I think thery're saying soldiers are getting killed and it's a waste. Agree or disagree I don't see that as mocking soldiers. That's like saying it's worse than theire actually being dead.

An absolutely honest, straight-up question - how do you?

Is there something missing in the report that you know that doesn't come across?

I agree. "Mocking" is not the right word.

Footnote to the article: "KCRA 3 received a call late Wednesday morning from the homeowner saying that a group of people had torn down the display. He said that what he did was not illegal, but what was done by the people who removed the display was."

The mini-poll on the site is running overwhemingly to the view that respondents "find this display offensive... [but] support their right to express themselves."

Frankly, I find that the most positive thing about this incident.

First off, I'm not sure why someone that is against war is automatically considered a leftist. RJ seems to just have this agenda to paint every thing that is not on the agenda of the president as leftist craziness. Making a statement like this not only what makes America great, it also shows that not everyone (yet) has fallen lock step behind whatever our government and politicians do and say based on ideology such as our buddy RJ. I like to approach each news item with an open mind and in this case I would agree that it is not "mocking" of any sort. These people are obviously feeling some sort of pain because of the deaths they hear about every day. To turn these peoples obviously strong feelings that our country has wasted the lives of our brave soldiers is something that should not be made out to be an evil act. They are not leftist, evil, stupid and this should not even be considered a controversey. Making statements like this should be made everywhere, everyday. Thats what makes this country great - regardless of your personal opinion on the protest being made. I do agree though that they probably could have found a better way to get their statement across....

Shame on you, our boys are dying over there and the least we can do is show some support. Since when being anti-American is ok? Since when mocking the dead is ok? We live in the best country on earth and for those of you who don't realize it - I dare you to go live anywhere else (whether it's Bosnia, Afganistan, Ukraine or France); you will come back kissing the ground you walk on, I guarantee it.

Has the envirionment in the US become so paranoid, that the very act of free speech has become the rallying point for censoring any and all dissent of the current administration? It's amazing that for all those who suggest the display is a 'mockery' to the brave troops, it is those same people who seem to have absolutely no problem with the idea that those troops are dying in Iraq due to the obscene lies perpetrated on them by Bush and Co. What in reality is worse; a display of free speech against military actions which the speaker considers immoral and unjust, or an immoral and unjust invasion and occupation of a soverign nation, executed under a carefully manufactured rationale of lies and dishonesty?

This Sacramento couple makes my day, in the best kind of way. It's a tremendous statement, courageous and bold - the kind of free speech moment that Jefferson and Co. dreamed of.

What I love is this: "How about a picture of Bush next to a sign that says "1597 dead and counting..." or some such? Why use the uniform of a brave American soldier and "lynch" it?" Well...yeah, brother, that would be great! Thanks for the idea, it'll be implemented immediately.

Hey folks: the biggest fallacy committed by the likes of the original poster is that somehow dissent is "America-hating", and that somehow "supporting the troops" means supporting the imbecilic foreign policy that puts them in danger of being killed.

Every time someone points out that this war is against a false enemy (remember that Iraq was the only secular i.e. non-muslim government in the Middle East) and based on countless lies, they get immediately slagged as "anti-American". How is wanting the US to honor its Constitutional ideals anti-American? If everyone is required to support the government no matter what then we've become the Soviet Union.

"(remember that Iraq was the only secular i.e. non-muslim government in the Middle East)" If that is the case, how come the words "God is Great" are written in Arabic on the Iraqi flag? IN any case , you could call the former Iraqi regime anything you like, the reality was that it was a totlitarian regime.

Why does it seem like so many people who post here never knew what was going on in Iraq until March 2003, it is like the last 15 years never happened in that country.

here's what i find disturbing (from the local Fox affiliate):


There's an Iraqi flag in a window and the homeowner also put up a Palestinian flag in the front window, which has his jewish neighbors across the street perplexed. Marque Cohen/Neighbor said "Both my wife and I are jewish we found it very offensive."

I'm sorry Jewish people are offended by the mere presence of a Palestinian flag. How intolerant we've become.

I am late to this thread but I am also failing to see where the real disagreement is: RJ said he supported their right to free speech. He explicitly said he didn't want them censored. He has a right to be disgusted by the content of that speech just as others have the right to cheer it.

I agree he made the assumption that the people involved are "leftists," but other than that, what's the beef?

Oh, and while every human life is precious, the war itself is noble and just.

