Bryan at Why Now? makes some excellent observations in his "Weekend Rant". On the Cindy Sheehan situation:
There is almost no reason in a civilized society to attack the parent of a member of the military who died in service to their country. I don't care if you supported or opposed the action by the political leaders that put the member of the military at risk. Your politics don't excuse the total lack of social conscience involved in such an attack. If you can't understand and respect the pain and grief of a mother who has lost a child, you are without any redeeming social value.On the NARAL ad flap
I want someone who claims that soldiers can die in vain to find a Virginian who had an ancestor die in Pickett's Charge and who thinks that the ancestor's death wasn't honorable and worthy, that it was in vain.
The NARAL ad incident is indicative of a major misunderstanding among people who should know better.And on the Mess in Mesopotamia:
NARAL is a single issue organization and would be unfaithful to their membership if they failed to give their support to politicians who support their views without regard to party. They would also fail if they didn't vigorously attack those who oppose their views.
Lost in this episode is the right to privacy. Reproductive choice is not the only issue that is tied to the right to privacy, and the easiest way to limit reproductive choice is by limiting the right to privacy. You can't give ground on Roe v. Wade without weakening the right to privacy.
Folks, there is no compromise to be found on the other side of the political spectrum, so stop wasting credibility looking for it. You don't give up basic rights to please the views of others. It's time people understood that the other side wants people to give up the Bill of Rights. They want to limit speech, bring religion into the government, and put the government in your doctor's office and your bedroom. This isn't about accommodating their values; it's about giving away your rights.
If you have a problem with choice, you need to understand that you don't support the right to privacy.
Just because you didn't read the signs properly and supported the invasion of Iraq is no reason to continue to support it now that you have ample proof that you were lied to and the Busheviks "fixed" the intelligence to justify their actions.Don't blame me: I never voted for Bush--and never will regret it.
There is no reason to stay in Iraq. It isn't going to get any better.
The Shi'ia are going to align with Iran, as should have been obvious. They were screwed over by the US after Gulf War I, so they don't feel they owe us anything.
Most of the damage and deaths were in the Sunni areas, so they certainly hate the US more than any of the other groups.
The Kurds have been screwed over by every Republican administration from Nixon forward, so they don't acknowledge any obligation to us.
The Iraqi women are about to be set back about a millennium with the imposition of Sharia law, so there is no support there.
Turkey and Syria are looking at the emergence of a Kurdish state, so we can forget any help from them, even if we weren't constantly trying to pick a fight with Syria.
The biggest hoot I've heard are the people who claim they couldn't believe that the Bush administration would be this incompetent. Excuse me, but where, exactly, in Bush's Curriculum Vitae do you find any indication of competence in any field other than slimy political campaigns?
Len on 08.14.05 @ 11:49 AM CST