Why a former Republican is voting Democrat

[x-g.o.p.er]

Hi,

Let me say that until a few months ago, I was a lifelong Republican. Never even voted for a Democrat for county dog catcher. All that has changed. I guess this is what is called a paradigm shift.

I am active duty military, and I have served in Afghanistan. On my second tour over there, got some weird viral infection, affected my balance, gave me blinding headaches, got sent home to see the docs. That is when my eyes started to open.

I see comrades who fight for their country, some of my friends have died, and then I read about the erosion of veteran's benefits. Hmm. While I was still drinking the kool-aid, I thought, "well, if it lowers the budget deficit, grudgingly, ok. What ever it takes, I'll do."

Had it not been for my wife beating down doors and demanding that I get the treatment I deserve, I would still be seeking treatment. Luckily, I have an awesome wife who doesn't take no for an answer, and I got to see the right doctors who treated me and got me back on active duty. But a lot of guys don't have an advocate like my wife, and they are forced to twist in the wind. Hmmm, seems like I was being treated like fodder, but that was my own personal experience. Many guys have gotten great care. But still, Bush had my support. And let me say, I supported both wars.

Then spending goes out of control. Hmmmm. Let's spend money for a drug benefits program that is a sham, and make our vet's take it in the shorts. And the program doesn't even really help the people it's supposed to, at the end of the day. I quit drinking the kool-aid, and I began to take notice.

One spending bill after another, while nothing changes for the better. The deficit is growing so large it will be paid off on the back of my grandchildren. Because of someone I voted for, and it angers me.

Free speech, WHICH I FOUGHT AND SOME OF MY FRIENDS DIED FOR, is being slowly but surely eroded. My view and his view of the Constitution are grievously different. How come no one is outraged when congess passes, and Bush signs, a campaign finance "reform" bill that LIMITS POLITICAL SPEECH????? Isn't peaceful political discourse and agitation one of the pillars of this country? How can a bill, passed by congress and signed by Bush, that allows the federal govt to indefinitely hold AMERICAN CITIZENS without due process have the word patriot in it?

And how can that same president vow to veto that bill if it's modified to protect basic citizen's rights?

For those reasons, and for the good of the Republic, I will pull the lever for ABB in 2004. Or press the possibly tainted computer touch screen that can't be manually checked.

[lancdem]

1. Welcome to DU!

Thanks for sharing your story. :hi:

[NewJeffCT]

2. Welcome to DU

Sorry to hear about your ordeal trying to get medical treatment. Aren't they also trying to cut combat pay for soldiers or reservists?

[myrna minx]

3. Welcome to DU, x-g.o.p.er.

:hi: Thank you for serving our country in order to protect all of the liberties and freedoms guaranteed in our Constitution and Bill of Rights. Your input will be greatly appreciated here.

[loudsue]

4. Thanks for a great post!

:bounce::hi::toast::beer::silly::party:

:yourock:

So glad to have you here! How did you find out about DU?

:kick::kick::kick:

[x-g.o.p.er]

9. Ummmm....

Heard about it from conservative talk radio. I used to peruse your website and laugh at some of the more whackier postings. Now I am one!!!

[BurtWorm]

12. Your post wasn't at all whacky!

;)

[liberalhistorian]

15. You're not

whacky at all, lol!

[leftchick]

18. You want to see wacky?!?

Have you been to freerepublic.com? That is one scary site!
Welcome to DU x-g.o.p.er! :toast:
Excellent Post and thank you for your service to our country!

[tom_paine]

48. Step #1: Stop listening to Bushevik Pravda

Funny how our Talk Radio airwaves have all the uniformity of the Soviet Union (or very close to that level).

The people you are listening to aren't True Conservatives any more than their Bushevik masters are.

They are Imperial Apologists who believe that you ARE cannon fodder (I was in the USAF myself). They leech of the decency of True Conservatism and use it as cover.

But they are Totalitarians who believe dissent and agitation are unAmerikan which they are, but they are AMERICAN.

In short, I took an oath, as you did, to protect and defend the Constitution. Opposing the Imperial Family is the only way to do so.

The Democrats are far from perfect, but their corruption and desire to shift America from the vision of the Founding Fathers that you and I seem to share (even though we may disagree on some policies, I am willing to bet we agree on more than a few since you sound like a right-centrist and I a left-centrist) absolutely PALES before the Busheviks. I've been known to call them Free-Market Stalinists because their love of Tyranny seems to be in the same ballpark as Stalinists (thank God the vestiges of the Old Republic still protect us from the Ultimate Bush Vision for the time being) but they use an opposing rationale to rationalize the same Tyranny.

So, do yourself a favor and stop feeding your head with Bushevik Lies

[spotbird]

88. Sometimes I wonder if Rush isn't cutting off his nose to spite his face

when he sends his listeners here. If they are curious at all they might learn something that they held as dogma is not true. Some might stay after a while.

Welcome to DU, do you think there will be more of you to kick the Kool-Aide?

[calimary]

92. Hey, x-g.o.p.er! Greetings again! Look how many people are welcoming

you now!

Again, tickled to pieces that you're here, and that you want to share your thoughts and your conversion. Your input is MOST valuable and I hope we can all gain some perspective from it. Your input is MOST valuable because YOU, unlike some of the Chickenhawks whose orders you had to obey, put your life on the line and actually went out and did the heavy lifting and doing the dirty work. YOU have put your life in the service of your country, which is a lot more than any of us can say about the pretender in the flight suit.

You and your wife are welcomed and cheered and embraced here! And here's hoping there are lots more disaffected former g.o.p.ers like you. We've got lots of room for all of you here. A pleasure to stumble upon your posts yet again!

Bless your heart!

[x-g.o.p.er]

122. Thanks,

You're the heat

[leesa]

115. Welcome. I think the more you read, the more you will realize that those

'whacky posts' are probably spot-on. It's our government and the rich corporatists who are whacky and anti-American.
Glad to see you have become vigilant.

[cavebat2000]

5. x-goper

Welcome to the ABB Camp. I am so glad to see republicans pissed at Bush too. As Howard Dean says, "hes not a republican, hes a radical"

[Demonaut]

22. Former military too, just the Cold War

alot of us are,

[BurtWorm]

6. I applaud your courage!

And your wife's courage. Welcome to the light! :toast:

[Thoth]

7. Welcome to DU

I will copy your post to Word, print it and hand it to the Republicans I know (and place it on cars with Bush-Cheney bumper stickers). I hope you don't have to go back to Afghanistan.

[prolesunited]

8. Welcome home!

:hi:

We have a number of active duty and former military members among us, so I'm sure you'll find a place for yourself here.

Are there others out there like you, who are now beginning to open their eyes? How is the fact that the invasion of Iraq was based on lies sitting with people?

[x-g.o.p.er]

21. The Iraq Invasion....

I honestly believe it was more of a massive intelligence failure than a Bush lie. The rest of the world, including the Clinton administration, blew it. EVERYBODY thought Saddam had, and was pursuing, a prodigous amount of WMD, including nuclear weapons. We can argue containment or invasion, but to me it seems that the war wasn't built on a lie as much as it was built on the worst intelligence failure in our history, save for maybe Pearl Harbor. That is what everybody should be outraged at, is the intel failure.

[prolesunited]

30. I'm not going to agree with you here at all

The run-up to war rests solely with the Bush administration.

Are you familiar at all with Project for a New American Century?
Why were their plans for going to Iraq formulated as soon as they took office?
If the whole world was fooled or "blew," how come so many of our long-standing allies were against the invasion?
What was wrong with inspections? The pressure we had applied got teams back in there (Who were not previously kicked out but withdrawn so we could start the first Gulf War.) Why not let them do their job?
What about the reports that numerous agencies within the government counseled AGAINST the invasion, but were silenced?