I love my country, and I hate the actions of a President who lied to us and the world. Does that make me anti-American? Only if you think that truth doesn't mean anything anymore. THAT'S un-American.

sfca says: Since when being anti-American is ok?

A large number of things have been said on this thread that I disagree with. The only one I have found offensive is quoted above.

As an American servicemember on Active Duty, I swore an oath "to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic". In the Constitution (First Amendment) it says: "Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press".

This may be difficult for some right wing-nuts to grasp, but being anti-American is ok because this is America.

I am free to disagree with those who are anti-American, but I am not free (nor do I have the desire) to suppress them. Based on his post, "sfca" falls into the category of anti-American, at least in my book. But, as stated, he is free to post it.

Roy, so you defend his right to say that he doesn't defend your right to speak in a manner that might be construed as anti-American, which is in reality the most American of all?

Eric: what you said (I think . . .)

The real point is that freedom of expression (particularly freedom to express political opinion) is a fundamental human right, to be defended regardless of what the person is saying. (This has some very limited exceptions, such as the infamous "shouting fire in a crowded theater", but being anti-American is not one of the exceptions.)

Here are a few more examples of the "mocking a soldier":

"...to listen to giant thalidomide baby Max Cleland tell it..."
- RJ (Bobby) Elliott, 7/31/04

"...he kinda sorta does look like a giant flipper baby..."
- RJ (Bobby) Elliott, 7/31/04

"Max Cleland can't fucking juggle."
- RJ (Bobby) Elliott, 7/31/04

(taken from RJ Elliott's blogcritics post "Kerry Dissed by Marines," July 31, 2004)

The display is mocking American citizens who believed the Bush administration lies. We are now spending billions of tax dollars which has resulted in over 1447 soldiers deaths. People are offended by the display because deep down they know they themselves are responsible!

I guess I can infer that pretty much all of your day, RJ, is occupied by shitting in bags and leaving them on people's doorsteps.

Maybe you should find a new hobby.

anybody who actually "supports" the troops wouldn't have sent them on this
mission based on a pile of lies in the first place!! DUH. and to add insult
to injury, without proper equipment -- and ~then~ cutting the funding for
supporting our poor soldiers' families back at home!! DISGRACEFUL.

you say that ya support Bush's policies (lies) without thinking, just 'cuz he's
your President?? well get your ass over to the recruiting station and join the
service and put your own butt on the line, you jerk.
and be sure to bring along your over-18 kids as well 'cuz we're going to need
all the cannon fodder we can get, for as long as we're over there.

In Bush's world, anyone not a true believer in his policies doesn't have a seat at the table and any dissent is corralled into "free speech zones" out of sight and out of mind (like the flag-draped coffins returning from Iraq).

In Bush's world, you are either with him or you are with the "terrorists" thus formulating the dangerous equation: Bush policy = patriotism. This has allowed his supporters to brand any opposition as "anti-American" and "treasonous" which they have done with a McCarthy-like fervor.

In Bush's world, it makes sense to wage the vague "war on terror" because it gives a blanket excuse for any action associated with it, it makes it difficult to measure success or failure, and it cows much of the public (including the Press and the Democrats) with fears of unknown, faceless boogiemen.

And to the poster who thinks that some of us don't know what has been happening in Iraq for the past 15 years, I suggest he go back and study what has been happening to Iraq since the end of WWI. The UK and the US have been screwing around with Iraq and that part of the world ever since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. If it weren't for us, Saddam would never have been there in the first place.

It seems to me it is the people objecting to BushCo who have a better understanding and love for American Ideals than those attacking us for not falling in line behind the neocon's dreams of empire.

If you can't live with the First Amendment you are truly anti-American.
Love it or leave it. Canada to the North. Mexico to the South. No stinking First Amendment supporters.

I am a decent person and do not find the display offensive.

I find the casual, pointless killing of human beings offensive.

I find the cheap display of 'patriotism' offensive.

I find knee-jerk loyalty to authority figures to be offensive.

I wonder if anybody out there has the slightest idea what the American revolution was about.

Taxes, baby, TAXES.

Well put, BHW. And there were a lot of hanging military uniforms around in the revolution.

Those currently in power and those seeking power should keep your message in mind, because IMO it's still all about taxes.

All Americans really care about - or at least the first thing the majority care about - is freedom and the bottom line of freedom and the one quantifiable measure of it is how much money the government takes from you.

