Jan 12 2007
Sadr’s Bluster, Boxer’s Hate
It is good to see decisive action being taken on Iraq. But what is most encouraging is all the souls being laid bare in the process. The facade’s of people are being ripped off as they are confronted. One facade now gone is that covering Muqtada al Sadr – the spiritual head of much of the Mahdi militia’s which are to be disarmed or destroyed. The bluster coming from Sadr’s group is classic “about to learn a lesson the hard way” middle east Arab. What us Star Trek fans would call a ‘red shirt’ role:
A spokesman for radical Iraqi cleric Moqtada al-Sadr has warned that US President George W. Bush’s new Iraq strategy risks sending thousands of American troops to their deaths.
“The American people have to prevent their sons from coming to Iraq or they may return in coffins,” said Sheikh Abdel Razzaq al-Nadawi, a senior official in Sadr’s movement in the Shiite holy city of Najaf.
Militarily the middle east is a wet noodle. The challenge has always been their penchant to kill each other with rampant bloodlust. It is very helpful, when it comes time to weed out that bloodlust, if they stand up and confirm their true nature. The Mahdi will be no more.
But right up there with this honest moment is the exposure of all the Bush Derangement Syndromes that are coming to the for as the Democrats go off on wild, insane tangents with the reality that holding a gavel is not all powerful (ask Newt). Barbara Boxer is the best examople as she tried to hit Condi Rice with a cruel comment about being childless. Clearly Boxer was being childish in her personal attack. And, Boxer insulted everyone who has lost a loved one fighting for this great nation:
“Who pays the price? I’m not going to pay a personal price,” Boxer said. “My kids are too old, and my grandchild is too young.”
While losing a loved on is hard, it should not be seen as ‘paying a price’. We all die. Some get to chose whether their death is for a good cause or is simply a useless loss. Drunk drivers cause useless losses. They make others ‘pay a price’. Criminals make others ‘pay a price’. What has been happening on the battlefields of late is a ‘sacrifice’. It is a priceless gift someone gave to all of us. It is an honorable sacrifice. And that is how those close to the person lost see it. They lost their loved one, yes. But they take pride and solace in the fact that loved one died doing what they wanted and in a cause they believed in.
That is the difference in ‘paying a price’ and making a sacrifice – the intentions of the one who died are either in conflict with conditions of the loss or in support of the conditions. Boxer is too BDS driven to comprehend the difference. In fact, she clearly implies to die for one’s country is to ‘pay a price’ – which means she really should not be in a leadership role. If she and her family cannot understand why people volunteer to fight and possibly die for this country, then they do not have the wisdom and insight to lead those people.
The common thread here is Boxer and Sadr see no value in the cause of America. Sadr sees body bags, Boxer sees body bags. Sadr sees discarded people, Boxer sees discarded people. Americans see heroes who gave us a precious gift that can never be forgotten or diminished. We understand these people did went into our battle because that was their calling. These were not the victims of a drunk driver, these were not useless deaths. And anyone who implies otherwise is actually the one who has become so deranged they cannot even retain respect for the wishes of the dead, of the message of their life spent for all of us. Boxer is a cold, hate filled person. Her life represents obsession and anger at not being considered as perfect as she sees herself in her own mind. So when faced with conflicts she lashes out. She should never be representing a state like California. The state is liberal, but it is not full of compassionless spite.
I just wish when some dem makes a tasteless condescending remark like the one Boxer made to Rice “you don’t have any children do you?” that he/she would come back and say “why do you feel the necessity to insult our military men and women by calling them children”. But this is just a ploy by the dems to bring pathos into the war. They love our troops so bring them home junk.
I never understood their attitude about the military. Why have a military if you won’t use them. Remember that the dems did their best to eliminate the military during the Clinton years. They don’t want us to have a military. They think we should be first in line to eliminate the military and weapons to show the rest of the world that we are serious about bringing peace and love to everyone. They are in effect saying we will be first in gathering around the campfire singing kumbaya until everybody else joins us. This utopian dream will never exist as long as other people want to destroy you and the libs and dems don’t seem to understand that these terrorisits want to destroy us or else they have closed their eyes to this fact. And this type of people will always exist.
Do they pass out naive pills to these people or do they just think we are naive? They hate gun control because they could never subdue an armed public. And that is why they are trying to put so many limits on the right to bear arms.
AJ,
Thanks for posting on this. I am afraid if I had a blog, I would have been alot more profane about this. I AM LIVID!!! As a matter of fact, I am going somewhere to cool down. I sincerely hope that Senator Boxer is somewhere contemplating the enormous insult she has just unleashed, not only on Dr. Rice, but on every single American who really respects and admires what our military has done for us. Every time she opens her mouth its an insult to her country. Apologies are not enough anymore from any of these depraved people!
When you are sleeping peacefully in your bed at night Ms. Boxer, realize that it IS because soldiers fight to keep that precious right. It infuriates me that they call each other “gentlemen” and “gentleladies” and honorable this and that. There is NO HONOR LEFT IN THAT CESSPOOL called Congress. PERIOD!!!
Carol
Barbara Boxer Must Apologize to Secretary Rice…
Barbara Boxer accused Secretary Rice of not caring about what happens in Iraq because she doesn’t have any children at risk. I can’t imagine anyone saying anything more reprehensible or cruel: Condoleezza Rice came under a shocking Democratic attack …
Bixer’s Snark And Ignorance…
From the New York Post, Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer, an appalling scold from California, wasted no time yesterday in dragging the debate over Iraq about as low as it can go – attacking Secre tary of State Condoleezza Rice for…
The woman is clueless. So clueless she gave a commendation last November to the California chapter or CAIR and did not even know that this organization is linked to terrorism. When she found out she withdrew the commendation. Too little, too late. Every thinking American already knew CAIR is linked to terrorism and has known for years, but not our esteemed senator from California.
Boxer is inconsistent in her actions and comments.
Boxer’s Comments on Condi’s Family…
I hate to be the grapefruit juice in everyone’s eye here, but I’m not quite getting the outrage over Boxer’s comments to Condi Rice yesterday concerning her domestic situation. I’ve watched the video and I don’t think Boxer was trying……
The Boxer Rebellion…
Newsbusters quotes Barbara Boxer’s exchange with Condi Rice yesterday:Sen. Barbara Boxer took an unseemly jab at Condi Rice yesterday. Of all the members of the Senate, the one you might expect to be least likely to call attention to a……
The Democrats are playing a very interesting game. What they are attempting to do is failing any counter argument, they are attempting to invalidate opposition opinion by disqualification of the opinion holders.
In other words, if you can’t attack the message, attack the messenger. They started this with their “chickenhawk” rhetoric where they implied that one must have served in the military in order to have a pro-administration opinion. Now one must also have children as well. The idea is to limit the possible pool of people who can “legitimately” support the administration through various arbitrary criteria while not in any way limiting the pool of people who can be opposed.
Of course this is all hogwash and anyone may have any opinion either for or against. In fact, as Democrats have demonstrated, it is even ok to change your opinion in mid-course. A person’s opinion is just as valid either way and simply because someone served in the military doesn’t make their opinion any “more valid” than someone who hasn’t. I knew some idiots in the military when I served and I know some pretty sharp people who never served. In fact, according to the Democrats, you can be a sharp lifelong civilian and have a valid opinion, as long as it is an opinion opposed to the administration. Then, according to their logic, your opinion is perfectly valid.
It is the sort of trick one resorts to when they don’t really have a message of their own except “I am against your message … no matter what that might be”. It is sophamoric.
Oh, and another thing … this Boxer thing is another example of exactly why I believe the Senate should return to being appointed by the state legislatures as our founders designed it and it was in the first 100 years of our nation’s history. Senate hearings would have a lot less showboating and a lot more getting down to business if that were the case.
Video: Boxer gets personal with Condi at Senate hearing…
Boxer’s Low Blow January 12, 2007 — Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer, an appalling scold from California, wasted no time yesterday in dragging the debate over Iraq about as low as it can go – attacking Secre tary of State Condoleezza…
Quick hits…
AJ Strata said: “That is the difference in ‘paying a priceÂ’ and making a sacrifice – the intentions of the one who died are either in conflict with conditions of the loss or in support of the conditions. Boxer is too BDS driven to comprehend the dif…
I see that Senator Boxer has sent out her handler instead of getting her hands dirty doing it herself. As per Fox News:
Boxer released a statement Friday to FOXNews.com through her spokeswoman, Natalie Ravitz, saying:
“I spoke the truth at the committee hearing, which is that neither Secretary Rice nor I have family members that will pay the price for this escalation. My point was to focus attention on our military families who continue to sacrifice because this Administration has not developed a political solution to the situation in Iraq.”
…..
Too gutless to even explain herself. Sending out your mouthpiece does NOT get you off the hook, Barbara. With no less than FIVE presidential candidates on the panel, salivating to use this as red meat for their own twisted purposes…you come off looking like some sort of self-righteous, hypocritical, SPECIAL PROSECUTOR in the opening impeachment rounds.
Carol
I don’t have children because I can’t have children. I had this same exchange with some obnoxious old woman. She said that if I had children I would understand what loss was.
I told her I had two relatives serving in Iraq and while neither of them were my sons, that was two more than she had serving there.
Another woman told me that since I had relatives in Iraq it was “ok” for me to have an opinion, otherwise I had no right to question her opposition. After all her brother was over there.
I told her that I had a right to an opinion whether I had relatives in Iraq or not and that her brother was in the military, not her. His decision to volunteer for the United States Military was about him, not her.
Who are these people who think they can decide who does and does not have a right to care or think or have an opinion about the war in Iraq or anything else?
Boxer’s Low Blow With Condi (Video)…
In case you haven’t seen it yet…here is a clip of today’s controversy everyone seems to be talking about.
Rice appeared before the Senate in defense of President Bush’s tactical change in Iraq, and quickly encountered Boxer. …
Condi’s response to Barbara Boxer should have been yob tvoyu maht.
you guys are off your rocker if honestly believe boxer was attacking rice for being childless. all she was saying is that rice was not risking anyone in her own family in the iraq war. that’s a chickenhawk argument, not a criticism for being childless.
honestly, sometimes i’m just embarassed for your guys. i’ve now read a dozen of so right-wing blogs going crazy over these remarks. not one even acknowledges that boxers remarks could be interpreted a different way. the carpetbagger really has the best analysis IMHO.
it’s craziness like this (and like jamail hussein, and like kerry sitting alone, etc. etc. etc.) that makes the rightblogosphere increasingly marginalized in this country’s political discourse.
Having been (informally?) banned here some time ago, I’ll make it quick.
I agree with AJ that Boxer is facile in her definition of the “price” of war. There are many prices to many people, and both victory and loss in a larger sense can be variously defined. It’s a stupid argument, due for elimination from the left’s stable of rhetorical devices.
On the other hand, it was no more than a stupid offhand argument. Boxer was asking who will suffer most from escalation (under her view of it) – not saying that no one should make decisions on war who is childless. And definitely not lording Rice’s “spinster” status over her. That’s just over the top.
Yes, it’s a problem that these Dem oldtimers get a little wind in their sails and wham! – they say something incredibly tone-deaf and untoward. But this story is more about Friday afternoon at the end of a tense week than anything of substance.
upyernoz:
The whole “chickenhawk” notion is stupid. To imply that a person can not letitimately be in favor of using the military unless they have served in the military is asinine. In fact, whenever I see anyone using the word “chickenhawk”, I pretty much discount whatever comes before and after. It tells me they have no clue what they are really talking about and are simply spouting rhetoric with cute little buzzwords. I can train a parrot to do that.
Harold, translation please. yob tvoyu maht.