home

Late Night: Open Thread: Baby Boomers and Vietnam

By Jeralyn, Section Media
Posted on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:47:05 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg This!! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

and

Two of my favorite songs from the Vietnam protest days. A third is below the fold. For those of you too young to remember the war in Vietnam, this BBC series is excellent. At the bottom of the first page are links to the next segments.

If you weren't around here earlier today, this and this is what tonight's late post relates to. [More...]

Comments now closed.

< On West VA, Kentucky and a Joint Ticket | West Virginia and Beyond >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Late Night: Open Thread: Baby Boomers and Vietnam | 224 comments (224 topical)
    I thought that didn't happen? (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by kredwyn on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:54:19 PM EST
    I've been told again and again that it's an urban legend.

    It is an urban myth. (5.00 / 3) (#120)
    by lorelynn on Tue May 13, 2008 at 02:30:09 AM EST
    Jerry Lembke, one of founders of Vietnam Veterans Against The War, is now a professor of sociology at Holy Cross College. He wrote a book a few years ago called The Spitting Image:Myth, Memory and the Legacy of Vietnam.

    http://www.vvaw.org/veteran/article/?id=350

    The short version is that the idea of anti-war protestors harassing soldiers doesn't appear anywhere in American culture until the late seventies. There are no media reports of it happening, no letters to the editor, no arrest reports - nothing. In fact, the VA distributed questionaires to soldiers returning from the war which asked them what was most helpful in helping settle back into their normal life. One of the most common answers was "the anti-war movement".

    Speaking as someone who protested the war, I never heard the soldiers criticized. Our anger was directed at the executives of the war. And the anti-war movement was run by Vietnam veterans, and lots of clergy and wives, moms and dads everywhere. I can't think of too many meetings I went to that didn't have lots of people there who had a loved one fighting in Vietnam.

    Basically, what the myth does is decouple anti-war protestors from the military. It suggests that anti-war activists are hostile to the military because they don't have a loved one fighting. Once our culture bought that, protesting became irrelevant. That's the point of the mythology.

    [ Parent ]

    That's not true (5.00 / 2) (#127)
    by daryl herbert on Tue May 13, 2008 at 03:26:30 AM EST
    There are no media reports of it happening, no letters to the editor, no arrest reports - nothing.

    Not true.

    As Jeralyn wrote on the earlier thread (in response to my comment), the issue is not whether it ever took place (it did) but how common it was, and whether the actions of a few jerks should reflect on the larger anti-war movement as a whole.

    By raising the issue, Sen. Obama is inherently giving credence to the idea that the spitting incidents should define the Vietnam-era anti-war movement.  That's the problem.

    [ Parent ]

    Only #ONE PERCENT# of Vietnam Vets (none / 0) (#158)
    by Exeter on Tue May 13, 2008 at 08:29:23 AM EST
    Reported ANY hostile treatment from the anti-war movement.

    A Harris Poll in 1971 showed that only 1% of the veterans encountered hostile reactions when they came home, and they did not think the antiwar movement was hostile to them.
    LINK

    This is nothing more than a divisive pop culture myth spread by the right wing and Obama referencing it either shows that he is ignorant or intentionally trying to triangulate himself away from the Democratic Party.

    [ Parent ]

    heh (none / 0) (#222)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:14:08 AM EST
    At the height of the war there were about 500,000 troops in Vietnam. Given the war's length and the one year service period, the number who served was
    2,709,965.

    Using your figure of 1% that would mean that 27,100 encountered hostile actions from their fellow citizens. Given that many people are loath to report conflict, just wanting to get on with life, the real number is probably much higher.

    But if you are satisfied with the 27,100 then you are welcome to it. I do think it tells us much about you.

    [ Parent ]

    You could one percent polling ANYTHING (none / 0) (#226)
    by Exeter on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:31:54 AM EST
    In fact, I bet five-ten percent of soldiers in today's hyper-sensitive "support the troops" environment would say that they "feel the anti-war is hostile toward them."

    The truth is that, for the most part, the anti-war movement consisted of people that were either afraid of being drafted or afraid of their friends and family being drafted or of Vietnam returning soldiers that didn't want others to go through what they went through. It doesn't make any sense to focus your attack on people that you know are in Vietnam in forced servitude.  

    [ Parent ]

    Too Good Not to Be True (none / 0) (#164)
    by datadriven on Tue May 13, 2008 at 08:44:38 AM EST
    I always felt the stories that hippies walked up to troops and spit in their faces was one of the Rambo movie cultural inventions: just too satisfying for the conservative mind for it not to be true. The linked references cite the Democratic National Convention (1968) supposed experiences of National Guardsmen, not troops returning from Southeast Asia. Here, "hippie" girls walked up to combat ready NG troops put flowers in the barrels of their guns and then spit in their faces. I guess it was some desperate effort to goad them into an act of lethal violence. Sure, that sounds entirely reasonable.

     

    [ Parent ]

    Utterly wrong (none / 0) (#185)
    by 1jane on Tue May 13, 2008 at 09:14:41 AM EST
    Obama's words meant everything to my husband, a Viet Nam vet. It took years before I, a war protester began to understand the way my husband and so many others were treated upon their return was totally wrong. This isn't about spitting on returning soldiers back then, it's about being ignored on their return and yes being looked down on. We were wrong back in the 60"s because we didn't seperate the men and women serving from the dumb Viet Nam War. We do that now because we learned how we hurt those who served by our out-self-rightious behaviors. Jeryln's decoder ring failed on this one.

