counting the minutes with cindy sheehan

I was just thinking about Cindy Sheehan, the mother of a U.S. soldier killed in Iraq a year ago last week, and how she she’s been standing outside the Bush vacation home in Crawford, Texas these past few days, hoping to talk with the President about her son’s death and ask what the “noble cause” (Bush’s words) was that he died for.

This afternoon while in my car, I heard someone, I think it was a Republican congressman, saying that even if he wanted to, Bush couldn’t get into the practice of talking with each and every parent of someone who had died in Iraq… And that got me started thinking about the numbers, and whether or not it really would be impossible for him to meet with the families of every soldier killed in combat.

Since the war began 1454 American lives have been lost in combat in Iraq. It’s a huge number, but is it so huge as to make it impossible? And, is Bush so busy that a way couldn’t be found?

President Bush’s current vacation, as a point of reference, is scheduled to last almost five weeks.

Here’s a clip from the Washington Post:

The president departed Tuesday for his longest stretch yet away from the White House, arriving at his Crawford ranch in the evening for a stretch of clearing brush, visiting with family and friends, and tending to some outside-the-Beltway politics. By historical standards, it is the longest presidential retreat in at least 36 years.

The August getaway is Bush’s 49th trip to his cherished ranch since taking office and the 319th day that Bush has spent, entirely or partially, in Crawford — nearly 20 percent of his presidency to date, according to Mark Knoller, a CBS Radio reporter known for keeping better records of the president’s travel than the White House itself. Weekends and holidays at Camp David or at his parents’ compound in Kennebunkport, Maine, bump up the proportion of Bush’s time away from Washington even further.

I’m not so na

This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.

53 Comments

  1. ChelseaL
    Posted August 9, 2005 at 8:05 am | Permalink

    Revolting.

  2. Posted August 9, 2005 at 9:38 am | Permalink

    OMIGOD! I’m thinking that a woman described as “articulate” would not use words like the ones Bob Newman used. I think it’s reprehensible that he would put words like that into her mouth. And oh yeah, a middle-aged woman in shorts standing on a dusty road in the Texas August heat is most definitely a national security risk. GIVE ME A FRIGGIN’ BREAK!

  3. Posted August 9, 2005 at 9:43 am | Permalink

    Funny how the neo-cons are talking so much about what others deserve. Iraqis deserve freedom. Judges deserve up or down votes. Corporations deserve free trade.

    Pardon me if I appear selfish, but what about what we deserve? Don’t we deserve to have our public servants put our priorities and interests first?

  4. Teddy Glass
    Posted August 9, 2005 at 12:47 pm | Permalink

    I’d like to know where that Newman guy, if he’s in fact a real person, gets off suggesting that he knows what transpired between the woman and her son.

    And how does he know that the son wasn’t a Democrat. It sounds as though he’s suggesting that everyone in the military is a Republican.

    A month ago, I would have thought that it was satire. Now I don’t even have to wonder.

  5. Jennifer
    Posted August 9, 2005 at 2:45 pm | Permalink

    Here’s something from today’s news-

    http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=51471

    More members of Gold Star Families for Peace (GSFP) and Military Families Speak Out (MFSO) are traveling to Texas to join the protest outside of President Bush’s ranch in Crawford, Texas, where he is vacationing for the month of August.

    Starting today, Gold Star families from Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Arkansas and other states whose loved ones have died as a result of the war in Iraq will be joining one of their members, Cindy Sheehan, at the protest. Ms. Sheehan, whose son Army Specialist Casey Sheehan was killed in Sadr City, Iraq on April 4, 2004, has been in Crawford since August 5th, demanding a meeting with the President. These families will be joined by military families with loved ones currently serving in Iraq or about to deploy or redeploy to Iraq. All of these families are coming to Crawford, Texas to share their stories about the personal costs of the war in Iraq and add their voices to the call for a meeting with President Bush.

  6. anon
    Posted August 9, 2005 at 4:30 pm | Permalink

    it could be like “speed dating”. Bush could just hop from table of mourners to table of mourners every five minutes, at the sound of a bell.

