It's back to reading DU for me.

[The_Mule]

I recently made a post that surprised me in the response it got. In the post, I tried to make three points:

1. Mr. Bush is trying to shift some level of blame for the Iraq war to the democrats. This is a position of major weakness for Mr. Bush, since it tacitly admits that the war was a mistake. I suggest that we do not go on the defensive about this, which is a position of weakness, but instead focus on ending the war immediately, a position of strength.

2. I pointed out a few of the atrocities being committed in this war in the name of all Americans. It makes me sick that this is happening, and I want it to stop immediately.

3. Obviously, I was also trying to impress how important it is for this war to stop immediately.

Now, I got a couple of reasoned responses even when someone was pointing out some flaws in my thinking or writing. Thank you for that. But for the most part, I got accused of being a freeper, repeating Mr. Bush's talking points, and trying to catch up people in a "guilt balloon". I think not wanting to see your country commit atrocities and wanting to end this war immediately are quite progressive values.

This wasn't a productive experience for me, so I'm going back to mainly reading DU, especially H2O Man, redstone, octafish, autorank, and kliljedahl's toon collections.

I don't want to rehash it in this thread, but here's my post I'm talking about:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5335293

I'm not expecting any replies to this. I just want everyone to know that I'm not some kind of freeper troll, something I thought I would never have to say.

[EFerrari]

1. What in the world is a guilt baloon?

:wtf:

[ret5hd]

2. and who's redstone octafish?

[The_Mule]

6. That's redstone, octafish

Damned commas.

[The_Mule]

3. I have no idea.

Ask Will Pitt.

:hi:

[EFerrari]

23. Maybe it's like being stuck in the refrigerator?

We squabble around here because we care. Damn caring.

:)

[WilliamPitt]

71. "If you're an American, you're to blame as well"

You skipped over a major portion of your post. To wit, everyone in the country is to blame.

I don't accept that. I'm not going to run through all the ten thousand things I've tried to do to stop this war before and after it started, nor am I going to run through the ten million things DUers have done to achieve the same end.

We tried to stop it. Many of us have been fighting it 18 hours a day, every day, since it first bubbled up in July of 2002.

If you want to feel like it is your fault, go for it. If you want to make generalizations about a complacent American public, fire away.

But you've picked the wrong audience if you are trying to drag us into the idea that this mess is our fault. It isn't. If the people here had gotten their way, Gore would be in his second term, the WTC towers would still be standing thanks to the presence of a competent administration, and Iraq would be a nuisance instead of a goddam killing cancer. Oh, and more than two thousand American soldiers and tens of thousands of Iraqis would not be dead.

Oh, PS, I never called you a freeper. I said you were wrong. Work on those coping skills.

[The_Mule]

77. I hear you, Mr. Pitt.

I wasn't trying to get you or anyone else here to take *blame*. I know that most of us are and have been doing everything we can. I can see where my words were not carefully chosen. Thanks for being part of the process for helping me get the right words behind my sentiment.

I know it wasn't you that called me a freeper. Someone (not you) did say I belonged in "freeperland". It doesn't bother me - it just surprised me. They may be your bread and butter, but words are a funny thing to me. I threw out words expressing outrage, and I didn't realize they could express blame for someone else.

[raccoon]

81. I second that emotion. nt

[Dutch]

78. A banal bit of Dr Phil speak used by those who think others are very, very

easily impressed.

[Vanje]

4. let it go

If you dont want to rehash an old post, then ferkripes sake, dont rehash an old post.

Move on

[DoYouEverWonder]

5. We are not at war in Iraq

The US is the Occupying Force. We are in charge and it is up to us to maintain law and order. It is not that hard to do. Iraq is a relatively small country of only about 25 million people, about the size of Texas. Yet, even after spending a billion+ per week, we seem to be hell bent on destroying Iraq no matter how much it costs.

Isn't it time to stop responding to everything that happens there with a military offensive? If the US can't figure out how to run a country, then stand down and let the UN take control of peacekeeping efforts. It's time to stop the senseless killing.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

10. Absolutely right

Every time I hear someone say "war" in regard to what we've done in Iraq, I flip. It was an "invasion," an "unprovoked attack," and now it's an occupation.

They are not "insurgents," they are people, patriots in most cases, who want the occupying invaders (us) out of their country. If the USA were invaded, I would be an "insurgent."

They are not "makeshift" bombs, nor are they "improvised explosive devices." They are carefully constructed bombs, just like the ones we use on the Iraqi citizenry - for no good reason. They are not some whimsical project dreamed up in someone's backyard, as the words "makeshift" and "improvised" would lead you to believe.

