Regardless of what you might think of MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, his syndicated Sunday talk show is a must-see due to the unscripted statements that often emanate from those not used to being so unfettered.
Such was certainly the case Mother’s Day when NBC’s Chief White House correspondent David Gregory made some extraordinary assertions about the “big bad threat of Islamic fundamentalism” and that “George W. Bush did not get that part of it wrong, that the [Middle East] needed to be transformed after 9/11.”
The discussion had moved in the direction of the Iraq war, and what position the Republican presidential candidates should take. Gregory suddenly took total control of the conversation, making the following statements that seemed to shock Matthews as well as the BBC’s Katty Kay sitting to his right:
Here’s what’s hard. Everybody wants some distance from Bush on the management of the war. That’s not the hard part. All of the candidates will have that…The point is that, is the war a mistake because it was handled to such a point that, whether it was a good idea in the first place, no matter, no longer matters. The issue is: What’s our posture in that part of the world going forward, and what do we do about this big bad threat of Islamic fundamentalism?
Shocking, wouldn’t you agree? A member of the liberal media stating that whether the war was a good idea no longer matters? And that the real issue is what our posture should be moving forward, especially as it pertains to Islamic fundamentalism?
What got into Gregory this morning to be so rational and impartial? Was it Mother’s Day?
Regardless, Gregory was far from done:
I mean, in some ways, that’s what Rudy Giuliani wants to talk about exclusively. He doesn’t want to talk about the war ‘cause he’s so associated with 9/11. But that’s what neither side is really talking about a lot which is: What is chapter two? That’s gonna be the hard part, and that’s what’s really going to define this election.
Matthews then asked Gregory what chapter two was:
Chapter two is: What are we, do we have troops over there, who do we take on next, what do we do about a nuclear Iran, and what do we do in general about the next phase of Islamic fundamentalism? How do we transform the region? George W. Bush did not get that part of it wrong, that the region needed to be transformed after 9/11. It’s the manner in which he did it that was so heavily scrutinized.
Wow. Absolutely, 100 percent correct.
I really love Mother’s Day. How ‘bout you?
As an aside, this wasn’t the first time Gregory has defended President Bush when not reporting specifically for NBC News. NewsBusters reported a similar occurrence last September when he was Bill Maher’s guest on HBO’s “Real Time.”
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
David!!!!
May 13, 2007 - 13:01 ET by NortoBeliever
I am in shock here. I have been very displeased with David as well as the rest of the MSM not reporting the news, but rather letting their own personal views become the focus of their opinions. This is a first.
I do agree with how GWB has handled the WOT and the force needs to be expanded to WWII levels of involvement across the nation. A draft would be nice, and fully bring the industrial/military complex in to let the world know we mean business.
Elect Fred Thompson in '08 to insure we get the US on track for success.
A draft is a bad idea. What
May 13, 2007 - 13:28 ET by Conservative VoiceA draft is a bad idea. What is a good idea is for the media to go pro-America like they did in WW2.
CV --gotta disagree--
May 13, 2007 - 13:53 ET by misterbillCV --gotta disagree--and you may remember I advocated the draft before. Others on this site esp. Libertarians and active service people disagree with me. Well, I have recently gotten in touch with some of my old shipmates and it has reminded me of the benefit(s) of the draft. Many of us, including me, thought about what I wanted to do in life, etc. etc. We did not look at a tour of duty as a suspension of life. Most of us looked at it as a starting point in life. Many of us (me included again) joined before we were drafted. That way we had an opportunity to serve in the branch we chose. I cannot remember one single person complaining. (Oh, there were lots of complaints--re: food , location of assignment, etc.) I can remember one of the CPO's saying, when the troops stop griping, then is when we really have a problem.
And, in spite of the potential problems expressed by active service people, I do believe that draftees served with the same performance as volunteers. I certainly will bet that as many draftees paid the supreme price as volunteers. Unfortunately, the only way to protect our Republic, at times. is through force of arms. Of course, if you prefer to see our youth continuing down the road with no sense of country, no sense of moral judgment, no sense of duty to their fellow citizens, then remain opposed to the draft. If you prefer a country where the fat cats can sit around and sneer at the military and tell lies about the volunteers intelligence and determination, continue to oppose the draft. If you want to continue with another divisive element in place in our country, why not make it an issue about what jerks those poor fools who enlist are. I do not care if it is classified as National Service or whatever appeals to you(I am sure nothing will if it is not purely voluntary). But, what the hell, the country is lost already to illegals, corrupt politicians, cheating, lying, sexually depraved ministers and priests, so why even try to feed patriotism to anyone. I guess you are right and I am incorrect. Shoot, I think I'll just start learning how to enjoy filthy rap words and how to speak Spanish. God, anything is better than being forced to support and defend your country.