  7. john galt
    Posted August 9, 2005 at 6:19 pm | Permalink

    Bush already met with her once after her son died, and she had nothing but positive things to say about him after the meeting, I’ll cut and paste later. The question is why has she changed her story so radically since? Could be grief, or it could be that she’s been courted by various anti-war groups and now has a feeling of belonging and empowerment.. I think Bush sent his Chief of Staff and a couple of other people out to meet with her a couple of days ago.. She said that wasn’t enough.

  8. chris
    Posted August 9, 2005 at 8:29 pm | Permalink

    Yeah, I think it is truly a waste of time for her to meet w/ him too. A masochistic excercise in futility. It goes to show what a moron he is as this will look worse for him ultimately. Maybe he recognizes its pointless too, as latest polls show that a large majority no longer support the war so why bother.

    The thing that always annoys me is that it seems that chicken hawks are the most vociferous in their support of the war. As if their bellowing could deflect their lack of service. Coming from a long line of veterans having served active duty, and having myself lived on many an army base I can support this woman, however jaded that support is.

    Its like when I see some fat fuck white skinned hick (yes I did I’ll drop to newman’s level) wearing a 9/11 FDNY/PDNY hat. I just want to kick them in the neck or at least beg them to PLEASE YES FORGET! I promise I won’t question your patriotism if you do!

    Oh, and here’s a hoot. Dov Hikind, a conservative Jewish NY state assemblyman is calling for racial profiling!!! The irony is that to most middle Americans (and my lizard brain via my ignorant subway anecdote), the only physical difference at times, between the arab and the jew, is the style of hat they are wearing.

  9. john galt
    Posted August 9, 2005 at 8:43 pm | Permalink

    you’re French right?

  10. john galt
    Posted August 9, 2005 at 8:53 pm | Permalink

    Bush, Sheehans share moments
    By David Henson/Staff Writer

    Since learning in April that their son, Army Spc. Casey Sheehan, had been killed in Iraq, life has been everything but normal for the Sheehan family of Vacaville.

    Casey’s parents, Cindy and Patrick, as well as their three children, have attended event after event honoring the soldier both locally and abroad, received countless letters of support and fielded questions from reporters across the country.

    “That’s the way our whole lives have been since April 4,” Patrick said. “It’s been surreal.”

    But none of that prepared the family for the message left on their answering machine last week, inviting them to have a face-to-face meeting with President George W. Bush at Fort Lewis near Seattle.

    Surreal soon seemed like an understatement, as the Sheehans – one of 17 families who met Thursday with Bush – were whisked in a matter of days to the Army post and given the VIP treatment from the military. But as their meeting with the president approached, the family was faced with a dilemma as to what to say when faced with Casey’s commander-in-chief.

    “We haven’t been happy with the way the war has been handled,” Cindy said. “The president has changed his reasons for being over there every time a reason is proven false or an objective reached.”

    The 10 minutes of face time with the president could have given the family a chance to vent their frustrations or ask Bush some of the difficult questions they have been asking themselves, such as whether Casey’s sacrifice would make the world a safer place.

    But in the end, the family decided against such talk, deferring to how they believed Casey would have wanted them to act. In addition, Pat noted that Bush wasn’t stumping for votes or trying to gain a political edge for the upcoming election.

    “We have a lot of respect for the office of the president, and I have a new respect for him because he was sincere and he didn’t have to take the time to meet with us,” Pat said.

    Sincerity was something Cindy had hoped to find in the meeting. Shortly after Casey died, Bush sent the family a form letter expressing his condolences, and Cindy said she felt it was an impersonal gesture.

    “I now know he’s sincere about wanting freedom for the Iraqis,” Cindy said after their meeting. “I know he’s sorry and feels some pain for our loss. And I know he’s a man of faith.”

    The meeting didn’t last long, but in their time with Bush, Cindy spoke about Casey and asked the president to make her son’s sacrifice count for something. They also spoke of their faith.

    While meeting with Bush, as well as Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, was an honor, it was almost a tangent benefit of the trip. The Sheehans said they enjoyed meeting the other families of fallen soldiers, sharing stories, contact information, grief and support.

    For some, grief was still visceral and raw, while for others it had melted into the background of their lives, the pain as common as breathing. Cindy said she saw her reflection in the troubled eyes of each.

    “It’s hard to lose a son,” she said. “But we (all) lost a son in the Iraqi war.”

    The trip had one benefit that none of the Sheehans expected.

    For a moment, life returned to the way it was before Casey died. They laughed, joked and bickered playfully as they briefly toured Seattle.

    For the first time in 11 weeks, they felt whole again.

    “That was the gift the president gave us, the gift of happiness, of being together,” Cindy said.

  11. john galt
    Posted August 9, 2005 at 8:57 pm | Permalink

    “That was the gift the president gave us, the gift of happiness, of being together,” Cindy said. I guess the bloom is off the rose, or else her “progressive” friends have other plans for her grief. Amazing how much coverage this story is getting…

  12. mark
    Posted August 9, 2005 at 9:23 pm | Permalink

    John, before you go shooting your mouth off too much, telling (the French-sounding) Chris that she doesn’t understand the situation, etc, you might want to know that Chris’s dad is serving in Iraq.

    As for Sheehan, if you go to her diary (which is linked to in my post), she discusses the first, brief meeting with Bush and explains why she feels it’s necessary to speak with him again.

  13. chris
    Posted August 9, 2005 at 9:29 pm | Permalink

    I invite you to post to her blog and tell her how you feel John. I am sure she would see it your way and put off all this silly selfish behavior. Because, given what I’ve read in your latest cut/paste according to you she obviously has precluded her right to grieve how she sees fit. For Christ sake why doesn’t she just go and bury her son already, Bush has. Is that your argument John? You don’t need to convince me, I support her. You need to convince her.

    Show a little more respect for our men and women in uniform, as they have made the ultimate sacrifice. She has earned the right to say whatever she wants to whomever she wants and they damn well better listen.

    You better represent before you get back up on this soapbox. Patriotism is not proven in the blind obeisance of your postings but in service. And no, the minor leagues don’t count.

    And yes, I must be French… about as French as your earlier nonsequitur.

  14. Jim
    Posted August 9, 2005 at 10:49 pm | Permalink

    The article that John cut and pasted makes it clear that at the time of Sheehan’s meeting with Bush, she was already opposed to the war. Whatever praise she had for Bush was faint, if not ironic.

  15. ChelseaL
    Posted August 10, 2005 at 7:44 am | Permalink

    And can we leave the French out of this, please?

  16. Shanster
    Posted August 10, 2005 at 10:43 am | Permalink

    Zat is vat ze Germans said about Paris.

    Is this grieving? How different from sitting Shiva. From her diary (or maybe the Dkos interpretation), CS has no real hope to meet with W. Apparently, what whe really wants is to draw attention to the anti-war movement. Is this honestly her way of honoring her son? I don’t think so, but who am I to judge her heart? I hope she gets her meeting, screams at W for twenty minutes, they cry together, share a time of prayer, become best friends, and we all move on.

  17. chris
    Posted August 10, 2005 at 2:46 pm | Permalink

    You honestly don’t think that protesting the war is an honorable way to serve her son?

    How would you have her do it Shanster? Of course, your sentiment would be more legitimate were you to have a family member die in this war…or even serving.

  18. Shanster
    Posted August 10, 2005 at 3:03 pm | Permalink

    Actually, Chris, my ‘honestly’ was not just to make a sarcastic point. It was a real question. And it IS an honorable way, but I’m not sure that honoring is her true intent. I’ll keep reading and watching her reaction to the future events.

    No, I don’t have a family member serving and dying, but a brother who went to Gitmo for nearly a year.

    Well, it’s not my business how she grieves. Most people do it privately, or set up funds; it’s still a free country. As I said, let her go on sitting until she gets what she needs.

  19. chris
    Posted August 10, 2005 at 3:17 pm | Permalink

    OK, I will get back to you. But right now, I am going to help pack boxes of toiletries, nonperishable food items, and other sundries for the servicemen and women in Iraq. BTW, this will be done at my Episcopalian church. I will be sure to ask them if they believe in evolution.

    One final question, Shanster and John. When were you at the post office last and what did you purchase when you were there?

  20. Shanster
    Posted August 10, 2005 at 3:23 pm | Permalink

    Why? 2 months ago…stamps…Dr. Seuss ones, I think.

  21. chris
    Posted August 10, 2005 at 7:58 pm | Permalink

    Well, the next time you go I invite you to purchase a calling card for servicemen and women serving over seas so they can call their loved ones back home. A program that has been in place for some time.

    It would be a nice gesture to show your support for the people fighting your war, and let them know you are grateful for their sacrifice.

    That way you don’t have to question whether mother Sheehan is being altruistic or not. And this way you will be able to say you did something too, rather then said something on a pinko commie blog.

    ooooh, I am becoming rather Rovian in my hyperbole. DNC, are you listening? Self righteous, indignant bitch for hire!

  22. mark
    Posted August 10, 2005 at 9:41 pm | Permalink

    Is your dad still over there, Chris, or is he back home yet?

  23. chris
    Posted August 10, 2005 at 10:51 pm | Permalink

    Thank you for asking Mark. Dad got back right before the insurgency really got going late last spring. While there, he was serving as an electrical engineer managing the restringing of electric lines in this region.

    Right after the incident in Falluja, the commanders of the camp (Camp Mad Dog)he was staying at felt they needed to return to Baghdad. If I am not mistaken, the camp was not to far from Tikrit. Because the camp’s purpose was rebuilding the infrastructure rather than “engaging the enemy”, their security detail was essentially private contractors (read:soldiers of fortune). On the return to Baghdad, they were stopped at the main road by US Army blockades informing them that the road was too dangerous and they had to turn back. This, according to my father, was entirely unfeasible given the degree of civil unrest (why the fuck did they leave in the first place?).

    Having to find another way to Baghdad of course required that they go down less secure roads. This totally screwed them as their convoy was stopped and surrounded. My father was in the lead car which he was initially advised against as that is usually the first car to be attacked, but he insisted.
    According to my dad, shots were fired and exchanged from somewhere within the mob. My dad was pulled from the car by the driver, himseslf Iraqi, and shuttled to one of the rear cars. As he was being whisked to one of the back cars he heard a voice screaming, “I’ve been hit”. Unfortunately, that voice was that of one of the private security detail who later died from his wounds.

    Now here is the really shitty thing. About a month ago I heard a news report regarding the increasing contentious/agressive attitude towards the private security contractors by the enlisted soldiers. The latter being rightfully pissed off at the disparity in pay with the former. The news report had an interview with a private security detail who had been detained by MPs, and while brutally being beaten (he had a testicle crushed under the heal of an MPs boot) the MPs taunted him about his pay. Asking him how he “liked the contractor pay now”.

    Also in this report were stories of how convoys containing civilian military engineers (my father)being protected by private security had been prevented from going down secure roads because of this feud (really one sided) between the contractors and the enlisted. So, was this guy’s death potentially avoidable? I, personally try not to think about it. When I related this report to my father he had nothing to say. I think he was truly traumatized by this experience. This being a man who as a child during WWII had the misfortune of living in a battle zone and sought refuge in dugouts. (He lived overseas in an area where the war was being fought.)

  24. mark
    Posted August 10, 2005 at 10:59 pm | Permalink

    Thanks for sharing that Chris… And I’m happy to hear that your dad made it back safely.

  25. Shanster
    Posted August 11, 2005 at 5:59 am | Permalink

    Indeed. Thanks for the info on the calling card. I’ll get one next time I’m there.

  26. john galt
    Posted August 11, 2005 at 2:15 pm | Permalink

    FAMILY OF FALLEN SOLDIER PLEADS: PLEASE STOP, CINDY!
    Thu Aug 11 2005 12:56:21 ET

    The family of American soldier Casey Sheehan, who was killed in Iraq on April 4, 2004, has broken its silence and spoken out against his mother Cindy Sheehan’s anti-war vigil against George Bush held outside the president’s Crawford, Texas ranch.

    The following email was received by the DRUDGE REPORT from Cherie Quarterolo, Casey’s aunt and godmother:

    Our family has been so distressed by the recent activities of Cindy we are breaking our silence and we have collectively written a statement for release. Feel free to distribute it as you wish. Thanks

  27. Posted August 11, 2005 at 3:01 pm | Permalink

    john,

    this ain’t your grandaddy’s anti-war protest.

    seriously, haven’t you ever done something your family didn’t approve of? How would society progress and change if people didn’t buck convention every generation or two?

    I don’t personally see any reason why these family members would have made these statements, beyond the very “self promotion” they themselves are criticizing.

    For all we know, everybody in the family could have also hated Cindy years before the iraq war even started, and just now got their opportunity to act on it.

    I would add something about the fact that this is from Drudge, but why bother?

  28. chris
    Posted August 11, 2005 at 4:07 pm | Permalink

    Dear John and Shanster,

    John as you are the master of cut and paste, please dear God tell me this isn’t true. I am totally serious. I personally cannot believe it is this slanted. Tell me this is some kind of exaggerated liberal propaganda.

    This is one of the reasons that I am glad that you are both here. I know you can rectify this seeming disparity. Because at times the Democrats get on my nerves too.

    Please limit your search to current house, senate, and cabinet members. Colin Powell is missing from the Republican list, so there’s a freebie. There has got to be more, right?

    I will also accept conscientious objectors in the Republican party.

    It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and
    groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, more vengeance, more
    desolation. War is hell. -William Tecumseh Sherman, Union General in the
    American Civil War (1820-1891)

    Let’s look at several prominent Democrats and Republicans and see who are
    the Heroes and who are the Chickenhawks.

    Democrats:

    * Richard Gephardt: Air National Guard, 1965-71.
    * David Bonior: Staff Sgt., Air Force 1968-72.
    * Tom Daschle: 1st Lt., Air Force SAC 1969-72.
    * Al Gore: enlisted Aug. 1969; sent to Vietnam Jan. 1971
    as an army journalist in 20th Engineer Brigade.
    * Bob Kerrey: Lt. j.g. Navy 1966-69; Medal of Honor,
    Vietnam.
    * Daniel Inouye: Army 1943-47; Medal of Honor, WWII.
    * John Kerry: Lt., Navy 1966-70; Silver Star, Bronze Star
    with Combat V, Purple Hearts.
    * Charles Rangel: Staff Sgt., Army 1948-52; Bronze Star,
    Korea.
    * Max Cleland: Captain, Army 1965-68; Silver Star &
    Bronze Star, Vietnam.
    * Ted Kennedy: Army, 1951-53.
    * Tom Harkin: Lt., Navy, 1962-67; Naval Reserve, 1968-74.
    * Jack Reed: Army Ranger, 1971-1979; Captain, Army
    Reserve 1979-91.* Fritz Hollings: Army officer in WWII; Bronze Star and
    seven campaign ribbons.
    * Leonard Boswell: Lt. Col., Army 1956-76; Vietnam,
    DFCs, Bronze Stars, and Soldier’s Medal.
    * Pete Peterson: Air Force Captain, POW. Purple Heart,
    Silver Star and Legion of Merit.
    Mike Thompson: Staff sergeant, 173rd Airborne, Purple
    Heart.
    * Bill McBride: Candidate for Fla. Governor. Marine in
    Vietnam; Bronze Star with Combat V.
    * Gray Davis: Army Captain in Vietnam, Bronze Star.
    * Pete Stark: Air Force 1955-57
    * Chuck Robb: Vietnam
    * Howell Heflin: Silver Star
    * George McGovern: Silver Star & DFC during WWII.
    * Bill Clinton: Did not serve. Student deferments. Entered
    draft but received #311.
    * Jimmy Carter: Seven years in the Navy.
    * Walter Mondale: Army 1951-1953
    * John Glenn: WWII and Korea; six DFCs and AirMedal
    with 18 Clusters.
    * Tom Lantos: Served in Hungarian underground in WWII.
    Saved by Raoul Wallenberg.

    Republicans:

    * Dick Cheney: did not serve. Several deferments, the last
    by marriage.
    * Dennis Hastert: did not serve.
    * Tom Delay: did not serve.
    * Roy Blunt: did not serve.
    * Bill Frist: did not serve.
    * Mitch McConnell: did not serve.
    * Rick Santorum: did not serve.
    * Trent Lott: did not serve.
    * John Ashcroft: did not serve. Seven deferments to teach
    business.
    * Jeb Bush: did not serve.
    * Karl Rove: did not serve.
    * Saxby Chambliss: did not serve. “Bad knee.” The man
    who attacked Max Cleland’s patriotism…
    * Paul Wolfowitz: did not serve.
    * Vin Weber: did not serve.
    * Richard Perle: did not serve.
    * Douglas Feith: did not serve.
    * Eliot Abrams: did not serve.
    * Richard Shelby: did not serve.
    * Jon! Kyl: did not serve.
    * Tim Hutchison: did not serve.
    * Christopher Cox: did not serve.
    * Newt Gingrich: did not serve.
    * Don Rumsfeld: served in Navy (1954-57) as flight
    instructor.
    * George W. Bush: failed to complete his six-year National
    Guard; got assigned to Alabama so he could campaign for
    family friend running for U.S. Senate; failed to show up for
    required medical exam, disappeared from duty.
    * Ronald Reagan: due to poor eyesight, served in a non-
    combat role making movies.
    * B-1 Bob Dornan: Consciously enlisted after fighting was
    over in Korea.
    * Phil Gramm: did not serve.
    * John McCain: Vietnam POW, Silver Star, Bronze
    Star, Legion of Merit, Purple Heart and Distinguished
    Flying Cross.
    * Dana Rohrabacher: did not serve! .
    * John M. McHugh: did not serve.
    * JC Watts: did not serve.
    * Jack Kemp: did not serve. “Knee problem, ” although
    continued in NFL for 8 years.
    * Dan Quayle: Journalism unit of the Indiana National
    Guard.
    * Rudy Giuliani: did not serve.
    * George Pataki: did not serve.
    * Spencer Abraham: did not serve.
    * John Engler: did not serve.
    * Lindsey Graham: National Guard lawyer.
    * Arnold Schwarzenegger: AWOL from Austrian army base.

    Pundits & Preachers:
    * Sean Hannity: did not serve.
    * Rush Limbaugh: did not serve (4-F with a ‘pilonidal cyst.’)
    * Bill O’Reilly: did not serve.
    * Michael Savage: did not serve.
    * George Will: did not serve.
    * Chris Matthews: did not serve.
    * Paul Gigot: did not serve.
    * Bill Bennett: did not serve.
    * Pat Buchanan: did not serve.
    * John Wayne: did not serve.
    *Bill Kristol: did not serve.
    * Kenneth Starr: did not serve.
    * Antonin Scalia: did not serve.
    * Clarence Thomas: did not serve.
    * Ralph Reed: did not serve.
    * Michael Medved: did not serve.
    * Charlie Daniels: did not serve.
    * Ted Nugent: did not serve. (He only shoots at things
    that don’t shoot back.)

    —— End of Forwarded Message

  29. Shanster
    Posted August 11, 2005 at 4:32 pm | Permalink

    Wow! I’ll leave this one to “the cutter”.

  30. Posted August 11, 2005 at 5:57 pm | Permalink

    Chris, I’m sorry, but you forgot:

    * John Inman:Are you being served?

  31. chris
    Posted August 11, 2005 at 6:47 pm | Permalink

    OK, I am dum. I totally don’t get it. Please ‘splain it to me.

  32. Posted August 11, 2005 at 7:03 pm | Permalink

    My cultural reference had nothing to do with the conversation, actually. Please ignore me and continue the discussion.

  33. chris
    Posted August 11, 2005 at 7:05 pm | Permalink

    Dude, my MOM watches that show! And isn’t that BJ from M*A*S*H?

  34. john galt
    Posted August 11, 2005 at 7:41 pm | Permalink

    one way to solve Chris’s problem, compulsory military service like they have in other countries… On a tangent: if it was blood for oil, why did I just pay 2.68/gal for gas? Can’t we just get oil from Iraq for free now?

  35. chris
    Posted August 11, 2005 at 8:08 pm | Permalink

    John, I am laughing that’s funny. Did you see Jon Stewart the other night? Asking God why he put “our” oil under a desert, rather then say…New Jersey?

    No but seriously, this list can’t be true can it. I refuse to believe it. As a card carrying republican you have got to help me out here.

    By the way, somebody could very well be getting the oil for free, but has unfortunately decided not to pass on the savings to you. You do know that even at $2.68 a gallon it is still lower then what the rest of the free market economy pays for it as it is govt. subsidized.

    But w/ subsidies like that who needs gas?

  36. john galt
    Posted August 11, 2005 at 8:26 pm | Permalink

    from a funny and insensitive Fark post

    In the far future, we all evolve into dinosaurs. It is only then that we will be smart to unlock the secrets of time travel. At that point, “undesirable” dinosaurs (Mexicans) are sent back in time hundreds of millions of years to die. Once all the Mexicans have been exterminated, our future selves will cease this practice.

    From our current perspective on the fossil record, it appears that dinosaurs have gone extinct, when in reality they do not exist yet. All we know is that someday, in the far future, there will be no more Mexicans.

  37. john galt
    Posted August 11, 2005 at 8:52 pm | Permalink

    To your other point chris, I have no problem with limiting either congress or citizenship to people who have served in the military, That would’ve Eliminated Clinton from consideration, but as long as we have an open republic I’m not sure I get you’re point… If you have to serve in the military for your voice to count, then I’m guessing your voice is meaningless.. Read Starship Troopers (Heinlein) (not the movie).. It explores the idea that citizenship should only be given to people who have put their life on the line for their country. Since we don’t have that requirement in the constitution yet, I don’t understand whats wrong with people who didn’t go into the military being in congress. People did vote for them didn’t they?

  38. chris
    Posted August 11, 2005 at 9:07 pm | Permalink

    Dude, I told you I was serious. I have no point other than I do not believe this list. I believe that whoever put this list together did not do any research on the Republican side as I am of the opinion John McCain can’t be that lonely.

    Yeah, you can have a voice w/out having served any miitary duty. But would you have surgery from a surgeon who did not do his residency? You brought this point up, not me.

    And I don’t grok your Mexican dinosaurs in space joke at all. But that’s OK.

  39. Shanster
    Posted August 12, 2005 at 5:13 am | Permalink

    Chris-
    since John didn’t take up the challenge yet, I looked up a little bit. McCain is not so alone. I searched only the first two states, and found Republicans Sessions (AL), Stevens (AK), and Young (AK) all served in some capacity. The search was getting too tedious. I’m sure there must be a simple comprehensive list somewhere.

  40. Doug Skinner
    Posted August 12, 2005 at 8:06 am | Permalink

    Hey, what about Bob Dole? And what’s John Wayne doing on the list??

  41. Doug Skinner
    Posted August 12, 2005 at 8:53 am | Permalink

    Sorry, you want only current honchos. It does seem disingenuous to leave off such a recent presidential candidate, though. Or to mention Quayle, but not Bush Sr.

  42. Jim
    Posted August 12, 2005 at 9:28 am | Permalink

    There’s more on the Quarterolo letter here:
    http://www.pnionline.com/dnblog/attytood/archives/002306.html
    The first 5 or 6 comments also contain some relevant information.

  43. Jim
    Posted August 12, 2005 at 4:00 pm | Permalink

    If you are wondering why Bush doesn’t just go out, talk to Sheehan, and put an end to this embarassing episode, check out this ad:
    http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Video_Mother_of_fallen_soldier_asks_questions_of_Presiden_0812.html
    I would be afraid to talk to her too!

  44. William Leatherwood
    Posted August 21, 2005 at 3:56 am | Permalink

    The URL in which Cindy Sheehan says a former friend doctored an email is at

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cindy-sheehan/camp-casey-day-12_b_5830.html

    This specter who is according to her, a

  45. Posted August 21, 2005 at 12:09 pm | Permalink

    Mr. Leatherwood,

    I believe what you’ve proposed is called a “Strawman” argument by conservatives, insofar as it distracts from the real issues being discussed, and (you believe) can be easily refuted.

    Unfortunately for your position, “Israel” is not “Judaism”. Even if she made the assertion you claim, which I don’t personally believe, it hardly can be qualified as anti-semitism.

    More importantly, David Duke is not Cindy Sheehan, and no amount of grandstanding on his part will make him so.

    If I publicly said I agree with you on a certain point, would you then automatically be held responsible for every other ideological view I hold myself? I think not.

  46. William Leatherwood
    Posted August 21, 2005 at 3:15 pm | Permalink
  47. Posted August 21, 2005 at 7:43 pm | Permalink

    mr. Leatherwood,

    please respond to the points i made, or else shut the fuck up.

    seriously.

    you and i are taking up the bandwith of mr. maynard, and unless you plan on engaging in dialogue, i see little point in even recognizing your existence.

    why don’t reporters challenge her?

    I don’t know.

    I guess it must be the fact that they’re interested in keeping their jobs in the media kabal, which is exclusively controlled by wealthy, liberal jews, who don’t want to draw attention to the actions of the zionists, without whom american christian fundamentalists will not be able to immanentize the eschaton, and bring about the rapture.

    Are you happy with that assumption?

    I’m not.

    Have i mentioned, “shut the fuck up?”

  48. mark
    Posted August 21, 2005 at 9:57 pm | Permalink

    Clearly Sheehan, like Terri Schiavo’s evil husband, orchestrated the death of her loved-one just to worm her way into the media spotlight… I say we just ship her off to Guantanamo Bay and teach her a lesson about patriotism that she never forgets.

  49. William Leatherwood
    Posted August 22, 2005 at 12:41 am | Permalink

    Brett–” I guess it must be the fact that they’re interested in keeping their jobs in the media kabal, which is exclusively controlled by wealthy, liberal jews, who don’t want to draw attention to the actions of the zionists.”

    Brett was David Dukes standing behind you dictating that unintelligible hodgepodge of anti-semitism and high school invective and logic are is that your very own display of ignorance? And by the way Im not here to engage you in your nonsense, its called a perspective, and it must really have struck a nerve in your weak kneed anti-semitism and racism.Maybe Brett you and Robert Byrd and David Dukes and Cindy Sheehan can all exchange Jew hating notes. Bret put your David Duke autographed “Mein Kampf” down and read a real book.

  50. Posted August 22, 2005 at 11:08 am | Permalink

    mr. Leatherwood,

    I generally expect the possibility of complete strangers missing the sarcasm in my comments, but when I actually clarify that they are supposed to be sarcastic, and you still misunderstand my meaning, then it’s clearly an issue of poor reading comprehension on your point.

    You are either unable or unwilling to address the points I made, despite the fact that I responded to all of yours. Please explain why I, or anyone else, would want to talk to you if your only method of debate is to hurl insults.

  51. William Leatherwood
    Posted August 22, 2005 at 5:57 pm | Permalink

    I notice the

  52. mark
    Posted August 22, 2005 at 8:45 pm | Permalink

    I think you’re absolutely right, Mr. Leatherwood… Having another Islamic theocracy in the region is well worth the lives of 2,000 American men and women. Hell, it would be a bargain at twice that.

    That, in case you were confused, was sarcasm.

    And, by the way, no one is/was arguing that Sadam wasn’t a cruel and evil bastard. He was a cruel and evil bastard for years… even when Rumsfeld was there, shaking his hand.

  53. Posted August 22, 2005 at 11:11 pm | Permalink

    Apparantly he was sometimes right here to have his hand shaken. Wasn’t he given the key to the city of Detroit while he was our friend?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Connect

BUY LOCAL... or shop at Amazon through this link Banner Initiative Apes Selection