Good read...she was direct and right on target.


War Widow To Bush: "You're Here To Serve The People. And The People Are Not Being Served With This War."

By Greg Sargent

I just got off the phone with Hildi Halley, a woman from Maine whose husband is a fallen soldier. Yesterday President Bush met with her privately, and news of their meeting was reported in a local Maine paper, the Kennebec Journal, which said simply that Halley objected to Bush's policies and that she said Bush responded that there was no point in them having a "philosophical discussion about the pros and cons of the war."

But Halley has just told me that she went much farther in her criticism of Bush, telling him directly that he was "responsible" for the deaths of American soldiers and that as a "Christian man," he should recognize that he's "made a mistake" and that it was his "responsibility to end this." She recounted to me that she was "very direct," telling Bush: "As President, you're here to serve the people. And the people are not being served with this war."



I reached Halley at her home in Falmouth, Maine. She told me that her husband, Patrick Damon, who's long been active in Democratic politics, had been in Afghanistan as an engineer building roads when he died in June. She said she was first told that it was of a heart attack, but that subsequently she was told there was no sign that a heart attack had killed him. An invesigation into his death is continuing.

Halley, who's also been politically active for Democrats, said she told GOP Senator Olympia Snowe that she'd like a phone call from Bush. Subsequently Halley got a call from White House staffers looking to set up a private meeting. Bush came yesterday.

Halley tells me that she told the President that she's been opposed since "day one" to both the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"I talked to him about how important this person was to me," Halley recounted, speaking of her husband. "It's not just a soldier who died. Lives are changed forever...I said, `This doesn't make sense to me.'"

"He said, `Terrorists killed three thousand people, we had to go to war.'" Halley continued to me. "I said, `Well, who put the Taliban into power? The United States did.' He said, `I'm not going to have a philosphical debate over politics.' The whole conversation was very gentle."

Halley says that while Bush was personable and receptive to her, she was very direct and critical of Bush's policies and insisted that the right thing to do was to end the war.

"We literally sat knee to knee...I looked deep into his eyes and talked to him about love and losing people and that he was responsible for this. I said, `I didn't vote for you, but you are my President. And you're not serving me.'"

"I said I believed it was time to put an end to this. His job is to find solutions. I said, `You yourself have said you had erroneous information going into this.'"

She continued: "I said, `As a Christian man, you realize that when you've made a mistake it's your responsiblity to end this. And it's time to end the bleeding and it's time to end the war.'"

"I said, `what would truly bring healing is to start working on changing your policy towards the Middle East...as President, you're here to serve the people. And the people are not being served with this war.'"

She added: "I told him, `It's time as a Christian to put our pride behind us."

Halley said that the President appeared moved by what she'd said, but that she doubted it would bring about any real change. "He cried with me," she recounted. "I feel he responded to me emotionally. I don't know if that's going to change policy. It probably won't. But I hope it makes him think a little bit further."

I give Bush credit for meeting with her.

I said, `what would truly bring healing is to start working on changing your policy towards the Middle East...as President, you're here to serve the people. And the people are not being served with this war.'"


I didn't get her permission to speak for me. I do feel as if the best interests of America are being served.

Thanks, drive through.....

Once again Bush shows he's a man of compassion when more would've avoided this meeting.

Fandros Finglaflin

Thankfully Fandros, no one cares what YOU think, but being a democracy its the majority that matters. Right now somewhere between 50 and 70% (depending on the polls you read) of the country feels this war is definately not in the countries best interests. The polls naturally aren't the barometer for how decisions are made, but the elections in November hopefully will be and even your beloved Fox reports that 58% of the country would prefer the Democrat party to gain power in Congress and only 38% feel the Republican party should remain in power.

We can hope its these numbers, as well as the continuing intel out of Iraq and Afganistan that things are going poorly at best, that will help drag the country ouf of the mess we made.

I always said I liked Bush as a person. He is a good man.
He is just a shitty President.

We can hope its these numbers, as well as the continuing intel out of Iraq and Afganistan that things are going poorly at best, that will help drag the country ouf of the mess we made.


