Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A Canadian Bush Backer Speaks Out

Posted on 12/03/2004 11:47:05 PM PST by aidanmac

A Canadian Bush Backer Speaks Out

Recently I got into a discussion with a few Canadian friends about the Bush victory in the 2004 Presidential election and the ongoing war in Iraq. These friends are well educated and cultured people with a preference for European wine and movies with sub-titles. I suppose they could be described as middle-of-the-road liberals and made for pleasant company at dinner over a bottle of Beaujolais Nouveau ... at least until the subject of George W. Bush came up.

Their reaction to the re-election of the President was unequivocal. Choice of language included adjectives such as "dreadful", "shocking", "appalling" and even "bizarre". Their self-righteousness was more akin to arch inquisitors passing judgement on a proven devil worshiper, rather than dinner companions airing views on a President of the United States.

When I offered a contrary opinion, there was a hush and eyes widened with genuine horror - as though the late hour had induced the first physical evidence of my ‘werewolf within’. One of them even said - "are you feeling alright Aidan?"

You see, I’m one of those anomalies in the Canadian dominion - a Bush backer. A partiality that induces some of my fellow citizens to regard me as ... if not exactly a brown shirt ... then at the very least a tan shirt.

In the majority of Canadian minds the standard Bush caricature reigns supreme; the idiot cowboy with his finger on the trigger of the greatest arsenal of weapons ever assembled in the history of mankind. They buy the stereotype of the phonetically challenged goofy guy with big ears who would seem more at home eating beans under a starry sky than sitting behind a desk in the Oval Office. So why don’t I see this also? Is it possible that an emissary of Karl Rove has slipped a President enhancing drug into our rural Ontario well?

I’ve always been a little suspicious of iconic Presidents. Clinton for example, with his majestic white mane and inclusive body language; master of the language and equally at home with an Ohio pig farmer and the head of the PLO. Reagan with his star appeal and charming malapropisms; shielded from accusations of idiocy by his transcendental belief in "the good" as personified by America. These legendary Presidents almost compelled belief by sheer force of presence. Something the reverend Sun Myung Moon is also rather good at doing.

By comparison, Dubya seems human and entirely fallible.

He reminds us of a guy we might encounter at the local sports bar or rub shoulders with in the bleachers during a ball game. Like most of us run-of-the-mill humans he screws up from time to time, mangles his grammar and even chokes on food at inopportune moments. He has daughters who have been known to act out and a wife who holds it all together with a stoicism that is instantly recognizable to those of us with an appreciation for self effacing, strong willed matriarchs. George is simply 'that guy'... the only difference being that he also happens to be President of the greatest superpower in the history of the planet.

In internet chat rooms and when talking with friends, Bush backers like myself are constantly accosted with the idiot word. "Bush is an idiot" has probably been recited more times than the Hare Krishna mantra, and yet despite a stratosphere that reverberates with the "Bush is an idiot" echo, I don’t buy it.

My reluctance to give the nod to the ‘Bush as idiot’ consensus doesn’t reflect either willfulness or perversity. When I observe Bush speaking off-the-cuff to reporters I see a guy with a folksy style who addresses the issues in a direct down-to-earth fashion. There are occasional moments of levity when he upstages a journalist or offers a witticism or two. Clearly this is a regular guy talking and not an icon, and therein lies the offence. For some, Bush is simply too human and they wonder how a President who looks and sounds like the guy next door, can ever be relied upon to do and say the right thing. But to leap from that assumption to the conclusion that Bush is therefore an idiot, is facile in the extreme.

After 9/11 he rallied Americans with his down-home appeals to the nation. When he stood on the smouldering debris of the towers with an arm around a fireman and spoke into a megaphone, he was one of us ... a surrogate doing what we all wanted to do most ... reach out to a nation reeling in a time of crisis.

When he made speeches at the U.N. and at military academies around the country, his words were of course scripted ... and yet there was nothing about either his diction or his delivery that was suggestive of an idiot. He speaks well, despite the occasional mangled word, and sometimes even speaks with energized power and conviction. All of which makes the ‘idiot fixation’ such an odd phenomenon.

Of course, these detractors will argue that going into Iraq was idiotic and will predictably cite the non-discovery of WMD as proof positive of idiocy. According to them Bush was acting from the most venal of motives; indulging his appetite for a personal vendetta and sacrificing young lives on the alter of his ego. For some reason these detractors feel more inclined to call Bush’s motives into question, rather than examine the despicable nature of the Iraqi regime and the long term consequences of leaving Saddam in power.

The entire world, and maybe even Saddam himself, believed erroneously that the regime was in possession of large stockpiles of proscribed weaponry, so when the larder was fond to be bare it prompted many to accuse the Bush administration of leading the everyone up the garden path. The compelling information that has surfaced concerning links between Saddam’s Baa’thist regime and Al Qaeda is simply disregarded by the President’s detractors. The genocidal excesses and expansionist tendencies of the Iraqi regime are similarly overlooked. Saddam’s funding of suicide bombers is disregarded, as is the presence in pre-invasion Baghdad of that most sinister of terrorist godfathers ... Abu Nidal.

In her book The War Against America, Laurie Mylroie claims that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed who was captured in Pakistan, may not in fact be Kuwaiti as he claims, but rather an Iraqi agent. Since Mohammed was an Al Qaeda operational leader, this information could well create direct ties between Iraq and the 9/11 New York attack, and so has important implications. Yet even such potentially damning information fails to move the die hard ‘idiot brigade’ who see in the person of Bush an atrocity that far exceeds even the rape room activities and genocidal excesses of the Baa’thists.

This odd fixation with Dubya’s inner idiot is compounded by the latter’s candid admission that he is a man of faith. Liberals by and large become alarmed at the prospect of God insinuating his way into the affairs of state. Some like Ann Coulter, have argued that this aversion is due to liberals devotion to the 'golden cow' of political correctness - something akin to a secular religion in and of itself. Coulter points out that while hundreds of references to the "Christian conservatives" and "religious right" occur in the New York Times, a Lexis-Nexis search of the entire New York Times archive did not succeed in unearthing even a single reference to "atheist liberals" or "the atheist left". Her not unreasonable conclusion, is that demeaning references are reserved for entities to the right of center.

Unlike his predecessors in the Oval Office who kept matters of personal faith in the closet, Bush has the temerity to refer candidly to God as if He actually exists and doesn’t hesitate to characterize terrorism and the states that support it as evil. Such candor is deeply disturbing to those liberals who view God as a type of quaint metaphor that nobody in the final analysis, takes seriously. Such Presidential utterances shocks them deeply - in much the way the psychiatric nurse was shocked by the ravings of the Jack Nicholson character in One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest.

In attempting to get to the roots of the knee jerk tendency to characterize the President as an idiot, I must also make some reference to ‘the line’.

There are some lines, such as union picket lines, that right wingers cross at risk of death and dismemberment. Even though all of the evidence and the call of destiny might necessitate the crossing of a non-negotiable line, the actually crossing of it brings unforseen consequences. Bill Clinton knew this very well. So while he was prepared to make shows of American military power by bombing a factory in the Sudan and ordering an air campaign in Kosovo, he was too much of a liberal to cross the scariest line of all. When Al Qaeda began testing the American will with bombings in the Middle East, most notably the attack on the USS Cole, the Clinton administration declined to act. Even when Dick Clarke, the former counter-terrorism czar, counseled a bombing campaign against terror camps in Afghanistan, the administration twiddled it’s thumbs and deferred. Opening a front with Al Qaeda was a scary line to cross and Bill Clinton wasn’t about to fire up the arab world and ruin fun times at home, let alone turn himself into a potential target for assassination.

The task of crossing that line fell to George W. Bush, and once he stepped over the line with the attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq - all hell, as they say, broke loose. The Iraq attack in particular, in the eyes of many liberals was the act of an idiot. To others, it demonstrated tremendous courage and a willingness to defend the United States at any price. The jury is still out, debating the final verdict. As Jacques Chirac recently remarked ..."history will judge". Of course, it’s easy to play the proctor when you are comfortably ensconced on the sidelines sipping a pernod.