Ever since the far right hijacked the phrase "pro-life," when all they really are is "anti-choice," I've been on the "Use The Right Words, Dammit" bandwagon. It'll be such a relief when someone catches on.

Your post is spot on. Thanks.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

14. I'd be an insurgent, too

if we were invaded (well, in my younger days..now I'd make sandwiches for the isurgents) but you know, I gotta tell you, I wouldn't blow myself up.

That is a whole different mind set and world view and I just don't share it. It is rather unique, I think!

[OldLeftieLawyer]

18. WE'd make sandwiches

We'd be consultants (I first typed "conslutants," but we're not Republicans....), but, no, we'd never do violent stuff.

We would, though, make sure everyone was dressed properly. And had a safe place to sleep.

Yes, the world has changed, and what we haven't yet internalized, I think, is that the "war on terror" is going up against people who are willing to die for their beliefs, no matter how irrational we think those beliefs are.

I don't know how you fight that. I really don't.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

25. I don't know how to fight that, either.

And that in a nutshell is the cultural divide. It is an attitude about death, I guess.

And it is very alien to our Western culture.

I mean, there was the "Give me Liberty or Give me Death" meme with Patrick Henry, but you know that was all spin. He didn't mean it!

[OldLeftieLawyer]

28. It's about faith, isn't it?

These people, no matter how misguided we believe them to be, are sincere in their faith in a way that escapes Western religions.

If Christians truly believed in Heaven and Hell and martyrdom, they would be just as fearless and dedicated as the terrorists. But, as with most organized religions, they're just blowing smoke. They're not willing to die for anything, and that, I think, might just be where it all ends for everyone.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

33. Yes, I don't know that I am wiling to die for my faith

I wouldn't have gone into the den with the lions. I am WAY too pragmatic for that. I figure I can think whatever the hell I want to and so far, nobody can get in there with me.

Yes, these people must really believe in the afterlife concept. I wonder where they get their surety? Do they know something we don't know?

[enough]

40. Faith and profound desperation.

I think we have to keep the despair of generations in mind when contemplating the willingness of people to die for their beliefs. If you truly feel that your life and that of your community is made intolerable by implacable injustice, your view of suicide is surely different.

[WiseButAngrySara]

46. I'm not sure about that. Look at the words of "Onward Christian Soldier",

"Onward Christian Soldier, marching as to War, With the Cross of Jesus,Going on Before...Like a Mighty Army, Moves the Church of God...

And another: "The Son of God goes Forth to War, A kingly crown to gain; His blood-red banner streams afar; And follows in his train...

And: "Stand Up, Stand Up for Jesus! Ye soldiers of the Cross, Lift high his Royal Banner, It must not suffer loss. From Victory unto Victory, His Army shall he lead, Til every foe is vanquished, and Christ is Lord indeed...

And: "Who is on the Lord's Side? Who will serve the King...Enter we the Army, Raise the warrior psalm...Fierce may be the conlict, Strong may be the foe, But the Kingdom's army, none can overthrow!...

These are just a few examples (out of 25 hymns) from the Presbyterian Hymnal on the subject of (I kid you not!) Christian Warfare.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

47. So, tell me -

are there any verses about dying?

[WiseButAngrySara]

49. What war doesn't imply death? War in God's name, in Christ's name,

War to obtain the Kingdom of Heaven, which is death itself, the death of the martyrs for Christ...all about death! How do we know that the Jihad's original intent was a metaphor which was misinterpreted by fanatical followers, just like the Crusades?

All of the Christian Hymns I quoted from are examples of a Holy War, which is exactly what the Jihad is, IMHO.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

51. Agreed

But, in these hymns, as with all propaganda, there's no specific mention of death. That's the sanitizing of it all, giving something horrible the appearance of something clean and neat and righteous and noble.

I never meant to imply in my question that war did not imply death. What I asked, specifically, was where in the hymns was death mentioned?

People do not respond to implications and allusions - they respond to the cold, hard reality of the words, and if the propagandists can make the words understandable, they've got the people on their side.

There is no mention, in any of those hymns (none of which are familiar to me, by the way, except in the most passing way), I'll wager, of death.

Without that belief that enables you to die happily for that in which you believe, you will not prevail.

[WiseButAngrySara]

63. I think I see what you mean. You have my curiousity up. I'll do further

research, and update if I find anything. I was raised Presbyterian, and the song "Onward Christian Soldiers" is quite familiar to me, but I had to look it up in the old hymnal to quote it exactly, and then I discovered the category of Christian Warfare songs.

