WTF?

Via atrios:

Staff Sgt. Jason Rivera, 26, a Marine recruiter in Pittsburgh, went to the home of a high school student who had expressed interest in joining the Marine Reserve to talk to his parents. It was a large home in a well-to-do suburb north of the city. Two American flags adorned the yard. The prospect's mom greeted him wearing an American flag T-shirt. "I want you to know we support you," she gushed.

Rivera soon reached the limits of her support.

"Military service isn't for our son. It isn't for our kind of people," she told him.

Excuse me, but that disgusts me.

•  What kind of peoples is she? n/t

  by Alohaleezy on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 07:49:11 PM PDT

  •  The kind...

    who proudly professes her support for the war, vilifies those who oppose it as anti-American and then runs for cover the minute the war has any tangible relationship to her flag filled lawn world.  

    by Stevo on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 07:53:00 PM PDT

    •  Precisely...

      ...she supports George W. Bush and his policies, so why should her family have to make any sacrifices? Isn't that for the people who lost the election? You know, the ones that aren't as patriotic or as well off as her family is?

      by Alumbrados on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 07:55:36 PM PDT

      •  Oddly, they don't even think that

        after all, we are quiche-eating 'Jean' kerry supporters.  They can't even make the sort of logical construct you have spelled out.  It's just too complicated for their little tiny minds.  All they know is it's a dirty job and someone esle has got to do it.

        by NYFM on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 06:13:01 AM PDT

    •  I bet

      That their SUV is covered with all kinds of magenetic ribbons too.

      by UndercoverRxer on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 07:57:29 PM PDT

      •  I must be a patriot

        My car's got a flag on its ass!
        

        by bleeding blue on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 10:18:10 PM PDT

      •  Magnetic ribbons

        I missed the memo that said only BUSH SUPPORTERS could display magnetic ribbons giving support to the troups.  Using this argument gives credance to the idea that ONLY people who support Bush and the war support the troops! I actually believe that displaying a flag or a car ribbon can say just the opposite of what this administration stands for.  

        by Dancer on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 07:52:01 AM PDT

        •  Yes, it can.

          Unfortunately, it does not.  I'd suggest we adopt another "I support the troops, not the war" icon for our vehicles.  U.S. Army Recruiting Command's colors are bright yellow and black.  A black and yellow striped ribbon with the Army logo at the tip, and the caption, "Support the war?  Help fight it!" and the URL http://www.goarmy.com.  It might be a conversation starter.

          by republicans are idiots on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 08:39:23 AM PDT

        •  I don't have a ribbon on my car...

          ...precisely BECAUSE it might be construed as support for the war or support for Bush.  And while it may not be true in every case, when I see one of those ribbons, I make that knee-jerk inference every time.

          by Vagabond57 on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 09:41:26 AM PDT

        •  Actually, I consider a Bush sticker and a

          Support Our Troops magnet on the same car as as hypocritical as can be.

          by proudVet on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 11:21:00 AM PDT

        •  I did visibility for Kerry on Nov 2

          and we elicited several honks of approval from cars with ribbons.

          by angryandy on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 01:05:13 PM PDT

    •  Is this really apparent from the article?

      I don't mean to be obtuse.  I just think this article (and by association this diary) is rife with suggestion and extremely unclear.  Big fucking deal.  We know the attitude and hypocrisy hinted at here exists; in what way is this damning or illuminating?

      I support the troops too.  If I had a son of enlistment age, you'd have to go through me to get at him to serve in this criminal clusterfuck of a war.  I might not phrase it this way, but who's to say she did, either?

      by The Termite on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 07:58:46 PM PDT

      •  Your kind

        don't serve?

        by Armando on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:03:31 PM PDT

        •  Oh, please

          That's not what I was saying and you know it.

          You frontpaged a big "so what" of a diary.  Of course the rich in this country serve disproportionately.  Of course they feel entitled to have the disadvantaged sacrifice for them.  And this is news how?

          by The Termite on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:06:08 PM PDT

          •  This is a so what diary?

            I so beg to differ.

            It is a very big deal IMO.

            by Armando on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:10:28 PM PDT

            •  Yes

              It's a huge issue because it speaks to the detached mentality that leads us to war.  Easy to pontificate about the necessity for war when you have no personal stake.  This is why I would love it(never happen) for a reporter to ask Bush why his daughters haven't enlisted- given the moral necessity, freedom, honor and all.  It speaks to hypocrisy in the starkest terms.

              by Stevo on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:14:54 PM PDT

              •  The starkest terms?

                No.

                The starkest terms are things like a feller in the Oval Office who went AWOL sending children to their death.

                The starkest terms are things like Cheney, who had "other priorities" during Vietnam, engineering a war for purposes of profiteering.

                Et cetera.

                The starkest terms are not a lady in a doorway in a tony Pittsburgh suburb allegedly insinuating her boy is too privileged to serve.

                by The Termite on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:18:23 PM PDT

              •  Alexander the Great

                In ancient times, and even in some not so ancient, leaders LED the troops into battle. I think that there would be a lot fewer wars if our leaders had to be at the front lines, instead of behind a desk talking about casualties in a detached cold-hearted manner. As a matter of fact, why not petition Congress to enact a law stating that anyone VOTING for WAR must also fight in it, including themselves. We can always elect more Congressmen, and a new President if they become casualties.
                

                by dwd413 on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 07:45:03 AM PDT

                •  I never liked this line of thinking.

                  Sure, our histories and mythologies of bold leaders always represent them as charging into battle.  I don't, however, think it's a realistic ideal.  I don't want my diplomats and legislators to be warriors.  I want them to be mature, thoughtful, and well-educated.  On the same token, I hate when every election cycle the issue of whether or not a candidate has fought in Vietnam comes up.  Who cares?  Are you only a worthy citizen if you sign up for war?  This line of thinking is ridiculous.

                  Also, I am more frightened of the zealot who believes in his cause so much that he would go to the front-lines.  At least in politics, you can cut bait if things go too wrong (well, maybe not our current administration).  For a true-believer, however, they will not give up for anything.

                  by Naso on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 03:07:34 PM PDT

            •  What is a big deal?

              That a rich lady in Pittsburgh is alleged by a feature reporter to have said that "her kind of people" don't serve in the military, when we don't even know except for the reporter's pre-established context that she is rich what she might have meant by that?  My God.  We need to find this woman.  We need to find her, and ask her what she meant by that.  And if it's what we think she meant by that (that rich people don't serve in this war), then by God, this is the proof we need to...well, I'm not sure what, but it's HUGE!

