Plame Testifies At Waxman Hearing
Valerie Plame testified before the Waxman hearing today, you can watch the C-SPAN replay via C&L. Her comments about the politicization of intelligence and the damaging effects that her case could have on recruiting non-Americans to work with covert operatives and risk themselves should be noted.
It also should be noted that at the time the Novak piece was published, Plame was still a covert agent for the CIA, and that that fact has been firmly established by Michael Hayden, the current director of the CIA.
Interestingly, though not surprisingly, the White House once claimed that were they to find that such information had been leaked that they would terminate any and all persons found connected to the incident. But according to testimony also given today by James Knodell, the White House’s director of the Office of Security, the White House never even initiated an internal investigation.
A Look Around
I thought I would take a few minutes to see which of the more popular American right-wing blogs had mentioned Plame’s testimony, or Knodell’s for that matter. Little Green Footballs hadn’t, nor had Michelle Malkin, nor had Captain’s Quarters. Powerline did mention it, though offered no real comment as to the substance of Plame’s testimony other than to make a crack about her claiming to be a covert agent, even though the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency has, in fact, confirmed that she was. The focus is, of course, being placed on whether she or someone else had anything to do with her husband being sent to Niger and his efforts there to determine if nuclear materials were being sold to Iraq - not particularly the fact that she was outed by a member of the administration. It is, of course, simply sidetracking the greater issue. You can read more about that aspect at The National Review Online. Not surprisingly, Blogs For Bush takes the usual approach, attacking Plame rather than addressing the greater issue at hand.
Want to bookmark or share this entry?
This entry was posted on Friday, March 16th, 2007 at 12:39 pm. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
March 16th, 2007 at 1:05 pm
Interestingly enough, I was watching CNN and Glenn Beck commented on this story. He said that this should not be considered news because it ultimately has no importance to the American people. Apparently what was in Anna Nicole’s fridge was important, but deliberate intimidation tactics by the U.S. Administration isn’t.
March 16th, 2007 at 2:13 pm
Yep, just as I thought…it’s those evil conservatives again failing to mention the truth as we see it. I wish those evil conservatives could adopt our good natured liberal ways. The problem is indeed that simple; conservatives are always evil and liberals are always good. That’s why liberal blog sites never contain a negative story about liberals - because there are none. Sure, that’s it. But if there was I’m sure we’d be upfront about it, right?
March 16th, 2007 at 2:15 pm
That’s absolutely correct.
March 16th, 2007 at 4:13 pm
Yes, Mr. Good, it is absolutely correct. Now you’ll have to exuse me for a moment while I hug and kiss some poisonous snakes. That’s better. Now I can be sure that my comment is just as sarcastic as yours.
But seriously, the first comment was a shot at Glenn Beck and I must take exception to that. Glenn Beck is no doubt a conservative, but he also does a great job of showing both sides of the story and has taken a fair amount of shots at his fellow Republicans as well. There are some bloggers, who shall remane nameless :), that only like to bash the one side. I’m not going to say who, but Matt, I think you know him very, very, very well.
March 16th, 2007 at 5:09 pm
What is the other side here? The Neoconservative movement in the United States? The same movement whose foreign policy platform could only be enacted because of a terrorist attack? Because when Paul Wolfowitz originally penned the Defense Planning Guidance in the early 90’s and the New York Times leaked parts of it, it was ordered buried. It then became the cornerstone of PNAC’s ideology, and after 9/11 it was made official US foreign policy – what is now known as The Bush Doctrine. It is a doctrine that preaches unilateralism, preemption, and the use of force to ensure that the interests of the United States are protected – which includes everything from security to energy interests. For that purpose, the United States operates over 700 military instillations globally, has a defense budget that this year totals $532.8 billion dollars, produces more armaments than any nation on earth, is more beholden to it’s defense sector than any democracy on earth, and is, according to the majority of global polls – the most feared country in the world.
What I believe in with regards to the United States is it’s Constitution. It is a document steeped in the language of emancipation, not fear. That being the case, as an American, you must ask yourself why the application of its principles by this administration, be it domestically or otherwise, has been skewed? If the United States is known for any particular greatness, it is the greatness contained in that document and its amendments.
