Jan 12 2007
Sadr’s Bluster, Boxer’s Hate
It is good to see decisive action being taken on Iraq. But what is most encouraging is all the souls being laid bare in the process. The facade’s of people are being ripped off as they are confronted. One facade now gone is that covering Muqtada al Sadr – the spiritual head of much of the Mahdi militia’s which are to be disarmed or destroyed. The bluster coming from Sadr’s group is classic “about to learn a lesson the hard way” middle east Arab. What us Star Trek fans would call a ‘red shirt’ role:
A spokesman for radical Iraqi cleric Moqtada al-Sadr has warned that US President George W. Bush’s new Iraq strategy risks sending thousands of American troops to their deaths.
“The American people have to prevent their sons from coming to Iraq or they may return in coffins,” said Sheikh Abdel Razzaq al-Nadawi, a senior official in Sadr’s movement in the Shiite holy city of Najaf.
Militarily the middle east is a wet noodle. The challenge has always been their penchant to kill each other with rampant bloodlust. It is very helpful, when it comes time to weed out that bloodlust, if they stand up and confirm their true nature. The Mahdi will be no more.
But right up there with this honest moment is the exposure of all the Bush Derangement Syndromes that are coming to the for as the Democrats go off on wild, insane tangents with the reality that holding a gavel is not all powerful (ask Newt). Barbara Boxer is the best examople as she tried to hit Condi Rice with a cruel comment about being childless. Clearly Boxer was being childish in her personal attack. And, Boxer insulted everyone who has lost a loved one fighting for this great nation:
“Who pays the price? I’m not going to pay a personal price,” Boxer said. “My kids are too old, and my grandchild is too young.”
While losing a loved on is hard, it should not be seen as ‘paying a price’. We all die. Some get to chose whether their death is for a good cause or is simply a useless loss. Drunk drivers cause useless losses. They make others ‘pay a price’. Criminals make others ‘pay a price’. What has been happening on the battlefields of late is a ‘sacrifice’. It is a priceless gift someone gave to all of us. It is an honorable sacrifice. And that is how those close to the person lost see it. They lost their loved one, yes. But they take pride and solace in the fact that loved one died doing what they wanted and in a cause they believed in.
That is the difference in ‘paying a price’ and making a sacrifice – the intentions of the one who died are either in conflict with conditions of the loss or in support of the conditions. Boxer is too BDS driven to comprehend the difference. In fact, she clearly implies to die for one’s country is to ‘pay a price’ – which means she really should not be in a leadership role. If she and her family cannot understand why people volunteer to fight and possibly die for this country, then they do not have the wisdom and insight to lead those people.
The common thread here is Boxer and Sadr see no value in the cause of America. Sadr sees body bags, Boxer sees body bags. Sadr sees discarded people, Boxer sees discarded people. Americans see heroes who gave us a precious gift that can never be forgotten or diminished. We understand these people did went into our battle because that was their calling. These were not the victims of a drunk driver, these were not useless deaths. And anyone who implies otherwise is actually the one who has become so deranged they cannot even retain respect for the wishes of the dead, of the message of their life spent for all of us. Boxer is a cold, hate filled person. Her life represents obsession and anger at not being considered as perfect as she sees herself in her own mind. So when faced with conflicts she lashes out. She should never be representing a state like California. The state is liberal, but it is not full of compassionless spite.
“it’s craziness like this (and like jamail hussein, and like kerry sitting alone, etc. etc. etc.) that makes the rightblogosphere increasingly marginalized in this country’s political discourse.”
It’s craziness like a political party that is the sole support of killing inconvenient children. A media that writes it’s own version of what ever the story, irregardless of the facts; a media that cooks up a non existent
human being to sell their enemy propaganda. A US citizen, who meets with our enemies during war time and goes in front of a Senate committee on Foreign Relations on 22 Apr 1971 and confesses and admits that he endorsed and adopted the enemies positions and is promoting them in this country, then is nominated by said political party to be their candidate for President of the US. A politicial party
where members who have taken an oath to defend the US, refuse to
allow the President to defend this nation, and instead want to impeach him for defending the US.
The reasons shown above, are but a very small portion of the reasons
that this nation must have a Strong right wing blog system
defending the United States of America, from American leftist terrorist enablers who want nothing except to destroy this great country.
In my opinion, if it had not been for the heroic efforts of the Swift
Boat Vets and some right wing blogs, this country would have already
done what so many of the Democrats say they want to do-Surrender.
