The Ostroy Report

The Ostroy Report is a fresh, aggressive voice for Democrats and a watchdog of the GOP/Tea Party. We support President Obama and the Democratic agenda and seek to preserve the Senate majority while taking back the House. But we're also not afraid to criticize the left when necessary.

Tuesday, April 18, 2006

Soldier's Grieving Mom Chillingly Illustrates the Profound Success of the Bushevik Propaganda Campaign


Ever since they took office, the Busheviks have painted a bullseye on the back of Saddam Hussein's uniform, aiming squarely to take out the Iraqi dictator no matter what. We now know this, of course, through the infamous Downing Street memos, firsthand testimony of former terrorism czar Richard Clarke, and other accounts of those early Bush days made public by various sources. The Bushies wanted Saddam and they wanted him bad. All they needed was a reason. Any reason. In 2001 Osama bin Laden gave them Christmas in September. And so began what is now a four-year campaign of lies and deception; a well-oiled, highly effective propaganda machine that was never more evident than in Tuesday's Hardball with Chris Matthews on MSNBC.

Discussing the controversy surrounding several U.S. generals' demand for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's resignation, Matthews interviewed the mothers of two soldiers killed in battle in Iraq. Defending Rummy was Deborah Meyer, whose stepson, PFC Jason Meyer, 23, was killed in action three years ago. Her son Jonathan will be deployed to Iraq this Fall. She is a member of Families United for Our Troops and Their Mission. Taking the opposing position was Rosemary Palmer, who with her husband founded Families of the Fallen for Change. Her son, Lance Corporal Edward "Auggy" Schroeder, 23, was killed in August.

Palmer stated what was obvious: that Rumsfeld has grossly miscalculated the war effort and the insurgency, and should be removed from his cabinet post. She simply stated the facts. No spin, no truth-stretching. Just a grieving mom trying to understand how our government, and those in charge of the war, can screw up so badly.

Turn to Meyer, another unfortunate victim of this tragic war to whom our collective hearts go out. As expected, she offered some of the standard pro-war, everything is wonderful rhetoric, reading from notes: "Well I think Sec. Rumsfeld has served our country with incredible distinction and commitment to the defense of our country. He's been confronted with some incredibly challenging circumstances, and he's met and continues to meet those challenges. He has the full confidence of the president, and his steady leadership is exactly what we need in Iraq right now."

Ok, we can certainly accept this highly partisan support, and even excuse it, coming from the mouth of someone who's experienced heartache. But then her comments started to get less partisan and more convoluted as Matthews asked if we should've gone into Iraq.

"I think we didn't have a choice. I believe that the Taliban and Saddam Hussein had power, and under Sec. Rumsfeld's leadership our military have liberated millions of people. There are many improvements happening in Iraq on a daily basis and I don't feel we had a choice." The Taliban? I guess I must've missed that memo.

And finally, Meyer's response became downright bizarre and highly strained when a polite and deferential, yet noticeably frustrated, Matthews asked, "A simple question: why did your son and all those hundreds of thousands of troops get sent to Iraq? What was the reason for going to Iraq?"

Appearing like a deer caught in the headlights, Meyer hesitated and began to answer the question, peppering her reply with long, uncomfortable pauses and much stammering: "Um...we went to Iraq, in my estimation, to, um, fight against the terrorism that is invading our country. We were attacked. It was on 9/11 and many times before that. Um...we needed to (long pause) help the Iraqi people free themselves and, um, free themselves from Saddam Hussein's regime, um, and the terrorism that we're living under. I would rather be fighting them in their backyards than having them come to my backyard and fight here."

There is just so much wrong with what this poor woman has said, and with what she believes. Listening to her made me angry. Not merely angry that a mother had to experience the loss of a child, which is the worst possible thing a parent can go through, but moreso how this grieving woman has been lied to and manipulated by a callous, war-mongering administration. And it scared me to see someone so clueless and ignorant of the facts desperately trying to defend something of which she doesn't even have the slightest understanding.

It's truly unfathomable to think that in 2006 someone can still believe that the Taliban was in Iraq, that Iraq and Al Qaeda were the same, that Saddam caused 9/11, and that we invaded Iraq to fight the terrorists who attacked us. But she's not alone. There are millions and millions of misguided, gullible souls just like her who've been brainwashed by the Busheviks' highly orchestrated propaganda machine. It's shameful, and an utter disgrace. Perhaps people like Meyer, in order to get through each day, need to believe that their sons and daughters did not die in vain, and thus cling to the Bush rhetoric for dear life. That the Bushies still feed them this pack of lies knowing this is even more reprehensible.

12 Comments:

  • At 10:51 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I grieve for this poor woman. Imagine sending your strong, healthy, bright eyed child into the military and having that child killed in Iraq. Mom must feel she has to have some reason, some justfication to hold onto. "My child was fighting the war on terror and did not die in vain". Admitting that your child died for nothing or worse, to further some nutcase's greed would make your emotional being crumple like the towers did on 911. I don't see any way to recover from that or even go on living. All I can do is somehow pray for healing for these poor families and work to end this war.

     
  • At 1:14 AM, Blogger LiberalPride said…

    She was coached. That's my theory.

    In other words, some of her answers sound like Republican Party talking points. Someone from the Republican Party sat down with her before her appearance and went over things with her. But then Chris Matthews asked her some questions that couldn't be answered by some pat Republican spin. That's when her responses became more convoluted and somewhat deranged sounding.

    Now, I'm sure Democrats have used coaching on certain occasions, like before presidential debates, for instance. However, the Republicans, from what I can tell, are using it to a much wider extent and more frequently. Hey, lies just bear repeating and repeating and repeating...which really should be the new Republican campaign motto. And it pays well, too.

