Anti-war Iraq veterans were banned from participating in a Veterans Day parade in Long Beach, CA, because “we do not want groups of a political nature, advocating the troops withdrawal from Iraq,” said one organizer. Brandon Friedman notes that the organizers seem to have no problems with groups advocating staying in Iraq, however.
American Legion & VFW’s struggled with Viet Nam Vets joining their service clubs after that war.
These prim & proper crewcut vets couldn’t get used to us ‘Nam Vets. We looked different, acted outlandish & outlawish, and weren’t into the pomp & circumstance associated with these memberships.
You know what brought the two opposites together? MIAs.
We saw a lot of resistance to honoring our Missing In Action brothers at first, but the older regimes didn’t take long to admit that anyone standing up for soldiers missing in action can’t be ‘all bad’.
I still get a charge out of seeing crewcuts & ponytails together to this day. We could all use a little sensitivity in accepting other’s differences; it’s what makes America great.
November 12th, 2007 at 12:27 pmHooray for “freedom of speech” and “honoring the troops” …
November 12th, 2007 at 12:27 pmThis seems to be quite fair, if you want to sustain the image of a military that is keen on fulfilling the desires of its Commander in Chief. After all, the folks who don’t agree with him needn’t enlist and/or can quit. No excuse for being there anf then whining about not liking it. It was your choice - too bad.
November 12th, 2007 at 12:29 pmAgain, THANK YOU, Lt. Ehren Watada, a PATRIOT brave enough to stand up to Chickenhawks like AWOL coward Bush and Cheney.
http://www.google.com/ search?hl=en&q=ehren+watada&btnG=Google+Search
Sincerely,
NRA Gun Nutes
November 12th, 2007 at 12:30 pmWow. I wonder if there will be a lawsuit? Can there be a privately organized observation of a National holiday that bans people with standing to participate?
November 12th, 2007 at 12:31 pmdesires of its Commander in Chief
Yeah, a little AWOL coward TRAITOR coxucker PUNK who didn’t fulfill his own military service.
his “desires”??
What does “Jeff Gannon” have to do with it???
Sincerely,
NRA Gun Nutes
November 12th, 2007 at 12:33 pmOn this issue, I can see the point of the organizers — sort of. Having an event focusing solely on thanking veterans for their service with NO political overtones whatsoever is a worthy (if difficult) thing to do.
However, if this is their goal, they should have stayed true to it across the board by banning ALL groups with a political statement to make — both pro-Iraq war and anti-Iraq war. The organizer should have said, “We do not want groups of a political nature, either advocating the troop withdrawal OR maintaining or escalating the occupation of Iraq. That isn’t what this is about.”
November 12th, 2007 at 12:36 pmmissmolly,
November 12th, 2007 at 12:40 pmYou’re always a voice of reason in a sea of turmoil…thanks.
This seems to be quite fair, if you want to sustain the image of a military that is keen on fulfilling the desires of its Commander in Chief. Comment by hits — November 12, 2007 @ 12:29 pm
That’s funny… I thought they joined in order to defend the country, not to mindlessly do whatever the Chimp-in-charge asks of them. That’s your job.
November 12th, 2007 at 12:42 pm“hits” sez:
Actually, the purpose of the nation’s armed forces is not to fulfill the “desires” of the Commander-in-Chief.
Actually, many of them were enlisted prior to his demented “War on Terror”. Many of them enlisted when he was still pushing the lie that we were actually going to go after the alleged perpetrators of 9/11, instead of invading and occupying a country that had nothing to do with the attack.
Actually, they can’t “quit”. Google “stop loss”.
Even by your dismal standards, Jake, this was pathetic.
November 12th, 2007 at 12:42 pmAfter all, the folks who don’t agree with him needn’t enlist and/or can quit. No excuse for being there anf then whining about not liking it. It was your choice - too bad.
Comment by hits — November 12, 2007 @ 12:29 pm
Actually, once you enlist you CAN’T quit. You volunteer for a specific length of time and you take an oath to serve for that time.
And when that length of time gets extended because there aren’t enough people to replace you, that’s called a “backdoor draft” and you are no longer a volunteer.
But to your point about people who volunteer and then find they are sent to fight a war they find immoral — you’re right, they’re stuck. It’s one of the risks associating with volunteering. And it’s because of this risk that recruiting is way down.
November 12th, 2007 at 12:43 pmThree cowardly trolls had to rush in to justify their existence.
And Keltoi, how does the City of Long Beach stage a “privately” organized parade? No police, no city officials, what?
November 12th, 2007 at 12:45 pmLuis M,
The troops are ultimately sworn in to the chain of command. They do bend to the President’s wishes - even if they seem unreasonable. Teasing out the “unreasonable desires” among the President’s wishes is not their job. That’s left to the Legislature, the Judiciary, and ultimately to the people
Hits
November 12th, 2007 at 12:45 pmAnd Dreamcrush, who said the VFW “held” the parade. Having reading comprehension problems?
November 12th, 2007 at 12:46 pmTripMaster Monkey,
Yes, they can always quit. If they are not willing to assume the cost of “stop loss”, that’s their decision too, ain’t it?
Hits
November 12th, 2007 at 12:46 pmComment by DreamCrusher — November 12, 2007 @ 12:45 pm
you loser! you ran away last night when your troll buddies needed you most. coward!
November 12th, 2007 at 12:47 pmmissmolly,
They can quit. There is a cost to quitting. That’s all. And you are correct - recruiting can go down under the situation you describe.
Hits
November 12th, 2007 at 12:47 pmhits, these are veterans, Ve-Te-Rans. They have already served this country in the armed forces, and their service is done. That service should be honored, as should theiur right to exercise the rights of U.S. citizens to criticize the Government.
You seem to have them confused with people in active military service.
And the military should never be ‘keen on fulfilling the desires of the Commander-In-Chief.’ They should be zealous in the defense of thhis country and the support of the Constitution. In monarchies, dictatorships and fascist states, the military’s loyalty is to their commander. In a democracy their loyalty is to the people.
It depresses me that I should have to lecture a fellow American on the principles that should be graven in his heart. But I guess in some it doesn’t take.
November 12th, 2007 at 12:48 pmComment by hits — November 12, 2007 @ 12:46 pm
and you! you’re worse than dc, call yourself a troll?! as dick cheney once said: “winners never quit and quitters never win”
get it?
November 12th, 2007 at 12:50 pmDreamCrusher sez:
Wrong, DC. It’s not a “bait and switch” at all.
By pointing out the past politicization of the American Legion and the VFW, Brandon Friedman puts the lie to the claim that the IVAW was barred because of 501c3 concerns.
