today's Doonesbury

[catmandu57]

It's a keeper.

[oasis]

1. A dandy "keeper".

[spooked911]

2. I don't think Perle, Wolfowitz and Rice give a rat's ass about the people

who have died in this war, nor will they ever.

They are evil people, plain and simple. And they WANT discord in Iraq-- they don't really want democracy-- they want turmoil in order to keep the middle east backwards.

[Junkdrawer]

5. Yep...McNamera and Perle were cut from different cloth..

Some similarities, but Perle, Wolfowitz and Rice are "true believers" who think their "more sophisticated views" entitles them to ignore the consequences of their actions.

[Eric J in MN]

19. I can't comment on all of the them, but I dont' believe Condoleeza Rice

will ever feel guilty about the deaths she's caused.

[RoBear]

3. If only our representatives

had the courage to say the things that Trudeau does.

[leftchick]

4. excellent

thank you for posting! :)

[Sydnie]

6. Perfect

Now, if they would just hear that message and think... oh yeah, I forgot. They won't ruin their beautiful minds on things like this.

[catmandu57]

7. I don't believe that perle, rice, and wolfowitz

think either. I firmly believe they are drivcn by a twisted ideology, and are border line sociopaths if not all the way. The thing is people will see this and ask the same questions. WHY?, AND FOR HOW LONG?

[Blue Gardener]

8. Opus is great today also

Don't have a link, but it references the Spongebob lunacy.

[CindyDale]

9. Isn't this racist?

Apparently the implication is that white male Christian neocons aren't capable of thinking (so they aren't the ones responsible).

It's really disturbing to see this type of stereotyping infiltrating the media from the left. Where is it coming from???

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CindyDale]

13. Reread my post

I believe it refers to white Christian males, and I was being facetious.

BTW, "Jewish" is not synonymous with "white." For example, Ethiopian Jews are not white.

It seems awfully strange to me that everyone attacks minority neocons in disproportion to White Christian males. It reminds me of a textbook I once saw in which everyone in the book was white, except for one person in a jail cell, and of the stories I used to see in the NY Post when I lived there back in the 80s when almost all the stories about African-Americans were negative.

[BiggJawn]

16. Facetiousness doesn't always transmit well.

Which is why we put in stuff like <sarcasm> and <irony> on our posts.

And please to tell me which "Whte Christian" Neo-Cons are getting a pass? Rumsferatu? Cheney? Could it be that the Neo-Cons put their minorities forward in order to give you grounds to "throw the Race Card"?

[CindyDale]

18. Possibly, but it has a sinister effect

and it makes no sense to mention them if Trudeau believed they are only put there to be used as a smokescreen for white Christian men.

[msanthrope]

21. Sinister effect? To whom?

To lurking Freepers trying to pick a fight and distract us all, yes. To anyone else, no.

[CindyDale]

22. I'm not registered with Free Republic or any other RW site

and IMO, if you are buying this minority neocon distraction, well then, you are already distracted, so what could I say to distract you any further? If you really want to stop these wars, boycott Chevron, for example.

[eShirl]

11. No, the implication is that Bush *doesn't* think deeply about things

not that he's incapable of it. What's racist about that?

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

12. It happens to be that the named "thinkers" are the prime movers of the

neocon movement. Shrub was just successfully recruited into being the effective tool of this ideology, or at least that's the way it appears if you follow shrub's campaign statements etc.

Trudeau makes no mention of race or religion. You can draw whatever conclusions you wish from the people involved.

[CindyDale]

15. Yes, and he makes no mention of oil, either

I don't know what conclusions to make, but it is disturbing.

[ashmanonar]

33. it's hard to show EVERYTHING about a subject in a comic strip.

i think trudeau did a tremendous job on this one, showing a specific topic. he demonstrated that bush DOESN'T CARE, and that the other neocons certainly do think about it, and show by their reactions that they DON'T CARE.

if he threw oil or race or whatever into it, it'd get blurry. comics are topical, they cover one thing very clearly.

[qanda]

23. huh?

[Hissyspit]

14. Toughest I've seen from Trudeau in a while...

Good job.

I don't get the 'racist' comment at all. Bush doesn't think because he doesn't have to do it for a living. Others do have to think for a living. Where does racism come in? Because they are African-American and Jewish? Bush has publicly stated he avoids newspapers and, paraphrasing, has gut reactions, makes up his mind about something pretty much immediately and then sticks with that belief. I don't remember the others saying anything like that.

[CindyDale]

17. Yes, and his wife later said he *does* read newspapers

I am not defending the particular individuals, but I don't think they are the ones setting U.S. policy. I think this war resulted primarily from oil and other private industry interests.

So that's why all this carrying on about minority neocons disturbs me. It looks like a smokescreen, and the left is buying it. In that case, we are no less deluded than the right, IMO.