I am NOT buying the new spin and I doubt many here will either. BTW, we can certainly back all of this up.

[x-g.o.p.er]

34. Let's agree to disagre, my new friend

Because civil discourse is what it's all about, right?

PNAC--no, but I will look into that. I promise. If nothing else, I will approach it with an open mind. Fair enough?

I think our allies were against the war because they were lining their pockets with Saddam's oil and money in the form of bribes. As a matter of fact, I thought I saw something in the news yesterday that alluded to the fact that some French official had been given a voucher for over 1,000,000 barrels of Iraqi oil (cash equivalent) if he helped to convince the US to avoid an invasion.

For me, the problem with inspections is that they were ineffective, and didn't work. Saddam gave the impression that he was hiding something. Had an effective inspection program been put in place, I would have been all for it.

Chief weapons inspector David Kay testified before congress yesterday that everybody (in the intelligence community) blew it, and he had talked to many intelligence analysts, and not one of the mfelt they had been pressured to slant the inte towards the administration's position.

Hey, it's just my opinion.

[GreenPartyVoter]

38. X, help get an investigation rolling

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1068924

[prolesunited]

46. I know we had some excellent PNAC summaries here

Could someone provide him with some links for further education? I don't have them handy here at work. Thanks!

BTW, would you care to discuss Cheney and Halliburton and how he's profited from this scheme as well as the Carlyle Group and a number of other Bush cronies? You have heard of the Carlyle Group, right?

I think if you approach things with an open mind, you're in for the shock of your life. I'm pretty cynical and skeptical myself. I thought half the people here wore their tinfoil hats too tight as well. You'll see.

The truth WILL set you free, but first it's going to piss you off. Enjoy the journey. :-)

[MISSDem]

55. Here is one site about PNAC

http://www.newamericancentury.org/aboutpnac.htm

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

85. This is PNAC's actual website

eom

[Stephanie]

117. Please read this PNAC thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=301411

And Welcome to DU, ex-g.o.p.er! Welcome! Very happy to see you here.

[leftchick]

59. Here you go...Your PNAC Primer

It will open your eyes but be prepared....It is way worse than you could imagine...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1069536

[starroute]

113. Have a look at Joshua Marshall's blog

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_01_25.html#002507

"There’s no question that it was widely believed within the US intelligence community that Iraq had on-going weapons of mass destruction efforts and probably had at least a chemical and probably a biological weapons capacity.

<snip>

"We didn’t go to war because Iraq had mustard gas or nerve gas or even anthrax. The threat, as presented by the White House, went far beyond that. All WMD are not created equal. Indeed, the catch-all phrase 'weapons of mass destruction' obscures much more than it clarifies. It groups together things like mustard gas, which is really battlefield weapon, with nuclear weapons, which really are weapons of mass destruction.

"The White House was well aware of this. And for that reason it repeatedly pressed the argument that Iraq was close to creating nuclear warheads --- a point over which there was very real disagreement within the Intelligence Community."


Simply put, the intelligence community believed that Saddam probably had a few apples, but the Bush administration got us into war on the basic of a claim that he had stockpiles of oranges. And now the administration is pointing at the CIA and yelling, "It's their fault! They told us he had fruit!"

[LunaC]

123. PNAC 101

Short, concise, lays it all out....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=976762

[eissa]

31. Welcome, but

it WAS a bush lie. As an Iraqi who has family active in the Iraqi opposition, I can tell you that bush & co. had plans to invade Iraq before being appointed to office. 9/11 was like manna from heaven to these people, and in my opinion, this administration should kiss the ground bin laden walks on for giving them the excuse they needed to implement their agenda.

[spotbird]

90. Give the guy a break, it is hard to find this stuff out all at once.

He has had to give up the political party he believed protected him. The full magnitude may not hit him for some time, it took me a while and I'm a Yellow Dog.

[leftchick]

33. Not everybody!!

Take a few minutes to read this....

http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=24889

Then let us know if you still feel the same way.... :)

[K8-EEE]

37. Lots Of People Knew WMD Was A Lie

From my perspective, one of the millions and MILLIONS of protestors around the globe, it all looked totally bogus from the get-go.

Like Michael Moore said -- fictional president, fictional reasons for war. There were MILLIONS of people including in the government who never believed we were at risk.

Look, when we KNOW people have WMD we tend not to invade them (Russia, No Korea, etc.) Not invading them is not necessarily "doing nothing." The weapons inspection program apparently worked...and many people last year believed that.

[Malva Zebrina]

42. Welcome, but I think you have bought something again

that is untrue and that you will soon find out is just another Bush pull the wool over your eyes, take advantage of you as a military pawn of an AWOL CIC.

On DU today this link has been provided by some astute persons and this link lays out the number of times the intelligence community warned Bush about his sloppy intelligence he was getting from his own private intelligence source, (it is sorta like the brown shirts or the private army you know?) the OSP Here is a link that lays out all of those warnings in a very understandable time line, I am grateful for the persons who did this and for the person who gave DU posters the heads up on it because for those of us who are not too skilled at organizing files and such, it is hard to keep track of the whole thing.

http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=24889

[tom_paine]

65. Does EVERYBODY include Hans Blix and the UN Inspection teams?

I asked you this question once before. You didn;t answer.

Seems like everyone who had boots on the ground knew. They tried to tell the Emperor and he wouldn't listen. Some might say he didn't listen.

But for you to say that EVERYBODY believed Saddam had WMDs is not only a Bushevik lie but cannot even withstand a cursory inspection.

I ask you again, since you seem so keen on repeating Bushevik Pravda in spite of reality:

Does EVERYBODY include Hans Blix and the UN Inspection teams?

If you are to join the ranks of Free America, and it sounds like you want to do just that, first you must begin opeing your mind to how reality conflicts with the Orwellian Lies you've been spoon-fed-by-repetition from the Party-Loyal Right-Wing Sub-Media.

Could you kindly answer my question?

[x-g.o.p.er]

66. Answer

As far back as 1998, I believe, (don't quote me until I can get home and look) the UN, who was in charge of the weapons inspection teams, said that Saddam had WMD. Hundreds of tons of VX nerve agent, blah, blah, blah. Blix, while he was looking for weapons, also stated that he had not had full access, and conceded that although they had not uncovered anything, they very well could exist. He just didn't know. So yes, I include them as well.

[tom_paine]

70. Answer to your answer

That isn't true.

And now, the backup...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3323633.stm

http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/SC7asdelivered.htm

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-12-16-blix-iraq_x.htm

http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe/06/06/sprj.irq.blix.wmd/

(this one sort of back your view, but given everything else Blix said pre-invasion, it's quite a tepid support considering everything else he said during the runup to the war)

Just for contrast, here is an odious liar and Imperial Bootlicker following Standard Imperial Procedure by following up being caught in a lie by tell six more lies

(a very effective technique, actually...)

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/06/08/sprj.irq.main/

So, it certainly is your prerogative to take a half-truth (yes, AFTER the inavsion, Blix said he wouldn't be surprised to find WMD even though they'd found nothing in 2001-2 as well as the years prior to 1998, but that makes it far from worthwhile to lose 500 brave soldiers' lives over such tepid speculation) and do as they do on Bushevik talk Radio, which is spin it into absolute ironclad truth.

But I'm sorry, that doesn't make it any more true.

I'm glad you're here x-g.o.p.er, but I say again, if you are to join the ranks of Free America you must first free your mind from Imperial Pravda, just as if you were a Soviet Commie yearning to dissent from the Kremlin in 1978 you would have to stop buying into Commie Pravda.