              Come on.  You're right about one thing: assuming that everyone who's assuming is assuming correctly, it's disgusting.  Is it news?  Does it in any way provide leverage?  Is it a story with legs?  Or is it just another of a million windmills that feels vaguely nice to tilt against?

              Explain to me what I'm missing, besides, "sigh, typical Republicans."

              by The Termite on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:15:47 PM PDT

              •  Well

                I don't want to fight with you but I see the story as demonstrating that this woman's attitude is not emblematic of the very type of attitude that allowed the Debacle to occur, the "it doesn't require a sacrifice from me and mine so go get em" attitude that has led us where we are today.

                 

                by Armando on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:19:59 PM PDT

                •  I agree

                  It is emblematic.

                  Along with thousands of other things.

                  Forgive me, Armando...I'm a little pissy this evening and I was hoping for something a little more meaty, I guess.

                  by The Termite on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:22:18 PM PDT

                  •  See

                    I think this is, in real terms, the meatiest post I have posted in some time.

                    It cuts to the heart of the problem.

                    We really disagree on this.

                    But I know your heart is in the right place so no need to belabor the point.

                    by Armando on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:26:16 PM PDT

                    •  Agreed!

                      And you have identified the problem (or maybe I should say disconnect from reality) that so many of those so-called war supporters have.  Specifically, that they perceive themselves as too priveleged to do anything other than mouth gop bs as opposed to acting on what they believe.  If that woman really supported what the actions of the troops and the present adminstration, she would have encouraged her son to enlist!  But, no, she's too good for that, due to her socio-economic status.  So the burden of doing the actual fighting falls to someone else!

                      by Street Kid on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:37:25 PM PDT

                  •  I'm with ya.

                    The thing itself is no big deal.  And while, yes, it's a nice crystallization of a certian kind of hypocrisy, it's just something someone said.  It just doesn't rise to the level of outrage for me.

                    I go to Armando for real outrage, man.  This is empty calories.

                    by loopster on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 10:23:21 PM PDT

              •  Jimreyn

                Why don't you sack up and argue your point instead of throwing a 1 at me?

                by The Termite on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:40:33 PM PDT

                •  1 granted!

                  For shameless ratings-moaning.

                  by EconAtheist on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 11:56:45 PM PDT

                  •  Oh, blow me

                    All I was doing was suggesting he might want to -- gee, I don't know -- actually articulating a fucking opinion instead of hiding behind a bullshit number.  How fucking lame it is to pull shit like this with someone who takes the time to articulate their point of view.  I will never stop calling sissy twerps like this to the mat.  I don't care how many 1s you throw at me, jackass.

                    by The Termite on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 06:18:52 PM PDT

              •  This kind of story

                is ageless.  140-some years ago, "her kind of people" bought surrogates to do their fighting for them.  

                Nowadays the arrangement is a little less frank.

                Why is it important?  First of all, see how shallow and blithe her dimestore patriotism is.  That same mentality got thousands of the children of the "little people" killed in Vietnam.  When war hysteria is thick, we could all use a reminder--before we do something rash, such as give a chimp carte blanche--of how ginned up and insincere it all is.

                Secondly, we are Democrats.  We are supposed to stand for the "little people," be utilitarian . . . and this is class warfare, because too few people have too goddamn much.  

                Someday Betty Burbs and "her kind of people" are going to have to step aside, take a cut, share the wealth.  Lest we have any compunctions about afflicting the comfortable, we need to remember that Betty thinks it's okay for lower income children to die in her children's stead.  As does President Bush, she probably has some Calvinist delusions of deserving what she has, and may even see the soldiers dying as members of some degenerate trailer nation that deserves its ill fortune for having been born in disfavor.  One never knows what the rationales are.

                As Democrats, it is our duty to remember her words and do our best to make her life a little less comfortable, so, I don't know . . . we can all have healthcare, maybe?  

                by rhubarb on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 09:43:27 PM PDT

                •  Or if they did serve

                  they bought a commission. They were automatic officers with training or without, sitting on their pretty horses with their swords. They weren't the grunt footsoldier with a musket.

                  by mirrim on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 10:18:25 PM PDT

                •  More dots to connect

                  This story, Cindy Sheehan's story, the Philly cop's story . . . I think any illustration of the war that appears in the context of everyday people is a big step closer to outing this travesty. The weekly croaking of Rumsfeld the Frog or the intermittent wandering stammer of the Village President is mind-numbing and distracting to the point brilliance on their part. But stories like this definitely serve the purpose of making people think about the RE-A-LI-TY (think of Bush's phoneticism) of this war.

                  Keep it real Armando.

                  by KOTCrum on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 04:32:59 AM PDT

              •  adsf

                And if it's what we think she meant by that (that rich people don't serve in this war), then by God, this is the proof we need to...well, I'm not sure what

                Its the proof we would need to let Middle America know exactly what some people in this country think of their fellow man. "Better you than me". Yeah, its an obvious truth, but one which is never expressed so nakedly as when this woman said "our kind of people".

                Remember, Bush ran on the platform of being a "uniter, not a divider". Its plainly observable that he lied about that. But its exceedingly rare that it gets expressed so openly.

                by PanzerMensch on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 07:31:50 AM PDT

            •  If I am not willing to serve or send my two sons

              to die (as I would have been willing to do to find bin Laden in Afghanistan after 9/11)then I cannot support a war. We need to close this disconnect between those who support the war and those who actually fight in it, otherwise we will continue to have wars fought by the indentured servant underclasses.  

              by adigal on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:52:13 PM PDT

              •  Two words:

                CANNON FODDER.

                (I typoed GANNON FODDER. Where was my keyboard during THAT punfest?)

                This is so our history of sending the poor to do our dirty work that it's immortalized in cliche.

                by Little Red Hen on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 05:16:44 AM PDT

              •  Supporting the troops means

                • you don't support this war
                  
                • you do support veterans benefits
                  
                • you buy American products so the troops have jobs to come home to when and if they get back
                  
                • you dispell the falsehood that we are in Iraq because of 9/11

                by lubarsh on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 06:15:40 AM PDT

          •  In that it was stated to a Marine

            who she was willing to send over there with all her polyester support.

            Do you need flash cards?

            Marine on one side.  On the other, a upper class hypocrite in red-white-and blue who's perfectly willing for him to die in Iraq because he's not one of "her kind of people".

            I credit his Marine discipline that she didn't get a sock in the jaw.

            by boadicea on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:17:29 PM PDT

            •  Newsflash!

              The rich are callous!

              Film at 11!

              by The Termite on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:19:32 PM PDT

              •  And they like to pretend they're not.