What I asked, specifically, was where in the hymns was death mentioned?

People do not respond to implications and allusions - they respond to the cold, hard reality of the words, and if the propagandists can make the words understandable, they've got the people on their side.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

61. Yes, Christian warfare

but wouldn't you agree a metaphor? Where the soldiering is in the world for Christ? But really, what is WITH all the war metaphor? You know these were all written by men. (not trying to start and gender wars, though)

Now, listen to the words of I Vow to Thee My Country:

I vow to thee, my country—all earthly things above—
Entire and whole and perfect, the service of my love;
The love that asks no question, the love that stands the test,
That lays upon the altar the dearest and the best;
The love that never falters, the love that pays the price,
The love that makes undaunted the final sacrifice.

And there’s another country, I’ve heard of long ago—
Most dear to them that love her, most great to them that know;
We may not count her armies, we may not see her King;
Her fortress is a faithful heart, her pride is suffering;
And soul by soul and silently her shining bounds increase,
And her ways are ways of gentleness, and all her paths are peace.



No surprise it was written in England in 1918 when they had just basically lost an entire generation of young men.

But you certain have a point: Christians celebrate war and war imagery.

[WiseButAngrySara]

64. Thanks for posting this. It's beautiful. Made me cry...this "occupation"

(bloody illegal, immoral WAR) has got to end!


We may not count her armies, we may not see her King;
Her fortress is a faithful heart, her pride is suffering;
And soul by soul and silently her shining bounds increase,
And her ways are ways of gentleness, and all her paths are peace.

edited to add following when I realized thatI hadn't addressed the issue of metaphor, which I had done in a previous post...

"How do we know that the Jihad's original intent was a metaphor which was misinterpreted by fanatical followers, just like the Crusades? All of the Christian Hymns I quoted from are examples of a Holy War, which is exactly what the Jihad is, IMHO."

So much of "true" Religion is metaphorical, and meant to be. The extremeists always take it to be the literal truth of God, IMHO.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

73. I couldn't agree with you more

if I had written your post.

[sendero]

70. Talk is cheap...

... and the faith of most does not extend to assuming god will protect their head from being blown off.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

19. Semantics check

to me, anything that is not made in a factory is "improvised." I have read that these weapons are, indeed, made in backyards, in basements, etc. Certainly "whimsical" would not be a word that would apply, but "makeshift and improvised" are, in my opinion, descriptive.

Now, rocket launchers that they bought from another country, that's not makeshift.

Actually, to me, "makeshift and improvised" are not in the least bit negative, they speak to the insurgency's resourcefulness and passion.

I respectfully add that we can't demand, in life, that everyone use the same words we do. For example, to me, a person can pro life and anti choice, both, OR one or the other. It all goes to that actual person's mindset, not a political movement. Everyone using the same word for widely varying attitudes and emotions I believe is a form of group think, or group talk and not a good thing.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

24. I would respectfully disagree

Your definition, while your own, is wrong. Look up "improvised" and "makeshift." You would define as "improvised" a piece of handmade jewelry? No, the language of the occupation is quite deliberate and very misleading. Don't buy into it. Seriously, check the definitions.

They are not descriptive of what the "insurgents" are doing. Their weapons are just as carefully planned and crafted as ours, albeit on much smaller scales.

Words are weapons, especially in times like these. Those words are carefully selected to cause the "insurgents" to appear less-than-organized, when, in fact, they're killing our military are a very organized rate.

I never proposed "everyone using the same word," and I'm not sure how you got that notion from my words. In fact, I was railing AGAINST that precise concept, since that's what the MSM is doing by using the words of the government.

And those words are deliberately inaccurate, deceptive, and misleading.

Seriously. Check those definitions. I live and die by good dictionaries, I must admit. They're the coin of my realm, and, in my work as a lawyer and as a novelist, they must always be precise. That's why this aspect of the Iraq occupation is particularly jarring to me.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

29. Well, you are correct...I haven't looked them up

I was just going with the definitions as commonly used. I will get to dict.online.

I do think you can be makeshift, improvised and VERY organized, as in the Viet Cong.

I can certainly see how you would be a wordsmith, given your vocation (especially) and your avocation.

I think your statement "I've been on the "Use The Right Words, Dammit" bandwagon" gave me the impression there are very specific words you think we should all use.

However, I think that arguing the meaning of words is really a positive way to frame one's position, so I'm okay with that.

