Fuck.

[WilliamPitt]

Last edited Wed Jan 29, 2014, 11:17 AM - Edit history (2)

He stood that soldier up at the end, the man with the blasted head and the scarred life, with the visible dent in his skull, who will never ever be even remotely close to the same again because of the ten deployments we sent him off to so someone he'll never meet can make a lot of money, and gave that man his reward: a standing ovation from the worst roomful of people on the skin of the Earth...

...followed by this burbled bit of spitup pabulum: "Sometimes we make mistakes."

WOW DUDE. DEEP.

Yeah. That happened. On national television.

That guy deserves better than a star turn in the parliament of whores, he deserves better than "Oops" from his Commander in Chief, and speaking of the boss, that guy deserves better than to be a prop in a passion play about how everything is awesome, and the last 13 years never happened.

I am sure the to-the-knife Obama defenders out there will seethe and howl upon reading this. Whatever, man. That was one of the more despicable displays I have ever had the misfortune to witness. He had the opportunity to do more than use a blasted, shattered soldier as a prop in a ZOMG HOW AWESOME IS AMERICA I MEAN TOTALLY montage, to maybe bring home some truths about actions and consequences...and he went for the easy applause line and the "Awwwww" moment.

You say "Awwwww" at puppies and babies. You don't say "Awwww" at soldiers victimized by ruined policy deployed by a ruined country...and if you have half a conscience, you make note of that on the largest stage with the biggest microphone in the world.

Another missed opportunity in what has become a truly impressive string of missed opportunities. Yeah, the SOTU is a show. That does not mean it has to be utterly meaningless, and it certainly does not mean that it has to be grossly exploitative.

Maybe I'll feel different tomorrow upon review. I doubt it. I am sick to my stomach.

[phleshdef]

1. Wow, one of the most irrational take aways from any speech ever.

I don't even know where to begin with how absolutely wrong you are on this.

[morningfog]

4. You could begin by addressing why we should be proud that there exists the

possibility that anyone could be sent to unnecessary wars for 10 deployments.

[phleshdef]

6. Oh I think thats absolutely insane. But the OP missed the point. Chris Hayes got it right though.

There was a connection between declaring that America has to remove itself from permanent war footing and then shortly after introducing the consequences of said permanent war footing.

[morningfog]

9. All by the Commander in Chief perpetrating said permanent war footing.

It was disingenuous, at best. But offensive to anyone who has paid attention to the permanent wars. Which, if you listened, they certainly aren't ended anytime soon. Explicitly forces will remain in Afghanistan for the foreseeable future and there are now four countries on the war on terror list (even though Obama has enough sense to not use the term axis).

[Schema Thing]

40. .

[Skittles]

210. THANK YOU

so many DUers act like he is an innocent bystander

[fadedrose]

395. No. Korea was part of the axis..

Iran, Iraq and No. Korea. Iraq has it's own trouble and is not part of any axis now. Iran remains to be seen, but Doves all over the planet are working on it.

No. Korea just sent a letter to So. Korea requesting a decline in hostilities.

I have hopes for No. Korea and Dennis Rodman because Jung Un has asked several times for a phone call from us.

Dennis Rodman is seeking help for his drinking problem, I heard somewhere.

We don't know why the uncle was executed. He comes as the part of the group of hardliners who had such atrocious policies dealing with their people and perhaps wanted to rid himself of the US flirtation by Jung Un who caught on and got rid of him instead.

Nothing is what it seems.

I think we have more than an axis of economic enemies until we put trade on an even playing field (I hate these trite expressions, but sometimes they fit.)

[AAO]

415. Do you know that Kim killed all of his uncles relatives too?

Men, women, children, babies. His entire extended family, parents, wife, children, childrens children...

[aquart]

437. Somebody make him read a biography of Alexander the Great?

Very old style.

[fadedrose]

469. To be fair, all the old style was not just killing family

Many married their grandmothers or sisters to retain a royal bloodline, some of whom are still alive....

Ann bolyn didn't make the cut....or rather, she did...sorry.

[yurbud]

601. Our government doesn't give half a shit what other governments do to their own people

The two things that matter:

1. Does that country have something that rich people here want?

2. Is the leader of that country doing business on terms that our rich people dictate?

Since North Korea doesn't even have the first, including it in the "Axis of Evil" was little more than a rhetorical flourish.

If a country does both, they don't have to be democratic, they can deny women's rights of all kinds, imprison political opponents, hell the president of Uzbekistan even boiled a guy ALIVE.

[dflprincess]

11. Tweety just gushed over that "remove us from permanent war footing" line

he even gushed about how Obama said it in 2008 and now he's saying it again. Really? Because 2008 was 6 years ago and he's had 5 years as President to do something about it and we haven't seen much movement in that direction - instead they make noise about needing to leave troops in Afghanistan longer.

It's a line that plays well but I though using that poor soldier was a real Bush league move.

[phleshdef]

195. "we haven't seen much movement in that direction" = total bullshit

I don't even have to recount all the differences that have been made in regard to how many troops were deployed in 2009 vs today. Its a whole lot less. We are winding down one war, not proactively fighting any at all really. Its more of an attempt to make a graceful exit than it is anything else.

Leaving a small amount of troops deployed somewhere, though I am against it, is not "permanent war footing". There is a difference between an occupation vs a small presence and its a huge difference.

[pangaia]

357. But, I don't disagree with you at all.

But, honestly, why do we need 'troops' all over the world in the first place?

[Fantastic Anarchist]

452. No, because now we have drones!

More efficient at killing and perpetuating war while absolving one's self of any guilt.

It's like Palm Olive. It softens hands while doing dishes.

[MynameisBlarney]

367. Forgot about the obstructionist congress have you?

They have made it very difficult for Obama to do anything.

And he used the soldier as an example for just why we have to get out of the ME.

I think it was a very well made point.

[brush]

398. The President avoided war in Eygpt, Libya and Syria

yet you talk about this administration not doing anything to get us off a permanent war footing.

I must say memories are short around here but you just have to remember all the repugs clamoring for troops to be sent to Eygpt, Libya and Syria yet Obama resisted? And just tonight this president threatened to veto any bill for sanctions against the Iran negotiations so that we can give diplomacy a chance to again, AVOID WAR?

No?

C'mon, it wasn't that long ago. And you know Bush/Cheney would have been right on it with plenty of boots on the ground but you give this president no credit for getting Mubarak and Kaddaffi out and Assad to cough up the chem weapons WITHOUT SENDING ANY TROOPS.

What a tough crowd.

And even though he's had to clean up after Bush's two wars, HE HASN'T STARTED ONE OF HIS OWN (see Eygpt, Libya and Syria), practically a rite of passage to manhood for repug president's.

[840high]

466. It was.

[sabrina 1]

59. I read recently that 18 veterans of these horrendous, WRONG, wars commit suicide in this country

every day, unable to live with what they were sent to see and do. More dying now of suicide than on, what they laughingly call 'the battlefield'.

One of them sent a letter to this president before he died. A thoughtful, intelligent letter that gave more wise advice to him than all his generals put together.

Then I read that the troops on the 'battlefield' when they went to have breakfast last week, saw a sing telling them there would be no breakfast from now on because of 'cut backs'. I bet the Private Contractors are eating breakfast.

Support the Troops! Yay!

So disgusting, so tragic, all of it. They should ALL stop using these troops period, for wars, for political props and just bring them all home and THEN TAKE CARE OF THEM.

[DonViejo]

90. sabrina 1...

can you source this info for me, please?

Then I read that the troops on the 'battlefield' when they went to have breakfast last week, saw a sing telling them there would be no breakfast from now on because of 'cut backs'.

Thanks in advance!

[sabrina 1]

254. Odd, that makes two people less interested in the suicide rate among veterans

than in the rumor about breakfast. You didn't ask, but here is some information on the tragic suicides of veterans. You need read the article for a breakdown of who they are. If you're interested of course.

Many are older, and then there those who commit suicide while on active duty. One a day according to this report.

Suicide Rate Among Vets and Active Duty Military Jumps - Now 22 A Day

Almost once an hour – every 65 minutes to be precise – a military veteran commits suicide, says a new investigation by the Department of Veterans Affairs. By far the most extensive study of veteran suicides ever conducted, the report, issued Friday, examined suicide data from 1999 to 2010.

The data was then compared with a previous investigation – primarily an estimation – that had been conducted over the same time period, and had found a suicide rate of 18 per day.

The good news, if you can find anything good about any of this, is that a crisis line was set up to try to deal with this tragic situation.

The Department of Veterans Affairs has a new crisis line and website with multiple avenues, including text and online chat, for those contemplating suicide to reach out. The site also offers extensive information and resources for families and friends to help them spot the warning signs of depression and suicidal thinking and take action.

ccording to this week’s press release, the crisis line has already resulted in saving 26,000 veterans from suicide. That’s wonderful news – except that the fact that 26,000 vets are actively suicidal is deeply disturbing.

President Obama signed an executive order on August 31st authorizing the VA to hire additional staff and double the capacity of the crisis line. Let’s hope that helps.

War is HELL. And no country should ever send its troops to war unless that country is under attack. We were lied to, as everyone knows, and thousands of men and women died, more are maimed for life, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of men, women and children who did nothing to us who are dead, their country destroyed.

Sorry not to play your gotcha game. I try to keep the focus on important things, like the lives of human beings. I am not especially worried about politicians unless they too are in harms way.

As for the rumor about breakfast, as I said 'I read it AFTER reading' the far more important reports on Veteran and Active Duty suicides. It seemed trivial to me compared to the far more tragic story I had just read. Knowing troops who have served it wouldn't have surprised me if it was true.


But since it appears to be more important to you and you apparently have no access to a search engine, here is the military's response:

http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=118959
DOD Takes on ‘No Breakfast’ Internet Myth]

The Internet myth’s genesis came from a few forward operating bases in eastern Afghanistan’s Paktika province that are closing or being turned over to Afghan security forces. Instead of a hot, prepared breakfast, service members at those bases receive packaged meals known as “meals, ready-to-eat,” or MREs. This streamlines the logistics for these closing bases, officials explained.

Snopes.com -- a website that looks into Internet myths -- rates this tale as “partly true.” The original email that sparked the controversy vastly overstated the extent of the “MRE for breakfast” policy. The original email also said the reason for the policy was because of DOD budget cuts. This is not true, defense officials said.

If you need any more information on the troops or would like to help in any way, let me know. I have access to google and would be happy to provide you with info on how you could help.

[DonViejo]

352. Thought you might be interested in

my response to a comment by sabrina 1...a comment you labelled a "great post. +1000", is here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4407445



Don

[DonViejo]

348. I didn't ask about the suicides because I'm well aware of the

tragedy that's occurring; I work with Vets at my local VA Hospital. It is presumptuous of you to suggest I don't care about the horrid suicide rate. Neither those vets, or I, need your patronizing or condescension so, please spare us. As a Vietnam vet, I also don't need your lectures on the hell conditions of war.

When you make claims about the way our troops are being treated (or even what some elected official did or did not say), be prepared to backup your comments with links to articles supporting your position.

The Internet myth’s genesis came from a few forward operating bases in eastern Afghanistan’s Paktika province that are closing or being turned over to Afghan security forces. Instead of a hot, prepared breakfast, service members at those bases receive packaged meals known as “meals, ready-to-eat,” or MREs. This streamlines the logistics for these closing bases, officials explained.

Snopes.com -- a website that looks into Internet myths -- rates this tale as “partly true.” The original email that sparked the controversy vastly overstated the extent of the “MRE for breakfast” policy. The original email also said the reason for the policy was because of DOD budget cuts. This is not true, defense officials said.

Based on that excerpt it would appear you were either misinformed or deliberately attempting to mislead DU'ers. BTW, I knew you were doing one or the other, misinformed or attempting to mislead (my affiliation with the VA affords me that knowledge). But, I don't care which of the two is the reality, however; I will from now on be very careful and perhaps a tad cynical about your thoughts when reading your comments. No, I won't put you on "ignore," I don't believe in that and I've learned, even the most outrageous commenters DO have times when they are profoundly insightful and sincere. Nonetheless, thank you for your informative, yet long winded, response to my question.

[heaven05]

359. I don't agree

with everything that this prez is about in regard to afghanistan and iraq. Sabrina gets a little passionate in her responses sometime, hell I do. Yet with people like you to set she and people like myself straight, which I count on if I am wrong, I never worry about misleading, which is unintentional. Misinformed, yeah I go for it sometimes, I'm human. thanks. back atcha

[DonViejo]

361. I don't need your condescension either...

like I told Sabrina, I'm well aware of the suicide rate owing not only to my ability to read newspapers/magazine/web site articles about it but, more importantly for me, from my work with vets at the local VA hospital. She didn't "set me straight" on anything but, please continue to believe she did if it helps you to feel better about her comments.

[heaven05]

368. I hope she

as I am, "set straight" by people like you who are well informed. Not the other way around. No condescension meant! I'm sorry I didn't make it clearer and was misunderstood.

[DonViejo]

372. No problem and

no need to apologize but, I do appreciate your words. Thanks.

[sabrina 1]

497. Thank you. The information on the breakfasts had just been sent to me by a Veteran.

He knows that I would be more than willing to make calls, sign petitions whatever it takes to get veterans what they are entitled to. I don't bother with people who play games other than to expose what they are trying to do.

I have sent him the information so that he can take his mind off this as he has so many other issues he is trying to deal with.

My comment was mainly about the suicides. I mentioned the rumor about the breakfasts which I had just read. Curiously, or not so curiously, the game players ignored the most important and documented information on the rate of suicides (and having experienced and intervened in one such case, I know how little help veterans get once they are out of the military, even when they are in it.

I despise people who use veterans for political purposes. I'm glad that at least the breakfast story, unlike the water and showers and benefits for dead soldiers families, was just a rumor. Truly glad, they have enough to worry about.

We lost a wonderful close family friend who was a veteran recently. He had fought for years to try to get the benefits he earned, disability for his condition, Agent Orange, from which he suffered all of his life until it finally killed him. They refused for years and years to just give him his benefits. Two years after his death, he was finally given full disability going back to when he left Vietnam. AFTER HIS DEATH. So forgive me if I err on the side of 'they are screwing the veterans again' once in a while. When I am wrong, I correct it as I did here. I used to drive him to the VA to try to get what was owed to him, sometimes waiting, in his painful condition for HOURS before even seeing anyone.

I make NO apologies for standing with the Veterans. The treatment of veterans is a disgrace and I won't shed any tears if once in a while, people believe that once again they are being screwed, based on past history.

It is instructive though to see how defensive some people here are of those who HAVE denied the veterans so many rights. My friend, eg, could have received better medical treatment IF his benefits had been given to him BEFORE he died.

[heaven05]

607. no apologies needed, ever

for standing tall. I do my best for all vets when I can and when called upon.

[heaven05]

364. I am also aware of the suicide

epidemic among our current war's veterans. Years back I ran into a friend of mine at a local coffee shop sitting with another person. I stopped to chat and learned that the younger man was just back from Iraq and some of his experiences, you know no armored vehicles, lack of body armor when sent into a hostile area, all Rumsfeld related FUBAR leadership. He was back and having trouble adjusting, no job, PTSD, while he was going to VA and was in the system, I turned him on to a personal friend I had in the psychiatry department at our local VA. He got some help fairly quickly. He finally got a job, in a local store, got into classes at our university and is doing quite well, all things considered. I'm trying.

[sabrina 1]

619. So glad you were able to help that young veteran.

Sometimes it helps to know someone cares. The good news is that more is now being done for those returning and according to the article I linked above, it is estimated that approx 26,000 have been saved since new programs have been made available to the veterans.

[heaven05]

620. yep, our vet health system is

waking up, slowly. Good for the current vets. That piece about granting benefits 2 years after the vet died is so typical. I was turned down for agent orange poisoning for problems no one in my family had ever experienced. After a couple of years I just quit trying, and because I have a good personal physician, have them controlled. Yet when they revised the agent orange criteria I met all criteria. I didn't go back because to tell you the truth walking the hospital halls, I just figured there were many more that needed it besides an old fellow like me who had his symptoms controlled. I remember the walter reed scandal right after the bush cabal's invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan...sickening. Locally I stay on the case so they don't get ignored. The va hospital in my area actually is pretty good at helping and treating the different psychological and physical problems the our vets are facing today. Yep keep up the good work and scrutiny. I'd have you in my bunker any day.

[sabrina 1]

496. I believe I already provided you with that information. Yes, I was misinformed and corrected it

I am affiliated with the VA also through several family members. Very familiar with the VA on a very personal level. I will be equally careful about your comments, giving credit where it is due, and being forthright when I believe I someone is simply playing games. Always have been straighforward with people and always will be. I have found that sometimes I was wrong about someone's intentions and have always admitted that.

The info on the breakfasts was sent to ME by a Veteran. I have set his mind at ease as understandably he was very angry about the news. It's not as if the soldiers haven't been screwed before so I would prefer to err on THEIR side when there is any doubt until the facts are known.

Oh, please with the ignore threat. Go right ahead, I do not use that feature since I am more than capable of dealing with even the most abusive people here. Several years of taking on Bush supporters was a sort of 'boot camp' for me when it comes to the nastiness some people engage in on the internet. None of it bothers me, in the words of a great Democratic President 'I welcome their hatred'. Hatred, such a wasted emotion.

Sorry if standing up for the rights of the troops, for SS, for the Environment, for the Poor, for the Working Class, against lying, corrupt war mongers like Bush/Cheney, against Wall St Corruption FOR a living wage for the working class, against tax breaks for the wealthy who take jobs out of the country among other things is OUTRAGEOUS in your opinion. In my opinion NOT being outraged at this point in time is the real OUTRAGE.

[VanillaRhapsody]

626. So you lied about the breakfasts....

but expect to be taken serious as a "journalist"....pretty bad "reporting"....when they were given MRE's just not a hot breakfasts....

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/27/during-drawdown-pentagon-cuts-cooked-breakfast-for/?page=all

that took me all of 30 seconds on Google to find out...

Have you apologized for this mistake yet? I haven't seen it...

[sheshe2]

149. Chow Down

MIXTURE:
FALSE: Budget cuts have eliminated breakfast for U.S. troops deployed overseas.

TRUE: Hot breakfasts have been replaced with MRE for troops at some military bases in Afghanistan that are transitioning to local control.

Origins: This item about breakfast no longer being provided to U.S. troops deployed overseas has some elements of truth to it, but not to the extent suggested by the example reproduced above. It isn't true that, due to Congressional raises or fiscal cliff-related budget cuts, breakfast has been completely eliminated for all U.S. troops stationed outside the U.S. It is true that "hot chow" breakfasts have been replaced with MREs (Meals Ready to Eat) at some U.S. bases in Afghanistan because those areas are preparing for a transition to local control.

CDR Bill Speaks, Secretary of Defense Press Officer for the Afghanistan/Pakistan/Central Asia area, told us that at U.S. bases in the Paktika Province of Afghanistan (which are being transitioned to Afghan control) the meal cycle has been modified such that troops now receive breakfast as MREs rather than as hot meals:

We want to assure you that all Soldiers are receiving 4 meals per day (if they want all four). Breakfast is an MRE, lunch and dinner are traditionally served hot meals, and the midnight meal is MRE. Most dining facilities have a variety of takeaway items like cereal, milk, juice, fruit oatmeal, and granola bars to augment the MREs.

As part of the responsible drawdown of operational forces serving in Afghanistan, the staff examined ways to reduce our footprint and set the conditions for the reduction of forces. The leaders, both military and civilian, provided feedback during the process and estimated that by changing the meal cycle, they would reduce their overall operations by 40%. After careful examination, the local command in Paktika decided to modify the meal cycle. This has nothing to do with the national budget, and everything to do with our responsible reduction of forces. We see this as a good thing — even though some of our amenities may change as we head home, our Afghan partners continue to transition into the areas we once held.

The American Forces Press Service also reported that:
There is no truth to the Internet myth that Washington budget cuts have taken away breakfast for service members in Afghanistan, Defense Department officials said.

Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/military/breakfast.asp#yVw2yqjOJOD3Cf1y.99

Well here you go Sabrina~

I know, I know you will still blame this President for a war that he indeed did not start.

Yet here are some facts for you.

[VanillaRhapsody]

240. those darn "FACTS" getting in the way of a good narrative again huh?

[sheshe2]

256. Hard to believe VR...

facts over hair on fire ...sigh. Fox News rears its ugly head.

[VanillaRhapsody]

441. and right here on D.U.!!!

who woulda thunk?

[sabrina 1]

259. Would you like some information on the suicide rate among the troops which was my

main point? That makes two people more interested in playing 'gotcha' than in the terrible tragedy that has been going on for several years now.

Do not speak for me, btw. I blame everyone who ever in any way supported this travesty, voted to fund it, did not oppose it, from elected officials to voters to political partisans who ignore the lives that are being destroyed in order to try to defend their favorite politicians. Shameful really to play politics with so many, many lives. Great they are getting MREs but they ARE still dying and committing suicide and coming home maimed both mentally and physically for life.

Here is my response to those more interested in political figures than in the lives of the troops:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4406755

When politicians are in harms' way I will be as concerned about them as about those who actually are. Until then I am confident they are all doing fine so I will continue to worry more about the people who appear to be forgotten unless they can be used for political purposes.

[sheshe2]

274. I am well aware of the veterans that are left behind.

no need for a lecture on that.

Do not speak for me Sabrina!

Odd, that makes two people less interested in the suicide rate among veterans

than in the rumor about breakfast. You didn't ask, but here is some information on the tragic suicides of veterans. You need read the article for a breakdown of who they are. If you're interested of course.

Many are older, and then there those who commit suicide while on active duty. One a day according to this report.

Post 254

My brother was a veteran and he too committed suicide. So do not for a moment lecture me or tell me I am more interested in the 'gotcha' than the truth and the facts.

You are in fact more interested in condemning this President than supporting these troops that need help. Shame on you.

[sabrina 1]

277. We just lost a veteran also. You wanted to play a game, and it disgusted me, sorry.

I'm sorry about your brother, truly sorry. I'm sorry about all the lives lost. I'm sorry about our family, my girl friend's brother, my friend who never was the same until death finally released him.

I've been sorry since Bush first lied us into Iraq and will continue to condemn all of it NO MATTER WHO IS IN THE WH. I frankly doubt any more that the president has any say in anything. But if he really wants to get out of all these wars then YOU'RE NOT HELPING HIM. It will be those who vehemently oppose them who will help any leader who may be unable to stop them, who end all of this. When the outrage is big enough whoever is responsible for all this killing will finally have to stop.

If it were up to me, no one would be going to fight these wars and if you don't like me continuing to speak out against them as I ALWAYS HAVE and NO, not EVERYTHING is about OBAMA. Get over this nonsense. I have not changed ONE BIT in my opinion of these invasions that are killing people, innocent people all over the place now, Somalia, Yemen and who knows where else.

and so long as people like you worry more about politicians than the real problem, THEY WILL KEEP doing it. When a repub is in power, Repubs support it, and when a Dem is in power, Dems who used to oppose it, support and defend it. And when a Repub gets in again the same Dems will again oppose it.

And they always have half the country supporting them. That is what has to change. Do not expect me or anyone else who has been saying EXACTLY THE SAME THING for over ten years now to stop just because of a change of party.

And don't waste your time playing gotcha games with me, I'm not interested. Take your little victory and enjoy it if it means that much to you. But you or anyone else, Bush supporters with all their threats and insults couldn't do it and they were far, far better at it than anyone here, couldn't stop me from saying what I think of all this.

You won a tiny internet game you were playing by yourself. Great, meantime people are still dying and until everyone says NO MORE no matter who is in the WH it will continue.

[sheshe2]

287. Amazing heartfelt statement, I would thank yet it was not.

Sorry about my brother? No Sabrina you are not. Your post states that. You can not let it go for one simple post. One that commiserates with another human being. That is telling and so very sad.

You say I am playing a goctha game and I should savor my victory. Really Sabrina?

But you or anyone else, Bush supporters with all their threats and insults couldn't do it and they were far, far better at it than anyone here, couldn't stop me from saying what I think of all this.

You won a tiny internet game you were playing by yourself. Great, meantime people are still dying and until everyone says NO MORE no matter who is in the WH it will continue.

I am sorry for any harm and pain that happened to your family for these wars. I truly wish that for one, just one post that you could have put your hate aside to respond to me, yet you could not.

My heartfelt wishes to you and yours, sabrina.

sheshe2

[sabrina 1]

291. No, you're not sorry for any pain and harm that happened to me or my family which I deliberately

do not speak about in the middle of discussions of issues that are far more important than anything that may have happened in my life, because I'm not a fan of trying to emotionally manipulate people. I don't want or need anyone's pity or sympathy so don't worry about it. I don't need you to care about me personally.

What is needed is for the entire country to care about stopping these wars. You can make stuff about those who don't see things your way all you want,which you do constantly but it won't change the facts. I've never been bothered much by internet insults so you're wasting your time and it will only make me more determined to continue to oppose these vile, vicious, brutal wars no matter who is in power.

And yes, I am sorry for every soldier and every innocent person who lost their lives and who saw their countries destroyed in wars that were for profit, and sorry that the War Criminals are still free, obscenely wealthy from their ill-gotten gains and anyone who even tries to defend any of this, should be ashamed of themselves.

[Desert805]

541. Disgusting run you're on.

Just gross.

[sabrina 1]

544. Standing up for the troops has always been a 'disgusting run' to those who have supported

these criminal wars. Disgusting to see those who have been sent to fight these for-profit wars used for political purposes here on a forum that was one of the most outspoken against Bush/Cheney lying this country into war, EVEN it is just a small minority.

Disgusting comment from you, just gross and thanks for weighing in and demonstrating just how far some will go for the sake of politics.

[Desert805]

603. Yuck.

[sabrina 1]

613. Yuck indeed. Yuck to war, yuck to lies about war. Yuck to wars for profit, yuck to sending

tens of thousands of people to die and get maimed for profit. Yuck that not one of the chicken hawk war criminals who are responsible for that soldier has yet been brought to justice. Yuck to anyone who supported, voted for, excuses, glorifies, or sweeps it under the rug for political reasons. Yuck to those who use the troops for their own gain.

Most of all yuck to hypocrites who said YUCK when Bush was occupying the WH and now shrug their shoulders.

Kudos to those who did not sell out their principles despite the nasty attacks and attempts to silence them. Kudos to them for continuing to say what they always said. THEY will be the ones to make sure no one in the future will suffer the consequences of these criminal wars.

Welcome again to DU. We appreciate your contributions.

[Desert805]

615. Your schtik

Isn't nearly as clever as you think it is, but hey-- everybody needs a creative outlet.

*wavey thing*

[sabrina 1]

616. Thanks, clever was not the goal. Just facts.

Always happy when someone gets that. The old 'you think you're so clever 'schtik' has been around for a long time. Might be time to put away in the 'old talking points' musty drawer. Nothing more jaded than old talking points.

I gather you support everything I said Yuck to then? Nice to know.

[Desert805]

618. Ok

[msanthrope]

374. You respond to news of her brother's suicide by claiming she won a "tiny Internet game?"

WTF??????

[sabrina 1]

434. No, actually but don't let that stop you.

The game was played after my first comment, this is not for you btw, but for those who care about facts.

Thankfully most people here do get it.

And you respond to my post about veterans by playing yet another game, again using Veterans to do so.,

Thanks for your compassion, not that I expected any, for the veterans in my life mentioned in the post you just responded to.

[joshcryer]

551. Par for the course.

It shows that this really is a "tiny Internet game" to them, and not anything sincere.

[cui bono]

278. Your "shame on you" is a thinly veiled "fuck you".

Shame on you for saying it to Sabrina. She supports the troops plenty in her posts and she doesn't blindly follow someone just because, she stands on principles which don't change due to who is carrying out the policies.

[sabrina 1]

282. Thank you cui bono. No, I don't change my principles based on politics.

And this is how they keep those wars going. When a Repub is in power, Repubs support them and Dems oppose them. Then when a Dem is in power, Repubs oppose them, and the Dems who used to oppose them suddenly defend them. Then when a Repub gets in again, Repubs go back to supporting them and the same Dems who supported them, turn around again and oppose them.

So they always have support. They must love those who are so easily manipulated making it easy for them to keep their obscenely profitable wars going.

But one day maybe, people will get tired of switching from one position to another and wake up and decide that to stand on principle and maybe when that happens and they have no more support for their criminal wars, they will finally have to stop.

Until then the seesaw will keep going up and down and the wars will go on and people will continue to die until maybe we are bankrupt, which might not be a bad thing in the end, if it stopped them.

[cui bono]

290. Thank you for all your informative posts.

And for fighting the propaganda that we have to put up with on here from the apologists.

[sheshe2]

292. Really?

so glad that you both support the troops...did you happen to read where I posted in that response that my brother committed suicide, a vet? You just said a big FU to my brother. And it was not thinly veiled.

Guess that does not matter when you are an Obama supporter. Who should I have supported that would get empathy from you?

[cui bono]

295. Nice try, but that deflection doesn't work.

I said nothing about your brother. Perhaps I could have mentioned I was sorry to hear about him, but I didn't as that wasn't the part of your post I was addressing. Got it? That wasn't the part of your post I was addressing. So you are completely wrong on that. How you can try to contort my post into that is beyond me.

As to your guess. Wrong again. My empathy doesn't depend on who/what someone supports. That's not what empathy is nor what it depends on. Empathy is the ability to vicariously feel another's plight or emotions, situation. What does that have to do with agreeing with that person's choice of idol or disagreeing with that person abandoning principles in order to defend a person who violates said principles?

I think you meant sympathy. Which Sabrina gave you and you flat out said she was lying about it and that she was not sorry about your brother. So what is it that you really want? What would be good enough for you? Perhaps you are the one who will only accept to get sympathy only from those who you agree with, perhaps you are projecting.

[sheshe2]

298. Oh I got it!

You, and as you said sabrina support vets..yet you left my brother out.

Perhaps I could have mentioned I was sorry to hear about him, but I didn't as that wasn't the part of your post I was addressing.

You only responded to my "shame on you"

Shame on you for saying it to Sabrina. She supports the troops plenty in her posts and she doesn't blindly follow someone just because, she stands on principles which don't change due to who is carrying out the policies.

Excellent news cui... you support only the selected ones. Oh yeah I got it.

Night, hope you sleep well.

[cui bono]

299. Wow. Can't address what I say so you twist it all up to try to make me have said

whatever you want to respond to and use in an attempt to smear me.

Again, I said nothing about/to/in regards to your brother - good or bad, or the other troops for that matter yet you give me credit for supporting them for some reason, but only in that you are accusing me of selectively supporting the troops.

Please help me understand how you came to that conclusion, I don't get it. Can you lay it out in a logical way so I can understand how I'm doing that, especially when I didn't mention my supporting any troops at all (now don't go using that to say I don't support the troops, that's not what I'm saying but I can see you are in a real gotcha mood atm)? So go ahead, do it as if I'm a fifth grader cuz it's not making any sense to me. Unless of course you're just making a knowingly false accusation to paint me in a bad light.

[sabrina 1]

559. That's the tactic. Bvar posted wmws's description of internet deflection tactics below and what

we are witnessing here is classic. The attempt to smear you, me, and look at the thread, almost everyone in the thread who dares to object to using the troops for political reasons, has been a total failure. I wouldn't worry about it if I were you. I don't. As I said below a person's credibility here is often ENHANCED when you are attacked, depending on the attacker.

I would say you and I and all the others being targeted here are pretty safe from 'successful' smearing.

[joshcryer]

556. It wasn't part of the post you were addressing...

...because you thought it more important to defend an anonymous Internet poster than show compassion to someone who lost their brother to suicide.

Your empathy clearly does depend on who/what someone supports because you supported an Internet poster over impassioned comments made here.

I don't believe anyone who claims these discussions are "tiny Internet games" has any iota of empathy or sympathy toward those who are hurting. I've been on the receiving end of the veiled, cruel insinuations against others here, I know first hand.

[cui bono]

568. Again, you are missing the point.

You could know what I thought by reading what I posted. What you said I thought is your false assumptions most likely based on your bias.

I already addressed the empathy part. Go ahead and reread my posts for clarification. Comprehending them will help.

And again, you are trying to make the phrase "tiny Internet games" apply to something to which it was not directed.

Really, you are just missing what happened and interpreting it in correctly. But thanks for your input.

[joshcryer]

573. Thanks for the dismissal.

I'm just not able to "get the point."

[cui bono]

576. Oh, and your moral judgment of me after you incorrectly decided what I thought was fine with you.

[joshcryer]

580. I didn't say anything about your thoughts.

I only mentioned the facts of the behaviors that were objectively observable.

I mentioned not once what your inner thoughts were.

[cui bono]

581. "because you thought it more important to defend an anonymous Internet poster than show compassion

to someone who lost their brother to suicide."

That is both mentioning what I thought and making a moral judgment about me for something that never even occurred.

I can see what you're saying actually, but I was not addressing anything other than the fact that she used that phrase "shame on you".

Then she decides to attack me and claim that I selectively care about some just because of who they support, which is nothing short of absurd.

Throwing a personal loss into a debate and then using it against your opponent is less than honorable and shows that one is not having an honest debate of the issue, just trying to derail it by demonizing the other person.

[joshcryer]

583. That is precisely what happened.

I don't know if you put any conscious thought into it whatsoever. I don't know what your motivations are. But you did, in fact, choose to defend an anonymous Internet poster over showing compassion. That choice did involve some iota of thought, though you may not know why you're behaving this way. Your fingers took to the keyboard to make the argument.

Shame on that poster and shame on you for defending them. Whether you have shown a conscious decision to come to the aid of someone condescending others here over troop suicide, I cannot say. I know I wouldn't consciously decide to do that.

[cui bono]

584. First of all, I edited my post while you were responding because I can see what you're saying

about what you were saying when you said "you thought..."

However, it doesn't mean what you think it means. I was only responding to the "shame on you" part because that is basically telling someone "fuck you". Just like "bless your heart".

Then she went and misconstrued the whole thing and doubled down in a later post by completely mangling what I was saying, even saying that I supported some troops but decided not to support her brother. That was so completely false.

No one is condescending anyone over troop suicide. She decided to put something personal in her post and then is use it to demonize anyone who doesn't glom onto that one sentence in her post and offer condolences. Then she, and now you, are misconstruing it and continuing where she left off.

If one really wants to debate an issue they would not do that, especially to the extent she did.

And I didn't miss your choice to continue the use of "shame on you" either. So I will take it as I'm sure you meant it and sign off from anything further with you. If you want further clarification you can just read my exchange with she, it's pretty clear how she completely fabricated what I was saying, especially when she claimed I said something that I never brought up at all.

[joshcryer]

589. I appreciate the edit.

I takes courage to admit an argumentative error.

I also appreciate the effect a "shame on you" has in argument, as it is a powerful phrase to use.

However, and this is a big one, if anyone had only googled the username in question and "suicide" you'd know they mentioned it before, in a very emotional thread, at that (Google "sheshe2 suicide brother&quot . The empathetic amongst us would have done that before trying to "inform" someone of military suicides. The rather tactless, rather "tiny Internet games" amongst us wouldn't give a shit before making such a post. They just do it to hurt, to cause pain, to be completely unsympathetic toward other human beings. They wouldn't care.

I find it extremely condescending to ask another DUer, people who I consider highly informed, whether they are "informed about troop suicide." I think, especially for a DUer, to ask such a question is extremely risky, as a point of argument, because we are all informed and there's a strong likelihood we're personally affected. I myself might have been affected (personal information, but my brother almost did the same; literally moments away from it until someone intervened; the odds of that are not high, the MIC has inundated the lives of almost every American, there is just a high likelihood of a DUer being affected by this reprehensible side effect of war; which, btw, was Obama's most strident point).

"Offering condolences" is irrelevant to me, people react differently to situations, but if you're in an anonymous Internet argument, you better be prepared for the response, and if you're trying to trigger people by pulling out a very serious issue such as troop suicide, you better be apologetic if you pushed the wrong buttons. It's really simple ethics. What kind of person would do that? Who could defend that under the auspices of "that's not what we were talking about"? It is insane. I seriously would never expect this behavior in a real life conversation. That's how I frame all Internet discussion. "Would I say that over a cup of coffee face to face with someone?" Most people wouldn't. They'd know the limitations of civil discussion.

If someone said their brother killed themselves in conversation to me in real life as I used "troop suicide" as an argument, I would be mortified. I would literally slink away apologetically and just end the argument right the fuck there. There's no way I would defend myself. I would pray, I would beg for forgiveness. That would be something so far out of cultural and ethical norms for me I would probably take it to my grave as an ultimate regret. It just isn't something you shrug off in real life.

This is why I don't use "troop suicide" as an arguing point here, because I don't post as an anonymous coward, and I own everything I say. I find the effects of the MIC, including troop suicide abhorrent (we should not forget rape within the military). But as an arguing point? As a refutation to someone here? That would be abhorrent to me. Inconceivable. Someone may be affected by it. I could never use it in that manner.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

597. eloquent.

This is one of those posts worth reading again.

[sabrina 1]

630. I have asked you several times now to stop following me around this forum and using your

third party tactic to lie about me. This is the last time I am going to ask politely. I asked you not to address me because of your abusive posts, some of which were rightfully hidden airc, by the jury. Find a way to avoid discussing me I have no interest in interacting with you in any way, third party second or first.

[joshcryer]

634. I wasn't talking to you.

I have not addressed you.

I have not had a hidden post since September and before that for a much longer time frame.

Leave me alone and be ashamed in your using "troop suicide" as ammo in "tiny Internet games."

[Bobbie Jo]

644. This one

Has no shame.

In fact, I don't think I've ever seen anyone with such a profound lack of self-awareness.

[joshcryer]

646. It's messed up.

After dozens of times responding to my sub-threads, they have taken it upon themselves to extend the "don't respond to me" request to "don't respond to my sub-threads." That is simply unacceptable. I have never once responded to them after their request for me not to do so. Not once. Never. But they have decided that they can reply to me whenever they want, this is the 4th time now. It is disgraceful. I, however, have reserved the right to respond to them when they harass me personally, as I have done here, because I can't let a bully respond and post blatant falsehoods and expect me to stand down. That is simply unacceptable.

Would it be that said poster would leave me alone, I would be so utterly happy, but no, 4th time. I have kept to my side of the bargain, even as they have insulted and ridiculed me in subthreads I was in, I never responded to it. Just search our names it's easy enough to prove. I even stay far away from that poster, but they were shitting on someone I respect here, so defending that person they were shitting on directly couldn't be helped. Who uses "troop suicide" as a "tiny Internet game"? I have never come across such a reprehensible poster. Ever.

[sabrina 1]

614. Don't waste your time cui bono. This is par for the course for this

poster. Third party attacks are still attacks and I am considering what to do about it. But a majority of the people here can read and they understand the tactics very well. Notice that missing from the conversations you are having is any discussion of the actual issue raised.

Thank you for remaining consistent on issues such as this. Thankfully so have most Democrats.

[sabrina 1]

435. I expect you will admonish the poster who just attacked my post regarding the veterans I mentioned

in our family also? Shameful for you to attack those who have and do and will continue to call for an end to these useless, brutal wars.

I don't intend to use my family members to try to deflect from the issue, nearly everyone in this country today either has a relative or knows someone who does who has been tragically affected by these criminal enterprises.

I will continue to speak about the issue which you ignored in my first comment preferring instead to play a game with someone you perceive to be the 'enemy' for some inexplicable reason.

[joshcryer]

554. That poster is the one calling this "tiny Internet games."

If these very serious discussions are "tiny Internet games" to them, they should be ashamed.

[cui bono]

563. You're missing what she was referring to then. She's not talking about the subject matter,

but the tactics of the poster.

All you have to do is read sabrina's posts to know she takes things very seriously.

[joshcryer]

569. The poster posted a falsehood.

And was corrected.

And rather than sit back and go, "Hey, you know, I was wrong, I thought that was true, and I was wrong for not fact checking, and you're right." They got all up in arms and accused the person, who's brother was lost to suicide, of playing "tiny Internet games."

Those are the facts of the situation.

If I post something that is objectively false, I will immediately apologize for my ignorance and I will not go off on some tangent about winning fake Internet points. 100% of the time. (I may send a personal PM if I am wrong and don't feel like kicking a thread, like the recent Nazi thread on Ukraine where I was wrong about the tanks being shipped in.)

I cannot take seriously anyone who admits that a serious discussion on suicide and soldiers being used as props as "tiny Internet games." I cannot respect anyone who says something like that. It doesn't help that I have been inundated with falsehoods from certain posters here for years now, and every time it happens, they never correct themselves, they never apologize, and they keep doing it, hoping no one notices.

I notice.

[cui bono]

570. Just because someone loses a brother to suicide and mentions it in a long winded post

doesn't mean everyone else has to discount the rest of the post and only respond with condolences.

It's a very sad thing to have happened, but to then use it as a reason to attack others when they don't make any mention of it/continue to disagree is disingenuous. A lot of people have had losses in their lives and most likely they don't attempt to use it to nullify someone else's argument.

I'm sure you're going to say something about me being callous, but stating something like that and then using it in every post thereafter as a way to demonize the person you're arguing with is a less than honorable method of having a debate, and in fact, as we have seen here, can be used to derail the debate by making it all about whether or not the "opponent" has shown sufficient sympathy, when that's not what the discussion was about.

And I notice that.

[joshcryer]

579. No, callous would be too strong.

I'd say you were oblivious.

When corrected the poster literally changed the subject so troop suicides, asking if the poster would "like some information" about troop suicides. I mean, what a can of fucking worms that's gotta be, you can never know if someone is personally affected by it, so to go around "informing" people of it is pretty messed up. No empathy for those people out there who may be affected. Just the hopes that they can win "tiny Internet games."

Then what happens? The person says that they were personally affected.

And what does the poster do? Well by golly, rather than apologize for trying to win some "tiny Internet game" they come around and claim that they too were affected by army suicide. You criticize sheshe2 for her "attempt to use it to nullify someone else's argument." But not one criticism for that poster for turning the argument around and making similar comments!

I think it is deplorable that you are judging sheshe2 for mentioning her brothers' suicide after being condescended by someone wanting to "inform" them of troop suicides. Deplorable.

The discussion was first about troops getting meals, then it turned into troop suicides. Of course sympathy must come into the equation because once you start to condescend someone about something of that magnitude you better be damn sure it's rooted in reality (ie, you think they are ignorant, or have information that they don't know about troop suicides). Otherwise your character shows and you wind up looking like someone who likes to play "tiny Internet games."

[cui bono]

585. As I said, I was responding to the one thing in her post.

I didn't take on the entire subject matter. Sometimes I (and other people) respond to everything said, sometimes just to one of two things. Sorry, but I wasn't in the frame of mind to jump into the whole debate, but did feel like pointing out the "shame on you".

After that she attacked me and said I was discriminating in who I would give my "empathy" to, which was a completely personal and baseless attack, because I didn't offer condolences.

Then she fabricated the entire content of some imaginary post of mine that bore no resemblance to what I had actually said, trying to further demonize me. I was responding to that at that point. My issue with her was the "shame on you" and the fact that she tried to claim I deemed her not worthy of "empathy" because she's an Obama apologist, and then the fact that she completely made up things that I had said or not said. She made it personal attack on me at that point - a slanderous one - and that's what I was addressing. And she did so by using her brother's suicide to score points, when that wasn't part of our discussion. That's pretty bad in my eyes. Especially when you couple it with complete fabrication of what the other person said. There was no genuine attempt at honest communication, but a real attempt to smear me using falsehoods.

With that, I'm done. It really has been gone over a couple times now at least.

[joshcryer]

590. It's not about you.

Once you realize that it's not about you, you'll realize how to have a civil discussion on the Internet. You take things personally. Who gives a shit what assholes say about you (and yes, I regard the poster you're defending as one of those people who talk shit about people). If it's not true, then they can fuck off.

You say I don't get it, fine, that's your opinion, I don't care if someone claims that. "You don't understand," is something I've heard so often on the Internet it's a joke. I don't care. I focus on objective fact.

And the objective fact in this subthread is that someone thinks the suicide of someones brother is a "tiny Internet game." Full stop. Do not pass Go, do not collect $100.

Nevermind you shouldn't be using fucking suicide as an Internet arguing point. It's bound to backfire. Only those with questionable character would ever resort to that tactic. People have been affected by suicide across the board. Troop suicide is even one of the leading causes. It's insane to try to score points on it.

[Chiquitita]

336. Sheshe, I am sorry for your loss of your brother.

He deserves to be recognized and his life and story remembered. Your grief deserves to be heard. Thinking of you and hoping that you are alright after this conversation.

[SidDithers]

327. Heheh...

Well done.

Sid

[sabrina 1]

535. Thanks for that endorsement. I was hoping you chime in Sid, it instantly

raises my creds. You have no idea how valuable your opinions are to us!

[SidDithers]

592. Wait. Having your made-up stories and right-wing memes exposed as false...

... raises your "creds"?

Well, that's curious. I guess it all depends on who you're hoping will view you as credible.

Sid

[heaven05]

354. MRE's are nasty

unfullfilling garbage and if you've never eaten one then you are on poor footing. Have you ever been forced to eat one? Do you have to eat one every day? I want, also, to see our POTUS bring out all troops from afghanistan and iraq, ALL!!!!!! Of course we can't militarily because of our large footprint in those countries that can never be erased. Sabrina is hard on this prez, but not without reason. Our prez can do only what the bankers and PTB tell him, nothing more, nothing less, especially if critical assets such as oil and precious metals ect are present in those countries, we occupy, that bring in huge profits for the corporations...

[CrispyQ]

387. More & more I'm beginning to believe this line is true:

Our prez can do only what the bankers and PTB tell him

The Office of the President has become an icon, a representation of power, but without real power.

[axollot]

664. Worked on the 08 and 2012 elections but always knew that he will only do as...

much as TPTB allow him to do. There was a meeting in early 09 that I distinctly remember seeing the Prez come out of looking green (my olive skin kids turn green too when they are physically sick to their stomach) my gut reaction was 'they got to him and we'll see no real, reforms' so far so true, sadly.

Has the Prez done some good stuff? Absolutely and he'll get all the credit in the world for the positives but there was so much goodwill from the people, particularly in 08-2010 that was squandered. Health care was an important step but we still have a convoluted for profit system and even folks like me, who have medicare due to a disability (car accident) struggle to maintain good quality care and being able to obtain our medications. The big problem there is expensive medications with no generic alternatives are taken off the formulary.

We need a President like FDR who also faced a huge up hill battle but took no shit and didn't work to appease his detractors, he just did what he thought was best for the country and then dealing with WWII was no peach either. Of course, no president in the 21st century could get away with using the executive order close to 4000 times as FDR did but I don't think it is a virtue of President Obama to have used it 'less" than Bush, considering the country for most people is a mess and he is facing unprecedented obstruction. That is when the E/O should be used. Often they are abused, often they are misunderstood too. The conspiracy theorists subscribe to Obama E/Os that Truman or Eisenhower did.

[malthaussen]

405. Dude, they're better than C Rations.

Although at least with C's you got canned fruit. Still, it's like choosing between Romney and Bush.

-- Mal

[heaven05]

407. lol

you are right, although I did so love the canned fruit.

[bullsnarfle]

382. Sure about that?

Have you ever been in the military? I have. On one deployment we were told that we were authorized an MKT - that's Mobile Kitchen Trailer for you civilians. Well, the MKT never showed up; seems they had been "over-allocated" and there were not enough to go around. So someone up the chain says, hey, no sweat, just send 'em some MRE's.
Well, guess what? We got no MRE's either. Why, you ask? Because our unit was authorized and assigned an MKT, of course! What did we need with MRE's when we had an MKT? You know, the one we never got? Shit, we were making "meals" out of crackers & canned cheese and junk we brought from home.
So DO NOT pat me on the head and tell me, or any other service member, that you know we are getting fed "because those nice people at the DOD told you so". Those bureaucratic crap-heads wouldn't know what's happening in the field if you drew it for them in crayon.

[cui bono]

495. That's horrible! Sorry you and others had to go through that.

It's important for people to hear about it so I'm glad you are sharing the info.

Welcome to DU.

[NealK]

529. Yikes, sounds like catch 22.

[sabrina 1]

545. I'm really sorry you were treated that way. I know that several years ago we learned that the troops

needed items of clothing and snacks and other simple things that we thought would have been supplied by the military considering all we heard about supporting the troops. People were asked, mostly by family members, to send packages to them which of course they did, and to write to Congress to complain.

We also learned that soldiers could not even take showers sometimes the water was so dirty.

I am being admonished here for daring to make one comment about the breakfast issue and have been told that the troops are doing just fine. I know that is not the case but for those who want to protect the bureaucrats for political reasons, they will pounce on every tiny point they can find to distract from the real issues.

I hope you are home safe now and thanks for your comment.

[Enthusiast]

314. every day

[sabrina 1]

446. It's astonishing and it isn't just recent, it goes back several years apparently. I was

shocked when I read those statistics.

[bjobotts]

72. He wasn't "sent". He volunteered. Your reaction

Maybe the reaction you're having is exactly the intended reaction. How sick and pathetic these war 'deployments' really are. He wasn't protecting America...that's the propaganda. He was protecting fellow soldiers and fighting for the corporatocracy who profited greatly by his service.
The whole thinks should make you sick and that is exactly what Obama knew many would feel...sick.
He's trying to prevent a war with Iran and prevented one with Syria. It's been a long time since soldiers actually fought for America and freedom...now they fight for profit and the war profiteers.

Obama has done far less damage than those who have opposed his every move...but he is not perfect yet the republicons are that sick and disconnected from humanity.

[JDPriestly]

126. I agree with your view on those moments in the speech.

A lot of young people in my community volunteer for the military. I hope this will cause some of them to pause and ask what they will be asked to fight for. Just to come home to an unlivable minimum wage? Really?

[El_Johns]

162. Lots of young people "volunteer" without knowing anything about what they're getting themselves

into.

The distinction is pretty much meaningless.

[Sirveri]

218. Lots of people volunteer because that is the only way they see to get out of poverty.

I know it was for me. I would rather have done something constructive with my time, but this society apparently doesn't give two shits about that, so instead I chipped paint for the USN for a bit so that I could actually have the money to go to college.

[dreamnightwind]

296. Excellent point

and a very poor jobs program the military makes. We should, indeed, have people do something useful here at home with the money rather than sending them off to support corporate access to natural resources in foreign countries, which for the most part is what the U.S. military does. We have an economic draft.

[CrispyQ]

389. "An economic draft."

A perfect description.

And when resources become scare to the point of rationing, we will have economic rationing. There is no sense of community anymore, a sense of we're all in this together. Instead, it's you're on your own, every man for himself & if you don't have enough, tough shit for you loser.

[Rockyj]

417. I Totally Agree

I am so tired of this Obama can do no wrong BS! He's trying to fast track TPP, he'll probably end up approving KeystoneXL, he's allowing protestors and whistle blowers to be labeled as terrorists as our country's police turn in to the military, he's allowing NSA to collect meta date on ALL Americans without probable cause, he holds the record in the deportation of immigrants and NOW, he allowed a disabled veteran to be used as a prop for the military industrial complex. Basically, saying to young people...that if you go fight for the MIC and your face gets blown up & you become disabled for life at least you will get a standing ovation by a bunch of worthless tools!

[WilliamPitt]

5. Then don't begin.

Spare us both the hassle.

[rhett o rick]

21. His take is very rational and an empathetic person. I can see that those that can justify

war, think that exploiting a victim might be of value. This administration is continuing the "For Ever War", that is killing our soldiers and bankrupting the middle class. Drone strikes in an undeclared war in sovereign nations is wrong.

[brush]

54. This president deftly avoided war in Eygpt, Libya and Syria . . .

yet you talk about this administration contining the "For Ever War".

I must say memories are short around here but you just have to remember all the repugs clamoring for troops to be sent to Eygpt, Libya and Syria? And just tonight this president threatening to veto any bill for sanctions against the Iran negotiations so that we give diplomacy a chance to again, AVOID WAR?

No?

C'mon, it wasn't that long ago. And you know Bush/Cheney would have been right on it with plenty of boots on the ground but you give this president no credit for getting Mubarak and Kaddaffi out and Assad to cough up the chem weapons without sending any troops.

What a tough crowd.

[NuclearDem]

75. You've got to be joking.

Because I distinctly remember seeing the bombs drop on Libya and an entire fleet moved in on Syria before Kerry's off-the-cuff remark.

Fine, they weren't boots on the ground, but that's still armed conflict.

[brush]

93. I said no boots on the ground

No 10 deployments. And he's talking about taking us off permanent war footing and negotiating with Iran instead of going to war.

Those are things you disagree with?

[brush]

118. What was your point . . .

because you certainly missed the point the President was making tonight about how 10 deployments can be avoided if we get off permanent war footing.

[quinnox]

83. Going to war in any of those countries would have been completely unjustified in the first place

Giving Obama credit for that is like giving him credit that he didn't invade Russia or hell, jolly ole England.

[brush]

154. You know Bush would have jumped right in there with troops

And repugs were clamoring for war but this president had the sense not to.

[Skittles]

207. comparing anyone to Dubya is a very, VERY low bar

[brush]

212. How about this . . .

starting their own war is almost a rite of passage into manhood for repug presidents (even St. Ronnie). Low bar or not, this President had enough since to not jump over it, not matter how much AIPAC and the warmongers in Congress clamored for it.

[VanillaRhapsody]

244. because the "Last thing" one would want to do is "give him any credit"

right????

[sabrina 1]

272. Do you ever give any thought to the thousands of our troops who are still dying

every day or is it all about politics to you? Have you any idea how many will live their lives mentally and physically disabled, not to mention the huge numbers who are committing suicide every day because WE WERE LIED INTO A brutal war that was supposed to take 'months, weeks maybe' and now it's more than a decade later and we destroyed a country and its people who DID NOTHING to us?

Millions of human beings had their lives destroyed, we're still DRONING men, women and children, beautiful little children who have a RIGHT to live in their own countries, and all you can worry about is politics??

Sometimes it makes me sick and so long as we have people who care more about their politics than about the precious lives that are being lost every day due to our 'humanitarian bombs' it will NEVER end because of all the enablers who ignore the tragedies being committed in their names. I would like to send all of them to live under our bombs and drones for a week if I could. Maybe THAT would get them to focus on the REAL problem. Which is not OUR politics, it is LIVES, human lives!

[sabrina 1]

100. We WERE in Libya and are behind the scenes in Egypt and Syria using our 'proxy' armies

because we can't show our own faces in the ME anymore after Iraq. Hillary even boasted about the 'new way to fight wars' using 'proxy armies' you know, from the dictatorships we support like Qatar and Bahrain and of course the Saudis who finance and supply 'insurgents'.

We did not stop a war in Syria. The British Parliament, finally had enough and said 'no way' after which without our closest Imperial ally, the US had to do an about face.

If you want proof, we have plenty of videos of Kerry et al pushing for 'intervention' to 'save the poor people of Syria' knowing full well that our buddies the Saudis were killing those poor people. The Brits couldn't ignore the proof that they were, would be, arming the most extreme terrorists who were responsible for the ongoing conflict there and their own people are still OUTRAGED over the lies that got them into Iraq.

Let's not rewrite history especially when the facts are so easily accessible.

We are never going to stop these wars, we are everywhere, in Africa, in the ME and we are still trying to get back to S. America, unless someone else stops us. The Brits did it with Syria. Hopefully for the sake of the lives at stake, someone will put an end to these insane wars.

[KoKo]

155. I think we just bombed some people in Somalia...and we have

what's called a "small contingent" of "Boots on the Ground" we sent in there. But, now we are bombing. No declared War Action, though. We don't have to fake that kind of clearance with Congress or UN anymore... Of course..we've always done wars in places without having to get the "proper clearance" .....so there are those who would say there's nothing new going on here with this President that hasn't been done one way or the other in our past "interventions/proxy wars" & such. There are even those who think that Obama is ending all our wars and interventions.

[El_Johns]

166. There are undeclared wars all over the globe.

[brush]

217. Well at least your take on Syria is different . . .

than what is most often said around here. Many give Putin the credit for getting Syria to cough up the chem weapons.

And c'mon, you know Bush would've rushed in there with our troops and not bothering at all with any proxies.

And the president is the first president to acknowledge a need to get off a permanent war footing. I don't know about you but that remark made me sit up in my chair. That's signaling a MAJOR, MAJOR policy rethinking for a country that has been involved in coups, occupations, wars and assassinations CONTINUOUSLY since we sent gunboats to back ex-pat American planters in their overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy in the 1890s.

You have to know that weaning America off war is like turning an oceanliner. It's a long, slow process with a lot of forces trying to jerk the wheel towards their war of choice.

[sabrina 1]

266. No, Bush would have WANTED to go to Syria, there is no question about that, but the world

and some of our 'allies' don't have the stomach to repeat the horrible travesty they got themselves involved in Iraq and Afghanistan and wherever else we dragged then to. The same thing would have happened. I cheered when Parliament, surprisingly because they have a long, long, long history of invading other countries, finally said 'no'. Probably because the Brits are still trying to nail Tony Blair for his lies so politicians there are a bit more wary than ours who have no fear of accountability.

I'm hoping more of our 'allies' at least our Western allies, do the same thing. We still have all those other allies unfortunately, like Bahrain dictatorship and the Saudis who are thrilled to send their troops to invade other countries on our behalf.

But Syria was a small glimmer, too late for all those who already died, of hope that at least some of our allies have had enough of the killing and torture and the hell that is war.

[VanillaRhapsody]

241. sshhhhhh!!!! You are messing up that good narrative....!!!

[Chiquitita]

331. It is a good narrative

and I appreciate reading it and considering it. Please don't try to bully and silence people on DU. Some of us come here to hear multiple points of view.

[bobduca]

377. If that poster stopped bullying

it wouldnt post here anymore. just full ignore the loyalist drones.

[QC]

412. Amen! n/t

[VanillaRhapsody]

451. awwww....I am such a bad bad bully!

you just cannot stand up to some criticism is what the problem is....under scrutiny your positions all collapse like a house of cards!! Fold like a cheap suit! This thread exemplifies that!

Please continue....there is still just a little rope left for you right there!

[VanillaRhapsody]

450. have I hurt your fee fee's?

[VanillaRhapsody]

449. meanwhile....did you watch the SOTU yourself?

I am berating someone who DID NOT! And they call themselves a Democrat AND post on a Democratic Forum...

But DIDN'T what the Democratic President deliver the SOTU address in a midterm election year...

SPEAKS volumes about those posters doesn't it?

[Chiquitita]

453. Yes, I watched it with my husband

We were folding laundry and listening to the end. Peace Vanilla.

[VanillaRhapsody]

454. Well I was replying to people who DID NOT!

and YOU were defending them...


perhaps read before you defend someone....NO EXCUSE for someone who calls themselves a Democrat or who post on a Democratic forum...NOT to watch the Democratic President deliver a SOTU just on principle....that dog don't hunt!

[Chiquitita]

457. Okay Vanilla

I hear you. You hear me. I have a right to write here. You have a right to write here. It's all good. I hope you can see that there is no harm in all of us listening to each other. It's okay, I think. It helps us get farther in our thinking. At least it helps me.

[VanillaRhapsody]

459. if you didn't watch the SOTU last night....you have no reason to take a position

do you? And furthermore....just accepting someone else's opinion of it as fact is even more egregious...and has been documented several times in this very thread...

The one thing I truly love pointing out....is Hypocrisy! This is the epitome of it!

[sabrina 1]

546. I didn't see you point out any hypocrisy. Nor did I see anyone 'just accepting someone else's

opinion'. Scratch that, there are a few who just accept opinions told to them by others.

[VanillaRhapsody]

552. Of course YOU didn't

why would that surprise me in the least? The very same people who are accusing others of being "lock step" are the ones that are IN lock step!

There you go...in case you missed it...I however didn't!

[sabrina 1]

555. Lol, you sound frustrated. Can't say I blame you. If I realized that a vast majority of

Democrats were failing to get my point, I'd be frustrated also.

[VanillaRhapsody]

561. Oh goody...here comes page seven in the manual...when you accuse me of hysterics

or that I am "upset" or "angry"


hahahahaha yeah...right!

[sabrina 1]

564. Why, has that happened to you a lot? You seem to have a lot of bad experiences

with people. That's too bad, I wonder why that is?

[VanillaRhapsody]

566. hahahahaha! You are so funny...

No I have a lot of FUN! You don't even know how much fun I have!


Is this page 8 where you accuse me of not having any allies?

One of my talents in life is the ability to see patterns slightly better than the average bear...

[sabrina 1]

571. You're funny too.

I can only imagine all the fun you have.

Hey, since we're both having so much fun let's make it a party.

[VanillaRhapsody]

575. what? This is the best you got?

whatever dude...I'm not having fun WITH you....I am having it AT your expense!

[sabrina 1]

577. You got that backwards! Dude!

Who's having fun with whom again?



I think that's pretty obvious, Dude!

Hey, thanks for playing and helping to keep this thread kicked!

[VanillaRhapsody]

578. no actually I didn't...and you really suck at this..

I don't care about the thread...YOU seem to...though....now we know what your "motivations" are...pretty pathetic...

did you run out of "manual"?

[SMC22307]

617. There's a scolding, hysterical quality to your posts.

I am berating someone who DID NOT! And they call themselves a Democrat AND post on a Democratic Forum...

But DIDN'T what the Democratic President deliver the SOTU address in a midterm election year...

SPEAKS volumes about those posters doesn't it?

Reminds me of a certain someone, a "famous" DUer driven off by the meanie leftists, hmm, a ranter, what's her name?

While your performance in this thread is impressive, it doesn't quite match some of the gems in the male/rape/orgasm thread.

out of

[msanthrope]

30. So amazingly wrong--it's sickening. nt

[longship]

43. This is an introduction to a rational dialog.

Please take it as such whether you agree or not.

I understand what PBO was saying -- I love that the camera focussed on Congressperson Tammy Duckworth during the extended applause.

That was what this was about. If you do not understand that you do not understand what President Barack Obama was saying.

You might have said similar about Tammy Duckworth.

[duhneece]

371. Maybe start with 'ruined'

My late husband lost both legs in VietNam, but he wasn't 'ruined.' He hated the word 'disabled'...he preferred 'challenged' as in 'physically damaged.'
With a grin, he used to say that he actually preferred the word 'gimp'...he said it was one syllable and reminded him of 'cute'.
But, Will, I do know you meant it with compassion and caring so I don't hold that against you. I really do get where you're coming from, but I bristled starting with that one word...maybe just my own prejudice. There IS no easy way to talk about the changes in men, women and children due to unjustified war (I actually think WWII was justified, especially and mostly after seeing the concentration camps 'tho not the dropping of atomic bombs, but that's many other threads!)

[warrant46]

420. Tell me ?

[secondwind]

482. This soldier voluntarily went back time and again. I think the OP is very wrong, also.

[5X]

504. Mr. Pitt was spot on.

and I am not one to say that very often.

Mr. Pitt, I hope you don't change your mind in the morning.

[morningfog]

2. It was an offensive finish. And I really don't get the reason to draw

attention to our national (and Obama's Presidential) failures. Because that is what 10 deployments are.

Shameful and nothing to cheer.

[msanthrope]

35. You didn't get the reason???? Because we have idiots who want war with Iran....

Did you completely miss the fact that the President wasn't happy about the 10 deployments???? Did you really not understand that the President was holding this soldier up as patriot, and not something to be used?

"We must give diplomacy a chance to succeed." Did you miss what he had to say about Iran?

[morningfog]

46. The President chose to continue the need for many of those depolyments.

I heard what he said about Iran. I applaud that.

The 10 deployments as a point of pride or honor, no. His point could have been made without the poor soldier. Especially since there is still no real end in sight to permanent war.

[msanthrope]

81. It's really too bad you missed the point about the 10 deployments. Sad. nt

[morningfog]

91. Ah, don't let it get you down, Ms. Not everyone is willing to cheer the product of endless war.

Especially when the one delivering the applause line is the Commander in Chief who has kept it going for 5 years (and counting).

[msanthrope]

102. Neither you, nor the OP could be bothered to use the name of the soldier you are so outraged about.

Pretty telling who thinks Cory Remsburg is a prop.

[morningfog]

128. And you, as per usual, cannot engage without making it about DU posters.

Telling in itself.

I have no reason to use Cory's name. I'm not using him as a rally call. I think he was fucked over by our country and the past two presidents. Obama saw him before his 10th deployment. Obama was the CiC who sent him BACK for his 10th and the one that damn near killed and left him forever injured. It is Obama's choice to continue the pointlessness that is the Afghanistan war, now in the 13th year. He was not brought out to show why the wars must end, far from it. The reaction he got was clear. We will engage in wars despite what it does to our people. We will abuse and break them and then cheer for it.

[msanthrope]

136. Again--neither you, nor the OP could be bothered to use Sgt. Remsburg's name or rank in your pursuit

of your agenda....so I know who thinks this soldier is a prop, and who thinks this soldier is a dire imprecation to avoid war in Iran.

Sgt. Remsburg chose to be there tonight. I respect his sacrifice.

[morningfog]

165. Well look at you! You put in the effort to find out his rank!

LOL! I expect your next post will list the times and locations of his 10 deployments.

"dire imprecation to avoid war in Iran"

Now, that is hilarious. I hope you didn't hurt yourself in that stretch.

I have no agenda, so kindly get over yourself. This is a message board for fuck's sake.

[msanthrope]

317. So you didn't actually watch the SOTU? How did you.miss his name and rank, then?

I didn't have to find it out, because it was said more than once.

[morningfog]

176. I'll add this.

I find you utterly obnoxious and disruptive. You do nothing but draw posters in with childish personal attacks. Your schtick is tired and rather sad. Off to ignore.

[sabrina 1]

285. + 1000 n/t

[msanthrope]

319. I think you should apologize for the Snopes incident upthread....nt

[sabrina 1]

443. Didn't even have to look, I knew it was you. You should be ashamed of using the troops

for political purposes.

[joshcryer]

557. And the "tiny Internet games" comment.

[Puglover]

322. Why anyone on this board

addresses this posters never ending argle bargle is beyond me.

Sad is right.

[morningfog]

332. Quintessential trolling.

Constant condescension, disrespect and personal attacks. Always disruptive. Rarely about subjects other than DUers. Unfortunately the jury system isn't designed to deal with this type of poster.

[msanthrope]

370. Pointing out that neither you, nor the OP could be bothered to use the name of the soldier

you were so outraged about is disconcerting, I'll grant you.

[sabrina 1]

549. Most people don't engage I've noticed. You're right, never ending repetitive 'argle bargle'.

It's a tactic. Use the headline box to create a false impression about other DUers and then repeat and repeat it hoping someone will believe it. I think everyone knows what is going on by now.

The only reason I respond to nonsense like that is to kick threads that are interesting. Might as well get some use out of it.

[cui bono]

280. OMG.... lololol....

That is hilarious. You think you can discount what they said simply because they didn't use the soldier's name???

Wow.

[bobduca]

381. truly pathetic

The loyalist bucket brigade is out in force!

[pecwae]

468. No shit!

I can almost hear the furious mashing of keys. Sad, but not unexpected.

[bvar22]

483. Will predicted their appearance, and their attacks.

The phony, manufactured outrage is transparent.


woo me with science describe them perfectly

The goal is not to convince anyone of anything.

It is to thoroughly hijack, pollute and therefore eliminate public spaces where real discussion and organization can occur. Occupy is disbanded with clubs and pepper spray. Dissent and organization online are disrupted with surveillance and propaganda.

It is no accident that propaganda brigades post new threads on discussion boards far out of proportion to their presence in the community, and that they nearly *always* demand the last word in any interchange.

The goal is to disrupt the important public space for liberal thought, discussion, and organization that these boards offer, and to keep the participants busy instead batting off the corporate lies and talking points.

woo me with science Sun Jul 28, 2013
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023359801

Well Done, Woo.
Thanks.

You will know them by their WORKS!

[Puglover]

493. Pointing out that you didn't use the

soldiers name!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.....................for the 59th time in this thread and no one is doing anything but LOL at me.

Christ even Elle Woods got her point across quicker then that.

[phleshdef]

199. Not offensive to the troop that was being honored, or to his father...

...or to the many progressive Dems who stood and applauded as part of that moment. You are pretty much in a minority on this nonsense as well as the OP.

Seriously, you are gonna talk shit about the President of the United States honoring a combat injured veteran as a SOTU speech, you and the OP are both transparently stretching and twisting yourselves into pretzels to talk shit about something like that? That's the only thing here that is offensive.

[morningfog]

208. I'm fine with being in the minority.

Why do you take it so personal that you have to try and make it about me?

I'm sick of war. I'm sick of parading injured vets. I'm sick of pep rallies. I'm sick of wars without end. 13 years we have been at war. Enough.

It would be more enjoyable to discuss it with you if you didn't try to make it about me. But, it tells me about what I am dealing with.

It was a cheap finish. Can't we stop holding wars and vets up as applause lines? I hope that the soldier recovers fully and I suspect that since he was so badly injured, he won't go back for an 11th deployment even though the war drags on.

[phleshdef]

213. You called this man's story "shameful and nothing to cheer".

So don't lecture me about saying something personal or nasty.

We are all sick of war and that was the point being made and the President made it in a tasteful way that seemed to resonate with a lot of folks. There was nothing cheap or shameful about it. It was grade A genius and genuine at the same time. The war has been perpetually winding down for awhile now. Its is going to be over this year, small presence or no presence at all. Theres a certain point where its no longer a war and its pretty much getting to that point.

Obama isn't ending the policy international troop presences that we've had in many countries for many decades. But he is ending the general state of war we've been in and that's undeniable if you are being honest. And he fighting against both parties on Iran right now, favoring peace and diplomacy.

[sheshe2]

251. phleshdef,

I watched tonight, so moving to see Cory and his Dad. He was so proud to be there. It broke my heart. He volunteered over and over to serve his country.

So sad for those here that are basically calling him a tool and a fool for being there. He was a prop and Obama used him.

Sad to say some will never get it. Not ever.

[morningfog]

313. Bullshit. You are making shit up now.

And still being dishonest and nasty.

But now it was genius!!! Fucking hilarious.

[VanillaRhapsody]

245. It wasn't cheering...why can't you see that?

it was pointing out WHY we want to avoid going to war....because there are REAL consequences......


the only cheering was for his continued success in his recovery....not the fact that he was injured. If they had cheered for someone fighting cancer...would you think that they were cheering for the Cancer too?

[GP6971]

3. I honestly was ashamed. n / t

[The Wielding Truth]

393. It worked. We should be ashamed of war. We should be ashamed of 10 deployments.We should be ashamed.

Last edited Wed Jan 29, 2014, 01:22 PM - Edit history (1)

We should fight to stop this from happening to anyone, soldier or civilian. We should admire the soul of this young man who is fighting every day to regain his life. War is shameful and the last resort. If this disgusted us than it did its job. War is disgusting.

[quinnox]

7. interesting take

I'm glad to see the different reactions as someone who didn't watch it. I think I would have had the same reaction as you did.

And yea, I think your description of "to-the-knife Obama defenders" is extremely apt.

[QuestForSense]

51. I'm with you on this.

[KoKo]

119. I think I would have, too. When I saw the line up of those

to sit with Michelle (hand picked) I decided not to watch and wait to read the transcript tomorrow...but, agree ...if I'd watched what Will Pitt says I would have had to run out of the room and barf. So...I'm glad I didn't watch.

I think it was Reagan who started those "Photo Op Moments" where hand picked people who would be props for something in the SOTU would sit next to the First Lady and be picked out of the audience to stand up and take a bow. It seems to have taken hold so that all the rest of them now feel it "adds some marketing value" to focus on and parade these seleted people for whatever their reason is to make a point in their speeches.

[zeemike]

167. I am glad I did not watch it.

I find things like that embarrassing...embarrassing for our country and our government.

[quinnox]

169. same here

[VanillaRhapsody]

247. so you take positions on things you never even witnessed yourself???

that's quite enlightening! but not about the President...

[quinnox]

249. I see a lot of progressives here, whom I respect, saying the same things that did see the speech

and on the other hand, I see the BOG-er types who defend the president no matter what, and frankly always sing Obama's praises, saying something different. Well, that is an easy choice for me on whose side to take, and who I think I would tend to agree with more.

[VanillaRhapsody]

252. Yeah....right...I see ALOT of the same people who all claim not to have seen it...

but are still taking positions on the SOTU.....it is quite amusing...please continue Y'all!

[zeemike]

360. And there is something wrong with that?

You mean you have to witness a murder before you can take a position on it?

And BTW this is not my first rodeo....I have seen SOTU speeches before and seen them exploited in that same way and every time it embarrass me...particulary when it is someone I voted for.

[VanillaRhapsody]

439. you are comparing a SOTU with a murder now?

I thought you all were against the "lock step" mentality....seems "not so much" when it comes to President Obama huh?

[zeemike]

471. I compared no such thing.

I commented on your claim that you had to witness something before you comment on it.

So you think a "lock step" mentality means you critisize?...talk about turning things on their head.

[bobduca]

379. Your act is tiresome

[Bobbie Jo]

401. Clue.....

So is yours.

Give the ankle biting a rest, already.

[bobduca]

409. appeals to age, check

got anything but dishonest rhetoric?

[Bobbie Jo]

429. No, just characterizing the nature of pointless jeering.

check.

[VanillaRhapsody]

445. It's now dishonest to point out "dishonest rhetoric"?

since when...because that is EXACTLY what I was pointing out here....

If you are relying on someone else's opinion of the SOTU....then YOUR rhetoric IS dishonest on its face!

[VanillaRhapsody]

440. My "act" is the truth!

got a problem with witnessing for myself? If you didn't see it yourself...and are relying on what W.Pitt says as YOUR opinion then YOU are walking in "lock-step" which is what I thought you all hated!!!


BHWAHAHAHAHAHA!

Not so much when it comes to hating Pres. Obama...as THIS thread so obviously points out....I am still laughing at this thread...

[840high]

517. Yes.

[BelgianMadCow]

8. Me Two

I am glad you saw it like that, Will. Gives me hope. And when by tomorrow, you start to see good points in the speech, that's fine as well.

[rug]

10. Human beings reduced to fodder and props.

[quinnox]

13. ouch, poetic and harsh at the same time

[KoKo]

123. sadly...yes.. eom.

[Retrograde]

172. Or to put it another way, the human face of jingoism

Or rather, the results of jingoism. GWB was great about rattling the saber and talking about sacrifice, but this is a person who paid the price for that rhetoric. I think the country - especially Congress - needs to be reminded that the desires to have wars have human consequences.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

378. he's trying to make a point that the saber-rattlers dont want to hear.

And he has to do it within the accepted tropes of the occasion.

I don't think Sgt. Remsberg misunderstood the implications of why he was there.

If he were unknowingly being used as a prop, that would make him pretty stupid.

[albino65]

12. What a Fuck

[1000words]

14. Thanks, Will.

Rec

[kelliekat44]

15. I think the point is missed here. President Obama had a personal relationship with that soldier.

He asked that we get off a permanent war footing for the very reason of that soldier's destroyed life. But then, who are we to judge for that soldier who seemed to not to be offended by being there. The "sometimes we make mistakes" was a collective "we" to me. And yes, we make mistakes, war is a mistake to me, but for many war is an answer and I think exposing us to that soldier show the very real consequences of the mistake of war.

[WillyT]

16. Now Will... You Once Called ME Devisive On DU...

But I hear ya brother.

Tomorrow never knows.

& Rec !!!



And... met you in SF with other DUers when you were speaking to veterans...

[H2O Man]

17. agreed

[fadedrose]

18. Now, now William

I thought he was in great form. We needed a squishy-type of speech to make us feel good again. When we feel good, we spread cheer and renew hope.

That's what we really needed. A renewal of hope, a lot of which has dissipated, and he knows that...

[KentuckyWoman]

19. Yeah that part turned my stomach too

The soldier seemed to appreciate being there. So I guess that's something.

[Demo_Chris]

20. USA! USA!

[Skittles]

22. I agree

disgraceful

[Demeter]

23. Will, I didn't see it, and I won't see it

as I am sick enough already with the cold weather and some nasty bug.

But I've seen enough of these grotesque dog-and-pony SOTUs to not only believe you, but to feel queasy myself. And I know it's not something I ate, either.

Thanks for watching it, so I didn't have to. There's only so much pain a body can stand. I owe you one.




PS: I have a Vietnam vet for a neighbor...a totally inoffensive, disabled man (closed head injury, I believe, and some mental disability). He's hard to converse with, because of it. He's not living on the streets because he has family with money to keep him housed and all.

NO MORE VETERANS! AND NO MORE VICTIMS! NO COLLATERAL DAMAGE--THAT DISGUSTING EUPHEMISM!

NO MORE DRONES! NO MORE SPECIAL OPS! NO MORE WARS OF AGGRESSION, INTERVENTION, OPTION.

YANKEE COME HOME!

[rhett o rick]

24. I have nothing to add. You said it well. Fuck those that use war for profit or political gain.

Fuck I say.

[awoke_in_2003]

25. I am glad I missed it...

I was watching something on the Wounded Warrior Project, wondering why the government doesn't do something about these vets. It pisses me off that they have to depend on private charity when it should be handled by the VA.

[farmbo]

182. You need to watch it. It was a fitting tribute to a recovering soldier...

... Who his Commander-in-Chief (PBO) had met and personally interacted with before he later met his fate after volunteering for his next (10th) deployment to Afganistan.

He was honored with a 3 minute standing ovation by the leaders of all branches of our, perhaps imperfect, constitional democracy in the US Capital at the SOTU. Thereafter, the CIC announced that he would no longer keep the USA on a "permenant war footing."

So, i get it. Every last soldier in Afganistan will not be flown back tomorrow. I still fail to understand how this event could be spun in to an indiciation of an Obama character defect.

Sometimes cynicism just hardens the heart.

[awoke_in_2003]

233. You may be right...

but i am sick to death of the whole "support the troops" BS when we, in fact, do not. We use these people to make ourselves feel better.

[uppityperson]

237. Thank you. And I totally agree.

[msanthrope]

26. Really? Joe Biden, Elijah Cummings, Nancy Pelosi, John Lewis, Michelle Obama, Dr. Biden, John Kerry

Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren.....all the Democratic Senators, all the Democratic House reps......all the Cabinet...Madame Justice Ginsburg.....

These are the worst roomful of people?????

I saw that soldier, and I applauded him for his sacrifice. His sacrifice not just for the worst, Will, but for us, for ALL OF US. We ALL bear that burden, that lesson.

Don't you see, Will....what the President was saying, coupled with his remarks on Iran?????


Never, ever again....because this is the price. That was the price--lest we never, ever forget it.

[morningfog]

38. His sacrifice was not for ALL OF US.

We have not benefited from these wars. Quite the opposite.

Absolutely we should say never again, but deployments will continue tomorrow and for the foreseeable future.

[quinnox]

50. thank you. I noticed that jingoistic bullshit war excuse too

not surprised by their post though.

[msanthrope]

53. Benefit??? What benefit did you or that soldier get? The point your President made was that

a sacrifice was made, with no benefit to either to the soldier or the body politic. And coupled with his remarks on Iran, it was a clarion call that this cannot happen again.

I am sorry you didn't get it.

[TwilightGardener]

55. Yeah, that "worst roomful of people"...not quite.

Many I don't respect, but many I do.

[joshcryer]

168. OP's post is worse than his "goddamned incoherent" moment.

[Desert805]

173. +1

We'll said, msanthrope. Some folks will stand in the tropical rain and accuse someone of pissing on their cupcakes. *shrug*

My favorites are all the people commenting who didn't even bother to watch it. Ridiculous.

I wonder how much the Heritage Foindation is paying them?

[Number23]

248. "My favorites are all the people commenting who didn't even bother to watch it. Ridiculous."

Hey who needs an informed opinion when there's a'kicking and a'recing of the latest anti-Obama spiel to be done??!

[VanillaRhapsody]

250. I notice that too...and none surprising at all...

it was amazing how many of them just accept someone else's opinion when they had every opportunity to make up their own. Quite telling about some....

[GeorgeGist]

316. His 'sacrifice' was a mighty waste.

Fuck the rah rah crowd.

[MrMickeysMom]

27. No, Will… Don't change your mind about this tomorrow… It is RIGHT

And, the Republicans rolled out their female version of the whole passion play.

I'm not impassioned. I kept going back to the Star Trek re-runs, so you see… I'm not sick to my stomach right now. At least the Enterprise has vision.

K&R

[Smarmie Doofus]

28. Glad I "stayed home". That shit is WHY I did. Cannot STAND it. k and R

[brush]

29. That's all you got out of the speech?

Nothing worth mentioning about the President taking us off a permanent war footing so solders don't get injured on their TENTH deployment?

[Cha]

58. This gets the most

recs, doesn't? The one that doesn't understand shit about what was being said?

the big "derp" one?

[Whisp]

92. o Cha. lol

the big derp one

The Big Derpowski
Hey, that SOTU speech held the room together, man.

[Cha]

143. Divisive Bullshit.. par for the

fucking course, Whisp.

[fadedrose]

151. William is in a bad mood tonight

The rec's will make him happy, CHA. I almost always rec him, but "forgot" tonight.

He writes so well and is so informed, but sometimes comes to a conclusion other than mine.

If I feel the need for a lift, will go to one of your posts.

[Cha]

175. ..

fadedrose~

[bobduca]

380. Can I join this scornful loyalist subthread too?

[dflprincess]

80. I must have missed the part when he said we were pulling all the troops out of Afghanistan

What I did not miss was Tweety gushing over the line about war footing and mentioning that he said it before in 2008...

[brush]

109. Read post 54

Keep an open mind and view the whole foreign body of work of this president and you'll see a man trying to stay out of wars for the most part, even though he had to clean up Bush's two wars.

My point is, he hasn't started one of his own, which is just about a manhood-proving ritual for repug presidents.

[Maedhros]

426. Oh yes, indeed: "Trying to stay out of wars for the most part"

Except when he's instigating military operations in 39 African countries:

http://www.thenation.com/article/176045/us-militarys-pivot-africa

[brush]

442. If I stand corrected, so be it.

But this president is the first president to acknowledge a need to get off a permanent war footing. I don't know about you but that remark made me sit up in my chair last night. That's signaling a MAJOR, MAJOR policy rethinking for a country that has been involved in coups, occupations, wars and assassinations CONTINUOUSLY since we sent gunboats to back ex-pat American planters in their overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy in the 1890s.

You have to know that weaning America off war is like turning an oceanliner. It's a long, slow process with a lot of corporate forces and their bought-and-paid-for-legislators trying to jerk the wheel towards their war of choice. And the president is not a king who can say, "okay, we're stopping operations in Asia, Europe, and Africa tomorrow.

He's been in office for 5 years now and knows the lay of the land pretty well and it took him until now to talk about getting off the "permanent war footing", a remarkable and courageous statement, IMO, from an American president.

And a far cry I'd be willing to bet from the secret briefings a newbie president most likely gets when he takes office — attended by major corporate and bank heads, generals and admirals and other defense department honchos wherein he learns that his purview is mostly the domestic policy arena were he can joust with the repugs but as far as major changes to our imperialist, predator-nation-interventionism for the corporate reaping of other countries natural resources, it's hands off. And I wouldn't be surprised that mentions of what happened to JFK aren't thrown in.

That's why I say his statement about getting off a permanent war footing was remarkable and courageous, that from an American president, knowing what the office stands for — head of empire — at least nominally the head but not really.

[Hekate]

456. +1 brush. In my 60+ years I have never heard a POTUS say that, ever. It's major...

I think that, typically for Obama, this has been going on in the background for some years now, in bits and pieces. Now he's said it out loud, and it is a major shift for US foreign policy -- and domestic, because of all the money generated by the MIC.

That maimed soldier with 10 deployments is what you get when the MIC runs the country, but because Obama let the context speak for itself and didn't spell the connection out in Words of One Syllable, the permanently outraged -- still outraged this morning, eh?

I continue to keep my fingers crossed for the physical safety of the very human and not-at-all-a-god occupant of the Oval Office.

[brush]

463. Same here, Hekate.

I'm also hoping for the continued safety of the President.

And I'm still just flabbergasted at all the posters here who are outraged that the President "used" that solder as a prop for the MIC.

Were they watching the same address? I'd heard of things going over heads, but over so many?

I mean he didn't say it out loud that 10 deployments can eventually get you a disfiguring injury so we should stop with the need for solders to be deployed 10 times. But that next to his actually and unprecedentedly saying out loud for us to get off a permanent war footing is pretty obvious.

He wants to avoid wars, and further backs it up with his promise to veto any bills for more sanctions that would scuttle the Iranian nuclear negotiations — sanctions backed by AIPAC and others that want war with Iran.

[Whisp]

485. some of those recs are from socks and sockettes from around the countryside...

rolling into town with their horses and wagons to come and make their vote, vote and vote often!

yeeehaaaa! giddy up.

[840high]

520. ...

[NuclearDem]

31. The only appropriate thing to say in that instance

is "we're sorry. We are so, so sorry."

Not "we make mistakes." Writing "poop" instead of "pop" is a mistake. Sending someone off ten times and ruining their life as a result demands a long, very sincere fucking apology.

We've got a suicide epidemic, sexual assault running rampant, PTSD and TBIs, a shitty job market to return to, the VA's a damn mess, and now retirement cuts on top of all that.

That needs a hell of a lot more than "sometimes we make mistakes."

[AtheistCrusader]

32. It did not sit well with me, either.

I can guess how it was meant, but without accountability for the 'mistakes' made, it rings so utterly hollow...

[CrispyQ]

392. Best response in this thread, right here. ^^^

without accountability for the 'mistakes' made, it rings so utterly hollow...

The look forward president.

[ProSense]

33. I think this reaction is disgusting

But that's just me.

It completely misses the point.

"I am sure the to-the-knife Obama defenders out there will seethe and howl upon reading this. Whatever, man. That was one of the more despicable displays I have ever had the misfortune to witness."

Yeah, I'm sure.

[msanthrope]

41. Thank you....it's as if the OP didn't hear any of the remarks on Iran, and simply refused to

understand what the President's point was.

[Whisp]

107. that was one of the biggest Wooshes in DU history, I think. n/t

[msanthrope]

116. Note that the OP couldn't be bothered to learn the name of the soldier he was outraged over, either.

Not mentioned once, by name, in the OP.

[brush]

170. Yeah, almost like that poem . . .

"Casey at the Bat" where the might Casey — whoosh — struck out.

[sheshe2]

265. Selective hearing, that's what it is,msanthrope. n/t

[Cha]

61. I'm sure the ones

who jump on kneejerk threads to rec.. that don't know shit about they're talking about will get the most recs.

"I am sure the to-the-knife Obama defenders out there will seethe and howl upon reading this. Whatever, man. That was one of the more despicable displays I have ever had the misfortune to witness."

Big fucking divisive fail.

[Jesus Malverde]

77. Seeing what has happened in our name is shocking...

We will never be the same and no one has been held responsible for those crimes.

It's a tragedy much bigger than President Obama...

The military industrial complex takes members of society in their prime and spits them back broken.

[Vashta Nerada]

134. 82 people disagree with you.

[ProSense]

145. That's OK.

My opinion's, unlike some, are not intended as fodder for a popularity contest.

"82 people disagree with you."

Likely more disagree with me on the value of the health care law and a host of other issues.

The OP reaction is still disgusting.

[Vashta Nerada]

196. I agree with the OP.

Injured soldiers from Iraq and Afghanistan shouldn't be used as "oopsie" political props, I don't care what party is in power.

And the number is now up to 99.

[LordGlenconner]

202. Agreed

Sounds a bit like a middle school taint to me.

[cherokeeprogressive]

159. Of course you do.

And, that's just you.

[uppityperson]

236. thank you, seems the point was missed here.

[Logical]

428. LOL, really? Really? I am shocked! Shocked I say! nt

[gLibDem]

34. I am really tired of fetishizing the war machine,

be it our so called technological superiority or the volunteers who carry out the slaughter.

[1000words]

52. Welcome to DU

[gLibDem]

88. Thanks

[ChisolmTrailDem]

36. I've supported POTUS since the beginning but I have to agree and have nothing to add. nt

[frazzled]

37. In the context of "America must move off a permanent war footing"

—which was a major theme in the speech leading up to the introduction of this soldier—it was a stroke of brilliance. It was a striking reminder of why we need to pursue diplomacy, not war (another of the themes in the speech).

It kind of makes me sick to my stomach that you didn't get that. You really need to listen more, rather than hewing to an agenda of your own making. This was not George W. Bush up there rooting for war and sending men off: it was about why we need to stop sending them to war.

We have to remain vigilant. But I strongly believe our leadership and our security cannot depend on our military alone. As Commander-in-Chief, I have used force when needed to protect the American people, and I will never hesitate to do so as long as I hold this office. But I will not send our troops into harm’s way unless it’s truly necessary; nor will I allow our sons and daughters to be mired in open-ended conflicts. We must fight the battles that need to be fought, not those that terrorists prefer from us – large-scale deployments that drain our strength and may ultimately feed extremism.

So, even as we aggressively pursue terrorist networks – through more targeted efforts and by building the capacity of our foreign partners – America must move off a permanent war footing.

[uppityperson]

238. Thank you. It is amazing how different it is in context.

[one_voice]

408. Yes, context is everything.

Surprised by how many people don't get that.

[Maedhros]

431. This is demonstrably incorrect:

As Commander-in-Chief, I have used force when needed to protect the American people,

Libya presented absolutely NO threat to the United States. NONE.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

484. Clueless, as always...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_Am_Flight_103

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[Maedhros]

488. Libya was not a threat to the United States

anymore than Israel is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident

I have no time for NeoConservative Democrats.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

599. You're comparing accidentally mistargeting a warship in the middle of a desperate war for survival..

...to the peacetime terrorist murder, deliberately planned through subterfuge, of hundreds of innocent Americans and uninvolved foreigners.

Got it.

Go crawl back under the rock from which you came.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[Maedhros]

604. Your are citing a terrorist act that was committed in 1988

as an "imminent threat" to the United States that justifies military intervention. Congratulations: your morals are as well-developed as George W. Bush.

Remember that Reagan responded to the Lockerbie incident by bombing Khaddafi's compound, killing a number of people including his children. That was 25 years ago. Trying to claim that that act justifies military intervention in 2011 is, frankly, ridiculous.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

606. I'm saying NATO's actions to prevent a civilian massacre

...justified by UN Security Council Resolution 1973, did exactly as it was intended. It directly saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of Libyans, removed from power an unstable dictator with no qualms against sending agents into other nations to murder Americans, and increased the status of the U.S. in the region (with indirect effects of safety). All without direct U.S. military intervention.

So seriously guy, you need to get your unreasoning hatred right. It was the French who were doing sorties into Libya. The U.S. only acted in a support role. (Admittedly, the French could not have sustained this without the U.S.'s support, but still.)

So in addition to being an apologist for terrorists, you're also completely wrong on the facts. Last time I checked, Bush didn't "intervene" in Iraq by merely supporting the French in helping the Iraqi people overthrow Saddam. Most NATO members were entirely against Bush's adventure from the start.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[Maedhros]

608. Congress rejected the President's request for approval to bomb Libya.

The War Powers Act enables the President to use military force in the event of an "imminent threat" to the United States. Libya presented no imminent threat.

The President made this statement:

As Commander-in-Chief, I have used force when needed to protect the American people,

This is demonstrably false in the case of Libya, and probably also false with respect to drone murders in Pakistan and Yemen.

As for your accusation that I am an apologist for terrorists, it is an unfounded claim and simply an insult by you. I've seen you level baseless insults at other posters as well, so I guess I can suffer my share.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

621. Arguing with someone so wrong on the facts is frustrating

I certainly hope you appreciate the time I'm taking to educate you.

So let me get this through to you, the President did not request Congress for approval to bomb Libya, so your statement that Congress "rejected his request" is 100% false.

Further, the U.S. armed forces simply enforced the UN Sanctioned No Fly Zone, which involved extremely minimal bombing of anti-air defenses to prevent them from shooting down patrolling aircraft. It was NATO, and largely the French, who were the ones who intervened in the Libyan Civil War, with massive U.S. logistical support (refueling tankers and the likes).

The phrase "Protecting the American people" involves any action which can be reasonably construed as lowering the threats to U.S. citizens from armed hostile groups, regardless of whether a threat is immediate to an American or not. This is the exact justification also used to battle Somalian piracy, regardless of whether the victim is U.S. or Iranian. The very act of arresting and/or killing pirates protects the American people, because these pirates will otherwise continue to act unless stopped, and they will inevitably attack Americans.

Finally, the War Powers Act is not the only act on War. Though Bush clearly stretched the law beyond its legal limit almost as soon as the ink was dry, the AUMF is an explicit authorization for the President - any President - to go after terrorists anywhere they are, and/or regimes that harbor terrorists. This is the exact justification used to kill Osama bin Laden. And Ghadaffi proved himself a similar threat and was harboring similar people (since he ordered them). In fact, he harbored terrorist far more than Saddam ever did.

By the way, this is nothing new. George Washington fought the Whiskey Rebellion without a declaration of war, President Jefferson went after the Barbary Pirates in Tripoli without a declaration of war, and Clinton prevented a human rights disaster in the Balkans without a declaration of war. So if anything, we're a bit more careful now with war powers than we've been in the past.

And finally, by your own statements, your hatred of President Obama is so great, you clearly would have preferred Ghadaffi to have been allowed to prosecute a mass slaughter of Libyans. You clearly would prefer to live in an alternate world where Ghadaffi, a terrorist murderer of Americans was still alive, and they were all dead. So it isn't an "unfounded claim" to say you are an apologist for terrorists. Just the unvarnished truth, stated in a way you don't like.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[Maedhros]

623. I get it - as a (Neo)Conservative Democrat, you like it when the U.S. flexes its military muscle.

That makes you no different that many, many other (Neo)Conservative Democrats.

But, the President's statement is still false:

As Commander-in-Chief, I have used force when needed to protect the American people.

Libya did not present an imminent threat to the United States, and attacking Libya did nothing to protect the American people. Ditto for Yemen.

Condescend all you want. You're just another Conservative insulting us Lib-tards for not aping your world view. I take the disapproval of Conservatives as a matter of pride!

[ConservativeDemocrat]

672. You seem to imagine that "protect the American people"...

...is intertwined with the War Powers Act construction of "immanent threat". It is not.

President Obama did NOT say:

As Commander-in-Chief, I have used force to protect the American people only when some random angry Ghadaffi-apologist on an internet forum thinks they're under a threat that's immediate and obvious even to him (though he's been repeatedly proven wrong and doesn't admit it).

Your assertion that freeing Libya from the yoke of a dictator who's showed no compunctions against murdering innocent Americans enmasse "did nothing to protect the American people" is laughable.

Finally, not only do you not speak for Democrats, you don't even speak for all liberals. You speak for but a tiny fraction of them. Reflexive anti-Americanism of the type you engage in went out of style on for liberals 20 years ago, which is why you're stuck here attacking Democrats like President Obama (as you no doubt bashed President Clinton when he saved hundreds of thousands of lives in Kosovo).

But it is also clear that I'm not going to convince someone who defends terrorists as you do, or attacks our Democratic President of the United States with such hatred as you do. Or is so wrong on the facts, as you are. Or who, when called out on your factual assertions that are incorrect, turns to speaking about "condescension" instead of simply admitting you are wrong. So I think I will stop now.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[Maedhros]

675. I'm not defending terrorists.

I'm stating two facts:

1. Libya was not an imminent threat to the United States.

2. Therefore, Obama was not protecting the American people when he bombed Libya.

Feel free to stoke your jingoistic power fantasies, but that doesn't change the nature of these two facts.

[bvar22]

490. And yet, after all these lofty words,

this same Commander-in-Chief WILL send MORE of our Boys and Girls out to fight a completely unnecessary WAR that has absolutely NOTHING to do with "Protecting the American People".

President Obama has been great with the lofty rhetoric,
poor in actually following up.

The unnecessary WARS will continue,
and more ruined soldiers WILL be the product to be exploited in Nationalistic PR stunts for the foreseeable future.

....but the Jingoistic Rhetoric was nice,
wasn't it?
WOOHOO for more Ruined Soldiers.
Make sure we have an unlimited supply for next year's SOTU.!

[frazzled]

492. He will? Where?

Do you have some inside information?

Or is it just wishful thinking?

[840high]

522. ^

[Blue_Roses]

650. thank-you!

Well said.

[TM99]

39. Well said!

I turned off the stream in disgust after that. I am sick of the duplicity, the lies, the propaganda, the perpetual war, etc.

Just fucking sick of it all!

[brush]

76. Read the post just above yours

Seems you, and poster completely missed the point.

[TM99]

226. Nope, I didn't miss the point.

I recognized, like Pitt, the double message which made it an appalling display of sick propaganda.

Obama talks about ending perpetual wars so that other men like this vet will not be scarred by unjust wars.

Then why has Obama allowed the sequester to impact social services but protect the MIC?

Then why has Obama not only kept the War on Terrah going but escalated it with drone strikes, blanket NSA spying, etc.

[brush]

229. You've seen this decent man for 5 years in office

". . . a major theme in the speech leading up to the introduction of this soldier—it was a stroke of brilliance. It was a striking reminder of why we need to pursue diplomacy, not war (another of the themes in the speech)."

You don't have to agree with everything he'd done but do you seriously think he's going to use a veteran like the poster described?

[TM99]

308. Obama is not a 'decent man'.

He is a politician. He is his persona. That is what I and everyone knows of him. His persona today in 2014 is not the one he wore in 2008 to get elected. So 5 years after seeing a lot of pretty speeches and little action to back those up, I am not at all surprised to see him use a veteran as described.

Politicians have used warriors for this little game since the dawn of human civilization. It is a very old game.

As I already stated, because he is double messaging (i.e. his words don't match his actions), his use of this man in his State of the Union Address was in very poor form.

[brush]

376. That's your opinion nt

[TM99]

399. Given the discussion at hand,

it is an opinion based on solid and observable facts.

[Chiquitita]

340. That's right

And if the media only talks about the ovation as a "moving" moment, it takes all the power out of it to really make us face up to the collective GUILT for these wars.

[TM99]

345. I have no quilt for this 'war'.

When I was a Republican, I was against it. As an Independent who now leans more Democratic, I am still against it. I was a soldier, and I was still against it.

The politicians and the media both should share in that guilt for they as well as the corrupt corporations are the ones that push this perpetual war on us today.

If I did feel guilt, if we as a community did feel guilt, if the politicians including Obama do feel guilt, standing ovations are not the appropriate response. Unostentatious and genuine emotional expressions of sorrow and promises with actions to back them up to make amends are the appropriate response.

[Chiquitita]

349. Agreed. I didn't mean to imply anyone who was against the wars should feel guilt.

I think your position is very convincing. But I do think many of the people in that room should have felt guilt and remorse. I hope that standing ovation doesn't serve to soften and expiate their sins.

[TM99]

356. No one in that room including Obama feels guilt for their sins.

They have wrapped it up in jingoism, parading out vets, and offering standing ovations for those who volunteered or not to fight unjust and illegal wars based on lies and corporate profits.

[TwilightGardener]

42. Honoring this man's sense of duty and his sacrifice was the right thing to do,

especially when the nation's leaders, AND his commanders, are assembled in one room. He is head and shoulders above pretty much all of them. It was appropriate to honor him, regardless of politics, speech lines, or one's feelings about war in general or this man's war in particular. I can't agree with you.

[highplainsdem]

57. +1,000. Agree completely with you, TwilightGardener.

[Cha]

63. Thanks TG..

[Shemp Howard]

65. They weren't honoring him, they were using him as a prop.

You honor a person at a ceremony that is all about him. Like at a retirement ceremony, or at a Medal of Honor presentation.

I like that Obama made a point about injured vets. I don't like the prop aspect.

[brush]

79. Read post 37. nt

[TwilightGardener]

84. No. Nobody was using him. His Commander-in-Chief asked him to come--and

the CiC, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Chiefs, Congress--all the leaders that order men like him into battle, vote on their compensation, decide foreign policy--damn skippy they need to stand, face, and applaud a soldier who did EVERYTHING that was asked of him, over and over again, until he was nearly ruined. Who in that room gave as much for this country as he did? Whatever you believe of war, or of the occasion in which he was honored, the moment wasn't wrong--not at all.

[phleshdef]

204. No, people are attempting to use the President honoring him as a prop to criticize.

[Chiquitita]

355. Here's a picture of Cory Remsberg before

He lost his health and his whole future was changed.

[Orsino]

680. It can be both.

Not everyone who applauded did so for the same reasons. A well-meaning salute to the dedication of one of our warriors, who is standing in for so many more, isn't in itself a bad thing.

Letting our parliament of whores spit-shine their bloody suits with him stinks. War sucks, and the best possible tribute to those who fight is to say, "Never again." That's not what was going on in that particular room, or not unanimously, anyway.

[HangOnKids]

89. We get the man's sense of duty

That is a fine fact. But using him as a poster boy for this "groovy war" is BULLSHIT. The kid is wrecked for the rest of his life. You missed that?

[TwilightGardener]

108. He's not a poster boy for anything. He's a man who answered the call, and served, and

suffered terribly, and is clawing his way back. Whatever circumstances, policies, and decisions led him to be there tonight didn't matter when it was time for him to stand. They should all have been humbled, in the audience and behind the podium, and probably most of them were--regardless of politics.

[HangOnKids]

132. The war was a fucked up call

Please do not disparage my comments, I nearly lost my son in Iraq. I have a dog in this hunt TG. End of discussion with you.

[TwilightGardener]

148. I didn't disparage your comments. I disagreed with you.

[HangOnKids]

157. Get back to me when one of your kids get blasted up in war

an illegal gross war. When they get to be homecoming queen in a fucking grotesque play I'll be there to applaud.

[TwilightGardener]

179. I'm sorry that it happened to your family. Not everyone experiences things the same way,

or attaches the same meaning to events, however. My husband served for 20 years, deployed several times, and I was lucky that nothing bad happened and that he only spent a short time in Iraq itself (as opposed to nearby support bases). I don't know what I would be thinking now if the worst had occurred, but I also don't believe that renders my opinions and feelings invalid, either. Good luck to you and your son.

[HangOnKids]

186. I have always liked your posts

Peace and out.

[TwilightGardener]

190. Peace to you and yours, H-O-K...

[Desert805]

638. This here

Whatever circumstances, policies, and decisions led him to be there tonight didn't matter when it was time for him to stand.

[uppityperson]

239. That was exactly the point, that this was a fucked up war that needs to be stopped.

You missed that?

[Gothmog]

477. Agreed

It was very appropriate for President Obama to honor this hero

[Chiquitita]

44. You put my feelings into words

I was wondering what the man's father was thinking as he stood there listening to the thunderous applause...it was the collective guilt of that room trying to drown out its own hypocrisy to no avail. And that man was there for his son though, nothing more.

[countingbluecars]

45. I don't agree.

If this young man and his father chose to be there as a symbols of the horrors of war, so be it. Maybe the American people need to see more reality and a little less USA,USA chest thumping.

[kysrsoze]

66. Exactly. To me, it said, "Here's the fucking meat grinder you all happily put these soldiers through

It was a stark reminder of what our perpetual war circle jerk planning has done to people. I think he should have shown innocent drone and collateral victims, but you can imagine the shitstorm which would have resulted.

[Whisp]

122. Exactly.

It's dissapointing, to say the least, that this powerful message against war has turned into another fresh opportunity of ODS.

same players.

[Blue_Roses]

649. great point

The realities of war, especially a war that was based on lies, where our soldiers are maimed and killed--not to mention living the rest of their years with PTSD--are better shuffled under the rug.


I found myself deeply touched by this soldier's testament to "fighting back", even in the face of severe injuries. That in itself was worthy of the applause.

[LordGlenconner]

47. Lens Crafters

That's what I'm reminded of with this OP.

Been awhile since we've seen this kind of drama.

[flvegan]

48. Well said.

Like the encore at a rock show.

[Luminous Animal]

49. 10. 10. Deployments. Dragged out like a circus freak.

[rudolph the red]

676. You need to understand what a deployment is...

I was a Marine from 2002 - 2012, when I was medically discharged.

The SpecOps guys operate under different rules, they are rotated in and out based on specific circumstances. They are usually in harms way for maybe 1 week or 3 months at a time, but each rotation can be counted as a deployment. Whereas, the typical Marine/Soldier/Airman is there for 6-12 months. By your definition, I was deployed 36 times.

The whole 10 deployment outrage is a farce that people who have no idea how the military works can latch on to.

[hfojvt]

56. that wasn't my reaction

But now that you mention it, you definitely have a point.

But at the same time, although his life will "never be the same", tonight I also saw somebody on "Inside Edition". Joni Eareckson Tada, whose life story I saw in a movie some thirty years ago. She broke her neck in a diving accident and has been a quadripalegic for 47 years.

Her life has not been close to the same since then, but at the same time, it does not mean her life was ruined. It has not always been easy. I heard her speak, talking about being sick and bedridden for months, but at the same time, she has achieved a certain amount of fame, and meaning, and acclaim in her long life. She's spoken before crowds, been married for 32 years, and is now nominated for an Oscar.

Perhaps we say "Awwwww" because we have the hope and belief that this young man's life is not ruined either.

[Phlem]

60. Thanks for the update. I missed it on purpose.

But we have Hillary!

-p

[blue neen]

62. I'm old enough to remember what happened to Vietnam veterans when they returned home.

They were ignored, demonized, spit on over a war they were drafted into. It was terrible...More trauma for soldiers and their families who had already seen and experienced so much horror. That should never happen again. Ever.

Most of us disagreed vehemently with the war in Vietnam, too. Just because we disagree doesn't mean we shouldn't honor the veterans' sacrifices.

It wasn't just that roomful of people applauding Sgt. Remsberg. It was almost all of us, out here. We weren't applauding war--we were applauding him.

[kysrsoze]

71. Thank you.

[MindMover]

104. Thank you, and you are correct, we were applauding him ... unfortunately ,,,

his sacrifice seems futile in the face of the ludicrous backward nature of the lawless country of Afghanistan ...

[busterbrown]

117. I have several close friends in Vietnam...

I keep in touch with them frequently...
Once got into a discussion with them one at a time and I brought up the subject of being demonized and spit on...

All of my friends said they never saw it happened and it certainly didn’t happen to them.
I know one thing,, In my city if anyone ever spit on a Vet, the Vet wouldn’t have had a chance to dismantle him.. The ones watching would have nailed him first..

If you experienced this horrible act yourself, then I surely be the first to say that the people who did it should have suffered a good ass kicking.. However after investigating this situation.. the stories about “Spitting on Viet Nam Vets” seem to have been mostly a fabrication made by right wing political operatives.. Not saying it didn’t happen at all.. But the stories stink of punk right wing chicken hawks...Similar to the Drudges and Okeefe’s of today’s world..

[blue neen]

201. "investigating this situation"

Check out some of the writings of James Reston, a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist. Most people would trust Mr. Reston's words over those of Drudge, Okeefe, and "punk right wing chicken hawks".

Good night and good luck.

[MindMover]

234. Not only saw it happen, but was there when one of the spitters got his jaw busted ...

by a huey gunship gunner .... lucky the guy stayed down ....

[TM99]

325. Bullshit!

This myth has already been debunked.

http://www.creators.com/opinion/david-sirota/the-legend-of-the-spat-upon-veteran.html

http://www.vvaw.org/veteran/article/?id=215

You honor vets by having a robust job market for us to return to when we are done fighting. You honor vets by having college educations available to use when we are done fighting. You honor vets by increasing health and social services funding instead of slashing it when we return from fight.

Most of all, you honor vets not by parading us out in public to serve your political agenda but by actually being a man of your word and stopping this stupid 13 year on 'War on Terrah'.

[blue neen]

419. Sorry, I refuse to deny and further dishonor those vets. From one who was there:

"I am not aware of many Vietnam vets who were not subjected to some disrespect, either personal or from the culture that called us "baby killers." We were shamed and embarrassed. My car (with a military base sticker) was "egged." I bought a wig to hide my military haircut."

"The spitting on veterans was just a small part of the overall feeling of lost honor, but it was real, contrary to Sirota's article, which appears to borrow heavily from a review of a book written by socialist and war protester Jerry Lembcke."

<snip>

"But Lembcke is refuted by many other sources, including Jim Lindgren, a Northwestern University law professor who cited news accounts that documented many spitting incidents. One example: A 1967 Bucks County Courier Times article reporting that two sailors were spat on outside a high school football game by a gang of about 10 young men. One of the sailors was stabbed."

Others:

"• In October 1967, Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter James Reston's front page article in the New York Times described his eyewitness account of protest behavior so vulgar that spitting was the least of the transgressions."

There are many more examples at the link.

http://www.startribune.com/opinion/commentaries/160444095.html

[TM99]

422. I honor vets by facing the realities.

I am a vet. I know plenty others including uncles and older friends who fought in Vietnam.

Your rebuttal to the facts of Lembcke's study comes from ONE man.

This statement alone shows his attack of the person and not the study which he can't refute:

Lembcke is an avowed socialist and has tried to use incomplete or dishonest research to lend credence to his government-as-pro-war conspiracy theories, to use the 9-million-plus Vietnam-era veterans as anti-war pawns.

Have there always been isolated incidents of assholes being assholes to returning soldiers? Yes, absolutely. Was there a massive hatred for returning Vietnam vets in particular? No, there was not.

[blue neen]

427. Hey,

obviously, you're going to believe what you want, but you cannot change my memories and experiences, at that time, of far more than ONE man.

Good luck to you and your veteran friends. I thank you all for your service.

[TM99]

430. I am truly sorry if you even alone were one man

who had such an experience.

No one ever deserves to be treated that way - vet or not, 'popular' war or not.

Thank you as well.

[WilliamPitt]

68. "He voted against the war in Iraq."

Rilly?

The Iraq war vote was in 2003.

President Obama was sworn in as a senator on January 3, 2005.



FU right back, you fact-deprived fool.

[NYC_SKP]

73. I don't know this person.

I just served on the jury.

As such I'm not free to tell you how I responded to the challenge.

That said, I wouldn't pull your reply to them...

Cheers.

[Rex]

137. Wow said person been here since 2001 and JUST started posting, you should feel honored!

You must have rubbed the right person the wrong way!

[Boom Sound 416]

74. He voted against the war in Iraq?

From the Illinois State Senate?

[Shemp Howard]

124. Well, Obama was on record in 2002 as against the war

Remember that back in 2002 almost every politician was pro-Iraq invasion. It was the "patriotic" thing to do.

But Obama spoke out against an invasion in 2002 speeches. Google it. Given the mood of the times, that was a gutsy thing to do. Of course, none of this excuses Obama's (IMHO) warlike attitude since 2008.

But I did want to set the record straight about the 2002 Obama.

[cherokeeprogressive]

171. Set the record straight about what? Votes in the US Senate? Or, speeches as a State Senator in IL?

[CrispyQ]

397. He's also on record for increasing the SS cap, & advocating against mandated insurance. -nt

[Flatpicker]

67. It was exploitative

I can see the pattern they had going tonight.

Hit the right with some heavy issues and then quickly segue into something that they would have to applaud for.

I can't say that I like what went on, but I can read the pattern well enough.

Am I sick about it? No.
I'm pretty willing to believe that the soldier was aware of how he was going to be presented prior to the speech. He may have agreed to it in an attempt to lend a face to the problems of constant war.

I don't see it any more despicable than the constant 911 references of the previous admin.

[Phlem]

69. woe dude, fire works be startin!

-p

[Hekate]

70. What I saw was: "OK you SOBs, this is the consequence of war without end"

"This maimed soldier is the consequence of Bushco's wars of choice. Go ahead, McCain --I know you've never seen a war you didn't want to send someone else to. I didn't take us into Syria, and I will veto useless sanctions against Iran. Give peace a chance."

POTUS had a lot more to say -- all relevant. Fuck, Will. I'm sorry you didn't see the same speech I saw, even tho I certainly didn't see a god up there.

[msanthrope]

78. And that was EXACTLY the point that was made. EXACTLY. Too bad some of us missed it. nt

[pnwmom]

85. I saw the speech you did. And I saw a family that wanted to be there and didn't feel used.

Not by the President, anyway.

[Whisp]

95. I saw that too.

but if I was looking through a triple whiskey or a six pack I might have seen it the OPs way.

[grasswire]

501. I alerted on this post last night.

It was a low personal and hurtful attack on Will Pitt. The jury was split. Over at conservative cave, where precisely this kind of insult is spat out against Will Pitt, I'm sure they were lauding the insult.

[Desert805]

639. That wasn't the only place!

[Beaverhausen]

103. Well said. I agree

[steve2470]

223. I saw it your way also nt

[SunSeeker]

227. Thank you. I'm glad not everyone missed the point. nt

[SidDithers]

330. Nailed it...nt

Sid

[CrispyQ]

402. There should have been consequences for those who made mistakes.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024405271#post32

Instead, they are painting & writing books & doing quite well.

[sheshe2]

470. +1 Thank you Hekate.

[MirrorAshes]

519. Big +1

Exactly how I took it.

[Whisp]

82. trash thread IS useful.

a bit rusty because I very rarely use it...


squeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeek. clunk.
*puts lid back on

what a buncho hyper tripe

[alcibiades_mystery]

87. Will be joining

I'll let the "anti-authoritarians" ( ) gather around their leader-figure.

[1000words]

139. Don't come back to the thread to read this ...

Made ya look.

[WilliamPitt]

97. Good thing he kept such an important point subtle.

Otherwise most people might mistake the whole charade for war porn.

...is the point you missed.

Big microphone. Unused.

Again.

This whole eleventy-dimension chess thing is getting awfully tired, Cali.

For most of us, anyway. Keep on truckin'. I'm sure we'll reach the promised land soon.

[WilliamPitt]

105. Wha...?

Giving those scumfucks a reason to cheer a soldier while on camera is your idea of how to stop this war shit?

Um.

You actually follow American politics, right?

[morningfog]

110. It was Obama's order to surge in Afghanistan and to continue there.

All of the drone wars come from his office. Congress has very little to do with Obama's wars.

[Hippo_Tron]

113. Then why are we staying in Afghanistan after this year?

That's not congress' call, the President has full authority to bring the troops back home.

[ProSense]

111. "Otherwise most people might mistake the whole charade for war porn. "

Good grief. Do you read what you write?

How the hell is the tribute to a wounded soldier, his resilience in recovery, "war porn"?

Who on earth would think such scars are anything other than a direct rebuke of war?

[msanthrope]

112. Subtle to whom? The drunk Speaker, perhaps. The utterly clueless, maybe. But to the rest of us,

no.....


FYI--you couldn't be bother to use Cory Remsburg's name in your OP....who is using that soldier as a prop?

[Whisp]

141. that's right, looks like the guy was used just as a prop for some recs

[msanthrope]

147. It's amazing--a whole OP, and we can't be bothered to use the name or rank of the person we are

outraged about........

[NYC Liberal]

114. "people might mistake the whole charade for war porn" - Yes, people who didn't pay attention

There is no possible way anyone could have actually watched the speech and come away with the idea that anyone was doing any "war porn". The entire segment of the speech was very much ANTI-war and a rebuke to every single war cheerleader and chicken hawk who got us into those messes.

And calling this man a "prop" is disgusting and disgraceful. Because to say that is to say he is an idiot, is stupid, or that he is a baby who simply does what he is told. Shame on you.

[WilliamPitt]

125. "Yes, people who didn't pay attention"

Says the guy who just asked me for a link to the vid because they HAVEN'T SEEN IT YET.

Wow, dude. Lots and lots of wow.

[NYC Liberal]

129. I never asked you for a link. What are you talking about?

I watched the entire speech LIVE.

[WilliamPitt]

131. Ag.

NYC_Skip asked.

I saw 'NYC' and fogged over with Yankees hate.

You have my most sincere apology, NYC Lib. My bad.

[NYC Liberal]

135. No worries...sometimes I see "NYC_SKP" think they're my posts!

[WilliamPitt]

138. I will polish my glasses more thoroughly henceforth.

[Oakenshield]

221. I'm inclined to agree.

The President made it clear he was against the open ended military conflicts that started this mess to begin with.

Quoted from the State of the Union

"but I will not send our troops into harms way unless it is truly necessary nor will I allow our sons and daughters to be mired in open ended conflicts. We must fight the battles that need to be fought, not those Terrorists prefer from us-large scale deployments that drain our strength and may ultimately feed extremism. So even as we actively and aggressively pursue terrorist networks through more targeted efforts by building the capacity of our foreign partners, America must move off a permanent war foot."

What the fuck else can people really expect or hope for from a Democratic President? Do they really expect him to just pack everyone's bags in an instant and withdraw everyone? He's tried to end the conflict responsibly, which is commendable.

[HangOnKids]

120. The fucking biggest platform in the GOD DAMN world and we got this

How pitiful and so fucking sad.

[brush]

178. It was pretty clear to a lot of us. nt

[hunter]

98. .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4406052

[WilliamPitt]

101. +1

[Jamaal510]

106. Apparently not every DUer watched the same SOTU speech. eom

[NYC_SKP]

115. Fuckin Will. Would your kindly post a freaking link to the part that I missed.

I love you dude, I caught the beginning.

And then life interrupted.

I wanna see the bad part that I missed so that I can respond appropriately.

TIA!

[WilliamPitt]

121. The last ten minutes.

It should be on MSNBC.com by now.

[msanthrope]

140. You couldn't be bothered to use the soldier's name or rank in your OP. Perhaps, in your outrage,

you might have missed something????

[WilliamPitt]

144. ZOMG LOTS OF QUESTION MARKS MAKE POSTS MORE IMPORTANT

Kinda like all caps.

And shit.

[msanthrope]

158. And shit???? Expecting you to actually use the name of the person you are outraged about

is just having basic expectations about the level of journalism you are putting out.

I mean, seriously, Will.....if Chuck Todd had written a screed about a soldier he was upset about BUT FORGOT TO INCLUDE THE NAME OF THE SOLDIER, wouldn't you question his motives???

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

271. The OP is not about the soldier.

[NYC_SKP]

163. Dude. Your OP said "Fuck".

And I'm packing for IAD to ROA... don't ask.

But people read your subject lines and expect content.

I'm lost. I caught the first part, now I'm out of battery.

I guess I'll catch up later in transit, but it would be terrific if somebody would give us wee folk some crib notes!

[NYC_SKP]

232. Thank you, Sir.

Not surprisingly, I'm not in a fixed location. Pacing now for trip from SMF to IAD to (shhhh DC) in a snow fuck, I guess. Be well. And, Really, that girlchild is ADORABLE!...ciao.

[cry baby]

130. I certainly respect your view, but I saw it differently.

I saw the soldier's story of recovery as an inspiration for all of us to keep trying and not to give up even though things are difficult.

I believe we should have been out of Afghanistan the day after we killed OBL and disagree with this prez's decision to continuing to keep our soldiers in harms way there...that said, I really got the feeling that this soldier was asked to be a guest so the prez could honor his courage...especially since the prez had met him before the soldier was injured.

A between the lines meaning was also to show those hawks in congress what a "constant war footing" can mean for those that they send to war.

[neverforget]

133. I didn't take it that way

but I can see how some could.

[Drunken Irishman]

142. You know what's disgusting?

The fact you've leveled this person as nothing but a political prop - as if he's too stupid or too naive to have a thought of his own. You say Obama used him as a prop? Didn't you ever stop to think that maybe, just maybe, for this guy, that honor, everyone focused on him, cheering him, helped ease his sacrifice?

Let's not shit ourselves here and stop pretending you have that soldier's feelings at heart. He was the one who chose to come, he was the one who chose to be honored by HIS president. He's not some puppy dog and the irony here is it isn't Obama who turned him into one. It was you.

[msanthrope]

161. Will couldn't be bothered to use his name or rank in the OP. Which isn't something I would accept

from any journalist....much less one that posts here at DU.

[sabrina 1]

288. Will wasn't USING the soldier to make his point. That would be disrespectful.

He is showing more respect than you are by personalizing the issue. He made a point that a majority here got and agree with. You are repeating yourself and still not making any point. The 'gotcha' thing you're apparently trying to accomplish, isn't working because the omission was clearly deliberate out of respect for the soldier.

[msanthrope]

318. Hey Sabrina...upthread Snopes disproved the RW talking point you posted about

our troops and their meals. I understand if you are upset about that, and I think you should apologize.

[Bobbie Jo]

324. Admitting error world involve a certain level of

integrity.

Spewing lies and half-truths just involves access to a keyboard.

I seriously doubt that she will take ownership of this one.....either.

[msanthrope]

337. Revealing her source of her claim could prove pretty interesting. The use of RW

sources has become telling and sloppy.

[sabrina 1]

447. You should be ashamed of yourself for using the troops for political purposes.

I think you should apologize.

[ProSense]

164. Nailed it.

It's pretentious.

[SunSeeker]

228. +1

[Blue_Roses]

651. bingo!

[liberal_at_heart]

146. This is why I don't watch SOTU speeches. Every single president, it doesn't matter who it is

uses people as props to make them look good. That and I knew I didn't want to hear him talk about education. Especially today after I learned that my son doesn't have a single educational assistant in any of his general education classes, I didn't want to hear him talk about education. That would have just pissed me off to no end. So, I just didn't watch it.

[quinnox]

151. +1000. Yep, all the presidents do it

and maybe we should stop the war glory and military fetish for once. Hell, what a revelation it would be, if they didn't have to trot out a soldier or war hero and have them take a bow in a SOTU speech!

[LibDemAlways]

562. It is now also customary to trot out members

of the military at sporting events. At every LA Kings hockey game, a soldier or sailor is lauded as "hero of the game" and receives a standing ovation to loud applause. This has nothing to do with hockey. As far as I'm concerned the hero of the game is the guy who scores the winning goal.

[Rex]

150. Seems the new meme is that you 'missed the point'.

Why can't you just accept jingoism Will? Don't you love Uncle Sam? You know, he needs your help. Military professionals being used as props by political leaders; second oldest trick in the book.

[brush]

197. If you get a chance, go back and review the speech

You'll maybe see why many of us know that the original poster definitely missed the point — a president speaking of the need for America to get off a "permanent war footing" so that there will be no more 10 deployments.

[Rex]

198. Many? It is a tiny amount of the posters in this thread - but don't let reality stop you.

There should have never been 10 deployments, but don't let that stop you either from missing the real point.

[brush]

215. And what do you think the point was?

Last edited Wed Jan 29, 2014, 08:18 PM - Edit history (1)

Out of that whole speech all the poster got out of it was that the President was using a solder as a prop and you agree with that?

Did you watch the speech at all?

[Rex]

486. That wasn't the point at all - really if your crew cannot come up with

anything better than that, then why even bother?

[sabrina 1]

502. The point most people got? 'We have to continually FIGHT for our 'freedoms'.

Lol, the only ones taking away our 'freedoms' is our own government. Terrorists don't have the power to do that.

[obxhead]

153. When you are asking for more through actions

telling us you want less is bs.

That soldier was Obama's yellow ribbon car magnet.

He deserved better than that.

[Brigid]

156. I only hope . . .

That many young people took one look at Cory Remburg and will avoid military recruiters like the plague.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

184. POST of the thread.

Thank you. Fuck fucking war.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

160. what is this bullshit? PBO is not free to whip out the "EFFIN'" and ""SCUMBASTARDS"

He has to make his point subtly; at the same time, he has to make it as powerful as possible.

That's why you use big drama and tropes: to make a juxtaposition of concepts when you can't resort to "I'm gonna start kicking ass, you muthafuckas !!"


So wtf is it that people don't get that? It's worthy only if he does it in words that sound blustery enough? I thought we had enough of cowboyism in the Office?

Also, I don't believe it's possible to just pack up and leave a warzone. Even if it was started wrongly and perpetuated by evil greed and the military industrial complex......you may not support it, but you have to manage the violent chaos that the previous administration created.

[brush]

203. Thank you for excellently explaining . . .

something that wasn't all that subtle.

Some people must have had a second glass of wine with their dinner.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

216. oh, we should just forget that he bluntly said the sexist pay gap is wrong?

Let's just get pissed off (about something we diametrically misunderstood. )


I haven't EVER heard a president speak so clearly in support of women's rights, well, aside from PBO himself, like when he ended the global gag rule.

The pay gap issue gets clouded over by the far more compelling (dramatic) issue of abortion. But why in the hell do women make up the larger percentage of those in poverty? It's issues like this-- unmentioned until this president. Because no one else is taking women's issues seriously.



Ranted......forgive me.

[brush]

219. It's allowed. I agree with you.

So many people on this Democratic site short change this president.

I don't get it at all, especially with all he's accomplished despite the unprecedented

obstructionism from the repugs.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

225. really.

Too much media watching, maybe?

It's cool to be snarky?

The perfect is the enemy of the good. Even the damn good.

Yes, and the unprecedented MUTINY of repukes in Congress. And dont forget that rotten crap media we're stuck with. Corporate approved propaganda, all the time. 24/7.

[llmart]

513. Excellent post....

and I agree wholeheartedly. But then some of us are older and wiser and know that idealism and utopia are not reality.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

527. and look---the OP rncouraged a lot of other people to

call this president, who is getting things done--lots of things,--in spite of batallions of PUKES blocking and tjreatening and spewing irrational hate, and a goddamned journalism culture of lazy snarking, disinformation, ridiculous garbage peddling.

So now this author pens an OP calling loyal liberal patriots to hurl epithets, call this president "a fuck.".....


Disgusting.
And mistaking gonzo bravado and vulgarity for "hard-hitting lefty truth"? That's like mistaking fux spews for news.

[4edwards]

174. I felt like I was watching a scene from the Hunger Games when they were clapping for that soldier .

I was sick too when I saw that poor man who was sent on 10 returns to war stand up and get an ovation of sorts from all. It made me sick. I don't know if anyone here has seen either of the Hunger Games movies, but honestly it was like a real life scene from that movie. It made me almost physically sick to watch that scene. I guess I'm saying I basically agree with WilliamPitt.

(and I'm not 4edwards - haven't been obviously for years and years but it's too difficult to change the name).

[quinnox]

180. I have seen them, and I know what you mean

by the reference. Nice to see some new posters around.

[tabasco]

177. I'm an Army Ranger

(1986-1995)

and you are full of shit.

[Egnever]

183. .

[1000words]

189. How does your service ..

give you a better understanding of political opportunism, than a political journalist? How does it make your opinion more valid?

[Rex]

209. It doesn't, it is just chest thumping knowing a certain crowd will say

ATTABOY!

[Skittles]

269. I'm a veteran

a veteran who understands the best way to honor soldiers is to not send them over and over into a senseless war

[TM99]

307. As am I

and fully agree.

[elifino]

326. Vet here also

+1

[Rex]

611. Same here, 96 Romeo at your service!

However, I don't feel the need to thump my chest with pride.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

666. Me too. A lot of blood has been spilled so politicians could look like a "Strong leader".

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.  H.L. Mencken

[Number23]

258. !!

[SidDithers]

333. /thread...

Sid

[Cha]

508. Mahalo, tabasco~

[Whisp]

181. another poor attempt at channeling hunter thompson.

wow.

I just reread that and...


wow talk about missing the whole point in all kinds of whole ways.

[1000words]

185. See all those recs?

Who's missing the point?

[countingbluecars]

188. If the unrec were still around

that number would be a lot lower is my guess. There are a lot more than 100 people on DU on the night of the SOTU.

[uppityperson]

242. I would unrec the op for missing the point.

[Whisp]

192. same crowd, is who all those recs are.

It's a guarantee that if the OP says Fuck loud enough, and jumps up and down high enough he will be cheered for it by the same contingency. It's a new science call Derpology.

Anyone can name a thread 'Obama is a poopyhead' and they'll get the same recs, from same crowd.

[1000words]

193. In other words:

You got nothing.

[Hekate]

214. In other words, there is no more Unrec to offset the Recs. That is all that signifies.

[Whisp]

283. Don't Huelskamp me, bro!

[Number23]

261. "Obama is a poopyhead' and they'll get the same recs, from same crowd."

Yep. See the tired musings of another male character around here, one who was simply shocked and appalled a few days ago that the world was a mean place and got over 200 recs for that stunning revelation.

That poster could type "tofu is yummy" and get 200 recs from the same crowd of seal-clapping anti-Obama lunatics that are eating this OP up with a spoon too.

[sheshe2]

294. Dear gawd!

Did I need a laugh tonight. You just gave it to me, thanks number23.

[Number23]

465. You're welcome! Check out the jury results on my post for another well needed chuckle

1-5 to Leave it Alone but Juror #2 won my heart:

Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE Explanation: It is not against the rules to disagree with another, or group of, DUers. There is nothing disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate about this post. Toughen up.

[sheshe2]

472. Thanks for letting me know Number23.

Gotta love #2~

[Gothmog]

478. Good post

[ScreamingMeemie]

662. Seriously Whisp?

I rarely recommend Will's writing because I very often disagree. You can run that through whatever checker the note-takers are using these days.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

595. gonzo

Gone wrong

[mwrguy]

187. That soldier wouldn't be there if he didn't want to be.

He obviously has no problem being there to help Obama.

This will probably end up being one of the most constructive things he ever does.

[WilliamPitt]

191. My internet has gone to the zoo

Country living.

Writing this from my phone. I am not voluntarily leaving this dscussion. I have no internet, and I'm not going to do ths by phone, so my apologies. This is not a hit-and-run thread. I am experiencing technical difficulties.

Sorry. I'll be back when my internet unfucks itself.

[Skittles]

267. you will be shocked and disappointed at the sheer idiocy and naivete

hoo boy

[sybylla]

353. Definitely a clear disconnect at least.

I get the point the Pres was trying to make. But I agree with Will that this was absolutely the wrong way to go about making it. I had the volume turned off as it happened because I was on the phone and at first glance I didn't like it. The replay with sound made my head hurt.

[LeftyMom]

200. Member since Sept 2013.

Always interesting when supposedly new DUers remember stuff that's years before their time.

[Rex]

211. Check out post #64!

Been here since 2001 and decided to make their first posts to Will! Amazing!

[QC]

418. The sockpuppets are really getting a workout in this thread.

[Union Scribe]

515. does that mean they're...

sweat socks

[Whisp]

276. zing!

I have recollections of that.

[davidthegnome]

205. I really didn't see it that way.

I saw it as an example of the consequences of war. I also saw it as a moment to applaud and show our gratitude to a man who sacrificed so damn much for his Country.

I get your anger, because I share it. I hate the wars for profit, the bull shit lies we're told - and I'm really angry about a whole lot of things that have happened these last thirteen years.

I don't think that our President used this man as a stage prop. I believe he wanted to thank him in a grand way, but I believe he also wanted people to see an example of what these years of war have done to so many.

Given though, that you do see it that way... I definitely understand why you're pissed off and sick to your stomach. I also know you were hoping for a lot more, for something more grand, more passionate, more inspiring. Honestly - I was too. I think you're wrong about this though, I don't think Mr. Obama deliberately used this man in the manner you suggest, I believe the intent was to thank him, to honor him, and perhaps to demonstrate the cost of war.

Of course, neither of us can really say what went on in the President' head with any certainty, but I can't believe that he would have the kind of sick intent you suggest. No. He's far from perfect - and he pisses me off some times, but he's a good man. Good men don't do that shit.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

220. Did he address the "mistakes" made with drones?

[liberal_at_heart]

243. +1

[ReRe]

222. You said it, Will...

... and I second it. As a matter of fact, I didn't watch it at all. I knew what would happen. BP would shoot up and I would get sick to my stomach. If you've seen one, you've seen 'em all. I will never watch it again, unless we get a real Democrat in the White House. And what you mentioned about the soldier would have affected me the same as it did you.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

224. The entirety of what Obama actually said after the applause for Cory:

(Extended cheers and applause.)

My fellow Americans -- my fellow Americans, men and women like Cory remind us that America has never come easy. Our freedom, our democracy, has never been easy. Sometimes we stumble; we make mistakes; we get frustrated or discouraged.

But for more than two hundred years, we have put those things aside and placed our collective shoulder to the wheel of progress: to create and build and expand the possibilities of individual achievement; to free other nations from tyranny and fear; to promote justice and fairness and equality under the law, so that the words set to paper by our founders are made real for every citizen.

The America we want for our kids -- a rising America where honest work is plentiful and communities are strong; where prosperity is widely shared and opportunity for all lets us go as far as our dreams and toil will take us -- none of it is easy. But if we work together; if we summon what is best in us, the way Cory summoned what is best in him, with our feet planted firmly in today but our eyes cast towards tomorrow, I know it's within our reach.

Believe it.

God bless you, and God bless the United States of America. (Cheers, applause.)

[SunSeeker]

231. Thank you.

The OP was based on a completely different script apparently.

[sabrina 1]

262. Iraq was not 'for our freedom'! Iraq was a lie as everyone surely knows by now.

We don't invade these countries to 'free them from tyranny, we BRING tyranny to them. When did the 'left' begin to support the lies told by Bush/Cheney?? None of these invasions, they are not WARS, remember? We insisted on calling them what they are when Bush was occupying the WH. Have you read anything about the devastation we left in Iraq? To call that crime a 'war for our freedom' at this point, is an outrage. Until the truth is told, and a few brave elected officials have told the truth about it, too few sadly, there really is no hope of stopping any of it.

[SunSeeker]

275. Obama never said Iraq was for freedom, his POINT was to honor those the war devastated.

Like that poor soldier, who represents the hundreds of thousands whose lives were horribly altered by that war. And yet, he did not give up on life, just like we should not give up on our country, despite the terrible lies and mistakes our leaders have made in the past.

I thought showing that gravely wounded soldier was the best way Obama could have gotten his anti-war message across. Obama did not romanticize war, he showed it's devastating reality, a refreshing acknowledgment of war's horror, rarely seen in our country's politics.

I really am disgusted that so many here missed the point.

[progressoid]

281. Anti-war message?

If he wants to send an anti-war message, stop the fucking wars!

[SunSeeker]

284. He is stopping the wars.

He ended Iraq and he is drawing down troops in Afghanistan.

And he kept us out of war in Syria and is working mightily to keep us out of war in Iran, as he noted in his speech. And both Republicans and Democrats are attempting to sabotage his Iran peace efforts. It appears he has beaten them back though, for now.

[progressoid]

311. Huh?

He ended Iraq? More accurately, he proceeded with the withdrawal from Iraq that had been negotiated by the Bush admin. In fact the Obama admin wanted to extend our involvement in Iraq but Iraq rejected it.

A draw down in Afghanistan? I suppose that's true if you don't count his surge of 30K troops, or the increase in airstrikes and drone attacks. If we leave as Obama promised, we will still have been there longer than any other US war. Apparently it takes 5 years to draw down.

Syria?? You mean he kept us out of the war he threatened to start? Perhaps what kept us out of Syria was nearly no support from Congress, the American people and most of the world.


Iran? Yeah, he gets kudos for the nuclear talks.

[JoePhilly]

342. In July 2008, Bush adopted the timline Obama proposed in Dec 2007.

The same timeline Bush argued AGAINST from Dec 2007 all the way up until July 2008.

Bush was trying to remove a political obstacle for McCain and make the Iraq war a non-issue for the election.

I understand why right wingers would not want to remember this.

But I'm always surprised when I see a Democrat that's apparently unaware of it.

[progressoid]

411. Yes.

But what does Bush's motivation have to do with the actual enforcement of that plan by the Obama administration?

Let's say I move into a house where the kitchen is being remodeled but it's only partially done. I can stop the contractor and change the plans to my desires and timeframe. But if I continue with the previous owners plans, it would be a bit disingenuous to say that I designed the kitchen.

[JoePhilly]

416. Obama proposed the time line ... Bush adopted it in name only ...

and then left the White House.

Obama, carried out the EXACT time line HE put forward originally.

If McCain had won, that timeline would have been SCRAPPED immediately ... McCain was never going to leave Iraq, and Bush knew that.

Bush does not and should not get any credit for adopting the timeline, a timeline that he argued against, and a timeline that he knew no GOP President would ever actually carry out.

Oh, and let's be clear here .... Bush didn't DESIGN shit.

President Obama, along with the generals, determined the actual withdrawal plan, and executed it starting in Feb 2009. The actual troop withdrawals not starting until the summer of 2009.

Meanwhile, Bush was at home painting pictures of himself taking a bath.

[progressoid]

421. Wait.

So Senator Obama designed the agreement and then President Bush flew to Iraq to sign it with Maliki?
http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2008/12/20081214-2.html


And why would the Obama administration say it's Bush's plan?
Obama living up to Bush's terms on Iraq withdrawal, Carney says

[JoePhilly]

423. The agreement signed by Bush did not define

how the withdraw would take place. Or the pace.

All of that was determined by the Obama administration.

Did you notice that Bush did not sign the agreement until 1 month AFTER the election.

Want to guess why?

Na, I doubt you do.

You also didn't have anything to say about what McCain would have done if he won. Big surprise.

[progressoid]

433. Actually, it did define the pace.

It established that U.S. combat forces would withdraw from Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009, and all U.S. forces will be completely out of Iraq by December 31, 2011.

And what do Bush's motives or McCain "what-ifs" have to do with Obama's decisions?

[SunSeeker]

444. You just admitted everything I said. nt

[progressoid]

455. Yes, it's called tongue-in-cheek.

[pacalo]

286. To be fair, maybe it was too subtle a message for some.

The deplorable opportunism we witnessed in Bush/Cheney & their cheap regard for the military left a bad taste in our mouths. It was in bad taste, no doubt.

But I saw it the same way you did when I saw it live. I thought Obama made his anti-war message so effectively & brilliantly. It went with his diplomacy-before-military action policy for Iran.

[grasswire]

503. anti war message?

Whew. I thought the Bushies were delusional. Up is down, still.

[Vattel]

643. Great post. People seem not to have read what

Obama said after introducing the soldier. He implies that the soldier was helping America fight for its own freedom and/or the freedom of other nations. More militarist mythologizing. Obama seldom respects the intelligence of the citizen when he talks about war. His justifications for war are always simplistic and unconvincing.

[sabrina 1]

661. Exactly, he tied 'our freedoms' to the troops' sacrifices and that is an outright lie.

Then in order to try cover the lies, we are told that we shouldn't be on a permanent war footing. What does that mean? We should be on ANY war footing. No one is attacking this country, we are CREATING enemies by going around the world killing people who did nothing to us.

I despise the continued attempt deceive the American people. And yes, on more than one occasion this president has demonstrated a lack of respect for the intelligence of the American people. I remember him saying that we the people 'don't understand the financial system' when they we bailing out the Wall St Criminals.

And again regarding the TSA. Well I have news for them if they think the people are not smart enough to see through the deceptions. They're wrong.

[grahamhgreen]

532. This implies tha Afghanistan was somehow vital to our freedom and democracy, but the truth is

80% of Americans want us out of Afghanistan. Because it has nothing to do with freedom or democracy, it is a profit tool for the MIC.
If we had a democracy, we'd have been out years ago.

[Xyzse]

230. That's ok...

Take your time, digest it.
Sometimes, it is best to write down what you think initially... then stop.
Filter, and figure things out afterwards, and write again.

I did not watch the State of the Union.
I will read it in a few moments, and to tell the truth, I should not have read your post yet.

Any how, you're right that injured soldiers should not be exploited. However, that is done every single day.
It doesn't excuse it, and it is sickening, but for now, I really should read it without pre-judgement.

[quinnox]

235. Full transcript of the speech -

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/full-text-of-obamas-2014-state-of-the-union-address/2014/01/28/e0c93358-887f-11e3-a5bd-844629433ba3_story.html?tid=pm_politics_pop


I read the last part, and there are some odd notes. One, the president did not make reference to the country getting off a war footing and then immediately introduce the soldier. He made that reference many words before that part. In real time, at least 5 minutes to 10 minutes before, I estimate. Two, the president said the soldier was trying to get better to serve America again. My reaction - WTF, has this soldier not served enough already??

three, this part, right after the cheers for the soldier dissipated - My fellow Americans -- my fellow Americans, men and women like Cory remind us that America has never come easy. Our freedom, our democracy, has never been easy. - this could very easily be interpreted as a justification for our wars in the past, and an endorsement of the military conflicts the soldier was in. So don't tell me that Pitt and others saw imaginary things.

It is a matter of opinion, and just because some Obama supporters see it one way, does not mean the other interpretations are invalid.

[SunSeeker]

289. Obama NEVER said Iraq was about freedom. He always said it was a mistake and stupid.

After he says he wants to take us off permanent war footing 5 times before that line you bolded, and acknowledging that our country has made mistakes (when was the last time you heard that in a SOTU speech?) there is no reason to interpret that statement as glamorizing or espousing war, any war. So yes, Pitt's flame-bating OP missed the point of spotlighting that soldier about as badly as Huelscamp's rant on Rachel Maddow did.

[sabrina 1]

293. Iraq was NOT a mistake. It was a LIE that was supposed to last 'months, weeks maybe'. It is a CRIME

that has yet to be prosecuted. Calling the slaughter of over one million people based on a lie a 'mistake' is just plain WRONG. When we worked to give Democrats the power to stop these crimes in 2008 we expected to see some of the criminals brought to justice. We really thought that there would be SOME accountability. Now we are calling it all a 'mistake'.

It was and is a crime and there is still time to prosecute the criminals who caused the deaths of thousands of our own troops and over one million innocent men, women and children who did NOTHING to us.

And each time a soldier is brought before the people it causes the people to want to support them even though they do not want these wars. I am waiting for the day when someone tells the truth about all of this. It is unbelievable that not one of the lying War Criminals has even been questioned about the massive crimes they committed. A mistake! Unbelievable.

[SunSeeker]

297. Bush lied to get us into Iraq, but Dems made a mistake in believing him.

Dems voted to get involved, and they were stupid to believe Bush.

The SOTU speech was in no way a glorification of Iraq, or any war. It was just the opposite. The point of showing that soldier was to honor resilience and spotlight the terrible cost of war.

[joshcryer]

300. Only those not on the Senate intelligence committee.

And those who were stupid and not seeing Bush's posturing for the 6 months leading up to the war.

Frankly I don't hold too much respect for those who claim naivety.

Other than that I agree with you.

[sabrina 1]

301. Sigh! If an elected official is more stupid than the average voter who begged them not to believe

what WERE OBVIOUS LIES then they definitely do not belong in any position of power. I would actually rather believe what Sen. Graham has said, that THEY DID KNOW or had access to, information that, when he took the trouble to read it, changed HIS mind, because at least that would mean they are intelligent, though corrupt so that doesn't work either.

Are you kidding me? It was Bush that got me involved in politics in the first place. I just KNEW he was lying. I then began to look stuff up and CONFIRMED he was lying. And all I had access to was Google. So please, don't insult OUR and THEIR intelligence. They thought that being 'patriotic' would serve them well when they ran for office.

I absolutely hope that we do not have a Congress that is so stupid they believed a word of what those war criminrals were selling because that doesn't bode well for this country.

I knew teenagers who knew they were lying who had zero political experience. They were so OBVIOUS it is ludicrous to think that anyone with even average intelligence did not see the lies.

[SunSeeker]

303. Ok, but you are not addressing the issue of this thread.

This thread is discussing the point behind spotlighting the wounded soldier during the SOTU. And a lot of people here missed the point in their rush to bash Obama. Not DU's finest hour.

[reddread]

400. inexcusably complicit in war crimes.

They could have listened to their constituents and voices around the world.
Instead they played along with the Chimp who was installed and ignored the
voices of voters who did not give him the majority in Florida.
I remember when you could expect a modicum of justice.
In the last century.

[Vattel]

645. BS. He has said in earlier speeches that America gave Iraq a chance for freedom.

Last edited Fri Jan 31, 2014, 10:36 AM - Edit history (1)

And he said he didn't know whether he would have voted for the invasion of Iraq if he had been in the Senate.

[SunSeeker]

655. Links? Obama never supported the invasion of Iraq.

His campaign centered on his unwaivering opposition to the Iraq war. That is how he distinguished himself from Hillary. Your "quotes" do not sound like anything Obama would have said. Please provide a link for these "speeches."

[Vattel]

670. To quote one (speaking to soldiers at Fort Bragg):

“Because of you – because you sacrificed so much for a people that you had never met, Iraqis have a chance to forge their own destiny,” Obama said. “That’s part of what makes us special as Americans. Unlike the old empires, we don’t make these sacrifices for territory or for resources. “We do it because it’s right. There can be no fuller expression of America’s support for self-determination than our leaving Iraq to its people. That says something about who we are,” he added. - See more at: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/after-calling-it-dumb-war-2002-obama-proclaims-iraq-war-part-what-makes-us-special#sthash.iBmtOw3U.dpuf

[SunSeeker]

673. Trifecta: You lie AND link to a right wing rag AND it doesn't even support your claim.

That quote is Obama praising the ENDING of the Iraq war as "the right thing to do."

You scoured cnsnews.com, "The Right News, Right Now," and still couldn't find support for your bullshit.

[Vattel]

677. You should learn how to read

Last edited Sat Feb 1, 2014, 06:56 AM - Edit history (1)

Edited to add: Obama said: "We don’t make these sacrifices for territory or for resources. We do it because it’s right." And yet you say he was referring to ending the war when he said that "we do it because it's right." Reading comprehension is your friend.

[SunSeeker]

678. Yes, reading comprehension is my friend, and your enemy.

He was talking about withdrawing. You offer nothing that supports your earlier assertions that Obama thought the Iraq war was "about freedom."

Most telling, you offer no explanation for why you would cite to a right wing rag that lies about Obama. I guess the explanation is self-evident.

[Vattel]

679. to reiterate:

Obama said: "We don’t make these sacrifices for territory or for resources. We do it because it’s right." And yet you say he was referring to ending the war when he said that "we do it because it's right." Reading comprehension is your friend.

As for the "right wing rag," I just googled for the transcript of the speech and that is where I found it. What difference does it make where the transcript came from?

[SunSeeker]

681. If you Googled the transcript, you wouldn't get a lying RW article with no transcript.

If you had Googled "transcript fort bragg, n.c., wednesday, dec. 14, 2011," your first search result would have been the White House site with the actual transcript: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/12/14/remarks-president-and-first-lady-end-war-iraq

It was Obama's famous "Welcome Home" speech. He wanted to make sure our Iraq war troops got the welcome home that the Vietnam vets never got. THAT was the point of the speech. That is how the mainstream news sites reported it. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-to-troops-welcome-home/

The fact that you strain to find another message in it says a lot about you. You truncated a quote, suggesting he was referring to the Iraq War, when he was referring to the WITHDRAWAL from Iraq. Here's the full paragraph you purport to quote:

Because of you -- because you sacrificed so much for a people that you had never met, Iraqis have a chance to forge their own destiny. That’s part of what makes us special as Americans. Unlike the old empires, we don’t make these sacrifices for territory or for resources. We do it because it’s right. There can be no fuller expression of America’s support for self-determination than our leaving Iraq to its people. That says something about who we are.

(emphasis added for the reading comprehension impaired)

You can search that whole speech and nowhere will he say it was a good idea to start that war. As he noted:

Now, nine years ago, American troops were preparing to deploy to the Persian Gulf and the possibility that they would be sent to war. Many of you were in grade school. I was a state senator. Many of the leaders now governing Iraq -- including the Prime Minister -- were living in exile. And since then, our efforts in Iraq have taken many twists and turns. It was a source of great controversy here at home, with patriots on both sides of the debate. But there was one constant -- there was one constant: your patriotism, your commitment to fulfill your mission, your abiding commitment to one another. That was constant. That did not change. That did not waiver.

It’s harder to end a war than begin one. Indeed, everything that American troops have done in Iraq -– all the fighting and all the dying, the bleeding and the building, and the training and the partnering -– all of it has led to this moment of success. Now, Iraq is not a perfect place. It has many challenges ahead. But we’re leaving behind a sovereign, stable and self-reliant Iraq, with a representative government that was elected by its people. We’re building a new partnership between our nations. And we are ending a war not with a final battle, but with a final march toward home.

The point of the speech was to celebrate the end of the war and honor the veterans, and in particular these veterans, who served in the years-long drawn-down mission. They did not volunteer to serve in an unjust war. They volunteered to serve their country. Iraq war veterans did not fail their country, it was their country that failed them. Obama did not want to repeat the same mistake as we made with the Vietnam vets. Veterans who served in an unjust war still served their country, they still sacrificed, they still died. And their sacrifices should be acknowledged. That is what this speech was about.

You ask "What difference does it make where the transcript came from?" The difference is that right wing sites are destructive. First, they often contain mal-ware and viruses. It is not a coincidence that my computer froze after I clicked on your link. I had never heard of CNSnews.com. If I had known what it was, I would not have clicked on it. Clicking on right wing sites supports that site and right wing causes. Every click translates into advertiser dollars. If you are progressive, which you claimed you were as part of joining DU, then you should not be supporting right wing causes. Finally, right wing sites are invariably full of lies, as all right wing arguments are. Right wing philosophy goes against the interests of the 99%. The only way to get the 99% to vote for the right wing is to lie them. That is the right wing's only way to get us to voluntarily give them power. Please do not support their lies. And do not repeat their lies here. I come here to get away from that crap.

[Bobbie Jo]

683. Nicely done.

It's good to see these deliberate attempts to mislead nipped in the bud. Spamming this board with half-truths and outright lies is standard operating procedure for some of these folks.

Your efforts are much appreciated.

[SunSeeker]

684. Thanks. Glad I wasn't just whistling into the wind.

[Vattel]

685. Dude, seriously, take a deeep breath, read, and think.

Because of you -- because you sacrificed so much for a people that you had never met, Iraqis have a chance to forge their own destiny. That’s part of what makes us special as Americans. Unlike the old empires, we don’t make these sacrifices for territory or for resources. We do it because it’s right. There can be no fuller expression of America’s support for self-determination than our leaving Iraq to its people. That says something about who we are.

Read the quote. "Because you sacrificed so much for a people you had never met" (i.e. because our soldiers made the sacrifice of serving in Iraq) "Iraqis have a chance to forge their own destiny" (i.e., Iraqis have a chance at self-determination aka freedom). "Unlike the old empires, we don't make these sacrifices for territory or for resources. We do it because it is right" (If that doesn't imply that our fighting in Iraq was right, I don't know what does.)

Of course the focus of the speech was about leaving Iraq, but the specific remarks here were about the sacrifices our armed forces made to give Iraqis "a chance to forge their own destiny." A first grade level of reading comprehension is all that is required to see that.

Sorry about the link. That was not the link to the transcript I read. It did have the specific quote, though, which is all I used from it. Of course you want to suggest that I must be interested in pushing rightwing lies, but most people will see through that little bit of sleaziness on your part.

[SunSeeker]

686. LOL. You link to a RW site and accuse ME of sleaziness.

Yes, these soldiers DID "sacrifice so much for a people they never met." That is not saying the invasion was a good idea. They risked their lives, and some gave their lives, during this years-long "draw-down" mission to button up the Iraq we broke when Bush invaded. We could have just left them in the chaos that Obama was handed, but we did not. We wanted to give Iraqis a chance to get on their own feet, to "have a chance to forge their own destiny" as Obama states in the speech. That cost our soldiers a lot. That sacrifice should be acknowledged. As bad as things are now in Iraq, it would have been a lot worse if we had left running for the exits like we did from Vietnam.

Again, for the reading comprehension impaired, Obama spells it out: "So here’s what I want you to know, and here’s what I want all our men and women in uniform to know: Because of you, we are ending these wars in a way that will make America stronger and the world more secure." http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/12/14/remarks-president-and-first-lady-end-war-iraq

So you now say you used that RW link because it had the specific (truncated) quote you used. I notice the headline of that article also contains the false narrative you are pushing. It is not "sleaziness" for me to accurately point out what you are doing. Sleaziness is linking to a lying RW article as an authority. If I wanted to be subjected to that, I'd open up my right wing in-laws' crazy emails. Like I said, I come here to get away from that crap.

[Vattel]

687. The quote I used wasn't truncated. It was the full quote you used to defend your silly position.

Your "untruncated quote" in your first reply to me is the same one I used in my original reply to you. As for the link, it did contain the untruncated quote I used.

I am glad that you now admit that Obama did think that the war in Iraq gave the Iraqis a chance at self-determination.

[SunSeeker]

688. You (and your lying article) misrepresented the speech.

You took a snip out of the famous "Welcome Back" speech that was talking about the drawn-down and you claimed it supported your calling "BS" my statement that Obama never said Iraq "was about freedom."

As the speech in full makes clear, he was honoring the troops, not the invasion. Nowhere in that speech does he say the invasion of Iraq or the Iraq War "was about freedom." Yet that is what you and your right wing article assert. And that is a lie.

I did NOT "admit " that "the war in Iraq gave the Iraqis a chance at self-determination." I said the "draw-down" mission gave Iraqis a chance to get on their own feet, to "have a chance to forge their own destiny" as Obama said in the speech. Had we stayed, they would never have had that chance. Invading Iraq did NOT give them that chance. The ensuing war certainly did not give them that chance. It was a disaster for all concerned. It was our tempered withdrawal that gave them that chance.

It is amazing how free you feel to lie about what is stated plainly in print.

[Vattel]

689. Wrong again. He said our soldiers' "sacrifices" gave Iraq the chance at self-determination.

Are you saying that by "sacrifices" he meant "leaving Iraq?" Lol, that is a creative interpretation.

[SunSeeker]

690. No, you are wrong. Leaving Iraq was their mission, not their sacrifice.

Their sacrifices were the same sacrifices all soldiers make when serving their country in carrying out a mission they are given: they are away from their families, they miss births, holidays and weekends having fun with friends; they endure the hell of living in a hostile place; they get wounded; they watch comrades die.

As Obama acknowledged in the Fort Bragg speech, if they didn't make these sacrifices, our country would not be able to complete its mission. And they make these sacrifices regardless of whether the mission is a good one or a stupid one, whether it is a nation reconstructing draw-down or an illegal invasion. They make these sacrifices because they chose to serve their country. And serving your country entails carrying out the mission that is given to you. Regardless of the mission, a soldier has sacrificed and therefore should be honored for his or her service to our country.

That was the point of the President acknowledging Sargent Cory Remsberg at the SOTU speech. Obama was not glorifying war, he was honoring the soldier's sacrifices in service to our country...sacrifices this country has been woefully inadequate at acknowledging and compensating the soldiers for once they come home. Hell, Bush did not want us to even see the coffins, let alone give them treatment for their PTSD or job training. Obama made sure we saw them. And in particular, he made sure the Republicans who are voting to cut vet benefits saw Remsberg.

[anAustralianobserver]

246. I think you might have been so discouraged (understandably) that you misinterpreted a

surprising moment of shared compassion and unity and even patriotism (that transcended warmonger vs neocon vs last-resort vs pacifist perspectives).

I don't think Obama has always acted honourably on defence matters but I think his focus here was lifting up the soldier with his unhidable scars and providing an opportunity for all Americans to remember that there is still an American community.

[longship]

253. I agree in part. But don't tell that to Tammy Duckworth. nt

[bravenak]

255. I'm glad the Sgt was there.

We need to see what we did. We need to look at the horrors we caused by being so quick to go to war. It should make us feel ashamed, it should hurt us to look at him. We did that. And we better not ever do it again or that's what's going to happen to our sons and daughters. To us.

[flamingdem]

263. Exactly, being SEEN is not the same as being used as a prop

How can we move forward without acknowledging the suffering of our vets?

[bravenak]

268. We can't.

We might forget what we did. We must prevent this from ever being done in our names again. Thank you to all of those good Americans who protested these wars. Thank you to the soldiers who fought in our names. Thank you president Obama for ending these wars and showing us that we can do better. Never again will we be manipulated by rich wargamers into sending our brothers and sisters off to war in our names to provide profits for the rich and powerful. That's why we need to look these soldiers in the face and see their wounds.

[llmart]

514. I wonder if there would have been as much outrage from Will and his contingency...

if the guy was a war vet who looked "normal" and wasn't "damaged"? I think what bothers people on this thread the most is that it wasn't a pretty sight to look at, and on some level, we want our heroes to look a certain way. Can we be honest here? If this was a strapping young man standing straight and tall and all decked out in his uniform with medals and his proud father by his side, there would be no controversy.

[flamingdem]

257. Visibility on the national stage is exactly what IS needed for war to end

That's very different from the concept of "prop" being promoted here.

Respect to Cory and his sharing with us what he went through.

[blackspade]

260. Fuck indeed.

[Bonobo]

264. Sometimes you really fucking rock. nt

[countmyvote4real]

270. Methinks you doth protest too much.

Will, I am a longtime admirer and supporter of your outrage on the state of things. However, I was somewhat taken aback by your reaction to the SOTU address regarding the Presidential acknowledgement of Cory Remsburg’s service. Yes, I agree that ten terms is too much. No, I’m not a “to-the-knife” Obama supporter. (I was actually an Edwards supporter in 2008.)

I just watched the replay of the address trying to put on your filters and I still don’t get your OP.

OK, maybe not fast enough, but I think we are already out of Iraq and Afghanistan is on the way. Did you not see or hear Obama plead the “do nothing Congress” to finally close GITMO yet again?

While I share your outrage at what has become of this brave soldier, I think it is misdirected at President Obama.

Get a grip already.

[calimary]

302. Methinks some of us were watching a different speech than the one I saw.

I want to make sure you know how many multitudes of times I have admired and stood shoulder-to-shoulder with Will Pitt's always eloquently-stated views, and quoted them widely. But this time, Will, I think you misread this, my friend.

I missed the speech when it originally aired. Caught the very late replay. I was waiting for that last ten minutes or so, in which Cory Remburg was singled out. How one can think the President made some cheap, pathetic spectacle of this brave sergeant is frankly beyond me. I was seriously moved. And I thought it was FUCKING BRILLIANT to show, smack-in-the-face, WHAT WAR IS. And WHAT WAR DOES.

We've had it hugely and disgracefully and miserably sanitized for too many years. We've been WAY too disconnected. Too insulated. Anybody remember the orders from on high - during bush/cheney - that NO flag-draped caskets coming back from the war could be photographed, honored, or spoken about? No funerals were allowed to be covered, photographed, or telecast. They were hellbent on making sure America wouldn't know how much it cost or how badly it would hurt. 'Cause then nobody will mind or care how long you carry on with it. Or how many administration officials or hawkish politicians would get to keep saying "let's give it another six months and then we'll see." Those who attempted even to show ONE photograph were threatened with dismissal or fired outright, and vilified, accused of being al Qaeda sympathizers or Saddam lovers or traitors. NO ceremonies at Dover Air Force Base were covered. No media was allowed. Heaven forbid we have to see the results of that dirty work from Hell. Those coffins were brought back IN THE DARK. UNDER COVER. No solemn, reverent, or grateful greeting by their Commander-in-Chief, receiving them home after they'd paid the ultimate price (that the disgusting chickenshits in the Oval Office weaseled out of). As though America should be ashamed of them, and should keep them hidden - out of sight, out of mind, a dirty little chickenhawk secret. bush/cheney forbade ALL coverage. Guess what one of the first things was - that the newly inaugurated President Obama did? He made a beeline for Dover one late night, inviting broadcast and cable coverage. So we could, at last, all see that ultimate price tag. And get even the barest sense of that profound and permanent a sacrifice. President Obama wanted it out in the open, in public, for America to see and feel and experience. He wanted to lift that stupid ridiculous chicken-shit embargo and greet those coffins personally, and he did.

We needed to see that. We needed AS A NATION to see that. To have it pushed into our faces. To see the real invoice being delivered from that damn war and how costly the freedom is that we take for granted and speak about so casually, all safe and comfy at home here. We NEEDED to see that. And more. At this State of the Union speech, we didn't just see that young, damaged Army Ranger and his father up in the balcony with the First Lady, OR for that matter, Congresswoman Tammy Duckworth in a brief glimpse, from down on the chamber floor. Anybody notice how visibly difficult it was for her to struggle to her feet to join one of the standing ovations? Remember her - the double amputee? She'd been a helicopter pilot, served in Iraq, and had both her legs blown off in bush/cheney's damn fucking war. And dammit, I think we need to see that. We need to be forced to face what the cost of war is!!!! Otherwise why the hell should we care if it never ends? We need to SEE, and FEEL, and WATCH, and EXPERIENCE, the fact that this is no game. There's no reset button in real life, like you enjoy after you've mowed down all the bad guys with your big bad-ass guns in your stupid damn hollow useless senseless video war game. Oh gee, isn't it fun. And you can just hit reset and start over with your troops all up 'n' at 'em again like nothing happened. No muss, no fuss. And all the wreckage and bloodshed and bodies and dismemberment just - POOF! Goes away. It's conditioned and numbed far too many of us to what war IS. It's not some exciting action movie where you can get up from and go out to the snack counter and buy more popcorn, and return to your nice comfy seat all free and easy and antiseptic and ever so far away, and thrill to the pretend carnage playing out on the big screen.

WE NEED TO SEE THAT. We NEED to have it shoved in our faces. We NEED to be forced to understand the true anguish. For too long in the last decade, many of us railed against the chickenhawks who never served, never saw combat, never paid any price, never even wore their country's uniform, never stuck their own necks out there in harm's way, never put their own asses on the line. Do we really need to keep pretending it's not there, that it doesn't really exist, that there really is no price to pay that's all that high. If we're gonna play the REAL war game, I think we need to see WHAT WAR IS, and WHAT WAR DOES. And we need to face it a LOT. We need to see what's real and what is most certainly NOT cheap and easy and glorious and clean and neat: the blood, the wounds, the permanence, the irreversible damage, the afflictions that last a lifetime and damage and break entire families for the rest of their days.

LOOK AT HIM, America. LOOK at what your hard-on for war has done. LOOK at Cory Remburg. LOOK at Tammy Duckworth. LOOK at what the boys and girls you were okay with sending off to that meat-grinder have to live with every damn day! Breathe it in and own it. And for GOD's SAKE STOP making - AND wanting - more of it.

(Oh forcryingoutloud, Pollyanna was just on TV spewing her singsong-y platitudes and cliches and bullshit with such a cutesy obnoxious smile. YUCK!!! Sorry - interrupted while I was writing this.)

[countmyvote4real]

321. +1

Thank you for taking the time to fully express what I could not.

[grasswire]

505. with all due respect...

...I believe you are sentimental, noble motives to Obama -- motives that are not reflected in his actions.

I say, spare us the sentimentality, Mr. President. Prove your concern for our wounded warriors by doing something concrete. You can't wait for congress to appropriate enough money for proper care of veterans. But perhaps you could order measures that diminish the profiteering by corporations off war. Perhaps you could advocate for a draft. (That would immediately end wars.)

Showing a wounded warrior in the hopes of driving policy is a passive aggressive act.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

526. plus 38 zillion.

And a half.

Yeah i remember the sanitized for the public safety years. Convincing people to cheer for a phony patriot, phony christian's war......ugh god i still remember exactly where i was when i saw that fucking speech---- well i thought about it (he had "vowed" to The American People that he didntceantcear and would only choosectjatcas a last resort.....then ignored reports back from the investigation yeam, ignored all advice to back off.....and less than a week aftervsayingvthis, announced we werrr going to war.

Just as if he'd never said what he did a few little days prior.

Oh hell yes, i remember how it felt, hearing that.....

So, real images were upsetting the public support for war.......
Can't have that.

Lies lies and more lies.
That's what should make anyone run out of the room to vomit.

Not what PBO did: grab reality and put it where no one can look away.

[Desert805]

543. Thanks

I appreciate you taking the time to type that.

[calimary]

660. Welcome to DU, Desert805!

Glad you're here! This was some thread, 'eh? We do get into it here - or would that be "we DU get into it here"? While I disagree with the OP, I appreciate the opportunity to voice and vent, and to read and appreciate others' thoughts as voiced and vented here as well. Some people really like to stir things up. But it seems to me that's kinda why DU, in general, is here. WE need to be here to stir things up in the rest of America. Stir things up and WAKE things up. And SHAKE things up. It's vitally important to rip people out of their complacency as much as possible. Because those who choose to sit it out often wind up getting run over.

[Whisp]

273. Huelscamp, Huelscamp, dat you?

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/watch/huelscamp-gives-voice-to-extremist-right-129649219657

[Maraya1969]

279. I looked at it as an example of American failure and how

America failed that man. I am glad he was honored but the fact that he went through 10 deployments is a disgrace and the fact that we are even in this war is a disgrace.

[truth2power]

304. My take away, too, Will. 10 deployments, to PROTECT America...

B.S. It's about RESOURCE WARS. Sad, sad, sad.

And a cursory look here this a.m. - people trying to put the best face on the whole thing. With a distinct lack of detail, but what else can they do. <sigh>

[justiceischeap]

310. Maybe I'm wrong but your point about 10 deployments to PROTECT America

seems to be missing a vital element. This soldier volunteered for those deployments by continuing to re-up his commitment to the military and thus to "protecting" America. Another element that seems to be missing from your statement is that this soldier may have felt he *was* protecting America--personal choice and all that.

I have no dog in the hunt about whether the President should have honored him or not, because contrary to the OPs belief, it is supposed to be an honor to be invited as a guest to the SOTU. And I'd also guess that he was aware of what the President intended with his invitation to the SOTU, and though so many here are outraged, he apparently wasn't because he didn't decline the invitation. It seems the Sgt. felt it was important for him to be there and be the face of what 10 deployments and unending war can do to a human being. That's my take anyway.

[ecstatic]

305. Your anger is misplaced, IMO. nt

[Kablooie]

306. But it reminded all of us that these damaged for life people exist...

And our country has a moral responsibility to insure that they are cared for.
The GOP wants to cut their pensions and support and that can't be allowed to happen.

Yes, that individual was a prop but the display was in service of protecting all the damaged, physical and mental, veterans of our wars. Without him the issue would continue to be easily buried by our lovely conservatives.

[aristocles]

309. Well said. Thank you. +1

[Enthusiast]

312. Those fucking wars accomplished exactly ZERO.

And they did a shit load of harm. All the wars did was enrich a handful of Bush and Cheney cronies. The MFers should be swinging from a gallows somewhere.

[another_liberal]

315. You got the hornets out of their nest with that one, Mr. Pitt!

Personally, I can't remember ever being more disappointed in a leader I had wholeheartedly supported and admired than when, in 2009, President Obama announced he was sending thirty thousand more American soldiers and Marines to Afghanistan. I did not understand why he had allowed himself to be convinced that was the right thing to do, and I still don't.

I did go on to support the President in 2012, and I support him today. I also like him as a person. I will never, however, trust him as unquestioningly as I did before that first Presidential speech on the Afghanistan "Surge."

[jimlup]

320. To be president you must be a master of propaganda

I don't begrudge him the easy fix at the end. Whatever...

What I care about is the action and we will see. If he follows through with pushing back hard against the reptilian congress then he will have done his job. I was rather pleased with the "Climate change is a fact" statement. Of course anything less would have been to demonstrate that no backbone exists.

WE'll see. I don't give a shit about the propaganda as long as actions are taken to fix some of our economic inequity.

[SidDithers]

323. Derp...nt

Sid

[countryjake]

328. It made me cry.

Listening to the lead-up in his speech, his description of how he had gotten to know Sgt. Remsberg, honestly put me in tears, long before that ovation for the wounded soldier, and all that I would have liked anyone in that hall to do would've been to tell Cory, "We're so sorry", rather than clap for two minutes.

It angered me that the rah-rah Army/America shit was the final introduction to that poor kid, but then, that's about all I've ever seen any of our presidents do when it comes to the military, so I'd guess it's to be expected. After all, that is their other title...commander-in-chief. However, I couldn't help but be reminded of the VVAW's Winter Soldier investigations and that simple statement that John Kerry made later to the Foreign Relations Committee of our Senate. How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?

All of these years, and all of the thousands and thousands of war-time deaths, later, due to the deliberate profligate promotion of the Military Industrial Complex, and we still must listen to leaders giving us inane platitudes, inadequate excuses, and blatantly wrong-headed rationalizations for why the maiming and killing goes on.
In our name.

I might have been bawling because that moment in that speech came right on the heels of the loss of one of the greatest voices of all time for the anti-war movement in our nation. I don't know, where have all those voices gone?

[Desert805]

582. Made me cry too

It was very powerful.

[countryjake]

586. Stopped the instant Obama compared the wounded soldier to "America"...

and when that hall packed full of so many warmongers had the gall to stand up there and try to pretend that they ever gave two figs about any of the American men and women they sent to fight in these empire-building wars, it made me sick to my stomach!

When I think of those destroyed nations full of people now struggling just to survive, countries forced daily to deal with illegal invasions by the USA, then that line in which he compared Sgt. Remsburg's own struggle to recover, "Like the America he serves, Sergeant First Class Cory Remsburg never gives up, and he does not quit", I was immediately struck by the incredible crassness and terrible truth of such an introduction. That room full of hypocrites applauding simply disgusted me.

Exactly how long does it take "America" to give up and quit a vile war of aggression?

This thread desperately needs the voice of an actual Peacemaker!



Remove us from permanent War Footing my ass!

[warrior1]

334. I disagree with you Will.

[ProSense]

335. Congratulations

You've achieved bipartisanship: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024405466#post1

[tridim]

338. Sorry Will, I respect you and love your writing,

But damn dude, when you don't get it, you REALLY don't get it.

I suggest you reset and watch the speech again, you missed 99% of it.

[dougolat]

339. Who gets introduced to Sergeant Cory Remsberg without gulping?

Last edited Wed Jan 29, 2014, 12:53 PM - Edit history (1)

Think on what it means to those who made similar sacrifices; their families and friends.

Think on what it means to those assembled who took part in sending him.

Think on what it means to immigrant refugees from Afghanistan and Iraq and other war-torn countries.

Think on what it means to the American public in whose name all this was and is being done.


Reactions are varied, but there's some legitimacy to all, as we're facing something that has been too much ignored.
Will reacts to the injustice and the horror and guilty parties walking around scot-free. Fine, it is both perilous and shameful to ignore that aspect.

I think it was on the whole a good thing to have us face Cory, and our own reactions, and each other, too. Especially the assembled officials.
It may even have been a brave thing address the war-machine with Frazzled's post #37:
"...large-scale deployments that drain our strength and may ultimately feed extremism. .....
..America must move off a permanent war footing."

[heaven05]

341. Pitt +10000

you hit the truth mark again, and again, and again. 10 deployments??!!! I spent 13 months in a very hostile environment. Took a while to get used to 'civilized' society again and I bore no physical damage to my body. I didn't/won't watch this event, ever. Such bullshit wrapped around such magnificent sounding verbal puke. I'm with you. "parliament of whores". GOD that's great!!!!!!

[JoePhilly]

344. Wheel. Of. Outrage!!!

[Whisp]

512. Funny you should mention that. I was watching Wheel of Fortune one day

and this came up. The audience did giggle a bit. ha!

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[rtracey]

346. and he got better

You really did miss the boat on this. This man, this soldier was an inspiration, and yes a call to all to end these wars. He will ALWAYS be remembered as a hero, a man, and a soldier doing his duty to the country he loves, much like a lot of nameless soldiers who did theirs. As far as you being sick to your stomach, well go with the feeling, because after reading your little rant about our "ruined country" and the "missed opportunities", i got sick of seeing it. Yes I hope you do feel better tomorrow. perhaps stepping outside and breath some air will do you good.

[n2doc]

347. Toon that sums it up

[cali]

350. a very sad rec and thank you.

[Scuba]

351. Please allow this old veteran to weigh in ...

I too feel the revulsion toward war. I understand how war turns our service men and women (and innocent civilians) into hamburger. I have particularl disdain for the illegal, unnecessary conflicts that have been waged not to protect America, but to protect corporate profits and further enrich the wealthy. I understand the emotions that prompted this OP, and sympathize with them.

However, I disagree with the interpretation of the President's intent. I think he was highlighting the horror of the battlefield, the absurdity of 10 deployments, the gut-wrenching human cost of war, as a means of promoting diplomacy over military action.

I have great admiration for SFC Cory Remsburg for the incredible sacrifices he has made. That doesn't make me a war lover; quite the opposite. Was he used as a prop? Yes. Was it an attempt to drum up support for more war? No, at least not in my opinion.

[Beaverhausen]

410. well said. Thank you

[octoberlib]

414. +1

[Union Scribe]

567. I just don't think people who send others to war

should get to use someone as a symbol of the horror of war and act like it's profound. Yes that's the human cost of war, but it's crazy that the one spending those people should be credited with making that point.

[GoneOffShore]

358. Well said, as always.

And the hordes pile on.

So it goes.

[JNelson6563]

362. Good Morning Lemmings!

lolz

Only on Du could an such a lame ass stinky pantload rack up the recs like this. No one does self-righteous better!

[1000words]

480. Nice of you to diminish nearly 300 fellow DUers

Well done

[llmart]

516. +1,000

Sometimes it can be like a cult

[erpowers]

363. True Strength and What the Wars Have Done

When I saw the soldier last night I thought he showed true strength. What he went through requires true strength. Seeing him also forced everyone who watched the SOTU to see the often unseen results of the wars. Most people do not see how the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have affected the men and women who came home. Last night, millions of Americans saw what thousands of young men, women, and their families are dealing with everyday.

[blm]

365. It was in the context of ending 'permanent war' policies - it was his 10th deployment.

I would agree with you about these displays, but, when put in context, it was actually very compelling.

The same lawmakers who refused to support war-ending policies, and who refused to support diplomatic efforts that would prevent war were standing and applauding the consequences of this nation's 'permanent war' policies.

[90-percent]

366. just posted on FB and another DU thread

Enjoy! - 90% Jimmy

TEN F’ING DEPLOYMENTS! We Americans treat our factory farmed animals better than we treated the brave and patriotic young people we sent repeatedly to fight our war of choice in Iraq! Why on earth should we feel proud or patriotic about the cruel and unusual punishments we asked of people like Army Ranger Cory Remsburg? (I wonder if Dick Cheney said to himself; “So what? He volunteered!” when he watched this?)

Many of the elected idiots in that room are directly responsible for supporting the needless and downright stupid invasion of Iraq. I hope what’s left of their conscience eventually realizes the extent of needless human misery they forced upon people that volunteered to serve their country! Please also consider the hundreds of thousands of displaced and dead Iraqis that was also a mostly forgotten consequence. I wonder how much patriotic feeling would have been invoked if one of their grievously wounded also shared the stage with the President and Remsburg?

War should be the last terrible choice only in dire circumstances where the security and well being of our country is at bona fide risk. i.e., WW2. It should not be merely another choice in our bag of tricks for international policy!!!!! Like Obama has said; “I’m not against all wars. Just stupid ones.”

What about WAR IS HELL do these monsters not understand?

[snooper2]

369. Is the hangover wearing off yet?

[N_E_1 for Tennis]

373. Will you are completely correct.

No person should ever be used as a prop for political maneuvering.
What I say is not any kind of indictment against the President.
This speech has turned into, in parts, just a dog and pony show.

Some on this thread have stated they lost loved ones, I sincerely feel sorry for them.
My condolences.

But....
I think that some here would change their stances if they were to spend a little time in a
VA hospital. I'm a vet, I spend some of my days there. First for my health condition then to visit, to sit and talk to returning vets, old vets and those in between. I do this because they are my brothers and sisters. I have a hard time describing the "why" I do this, guess it really is not important.

We should close ALL military bases. We should bring everyone home. The United States has no right to be in any country with the lame excuse of "protecting" U.S. interests. Current technology put an end to that premise.

I urge the supporters of these actions to visit a VA hospital. Go talk to the vets they will appreciate your visit.

[ConcernedCanuk]

375. I didn't watch the SOTU address

.
.
.

nor did I follow it on DU.

BUT

I read the full text this morning.

Twice.

Sadly, I am neither surprised nor encouraged;

just disappointed and fearful.

(sigh)

CC

[truebrit71]

383. Sorry Will, but I think you completely missed the point.

This wasn't some phony George W. Bush photo-op set up, this was the President honoring the sacrifice and struggle of this one particular man, whilst making a call to STOP the endless wars and to move away from a permanent war-footing.

The fact that he mentioned that he was on his tenth deployment, which would be ten more than Lt AWOL Bush in the Champagne Unit of the Air National Guard, and four fewer deferments than Dick Cheney was not lost on me. Perhaps you didn't hear it that way. And Chris Hayes made the point that by honoring Sergeant First Class Cory Remsburg's sacrifices it made the rethuglicans in that chamber acknowledge that their votes have real world, ongoing consequences.

As far as political stunts go I'd say standing on the ruins and corpses of the WTC with a bullhorn taking about "we're gonna get 'em"...or landing on the flight deck of an aircraft carrier whose crew you delayed by a day from returning home to their loved ones so you could stand in front of a banner declaring 'Mission accomplished' are far, far more despicable.

I am far from being an Obama-apologist, in fact I am often accused of being the opposite, but I have to wholly and completely disagree with your assessment of this speech.

[Skittles]

494. he ESCALATED that war

do you not remember that???

[stevenleser]

674. Correct. This wasn't that hard. A. This is what war does. B. Let's stop them now. C. This soldier

is a hero.

Three very simple messages was all that was going on here.

[cer7711]

384. Every Word of Your Post Is Sterling, Ringing Truth

Thank you for saying it.

If you believe in a god, God bless you.

If you don't, thank you for existing at this particular time on the planet and raising your voice--a voice of profound empathy, reason and deceny--to power.

[whatchamacallit]

385. Truth. Thanks man. K&R n/t

[uponit7771]

386. WilliamPitt Hates Obama... in other news, bears do something that stinks really bad in wooded areas

[pscot]

388. Thanks for saying this

The speech was mostly pablum capped with a loathsome piece of exploitation.

[savannah43]

499. Yes, Hunter. Thanks from me, too.

[madrchsod]

390. i agree...

this is one of the reasons i never watch any president`s dog and pony show.

to bad they can't be brutally truthful with american people yet i doubt the majority of american people could handle the bitter truth. best let them live in a world where being maimed in war is noble and being killed is the ultimate sacrifice for the
multi national corporations that sell us the precious juice.

[alarimer]

391. 10 deployments in unnecessary wars is 10 too many

And that display was absolutely disgusting. I wonder if this guy really wanted to be a puppet? What does going to the SOTU get him, besides some pats on the back? Nothing. He won't get his life back, a life that was squandered because he believe the absolute bullshit peddled by this country, about "freedom" and "protecting our liberties" and all that other nonsense.

This country well and truly sucks.

And Obama is trying to score points both with the chest-thumping Neanderthals who started these wars and yell "America, fuck yeah!" at every opportunity, and with the people who want these goddamn wars to end once and for all.

Obama, those little boys with their big guns are NEVER going to like you. So quit the posturing with the heroes (who would have been intact if you had ended the war like you said you were going to) and just end them, once and for all.

[CrispyQ]

394. AthiestCrusader speaks for me.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024405271#post32

[arely staircase]

396. pretty disgusting post, fitzmas. nt

[malthaussen]

403. Eloquent, William, eloquent.

Makes me glad I didn't watch the thing.

-- Mal

[Desert805]

640. Yeah

God forbid your opinion was informed.

[scheming daemons]

404. Love you, Will.... But you swung and missed here.

You missed the point entirely. You saw red and it clouded your ability to hear the whole segment in context.

Obama was showing how wrong the endless wars are... That there are real human costs.... That we shouldn't make these mistakes again.

[gordianot]

406. An apt title for this thread and most of the content.

I want to know about "fast track" and TPP did not hear anything that was clear. Face it things could be a lot worse with a Christie or any Republican Presidency. We already have the world's most dysfunctional congress which is a threat to the nation if not all of humanity. Given the lack of understanding of the voting public what is to be expected? The solution to all of this go get retrained so you can become productive.

"expletive deleted"

[Politicub]

413. Would you rather wounded soldiers be hidden away as to not offend your tender sensibilities?

I was really touched by it, and believe it was a dose of reality for those who have a sanitized view of war.

Obama made a plea for more support for vets, and it was a poignant way to show exactly why this is important.

Bizarre that you have a problem with that, but that's why people are different, I guess.

[Demonaut]

424. when you look at the faces of the republican side and their smiles...I see your point

but I guess we should sweep it under the rug............if it's a Dem Potus

[Demonaut]

425. UNREC

[Logical]

432. LOL, you know the unrec is gone, correct? nt

[Demonaut]

525. I still see it................

[Whisp]

436. '''Maybe I'll feel different tomorrow upon review.'''

I suppose you can count the support and non support posts and decide based on that.

The Church of Derpology apparently allows that.

[mstinamotorcity2]

438. I will just be very happy

when all our troops can come home and reunite with their families. They are needed and loved.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

448. Yes, Fuck!, Indeed.

This is the government we deserve.

For shame.

[Cofitachequi]

458. The president did a good job and his guests were appropriate.

Particularly the injured ranger who did a good job of reminding us the sacrifice that many have made for the flippant decisions to go to war that we, as a nation, have made in the past. The evening should have shamed neo-cons and served to inspire friends of peace.

[struggle4progress]

460. Back in the Vietnam era, we got more real war coverage. Under Reagan and Bush-I,

there was a move to restrict war reporting, in order to reduce public opposition; and this has continued to the present

There are about 40K US casualties from Bush-II's Iraq adventure. Due to advances in medical science, more people are saved now, than in the past, and this means more people with long term disabilities

Cory Remsburg was seriously injured. He's not dead: he has serious long term disabilities as a result of his military service.

What should we say to him or to people like him? You should have listened when we tried to warn folk Iraq would be a clusterfuck? You know, you really shouldn't feel honored that Congress applauded while you stood beside the First Lady last night? You're just a performing dog?

I guess self-righteousness may work sometimes. But it's often unattractive

[I hate liars]

462. Exactly the word I uttered...

That scene was one of the most blatant appeals to raw emotion and misplaced patriotism I've ever witnessed. I was already fed up with what was mostly pablum up to that point, but when Obama introduced the soldier, my reaction to that cynical, manipulative section of his speech was a simple "fuck you".

Only two things stop me from condemning Obama completely over this:

1. He didn't start the wars that caused so much human misery in Afghanistan and Iraq (but he sure took his time winding them down)

2. If a Republican were giving the SOTU, I know we'd see the same damned spectacle, but with more fawning praise for our "brave men and women"

It would be different if such sentiments were sincere. But among the assemblage at the SOTU, it's just a cynical cover for war profiteering and juvenile neocon fantasy-fulfillment, aimed at us, the rubes.

[CBGLuthier]

464. Thirteen years of reading you and you have never been more correct or to the point.

I am sick to fucking death of making excuses for war. Fuck all of the bastards who start and perpetuate them and yes, that includes Obama, Hilary and the whole fucking rotten lot of them.

[B2G]

467. Has Will woken up yet?

[Whisp]

474. I think so. There seems to be an edit to the OP dated this morning.

but I couldn't bother figuring out what was scrubbed.

I don't think he'll show up here again.

[snooper2]

479. He changed the same couple lines twice---- (ruined soldiers didn't sound so good)

Original--


You say "Awwwww" at puppies and babies. You don't say "Awwww" at ruined soldiers victimized by ruined policy deployed by a ruined country...and if you have half a conscience, you make note of that.


First edit-

You say "Awwwww" at puppies and babies. You don't say "Awwww" at ruined soldiers victimized by ruined policy deployed by a ruined country...and if you have half a conscience, you make note of that on the largest stage with the biggest microphone in the world.


Second edit-

You say "Awwwww" at puppies and babies. You don't say "Awwww" at soldiers victimized by ruined policy deployed by a ruined country...and if you have half a conscience, you make note of that on the largest stage with the biggest microphone in the world.

[Logical]

518. Over 300 recs proves he was right. n-t

[Whisp]

521. he gets 300 recs if he farts.

[Logical]

524. Ok, jealousy, I get it now! nt

[joshcryer]

553. It proves he got 300 recs.

It does not prove correctness.

You should live up to your nickname more.

[snooper2]

475. He must still be having "technical difficulties" LOL

or hasn't found the box of Chaser yet





If he can get 50 more recs that will be more than the 324 subscribers they have to the TruthOut YouTube channel


http://www.youtube.com/user/truthout

[Whisp]

539. Nope, technical difficulties have been overcome

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024411886

I suppose it's a shy thing then.

[joshcryer]

548. He typed that on his phone, from memory.

[Whisp]

550. on that teeny weeny teenis keyboard? wow

hercules

all hail

[fredamae]

473. I am more pissed off

about all the people in that room who Voted for the GD war in the first place. Their Votes sent Sgt Remsberg there. They sent many, many soldiers like Cory over there-many of whom returned in a box....many more who are irreparably broken and now the GOP and compromising Dems take actions to Cut services to them.

Those hypocrites had some Nerve to applaud him--they should have Hung their Heads in utter Shame, imo.

[treestar]

476. Of all issues on which ODS is used

this one is the most determined attempt at it I've seen yet to date. This guy was being applauded for him, for his service. Taking it another way is an insult to him. It's using him in the cause of ODS. No one was applauding the war, his injuries or his ten deployments. That is blatantly obvious.

[Whisp]

481. This Fuck thread got a good rogering.

It appears there is not going to be a further defense from the initiator.

[Rex]

487. LOL! The Crew is still foaming at the mouth over your rant!

How amusing!

[4bucksagallon]

489. When did you serve William?

This stop gap policy was not put in place by Obama, and the soldier knew and seemed proud to be picked to be there so I guess I don't follow your reasoning.

[Whisp]

507. I think William is being served now. n/t

[kjones]

491. Reality can be inconvenient, uncomfortable, and often outright disturbing.

Last edited Thu Jan 30, 2014, 12:35 PM - Edit history (1)

It was not some sort of masturbatory military showing. They didn't bring out some photogenic, untouched stock hero and prattle on about his exploits. In fact, all that was said was that he was wounded within an inch of his life and has been left to slowly regain what he can. I see no room for "ZOMG HOW AWESOME IS AMERICA I MEAN TOTALLY" in there.

All I saw was one more example of why war is such a terrible waste.

But maybe I was reading between the applause lines.

[txwhitedove]

500. That was my take too, especially and pointedly "10 deployments". Perhaps that was the point.

[bvar22]

498. Add my DURec to the pile, Will.

Well written.

I was nauseated when Bush-the-Lesser used our troops for props.
It is still nauseating when President Obama uses them for an Applause Line in the SOTU.


I wonder if the same people cheering the Nationalism and the "Keeping Us Safe" PR bullshit
cheered when back Bush did it?

Consistency is the hallmark of an Honest Broker.

[Skittles]

511. they are the biggest hypocrites EVER

fuck them all

[1000words]

523. The recs keep piling up, don't they?

Yet, Will is "way off base," and some just can't believe anyone would see it that way.

[Aldo Leopold]

506. God, I wish I knew how to spell "raspberry" phonetically...

[MissDeeds]

509. Thank you!

Huge K&R. It is a disgrace that this fine and noble man who served his country far better than his country has served him was used as a prop. How many times was he deployed? I heard ten. And for what? In the name of all that is sane - for what? Honor? Peace? Winning something that has yet to be defined? I am ashamed of our president and our country that allows this atrocity to continue. Good men and women are destroyed for this sham of a war. It is a complete and total disgrace, and Obama is now as complicit as Bush.

[proud patriot]

510. I was recalling all the anti invasion rallies I attened

to keep injuries such as these from befalling our young soldiers.

"I tried to stop it , to keep it from happening" I knew it was wrong I could feel it in my bones.

Sometimes it sucks to be correct.

Great piece Will

[Whisp]

528. spend your time more wisely fighting sick shit like this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024412684

Lunches seized from kids in debt at Salt Lake City elementary
Up to 40 kids at Uintah Elementary picked up their lunches Tuesday, then watched as the meals were taken and thrown away because of outstanding balances on their accounts — a move that shocked and angered parents.

"It was pretty traumatic and humiliating," said Erica Lukes, whose 11-year-old daughter had her cafeteria lunch taken from her as she stood in line Tuesday at Uintah Elementary.

Lukes said as far as she knew, she was all paid up. "I think it’s despicable," she said. "These are young children that shouldn’t be punished or humiliated for something the parents obviously need to clear up."

Jason Olsen, a Salt Lake City District spokesman, said the district’s child-nutrition department became aware that Uintah had a large number of students who owed money for lunches.

----
accentuates the sickness of the recs for this type of thread and the one here will wilt away to nothing.

Fuck. At least he got one word right.

[Union Scribe]

558. If you criticize the President you hate starving children?

Interesting new tactic. Why don't you just leave this thread alone if you hate it so much? Clearly a lot of people agree with the OP and for whatever reason some of you can't handle that.

[Whisp]

560. of course the whoosh overwhelms you.

and a Lot of people disagree. If unrec were available this Original post would drip to the bottom of the septic tank where it belongs.

If this post can get the recs from all the oathkeepers for something actually IMPORTANT and not something someone farted against the President because he's in a bad mood or needs to sell something to a larger audience...

whatever, I'm tired.

[Union Scribe]

574. Yeah, I'm sure the ten people whining about this thread

would totally wipe out the 300+ recs it has. I guess it might be a cool dozen if we count all the posts from accounts that conveniently woke up from their slumbers to repeat inane personal attacks against the OP.

But it's the bizarre notion that Pitt and the rest of us don't care about schoolchildren that really got me. "If this post can get the recs from all the oathkeepers for something actually IMPORTANT..." then what? The issue will be solved because we recced that thread?

And I note that your only post on that thread I can see was to complain about this thread, and that's the only context you've brought it up IN this thread too, versus all your other posts in this thread, so maybe if it's so important that that thread be discussed over this one that you lead by example?

[bvar22]

600. If UNREC wwere still available,

this thread would have about 12 less Recs than it does now.

I would LOVE to have the UNREC back.

[bobduca]

565. shame on, patriotic scold!

tell everyone how they should react to this!

[grahamhgreen]

530. What is the mission in Afghanistan? Anyone?

[1000words]

531. Bin Laden

"Mission Accomplished." Bring 'em all home.

[grahamhgreen]

533. Oh yeah! I forgot! Wasn't he in Pakistan? What a tricky bugger!

[1000words]

534. Tora Bora

When you let him get away, it tends to drag the war on.

Again ... "Mission Accomplished."

[grahamhgreen]

542. So, the current mission is what?

[1000words]

547. ...

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

657. "Tough on terra'", "Real Leader", political PR like it was in Vietnam.

[grahamhgreen]

659. Yes, it sickens me that no one knows why we are there.

[hrmjustin]

536. Yes he does deserve more than a standing ovation.

While I am sure he was happy to get it and receive it in the name of all our troops I think he deserves more.

[NealK]

537. K&R n/t

[Fearless]

540. If Congress wanted to do something real for the guy

They'd pay for his surgeries and therapy out of their pay checks.

That is a big IF though.

[quinnox]

587. Wow, over 300 recommends, and its driving a certain very devoted segment crazy

I think all the hidden posts and whining about all the recs speaks for itself.

I guess it does suck for a certain segment when you clearly see that DU remains a progressive site, and is not a lock-step, empty headed cheerleading site.

[joshcryer]

591. Who is being driven crazy?

Can you name one nickname?

OP did a hit and run and passed it off as a phone issue.

It worked wonders. Bravo, I say. Bravo.

[quinnox]

596. Its a massacre of hidden posts, see for yourself

And most of them are the equivalent of - aaaaarg! - or *sputter* - *unhinged attack*
I don't remeber seeing so many in one thread before.

[Hekate]

605. In 601 posts I counted 4 jury hides and 5 self deletes. You call this a massacre?

You and your two gloating pals go right ahead and enjoy the "bloodshed," okay?

As for "unhinged attacks" -- the OP set the bar himself. A number of his followers leaped to the challenge, including one who purveyed a RW meme in one post and attacked a fellow DUer in another by saying she was "playing little internet games" when she said her own vet brother had committed suicide (yet apparently still supports Obama and doesn't blame him personally).

It's been enlightening, I'll tell you that much.

[quinnox]

631. Your math is off. Count again, It is 5 hidden posts, not 4.

That is an unusually high number for one thread. But go on and pretend it is normal.

[Hekate]

632. Ooooooooo

[dionysus]

667. !

[Union Scribe]

609. +1

Then they deny it's under their skin as they revisit the thread for the 50th time to snarl at it some more.

<---"I don't care about this thread argleyargg!"

[treestar]

610. This is what you are choosing to be smug about?

You wish to determine that you have dominated this site? Empty headed bashing with no agenda but dividing Democrats? You celebrate success at that for one particular web site?

[Rex]

612. Yeah the 'echo chamber' lovers are still spitting nails at this thread!

I love watching authoritarians cry like babies, it is endlessly amusing.

[joshcryer]

636. As if this thread isn't an echo chamber against certain people here.

BTW, those people would do good not to be offended by mischaracterizations of their positions, just because they've got into spats with people here. I simply do not accept the mischaracterizations people have made about me and they can read my journal to know my position on things if they are so inclined. My words speak for themselves.

[riversedge]

588. I am sure Faux news would love to have you

come on with your rant I think our President was sincere in his honoring of the soldier.

[ProSense]

593. Meet the other SOTU "props"

Meet the other SOTU "props"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024412101

Obama Slams GOP’s Booing Of Gay Soldier: ‘That’s Not Reflective Of Who We Are’
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024412056

[DevonRex]

594. Whatever man.

Got your hate on for people who like Obama. That must've made you happy. And it gave other people the opportunity to joke about people who like Obama, too. So it made them happy. That's how I see this thread. Just my opinion.

Kinda sick the stuff that makes you guys happy. Whatever man. The rest of your post was just bizarre. Kind of like Clint and the empty chair. Just my opinion. Bye Will.

[dionysus]

625. it's just poutrage bandwagoning... seeking attention. no more, no less.

[DevonRex]

627. I could almost feel sorry for him.

But I don't. Not one little bit. Once he crossed that line into getting attention by bullying other people that was it. That's as low as anyone can get. Rock bottom low.

[dionysus]

629. to quote George Galloway vs Christopher Hitchens:

"I don’t know what it was. Whether it was Vanity Fair or whether it was the lucrative contracts that you’ve landed since, but somehow you decided in 2003 — maybe it was the whiskey. Maybe it was the whiskey."

[joshcryer]

635. I do.

I expected an apology for the hyperbole but nah, he doubled down in a post on Truth Out, thanks to his hubris.

Look, we all probably had a problem with the extended applause. I know I felt it was pretty overdone and I think the timing was off, the words of diplomacy should've come after that, not before. To close the speech with that of course didn't settle well with me.

But to call that guy a prop or a "circus freak" or to call people defending Obama playing "tiny Internet games," I think that's just far beyond reality.

I think, quite literally, had Obama followed Cory's Remsburg introduction with the "no more war state" language, and with the "help the vets" and with the "diplomacy with Iran" thing, it would've been greeted with more respect than it has (and let us not kid ourselves, the people here are using Cory Remsburg, as he would no doubt disagree with their characterization, which btw, the RW has used). Instead because of the timing and because he closed with Remsburg, we get the petulant nonsense we see in this thread.

But then there's an argument that you want to close with Remsburg after having just said those things against war, and for the vets and for diplomacy with Iran. Because what bigger honor is there to close the State of the Union with a standing ovation for someone who you'd just referenced as being part and parcel to the ideals of the Democratic Party? The Democratic Party doesn't want war, and Remsburg is but one of many tens of thousands of men who represent why the Democratic Party is against war.

You'll never get that sort of analysis here.

[DevonRex]

641. Never on DU.

The only ones who could possibly view honoring a wounded war veteran in such a negative and bizarre way would have to have started the SOTU with that mindset about President Obama . In my opinion there is no difference between what Pitt wrote twice now and that Republican walking out during the speech or the ones who called for his impeachment right afterwards.

Every serious, thinking Democrat honored Cory Remsburg and appreciated the fact that wounded veterans' issues were brought to the fore. Especially with this Congress that refuses to work. But they love to send soldiers to war. Then pretend it's all glory. I guess Will doesn't want his beautiful mind bothered with reality either.

I still don't feel sorry for him. He made his bed. A reputation down the drain.

[joshcryer]

642. You don't think it's pitiful?

I do because I think, I mean, literally this is a discussion board that doesn't really drive US politics to any significant extent. So people raising their opinions up to that point, they are just sad, pitiful people who derive ego-boosting from replies, echo chambers, recommendations. It's not that they actually care about the situations they discuss. In that vein I find it utterly sad, pathetic, just worthy of ones sympathy, because, how else do you respond to such behavior?

Jump up and down and respect them, when they're so utterly wrong and trying to score political points? No, to me, they are just sad and pathetic. I really do feel sorry for them. They provide nothing of substance to the discussion and it's clear that they get more from infighting than they do from actual criticism or discussion. It's really pathetic.

[Bobbie Jo]

647. IOW

"Tiny internet games."

Phony beyond belief.

[joshcryer]

648. Basically.

It's all a game to them. Fuck compassion, fuck sincerity, fuck honesty, fuck being genuine. They just want the flames they just want to make people miserable.

Hey, it works, I would be far more optimistic were it not for the Internet trolls. I am generally optimistic but I have to invoke an inner cynicism to even post here.

[DevonRex]

652. No more than I do for Republicans who say similar things.

I don't make excuses anymore for other people. It's not my burden to carry, it's theirs.

[axollot]

598. Grossly exploitative...

When I saw him next to Michelle I thought...oh hell no...he's using this guy as a prop! A PROP!

What about, ya know actually making sure all returning vets and enlisted can buy food for their family without needing food stamps? But if we are going to use food stamps how about making sure you don't cut those and when Congress does...you go out of your way to stop it. Because nothing says eff you quite like having your F/S cut just in time for the holidays. If you got 100 a month you now only get 70 a month. 30 dollars isn't much for many but it is a LOT when you're hungry or you know, you want to buy a turkey for Thanksgiving but the government you worked for, that sent you to get your face blown off...they just gave you another reason to not be thankful. They poured salt in your wounds but soon as its budget time they are going to drag your behind back out and use you as a prop again. (both sides are guilty but the top Military Brass have been doing this for 50 years now. No both sides aren't the same but on some policies the differences are marginal)

Fuck 'em. We've got a lot of work to do in 2014. Because LOCAL. Always more important than President. Bad policies are a bipartisan problem. Quite disillusioned by the DNC these days though. I don't play team sports in politics.

You just keep being you Will and if folks want to call me a cheerleader, at least let me get my pom poms out first.

Cries of Firebagger in 3...2...1...

Cheers
Sandy

[Desert805]

602. Will used him just as much

for his Obamatainment piece.

[bobduca]

622. First name basis with Will lol?

And Will brought the soldier up in front of congress too?

[Desert805]

624. Does it matter what I call him?

Did the President heap on the melodrama? Nope. "Mr. Pitt" sure did.

[joshcryer]

637. Worse, Remsburg wouldn't agree with the OP.

Remsburg would likely be highly insulted that he was nothing more than a "prop."

[axollot]

663. Oh rubbish..pointing out something that made a lot of folks squirm uncomfortably is not the same eom

[tnlefty]

628. I was more offended by the people in the gallery,

many of who cast the vote to send him in the first place,but that's just me. I didn't watch the SOTU, I saw that part later, and I cried. I cried for the soldier who fulfilled his duty while despising the politicians who voted for that duty.

[Rex]

633. And epic thread to be sure.

Applause is easy, free and safe.

[Dash87]

653. These are the only words Obama should have said: "Never again"

No more war, no more killing, no more soldiers with gruesome and life-changing injuries. No more wars for oil and other natural resources, or for profit.

If you love our troops, don't clap for them and parade them around. Bring them home to their families.

[mimi85]

668. Because he knows that

there will be no more wars when there are no more humans.

[polichick]

656. Pawns in their game...

k&r

[LittleBlue]

658. Glad that I didn't watch this farce

Political theater at its worst.

It's pretty fucking awful when the fondest memories of a president are him NOT starting another stupid war. Exploiting a wounded soldier is disgusting.

[warrant46]

665. +1

[woo me with science]

669. K&R

[Skip Intro]

671. Newtown victims were used as props as well.

All to push a vague yet urgent agenda that would have had no effect on the tragedy there. But those poor parents were dragged from event to event.

It's all a show.

[frwrfpos]

682. kick and recommend

good thread