« Daily Kos' "purge" missed a few barking moonbats | Main | The Legend Of Al Gore Grows »

Moonbat Democrats Against the War

It is real, real hard to take anyone on the left seriously when we read things like this nearly everyday:

Pennsylvania Lieutenant Governor Crashes Marine Funeral to Lobby Against War

Catherine Baker Knoll, Pennsylvania's Lieutenant Governor, came uninvited to the funeral of Marine Staff Sergeant Joseph Goodrich and proceeded to hand out business cards and lobby against the war, according to the deceased's family members.

Lt. gov. crashed Marine's funeral, kin say (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette)

The family of a Marine who was killed in Iraq is furious with Lt. Gov. Catherine Baker Knoll for showing up uninvited at his funeral this week, handing out her business card and then saying "our government" is against the war.

Rhonda Goodrich of Indiana, Pa., said yesterday that a funeral was held Tuesday at a church in Carnegie for her brother-in-law, Staff Sgt. Joseph Goodrich, 32. She said he "died bravely and courageously in Iraq on July 10, serving his country."

In a phone interview, Goodrich said the funeral service was packed with people "who wanted to tell his family how Joe had impacted their lives." Then, suddenly, "one uninvited guest made an appearance, Catherine Baker Knoll."

She sat down next to a Goodrich family member and, during the distribution of communion, said, "Who are you?" Then she handed the family member one of her business cards, which Goodrich said she still has. "Knoll felt this was an appropriate time to campaign and impose her will on us," Goodrich said. "I am amazed and disgusted Knoll finds a Marine funeral a prime place to campaign."

and this:
Leftist Vandals Attack Family Of Slain Soldier

The family of a soldier killed in Iraq and just buried less than 24 hours earlier awoke the next morning to a fire in their driveway, which totaled the car of the soldier's sister-in-law. The arsonist(s) set the fire with 20 American flags that the family displayed yard, given to them by mourners at the soldier's funeral:

American flags, lining the lawn of the mother- and father-in-law of fallen U.S. Army Pfc. Timothy Hines Jr., were heaped in a pile early Saturday and burned under a car parked in front of the home - less than 24 hours after Hines was buried in Cincinnati's Spring Grove Cemetery. ...

The flames totaled Sara Wessel's car.

Sara is Hines' sister-in-law and Jim Wessel's oldest daughter. She had been staying at the house on Sando Drive since the family returned last week from Washington, D.C., where they were visiting Hines at Walter Reed Army Medical Center.

Hines, 21, was buried Friday after more than 400 people mourned his passing and celebrated his life at the Vineyard Community Church in Springdale. He was buried with full military honors, leaving behind a pregnant widow who expects to give birth in about two weeks and a 2-year-old daughter.

Then when they lose the next election, the Democrats will claim it was voter fraud.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Moonbat Democrats Against the War:

» Macmind - Conservative Commentary and Common Sense linked with Moonbat Rage Alert! - Lock and Load

» Blind Mind's Eye linked with This is the face of the “anti-war activists”

» Joust The Facts linked with Furtive Glances

» Danny Carlton: codenamed "Jack Lewis" linked with Funeral crashing Lt. Governor issues "apology"

» Caerdroia linked with Hanoi Hussein Jane

» Conservative Outpost linked with More on PA's Lt. Governor

Comments (80)

You know you keep thinking ... (Below threshold)
AnonymousDrivel:

You know you keep thinking that some have hit bottom and, lo and behold, they discover another strata. At that point you just quit measuring as they burrow out of site. They are not serious people in a philosophical sense though their actions are. Fortunately, their message joins them in their plot. The only concern becomes what of the epitaph on the tombstone. The etchers are certainly keeping well employed with these two.

That's what the famous Big ... (Below threshold)
bullwinkle:

That's what the famous Big Tent of the left gets you, it not only encompasses the the circus, it welcomes the sideshow freaks into the party also.

Well when Clinton was in po... (Below threshold)

Well when Clinton was in power and the fringe right-wingers had their panties in a wad, they never did anything like this.

They just blew up an office building in Oklahoma City. Not to mention assorted abortion clinics and gay bars. I don't condone this behavior at all but you have to admit, it's not quite as lethal as the right wing version of the same crap.

Rick DeMent:Are yo... (Below threshold)
joe:

Rick DeMent:

Are you saying that stuff wouldn't have happened without Clinton?

I mean, what is your point, exactly?

Rick:This a govern... (Below threshold)
Peter:

Rick:

This a government official we're talking about here! Not some freakin' loon who bombs office buildings, clinics and gay bars. Not even CLOSE to the same thing.

(Gay bars? When and where have those been blown up? I've lived in 2 of America's gayest cities—SF and Seattle—and have NEVER heard of any gay bar being bombed. Proof, please.)

Rick DeMent,You're... (Below threshold)
LoadTheMule:

Rick DeMent,

You're saying both of the above were committed by the left-wing fringe? The Lt. Gov. of PA is part of the left-wing fringe; that's your contention? As yet, we have no idea who set the car fire. You're positing that was some loony left-winger, too, are you?

If not, then get a real clue, my friend. I don't condone or support the right wing troglodytes who bomb federal buildings OR abortion clinics. In each case, the perps got exactly what they deserve.

Your comparison, tho, is totally off base. Unless, of course, you're blaming the above on left-wing nut cases.

Are you?

Regards...

I didn't know jane fonda wa... (Below threshold)
moseby:

I didn't know jane fonda was the Lt Guv of Pennsa-tucky. Wow...she really let herself go....YUCK!

<a href="http://michellemal... (Below threshold)
Sabba Hillel:

Michelle Malkin has a copy of the "letter of apology" that the Lt. Gov. sent to the family. It was faxed to her by the chief of staff in order to make sure it got publicity (that says something about its meaning). The Lt. Gov. totally ignores the point about her anti-war ranting and pretends that never happened. She pretends that she just came on a normal condolence call.

(Gay bars? When and wher... (Below threshold)
joe:

(Gay bars? When and where have those been blown up? I've lived in 2 of America's gayest cities—SF and Seattle—and have NEVER heard of any gay bar being bombed. Proof, please.)