ADDENDUM: I'm back from my trip to the dictionary. Here's what I found for "improvised."
To invent, compose, or perform with little or no preparation.

To play or sing (music) extemporaneously, especially by inventing variations on a melody or creating new melodies in accordance with a set progression of chords.

To make or provide from available materials: improvised a dinner from what I found in the refrigerator.



Now, I think the third definition, making something from available materials is what I had in mind. Because with the occupation they can't really go purchase the ordinances legally, or the materials, so wouldn't they use what they could come up with? That said, you know what? I have no idea, really, how they do it!


and here if "makeshift."
n.
A temporary or expedient substitute for something else.

adj.
Suitable as a temporary or expedient substitute: used a rock as a makeshift hammer.



I guess I'd put forth the same argument for makeshift as above.

Perhaps the problem is in the way we view these words. I am under the impression you feel the use of them paints the insurgents as novices, ineffectual, etc. But I see the words as hearkening back to concepts like the American Revolution when we used what was at hand. (No, freepers, I'm not calling the insurgents patriots so don't bother to copy this thread, it isn't my point.)

[OldLeftieLawyer]

52. Well, you'd be right -

they are, those "insurgents," in the same spot as were our forefathers during the American Revolution. Only, this time, we're the Brits, we're the Bad Guys, we're the invaders, and the dynamics are identical.

But, my point was that calling these things "improvised" and "makeshift" is a subtle and very smart psychologist move, designed to lull the sheep who are the majority of our citizenry into thinking that the "insurgents" are not prepared, not able to accomplish much, sort of like they're working with construction paper and rounded scissors, a great big pot of glue, and maybe some paper clips.

See what I'm trying to say?

[TallahasseeGrannie]

60. Yes, I see where you are coming from

and I think it might be that I am too nuanced in my interpretation of these words and that the vast majority of folks do it it as running with scissors.

[WiseButAngrySara]

37. OldLeftieLawyer, I wish you'ld start a separate post on the RW

hijacked phrases, as that could be most illuminating. Every word used by this administration is in fact, almost the opposite of the real meaning of the word! "Freedom" with the use of force on an innocent country that did not provoke us, "Pro-Life" when they are anything but pro-life, being pro-war, pro-death penalty, pro-guns, "Moral Values" when their actions in the past and present continue to belie any morality at all, and etc., etc., etc.

It drives me mad with fury at times, and they like to paint things in black and white terms, because that's how 'simple-minded' Americans tend to think. Since the RWers are 'pro-life', 'freedom' lovers and the party of 'moral values', the opposition becomes pro-death or pro-abortion, freedom haters, and the party of the immoral! Just look at how the wonderful word Liberal has been maligned!

[OldLeftieLawyer]

53. Feel free

Take my post and do whatever you want with it.

[ljm2002]

39. I am always careful...

...when discussing the Iraq fiasco, to call it an "invasion" not a "war".

We do need to use language more precisely. One reason the rabid right was able to hijack the political discourse in this country, was they had their "talking points" and used them religiously. I am not suggesting we do the same -- we don't have to put out the blast fax every morning -- but certainly our party's leaders and spokespersons should have some consistency in how they frame the issues of the day, and precision in the language that they use.

It is a mistake to think people don't notice language. Even if they do not consciously notice, it sinks in. Again -- it is one reason the rabid right has been so effective. They take ownership of the word "values" and all of a sudden it means we don't have any. They coin the term "pro-life" and by implication we are "anti-life". We of course must never use the term "pro-life" to describe their position, we must simply call it "anti-choice". To do otherwise -- to use their term -- is suicidal to our position.

My pet peeve is their conscious use of the term "Democrat party". But dammit, I have not yet come up with a suitable tit-for-tat alternative. "Republic party" just doesn't work -- because we *do* use the word Democrat to describe a party member, whereas they *do not* use the word Republic for that purpose. And other shortened forms -- "Repub", "Pug", "Publican", "Repuke", etc. -- simply do not work as well. Still I think we really need to find an equally irritating form to start using, whether it applies to the word Republican or to some other word that encompasses them. It is just something we need to do, IMO.

[WiseButAngrySara]

48. I agree! I hadn't noticed the intentional "Democrat Party"...thanks for

the alert. I like "Republican Party" myself, as in retro puberty! (pronounced re- peeyoo- ble- can)

[ljm2002]

54. I like a lot of the alternative forms...

...for Republicans; unfortunately, they will not sink in at the unconscious level the way the term "Democrat party" does.