What if we were having this same conversation in 1971 and, next week, the Pentagon Papers were leaked? What would you say then of the right and the left and all the smoke and mirrors that exist to detract from the realities of issues? That the portions of that internal Pentagon study were fake or only applicable if you happened to be “a liberal�? Where does truth enter into it exactly? When it fits some ridiculous ‘objectivity’ that takes into account the feelings of both sides of the American political spectrum?
That’s simply nonsense, and in that context I am anything but a liberal. You want truth, here is truth…
You want to talk about the realities behind 9/11? Then we should go back to the early 1980’s and examine some truths behind US foreign policy and certain bedfellows. We should also talk about why ties with Saudi Arabia remain firm despite the fact that majority of the 9/11 attackers were Saudi nationals.
If you want to talk realistically about Iraq and weapons of mass destruction, then we have to openly talk about who sold Saddam Hussein’s regime the Anthrax and the Mustard gas that he combined and used against the Iranians and the Kurds. We have to talk about who financially supported him until he became a liability. If we’re to talk about Latin America we have to inevitably broach the realities of what US backed despots did over decades of murderous rule.
There are evils in this world aplenty, there is no denying that. There are those that would see the destruction of others for gain, for God, for madness. But there is nothing more deadly, nothing more powerful than the willful ignorance of a population of a world super power in which destraction through consumption reigns. Because the reality is that while fighting for an ideology can impassion some individuals to sacrifice themselves, all that is required amongst the population of a world super power is apathy for complete strangers to be sacrificed in their name.
All of that said, unless you have something worthwhile and intelligent to add, then my responses to you end here.
March 16th, 2007 at 6:25 pm
pwned.
I hate it when people politicize… politics.
March 16th, 2007 at 6:31 pm
Oh, Matt! Off topic, but tonight was the eve of 50 Human Peace Signs around the world in protest of the Iraq War. I just got back from the Kitchener-Waterloo Peace Sign, and it was fantastic. Over the speakers they were playing a variety of 60’s influenced peace songs, but in there I also heard Blue Skies Over Bad Lands. Thought you’d be interested in hearing it.
March 16th, 2007 at 7:12 pm
Matt, I think there are a few things you don’t mention in your writing.
First - the US defence budget. You can probably double the US defence budget. There’s a lot of black ops type stuff, secret projects, the military wants to hide - mainly because if its enemies found out the difference between the known and the unknown, it might help reveal what they’re spending it on. China probably hides a lot. Ditto the missing North Korea which I wager is spending more than South Korea.
But onto the Plame testimony and the CIA. This needs much more serious attention. The stakes are not just American soverignty but also, as i’ll mention later, the protection of spys in other agencies abroad.
I mention the Cold War because the stakes here are still the same. Nuclear weapons are a danger. There are more nuclear powers than in the Cold War. Missles have bigger explosions, more accurate and longer range. Some nuke power countries are rather unstable. I question the security of those weapons. I would hope this is something spy agencies look at - to protect everyone. But there are other problems too, the CIA doesn’t only deal with nuclear weapons and there are other things to look at.
My concern is that if CIA agents can be easily exposed, what motivation is there for them to work and find out this information? Not only to protect the USA - Japan only has a defensive force and NK and China are threats. The US via the CIA probably shares info with its allies. They benefit from the CIAs info too.
The other problem is what happens when the public, political and media perception abroad is that since Plame’s name can be revealed, its ok to leak the names of agents in other countries. Inexcusable. What if it happens in other countries through domestic media channels? Plame isn’ the only one effected here. She should be testifying because her name should never have been leaked. But there’s a risk, if this case isn’t a deterrent, other democratic countries might follow suit for whatever there is to gain by leaking those names.
March 17th, 2007 at 4:01 am
BobbyHaven -
Glenn Beck is as useless as a tit on a bull… and I’m being generous…
over and out.
March 17th, 2007 at 7:04 am
Not that anything needs to be added to BobbyHaven’s comments, but whetever.
Bill Clinton was considered “Liberal” (and I use a capital ‘L’ with good reason) and he, like every other American president since at least World War II was guilty of war crimes. And no, I’m not speaking of getting a blowjob from Monica (that was another Anna Nicole Smith-like distraction tactic), he was guilty of war crimes for the whole Kosovo fiasco.
I think it’s safe to say that Matt would talk about anyone who violates anyone’s basic human rights, but he has a point when he says that these days it tends to be neo-conservatives who do most of it.