One in the southeast by Eric RObert Rudolph, I think. That's the only one I know of.

And this is problematic how... (Below threshold)

And this is problematic how?

Is it like there is something wrong here?

Isn't the current state of politics that anything goes.
Out CIA Operatives. Act as if 'being at war' is the
quick and cheap political expediency in lieu of
any actual argument.

So if folks are really concerned about some sort of desecration
of our 'honored fallen dead' wouldn't it be a good thing to
actually consider the whole range of desecrations?

Or is that the problem here. Dealing with the actual desecration of the honored dead remains too emotionally traumatizing to the victims of ChickenHawk Angst, as they vote with their feet against what their lips were flapping against.

Rick,No one is out... (Below threshold)

Rick,

No one is out there celebrating violence like OKC or an abortion clinic bombing. Those are disgusting criminal acts that do not represent any popular belief system. It is one thing to disagree, and another thing entirely to kill over such disagreement. The ones who react in that manner deserve the needle that is surely headed their way.

The actions of the idiot Lt. Gov and the flag-burning ghouls are not, despite what you'd like everyone to believe, the acts of some sort of lunatic fringe on the Left. More and more, such actions represent the "new mainstreram" of leftist thinking, as espoused by sites like Kos and MoveOn.

The idea that the "right wing version" is to go and start blowing things up is a crock of B.S.

When Lefties assemble nowadays, as they did recently in San Fran, violence and destruction are usually not far behind. That's the sad truth, and that's why all the left does anymore is lose come Election Day.

drieux:What kind o... (Below threshold)
Peter:

drieux:

What kind of blabbering nonsense are you espousing? It's OK to descrecrate the dead in the name of getting your 'cause' out/voice heard? Is that really part of your humanity? Did the Lt. Gov. even stop for one minute to consider the emotional state of the family at a FUNERAL? Who said "anything goes" at a funeral for crying out loud. You think the ALLEGED (still) outing of an ALLEGED CIA operative justifies dishonoring not only the deceased but the relatives of the deceased? Whatever your disagreement with our foreign policy and actions, it by no means justifies your (or the Lt. Gov.'s) inhumanity and disrespect toward the deceased or their relatives.

RE: Rick DeMent's post (Jul... (Below threshold)
AnonymousDrivel:

RE: Rick DeMent's post (July 25, 2005 03:45 PM)

...they never did anything like this.

They just blew up an office building in Oklahoma City. Not to mention assorted abortion clinics and gay bars. I don't condone this behavior at all but you have to admit, it's not quite as lethal as the right wing version of the same crap.

Of course there are nuts on both sides who aren't necessarily ideologues as much as they are psychopaths. No, the issue, as already emphasized by Peter and LoadTheMule, is that one of the actors is a Lt. Governor of a rather populated state... a not insignificant point. It would be irresponsible to equate the two.


RE: drieux's post (July 25, 2005 04:23 PM)

And this is problematic how?
Is it like there is something wrong here?
...
Dealing with the actual desecration of the honored dead remains too emotionally traumatizing to the victims of ChickenHawk Angst, as they vote with their feet against what their lips were flapping against.

I'm not sure I follow that last line. Do you mean "chickenhawks" are running away from what they are saying that they are against? I'm confused.

Anyway, let me propose the concept that the family knew their son better than anyone and considered this an obscenity and offense. If they were offended, then that is enough for me. Forget the etiquette that each of us decides is appropriate or inappropriate. I believe she was well out of bounds and quite disgraceful to politick at a funeral. Ultimately, that is irrelevant... but his family's sentiment and the feelings of those assembled are not.

She will deservedly lose her office over this unless the soldier's family publicly accepts her apology. She may lose it anyway.

>And this is problematic ho... (Below threshold)
D:

>And this is problematic how?

Evidently the fellow who wrote this saw no problem with the Paul Wellstone memorial service cum Walter Mondale political pep rally a few years back. Nope, no problem there. That was a natural outcome of the "current state of politics". We on the left are just automata and can't help ourselves. In truth it's the fault of all you righties!

And you wonder why you keep losing ground.

Oh yes, I give so much cred... (Below threshold)
Joe Mama:

Oh yes, I give so much credence to an article that points to leftists, with absolutely no proof the flag burning was done by anyone on the left. And by the way, there are Republicans out there that are against the war. Of course I am sure you would like to burn them at the stake.

drieux: If you feel that st... (Below threshold)
Cousin Dave:

drieux: If you feel that strongly about it, why haven't you volunteered your services as a human shield? Chicken-dove.

Of course I am sure you ... (Below threshold)
joe:

Of course I am sure you would like to burn them at the stake.

Um, no. Unlike you, I don't believe differences of opinion are a capital offense.

why do you folks presume I ... (Below threshold)

why do you folks presume I am not a Republican Veteran?

Simply because I ask the simple question of why you have
problems with this?

Could it be that your leap of faith has run away with you.

So why not try to explain to me why this is problematic.

drieux:I know vete... (Below threshold)
Peter:

drieux:

I know veterans currently. I've known veterans in the past. I've played golf every Sat. and Sun. with veterans from the local VA hospital. If indeed you are a veteran, you know the answer to your very own inhumane, disrespectful and moronic statements. Statements I sincerely doubt ANY veteran would make regarding the Lt. Gov.'s ugly attempt at politicking at a FUNERAL.

joe:Oh, and I stil... (Below threshold)
Peter:

joe:

Oh, and I still see no proof (yet) that Eric Rudolph bombed a gay bar. I've seen no evidence (yet) that says the Otherside Lounge was a gay bar (though the name is a pretty big indicator of the possible clientele, that means squat).

Again, the terrorist acts of a private citizen, one not associated or employed by the government versus the acts of a government employee, are two ENTIRELY different matters.

I just finished viewing "We... (Below threshold)
-S-:

I just finished viewing "We Were Soldiers" and I can tell you, this story of this particular vandalism of this soldier's family is about as vile as ever could be -- with the "We Were Soldiers" story exemplifying just what some humans give and endure so people can be alive today in our country, to vandalise and be brutes with complete irresponsibility (not that that's the motive for military service, just saying, for their lives, some creeps get to be here today to do whatever else).