(we would probably agree on what we think of Commies and Soviets, as well as guns, immigration and a few other policies)

[x-g.o.p.er]

72. If I may retort

Tom,

If nothing else, I admire your unshakable belief. I promise I will research your information this weekend. If it is any comfort to you, I want you to know that anything the administration says, on any topic, I take with a grain of salt and research on my own to try and find the story behind the story, if you will. And almost everything I find lately contradicts what was said by them originally.

I have quit drinking the kool-aid, I promise, lol.

But right now, I am going home, and my wife and I are going to a show and to a movie--with friends of ours who have yet to see the error of their political ways. Hopefully, we'll get them to see what we do. One voter at a time.

Like you, I feel most people are closer to wanting the same things than the mainstream press would have them believe. It seems the shrills, both right and left, prefer a vast chasm between the two sides than an actual coming together. Almost conspiratorial.

Anyways, you've given me a lot to digest. Thanks, and thanks again for your warm welcome.

Ted

[tom_paine]

78. And you have given me some stuff to think about, x-g.o.p.er

I also agree about the left-right chasm. I wouldn't trust the Left with unchecked power any more than I would the Busheviks. Of course, as I'm sure you know, the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution with the idea that NO ONE can be trusted with unchecked power and that a Moderate Nation with balancing passions preventing extremism was the way to go.

However, the power of the Left has so waned, and their corruptions (sure, it's true that almost all politicians are corrupt to some degree) so mild in comparison (but no less worthy of opposing were they allowed to have things all their own way), that I cannot worry about that now...not while the nation is in danger.

The way I like to think of it is this: Let's say we lived in an Alternate Universe, like in that show Sliders. And in this Alternate Universe the Democrats had been taken over by Hard-Core Socialist/Commies. Further, they knew because they couldn't win the American People over to their point of view with standard arguments, they set out to create a Propaganda Infrastructure with billions of dollars. Let's say they also invested heavily in Propaganda Mills they disguised as "Think Tanks" and financed a Party-Loyal Commie Sub-Media with no fact-checking, but who's sole job was to aid the Party any way they could, even to the point of laundering absolute lies in the Service of the Party. Let's say these hardcore Commie Democrats had just stolen two elections, and were pushing paper-trail-less electronic voting made by Commie manufacturers, one of who's CEOs had said, "I am dedicated to bringing Ohio's electoral votes to Comrade, err President Trotsky."

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0904-10.htm

(I recognize this is the Left's version of Newsmax, but, frighteningly enough, CNN had no records of any article mentioning this AND I KNOW I SAW IT THERE WHEN IT HAPPENED)

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3339650/ (found one from a Mainstream source)

In that Alternate Universe, I hope and pray that I have the conscience and courage to stand up and fight them as hard as I am fighting the Busheviks today.

My unshakable belief comes from my reading of history. This is my first experience with zealotry, and I don't like it one bit. But if we are to save the Old Republic, we must counter passion with passion, and yes, zealotry with zealotry. I could have lived my entire life without ever getting this involved in politics.

But then, there is the pesky matter of that Oath you and I took.

By the way, I love that Orwell quote and wholly agree. He was a brilliant man, wasn't he?

tom

PS Sorry about the windy post. I am a vociferous bastard, ain't I? I, too, am going home shortly to an evening with friends. I clasp your hand in friendship, sir.

[Zhade]

100. Tom, you are a class act.

Seeing you and our new DUer x-g.o.p.er speak with such respect and honesty is amazing to behold. I feel privileged to see two people interact in such a great way.

Kudos to the both of you. Welcome to DU, x-g.o.p.er! I salute your courage and honesty. Hope you find this place a rewarding experience. :)

[x-g.o.p.er]

127. Vociferous, yes. Bast@#d, no. And I concede part of your point

Tom,

I have read the attached articles that you put in your previous post, and I could be willing to concede your point about the UN, but Blix is 50-50 at best, IMHO. But I stand by my original point that the rest of the world, including the Clinton Administration, thought Saddam had a large stockpile of WMD. I will wade into the PNAC stuff when I get some uninterrupted time later this weekend.

I think Orwell was a prescient man. Take this country on the current track, add about 10 to 15 years, and then go and re-read 1984. Almost prophetic. Eye-opening, if nothing else.

As far as the electronic voting machines go, you don't need to sell me. My reference to that on my original post was put there in sincerity, not sarcasm. What frightens me more is that no one, save for a few who are quickly dismissed as "tinfoil hat wearers" by the mainstream media, seems to care. I think it would be very easy to manipulate voting returns, especially since there is no paper trail to check it with. Has it already been done? Maybe. Does anyone still care? No. Frightening.

I gladly shake your hand and am proud to call you friend, Tom.

Ted

PS--How many posts do you have to put out before you are allowed to contact someone direcly via email or private message? Enquiring minds would like to know

[calimary]

93. By the way, x-g.o.p.er, did you happen to catch Scott Ritter on CNN?

Here's the link to the transcript, I think. MAN, did this guy make a good point. A whole bunch of 'em.

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0401/30/wbr.00.html

But I'm with the poster above who admonished another one of us to "go easy on the guy." Hey, you're just finding your way in new and unfamiliar territory. Any of us would be in the same position if we were in similar circumstances (well... maybe not similar POLITICAL circumstances, but you get the idea).

I'm feeling rather protective of you so I don't want anybody giving you a hard time. Take your time. Read in. We had to spend two hours every day, uninterrupted, when we set foot in the newsroom, before a single finger hit a single typewriter key, just READING IN. See what you discover. Share thoughts, ask questions, ask people here for input and links and proof. Make us prove it. It sharpens us all, and makes us worthy of people like you. Now that you're here, it'd be kinda nice to keep you!

[RainDog]

131. yes, good govt is the goal for any reasonable American

good as in efficient and not wasting money--what constitutes waste is open to opinion, but I think most Americans agree that pork should not the the white meat of govt. (of course, when it's your Congressperson bringing bucks to your area, people may differ on the definition of pork...)

good as in the best interests of the people of this nation, and not special interests.

I don't think there is any sane American who wants abortion as birth control of first resort. The goal is to avoid such a scenario. How you achieve that goal is at issue for some people, but I think most Americans want to be sane about insuring accessible pregnancy prevention before the fact...and education about those things.

Just as I do not want to impose my reproductive beliefs on others, I do not want others beliefs imposed upon me.

I honestly believe that a majority of Americans do not think the drug war is sane policy, if they are aware of the social costs and the lack of data to support punative over health approaches, nor do they think that medicines should be denied to people based upon "hysterical" fears...at least when it's their family member...and thus this sane approach should be applicable for all.

I honestly believe that the majority of Americans want to have such things as roads and public universities and a strong military and therefore, rationally, know that tax dollars are required to fund those things.

I believe that the majority of Americans do not think it's necessary for people to have AK-47s to go duck hunting, but realize that it is important for people to have the right to own a gun, especially rifles in rural situtations.

I know there are differences in the issue of registration, but I do know that I'm glad people have to have a license to drive a car, and wish that gun owners would have to show an equivalent level of competence, both mental and practical, before they park a gun at their house.

Since Bush has been in power, for the first time I understand the right's concern over govt vis a vis gun registration, etc, but I also think that if people who were going to own guns anyway were dealing with a crazy govt, no matter which side of the extreme it came from, people would also have no problem coming up with a weapon.

I think all decent Americans want children, no matter how financially strapped their parents are, to have a warm bed to sleep in and enough food to keep them healthy, medicines to keep small illnesses from becoming large ones, and to have the security of ensured survival to learn at a school that is safe and functioning to create citizens who can think.

