September 16, 2005
Adventures in Commuting
At a few on-ramps up and down the Puget Sound interstate corridors, you'll find cardboard-wielding individuals declaring their penury and soliciting impromptu donations. This morning, something different: at the 175th St. NE southwestern corner I-5 on-ramp a well-dressed woman was holding a large blue picket sign with the name "Bob Ferguson--Democrat."
I would admire her fortitude (I guess) to tough out the sign-waving in the rain, however, she had a little girl in a back-carrier-- without a hat or rain cover. As a new dad myself, I had to shake my head at her as we drove by. Her daughter is forced to sacrifice for another's sake, without free choice-- kind of an early object lesson on the essence of the liberal political viewpoint. (I have a feeling Ferguson would rather she didn't stand there with the baby in tow.)
Most days I travel south on 405. At one particular footbridge overpass in the Kirkland area, there is a regular set of anti-Iraqi-Freedom protestors, standing beside a sign reading: "US Out of Iraq Now" and sometimes "Wage Peace" (a fatuous admonition if there ever was one-- most peace is won through battling evil.)
A few of times of late, I have seen a backlash protest crowding out the other side on the same footbridge. A group of stalwarts with US flags, ribbons and larger signs reading: "We Support our Troops, Iraq, and our President." I imagine both sets of protestors get their share of both appreciative and hostile gestures from drivers passing beneath.
To the troops-supporters, if you read this, thanks for being there.
Posted by Brian Crouch at September 16, 2005
10:28 AM | Email This
1. Unfortunate - but we support Ferguson over Edmonds, do we not?
2. Well said. Progressives believe that the end justifies the means. Sacrifice is their mantra. And sacrifice, or forced sacrifice for the sake of others is their ultimate goal.
3. ...and that passionate liberal, 'green' mom has that kid in a disposable diaper for the landfill...just like the morons who parade their kids around with school levy or school strike signs; I love it...and they talk about evil, misleading CORPORATE advertizing? ha-
4. I had my own adventure in commuting. While driving into Seattle on 522 Monday morning, I noticed 3 individuals waving and holding "Elect Carlolyn Edmonds" signs at the main intersection on 522/104 in Lake Forest Park. As I drove closer, I saw that it was none other than Carolyn Edmonds herself! Imagine my surprise as it was 8:30a.m. on Monday morning and Carolyn was SUPPOSED to be at a King County Council meeting at Boeing Field for a hearing on the Southwest proposal. Guess we know what her priorities are!
5. Mimi-- thanks. Doesn't surprise me...
I promise not to claim that racist skinheads represent the "conservative political viewpoint" if you stop saying that child-abusing panhandlers represent the "liberal political viewpoint." You know how meaningless this is.
Re "Wage Peace": Without discussing the merits of any particular war here, do you really miss the meaning of this phrase? Sure, sometimes peace must be fought for, but are you saying we must be perennially fighting wars everywhere against evil? What a dangerous worldview.
At least I admire the protesters who said "We Support our Troops, Iraq, and our President" for their honesty in being willing to associate themselves with this President's catastrophic foreign policy. As far as I can tell, most people who say "We Support Our Troops" think it sounds more moral then "We Support the War", but when pressed, refuse to accept any practical difference between the statements.
"Sure, sometimes peace must be fought for, but are you saying we must be perennially fighting wars everywhere against evil? What a dangerous worldview."
Oh, really? That's interesting, as that was the worldview espoused by Presidents Harry Truman and John F Kennedy, among others.
Dare I remind you of a few excerpts of JFKs inaugural address?
"To those peoples in the huts and villages across the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best efforts to help them help themselves, for whatever period is required—not because the Communists may be doing it, not because we seek their votes, but because it is right."
"We dare not tempt them with weakness. For only when our arms are sufficient beyond doubt can we be certain beyond doubt that they will never be employed."
Sadly, the Democratic Party had completely abandoned this philosophy by the reign of terror of Jimmy Carter, and we can see the rise of islamofascism traced directly from his time in office.
What happened Bruce? When did your party lose its spine?
8. Tell you what, Bruce. I'll denounce Skinheads in my party if you denouce perveyors of child abuse for the sake of politics. I'm sure we can agree on that.
I support the war in Iraq. I support the troops (I have family over there) and I support George W. Bush. How's that for honesty.
Catastrophic foreign policy?
Instead of eagerly gulping down what the left leaning MSM is pouring, try listening to some of our fighting men and women over there tell you how catastrophic it really is. Being greeted and thanked by almost every Iraqee that they encounter. Free elections, new constitution. Sure there's problems - but they are greatly outweighed by the benefits.
Why don't all of the "No Iraq War" folks change their signs to "No Free Iraq". Just word games, aye?
I thought skin heads were neo-nazis. If you know anything about nazi ideology you will know that one of the central tenets is aethism.
So Bruce, are you claiming the Republicans are atheist? Or even that fringe Republicans are atheist?
Well I suspect after the Mayor announces his next in a long line of stupid plan decisions on the failed monorail system in Seattle this afternoon, the monorail board will be standing at off ramps with tin cups and signs saying "Save our Monorail, donate your whole paycheck today"!
I think they should just buy the failed Las Vegas monorail, and ship it up here! That is of course if you can even find it! Talk about the lost arc, look for this one when you visit Vegas. No wonder it is not ridden.
I respect someone's right to protest and express themselves peacefully. Even if I hate the message. However, dragging in your kids to your (adult) fights is where my line gets drawn. They are not willing participants.
This says reams about your parenting responsibilities and priorities. What's ctitical--your selfish political message or your kid's welfare? It's like shoving your (unarmed) kids in front as your charge the Bastille. Get a life. Get a clue. Hire a qualified (responsible) babysitter for your 'Political Ranting Day.'
This way, you will be doing the economy a (conservative values) service--hiring a daycare worker while you pizz & moan about your stature and aggrevied status.
13. It's a prop child - used to purpetuate the "it's for the children mantra". I hear the you can rent them from moveon.org for any liberal protest or to promote a leftist candidate.
14. 'Rat/Libs lost their balls ages ago, along with their moral compass. Stalin was right...useful idiots.
Check out the button for sale in Bezerkely
. Tells it all no real reason to oppose anything just a hatred of the US.
16. ..beats holding a Carolyn Edmonds sign!
17. Actually Larry the Brotherhood started as a direct result of Nasser's Western ways back around WWII, which is the original father of your modern run-o-the-mill terrorist. Generic muslim extremism dates back a thousand years. Carter only made them mad enough to kill Sadat.
Candrew has a valid point, it's much longer going and more complex than that. We all know the back story on Bin Laden. And that the current terrorist leaders recieved thier training and money and became extremist during the Cold war as a result from the use of thier religion as a political tool by either the US or USSR.
But there is another cause which is more basic. My grandfather is largely responsible for building Saudi Arabia's at one time Western style public health agency (think CDC) which was until the 80's as good as many Western agencies. His observation prior to his death, which I happen to agree with was that society in the gulf area had been subsistence based for a thousand years during the decline of the Ottomon Turk empire with minimal exploitation by western colonial powers on a small time basis. After WWII suddenly in the space of 20 years you literally industrialize the entire region. We all studied in history the problems of industrialization in the west in high school and that took much longer, it's not surprising at all that you would have massive social upheaval. (i.e Sadat) To blame this on Carter or any single other individual or president is way to simple. But does make a nice sound bite.
Is that why libs use pro-choice when they mean pro-abortion? As obviously they do not mean pro-choice, like choice of which school to send their kids to with vouchers, pro-choice if to have a job without having to join the union, pro-choice is to choose where union dues go to and ensure that they do not go to political parties with whom you disagree....
Shall I continue?
On a slightly related topic; Remember a few months back when Barbara Walter's made her anti-public breast feeding comments. Then Schrambo made one of his angry tirades (which I find to quite witty, yet still informative) about breast feeding.
Down at a certain building with a huge rotunda on top, a bunch of ladies staged a pro-breast feeding rally. I am not making this up, but one of those kids on the boob had to be over 3 years old. Some of these women were basically, force breast feeding their kids just to make a point.
And for the record, if the kid can ask for the boob, it's time you get him off yours and on to chasing others.
You touched on an interesting subject; one that is discussed in too few Republican circles today.
Last night after buying a new suit, I drove over the 38th Street Bridge in Tacoma. At the next intersection was an indigent man, holding a sign that read, "I'd rather beg than steal" and "God Bless You All".
Perhaps only tangentally related to your post, why is it that we neglect these "sign-waivers", both in discourse and in other more "civic" ways?
Benjamin Franklin once said, "I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it."
Food for thought, as poverty in the Puget Sound routinely escapes the "to-do lists" of our elected officials.
patrick--did you give him your new suit? i think most conservatives give to many good charities;
however, i suspect your "id rather" person does not want to comply with shelter, church or soup kitchen basic rules in order to start that long journey to self-sufficency; granted, it's probably a hard row to sow after years of street life;
however, i RARELY see the papers present a story of self-help and victories of homeless people who went on to greater things; why only the victims' sides? do the sad, smudged puppy faces sell more papers; are we to assume NOBODY exits this lifestyle and these choices? it's hard to believe;
how about "id rather help myself than beg?" maybe i'm cold, but there are too many scam-olas out there to be so trusting; and as for Katrina, let's watch carefully how many bootstraps are pulled up by one's self compared to how many are screaming for yet more free designer boots;
Patrick - I frequently drive the route you describe. It is "panhandler central". One of my favorites was a female (I think) who placed herself adjacent to the freeway entrance begging for "bus fare" so she could get home.
Day after day.
Week after week.
You get the picture?
I watched the TPD break up a fight among these "entrepreneurs" when one dared to beg on the others' "turf". As the cop is determining who gets to go to jail, the "landowner" suddenly gets wise and retreats.....to his Chevy van!
So, what's your point? Does poverty happen? Sure it does, and so does enrichment.
Can these guys (& gals) be legit? Yea, and they can be scammers, too. We each have to decide case by case.
Here's a unique idea - let me decide with my money, and I'll let you decide with yours!
I do not call liberating 25 million people, peacefully disarming Libya of nukes, getting the Syrian Amry out of Lebanon and capturing of killing much of Al Aqeda senior leadership a "catastrphic" foreign policy.
What WAS a catastrophic foreing policy was the one that allowed the USS Cole to be blown up, resulting int he deaths of 21 US servicemens, the blowing up of Khobar Towers, THe African Embassies being blown up and the 1993 Trade Towers bombing all with NO ACTION from the sitting president as the time to stop the terrorists. Of course I am talking of the ever philandering presidential icon of Democrat lore.
Under the current US president our security has been FANTASTIC! Yeah 911, which was planned and encouraged on Clinton's watch, happened on Bush's watch. But since the Bush doctrine has been in place there haven't been any embassies being blown up, Navy ship blown up or any more planes bringing down skyscrapers.
And Bush's policy IS bringing the fight to the enemy in Iraq. Of course you will cite the British bombing, but those were HOMEGROWN terrorists, British citizens all except one.
So all, in all the Bush foreign policy has been a historic success.
You are sorely mistaken if you believe that historically Nazi's have been atheists.
Hitler wrote: "I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.." As a boy, Hitler attended to the Catholic church and experienced the anti-Semitic attitude of his culture. In his book, Mein Kampf, Hitler reveals himself as a fanatical believer in God and country. This text presents selected quotes from the infamous anti-Semite himself.
And you should see the photos of the Roman Catholic priests giving the nazi salute:
26. pbj: Look, at the very least, at "The Myth of Hitler's Pope" by Rabbi David Dallin. You are sorely mistaken, but cannot convince you if you do not look at the evidence.
Sure. Next you will tell me that the current pope was never a Nazi.
He was a Nazi only because he had a gun to his head. It was required by law that he join the Hitler Youth when he was a kid, and he was a conscript, not a volunteer, in the German army... which he later deserted.
No, I kept the suit. I did think about the levels of ingenuity in begger sign-making.
The beggers slogan simply made me do a double-take, and think...
I should also note that this same begger has been in the same spot for over nine months.