My response to RW cousin

[cfield]

Don't know if it came out making any sense but I wanted to share it with you all since you've made me feel so welcome the past couple of months. Someone earlier posted the BATTLE HYMN OF THE REPUBLICANS which I sent to many RW family memebers. This is the first response I got, and following that, my response back.
__________________________________________________________________

Cute song but now I have come back.
>For your reading pleasure:
>Eddie.
>
>
>Maybe it's time somebody says, "Yeah! Yeah, we are questioning your
>patriotism, but don't get me wrong. You have the right to speak your
>mind." Remember, these people have had to redefine patriotism recently.
>Hillary Clinton defines patriotism these days as having the "courage" to
>speak out and criticize the president. That is their new definition of
>patriotism, among others. You people on the left can speak your mind all
>day long, but I'm going to question the workings of your mind as long as
>you speak. You have a right to come up with clever lines like, "I
>support the troops but not the war," but we have the right to tell you
>that those are trick lines, created by professional propagandists, not
>by your gut feeling, and the reason we know it's not a gut feeling is
>because once it's articulated, your whole movement then picks it up.
>It's nothing more than the latest talking points from whoever dreams up
>this stuff. You even have the right to use the senseless phrase "the
>Bush attack machine." But you don't realize it's not Bush on the attack,
>it's your crowd. You are the machine attacking Bush, and there are
>people who are coming to Bush's defense. But the defense does not start
>things. Your offensive attack does.
>
>I mean, is there any more vicious attack machine, more ferocious than
>the New York Times? You've got Maureen Dowd. You've got Paul Krugman the
>ferret-like columnist. You have Frank Rich. You've got the editorial
>page -- and even worse you've got the main news pages, and then you've
>got al-Reuters, then you have al-Jazeera, then you have al-CNN, and then
>you have al-MSNBC, you have al-CNBC. I mean, is it any wonder? Is there
>any attack machine more ferocious than the New York Times-led mainstream
>media? May I ask a question? Just where is all that good news that
>we're being flooded with? When they say, "Tell the truth, Mr. President,
>all the news is not rosy in Iraq," would somebody tell me where the good
>news is? Can you name for me a war hero? Can you name for me a
>successful mission? Can you name for me an inspirational act of courage
>or a noble act or a good deed that has taken place in Iraq, just one,
>that the mainstream media has reported on? Can you list any of the many
>signs of progress in country after country in the Middle East? You
>cannot, because they are not reported. So where is this good news?
>
>"Oh, we can only report bad news."
>
>Why?
>
>"Well, we live by a law, a law set in concrete -- a law more powerful
>than the Constitution. 'If it bleeds, it leads.'"
>
>All right, fine. Well, let's move on.
>
>"You can't question what we do, we're the mainstream press and we set
>the agenda here."
>
>Now, if this sounds contemptuous of the anti-war left, you are
>misreading me a bit. I don't really feel anger. I feel sympathy. I can
>believe in my country and I can believe in my president and the mission,
>and they can't. You know, I'd rather be me. I'd rather be on my side of
>this. I ask this question every day: What must it be like for these
>people to get up every day and say, "Every waking hour ahead of me today
>I will be spending in misery, and every waking hour today that I am in
>misery, I'm going to try to make as many other people miserable as I
>can, because I am not happy, and I don't have any prospects of being
>happy. I am an outcast. I am a lost soul. I can't find a place in my
>country where I fit in and so I'm going to blame everybody else for it,"
>and so trying to get noticed, and trying to be relevant, and trying to
>matter... We all want to matter. We all want to think our lives have
>purpose. We all want to think our lives are meaningful. We decide to do
>that which calls attention to ourselves, and in this day and age, go out
>and write a book suggesting that President Bush should be assassinated,
>you'll be praised as someone who engaged in a great literary effort that
>we should all learn from, go out and produce a phony propaganda movie,
>and everybody will think, "Oh, this is the guy that we should have been
>listening to," and you will get some attention that you've been craving
>all your life that your mother may never have given you. I don't know
>what is the reason for it, but nevertheless, once you get the attention
>that you crave by saying things that the attack media wants to hear,
>then you become in your own mind important and relevant, thus you end up
>being exploited.
>
>And so when you start suggesting policies or outcomes that would result
>in the defeat of our country and then people question your patriotism,
>and, "How dare you question my patriotism!" Well, you know, there are
>people who are going to start questioning your patriotism -- and it's
>about time . -- and not your definition of patriotism. You can redefine
>all these terms so that you are exempt from the original meaning, you
>start saying, "Well, you know, patriotism. That's the precious right to
>dissent. I am being patriotic. I am criticizing my government. I am
>criticizing my president, because that's what the Founding Fathers did!
>Why, they criticized the king and they criticized Great Britain and they
>found for themselves what they want." Yeah, but all this falls apart and
>you people have absolutely zilch in common with the Founding Fathers.
>The Founding Fathers were builders! The Founding Fathers were
>constructors; the Founding Fathers were people with a vision for the
>betterment of all. You have nothing in common with the Founding Fathers.
>You have more in common with Ramsey Clark and the rest of the
>Gee-we-hate-America crowd than you'll ever have with the Founding
>Fathers -- and yet you want your actions to be considered patriotic and
>you don't want to be criticized for not being patriotic, and of course,
>so everybody can be politically correct.
>
>"I'm not questioning your patriotism. I'm really not! I'm just
>questioning your judgment."
>
>Well, time to take off the gloves. It is time to start honestly
>considering the patriotism of some of those on the American left.

_______________________________________________________________

Patriotism is love and support for your country, that DOES NOT MEAN for the president. MY country is made up of the American people. The American people, INCLUDING our soldiers, are all I have to support and defend in order to be patriotic. What is wrong with having more support for the soldiers who are dying daily for LIES than for the man who has lead them to their death? NOTHING, these people are my brothers and sisters and their needless death is more important to me than 'defending' their murderer. So don't try to make me think I'm not being patriotic. There's nothing 'tricky' about my feelings.
You say it's not Bush on the attack. Then tell me, just who decided to invade Iraq? Every news source I've heard/read (including faux news) has said it was Bush. So I'll admit that statement has me completely baffled. Bush DID attack, he attacked a country that never attacked us. Not the other way around.
And, if you can't think of one successful mission over there, then why the "Mission Accomplished"? Why did we go if we weren't going to be successful? Why are we still there if we're not having success? Does it not stand to reason that if we're failing so badly we should be planning an exit? Come on, I thought _your side_ was supposed to be the one with all the good news and you're telling me there is none? Then why does _your side_ keep talking about all the good that's happening there? No, wait, that's right. The insurgents are building, they're growing and getting more and more powerful so we HAVE to stay and keep fighting. We can't have let all these American deaths be in vain. If we're making such progress, why do we never hear about it? It can't possibly be because that progress is exaggerated. No one would believe lies from the GOVERNMENT so we have to be prevailing; we just must be. But...if we are, then why aren't we hearing the good news? It's a big circle. You say we're doing good, but the media won't report it. The media says we're doing bad but Bush won't admit it. Someone's not telling the truth here. And my bet the liars are the people who've been there, who've seen what's happening, who have heard first hand accounts from others who have been there and seen it. Bush HAS to be telling the truth, it doesn't matter that he hasn't been over there. Who cares that his own military tries to tell him that things aren't looking good. Him's the presydent so him knows the truth. (Is Faux news reporting any good news, any successful missions? And if so, then why don't the other stations? Surely if there's good out there, it's not just one TV station that has access to those reports.)
Briefly, on your misery comments; I'm not miserable. I'm pissed. Pissed that the country I grew up loving and respecting has turned so vile. Pissed that the country I grew up to be proud of hasn't faught to stay close to our values. Pissed that people like you are proud of the way your commander in chief is leading. If you've made it this far and you aren't appalled, you haven't been paying attention and I have no hope for any of you. May God have mercy on your souls, because God help me, I wouldn't have the compassion.

I'll be honest, when it comes to organizing my thoughts and feelings into words, I do a pretty shitty job of it. But I know what I think, and I know what I feel, and I know what I believe. And even if I can't relay that to anyone coherently, I don't take kindly to people insinuating that I'm just a follower, that I'm not patriotic, that I don't give a rat's ass about the troops, or that I'm just following some 'left wing agenda'. Wanting innocent Americans to come home alive from an unjust war is not unpatriotic, it's called caring about my fellow man. Wanting the war criminals who have violated the Geneva convention to pay for their acts isn't unAmerican, it's justice. Just because their crimes were committed against 'stupid Iraqis' doesn't make it okay. I'll never understand why the life of an American is supposed to be more valuable than the life of another man. And I'll never believe that it is.

[BrklynLiberal]

1. Well done!!!!

:thumbsup: :applause: :applause:

[Iris]

2. I cannot believe a family member would write this: "It is time to start

honestly considering the patriotism of some of those on the American left."