The reflex tendency to dismiss Bush as an idiot trivializes the very real threat of international terrorism. The demonizing of the USA and it’s President simply provides a pillow for the enemy who are greatly comforted by the sight of the western media reducing America to a loathsome caricature.

In the final analysis, war polarizes and compels people to choose sides. The Bush detractors in N. America are operating in shrinking neutral territory. When the final verdict comes in, they may well find themselves further out to sea than they had ever dreamed possible.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 12/03/2004 11:47:05 PM PST by aidanmac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: aidanmac
In the final analysis, war polarizes and compels people to choose sides. The Bush detractors in N. America are operating in shrinking neutral territory. When the final verdict comes in, they may well find themselves further out to sea than they had ever dreamed possible.

Most of us remember that Ragan was also thought of as an idiot and a B grade actor for his entire presidency. Now he eclipses all but Roosevelt as the century's greatest president.

Bush's recognition will probably have to wait till after he is out of office, having accomplished a totally revamped tax code, Peace In Iraq and Afganistan, a Palistinian state starting to manufacture something beside suicide bombers and a collapsed European Union.

Maybe, just Maybe some of the left-over left will realize how wrong they were. But don't count on it.

2 posted on 12/04/2004 12:05:49 AM PST by konaice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aidanmac
That's nice... but I'll simply repeat what I tell the "Bush is an idiot" crowd:

People who are stupid, inattentive, or unable to master a lot of complex details very fast & very accurately-- don't fly high-performance aircraft...
...for very long.

3 posted on 12/04/2004 12:06:59 AM PST by backhoe (-30-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: konaice

President Ragan? Who was VP, Kang?

But surely, I jest.


4 posted on 12/04/2004 12:07:59 AM PST by yayforlater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: aidanmac

Gee Whillikers, aidanmac, you figgured it out. Got a grandson named Aiden Mc... Good name. And fuddle duddle the Bush-bashers, as our honorable leader might have said.

Mista Science


5 posted on 12/04/2004 12:10:40 AM PST by mista science
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aidanmac

Bravo for his common sense in a hostile environment.


6 posted on 12/04/2004 12:15:53 AM PST by lainde
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aidanmac
The world has turned upside-down.

America is seen as evil and Saddam is protected.

Bush is compared to Hitler and Saddam as the one who was unjustly taken from power.

How much longer will we have to wait for the world to right itself? Americans don't want to be hated the world over, but the world must understand...if we go down in this fight they will go down with us.

How can they hope for a failure in Iraq when it would mean doom for them as well?

7 posted on 12/04/2004 12:28:01 AM PST by processing please hold (Islam and Christianity do not mix ----9-11 taught us that)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aidanmac; Admin Moderator

Taken from this blog:

http://www.peaktalk.com/archives/000923.php


8 posted on 12/04/2004 12:31:23 AM PST by Slings and Arrows (Am Yisrael Chai!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aidanmac

"a wife who holds it all together with a stoicism that is instantly recognizable to those of us with an appreciation for self effacing, strong willed matriarchs."

This sentence is a gem of an insight totally lost on the 'rats and their media whores.

The 'rat attacks on Laura as some kind of dopey "xanax" First Lady who never held a "real job" may have cost the 'rats far more than they will ever realize.


9 posted on 12/04/2004 12:39:57 AM PST by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aidanmac
Great essay, Aidan, and welcome to Free Republic! (Did you lurk long before signing up?)

BTW - you could have mentioned that Bush's score on the Air Force Officer Qualifying Test put him at approx. the 95th percentile of the general population, while Kerry's score put him at the 91st percentile. Or the fact that Bush had an undergrad from Yale and an MBA from Harvard. In fact he lost his first congressional race in Texas to a Democrat who made a big issue out of Dubya's Ivy League credentials, successfully portraying W. as an egghead intellectual out of touch with "regular Texans".

I also think that a major factor driving Liberal's "idiot" view of W is just plain old bigotry - Religious bigotry and Sectional bigotry.

Liberals are without a doubt the most bigoted people on earth. Because of this huge myth they perpetuate about themselves that their support of "affirmative action" and race quotas and reparations makes them the exact opposite of bigoted, they are the last people on earth who would ever be able to look in a mirror and recognize a bigot staring back. Their belief in this myth is so strong that it allows them to slip deeper and deeper into the nastiest forms of bigotry without the slightest chance that they will ever clearly see themselves for what they really are.

They buy hook, line and sinker into Hollywood's perverted views of culture and politics. So they just KNOW deep down in their gut that anyone with a southern accent is the second stupidest form of life on earth. And those who publicly profess faith in Christ are at the very bottom of the intelligence pyramid. Bush is in both categories. And since they never doubt for a second the truth of their bigoted worldview, it is absolutely inconceivable to them that any thinking person could support Bush.

"It's inconceivable!" ..... "It's utterly inconceivable!" ..... "I don't think that word means what you think it means".

10 posted on 12/04/2004 1:00:46 AM PST by CardCarryingMember.VastRightWC (The heart of the wise man inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left. - Eccl. 10:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Slings and Arrows

Oops. Maybe he just forgot to give Kudos....or maybe he wrote that one too? Whoever it was, it's well done.


11 posted on 12/04/2004 1:04:49 AM PST by ALWAYSWELDING
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: CardCarryingMember.VastRightWC

I am a liberal democrat, and I feel that Osama has won... we have abdicated many freedoms, our country is divided and Americans are at odds with each other, and American forces have invaded a sovereign nation and our boms have killed or maimed tens of thousands women, elderly and infant civilians.

I detest Saddam, Osama and I condemn the Palestinian suicide bombers. I just disagree with the method by which we have toppled saddam. But what is more important, is I understand that you are all my fellow Americans, and my neighbors. We work in the same businesses, shop in the same stores, live next to each other.

The insults, denigration, name calling and put downs hurt our country. I work, have children, pay my taxes, I love America. I am not your enemy, democrats are not the terrorists amd do not support them. We need to bridge the divide. We are actually all on the same side, we just disagree on how to go about defending and running our nation. But if I saw you in a wreck on the side of the road, or in a burning building, I would risk my life to save you. I think you would do the same for me, I hope so anyway.

We are all good decent people. I refuse to hate my fellow countrymen. That is our biggest defeat.


12 posted on 12/04/2004 4:54:26 AM PST by Dragginfly (I am a liberal democrat But I am not your enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Dragginfly

You have it backwards; it is liberal Democrats who abhorently treat conservative Republicans as enemies. Are there exceptions? Surely. Just as there are to every rule.

What I and my kind are most interested in is, who is an enemy of my country (even unwitting Americans), as my country's soldiers are fighting and dying in the war on terror. If you don't see that war as including Iraq, bigtime, then I don't think anyone can convince you.

The facts of the Saddam Regime as a terror state, both internally and externally, are plainly out there to see.

And as is equally plain, there was no other way to take out that cancer without cutting it out. Saddam & Co. plus their terrorist fellows were never going to do themselves in, nor was France, Germany, Russia, etc. going to lift their dirty fingers that were so stained by Oil for Food.

Your only hope is to let go of the orthodoxy of Liberalism and get real.


13 posted on 12/04/2004 5:31:44 AM PST by txrangerette
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Dragginfly

I think your opening paragraph is an idicatin of how incorrect you are. From where did you gather the figure that tens of thousands of Iraqi elderly, women and infants have been killed or maimed by American bombs? Isn't this simply a figure that has been constructed out of thin air. I notice you have left men out of the count. Aren't men worth notice.
What freedoms have the American people surrendered in the war on terrorism? Can you point to one freedom that you no longer enjoy since the war began that you enjoyed before the war started? I don't believe you can.
Have you noticed the all out assault on the Christian and Jewish faiths by the liberal Democrats? Is this the lost freedoms you are referring to. The anti-God, anti-morals pimps of the ACLU are doing everything in their power to make this a Godless nation without one point on a moral compass. Anything goes as long as God and moral values aren't involved.
Sign me a conservative Democrat who is sickened by the plilght that the liberal agenda has foisted upon this nation.


14 posted on 12/04/2004 5:44:54 AM PST by em2vn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette
I teach a course in a university on writing persuasive research papers which emphasizes that in order to persuade people you need to see the other side of an argument so that you can address their concerns and therefore you can best persuade others to take your side.

To illustrate this I had a debate in class to present multiple sides of the argument for invading Iraq. I split the class into three sides: Invading Iraq was necessary, Iraq should not have been invaded and Iraq should have been invaded under certain circumstances. I purposely put people on sides that were contrary to their stance on the issue so that they could better understand an opposing view. I think everybody knows the arguments for the first two sides. Let me explain the latter argument.

These people feel that Iraq should have been invaded only if the political ground work was laid out so that the Arabic world would have a better understanding that this was not an attack on Islam. It has been described that by attacking an Islamic country without getting appropriate buy in from Arabic countries and selling it more or better to the populations of the nations who did participate in the coalition of the willing then the aftermath of the invasion would have been more successful. These people do not want to hand over our foreign policy to foreign governments by any means. They feel doing it this way was important because:

1) It would not be wise to piss off the Islamic world because that could further radicalize them and cause them to join the terrorists instead of helping us by informing on the terrorists. This has actually occurred according to Don Rumsfeld and numerous experts and media reports.

2) They feel that the best way to successfully setup a government in Iraq after our inevitably successful invasion would be for the local population to not feel like we were an occupying power as they currently do, according to recent polls. This thinking believes that because the US supports many governments in the region which the locals feel are despotic then our invasion would be just to install another government that is friendly to the US but not to their population. We all know that the US does not want to run Iraq, but the Arabic population has such ill will towards us because of our perceived favoritism towards Israel and other perceived despotic regimes that they don't believe President Bush when he says that we are not interested in controlling Iraq and that we will leave as soon as possible no matter how much he says it. Just because we install a democracy might not be enough because the Arab world might still look at it with a suspicious eye because mainly the US set it up and how can they trust us given what they perceive as our poor track record of supporting despotic regimes.

These middle of the road people felt that we needed to address this credibility problem and it was not addressed. I teach that when making a persuasive argument you need to establish credibility first by showing that you understand their issues. President Bush did this in his presidential campaign when he talked about mainstream values and based his positions on his Christian faith, therefore voters got a better feel of where he was coming from. The vote was so close that John Kerry could have won if he would have done a better job of establishing his credibility earlier on instead of letting the Bush campaign define him early. But, Kerry is a poor campaigner and did not do that.

I know it is a tough nut to crack, but these middle of the road people feel that if we cajoled these Arabic countries better then we would have had more of a Muslim face on the invasion of Iraq just like we had in the '91 Gulf War and therefore would have had a better chance of setting up a government post invasion. Many of Iraq's neighbors would have loved to have taken Saddam down. After all, he was a threat to them also, but these middle of the road people position is that the Arabic countries did not overtly support us because they were afraid of their own populations. The middle of the road people feel that the US should have done a better job of getting the Arabic countries to support us just like they did during the first Gulf War.

These middle of the roaders also think that because we did not get the buy in of the local populations of the members of the coalition of the willing these countries did not have as much resolve as we do. This was demonstrated when the Philippines pulled their troops when a Filipino was kidnapped. Their local population threatened to topple the government with protests. The first rule of many leaders is to not do anything that would get them kicked out of power. The Philippines pulling out gave the terrorists in Iraq an opening to reek more havoc on humanitarian agencies and other countries' forces. That is also the stated reason why Poland plans to pull out of Iraq in 2005.

This was not helped by disbanding the Iraqi army which Paul Bremer now admits was a mistake. Even our allies, the Kurds, feel like the US switched from becoming a liberator to an occupier when Bremer disbanded the Iraqi army. The Kurds feel that a better job of weeding out the true Baathists in the officer ranks would have been a much better tact to take.

This view believes there was a good way and a less fruitful way to invade Iraq and the manner that was chosen was not a very fruitful way as has been illustrated with the current events in Iraq according to them.

In regards to which side demonizes which side, I personally feel that both sides do a pretty good job of demonizing and abhorring the other side. Both sides feel they are in the right and that the other side does not listen to reason and logic. Maybe both sides need to just chill out and take a step back. But, unfortunately that is not how it is going to play out in the Congress. Republicans feel emboldened to enact what they want and Democrats will just attack more due to these tactics. You might remember this is what happened between '93 and '94 when the tables were reversed. Back then editorials were written that said that Republicans were going to become a long time minority party. If Republicans get too aggressive then they could end of having the tables turned on themselves.
15 posted on 12/04/2004 2:36:23 PM PST by netengineer (RE:A Canadian Bush Backer Speaks Out)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Dragginfly

Sniff, Sniff, do I smell a RAT?


16 posted on 12/04/2004 3:05:51 PM PST by Lancer_N3502A
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: aidanmac

Get new friends.

They have contracted the Michael Moore virus. They cannot be reached. They will make themselves look absolutely stupid to defend what they think. They will spew forth the most outrageous, irrational nonsense imaginable.

Move on...say good-bye. It isn't worth it. This runs much deeper than politics.


17 posted on 12/04/2004 4:10:24 PM PST by JudyinCanada (Five-fingered Canadian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dragginfly
I am a liberal democrat,

Welcome to FR, and thank you for your reply to my post.

our country is divided and Americans are at odds with each other

Agreed. And why is that? GWB's response to terror was to attack terrorists and terrorist-harboring and terrorist-abetting countries. Democrat's response to terror was to attack Republicans. Which is more divisive to our country? GWB was compared to the Nazis in a film short on one of George Soros's many pet organization's websites. Would you consider that divisive? Numerous well-known Democrats have called our President an "idiot". Here in Colorado we were flooded with ads showing a lookalike to our GOP Congresswoman picking the pocket of a corpse in a funeral home and of a soldier fighting in Iraq

You are right in saying that our country is divided. It is too bad you didn't follow that sentence with an apology on behalf of your fellow liberal Democrats for the fact that we are so sharply divided.

our bom[b]s have killed or maimed tens of thousands women, elderly and infant civilians.

You have been sadly misinformed. But at least you are making an attempt to correct the situation by being here of FR. I am of course hopefully assuming that you will stay and frequently read what FR has to offer, and that you didn't just come for a quickie drive-by shooting.

18 posted on 12/04/2004 10:32:05 PM PST by CardCarryingMember.VastRightWC (The heart of the wise man inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left. - Eccl. 10:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette

Well, you folks think everything is one sided, you are so self righteous that you ignored my attempts to find middle ground. The sad truth is both siodes bash each other. I have been spit on, called a traitor, threatened with violence... by conservative republicans, and for quietly and peacefully showing my support at a vigil. So it goes on on both sides. I admit that, why can't you?

I would still risk my life to save any of you if the situation presnted the opportunity.I get the feeling you would let me die.

As for the tens of thousdands of civilian deaths, are you really denying it? At least tell my why it is worth it, that war has a cost, that it is for our freedom. But break your denial. My brother is there right now. I have read his letters. Bombs kill people. My brother is in the army and at least he admits that. There has been mass casualties, but how would you know, the "liberal media" does not show any of it in America. None, it is whitewashed, blacked out.
You folks are filled with hatred. You despise "liberals" but feel above any form of criticism at all. If my brother is killed in this war will I get even a particle of respect then? My post was polite and decent.

You all completely ignored my ststements that America needs to come together. You enjoy the division it seems. Do I have a right to oppose this war without being an idiot, or a traitor? I am an American, I am proud of that, and I demand my right to an opinion without being insulted. Shame on you. Am I an evil person because I am concerned with the children being killed. I have seen the pictures, it is happening, dispute the numbers, but at least accept that fact. Cn't I noppose Saddam and Osama without agreeing on the strategy? There are military people who opposed this war, are they traitors and fools too? I thought just maybe I could be involved in a dialogue here without being attacked. I was wrong. God help America. I pray that some day we will be able to live and disagree together in a civilized manner without hatred and insults being hurled back and forth. I refuse to fight with my fellow countrymen. My husband warned me about posting here, I was wrong and he was right. I am still a liberal democrat, and I am still not your enemy...maybe I am wrong, let me rephrase that...you are not my enemy. You are my neighbors, and I am trying to respect you. More than you are offering me I gues.