                So call 'em on it. Every damn time.

                by boadicea on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:21:11 PM PDT

              •  I just don't understand this...

                Or we going to stop noticing that Bush is a hypocrite because it isn't news?

                And it's clear that the problem with this woman is not that she's not willing to have her own children killed, it's that she's a blooming hypocrite.

                by Cathy on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 10:00:51 PM PDT

              •  and everytime

                this is mentioned, the right screams "Class war language"!

                Every single time anyone in the US brings up the failures and injustices of capitalism, the chorus is overwhelming - you are using the language of class warfare, you are instigating problems!"  They deny the injustices, they insist this is the most moral and fair and reasonable system and that all injustice is imaginary.

                This woman's quote should be the "let 'em eat cake" of our time.  Their kind don't do without dental and health care, their kind don't suffer.  "Only the little people pay taxes".  And "Only the little people die in Bush's war".  

                She said what they all think.  It's time it was publicized and maybe - just maybe - their will finally be some righteous outrage in this country.

                by KibbutzAmiad on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 06:09:00 AM PDT

                •  So maybe we ought to point out

                  that you ignore the so-called under classes at your own risk.

                  That is what breeds revolution.

                  Like Dylan said
                  When you got nothing, you got nothing to lose

                  And watch out when more and more people have nothing.

                  The Russians learned that. So did the French. So did the British -- and you'd think we would too, since WE were one of the ones who taught the Brits.

                  by mmacdDE on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 11:35:34 AM PDT

              •  The rich aren't callous.

                Proudly ignorant racists fucks who don't give a good god damn about other people and their sacrifices are callous.  

                by lubarsh on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 06:18:02 AM PDT

          •  However

            it IS what she was saying.

            Ladies and gentlemen, meet Mrs. Joe Republican, your standard freepercreep.

            by NCYellowDog on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 09:20:21 PM PDT

          •  I'm not so sure

            She's rich.  Rich people don't have flags stuck in their lawns, at least not in Beverly Hills.  In fact, I don't know what she is.  Quaker?  Doesn't sound like it.  Insufficient information for me to get disgusted.  I just don't know what her kind is.  Given the last 4 years, I want real information before I hate someone, and it's not in this excerpt.  Sorry.

            by moltar on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 09:26:44 PM PDT

            •  Can't speak for Philly or Bev Hills, but...

              ... I drive a dry cleaning delivery route through the wealthiest 'hoods in and around Memphis, TN, and you can't walk ten feet in one direction on some lawns without tripping over a bunch of flags.

              I don't think there is any one single stereotype for "rich people," whether it has to do with flags or with chickenhawk support for the war.

              That having been said, I think Armando is probably spot-on, and whoever suggested that we find this woman and just ask her what she meant before we get all bent out of shape was thinking in the right direction.

              by autoegocrat on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 05:46:03 AM PDT

              •  After 9/11...

                ...I decided to fly the Stars and Stripes pretty much full time. When Smirky invaded Iraq, I replaced it with the Jolly Roger, a more appropriate symbol, I think.

                by itsjim on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 06:38:59 AM PDT

            •  I AGREE

              ...although this does support what I choose to believe is true about many who support the war with their lips but not their bodies (or those of their loved ones)...there is little evidence for me to KNOW it happened as reported...we don't need to do the very thing that we criticize this administration and right wing bloggers, who just link to one another for credance, for doing.  

              by Dancer on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 07:59:01 AM PDT

            •  Speaking as a Pittsburgher...

              the lady probably lives in a suburban community called Wexford.  The place is filled with Hummer dealerships and McMansions.  Her son almost definately went to North Allegheny HS, which is in one of the best school districs in the county.  Believe me, this lady leads a comfortable suburban life.

              by daaawi on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 02:19:17 PM PDT

        •  don't play that game

          Be cautious with this.  Kelly leans very very far to the right on these issues and was possibly looking for a spin in response to a very successful rally held last Saturday by the Pittsburgh Organizing Group against Military Recruitment.

          <blockquote. Antiwar activists present an obstacle, as well. Demonstrators disrupted Army Reserve recruiters at Carnegie Mellon University in April, and the local chapter of the American Friends Service Committee plans a "nonviolent day of direct action" a week from Saturday to "shut down military recruiting in Pittsburgh."</blockquote>

          and, oh yeah, the American Friends Service Committee does do anti-recruitment work but they are not organizing the August 20 protests.

          Folks should keep their heads up for the great work going on in Pittsburgh (and largely led by talented high schoolers) against the aggressive recruitment.

          by seamus on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 09:34:36 PM PDT

      •  Giving her waaaaaaay too much latitude

        Maybe you don't mean to be obtuse, but you are. I don't mean to be insulting to you, but I'm just making an observation ...

        While it's true that the shortness of the article lacks details because much more could have been written. And, of course there is an implication there. The question is, Are we being given the wrong implication?

        When a recruiter visits a really nice suburb of Pittsburgh and the mom forwardly states, "[the military] is not for our kind of people", it's quite obvious that she believes that her family is above the rest of us. Not disqualified, but above us all. Really. What other reason could there be? Is she the matriarch for a family of dwarfs? If the kid was only 4'6", the recruiter wouldn't have been going out there. If her family was full of blind people, the kid would be disqualified and the recruiter would have marched on, so to speak.

        So, what other reason that SOCIAL CLASS could this woman be referring to? She didn't say that the military isn't for her son because he has been taking Prozac for too long and has threatened homocidal killings of his classmates. Nope, she didn't say the military wasn't for HER SON and HERE'S WHY. She said that it wasn't for her kind of people.

        Yep, everyone else on this board is right. She's got flags in the yard, ribbons on her car and stars on her breasts, but she thinks that the people who join the military are of a low social class or have below average intelligence with no other options in life, or both.

        What's sad is not that she was trying to talk her son out of it, or talk the recruiter out of recruiting her son, but rather making an assumption about herself and everyone else. I'm sure she took that mentality to the voting booth and kept us in the morass we are in now.
        

        by j9581 on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:18:59 PM PDT

        •  Question

          If the reporter had not offered that she lived in a nice neighborhood BEFORE the quote, what would your assumption be about what she meant?

          It is a shittily written story, and while the implication contained therein is nauseating, it is a waste of time to handwring over the fucking thing.

          by The Termite on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:21:03 PM PDT

          •  Her neighborhood only enhances the article

            Even if the reporter had not mentioned the characterists of her neighborhood, I would have made the same assumption, SOCIAL CLASS. Why?