Dave

I live two houses down from Steve and Virginia. They're good friends with some people in my house. I'm a little annoyed that people automatically assume they hate America. They wouldn't be living in America if they hated it. America, however, is not perfect. I'll never apoligize for saying that because it's true. These people are trying to speak out agains what they think is wrong, just as "right wingers" often speak out against gay marriage and abortion (I was trying not to generalize like that, but I had to simplify it). Knowing these people personally, I can tell you that they don't hate America, and they aren't mocking the troops. I have family in the Army, I wouldn't want to mock them (Though I wouldn't commit crimes against people who were, I just wouldn't like those people too much). My family went into service to protect this country, but this war (According to some people, your opinions may differ) was not about defense. It was an attack. My family didn's sign up for the army so they could be made disposable pawns in a regime change. I also don't see how someone who claims to support America so much could think it's right to break AMERICAN laws in order to stop other people from exercising the constitutional rights our soldiers SHOULD be fighting for.

"If you oppose the war in Iraq, fine... [why] use the uniform of a brave American soldier and "lynch" it?"

In this case, the message is definitely overshadowed by the medium used to convey it. I don't agree with the folks who tore the display down, but what did these folks expect, especially in a town that has a lot of military personnel originating from it?

I posted something along these lines before the crash today:

I don't agree with the folks who tore the display down, but what did these folks expect, especially in a town that has a lot of military personnel originating from it?

And there we go: blame the victim.

What was she doing out jogging at night?

What did she expect if she was wearing *that*?

Maybe it's a woman thing, but whenever I hear the words, "What did he/she/they expect?" I get the creeps.

I think that there is no form of speech on someone's private property that would fall into crossing the line of deserving some sort of vandalism as payback. It's your property and you should be able to be as outrageous as you want without other people using that as justification for vandalism.

The homeowners in this case should have expected that some people -- maybe even most people who drove by -- would be upset by the display [I'm not sure why because it wasn't an attack on the military personnel, but on the people who send them overseas to fight], but they should never *expect* that it will lead to vandalism or worse. Sorry, that's just backwards.

And if it *is* a military town, then I'd love to know if a person in uniform was the vandal. If so, then that person has done more to sully the military uniform than the homeowner did.

BHW:

Have you ever heard of "victim precipitation"?

No? Look it up...

Here's a thought:

Try going into inner-city Detroit wearing a Klan outfit. I mean, free speech, right? You would certainly have the Constitutional right to do so.

But you'd get your ass kicked in about 10 minutes. Probably robbed. Possibly killed.

Doesn't mean it's RIGHT to have attacked you, but it could be reasonably expected.

Like I said, victim precipitation...

Here's a thought:

Try going into a gated-neighborhood black, with an afro. I mean, free speech, right? You would certainly have the Constitutional right to do so.

But you'd get your ass kicked in about 10 minutes. Probably robbed. Possibly killed.

Doesn't mean it's RIGHT to have attacked you, but it could be reasonably expected.

Like I said, victim precipitation...

lol, Temple....

Victim precipitation, RJ, is the same thing as blaming the victim. The clothes she wore, the color of his skin, the "look" he gave the white woman, etc. -- it's all the "what did you expect" defense of criminal behavior.

TS:

You honestly believe a black dude would get attacked and robbed and maybe killed simply for being in a "gated community"?

What planet are YOU on?

"Victim precipitation, RJ, is the same thing as blaming the victim."

No, it's not. Try taking a CJ course some time...

I think in the gated community you'd probably get escorted out by security or perhaps get a gardner or cabana boy sicced on you, but I think the chances of getting your ass kicked and beyond are pretty slim.

Unless you're a total wuss...

Didn't say the comparison was perfect. Just trying to make a point to see what comes out the other end.

RJ: >>Try taking a CJ course some time...

I suppose you've been told often that you sound very condescending, right?

Yeah - you'd have to be a wuss to get beaten up in a gated-community. Um, I guess cause they're all weaklings and not big and black and dangerous ????????

It's the same thing, college boy. The victim bascially gets blamed for playing a role in the crime perpetrated against him/her. You know, wearing a short skirt and all that.

I love the how, typically, the personal responsibility of the lawbreakers in this case, the vandals, gets tossed out the window by one of the resident ultra conservative BCs. A.k.a., it was wrong of the vandals, but it's not really their fault. The victim is at fault for "precipitating" the crime -- bringing it upon him/herself -- and therefore deserved it.