God not me. The thought of a congress/senate with a party of no direction or clue as to how they even want to run things. I much prefer a party that is not afraid to make tough decisions and is willing to stay the course in tough times and not abandon long term goals during hardships. Ok now please set forth with your insults as it will be probably another 3 or 4 weeks before I remember to run by here again.

God not me. The thought of a congress/senate with a party of no direction or clue as to how they even want to run things. I much prefer a party that is not afraid to make tough decisions and is willing to stay the course in tough times and not abandon long term goals during hardships. Ok now please set forth with your insults as it will be probably another 3 or 4 weeks before I remember to run by here again.

Heres an Idea Os, join the Marines and request infantry....sounds like you need to participate so as to not abandon any long term goals.

Wish I could. Wish I could.

Wish I could. Wish I could.

No need to wish...just get off your ass and do it. Hey, then you can actually do something to back up your views. Go to Iraq, kill foriegners and you know what, you'll be able to say I put my money where my mouth is vs the I link to websites.

Anyway, I'm certain they would take you as they have drastically lowered the standards in the past 2 years.

Thankfully Fandros, no one cares what YOU think,

Such a delightful tool you are child. Apparently you've decided to somehow convince the entire world that my own vote is null and void now?

Guess my vote is worth something, Bush won last time hmmmmm did your vote go for a winning cause?

Child, I think it best if you go back to name dropping and making up important sounding days.

All I said was she doesn't speak for me, she made a broad generalization and as such I was letting it be known that not everyone feels the way she does.

I feel for her loss, I do....but her family member was in Iraq by choice and was proud to serve. Rather not see her turn into a nutter like Cindy Sheehan, who has disgraced her son's memories imho...oh and the opinion of her now exhusband...

Oooo and once again child I caution you not to put too much faith in the polls. They are purposely weighted to express opinions that the pollsters themselves want shown. They are leading you by the nose....enjoy the ring tugging ever so much would you? Exit polls in Ohio for the win!!!

Fandros Finglaflin

No need to wish...just get off your ass and do it. Hey, then you can actually do something to back up your views. Go to Iraq, kill foriegners and you know what, you'll be able to say I put my money where my mouth is vs the I link to websites.

Anyway, I'm certain they would take you as they have drastically lowered the standards in the past 2 years.

Not medically eligible.. I tried/checked.

Not medically eligible.. I tried/checked.

Oh well...at least you are backing an administration that is ripe with people who have the same reason as you for never having served...but I guess thats par for the course.

lol

Bah Rover...Canadian border is due north. Keep going till you can rid yourself of the stench of hard nosed labor.

I served bruddah, in the Storm and I back the administration in it's efforts.

Fandros

Bah Rover...Canadian border is due north. Keep going till you can rid yourself of the stench of hard nosed labor.

I served bruddah, in the Storm and I back the administration in it's efforts.

Fandros

Well not all veterans are perfect!! Smootch!!!

God not me. The thought of a congress/senate with a party of no direction or clue as to how they even want to run things. I much prefer a party that is not afraid to make tough decisions and is willing to stay the course in tough times and not abandon long term goals during hardships. Ok now please set forth with your insults as it will be probably another 3 or 4 weeks before I remember to run by here again.

Wow, can you say "regurgitated talking points?"

Osgi reminds me of the way four year olds quote TV commercials.

Well not all veterans are perfect!! Smootch!!!

And you are a perfect example of this, you certainly don't speak in the majority of those that have served.

Wait I know you served in the so called Hippie era huh.

Smoked your bedroll, pillow and anything you could light up and then blame everyone else!!!

Makes sense now.../nods

Fandros Finglaflin

you certainly don't speak in the majority of those that have served.

Nearly every veteran of the Iraq occupation I have spoken with does not think it has been a good idea. Quite a few of them did after their first tour in 2003, all with the same can-do "We're here to help the Iraqi people" spiel, then next to none after their second. Most of these people are stereotypical rural conservatives.

In this case I think the polls are telling a much rosier story than really exists in the American zeitgeist.

I work daily with 100's of folks that have served or just returned.


I've heard from 2 of them the opinion you just expressed Malse. The rest are very supportive.