November 12th, 2007 at 12:50 pmpbg,
It’s called ex-tra-pol-ation. You should look it up. They have a right to criticize, just as the organizers of the rally have a right to choose who to allow in the parade.
Hits
November 12th, 2007 at 12:51 pmComment by DreamCrusher — November 12, 2007 @ 12:45 pm
ps - you traitor. how are things in sydney?
November 12th, 2007 at 12:52 pm“hits” sez:
I’m not going to play these sophomoric word games with you, Jake.
November 12th, 2007 at 12:54 pmIt’s called ex-tra-pol-ation. You should look it up. They have a right to criticize, just as the organizers of the rally have a right to choose who to allow in the parade.
Hits
Comment by hits — November 12, 2007 @ 12:51 pm
gee that comment’s been cut about a thousand times… do some original work for a change. stop embarrassing yourself.
November 12th, 2007 at 12:54 pmAnd Keltoi, how does the City of Long Beach stage a “privately†organized parade? No police, no city officials, what?
Comment by Shayne — November 12, 2007 @ 12:45 pm
It was a QUESTION. It wasn’t clear from the article who organized the march. I did not see that the government was involved in making it happen, if they were they would be wide open to a lawsuit on 1st and 14th Amendment grounds if they banned Vets because of a political viewpoint. Providing security is a seperate issue, government does that for privately led events all the time.
November 12th, 2007 at 12:54 pmWell, according to drug addict Rush Limbaugh, the anti-war vets are all “phony soldiers” anyways. They don’t deserve their freedom of speech according to the radical right. They fought to defend those rights so that people can take them away when they come home.
November 12th, 2007 at 12:55 pmI’m not going to play these sophomoric word games with you, Jake.
Comment by TripMaster Monkey — November 12, 2007 @ 12:54 pm
of course you aren’t because you always lose… why can’t you be more like dc?
November 12th, 2007 at 12:55 pmand you! you’re worse than dc, call yourself a troll?! as dick cheney once said: “winners never quit and quitters never winâ€
get it?
Comment by joe cantwell — November 12, 2007 @ 12:50 pm
“Winners never quit, quitters never win, but those who never win and never quit, are idiots.”
November 12th, 2007 at 12:56 pm(from Larry Kersten)
joe cantwell,
An accurate unoriginal comment is any day preferable to an inaccurate original one.
Hits
November 12th, 2007 at 12:57 pmWow…so much for all that “free speech” they fought for, eh…?
November 12th, 2007 at 12:57 pmjoe cantwell sez:
???
November 12th, 2007 at 12:58 pmAnd how about this?:
Among the veterans being turned away, Jason Lemieux, a Marine who served three tours in Iraq, told Puente he was under the impression that free speech is one of the freedoms for which he fought.
“It feels like I’ve been betrayed by the very people I fought to serve,” he said. “They should be embarrassed by themselves.”
Explaining why the groups are not being allowed to march, Thuente said, “They just don’t fit the spirit of our parade.”
She also added that parade organizers are “not allowed to take a political stance.” Actually, they took one the moment they decided who could and could not take part in the parade.
Adrian Novotny, who heads the Long Beach Chapter of Veterans for Peace, finds the organizers’ action absurd. He notes that the group was allowed to march last year.
Thuente says parade coordinators failed to fully check the group’s application before last year’s parade. If they had, she says, Veterans for Peace may have been banned then.
But what about “Military Families Against the War?” What part of that title did the parade coordinators not understand. You don’t have to comb through its agenda, by-laws or parade application to know what it stands for. Yet, it, too, was allowed to march last year.
“Military Families” is what it says it is: a support group for those with family members in the war. Does that make them somehow un-American, disloyal, or treasonous? As the parent of a soldier who has served in Iraq, I like to think it does not.
http://www.presstelegram.com/news/ci_7411756
November 12th, 2007 at 12:58 pmmissmolly,
However, if this is their goal, they should have stayed true to it across the board by banning ALL groups with a political statement to make — both pro-Iraq war and anti-Iraq war.
Can you find any evidence that this isn’t the case? DailyKos simply pointed to the organization advocating on behalf of the war in other instances, not in connection with the Veterans Day Parade. It’s called a bait and switch.
Comment by DreamCrusher — November 12, 2007 @ 12:45 pm
———————————————————-
I didn’t check the DailyKos item, I read the San Jose Mercury News article.
In that article was the following quote: “They do not fit the spirit of the parade, the spirit being one of gratitude for what the veterans have done,” said Martha Thuente, coordinator for the nonprofit Veterans Day Parade Committee. “We do not want groups of a political nature, advocating the troops’ withdrawal from Iraq,” she added.
Nothing was said about banning groups from EITHER side who wanted to use the occasion to make a political statement. I was objecting to the lack of neutrality.
I have no evidence that any pro-war group who wanted to make statements in support of the war was allowed in the parade by the organizers, nor did I indicate in my earlier post any claim this actually happened.
Even though I personally think the best thing we can do to “support the troops” is to get them out of Iraq, I did speak up for the parade organizers in my earlier post and their right to have a non-political event. I just said I hoped that their ban on political statements extended to both sides.
November 12th, 2007 at 12:59 pmWhat a slap in the face to our veterans.
November 12th, 2007 at 12:59 pmThey have a right to criticize, just as the organizers of the rally have a right to choose who to allow in the parade.
Hits
Comment by hits — November 12, 2007 @ 12:51 pm
You’re correct, the organizers of the parade have a right to be hypocritical d!cks, bald-faced liars, and disrepectful to troops on Veterans’ Day. None of this seems illegal. However, it speaks volumes that you are willing to defend this conduct.
November 12th, 2007 at 1:00 pm‘There is a cost to quitting.’
November 12th, 2007 at 1:02 pmYes. It’s called the firing squad. ‘Quitting’ is also called ‘desertion.’
When people are pointing guns at you and will shoot you if you do something, that is not called being free to do something. By that definition the people of the Soviet Union and the Jews in Nazi Germany were free, too. They could do all sorts of things–they just had a price, and the price was death.
you don’t understand America, so it’s not surprising you don’t understand freedom.
joe cantwell,
An accurate unoriginal comment is any day preferable to an inaccurate original one.
Hits
Comment by hits — November 12, 2007 @ 12:57 pm
well when you’re high on drugs there’s just no reasoning with you… come back when you sober up. and for the love of god practice your rw troll skills, your argumentation and fact points are really weak.
November 12th, 2007 at 1:02 pmComment by DreamCrusher — November 12, 2007 @ 12:57 pm
Did you bother to read the DailyKos article, DC?
The VFW has officially taken political positions in the past. Therefore, their rationale to bar IVAW on the basis of 501c3 concerns is invalid, your amusing attempts to restrict the debate to the parade notwithstanding.
November 12th, 2007 at 1:05 pmThey can quit. There is a cost to quitting. That’s all.
Comment by hits — November 12, 2007 @ 12:47 pm
Yes, and I can rob a liquor store — but there’s a cost to doing that, too. Jail, and a criminal record for the rest of my life.
Quitting without being properly discharged is called Absent Without Leave, or AWOL. People get jailed for that, too (unless, of course, their last name is Bush).
November 12th, 2007 at 1:05 pmpbg,
“America” is nothing to understand. It’s the sum total of a variety of realities. You attempt to obfuscate a simple reality doesn’t mask the apparent lack of understanding of the matter at hand.
Hits
November 12th, 2007 at 1:05 pmBrianFL,
Well, according to drug addict Rush Limbaugh, the anti-war vets are all “phony soldiers†anyways.
That’s not what he said. Always the ad hominem attacks…
Comment by DreamCrusher — November 12, 2007 @ 1:01 pm
well that was worth waiting for. not! c’mon tell “BrainFL” what old pimple ass really said.
November 12th, 2007 at 1:05 pmDC - it is EXACTLY what he said. Read the friggin’ transcript, you moron!!
November 12th, 2007 at 1:05 pmWell Keltoi and DC one would assume that the city was holding a veterans day parade the way cities do. I guess if they don’t respect all veterans regardless of their views then they shouldn’t have a Veterans’ Day Parade. Maybe they should just have a Fourth of July or Flag Day or Columbus Day parade if they can’t handle it.
November 12th, 2007 at 1:06 pmComment by hits — November 12, 2007 @ 12:57 pm
well when you’re high on drugs there’s just no reasoning with you… come back when you sober up. and for the love of god practice your rw troll skills, your argumentation and fact points are really weak.
Comment by joe cantwell — November 12, 2007 @ 1:02 pm
So… are you implying that there is a time when it is possible to reason with “sh!ts”?
I gotta spend more time here. I keep missing those moments.
November 12th, 2007 at 1:06 pm“America†is nothing to understand. It’s the sum total of a variety of realities. You attempt to obfuscate a simple reality doesn’t mask the apparent lack of understanding of the matter at hand.
Hits
Comment by hits — November 12, 2007 @ 1:05 pm
i want you to read that to a man who works for a living. don’t forget to duck after you read it because he’s gonna punch you in the mouth for being such an elite pussy!
November 12th, 2007 at 1:07 pmEx-tra-po-la-tion means extending a description from where it belongs to where it doesn’t belong.
November 12th, 2007 at 1:10 pmLike: things which apply to active duty service men are applicable to people whose service is done.
Like: Obedience to legitimate orders can be extended to fulfilling the desires of the Commander.
Got it.
You don’t know English either.
I gotta spend more time here. I keep missing those moments.
Comment by ralph the wonder llama — November 12, 2007 @ 1:06 pm
can we reason with a person who’s a perpetual and hopeless mental masturbator? perhaps not. but shouldn’t we carry on and try?
hits, what are your thoughts?
November 12th, 2007 at 1:10 pmDenver has also banned anti-war veterans:
http://www.suntimes.com/ news/ otherviews/ 644621,CST-CONT-vet11.article
“The Denver United Veterans Council’s take: “If the vets for peace had just marched and kept their mouths shut last year they would have been invited back,” member Andy Gried told Denver’s Fox31. “But because they didn’t, we voted to exclude them this year.”
“A Vietnam War Marine’s take: “I think that is sad,” Mike Bundgaard told the station. “That is the reason we went to war — freedom of speech.” “
November 12th, 2007 at 1:11 pmOrganizers said the groups were trying to push a political agenda at an event to honor veterans.
From this it is clear that IVAW was excluded because they showed up trying to make a political statement. It was their actions at the event that caused them to be excluded, not what kind of organization they were.
Comment by DreamCrusher — November 12, 2007 @ 1:05 pm
It is not clear at all. It is the word of the organizers with zero proof of anything untoward.
November 12th, 2007 at 1:13 pmmissmolly,
Check this from the article:
Members of Iraq Veterans Against the War, Veterans for Peace and Military Families Speak Out were prevented from joining the annual parade down Atlantic Avenue and restricted to a nearby parking lot, officials said. Organizers said the groups were trying to push a political agenda at an event to honor veterans.
From this it is clear that IVAW was excluded because they showed up trying to make a political statement. It was their actions at the event that caused them to be excluded, not what kind of organization they were.
Comment by DreamCrusher — November 12, 2007 @ 1:05 pm
————————————————–
Are you actually READING my posts??? I’m not arguing against any of this. All I am saying is that the organizers of this parade appeared to be trying to hold an event without political statements. They banned some groups who wanted to make political statements for this reason. I SUPPORTED THIS; did you miss that? Furthermore, I made NO claims that any group vocal in their support for the Iraq war was allowed to be in the parade — I just voiced my hope that a ban on political statements applied across the board.
The point I was making was that when the organizers said “We do not want groups of a political nature, advocating the troops’ withdrawal from Iraq, ” they SHOULD HAVE SAID, “We do not want groups of a political nature, either advocating the troop withdrawal OR maintaining or escalating the occupation of Iraq. That isn’t what this is about.”
If you’re going to rebut my posts, I only ask that you read them first. And then don’t rebut arguments I haven’t made.
November 12th, 2007 at 1:14 pmOT, sorry..The Onion has a posting about russian ship’s sinking on the Black sea…One full of oil, one sulfer…..Several sailor’s dead and many missing….Storm caused……Seem’s to me there need’s to be heavier standard’s in ship building and shipping time’s considering the spill in San Fran. Calif because of fog or pilot errors and now in russia…..Covering our planet with black goo, killing wildlife and human’s for oil will bring a quick end to all life, along with personal war’s and bomb’s…Blessings
November 12th, 2007 at 1:15 pmcan we reason with a person who’s a perpetual and hopeless mental masturbator? perhaps not. but shouldn’t we carry on and try?
Comment by joe cantwell — November 12, 2007 @ 1:10 pm
I’m with you there, Joe. Yet it’s such a delicate balance, trying to determine the point at which the fruitlessness of the attempt overtakes any potential benefit.
November 12th, 2007 at 1:15 pmofficials said. Organizers said the groups were trying to push a political agenda at an event to honor veterans.
From this it is clear that IVAW was excluded because they showed up trying to make a political statement. It was their actions at the event that caused them to be excluded, not what kind of organization they were.
Comment by DreamCrusher
Wow you glean a lot by what is not said. Perhaps the organizers felt that the name of the group meant they were pushing a political agenda. This comment says NOTHING about any actions this group took that were political. Read much?
