The Left Continues Its Celebration of the Murder of American Troops

It's The Only Way They'll Win

By Erick Posted in Comments (95) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

Let's not mince words.  The left celebrates every death of every American soldier in Iraq.  Let me just repeat it so that it sinks in.  The left celebrates every death of every American soldier in Iraq.  They are a means to an end.  The means is incitement through propaganda.  The end is the repudiation of President Bush and the military -- the two institutions in this country the left hates.  

The left celebrates every death of every American solider in Iraq.  In 2006, the Democrats saw nothing wrong with using dead soldiers to raise money.  Today, the left is showing the murder of American soldiers to provoke outrage against Senator Mitch McConnell in Kentucky.

The left is using the murder of American troops for political purposes.  Why?  Because provoking outrage over the death of American troops is the only way to stir sentiment that we must not complete the ongoing surge.  The left cannot abide us completing the surge because the surge is working.

Militant groups are abandoning their positions.  Security tips have jumped sharply.  Even Brian Williams of NBC has noticed "that 'the war has changed.'"

We have escalated the destruction of Al QaedaShops are beginning to reopen.  Oh, and the body count stories in the New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times, and news networks have dropped off the front page in favor of the U.S. Attorney scandal because there is less to report.

The surge is having a meaningful impact.  The left's policy of retreat is about to be proven foolhardy.  So, like terrorists blowing up car bombs in front of the American media to attract attention to their cause in Baghdad, the left is having to show troops blown to bits in Iraq to the American people to attract attention to their cause and detract attention from the fact that the deaths of those soldiers have not been in vain.

The left celebrates every death of every American soldier in Iraq because it is the only effective means they have to distract the public from the tangible signs that those same soldiers are having a meaningful impact in winning the war -- a victory the left cannot abide.

« We need more COIN in the Afghan realmComments (0) | Correction to Najaf story.Comments (18) »
The Left Continues Its Celebration of the Murder of American Troops 95 Comments (0 topical, 95 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »

most Americans don't want to see defeat in Iraq. The general public and the Left may oppose the war in general, but the desire to seek American humiliation remains with the fringe. That divide will marginalize the Left and its allies at the end of the day.

"The end is the repudiation of President Bush and the military -- the two institutions in this country the left hates."

Come on Eric, be fair. They have more hate in them than that. The church (at least those with remotely orthodox theology) for example.

I forgot the nuclear family too.

My bad.

Is not an American Institution. Different source, different hate...

There are those who look on Dresden and Tokyo and Hiroshima as some of the greatest evils ever perpetrated by man. I look on them and thank the perpetrators for saving millions.

The unpopularity of the war is your fault. Righties such as yourself have been screaming about how unfair the media is since Clinton was in office and you have been screaming about how un-American we Lefties are since before I was born. Despite "knowing" both of those things you let the media and the "Left" beat you again in the public opinion arena. Blame yourselves for your failure.

If you really cared about winning in Iraq you would find a way to get America invested in winning in Iraq instead of looking for someone to blame for losing it. The only way to succeed in Iraq is to keep American troops there for a long, long time. Jumping up and down about how Lefties hate the troops and celebrate their deaths won't help convince anyone that our country needs to make a very long term committment to Iraq in order to succeed there.

I've been saying for a long time that the fundamental problem with the Republican Party is that its politicians don't play politics, and especially don't communicate. The failure of the Commander-In-Chief to "sell" the war has been the worst of this. Lots of columns have picked up on this, especially recently.

However, the Democrats are still responsible for their own actions. Like the multi-billion dollar campaign by Soros, labor unions, etc. against the war. Much of this campaign is false and omitted information.

Well, live and learn.


PS: I'll be a lot more impressed with your objections to that once I see you castigating the people using video of dead soldiers to make a partisan political ad with equal fervor as you just did the people objecting to it. Or, in fact, once I see you doing it at all.

Oh, right. We won't actually do anything to you over here. Silly me.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.

...I must want our troops to die. Isn't that how simple it is?

...if only you showed any interest in condemning the people committing the offenses that we're condemning.

This bed was made over several years, Blue Neponset. Over at dKos you helped make it, in fact. So lie down on it. The fact that it's uncomfortable is not our problem.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. finding a solution to what is happening in Iraq. If you and Erick think hating on Lefties is going to help that then we are wasting our time talking to each other.

