Posts
Ok some of the things I am gonna talk about are old news I know but I have kept my mouth shut long enough.
First off. What kind of country are we becoming when we insult people who we have asked to come speak? For those who don't know, Columbia University's President basically insulted the President of Iran on Monday when he introduced him to the crowd waiting to hear what Iran's pres had to say. Now the last time I checked if you ask someone, no matter who it is, to come speak you DO NOT insult them. No matter how much you disagree with them, if you invite that person, you show them courtesy. No wonder a lot of the world think the U.S. is populated by ass holes. Who in the hell are we to demand respect and attention when we can't even show respect to a simple college guest speaker? Call me old fashioned but I feel if you want respect you have to give it first! There are times when you call people out on their position and views but when you introduce them as INVITED guests is not the time. That is for afterwards during questions or whatever. I admit I detest Iran's pres and his radical views as most people do but that doesn't mean I would ever invite him, or anyone else, to come speak and then when I introduce them say that they are a son of a bitch and they can take whatever they are gonna say and shove it up their ass. The second I do that, I become no better than the ones I can't stand.
Secondly. All wars are policies of governments and as such a policy should be defended and/or promoted by POLITICIANS and not military leaders. If the President of the United States wants to defend his policies then a members of HIS staff and the State Department should have been testifying before Congress and NOT General Petraeus. His job is overseeing and commanding the troops in Iraq, not posing for cameras. Which leads into my last thing.
Thirdly. Explain to me why all of a sudden an ad questioning, or attacking however you want to see it, a member of the Armed Services is a "disgusting" (as the President put it) thing to do. I personally didn't care for the phrasing of it but I respect that organization's right to publish it. From what I remember, the President didn't find anything wrong with the ads attacking Sen. Kerry in the 2004 election campaign or for that matter how Carl Rove (and others) during Bush's 2000 campaign used Sen. McCain's war record against him. Then you have Rush Limbaugh agreeing with a caller that we have "phony soldiers" who come back from Iraq and criticize the war. Both Kerry and McCain at least FOUGHT in Vietnam rather than play the system as Bush did. Even so all 3 did serve their country. But going back to the ad. Is the President saying that its ok to attack/question former members of the military about their service and patriotism when it allows political gain but not active members to try and achieve the same goal? Funny how a CONSERVATIVE publication also attacked/questioned Petraeus's report and yet no one has said a word about it (I apologize but I can't remember the name of the publication).
One final thought (I mean it this time lol). Can someone please pull Rush Limbaugh's head from his ass. It was this week I believe that R.L. was agreeing with a caller that we have "phony soldiers" who come back from Iraq and criticize the war. If you serve you serve plain and simple and they have the same right to criticize as we do. I can somewhat understand not liking the active duty people to, however, it seems that it is the Reservists that are taking most of the heat. As long as they aren't on active duty they can do and say whatever they want. I can't imagine how anyone could call any soldier "phony". Whether you agree with them or not they have bled for this country and know better than anyone the conditions over there.
That is all for this tirade
By the way, links for those interested:
http://www.huffingtonpost.
http://www.usatoday.com/ne
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/i
No comments:
Post a Comment