Rick DeMent...there was one... (Below threshold)
-S-:

Rick DeMent...there was one person who "blew up a building in Oklahoma City" that's been proven -- and he's been put to death for that murdering act -- and a few others still with penalty due, also involved.

That hardly represents "the righties" as if the murderers involved with Oklahoma City were members of a larger political group that includes conservatives, Republicans as a characteristic.

It's a very dishonorable and grim snip you've made there, hardly worth saying anything more about.

I mean, comparing "leftists" with "righties...who got their panties in a wad" and then blew up the Murrah Building in Oklahoma is incredibly nasty to even suggest. You write without human compassion or even sensitivity about these incidents.

How did she hear about this... (Below threshold)
Robert:

How did she hear about this funeral of a soldier?

My paper and local news doesn't even mention dead soldiers.

Peter,As long as y... (Below threshold)
Robert:

Peter,

As long as you make a point this is one person, and not "the left".

Robert: Absotutely... (Below threshold)
Peter:

Robert:

Absotutely, with a caveat: She' IS a Democratic representative of her constituents. But she alone is the loon and likely (and hopefully) does not speak or act on behalf of most Dems. It would be utterly shameful if she took such a stance.

I like the word ALLEDGED.</... (Below threshold)
Robert:

I like the word ALLEDGED.

As in the ALLEDGED war in Iraq.
Here's one guy that doesn't believe in it.
Why not?

I still haven't seen one flag-draped coffin come back to the US and I read the newspaper and watch the TV news every day.
No gas rationing.
No scrap metal drives.
Tax cuts (during time of war, I don't think so!)
Outing a covert CIA agent. Not if there's really a war going on.
I took a look at the US budget. Not one dollar in that budget for wartime activities.

Who are these fools that really believe a war is going on.
I call Bullsh**.

Um...Robert, buddy...either... (Below threshold)

Um...Robert, buddy...either I was in a war, or they sure put on the most expensive fireworks and laser light show in the history of man. in the middle of a desert.

the burning things that looked like bodies and tanks, as well as the MASH filled with people in wounded make-up was a nice touch.

so great some folks know ve... (Below threshold)

so great some folks know veterans.

I am a veteran, I am a republican.

I am still trying to understand why you folks
are unwilling to discuss what is your moral standard here.

Could it be that folks are afraid to deal with the actual issues?

Could it be that you have boxed yourselves in as we tried to warn you, back in 1988, that you might not want to crawl out on that limb about 'draft dodgers' ??? Hum???

So why is it a bad thing to play politics on the graves of fallen veterans? On the Wounded And Maimed?

Fundamentally what really changed in the congressional authorization between when clinton was bombing iraq and the current operations there? Hum???

Please. Do clarify which moral standard if any you folks are really willing to stand up and be counted for.

The fact that you are still here, in the rear, with the beer, after the 2nd attack on the world trade center is speaking loudly to those of us who served.

how do folks get to leap to... (Below threshold)

how do folks get to leap to 'leftist' when, assuming that we were at war, then the burning of flags could be one of those Super Secret Al-Qaeda Terrorist cells that we have been hearing about since before the soviets pulled out of Afghanistan.

or is that too a part of the problem here.

it is easier to whine and blame others than to do your part and actively get up off your collective duffs and into the war.

A war that some of us have been involved in for over 30 years now.

Why is it all of a sudden fashionable to be so trendy and chic now? Or at least play acting as if you were concerned enough. Well at least slightly more concerned than after the 1st attack on the WTC. As some will have learned from recent reporting on the Young College Republicans, some are even thinking seriously about getting involved if there is a 3rd, 4th or 5th attack on the world trade center.

Why is that?

or do you folks forget when Karl Rove was running the Young Republicans when some of us were dealing with Medivac Flights out of Saigon....

Hum?

RE: drieux's post (July 25,... (Below threshold)
AnonymousDrivel:

RE: drieux's post (July 25, 2005 08:38 PM)

So why is it a bad thing to play politics on the graves of fallen veterans?...

As I suggested earlier, because she imposed herself upon the family in their moment of grief. Their public rebuke is evidence of their position and everyone should respect it. I don't care if it is the President of the United States or the Pope or Mohammed or Ghandi or [insert world leader or pontif of choice] - if the family does not want you there or if the deceased left a will indicating who could(not) attend, then you respect it. Period.

Would one of you who have s... (Below threshold)
ClobberGirl:

Would one of you who have stated that abortion clinics and gay bars were blown up during the Clinton administration please back up your assertions? That means links, people, and multiple examples.

I'm not saying that it hasn't happened, but I am deeply skeptical that multiple abortion clinics were blown up during the Clinton administration. Seems like the sort of thing the liberal media would have been all over and would still be talking about today.

AnonymousDrivel writ... (Below threshold)
s9:

AnonymousDrivel writes: As I suggested earlier, because she imposed herself upon the family in their moment of grief.

Why am I not surprised that it has nothing whatsoever to do with any supposed disrespect to the memory of the deceased person?

Drieux, I think that might be where you got confused. You maybe were thinking these folks were concerned about anything other than the feelings of the relatives. It isn't that the Lt. Governor paid a condolence call to the funeral for a marine, and she handed out a few business cards when people asked who she was— it was that the family of the dead marine had their feelings hurt "in their moment of grief" when it seemed to them that a politician was politicking at their dead marine's funeral. God help any politician who accidentally hurts the feelings of a grieving family by paying a condolence call at a funeral.

"Hey, who asked you to play politics on the grave of our dead marine? That's our job!"

AnonymousDrivel w... (Below threshold)

AnonymousDrivel writes: As I suggested earlier, because she imposed herself upon the family in their moment of grief.

Why am I not surprised that it has nothing whatsoever to do with any supposed disrespect to the memory of the deceased person?

The one implies the other, you idiot.

Oops: I meant to add "s9... (Below threshold)

Oops: I meant to add "s9 responds:" to the second paragraph of my comment. The reply was not aimed at AD.

drieux claims:"I a... (Below threshold)
Cousin Dave:

drieux claims:

"I am a veteran, I am a republican."

Bullshit. I don't believe a word of it. You're lying.

s9 rants:"God help... (Below threshold)
Cousin Dave:

s9 rants:

"God help any politician who accidentally hurts the feelings of a grieving family by paying a condolence call at a funeral."

Do you not understand the meaning of the word "uninvited", or are you one of those leftists who thinks that your politics gives you the right to enter any private property at any time you choose? Go get a fricking dictionary and look it up.

If one of my relatives is killed in war, I do not want any dumbass politicians there for any reason whatsoever.

I agree with Cousin Dave.</... (Below threshold)
Sue Dohnim:

I agree with Cousin Dave.

Also, to any imbecile who compares the anti-patriotic thugs who burned that car with Eric Rudolph and Tim McVeigh, please remember we executed that bastard McVeigh, and we hopefully will do the same with Rudolph if he's found guilty. "Rightwingers" don't excuse terrorists and criminals like leftist socialist commie morons do.

RE: s9's post (July 26, 200... (Below threshold)
AnonymousDrivel:

RE: s9's post (July 26, 2005 04:05 AM)

Why am I not surprised that it has nothing whatsoever to do with any supposed disrespect to the memory of the deceased person?

Why am I not surprised that you don't get the point?

I would have no quarrel wh... (Below threshold)

I would have no quarrel whatsoever with Lt. Gov Knoll going to the funeral. Nor would I have a quarrel with her passing out a couple of business cards to relatives in order to make sure that the family got all the benefits due.
The line was crossed with the statement that "the State Government is against the war".

AnonymousDrivel writ... (Below threshold)
s9:

AnonymousDrivel writes: Why am I not surprised that you don't get the point?

Well, it would be easier for me to know what point you're trying to make if you would get to the fscking point.

drieux asked: why is it a bad thing to play politics on the graves of fallen veterans?

Your answer was "because she imposed herself upon the family in their moment of grief." Which is convenient, because that absolves you and everyone else in this discussion we're having online here, because none of us are imposing ourselves upon the family of that dead marine while we are getting our politics on over his grave.

But apparently, that's not how you think. Apparently, there is some ethical standard you think should apply here. Well, come on honey— step up to the microphone and tell us in clear unambiguous language how what the Lt. Governor did was unethical, but what you're doing here online isn't. I can't wait for your explanation for that...

I would first like to begin... (Below threshold)
CSM CM Paugh:

I would first like to begin my email by telling you guys that I think most of you did a fine job writing these comments about Lt. Gov. Catherine Baker Knoll. I spend about an hour a day online reading the news, and this site's version of this story caught my eye over the others.

As a member of the US military, I can tell you that I support Lt. Gov. Catherine Baker Knoll expressing her views on the war. We are fighting to protect people's freedom of speech and other Constitutionally protected rights. Anyone attempting to silence this women soley because they disagree with her is not a patriot, and they do not love this country. I will go as far as to say anyone attempting to silence her views insults the memory of this Marine who gave his LIFE to support her right to free speech.

This war is controversial. With 20 years military service under my belt, I know it violates international law, and there may come a day 10 years down the road that I myself may be tried for war crimes for having "just followed orders" fighting in it. I am first of all an American, and I do what my country tells me to do so I accept that risk. Having said that, I can tell you that over half of us in Iraq are against this war, and we believe it cannot be justified. We wish more people would SUPPORT us by speaking out AGAINST the war. Being against the war is NOT being against us, the troops. How twisted are people who think this?

Anyway, keep up the good work. You keep on writing, and I'll keep on fighting. Together, maybe one day we can make America truly strong and respected again and not just the bully on the block.

Currently serving in Iraq and wishing to be home.

RE: s9's post (July 26, 200... (Below threshold)
AnonymousDrivel:

RE: s9's post (July 26, 2005 04:50 PM)

Are you being intentionally obtuse? I'll present again the context of what was being discussed and highlight the keywords. Pay attention.


___________
RE: drieux's post (July 25, 2005 04:23 PM)

And this is problematic how?
Is it like there is something wrong here?
...
Dealing with the actual desecration of the honored dead remains too emotionally traumatizing to the victims of ChickenHawk Angst...

[irrelevant material snipped]

Anyway, let me propose the concept that the family knew their son better than anyone and considered this an obscenity and offense. If they were offended, then that is enough for me. Forget the etiquette that each of us decides is appropriate or inappropriate. I believe she was well out of bounds and quite disgraceful to politick at a funeral. Ultimately, that is irrelevant... but his family's sentiment and the feelings of those assembled are not.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at July 25, 2005 04:55 PM

___________
RE: drieux's post (July 25, 2005 08:38 PM)

So why is it a bad thing to play politics on the graves of fallen veterans?...

As I suggested earlier, because she imposed herself upon the family in their moment of grief. Their public rebuke is evidence of their position and everyone should respect it. I don't care if it is the President of the United States or the Pope or Mohammed or Ghandi or [insert world leader or pontif of choice] - if the family does not want you there or if the deceased left a will indicating who could(not) attend, then you respect it. Period.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at July 25, 2005 09:31 PM


The family either did not want that person to attend or were offended by her actions. They thought she was playing politics and captitalizing on their grief. They found it to be offensive and that is a good enough reason for me. It is "a bad thing to play politics on the graves of fallen veterans" because at this funeral, it upset this family. The funeral is not so much for the dead as it is for the living. The family owes no one an explanation as to why they were upset... just that they were and the source of their consternation was seen to have exploited them in their minds.

Now, if you want to allow politicking by intruders on your death or the death of a loved one, by all means, knock yourself out. In fact let me know your name and address and I'll track the obits for your demise. Should you beat me to the grave, I'll send over a singing telegram with a modified "Hail to the Chief" lyric sheet indicating your praise of the Bush administration for its compelling leadership during the Iraq crises.


s9: ...none of us are imposing ourselves upon the family of that dead marine while we are getting our politics on over his grave.

I am expressing my support for a grief-stricken family whatever their view. If public support provides for them solace, I'm unabashedly unashamed of these declarations.


s9: But apparently, that's not how you think. Apparently, there is some ethical standard you think should apply here. Well, come on honey— step up to the microphone and tell us in clear unambiguous language how what the Lt. Governor did was unethical, but what you're doing here online isn't. I can't wait for your explanation for that...

Well, "honey", the ethical standard is to respect the wishes of the family at their family's funeral. I am not going to the funerals of veterans to make a political statement. I'm reacting now to express my condolences and support for the family. I am criticizing those who interject ideology when the aggrieved find it unwanted. Persons of such tendencies do not deserve to have their message heard not because of what is said (necessarily) but because of the venue and disrespect if that behavior or speech is perceived as improper. I just don't know how I can express this any more clearly. You may interpret my response as playing politics on the same grave but I see it differently.

Let me ask you... what is your position if Karl Rove came by your funeral, unannounced, and started handing out campaign buttons for the Republican party and stated that he was doing it because you were such a great American, a proponent of freedom maintained by strong military action, and that he felt you would have wanted to perpetuate the Bush legacy?

But always ... (Below threshold)
Ed:


But always remember, they support the troops?????

CSM CM Paugh:I bel... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

CSM CM Paugh:

I believe if you read the preceeding posts you'd see that no one wishes to infringe upon the rights of the Lt. Gov. or quell her dissent. It is the time, place and manner in which she chose to express her opinions that is so egregious, disrespectful and tasteless. I should think as a solider you could appreciate our disgust in the matter.

By the by, when you say "We wish more people would SUPPORT us by speaking out AGAINST the war. Being against the war is NOT being against us, the troops. How twisted are people who think this?" in brings into question your credibility as an actual soldier posting from Iraq; knowing full well that speaking out against the war undermines our (yours) effort, empowers Zarqawi & Co. to greater acts violence against US troops in hopes of hastening their departure from Iraq and puts you, as a solider in greater danger than you already are. And no one here wishes for that, of this I can assure you. I can also assure you that whatever "half of us in Iraq are against this war" is also highly dubious. Half who? Your platoon? Your company? Division? There are no polls indicating any such dissent among our brave and courageous service men and women.

P.S. This war is absolutely legal. http://www.brook.edu/views/op-ed/ohanlon/20040926.htm

Command Sgt. Major:<p... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

Command Sgt. Major:

Last comment: I find it highly odd for an officer of your standing to be allowed to lead any one given your unabashed objection to the war itself. Just doesn't make for good leadership. I'm sure it would put your pension in jeopardy, especially to attached your name to a post.

RE: CSM CM Paugh's post (Ju... (Below threshold)
AnonymousDrivel:

RE: CSM CM Paugh's post (July 26, 2005 05:38 PM)

With 20 years military service under my belt...

First, thank you for your continued service. I am grateful for your sacrifice.


...I know it violates international law, and there may come a day 10 years down the road that I myself may be tried for war crimes for having "just followed orders" fighting in it. I am first of all an American, and I do what my country tells me to do so I accept that risk. Having said that, I can tell you that over half of us in Iraq are against this war, and we believe it cannot be justified.

What options do you have where you could still serve but that won't violate your view of this conflict? Is there no recourse for your belief? And on what do you base your opinion that this war violates international law? Lastly, as noted by Peter F., the statement that "over half" of the soldiers are against U.S. involvement in Iraq is quite stunning. That contradicts every other story that I have heard or read even from the MSM. Can you recommend alternate domestic sites where this data or opinion may be critically reviewed?

AnonymousDrivel writ... (Below threshold)
s9:

AnonymousDrivel writes: Let me ask you... what is your position if Karl Rove came by your funeral, unannounced, and started handing out campaign buttons...

Ask me a serious question. That one is not a serious question. I'll answer it anyway: I wouldn't care— I'd be dead. In the unlikely event that I might be in the position to plan my own funeral, I would not do anything remotely as silly as expressly forbidding Karl Rove from showing up and pressing my relative's flesh— even if I had reason to think it was likely. Many of my relatives would be tickled pink by his presence. The rest would probably take the opportunity to make it more than a little discomfiting for everyone.

p1. Lt. Governor Knoll was not handing out campaign buttons. She was handing people her card when they asked who she was.

p2. If the family of that dead marine was offended by a mere condolence call from the Lt. Governor, who is apparently opposed to the continuing the More@WarThanEverBefore™ policy in Iraq, then they were perfectly within their rights to insist that she leave them alone.

p3. When the family of that dead marine decided that merely requiring the Lt. Governor to leave them alone was not enough for them— no, they needed to call up a newspaper and make a political stink of their own about it— you have to ask who's using the grave of a dead marine to play more politics here: the Lt. Governor, who was only interacting with a few people, or the family that decided to spurn the Lt. Governor's gesture of condolence, and turned it into a national fscking gibber-fest.

p4. It's really pretty silly to watch the rest of the children here on Wizbang! get all wrapped around the axle on this story, making yet more political hay off the grave of a dead marine.

p5. It was especially sickening to see the story about the Lt. Governor put side by side (without any stated reason for it) next to a story about vandalism and flag burning, attributed without any rational explanation to "leftist anti-war" hooligans. Talk about using the graves of honored fallen soldiers for cheap political diversions.

So. Any time somebody wants to step up and explain the ethical standards for when it is appropriate to use the graves of dead marines as a political prop and when it isn't appropriate... it would be nice to know what the rules are supposed to be. It looks to me... like this yet another case of... It's Okay As Long As You're Not A Leftist Anti-war Terrorist Sympathizer.

Prove me wrong.

Everyone might want to visi... (Below threshold)
Liz:

Everyone might want to visit drieux here. There's simply no reasoning with that sort of mind. Republican? BS. Veteran? Even worse BS. (Either that or he came back from his war veeeery messed up.) Poor little thing is desperate for some attention.

Okay, s9:It is oka... (Below threshold)
fatman:

Okay, s9:

It is okay to discuss (here) the puerile attempts by the political hack daughter of a political hack to politicise the funeral of a fallen Marine. It is NOT okay to be that political hack and do what she did. But I expect you already knew that, didn't you s9? You're nothing but a particularly revolting species of troll, delighting in the pain and sorrow of that family and like a leech, feeding off the anger of decent people who think that Catherine Baker Knoll ought to be horse-whipped for what she did.

s9:"...it would be... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

s9:

"...it would be nice to know what the rules are supposed to be."

The rules are inherent to most of mankind and need not be spelled out. Compassion. Respect. Honor. Humanity. Dignity.

It's clear from your self-centered diatribe that you do not, cannot or are completely incapable of understanding that it was the Lt. Gov. making "political hay" out of the soldier's death. And she was not, as you insist, "just handing out her card"; her card came with this specific message: "our government" is against the war. That's politicking to the Nth degree, friend AT A FUNERAL. And it's disgusting.

Moreover, the family had every right to blow the whistle to the press about the Lt. Gov.'s actions. She's an elected official for God's sake. What kind of behavior is that for any elected official—Democrat OR Republican? It's simply inexcusable.

Now I don't know which part of this you don't understand, but you should take a hard, long and deep look at exactly what you think being a human being is all about and then maybe, just maybe, you might start to adjust your moral compass in a more human direction.

I'm done.

I'm just looking to see if ... (Below threshold)
s9:

I'm just looking to see if there's an ethical standard you folks are interested in proposing, or if you're just cranking on an anti-war politician because it feels good to be anti-anti-war.

Thought experiments:

1) pretend for a moment that the family of this dead marine had not been offended, but instead had welcomed the Lt. Governor and found her comments about her office being against the war comforting. Would that change whether what she did was unethical in your view?

2) pretend instead that the Lt. Governor came with the opposite message, i.e. full-throated support for the war, and the family welcomed her and found that message comforting. (This is a scenario that happens all the time in the real world.) Would that change whether what she did was unethical?

3) pretend that the Lt. Governor came with the opposite message and the family had been offended by that. Would that make a difference?

There are a total of four possible scenarios here, when you include 4) the actual events that prompted this discussion. I'd like to know if you have found an ethical standard that allows you to condemn the act of politicking at the funerals of dead marines in all cases except the one where the politician is a full-throated war supporter and the family of the dead marine likes it that way.

It's kinda difficult, don't you think? It's hard to issue a blanket condemnation of all politicking at funerals of dead marines, because then it kinda makes the sort of spectacle you see politicians mount every Memorial Day into something you have to condemn, don't you? On the other hand, if you want to give an exception to politicians who politick at funerals where the family of the dead marine ends up welcoming the politicking, then well— you aren't really concerned with respecting the memory of dead marines as much as you're concerned with respecting the sensibilities of their families, are you? Alternatively, you could just opt to condemn anti-war politicians for being anti-war when they pay condolence calls to the funerals of dead marines, but then to be consistent you'd have to condemn them when they do it at funerals where they're invited by the marine's family expressly for that purpose.

So what is the ethical standard you wish to adopt?

1) Anti-war politicans shouldn't be allowed to attend funerals of dead marines, whether their families are anti-war or not.

2) Politicians of any kind shouldn't be allowed to attend funerals of dead marines, unless their families share the ideological alignment of the politician.

3) The only time politicians should be allowed to attend funerals of dead marines is when both the familes and the politicians are full-throated supporters of the war.

4) Politicians, including pro-war ones, shouldn't be allowed to attend funerals of dead marines, whether their families want them there or not.

5) There is no particular ethical injunction against politicking at the funerals of dead marines. All this kvetching about Lt. Governor Knoll is just bleating for anti-anti-war effect.

I think you'll find that these five alternatives collectively exhaust the possibilities. Pick one. Let us know why you think it should be the one we all use from now on.

6) No person should show up... (Below threshold)
Sue Dohnim:

6) No person should show up at a funeral if they're not paying respect to the deceased and to the deceased's family. Especially if the person is uninvited and attends for alterior motives.

You haven't gone to many funerals, from what I can tell of your demeanor.

One ethical standard: Be a ... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

One ethical standard: Be a compassionate human being.

End of story. I'm not addressing junior high debate class hypotheticals.

You don't show up at funera... (Below threshold)
AnonymousDrivel:

You don't show up at funerals for people for whom you have no professional, social, or familial association. If there is doubt or you do not fit those categories, then you ask for permission in advance. Politicians should be particularly attuned to such etiquette given normal sensitivities and not be quite so boorish that they ask family members who they are and then mug for the camera. You'd think they'd be aware of decorum... but that's asking too much of an ideologue. She was too busy trying to make a statement or soliciting support from disinterested mourners.

Fit that anywhere on your incomplete list that you like. Maybe somewhere near the top so you might comprehend its priority.

Of course, now I'm expectin... (Below threshold)
AnonymousDrivel:

Of course, now I'm expecting some hypothetical of "well, what if it's a funeral for the President of the United States, aka the CIC? Then should one seek permission since that cannot be pigeonholed as you described?"

Surprise me s9. Tell me you get it.

What I love so much about t... (Below threshold)

What I love so much about the VoCHA, (Victims of ChickenHawk Angst) is that they are so loving and supportive of vets, as long as the vet is one who is politically correct to kow tow to their cowardice in public.

It's so funny watching folks preach all about the importance of respecting the dead, OUR DEAD, because of their political needs.

But hey, this so does not surprise most of us. If we served in the military, that is not Real Military Service, unless it is the politically correct enough type for the likes of AnnonymousDave and the rest.

Why not call up Karl Rove, I am more than sure that he would be willing to save you the cost of doing the FOIA.

Which brings us back to the unpleasant reality check. IF you will not respect Vets who are Alive, why do you care about what happens to the dead one?

What is the real moral standard here?

Or is it really just one more case that the anti-anti-war types like to dehumanize vets, so that they are no longer people, but merely idols for worship, so that they can steal our VALOR as they have none of their own.

After reading some of your ... (Below threshold)
Sue Dohnim:

After reading some of your blog and your posts here, drieux, I think I've figured out how you served in our armed forces.

Poor soul.

it is actually somewhat rea... (Below threshold)

it is actually somewhat reassuring to hear that
the reading skills keep the players up to speed.

thought I would share from the panciky moments
of some kids in the military:

http://www.wetware.com/drieux/PPandE/TWAT/NITD.html

but it is actually reassuring to know that so many of the anti-anti-war crowd are so in favor of pissing on vets when it is politically expedient. Clearly an improvement on the old complaining that they use to do about spitting on veterans.

So clearly we are making some progress.

please don't let me interrupt your dissing the veterans community with your desperate needs to make yourselves feel all warm and patriotically correct. Clearly you folks need to fill your lives with something while you wait for that 'real attack' on america that will actually get you motivated to be active...

I see Congressmen attending... (Below threshold)
Edgar Cayce:

I see Congressmen attending the funerals of fallen soldiers every week on television with 75% of them giving pro-war speeches over the grave. I think this is many times worse than a 74 year old woman who happens to be a Lt Gov showing up, offering condolences without the media present to one family member, then the family member turning the event into a media circus. I think the guy's sister is the one at fault here, not the Lt Gov, but no one wants to mention that she was the one who involved the media and made this a circus -- not a politician.

drieux wrote:... (Below threshold)
Sue Dohnim:

drieux wrote:
thought I would share from the panciky moments
of some kids in the military:

http://www.wetware.com/drieux/PPandE/TWAT/NITD.html

Where on that jumbled incoherence of a webpage are any "panicked moments?" Panicked moments of emailing someone who's hit the bong too many times to use proper English syntax?

Or maybe you're not American or something. Who knows. This guy is more comprehendable than you.


but it is actually reassuring to know that so many of the anti-anti-war crowd are so in favor of pissing on vets when it is politically expedient.

Not pissing on vets, pissing on you. Seriously, did you have a stroke or something?

please don't let me interrupt your dissing the veterans community with your desperate needs to make yourselves feel all warm and patriotically correct.

You are not the veterans community.

Dissing you is not the same as dissing the veteran community.

Dissing you is dissing some strange man typing strange things that look like English but are more akin to moon babble.

All jokes aside, what meds are you on?

Edgar Cayce wrote:</... (Below threshold)
Sue Dohnim:

Edgar Cayce wrote:

I see Congressmen attending the funerals of fallen soldiers every week on television with 75% of them giving pro-war speeches over the grave.

Names and transcripts, please. Otherwise, you're just making shit up.

RE: Edgar Cayce's post (Jul... (Below threshold)
AnonymousDrivel:

RE: Edgar Cayce's post (July 28, 2005 04:42 AM)

I see Congressmen attending the funerals of fallen soldiers every week on television...

If it is with permission of the family, then that is fine. The family would know what best represents the soldier's or the family's position. Was this family member not acting as the family's spokesperson to criticise the Lt. Governor's presence? Was she not entitled to publicly criticize, on her and her family's behalf, irresposible behavior from an elected representative?

Edgar Cayce,Just t... (Below threshold)
AnonymousDrivel:

Edgar Cayce,

Just thought I'd provide a link to show who played the media card to initiate the imbroglio.

Knoll apologizes to Marine's widow
Tuesday, July 26, 2005
By Tom Barnes and Jerome L. Sherman, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Note the Post-Gazette photo.

Michelle Malkin provides more context to the story.

Sue Dohnim writes: <... (Below threshold)
s9:

Sue Dohnim writes: Poor soul.

I doubt this will make a dent in Drieux's demeanor, but it really pisses me off.

I have a close family member who was one of those research subjects back in the late fifties. Those people suffered so that American military planners could know as much and as early as possible— during the height of the fscking Cold War— about the powerful psychological effects of a drug that is effective in microgram doses.

It turned out LSD doesn't have any military applications, but in those days— they didn't know that. How the fsck do you think they found out? Those research subjects made a very real sacrifice so that people like you could remain blissfully unaware of the war going on all around us. The least you could do is show some respect.

Why am I not surprised that people here think such sacrifice should be the subject of a joke? Do any of you people actually think about the business of low-intensity warfare? Or do you just like to pretend you know something about it from reading cheap, trashy potboilers and watching Hollywood movies?

Sue Dohnim writes: <... (Below threshold)
s9:

Sue Dohnim writes: No person should show up at a funeral if they're not paying respect to the deceased and to the deceased's family. Especially if the person is uninvited and attends for alterior motives.

p1. Lt. Governor Knoll was paying respect to the dead marine. And the family. Too bad the family was apparently too dense to notice it.

p2. I've been to a lot of funerals that were announced in public with an invitation to anyone who wished to pay respect. I haven't seen any reason to think this wasn't one of them. If it were a private funeral that was not announced to the public, then how the fsck did the Lt. Governor find out about it?

p3. The word is 'ulterior'... and it doesn't apply here. The Lt. Governor's purpose in attending the funeral was not hidden. It was perfectly obvious to everyone, including the family.

You haven't gone to many funerals, from what I can tell of your demeanor.

I lost count of the number of military funerals I attended in the 1980's when I was in a position where doing that was part of my normal routine. You don't know jack about where I've been and what I've done.

Oh s9, you've attended so m... (Below threshold)
Sue Dohnim:

Oh s9, you've attended so many military funerals as a routine and had relatives in questionable ultrasecret government programs. Did you happen to run guns to Cambodia with Kerry, too? Were you in Roswell when the aliens landed? Did you have relatives who talked to Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster as well? How many of your aunties and uncles were "disappeared" by the Freemasons and Illuminati? Oh, I know, you thought your dad was one of their victims, but it turned out he was teleported to another dimension in the Philadelphia Experiment and is working for the Time Police.

You're so funny.

Sue Dohnim writes: <... (Below threshold)
s9:

Sue Dohnim writes: Oh, I know, you thought your dad was one of their victims

I didn't say it was my father— I said a close relative, and I won't say any more than that.

I certainly didn't call him a victim. You were the one who turned the suffering and sacrifice of an honorably discharged veteran into a "victim" status. And no, I don't subscribe to any of that other conspiracy bullshit, but I know what the Church Committee said about the LSD experiments, and what my relative told me in confidence about his experiences more than three years prior to the New York Times article that made the first public news about the project. Believe what you want— but you're not impressing anybody who's actually been there and done that.

I think Drieux may have tagged you with a bullseye. You have only contempt and derision for the suffering and sacrifice of those who served, and it's all because you can't get a grip on your own lack of valor— no, you have to deny it from the veterans, too.