The problem is that the Left's price for signing off on it will be a Democrat in the White House.

And, for the record? It's 'contempt'.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.

No matter how much 'contempt' you have for me or any other Lefty we aren't the ones screwing things up in Iraq. Your 'contempt' would be better directed at a President who can't explain to the American people the sacrifice necessary to succeed in Iraq or maybe at a Defense Secretary who is too stubborn or incompetent to react to the situation on the ground.

Too busy being offended at people who are only for freedom and helping others when a Republican can't hope to take credit for it. With a extra helping for people whose willingness to speak truth to power is inversely proportional to the likelihood that they'll suffer for it.


The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.

wash your hair when your head hits the air again.

The Democrats in DC supported actions in both Afghanistan and Iraq with their votes in Congress. Within days of the start of each action they were screaming about "Vietnam" and "quagmire". Your elected leadership have done everything they can possibly do - again, since day one - to undercut the President and US military in time of a war they voted to proceed with.

I'm absolutely no fan of the way Bush has conducted this war, but what the leaders of your party have done is disgusting, despicable and absolutely anti-American and will do untold long term harm to our national security.
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.

Did they support the actions with their votes or did they do everything to oppose it from day one?

Um, no.
The CIA has better politicians than it has spies - Fred Thompson

A random walk through my head at Indiscriminate Tastes

They voted for it. And almost immediately started railing against it.
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.

talking, what IS a waste of time is having any discussion with the elected Democrats in Washington.
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.

If the Left really wants a solution for Iraq, then the Democratic Congressional leaders aren't listening. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi haven't shown any interest in finding a way to win in Iraq, and in fact they are using hardball politics to try to set an absolute date for pulling out of Iraq. Complete surrender and retreat is not something which would normally be called a "solution".

...and they don't think that because they hate America. They think it because they have run out of patience with the people who are running the war.

If you didn't want to stop the war, you wouldn't support losing the war as a way to stop it and the more troops that die are indicative of our "losing the war". Hence, dead Americans are a "symptom" of a "bad" war to be used to your advantage. And, yes it does disgust patriotic Americans.

Envisioning when all that is Left is the Right.

I believe that most on the Left do not wish to see any Americans die needlessly. The death toll figures are indicative, not, "of our losing the war", but rather the cost of the war in American lives. This war has been poorly planned and poorly executed since day one. It is not "unpatriotic" to say so.

Your working title will be "Poorly planned and poorly executed - as compared to what?"

The literary reference is a bit out of period for you, but what the heck. We'll turn your account back on once you send it in.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.

The point is that no one besides a pacifist could see a high casualty count as a reason to surrender a war. Saying "Some of our soldiers have been killed, so we should surrender" is like saying "The enemy is shooting back at our soliders so we need to surrender immediately".

The US death count for this Iraq war is just under 3,300. The death total for World War II was over 407,000 Americans, meaning that 123 US troops died in World War II for each that has died in this Iraq War.

It doesn't make sense to stop a war at a specific death count, but the point is that if we did we would have surrendered World War II, we would have given up.

Mistakes were made in World War II, yet we didn't give up. Someone could say that the death count in Iraq is high because of mistakes, but that could never be a reason to end the war. If a war is being fought with the wrong techniques, then we could make changes instead of giving up.

So I think some people on the Right are angered (and puzzled) when some on the Left say that we should surrender in Iraq just because troops keep dying. Such an argument leads to pacifism, that we could never fight a war. It would seem more honest for the Leftists to simply say they are pacifists, and no matter where or why we fight, they will say we should quit because our troops are dying.

Elagablus: I believe you cannot know if "this war has been poorly planned and poorly executed since day one". Due to the one-sided
press reports, we have no idea day to day of any of the following:

- How many battles are won day to day?
- How many insurgents are captured day to day?
- How many of the enemy are killed?
- How many of the enemy end up deserter?
- What have our troops done to save iraqi residents
from being victims of war?
- How many children have americans saved in Iraq?
- How much information and what kind of information
are we receiving daily from the Iraq citizens?
- What schools are opening?
- Who got power today - are they happy?
- What businesses opened today?
- What medical services did our war doctors perform
to save Iraqi citizens today?

I could go on and on. This is only the tip of the iceberg
reflecting the lack of information you are using in your
boring rhetoric. Our press today does not report unless it is a death count. No it is not "unpatriotic", (although I will
never fully understand what empowers you to say it), but it
certainly points to a questionable intelligence due to the
lack of comprehensive reporting we all receive. Unless you
consider American death counts comprehensive.

on the left do want to want to see America lose the war against terrorism. The American leftists refuse to support America.

Thats being shown wrong publicly. For them to fight the surge and demoralize the troops is a twofer.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

There has been a vaacuum of leadership from the top down in this country. The goals and stakes in this war have not been articulated and when they are articulated are lost in the spin and counterspin of politics. If the american public is overwhelmingly against the way this war is going it is due to the fact that no progress is being shown and that when it is shown it is quickly forgotten. They have a constitution, voted twice in higher numbers than americans, and have started to form their own army all in 4 years. This information is overlooked in most cases even discounted by the same people that were wrong about every difficulty in this war. Remember the 10s of thousands of deaths it would supposedly take to capture Baghdad as we battled street to street? Remember how we were supposed to lose in Afghanistan? The same people saying that we were going to lose both of those battles have been talkin in a vaccuum to the american people how we have lost, are going to lose, or straight up dont deserve to win. When the leadership doesnt even combat these people when they say assinine things then the american public after 6 years is bound to be a bit pessimistic.

"It is the soldier,not the priest, who protects freedom of religion; the soldier,not the journalist, who protects freedom of speech. History teaches that a society that does not value it's warriors will be replaced by a society that does."


Well, my point is that I think you went a little overboard with the formatting. Meant as constructive criticism... less is more sometimes.

Erick: "The left celebrates every death of every American soldier in Iraq."

This is disgusting, unprovable and untrue.

Erick, I'd like you to say this to the faces of Democratic-voting parents who just lost their son or daughter serving in Iraq.

But the left celebrates each one of these deaths as it gets them further toward their goal of defeat and surrender.

Who is "the left?" What venues have they booked for these celebrations? Have you got any aerial photos of the jamboree?

There may, in fact, be misguided Americans celebrating the death of our soldiers. Those people are not representative of whatever "the left" means in your mind any more than Fred Phelps is representative of whatever "the right" means in the mind of anyone who would attempt to make that misguided connection.

Your whole post is just irresponsible hyperbole.

is every bit as challenged as your party's concern for national security, their judgment on governance in general and, yes, their patriotism.

Phelps is a Democrat.
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.

I don't suppose you read to the end of the sentence?

misguided connection.

But, given the stupidity of the rest of the comment, it just registered as more stupidity.
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.

I particularly enjoyed how you sussed out my "party" based upon a comment suggesting that branding a huge percentage of the American population with a death wish for our soldiers simply because they disagree with the current direction of the Iraq war is irresponsible and intellectually lazy.

From that Journal of the Right Wing Conspiracy, Mother Jones,

Phelps remained prominent in state and local politics [after he was disbarred in Kansas in 1979], working for years as a major organizer for the state's Democratic Party. (He still calls himself a Democrat, refusing to change just because his party has.) In 1988, Phelps housed campaign workers for Al Gore's first presidential run; in 1989, his eldest son, Fred Jr., hosted a fundraiser for Gore's Senate campaign at his home.

Phelps has frequently run for public office -- for governor in 1990, '94, and '98, for the Senate in '92 -- always losing the primaries by a landslide. Because of their years as loyal Democrats, the Phelpses have even been invited to -- and attended -- both of Clinton's inaugurations.

Emphasis is mine.

Your welcome. My pleasure.
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.

And bonus points for the Mother Jones quote. Unfortunately you missed the main point of the comment. Let me help you with this:

A comment was made that "The Left" celebrate the deaths of American soldiers.

A reply was made by Amelioration that people who celebrate the deaths of American soldiers are no more representative of "The Left" than Fred Phelps is representative of "The Right".

This is where you got to show off your internet search skills as you point out that Fred Phelps is actually a wacko with ties to the Democrats. (Now pay attention here Mr. Becker, because this is where you appear to have gotten a little lost)

The main point of Ameleration's comment is that Fred Phelps does not represent "The Right" any more than the odd cretin who celebrates the death of American soldiers represents "The Left". As convenient as it is to work yourself into a self righteous lather about "The left" celebrating the deaths of American soldiers, the reality is that these horrible lefties celebrating the deaths of American soldiers are non existent straw men.

