[Pokey78]

Sullivan ping.

[tallhappy]

Meme? Meme?

There's someone who actually uses this failed attempt to coin a phrase?

[Sloth]

The evidence? That he hasn't attended any military funerals related to the Iraq war. This particular indictment works rhetorically because it manages to sum up a criticism of the Bush administration's Iraq policy while adding the extra ingredient of damning Bush personally.

It's a complete load of crap. As much as I despise Hillary, I have never understood why O'Reilly and others wanted to criticize her for not going to funerals of 9/11 victims. Hello?! If you had just lost a spouse, would you want Hillary Clinton showing up at the funeral with the Secret Service for a friggin' photo op? Bush should be avoiding funerals for the same reason -- respect for the families.

[GulliverSwift]

I see the ban on media coverage of funerals as both good for the families' privacy as well as stopping support of the terrorists.

The British have a similar ban regarding broadcasting images of IRA members IIRC.

[anoldafvet]

Anybody want to bet that if he did attend the funerals he would be ripped for creating "photo ops" at the expense of grieving families?

[Steve_Seattle]

If Bush doesn't go to funerals, they say it's because he's callous. But if he does go to a funeral (or visit the troops), it's called a cynical photo-op or a "stunt." So either way, his critics will interpret it in a way to suit their negative assessment of him. You can't win.

[Freemeorkillme]

BUMP to sound critical thinking.

[Steve_Seattle]

I thought there was a thread a few days ago where someone claimed that Bush HAS met privately with a lot of the victim's families.

[gridlock]

There's a growing anti-Bush meme, pioneered in part by Maureen Dowd and The New York Times...

Allow me.

Rules are rules, after all.

[mountaineer]

At yesterday's protest in Pittsburgh, one leftwinger was all in a lather. He argued if Bush cared about the soldiers so much, he'd be there fighting alongside them in Iraq. I asked why we didn't see Bill Clinton pick up a rifle and join the fray in Serbia. His response? "Well, that was a just war."

???

[xzins]

I was with a very high profile unit at one of our KY installations, when the problem of the media first surfaced. With no regard whatsoever for the feelings of families and grieving human beings, they would stick their mikes in the faces of weeping loved ones and ask absolutely insensitive, rude questions.

The unit simply banned anyone but family, friends, and unit members. In the years following, I saw other military units go to the same procedure.

It was clearly geared to the needs of the grieving and bereaved. There was plenty of information on the deaths out there that the media could use. They had no need to be at someone's funeral service OTHER than sensationalism.....the last thing a person in grief needs.

Our president knows that if he attends these private, family/unit gatherings that they will become a circus sideshow of media anti-americans besmirching the sacrifice of our best and our bravest while trying to get a grief-stricken loved one to make a mistake on camera or on sound-bite.

He is doing the right thing. He's an outstanding Commander in Chief!

Xzins
Chaplain (Retired) US Army

[PhilipFreneau]

The goal of the Baathists in Iraq is not to remove the coalition forces by military means, but to so weaken Western morale that the American and British publics decide to throw in the towel. A critical part of the enemy's calculation is the lesson it took from Beirut and Somalia: that the American public cannot tolerate any casualties. So broadcasting every funeral plays directly into the hands of the Baathists. It's what they want. Why does it honor soldiers killed by these thugs to give the enemy an easy propaganda victory?

Why is it that America's media (so-called) elite cannot grasp this simple concept?