(no subject)
A local columnist for the St Pete Times, Robyn Blumner, wrote this column last week, in which she took the "manly" foreign policy of Bush & Co. to task for completely failing to do a damn thing right. I read it, I thought it was a good column, I moved on.
Well, she took a drubbing as a result. Rush "Hillbilly Heroin" Limbaugh picked up on her column and waved it about as an example of the "chickification of news". What the fucking fuck? Anyway, the Dittoheads flooded her with hate mail. Plus, they ran a critical letter which basically said, "Liberal women ought to be grateful for manly men, without whom they would all be wearing burkhas."
First of all, can I just say that I look forward to the day when all of the new War on Terror cliches fall to the wayside? "...Or else the terrorists will have won", "You're either with us or against us", and now "You'd be wearing burkhas if it wasn't for Bush/the military/the GOP/Mr. Ed" - all of these are so tedious and so boring and immediately betray the fact that the reader/speaker obtains all of their political commentary and analysis from the talking heads on Fox News.
Anyways, I fired off this letter to the editor this morning:
"I'm writing to express my support for Robyn Blumner. I am one of those much maligned 'liberal women' who disagrees with the way the War on Terror is being handled. (I even have credentials - last year I appeared in your newspaper as an anti-war protestor.) Her critics seem to labor under the misconception that we are still fighting the Germans and the Japanese in World War II, and they are supporting foreign policy positions that are just as outdated.
Supporters of Bush love him because they feel he is a tough guy when it comes to foreign policy and fighting terror. But when you look beyond the rhetoric and the staged photo ops, what has this approach gotten us? Five years into the War on Terror, we have lost thousands of American lives and countless Iraqi and Afghani lives, not to mention those who have been injured both physically and emotionally. We have devastated families and communities, both at home and abroad. We have lost the trust and the respect of the majority of our fellow human beings. We have spent billions of dollars on "nation building" in the Middle East while schools go underfunded, health care is in shambles and our social safety net lies in tatters. And what is the end result of all of this pain and sacrifice and misery? Iraq has fallen into a bloody civil war that claims four thousand lives a month, the Middle East is destabilized, and the Taliban is back in power in Afghanistan. Again, I ask - what has the "tough guy" approach gotten us, beyond a sense of smug superiority that can only be enjoyed from the comfort of our living rooms?
Instead of fighting military wars against civilian populations halfway around the world (a strategy which is certain to unleash even more terrorists upon the US in coming years), our anti-terrorist efforts should be focused on intelligence gathering and bridge-building. We should be establishing relationships based on trust and respect with moderates within Muslim communities. We should be fostering friendly relations with countries that have large Muslim populations. If we want to actually DO something about terrorism, we need to have these people on our side. We cannot continue to pretend that the War on Terror is one that can be fought with bombs and tanks. Unfortunately, because of the actions taken by this administration, the likelihood that we will ever accomplish these goals is rapidly disappearing.
Being against the current War on Terror does not mean that one must be in favor of terrorism, and shame on those who succumb to such dualistic thinking. I can only take solace in knowing that such a mindset belongs to a rapidly shrinking minority."
It's probably too long, so I doubt they'll run it, but I'll make sure to mention if they do.
------
Later on today, my thoughts on Katrina.
Well, she took a drubbing as a result. Rush "Hillbilly Heroin" Limbaugh picked up on her column and waved it about as an example of the "chickification of news". What the fucking fuck? Anyway, the Dittoheads flooded her with hate mail. Plus, they ran a critical letter which basically said, "Liberal women ought to be grateful for manly men, without whom they would all be wearing burkhas."
First of all, can I just say that I look forward to the day when all of the new War on Terror cliches fall to the wayside? "...Or else the terrorists will have won", "You're either with us or against us", and now "You'd be wearing burkhas if it wasn't for Bush/the military/the GOP/Mr. Ed" - all of these are so tedious and so boring and immediately betray the fact that the reader/speaker obtains all of their political commentary and analysis from the talking heads on Fox News.
Anyways, I fired off this letter to the editor this morning:
"I'm writing to express my support for Robyn Blumner. I am one of those much maligned 'liberal women' who disagrees with the way the War on Terror is being handled. (I even have credentials - last year I appeared in your newspaper as an anti-war protestor.) Her critics seem to labor under the misconception that we are still fighting the Germans and the Japanese in World War II, and they are supporting foreign policy positions that are just as outdated.
Supporters of Bush love him because they feel he is a tough guy when it comes to foreign policy and fighting terror. But when you look beyond the rhetoric and the staged photo ops, what has this approach gotten us? Five years into the War on Terror, we have lost thousands of American lives and countless Iraqi and Afghani lives, not to mention those who have been injured both physically and emotionally. We have devastated families and communities, both at home and abroad. We have lost the trust and the respect of the majority of our fellow human beings. We have spent billions of dollars on "nation building" in the Middle East while schools go underfunded, health care is in shambles and our social safety net lies in tatters. And what is the end result of all of this pain and sacrifice and misery? Iraq has fallen into a bloody civil war that claims four thousand lives a month, the Middle East is destabilized, and the Taliban is back in power in Afghanistan. Again, I ask - what has the "tough guy" approach gotten us, beyond a sense of smug superiority that can only be enjoyed from the comfort of our living rooms?
Instead of fighting military wars against civilian populations halfway around the world (a strategy which is certain to unleash even more terrorists upon the US in coming years), our anti-terrorist efforts should be focused on intelligence gathering and bridge-building. We should be establishing relationships based on trust and respect with moderates within Muslim communities. We should be fostering friendly relations with countries that have large Muslim populations. If we want to actually DO something about terrorism, we need to have these people on our side. We cannot continue to pretend that the War on Terror is one that can be fought with bombs and tanks. Unfortunately, because of the actions taken by this administration, the likelihood that we will ever accomplish these goals is rapidly disappearing.
Being against the current War on Terror does not mean that one must be in favor of terrorism, and shame on those who succumb to such dualistic thinking. I can only take solace in knowing that such a mindset belongs to a rapidly shrinking minority."
It's probably too long, so I doubt they'll run it, but I'll make sure to mention if they do.
------
Later on today, my thoughts on Katrina.