Support Our Troops, Support Our President

Another "gem" from the MSM was published today in the Miami Herald, this one being an opinion column by Washington Post lefty columnist Ellen Goodman tilted "Tainting Dissenters with Disloyalty".

Time for a little fisking (thanks Val for the correction).

In the column, Goodman starts off by describing her thoughts after seeing "Support Our Troops" bumper stickers and decals while driving down the highway. In typical liberal fashion, she deduces the following:

"I cannot interview the drivers at 70 miles an hour, so I do not know the complexity of their politics. But I automatically read ''Support Our Troops'' as a proxy statement for ''Support Our Commander in Chief.'' The yellow ribbons tied for soldiers fighting in Iraq seem to have morphed into a collective blue ribbon for the president handling this war."

You're right Ellen. If you support the troops in ANY way, then by default you must support the efforts of the person who made the decision to put them to war.

Unfortunately, this is the last time Goodman makes sense in the column.

"If there is anything this White House is adept at, it is co-opting symbols. If there's anything that makes this driver wince, it is having such powerful symbols wrenched away. These days those who do not support the president are easily dismissed as people who disparage the troops."

Why so defensive Ellen? Perhaps you feel guilty because many of your left-leaning colleagues actually feel that way about Bush AND the troops?

"Last week, the president stood before a sea of soldiers and used prime time to defend a war that is not going well."

Gee Ellen, didn't know you were a war expert. And to whom did you expect the president to give his speech to? Al Qaeda?

"At one point, Bush said, ''The best way to honor the lives that have been given in this struggle is to complete the mission.'' In a single sentence, he defined his mission as the mission and his opponents as those who would trample the graves of soldiers."

Once again, why so defensive? Automatically deducing that those against "his" mission are against the troops. By the way Ellen, "his" mission is one that is shared by many in this country, polls be damned.

Near the end, the truest statement of the entire column; of course it was not from Goodman:

"Nor can I forget the New Hampshire wife who told a reporter querulously, ''I have to respect the president. To not respect him would be to not respect, in some sense, the reasons why our husbands are over there.''

"Who among her neighbors wants to shake her faith?"

Now for the grand finale, straight from the liberal handbook of anti-Bush/anti-war quotes:

Today, few Americans see either a clear way forward or a clean way out of Iraq. When a war begun on false premises slogs on without an exit strategy, when a war against terrorists becomes a terrorist training ground, when the body count rises -- 1,700 American troops and counting -- it's time to give up the notion that dissenters are the dangerous ones.

The war that was initially supported by BOTH Democrats and Republicans. The war that Democrats turned their back on for political purposes once the first American casualties were announced.

The wife from New Hampshire whose faith Goodman didn't want to shake? I think she just did with that last paragraph.

After reading the column, I was reminded to put up the "Support the Troops" decal that I have been putting off from placing on my car. Thanks Ellen for reminding me of what's right.