You would be better served to address the point of the comment rather than becoming distracted by your misunderstanding of the analogy.

Your welcome. My pleasure

Ameleration is quite wrong because the leadership of the majority party, namely Reid/Pelosi/Murtha are in fact rejoicing at every death of a US serviceman in Iraq. In the House they vote on a bill to defund the military and put them at increased risk because of an artificial timeline to run away and the leadership cheers and does high fives.

I'm not distracted at all. The leadership of the Democratic Party disgusting, disingenuous, anti-American people in search of nothing but power in the government. They don't give a tinker's dam about the men and women they voted to send into harms way, they simply view them as a tool with which they can beat the President.

If you can't - or wont' see that - you are every bit as pathetic as they are.
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.

Can you provide a link, a video, a quote, or any writing from any Democrat that celebrates the death of American soldiers?
Of course you can't, because these straw men exist only on the pages of Redstate, not in the real world. Nobody on the left or the right celebrates the death of American soldiers.

each time the US deathtoll approaches another milestone. At 1000 they screamed it from the headlines. 2000 got them almost giddy. When we passed 3000 they were so thrilled to surpass the 911 deathtoll they wet themselves all over.

Yes, celebrate, while it might be an uncomfortable word, is quite accurate.

If any of them actually existed.

Can you provide any photos, links, writings, etc or any actual proof of people becoming giddy or thrilled about the deaths in Iraq. Just because those who don't agree with you use hard facts and reality in their arguments doesn't mean they take any joy in the deaths.

Apparently your frustration with people who disagree with you is leading you to create problems and motivations entirely out of thin air.

Again, I say to you simply provide proof of anyone celebrating the deaths of American soldiers.

Would just be another nutty Mom had it not been for the death of her son. She may not celebrate, but she certainly was able to sprawl across his grave in the pages of Vogue in one of the most sick and mawkish photos I have ever seen in my life.

Democrats love standing on dead bodies to score cheap political points, and the higher the stack the better. And I have plenty of sources to back that up. If no one dies, they are irrelevant.

Also, would someone please provide teeny with a photo of the protesters with the "F*** The Troops" sign? I'll go out on a limb and say they are not Republicans...

that even Cindy Sheehan is not "celebrating".

Let me help you guys frame this argument in a way that is at least rational:

There is virtually no one of any importance on the left who celebrates the death of troops.

There ARE however, people on the left who argued against this war from the very beginning on what they felt were moral and/or strategic grounds. Now that the death toll continues to climb, some of those people may find a certain..vindication..that they are being proved correct.

Do not confuse a sense of vindication with celebrating death.

You can disagree with their opposal to the war in the first place.
You can disagree with them that the deaths of American soldiers prove that the war was wrong.
You can disagree with them that the US should get out of Iraq.
But do not assign "The left" as having a ghoulish glee from the death of American soldiers. That argument just makes you look silly.

Hope this helps you..

The left does indeed have a "ghoulish glee" when American soldiers die. I will not confuse that with a "sense of vindication", which in my view is a distinction without a difference when speaking of the deaths of American soliders.

"Ghoulish glee" is perfectly worded, and I appreciate you coming up with it. So, in fact, you DID help me. I will keep it handy, and if you have any more Freudian slips please let us all know.

of any American actually taking joy in the death of American soldiers. There is no proof because the entire idea is constructed only for the purpose of letting those who are so inclined to work themselves into a self righteous rage against those who would dare disagree with them. It's not evil-it's just intellectually lazy.


Lieberman and McCain and Graham, 3 little men, who hate american troops enough to send more to their deaths! Wonder how all those Fervent trolls who used to sing his praises feel when they see exactly what they were supporting!

US deaths are all on their heads! they asked for it, now they got it!"


That took all of three seconds and one google search. Certainly a rarity, huh.

OH that's right..YOU did...and you got it wrong. Here is a more realistic translation of this comment:

"Lieberman and McCain and Graham bear responsiblity for the deaths of American soldiers. I wonder how all those fervent trolls who supported them feel now that American GI's are dying. I bet they feel bad NOW"

I don't see any celebration of American deaths here at all.This is an expression of frustration that American soldiers were sent to die, not a celebration of the deaths.

You seem like a bright enough guy, but you obviously see whatever you need to see in order to maintain that delicious self righteousness in the face of the hard truths about this war.

Good luck with that.

Your translation: "I bet they feel bad NOW"

Another translation: "Cause me and Ned feel so damn GOOD about it."

Face it - if troops don't die, this type of gloating - pardon, ghoulish glee - never takes place.

I don't see what I want to see, I see what's there. Please go ahead and get the last word in. You need to in order to defend the people on your side whose rhetoric is indistinguishable from Bin Laden's, who calls the terrorists "Minutemen", and who only go to funerals if they can score a point against Bush or make a speech.

Good luck with that, and good night.

call the burning in effigy of a soldier at a protest in Portland. That not only shows they want them dead but they would like to do it. There's your proof of "any American" hot shot.

teemn comment #45.

any more than Terry McVeigh "represented" the right when he bombed the Federal building in Oklahoma City. Surely you are not simpleton enough to suggest that the actions of a crazed few represent "The left".

for claiming they don't. And, I don't recall Terry McVeigh ever cliaming to represent the Right. You argue like a third grader, but you do spell better than most of your friends. Oh, and don't call him Shirley.

Envisioning when all that is Left is the Right.

Winger he was far beyong that inreality he was baby killer, a crazy murderer who was on the extreme fringes of the White Supremists movement. He shouldn't be labeled a right winger because everything he did was just plain wrong.

sure that if they vote it will be for a democrat unless Ralph Nader runs again. The left is wrong but these idiots are Hooligans.

your the one that made the "any American" comment. I gave you an example that hit home and you run and hide behind McVeigh. You then start your childish name calling in the usual condescending liberal tone. Your behavior justifies what my father would call an invite out back for an air clearing "chat."

What would you call the burning in effigy of a soldier at a protest in Portland.

Those people were Anarchists. I mean literally. They don't represent anybody but themselves.

read up thread he asked for "any American". Who do you think those Anarchists supported in 04 George W. Bush?

Who do you think those Anarchists supported in 04

I suspect they didn't vote. What with being Anarchists and all. The point is they don't represent the right or the left, whatever "right" and "left" means when you're trying to call your fellow Americans bloodthirsty death merchants for partisan political purposes.

That being said, you are correct. Teemn's call for proof of "any American" celebrating the death of US soldiers was sloppy. Certainly there are deeply disturbed and misguided individuals in this country, as in others, who will celebrate these losses. The point myself and others have been trying to make here is that it's openly dishonest and fallacious to claim "the left," clearly implied in the original post to be anyone opposed to the current direction of the Iraq war, is celebrating the death of our sons and daughters.

and was around some of these fine Americans and they DO vote and they vote DEMOCRAT and they sound just like Kos Kids. I know its not a comforting thought but blind hatred of Bush has driven some people over the edge and they are on the left side of the fence.

Hatred of Bush as it relates to Anarchists has to do with their opposition to what they see as government encroaching on their private lives, ala Patriot Act, and, yes, opposition to our current foreign policy. I guarantee you that in the past, with real Conservatives in the running, Anarchists, if they chose to vote, would have been entirely against the Democratic party's big government ideals.

them Anarchists. I am not even going to concede that. As I said I lived there and that bunch is as far left if not farther than their San Fran brethren. They were at an anti war rally not an anti big government rally. What would you honestly say the percent of those protesters voted for Bush? I would like you to be more honest than try to spin this into these people voted for "real conservatives."

You already conceded that, and they were. You of all people know the Anarchist community in and around Portland is active. I'm not saying they were real, thoughtful, well-educated people, but they would self-identify as Anarchists.

No. Amerlioration's comment implies that Phelps is a part of the Right. Considering that Phelps is a Democrat, that doesn't make any sense. mbecker was just pointing that out.

Now, I know this is not the main point of Amelioration's comment but to ignore it would be a disservice to people who would read this comment and possibly go away thinking that Fred Phelps has anything to do with the mainstream Right or Rpublicans.

mbecker's just noting for the record that he's on your side; a Democrat - on the Left.

