Mr. Marshall needs to remove the word ‘progressive’ from the name of the institute he heads. Unlike many people on the left, I like the word ‘progressive’ better than the word ‘liberal’. Liberal doesn’t mean anything anymore. But progressive is self-explanatory. We believe in making progress. There are things we wish to conserve, like our constitutional right to privacy. But we are fundamentally concerned with making improvements in the human condition, both here at home and across the world.
I don’t normally quote Jesus, but Mr. Marshall needs to hear it. If I dwell obsessively on U.S. misdeeds, there is a reason:
You hypocrite, remove the wooden beam from your eye first; then you will see clearly to remove the splinter from your brother’s eye. -Matthew 7:4-5
How can I tell Iraqis not to mistreat prisoners when Donald Rumsfeld has not been fired? How can I condemn the killing of innocent people when no one in any authority has been held responsible for over 20 prisoner fatalities? How can I get vexed about rape rooms when we allowed rape at Abu Ghraib? I am absolutely appalled by the tactics, brutality, and indiscriminate nature of the Iraqi insurgency. I condemn the bombing of civilians and the public beheading of people in the strongest possible terms. But I don’t have a vote in Iraq. I have a vote here. And until we are willing to remove the wooden beam that is the Bush administration, I cannot in good conscience obsess over the splinter that is the insurgency.
It is a gross misunderstanding of the goals of progressivism to consider my stance un-American or to say it lacks credibility. Since when is taking Jesus’s advice to avoid hypocrisy lacking in credibility?
Although I dislike labels,I call myself a pragmatist. War doesn’t work,it never has,it brings out the criminality in everyone involved,and promotes it in those who have that tendency but kept it hidden in time of peace.Which is why it should be a last,desperate resort,certainly not a tool of opportunists using false patriotism as their excuse. But you can fool some people some of the time……etc.
As I see it, and being an independent, I want to see if the progressive end of the democratic party can handle their stance. I am seriously wondering about it, from where I stand, anyhow.
I want to believe in the progressive ways of this debate. It is how I feel. I want to see if they change directions to get any traction in any direction. I am one who is watching and waiting to SEE…with my own eyes.
I’m with you BrendaStewart as far as wondering about the progressive end of the Democratic Party’s abilities. Who do we have in DC that actually stands up forthrightly for the principles we’re supposed to be about. Who among the Democratic leadership is even close to identifying themselves with us not just by word but by deed, (i.e. vote)?
We must repudiate the DLC types in all their incarnations. They are even worse than the Repubs in that their self-serving corporate money approach to electoral politics insures not only that the Democratic Party remains fragmented, but that their own candidates consistently fail to achieve major political victories. “Repub lite” will always come in second place to “Repub”.
I won’t spend a plug nickel on or devote one iota of time and effort to any Dem candidate that runs for office under the aegis of the DLC.
If we’re not able to stop the DLC from hijacking the Democratic side of the national debate, there’ll be a lot of Dems voting for guys like (R) Chuck Hagel. As it is now it looks as though there’s 3 main parties seeking the presidency; the Repubs, the DLCers, and the (real) Democrats. As to who might represent us, (and have a chance to win), the selection of candidates is pretty thin.
Will Marshall with more of the “with us or against us” crap. My tax dollars are going to kill insurgents might I remind Mr. Marshall.
I don’t want my tax dollars going for torture, humiliation or murder of prisoners. Its a personal choice. I don’t expect Marshall to understand.
Booman’s last 2 paragraphs
Hammer. Nail. Head.
Great job.
Amen.
And i sent this on to the 540-member ProgressiveTalk list, which has had many discussions over the years on the meanings of liberal and progressive.
I like the KJV with all its flowery language:
Thou hypocrite indeed!
Or if you prefer:
Pax/Salaam
In the trial of US Misdeeds v. Heinous Crimes, Mr. Marshall for the Misdeeds:
“Ladies and gentlemen of the jury. Boys will be boys. You can’t make an omelette without breaking a few eggs. What’s a little beating, some minor anal penetration, a few deaths and the occasional raping of small children for a good cause? We’re talking about America, freedom, democracy. A few Misdeeds, all perfectly legal without photographic proof that is, in no way compare to Heinous Crimes. HE GASSED HIS OWN PEOPLE.
Blah, blah, blah, fog of war, blah, blah, blah, God bless America, blah, blah, blah US good Saddam evil, let freedom ring. Thank you.”
On the other hand, there is a document from human hands that does make them our brothers:
Our concern is a seamless extension of simple common sense, even if you don’t take it as the word of God.
Oh and the accusation “anti-American” is a statement that the speaker refuses to deal with the accused.
Yeah right. It’s not like any law-abiding democratic country should use a dictator or a terrorist group as moral standard (“I’m better than those”).
Besides, Marshall is dead wrong. What the US committed in Iraq (but its media keeps ignoring and whitewashing) is far more heinous than what the insurgents did. This can be seen from the relative numbers of killed, or if you think for a moment about what the US committed in Fallujah.
Supporting toture is supporting America?
Opposing torture is opposing America?
hello, reality here……
You know, I occasionally think about the bullshit the Bush League pumps out and what my Mom’s reaction would’ve been if I’d tried to get away with that sort of thing when I was a kid.
If I’d said, “Hey, what I did wasn’t as bad as what Stevie down the street did”, that sure as hell wouldn’t have helped my case. “Being ‘not as bad’ ain’t good enough.”
If I’d kept changing my excuses every time one of them was challenged, she’d have just given me that look that says, “Who are you trying to kid? ‘Cause it ain’t working with me, buster.”
(So why the heck is my Mom a Bush fan? Why is it okay for Bush to do what I couldn’t get away with when I was a kid? Maybe I should’ve tried invoking God …)
I’m particularly critical of the US, because as a citizen I’m responsible for the actions taken in my name. Granted, most of the power to influence those decisions has been taken away from me, but so far they haven’t taken away my ability to speak out.
I think what galls me most is the equating of apples and oranges-the Iraqi insurgents didn’t invade our neighborhoods and kill our families and then take the place over. The fact that if we weren’t there occupying their country this wouldn’t be any kind of an issue seems to be a fact that isn’t to be mentioned. I don’t condone violence but if someone attacked my country and tortured a few relatives and bombed my house flat…I might get a bit ticked off myself. How can the right wing fail to notice that bombing people doesn’t make them like you? How hard it this to grasp? To then turn around and say..but look, they’re violent is a sick joke.
Of course, if one does denounce the actions of the insurgents, then one must be anti-Muslim or anti-Arab. Denouncing those who use guns makes one an anti-gun nut. If the insurgents are male and the critic is female, the critic is anti-male.
Deploring atrocities in Africa is racist; not deploring them is equally so.
Approving or disapproving anything is bigotry of some kind.
According to Will.