I think that all decent American want to respect each others' right to practice their religion (or not) without govt interference, or govt coertion.

I think all rational Americans realize that we cannot live off deficits and expect our children and grandchildren to pay for irresponsible spending and tax cuts, while most support fairness in tax cuts and in spending.

In other words, I think that the 1% of the power brokers in this nation have distorted the issues to such an extent that we fail to have discussions over the substantive questions and instead waste our nation's greatness by their distorted agenda.

maybe you disagree, but it seems that historically these issues have been about matters of degree or implementation, and not the issues themselves.

we need a media which is capable of examing what has worked and why, and what hasn't worked and why...not via the "media lobbyist" version of talking heads tv, but via education into the honest data.

[maggrwaggr]

87. don't forget Colin Powell saying Saddam was no threat, had no weapons

here:

<<And frankly they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors.>>

right here at the State Department's own website:

http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2001/933.htm

[rman]

107. everybody? 'everybody' in the US maybe;

The rest of us knew about how the 1st Gulf war destroyed much of Saddam's weapons capabilities - in particular the only thing he had that qualifies as WMD: the Scuds. Which Saddam used only with conventional payload - the only serious concern regarding WMDs back then was that Saddam *could* deliver chemical payloads with those scuds to Israel.
Then after that came 10 years of UN inspections and sanctions, at the end of which it was quite obvious Iraq had in essence nothing left - apparently this was underreported inthe US.
Then out of nowhere (as far as the rest of us is concerned) came Bush and Blair with allegations about Saddam having all sorts of WMDs some of which supposedly could be deployed in 45 minutes and could even reach the US. When the UN failed to confirm these allegations, Bush and Blair went in anyway.

The intelligence failures are in the WH ignoring warnings regarding 9/11, leaning on the CIA to find "anything, ralated or not" (Rummy) that could be reason to go to war on Iraq, the WH setting up its own intelligence agency (Office of Special Plans - also Rummy) which had a 'special' way of interpreting available intelligence, and failing not to mention information that had already been proven be a forgery (yellow cake papers).
Saddam, the intel community and the UN had been saying Iraq has NO WMDs, and now that no WMDs are found, the WH blames the IC for not warning about 9/11 and for faulty intel regarding WMDs, blames Saddam for lying ("bluffing") about having WMDs, and blames the UN for being ineffective.

[Jacobin]

109. The information on the neo-cons agenda to invade is

available, but not easy to find.

Here are a few links. Office of Special Plans, which attempts to undermine the CIA is what happened. You can thank, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld and the others at PNAC for the invasion of Iraq and the LIES which started it:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,999737,00.html
---

No weapons in Iraq? We'll find them in Iran

By Neil Mackay Sunday Herald

Sunday 01 June 2003

Ironically, it was the ultra-hawkish US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld who let the cat out of the bag when he said on Wednesday: 'It is possible Iraqi leaders decided they would destroy (WMDs) prior to the conflict.' If that was true then Saddam had fulfilled the criteria of UN resolution 1441 and there was absolutely no legal right for the US and UK to go to war. Rumsfeld's claim that Iraq might have destroyed its weapons makes a mockery of the way the US treated the UN's chief weapons inspector Dr Hans Blix. The US effectively told him he wasn't up to the job and the Iraqis had fooled him.

<snip>

With September 11 as his ideological backdrop, Rumsfeld decided in autumn 2001 to establish a new intelligence agency, independent of the CIA and the Pentagon, called the Office of Special Plans (OSP). He put his deputy, Wolfowitz, in charge. The pair were dissatisfied with the failure of the CIA among others to provide firm proof of both Saddam's alleged WMD arsenal and links to al-Qaeda.

<snip>

That was the policy blueprint, but to deliver it Rumsfeld turned to the Office of Special Plans. Put simply, the OSP was told to come up with the evidence of WMD to give credence to US military intervention. But what do conventional intelligence experts make of the OSP? Colonel Patrick Lang is a former chief of human intelligence for the Pentagon's Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) in the 1990s. He was also the DIA's chief of Middle East intelligence and was regularly in Iraq. He said of the OSP : 'This office had a great deal of influence in a number of places in Washington in a way that seemed to me to be excessive and rather ill-advised. 'The regular organisations of the intelligence community have very rigorous rules for how you evaluate information and resources, and tend to take a conservative view of analytic positions because they're going to dictate government decisions. 'That wasn't satisfactory in Secretary Rumsfeld's Pentagon so he set up a separate office to review this data, and the people in this office, although they're described as intelligence people, are by and large congressional staffers. They seemed to me not to have deceived intentionally but to have seen in the data what they believe is true. I think it's a very risky thing to do.'

<snip>

In a further curious twist, an intelligence source claimed the real 'over-arching strategic reason' for the war was the road map to peace, designed to settle the running sore of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The source said: 'I believe that Britain and America see the road map as fundamental. They were being told by Ariel Sharon's government that Israel would not play ball until Saddam was out of the picture. That was the condition. So he had to go.'

<snip>

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0601-02.htm

---

<snip>
"They are running their own intelligence operation, including covert action, and are using contractors outside the government to do some of the leg work," said a former top CIA official. "Their area of work has been concentrated on Iraq, which is why the intelligence on WMD was so bad, but they have a much broader portfolio. The office is undergoing some scrutiny from inside the government given its poor track record and the lack of 'sanity checking' their products with the intelligence community. A lot of material they produce is not shared with CIA, not coordinated, and finds its way into public policy statements by the likes of Rumsfeld and Cheney."
</snip>

[SoCalDem]

132. Two things to consider..

First of all.. :hi: and Welcome..

now to the meat & potatoes..

If it was an intel failure, ask yourself this...

Why it was that a bunch of "ordinary people" like us (at DU) figured it out from the get go.. There is a wealth of information online that is easy to fact-check, and if people take the time to look, there could be no doubt that BUSH was WRONG..his "people" were wrong.. If they truly did not know it, then they are fools..

Not a great choice.. Go to war , sent by LIARS or FOOLS..

part 2

The day that Bush let Tenet stay on, gave me a chill.. There could only be 2 reasons that he would do that..

1. He needed a Clinton holdover to be the fall guy when "something terrible" happened

2. Tenet had "the goods" on the Bush family and strongarmed his way into staying..


The head of the CIA is a pretty important job, and if Bush was willing to change most of the other appointments, why not THAT one too..

which reminds me.. Mineta, a Dem, just happened to be in charge of transportation, which includes AIRLINES..(a very integral part of the HUGE "intel failure of 9/11")

Call it conspiracy or not.. But if one looks backwards, with what we now know, it makes a lot more sense..



In politics.. nothing happens by accident :(

[liberalhistorian]

10. Good for you and

WELCOME! You'll find a lot of friends here, and we're also grateful for and proud of your military service (you'll find that many DUers have sons/daughters or other family members on active duty, some are even in Iraq or Afghanistan).

And I'm sorry you had to go through the ordeal you described concerning your service. It infuriates us to see how the troops are really being treated ("used" is a better term) and abused by the current occupant of the WH, who used his family name and money to get out of Vietnam and didn't even bother to show up for his last year in the Texas Air National Guard, and Dick "I had other priorities during Vietnam" Cheney, etc., etc., and to see how little their lives are valued by those currently in charge.

I have a 12-year-old son, and I'm very glad that I don't have to worry (at least not yet) about him being used in such a way. Cutting their benefits to the tune of billions over ten years, skimping on their medical treatment, actually charging them for food while they're recovering from injuries, etc., etc, is NOT our idea of "supporting the troops."

Do you have any suggestions as to how we might go about helping others who believe as you once did to "see the light?" What do you think is the best way to do that?