We need to find something equally annoying to them, and that will be unconsciously adopted by those who are not paying attention -- because that is a large part of what makes the term "Democrat party" both so annoying to us, *and* so effective for them.

[WiseButAngrySara]

62. Repubocrat? LOL! ...n/t

[WiseButAngrySara]

65. No, a better one: Canned the Republic (instead of republican) ...n/t

[ljm2002]

67. Actually now that I think about it...

...maybe "the Repub Party" would work. For some reason, "the Republic Party" does not work at all. Actually I know why, it's because we do not call members of the Republican Party, Republics. We call them Republicans -- it's the same word as the party name.

I'm a Democrat, a member of the Democratic Party. Calling it the Democrat Party shortens the real name into a word used for members of the party. It works, and others unconsciously adopt it, because it's almost right. But make no mistake, it was instigated consciously.

You're* a Repub, a member of the Republican Party. Calling it the Repub Party shortens the real name into a word used (by some of us) for members of the party. It's almost right, and it is not overtly pejorative, an important point if this is to be effective.

If used consistently and visibly, by members of our party, it could get annoying to the other side. Especially, if our side would just use it -- pointedly -- *every time* a member of the other side used the term Democrat Party.





* Not you personally, of course, just for the sake of the formal argument.

[WiseButAngrySara]

72. I'm all for it! Or, the Republic Party, but that isn't as 'overtly perjor

-ative' as the Repub Party!

[raccoon]

82. They are not "insurgents," they are resistance fighters. nt

[seabeyond]

7. depends on who i am arguing with,but i sometimes use this argument

myself. if i am talking ot a person that wants to pretend they have no responsibility in this,..... ergo able to shut ears and close eyes to atrocities then i bring this up. that each and everyone of us are responsible for these death and the actions of our country. i agree. but....

raising kids and how they have got to learn to walk life, they are responsible for their action, and that is when i squarely place it on bush shoulder. this is his job. the results are from his decision making. we have no control in this. ultimately, this is bush war and his failure and his shame

but in the larger picture, you bet, this is all of us

and no, i dont think you are a freeper. i dont hunt for freepers. seldom i see them among us

you seem relatively new here. dont take things personally. the net. people say things on this board they would never say eye to eye

[ohio_liberal]

8. You've gotta have a thick skin

If you post something that might be controversial you have to accept that some people will oppose your point of view, maybe even in a rude way. I wouldn't take it so personally.

[Ladyhawk]

27. It's easy to say this, hard to do.

:shrug:

I wasn't involved in this particular argument, but I've been involved in others (obviously). It would be nice if folks could refrain from personal attacks and rudeness, but that's probably expecting far too much, even though good behavior is outlines in the board rules.

I know I've been guilty of personal attacks, too. All I'm saying is it would be nice to be able to discuss ideas without flames erupting at every turn. Gasoline-soaked kindling is stacked around DU. Say anything controversial--or heck, just say anything at all--and someone is going to strike a match.

[ohio_liberal]

30. Oh, I'm sure you're right

It is the bane of my existance that I can't express myself well in print. I meant to say that you have to expect arguments and learn to deal with it, not that people will stop engaging in that sort of behavior.

One long-time member suggested that I was a Freeper infiltrator within my first 10 posts. Of course that was back when the rules allowed that sort of thing. If I had let myself take it to heart I wouldn't have come back.

[sandnsea]

9. Oh, happens to everybody

Toughen up!! :)

I think people didn't understand what you were trying to get at. We need a "We The People" moment, like the little Vietnamese girl, when we collectively become sick and realize "We The People" ARE doing this. Certainly the endless deaths of our troops contributed to stopping Vietnam, but so did the atrocities to the villagers and children.

We do need to own our government and this war. And that WE were lied to. We talk about a disconnect between the people and reality. This is part of it. People compartmentalize their own lives as "Americans" and what "the government" is doing around the world. Needs to change.

[The_Mule]

74. That's exactly where I was trying to go with it.

I wasn't trying to say we here at DU, and lots of other people as well, aren't doing everything we can. Or that we are to *blame* for the atrocities. It's just that we need to have the "We The People" moment, as you put it so very well.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

11. I had not read that thread

And while I can admire your sense of responsibility, I personally don't share it.

I am ashamed of my country and its actions but I have never pulled a trigger and I do not accept moral responsibility for the mess in Iraq, any more than I did for Viet Nam, Hiroshima, etc. If I did, I'd end up in the psych ward, paralyzed and unable to do anything at all.

Evil people do evil things and sometimes the rest of us are in the vicinity. It has always been this way and I believe it always will be this way. My in-laws lived miles from German camps. While they have suffered because of that, they still know they didn't commit those heinous acts and they had no way of stopping them.

