Monday, August 15, 2005

It's a beautiful day in the neighborhood....

Or it used to be for Larry Mattlage, who seems to just want his peace and quiet back. Can't say anyone should blame him though some on the blogs haven't been quite so understanding.

While I don't think firing his shotgun in the air was especially intelligent, it must be frustrating to have that many protestors and their porta potties across the road from you. However, according to Cindy Sheehan?

"If the neighbor is tired of having us here, he should talk to his other neighbor, George Bush, and ask George Bush to come out and meet with me, and then we'll leave," she said.

What is ironic is he was originally sympathetic to her protest, now he feels, "I just want them to pack the damn tents and go where they came from," Mattlage said. "They made their point and everybody understands it."

UPDATE: Newsday is reporting several of the neighbors have had enough and are going to court to place limits on the protesters. Here


Me4Prez said...

He went about it wrong, but you could understand how he feels. He lives in a town with one flashing light and no traffic that has become a media and protestor circus.

historymike said...

It does say something about the metality of many in the rural South, though.

I'm just not sure what...

Dottie said...

You join the services of your own free will. Her son knew what he was in for and the chances he was taking when he joined. I feel for her loss but she cant put all the blame on pres Bush. Personally I wish we'd send more troups there and get the job done instead of pussy footing around.
But thats just me.

Lisa Renee said...

Okay, I've become popular with the spam bunch - lol

He was there before Bush bought his ranch from what I understand so it's understandable there was already some frustration. This has made it worse, because alot of them are worried that this type of protest thing is going to become more common - especially if it actually works and Bush does talk with her.

Royce Ogle said...

When I happened here I was at first taken aback! "Liberal" and "common sense" is the same thought?
Cindy Sheehan is the perfect liberal. Wants to meet with the President, already has. Says Bush killed her son, he didn't. Has decided she will show Bush, she will not pay her income taxes. How will he make ends meet without her tax money? She has overlooked that fact that her son was not drafted, he joined because he wanted to.
The news media have overwhelmingly embraced this sad momma but her hubby has had enough. He filed for divorce today.

Me4Prez said...

You do join because you want to and you sign a contract giving up many of your rights. The government makes a committment to use you only when necessary and when they do, to make you are properly equipped and the planning is done intelligently. None of that occurred in the case of the Iraq War and Bush should explain to everyone why it was so necessary to rush into a war unprepared and underarmed. He did not kill any of our soldiers, but his bad decisions put them into a position where they were unprepared and aided in their deaths.

If you are not helping us, you are hurting us. Bush and Co are not helping anyone

Lisa Renee said...

Well Royce, I welcome you but I have to tell you she's not my idea of the perfect liberal.

The main reason this blog was created was to demonstrate that while the extremes of each party may get alot of attention that there are those of us that consider ourselves "liberal" that don't follow the same mantras.

There are also those who post here who are conservative, and they are also welcome. I appreciate all viewpoints, even ones that don't agree with mine.

I support her right to protest, I just don't think this method is going to be effective. I am sorry for her that she not only lost her job but is facing a divorce. Losing a child is enough to stress any marriage, without the whole anti-war thing. I know that from personal experience.

I don't have a clear answer on do we need more troops or what the solution is for Iraq, I do know though that whatever is done needs to be done in a manner so we don't have to keep going back. It's better to take a bit longer now and make sure it's done right than to guarantee that our next generation of children will have to go back there. Sometimes it seems like that isn't going to be possible.

Was it really worth it will depend on what Iraq can do once we do leave.

Dottie said...

All I know is there hasnt been a terrorist attack here in the US since 911.... wonder why? Could it be we're keeping them where they belong, in the caves where cave men belong? This war is not just about making Iraq democrat,, its because thats where the cowardly terrorist are from and we're keeping them on that side of the Earth and out of our back yard by being there.
My only qualm with the military and government concerning the military is they're not paid enough and their benifits dont come close to what they deserve.

Lisa Renee said...

I agree with you that military pay and benefits should be higher.

I can't explain why there hasn't been a terrorist attack here either, we supposedly still have terrorist cells in the US. Only reason I can think of is they've learned it doesn't work. All it would do would increase US support of the war in Iraq, because that's probably the most expected response. That I'm sure they don't want.

I have wondered that though, not that I of course want another attack but I know it is not because of our 'wonderful' increased security.

bschneider5 said...

Is there such a thing as liberal common sense?

Lisa Renee said...

bschneider5, of course there is, or it is some twisted public image campaign just to make people wonder if it really does exist.

I'll leave it up to you to decide.


Me4Prez said...

How long was there between the first al Qaeda attack and 9/11? Was that because of our war on terror under Bill Clinton? No, it was because they always have to do something bigger to get the notoriety. We are not only fighting them there, but also training them there. What we have done by going in to Iraq is create a group of well trained people who hate us. The CIA and DoD have both said that those foreign fighters who survive Iraq will be formidable in future battles.

I do agree that the military isn't paid enough and their benefits are crap, but there are other things that should concern you. How about sending national Guard and Reserve troops who aren't properly trained or equipped for combat. Not having enough armor and an incompetent battle plan also come to mind. There is more planning ot be done after the initial victory and celebration. We wouldn't have gone to a training exercise with the incomplete plan they had put together

Me4Prez said...

I should say that although I supported her at first, the protest is getting old and losing steam. I totally agree with what she is saying, but she needs a new venue. The President owes his supporters and detractors an explanation of the war and one that is honest.