[theorist]

11. Welcome.

You must open a discourse to share these feelings with as many people as you can, especially your Republican-backing buddies. Chances are they can be brought onto your side, if you have credibility with them. Your friend's lives will not be in vain if we can change the collision course we are on.

[bahrbearian]

13. Great Post

One of the Best Posts ever...

[x-g.o.p.er]

39. Thanks for the kind compliment

[GreenPartyVoter]

14. Welcome :)

I am sorry you've been given the run-around on treatment by the military. :( this admin is unreal when it comes to the way it treats our service members, both in and out of uniform.

I agree that the current campaign reform does hurt our election system in that it makes it easier for the GOP to raise money, but ulitmately I support publicly financed campaigns. Those corporations who make up the biggest donations are making up their losses by sucking money from you when you buy their goods and services at a raised price and via gov't subsidies made up from our taxes.

For myself, I'd rather have my tax money split evenly and just the one time between all the candidates than let the "golden rule" (he who has the gold, rules) live on. (You can read more about this on my website. See link below.)

[Bandit]

16. I hope because of your "Awakening" you will feel the same about the

other Republicans running America. Congress for instance and not focus all your anger and resentment only on Bush*. He is after all only a puppet and signs every bill the Republican Congress puts on his desk. Democrats don't have all the answers and some are every bit as corrupt but on the whole if you analyze the financial history of America with an open mind you will realize that almost every single Republican Administration has ushered in a recession or depression while only a couple of Democratic administrations had a recession. Democrats have always managed our monies better and America always prospered. The facts are there they just need you to look at them. The Republicans have always been the best at pulling the wool over everyone's eyes.

[qanda]

17. Welcome to DU

There are many different voices and opinions here. I'm sure you will find yourself challenged from those who agree and disagree with you on the issues.

I'm glad you found help for your condition-- wives are great advocates (I know because I am one) ;)

Anyway, I hope you feel welcome. :hi:

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

19. Welcome!

You're not the only one who's questioning their politics!
A few good friends of mine are seriously considering voting ABB in 2004, and they've voted Republican for their entire voting lives.

[MoonAndSun]

20. Welcome to DU...

my father who is a Korean War vet was attracted to bush* because he said he would take care of our vets, and now he sees what a liar bush* is. So there are many more like you out there that see what this liar has done to our vets, and to our country.

You are not alone. :hi:

[K8-EEE]

23. Welcome And Thank You

I loved your post. I would love to think that people can really come together, regardless of their personal beliefs, and vote out GWB for all our sakes.

I am a lifetime Democrat and I thank you for your military service and sacrifice. I am not anti-military but think our military is being abused by the chicken hawks.

Hey a big DU KICK to your wife for making sure you're getting the health care you deserve. Hopefully we can make sure all our vets are taken care of.

SUPPORT THE TROOPS...VOTE FOR REGIME CHANGE IN 2004!

[Kathy in Cambridge]

24. Welcome to DU!

Great first post. The policies of the Bush administration are an affront to anyone who served their country in the military. I'm sorry for your predicament, and hope you are healing from your infection.

You will also find some evidence on DU that the Bush administration was planning the invasion of Iraq before 9/11. In fact, their game plan was outlined by Project for a New American Century (PNAC), whose members and authors include Perle and Wolfowitz.

That these evil men used our men and women in the military as a means to make their friends (Halliburton, Bechtel, and other large corporations) wealthy is treason.

[x-g.o.p.er]

27. That's what PNAC stands for!!!!

I was wondering what the heck that acronym meant.

[Smirnoff]

40. That's my problem!

Being new here I never know what they mean! :)

[liberalhistorian]

82. LOL!

I also remember how confusing it sometimes was my first few months on here, with all of the acronyms and "inside" sayings, but DUers are very helpful and all you have to do is ask to find something out.

[calimary]

94. Welcome to YOU, too, Smirnoff!

It takes awhile, but soon enough you learn all the ROFLMAO stuff (roll on the floor laughing my ass off) and BFEE (bush family evil empire) and LIHOP (let it happen on purpose). Heck, I think I may have about 26-hundred posts by now and I ONLY JUST DISCOVERED that "eom" means end of message. It's taken a couple of years for me to come that far! D'oh!

One of the things I LOVE LOVE LOVE to do is welcome new DUers! It's just the best. BOTH of you have made my day, and my evening (and my daughter's out with SOME BOY, so I can use all the comfort I get get!!!).

[Smirnoff]

108. Well at least I know other people had this problem!

I just felt like an idiot! :)

[calimary]

128. Repeat after me - I am NOT an idiot!

How could you be, if you found your way here?

HUGS!

[northofdenali]

64. Welcome to DU, x-g.o.p.er! For you and others new to DU,

here's a pretty good dictionary of our little foibles with initials and other invented terminology:

http://dug.seattleactivist.org/

Great post, btw. I see and hear of more and more active-duty folks (I live near both an Army post and and Air Force base) getting turned off by GOP policies - and Bush. Thanks for joining us.

[proud patriot]

25. Thank Goodness for Your Wife , and Welcome Underground

Thank You for your sevice to this Great Nation
and defense of the Constitution .

I hope you enjoy the lively debate .

[SpaceCatMeetsMars]

26. Have you seen the book "American Dynasty," by Kevin Phillips?

He is a moderate Republican that basically thinks the Bush family has highjacked the Republican party. I think he is right. My husband's late grandfather was the old-type Republican and I always respected his point of view, even though I am a Democrat. We used to have discussions and we always agreed on the basics of democracy. I don't think he would like what's been happening. I wonder all the time what's going on with the Democratic party as well, but overall, at least they seem to still believe in democracy, checks and balances and all that. I don't think Bush, Cheney and the neo-cons really believe in democracy.

Anyway, I would recommend Kevin Phillip's last two books to you if you have the time. The other one is called "Wealth and Democracy" and talks about the history of empires and how that relates to modern day America.

[x-g.o.p.er]

29. No, but I'll check them out

Thanks for the tip

[heidiho]

28. I am sending this on to my address book in the form of an e-mail

and urge all of you to do the same.

Thank you, xgop'er for posting this and for your service. I hope that you know that your post provides inspiration to those of us who
sometimes feel like we are screaming to America but no one is listening.

[Skittles]

32. x, you are putting your country above your party

I hope others will do the same

[liberalitch]

35. greetings to you and your wife!

Thanks for switching "Prides"... and thank you for your service.
I am so sorry that have lost friends in this horrible trap that we are in.... I thank you, you have given much!

You will find that we all think differently and even if you still hold some conservative views.... that's okay! Herd like mentalities make for a boring chat room! :-)

One of our founding fathers said (I think Jefferson) "I may not agree with everything a man says... but I'll fight to the death for his right to say it."
... I think everyone would agree.

At DU our one goal is to take back our great nation from the chimp

[caledesi]

36. Thank you for your service!

I am sorry for what you had to go through x-goper. It's sad that someone has to come back to the States to find out what is really going on in terms of cutting Vet's benefits and shut down a bunch of hospitals.

If you want to listen to some of the best Dem tak shows, go to:
www.therandirhodesshow.com She is something else. Has FACTS not theories or rhetoric. You should call in bec Randi was in the military as well and she loves to listen to people like yourself coming to the sad conclusion of what has happened to our country.

Welcome to DU!

[Catherine Vincent]

41. I don't believe you.

[GreenPartyVoter]

43. What's not to believe?

[skypilot]

50. I would hope that xgoper isn't doing this but...

...over at freerepublic.com I have seen posts where folks talk about logging onto DU and posing as a Democrat only so that they can gradually introduce conservative Republican points of view. I hope that xgoper is sincere but, like Catgirl, I'm usually a little wary.

[GreenPartyVoter]

54. I understand the wariness

but I think it is reasonable to give people the benefit of the doubt.

Also, I think it is highly unlikely freeps can invade here and win us over to their way of thinking. We see the same stuff every day in the media, 24/7, so why should a post or three from "infiltrators" be the tipping point and cause us to change what we think? *l*

[skypilot]

56. Oh, I didn't say that I thought they might succeed...

...at winning us over. I just wouldn't want to waste time reading the posts of someone who had ulterior motives.

[GreenPartyVoter]

61. You never know

they might come here to convert but instead be converted. :D

[iverglas]

71. certainly had my own doubts

right from the first post.

A fresh convert, first time out, attacks government spending and election campaign reform?

Where I come from (which of course is not the US, so I don't jump to apply my paradigm), those are biiiig right-wing talking points.

The spending in question may be military spending on an immoral and illegal invasion, and thus one that even supporters of government spending for the common welfare would oppose.

And the legislation to prevent rich special-interest groups from unduly influencing election outcomes may be a limitation on speech, and thus one that even sincere, good-faith advocates of democratizing the electoral process could oppose on principle.

But I'm not really seeing what I'd call whole-hearted embracing of the kind of stuff that *I* consider to be on my side of the fence, and to be important ... and I may suspect that I'm seeing a set-up.

.

[calimary]

95. Let's not look a gift horse in the mouth. True, we've been burned,

and who knows how many lurkers from Freeperland are here right now, having a good ol' laugh at us. NO MATTER. I'm just glad the new people are here. The disruptors among them make themselves pretty obvious, pretty quickly. But I'm a Catholic, so I'm big on conversions and redemption. St. Paul was once the world's biggest dumpers on followers of Christ. Til he had one of those epiphanies and became one himself.

But whaddo I know...

(on edit) ...besides spelling corrections?

[iverglas]

130. well, I had taken the precaution ...

of doing a little search for x-g.o.p.er's posts. (After all, that's what I pay those DUes for, eh?)

And I saw those same talking points -- opposition to spending, and whatever the other one was -- and not much else. Oh yeah, general Bush-bashing.

Even if there has been a conversion, I'd hesitate to call it a conversion *to* anything (in fact I don't believe he himself has said this -- he has not said that he plans to vote a Democratic ticket). Lapsed RCers are not necessarily Protestants, let alone Buddhists.

It is not uncommon for people to vote against their party from time to time if they object to the leader or a local candidate. This does not mean that someone who generally espouses the principles and policies of that party has decided to embrace those of another party.

I know, it's anybody but Bush. But will that work come 2008?

I'm just a furriner; not for me to say. But I'd sure be wary about embracing someone whose conversion was so apparently shallow (or non-existent) and risking seeing the policies and principles of my party diluted in any way to hold onto a vote (or a bunch of votes) that were really just protest votes in the first place.

.

[laylah]

120. I am thinking

xgoper is genuine. He can "speak", SPELL, and articulate his arguments clearly and intelligently; therefore, I believe he's the "real deal"...and with that, may I join in welcoming you. :toast:

Jenn

[x-g.o.p.er]

62. Well, sorry you feel that way

When I get the ability to send private emails, I'd like to send you my email, and we can exchange conversion stories with skeptical rebuttal electronically, if you'd like.

[petrock2004]

86. :) i believe you

:hi: and why not? wouldn't it be admitting a weakness in my own viewpoint if i was skeptical at someone else's acceptance of it?

i'm pretty new here too, although i've pretty much been on the left side my whole life already. but it's really nice to hear your story - actually, it made me tear up a little (what can i say, it's a girl thing... lol)

you give me hope that people are outraged. even if you go back to being a republican after the neo-con army has been marched out of DC, your outrage is greatly appreciated. :pals:


:toast: :yourock:

[LTR]

133. Hey, I believe you

You actually articulate in multiple paragraphs. Don't see that too often with freepers.

Also no mention of "Hillary". Another freeper give-away.

You seem okay in my book. Definitely too smart to be a freeper.

[SammyWinstonJack]

112. I don't either

:shrug:

[RedSox02]

44. Great to here from you

I am obviously not Republican, but I would think even the GOP can do alot better than Bush. His Presidency has even been a failure under Conservative standards. He has accomplished little domestically, and after reading this article today (http://www.salon.com/books/review/2004/01/30/frum_perle/index.html), I have to say I really do not want this guy handling our National Security anymore with the kind of people he has wispering in his ears.

[democrank]

45. Watch what Bush does, not what he says.

especially in the area of veteran`s benefits.I`ve been a supporter of veteran`s issues for decades and the lip service from this administration is sickening. From Bush being AWOL from his National Guard "service" to Cheney commenting that he "had more important priorities" during Vietnam, I`m fed up with this whole bunch.

My friend, a Vietnam veteran who lives at the poverty level because of medical issues, just had his VA doctor visits go from $0 to $50 each, plus the cost of all his medications have tripled. Just do a little research and you`ll find a lot of cutbacks in veteran`s services.

If you want a real eye opener, visit these websites:

-awolbush.com...be sure to "click" on the Chickenhawk database,
which should pretty much crush the notion that Democrats don`t
stand up for their country
-Veterans for Common Sense
-Veterans for Peace
-Veterans Against the Iraq War

Be careful, though, or you might end up at GITMO with no access to a lawyer, your family, or any other mechanism for self-defense.Stay out of libraries and sever ties with any dark skinned friends who look like a terrorist. When an AWOL American president can use our soldiers for props, it`s time to say ...enough! There isn`t a rented flightsuit in the world that can erase how George Bush`s privilege and connections kept him safe during Vietnam and kept his name off that Wall in Washigton, unlike those friends of mine...mostly Democrats...who are today no more than a memory. Thank you for your service.

[JohnyCanuck]

47. They got the intelligence they wanted to get

even if they had to create their own "intelligence" agency to get it. But some justification had to be found for the pre-planned war that the PNACers were itching to get.

According to former Bush officials, all defence and intelligence sources, senior administration figures created a shadow agency of Pentagon analysts staffed mainly by ideological amateurs to compete with the CIA and its military counterpart, the Defence Intelligence Agency.

The agency, called the Office of Special Plans (OSP), was set up by the defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, to second-guess CIA information and operated under the patronage of hardline conservatives in the top rungs of the administration, the Pentagon and at the White House, including Vice-President Dick Cheney.

The ideologically driven network functioned like a shadow government, much of it off the official payroll and beyond congressional oversight. But it proved powerful enough to prevail in a struggle with the State Department and the CIA by establishing a justification for war.

<snip>

The OSP had access to a huge amount of raw intelligence. It came in part from "report officers" in the CIA's directorate of operations whose job is to sift through reports from agents around the world, filtering out the unsubstantiated and the incredible. Under pressure from the hawks such as Mr Cheney and Mr Gingrich, those officers became reluctant to discard anything, no matter how far-fetched. The OSP also sucked in countless tips from the Iraqi National Congress and other opposition groups, which were viewed with far more scepticism by the CIA and the state department.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,999737,00.html

BTW with a background in the Armed Forces you might be interested in this Real Player video of a CBC documentary on the Pentagon forcing US military personnel to take dangerous drugs such as amphetamines etc.

American military personnel speak for the first time, to explain how they were used as guinea pigs in wars ranging from Gulf, Bosnia, Afghanistan and right up until the recent conflict in Iraq.