Now, I have also not given over my life to protest, and pointing out the evil in the world..(and I admire those who have) but I spend my life teaching young children to value creativity, construction and peace. That's what I do.

[The_Mule]

76. I know what you mean, TG.

Your last paragraph is beautiful.

[MojoXN]

12. I'm sorry that you're disillusioned...

But hey, look on the bright side. Your original post got eight nominations! I know that none of MY posts ever had eight when I was at a 200 post count.

Stick with posting. It's a great way to blow off steam. And remember, it's just the "internets"!

:hi:

MojoXN

[The_Mule]

79. Thanks for the advice, MojoXN.

I may just keep the posting up.

My teenager says "internets" is now out and now it's "interweb". Don't know where they got that one. :shrug:
I like "internets" since it makes fun of Bush.

[madokie]

13. You'll never have to say that to me.

I don't and won't disect your or anyone else's statements, I read the message. Some get hung up on one aspect of a person's post and then never see the big picture. You hang in there. We need personal views.
:toast:
Edited: Welcome to DU

[acmejack]

15. Don't take it so personally (please)

A provocative headline is sure to generate comment. There are a large number of people who have fought this war tough and nail since it's inception. The only crime they are responsible for is the location of their birth, IMO.

Anyway, people here tend to be quite passionate and be prickly. I have apologized to more than one member for ill considered comments. They were gracious enough to accept too. People are (or should be) attacking the idea, not you personally.

[UTUSN]

16. A Point of Style: The "Mr Bush" Multiple-references Were Jarring to Me

Perhaps you are just polite and use formal address for (everybody?), but one small sign of my being repelled by anything and everything that Shrub, LIMBOsevic, O'LOOFAH, et al., stand for is never (for me) to refer to them with any form of respect, even just their correct surnames, much less "Mr". Perhaps your respectful references gave a patina of legitimacy to him and his policies that irritated others by association.


For the record, on content (as opposed to style), I disagree with your o.p. in the original thread. Key words: "Opinions," "discussion". The posters who disagreed with you mostly gave their reasons. What bothers me is when people SUCKER PUNCH (which is not the case here).

[Pirate Smile]

17. It happens to everybody. The worst is when you think you said something

that is no big deal and then you get knocked-upside-the-head when you weren't really expecting it.

I think it is time for a group hug.

:grouphug:




I don't know why but I think you need the baby hippo pic




NAIROBI, JANUARY 6: A baby hippopotamus that survived the tsumani waves on the Kenyan coast has formed a strong bond with a giant male century-old tortoise, in an animal facility in the Port city of Mombasa, officials said today.

The hippopotamus, nicknamed Owen and weighing about 300 kilograms, was swept down Sabaki river into the Indian ocean, then forced back to shore when tsumani struck the Kenyan coast on December 26, before rangers rescued him.

‘‘It is incredible. A-less-than-a-year-old hippo has adopted a male tortoise, about a century old, and the tortoise seems to be very happy with being a ‘mother’,’’ ecologist Paula Kahumbu, who is in-charge of Lafarge park, told AFP.
:)

[OldLeftieLawyer]

21. You're right!

And, how about The Pussycat?

Yes, yes, The Pussycat:

[EFerrari]

22. That damn cat makes me laugh every single time lol! n/t

[OldLeftieLawyer]

26. You're so easy ......

I'll bet you like him, too (I think of him as George W. Bush):

[EFerrari]

35. ouch!

LOL!

[lostnfound]

38. I second that.

:grouphug:

It happens to all of us. It's hard to judge a person's sincerity sometimes just by reading their words, and people jump to conclusions occasionally. Maybe you hit some nerves. It's definitely a raw subject. Feeling powerless to stop the invasion when it was happening was a very painful experience.

If someone accuses you of being a freeper they are violating DU rules and you are more than welcome to alert on it, by the way.

[WiseButAngrySara]

56. Oh Pirate Smile, you made ME smile!

:) :) :) :grouphug: :) :) :)

[OldLeftieLawyer]

20. Your original post back there

That was a terrific post. I think you went over the heads of a lot of folks, but you certainly spoke to more than a few.

I agree with all that you said.

Welcome to DU, and don't let yourself be put off from posting by people who didn't understand. If it upsets you, don't forget that little icon up there, on the far right of the name of the poster who might not get you - it's the "Ignore" feature, and, it's a brilliant solution.

Welcome. Don't stop.

[itzamirakul]

31. Choose your battles....

wisely. Just a week or so ago I wrote a post about the fact that the Congressional Black Caucus was being ignored for the work they have been doing for five years in election fraud when the Kerry/Mark Crispin Miller argument came out. After awhile, my thread was deleted and I was advised by a mod not to "call out" other DUers.
That taught me that one can not always say what one really feels on these boards. It is up to the mods, who can often post whatever they choose and delete whatever they choose.

So, it is not worth the battle to fight with them or some of the more favored posters or ideas. With a little ingenuity you can always get your point across. In the end, what does it matter because the pols we are talking about don't give a sh!t what we are saying on these boards anyway.

Of you are a freeper, people will soon figure that out. If you are not, just forget that post and go on to the next battle.

[The_Mule]

80. At the risk of deletion.

I think the CBC have been largely ignored. I still remember 2000 when they were the only ones standing for the fight.

[neebob]

32. Shoulda just gone with the three points

What I get from your other post is that Iraq is my personal doing. Pitt's response about the guilt balloon was merciful in its restraint. I ain't gettin' in, either.

[pitohui]

34. you made your points badly

too bad but it's a cruel old internet

saying "you (and making it explicit that by "you" you did mean DU posters and not the generic "you") bombed fallujah" is a hurtful and unfair accusation that will not win you any friends nor should it

guilt does not empower, it saps the heart & the will

i suggest if you want to oppose war that you find a way to make yr case w.out trying to guilt-trip people, it don't even work when mom does it

[Old and In the Way]

36. Seems a reasonable collection of statements.

Please don't stop arguing your opinion. If everyone did, it would get damn boring around here...

[Festivito]

41. I agree with thicker skin responses.

There are freepers here, what makes you think they don't just try to irk you into doing what you're saying you'll do? Huh?

Try not to take things too seriously.

One guy said your POST should be in freeperland, NOT YOU. He was stretching a point, I think he was wrong, you think he was wrong, but, SO WHAT. He was trying to be passionately expressive.

Your point was passionately expressive.

So, you both should go hide like ostriches from each other and the rest of us. No.

It's hard to let those hits roll over our user names. My username probably still clogs DU's ignore list function for years. I have controversial points, I want to make. It takes time and persistence.

Hone your skill. The best memory tool is the pen, now the keyboard. Good progress is slow but lasting. And, your point from that post, has not sunk into my way of thinking yet. It's working its way inside me.

We are responsible for the actions of our democracy, inasmuch as we have a true democracy. Democracy brings about a higher level of performance by hearing the involved larger group of peoples, IMHO. So, we need your democratic responsibility to speak, as much as your expection of all to hold responsibility for our war.

[Beelzebud]

42. Don't feel bad. I was called "freeperesque", "bush-like" and..

"like those who supported the invasion of Iraq.", by a few ppl on this site, earlier in the week.

The reason?

I think Andrea Yates should be in prison, for life, for murdering her FIVE children.

[Pirate Smile]

44. I was compared to Ann Coulter because I didn't think gas stations

should have to let people have sex in their bathrooms.

:D

[Beelzebud]

45. Serously??? wow...

Just shows there are wing-nuts on both sides, i guess...

[kliljedahl]

43. I don't see anything wrong with the original thread

and BTW, thank's for the compliment, I'm glad you appreciate the TOONs.

[tamtam]

50. Please

Those that are so quick to call people freepers, just because the do not agree with them, are engaging in freeper behavior. Yea, there are quite a few of them on this board that do that. I've been called a freeper a couple of times on this board. I remember one of my first post I had two people go at me trying to twist my words ( I guess they thought I was a freeper). I made a comment about seeing military personnel signing a petition to get the green candidate on the ballot. I made the comment that I could tell they were military but I didn't go into detail. Well someone took issue to that asking me if I thought all military personnel were Republicans. I didn't think I needed to explain that I knew they were military because they were standing outside of North Island naval station and those signing the petition were in their dungarees, I just assumed when I said I knew they were military most people would assume "oh yea the uniform" also my profile says I live in San Diego. They really thought they had me though and they just wanted to pick a fight with someone with 12 post. There are also those who let their post count go to their head putting down others with low post counts whenever they get the chance; as if having a high post count makes you better or something. I know some people who have been members of this board for at least of couple of years with 200-300 post. Some of us read more than we post that doesn't make us less of a DU'er than a high poster. Yup, DU does have their share of assholes just like any other board. The best thing to do is put them on ignore and go on about your business.

