• Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
New posts

Bob

SoWal Insider
Nov 16, 2004
10,366
1,391
O'Wal
We Have the Moral High Ground

By Cindy Sheehan

Sunday, August 23, 2009 at 01:14 PM

We Have the Moral High Ground

I remember back in the good ol' days of 2005 and 2006 when being against the wars was not only politically correct, but it was very popular. I remember receiving dozens of awards, uncountable accolades and even was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.

"Hate begets hate; violence begets violence; toughness begets a greater toughness. We must meet the forces of hate with the power of love ... " Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. 1958 "There comes a time when silence is betrayal ... " Dr. King, 1967
Those were the halcyon days of the anti-war movement before the Democrats took over the government (off of the backs of the anti-war movement) and it became anathema to be against the wars and I became unpopular on all sides. I guess at that point, I could have gone with the flow and pretended to support the violence so I could remain popular, but I think I have to fiercely hold on to my core values whether I am "liked" or not.
Killing is wrong no matter if it is state-sanction murder or otherwise. Period. Not too much more to say on that subject, except what I quote above from Dr. King.
However, while the so-called left is obsessed over supporting a very crappy Democratic health care plan, people in far away countries are being deprived of their health and very lives by the Obama Regime's continuation of Bush's ruinous foreign policy.
I was never dismayed when the so-called right attacked me and called me names for protesting Bush. However, something inside me gets a little sick when I hear people who claim to be peace activists supporting the Obama Administration's foreign policy, a policy that is not like Bush's in the fact that it's much worse.
I have been called a "racist" from the so-called left. In these people's opinion, I was totally justified in protesting Bush, but I am a racist for protesting the same policies under Obama. When I opposed Bush's policies, I was called traitor, anti-American, anti-Semitic, and other names I cannot print. Name-calling is a great way to shut down critical thinking and discussion. And, not to mention, I think the murder of innocent life in the Iraq-Af-Pak regions is racist and morally corrupt.
There are many people in this country who oppose Obama because they're racist, but I am not one of them. I oppose Obama's policies because they are wrong ... again, period!
One cannot obfuscate when innocent lives are being destroyed, here and abroad. We cannot allow "political reality" to get in the way of morality. Human sacrifice is not worth the political reality. Violence, killing, war and more war are NEVER the solution to any problem. Period.
If Obama has violent shadow forces around him pulling him in the direction of violence, which begets more violence and more resistance; then we, especially people in the peace or anti-war movements need to gather and organize to pull him in the direction towards peaceful conflict resolution and solutions that aren't based on exploiting people's fears, anxieties or ignorance.
I am going to Martha's Vineyard because we have the moral high ground. The war supporters aren't going to protest Obama's wars. They are strangely silent over his foreign policy, unless they are praising it.
I am going to Martha's Vineyard because someone has to speak for the babies of Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan that do not deserve the horrible fate that has been handed to them by the US Military Industrial Complex. The voiceless need a voice, and even if I am called every name in the book by all sides, I will speak up for them.
I am going to Martha's Vineyard because so many people have been blinded to the fact that the system has momentum that rolls on and over and around no matter who is the titular head of the system.
Let's just pretend that elections are fair in this country and my candidate, Cynthia McKinney, won for president. If she wasn't able to rein in the systemic violence, then I would be going wherever she vacationed to protest her policies, too. I guess at that point, I would not only be called "racist," but I would be called a "self-hating female."
In a recent conversation someone was trying to convince me that I should not be so stridently opposed to Obama's policies and I responded that today 75 people were killed and 300 people were wounded in a bomb blast in Iraq and 26 mostly women and children were killed in a wedding party in Afghanistan this week and she said: "Oh, that wouldn't be acceptable if it happened here."
And that's the problem: it's not acceptable if it happens anywhere, to anybody, no matter who is President of the USA.
Not only is the death toll mounting for innocent civilians but also is once again climbing for our troops.
While the "festivities" are occurring on Martha's Vineyard next week, there are families all over the world who will never again be able to fully feel festive. Ahhhh ... everyone should just stand down, relax and sip an Obamarita on the beach ... Hope reigns once again in The Empire.
And, yes, we are going to Martha's Vineyard to get attention. We vehemently want to call attention to all of the points I have made above.
Even though there is a small anti-war, peace movement in this country, there still is one and this movement has the moral high ground and punditry, personal attacks, glitzy marketing, or "political realities won't drown us out.
Members of Dr. King's own caucus tried to convince him not to publicly speak out against the Vietnam war, and that's when he delivered his brilliant Beyond Vietnam speech at the Riverside Church in NYC exactly one year before he was assassinated. That speech was in response to the critics. Dr. King took the moral high ground when he said: "There comes a time when silence is betrayal."
That time has now come, once again. By our silence we are betraying humanity. Love the President or hate him, or anywhere in between, but we must speak out loudly and without any timidity against the institutional violence of the US Empire.