I never said these folks deserved it, I just made this point to emphasize why I am not surprised it did happened.
I stll don't condone it destruction.

My take on it is that if you make unpopular statements, you'd better be aware people will confront you about those statements. Of course, if they take the confrontation to an illegal level, they are wrong.

Hours later, I realize the word "Confront" might be too strong a word. People who voice a controversial opinion, or in this case, present their displeasure in a way that the presentation overshadows the message should expect criticism, but when that criticism veers into illegal or unlawful means, as it did in this case, that is wronge.

The headline of this one kinda bugged me- "leftists mock dead soldiers."

I saw the prostest, and there was no mockery. It was a statement- soldiers are dead, and tax dollars are facilitating it. The image of the empty uniform wasn't mockery, it was supposed to make people outraged at the death of the soldier. How is this mockery?

If the soldier had been called a baby killer, or if there had even been the sparest mention of the soldier being at fault, then it would be mockery, but both were absent. This is not mockery, it's objective fact, presented in artistic form.

The brushes with which some people paint
others with are much too broad.I know of
many friends who are staunch Republicans
that do not support the war and I also
know Democrats that have an aversion to
much of Bush's present policy that will
defend the war tirelessly. The tired old
adage "Never assume anything,it makes an
ass of U and Me" could not be any more
applicable when it comes to phrasing in
regards to post such as these.

I thought 'victim precipitation' was when it started raining victims like cats and dogs.

Dave

SFCSki says; "Shame on you, our boys are dying over there and the least we can do is show some support."

Protesting the war by reminding the public that lives are being lost is a SUPPORT of the soldiers if anything. How do you twist this around to being an attack on soldiers. On the contrary, it is a call to wise up and quit using human life as a means to a political ends.

SfcSki says; "Since when is being anti-American is ok?"

Why is it "Anti-American" to oppose war? ...to oppose the death of your own citizens and the citizens of Iraq? Quit twisting shit around and making senseless, empty, arguments. Really THink before you repeat that garbage. In effect, what your doing is creating a climate in America where you can't oppose the views of the government. IF you do, your "Anti-American".

In fact, "anti-american" labels are just a convienient way of ignoring the issue and discussing it on its own merits. It's a way of excluding that person from the political discourse by suggesting that he hasn't America's interests in mind. Its cheap, and its ignorant.

I think its damn depressing to see how many people have slipt into this view that "your either with us or against us". It means that George bush's grade school rhetoric is falling on ears that haven't the critical skills to see thru it. It's an insult to reduce this political discourse to being "with us or against us". Why arn't you outraged!

>>Why arn't you outraged!<<

I thnk he is, Sydney.

Dave

When you decide to make your home a public forum for debate, be prepared for the debate. Is it any more shocking than the visuals of dead marines being hung over a bridge last year? If Steve and Virgina Pearcy spent their money and took out a full size bill board to express their opinion would that also be surpressed? I probably do not agree with their politics, but I do agree with their right to express their opinion. I just would challange their judgement concerning the medium chosen and whether "damaging the environment" for the rest of their community is the right way to express themselves. When you light a fuse to a stick of dynamite, expect the eventual explosion. They will have to deal with it. They choose it.

I noticed the site's filled with all sorts of examples of self destructive behaviors recently. A sign of the times ?

Yet another person excusing the vandals' behavior as something to be expected.

Great country we live in: publicize your political opinion on your own private property, and *expect* to have it vandalized. That's the American Way.

Sydney, I did not say either of the things you haved attributed to me.

Have you seen this soldier's uniform hung by a noose?

http://www.thekcrachannel.com/news/4184282/detail.html

Steve and Virginia Pearcy have made a public display on their Sacramento home at Marty Way, CA 85118. Their phone number is also publicly listed as 67.111.95.37 (Temple ed. Quit fucking around sweet - we aren't going to be posting people's phone numbers).

They have used their home to make a public comment. Therefore, it is legal to post their address, which has been clearly identified by television news reports. Please respond and let them know they are wrong.

Who are they?

>> noticed the site's filled with all sorts of examples of self destructive behaviors recently. A sign of the times ?

A sign of what attracts a blogger most. Negative media my ass ;-)

What's your point, sweet? Seems like a good story: a girl raised in the welfare system pulls herself up by her bootstraps. Sounds like success to me.

And your understanding of cause and legality is flawed sweet.

bhw - not to mention she seemed a smartypants college at 14?

No kidding!

I bet she took more college courses than RJ.

SFC Ski, I'm sorry. Those quotes I copy and pasted belonged to SFCa.

Sweet,

I wonder if sweet, SFCa, and Rj are offended by the sight of a uniform in a noose or if they are just offended by ideas that differ from their own. Because, in my opinion, RJ et al. should recognize that this family surely has noble or at least respectable intentions (to put and end to the killing). What does this image mean for Rj? And what does it mean to the protesting family?

The disagreement then, is over which manner of protesting is offensive. Well, to me, once you acknowledge that this family is obviously not trying to offend military people, rather that they are supporting them, than why is it so offensive?

The negative associations that RJ and others have for the display, are the product of their own imagination and are not representative of the protesting family's message or intentions. It would be like judging two 'nudes', one of eve on the Sistine chapel, and the other of a porn star, and attributing the same meaning to both. In the case of this protester, the image is that of the 'uniform in the noose', and the protesters have created a meaning that symbolizes peace and non-violence (and also outrage). If they are attributing a meaning that connotes violence, or anti-Americanism,?? Then surely they are totally missing the whole point of the demonstration.

If RJ and others find it offensive I think they need to really track the semiotics of this image and justify why they feel it is so offensive.

Sooo...

Lynching a US GI's uniform over a roof is all about "peace" and is pro-US military?

Interesting...

(What's even more interesting is that most US military personnel in Iraq voted to re-elect Bush...)

"I bet she took more college courses than RJ."

Unless she has a graduate degree, that would be unlikely...

As of 1996, according to the article, she had completed a bachelor's degree in math and was in law school.

dude - why did you even answer that dumb comment? Are you in competition with the lady to see who's better? Aaaaah funny. Sorry, it just is.

RJ - can you write some music and book reviews? I know you've likely done one or two for the site but let's see some more. Let's see that education put to greater use than the lowly art of politics. TV even.

"RJ - can you write some music and book reviews? I know you've likely done one or two for the site but let's see some more. Let's see that education put to greater use than the lowly art of politics. TV even."

The beauty of BC is that we can write what we want.

I have written book reviews. I have written movie reviews. I have done the sports thing, and the politics thing.

So, my next post will be...my next post. By my choice. And you ain't my editor.

TYVM... :)

Oh, I've done music reviews too. And music news. And...

Etc.

Why bitch about my politics posts? Because you disagree?

I am if you write book and music reviews - LOL.

OK. Whatever. I'm just saying, you must aspire to more than just getting an argumentative reaction. Maybe not.

One of my goals at BC.org is to inspire debate.

The best debates are political.

QED...

... and ultimately the most meaningless. QED ...

Posting half-assed Drudge Reports - and then not admiting their inaccuracy does not inspire debate. It inspires less faith in your judgment.

This post DID sponsor debate, but it devolved into anger on both sides - as most politics does on the blogs. What did you learn? Anything that didn't support the beliefs you already hold?

I learned that what I saw as an illustration of terrorists hanging an American soldier some took to mean the protestors were hanging the soldier.

I wouldn't like that on my block either.

Sorry, RJ. I'm in a somewhat argumentative mode myself now. I get accurate - and ugly. I'll stop now.

qualifier on my above statement. What most people think of as political questions are really questions about culture. As was this post even though it was in the politics column.

CANDLELIGHT VIGIL IN FRONT OF THE PEARCY'S HOME
Tuesday, Feb. 15th from 7 to 10 PM

2732 Marty Way, Sacramento, CA 95818

Sponsored by moveamericaforward.org

Education means fuck all beyond the highschool point. A few years of university might help but really a moron is a moron, no matter how many books he reads. The difference is that the more he reads the more convinced he is that he/she is right.

Thats the sad truth of it all...

So would it be de classe of me to point out high school is two words?

Just joking of course.


- Temple "Typo" Stark

BUSCH IZ HITLUR!

Sigh.

RJ, I hope you meant that last in a satirical way. As political commentary, it fails to meet a minimum requirement of coherence and relevance.

It was a parody of Leftists...

Ah, you relieve my mind! BTW, I noticed Sydney's comment a few back, and it brought to mind the quote: "People talk about a self-educated man as if there were some other kind."

It's actually a meta-education that should happen in school - learning to learn. Sadly, most people put learning aside post-high-school, and retain only what little they use in day-to-day life, even if they went on to college or university.

and this is yet another reason why blogging is such a positive sign for the culture: "how can the laboring man find time for self-culture"? Blog

I live in the area where the pearcy's did this, I think it's horrible...
It's sad people with their political belief's can't accept that the majority of americans don't want what the left is selling. Put up all the signs of protest you want to, it's your right but don't cry on camera when someone decides to take it down, again the "majority" of the community thinks it's offensive. By the way, I think it's funny that Virgina Pearcy crys on camera about how important the second amendment is, yet I find it odd that the second amendment is open to interpretation by people like them.

The best debates are political.

That sounds like a matter of taste. One could easily argue that the most contentious debates aren't political.

It's sad people with their political belief's can't accept that the majority of americans don't want what the left is selling.

It's more sad that some Americans think that it's okay to curb someone else's freedom of speech if they don't like what's being said.

Put up all the signs of protest you want to, it's your right but don't cry on camera when someone decides to take it down, again the "majority" of the community thinks it's offensive.

So, john smith, it's okay to trespass on private property and destroy someone else's property because the majority in the community don't like it? It's okay to break the law and to stifle someone else's free speech -- you know, one of those key freedoms our soldiers are supposedly fighting to protect here at home -- if you don't like the way they make their political statements?

What if you were a minority member of a community. Let's say you were a Christian living in a mostly Jewish neighborhood. Is it okay for your Jewish neighbors to destroy your "Jesus is the Messiah" Christmas display because they find it offensive?

Don't cry if you find baby Jesus tossed in the street, okay john?

"IMO it's still all about taxes" ?

huh? So it's all about whether you have to share your money with the rest of America or not? Wow, it's really all about you isn't it? Well, that does put things like the sacrifices of soldiers, the welfare of your fellow Americans, the ideas of justice and liberty in their proper perspectives doesn't it?

It's all about the taxes? I hope perhaps one day you might form a conscience... Good luck on your journey through life with Money as your guiding principle..

BTP, money is the one quantifiable measure of success there is in the world. The desire to acquire it through hard work is what drives our society, creates jobs, grows the economy, and makes it possible for the government to tax us and get enough money from those taxes to do its good works. Without the desire to earn and produce all the rest of society falls by the wayside. So is it all about money, yes. And for the individual it's all about how much they keep. The government should take enough to do the vital elements of its job and no more, because every cent left in the hands of individuals does more to improve and advance the nation as a whole than it could ever do in the hands of government.

And I do want to share my money with the rest of America. I want to share it by spending it to buy things so that people can have jobs in retail and in distribution and in manufacturing and in advertising, and so that they can take the money they earn from the money which I and others spend and in turn spend it on things they want and need so that I can also make a living. It's how the economy works. Money makes the world go round - and believe it or not, it's a good thing.

Dave

BTP, money is the one quantifiable measure of success there is in the world.

Dee Nalle, money is nothing more than a consentual hallucination. And it could all literally disappear tomorrow. Which means as a quantifiable certainty, it is meaningless. Which is the foundation of your philosophy of fear and lies.

Here's a homework assignment for your sad sorry soul, read Neal Stephenson's "Baroque Trilogy" and prepare a paper on the changes Sir Isaac Newton made to the Royal Mint to establish the concept of "money" as distinct from a physical product.

BTP, money is the one quantifiable measure of success there is in the world.

I don't know, I could choose perhaps, mortality rate percentages from violence and disease as a quantifiable measure of success in the world. But I guess it might depend on if you think success is only possible by individuals or if we can actually succeed better through cooperation (also known as civilization) than by indivual striving alone.

I started reading the "Baroque Trilogy", I love Neal Stephenson and I finished the first one but got distracted, I will eventually read the rest. Hmmm, it seemed that all kinds of things happen in the first book, wars, science, religious strife, it wouldn't seem that money was even a top theme. You might read his book "The Diamond Age" (a really great book) where technology and knowledge appear to be stronger forces than money.

Carruthers:
>>Dee Nalle, <<

Dee? Like Dr. John Dee? I'm honored.

>>money is nothing more than a consentual hallucination. And it could all literally disappear tomorrow. <<

Money is symbolic of property. Without property there is no society. So you're saying that society could disappear tomorrow. If that happens, then no matter what you've put your faith in, you're screwed - so until it happens I'll stick with money.

>>Which means as a quantifiable certainty, it is meaningless. Which is the foundation of your philosophy of fear and lies.<<

MY philosophy of fear and lies? Where do you get that from? My philosophy is one of an interlaced and productive society where money is used as a medium of exchange for ideas, property, services and anything of value. It's the way the world works - learn to cope with it.

Money makes the world go round
The world go round, the world go round
Money makes the world go round
It makes the world go round!

Dave

I joined the service out of a profound sense of patriotism and for the camaraderie. I expected to lead good men and women and be lead by good men and women. Soldiers, who would speak frankly and freely, follow orders once the decision was made and who would place the good of the organization above all else. Soldiers who would be willing to sacrifice for this great nation and these were men and women I could trust with anything, and they could trust me.
A Master Sergeant once told me that Priests do the Lord's work and don't plan to be the Pope. They were in touch with their soldiers and supportive of their seniors. I will keep their memory alive by passing on what I have learned to my soldiers. I can not understand why are so many people mad at us for doing our job? We defend the freedoms and the American way of life that we all enjoy. We do what we do so you can do what you do and want. If you get your kicks from hanging a uniform from a noose or burning Old Glory; well enjoy that freedom of expression that so many Americans paid for by giving their lives to protect and defend your right to do so.
How can a American be Anti-American. A man that does not love his country, can love nothing.
"I have given more to America than I ever took from HER...and I'm proud of that." God Bless America!
SGT Randy B.
US Army Europe and so many other country's.

congrats randy
but you say

"I can not understand why are so many people mad at us for doing our job?"

i have heard noone anywhere say such a thing. i have heard alot of criticism of that thug bush who dodged the draft then brazenly sent troops into harms way when it wasnt the last resort.

but noone is mad at the troops any more than they are mad at a doctor who has to save a criminal patient.

it is just part of the job. people are proud of you. they are not proud of the civilian decision makers.

Thank you!
Being on the other side of the fence, civilian and military, I see and hear the good and bad things about the military. Most are good but I have been approached by people that didn't have good things to say about the uniform or the military. I have also seen the heart and soul of the people that support us 100%. I went home to SC, in uniform, to register my truck and I stopped to get some gas and the gentleman behind me insisted that he pay for my gas. I told him he didn't have to but he would not take no for an answer. He even bought me a coke. After thanking him, he hugged me and thanked me. I was the proudest soldier in the Army that day.

I don't agree with everything the President says or does. I did, however, swore an oath "to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic". And I promise you that I will.

Thank you for your response and your support. It is greatly appreciated.

SGT Randy B

thanks for doing your job. id buy you gas too, but it has gotten a little expensive here lately. arent there any oil-soaked dictators you can go topple so we can bring the oil home? (just kidding)

Thanks for the offer Billy. I feel the pain every time I top off my 4x4 Dodge Ram Extended Cab. Military pay can go only so far.

Good comment about the "oil-soaked dictators". :)

I received this in a email some time ago. I thought I would share it with y'all.

IF YOU'RE NOT IN LOVE WITH A SOLDIER

If you're not in love with a soldier, you can't know adventure. You don't know smelly gray PT uniforms that require a daily washing. You can't understand green and brown camouflaged bags flooding your bedroom floor.

If you're not in love with a soldier, you can't understand the meaning of the phrase "going to the field" and the weeks you spend away from each other.

If you're not in love with a soldier, you can never imagine the hole in your heart when that phone call comes? "Honey, I am leaving tomorrow to go overseas. I don't know how long I will be gone or exactly where I am going, but I want you to know that I love you - always!"

If you're not in love with a soldier, you don't know what it's like to say that final good-bye. You don't know what it really means to be glued to the television. You don't understand fear and you can't possibly understand the sleepless nights of endless crying wondering if you will ever see the love of your life alive again.

If you're not in love with a soldier, you can't know the immense joy, the uncontrollable smile, or the butterflies in your stomach when you see your soldier march into the family waiting area upon redeployment. You can't understand the self-control it takes to stand on the other side of the room as some higher-up gives a seemingly endless welcome home speech while all the soldiers stand in formation. You don't know what it's like to have that second first kiss or what it's like to experience puppy love all over.

If you're not in love with a soldier, you can't truly understand how to make every moment count because you never know when that phone call may come again.

If you're not in love with a soldier, you can never really understand how very delicate life is!
==============
My heart goes out the the families in Ohio of the Marines that were killed this week and also to all of the families that have lost their service members too.

I have been to too many funerals in the past few years.