19 posted on 12/04/2004 11:56:35 PM PST by Dragginfly (I am a liberal democrat But I am not your enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Dragginfly

before you criticise me for my typos I have multiple sclerosis. I am not seeking any pity, I need none, but that is why my typing is sometimes off. I want you to know how much we liberals all fear you. We fear being shot or attacked for our beliefs. I wish there was a way to let you see through my eyes so you would know that I am a good person, and a proud American, and that I just have a different opinion. I apologize for the signs with Bush as a nazi, and for the boneheads on our side who do and say such things. To think that we all support that stuff is crazy and innaccurate.

I have looked at your websites. You laugh at us, call us names, make fun of our ethnicity, make fun of our weight and appearance. And then you have the gall to quote Jesus Christ in the next breath. No, I will not shrink from the discomfort and insults. I will continue to attempt to communicate decently, and try to mend the dicision. It hurts our shildren to see such hatred on bith sides. Both sides are equally guilty, just like with Israel and Palestine. Both sides make mistakes, both sides have boneheads who do terrible things. I apologize for ours, and ask your forgiveness. I am an American, and I am afraid of you folks. Perhaps you like it that way, I don't know. Some of you, anyway. Sorry for posting so girthy, I will go away and let you have your website. God Bless America, both red and blue America, and especially the true America which is purple. God Bless You all.


20 posted on 12/05/2004 12:09:09 AM PST by Dragginfly (I am a liberal democrat But I am not your enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Dragginfly
I’m not sure how familiar you are with Free Republic, but since you’ve shown up – I’ll respond to your post. I’m more hopeful and optimistic that you are. You seem like you’ve already given up – saying that Osama has won and we’ve lost our freedoms, etc. And you don’t have your facts right about the number of civilian deaths. Around here you need to *prove* statements like that - not just blithely make them. It’s my understanding that there have been somewhere around 10,000 – 15,000 civilians killed.

I think that there are decent people who opposed the war. And I think that there are vile folks like Michael Moore and the kind who are violent and hateful at anti-war rallies. I’m sure you know who I mean.

The war to take out Saddam became inevitable, imo, when countries like France and Canada made it clear that they would never cooperate or support us. France, of course, it turned out was raking in the dough through the Oil-for-Food scandal and wanted to keep Saddam in power. So war became inevitable and we have lost some of our best and bravest...which is tragic. I hold a grudge against countries like France and Canada because with their support – war could have been avoided.

21 posted on 12/05/2004 12:39:00 AM PST by Sunsong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: netengineer
Your post about your class and your debate with three sides of the Iraq issue is interesting. But I don’t think it’s helpful. The decision was made and the war is underway. What is needed now is support for the war. What is needed now are people who can make a difference in creating success in Iraq.

Debates about what should or should not have been done can be real interesting – especially to the debaters – but now that we are there, those who opposed the war (for whatever reasons) need to get on-board, imo, and help us succeed.

Also, I don’t think you are necessarily correct about Arabs. I think that as Afghanistan succeeds, as Iraq succeeds, as the election takes place (which I’m sure that it will), as Palestinians elect a new leader, change will be accepted. I agree with President Bush – there is a natural yearning in the human heart for freedom. What we are doing in Iraq is removing the obstacles so that the Iraqis can establish their own government.

Stick around and be a part of something that is beautiful and good because that’s what’s happening…Afghanistan and Iraq are places of tremendous change and the change is better for all of us.

22 posted on 12/05/2004 12:51:03 AM PST by Sunsong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Dragginfly; txrangerette; Sunsong
I and TXrangerette and Sunsong are the only ones who replied to your posting above. And I thought that all 3 of us were pretty reasonable in our responses. So if you truly want a dialog here, you can have one. For instance, you could start by backing up your original assertion of "tens of thousands" of women/children/elderly killed by citing some credible references, seeing as how we have challenged you on that statement.

But somehow I suspect you never had any intention of carrying on a meaningful dialog. Am I right? Your response to us - including such lines as, "You folks are filled with hatred" or "I would still risk my life to save any of you .... [but] I get the feeling you would let me die" tells me a different story. It makes me suspect that you just want to play the role of "victim," and this need is strong enough that you will sign in to a conservative forum and identify yourself as a "liberal democrat" in the hopes that someone will yell at you and insult you so that you can copy/paste it into an email to your friends and say, "See? Look! I've been victimized! By those hate-filled conservatives we've been warned about!"

But when nobody here would say the nasty things you expected us to say, you decided to play the victim anyway and grossly distort what we said to you. So the bottom line is that it didn't really matter what we said, did it? You were determined to find "hatred" in us, so when it wasn't in the lines, you just went ahead and read it between the lines.

You're welcome to prove me wrong.

23 posted on 12/06/2004 11:56:42 PM PST by CardCarryingMember.VastRightWC (The heart of the wise man inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left. - Eccl. 10:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: netengineer
middle of the road people feel that if we cajoled these Arabic countries better then we would have had more of a Muslim face on the invasion of Iraq

I'm a real newsaholic, and I read reams of opinions from all sides leading up to the war. But I don't once remember any naysayers suggesting we had to line up more Arab allies before invading. No way. All of the naysayers I remember were demanding either that we not invade at all, or that we wait for UN sanctions to work (another 12 years??).

Can you back this up? Do you have any references to pre-war opinion pieces that made the argument that if only we could get more Arab countries to join the coalition then it would be just fine to invade?

24 posted on 12/07/2004 12:05:45 AM PST by CardCarryingMember.VastRightWC (The heart of the wise man inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left. - Eccl. 10:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: CardCarryingMember.VastRightWC

You are correct. I apologize, and have little excuse for my emotional reply, so I won't attempt one. As for tens of thousands of civilians killed, there is an estimate of 100,000 killed in Iraq since the beginning of thw invasion. Logic would dictate that a percentage of them are civilians, and a percentage women and childre. It was my brother, who is in Mosul, who estimated 10-20% civilian deaths, from the bombings. Have you seen the pictures of the injured babies? There are scores of them. I will come back with the most credible refernce I can find, but it will be hard considering the policy to not disclose the numbers (for obvious political reasons, justv like the decision not to show burials or caskets). My brothertold me that Bush has not attended a funeral yet. I do not know if that is true or not.

Since the US government has chosen not to count (or release the count) of Iraqi deaths, how can anyone substantiate any number? We cannot. Let me rephrase my comment: Women, children and elderly civiliansd have died as a result of American bombs and bullets. I know our Army would never deliberately target civlians, but they are caught in the crossfire, they are killed by the bombs, it is unavoidable.
I would have preferred a unilateral invasion as a last resort, we can disagree forever whether it was one or not. I believe not.

I stand by my opinion that liberals and conservatives need to bridge the gap, mend fences as best possible, because we are all Americans, and both sides are comprised of many decent and good patriots, as both sides have boneheads too.

I did a very poor job so far, please do not let my emotional outburst reflect on other liberals. BTW: My car, with many bumperstickers, was firebombed a year ago (with a jumo roman candle lit and placed in the front seat and a Bush/Cheney sticker put on the window), it was then attacked 6 times with a paint-gun (I just washed it off), and my house has been egged. I have been spat upon, told to get a job, get a life, called a communist, a socialist, a lesbian, and a traitor... by right wing conservatives. Most of this happened while I was standing at a silent vigil, some when I standing in front of the federal building.

That does not condone or excuse my outburst to ya'll, but it is the reason I am so wound-up and defensive.
It was totally unfair of me to dump on you folks the way I did because of the things I have read and seen on other conservative right wing republican sites, or for the threatening and terrible treatment I have recieved by other individuals of that persuasion, and I deeply regret my words to you. I thank you for your calm and reasoned response. Have you seen the critique of your site at: http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2003/12/27/173837/60

Thak you for not erasing me, you may think me a wing-nut, but I am a fellow American who walks my talk, loves my country, and have 3 kids of draft age. I have never missed an election, support the troops competely, and strongly disagree with president Bush's policies. I hae knitted 7 red, white and blue afghans and sent them to my brother to distribute among his comrades. My brother strongly opposes the policy of the Iraq War too, btw. He feels we/he has no business there, and that we have already lost the war. He follows orders, does his duty, and is risking his life.

