Durbin Apologizes--Good Enough
Dean
A couple of years ago webloggers helped get former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott fired for not just saying nice things about Strom Thurmond's career as a racist Dixiecrat. At the time I had absolutely no pity on Lott, because instead of just saying, "You know I was just trying to say something nice on the retirement of an old friend, I didn't mean it to sound like it did, sorry about that," Lott stonewalled and refused to admit that he'd said something incredibly stupid, THEN he issued several half-assed and insincere apologies that just made it worse, THEN did a complete 180 even on his former policy positions just to "prove" he wasn't a racist. It had to be damn near the most phony thing I'd ever seen in my life.
I've recently been pitiless on Senator Durbin for saying some outrageously inappropriate, over-the-top things about members of our armed forces. He waffled for almost a week under criticism, but Dick Durbin today issued a completely un-Trent Lott-like apology, didn't mince words, and didn't act like a weasel.
Good enough for me. I suspect it's good enough for most members of the armed forces too.
* Update * Political Teen has the video of the apology. Although he thinks it's weak, it's still good enough for me. Rusty has some detailed thoughts on why it's good enough. Scott, a veteran of the Iraq theater, says "Show's over, folks. Move along.
Trent Lott is not much a leader, Dick Durbin is a trader to our country and armed services.
It is funny how Democrats can say anything, but Republicans says something and he is wrong.
USN Retired
Lott's comments enraged me, but knowing a lot of "good ol' southern country boys," his explanation of just trying to be nice to an retiring colleague was probably true. Still, as majority leader, he should have been held to a higher standard.
Durbin, on the other hand, directly accused our troops and our President of being on the same level with Nazi's and totalitarian thugs. I believe that he believes that. I also think that is despicable. At the minimum, he should be stripped of his leadership role in the Senate. As for his membership in the Senate, that is for the voters of Illinois to decide. I know that were I still a resident of Illinois, he would not receive my vote. And I also know that my brother, who resides in Evanston, Illinois will make every attempt to return him home in the next election.
You have to remember that you are VERY different than most of the people who both read you and consider themselves conservatives.
You can use reason an d you can say something nice about people you disagree with on occassion. There are people here and elsewhere who couldn't do that if their life depended on it. Sorry. It's true.
And I make no apologies for saying it.
Anyone who read or listened to the entirety of Durbin's remarks knows this.
And they also know Durbin made a proper point.
Those that say they "support the troops" and still support a policy where US soldiers are put into the position of beating or terrorizing detainees...are liars, in my view.
Good, but still half-assed. He should have then directed a statement to those who DID NOT believe his remarks over the line, that believe his original words were 100% true, that they are as in the wrong as he was.
He's sorry he offended people, he's sorry he used those words. And he is most assuredly sorry that it might have damaged his political career. But he still despises America.
That may sound harsh, but it is really the charitable interpretation of his statements.
Huh ? I guess if you equate that with Rep. John Conyers announcement just before the start of Iraq I then maybe it might have some credence.
Conyers announced that 50,000 body bags would be necessary and those were just the ones for one minority group. He was /is a bit off.
Democrats need to get a clue.
Trent Lott is not the evil empire devil incarnate.
Dumbleadership-less maybe. But to get up and tell a group of people at a funeral he admired Strom Thurmond wasn't exactly a death blow to freedom.Everett Dirksen would have handled Durbin's nazi comments with dignity and poise. He would have
said, "Ladies and Gentlemen of the Senate, I detect the odor of mendacity in the chambers."
Then, he would have called a recess.
Durbin owes a big apology and I am glad that he was man enough to give it.
Oh and the soldiers that followed Hitler's orders weren't bad either. It was just THE POLICY. Right?
Carla said, "Anyone who read or listened to the entirety of Durbin's remarks knows this."
We've all read and listened to him make the remarks. We hold him accountable for what he actually said and not what he "says" he meant. Your insinuation is baseless, well actually it has a base, all the lefty trolls like to imagine that they are so much more enlightened than us knuckle dragging Republicans. Guess what? If YOU read what he said and not what the lefty talking points said he said, you'd be pissed too, unless you don't give a shit about the Troops or America in general.
Carla said, "And they also know Durbin made a proper point."
Yes, he made a point alright. He thinks that making a guy sit handcuffed in his own shit for 24 hours equals getting gassed in A CONCENTRATION CAMP. He thinks that a few isolated instances of abuse equal FORCED LABOR FOR 14 HOURS/DAY, 7 DAYS A WEEK WHILE BEING SLOWLY STARVED AND BEATEN IN A GULAG.
