« Factual Rebuttal | Main | Random Thoughts for 11/18/05 »
November 18, 2005
Jean Schmidt: Ball Buster?
The woman who defeated the media darling: Paul Hackett (you should read that first). DeWine should take notice.
Did her comments cross the line? Yes. The way she phrased her statement implied that Rep. Murtha was a coward...he is a decorated war veteran who served his country with courage and bravery.
I will state, however, that prior bravery (that should be revered) does not entitle you to be an ass your entire life (see John Kerry). Rep. Murtha, whatever he claims to have meant, took to the microphone in front of a hungry press, wanted the troops out of Iraq, regardless the consequenses. He only wanted the troops out safely, but cared nothing of result to the people in the region.
Here was a brave man who served his country, but he makes statements that terrorism started with Abu Ghraib. You can respect a man's service and his bravery, but still know he is either a political hack, a tool of political hacks or an idiot.
From Opinion Journal we have this exchange from PBS yesterday:
In exchange with Margaret Warner on last night's "NewsHour With Jim Lehrer," though, suggests that Murtha has simply taken leave of reality:
Warner: But may I ask you, sir, if you believe--[the president] says--for whatever reason, Iraq has become the center of terrorism - that if the U.S. appears to retreat in the face of that, that it will be a blow to the American fight against radical Islamic terrorism? What do you say to that?
Murtha: Well, I say that the fight against Americans began with Abu Ghraib. It began with the invasion of Iraq. That's when terrorism started. It didn't start when there was criticism of this administration. This administration doesn't want to listen to any ideas.
These are the words of a liar or an idiot.
But he shouldn't be attacked on the floor of the House. His ideas should be attacked. Am I splitting hairs? Maybe. I cannot think of the Bible passage off-hand (I think it was in Job) where, without sinning, he said to his wife that she spoke like the whores speak--therefore not calling her a whore, but telling her how she sounded. What Schmidt needed to do was the same, attack Murtha for speaking like whores (Michael Moores) speak, but not that he is a whore himself. Political Teen has the video...
"Cowards cut and run, Marines never do."
Posted by Aaron at November 18, 2005 08:10 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.lifelikepundits.com/cgi-bin/mt3/mt-tb.cgi/1757
Comments
Wow - what a flip-flopper - called Murtha a coward, then said she didn't, and asked her words to be stricken from the record.
Course, if she wasn't calling Murtha a coward, why did her words need striking?
Posted by: at November 19, 2005 12:10 AM
I tried to trackback to this post, but I received an error message. Anyway, I linked to you here. I included a history lesson for John Murtha. Check it out.
Posted by: salt1907 at November 19, 2005 09:14 AM
Rep. Schmidt was relaying a message she received from a Marine to Rep Murtha.
And by the way, Murtha's call for "Cut and Run" is cowardly...most military vets will tell you that!
I guess Murtha can now pull a Kerry..."I was for the Pull Out before I voted against it"
About time the pubbies flexed a little muscle.
Posted by: Jay at November 19, 2005 09:16 AM
Rep. Schmidt can not hide behind ' I was just relaying a message'. If I fee the policy in Iraq is wrong and say so why am I a coward? I served in combat in Viet Nam. This war is a mess and was sold to us on hype. Just why are we there? How long do we stay? What is our stategy? These questions have to be answered.
Posted by: pete at November 19, 2005 11:40 AM
No one is calling you a coward or questioning your patriotism on our site--please don't think that.
Thank you for your service in Vietnam. I believe the frustration comes from this "absolute moral authority" that liberals try to claim by using veterans to get out their message.
Democrats believe that if you're a veteran, you cannot be criticized for your views. When a person attacks the policy, then you are somehow "attacking his/her patriotism."
If you are still unclear as to why we are in Iraq, I invite you to read the Iraq resolution passed by congress: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/print/20021002-2.html. It lists 23 reasons for going to war, of which only one was wrong (WMD).
You can read about it here: http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson200511180818.asp
Regarding Jean Schmidt, I said in my post that she crossed the line, but others disagree. They contend that she was simply passing a message from one veteran to another. Can't veterans disagree? This brings us back to the moral authority issue--some veterans (those that oppose the war) are given better standing than other veterans (those who support the war).
Again, God bless you for your service in Vietnam. We love you for your courage and sacrifice. But we also wish we could have had that sacrifice result in victory, not retreat.
Posted by: aaron at November 19, 2005 11:51 AM
Regardless of his Vietnam service, it is cowardly and dishonest for Murtha or anyone else to lie in order to change American policy. And BTW, Ann Coulter called out the Dems on this "veteran-as-peacenik" scam two years ago.
Posted by: salt1907 at November 19, 2005 12:17 PM
After listening to years of "crossing the line" characterizations of Bush as a war criminal, liar, crackhead, Hitler, fascist, etc. and the troops as Nazis, thugs, baby killers, etc., I think it is touche time for the Democrats.
We have just become so used to the unceasing, over-the-line verbal abuse from the left that when the mostly restrained right does it, it has a little more shock value.
Posted by: inmypajamas at November 19, 2005 12:20 PM
I don't remember any members of Congress calling Bush a crackhead or Nazi on the floor and on the record.
Posted by: msf at November 21, 2005 04:29 PM