You don’t think that those who have made a sacrifice have a little more invested than those of you who haven’t?
There you go again with this charge against an amorphous “The Left” that you can never identify when challenged. Okay, tell us, O Oracle - who is this “Left” you refer to? Are you suggesting there was a board meeting of The Left, perhaps chaired by Michael Moore and George Soros, at which it was decided to go recruit a Gold Star Mother for a publicity stunt? If that’s what you mean, you’re being even more ridiculous than usual. If it isn’t, put up or shut up.
You can only hope so.
Your credibility with cites is so spotty (to be charitable) that it’s time to demand one for this, too - including the date and the wording of the question, of course.
So when are *you * enlisting?
You really don’t know dick about how American politics really works, do you? Bush’s refusal is totally tone-deaf and politically damaging, especially given what he’s very publicly doing instead. Are you really that unaware how it’s playing?
Looked in a mirror recently?
When that actually happens, be sure to let us know. Meanwhile, be aware that you’re attempting to counter a fact with a fantasy, in the endless campaign by GOP partisans (such as yourself) to create self-excusing tu quoques, out of whole cloth when necessary. Do you ever wonder why your bullshit doesn’t work here? Ever?
Because he tends to balance them out with more spot-on analyses about equally egregious right-wing behavior as exemplified by the article in this month’s issue about the as yet un-indicted co-conspirator Karl Rove.
Actually, it doesn’t even make a dent in the chickenhawk argument. To do that, you would need a poll that shows that almost 80% of the people actually supporting the war served in it.
I’m sure it’s not nearly as hard to find active duty soldiers who support the war as it is to find family members of the Bush administration on active duty.
You know, it occurs to me that the Left is demanding that Cindy Sheehan be listened to respectfully and without any criticism of her motives, due to the terrible pain she has endured on behalf of her country. It doesn’t matter which liberal websites she’s posting on, it doesn’t matter which radical leftist groups are aligning themselves with her and it doesn’t matter at all if her position has (arguably) changed over the past year. Fine. Fair enough.
But you know what? I can think of another group of people who sacrificed for their country who recently decided to speak out against another politician. The Swift Boat vets. I don’t seem to remember the liberals in this country granting these 60 or so decorated combat veterans any slack when it was their turn criticize John Kerry. Do you? All I seem to recall is that they were called “liars” who were backed by “the GOP and Karl Rove.” Isn’t it possible, just possible, that the Swift Boat vets were just as honest in their criticism of Kerry as is Cindy Sheehan in her criticism of Bush? Or were they just being “used” by right-wing groups to help defeat John Kerry? I’m just asking…
The Swifties were indeed determined to be lying, pretty much right across the board. Read this for the facts. There’s no question of “slack”, nor is the accusation of lying just more rhetoric. The *fact * is that they *were * lying. Why should that not be discussed?
Uh huh. Sure. 60 or highly decorated combat veterans just decided to all get together and trash their reputations by ‘lying’ about John Kerry? I’m sorry, but you’re gonna have to do a little bit better than that. Your website is meaningless. Do you have any credible sources showing the Swift Boat vets all decided to lie about Kerry?
I didn’t figure Stephe96 would consider the Navy itself as a “credible sources” anyway. Because, by God, if they don’t agree with Rush, then they can’t be true Lalalalalala, I can’t hear you!
However, I will tell you the similarities between Shehan, ans Kerry. Both are victims of a right-wing smear machine, who will stop at nothing to get their “talking points’ (Sweet Jesus I hate that phrase) on the air.
Great. Works both ways. She’s obviously media-savvy and is using loosely related assets of the anti-war movement to get her message out to as many people as possible. Having read and seen her story in Spanish TV and print, I’d say she is doing just that.
And seeing how the Chimp is bleeding in the polls, the timing’s perfect too.
As is the Iraq invasion to emotionally disconnected cheerleaders such as yourself.
Horsefeathers, chickenlittle! Show them the “courage of your convictions” by visiting your friendly recruiting office – and yes, I’m pretty sure they’ll make an exception for a Canadian: U.S. seeking foreign fighters to fill Iraq jobs
Of course you’d expect a feeling of solidarity amongst the majority of the US rank and file; otherwise you’d have yet another insurgency to deal with and no one to fight it with – not you, Shrub, Scylla, or the majority of the Neocrazies. As for the troops, they are professional soldiers carrying out a mission. It’s what they are trained for and their lives often hang on that very esprit de corps that is fostered in the military – even if they don’t necessarily agree with their mission.
Having said that, I’d also like to see where you got your numbers from – you’re not exactly a bulwark of credibility as far as I am concerned. Plus there’s this:
On top of making near-constant references to Sheehan’s alignment with “radical leftist groups,” you keep engaging in hyperbole with regard to this amorphous group you call “the Left” (with a capital “L”). Since you appear to be painting with a bigger brush than any I’ve seen, I can only assume you’re talking about liberals in general, in which case I need for you to show me just exactly how “the Left” is demanding no one criticize Sheehan’s motives.
Oh, and I’ve been waiting patiently for 6 pages for your cite regarding the earlier assertion you made regarding how Sheehan is being controlled by either Michael Moore or MoveOn. Where is it? Put up or shut up.
Fine. The Left has no problem believing that sixty or so highly decorated combat veterans decided to get together and lie about John Kerry’s four months in Vietnam, totally trashing their reputations in the process. They made charges, by the way, that I don’t seem to recall Kerry as calling “lies.” In fact, I don’t remember Kerry addressing the Swift Boat vets at all. OK.
Now. Can’t these same liberals admit that there is a chance, a chance, that Cindy Sheehan who:
-Met with President Bush last year, had the chance to call him a ‘murderer’ to his face but didn’t. In fact, said very nice things about him…whether out-of-context or not, she still said them…
-Is now posting daily to Michael Moore’s website…
-Whose husband has filed for divorce and whose family is apparently asking her to stop her vigil and come home…
Can you libs admit that there is the chance that Sheehan has in fact been “gotten to” and is being used by a group of twisted Bush-hating extremist libs to suit their own agendas? Is it just possible? And if so, shouldn’t an investigation into her motives be welcomed? Even encouraged? Or is that too much of a ‘smear?’
I suspect she is being used. I don’t see why that is so hard to believe…or why it’s considered ‘trashing’ her to point it out.