November 12th, 2007 at 1:15 pmGreat post’s missmolly, I agree and thank you..Blessings
November 12th, 2007 at 1:16 pmIf you’re going to rebut my posts, I only ask that you read them first. And then don’t rebut arguments I haven’t made.
Comment by missmolly — November 12, 2007 @ 1:14 pm
Good luck with that, missmolly.
You may get a better response from Dreamcrusher than we’re used to from typical “dissenting voices”, but for most of the trolls, misrepresenting liberal arguments is the only way they can possibly get any foothold on a rebuttal. Well, that and just making sh!t up.
November 12th, 2007 at 1:18 pmComment by joe cantwell — November 12, 2007 @ 1:02 pm
So… are you implying that there is a time when it is possible to reason with “sh!ts�
I gotta spend more time here. I keep missing those moments.
Comment by ralph the wonder llama — November 12, 2007 @ 1:06 pm
Sorry JC but I’ve got to agree with Ralph here. When exactly does the “shits” say anything coherent? Being drug addled for shits is just icing on the stupid cake.
November 12th, 2007 at 1:19 pmWRT Limbaugh:
He said “phony soldiers†alright, but about whom?
It was in response to:
No, it’s not, and what’s really funny is, they never talk to real soldiers. They like to pull these soldiers that come up out of the blue and talk to the media.
Limbaugh thereby referred to “not real soldiers†that “come up out of the blueâ€, when saying “phony soldiersâ€.
Come on guys. Everyone knows what “out of the blue†means, and can see that the caller explicitly said that the soldiers they were referring to were not real soldiers.
Grasping at straws comes to mind.
Comment by DreamCrusher — November 12, 2007 @ 1:16 pm
You’re right, and this exchange directly followed a caller named “Mike from Chicago” whose claims to be a Republican and a veteran were dismissed by Limbaugh because he was anti-war.
There’s no proof that he was either, but Limbaugh had no cause for making that judgment other than the caller’s attitude on the war.
To anyone who knows that the truth is found between the lines, it’s crystal clear that Limbaugh’s “phony soldiers” remark referred to anyone who claims to be a veteran yet thinks this war is a mistake.
November 12th, 2007 at 1:23 pmAs Country Joe McDonald said….
“And it’s 1,2,3, what ARE we fighting for?”
November 12th, 2007 at 1:26 pmDreamCrusher sez:
Let me know when you’ve finished trying to split hairs, DC.
Because of the VFW’s engagement in partisan politics in the past, they have no right to fall back on the 501c3 argument.
Or perhaps you think that a parade is an official function, while a statement to Congress isn’t?
I realize, that as a neocon watercarrier, you’re inured to hypocrisy to the point where you may honestly not even notice it anymore, but I’m patient.
November 12th, 2007 at 1:26 pmLimbaugh thereby referred to “not real soldiers†that “come up out of the blueâ€, when saying “phony soldiersâ€.
Comment by DreamCrusher — November 12, 2007 @ 1:16 pm
gee dc when you put that way… you sound like a commie commissar explaining the smashing success of the latest “five year plan” to a bunch of starving peasants who know better. give back your troll card, you putz!
November 12th, 2007 at 1:26 pmFirst and foremost, a big Thank You and happy Veteran’s Day to all those that have served (Wayne, Spudge_Boy, and others I’ve forgotten).
You will always be appreciated.
Now, on topic. I don’t care about a veteran’s political or religious belief. I don’t care about his/her support or opposition of this war, or any war. If you’ve served, and you’re not a criminal, you should always be welcomed to march. ALWAYS!
November 12th, 2007 at 1:27 pmAnd to those that prevented these brave men and women from marching, shame on you. How very anti-American, and anti-support the troops. Your last grasps at political injustice and hypocrisy is just about over!!!!
Sorry JC but I’ve got to agree with Ralph here. When exactly does the “shits†say anything coherent? Being drug addled for shits is just icing on the stupid cake.
Comment by Shayne — November 12, 2007 @ 1:19 pm
my feeling is that as long as he’s here we know he isn’t out with dc loading up a truck with fertilizer and an ignition device getting ready to murder kids at a day care center like their heros mcviegh and nichols. it’s a safety concern with me.
November 12th, 2007 at 1:29 pmThis is no surprise.
All of the talk about ’supporting the troops’ etc. coming from this government is just that, talk.
They couldn’t care less about our troops or the people of this country or the people of any other country.
They care about one thing, keeping the war machine running.
Someone on an earlier thread posted a link to: War Made Easy: How Presidents & Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death (2007).
November 12th, 2007 at 1:32 pmThe way it pieces things together it’s pretty easy to see where this country has been on the subject of war for a long long time.
OK JC as long as we don’t expect anything of any importance to come from hits we won’t be disappointed when he’s here for a long time and all that comes out is crap.
November 12th, 2007 at 1:36 pmSomeone must tell the organizers that the US has lost the war when it comes to IRAQ. We were told that it would last weeks, we were told that “mission was acomplished”, we were told that iraquis were going to receive the “terrorists” (USA) as liberators, we were told it is not an occupation… five years later, the only progress you got is the number of american casualities! IMPEACH, INDICT AND IMPRISON BUSH AND CHENNEY!
November 12th, 2007 at 1:38 pmWell at least DreamCrusher uses an appropriate handle…Bush supporters have crushed all dreams and futures for our military who believed his lies.
November 12th, 2007 at 1:42 pmhits, I have to wonder if you’re even in college.
‘Variety of realities’ is incoherent babble. It isn’t? Name two varieties of reality.
Fulminating abstraction is what scared high-school debaters do.
I’ll make it plain. America is an organizing principle of this corner of this vast and multifarious reality. It is an ordering, on a set, one-to-one and onto. It turns a set into a topological space.
The orrdering of America is the principles and tenets of the nation’s founding. besides categorization, it is also how we exist as a governmeent and a society.
Big and complec things ccan be talked about and understood, and America is no different from the phase space of chemical reaction or the interior of a star.
America can be understood in terms of its organizing principles, and that is what we are doing here.
We are asserting that banning veterans from a parade honoring veterans is a violation of American principles. Not only the right of free speech but the right of assembly are being violated in a public space, at the ordering of unelected ‘organizers.’ I object to the honoring of some abstract version of veteraniness at the expense of the reality of the people who served. It is not ‘Military Service Day’, and it is not ‘Parade Organizers Day.’
November 12th, 2007 at 1:45 pmIt’s their day, and it’s undemocratic arrogance to tell them what they should do with it. And that’s even before we talk about poitical bias.
America. freedom. You steadfastly argue against both.
#71 Comment by Shayne — November 12, 2007 @ 1:36 pm
dude someday at an oxycotton support group “hits” might stand up, no, make that will stand up and say:
“my eyes are open,
my mind is free,
it’s time for me to start thinking
progressively”
group hug.