            First, how many mothers of families earning less than, say, $30K/year, would say that the military is not for "their kind of people". Signing bonus, GI Bill. The soon would probably make more money than the family. Nope, that mother would have been begging off the recruiter to simply not have her son go to Iraq. Class, or her kind of people, would not have been the words or thoughts coming out of her mouth.

            Second, given the above, in what setting would you imagine a mother saying that the military is not for her kind of people? We know it's not the mother standing on the stoop in front of their 1920s run-down house in Oakland (a not-so-nice section of Pittsburgh). Nope, the family probably lives in Fox Chapel.

            by j9581 on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:29:14 PM PDT

            •  Jeeze, people!

              ... I don't live in a fine Philly neighborhood. I live in a kinda still okay, fine by me, marginal NM neighborhood.

              Would this then forbid me to say the war isn't for my kid (if I had one) or people like us?

              I know who's volunteering for and fighting the  war. I live in Albuquerque near enough to Kirtland AFB -- those volunteers would be the men and women of last year's high school graduation class. Or, the boys and girls, rightly put from my perspective.

              But it's just wrong to imply that all the rich are pigs and all the fighting janes and joes are humble saints.

              We are who we are, good. bad, patriotic or don't-have-anything-better-coming up. Rich and poor, we gave ourselves a volunteer army and some thought it was great.

              Well -- here we are. You want a volunteer army, you get the ones who want to volunteer. No one else is forced to go.

              It can change with a draft. If you think that's a good idea, work for it.

              If you dont' want that, and you don't want the war then stop reinforcing the class strife strategy of the administration.

              Talk to people. Someone talk to the rich lady.

              Someone go say, "Can you explain this to me, help me understand? May I explain my feelings to you, help you understand?"

              Wear a fuckin' flag shirt if that's what it'll take to get you onto her lawn to talk.

              Sheeesh. Don't do Bush's divide and conquer work for him if you don't have to.

              Bless.

              Nance

              by Nancy Varian on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 09:05:09 PM PDT

              •  I don't know that people are implying that

                I havn't seen anyone say that all rich folk are pigs, or self absorbed, or believe they are better than everone else. But many do. Enough that the GOP has won two elections catering to their rich benifactors.

                This country is following the Mexico model. Won't be too long and we'll look just like them: a few very rich folk and everyone else dirt poor.

                It didn't used to be this way you know. During WWII the rich were taxed heavily and for the most part they accepted it. But the last 30 years of "Looking Out For Number One", "greed is good", right wing hate radio, and on and on. There is a larger divide than I believe there used to be and the right has nurtured that divide.

                by brenda on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 10:45:13 PM PDT

              •  Pittsburgh, not Philly

                But does location or proximity to wealth or a military base matter?

                I know who is volunteering for the military now, less and less and less people. Because the worthlessness of this falsely premised war is finally slapping people in the face, despite the best efforts of the government and the mainstream media to dampen down the "bad news."

                by KOTCrum on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 06:33:34 AM PDT

          •  class war

            "our kind of people" IS a statement of class.  

            We didn't need a description of her house and yard and neighborhood... that phrase tells it all.  Her kind is so extra special... like Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rice, and all the other privileged fat cats... they do not serve in the military, they do not sacrifice, they do not risk anything for anybody else... and certainly not for some nebulous "public good" such as the defense of the nation which provides an opportunity for them to get rich from the work and sacrifices of others.  

            The only thing they serve are their own filthy interests.

            Carolly

            by hauksdottir on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:43:26 PM PDT

            •  It is class warfare --

              -- and Bush is laughing his ass off while half the nation runs around cussing or sneering at the other half, all this on the strength of the assumptions,  prejudices, lies and and fury and they fuel.

              You think it doesn't make them happy to know "their" consitutency is loathed like this? That's ammo you're giving them. Next time he says, "They hate us for our freedom," us will be him and his constituents and they will be us, the folks now so colorfully known as Blue staters.

              You think they don't love it each night going to sleep knowing the people in this country are so torn apart from each other that we will never talk, never figure out that there is common ground between us somewhere?

              Are you a Dem or a Progressive, Carolly? Ever piss you off to be sneered at as a latte liberal? Hate to be called a Bonston snob even though maybe you've never set foot in the place?

              Hate it that people in the middle of the country who have never spoken a word to you, near you or even know your face assume you're a rat's ass of a souless degenerate because you might have voted for someone other than Bush -- and therefore are damned to hell and very likely the whole reason the world is falling to pieces?

              You sound like a good person. I'm willing to bet no one would be anywhere near right making those judgements about you. But a goodly chunk of the nation would make them -- just based on what they might guess or assume about how you live, how you vote, where or whether you worship, who you sleep with or don't.

              Bush and his boys sell all that, in two brands ... and too many of us buy it, in both brands.

              Mamma Bush has herself one smart chimp, laughing all the way down the road while this nation tears itself to pieces rather than tries to find even the slimmest inch of common ground that might not be immediately obvious.

              No one here knows that lady in Philly. Including me. No one here knows whether they could sit down with her, find the commond ground, and have a civil talk instead of a civil war.

              Common ground? What common ground?

              It sounds to me like you're both mothers. It sounds to me like neither of you wants to see a son or daughter go to war.

              It's a place to start. If we'd only start.

              Right now, though, happy, happy George. It's all working out fine for him.

              -- Nance

              by Nancy Varian on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 10:39:36 PM PDT

              •  I loved your post

                and I wish I could give it more than a four, because ultimately you're right.  In a beautifully expressed way.

                But this one point:

                Common ground? What common ground?

                It sounds to me like you're both mothers. It sounds to me like neither of you wants to see a son or daughter go to war

                I think you're mistaken on, because the difference overriding that common ground is that she thinks YOUR son or daughter should still have to go, though.

                But not hers.

                by KB on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 07:15:24 AM PDT

                •  Common ground -- good point and place to start

                  Thanks for the comment. It fills in my late-night thinking and typing lapse very nicely.

                  I do agree with you, the common ground is really really slim. They are both mothers -- that's where they start. (OK not these two women now, but any two with the same diffrences of opinion.)

                  "We are mothers. I don't think my son should have to fight. I'm fortunate that he doesn't have to, and we can support the troops with donations to the VA, the PVA or other good causes. But I feel lucky that we do have an army to fight for us.

                  "And you must be grateful for the army, too. Look at the chances your child will have for college after she comes home. After after all, isn't that a lot of what the volunter army is about? Chances for education they might not get."

                  Well, yeah, you'd want to hit her with a brick. But if you did, you get nowhere.

                  So the other mother could talk about her own reality, and she could calmly speak of how she'd love to see her kid have a great education and how she'd do anything to know her daughter will come home alive and well and ready to get on with life. "But something's ... wrong here. It isn't working anymore. People aren't volunteering."

