« In The Jetstream | Main | Movie Week At Jet Noise: Movie Quotes »
October 18, 2004
Great Speeches
Oftimes when courage is at its lowest ebb, a great leader comes along as if sent by the Gods! to stiffen our spines and gladden our hearts with stirring words of wisdom.
History gives us such strong men to inspire us when our need is greatest. There was FDR's famous The only thing we have to fear is fear itself:
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself—nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory. I am convinced that you will again give that support to leadership in these critical days.
Or Sir Winston Churchill's Blood, Toil, Tears, and Sweat speech:
I would say to the House, as I said to those who have joined this government: "I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat." We have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind. We have before us many, many long months of struggle and of suffering. You ask, what is our policy? I can say: It is to wage war, by sea, land and air, with all our might and with all the strength that God can give us; to wage war against a monstrous tyranny, never surpassed in the dark, lamentable catalogue of human crime. That is our policy. You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word: It is victory, victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory, however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival. Let that be realised; no survival for the British Empire, no survival for all that the British Empire has stood for, no survival for the urge and impulse of the ages, that mankind will move forward towards its goal. But I take up my task with buoyancy and hope. I feel sure that our cause will not be suffered to fail among men. At this time I feel entitled to claim the aid of all, and I say, "come then, let us go forward together with our united strength."
...And who can forget the immortal words of Bob Herbert, who takes his place beside these giants of Modern History?
There should no longer be any doubt that the war in Iraq is an exercise in lunacy. It was launched with a spurious rationale, the weapons of mass destruction, which turned out to be a fantasy relentlessly stoked by obsessively hawkish middle-aged men who ran and hid when they were of fighting age and the nation was at war.
Now we find that we can't win this war we started. Soldiers and civilians alike are trapped in the proverbial briar patch, unable to move around safely in a country that the warmongers thought would be easy to conquer and then rebuild.
Even the heavily fortified Green Zone, which contains the U.S. embassy and the headquarters of the interim Iraqi government, was penetrated by suicide bombers last Thursday. At least five people, including three Americans who had been providing security for diplomats, were killed in the attack.
As the pointlessness of this war grows ever clearer, the president's grand alliance, like some of the soldiers on the ground, is losing its resolve. When John Kerry, in the first presidential debate, mentioned only Britain and Australia as he mocked Mr. Bush's "coalition" in Iraq, the president famously replied, "You forgot Poland."
As for the rebuilding of Iraq, forget about it. Hundreds of schools were damaged by U.S. bombing and thousands were looted by Iraqis. It's hard to believe that an administration that won't rebuild schools here in America will really go to bat for schoolkids in Iraq. Millions of Iraqi kids now attend schools that are decrepit and, in many cases, all but falling down-lacking such essentials as desks, chairs and even toilets, according to the United Nations Children's Fund.
Yes.... in the face of the overwhelming Arab armies arrayed against our pitifully weak and underarmed forces, men like Bob Herbert stand tall. He's right: how can we ever hope to prevail?
One imagines Mr. Herbert viewing the battlefields of Lexington, Yorktown, Gettysburg, Sharpsburg, Verdun, the Somme, Belleau-Wood, Normandy, Iwo Jima... if only we'd had his expert advice then.
Ah...what could have been.
UPDATE: As the Conscience of This Blog (hey, someone's got to keep us honest, and we can't have a conservative in that role for Pete's sake :) has quite correctly pointed out to me, I erred egregiously in titling this post, originally, "Great Wartime Speeches". The first speech quoted (FDR's speech) was from his first inauguration when the nation was not yet at war. Hitler was just beginning his rise to power this year - he withdrew from the League of Nations and the Geneva Disarmament Conference. So although there may have been a climate of fear, the nation was nowhere near being at war. I have been duly admonished and have submitted to the ritual self-flagellation with mass quantities of overcooked pasta products :)
- Cassandra
October 18, 2004 at 11:59 AM | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83452b19169e200d834666d1369e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Great Speeches:
Comments
Interesting.
I don't know whether to post this comment on this thread or the one regarding high-school literacy, but bear with me.
A few weeks ago I was in DC, walking about on Sunday afternoon. I ended up at the Lincoln Memorial about 5 in the afternoon. I walked up and stood for a few minutes, read the Gettysburg address inscribed on one wall, then Lincoln's 2nd inaugural address on the other. I over heard a grown woman (in her 40's) speak to her teen-aged child about the Gettysburg address being started on one wall and finished on the other.
What?
She also said she memorized it (Gettysburg address) in 5th grade. Hey, I bet they added those additional paragraphs since then, huh?
I did think that the words from the 2nd inaugural are appropriate for our times, too.
Posted by: Don Brouhaha at Oct 18, 2004 12:20:05 PM
The great man's words:
"With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan--to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves, and with all nations."
I'm sure Mr. Herbert could improve on that, too, though.
Posted by: Don Brouhaha at Oct 18, 2004 12:25:11 PM
Mr. Herbert is a small, small man.
Lawrence of Arabia not my favorite movie, but it is a powerful one and I wish I could remember the exact quote. One of my favorite actors, Peter O'Toole, who is absolutely riveting in so many movies, says something to the effect of "...so long as you continue to fight among yourselves, so shall the Arabs remain a little people... a silly people."
Every time I hear idiots like Herbert, I can't help thinking of that quote and wondering what we have become.
Posted by: Cassandra at Oct 18, 2004 12:38:50 PM
I know I will be severely criticized by the interventionists in America when I say we should not enter a war unless we have a reasonable chance of winning. That, they will claim, is far too materialistic a standpoint. They will advance again the same arguments that were used to persuade France to declare war against Germany in 1939. But I do not believe that our American ideals, and our way of life, will gain through an unsuccessful war. And I know that the United States is not prepared to wage war in Europe successfully at this time. We are no better prepared today than France was when the interventionists in Europe persuaded her to attack the Siegfried Line.
I have said before, and I will say again, that I believe it will be a tragedy to the entire world if the British Empire collapses. That is one of the main reasons why I opposed this war before it was declared, and why I have constantly advocated a negotiated peace. I did not feel that England and France had a reasonable chance of winning. France has now been defeated; and, despite the propaganda and confusion of recent months, it is now obvious that England is losing the war. I believe this is realized even by the British Government. But they have one last desperate plan remaining: They hope that they may be able to persuade us to send another American Expeditionary Force to Europe and to share with England militarily, as well as financially, the fiasco of this war.
I do not blame England for this hope, or for asking for our assistance. But we now know that she declared a war under circumstances which led to the defeat of every nation that sided with her, from Poland to Greece. We know that in the desperation of war, England promised to all these nations armed assistance that she could not send. We know that she misinformed them, as she has misinformed us, concerning her state of preparation, her military strength, and the progress of the war.
In time of war, truth is always replaced by propaganda. I do not believe we should be too quick to criticize the actions of a belligerent nation. There is always the question whether we, ourselves, would do better under similar circumstances. But we in this country have a right to think of the welfare of America first, just as the people in England thought first of their own country when they encouraged the smaller nations of Europe to fight against hopeless odds. When England asks us to enter this war, she is considering her own future, and that of her empire. In making our reply, I believe we should consider the future of the United States and that of the Western Hemisphere.
It is not only our right, but it is our obligation as American citizens to look at this war objectively, and to weigh our chances for success if we should enter it. I have attempted to do this, especially from the standpoint of aviation; and I have been forced to the conclusion that we cannot win this war for England, regardless of how much assistance we send.
-Charles Lindbergh
April 23, 1941
Posted by: spd rdr at Oct 18, 2004 12:42:24 PM
Another Great Amurrican.
Mr. Lindbergh has always made my skin crawl - thanks spd, for lifting that rock :)
Posted by: Cassandra at Oct 18, 2004 12:53:03 PM
Lindbergh was just ahead of his time. Don't we live in a generation where children play in sporting events where each side wins? How can yo have a child lose?
Even if the goal is noble and just, if there is a chance one might lose, do not fight the war.
Posted by: RIslander at Oct 18, 2004 1:18:44 PM
Spd,
Excellent quote.
Exactly to the point.
And as for Lincoln's words; especially for Nicholas Skinner, his mom and brother.
Posted by: Don Brouhaha at Oct 18, 2004 1:52:15 PM
My Favourite speech was the one made by Hirohito, the Japanese Emperor of Tokyo, Japan
August 14, 1945.
I will paraphrase it for you - my Japanese is kind of rusty but basically he said:
We Quit - you win....
Ironically that was the first time , broadcast by radio, that the Japanese people had ever heard the voice of their leader.
My God - people are lemmings and gullible to boot...
Posted by: Dr. Harden Stuhl at Oct 18, 2004 3:26:57 PM
JFK1 paraphrased this great quote.........
"It is now the moment when by common consent we pause to become conscious of our national life and to rejoice in it, to recall what our country has done for each of us, and to ask ourselves what we can do for our country in return"
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.
these pitifully small men and women in the media are not worth taking seriously.
Greg
Posted by: Greg at Oct 18, 2004 6:07:41 PM
Great speech by FDR. Except that it was not a "wartime" speech, but a "depression" speech. I love to hear conservatives quoting FDR even as they plan to trash his legacy.
Bob Herbert is a great columnist but he is not a wartime leader. Nor is he any kind of politican at all, so he can afford to speak the truth.
And how about Scott Mcconnell in the American Conservative (Nov. 8 edition) http://www.amconmag.com/2004_11_08/cover1.html
"Bush has behaved like a caricature of what a right-wing president is supposed to be, and his continuation in office will discredit any sort of conservatism for generations. The launching of an invasion against a country that posed no threat to the U.S., the doling out of war profits and concessions to politically favored corporations, the financing of the war by ballooning the deficit to be passed on to the nation’s children, the ceaseless drive to cut taxes for those outside the middle class and working poor: it is as if Bush sought to resurrect every false 1960s-era left-wing cliché about predatory imperialism and turn it into administration policy. Add to this his nation-breaking immigration proposal—Bush has laid out a mad scheme to import immigrants to fill any job where the wage is so low that an American can’t be found to do it—and you have a presidency that combines imperialist Right and open-borders Left in a uniquely noxious cocktail."
"George W. Bush has come to embody a politics that is antithetical to almost any kind of thoughtful conservatism."
Sounds about right to me, but not very Churchill-esque. Interesting, anyway. Is this guy a closet Democrat, or is he just afraid for the reputation of conservatism?
Posted by: Al Peck at Oct 18, 2004 6:29:00 PM
Or good old Pat Buchanan:
"Everything we predicted has come to pass. Iraq is the worst strategic blunder in our lifetime. And for it, George W. Bush, his War Cabinet, and the neoconservatives who plotted and planned this war for a decade bear full responsibility. Should Bush lose on Nov. 2, it will be because he heeded their siren song—that the world was pining for American Empire; that “Big Government Conservatism” is a political philosophy, not an opportunistic sellout of principle; that free-trade globalism is the path to prosperity, not the serial killer of U.S. manufacturing; that amnesty for illegal aliens is compassionate conservatism, not an abdication of constitutional duty."
If you read further he does sorta endorse Bush, but it's not a very ringing endorsement. Why has Pat joined the doom and gloom Bob Herbert camp?
Posted by: Al Peck at Oct 18, 2004 6:34:39 PM
Ooooh, I love it when liberals quote Pat Buchanan.
Posted by: Pile On® at Oct 18, 2004 7:28:09 PM
Al, Pat Buchanan is not a conservative.
He's a kook.
From McConnell (My comments intertwined):
"Bush has behaved like a caricature of what a right-wing president is supposed to be, and his continuation in office will discredit any sort of conservatism for generations."
I don't think that McConnell knows what a Right-Wing president should be.
"The launching of an invasion against a country that posed no threat to the U.S.,"
Maybe he doesn't think Saddam was a threat (500 tons Yellowcake, 2 tons Enriched Uranium, Sarin and VX gas found at the Syria-Jordan border {Syria has no capabilities to make VX gas}), but I do.
"the doling out of war profits and concessions to politically favored corporations,"
This charge was proved false 2 years ago, the "no-Bid" contracts were part of LOGCAP. LOGCAP had already gone through the bidding process.
Incidentally, Halliburton also got a no-bid contract (under LOGCAP) during the most recent Balkan war.
"the financing of the war by ballooning the deficit to be passed on to the nation’s children,"
No, the financing of the government for useless social engineering programs is what is ballooning the deficit.
"the ceaseless drive to cut taxes for those outside the middle class and working poor:"
This is the same drivel that the left said about Ronald Reagan. Tax cuts for the rich. My pocketbook says otherwise.
"it is as if Bush sought to resurrect every false 1960s-era left-wing cliché about predatory imperialism and turn it into administration policy."
Not even close (Gawd, who wrote this claptrap, not a real conservative).
We weren't fighting for an empire in the 1960's, we were fighting against an empire.
We are not fighting for imperialistic expansion of our borders now. We are not forcing our values down anyone's throats. However, we are shoving Democracy down the throats of tyrants.
"Add to this his nation-breaking immigration proposal"
I don't think it's nation-breaking, but we should be more selective about who we choose to let into our country.
"Bush has laid out a mad scheme to import immigrants to fill any job where the wage is so low that an American can’t be found to do it"
Good luck filling that scheme. Not going to happen even if Bush was trying, and he's not.
"and you have a presidency that combines imperialist Right and open-borders Left in a uniquely noxious cocktail."
Only leftists are imperialist. Look at all the wars of the last 75 years: Soviet expansion into the Ukraine, Nazi Germany, Mussolini, Stalin's takeover of Eastern Europe, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, The Yemen war, Chile (Allende was a Commie AND a kook), Cuba, Nicarauga, Cambodia, Laos, China, Grenada, the list goes on and on.
And every time we try to do the right thing, the left screams imperialism.
Which brings us to Bob Herbert's employer, the NY Times. Fact free for at least 30 years.
Editorial board were Nazi collaborators in the 30's, until they found out that Hitler was killing Jews.
The Times outright lied about the Soviet spies in our government in the 40's and 50's, bringing a tinge of Red to their usual yellow journalism.
The Times fought us tooth and nail over Vietnam, a war where we won every major battle, but lost the war because of Congressional Democrats.
The Times thought Jimmy Carter was a great man, instead of the wimpering little bully that was actually collaborating with the Soviets.
There was plenty of invective for Ronald Reagan at the Times, freaking out every time Reagan confronted the Soviet beast.
Didn't like Bush the 1st either, the wall came down on his watch.
The Times really laid down for Bill and Hillary.
Not asking about Whitewater (19 convictions).
Not asking about Cattle Futures ($100,000 in 3 months).
Not asking about Rose Law Firm Records.
Not asking about OK City (Rush provoked McVie, yeah right).
Not asking about Waco. (Why didn't BATF get Koresh when he was jogging).
Not asking about TWA flight 800 (275 witnesses said it was a rocket attack).
Not asking about Juanita Broderick, Kathleen Willey, and others.
Not asking about 43 Cray supercomputers sold to Red China.
Not asking about the latest nuclear technology being sold by Clinton to China for campaign contributions.
Gawd, Pravda has a better track record of telling the truth than the NY Times.
So let me ask you a question, Al. After all the facts are laid out, why would I believe anything that the NY Times prints?
Posted by: purple raider at Oct 18, 2004 7:32:06 PM
I'm not trying to speak for Mr. McConnell, he's doing that himself. So is he as bad / worse than Bob Herbert? I don't know anything about him, except he wrote this in a so-called conservative rag.
I am a bit curious about the "leftists are imperialists" thing. Nazi Germany and Mussolini were leftist?
Chile under Allende didn't start a war with anybody. Nicaragua didn't start a war with us. We started one with them. Was Reagan an "imperialist leftist?"
Of course Stalin was an imperialist, but his strategic goals were pretty much the same as Catherine the Great's. Imperialism goes back long before any sort of "leftism" emerged as a philosophy.
Then back to the main point, why are we comparing newspaper columnists to great war leaders, as though there were some equivalancy?
Or, if we want to compare Bush to Churchill, just do it straight out:
Churchill: "...we shall fight on beaches, landing grounds, in fields, in streets and on the hills. We shall never surrender..."
Bush "We all thought there was weapons there, Robin. My opponent thought there was weapons there."
And just an aside, if Bush gets elected to another term, it seems it may be increasingly difficult to keep blaming all the world's ills on the supernatural powers of Clinton's organ.
Posted by: Al Peck at Oct 18, 2004 8:36:41 PM
RE; NY Times, I don't believe everything I read in the NYT. Indeed, they do err more from omission than commission, but a bot of both.
Herbert is a columnist, not an "objective" reporter. His work is OPINION. That's all it is. Same as Safire. Don't believe either one if you don't want to.
Posted by: Al Peck at Oct 18, 2004 8:38:43 PM
Nazi: National Socialist Workers Party.
Posted by: Masked Menace at Oct 18, 2004 9:22:21 PM
Al, of course Hitler and Mussolini were leftists.
Fascism is Leftism.
According to "legend" the CIA took out Allende.
If they did, they did the world a great service.
We didn't start a war with Danny Ortega, we supplied arms to the opposition. The country was already at war.
We may never know the full damage from the 8 years of the Clinton crime spree. And we may never know how much of a traitor William Clinton and Hillary Clinton was.
Much better quote from Bush:
"You're either for us or against us."
And I didn't have to make up my quote.
Posted by: Purple raider at Oct 18, 2004 11:44:35 PM
re: Great speech by FDR. Except that it was not a "wartime" speech, but a "depression" speech.
You got me :) Actually I think the speech is from his first inauguration or something.
That's what happens when you:
1. Post on your lunch break
2. Do the title last - it's always something of an afterthought, and often what I have the most trouble with. In this case, I just tossed it off hurriedly, so it wasn't really very apt.
You have uncovered my Dark Tragic Secret - I'm not perfect... [shudder] :)
Anyway, in spite of the bad title, or even the fact that I was too lazy to exceed the 15 minutes I normally take for lunch to go look up the full text of one of FDR's war speeches - that's not really my point. The point remains that Mr. Herbert is always, like Mr. Krugman, predicting failure and gloom and doom.
And he's wrong, and it's still harmful, and I still disagree with him, and I still think he's a big wimp.
And the contrast to bigger men is still pretty obvious:)
Posted by: Cassandra at Oct 19, 2004 4:29:05 AM
Churchill: "...we shall fight on beaches, landing grounds, in fields, in streets and on the hills. We shall never surrender..."
Bush: "The last time I spoke here, I expressed the hope that life would return to normal. In some ways, it has. In others, it never will. Those of us who have lived through these challenging times have been changed by them. We've come to know truths that we will never question: evil is real, and it must be opposed.
Bush: "Our war against terror is a contest of will in which perseverance is power. In the ruins of two towers, at the western wall of the Pentagon, on a field in Pennsylvania, this nation made a pledge, and we renew that pledge tonight: Whatever the duration of this struggle, and whatever the difficulties, we will not permit the triumph of violence in the affairs of men -- free people will set the course of history. (Applause.)"
Of course, you can choose a quote that has nothing whatever to do with Churchill's quote, but wouldn't it make more sense to pick just one of the many, many similar ones? These took me all of two minutes to find, Al.
I believe in the transformational power of liberty: The wisest use of American strength is to advance freedom. As the citizens of Afghanistan and Iraq seize the moment, their example will send a message of hope throughout a vital region. Palestinians will hear the message that democracy and reform are within their reach, and so is peace with our good friend, Israel. (Applause.) Young women across the Middle East will hear the message that their day of equality and justice is coming. Young men will hear the message that national progress and dignity are found in liberty, not tyranny and terror. Reformers, and political prisoners, and exiles will hear the message that their dream of freedom cannot be denied forever. And as freedom advances -- heart by heart, and nation by nation -- America will be more secure and the world more peaceful. (Applause.)
America has done this kind of work before -- and there have always been doubters. In 1946, 18 months after the fall of Berlin to Allied forces, a journalist wrote in the New York Times, "Germany is -- a land in an acute stage of economic, political and moral crisis. [European] capitals are frightened. In every [military] headquarters, one meets alarmed officials doing their utmost to deal with the consequences of the occupation policy that they admit has failed." End quote. Maybe that same person is still around, writing editorials. (Applause.)
Fortunately, we had a resolute president named Truman, who, with the American people, persevered, knowing that a new democracy at the center of Europe would lead to stability and peace. And because that generation of Americans held firm in the cause of liberty, we live in a better and safer world today. (Applause.)
The progress we and our friends and allies seek in the broader Middle East will not come easily, or all at once. Yet Americans, of all people, should never be surprised by the power of liberty to transform lives and nations. That power brought settlers on perilous journeys, inspired colonies to rebellion, ended the sin of slavery, and set our nation against the tyrannies of the 20th century. We were honored to aid the rise of democracy in Germany and Japan and Nicaragua and Central Europe and the Baltics -- and that noble story goes on. I believe that America is called to lead the cause of freedom in a new century. I believe that millions in the Middle East plead in silence for their liberty. I believe that given the chance, they will embrace the most honorable form of government ever devised by man. I believe all these things because freedom is not America's gift to the world, it is the almighty God's gift to every man and woman in this world.
Oh... and while we're on the topic of "he never told us it would cost money to fight this war:
from 2002:
It costs a lot to fight this war. We have spent more than a billion dollars a month -- over $30 million a day -- and we must be prepared for future operations. Afghanistan proved that expensive precision weapons defeat the enemy and spare innocent lives, and we need more of them. We need to replace aging aircraft and make our military more agile, to put our troops anywhere in the world quickly and safely. Our men and women in uniform deserve the best weapons, the best equipment, the best training -- and they also deserve another pay raise. (Applause.)
My budget includes the largest increase in defense spending in two decades -- because while the price of freedom and security is high, it is never too high. Whatever it costs to defend our country, we will pay. (Applause.)
*****************
Al, I have said this before, but perhaps it bears saying again. Just before 9/11, we had built a retirement home and were planning on getting out. I was going to go to grad school and was really excited about it.
We sunk all our life savings into this house - it was our dream come true. I can't tell you how much I was looking forward to not moving anymore - I've moved all my life. I have a career now for the first time, my children are grown, so they don't move with us anymore, our parents are older, so we worry when we're on the other coast that they'll get sick and we'll be too far away if they need us. My husband had just been promoted and been approved for command, but he had turned it down to retire. He was enrolled in grad school in economics at Johns Hopkins.
At this time, our house was nearing completion and we were hoping to move in within the next month or two. We'd been living out of a suitcase for several months. I had just spent an exhausting 4 months packing us up by hand every day after a 10-hour work day and doing a do-it-yourself move (not fun when you're in your forties) into storage, but we were really looking forward to being in our own home finally.
Shortly after 9/11, I got this email at work. I can't say I was surprised:
Cass (no, not my real name):
I decided to accept the command.
I have been wrestling with this since the attacks on Sept 11. Listening to President Bush, gauging what the terrorists will continue to do, guessing what our response will be, the impact this will have on the US, and how we will react; I know that I want to part of the response and support our country and way of life.
Our nation and our military are going to need a lot of support in the coming years. The American people, especially young people, are going to need a lot of education and guidance. I have the opportunity to affect a lot of citizen-Marines at x/xx, the local community, and even the Marine Corps as a "commander". I want my contribution to be valued, and I think it will have the most value and the greatest impact if I stay in the Marine Corps.
I truly believe our country is in a time of need and that the need will become a greater in the next few years. I know this is going to upset our plans and affect the boys and our extended family. I am sorry in advance for all the turmoil this decision will cause. It is something I think I must do, and I feel better for having done it.
Knowing that you love me and will support me made this decision easier, but because I love you, I know how big an impact it will have on you. I made it because, as you have said, I need to be able to live with myself.
***********************
I wasn't surprised, and I wasn't happy. This meant that we would get to live in our new house only a few months before packing up and moving across country to California. I didn't know if I'd lose my job (which I depended on to pay $4000/month in tuition fees for our two sons in college), and I could forget about grad school. But I was proud of my husband, as I have been every single day since the day I met him when I was only 17 years old.
You will never convince me that the Bob Herberts of this world are right, and my husband is wrong.
Bob Herbert is a sniveling coward. He hasn't a clue as to what's really going on in Iraq - he has never set foot there. He lies and distorts the news. I'd rather stand with the people who are trying to do something about this problem than the whiny snots who carp and bi**h and moan any day. On the day he dies, Bob Herbert will never have done anything positive with his life.
My husband, along with just about the entire United States Marine Corps, will not have to meet their maker with that on their conscience. I am proud to be associated with them, even if all I do is make his bed or pour the man's coffee in the morning.
Bob Herbert isn't fit to pour pi** out of his boot.
Posted by: Cassandra at Oct 19, 2004 5:07:09 AM
Al,
FDR and W share a common trait. Both were liberal domestic spenders, but good war time leaders;-)
Posted by: KJ at Oct 19, 2004 10:50:57 AM
Cassandra, that was a very eloquent and moving post. Grad school will get you hooded, but you already have a PhD in reality skills.
Greg
Posted by: Greg at Oct 19, 2004 5:26:51 PM
Why Greg...
You have just done what few men have ever done: you have momentarily rendered me speechless.
Thank you.
Posted by: Cassandra at Oct 19, 2004 5:35:28 PM
One last one here for me,
First, I admire support, and approve all our men and women in the armed forces, and their families, including Cass and her husband. I'm willing to kick in for the extra combat pay and medical care, and VA benefits; I'm not sure why the Republicans were trying to cut it.
If we're really stuck with Bush as the great War Leader, I sure hope he starts to learn from his mistakes. Lincoln and Churchill did.
Third, Bob Herbert is a newspaper columnist, not the President.
Posted by: Al Peck at Oct 20, 2004 2:02:08 AM
Al, no one cut combat pay. That was a temporary extension that was scheduled to expire and was being supplemented by other allowances anyway.
Republicans weren't trying to cut it. That is not an accurate statement. People in the combat zone already get a tax break on their pay that is worth mega bucks plus other allowances. You need to check your facts. Kerry said several things (as Edwards did) during the debates that were flat out wrong - I know - we're in the military and we get the paychecks and see the LES's. My husband was in Fallujah at the time and was getting the very allowances they were talking about because he was in a combat zone. Stupid, but that's the rule.
Posted by: Cassandra at Oct 20, 2004 6:33:24 AM
Al,
As the spouse of one who went over to the ME two years ago, I can attest to the truthfulness of Cass's assertions of taxfree pay in combat zones, not to mention the hazardous duty pay, and the IRS doesn't even come back a year later to get their cut when they come home.
However, he is home safe now, with a 2,000 a month reduction in pay because he lost the perks when he returned stateside, and about to take a 50% base pay redcution because he is retiring. Oh, he starts a new job soon, but he will lose a further 4,000 a month.
That is a combination of his base pay and BAQ and BAS.
yes, there is a possibility that he could go back in, but with everything that has happened to our family this past year, the Army is pleased and so are we.
Posted by: Cricket at Oct 20, 2004 1:17:19 PM