We hear from a former White House 'Drugs Czar' who expresses grave concerns about the use of amphetamines in the military; from the man who, as Air Force Chief of Staff, banned the drugs as soon as he took over, only to see them re-introduced after his retirement; from one pilot who sacrificed his career in pursuit of the truth, as well as the case of a 'ground' soldier who killed innocent civilians for reasons he cannot understand to this day.

We're also told how the 'voluntary' nature of dispensing these drugs makes legal nonsense and how the Pentagon may very well be breaking its own laws, to the detriment of its serving men and women; only to discover that, in reality, the U.S. military is a law unto itself.

The Need for Speed, directed by Jamie Doran, is a co-production of Atlantic Celtic Films and Studio Hamburg Documentaries.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5595.htm

[matcom]

49. I'm A Fellow Vet

and DAMN PROUD to have you on board.

:hi:

[democrank]

51. I forgot to say

WELCOME! and I mean it.

[calimary]

97. Welcome to you, too, democrank!

[Mari333]

52. Welcome

As the stepmother of a military reservist on his way to Iraq, welcome to DU.
I share these sites with you also.
www.mfso.org
www.bringthemhomenow.com
=)

[Epoch]

53. These are the posts...

That make me believe we are going to win in 2004!

Welcome to DU!

[bleedingheart]

57. Welcome aboard!

I hope that you are feeling better!

[Mountainman]

58. From a Vietnam vet, welcome home and welcome to DU

I really hope your life gets to be all you want it to be. And I hope more people open their eyes as you have.

I want to tell you that we here at DU support all the troops though many of us did not support the war in Iraq.

I want to see our troops safe and not be killed in Iraq and Afghanistan and anywhere on this globe.

Bush will bring back the draft if he can to create more wars for the greater good and wealth of his supporters.

We are just numbers to them. People that they can sacrifice for their gains.

We have to stand together to make this a better country and a better world for all of us not just the haves but also for the have nots.

[SeekerofTruth]

60. Feel the same way

Absolute power corrupts absolutely. With Republicans controlling the Congress and Presidency, they are destroying the country.

About 75% of my votes are usually Republican, (keep spending in control) but more and more times voting for Democrats. Here in Illinois we through out a crooked Republican administration and hoping the same thing happens at the federal level.

I sincerely thank you for serving!

[calimary]

98. Cheers and welcome!

Now it's getting to the point that I can't keep up with all the new welcomings...

[catzies]

63. This thread has responses from several new DUers

and I'd like to say "welcome" to you all.

You also echo many of the same thoughts that were expressed to me just last night by a dear friend who is a very disillusioned GOPer right now. Lately he seems to have evolved a great deal and I empathize with him and with others who also have had the courage to reexamine long-held beliefs and in doing so rediscover their soul.

I love you all.

[shance]

67. What a wonderful, touching post* Thanks.

Im an ex Repub too, although its been some time now.

I hope you are feeling better, and I really appreciated you sharing your experience.

You inspired me to remember to do my duty and vote NO MATTER WHAT.

Ive been angry with much of the media/election process these days, but that doesnt eliminate the fact that I have to do what is in my power to make things better.

Thanks again.

[x-g.o.p.er]

69. Thank you

For your kind words. When, may I ask, did you, switch sides? And what was it that caused you to leave the GOP?

[SharonAnn]

121. I left in the early 1980's and became Independent. Still voted

for Republicans at times but began voting for some Democrats too, particularly for President and Senator.

There were three things that caused my to become awakened and then to officially "divorce" the Republican Party. They were:

1. Environment - when the Reagan/Bush people (James Watt) began removing environmental protections and selling the resources of public lands to their friends (logging, mining, drilling). I started voting for some Democrats who had concern about the environment.

2. Women's rights - when the Republicans continued fighting, even stronger, against the ERA and began trying to remove every EEO protection there was for women and minorities. Clarence Thomas was appointed to the EEOC at that time though I didn't understand the impact until later when thousands of suits had their paperwork delayed until the time period to file had expired. I started calling myself an Independent and did lots of cross-over voting.

3. Religious Right - When the religious right took over the Republican party in my part of Ohio and nearly took over the state school board with "stealth" candidates who were opposed to teaching evolution. Then I started calling myself a Democrat because I realized that my values were those expressed by the Democratic Party.

[phillybri]

68. WELCOME!!!

:kick:

[fleetus]

73. Welcome, patriot.

I am glad you share our concern for the direction our country is headed. I am active duty as well, although I've never been a Republican.

There is a Project for the New American Century (PNAC) thread aimed at people who have never heard of it before in the General Discussion forum right now. You could bookmark the thread and explore the links at your leisure because it is very long.

I don't know how to link directly to the thread, but maybe somebody else knows the thread I'm talking about and can do it.

Again, welcome! :hi:

on edit: "leftchick" posted the link to the thread I'm talking about as post #59 on this thread.

[x-g.o.p.er]

74. Thanks, I will

[Cleita]

75. Scales dropping from eyes make such a musical sound.

Welcome to DU belatedly. I didn't see the thread until now. :toast:

[ignatius]

76. Hi there, so glad you have awakened from a deep sleep

and are seeing the truth. Bush and Cheney, who ran as moderates, are taking this country in a disatrous direction. They are the neo-con right wing radicals, yes radicals, that label that they have always accused liberals of wearing.

For the love of country, I hope and pray that there are many more like you out there.

Welcome.

[rumguy]

77. heartfelt, righteous words my friend

I don't have kids yet, hell I am not even married.

But when I do settle down and have a family, I don't want my children to be saddled with a debt we could have stopped.

I cannot stand debt. I don't even own a credit card, and it saddens me to see our government acting like a socal valley girl on a spending spree in a strip mall...

[Danieljay]

79. welcome, would you consider

mailing your letter to your local paper editorials? I admire your courage and your ability to see the truth! Blessings to you and your family.

[otohara]

80. Welcome to DU

and the other side

[MrsMatt]

81. Thank you for your reasoned post.

Hopefully, you will find that DU is a very inclusive entity; with room for diverse philosophies. Many members are very passionate about their views, and will not shirk from telling you when they think you are wrong. But overall, I believe that most of us are respectful of the views of others, even when they disagree with your position. Of course, if you come across someone who really bugs you, you can alway put them on "ignore"!

Many thanks for your past and continued service for our country. It's an honor to welcome you to our little on-line community.

[Postman]

83. Welcome fellow veteran. US Navy 1981-86

I hope Bush is toast in November. I just registered my son and his friend to vote today. Both in the Democrat column.

[RainDog]

84. Welcome, and thank you and your fellow soldiers

who are willing to put yourselves on the line for our country.

I am so sorry to hear of all the abuses the current soldiers and vets have had to endure lately. It makes me ashamed of my fellow citizens.

I supported the Afghanistan invasion, but not the Iraqi one, because I had followed the way in which intel was created...not by intel veterans, but by the Office of Special Projects.

This exerpt starts to get into the issue, and there is a second part to this Lt. Col's article also online. The third part, as far as I can tell, has not yet been published.


http://www.amconmag.com/12_1_03/feature.html

A senior Air Force officer watches as the neocons consolidate their Pentagon coup.


By Karen Kwiatkowski

Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski recently retired from the U.S. Air Force. Her final posting was as an analyst at the Pentagon. Below is the first of three installments describing her experience there. They provide a unique view of the Department of Defense during a period of intense ideological upheaval, as the United States prepared to launch—for the first time in its history—a “preventive” war.


...At the end of the summer of 2002, new space had been found upstairs on the fifth floor for an “expanded Iraq desk.” It would be called the Office of Special Plans. We were instructed at a staff meeting that this office was not to be discussed or explained, and if people in the Joint Staff, among others, asked, we were to offer no comment. We were also told that one of the products of this office would be talking points that all desk officers would use verbatim in the preparation of their background documents.

About that same time, my education on the history and generation of the neoconservative movement had completed its first stage. I now understood that neoconservatism was both unhistorical and based on the organizing construct of “permanent revolution.” I had studied the role played by hawkish former Sen. Scoop Jackson (D-Wash.) and the neoconservative drift of formerly traditional magazines like National Review and think tanks like the Heritage Foundation. I had observed that many of the neoconservatives in the Pentagon not only had limited military experience, if any at all, but they also advocated theories of war that struck me as rejections of classical liberalism, natural law, and constitutional strictures. More than that, the pressure of the intelligence community to conform, the rejection of it when it failed to produce intelligence suitable for supporting the “Iraq is an imminent threat to the United States” agenda, and the amazing things I was hearing in both Bush and Cheney speeches told me that not only do neoconservatives hold a theory based on ideas not embraced by the American mainstream, but they also have a collective contempt for fact.

By August, I was morally and intellectually frustrated by my powerlessness against what increasingly appeared to be a philosophical hijacking of the Pentagon. Indeed, I had sworn an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, but perhaps we were never really expected to take it all that seriously … 

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

91. Last part here:

http://www.amconmag.com/1_19_04/article1.html

[RainDog]

114. When I read that the chickenhawks called Gen. Zinni a traitor

I was floored. The lunatics have taken over the asylum.

"I was present at a staff meeting when Deputy Undersecretary Bill Luti called General Zinni a traitor. At another time, I discussed with a political appointee the service being rendered by Colin Powell in the early winter and was told the best service he could offer would be to quit. I heard in another staff meeting a derogatory story about a little Tommy Fargo who was acting up. Little Tommy was, of course, Commander, Pacific Forces, Admiral Fargo. This was shared with the rest of us as a Bill Luti lesson in civilian control of the military. It was certainly not civil or controlled, but the message was crystal.

When President Bush gave his State of the Union address, there was a small furor over the reference to the yellowcake in Niger that Saddam was supposedly seeking. After this speech, everyone was discussing this as either new intelligence saved up for just such a speech or, more cynically, just one more flamboyant fabrication that those watching the propaganda campaign had come to expect. I had not heard about yellowcake from Niger or seen it mentioned on the Office of Special Plans talking points. When I went over to my old shop, sub-Saharan Africa, to congratulate them for making it into the president’s speech, they said the information hadn’t come from them or through them. They were as surprised and embarrassed as everyone else that such a blatant falsehood would make it into a presidential speech.

When General Zinni was removed as Bush’s Middle East envoy and Elliot Abrams joined the National Security Council (NSC) to lead the Mideast division, whoops and high-fives had erupted from the neocon cubicles. By midwinter, echoes of those celebrations seemed to mutate into a kind of anxious anticipation, shared by most of the Pentagon. The military was anxiously waiting under the bed for the other shoe to drop amidst concerns over troop availability, readiness for an ill-defined mission, and lack of day-after clarity. The neocons were anxiously struggling to get that damn shoe off, gleefully anticipating the martinis to be drunk and the fun to be had. The other shoe fell with a thump on Feb. 5 as Colin Powell delivered his United Nations presentation.

It was a sad day for me and many others with whom I worked when we watched Powell’s public capitulation. The era when Powell had been considered a political general, back when he was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, had in many ways been erased for those of us who greatly admired his coup of the Pentagon neocons when he persuaded the president to pursue UN support for his invasion of Iraq. Now it was as if Powell had again rolled military interests—and national interests as well."

[ElsewheresDaughter]

89. welcome back from the darkside...i'm sorry you were hurt by bushco*..

but i'm happy you walked into the light :toast: :you rock:

and drinks all around for everybody:beer: :beer: :beer: it's a time for celebration :party:

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

[Hippo_Tron]

96. Woot, exactly what I've been saying all along...

Bush is not a conservative just a hypocritical corporate crook.

[GregD]

99. tainted computer touch screen...

<<<Or press the possibly tainted computer touch screen that can't be manually checked.>>>


x-g.o.p.er: Drop by www.verifiedvoting.org and have a look around. Also, have a look at www.servesecurityreport.org to learn how the DoD plans to have uniformed military vote.

With your credentials, and potential contacts, there may be a very helpful way you can assist in resolving the paperless electronic voting issue. The contact link on our site is a good way to reach me.

Welcome back from the war - I hope you health improves.

GregD

[Seldona]

101. Bravo!

And welcome.

I too think what is being done to vets benifits is obsene.

If we need to make cuts, I believe the last place we should be doing it is to people that put their lives on the line for their country.

And I respect the military and the sacrifices you are asked to make.

/salute

I am glad you were able to get better.

To bad it took a spitfire like your wife to make it happen.

Unacceptable.

[shoopnyc123]

102. WOW...

I SOOOOOOOO RESPECT YOU! Thank you for your post!

[Solomon]

103. You can't imagine the relief that you bring.

And the most impressive part of your stellar post, is your understanding of the freedom to speak. You understand it the way it's meant to be understood, and some of us were beginning to wonder whether the military understands free speech. God knows you are soooo reassuring to us. It's beautiful. Simply beautiful.

[Piperay]

104. Welcome x-g.o.p.er

:hi: I used to be a republican too, though it was a long time ago. I'm glad you joined us. :-)

[radfringe]

105. welcome aboard!

[fujiyama]

106. WELCOME TO DU!!!

:toast:

:bounce:

[G_j]

110. let me add my welcome also!

:toast: The American people want their country back.

[Jack Rabbit]

111. Welcome to DU, sir

Don't mind the sir in the salutation. Since I left the military, it's something I call only people worthy of respect.

[Andy_Stephenson]

116. Glad you stopped

"Drinking the Kool-Aid"

[jsw_81]

118. Welcome to the party!

I'm also a former Republican but I became a Democrat four years ago after seeing how they savaged John McCain in South Carolina. That little episode made me sick to my stomach. The Florida debacle made me a Democrat for life.

p.s. Thank you for your military service.

[KayLaw]

119. My neighbor feels the same as you

He is a veteran of the Gulf War and has some sort of disability because of it. I think it's something the government denies causing. I should know because they even did an article about him in the St. Petersburg Times, but I can't quite remember what the disability is.

Anyhow, he feels so angry and betrayed that he won't even fly the American flag over his house on July 4th, or ever.

When I was younger I was a respiratory therapy technician. One woman I went to school with went to work at a VA hospital while I took a position at a private hospital. I couldn't believe the things they let her do - intubation, inserting arterial lines - things that usu sally are done only by physicians. At the time, I rather envied her, but now wonder why it was allowed.

Well, welcome.:hi:

[UrbScotty]

124. Once again, WELCOME!

Welcome to our cause!

[Zhade]

126. Your signature is dangerous.

We should NOT be encouraging people to vote online. Dear God, the voting machines are bad enough - internet voting has NO security worthy of the name!

[Raenelle]

125. Welcome to DU.

I've always been a Democrat, but I had a light go off in the 60s about war. Some magazine had a picture of a VC with his head cut off. I stared at it and was just overcome by his humanity. My dad, a WW2 vet, said something of the same thing during Iraq War I--you can't tell the difference between a dead Iraqi soldier and a dead American soldier, if they don't have their uniforms on.

I respect what you did, fighting for the US, but not because I put patriotism above human rights, but because I admire courage wherever I see it.

I'm one of those left-of-the-lefties here, and it will undoubtedly be a good thing to have an informed, thoughtful, generally more conservative voice here. Thanks for your post, and welcome.

[petrock2004]

129. wow

very thoughtful post... i just meandered back on here today to see what else people had written and i'm glad i did.