He could have made his point much differently. He could have said these bad things that have occasionally happened aren't our way. We should be ashamed, blah, blah, blah... He didn't do that, he EQUATED US WITH THE FUCKING NAZIS, POL POT AND STALIN. I know you lefties have a soft spot for Pol Pot and Stalin but c'mon they murdered MILLIONS and not quickly, they enjoyed it.
Carla said, "Those that say they "support the troops" and still support a policy where US soldiers are put into the position of beating or terrorizing detainees...are liars, in my view."
I support the troops and I support the Geneva Convention policy on unlawful combatants. A bullet in the back of the head.
Guess that makes me pretty honest.
Oh and the soldiers that followed Hitler's orders weren't bad either. It was just THE POLICY. Right?
Durbin owes no apology. I don't think he should have done it. HE WAS TELLING THE TRUTH. Did you bother to read the transcripts of what he said in their entirety? He wasn't just talking out his ass.
We've all read and listened to him make the remarks. We hold him accountable for what he actually said and not what he "says" he meant. Your insinuation is baseless, well actually it has a base, all the lefty trolls like to imagine that they are so much more enlightened than us knuckle dragging Republicans. Guess what? If YOU read what he said and not what the lefty talking points said he said, you'd be pissed too, unless you don't give a shit about the Troops or America in general.
I give a shit that the POTUS and his merry band of torture advocates are giving orders to our troops to beat the shit out of detainees. Or do you approve of that? Or leaving them for hours and hours to sit in their own feces.
I actually DID read what he said..in it's entirety..on the PDF file available of the transcripts. Frankly, I expect our nation to follow the Geneva Conventions because it's the right thing to do. And we're quite obviously not.
The things he read on the Senate Floor about what we are doing IS something you'd expect to read in a transcript from a gulag or fucking Pol Pot. Your attempt to pick nits over it being "not quite as bad" is just pathetic. I tire of these rightwing excuses for bad behavior. Own up to it, for crissakes.
When I was a girl I remember hearing from my grandfather who served in WW2 about how German soldiers surrendered deliberately to US soldiers..knowing they'd receive good treatment. That is a thing of pride for me. My grandfather was one of the good guys.
This "bullet in the back of the head" business is shameful. It's also cowardly. How dare you sully the reputation of this great nation because of your base fear.
Spare me the righteous indignation of your "lefty troll" whine as well. I'm no troll. I don't need to be. Your lack of ability to handle basic dissent sullies you as well.
It's wrong. We are not and should not trying to be "just a little better" than those we say we hate.
By the way there is A war going on.
We are following the Geneva Conventions. And those conventions allow unlawful combatants, like the prisoners at Gitmo, to be summarily executed with a bullet to the back of the head after a secret military trial.
I was listening to a documentary on WWII. One of the soldiers said they found a couple of their scouts had obviously been executed by the Germans instead of being taken captive. In response, they executed a couple of German captives and let the Germans find them. After that he said the Germans didn't execute any more Americans.
I don't know if it was true. I do know that American soldiers did commit verifiable war crimes during WWII, for which they were convicted. And we did fire-bomb Dresden, killing 100,000 and nuke Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I've even heard we beat up SS troopers held in American POW camps. Stop looking through the rose-colored rear view window. Arnold Harris can tell you how nasty WWII was. So can Dean. When Dean says this war is one of the gentliest America has ever fought he isn't blowing smoke.
Chaining someone up on the floor for long periods isn't torture. It is really awful. We can talk about the proper limits on it. You might consider that soiling oneself is a splendid tactic when claiming abuse, as well as being a pretty effective protest in a place where your enemy does the laundry.
Solitary confinement isn't torture either, or American civilian prisons are all torture camps. But all agree it's very nasty. I think there should be limits on it, but there does have to be a way to punish prisoners, right?
Yours,
Wince
Thanks.
I do wish that all these people that think Durbin was just being honest would read about gulags, WWII and the killing fields before they open their stupid fucking mouths.
The Nuremberg trials after WWII said that the individual Germans down to the level of Private were guilty of war crimes. The entire chain of command was guilty. During the Vietnam War we convicted a Private of a war crime for executing someone. His defense? My Corporal ordered me to do it. Didn't wash, even though both the Private and the Corporal agreed that the Corporal gave the order. The Corporal wasn't convicted, however, because he, perhaps like a certain WWI Corporal, was insane.
