Front page
Silflay Hraka?

Bigwig is a systems administrator at a public university
Hrairoo is the proprietor of a quality used bookstore
Kehaar is.
Woundwort is a professor of counseling at a private university

The Hraka RSS feed

bigwig AT

Friends of Hraka
Daily Pundit
cut on the bias
Meryl Yourish
This Blog Is Full Of Crap
Winds of Change
A Small Victory
Silent Running
Dr. Weevil
Little Green Footballs
Fragments from Floyd
The Feces Flinging Monkey
the skwib
Dean's World
Little Tiny Lies
The Redsugar Muse
Natalie Solent
From the Mrs.
The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler
On the Third Hand
Public Nuisance
Not a Fish
Electric Venom
Skippy, The Bush Kangaroo
Common Sense and Wonder
Neither Here Nor There
The Greatest Jeneration
Ipse Dixit
Blog On the Run
Redwood Dragon
Greeblie Blog
Have A Cuppa Tea
A Dog's Life
Iberian Notes
Midwest Conservative Journal
A Voyage to Arcturus
Trojan Horseshoes
In Context
The People's Republic of Seabrook
Country Store
Blog Critics
Chicago Boyz
Hippy Hill News
Kyle Still Free Press
The Devil's Excrement
The Fat Guy
War Liberal
Assume the Position
Balloon Juice
Iron Pen In A Velvet Glove
Freedom Lives
Where Worlds Collide
Knot by Numbers
How Appealing
South Knox Bubba
Heretical Ideas
The Kitchen Cabinet
Bo Cowgill
Raving Atheist
The Short Strange Trip
Shark Blog
Ron Bailey's Weblog
Cornfield Commentary
Northwest Notes
The Blog from the Core
The Talking Dog
WTF Is It Now??
Blue Streak
Smarter Harper's Index
nikita demosthenes
Bloviating Inanities
Sneakeasy's Joint
Ravenwood's Universe
The Eleven Day Empire
World Wide Rant
All American
The Rant
The Johnny Bacardi Show
The Head Heeb
Viking Pundit
Oscar Jr. Was Here
Just Some Poor Schmuck
Katy & Bruce Loebrich
But How's The Coffee?
Roscoe Ellis
Sasha Castel
Susskins Central Dispatch
Josh Heit
Aaron's Rantblog
As I was saying...
Blog O' Dob
Dr. Frank's Blogs Of War
Betsy's Page
A Knob for Brightness
Fresh Bilge
The Politburo Diktat
Drumwaster's rants
Curt's Page
The Razor
An Unsealed Room
The Legal Bean
Helloooo chapter two!
As I Was Saying...
SkeptiLog AGOG!
Tong family blog
Vox Beth
I was thinking
Judicious Asininity
This Woman's Work
Fragrant Lotus
Single Southern Guy
Jay Solo's Verbosity
Snooze Button Dreams
You Big Mouth, You!
From the Inside looking Out
Night of the Lepus
No Watermelons Allowed
From The Inside Looking Out
Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics
Suburban Blight
The SmarterCop
Dog of Flanders
From Behind the Wall of Sleep
Beaker's Corner
Bad State of Gruntledness
Who Tends The Fires
Granny Rant
Elegance Against Ignorance
Say What?
Blown Fuse
Wait 'til Next Year
The Pryhills
The Whomping Willow
The National Debate
The Skeptician
Zach Everson
Geekward Ho
Life in New Orleans
Rotten Miracles
The Biomes Blog
See What You Share
Blog dElisson
Your Philosophy Sucks
Watauga Rambler
Socialized Medicine
Verging on Pertinence
Read My Lips
The Flannel Avenger
Butch Howard's WebLog
Castle Argghhh!
Andrew Hofer
Moron Abroad
White Pebble
Darn Floor
Pajama Pundits
Goddess Training 101
A & W
Medical Madhouse
Slowly Going Sane
The Oubliette
American Future
Right Side Redux
See The Donkey
Newbie Trucker
The Right Scale
Running Scared
Ramblings Journal
Focus On Reality
Wyatt's Torch

August 26, 2005

Ruthless Capitalization

Cindy Sheehan's anti-war / astroturf campaign continues.

She says all sorts of things on taped TV interviews that are generally edited to make her sound halfway reasonable. I've caught some of the live, unedited stuff though, and it's different. She usually calls for an end to all wars (good practical solution, there); get Israel out of Palestine (I guess they can go to Germany?); gimme a do-over on capitalism; nobody in the media ever airs non-Republican viewpoints; and so on. She's doing better in the live interviews lately; I guess that's what happens when Fenton Communications shows up to coach you on interviewing skills.