First - it sounds like a veiled threat. What will we do with those who are deemed unpatriotic? Gulags? Public stockades? Taking away their right to vote? Death Penalty?

Second - Hasn't the patriotism of the left been constantly questioned since Bush took office?

[cfield]

5. it's even more disturbing

because he's so sensible. Well, about anything but politics. Why is it MY family that's so dorked up? My husband got all the cool relatives, it's not fair!!!:mad:

[Iris]

9. I rarely run into someone who is sensible in all areas but politics. But

when I do, it's very disturbing.

[getmeouttahere]

3. If it comes from the heart, it can't be bad...

when they continue to support BushCo despite the fact they are destroying this country as well as Iraq, well, that's why I avoid my RW family members. It's a shame, but we're talking about the future of a country here. And the future is bleak.

[Iris]

10. This is how I feel as well - with family and friends.

Because it's about the kind of world we want to live in and their version of the future is so gloomy and lonely - every man for himself. No thanks. Bad for women, bad for children, and, ultimately, even bad for men!

[Child_Of_Isis]

4. This pretty much sums it up...

If you've made it this far and you aren't appalled, you haven't been paying attention

:applause: :woohoo:

[Mythsaje]

6. I have a response

Maybe it's time somebody says, "Yeah! Yeah, we are questioning your
patriotism, but don't get me wrong. You have the right to speak your
mind." Remember, these people have had to redefine patriotism recently.
Hillary Clinton defines patriotism these days as having the "courage" to
speak out and criticize the president. That is their new definition of
patriotism, among others. You people on the left can speak your mind all
day long, but I'm going to question the workings of your mind as long as
you speak. You have a right to come up with clever lines like, "I
support the troops but not the war," but we have the right to tell you
that those are trick lines, created by professional propagandists, not
by your gut feeling, and the reason we know it's not a gut feeling is
because once it's articulated, your whole movement then picks it up.
It's nothing more than the latest talking points from whoever dreams up
this stuff. You even have the right to use the senseless phrase "the
Bush attack machine." But you don't realize it's not Bush on the attack,
it's your crowd. You are the machine attacking Bush, and there are
people who are coming to Bush's defense. But the defense does not start
things. Your offensive attack does.

Maybe it’s time your people learned to shut the fuck up long enough to listen to someone else.

Patriotism is questioning authority when it’s doing things to harm America. And, yes, unfortunately, turning the rest of the world against America is pretty fucking harmful. So's enticing terrorists to attack with such crap as "Bring it on."

Hillary Clinton is a DINO. A DLCer. She’s as much a whore to corporate interests as your icons. The only difference is that she’s trying to appeal to a different base—you know, the ones who aren’t religious extremists.

I have my own lines. Nobody feeds them to me. Try this one. “I support the troops by NOT supporting a war based on lies.”

You should talk about “our whole movement” picking it up, considering that your RW pundits are a fucking echo machine of Rovian mechanics.

I mean, is there any more vicious attack machine, more ferocious than
the New York Times? You've got Maureen Dowd. You've got Paul Krugman the
ferret-like columnist. You have Frank Rich. You've got the editorial
page -- and even worse you've got the main news pages, and then you've
got al-Reuters, then you have al-Jazeera, then you have al-CNN, and then
you have al-MSNBC, you have al-CNBC. I mean, is it any wonder? Is there
any attack machine more ferocious than the New York Times-led mainstream
media? May I ask a question? Just where is all that good news that
we're being flooded with? When they say, "Tell the truth, Mr. President,
all the news is not rosy in Iraq," would somebody tell me where the good
news is? Can you name for me a war hero? Can you name for me a
successful mission? Can you name for me an inspirational act of courage
or a noble act or a good deed that has taken place in Iraq, just one,
that the mainstream media has reported on? Can you list any of the many
signs of progress in country after country in the Middle East? You
cannot, because they are not reported. So where is this good news?

If you’re trying to catch rats, a ferret is a good thing to have.

All the things you list may be happening, but the bigger picture is that we’re getting our asses handed to us, our men and women are dying, and the best we can hope for out of the deal is a Republican based on Islamic Law.

That’s not freedom.

"Oh, we can only report bad news."

Why?

"Well, we live by a law, a law set in concrete -- a law more powerful
than the Constitution. 'If it bleeds, it leads.'"

All right, fine. Well, let's move on.

"You can't question what we do, we're the mainstream press and we set
the agenda here."

Isn’t it interesting how both the left and the right both hold the mainstream media in contempt? We just parse the bias differently.