November 12th, 2007 at 1:46 pmWell said pbg. We are way too sanitized.
November 12th, 2007 at 1:51 pmgroup hug.
Comment by joe cantwell — November 12, 2007 @ 1:46 pm
I hate for you to be disappointed jc, but “you can’t fix stupid”. Hits will never see the light.
November 12th, 2007 at 1:57 pmI have to say, I understand what the organizers of the parade were trying to do; however, I would say that not allowing veterans to march solely BECAUSE of their views is dishonoring them and all others who have gone before. All those that gave their lives and sacrificed throughout history to stand up for an ideal.
This is VETERANS day. Not “VETERANS THAT DON’T HAVE AN OPINION DAY”. If veterans want to participate in the parade and show what this day means to them; they should be allowed.
I spoke at a peace rally in Madison, WI. I was torn about what to say, or even if I should speak there for the very same reason being discussed. I came to a labored conclusion that the biggest insult to those that have fought, and those continuing to fight for this country and its ideals, was to be silent.
The parade should be for ALL VETERANS. If you don’t like the message of one veteran group, then don’t join them and just appreciate the parade for what it is. A celebration of ALL OF OUR VETERANS, whether you agree with them or not. That is how you make it apolitical.
November 12th, 2007 at 1:57 pmAll you reTHUGlican morons need to go out and buy yourself another made-in-China magnetic “Support our Troops” ribbon, slap it on your 8 mile-per-gallon SUV and tell yourself that you’re the REAL patriotic Americans.
The rest of us will fight to bring our troops home, get them the medical care they need and the jobs they deserve.
November 12th, 2007 at 1:58 pmI hate for you to be disappointed jc, but “you can’t fix stupidâ€. Hits will never see the light.
Comment by Shayne — November 12, 2007 @ 1:57 pm
sure he will. then he’ll go into it. then he’ll be gone.
no one here gets out alive.
- jim morrison
November 12th, 2007 at 2:00 pmLuis M,
The troops are ultimately sworn in to the chain of command. They do bend to the President’s wishes - even if they seem unreasonable. Teasing out the “unreasonable desires†among the President’s wishes is not their job. That’s left to the Legislature, the Judiciary, and ultimately to the people
Hits
Comment by hits — November 12, 2007 @ 12:45 pm
That’s the same excuse used at Nuremberg, by the men we convicted for not stopping torture and illegal wars…
pbg,
It’s called ex-tra-pol-ation. You should look it up. They have a right to criticize, just as the organizers of the rally have a right to choose who to allow in the parade.
Hits
Comment by hits — November 12, 2007 @ 12:51 pm
They also have the right to be hypocrites, and you have the right to be an ignorant fool just as we have the right to criticize them for being one. You should look it up. When troops came home from vietnam that were pro-vietnam they whined about being excluded from parades and events. Now they do this themselves to others. It’s typical hypocrisy of the wingnuts - and we’re exercising our first amendment rights to criticize this - look it up ‘tard!
joe cantwell,
An accurate unoriginal comment is any day preferable to an inaccurate original one.
Hits
Comment by hits — November 12, 2007 @ 12:57 pm
Then how does an inaccurate unoriginal comment like yours have any place your - fool?
November 12th, 2007 at 2:02 pmI believe the far left is destroying the dreams and future of the soldiers.
Comment by Southern Man — November 12, 2007 @ 1:57 pm
sure you do but you didn’t mention anything about believing in a man called jesus…
have you forgotten him?
November 12th, 2007 at 2:03 pmSorry to be off topic - there is no think fast thread today.
This is a one-click vote for impeachment investigations to the judiciary.
http://www.democrats.com/topelosiandjudiciary
November 12th, 2007 at 2:03 pmSouthern Man said:
I believe the far left is destroying the dreams and future of the soldiers.
Then he followed with:
Whenever there is progress, and there is a lot of progress, it gets put on page seventeen. It’s always ignored here for some strange reason.
Please, SM, explain two things:
1) how is this the doings of “the far left”?
2) how does this “destroy the dreams and future” of our soldiers? Seems to me like their dreams and futures are destroyed far more efficiently by placing them in the middle of sectarian civil war with no clear military objective.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:05 pmPlease tell?
Comment by Southern Man — November 12, 2007 @ 2:04 pm
no, you please tell…
this is your soul we’re talking about pal.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:06 pmDo you want to win the war first and then go home? Or do you want to lose the war and go home? Please tell?
Comment by Southern Man — November 12, 2007 @ 2:04 pm
First you tell us what “win the war” means, then we’ll answer.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:07 pmMy dreams and future have not been harmed by those trying to end the war, in fact, it is quite the opposite. And you are basing your opinion on what? Anything else you would like to say is harming me?
I would say that the 3900 KIA can’t have much more damage done to their future, and the 50,000 + who have been physically wounded as well as the scores of thousands who have lasting psychological scars would disagree with who is harming their futures.
I am glad that bombs and mortar attacks are at a 22 month low (if that is true, I did not see a citation of the information); however, do you realize how many are still happening? Since most of the mortar attacks and IEDs are set for US troops, how much do you think it would decline if we gave the Iraqi citizens what they want, and left?
The Iraqis want us out. PERIOD. That is reason enough to end the suffering and loss of life of our troops. Support the troops is more than a talking point.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:07 pmSouthern man - what about the promises of the 3856 who were led into a war on false premises? Or the 28,000 severly wounded and the 47,000 with emotional problems that will follow them forever?
We did not need to go into Iraq and you and Bush are responsible for cheating these young men and women of life. Sleep on that for the rest of your life !
Go volunteer at a VA hospital and see how righteous YOUR war seems now. Hold a vet’s hand if he still has one. You war mongers make me sick.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:07 pmComment by Rovian Stormtrooper Commander — November 12, 2007 @ 2:10 pm
you’re right, if you want to get in touch with the vets who served their country with honor and dignity then tp is indeed the place to be!
(after all you’re here, aren’t you?)
November 12th, 2007 at 2:14 pmThere should be no pro-Iraq statements, no anti-Iraq statements on this day.
It’s a day of thanks and respect.
People can shove all other commentary up their ass.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:14 pmProgress, progress ! Progress wasn’t even needed until you war mongers destroyed this poor country and its people. Where is your shame for following this arrogant little dictator?
If those of us that fought against going into a country that had NOTHING to do with 9/11 3856 men and women would be alive today. As I said, remember who sent our young to die and try to live with that Southern Man
November 12th, 2007 at 2:15 pmSo from me, thanks vets, and a special recognition for all the swabbies out there from a former Bos’n Mate.
Comment by Rovian Stormtrooper Commander — November 12, 2007 @ 2:10 pm
I would like to thank the vets that came home and told the truth: war is hell, soldiers are cannon fodder, and nobody should join the military under a Republican administration. I would like to thank the vets against war for their service and patriotism. phonies like RSC are very busy claiming service that they never saw, and riding on the backs of those that actually did serve, while they worship at the anus of their Deserter-In-Chief, a cowardly drunk who no soldier should be ordered to follow. Iraq vets banned from a Veterans Day parade is all we need to know about the false patriotism of those such as RSC, a chickenhawk liar if there ever was one.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:19 pmI’d be rather interested in knowing how the parade organizers aren’t opening themselves up for one gigantic lawsuit ?
November 12th, 2007 at 2:19 pmPeople can shove all other commentary up their ass.
Comment by DaveRywall — November 12, 2007 @ 2:14 pm
As you have a right to say that the vets have a right to say otherwise. Go F yourself pinhead.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:19 pmPeople can shove all other commentary up their ass.
Comment by DaveRywall — November 12, 2007 @ 2:14 pm
From where you got yours, obviously. Nice of you to try to suspend the Constitution on your own, but no takers here, except the pathetic rovot with the gay nym.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:20 pmPreznit Bush AWOL
VPreznit and 4th Branch Cheney 5 deferments
Wonderful example to the vets thes? Right? And they get to make speeches on Vets Day.
PATHETIC!
November 12th, 2007 at 2:21 pmdave can say whatever he wants to say. so can rsc. and thebobh. and lefty patriot.
that’s what america means to me.
happy veterans day everyone!
November 12th, 2007 at 2:22 pmWe do not really know enough about the event to determine why these groups were excluded. We are given a conclusion from the event organizers. The very name of the group would be enough to make some conservatives assume the worse. At the same time, I agree that the event should not be used to push a political point on either end of the spectrum.
Indeed, it would seem that both sides missed an opportunity to bring people together. A parade supporting veterans from all past wars and honoring their sacrifice for this nation without political comment in favor or or against the current conflict can help in the healing of the hyper partisanship so wrongfully created by Bush and the conservatives.
I do not believe in this latest military adventure. However, I am sick and tired of being accused of not supporting the troops because I disagree with the mission on which the troops were sent.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:23 pmps - southern man, check out this link:
http://home.messiah.edu/~chase/h/
they can help.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:23 pmAssumptions are like liberals’; Almost always wrong!
Comment by Southern Man — November 12, 2007 @ 2:22 pm
pretty weak, like the rest of your whining. southern pansy should be your nym.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:24 pmOur soldiers have won “Bush’s war” They fulfilled every changing goal Bush/Cheny have set. They need to come home and Iraq needs to pay Blackwater or defend themselves. Bush’s only agenda is to try and control the oil in Iraq and Iran.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:25 pmWhat? Because of my name, you bring up Jesus? Because of my comment you bring up Jesus? You’re a smart one JC. 1+1=Jesus
Assumptions are like liberals’; Almost always wrong!
Comment by Southern Man — November 12, 2007 @ 2:22 pm
calm down, calm down. he loves you. not in the carnal way. but in the divine, spiritual way that will save your hate-filled soul.
amen.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:25 pmShhh.
Soldiers should be seen and not heard.
We don’t want them to ruin the idea that they are only good for confiscating oil fields and as a bargaining chip for furthering the political agendas of others.
On a side note, yeah, that freedom you were fighting for….
November 12th, 2007 at 2:26 pmYeah Lefty Patriot, I’m trying to “suspend the Constitution”.
Go be an ass and protest the Iraq war at a V Day event. In fact, go scream your head off beside a 90 year old vet. Your grace, maturity, respect and tact will be most appreciated.
Have a nice day.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:28 pmI do not believe in this latest military adventure. However, I am sick and tired of being accused of not supporting the troops because I disagree with the mission on which the troops were sent.
Comment by JMOHR — November 12, 2007 @ 2:23 pm
I attended a WW2 Memorial dedication event yesterday, and every Repuke cheap-suit pol used the occasion to try to bash liberals, in spite of the fact that FDR won that war. It’s just pure Nazi tactics; the right wing cares less about freedom then power, and less about people than profits. We may have to adopt some of their techniques in order to purge them from our democracy, before they ruin it entirely. the right wing loses every war every time, but the left is too evolved to destroy them so they can’t come back and poison humanity again. it’s a real problem, as evidenced by the lockstep nazi “thinking” of our wingnut trolls.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:28 pmHave a nice day.
Comment by DaveRywall — November 12, 2007 @ 2:28 pm
Enlisted yet, coward? or just wrapping yourself conveniently in a flag everybody else gets to fight and die for?
Have a shitty day.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:29 pmCommenter #3 “hits” is a crack-up … remember his type … the Love it or leave nimrods. They’re still out there. Gotta love his logic that they either didn’t enlist or they can quit … how do you QUIT the military when that coward-in-chief won’t even let them come home after 3 tours??? Hey “hits” … grow a brain. Sheez.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:30 pmHave a nice day.
Comment by DaveRywall — November 12, 2007 @ 2:28 pm
dave, is this a day for sarcasm…?
November 12th, 2007 at 2:30 pmDo you want to win the UNWINABLE war first and then go home? Or do you want to lose the UNWINABLE war and go home? Please tell?
Comment by Southern Man
So you don’t have the brains to understand that the War is UNWINABLE?
Besides why worry, we are never gonna leave the Middle East, oil drives the economy and when you don’t have oil you are gonna have riots and anarchy.
Americans will not support each other, they will kill their neighbors for food and energy when society completely falls apart.
Which is just what the conservative christofascist want, the end times crap.
Man I just hate all of you scum bags.
Buck Fush
November 12th, 2007 at 2:31 pmShits-some of us antiwar vets were DRAFTED! WTF is your excuse?
November 12th, 2007 at 2:32 pmHave a shitty day.
Comment by Lefty Patriot — November 12, 2007 @ 2:29 pm
now, now, no “shitty” days for anyone today, ok? except for “southern man” and that’s only because he’s trying to resolve a spiritual crisis i’m trying to help him with. let’s be nice with each other.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:33 pmNot that I owe anybody anything, but for all of you twisted, pathetic rightwing cowards, I just want you to know that i attended the WW2 memorial dedication ceremony yesterday because I am a fundraiser for the project. A major fundraiser. It was the last war America needed to fight, which is why we won. It should be memorialized and remembered, as the true meaning of American patriotism, as opposed to the mass-murder called for by Bush, and the accompanying cowardice of Bush followers. I can imagine that the pussies trolling today would also have avoided service in WW2, being bone-deep cowards.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:34 pmhits KNOWS they can quit! His king, preznit Bush the 2nd, quit. Remember: AWOL. Quit and let his daddy fix it for him
November 12th, 2007 at 2:35 pmThat is the definition of win. This came from my 7 year olds elementary dictionary. I would have used mine, but this short definition is more your speed.