[porphyrian]

55. Yeah, there's definitely intolerance in our big tent of diversity.

But so what? Each one is just another asshole with an opinion. If you let them decide your course of action for you, that's your choice.

Frankly, I rather enjoy when the dolts accuse me of being a rightie just because I dare to question their stupid talking points. It means they can't really argue what I'm saying, but they feel it has to be wrong. You gotta love their spirit, though.

[SmokingJacket]

57. You got 11 nominations for that post!

Let me guess: you're a very sensitive person and will ignore 1000 compliments and obsess all day over one ambiguous criticism. I'm right, aren't I?

Saying "we're responsible" can be taken two ways: as you meant it, which is that in a democracy, the people are responsible for the actions of their leaders, or secondly, that We, dems, didn't do enough. So some people took it the other way.

You have to expect strong reactions when you post something so strongly worded and powerful.

[DemonFighterLives]

58. Good Luck in whatever you do

I didn't see anything too bad in the original thread, but I don't blame myself for the war. It lies squarely at dubco and Pnacs feet. The blood is on their hands; they wanted war and they lied and cheated and stole to get us there. We will be paying for this fiasco for 50 years and the poor servicemen coming home dead or sick in the head are not to blame either. They follow the orders put out by the perpetrators.

[mandyky]

59. Do people have to agree with all your posts?

As long as the mods don't think you are a troll don't worry about it.

Post, read, and be merry! :)

[hlthe2b]

66. I can be devil's advocate on this one, pretty easily, The_Mule...

Your post was cogent and truthful. We are all responsible for our country's actions. That is the bottom line.

But it is like pouring alcohol on the 1000s of cuts and scrapes one would get from "bicycle meets pavement." In this case the cuts and scrapes come from the years and hours and minutes spent worrying, reading, self-informing, arguing,convincing others, and most of all, in overt activism against the alcohol we saw was coming. Yet, all for naught. And now we reep what so many of us tried so very hard to stop--that all painful alcohol bath.

For me, it is like listening to Jerry Springer on AAR. Jerry's MO is to be so overly respectful of all, including Freepers, that he similarly never blames the RW, but rather says these actions were OUR actions. He intentionally softens any of his arguments by starting out with apologistic type statements (e.g., "the President is surely a nice man, a good man...."). This bending-over-backwards attempt to take on all the blame collectively rather than lay it at the feet of those DIRECTLY responsbile is so infuriating to me, that I am flinging myself out of the shower to turn him off each morning!

So, The_Mule maybe that explains a little bit why you got the response you did? Keep pitching your thoughts. They are worthwhile even if provocative.

[SomewhereOutThere424]

68. I hear you. Personally I just make posts and then ignore the thread

It's sad, once I thought the majority of democrats a strong, proud people. Now they seem to be paranoid, delusional, and hateful for the wrong reason.

If free republic exists for a reason, it is to make democrats doubt other democrats. It's sad and terrible so many democrats have become weak minded enough to follow it...

But don't lose hope either. There are those who read, normally the most vocal and advocating to reply are hypocrites and scoundrels. Just take faith in those who will take insightfulness out of your posts..and leave the topic for dead, as there will always be a jerk out there, a real freeper, who will try to place his stench onto you. But don't worry...the intelligent of us take their banter with a grain of salt.

[Quixote1818]

69. What are you talking about? You got more positive responses than negative

responses. Hell, your thread was nominated for the greatest page 12 times??? A lot of people would love to have a thread nominated 12 times much less once or twice.

I have had threads where I was attacked by 9 out of ten people and I have had threads that 9 out of ten people loved and nominated 30 times. This is not about being loved but by getting your opinion out to the world to be accepted or rejected. The important thing is saying what you believe!!!

[The_Mule]

75. Uncle.

I have *got* to get better at this discussion board thing. It goes too fast for me to make sure that my words don't lead to unintended meanings.

I go back to read my original thread, and I see how it could have looked like I'm trying to get everyone to take *blame* for the Iraq invasion and occupation (not war, thank you OldLeftyLawyer). And then I read this thread and I sound like a thin-skinned crybaby.

Let me put it this way. I sense a great outrage swelling within the general American public, much like we here at DU have been outraged since Nov, 2000. It heartens me, and I actually welcome it in a way, because I think it is the thing that will finally stop the madness of King George.

Thanks to everyone for helping me focus my words to better fit what I wanted to express. It's better to get shredded here than to get a LTTE published that might confuse the issue.

[underpants]

83. What? That is outrageous!!!!

I was SURE you were a freeper. :evilgrin: :hi: Just kidding.