And thanks Roy, Beck is a useless tit on a bull…
How can anyone possibly use the “fair and balanced” argument for him?? I can’t watch him for more than 5 minutes without wanting to smash my TV.
March 17th, 2007 at 8:31 am
I honestly have nothing to contribute about the CIA or security in general. I did however want to mention that I picked up the 3-disc “In a Coma” boxset along with another Canadian CD. I don’t have my Creative player yet so I still use CD’s. The rack– CD rack (get your mind out of the gutter)– can only hold so many albums. In the process of buying those 2, I got rid of another 2– both belonging to Bryan Adams. I’ve outgrown his sappy pop music, and he has made it clear over the years that he cares very little about his fans. He doesn’t care about Canada anymore either– which is why he moved to England like that Conrad nutcase. Ironically, a college professor of mine once cancelled one of our classes so we could attend a lecture that Conrad was giving at the auditorium on our campus. Unlike Martha Stewart, I think Conrad will get put away for quite some time considering his crimes. How the mighty have fallen!
I digress. Back on topic– you really can’t trust ANYONE. I learned this the hard way.
Happy St. Paddy’s Day, Matt.
March 17th, 2007 at 10:44 am
Wow. I am big enough to admit when I’ve been intellectually knocked out and I’ll give everyone here “props” for doing so. I’m not educated enough to come up with an effective rebuttal to Matt’s last comment so I’ll throw in the proverbial towel and end this battle for now, but before I do allow me to completely clarify my point of view as a Conservative.
Yes it is obvious that this current regime has not acted in good faith occasionally, and there is a good case to be made that George W. Bush has not been one of the greatest Presidents ever. I can understand why you have “wagged the finger” Stephen Colbert style at some of these Conservative blogs like ‘Powerline’ and ‘Blogs for Bush’ and the Military Expenditures Chart you have provided certainly shocked me.
However, I am not going to switch over to the “dark side”, otherwise known as the left. There are several reasons for this, but I’ll give you the biggest reason of them all; Security. I feel safer with a Republican in office than I would with some Demoncrat like Hillary or Barrack, and here in Canada I’m glad that Mr. Harper is at the helm rather than some Liberal Francophone who’d probably wear a visor if he played hockey. I feel safer with these people because they, although sometimes up to some funny business under the table, were elected into office because they are not shy to kill those people who are trying to kill us.
We are really in a Religious war and there is no other way to look at this situation in my opinion. Though there are only a small percentage of Muslims that are “extremists”, that percentage is in fact growing and they are very committed to seeing a Global Muslim empire. What am I supposed to think? Who am I supposed to vote for when one side is committed to protecting us and the other is trying to “talk” to the enemy Oprah Winfrey style.
Listen guys, I know you mean well and you all, especially Matt, seem to have done a lot of research and I can’t compete with you guys on that level. But my first priority is to be safe, and to make sure my children can live in a safe environment, free to believe in any God they choose without the threat of having their freakin’ heads cut off. Matt, you want me to get some numbers for you and put forth an intelligent argument like you did…well sorry, for me it’s just that simple; I want my kids to keep their freakin’ heads.
And by the way, Glenn Beck is way more useful than a tit on a bull.
- Miss. B. Haven
March 17th, 2007 at 12:13 pm
A religiously based war? Having read the Qur’an I can say that it is about as violent as the Christian bible and professes the same governing virtues. In fact, Jesus is a prophet in the Islamic faith, and were you to read, for example, Robert Fisk’s book, as he has interviewed Bin Laden more than anyone else, you’d know that when even Bin Laden mentions Christ he honors him by saying “Jesus, peace be unto him�.
Throughout human history there have been those that have used radical religious ideology as motivation for endless acts of barbarism, and Christianity above all of them has solidified first place in that category. In a modern context it is by no means limited to Islam, and to even claim that the goal of the Islamic world is a “Global Muslim Empire� is ridiculous. Has the support for those that would attack the West grown in the Muslim world? Yes, it certainly has. And why is that? Could it be that Middle Eastern nations have been unilaterally invaded by Western powers, leaving hundreds of thousands of innocents dead? Could it be the decades of colonial pillaging and exploitation? Could it be the West’s hypocrisy with regards to Israel? If you want to lay blame on the further radicalization of the Islamic world, look no further than the mirror, or perhaps Western support for regimes like that of Saudi Arabia.
What are you supposed to think? What you’re supposed to do - is think.
The Harper government has done little more than its predecessors pledged to do with regards to our commitment in Afghanistan, so I fail to see why mentioning his government means anything. Canada’s role in Afghanistan is, as I have pointed out on countless occasions, a detriment to Canadian national security if anything, and has cost the lives of over 40 Canadians in the process. Like all Western interventions in parts of the world where we fail to learn from the region’s history, we have signed on to be a part of a folly, one that simply studying what befell the Russians could have saved us from. Peacekeeping under direct UN command – fine. We’re not there doing that, and to even think that NATO has say over operations without CENTCOM’s approval would be a step.
If defense is your concern then why should you feel threatened? A single Ohio Class Nuclear Submarine carries enough firepower to kill over 50 million people. The United States has the ability to destroy the entire planet numerous times over, a conventional force that is second to none in its logistical and technological capabilities – all of which are supported by just under a thousand world-wide military bases. It has some of the best intelligence capabilities in the world, though since 9/11 it has lost a lot of vital support because of both its actions and the politicization of the Central Intelligence Agency itself and the removal of CIA veterans that did their jobs rather than providing half assed intel for PDB’s to further the ambitions of neoconservative ideologues.
Think about this for a second. The Taliban, during an engagement with British Royal Marines, held at the Helmand river despite being bombarded by heavy artillery and having 2,000 lbs bombs dropped on them by the US airforce using nothing more than small arms and RPG’s. The reality of radicalism is intent and will. What has occurred because of the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan is that we have helped proliferate the intent and will of those that might otherwise have had nothing to do with those that promote radical ideologies.
Let’s also not forget that in North America there has been a considerable increase in Conservative evangelicalism – Christians who, like some Muslims, can simply toss aside the actual teaching of, in their case, Christ, in favor of supporting conflict and demonizing another religion to such a level as to become openly bigoted.
We are in a global war, there is not question about that. But it is not one involving religions or even nations. It is one involving intelligence and ignorance.
I also wanted to mention something else. Who killed Yitzhak Rabin? Yigal Amir killed him, a right-wing Israeli that opposed the Olso Accord. Radicalism is not limited to a single people, nor are acts of terrorism. During the US invasion of Panama, some 3,000 Panamanians were killed by errant US bombs. Panama did not invade the United States after building an international coalition at the UN, nor did the world weep as if the sky had fallen. And all to simply remove a man that was trained by the US at the School of the Americas at Fort Benning, who was a CIA asset, and whose daughter’s God Father was the President of the United States himself at the time of the invasion.
March 17th, 2007 at 12:55 pm
“We are in a global war, there is not question about that. But it is not one involving religions or even nations. It is one involving intelligence and ignorance.”
We will just have to agree to this disagree when it comes to what this war is really about. Also, let’s not mislead people into thinking Bin Laden does not hate Christians just because he said “Jesus, peace be unto Him”.
We are getting way off topic anyways, and I think that I’m to blame for that so I’ll digress. You made a lot of great points, but I still believe this is a religious war.
March 17th, 2007 at 1:04 pm
I think your mentality, Bobby, is obviously fear driven as a parent, which I understand. But violence never solves violence. The “Oprah” style talking sometimes open lines of communication and gains trust, which is always a good starting point with any conflict resolution. Although I don’t think this is about “conflict resolution” or even keeping us safe from terror. You buy that but I don’t know that I do. Do I think there are those who are on a mission and nothing will stop them?…yes. I just don’t think killing them before they kill us and taking everyone in the wake is the answer. Or the whole truth. And I usually don’t comment because I’m not well enough informed and am learning. But I do know that when innocent people are killed as a so called “preventative” measure, nothing good can come of that. And that creates more hatred/reason to be killed.
Your very casual way of expressing the lies, cover ups and crimes being committed here concern me - “Yes it is obvious that this current regime has not acted in good faith occasionally, and there is a good case to be made that George W. Bush has not been one of the greatest Presidents ever.”. It is not “occassionally”, it is daily it seems. And not only has he not been one of the best, he’s one of the worst. So to accept, minimize and try and justify the acceptance of a Government “not acting in good faith” based on “they’re not as bad as they could be” has me concerned.
Another example - “although sometimes up to some funny business under the table”. That’s not acceptable, that statement right there. And as long as you’re willing to accept it, it allows it to happen/grow. There should be no “funny business” with Governments (yeah right, like that’ll ever happen). But, when we learn that there is, it’s our responsibility to call them out on it. Not support them through it because “they’ve got our backs” (or we think they do). You pass it off like it’s nothing but it’s something. We have to hold Governments responsible and make them accountable for their actions or we open the door and provide opportunity for further corruption and deceipt. If you turn your head the other way and will compromise for the safety of your children, you’re not really doing them any favors for the future of their country. They may survive the terrorists but they still have to live with the Government.
March 17th, 2007 at 1:07 pm
*deceit (I hade typos)
March 17th, 2007 at 1:52 pm
I love how when backed into a corner, rather than informed discussion (which would no doubt be greeted with open arms here), some people resort to ad homonym attacks like “some liberal francophone who would probably wear a visor in hockey.” Any argument based on a comment like that should be completely disregarded.
Thanks for the information Matt, you’re a better source than most University professors.
March 17th, 2007 at 1:57 pm
…who’d probably wear a visor if he played hockey.
um, BabbyHaven, that’s an issue of safety. What kind of dental coverage do you have??? :)
And for the record, historically, the “demoncrats” are very bit as gung-ho as the “republicons”. When one is in power, the other typically cries foul every time the use of force is authorized, and often when it is just being discussed. It’s how they play their “games”. To me, the statement that one or the other is weak on security/defence/cime/terrorism is at the least short-sighted.
And in respect to Glenn Beck: I hereby call for Mr. Roy to issue a formal apology to all bulls with tits. ;)
Beck’s gesturing and expressions, let alone views, are enough to make me puke in my mouth a little bit if someone happens to have his show on for a second. Sooner or later he’ll go so far that the only place he’ll be welcome is Faux News. Maybe he & Coulter will get together. Ew! BAD MENTAL PICTURE! GO TO A HAPPY PLACE! GO TO A HAPPY PLACE!
March 17th, 2007 at 3:00 pm
That military spending graph is scary.
March 17th, 2007 at 3:20 pm
To clarify, I never said that I was a parent. I used the term “my kids” assuming that I’ll have kids in the near future.
I disagree with Deb’s comment, suggesting that my reasoning is “fear driven”. I make an effort to live my live without fear and I certainly don’t allow fear to affect my judgement (though as Rocky would say, sometimes Frankie Fear can be our friend). It is not out of fear that I decide not to take a walk at Centenial Park in Toronto (Crack-head central) at 3:00 AM, but I make that decision out of common sense. It’s also common sense that leads me to believe that Demoncrats are weaker on defense then Republicons (thanks J. Canuck).
March 17th, 2007 at 4:30 pm
So, in effect, what you are saying is - rather than educate yourself you’re simply happy to remain ignorant? What do you actually know about American politics? I’m not going to go through the list, because it’s quite extensive, but let’s use Truman as an example, because his is of importance. Harry Truman was a democrat. Not only did he authorize the dropping of the atomic bombs on Japan, something that most felt should never have been done (including Eisenhower, also a Democrat), but was probably done for future geopolitical purposes (which in effect marked the beginning of the nuclear arms race), but his Presidency also saw the creation of:
- The Central Intelligence Agency.
- The Department Of Defense.
- Strategic Air Command (the US bomber-based and ballistic missile-based strategic nuclear command which was dissolved in 1992).
- And the creation of a permanent arms industry in the United States where none had existed prior.
So here’s the thing. Back then it was the Russians. Now it’s the ever ambiguous al-Qaeda, the leadership of which has still yet to be apprehended by this administration despite the overwhelming tools at its disposal. Rather than demonstrating a rather frightening level of ignorance, I would instead suggest educating yourself prior to commenting on, for example, my objectivity.
March 17th, 2007 at 8:25 pm
Bobby will claim that this is a religious war because he thinks that there is an argument there - somewhere - although he doesn’t want to make it, because he doesn’t know what that argument is.
Of course, like most apologists regardless of affiliation, he thinks that second-hand portmanteaus like “Demoncrats” is clever - and, worse yet, true. Unfortunately, hacking out perjorative spittle like this is the first-line defense of the ignorant.
Bobby, Glenn Beck is a psycopath who replaced alcohol and pills with disseminating hatred. For some reason, you’ve mistaken his feigned disagreement with GWB on some issues as being “fair and balanced”, which really just smacks of tunnel vision. Of course, I would love to live in your world of binary morals and trying to single-handedly tabulate the Liberal versus Republican blog score, but I can’t.
Combing the internet for discussions on these subjects is almost scary. The vast majority of people out there right now are like Bobby, except they don’t admit defeat quite so readily. They’re packs of circle-jerking hatemongers, replacing facts, thought, and rationality with insults. I think it’s actually kind of sad that you think that the kind of “fear” you would experience from, apparently, out walking at night is the same kind of “fear” at the root of your opinion. Modern conservatism, even paleoconservatism, is less rooted in preserving such things as the original intent of the founding fathers than it is the fear of a lack of permanence. It’s very much like its stepcousin, the White Supremacy movement, in that it portrays itself as a protective traditionalist organization that’s unfairly under attack, composed of individuals who use the organization as a way to eject other personal issues or motives. So, maybe you’re afraid of a perceived change in your personal lifestyle. It’s not the basal heart-pumping fear that you think is synonymous with the word, but it’s fear nonetheless.
A lot of seems like a personal attack, because it is. It’s become more clear to me that it’s impossible to argue specific points with hardliners, especially those from the right, because their allegiance is less based on a logical understanding of their own party than personal deficiency.
March 17th, 2007 at 8:34 pm
That’s a very good point, Adam.
For example, I really wanted to go and see that “300″ film this weekend. That was until I found out it was supposed to depict the battle of Thermopylae. The Greeks, of course, lost at Thermopylae, though they did put up a rather decent stand. But from what I have seen from the film trailers, it makes it out to seem as if the Greeks are victorious - even worse, that the Persians were little more than evil personified. Of course, Alexander, for example, would conquer the Persian world and most consider him a ‘genius’.
Well, those that don’t realize that he was a raging homosexual anyway. After they find that out they tend to try and change the subject.
March 17th, 2007 at 8:59 pm
Going even further into that, the first thing I thought of from the film’s title is that it seems to completely ignore the 700 Thespians who - unlike the Spartans, who were bound to stay because of their faith and orders - volunteered to stay (and also die). I guess World War II films belittling the French were getting passe, so they had to find a new ally to ignore.
Speaking of homosexuality, don’t let anyone who loves the movie because of all the gung-ho bloodshed know that in ancient Greece, homosexual soldiers were not only the norm, but homosexual relationships were encouraged - the thought being that a soldier who loved his fellow man would fight harder for him.
Hell, if I made that film, the final frame would have said “Everyone you like in this film was gay, which means you’re probably gay too.” Of course, it wouldn’t have gone over well, but maybe using classical conditioning to equate their greatest love with their greatest insecurities, much like a mouse with electrified cheese, is the only way to get through to them.
All that said, I still want to see that movie..
March 17th, 2007 at 9:44 pm
Bobby, while i disagree with many of your opinions, hats off to you for coming in here & making an argument knowing 95% of everyone was going to disagree with you. Makes for better debate than “Oh i agree Matt!”.
The biggest thing that bugs me is this liberal vs conservative & bi-partisan B.S. One of the biggest problems in America is that the average person doesn’t really give a shit about whats happening here, and those that do give a shit are too busy defending their side for spite’s sake instead of allowing themselves to see the truth.
Americans are way, way too partisan. Screw both the Republicans & Democrats, they are both are a bunch of filthy, corrupt, power/money-hungry machines. Americans should be seeking the truth & making these crooks responsible for the acts they’ve committed. The Republican administration right now is disgusting, but the Democrats are equally disgusting because they won’t impeach anyone for their crimes simply because they don’t want to fudge their chances of winning the next election. Power > “what’s right”?
How are Americans not smashing down the White House & dragging these crooks & liars out of power? The scary thing about all this is that since nothing’s being done, what’s to prevent this sort of thing from happening again?
Bobby, you worry about future your children. How are your children safe if they’d signed up for the army after 9/11 for patriotic reasons, then see themselves getting killed in a war that never should have happened? How many U.S. soliders were going after Bin Laden in Afghanistan etc. vs fighting in Iraq? I don’t much like the Liberal Party of Canada either, but they didn’t send us into Vietnam & they didn’t send us into Iraq, i have to give them that.
Do your children a favour (and this goes to everyone here too), keep off the partisan glasses as much as humanly possible & scrutinize ALL members of gov’t with equal ferocity because we are the only thing that keeps those fuckers in check.
March 18th, 2007 at 6:51 am
“How are Americans not smashing down the White House & dragging these crooks & liars out of power?”
Too many Americans dont care enough about the war. The majority are not the ones going off to fight the war. How can over 70% can disagree with the war and not have more being done to end it. Interesting to see how the perception of American’s would change if the draft were reinstated, instead of recycling the same troops over and over again to go back to Iraq.
March 18th, 2007 at 7:10 am
And as far as the future of our children, didn’t the US national intelligence estimate say that being in Iraq, a country that previously was not a terrorist problem, we were in fact creating more terrorism. Im far more worried about my future and the future of my children because of the actions of the Bush administration since 9/11.
March 18th, 2007 at 11:26 am
Yeah, as soon as I saw the previews for “300″ I knew it was going to be another miss for me. It look like another stylized “ass-kicker” glossed over by some psuedo-historical cover.
For those that want the real story of the battle at Thermopolae, try wikipedia. their entry is pretty good if not totally complete.
March 18th, 2007 at 12:53 pm
Matt, Adam Bruce, and Moonlight Graham (cool name - awesome movie) all make great points and you’ve given me a lot to think about.
The truth is that I’m just a regular blue-collar worker, and like many other people in this world I don’t have time to read as many books and do as much research as you people have done. After working a 12 hour shift, forgive me if I don’t feel like reading the latest Al Franken book and I’d rather watch American Idol or the Leafs game.
I guess part of the reason there aren’t many conservatives that want to partake in any of the discussions on this site is because Matt Good and his fans are pretty damn smart and will eat them alive, as you guys have me. So I forfeit, but I’m sure a much smarter person like Glenn Beck could have done a much better job (sorry guys, Glenn Beck still rules).
I’d also like you guys to know that I’m not completely conservative and there is even a little “liberal hippie” in me. I have a nose piercing and just recently after watching the movie ‘Fast Food Nation’ I became a vegetarian (I’m serious, and that movie is a MUST SEE). And dammit, I have every single one of Matt Good’s albums so I can’t be a total ass hole, right?
In closing, I just want to say that I feel bad about taking over the topic a little bit and I’m not going to post many comments anymore. I’ll still visit and read, but it just seems like anytime I say something it’s like putting my hand in a piranha tank. I really don’t think one side is evil and the other is good. There are a lot of lying pricks on the right and you have to admit that there may be just as many on the left. My only point was that each side is very committed to their cause and both liberal and conservative bloggers are liable to give you only THEIR side of the story.
In closing, I just want all of you to know that although I still consider myself a conservative, I’m a lot less conservative now after I’ve been torn to shreds by all you tree hugging pot smoking liberal hippies. Good job, now leave me alone.
P.S. Matt, hurry up with that new album.
- Miss B. Haven
March 18th, 2007 at 1:28 pm
Glenn learns the bare minimum necessary about a subject in order to make his vitriol sound factual. For anyone who actually has knowledge on the subjects he talks about, he’s clearly a moron. For his average viewer, who LEARN their information from him, I can see how he would appear to be intelligent.
March 18th, 2007 at 1:58 pm
That is the reality of information post 9/11 – though it should not be said that prior to that it was any less reduced. But 9/11 allowed for the opening of the floodgates of ignorance, for mass generalization, for partisan “factuality�.
There are millions upon millions of people just like Miss B. Haven in this world, people who use terms such as ‘hippie’ to describe those that oppose conflict. It is, of course, in the annals of pop culture, simply a term that is only applicable to a small counter cultural movement in the 1960’s and early 1970’s, but that doesn’t stop it from being used to stereotype people - even worse, peace itself.
If being a hippie is for believing in demilitarization, then the world’s preeminent intellects are hippies, the majority of Nobel Peace Prize winners are hippies, and George Washington himself, as President, was a hippie.
Easily employed pseudo-intellectual vernacular is something that makes mental midgets into self perceived mental giants, and if they are surrounded by like minded people it’s only compounded. Miss B. Haven represents, if anything, the problem with our society’s willingness to remain ignorant simply because they can explain away their inability to learn by pointing to the fact that they work blue collar jobs and are too tired to bother. But it seems what they are not too tired to do is sit on a sofa and listen to morons expound on subjects that they really know very little about – information that said recipient then passes off as fact elsewhere. How that isn’t the definition of manufacturing consent is beyond me.
March 18th, 2007 at 2:29 pm
Wow, way to tear me a new one Matt. If your music wasn’t so damn good I I’d get all pissed off and stop being a fan.
I was just kidding around with that “hippie” and “demoncrat” stuff, and I really didn’t mean to offend you or anyone else (well, at least not to the extend that I apparently have). To suggest that I was using that sort of terminology as “easily employed pseudo-intellectual vernacular” to make me look like a “mental giant” is a little odd when you consider that I straight out admitted that I was intellectually out-matched in this discussion.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but it seems to me that you believe one way to correct some of our problems in post 9-11 society is for everybody to put down the clicker and read a book. I just down see the poor over-taxed over-working majority doing that any time soon. Sorry to sound pessimistic, but although I believe America is the greatest country in the world I also know it’s full of idiots like me and their collective IQ will probably only decrease in the future (if you’ve seen the movie ‘Idocracy’ you know what I mean).
I’m waving the white flag here and I’m just hoping that you guys take me in as a P.O.W. I don’t think my bruised ego can take much more of this.
P.S. Miss B. Haven is having a rough time on her only day-off being mentally abused by her Rock Idol so some kind words would be appreciated.
March 18th, 2007 at 2:54 pm
Matt, after reading your last comment a second time your words really did get through to me. I know that I’d better start making more of an effort to educate myself on the issues and I probably shouldn’t believe everything that Glenn Beck says. I guess it’s also not a good idea to rely on his show as my only source of news/commentary.
I find your writing style harsh and impacting, yet well written and insightful. I guess I’m too easily offended, but I’m sure that wasn’t your intent, right?
Also, I really am starting to rethink this conservative thing (I’m serious, but I am not promising that I won’t vote for Harper next time. I just need some time to think). Peace.
- Miss B. Haven
March 18th, 2007 at 6:46 pm
[quote]Miss B. Haven represents, if anything, the problem with our society’s willingness to remain ignorant simply because they can explain away their inability to learn by pointing to the fact that they work blue collar jobs and are too tired to bother. But it seems what they are not too tired to do is sit on a sofa and listen to morons expound on subjects that they really know very little about – information that said recipient then passes off as fact elsewhere.[/quote]
Well said. Also Bobby, you don’t need to read books to stay informed. I don’t read a lot of books either, or at least as many as i’d like, because like you there just aren’t enough hours in the day. But i do make a point to pick up the front section of my newspaper every day & take 15-30 minutes to see whats going on in the world. Surely everyone has time for that (ok many people dont get the newspaper but online news is the same).
Heh if we all spent 30 minutes a day exercising on a treadmill & 30 minutes a day reading the news, our society would be much more physically & mentally healthy. Unfortunately most of us are some combo of overweight & ignorant.
p.s. there’s nothing wrong with being conservative. Abraham Lincolm was a Republican. The problem is ignorance & stupidity.
March 19th, 2007 at 8:39 am
Thanks for the kind words Moonlight Graham. It’s not easy being considered the representation of “our society’s willingness to remain ignorant” so I appreciate your thoughfulness.
The truth is that I was never a great conservative anyways and I’ve been re-thinking my political stance for a while. Visiting this site and hearing the words of Matt and people like you have certainly given me a new understanding of the world we live in. As crazy as it may sound, I think I still haven’t completely adjusted to post 9-11 society. I was watching a documentary on 9-11 on TLC just last night and it still seems unreal to me even after more than five years. This war sucks.
March 20th, 2007 at 10:01 am
BobbyHAven
“Security. I feel safer with a Republican in office”
Um… the Republicans WERE in office when you were last “attacked” Boy did they ever keep you safe, so safe your now embroiled in not one, but two wars smack dab in the middle east, helping to breed more of those you claim to fear. So ONCE again, how is it Bush is keeping you safe? Oh yes, by fighting them over there, YOU don’t have to fight them at home. What pure, unadulterated rhetorical BULLSHIT. What’s stopping them from attacking you AGAIN on home soil??? What?
I’ll give you some time to answer those. They are two fairly simple questions right? Answer at your leisure.