                  Then she could quietly wait for the answer that won't come.

                  In that moment, she could gently shift the subject to getting on with life ... which we'd all like to do. But in the end, no mother can take that for granted if the world is now as dangerous as we know it to be. In the end, everyone's baby has to show up.  

                  (No anti-Bush rant, there is no commmon ground.)

                  These imaginary mothers of mine will not end up being best friends, but one of them might start the long night lying in bed thinking.

                  Maybe Rich Mother won't be thinking about Poor Mother's kid. Maybe she will, who knows? Not me. But it's likely that, given human nature, she'll be thinking about her kid and his future and realize that rich men and poor men died in the Towers on 9/11. (I am NOT tying Iraq to that, just saying distaster lurks all the time now because of Bush's idiotic response to 9/11.) Then she'll think about the future of the country ... maybe.

                  Maybe she'll understand that there's only one kind of "people like us" -- we the people. Maybe she'll talk to her neighbors and fellow Rich Moms. Maybe.

                  Never know till we try.

                  Thanks for keeping the conversation going. :-)

                  -- Nance

                  by Nancy Varian on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 04:23:40 PM PDT

          •  Irrelevant.

            It doesn't matter what her socio-economic status is. The idea of "our kind" of people is the sort of repugnant and enthusastic classism that needs to be eliminated.

            by Pope Guilty on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:56:15 PM PDT

            •  How do you know....

              ...she didn't mean pacifist?  Or left-handed?  Or lesbian?  Or even Democrat?  It may have had to do with class...and it may not have.

              We don't know what she meant, because the writer didn't bother to ask (didn't bother to ask!!!).  All we know is what the reporter insinuated.  Which makes for a shitty piece of reportage, and unworthy in my opinion of a front-page reference by one of our best contributors.

              by The Termite on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 09:00:25 PM PDT

              •  How do you know

                that the reporter "didn't bother" to ask? You're falling into the same trap you're skewering others for falling into.

                The reporter might well have asked that question, and put the woman's answer into the story only to have it cut for space (happens all the time).

                The more likely scenario, keeping in mind the Pentagon's abiding hostility toward media coverage of recruiting: The reporter likely had to do a hell of a lot of finagling to be allowed to tag along on this visit, possibly to the point of promising not to ask questions for fear of scaring off a recruit. Reporters don't operate in some void where they get to be assholes and no one thinks anything of it. Gathering information is a constant negotiation with real people, taking into account real emotions and motivations. Just getting that scene probably took a lot of hard work. It's possible that it didn't, too, but my point is that you don't know. I love the smell of irony in the morning.

                by kapoleon on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 11:40:00 PM PDT

              •  Because if I answered

                I would have said used "I,me,us,we" not "our kind".  In effect she is not just speaking for her and her family but a certain group, and if that group had a name, I'm sure she'd have used "pacifist, Quaker, Jehovah's Witness, peacenik, hippy, Libertarian or Green" unless she was embarassed to tell the public.

                "Our kind" draws a line in the sand.  It implies there is "our kind" and "those others".  And if "our kind" doesn't serve then obviously "those others" do, should, must serve.

                And only by asking this lovely lady directly can we truly understand the meaning of her words.

                by Fabian on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 04:18:05 AM PDT

              •  That was my reaction as well

                Given the current momentum among the left for counter-recruitment, she could just as easily be a progressive.

                Need more context.

                by currahee on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 06:43:57 AM PDT

          •  This is not handwringing....

            handwringing is whiny helplessness, this is outrage, the mildness of it is only due to the lack of surprise, but I don't think we ought to be ho hum about it either.

            by Cathy on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 10:04:24 PM PDT

      •  oops...

        Despite your intent, that comment is obtuse.  Are you saying you suspect the quote is made up or paraphrased, or are you tone-deaf to the class snobbery of the woman's words?

        I'd like to believe she was misquoted because her comments are disgusting. She wasn't quoted as saying she supported the troops but was against the war, which would be an excellent rationale for keeping her son out of Iraq - and seems to be the strawman position you stake out.

        And more to the point - I support the troops in Iraq but I do not support the efforts of recruiters to convince wavering kids to sign up for this most historically stupid of wars.

        I'm glad Armando, among others in the blogosphere, passed this along to us.  Your quibble falls flat.

        by sfgary on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:23:22 PM PDT

        •  A few points

          and then I'll let this drop.

          First of all, I believe this attitude exists.  I do.   And it disgusts me.

          However, as badly as this article is written, it surprises me that it has made it this far, and I highly doubt it will find traction anywhere else, for a few reasons.  First, it's anecdotal hearsay, and therefore "proves" nothing.  Second, the woman's quote is almost cartoonish, and that combined with the fact that her name is not provided (nor anything else about her) leads me to believe that it may have been fabricated to make a point (certainly this is not the first you've heard of things like this on either side of the political spectrum, is it?).  It just reeks of emptiness.

          Contrast this with the scene in F9/11 when Moore was asking Republican Congressmen whether they were going to offer up their children to serve.  He made this point.  Made it well.  This reinforces it, certainly, but is it front page material?  Not in my opinion.  It's another windmill.

          by The Termite on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:50:06 PM PDT

          •  conditionally granted

            I get your point.  But most of what's on the front page here and elsewhere falls into the category of trivia.  In the current climate of national enmity (Americans don't hate anyone as much as they hate other Americans) this article serves as grist for the mill.

            If your complaint is that all of this is a mind-numbing, time-wasting mire... I agree.  But it makes no sense to wade into the swamp and cry out, "It's muddy where I'm standing".  We're all in the swamp.  We know it's muddy.  DKos might help the democrats get back into power but it's doing nothing for the peace of either its members or its detractors.  DKos is where we go to get righteously angry.  We have to to the gompa if we're looking for peace and rationality.
            

            by sfgary on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 09:05:42 PM PDT

            •  Well put

              Sometimes I'm in the mood, supposes I, and sometimes I ain't.

              by The Termite on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 09:08:23 PM PDT

            •  Why all the complaining about how badly...

              written the thing is, it's not pulitzer material, so what?

              We talk about many anecdotal examples that aren't proof, and aren't well-written.  But, it's outrageous behavior, and it's worthy noting that.  I don't think this woman is only preserving her children, she's saying that there's a class that fights and a class that cheerleads.

              Perfect.  That's what's in the White House, a cheerleader.

              by Cathy on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 10:08:31 PM PDT

      •  Is this really apparent from the article

        I agree with you.  Where does it say she supports bushie?

        Unless you've been a wife and mother of someone in war (I've been both) you don't have a clue.

        I was lucky mine both came home.

        To Cindy and all good luck, God Bless and God speed.

        by sunshine85364 on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:47:40 PM PDT

      •  It is always interesting to see a different view

        of a question here, Termite.  It is getting so lately that anything that differs slightly from the expected is trolled and flamed.  Thanks for the different point of view.

        by hopscotch1997 on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:47:55 PM PDT

      •  No valid use for the article

        I will agree with a point that I think you implied, and in turn I'm making the assumption ...

        There is no valid use for the story. Was she the wife of the governor coming out on the front lawn making that statement? Obviously not. Did she physically assault the recruiter after making that statement? Nope. Police were not involved. No law was violated.

        The only reason for putting that in the article was to incite people like us on this board, and perhaps a few more, to joust this anonymous lady with our fingertips. Maybe on the margins the writer wanted to help the recruiter make this woman feel poorly about her mouth when she read her own words in the paper. I doubt that worked.

        There are people from all social classes in the military and she doesn't wholly represent any of them. I will grant you that there are is a disproportionate number of servicemen/women from lower income families. It's simply not true to state that no one from rich families ever goes into the military. Just because Bush fucked it up doesn't mean they all do.

        However, her comments give us the general mood of most of the ignorant jackasses that voted for Bush in the first place. They are people who just don't believe that they pay too much in taxes, but that they shouldn't pay any at all, they believe in sticking their proverbial dicks out of the pants at the rest of the world while somebody else is holding the weapon.

        Obviously, my own distaste for her remark is simply magnified against a certain group of people that she represents. The vast majority who hate "those damn liberals who are trying to turn over America to communists" but are happy to go along with the Bush form of facism.

        Believe it or not, I'm a really reasonable guy.
        

        by j9581 on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:48:46 PM PDT

      •  It's really FUCKING clear...

        We love you and your war, but we don't want "our people" to die in it.  There's our support.  That's how patriotic we are.  So go find someone else to die for the president^TM.

        If you don't support the war, fine.  If you support the troops, fine.  But don't support the war and not the troops.

        There's your hypocrisy.

        Flying the flag, wearing the flag, and telling the recruiter, "No Thanks!"!?!

        Obviously, the son has a concience, he told the recruiter he was interested, probably from listing to the positions of his parents.  They caught wind of it, and "changed his mind."

        FUCK 'EM.

        by seronimous on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 09:06:31 PM PDT

        •  Sheesh!!!!

          Since he is at or near the age of being old enough to serve in the armed forces (and mommy and daddy changed his mind) it is safe to assume that he is at or near voting age.  (That is, if he even bothers to register to vote.)  But assume he does, is he going ask for mommy and daddy's permission on which candidate to vote for?  

          by Street Kid on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 09:39:18 PM PDT

          •  Hard to say...

            Every male in my direct line of descent (and many others, as well) had served in the military, but when I joined up (without parental consultation, I might add) things were not so "pleasant" around the old seronimous family home...

            And that was years and years ago.

            I'm sure the pressure now has reached an all time high.

            Nevertheless if you're broadcasting your "patriotism" don't be surprised when someone calls you on it...

            by seronimous on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 09:20:38 AM PDT

          •  Hard to say...

            Every male in my direct line of descent (and many others, as well) had served in the military, but when I joined up (without parental consultation, I might add) things were not so "pleasant" around the old seronimous family home...

            And that was years and years ago.

            I'm sure the pressure now has reached an all time high.

            Nevertheless if you're broadcasting your "patriotism" don't be surprised when someone calls you on it...

            by seronimous on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 09:23:18 AM PDT

            •  sorry, double post n/t

              by seronimous on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 09:26:53 AM PDT

      •  Disagree with your posts here

        but gave you 3s to help offset some bad mojo people are abusing the rating system by giving you 1s.

        Mitch Gore

        Wanna win in '08...?

        Put your money where your mouth is.

        by Lestatdelc on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 09:50:41 PM PDT

        •  Excuse me Know Nothing...?

          My counteracting ratings and explanation deserves a 1?

          Fucking unbelievable.

          Mitch Gore

          Wanna win in '08...?

          Put your money where your mouth is.

          by Lestatdelc on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 11:40:33 PM PDT

          •  No kidding!

            What the hell was the 1 rating for?  What crap!  Please grow up.  Lestatdelc:  love your posts keep doing what you do.  Freaking unbelievable sometimes.  

            by pilotweed on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 12:40:03 AM PDT

      •  Yes, I defintely think it's clear from the article

        
        Here's the original article.

        I live in Pittsburgh. The suburbs to the north are filled with wealthy republicans whose SUVs are filled with Bush stickers and yellow ribbons. She meant exactly what it sounds like. Her son isn't meant to join the army, he's meant to join the college republicans.

        by Auntie Mame on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 05:19:47 AM PDT

        •  Just want to add

          That we refer to the northern suburbs as "The Great White North."

          by Auntie Mame on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 05:22:44 AM PDT

  •  First thing that jumped into my mind?

    What kind of peoples is she?

    Republicans.

    They dont serve, they just cheer.

    by JoeOhioan on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:01:07 PM PDT

    •  Exactly...

      Bush stayed out of Vietnam because his daddy was rich and had power. But those who where not so lucky, so wealthy, so powerful, had to go.

      by ljly on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:29:21 PM PDT

    •  i have to challenge that comment

      To my eyes, even their cheering lacks credibility.
      Have you noticed how difficult it is for them to defend this failed endeavor? They are trying to keep a stiff gopper lip but the smules are becoming more forced.

      by demnow on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:34:56 PM PDT

    •  That was my first thought, too. <n/t>

      by xeju on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:52:25 PM PDT

    •  I thought something like that...

      Republican and/or rich and/or racist whites.

      by Antioch on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 09:12:02 PM PDT

    •  Get away from Republicans

      Join the military.

      by 88kathy on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 04:10:53 AM PDT

  •  Oh I know, I know!!

    Ask me. Oh Oh! (think Horseshack, welcome back)

    Kotter: Okay, Horseshack, what kind of peoples is she?

    Horseshack: She's a well-bred Republican lady who has her nails done and her hair too! And she drives a Mercedes, a Lexus or an SUV and has cocktails at 4 on the dot, and falafel sex sometimes when the kids are away. She's never had an abortion that she will admit to; and her idea of church is to dress up in something pastel or black and bow her head (hairsprayed!) with white gloves steepled in prayer. She wears red lipstick and perfectly accentuated eye shadow (no Harris over blue for her, no sirree). Someone in her family actually made a lot of money doing something, but it probably wasn't her. She thinks of someone like you or me (Horseshack) as the 'little people'. The idea of Watts terrifies her. She believes ghettoes should be nuked, and welfare is for black ladies in Cadillacs who steal from hard working Republicans like her.

    How'd I do?

    by DelicateMonster on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:03:22 PM PDT

    •  Welcome to my world

      You just described my friends and neighbors, and well, a few things about myself (the nails, SUV, that kind of thing. lol)

      I don't even want to talk to them anymore... I try to talk about the kids, other stuff, but I just want to yell at them and tell them what fools I think they are.

      I'll never forget the comment I heard in the kitchen of one of those big suburban houses -- "Well, I think the Democrats are an immoral party."

      I honestly felt ill. It was all so fruitless.

      I don't think I've ever had politics put such a wedge between me and others. I defended Clinton, hated the Impeachment, but they weren't all right-wing nutty about it all -- but since 9/11 and the Bush years, its been completely different. I'm firmly convinced 9/11 warped people. I really do.

      by Dunbar on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:28:05 PM PDT

      •  We have neighbors like that, too...

        ..which is how I know what they're about, plus, of course, my parents tend toward that...what's strange is it used to be a generational thing, now it's more and more a political or even class thing. Really, the distinction is all about appearance, the appearance of propriety is more important than propriety itself, the appearance of morality more important than behaving in an ethical fashion. I'm sure what disgust a lot of folks in Crawford now is the 'mess' that Cindy Sheehan is making of their cozy little desert neighborhood. So there's a part of me that wants to respond to this rejection angrily, savagely, even. With a kind of attitude best epitomized by the Stones'... Heartbreaker...I want to tear your world apart.

        There's another part of me that wants to explain all of this in a way that can somehow change their priorities, make them less rigid, make our world less polarized around some fairly petty differences. Somehow I think 9/11 injected a level of fear that enforces the rigidity, though, fear we've really not seen in this country since, say the late 50s when they used to do their atomic bomb drills. And everyone had 2.5 kids and what was good for GM was good for America. That's Cheney's world, and Rumsfeld's too. Militaristic, fearful, 'religious', and, most importantly, absolutely obedient.

        by DelicateMonster on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:53:07 PM PDT

      •  You forgot to mention

        that as soon as they walk out of Sunday services they are gossiping about every woman who had the nerve to show their face in church...or swearing at the little old man who is taking too long to pull out of the parking lot and delaying her trip to the 'club.'

        by mammalicious on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:59:31 PM PDT

        •  In Westminster Abbey

          John Betjeman knew the kind well:

          In Westminster Abbey

          Let me take this other glove off
          As the vox humana swells,
          And the beauteous fields of Eden
          Bask beneath the Abbey bells.
          Here, where England's statesmen lie,
          Listen to a lady's cry.

          Gracious Lord, oh bomb the Germans,
          Spare their women for Thy Sake,
          And if that is not too easy
          We will pardon Thy Mistake.
          But, gracious Lord, whate'er shall be,
          Don't let anyone bomb me.

          Keep our Empire undismembered
          Guide our Forces by Thy Hand,
          Gallant blacks from far Jamaica,
          Honduras and Togoland;
          Protect them Lord in all their fights,
          And, even more, protect the whites.

          Think of what our Nation stands for,
          Books from Boots' and country lanes,
          Free speech, free passes, class distinction,
          Democracy and proper drains.
          Lord, put beneath Thy special care
          One-eighty-nine Cadogan Square.

          Although dear Lord I am a sinner,
          I have done no major crime;
          Now I'll come to Evening Service
          Whensoever I have the time.
          So, Lord, reserve for me a crown,
          And do not let my shares go down.

          I will labour for Thy Kingdom,
          Help our lads to win the war,
          Send white feathers to the cowards
          Join the Women's Army Corps,
          Then wash the steps around Thy Throne
          In the Eternal Safety Zone.

          Now I feel a little better,
          What a treat to hear Thy Word,
          Where the bones of leading statesmen
          Have so often been interr'd.
          And now, dear Lord, I cannot wait
          Because I have a luncheon date.

          -- John Betjeman

          by Del C on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 02:23:47 AM PDT

          •  Good poem

            ...Thanks!

            by DelicateMonster on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 05:17:13 AM PDT

    •  That's entertaining

      Hilarious, sad and true but hilarious.

      I'm trying to decide if the people who support Bush's stupidity in all of this are just stupid themselves or deluded (they could be both, but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt one way or the other).

      Bush sold an image, and they bought it. His core are all Bob Jones people (who probably think Bush is a liberal, but close enough to their own cause to vote for him). Folks, I'm an atheist. I think the Bob Jones crew and those like him have all brainwashed their followers. Praise Jesus and protect the Jews with the blood of some kid from Omaha whose parents can't afford to send him to college and his SAT scores don't attract the attention of anyone with scholarship money to hand out.

      Nope, the shinier you are, the more golden you are, the higher up you are and what a major social disaster to have your son leave his 7 bedroom, 10,000 square foot home and his own Hummer behind in order to shoot those damn heathen  muslims. (Absolutely no offense to anyone's religion is intended, just building the setting in which that thought process is born.)

      By the way, this mother is going to make one helluva satanic mother-in-law for her son's future wife. "Honey, we don't show up wearing xxxxx because we're not 'that kind of people'". I have to assume he is not gay, because she could have easily blurted that out to the recruiter. Of course, admitting her son might be gay is also an impossibility for "her kind of people".
      

      by j9581 on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 09:57:27 PM PDT

    •  I know I'm late to the game

      but this is the kind of woman I had to wait on the last ten years of retail I worked before I went back to college.  In the midwest, selling my soul waiting on this type at a department store, they had the nerve to treat a person like me like shit after they got out of church to go shopping.  They became so predictable...and believe me, the parking lot was FULL of SUVs and magnetic ribbons, so I'm not just stereotyping.  These women acted like they wanted to murder me if I had run out of their favorite lipstick color.  Honestly, selling makeup is what turned me into a democrat.

      by exiledfromTN on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 11:02:09 PM PDT

      •  Selling make-up is what

        turned me into a Democrat.  Now, I don't know how, when or where -- but somehow that comment has to be used in the next election.  It has such panache.

        by xanthe on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 02:15:10 AM PDT

  •  This kind

    Then my wife said, "Hey, I'm worried 'cause they're starting to deploy"
    I said, "Honey, don't be silly, we'll send someone else's boy
    'Cause we all make sacrifices
    And in a war
    That's what the poor
    People are for"

    by Omir the Storyteller on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:07:37 PM PDT

    •  Great Tune!

      I loved this song.  I saved it and sent it out to nearly everyone in my address book.  Any credits?

      by pilotweed on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 12:02:33 AM PDT

      •  It's by Roy Zimmerman

        who has gotten very high praise indeed from people like Tom Lehrer and Dr. Demento (who in "real life" is a musicologist with a much wider range than novelty tunes, and has compared Zimmerman favorably to Lehrer). He's gotten a bit of recognition in the world at large as well -- he sang "Chickenhawk" at one of the counter-events to the Repubcorp™ National Convention in New York last year.

        Check out his website for more information. http://www.royzimmerman.com

        by Omir the Storyteller on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 09:06:43 AM PDT

  •  The kind of women who benefited

    from tax cuts for the wealthy on the backs of unwealthy "volunteer" forces' families, who not only pay taxes but sacrifice for their wealthy protected asses.

    I'm on a roll tonight on DKos because my son is vacationing in MI with his grandparents. Unusual free time.

    It has given me more hope than I've had in a long while to find that hope really is alive ... allowed by the gift of time to read in depth the often fleeting brilliance of DKos diaries/posters.

    Let me tell each and every Kossack here ... just speak. In your truest voice. Because whenever we can catch it, somebody is listening.

    Thanks Markos, the popular, influential bastard who refuses to let DKos become an ATM machine.

    When or where can I and my partner buy you a drink in Richmond VA? Better yet, I'll pull together a great meal from some of today's recipes.

    by towit on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:19:13 PM PDT

    •  Hey ...your a Richmonder?

      ...I live in Richmond too! I wonder how many other dKos Richmonder's there are? Maybe we should form a drinking liberally dkos section or something. You in the fan? I'm in Stratford Hills, five minutes walk from the James.
      

      by DelicateMonster on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:33:53 PM PDT

      •  Delicate, would love it and

        call on all Richmond Kossacks to unite.

        I drink Liberally in the Fan, living there.

        Drop me an email from my DKos profile. The home of the Confederacy needs to rally to a new day.

        Finally.

        by towit on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:43:27 PM PDT

  •  The proper term

    is "hypocrite", but it's a bit mild for this case. "Worthless sack of protoplasm deeply in need of having her citizenship revoked and being renditioned to Uzbekistan" seems a bit long. "Fucktard" has a nice ring to it. Yeah, I'll go with fucktard for now.

    by justme on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:44:48 PM PDT

    •  It's a Girl

      How about "Turd Blossom"?

      Or has that been taken?

      by Limelite on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 09:35:17 PM PDT

  •  RICH

    by qofdisks on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 12:12:16 AM PDT

  •  Chiming in

    In case it matters to anyone, this article was on the front page of the P-G yesterday and the photo was above the fold.  

    Pretty prominent placement.  I was a little surprised.

    by Pennsylvanian on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 06:57:14 AM PDT

  •  A little context maybe?

    Exactly.  I get the gist of the excerpt but it would be nice to get a little context.  What kind of people does she mean, yes.  But is the implication here also that somebody who's got flags draped all over their house and themselves are required to support their child joining the military?  I don't buy that.  If that were the case, then all of us on the left who consider ourselves patriots, should be signing up to fight too.  

    by sterno on Fri Aug 12, 2005 at 12:47:23 PM PDT

•  Amazing...

  that the article didn't delve at all into this.

  by LiberalFromPA on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 07:50:13 PM PDT

  •  Yeah...

    How could you get a comment like that and just leave it there?

    All Old Glory and no Guts...

    by TexasDemocrat on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 07:58:05 PM PDT

•  Pretty much

  sums it up.  The Yellow Elephant brigade is alive and well.

  by RevDeb on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 07:50:59 PM PDT

•  Our kind = rich

  I swear, sometimes it seems like the only respected aspiration in this country is to accumulate wealth with as little personal risk as possible.

  by f8free on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 07:51:20 PM PDT

  •  More like our kind = white

    and Anglo and not like you, Sgt. Rivera.

    by flo58 on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:28:12 PM PDT

    •  my thoughts exactly

      I imagined her saying "our people" and waving her flabby arms to display the nice, suburban lily-white neighborhood.

      sorry, just my first impression.

      "not for our people.  but for your people...sure, whatever.  be a dear and cut our grass on the way out, wouldya?"

      by kineticdissent on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:40:59 PM PDT

      •  I'm surprised

        that she didn't ask to see his green card.

        by AdmiralNaismith on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 09:02:22 PM PDT

    •  Damn straight

      How many other contexts besides race (and corporate propaganda, which doesn't apply here) do you hear anyone say "Our people"?
      

      by Antioch on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 09:15:21 PM PDT

  •  Parody Patriotism

    It's really sad that there are so many of these parodies of patriotism around, ready to grab the good from this country but unwilling to pay any of the costs, whether taxes or allowing their child to enlist. They have no idea what citizenship is.

    by freelunch on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 09:12:34 PM PDT

•  And we're surprised...

  because?

  by TexDem on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 07:51:27 PM PDT

•  Too bad there's no photo of her...

  wearing her flag T-Shirt. A true patriot.

  by fly on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 07:51:45 PM PDT

•  aoeu

  Is membership in the KKK a disqualifier to military service?

  by TealVeal on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 07:52:04 PM PDT

  •  Yes it is.

    So too is the wearing of racist tattos, etc.

    by soonergrunt on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 09:52:55 PM PDT

•  HEY

  Hey they got the flags and probably the cute yellow ribbons on the car what more do you want?

  by kerry on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 07:52:41 PM PDT

  •  Not enough!!

    I demand to know if they sport a Viva Bush sticker on the back of their Hummer.

    HEY

    Hey they got the flags and probably the cute yellow ribbons on the car what more do you want?

    by fly on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 08:00:13 PM PDT

  •  Yellow Ribbon Magnets...

    ...made in sweatshops in Communist China... let's not forget that Cygnuis X-I of a myopic black hole the Fright-Winger^TM have about "commie socialism" like, universal health care coverage.

    Mitch Gore

    Wanna win in '08...?

    Put your money where your mouth is.

    by Lestatdelc on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 09:57:23 PM PDT

•  asdf

  I neither want nor require her support.

  by darwinsjoke on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 07:52:46 PM PDT

•  Republican philosophy in a nutshell..

  ..I'll support just about anything as long as I don't actually have to get off my ass to do anything (aside from buying a made-in-Taiwan "Support the Troops" bumper sticker, if its easy to grab at the check-out counter, of course)..