George W. Bush: He's A Folder ... Not A Fighter.

Amelioration's comment implies that Phelps is a part of the Right.

My comment implies no such thing. You would think that would be made obvious by the fact that I specifically called that assumption misguided in that same very brief comment.

It is, however, an assumption many people make due to their associating a less out-and-out insane form of his particular obsession with the "Homosexual Agenda" with "the right." People who are paying attention realize this is not the case. People who are willing to be honest with themselves and those they address, despite their own political leanings, realize that you can't brand a huge group of people from the actions of a shrieking few.

that war protesters burning a soldier in effigy vote for conservatives.

I'm pointing out to you the very obvious fact that someone who self-identifies as an Anarchist is more inclined to vote, if they chose to do so, for a candidate in favor of less government restriction on private life. That's not a reflection on the party they shoose to vote for, it's just how things break down.

War protesters burning a soldier in effigy in a leftist city at a leftist rally wish harm to our troops. There is a part of the far left that wish for the death of troops to bring down our military. There is a larger part of the left that will gloat at a humiliating defeat. Political power trumps everything. That is my honest opinion gathered from their words and actions. Nothing will change that view short of a change of said words and actions. There is plenty of honest dissent from the left and plenty more driven by hate and opportunism.

Anarchists are not part of the left. It doesn't matter where they do anything they do, it matters what they actually are.

In what way is an anarchist REALLY different from a libertarian? They both believe in small government, although it seems anarchists also hate corporations and sometimes believe in God (unlike, say, Penn & Teller). Then again, Pat Buchanan can be heard occasionally talking smack about corporations too. How do people here feel about "corporations"? I have money in the stock market, so I mostly think they're okay. But I recognize they occasionally do messed up things.

If they believe a more anarchic society can only be created by the collapse of the existing one, they will trend democrat.

"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

Is everyone who voted for and is thus represented by the following:
Jack Murtha
John Kerry
John Edwards
Nancy Pelosi
(I forget his first name) Casey
And the rest of the politicians who are celebrating and working toward the deaths of American Soldiers.
That is who "The Left" is. The more a given thing furthers their political goals, the harder they work for it and the more they celebrate its success. The deaths of American Soldiers fits the above criteria and the bills and resolutions they are writing and putting forward are helping them make more happen.

There are those who look on Dresden and Tokyo and Hiroshima as some of the greatest evils ever perpetrated by man. I look on them and thank the perpetrators for saving millions.

...when people call you on your war porn.



PS: I already gacked your backup account.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.

more families who've lost sons than I want to think about, I would sit down and have that discussion.

The Pelosi/Reid/Murtha axis has done more to devalue the service of our military and the worth of America than any small group since the founding of the republic. The elected representatives of the Democratic Party in the US are simply disgusting. I have a stronger opinion but posting guidelines constrain me.
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.

hard hitting and to the point. The only people it will offend are the people who you hit between the eyes. I always wanted to say the left just has a differece of opinion. But they do not care for the American soilder they just want power.
Like you I can not just sit by and say we have different way of looking at things. It must be called just as it was in this post. I don't care who I anger anymore. I don't care if I lose sales over this. The truth is the truth.

"I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm's way."
John Paul Jones (letter to M. Le Ray de Chaumont,16 Nov.1778)

are offensive people.
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.

You wrote it down and posted it, therefore it must be a known fact.

And go talk to the grave dancers on your side. Maybe you can make a difference there, 'cause you're sure not making one here.

Asking you to prove the existance of the evil straw man grave dancers is....inconvenient...for you I suppose.

I will try not to hurt your feelings in the future Mr.Savage, so that you won't have to resort to putting your fingers in your ears and telling me to go away instead of providing any proof of the ridiculous assertions that make up the main premise of the post that started this thread.

I was just trying to point out your ineffectiveness without being mean.

After decades of treason, the left is no longer innocent until proven guilty. Quite the opposite, in fact. So maybe we could ask for examples of the left's genuine concern for and support of the troops, apart from political calculations - but I believe that would that be too inconvenient for you. Much easier for me to post pictures of lefties defacing war memorials, burning flags and the like...

I've been reading RedState for a couple months because I was told it was a site that wasn't just an irrational knee jerk to all things left. I was told that though unabashedly conservative, it was a rational place with rational posts that didn't cotton to irrational posts.