    So she is definitely a willing accomplice to all of this. She is not necessarily a victim of the Republican spin machine, because she actively promotes the spin herself.

    And, based on some of her strangest answers, it wouldn't surprise me to find out that she's associated with one of the pseudo-Christian evangelical "hate-groups" like Dobson's or Robertson's. In other words, same-sex marriages..."the terrorism that is invading our country." Keeping intact the wall separating church and state..."the terrorism that is invading our country." The "bogus" war on Christmas and Easter..."the terrorism that is invading our country."

    This is why what she said sounded so bizarre. We are literally facing a new language that is based on lies and twisted logic called Republican spin-ese. She hasn't gotten it down completely, but with enough time and extensive coaching she will someday master it...like Karl Rove.

     
  • At 4:41 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    i was stunned and saddened at her replies to Chris Matthews' straightforward and simple question. this mantra that is repeated over and over again to the masses become accepted without question as truth. innuendo and intimation of fact becomes accepted as fact. it's a quite sad state of affairs in America. many "uneducated" (those who trust without verifying information heard) do not even bother but to occasionally monitor international events. this poor woman did not sound coached. she seemed to be one of those who simply accepted that you have to trust what your leaders say (because why would they lie?), otherwise she would have to accept the more devastating prospect that her son died in a misguided war in Iraq when the true objective should have been and remains in the region in and around Afghanistan.

     
  • At 8:57 AM, Blogger Dicky Neely said…

    Bush, Cheney, Rummy et al, keep perpetrating the Saddam/9-11 myth because it suits their purposes. They know it's a lie, we know it's a lie. Who are they targeting? The gullible people like that poor mother and others who really want to believe in the President and their country, as the administration gleefully runs this country into the ground!

     
  • At 8:57 AM, Anonymous Cathy said…

    If you really want to think as to the lies and propaganda of 9/11, watch Loose Change. Go to www.loosechange.com. It will blow you away.

    As for that poor woman, she has her talking points down and they are all the same. I bet she is part of Bush's religious base which is pretty much all he has now.

    The polls look good for a change, but with the Repubs in "safe seats" all over the country, I fear we won't see much change in 2006. No one ever talks about the "safe seats" and I fear many will be disappointed in 2006.

    Cathy
    From the once great State of Michigan

     
  • At 11:12 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    " ... this poor women ...", how about stupid, fascist women? Sorry, I have no sympathy for those that can't see the forrest for the trees. If anyone took just a few moments to look there is enough evidence of truth out here to dispel all of the bushits claims, from 9/11 to fraudulent elections to Iraq.
    To me you have to be one, or all, of three things to still support bush, 1) misinformed, which can be corrected, 2) stupid, which can't or 3) a fascist, which makes you the enemy of all that America is suppose to stand for.
    And being "this poor women" went out of her way to start the group she heads I put her in the last two categories.

     
  • At 11:12 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    " ... this poor women ...", how about stupid, fascist women? Sorry, I have no sympathy for those that can't see the forrest for the trees. If anyone took just a few moments to look there is enough evidence of truth out here to dispel all of the bushits claims, from 9/11 to fraudulent elections to Iraq.
    To me you have to be one, or all, of three things to still support bush, 1) misinformed, which can be corrected, 2) stupid, which can't or 3) a fascist, which makes you the enemy of all that America is suppose to stand for.
    And being "this poor women" went out of her way to start the group she heads I put her in the last two categories.

     
  • At 1:46 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Women like her are the breeders for the future war using poorly educated bullet stoppers for our imperial wars. Think this is an aberration? Speak to some in the grocery store the next time you get the chance. AMerica is the home to indoctrinated dumbasses and probably deserves the fate awaiting the end of this long dark tunnel. Enjoy your new lifestyle. It is coming to your neighborhood sooner than you think!

     
  • At 2:44 PM, Anonymous Catherine said…

    It is heartbreaking for parents and vile of the Bush/Rove propaganda machine to use these grieving parents. Perhaps she has to force herself to believe these things in order to get up and face the day

     
  • At 2:46 PM, Anonymous Donald from Hawaii said…

    Try living in a family where this sort of rupture, which is playing out nationally, is internal.

    I lost my father in the Vietnam War. My mother soon became vociferously anti-war, while my paternal grandparents both continued to support President Nixon's war effort. Because of their differences over Vietnam, which soon degenerated into a personal realm, they didn't talk to one another for eight long years, reconciling only after Saigon fell in April 1975 and the war ended.

    For that, I'd like to thank the GOP's "God Bless America/Family Values" crowd. You all taught me a valuable lesson: Hypocrisy is the ultimate compliment that vice pays to virtue.

     
  • At 6:05 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    The Bushies would be happy to have everyone think that all those A-Rabs are all alike, and that it doesn't make any difference whom we start a war with, as long as it's with those "damn A-rab terrorists".

     
  • At 9:37 AM, Anonymous pinellas county, FL said…

    I think it's important that this type of stuff is shown to the public, not suppressed, but....

    What about the false equivalency factor? The idea that the mother in question & her group (might wanna look up their creds) represent an equivalent to those opposed to the 'war' in Iraq - obviously worked, since Ostroy, et al. are presuming 'millions & millions' of people are on her side of the opinion fence.

    This type of phony 'balance' gets put forth almost constantly by corporate media & guess what? It works.

    I've a hunch there are many more spontaneously generated anti-war military family & vet groups around the USA, way more than the astro-turf groups......

     

Post a Comment

<< Home