Doggedly searching for the crux of the biscuit.
Here's a little thought exercise. Try, just try, to imagine the reaction if an anti-war protestor had driven a pick-up truck through a memorial to dead soldiers. Right. The apoplectic denunciations and indignant demands for the same from everybody who ever pulled a Democratic lever would be drowning out air raid sirens. But, hmm, barely a murmur. I don't think it's quite fair to judge entire groups of people by the actions of one lone Texas nutcase (unless, of course, they voted for him), but my criteria don't seem to be the ones that were adopted by our friends across the ideological divide, now are they?
An Iraq veteran wrote a letter to the driver of the truck that's worth the short time it will take you to read it and Elizabeth Edwards, who knows about losing a son, has written a moving open letter about Cindy Sheehan. Sheehan scares the hell out of the Bush administration because it's a battle they can't win. That doesn't mean they won't go their normal route of trying to slime their opponents through proxies. That's all they know how to do and their little obedient orcs are more than happy to play along, but in the end it won't work because this isn't about Cindy Sheehan or the parents of Edward Schroeder or the other grieving parents you'll be hearing about in the coming months. It's about a nation led into an illegal, immoral, dishonest war that offers neither a way to win nor a way to escape, prosecuted with monumental incompetence and corruption. And that has precisely nothing to do with the fact that Michael Moore is fat or that some perennial bête noire of the right supports Sheehan. It does, however, have everything to do with the huge and rapidly growing pile of dead bodies.
The mourning parents and the soldiers who have returned with their lives and bodies shattered, however, are the human face of this war. At least, they are the American face, which is the only kind that seems to matter to much of America, and even that face has been carefully hidden from view. Until now. The brayers on the right would have you believe this is just another political game, but it's no such thing. Oh, it is to them, make no mistake, because everything is to them. Cindy Sheehan, on the other hand, is insisting that the memory of her son not just disappear with bland acceptance into the daily blur of casualties. Insisting that the country — not just Bush, but the country — not change the subject because it's uncomfortable.
TrackBackThe difference between Churchill and Northern is that Churchill had the support of a university that thought he was just the kind of person it needed teaching its students. It paid him nicely for spewing his fight-the-power rhetoric. Plenty of people thought Churchill had it right.
No hired Northern to drive over crosses.
Posted by: GaijinBiker at August 18, 2005 07:56 AMThe point remains, though. So they both had jobs. Big deal. That still doesn't make him any kind of representative of the left, nor does it make Northern a representative of the right. I suppose it makes him a representative of the Native American Studies Department of the University of Colorado, but when counting down the influential institutions on the left, you have to get way the fuck down the list before you hit that. In fact, you really have to get off of the list altogether.
Quick, no googling: name two other Native American studies professors anywhere in the United States. Mm-hmm. Nobody had ever even heard of Ward Churchill before the Eichmann comment. I certainly hadn't, and I'll bet good money you hadn't either. Similarly, nobody had ever heard of Larry Northern before this incident, but you aren't seeing every lefty blog expressing half-assed, sarcastic regret that he represents the "true face of the right."
Anyway, Ward Churchill is a libertarian who insists there is no difference between the two major parties, which makes him a terribly odd spokesman for the left in this country. Now that we're done punching the strawman, back to the actual point.
Posted by: apostropher at August 18, 2005 08:13 AMHey, quit sliming us Orcs. At least we don't lie about why we go to war. And when we do, our leaders are out in front. --Muglug
Posted by: Charles Watkins at August 18, 2005 01:42 PMChurchill isn't even on the agenda. For fuck's sake, the dude took a pick-up and used it to run over memorial crosses. What does he have to do before the people on his "side" realize what disrespect that is? Isn't the point of "support the troops" that respecting the people who choose to defend our country is something more important than petty politics? HE RAN OVER MEMORIAL CROSSES. What part of that sentence is in any way controverial in terms of its factual nature, carries any spin or in any way shows any respect for the dead or the armed services?
Posted by: Robust McManlyPants at August 18, 2005 04:05 PMI think everyone realizes Northern's act was despicable. No one I have heard of is defending it.
Posted by: Gaijin Biker at August 18, 2005 07:01 PMAnd I'm glad, for one, no is defending it. A condemnation would be nice, but I ain't holding my breath.
Posted by: Sterling at August 18, 2005 07:39 PMAnd, who are we accusing of "spewing fight the power rhetoric"?
Posted by: Sterling at August 18, 2005 07:43 PM