Thanks for sharing! Wish I had heard it with my own ears. Has anyone read Nat Hentoff's [Why I am not marching against the war] in the Village Voice online? Can't link to it, but hope you'll find it and read it. Today has been a really good day to Blog! Thanks for adding to my reading and thinking pleasure.

Here's the link to the Hentoff article on why he's not marching in anti-war protests this time around.

i'd argue that those still protesting the war are less about protesting the war and more about protesting bush.

I was reading the other,day about Pearl Jam in concert. These woosy Bas.... would be the first ones to run and hide if the war was in the US. I believe we should still have the draft, then these anti-Bush, anti-War babies would see what it is like when you walk into a country that has been run by Dictators for so many years.They can sit back in their fancy homes and wine about the war until its on their doorstep, then they'll be protesting that the Government is ignoring them if the soldiers don't show up in time. To all you protesters against this war. GROW UP AND GET A LIFE.
Yves from Canada.

The patriotic left died with Hubert Humphrey, Scoop Jackson and Daniel Patrick Moynahan.
The Right has banished it's kooks and flakes, where is David Duke in Republican circles? Why did Buchanan leave the Republican Party? The answer is that we repudated them.
The Left has not repudated their kooks and flakes, instead it has allowed them to define the Left. There is no substantantial difference between Pelosi, McDermmot, Kerrey and the people who carried the sign proclaiming we support the troops when they shoot their officers. There is no one in the Democratic Party leadership denouncing de Genova (sp?).
The public sees this and the revulsion grows. Lifelong Democrats here in Northeast Texas (home of the yellow dog) look in disbelief.
The Left races to the margin. They've grown as hatefilled as the KKK.

There's a very easy way to separate the sensible dissenter from the moral cripple. A sensible dissenter is one who recognizes the essential moral virtue of the US and wants the best for this country. He might have thought that the war was not in the best intersts of the US, but now that the shooting has started, the sensible dissenter recognizes that the only good way for it to end is with a US victory. He knows that simply walking out and leaving Saddam in power is not an option. Hence, no one who is still protesting, trying to end the war, can be considered a sensible dissenter.

Those who are still protesting fall into one of two possible categories: 1) those who hate the USA and everything it stands for; and 2) those who just hate Bush. I'm not certain that those really are two categories, but I allow for the possibility that there might be people whose hatred for Bush is so deeply ingrained that they are blind to the fact that, in trying to bring him down by making the war a political issue, they are doing our country a grave disservice.

I SUpport in ITALY the troops...
i LOVE ALL of us..
i thinks to you all of my day in every minute..
i proud that exists persons as you
infinitely tanks!!also from part of all my friends and my family.
If those felt single watched stars... are all the persons whom like me they love to you and they are there.. with you!!! If you want to write to me.:
sabrydm@libero.it
...excuse for my bad english..:-))

Great story. I'm against the war, but I loathe the "don't you care about the children in (fill in the blank)" line that big-L Liberals have used as a red-herring for every single conflict we've been in since at least the beginning of the Reagan administration.

I do not consider myself a Liberal. I consider myself a patriot. I served in the military, and I even voted once for a previous Bush. I never voted for Clinton or Gore. But I think the war is wrong.

Still, if someone had used the "don't you care" line on me (which, when I was in college, usually was followed by "the children in Nicaragua"), I probably would have reacted similarly. You don't create informed dissent by accusing your audience of not caring, or by "dying" in front of their cab, or by burning the flag. The only way to achieve change is by a rational exchange of ideas; anybody who uses the "don't you care" argument isn't intellectually invested enough in the debate to be worth listening to.

It's something of a commentary on our time that:
1) The young woman had the effrontery to ask that "question";
2) The majority of American men would probably not have read her off the way the old woman did. Whether that would be because of a lack of brass or an overpowering desire to avoid confrontation is difficult to determine.

Since Black Tuesday, the in-your-face anti-American Left is getting whacked in the teeth this way more frequently than before. Still not frequently enough, but one must start somewhere.

I'm a recently new blogger and felt like contributing to this wonderfully enticing dialogue.

I'm a liberal and I'm ashamed of the conduct that other liberals are displaying. I'm also a veteran and have a deep sense of patriotism towards my country and fellow citizens.

The "Left" that everyone is speaking of is truly disrepresentative of my thinking and judgement regarding this war. While I don't agree with the manner our government has approached this war, I do agree that the action is necessary. I couldn't agree more with ardsgaine and sean g! If you are a dissenter, you have the right to an opinion, but recognize that a difference of opinion should minimally require a different solution; lacking a proposed solution makes you nothing more than a whining idiot.

It is an impressive new fighting force that we have put into action in Iraq and the technology is not perfect but it is an order of magnitude better than anything previously seen in use to limit civilian deaths. I didn't want this to happen and feel that our current leaders decided to put their peace plan for the region into action no matter how many American's told them no. They lied to us right and left to confuse the real motives that are behind their actions and I'm not ok with that. But I'll admit that the reality of becoming the world's police force and cooling down these troubled areas is one I can understand and agree with. Anyone who drives their car to protest this war looses all credibility in my eyes because you can't have one without the other. I support our brave military men and women 100% and say good job people. I regret that protesting the lies our leaders have used to put these soldiers in harms way will soon be punishable as an act of terrorism as our basic freedoms of speech and assembly are removed. Considering the actions of many of these future terrorists there will be few mourning their incarceration nor realizing the cost we as Americans will pay for the false promise of safety offered in exchange for those rights.

Stereotyping from any side of debate or discussion does nothing to further a positive discussion about divisive issues. On, the otherhand, I feel stereotypes lend well to isolation and contempt.

Sometimes I like to isolate myself because of the overwhelming failures I witness in others attempts to create peace, undestanding, and mutual accord. And in that way, I might say, "You fucking idiots." Leave it up to yourself whom I might be directing that statement toward.

So the old lady doesn't even seem to understand the cause for which her husband died. That's truly a shame.

I'm so tired of hearing that those who are protesting are unpatriotic or -- as I was called yesterday -- "parasites of freedom."

The fact of the matter is, though I am a pacifist, I would have hopped a plane to Afghanistan to shoot bin Laden myself -- and I would have slept like a baby afterward -- if I had had the chance. That's because he was a real threat.

But Saddam has never been a threat to the US. After two weeks of war there are still no chemical or bio weapons. (Sure, we may eventually find them, but they certainly don't seem to be pervasive). There is even some evidence that the Bush administration forged documents to make it look like Iraq had a nuclear program -- and there is positively zero evidence of any such weapons.

Osama bin Laden only became interested in bringing down the US after what he perceived as meddling in Arab affairs in Gulf War I. So now that we are back -- with no UN mandate and in opposition to world opinion -- how many new bin Ladens are we creating?

When I protest this war I do so because the President, who had never been off the continent before his election, is a fool with no understanding of the world around him. I am protesting to keep our troops home and all of us safe from more terror.

Let's address actual threats: North Korea and the remnants of al Qaeda, not some ficticious enemy that the CEO-in-chief has concocted.

This was written by Teddy Roosevelt and printed on the inside cover of the bible biven to every American Soldier as they left ot liberate Europe in WWI.

The teaching of the New Testament is foreshadowed in Micah’s verse: “What more doth the Lord require of thee than to do justice, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God.” Do justice; and therefore fight valiantly against those that stand for the reign of Moloch and Beelzebub on this earth. Love mercy; treat your enemies well; succor the afflicted; treat every woman as if she were your sister; care for the little children; and be tender with the old and helpless. Walk humbly; you will do so if you study the life and teachings of the Savior, walking in His steps. And remember: the most perfect machinery of government will not keep us as a nation from destruction if there is not within us a soul. No abounding of material prosperity shall avail us if our spiritual senses atrophy. The foes of our own household will surely prevail against us unless there be in our people an inner life which finds its outward expression in a morality like unto that preached by the seers and prophets of God when the grandeur that was Greece and the glory that was Rome still lay in the future.

I believe we are seeing this wish put into action by our soldiers now. I am very proud of them all!

Since when is criticing the current adminstration "bad-mouthing" America? There's huge leap there. I don't think the Founding Fathers would have drafted the Bill of Rights if they didn't believe voicing opinions about how the nation's resources was one of the foundations of democracy. I hope that woman's husband is mortally ashamed of her, since she's expressing a sentiment - discouraging someone from speaking their mind about the government - that is far, far more anti-American than anything I've seen at an anti-war demonstration.

Ardsgaine's comment about the distinction between "the sensible dissenter from the moral cripple" strikes me as profound and true.

If you believe it, and I do, then yes this protester is going beyond bad mouthing an administration - she is indeed expressing hostility to the country, not just its present steward. The creeping perception that this is in fact the "peace" movement's animating principle above all others does much to explain both the elderly lady's reaction in this instance, and the growing marginalization of the Left in the United States.

how is that expressing hostility to America? Bush is only one American. A powerful American, but he does not represent America, particularly within these borders where we are free to criticize our leaders.

As a Christian, I think anyone who uses the bible to support this war is a moral cripple. If you want to pervert a sacred text in the name of violence and quash dissidence you belong in a nation like Iran.

Does anyone really believe this story? It screams "phony" to me.

As someone familiar with the concept of Christian "just war" doctrine, I find the position of "Christians" like chris to be profoundly ironic, in 2 ways. [1] Advocating a religious position that does not in fact exist - the Bible could indeed be used legitimately by a believing Christian to justify war, so perhaps closer study of his religion would be beneficial; and [2] He suggests Iran as a suitable place for his political opponents, but the gravitas of his argument against them is theological. Uh, chris, I think that's their game, not ours. Church, state... no? Never mind.

If you convert to Islam, chris, I think the Iranians will happily take you.