So you indite the entire chain of command, including the troops when you say this: The troops know all about illegal orders. It's covered intensively and repeatedly from Basic training on. Not only that, but most of the experts on the Geneva Conventions work for the US Military to make sure we don't violate them. That's why they and I get so testy when people spout off like you and Durbin did. You really did criticise the troops. I'll accept it may have been inadvertant on both your parts. But it was real.
Carla, you may be familar with the Jewish Anti-Defamation League. You may consider us the US Military Anti Defamation League.
Yours,
Wince
"I do know that American soldiers did commit verifiable war crimes during WWII, for which they were convicted. And we did fire-bomb Dresden, killing 100,000 and nuke Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I've even heard we beat up SS troopers held in American POW camps."
And I support absolutely everything our soldiers did to win that War. I support every single bomb we dropped on the Germans and the Japanese, including every nuclear bomb. Our soldiers also executed SS guards on the spot at Dachau. Good! Justice.
And I support absolutely everything our soldiers are doing to win this War, too. We are at War for the very survival of America, of all that is left of the West, of freedom.
I have no pity for terrorists. None. I would hang them all. Harsh, I know. That's the way I am.
Carla wrote:
"Your lack of ability to handle basic dissent sullies you as well."
You were addressing Rosemary Esmay, the Queen of All Evil, and you are quite wrong. She allows, even encourages, more Liberals and Leftists to hang around on her Conservative blog than any other Rightist I know.
There's a difference between "I'm sorry for what I said," and "I'm sorry for what you thought I said," or "I'm sorry for how you reacted to what I said." The first is sincere; the latter two are evasive.
Reading the Senator's web site, he manages to be both sincere and evasive at the same time:
That seems pretty unequivocal: "I misspoke, and was an ass."
But then:
Let it go, Senator. You did cross a line.
I think the Senator did a good job of coming clean. I just wish he would let go of that last bit of face-saving. It's not "beliefs" or "feelings" that are the issue here. It's that he simply got carried away and made outrageous comparisons. He admitted as much, but he should do so without caveat.
As far as Durbin. I hope every sensible person in his states works to get this piece of excrement out of office. I am guessing they did not elect him to give rhetorical sustenance to our enemies. Which is, of course, exactly what he is doing. If I were Al Queda I would laughing my head off at how the US is in a twitter over Gitmo.
His apology is total crap. He was having a go at anyone who "misinterpreted" his remarks. Its not their fault its his for making such a moronic statement.
You know the game - Democratic leaders give red meat to their Moore-onic base, and then try and present a reasonable face for the C-Span cameras.
All in a days work for a Democratic Party which believes in nothing other than gaining and retaining power...
"The US is not a signatory to the Geneva Convention..."
Huh? That's news to me. I'm afraid one of us is confused, and I'm pretty sure it's you.
Now I do know there's some ancillary document -- I forget what it's called -- which we haven't signed. That document is the basis for claims that these unlawful combatants should be treated like lawful combatants. We haven't signed that one for a very good reason: it undercuts the whole purpose of the Conventions, and puts our troops in jeopardy. It would be a dumb move to sign it.
Dean,
Re: "prominent Democrats", plural? Are you including prominent non-elected Democrats, like the folks from the ADL and Holocaust survivor groups and such?
Among elected Democrats, the only one I heard about was Mayor Daley. If you know of others, I'd be glad to hear about it. We need some voices of reason from the Democrats.
If there was a Democrat Senator who spoke out (other than ex-Senator Zell Miller), I missed it. It's entirely possible.
I'm sure that the responsible-but-silent Democrats that you describe exist; but their silence saddens me. And from a purely pragmatic sense, I think their silence was a dumb strategic move. This would have been a real "Sister Souljah" moment that could have made the right Democrat look really good to the center. And let's not forget that the original "Sister Souljah" moment was where a candidate named Clinton established (or faked, depending on your perspective) his independence from party orthodoxy. I think this was a real opportunity for a different Clinton to make a stand.
Instead, Senator Clinton dodged the question, pretty much. Senator Reid and folks like Andrew Sullivan, Carla, and sadly even Michael Demmons went farther, running to the barricades to insist that Senator Durbin said nothing wrong. And now Senator Durbin himself says he said something wrong, leaving his supporters swinging in the wind. The only person who gained political ground in this, in my opinion, was Mayor Daley. The rest of the Democrats missed a chance to align principle with politics. Frankly, I'm surprised Senator Clinton missed the chance.
I salute your brother and every one of the brave men and women who are fighting or standing ready to fight to defend our freedom. I support our soldiers 100%. I despise anybody who calls them Nazis. God bless America and victory to our brave soldiers.