be the first thing that pops to charley's mind.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#50)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:23 PM EST
    I'm a "Product Evangelist" - i.e., I'm paid to spread the word about a product. So you're one of those pushy corporate sales people. I never would have guessed. "To be blunt, he's a partisan hack..." To be blunt, you're an apologist for people with innocent blood on their hands. "What you don't realize is just how turned off the center is by the left fringe that is currently controlling the Democratic party's message. First, I could care less what proponents of the status quo think. Second, if the left fringe controlled the 2004 election, I doubt that someone who voted to allow the Iraq war would have been the candidate. Furthermore, I doubt that left fringe election scriptwriters would have included rhetoric like "make America safer by killing terrorists" as the centerpiece of so many speeches. "You want to start winning elections? Then ditch mindless haters like Kos, send TChris..." Having read the garbage you write here, I don't ever care to walk out of the election booth arm in arm with someone like you (or anyone who believes as you do). Democrats may lose elections, but it will not be because they adopted any "leftist" philosophy. As for me, I will sleep better at night having stayed true to my convictions - namely not supporting immoral wars. "...and your side took a beating, both times." Since both D.C. Republicans and Democrats are mostly Corporate apologist stooges and militarists, I'd say that your side stirred up a lot of dust beating up on itself. The crap that CNN and Fox News label "leftist" isn't any such thing. It is unreason carefully crafted to narrow the debate down to two versions of the same sorry reality. I'm glad you're enjoying the current state of affairs in America -- good thing, because you're just as powerless to do anything to change it as all the rest of us are. If you're still out there hustling a product, sounds like you're in the same boat with the rest of us - living off the spoils of foreign warfare and working everyday to make the already wealthy more wealthy while your own salary remains pretty close to the inflation number. I suppose you can take solace in the fact that your commissions are probably higher than the salaries paid to those 18-26 year olds over there getting killed in Iraq.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#51)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:23 PM EST
    TS, well stated, well done.

    Re: Few Show Up to Support the War (none / 0) (#52)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:23 PM EST
    first, blame bush, not the psychopaths planting the bombs for the deaths. this goes with the left being unwilling to judge anyone but bush.
    Simple cause and effect. No invasion and occupation of country that was not a threat to U.S results in....no bombs being planted killing Americans there. Kinda funny how that works isn't it? Or too strange a concept to comprehend in bIZZARRO wORLD?
    do you deny that members of families killed in action spoke at the "pro-war" rallies? are you that big of a liar?
    Like I said, your goal seems to be that we stay in Iraq long enough to increase the number of dead kid's families...to increase the turnout at the pro-war rallies. You are a noble patriot. How about sending your kids there so they can die and then you can speak at a pro-war rally, too?
    how can you want to keep the troops alive when you back those doing the bombing?
    I guess the same way that you want to support the troops by leaving them in harm's way, when every single reason you can give for them being there turns out to be a crock o'sheeit. Hey why don't you ask Bush to look for a reason du jour for the Iraq mess under his desk in the Oval Office again? That's always good for a laugh.
    do you deny that ANSWER and its friends on the left such as yourself back the resistance? again, their/your words speak for themselves-your dishonesty is showing.
    I HONESTLY support international law. You obviously do not. I will say that no one has found much honesty coming from your side lately, just tragedy and comedy.

    Few Show Up to Support the War | 52 comments (52 topical)