On Aug 16, 2005, at 10:40 AM, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
--- Dave Land <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Gautam,
--- Dave Land <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This guy's head -- and apparently, his heart --
is completely empty.
I'd say that that description is much more
accurate of the anti-war
movement that's cruelly using this poor woman.
She went there of her own accord. What others do
with that is their
choice. Some, like the neo-con echo-chamber, are
cruelly abusing her.
That's their choice, too.
Dave, you flawlessly agree with everything everybody
on the antiwar left says. I really don't think the
echo-chamber thing is really something you want to
bring up.
Pathetic. I will not allow the fact that I have a
consistent point of view to be held against me.
She and a group of others met with him prior to the
revelations that
this war of choice was entered into on a foundation
of lies. She was
mildly polite about their last meeting, and has
changed her mind as the
falsehoods that cost her son his life have piled up.
There used to be a photo on her family website of the
President kissing her. Possibly she's (at the urging
of people like Michael Moore) changed her story? The
evidence suggests that this is the case.
Cite.
But I think her belief that we
fought this war for Israel at the behest of a Jewish
cabal is pretty obviously anti-semitic. If you
believe that, have the balls to say so. If you don't,
have the decency to repudiate it.
This isn't about my balls, but it helps me see that you
are putting this in a "my manhood vs. your manhood" frame,
which I find completely useless.
I will neither "say so" nor "repudiate" what you think
about her beliefs. I'm not in your head -- or your balls.
I support people with whom I agree, so I probably
wouldn't get behind
the Mukundas' pro-war rally. Nonetheless, they would
be as much under
Maureen Dowd's claim that "The moral authority of
parents who bury
children killed in Iraq is absolute." as Cindy
Sheehen is. I would
disagree with their stated aim, but endorse their
right to declare it.
That is the most intellectually vapid argument it is
possible to make. You have the _right_ to declare
that you are an armadillo. No one is suggesting that
you don't. The point is, would President Bush (or,
say, Howard Dean) be mindless and heartless for
refusing to meet with them? You can't have it both
ways. Unless you are, of course, mindless and
heartless and just using this poor woman to make
political points.
No, actually, the following is the most intellectually
vapid argument it is possible to make:
How do you feel rallying to someone supported by
David Duke - it seems to me that people willing to
exploit a poor, bereaved woman as she lashes out to
assuage her grief should be comfortable in his
company.
...
Well, Dave, line up with the anti-semites and people
are going to draw conclusions.
I think I said before that I will not play that game
with you. I continue to stand by it.
Dave
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