Thanks

Fandros Finglaflin

And you are a perfect example of this, you certainly don't speak in the majority of those that have served.

Wait I know you served in the so called Hippie era huh.

Smoked your bedroll, pillow and anything you could light up and then blame everyone else!!!

Makes sense now.../nods

Fandros Finglaflin

Well you airwingers would know something about smokin' and jokin' while the men at the front kept your asses safe.

In the words of Gunny France..."ain't no hippies in the marines...thats what the airforce is here for"

Don't mistake dissent for failed policy as a lack of support for the troops on the ground...it just is not the way things are.

Osgi reminds me of the way four year olds quote TV commercials.

I spout talking points from the right you spout talking points straight off Air America so what's the difference? You believe yours and I believe mine.:rolleyes:

The difference is, despite your heartfelt confession, you are the only one regurgitating lame ass propaganda from a failed ideology. Step out of the echo chamber once in a while Osg, youll find that honest, direct and thoughtful conversation will make you alot happier than being the anus of the neocon, Delayism movement, shitting out whatever crap the Rovian mouth has wolfed down.

How very Al Frankin of you...

w/e continue with your self delusion.
Reality in November

Delayism movement

Speaking of ole Tom, does anyone know if there is any truth to the rumor that he is opening a franchise of Spatula City?

man, UHF is a great movie.

Though I'd love to see Delay eat a twinkie weiner sandwich

A twinkie weiner sandwich would really cheer me up...

w/e continue with your self delusion.
Reality in November

I think we heard this same kinda rhetoric last Presidential election.

One might ask where the delusion really lies.

Fandros

Wow, it's amazing that instead of sticking to the issues, the personal attacks come out in full force.
You guys are amazing.
Bush met with this woman, sat down with her, and had a heartfelt talk about some very painful things.
No one wants thier loved ones in an armed conflict. But that's what happened when you sign your name on the dotted line, so to speak. You serve with the chance it might happen.
Hopefully, if all goes well, the loved one makes it out alive. There's always the chance, however, that they won't.
There also a chance they might die in training. So should we should stop all training exercises, because of this?
Of course this is a ridiculous argument. The risks should be minimized, but you can never guarantee no one will ever die in training.
I know there is a big difference in being in training, and in being in an armed conflict (WANAW).

Perhaps we should let the soldiers do the job placed in front of them. Perhaps we should quit giving their enemies hope that the people that want peace at any cost will somehow win out.
I'm not saying you are disloyal if you disagree with the reasons behind this war. What I am saying is the power of free speech is a great responsibility. Your intent might not be to undermine the efforts of the soldiers on the ground over there, but the people that wish us harm don't make that distinction.
When you say,"This war is wrong.", they hear; "America is weak and doesn't want to fight us. If we try harder, we can drive them out and claim a great victory."
I'm not saying you shouldn't express your opinion. What I am saying is, choose what you say wisely. The people that wish to drive us out may take solace in what they hear there.

When you say,"This war is wrong.", they hear; "America is weak and doesn't want to fight us. If we try harder, we can drive them out and claim a great victory."


Talk about re-gurgitating rhetoric...<insult removed, uncalled for, sorry Sixee>

...and another thing, when you sign on the dotted line you expect the leadership to act responsibly, competitantly and in the best interests of the country as a whole. The collection of stupid baboons in power now did none of the above in my opinion.


Does that mean we "cut and run", no....it means we change strategy and stop being pussies. No one, but no one should be armed in that country except official Iraqi security forces and coalition forces. If your armed and not one of those two....it's open season. We need to get Iraqis working to help themselves....20-40% unemployment will breed exactly what we have, fucking chaos. If I was desititute, having trouble getting food for my family and I saw a bunch of fucking infidel foriegners coming in to do all the work in the country.......'nuff said. We get this shit done and set a timetable to give the country back.

When you say,"This war is wrong.", they hear; "America is weak and doesn't want to fight us. If we try harder, we can drive them out and claim a great victory."