    [ Parent ]
    Not a lot has changed (none / 0) (#223)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:22:15 AM EST
    There were a few tense moments, however, including an encounter involving Joshua Sparling, 25, who was on crutches and who said he was a corporal with the 82nd Airborne Division and lost his right leg below the knee in Ramadi, Iraq. Mr. Sparling spoke at a smaller rally held earlier in the day at the United States Navy Memorial, and voiced his support for the administration's policies in Iraq.

    Later, as antiwar protesters passed where he and his group were standing, words were exchanged and one of the antiwar protestors spit at the ground near Mr. Sparling; he spit back.

    NY Times

    Troops burned in effigy.

    And this says it all.

    [ Parent ]

    I find his distancing offensive, and I DON'T think (5.00 / 4) (#7)
    by DeborahNC on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:02:04 AM EST
    it's smart politics. The Boomers that I know (myself included) are active in politics and have more money than ever to donate to political campaigns. This is just adding insult to injury, imo. He's basically said (through a surrogate) that he doesn't need people like me, so he'll have to proceed with his candidacy without my money.

    I sincerely don't understand why Obama's determined to alienate a major cohort of voters. Maybe he really thinks he doesn't need us. If so, he's making a big mistake!

    Early-ish on in the primary, Barney Frank posted (5.00 / 12) (#10)
    by Joelarama on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:05:36 AM EST
    an Op/Ed piece at HuffPo and other places that focused on a key reason he supports Hillary: his unease with Obama's rhetoric about getting beyond the conflicts of the 90s.  Frank pointed out that the issues fought over in the 1990s -- abortion, gay rights, the role of government -- are central to what it means to be a progressive.  He was proud to have fought them.  Indeed, he asked implicitly, was Obama suggesting that he could wave a wand and make these issues go away? Or, was he suggesting that we must not fight on these issues in service of some idea of "post-partisanship"?  And what could we hope to accomplish?

    I don't think we have ever gotten the answers from Obama.

    And, now, Obama appears to be echoing the narrative, spread by the right and their media friends, that the anti-war movement was against the troops.   We all know the stories -- that soldiers were spat upon as they returned from Vietnam.  In reality, there are few, if any, credible reports that this happened.  It was quite the opposite -- anti-war protesters wanted to end a meaningless war and bring the draftees home.

    What gives?  Many of the battles of the 1990s had their genesis in the battles of the 1960s. And the protests against the Vietnam War, of course, had the civil rights movement as their model.  

    How much of what these people fought for does he believe he now need not champion?  I really can't tell -- I don't know where he stands.

    I never knew an ad campaign could (none / 0) (#19)
    by andgarden on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:13:50 AM EST
    be so effective.

    [ Parent ]
    Which ad campaign? I missed it. (none / 0) (#20)
    by Joelarama on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:14:44 AM EST
    Am I falling for a Hillary ad that I didn't see?

    [ Parent ]
    Sorry, (5.00 / 6) (#28)
    by andgarden on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:21:43 AM EST
    I'm talking about the Obama (ad) campaign. The whole thing was one, in my opinion.

    [ Parent ]
    Lol. I hope it works in Nov., if he is the (5.00 / 4) (#38)
    by Joelarama on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:31:09 AM EST
    nominee.  I know a Democratic candidate has to reach out to centrist voters (the Clintons mastered this) but I hate to see Obama reinforcing their prejudices and unease with liberals.  I'd prefer to see him "pander" on a gas tax holiday.

    I am pessimistic for Nov.

    [ Parent ]

    I am too (none / 0) (#41)
    by andgarden on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:35:36 AM EST
    And we can't lose this one. It would just be too much to bear.

    [ Parent ]
    More issues to "pander" on (none / 0) (#215)
    by datadriven on Tue May 13, 2008 at 09:59:35 AM EST
    After the gas tax holiday he could "pander" on healthcare, childcare, mass transit, Amtrak, roads and bridges, primary and secondary education, federal support for public universities (the "non-branded" variant of tertiary education), public housing, and a few other things.  

    [ Parent ]
    Barack=iPod (5.00 / 4) (#50)
    by LatinoVoter on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:45:08 AM EST
    All the kids want one.

    To understand the success of the Obama campaign and strategy just look at the marketing of the iPod. From the rounded and safe design of the iPod to the silhouetted figures (who looked cool and danced like you wish you could) you couldn't identify that were used to sell it.  

    [ Parent ]

    ipods are (5.00 / 2) (#55)
    by Leisa on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:49:38 AM EST
    environmentally unfriendly...  too many toxins in the electronics.  Yep... marketing above responsible consumerism.

    [ Parent ]
    It's totally an ad campaign. (5.00 / 4) (#60)
    by masslib on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:56:49 AM EST
    for me, it's a rerun.  I've been through this before with Governor Patrick.

    [ Parent ]
    I was thinking Bill Bradley (5.00 / 4) (#63)
    by andgarden on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:59:59 AM EST
    But what really creeps me out are the halo posters. Heck, go to his website and see how they have him cast.

    It's hard to not feel like I'm being asked to join a cult.

    [ Parent ]

    So funny... (5.00 / 2) (#103)
    by masslib on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:39:34 AM EST
    Yes, I say this all the time, Obama is the Bill Bradley of this primary season, with the benefit of the african american voting base.  

    [ Parent ]
    That's my line. . . (5.00 / 3) (#112)
    by andgarden on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:49:14 AM EST
    I'm just reflecting on this whole process: How is it that we're about to hand the nomination to the candidate who lost California, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Texas, New Jersey Massachusetts, etc.???

    I said on Super Tuesday that he played the Bush map to gather delegates from Democrats who were afraid that Republicans would say mean things about Hillary, and now here we are.

    This nomination system has FAILED.

    [ Parent ]

    The process is designed to be (5.00 / 3) (#115)
    by Stellaaa on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:53:46 AM EST
    hacked and manipulated.  It's not designed for a democratic winner.  I have to say, Obama's campaign really and truly manipulated the primary process and they still are.  (MSM and party elites helped)

    [ Parent ]
    It's completely crazy. (5.00 / 4) (#116)
    by masslib on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:53:59 AM EST
    I could accept that he gamed the system and all if the press and the Dem elites would stop acting like BO is such a stunning candidate.  If he were, he would have won at least one of those.  

    [ Parent ]
    we are the problem here (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by Kathy on Tue May 13, 2008 at 07:26:09 AM EST
    remember when Bush kept insisting he won, and he declared victory, and he said to stop the votes being counted, and he hired a transition team and announced members of his cabinet and just bullied everyone into thinking he won?

    Can anyone remember if anyone protested on the internet around that time?  Anyone?  Anyone?

    [ Parent ]

    There weren't as many web sites then (none / 0) (#156)
    by ruffian on Tue May 13, 2008 at 08:27:26 AM EST
    but I do remember finding Daily Howler at that time.

    [ Parent ]
    The MSM has contributed to the halo (5.00 / 1) (#198)
    by FlaDemFem on Tue May 13, 2008 at 09:29:42 AM EST
    effect too. I am interested in image as propaganda, and I have noticed that they have been doing the same thing. Obama is portrayed back-lit, with a halo effect some of the time, and always from below. Hillary is usually angry looking or in an awkward pose. I take pictures, so I know that they have a good choice of pics when a photographer comes in with the pictures, they do many of them and pick one. The ones they pick for Obama are messianic and the ones they pick for Hillary are angry woman with an attitude. It has been going on since the beginning of the campaign. Joseph Goebbels would be proud.

    [ Parent ]
    They are wedgies that divide powerful groups (none / 0) (#142)
    by Salt on Tue May 13, 2008 at 07:48:50 AM EST
    within the electorte and he was and is correct many voters vote one issue kind of the low hanging fruit.

    On ABC's "Good Morning America," Stephanopoulos said Obama's team may stress abortion to lure Republican women from McCain. Also noted Obama's plans to spend three days in Florida next week, support of Rep. Rangel and others for a "dream ticket."

    IMO if Dems are thinking they can rally women one way or the other to him using this issue just another example of how out of touch Dems are on issues impacting women.

    [ Parent ]

    He's got a ot of nerve (none / 0) (#159)
    by ruffian on Tue May 13, 2008 at 08:29:48 AM EST
    comiing to FL for fundraising before the delegate issue is settled. Maybe he will use the opportunity to say 'seat the delegates as is' and use that as a fundraising mantra.

    [ Parent ]
    He wants our money but not our votes?? (5.00 / 1) (#201)
    by FlaDemFem on Tue May 13, 2008 at 09:33:41 AM EST
    That is arrogant, arrogant as hell. He won't get a penny of my funds. I hope he gets told off regarding the primary votes. He won't, but I can hope, right?

    [ Parent ]
    What bothers me (none / 0) (#146)
    by mikeyleigh on Tue May 13, 2008 at 08:06:15 AM EST
    most about Obama is his lack of any historical context for the statements he makes.  He doesn't seem to realize that ideals have genealogies.  It's easy to see the roots of the Iraq war division in Viet Nam.  It's obvious that many of the culture wars of the nineties emerged in the sixties and the Viet Nam protests.  But you can take the conflicts over Viet Nam back further, back to the early fifties and the "who lost China" debate.  And some of those on that side, old, old men by then, were the most strident opponents of American entry into WWII, and even earlier, veterans of the League of Nations fight after WWI.  I don't understand the arrogance of an Obama, a man who thinks his election simply erases the conflicts of a century-long foreign policy debate.

    As for anti-war songs "Sky Pilot" has always been one my favorties.

    [ Parent ]

    This obviously (5.00 / 7) (#11)
    by txpolitico67 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:05:41 AM EST
    struck a real big nerve with you Jeralyn.  I agree that Obama is just throwing any and every constituency under the bus to appease the crowd d'jour.

    Great vids by the way.

    it strikes a nerve with a lot of people. (5.00 / 8) (#15)
    by hellothere on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:09:38 AM EST
    the boomers carried the banner of the promise of camelot and the kennedy promise. they walked with the civil rights marchers. they for the most part campaigned peacefully for an end to viet nam. this movement didn't just take place here. look at what happened in mexico and france. it was an important era. the music from that time says a lot about america. think easy rider ya'll.

    [ Parent ]
    we also were filled with (5.00 / 15) (#34)
    by Jeralyn on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:27:39 AM EST
    hope and thought we could change Washington. We didn't succeed but we marched our hearts out against the war and for civil rights and paved the way. Now he's co-opted the words and reduced them to a campaign slogan, and to top it off, throws us under the bus.

    He was 7 years old in 1968 and now wants to gain his street cred among conservatives by distancing himself from us to prove his patriotism and fitness to run against "war hero" John McCain?

    He's not showing unity and a new kind of politics. He's spreading divisiveness and showing his brand of politics is no different than that of those that preceded him.

    [ Parent ]

    And a fair number of us (5.00 / 5) (#56)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:51:16 AM EST
    got gassed or had our heads broken by police nighsticks in the process, or had to leave our country to go to Canada, or were locked up in the brig or lost college scholarships or got shot.

    What the hell does he know about any of that?  What has he ever done that risked sacrificing his health or his future?

    I wonder when we're going to start hearing from him about how "divisive" the Civil Rights struggle was.  Better make room for MLK and Rosa and Fannie Lou, too, under our bus, if he keeps going the way he's going.

    [ Parent ]

    I see a similar hope in Obama followers (5.00 / 3) (#62)
    by nellre on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:57:57 AM EST
    But there is a component of arrogance and smugness in their eyes. The roots of that attitude I can't really pin down.
    We were not arrogant and smug in those days if my memory serves me. We were determined.
    Some (four dead in Ohio) died proving it. I marched with my months old daughter on my shoulders in San Diego in the biggest protest I participated in. Of course, when the cops started to look confontational I pulled away. My daughter's well being was more important than anything in the world to me then, as it is now.

    A little aside: long after, many of my fellow protesters claimed they were going along to be in the in crowd. Truth.
    I don't think humans have evolved that much in the last 40 years. I think the Obama followers are going along with the crowd. They might believe they are members of the creative class that way?
    It's a human weakness to cling to whom we perceive as powerful in the hopes some of that power will become ours.


    [ Parent ]

    Thank you for the Kent State video (5.00 / 9) (#85)
    by Cream City on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:23:08 AM EST
    Jeralyn -- and let's remember the Jackson State students murdered, too, where more than 500 bullets were found afterward in dorm walls.

    Interestingly, I found and used this same Kent State video in one of my college classes this year -- and many students today were stunned by that and more that they finally learned.  They had to unlearn what they had been taught, that the students were at fault.

    I also have repeatedly dealt with students who tell me, an antiwar protester (yes, teargassed for it) and wife of a Vietnam veteran, that I hated veterans and spit on them and etc.  They know this about all of us who protested the war because it's in their grade school and high school American history textbooks.  That's what they told me, one brought in one of the high school history text books, and it's stated there.

    So I looked up more of the textbooks -- and on this and so much more about the '60s and '70s, including the modern women's movement, I now know where today's 20- and 30-somethings got so much misinformation about and hatred for us.  

    Of course, you probably know about the concerted campaign of the right wing to rewrite the history textbooks, using Texas as their weapon in the publishing marketplace.  They played it brilliantly.  They have won with their revisionist history.  

    And we are seeing the result in this campaign, in comments such as this from their candidate.

    [ Parent ]

    god, that's disturbing... (5.00 / 1) (#134)
    by kempis on Tue May 13, 2008 at 06:58:52 AM EST
    I knew that our students were unlargely un-informed about those days (except via movies that they now lack the context to understand fully), but it honestly hadn't occurred to me that they have been actively brainwashed....Wow, I'm still naive after all these years. I should have considered that the textbooks would be slanted against Vietnam War prostestors, most of whom, like me, had loved ones over there in that meat-grinder.

    No wonder people were so primed to bop merrily off to the Iraq War. And the moment someone piped up with "hey, maybe this isn't such a good idea" we were shushed with the specter of Vietnam protests.
    After all, the history books (as currently written) prove us wrong.

    In reality, of course, the rightwing textbook editors just doomed us to repeat history.

     

    [ Parent ]

    re: Kent State (none / 0) (#136)
    by bobbski on Tue May 13, 2008 at 07:07:25 AM EST
    Kent State was a tragedy.  

    The Boston Massacre was a tragedy.

    Unfortunately such events become inevitable when people armed with bottles, rocks, etc. attack, taunt or otherwise assault people with guns.

    Fact is, the national guard troops, much like the redcoats involved in the Boston incident, were not much more than kids themselves.

    Remember, the redcoats who fired on the mob at Boston in 1770 were found not guilty.  

    Personally, I thought the kids in the mob were ill served by their "leaders" and if the truth were known, the "leaders" got the result they were hoping for.

    At the time of the Kent State incident I was a year away from being 30 and 4 years away from having served 8 years in the USAF.

    [ Parent ]

    Any fool knows.... (none / 0) (#189)
    by kdog on Tue May 13, 2008 at 09:17:17 AM EST
    you gotta take everything you learn in school with a grain of salt.  They teach alotta bullsh*t.

    Ultimately, the responsibility lies with parents to de-program your kids daily when they get home.

    [ Parent ]

    and now obama is using that (none / 0) (#197)
    by hellothere on Tue May 13, 2008 at 09:28:54 AM EST
    to spread division among groups. do i want him for president? well, i'll have to think about the tone don't you know!

    [ Parent ]
    And we risked a lot Jeralyn.... (5.00 / 1) (#135)
    by Maria Garcia on Tue May 13, 2008 at 07:05:01 AM EST
    ...that's what people forget. I had two good friends who went to jail for being conscientious objecters. One of them was never, ever the same when he came out. I knew people that were beaten by the police just for having long hair...what would today's priviledged white kids who can do anything they want do in the face of that? And that's not even taking into account all the drug busts. Sometimes I think that one of the reasons that the feminist movement could take root in our generation is that our male cohorts had just as heavy a burden as the women. We were all facing real injustices and yet we were still moved enough to put ourselves on the line on behalf of those even more oppressed. Our heroes, MLK and RFK, asked more of us than to contribute on the Internet and go to some rallies. So do I sound a little bitter? Maybe I am because it really bothers me a great deal that what our detractors said about us has become the conventional wisdom about our generation. I guess that's maybe one reason so many of us relate to the Clintons.

    [ Parent ]
    heroes? where are they today? (5.00 / 1) (#199)
    by hellothere on Tue May 13, 2008 at 09:30:44 AM EST
    answer: i don't believe they are in chicago. maybe each one of us who stands for what we believe and work for it in the face of the shaft from the media are all heroes. that is my view.

    [ Parent ]
    another important factor (none / 0) (#140)
    by Kathy on Tue May 13, 2008 at 07:30:56 AM EST
    I think, was the sense of ownership.  "This is our America, and we will not go down this path."  It was very patriotic in its own way.  The children of the WWII generation were raised to love their country, and they vehemently did.  When they marched and protested, it was in the true sense of civil discourse.  It was one of the core rights our constitution intended to guarantee.  They did not want to tear down America, or denigrate America, they wanted to define it, to make it better.

    (and of course I am referring to the vast majority of protesters, not the Weather Underground, SLA, etc)

    Kids today want to wear the tie dye and the peace signs, but they don't want to acknowledge the movement.

    [ Parent ]

    jeralyn, your words are eloquent. (none / 0) (#192)
    by hellothere on Tue May 13, 2008 at 09:23:34 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Speaking of cred.. Country Joe is still around (none / 0) (#208)
    by FlaDemFem on Tue May 13, 2008 at 09:42:34 AM EST
    and still anti-war and pro-vet. Here is a link to his web site. Country Joe McDonald.

    [ Parent ]
    I imagine (5.00 / 10) (#37)
    by dissenter on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:30:59 AM EST
    it will strike a chord back in the stan and Iraq too. The military can't stand Barack Obama - especially after the Wright videos.

    If he thinks statements like this are going to help him get the military vote he ought to get out of the football stadium and check out the situation on the ground.

    Few people like him and frankly, he scares the hell out everyone in the war zone including the contractors.

    And if there is one thing we are all sick of hearing it is words like "change," "transformation," "revolution," or anything else resembling those words. We're sick of dreamers. We want a fixer and someone with a friggin realistic plan backed up by intelligent government action.

    What amazes me is that those words didn't just insult boomers, they were equally insulting to current soldiers, their families and the thousands of Americans who lend support to us. Nobody is spitting on us. I do reconstruction work and my local cargo pants store gives me a 10% discount just for having to go back. My Afghan driver has a kid with a mental disability and she can't go to school because the school doesn't want to deal with her. My brother's church is paying for a private teacher for her. I don't even know anyone in his church and neither does my driver.  My mom and local vet are collecting money and donating supplies for animal shelters in Kabul. Who are all these horrible people?

    It is like the guy is on the national insult tour. All he has is condescending words for people he knows nothing about.

    [ Parent ]

    Thanks for your good works (5.00 / 6) (#64)
    by RalphB on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:00:18 AM EST
    in Afghanistan!  Like a lot of other southern boys I joined the Corps and did a tour and a half in Vietnam.  Then vehemently protested it later.  I was not treated badly upon my returns.  There were no victory parades but then we didn't expect any.

    My son served eight years in the Corps and we agree on one thing for sure.  Obama is not qualified to be president.  Sorry, he's just not, no way, no how.

    I couldn;t agree more about the national insult tour.

    [ Parent ]

    Protesters are good (5.00 / 4) (#77)
    by dissenter on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:16:44 AM EST
    I protested Iraq too before it started. Then I went over to work cuz cleaning up messes is the job. Unfortunately we don't have the tools we need and the governments are just too corrupt. It is like banging your head against the wall.

    I do this work but I support the protesters. Without them, there would be NO accountability at all. But you already know what I am talking about:)

    I was a young one during Vietnam but had family there as well. I salute you for going and protesting.

    [ Parent ]

    Love 60's music... (5.00 / 2) (#21)
    by k on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:15:02 AM EST
    My favorite is this one...For What It's Worth by Buffalo Springfield. This particular video has some great pics. The one with a young John Kerry standing with John Lennon stands out. A little rough language on a sign so if you click thru, be warned.

    great video! jim morrison fan here! (none / 0) (#200)
    by hellothere on Tue May 13, 2008 at 09:33:40 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Ron Kovic (5.00 / 4) (#40)
    by Manuel on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:35:11 AM EST
    From wikipedia

    Kovic was a speaker at the 1976 Democratic National Convention, seconding the nomination of draft resister Fritz Efaw for Vice President of the United States.

    In Kovic's words.

    Most of my fellow veterans were angry at the protesters, cursing them and calling them traitors ...

    Senator Obama's remarks today were a gross oversimplification of a troubled time in our nation's history.  They showed either a misunderstanding of the antiwar movement or a cynical political calculation.

    he was only 8 years old (5.00 / 4) (#45)
    by Jeralyn on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:40:32 AM EST
    then, you'll have to excuse him (sarcasm)

    [ Parent ]
    In the sam token (5.00 / 3) (#48)
    by Stellaaa on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:43:42 AM EST
    some of us were not born during WWII and yet we respect the struggles that people had during the war and we don't oversimplify for purposes of manipulation, but then again, that was the "good war".  

    [ Parent ]
    Protest (none / 0) (#137)
    by bobbski on Tue May 13, 2008 at 07:11:34 AM EST
    "...some of us were not born during WWII..."

    Indeed.

    Some of us were born before WW2.

    Ouch.  ;)

    [ Parent ]

    That was during his prime foreign (5.00 / 7) (#52)
    by tree on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:46:44 AM EST
    policy years, from 6 to 10.

    [ Parent ]
    You are soooo bad. Guess (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by oculus on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:51:23 AM EST
    you won't be checking Unity Ticket on the TL poll anytime soon.

    [ Parent ]
    Probably not if its (5.00 / 6) (#102)
    by tree on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:36:51 AM EST
    Obama-Clinton, mainly because I think that Obama would marginalize her as VP and she would be extremely underutilized. He doesn't seem to recognize talent when he sees it, unless it can be utilized to promote himself. I think he'd be afraid that she would outshine him, which is also why I don't think he will even ask.

     My snarky comment did make me realize though that Obama wasn't even in the country during some of the most turbulent years. He was in Indonesia from '67 thru '71. He probably has no vivid memory of MLK's assassination or RFK's either, and no memory of the Vietnam war or the anti-war movement before '71. So obviously he's read some book and misunderstood what it meant, just like he misunderstood Frank's book.

      I was in my mid to late teens then and I remember being blamed for the war because I was against it, 'cuz ya know, if all us anti-war protesters had just shut up the war would have magically ended. And now I'm being blamed again for something I never did. Many of the strongest protesters against the war were Vets, and they mostly got hell from the hawks for standing up for their beliefs. Nobody seems to blame the chickenhawks for the ugliness, only those of us who were trying to save lives are to blame, then and now. Thanks, Obama. For someone who's supposedly so smart you are clueless at understanding people and events.  

    [ Parent ]

    Obama has been ahistorical (5.00 / 6) (#111)
    by Cream City on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:48:59 AM EST
    in his statements so many times that I have to wonder about that vaunted Columbia education.  Is its history department's reputation overstated?  Did he ever take an American history course?  

    Yet for years now, many years, I have listened carefully to Hillary Clinton's speeches, and she really knows American history so well.  It speaks well for Wellesley, far better than he represents his alma mater in this area.

    [ Parent ]

    Obama has no personal connection (none / 0) (#186)
    by felizarte on Tue May 13, 2008 at 09:16:30 AM EST
    to the sixties movement:  Assassinations of the John and Robert Kennedy, MLK, the Beatles, Peter, Paul & Mary, Joan Baez, Pete Seeger, Bob Dylan and the other artists that stoked the spirit of the times. The protests were the reason for the removal of the draft.  Someone ought toi write a movie/or movies that capture the true spirit of that era.

    In Indonesia at age 6-10 then growing up in Hawaii, away from Mainland USA, His statement quoted above about Boomers and the Vietnam War era, certainly demonstrates his lack of information and appreciation for  that important time in American history. This is not good for someone vying for the most important job in U.S. govt. He needs a crash course.    

    [ Parent ]

    the question is just does obama (none / 0) (#203)
    by hellothere on Tue May 13, 2008 at 09:38:30 AM EST
    have for personal connections? take a look at his associations for your answer. i believe that ayers wants to reshape the usa but in all that hoopla i do see a sort of twisted love for the country. i don't think you could get him out with a blow torch. whereas obama and michelle seem to put the words of rev wright at the top of their hit parade. division and blame the group in charge for all your woes no matter how well you do.

    ya'll please don't get me wrong about ayers. in truth the guy should have gone to jail.

    [ Parent ]

    I'm only a couple years older than him (5.00 / 4) (#74)
    by nycstray on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:13:39 AM EST
    so I don't have to.  ;)

    He seems to have a real disconnect and lack of empathy for many things. I haven't read his books, but he should have been old enough when the war was ending and the years after to have a better understanding. Those of us that were too young in the 60's weren't so young in the 70's.

    Or maybe it's because I was raised in CA on avocados and alfalfa sprouts?*  {grin}

    *by mid-western parents, lol!~

    [ Parent ]

    I dunno (5.00 / 3) (#122)
    by janarchy on Tue May 13, 2008 at 02:47:26 AM EST
    I'm 2 yrs younger than he is and his lack of awareness on issues like these are pretty incredible. My parents were against the war at the time, but too old and busy (working full time and going to school to get their PhDs) to do the protest thing and even at a very young age, I knew it was the government that had caused all the problems re: the war and not the actual soldiers, esp since most of them had been drafted.

    And yes, I was certainly old enough to remember the whole mess in the 70s and when the war ended.

    [ Parent ]

    An American Idol Campaign (5.00 / 3) (#53)
    by Dalton Hoffine on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:49:32 AM EST
    One thing that I think Obama's camp recognizes as a sad fact of our society, and uses it to political advantage, is just how much our society is into material stuffs, 10-second soundbytes... an oversimplification is wrong, and not representative of the true struggles that our protesters as well as our troops went through. They deserve more than this, but sadly, there is a large segment of our society who needs everything over-simplified.

    [ Parent ]
    I Agree (5.00 / 3) (#67)
    by MO Blue on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:05:34 AM EST
    They might as well eliminate the primaries altogether and just go to an American Idol format. The final round would have a candidate from each format and whoever wins is president. It would save the hundreds of millions of  dollars that are wasted every four years.

    [ Parent ]
    Why (5.00 / 2) (#131)
    by kenoshaMarge on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:32:25 AM EST
    even bother with American Idol? The media tells us who we can have as candidates, which of those candidates is the winner and then will tell us who will make the best President. After we have been "spun" dizzy then we just accept "their" choice and go on our merry, or not merry, depending on if you have enough money to afford to be merry, way.

    [ Parent ]
    Why do I get the feeling (5.00 / 3) (#58)
    by Serene1 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:52:13 AM EST
    that Obama's stance on vietnam veterans is more to do with diluting the impact of his Code Pink connections. Obama had this habit of saying things and then quoting it later to prove that even if his past connections prove something people should judge him based on his speeches and not his connections or activity.

    He did it with Wright. He used to preach about post racial new world integration blah blah while his past showed that he was actually close to a church whose belief was more founded on segregation than integration. Again here his defence was go by my speeches rather than my actions. He talks of new politics but his ascendancy to the Senate and now the front runner has been by doing politics the good old way. But then he happily tells everybody that because he says new politics we should believe what he says rather than what he does.

    Similarly his new stance, I believe, is a way for him to later distance himself from code pink and Jane fonda if need be.

    Gonna be tough if he really did announce (5.00 / 3) (#61)
    by oculus on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:57:39 AM EST
    his U.S. Senate candidacy from Ayers front porch.  

    [ Parent ]
    That is probably what is coming next (5.00 / 4) (#70)
    by dissenter on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:07:19 AM EST
    We dodge IEDs every day and Obama's fund raiser and friend is a domestic bomber. And people wonder why I distrust his judgment.

    Ayers wouldn't seem so glamorous to Obama's supporters if they witnessed the aftermath of a market bombing or barely escaped a massacre in hotel gym. I seriously can't believe that guy is where he is today. For that matter, both of them.

    [ Parent ]

    I was doing o.k. accepting that Ayers was (5.00 / 5) (#71)
    by oculus on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:10:39 AM EST
    never convicted, innocent until proven guilty, etc.; then I read he is married to Bernadine Dornh, who, of course, was convicted.  Amazing. Excellent location for a fundraiser and announcement of a candidacy.  

    [ Parent ]
    I haven't followed his Ayers connection (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by nycstray on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:19:19 AM EST
    too closely, just enough to know the basics and it's more of a friendship/relationship than he lets on. Is it true there's a connection to the Woods group and him being hired as a community organizer? I was trying to watch the O Factor bit while distracted, but it sounded like there was.

    [ Parent ]
    as I recall, Obama and Ayers were both (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by oculus on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:31:42 AM EST
    on the Woods board at the same time, which is why Obama likes to characterize their relationship as mutual involvement for the greater good.  

    [ Parent ]
    Ayers is guilty as sin (5.00 / 4) (#119)
    by daryl herbert on Tue May 13, 2008 at 02:20:51 AM EST
    He wasn't convicted because he came from a wealthy family and could afford good defense attorneys (no offense to defense attorneys--they're just doing their jobs)

    He even bragged about it later: Guilty as hell, free as a bird--America is a great country, danced on an American flag, and said the only thing he regretted is that he didn't do more back when he was in a terrorist group.

    I normally wouldn't fault anyone for praising the US justice system, but Ayers hates America and favors the Chinese Communist/Fascist system.  He looks at America and sees only bad things; he looks at evil governments around the world and sees only good things.  Not a good guy, and not a good guy to hang out with if you want to be president.

    [ Parent ]

    RW Trolling? (none / 0) (#126)
    by squeaky on Tue May 13, 2008 at 02:57:29 AM EST
    The rag you link to brags about itself:

    During the Giuliani Administration, the magazine served as an idea factory as the then-mayor revivified New York City, quickly becoming, in the words of the New York Post, "the place where Rudy gets his ideas."


    [ Parent ]
    I knew the quote (none / 0) (#129)
    by daryl herbert on Tue May 13, 2008 at 04:03:10 AM EST
    so I went onto Google to find it.

    I only looked through the first few links for an acceptable source.  It's a conservative publication, but the quote is accurate.

    I don't think Bill Ayers has ever claimed to be innocent.

    [ Parent ]

    Considering I knew someone (5.00 / 2) (#168)
    by Fabian on Tue May 13, 2008 at 08:50:02 AM EST
    who was one of the ones who simply said "Lock me up, I'm not going." and indeed served time for refusing to serve - Ayers just comes across as a crass egotist.  Convinced in the rightness of his cause and actions, as if the ends really did justify the means.

    [ Parent ]
    Speaking of throwing under the bus.... (none / 0) (#194)
    by kdog on Tue May 13, 2008 at 09:25:11 AM EST
    isn't that what you guys are doing to Ayers?

    I'm no fan of violence, but I think the Weather Underground was a heckuva lot more righteous than the US govt.  And they had the balls to fight against a tyrannical, violent government.  I give him mad props.

    You guys criticize Obama for throwing the hippies under the bus, but then demand he throw Ayers under the bus?  I don't get it.

    [ Parent ]

    I'm not throwing anyone under the bus. (5.00 / 1) (#204)
    by Fabian on Tue May 13, 2008 at 09:39:30 AM EST
    The majority of the protesters had no interest in being violent and destructive.  They just wanted the government to listen to them.

    Now you can get people to pay attention to you if you are violent and destructive, but the odds are good that they won't listen to you.

    I think it take way more courage to voluntarily go to prison and risk loss of freedom and possibly more, than it does to destroy property and possibly kill people.  In fact, acts of violent vandalism are cowardly if you make sure that you are safely away when the bomb goes off.

    [ Parent ]

    Obama takes the same stance that (none / 0) (#212)
    by FlaDemFem on Tue May 13, 2008 at 09:50:54 AM EST
    my parents did when I was underage. They said, "Do as I say, not as I do". Obama wants us to take him at his word, not his action. Too bad that doesn't work for politicians like it does for parents.

    [ Parent ]
    Another article on (5.00 / 3) (#69)
    by Serene1 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:05:48 AM EST
    the sexisim faced by Hillary

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/05/clinton_campaign_brought_sexis.html

    But increasingly I feel what's the point. I hardly see any protests or anybody taking offense to it. In most of the cases women themselves are in the forefront actively promoting the sexisim  case in point Arianna's website - where from attacking Hillary's policies the website has now come to attacking Hillary on her dress sense, manly behaviour, calculative ambitiousness, lack of coolness etc and MoDo's serial articles attacking Hillary with a recent article imploring Obama to punish Hillary.

    Barbara Ehrenreich and a "spiritualist" (5.00 / 2) (#72)
    by oculus on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:12:16 AM EST
    were today's female critics of Clinton.  Disgusting.  

    [ Parent ]
    Comment I read somewhere (none / 0) (#76)
    by Stellaaa on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:16:33 AM EST
    Since Obama is not campaigning in WV and KY, will he ask for half of the votes a la Michigan and Florida?  

    [ Parent ]
    I saw that and laughed. (none / 0) (#89)
    by oculus on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:25:24 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    When compared to the '60s (5.00 / 6) (#79)
    by nellre on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:17:26 AM EST
    This feels fake.
    "This " being the Obama phenomenon.
    I was there then. I am here now.
    Then seemed more real.
    Now seems more high school.

    I was too young (5.00 / 4) (#94)
    by dissenter on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:30:32 AM EST
    to be there but I agree with you. Boomers also had a larger stake because of the draft. Today you can either be a cheerleader for the war or a protester like today's college kids with no risk to yourself. Being an Obamabot is more like belonging to a social networking club like facebook where you meet new people who share your angst.

    I asked my God daughter who is a student at Tennessee why she is for Obama. I asked what he stood for and when she thought about it she couldn't think of a thing except of course change. She did say however it was cool meeting all the fellow obama supporters and she likes the rallies lol. In other words, she made new friends.

    [ Parent ]

    Like church without the guilt? (5.00 / 2) (#128)
    by Fabian on Tue May 13, 2008 at 03:52:11 AM EST
    As a Social Justice Catholic, I got the traditional guilt, plus a dose of "What have you done for your fellow wo/man?" guilt.

    There is real sacrifice involved in campaigning for candidate, but it's only short term.  That's why personality politics is doubly self serving.  If you get fired up  about a person rather than issues, when they let you down, you'll probably just move on.  If you are about issues, you'll probably be in it for the long haul, becoming one of many pesky grassroots gadflies holding every public servant accountable.

    Go gadflies!

    [ Parent ]

    Wow (none / 0) (#86)
    by nellre on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:23:09 AM EST
    my feelings exactly!

    [ Parent ]
    sorry (none / 0) (#90)
    by nellre on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:26:22 AM EST
    I laughed at my foible for several minutes.

    [ Parent ]
    Ha! No worries... (none / 0) (#114)
    by tree on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:51:23 AM EST
    If you can't agree with yourself, well, then you've probably got bigger worries.

    [ Parent ]
    Ok, Jarlyn, believe it or not (5.00 / 6) (#84)
    by masslib on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:21:00 AM EST
    dissing the boomers is a play for your vote.  It's an Axelrod special.  I've been there, done that with Deval Patrick.  He's sticking a mirror in your face.  You screwed everything up, give the younger generation a try.  What is particularly galling about the entire episode is of course all but a few protestors were completely repspectful of the Vets.  Hell, that's who they were protesting for.  It's a rewrite of history written by conservatives, nice BO would exploit it.  Actually, BO is a late-boomer or early yuppie.  Yuppies never picked up the mantle of the boomers and their tremendous social justice gains.  They were the me first generation, so Obama's wicked narcicism is no real surprise.  This is like Deval Patrick all over again, without the heart or the work ethic.  Let's say BO does get elected and I don't think he will, no one will be happy.  He's campaigning without any sort of clear agenda, so whatever piecemeal he proposes in office will offend some segment of his supporters.  This is exactly what happened with DP.  This is such a disaster.

    What amazes me is to read Tom (5.00 / 2) (#87)
    by oculus on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:23:18 AM EST
    Hayden say support Obama, all is new and good, plus, Hillary drop out.  Hayden has sold his soul.

    [ Parent ]
    Hayden? (none / 0) (#91)
    by masslib on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:27:45 AM EST
    Really?  That is depressing.

    [ Parent ]
    He has posted at Huff Post (none / 0) (#99)
    by oculus on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:35:19 AM EST
    several times.  Avid Obama supporter, but scolding Hayden's former followers to abandon their old, tired ways and join him.  It is a new day dawning.

    [ Parent ]
    So, what gives with Haydn (none / 0) (#95)
    by Stellaaa on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:30:56 AM EST
    Nation Magazine, all the other so called intelligentsia of the left?   Other than Krugman, who has not jumped on the wagon?  


    [ Parent ]
    The deck is/has shifted and (none / 0) (#100)
    by oculus on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:36:07 AM EST
    everyone wants to be on the winner's side.  (Including Tom Hanks!)

    [ Parent ]
    heh (5.00 / 5) (#88)
    by andgarden on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:24:30 AM EST
    I love phoned-in trolling.

    Trolling (5.00 / 4) (#93)
    by Dalton Hoffine on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:28:56 AM EST
    This is a progressivist website, and while we respect the views of others, we do like to keep to ourselves. Being called venomous and vacuous is probably not your best shot at winning any friends here. :P

    Practicing Obama Campaign technic (5.00 / 2) (#121)
    by Boo Radly on Tue May 13, 2008 at 02:43:37 AM EST
    Making new friends and influencing others. Let us unite....so wrong on so many levels.

    [ Parent ]
    Reply to #80 above (none / 0) (#123)
    by Boo Radly on Tue May 13, 2008 at 02:48:32 AM EST
    This is in the wrong place...sorry...late

    [ Parent ]
    another election day hitjob by NYtimes (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by boredmpa on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:40:07 AM EST

    "That's basically what get-out-the-vote money is," he said. "Paying to get votes."

    A lovely hitjob, that mentions obama, but is alll about Hillary.

    And this one isn't even under the cover of an op-ed or a new op-ed columnist.  I am thoroughly disgusted by the nytimes and how they selectively revisit recent issues with a heavy slant when it involves clinton.  

    Today's article, as it is a news piece, is more subtle than the KKK-3 am ad reference (the day of the Mississippi primary).  Or their new AA columnist  right before the NC election that branded clinton a racist.  However, it's clear that it's one-sided and it's also race-baiting.  A narticle about hillary paying hispanic citizens to GOTV in texas.

    Pathetic

    It's jarring because: they usually don't review previous issues in the news (everything sinks down the memory hole or doesn't get reported); they already reported on street money; they call her out on old style politics and not obama; they ran a quote that clinton supporters aren't energetic; they don't effectively highlight class a reason to pay and instead highlight energetic obama workers as deserving of compensation; they