Sorry, I guess I see so many advantages to reinstating the draft and most people disagree with me.
Misterbill, I disagree with
May 13, 2007 - 17:24 ET by sarcasmoMisterbill, I disagree with you, but I'll have to be honest, I just found the most powerful argument I've yet seen that you might be right in at least one sense, but no matter what, I'll never agree with those who believe that patriotism can be drafted or otherwise forced into a person.
JMR
Sarcasmo-- You are indeed a person of honor--
May 13, 2007 - 18:19 ET by misterbillSarcasmo-- You are indeed a person of honor--when you present a most successful challenge to your own position. Were you in front of me, I would raise my glass to you. Were you to be my enemy ( and I am so glad you are not), I would be facing an honorable foe. (I will raise a glass to you later-at dinner.) May I be so bold as to ask if you have served or been impressed into military service? I believe neither, for I think you would hold a different position. The key expression that comes from the article you linked is far from "mercenary". One can use the word "prostitute" as broadly as the professor used mercenary.
The real expression is "citizen soldier". I sit here an older man with some of the infirmities that come with age. If my country, through my President asked me to park these old bones in a rocking chair in the front lines or in the Green Zone, I would do it. I would do it because I am a citizen who loves this country. I would do it because every citizen in a Republic needs to be a soldier in one form or another for our Republic to survive. My life is not as precious to me as the freedoms for my children and grandchildren. I would do the same for you and your issue.
I am not a jingoist. I am not a Chauvinist. I am a citizen who loves this country and the bounty it has given me. It is dying and dying fast.The people who come here now are not coming to help build our world and maintain our strength and leadership. They are coming to escape their worlds and their restrictions.
The draft instilled a strong patriotic feeling in most of us, especially those who joined before being drafted. I had a very successful, moderately prosperous career because of my military training and because of America.
Where’s the coward that would not dare to fight for such a land? And the parent that wouldn't be honored by the sacrifice?
Sir Walter Scott & Noel Sheppard
Crap, the system just ate a
May 13, 2007 - 19:30 ET by sarcasmoCrap, the system just ate a huge reply, and I have to eat, but anyway, I've never been in the armed forces, but I've helped (and tried to help) them many times. Thanks very much for your kind words.
JMR
Misterbill, as one who was an
May 13, 2007 - 17:39 ET by AppyAmericanMisterbill, as one who was an Air Force enlistee in the mid 60s, I want to say that I totally agree with your position. I left college after my freshman year with less than average grades and was faced with a possible draft letter. I made the decision to enlist in the USAF and have never regretted it. It gave me a chance to grow up, basically be taken care of while that happened, (food, medical, housing & pay) all the while I was performing a valuable service for my country. It gave me the opportunity to travel to places I might never have seen and a marketable skill when my enlistment ended. In my opinion, it would be a great opportunity for most every young person to experience what I did. I realize that not every young person would be suited for the military but the chance to serve your country in some other capacity would do wonders for the outlooks of these young people. I'm on your side.
The 46 million veterans
May 14, 2007 - 03:06 ET by SportPoliticsI have read we had 46 million veterans, at the largest point of those who served still being US citizens/soliders.
So if I believe the oft cited pro-volunteer / bad draftee, I guess I can assume about 40 million of the "greatest generation" were the lesser than rabble I've so often heard they were, since the vast majority were drafted.
LOL - Sometimes the argument nowadays borders on the insane, even on the conservative side. It is a shame.
Yes, how can we disagree, the greatest generation were crap - drafted against their will and better that they never had served...
And worse yet, what they little were capable of then, today, they would not match up - the new transformation has made them ineligible...
Sport, are you saying that th
May 14, 2007 - 18:18 ET by Conservative VoiceSport, are you saying that the greatest generation is due in part to the draft? I do not believe that the military builds character, rather defines character already there. Fact is we were a different country back then, people wanted to serve, and the draft worked because most people were willing to serve and do their part. Sadly that isn't the case today, not does it follow basic market forces.