What kind of bullshit is this? The rest of the world is not a bunch of 10 year olds. The statement they read from our invasion of Iraq was not "Team America is fighting terrorism!" to begin with, and any idiot who can read a non-US news source was fully aware of this from the massive demonstrations in 2003. Our partner in crime, Britain, practically had a government change over the backlash, and Spain did have one as a result.

Terrorism was proven effective already. It's a done and sealed deal. Our country funded some of the groups that did so decades ago, and left millions dead in places like Nicauraga in the process (combined with millions more in Laos, Vietnam, central Asia, and Africa thanks to similiar interest from China, Russia, France, and Britain). Nobody except the mentally numb here is watching Iraq and thinking it's an ideological testing ground where Doubleplusgood Freedom (tm) is duking it out with Islamic Extremism. Hint: The people we just put in power are actively trying to return to Sharia law (you know, that thing Bin Laden is so big on) from the relatively progressive (for the region) secular system of law that Saddam had in place. If that doesn't show you how utterly wrongheaded this whole adventure has been, I'm not sure what possibly can.

Hey, if there comes along a good Democrat candidate with a very strong moderate ( centerist?) platform I'd look hard at giving my vote to him/her.

Sadly all I get is...I'm not Bush nor am I Republican so vote for me.

Sorry, that's not leadership....that's partisian bs.

Fandros Finglaflin

I'm still hoping Evan Bayh is the Democratic candidate. He fits pretty well with what you just described Fandros. Though my ideal ticket would be McCain for President and Bayh as his VP. Both being moderates, if you could pull the two of them together, one might be able to lessen the divide we currently see in the political atmosphere in this country.

Of course I think I've stated this a few times here, but here's to hoping that through repitition, it becomes a reality at least from my point of view.

I remember Bayh from when I was a Hoosier. He's remained around all these years in what is by in large a Republican stronghold.

I'll have to check him out, to be honest he had fallen off my radar.

Thanks Talespinner


Fandros

He was very effective as a Democratic governor in a predominantly Republican state, so he definately has a history of working with both sides of the aisle. I think we need someone that can work both sides of the aisle, regardless of what party he/she might be from as our next President. We need someone that can bring people together and not so divisive (not blaming Bush for this, most politicians, regardless of party have been playing partisan politics for far to long now).

Partisan politics gets nothing accomplished. People that have moderate views get things done. They tend to see both sides of the issues, and can come to a rational conclusion.
Unless your name is Lieberman. Then your party disowns you, and makes sure you have to come back as an Independant candidate....

Which may ultimately prove to be the best thing for Lieberman long term.

Partisan politics gets nothing accomplished. People that have moderate views get things done. They tend to see both sides of the issues, and can come to a rational conclusion.
Unless your name is Lieberman. Then your party disowns you, and makes sure you have to come back as an Independant candidate....


I wouldn't call it disowning him, he lost a primary election. This means that by the election laws he was not the candidate for the democratic party. Like any political party they back the candidate for the election that was voted in by that party, unlike the republicans who have disowned their parties candidate in Connecticut.

Although I tend to disbelieve polls in general I did read that Lieberman is leading as an Ind now.

Fandros Finglaflin

Although I tend to disbelieve polls in general I did read that Lieberman is leading as an Ind now.

Fandros Finglaflin

Which if it is so is exactly the way things should be. If Lieberman wins as an independant that is as good as Lamont winning as a Dem.

/nods tho you'll find purists argue that anything outside the two parties is a waste of resources.

Myself I believe it's how it should be, force the two ever increasing fringes to move towards the center to get the the voters.

fandros

I think Lieberman winning as an Independant could be just exactly what is needed to potentially change the political atmosphere and move people away from the fringes. It may even help a movement away from a strict 2 party system that most of us on this board seem to abhor already anyhow.

But that's what a lot of people said when Jesse Ventura won Governorship of Minnesota....
The media might as well have put clown makeup on the guy, the way they ran him thru the wringer.

I think that had alot more to do with him being a Professional Wrestler than an Independant though.

Lieberman wont win here in Connecticut.

He isnt going to gain any traction from this point on, Lamont has the significant advantage in infrastructure, that Lieberman now has to rebuild, and such resources as a network of volunteers. Nor does Lieberman arouse the passionate on either end. Its the passonate people that win campaigns, the people going door to door, getting the vote out, going the extra mile. Lieberman lost that, all he has is middle of the road people. All the passion is on Lamonts side.

Its the passonate people that win campaigns, the people going door to door, getting the vote out, going the extra mile. Lieberman lost that, all he has is middle of the road people. All the passion is on Lamonts side.

So you admit, screaming and yelling gets more attention, than having a rational thought process that more people are in touch with.
That's today's political atmosphere of glam and glitz over actually getting something done.
And people wonder why there is polarization going on in today's society.
"Middle of the road" people outnumber the "passionates", but the one who screams louder and longer, wins.

Its not about the screamers. Screamers do nothing.

Its about people who stay in a campaign office stuffing envelopes until 3am for no pay. Its about people pounding the pavement for days, knocking on every door. Its about informed, educated people talking about their candidate in civil, mature, knowledgeable ways.

These are the people who win campaigns. The screamers scream because thats all they do. Id say the fringe of either party is near useless because all it is unfocused, uninformed rage. The ability to inspire passion is what makes a candidate win. Neither Gore or Kerry could do it on a mass basis while Bush utilized the religious base to great ends. Most the religous people arent fringe, but they do feel strongly about one or two issues. That passion motivated. The Bush campaign was able to skillfully harness religious passion into campaign fuel. It was a brilliant strategy.

You dont have to be fringe to have passionate people. Kennedy had Passionate people, Reagan had passionate people, So did Clinton.

Republicans are in very deep trouble in this election because the same dynamic, the Iraq war that is fueling extreme passion on the Democratic side, is creating fatigue on theirs. They have failed to deliver any of their promises that they had been elected to, the motivations to be passionate are gone. Even the Right Wing talk show hosts are showing extreme desperation. Sean Hannity who all through the Kerry campaign correctly predicted that you cant win a campaign on "Hate Bush" now has only the spectre of "Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi" to motivate the base. People want to believe in someone, not hate someone.

Its like I tell my students, in this world that we live in IQ scores mean very little anymore, the thing that will make you is your Passion Score and your Curiosity Score. A passionate, curious mind is worth 10x that of the high IQ.

Its also about having a guy like Karl Rove on your side who through brilliant spin can make your opponent, who is a decorated Vietnam war vet, look like a wimp. Thats what won the election in 2004.

If you take a serious look at it, Rove made a guy who, through privelige, was able to get into the national guard and avoid service in Vietnam, he made him look like a medal of honor winner, he took a real war hero with a silver star and purple hearts and made him look like a total loser who had never even seen a military base.

Thats what won that election.

Well, you have to admit, throwing his medals/ribbons out like they were trash, was akin to shooting himself in the foot, politically.
Both good posts, you get reps.

Kerry did himself in, he was a terrible candidate. I dont give Rove much credit for 2004, 2000? Yea, he was Brilliant.. But 2004 was awful, Kerry was a throwaway candidate. Every real Heavyweight opted out of the 2004 election because at decision time, when they had to build their organization and start the process, GWB had 80% approval ratings. Anyone with half a political brain didnt run in 2004.

Even still, the election was WAYYYY closer than it should have been. Rove and company did a horrible job in 2004. It was like USC beating Tulsa State by a field goal. Sure you won, as you were expected to, but you exposed yourself in the process.

How humorous....

L2 is 100% correct, wasn't Rove that won 2004 twas a lackluster/feckless Kerry that lost it.

I do challenge you on your assertion that the republican party is in trouble. Bruddah L, that's pure hype and you know it. Dems need to take what 20 seats to win the House? Won't happen, no poll supports this info so that's just guesswork.

Senate Maaaaaaybe the Republicans will lose but I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing.

No Dem stands out as a sure ticket in 2008 either...

Fandros

Maybe Lieberman should run for President?
That would shake things up a bit.

If you examine the individual races Fanny, you'll see that the republicans are really in trouble.

http://www.electionprojection.com/

its not hype, its hardcore polling.

Done alot of that thar research myself and found polls contrary to your own listed resources bud. Infact most of the info I listened to and heard over the news says alot of the races are very tight and could go either way.

They have to win 20 seats.....sorry the platforms of Not Republican and Cut N Run won't carry that many.

If I had VCash I'd betcha that the Dems wouldn't win the house. Alas my betting record doesn't lend me much credence as knowing a surething. ;P

Fandros

L2 thats a cool site. I'd think its only error would be the Allen / Web race in Virginia. Web has made great strides since the racism video came out on YouTube and we're hoping he can pull it off.

Election two full months away and already victory is declared.

Been there and done that before. Some poeple must like pie in the face.

And Kerry never got a convention bounce... he actually lost poll numbers the days after his convention. The people saw him and were unimpressed.

Stop blaming some hokey pokey conspiracy on Rove as why Kerry lost. It's just stupid.

I expect Dems to pick up seats in both House and Senate. Whether or not they're projected to take either house, the Repubs are always great finishers. I'd be surprised, albeit pleasantly, if the Dems took either majority, much less both.
sorry the platforms of Not Republican and Cut N Run won't carry that many.
I think fewer voters are falling for these Repub talking points, given the failure in Iraq and the non-plan of "stay the course." And, of course, there's the state of your VCash. <g>

A lot can happen with two months to go. The Repubs may yet capitalize on as yet unrealized fears, or the Dems may find ways to take advantage of majority failures. Fun fun fun.

What's this?
No talk of "Fake Terror Alerts" just before the elections?
This might actually be a thread that stays on track....

But that's what a lot of people said when Jesse Ventura won Governorship of Minnesota....
The media might as well have put clown makeup on the guy, the way they ran him thru the wringer.

Ventura brought all his problems on himself. He did not run to affect any significant change, other than to make the Independent party more of a player. He was as surprised as anyone else that he won, and his consistent blunders and gaffes prove that; the only thing that kept him from being even more of a clown was having a wife with some sense of class and sophisitcation who was able to give the occasional whisper in the ear, "STFU".

His media woes were also of his own creation; the first time the media said something that was unflattering or not exactly how he wanted it stated, he started acting like a spoiled baby and calling them names.

Ventura was a joke, is a joke, and will remain a joke as long as he keeps putting himself in the spotlight as anything other than a semi-successful former wrestler and bit-part actor.

Just saw the latest Gallup polls ( as crooked as the rest mind you) and they have the following

Which party do you intend to elect in your congressional area.

Dems 47%
Rep 45%
Unk 7%

3% margin of error.

And they have to lose 15 seats to the Dems to lose control...tsk tsk the tide swings...

Top that off with the Rep party finishing well traditionally and we have us a ballgame folks.

Fandros

I agree that polls are a joke overall Fanny...


I am a registered Republican who always votes, and I have NEVER been contacted by any polling service. They are and always will be a guess at best. One of the reasons Republicans finish strong is that most Republicans vote. There are many democrates that talk the talk..but do not walk. Mainly the young.. Rock the vote.. or VOTE or DIE!!! ya that worked. Well, actually it probably just got the conservative young people out.

I found this to be an interesting article.. http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110008831

If it is factually correct or not can be up for debate..

Now back to the original point of this thread. I agree that this lady does not speak for me, and I think my President is serving me just fine. The armchair generals out there can sit and criticize the handling of this war until the cows come home, but I have not yet heard a viable solution from the Left on how to deal with it. All I hear is bring the troops home... ok.. THEN WHAT???? If we give in on this conflict, you may as well sharpen the sword that will cut your head off...

This is 1 of the times I tend to agree with the Administration's policy.
I certainly would rather have them fighting our soldiers over in another country, rather than here.
Where I part ways is where it's said we are trying to "Spread Democracy".
That line only works if you consider killing Muslim extremists, "Spreading Democracy". What we are trying to do is kill more of them than they do of us.
The sad part is the civilians get caught in the middle. That's the sad part of any conflict. This doesn't mean because there are civilian casualties, that we should let the Muslim extremists do as they will.
Maybe if Iraq becomes the 52nd state (after Puerto Rico), this'll sway the vote more Republican?