Prosecute the torture.

January 27, 2007

News on the Protest

The AP:
Protesters energized by fresh congressional skepticism about the Iraq war demanded a withdrawal of U.S. troops in a demonstration Saturday that drew tens of thousands and brought Jane Fonda back to the streets.
Oh geez. I can hear the wingnuts now. As soon as they read the words "Jane Fonda" that's all they'll talk about. Just wait - you'll see. It should take about 6 minutes for the right to start talking "Hanoi Jane" 24/7. They may even pull out that picture of Fonda and John Kerry. When they do, it's a guarantee that they're hoping you'll miss this part:

Standing on her toes to reach the microphone, 12-year-old Moriah Arnold told the crowd: "Now we know our leaders either lied to us or hid the truth. Because of our actions, the rest of the world sees us as a bully and a liar."

The sixth-grader from Harvard, Mass., the youngest speaker on the National Mall stage, organized a petition drive at her school against the war.

A sixth grader's annoyed enough to organize a petition. They're also hoping to distract you from this part:

The House Judiciary Committee chairman, Rep. John Conyers, threatened to use congressional spending power to try to stop the war. " George Bush has a habit of firing military leaders who tell him the Iraq war is failing," he said, looking out at the masses. "He can't fire you." Referring to Congress, the Michigan Democrat added: "He can't fire us.

"The founders of our country gave our Congress the power of the purse because they envisioned a scenario exactly like we find ourselves in today. Now only is it in our power, it is our obligation to stop Bush."

And then this:

A small contingent of active-duty service members attended the rally, wearing civilian clothes because military rules forbid them from protesting in uniform.

Air Force Staff Sgt. Tassi McKee, 26, an intelligence specialist at Fort Meade, Md., said she joined the Air Force because of patriotism, travel and money for college.

"After we went to Iraq, I began to see through the lies," she said.
In the crowd, signs recalled the November elections that defeated the Republican congressional majority in part because of Bush's Iraq policy. "I voted for peace," one said.

Hey, me too!

Lest we think that the protesters (as I am sure the wingnuts will claim) are "out of touch with mainstream America" Newsweek is reporting on a poll that paints a different picture. When asked "Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the way things are going in the United States at this time?" those polled answered 2-to-1 against being "satisfied" (61 to 30 percent).

Have a good Saturday.

Protests are patriotic!

18 comments:

Democrats-Lie said...

What a shame. The liberal left is so desperate to politicize the war on terror, they are now using children as their political tool to do so. How sick is that.

Like that 12 year old knows anything about what the war in Iraq is about. How could she? She's a child. When I was 12 years old, I'll be damned if I knew anything about what was really going on in the world. I was too busy being a kid and doing what kids do.

By the way, one has to wonder who told that 12 year old girl what to say. No mention of that.

Only the left would take an innocent child and use him/her as a tool for political gain. Of course, that's not twisted and sick, huh? Nope. But I guarantee it that if a Republican did that, the liberal left would be all over it, and do not any of you liberals even try to deny it.

And David, that poll you mentioned in your last paragraph lacks data regarding the first question:

"1. Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the way things are going in the United States at this time?"

30 percent = satisfied
61 percent = dissatisfied
9 percent = don't know.

So David, 61 percent of who are dissatisfied? Democrats, perhaps? We do not know. How "fascinating" that you fail to mention that fact.

And that right there is why I cannot trust polls. But David on the other hand, seems to take delight on using polls as an accurate "feeler" regarding how Americans feel about being satisfied or dissatisfied about the way things are going on in America. And by the way, "what things" are we talking about. "Things" could be anything. See how polls can be manipulated as a political tool?

Walter Trego said...

What a shame. The Conservative Right is so desperate to politicize abortion that they are now using children as their political tool to do so. How sick is that?

Only the right would take an innocent child and use him/her as a tool for political gain. Of course, that's not twisted and sick, huh? Nope. But I guarantee it that if a Democrat (athough I don't recall the article stating a party) did that, the conservative right would be all over it, and do not any of you conservatives even try to deny it!

Schmuck Shitrock said...

When I was 12 years old, I'll be damned if I knew anything about what was really going on in the world. I was too busy being a kid and doing what kids do.
Isn't it nice to know that something hasn't changed over the past twelve months?

Jesus is a liberal said...

By the time I was 12 (7th grade) I was watching the nightly news with my Dad and reading the newspaper so that I could join in family and school discussions about the world around me.

12 year olds should be forming opinions based on rational thought-it's called educating the next generation.

Mr. Democrats-Lie must have been home-schooled in order to be too busy playing when he should have been learning like normal 12 year olds.

Anonymous said...

Braden (D-L) wrote:

"1. Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the way things are going in the United States at this time?"

30 percent = satisfied
61 percent = dissatisfied
9 percent = don't know.

So David, 61 percent of who are dissatisfied? Democrats, perhaps? We do not know. How "fascinating" that you fail to mention that fact.

And that right there is why I cannot trust polls.


This tells us everything we need to know about Braden's politically drenched skepticism. Think about what he's trying to sell us: That Newsweek, while obviuously polling Republicans AND Democrats (and anyone actually reading the poll would see this), would ONLY report on how Democrats answered the question. Or maybe they only asked Democrats that particular question. Braden doesn't say.

This is so riduculous that anyone even trying to use it raise doubt about the poll looks, well, ridiculous.

And that would be our Braden.

They also didn't ask whether all those 61% were sober. So can't we then assume that at least some those Democrats were drunk? That would explain how they can't see what Braden so plainly sees.

Interesting that Newsweek doesn't even seem to care the drinking habits of the people they're polling, eh Braden?

And how can we be sure that Newsweek even asked human beings? The implication is that they do, but they don't specifically say it, anyone with a healthy skepticism HAS to raise the question.

Isn't that right, Braden?

Maybe al qaeda has infiltrated Newsweek magazine and is manipulating the opinion polls in order to undermine our President's credibility and thus win the war on terror.

Since it doesn't specifically say they haven't, we have to assume it's a reasonable possibility.

Don't we Braden?

Ridiculous - he's absolutely ridiculous.

Democrats-Lie said...

What did you think you were telling us that we didn't already know, Anon?

-- That this guy is ridiculous?

-- That his facts aren't factual?

-- That his logic isn't logical?

-- That he's not really Democrats-Lie?

Whigsboy said...

Of course, Jane Fonda is free to do whatever the hell she wants, but why can't she just use her money to do some good and keep her mug hidden in one of what I'm sure are multiple homes around the world. Rightfully or not, she is hated by a good many people and, as David points out, her presence redirects the conversation away from the important points to be made to a rehash of Hanoi Jane. And not just among the wingnuts. The dumb television and print reporters who can't pass up an easy story line will write about Jane Fonda being there and, while it's complete rubbish, in many people's eyes, it casts the protest as a gathering of a bunch of "liberal hippies," when I'm willing to bet that a lot of the people there had never been to a war protest march in their lives and are fairly far afoot from being liberal hippies.

Jane, do us all a favor, if you really want to make a difference, stick to getting big paychecks for making bad movies with J-Lo, donate that money to progressive groups and candidates, and leave the war protests to the little people.

Schmuck Shitrock said...

It is more than her right to protest, Whigs, it is her duty. Without Ms. Fonda and many, many more like her, we might still be losing American lives in the jungles of Southeast Asia.

Of course the residents of Wingnuttia will use her for target practice just as they did 30-some-odd years ago. So what? If we are afraid of the screed coming from the likes of xRanger and the "old" Democrats-Lie, we don't deserve to wear our Courageous Lefty Peace Sign badges.

Jane Fonda helped America support our troops by bringing them home back in the 70's, she'll help us do it again in the 00's.

xranger said...

Actually, Schmuck, I whole-heartedly defend any American's right to peaceful protest.

Regardless of whether or not I agree with your position, protest away.

Schmuck Shitrock said...

Why, that's mighty liberal of you, x. May I also choose my own bedtime? (:^)}

I don't think that was the question, though. Of course we can protest. The question, as I read it, was whether Ms. Fonda, being an incredibly visible target for the hawks, creates more problems for the Cause than she is worth.

I say she has a great track record. What say you?

Note to Whigs Re: Donations, etc. She already does all that. And remember, her husband has pledged a BILLION bucks for worthy causes around the globe.

xranger said...

Put me into the catagory of those who despise Jane Fonda. I don't feel that sitting behind the trigger of an anti-aircraft gun did anything to stopping the war. Her faux orgasmic look of glee at the trigger did not help matters, either.

She has the right to protest, I have the right to boycott her movies. You can go to bed whenever you want.

Anonymous said...

So it's now reported that a number of protesters were allowed...that's right ...allowed to deface the U.S. Capital building all the while Capital Police were told to stand by and not doing anything.

Nothing to say any of you? Of course not. You're all liberals.

And of course, David will not say a word about it either. David's only interested in being as politically biased as he possibly can.

Moving on:

Since when does exercising one's First Amendment Rights also give the right to vandalism of public property?

Tell you what, if any of you think that it is their right as protesters, leave your address within the comment section so that I can be sure to send someone to your house and vandalize it with anarchist symbols, all the while they exercise their First Amendment Right.

You liberals make me sick.

Schmuck Shitrock said...

Anon, I'm sure you have a link for us about this? Why not share?

Whigsboy said...

As I said, she can protest if she wants. I just believe she does more harm than good. And I've seen no evidence that her involvement did anything to help end the Vietnam war and I don't think her presence in D.C. will do anything other than to allow the wingnuts and the MSM to put her name in the article or show footage of her in that news clip and thereby flip that switch in many, even sensible readers'/viewers' minds that says "Jane Fonda, yuck" and never make it to the fact that there were soccer moms and active-duty and former soldiers there.

Just because she can join in the protest doesn't mean she should. That's all I'm saying. It's weighing the harm vs. the good, and I think many people would argue that she does more of the former and less of the latter with her presence.

xranger said...

Here's the link to the spray painting:

http://thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/012507/protesters.html

Schmuck Shitrock said...

I understand what you're saying, Whigs, as I think you can see from my response to x, above. I just disagree with you.

I think she is a patriot, and a credit to any cause with which she associates herself.

Still pretty damn hot, too, last time I looked. At least to a geezer like me.

Schmuck Shitrock said...

So they were anarchists, not liberals. I'm not surprised.

But the police who failed to stop them should be fired, and their bosses should be fired, all the up to...oops!

Richmond K. Turner said...

Of course, Jane Fonda is free to do whatever the hell she wants...

Provided, of couse, that she refrains from doing anymore workout videos featuring herself wearing leg warmers.