The Jamil Hussein thing is particularly interesting because in that case AP has been exposed for lying. His name isn’t nor has it ever been Hussein. His “reports” included incidents far from his station. It is likely that nearly all of his “reports” were fabrications. And AP is more interested at attacking thei critics than in getting their story straight.
It is quite clear that at this point AP believes that nobody cares if they are accurate or not, just as long as there is a certain “truthyness” to the reports.
Harold, translation please. yob tvoyu maht.
Left by erp on January 12th, 2007
…..
Silly wabbit…it’s Klingon, obviously! LOL. If its good enough for congress, its good enough to repeat here – right? A quick visit to Hotair should fill you in on what that means.
…..
And just who the hell is this little freshman congress jerk from Wisconsin at orientation verbally assaulting Rove (in the restroom no less) and Cheney on the White House tour? I heard something about that today too. Webb seems to now have company in the deranged moron constituency.
Well if the chickenhawk nonsense has any merit then how can Boxer be a US Senator. After all she has to vote on these matters and she has never been in a war herself, nor has she or Hillary ever worn a uniform so what right have they to make these decisions.
As for the right being marginalized…just think of Cindy Sheehan taking over the press conference for the Dems. That would be the same Cindy Sheehan that loves Hugo Chavez, that would be the same Chavez who is cosying up with the Death to America crowd. Now that is marginal.
Terrye, by their twisted logic, if you have not been in the military you are qualified to vote against it, just not qualified to vote FOR it.
See? It is really twisted logic. It isn’t even logic at all, it is a fabrication pulled out of thin air.
“it’s craziness like this (and like jamail hussein, and like kerry sitting alone, etc. etc. etc.) that makes the rightblogosphere increasingly marginalized ”
Having read many responses to Bush’s speech on some of the more liberal websites, I find that remark to be very funny. Those folks said that they would like to see Bush impeached, shot, run out of the White House by an angry mob, or driven out by a military mutiny. You can read rants like that any day of the week. But, of course, we wouldn’t want folks like that to be considered marginal.
I think conservative bloggers point to facts, and leftist bloggers point at your face.
crosspatch:
Hey, don’t question their patriotism, just their sanity.
Even tho I served in Military voluntarily, I don’t feel as if it is any requirement for anything except veterans benefits. All Americans are eligible for all the benefits of citizenship and that especially applies to freedom of speech. But saying that, I don’t think it is very appropriate or patriotic for someone that does not serve to demean someone that is serving, That person is serving to protect those very rights I’m talking about.
Nobody should be for the defeat or harm to any military person.
It would be the grandest compliment to be considered marginalized by the Left. Truly. As we say, we would “consider the source.”
And frankly, regarding Jamil Hussein and Kerry…you have NO clue.
Pagar – a most excellent post on the left & Kerry.
Crospatch – to follow up on you earlier post on dems tactics, well, go back the last year or so leading up to the recent elections. Who do they trot out for spokespersons? Cindy Sheehan, who lost a son, so you cannot criticize or rebut her because she’s grieving and you/we don’t have a right unless we also have a son/daughter in harm’s way. Michael J Fox, another victim immune to criticism, even if he patently lied in his ads. And then there’s the 9-11 ladies … shameless & disgusting tactics, but now expected.
And speaking of the 9-11 families who lost loved ones. Well, it’s sad and tragic they suddenly and unexpectedly lost a loved one that day. But, that does not give them an extra say in how we as a country respond. 9-11 was as much a blow to me as a patriotic American as it was to anyone else, whether or not I lost a loved one. Giving these spouses a platform as if they suddenly were experts rankled me.
The talk of the day was…….
….Barbara Boxer’s incredibly classless remark to Condoleeza Rice. Rice appeared before the Senate in defense ……
I’ve been in one of Senator Boxers offices and her staff spent the entire time I was there (about 2 hours) Googling her name to put together a newsletter of her “accomplishments”. Shortly thereafter I was in Congressman Bonos office and her staff spent the whole time I was there talking to constituents on the phone and in person about illegal immigration issues. The difference was quite striking.
~RJH
Pagar,
Thanks for the outstanding comments.
Of course, Sen Boxer wasn’t attacking Rice for being childless. But she was trying to de-legitimize her. It has been a tactic of the Democratic left since the War began, by constantly noting Cheney’s lack of service and trying to minimize Bush’s. That is the very definition of demagoguery.
Wiley,
Well said. It’s as if the families of the Pearl Harbor victims had been given an extra say in WWII.
Okay….Barbara asked why someone didn’t confront the ones that keep calling the troops ‘children’. Makes me repeat my point about why we lost the last election. It started with all the confirmation hearings where the Repubs decided to sit quietly and let the Dems trash each and every one of Bush’s nominees. Not all the Repubs are guilty, but enough of them enjoyed rubbing Bush from the McCains/Grahams all the way through the moonbat Specters/Hagels. I asked at the time……why are these people not shouting down these insulting people? Why did they not have the cahones to confront them on camera about their INSULTS? Which Senator did you ever hear calling Boxer what she really is the first time she personally insulted Rice?
The good Congressmen lost their power because they thought they could push off all stink onto Bush while they hid and smirked or threw their jabs with McCain=torture, Spector=NSA, Collins=Katrina. Never has a bunch deserved it more. Just a darn shame it had to take down the good ones that tried to fight. They needed to stand up and stop the outrageous behavior of the Boxers from the beginning.
Carol talks about ‘livid’. Yep…..that was me when I listened to the rant on The View the day after Bush’s speech. It combined all the really nasty, hatefull elements into one. So I ranted back with something they probably never receive. I claimed this war. Yep…..I said that this was not George Bush’s war…..this is MY WAR. This is not Rosie’s UN country that their president has the right to decide the war was illegal……..this is MY country and Bush is MY president. Mine. MY WAR.
I thought it was time for someone to claim this war. ME. Only wish I could have seen the good Senators say the same thing back to the Boxers and Rosies of this world. Oh, I added that even though it was a Democrat that started Vietnam and was in office while about 50,000 died……Vietnam was MY war, my country, and Kennedy and Johnson were MY presidents. I refuse to let Bush receive all the credit. I wanted to go take out Hussein. I wanted to change the same-o, same-o approach of kissing Arafat’s azz. I wanted to get in the faces of all the people who have hid and attacked us since Iran took our embassy. MY WAR. They are coming…..they are here. The Boxers of this world are the ‘children’…….not our brave, volunteer fighting warriors.
The whole “chickenhawk†notion is stupid.
crosspatch, maybe. but my point wasn’t whether boxer was making a good argument, it was whether she did made any sort of personal attack on rice’s lack of children. i don’t think her remarks could reasonably be read that way. and, as i said above, i was embarrassed for all the bloggers on the right who insisted that she did. what a ridiculous attempt at “gotcha” politics.
Having read many responses to Bush’s speech on some of the more liberal websites, I find that remark to be very funny. Those folks said that they would like to see Bush impeached, shot, run out of the White House by an angry mob, or driven out by a military mutiny. You can read rants like that any day of the week.
dennissa,
okay, i’ll call your bluff. can you provide me one example of a liberal website that called for bush to be impeached and shot, and run out of thee whitehouse by an angry mob or driving out my a military mutiny.
give me a link. any link. it’s gotta have more than just a call for impeachment (let’s fact it there have been calls to impeach every president since at least nixon. that’s not nearly as marginal as any of the other things). if you really can “read rants like that every day of the week” finding me a link should be ridiculously easy
Well if the chickenhawk nonsense has any merit then how can Boxer be a US Senator. After all she has to vote on these matters and she has never been in a war herself, nor has she or Hillary ever worn a uniform so what right have they to make these decisions.
did you read boxer’s actually remarks that strata is huffing a puffing about? she applied the chickenhawk argument to both herself and rice. she said that no one in her immediate family was serving and that no one in rice’s immediate family was either. her point was that both of them are in positions to make decisions about this war but neither of them are directly touched by it.
it’s actually a good point, and to boxer’s credit that she also pointed out that she herself was in the same boat as rice. which is again why right blogistan’s attempt to spin her remarks into some kind of attack on rice’s fertility is so ludicrous
to follow up on my last comment, here is what boxer said:
(emphasis added)
see how boxer is clearly stating that neither she nor rice were “paying a personal price’?
Great post, Owl!
Yes, it is MY war, too! And MY President who I am extremely proud to claim…
Upyer you, as usual, miss the point.
Grown up professional people (what we should have in Congresss, but unfortunately don’t,see Barbara Boxer) should be talking about what is best for the country. It’s not what’s best for individuals. They shouldn’t be putting things on a personal basis.
Barbara Boxer’s comment was entirely personal and not even remotely professional. She owes an apology. Simple as that.
Whether her children are ‘involved’ or whether Rices’s children are ‘involved’ shoud have absolutely zero to do with the decision.
If Gen Eisenhower’s son had been in the invasion force for D day, do you think he would still have ordered the Normandy invasion? I do.
Do you think that should have been a consideration for whether D Day was a good idea or not?