Lisa Renee said...

EEEEK what is going on with the spammers today

I dont' wanna be popular goooo away - lol

Good point about the terrorists me4, that does make sense.

As to Cindy Sheehan? I don't agree with how far some have gone to try to slam her, I don't think this protest is going to help and the potential is growing that it could hurt. However it's pretty clear she is still dealing with alot of emotion which is understandable.

Aaron said...

bschneider5, yes, but you might not understand. There is conservative common sense as well. It all despends on who is dispensing the words.

dottie, Actually we have had another attack, but it was thwarted for technical reasons (remember the shoe bomber anyone?) There have been supposed near misses that were averted by out excellent intelligence agencies. Also, as far as I'm concerned attacks in UK are just as bad as attacks in US. Besides, look at how many years spanned between the original World Trade Center bombing and the hijacking (8 or 9 years?). What has it proven that we haven't seen another succesful one here in 5?

Also keep in mind that Bin Laden became a legend by fighting the Russian occupied Afghanistan much the same way as Sadr and to a lesser degree Al Zarqawi fight the fledgling Iraqi government that is still generally considered an allied occupation.

Times of desparation and stories of atrocities against civilians (of which there are plenty in Iraq, whether substantiated or not) produce leaders who can rally a whole new generation of lost, stunned, scared, angry, people who can easily be swayed to militant ends. It isn't too difficult for an ideological militant (one with no record) to come here in the future to wreak more havoc. They will be educated, nearly transparent, and of questionable risk, just like the last bunch were.

Lisa, you might actually be wrong about what the islamic militant leaders want. Al Zarqawi and Bin Laden's plans to wreak havoc on our economy actually DEPEND on us spending more and more cash on war.

Me4Prez said...

Aaron, that is a good point. The best way to go after our economy is not to attack us, but to get us to rack up a debt that devalues the investment other countries make in us. I am not afraid of having Wall Street blown up(at least not economically), but I am afraid that China will ask for the money we owe

Lisa Renee said...

Aaron, that is a possibility that I did not consider. I was thinking more along the lines of they prefer to see the division in America as a sign they have had an effect.

Dottie said...

dang lisa.. can you delete those spams? what will they think of next. I hope nobody clicks the links and encourages them to do it more.

Lisa Renee said...

I have been deleting them almost all night - over 20 so far

and they keep coming, so I had to temporarily make the blog not allow anonymous comments. Hopefully they'll move on to someone else.

Me4Prez said...

Maybe they will move to my blog. Do they count as hits? If not, I don't want them then

Lisa Renee said...

lmao yes me4 they count as hits, but I could do without them


Cyberseaer said...

Can we now all forget about Cindy Sheehan? Sorry she has lost alot, but enough is enough.

The best way to have alot of people disagree with you is to inconvenience the hell out of them. I remember a group of college kids stopping traffic in Chicage during rush hour by linking themselves with pipe to protest the start of the Iraq War. I don't know about everyone else, but if I was working in a big city and trying to get home after a long day and find out that there was traffic because of a protest, I would find out what the group's position was and be against it just out of spite.

Protesting is something that is good, but done the incorrect way is just counter productive. In my opinion, protests really don't do anything. Small groups rant and rave and the people who have the real power let the others blow off steam and then go about business as usual. The last real protests that worked were the civil rights movement in the 1960s. That's why to get real change is go inside and change from within. Unfornately the ones who do that most of the time lose their focus and it is business as usual again.

Royce Ogle said...

Geez! How many times does the President have to explain the war and his reasons for us being there? He explains it in language a 6th grader should understand and people look at him like a calf looking at a new gate..

People, like Bush, Reagan, Winston Churchill, and others, are visionaries. They see past the end of their noses. This is a simple example but a good one, More taxes vs less taxes.

A liberal sees a need he believes the government should supply and his or her immediate response is, lets raise enough tax money to pay for the cost of the need.

The conservative says, lets lower taxes, business will invest more in research and development, hire more people, people will spend more money and revenue will increase and the government will take in more money.

The economy is steaming along, the deficit is shrinking at about the rate Bush predicted, and tax cuts are the reason.

One must think 5 years 15 years or even 25 years into the future to effect meaningful policy. Iraq is not a Knee Jerk solution, but a start. The future will be drastically changed for the better for the middle east and the world because Bush believed in the principals of democracy and freedom.

Lisa Renee said...

Royce, I don't agree with you on Bush being a visionari, but your comment about a long term goal for the middle east when it concerns Israel and Palestine is something that I believe is going to have more of a future positive impact than Iraq. President Bush has done not as much as I would have liked but more than Clinton did in helping for that to start to happen.

Had it not been for the pressure put on Israel by the US, the disengagement from Gaza would not be happening. While this is only a first step, at least it is a step forward.

Me4Prez said...

I wish President Bush would explain Iraq in a simple way. I guess I just haven't understood what he was talking about when he calls it a just war even without finding WMD's. I would love a change in the Middle East, but like James Dobson said, "Positive results do not justify bad actions."

As far as conservatives and taxes. If Clinton would not have come along when he did and raised taxes, the economy would have gotten far worse. There is some justification for supply side economics, but even conservative economists don't trust it. As the 90's seem to have shown, when you give the money to those who need it, the economy picks up faster than it is under the visionary Bush. This is the longest recovery from a recession in decades and it was a relatively small recession