CV-- the efforts of boot camp training--
May 14, 2007 - 18:37 ET by misterbillCV-- the efforts of boot camp training--was to work you hard, get you tired and then try to take your individuality, peel it down a little , then help restore it as an individual yet part of the group. I mean no disrespect when I say, I doubt you will get it . You are living in an age that does not inspire respect for the team or for wholesome values. That is not directed at you. It is society in general. It is probably harder for you because you hold some of theses conservative values and do not understand why they need to be infused in others.
I have done this before --I believe it gives an example of how society has changed--
Yo, I'm makin short term goals, when the weather folds
just put away the leathers and put ice on the gold
Chilly with enough bail money to free a big willie
High stakes, I got more at stake than Philly
Shoppin sprees, copin three
Deuce fever IS's fully loaded, ah yes
bouncin in the lex luger, tires smoke like buddha
50 G's to the crap shooter, niggaz can't fade me
Chrome socks beamin
Through my perephreal I see ya schemin
Stop dreamin, I leave your body steamin
Niggaz is fiendin, what's the meanin?
I'm leanin on any nigga intervenin
with the sound of my money machine-in {*brrrr*}
My cup runneth, over with hundreds
I'm one of the best niggas that done it, six digits and runnin
Y'all niggas don't want it, I got the Godfather flow
The Don Juan DeMarco; swear to God, don't get it fucked up
Isn't that sweet???? Now I don't pretend that the jive asses will stop lisnin-ya hear?? But here's what the bad-asses of my time listened to:
She wore blue velvet
Bluer than velvet was the night
Softer than satin was the light
From the stars
She wore blue velvet
Bluer than velvet were her eyes
Warmer than May her tender sighs
Love was ours
Ours a love I held tightly
Feeling the rapture grow
Like a flame burning brightly
But when she left, gone was the glow of
Blue velvet
But in my heart there'll always be
Precious and warm, a memory
Through the years
And I still can see blue velvet
Through my tear
I know it is hard for many to understand and they may feel I belabor the point too much. My life experience says theses things you just read define the spirit and quality of the people. There are still millions, yes, I said millions of young people who just want to live a decent life with the person of their dreams. Those are the young men and women who serve us now. They don't have to listen to or like either of the music styles illustrated here, but you can bet your life any red-blooded soldier who comes home to his/her loved ones would rather slow dance than listen to filth. The military will help to make the young people the better kind of people.
Where’s the coward that would not dare to fight for such a land? And the parent that wouldn't be honored by the sacrifice?
Sir Walter Scott & Noel Sheppard
Misterbill, you should reenli
May 15, 2007 - 00:27 ET by Conservative VoiceMisterbill, you should reenlist as a recruiter :) Seriously though, I understand the psychological aspects of boot camp. With everything else, the market works...the military should be no different. We are further ahead if it isn't forced...if parents think their kids should join an academy to build character, more power to them....I do think schools would benefit if it was more structured like the military...uniforms, haircuts, and respect for authority is good. If the goal in mind is to build character than there are ways to do it without forcing people to join. I am ok with trying to convince people to join, just not under threat of prison.
Misterbill & SarcAdmitt
May 13, 2007 - 17:41 ET byMisterbill & Sarc
Admittedly i'm using this as a sounding board to flesh out some ideas so insight and feedback is appreciated
After reading MBs post i thought well Israel has compulsary military service for all. Should the US have a draft such that we always have a set not less than (pick a number) military? There would be some some increase in support for the troops as more people would know someone who was serving from all groups, neighborhoods, families etc. Comments?
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
I also wonder what it would d
May 13, 2007 - 17:53 ET by bigtimerI also wonder what it would do to help with the decrease to the gang mentality....let alone the gangs of all stripes.
Just thought I would throw that in there.
a good thought BT, if 1 out o
May 13, 2007 - 17:59 ET bya good thought BT, if 1 out of every 4 gang member served what would be the result? Of course if 60% of gang members are illegals then it doesn't work. Well what if some of the draftees are partrolling the borders and we actually enforce existing law?
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
I know one thing for sure...o
May 13, 2007 - 18:08 ET by bigtimerI know one thing for sure...our borders have to be patrolled.
Now.
Using our forces in any way will help one of our biggest problems.
Going to be interesting to see what the some of the gutless wonders in the Senate do this week.
And give them weapons with am
May 13, 2007 - 18:16 ET byAnd give them weapons with ammo
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
BT-- excellent use of our forces.