Supposedly, her loss makes her off limits to criticism. Tough luck, I say; this ain't the movies, no free passes here. If you are in the camp that thinks that her loss means she can politically campaign without being criticized, I suggest that you consider the perpetual foot rot and the bad back I picked up when I served, and correspondingly tone down your inevitable vicious retort 20 or 30%, in light of my pains.

If she were scathingly honest about what she is doing, here's what she'd say. "I'm just a grieving... left wing mother... whose son would probably be badly embarassed were he still alive... but who fortunately isn't and left me as his dying gift a great tool to drag down Bush a bit... did I mention that Bush stole the election twice, and Halliburton actually runs the country?"

Yeah, I guess I'm a mean-spirited SOB for criticizing a poor, grieving mother who just wants to grieve, etc. I felt sympathy for her loss for about the first day of her protest. Now that it's turned into the Dems' talking point for the 2006 elections, I don't feel sorry for it at all. Who is a bigger bastard - me for criticizing her explicitly political campaign, or her for ruthlessly capitalizing on her son's death to score political points?

Her son isn't the only member of the military being used. Lately, it seems she's taken to calling the Ben & Jerry's / MoveOn funded hippie hootenanny "Camp Casey." (H/T Insty).

What makes this a bit grotesque is that at the real Camp Casey, the troops who patrol the Demilitarized Zone in South Korea stand looking north, facing a flood of Red troops that could pour south at any time the deranged Kim Jong Il chooses to say the word. It's a hardship tour, and men have died in the Camp Casey pressure cooker, both in high intensity training accidents and in and real world incidents triggered by the North Koreans. You may remember some of those incidents. Camp Casey is probably drawing down a bit with our change of strategy in South Korea, but it is an honorable place with an honored name.

Might as well start calling IndyMedia 1/506 P.I.R., if that collection of basically anti-American left wing nuts is known as Camp Casey from now on.

Posted by Blackavar at August 26, 2005 02:37 PM | TrackBack
First time visitor to House Hraka? Wondering if everything we produce could possibly be as brilliant/stupid/evil/pedantic/insipid/inspired as the post you just read? Check out the Hraka Essentials, the (mostly) reader-selected guide to Hraka's best posts, and decide for yourself.

And yet, every person who is in the military or any others who disagree, and yet have lost family members, speak of her right to say what she will.

Smearing doesn't seem to change that.

90% of Americans queried agreed that she has a right to speak. At least the majority of my fellow citizens are decent about the right to hold an opinion.

The 10% who don't agree are the true aliens, the subversives we need to watch out for.

Posted by: Scorpio at August 27, 2005 01:18 PM

Um, how am I smearing her? Could you please point out one lie I told? Or that I asserted that she hasn't the right to say what she is saying?

I'll merely note that she has stated that Israel has to go, before there can be peace in the middle east, and I'll also note that she characterized the Al Qaida operatives running 1/2 the insurgency as "freedom fighters" on an IndyMedia video that was up and posted as recently as yesterday - an outlet that isn't exactly Fox news.

She's not against the war; she's on the other side. That's cool, it's her right. Her personal loss and her First Amendment rights don't earn her amnesty in my book, however.

Posted by: Blackavar at August 27, 2005 06:21 PM

Heavens! It wasn't you who was smearing! Rush, other loud "personalities".

She's not anti-war, she's anti-Iraq war, and has stated that Afghanistan was a proper thig to do, and that each person would have to feel free to fight were we attacked -- including her.

Tell me, if we were attacked to liberate us from the Bush election manipulations, would you want to be called an insurgent?

Posted by: Scorpio at August 27, 2005 08:06 PM

Beep. Beep. Beep.

Oh, sorry, that's my "can't take your argument seriously now alarm" going off. I'll just shut it off and answer.

After the MSM dissection of the 2000 election results, esp. w/r/t the Florida results, it's hard to take anybody seriously who keeps floating that stolen election crap / DNC talking point. I'll let you have a mulligan, however; I understand that you thought your pals owned the presidency, so it hurt when somebody else got it.