She continues to prove my point. The left is pissed now. It wasn't about protesting the war, it was about hating Bush. Politicizing your support for the military is the lowest form of treason in my opinion, and those guilty of doing so should be ashamed of themselves. I am not accusing the entire left here, but it sure seems the left and the lib media sure got quiet on this topic all of a sudden back in January.

you are forgetting who started the war. he's sitting in texas, staying very, very quiet like the kid who ate the pie.
 

Geo

Beach Fanatic
Dec 24, 2006
2,740
2,795
Santa Rosa Beach, FL
She continues to prove my point. The left is pissed now. It wasn't about protesting the war, it was about hating Bush. Politicizing your support for the military is the lowest form of treason in my opinion, and those guilty of doing so should be ashamed of themselves. I am not accusing the entire left here, but it sure seems the left and the lib media sure got quiet on this topic all of a sudden back in January.

I don't think this is a left vs. right issue as you and Cindy summarize it. It's not an Obama supporters vs. Bush supporters or Bush haters vs. Obama haters.

Bin Laden and his fanatics flew jets into the WTC buildings. This attack in the hearts and minds of Americans warranted a military retaliation. And since it was Afghanistan who was harboring Bin Laden- guess where we thought the retaliation would take place. I don't personally know many Americans who protested going into Afghanistan. Do you? Does Cindy? Was she against it? We have been "not against" commiting troops to Afghanistan all along...

So Bush decides to invade Iraq. Folks weren't protesting in masses. Some doubted the decision to invade but on the whole Americans went along with it initially (still high from 9-11). It was only when it became clear that the intelligence was faulty, when American casualties began to add up, when it seemed that Iraq was being mismanaged and it was a quagmire that the masses began to protest. At that point I don't recall Americans being against Afghanistan. They took issue with Iraq.

So Obama says Iraq was a distraction and that we took our eyes off the ball in Afghanistan. Americans don't seem to disagree. Obama commits to getting our troops out of Iraq. He gets elected, presents a timetable and so far seems to be following through. And the fact that Bush gambled and dedicated more resources to Iraq (the surge) seems to have worked. So- the net result is that folks aren't up in arms about Iraq anymore.

Where in this story were Americans against Afghanistan? They weren't. So saying that we aren't against Afghanistan now isn't a result of left vs. right, hatring or loving bush/Obama.

:dunno:
 
Last edited:

Geo

Beach Fanatic
Dec 24, 2006
2,740
2,795
Santa Rosa Beach, FL
mtlinscomb,

I'm not arguing with you as a lefty or an Obama supporter. I am (IMHO) objectively reporting on what has transpired. If you do not believe I have presented an accurate view of American support (or lack thereof) then please present your own.

You and Cindy saying that there is no American outrage over Afghanistan is true. And you and Cindy saying there should be outrage might be true as well. But your reasons as to why there is no outrage are off base and seem to ignore the larger story.
 

mtlinscomb

Beach Fanatic
Apr 1, 2009
343
109
Houston, TX
you are forgetting who started the war. he's sitting in texas, staying very, very quiet like the kid who ate the pie.

You are confused, Bob, like most libs, as he is sitting in a cave in Pakistan twirling his beard...or are you one of those GW is the dumbest man alive yet he also engineered 9/11 types?
 

scooterbug44

SoWal Expert
May 8, 2007
16,706
3,339
Sowal
Sheehan makes some valid points, then TOTALLY loses me when she starts talking about Cynthia McKinney being president.

Seriously, if you look in the dictionary under "wack-a-doodle nutjob" you will see a picture of McKinney.
 

mtlinscomb

Beach Fanatic
Apr 1, 2009
343
109
Houston, TX
mtlinscomb,

I'm not arguing with you as a lefty or an Obama supporter. I am (IMHO) objectively reporting on what has transpired. If you do not believe I have presented an accurate view of American support (or lack thereof) then please present your own.

You and Cindy saying that there is no American outrage over Afghanistan is true. And you and Cindy saying there should be outrage might be true as well. But your reasons as to why there is no outrage are off base and seem to ignore the larger story.

You see my reasons for the lack of outrage as off base and ignoring a larger story, but I disagree. I'm personally happy to see the lack of outrage...it's about f'n time. That outrage over the last 8 years should have been channeled into support for the troops in a war that our Congress overwhelmingly voted in support of. But out of hatred for W, a significant percentage of the left, members of Congress, and the media that represents their side of the aisle, took their rhetoric to the point of what I consider to be treasonous. Our current President ripped the military for killing women and babies, and his supporters cheered along with him. There have already been a few instances where he has done the same in Afghanistan, only noone is trumpeting these atrocities. The media would love nothing more than for Obama to succeed in his portion of this war on terror, yet their rooting against the former President couldn't have been more apparent. This exact attitude is what I have experienced since January with most libs I encounter regularly. You might be in a different boat, and I hope sincerely that you are in what you have experienced. Here is my simple way of putting it. Our military is our team. No matter my feelings for the coach, I will always support our team. My experience is the right follows suit with their support, no matter the coach. The left, however, seems to support their team when they like the coach, but if they hate the coach they like to badmouth the coach, the game, and even sometimes the team, not knowing what level of damage it is doing to the players. Might not be the best example, but just my take.
 

Bob

SoWal Insider
Nov 16, 2004
10,366
1,391
O'Wal
You see my reasons for the lack of outrage as off base and ignoring a larger story, but I disagree. I'm personally happy to see the lack of outrage...it's about f'n time. That outrage over the last 8 years should have been channeled into support for the troops in a war that our Congress overwhelmingly voted in support of. But out of hatred for W, a significant percentage of the left, members of Congress, and the media that represents their side of the aisle, took their rhetoric to the point of what I consider to be treasonous. Our current President ripped the military for killing women and babies, and his supporters cheered along with him. There have already been a few instances where he has done the same in Afghanistan, only noone is trumpeting these atrocities. The media would love nothing more than for Obama to succeed in his portion of this war on terror, yet their rooting against the former President couldn't have been more apparent. This exact attitude is what I have experienced since January with most libs I encounter regularly. You might be in a different boat, and I hope sincerely that you are in what you have experienced. Here is my simple way of putting it. Our military is our team. No matter my feelings for the coach, I will always support our team. My experience is the right follows suit with their support, no matter the coach. The left, however, seems to support their team when they like the coach, but if they hate the coach they like to badmouth the coach, the game, and even sometimes the team, not knowing what level of damage it is doing to the players. Might not be the best example, but just my take.
so who started this redneck bar fight of a war? wasn't the phrase "wanted dead or alive"? it must have been the left wingers because things haven't turned out to well, have they?
 

mtlinscomb

Beach Fanatic
Apr 1, 2009
343
109
Houston, TX
so who started this redneck bar fight of a war? wasn't the phrase "wanted dead or alive"? it must have been the left wingers because things haven't turned out to well, have they?

I guess that all depends on your own personal definition of the word "well" is. I'm assuming you would have preferred the current strategy of a Middle East apology tour following 9/11. To each their own.
 

Bob

SoWal Insider
Nov 16, 2004
10,366
1,391
O'Wal
I guess that all depends on your own personal definition of the word "well" is. I'm assuming you would have preferred the current strategy of a Middle East apology tour following 9/11. To each their own.
bombing fort sumter was another fight the rednecks could not finish. southerners love to start the fighting, but you never can't quite finish because your cause is wrong.
 

Geo

Beach Fanatic
Dec 24, 2006
2,740
2,795
Santa Rosa Beach, FL
You see my reasons for the lack of outrage as off base and ignoring a larger story, but I disagree. I'm personally happy to see the lack of outrage...it's about f'n time. That outrage over the last 8 years should have been channeled into support for the troops in a war that our Congress overwhelmingly voted in support of. But out of hatred for W, a significant percentage of the left, members of Congress, and the media that represents their side of the aisle, took their rhetoric to the point of what I consider to be treasonous. Our current President ripped the military for killing women and babies, and his supporters cheered along with him. There have already been a few instances where he has done the same in Afghanistan, only noone is trumpeting these atrocities. The media would love nothing more than for Obama to succeed in his portion of this war on terror, yet their rooting against the former President couldn't have been more apparent. This exact attitude is what I have experienced since January with most libs I encounter regularly. You might be in a different boat, and I hope sincerely that you are in what you have experienced. Here is my simple way of putting it. Our military is our team. No matter my feelings for the coach, I will always support our team. My experience is the right follows suit with their support, no matter the coach. The left, however, seems to support their team when they like the coach, but if they hate the coach they like to badmouth the coach, the game, and even sometimes the team, not knowing what level of damage it is doing to the players. Might not be the best example, but just my take.

I heard about people calling our troops babykillers and throwing things at them- in 1969...

I'm pretty sure I know/run around with more liberal types than you do. And most (if not all of them) are able to separate their feelings for the coach from their feelings for the players. Do they cheer when people rip soldiers who kill innocents? Yes. But they do not judge all for the bad behavior of a few. And they are grateful to our troops for their service...

We'd all be better off without the "us against them" political ideology. You'd be better off without the sweeping generalizations about people who disagree with you.
 
Last edited:
New posts


Shop SoWal Photos

Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter