NYTimes Editorial: "More Than A Feeling" (Bush's Too 'Emotional' Claim About War Critics Is Absurd)

[Hissyspit]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/04/opinion/04weds1.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

Editorial
More Than a Feeling

Published: April 4, 2007
President Bush and his advisers have made a lot of ridiculous charges about critics of the war in Iraq: they’re unpatriotic, they want the terrorists to win, they don’t support the troops, to cite just a few. But none of these seem quite as absurd as President Bush’s latest suggestion, that critics of the war whose children are at risk are too “emotional” to see things clearly.

The direct target was Matthew Dowd, one of the chief strategists of Mr. Bush’s 2004 presidential campaign, who has grown disillusioned with the president and the war, which he made clear in an interview with Jim Rutenberg published in The Times last Sunday. But by extension, Mr. Bush’s comments were insulting to the hundreds of thousands of Americans whose sons, daughters, sisters, brothers and spouses have served or will serve in Iraq.

- snip -

Mr. Dowd’s case, Mr. Bush said, “as I understand it, is obviously intensified because his son is deployable.” Over the weekend, two of Mr. Bush’s chief spokesmen, Dan Bartlett and Dana Perino, claimed that Mr. Dowd’s change of heart about the war was rooted in “personal” issues and “emotions,” and talked of his “personal journey.” In recent years, Mr. Dowd suffered the death of a premature twin daughter, and was divorced. His son is scheduled to serve in Iraq soon.

- snip -

This form of attack is especially galling from a president who from the start tried to paint this war as virtually sacrifice-free: the Iraqis would welcome America with open arms, the war would be paid for with Iraqi oil revenues — and the all-volunteer military would concentrate the sacrifice on only a portion of the nation’s families.

MORE

[Poiuyt]

1. Why don't we put the twins into the middle of Baghdad and see who gets emotional

[Omphaloskepsis]

8. Honestly....

He would just have them guard McCain. He is that much of a dick.


Now I will drink myself to sleep.

[Joe Chi Minh]

9. I don't think it's fear for their safety, so much as a perception that it

would be infra dig. Only La Helmsely's "little people" go to fight wars these days.

The days of the old patrician, noble-warrior culture, the concept of the purity of arms, inherited from the Normans, where leading families sent their sons to the military to fight or die for their country, went out of the Republican Party with the exodus of the patricians, the leading families, themselves; which, in the event, was clearly not a day too soon, considering this anachronistic, imperial war of occupation. All that seems to be left in their party are crooked lawyers, criminal businessmen, and a few simple souls, good and bad.

[magellan]

2. You know what annoys me

...almost as much as Bush**'s disrespect of everyone in general, and our troops and their families specifically? Shitty corporate newspapers that suddenly, after six years, find it within the parameters of acceptable to print the opinion that "President Bush and his advisers have made a lot of ridiculous charges about critics of the war in Iraq". That should have been the topic of an A1 story long ago.

Kudos to whoever wrote the opinion piece.

[grannylib]

4. Exactly! And just who printed their stupid-assed 'charges about critics of

the war in Iraq'? And who continues to push the notion that it's the Democrats who are being confrontational or obstructionist?


Whores, the lot of 'em.

[cali]

7. Actually, it's not an opinion piece

it's an editorial- in other words, it's not one individual expressing an opinion, it's the organization.

And it's not appropriate for an editorial to be the topic of a news story.

The NYT certainly screwed up with its reporting by Miller, but this isn't the first hard hitting editorial they've written about the prez and the war. They've been doing it for years.

[19jet54]

11. Bush Tantrum Comments

"If I don't get a clean bill soon, some troops may have to stay longer & others may be deployed sooner" - W

Translation - If you American people don't put a lease on this new congress, I will punish your children; maybe even get them killed?

I don't know about you, but I do not respond well to threats! :mad: SCREW "W" :patriot:

[SammyWinstonJack]

15. ..

:thumbsup:

[redqueen]

18. Well spotted... he is threatening American families...

not surprising at all, sadly.

[juno jones]

3. Sociopath...n/t

[Hissyspit]

5. .

[Solly Mack]

6. They say the same thing about veterans - that their perception

has been clouded by having gone to war so they can't be rational about war

Back in 2000 that's how they attacked McCain...and later on others

[ClintonTyree]

10. Bubble boy Bush....

<snip>
"He gives a frightening impression that he has never heard any voice from any quarter that gave him pause, much less led him to rethink a position".

Ya' think? :eyes: "Frightening" is right. The fact that this miserable simpleton surrounds himself with ass kissing sycophants and stubbornly refuses to even consider the fact that there may be better solutions to the Iraq problem is downright terrifying. Reality is a stranger to him, that's for sure.

[tanyev]

12. Poppy Bush has been getting very emotional lately.

Guess that cancels out anything he says nowadays, too.

[whistle]

13. We need a complete psychological profile of George W. Bush

...just like what was commissioned by the OSS back in 1943 on Adolph Hitler titled: "The Secret Wartime Report: The Mind of Adolf Hitler" By Walter C. Langer

[The Wizard]

14. The comment in yesterday's press conference

that was reflective of Bush's bubble was his citing a "group that thinks we shouldn't be in Iraq at all." The majority of civilization is not a mere group. Talk about isolation from reality and spin, the Bush cabal is the face of cognitive dissonance.

[Marnieworld]

16. Another point to make

All of this talk of others' emotions underscores the fact that the * admin is emotionally detached from Iraq. Shouldn't they also care personally? Thousands of American lives in my hands would affect me emotionally but then again I'm not a sociopath.

I've never killed a small animal for fun or joked about doing it.
I've never mocked someone on Death Row.
I never told terrorists to "Bring it on!" and risked others' lives.
I never read a children's book while Americans were under attack.
I never happily ate cake and strummed a guitar while Americans were drowning in their streets.

I think that it is a very telling sign when someone relates the concept of caring, compassion and the need to protect people from harm, human emotions and sentiment, to something worthy of dismissal. Someone should tell them that the absence of these things is what is truly irrational and perhaps if they actually cared about what happens to the people involved then they would make more rational choices, I dunno like escaping someone else's civil war perhaps?

[MaryBear]

17. This is more than an attack on Dowd. Claiming emotionality

blurs thinking has long been a stereotype regarding women. This is an attack on nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, etc. It is a call to the Good ol boys.

[midnight]

19. What exactly does that statement mean? Parents and family

who have children fighting in this war and oppose it are too emotional to see the value of all the killing? Is that what he means?

[maxsolomon]

20. "Emotional" is GOP code for "Feminine"

you got to hand it to them; they keep sticking to their worn-out frames.

[pigpickle]

21. kick