Peace and justice, Vivian-


25 posted on 12/07/2004 3:12:03 AM PST by Dragginfly (I am a liberal democrat But I am not your enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Lancer_N3502A

What's that supposed to mean?


26 posted on 12/07/2004 3:17:40 AM PST by Dragginfly (I am a liberal democrat But I am not your enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: CardCarryingMember.VastRightWC; Dragginfly
It's important to get your facts right when discussing politics with conservatives - so if you really mean it that you want to bridge the divide please don't dishonor us with "estimates" and "guesses". Conservatives want the facts...they are truth seekers. The left-wing propaganda group spewing the lie about 100,000 civilian deaths has no credibility. Tell yourself the truth, dragginfly -- don't you think that if there were anywhere near that number of civilian casualities there would have been front page stories and pictures all over the world. This is from Reuters (no friend of conservatives) today:

But the Iraq Body Count (IBC) -- an Anglo-American research group tracking civilian deaths via numerous sources -- has come up with a much lower toll of about 14,000-16,000.

27 posted on 12/07/2004 10:43:43 PM PST by Sunsong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Sunsong

Sunsong, I had in my last post rephrased the statement to say simply that civilians have died. I have apologized for my response, perhaps I should go further and apologize for my previous numbers. I apologize for my previous numbers.

You imply that conservatives are the only truth seekers. I hope that is not what you meant, I believe there are truth seekers on both sides, and that sweeping generalizations are incorrect regardless of who makes them. Perhaps I have taken the statement wrongly, if so, then hell, I apologize for that too. Some day maybe someone will respond to me in a conciliatory tone, after the lengths I have gone to to humble myself and attempt to make sincere ammends. I am not playing victim, I am just being a human being with a sincere desire to make some peace with my fellow Americans, regardless of political affiliations.

There are pictures all over the world. Have you seen the news in Europe, or Asia, or South America? It is only in the USA that pictures of civilian casualties do not make it on the evening news. I am not suggesting that there are tens of thousands, just thousands.

I ill not give up my attemps at dialogue with folks on the other side of the fence. There is too much at stake. I want to be able to tell my children that I tried to reach out, to understand, and to bridge the divide in some fashion for their future, and for the future of the greatest country in the history of the world. The terrorists love the division in America. I do not want to give them that satisfaction.

Regards, DF-


28 posted on 12/07/2004 11:32:46 PM PST by Dragginfly (I am a liberal democrat But I am not your enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Dragginfly
Sunsong, I had in my last post rephrased the statement to say simply that civilians have died. I have apologized for my response, perhaps I should go further and apologize for my previous numbers. I apologize for my previous numbers.

Here is what you said:

As for tens of thousands of civilians killed, there is an estimate of 100,000 killed in Iraq since the beginning of thw invasion. Logic would dictate that a percentage of them are civilians, and a percentage women and childre. It was my brother, who is in Mosul, who estimated 10-20% civilian deaths, from the bombings.

And I repeat, the leftwing proganda group putting out the lie about 100,000 civilians deaths has been discredited. So, I would suggest, it was not helpful in any way to bring it up. It is not acceptable to conservatives to tell us about “estimates” or “guesses” or what someone you know said. Conservatives are interested in facts. They are truth seekers as a rule.

It is not helpful to assume that when I say that conservatives are truth seekers, I am implying anything. But it would be helpful if you take that seriously, since you have entered a “conservative” website. Please be respectful of those here and do not make assertions that you cannot back up with facts. For instance what you say here:

There are pictures all over the world. Have you seen the news in Europe, or Asia, or South America? It is only in the USA that pictures of civilian casualties do not make it on the evening news. I am not suggesting that there are tens of thousands, just thousands.

Perhaps you have not been at Free Republic long or you would know that all kinds of international news is posted here. We are familiar with Foreign news sites. There are no pictures that give evidence of thousands of civilians casualties, which is what you claimed – and what you seem to be continuing to. I have written to you already about your pessimism amd doom and gloom attitude. I think you are way off base with your negativity. I think that the liberation of Afghanistan and Iraq are beautiful and good acts of a good and decent country. And I think that the future for millions of people is now much, much more hopeful because of the policies of President Bush.

I ill not give up my attemps at dialogue with folks on the other side of the fence. There is too much at stake. I want to be able to tell my children that I tried to reach out, to understand, and to bridge the divide in some fashion for their future, and for the future of the greatest country in the history of the world. The terrorists love the division in America. I do not want to give them that satisfaction.

I repeat myself. But perhaps in the repeating, it will have more meaning to you. If you honestly want to dialogue with conservatives – take care to tell the truth – take care to have facts to back up your assertions and show respect for the conservative point of view. Then you will find that people will respond favorably to you.

Good luck

29 posted on 12/07/2004 11:57:16 PM PST by Sunsong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Sunsong

Sunsong, although I may have blown my opportunity at the starting gate, I have a heartfelt desire to engage in productive discourse with "red state" folks like yourself.
I most likely will need the good luck you wished me after my poor performance. I do have numerous pictures of limbless, burned and bandaged babies. They do exist, and I would ask for an understanding that I am concerned about my brother's life, and equally concerned with the civilian casualties that are undeniably collateral damage from war, this "war" is no exception.

Of course Blair, today, opposed a review of civilian deaths:
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2004-12/08/content_2310397.htm \

A group of ex-diplomats, military men and academics has called on Tony Blair to hold an inquiry into civilian deaths in Iraq. They say the UK has a duty enshrined in international law to record the deaths: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/4079059.stm

Here are some places you can read about the other perspectives on the war from Iraqi and other journalists reporters http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=30

Would one presume to claim that the Red Cross is just a bunch of whiney liberals? They put their lives on the line to do the work of Christ in the worst spots all over the globe. They are highly critical of both the abuses at Guantanamo Bay and in Iraq that have inflamed global opinions of the US: http://www.wpherald.com/Human_Rights/storyview.php?StoryID=20041201-101827-6199r

Over 1,200 American soldiers have died in Iraq. The official count of the wounded is 8,956, though unofficial estimates almost double this, putting the total at between 15,000 and 17,000. The Iraqi casualties, of course, are far higher. A group of independent American and British researchers, Iraq Body Count, having collated published figures, puts the number of Iraqi dead between 14,454 and 16,604, but acknowledges that since they require stringent proof for every mortality, their total “is certain to be an underestimate.” It was the renowned British medical journal The Lancet published a study estimating civilian deaths at over 100,000. That study was conducted by researchers at Johns Hopkins University in Maryland and the College of Medicine at Al Mustansiriya University in Baghdad, using sophisticated modern statistical sampling of overall mortality figures. But I guess you will dismiss them as lunatic liberals manifesting those numbers out of thin air.

Health service in Iraq is dismal as well: http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2004-12/01/content_2280305.htm

I could go on. To suggest that there is only one valid perspective is to be in denial of the complexity of these issues and the extensive plethora of data and facts that are out there for all to see.

I hope that I have done a slightly better job at offering my viewpoint in something other than my disgusting emotional outburst that I will probably never live down to you folks. Believe it or not, I am sincere in healing some of the wounds betwen both camps. This is probably not the place for it, but as long as you folks allow me to communicate with you I will attempt to do so in a respectful & factual manner. This is your site, and it could be said that I am intruding. I appreciate you coninuing the discourse with me, and I wish you and your loved ones good health, and a very happy holiday season, sincerely.

God bless, Viv-


30 posted on 12/08/2004 2:40:40 PM PST by Dragginfly (I am a liberal democrat But I am not your enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Dragginfly

more: At a minimum, Bush is responsible for between 14,619 and 16,804 Iraqi civilian deaths during the 21 months since the invasion. Compiled from hospital, morgue, and media reports, these figures understate civilian deaths. In keeping with Islam's quick burial requirement, many Iraqis were buried in sports fields and in back gardens during protracted U.S. assaults on urban areas. The British medical journal, The Lancet, (medical journal a liberal propaganda machine?) estimates that 100,000 Iraqis have been killed since March 20, 2003. This figure does not include the large number of Iraqi deaths from the embargo and U.S. bombing for more than a decade prior to the U.S. invasion, however.

Projecting the reported Iraqi civilian deaths for four more years of U.S. occupation produces a figure of 51,621 civilians killed as "collateral damage." Projecting The Lancet's figure produces a figure of 328,571 civilian deaths by the end of Bush's second term, but let's not go with just the lancet.

Then there are the civilian injured, for which there appear to be no figures. If we assume the same ratio of killed to wounded for civilian deaths as holds for the U.S. military, the reported death figure gives a civilian wounded figure of 392,320. The Lancet estimate gives a wounded figure of 2,497,139. So I am fine with foregoing the Lancet figures. Either way, there are a heck of a lot of civilian causalties.


31 posted on 12/08/2004 2:56:02 PM PST by Dragginfly (I am a liberal democrat But I am not your enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Dragginfly

Last entry, you asked for facts. This is the Miami Herald.
War detsroys' Iraq's future (children): http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/opinion/10258803.htm?1c


32 posted on 12/08/2004 3:08:21 PM PST by Dragginfly (I am a liberal democrat But I am not your enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Dragginfly
Pacifists for Genocide is expanding their membership I see.

You folks have no shame.

The mass graves, Habalja, the bounty paid by Iraq to the murderers of Jews and Americans and his grant of sanctuary to every deadender terrorist with nowhere else to go simply flies right over your empty squash.

33 posted on 12/08/2004 3:23:28 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Dragginfly

'I would still risk my life to save any of you if the situation presnted the opportunity.I get the feeling you would let me die.'

Now that is an odd statement. I wouldn't know you were a lib in a situation like that. So as a conservative I'm just a coward? Hateful would be throwing you back AFTER finding out you are a lib.

'You are correct. I apologize, and have little excuse for my emotional reply, so I won't attempt one. '

Try anyway. Would show you are sincere and not a 'bomb thrower.'

During the campaign did you speak out about the excesses of the Left? If not, you are similar to the Muslims who don't condemn violence. Words have effects.

If you are really interested in mending America, you have to stop spouting the propaganda of the Left.

'As for the tens of thousdands of civilian deaths, are you really denying it? At least tell my why it is worth it, that war has a cost, that it is for our freedom.'

Not denying deaths, but to think there would be no civilian casualties in a high intensity conflict is foolish. By the way, how do you know who were 'civilians'. They are having a tough time now. Consequence free conflict and casualty free war are not realistic ideas. Reality awaits you.

And it wasn't for freedom necessarily, but for your security to have freedom.


34 posted on 12/08/2004 5:03:08 PM PST by xone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Dragginfly

'This figure does not include the large number of Iraqi deaths from the embargo and U.S. bombing for more than a decade prior to the U.S. invasion, however.'

Saddam had absolutely NOTHING to do with those. Riiiight.


35 posted on 12/08/2004 5:05:08 PM PST by xone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Dragginfly

As to your tagline, after the machinations of the lib left, you'll understand if I don't take that at face value. Lib democrats are proving to be the enemy of the US.


36 posted on 12/08/2004 5:07:26 PM PST by xone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: pbrown
How much longer will we have to wait for the world to right itself?

It won't, so get used to it.

Americans are driven to be the best and most powerful but we really don't want to do anything with it except be left to happily toddle on our merry way.

World domination? Who needs it? We have more interesting things to do.

The world doesn't get it because they don't think that way. If they had half the power we did they would use it for..well...taking over the world. That is the way "normal" people think.

We don't think like that but it doesn't stop them from being terrified that we will. We are in their eyes a very real and present danger because we must want to take over. Indeed, we must. And everything they see is through that distorted prism.

So Saddam must be backed because he provided a "check on American Power." Except of course he didn't and bit by bit we are squashing those who mean us harm like bugs. (which they quite understand) and then re-build what we messed up in the bug hunt and walk away. At that point smoke begins pouring out of their ears. They don't get it. So it must be part of some evil American plot to take over the world because that must be our goal.

Anything else is unthinkable.

37 posted on 12/08/2004 5:27:50 PM PST by Harmless Teddy Bear (Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum europe vincendarum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Dragginfly
I am a liberal democrat, and I feel that Osama has won...

Feelings nothing more then Feeeelings

We have abdicated many freedoms

Name three.

our country is divided and Americans are at odds with each other,

Then quit dividing. And we have always been at odds with each other. You did read the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers didn't you?

and American forces have invaded a sovereign nation

You would prefer we invaded an dependent nation?

and our boms have killed or maimed tens of thousands women, elderly and infant civilians.

Which was ok under Clinton but not now. (PS your statistics are off by a magnitude of ten)

I detest Saddam, Osama and I condemn the Palestinian suicide bombers.

And I should buy that because....?

I just disagree with the method by which we have toppled saddam.

Why yes we should have just continued to let him shoot at our pilots. I can see how that would be just peachy with you.

But what is more important, is I understand that you are all my fellow Americans, and my neighbors.

And I should believe that because....of the brother love you have shown? Hmmmm?

We work in the same businesses, shop in the same stores, live next to each other.

Finally a bit of truth.

The insults, denigration, name calling and put downs hurt our country.

Funny that it never bothered you before.

I work, have children, pay my taxes, I love America.

The last is a bit doubtful. Maybe it depends on what the meaning of the word love is.

I am not your enemy, democrats are not the terrorists amd do not support them.

That was why you protested when Clinton pardoned a bunch of terrorists, right?

We need to bridge the divide.

And once again I must comment on the strange fact that that never bothered you before. One might be forgiven for thinking that you had an agenda.

We are actually all on the same side, we just disagree on how to go about defending and running our nation.

I hate to break it to you but that is not being on the same side.

But if I saw you in a wreck on the side of the road, or in a burning building, I would risk my life to save you. I think you would do the same for me, I hope so anyway.

Nice dream isn't it? Why do I doubt you doing any such thing?

We are all good decent people.

Except for those that are trying to get as many Americans killed as possible. That would be your side I believe.

I refuse to hate my fellow countrymen.

But support policies that would get more of us killed. Your idea of hate is nearly as strange as your idea of love.

That is our biggest defeat.

Hating Evil?

Yes, I can see where it would be easier for you if we didn't.

38 posted on 12/08/2004 5:47:54 PM PST by Harmless Teddy Bear (Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum europe vincendarum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Dragginfly
We fear being shot or attacked for our beliefs.

Oh please cut the CRAAAAAAAP!

It was not the offices of Democrats being broken into, shot up and vandalized.

You want to bridge the divide? I doubt it. But on the off chance....Maybe you could try to keep from shooting at us?

Maybe you can keep your union thugs in line?

You get your damn house in order and then maybe we can talk. But I have absolutely not respect for people who shoot from the dark and then whine when their tails are righteously kicked at the ballot box.

39 posted on 12/08/2004 5:56:14 PM PST by Harmless Teddy Bear (Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum europe vincendarum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Dragginfly
Sunsong, although I may have blown my opportunity at the starting gate, I have a heartfelt desire to engage in productive discourse with "red state" folks like yourself.

So you say over and over. And yes, you have blown your opportunity and continue to. You are bombing here, dragginfly, and I wouldn’t be surprised if you are banned in the not too distant future. It’s like you absolutely refuse to listen. You cannot have a “productive” discussion if you are unwilling to listen.

I wonder how many times I need to say that your doom and gloom negativity is not helpful before you will stop it? And your back and forth on whether or not you are sorry and your continued focus on civilian deaths is not helpful. And it is not helpful “if” and that it the question here – “if” you want to bridge the divide. Please answer this question, dragginfly – how do you see it as reaching out to us conservatives on this conservative site( that you have indeed “intruded” on) – how do you see it as reaching out to us to talk about civilian deaths in Iraq? And how do you see it as reaching out to us to continually site bogus numbers that are used by such hateful and dishonest organizations as ANSWER and al Jazeera?

There are somewhere around 15,000 known civilian deaths. How many civilians were dying each month under Saddam’s regime, dragginfly? Do you even know? How you ever bothered to check? Were you even the slightest bit interested?

What is your opinion of the 70,000 civilians dead so far in Sudan? Why is that not a higher priority for you than Iraq?