Now, if this sounds contemptuous of the anti-war left, you are
misreading me a bit. I don't really feel anger. I feel sympathy. I can
believe in my country and I can believe in my president and the mission,
and they can't. You know, I'd rather be me. I'd rather be on my side of
this. I ask this question every day: What must it be like for these
people to get up every day and say, "Every waking hour ahead of me today
I will be spending in misery, and every waking hour today that I am in
misery, I'm going to try to make as many other people miserable as I
can, because I am not happy, and I don't have any prospects of being
happy. I am an outcast. I am a lost soul. I can't find a place in my
country where I fit in and so I'm going to blame everybody else for it,"
and so trying to get noticed, and trying to be relevant, and trying to
matter... We all want to matter. We all want to think our lives have
purpose. We all want to think our lives are meaningful. We decide to do
that which calls attention to ourselves, and in this day and age, go out
and write a book suggesting that President Bush should be assassinated,
you'll be praised as someone who engaged in a great literary effort that
we should all learn from, go out and produce a phony propaganda movie,
and everybody will think, "Oh, this is the guy that we should have been
listening to," and you will get some attention that you've been craving
all your life that your mother may never have given you. I don't know
what is the reason for it, but nevertheless, once you get the attention
that you crave by saying things that the attack media wants to hear,
then you become in your own mind important and relevant, thus you end up
being exploited.

Exploited? Like the 1900-odd soldiers and marines that have died looking for WMDs this administration knew damn well weren’t there? Or is it okay to die for a lie as long as it’s a Republican who tells it?

And so when you start suggesting policies or outcomes that would result
in the defeat of our country and then people question your patriotism,
and, "How dare you question my patriotism!" Well, you know, there are
people who are going to start questioning your patriotism -- and it's
about time . -- and not your definition of patriotism. You can redefine
all these terms so that you are exempt from the original meaning, you
start saying, "Well, you know, patriotism. That's the precious right to
dissent. I am being patriotic. I am criticizing my government. I am
criticizing my president, because that's what the Founding Fathers did!
Why, they criticized the king and they criticized Great Britain and they
found for themselves what they want." Yeah, but all this falls apart and
you people have absolutely zilch in common with the Founding Fathers.
The Founding Fathers were builders! The Founding Fathers were
constructors; the Founding Fathers were people with a vision for the
betterment of all. You have nothing in common with the Founding Fathers.
You have more in common with Ramsey Clark and the rest of the
Gee-we-hate-America crowd than you'll ever have with the Founding
Fathers -- and yet you want your actions to be considered patriotic and
you don't want to be criticized for not being patriotic, and of course,
so everybody can be politically correct.

"I'm not questioning your patriotism. I'm really not! I'm just
questioning your judgment."

Well, time to take off the gloves. It is time to start honestly
considering the patriotism of some of those on the American left.

Question away. While you’re busy trying to dismantle all the good things we HAVE built in this country—like equality, safety, prosperity, security… you have the nerve to say we never built anything?

If it weren’t for liberals you’d be living in squalor working in a factory 16 hours a day with your wife and kids working alongside you. That’s what pure capitalism breeds… welcome to America circa 1900… That’s what the New Deal freed us from.

But continue with your delusions. They obviously make you happy.

[Divernan]

7. Welcome to DU

It appears cousin "Eddie" did not write this personally, but is passing on some right wing spiel. I have right wing cousins (frankly, the not- too-bright branch of the family tree), and I pretty much limit myself to sending them the fact-filled, carefully documented Snopes/urban legend rebuttals.
Eddie accuses you of using "trick lines" created by "professional propagandists", but then he replies by using a piece of his own professional propaganda.

There are some people whose heads are permanently buried in the sand. But just keep sending the fact-filled articles and reports that they will not be able to refute - like the cuts Bush performed on the VA budget, and the soldiers complaining they still don't have body armor for themselves or their vehicles, or how the Marines have just had to start rebuilding helicopters which have been sitting in a desert "graveyard" for military machinery for 20 years or so, while the Bush buddy/defense contractors/oil companies rake in record profits.

[GoneOffShore]

8. Wonderful

You might also have pointed him at crooksandliars.com with all those lovely supportive things that the Repubs in Congress said when Clinton sent troops into Kosovo. Ask him how he defends those statements. And there were all the nasty things said about Clinton when he wanted to go after Bin Laden.
I guess irony is a word that isn't in your cousin's vocabulary.
Good luck.
Added on edit -
You could also rebut him with the Teddy Roosevelt quote about criticizing the President. I would hope he doesn't find that TR is a 'left wing lackey'.
Though it's a tough call.
Additional edit:
Huzzah! I just noticed - This is my SEVEN HUNDRETH DAMN POST!!!!

[ck4829]

11. "I support the troops but not the war"... Tom DeLay once said that too.

Or something along the lines of "You can support the troops, but not the President"

[mmonk]

12. He is a product

of administration propaganda and a press that props it up and does not reveal questions much less the truth. So he is living a contrived reality only based in partial truths + outright lies. It's not his fault but a failure of a free press concept, our democratic institutions and the lack of an opposition party that will scream out the truth. I would suggest showing evidence of the truth that contradicts the propaganda, but not just your word. Show legitimate sources that show his "truth" is incorrect. It's the only way we are going to get our country back. Overwhelm them with indisputable facts until the back of the cult is broken.

[cfield]

13. it took a couple of days

but he finally responded back.
For your viewing disgust:

OK, you asked for it! Here are a few excerpts from a few of my fellow
believers.
Enjoy. :)


Our nation is engaged in a global war on terror that affects the safety
and security of every American. In Iraq, Afghanistan and across the
world, we face dangerous enemies who want to harm our people, folks who
want to destroy our way of life. Throughout our nation's history,
whenever freedom has been threatened, America has turned to the
Military. From the War of Independence to today's war on terror, the
Military has defended this country with courage and determination.

A time of war is a time of sacrifice, and a heavy burden falls on our
military families. They miss you and they worry about you. By standing
behind you, you're standing up for America -- the families are standing
for America. And America appreciates the service and the sacrifice of
the military families.

Our nation depends on our Military families, and we depend on the
understanding and support of the employers of our Military men and
women. Your service would not be possible without the employers, without
the help of the employers. In offices and schools and factories across
Idaho, your colleagues do without your talents so that you can serve our
nation. Businesses are putting patriotism ahead of profit, because they
know that our prosperity and way of life depend on the freedom you
defend.

America will not wait to be attacked again. Our doctrine is clear: We
will confront emerging threats before they full materialize. And if you
harbor a terrorist, you're just as guilty as the terrorist.

We will stay on the offense. We'll complete our work in Afghanistan and
Iraq. An immediate withdrawal of our troops in Iraq, or the broader
Middle East, as some have called for, would only embolden the terrorists
and create a staging ground to launch more attacks against America and
free nations.

Since September the 11th, we've followed a clear strategy to defeat the
terrorists and protect our people. First, we are defending the homeland.
We've strengthened our intelligence capabilities; we've trained more
than 800,000 first responders; we have taken critical steps to protect
or cities and borders and infrastructure. We have taken the fight to the
enemy in our midst. We've disrupted terrorist cells and financing
networks in California and Oregon and Illinois and New Jersey and
Virginia, and other states.

This is a different kind of war. Today's enemies do not mass armies on
borders, or navies on high seas. They blend in with the civilian
population. They emerge to strike, and then they retreat back into the
shadows. And that's why there are thousands of our fellow citizens
running down every single piece of intelligence we can find, doing
everything we can to disrupt folks that might be here in America trying
to hurt you.

The stakes in Iraq could not be higher. The brutal violence in Iraq
today is a clear sign of the terrorists' determination to stop democracy
from taking root in the Middle East. They know that the success of a
free Iraq, who can be a key ally in the war on terror and a symbol of
success for others, will be a crushing blow to their strategy to
dominate the region, and threaten America and the free world. They know
that when their hateful ideology is defeated in Iraq, the Middle East
will have a clear example of freedom and prosperity and hope. And the
terrorists will begin to lose their sponsors and lose their recruits and
lose the sanctuaries they need to plan new attacks.

And so they're fighting these efforts in Iraq with all the brutality
they can muster. Yet, despite the violence we see every day, we're
achieving our strategic objectives in Iraq. The Iraqi people are
determined to build a free nation, and we have a plan to help them
succeed. America and Iraqi forces are on the hunt, side-by-side, to
defeat the terrorists. And as we hunt down our common enemies, we will
continue to train more Iraqi security forces.

Like free people everywhere, Iraqis desire to defend their own country.
That's what they want to do. They want to be in a position to defend
their own freedom and their own democracy. And we're helping to achieve
that goal. Our approach can be summed up this way: As Iraqis stand up,
we will stand down. And when the Iraqi forces can defend their freedom
by taking more and more of the fight to the enemy, our troops will come
home with the honor they have earned.


(Notice he states right up front that this isn't from him but from a few of his friends. And how 9/11 is so obviously why we're in Iraq. Idiot)