Comment by Southern Man — November 12, 2007 @ 2:33 pm
“short”?
ps - didja check out that link yet? really dude, they can help you!
November 12th, 2007 at 2:35 pmThat is the definition of win. This came from my 7 year olds elementary dictionary. I would have used mine, but this short definition is more your speed.
Comment by Southern Man — November 12, 2007 @ 2:33 pm
and just as completely irrelevant. Even by your 7-year-old’s dictionary the “war” is already won. maybe you need the 3-year-old’s dictionary. Have your 7-year-old explain it to you.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:36 pmWhat are we acquiring then Southern Man? (besides a monstrous debt)
What are we gaining? (besides the ill will of the world) Etc.
Your child’s dictionary didn’t seem to really get into that.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:38 pmAhhh, Lefty Patriot, thanks for the tired and irrelevant “grab a gun and man a post or stfu” drivel.
I’m sure you’re quite anxious to get back to watching Cl. Jessep’s Few Good Men speech in your underpants (again), so don’t let us hold you up.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:38 pmWe hate you to. Please don’t ever forget that.
Comment by Southern Man — November 12, 2007 @ 2:35 pm
come on, get to that dictionary, you moron. Of course you hate us, we beat the tar out of you in 1865. Get over it, and learn to live with being a loser. Bush has. condi has. Rove ran away to learn that lesson, zs did Powell. Follow your leaders and quit your pathetic whining!
November 12th, 2007 at 2:39 pmComment by DaveRywall — November 12, 2007 @ 2:38 pm
“tired and irrelevant” is a veru imaginative way to excuse your cowardice and lack of patriotism, Dave, points for that. Otherwise, enlist or shut up.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:40 pmThat dude spent 33 years and 4 months in active service and as best I can tell he is the one and ONLY DOUBLE recipient of the Congressional Medal of Honor. He said, “War is a rackett“. Which commenter here is a more qualified expert on the subject? “Bring-it-on”. http://www.warisaracket.org/
November 12th, 2007 at 2:40 pmTypical progressive answer to a question †What does win meanâ€.
Since I read that stupid answer to a question a lot here,
win (win), v.i. [p.t. and p.p. won, pr.p winning] to acquire by effort or gain by superiority; to be succesful, triumph;to be victorious in, as to win a game; to obtain as to win consent.
That is the definition of win. This came from my 7 year olds elementary dictionary. I would have used mine, but this short definition is more your speed.
Comment by Southern Man — November 12, 2007 @ 2:33 pm
Thanks for responding. I was beginning to suspect that you were a “typical regressive troll” who only answers questions for which he has ready talking pooints, and only then with invective, misdirection and lies. Thank goodness you’re not one of those.
Perhaps I should have been clearer.
What does “win the war” mean in the context of Iraq?
What is the objective in Iraq that we can “acquire by effort or superiority”? (Or that meets any of the other definitions you offered?)
A stable government? Our military has no control over that.
Control of the oil reserves? Nope, can’t be that, President Cheney said this was about freedom, not oil.
“Freedom for Iraqis”? Our military has no control over that, either.
So do tell us, Southern Man, what does “win the war” mean in the context of IRAQ?
November 12th, 2007 at 2:41 pmI know this is Veterans Day, but people need to remember that America didn’t win WWII by itself - all the Allies did. A little less Americentricness with the we won, FDR won etc etc, and a little more historical accuracy, pls thx.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:42 pmSmedley Butler, disgusted with warring for American corporations, died in the hopes that wingnuts like dave the coward and hits the moron would learn some lessons from his writings, but nothing has changed. Rich fat white men sending poor desperate kids to war for corporate profits. Shame on America for putting up with this.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:43 pmA little less Americentricness with the we won, FDR won etc etc, and a little more historical accuracy, pls thx.
Comment by DaveRywall — November 12, 2007 @ 2:42 pm
As long as you recognize that Bush would have lost it, fine.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:44 pmPosters like SM and DC are not worth the time to argue with them. They have no feelings for their fellow man, or woman. They are selfish, empty shells pretending to be human beings. They really are just space takers.
It makes them happy when they see real humans react to the loss of life and the destruction of our wonderful country even if they can’t understand the words honor, compassion and respect.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:45 pmCan you imagine how WW 2 would have gone with Bush as CIC?! Shudder.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:46 pmQ: Cookie Monster, why did you eat the cookie?
CM: I didn’t eat cookie. Cookie Monster don’t eat cookie.
Q: But Cookie Monster, you’ve got the cookie right in your hand. There’s cookie crumbs all over your fur.
CM: But I didn’t eat cookie. Cookie Monster does not eat cookies. Period.
Q: So what is that in your hand?
CM: What?
Q: That thing that looks like a cookie in your hand?
CM: Oh this. This am not cookie.
Q: It’s not.
CM: No. Media is mistaken. Biased. Left-wing. Cookie Monster could not be holding a cookie because Cookie Monster, as previously stated, do not eat cookie!
Q: So what is it?
CM: Freedom.
Q: It’s not a cookie, it’s “Freedom”.
CM: That is right. Cookie Monster redefine “cookie” as “freedom”, so when Cookie Monster eat cookie, Cookie Monster can lie right to your face and say Cookie Monster don’t eat cookie. He eat FREEDOM.
Q: Seriously?
CM: 9/11 changed everything.
Bush redefined Peace as War. Sweet, the republiidots are taking it hook line and sinker.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:46 pmComment by Southern Man — November 12, 2007 @ 2:42 pm
I love when you miss the points of a reply, as well as the humor and irony. Makes you look real stupid, and yet you continue to embarrass yourself. You are very much like Bush, are you also a fake southerner like him?
November 12th, 2007 at 2:46 pmSomebody needs to point this out:
I love when you type inâ€calm down†when someone responds to your BS. Makes you look real stupid…..calm down little progressive.
Comment by Southern Man — November 12, 2007 @ 2:42 pm
November 12th, 2007 at 2:47 pmyeah that assboy bush wasnt even born south fo the mason dixon line.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:49 pmI love when you type inâ€calm down†when someone responds to your BS. Makes you look real stupid…..calm down little progressive.
Comment by Southern Man — November 12, 2007 @ 2:42 pm
November 12th, 2007 at 2:50 pm…………………………………………………………………………………………………
Drinking all that kool-aid let to an irony deficiency.
Bush would’ve lost WWII, but his family’s pre-war Nazi ties would have ensured the family fortune would be safe.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:51 pmcorrection:
November 12th, 2007 at 2:51 pmDrinking all that kool-aid led to an irony deficiency.