I most likely will need the good luck you wished me after my poor performance. I do have numerous pictures of limbless, burned and bandaged babies. They do exist, and I would ask for an understanding that I am concerned about my brother's life, and equally concerned with the civilian casualties that are undeniably collateral damage from war, this "war" is no exception.

Is it possible for you to pay attention to what is written to you? I said that there are no pictures showing thousands of dead civilians and you come back and say that there are pictures of a few civilian deaths. What does your statement have to do with what I said to you?

Are you aware of the nature of war? Do you realize that people, including civilians, die in war? Are you aware of the number of people that Saddam Hussein killed?

Would one presume to claim that the Red Cross is just a bunch of whiney liberals?

The Internaitonal Red Cross is anti-American. How is it that you do not know that? The American Red Cross is a good organization. The International Red Cross is not.

Please read an absorb this statement: it is not helpful for you to come onto a conservative site and spout off with anti-American sources. Can you see that?

. A group of independent American and British researchers, Iraq Body Count, having collated published figures, puts the number of Iraqi dead between 14,454 and 16,604, but acknowledges that since they require stringent proof for every mortality, their total “is certain to be an underestimate.”

Again, I ask you – is it possible for you to pay attention to what is written to you. I have already sited this group. And I think it is the right thing to do to require “proof” of death. Are you honestly trying to say that it is not? The Lancet group used interviews – of what they called random groups and then multiplied the number they got to come up with their bogus claim of 100,000. There is nothing credible about it. It is used by al Jazeera and ANSWER – both groups have no credibility.

This is probably not the place for it, but as long as you folks allow me to communicate with you I will attempt to do so in a respectful & factual manner. This is your site, and it could be said that I am intruding. I appreciate you coninuing the discourse with me, and I wish you and your loved ones good health, and a very happy holiday season, sincerely.

Boy oh boy, do you have a problem with telling the truth or what? You “are” intruding. This “is” a conservative site. I’m sure that you know that. Why in the world would you say something so lame as “it could be said that I am intruding”?

Jeez, as I say – you are bombing here. It is my opinion that if you had really wanted to have a productive conversation with a “red stater” – then you would have. You can tell a person's intention by the result that they get, imo. And look at the result you have gotten

Here's a recap of the advice I've given you so far:

1. optimism vs pessimism
2. facts
3. talking about civilian deaths is not helpful
4. there are good and bad people who opposed the war
5. the 100,000 deaths figure has been discredited
6. we are familiar with “other” sources of info and foreign sites
7. listen to what is said to you

40 posted on 12/08/2004 7:16:54 PM PST by Sunsong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Dragginfly
War is an ugly thing
but not the ugliest of things;
the decayed and degraded state of moral
and patriotic feelings which thinks that
nothing is worth war is much worse.

A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight,
nothing which is more important than his own personal safety,
is a miserable creature
and has no chance of being free unless
made and kept so by the exertions
of better men than himself.
-
John Stuart Mill

41 posted on 12/08/2004 7:56:51 PM PST by Sunsong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Sunsong

Don't ban me. There is no need, I am gone. I will post not another word. You see, I have already read that as soon as anyone posts any meaningful facts that are not in accordance with your opinions, they get banned and deleted. I will leave ya'll to your holier than thou smug arrogant self-righteous "American supremacy" selves. You can continue to mock us, criticise us for being over-weight or our ethnicity (I was looking at the posts ripping on the pics from Sorry Everybody") or just plain being what you all term a "loser" because of the way someone's facial features or appearance is.

In my attempts to humble myself before you folks I have not recieved a single kind word, not one conciliatory tone, not one... no aknowledgement that I was at least attempting to find middle ground, certainly no mention that ya'll would lift a finger to help me if I were in peril (in response to my assertions that I would respond in kind). No need to mend anything with anybody. After all, you are the ruling class.

It's a huge waste of my time to attempt anything here because you folks obviously have no desire to do anything but criticise me and those like me. That's OK, this is America. This is your site, your domain, you owe me nothing. I am an alien here and don't belong here anyway.

But I tried. Whatever ya'll think of me, I gave it a shot. Ya'll could have said "I disagree with you, your facts are skewed, you are a dumbshit...but it's nice that you are trying to understand us and reaching out to fellow Americans"...nope. Not here, not from you.

You live your red state existence and I'll live my blue state existence but as sure as God is great, I will find a republican, a right winger, a conservative group somewhere that will at least treat me with some common decency and be impressed that I feel it is a good thing to attempt to bridge the divide and we can disagree in harmony. I apologized for the boneheads that berate Bush, I apologised for my stupid post, not one iota of anything but smug arrogance from you folks to me. Not one word of thanks that my brother is fighting your war. No wish that he does not get killed. Nothing but vitriol and sarcasm.

Good luck, have a great Christmas, enjoy the next four years as Bush drives the economy into the ground, have fun as Iraq simmers in blood and disintegrates, and let's see if in four years Bush can blame it all on the "Clinton Recession".

God help America... a nation divided. Osama is laughing. We are that much closer to a police state, dems and repubs at each other's throats, Bush is spending money faster than any tax and spend democrat as he gives our children's future away.

Yeh man, enjoy your ride to the top. It's gonna be a long ways down. But I made an honest, albeit feeble attempt. You perfect people, the truth seekers need no affiliations with a peace lovin housewife liberal "rat".

Happy Trailmix! I'm outta here.
Later days, DragginFly- Delete me for all I care. I am not coming back.


42 posted on 12/08/2004 9:12:34 PM PST by Dragginfly (I am a liberal democrat But I am not your enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Dragginfly
Here’s what I think: I think that this and your other “emotional” outburst are the real dragginfly. I think that the attacks you just made and the attacks you made in your other posts on this thread are exactly what you really think and how you really feel. And I think that that is what you intended all along. You wanted to “tell off” some conservatives and you came here to do just that.

As I said, no ones believes that you came to “bridge the divide” and tried to do that by criticizing the war and talking about civilian deaths. That’s just not what a person who wanted to reach out would say.

I hope that you will at least tell yourself the truth.

You were treated fairly here, considering that you registered on a conservative site under false pretenses. You are aware that this is a place for conservatives only. It is you who have been rude and insulting and unfriendly.

You are obviously not at peace. I hope you get serious about finding peace, since you claim an interest in the subject, but you must first realize that to have peace you must be peaceful and you are anything but. As the great sage said, “peace of mind is clearly an internal matter”.

Perhaps sometime when you are alone and in a brutally honest mood you will realize that peace is truly a worthy pursuit and those who proclaim it the loudest and “protest” for it and commit all kinds of verbal and physical violence in the name of it – are the ones who know the least about it.

43 posted on 12/08/2004 10:17:01 PM PST by Sunsong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Dragginfly; txrangerette; Sunsong; Harmless Teddy Bear; xone
Hello, Dragginfly! Haven't had time to vist FR in 2 days now.

Thank you for your replies since I last talked to you. They are of a very different nature (compared to your first posts). And, yes, I do now believe you want a meaningful discussion. And, no, I do not speak for anyone else on FR, nor do they speak for me.

OK, let's talk about civilian deaths. Some points here...

I can't say this any better than P. J. O'Rourke did in a column where he was giving advice to GWB as to how he should answer Kerry's main "talking points" during the debates. Here's some of what he had to say (putting words into Dubya's mouth as he debates Kerry):

(7) You say that we won the war, but we're losing the peace because Iraq is so unstable. When Iraq was stable, it attacked Israel in the 1967 and 1973 wars. It attacked Iran. It attacked Kuwait. It gassed the Kurds. It butchered the Shiites. It fostered terrorism in the Middle East. Who wants a stable Iraq?
.....
(14) Let me tell you something, Senator Kerry. I don't blame the U.N. for not supporting me in Iraq. The world is full of loathsome governments run by criminals, thugs, and beasts. When I mentioned "regime-change," hairy little ears pricked up all over the earth. Beads of sweat broke out on low, sloping brows. Blood-stained, grasping hands began to tremble. I had to put poor Colin Powell on the phone to various hyenas in high office and have him explain that America itself needed regime-change from 1992 to 2000. And we didn't bomb the fellow responsible, and we only impeached him a little. Secretary Powell had to tell Kim Jung Il, Robert Mugabe, and Jacques Chirac to quit worrying and look at Bill Clinton and realize the fate that awaits them is a lucrative lecture tour, a best-selling book, and many willing, plump young women.