As for the allegation you imply that Bush stole the election in 2004... Okay, sorry. Argument's over. If you seriously believe that then there's no use arguing with you, since you don't accept plain facts. Bush didn't steal the 2004 election, he kicked Kerry's a**. Get over it. If you can't get over it, I suggest you find a manufacturer of cheap glue. If you are going to indulge in rotted brain level reasoning and delusional night sweats, you might as well have some fun hallucinations to go along with the painful ones.

And one final comment about Ms. Sheehan, that really hurts her arguments to my way of thinking. She is arguing openly for the elimination of Israel, and says the existence of Israel is why we have conflict in the middle east today. I know, I know, being anti Israel isn't per se anti semitic or even necessarily arguing for the genocide of the Jews.

It's just that it's bloddy hard for me to see the difference to that distinction from where I sit, and frankly, that makes her intellectual kin with a lot of incredibly reprehensible people. You know, maybe she's just right. If you think so, then what are the consequences, and what actions must you necessarily advocate in order to bring about a fix?

Posted by: Blackavar at August 27, 2005 08:42 PM

Sorry but I din't think eliminating Israel would solve anything. I find the current process going on in the middle east to be fascinating.

Sharon is pretty much a man of his word.

Posted by: Scorpio at August 27, 2005 09:22 PM

You know, Scorpio, deception in the defense of Cindy Sheehan doesn't enhance the credibility of either of you.

Scorpio: "She's not anti-war, she's anti-Iraq war, and has stated that Afghanistan was a proper thig [sic] to do ..."

Sheehan on Hardball with Chris Matthews:

MATTHEWS: Can I ask you a tough question? A very tough question.
MATTHEWS: All right. If your son had been killed in Afghanistan, would you have a different feeling?
SHEEHAN: I don't think so, Chris, because I believe that Afghanistan is almost the same thing. We're fighting terrorism. Or terrorists, we're saying. But they're not contained in a country. This is an ideology and not an enemy. And we know that Iraq, Iraq had no terrorism. They were no threat to the United States of America.
MATTHEWS: But Afghanistan was harboring, the Taliban was harboring al-Qaida which is the group that attacked us on 9/11.
SHEEHAN: Well then we should have gone after al-Qaida and maybe not after the country of Afghanistan.
MATTHEWS: But that's where they were being harbored. That's where they were headquartered. Shouldn't we go after their headquarters? Doesn't that make sense?
SHEEHAN: Well, but there were a lot of innocent people killed in that invasion, too. ... But I'm seeing that we're sending our ground troops in to invade countries where the entire country wasn't the problem. Especially Iraq. Iraq was no problem. And why do we send in invading armies to march into Afghanistan when we're looking for a select group of people in that country?
So I believe that our troops should be brought home out of both places where we're obviously not having any success in Afghanistan. Osama bin Laden is still on the loose and that's who they told us was responsible for 9/11.

I don't believe there is any way to honestly characterise the above as Sheehan indicating she thought invading Afghanistan was the right move.

So, Scorpio, were you lying, mistaken, or do you have some source where Cindy Sheehan did "state[] that Afghanistan was a proper thig [sic] to do?"

Posted by: Lynxx Pherrett at August 27, 2005 09:28 PM

So now we have personal attacks as our "logic", eh. RNC SOP. The flat fact is that your first impression of someone who disagrees with you is that theyare lying. Ding! Ding! Ding!

Just as Blackavar didn't get that "WMD" = "manipulated election results" (both equally real).

My "defense" is that she has the right to speak, as you do yourself. Gee, what a heretical, unpatriotic notion. Guess I should hang my head in shame while you water the Constitution with yellow waste products, eh?

Posted by: Scorpio at August 28, 2005 10:22 AM

Sheehan: "If were attacked, we would all go out. Wed all take whatever we had. Id take my rolling pin and Id beat the attackers over the head with it. But we were not attacked by Iraq."

Now unlike her, I am positive Osama would have attacked and attacked until he got a response. 9/11, after all, was his second attempt on the WTC. I have no doubt he'd ave tried until he succeeded, because he was obsessed.

So. While I have not yet found the *original* Afghanistan quote. I'm pretty sure I read it and that with enough research I could turn it up again.

Posted by: Scorpio at August 28, 2005 10:36 AM

The problem with that "defense", Scorpio, is that nobody here was denying that she has a right to speak.

In fact, I don't think I've seen anyone anywhere claim she doesn't have that right.

Posted by: Sigivald at August 29, 2005 05:17 PM
Post a comment Note: Comments with more than two dashes per line will be blocked as spam.

Remember personal info?