[Hissyspit]

20. Well, then, I believe Laura Bush...

The implication is that they 'think' therefore are SMARTER than the President, plus they are compared to a WHITE CHRISTIAN MALE, as far as I know - McNamara - with regards to their fate. Bush may face a similar fate, but will not be aware of it, because he doesn't think, a deriding of the white Christian male, too programmed to think for himself. He's addressing individual behavior, anyway.

And where is "all this" carrying on about minority neocons? I haven't seen it.

Sorry, not buying your thesis.

[CindyDale]

26. Unfortunately, I have seen it

I think posts are deleted when they go too far so people don't see all of them.

Perpetuating negative stereotypes about ethnic groups should be carefully avoided in the media, IMO, even if it takes extra effort on the part of the writer or editor. People are affected by them without even realizing it.

This article mentions "bias of omission," which is "difficult to detect."

http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/resources/educational/handouts/broadcast_news/bw_bias_in_the_news.cfm

When I see only certain individuals mentioned over and over, it makes me think of this, and yes, I am seeing it have an effect.

Fixed typo.

[catmandu57]

25. You mean kindasleezy?

I wouldn't believe a word that comes out of that lying spiteful bitches mouth. As for the lump, same goes.

[CindyDale]

27. In the context of this particular discussion

your remark strikes me as rather sleezy in itself.

[Stirk]

28. It's an incestuous relationship- many of the big players in the

neoconservative movement are closely tied to corporate America- especially the arms industry and the oil industry. Put very briefly, they consider the interests of big business and the interests of government to be indistinguishable.

They are setting US policy, make no mistake about it. I really doubt that racism and public opinion ever enter their thoughts.

[CindyDale]

29. It is odd that only individuals with certain ethnic identities are

mentioned over and over, though. It begins to appear nonaccidental if you watch it for a while.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

30. Wolfowitz, Perle et al are not singled out because of their ethnicity.

http://newamericancentury.org/

If you read years worth of their signed publications as part of the Project for a New American Century organization, they were promoting the "activist" interventionalist/imperialistic U.S. foreign policy we now have for years while the Republicans were out of the White House. It is a paper trail that clearly delineates the origins of our current foreign policy.

Their policy ideas became official administration policy after 9/11.

The players, and the evolution of their movement from wingnut advocacy with the PNAC to administration policy, is well summarized in Jay Bookman's excellent reprint from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution from a couple of years ago.

http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file=/views02/0930-08.htm

If you would rather watch TV than read, the same story is told in streaming video in the following Frontline shows.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/iraq/view/

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/truth/view/

[CindyDale]

31. Here is who funded it, though

http://www.mediatransparency.org/search_results/comment_string_search_results.php?Message=new+american+century

Why don't we hear about these groups instead of those they hired?

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

32. What's your point here! Wolfowitz, Perle, Feith, Cambone etc. are

repeatedly named here because they were key players in PNAC, published documents and letters that now appear to have become administration policy. No one except you is making claims of racism.

The only other people who do are RWers trying to play the "antiSemitism" card and distract attention away from the actual policy and its origins.

Much like the same RWers, Rove's flying monkeys, are trying to play the "homophobic lefty bloggers" card and distract attention away from the true problem of fake administration-sponsored propaganda "journalism".

[CindyDale]

37. Why not tell the real story?

Where the money is coming from? Is there a problem with that?

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

38. The people writing the policy are the story as well.

The funding is an additional part of the story.

Again, no one but RWers are trying to make any racial thing out of the PNAC group. They are who they are and there's no point hiding it. No one but defensive RWers are making a thing about the ethnicity or claiming that pointing the individuals involved in the policy has any racial component.

Their writings are signed and on the record.

Feel free to promote additional information and stories about the Olin foundation but don't call Dems and DUers racist for attacking the PNAC's malign influence on America.

[CindyDale]

39. I actually didn't call Democrats or DUers racist

I made a joke that Trudeau was implying that white Christian men are stupid.

Excuse me, but I am making a thing about it. I am not RW. LOL

I do know something about stereotypes and media, though, and I don't like this.

The main supporter is the Bradley Foundation, and I think it is odd that no one is talking about that group, only about who they hired.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

40. We've gone round and round on this enough. I disagree with you

that there is anything racist about mentioning the names of the known PNAC players.

I look forward to your future posts.

[CindyDale]

42. It's called "bias of omission"

Even if it is not blatant racism, it can have the same effect.

You don't have to agree, but IMO, the truth is a whole. You can't break off one small splinter and still call it truth.

BTW, I'm actually not the only LW poster who has noticed this odd phenomenon.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

43. We agree to disagree (eom)

[CindyDale]

35. Note: these foundations are not headed by Jews or African Americans

http://www.mediatransparency.org/funders/bradley_foundation.htm

They have their own agendas.

[Melissa G]

24. Good Post!

[Misunderestimator]

34. Beautiful!

[SmartBomb]

36. Too good. n/t

[Stop_the_War]

41. kick !!!!