May 13, 2007 - 18:38 ET by misterbillBT-- excellent use of our forces. We then can patrol the entire border. We can reduce the illegals entry to next to none. Whoever is our President can advise/help/ cajole the Mexican governmet into entering the industrial world and creating jobs for those poor people in their own land. When they sneak into CA it's to go to Disneyworld. Better still, build one in Mexico!!
Where’s the coward that would not dare to fight for such a land? And the parent that wouldn't be honored by the sacrifice?
Sir Walter Scott & Noel Sheppard
IMO the key is for the Mexi
May 13, 2007 - 19:23 ET by sarcasmoIMO the key is for the Mexican government to leave business and people alone, and the jobs and business will then naturally come to Mexico. This is true for all those countries, because there's so much business regulation there's also huge corruption, which would be eliminated or greatly reduced with a market economy, but nobody's even used to the idea. Anyway, it's no great mystery for countries anymore how to be an economic success -- it's understanding that governments can only steal. They don't, and can't, "create jobs."
JMR
the key is for the Mexican government-
May 13, 2007 - 20:17 ET by misterbill"the key is for the Mexican government to leave business and people alone".
righteeo!! Other than regulations for safety, Mexico will grow, if businessmen are left to develop business. There is a long term interrelationship of business, government and military in Mexico. It will take a major change in attitude to accomplish it. One thing that bothers me is on recent shows where learned experts talk about the low unemployment rate in America (4.7%) and how we need Mexican workers, they never mention that Mexico has a rate of 3%. So, if I were to be a brilliant numbers man, I would ask myself, if they have such a low number, why would Mexicans have to come here? HMMM?
Do numbers lie??? Do liars use numbers?? How can this be?? Why doesn't Lou Dobbs, Bill O'Reilly,etal ever mention the low unemployment rate in Mexico??? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm?????
I am not a mathemetician nor a statistician, but we only need foreign workers when the unemployment rate is 0%. The 2006 labor force estimate is 151 million. Our 4.7% rate indicates over 7 million are out of work. So why do we need to import workers???
Bigtimer---you are thinking exactly--
May 13, 2007 - 18:25 ET by misterbillBigtimer---you are thinking exactly--the way I am thinking. Those in my barracks came from different walks and sconomic strata in life. I had never mat a black man before my service. (1951-1953) The signs were still up "Colored Drinking Fountain". IMHO, serving side by side with fellow Americans of all races, ethnicity and creeds was one of the key factors in white Americans learning that indeed all men are created equal. I made some wonderful friends.I never chose them based on anything except that we liked each other.
My platoon CPO would split the gangs up into different groups and have them compete against each other in drillinlg, softball, speed a t cleaning up the barracks and all sorts of activities where supporting your team is the greatest thing you can do. Winning these little contest gave us a great feeling.
Our loyalty was to our teammates and our Navy and our country.
Where’s the coward that would not dare to fight for such a land? And the parent that wouldn't be honored by the sacrifice?
Sir Walter Scott & Noel Sheppard
Well, do you agree with the
May 13, 2007 - 17:56 ET by sarcasmoWell, do you agree with the guy I linked-to for misterbill that a draftee army would be harder to deploy, and that might be a good thing in some presidencies? Also, I worry about the boondoggle of waste that would appear if this idea re-emerges, since the military can't and won't use all those young bodies, but SOMEBODY's gonna want-to, and that politically-connected someone is probably going to want to use/indoctrinate them in ways I dislike... And even though I've always been against the Iraq adventure, I've also always considered myself a supporter of the US military, but some obviously will disagree, and that right to disagree is part of what they're there for, in the end.
JMR
Sarc,so the thought is if eve
May 13, 2007 - 18:05 ET bySarc,
so the thought is if everyone has a dog in the fight then the fight is less likely to happen. While at the same time the undermining is less likely to happen. What about making the border patrol part of the Coast Guard?