Incorrect, sugar, I have co... (Below threshold)
Sue Dohnim:

Incorrect, sugar, I have contempt for everyone on the internet until they prove to my satisfaction that they're not some 15 year old snotnose whacking it to hentai on their daddy's computer. Or maybe some 40 year old basement-dwelling virgin whacking it to hentai on their mommy's broadband connection. I haven't seen anything from you to convince me otherwise.

If we're going to just claim shit and have it accepted as the absolute truth, then I'm the Queen of Norway and I bathe in emeralds and $1000 bills twice a day while Antonio Banderas serves me bon-bons off of his naked belly.

Putz.

Sue, how did you find that ... (Below threshold)
AnonymousDrivel:

Sue, how did you find that TimeCube thingy? My eyes were rolling after I finished the third sentence.

Seriously. What the heck was that about? Surely it's a very poor joke from the Onion to do some sort of polling of idiots. Or some automated regular expression script reassembling the same theme in multiple ways. Who would waste the money on such an idiotic assemblage of text, even if some sort of joke or web curiosity?

AD, believe it or not, that... (Below threshold)
Sue Dohnim:

AD, believe it or not, that Timecube thing is not a joke. An old guy (I forget his name) actually typed and drew all of that up because of his motivation to educate future generations about the secrets of the universe. He even issued a $10,000 challenge for anyone who could prove his Timecube theory wrong, and some M.I.T. students took him up on it. There's video of the meeting floating around on the internet somewhere, and it's painfully funny.

I feel sort of sorry for the man, because I think about how must have no family members to keep him from publicly embarrassing himself.

Where I found Timecube: som... (Below threshold)
Sue Dohnim:

Where I found Timecube: some old message boards I used to visit two or three years ago.

so how was Sue Dohnim going... (Below threshold)

so how was Sue Dohnim going to prove that she was not just one more of her 15 year old snot nosed little boys in drag?

By her patriotic opposition to actual veterans who served in the armed forces of the united states of american while she sat safely with the rest of the little boys from wizbang whining that those who had served were not nice to them.

Here the whiners of the anti-anti-war movement want to make as much political hay out of the death of OUR TRIBE, while safely hiding in the REAR. They want us to make the really absurd choices. Think about it whiners.

Should I support a fellow member of the Intelligence Community or some Political Hack? But I guess we have grown accustom to all of the "clintonite wannabe's" and their desperate hiding behind the 'alledged allegations' - even when Karl Rove Came Out and admitted that he had burned the CIA Asset. Good Lord, you folks don't even believe Karl Rove! And yet you want to defend him....

While at the same time bending over backwards to make any political hay that you can about anything other than the cause of the deaths of our Troops.

But what was I really expecting from a bunch of civilian parasites who believe that their shiney hiney's are so much more precious than Veterans.

RE: drieux just drieux's po... (Below threshold)
AnonymousDrivel:

RE: drieux just drieux's post (July 29, 2005 09:55 AM)

Sometimes discretion is used when responding to posts. Even those with wicked tongues employ that discretion if only intermittently. Frankly, I could neither follow most of your postings nor your web content that might support your positions.

About that "chickenhawk" argument, which I was able to decipher - it's a bit tiresome. I am grateful for your service (if you served) but that meme has been criticized regularly, even here at Wizbang. Revisiting it didn't seem necessary.

driuex wrote:... (Below threshold)
Sue Dohnim:

driuex wrote:
(rambling)

YOU WILL ADDRESS ME AS YOUR HIGHNESS OF NORWAY, PEASANT! BRING ME MY EMERALDS AND LEGAL TENDER! Oh, and tell Antonio he can have the night off, I'll have a Klondike bar instead.

drieux wrote: so ... (Below threshold)
s9:

drieux wrote: so how was Sue Dohnim going to prove that she was not just one more of her 15 year old snot nosed little boys in drag?

Sue Dohnim exclaimed: YOU WILL ADDRESS ME AS YOUR HIGHNESS OF NORWAY, PEASANT!

Nice. Proof by repetitive assertion.

"Am not."
"Are too."
"Am not."
"Are too!"
"Am not!"

Sigh. You deserve to be terrorized.

<a href="http://saturn.hidd... (Below threshold)
Sue Dohnim:
Oh no, I think I got my moo... (Below threshold)
Sue Dohnim:

Oh no, I think I got my moonbats mixed up. Is it you or JmaR who's the Deaniac? Pfffffft, like it matters, you're all barking at the moon out of the same cave.

Yes, you're confusing me wi... (Below threshold)
s9:

Yes, you're confusing me with some other moonbat. I'm not even a Democrat, much less a Howard Dean supporter.

RE: Sue Dohnim's post (July... (Below threshold)
AnonymousDrivel:

RE: Sue Dohnim's post (July 29, 2005 09:53 PM)

That's like a white-collar Ozzy Osbourne concert. Has PETA been notified? And did he run out of moonbats?

Sue Dohnim also wrote: "Nam... (Below threshold)
cal godot:

Sue Dohnim also wrote: "Names and transcripts, please. Otherwise, you're just making shit up."


Fairfield teens face charges in flag burning

By Michael D. Pitman
Cox News Service

FAIRFIELD | Two Fairfield juveniles are facing felony charges in an arson involving American flags at the home of a dead soldiers' in-laws a day after his funeral.

Police said Thursday they arrested and charged the 15-year-old and 13-year-old boys who live near the Sando Drive home each with fourth-degree felonious arson.

The teens, who police said admitted their involvement in the Saturday morning arson, were released to their parents.

The arson at the home of the Wessel family came one day after the funeral of Army Pfc. Tim Hines Jr., who died July 14 from injuries suffered while serving in Iraq.

The family of Hines' widow lives at the home.

The fire caused outrage throughout the community, with fire officials offering a reward in the case.

Yet Hines' father-in-law, Jim Wessel, pleaded for the community to show restraint.

The 21-year-old Hines was mortally wounded on Father's Day in Baghdad and died a month later in a Washington, D.C. hospital.


----

Now who's making shit up, Suebaby?




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

tips@wizbangblog.com

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy