Welcome WaPo readers.  My rebuttal to Mr Arkin's response can be read here

Update:  Who is William Arkin you may ask?  Read about him here.  And Listen to his interview at Hot Air to really hear his disdain for yourself.

I posted a video last week where an NBC news team interviewed  some troops who expressed sincere frustration to the growing feeling of betrayal they have concerning America's lackluster support.

"If they’re going to support us, support us all the way" was their simple and heartfelt message.

Well William Arkin of the WaPo responded and in essence told them you are lucky to have the people's respect at all, and you should be thankful for the paycheck we give you, so shut up and quit whining.  No that's not a quote, but it is damn hard not to read this any other way.

If you cannot handle a pissed off vet venting over this, look away now.  I may use a bad word or two.

The Troops Also Need to Support the American People

From the word go, he offends me.  Hey dipstick, the troops DO support the American people: with their lives.

I've been mulling over an NBC Nightly News report from Iraq last Friday in which a number of soldiers expressed frustration with opposition to war in the United States.

I'm sure the soldiers were expressing a majority opinion common amongst the ranks - that's why it is news - and I'm also sure no one in the military leadership or the administration put the soldiers up to expressing their views, nor steered NBC reporter Richard Engel to the story.

I'm all for everyone expressing their opinion, even those who wear the uniform of the United States Army. But I also hope that military commanders took the soldiers aside after the story and explained to them why it wasn't for them to disapprove of the American people.

Sure it is.  They have free speech and can be critical of the American People if they want, particularly when their lives are on the line.  They have every right to express their frustration when they feel the support foir what they feel is an honorable mission is reroding.

Seriously that it what it amounts to.  Hey enemy?  Kick back, here is when we will be gone. 

Apparently the enemy is too dumb to know how to win, so congress has decided to plan it for them.

Oddly (sarcasm) this round up of defeatism and surrender comes via the self congratulatory Daily Kos and Truth Dig:

S. 121, introduced on January 4th by Sen. Russ Feingold. The bill would give the Pentagon and State Dept. jointly 60 days to submit a plan for redeployment from Iraq, within 180 days from enactment. Cosponsors: Boxer.

S. 233, introduced on January 9th by Sen. Ted Kennedy. The bill would prohibit funds for any U.S. forces above the number of forces already there as of January 9, 2007, without a specific Congressional authorization for such increase. Cosponsors: Boxer, Brown, Harkin, Kerry, Leahy, Menendez, Sanders.

H.R. 353, introduced on January 9th by Rep. Ed Markey. This is the House counterpart to Kennedy's bill. Cosponsors: Abercrombie, Conyers, DeFazio, Delahunt, DeLauro, Grijalva, Hinchey, Maloney, McDermott, McGovern, Meehan, Olver, Schakowsky, Mike Thompson, Tierney.

H. Res. 41, intruduced on January 9th by Rep. Marty Meehan. A non-binding resolution rejecting the escalation as "the wrong course of action and should not be done without an express authorization for the increase in an Act of Congress." Cosponsors: Abercrombie, Allen, Baldwin, Blumenauer, Capps, Capuano, Conyers, Cummings, DeFazio, Fattah, Frank, Grijalva, Harman, Hinchey, Hirono, Honda, Inslee, Jackson-Lee, Kaptur, Kennedy, Lee, Lewis, Lynch, Markey, McCollum, McGovern, Moran, Neal, Olver, Payne, Rothman, Schakowsky, Smith, Solis, Stark, Tauscher, Watson, Woolsey, Wu.

H. Con. Res. 23, introduced on January 10th by Rep. Dennis Kucinich. A non-binding concurrent resolution expressing the sense of Congress (both Houses) that the President should not order an escalation in Iraq. Cosponsors: Capuano, Carson, Clay, Cohen, Conyers, Cummings, Danny Davis, DeFazio, Doyle, Fattah, Grijalva, Hirono, Holt, Honda, Jackson, Hank Johnson, Kilpatrick, Lee, Lynch, Moore, Nadler, Payne, Rothman, Schakowsky, Serrano, Solis, Stark, Watson, Woolsey, Wu.

Honestly, you cannot make this stuff up.  Via Hot Air

Jail loos turned from East

JAIL bosses are rebuilding toilets so Muslim inmates don’t have to use them while facing Mecca.

Thousands of pounds of taxpayers money are being spent to ensure lags are not offended.

The Islamic religion prohibits Muslims from facing or turning their backs on the Kiblah — the direction of prayer — when they visit the lav.

Muslim lags claimed they have had to sit sideways on prison WCs.

But after pressure from faith leaders the Home Office has agreed to turn the existing toilets 90 degrees at HMP Brixton in London.

The Home Office refused to reveal the cost of the new facilities — part of an “on-going refurbishment”.

One Muslim former inmate said: “The least the Prison Service can do is make sure people can practise their religion correctly in prison.”

But a Brixton jail officer said: “If they didn’t get locked up for committing crime they would not have this problem. Yet we have to sort out their loos. If we weren’t paying for it as taxpayers I’d laugh my socks off.”

Around a quarter of prisoners at the Category B jail are Muslims.

Labour MP Khalid Mahmood said: “As far as I understand this rule only applies in a place of worship.”

Tory MP Ann Widdecombe said: “Some common sense needs to be applied.”

Will the insanity ever cease?  We are way past common sense here....

Will the insanity ever cease?  We are way past common sense here....

Yes they really did spit at (not on, at) him and call him names.  Via Hot Air.

Is this how the nutroots peacefully protest? Is this how they Support the Troops, but not the war?

Well this clip below has a familiar face to LSU, that of Joshua Sparling, the soldier I wrote about in 2005 who was recovering at Walter Reed, and recieved a get well card from a child that said:

Dear, Soldier, have a great time in the war and have a great time dieing in the war From migual Gallier ps DIE

I was pretty pissed then.  Michelle Malkin had a great write up on it too.

Well, he was at the rally in DC as part of the counter protest, this last weekend and got spit at, flipped off and called names.

But as the video shows, he is fairly level headed and fair about his experience, and even had a surprise for his girl friend.

Congrats and best wishes to you both.

I also include this video, from Hannity and Colmes where he discusses his repeated indignities.  In it he does detail the rally a bit more.

Once again it makes me wonder what the nutroots are so afraid of that they have to resort to personal indignities and rude behavior as a part of a peaceful protest.

Apparently the truth will not set you free unless you also throw cigarette butts.

I make no secret of my admiration of Pat Benatar.  She is easily one of finest singers ever to hit the rock and roll business.  Aside from taking the industry by storm in the 70s, she has continued an incredible odyssey of musical invention through the 80s, the 90s and well into the new millennium.  Teamed with one on the finest song writers, producers and guitarists in rock and roll, the great Neil "Spyder" Giraldo, there has been pretty much nothing they have not done and cannot do, and do better then anyone.

I saw her in play in Tacoma a few months ago and the only indication of her age and the length of her career, is that she may not be able to hit all the high ones any more.  I assure you however, that she suffers no lack in that regard, for she sounds as incredible to me as the first time I heard her sing on some top 20 countdown in High School.

So since I haven't posted anything for entertainment this week here are two videos by her.  The first is from the Tonight Show in 1993 when she was touring Gravity's Rainbow.  The song is Somebody's Baby, likely the second most powerful song she has ever recorded, second only to Hell is for Children, her incredible and oft misunderstood child abuse anthem.

The second clip is the video for the same song, which should do a good job explaining what the song is about and why it is so immensely powerful.  Pay attention to the details.  Also know that at least one of those people showcased therein is now dead. 

When I am faced with situations where I am tempted to condemn and judge people, I do try to remember the lesson in humanity her song offers.  All people, the stars, the nobodys, the politicians, the criminals, the villains and the heroes, we all used to be Somebody's Baby.  It doesn't excuse anything or mitigate anything or even prove anything.  But it does remind me that they are still humans at some deeper level.  We are all linked together, and the evil done to one is a felt by all, even as we triumph together.  I won't make this into some new age mantra, but if you think about it, it is true.

It's a simple but potent message from the frontliners, the boots on the ground.

While the left may sing themselves to sleep each night comforted by their pseudo support mantra "Support the troops, not the war", the real troops are having none of it.

What the left does not get is that while they do not believe in the war, the troops do.  What the troops feel from their "support the troops, bring them home" chants is frustration that their nation does not believe in them and is abandoning support.

Watch the clip and see for yourself how the troops feel.

The question becomes can you support them and their ideals and not give them the support for the mission they are doing?  While the left sees no conflict, the troops feel it.  How can we support them and not equip them for success?  Oh sure, we give them armour, or guns.  Do we give them belief?  Trust? They also need the emotional support.

Because the war is winnable.  They know it.  They just wish you did too.

And yes, that includes equipping them with solid leadership.  I am not letting Bush and the Pentagon off the hook.

McQ at Qando nails it thus:

We’re not talking a general philosophical discussion here. We’re talking about a particular war and a mission assigned by the Commander in Chief to the troops on the ground.

While I can appreciate the argument that you can support the troops by wanting them home or wanting them properly equipped or any of a number of other reasons, if you don’t support their mission then whatever support you do claim is qualified support. A bit like saying “we want you to look like a soldier, and we love you for being one, but we can’t support you acting like one it this instance”.

Indeed.  He also notes a conversation between Hugh Hewett and Mark Steyn, addressing the defeatist Democrats and the turncoat defeatist Republicans:

Want to show your opposition to the Republicans in the Senate who plan on siding with the Dems by voting to express their opposition to Bush’s surge plan? Dean Barnett explains exactly how you can do it.

Already aware of the pledge but just haven’t gotten around to signing it? Click here to do just that.

Lots of ’signatures’ on there already, including one from LSU.

Show the craven poll driven politicians that it matters.

Hat tip to Sister Toldjah

Yes that's right, I will briefly turn my back on politics to address this pop culture shocker.

On the Angus Young Bio at Wikipedia, it is reported that Angus is dead.  I heartily suspect it is a hoax, as the reasons and cause of death are somewhat obscene and graphic.

Since I am sure Wiki will remove the entry I can only assume is bogus, I took a snap shot of it (below) for posterity.

NOTE- Already gone

In the larger view this prank is not to serious, but it should be remembered that this is the flaw of a user controlled encyclopedia.

Something I will remember the next time I am tempted to quote Wiki as authoritative.

But in case its true, here is an AC/DC Angus tribite video.

The polls show her running strong out front, and Keith Olbermann's offers her a fluff interview, but her campaign to be the CIC has some serious challenges ahead of it.

One of the biggest challenges will be Bill.  You remember him, the former president?  He offers many problems that must be dealt with, and no clear method presents itself.

• His history of past sexcapades, rumors of his current ones and his recent (unofficial) diagnosis of sexual addiction remind us that she is married to a man of questionable values, and also raises the questions of what she knew, when she knew it and why she stays with a man who shows no respect for his marriage.  The answer pretty much has to be political gain and everyone knows it.  Had she divorced him in 2000 I doubt she would have been able to Carpetbag New York as easily as she did.
  
• Every day he appears in public, he is a slap in her face that she will always be second best.  He is more charismatic, a better speaker, a better writer and a better politician then she is or ever will be.  She rode his coattails to Little Rock, then to Washington DC, and no matter how hard she tries, she is still riding them today. 
  
• Too many people see her possible Presidency as a way to circumvent the 22nd Amendment and return Bill to the Whitehouse.  Once again it is about Bill, not her

And the ugly truth is that she is caught between a rock and hard place.  She cannot win without his support.  But every times he speaks he reminds how much less then him she is.  She will never be able to over come being second.

Sure she has some people trying to grease her past the challenges.  As I mentioned, Olbermann sat her down for a not so hard hitting piece of fluff that had meaningless leading questions and a complete lack of substantive answers.  Examples (via Hot Air and Olbermann Watch):

Via Michelle Malkin, this is a sobering fact.

Since they have the leadership now, lets see some leadership.  And being the first to run away does not count.