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
I suspect many people, or a
May 13, 2007 - 19:18 ET by sarcasmoI suspect many people, or at least a few Presidents, would find that thought offensive, and I have my own "we're not slaves, the government doesn't need this" reservations, but yes. I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "undermining," but I think it's speculative to predict the psychological & societal impacts of big government jobs-programs. Besides, what about the rare sixteen year old entrepreneurs we all love, who are already a success at a very young age due to their hard work & smarts? Why should they be ripped away from their nascent capitalist enterprises and enslaved by a stupid, big government their taxes are already supporting?? As for the border patrol and Coast Guard, I'm for whatever works cheapest as long as a vestige of individual liberty is preserved. I keep saying that if Mexico would pass the '70s Hong Kong Statutes Annotated and repeal all Mexican law (and many of the Hong Kong statutes, as far as I'm concerned) they'd need a wall to keep the likes of people like sarcasmo out!!! Libertarians generally want a tall fence with a wide gate for human migration, though. Florida, for example, is too cold for me, and that's one of the reasons I'd like to move somewhere even more tropical. It would be nice if that place eventually accepted peaceful people who want to be left alone and work, so understandably I want Florida to have the same policies. It breaks my heart to see Haitians & Cubans sent back to those hellholes (which also both ought to pass some form of the Hong Kong Statutes Annotated from the late '70s) when they've risked floating over here, and regardless of what people think of immigration, I think it's safe to say they want to be here, but I really don't have the time/resources to help them.
JMR
I'm not exactly sure what you
May 13, 2007 - 19:39 ET byI'm not exactly sure what you mean by "undermining,"
what i mean is the way negative manner the MSM reports on the military and the shameless political stunts
As to some of your comments i tend to support limited govt (no national health care it will triple the cost while diminishing service; pro school vouchers etc) but for National Defense can there be any other way? I'm for individual liberty but not without responsibility.
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
botg - By God----
May 13, 2007 - 18:33 ET by misterbillbotg - By God----I think he's got it. (Not a putdown, just a joke from showbiz.)
I may shock you, but if an illegal wants to join our military and takes an oath of loyalty--and KEEPS it, he/she should be put on the citizenship list with special consideration. I emphasized the word keep because there was a recent news article about a foreign national in our military who told the interviewer he had no loyalty to America, he just wanted the paycheck and citizenship.
How does one test for that?????
In WW2 there was a flag with a star in it in every window that had a person in service. Why don't we show that pride again and issue those flags to military families. It was a blue star, but if , unfortunately, the person was killed, it was Gold star. Small comfort for the loss of a loved one, burt sorrow shared is easier to bear.
Where’s the coward that would not dare to fight for such a land? And the parent that wouldn't be honored by the sacrifice?
Sir Walter Scott & Noel Sheppard
MisterbillI think you are cor
May 13, 2007 - 18:43 ET byMisterbill
I think you are correct, and the military would be a great vetting for potential citizens. It does eliminate the whole mercenary/prostitute concern. Just one question i thought the quote was: By Jove I think he's got it!
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
By Jove---
May 13, 2007 - 19:37 ET by misterbillBy Jove---I think she's got it.
By Jove , I think you're right.
Where’s the coward that would not dare to fight for such a land? And the parent that wouldn't be honored by the sacrifice?
Sir Walter Scott & Noel Sheppard
While I agree with sarcasmo t
May 13, 2007 - 21:21 ET by Conservative VoiceWhile I agree with sarcasmo that a draft will make it harder to go to war, it will make it harder to succeed one as well. Vietnam is truth to that. Mother sheehan had a son in the military, did she become more pro-military, no. Currently there are already people serving from all groups, neighborhoods, families etc, from young men and women who volunteered. Its a powerful force to be reckoned with. We have the advantage of technology and equipment, but the people in the military are on a mission and that is more powerful. Which is why our enemies are aiming at our spirit and will.
Actually rethinking it, it wo
May 13, 2007 - 21:23 ET by Conservative VoiceActually rethinking it, it won't make us less likely to go to war...if the war isn't popular less people will join. Just like any job, when you are forced, you don't work as hard as someone who owns.
I think the problem is mister
May 13, 2007 - 21:16 ET by Conservative VoiceI think the problem is misterbill is there was a clear majority back then who were very patriotic, so it was just a matter of getting them to serve. Now there are too many hippie types, we have people fighting to take out the pledge in schools, and many other unAmerican propaganda (rap music etc). I don't think joining the military is where you learn to be patriotic. Nor do I think the military is the place for social engineering. Gangs happen because the kids don't have dads, so they look for authority and family in a gang. If the military was such a reformer, than why have people in prison, why not just have them join the army?
I much rather have schools teach kids at a young age why joining the military is a great opportunity and why they can be proud to be American, the to force people to join. I much rather see society strenghening the family (especially where it comes to fatherhood and what it means to be a man) then to have the federal government play the father role (either with welfare...ie provide, or teaching discipline, ie military). I agree that the military is a great opportunity and hope many take that opportunity. I myself have never served, but would have if health permitted. An army full of people who wish to be there is far more powerful than one that is part way commited.
CVBased on your comments you
May 13, 2007 - 21:24 ET byCV
Based on your comments you must be for school vouchers. What you say will never be implimented by the teachers union
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
lol, I am so for separation o
May 13, 2007 - 21:30 ET by Conservative Voicelol, I am so for separation of School and State
CV Hi-
May 13, 2007 - 22:34 ET by misterbillCV Hi-just on my way to bed--saw your response--
"If the military was such a reformer, than why have people in prison, why not just have them join the army? "
The objective is to get them before they commit serious crime. I submit that when they are in a group where hoodlumism has no rewards and helping your fellows can and may save your life creates an attitude that is very positive. Meeting others who do not share your gang colors, rules and other attitudes is good for the young men and women and good for America. Your common enemy is your drill sergeant or CPO. He is a friendly enemy.
My experience is that "social engineering" happens because of training and objectives that can only be achieved through teamwork.
I will waste some time on anecdotal evidence. On September 11, 2001, my son was 15 years old. The planes crashing in to the twin towers had been shown in many schools (the second crash). When I came home from work that evening, my son, who was with a couple of friends, asked if it would be possible if they could join the military. They were overwhelmed with sorrow and loaded with patriotic fervor. If you tried to get him to join today, he would think you are crazy. Take this little anecdote, ask yourself "what inspired the patriotism", "why has it gone away?". I submit to you that a group of young men in uniform whether volunteer or draftee mostly feel the same about protecting their country. And if every young American had an obligation to serve his/her country in some capacity, I sincerely believe that would raise the patriotic spirit of most of them, There will always be "bad guys". There will always be shirkers. The good news is that shirkers are usually caught and have to do more than if they had done their original duty.This part I post in challenge to your last sentence. If the young men in 'Nam had seen their American people rooting for them to win, they would not be the haunted men of post-war 'Nam. Of course there would be some, war is definitely hell, especially for those in the front. Society will be as weak in strenghtening the family as it is in creating volunteers for the military. You will not be able to dissuade some young man or woman from enjoying a life of hook-ups, meth, rap and all the other tripe that is going on in this country. I submit, respectfully that you do not have a clue as to the positive influence serving our country has on most young people, especially when they get the respect they deserve from those of us at home.
I know this much, and I don't
May 13, 2007 - 22:49 ET by Conservative VoiceI know this much, and I don't mean to demean your service misterbill...service of any kind is good for the soul, but it must be done without force or grumbling...because if we are murmuring while doing service we receive no blessings, and harden our hearts even more. You served our country in time of need and I salute you for it...though you were drafted you quickly became a volunteer and owned the war as your own.
You are right in saying that the media and people help drum up the patriotic spirit...hence my point, your son at the moment of seeing his country in need and his countrymen joining a unifying cause was willing to go in uniform. Now if he were forced to go to Iraq, you coudn't claim the same feeling...in fact a lot of energy would have to be spent to convince him to commit himself fully versus the energy at the point where he was begging to go. Slave labor < Paid labor < Owner's labor. The draft is akin to slave labor...you will do what your master the government tells you or be put in prison or killed. Paid labor is akin to those who volunteer for the benefits. Owners labor are those who are fully committed to the mission and own it completely. Those are the ones that will be heros, the high risk takers, the ones who will win.
CV I can see that--
May 13, 2007 - 22:59 ET by misterbillCV I can see that--you are as sure you are right as I am. I disagree ,but I respect your position. I can honestly see the reasoning of your thoughts. it is just, again, I believe that if you put us together and give us a common goal, protecting our country, it is a seed of goodness that usually sprouts into a full grown emotion of patriotism. If you read my tagline, you can see my feelings. I did not feel that way before I went in the service. Not just because the service changed my mind--far simpler than that--I simply did not think about it either way until I was involved. Hence, I hope you can understand why I believe the draft is such a good thing.
Going by life experience, my best friend is 8 years younger than I. He never served. He holds very different attitudes than I do about a lot of things in life.
I believe that, in general, when you are given things, you never learn to fully appreciate them. When you earn things, you know their true value.
Where’s the coward that would not dare to fight for such a land? And the parent that wouldn't be honored by the sacrifice?
Sir Walter Scott & Noel Sheppard
and the self-respect they dev
May 13, 2007 - 22:52 ET byMBill
and the self-respect they develope from being given and meeting challenges they would never otherwise encounter
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
botg amen to that---
May 13, 2007 - 23:07 ET by misterbillbotg Amen to that. I was a kind of a goof off. I somehow managed to NOT get a scholarship. (I had two opportunities.) I listened to my Dad and joined the Navy, where he felt I would learn a trade. I turned down OCS (on the advice of some sage 17 and 18 year old companions). I turned down an offer of four years in a prestigious Ivy college, because those same wise individuals told me that I would wind up having to spend most of my life in the Navy. That made it instantly undesirable. Why?? God help me, I don't know. A few years later it sounded darn fine to me. In spite of all that, I was trained in Electronics and wound up working over 40 years in computers. I also made mistakes and through them, grew. I learned to appreciate my Mom and Dad as I never had before. I made some wrong decisions. I learned that I had to suck it up because they were MY decisions. It took a while but eventually I developed self-respect and some confidence. I came out a man.
Where’s the coward that would not dare to fight for such a land? And the parent that wouldn't be honored by the sacrifice?
Sir Walter Scott & Noel Sheppard
Goodnight Mister BSupreme Cou
May 13, 2007 - 23:09 ET byGoodnight Mister B
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
bon soir, bono notte, buenos noches
May 13, 2007 - 23:11 ET by misterbillGood night to you too, fellow traveller. Pleasant dreams.
Gregory
May 13, 2007 - 13:27 ET by pocomocoNBC’s Cheap White House correspondent David Gregory, having momentarily awakened from his Bush Delusional Syndrome, actually had a moment of enlightenment today. It’s kinda’ a breathe of fresh air. Imagine, a reporter thinking rationally.
But not to worry, because it won’t be long before Gregory reverts back to his ignominious ways. After all, where will he get the sound bites he needs for his TV show.
I think we should applaud Gre
May 13, 2007 - 15:07 ET by KC MulvilleI think we should applaud Gregory. When they get it wrong, we go after them. When they get it right, we should encourage it.
However, it does raise a question. If the MSM actually understands what’s really going on, why do they report it the way they do? I mean, even if the administration played this perfectly, we would still need years of patience. Terrorism works when the public reacts against violence to change policy. How the media presents the violence is crucial. The MSM should report the violence, but present it for what it is: an attempt to change policy. Instead of keeping that perspective, our MSM did the opposite. They magnified every violent act and led the chorus to change policy. They encouraged the violence by giving terrorists exactly what they wanted. You can only defeat terrorism if you prove that these acts of violence will not change your policy. Terrorism is a tactic, and to defeat it, you have to show that it won’t work. Yet the MSM and the Democrats have been demanding policy change as soon as they could get away with it.
Look at what happened right after Saddam fell. There were reports that the Iraqi museum was looted, and that precious historic artifacts were left unprotected. Those reports turned out to be false, but the bell had been rung. Soon the reports were that Baghdad was in chaos. When we really needed the Iraqi people to trust us, instead these false reports convinced the Iraqis that we were going to allow anarchy. Instead of patience, the MSM reported chaos. At every moment we needed a broader perspective, the MSM exploited and sensationalized.
What scares me about Gregory’s comment is that the MSM knew what was happening, but when we needed patience and perspective, they reported anarchy and chaos. And the MSM knew what they were doing, and did it anyway.
The media are not stupid. The
May 13, 2007 - 17:04 ET by pocomocoThe media are not stupid. They know exactly what’s going on at all times. They do, however, have political agendas to push which means that reality takes second place, if not last.
The media have set themselves up as the fourth branch of government leaning towards its Democrat side because those who tend to go into the media have a social conscience – so they say. It should be of no surprise, therefore, that the we get the kind of one-sided news coverage we see on a daily basis.
There is, however, a light at the end of the tunnel and its called failure as subscribers, investors, and advertisers are leaving them at unprecedented rates The media having long ago reneged on their charter to ‘report’ the news have become nothing more than a trite political tool.
How the media presents the vi
May 13, 2007 - 17:14 ET byHow the media presents the violence is crucial. The MSM should report the violence, but present it for what it is: an attempt to change policy. Instead of keeping that perspective, our MSM did the opposite. They magnified every violent act and led the chorus to change policy. They encouraged the violence by giving terrorists exactly what they wanted
KC excellent insight and a clear concise summary
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
I watched this show this morn
May 13, 2007 - 16:53 ET by bigtimerI watched this show this morning and was once again pleasantly surprised by Gregory.
Can't quite figure out what has come over him, or what his aim or goal is?
I hope it is really him, just being him...and speaking the truth from his view...for a change.
That is pretty shocking that
May 13, 2007 - 21:09 ET by GregEThat is pretty shocking that Gregory would get it so right in this interview. Where has he been on it in the past? And even a bigger question, where will he be on it tomorrow? Were these correct words just something he made up today? Likely not. He's likely had these thoughts and will likely have them next week and beyond. They're pretty common sensical, so I wonder is this the last we've heard this from Gregory? Will the whacko libs pound him for speaking common sense?
Those wanting us to withdraw from Iraq ASAP won't answer the question about what happens when we do leave. But then again, the media won't ask them. Seems like it would be the #1 most obvious question to ask, and ask often, and ask of everyone who is calling for withdrawl.
I don't find it shocking
May 14, 2007 - 03:36 ET by SportPoliticsI don't find it shocking, Gregory has obviously seen the depth of the Pelosi and Reid crowd, and realized he and his butts are on the line.
I'd bet the lib reporters are going to be a bit shocked and scared that Pelosi's idea of defense will be submitting in a maple leaf scarf to the terror leader of nations, like she did in Syria, and wanted to already, right after that, in Iran.
When the reporters finally don't have just GWB and republicans to blame, they're going to have to take a "where's the plan" stance, at least for a few seconds, to try to seem legtimate,since their dem allies have been whining about GWB not having a plan and not changing directions but being stubbourn.
So, the tiny inkling that the region should be changed,is merely a call for the demo pelo paltalk alliance to get ready to get busy and bustle over there with some glad handing and helpful Hints from Peloise.
Of course, deep down inside, they know the score about what goes on over there, the hundreds and thousands of news reports they canned and kept under the radar for years now, are constantly nagging away at their inner demon helper. It has to slip through every once in a while.
Let's face it, when it's a jaw dropper that mr lib reporter doesn't actually lie his yakk yakk off against GWB twice in the matter a year or two, I'd say there's no chance in HE double toothpicks he got some sort of sudden revelation and enlightenment.
On the older Maher link, he was getting attacked - for the press not asking the right questions,and of course, just like a lying politician, he claimed the press did ask all the questions and is asking all the questions. So, we get the usual, the one side of the same side sneering, and the other half sneering back, since they both weren't directly focused on Bush bashing that very second. I'd bet the green room beforehand gave Greggie a little hint he would be attacked, so he made sure there was a reason for it.
I'm sure he can use it as a permanent lifetime claim that he was never biased against GWB, and certainly 99% of the people will believe it so it seems.
Allit proved to me was he was playing games and lying most of the time, and he knew it, and he would surely play games and lie for himself, as the older Maher clip proves, and he is more than a stupid, uninformed idiot, not worthy of the post, and I was convinced of that at the Rose Garden dip-inquisition he levelled, where he asked GWB what he would do if Iran and DPRK jacked a few cia agents and did what we do to captures, to them.
We all know what is done already. Sleep deprivation,air conditioning and heating, loud music, an occassional slap across the face(although I believe that last one was a no-no yet confirmed during riots and shellings), and now the most productive yet cancelled - the greatest ever - waterboarding.
So, instead of beating them senseless, pulling their teeth out, ripping off their fingernails, slicing of their scrotums, and ramming pipes up their backsides, tearing their ears off, hooking up the mobile phone and cranking up the power(thanks John Kerry nice 30 year smear extension)we have what we all know was the validated extent of it.
I guess drunken puffy jaw smarmy smirkface gregory never had a clue as to what Iran or DPRK did or does to captured enemies, but boy if there were any renditions to either of those places we could be sure it was unspeakable razor blade horror and flesh torn terror administered by the secret cia of the USA, according to them, of course. And according to smarmboy, if "they did do it" -( implying they never would and never have ) he queried what would President Bush think. I remember the answer - " The world would be a better place if they only did what we do." Smarmboy didn't like that answer.
I can't stand the idiot press. Blind, lame, morons, with no information, and pure speculation, unwilling to accept what was found out, and always certain some dark secrets are kept out of their reach, and if only they could make those in the know slip up and reveal them, and by golly they will never stop trying, because they know full well how they themselves have snowballed and lied to the American public, and gotten away with, for decades, so - of course GWB is doing it, he could never be a better man than they... so they think.