Wednesday, October 03, 2007

Rush, The Phony Solider(s) and Patriotism

If one was to be rational about this, one might think that the soldiers might somewhat resemble the population as a whole. Certain restrictions keep out the worst of the worst. Other than that it is likely there are some excellent wonderful people in among the troops. Quite likely there are many that resemble what you might consider your average American, and yes even those that are probably less than respectable. Our soliders are us, good and bad. As a Liberal I respect the fact that they are willing to do a job that is a service to the community as a whole. I respect that it might involve death. That said, it is likely that there was more involved in their decision to join than that. The recruiters sure seem to think so.

My problem with the rightists comes from their desire, over the last several years especially, to use "support the troops" as a bludgen to attack my patriotism. To worship them as an unapproachable icon. To twist and spin things so sadly that I have been turned into an enemy of my country. To negate my opinion with spin and lies. I find it beyond the pail.

What is happening here is people trying to point out that patriotism or lack of it is not party selective....or even political philosophy selective. It's pretty much a judgement call for everyone. Unfortunately the rightists never get the hint. Never evolve. They are so self absorbed in how horrible the left is that they, to coin a term, miss the forest for the trees. Listen to Rush or Sean or any of them and you will clearly hear who the enemy is. It's about people not about ideas or solutions. It is non stop divison of this country using not ideas but people. It's easier for the slow ones to grasp. If the jahidist is mentioned at all it is almost always in connection with an American they don't like or an American group they don't like. We are using talk shows and blogs to snark. We are raising an entire generation that confuse this with political discourse. We are falling apart not coming together. We need to quit saying America so much and start saying the United States. Just maybe the reminder might help. I honestly feel we are in the most literal sense moving toward two countries instead of one.I've even had positive thoughts about that myself. It's likely not what should happen to a civilized society though.

9 Comments:

Anonymous DC said...

Y' know, Ron, it has seemed that for much longer than the last 7 years we have been divided into 2 countries. Speaking of blue and red, why in Heaven's name is the GOP Convention using a blue elephant in its ad/logo? Isn't it bad enough that they have stolen the flag, the Pledge, the national anthem, and just about every other patritic song from us? (But, that's just fine with them cuz we (Dems, rational Republicans, etc.) are unpatriotic traitors in the opinions of the Rushites and the Bushites.) Now, they are trying to steal our color, too! That is going too far!!
Anyway, I digress. Rush is a hypocrite and a big fat idiot and a liar and I don't think even he believes half of what he says. He has figured out that the way to make $25 mil. a year is to diss everyone but the guys who make sure he doesn't have to pay a fair amount of taxes (if any) on that $25 mil. He plays to the angry white man and anyone else gullible or dumb enough to listen to the garbage coming out of his mouth. Much as I loathe Bush, I give Rush the credit for dividing the country prior to Bush's selection to the Presidency by redefining the word liberal to mean crazy far left radical rather than generous, broadminded, and progressive.
I rather doubt that most people are really that different. Many people have both liberal and conservative views on the issues and that balances out to moderate. I work with people who are conservatives (both Dem and GOP) who are very nice people that I can talk to about a variety of topics and we can agree on things like how terrible it is that U.S. jobs have been outsourced, etc. However, I usually try to avoid the subject of politics to stay out of trouble (not today, unfortunately when I got into a discussion with some fellow liberals who came into the place I work). Liberals have usually been willing to listen to and tolerate the viewpoints of others, but we are really angry due to the sheer hatefulness of the GOP conservatives and it is not easy to keep one's mouth shut. But, y'know I have found that if I say anything, wear a campaign pin, a peace sign, etc. I am sure to get hateful and hostile looks from the other side. They just can't stand those who differ from their totally misinformed points of view. I truly believe many of them have been brainwashed by their churches and the rightwing corporate media. I mean, it is insane. How can a peace sign be an evil horrible thing to a Christian when Jesus is called The Prince of PEACE? It is totally illogical! How can Bush be deemed a saint by some when he thinks it's great to spend billions a month on a war we want out of that is killing thousands of people and terrible to spend $60 mil. over 5 years on children's health care? He says that would be moving health care in the wrong direction...maybe he thinks Jesus is going to be coming back to heal these sick kids who can't afford health care. Do you want to know what's really sickening? Bush's younger sister, Robin, died of leukemia as a young child. One would think he would consider it a high priority to make sure that children would get not only medical care when they are sick, but preventative and diagnostic care, also. Progress in treating leukemia has advanced tremendously since his sister died, but that means little when parents can't afford to take their sick kids to the doctor to be tested, let alone treated for it.
Back to Rush, the anal cyst guy, who could've gotten a military job pushing papers during the Vietnam
War which I am sure he was gung ho for instead of a deferment...he is a total hypocrite and he is always the worst person in the world in my opinion!

2:21 PM, October 05, 2007  
Blogger Ron said...

The thing I take most offense to is the distance they have gone to to turn their fellow citizens into the enemy. Like you say. It's hard not to want to crank up a verbal brawl.I think the time is coming that all their huff and puff will just be their stuff. They aren't governing, they are marketing a product. It's a sales job and they are a bunch of cons.


Oh, I saw some stuff about people being upset about the blue elephant. I think some time back I read something to the effect that every so many(I think 2 or 3) national elections they reverse the colors! Apparently this is something they agreed to some time ago. If that is true it could be the reason for the blue elephant and will be a pretty shocking thing to a lot of people.:-) I don't personally care what color I get. I care that people that are going to advance our country get elected and not those that can think of nothing to do but invade and occupy countries and transfer more wealth to the most wealthy.

7:53 PM, October 05, 2007  
Anonymous DC said...

Blue is the color of Heaven so it is appropriate for Democrats while Red is the color of hell fire, so it appropriate for the GOP which will eventually be headed for it-right? LOL
Besides, any elephant, a nice animal, would surely be blue :-( on account of having to be the symbol for the Party that's symbol should be a snake in the grass which is more appropriate.
What I am most angry about with the majority of Republicans is their complacency. They continue to listen to Rush, watch False News, etc. and vote Republican without getting involved. If they were more politically active they might begin to see just how far right their Party has become and take it back from the Ameri-fascist neo-cons who are destroying the country due to their own greed for their own wealth and power. I keep having this argument with someone who is a Bush hating Republican, but who refuses to see the truth about his own Party. Just too easy to diss the other side and do nothing to clean up one's own house, I guess.

2:52 PM, October 08, 2007  
Anonymous Tim Regler said...

I think before we too quickly "Rush" to judgment, we need to consider all that Rush has and continues to do for us. His attack on Michael J. Fox (he was faking his Parkinson symptoms) may have easily tipped the scales of the Missouri Senate race in the Dems favor and given them control of the Senate. Thanks Rush! Consider this for just a moment. It becomes clearer and clearer to me each day that Hillary Clinton will become the next President, and the people most responsible for making it happen will be people just like Rush. That's pretty damn funny. Almost as funny as the fact that thanks to Bush, Cheney, Gonzo, Rove, etc...she will be the most powerful President in the nations' history. ZOWIE!!!!

9:31 AM, October 09, 2007  
Anonymous DC said...

Hillary Clinton will become the next President...she will be the most powerful President in the nations' history.
And we still won't have universal health care because Hillary has compromised herself by taking mucho contributions from the drug companies, etc. that don't want universal health care.
Sorry, I don't want Hillary as the candidate. Biden would be much much better and I think she is Republican Light, besides.
Rush, etc. want Hillary as the candidate so they can turn on their sleaze machine full throttle, so we will lose. That beyond her gender is gonna be a big problem with voters unless a lot of GOPs stay home or the ticket is split due to Ron Paul maybe running as a Libertarian and/or the religious right running a Pro-Lifer against Giuiliani.

3:14 PM, October 10, 2007  
Anonymous DC said...

Saw on Yahoo News that Hillary is going to have more trouble in Iowa than we think, based on her gender, as Iowa has never elected a woman as its governor or to Congress. :-( for Iowa, but gives me hope re: Biden, maybe, or at least Edwards.

1:44 PM, October 11, 2007  
Blogger Ron said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

3:03 PM, October 13, 2007  
Blogger Ron said...

Not that many women have run. Not many at all. Iowa(my home state) did have a woman atty gen. at one time not too long ago. I don't think she will have trouble in Iowa because she is a woman. Iowa is a rather populist state. Maybe that's why I turned out like I am!? While senator Grassley is quite republican he also shows a populist streak and does have his limits. Harkin is a populist all the way. We had some freakin Jim Nussle etc neocons in congress for a while but the last election took care of most of that. If she wins it will be because she struck populist cord. If she loses it will be because she didn't. On the right it depends on who turns out. There are plenty of traditional republicans like grassley but there is a lot of christiban too.

3:07 PM, October 13, 2007  
Anonymous DC said...

Come on, Ron, try to think positively. :-) You don't seem to be any more thrilled with Hillary than I am. I'd love to see a woman President, but Barbara Boxer before Hillary. Hopefully, gender plays enough of a part that one of the guys wins in Iowa.

2:34 PM, October 15, 2007  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home