Unfortunately it appears this article and its supporting posts seem to prove otherwise. If indeed RedStaters believe that "The left celebrates every death of every American solider in Iraq" then this red/blue, left/right, Rep/Dem, lib/con gulf is too wide for me to stomach. It appears that a lot of RedStaters really do, honestly, all trolling aside, believe "the left" is happy and joyful when American service personnel die in Iraq.

In the spirit of Moe though, if any RedStater can, in 100 words, explain that this isn't anything more than indefensible overblown hyperbole I'll take the line out of my host file helping to block spyware and porn.
Until then "Ka-click".

holding the gun to his own head.

Think about it!

It'd be a stone cold moneymaker, let me tell you.


The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
Starbucks: Coffee, good. Cups, bad, but
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

I just need one. Truth.

Looks like Moe only need one too, but his was Blam. Much more effective IMO.
The CIA has better politicians than it has spies - Fred Thompson

A random walk through my head at Indiscriminate Tastes

"I was told that though unabashedly conservative, it [RedState] was a rational place with rational posts that didn't cotton to irrational posts."

Unfortunately, this is not always the case. Rough guess -- about 2/3 of the diaries are rational, and about half of the comments. There's still some good stuff, but there's a fair bit of panting hyperbole, and a severe double-standard in how much snark is allowed from the true believers vs those who disagree.

It will be interesting to see this site evolve... the republican minority status seems to be bringing out the worst in Redstate commentary. "Hey you voters! You don't agree with me?! I'll have to scream louder!"

This diary is an example. It's really just throwing red meat to the faithful -- there obviously is no significant group anywhere in the US that celebrates the death of US servicemembers. The trouble as I see it is that this diary sounds like a far fringe rant, and it will hurt rather than help the conservative cause.

of the diaries and half the comments are written by liberals, but counting yours, you may be right.

Envisioning when all that is Left is the Right.

Another is that there's increasing unwillingness of the readers here to pretend that there isn't something sick in our political opponents, and getting sicker.


PS: You do disapprove of people using footage of dead soldiers to fuel anti-McConnell ads, yes? Please answer - not least because if you do, you'll be the first critic on this thread to do so.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.

As I am typing this, the base here is at alarm red. For those of you who haven't had an opporunity to hang in the sandbox, that means there are incoming mortars. I think that establishes my credibility to comment on this issue.
To us, every soldier lost is a tragedy. Although it would be impossible to know every other member of the U. S. Army, we are a "brotherhood"(in quotes because I would never leave our wonderful female soldiers out of it). I believe every person in my unit was at least acquainted with someone who has been lost in Iraq. One guy that I used to sit near in the DFAC(dining facility) on a regular basis was blown up by an IED on a short trip outside the wire to chase down insurgents who had launched a mortar attack on us. He was 19.
With that said, WE believe in our mission. Lord knows I don't want to die in the God-forsaken desert. On the other hand, I accepted that possibility when I raised my right hand and swore an oath.
We are succeeding here, it is slow, it is painful, and it is costing the lives of American Soldiers. That is not the standard by which we judge. We do not count the bodies in the way that the media does, because we know they aren't numbers. Each time we hear of one falling, we bow our heads and say a prayer, or we stand at attention and render a crisp salute to their sacrifice. Our standard is victory, and although it is not as easily defined in this conflict as it was in the past, that makes it no less valuable or attainable.

We watch the news. We know what the left thinks of us. Erick has it right, the left wants us to fail, no matter the cost. The President and I want us to succeed, no matter the cost.

If you truly care about the lives of soldiers, then honor the sacrifice they make. A soldier's greatest fear is not of dying, but of having the sacrifices he or she makes rendered meaningless by surrender.

It will linger here because the thread is about worn out. This should be required reading to get or keep an account.
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.

"During my lifetime, all our problems have come from mainland Europe, and all the solutions from the English-speaking nations across the world." - Thatcher

and I agree with becker, turn this into a diary/blog!
The CIA has better politicians than it has spies - Fred Thompson

A random walk through my head at Indiscriminate Tastes

Redstate Network Login:
(lost password?)

©2008 Eagle Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. Legal, Copyright, and Terms of Service