--- from "Putting Words in the President's Mouth" by P.J. O'Rourke

There is so much more I want to say, but this is getting too long. The bottom line here --- the major point I'm trying to make is that if you truly do feel compassion for Iraqi civilians and want to see their deaths minimized, then you should support our Iraqi action.

But if your only desire was that no Iraqi civilian deaths should have ever been caused by *our* soldiers, even if our staying out of war would have caused far more civilian deaths under a continued Saddam regime than we would ever cause, then I can see why you would be against this war.

But consider the question, are civilian deaths caused by dictators during peacetime sweeter than those caused by armies during wartime? What makes peacetime slaughters more palatable than wartime slaughters to some people?

44 posted on 12/08/2004 10:28:02 PM PST by CardCarryingMember.VastRightWC (The heart of the wise man inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left. - Eccl. 10:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Dragginfly
Hey, you can't go away yet! I just spent 2-1/2 hours on a single reply to you about the entire Civilian Casualties issue. And none of it is insults or invective, I might add.

Even if you are unable to carry on insult-free discussions with other FR members due to bad chemistry between you or whatever the reason is, you can still carry one on with me.

Do note, though, that FR is no different from any other partisan forums - whether conservative or liberal. The rules are not fairly applied to both sides. For instance, if I were to login to DU, state I was a conservative, and ask for a meaningful dialog on some issue, I would fully expect that for every person who would respond to me only in an insult-free meaningful dialog, there would be 50 people who would respond with only insults or with some combination of insults and attempts at dialog in the same post. Furthermore, I'd expect that the first time I blew my cool and insulted someone back, I'd be removed by the admins and lose my channel to the one person I could talk to.

That's why FR is so superior to DU --- because for every one member here who a liberal like you can talk to unemotionally, there are only 5 (instead of 50) people who will insult you!

:-) :-)

But unfortunately, if you make even one person mad at you, you'll still be banned by the admins, just as at DU.

There are very few neutral political forums on the internet. The ones without rules are next to useless because "signal to noise" ratio is close to zero, and the "noise" consists mostly of foul mouthed ranting. And neutral forums controlled by moderators might be mostly invective-free, but they are never really fully neutral. They might start out that way with the best of intentions, but the moderators are only human with their own set of biases, and they only have so much time on their hands to work at such a thankless job.

45 posted on 12/08/2004 11:29:10 PM PST by CardCarryingMember.VastRightWC (The heart of the wise man inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left. - Eccl. 10:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Dragginfly
After all, you are the ruling class.

Behold the difference between a "Liberal Democrat" and a "Conservative Republican"

The Democrat believes in a "ruling class" and of course would never think to talk to those who were not "ruling class."

Which of course explains why they treat everyone like dirt unless they are out of power.

no acknowledgment that I was at least attempting to find middle ground,

What is this middle ground of which you speak? You have yet to put forward a single position that would be considered middle ground. Your idea of middle ground seems to be "Do it my way." If that is not what you mean then please give concrete examples of what you consider middle ground.

certainly no mention that ya'll would lift a finger to help me if I were in peril (in response to my assertions that I would respond in kind).

Why should we have to. Is that not a given of how a civilized society works? Should I also have to reassure you that I will not roast you over an open fire? That fact that you feel a need to even bring it up shows how far from civilized behavior the Democrat Party has gone. Because of that we beg leave to doubt it.

It's a huge waste of my time to attempt anything here because you folks obviously have no desire to do anything but criticise me and those like me.

Mememmememememememememememmemememem! Do you ever think of anything but yourself. Do you see everything through a prism of you? We actually discus ideas here. So far I have seen not a one from you.

but it's nice that you are trying to understand us and reaching out to fellow Americans"..

There is that ruling class condescension thing mixed in with the MeMeMe bit again.

How incredibly kind of you to condescend to visit us.

I will find a republican, a right winger, a conservative group somewhere that will at least treat me with some common decency and be impressed that I feel it is a good thing to attempt to bridge the divide and we can disagree in harmony.

We are not worthy. Once again all you do is criticize and condescend.

I apologized for the boneheads that berate Bush, I apologised for my stupid post, not one iota of anything but smug arrogance from you folks to me.

Hello Pot...this is kettle....

Not one word of thanks that my brother is fighting your war. No wish that he does not get killed. Nothing but vitriol and sarcasm.

Maybe because most of us don't believe he actually exists.

But hey, if he does I hope he comes home safe.

Good luck, have a great Christmas, enjoy the next four years as Bush drives the economy into the ground, have fun as Iraq simmers in blood and disintegrates, and let's see if in four years Bush can blame it all on the "Clinton Recession".

And once you never manage to get your facts right. The economy is going great guns with 3.9 million jobs being added since President Bush was elected. That is your problem, you don't bother to learn anything because, Hey you already know it all.

As for the "Iraq simmers in blood and disintegrates" not going to happen so you can keep your happy good wishes to yourself. I know that is what you are hoping for. Which once again shows the basic difference in the mine set of a Liberal and a Republican. You hope that every thing we touch will fail because we touched it. We, on the other hand oppose your plans because we think they won't work.

I think Clinton was a fool for going into the former Yugoslavia. Time has proven me right I really wish I had been wrong. Because I don't see the world through what is best only for me.

God help America... a nation divided. Osama is laughing. We are that much closer to a police state, dems and repubs at each other's throats, Bush is spending money faster than any tax and spend democrat as he gives our children's future away.

Now you are worried about money? And you have yet to produce even one example of your hyperboloid "police state".

Yeh man, enjoy your ride to the top. It's gonna be a long ways down. But I made an honest, albeit feeble attempt. You perfect people, the truth seekers need no affiliations with a peace lovin housewife liberal "rat".

And once again the hope for failure. And for no other reason then that people you don't like are in charge. Now tell me where does that fit in with peace loving? Do you have any idea that your bitter vitriol keeps bubbling to the surface no matter how hard you try to fight it?

And you wonder why the two parties are at each others throats as you put it? Take a look inside yourself. You don't want what is best for the nation even if it means a Republican in charge. You want to be in charge.

46 posted on 12/09/2004 3:32:13 AM PST by Harmless Teddy Bear (Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum europe vincendarum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Dragginfly

'Don't ban me. There is no need, I am gone. I will post not another word. You see, I have already read that as soon as anyone posts any meaningful facts that are not in accordance with your opinions, they get banned and deleted'

Translation: Wah, I'm a lib.

'In my attempts to humble myself before you folks I have not recieved a single kind word, not one conciliatory tone, not one... no aknowledgement that I was at least attempting to find middle ground, certainly no mention that ya'll would lift a finger to help me if I were in peril (in response to my assertions that I would respond in kind). '

Translation: Wah I'm a victim an conservs are cruel.

'But I tried. Whatever ya'll think of me, I gave it a shot. Ya'll could have said "I disagree with you, your facts are skewed, you are a dumbshit...but it's nice that you are trying to understand us and reaching out to fellow Americans"...nope. Not here, not from you.

Some told you you were wrong and didn't have your facts straight, no one called you a dumbshit, so to make you feel better I will.

'Not one word of thanks that my brother is fighting your war. No wish that he does not get killed.'

Why would I thank YOU for your brother's service. By the way, it is HIS war as well unless he just joined for college money. As for wishing for the death of servicepeople, that is a lefty lib thing.

Yeh man, enjoy your ride to the top. It's gonna be a long ways down. But I made an honest, albeit feeble attempt. You perfect people, the truth seekers need no affiliations with a peace lovin housewife liberal "rat".

'Yeh man, enjoy your ride to the top. It's gonna be a long ways down. But I made an honest, albeit feeble attempt. You perfect people, the truth seekers need no affiliations with a peace lovin housewife liberal "rat".'

Okey dokey.

' Delete me for all I care. I am not coming back.'

Alright, MoDs FORAC.


47 posted on 12/09/2004 6:33:47 AM PST by xone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson