Home > Jay Bookman > Archives > 2008 > December > 31 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.US‘The Forever War’: Highly recommended for those who care to know
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
I just finished reading Dexter Filkins’ “The Forever War,” a Christmas present. I recommend it highly.
Filkins is the New York Times war correspondent who has reported from Afghanistan, Iraq and now Afghanistan again. He puts himself at the front lines, often in ways that seem foolhardy, but he comes away with remarkable stuff. I hate to use cliches such as “gripping,” but his book is … gripping. You start reading it and it’s hard to stop.
It also gives you a real ground-level view of the difficulty of what we’re trying to accomplish by force of arms, and what our men and women in uniform face overseas. In my conversations with military people, the constant refrain is that they feel they have gone to war while the American people have gone to the shopping mall. They feel ignored by a population that just doesn’t seem to care much anymore, and it’s hard to argue with that perception. They come home on leave or on rotation, and it shocks them to see that the war that had occupied their every waking and sleeping moment gets almost no attention here at home.
The number of U.S. media outlets with reporters in Iraq and Afghanistan is down to barely a handful. Part of that’s a consequence of economics — keeping journalists in a war setting is expensive, and the media industry is suffering. That reality aside, it’s certainly fair to criticize decisions by media executives to focus on celebrity coverage while ignoring the efforts of our military.
But if you look a little deeper, those media executives are merely responding to the market. The American people just aren’t interested in war coverage. It doesn’t do anyone any good to file news stories that few people read or watch, and the lack of media coverage is a reaction to that reality.
However, for those who do want to know, “The Forever War” will tell you a lot.
Services »
Comments
By GodHatesTrash
December 31, 2008 12:09 PM | Link to this
War makes people and cultures crazy. Not just the country and the people being bombed, but the bombers, too.
Maybe especially the bombers.
By The Corporal
December 31, 2008 12:16 PM | Link to this
To GodHatesTrash
But to politely answer your question.
My Dad fought in the Navy in WWII.
By DB, Gwinnettian
December 31, 2008 12:18 PM | Link to this
“The American people just aren’t interested in war coverage. It doesn’t do anyone any good to file news stories that few people read or watch, and the lack of media coverage is a reaction to that reality.”
That is true, if you define what’s going on in Iraq and Afghanistan as “war.” However, the official definition/designation seems to change with the wind; it’s “war” if we’re talking about (say) the legal status of “enemy combatants,” but it’s over-and-done-with if (say) the current Administration wants to talk about its notion of victory, in Iraq at least.
And then there are those on my side of the aisle who are loathe to call this invasion and occupation “war” when it seems an odd term for something so asymmetric. (and yeah, I’m aware of the term “asymmetrical warfare.”)
Anyway, thanks for the book recommendation. When I finish the bio I’m plowing through at the moment, maybe I’ll go check it out.
By The Corporal
December 31, 2008 12:22 PM | Link to this
We must look at the fight against terrorism as we do the fight against murder, or organized crime, or rape or whatever. It will always be there and must be fought.
That said, this also applies in many ways to our current veterans. Sad.
If there was immorality in the war in Vietnam, it was that a democratic nation called her citizens to war, had them killed by the tens of thousands, and then, like a faithless lover, turned and scorned the survivors. Oh, perfidious nation!
By tcoach
December 31, 2008 12:32 PM | Link to this
God hates are those your opinions or are they proven?
Maybe with the student prison experiment but not sure if it would apply to war, since with bombers there is not much face to face interaction with the enemy.
By The Corporal
December 31, 2008 12:42 PM | Link to this
During WWII, the government tried to protect the citizenry from the truth of war. Newsreels were censored, movies showed only the glory, etc., etc.
Then, people got apathetic, War Bond drives were down and the country was in a malaise (as we are now).
Along came the Battle of Tarawa in the Pacific where over less than two days, on an island three miles long and 600 yards at its widest, 1,700 Marines and sailors died.
The government laid it all out and allowed the uncensored carnage to be shown in movie theaters across the country.
It changed everything (but just like 9/11) but only for awhile ……..
By Paul
December 31, 2008 12:47 PM | Link to this
Seems Iraq coverage eclipsed Afghanistan for a long time - appropriate, given the circumstances. But is my memory unclear, or did Iraq coverage dramatically decline once the ‘surge’ efforts led to improvements and decline in American casualties?
If so, I question the ‘market-driven’ aspect, as I wonder if the American public was really interested in a day-to-day casualty listing, as that reporting carried with it relentless criticism of the Administration and its policies. Not just current, but constant on a view of how and why we entered the war.
The situation after the defeat of Saddam’s military was horribly mismanaged. It took a tremendous effort in the face of much internal resistance (Army and Dept of Defense) for the likes of a Gen Petraeus with new ideas to break though and for the Administration to fire civilian leadership and stop promoting the military people who kept on with more of the same, even when it wasn’t working.
But once it did, and the efforts bore fruit, reporting dramatically declined. There was not nearly the examination of the causes of success and where it could lead us as there was of the relentless “how we got here.”
I’ll continue to make a central point: if not for oil, we’d not care much about what happened in the Middle East (absent the Israel factor).
And Afghanistan? If our purpose there is to prevent the recurrence of a government (Taliban) intertwined with al Qaeda, or the Taliban reemerged as another Islamic fundamentalist terror group, I’m not sure our ‘pump up the number of troops” is the most effective strategy.
Which is why I hope Pres-elect Obama’s stimulus package is heavy on alternate energy/transportation initiatives (so we won’t need ME oil, even if that’s 15 years out) and much shorter on expanding the old infrastructure. Then we can really concentrate on battling the ideology of Islamic fundamentalism without being dependent on the commodity (oil) of the region.
By lewis
December 31, 2008 12:48 PM | Link to this
This is partly a result of having an all-volunteer army and using “contractors”. The public at large doesn’t feel they have so much of a stake in it without draftees involved. And we are stretching our volunteers to the point that there is great concern over our capacity to handle what’s needed. There are no great victories in these sorts of wars to capture the public eye and give a sense of something being accomplished along the road to “victory”. Fighting groups that would attack us is going to be a long-term war of attrition and the public doesn’t get it or cannot follow its ups and downs without some big dramatic incident. The media look for what is sensational and will capture viewers and readers. After all, they are businesses. Let’s hope we have not squandered the energy and talent that our forces are made up of these days for we will no doubt need such men and women again and they may not be willing to volunteer if the leadership does not do a better job of deciding where, when, and how to use their commitment.
By AJC/DNC Management
December 31, 2008 1:20 PM | Link to this
But if you look a little deeper, those media executives are merely responding to the market. The American people just aren’t interested in war coverage.
What a total load of BS.
The only coverage of the war we have ever gotten from the drive by media is what they could use to pummel the Bush administration with, a complete anti American fiction world.
What the hell use does the pinko media have for an American victory, when it goes totally against their narrative of bad, evil USA?
The nerve to blame it on the people of this country, like they want to sit around and hear how horrible they are, like some depraved, self abusing Oblahmi sicko.
Gee what fun that is.
Unreal.
By AF
December 31, 2008 1:28 PM | Link to this
By Lewis: This is partly a result of having an all-volunteer army and using “contractors”.
So true. At this stage, to pay attention is to be reminded that we have no reason to be there except the oil. Bush and Cheney either lied to us or were deceived by others. Either way, they were responsible for an unjustified war that has cost the US thousands of soldiers and the Iraqi’s tens of thousands of civilians.
I think we should have a law that declaration of war requires a draft. We would pay attention if our own children, grandchildren, or friend’s children were at risk. We, the public, and the press would have demanded better justification from Bush if our own were to be put at risk.
The lack of public outrage at Bush and the Republican Party is unbelievable to me.
In my own family, brothers and sisters who vigorously argued that there were weapons of mass destruction, that we had to invade Iraq before they sent nuclear bombs over here, have been silent for several years now. No one admits they were wrong, no one has anger against Bush. There is an appalling silence.
By AJC/DNC Management
December 31, 2008 1:31 PM | Link to this
Well, well, seems to me that Oblahmasan is back in play-
U.S. Attorney Seeks Extension to Indict Blagojevich- U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald has asked the court to grant him 90 days to review massive amounts of materials in the case against the Illinois governor.
“Massive amounts” of material hasn’t been reviewed, so who can say what might just turn up?
They haven’t even listened to all the telephone conversations yet.
You can bet your sweet patuti that Emanuel is a goner, all that is left to sort out is who will drop the dime on Oblahmi.
Biden for president?
ew
By GOP is gone
December 31, 2008 1:40 PM | Link to this
Could not agree more about the lack of abject anger concerning Iraq.
And the Draft point is completely true also. But everyone should be drafted without byes for rich kids who have fathers with influence. One of the things that outraged me about this “War” was the foursome planning it never served.
By getalife
December 31, 2008 1:49 PM | Link to this
The bombing of babies (post term abortions) are too ugly for even the warmongering wingnuts to see.
Americans can’t handle the truth of war but easily buy the lies.
The documentaries after the wars show the ugly truth.
By Mike
December 31, 2008 1:55 PM | Link to this
“But if you look a little deeper, those media executives are merely responding to the market. The American people just aren’t interested in war coverage.”
What a pathetic statement. You guys do your best to undermine the war effort for years and as soon as the tide turns, you claim that nobody wants to hear about the good news.
You give media execs are given a pass for their abrogation of their journalistic duties because they are responding to the market. This from the man who demonized GM and Ford for making the trucks that the market demanded and the evil builders for “responding to the market” with sprawling suburbs. Bookman’s selective citing of “the market” dovetails nicely with his stances that shift to support whatever he and associates find convenient at the moment.
Typical Bookman hypocrisy. Everyone is worthy of criticism with the exception of him and his bosses. Disgusting.
By AF
December 31, 2008 1:57 PM | Link to this
GOP is gone.
Yes, there should be no exemptions to a draft except physical inability to perform as a soldier. A draft should also include women. If we are not ready as a society to have women in combat, then women could take over administrative and support tasks, or perform other public service.
By GOP is gone
December 31, 2008 1:59 PM | Link to this
I would have loved to see the Bush twins drafted
By DB, Gwinnettian
December 31, 2008 2:02 PM | Link to this
“This from the man who demonized GM and Ford for making the trucks that the market demanded and the evil builders for “responding to the market” with sprawling suburbs.”
Um, Mike?
Cite, please.
By GOP is gone
December 31, 2008 2:05 PM | Link to this
Typical Mike: I hate Bookman and I like to tell him daily in case he forgets.
Any narrow minded person who disagrees with my narrow minded views is narrow minded.
By DB, Gwinnettian
December 31, 2008 2:09 PM | Link to this
“You can bet your sweet patuti that Emanuel is a goner”
This, from the same prognosticator who gave us this:
By AJC/DNC Management
October 30, 2008 12:58 PM | Link to this
McCain 273 Oblahmasan 265.
McCain 50.3% Oblahmasan 47.8%
By jasper
December 31, 2008 2:30 PM | Link to this
Jay - I love a good book, and you had me intrigued, but then you lost me with “is the New York Times war correspondent”. From that point on I knew that Filkins would only report on those soldiers and interviews that fit his agenda. Alas, the story will be as fictional as the title.
By AJC/DNC Management
December 31, 2008 2:32 PM | Link to this
Hey DB-
“The investigation includes multiple defendants and potential defendants as well as thousands of intercepted phone calls, and additional factors warranting an extension of time,” Fitzgerald wrote.
Alright, you tell us who the “multiple defendants” are.
Hahahaha.
And that doesn’t even cover “potential.”
Hahahaha.
I told you you were going to wind up hating Fitzgerald, didn’t I?
karma
By DB, Gwinnettian
December 31, 2008 2:39 PM | Link to this
As recently as 11/3, poor Andy was still counting on the “Bradley Effect” to ensure a McCain victory:
“Undecided” means never being called a racist by some hysterical lib pollster.
But when they close the curtain on the voting booth……surprise, surprise.
By AJC/DNC Management
December 31, 2008 2:42 PM | Link to this
Aahhh, yes, as the circus turns-
At Tuesday’s news conference, Burris wasn’t particularly knowledgeable when asked how much he had given to the governor. When a reporter suggested it was as much as $14,000 in the last six years, Burris acted surprised. The actual amount, by the way, if you count Burris’ personal contributions and that of his lobbying and law firm, is more than $20,000. The most recent contribution was a grand in June. Contributions to Blagojevich by Burris’ lobbying clients will provide another area of questioning.
“Surprised” he was, geez, these bozos don’t even bother getting their story straight about the 20 large before they barge out onto thee Oblahmasan world stage.
But then again, 20 K is piddling pocket change up in the hood.
ew
By Class of '98
December 31, 2008 2:43 PM | Link to this
I saw a documentary on the crew of the Enola Gay, and they are not crazy, feel no personal guilt, and lose no sleep at night.
Nor should they.
By Mike
December 31, 2008 2:45 PM | Link to this
DB, Gwinnettian -
Unfortunately, though, some suburban dwellers hear criticism of sprawl as some sort of a value-laden condemnation of suburban life. They respond by launching a defense of sprawl that can be paraphrased with the following:
“What others deride as sprawl is actually just the free market at work, the result of millions of Americans choosing the lifestyle they prefer. And any effort to control or limit ‘sprawl’ is a misuse of government power promoted by elitists who want to instruct us common folk how to live.”
Well, I’ve covered enough county commission and zoning board meetings to know * that’s just romantic mythology*.
Jay Bookman - AJC 12/5/05
I had to wade through too much of Bookman’s turgid writing for that. You can do your own research on the next one.
GOP is gone:
You miss the point. Folks like you and Bookman sneer at people who don’t share your narrow views as a group. As your silly name suggests, you are a silly partisan who thinks that Republicans are defective as a group. I
I, on the other hand, address people as individuals. I think that there are smart liberals and stupid conservatives and vice versa. When I make a criticism of Bookman or his dittoheads like you, it is a specific criticism of a specific statement. Not just some idiotic “neoCONS suck!” or sneering at Bush’s children or some similar childish crap.
Thanks for the Pavlovian yapping, though. Get on back to hating people who don’t share your narrow views. That’s what folks like you and Hannity fans do.
By AJC/DNC Management
December 31, 2008 2:48 PM | Link to this
Oh my goodness-
Now, if you think this whole affair had been scripted for the theater of the absurd, you’d be right. Absurd is how Illinois and Chicago politics works. And we have one of the worst governed, most financially troubled states in the nation to prove it—a state, it should be noted— run entirely by Democrats.
So how does everybody like being the new Zimbabwe?
ew
By Mike
December 31, 2008 2:49 PM | Link to this
GOP is gone -
One more thing: your inability to respond to any specific argument with anything other than meaningless and snarky comments demonstrates how deeply unserious you are about the subjects that you yap about. Show us that superior intellect that you seem to feel you possess and actually answer a point that someone makes instead of your usual childish sneering, that makes you feel good about your otherwise sad life.
By JAY BOOKMAN
December 31, 2008 2:50 PM | Link to this
Too bad for you, Jasper.
Because you are only willing to accept input from sources that will confirm what you already believe, you’ll miss out on a book that Hugh Hewitt calls “Brilliant, riveting, and deeply disquieting … clear-eyed, unsentimental … superb,” a book that Bing West, a former Marine officer and Reagan assistant defense secretary, calls “Splendid… These stories are accurate but not antiseptic, detached but not uncaring. And they force the reader to reflect on how fragile civilization is and how fortunate we Americans are.”
Oh well.
By Dusty
December 31, 2008 2:52 PM | Link to this
I certainly agree with some comments made here today regarding US media during Amrican war time.
Paul @ 12:47 asks”…did Iraq coverage [by news media] dramatically decline once the ‘surge’ eforts led to improvement and decline in American casualties?”
Yes, it did, Paul. And biased media continues today about Israel and Palestine. There are constant comments on TV about Israel’s attack and all the Palestinian casualties and suffering.
Only Bush’s press people give reports that bring reality. They reiterate that Hamas must stop firing rockets into Israel before there can be any peace.
Meanwhile, Hamas still fires rockets into Israel. Yet Gaza food and medical supplies are being sent from and through Israel even as the press presents Israel as the evil aggressor. Crazy!!
AJC Management @1:20
You are correct about the politically slanted news media. You said* The only coverage of the war we have ever gotten from the drive by media is what they could use to pummel the Bush Administration.*
Absolutely! Here in Atlanta we have prime examples with Tucker, Bookman and Luckovich. I suppose after Jan. 20 everything will be reported as peaches and cream in Washington politics. At least, that will be the way it is reported. The ‘poison pens’ of journalism will switch to ’ honey homilies’.
CHANGE! Will we get HONEST journalism? I hope so but that would not be CHANGE. That would be a MIRACLE.
By Mike
December 31, 2008 3:01 PM | Link to this
Bookman is right. Filkins is a great journalist and unlike anyone at the AJC can actually report good news:
[Jeffrey Goldberg: In a review in the Times today, Michiko Kakutani quotes Farnaz Fassihi writing in 2004: “The genie of terrorism, chaos, and mayhem has been unleashed onto this country as a result of American mistakes, and it can’t be put back into a bottle.” The question is, is the genie back in the bottle?
Dexter Filkins: Yes, it is, for now. The progress here is remarkable. I came back to Iraq after being away for nearly two years, and honestly, parts of it are difficult for me to recognize. The park out in front of the house where I live—on the Tigris River—was a dead, dying, spooky place. It’s now filled with people—families with children, women walking alone, even at night. That was inconceivable in 2006. The Iraqis who are out there walking in the parks were making their own judgments that it is safe enough for them to go out for a walk. They’re voting with their feet. It’s a wonderful thing to see. ](http://jeffreygoldberg.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/09/dexter_filkins.php)
Of course, this is not what Bookman predicted when the surge was launched. Jay said:
“”President Bush and others are proposing to escalate our effort in Iraq…It is a futile gesture, a vain attempt to salvage what is already lost…”
When are you going to admit your were wrong, Jay?
By Dusty
December 31, 2008 3:11 PM | Link to this
Sorry, Jay Bookman,
Your reputation for writing left leaning, anti-Bush, anti-war, anti-military literature far exceeds your reputation as a proponent of “good books”.
As there are numerous “good books” out there to read,including the one most sold and read in the world, your selections are far down my list. When you tire of “The Forever War” try “War and Peace” for a change.
By JAY BOOKMAN
December 31, 2008 3:13 PM | Link to this
Ah, but Mike, you didn’t mention the thrust of that zoning piece. Maybe you just didn’t understand.
That piece pointed out that suburban sprawl-inducing zoning is meant to FRUSTRATE the market. If the market wanted homes on five-acre lots, it wouldn’t need government rules to require that kind of development. Sprawl is produced by government interference, not by the market. The market left to its own devices produces density, not sprawl.
As I mentioned in that piece, developers never ask for less density; they always want more density, because that’s where the greater profit is.
As to the surge, I’ve written repeatedly that it has been a surprising success. Not that it will matter to you in the least.
By JAY BOOKMAN
December 31, 2008 3:22 PM | Link to this
And Dusty, I was indeed anti-Bush and anti-invasion long before a lot of people, and over time the vast majority has come along to that way of thinking. I won’t back away from that for a moment. Saying things that other people don’t want to hear at the moment is part of the job and I’m willing to do it.
In fact, I would agree with every word of your description except “anti-military.”
That particular phrase has no basis in fact, and you can’t find anything in my writing to justify it.
By AJC/DNC Management
December 31, 2008 3:24 PM | Link to this
Shanklin got the idea for his controversial tune “Barack the Magic Negro” in March 2007 after reading a column titled “Obama the Magic Negro” by David Ehrenstein in the Los Angeles Times. In the column, Ehrenstein compared Obama to the stereotypical shallow black movie character that exists only to aid the white protagonist.
On the advice of a friend, Shanklin declined the Today show invitation and issued a simple statement: “The song speaks for itself. It’s a parody of David Ehrenstein’s column in which he called Obama the ‘Magic Negro.’ Go read it.”
Or lie about.
As some of us chose to do.
Obama the ‘Magic Negro’ The Illinois senator lends himself to white America’s idealized, less-than-real black man. By David Ehrenstein, L.A.-based DAVID EHRENSTEIN writes about Hollywood and politics. March 19, 2007
Whatever gives you liberals your kicks, I guess.
By The Corporal
December 31, 2008 3:25 PM | Link to this
Headline
*Both Iran and its Hamas proxy in Gaza have been busy this Christmas week showing Christendom just what they think of it. But no one seems to have noticed.
On Tuesday, Hamas legislators marked the Christmas season by passing a Shari’a criminal code for the Palestinian Authority. Among other things, it legalizes crucifixion.*
And some of you want to negotiate with people like this ?
By DB, Gwinnettian
December 31, 2008 3:27 PM | Link to this
Mike, nowhere did Jay call builders “evil.” You lose, again.
By The Corporal
December 31, 2008 3:33 PM | Link to this
Off Topic
I heard an interesting analogy today.
For those of you who believe in a living Constitution that means there is no Constitution because there are no standing rules.
It would be similar to the NFL Rule Book being a living rulebook for the referees to interpret/change based on what they thought is fair. Now agreed, whether a player commits pass interference is based on the referee’s opinion but what constitutes pass interference in the rule book is not. Two different things.
The Constitution is a written contract between the American people and their government, limiting the powers of said government to those granted.
Anyone who has taken Business Law 101 knows a contract is a contract and it means what it says on the date it was signed. Contracts can be altered but they don’t breathe nor do they change by osmosis !!
To view the Constitution as a living, breathing document is to cheapen it. If you want to change it, there is a mechanism.
By Dusty
December 31, 2008 3:45 PM | Link to this
Sorry Bookman,
I don’t know your vast majority of people who are anti-invasion, your title for our war on terrorism. I know many people who do not “indulge” in blogs and “letters” and have long had great respect and service for this country, even to toleration with patience the mistakes made by our leaders who are not perfect any more than the rest of us.
But the vast majority of the people I know cannot abide with those who undermine our country. You cannot complain and protest continuously about the USA and be for it. That does not work for country, friends, family or children.
Most certainly, you cannot be FOR the military when you protest poisonously against the war in which they fight. Our current war has been for the long run protection of our country whether YOU believe it or not.
You were hired by a leftist newspaper and your job is to continue your known leftist attitude. You may be willing to write continuous leftist lingo but a journalist writes the truth and facts, not what readers do or do not want to hear.
By Hillbilly Deluxe
December 31, 2008 3:48 PM | Link to this
Perhaps in the future a lot of grief could be solved by following the Constitution. If a President wants to use military force, he should put his neck out and ask Congress for a Declaration of War. Then Congress should stick its neck out and vote yea or nay. Since WWII neither branch has really had the stomach to fish or cut bait (or that other saying about getting off the pot).
By DB, Gwinnettian
December 31, 2008 3:51 PM | Link to this
“Since WWII neither branch has really had the stomach to fish or cut bait (or that other saying about getting off the pot).”
Which, actually, speaks volumes about the moral vacuity behind just about every post-WWII military endeavor we’ve embarked upon, doesn’t it?
By The Corporal
December 31, 2008 4:02 PM | Link to this
Headline: U.S. Attorney Seeks More Time to Indict Blagojevich
U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald asks for a 90-day extension to indict Illinois governor on corruption charges.
If he hadn’t cut the case short and taken the wires down he wouldn’t have to worry about this. This case is in trouble !
In any case, this is a bunch of hooey! He can dismiss the warrant and then take all the time he wants to indict.
We used to do that occasionally to use an arrest as an investigative/psychological tool.
You get a lot of good evidence (body/vehicle search) and information (interview) before they lawyer up ……………
The most fun (almost) I have ever had is have attorneys show up demanding to see their client. Answer - He is talking to us and hasn’t asked for you yet so - after we are through.
They would almost have a stroke !
By getalife
December 31, 2008 4:05 PM | Link to this
You can write a book on how many posts the wingnuts were dead wrong.
After w cut and ran in Tora Bora to occupy Iraq, Americans took their opinions to the voting booth in major thumpins.
By CommunistAJC
December 31, 2008 4:13 PM | Link to this
Speaking of “war,” this is a fight I really want! Keep it up atheist because you are all outnumbered 10-1 in this country. This is the problem with this country. Libs can’t win debates so they have to sue everyone because something “offends” them. Waaaaaa..poor little babies.
Lawsuit seeks to take ‘so help me God’ out of inaugural.
By Carol Cratty CNN
WASHINGTON (CNN) — A number of atheists and non-religious organizations want Barack Obama’s inauguration ceremony to leave out all references to God and religion. President-elect Barack Obama will use the Bible Abraham Lincoln used for his inauguration.
In a lawsuit filed Tuesday in Washington, the plaintiffs demand that the words “so help me God” not be added to the end of the president’s oath of office.
In addition, the lawsuit objects to plans for ministers to deliver an invocation and a benediction in which they may discuss God and religion.
An advance copy of the lawsuit was posted online by Michael Newdow, a California doctor and lawyer who has filed similar and unsuccessful suits over inauguration ceremonies in 2001 and 2005.
Joining Newdow in the suit are groups advocating religious freedom or atheism, including the American Humanist Association, the Freedom from Religion Foundation and atheist groups from Minnesota; Seattle, Washington; and Florida.
The new lawsuit says in part, “There can be no purpose for placing ‘so help me God’ in an oath or sponsoring prayers to God, other than promoting the particular point of view that God exists.”
Newdow said references to God during inauguration ceremonies violate the Constitution’s ban on the establishment of religion.
Newdow and other plaintiffs say they want to watch the inaugural either in person or on television. As atheists, they contend, having to watch a ceremony with religious components will make them feel excluded and stigmatized.
“Plaintiffs are placed in the untenable position of having to choose between not watching the presidential inauguration or being forced to countenance endorsements of purely religious notions that they expressly deny,” according to the lawsuit.
Among those named in the lawsuit are Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts, who is expected to swear in the new president; the Presidential Inauguration Committee; the Joint Congressional Committee on Inauguration Ceremonies and its chairwoman, Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California; and the Armed Forces Inaugural Committee and its commander, Maj. Gen. Richard Rowe Jr.
The two ministers scheduled to participate in the ceremony also are named: the Rev. Rick Warren and the Rev. Joseph Lowery. The document includes a quotation from Warren on atheists: “I could not vote for an atheist because an atheist says, ‘I don’t need God.’ “
Newdow told CNN that he didn’t name President-elect Barack Obama in the suit because in addition to participating as a government official at the ceremony, he possesses rights as an individual that allow him to express religious beliefs.
“If he chooses to ask for God’s help, I’m not going to challenge him,” Newdow said. “I think it’s unwise.”
Newdow said that as a member of a racial minority, Obama should have respect for atheists, who also are members of a minority.
Newdow said religious references in the inauguration ceremony send a message to non-believers.
“The message here is, we who believe in God are the righteous, the real Americans,” he said.
Newdow said it’s unconstitutional to imply that atheists and others are not as good.
He acknowledged that his suit is unlikely to be successful.
“I have no doubt I’ll lose,” he said, adding that he hoped to eventually succeed through appeals and hoped future inauguration ceremonies would exclude religious references
By The Corporal
December 31, 2008 4:15 PM | Link to this
To Getalife, et al
You are respectfully entitled to your opinion but that’s all it is …. an opinion …. same as mine.
Now that said, with current events in Israel/Gaza, can you imagine an unchained Sadam in Iraq? Remember when he invaded Kuwait and wound up firing missles into Israel? What had they done?
He merely used it as an excuse …….
He could not be left there. He had to be taken out !!!
By getalife
December 31, 2008 4:24 PM | Link to this
Yes private.
Iran thanks you for that logic.
He was found in a spider hole with no WMD’s and batsh-it crazy.
By JAY BOOKMAN
December 31, 2008 4:29 PM | Link to this
Certainly you can be against the war but for the military, Dusty. It’s not that hard a concept. In fact, I know a lot of people WITHIN the military who thought invading Iraq was a dumb idea. Generals even.
As to the public at large, roughly two-thirds of Americans in poll after poll say they believe the invasion of Iraq was a mistake. The other one-third are your friends, apparently.
By Taxpayer
December 31, 2008 4:30 PM | Link to this
Jay,
It looks like you still have some of those posters who believe in such nonsense as “You cannot be for the USA AND criticize its president” and similar statements. Unfortunately, you simply cannot expect some posters to understand that freedoms such as “speech” are not really freedoms if they are restricted to a particular perspective. If so, we may as well be ruled by China or North Korea. Anyway, I’ll keep an eye out for the book while I’m out supporting consumerism.
By The Corporal
December 31, 2008 4:34 PM | Link to this
To getalife
1) Why make a personal attack against me? I alway refer to you by your chosen blog handle. Please just debate.
2) I’m not talking about WMD or Iran.
3) He sent numerous huge missles into Israel for no reason. What had they done?
4) He would have done it again (even before now).
5) What would you suggest if he were still there and lobbing missles into Israel? They would not sit by and let it happen thus risking an even wider confrontation.
6) He had to be taken out.
By The Corporal
December 31, 2008 4:37 PM | Link to this
Jay
What do you think of my 4:15 and 4:34?
Can you imagine Sadam in Iraq with seven years to have perfected his missles (payloads) to strike Israel?
We barely kept Israel out of it during the Kuwait War.
By The Corporal
December 31, 2008 4:43 PM | Link to this
JAY
It’s not always simple …. sometimes good leaders do unpopular things (and don’t forget your hero Lincoln - the great percentage of Northerners did NOT want a war and many of your journalist ancestors were put in prison for merely stating so).
In 1937, Indiana Representative Louis Ludlow proposed a constitutional amendment requiring a nationwide referendum before the United States could take us into an unprovoked war without the consent of We the People. The Ludlow Amendment was rejected by Congress on the advice of President Franklin Roosevelt, who, even then, was maneuvering to get the U.S. into the war that he knew was coming. Right through 1941, polls showed 80 percent opposition to American involvement. Only after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor did U.S. entry into World War II become politically possible.
In other words, if the Japanese had not been so stupid to bomb Pearl Harbor, England would be a province of Nazi Germany …………..
By getalife
December 31, 2008 4:44 PM | Link to this
I think those missiles you are talking about were destroyed in the Gulf war.
By Taxpayer
December 31, 2008 4:46 PM | Link to this
I’d like to see complete coverage of things like the confrontation between Israel and Hamas. You wouldn’t even need embedded reporters for that one. Their confrontations are so predictable, you could schedule the shows years in advance and cover them live with cameras that had been previously mounted on buildings and bunkers. Speaking of embedded reporters, FOX was really pushing that at the beginning of the shock and awe strategy and they slowly faded over time. If there were a market for it amongst the devout followers of the Limbaugh-Republican faith, surely they would be capitalizing on it. And, as far as the surge working and all those other myths, why do we need the troops there if it worked so well. Perhaps that sentence, “The surge worked” could use a few modifiers much as “Mission Accomplished” does.
By The Corporal
December 31, 2008 4:46 PM | Link to this
P.S. to Jay
You have seen this before but just a reminder.
Draft rate for Vietnam (25%)
Draft rate for WWII (66%) They just didn’t want to go !
By Midori
December 31, 2008 4:48 PM | Link to this
Well, Jay - on a happier note “Kelley’s Heroes” is being replayed right now on AMC.
You deserve a much needed break.
Arguing with the undead takes a lot out of you.
I can think of no better company to spend New Year’s Eve with: Oddball, Kelley and his greedy misfits, and a couple glasses of cognac. Or should I go with some wine, cheese, and try to catch a few rays? :)
By ditohead
December 31, 2008 4:48 PM | Link to this
WE HAVE A Celebrity-obcessed liberal Media……that went gooo-gaa—gaa over Barack Obama…..JOURNALISM is dead…JOURNALISM iisssss DEAD-! ! !
By The Corporal
December 31, 2008 4:50 PM | Link to this
to Getalife
OF COURSE THEY WERE !!!!!!!!!!
But if Sadam was still in power then what? He would be lobbing them at Israel (he did once before).
Can you not see that ???
By getalife
December 31, 2008 4:54 PM | Link to this
No private.
They hung him.
Are you scared 24/7?
Geez.
By @@
December 31, 2008 4:55 PM | Link to this
But if you look a little deeper, those media executives are merely responding to the market. The American people just aren’t interested in war coverage. It doesn’t do anyone any good to file news stories that few people read or watch, and the lack of media coverage is a reaction to that reality.
And when all eyes were focused on Iraq, jay….
The left-wing media blew it. Rather than acknowledge the successes, they chose to paint the Iraqis as victims of our troops aggression.
Disgusting!
This is a Noble American talking about another Noble American, Michael Yon, (“Moment of Truth”) who, at his own expense, traveled to Iraq to tell the whole story.
General David Petraeus, the man the liberal MoveOn tagged as General Betrayus.
By AJC/DNC Management
December 31, 2008 4:56 PM | Link to this
Dusty- Make note that the war where we disposed of a murderous dictator, freed 25,000,000 people from tyranny, soundly defeated al Qaeda, won a victory against Shiite fanaticism and helped to create an all inclusive democracy is the war the liberals despise, but in Afghanistan, where their side still has a chance and everyday brings a new chance to hate on America, they are all for being there.
Know what I mean?
By getalife
December 31, 2008 5:02 PM | Link to this
I know what you mean Andy.
With every post you attack our new President before he even takes office, you are hating on America.
Right dusty?
By JAY BOOKMAN
December 31, 2008 5:05 PM | Link to this
I admire Yon’s work, @@, and Moveon’s advertisement about “Gen. Betrayus” was stupid and bad and very very foolish. (By the way, though, he had been called that name within the military for a long time before then by some who resented his success and ability to woo the media — Moveon didn’t invent the name.)
However, the “left-wing media” didn’t blow it in Iraq, not by a longshot. From 2005-2007, when things in Iraq were going bad, the media reported things were going bad and the Bush administration kept saying everything’s fine everything’s fine everything’s fine. Remember Rummie denying there even WAS an insurgency?
It wasn’t until after the ‘06 elections that Bush finally admitted that things really weren’t fine, that things were actually pretty terrible. In effect, he admitted that the media had been right all along and that changes had to be made.
By Taxpayer
December 31, 2008 5:14 PM | Link to this
I thought the Limbaugh-Republican faithful wanted to take the war against terror over to the terrorist’s supposed back yard — the middle east. The L-Rs (Limbaugh-Republicans) claimed that by taking the war to the terrorists, we were effectively preventing attacks on American soil — preventing additional 911s. Now isn’t that just so thoughtful of the L-Rs. They’re so willing to offer up another country and its population to the horrors of war just so they can feel safe at night under their bed covers. On top of that, they complain when the military (still under Bush’s command, by the way) shifts its attention to Afghanistan. Well, if the surge was so successful, what’s left to do in Iraq anyway. On another note, if the L-Rs were so interested in preventing more 911 style attacks in America, shouldn’t that same level of caring have been extended to innocent civilians everywhere. Why not draw the terrorists out into unpopulated areas instead of populated areas. Wouldn’t that be the more caring and considerate thing to do.
By @@
December 31, 2008 5:14 PM | Link to this
jay:
There were good things and bad things going on in Iraq. The left-wing media focused only on the bad things, ignoring any positive news.
he had been called that name within the military for a long time before then by some who resented his success and ability to woo the media — Moveon didn’t invent the name.)
But what gave MoveOn, and liberals sitting stateside, the right? Nothing…..that’s what!
What was the name of that liberal columnist from the L.A. Times…….the one who called Obama “The Magic Negro” in 2007? Limbaugh wasn’t the first to introduce the puff.
Oh yea! David Ehrenstein.
By JAY BOOKMAN
December 31, 2008 5:23 PM | Link to this
@@, the general trend in Iraq at that time was down, and the media reporting reflected that reality. Focusing on “good news” when US casualties were soaring, a civil war was breaking out, al Qaida was gaining strength and thousands of innocent Iraqis were dying would have been fraudulent.
As to what gave Moveon the right, the Constitution does. That doesn’t mean they were smart to do so, however. They got sharply criticized for the move, including by most Democratic elected officials, which is how free speech corrects itself. I suspect Moveon officials realize now how utterly juvenile that was.
Finally, I have no problem with Limbaugh peddling that baloney to the people who like baloney. But when folks who want to be the official leader of the Republican Party start embracing it, that’s something else entirely. It’s the difference between Moveon calling Petraeus Betrayus and Howard Dean doing so.
Which of course he didn’t.
By sunshine and thunder
December 31, 2008 5:24 PM | Link to this
JAY
Nah. The media coverage in Iraq slowed down dramatically after the surge started working.
The radical left and the media (is there an echo here?), try as they might, simply could not pull off another Viet Nam. Remember, that is the war that was lost because hippies threw fits and burned draft cards for years. Now all those hippies are grown up and still trying to defeat America on the battle field by propogandizing at home.
Well it didn’t work this time. This time the war appears to be won and now the whole situation will be handed off to one of the hippies who must see it through.
To pull out now would create another Killing Fields and not even the Harry Reids of the world (the war in Iraq is lost, April 2007) want that on their bloody hands.
By CommunistAJC
December 31, 2008 5:25 PM | Link to this
@@, The reason “journalist” and news anchors never report good things out of Iraq is because deaths of soldiers make them happy. Anything to blame on Bush makes the MSM happy. Blood and guts sell. Not rebuilding a torn nation or getting rid of a horrible dictator. Why else do democrats want to decrease the military? 1: to cancel out votes for republicans because they know the military men and women vote 10 to 1 over democrats. 2: Liberals consider the military evil. I was watching CNN this morning about Israel defending itself against Hamas. CNN had three muslim apologist talking about how Israel is evil and Hamas is some innocent group. Yet, there was one Israeli ambassador who was clearly outnumbered. It’s hypocrisy at it’s best.
By The Corporal
December 31, 2008 5:27 PM | Link to this
Jay
I really would appreciate your position(s)re: my 4:37 and 4:43.
I’m just looking for your opinion on the 80% “let’s not get involved” figure for WWII and what would be happening re: Israel with those missles if Saddam were still in power (I can’t seem to get Getalife to comprehend that).
No agenda and I know you’re busy ….
By AJC/DNC Management
December 31, 2008 5:28 PM | Link to this
al-Gitmo: Our new president hates America so by me “hating” on him, how could I possibly be hating on America?
Do explain.
~~~~~
It wasn’t until after the ‘06 elections that Bush finally admitted that things really weren’t fine, that things were actually pretty terrible. In effect, he admitted that the media had been right all along and that changes had to be made.
O.K. so here’s the part where we act like we weren’t wholesale against the “surge.”
And who were things “going badly” for, exactly?
The Iraqis that chose of their own free will to side up with al Qaeda against us?
There were the ones who allowed the terrorists to come and fight us, what were we supposed to do, kill everybody?
Install a new dictatorship?
Yeah, that would have went over well.
The Sunni Awakening had to happen for the surge to be successful, and it didn’t until al Qaeda overplayed it’s hand.
Maybe it was planned that way, maybe it wasn’t.
But I do know who whined against it, who said 10,000 troops would die taking Baghdad, blah, blah, blah, who can blame you for wanting to change your story?
By The Corporal
December 31, 2008 5:32 PM | Link to this
To Getalife
No but Israel is scared 24/7 and this is what this discussion I thought was about?
I’ll try one more time.
1) You do not think we should have gone into Iraq.
2) Let’s assume we didn’t and that Saddam wasn’t hung or his missles destroyed.
3) Are you with me so far?
4) What is your opinion as to whether or not he would be sending missles into Israel given the fact that he did so once before?
By CommunistAJC
December 31, 2008 5:32 PM | Link to this
JAY BOOKMAN, Rush has over 30 million listeners per week. He’s been around for over 20 years and has dominated the airwaves. He’s had parties thrown for him by Margaret Thatcher and the owners of several NFL teams. A lot of people in high places think he is the smartest man in America. For you to say that he “peddles that baloney” to people is a little confusing. Answer me this: Why are newspapers and traditional news channels like ABC, NBC, NY Times, CNN and CBS failing horribly with viewership? Rush certainly isn’t.
By getalife
December 31, 2008 5:34 PM | Link to this
Andy,
The blog monitor, the private, wants us to use our posted names but please post a link to our new President hating America.
By The Corporal
December 31, 2008 5:35 PM | Link to this
To All Conservatives/Israel Supporters Out There
I seem to be “hearing” a lot of silence on the “what if Saddam were still in power with his missles for Israel program” question.
Am I wrong ?
By JAY BOOKMAN
December 31, 2008 5:39 PM | Link to this
Rush is just an entertainer, Commie. He tells you so himself. And I very much doubt that a lot of people in high places think he is the smartest man in America. They think he’s a court jester who some of them have to placate, and do.
And Corporal, those SCUD missiles of Saddam had no strategic consequence. He fired the few he had at Israel, they did little or nothing and the rest were blown up as soon as they emerged. If Saddam was still in charge in Iraq, nothing would be different. He would be railing about Israel but do nothing. Just like Maliki is doing right now.
By The Corporal
December 31, 2008 5:43 PM | Link to this
To Getalife @ 5:34
Getadeath - Translation please ?
Does anyone out there know what Getadeath is saying?
By Taxpayer
December 31, 2008 5:46 PM | Link to this
Corporal,
As I recall, Israel had no problem whatsoever defending itself from threats, real or perceived, from Saddam. They certainly took out that nuclear power plant in short order. But, Israel’s ability to protect itself is not really the issue, is it. I mean, they do have nukes. Do you think they’ll use them if they feel as though they have no other options.
By AJC/DNC Management
December 31, 2008 5:46 PM | Link to this
al-Gitmo:
What was it that Sen. Barack Obama said on the subject? “We can’t just keep driving our SUVs, eating whatever we want, keeping our homes at 72 degrees at all times regardless of whether we live in the tundra or the desert and keep consuming 25 percent of the world’s resources with just 4 percent of the world’s population, and expect the rest of the world to say you just go ahead, we’ll be fine.”
Funny though, when the depression hit and threatened his soon to be economy, a perfect chance for America to scale back it’s consumption, Oblahmasan wants to spend a trillion of China’s money to keep the party rolling.
Sen. Barack Obama’s pastor says blacks should not sing “God Bless America” but “God damn America.”
20 years, never said a word until it started screwing with his kkkampaign, he may have you fooled…….
Obama, yesterday: “Everybody’s watching what’s going on in Beijing right now with the Olympics , Think about the amount of money that China has spent on infrastructure. Their ports, their train systems, their airports are vastly the superior to us now, which means if you are a corporation deciding where to do business, you’re starting to think, ‘Beijing looks like a pretty good option.’”
Communist China? Repressive slave labor China?
Better than the United States?
Maybe some day China could start giving some non military aid abroad, It’s a joke to think they would ever give what we do.
Oblahmi ain’t impressed.
Neither am I.
By CommunistAJC
December 31, 2008 5:47 PM | Link to this
JAY BOOKMAN, I’d trust Rush over ANY journalist these days. At least Rush doesn’t make up false allegations like Dan Rather who supposedly was one of the best “journalist” America had to offer. Court Jester? That’s too funny. I’ve heard Roger Aisles, Warren Buffett, Jack Welch and several other prominent billionaires say that Rush is one of the smartest people in America. Rush was in the top ten of America’s all-time icons. I always find it fascinating how you dis people like Rush and Neal Boortz yet you never have any answers for problems other than, let the government solve all of Americas problems. Typical lib.
By getalife
December 31, 2008 5:48 PM | Link to this
Like Hillary, I do not engage in silly hypotheticals.
Where is that link Andy? There is none. He is trying to save America and could use yours and dusty’s support.
I know ya’ll can do it.
By CommunistAJC
December 31, 2008 5:52 PM | Link to this
The Corporal, No, you are not wrong.
“One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line.” - President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
“If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.” - President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
“We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction.” - Madeline Albright, Feb 1, 1998
“He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983.” - Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
“[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.” Letter to President Clinton. - (D) Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, others, Oct. 9, 1998
“Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.” - Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
“Hussein has … chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.” - Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
“We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them.” - Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
“We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.” - Al Gore , Sept. 23, 2002
“Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.” - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.” - Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
“The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons…” - Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
“I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.” - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
“There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years … We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.” - Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members … It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.” - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
“We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction.” - Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002
“Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real…” - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
Still think Bush lied?
By The Corporal
December 31, 2008 5:52 PM | Link to this
Jay
Thanks for your reply but I respectfully disagree. I can’t believe you are comparing Maliki (and any response he might have to what’s going on in Israel) with Saddam but if that’s your position - so be it.
Saddam would have had seven years to perfect/order (from N.Korea, etc.) better/bigger missles and seven years to work on chemical/biological agents).
To ignore that I think is to ignore logic. May I remind you that Saddam did not previously just rail at Israel. He used missles once against Israel when they had no part in his being expelled from Kuwait.
In my opinion, he would have done it again.
Thanks again for your input.
By AJC/DNC Management
December 31, 2008 5:55 PM | Link to this
al-Gitmo: I listen to Rush Limbaugh so that makes me a racist, or something to that effect, right?
On the other hand, Obalhmi picks himself a spiritual advisor that hates the United States but has no influence on little obambi’s thinking, nope, why, of course not.
Try again, homey.
By The Corporal
December 31, 2008 5:56 PM | Link to this
To Taxpayer
I hear you but:
1) My point is if Saddam were still in power he would use missles against Israel and everything that is going on now (as bad as it is re: Gaza) would escalate.
2) In my opinion, Israel would use their nuclear weapons (certainly the tactical ones) under the right circumstances.
And ………. if ever faced with annihilation by overwhelming forces …….. remember their motto:
NEVER AGAIN.
Thanks for your input.
Off to dinner now ……….
By getalife
December 31, 2008 6:05 PM | Link to this
No Andy,
Like Jay said, he is an entertainer so I guess you think he is funny.
I thought his short stint in the NFL ended in racism.
I don’t think he is funny.
By AJC/DNC Management
December 31, 2008 6:06 PM | Link to this
Speaking of being wrong-
The official story on Iraq has never made sense. The connection that the Bush administration has tried to draw between Iraq and al-Qaida has always seemed contrived and artificial. In fact, it was hard to believe that smart people in the Bush administration would start a major war based on such flimsy evidence.
The pieces just didn’t fit. Something else had to be going on; something was missing.
In recent days, those missing pieces have finally begun to fall into place. As it turns out, this is not really about Iraq. It is not about weapons of mass destruction, or terrorism, or Saddam, or U.N. resolutions.-Bookman, 2002.
Hehehehe.
Aahhh, yes, would anyone like to step up to the plate and deny the huge defeat al Qaeda suffered in Iraq?
If you would like an explanation of how we got to WMD, idiot town drunk Bushie, moron for the ages, listened to the lib media and changed his story.
What a dunce!
By AJC/DNC Management
December 31, 2008 6:18 PM | Link to this
Speaking of racism, and at the heart of hopeandchangeland, no less-
ANTIOCH, Calif. (AP) - As more and more black renters began moving into this mostly white San Francisco Bay Area suburb a few years ago, neighbors started complaining about loud parties, mean pit bulls, blaring car radios, prostitution, drug dealing and muggings of schoolchildren.
Yeah boy, all those Bay Area Rethuglicons rampaging on the hopes and dreams, oh wait, I forgot, San Franfreako is slap full of democrats.
huh.
Who would have ever thought.
Well, besides me.
By @@
December 31, 2008 6:23 PM | Link to this
Well, jay…amidst that civil war!?! the beginning of the end for al Qaeda, and the death of innocent Iraqis at the hands of al Qaeda, Michael Yon, whom you admire had a large readership because he was able to see beyond what you would call fraudulent journalism. HECK! he exposed the fraudulent journalism.
Certainly, MoveOn had freedom of speech. I can’t think of one liberal at Luckovich’s who condemned the ad. Nope! they cheered the ad.
BTW, did Obama ever vote on Cornyn’s amendment that called for representatives to denounce the ad specifically? No, I don’t believe he could find the time after voting on Boxers alternative reaffirming strong support for all men and women in the military and condemning attacks on the honor, integrity and patriotism of any individual serving along with Feingold’s amendment to begin withdrawing troops in 90 days.
No…no…no
the denigration of an honorable man just wasn’t high on Obama’s list of priorities. After all, he had an anti-war crowd to woo.
About the baloney. I’ve long advocated Michael Steele as Chairman of the RNC. I was angered by Bush passing over him the first time.
To be honest, I don’t listen to Limbaugh and have never heard the Obama Magic thing. I felt like you had applied a double standard so I called you on it.
By Dusty
December 31, 2008 6:32 PM | Link to this
Great insight into Bookman’s thinking. The polls seem to be the major influence on his “opinion”. ….
He knows someone in the military who doesn’t like the president or the war therefore it is OK for Bookman to trash the war and president. It is just his way of “admiring” the military who are doing the fighting .
All the accomplishments of our military and their Commander-in-Chief are just things Bookman forgot to mention…that’s because the polls thought otherwise. AJC Management @ 4:56 gave us a fine list of what our fighting Americans are doing for the world and for us..
I am sorry that Bookman can only give dissent to his country. His article on Christmas day sounded like an Obituary for the USA. I don’t have a death wish for the USA even when some things are not as I like them. Good old Bookman logic: Step on the country and the president when some things are “down”.
By @@
December 31, 2008 6:37 PM | Link to this
And this statement you made to Dusty, jay…
As to the public at large, roughly two-thirds of Americans in poll after poll say they believe the invasion of Iraq was a mistake.
80% of Americans were opposed to going after Hitler.
Should our leaders have listened to them?
Let’s face it! With liberals, it’s all about the resources. They just don’t wanna share.
By @@
December 31, 2008 6:44 PM | Link to this
Oops! needed some punctuation between serving and along.
By AJC/DNC Management
December 31, 2008 6:55 PM | Link to this
DECEMBER 31—As if being linked to one high-profile criminal case weren’t enough, President-elect Barack Obama’s name may soon pop up in another federal prosecution, this one involving a massive Ponzi scheme (no, the other massive Ponzi scheme). In addition to the Rod Blagojevich pay-for-play probe, Obama could figure in the upcoming fraud trial of Norman Hsu, the disgraced Democratic fundraiser who was charged last year with operating a $60 million pyramid scheme. According to investigators, Hsu, a major Hillary Clinton fundraiser, pressured investors to donate money to political candidates with whom he was aligned.
ew
By JAY BOOKMAN
December 31, 2008 7:13 PM | Link to this
@@, Dusty questioned whether the vast majority of Americans support or oppose the invasion of Iraq. I merely documented the facts. If documenting the facts is somehow offensive to you, well, I guess I can understand that, given your position.
Also, I’m sure that both @@ and Dusty will give their full support to President Obama for whatever lies ahead, because as we all know from their telling us so, support for the president is the best gauge possible for how much a person loves this country.
I would also point out that by that metric, Management is a regular Benedict Arnold. Or should I say Benedict Arnold-elect, pending Jan. 20. How dare he criticize our president/country!!!
Have a happy and safe New Year, folks.
By Paul
December 31, 2008 7:16 PM | Link to this
Saw “Annie” on stage last weekend. Situation similar - but the song “Tomorrow” is appropriate. Been a heckuva year, tough times now, but an intelligent, moral, decent man will lead us in the new year.
“I luv ya, tomorrow” - it can only get better.
Pleasant evening all - talk with you next year.
By getalife
December 31, 2008 7:22 PM | Link to this
Andy,
Now Hillary and the President?
Ya know, dusty does not like you hating America like that and am sure she will respond like she did Jay.
By getalife
December 31, 2008 7:25 PM | Link to this
You too Jay.
They are gop patriots.
Does not apply with a Dem President.
By AJC/DNC Management
December 31, 2008 7:34 PM | Link to this
When Bush left the seat up in the White House restroom, you liberals wigged.
My favorite is the “loss of respect in the World,” like anyone even knows what the f that means, but who would like to bet that Oblahmi restores it in 6 months or so, well, at least according to the pinko media.
At least with Oblahmasan we don’t have to make scandals up, hahahahaha, our job is going to be so much easier.
By Bud Wiser
December 31, 2008 7:36 PM | Link to this
Sorry I missed this all day; I was out having fun, not having the indoor lights suck up my Vitamin C.
Anyway, a book review to liberals is like Chinese spoken to a redneck - neither will understand whatever the hell is there because they haven’t the intellectual curiosity or capacity to understand.
By Midori
December 31, 2008 7:45 PM | Link to this
Hey Bud!!
Happy New Year!!!
By The Corporal
December 31, 2008 7:47 PM | Link to this
To Communist AJC
Thank you sir for your input on my behalf.
It’s truly amazing that some (i.e., Jay and Getadeath) cannot see the immense danger regarding current events if Saddam were not dried out in the sand somewhere.
It would have been similar (as some wanted to do) of negotiating an armistice with Hitler and leaving him in place to develop nuclear weapons. They were so close. If that war had gone on even six more months, it may have turned out a lot different - especially for Great Britain.
By DB, Gwinnettian
December 31, 2008 7:47 PM | Link to this
Per Jay upthread: the “left-wing media” didn’t blow it in Iraq, not by a longshot.
Indeed, they were right from the get-go. Which is why they’re still so loathed today—nobody likes being shown up by Dirty F*cking Hippies.
Happy New Year, everyone. I know that 2009 ain’t gonna suck like ‘08, ‘07, and the four years before that, because finally these vile, lying fascists have been shown the door.
About time.
By JAY BOOKMAN
December 31, 2008 7:52 PM | Link to this
Corporal, that is hilarious.
“They were so close.”
Close to what? Iran?
You imply, I believe, six months from a nuke. That would really be something, given that Saddam had no nuke program whatsoever when we invaded.
Like I said, hilarious.
By the way, where was Hitler born? Do they have a plaque outside the hospital?
By getalife
December 31, 2008 7:53 PM | Link to this
Yes, the worst.ever. is gone soon and DFH rule.
Geaux Tigers!
By Midori
December 31, 2008 7:53 PM | Link to this
right back atcha, DB.
and a very happy new year to you, too.
By @@
December 31, 2008 8:11 PM | Link to this
Did jay get namejacked at 7:13? If not….
support for the president is the best gauge possible for how much a person loves this country.
I’ve never said ^^^ that.
Also, I’m sure that both @@ and Dusty will give their full support to President Obama
Why not! I can be a “good sport”(s) bra for his man boobs — the two off of which the sun glints.
If he stays to the right, he might just earn my respect but no more and no less than any other politician.
By AJC/DNC Management
December 31, 2008 8:18 PM | Link to this
You imply, I believe, six months from a nuke. That would really be something, given that Saddam had no nuke program whatsoever when we invaded.
Oh, o.k.
December 16, 1998 BILL CLINTON: Earlier today I ordered America’s armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq’s nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors…Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.
By @@
December 31, 2008 8:18 PM | Link to this
That 7:52 has to be a namejack.
Corporal was saying it was Hitler that was so close.
Even jay’s not stoopid enough to misread that.
Happy New Year Midori!
By DB, Gwinnettian
December 31, 2008 8:30 PM | Link to this
Back atcha, Midori.
I’ll leave 2008 with this exceptionally annoying-to-the-wingnuts linkee, excerpted below:
=======
WASHINGTON (CNN) — A national poll suggests that three-quarters of the public thinks President-elect Barack Obama is a strong and decisive leader, the highest marks for a president-elect on that characteristic in nearly three decades.
Seventy-six percent of Americans questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey released Wednesday said Obama is a strong and decisive leader.
“That’s the best number an incoming president has gotten on that dimension since Ronald Reagan took office in 1981,” CNN Polling Director Keating Holland said. “The public’s rating of his leadership skills is already as high as George W. Bush’s was after 9/11 and easily beats the numbers that both Bush and Bill Clinton got at the start of their first terms in office.”
Just six in 10 felt that Bush was a strong leader when he took office in 2001. After the attacks of September 11, that number rose to three in four. Sixty-seven percent thought Bill Clinton was a strong leader when he took office in January 1993.
Eight in ten Americans said Obama inspires confidence, can get things done and is tough enough to be president, three characteristics Americans look for in a leader and the three qualities on which Obama got his highest scores.
He also gets higher marks than Bush did in 2001 on honesty, values, issues, management abilities and compassion.
By Bud Wiser
December 31, 2008 9:11 PM | Link to this
Must have been an inner office CNN poll.
By Paul
December 31, 2008 9:13 PM | Link to this
getalife
Your Tigers are making a great celebration for you, aren’t they?
Georgia Tech looks like Republicans in ‘06 - shellshocked. ‘cept GT never saw it coming.
By Bud Wiser
December 31, 2008 9:16 PM | Link to this
A partial re post is in order here that applies you Obama worshipers:
A level playing field when it comes to who and how certain people in the public eye are talked about is all I ask. Certainly not this myopic level of (allegedly) journalistic application I and others like me fight every day. Just remember, without us, you are nothing. All of you little tools go jam your heads deeper into the sand and wait for Congress to come up upon you from behind. Also remember that 47.1% of the American people DID NOT vote for the Messiah, and you idiots are already propping him up like some kind of GOD before he has even done one little thing. Your undisguised hatred for Bush has warped and twisted your senses of reasonability and social interaction. You wanted change? Where is it? In all the Clinton era rehires?? Change from Bush? What??
You know not what you want.
I am here to point out the fallibility of the masses when they try to think and act collectively, the “dumbing down” effect you tools foster upon yourselves. You almost masturbate yourselves into a sexual-like frenzy when speaking of The Token One, a man who has revealed virtually nothing to you or anyone else about what makes him tick, how he will lead (I refer to the change again into recycled Clintonites), yet you fall for it, fall into this darkness of a person of which you have no concept whatsoever of what kind of man he is.
Well, go ahead. But don’t raise a whisper, do not lodge one protest, when this mystery man and his all-too-well-known associates in Congress come for your wallet, your bank account, your retirements, etc, etc, etc, to pay for all the crap he’s going to throw at everyone but you.
And you will have your pointy little heads aimed skyward saying “Why not me, why aren’t I getting any of the freebies you promised, why am I having to pay for your freebies, the bailouts, Congressional retirement plans (a really good subject that needs broached soon), auto companies, banks, Wall Street, and virtually everyone that has failed financially while I worked my whole life and saved up only to see it given to the freaks, cheaters and losers? Why, Oh why me?”
Suck on that, losers.
Happy New Year, all. I am enjoying watching the arse whipping LSU is laying upon the pencil neck geeks from Ga Tech!!!
Then, party time!
By getalife
December 31, 2008 9:33 PM | Link to this
It’s a thumpin Paul and the freshman QB is playing well.
I don’t think they ever lost at the Dome.
By viva castro
December 31, 2008 9:42 PM | Link to this
Bookman uses the phrase, “…it’s hard to argue with that…” alot.
I dont think it means what he thinks it means.
JK
Happy New Year.
By The Corporal
December 31, 2008 9:49 PM | Link to this
Jay
1) Why are you being so unprofessional and impolite to a blogger and 20 year subscriber to the AJC?
2) If you read my post carefully, you will see I was talking about Germany being six months from developing a nuclear weapon (and they had a one way bombers ready).
3) You are dodging and have not adequately addressed my point that a Saddam still in power (who sent missles into Israel once) would in all probability do it again thereby escalating an already tense situation.
That is not a subjective/hypothetical argument. He did it once and Israel had done nothing to provoke him.
4) I will glady research the hosptial Hilter was born in if you will research the hospital Aytch was born in.
5) Since you violated your own policy and even brought the hospital thing up, I surmise you are hitting the bubbly a little early already this holiday evening ?
6) Have a Happy New Year ………..
By The Corporal
December 31, 2008 9:50 PM | Link to this
To @@
Thank you sir.
No way Jay could have missed that unless he is totally ignoring the argument or he has hit the bubbly early.
By Rush Public Can
December 31, 2008 9:52 PM | Link to this
I just loved that commercial with the frogs lined up on their lily pads. Bud Wise Er Bud Wise Er Bud Wise Er. And then that follow up that they did where the one frog shoots out his long tongue and latches onto that beer truck. Those were the days of tasteful advertising. Don’t get me wrong now. The product was absolute crap. Right down there in the dregs with Pabst. But the presentation at one time was worthwhile. Now…Well…Now, there’s just absolutely nothing there of significance. What a waste of good hops and barley.
By Cherokee
December 31, 2008 10:02 PM | Link to this
Corporal I know you are a leader in your Baptist Church. I encourage you sometime to read I Peter 2: 13-14. Our decision to “take out” Saddam was immoral and against the clear teaching of the Bible.
By sunshine and thunder
December 31, 2008 10:03 PM | Link to this
DB Gwinnettan
You wrote:
The public’s rating of his (Obama’s) leadership skills is already as high as George W. Bush’s was after 9/11 and easily beats the numbers that both Bush and Bill Clinton got at the start of their first terms in office.”
And just how does the public arrive at such a conclusion? How does the public gauge Obama’s leadership skills?
BECAUSE MTV AND ENTERTAINMENT TONIGHT SAID SO!!
Morons.
By AJC/DNC Management
December 31, 2008 10:20 PM | Link to this
Anybody that thinks 2009 is going to be better is a clown-
WASHINGTON (CNN) — A national poll suggests that three-quarters of the public thinks President-elect Barack Obama is a strong and decisive leader, the highest marks for a president-elect on that characteristic in nearly three decades.
Speaking of which, we have become a nation of clowns, bozos who believe anything they are told, like a bunch of sheep in search of a shepherd, unable to think for themselves.
And, of course, Jesus Christ isn’t “cool” enough to lead them.
Nope, now we worship dimwits and criminals because the TV tells us to.
Who needs Salvation when you have hopeandchange?
Bow down to your “savior,” the flat screen monitor, morons.
I pray for you America.
Happy New Year!
By AJC/DNC Management
December 31, 2008 10:24 PM | Link to this
Look at your boy getting schooled by some race baiter in the hood-
In that campaign for a seat on Chicago’s heavily black South Side, Rush, a Baptist minister and former Black Panther, mixed a familiar message of race, class, and generation of the sort that is often used by older African-Americans against upstart primary rivals.
“Barack is a person who read about the civil-rights protests and thinks he knows all about it,” Rush said to a Chicago paper at the time.
The president-elect ran in a primary against the veteran congressman in 2000. Rush easily held his seat, winning 61-30 and temporarily sidetracking then state Sen. Obama’s ambitions.
You live by the bait, you die by the bait.
ew
By AJC/DNC Management
December 31, 2008 10:36 PM | Link to this
You libs are a joke.
You elected a stage prop, this false prophet is getting called out and humiliated by his own political organization, what answer does he have, pose on the beach with his man boobs and “no comment.”
The hacks and felons he rode on the back of are rampaging around, what a powerful statement from their new leader; “No Comment.”
When will he make his new silly emblem for the grand office of “No Comment?”
Better yet, when will See B.S. tell us that “no comment” is profound and distinguished and Abraham Lincoln like?
Will this be the new slogan for 2009, kicking hopeandchange out into the cold, “No Comment?”
Happy New Year, No Comment!
By sunshine and thunder
December 31, 2008 10:42 PM | Link to this
AJC/DNC
Here’s something few of these sheeple have ever seen.
By The BlogFather of Scroll
December 31, 2008 11:01 PM | Link to this
Budweiser stole that frog commercial idea from my blogs, the dirty rats.
HNY!
By @@
December 31, 2008 11:19 PM | Link to this
Corporal:
I’m not a sir!
By The Corporal
December 31, 2008 11:43 PM | Link to this
To @@
Ma’am ??
By The Corporal
December 31, 2008 11:58 PM | Link to this
To Cherokee
One of the first rules of proper Biblical study and interpretation is:
A text taken out of context is no text.
That is what you have done.
1) If you study the whole chapter (actually study the whole letter as chapters are manmade) you will find Peter is talking specifically to Christians living in a pagan world. They are intructions to individuals not nations.
2) Christians are to submit themselves to the civil authority of government. In other words, Christians are not above the law.
3) You conveniently left out verse 18 calling for slaves to submit to their masters even if they are harsh? Do you subscribe to that?
You can’t pick and choose!
No, Peter was not condoning slavery, he was just saying that Christians slaves even are held to a higher standard.
4) Under your logic, the Governor of Illinois could never be challenged (or we could never indict or impeach a President) as the people of Illinois have to submit to his authority.
5) Again, keep it in it’s proper context.
It has nothing to do with a free nation going to war with a despotic nation for valid reasons. The reasons can be argued, but not the principle.
There are many passages that support that premise so if you would like more information just let me know …. :o)
Thank you for you input.
By @@
January 1, 2009 1:27 AM | Link to this
I’m female, but please don’t call me Ma’am.
Happy New Year, Corporal.
A message of Hope:
I am the new year. I am an unspoiled page in your book of time.
I am your next chance at the art of living. I am your opportunity to practice what you have learned about life during the last twelve months.
All that you sought and didn’t find is hidden in me, waiting for you to search it but with more determination.
All the good that you tried for and didn’t achieve is mine to grant when you have fewer conflicting desires.
All that you dreamed but didn’t dare to do, all that you hoped but did not will, all the faith that you claimed but did not have—these slumber lightly, waiting to be awakened by the touch of a strong purpose.
I am your opportunity to renew your allegiance to Him who said, “Behold, I make all things new.”
By Cherokee
January 1, 2009 7:00 AM | Link to this
Corporal if you happen to check this out let me respond to you.
The whole point of the chapter is that we are to be content in whatever situation we are in. Nothing was taken out of context. If we’re a slave, with a harsh master, be content. If we have a good government, be content. If our government is not good, be content and show by our actions that our Christian faith is a serious part of our lives.
Thus if you’re a slave in the south in 1700, be content. If you’re a subject of a poor government, like the colonists in 1776, be content and humbly submit yourselves to that government.
There is no provision for armed revolution, or, for “taking out” a bad government leader by force.
Again, this chapter, in context, is very clear.
By GodHatesTrash
January 1, 2009 9:10 AM | Link to this
PULLED.
Trash, you know better.
By GodHatesTrash
January 1, 2009 9:24 AM | Link to this
Now Bookman, that was a good one. ;-)
He’s a creep.
By The Corporal
January 1, 2009 9:56 AM | Link to this
To Cherokee
Obviously, I strongly disagree (as do most Biblical scholars - do the research) and we could argue this until the sun sets. That’s why there are so many denominations.
God used Israel many times to “smite” wicked nations.
Jesus (God in the flesh) was no pacifist.
1) He drove the money changers out of the Temple. 2) He told his disciples to buy swords to protect themselves. 3) He is coming again to smite evil nations with a rod of iron.
We are never to submit to evil and that means the burglar in the middle of the night or Nazi Germany. You have much to be thankful for that Christians in the past have done for your freedom.
It’s all there. I’m sure you have read it.
God bless………and Happy New Year.
By The Corporal
January 1, 2009 9:57 AM | Link to this
To @@
Aye, aye Ms.@@ ………….
By GodHatesTrash
January 1, 2009 9:59 AM | Link to this
(The following should meet the oftimes shifting editorial standards of this blog…)
I’ll betcha the typical Bookman RightWingnut “library” consists of 400-500 well worn mens muscle and wrasslin’ magazines (that they bought for the pichers), almost as many Soldier of Fortune mags, a copy of the Turner Diaries, a hardback or two from one of the literary giants O’Reilly, Hannity or Limblahhh, and a couple of copies of My Pet Goat.
By GodHatesTrash
January 1, 2009 10:20 AM | Link to this
You know, Bookman, this book is waaaaaay above the reading level of Bookman RightWingnuts. Recommending reading above their ability to comprehend is - to use one of those old shepherd phrases of which the corporal is so fond - casting pearls before swine.
Here’s a book that will still be an intellectual challenge for them, and they will really enjoy
By The Corporal
January 1, 2009 10:21 AM | Link to this
To GodHatesTrash
We are starting a new year.
How about just polite discussion and reasoned debate instead of ridicule and attacks?
By GodHatesTrash
January 1, 2009 10:30 AM | Link to this
Now corporal, your vapid quoting (and misquoting) of ancient shepherd fables hardly counts as discussion or reasoned debate, now does it.
Dismissed.
By The Corporal
January 1, 2009 10:44 AM | Link to this
To GodHatesTrash
Your opinion but at least you were polite and that is what we are looking for !
P.S.
But then why do you quote Him in your blog handle ?
Hummmmmm ………..
By GodHatesTrash
January 1, 2009 11:37 AM | Link to this
corporal, I don’t recall anywhere in your ancient shepherd fables where it says “God hates trash.”
By The Corporal
January 1, 2009 11:45 AM | Link to this
GodHatesTrash
“God Hates Sin/Imperfection/Trash”
In any case, you are evoking His name. But that’s o.k.
Don’t get me wrong. It’s a start.
By Empty Nester
January 1, 2009 6:12 PM | Link to this
Oh wittle Mickey gets get so offended when told how he is just as partisan as he claims the opposing team is. You routinely show up here to say the same damn thing daily. Jay is a hack, blah blah blah, soon he will lose his job blah, blah blah……………Rarely do you comment on the subject.,you just repeat the same old thing over and over.
Kind of like Management, with less free time.
Most of the time I will make a post ON TOPIC, sometimes I will just get fed up with people like you and comment on the hypocrisy you claim about everyone else.
Apparently you do not read most posts, just the ones that call YOU out.
You are utterly boring and predictable. Like Dusty, I’m a patriot and you are not, only less intelligent.
So if you really want Jay to lose his job, try not supporting his blog site daily with your “hack writer” posts.