People seem to have forgotten that the VFW and American Legion are today and have been for the last 100 years extremist right wing organizations. These guys in the early years of the last century were used as antiunion goons and strikebreakers. They are a self selected bunch. Eight of my uncles and father fought in WWII and not one of them would have anything to do with these groups. In Germany, Italy and England it was similar groups after WWI that provided the initial support for the fascists parties.
We should just keep this in mind when dealing with them. The Iraq vets should have forced the issue and just marched in the parade. It is not worth debating these cretins.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:51 pmBlack enlistments down Yo’ ‘hits’ … looks like Black-folk be catchin’ on … your boy Bush better round up all those Hispanic illegals next and get ‘em in uniform before he has to resort to putting Jenna in uniform. We all know he’d send her before going himself!
November 12th, 2007 at 2:53 pmAnd please tell where I am whining? Pathetic responses!
Comment by Southern Man — November 12, 2007 @ 2:52 pm
“We hate you to. Please don’t ever forget that.”
That isn’t whining like a 5-year-old?
Please, give it up. You’re over your head here, out of your league, outclassed, outgunned, outsmarted. Go on over to redstate or lgf, where you can bask in the collective room-temperature IQ.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:54 pmWow….who’s the latest troll? “Southern Man” seems to be going out of his way to make himself look stupid…
November 12th, 2007 at 2:55 pmWe should just keep this in mind when dealing with them. The Iraq vets should have forced the issue and just marched in the parade. It is not worth debating these cretins.
Comment by syvanen — November 12, 2007 @ 2:51 pm
Good points, s. My dad is a WW2 vet and would have nothing to do with them, either. A bunch of drunken crybabies, he thought.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:56 pmThe new breed of vets will have a much different look upon their country than the ones described by syvanen.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:57 pmLefty Patriot; thanks for fundraising for the WWII memorial. My grandfather and father-in-law were WWII vets.
November 12th, 2007 at 2:58 pm“Wow….who’s the latest troll? “Southern Man†seems to be going out of his way to make himself look stupid…”
November 12th, 2007 at 2:58 pm…………………………………………………………………………………………………
Usual leftist/John Kerry/Rovian Stormtrooper Commander
Comment by Southern Man — November 12, 2007 @ 2:58 pm
Why won’t you answer the question TROLL?
November 12th, 2007 at 3:01 pmSouthern Man sez:
I call bullsh!t. If victory was as simple and obvious as you would like us to think, you’d have no problem laying out the requirements for us.
Tell us, SM, how do you define “victory” in the case of Iraq, especially given that it’s not a ‘war’….it’s an occupation. How exactly does one “win” an occupation, SM?
November 12th, 2007 at 3:03 pmSo do tell us, Southern Man, what does “win the war†mean in the context of IRAQ?
Comment by ralph the wonder llama — November 12, 2007 @ 2:41 pm
It means what I asked? Do you or don’t you want to win the war? I am not going waste my time on someone such as yourself arguing what “win†means. This talking point that the left adopts is childish. But it is the left, so…ironic!
Comment by Southern Man — November 12, 2007 @ 2:58 pm
Seriously? This is your answer? Wow. I thought maybe you had a bit more game than this.
November 12th, 2007 at 3:06 pmHey Southern Man … Save Your Dixie Cups, the South will Rise again [NOT!]. My Great Great Grand Father fought for the 15th Virginia Cavalry and his sword is stashed here at the house. I’m a son of the Confederacy, but sooner or later you need to grow-up and recognize
1) the south was wrong,
2) the south lost the war, and
3) the war ended a very, very long time ago.
But hangers-on like you and Bushie miss it sooo much ya have to go involve us in Iraq’s civil war. 9 of the 15 hijackers on 9/11 were Saudis … when ya gonna get around to invading Saudi Arabia? Gotta love these Bush lemmings and sheep.
Yeah but, I’m sure all these good ‘CONS in here all know better than Teddy, right? Fools ;-)
November 12th, 2007 at 3:06 pmSo do tell us, Southern Man, what does “win the war†mean in the context of IRAQ?
Comment by ralph the wonder llama — November 12, 2007 @ 2:41
November 12th, 2007 at 3:07 pm………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Why are you afraid to answer this questionTROLL?
The day I’m in over my head here is the day I vote Clinton.
Comment by Southern Man — November 12, 2007 @ 3:04 pm
It’s a good thing SM can breathe underwater. He’ll never have to face the truth of his delusions. It’s probably the greatest kindness God has ever done for him.
November 12th, 2007 at 3:07 pmThere is no “war”. There is the AUMF and the Iraqi resolution but Bush isn’t keeping up with the goals of these.
November 12th, 2007 at 3:09 pmhellinabucket: You missed my point when your wrote “The new breed of vets will have a much different look upon their country than the ones described by syvanen.” The VFW and the Am Legion are not representative of vets in any war — they are a self-selected group of right-wing crybabies. Most served in behind the line support services, I know a few veterans who saw front line combat and they avoided these guys as a bunch of bullshit artists.
November 12th, 2007 at 3:09 pmDo you want to win the war first and then go home? Or do you want to lose the war and go home? Please tell?
Comment by Southern Man — November 12, 2007 @ 2:04 pm
Recommend (0) | Report Abuse
We’ve already lost the war, you idiot, thanks to your hero, GDumbya.
I want our troops home NOW. They shouldn’t have to pay with their lives for Dubya’s IDIOCY and VANITY.
November 12th, 2007 at 3:09 pmWe’re still waiting for an answer to the question, Southern Man.
A confession that terms like “victory” and “winning” are inapplicable to an occupation will also be acceptable.
November 12th, 2007 at 3:12 pmI support this group
November 12th, 2007 at 3:13 pmSM has yet to explain his and Bush’s meaning of “win”. Do you want Saddam to write and apology? Oops can’t do that. Do you want to own the country? Well you do and your taxes and mine are buying it daily.
Our military did EVERY CHANGING GOAL Bush kept raising….time to come home.
November 12th, 2007 at 3:14 pmI agreed with you syvanen. I’ve stayed away from these groups for that reason.
November 12th, 2007 at 3:17 pmWhere’s southern pansy? Off to whine about being out of Colt 45? Well, good, he was making the thread soggy.
November 12th, 2007 at 3:17 pmSouthern (wo)man: So tell us, just what are YOU doing to help “win” the Iraq war? Are you going to enlist?
Didn’t think so, coward.
November 12th, 2007 at 3:17 pmBush would’ve lost WWII, but his family’s pre-war Nazi ties would have ensured the family fortune would be safe.
Comment by DaveRywall — November 12, 2007 @ 2:51 pm
Dave, did you put down the koolaid? You’re making sense.
November 12th, 2007 at 3:18 pm