Politics and Culture

I honor all of my brothers and sisters in the military, people who voluntarily offered to risk their lives for their country. And, of course, I grieve along with those parents who have lost their children to the war.

Now, I was going to criticize Indiana Bob of the Daily Kos for using a nation's condolences to further a political cause, but it was Andrew Bacevich, the father of a fallen Iraqi veteran, who decided to use that sympathy for political reasons (not an attack. It's just being accurate, no?), so I won't mention that aspect of the post. Some points, however:

1. Do soldiers have more credibility on the war or not? Should we listen to parents of fallen soldiers or not? Unless you conduct a survey and alter your opinion accordingly, DON'T MENTION THE FALLEN SOLDIERS OR THEIR PARENTS TO MAKE A POLITICAL POINT. It is what it is: emotional exploitation.

How much would you like to bet that Indiana Bob had the same opinion before he read about Bacevich or any other soldier's family? How much would you like to bet that Indiana Bob would have the same opinion had Bacevich come to a different conclusion about the war after his son's death? How much would you bet that Indiana Bob would have the same opinion had 100% of the fallen soldier's families been in favor of continued involvement in Iraq?

The president honors soldiers because that's part of his job, but I wouldn't like him to say something like "Joe's dad wanted to say that he supports the war." If he has, he should be ashamed.

2.

I would like every single democratic congressman to listen to this piece before they vote on Thursday, especially when a grieving father asks the following:

¨

What kind of a democracy is this when the people do speak, and the people´s voice is unambiguous, but nothing happens?¨

¨Our voices,¨ he says, ¨are simply lost.

Is that a smart thing to say? Do you think congressmen, who have been studying this war and its consequences for America and the world for four years, are just going to dump all of their opinions because of that statement? Is that how you want the congress to govern? Why don't we all just send them quotes instead of offering solid reasoning?

Besides, does Indiana Joe think the last election was unambiguous? So all of those millions upon millions of words and contrary opinion and analysis on the war was for nothing? Please! As if Indiana Bob said the 2004 congressional vote was unambiguous. Don't insult us, Mr. Bob.

Again, is the public right or not? If you're going to give weight to public opinion, then you should change along with them, no?

This is something everybody does: When the public votes for the other guy, the public are "sheeple," stupid, uninformed, etc. When they vote for your guy, the public is "awakening," wise, and should be heeded. So when they change back, do they get stupid again? The education system fell apart overnight only to improve four years later only to fall...

Please, Indiana Bob, Don't insult your audience with this stuff.